• Black Tide - Pt. 1

• Calving Chronicles - Pt. 2

• Cues From Consumers

• Reads For Ranchers

• The World According To
   Hooter McCormick

• What's Next

• Whiskey And Water

EDITORIALS

• TRAILS
• RIDING THE GAP

Surely, though, Angus breeders and commercial users of Angus genetics can forgive those who look at the breed’s sheer size and wonder if the breed’s domination is a good thing, cause for concern or neither.

After all, as the percentage of one breed increases in an individual herd or in the national one, heterosis and its benefits decline. Go far enough, long enough in any one genetic direction, and what is gained or lost and at what cost?

Super-Sized Influence
There’s no question that Angus has become the three-ton gorilla in the industy’s genetic closet, just as Hereford was about four decades ago.

Try this on for size. The American Angus Association (AAA) registered 347,572 head this year. That’s more than the next eight largest breeds—as measured by annual registrations—combined. Just the registered Embryo Transplant (ET) calves would comprise the sixth largest breed—35,000 ETs were registered last year.

Throw the 2006 Angus registrations in with the 2005 registrations for Red Angus Association of America (RAAA), as reported by the National Pedigreed Livestock Council (NLPC)—43,201—and the total (390,773) is more than the next 13 largest beef breeds, combined.
Using a different rope, Angus and Red Angus registrations last year represented 80% of the total registrations from the primary English breeds; 48% of all cattle registered with the primary English, Continental and American breeds reported by NPLC (Table 1).

Just as startling is the realization that current Angus registrations don’t even represent the breed’s apex. So far, according to NPLC figures that occurred in 1968 with 406,310 head. That same year, 4,652 Red Angus were registered. This year’s Angus total is the largest since 1972.

The nation’s beef cow inventory back then (34.5 million head) was similar to today’s 33.2 million—based on January 1 USDA statistics.

Back then, Charolais was the only newfangled Continental breed on the scene (70,102 in 1968), and Hereford was as dominant as Angus. For that same year there were 384,799 Hereford registrations and 165,192 Polled Hereford registrations for a total of 549,991.
For perspective total beef cattle registrations in 1968 represented 3.2% of that year’s total beef cattle inventory. It has never been higher since—2.2% last year. In 1968, Angus registrations represented 1.2% of the total beef cattle inventory; they were 0.9% of it last year. Combine Angus and Red Angus and total registrations were 1% of the total beef inventory last year.

Of course, none of this speaks to purebred Angus cattle in commercial herds or to commercial cows that are becoming increasingly Angus in their makeup. By that measure, according to various surveys, Angus is the primary genetic component of approximately two-thirds of the nation’s cow-herd.

One example is a survey commissioned by Certified Angus Beef, LLC a couple of years ago. In that survey 65% of respondents—commercial producers with at least 100 cows—said there herd was Angus-based. Another 5% named Red Angus as the primary component.
In another survey conducted by the American Angus Association a couple of years earlier, 33% of producers surveyed said their cowherd was primarily composed of Angus. Another 30% said it was Angus crossbred and 22% answered crossbred. Of the 22% who answered crossbred, 78% indicated Angus was represented in those genetics. According to AAA, “When analyzing all responses, 68% of total producers surveyed indicated Angus was a major influence on the genetics of their cowherd. All other breeds were mentioned specifically by less than 10% of producers surveyed.”

Drive through the country or visit with your fellow producers and that would be tough to argue against.

Reasons for Angus Dominance
Just how Angus has so completely permeated the industry is a lesson in genetic merit, vision, commitment, and luck actually.

Think of Angus, and the two traits that likely and rightfully come to mind first are maternal traits and carcass quality as defined by marbling. In the broadest of terms these inherent genetic strengths have fueled Angus demand from both ends of the industry spectrum—building mama cows in the pasture and creating carcasses capable of grading USDA Choice or higher for the nation’s meat case.

Bob Hough, RAAA Executive Secretary sums up the thoughts of many when he says, “Angus probably does as many things right as any breed today, but breed complimentarity is powerful, too.”

In fact, Hough explains, “As an association we believe in crossbreeding, but we also believe that the base component of the cowherd will be Angus or Red Angus combined with other breed components.” The next article in this series will explore these issues in depth.
Bob Weaber, beef extension specialist at the University of Missouri says, “Angus has been used to clean up the crossbreeding wreck of the 1970’s and 1980’s.”

If you were along for that ride, crossbreeding was too often less disciplined and strategic than outright mongerelization as this new Continental breed and that one were tossed on to sets of cattle fairly indiscriminately. As usual, money helped fan the flames as a half-blood of any new Continental was worth some decent jingle, whether the animal in question was any good or not. When the industry decided it had become too mixed up, too large in terms of birth weight and mature cow size, too lean and all of the rest, Angus was a simple fix to bring moderation and uniform coat color back into herds.

This surely comes under the heading of luck because no one could have planned for the introduction and evolution of Continental breed use the way it occurred.

During this same period of time Angus breeders committed themselves to more accurately characterizing the genetic merit of the breed and also to developing a visionary branded beef program based on the carcass strengths of the breed. Today Certified Angus Beef (CAB) is the largest branded beef program in the world, accounting for at least 500 million lbs. of CAB beef each year for the last seven years in a row.

