New suckler scheme on per hectare basis!!

ellewood

LivInt20 wrote: »

Exactly.

With more information recorded and genotyping of more animals the €urostars will become more accurate.

That is why there is little point in reducing the 60% genotyping requirement.

The quicker we improve the accuracy of the database and €ursotars, then the quicker we can improve the national suckler cow herd.

Livint20 I'd agree with that 100%, and I think genomics will b a great addition/asset to the suckler herd in ears to come.

Seems you seem to be well up on all things about this scheme can you enlighten me on 1 stipulation - the 1 where if you reduce you're area farmed by more than 20% from reference year of 2014 you are kicked out of scheme Why ??

LivInt20

ellewood wrote: »

Livint20 I'd agree with that 100%, and I think genomics will b a great addition/asset to the suckler herd in ears to come.

Seems you seem to be well up on all things about this scheme can you enlighten me on 1 stipulation - the 1 where if you reduce you're area farmed by more than 20% from reference year of 2014 you are kicked out of scheme Why ??

Can you quote me the line in the T and Cs where it says that please.

My understanding is that it is the cows calved divided by 1.5lu to give hectares required under the programme.

So take the average farm 30 cows calves in 2014 and 40 ha declared on SFP.

30/1.5 = 20 ha which is only 50% of land declared on SFP.

Therefore you would need to be farming 20 ha to continue in the scheme not the 80% that some people think.

Rushy Fields

Was thinking of joining the scheme but can someone tell me, if I have a herd of sucklers of 20, how many can I reduce to over the 6 years. Cows calving is not ideal at the moment and I don't want to get out of them totally. I have 35ha eligible o sfp. Am trying to manage the farm and a full time job as well as a young family. Was thinking of reducing number of cows. Is it worthwhile joining the scheme at all with such a small set up?

ellewood

LivInt20 wrote: »

Can you quote me the line in the T and Cs where it says that please.

My understanding is that it is the cows calved divided by 1.5lu to give hectares required under the programme.

So take the average farm 30 cows calves in 2014 and 40 ha declared on SFP.

30/1.5 = 20 ha which is only 50% of land declared on SFP.

Therefore you would need to be farming 20 ha to continue in the scheme not the 80% that some people think.

Quote from help sheet that came with form

" If the land on you're holding decreases by more than 20% of the amount set in 2014, then you will be disqualified from the programme "

LivInt20

nealger wrote: »

Was thinking of joining the scheme but can someone tell me, if I have a herd of sucklers of 20, how many can I reduce to over the 6 years. Cows calving is not ideal at the moment and I don't want to get out of them totally. I have 35ha eligible o sfp. Am trying to manage the farm and a full time job as well as a young family. Was thinking of reducing number of cows. Is it worthwhile joining the scheme at all with such a small set up?

All that info will be sent to you in the next few weeks, at which point you can then withdraw if you wish.

Figerty

LivInt20 wrote: »

Well clearly the negative database will be bigger.

However the positive ones will have their payment by December and have a better suckler herd over the next six years.

So two positives for the farmers in the scheme.

Also there will be about 30000 farmers signed up out of a total 70000 suckler farmers so not much difference between for and against.

The negative database will spend the next six years complaining that they can't get in to the scheme and saying if they had know how easy it was going to be they would have joined.
I'm glad I'm in the positive basket.

I'm in the not sure basket.
I have signed up but I am waiting to go through the detail before I decide to accept the conditions or withdraw. I think it's a bit early to decide if there is a difference between for or against.

Actually the word 'against' isn't correct. I am not against it, I may decide not to participate.

Alibaba

nealger wrote: »

Was thinking of joining the scheme but can someone tell me, if I have a herd of sucklers of 20, how many can I reduce to over the 6 years. Cows calving is not ideal at the moment and I don't want to get out of them totally. I have 35ha eligible o sfp. Am trying to manage the farm and a full time job as well as a young family. Was thinking of reducing number of cows. Is it worthwhile joining the scheme at all with such a small set up?

I'm was thinking along the same lines myself. See my earlier post.

Apply anyway and you can be thinking about it after.

As LivInt20 says you can always get out if it doesn't suit.

I applied last week

Bullocks

Anyone that buys limx off heifers from dairy cows to cross with terminal sires won't qualify I presume if they keep buying those type heifers as replacements?

tomieen jones

This has probably been asked already but cows that calved in 2014 and the calves died? Will they be counted in the reference number

dh1985

LivInt20 wrote: »

Well clearly the negative database will be bigger.

