As the row between pedigree breed societies and the ICBF escalates, we chatted to the CEO of ICBF, Sean Coughlan, this week to ask him where the current standoff is at, and what will the next steps be in restoring pedigree breeders confidence in the ICBF.

There are questions being raised around calving data accuracy. Are these claims warranted, and is there anything being done about them?

In overall terms, we are confident in the calving difficulty evaluations. The data shows they do a good job of protecting farmers. That said, there are improvements to be made, especially in relation to some foreign bulls. This work is ongoing and will be implemented during the summer.

After 26 years, some say the objectives of the ICBF have been lost

ICBF’s objectives are unchanged since its inception – which are to increase the profitability of commercial suckler farming through improved genetics.

Has the ICBF lost the confidence of suckler farmers?

Suckler farmers want to use the ICBF EuroStar indexes. For example, I have not spoken to any suckler farmer who will not look at the ICBF calving difficulty figure when buying a bull. That is the fundamental role that we play – providing information to suckler farmers to help them make informed decisions that will help their farms be more profitable.

One-size-fits-all index – is it working and can it work if all breeds want different things?

Sustainable profitability for commercial farmers should be the ultimate goal of every breed. Breeds may use different paths to deliver it, but the fundamentals of commercial suckler farming remain the same.

Who owns the data? If a breed society wants to exclude ICBF, can that happen?

The ICBF view is that the individual farmer controls his/her data in the ICBF database.

Some breed societies maintain that no progress is being made in the beef stakeholders forum, no minutes being taken and no actions being agreed out of each meeting.

The beef stakeholders forum has identified several focus areas which will see updates later in 2025 namely:

This is in addition to the changes already made to the cow liveweight figures.

Some breed societies are also criticising ICBF on its communication with them and lack of communication.

Communication of technical messages in simple terms can be difficult. I think that anyone who engages with the ICBF in good faith will find a group of people who are very open to engaging in dialogue, and doing what is right for Irish farmers.

Continental breed societies say the changes that came in November 2023 favoured traditional breeds and negatively affected them.

Ultimately, 84% of animals that were 4- or 5-star before the November 2023 changes remained 4 or 5 star afterwards. Yes, there were some winners and losers, but it is impossible to make changes without that being the case to some extent.

Breed societies maintain the indexes and schemes are narrowing the gene pool in all breeds. What do you say to that? Or is there a way this can be rectified?

That is a challenge. But we can overcome it. It does require a systematic approach to bringing in new bloodlines. My view is that this should be coordinated at the individual breed society level, and not just leave it to individual breeders to take a chance in bringing in new genetics. The use of genotyping allows us to bring in new bloodlines that can come in with 4 or 5 stars. The Gene Ireland programme has tested foreign bulls in recent years and can play an integral role in introducing new bloodlines into the Irish suckler herd.

There is a lot of talk regarding the average daughter liveweight of the top 10 bulls on the replacement index on the active bull list. Is the ICBF promoting smaller suckler cows?

The ICBF is promoting efficient cows. There is nothing wrong with a heavy cow, provided she weans a heavy calf. The large volume of cow liveweight data recorded in recent years indicates that the mature cow liveweight of the current herd is approximately 690kg at the time of weaning. Current indications are that the average cow weight won’t reduce in the coming years.

Breed societies say there is a conflict of interest on the board, with some members also on the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) and representing artificial insemination (AI) companies

Whether one is a breed society, farmer co-op, or ICBF, one has to have a process to manage conflicts of interest. I am confident that ICBF’s process to manage any potential conflicts of interest is robust.

Some societies say the National Cattle Breeding Centre (NCBC) has too much representation on the board

The shareholding of ICBF was established in 1998. The board members of ICBF are appointed by the shareholders. ICBF does not have control over who is appointed to the board by the members.

Has the ICBF reached out to the breed societies that have made a decision to walk away and is there anything that can be done?

Yes, the ICBF has reached out. My understanding is that societies have not made a decision to “walk away”. Some societies have made a decision not to publish evaluations on their society sale catalogues, which is different to walking away.

Where to from here, what are the next steps?

I think dialogue with individual breed societies is required – each society has different issues and I am committed to working through those issues with the different breeds.

Will this decision effectively stall genetic progress in the Irish suckler and beef herd? Pedigree breeders play a very important role in driving that genetic progress, if they are being told by their respective councils to ignore figures, will figures go back?

Commercial farmers will continue to access the figures on animals before they buy through the ICBF animal search. Even within pedigree circles, I believe that the figures will continue to be used to inform breeding decisions.

