Does anyone else have a hard time (ethically) bottlefeeding?
 

I have gone back and forth a dozen times trying to decide whether to let kids nurse, or bottlefeed. I have looked deeply at all the pros and cons, and I still can't decide.
It probably seems strange to most of you but, with my personal ethics, I am having a hard time reconciling myself to pasteurizing and bottlefeeding.

Here is my internal debate,

I know the problem of CAE, and how to raise kids on prevention, and that responsible breeders do not approve of letting kids nurse.

but...

I am a lactavist, breastfeeding is a very big part of my parenting philosophy.
I believe that it is a birthright for mammals to get an un-adulterated milk supply from their particular species.
I am concerned that in pasteurizing the milk I am preventing (possibly, it's not foolproof) a disease that the mothers are very likely NOT infected with, and in doing so, I am depriving the offspring of a myriad of other antibodies and enzymes that could prevent many other problems.
One of the reasons I am raising goats is so that I can have a healthy raw milk supply for my family, and turning around and feeding the kids "dead" milk feels hypocritical to me.
Also, I am concerned that in raising my goats this way that I would be robbing them of the instinctual knowledge of how to care for their offspring, and in doing so would create another species that can not self-perpetuate (similar to chickens that have no setting ability)

Blah... blah... blah... you get the idea, right?

BUT...
I want to do things the "correct" way, and be a respected breeder, that can sell my kids for their actual value.
I want for my goats to have easily milkable teats, and produce well.
I can't sort out my feelings on this. I'm not trying to anthropomorphize my goats, I just want to do what's best for them. :help:

Has anyone had this same problem? Does anyone have any input, or a different angle that I should consider?
Thanks,
Crissei

For years I listened to other breeders, and felt "bullied" into bottle feeding only. What a pain.

Now I let my CAE negative does nurse their own kids. That would be ALL of them, because they're tested yearly.

It has nothing to do with ethics, and everything to do with lazy.

Personal experience though, my bottle kids have been healthy and robust. I do believe my dam raised kids have been more so.

Yes. I have had the same problem. Oddly enough, though, we take the dairy calves within a day of birth usually and rear them separately. Which seems perfectly normal to me, but to take all the kids from a doe?
The thing is here, we have had CAE positive goats (I'm shooting myself in the foot). I chose to be responsible about animals that may end up in the hands of others, because I know what it does and no one and no other animal should have to suffer that.
I started pulling for prevention this year. I am there at the delivery of the kid, check gender as it arrives and remove it if it is a female (or reserved buckling) and wisk it away. However, I will not take all the kids in a family unit, unless the doe is one of our few positives and she has nothing but does. Hasn't been a problem yet.
I am only selling prevention raised kids as breeders. The does left on their (test negative) dams are being retained. For this very same delimma..I couldn't stand removing them when they would grow best on their dam..plus I don't have a separate area for prevention raised kids beyond weaning (I have one for unweaned). I hope to get a pasture and pen together for the "clean" goats raised by me on strict prevention. So far, all my prevention raised kids but one has a new home or is reserved. The kids left on their dams? If we don't keep them they will go for meat. Our wethers end up as meat every year anyways. I quit actively trying to sell them as pets because we get a better price at market.
What helps me, is we are using whole raw milk. It is cow's colostrum and cow's milk from our tested herd. No chance for screw ups. If a kid were accidently given raw goat's milk (and it happened unfortunately), the kid is immediately removed from prevention and I treat them as though they are exposed and positive. So they go in with the main herd. The kids grow just as well, if not better, on it. I'm confident in it breaking the cycle and am comfrortable in selling them to others.
Besides, if I pulled all kids I would have to milk over half the does and the rest would be carried open and dry..which is not efficient monetary wise for us. Simpler to leave a wether (who will not live much past his first birthday) with its dam and have everyone be happy.
Next year, if I have my separate area (we have a 120 acre farm), I will pull all does and raise them all on prevention. Starting in March I will be pulling all the does for prevention. If I don't, I limit who I can keep and who I can sell. I am locked into keeping the doelings I didn't pull or selling them for meat. I'd rather have the option of selling them for breeding, but refuse to do so with them running with the herd.


