[Jacob-list] Modern Jacobs

[Sally Durbin]

I will just add one note -- I think you could both be O.K. with
your feelings on genetics -- that's what makes it great.
To keep some of the traditional looks and add in some other
positives makes a genetic pool for all parties to choose the
type of Jacobs they breed.  I have been in the cattle business
for years and watched the "trends" come and go -- so I tend
to hold off on the "new" looks just for the show ring -- I
have seen the good and the bad it brings.  I am surely enjoying
all the comments and stories on the Jacob list here as I
further my knowledge of the breed and it's breeders.

So -- it is great that some will strive for a traditional jacob
and others strive for improvement.

Sally

Thomas Simmons wrote:

> Well, Seth,
>
> that just goes to show you the breadth of philosophies surrounding animal
> husbandry.  Asregards rare breeds especially, I take thwe
> 180-degree-opposite position that you do.
>
> Many once-primitive animals have been bred for standardization.  It makes
> "commercial" sense, and it makes for nice blue ribbons on the mantel. But it
> also "creates" something that disin;t exist, and destroys that which did
> exist.
>
> Standarized horse breeds look lovely and run well, but break their ankles
> all too easily.  Turkey is great at thanksgiving, but, left to themselves,
> they would die, since they are no longer physically able to breed.
>
> There is more in a gene pool than just "what it looks like."  There are
> mothering instincts, and hardiness, and resistance to disease and stress,
> and a tone of other non-visible traits. When we breed for "standarization"
> and throw out those with the "wrong" genes, we are also throwing out tons of
> other genes, too.
>
> I prefer my Jacobs funky.  The lean ram, the unique horn, the
> fade-to-apricot, etc.  I prefer my gene pool as varied as it can be within
> the "jacob realm."  Someday, my flock might have a "flock look," but God
> only knows what that's going to be!
>
> thom
> -----Original Message-----
> From: SETH DYER <RAVENPR2 at webtv.net>
> To: jacob-list at jacobsheep.com <jacob-list at jacobsheep.com>
> Date: Friday, December 08, 2000 12:47 AM
> Subject: [Jacob-list] Modern Jacobs
>
> Hi,
>
> I do understand why some people in the USA are keeping the old type
> jacobs.  I don't think it makes a lot of sense, nor do I support it.  I
> have raised rare breeds and commercial sheep for over 15 years.  While
> we never had spyder-genes  we did have some callyipege and I think as
> long as you don't breed the crap you are doing it right.
>
> If you can raise heavier muscled higher yeilding market lambs and finer
> grading colored fleeces.  Why waste your time breeding them to be fail.
>
> I think Jacobs should be black and white.  I don't think lilac sheep
> should be bred.  I also beleive that everyone should cull improper horn
> sets on rams.
>
> I am not saying they need to look like texels or dorpers.  A little more
> bone and muscle would help to market them to the US meat markets.
>
> Seth
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jacob-list mailing list
> Jacob-list at jacobsheep.com
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/jacob-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jacob-list mailing list
> Jacob-list at jacobsheep.com
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/jacob-list