(= a: Two Years’ Results on Production i Early Spring Lambs il ' om ll Thesis on Degree M. Agriculture ni ; Ow Uma gl Er ) 1922 THESIS ‘uo "31293 01107 9815 | LIBRARY Michigan State University . __ / —— es pummme = PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 186 c/CIRC/DateDue.p6é-p.14 i. Ze Se 4. THESIS TWO YEARS’ RESULTS ON PRODUCTION OF EARLY SPRING LAMBS. Influence of Top Crosses of Different Breeds on Common Ewes. Comparison of Dark-Faced and White-Faced Ewes. Effect of Condition of Ewes at Breeding Season. Effect of Driving Ewes Before Turning in of Rams. Presented by C. A. WILLSON '06 ee emwney for Degree MASTER OF AGRICULTURE October l, 1922. 44 ESIS Thb InFLUE..CE Of VOP CROSSES 0: DIFFERE.T BREEDS Ox CCMNMOx EWES In Tuk PKODUCTION OF MankKsl Lak.BS by C. Ae Yillson Tennessee has been one of the foremost states in erly spring lamb production, and offers an excellent opportunity for the expansion of this industry. the method that has been effectively emnloyed by spring lamb produccrs in this State is to nurchase common ewes from the states lying to the south and use one of the black-f.aced Down breeds for the top cross. Many problems have in this industry which will be studicd in an experimental way at the Middle Tennessee s«xperiment Station. There has been much debate amons the producers, as to which of the black-faced Down breeds is rost suitable for use as a top cross on common ewes in early spring lamb production. The present bulletin is a preliminary report on the use of Southdown, Shrop- Shire, Hampshire and Cxford Down rams on common ewes. Data are also given on the effect of driving ewes before turning rams in at the breeding season, number of lambs of each sex produced, averare birth weight of lambs of each sex, and conditions af- fecting the vroduction of twin or single lambs. PART I, 1920-21. On July 26, 1920, 110 common ewes with unbroken months were purchased for the experiment. Most of the ewes had white faces, the remainder had black faces, but did not show strixing breed NOTE: The experiments were conducted under ihe immediate supervi- Sion of Mr. C. Me. Hume, Acting Superintendent of the Middle Tennessee Experiment Station at Colunbia. 404102 characteristics excent in a few cas¢s. After the purchase of the flock by the Experiment Station, they were on August 13, 1920 divided into four equal flocks, weighed on large plat- form scales by groups, and labeled, then individual weights were obtained. The group weishts were as follows: Group I. 28 ewes, 2940 lbs. " TI. 28 ewes, 2940 Lbs, " III, 27 ewes, 2845 lbs. "Iv. 27 ewes, 2845 lbs. Dat a were collected in each case with regard to the condition of flesh, weight, color, health, whether the ewe had a long tail, whether bare on belly, and the approximate amount of breeding, if any. In addition to the above, on August 14 the four flocks were brought in and each flock divided into halves. One- half wa- turned into one common flock and given a drive of 17 miles on the highway. Upon returning from the drive in the late afternoon, they were sorted out and turned back to their resnective flocks. The rams were then turned in with the respective flocks. Below is a list, by group and number, of tne sheep that were t:ken on the 17 mile drive. \ ao oe Sheep taken on 17 mile drive August 14, 1920. oup III Group IV Group [I SPOUR II Stee ous NO. ° 97 0 39 74 100 7 56 61 92 9 16 57 107 4 39 82 93 * 40 70 84 : 2 68 LO9 * = 72 102 0 41 63 LO5 iB 76 110 3 " : “3 53 75 90 8 1 55 50 The reason for taking one-half of each flock on a long drive before turning the rams with them was to test the theory existing for many years among Tennessee sheepmen, that if ewes are given a long drive before the ram is turned withthem they will breed much earlier. The theory is that a long drive has the same effect on the ewes as flushing. Fig. 1. Ewes used in experiment work. Picture taken August 6, 1921. Fig. 2. Ewes used in experiment work. Picture taken August 6, 1921. -—~S a ° ( Breeds Used in Top Crossing The groups were headed by rams of four breeds, Group I, headed by a Southdown ram; Group II, headed by a Shropsnire ram; Group III, headed by a Hampshire ram; and Group IV, hei.ded by an Oxford Down Tare These brecds were selected for three reasons: (1) They represent those commonly used in spring lamb production in Tennessee; (2) there is a gradation in size from the Southdown to the Oxford Down; (3) and they were all of the black-faced brecds. Each ram used was strong, vigorous, and thoroughly typical of the breed. On August 13, the Southdown ram was described as 140 pounds in weight, three vears of age, and in good condition; the Shropshire ram 149 pounds in weight, one year old, and in good condition; the Hampshire ram 168 pounds in weight, one year old and in thin condition. On October 28, the Shropshire ram died from an unknown cause, and immediately a two-year-old prize winning ram was purchasec from a reputable breeder to take his place. Handling of the Flock During the Fall and Winter Bach flock was kept in a separate enclosure, the fences of which had been carefully examined to see that there were no ovenings where sheep of one flock could get through and become mixed with anotner flock. Bach flock was changed to a different pasture every two weeks during the breeding season, usually toa fresh pasture. Where this could not be done, the flocks were rotated on their respective pastures. This was done in order that the conditions for the various flocks should be as nearly alike as possible. On October 15 all rams were taxen away from their flocks for five days, and on October 21 the Hampshire ram was put with the flock that had been headed by the Southdown ram. On October 28 -6- the Shronshire ram referred to above was purchased and nut with the flock which had been headed by the Oxford ram. The Oxford ram was in the barn from October 14 to wovemnber 7 on account of foot-rot, and was than put with the flock that had been headcad by the Shropshire ram. the Southdown ram had also exnerienced the same difficulty, and was not put with the flock that had been headed by the iLampshire ram until wovember 10. All rams continued with the flocks as above outlined until December 15. The reason for the chanje of rams was that there is always a possibility of a ram being sterile, and the change of r ms to the various flocks doubled the chances of each flock of ewes being safely bred. The weights of the fleeces of wool of the above rains on May 19, 1921, were as follows: Southdown ram, 8 pounds Shropshire ram, 12 pounds Hamoshire ram, ll vcounds The Oxford ram died during the winter, havin; been injured in fighting with the Hampshire ram. After the rams were removed from the flocks on December 15, all flocks were turned into one common flock and grazed throughout the winter months on crimson clover rye. Qurikngxkhaxninkarxx They were in the barn only two days during the winter, and were fed hay and grain for only four feedings. During, the spring months, the ewes lambed on crimson clover and rye fields and on crimson and red clover Fields, and were continued on pasture of this character until the lambs were sold. The lambs or ewes were not given grain except for the four fe:ds mentioned. The flocks 7 3 during the bre:ding Season were salted and counted twice each week, as was the common flock throughout the winter :ronths. They had access to water at all times. vescriptions of Ewes. Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4 give weights and descriptions of individual ewes of each group as taken on August 13, 1920; and &@ column is added which gives weishts of each fleece on May 19, 1921. The ages as siven for the older ewes were estimated accordin; to the appearance of the teeth. They are not exact for the older ages, but it was noted that when 6wes were culled because of »roken months on May 27 and July 1, 1921, in each instance they had been rated inthe fall a: beings of seven or eisht ye:irs of ase. a SS —_—_———_—_—_—_— Qn Table I. 4 Teilghts and descripticns of fwes of Group I. “Neighed A. MW. August 12, 1920 "Ite No. Age Condition “eight Description fleece Color uose Tail Remarks Way 19, 1921 1 6 Thin 89 Black wee eee eee 2 4 Thin 117 White wee Seen 6 3 4 Thin 101 White Long Label lf. ear Bare pelly. Dead 4 7 Very thin 87 Black Mottled jaw ---- Bare belly 5 5 6 Good 99 Brown Miottled 6 ine ---------- 4 6 8 Fair 105 Brown ---- Bare belly 6 7 5 Fair 99 “hite Long Bare belly 6 8 4 Thin 97 Mottled e--- 00 ---------- Dead 9 7 Thin 101 Grey wees ae eee 5 Mottled LO 5 Good 96 Light ---- Label on ton 2 Yellow Bare belly may be bred. 11 4 Thin 86 “hite ea R em we ee eee eee 6 12 6 Thin 97 Black-~ -~--- One side udder o Grey spoiled. Bare 13 5 Fair 107 Light ---- Bare belly 5 Yellow 14 6 Thin 91 White Long Bare belly & legsDead 15 6 Fair 89 Black head wee meee nee Dead 16 2 Fair 94 White eae Ne. bell 8 17 1 Good 125 Black Leng Hampshire 8 18 5 Good 107. Black wane eee ene 55 19 4 Good 91 “hite ---- #Bare belly De:d 20 4 Very good 107 Black ---- Bare belly 6 Mottled 21 3 Good 104 Black --- 3Bare belly 6 Mottled jaw | 22 5 Good 124 Very black 5 in. {Bare belly 6 23 4 Extra good 127 Mottled ---- Bare belly 6 24 6 Fair 1635 Light Long Bare belly 3 Yellow 25 5 Thin 108 All black Seine Longs legged 5 26 4 Good 118 Brown -Leng Bare belly 6 27 7 Fair 110 Yellow Long May be bred 4 28 4 Good 107 Dark brown ---- Left ear cronned 5 — om ~—- = - —_— — -- — eee 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 40 41 42 435 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 o4 05 06 > C2 @ I QOOANNMD WO WN FP DO PW ND OF F ODO A KF HW I oD * bh OY PAAR ~9- Yelghts and descriptions of swes Condition “Weight Color Fair Fair Good Thin Fair Good Good Fair Good Thin Fair Good Extra Good Good Fair Good Good Fair Very thin Good Good Good Good Good Fair Good Good good of Group II. Neighed A. M. Ausust 13, 1920 "tL. of Tail Remarks fleece May 19 _ 1921 116 Black ---- Bare belly 5 liz White ---- Vay be bred 4 87 White ---- Bare belly 5 93 Mottled--- ----~-~.