- Location
- Essex
Not if they are still farming it isn't.There is something very far wrong with these figures. That level of losses is simply unsustainable.
Not if they are still farming it isn't.There is something very far wrong with these figures. That level of losses is simply unsustainable.
I've never worked this out but 50% won t be far off when you add together all the ewes that get culled early for bad bags, mouths, geld, lean, we cull on 7 year old and there's never many to cull on age aloneWhat about premature culling?
There has to be an explanation,is it on ewe lambs born?Not if they are still farming it isn't.
Still a lot nicer to sell a texal x for 100 than a easycare for 50 even if you lose 20% over a lifetime it's still 80% of the ewes making 40% more per animal.Listened to this Head Shepherd podcast recently. A study followed an NZ cohort of 13,000 ewe lambs from weaning through their productive life.Google Podcasts
podcasts.google.com
Key points
Only 10% survived to cull as 6yr old
50% were culled before this point
40% died on farm
Does anyone have similar figures for UK yet? I know this is what Challenge Sheep is looking into, but I haven't seen any results yet.
How does this vibe with posters own records?
What are the implications? Does this counteract the philosophy that a big expensive replacement has her cost offset by increased cull value?
It may be financially sustainable but can't be right to pick up 40% dead and be forced to cull another 50%Not if they are still farming it isn't.
Exactly. A few here and there every year. I would assume in the uk that most will have been culled rather than died on farm to get a similar figure.I've never worked this out but 50% won t be far off when you add together all the ewes that get culled early for bad bags, mouths, geld, lean, we cull on 7 year old and there's never many to cull on age alone
50% cull fair enough. 40% dead shamefulWhere does the progression of genetics just cross into poor shepherding? Animal welfare crew would have a field day with that data
Presumably that 40% would translate into a flock mortality? In which case you would struggle to keep the numbers up.50% cull fair enough. 40% dead shameful
They'll be the 10% that went cull at 6yr old then.We are one of the Challenge Sheep farmers and I think you’ll find that NZ and ourselves have a policy of drafting after 4/5 crops regardless of teeth so that will figure in replacement %
Some of it was also selling empty hoggets if ewe lambs were matedThey'll be the 10% that went cull at 6yr old then.
What about the other 90%? Can you share any figures?
I could understand the 50% culled as Kiwis are famously unforgiving with their sheep but 40% dying on farm seems excessive? Seems odd that they haven't cottoned on to the importance of BCS as well, given that they seem to be so progressive in other ways.
I’ve shepherded extensive hills and you don’t have that death rate. It’s a case of you can make figures say anything and it will be the way that they are collated that is throwing up these weird stat’sThis was a really interesting podcast. The only thing i could think was a high death rate during lambing? Due to being unassisted? Also not having sheep close to hand to draw out thin ewes and put on better land or cull might result in those ewes dying??
This needs more break down of data to understand what's really going on? Such as, at what ages were the 50% culled?Listened to this Head Shepherd podcast recently. A study followed an NZ cohort of 13,000 ewe lambs from weaning through their productive life.Google Podcasts
podcasts.google.com
Key points
Only 10% survived to cull as 6yr old
50% were culled before this point
40% died on farm
Does anyone have similar figures for UK yet? I know this is what Challenge Sheep is looking into, but I haven't seen any results yet.
How does this vibe with posters own records?
What are the implications? Does this counteract the philosophy that a big expensive replacement has her cost offset by increased cull value?