01/21/2026
Everyone talks about maternal, performance, or carcass, but no one ever mentions structural correctness.
As I view more and more sale catalogs and videos, I notice a trend that most producers describe their program as “maternal with performance” or “maternal with performance and carcass.” Although some breeders make note of feet as a priority, feet are just a small component of structural soundness and skeletal design. Bad feet are most commonly due to either management/nutrition/exercise, or other underlying skeletal issues. Feet don’t tell the entire structural story. Some of my best footed animals have restricted movement.
I’ve seen numerous bull videos already where you can tell that he won’t last two years in the breeding pasture just based on structure. Bulls will get foot rot or injured causing them to have a shortened career, but they shouldn’t be falling out of the herd before 5 just from bad phenotypic design. Does it matter if a bull is top 1% WW if he can’t travel with ease? Should it be a rarity for a breeding bull to last 5 years?
Someone once told me that when you’re in the picture pen, the animals that never set up and strike a pose are probably just physically unable to do so whether it is being short hipped, incorrect angle to the hock, etc.
Meanwhile, the animals that are constantly setting up and striking a pose are more likely to be correct in the layout of their skeletal design with more range of motion.
Think about how many issues could be eliminated for commercial cattlemen if we got the structural design of their cowherd honed in and then started pushing the needle towards greater performance.
There are higher performing, bigger scaled cattle that are correctly made just as poor performing cattle can be incorrectly made. It seems that evaluating skeletal layout, mobility, and flexibility are overlooked and under emphasized in genetic selections regardless of the type of cattle you are breeding towards.
I understand that heavier bulls are easier to sell because growth/size is a tangible selection measure. So how do you explain to a customer that “this bull may give up a little performance (he’s not the biggest) but he’s from a cow family that is consistently fertile and sound with good udders.” Conformation and skeletal design needs to be a higher priority than performance, but that is so unattractive to incorporate into marketing and messaging.
Maternal function, production, optimal performance, feet, udders, fertility, docility, muscle, mothering ability, and more are selection priorities, but structural design is the area I am the most critical of in my own cowherd.
Direction is more important than speed. While generational turn around in cattle breeding is a slow process, it is exciting to intentionally breed towards cattle that balance maternal, performance, and phenotypic design with emphasis on structural conformation.
