With the mule out in the equation and I would be interested in how a whole flock of terminal ewes would do.
I will let you know later in 2014
With the mule out in the equation and I would be interested in how a whole flock of terminal ewes would do.
With the mule out in the equation and I would be interested in how a whole flock of terminal ewes would do.
suffolk x mule takes some serious beating.
Will the mule eat less than a mule x texel? I doubt it would be much different. I wont have suffolks here again, but found the suffolk x mule milky. Any lamb with any mule colourings at the market make at least £5 less (the beltie x mule stores i mentioned in the beltie thread were the exception but the farmer is recognised to keep superb sheep)
Meatlincs are probably too big to keep as a commercial ewe... Texel have a reputation for bad feet (local lad here talking of selling up and buying aberdales? aberfield?) Has anyone bred texels for wide pelvises and good feet off grass?quote]
.
I agree.But you could say that of any breed or cross.Bfls would make excellent hill ewes if you culled and selected hard enough for long enough.Though that would need to be a project for a very young man!not a terminal ewe but ive always thought with some ruthless culling and selection that a cheviot x BF/swaledale would work the same if not better than the mule, it would require less attention and be more heavily stocked as its a smaller ewe. Some of my BFxCheviots will produce a set of twins at 30+ kg by sale day in september and thats coming off poor ground.
I agree.But you could say that of any breed or cross.Bfls would make excellent hill ewes if you culled and selected hard enough for long enough.Though that would need to be a project for a very young man!
I think on this West Coast unit which is exposed and windy [not conditions sheep particularly agree with] the Mule ewe lasts longer and is easier looked after as it gets older than the Tex X Mule. They may eat much the same , but when you look at the greater number of lambs reared from the Mule , then the Tex X ewe just isn't feasible on this farm.Will the mule eat less than a mule x texel? I doubt it would be much different. I wont have suffolks here again, but found the suffolk x mule milky. Any lamb with any mule colourings at the market make at least £5 less (the beltie x mule stores i mentioned in the beltie thread were the exception but the farmer is recognised to keep superb sheep)
Meatlincs are probably too big to keep as a commercial ewe... Texel have a reputation for bad feet (local lad here talking of selling up and buying aberdales? aberfield?) Has anyone bred texels for wide pelvises and good feet off grass? I dont know much about them as a terminal ewe but the obvious one to me seems the Charollais from what ive heard... are they not milky, prolific and do well off grass? I use them as a terminal and find them fantastic easy lambers (narrow shoulders) but average feet (mine have soft feet) I have a few charollais x noe mule x dorsets and they are smaller, shapely and look a fine ewe... 200% lambing this year for the gimme lambs.
So charollais put to a beltie/texel etc, or a x could be a charollais x lleyn put to a beltie/dutch texel etc. I personally wouldn't put a charollais back on as a terminal, but each to there own. The one problem i find with the charollais tups is they tend to be so lean, dont tend to carry any extra, no fat at all like a suffolk would, so this maybe wouldn't be great for a maternal flock, who could put on extra condition so could melt a bit, keep warm in adverse weather etc?
I think on this West Coast unit which is exposed and windy [not conditions sheep particularly agree with] the Mule ewe lasts longer and is easier looked after as it gets older than the Tex X Mule. They may eat much the same , but when you look at the greater number of lambs reared from the Mule , then the Tex X ewe just isn't feasible on this farm.
The Charollais I found to be milky for a short , sharp burst , maybe the first 3/4 weeks of lactation , then absolutely nothing after that. They were astonishingly prolific , they had far more lambs than they could rear each year!!
I tried some of the Char. X Mule females as ewes on this place and I thought they were a disaster. Years back I used to sell a lot of my lambs as stores and a lot of my Char/Mules went to a buyer in Cheshire who drew out the ewe lambs for his own flock. Life on the West of Scotland was too hard for them to work out as a ewe , but Cheshire suited them down to the ground. He loved them. He thought they were pures!! [they weren't!!] and he found them prolific , maternal and milky. So I reckon a lot depends on your climate/location as to whether certain breeds will suit your unit.