-- 5+ 108 “hite Long --------- 6 90 Gray Long Bare belly 5 116 Brown- Gray —--= 0 wwe een ee Deud 87 Gray “= Bave-beidy Dead brown 92 MottledLong ----~------ 5 77 White ----—- Lame lf. hind 5 foot 108 Brown Long + Oxford Dead 133 Black ---- + Oxford; new 7 bell 123 Black ---- Bare belly 5 98 Black Lons Bare bally 5) 101 “hite ---- { Bare belly, 4 Bell 93 MottledLong i Bare belly 4, gray 98 Brown ---- 4 Southdown 3 113 Black ---- +s Oxford 6 88 Brown ---- Cropped lf. & 5 label lf. 92 “Nhite Long Bare belly, label on top;V notch 6 both exurs 123 Black ---- #4 Oxford 6 LO5 White Long Bare belly 6 101 Brown Long May be bred 7 lil White ---- ---------- 3 95 White 5 in. Bare belly 5 90 Black ----- Short cron lf. 4 ear 90 “hite, 6 in. $ Bare belly 5 little ' yellow _100 White ---- Bare belly 5 2840 + be _- —_—_ —_—_— = ——. _—_—— _- _ —— —_— —_ _ = -_-_- — -10- Table 5 A Weights and Descriptions of Ewes of Group III. Weighed P. M. August 13, 1920 Wte of “L Noe Age Condition Weight Color Tail Remarks fleece May 19, __ 1921 57 1 Good 102 Black Long 5 Hampshire 6 08 2 Fair 103 All blacke--- ---------- 8 59 5 Good 109 Darkbrown Long Bare belly 4 60 5 Good 107 Brown ---- Bare belly 4 61 5 Thin 70 “hite ---- Bare belly 5 62 4 Fair 105 Black 6 ine e«-----~--- 7 63 5 Fair 93 Nhite ---- Bare Belly 2 64 8 Fair 93 Vhite, ---- Bare belly 4 little yellow 65 4 Good 155 Darkbrown ---- New bell Dead 66 5 Gocd 98 "hite --- Very bare belly 2 67 2 Good 93 Black ---- Bare belly 4 68 6 Good 121 Black --- < Hampshire 5 69 2 Thin 99 White ~--- Long wool 5 70 5 Good 136 Mottled ---- ----+----- 45 71 5 Very Good 101 White --- Bare belly;dif=- 4 ficult breathing 72 6 Thin 113 Dark- Geine s--------- Dead mottled 73 8 Fair 108 Mottled- 7 in. Broken mouth, 5 gray " geours 74 5 Good 110 ‘Yhite 4 in. Bare bélly, label lf. 6 75 5 Fair 98 White eee mene en 8 76 4 Fair 96 Dark-brown --- = Bare belly Lost 77 6 Fair 108 Brown mem ee ee eee ene 6 78 4 Fair 81 Yellow- ---- + Bare belly 4 brown 79 5 Fair 88 White ---- Label on top 34 80 6 Fair 54 White ---- Bare belly 4 81 4 Good 106 Black face --- }#£.Bare-belly 4 gray cheeks 82 6 Good 104 White meee eee eee nee 4 83 4 Fair 90 White ii Dead 2721# average 101# Table 4 87 88 89 90 91 92 935 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 LO1 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 1LO9 110 Age two re Aa pb no W on aa o1 “N Go ol Yo ee Oe O1 00 Ono oO tw -lle- Teights and Descriptions of Ewes of Group IV. 12 “eizghed P. MVM. Auzgust 13, 1920 Condition Good Thin Fair Fair Good Very Fair Good Fair Thin Fair Fair Very Very Good Fair Good Fair Good Thin Fair Good Good Thin Good Good Good z00d sood g30od WYeight Color 102 126 77 Lie 95 132 78 106 85 90 98 90 100 61 126 108 LOZ 98 110 77 85 121 102 82 87 835 112 Black Black White White Black Brown Tail Remarks. "te of fleece Long White face yellow svots Black Brown Black White "hite White Gray- black Brown Mottled MNottled Gray Black White White Black, 6 ine gray cheeks Yellow light, May 19, 1921 -~---.-- Z ‘Oxford;. bare 5 pelly ;newbell Bare belly 5 6 8 abel on top; bare Label on top; triple split rt. ears;both cropped + Southdown; 5 bare wee eee 3 wane 6. axe =e om we =e oe a0 ms a oe 5s nes 7 Very bare shoul- Dead ders,neck & belly Label on lf.ear 7 Cropped rt.car; 4 bare belly;label lf. ear Bare belly 6 Southdown 4 ¢ bare belly 4 = Bare nelly 8 4 a HRC| Lbel on top; bare;both cropped; double slit rt.e:ur wane ee 8 Label on top 6 Bare belly 5 wee ----- 5 Long.Mother of lamb 7 one Wk. Bell Dead Long mouse color Yhite Brown Vottled 26434 averaze 98-" + Bare; label top;ears badly 3 slit. Bare belly LN -12- In order to test the fairness of the division of the flock into the four smaller flocks, Table 5 has been prepared, being a summary of Tables l, 2, 3 and 4. Of the 110 ewes purchased and used in the experiment, there were, according to age, 6 yearlins, 14 two-vear-olds, 12 three- year-olds, 27 four-veur-olds, 23 fivcevezr-olds, 16 six-vyear- olds, 6 seven=""ear-olds, and 6 eight-vezir-olds. AVe age YPs e 4.89 AVe Age Yrse 3296 AVe Age Yrse 4.62 AVe Age Yrs e 3092 a Oe e (3103.07 ; 3 $ : AVe g ¢ "Ne : 3 LbS e: 3101.42 ; $ ° 3 AV e $ : Wte : $ LDS eo: 3 ° 2100.77 ; AV e : Lbs. : 97.88 ° 8 Table S=<-Summeary of Description of Hves e ee oe ee oe : Black :Brown :Mottled; Faces :Facess: |aces ~13— Group I Group 12 Group 12 Group 10 Faces: Til eo 12 oe ll; 12 14 ee ee ee ee ee oe ee a \S It will be noted that there was little variation in the avera;ze ase of each sroup; also but little variation in each one of the other resnective descriptions of the ewes of the different ZrounsS e The average age of Group I was 4.89 years; of Group II 3.96 years; of Groun III, 4.62 years; of Groun V, 3.92 years, and the average weights were as follows: Group I, 100.07 lbs; Group II, 101.42 lbs; Group III, 100.77 lbs, and Group V, 97.88 lbs. Other characteristics of each group were equally well balanced. I {5 Considering the fact that 20 of the 110 ewes were classed as "thin" on August 13 and also that 7 died of iiemorrhagic Septicaemia during January, February, and karch, the losses were not unusual. The number lost out of each group was as follows: Group I, 5 ewes; Group II, 3 ewes; Group III, 4 ewes; and Groun V, 3 ewes. Of the ewes lost, one was classed in the fall as a vesrling, 2 were classed as threc-yvear-olds, 7 as four-year-olds, and 4 as six-vyear- olds; or 16.65 ner cent of tne yearlings, none of the two- vear-olds, 16.65 per cent of the thre--:'cir-otds, 25.9 ner cent of the four- yearjolds, 43.6 percent of the six-year-olds, and none cf the five- seven= and eizht-vear-olds. twenty-five percent of those classed as thin in the fall died; 19.5 per cent of those classes: s fair, and but 5.6 per cent of those classed as in good conditione -16- a i Management of Ewes and Lambs During Lampins Season The ewes began to lamb January 21 on onen fields of crimson clover and rye, and red clover and crimson clover. The flocks were under observation three or four times cach day so that ewes could be assisted in case of difficult lambing. NO such assistance was required with any of the ewes. In most cases, first weights of the liombs were tasnen at 12 hours of age or less. The lambs of one ewe were weished at 48 hours. wach lamb was given a metal ear tag at time of weighin:s. All lambs were docked and male lambs were castrated’ at one to two weeks of AlGe Tables 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 give data as to the ewes that lambed, with a descrinvtion of each and the sex and birth weight Of each lamb. ~17- Table 7-=Data on birth of lumbs--Group I Eves Noe of Condition _f@ Tail or “hite Date of No. of Sex of Birth ewes sent oi ewes in of no tail or lambing lambs lambs weights on drive August ewe colored face Lbs. 1 Thin 6 —— C Apre 13 1 E 10.0 2 Thin 4 ~-— VW Feb. 7 1 R 12.0 5 Good 6 —— C Feb. l 1 R 725 6 Fair 8 _— C Apre 8 ( BE 9.0 a E 9.0 8 Thin 4 == C -— ——Twe died (= 11.0 10 Good 5 -— W Apre 7 2 (E 10.0 15 Kair 6 —— C Fede 2 1 v 9.0 16 Fair 2 -— wT Apre 13 1 BE 10.20 19 Good 4 -—— Vv ~—- -=hwe died (E 11.0 20 Good 4 -— C Apre 23 2 (E 12.0 22 Good 5 Tail C Apre 13 1 E 13.0 (E 9.5 23 Good 4 -— C Fed. 7 2 (R 8.5 24 Fair 6 Tail w Apre 20 1 R 12.0 27 Fair 7 Tail "e Apr.e 8 1 E 11.0 Ewes not driven 3 Thin 4 Vail W _- = - --Eve died 4 Thin 7 — C —_— = - =--}30 lamb 7 Fair 5 Tail © Apre 13 1 R 12.0 9 Thin 7 -- C Apre 12 1 R. 12.0 (R 725 ll Thin 4 _ W Feb. 13 2 (R. 7.0 (E 9.0 13 Fair 5 -- W Apre 13 2 (R 8.0 14 Thin 6 Tail W —— - --Ewe died (E 11.0 17 Good 1 Tail C Feb. 13 2 (E 11.0 (E 7.0 18 Good 5 -— C Febe l 2 (E 6.0 (E 12.0 21 Good 3 — C Apre 20 2 (E 11.0 (R 8.5 25 Thin 5 Tail C Jane 31 2 (E 70 26 Good 4 Tail C Apre 8 1 R 10.0 28 Good 4 —o C APY e 12 1 E 12.0 -18= Table 8-—-Data on birth of lambs=——Group II Ewes NOe of Condition Age Tail or White Date of Noe of Sex of Birth ewes sent of eves in of no tail or lambing lambs’ lanbs weight s on drive August eve co lored face Lbs. 29 Fair 4 woe C Febe 3 1 R 12 | Good 6 —_ VW Mare 7 1 R 10 33 Fair 5 Tail - Feb. 27 1 R 11 35 Good 3 - Cc me men - Ewe died 36 Fair 6 -_— C — om ~ Ewe died 39 Fair e Taka C. —— ~ Ewe died | (E 9 40 Good 4 - Cc May 19 2 (R 8 (R 9 41 Good 2 -— C Mare 12 2 (E 9 46 Good 3 -— C — so - No lamb (E ll 49 Good 3 —_ C Apre & 3 (R 8 (R 8 50 Good 4 Tail -~ Febe 22 1 E 10 (R 725 51 Good 4 Tail C Apre 27 2 (E 7 (E 8 52 Good 4 — - Febe 235 2 (R 8 53 Good 1 Tail - Feb. 16 1 E 11 (E 11 55_ Good 4 Tail - Mar. 7 2 (E 9 Ewes not driven 30 Fair 4 — - Mare 7 1 R 10 (R 725 32 Thin 7 Tail C Feb. 21 2 (E 725 3A Good 4 Tail - Febe 16 1 E 10 37 Good 1 Tail C Mare 15 1 E 9 38 Thin 8 — - Mar. 12 1 R 7 42 Good 4 Tail C — - No lamb 43 Good 2 ~— - Mare 12 1 R li 44 Fair 2 Tail C Mar. 8 1 R 12 45 Good 2 — C Feb. 25 1 R ll 47 Fair 6 —_ C Feb. 12 1 E 8 48 Thin 7 Tail ~ Mar. 7 1 E 8 54 Fair 6 _ C — mo - No lamb 56 Good 3 ~_— - Mare 7 1 E 10 Table 9=—-Data on birth of lambs-~Group III Ewes No of Condition Age Tailor White Date of Noe of Sex ot Birth eves