However the positive ones will have their payment by December and have a better suckler herd over the next six years.

So two positives for the farmers in the scheme.

Also there will be about 30000 farmers signed up out of a total 70000 suckler farmers so not much difference between for and against.

The negative database will spend the next six years complaining that they can't get in to the scheme and saying if they had know how easy it was going to be they would have joined.

I'm glad I'm in the positive basket.

There is certainly no guarantee they will have a better suckler herd in 6 years. They might have it on paper but that may not equate to a better herd in reality. It could be another version of fr. dougals dreams and reality scenario.
This is very little incentive to join this scheme. When the cost of the genotyping is taken out the total payment will be reduced to about 70%. There is nothing stopping people from improving their herd at a more sustainable rate than what the scheme is demanding. What this scheme means is that at a minimum 50% of a suckler herd will be changed over 5 years. And thats without taking into account animals that wont make the grade required. Changing that % of a herd in that space of time will cost farmers more money than the scheme will return.
And back to my first line there is no guarantee that a mans herd will be any better in 6 years. I think a larger amount of the large calving intervals and poor weanling performance might be more down to poor farm management than blaming it on the cows no matter how many stars they have. And that wont change.
There may be 30000 farmers signed up but I think no more than myself alot of them are buying time to see what develops in the coming months before first payment is received.
The one guarantee that can be said about this scheme is the only people certain to reap rewards from it are the ai man and the agri advisor. The poor suckler farmer will have to wait six years and see what the outcome is and by then he could be sorry he joined.

Bullocks

dh1985 wrote: »

There is certainly no guarantee they will have a better suckler herd in 6 years. They might have it on paper but that may not equate to a better herd in reality. It could be another version of fr. dougals dreams and reality scenario.
This is very little incentive to join this scheme. When the cost of the genotyping is taken out the total payment will be reduced to about 70%. There is nothing stopping people from improving their herd at a more sustainable rate than what the scheme is demanding. What this scheme means is that at a minimum 50% of a suckler herd will be changed over 5 years. And thats without taking into account animals that wont make the grade required. Changing that % of a herd in that space of time will cost farmers more money than the scheme will return.
And back to my first line there is no guarantee that a mans herd will be any better in 6 years. I think a larger amount of the large calving intervals and poor weanling performance might be more down to poor farm management than blaming it on the cows no matter how many stars they have. And that wont change.
There may be 30000 farmers signed up but I think no more than myself alot of them are buying time to see what develops in the coming months before first payment is received.
The one guarantee that can be said about this scheme is the only people certain to reap rewards from it are the ai man and the agri advisor. The poor suckler farmer will have to wait six years and see what the outcome is and by then he could be sorry he joined.

I'm inclined to agree with you , I think ICBF will be learning nearly as much as the farmers partaking and don't know if the cattle will be much better after .

annubis

Bullocks wrote: »

Anyone that buys limx off heifers from dairy cows to cross with terminal sires won't qualify I presume if they keep buying those type heifers as replacements?

why is that?

Bullocks

annubis wrote: »

why is that?

It was more of a question than a fact , but a limx calf as a breeder will hardly be 4 or 5 star in the next couple of years I'm guessing .

LivInt20

dh1985 wrote: »

There is certainly no guarantee they will have a better suckler herd in 6 years. They might have it on paper but that may not equate to a better herd in reality. It could be another version of fr. dougals dreams and reality scenario.
This is very little incentive to join this scheme. When the cost of the genotyping is taken out the total payment will be reduced to about 70%. There is nothing stopping people from improving their herd at a more sustainable rate than what the scheme is demanding. What this scheme means is that at a minimum 50% of a suckler herd will be changed over 5 years. And thats without taking into account animals that wont make the grade required. Changing that % of a herd in that space of time will cost farmers more money than the scheme will return.
And back to my first line there is no guarantee that a mans herd will be any better in 6 years. I think a larger amount of the large calving intervals and poor weanling performance might be more down to poor farm management than blaming it on the cows no matter how many stars they have. And that wont change.
There may be 30000 farmers signed up but I think no more than myself alot of them are buying time to see what develops in the coming months before first payment is received.
The one guarantee that can be said about this scheme is the only people certain to reap rewards from it are the ai man and the agri advisor. The poor suckler farmer will have to wait six years and see what the outcome is and by then he could be sorry he joined.

