|
Post by legendrockranch on Oct 9, 2017 21:48:13 GMT
Judy below is what you said to me. Copied and taken directly from this forum. So Judy, now that we all know that you know and have seen the second test results on SP why have they not been released. I guess the owner is still not ready to make them public. What a joke.
May 23, 2016 10:40:29 GMT -5 jamshundred said:
"The results nor the information forwarded to me belong to me. When the owner is ready to make them public it will be done. Meanwhile, Barbara, why don't you go ask UCD if there were other comparisons other than the one in your hand? My word is established as good and trustworthy and I trust the person who sent me the information."
Judy
Edited to add: Judys comments were made well over a year ago. Does anyone on this forum actually think Judy will ask the person who she "trust" to release the second report???
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Oct 9, 2017 22:19:06 GMT
the original registration with an unknown, un-named crossing is the correct entry There is no record of any other breeds involved. So the unknown, unnamed parentage could be a purebred Dexter, and the breed purity tests tell us it almost certainly was a pure Dexter. That's exactly the same as Limbury Fanny on most every "Traditional" Dexter pedigree. Fanny also has an unknown unnamed parent. But she doesn't have a breed purity test.
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Oct 9, 2017 23:06:14 GMT
Judy, none of your response addresses the FIVE introgressions you continue to promote. Instead, you talk about one...
What clearcut evidence do you have, other than gossip 50 years later, that the original crossbred entry for HR is the correct one and the correction was a lie? Is this not another example of choosing which story to believe, depending on your wish list?
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Oct 10, 2017 0:55:08 GMT
Barbara,
I vividly recall that some moons again, you were in the forefront of arguing about ownership rights of results. . . . and frankly you and others were disingenous with your concerns then as you are on this issue. .. . . . especially since the ONLY entity that has every protected genotype ownership has been ME. So, just for the sake of clarity. . .. yet again. .. . . .
*I* own the original DNA genotype that is on file at UC-Davis. I submitted the sample, I paid for the test. *I* do not own any other results, and I especially do not own results from a purity test either copy one or copy two.
This is what is interesting to me. Kirk says there is a second result. Barb insists there is a second result. So why don't one of you provide that result? I have no interest in any purity result because they have no value. I have never given permission for results I own, nor do I know of any other breeder who owns animals in the small . . . . roughly. . . . . seven percent of non-Saltaire Platinum samples who has ever given permission for their samples to be accessed for comparison in a "purity " test. Saltaire Platinum was compared to his own descendents. Any result as to HIS purity is worthless.
Let me post yet again the exact, precise, quote of Dr. Penedo who clarifies that the "purity" result does NOT imply purebred status. You all will go to any length to forge ahead with a fairy tale. And you each know you are deceiving your buyers. Lordy, I hope you are so far gone you are still actually deceiving yourselves.
Teatpuller. Mrs. Hunt has been very forthright in stating that the re-registration of Homer Rixey Piella was a mistake. The original breeder stated and confirmed as well it was an error and that Homer Rixey Piella cow was the result of a crossbreeding. Just how desperate are you guys to keep on keeping on with the deceit? Furthermore, you are no novice. You've been around. My personal website has had very detailed information on the SP pedigree introgressions for a decade.
By the way. . .. . . . NO ONE ever answers my question about how there came to be Dexter polled animals that tested with the Friesian results?
Judy
|
|
|
Post by legendrockranch on Oct 10, 2017 1:25:29 GMT
How convenient for you Judy. Please read over my post. "your" comments are highlighted in blue. "The results nor the information forwarded to me belong to me. When the owner is ready to make them public it will be done" You can try and wiggle out of this, or twist it any way you want. "For the sake of clarity" your words say it all.
|
|
|
Post by legendrockranch on Oct 10, 2017 3:51:13 GMT
By the way. . .. . . . NO ONE ever answers my question about how there came to be Dexter polled animals that tested with the Friesian results? Judy That's news to me. So how did you find this information out? Should be an interesting answer.