sent of ewes in of no tail or lambing lambs lambs weights on drive Augiwt ewe colored face Lbs. (R 75 57 Good 1 Tail C May 15 2 (Ez 75 61 Thin 5 —_ W Febe 7 1 R ll 63 Fair 5 — - Keb. 17 1 E 11.5 68 Good 6 — C Feb. 7 1 R 12 69 Thin 2 - = May 12 1 E ll (E 10 70 Good 5 -- Cc Febe 24 2 (R 10 72 Thin 6 Tabs C oe ee - Ewe diei 74 Good 5 Tail - Febe 17 1 E 10.5 75 Fair 5 —_— - gan. 30 1 R 12 (E 9 76 Fair 4 —_ C Mare 5 2 (E 9 (R 75D 77 Fair 6 —_— Cc Feb. 16 2 (R 705 78 Fair 4 —— C Apre 27 1 R 10.5 (E 35 82 Good 6 -- - Febe 1 2 (R 6.0 Ewes not driven (E 8.0 58 Fair 2 -— C Febe 20 2 (R 75 (E 7.0 59 Good 5 Tail C Febe 11 2 (E 8.0 62 Fair 4 Tail C Febe 16 1 E 11.0 64 Fair 8 = - Mare 16 1 R 9.0 65 Good 4 =o Cc —— wae ~ Ewe died 66 Good 5 —— = Feb. 28 1 R 10.0 67 Good 2 — C Febe 5 1 E 12.0 71 Good 5 —— ~ kebe 9 1 E 10.0 (E 12.0 73 Fair 8 vail C Febe ll 2 (R 10.0 (R 75 79 Fair 5 -< - Jane 30 2 (R 75 80 Fair 6 —_ - Febe l 1 R 9.5 (E 7D 81 Good 4 -- C Febe 3 2 (R 725 (E 8.5 83 Fair 4 —— - Feb. 5 2 (R 8.0 Table 10—=Data on birth of lambs--Group IV Ewes ‘oo No} of Condition Age fail or white Date of No. of Sexof Birth ewes sent of ewes in of no tail or lambing lambs lambs weights on drive August ewe colored face Lbd8se 84 Good 8 -< C —— — -- NO lab 85 Thin 7 —_ C a —— -—- No lamb 80 Fair 2 —_— W Fety 18 1 R 12.0 (R 8.0 91 Good 4 — C Mar. 9 2 (R 9.0 (R 8.0 92 Fair 3 — C Feb. 21 (R 725 (R 11.0 93 Thin 5 Tail C Mare 12 2 (R 11.0 97 Good 5 = C Jane 2) 1 R 12.5 100 Good 2 Tail Cc Febe 8 #=z£il E 12.0 102 Good - 2 one C Feb. 6 1 R 12.0 (E 8.0 107 Thin 4 Tail - —_— — ~-- Ewe died 109 Good 2 —_ Cc Ma y 6 1 R 9.0 110 Good 2 == C —— mance - ~= Ewe died Ewes not . driven 86 rair 5 -— ~- rebe 19 1 R 10.0 (E 7.0 87 Fair 4 Tail - Apre 13 2 (R 720 88 Good 5 -— C Mar. 9 1 R 12.0 (R 10.0 89 Good 3 ~= C Mare 9 2 (R 10.0 94 Fair 3 —_— - —— - =m Eve died (R 92 95 Fair 1 Tail - Feb. 14 2 (E 9.0 96 Good 2 “= - —en cmevenen - -<- No lamb 99 Fair 6 — C Feb. 19 1 R 11.0 101 Fair 8 — - Apr e 13 1 R 12.0 103 Thin 5 == ~ Mar. l 1 E 10.0 104 Fair 1 —= - ¥Kebe 17 1 R 10.0 106 Good 3 Tats - Apre 20 1 R 720 108 Good 5 -= - FeDe 22 1 E 12.0 me ee — — reo ean GD Sem = — Twelve of the ewes died before lambing; time. mneven of the ewes that lived through falled to lamb. The whole tlock of eves dropped 127 lambs, or en average for the fiock of 1.16 lambs. The average for the ewes that lambed was 1.4 laths. Effect of Age upon Production At the time of taking descrirntions of the ewes, in August, 1920, an estimate was made of the aze of each ewe. Fairly accurate estimates could be rade for the youn,er ages, but the older ages are merelv by the condition cf the ttéeth. ihe followin; tale gives the result by ages of the production of the ewes¢ 0) Table 11--Summary of Birth Data by Ages of wes, \ IN Ages NOe NOe Of Ave weizht Per cent AVe WOe Of VYSe of ewes lambs of labs of ewes lamcss ner lambing dropped at birth having ewe of twins each are 1 6 9 9249 -= == 2 12 14 l1.11 14.635 1.16 5 8 13 9.22 550d 1.62 4 ol 33 9.135 57 el 1.57 5 ZO 32 9.84 42.5 1.39 6 12 14 9.00 16.6 1.16 7 4 5 9.20 “--- ---- 8 5 7 9.57 ---- ---- Total 91 127 AVGPaSe? 39.5 1.59 oY we 2 we oO It is evident from the data shown in Table 1l that a ewe reaches her maximum production at the ace of fcur years, after which there s ems to be a steady decline. The per cent of ewes having twins ét three ye rs of age was 55.5, and of those at four yeurs 57.1. The averaze number of lambs per ewe at three ye: rs of age was 1,62, at four years 1.57, und at five yeers 1.39. The number of eves of three years of age having lambs is a little too small to justify definite conclusicns. There seems, however, to be a decline in the per cent of ewes having twins after the fourth year. Of all the ewes lambing, 39.5 per cent had twins, and the average number of lambs per eve for the 91 ewes that lambed was 1,39. Effect of Tipe of Ewe upon Lamb Production For a number of yesrs there has been « prevalent opinion among lamb raisers of Middle Tennessee that the cornmon white=faced ewes that show but little breeding are better for lamb production then ewes showing sore blood of the dark-faced brecds. Since in this exneriment there was nezrly an equal distribution of white-faced ewes in euch flock, there has >een an excellent opportunity for studying the difference between these two types of ewes on lamb production. Table 12 shows the apparent effect of tyne of ewe upon lamb pro- duction in this experiment. “Shite faced ewes in this experiment were mostlv common Alabama ewes. Dark faced ewes were those of improved breeding. 24m Table l2g--Effect of type of ewe on lamb production. Jescription lo. of Av. iio. Av. date NO. ewes Av. Wt. Ave. wt. Av. daily 1f ewes ewes of lambs of lambing raising of lambs of lambs gain of lambins dropped lambs to marketed marketed lambs market per ewe per ewe raising lambing. lambs. Lbs. Lbs. Vhite faces 41 1.24 March 5 31 82.9 6267 082 50 1.52 March 8 48 99.1 95.2 079 Jark faces -25- 23 The white-faced ewes dropped an averase of 1.24 lambs e ch, and the dark=-faced ewes an everesge of 1.52 lambs each. The average d te of lambins of the «white-faced ewes was March 5, and of the durk-faced ewes larch 8. The white-faced ewes did not pvrove as good mothers as the dirk-faced ewes. They raised fewer of their lambs to market age, and breught them to marnhet time at a -.ess averase weight. The averaze weight of Jambs marketed per ewe raisin; lambs of the white faces 82.9 pounds, and of the dark faces 99.1 vounds. If we con- Sider all the white-faced ewes that lambed as against all the dirk- faced ewes that lambed, the average weight of lambs marketed per ewe of the white faces that lambed was 62.7 pounds, and of the dork faces 95.2 pounds. The average daily gain of lambs of the white face ewes was .82 nounds, and of lambs of the dark faced ewes .79 po ind. This apparent discrepancy was due to the fact that the white faced ewes raised more single limbs than the derk-f-ced ewes. The white-fuced ewcs produced nine pairs of twins hut raised only three unbroken pairs. The dark-faced ewes produced 24 pairs of twins and raised 19 unbroken pairs. Only 75.8 per cent of the white-faced ewes lambing raised one or more of their lambs to market age, against 95.9 per cent of the d:rk-faczd ewes. Effect of Condition of Ewe on Lamb Production At the time of the bezinnigg of the exneriment, in Auzust, 1920, each ewe was described, with rcference to the conditicn of flesh at that time, az thin, fair, or good. In this resnect the four groups were about equally divided, as reference to Table 12 will show. It has been asserted by many lamb brecders that ewes thin in condition would larb earlier and produce more lambs than those in 3ood conditicn. Table 13 will show the effect of tne condition of the ewes in this experiment on lamb nroducticn. 23 Table 13--Effect of condition of ewe on 1liutrb production. Condition Total Ave Now Ave. date iioe Of Ave wt. Ave Whe Av. daily of ewe Noe Of of lambs of , ewes of lamb* of lambs gain of ewes per ewe lambing raising marketed marketed each lambing dropped lamb to per ewe per ewe lamb market raising lambing lambs Thin 13 1.31 Mareh 10 12 °[.8 84.6 76 Fair 32 1.354 March 4 24 97.9 7505 81 Good 46 4245 Karch 7 43 92.7 86.7 «80 *"Lamb" refers to total weight of lambs per ewe in each case. -~28—{ 74 There were 13 ewes classed as thin, 52 as fair, and 46 as =00de The ewes in thin condition dropned an averase of 1.81 lambs, those that sere fair in conditicn, 1.34, and those that .ere good, 1.45. The averase date of lambing was practically the same for each group, with the odds in favor of the ewes that were fiir to good in condition. The averase weight of lamb marketed per ewe for those producing and raising lambs was, for the thin ewes, 91.8 nounds, for the fair ewes 97.9 pounds, and for the gocd ewes 92.7 pounds. she averacse daily gains were gre.ter for the lambs produced from ewes in fair to good condition in the fall. The most significant fact vrought out by the table is that ‘the ewes that were in fair to so00d condition dropped a larser percent.se of twins than those that were thin. Effect off Lamb Production of Driving Ewes In the earlier history of early spring lamb production by farmers in Middle Tennessee, it w.s the custon to purchase common ewes in the state lyinz south, or from the Cumberland Plateau in Tennessee, during the month of July or ths forepart of August, and then drive them through the country to the farm destination where they were ot be xept during the winter months. After these long drives, the ewes were turned onto the fresh pasture that hed been preserved for them by the new owner and the ram turned with the eW2Se It was observed that these ewes lambed earlier than the ewes thet had becn kept thrcughout the vear in the same locality. uence, the thpory arose th. t if ewes were driven for some distance on the road or about the pasture field before the rams .ere turned in at the breeding season most of the ewes would immediately Some into season, .nd the birth date of the lambs would be bunched at the -29— earliest possible date after the ram was turned with the flock. In order to test the accuracy of this theory, each groun of ewés was divided into two equal flocks on August 14, 1920, 2nd one e:.ch of the flocis was turned into a gene:al flock «nd driven on the public hizhway for a distance of seventeen milcs. “ne drive consumed most of the dav. On pase 3 is givena list of the ewes of each froup that were sent onthe drive. “Table 14 will show the apparent lack of effedt of driving upon the date of lambing. 