True-Short Dexters vs. Chondro-Short Dexters

[kansasdexters]

I have refrained from saying much on this thread, because I think that each breeder is responsible for what they choose to use in their breeding program and they are entitled to make that choice for themselves.

Every cattle breed has it's share of "lethal" genes. If you look at the semen catalog for Shorthorns and Angus, you will find plenty of AI sires in those breeds that "carry" lethal genes. Now days, they are tested, advertised as being carriers, and utilized to the breed's advantage. These sires are valued for their positive qualities, and their offspring are tested to identify carriers, but not all are culled for being carriers at the expense of the valuable "good" genetics that some of these animals still contribute to the breed.

Finding one or two defective genes (by testing or by progeny) and rejecting that animal without any further consideration means rejecting the thousands of good genes that can be passed to the next generation by continuing to use that animal in a breeding program. A Chondrodysplasia-carrier (aka a "true dwarf") can be a very functional and beautiful cow, bull, or steer. A Chondrodysplasia non-carrier can also be a very functional and beautiful cow, bull, or steer. But knowing what you have, truly appreciating it, and breeding responsibly is much more important than what the actual Chondro-status is.

Patti

[aggieelissa]

Nov 25, 2012 10:30:38 GMT -5 cddexter said:

And, Elissa, you're right. I didn't realize that gorgeous cow Nancy placed over Roberta's was yours. Quality is quality. Your cow didn't win because she was a dwarf, she won because she was the best cow in the ring. I asked Nancy later why the other cow got GC over you, and she said the calf at foot was a little better, so when all the points were considered, her pair had the slight edge.

The other cow did not get grand champion, this year, she has been grand or reserve for many many years. Yes, She won the cow calf class with ruby being second. Ruby won the mature cow class as well as the milking cow class. Then ruby went on to win the show. Ruby's calf was very gaunt from scours also she was only a month old at the show, it's very hard to judge the quality at a month, Nancy said that in the ring several times. Paula had a great calf at side and he was older, you could see the quality she produced that is why she won that class and it was deserved. Then in champion drive Nacey went on to say all points considered at the end of the day she was judging the animal as an individual, and how they stood that day in the ring.

[Cascade Meadows Farm - Kirk]

Nov 25, 2012 10:47:39 GMT -5 kansasdexters said:

Every cattle breed has it's share of "lethal" genes.

That's true, and if you understand genetics, you'll understand that via mutations, all breeds continue to accumulate more and more of these lethal genes over time, UNLESS efforts are taken to continually identify and scrub a breed of lethals (and other negative genes).

Lethal genes and other negative genes, are simply accidentally "misspelled" normal genes. The misspelling interferes with a normal function in an animal. The misspelling usually occurs during the production of eggs and especially sperm, creating fresh lethal genes that can then be handed down to future generations.

For Dexters, it won't stop with PHA and Chondrodysplasia. Over time, via the accidental mutations that occur in all breeds, more lethal genes will be found in dexters (and in all other breeds too).

If we don't have plans as a breed, to work toward identifying and reducing of these lethal and other negative genes, in another 100 years, we'll have a long list of them and the Dexter owners of that generation will look back at us and wonder what the heck we were thinking in letting all these lethals accumulate.

Now certainly, there are slow and gentle approaches to finding and eliminating these lethal/negative genes, leaving plenty of time for breeders to extract all the goodness out of their existing carriers.... So I'm not proposing culling.

Perhaps I'll start a new thread in coming days where we can kindly discuss how we can identify and reduce current and future lethals/negatives.

I'm sure the discussion won't be for the faint of heart, but surely we can keep it friendly.



PS. Thanks to EVERYONE for all the good and kind-hearted discussion on this thread. I'd say it went reasonably well, for such a tender subject.

[lakeportfarms]

Finding one or two defective genes (by testing or by progeny) and rejecting that animal without any further consideration means rejecting the thousands of good genes that can be passed to the next generation by continuing to use that animal in a breeding program. A Chondrodysplasia-carrier (aka a "true dwarf") can be a very functional and beautiful cow, bull, or steer. A Chondrodysplasia non-carrier can also be a very functional and beautiful cow, bull, or steer. But knowing what you have, truly appreciating it, and breeding responsibly is much more important than what the actual Chondro-status is.