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Oct 10, 2017 11:43:50 GMT
Ahhh...the gang is in full force. Here's the real problem you all don't want to address. Polled in the Dexter breed, along with the desire for beefier Dexters, makes incidents of crossbreeding a feature, not a bug. Do you think incidents like the example in the link below never happen, and who would know the difference if you have polled Dexters, except that now the ADCA puts the financial burden of genotyping and ultimately parent verification to slow the spread of these types of examples? Not that I live near any Angus farms, but if I had a polled calf pop out that was big and beefy I'd know right away that there was a problem. Not so if you have a polled herd. And teatpuller, I know you're going to bring up the Highlands...and once I did have a little bull calf that I thought for sure was an accidental breeding, short leg, very hairy. I didn't know how it could have happened, though, because we have very good fencing and buffers between our herds and different bulls, not just on a fenceline. Nope, he tested as the progeny of one of our Dexter bulls. dextercattle.org/ads/2017_new_dexter_ad_166.html
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Oct 10, 2017 13:44:08 GMT
For goodness sake Barbara, what in the name of hell are you after?
Isn't that exactly what I keep saying? What's there to wiggle?
My curiosity is flapping in the wind again! There is something bothering you folks that you aren't spitting out. This conversation has gone on and on and on for a couple pages. . . veers here, veers there. Same ol', same ol'. So now there seems to be new attention to the same old argument as if that is ever going to change history. So, what burr is really under your saddles?
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Oct 10, 2017 14:11:26 GMT
Perhaps we should require a breed purity test for all Dexters born on farms that manage a menagerie of various breeds and cross-breeds.
I think Dexter's are the perfect breed. I don't want/need any other breeds on my farm. Thank goodness my closed herd of Dexters come from the only DNA Tested purebred line of Dexters (Saltaire Platinum). The breed purity test offers the very best evidence of purity available, by far, and Saltaire Platinum passed the Dexter purity test twice.
Without the purity test, what other evidence do we have that Lakeport's Dexter aren't a mix of Highlanders and Zebu?
The UC Davis Breed Purity DNA test is a million times more accurate than Judy's "Breed Purity Test" which involves staring at some dusty old inaccurate papers.
Concerning polled genes.... Geneticists have found two different versions of polled genes so far (Celtic and Friesian). They are both almost certainly switching-type genes. It's possible that both of these genes have been in Dexters since the start of the breed, since breed associations didn't track horn status, and also since scurs on polled animals can mimic horns.
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Oct 10, 2017 14:20:49 GMT
Here we go again. Kirk knows more than the head of the UCD lab who oversaw the test!
|
|
|
Post by legendrockranch on Oct 10, 2017 14:32:42 GMT
I will try and make this as clear as possible to you Judy without the insults you like to throw out at people. Acknowledge that their is a second purity test on Platinum that you have seen but is not being released. I'm sure do to the fact the results are the same as the first test. Is this clear enough for you Judy.
Below is what Judy posted on this forum where she is giving permission for anyone who would like to pay for a second purity test run on SP from samples submitted by Legacy. Below is part of Judy’s original post.
Post by jamshundred on Dec 13, 2014 at 7:54am
“There is a current DNA marker panel on file at UCD of Saltaire Platinum submitted by Legacy and derived from semen in the past year or close to it. It is the only 16 marker panel of which I am aware. If there is sufficient information/sample, I will give permission for a breed analysis.
The cost of this test is $100.00 Any interested parties who would like to PLEDGE a donation - ( do not send money) may do so. Here or privately and I will keep everyone posted on the progress of the DCW breed analysis project relating to SP if there is any interest.”
The first test that was run was paid for by Patti Adams who owns the right to it. It is Patti’s tests results which we will call the first purity report on SP that is the report that has been released for all to see with her name on the report.