5) Table —s <4 O e -30- “) 14--Results on lamb production of driving ewes. NOe OF ewes Av. date of Av. Wo. of Ewes driven 56 lambing lambin; lambs per ewe lambin: 44 Mare 13 1.45 - AT Mare 3 1.04 Ewes not £54 —’ driven For the 56 ewes that secre driven the average dete of lambing was March 13, for the 54 ewes not driven the average date of lambing was farch Se The ewes not driven lambed, on &he avera,;e, ten davs earlier than the ewes that were driven. The average number of lambs dropped per ewe wa:; in favor of the ewes that were driven, heing 1.45 lambs. For the ewes not driven the avera3 Was 1,34 Lamose In this one year's trial there is not mich to vrove the accur cy of the theory that long drives will cause ewes to breed at an earlier date. Sych difference as does exist is in favor of the ewes not driven. Production of Ewes of Each Groun that Produced Lambs that were Marketed. Complete data we:e kent on each livin: lam. Data were also kept on all ewes throughout the yer. ine following table will Show the production of ewes of each group: 7) roup ee ED Il III 02 Table 15-=Production of ewes of each group that produced lambs that were m.oriceted, NO. of NOe ewes Ave Wte Av. Sain iNOe ‘Ve ewes dend at of liv- of living lamos birth living market ins; eves ewes born wt.of at mar- time that June,1921 lambs het tine marxzxeted that had lazmbs NOs. OF lambs mar= keted Loeof total «wt. lambs of lambs per marketed ewe per ewe Lbs. marketed lambs OLS. Lbse 19 1 125.5 Leek oe 9.58 ol 0 120.8 20.8 28 9.36 21 2 12335 coel 37 9432 _14 | 1 122.0 24.6 50 9.72 75 4 Pp - a ee -—- 26 32 19 —_———eneeee 1.590 8845 1.19 B80ee 1.59 112.0 1.56 94.0 LO2 Most of the ewes made from 20 to 25 pounds gain during: the year from August 14, 1920, to May 27, 1921. The averae cain made by each group of ewes was practically the same, The averaze birth weight of Southdecwn lambs was 9.58 pcunds, of Shropshire lambs, 9.72. The averasze numoer of lambs dronned per ewe was practicsally the same for escn Groupe "hen most of the lamos were rc..dy for market, the washviile Stoci: Yards Compnan;, of Nashville, te nessee, were requested to send some one to the Exvneriment Station to grade the lambs. They kindly sent Kr. G. L. “atkins, who has had many years' experience in buying lambs on Louisville, Chicuyo and Nashville MEriGtS.e the lambs were gro.ded in three marset classes, fancy select, medium, and [00d-e host of the lamos were mar.eted May 27. A few of the smaller ones marxnetcd on July l. Table 16 gives data of all lambs marketede Fig. 4. Shropshire Lambs. 1920-21, ~34— Table 16=—Dat:: on lambs sold May 27, 1921 Group I (Southdown ) LN Lamb Ewe ‘MTwin Birth Dade Days Wteof Wt. of Gain AVe Ewe or NOe NOe or Wt e of old lamb ewe of daily wet her | single Lbs. birth Lbs. ay 26 ewe gain lamb LbdS e Aug el4 of to lamb May 26 37 1l Twin 7 Feb. 13 102 75 112 26 073 wetler 19 2 Single 12 " 7 108 87 151 34 280 ‘ether 6 17 ‘twin 11 " 13 102 681 163 38 079 Ewe 36 11 ‘win ? " 13 #102 78 112 26 076 wether 63 18 Twin 7 " 1 #114 78 137 30 068 Ewe 5 17 Twin 11 " 13 102 680 163 38 o79 Ewe 64 5 Single ey " 1 4114 76 128 29 066 Weths r 71 15 Single 9 " 2 113 70 dead — °61 Wet her 62 18 ‘Twin 6 " 1 #114 80 137 30 o70 Ewe 11 23 Twin 92 " 7 108 76 155 28 270 Eve 12 23 Twin 65 " 7 108 #77 155 28 e771 Wetler 66 25 ‘Twin 6 Jane 31 115 73 #409117 9 063 Wether Group II (Shropshire) 34 48 Single 8 Mar. 7 80 77 127 35 093 Eve 25 52 3=Twin 8 " 23 92 67 112 1 V2 Wether 80 43 Single 11 " 12 75° 45 115 14 060 wet her 17 53 Single 11 " 16 99 80 134 39 080 Ewe 74 37 Single 9 " 15 72 55 110 18 o76 Ewe 42 47 Single 8 " 12 105 84 117 29 083 Ewe 45 50 Single 10 n" 22 95 79 134 29 085 Eve 24 52 Twin 8 " 23 92 69 112 1 75 Ewe 81 41 ‘Twin 9 " 12 75 62 155 32 082 Ewe 33 56 Single 10 rr 80 78 125 25 097 Ewe 38 34 Single 10 " 16 99 80 110 20 080 Ewe 7 32 ‘Twin "e " 22 94 56 113 20 055 Wether 8 32 Twin - " 21 94 653 113 20 053 Ewe 75 44 Single 12 " 8 71 #77 #42»:122 29 1.08 Wet her 48 33 Single 11 " 27 90 83 142 34 092 wether 39 29 Single 8 " 3 4112 85 127 11 076 Wet her 83 31 Single 10 a 80 63 92 5 078 wether 72 30 Single 10 "49 80 73 118 6 091 wet her 53 45 Single 11 " 25 90 82 114 16 91 Vet her 30 55 ‘Twin 9 nO 80 66 97 7 082 Wather 31 55 Twin 11 n 7 80 67 97 7 083 Ewe Gro IIT ampshire 14 58 fwin 8 Feb. 20 93 76 121 18 081 Ewe 49 61 Single 11 " 7% 108 90 61 11 083 Wetler 40 74 Single 10% " 17 #98 87 137 27 280 Ewe 70 67 Single 12 " 5 110 100 120 27 090: Ewe 3 60 Single 7% " 18 97 #77 145 38 079 Ewe 43 71 Single 10 " 9 106 102 123 15 096 Ewe 60 81 Twin ty " 3 112 85 126 20 075 Ewe 28 76 Twin 9 "5 82 50 54 Eve 29 76°) Twin 9 " 5 82 57 062 Ewe 26 77 Twin 7S " 16 99 80 145 37 °80 Wether 47 63 Single 114 " 17 98 95 108 15 095 Ewe (continued on next page) “e s 4 Data on lambs sold May 27, 1921 (continued) Lamb Ewe fwin Birth Date Days Wee of Wt. of Gain AVe Ewe or NO. NOe or wte of old lamb ewe of daily wet r single Lbse birth Ae May 26 ewe gal n lamb Lbs. Aw ol4 of to Lamb May 26 41 62 Single 11 Feb. 16 99 #96 138 33 096 Ewe 59 81 twin 7% " 3 #112 2101 126 20 090 wether 13 58 Twin 7 " 20 95 82 121 18 8&6 wet her 2 59 #8 Twin 7 " 11 #104 ~ 55 137 28 052 Ewe 23 70 Twin 10 n 24 91 738 168 32 280 Ewe 55 75 Single 12 Jane 30 116 94 97 1 8] Wether 27 77° «Twin re Feb. 16 99 80 #145 37 80 wet her 68 59% Twin Jeane 30 116 #85 112 24 ofS wether 73 64 Single 9 Mare 16 71 #58 94 1 82 Wether 22 70 ‘Twin 10 Feb. 24 91 #4«78 168 32 085 Wether 65 60 Single % " 1 #114 94 77 23 082 Wether 52 66 Single 10 " 26 88 #£=84 116 18 095 Yeth er 56 63 Twin ae " § 110 73 dead — 066 Ewe 57 83 Twin 8 " 5 110 468 dead — 061 Wet he r 1 59 Twin 8 " 11 #100 = 83 137 28 083 Ewe 46 68 Single 12 " 7 #108 £=99 157 36 a | Wether 51 73 Twin 11 e 11 #100 77 134 26 o?7 Ewe 50 75 Twin 10 " 11 #100 -= 87 134 26 87 Wether *This ewe, NO. 76, is a wild ewe, and was not found with the flock at the time of the collection of the above data on the lambs. the sheep were shorn May 19. % One of the twins of this ewe was killed by a mule Feb. 4. 58 21 4A 15 35 78 4 20 18 76 54 9 61 V7 79 10 97 90 108 92 98 93 102 100 68 89 103 91 99 89 93 91 Single Sin gle Single Twin Single Twin Single Single Single Twin Single Twin Single Twin Twin Twin 12% 12 12 8 10 11 12 12 12° 10 10 8 11 10 11 9 Jane Fede Li] i ] rf Mat e Fede Fede Mare rf? ee Fede Mare Grou ZL 125 18 97 22 8693 21 94 18 97 12 75 6 109 8 107 9 78 9 78 1 86 9 78 19 94 9 78 12 75 9 78 She was on hand at the time that Oxford Down 94 94 3O 90 106 28 85 92 5 80 112 29 78 105 21 72 122 32 86 132 22 102 143 41 73 139 44, 74 154 22 82 82 5 69 129 43 75 135 68 154 22 68 122 32 74 149 43 075 092 089 o& 070 096 78 095 093 0935 095 088 ef9 087 090 094 Wether Weth er Wether Wether Veths r Wether Wether Ewe Wether Wether Veth er Wethe r Wethe r + (Since the rams were changed with reference to groups, the ewes put in these grows md6= Table 17--Data on lambs sold July, 1921 at this time will be according to the breed of the sire of the lambs). Group I (sired by Southdown ram) Lamb Eve Twin Birth Da&e Days Vt. of Wte of Gain AVe Ewe NOe NOe or We of old lamb ewe of ewe daily or Single Lbs. tirth July 1 Augel4 gain wether LbdS8 to of lamb July 1 lamb Lbs. 111 57 Twin 9 May 15 47 53 147 45 1.13 Wet her 109 69 Single 11 May 12 #50 45 112 13 90 Ewe 112 78 Single 105 £Apre2? 65 #50 75 4 077 Wether Group II (sired by Shropshire ram) 114 109 Single 9 May 6 56 46 115 32 o82 Wether 101 $$106 Single 7 Apre20 72 51 112 10 70 rrethe r 88 49 friplet 11 n 8 84 51 147 24 60 Ewe 86 49 Triplet 8 " 8 64 56 147 24 60 vet her Group III (sired by Hampshire ram) 89 6 ‘win 9 Apre 8 8&4 66 129 24 238 Ewe 90 6 Twin 9 " 8 84 53 129 24 063 Ewe 92 28 Single 12 " 12 80 74, 112 5 092 Ewe 96 22 Single 12 n 13 #79 72 143 19 e91 Eve 93 12 Single 123 " 12 @ 68 117 20 085 Ewe 95 27 Single 11 " 8 84 66 95 15 78 Ewe 104 1 Sinzle 10 " 13 79 53 120 31 067 Ewe 94 9 Simwle 12 n" 12 8 56 115 14 70 Yet he r 115 20 Twin ll " 23 69 52 108 1 075 Ewe 110 20 Twin 10 n 8623 —COaBD 49 108 1 e71 Ewe 91 26 Single 10 " 8 84 60 151 33 o7l Wet her 85 10 Twin Ll " 87 685 57 93 3 067 Ewe 105 21 Twin ll " 20 72 60 140 36 283 Ewe Group IV (sired by Oxford ram) 117 40 Twin 8 May 19 43 34 163 30 079 Ewe 336 40 Twin 9 May 19 43 oF) 163 30 77 Ewe 102 101 Single 12 Apr 13 79 73 117 19 099 Wet her an ww Market grades of Lambs of Each Breed In grading the lamnos into three groups, fancy select, mediun, and zood, kr. “atkins made the statement tnat tne lines of de- marcation between tne groups as he has made them were very slight. It was his ontaion that the lambs in the lower srades were younger lambs and would have graded fancy select iad they been given a few ’ more days in which to mature. The grading of the lambs for each breed were according to Tavle 18. . rd Pt us Ui) Oxford Lambs. 1920-21. ~58= Table 18-ekarket grade of lambs of each breed. 