If replacing 15% of the herd per year then 90% will be changed over the six years anyway.

annubis

Bullocks wrote: »

It was more of a question than a fact , but a limx calf as a breeder will hardly be 4 or 5 star in the next couple of years I'm guessing .

bought a lim heifer off a dairy man this year for cow that lost her calf, she is 4.5 stars for maternal and i think 3 for terminal, first cross off a dairy cow!

tomieen jones

tomieen jones wrote: »

This has probably been asked already but cows that calved in 2014 and the calves died? Will they be counted in the reference number

anyone? Can't see the answer in terms and conditions

mayota

tomieen jones wrote: »

anyone? Can't see the answer in terms and conditions

If the calves were registered I see no reason to exclude the cows.

LivInt20

tomieen jones wrote: »

anyone? Can't see the answer in terms and conditions

Yes will qualify

Connemara Farmer

http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/genomics-scheme-is-a-load-of-bull-inhfa/

Bellview

LivInt20 wrote: »

If replacing 15% of the herd per year then 90% will be changed over the six years anyway.

agree replacing herd should improve your herd... as that is everyone's simple objective... the problem as stated in a number of posts is that the cows that ICBF thinks is a 4 or 5 star is breeding poor cattle versus the one that ICBF rate 2 star.

I have applied but unless the 3 stars are in, I'm definitely out... as the few quid got out of scheme will be lost trying to buy in 5 star heifers to hit a metric... and most likely I will then have to cull these heifers again once metric achieved as I will continue to breed off the cows that deliver real results rather than low reliability stars which from listening to Teagasc & ICBF you would believe they were 95%+ accurate

the real measure of success will be
1. how many stay in the scheme - we will know before the end of the year & will Dept of ag publish how many will opt out...
2. The impact of inspections & penalties in the scheme when operational as this will become an issue and may drive more guys out of business, like what happened to the smaller dairy men some years ago...

Andy Gray

Figerty wrote:

There will be penalties for those that drop out or fail to meet the requirements if I have read the reports properly. This means that there is a huge onus on paper work and records; again arguable that it's merited for payment. However this puts a huge burden back on the farmer, and while I may be capable of handling this I can tell that probably 90% of me neighbours are too old to handle this stuff or not interested. My neighbours fell foul of the paper work in the first scheme; most dropped out.

Nettleman wrote:

why don't ICBF, as ive suggested many times before, return the free cash they have pocketed from beef farmers cattle tags since incorporation, abolish the 60 annual fee, offload a few directors and I think that would be a massive contribution to improving the PROFIT of the suckler herd, and lowering our cost base. Then, if ICBF want to charge commercial rate to any farmer who, by their own choice, want to avail of ICBF services, then they can do so. If their services are relevant, then the organisation might survive, if not, then they run out of cash, and out of business. On Databases, Maybe you could you put together a database of the positive reaction and another database of the negative reaction to your much defended scheme and see which database is bigger, starting with the headline on front page of todays rag. Im still not applying as this scheme is a con job, being peddled to benefit farmers, but there are so many others who benefit. more text messages received here too, even adds in the rag paid for by Teagasc encouraging signup. Thanks but no thanks

Nettleman wrote:

why don't ICBF, as ive suggested many times before, return the free cash they have pocketed from beef farmers cattle tags since incorporation, abolish the 60 annual fee, offload a few directors and I think that would be a massive contribution to improving the PROFIT of the suckler herd, and lowering our cost base. Then, if ICBF want to charge commercial rate to any farmer who, by their own choice, want to avail of ICBF services, then they can do so. If their services are relevant, then the organisation might survive, if not, then they run out of cash, and out of business. On Databases, Maybe you could you put together a database of the positive reaction and another database of the negative reaction to your much defended scheme and see which database is bigger, starting with the headline on front page of todays rag. Im still not applying as this scheme is a con job, being peddled to benefit farmers, but there are so many others who benefit. more text messages received here too, even adds in the rag paid for by Teagasc encouraging signup. Thanks but no thanks

I was worried for a while that you were going to sign up!! Thank God your not. It'd be an awful waste of scheme money ðŸ˜႒

