Best terminal ewe

[GTB]

There's a lot to be said for Easycares. No shearing, plenty of milk and prolific too plus better conformation these days. Not sure why everyone hates them so much

 

[CharcoalWally]

As said early I find 50% Texel or Suffolk much easier to look after than a Mule, much less likely to go "walkabout". Lambs much easier to finish, easier to sell & generally settle better when housed.

I prefer native breed suckler cows though for the same reason, quiet to handle & calves easy to finish.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this DA. Don't find the Tex. X any easier to look after than the Mule. Harder if anything. Lambing of them ring any bells?

Are their lambs easier to finish ? No , they're just the same , and you have rather less of them to finish for my liking.

My Simmental cows are the quietest cows I have ever worked with. Bar none. Don't take my word for it , ask any of my buyers who keep coming back for more of my canny , easily handled heifers. They certainly like them!

 

[Jackson4]

Variable. But the best will still be a long way behind what I would hope for from a commercial ewe. IME, people that tell you their's milk well, have never lambed them alongside decent maternal sheep.

I must say that, within the Charollais flock, I do select heavily on muscling & growth traits, rather than trying to improve milkiness particularly. I don't keep a stock ram from a 'poor' milking ewe though, neither will I sell one to a pedigree flock. If any customers tell me they are looking at retaining crossbred females (against advice), I will steer them away from certain rams too.

To quantify my flock within the general population, I have bred several of the top maternal ebv rams in the breed, and is still rate them as poor milkers compared to most 'maternal' breeds.

@CharcoalWally has it spot on, I'd say.

Better see how the charollais x on mine milk before i keep many back then. Alot of kiwis on here would have you believe breeding for certain traits is easy, but if it was that easy then we wouldn't need maternel breeds we'd just have terminals which could milk, lamb and look after them. Or would we? i suppose they'd eat alot more to keep that muscle on? so maybe a balance would best. You do seem to lose something to gain something in breeding, look at the 3 lactation holstien cow? although they are bred better nowadays.
I believe the nz texels will have better feet, and may do better at grass but they dont look like they have the conformation of those in europe?
Is there a niche for someone to rear purely maternal crossing terminals? Innovis do it i suppose. Just start a terminal and aim for good feet and milk, motherliness etc. How do you select for milk? weekly weights?

 

[exmoor dave]

There's a lot to be said for Easycares. No shearing, plenty of milk and prolific too plus better conformation these days. Not sure why everyone hates them so much

because they are different!

agree, alot to be said for wool shedders (i've got some wilts&exlana)................of course when we get back to "the wool chq paying the farm rent" we might think different

 

[spark_28]

Better see how the charollais x on mine milk before i keep many back then. Alot of kiwis on here would have you believe breeding for certain traits is easy, but if it was that easy then we wouldn't need maternel breeds we'd just have terminals which could milk, lamb and look after them. Or would we? i suppose they'd eat alot more to keep that muscle on? so maybe a balance would best. You do seem to lose something to gain something in breeding, look at the 3 lactation holstien cow? although they are bred better nowadays.
I believe the nz texels will have better feet, and may do better at grass but they dont look like they have the conformation of those in europe?
Is there a niche for someone to rear purely maternal crossing terminals? Innovis do it i suppose. Just start a terminal and aim for good feet and milk, motherliness etc. How do you select for milk? weekly weights?

I seen a Nz texel X with a regular texel and this thing had fantastic conformation, while it was more streamline it was as long as a horse. plus aren't they selected for the double muscling gene?

 

[neilo]

I seen a Nz texel X with a regular texel and this thing had fantastic conformation, while it was more streamline it was as long as a horse. plus aren't they selected for the double muscling gene?

The MyoMAX gene will give you extra meat yield, but extra from what would have been there from those genetics. You can have a sheep carrying 2 copies of MyoMAX that isstill relatively poor confirmation, there's just 10% more meat in the hind quarter than there would have been without that gene mutation. A lot of the 'regular' Texels that you mentioned, will be carriers anyway.

 

[spark_28]

I think these rams were selected if they had it as we were muscle scanning them

 

[neilo]

Better see how the charollais x on mine milk before i keep many back then. Alot of kiwis on here would have you believe breeding for certain traits is easy, but if it was that easy then we wouldn't need maternel breeds we'd just have terminals which could milk, lamb and look after them. Or would we? i suppose they'd eat alot more to keep that muscle on? so maybe a balance would best. You do seem to lose something to gain something in breeding, look at the 3 lactation holstien cow? although they are bred better nowadays.
I believe the nz texels will have better feet, and may do better at grass but they dont look like they have the conformation of those in europe?
Is there a niche for someone to rear purely maternal crossing terminals? Innovis do it i suppose. Just start a terminal and aim for good feet and milk, motherliness etc. How do you select for milk? weekly weights?

Agreed, you'll soon see how you like them on your system.

