Suffolk or texel Rams?

Sandpit Farm

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Derbyshire
I haven't seen Hampshires mentioned much, yet I know many who use them north of the border and have excellent results. To me they are an exciting breed that could go places. I have read that 40% of the lambs born in the breed are from recorded flocks, which means they have their commercial heads on (IMO as it is commercially driven not show driven).

If I were selling deadweight, I think I would buy some Hampshires and quietly get on with things while I left everyone else to argue about which is better, Texel or Suffolk?

(Should also say that I like both Suffolks and Texels and it is difficult to generalise so important to ensure you buy from the right breeder with a commercial nature).
 

ImLost

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Not sure
Havent even bothered reading the entire thread, it looks like a verbal tennis match!! However, from the little I did read, i came to some conclusions. Next year, if i can get the land, I would like to buy a mixture of sheep breeds, and throw them all in together. In terms of what i will get off them, I reckon there is only so large or small a sheep can get. Of course there will always be the odd anomaly, but there is the possibility that it could happen with any breed or cross.So the lambs i get should reach an average weight within a certain range if that makes sense? Its not like im going to end up with all the lambs weighing 10kg fully grown. The point I am trying to make is that if breeders were breeding more for labour saving and longevity etc. I doubt they would lose too much carcass size. IMOE the breeders I have come across and worked for fall in to three categories.

1) Those who have easy lambing sheep with good feet etc that can live on slightly rougher ground and require less attention than most sheep. Lambs weights are lower but this is generally balanced out by the labour/feed savings.

2) Breeders who use what the layman would call an average sheep. They use average rams, have an average number of lambing problems, put an average amount of labour in.... you get the picture, pretty average, nothing extreme in either direction. And guess what? They get average weight sheep. These guys seem to use mule ewes and any meaty not-too-expensive-reasonable shape rams they can pick up.

3) The michelin man style sheep breeder. These chaps breed solid lumps of pure muscle. Texels and Beltex seem to be popular breeds. Indoor lambing is often a must, most lambs need some help, they are nearly the size of the parents at birth. Feed requirements are high and labour and other costs are high. Decent rams are expensive and they need more in the way of shelter and good grass than most sheep. The lambs sell for a high price.... but any profit has gone in rearing them.

Have you ever considered exactly why you keep and breed the sheep you do? Have you ever put the costs, profits and losses of different breeds alongside each other and understood why some breeds work out better than others? Who makes more profit per head. The breeder of hardy hill sheep who hardly has to touch his sheep, feed them anything extra etc. and gets a lamb a year per ewe at a low cost? Or the the breeder who has solid lumps of muscle that need wrapping in cotton wool because they dont have any wool of their own. Paying for extra labour for help with lambing ewes who commonly have difficult births and lamb indoors requiring extra feed will wash a massive percentage of the profits down the drain.

Someone please correct me if i am wrong.
 

Nithsdale

Member
Livestock Farmer
I haven't seen Hampshires mentioned much, yet I know many who use them north of the border and have excellent results. To me they are an exciting breed that could go places. I have read that 40% of the lambs born in the breed are from recorded flocks, which means they have their commercial heads on (IMO as it is commercially driven not show driven).

If I were selling deadweight, I think I would buy some Hampshires and quietly get on with things while I left everyone else to argue about which is better, Texel or Suffolk?

(Should also say that I like both Suffolks and Texels and it is difficult to generalise so important to ensure you buy from the right breeder with a commercial nature).


The single thing putting me off Hampshire's is the topknot.

Yes, OK, 90%+ of my lambs do go direct and it wouldn't matter. But i would hate to cut myself off from having the options of store/live ring, and to be able to play the market. Locally, the markets (buyers) punish anything with a topknot - or which looks 'out of place' alongside the Texel, Beltex and Suffolk lambs (n)
 

Sandpit Farm

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Derbyshire
Havent even bothered reading the entire thread, it looks like a verbal tennis match!! However, from the little I did read, i came to some conclusions. Next year, if i can get the land, I would like to buy a mixture of sheep breeds, and throw them all in together. In terms of what i will get off them, I reckon there is only so large or small a sheep can get. Of course there will always be the odd anomaly, but there is the possibility that it could happen with any breed or cross.So the lambs i get should reach an average weight within a certain range if that makes sense? Its not like im going to end up with all the lambs weighing 10kg fully grown. The point I am trying to make is that if breeders were breeding more for labour saving and longevity etc. I doubt they would lose too much carcass size. IMOE the breeders I have come across and worked for fall in to three categories.

