Archive for Murray Hunt

Lactanet Gave Murray Hunt Its Distinction Award. He Gave the Room a 3,500-Herd Problem

In 1970, Canada had 90,000 dairy herds. By August 2025, there were 9,048. By 2035, there may be just 3,500. Upon receiving Lactanet’s Distinction Award, Murray Hunt challenged the industry: the milk tank can’t pay for the structure we have now.

Murray Hunt thanked Neil Petreny and Paul Larmer for helping him up to the podium. “Age is catching up,” he said, “but I still love the industry.” Then the 81-year-old spent the rest of his time at the podium proving it, first by thanking the people who built his career and then by telling the people who run Canada’s dairy cattle improvement organizations that the structure he spent that career building has outgrown the milk cheque.

“In 1970 we had 90,000 herds in Canada, 25 cows each, and every farmer organization had its own silo, its own goals, its own area, and you didn’t dare get outside them,” he told the Dairy Cattle Industry Forum at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel in Toronto on September 22, minutes after Lactanet presented him with its 2026 Dairy Cattle Improvement Industry Distinction Award. Canada had 9,048 farms shipping milk on August 1, 2025, according to the latest available Canadian Dairy Information Centre data. The estimate Hunt had read for 2035 is 3,500. “The milk tank, that little spigot at the end of the milk tank, can’t pay for the structure that we have now,” he said.

Few people in that room had more standing to say it. In 1998, as executive director of the Canadian Association of Animal Breeders, he saw CAAB dissolved once its genetics work had moved to the new Canadian Dairy Network. Four years earlier, Larmer’s citation noted, he “navigated a successful streamlining and integration of research dollars, people resources, and effort” across industry organizations to create the Cattle Breeding Research Council. On Tuesday, he asked the room to do it again. “Alignment for me and Karen personally was that we were out of a job,” he said.

His 2035 number sounds extreme until you look at who actually buys dairy improvement services. Herds enrolled in milk recording fell 17.3% in five years, against 10.4% for all farms. Hold that pace, and Lactanet records roughly 3,650 herds in 2035, within 150 of Hunt’s figure. That’s a Bullvine calculation, and the math is below.

The Names Read Before His

Larmer read the roll of previous recipients before he read the résumé. Doug Blair and Robert Chicoine shared the first award in 2008. Bonnie Cooper became the first woman honoured in 2019. The 2023 forum made up for three pandemic years with Pierre Laliberté, Dr. David Kelton and a special award to Brian Van Doormaal, according to Lactanet. Gary Bowers followed in 2024, and the late Dr. Gerrit Kistemaker was honoured posthumously in 2025. 

Lactanet’s announcement calls Hunt the sixteenth recipient since the award’s creation in 2008. Semex announced Chicoine’s death on September 15, so the name that opened the list was read a week later. 

Jack Britt had come up from the United States for the evening. The North Carolina State dean emeritus co-wrote the 2018 Journal of Dairy Science review imagining dairy farms in 2067, a fitting guest for a speech about 2035. Hunt also thanked Van Doormaal for starting the forum at CDN and Lactanet for carrying it on.

Larmer called it “a lengthy résumé, but one of contribution, foundation building, and success that has touched on almost every aspect of our dairy improvement industry.” We covered it in full when Lactanet announced the award in August. The short version: a 1970 University of Guelph master’s thesis under Dr. Ted Burnside arguing for the maximum number of young sires in structured sampling, which at its peak meant more than 500 young bulls sampled in Canada a year. The Production Dollar Difference, Canada’s first sire ranking index built on profit and a forerunner of the Pro$ index that arrived in 2015. Eighteen years at Holstein Canada. Inaugural chair of the Genetic Evaluation Board. A seat in the Futures Group that led to Canadian Dairy Network on May 29, 1995. 

→ The full career story: 500 Young Bulls a Year: The 1970 Thesis Behind Murray Hunt’s Lactanet Distinction Award

A Farm Accident, a Centennial Dance and the Hardest Lesson

He was 15 when his parents, Sterling and Irene Hunt, bought Huntsdale Farm: 22 cows and a 25-acre market garden. The herd went on Record of Performance, started using AI in 1962, and was type classified in 1963. Huntsdale earned Holstein Canada’s Master Breeder shield in 1984.