Thanks Patti. Well said.

[lakeportfarms]

1. Why doesn't Gene deserve the same stricture?

2. " ...good thing you don't make the rules. I think there should be a rule that once a thread that's so contentious reaches 10 pages it should be locked and the person that put it over the top gets the last word."

Speaking of making rules...

Carol, I haven't seen any instances where Gene has proposed the elimination of certain genetics from the breed (i.e. polled, dun or red), just because he doesn't think they are true Dexters. Gene is an advocate of testing including genotyping, and not just for chondro or PHA, which is as Patti mentioned in this or another thread, a "gift" to future owners of the Dexter breed . If there is at some point in the future another genetic "lethal" as you all like to call it, that testing or the preservation of the hair samples may be invaluable in tracking down the orgin and could help countless others with their breeding decisions.

Regarding the rules...I was simply showing a bit of sarcasm towards Kirk's proposal that the rules be changed for the AGM or other shows to eliminate chondro or PHA affected animals from contention. It is an insult to the many worthy champions in the past such as Ruby or Paula, and the future exclusion of such nice examples from overall champion honors.

Dexters have a relatively unique position of being able to appeal to a wide variety of owners. Just using our own experience as an example, we got into Dexters because we didn't want to do AI on our Angus herd anymore, or have a 2000 lb. Angus bull that would be looking me in the eyes on our property with 5 kids around. We ended up with Mike because he was so short he didn't even look into the eyes of our kids. We now have zero Angus and over 40 Dexters in our herd. Had it not been for our first experience with the chondro carriers we would have been looking at another breed like the lowline Angus or mini Hereford and we would have been singing their praises. Maybe some would prefer we hadn't discovered Dexters to join all of you on this fine site ;D, but we have introduced the breed to a lot of new owners in a relatively short amount of time, and taken a lot of time to educate these owners on the breed including all the genetic issues. It seems to me that is a good thing.

[wdd]

[/quote]
Carol, I haven't seen any instances where Gene has proposed the elimination of certain genetics from the breed (i.e. polled, dun or red), just because he doesn't think they are true Dexters. [/quote]

I'm not Carol but if you go to the dextercattle2 board and search through the old threads you will find his support of Judy wishing to revoke the registries of dexters with certain English bulls in their pedigree. He has also claimed that any dexter with a large well formed udder has it due to crosses with Jersey's. Petrel's udder is nice and large in my book and he would have a hard time convinsing me that Woodmagic had a Jersey outcross program and there are many pictures from the early 1900's and late 1800's that show large well formed udders on dexters. These statements have turned many people against his other views and oppinions. He has done much for the Dexter Breed and promotion of Dexters, but some of his statements have alienated other breeders. I myself am guilty of this at times.

I am not trying to stir the pot here just addressing your statement and informing those who haven't seen some of the heated discussions on dc2 why some people, Gene included, have such a hair trigger when certain subjects or statements are made. I choose not to breed affected dexters but I would not use my resources in order to stop someone from doing so if they choose. I come from a dairy background so most dexter udders make me cringe (no my animals do not have perfect udders in my book but they are better than a large portion of the dexter udders I have seen). The Jersey Registry has taken the stand to try and eliminate lethal mutations when they appear. They will register carrier cows but not carrier bulls with the idea that eventually the defect will be eliminated without throwing out the genetics that lead breeders to those lines in the first place. That is an example of what some are talking about for those not familiar with these policies. I am not advocating this to be done with PHA nor Chrondro. I have seen some very nice looking affected dexters I would be proud to own if I was so inclined and some that were so disporportionate they left a bad taste in my mouth.

