A homesteading topic for discussion ... civilly, please.

I qualified my statement with the disclaimer that I may well be alone in views, it seems I'm not. The thread also asked for civility....which suggests some amount of restraint. Your self-sufficiency comes at a cost... the increased danger for animals and handlers.
Have you stoped and watch animals in nature... it can be a horribly cruel and unpleasant life for some animals. I think more of my stock than that, and yes i will admit that money plays a role in my decision making, I can't afford to replace studs.

Maybe you haven't seen my website!

Wisdom's Way

And here are my grades which did show an improvement over the generations. Saffron was a tremendous improvement over Anise, who in turn was a huge leap ahead from her dam, Heidi. Same thing with the Cricket line: Cricket was a big deep bodied doe, but didn't milk enough for me. Her daughter Katydid was better, but smallish and finer boned than what I wanted. Junebug (Katydid's daughter) has it all: big, strong deep body and a LOT of milk. She tops out at close to 2 gallons a day, is easy to milk, nice personality, strong and hardy.

This pic was taken before she kidded. As a first freshener, she peaked at 10#. Definite improvement over Cricket, who peaked at 6-7# anytime in her life.

Not a grade, but Firefly also exhibited huge improvment over her dam. The dam was dumb as a post, didn't milk, and had milk fever or some such every time she kidded. I got rid of her and kept Firefly, who milked very well, kidded without difficulty, and was also more intelligent and quicker to learn the routines.

Ah Emily - that's another gripe of mine! lol Around here you can't buy a goat that isn't some percentage boer. ARGH!

Egads we're talking pigs? In that case I have more gripes than just the AI aspect. I wonder how much dirt those pigs ever see to root around in. I guess dirt is just too dangerous for factory farmed pigs. Piglets are being weaned at what, 2 weeks nowadays? There's not really anything natural about raising confinement animals so the reasons that confinement breeders do what they do really won't hold up in a natural, self-sufficient promoting discussion. An article I was reading to find out the actual age of weaning in these facilities stated that all sows are fed antibiotics in the last weeks of pregnancy during the duration of nursing and the piglets are given antibiotics throughout the suckling phase and when they enter the new facility at 17 whopping days of age. Oh, yeah, the sows are induced and labor is 'attended'. Heaven forbid anything natural take place. This particular article states that weaning prior to 17 days causes a delay in when the sow can be rebred. So, it's not a matter of piglet health that is considered when deciding to wean at 17 days, or the sow's health, for that matter, it's the fact that the sow cannot recover physically until then in order to be bred back as fast as she possibly can. Hmmmm...and we're concerned with a few injuries that may occur during mating? Somehow the health and well-being of factory farmed animals isn't ever truly considered so that argument just doesn't hold water. Factory farming is a least $ in, most $ out enterprise. Quality of life? That's not even considered unless you're talking about the owner's quality of life. Healthy animals? Not unless you consider a constant need for antibiotics healthy. Confinement animals are the sweat-shop workers of the animal world.

Factory farmers are not worried about the health or well-being of their animals, or their studs, they're worried about losing $. After all, if an animal is injured in live cover then that another stud would have to be used and the original stud with his superior genetics (that just about every other factory-farmed boar would possess) would either have to have his boo-boo treated (waste of time and $) or he'd have to be put down (to save time and $). The gene pool with factory farmed animals isn't that large is it?

As for what happens, 'in nature', you're comparing apples and oranges. We're talking selective breeding here for a more self-sufficient, productive farm animal. Survival of the fittest only plays a small role in the life of a homestead animal. The fittest are used to perpetuate the flock, or herd, and the unfit are culled or eaten. Predation is manipulated by the owner to ensure, as much as possible, the health and safety of an animal. Any animal that displays aggressive tendencies above and beyond what is considered normal for that specific breed are generally culled. Improper behavior is cause for an animal to be culled.

As far as danger to the animal and the handlers? Well, I for one, and I may be alone in this, but I'm not too concerned with getting in the way of any 'stud' when he's trying to mate. They used to be able to get the job done without human assistance, I can guarantee you. They might not anymore thanks to those who insist on using AI - which is actually what we're seeing in several breeds of poultry. Now, I was young when we used to raise pigs but I do not once recall ever hearing of a boar or sow being traumatically injured during mating. I've never seen a goat, a cow, or a sheep traumatically injured during mating.