Even casual observers know the live specification for CAB is that cattle be at least 51% black-hided. When the program began in 1978 it was a safe bet that cattle fitting this description were at least half Angus. Obviously, this is no longer the case as virtually every other non-black breed began placing a premium on the color. Arguably the incentive has been two-fold: create black bulls for a national cowherd becoming increasingly black and offer users of those bulls the opportunity to qualify calves for CAB premiums.

As Dave Daley, animal science professor at California State University-Chico says, “I can’t tell you there are more Angus-influenced cattle today than there were Hereford-influenced cattle in the 1960’s, but I can tell you there are more black cattle today than there were red father-necked cattle then.”

It’s no small feat that the growth of CAB spawned its own premium category in the fed cattle market. Today there are 46 different branded Angus beef programs.

Incidentally, CAB was no overnight success. As the story goes, early on CAB was within one vote of the AAA board of directors of being scrapped because it had bled red ink for so long.

Finally, in this incomplete list of reasons for Angus popularity, the fact is that using an Angus bull year after year is more convenient than embarking on a rotational crossbreeding system. Growing use of composites in recent years are offering commercial users an easier and less risky approach to introducing heterosis into their herds. But in the case of every heavily used composite, Angus is a component. Think in terms of Balancer (Gelbvieh X Angus) SimAngus (Simmental X Angus) and LimFlex (Limousin X Angus). Until these composites achieved some critical mass, though, many commercial producers ignored heterosis, the product of crossbreeding.

With composites, Dan Moser, animal science professor at Kansas State University points out, “Some crossbreeding is being shifted from the commercial producer to the seedstock producer.”

Overall, Bill Bowman, AAA Vice President of Industry Information and Data Programs explains, “We’ve (AAA) tried to take the approach that if we (the industry) all agree that we’re trying to increase beef’s share of the protein market, then as suppliers of that protein we need to improve our product and the characterization of it…

“In the late 1970’s and 1980’s when we weren’t in as a predominant position in the industry, we then chose to emphasize meeting the needs of consumers and commercial producers, and that’s where our focus remains, giving commercial producers the tools to make improvement,” says Bowman. Angus registrations reached their nadir in 1986 at 133,475.
Keep in mind, Bowman is also quick to emphasize, “As we know today, just because cattle are black-hided doesn’t mean they’re Angus, and just because cattle are called Angus doesn’t diminish the need to characterize differences in those genetics.”

Growing Goliath
There’s no telling whether the growing density of Angus genetics in the nation’s cowherd is the result of more producers using Angus bulls again and again—basically straight-breeding—or more folks using composite bulls with Angus as a component. The safe money seems to be that both are increasing.

“In this part of the world, the Angus influence is increasing through both straight-breeding and the utilization of composites,” says Weaber. “When producers use composites here it’s mostly those with cows that are a high percentage Angus who want to introduce a modest amount of Continental blood back into the herd, although a growing number are using composites to stabilize breed inputs and optimize heterosis of British-Continental crossbred cows.”

According to Daley, “We have less indiscriminate crossbreeding and more breeding to straight Angus today than in the past. Do we have more planned crossbreeding? I expect not.”

“Right now we’re (the industry) going further toward straight-breeding,” believes Hough. “I think we’re at a key point in history when it will be determined if crossbreeding will be an integral part of our future.”

John Burbank is CEO of Seedstock Plus, a cooperative of seedstock producers that grows and markets about 1,500 bulls and females of multiple breeds annually, including Angus, Red Angus, Gelbvieh and Balancer. He says the organization’s customers fit the profile described earlier of commercial producers with Angus comprising two-thirds or more of their cowherds.

“Some are still using Angus to straighten up multi-colored cows, but we hear from more of them that they believe they’ve gone too far with Angus and they’re trying to put some Continental blood back into the herd with a purebred or with a composite,” says Burbank.
The key question an increasing number of commercial producers wants to know is how black is too black, how much Angus or how much of any one breed is too much?
For that matter, can breeds be viewed through the same lens as yester-year? As Bowman says, “As an industry I think we have to guard against into the old traps of pitting one breed against another and trying to define breeds the same way we used to. Those definitions no longer exist.”

Back in the day, for example, no one would have depended on English breeds for growth or would have believed Continental breeds could serve up calving ease. While each breed still possesses inherent advantages and necessary differences, the fact is breeders have bent the relationships between cattle traits to the point that knowing the breed involved in an equation is barely a first step.

Burbank puts it this way: “Differentiation to us is type and kind and data. We don’t get completely hung up on the percentages of this breed or that one in a bull. Relative to a producer’s targets, we focus on finding the right bull for their needs whatever that bull happens to be.”

Spin the breed question around, how much heterosis should the nation’s cowherd embrace and how many breeds should be a part of creating it?

We’ll pursue the answer to those queries and others in next month’s installment.

Reflects Total Active Female Registration (females considered “active” in member inventories for registration and performance recording purposes/cannot be compared directly to annual registrations)*

Based on Whole Herd Reporting (record of all calves born to females reported in individual member cow inventory/cannot be compared directly to annual registrations)*

*”Registrations” are fewer than the reported inventory numbers

Source: National Pedigreed Livestock Council