[jamboru]

23/9/07 ...................etc, etc.
All Woodmagic animals today are descended from short leg Dexters - Midget, Marjoram, Plover - my foundation animals were all short legged, every Woodmagic goes back to them, it doesn't say much for the logic of folks that then condemn 'Woodmagic' as non-Dexters.
All my love
Beryl

[jamshundred]

Gary

<<I'm not Carol but if you go to the dextercattle2 board and search through the old threads you will find his support of Judy wishing to revoke the registries of dexters with certain English bulls in their pedigree.<<

Oh jeez! Another stealth attack. I much be crimping the pantaloons of ADCA because just like clock work. . . out of the blue comes a hit man from the inner connections! And Gene must have mentioned Legacy again. Oh dear.

As far as I recall, I've only named one bull as having a pedigree that did not qualify for inclusion in the ADCA herd book. That was Saltaire Platinum with an Angus great-grandmother ( recorded in the UK herd book appendix( upgrading) records - 1969 and confirmed to be accurate by UK and US interests) he did NOT meet the US registry requirements for imported animals. Having reiterated that fact, I would like for you to show me any formal request I have ever made to remove any animal owned by anyone other than myself from the herd book of any registry.

I daily work with people who breed animals from EVERY bloodline in the Dexter breed. None of them will substantiate your accusation nor does any effort I have made to further the interests of the breeders and the breed confirm it. You bear false witness. I am just confused as to your agenda but I figure I will figure it out if I want to bother to try. If your feathers are still ruffled that the truth of these out-crossed genetics has been discussed and you purchased animals without full knowledge of this. . . tough. It's reality. Deal with it. If you were comfortable with those genetics in your herd, you wouldn't be carrying around this grudge, now would you? Perhaps you need to look within for the source of your anger and then direct it at the real perps. Can't be me. . . I had nothing to do with those decisions. PS. I have some of those bloodlines in my own herd and like you. . . it was because breeders were not given full disclosure. In fact, I was lied to about it.

Do I advocate for the knowledge of, and therefore the preservation of our earliest seedstock and traditional bloodlines now in a CRISIS of numbers. YEP! That you nor anyone in the inner circle has ever offered encouragement or did a single thing to promote or preserve the US rarity in this breed is a disgrace. I guess you all figure if you ignore it, it will eventually go away and darned if you haven't almost succeeded.

As to Genebo! The breed is better for having had him. I don't know anyone who loves or promotes Dexter cattle with the untiring enthusiasm he consistently shares with others. There is no one he won't befriend or rush to help with any problem. He is a Dexter treasure himself!

Judy

[wdd]

Judy please read my statement again that you quoted. Notice the word "wishing". I never stated that he nor yourself ever official requested that the registration be revoked. This thread includes statements from those that feel carrier type animals shouldn't be given the same status or privledges as non-affected dexters, which I don't agree with. I was correcting a statement made by another who hadn't seen any of Gene's posts advocating or supporting elimination of 'certain genetics from the breed'.

As far as 'bearing false witness' goes. You claim I am part of the ADCA inner circle and a 'hit man'. I have personally spoken with Sandi Thomas ( I bought my first dexters from her and she is the chairman of the Pedigree & Genetics Committee which I serve on and I get occational e-mails from her concerning P&G business but nothing personal or orders to 'hit' anyone). I spoke briefly with Monica Dexter at a PDCA AGM held here in Idaho a few years ago and she is my current Director (she is also on the P&GC so I see emails from her regarding cases we are looking at). I had sent e-mails to Chris Richard who is a former ADCA President about some animals I was interested in back in 2008. I have had correspondence with Carol inregards to bulls that were from her breeding and if she knew of any available source for the semen (I have no knowledge of any Committee or official capacity she serves in the ADCA and the e-mails were over a couple years ago). These are my contacts with anyone that may be concidered by you as an insider. You and Gene have had more contact with the 'inner circle' than I have over the years and even in the short term. You claim to be of the highest integrity but on this issue you have fallen flat on your face.

You never checked your facts before 'bearing false witness' against me. Your integrity will always be in question with me now and I hope this shows your true colors to those that read these posts. You are blinded by your own agenda and won't let the truth or 'facts' get in the way of you thrusting your agenda on others. You impunded yourself trying to discredit me. Take off your blinders and check the facts before 'bearing false witness' against others.