Nettleman

Andy Gray wrote: »

I was worried for a while that you were going to sign up!! Thank God your not. It'd be an awful waste of scheme money ðŸ˜႒

Do you go on the drink on sundays or what because you made personal comments on a sunday night a few weeks ago (to which I didn't respond) and you got a MOD warning for that. Now your duplicating quotes, again on a sunday night. As for your actual comment last night, its always been my position that I wouldn't sign up to this scheme, so you shouldn't have been worried. I would be interested if you could explain why it would be a waste of scheme money if I had signed up or is that also going to result in more personal remarks? I await a constructive response next Sunday night:D

joanneq

Can I sell my cattle & still recieve farm payments ? I would buy cattle again in October just in very difficult position at moment.

limo_100

if i wanted to go up in numbers would i only get paid on the number of cows i had in 2014 or would i get paid onthe increased numbers aswell?

skoger

limo_100 wrote: »

if i wanted to go up in numbers would i only get paid on the number of cows i had in 2014 or would i get paid onthe increased numbers aswell?

You just get paid on 2014 numbers

joanneq wrote: »

Can I sell my cattle & still recieve farm payments ? I would buy cattle again in October just in very difficult position at moment.

I'd phone icbf and ask them. You'd need to have enough animals this year to genotype 60% of the number of cows you calved down in last year. Whether this has to be done before Oct or you'll have enough time after you restock, I don't know

kelslat

limo_100 wrote: »

if i wanted to go up in numbers would i only get paid on the number of cows i had in 2014 or would i get paid onthe increased numbers aswell?

I will be increasing numbers by 1/3 or more over the next year or two. I was wondering how this will affect me joining the scheme. Will it be help or hinder me?

votuvant

kelslat wrote: »

I will be increasing numbers by 1/3 or more over the next year or two. I was wondering how this will affect me joining the scheme. Will it be help or hinder me?

I'll be increasing as well but it's only on what you had in 2014 that you get paid. In a way it's a help as all your top rated cows qualify your and lower rated ones can stil be kept on if your numbers are over 2014 levels.

I was talking to my AI man about it the other day and he couldn't believe which of my cows were 4 and 5 stars and which weren't.

This scheme could have been so much better thought out but I still think this was rushed through so simple Simon could have another good news story ahead of an election.

Bullocks

votuvant wrote: »

This scheme could have been so much better thought out but I still think this was rushed through so simple Simon could have another good news story ahead of an election.

It won't be something that will swing himself or FG one extra vote around here anyhow

Kovu

I wonder will they have to show the stars of heifers in the Breeding Heifer classes at shows Now THAT would be fun to watch.

tomieen jones

Bought dairy cross angus heifers last year as potential replacements and can see as they have no sire recorded have a very poor star rating! Anyone know how if they are genomic tested will they improve in star rating? Even if they have no record of the bull

Wooly Admirer

Few good pieces in the press lately - finally! There's been some rubbish in the past few weeks. The best was the tool in the IFJ letters to the Editor last week - Claiming if we breed suckler cows with too much milk, we'll have trouble with scour and mastitis. I'll tell ya one thing, it wouldn't be a bad problem to have. As opposed to following breed society show rings and ending up with a big bitch of a Terminal cow with a calving jack hanging out her hole at 3am every year. Having to wait another hour to defrost a bottle of beistings received from wealthy neighbouring dairy farmer to feed the calf, because the bitch of 600kg cow has a cup full of milk. Super looking cow though! She's my best! And ICBF tell me she's only 2 star - what a joke...............

How the IFJ give these fellas airtime is beyond me.

The Editors piece from Darragh in the Farming Indo this week, was the most sense I ever heard coming from that man.

Tommy Moyles really talked sense also in the IFJ - page 24. He says 'It would make a pleasant change if beef farmers
showed as much interest in what they could achieve from improving their grass, financial and time management skills compared with burning negative energy on a scheme that they are not compelled to enter.'

Bellview

Wooly Admirer wrote: »

Few good pieces in the press lately - finally! There's been some rubbish in the past few weeks. The best was the tool in the IFJ letters to the Editor last week - Claiming if we breed suckler cows with too much milk, we'll have trouble with scour and mastitis. I'll tell ya one thing, it wouldn't be a bad problem to have. As opposed to following breed society show rings and ending up with a big bitch of a Terminal cow with a calving jack hanging out her hole at 3am every year. Having to wait another hour to defrost a bottle of beistings received from wealthy neighbouring dairy farmer to feed the calf, because the bitch of 600kg cow has a cup full of milk. Super looking cow though! She's my best! And ICBF tell me she's only 2 star - what a joke...............