1) Those who have easy lambing sheep with good feet etc that can live on slightly rougher ground and require less attention than most sheep. Lambs weights are lower but this is generally balanced out by the labour/feed savings.

2) Breeders who use what the layman would call an average sheep. They use average rams, have an average number of lambing problems, put an average amount of labour in.... you get the picture, pretty average, nothing extreme in either direction. And guess what? They get average weight sheep. These guys seem to use mule ewes and any meaty not-too-expensive-reasonable shape rams they can pick up.

3) The michelin man style sheep breeder. These chaps breed solid lumps of pure muscle. Texels and Beltex seem to be popular breeds. Indoor lambing is often a must, most lambs need some help, they are nearly the size of the parents at birth. Feed requirements are high and labour and other costs are high. Decent rams are expensive and they need more in the way of shelter and good grass than most sheep. The lambs sell for a high price.... but any profit has gone in rearing them.

Have you ever considered exactly why you keep and breed the sheep you do? Have you ever put the costs, profits and losses of different breeds alongside each other and understood why some breeds work out better than others? Who makes more profit per head. The breeder of hardy hill sheep who hardly has to touch his sheep, feed them anything extra etc. and gets a lamb a year per ewe at a low cost? Or the the breeder who has solid lumps of muscle that need wrapping in cotton wool because they dont have any wool of their own. Paying for extra labour for help with lambing ewes who commonly have difficult births and lamb indoors requiring extra feed will wash a massive percentage of the profits down the drain.

Someone please correct me if i am wrong.

I know what you mean but this could be an over simplification. Many people have average sheep, buy high performing rams (which aren't actually that expensive if we assume we are buying on performance rather than show winning) and have a good attention to detail and inputs can still be reduced.

There are people breeding highly functional British Suffolks out there. The same is true for Texels. Both have a place in the industry... it is impossible to compare breeds like that. It's more important to look at where you are buying them rather than what breed you are buying.
 
Yeah early lambing up here isn't to common, and to a Charollais is even less common.

Suffolk x mule ewes, although some have them are not a common as a Texel x Mule up this way, or in NI.

Most who run Char rams up here tend to have them on a Texel based ewe. Some go onto mules, but 1/2 Char 1/4 BFL isn't really a recipe for toughness.

Ahh I see so yes more a regional lowland factor rather than the case for all lowland scenarios.
 
Ahh I see so yes more a regional lowland factor rather than the case for all lowland scenarios.

Of course not all lowland units, I'd assumed based on what is seen and heard, that it was more than regional, unless you class UK wide as regional.

But if Texel based ewes or Texel sired lamb's are not a common sight on the majority of lowland sheep units, I am happy to stand corrected.
 

neilo

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Montgomeryshire
fair point, if you can manage that I would be very impressed. Certainly it is more likely out of the tex/mule than a mule dam.

He damned well should do, if he's creep feeding March born lambs out of Texel Mules, so essentially 3/4 terminal sire (one of which has some growth, and another that has some fleshing abilities). Assuming he's not weaning early of course, if he can't hit that target, you'd have to wonder what the point was.
 

glensman

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
North Antrim
He damned well should do, if he's creep feeding March born lambs out of Texel Mules, so essentially 3/4 terminal sire (one of which has some growth, and another that has some fleshing abilities). Assuming he's not weaning early of course, if he can't hit that target, you'd have to wonder what the point was.
I still think finishing an entire crop of lambs in 14-16 weeks in that part of the world would be unlikely, but I am happy to be proved wrong
 

Nithsdale

Member
Livestock Farmer
He damned well should do, if he's creep feeding March born lambs out of Texel Mules, so essentially 3/4 terminal sire (one of which has some growth, and another that has some fleshing abilities). Assuming he's not weaning early of course, if he can't hit that target, you'd have to wonder what the point was.


Decided not to creep them.

Ewes are on feed, and decent grass. Waiting on getting access to new land, but the landlords 'man' fecked up the land transfer with our tenancy :banghead: once that's cleared the ewes are dropping 150-200ft down the hill onto some Non-LFA land wading in grass (y)

I usually get my first draw (Texels) away late June, off grass. So I'm hoping these will start going early June. Weaning probably last week of July/first week of August for anything that's left - hopefully very few.
 
I still think finishing an entire crop of lambs in 14-16 weeks in that part of the world would be unlikely, but I am happy to be proved wrong

I would say so, it's very different in the South where grass is a month or two ahead, forum photographs and aren't you cutting silage yet type threads are examples of well advanced things are in down there.

I'm always careful about taking on board or trying to apply the standards of those in a kinder climate.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 80 42.3%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 66 34.9%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 15.9%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 7 3.7%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,292
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top