The Char. tup is more about muscle and a decent cover of flesh than fat IMO. I never found the tups to lack condition. They looked after themselves well , lived a long life usually.Why wouldn't you use them as a terminal again ? Is it the old outdoor lambing thing or do you have other reasons?
Have never worked with anything like a Beltex/Texel ewe. My neighbours kicked their Mule ewes off many years ago citing them as too dear too keep [the usual reason]. They went to Shetland , then Shetland/Cheviot , then Texel X Shet/Cheviot , then Beltex X Texel. This year their farm is covered in Mule ewes again and they say they've got their first decent crop of lambs for years.
People around here used to rate the rouge x as a good ewe don't see many about now though, an aberdale ram is basically a terminal sire selected for maternal traits as well as the inverdale gene
And one with more of a sense of humour than I have....
I think on this West Coast unit which is exposed and windy [not conditions sheep particularly agree with] the Mule ewe lasts longer and is easier looked after as it gets older than the Tex X Mule. They may eat much the same , but when you look at the greater number of lambs reared from the Mule , then the Tex X ewe just isn't feasible on this farm.
The Charollais I found to be milky for a short , sharp burst , maybe the first 3/4 weeks of lactation , then absolutely nothing after that. They were astonishingly prolific , they had far more lambs than they could rear each year!!
I tried some of the Char. X Mule females as ewes on this place and I thought they were a disaster. Years back I used to sell a lot of my lambs as stores and a lot of my Char/Mules went to a buyer in Cheshire who drew out the ewe lambs for his own flock. Life on the West of Scotland was too hard for them to work out as a ewe , but Cheshire suited them down to the ground. He loved them. He thought they were pures!! [they weren't!!] and he found them prolific , maternal and milky. So I reckon a lot depends on your climate/location as to whether certain breeds will suit your unit.
The Char. tup is more about muscle and a decent cover of flesh than fat IMO. I never found the tups to lack condition. They looked after themselves well , lived a long life usually.Why wouldn't you use them as a terminal again ? Is it the old outdoor lambing thing or do you have other reasons?
Have never worked with anything like a Beltex/Texel ewe. My neighbours kicked their Mule ewes off many years ago citing them as too dear too keep [the usual reason]. They went to Shetland , then Shetland/Cheviot , then Texel X Shet/Cheviot , then Beltex X Texel. This year their farm is covered in Mule ewes again and they say they've got their first decent crop of lambs for years.
I think the fashion for ewes that are sired by terminal sires is merely rearranging the deckchairs to no good effect. Possibly the one that gets closest to hitting the target is the TexXMule , but let's face it , it's not as good as the Mule. Not as prolific , not as easily lambed , not quite as milky. The traits that come from their terminal genetics only serve to get in the way of the qualities that you're trying to wrestle out of a maternal animal. A maternal ewe really isn't meant to be a block of muscle with a tiny pelvic area. She should be the opposite.
This fashion is imitating the trend in cattle for the likes of the Lim/Blue cow. Seems we're living in times when a small group of farmers seem to enjoy working with unsuitable maternal females that cost a lot in money and time , and make your life a lot harder.
Maybe neil can tell us how his milk?
some exmoor mule x suffolk, poll and texel
some of the texels might be xlleyn
View attachment 24664 View attachment 24665
I think the fashion for ewes that are sired by terminal sires is merely rearranging the deckchairs to no good effect. Possibly the one that gets closest to hitting the target is the TexXMule , but let's face it , it's not as good as the Mule. Not as prolific , not as easily lambed , not quite as milky. The traits that come from their terminal genetics only serve to get in the way of the qualities that you're trying to wrestle out of a maternal animal. A maternal ewe really isn't meant to be a block of muscle with a tiny pelvic area. She should be the opposite.
This fashion is imitating the trend in cattle for the likes of the Lim/Blue cow. Seems we're living in times when a small group of farmers seem to enjoy working with unsuitable maternal females that cost a lot in money and time , and make your life a lot harder.
I notice that the mule is in the background of a lot of the terminal cross ewes being quoted, which will be providing the maternal strength not the terminal breed.
With the mule out in the equation and I would be interested in how a whole flock of terminal ewes would do.