University wasn’t the plan. “I had a farm accident, and she said, ‘You may not be able to farm,'” he said of his mother. “I wanted to farm. As always, mothers are right.”

He called August 5, 1967 “my greatest blessing.” It was a community centennial dance. “I’m not a very good dancer, mostly a wallflower. She did let me drive her home. We went out on a date the next day, and the rest is history.” Karen was entering her first year at McMaster; he was partway through Guelph. They married two years later. “If I have any communication skills, I learned from Karen. She’s my rock, my support, my everything.”

His first job, running Ontario’s Dairy Herd Improvement Program for the provincial agriculture ministry at 25, taught him business and human resources the hard way. “Firing people. That was the toughest thing I ever had to learn,” he said. “I had to learn to part with people in a good way.”

Larmer’s citation filled in the life around the work: more than 15 years as a 4-H leader coaching teams at what’s now the TD Canadian 4-H Dairy Classic, two decades producing the six-night Rockton Dinner Theatre with Karen to raise money for the Rockton Fair, and service as an elder at West Flamborough Presbyterian and Troy United churches. They have three children and eight grandchildren. None of the grandchildren is in dairy. He listed their careers with obvious pride, from data systems to medicine, in the same speech where he cited a 3,500-herd estimate.

How Did Milk Recording Go From 10% of Cows to 58%?

When Hunt joined Holstein Canada in 1973, he said, 10% of Canada’s dairy cows were milk recorded and 6% were type classified. “We’ve heard here today that we don’t need every animal recorded, but at one time we thought we did, so we pushed hard.”

Pushing meant travelling the country to combine the federal ROP program with the provincial DHI programs. It meant writing the first constitution of the Ontario Dairy Herd Improvement Corporation with a lawyer the Ontario Milk Marketing Board paid for. And it meant spending three hours one day explaining to Lorne Hurd, the board’s general manager, why DHI needed a checkoff. “Now whether it’s being well used or not,” he said, “Neil Petreny will have to explain that.”

It worked. In 2025, 563,492 cows in 5,333 herds were on milk recording, according to Lactanet data published by the Canadian Dairy Information Centre. That’s 58% of Canada’s 971,600 dairy cows. 

Classification was the harder fix. “The type classification program may not now be meeting everyone’s needs,” he conceded, but in 1973, 47% of first-lactation cows were classified Good Plus, and there were more Goods than Good Pluses. The scores weren’t separating cows, and the recording needed to be standardized.

The answer turned up at a grounded Ottawa airport. It was February, about minus 20, and planes weren’t leaving because Ottawa didn’t have de-icing yet. Hunt got talking to a man in snow boots working on a portable device. He measured trees for a living, he said. He could only work outside for an hour and a half at a time, then went back inside and worked the data. Hunt wondered whether classifiers could use the same thing.

Dalton Hodgins, the Shawville classifier who later led Holstein Canada’s classification staff, according to Holstein Québec, took the project on with him. He’d drive out from his Brantford hotel to the Hunt home at night, where a young Andrew Hunt would pepper him with questions and then start punching keys. Hodgins would warn the boy, “Oh, don’t do that. You might break it,” Murray told the room. “Andrew’s never been afraid of computers.” Larmer’s citation credits that work as the first handheld device used to standardize classifiers’ records, and the Canadian system was adopted by multiple countries. Hunt trained classifiers in Australia, Japan, Brazil, France, Italy, Cuba, Germany and Spain. 

He didn’t oversell the result. “I’m not sure we were successful in getting the right feet and legs on the cow,” he said, “but nevertheless, it was a lot of change.”

The Silo Speech

Hunt said he’d cleared it with the organizers first. “I could throw out a little bit of my bias here.” Then he told a room full of cattle people that he wasn’t there to talk about cows. “I want to challenge you on the infrastructure.”

In the 1970s, he said, Canada sampled 500 young bulls a year, and some herds generated 30% of their revenue from breeding sales. The organizations serving them stayed in their own lanes. Some of those walls have come down since. “In my opinion,” he said, “not enough.”

