Traditionally in the seedstock business, reporting data on weaned calves to breed associations was voluntary, and generally only done on calves worthy of registration. However, in 2004, the Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) recommended that performance data should be collected on a Whole Herd Reporting (WHR) basis in their Guidelines for uniform performance reporting. This includes accounting for the annual production of every cow, and the performance of every calf raised through weaning.
Without WHR, a breed’s database is biased because only data on selected animals is reported, which ultimately results in biased genetic predictions. Also under the old system, the proper data wasn’t collected to produce reproductive EPDs (expected progeny differences). Reproduction is the most economically-important trait in any cow-calf operation, so the ability to objectively describe reproductive traits is of paramount importance.
Although individual breeds’ WHR programs vary wildly, the BIF Guidelines recommend cow herds be broken down into spring- and fall-calving inventories. This allows the breeder to declare their herd inventory for each season after their calves are weaned and pregnancy checks are completed, but before the calving season starts. This gives an unbiased system for describing the reproductive status of the cow herd for the coming year (e.g., did they rebreed, culled, etc.). WHR allows traits related to sustained fertility, like Stayability, to be described with genetic predictions.
Heifer pregnancy is another important trait made possible by a WHR program. The BIF Guidelines recommend heifers that are going to be exposed be reported to the association prior to the breeding season. They must also be placed in their proper management groups, which includes designating heifers that are naturally bred in different pastures being put into separate contemporary groups. The start and end date of the breeding season also needs to be reported to avoid using data from unreasonably prolonged breeding seasons (>90 days) in the prediction of heifer pregnancy EPDs.
For the cow herd, it is also recommended, but not required, that a producer collect traits like udder scoring around calving time, and mature weights and body condition scores around the time calves are weaned. This allows for the accuracy of the Stayability EPD to be improved. It also provides the information to calculate maintenance energy EPDs.
The only calf weight required is weaning weight. Birth weight is not required because it is not reasonable for producers managing their cattle in extensive situations to collect 100 percent of the birth weights in the first 24 hours. However, all calves raised through weaning must have a weaning weight collected for the cow to remain active in a breed’s herdbook.
Seedstock producers collecting weaning weights on the entire calf crop allows for unbiased genetic predictions through weaning. Of perhaps more importance, however, is that WHR of weaning weights allows for prediction models to account for selection in post-weaning traits.
An example of this is yearling weights. The models assume that culling occurs after weaning, but by using the weaning weights within their contemporary group, this selection can be accounted for. That way the better end of the calves aren’t penalized because they are no longer being compared to the bottom end calves that were culled. The majority of traits with genetic predictions—from growth through carcass—account for selection utilizing the weaning contemporary group. That makes collecting weights on all the calves raised through weaning of uppermost importance.
It has always been desired that, through the use of disposal codes and reason codes, accuracy could be improved on a number of genetic predictions. For example, having the information that cattle were culled because of bad feet, disposition problems, respiratory disease, or any number of other traits, could lead directly to increasing the accuracy for the genetic predictions associated with them. The number of traits impacted would range from disposition to Stayability.
However, in the past, too many animals got lumped into non-descript disposal codes like “other” to yield useful data. The latest edition of the BIF Guidelines being worked on right now will strive to rectify this by increasing the number of specific disposal codes while removing non-descript codes like “other” or “miscellaneous.”
Another tool to make sure complete data is submitted is to have an inventory-based fee structure. An inventory-based fee charges an assessment per cow, instead of the traditional fees for each weight submitted, registration done, and transfer completed.
The inventory-based system is desirable because: 1) it removes all financial disincentives to submitting complete production and performance data; 2) it encourages producers to maintain an accurate active inventory; and 3) it promotes the registration and transfer of seedstock destined for use in commercial production.
However, some breed associations have latched on to the inventory fee system without the data collection requirement. This is simply a way for them to increase revenue and make it more consistent for the association from year to year. This is not why WHR was developed and not why an association should use an inventory-based fee structure. The goal is all about data collection, and the fee structure is just another way to accomplish collection of production and performance data on the whole herd.
In the end, calculating unbiased genetic predictions on a wide range of traits, requires collection of complete data on the whole herd. Knowing the production of every cow leads to unbiased genetic predictions for reproductive traits.
Accounting for the collection of weaning weights on all calves raised through weaning allows bias to be removed from genetic predictions for early growth. Most importantly, complete weaning contemporary groups can be used in accounting for selection in post-weaning traits.
Commercial producers have a lot of choices when selecting which seedstock bulls to add to their breeding program. A valid question they should be asking is how their seedstock supplier collects their data. Are they using their breed’s WHR program? Also, what is required by a particular breed’s WHR program?
Both commercial producers and seedstock suppliers’ goal should be to have the best objectively described cattle possible. WHR in a breed that follows BIF Guidelines is one of the best ways to accomplish this goal. — Dr. Bob Hough
(Dr. Bob Hough is the retired executive vice president of the Red Angus Association of America and freelance writer.)
