[TheCaptain]

Argh! I still don't know how I feel about this!!!

Thank you everyone for your input so far!

[woollyval]

I have been breeding pedigree and also commercial livestock for 30 odd years.....I have been involved with cattle, pigs, goats and sheep in the way of large livestock.

There are many dilemmas here ......do we want to conserve every member of a rare breed regardless just because they are rare, do we want to ruthlessly cull to accentuate certain points, do we cull or refuse registration for over height, odd spots etc etc?....

Well as far as I am concerned we don't want all breeds to become homogenised into a single 'type' but there are important faults and less important faults and what I personally perceive as daft faults!

For example good breeding animals need 4 good legs and good feet to stand on, a decent coat/fleece/hair etc to keep out the weather, wide pelvis for easy lambing/calving etc, good heart room to be able to breath and eat efficiently, If horned good horns with which to ...if they were wild....fight with.....etc etc
These are  basics and in the past would have been sorted by natural selection...ie the lions or wolves would have got it!
After that the different breed charecteristics were fixed by man a lot of the time for specific properties...even the primitives....as they are adapted for the places they came from...for example the North Ronaldsay is a small sheep that can live on next to nothing and even eats seaweed....which a Texel would starve rather than eat
After that it starts getting pernickity.....imho...!
For example 20 years ago i bred a fabulous Greyface dartmoor ram.....really good! I was very pleased with him! However...he had a few black tiny spots on his lower legs so was rejected as a breeding ram......wheras another that was submitted that was not a patch on him....passed!.....needless to say we ate the one that passed and used the other one on our commercials....with a very good if not conventional result!

I bring this up as you can sometimes literally throw the 'baby out with the bathwater' especially with rare breeds and limited genepools.....

I now keep Ouessants....much to the amusement of my farming friends who think I have taken leave of my senses and call them handbag sheep We have a limited genepool in Britain and I cannot find a good black ram....I can find lots of black rams...but not a good one (poor horns, legs, feet, narrow body etc)....demonstrating the practice of keeping an animal that should be eaten/castrated...just because its rare/unusual! I however have a few specimens who are a bit overheight....but in every other way are perfect and I know the reason is good nutrition...which as has already been pointed out can cause primitives to grow bigger.....I am not going to cull these I just use a small ram....result is correct height offspring....

Breeds evolve......just like people...who are taller now than they used to be!

[Hazelwood Flock]

For example 20 years ago i bred a fabulous Greyface dartmoor ram.....really good! I was very pleased with him! However...he had a few black tiny spots on his lower legs so was rejected as a breeding ram......wheras another that was submitted that was not a patch on him....passed!.....needless to say we ate the one that passed and used the other one on our commercials....with a very good if not conventional result!

I've heard of this black spot witch hunt before, and thankfully those days are now gone! GFDs have to have black excessively to be rejected, or conformation faults as already described. I'm not sure how EU rules affect registration inspections when the reason is to maintain the purity of the breed, and GFDs have been known to have been crossed with Devon & Cornwall Longwoolls and Whiteface Dartmoors - and some throwbacks have been seen.

[SallyintNorth]

I believe that with some breeds there is a suggestion that 'foreign blood' has been introduced at some point and that this can be identified by eliminating certain traits.  In Hebs it's white spots, wool on the legs, Roman noses, Scrapie resistance type ARR, too much size;  in Jacobs it's pink noses, too much black and so on.  So if a lamb doesn't quite fit the description/standard (there is a difference) then it is suspected of not being a 'purebred' lamb.  Genetically, by culling all pink-nosed Jacobs, you cannot of course eliminate all the 'foreign blood' which has caused them to appear, but it seems to make people feel better.  The phenotype ie what the animal looks like, may only loosely reflect the genotype ie it's genetic makeup, as not all genes are expressed.  This is also how certain phenotypic expressions may suddenly appear in lambs from 'true to type' parents - also known as throwbacks.
My feeling is that in most breeds the mixing happened so far back that there is not much point in eliminating suspect animals now, but on the other hand the breed societies do have to draw the line somewhere.  If it's a case of 'anything goes', then breeders will be adding a little bit of this and a little bit of that and as Robert has pointed out, the true genetic make-up of the breed will quickly become diluted.

I think you've answered a longstanding question - and cause of considerable frustration - for me, Fleecewife.

