Barb Lee
Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:42:11 -0800
Sharon, a wonderful subject is hay! :o) It could have its whole own list! LOL! Probably does somewhere. In our area, metropolitan area, Portland Oregon, local hay is getting harder and harder to source. Transportation costs really drive up the cost of feeding the sheep, and makes feeding them willy-nilly economically disastrous. The thing that angers me most these days - and one of the things that's driven me to be much more savvy about feeds and feeding - is being ripped off at $235 per ton for very modest quality grass hay that looks suspiciously like combined grass seed straw (but it isn't, it's actually well balanced for maintenance ewes...too "sugary" for air fern horses). It is one agricultural commodity which requires no inspection, no feed tag, no quality control. Most of us buy it according to how it looks. After I'd done a feed analysis a time or two and got a comfortable handle on the results, more often than not the actual feed value have been so out of balance that it feels very much like being fleeced (no pun intended) every time a new load comes in. This is another reason why I'm talking about feed so much...if only to generate some chat about a subject that I'm currently very interested in (self indulgent, I know, but hay, we need some chat on the list!) Knowing what's really in the hay and what is not, which nutrient is deficient and which is excessive, are pretty helpful in saving money in the long run, not to mention hopefully being on time with the right stuff for the sheep in all stages of growth and production. Barb ----- Original Message ----- From: "The Wintermutes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <blackbelly@lists.blackbellysheep.info> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 4:18 PM Subject: Re: [Blackbelly] Feeding Trivia > Barb, > > 25# of Cecil's hay is not going to give the same results as your hay > or > mine. Its very geographically different just as each flock is > genetically. > > > Carol's observation of 100# ewe between 1.5 and 2 years is considered > small > for us. Again, our hay is of different quality and nutritional value > than > Carol's. We have access to all kinds of hay since the farmer's here > were > overstocked last year. Currently we have five different varieties > that are > used based on the different times they are needed. Alfalfa hay, > actual weed > hay (yes they do exist on weeds, and its extremely cheap), brome hay, > bluestem hay, and fescue hay. > > Depending on what each group needs, they get which ever they need. > The > same ration every day is not necessarily good. They do not get any > supplements of grain unless nursing (then sparingly) only salts. > > > Sharon Wintermute > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Barb Lee > Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 6:08 PM > To: blackbelly@lists.blackbellysheep.info; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Blackbelly] Feeding Trivia > >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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