jfh wrote: » I tagged the wrong animal, anyone know if you can change the selection after you have received the tags? I took hairsample of the correct one just in case I couldn't.
Hurling Hereford wrote: » Contact the ICBF HelpDesk @ 023 8832883, explain exactly what happened and they will sort everything out for you.
Green&Red wrote: » No need for that even, just stick a note in with the samples explaining what happened
dohc turbo2 wrote: » Anyone hear any thing lately re there appeal ? I’ve still heard nothing only it’s in the hands on the one dealing with it
Lady Haywire wrote: » Anyone else's cows STILL fecking changing. My blonde cow that had twins last year has suddenly jumped from 3 to 5 stars since last winter
Hard Knocks wrote: » Yep, but the reliability is still the same ðŸ€
Lady Haywire wrote: » No, she is eligible now but she wasn't for the last few years. Just goes to show how accurate it is when it takes the very final year to even get her into the scheme allowance despite the genomics testing. No matter of her stars anyway she's still one of the best cows in the place & I didn't need her to be 5 stars to tell me that.
kollegeknight wrote: » I got the letter in dec/jan about tag selection and still waiting. Weanlings going out today so another day of gathering
High bike wrote: » are you sure she qualifies for oct this year,I’m fairly sure it’s her stars when she was genotyped that counts
Lime Tree Farm wrote: » Sometime ago several posted that they had received theirs. I then logged onto ICBF and saw that the genomic bar indicated that the tags had been issued. Approx 3 weeks later I found them behind a curtain, the postman not meeting anyone had put them in an open window. Just about managed to get them sent off before the 28 Feb.
dh1985 wrote: Because as of now I think they pull them put of the cows ass.
Justjens wrote: » Had two heifers a year apart same cow same bull, one had an index €20 more than the other. When I enquired why the difference I was told it was their estimate that one was better than the other.
rushvalley wrote: » What happened to calves having a replacement index of the average of its parents? Bulled a few 5 star cows with high terminal bulls last year as I don't need too many more 4/5 star heifers but ICBF have a number of the calves rated at 1 star replacement ??
Lady Haywire wrote: » Yes, certainly seems eligible anyway as she's on the last report. The only reason I copped her was that I knew the number of cows we had which were 4 stars & eligible for the scheme. The most recent report had an extra one as qualified eligible which made me look into which had changed. All her evaluations have been genomic since I tagged her & she was one of the first we did. Just noticed the yellow box now, what's that about? The fact some genomic tested ones have dropped since but still eligible?
High bike wrote: » i see your point but the t’s and c’s she has to be either 4 or 5 star at the time of genotyping your prob better off ringing to clarify .Have one her myself that I’d consider my best cow who was 3 star when genotyped and is now 5 star.The yellow box seems to be saying they’r stars may change before October so maybe can’t count on them.
Buford T. Justice VI wrote: » Was there a difference in gestation length or calving difficulty between the two animals?
Justjens wrote: » Not that I recall, my records wouldn't be that accurate and there was no mention of that when I queried the ratings, it was their 'opinion' that one was better than the other. I kept the lesser of the two and she bred the best rated heifer a couple of years ago.