The second test which Judy has acknowledged receiving per her statement on this forum dated May 23, 2016 10:40:29 GMT -5 jamshundred said: "The results nor the information forwarded to me belong to me. When the owner is ready to make them public it will be done"
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Oct 10, 2017 14:36:38 GMT
Like I said. .. . . . I keep saying the same thing. *I* do not own any purity test results to share with anyone. How much clearer can *I* be? Have YOU asked Ms. Adams if SHE has copies of a second test? If she does, why isn't she sharing THAT result? The polled community keeps saying there is a second result. . . . . . WHY doesn't the polled community produce it?
Let me make it even clearer. The bull is a GRADE bull. There is NO test result that can change his outcrossed ancestors. .. . . . . so . . . . .. .is it just another attempt to legitimize a GRADE bull?
|
|
|
Post by legendrockranch on Oct 10, 2017 14:43:44 GMT
Judy I did not say you "owned" any purity test. I said in your words "The results nor the information forwarded to me belong to me. When the owner is ready to make them public it will be done"
Now now much clearer can I be?
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Oct 10, 2017 15:06:42 GMT
I understand the test very very well. I understand why the lab would stop short of saying it proves "purebred" status.
The term "purebred" is very subjective and fuzzy, like the terms "cold", or "warm". If a lab tested the temperature of an object and said it was 90 degrees fahrenheit, they would just leave it at that, and not declare it to be "warm"... But as a smart person, I could use the objective 90 degree lab reading to declare that the object is subjectively "warm", with strong objective evidence from the lab.
UC Davis provides the objective DNA informaton via their test. It's not their place to declare whether that objective information translates to a very subjective term like "purebred"
But as a smart person, I can take those lab results and claim that Saltaire Platinum has FAR MORE objective proof of Dexter purity than an animal that has no DNA evidence at all.
The Lab tells us they found no traces of other breeds in Platinum's DNA, the Lab tells us that Platinum's DNA looks just like Dexters that are considered to be "pure", the lab tells us he has a Y-chromosome consistent with Dexters.
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Oct 10, 2017 15:57:10 GMT
Speaking of veering, I think what needs to be said is:
1.While Judy does not own any 'purity' test, she has the results of two, the first used random Dexters as comparison which included some of Platinums' offspring, allowing her to claim the result is invalid because it compares him to some of his offspring; the second used only Dexters that Judy considers 'traditional'; these results mirror those of the first, which it appears she would prefer to ignore as it kills her theory of non-Dexter-ness or grade status.
2.Judy accepts as gospel-true the paperwork of owners in the past, where there is no written evidence of misregistration, if it suits her. If it doesn't suit her, then negative gossip prevails and the entire herd in question becomes suspect and unacceptable.
3.with one exception, the entire world accepts that some outcrossing with the result bred back multiple times into the chosen breed is considered 'pure' under known, accepted genetic terms. This is because there are precious few genes not common to all bovines, so once human selection has had its way, you are left with about 99% of the genes held in common among all bovines, and then those precious few genes used to distinguish one breed from another.
The exception is Judy under her various guises and her small group (Donna, Bill, Hans, Gene, Mike, sometimes Karen). For them, at least in public, 'purity' is customized as coming from (a) original imports of animals ranging from 1905-15 birthdates, (b) their offspring with no other introduced later imports, (c) Woodmagic genetics, (d) animals of suspect origin that Judy has decided she wants to include and therefore accepts the gossip as valid. What is NOT included is animals of suspect origin that Judy had decided she does not want to include and therefore does not accept the gossip as valid; and modern imports that have any outcrossing in their pedigrees back to 1900. A search of the internet provides the following info: under random breeding selection within a breed, it takes 27 generations statistically to produce an animal that has zero genes left from the outcross. With directed breeding selection within a breed, it takes five generations statistically to produce an animal that may have some of the common genes left from the outcross, but none of the genes that are specific to the outcross breed. These include hair type and length, horns and horn shape, excessive yield traits, size, and white markings. It is because any genes left over from the outcross are the same genes as already in the Dexter breed and so are not unique.
I support Judy's project, but do not support the manner in which she trashes every animal other than those she SELECTIVELY chooses. It's that non-objective process that diminishes her work, along with producing non-standard definitions in order to artificially create something special out of a loose group of Dexters with unproven backgrounds.
