|
Post by kansasdexters on Apr 16, 2014 7:49:04 GMT -5
Barb, In order for a two-tiered Dexter height "standard" to be used, breeder/owners would have to first determine by testing, if they actually had a chondro-carrier or a non-carrier. Chondro-testing and reporting would not be optional, as it is now. That's a sticking point with many owner/breeders. A two-tiered "guideline" or "standard" only works if you know for sure what you have. But many breeder/owner don't really know what they have and they don't test because they don't have to, in order to register their animal. What comes first, the chicken or the egg? We still have people referring to their Dexters as being either "short-leg", "medium-leg", or "long-leg". There are plenty of "short-leg" and "medium-leg" Dexters that are not chondro-carriers. These would be within the height standard for a chondro-carrier in a two-tiered height standard. There are also chondro-carriers that are large enough and that would be within the height standard for a non-carrier in a two-tiered height standard. Is the reason for having a two-tiered height "standard" to determine whether or not an animal is eligible for registration? Is it to determine whether or not an animal is eligible for competing in the show ring? Or is it to simply serve as a "guideline" for interested owner/breeders? Carol might consider editing her article ( www.dextercattle.org/adca/adca_article_chondrodysplasia.html ), which is already on the ADCA website, and explain the "WHYS of the difference in range". Patti
|
|
|
Post by marion on Apr 16, 2014 8:30:47 GMT -5
We often read that "Dexters are getting too large". I have read of, and seen a few non-chondro Dexters in the higher 40"s (and was astounded to read, a few years back, of someone with 'traditional' line Dexter cows that were over 50 inches.) We do not hear of the possibility of Dexters being or becoming too small, but if we already had a line of non-chondro 38-40 inch cows, if bred to a dwarf bull could throw extremely small carriers cows. What is the limit of viability of such small cows, where they would be petstock only rather than useful dual-purpose animals? Is anyone concerned about 'too small'? ..marion
|
|
|
Post by legendrockranch on Apr 16, 2014 11:53:44 GMT -5
In order for a two-tiered Dexter height "standard" to be used, breeder/owners would have to first determine by testing, if they actually had a chondro-carrier or a non-carrier. Chondro-testing and reporting would not be optional, as it is now. That's a sticking point with many owner/breeders. A two-tiered "guideline" or "standard" only works if you know for sure what you have. Or is it to simply serve as a "guideline" for interested owner/breeders? Carol might consider editing her article ( www.dextercattle.org/adca/adca_article_chondrodysplasia.html ), which is already on the ADCA website, and explain the "WHYS of the difference in range". Patti, the animals that already have been tested non-carrier/carriers if wanted could let their height measurements be known to whoever is collecting the data. Anytime there is a AGM or local show measurements could be taken and the breeders asked is the animals was tested and those results compiled.. No names of animals or breeders have to be involved. The information would be used as a "guideline" only for interested owner/breeders. Registrations would not be effected at all. I don't know how heights were taken years & years ago to give us the basis for what have read. Were they taken at events or just by word of mouth. What type of device did they use? How many animals were involved. In the future if we go ahead and do this everything will have to be worked out ahead of time. Barb
|
|
|
Post by cddexter on Apr 16, 2014 14:21:42 GMT -5
Hello? Explaining that Julie found a 5.5" and 8" difference, by sex, between non-carrier and carrier, and that bone growth is affected, with examples from all three types, isn't explainting why?
However, I do get your point about not knowing which type because people DON'T WANT TO test (god forbid they should know and have to acknowledge what they have). I suppose we could always complicate the heck out of it, and say here's the standard if you don't know, but if you do, then here's another standard you can rely on. One comes with no guarantees, the other with.
me.
