zephyrhillsusan
member
Caught Dexteritis in Dec. 2009. Member of this forum since Oct. 2013.
Posts: 1,502
|
Post by zephyrhillsusan on Mar 3, 2016 12:14:58 GMT -5
Funny, hoperefuge, I was just wondering about that today! I was going to search for it, then got busy doing other things. What got me wondering is that I was reading the Conformation article on the ADCA's great new Education page, and noticed that they give a range of sizes that goes above the "guidelines" given elsewhere. Completely off topic here, but you all should explore the Education tab on the ADCA Home Page, if you haven't already. It opens up another page with lots more tabs. This is a quick way to find things that used to be harder to track down.
|
|
|
Post by kansasdexters on Mar 4, 2016 12:09:40 GMT -5
The first "size" standard given in the American Kerry and Dexter Cattle Club and published in October 1911, was that Dexter bulls should not exceed 900 pounds, when in breeding condition and that Dexter cows should not exceed 800 pounds, when in breeding condition. There was no mention of any stature standard at that point in time. Here's the reference: www.dextercattle.org/bulletin_archive/bulletins_1911_1920/1911%20October%20American%20Kerry%20and%20Dexter%20Club%20Bulletin.pdfThe American Kerry and Dexter Cattle Club ceased to function in 1921, and it's records (including Volume 1 Herd Book) were archived at Ohio State University. Then, in 1940, John Logsdon (Peerless Herd in Iowa) and Roy A. Cook, Secretary of the American Milking Shorthorn Association, reorganized the American Kerry and Dexter Club and republished Volume 1 Herd Book, including additional animals to the registry at that time. (John Logsdon was never actually a member of the original American Kerry and Dexter Cattle Club, though he did purchase his first registered Dexter cattle from members of that organization.) The new Volume 1 Herd Book included the following descriptions: three year old heifers weighed 600 - 700 lbs, mature cows 700 - 900 lbs, and mature bulls 1100 - 1250 lbs. The new American Kerry and Dexter Club also published a brochure in the 1940's that described the size of a Dexter, by weight: "Weights of mature cows are 800 to 900 lbs, of mature bulls, 1,100 to 1,200 lbs." Here again, there was no mention of any stature standard. In 1957, the Club's name was officially changed to the "American Dexter Cattle Association", the ADCA. It wasn't until the 1982 Annual Meeting of the ADCA, that the "DESCRIPTION AND STANDARDS FOR THE DEXTER BULL" was adopted by the membership, based on the report of a Standards Committee chaired by Don Piehota (P-Bar Herd in Oklahoma). In this new standard, the following was given regarding a size standard for Dexter bulls: "Weight - Bulls at three years old and over, should not exceed 1,000 lbs. live weight. Height - Bulls should not exceed more than 44 inches in height, nor stand less than 38 inches in height at the shoulder, at three years of age." Subsequently, at the 1983 Annual Meeting, a "DESCRIPTION AND STANDARDS FOR THE DEXTER COW", and it included the following size standard for Dexter cows: "Weight - Cows at three years old and over should not exceed 750 lbs. live weight. Height - Mature cows should not exceed 42 inches in height, nor stand less than 36 inches in height at the shoulder." There hasn't been any "formal" adoption of another standard since then. Later in the 1990's the term "Standards" was changed to "Guidelines" because these criteria were not being used to exclude any animals from ADCA shows or from ADCA registration. Patti
|
|
hoperefuge
member
Milking our Dexters in the mountains of KY since 2007
Posts: 101
|
Post by hoperefuge on Mar 4, 2016 15:13:33 GMT -5
That's a significant change in the weights from 1911 to 1940.
Was there a standard from the early years in England that addressed height?
Kim
|
|
|
Post by legendrockranch on Mar 4, 2016 15:54:56 GMT -5
Here are the current breed standards for Dexters in the UK. I didn't go back and see what they were in past years. Patti's the guru at that. 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 kansasdexters on Mar 4, 2016 16:03:43 GMT -5
Kim,
The Dexter Cattle Society (DCS) rules in 1903 had weight criteria, not stature criteria for size. Their weight criteria were:
"Dexter Bulls should not exceed 900 lbs live weight, when in breeding condition."
"Dexter Cows should not exceed 800 lbs live weight, when in breeding condition."
Patti
|
|
zephyrhillsusan
member
Caught Dexteritis in Dec. 2009. Member of this forum since Oct. 2013.
Posts: 1,502
|
Post by zephyrhillsusan on Mar 4, 2016 16:14:14 GMT -5
I've always wondered how much improved nutrition and health care might have affected the size (both height and weight) of Dexters. Of course there's no way to tell, but it would be nice if we could--like adjusting 1930 income and expenses for today's inflation rates.
|
|
|
Post by kansasdexters on Mar 4, 2016 16:55:45 GMT -5
zephyrhillsusan,
Increases in size were observed and were noted by some of the early breeders in the United States. That really shouldn't surprise anyone, because even if ALL of the original Dexter cows and bulls imported into the United States had been Chondro-carriers, their first generation born in the United States would have been a mix of Chondro-carriers and Chondro Non-carriers and there would have been noticeable differences in their stature and weight.
