|
|
Post by cascade on Jul 4, 2015 0:58:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lilbitty on Jul 4, 2015 14:26:25 GMT
You are correct.
Please contact your regional director and Jim Woehl and insist that I be allowed to list "Legacy Qualified," which best explains his pedigree, and is how I initially wrote the add for Ollathir, but was blocked from doing so by the BOD.
Craig |
|
|
|
Post by lilbitty on Jul 4, 2015 14:34:19 GMT
As far as Lir, I guess it depends on YOUR definition of modern. Those of us who are concerned about such things, know that "modern" is a PC (that's politically correct) way of saying "no non-Dexter" genetics". I will see if the ADCA would prefer that I use wording like that, but I doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by lilbitty on Jul 4, 2015 19:34:39 GMT
Cascade - Please update us all here as to what the responses of you ADCA area director and Jim Woehl are to your concerns about the need to more properly denote these animals pedigrees. I certainly will do the same.
I sent an email today asking Ray Delany to make changes. (I believe it would help my cause a lot if someone like yourself were to also indicate your concerns about how their censorship may inadvertently mislead some readers of these adds. (I believe Ray took it upon himself (well meaningly) to substitute the words you are concerned with for "Legacy Qualified.")
LP Lir does not have WMH III, so the statement is somewhat more defensible, but I have sent them my preferred, and less ambiguous wording change, so as not to mislead anyone.
Again, I appreciate your close attention to these issues that are very relevant to preservation efforts.
Craig |
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Jul 4, 2015 20:18:42 GMT
I'm very much in favor of promoting horned dexters and promoting compact dexters, I'm just on a mission for us ALL to be 100% honest and accurate and to use objective terms that are absolutely clear and factual. The invented term "Legacy Qualified" is NOT an accepted term among official Dexter registries. It was a term coined by ONE INDIVIDUAL... not a registry with voting members and an elected board of directors. Further, the term "Legacy Qualified" is VERY shaky and subjective, with no firm definition. Nearly 100% of dexter genes came from other breeds, the rest are mutations within the breed. So there are ZERO dexters with "No non-dexter genetics". Both of the above AI bulls above have lots of blank spots on their pedigrees in the 1930's and even 1940's and those blank spots must be assumed to be non-dexters until those blanks are filled with valid pedigree entry information. I strongly support your right to present objective FACTS about these fine bulls. Perhaps for Ollathir, you can simply say "Complete Dexter Pedigree Back to 1935" (or whatever the year is that the first hole in the pedigree is encountered). Here are some 1930's holes on Ollathir's pedigree (there are lots more 1930's holes that I have found) legacydextercattleregistry.com/pedigree.php?registry=O®no=EF5552 In the case of LIR, I think you could only claim a complete pedigree back to the 1940's Here are some 1940's holes on LIR's pedigree via the UK Import Bull "Parndon Bullfinch" who was heavily used in the 1970's and 1980's (that seems pretty modern to me). legacydextercattleregistry.com/pedigree.php?registry=A®no=1361Term's like "Modern" and "Traditional" are subjective and 100% debatable, so just stick to objective facts like "Complete Pedigree back to 1935 (or 1945)" or whatever the year is. PS. I'm honestly trying my best to be helpful to the cause, but it needs to be smart and objective PPS. I thank Judy DAILY for the hard work she does in populating the online legacy database with all those old historically interesting records. |
|
|
|
Post by lilbitty on Jul 4, 2015 20:42:29 GMT
Here are some other terms in current AI adds that are not coined by voting members or an elected board etc., but the BOD has allowed these terms without editorializing them. (They are important information to a few people, and of no consequence to others, just as "Legacy qualified" would be.)
"certified (CSS)" - Certified Semen Services Corp.
"aAa Analysis": 4536 - registered service marks aAa®
A1/A2 test results - A2C owns various intellectual property rights
"Beef Quality" score- ?
"Beef Tenderness" score - ?
"Feed efficiency" score - ?
"Genestar test" - Bovigen LLC
The difference is that I have the distinct disadvantage of being a pawn in the war of ADCA vs Legacy, so I can't properly market my bull to the very folks who would be most interested in him (other Legacy breeders), and then I have to defend the change to my add that the ADCA made.
Again, I would appreciate an "unbiased" individual alerting the ADCA BOD and officers to the concerns you have, since they aren't real concerned about MY input apparently.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Jul 4, 2015 21:24:52 GMT
Items like "A2" are objective universal test results.... 10 different labs could do the test and get the same result.
Further, those universal objective measures exist across ALL breeds of cattle.
If a bull is listed as "A2/A2", it is 100% universally clear what that objective measure means and how it was arrived at.
"Legacy" and "Traditional" are completely subjective and even the individual that invented the subjective use of the terms "Legacy" and "Traditional" can't seem to give those terms a 100% firm objective definition.
Every time someone attempts to give me a 100% clear formula for "Traditional" or "Legacy", I can point out holes in the pedigrees that invalidate those definitions.