4 | Group Total No. grad= Av.age io. AVe 4,@ Noe Ave ace Per cent lambs ing fancy in days grad- in days grad- in days of each sold selects fancy ing medium ing good group select medium good grading fancy __ select Southdown 26 18 LOO 4 83 4 37 69 Shropshire 25 16 89 5 86 4 67 64 Hampshire 31 20 103 6 87 5 94 64 Oxford 19 9 96 3 77 7 74 47 TOTAL: 101 63 18 20 Average: 97 84 81 a5Qm Of the 101 lambs marketed 65 graded as fancy select, 18 as medium, and 20 as good. It was noticed from the tavle that the data compiled after the lambs were marketed verifies itr. Watkins' statement regarding the age of the two lower grades. The avera;se ase of the lambs gradin;s as fancy select was 97 days, of those gradins as medium, and of those gradin; as jood or below, 81 days. The per cent of each groun gradin; as fancy select was as follows: Southdown 69, Shropshire 64, hampshire 64, and Cxford 47. -40- 13 Gains made by Lambs Marketed of Hach Breed. The influence of the breed of the sire on Sains of lambs produced from common ewes seemed to »e directly proportionate to the size of the breed of the ram used in each case, Table 19 is given to show gains made by lambs sired by rams of each of the following breeds: Southdown, Suronshire, Hamyoshire, and Oxford. vehi he =~4]— Table 19=--Gains made by lambs marxeted of each breed. Group Total Av. age No. No. - Av. Daily Av. Av. wt. Av. total lambs of each twin Single gain daily of lambs wt. of lamb larbs lambs each lamb gain each lambs days Lbs of breed per ewe lamb Lbs e per ewe Lbs. I Southdown 26 92,2 14 1l2 074 0967 68.1 89.16 Ii Shropshire 25 85.1 9 16 79 0982 67 4 85.57 IIiIHampshire 32 9744 20 12 82 1.148 78.9 111.81 IV Oxford L9 84.6 9 LO 87 1.181 7402 99.91 45 -42- The average daily gains made by the lambs sired by the names of the respective brecds were as follows: Southdown 74 pound; Shrop- shire .79 pound; Hampshire .82 pound; and Oxford .87 pound. the averase welgits of lambs of the various bre:ds at tne time of mur-~ xeting were as follows: Southdown 68.1 nounds, Shronshire lambs 67.4 pounds, Hampshire lambs 78.9 pounds, and Oxford 74.2 pounds. the Southdown and Hampshire lambs avera,,ed a few days older than the shropshire and Oxford lamos. The Southdown lambs were slightly larger than the Shropshire lamvos, and the Hampshire lamuous slightly larger than the Oxford lambs. The differences could be accounted for partly b: differences in ase. The Southdown and Hampshire lambs were practically of the ssme ase as were also.the Shropshire and Ox- ford lambs, «nd may therefore be ccmpared on that Hak&£s basis. the Harpshire lambs were 10.8 pounds larjer tnan the Southdown lambs, and the Oxford lambs Were 6.8 pounds larger than the Shropshire lambs. The percentage of lamvos of each of the first three groups, namely, Bouthdown, Shropshire, and Hampshire, that graded as fincy select were practically the same, and sold at a price of 123 cents per pound for lanbs marketed. ihe Southdown lambs averased $8.34 each, the Shropshire lambs $8.45, the Hampshire lambs 39.56. ~43 Table 20--Gains by sex of lambs marketed. Group I Southdown "II Shropshire " III Hampshire " IV Oxford Totals Total Total Total Av. daily av. daily NO. NOe Noe gain gain ewe lambs wetner ewe wetner lambs lambs lambs lambs a ——» =e Lbs. Lbse 26 Ll L5 V3 075 25 13 12 V9 079 32 14 18 82 079 19 13 6 287 88 102 51 51 Averages ,.80 AS) ~44— The average gain made by lamos in each group were prac- tically the same for the two sexes. fine average gain of all wether lambs was .80 pound, and of all ewe lambs .79 pound. Tne avera;se daily gain of all laos was .795 nound. Vy re ~~ - t 1 ~Fr ™~, . eet en q . ‘ of o™ : on 7 “4 -he nlan for the exnoritrent durin; this vear wes the . = a) v., ~ — 7 wv —~ = + vos same as Tor tbe rrovicus yoar excert erat ane more Groun wes were 60 exes with unbroken rouths and that bod Sood lambing records which viere held over from uhe proviscus vear,. These aces cf common ewes. Cn July ll there were vourckacod 23 common white-faced eves averalsing 97.5 scunds at [4.00 each and on July 15 there were purchased 76 4 « f= 3K \ . . head averacin$ 96.5 at 42075 eache On sziusust 6, 1921 the eve flock was divided into 5 flocks as rearly caual as rossible J a With vegard to blaciy, rottled, grey, buff anid white faces, with pojard to aces, and akso so divided that che eves used the nrevious voar were divided amon; the five flocus. All T Vi eves not bearing; labels were Given alurinum ear tags «nd descrirtions and weilJhts taken as of vhe rrevicus vear.e. she ewes carried over from une nrevio.s year are descrived in these notes as “old ewes", meaning that they were used the ) Ww J FEEL J orevicus Qn fusuct 8, 1921 the coscrintions, weishings, anda division into flocks hal becn completed. Uach flock was then divided and one-half cf cach wurned into a comnon flock and rere sent on a17 mile drive. They were started at 7:30 Aes fe and returned to the barn at 4 P.M, “They were then sent to their resnective flocks. iach flock was Lent ina small ve 4 - = . : . 4 of - 5 ~ cy = . . ? t . ¢ a ~~ ovat 7 : enclosure in the bern for vhe nivhtant toe pars turned f ~ Yt . 1+ tof y- : 4 7 4}. ww TANTO: Lg ’ o 1. mira, - : “na Lhe Pirst tsi.cg vith their resreetive locks. she following 7. — %, a - ‘ - e°7e tne eves thet were sent on tne cdrivoe mn ~ ™ . Group Group _ II Group III Groun IV Jrcun V how C12 Twew Old few 06 Cld New Old Novy Ci ev . een Laos > AP NOS eee © a . 9? re i wes oN ‘wd SY Cos Oy ss Gos CNSS GCNCS CONCcS ONES 5 = = ae - eee - —.» «ae = a - er

| Lt t~ 7 ° Sl writ 1/2 Vite a 166 “ocd nice 6 are Dell: 0 Le S) Fai LOS Ve 1/2 Ra | ’ 4 C7 > r 1 LEllow cad 2 2 VWroea “4D y-79 8 Los - 9 Oe > > we oNw o - . ; 4“ by { LhLyv = — - -_-c-oo ood LSss rea by . ~ 7 wat jood = 163 Slack Ver; eddy oy El om wm - * < a1 ¥ « ww oy sens bare jelly 2B - m~ Nd -— Y Jory -o- 94 moat arg oelly ve dead VOD Gor 126 6Lve 1/ A c- ee ee 20) TT 5 my dh. 3 C aw ON 5 24 Cd wey QoLly Je eS Po mw L ‘r J 7 1 ann ee, o5a r “~ a Groun 2, ~glopintion of ances lvoust 7, Leal, , ars) Loi Ff yy’ vw) PN | ANN fe hake L GS Ce to a“ ay DNapdition "7 4 1,4 MW AT Asa “Voy pa en aqglea ? _ a - ae tt Y tag's - = ooo $4 PN Oy 2.099 L71 3 cGo3d LOS waite -- A, 172 6 YVYory thin EO MA 3 Largs bellr 3 w 173 1 Thin 75 “ottled -- 53 Toe Le OY oe Tyg ? L174 7 ’ we Ulcin Tt tte +7 I go jel): 4, L75 4 ~tiin c9 ite -—- C 177 S thin 91 “ite -= 5 184 2 Palr CO | 0OWhite 3/4 care velly 3h B5 5 Fair 98 “hits 5/4 “ar3 belly m 188 7 “iin 96 I ottled -_— 8 189 L oir 74 Lapin 3pown <- 5 L176 air 94 “hits inorns L178 Fair g9 lLottled o/s sare belly oad 179 roir 95 black LEO oh rair Q9 Yoel 181 Foir 97 Thil CO Low Pare belly to Very pare peli: { NIOOMOHOAWNUE! 0D. ae IS ae OLN a | é yt 182 Folir 72 Srown -- , 3 183 Thin 104 Light Y- 1/2 Rare belly 1e6 Fain 105 Light Ve +e i. 187 Good 120 Black 1/2 Bare belly a 190 Thin 93 Yellow Pare belly x — a a2 > oe i Description of old ev 103, Same Sroupe nw é C Noe Noe Ago Condition “eitht Color Remarks wacom the 1 — 7 rair 11¢ plack _— 4. ll =. 5 Very good 124 “hite -— 7 13 == 7 Good | 125 “hite varc belly dead 49 oe 4 Good 148 Black 1/2 Pars belly 6 52 -— 5 Good L15 “n1te 3/4 Bare belly 22: 80 —«- $ Yair 76 “bite 1/2 Zare belly 4. Good 23 “Hite — Fair LLO DLACK are oolly 16 -- a 4. Very good 153 Slack v7 Bare belly 5 4 3 20 -- Or mo —_ A5 —_ Very 300d L23 Lotticda 3/4 Bare velly 67 = 100 -- Very good l21 Black Sare belly Very ood L147 Lottled Bare belly 6 He» Ol be 01M ~~ ay ont oe ——<—2 —_ —~—~- 2s 2 —w w= oe ow > a aE we ey ee et . - -— - - cr - Qo + . 1 : -~ —_ ~ ‘ - . - * . - eo. 7 - ° ree oS - _ - ~~ - . - - > oo 7 o- wo - ‘ . — Sa . ‘ a ' — q . . . -— —- ote —_— + es . . - —_— — 26 = e743 4 oun 3. secepiotion of owes August 6, 1°21. “eight of Aluminus . _ rlcece op Ase Conditicon Vetoyht Color ACMAUIS moa Sy 1952 193 4. cin 89 “hite -— a 194 8 Gocd 139 "nite Jars belly 5 195 C, Fair 1190 “Pua pars oelly 3 200 8 Good L1O “hite vars belly 5 201 8 chin C7 “hite Parc belly 3 202 5 hin L1IG Srown —-- G 204 1 Yair eg Lotuled —— O 207 2 Moin 93 Black 1/2 Bare belly 6 208 8 “hin lll ‘Yhite Very bars Lelly 4 209 5 Fair 90 ““hite Mare belly 5 191 5 Fair &9 “white Rare belly dead 192 1 Yair 95 Black —— 7 Lae A roir LOZ 1 obtle = dead 197 5 thin €3 Yellow -- 2?: 198 C reir L108 “hite 1/2 Dare belly dead 199 8 Cood 114.0 “hite 1/2 Bare dolly 6 POS 1 Mair 76 WottLsod ~ on 6 205 3 Thin 95 “hite ~— 8 206 7 Fair 103 “hite a dead £10 C Pair 94 “"hite -~ 4, Descrirtion of old evics, Same Groupe Old New No. Noe “Age Condition “sitht Cclor 2ST Pus 6 ==» 7 Fair 127 Black -- 3 7 =~ 6 Good L227 “hite are pell- 5 50 =~ 5 Very good 124 “hite Pare belly 7 97 Sz3a 6 Vary sood 146 Slack -- 6 104% == 3 Very [Good 141 “hite ~= A." 28 =e S& Yair 120 Tdack --~ 4, 9 ~- 7 Yair 120 Black -- 17 -- 3 Good 1é5 Rlack 1/4 Ears belly 7 ZO £50 5 Fair 112 “hite 1/2 Pare belly 3 37 + 3 Good 115 bottled 1/2 Bare boll A. 92 ine 5 Good 12 Dlack -- 6 109 -- 3 Verv socd 123 "ottled Pars belly 42. 55 L16 5 chin 02 vhite Pare belly 4. ~ ° ~ * . . ’ — - . . - . y ° ‘ ‘ _ , . S eee - - . - S ~ _~ . soe - . ’ , —_— ~ ’ _ — — ~ - | _ _ - _- . _ . _ - . — r ~ x —_ + - ~ ee . e —— —— ~ —~ ‘ — . ‘ — =e — -< —_— ’ 1 . = \ ae . : — ~~ | Group 4 Description of swes susjust 3G, 1921. _ “eivht cof Aluminum Fleece ear tag Age C ond: tion Jeli ht © o.0n Mearns Lec Oy LO? oll S Jory $ood LE2 “hite =~ Ad 212 1 Thin 75 Plack Rare belly 5 aL 3 4 Fair 71 Nhite ~— 3 214 8 Fatr 105 “hite — 5 P15 e chin LOZ Hite = 6 219 1 Tair 94 ‘“Thite ~— 6? 222 4 Cnsod 129 Lottlod -- 7 225 5 uood 115 “White ~— 71. 227 4 rair L124 Black -— 6s 229 8 Thin 85 “nite care belly 3 215 4 sood 102 Crow -- dead 217 3 ahin 105 “ite -= 6 218 1 Fair 77 Vottled -- 43; 220 8 Gocd LOO “white Fare pelly dead 221 1 Thin S82 “hite -- Co} 223 1 Yair 73 “hite -- dead 224 2 rat 65 white 1/4 Rares belly ‘L 220 C wood L2 black Bare belly 5 228 1 chin 68 Black -— 5 250 8 Very thin 26 Lottled -= 4. Descrirtion of old ewes, same groun.e Old New No. Tlo, Age Condition “etsht Color Remarks 2 -- 4. Cood 143 “white -- 5 29 -- o Very Sood 144 Black -— aond LO == 6 Goec 96 “hite Paiy 2 18 -- 6 Very [ocd 143 Plack 1/2 Rare bellv 5 oA -= 5 Jory Good L117 "hite nares belly 4. 