I have, until now, never been able to understand why, for instance, a Swale with good markings would be placed higher than one with less correct markings but a better conformation.  In some cases, the markings could be regarded as so unacceptable that the animal would not be 'crowned', ie, registered in the Flock Book.  In my view, function and health should always trump cosmetics, but I can see from the above that the cosmetics can be seen as evidence of impure blood and it is that which is being penalised, not the colour variation per se.

Interestingly there are now two strains of Blue-faced Leicester.  The original, very pure, very blue-faced, one is shown and bred pure as Blue-faced Leicester.  The other, in some regions now openly described as Crossing Blue-Faced Leicesters, is less pure (up here it'll probably have a wee bit of Teeswater in it) - less blue-faced and may have spots on the legs and face.  It is the latter type you want to put on your Swale or Blackie to get your Mule ewe, particularly if you want the very striking deep-chocolate-on-white, clearly delineated facial markings - which you certainly will if you show and/or sell your Mule ewes.

You'd buy a specimen of the former type of BFL based on his and his lambs' performance in BFL shows, of the latter based on the performance of his Mule offspring.

These days it is probably the case that neither type could survive without the other, nor without the healthy market for the Mule ewe - and both types are (or can be) registered pedigree animals.  Wisely the Society does not reject the crossing type for registration but will penalise it in the show ring, which seems to result in the maintenance of a very pure type as well as allowing the breed to sustain its commercial viability.

[kanisha]

 re phenotype often times this is a complete misunderstanding of the genetics behind so many of the points that VSS labelled type and that Fleecewife points out are considered foreign. for example and there are many raised over this thread. white spots in hebredians.

I will address white spotting on the top of the head, or possibly tail tip as opposed to in the body as each can have different genetics. White spotting  ( poll spots ) is a recessive gene and as far as i can determine is present in almost every northern short tail certainly i'm struggling to think of one where it isn't present. Far from being an indication of "foreign blood" its more likely to be indicative of primitive traits, as a recessive it is only expressed in homozygotes and the difficulty with that is that those carriers that don't express this are not penalised those that are are disqualified. ....... losss of original breed genetics on a point of misunderstanding and failure to determine the mechanics of its inheritance oops! the maintenance of poll spots in the ouessants as  a relatiively stable trait  it is recognised in the breed standard and considered undesireable but not cause for disqualification which allows those of the breed that are good representations of the breed but homozygous for white spotting to move forward in the genepool without penalising  the fact that it is IMPOSSIBLE to eliminate recessive carriers of white spotting and that some will always come to the surface. Of the points listed by VSS particularly of type  in the portland there are a number where I would take issue if they are judged as a cause for disqualification although the maintenace of breed type ( identity ) is important there are steps to be taken that can allow both recognition of the breed identity and NOT lose valuable diversity because of ignorance..

[Fleecewife]

I was using the expression 'foreign blood' tongue in cheek, along the lines of Terry Pratchet's 'For'n Parts'.  Yes, the white spot on top of the head is a sign of the primitive origins of a breed and in the Heb world this is acknowledged in that fleeting crowns ie those which disappear before registration at 4 months, are allowed.  Great big dollops which stay are not allowed, probably because they interfere with the overall blackness of the Hebridean.  Only those who have done what Robert suggests happens  will know if these white spots are passed on to the lambs (I don't) .
In Hebrideans, the admixture is thought to be predominantly from Jacobs in a parkland setting - people see that Jacobs are spotted and thus assume that any spots in Hebs are a sign of that admixture.  This is of course inaccurate, as Jacobs are in fact a black sheep with white spots, and breed black dominant.  About 20% of Hebs have been found to be black dominant, in a breed which in its pure form is black recessive, and this is probably a sign that there has been an admixture of Jacob, or possibly BWM blood somewhere along the line.  In the last century a lot of work was done cross-breeding Hebs to determine whether or not they were black dominant and this was thought to be a way of culling out Jacob blood.  Of course this is nonsense - the 'foreign blood' ie genetic material, doesn't all stay together in a clump to be passed down through generations of offspring, so by now those genes will be well spread through the breed, and I for one don't think we should waste time pursuing rogue genes - the breed is at it is now and it's too late to change it.  The Jacob blood is thought to have come in way back in the 1800s and early 1900s.
So yes, the breed society committee members do need a far better understanding of genetics - but in their defence they are just ordinary bods giving up their time to support their favoured breed and shouldn't as such be demonised.  In an ideal world each society would have plenty of money and expertise to carry out research, educate its committee members and so on.  This isn't going to happen, at least not with the rarer breeds, whose societies are always strapped for cash

[kanisha]

demonised may be an over statement but Captains point was the disqualification of a sheep based   on a point thats has no real merit in terms of either  racial purity or fit for breeding but an  minimal expression in coat colour. It is the acceptance of this as a valid reason for disqualification that does need revisiting. the shetland standard also details any deviation from a fluke  tail to be an indication of cross breeding.historically crossing out to  commercial breeds of sheep would have  resulted in longer tails and was presumably a reason for the inclusion of this text in the standard but as tail length is a polygenic trait there is natural variation that is anything but crossing out.