Of course, I'm not having to worry about workman's comp claims on my $5 an hour migrant employees, either. Maybe that would make me wanna AI everything to death, too.

chamoisee, no I haven't checked out your site - you're too far away. I generally search for farms in the surrounding states and will get sent to websites of farms from other states searching for a specific term. For example, searching for Kansas nubians I got a lot of websites that have Cream of Kansas genetics even though the farms were from all over the states. I'll have to check it out when I get a few more spare minutes. Spent my allotted time today on pigs. lol

How big is the dog? Most show goldens (and labs) are currently way oversized even according to the breed standard set by the AKC. What I would really love to see would be gundogs with some sense bred back into them. Then I would love it if people would stop insisting that every gundog is the perfect family pet. I think that too many people think that any breed of dog with the proper training is a perfect family dog.

While the registries may be easy to point fingers at, it is truly the breeders who are influencing the animals every step of the way. Using the AKC as an example, the registry as a whole is not going out of its way to punish a dog with working ability. They are trying to recognize the example of the breed that should (based on structure and appearance) be the most suited to do that job. The standard may say that a certain breed should have a wiry coat that won't collect burrs, but if all the breeders are breeding for a showy, poofy coat, all the dogs will have a showy, poofy coat.

Being registered in and of itself has absolutely no effect on the animal. What does determine the usefulness of livestock and its offspring is the person in charge of its management. Poor management will produce poor results regardless of whether or not the animal has been registered or shown. Good management will produce good results regardless of whether the animal has been registered or shown. Proper culling is a huge factor in management also. Culling should mean that the animal is removed from the gene pool, whether by slaughter or by not breeding it. Too many people "cull" by selling off their weaker stock to an unsuspecting buyer, who then uses it as the basis of their breeding program.

Kayleigh

Well.....they are a wonderful goat.....its just the ultra-show ones that I have a problem with.

__________________
Emily Dixon
Ozark Jewels
Nubians & Lamanchas
www.ozarkjewels.net

"Remember, no man is a failure, who has friends" -Clarence

In regards to the AKC, I believe that they have actually helped my breed rather than hurt it (American Staffordshire Terrier). Back in 1936 they took the most popular breed of dog in this country, the APBT, and developed a standard that included temperament to make this breed less a fighting dog and more a companion and protector. It is the BREEDERS responsibility to produce healthy pups to standard and the AKC is the first to say that AKC papers are not a guarantee of quality. Now mine is not a working or performance breed so the ability to herd, etc, is not an issue. The fact that my intact breeding males can stand on a grooming table while hundreds of dogs are barking all around them is a very GOOD thing. The idea of an ideal size, stature amd temperament is fine with me. Not every pup will mature to this standard and that is why limited registration is an option. It allows the animal to be shown in obedience, agility and junior showmanship but offspring cannot be registered (for me, this means a spay/neuter contract).
Genetic issues can crop up in any breed, including mixes, just as it can in humans. If you have bred any type of animal over any length of time, then it is obvious that there are no guarantees, ever.
Now when breeders, owners and judges encourage malformities that make a normal birth and life impossible, that needs to change. The AKC does not write standards, it accepts the standard the national breed club approves. It is the people that will pay $2500 for an English Bulldog pup that had to be born by C-section and will have health problems all its life for the sake of a sour mug face and abnormal proportions that fuel that type of breeding. The money talks.
Now don't get me wrong, the AKC is all about making money, but they also step up and help defend our rights as dog owners as well. Right now the State of California is trying to pass a law requiring ALL dogs and cats be spayed or neutered, essentially making breeding illegal. The AKC is funding legal challenges to this legislation. Of course they are protecting their interests, but they are defending pet owners as well, and they have the funds to do so.
A registry is a tool, its value comes from how you use it.
Dianne

__________________
Jezebel, Mommie to the Boogie-man 11/07 Blogging at www.14acresplusorminus.blogspot.com
www.hyenacart.com/euconline maternity, infants and childrens resale boutique, wool and fleece diaper covers

While I agree with your manage ment ideas, registration is of vital importance to a breeding program....most registaries are now requireing bloodbanking and DNA references on almost all types of livestock. This alone gives peace of mind that the animal is truely bred to who you think and gives legal recourse if false. Without papers a great grade animal is just that grade, not even welcome on most breeding farms. The investment in time and money is usually very similar, the return is often much different. YOu must decide what you are selling meat or breeding stock, if you are trying to sell breeding stock w/o papers, not many people are going to take you seriously.

