[waterbuffalofarmer]

Sometimes we have to take a step back and look at it from a way off and analyse everything thoroughly. If my other half put it to me like that, the way you did, I would accept it because it's the logical decision. If on the other hand both points were illogical I would demand a third point of view

[Womble]

What if you knew that the point of view is entirely logical, but crosses one of your values? (such as involving turning your pet lamb wot you nursed lovingly for weeks in the kitchen into burgers) 

[waterbuffalofarmer]

What if you knew that the point of view is entirely logical, but crosses one of your values? (such as involving turning your pet lamb wot you nursed lovingly for weeks in the kitchen into burgers) 

I was always brought up to know that pets don't always make it to adult hood, males always go for slaughter, unless really good genetics, or to market. We were as children actively encouraged to rear the lambs, first few times was difficult and I always feel like a murderer after I have taken them to the abbatoir, very depressing, but meat is always good to help forget

[Lesley Silvester]

Insert your manly authority,

I take it you meant 'assert'...

    That is the best typo only. Unless, of course, it's not a typo. 


If my OH tried to lay down the law, he would no longer have a manly authority to inset or assert.

[Backinwellies]

I'm the smallholder with experience ... so any animal decisions are generally mine (though sometimes it would be good to have someone to discuss option with)... and have to say am a head person (with a heart which does fall for the cute things (hence the one eyed sheep dog and wethers kept cos they eat out of my hand!). However head always rules on safety (one cute weather who now butts is OFF!).


  Decisions about other stuff ... hmm he does have to admit I have good ideas ... I just have to be careful how they are presented!       

Think your idea of not discussing actual cases is probably the way forward generally ... make some general rules which you both agree on (max number of sheep and min number of productive sheep? ) then negotiate around that (a new cute one kept means another removed!)

[silkwoodzwartbles]

My OH is a lot more experienced with livestock keeping than I am, and the sheep are on his land so I do listen to what he says. I don't always agree though - we both have our own sheep and we know the land will only support 20 ewes, so we've agreed to 10 ewes and 1 ram each. He sometimes thinks I'm daft keeping the sheep I do but doesn't interfere so long as I don't breach my allotted number (although saying that, he played a very active part in my purchase of 4 new ewe lambs this summer, when I only intended buying 2!)

I tend to do a lot of research before making decisions and in some instances he's been very pleased with the outcomes - for example we now use Molecto instead of Crovect as it's considerably cheaper but the same ingredients, even though he's always used Crovect. When I do come up with a good idea, he embraces it, and I do the same for him but we do discuss and occasionally agree to disagree.

[twizzel]

No... pretty much together with most decisions regarding the sheep, as it's run as a commercial flock so no room for passengers. Empty for 1 year- cull, prolapse- cull, bad mother/feet/just plain wild- cull. It's a small flock so no room for free riders hence 30% of my flock were culled this year (2 empty, 1 small prolapse). Regarding the cows however there are a lot of things my partner and I would do different that his parents probably wouldn't agree with. I think my mini flock of sheep are run more commercially than the commercial herd of cows at the moment

[Womble]

a new cute one kept means another removed!

Mrs Womble has agreed in principle that Dinky should go before he does somebody a nasty (he likes her well enough - it's just me he goes for!). However, he is apparently so gorgeous that it will take two ewes to replace him without causing an unacceptable loss of overall flock cuteness.

Now I know what David Davis feels like!

[YorkshireLass]

It's not about manly authority (I just...no.)

It IS about cold hard facts.

I tend to have lines in the sand for certain things - animals that are dangerous, temperamental, or suffering. For example I've decided to cull a cow with mastitis once she's weaned this calf. Vet says she'd calve again, but do I want to breed in this weakness? Do I want to risk her own suffering again? The amount of treatment she needed was bordering on cruel, there were no injection sites left to use that weren't sore and bruised, etc etc.

Outside those hard lines, things can be fuzzy. We've a runt calf, but she's friendly and bucket trained, so she can go with each new batch of calves as a good influence.

Dangerous animals go to the butcher, but if one just doesn't quite fit with our system then it can go to a home. If an animal is fine with me but has taken against someone else on the farm, then that person decides.

[YorkshireLass]

What if you knew that the point of view is entirely logical, but crosses one of your values? (such as involving turning your pet lamb wot you nursed lovingly for weeks in the kitchen into burgers) 

I would ask what you were expecting to happen to your lamb and go from there

[pharnorth]

Great question [member=2128]Womble[/member]  Regarding shared decisions I guess I have learnt over the years that 1) I am usually right so 2) I am not always right and 3) Being right is often not the most important thing and 4) Emotive decisions are better made (especially if more than one decision maker) if the principles are decided beforehand.

I had one ewe this year with triplets, thought I would give her a go at bringing them on and rescue if necessary, wrong decision, she couldn't cope and will have to go on the cull list.  Had another ewe struggled a bit last year, gave her 'one more chance' she struggled and again had to rescue the lambs, she is on the cull list. So regarding principles my principle going forward is to err on the side of ' if in doubt don't, as both the above examples caused discomfort to the ewe and inconvenience to me. But I only learnt that by trying.

[Marches Farmer]

Mastitis will flare up again and be painful for the ewe, even if the lambs are bottle fed.  Dangerous animals have no place on a farm.  A ram that's stroppy at this time of year will be 20 times worse by tupping season.  Only the very best stock should be bred from:  anything else does no favours for the breed or the buyers of offspring that may look OK themselves but have the genetics to throw a wobbler in the future. 

[Womble]

Thanks Everybody. Marches Farmer - I know you're "right" about this (but I would say that, wouldn't I, because you agree with my point of view).  The key question is how do you handle the situation when your equal partner in life and smallholding thinks differently. Arguing logic as you have done is perfectly ok, but it is on a different plane from the one they're thinking on, and only makes one (i.e. me) look cold and uncaring.

An update on the situation then: Following Sally's excellent suggestion, Mrs Womble and I have agreed some basic ground rules:

1) Any animal that is dangerous has to go.

The problem here was not that Mrs W disagreed with this, but that because Dinky had never shown her any aggression, she thought I was using a minor transgression as an excuse to get rid of a non-productive animal. Once she witnessed his behaviour first hand, she agreed with me that he has to go. He has been booked into the abbatoir next week, along with our three mastitisy ewes (these are another story, but it's been a hard month!  ).

2) Any animal which is suffering, or may pass on ailments to others (e.g. infectious mastitis, CLA, recurrent footrot etc etc) has to go. In case of disagreement, we will ask the vet what they would do if it was their animal (with a smallholder head on, so not necessarily thinking purely commercially), and will then follow that advice.

We still have to decide what to do about other animals, for example non-productive older ewes or non-aggressive Dinkies, but this is at least a start.

Also in return for doing in her wee pals, I have to buy her some replacement ewes at the forthcoming Stirling Z auction. TBH, there are worse concessions to have to make to keep a marriage together! 

[Backinwellies]

I would ask what you were expecting to happen to your lamb and go from there

Best thing I learned from a coaching course I went on is try to approach difficult issues by asking a question rather than stating your point of view ....  cant say I always remember (logical heads just plough in!) but it has made quite a difference and think it smoothed the rearing of teenagers a bit!

[Marches Farmer]

We still have to decide what to do about other animals, for example non-productive older ewes or non-aggressive Dinkies, but this is at least a start.

We always keep back one tame ewe that would otherwise go to cull (generally an older one whose milk yield hasn't been up to scratch) to become head of the flock of weaned ewe lambs and make training to bucket and call much easier.  That way they serve a valuable purpose in the flock and generally die with their boots on.