Proceedings of the 55 th Biennial Spooner Sheep Day

Proceedings of the 55 th Biennial Spooner Sheep Day Dedicated to Yves M. Berger Spooner Sheep Researcher from 1988-2012 Saturday, August 18, 2012 Spooner Agricultural Research Station University of Wisconsin-Madison Spooner, Wisconsin

Yves M. Berger The 55 th Biennial Spooner Sheep Day is dedicated to Yves M. Berger who completed his last day as Sheep Researcher at the Spooner Agricultural Research Station on June 30, 2012 after 24 years of dedicated and productive service to the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the sheep industry of Wisconsin, the U.S. and many countries throughout the world. Yves received the B.S. degree in Agriculture in 1969 from the Institut Technique de Pratiques Agricoles, Paris, worked as a technician in dairy sheep research at the Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Jouy en Josas, France in 1969-1970, and earned the M.S. degree in Animal Science Genetics in 1972 from the University of Minnesota. Yves has had a varied and productive career working with sheep and goats in many countries on five continents. He was a research technician in the Patagonia region of Argentina (1972-74) and at the U.S. Sheep Experiment Station, Dubois, ID (1975-77). From 1978-80, he supervised a French project in the Ivory Coast on sheep and goats. From 1980-88, he was a research coordinator for the University of California-Davis USAID Small Ruminant Collaborative Research Support Program project, and was stationed in Kenya (1980-82), Morocco (1982-86), and the University of California-Davis campus (1986-88). Yves joined the University of Wisconsin-Madison as a Researcher and Assistant Superintendent of the Spooner Agricultural Research Station in 1988 and served as station Superintendent from 1999 until his official retirement in December 2009. Yves was convinced to return to part-time employment to manage the Spooner sheep research program through June 2012 while a decision was made by university administration on his replacement. Yves joins the ranks of only three individuals who have been in charge of the sheep program at the Spooner Station: Carl Rydberg (1941 1980), Tom Cadwallader (1980 1988), and Yves Berger (1988 2012). Yves is a nationally and internationally recognized expert in sheep production and management. He conducted the first comparison of the Finnsheep and Romanov breeds of sheep in North America where it was shown that the Romanov was superior to the Finnsheep in all aspects of lamb production. The artificial lamb rearing system that he developed at the Spooner Station has been adopted by sheep producers throughout the U.S. Yves and the sheep crew at Spooner artificially rear 500 to 600 lambs on milk replacer each year. Lambs are successfully weaned off milk replacer at an average age of 30 days after having consumed 18 pounds of milk replacer powder. Since 1995, Yves has supervised the operation of the only dairy sheep research farm in North America. The results of dairy sheep studies from the Spooner Station have been very important to the successful establishment of the dairy sheep industry in North America. While at Wisconsin, Yves has consulted on sheep and livestock projects in Albania, Macedonia, Kosovo, Mexico, Armenia, and Turkey. Yves has received several recognitions for his accomplishments in sheep research including the Friend of the Association Award from the Indianhead Sheep Breeders Association, the William J. Boylan Distinguished Service Award from the Dairy Sheep Association of North America, the Agricultural Research Stations Staff Recognition Award from the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) of UW-Madison, the CALS Academic Staff Research Award, the Animal Management and International Animal Agriculture Awards from the American Society of Animal Science, and the Master Shepherd Dairy and Art Pope Awards from the Wisconsin Sheep Breeders Cooperative. Yves and his wife, Lynn, have a son, three daughters, and a grandchild. i

Spooner Sheep Day was held annually at the Spooner Agricultural Research Station for 50 years from 1953 through 2002. We believe that it is the longest running agricultural field day of the several organized each year on the various Agricultural Research Stations of the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison. After the 2002 Spooner Sheep Day, the decision was made to hold the event every-other year on even-numbered years. This decision was made so that a Spooner Dairy Sheep Day could be held on odd-numbered years with a program that could be better tailored to the focused issues of the dairy sheep industry. Therefore, there is still a sheep field day at the Spooner Agricultural Research Station every year, and even though the 2012 field day is the 55 th Spooner Sheep Day, it is the 60 th consecutive sheep field day held at the station, and we hope to host many more. David L. Thomas, Editor Department of Animal Sciences University of Wisconsin-Madison 1675 Observatory Drive Madison, WI 53706 dlthomas@wisc.edu 2012 ii