53 -— A. Very Socd BO “nite vars belly 5 70 -— 6 Very ocod 170 Dark 1/4 Bare belly 4. 91 -¥ 6 Very s3ocod 146 Clack 1/2 Barc pelly 53 G6 -~— 5 Good L118 “hite ¥ery bare belly a 69 a 4. Fair 115 Yellow Bare belly 5 89 == 5 Very Jood 156 Dark “are belly 1 90 = 3 Good 115 “hite are belly 3 93 -- 6 Very gocd 133 Black -- T . . woe -~ - of = Group 5 Description of Ewes August 6, 1921 Weight of Aluminum Fleece ear tag Ago Condition Weight Color Remarks May 3, 1922 251 2 Very thin 76 White Bare belly 4 252 7 Very thin 77 White o= &t 236 & Geod 110 White dead 237 3 Good 137 White 3/4 Bare belly 4 259 8 Thin — 109 Yellow Bare belly s 241 6 Good lil White o= 7 242 1 Thin 60 Mottled «=~ 246 S$ Fair 108 White =o 248 3 Thin 92 White on | 5 546 8 Very thin 89 White Very bare belly S 2335 6 Good 110 White 2/2 Bare belly 5s 234 2 Good 120 Black om 12 2356 4 Fair 101 Buff om 7 258 2 Fair 100 Black oe 6 240 6 Good 336 White Bare belly & 245 7 1Good 92 White -= 4 244 6 Fair 97 White Bare belly 5s 245 7 # =Very thin 75 White oe Ss 249 8 Thin 88 White Bare belly 4 Description of old ewes, same class. Old New Noe No, Age Condition Weight Color Remarkg 40 == 6 Very good 164 Black 1/2 Bare belly 7 44. == S$ Good 127 Mottled 1/2 Bare belly 4 61 253 6 Thin 85 White Bare belly 4 719 aw 6 Goo0a 107 White Bare belly 3 88 £-= 6 Very good 132 Black -~- 7 48,0 6 Good 125 White re belly 4 6200 we 6 Very good Black i 4 Bare belly 7 108 om 3 Very good 47 Black «= ' L106 258 4 Very good 119 Yellow --=- 7 103 112 6 Thin 77 White <«- 2 , f = mei \ oe : . 7. & rs Ne . - — ee . -3 . ~- t. owes . ae , a - ~ we . os Ne . - - a . . = - - - ‘ e mone me mee oe . nie om ” - — ‘. aos - we - a ~ - -— we wn wd . wow om . . a . - we. - - <- In order to test the fairness of the division, table 6 has been prepared as a summary of tables 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Table 6 Summary of Description of Ewes, August 6, 1921. Group Group Group Group Group I II IIt IV Vv Av. wte new sheep lbs. 102 93 99 99 99 Av. wte old sheep lbs. 1359 123 125 133 L22 Av. wt. each group lbs. 116 104 109 L12 LOT Av. age yrs. 4.89 4-96 5015 4674 5.20 Black, brown or mottled faces 13 14 14 14 8 Light colored faces 19 18 19 19 21 Long tails 19 13 16 15 15 Bare bellies 25 19 18 13 LS Condition thin. 8 8 7 7 9 . fair 7 L2 L5 8 4 . good 17 12 ll 18 18 Av. wt. fleece ewes living | : May Sy 1922 4.6 4.6 409 4.6 5ek Fig. 9. Southdown Ram Used, 1921-22. Fig. 10. Shropshire Ram Used, 1921-22. 5% oldu Management of Ewes During Lambing Season The ewes and lambs were managed as they were the previous DA year except eachewe was put in shed for a week at lambing time. Lambs were weighed at birth, sex noted, and each lamb labelled. Table 7 gives the data collected. | alle Table 7. Data on Birth of Lambs Group I. Ewes, Southdown Ran. New - Condi- White ewes tion Age or Date Noe Sex sent on of ewes of colored of of of Birth drive in Aug. ewe face jambing lambs lambs Weight J @ een ne 6 —— - 905 151 Fair 2 oY ane 22 868 (--.---- - 8.75 a oe 2 eae R ——— - 8 25 152 Good 8 W Jan. 25 2 Re---cnne 9.76 ew eee pet 727== 6676 154 Fair s Ww Jan. 2 868 (Boo 27772 = 8.0 156 Thin 1 C Feb. 25 L-------= R-------- 9.25 157 Thin 2 W Jane 17 Jenw.---=8 R------ ~-10.25 E-~....-- 720 158 Thin sw Feb. 26 ------- {En~--7- =z 208 E-....-- = 6.76 159 Good 6 Cc Feb. 25 te " (Banwewscoe 720 162 Good 5 C Feb. 26 Lea---=«= = Re------<- 11.0 163 Thin 3 W Mar. 6 dew-ecane Ba..---- = 9226 165 Fair 5 W on No lanb New ewes not driven 153 Fair 2 W == No lamb On aD oD ob a =O wD R —— “ 9 0 355 Fair 8 W Jane 17 2 z_____. -* 920 ~a--c0m R----<- wo 7.26 160 Thin 7 Ww Jan. 24 82 {E- om ecee ~= 8.0 161 Thin 5 W men No lamb 164 Good 7 W Jan. 23 L---.a-n8 Ban ww wwe 8.78 166 Fair 8 W Jan. 23 l--.-- we Ba wnnnw 210.28 167 Good 2 C Feb. 29 Len-22-0 B---2c228 8,25 Ba. .---=- 9.25 168 Good 7 © Jam. 26 09 _2------=} F--=---- = 9686 169 Thin 1 C == No lamb 170 Thin 2 C Feb. 20 1l------ = E~--..-= ~10.0 ~~ 2 ag — -— o -- om « . — awe eC -- : . -- — = = om. o~ ~-- - o-~ -_- ~ - = —~- aw —- - — —_— =~ ~_—- —_ . -_— —_ se - . - -: - -- —_ . — mm mee oe —_—— — mE om ae ee ee om am ~ ~ . ~ ° 5 ‘ ww: . — e - - . - ' . ve > « e - T . ar : . i — ~ . 7° - _ —_ oe « -~ “ - Ls .* - Na . ‘ ~- * * ° ~ - ” : - ‘ _4 ~~ - ~ - oe ~ ~ -— + ~ - r - y? - xX os e . aad . ° ae - . - .- - . - - - . . - -« —_-w ee ow a oo : - - . - ~ tJ - ~ . = u- - te we a ' PP : > 7. . ot om y re : . -- ~ - — — ' . ~- ' - — e . - ‘ soy ~ AL. . - - ° . - es ary ‘ . - - - - - _ . : . . - - - . ——— - Table 7 Continued. Old ewes sent on drive =-12u Group I. Continued. (of 81 Good 4 C Jan. B Lewnwewe B---=- -~=21.0 57 Good 3 C -- No lamb 71 Good 6 W -- ewe died 1 Good 6 W Mar. 1 1----- -= E----- ~-=10.75 54 Good 7 C Febe 10 g------= (Fo =- 277 oore Old ewes not driven 33 Good 5 w _ No lamb 41 Good 3 C Jane 20 le---=ne E------ =+11.0 56 Good S W Jane 18 Lecnnwwe Ronn enn] 26 60 Good 6 C Jan. 6 Lewn-n-= R------ ~=1240 68 Good 7 c Febe 17) 9 Se-nanne BOTTI IIIT 8088 7S Fair 7 WW Feb. 20 1------= R------ =-11025 81 Good nr Jam, 24 9 8a-----=)Bo-7--7-7 908 Re----- ~-1005 oe wee - om Be ~e - —_ . ~~ bee - - _ —_— aw eee ee en ee oe 8 alse (,? Croup II. Ewes, Shropshire Ram. New Condi- White ewes tion Age or Date No. Sex sent on of ewes ef colored of of of Birth drive in Augg ewe face lambing lambs lambs Wei ght B---e-eee 920 171 Good & W Jane & er Bow ew we ~~10e5 (E------- =- 9.75 172 Thin 6 W Jan. 23 ee “(Re------210,88 L738 Thin L C Mar. § L ap ow or an as ou Bewne-wa2 8.0 - . 3 v Mar. 2 Quan ewe (Romm =o 8.5 177 hin r (Ban - anon 768 185 Fair 5 Jan. 24 &----- --(B.---2772 §e8 188 Thin 7 C Feb. 7 Leascaem BZaonanncae 6,0 189 Fair 1 c Feb. 24 g--~----{B-------* 7.5 Bo-- ene 785 Newewes not driven 176 Fair 4 W Jane 22 Llesenwwne Becananee 8,78 17@ Fair 5 0 Jane 21 9 R------=f Bo----7-= 20075 17¢ Fair 3 C Mer. 15 %------- Ben~7=772 868 180 ‘Fair o Mar. 1 2---~-- “teow oes 181 Fair 8 W Feb. 7 Leaaaa= e Benwenenn10.38 182 Fair 1 C Mar. 24 Lewnnnee Banu--cwe 940 ): eee 728 183 Thin 8 W Jane 24 Gan neve (| Reenanena 740 aaa wea 7.8 186 Fair 6 W Jane 19 Leoeaweane EBuececaae §,0 187 Good 6 C Jan. 24 Law.-cne Boann— an 9.25 190 Thin 7 W Jane 25 2------ Rew--cane 840 6.0 - . ° a ee om we fo woe hee “~@ - -- ™ ’ . . --@- ern" c @ we fy tm > "4 om - .e ang <= on - es . | $ —_ oP ong + « . — tem -w~ . - 7 4 ¢ . — a =e ~ “4 a a Y ‘ - ‘4 e \ — we o fo — —s ‘, @. ee .. ea. wi rm =~ a) 8 . ap an -a . y: . @: —— om ey - ~~ -« - - - = - es . ’ ry ~~ on . ~ ~ e a ee eo) —— e —~ a Ne ° ~ rk —<« _— —_— ee _- — — om ma -« —~— —- om m/m -- ~— wee oe — —!. — —< ~— — — _ =_— oe _ 7 — —g oe —a es = ws — 7 —w ae wae —_ wii eae — ce ~ = v7 . - , we vy @ .°? e - ~ @. : - - . ° e . “aq - ‘ - c Lt . { . a . o- * - . . . .* ts > de Lo ~ . . an ~ - . ' e : - . . , . . . °a a. ~ - 7 a in — = ee - —_— » - -_=— ——-nw . . —- we > em e -m— fer -- % — Om 6 . - a ‘ é ee . : - C —e wm et . . : =— oo we! } w-- @. . ~ J . + = be - : ° * * - @ x 4 ms = —_ eT —e wea . . - NS - @ «4 ~- le — — ) - ~ . . os ° “~~ oe oe ~. 28 -—= we =~ -- ote s- ° q —_ a? - . . ° . te 7, s —— oe ee ae ee ye oe eee -. de od - 6 eee te - a Cd . ane t . o ~~ ase ome ep ee me ee ow ok ’ . . oe : + oe s. . ~ ee ce —~—— =a . e 8 ot ee MR ee we ., : . . x @ . ~ - - — —- owe } — = ae 7 . . ees . - * ee ee s . ‘ - ’ . * -- ~ ee } —S omy oe d ~ “. . 1. * o . Oe ee ee - ore “ Nu eee ¢. ? . . . . ~~ -} . .7 a .° wig we gh enw — we == «= ea - - « a B - . mee - —“_ ww =m r - e , te —s yee oe ee * . > . 7 =. ~-e- - ~—— } - - - - - - ~ * - -_ ea - 7 om ~ - ~ - -— Gs .e.-Om sO we tt a — s mo Om, « —— ra « ¢ r* 7° “° ‘ . a ae ’ oe wo" - Ne - - . . . , C — oo eR en ee, a HE ome oe . wa Nw e .. . a . — ap tome . 4 . r , -¢ < ° ——— ee _— Ss .. a ~ ee —_— ee -—~ se = ~ - . .- , - es € . ~ aie OS eee . “TA. = ee... : - oe — —_ oe } .- ~~ = } - e e if . are wee ee me a e . ce na — — r ss - “ e —— i wes Ge we =e ee Oe PS ee , e . ~ -= —_ - -- . * e : i . ‘ —_ —— ore en OD es ORO eee . e - Ne ae = om ow . 3 ° ¢ % es , be s —> oe ° . fn ,=—_e rawr @e Nees @.-.. .- een — = wu oe ) « - a ~~ a PN . —s ae ee ~~. e . ~~ _ - : * - - —- Wem ee ee ee ~ > oa ‘ -- = . . . —_ew ae j « "4 e ee Oe u- e . . ‘ - . -—-— } « . - . we ee. - ~ @- — am fF -~2e , . wows - 4 = _-_ ee ae Ce ——_— <8 ~~ _ eek : - - ’ — inn . - cow & -+ om -- . tN aN e or roe oe - ns ~~" wea . . a - -~ 4 ae @ ew . - 4 ky re - « en e + 4 +r ~ ~e 7 8 e > b we = > . - os 8 s oN te ee 7. = wee ee - — - -” ~~ - . a cae” . 7 S + w&e a - o e - en ’ ~e sw 7 er ee. — a - - we —_ : - 7. — a ~ 4s =“ ¢ t . i wh we -— tee - Old ewes sent on drive aléa Group II. Continued. 63 1 Fair 7 Cc Feb. 12 Leaeananen Roauneenann]).25 wen ewe (EPH 222-10 5 11 Good 5 WW Jan. 1308 B----===210;0 Ls Good 7 Ww Mar. 16 Seannnwe (Bone 800 Eenccaune 760 49 Good 4 C Jan. 19 Leaaneee Roaw-ne~el0 e285 (Ba----e-= 640 52 Good 5 W Jane 20 Sawmnnne( Bon-ccmeae § 2265 E-...-.-- 7.0 80 Fair 6 y Jane 9 Lenasene Rennannne 965 Old ewes not driven mon ett tts 9675 20 Fair 6 Cc Jan. 29 Lewnna- a Bonn ennn=0e1 Oh 23 Good 5 C Jan. 7 2-~.