[wdd]

Sorry I missed one connection. Dan Butterfield who is a former Director but hasn't had much to do with the ADCA in the last couple years. He sponsored me in Herbalife but I haven't spoken with him for over 2 months with how busy I've been.

Judy I realize that you are getting advanced in age so if you misstating the facts is a result of a medical condition I appologize for being offended by your comments.

[wdd]

Sorry I was so confused about why you were attacking me over my post and the claims you made regarding what I supposedly said that I failed to respond to your personal attack against my Dexters, their progenitors, and the wonderful breeders I bought my animals from.
I had read many post by you and others regarding Lucifer, Outlaw, and other English bulls deamed as not "pure" enough. I spent 3-4 hours discussing many of these stories and theories with Sandi Thomas on the day I bought them (there were also many genetic and color questions discussed as well and several e-mails prior to my decision to purchase from her). Jeff Chambers was equally enlightening when I bought from him. I have no regrets concerning the Dexters I bought nor their pedigrees. These two individuals have more breeding and scientific knowledge regarding dexter genetics than most breeders out there. I trust these two and the information, personal knowledge, and experience they have gained more than conjecture and personal theories that are obtained to support misguided agendas. You can spit in my face if you want but leave my beautiful dexters and these respected breeders out of it.

[jamshundred]

Gary,

Frankly speaking - that was way too much information!

Let me just address these comments since it would appear to me ( my interpretation) that you feel the discussion that has taken place regarding imported bulls was erroneous since those you trust to tell you the truth must have done so. Here is some information you might not have been given?

Let's start with Lucifer of Knotting. I bought some cows just after the turn of the decade. When I received the registration papers there was a number and then an X that followed the registration number. I had never seen that before. I have boundless curiosity about everything. Everything. So I called the registry and inquired. I was told. . . there is an imported bull from England in the pedigree and that is what the X designates. I bought it. Seemed logical. ( Later I was told there was a breeder who INSISTED the X be placed on the registration certificate - and later than that this same breeder began using animals from this line and then insisted it be removed. Why don't you try to find out who that was for me I bred the cows. I had calves. They were "different" from other Dexters I raised. I began to sell them. After the split while doing pedigree research I discovered the X mean "experimental". The bull originally had the X placed on offspring in the ADCA registration process because of this. Not only is this experimental breeding program documented in the UK herdbooks, and the first animal that was entered into the herdbook shown to be a Angus/Jersey cross - it can be found in Ms. Rutherford's book where she clearly states that isn't the entire story, that she has documents with other info as well. So, we know that Lucifer carried Angus and Jersey and there is an insinuation of other breeds not named. THAT IS FACT.

Saltaire Platinum. I repeatedly asked ( along with others about his ancesty. Why don't you find those posts and talk about them Gary?
I was stonewalled, ridiculed, criticized, and much more. Just made me dig harder. The ENTIRE story is on my personal website along with the UK herdbook entries. On this very board, Carol Davidson was finally forced to admit the 1969 herdbook entry of the great-grandmother with the Angus. I didn't make it up. I reported it. That isn't all either.
The other herdbook info is on my website. There simply is NO doubt and since there is currently a thread about genetic defects. . . . seems to me there is room for more concern about these imported upgraded bulls and things they might be importing instead of American Dexters which had NOTHING but the dwarfism which has been in the breed from the beginning until the Canadian imports brought us PHA.

Looks like there is even more to worry about than upgraded genetics these days when it comes to imported bulls thanks to Kirk! My goodness but the pendulum swings. And just as an aside, I think there is also an issue of oversized calves and difficult births traveling the talk circles.