By focusing on not having permission to publish the results of the second purity test for Platinum, she directs attention away from herself having the knowledge of the results of both tests. Judy seems to think this allows her to pretend the second test does not exist, and certainly to ignore the outcome: both tests produced the same result. Either both tests were flawed, or Platinum's dna is no different from the accepted combination of genes found in traditional Dexters. Mrs. Netti: she's just pulling your chain.
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Oct 12, 2017 3:12:36 GMT
In response to the following from Teatpuller:
I have the "official" results of NONE. How many times do I need to say that? I can copy the actual official result of #1, just like the rest of you seem to have. . . . . and I've been told there is a #2, but *I* do not have and "official" results. You all make more comments on #2 than I know anything about, so provide it, why don't you? I keep hearing that #2 was compared to "traditional" animals. I would assume if samples that were owned by me or submitted by Legacy were used in an analysis, ( and most traditional/Legacy samples were for years), then I would have been notified and supplied the results of the comparison. I have NOT. I have NOT been advised that hundreds of traditional and Legacy samples owned by. . . or submitted through me were used in any research. Let me say it again. *I* have never ordered a purity test on Saltaire Platinum. *I* have never been advised that the bulk of the traditional or Legacy samples submitted by me were used in any purity comparison. The ONLY thing, for your information, (though it should be clearly obvious to all because *I* seem to be one of only a few in this breed) is the TRUTH. Whatever the truth is. And that is what I constantly seek.
That is typical of what takes place in today's media. An attempt to smear or discredit with absolutely no evidence. This is rancid deceit and untruth. Name one herd. You are attempting to discredit without a single bit of evidence being offered. In America an accused has a right to defend against the accusation. You are just out on a smear trip.
More of the same. The entire world does NOT. Gerald Fry, an accepted authority in the world of cattle in the US. .. . does NOT accept this. You are making another blanket proclamation that is not accurate.
What means " various guises"? Be specific. I don't accept ANY gossip as valid. Never have. I never accepted that dun was only found in Dexters. ( proven right). I never accepted the gossip that dun is introgressed I am close to proving it is not, and close enough to say I am right on that as well. I never accepted the gossip that Shamwell Robert was outcrossed but never researched it. Someone else did and testing showed he was. I never accepted gossip that Woodmagic is outcrossed. I have and am still working to prove I am right on that. . . . although there WAS some outcrossing to Black Welsh, ( one of which is in Saltaire Platinum's pedigree), Mrs. Rutherford told me personally the herd she closed and used in linebreeding had no upgrading. I believe her until I find otherwise. I researched carefully the gossip that polled was due to outcrossing and have provided the proof that is true. So you are just using the modern tools so many employ today to discredit with innuendo, for you certainly have given NO documentation of your insinuations, whereas I always do!
I don't know of ANY species that is NOT trying to protect and preserve purity. That the leadership of the Dexter breed, almost all of whom have been involved in breeding crossbred bloodlines has failed to do so is not to their credit. . . . and history will paint that picture. Deal with it.
Saltaire Platinum is a GRADE bull. That is YOUR problem. His pedigree is in error. That IS documented. Deal with it. Trying to discredit the researcher who has provided the documentation and records is just the same sheet that has been going on since 2005. You all own the Dexter breed now. . . . . . and even ADCA was forced to acknowledge the accuracy of the outcrossing. Deal with it.
More innuendo. " she trashes every animal other than those she selectively chooses". NAME one. My work is NOT diminished by anything, not even your attempts to smear me because. . . . *I* document everything. I give chapter and verse. Tough to argue with except with this type of low down common smear attempt.
I have NO results that belong to me to publish. I have been told there is a second test. I have been told what the results are. I do NOT have the test. How many times would you like me to say that? How many times would you like me to say that a "purity" test on a GRADE bull means nothing, ANY test that says he is "pure" makes a mockery of science for he ISN'T ! He's a GRADE bull. Perhaps a good speciman of a grade bull, but none-the-less there are fantastic grade bulls that go through sale barns every single day of the week.