Have your goats been tested?

Ok, Here is an idea, From Fias Co Farm. Ok They had a doe with 4 kids! Wow hard work! And bottle fed one and let the others suck. If this doe raised all four, but only fed 3 then one wasn't sucking! Right? Ok so that shows how a doe can raise a kid with out feeding her/him. So you could milk mom. feed the kids their colostrum. and milk and bottle feed. But let the dam raise. Now if she had CAE then you would have to take them away. But if shes CAE free and the kdis only know to suck on a bottle, then mom should care for her babies and not have to feed them. Now this could be wrong, But this is what I got from it. Don't listen to me just a thought.

I have been so stuck on the ethical side of it that I haven't even given much thought to the amount of work it would involve. Milking twice a day, and bottlefeeding several times a day, with a toddler to look after, :eek: does seem like it would be a challenge.

I'm not sure whether my two does themselves have been tested. I have only owned them since last May.
The breeder told me that they test the herd, and have never had a positive.

I'm not even sure how to go about getting them tested for it. :shrug: We have yet to find a vet that knows anything about goats. Everyone around here is all about horses.

If I could provide proof that my does are negative, would I still be able to get the same price for them that I would if they were bottlefed?

I know I do have the option of selling to people that have the same views as me (the way the fiasCofarm breeders do) but I know that that's going to drastically reduce the amount of potential buyers.

Thank you for your help,
Crissei

I prefer to do things as natural as reasonably possible. (ducking)

It may not be everyones preference, but I believe that if reasonable care is taken to reduce some risk, that a certain amount of lesser risk is reasonable and normal.

Maybe I feel comfortable with this because I own goats for my own use and very seldom sell any. But the benefits from raw milk and mama rearing just seem to outway the few risks in my mind. Plus all my stock came from closed tested herds. If I were selling milk I might feel differently, I don't know.

I like the fiasco farms aproach and philosophy. There site has so much info I still get lost there. Infact, Doc pointed me to a page on linebreeding today that I'd never seen there.

Last I read they put the kids up at night, milk mornings only and then put the kids back with mom for feeding/rearing the rest of the day. That's what we've done in the past with anyone we're milking, all the others raise their own kids and all has gone well for us. Thus far everyone has remained happy, healthy and well adjusted.

Added:
I have no infants/toddlers so my family drinks the milk raw.

I have bottle raised 3 kids out of necessity. There are circumstances where it is the only way... orphan, regected, too many kids, etc. All 3 turned out loving and healthy, both does were good moms too. However, when you compare them to the dam raised kids my dam raised seem better off all around.

You will make less money off your stock period. It is the bottom line.

I am an earth mother, breast fed all my kids, there wasn't homeschooling like there is now or mine would have been...I only knew one lady who homeschooled and didn't meet her until my kids were teens. Made my own baby food, cloth diapers, lived a year without electricty while we built our home out of pocket...real Mother Earth News (the old magazine :) types. Garden, store food, can flip a switch and be off grid, I have an inverter of my own for my desiel truck to run my barn if we loose electricty etc...

But...and it's a huge but...I have to make a go of my goats, most of you obviously have husbands who are footing the bill for this hobby of yours. Tell you what I know for sure, if you took all family money out of the equation and you were real homesteaders on a homersteading forum, you would sell half your goats tommorrow becaue they are not making you money, not providing even the milk for the family they should for 10 months out of the year, wethers would go in the freezer. I can't afford the sentimental part of this. Yes my goats have very nice lives, they deserve it, but to put human emotions onto my livestock? No way. I would never have an abortion although I am pro choice...but if a doeling group got out somehow and got bred, they would get lutelysed and aborted. I disbud and yes it is very painful for about 2 minutes (and yes some kids need pain meds afterwards, most do not) I bottle feed for sales. I milk for profit. I sell colostrum so kids get limited amounts. I feed what they need to exactly milk and stay in show shape no more.

Now if I had a husband who didn't mind working 40 hours a week and me spending his money each week on feed, hay, vets etc...yes I would have more goats. I would keep alot more doelings, I would take on a second breed (loved raising Lamanchas but there is no money in them here) I would let my brood does nurse their buckling kids, I would have a geriatric pen.