|
|
|
Post by legendrockranch on Apr 16, 2014 15:18:01 GMT -5
Just went to the UK site, here is their Dexter breed standards:
Size Bulls: between 42 and 48 inches (106 and 121 cm) at the rump. Cows between 38 and 44 inches (96 and 111 cm) at the rump
Barb
|
|
|
Post by hollydzie on Apr 16, 2014 16:17:30 GMT -5
I do not know if this will be of interest or not. Here are 2 brothers that I owned at one time, one is a carrier the other is not. I find it interesting to see the difference. They were born on the same day. They had the same sire and their mothers were mother/daughter. The non carrier was very close to 50 inches @ 3 years old. They were both steers. Just thought I would share a picture for a visual. It is amazing to me the extreme difference in height. Yet they were virtually full brothers of the exact same age. Only different because of the Chondro gene. Holly
|
|
|
Post by carragheendexters on Apr 16, 2014 18:21:23 GMT -5
Is the reason for having a two-tiered height "standard" to determine whether or not an animal is eligible for registration? Is it to determine whether or not an animal is eligible for competing in the show ring? Or is it to simply serve as a "guideline" for interested owner/breeders? Patti Hi Patti, here in Australia we do measure the height of the cattle entered at Dexter shows and, at most nearly all shows bulls are weighed. This information is written on the neck cards for the judge's information, the animal is not precluded from being judged.
Although we do have an ideal height in our standard, we also have a documented height "allowable for showing" (now these figures are from memory, I don't have the standard in front of me) which is for cows 92cm (36.8in) to 112cm (44.8in) and for bulls 97cm(38.8in) to 117cm (46.8in). this gives an allowance of 2 inches either side of the ideal height, which all up gives an allowable difference of 20cm (8inches) in both sexes which takes into account whether the animal is chondro or not.
Eight inches (or 20cm) is approximately 20% of the mean of both bull and cow allowable heights, which is a huge variation for any breed of cattle or even any species. Surely if people cannot breed with both chondro and non-chondro animals and get within a 20% variation then they need to look at what they are doing within their breeding program.
How many Dexter breeders really care about the height standard? The average Dexter breeder with a couple of cows (the majority of Dexter owners) would not even respond if a vote was taken on heights, so the vote would be skewed by those who are interested enough, only dedicated breeders or those who show and a change in height would affect them.
Unless the animal is going out in public, and the height can be noted, how would it affect other breeders. If someone only produces beef animals and prefers a slightly larger animal for more meat, or if someone is breeding purely for the pet market and wants to produce very small animals, you cannot change what they are doing, nor how they promote their animals to people that they sell live animals to.
Changing height standards are not going to affect anyone except those who take their animals out in public. Dedicated breeders are already on their own paths, and will continue doing what they are doing. The average Dexter owner doesn't care at all.
As an aside, just at what age would that height be taken, we have 3 years of age here in Australia. Bulls and some cows keep growing past 3 years of age. Some animals shoot up at a very young age and look as if they are going to be oversized, and then slow right down to stay within a reasonable size. Other animals grow at a steady rate and just keep on growing and growing.
Also, the one big thing that people keep on forgetting is how much nutrition affects growth rates and final size of animals. You may end up seeing a lot of half starved calves as people try and keep size down. It is possible to produce a small animal just by manipulating feed, both with calories and protein levels.
Now I will get off my soapbox LOL.
|
|
outofthebox
member
If you always do what you always did, You will always get what you always got.....Albert Einstein.
Posts: 78
|
Post by outofthebox on Apr 16, 2014 20:27:23 GMT -5
My current issue with the heights written in the Standard: 1. If the current heights listed in the Standard is _meant_ (and it doesn’t state this) to have the chondro-carriers at the bottom number and the non-carriers at the top then why is there a ‘range’ / a between instead of stating just two numbers for each sex? 2. The percentage between the minimum and maximum does not provide for the 20% difference created by the single chondro gene. IMO:- I don’t think we are giving those breeders who care, or are interested in watching the height of their Dexters against the Standard enough credit.
- Breeders who do not test for chondro, choosing to make a visual assumption would run their eye over the part of the ‘height range’ recommendation to what they determine the animal is.
- Those who know the chondro status, and / or those who are breeding (towards) a chondro-carrier type non-carrier would no doubt use the height recommendation for the ‘chondro-carrier’, I know I would.
