 |
|
Feedback to ABGA board on Traditional vs. Non-traditional Issue |
|
|
|
Feedback to ABGA board on Traditional vs. Non-traditional Issue |
[Index
of Web Site]
|
September 30, 2008 To: ABGA Board Subject: Ennoblement – Traditional/Non-traditional I would like to thank the ABGA board for requesting feedback from the members on the subject of Traditional vs. Non-traditional Ennoblement program. My recommendation is to eliminate the two categories and just have an Ennoblement program that looks at the animals from a meat goat breeding animal quality. The reasons for our recommendations are based upon the following reasons:
Mission Focus ABGA needs to get serious about defining a mission statement and managing to it. The association either needs to focus on developing the premier meat goat breed in the industry or focus on the breed meeting some defined color standard. If you focus on both of those objectives, you have NO focus. Does ABGA want to be an association similar to an association that focuses on registered painted quarter horses or registered appaloosa quarter horses? That is a focus on the LOOK of the animal and not the FUNCTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS of the animal. ABGA focusing on having two different categories of color standard gives an indirect emphasis that one is better than the other. I have had many breeders showing colored animals; complain about judges stating they had a very nice looking animal for a “colored animal”. Ennoblement Points are a Mess The requirements for an animal becoming ennobled, became a mess after ABGA went to Traditional vs. Non-traditional categories. Examples include:
Not all Breeders Treated Equally If a breeder has nothing but traditional animals, it is easer to get an animal ennobled because all of the offspring show points count toward ennoblement. However, if a breeder has some mixture of traditional and non-traditional, the show points cannot be added together. A breeder has to either get all of the offspring show points from traditional or non-traditional animals. In addition to that, more points are required for ennoblement if the main animal is in a different category than the offspring. A traditional animal with non-traditional offspring show points requires 100 points. A traditional animal with traditional offspring show points only required 80 points. There is no justification for that difference. No Justification for Non-traditional color definition The problem with assigning a traditional or non-traditional classification is base upon standards definitions that have no justification for why they were selected or any financial or health justification for many of them. Nothing should be put into a standard unless it can be justified. Below are the color criteria for a traditional animal. Following each of them, are some comments. · “A minimum requirement for head color requires a patch of red 13 square inches or approximately the area of a 4 inch diameter circle on both sides of head excluding the ears.” The question is why is “13 square inches” the correct number? If the problem of potential skin cancer is with the hairless areas, why does the head need at least 13 square inches of red color but the body can have no more than 13 square inches? If the color is good for the head, why is it bad for the body? · “Both ears, at least 75% red coloring.” If coloration on the ears is good, why is only 75% colored acceptable? If 75% is acceptable, why isn’t 60% or 50% acceptable? · “The red coloring may extend from the nose to the heart girth and no lower than an imaginary line extending from the flank to the breast bone.” Why is it ok for the color to go from the nose all the way down to the imaginary line to the breast bone but it is not good for it to continue to go another 3 inches down the leg? · “One patch, not exceeding 13 square inches or approximately the area of a 4 inch diameter circle, is permissible on the barrel, hindquarter or belly.” What is the difference between one patch not exceeding 13 square inches or two different patches that are only 6 square inches each? The two smaller patches have less color than the one that is acceptable. · “Patches of red on the legs may not exceed 3 square inches or approximately the area of a 2 inch diameter circle.” Does that mean EACH leg can have 3 square inches or the sum of all legs can't exceed 3 square inches? Why is it all four legs can’t have as much color as either the head or the body? Why is it bad for an animal to have one leg with 4 square inches of color but it is ok for another animal to have four legs each with 3 square inches of color. · “Very few red hairs are permissible at 12 months of age or younger” How many red hairs are “very few”? Does that mean 15, 100, 300 red hairs are ok? Does the “very few red hairs” include hair on just the body or are the head and legs also counted? If there are acceptable red areas on the animals, how far away from the acceptable areas do you start counting the unacceptable red hairs? What if the animal has no red areas on their body and legs but has noticeable red hairs sprinkled across the body and legs? Why is it ok for there to be enough red hairs on the body to create a 4 inch in diameter circle but it is un acceptable to take the same amount of red hairs and just sprinkle them over the body? Are judges required to count the red hairs to determine if there are very few on the animal? Why is it ok for an animal to have many red hairs after the age of 12 months? If an animal has more than "very few red hairs" and has a visual inspection done at 12 months old, the animal will be classified as "non-traditional". However, if the breeder waits one more day past 12 months of age, the animal will be classified as "traditional" even though there are the same number of red hairs. Where is the logic in that?
Time Dependent Visual Inspection is Bad I believe that it is wrong to have standards that can be met when an animal is 10 months old but cannot be met when they are two years old. The best example I know of is EGGSfile. I believe that he is probably one of the greatest bucks that the U.S. has ever had and we have built our entire herd around his genetics. However, he had at least an 8 inch diameter red spot on his back and that is twice the acceptable amount according to the standards. He passed visual inspection when there was only one category… traditional. The justification that is given for that happening is he passed visual inspection at 10 months old and the spot was only 4 inches then. We have heard too many breeders tell us that you need to get your animals visually inspected at the earliest age because there is less chance of color being a factor at that time. The problem is when you consider proportions, EGGSfile’s spot was no greater proportion of his body at 3 years than it was at 10 months even though one time it was 4 inches in diameter and another time it was 8 inches in diameter. The size of the spot did not change the quality of EGGSfile or his offspring. It did not change the number of times that he sold for some of the highest prices ever in the U.S. No standard is good that is in inches or square inches that can be inspected at different ages. There is no justification for allowing one animal to pass when they are 10 months old and have a spot that is 4 inches but failing another animal that is 3 years old and has a spot that is 5 inches. There is no room in the standards for having animals pass or fail visual inspection because the size of a spot at different ages. Multiple Visual Inspections are Bad The requirement for two visual inspections came about at the same time as when the non-traditional category was implemented. It was mainly implemented to allow multiple inspections to ensure the animals were put in the proper category of traditional or non-traditional. If there were not two categories, there would be no need for two visual inspections. In reality, there is no need for one inspection. The point has been made that a visual inspection is required to ensure no favoritism by a judge has occurred. The problem is, the same judge that awarded the show points to the animal, is authorized to do the visual inspection. A visual inspection is not to find the best animals. It is ensure an animal meets the absolute minimum requirements of the standards. If an animal can not meet the minimum standards, it should never be awarded any points in the show ring even if they are the only animal in the class.
|