The Accidental Smallholder Forum

Livestock => Sheep => Topic started by: Katrina on January 11, 2015, 05:22:15 pm

Title: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Katrina on January 11, 2015, 05:22:15 pm
Hiya

I am after some advice please and so many of you have such good experience.  I am considering next years ram and keeping an eye out for what becomes available locally and I am wondering if anyone has any advice of which Rams are not suitable or sensible for Ryeland ewes?

Many thanks
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Deere on January 11, 2015, 06:29:04 pm
Good evening,

I suppose it comes down to what you intend to do with the lambs.

If your wanting to sell the lambs into the market, you'd ideally need a commercial type to cross them with.

If your non to worried and intend to run them on for your own freezer etc then go for something you fancy I suppose?

Why not use a Ryeland tup?  ???
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Katrina on January 11, 2015, 07:02:54 pm
Hi 

Thanks for your answer.  Sorry I probably should have explained better.  Ideally I would like to put my coloured Ryelands on to a coloured Ryeland tup which would be the first option to increase my numbers. 

I also have Dorset Mules type sheep that I wish to breed possibly on commercial rams for meat.  I just wanted to make sure whatever Ram I source for my Dorsets would be suitable for my Ryelands as a back up in case the Ryeland tup didn't perform, got sick in the crucial weeks etc etc.

I hope this makes sense.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Katrina on January 11, 2015, 07:08:54 pm
and I also should have said, I have been offered the use of some commercial rams and I look at their size (which remind me of my little pony) and my little ryelands and I am not sure that wouldn't result in lambing problems, hence the question of any breeds to avoid.

Thanks again.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Deere on January 11, 2015, 08:02:18 pm
Ah, that makes more sense  :D

I run a small flock of Ryelands and some Mules, I used a new Ryeland tup lamb this year so in order to sweep up any he missed and to ensure they were all covered I put the Ryeland ewes in with the mules and my Charolais tup for the last couple of week.

Charolais x Ryeland lambs are still a good cross to put though the local market as a last resort.

Everyone will have their own opinion and experiences but it will also depend on how experienced your ewes are, whether you intend to be full time/hands on at lambing and also their feeding up to lambing.

If your hoping for easier, outdoor low involvement lambing I wouldn't put a big Suffolk, Texel or Beltex type on them but that's just my little old opinion.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Ladygrey on January 11, 2015, 08:03:37 pm
I have (and others have aswel) used large breeds such as charolais on small breeds such as shetlands with great success

Its not as much about the size of the lamb born but the actual shape of the lamb born, I find pure bred ryeland lambs much more chunky and heavy shape than even lambs from a charolais, charmoise etc

The lambs for easy lambing should be wedge shaped, so narrow head and shoulders and a slippery lamb, if the lamb is woolier such as a hampshire down, suffolk, ryeland with a broad head and heavier bones it may have a higher chance of getting stuck than a lamb with less wool (so its slipperyer) narrow head and fine bones

Also remember that muscle gives and bone doesnt, a pure ryeland is heavier boned in relation to size than a charolais even though the charolais looks bigger as is more muscly

I have put my ewes to both charolais and charmoise tups this year as I dont want to pull any lambs and I want lambs that produce a good commercial carcass  :thumbsup:

Goodluck!

Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Deere on January 11, 2015, 08:07:21 pm
Ladygrey,

The wedge shape, slippery lamb idea was what I was thinking but couldn't put it into sentences that made much sense so I deleted that part  :D
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Anke on January 11, 2015, 09:47:07 pm
Depends a bit on where in the country you are and what your lambing system is...

Charollais are not really suitable for outdoor lambing in the north of the country...
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: SallyintNorth on January 11, 2015, 11:53:44 pm
If you know what you are doing you can use Charollais tups in outdoor lambing systems even in upland Cumbria.

I wouldn't go more than 50% Charollais (ie, I wouldn't use the Charollais tup on a part-Charollais ewe), and it's important to use a tup who isn't too bare and doesn't produce lambs which are too bare, but it can be done.

We used two Charollais tups, grandfather and grandson, over a period of five years, on our commercial sheep, lambing outdoors in upland Cumbria.  We have kept on many of their daughters who do a grand job in our flock.

If the weather is cold and wet at lambing time, then the lambs will benefit from the clear plastic jackets, but although the lambs have thinner fleece than their Texel and Dutch Texel x peers, they are so active they are warmed by getting up and getting mum's milk quickly, which means less of this type get brought in for de-chilling than do the Texel types. 