 1970 (Hunt)2025 (official)2035 (estimate Hunt cited)
Herds90,0009,0483,500
Cows per herd25107225–240
Dairy cows~2.25 million (implied)971,600787,500–840,000 (implied)
Fat and protein per cow per day—baseline20%+ higher

Sources: 2025 farms and cows, Canadian Dairy Information Centre; 2025 herd average, Dairy Farmers of Canada. The 1970 and 2035 figures are Hunt’s, from the podium. Implied cow counts are Bullvine calculations.

“It’s going to be a business model on every farm,” he said of 2035, and the milk recording service will have to become a business-model service too. “Are you prepared to take down all the silos and get together for the benefit of the dairy farmers?”

He gave three asks.

  • Alignment. “Yes, I said alignment, not cooperation, not collaboration, not amalgamation. Alignment.” He held up Lactanet itself, which brought CanWest DHI, Valacta and CDN together in 2019, as the model and said it needs to go further. Then he looked right at the president of Holstein Canada. “It’s going to be a challenge for you, because I think there’s roles for breeds and there’s roles for others.” 
  • Rationalization. Each organization carries its own HR department and its own computer systems. “We need to destroy more silos.”
  • Innovation. “The dairy industry is bigger than Canada, and we need to be finding partners around the world to work on research and development.” Then came an admission from the man who helped shape the type program. “We used to think we had the Canadian kind. It was unique. We’re not any more unique than anything else. We’re finding out now she was too tall in front, and that chest width didn’t mean anything about how much feed she could take in.”

He also asked for modelling. The Futures Group of 1994 led to CDN the following spring. “It sounds kind of stupid now to say 1994. We were looking to the future.” His master’s was a computer model. Now he wants a new model for 2035, 41 years on.

Can 3,500 Herds Pay for Today’s Structure?

Here’s the surprise in his numbers. The milk in the tank barely moves. At 225 to 240 cows a herd, 3,500 herds is 787,500 to 840,000 cows. Add his 20% more fat and protein per cow, and total component output lands between 3% below and 4% above today’s.

So the spigot pays about what it pays now. What changes is how many farms are left to carry the costs that don’t shrink when a herd sells out: boards, head offices, evaluation runs, software, HR.

“We need to destroy more silos.”

— Murray Hunt, Dairy Cattle Industry Forum, September 22, 2026

Bullvine calculation: how fast does the fixed-cost share per herd rise?

Path to 2035Annual decline in herdsHerds in 2035Fixed cost per herd vs. 2025
All-farm pace (2014–2024)2.6%~6,9501.30×
Milk-recording pace (2020–2025)*3.7%~6,1901.46×
Hunt’s 2035 estimate9.1% (implied)3,5002.59×

All-farm pace from the AAFC Dairy Sector Profile. *Milk-recording enrolment pace, applied to all farms.

For all farms, 3,500 is aggressive. It needs herds to disappear three and a half times faster than they did over the last decade. For the herds that buy milk recording, it’s close to the current trend line.

Milk recording20202025Change
Herds enrolled6,4465,333−17.3%
All dairy farms10,0959,048−10.4%
Share of farms enrolled63.9%58.9%−5.0 points

Enrolled herds fell 3.7% a year from 2020 to 2025. Hold that pace for a decade, and the recorded-herd base is about 3,650 in 2035. Part of that is deliberate. The forum heard the same day that not every animal needs recording anymore, and genomics has made that true for some decisions. But a deliberate exit still leaves fewer herds carrying the same systems.

Put a dollar on it. Say an organization carries $1 million a year in costs that don’t fall when herds leave. Across 9,048 farms, that’s about $111 a herd. At 6,950 farms, it’s $144. At 3,500, it’s $286. Spread only across milk-recording herds, it goes from $188 today to $274 at 3,650. That’s an illustrative model, not any organization’s budget.

What Should Board Members Ask Before 2035?

Hunt aimed the challenge at the directors and delegates in the room, and he’d been on the staff side of that table. “Elected farmer representatives are a great resource,” he said. “Being young and brash, you think you don’t need to be told, but I did.” Here’s what his three asks look like as board work.