--- ~{§---7==7= 2868 45 Good 4 C Jane 26 Leann nnn R--a0- ==--10.75 67 Good 5 c Jane 4 B------ =) Eo-- = 77 Be78 100 Good 4 C Jane 17 denecuane Euaneanane 9,75 —~ -_ — —_— —- s “Lek. u ws —~ j — —~ — / ~~ - - ~ Group III. Ewes, Nampehire Ran. New Condi- White ewes tion Age or Date Noe Sex sent on of ewes of colored of of of Birth drive in Aug, ewe face lambing lambs Lambs Weight 193 Thin 4 W Apre 4 Lew---e e Be--enenal 0.0 194 Good 8 Wane 88 Bannan (Bo-n->- === 8478 198 Fair 6 W Jan. 17 Lennn-ane Rewwneenw]1,7§ 201 Thin 8 W Jane 19 Leanne a Reu-n-eoe - 9.25 202 Thin 6 C — No lamb (Ben-enwae 860 204 Fair L C Apr. l Ronwenewe (Pi uuneawe 8.0 207 Fair 2 C Mar. 17 le-n-- on Reonnnnn--1000 208 Thin 8 W Febe 8 Leancane Bonn canel] 9.78 209 Fair 5 W Jan. 235 Le-eweee R----- ow 8.5 New ewes not driven 191 Fair 5 W Jane 25 Leannnae Roewonnn- 12 25 192 Fair 1 C Jan. 27 ------ = en 9255 196 Fair 4 C Jan. 85 Lenn nanos Bownn enn] e285 Ban Baas Reacn---a10 0 197 Thin 5 W Mar. 15 2 R------2013.0 198 Fair 6 W Jan. 28 lennaaan Baua-asen],0 199 Good 8 W Mare 23 Q----nn~ Rano oerne B20 203 Fair 1 C Fob. 160 2nnann-wn iors Zo88 } - IR $£=Qvuwmaoe ae Reasaena 6 75 206 Thin 3 W Jang 15 2 wer eee 6.78 206 Fair 7 W = ewe died 210 Fair 8 W Mar. 7 Lannneame Ba-acxuae 8,0 o—~ ot. ee - 7 o - +: 8 tg = - ° « a- =F - Ew we — —_——_— -_ — —_a . . ° mg me ee oe ome me nt wet Oe . —~ oe we we Om ak we eee me ~ - ° - —g Bb on em oe ou ome oe @ema-- 7-7” wp ee eee we ow ee ee , ~~ Qn ww we ee ee” ~~ ee . . a6 - + on oh a te at —_—_ — } we Be wee - oe pee Eng oe Rew aww ee en vo: ~~ - . . —e ww ee ee we ew ew eee oa - - ag ome re ee ee ee — — ope ee ee . - . - — . ~~ Gin te we et mR ee ee ee a ~— -o, - . - - ad - - «a - - 8 > - @ene . - w - wo ~ ee oe OR eet eee —@ eg ee we ee -- ad : fee oe ew en we ee Oe ee } — ce tome wQ@ ome ae Oh Gee oe aoe Om +7. 4 . as . an om oe Mm == =) we mts —— wm ee ow eee oe ee ee - - wa nf Get a we oe ee ee ° . ,;—OCm mm . + Pe ; ee ee } =e - - - Pw ee 6 ee we ee ew “@) 4 = aot ow CC . ” o _—_— ee ee ae Met ee ee) } ee ee ee ee ee } oy - a he a we wen 8 oe ee we 2 / —_= ome week ee ow ee ee bee ~ ee tg em pa tem ee ee — we ee a a } ~ ° - © : . . oo ve . - ~ 1 — ee a ee em ow ok — =e SO aw et -—— we ’ w+. ~~ we me ee Oe Re -— = 8s = & - .- - — . 4 . “ . - -~ —— ome. —_—- ° - e .& . - 9 ° . - . ot .?¢ . —. . ave. . , - - . . . . é? =. % . . . . . & - - . - aloo ae ¢ — ~~ «- ~ ~ ~~ - ° , 4 Bee FAS e 7 o — . . ‘ r . ue ~ - ’ . te 2. ~ ae =. +e ~ - ‘ - Pn = @ws Pe , 4 s ' . ~ ~ ’ -- ~ .¢ - + . os f + ato. oN | ’ ee nm © O1d ewes sent on drive Group III. Continued. 6 Fair 7 C Jame 28 Ba-=- naw BOTT 7 or re Jan, 23 0 Bona =n =a PBTT“7=77z 808 50 Good 5 wv Jan. 7 Zann. -ne g--7222221358 97 Good 6 6c Jan, 29 B---nanafBr-roroes 8085 104 Good 3 v Feb. & Q~-----=|Bo---- 77-18 09 28 Pair. 8 c Feb. 9 lennaene Rennn--2-15 026 Old ewes not driven 9 Fair 7 ¢@ Mar, 16 0 ------e(Br=-=-r=7 900 17 Good 3 C Jans 240 Banwn nnn Brrr rrr eS 8S 30 Bair 5 ww Jane 9 Bannnnnn(Bon------ $75 S7 Good 3 C Feb. 4 lewennce Bonu--ene 9625 92 Good 5 C Apr. 1 Lenenece Reae-a-ne 860 109 Good 3 c Jan. 22 « Lenwn-nne Benw--nane 4625 65 Thin 5 W Jan. 4 Bown nann Bona ----=_8e25 Kanwcaneael? ef a@@ags¢ ll oe) —— eee em ee ee —e- amg ae on op Oe ee ee ed -_~— — ee —_——— —— os ft nt eee a —_— ee te eo! i ed ee Qe ee am epooewuo™ es ee —~— ow oP ae ee ee ee eng ew eee eee wet ee ee ee ee ee) tw ew ew ee ee el — Gas = == ee Pe A ee OR eee em a ee ee ee oe yy ec-te ao17« Group IV. Ewes, Orford Ran. New Condi- Whi te ewes tion Age or Date Noe Sez sent on of ewes of colored of of of Birth drive in Aug, ewe face lambing lambs lambs Weight 211 Good 8 W Feb. 24 Le---=2= o Bonnnnwnnl] £25 212 Thin 1 Cc Apr. 10 2------- {B------2= 700 213 Fair 4 W Feb. 3 a e R------- ~41.5 214 Fair 8 W Jan. 18 Lenwnann Bannnnswe= 960 215 Thin 8 Ww Feb. 2 Lewwnwnn Ba nwen- 2212675 219 Fair 1 WW Apr. 100 2a----nn (EUW TTT? S08 222 Good 4 C Jane 22 Leow--=- ~ Ba--n-n= - 8.75 225 Good 5 OW Apr. S$ 8=------ tEo~--=-7= 229 227 Fair 4 C Jan. 29 L----=---~ E-----~ --10.5 229 Thin 8 W Feb. 13 Lewnnnawe Bannnownne 965 New ewes not driven | 216 Good 4 Cc Jane 51 Qnnannnn} Bo777777 71000, 217 Thin 8 W Jan. 23 Lannnnne Bonanno 20l) oS 218 Fair 1 C Feb. 22 Le-w----== R-------<= 105 220 Good 8 W a= ewe died 221 Thin 1 W Mare 7 Iennane - E------- ~ 7675 223 Fair 1 W Jan. 51 Lewncnne Re-nn222213 40 224 Fair 2 W Mar. 1 Lennnncm E...--- == 8.25 226 Good 6 C Feb. Bannan Born n 7000 228 Thin 1 C Mar. 4 Lenencun Roa----= -~12.75 230 Thin gs Cc Jane 310 S---n-n-=(Bua2noee S078 R.--..- -= 7.0 ete = ww ~~ ~_ = -- me ee pee —_— —_— wo op es Group IV. Continued. Old ewes sent on drive . (Rew .asnee 9 e585 2 Good 4 W Jane SL 2 (Be-..-.0 8,75 ) ee 29 Good § C Jan. 12 Zon n-- we K--~... wool ose Jan. ll @~.---.. - (Ra ~---22210—.0 LO Good 6 ¥ an. 11 2 {B- ecnarce 10.0 18 Good 6 C Jan. 15 L----= ae B-nwn22-2-41,78 om ass sto «00 a tb OB Ba nwnwnnma Be 34 Good 5 w Jan. 28 = 8 (Eo------ = 899, = ecm me eer-==-2== §.0 535 Good 4 W Jan. 7 2 Raos-me2-11,0 : @0 «=» ob oe sm oe SD 5 =_———oane ne 8 0 70 Good - 6 C Feb. 2 2 ‘x wc-77 “27 808 Old ewes not driven 91 Good 6 0 oe Jan. 23 Sennnnnnffo===2222 3:8 a@ op Gp G2 aD 28 6D e W F wwaeneae er 9 0 66 Good 5 eb. ll 2 Ru----2n02 0. 5 69 Fair 4 W Jan. 23 1--.---. Ea.----.- 13.0 nnn an jn 72 == ~e11.25 89 Good 5 C Jane 18 = 2 ¥o--a--211.78 90 Good 3 W Jane 19 Leenanne Bowne n= 018.0 93 Good 6 C Jane 25 ««-- annua (B--~ = 912085 (B-----~- ~11.0 - a ee oe. Ls 6 e @ -- ed an oe -—_ ~~ = an - - . - -_— = ad we -- — = oo oe = ~~ - -_~ ~~ ~~ om. + — oo — -— —_ wm o.- = — —-— — — an am - ~ —_— oo ~~ —_ an -—— ‘ "| °° ww se Se —_— a é -— oo on~r = as ese - | ~_- = - -_ re eee ee ‘ a wee -_— i ee -- — * ’ ° 4 - -~ ~~ om ,—~S Sr ne > ww é ony ee . -— nm om 2 - et ee ee oe —_— ~w ° gee Gg > = — owe ow .- ‘ = = } — aa » ~ gem & ee oe _— oe < a eee ~— } _— ee - owt lOO Oe . ~ . - Ls - . . - 1 ~ > . . - a ~ ae Sf oe -_— . -> i “_- e@.-.-.- - woe we + - . : : . . - : . — ~ - eo - - - Lc . Te Le ° 1 7 - . . - - . ™- — . - . e - , . - - « . + . —_ - , . -- - se e - : - ve . - .. : . . . sn ve e a. 2 ‘ a) e~ - * v . = > . - . . o- . - . . ‘ . @as.r- a . lof uA 7 . .. - 7 9 on * w -- 2 - . ‘7 ‘ ~ ~— ~ =» 1. ow - ome oe le - - ~- - - » - . - i ~ es ° me “ee .¢ oo . - - -«- ~ ae ene -_ - ee - - - ? ’ 1 o7 8 . y - ° . _f@ oe . . - -- = rote - . - = * a.’ - oe @ ML . - ~~ . ~ 8 - . - e = | « . . ~ se 3 - - . ~ . ft r * . .. - - ar ° . o > 1 . : me ® . - XY th os ‘- as '- - . ve - . — a me ... : wT : - - - . . oy a - cd . - .- . n : - - ~ 7 wed e - . -~ . 7? -= ~ . « -_ e. «~ = . . -.- 2 _ oe 7 = . ~ =_—_ e2 BP +a 7. -_-- => ~ -— & . . - es - - —_—_-— - Cd -_—* «iQea Group V. Kwes, Scrub Ram. New Condition “hite Date ewes of ewes Age or of NOe Dex Birth sent on in of colored of of . drive August ewes face lambing lambs lambs weight | R--------- 7.0VU 231 Thin 2 W Jan. 24 Q------ (R------.-- 7.00 : (E---~---- 11.0¢ 232 Thin 7 W Apr. 10 Q2----=- (R-------- 9.00 (H-------- 8.00 256 Good 5 ¥ Mar. 17 Q------ (E-------- 8.00 (E------- 11.75 237 Good 3 W Jane 27 Qan--~-- (R------- 10.50 239 Thin 8 "7 Feb. 9 1------ (E+------ 9.75 241 Good 6 W Jane 19 l------- Eh------- L1L.00 242 Thin 1 C Mare. 13 jJ------- R------=- 7250 (R------- 7.00 246 Fair 8 W Jane 22 Q-----= (E------- 8.75 248 Thin 3 W Jane 26 l------=--= Re------ 14.75 (E------- 8.06 346 — Thin 8 W Jan. 29 Reow---- (E------- 8 .0©O Now owes — - not driven _—s_—d., , : LOO Good 6 W Jane 25 l------- R------- 9.50 2o4 Good 2 C Jan. 20 l------- Bh------- 11.00 2955 Fair 4 W Jane 22 l------- E-~---=<- 11.50 2358 Fair 2 C Apre 5 $1 ------= R----=-<- 11.006 (Ee------- 9.0C 240 Good 6 W Jane 25 Qaona--- (He------ 7.75 (R------- 7.75 243 Good 7 W Jane 24 Qn----- (R--.---- 7225 244 Fair 6 W Mar. ll ]-----<{- Re------ 9.75 245 Thin 7 W Jane 12 j------- Ee------- 10.00 249 Thin 8 W Feb. el ]------- Re------= 10.00 .-20- Group V. Continued. Old ewes. ent on (E- oo 9.50 drive” Good 6 C Jane 27 Bowron (E------- 6.75 (R —o— 10.06 44 Good 3 Cc Apre 2 Q------ (Re------ 9.00 (E ———— 9.75 61 Thin 6 W Jane 22 2------ (Re-----~ 10.25 (E ———o— 8.50 719 Good 6 "N Jane 22 2---~-- (E------- 7.75 (E "——<—— 11.0° a8 Good 6 C Jan. 18 Qo--=== (B------- 8.00 not driven (E------- 10.00 48 Good 6 q Jane 28 Qa---== (E----- s- 68.75 (R —_——<—<—-———— 8.00 62 Good 6 C Mare 25 3------ (Re------ 8.00 (E------- 6.00 102 Good 3 C Jane 4 1------= E------- 14,.0° 106 Good 4 W Jane 22 ]----~--- Re-----= 10.0~ 103 Thin 6 W Feb. 4 l------- E~------ 9.9 27 «E 18 R Fig. 11. Hampshire Ram Used Both Years, Fig. 12. Oxford Ram Used 1921-22, -21- TI Three of the ewes died before lambing and seven were re- ported as not lambing. the whole flock of ewes dropped 231 lambs or an average for the flock of 1.45. The average for the ewes that lLambed was 1.55. Effect of Ase of Ewe upon Production. Estimates were made of the age of each ewe in August 1921, as was done the previous year. The following table sives a summary of birth data by ages of ewes. moO 149 251 Averages 9.22 55.7 Table 8. Summary of Birth Data by Ages of Ewes. Loe Per cent Av. No. of NOe Of No. of Ave Wt. of ewes lambs per Ages ewes lambs of lambs having twins ewe of Yrs. lambing dropped at birth or triplets each age 14 20 8.51 42.7 1.435 10 14 8.75 40.0 1.40 16 24 10.57 50.0 1.50 18 22 10.135 2202 1.11 21 38 9.350 77d 1.81 29 49 9.25 58.5 1.68 16 a7 8.54 62.4 1.68 29 58 8.76 52.1 1.52 -23- 15 There seems to be an increase in fecundity from 3 to 7 yearBe The average number of lambs was highest at 5 years of age. At 8 years of ase the ewe begins to lose vitality and fecundity. Effect of Type ofkwe upon Lamb Production The ewes during the year 1921-22, described according to color of face and legs. Those with darx or colored faces showed traces of bresding of the down breeds, while those with white faces showed but little improved breeding. Table 9. Description of ewe “hite faces Dark faces Effect of Type of Ewe on Lamb