When we were first looking into Charollais tups we were told to buy one with a lot of wool on his head; this usually translates into having lambs who are woollier than some of this breed.  Both of our boys had thick carpet on their noodles, and in general their lambs, though thin-skinned, were not dangerously so.  We did get the odd pair that were really bare, generally from thinner-skinned mothers, so these families might get brought in if the weather was particularly evil.  But generally the very active lambs, having had an easy lambing, were up and at the milk bar very quickly, and did well.  If the weather was wet and cold we would jacket new-born lambs just to help them along.

I wouldn't have too many qualms about crossing Charollais onto Ryeland, in fact I think it would be a good mix.  And the Charollais on the Dorset Mules would give good commercial lambs too.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Katrina on January 12, 2015, 11:53:02 am
Thank you all so much, its all really helpful.  I am down in Cornwall, so generally temperature wise it should be ok.  I am planning on hands off outdoor lambing but in my garden field - so closely watched with the option to bring them in if the weather was truly awful.   

So as I understand it, it is less about size and more about shape and fleece.  I can now go and look at the these commercial tups and see what head shape they have and their frame.

If I was just to chose something I like the look of, I do like the herdwick rams but the option of a free local commercial ram is probably more sensible.  I will find out if they have Charollais available locally too, they do look like big chaps.  What are Charollais like for handling and temperament, obviously accepting no ram should be trusted?

Thank you all again.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: SallyintNorth on January 12, 2015, 02:37:34 pm
The Charollais tups we've had have been very nice-natured.  Friendly with humans, actually quite soppy.  The grandpa, Perry, we bought as an aged tup, we could tip him up and do his feet in the field, no need to pen him or anything.  His grandson, Fred, was bred by the fella from whom we'd bought the older boy previously, and was perhaps over-handled and too tame, if anything.  (He was greedy and could be pushy for feed, but otherwise a soppy boy.)

Fred did like to be boss tup, Perry was never bothered, he seemed to get on with every other creature.

Some people do go on about heads, but in my experience heads are not the issue, except possibly in breeds where tup lambs have significant horn buds (Exmoor Horn breeders strive for no singles for this reason). 

Shoulders are very important, you don't want big square shoulders where you've a concern about lambing. 

Very muscley backends on Beltex types can also be an issue if the ewe's birth canal is not generous.

I've never had a head I couldn't get out; I have however had plenty of lambs blocked at the shoulders and also some at the hips.

Charollais always weigh heavier than they look; whether this is down to light bones or very dense muscle I've never investigated.  Either way, from what people have said about the Ryeland being heavy boned, I'd say it would be a good cross.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Me on January 12, 2015, 07:55:22 pm
I have to say I think a Herdwick x Ryeland would be horrible! My nightmare sheep! Charlie seems a much more sensible suggestion to me
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Marches Farmer on January 12, 2015, 09:04:54 pm
Texels and Beltex, having a wide skull, short neck and broad shoulders, are infamous around here for leading to lambing problems and lots of folks have moved back to Suffolks after poor survival rates from Charollais, Rouge and Vendeens in the last two Springs.  Our Southdowns are very similar in build to Ryelands and we've only ever bred them pure, except for one year when we experimented by putting the first-timers to our Badger Face (get an excellent butcher's lamb from the reverse cross).  Every single one rejected her lambs, not just for a day or two but completely.  Nothing we tried would get them to accept those lambs and in the end we had to bottle feed the lot.  No idea why, as Southdowns are normally excellent mothers.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Me on January 12, 2015, 11:18:19 pm
Wow, I've never heard anyone talking Suffolk for increased survival! Are we talking NZ Suffolk or traditional? Also, IME Beltex lamb pretty well in the grand scheme of things on commercial ewes, a lot here use them on ewe lambs, very different approaches in the different areas
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Womble on January 12, 2015, 11:38:01 pm
a lot here use {Beltex} on ewe lambs, very different approaches in the different areas

Yes, our neighbour does that and reports very easy lambing. He offered me a Beltex tup for our Manx Loaghtan hoggs on those grounds. We chickened out and went with a Shetland tup lamb instead for their first time (and ours), but I'd love to know if he was right or not.

It's too late for this year, but it's something we could consider next year. Having said that, we have a lovely Zwartble tup here now, who looks like a narrow shouldered slippery type of chap. He's nearer the size of a Shetland pony than a Shetland sheep though, and that does make me nervous.  Too many decisions - I'm kicking that one into the long grass until the autumn, and reading this thread with interest!  ;D
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: SallyintNorth on January 13, 2015, 01:23:37 am
We know of a number of Beltex breeders who use a Shetland tup on their hoggs to give them an easy first lambing, and lambs that know what to do and will get up and get onto the teat without needing any help, whether or not the inexperienced young mother approves of the idea!

So it seems strange reading about using Beltex for an easy first lambing...

Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Deere on January 13, 2015, 07:27:19 am
My father in law has texel and texel cross Beltex and he has the same breed in tups all thought they keep a Charolais tup for using on all the first timers.

Must say its great to see lots of different opinions/ideas on the best/worst way forward, I guess it's what works for the individual and also the fact everyone has a different idea as to what easy really is!  :thumbsup:

Only another six weeks until we start lambing at work and three months until I lamb at home!  :fc:
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Womble on January 13, 2015, 11:00:07 am
everyone has a different idea as to what easy really is!  :thumbsup:

You may have hit the nail on the head there Deere!   That, combined with the farmer "talking his books" as it were?
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Me on January 13, 2015, 03:10:30 pm
I think you are confusing lambing the narrow pelvised beltex with using a ram bred the same way as a terminal sire Sally, pure Beltex ewes lamb badly (i have done many c -secs on them) but used as a ram Beltex = easy lambings as do Charollais

BUT if easy lambing is your top priority in choosing a terminal sire - use a Charmoise, there is no better choice for this IMO (see small head, wedge shape, light, light bone on avatar <left!)
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Marches Farmer on January 13, 2015, 06:16:50 pm
Wow, I've never heard anyone talking Suffolk for increased survival! Are we talking NZ Suffolk or traditional?

These are traditional Suffolks, not the show type with their heavy legs and heads.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Me on January 13, 2015, 06:35:19 pm
I would be interested to know how they are being farmed, what ewes they are on where they got their Suffolks from and what the fag packet survival stats vs the same place with the other breeds they tried if you have any of that information
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: SallyintNorth on January 14, 2015, 10:03:20 am
I think you are confusing lambing the narrow pelvised beltex with using a ram bred the same way as a terminal sire Sally, pure Beltex ewes lamb badly (i have done many c -secs on them) but used as a ram Beltex = easy lambings as do Charollais

Ah.  Similar to Blue cattle then.  Some of the cows, especially of the Belgian Blues, have a narrowed birth canal, but these days the British Blue bulls seem to be easy calving.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Me on January 14, 2015, 10:07:01 am
I should say: my post makes it sound as if Charollais struggle to lamb pure too - they don't seem to
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Me on January 14, 2015, 10:08:19 am
Yeah like the BB, I think all c sec animals should have an ear mark applied by the vet and not allowed to be registered or sold through society auctions
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Ladygrey on January 14, 2015, 12:49:00 pm
Yeah like the BB, I think all c sec animals should have an ear mark applied by the vet and not allowed to be registered or sold through society auctions

Thats a really good idea
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: SallyintNorth on January 15, 2015, 01:43:07 am
Yeah like the BB, I think all c sec animals should have an ear mark applied by the vet and not allowed to be registered or sold through society auctions

Thats a really good idea

As far as I am aware, a proportion of pedigree Belgian Blues are born by elective caesarean, having been gestated in surrogate cows, often Jerseys.  This so that a given top cow can produce more calves than her own breeding cycle would allow.  Originally they used Jerseys because the Jersey has a very wide pelvis, so could more readily birth the calves than the mother's own breed.  Then they found they were getting difficult calvings even with the wide pelvis of the Jersey, so now they just do caesars as a matter of routine.

It's the main reason none of my Jersey females will ever be sold through a livestock auction.

Sorry, OP, we've strayed away from your follow-up tup for your Ryelands!
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Me on January 15, 2015, 08:16:09 am
Yes the more potentially valuable the calf or lamb the more likely a section will be demanded by the farmer, and insanely the Belgian Blue is (or was last I heard) often brought into the world by planned section. Great! Not convinced by the flushing and embryo transfer idea either, its a way around your sheep not being able to give birth or provide milk very often
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: SallyintNorth on January 15, 2015, 10:48:25 am
Not convinced by the flushing and embryo transfer idea either, its a way around your sheep not being able to give birth or provide milk very often

I've got to say, it's one of the things that bothers me about routinely using AI, embryo transfer and caesarians, singly or in combination - that the very breed one is trying to preserve or improve may end up losing its natural fertility, and that not be realised, possibly until it's too late.
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Me on January 15, 2015, 11:07:04 am
Its an understandable thing where breeds are near extinct, but undesirable practice IMO. I have recently imported Charmoise semen to the UK and AI'd my ewes as there is a need for new blood here, top ebv sheep from the French testing centres etc etc. Its not something I would do routinely. I have one more AI season next year (different tup) and will be quite happy to go back to using the ram
Title: Re: What not to put Ryeland ewes to
Post by: Katrina on January 15, 2015, 02:38:54 pm
Sorry, OP, we've strayed away from your follow-up tup for your Ryelands!
[/quote]

It is very interesting though.  Learning something new.