Judy

[cddexter]

Carol Davidson was finally forced to admit

Judy, I guess umpteen times isn't enough, so here it is again:

I have the original handwritten records from the English registry secretary, and those entries were the basis of the printed herd books. Thus my info precedes the herd book info. They are recorded in a bound book, ~40 lines to a page. I have almost 300 pages. That doesn't include all the appendix and experimental registry entries. That comes to over 12,000 entries. If you look up Platinum in the purebred section, you can follow his pedigree back to day 1. I also have the official DCS Export Extended Pedigree, same info. The DCS online pedigree same thing. So far pretty conclusive. How many people wiould stop at this point? However, if you were to go into the appendix and experimental registries, and check every single animal in his background, eventually you would find one that shows twice. Oops, There is one animal that shows as an appendix entry for one year. Does the Herd Book show an entry for a purebred? yes. Go to the Herd Book, and the following year you can find the same cow, same birth date, with a registered fullblood calf. Two entries for the same cow, for the same birthdate. With no reason to do this exhaustive check, who would? So, next I suppose one should see how realistic the mistake is....the story I got was the breeder decided she'd been premature in her assessment, and the calf was in fact by the herd bull, not a cross as she'd thought, and had honorably registered as such. Was she right? i guess you (that's YOU, Judy) should provide some proofs rather than just gossip as to which was the more correct registration. Evidently the Society decided to accept her word. Unfortunately that story isn't anywhere near as interesting and destructive as the one you prefer.

Since as soon as i was told of the double registration, I did some checking with old breeders, I somehow don't think I was forced into anything. But, again, any time you can make it look like you've discredited another,, you are all over it like a bad rash.

Fill your boots. I always think of you in the same way I think of National Enquirer: fun to read but don't expect to take the info to the bank. cheers, me.

[jamshundred]

<<Carol Davidson was finally forced to admit<<
You were and you did and you fell all over yourself coming up with that hokey story about contacting someone in England and "just then" discovering it was true". You should have seen me jumping with joy when I at last got it out of you! It took me more than SIX years to break through your obfuscations, stonewalling, and. . . ( four letter word starting with L).

<<<I have the original handwritten records from the English registry secretary, and those entries were the basis of the printed herd books. Thus my info precedes the herd book info. They are recorded in a bound book, ~40 lines to a page. I have almost 300 pages. That doesn't include all the appendix and experimental registry entries. That comes to over 12,000 entries. If you look up Platinum in the purebred section, you can follow his pedigree back to day 1.

More smoke and mirrors. There are TWO pedigrees that can be traced on Saltaire Platinum. There are not so many pages that apply so WHY don't you go ahead and post them here. Everytime there is a discussion about anything you bring up all the records or photos you have - but you NEVER produce a thing for viewing. And you NEVER produce any authentication ( as in written articles or opinions) by the " experts" you invoke to buffer your opinions.


<< I also have the official DCS Export Extended Pedigree, same info. The DCS online pedigree same thing. So far pretty conclusive. How many people wiould stop at this point?<<

You know who SHOULD have stopped or started somewhere along that line. The people responsible for importing a bull that did not meet the breed standards into a CLOSED herd of cattle that had the most unique bloodlines in the world. The leadership of ADCA. They did NO investigation of this situation. How could they have and still allow the rarest herd of Dexter cattle in the world to be genetically changed forever.

<< However, if you were to go into the appendix and experimental registries, and check every single animal in his background, eventually you would find one that shows twice.<<

No Carol. The animal does not show twice. The calf from the animal shows twice. Once when registered by the owner and then again three years later when re-registered by a new owner with different parentage Who would a thinking person trust?. The breeder who subsequently DID state the original entry was correct or the second person with a possible vested interest in producing and selling polled cattle?

< Oops, There is one animal that shows as an appendix entry for one year. Does the Herd Book show an entry for a purebred? yes. Go to the Herd Book, and the following year you can find the same cow, same birth date, with a registered fullblood calf. Two entries for the same cow, for the same birthdate. <<

I cannot understand this- no clue what you are suggesting so I would be surprised if anyone else does - even you for that matter. It makes no sense and it isn't accurate. We can fix that. Easy enough to scan those pages to the board and everyone can see them.

<<With no reason to do this exhaustive check, who would?<<
The leadership of ADCA whose mission statement for years and years was: To protect the purity of Dexter cattle. That statement could be found in every publication where the mission statement was printed.