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Oct 12, 2017 3:24:46 GMT
Still finding all of this very interesting. Something is happening. . . .I just don't know what as yet. Something is making the polled folks very nervous. Why else are they on the smearpath? Fearful of truth? Probably. . . since they have been trying to hide it for a dozen years. All of a sudden they are back to the tactics they were using a dozen years ago. didn't work then. . . .what gives you any hope it will now?
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Oct 12, 2017 4:57:56 GMT
1. "The results nor the information forwarded to me belong to me."
If the results were forwarded to you, then unofficially you do have the official results. No where is anyone saying you did the test, just that according to you, you are in receipt of the results. Doesn't mean you have to publish them, just that since you know the two tests produced the same results, it would be smart to stop with the smearing. Doesn't do you credit.
2. Fermoy; Saturn.
3. Okay, two then. You and Gerald Fry, who is not part of the scientific community and doesn't pretend to be a geneticist. I've read the Cardiff Study, and you can't get a better expert, and that's his opinion.
Bullfinch, Fermoy; Sara, Saturn, Outlaw. Lucifer.
Nothing to do with defending polled. All about getting you to face reality and be honest.
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Oct 12, 2017 14:37:24 GMT
I also have the information on the results of the "purity" test on Shadwell Robert, but *I* neither own those results or have them in hand. SAME THING. WHY aren't you chasing down the results and posting them from whoever DOES have them? What difference does it make? REPEAT >>>>> He is a GRADE bull. There is NO purity.
Fermoy. What about her? *I* knew nothing about Mrs. Fermoy beyond her pedigree when I bought her. I didn't even realize she was a red cow when I asked to buy her. I just knew her pedigree. THEN. . . . . a Canadian breeder related gossip about her. So . ... what is it you are accusing me of with regards to an animal *I* own(ed)? Unlike those who DO spread gossip and innuendo, I have researched to either prove or disprove the gossip that has been posted by others. I never started anything on Mrs. Fermoy, but I have researched to find the truth including speaking with the breeder, and tracking down an owner of a full sister who offered to dig her up for me. If I thought it would have proven anything I would have taken him up on the offer.
Saturn. I do not recall from whom I first heard something about an appendix animal in the pedigree of Saturn, however, as a researcher, the anomaly was interesting to me. In a conversation with the recently deceased archivist of DCS, the subject of Sarah of Knotting being in the appendix registry, yet showing two registered parents arose. The archivist related to me the owner of this cow had Dexters, was killed in an accident on her farm, and since she was the only one who cared for the animals, their identification was unknown. The archivist said there were two heifers, and a major UK breeder liked one of the heifers and wished to purchase and register it, and the cow was registered in the appendix registry due to "late" registration. I was told there was nothing to show the cow was who she was registered to be. Simple as that. I posted that information on the chat group. Next thing I hear is that the archivist got a telephone call and was bullied into a "sort of" retraction. The truth is, *I* was told that story. . . . . I had no knowledge before the story was related to me and I told it as it was told to me. I trusted then and I trust now the person who was telling the story was relating the truth as she knew it, that there was no identificatiion as to the identity of either heifer.
Is that all you got? Pretty slim pickins'. Intersting that the same Canadian breeder is connected to both of those animals. If I was really interested in posting gossip. . . . or innuendo. .. . . I have much better than that Lots of much better.