All you have to do is look at the difference in appearance between working lines of any breed, and compare that to the appearance of those bred to look like they "should" to see that it will never work. You cannot breed a dog to do a job based on "structure and appearance". It is an exercise in futility. Invariably a breed that is bred to have a certain "structure and appearance" suited to do a certain job will lose the ability to do that job. What makes a dog suitable to do a job is in his heart and mind, and can only be demonstrated by doing the job, not by his appearance. The AKC and most show dog people do not understand this simple concept. Or if they do, they choose to ignore it.

What about Quarter horses? The halter ones with so much 'muscle' they can hardly move, much less be ridden- yet they command premium prices. And the Western pleasure qh, with a walk/trot/canter so slow and unnatural the horse appears to be limping, as their nose touch the arena floor? No, the QH is really the worst yet. I agree with most people about goats though. I breed my nigies at about 60 lbs. THey always kid out fine.

__________________
"I'm not normally a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me, Superman!" - Homer Simpson

I think the wholesale condemnation of anothers breeding practices by someone claiming to be a "homesteader" is the height of hypocracy. Homesteading is about living your own life, not trashing others.

__________________
Flaming Xtian
I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.
Mahatma Gandhi


Libertarindependent

Maura...

I wonder how many people who deliberately breed dogs don't do it in part for the money. Again, a personal friend of mine this time - his family has raised goldens for his entire life and he's in his 50s. His current bitch is about half the size of a good golden. She looks good on paper and has all the tests to back up her $600 per pup asking price, but she's no bigger than my $40 mutt border collie. His dogs all hunt, though. So, is he an irresponsible breeder for using a less than ideal sized dog in his breeding program or is he responsible because he actually has goldens that will retrieve? Are those who have picture-perfect goldens responsible breeders if their dogs won't retrieve? Would his $600 half-pint golden have more value than a $50 non-registered golden that retrieves? [/QUOTE]

First of all, let me say that I think any animal whose main diet is grasses or forbes should be on pasture. I also think that animals should be bred with the animals' health in mind. We cannot argue the problem of breeding dogs on purpose to be in ill health. It's disgusting.

Of course there are people who don't breed dogs for the money. If you do all of the testing and so on, you probably will not be making any money after stud fee, shots, vet visits, x-rays, etc. Some people do, but they are usually very serious about what they are doing. In the cases of golden retrievers, and many other breeds, there are two lines of dogs. One line is for the show ring, the other line is for hunting. I think this is very unfortunate. The best scenario is to have breeding dogs that are titled at both ends. It is great to breed a dog to conform to the breed standard, that's what the standard is for, so that you know what size dog you are getting, the kind of coat it should have, and the body type for the work it's supposed to be doing. What I've seen happen in the ring, however, is to promote dogs that do not fit the breed standard. Golden retrievers with feathering like a setter, GSDs who look like they have stomach upset, Spinone Italionos with narrow chests, and so on. People I know go to hunting lines for golden retrivers and labs because the hunting lines tend to be healthier and have more stable temperments than showring dogs. This is something that many people have a problem with. A breed registry should be something that maintains a proper breed standard, not something that creates fashion and ruins the breed.

As for your friend with the golden, how does his bitch compare with the written breed standard? Is she small in comparison with other goldens, or in comparison with the standard? With a dog that is too small, you need to consider if the size is a symptom of another problem, like kidneys or liver. A small dog should be treated as though there may be a problem with a blood panel check (and whatever else they do) to make sure she's just on the small size. When he breeds this bitch, I'm sure that he looks for a stud that will compliment her. The dog would be standard size, and in other ways balance the cons of the bitch. He would also have good temperament and be a good hunter/retriever. The end result should be sound healthy puppies. If he doesn't check hips or do other testing suitable for a golden then I would say he is not responsible, regardless of whether she hunts up.