Patti
|
|
hoperefuge
member
Milking our Dexters in the mountains of KY since 2007
Posts: 101
|
Post by hoperefuge on Mar 4, 2016 17:38:37 GMT -5
Yes, I was thinking along those lines exactly, Patti, and not just in the US, but in the original animals in the UK too. If a lot of the original population was, as Carol said earlier, dwarf Kerries, you still have the taller genetics in there that will show in non-carriers.
I had found the current DCS standard...easy enough to find. I just couldn't find anything older. So it looks like the original US one Patti linked was pretty much based on the 1903 DCS one. It seems a bit odd that there's only a 100lb difference between cows & bulls, though.
Kim
|
|
|
Post by kansasdexters on Mar 4, 2016 22:05:17 GMT -5
Kim,
The cattle that were exported from Ireland to England, as "Dexter-Kerry" cattle could have been crosses of Dexter or Kerry with other breeds as well. One of the most widely recognized promoters/exporter of Kerry and Dexter-Kerry cattle was Mr. James Robertson, La Mancha Herd, near Dublin, Ireland. Please read what is said about Mr. Robertson's breeding experiments, on p. 47, of Cattle Breeds and Management by William Housman, 2nd Ed. Vinton & Company, LTD, London, 1900:
"Mr. William Hooper (Farmers' Gazette, Dublin) in one of his interesting papers upon Kerries and Dexters written for the Live Stock Journal Almanac, records the very successful results of crosses of the Polled Angus upon the Kerry in Mr. Robertson's experiments as La Mancha, and suggests an experimental cross of the Kerry cow and the Red Polled bull, as likely to give better dairy results, although, for beef, the Aberdeen-Angus cross produced "just the kind that the feeder wants"--small polled cattle of prime quality; and some steers of the Hereford-Kerry cross have come out profitable feeders and good butcher's bullocks. Mr. W.J. Malden, of Cardington, Bedford, in the third part off the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England for 1894, gives interesting particulars of crosses between Dexter-Kerry and the Indian Zebu (humped), the Shorthorn, the Polled Angus, and the Jersey breeds, respectively."
Just remember that folks like Mr. James Robertson were running a business, and trying to make profitable herds. They had visions of breed improvement, and they used the best animals that were available to them, to breed and produce animals that were desirable and valued in the export market. We can't ignore what has been properly documented in the written and published articles and books of 1800's history of the Kerry and the Dexter breeds.
Patti
|
|
hoperefuge
member
Milking our Dexters in the mountains of KY since 2007
Posts: 101
|
Post by hoperefuge on Mar 5, 2016 12:27:52 GMT -5
My thoughts have always been, well OF COURSE they were cross-breeding with other breeds at the beginning. That is, after all, how you develop a new breed. And Ooohhh, the irony, that he was using polled breeds to produce small, polled cattle!! ROFL Kim
|
|
|
Post by cddexter on Mar 8, 2016 13:49:46 GMT -5
I retired with one final thing I always wanted to accomplish, and never did. That was fix the height standard for the ADCA. I came close at the AGM in Colorado about 12 years ago, but...all I had was experience of seeing Dexters worldwide, rather than actual physical measurements of specific animals and their type. So my idea was shot down until we had accurate, provable statistics. Never happened. So, if 'guesswork' based on vast experience is okay, or at least a place to start, here goes: Sticking with cows for now, I have found that the dwarf can run anywhere from 29" to 45", but the majority are between 37 - 42 inches, and my nose tells me the mean is 39". I have found that the non-dwarf can run anywhere from 34" to 48", but the majority are between 39 - 45 inches, and my nose tells me the mean is 43" That gives a difference of 4", although I suspect it's closer to 5" in reality (Which is why mine is just guesswork) Julie Cavanagh, AU, who identified the chondro gene, found a measured, provable height difference in her genetic samples of 142 animals to be 6". I was working with 'pure' populations in England, South Africa, the US and Canada. Julie was working with mostly upgraded animals, and I did notice that the AU animals tended to be a bit larger than I was used to seeing elsewhere. So, I'm going to go with somewhere in the 4-5" range, or 4.5" height difference between dwarf and non, based strictly on eye and memory. In my defense, remember I have a construction background where I was used to looking at lumber in fixed lengths and am used to 'eyeballing' something to come up with a length or height, and I was usually pretty good at it. Of course, this is nowhere really a guaranteed method, but I found it served me well, and I was right, or pretty darn close to right more often than not. If you accept the 4.5" figure, then ON AVERAGE it follows that the chondro gene is affecting height by approximately 4.5" ON AVERAGE, but that number could be substantially different, even in full sisters, at maturity. After all, look at the height differences in sibling humans in the same family. Don't lose sight of the fact that up until about 20 years ago, worldwide, no one was breeding non-dwarfs exclusively, and up to 15 years ago, almost no one was really breeding for genetic consistency, including height. Everyone was using the dwarf gene to bring height down (artificially). This is why it's taken so long for truly not tall genetically consistent non dwarfs to be selected for and hit the ground in any numbers. Since dwarfism was an original selection criterion, and since lots of owners put appearance over genetic stability, I think the dwarf is here to stay. At the time 'breeds' were being developed in the mid to late 1800s, production and cosmetic consistency were the guiding principles. I've always argued that if the originators of the breed had the genetic knowledge we have now, they would have used different selection criteria, but of course, I could just as easily be wrong. . Maybe sometime in the future there will be genetically stable dwarf-sized non-carriers of chondro, and the chondro gene will quietly die out because breeders have achieved the 'look' but by a different route. Meanwhile...I have plumped for a double height standard. Pick one type, set a preferred max and min height range, and then say the other type can range 4.5" smaller (if the base was nons), or 4.5 taller (if the base was dwarfs). For instance, cows can be any height but the preferred height in dwarfs is 36 - 40.5". This would make the preferred height range for non-dwarfs 40.5 - 45". At least it would be a place to start, and in my not very humble option better than what we have now. Over time, proper stats could be made a priority, say at 3yr age, and the standard could be adjusted to be more accurate. I'm willing to bet the numbers wouldn't change all that much from those above, probably going upwards in both categories by 1" at most. Close enough for me. At least it would fix all the confusion. Patti took on the job of collecting height stats from the evaluations, but the original forms didn't ask if the cow was dwarf or non, so the numbers were meaningless. Later, the form was modified to include type, but most owners either didn't test, or wouldn't make the results known, so the numbers were still meaningless. owello cheers, c.
|
|
hoperefuge
member
Milking our Dexters in the mountains of KY since 2007
Posts: 101
|
Post by hoperefuge on Mar 8, 2016 15:25:30 GMT -5
Great info, Carol, thanks!
What you said about having dwarf-sized non-chondro animals that are genetically stable, reminds me of something I read in Beryl's book that really stuck with me. She mentions that once she got her cows down to 42" or less, she was seeing that stability. I don't have near the years of experience she did, but I am seeing some evidence of the same thing in my herd. It makes me wonder if there is some sort of "true short stature" gene that once you have homozygous animals that you're breeding, that's it. Who knows!?
Kim
|
|
|
Post by cddexter on Mar 8, 2016 18:55:37 GMT -5
well, Kim, it's easy peasy. Lowlines did it from Angus, all in about 30 years. I did it with Hiyu/Bedford/Grinstead selection in about 20 years. Kirk's done it with his Cascade Dexters. Patti and Paula are doing it, Olga bought a Paula bull and will see the same result.
With Lowlines they kept breeding the smallest to the smallest, and the tallest to the tallest. After a while, selection ended up at one end of the spectrum with only small stature genes. All you have to do is find several animals that are naturally small, but with great conformation, breed them together, select carefully for only the best--and still small--and voila! small consistent high quality Dexters. You need to get Marion Clements to send you some pics. She had a heifer born recently that hit the ground with incredible body depth, even before it had time to dry off, and it's even better looking now at several months. It probably won't be taller than 42" at maturity. She's been doing some back and forth semi line breeding with four loosely related bulls from one gene pool, and it's paid off.
Wouldn't it be cool if we could get a bunch of breeders all doing this, ending with small, quality Dexters with both good udders and good muscling, true dual purpose? A lot of those gangly Dexters you see out there on the sales lists usually come from big animals where dwarfism was used to create small size, and because up to about 30 years ago, the only trait early owners really paid attention to was size.
c.
|
|
hoperefuge
member
Milking our Dexters in the mountains of KY since 2007
Posts: 101
|
Post by hoperefuge on Mar 8, 2016 19:56:17 GMT -5
It would be incredibly cool!! I've been plugging away at it with my little herd. Kim
|
|
|
Post by kansasdexters on Mar 9, 2016 8:38:06 GMT -5
Kim,
Breeding Dexter cows that aren't chondro-carriers to Dexter bulls that aren't chondro-carriers, while selecting for the desired temperament, conformation, dual-purpose phenotype, and desired size allows us to create a more uniform herd of high-quality breeding stock. That translates into more and more predictable breeding outcomes for phenotype. Since we also concurrently do marker-based selection for functional traits, we are able to produce predictable outcomes for milk proteins (Beta Casein, Kappa Casein, and Beta Lactoglobulin), docility, feed efficiency, ribeye area, marbling score, and tenderness score. Genetic testing helps us to quickly identify our next generation of registered breeding stock candidates, while they are still very young. It is worth the investment (all of this testing totals less than $200 per animal) and we are able to make better culling decisions that give us rapid improvements in the herd in only a few years time.
Patti
|
|