Barb Lee
Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:08:13 -0800
> So, 25lbs of dry matter is > about right. I have also noticed that the ones with the big bellies > will raise 2 lambs without any problem. Cecil, 25 pounds of hay is more than I feed my 900 pound horses per day (each). All this foolin' around with rations has come about in the months when I am feeding mostly dry feed. I may be grossly underestimating what they're getting out of the little bit of green pick they have at pasture right now. >From an evolutionary point, my little blackbellies are really out of their environment in our climate, and even though most of them are relatively local stock I may actually have a sort of "tropical fish in a goldfish bowl" situation where I am asking for something that they are not completely adapted to provide yet.Then again I am probably the only person on the planet that has my particular experiences with the sheep. The best thing I ever did was sit down with those NRC charts. They may not entirely apply to blackbellies, but they give a good starting point to someone who seems to have a lot of holes in their program (me). Barb This year with the super wet > grass then it turned off dry, and the grass has no real nutrition, > then > the ones with the big bellies have done well, I have lost 3 lambs from > lack of milk though. After robservation, their mothers have small > bellies and look very guant after 2 weeks of nursing twins. These wet > months we have had really tell what ones to keep and which ones to > cull, > Blackbellies thrive on dry grass. Wet grass causes a lot of > problems. > In Eastern OK, the cattle are always thin because of the sappy grass. > The western OK cattle are on Buffalo grass and grow fat. > > Cecil in OK > > Barb Lee wrote: >> I guess my burst of enthusiasm over feeding "trivia" may have looked >> a >> bit obsessive and unnecessary to some, but I got a real dose of >> validation last night. >> >> It's pretty undeniable that we all share a common goal of wanting to >> add >> value to our animals. We know we can't manage them exactly like >> wool/meat breeds, yet we don't often define why or how, nor do I see >> a >> lot of discussion about practical solutions to the issue of adding >> value. >> >> My main reason for trying to spark interest in the subject is because >> working with NRC nutrition tables and calculating rations has led me >> to >> believe that the main issue with lamb performance/gains, etc. is >> probably a natural adaptation of some sort...the sheep seem to be >> only >> capable of ingesting about 75% of the dry matter recommended on the >> NRC >> tables at any stage of life. I don't believe that a blackbelly >> requires >> any LESS nutrition than a wool/meat breed, I believe that the same >> nutritional balance needs to be maintained, but in smaller >> quantities. >> I think that frequently the sheep's "easy keeping" qualities are >> interpreted as lower levels of nutrition, when in fact, I think it >> actually means, same nutrition, lower amounts. In the end though, >> that >> means smaller, slower growing lambs. >> >> I'm sure the tables are based on observation of sheep that have been >> developed over perhaps centuries for wool and meat, then managed in >> industrial/university settings. Although a lot of the breeds are >> going >> down the feedlot tubes, there are sheep breeds and crossbreeds that >> are >> still highly adapted to pasture and grazing. This might seem like a >> no-brainer, but you have to look deeper than what seems obvious on >> the >> surface. >> >> Our sheep didn't evolve in temperate pastoral settings. We all know >> their feeding habits and requirements are "different" but still we >> haven't defined the differences and why our sheep "do things >> differently." >> >> I think that Difference #1 is their capacity for ingesting feed - >> notably high moisture grass, as evidenced by my attempts to feed them >> (dry feed) in the amount suggested on the NRC tables. Yes, I weigh >> the >> feed. It is high quality, palatable feed. I find on a daily basis >> that >> the animals typically eat far less than the NRC dry matter intake. >> (Please note that based on calculations of about 24% dry matter in my >> medium quality - no legumes -spring grass, a 100 pound, pregnant >> blackbelly would have to ingest close to 29 pounds of fresh grass per >> day to meet NRC nutritional recommendations.) >> >> So, does it make sense that an animal - even one that eventually >> grows >> to the same size as a "developed" breed - would tend to grow out >> slower, >> produce less milk, etc., if it simply does not have the capacity to >> ingest substantial quantities of forage? >> >> This was confirmed for me last night when I was contacted by a >> reporter >> for Farm Show Magazine on an unrelated topic. He looked at the BBSAI >> website and my farm website and then he emailed me with an experience >> he'd had years ago. His comments suggested that he didn't think the >> blackbellies looked like they had much gut capacity. He interviewed >> a >> rancher who moved his cattle from Colorado to Minnesota because of >> the >> grass he observed there. His Colorado herd was not accustomed to the >> watery grass, having adapted to higher dry matter forages in CO. >> They >> nearly starved to death for the first two years until they grew big >> enough bellies to handle the grass. >> >> This is probably one of the criteria that is driving cattle graziers >> to >> re-adapt their grazing genetics to grass - away from industrial >> "type" >> and is probably the foundation for the belief that most >> commercialized >> animals would simply die in a grass-based operation, without >> expensive >> concentrates. >> >> So the concept of "thrifty" is a two-edged sword. >> >> This is also one of the reasons that I don't really think >> blackbellies >> are ready for large scale success in the grassfed industry - yet. >> >> In my experience, "average" maintenance is adequate for producing >> robust >> single lambs, but since I am only interested in robust multiples, I >> am >> finding that what little room there is inside a twinning blackbelly >> had >> better be dedicated to high quality, balanced nutrition in order to >> get >> large, robust lambs and plenty of milk. If your sheep are different, >> it's because they are "adapted" and you have already done the work >> and >> have acquired the necessary knowledge to obtain your goals. I am >> envious! >> >> In my limited view, one of the things that it's going to take to add >> value to blackbellies is to begin really understanding why and how >> they >> are "different" from wool breeds, and if the breeder's interest lies >> in >> developing a flock of good producing, grass-adapted sheep, I think >> that >> the peculiarities of what make a truly successful grass-eating sheep >> ought to be considered. Broad muzzle, good teeth that meet the >> dental >> pad properly, strong straight legs for years of walking, and a big >> belly, capable of handling enough feed to nourish multiple, good >> growing >> lambs. >> >> The "big belly" part may go against closely held perceptions of >> phenotype for the Barbados. For the American, the possibilities may >> be >> broader, especially taking advantage of the fact that there ARE >> grazing >> genes in there. I guess it's all a matter of priorities. The sheep >> don't have to be "changed" in any way, but for folks who are >> dissatisfied with their return on investment in the sheep, this may >> be >> an area of "adaptation" that needs to be examined. >> >> Regards, >> Barb Lee >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> This message is from the Blackbelly mailing list >> Visit the list's homepage at %http://www.blackbellysheep.info >> > _______________________________________________ > This message is from the Blackbelly mailing list > Visit the list's homepage at %http://www.blackbellysheep.info > > _______________________________________________ This message is from the Blackbelly mailing list Visit the list's homepage at %http://www.blackbellysheep.info