Whatever that means. So, what does that mean? *I* never instigated discussions as to the pedigrees of any of those animals. As a matter of fact the first I ever knew of any of them was in various discussions on talk groups where questions were raised. Whoever started the "gossip" it wasn't me. I learned about the "gossip" on Bullfinch on the old DexterCattle2 group on Yahoo. There were posts on this from CDDexter and Germantrader2002. The first time *I* ever realized there were questions of purity in various Dexters were from these other "gossips". ( I assume that is what you call them since they dared to address the purity of certain animals. The first time I ever realized there was a controversy as to purity and polled was a post from CRicard to CDDexter questioning the purity of Saltaire Platinum, which was not answered, and instead a question raised regarding Bullfinch. Which triggered my curiosity as to why the question wasn't answered and my own research. Same with Sara and Saturn. I think ( though I am not sure of my recall on this) that it came up in discussions relating to something in the World Congress articles. I do not know who started the "gossip" as to Outlaw, but it wasn't me. Whoever it was seems to now have been proven right. ( See information in the book "Symposium" published by DCS relating to Shadwell Robert). Lucifer. Same thing. I was clueless. I purchased animals from Lucifer line and the registrations had an X after the registration number. I inquired as to what that meant and was told it denoted he was an imported bull. That answered my question. I thought no more of it until sometime around 2004 when some "gossip" brought up the issue of his "experimental" breeding. Most of the "gossip" I've read can be attributed to commentary on the old DC2 board by either of the posters mentioned above. For the record, *I* do not consider discussion of topics to be gossip.
Bullshit. I could only pray you have the same respect for honesty and adhere to the same strict standards as I.
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Oct 12, 2017 17:25:48 GMT
1. issue unchanged. You have just indirectly confirmed you do have the results, just that it's unofficially. This means you know the results of both tests provided the same conclusion. Since you know this, your referencing to the first test only and using it to show it is skewed is, to use your term, bs.
The issue STILL is since you know both tests came to the same conclusion, why do you prefer to keep using the first test to discredit the result? Selective reasoning. No matter how much you wiggle around, it keeps coming back to that. YOU KNOW THE SECOND TEST RESULTS. YOU KNOW THE TEST DID NOT INCLUDE ANY OFFSPRING. YOU KNOW THE RESULTS MIRRORED THE FIRST TEST RESULTS. YOU KNOW THAT HIS DEXTER PROFILE MATCHES THE PROFILE OF TRADITIONAL DEXTERS WITH nothing OUT OF LINE.
At this point, SCIENCE proves he is just as Dexter as traditional Dexters, only more so, because most of them aren't tested. Oh, you say, but there's xbreeding in his pedigree. Well, yes, but science has just proved it's irrelevant. Now what?
Going on about others chasing down results and posting them in an attempt to deflect attention from the real issue isn't going to work. The issue is your refusal to be fair. Get over it, and modify your behavior to honesty if you want credibility.
2. In both cases, you have claimed hours of sleuthing to discover the 'truth according to Judy'. Fermoy: her red either comes from Dexters way back, or from unrecorded outcrossing. Given the two choices, you choose to believe she's pure Dexter and her red gene came from the original imports back in 1915 which has been hidden for 60 or 70 years. Even though there were other crossed red animals on the farm, and the paperwork on other Wee Gaelic Dexter registrations was defective. Saturn: his dam was either registered late because the owner died before she was registered and the husband didn't make it a priority, or she's some other cow altogether and is misregistered intentionally. Given the two choices, you choose to believe Sara's registration was falsified. Even though you talked to the person who rescued Sara and had her registered, so got the story first hand, and know that late registrations were set back one generation by the Society.
Which story has more credibility? Selective reasoning.
3. It means that you and possibly Fry (although I doubt he's support you) know better than every single geneticist worldwide. Or, you are simply a kook with an agenda.
All the others? If you are getting forgetful, go back and read some of your earlier posts with justifications for why some animals really, actually, will likely prove to be, real Dexters once you have done your sleuthing and Judy's truth is known; and other posts with shrill accusations of deliberate attempts to deceive, grade animals defiling the purity of Dexters as you think they should be, because you have done your sleuthing and Judy's truth is known. This is all regardless of the likelihood of the gossip, the number of years and people involved, and your willingness to accept a version you don't like.
As Judy says, get over it.
Back to the issue at hand: why continue to talk about the first Davis breed test results being invalid because it had comparisons with offspring? You didn't pay for that test, but are referring to it because you know the outcome. Why not talk about the second Davis breed test results with comparisons to traditional Dexters only, which prove Platinum as pure as any other traditional Dexter? You didn't pay for that test either, but won't refer to it because you know the outcome.
