DEAR EDITOR,

I am disappointed and concerned by the amount of negative coverage surrounding the ICBF Euro-Star indexes.

As a full-time suckler farmer for over 35 years, I need each cow to pay her way. She needs to wean a calf every year.

My breeding programme is based on stock bulls. In my early years, purchasing a bull came with very little information. I relied on the animal’s ancestry, the breeder’s sales pitch, and my own visual assessment. While appearance is important, there is a lot I cannot tell by just looking at an animal.

Before the Euro-Star indexes, my selection process for replacement females was largely based on visual assessment. Now, in addition to my visual assessment, I use the replacement index and key traits before deciding. I have a much clearer understanding of a heifer’s potential for milk production, fertility, and overall ability to provide a good calf every year.

My cows now require much less labour at calving, and they go back in calf more quickly. I do not want too big a calf at birth, but I do want it to have the ability to grow quickly.

By using the Euro-Star indexes as a tool to guide my decisions, I am now producing more carcase weight at a younger finishing age.

My cows are slightly smaller than they were a decade ago, but they are more efficient and productive.

They need less labour, but I am producing more kilograms of beef per cow than ever. The star ratings are not perfect, but I believe they are taking us in the right direction.

Commercial suckler farmers need the independent information provided by the ICBF. We should trust the science available to us and not be derailed by a vocal minority.