How the IFJ give these fellas airtime is beyond me.

The Editors piece from Darragh in the Farming Indo this week, was the most sense I ever heard coming from that man.

Tommy Moyles really talked sense also in the IFJ - page 24. He says 'It would make a pleasant change if beef farmers
showed as much interest in what they could achieve from improving their grass, financial and time management skills compared with burning negative energy on a scheme that they are not compelled to enter.'

Hi Wooly I agree with your comments on milk & ease of calving (AA Ped breeder). There are some points that I'm sure all breed societies & breeders will not agree with above though. Ironically the ICBF stars could lead us down the road of more problems.

Speaking from a personal point I agree that a lot of the show calves/cows bloodlines are wrong for my breed. if I take Angus there are a lot of imported Scotish bloodline ie Rossiter, Bosullow Elmark, Rommels, Netherton Dunbars, Cruz etc that are being used by these breeders to have the biggest calf. These bloodlines are literally cow killers.... now here is the ironic part the AI's buy these bulls & ICBF rate these same calves 5 stars thus encouraging other breeders to use their semen/buy these calves... which creates the cycle you want to avoid at 3am with a jack.
in the last few years there is Goulding Jumbo King & Lisduff Dandy (both Rossiter) who on the ground I hear dairy farmers complaining about calving, both these bulls are 5 star.
In the maternal program from ICBF there is another Rossiter (Steil bull) being used & a Bosullow Elmark was admitted into the program (ICBF paid for him) but I have not seen him on any catalogue... this guy could have calving difficulty higher than 6% if he is released by ICBF... if the bull is not released for use by ICBF it would be good to know why was he bought and not used
Unfortunately the AI's have been buying their Irish bulls from a small circle that use similar Angus bloodlines rather than looking at what the breed characteristics are and how to enhance these... & help retain some of the older bloodlines to breed back in when there is too much ie difficulty calving,
personally I have stayed away from all these bloodlines above as my focus has been dairy men, easy calving but a calf that is not a small skin & bone weed... that will flesh despite its Holstein mother and allow the famer get 250 euro plus for his/her calf

so while some of the breed societies are complaining about the scheme, my biggest issue is that the stars are not accurate, not even 25% accurate. I know that all the herd at home are not show cattle (not my aim for show success) but I also know the cows that Dairy men want every year (all my bulls approx. 1.5% calf diff), but if I follow the stars I would only have 2 heifers come into my herd in the last 3 years...while my 2 stars would have to get culled, but I'm keeping these ladies daughters and not the 5 stars. The herd at home is 65% 4 &5 star which makes its ironic that only 2 daughters is all I would keep.

Another discussion that we could have is the amount of rubbish that has been published on promoting a scheme that promised to deliver a scheme for beef farmers but looking at the detail there is more upside for ICBF (revenue from genomics) and teagasc (admin fees) than the beef farmers that will hope to get paid for taking part in the scheme.

I have applied but unless there are changes to include 3 stars I will withdraw from scheme & too much red tape and there are too many opportunities to fail in the current scheme

LivInt20

There will be no changes at this stage. Applications closed. Not dropping to three stars. A mid term review is the earliest for any adjustments.

Bellview

LivInt20 wrote: »

There will be no changes at this stage. Applications closed. Not dropping to three stars. A mid term review is the earliest for any adjustments.

Unless there is a move from a baseline of 4 stars a lot of folks will step away and then show up the scheme for the weakness that it is... Icbf make a packet, teagasc make a packet... Farmers shoulder all the risk with penalties and red tape inspections

LivInt20

Bellview wrote: »

Unless there is a move from a baseline of 4 stars a lot of folks will step away and then show up the scheme for the weakness that it is... Icbf make a packet, teagasc make a packet... Farmers shoulder all the risk with penalties and red tape inspections

Why are people so afraid of red tape and penalties.