How does a breeder get access to the figures if they want to publicise the genetics that are in their stock?

A breeder can access their figures on their HerdPlus account, or the ICBF animal search.

Where does this leave Suckler Carbon Efficiency Programme (SCEP) and could farmers run into trouble getting eligible animals for their herd?

I don’t believe so. Star ratings on animals will still be available through marts, ICBF HerdPlus, or the ICBF animal search.

There has been some criticism that no marts or live exporters have been involved in the beef stakeholder forum. Are there any plans to widen the net with participation?

ICOS marts are represented on the stakeholder forum.

In terms of updating economic indexes, what beef price will be used in the next update and when will that happen?

Beef price in the index will be updated this summer. Dr Paul Crossan (Teagasc) is currently working on this.

What weighting does feed intake have in both the terminal and replacement indexes? What data do you have on feed intake?

Feed intake has a weighting of 11% in the terminal index and 4% in the replacement index. The feed intake data available all comes from the Tully progeny performance test centre in Kildare. Currently, the evaluation has over 9,300 animals with feed intake making it one of the largest datasets of its kind in the world.

Is there need for a new on-farm performance recording programme in pedigree herds?

Yes, I believe there is. There is ongoing work happening in this area, being led by a representative of the breed societies.

Is there need for a progeny test centre for pedigree cattle?

We ran our Tully centre on this basis for many years. It does have merit. Ultimately, I think running it as we do now, with commercial progeny of pedigree bulls is a more efficient and effective way to do it.

The pedigree breeders’ council has called for an independent review of the indexes. What do you say to that?

The composition of the indexes is driven by the Teagasc Grange economic model. It has been independently peer reviewed on several occasions.

It’s funny how things come full circle. I came across an article in the Irish Farmers Journal by John Shirley written in March 1999 around a mediator being appointed to bring a row between breed societies and the then CEO of ICBF, Brian Wickham, to resolution. Professor Jim Roche was tasked with the job when the ICBF was in its infancy and setting up the building blocks for the database. Twenty-six years later, we are back in the same place with a huge divide opening up between the ICBF and Irish pedigree breed societies over the last few months.

We are not quite at mediation yet, but by the looks of things, a “Kofi Annan” character will be required to bring back some peaceful times in Irish breeding circles.

The current fallout has probably been brewing for a while. The November 2023 evaluation run included new data on age of slaughter and incorporated carbon into the beef indexes.

This re-ranked some breeds – with most traditional breeds coming out better and some continental breeds dropping in terms of indexes.

Cow weight became a huge part of the debate in the following weeks and months, with the Teagasc model working off a cow liveweight of 670kg for the economic model that drives the indexes.

The ICBF database is quite unique in terms of cattle breeding and any visitors that come to our country always marvel at the amount of data that is collected within the ICBF database.

Millions of pieces of data all feeding into an index that aids decision making on breeding is a powerful tool. But there is a big difference in aiding a decision and dictating a decision and this is where the Suckler Carbon Efficiency Programme (SCEP) comes in. Farmers who joined the SCEP have no choice but to follow indexes with higher requirements to keep a higher proportion of high-index animals. While farmers joined the scheme in full knowledge of the requirements, some feel that the goalposts changed in November 2023.

You can’t help but wonder if indexes were left as a choice for some farmers to pick up if they felt it was right for their herd, would we be better off. It would be more of a walk into it rather than a sprint with deadlines.

Let’s not forget that SCEP will bring in over €250m to Irish suckler herds during its duration. €250m isn’t easy to find in today’s climate and maintaining animal support payments under an environmental umbrella is an important part of proving that animals are part of the solution in terms of meeting our climate change targets.

There is definite room for improvement in the ICBF’s communication and general liaising with pedigree breeders. The ICBF will point to the current beef stakeholder format, but breed societies are adamant that the group isn’t working, with no progress or defined actions to report to date. With a low level of AI adoption in the suckler herd pedigree breeders play a fundamental role in making genetic progress and without them on board the ship will slowly come to a halt.

Something has to change and there is something seriously wrong where a breed society feels they have no option but to pull indexes from their sale catalogues. I have had calls from commercial suckler farmers saying it’s not right that a few people sitting around a breed council table can make this decision for the industry and hide pedigree bull data from prospective bull purchasers; many of whom have to know the index of the bull they are buying to be SCEP compliant.

I have also had calls from other farmers commending the decision of breed societies. There are two sides involved and for the sake of the Irish commercial suckler farmer and our industry they need to sit down, knock some heads together and sort it out. It’s as simple as that.