Selling kids who are dam raised will not make me the reputation I need/have to do what I do, it is a fact in dairy. If you are doing meat goats than disregard my post :) Vicki

I'm getting this vision from one of the older Mother Earth Magazine covers - the hippy mom, the nekkid baby running in the grass, a daisy behind every ear, beads, peasant blouse.. old wooden milkstand in the field, mom placidly hand milking (into a wooden bucket!), gazing lovingly at her surroundings...

That was you! ha ha.

I only bottle feed my babies when they can't get what they need from their mother. This year I'm blessed with 20 healthy babies who are being raised by their mothers!

Yes, your post really gets to the heart of it. :Bawling:
I personally believe that pasteurizing has more health risks versus benefits in CAE negative goats.
But I know that the majority do not agree, and in order to be able to sell my goats for a good price, I am going to have to play by their rules.

At this point, I am thinking about raising this years kids on prevention just to pay for the initial outlay of my does and stud fees.
Next year maybe I can afford to do things the way I want to, and accept that I won't be making much off the kids.
I guess this is going to be a case of, "My poverty, but not my will consents" :grit:

Thanks again,
Crissei

But, cfarmher, keep in mind your own market. In Vicki's case, she can get a better price selling goats on total CAE prevention. In my market, either people don't care, they have no clue what it means because they're new, or they know me and they'll buy my goats anyway because the know my goats are all tested negative. I'll personally buy goats that are dam raised if the dam was tested. Others will too - and some won't. Depends. I get the same price from a newbie who doesn't know anything (sometimes more, heh heh) as I do from everyone else. My other farm "interests" pay for the goats (but the husband that pays everything sounds interesting - in theory of course) and so I guess I can "afford" to be a little lazy in my old age.

I understand all sides of the debate, and many positions have been well laid out here. I will just offer - and you can obviuosly take it or leave it - that I would not let kids be dam raiesd on an untested dam. My opinion is that - if you don't know if she has CAE - you shouldn't gamble with those kids' future health. You obviously want the absolute best for the kids - hence your reluctance to pasteurize in the first place. That would say to me, that you should test first, practice prevention in the interim and make decisions about future kids later. Good luck with whichever path you take.

I personally believe that pasteurizing has more health risks versus benefits in CAE negative goats.
But I know that the majority do not agree, and in order to be able to sell my goats for a good price, I am going to have to play by their rules.
................................

There is no basis of fact in your first sentence. It sounds logical that heat treating the colostrum and pasteurising the milk would effect it. Problem is goats raised on prevention are not just negative for CAE, but many many other things as well that causes them to be poorer milkers, have shorter lives etc... You will find that your bottle kids have healthier longer lives than your kids who nursed. I know that my kids now, are much healthier, herd health is very high right now, compared to the kids I raised on the same Lambars with pooled raw colostrum and pooled raw milk. My does now kid with softer easily milked udders, more milk, they are bigger, with few to no health problems.

But yes if your goal is a profitable breeding stock farm with milk sales etc...than yes you do have to play by rules. You loose your reputation by selling one sick animal...hell I referred a gal to someone who sold her a CAE positive group of kids...and you are to blame! There is no personal responsibility for anything anymore, so to sell, you had better know you can stand behind your gurantee.

Doc...well no dresses here, but being nearly 50 I was a San Diegan hippy transplanted to East Texas ;) But I do have a whole different mentality than yours...I take pride in producing new goat owners who purchase from me, who have clean stock, and most of my gals sell milk, sell breeding stock and make real money on the farm especially when they add soap. I enjoy the challenge of getting the new person in goats understanding that it's alot more than about nannies and billies. Plus if they aren't going to buy from me, I don't want them taken down the road with their sickly goats. Vicki

While we're on the subject, can I throw in a newbie question?

How do I get my goats tested, and do I need to test only for CAE? What should I anticipate for costs? (I've got one of those awesome husbands, but I'll need to prep him for the expenses!)

Where's a good website that discusses these diseases? I know nothing about them, other than the little I've picked from here.

Thanks!