Production Av. wte raising lambs to lambing lambingmarket dropped 1.04 Febe 1.53 Feb. ty AV. daily gain marketed per of ewes raising lambs. ——- — 067 ° 70 “25 5 There was practically no difference between dark-faced and white-faced ewes in their production of lambs. The average date of lambing for the white-faced ewes was one week earlier than the dark-f:.ced ewes, but on the other hand the durk-faced ewes produced an averaze of one pound more of lamb for -he markete Effect of Bondition of Ewe at Breeding Time on Lamb Production. Data was again collected in 1921-22 experiments on the condition of ewes at the bezinning of the breeding season. They were descrived as "thin", "fair", or "good", according to the amount of flesh they carried. The, were well dis- tributed between the groups, (see Table 6). Table 10. Effect of Condition of Ewe on Lamb Production Av. wt. Av. Woe of of lamb Total lambs Av. date marketed Condition No. ewes dropped of per ewe of ewe lambing per ewe lambing lambing Thin 37 1.46 Feb. 12 93.0 Fair 44 1.41 Feb. 8 88.7 Good 68 1.68 Jane 31 101.1 76 Av e Gai ly gain of each lamb »68 - 68 71 27 77 There were 37 ewes classed as "thin", 44 as “fair", and 68 as "good". The eweS in thin condition bred am average of 13 days later than those in good condition at time of turning in the ram, dropped .22 less lambs per ewe, and marketed 8.1 lbs. less per ewe. It seems to be important that the ewes be in good condition at the beginning of the breeding season. If ewes in good condition will breed from orie to two weeks earlier and produce more lambs per ewe than ewes in thin condition, it means that the profits may be much more per ewe owing to more favorable markets and more lamb. such difference in gain of lambs was in favor of the lambs from ewcs in good condition. Effect on Lamb Production of Driving Ewes The flocks were divided as inthe previous year and one half of each flock given a drive of 17 miles. Upon returning each ewe was returned to its respective group and rams turned with their respective groups. The plan was modified this year at the suggestion of sheep men b: putting each flock ina small enclosure in the barn for the first night. The following table gives the results: Table ll. Noe Of ewes Noe lambing Ewes driven ~ 78 75 Ewes not driven 8l 74 ~28- 1 Results on Lamb Production of Driving Ewes AV. No. of Ave date lambs per ewe of lambing lambing Feb. 8 1.60 Feb. 4 1.50 -28- A Effect of Castration on Male Lambs. While in this data no check of our uncastrated male lambs were kept yet the data from the ewe lanbs may be offered as a partial check. It was,for example,that the average daily gain of the wether lambs was e7l1 pound while that of the ewe lambs was .67 pound. Apparentl: the castration of the male lambs did not check their growth. ~29- 3 The avera;se date of lambing for the ewes that were driven before turning the rams with them was Feb. 8, and for the ewes not driven, it was Feb. 4. These results check with the previous. Evidently there is no bensfit to »e derived fron. giving ewes a long drive before turnin; in the rams. Influende of Rams of Various Breeds upon Production of Early Spring Lambs. Complete data was kept on all ewes (see page ), as was also for each lamb, including the grade of the carcass after Slaughter in Chicago. the followinj;, taole will show the production of the ewes of each Zroups -3Q— ¥| Table 12. Production of kwes of Each Group, 1922, that Produced Lambs that were Marketed. Woe of No. of Av. ewes liv- ewes total Group ing at dead at Av. wt. Ave No. of Wte of market market living Av. birth No. of lambs’ lambs time that time that ewes gain Noe wt. lambs market marketed marketed marketed June living lambslambs mar- ed per per lambs lambs 1922 ewes born born keted ewe ewe I 21 0 120.5 8.0 31 9.25 28 1.33. 92.5 II 30 3 115.6 11.5 55 8250 54 1.64 110.0 i Il 28 4 122.5 14.1 48 9.50 41 1.28 9347 IV ZO 4 125.4 15.8 39 10.20 38 1.41 102.5 V 26 2 125.9 17.6 44 9.25 44 1.57 103.0 128 13 217 205 The average gain of ewes of the various groups was from 8 to 17 pounds. The average birth weight was largest for lambs served by the Oxford ram. Hampshire and Southdown lambs were nearly the same and Shropshire the smallest at bibth. . . When the lambs were ready for market they were separated from their dams and put in a pen and graded into market classes by Mr. G. Le. Watkins, Nashville,Tenn. assisted by Mr. C. C. Flanery, Nashville, Tenn. ‘here were two shipments, one on May 3d, and the other on June 9th. ‘he lambs for the first shipment were graded into the classes, Prime, Good, and seconds. The second shipment was graded into Prime, Good, Second, and Culls. After the grading was completed, complete records were made of each lamb. “he lambs were shipped and sold by grade on the Nashville Market and then consigned to Armour & Company, Chicago, Ill.,where slaughter data of each carcass Werecollected,including dressing percentages and market carcass grading. As the head was severed from the carcass the ear label was slit from the ear and then fastened to the carcass. There was, therefore, the least possible chance of knowing at the time of grading the breed of the carcass. Tables 13 and 14 give the data collected on lamb and its dam, me ? DATA ON LAMBS SOLD MAY 3, 1922 dS Prime lambs above lst line Good above 2nd line Seconds above Srd line S—Strictly choice carcass; R--Good quality carcass; M--Medium quality Carcass; X=—-Poor quality carcass; XX=—~Very poor quality carcass. ~=S S Lamb Ewe Twin Birth Date Days Wee. Wte Gain Ave* Ewe Grade Net Woe Noe or wt. of old of of of daily or of wt. of single birth lamb ewe ewe gain wether car car= 5/2 aug 6of lamb cass cass _— —. 1922 May 2 lemb 197 166 single 1 1/23 99 74 122 11 of aNe S 4) 147 154 twin 1/23 99 67 145 16 067 ewe 8 S4 - -- twin 8 -= — —— = -< -—=- ewe died, date unkown 203 168 twin 1/26 96 6 111 2 69 ewe R 35 204 168 twin 1/26 96 11102 168 681 twin 9 1/%& 98 67 130 2 068 ewe S 35 167 81 twin 10: 1/% 98 72 130 2 #£«.?3 wether 3g 38 151 164 single 1/28 99 68 105 ~-10 069 ewe s 37 112 #75 single 113% 1/9 113 79 95 $1 £4.69 wether 8 42 139 157 single 10% 1/17 105 61 103 13 077 wether S 44, 165 151 twin 1/22 100 67 116 #21 067 ewe S 35 182 160 twin m 1/24 98 70 94 -2 71 wether § 58 — 160 twin 8 1/24 —~ =——- QM «2 — ewe died, injured in barn 41 single 1 20 102 77 #2168 27 e75 awe g 4) 174 152 twin 1/25 97 62 119 =6 64 wether § $l 175 152 twin 1/25 97 59 #119 6 #£.61 wether 8 $1 133 155 twin 9 1/17 105 70 116 =15 £.66 wether § 38 134 155 twin 9 1/17 105 62 116 -15 £59 ewe R 31 22,100 60 226 2) 960 ewe 31 | *339's old No. was 49 GROUP IT i-~SHROPSHIRE SIRE 115 67 twin of 1/4 118 86 117 —& .73 ewe s 45 114 67 twin - 1/4 118 86 117 -4 73 wether § 44 178 190 twin 8 1/25 97 68 90 3% e70 wether § 36 142 339* single 104 1/19 103 687 165 17 e84 wether R 47 101 171 twin 9 1/4 118 8g ll 3 75 wether § 44, 10@ 171 twin 10h 1/4 118 #89 112 =%3S # .%5 wether § 46 148 652 triple 6 1/20 102 62 2110 =5 060 ewe s S4 149 52 triplet 54 1/20102 70 110 =6 69 ewe s 36 0 62 triple 7 =%d1/20 Hand raised. Not ye mrketed. ewe 202 45 single 10% 1/26 96 78 124 $1 °&2.81 wether § 42 138 100 single 1/17 105 79 154 7 o75 ewe 8 45 171 176 single 1/22 100 80 105 11 °&#.80 ewe s 44, 198 187 single 1/24 98 %% 131 11 £4.75 ewe S 38 118 80 single 1/9 113 83 75 -1 £.%% wether gs 4.5 177 183 triplet 1/24 98 65 104 #0 ,.66 wether R 32 — 165 triplets 7 1/2 — — —- -— — wether 222 20 single 10$ 1/29 98 69 124 14 #474 ewe 3 36 115 23 twin 10 1/7 115 #77 #2158 '~ 5 67 wether § 39 120 11 twin 10¢ 1/13 109 81 122 = 7% ewe sg 41 119 411 twin 10 1A3 — —_- = — ewe died, unknown 132 186 single 1/19 103 #70 115 10 #£.68 ewe S 38 8 250 1 single 104 2/12 79 70. ~=+:127 1 288 ewe s 38 GROUP II--SHROPSHIRE SIRE-—Continued -~Jea~ BY 179 #190 twin 6 1/25 97 60 90 «3 62 wether M 30 160 16 twin ot 1/23 99 67 dead 067 ewe i 33 245 175 single 2/10 84 66 95 6 e79 wether R 34 185 172 twin ¢ 1/22 100 62 103 17 °&82 ewe s 46 200 17 twin 10% 1/22 100 71 1083 17 ~&#.71 wether 3g 35 1644 341 twin 7 #1/28 99 6 97 UN 064 ewe R 34 176 183 triplet 0 68 wether § 39 116 23 twin 5 265 ewe sS 41 159 16 twin 99 68 dead e68 wether WM $2 165 184* twin 99 6 WF ll 064 ewe R 32 173 178 twin 10% 1/21 101 68 dead 68 wether R 35 ow 55 BD DATA ON LAMBS SOLD MAY 3, 1922 Prime lambs above lst line Good above 2nd line S econ ds above 3rd line S--Strictly choice carcass; R—Good quality carcass; M--Medium quality carcass; X—=Poor quality carcass; XX- Acxnowledgments. Of the painstaking and untiring work of Acting-Superintén- dent C. M. Hume of the Middle Tennessee kxperiment Station in the management of the ewe flock; for the expert assistance ~ given each year by Mr. Ge L. Watkins, of Watkins, Coni thers & C Company, of Nashville, and Mr. CG. C. Flanery, Assistant Specialist in Animal Husbandry, University of Tennessee, in the market grading of the lambs on foot; and the co-operation of Armour & Company, of Chicago, through their representative Mr. H. Ae Phillips, in the collection of slaughter d:ta, gruteful acknowledgment is extended. nee art . = ae cote. 4 ™ oe ae: oF wee ‘¢ + Ww weet emer we i Lod 4 wr MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES U0 31293011079815 MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES ET 31293011079815 MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES UI ENN 31293011079815 MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES UNO 31293011079815 MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES UNC 31293011079815