Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

New suckler scheme on per hectare basis!!

Options
24567…21

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    limo_100
    Registered Users Posts: 1,281 ✭✭✭limo_100


    Farrell wrote: »
    Even when you look ay the latest beef excel report, in Charolais the bulls which have the highest weanling price are not 5 star for terminal.
    Like above pointed on HCA drop in value, lots other bulls do likewise which can be a kick in the teeth 9 months after selecting a sire.

    When the yellow tags first came out you could record the sire, as AI code or own bull.
    Looking on ICBF recently that info appears to be lost

    Is there even a 5star charolais out there, by that i mean nearly all the ch bulls were 5stars but with every update they keep slipping. I have a HKG cow shes top class in fairness 350-400 at weaning without being creep fed( one year i did creep i took the adx calf off the cow 505kg) shes rated at 1 star maternal and half star terminal


  • Options
    #33
    Wooly Admirer
    Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭Wooly Admirer


    I think its a great initiative anyway. Too many breeders out there spouting crap about rosettes and how curly the tail of their bull was in Tullamore. The reality is that alot of these superstar bulls are being cut out of cows, reared on Friesians and wedged into a creep feeder eating Red Mills pedigree honey nut cereal 99!! How is this situation relevant to profitable commercial suckler farming???

    Unfortunately I would like a cow to calf without the need for a scalpel and get that calf to a decent sale price without the need to pass my margin onto the co-op to cover a meal bill. The more schemes and hurdles the better to improve the current state of the industry.

    In relation to sire recording, I can understand a pedigree breeder recording incorrect sire details - they have a vested interest! A commercial farmer recording incorrect sires is nothing more than ignorant and idiotic. It's in every commercial farmers interest to record accurate data on these pedigree bulls to help wash over the bull**** being recorded by those few breeders trying to make tits of us buying their overfed bulls.........


  • Options
    #34
    tanko
    Registered Users Posts: 9,205 ✭✭✭tanko


    HCA has the following stats, muscle 2%, skeletal 2%, functionality 13%, docility 35%, all within breed.
    He has half a star out of five for carcase weight and carcase conformation within breed, width of hips in the bottom 5%, and two and a half stars for daughter calving interval.
    He has five stars for daughters milk and a calving difficulty of 4.4

    Even though most of these stats are really poor, he is given five stars within and across breeds for replacement index even though beef traits are supposed to make up 43% of the maternal index. This doesn't make sense to me.

    I've used HCA a lot over the last few years. He is a good easy calving bull to use on heifers producing leggy calves that lack muscle.

    But he produces heifers which have narrower hips than their mothers and less milk than their mothers (so far anyway).
    If he's a five star replacement bull then I'm Elvis Pressley.

    The euro stars are a step in the right direction and an improvement on what went before but they're far from perfect yet.


  • Options
    #35
    manjou
    Registered Users Posts: 377 ✭✭manjou


    LIstened to journal podcast and then checked eurostars of herd and 2 problems cropped up.
    1 The eurostars are changed twice a year and i have 5 star cows and heifers at the moment but by the time in 6 years the might not be as reliability at moment is around 30% so they may drop . So if you buy a 4 star heifer as weanling she might be 3 star when she calves.
    2 You have to sign up for 6 years with alot of terms and conditions so simple scheme has now become complicated with penalities etc


  • Options
    #36
    Grueller
    Registered Users Posts: 5,100 ✭✭✭Grueller


    manjou wrote: »
    LIstened to journal podcast and then checked eurostars of herd and 2 problems cropped up.
    1 The eurostars are changed twice a year and i have 5 star cows and heifers at the moment but by the time in 6 years the might not be as reliability at moment is around 30% so they may drop . So if you buy a 4 star heifer as weanling she might be 3 star when she calves.
    2 You have to sign up for 6 years with alot of terms and conditions so simple scheme as now become complicated with penalities etc

    Ya. Problem 2 could affect me potentially. We have a place that would suit milking and are waiting for a couple of years to see what the post quota landscape is so six years is a big commitment.
    Another issue that cropped up in my head. Is your payment tied to the number of cows you apply for in year 1 of the scheme? If so the price of sucklers is about to go through the roof.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Nettleman
    Registered Users Posts: 651 ✭✭✭Nettleman


    Grueller wrote: »
    Ya. Problem 2 could affect me potentially. We have a place that would suit milking and are waiting for a couple of years to see what the post quota landscape is so six years is a big commitment.
    Another issue that cropped up in my head. Is your payment tied to the number of cows you apply for in year 1 of the scheme? If so the price of sucklers is about to go through the roof.