Tracey Mouse

That'd be a great "picture" of Earth Mother Vicki, however, scratch that wooden bucket, even back then she would have had the trusty stainless pail out! hehe

With Nigerians and Minis, it's very accepted to dam raise and get the exact same prices. Especially if you TEST and can PROVE your herd is negative. I buy from tested herds and my girls are all tested yearly here. I dam raise everyone I can, as it's easier for me and I think healthier for the girls/kids.

Oh, I wouldn't say our mentalities are different at all. I know the goats that people buy from me are healthy and CAE free - isn't that the whole purpose of testing? The redundancy of pulling kids and pasteurizing the milk of negative does doesn't make scientific sense to me. If my goats don't have CAE, they can't transmit it to their kids. I do know a little bit about disease transmission and exposure versus antibody production. CAE "prevention" has become a religion, complete with scripture and holy grail. (Not unlike the terror of HIV) Many of the people who buy goats from me simply don't care if the goats are CAE free or not, regardless of what I attempt to explain to them. It again comes down to markets. I don't need to be as aggressive about it, that's all, and I still get top dollar for my goats.

Okay, I admittedly don't know squat, but I do have to say that Doc's logic sounds reasonable to me - if no one in the herd has CAE, why the need to pull the babies?

Tracey Mouse

I agree with Vicki 100%. It has been clear to me awhile that there are several different groups in here. Some have goats as pets, some as home milkers, some as professional diaryfolks, some for meat for themselves, some are breeders and some are meat goat farmers or ranchers.

In other words, some are in it for the country lifestyle, and some are in it for the business. Neither is "bad," but the perspectives are different.

I too am trying to make an economic go of the goats, not keeping them for pets. I love having them on the place, but I want to make money with them, not just have them as pets.

Vicki is absolutely right that as a business, if you want to make money with goats -- milk or meat -- you must do what your market demands you do. There is no luxury of doing it your way, if that is not what the market wants. Cross the market, and you will be out of biz. Move in lockstep with the wants and desires of the market, and control your production costs, and you will succeed.

I'm in meat goats because I don't like or have time for the chores of a dairy, I am completely opposed to disbudding, and I like the less demanding approach that comes with looking at the herd in meat production, as opposed to individuals in dairying.

All I have to do is raise a stout kid and keep costs rock-bottom low to succeed. That means I don't have the luxury of choosing to feed expensive feeds, for example -- whole cottonseed has 27% TDN and is cheapest this year, so that is what I fed. Next year, it may be soybeans or who knows what. In the summer, my goats eat grass and browse. Period. Those are free from the sun. To maximize success, I continue to explore adding value.

I'm an earth papa! I believe in Nature and letting Her do Her thing as much as She can in the way She intends. Even if Her way sometimes appears cruel to others, as in kids dying because they were neglected by the doe. Doing it that way saves me money in the short and long haul. And it improves my herd. There are certain things I have learned from years with cows and goats that I can apply, like looking for a small-headed buck/billy to ease birthing stress.

My FIL was a diary farmer all his life. I know how much work dairying for money is, when you have to pay the bills with it alone. He retired to beef cattle. Dairying as a business is too close to factory farming for me, too far removed from Nature. Since I am not willing to inject that much artificiality into the process, I went with meat. This is NOT to be read as a "slam" against dairying! It's just the nature of the beast, when it is being done as a business and not a hobby, because that's what the market demands.

Again, I agree with everything Vicki said. I can see in the discussions here that the content of the posts made depends on which of the groups I listed the poster happens to be in.

Bottom line is, if you are in it as a biz, you MUST find out what the market wants, and do what the market wants, to succeed.

Aww.. that's a lovely picture though.. I wanna be there! Well, ok. I take it back.. I'm 51 and I don't want anymore babies, nekkid or not!

Your right, there isn't. There haven't been any studies done on goats to prove or disprove it. I am just applying my knowledge of human milk, and pasteurizing/not pasteurizing, and the benefits and risks associated with it.

Maybe I am way off base and goats have many more bodily fluid transmissable diseases that humans. I don't know :shrug:

But there is no doubt about the fact that pasteurizing destroys antibodies that confer natural immunity.
Human milk banks have even stated that although pasteurized milk is more digestable than artificial milks, it does not offer the same disease resistance that un-treated human milk does.