  • Ask for the fixed-cost split this AGM season. Ask every organization you fund what share of its budget doesn’t fall when herd numbers do, and what that line costs per herd at 6,950 and at 3,500 farms. It’s a 30-day question. A total with no split isn’t an answer.
  • Price shared services before governance. Shared HR, IT and field systems attack duplicated costs without anyone surrendering a board, which is the distinction Hunt drew between alignment and amalgamation. The trade-off is control, since breed-specific rules have to survive the sharing.
  • Fund research with partners beyond Canada. Bigger research pools spread cost across more cows. The risk is losing Canadian pricing in the selection goal, the same logic that made PDD and Pro$ Canadian tools in the first place.

Hunt closed with John F. Kennedy, from Frankfurt in June 1963: “Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.”

He’d lived that line once already, in 1998, when the job he’d built was the one that went.

The room gave him a standing ovation. Karen was part of it, as she’s been through every chapter of this story: his biggest supporter and his biggest fan.

If the organization you pay dues to had to run on 6,950 herds tomorrow, what would it cut first, and has anyone on your board asked yet?

We’ll put that question to the organizations Hunt challenged and report their answers in The Bullvine Weekly.

Key Takeaways

  • Hunt’s 3,500-herd estimate for 2035 is aggressive for all farms, but milk recording is already on that track: enrolled herds fell 17.3% from 2020 to 2025, which projects to about 3,650.
  • On Hunt’s own 2035 figures, the tank ships about the same fat and protein, between 3% less and 4% more. What shrinks is the number of herds splitting the fixed costs.
  • Alignment always costs someone. In 1998 it cost Hunt his own job when CAAB dissolved, so any board asking for it should be ready to say who gives up what.
  • Hunt’s test for any partnership or shared-service plan: “In the end, the group that need to be profitable are the dairy farms, viable and sustainable.”

The Sunday Read Dairy Professionals Don’t Skip.

Every week, thousands of producers, breeders, and industry insiders open Bullvine Weekly for genetics insights, market shifts, and profit strategies they won’t find anywhere else. One email. Five minutes. Smarter decisions all week.

NewsSubscribe
First
Last
Consent

Learn More

  • Are You Breeding for the Future or the Past? — Align your genetic strategy directly with tomorrow’s milk cheque. Breaks down the hidden costs of outdated selection traits, arming you with the metrics needed to shift your sire criteria toward strict profit margins over show-ring appeal.
  • What Will the Dairy Industry Look Like in 2030? — Prepare your balance sheet for the consolidation wave Murray Hunt predicts. Maps upcoming bottlenecks in processing capacity against consumer demand, delivering concrete herd-size thresholds your operation must clear to survive the next decade.
  • Is Crossbreeding the Answer to Dairy’s Problems? — Challenge the purebred status quo with hybrid vigor economics. Follows the money on crossbred herds to reveal exactly how improved conception rates and reduced cull costs offset potential yield drops, fundamentally redefining baseline profitability.

500 Young Bulls a Year: The 1970 Thesis Behind Murray Hunt’s Lactanet Distinction Award

A 25-year-old grad student wrote that Canada needed to sample as many young sires as it could afford. At the peak, the country was proving over 500 a year. Lactanet just put a name on that idea.

Executive Summary: Lactanet Canada has named Murray Hunt the 2026 recipient of the Dairy Cattle Improvement Industry Distinction Award, with the presentation set for the Dairy Cattle Industry Forum on September 22–23 at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel in Toronto. The citation covers 28 years of professional service across three employers — the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Holstein Canada, and the Canadian Association of Animal Breeders — plus a Master Breeder Shield at Huntsdale in 1984 and more than 55 years of continuous industry involvement. But the résumé isn’t the story. The story is that two of Hunt’s ideas, both roughly half a century old, are still running the Canadian system: structured young sire sampling at scale, and ranking bulls by the dollars their daughters actually return. The first idea came out of a 1970 Master’s thesis at Guelph. The second, a profit index called Production Dollar Difference, was built while he was still a student and shows up today as Pro$. For breeders, the takeaway is uncomfortable in a useful way: the two selection tools you use most casually were both fought for by people who had to convince a skeptical industry that dollars and numbers beat instinct.