    Just read the 7 conditions of the scheme in the rag this morning and I wont be doing it. They have made a pure balls of the scheme that was there last year which I was in, and it took 15% samples at a cost of 30 euro, which was ok.


  • Options
    #38
    limo_100
    Registered Users Posts: 1,281 ✭✭✭limo_100


    Nettleman wrote: »
    Just read the 7 conditions of the scheme in the rag this morning and I wont be doing it. They have made a pure balls of the scheme that was there last year which I was in, and it took 15% samples at a cost of 30 euro, which was ok.

    what are the condinions that dont suit? I haven't read it yet be 7 before i get a chance


  • Options
    #39
    Nettleman
    Registered Users Posts: 651 ✭✭✭Nettleman


    limo_100 wrote: »
    what are the condinions that dont suit? I haven't read it yet be 7 before i get a chance

    1. Surveys as before but to be extended next year to include herd health and grassland mngt
    2. Genetype of at least 60% of herd (remember 15% last year at cost of 30 per sample)-
    3. record full animal details, calving difficulty as already
    4. if using AI, 80% must be from 4 or 5 star bulls, if using your own bull, he must be 4 or 5 star
    5. 20% of heifers/cows are 4 or 5 star, and by 2020, this must be 50%
    6. Do a carbon navigator, grazing length, slurry, fertiliser
    7. must attend training courses by oct 2016.

    and its not 100 euro, its 95


  • Options
    #40
    smokey-fitz
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭smokey-fitz


    Its all a load of crap anyway. You will never get true figures for anything, maybe some of you have been honest filling out the bdp last year but most just ticked the best. And as for buying in replacements that are supposed to be 5 star in a mart sounds ridiculous. Would you trust someone you dont know to out down the correct info when filling out icbfs forms?

    Id like to think majority of farmers are honest but all these figures are decided by the farmer. What I class as a good cow might be alot different to the next fella.


  • Options
    #41
    blue5000
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,617 Mod ✭✭✭✭blue5000


    limo_100 wrote: »
    I sold a heifer with a calf at foot in the mart the other day, she was 5star with an index of 242 i asked the mart should i bring the stars and put it up they told me no one has ever done it and no one has ever asked for it.

    On a different topic if your worried about not having stock with stars dont worry both it its a silly system one that can be manipulated as easy as hell. When we first got an icbf profile most of the cows had no sire so me being younger at the time i gave them one a 5star one at the time, and if i a buy a suck calf and she has no sire she'll have a 5star one before he knows it so it just proves it a stupid system

    This is why we have 5 star maternal bulls dropping to 3 stars very quickly. Later on more stats come out and the truth gets revealed as reliability % increases. It's not perfect, it should only be used as a guide. As genotyping increases the messers are being found out. Bad information knocks people back two or three generations when choosing a bull.

    If the seat's wet, sit on yer hat, a cool head is better than a wet ar5e.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    blue5000
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,617 Mod ✭✭✭✭blue5000


    Nettleman wrote: »
    1. Surveys as before but to be extended next year to include herd health and grassland mngt
    2. Genetype of at least 60% of herd (remember 15% last year at cost of 30 per sample)-
    3. record full animal details, calving difficulty as already
    4. if using AI, 80% must be from 4 or 5 star bulls, if using your own bull, he must be 4 or 5 star
    5. 20% of heifers/cows are 4 or 5 star, and by 2020, this must be 50%
    6. Do a carbon navigator, grazing length, slurry, fertiliser
    7. must attend training courses by oct 2016.

    and its not 100 euro, its 95
    95 for first 10 cows then 80 after that, but all depends how many apply for it.

    If the seat's wet, sit on yer hat, a cool head is better than a wet ar5e.



  • Options
    #43
    Cigarman
    Registered Users Posts: 2 ✭Cigarman


    Oh yeah hammer HCA alright and not a word about other bulls with 20% calving difficulty and no milk. Hes not perfect but hes a hell of a lot better than a lot of what is currently available out there to breed suckler cows from.

    Bringing in the Genomic testing is a great job - clowns who are knowingly putting wrong info into a system and then turning around and criticising the info that the same system spits out is just braindead behaviour...hope those lads get a fulltime job and give up suckling leave the rest of us alone who actually depend on it for a livelihood.

