Talk:Cattle judging
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Agriculture, which collaborates on articles related to agriculture. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
Good article but contains too many 'how to' sections. They need to be re-written in an NPOV and possibly put into Wikibooks. - Fneep 05:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm working on the article at the moment. Changing it to less of a rulebook/how-to and more of an article about it. CattleGirl 06:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Notice of import
A copy of this article was moved to wikibooks using the Import tool (with all revisions). If this article was marked for copy to wikibooks or as containing how-to sections, it can now be safely rewritten.
If contributors are interested in expanding on the practical information that was in this article, please do so on the wikibooks side. For pointers on writing wikibooks, see Wikibooks:Wikibooks for Wikipedians.
Note: wikibooks has a book on Raising Cattle that needs attention from someone familiar with the subject. This article might make a good chapter of that book. --SB_Johnny | talk | books 14:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I am a lifelong Angus breeder and know a lot about the cattle industry. I am assuming that the author is very young and inexperienced. I will try to not be overly critical, but some changes need to be made. 1. The term "cows". Unless you are showing dairy animals, this term is inappropriate. 99 percent of all cattle judging is "show steers" or "show heifers" for meat market or female replacement. "Cows" is misleading. Hardly anyone shows a beef cow, unless she is a pair (with calf). 2. Emphasis on "as much muscling as possible." This is a terrible mistake. We need only look at the Belgian Blue breed or other Continentals that have screwed up the degree of muscling to the point that the calves can't be born in a low-labor operation. There is a need for OPTIMAL muscling, but not MAXIMAL muscling. 3. The terms "claws" should be properly termed "dew claws". They are not cats or dogs. 4. The statement that the rump, as viewed from the rear, should block out the rest of the animal is only true if the animal is very fat. You are making the mistake that muscling is HIGHLY influenced by high-energy feeds and diet. A BCS (body condition score) animal of 9 will have a huge rump, but if you starve him down for about 6 months he will appear as a BCS 2 and will appear to "have light muscling." This is another problem I have with cattle judging. It tends to bias people for overly FAT animals. 5. The statement of WALKING as it relates to sickle and cow-hocked animals is inaccurate. Walking patterns, such as following the front tracks with the rear, has mostly to do with the fat content of the animal. Watch a heavily pregnant cow versus an open, thin yearling. It's common sense. 6. Deposition of fat is largely the same in all cattle. All feedlot managers know how the sequence goes....ribs first, then brisket, then tail-head, and cod (genital) last. 7. Size of testes has little to do with how many females a bull can breed. It is, however, highly correlated with female/male age at puberty and female reproductive rate, repro tract scores (pelvic measurements).
Hope this helps. 66.82.9.17 01:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