In the hebredian the presence of dominant black could be argued to be of little relevance in an all black breed unless of course you want to add weight to the value of white hebredians and then the mechanisms for the inheritance of black dominant or recessive come into their own as a very valid concern. The fact that phenotypically it isn't possible to determine dominant or recessive black can cause concern in other breeds such as the shetland where the inheritance of colour and pattern has significantly more relevance.

If people wish to be come a custodian of a rare breed then surely maintenance of that includes longevity. the dandie dinmont is now considering crossing out to try to return the very limited genepool to something that is viable and healthy what is hapening in dog breeds is only an acceleration of what will happen in some sheep breeds if steps are n't taken to rexamine breed selection on an unsound basis.

[TheCaptain]

Having absolutely no idea about genetics is the thinking about the black fur on a ram that the disposition will be for a ram to pass on that 'trait' to it's offspring?

[kanisha]

I think that  by recognising a breed as you are in the breed standard , you produce a picture ( representation)  of what it is that says portland sheep. the point behind this is that selection is designed to eliminate from breeding those sheep that either don't conform to this or are likely to pass on traits that would be considered deviating from this standard.

*Adalsteinsson writes:  ‘Sponenberg  defines three stages of variation within a breed or population. At the first stage we have a landrace, which shows considerable variation. The second stage of variation arises when the landrace is turned into a standardized breed. Types that do not conform to the standard are excluded from breeding. The third and final stage of unifying the breed still further converts it into industrialized stock. That stock is highly and scientifically selected for narrow environments, specific inputs and carefully defined selection goals.’

His full text is here. http://www.shetland-sheep.org/pdf/The%20Need%20to%20Conserve%20Different%20Types%20of%20Shetland%20Sheep.pdf

there needs to be an appraisal within each breed of in reality what the selection process is defining and refining and a recognition that aiming to KEEP variability is a requirement within breed currently this aspect is not adequately addressed in many breeds.

[Fleecewife]

You make some good points Kanisha. 
I only really know about Hebs and Soays, and a bit about Shetlands.  The fluke tail was specifically selected for from a population of variable length tails (but within the northern shorttailed group) and quoted in the 1927 standard for that breed.  There are still plenty of non-flukey tails, esp amongst the Foula type but these do not do well in the showring - which is the show case for the breed so what the public sees.  It's one of the aspects of Shetlands that I can't be bothered with, but if I was breeding to sell breeding stock then I would have to pay attention to it.

With dominant black in Hebs, the significance is when crossing - dominant black will produce 50% black lambs, which sell for less in the mart.  Black recessive Hebs when crossed produce 100% white lambs,, which definitely sell for a little bit more, in otherwise identical animals.  So there is a financial reason here for those who cross breed.  I don't care either way and feel that all that testing for black dominant breeding stock which was done a few decades ago was a waste of energy, and probably led to the culling of some good breeding stock.

I totally agree about the need to preserve longevity in the breeds, and would add ease of lambing, good feet and good teeth ie ones which stay in the mouth for many years.  Many breeders follow the lead of more commercial flocks where it is economically necessary to cull older animals, but this is less necessary amongst rare breeds owners, in many cases. Hebs are definitely long-lived and continue to lamb to great ages, such as our 15 yo with twins - and she isn't the only one.  We are trying to bring this point to other breeders.  We select lines where the ewes keep their teeth, have good feet, don't have lambing problems and continue to lamb to a great age.  These are all traits which we think are important, not just in Hebs but in all sheep in a changing agricultural environment, where the emphasis will change from high input livestock to lower input, more independant animals.
I think we should also be using older tups, not just the smart ie young, ones.  It is not possible to identify characteristics of longevity, good feet and teeth etc in a younger tup - he needs to reach maturity and beyond to know his genetic contribution to those attributes.  To prevent the older tup from running with his daughters, it's necessary to have several tups, and many breeders can't run to that.