    They only sent out letters to pedigree breeders who had wrong ancestry info - they havent changed back the wrong sires on the commercial cows yet but when they do...the cows that geniuses told lies about for a shortterm selfish gain will all have their sires removed and the system will be that bit better because of it.

    Best thing to ever happen beef breeding...yes it will be difficult to adjust to depending on what your stars are at the moment but currently your average suckler cow is getting worse for milk and fertility and anything that turns this around especially when your putting bread on the table because of it is a good thing.


  • Options
    #44
    blue5000
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,617 Mod ✭✭✭✭blue5000


    Wooly Admirer wrote: »
    I think its a great initiative anyway. Too many breeders out there spouting crap about rosettes and how curly the tail of their bull was in Tullamore. The reality is that alot of these superstar bulls are being cut out of cows, reared on Friesians and wedged into a creep feeder eating Red Mills pedigree honey nut cereal 99!! How is this situation relevant to profitable commercial suckler farming???

    Unfortunately I would like a cow to calf without the need for a scalpel and get that calf to a decent sale price without the need to pass my margin onto the co-op to cover a meal bill. The more schemes and hurdles the better to improve the current state of the industry.

    In relation to sire recording, I can understand a pedigree breeder recording incorrect sire details - they have a vested interest! A commercial farmer recording incorrect sires is nothing more than ignorant and idiotic. It's in every commercial farmers interest to record accurate data on these pedigree bulls to help wash over the bull**** being recorded by those few breeders trying to make tits of us buying their overfed bulls.........

    Agree 100% best post on this thread, thanks.

    If the seat's wet, sit on yer hat, a cool head is better than a wet ar5e.



  • Options
    #45
    Nettleman
    Registered Users Posts: 651 ✭✭✭Nettleman


    blue5000 wrote: »
    95 for first 10 cows then 80 after that, but all depends how many apply for it.

    I have just done a comparision of my females ratings today (updated for april evaluations) versus December, and the swings are large, and uncontrollable. One maternal bull (NOT HCA btw) has fallen by €80 since I bought his straws in early 2014, resulting in his heifers dropping by €40 (assuming mother ratings doesn't change), and this is completely outside my control, so whether you are / are not in the 4 star category is out of your hands, and you could be ok today, and next evaluation your 3.5 and you miss the threshold. Another very sneaky one is that cross compliance penalties hit this scheme, but it also says "vise versa", which I read to mean if you have a breach in this scheme, your BPS could be hit as well...???? am I reading that right????


  • Options
    #46
    manjou
    Registered Users Posts: 377 ✭✭manjou


    Wooly Admirer wrote: »
    I think its a great initiative anyway. Too many breeders out there spouting crap about rosettes and how curly the tail of their bull was in Tullamore. The reality is that alot of these superstar bulls are being cut out of cows, reared on Friesians and wedged into a creep feeder eating Red Mills pedigree honey nut cereal 99!! How is this situation relevant to profitable commercial suckler farming???

    Unfortunately I would like a cow to calf without the need for a scalpel and get that calf to a decent sale price without the need to pass my margin onto the co-op to cover a meal bill. The more schemes and hurdles the better to improve the current state of the industry.

    In relation to sire recording, I can understand a pedigree breeder recording incorrect sire details - they have a vested interest! A commercial farmer recording incorrect sires is nothing more than ignorant and idiotic. It's in every commercial farmers interest to record accurate data on these pedigree bulls to help wash over the bull**** being recorded by those few breeders trying to make tits of us buying their overfed bulls.........

    Agree thats its a good idea of a scheme but problem of using the star rating is the reliability of alot of bulls which means people using only high reliability bulls so you end up with smaller gene pool. This means all bulls appearing in sales from next year are all from same bulls and all related. If all information was collected over 6 years and at end then there would be better able to tell 5 star cattle from 1 star.
    My best cow same breeding as rest except grandsire on mothers side different has only 1 star while sisters have 5 stars so all data from weight recording fertility etc not showing up.


  • Options
    #47
    LivInt20
    Registered Users Posts: 491 ✭✭LivInt20


    Nettleman wrote: »
    Just read the 7 conditions of the scheme in the rag this morning and I wont be doing it. They have made a pure balls of the scheme that was there last year which I was in, and it took 15% samples at a cost of 30 euro, which was ok.

    Previous post, "The scheme is voluntary so you don't have to enter if you think it is too tough for you."

    So the scheme is too tough for you?