The standard medical hierarchy for human infants feeds is;

1) breastfeeding
2) the mother's own milk expressed and given to her child some other way
3) the milk of another human mother
4) pasteurized milk of the childs mother, or another human mother
5) artificial milk feeds

It makes sense to me that it wouldn't be any different for other mammals, that are in overall good health.

I want to empasize that I am NOT trying to be snarky. I really appreciate your input. :)
I just wanted to explain where I was coming from when I wrote that.

Thanks,
Crissei

Honestly, this is my theory: In the past, the testing was not as "confident" as it can be today. It often depends on the lab you use. My samples are sent to the WSU lab in Washington. Many other labs have a history of either false negative or positives, meaning, goats were tested and the results were not accurate. So, and additional step was added - pull the kids and feed them only pasteurized milk. That is reasonable. However, the testing has improved. WSU has an excellent record of "confident" tests. There is also the question of testing an animal, and then (however rare) having it exposed after testing. What I believe is really the case is that the original test was not accurate. It's not easy for a goat to "catch" CAE. It's not a "casual contact" disease. Even among positive animals, only a small percentage show actual symptoms. It can't be transmitted to humans.

I hate to say this, but in reality, CAE prevention has become a marketing tool among breeders. I'm a breeder too, and for a long time, I bought the party line. I've just come to the realization that it isn't the big deal maker or breaker it's advertised as. I agree, it can be a terrible disease for an animal to contract and die from, but in all reality, there are many other conditions I worry more about.

No two goat raisers do things the same way. Everyone does things THEIR way.

Personally I grew up on a cattle ranch and ANY cow that couldnt raise their own calf was culled. We considered them defective. I have a nice little herd and have been "upgrading" (??) to registered stock, and recently acquired a BEAUTIFUL registered spotted lamancha. And she freshened with two BEAUTIFUL doelings, who she BITES every time they try to nurse!!! She was a bottle fed doeling and is the WORSE mother I've EVER SEEN. I'm not saying that every bottle feed doe is going to be such a crappy mother, I don't have enough experience with bottle fed does to have an opinion on that yet, however I KNOW that if she didn't throw such beautiful kids, no matter HOW much she cost (she was actully part of my wedding dowry) I would get rid of her. I know LOTS of other people bottle raise, but since I have healthy does that would be counterproductive for our farm. We only "help" moms when they need help, the rest of the time we let them do their job.

Do whichever you feel is best for you. If you have healthy does and you don't mind "sharing" (which you do anyway since you are turning around and feeding your kids the milk you've just milked) than by all means, leave them on. Just make sure you give the kids enough attention so they don't go wild on you. I let my kids hug on them everyday and that works just fine for us. You might HAVE to bottle feed all of them that you are bottle feeding already since once they learn to drink from a bottle it may be hard form them to nurse from their moms. But by ALL means do whichever way is best for your family!!!

I'm trying to think of even one pathonogenic disease that would affect a kid through its dam's milk. See, diseases that live quite nicely in the gut of an animal sometimes makes a human very sick. E coli is one. Salmonella is another. Strep is yet another. There is a bunch of basic biology that just makes the idea that a goat kid will do better on pasteurized milk than its dam's milk that just plain doesn't make any sense.

I spend a lot of time educating humans about the dangers of drinking raw milk. My argument is that the enzymes and beneficial bacteria in raw milk is GOOD for a kid's or calf's system, but not for a humans. I have quite a bit of historical and scientific data to back that up.

In my experience, my dam raised kids have grown faster and been hardier than my bottle babies. There are plenty of factors involved in this, but the basic one is that goat's milk has evolved for the goat kid - no other reason. That we humans consume it is an aside from its original intention. Period.

It's in the dairy owner's best interest to redirect the "flow" so to speak, of milk, from the kid, to the open market (humans) who will pay $$$. Therefore, the kid is pulled, the kid is given just enough (but not as much as it may want) and the excess is sold. By controlling how much the kid gets, there's more to market. Economically advantage goes to the farmer, but not to the kid.