If you can complete a few straight forward tasks you will not be hit with any penalties.

cloonman

Hey there, if a charolais bull is 4 1/2 stars maternal within his own breed would he be classed as a 5 star bull or would it be his star rating across all breeds that hes judged on?
Thanks,

LivInt20

cloonman wrote: »

Hey there, if a charolais bull is 4 1/2 stars maternal within his own breed would he be classed as a 5 star bull or would it be his star rating across all breeds that hes judged on?
Thanks,

He will be classed as a 4 1/2 star bull, but either within or across breeds counts.

Bellview

LivInt20 wrote: »

Why are people so afraid of red tape and penalties.

If you can complete a few straight forward tasks you will not be hit with any penalties.

you are still missing the point from my earlier posts (which I'm not repeating), read in detail & stop selecting comments from my post and placing them out of context. I have described the herd and how the flawed star calculation would drive me to retain daughters off the wrong cows in the yard. simple choice is I breed as ICBF would direct me & get out of business as I will have to start focusing on hard calving traits which dairy men don't want.. ie rossiter sons or stay in business, breeds what sells... fail the ICBF random star generator model with 15% accuracy & then get penalties.

a little bit of paperwork, compliance & improving what I have never scares me, this issue is there is little if any common sense applied.

The more I look at this the only winner will be ICBF & Teagasc as they collect the cash & beef farmers are at the mercy of the excel file. Unless 3 stars are included then a significant number will be at risk of fines or buying expensive heifers to achieve a metric

blue5000

LivInt20 wrote: »

Why are people so afraid of red tape and penalties.

If you can complete a few straight forward tasks you will not be hit with any penalties.

Some of us on here have no other source of income.:(

blue5000

tomieen jones wrote: »

Bought dairy cross angus heifers last year as potential replacements and can see as they have no sire recorded have a very poor star rating! Anyone know how if they are genomic tested will they improve in star rating? Even if they have no record of the bull

Can you try find out from the name on the cards who the sire was? AFAIK if you get the bull's tag no or ai code you can then contact icbf and change the records.

tanko

LivInt20 wrote: »

Why are people so afraid of red tape and penalties.

If you can complete a few straight forward tasks you will not be hit with any penalties.

When you say "people" I take it you mean farmers, red tape and penalties never seem to apply to anyone else.
As usual there's no danger of any penalties for, or possibility of money having to be paid back by icbf no matter what rubbish stats they churn out or by Teagasc or by consultants.
The scheme hasn't even started, nobody knows whether the tasks will be straight forward or not.
The minister can change the terms and conditions at any time.

Sheep breeder

i would like to know livint 20 are you a genuine suckler farmer trying to make a profit, living from cows or as it seems from your post a form filler on the back of the suckler man,

Bellview

Sheep breeder wrote: »

i would like to know livint 20 are you a genuine suckler farmer trying to make a profit, living from cows or as it seems from your post a form filler on the back of the suckler man,

Great question. I have reviewed some older posts and livint appears to defend the stars a lot over the past year or so.. Are there any vested interests that living should make us aware of so we can understand the context of the strong icbf defence?

LivInt20

Bellview wrote: »

Great question. I have reviewed some older posts and livint appears to defend the stars a lot over the past year or so.. Are there any vested interests that living should make us aware of so we can understand the context of the strong icbf defence?

i would like to know livint 20 are you a genuine suckler farmer trying to make a profit, living from cows or as it seems from your post a form filler on the back of the suckler man,

No. I've answered this before. No vested interested.

Just a progressive suckler farmer who researches information and backup data that supports the work of ICBF and the database.

The data that produces the stars comes from farmers and the AIM.

Farmers who complain about low reliability are usually the ones who are entering incorrect information.

This is the future of beef breeding.

Previous to this an AI man would be talking to farmers and relaying this information back to head office. Now the information is collected and entered into a database. Same thing.

Farmers are getting paid to record data to produce good information on a bull, but some farmers cannot understand the background to the database.

I suggest those who are criticising the data, carry out some research to backup their arguments. There is plenty of research on ICBF.com to support the €urostars published.

Anyhow those who still disagree can withdraw from the scheme and leave it to the more technically advanced farmers to advance the national suckler herd.

Figerty

LivInt20 wrote: »

i would like to know livint 20 are you a genuine suckler farmer trying to make a profit, living from cows or as it seems from your post a form filler on the back of the suckler man,

No. I've answered this before. No vested interested.

Just a progressive suckler farmer who researches information and backup data that supports the work of ICBF and the database.