Hans made the only point with validity: Platinum doesn't have horns and Dexters are expected to. Thus, he isn't a traditional Dexter, by definition. Except the original standard didn't mention the absence of horns, it just talked about preferred horn shape (which no one paid any attention to anyway).
I wouldn't want your standards in a thousand years. I value honesty.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2017 20:08:51 GMT
titpuller, why not use your real name. Is it because you feel pretending to be a newb gives you more credibility then if people knew who you really are? Or is it because you are ashamed of the damage you have done to this breed? Or maybe you just got tired of using Kirk to promote your agenda?
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Oct 12, 2017 21:56:27 GMT
wrong on all counts.
If you want to believe that the introduction of another breed generations ago, has made 'grade' all Dexters that don't directly descend from foundation stock prior to 1922, that's your choice. In England, according to what I've read by Andrew Sheppy, there are zero animals anywhere in the country that have that level of 'purity'. Would it be interesting to see the reaction of English Dexter breeders if you told them every single one of them is raising grade animals that don't qualify to be registered, in your opinion?
Isn't this the case of some 10 or 15 Dexters worldwide that meet your criteria, and around 20,000 plus that meet everyone else's? If that's the position you want to take, fine. Sounds like some sort of cult mentality to me.
Next, if (in this case) we refer to Platinum, and the results of the second test which Judy has acknowledged she's seen and those results show zero difference between your 'traditional' Dexters and Platinum, what do you use to justify the claim that the bull is just a 'grade' animal and not a real Dexter at all? According to the science which you all seem to accept by the references to UCD, Platinum can't be distinguished genetically from any other Dexter of 'pure' (your term) breeding. As I said to Judy, now what?
Those questions apply equally to all animals trashed/discredited according to your standard, not just Platinum.
Why not go to Judy and ask why she continues to evade the issue? She has the second test results. No one is suggesting it's her test or she paid for it or she has the rights or anyone should post the results. All Msti is saying is Judy knows but continues to play dumb. Ask why. If it becomes recognized that Platinum is genetically identical to US traditional Dexters, the whole legacy thing collapses. Does that answer the 'why'?
|
|
|
Post by lonecowhand on Oct 12, 2017 23:43:02 GMT
When issues of Honesty and Integrity are bantered about, I tend to believe those who have no economic stake or financial ties to the object or outcome of the discussion.
Seems there's a lot of character assassination being displayed here. I also have to wonder at the timing.
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Oct 13, 2017 0:21:43 GMT
I agree Bill. Nothing in it for me, lots and lots and lots in it for the legacy people.
As much fun as it's been to pin Judy down to the point where her friends have to come on to defend her, and use personal attacks when accuracy is demanded instead...and we are still waiting to hear why she doesn't acknowledge she knows the results of test two which (unfortunately, haha) make Cascade right, oh dear, my husband has just been reading this stuff over, shook his head, and said I think you should give up. They don't want to admit they are the ones off key. Pretty good analogy. Off to bake carrot cake to keep him sweet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2017 14:41:48 GMT
I never said polled dexters should not be registered. Platinum should not have been. He was grade he did not qualify to be registered even in England who allowed upgrading he did not qualified. the ADCA did not want him they voted against it. It was only after they were lied to and bullied that he got in the backdoor. Nothing can be done about that now. It is you and kirk that keep bring this up and making it an issue.
You claim one bull did not make a difference. Have you seen the current US herd? Are you blind? Do you not see how different the animals are now? How do you explain that if not directly related to the polled animal.I have a few polled girls they are different. If you dont have others to compare them to some may not be able to see it but they are.