What you see in today's goat milk market, goat soap market, kid market, is a very basic campaign that uses the word "healthy" liberally, and thereby literally brainwashes the consumer into believing what the goat marketeer wants them to believe.

And what's that?

Raw milk is good for people, but bad for baby goats and calves. Makes your head spin, eh?

I can understand the logistics of economy in bottle feeding, and I can understand that if a doe is CAE it is better to bottle feed to raise kids that are free of CAE.

But I don't understand how in the world bottle kids have healthier longer lives than kids that nursed. Other than CAE, WHY would they live healthier, longer lives??

Joy, you are going to do really well in goats if you keep in mind those same cull factors that you used with cows. I do. The cow learning is extremely beneficial, especially in a goat info world full of hucksterism and marketing schemes. If the nanny/doe won't birth 1 or 2 kids (and no more) unassisted, raise them healthy from her own milk, and do that without you lifting a finger to help, she starts to get demerit badges on my notebook listing for her, depending on severity of her shortcomings: Raised one, other died. Etc.

Your LaMancha would be getting on the trailer if she were mine. I would maybe try her female offspring as moms -- maybe, and especially if I had sunk bottle feeding money and time in them -- but my experience is that all poor mothering traits and behaviors are highly heritable, just as they are in cows. So they likely wouldn't work out either. Better as terminal kids, but they won't pay off the bottle feeding bill if you honestly calculate it.

It is important, though, to separate management deficiencies from poor animals, as I am positive you know from cows. I had a neighbor who was culling his goats because they were early-birthing hairless kids. Not their fault -- it was a mineral deficiency!

Not all bottle-fed mamas are poor mamas, but I refuse to buy any bottle-fed replacements for my meat herd if the owner is honest about it when I ask. Why risk it? There is a REASON they were bottle-fed (and yes, it could be cuz the milk was dairied...that is one of them. I might make an exception then.).

A big plus to me in bottle raising, besides the prevention of CAE, is being able to sell them early. My kids are all 3 weeks old. The last of the ones I am going to sell are leaving this weekend. I am keeping 4 for myself & will continue to bottle-feed them. I like that I can sell them before weaning age. That is less mouths for me to feed & more milk for me to use. :D

That is something for me to keep in mind as well. I might be going to all of this trouble deciding what to do, and then when the kids are born have to scrap my plans and bottle-feed anyway. My does are second fresheners that have never nursed, and were bottlefed themselves. There is a very good possibilty that they won't nurse their kids, even if I tried to assist them.

I hadn't thought of that. :doh:

If your goats don't have CAE, how does bottle feeding prevent it?

I can understand bottle feeding so that you can sell bottle babies, I do that myself.

However, that again is a marketing and economics issue, not a health issue.

Two points here:

got my Nigerians from Cornerstone Farm in VA, all dam raised but tested. Most of her does are sold for $250 at the min., most for more since she has been breeding for at least 10years and her herd's dairy aspects are well respected. So there can be a market for dam raised.

If you think testing is important to your market, start early when you herd is small. The goat dairy around the corner from me bred about 25 does this late fall but tested for CAE over the winter-3/4's of their herd tested positive. So now they have this nightmare of milking, pasturizing and bottlefeeding a lot of kids. Otherwise they would have left the kids on for a couple of weeks then changed over to feed.

Hope these are useful points for others to consider.

I had a 7 yr old 5th freshner who rejected every single one of her kids, until this year. All her previous kids were bucks. She's raising her little doeling as if she's done it her entire life. Goats are mysterious creatures.

cfarmher, bottle-raised females do not necessarily mean poor mothers. HOW they are bottle raised matters -- I have found from hard experience that "PET" bottle does that have bonded to humans while young tend to do poorly as moms. If the goat was raised like a dog, it tends to be an adult "snot." So I don't risk it.

On the other hand, I have bottle-raised doe kids by slapping them back in the pasture after a few initial days and letting them be with all the other goats, feeding them right there, and they have have turned out wonderfully as moms.

I just got out of bottle raising all together, as it does not pay or even break even if all the costs are truly added in. If I could get $500 a kid, then it would pay. But I can't.