As for breeding goldens with no hunting ability or retrieving ability, I think that is a disservice to the breed. In any litter you are going to have some puppies that have the work instinct, and others that are lacking (what pet homes are looking for). A dog that isn't a good hunter could produce puppies that are. That's your roll of the dice, and I can see breeding a dog that had terrific conformation and good temperament but lacked hunting instinct with a dog that has good conformation and temperament and good or excellent hunting instinct to try to get the physical standard, the mental stability, and the hunting instinct of the breed. If it didn't work out, then don't breed the nonhunter again.

Of course, with goldens, their wonderful personality is what is, in part, ruining the breed because everyone wants one. When everyone wants one, puppy mills and backyard breeders churn them out without regard to the quality of life of the parent stock, or the health of the offspring.

To sum up, before breeding her, does your friend consider the hunting/retrieving ability of his lovely little bitch, her general health, her personality, and same for the dog? Does he take good care of her? Does he sell a puppy to anyone who has the cash or does he try to place them in appropriate homes? A person who truly cares for their dog(s) is unlikely to be running a puppy mill.

__________________
Nothing is as strong as gentleness, nothing so gentle as real strength - St. Francis de Sales

Until you waste lots of money buying and feeding substandard stock and it throws your breeding program out of whack for a year or more.

Until you pay buku bucks for a purebred dog and it gets hip dysplasia (of course, this only sets in after you've given your heart to the pet) and you have to watch it suffer and make the sad choice of putting it to sleep.

Until the other "breeders" of your breed of stock devalue what you have by selling their substandard stock dirt cheap, OR people get so burned out on the cheap stuff that they won't buy any at all.

Sad to say, we don't live in a bubble. Our actions and irresponsibility affect other people.

I disagreed with your position and I objected to the fact that you came out of the gate calling anyone who does things differently than you "foolish".

I pointed out that your factory farming practices and goals are not on par
with the goals that many folks here are trying to achieve.

Maybe it bothered you that I "outed you" on this thread? I thought folks would understand your remarks better if they knew where it was coming from. I was perfectly civil in my response to your comments.

__________________
Hut on the Hill Farm
http://www.hutonthehill.org

No, you are wrong on all counts. Redhogs called no one foolish. Stop putting words in his mouth.

You do not speak for the "group"

Your remarks were condescending, insulting and UNcivil.

__________________
Flaming Xtian
I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.
Mahatma Gandhi


Libertarindependent

I think you misread what i posted, on the subject of using "On farm AI" with high dollar studs.... I can not begin to understand the objections to taking every possible precaution.... Yes - the almighty dollar is a concern, but the super studs may only come every once in a blue moon....and once a stud is using live cover he will be a holy nightmare to collect or even handle. I have never felt the need to defend myself against you.... but since others are now being drawn into it.... I raise outdoors for the most part....that is to say all my commercial hogs are outdoors pasture based. My purebred show stock is indoor on dirt, I use concrete feeding areas.... but no hog is on concrete entirely.

Would you say you are being civil?

Did you notice you were the only other poster who charged right in with the name calling - I believe you called folks hypocrites?

I don't claim to speak for the group, but I do have an idea of the purpose of this forum, and it isn't called "factory farms R US".

I don't agree with your opinions and/or your practices 99.999% of the time. You really need to get over it and stop making every post a point of contention...

My apologies to the rest of the posters. It's pretty apparent that tinknal, redhogs and I don't care much for another. From here on out I will make every effort to spare you any further tit for tat.

__________________
Hut on the Hill Farm
http://www.hutonthehill.org

I agree with this statement. This is one reason I do not push my goats to milk a gallon plus a day. I have seen the udders on high producing dairy cows & also goats. They do not hold up as well in the long run from what I have seen. I would rather have a nice goat give me 10 years of 1/2 - 3/4 gallon a day, then a goat that will give me 1.5 gallons a day for 5 years & then be worn out. The more milk they give, the more money you have in them keeping them fed. The more milk they make, the more they are going to eat. So pushing them to give more milk really isn't gaining because you have more in them in feed. My higher producing does eat more than my lower producing ones.