Meeting the height recommendations could never be a requirement for registration because: 1. majority are registered before the age of three years. 2. Because of point one; mandatory chondro testing by associations wouldn’t provide anything of value, and 3. how could height be mandated especially when many breeders do not show or partake in classifications? If there was to be a change in the Standard to provide guidance on both types of Dexters then I don’t think it should state chondro-carriers and non-carriers because of the number of breeders who are actively breeding the “shorty-long” (Non-carrier, chondro-carrier type). I think a title along similar lines of ‘short legged’ and ‘long legged’ would make a better choice and would better accommodate breeders of short, medium and long legged Dexters. • I would love to see height recommendations for bulls and one for cows who are short legged with a range of (possibly) 4in • And another height recommendation, again one for bulls and one for cows who are long legged and also with a range of (possibly) 4in. • And have the above within a single breed standard.
Suggested Way Forward:
Set a time-frame of say, every two years for a review on the height recommendations after collating ONLY height information of 34 – 38 month old Dexters against the status of chondro-carrier and non-carriers for each sex. Maybe during the implementation phasesay, for 6 years or even 10 years, ask for information (and just sex, age, chondro status & height measurement) from marked crushes / races or from height sticks etc and on a voluntary basis from breed shows and classifications. The height of 34 – 38mth old Dexters does not have to be exact or precisely measured for th initial stages of collecting this information – we should be after estimates to work out an ‘average’ and then maybe place 2 – 3 inches on either side of this average for those breeders who want to work towards meeting “guidelines”. Its going to take at least 20 years worth of information before associations could even begin to provide stipulations on heights which, again, could never be mandated but at least it would provide some guidance on working towards uniformity for the Dexter in either short leg or long leg. There has to be a starting point somewhere…………………… Until then, we will make our own calcuations for self-assessment, and hope we get it in the ball park, just as others have done before us
|
|
|
Post by kansasdexters on Apr 16, 2014 21:30:53 GMT -5
How about keeping it simple. Just utilize frame score as the Dexter size standard (or guideline). Please refer to the following link. pods.dasnr.okstate.edu/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-1954/ANSI-3271web.pdfThe Purebred Dexter Cattle Association (PDCA) standard states the following: "Size: Frame score should be 1 (One) or below for both males and females. Cattle must be of diminutive stature compared to that of a standard breed but still capable of producing a carcass of reasonable market value, and a reasonable quantity and quality of milk production. They should be of proper size for their age and sex. An animal should be sufficiently developed for his or her age. They should have proper form and equivalent body proportions." Sometimes, less is more. Patti
|
|
|
Post by legendrockranch on Apr 16, 2014 22:37:08 GMT -5
Patti, frame scores are a very useful tool, below is what the miniature Hereford Breeders use. www.minihereford.com/fs.htmIn my opinion frame scores will not work unless we delineate the two types of Dexter our breed is comprised of. The Miniature Herefords were just bred down in size. Even though the Hereford breed did at one time carry a dwarfing gene which was recessive in nature. Miniature Herefords do not carry that gene or any dwarfing gene. Thus this frame score works for them. Barb edited to add: Point of Rocks Ranch were where the Miniature Hereford originated from here in Texas. If you have a chance read about their history.
|
|
|
Post by midhilldexters on Apr 17, 2014 5:58:17 GMT -5
From my point of view I don't want a guideline, I want a standard. I like the Aussie idea of allowing a 2" leeway for showing, but even with that their height allowance of 46" is so much better. However, lets take a stand on shows and AI bulls, if they are over the "new" height standard they don't get to show. It will make breeders serious about height, right now you get that attitude of don't care, "it works for beef." I do think there are many breeders worried about size, we have never bothered about adding bulls to the AI list that are 50" plus, what does that say? I unknowingly started with stock from a really big bull and it's taken years to get my heights down, it's a constant battle. Whatever we decide on I agree keep it simple, but not using phrases like reasonable market value, sufficiently developed, proper form. Those phrases mean one thing to one person and something else to me. Lets say what we mean, and mean what we say.
Carol K
|
|
|
Post by cddexter on Apr 17, 2014 9:07:08 GMT -5
Hi all:
Until we have agreement that we have two types, and STOP using cute euphemisms for them (short and medium and longleg; beef and dairy; true and Kerry-type; ttraditional; etc., etc.), which are (a) in the eye of the beholder, and (b) used by those who need an 'out', and start actually acknowledging what we have, none of this is going to work.