CAE is the "sacred cow" of goat breeding. I've stated my opinion, and if people bottle feed, that's perfectly okay - for actual prevention of CAE from positive goats, or because it benefits the breeder from an economic stand point. Healthier though? Hmm, no. Otherwise, well... :bdh: That's my last word on the subject.

i do bottle feed my kids and i'm aware of the economic nature. as wendy said it is possible to sell kids at much younger age and have the milk for my busyness.
i also would think there is a different in having dam raised or kids on lambar on pooled raw milk. i do believe that dam raised kids will be healthier (if dam is healthy of course) then kids on a pooled raw milk lambar because of the hygiene. i have a little buck on his dam because he goes for meat and he is as big and strong as his siblings raised on the bottle. i will never know about his longevity though. :rolleyes:

I work outside the home, so I can't pull all my babies. My does are CAE negative, so I let some nurse their kids. Some are bottlefed on prevention. Blossom has always been allowed to raise her kids, however, when she kidded last night, I pulled all three. I feel kind of guilty, because she misses her babies. I chose to pull them, however, because last year, when I allowed her to nurse 2 bucklings who were to go to market, they chewed up her teats had gave her a staph infection in one teat. This is my champion doe,and I had to keep her home from the shows last summer because she was uneven. I had wanted to show her in champion challenge and dam and daughter classes. I agree with Vicki that if you want top dollar for your kids, they need to be raised on prevention. Some of these show goats go for $300-$1,000. I have a friend who has had all tested negative goats for the past 20 years. She lets her dams raise the kids. She has lovely goats, but only gets $125-$200 for them. I trust them to be negative, but most are WILD. I prefer my doelings that I show to be bottle fed. They're alot easier to handle.

My goats are tested and are neg. for CAE and I pull them at birth before they nurse and bottle raise them on heat treated colostrum and pasteurized goat milk or cows milk from the store.

It makes me more money.

Our prevention raised kids are fed free-chioce, whole raw Jersey milk...replaced with fresh warm milk twice daily (we put bottles of hot water in the milk to keep it warm throughout the day. They drink their fill of high fat raw cow milk. *From a tested herd* Our cows are healthy and therefore our kdis are healthy. I'm way too paranoid to feel confident enough that my "negative" dam raised kids will stay negative.
I couldn't stand the idea of handing off a kid that could be a heartache later for the new owners.
I've lost sales because I educate those who come asking about goats....

My goal is to get to a negative clean herd. At taht point, I will probably let everyone dam raise. If the test results were correct, it won't take long, but I don't trust test results...ever.

All I can say is, I hope you folks who bottle-feed are remembering to add in all your costs, including labor and purchased equipment and/or milk. My own figuring on it -- and practical experience with it -- shows it to be a loss for my farm.

I concede that in some markets it may be possible to bottle-feed for a couple weeks and then sell them off as bottle babies and maybe squeak out at break-even, but there is a very thin market here for bottle babies. People are trying to get rid of them, not buy them. I have a short list of 5 goat farmers who have begged me to take their bottle kids; they don't want to mess with them, either. Shrug.

Under edit: Prices here for bottle babies are $15-35 (spotty). Doesn't matter if registered, not registered, or breed. You will not get more than $35 for the finest bottle baby you can produce.

From these posts it seems very clear that it just depends on what your reasons for having goats is. I would love to say that my hubby could just do all the outside work to support them, but we have other animals that help pay the feed bill and enough land to supply our hay/forage for most of the year so that's a big help. I don't think we could afford to have them otherwise.

I agree that if the buyers had certain criteria they want met and you want to sell to them you'd better meet your customers neends. However, I am not in that position so since nearly all of my goats will be meat or milking/breeding stock for personal use I can do well with not pasteurizing and bottle feeding. Since my time with my goats is not equalling an income, that means it is more valuable to me to use that time on other things.

I might like to raise meat goats for sale someday as a small retirement income, but that depends on how well my little homestead herd goes.

So dairy buyers want CAE neg animals & milk, but what do meat buyers want?

What kind of certifications, testing or ??? are they asking for?

Where I live, I get 4 times that much, minimum for the doelings, at 1 to 2 weeks of age...Perhaps it's regional or perhaps other facotors are involved.