Key Takeaways

  • Lactanet named Murray Hunt the 2026 Dairy Cattle Improvement Industry Distinction Award recipient, with presentation at the Toronto Forum, September 22–23, 2026.
  • His 1970 Guelph thesis argued for maximizing the number of young sires sampled annually. At the peak of Canadian young sire sampling, over 500 AI bulls were sampled per year.
  • He built Canada’s first profit-based sire ranking, the Production Dollar Difference, whose logic reappears in Pro$, launched in August 2015.
  • He chaired the inaugural Genetic Evaluation Board (created 1987) and helped move it from a government-directed body to an industry-driven one under CDN in 1996.
  • He worked himself out of a job. The 1998 dissolution of CAAB — the organization he ran as Executive Director — was the logical end of the restructuring he championed.

The award, and what it actually recognizes

Lactanet Canada announced on August 20 that Murray Hunt is the 2026 recipient of the Dairy Cattle Improvement Industry Distinction Award, an honour created in 2008 and presented each September at the Dairy Cattle Industry Forum. The presentation happens September 22–23 at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel in Toronto.

The nomination was prepared by Brian Van Doormaal on behalf of Lactanet Canada. That detail matters more than it looks. Van Doormaal was himself a 2023 recipient of the same award, and he spent his career running the genetic evaluation infrastructure that Hunt spent his career assembling the governance for. When the person who inherited the machine writes the citation for the person who built the frame, the document reads less like a tribute and more like a technical handover note.

Lactanet’s release describes “a lifetime of visionary leadership, innovation, and dedication.” Fine. Here’s the part that survives the Swap Test — you couldn’t write these sentences about poultry, or about anything other than Canadian dairy cattle improvement, because the specific institutions only exist here.

It started with 22 cows and a market garden

Murray Hunt was 15 when his parents, Sterling and Irene Hunt, bought Huntsdale Farm: 22 cows and 25 acres of market garden in Ontario. Through the 1960s the farm grew and picked up quota when the Ontario Milk Marketing Board first introduced it.

Then the teenager did something that tells you everything about the next 60 years. He enrolled the herd in the federal Record of Performance program and started using artificial insemination in 1962. Type Classification followed in 1963.

Think about what that meant on a 22-cow Ontario farm in 1962. Milk recording was a cost with no guaranteed return. AI meant handing your breeding decisions to a catalogue. Classification meant paying a stranger to tell you your cows weren’t as good as you thought. Plenty of neighbours passed. He signed up for all three before he could legally buy a beer.

That’s the through-line: measure it, then decide. Everything else in the citation is that instinct applied at progressively larger scale.

The thesis that built a sampling program

On his parents’ advice, Hunt went to the University of Guelph — B.Sc. in Agriculture in 1969, M.Sc. in Animal Breeding in 1970, supervised by Dr. Ted Burnside.

The thesis conclusion sounds obvious now and was contentious then: to find genuinely elite progeny-proven sires for wide national and international AI use, you have to maximize the number of young sires entering structured sampling programs every single year. Not the best-looking young bulls. The most young bulls you can properly sample.

That is a statistical argument, not a stockman’s argument, and it cuts against how breeders think. Every bull you sample that fails costs money and daughters. The counter-argument — that you cannot select intensely from a small pool, no matter how carefully you pick it — only pays off in aggregate, across years, at a national scale nobody standing in a barn can see.

Canada bought the argument. Per Lactanet’s citation, at the peak of Canadian young sire sampling the active adoption of that strategy meant over 500 AI young bulls sampled in Canada annually. That number is the thesis, cashed.

Barn math on the idea: A sampling program that proves 50 bulls a year and keeps the top 10% delivers five elite sires. Run 500 through the same 10% filter and you get 50 — and because the selection differential widens as the pool grows, the top of that 50 is better than the top of the five. That’s it. That’s the whole argument, and it’s why Canadian genetics travelled.

Before Pro$ there was PDD — and the paper trail is worth arguing about

Still a grad student, chasing both genetics and economics, Hunt built Canada’s first sire ranking index: the Production Dollar Difference, or PDD. It estimated the additional profit in dollars a producer could expect over a lactation from a given bull’s daughters versus an average cow.

Not points. Not a composite of traits weighted by committee taste. Dollars.

Because PDD was built on Ontario’s milk payment system, it was provincial rather than national in scope, and it got picked up by leading provincial extension specialists. That exposure landed Hunt his first job — Dairy Herd Improvement Program Director at the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, 1970 to 1973.