Would it be fair to say that a lot of NZ sheep tend to be a 'Jack of all trades'? If you select hard on any one trait, then you have to reduce selection pressure on another. If you go hell for leather on maternal traits, you will make much slower progress on meat traits. Further, I would suggest that some maternal traits will select against terminal traits. If you select for easy maternal lambing traits, you will get a large, upright pelvis, which is about the opposite of the shape of good hindquarter confirmation lambs on the EUROP scale.
In the UK, we generally run maternal breeds the cross them with a terminal sire, both of which should have been selected hard with their job in mind (even if by head markings), then the final crossing will throw the benefits of hybrid vigour in the prime lamb. It's a system that work well, and if the selection of both types was done in a more commercially focussed way, we would have no need of importing NZ genetics.

As for maternal crossing terminals, why take a good terminal sire and dilute it's fleshing qualities by selecting against them? You will end up with mediocrity that is neither one nor t'other, producing nothing better than a good terminal sire over a good maternal breed ewe. All IMHO, of course.

 

[neilo]

I think these rams were selected if they had it as we were muscle scanning them

The double muscling gene is picked up by a DNA test, I don't think you can tell reliably from a muscle scan. You can get the odd exceptionally muscled sheep that is not a carrier, potentially a very valuable animal, genetically. It has been found in Texels, Charollais & Lleyns that I am aware of, and some breeders of those will be actively selecting for it. A lot of other breeds/composites are/have 'introgressed' it, including most of the maternals that are doing selection via recording rather than looks.

 

[spark_28]

Admittedly I don't know feck all about it but thats why I thought they were scanned

 

[spark_28]

Actually remembering now I think they were Dna tested, because I remember the results were sent to the UK but they had stopped doing them or something?

 

[Poorbuthappy]

As for maternal crossing terminals, why take a good terminal sire and dilute it's fleshing qualities by selecting against them? You will end up with mediocrity that is neither one nor t'other, producing nothing better than a good terminal sire over a good maternal breed ewe. All IMHO, of course.

Careful with the use of that word 'mediocrity' - you might upset someone

 

[Jackson4]

Agreed, you'll soon see how you like them on your system.

Would it be fair to say that a lot of NZ sheep tend to be a 'Jack of all trades'? If you select hard on any one trait, then you have to reduce selection pressure on another. If you go hell for leather on maternal traits, you will make much slower progress on meat traits. Further, I would suggest that some maternal traits will select against terminal traits. If you select for easy maternal lambing traits, you will get a large, upright pelvis, which is about the opposite of the shape of good hindquarter confirmation lambs on the EUROP scale.
In the UK, we generally run maternal breeds the cross them with a terminal sire, both of which should have been selected hard with their job in mind (even if by head markings), then the final crossing will throw the benefits of hybrid vigour in the prime lamb. It's a system that work well, and if the selection of both types was done in a more commercially focussed way, we would have no need of importing NZ genetics.

As for maternal crossing terminals, why take a good terminal sire and dilute it's fleshing qualities by selecting against them? You will end up with mediocrity that is neither one nor t'other, producing nothing better than a good terminal sire over a good maternal breed ewe. All IMHO, of course.

Good post

 

[Gilchro]

[quote="neilo, post: 245715, member: Further, I would suggest that some maternal traits will select against terminal traits. If you select for easy maternal lambing traits, you will get a large, upright pelvis, which is about the opposite of the shape of good hindquarter confirmation lambs on the EUROP [/quote]

Could it be that EUROP is part of the problem?

 

[andybk]

[quote="neilo, post: 245715, member: Further, I would suggest that some maternal traits will select against terminal traits. If you select for easy maternal lambing traits, you will get a large, upright pelvis, which is about the opposite of the shape of good hindquarter confirmation lambs on the EUROP

Could it be that EUROP is part of the problem?[/quote]
I think you have a point ! one issue non farming friends often mention to me is the very small chops in spring lamb ,i ask if they have ever tried mutton ? ( as in shearling age stuff ) most say no , i think a better yeilding bigger carcase could find a ready market .

 

[Woolless]

The double muscling gene is picked up by a DNA test, I don't think you can tell reliably from a muscle scan. You can get the odd exceptionally muscled sheep that is not a carrier, potentially a very valuable animal, genetically. It has been found in Texels, Charollais & Lleyns that I am aware of, and some breeders of those will be actively selecting for it. A lot of other breeds/composites are/have 'introgressed' it, including most of the maternals that are doing selection via recording rather than looks.

And Easycares! I think it came in via upgraded Lleyns, who in turn had Texel somewhere in the pedigree. Dorsets have some of it as well, I think? I have some in my flock and I am selecting one family hard on that basis.

 

[GTB]

And Easycares! I think it came in via upgraded Lleyns, who in turn had Texel somewhere in the pedigree. Dorsets have some of it as well, I think? I have some in my flock and I am selecting one family hard on that basis.

Yes the myomax gene is found in many easycare's. A lot have the 'Golden' double gene.