  • Options
    #48
    LivInt20
    Registered Users Posts: 491 ✭✭LivInt20


    Cigarman wrote: »
    Oh yeah hammer HCA alright and not a word about other bulls with 20% calving difficulty and no milk. Hes not perfect but hes a hell of a lot better than a lot of what is currently available out there to breed suckler cows from.

    Bringing in the Genomic testing is a great job - clowns who are knowingly putting wrong info into a system and then turning around and criticising the info that the same system spits out is just braindead behaviour...hope those lads get a fulltime job and give up suckling leave the rest of us alone who actually depend on it for a livelihood.

    They only sent out letters to pedigree breeders who had wrong ancestry info - they havent changed back the wrong sires on the commercial cows yet but when they do...the cows that geniuses told lies about for a shortterm selfish gain will all have their sires removed and the system will be that bit better because of it.

    Best thing to ever happen beef breeding...yes it will be difficult to adjust to depending on what your stars are at the moment but currently your average suckler cow is getting worse for milk and fertility and anything that turns this around especially when your putting bread on the table because of it is a good thing.

    Excellent post.


  • Options
    #49
    smokey-fitz
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭smokey-fitz


    Nettleman wrote: »
    I have just done a comparision of my females ratings today (updated for april evaluations) versus December, and the swings are large, and uncontrollable. One maternal bull (NOT HCA btw) has fallen by €80 since I bought his straws in early 2014, resulting in his heifers dropping by €40 (assuming mother ratings doesn't change), and this is completely outside my control, so whether you are / are not in the 4 star category is out of your hands, and you could be ok today, and next evaluation your 3.5 and you miss the threshold. Another very sneaky one is that cross compliance penalties hit this scheme, but it also says "vise versa", which I read to mean if you have a breach in this scheme, your BPS could be hit as well...???? am I reading that right????

    I think you could be right about bps, ive also read something about this somewhere. Ive also read the likes of glas infringements might also effect bps. At the end of the day they are all department schemes so if you get penalised on one thing it could easily effect the others.

    Everyone on here is on about ai. What about the lads that run a bull. They buy a 5 star young bull (with low proven % due to not being used before) for 3 or 4k and a couple months down the line he becomes a 3 star? There is too much involved in this to backfire on alot of lads. No matter how good you are you will have to invest a bit of cash to up your breeding when your relying on numbers to stay put but is out of your control. For the money (that you may have to give back the full amount if you dont hit the targets) is not great and to me I dont think is worth it.

    Dont get me wrong, improving is the best and only way forward, but to push improvement to fast and the risk of loosing payment and incur penalty in the process if anything goes wrong is going to be a big blow to anyone.


  • Options
    #50
    Nettleman
    Registered Users Posts: 651 ✭✭✭Nettleman


    LivInt20 wrote: »
    Previous post, "The scheme is voluntary so you don't have to enter if you think it is too tough for you."

    So the scheme is too tough for you?

    asked and answered.- 1 have nearly 50% of my females 4 star and above so not too tough. Theres too much small print, hidden costs involved here. Also a major information transfer involved from farmer to quango in cork-not interested in making quangos more relevant and making us dependent on them.


  • Options
    #51
    smokey-fitz
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭smokey-fitz


    LivInt20 wrote: »
    Previous post, "The scheme is voluntary so you don't have to enter if you think it is too tough for you."

    So the scheme is too tough for you?

    Why try rise someone over this when they dont agree with you? Is your opinion the right way for everybody?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    skoger
    Registered Users Posts: 193 ✭✭skoger


    smokey-fitz wrote: »
    ....
    Dont get me wrong, improving is the best and only way forward, but to push improvement to fast and the risk of loosing payment and incur penalty in the process if anything goes wrong is going to be a big blow to anyone.

    I think this could be the biggest problem with the scheme as it stands. We're talking about getting 4 or 5 stars in one generation.


  • Options
    #53
    limo_100
    Registered Users Posts: 1,281 ✭✭✭limo_100


    Basically it's a big kick up the arse to anyone using stock from the dairy herd black limousine Angus and black whiteheads. Iv bought in nearly 20 black whites heifers to rear and sell on and they all have different sires and none of them cross 2stars. And blues from d dairy they don't go above 2either. It's only every second week there sayin in d paper that the black limo form British Fresian performs as the best suckler. And there's Notting wrong the the Angus or Herefords from the dairy you at least gurenteed weight for age.