Now the honest complication. Lactanet’s 2026 citation calls PDD “the first predecessor of today’s national Pro$ index introduced in 2015.” A 2012 Bullvine profile of Hunt described the same Dollar Difference Guide as “the precursor to the Canadian LPI system.” Both can’t be casually true, and the difference is instructive rather than trivial.

LPI launched in 1991 and, per Lactanet’s own comparison of the two indexes presented to Interbull, began as a production-and-type composite across six traits. Pro$ launched in August 2015 and works by accumulating each cow’s revenue and expenses to six years of age, then relating average daughter profit back to sire proofs.

On methodology, PDD is clearly Pro$’s ancestor, not LPI’s. Both start from money. LPI started from traits. Chronologically the Bullvine version is defensible — PDD predated everything, and LPI came first — but the intellectual lineage runs to 2015, and it took the industry 45 years to build the cow-level profit database needed to do properly what a Guelph grad student sketched with Ontario milk cheques.

Lactanet marked Pro$’s tenth anniversary in August 2025. Somebody should have handed out a second cake in Troy, Ontario.

Holstein Canada: the handheld device and the mindset shift

In 1973 Hunt moved to extension roles at Holstein Canada, and in 1978 became Genetic Improvement Manager — a post he held 13 years. The nomination lists what came out of that stretch, and three items deserve unpacking.

He argued breeders into using proofs. Hunt pushed Canadian breeders to fold Agriculture Canada’s production-trait bull proofs and cow genetic indexes into actual selection decisions. In the late 1970s that was a fight. The pedigree-and-eyeball camp was not persuaded that a number from Ottawa knew more than a good stockman.

He rebuilt type classification. Holstein Canada’s program was revamped under his direction, including deployment of the first handheld device to standardize how classifiers recorded animal assessments. That’s a data-integrity move disguised as a hardware purchase: get the score off the clipboard and into a structured field at the moment of observation, and the whole downstream evaluation gets better. Multiple countries subsequently adopted the Canadian system.

He wired the universities in. Hunt directed the Holstein Canada Research Committee, including the contract with the Centre for Genetic Improvement of Livestock at Guelph to calculate official Canadian type-trait bull proofs alongside federal evaluation services.

Then the committee work, which is where Canadian dairy improvement actually gets decided:

  • Selected as a dairy cattle improvement industry representative on the Canadian Milk Recording Board when the federal department created it in 1975.
  • Served years as inaugural Chair of the Canadian Genetic Evaluation Board for Dairy Animals, established 1987, and of its industry-and-breeder Genetic Consultative Committee.
  • Active leadership on the National Advisory Council for Dairy Animal Improvement, the table that pulled together federal and provincial governments, Dairy Farmers of Canada, the GEB, the Canadian Dairy Breeds, the CMRB and CAAB.
  • Co-led Benchmark 100 and Strategies ’88 with CAAB, conferences that produced industry-wide agreement on a breeding strategy with “lead emphasis on the improvement of production traits and that selection for conformation traits support higher production.”

Read that last line again if you breed for the show ring. Canada’s formal consensus, reached in the late 1980s with Hunt at the table, was that conformation selection exists to supportproduction. Not the other way around. That resolution echoes through Pro$, through the modernized LPI launched in April 2025, and through every argument in every coffee shop since.

Somewhere in the middle of all of it, the home farm kept breeding. Huntsdale earned Holstein Canada’s Master Breeder Shield in 1984 — the credential that stops the “he’s just an office guy” objection cold.

At CAAB, he restructured himself out of a job

In 1991 Hunt joined the Canadian Association of Animal Breeders as Market Development Director, became Director of Genetics & Industry Relations in 1993, and Executive Director in 1997.

The CAAB years were consolidation years, and the pattern is consistent: take scattered effort and centralize it where it compounds.

T.E.A.M. Hunt secured government funding for a four-year, million-dollar nucleus-style breeding project — superovulating elite donor cows and selecting five sons per “team” for young sire testing across different Canadian AI companies. Semen from each team sold as a group, and the full sisters’ first-lactation data sharpened the team’s evaluation before the brothers turned three. It’s the 1970 thesis logic with a family-based accuracy trick bolted on.

Cattle Breeding Research Council, 1994. Research dollars, people and effort scattered across CAAB, the Canadian Dairy Breeds, the CMRB and Semex got pulled into one body.