<< So, next I suppose one should see how realistic the mistake is....the story I got was the breeder decided she'd been premature in her assessment, and the calf was in fact by the herd bull, not a cross as she'd thought, and had honorably registered as such. <<

Carol, you just made that up. ( No surprise here - as I've had to fend off lots of your imaginations in the past the one I always reference is the lie you were caught in regarding Ms. Rutherford). You never in all our "dicsussions" of the past brought up this latest story. LOL! And it is not a realistic mistake. There is no way I can figure out how a person re-registers an animal with a different pedigree a "realistic mistake". If this was a simple correction the DCS would have published it as such. I cannot find that in the herd books. Since you claim to have ALL the paperwork, I will wait and watch for you to post it to substantiate your fiction.

<<Was she right? i guess you (that's YOU, Judy) should provide some proofs rather than just gossip as to which was the more correct registration. Evidently the Society decided to accept her word. Unfortunately that story isn't anywhere near as interesting and destructive as the one you prefer.<<

LOL! Same old tactics. Didn't shut me up before. . won't now either.
I refer you to the previous comment. I have provided ALL the information in the public documents on my website along with footnotes of where they can be found. YOU have provided nothing. You never do.
You just say and everyone believes it until I come along with the proof of the ......(three letter word -starts with L).

And by the way, when YOU provide the gossip as in the Parndon Bullfinch stories - that is OK. We don't need any proof then, right? LOL

<<Since as soon as i was told of the double registration, I did some checking with old breeders, I somehow don't think I was forced into anything. But, again, any time you can make it look like you've discredited another,, you are all over it like a bad rash.<<

No Carol. . .I am all over YOU like a bad rash. I don't like you because you have no respect for the truth and I detest . . . .(five letter word starts with L). You will tell a . . . . (three letter word starts with an L) when the truth serves you better and I don't care about the rest of your life, but I love the Dexter cattle breed and when I was told by a former director that you stood up at a meeting of the ADCA BOD and promised to destroy all the purity in Dexter cattle (and alas have almost succeeded), that was the final straw. I intend to see you fail at least for the duration of my lifetime in Dexters.

<<Fill your boots. I always think of you in the same way I think of National Enquirer: fun to read but don't expect to take the info to the bank. cheers, me.<<

You wish. Cute and nice try there but. . trouble for you is . . MY info can be taken to the bank because accuracy and documentation and yes. . that H word you dread, ( honesty) are important to me. I do it right or I don't do it. I make every efffort to check once and then again. Your post is just more of what you have handed out for the 9 years this little dance has been tapping except you seem to have dropped this often used quote taken from existing records of the Dakodan forum and copied here exactly as you typed it, " FACT~ALL of Esmeralda's 16 offspring were polled, from different horned Dexter bulls. Geneticists have all agreed that to have had that many calves, all polled, and from a variety of horned bull, she herself was homozygous for polled. This means there MUST be a mutation involved."

1. The sires of the calves were not all horned bulls nor were they all different.
2. Although you have been asked you have never given the name of a single genetist that was ever consulted. Another gambit you employ to substantiate your assertions. " So many experts", "this many scientist",
that many. . . . . You never publish the written opinons or give links or footnotes where to find the collaborating material. Never.

Rather than refer anyone with an interest as to who is right on the Esmerald offspring to the research published on my website, I will start a new thread and publish it here on the forum. It wil be: Esmeralda calving record.

I have always accepted the polled cattle in America while bemoaning the circumstances that brought them here. I work with breeders of polled cattle regularly and they are treated no differently than breeders of horned cattle. Although my personal opinion is that there were folks who saw a varied opportunity with the polled and then developed the circumstances and story needed to get that animal accepted as a mutation while avoiding testing ( and yes - I know two persons who both told me they suggested/requested testing and were not permitted to do so one from Canada and one from the UK one of them lamenting the fact that while in a field with Esmeralda the though to grab some tail hairs didn't occur until after the fact), and perhaps there were others whose inquiries were not "official" DCS requirements. None the less, if there was nothing to hide - why not? Although I accept and work with polled breeders, and respect and admire their love of the animals they choose to breed, I do NOT have to stop trying to save the unique and rare purity of the Dexter horned breed that exists ONLY in the US in more than a few numbers, and I do not have to accept fiction as fact or refrain from challenging it when it appears.

Judy