I personally would not want to drag my animals to shows all over the creation. You are just taking a huge risk in them catching something from another animal. I don't believe it is in the best interest of any breed to co-mingle with a bunch of strange animals. Herds build up immunities to certain things & you risk that by exposing them to animals you know nothing about. Pretty much why I keep a closed herd. I will bring in a new animal occasionally, but it goes into quaranteen for awhile before joining the herd. Do people that show quaranteen their show animals after each show? Just curious. If not, I assume they aren't concerned about bringing in an illness from someone else. I won't even show mine at the fair. They used to have a vet check, but no longer do that. Last year one gal's goats had a hacking cough & snotty nose the whole time there. Just not worth it in my opinion, just to get a trophy or ribbon.

__________________
I can't believe I deleted it!

As for the Border Collie, AKC Border Collies are from totally different lines and history than the working Border Collie registries. Breed standards only apply to the AKC registered dogs, not the working dog registries, AIBC, ISDS, NASDS, etc. Not the same at all. They very rarely ever cross these dogs, some do, but for the most part, no one does. Many ABCA registered dogs are now AKC, but that is mainly for agility sports, as the AKC really puts on the great shows for agility people. Even these folks rarely own a true AKC registered Border Collie, with only AKC in it's parentage. AKC opened it's books for the Border Collie mainly for agility sports.

And the folks who own the AKC lineage dogs, smaller, compact, nearly perfect. Well, they have a right to own them and love them. They are a breed of their own. They are great little dogs for the folks who know what they are. They are not the large, old fashioned working dog from Great Britian, and AKC breeders know this. They actually are beautiful little dogs, smart & great temperments. They do many herding events also. Someone looking for a working dog for a large farm would not go get one of these.

Working dogs come in all sizes, large-medium-small, shapes and weights, long hair, smooth coats and in-between. Does not matter. As for the hip problems, the rage a decade or more ago was to xray Border Collie hips. I think it got a start when AKC opened the books to them. (never done in the working hills of Scotland & Ireland where they originated. Dogs that could not work the hills were not bred) These breeders here found out too late what needed to be learned about Border Collie hips. They bred Excellent to Excellent and produced many bad hips, many. Now, years later, and allot of damage done, Excellents should only ever be bred to Good or Fair. Border Collies have loose hips. No other dog on the planet can move as fast and turn as sharp as they do. They could not do this with tight hips. Also, when the rage first started, many, many Border Collies did not wake up from the table, getting xrayed. They are very sensitive to drugs and being put under. Also, being knocked out, the hips of a dog are extreemly loose, much looser than normal. It is very hard to get a true measure of hips knocked out. A good example of wanting to perfect something that was allready perfect for the job it was intended. If only Excellent to Excellent hips were allowed, we would in short order no longer have the Border Collie, it would be like any other dog, not the exceptional athlete it is now.

Breed standard to conformation is not a part of the working Border Collie. Working ability, good temperment, eye, stance, smarts, calmness and more are important, not looks. ( of couse you don't want mutants )

The National Top trialing dogs that are bred produce some HD also. But they consider it worth the risk to keep the lines going. 5 or 6 out of 100 pups is really normal. Every new female is a new match for good and bad genes to a sire, it's a crap shoot for the genes we cannot see. All of breeding is this way, even people.......

Same with other breeds of livestock. If breeders are not careful, they will take out the good things the breed was known for in the beginning by messing with it too much or trying to perfect it. Nothing is perfect.

As for AI, I worked for many horse breeders who only used AI. Studs worth thousands of dollars could be dropped dead by one kick to the chest. I have no doubt, as I handled the studs for breeding, that they couldn't do it themselves. Most all of them did it themselves before AI came along, but AI was so much safer and you could inseminate 10 mares to one collection. Much easier on the studs, especially older ones, and much more gentler and kinder to the mares also. The mares loved the vet.... You would miss allot of mares if you had to wait for live cover on large farms. Studs cannot safely be over-bred, they will have a stroke and most likely turn really mean. And with the vet doing the AI, most all the mares concieved the first time. Easier all the way around.