Really the only point I was supporting initially is that of maintaining a small size in breeds which are small.  I am not a fan of breed standards in rare breeds, and when the RBST casually decided to change from breed descriptions, which are relatively flexible, to breed standards, without consultation, mine was the only objecting voice (you can read what I wrote in a past ARK but I don't know offhand which one).  I think only Hebrideans now continue to have a breed description and even Soays have a standard which I find very worrying.

[VSS]

I have, until now, never been able to understand why, for instance, a Swale with good markings would be placed higher than one with less correct markings but a better conformation.  In some cases, the markings could be regarded as so unacceptable that the animal would not be 'crowned', ie, registered in the Flock Book.  In my view, function and health should always trump cosmetics, but I can see from the above that the cosmetics can be seen as evidence of impure blood and it is that which is being penalised, not the colour variation per se.

This is a very difficult one for breeders of sheep where specific markings are laid down in the breed description and I feel it has to be handled very carefully if the breed is to continue to produce "good sheep" and not just well marked ones. If anyone on here has Balwens, then please accept my apologies, but this is a prime example, in my opinion, of a breed that has been ruined by selecting heavily for markings at the expense of conformation. Balwens used to be the same size as other commercial type welsh mountains, but over zealours breeding for markings has removed a lot of the vigour from the sheep and most of the size too.

The Badger Face has also been at risk of this (just my opinion) but last year the Society listened to the concerns of members that over selection for  show ring markings was reducing the size and vigour of the breed. Previously rams had all been inspected for correct markings before registration was allowed. The committee took the bull by the horns and decided to suspend inspections for a number of years to try to widen the range of tups being used and to ensure that the breed's thrifiness and hardiness is not compromised and I think they should be commended for this.
Occasionally a judge will be brave enough to put up a really well put together sheep with indifferent markings (this happened to my daughter at the Smallholder Festival a few years ago - her ewe had poor markings but was a cracking sheep. The judge's dilemma was that she either had to placed first or last. Luckily she was placed first), but it happens only rarely. Personally, I feel that they should be good sheep first and well marked second, but on the other hand, the markings are what differentiates them from the normal white fleeced welsh.

A total minefield!

[robert waddell]

are you not missing the poiint here if a breed is rare and endangered anything that is allegedly pure is breed from and registered    once they increase in popularity that is when the powers that be step in and move the goalposts             in pigs the close breeding is frowned upon yet with Hampshire's it is allowed because there are not enough lines to go further out once more become available that should stop

[TheCaptain]

are you not missing the poiint here if a breed is rare and endangered anything that is allegedly pure is breed from and registered    once they increase in popularity that is when the powers that be step in and move the goalposts             in pigs the close breeding is frowned upon yet with Hampshire's it is allowed because there are not enough lines to go further out once more become available that should stop

Exactly! Isn't it?

[Anke]

For anyone really interested in what happens over a long period (800 years) when a restricted group of animals is allowed to breed indiscrminately (within that group) and importantly WITHOUT any human intervention - have a look at the Chillingham White Cattle. It is in my opinion mingboggling and as a breeder of (rare) Golden Guernseys and (not so rare) white Shetlands gives a lot of food for thought!

Even better if you are planning a holiday in the NorthEast of England, or are just passing through, they have hourly tours in the spring and summer months and the guy taking the visitors is really good (he is not a scientist, nor a farmer/animal breeder - so his take is unique!) Our visit in late October (we were the only people on the tour) was the highlight of a rare two-day get-away from the holding and without the children too!

Btw the black spots issue seems to crop up in a few of the older breeds - white shetlands often have some black spots on their face, but they can still be registered as white, as the fleece counts (no black spots in it allowed). But you would get penalised in the showring (depending on how many other sheep with spots are in the class though and what the judge considers important - fleece or conformation or colour/look)

I think goat breeders have got it right - Herdbook registration for any crossbreed of (any, incl previous HB) registered goats. Even the shows have Any Other Variety (AOV) classes, where milk yield, conformation etc counts (and what the jugde likes...)

[kanisha]

For anyone really interested in what happens over a long period (800 years) when a restricted group of animals is allowed to breed indiscrminately (within that group) and importantly WITHOUT any human intervention - have a look at the Chillingham White Cattle. It is in my opinion mingboggling and as a breeder of (rare) Golden Guernseys and (not so rare) white Shetlands gives a lot of food for thought!

can you explain your point further? Another analogy would be the soay ......