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Oct 13, 2017 17:02:02 GMT
All of this discussion isn't really productive about the "purity" test of Platinum. I'll repeat once again, the biggest problem with Platinum is that he opened the door to a complete revision of the Dexter breed in a short number of years. The lack of a demand for genotyping and parent verification of all Dexters descending from Platinum from day 1 of allowing ADCA registry of him means the barn door was open for 20 plus years of potential crossbreeding with other polled breeds to introduce characteristics that the breeder wanted. Polled being the primary effort, however increased beef characteristics were another large factor. Don't like the udder from your Angus/Dexter cross? Bring in a Jersey and VIOLA! It's improved, after all, who's going to notice the "mealy mouth" when you have a polled bull that you can register as a Dexter and get big bucks, rather than sitting on him for 2 years until he's ready for beef.
When my wife researched the Dexter breed, I am so thankful that the research we saw at the time was more about the small size and traditional look and heritage status, rather than the polled, beef look, indistinguishable from Angus, that you now see so prominently in the breed.
At the same time, I'm sad that we invested so heavily in the breed that has changed so dramatically in the 12 years that we have owned them, and many new to the breed have almost zero knowledge about the Dexter pre-Platinum. And it requires educating so many new to the breed about the changes that have taken place. We have been successful mainly with people new to the breed that have read the older information out there. And upset that the major Dexter association in the US focuses more on registration and membership numbers that they think comes with polled, than the preservation of the historical nature of the breed.
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Oct 13, 2017 17:13:17 GMT
By the way, 19 year old short legged cow, Dinsmore Farm Inky, arrived last week along with another short leg heifer, 4BarL Caitriona, and two steers that hitched a ride because we got them for a good price and the shipper gave us a very low additional price to include them on the shipment. Inky did very well, and they're all settled into our little quarantine pasture while we give them a good checkup before they are introduced to the rest of the herd. When we let them off the trailer, Inky was pretty speedy and led the way while we directed them to their pasture. They enjoyed some nice alfalfa hay, and when I bring hay out to them they get pretty excited for it, so they were probably tired of that Bermuda or Bahia stuff they grow in Texas. However the other day we had a 45 degree cold rain, so they probably questioned the trade off Hopefully they start making their winter coats soon for our upcoming winter weather.
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Oct 13, 2017 19:23:52 GMT
This red hornless cow (Wee Gaelic Ms. Fermoy) is pre-Platinum This next black horned cow is a daughter of Saltaire Platinum. Obviously, Saltaire Platinum didn't change Dexters much
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2017 19:50:38 GMT
kirk you pick the same few cows all the time as your examples. Look at the bigger picture look at the national herd. I could post tons and tons of pictures that show just how much has changed. I am not going to do that. I do not think it is right to post pictures of others animals especially when doing it the way you do and say negative things about them.
|
|
|
Post by lonecowhand on Oct 13, 2017 20:55:30 GMT
TP2, you notice that the Original Thread regarded the topic of Shipping of Older Cows.
You may also notice that the THIRD post was a thread by Cascade challenging Chondro Tests. It's this Constant Harangue which begs the need for defensive argument on the part of those on this board who actually appreciate these cattle.
Although I do not know the specifics of which cow got with which bull to produce Saltaire Platinum, there will be no argument that can convince me that there was no Miracle Mutation, and I'm sure I'm not alone. Platinum was a cross breed, and should never have been allowed. When you bring in another breed , you get ALL of the other breed in the mix. Cascade knows he's wrong regarding purity, but because of improper precedent, The 'Polled Purebred' Platinum was allowed by ADCA as a registered Dexter. So there you go.
I don't see the advantage that you reference to the 'legacy people'. I don't see Judy, or any of the Traditional Folks making a killing on the sale of Horned Dexters. There is no financial threat to the polled producers. While the majority of new initiates will seek red polled, there are those who seek the heritage horned dwarf breed , and will try to find and steward that type. I have to suspect that this is a concerted effort on the part of the Platinum Boosters to upset any dialog ( at all) on this board. I don't really like wasting time defending the same principles FOR YEARS, but feel compelled to do so rather than let the bashing be the last post on every thread.
I partially concur with your sweet husband, you should give it up. Cheers!
|
|