The description still is set for the dwarf, so is the height. If we go to a 36 to 50 inch height for cows, which is realisitic, you can all hear the screams...but the reality is, there are 45" dwarfs. And raising the height would encourage those big dwarfs to be perpetuated.
What about a two tier system FOR TESTED ANIMALS. We could say chondro-carriers should be in the height range of x to y; non-carriers should be in the range of a to b. Then if you have a tested animal, you know where you stand. If you have an untested animal, and you are guessing, you will still have a valid range. For those who are new, this would serve as a head's up that we have issues with types, and maybe help inform them befoe they get sucked in and are disappointed later.
We aren't going to stop the uninformed and those with broader moral standards from claiming medium legs when it's really just a reasonably proportionate dwarf. ALL of the problems come not from the breeders of non-carriers, who are proud of what they have, but from the breeders of carriers who want to breed the type but find ways around being 'direct' in their comments.
Light when I woke up this morning, it felt all wrong. Most of my shifts are 4 and 5 and 6 am, so not having to get up until 6:30 for a 7:30 shift had my heart pounding, thinking that because it was light, I must have slep in and was going to be late. Ain't conditioning grand!
cheers, c.
|
|
|
Post by ssrdex on Apr 17, 2014 10:00:05 GMT -5
The majority of owners have no clue about ANY of the things that those that want to be serious breeders learn about, IMO. Chondro, PHA, horned, polled, feet, udders, A2 & the other milk traits &...on & on. They see or are sold on smaller cattle, less feed, reasonable amount of delicious beef, reasonable amount of milk for the family..not whether an animal fits within a 6" height spread. So there will forever be purebred dexters that fall above or below the "standard". That being said, I agree with Carol K that there should be a standard and not just guidelines when we're talking about show animals and AI bulls advertised on associations sites. I understand that the bulls are privately owned, but the associations are promoting animals outside of their own standards. Perhaps two categories would help keep breeders more accountable to the height standards, those that are within & those that are not.
|
|
outofthebox
member
If you always do what you always did, You will always get what you always got.....Albert Einstein.
Posts: 78
|
Post by outofthebox on Apr 21, 2014 16:39:59 GMT -5
The description still is set for the dwarf, so is the height. Hi Carol - oh how I wish the Standard would say so then. It would save me alot of confusion. We aren't going to stop the uninformed and those with broader moral standards from claiming medium legs when it's really just a reasonably proportionate dwarf. Now I thought the term medium legs was used to describe those non-carriers who were small in statue, resembling more chondro-carriers??? There are many breeders in Australia who are breeding for this. So confusing ALL of the problems come not from the breeders of non-carriers, who are proud of what they have, but from the breeders of carriers who want to breed the type but find ways around being 'direct' in their comments. Can you elaborate a little more on this comment? Arent breeders of carriers breeding to the Standard which was outlined for the carrier / dwarf? I hear alot about non-carriers being too tall, over height as written in the Standard but have heard very little re over-sized carriers.
|
|
|
Post by rawlingsdexter on Apr 21, 2014 18:04:01 GMT -5
Hi Donna
I have been breeding since 1997 and have found that my extremes, meaning my cattle that are very tall or very short have come from my chondro carriers. Our tallest female's dam was a chondro carrier. She has gone on herself to breed some animals which are oversized according to the standard.
My point with all of this in Australia is that DNA proves that a PB dexter is exactly that, yet there are still the powers that be that try to penalise members who have larger animals, when in fact they are descendant from the chondro carriers. I recently heard of one bull being denied entry onto the Accredited AI list because he is overheight, structurally correct and producing outstanding calves but denied entry.
Another issue I have is that DCAI wants animals that are Multiply Owned tested for Chondro, the purpose evades me, as so long as both parties are happy to share ownership of an animal and they are happy with the chondro status, it should be of no concern to DCAI Council.
For me I fully support the theory that Carol Davidson has been sharing for many years, we just need to convince the powers that be, that it should be adopted. I think like myself she is one party that is not as well liked by certain parties and they treat her and many others differently. For me she makes perfect sense, based on quantifiable facts and observations. Let's hope that others are able to convince those in higher places to at least listen and consider this valueable thought.
|
|