  • Options
    #54
    Limestone Cowboy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,519 ✭✭✭Limestone Cowboy


    limo_100 wrote: »
    Basically it's a big kick up the arse to anyone using stock from the dairy herd black limousine Angus and black whiteheads. Iv bought in nearly 20 black whites heifers to rear and sell on and they all have different sires and none of them cross 2stars. And blues from d dairy they don't go above 2either. It's only every second week there sayin in d paper that the black limo form British Fresian performs as the best suckler. And there's Notting wrong the the Angus or Herefords from the dairy you at least gurenteed weight for age.

    Ya it sounds like a load of cods wallop to me. Have some very milky red lims here the calf roughly the same time every year that are only 2 star maternal and terminal.


  • Options
    #55
    tanko
    Registered Users Posts: 9,205 ✭✭✭tanko


    Nettleman wrote: »
    asked and answered.- 1 have nearly 50% of my females 4 star and above so not too tough. Theres too much small print, hidden costs involved here. Also a major information transfer involved from farmer to quango in cork-not interested in making quangos more relevant and making us dependent on them.

    I'm all in favour of genetic improvement in the suckler herd but this scheme puts ICBF in a very powerful position.
    The make up of the ICBF board doesn't inspire me with confidence, 17 members in total. 5 Progressive Genetics/Munster Ai, 4 IFA, 2 IHFA, 2 DAFM, 1 Dovea Ai, 2 ICMSA and 1 from Herdbooks.
    Not much independant expertise there.
    The share holdings are dominated by PG and Munster Ai also.


  • Options
    #56
    Bullocks
    Registered Users Posts: 5,890 ✭✭✭Bullocks


    limo_100 wrote: »
    Basically it's a big kick up the arse to anyone using stock from the dairy herd black limousine Angus and black whiteheads. Iv bought in nearly 20 black whites heifers to rear and sell on and they all have different sires and none of them cross 2stars. And blues from d dairy they don't go above 2either. It's only every second week there sayin in d paper that the black limo form British Fresian performs as the best suckler. And there's Notting wrong the the Angus or Herefords from the dairy you at least gurenteed weight for age.

    Yup I can't see our black suckler going into the scheme . The money would be nice but they can **** off if they think I'll change to a 5 star herd of muscley , lacking in milk continentals and pretend that it's a great herd then . I thought the factories were saying that they didn't want these big carcase cattle either ?


  • Options
    #57
    limo_100
    Registered Users Posts: 1,281 ✭✭✭limo_100


    blue5000 wrote: »
    This is why we have 5 star maternal bulls dropping to 3 stars very quickly. Later on more stats come out and the truth gets revealed as reliability % increases. It's not perfect, it should only be used as a guide. As genotyping increases the messers are being found out. Bad information knocks people back two or three generations when choosing a bull.
    I forgot to reply to you earlier but the heifer was not bred by a bad bull she was by RIO a long time proven bull and the calf was a ADX bull calf


  • Options
    #58
    Bodacious
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭Bodacious


    is it only payable on no. of calved cows you had in2014?!


  • Options
    #59
    dohc turbo2
    Registered Users Posts: 837 ✭✭✭dohc turbo2


    That was said at a btap meeting I was at yesterday , he said a lot of the terms and not set yet , I only had heifers last year as only starting off so must find out where I stand


  • Options
    #60
    LivInt20
    Registered Users Posts: 491 ✭✭LivInt20


    Bodacious wrote: »
    is it only payable on no. of calved cows you had in2014?!

    No, but to keep suckler cow numbers up you must test 60% of your cow numbers held in 2014.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Grueller
    Registered Users Posts: 5,100 ✭✭✭Grueller


    So a twenty cow man must test 12 cows @30 each and give icbf €60 as well. That adds up to €420. He will only get a payment of €1670 iirc so gains €1250 for all the extra cross compliance risk. Say this guy expands to 40 cows, does he now need to test 24 or still only 12?

    We have around 80 cows here so need to test 48. €1440 of a genomic test bill. Crikey. It is more worth our while as we wold get about €6500 out of the scheme leaving €5000 after costs. The small suckler farmer is being shafted here. First 20 cows imo should have a larger premium on their payment sliding back further after that. Say €150 for 1st 20 and €50 for remainders with about 40% tested. We at 80 cows would still get €6000, a small drop but 20 cow man would get €3000, a large rise. My figures may need revision to ensure the budget can cope but the small suckler man needs this support.


Advertisement