Further, words like "Legacy" and "Traditional" can NOT be trademarks owned by any one individual or group. Those standard English words are free for us all to use as we subjectively desire. If you want to use the words "Legacy" or "Traditional" to describe your animals, I too can use the words "Legacy" and "Traditional". You can't claim OWNERSHIP over those words.
On the other hand, I can't use the words "Genestar Test" or "A2" however I want, because those are registered trademarks.
Imagine if some polled breeders wanted to own the words "Super-Star Dexter Qualified" or "Much Better than Legacy" I assume the ADCA would also reject those terms because I believe the ADCA isn't in the business letting one sub-group claim their dexters are better than another sub-group's dexters.
ADCA does let you list objective facts about AI bulls, so stick with OBJECTIVE facts.
Having a "complete pedigree back to 1935", sounds 100% objective. I would fight for your right to make that objective claim that if you did enough research to prove it (at least on paper, since we don't have historical parentage proof).
|
|
|
|
Post by lilbitty on Jul 7, 2015 0:17:24 GMT
Update on this issue for everyone concerned about this important issue:
No response from the ADCA to my email. Apparently they do not feel this issue has the urgency that you do Kirk.
AGAIN, perhaps if YOU were to contact them, as a concerned citizen, they would heed the message.
The ad for Ollathir still contains the offensive words (even though I NEVER gave consent for them). Again, those incorrect words were placed in MY ad WITHOUT MY CONSENT!
The add for Lir still contains the offensive words (which I am still willing to defend as correctly identifying his pedigree), despite the fact that I asked them to change the wording so as not to offend or confuse people outside of preservation efforts, such as yourself.
Kirk, now that you have carefully researched the impressive pedigrees of my bulls, can I expect that you soon will be placing an order for straws to use on your cows? (Or was this just yet another of your angry attacks of a preservationist because you don't personally share our priorities?)
BTW, I'm not sure what your breeding priorities are (and won't waste my time researching the pedigrees of your animals just to personally attack you), but I assure you I have no intention of hampering your breeding efforts. Let me post here the same PM (from FB) I sent you in response to a similar attack you shared with me prior to me blocking your ability to PM me:
"Clearly we disagree. I suggest you breed animals, Dexter or not, as you see fit and allow me and others to do the same."
I probably will not bother to update or view this thread further because I have done what I can to resolve this horrible dilemma, and have more important things to now tend to.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Jul 7, 2015 0:57:27 GMT
I support the diversity of Dexters, and I support people making their own breeding decisions. I like science and objectivity and I like things to make sense. If you were to make a list of Dexter traits that you consider to be traditional that you think are important to preserve, I'll bet I'd likely support most everything on your list. My list of preferred traits is likely similar to yours. Compact, friendly, dual purpose, hardy, trouble-free, efficient, easy calvers, etc... PS. Here's the ENTIRE private discussion that you attempted to make public (readers should note that there is NO attack).  |
|
|
|
Post by lonecowhand on Jul 8, 2015 17:14:59 GMT
As usual, cascade, you mince your words.
When there is no useful term for a quality, one will be coined by those to whom the distinction is important. Once it is in common usage, it becomes the term. "Traditional" and "Legacy Qualified" are useful descriptive terms understood by everyone other than yourself , apparently.
These useful terms describe an animal that threatens to devalue the type touted yourself or by the ADCA , so of course they are unwilling to recognize them.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Jul 8, 2015 18:18:21 GMT
Precisely give me an EXACT objective formula for determining if a dexter is "Traditional" by your definition, and also the exact objective formula for "Legacy".
Provide me with a list of all your Dexters and tell me how each of them is classified ("Traditional" vs. "Legacy").
I'll bet you won't/can't do this simple task because the definitions are illogical.
|
|
|
|
Post by lilbitty on Jul 24, 2015 22:12:29 GMT
Kirk, thank you for your continued input regarding Dexter preservation efforts.
Please know and understand:
WE GET IT!
You don’t need to continue to tell us all that there are holes in the pedigrees of nearly every Dexter afoot (most of which occurred when the English were more concerned about the potential need to learn German than they were the need to keep up with cow registrations).
WE GET IT!
You don’t need to continue to propose that these holes can mean only one thing in your opinion (that those owners were trying to cover up their cross-breeding efforts). A curious idea since in general, in the UK of that era there was a general acceptance of the practice (as exemplified by the Appendix and Experimental registries.)
WE GET IT!
You don’t need to continue to then conclude for all of us that those animals with documented crossbreeding are just as “Dexter” as those without in your opinion.
WE GET IT!
You don’t need to continue to pretend that Saltaire Platinum and all of his polled descendants look just like every other Dexter. (They DON’T HAVE HORNS… DEXTERS ARE A HORNED BREED!!!!)
We GET IT!
In short, you don’t need to continually demonstrate that you do not support Legacy Dexter or Traditional Dexter breeding efforts in any way shape or form.
WE GET IT!
Now why don’t you start using ALL of the time and energy you devote to harassing our productive efforts for something productive of your own? Is trying to get all of us to realize that you are an opinionated and obstinate ass the highest calling you have? If so, you can stop now:
WE GET IT!
|
|