Canadian Dairy Network, May 1995. As a NACDAI executive member, Hunt helped conceive and form the Futures Group — CAAB, CDB and CMRB — that produced CDN, Canada’s national genetic evaluation centre and the direct institutional ancestor of Lactanet Genetics.

The GEB handover, 1996. Hunt led the transition of the government-directed Genetic Evaluation Board into an industry-driven CDN committee. The nomination calls the result “globally envied.” That phrasing is a nominator’s flourish, but the structural point stands: producers and industry, not a federal department, set the rules for Canadian genetic evaluation.

DairyGen, 1998. The CBRC Genetics Sub-Committee became the Dairy Cattle Genetics Research and Development Council under CDN.

And then, 1998: CAAB dissolved. Once CDN existed with its own industry funding strategy, the organization Hunt led had done its job. He didn’t defend the org chart. He closed it, which also closed out his own 28-year professional career in dairy cattle improvement.

That is the single most telling line in the nomination. Most industry executives spend their last five years protecting a budget. Hunt wound up the association he was running because the function had moved somewhere better.

He never actually stopped

Hunt and his wife Karen — a Master Breeder in her own right at Huntsdale — spent roughly a decade after that running Wellspring Enterprises & Huntsdale Holsteins, consulting for national and international clients.

Lactanet’s release also credits more than 15 years as a 4-H leader, developing cattle judges, industry leaders and dairy farmers. Ask around Ontario. That list is longer than the résumé.

At 81, he still shows up to Lactanet’s Open Industry Sessions twice a year, virtually, and still asks the questions other people were thinking. He was a presenter at the 2018 Dairy Cattle Improvement Industry Forum and CDN’s 23rd AGM, and he’s still filing genetics analysis for this publication — including a recent piece on using LPI subindexes to find bulls whose components carry them into the top of the profit rankings despite mediocre production traits.

Which is the same argument as PDD. Follow the dollars, not the reputation. Fifty-six years, no drift.

What This Means for Your Operation

This isn’t a hall-of-fame story you read and forget. Three of the decisions on your desk this month trace directly to work in that citation.

1. Check whether your index actually matches your revenue. PDD failed to go national because it was built on one province’s milk payment system. Pro$ works because it uses accumulated cow-level profit to six years of age. If you’re selecting on a total merit index built for a different payment structure than the one on your milk cheque, you’re repeating PDD’s original limitation. Pull your last 12 months of component and quality premiums, then confirm the index you’re using weights them the way your processor pays you.

2. Don’t over-concentrate on a small pool of sires. The 1970 argument was that genetic progress needs a wide sampling base. The genomic-era version: a young genomic sire at 70–75% reliability is a prediction, not a proof. Set a maximum share of services for any single genomic bull — many advisers land in the 10–15% range — and hold that discipline no matter how good the number looks.

3. Audit your own recording data before you blame the evaluation. The handheld classifier device was a data-quality fix, and it worked. Your equivalent is sire IDs, calving dates and health events entered at the moment of the event, not reconstructed from memory on Friday. Bad inputs make good indexes look wrong.

4. If you’re on a committee, know what it’s for. Hunt closed CAAB because the function had moved. Ask the same question of every board, breed club and association you sit on: is this structure still the best home for the work, or is it just the oldest?

The awkward part

We should name the thing this article can’t escape. The Bullvine was built partly on being willing to make the Canadian industry uncomfortable, and its founder’s parents are two of that industry’s most decorated figures. That tension has been on the record here since at least 2015.

So take the family framing out. Strip the name off the citation and what’s left is a 1970 thesis that scaled Canadian young sire sampling past 500 bulls a year, the first profit-based sire ranking this country produced, a modernized classification system that other nations adopted, and the governance architecture that put Canadian genetic evaluation in producers’ hands in 1996 and kept it there.

That earns the award on its own. The family part just means we knew about it earlier than everyone else.

Congratulations, Murray. See you in Toronto in September.

The Sunday Read Dairy Professionals Don’t Skip.

Every week, thousands of producers, breeders, and industry insiders open Bullvine Weekly for genetics insights, market shifts, and profit strategies they won’t find anywhere else. One email. Five minutes. Smarter decisions all week.

NewsSubscribe
First
Last
Consent
Send this to a friend