The data that produces the stars comes from farmers and the AIM.

Farmers who complain about low reliability are usually the ones who are entering incorrect information.

This is the future of beef breeding.

Previous to this an AI man would be talking to farmers and relaying this information back to head office. Now the information is collected and entered into a database. Same thing.

Farmers are getting paid to record data to produce good information on a bull, but some farmers cannot understand the background to the database.

I suggest those who are criticising the data, carry out some research to backup their arguments. There is plenty of research on ICBF.com to support the €urostars published.

Anyhow those who still disagree can withdraw from the scheme and leave it to the more technically advanced farmers to advance the national suckler herd.

Lots of sweeping statements there...

tomieen jones

LivInt20 wrote: »

i would like to know livint 20 are you a genuine suckler farmer trying to make a profit, living from cows or as it seems from your post a form filler on the back of the suckler man,

No. I've answered this before. No vested interested.

Just a progressive suckler farmer who researches information and backup data that supports the work of ICBF and the database.

The data that produces the stars comes from farmers and the AIM.

Farmers who complain about low reliability are usually the ones who are entering incorrect information.

This is the future of beef breeding.

Previous to this an AI man would be talking to farmers and relaying this information back to head office. Now the information is collected and entered into a database. Same thing.

Farmers are getting paid to record data to produce good information on a bull, but some farmers cannot understand the background to the database.

I suggest those who are criticising the data, carry out some research to backup their arguments. There is plenty of research on ICBF.com to support the €urostars published.

Anyhow those who still disagree can withdraw from the scheme and leave it to the more technically advanced farmers to advance the national suckler herd.

you see yourself á more advanced than those who rather breed by eye!
I'M JOINING THE SCHEME but I won't be placing the future of my herd in the hands of a guy behind a desk top entering stats! I will be selecting my sires on the ground and if the stars match up then great is a bonus and I'm get paid! !YOU SUGGEST THAT ANYONE NOT FULLY IN BELIEF OF THE ICBFand their stats are behind the times and not at the races! I hope youdon't end up with a herd of 465 day calving a pallet of maverick and two calving jacks

votuvant

By the way if genomic testing is so good why are all these AI Bulls indices fluctuating so much. Surely if it's as good as it's supposed to be, a bull that is tested should be reliable.

tanko

LivInt20 wrote: »

i would like to know livint 20 are you a genuine suckler farmer trying to make a profit, living from cows or as it seems from your post a form filler on the back of the suckler man,

No. I've answered this before. No vested interested.

Just a progressive suckler farmer who researches information and backup data that supports the work of ICBF and the database.

The data that produces the stars comes from farmers and the AIM.

Farmers who complain about low reliability are usually the ones who are entering incorrect information.

This is the future of beef breeding.

Previous to this an AI man would be talking to farmers and relaying this information back to head office. Now the information is collected and entered into a database. Same thing.

Farmers are getting paid to record data to produce good information on a bull, but some farmers cannot understand the background to the database.

I suggest those who are criticising the data, carry out some research to backup their arguments. There is plenty of research on ICBF.com to support the €urostars published.

Anyhow those who still disagree can withdraw from the scheme and leave it to the more technically advanced farmers to advance the national suckler herd.

No vested interested?? If you're farming full time now, you picked a bad time to give up the consultancy work. This beef data and genomics scheme is going to be a gold mine for pen pushers.
How do you know that farmers who complain about low reliability are the usually the ones who enter incorrect data? Have you any research to back this up?

Surprise, surprise that "research" on icbf.com supports the eurostars published. That a bit like tabacco companies saying that smoking is good for you. Independant analysis of the accuracy of the eurostars would be interesting.
Your last point about more technically advanced farmers advancing the national suckler herd stinks of arrogance. Sure work away, don't let us inferior farmers hold you back.

Kovu

[Post Deleted]

Blue, that's not on. When you signed up to Boards you agreed to the following;

We expect you to act responsibly in posting Material on Boards.ie. You agree, through use of this service, NOT to use boards.ie to:

• post illegal Material
• treat others with disrespect
• defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the rights
  
• (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others
• identify or speculate as to the identity of any anonymous or pseudonymous user

AP2014

blue5000 wrote: »

Some of us on here have no other source of income.:(

Would ya think about getting a part-time job? Teagasc seem to be keen on pushing suckler farmers that way.