Grueller wrote: » I would say the beep-s is the successor and is already in place.
Hard Knocks wrote: » I think Beeps is a far better program Sadly there’s allot of cost
Green&Red wrote: » I wouldn't agree with this at all, BEEP is partially aimed at gathering information for emissions targets. BDGP was solely aimed at increasing the female genetic characteristics of the Irish herd
Bellview wrote: » In my view they should tie the weight gains to the Star rating as you can have ie2 star cow putting on1.5kg a day while another could be putting on 0.6 kg a day.. if there is a trend of poor performance then icbf should hammer the low weight gain while lifting the higher weight gains
Bellview wrote: » Disagree with you on costs .. Cost not bad as rent scales 50 .. and if you feed a bag of feed to a calf it covers the meal feeding.. so you get 40 for spending 8 .. nothing wrong with the scheme Return
Green&Red wrote: » Disagree with that too. A big huge cow isn’t what they are looking for, if you’ve a cow putting on a pile of weight then it’ll cause trouble calving and effect milk levels
Grueller wrote: » Nope. BDGP stated mission was to increase the output of the beef herd by driving efficiency. This in turn was then spun as an environmental scheme ie more kilos of beef from less animals = less emissions. That's the rational that secured the funding from Europe.
Green&Red wrote: » Not accurate, from their own material BDGP I - "The programme will address widely acknowledged weaknesses in the maternal genetics of the Irish suckler herd" By the time BDGP II had come along this was widened to: "The objectives of the BDGP II are: 1. To lower the intensity of greenhouse gas emissions by improving the quality and efficiency of the national beef herd. 2. To improve the genetic merit of the national beef herd through the collection of data and genotypes of selected animals which will allow for the application of genomic selection in the beef herd."
Lady Haywire wrote: » I assumed Bellview was on about the cow's calves, not the cow herself?
Bellview wrote: » correct - i'm more interested in the offspring
Bellview wrote: » my point is more what the cow produces ie if you have cows in a field regardless of size that rear a calf that is gaining 1.5kg a day.. then they should stay and if you have cows that their calves are gaining 0.7kg a day they need to be culled ideally you want a small cow rearing a massive calf but this does not always happen.. i get tired of lads talking about massive cows and they breed runts etc on a personal level i'm hard on culling etc and if i see a cow that ie loses a calf if too fat .. then she is with larry so solves the problem .. and generally over time you finish up with a pretty functional herd (at least in theory)
Green&Red wrote: » How do you differentiate between the calf that’s on meal? Weight gain isn’t a level playing field.
Hard Knocks wrote: » Agree on cull hard Weighed recently for BEEPs Lightest cow at 520kg calf doing 1.3kg Heaviest cow at 840kg calf doing 1.5kg What’s the odds the lightest cow gets scored better
john mayo 10 wrote: » Sorry if this is a silly question but how are ye calculating daily weight gain. Are ye estimating their birth weight plus how many days old they are
Lady Haywire wrote: » Lightest cow will get scored better there but lets say the larger cow's calf makes 200 more at sales (higher quality, better weight for example) does the heavier cow then get marked up for a better ppk on the calf? When she's culled, better ppk on her LW as well. We have cows in the 550kg bracket, and cows around the 750kg bracket. Would I put TVR on the small cow? No. Would I put it on the bigger cow & expect a fancier calf to get an better price? Yes indeedy. There's pros & cons to each, I guess. Only the farmer can decide which he prefers to aim for. If the bigger cow isn't producing the goods with more valuable calves at sale time, then cull away, but it's not as clearcut as the powers that be telling us the lighter cow is a better one to keep. That's how we do it anyway.
Bitten & Hisses wrote: » I bought a scales under TAMS a couple of years ago. I leave it in the calving shed when it's not in the crush and I weigh each newborn calf as soon as they've sucked, or at worst on the day after birth. I key it into ICBF and that gives the ADG. 2020 is the first year I've been disciplined about doing it. The remarkable thing is that the vast majority of my calves are 42-43Kg, with a very occasional outlier. The heaviest cow I have at 800KG + gave birth unassisted to a 65Kg monster this year! It'll be interesting to see how they perform as a package. In terms of performance, I believe we have to live with the fact that BDGP won't be perfect in terms of variables like meal feeding. Another, probably more significant variable is from calves who suck other cows - I can see 4 calves under certain cows some days!
sonnybill wrote: » Anyone lodge an appeal to 2019 bdgp penalty and get no response ?!
DukeCaboom wrote: » A neighbour bought 3 genotyped heifers. He isn't signed up to icbf but wants to check their stats. Any tips other than signing up to icbf. Cheers
Bellview wrote: » If your a member of herdplus can you check their tags.. if you wish pm tag number to me and I can check If it helps
Lime Tree Farm wrote: » Yes, but it will return limited information. I have checked on our own sold stock, the information is restricted.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/73a050bf46afce149fa8c6da703ec9d2.svg)
