Think I’ll flip a coin I’m a winner either way.
Mmmmm I feel lucky today
Mary Chapin Carpenter
Camera Grading: Following the first column on camera grading, one reader sent an email stating that, a “half century ago USDA Prime was being harvested at 2.3 to 2.5 of all harvested animals. That has not changed and we are still at 2.39 percent.” He then shared this thought regarding USDA’s grading system: “At best it is total incompetence and at least it is criminal and someone is getting paid.”
He didn’t offer any corroborating data. But the sentiment matches the original assertion that camera grading (and grading in general) is somehow a “farce”. So, let’s unpack that from a real-world perspective.
Central Planning: At the start, there’s one key item to consider – namely, the distribution (or allocation) of grade assignment across the slaughter mix. IF one believes there are too many carcasses grading Prime, THEN we need to follow with questions about how that happens. IF the process truly is a “farce” or even “criminal”, THEN there must be some central planner -the master behind the curtain - assigning grades across all the plants and all the shifts.
Of course, we all know that to NOT be the case.
Dumb Luck: In March, I wrote a column highlighting closeout data from customers of Gardiner Angus Ranch. It was intended to demonstrate revenue potential associated when one is intentional about genetics and management. The same data is updated through early-June and highlighted in the graph below. Note the incremental and systematic gains in the percentage of Prime year-over-year.
IF the process is a “farce”, or “incompetent”, or “criminal”, THEN what are the odds that over18,500 head of cattle over the span of six-and-a-half years just happened to win the scratch off so consistently?
Not only win, but manage bigger prizes with each consecutive year. Maybe it’s just dumb luck?
Genetic Tools: Of course, NONE of it’s luck. To the contrary, as explained in the grid column, it’s “the direct result of: 1) producing high-quality cattle, 2) implementing excellent management (staring at calving and throughout the entire feeding period), and 3) selling the cattle into a responsive grid that rewards those efforts.”
With that in mind, I requested sale data from the Gardiners going back to 2014. The purpose being to review the trend of marbling EPDs of the bulls sold in their respective spring sales (see second graph). In just 10 years, the average has jumped by nearly one-half marbling score on nearly three times the number of bulls (and all the while still outpacing the genetic trend for the breed).
Replicate The Process: As a result, the cattle kill sheets are precisely what we’d expect: EPDs and the principles of population genetics really work. Mark Gardiner explains it’s the result of “using selection discipline” and being able to, over time, “replicate the process.” That produces stacked genetics for a highly heritable trait – all leading to the outcome above. As such, it’s a case study in what’s possible.
Progress: A South Dakota commercial producer also emailed me following the first column expressing his frustration about the lack of acknowledgement towards the work that’s been done. The naysayers refuse to see “…the progress the herd has made in marbling scores, and the influence progressive breeders have applied to this issue.” They either don’t know, or want to discredit, how much the cowherd has changed over time.
The “farce” (or “incompetent” or “criminal”) camp, for whatever reason, portrays the advancement as a function of lady luck. They negate the work and the investment and the thought and the discipline that makes it all happen.
But wait…maybe they’re right? After all, diligence is the mother of good luck.
Nevil Speer is an independent consultant based in Bowling Green, KY. The views and opinions expressed herein do not reflect, nor are associated with in any manner, any client or business relationship. He can be reached at nevil.speer@turkeytrack.biz.