55 th BIENNIAL SPOONER SHEEP DAY Spooner Agricultural Research Station of the University of Wisconsin-Madison Spooner, Wisconsin Saturday, August 18, 2012 8:30 a.m. Registration - Station Headquarters 9:00 Welcome and CALS and Station Updates Dwight Mueller, Director, Agricultural Research Stations, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences(CALS), UW-Madison and Philip Holman, Superintendent, Spooner Agricultural Research Station, CALS, UW-Madison 9:10 Keys to a Successful Intensive Grazing System Richard Otto Wiegand, Area Livestock Agent, UW-Extension, Spooner, WI 9:45 Resources for Starting Grazing or Improving Your System Laura Paine, Grazing Specialist, Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection, Madison, WI 10:25 Break 10:40 Ewe and Ram Management for a Successful Breeding Season Justin Luther, Assistant Professor, Department of Animal and Food Science, UW-River Falls, River Falls, WI 11:25 Highlights from 24 Years of Sheep Research at the Spooner Agricultural Research Station Yves Berger, Sheep Researcher (Retired), Spooner Agricultural Research Station, CALS, UW-Madison Noon Presentation of Sheep Industry Award Rudy Erickson, Producer, Wilson, Wisconsin 12:15 p.m. Lamb Barbecue Lunch $8.00/adult, $5.00/child under 12, Free/child 5 and under 1:15 Demonstrations and Presentations at the Sheep Facilities and Pastures: -Establishment, Longevity and Use of Kura Clover-Orchardgrass Pastures Phil Holman, Agronomist, Spooner Agricultural Research Station -Ram Breeding Soundness Exam, Semen Collection and Evaluation Justin Luther, UW-River Falls -Condition Scoring of Ewes Prior to Breeding David Thomas, UW-Madison 3:15 Adjourn Spooner Sheep Day is sponsored by the Agricultural Research Stations and Department of Animal Sciences, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison and Cooperative Extension, University of Wisconsin-Extension. iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Yves M. Berger.. i PROGRAM... iii SPOONER AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION UPDATE - Phil Holman 1 KEYS TO A SUCCESSFUL INTENSIVE GRAZING SYSTEM - Richard Otto Wiegand 3 RESOURCES FOR SUCCESSFUL GRAZING - Laura Paine 5 EWE AND RAM MANAGEMENT FOR A SUCCESSFUL BREEDING SEASON - Justin Luther..11 HIGHLIGHTS FROM 24 YEARS OF SHEEP RESEARCH AT THE SPOONER AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION - Yves Berger.19 DEALING WITH DROUGHT IN PASTURE SYSTEMS - Phil Holman..26 ESTABLISHMENT, LONGEVITY AND USE OF KURA CLOVER-ORCHARDGRASS PASTURES - Phil Holman...27 BODY CONDITION SCORING OF SHEEP James M. Thompson and H. Meyer...29 PAST RECEIPIENTS OF THE SHEEP INDUSTRY AWARD...33 INDEX OF ARTICLES FROM SPOONER SHEEP DAY AND SPOONER DAIRY SHEEP DAY PROCEEDINGS FROM 2000-2011...34 iv

SPOONER AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION UPDATE Sheep Production & Research: Phil Holman Superintendent Spooner Agricultural Research Station, UW-Madison Spooner, Wisconsin The 2012 lambing season was excellent. Overall, the ewes averaged 1.99 lambs per ewe. Adult ewes averaged 2.10, and ewe lambs averaged 1.65 lambs per birth. The lambing season weather was relatively warm and contributed to better lamb survival. Lamb health was relatively good. Death loss from all causes (birth to sale) was 15.7%. There was some pneumonia but much less than previous years when we have been over 20% death loss. Milk production per ewe has been good. In February and March, the ewes averaged over 5 pounds of milk per day. These are the highest two production months on record. April also had the highest milk per day compared to other years. In late May and June, we attempted once a day milking for labor savings but the somatic cell count became an issue so we went back to twice a day milking. As ewes are getting later in lactation, we are now going to once a day milking again. Research projects this year included a milk replacer trial looking at two different fat levels in milk replacer and the start of a new project trying to determine genetic links to lamb death loss. Dave Thomas has a new graduate student starting this fall who will work on the genetic project. We continue to work on dairy sheep genetics in general and are continuing with attempts to import sheep genetics. The biggest change to the sheep program has been the full retirement of Yves Berger. Yves retired in 2009 but has been working part time managing the sheep research projects. As of June 30 th, Yves no longer works for the University but he is back today for his presentation. The University is in the middle of the hiring process and plans to have someone here leading the sheep research program in the next month or two. In the mean time, I have been managing the sheep data collection and management, Scott Butterfield has been managing the care of the flock, and Heidi Smith has been in charge of the milking crew. Agronomic Production and Research: 2012 has been a good crop production year for the Spooner Ag Research Station. A mild winter and low snow total meant that field work could start relatively early. Grass growth started early too, and ewes were put on pasture in mid April. Rainfall here was plentiful in May and June. We received 6.45 in May and 5.55 in June, which was above normal for both months. July also received 3.25 but this was a bit below normal. We are a bit dry since mid July and with the heat now, both pastures and some crop fields are showing signs of drought. 1

First crop alfalfa was average, but second and third cuttings have had good yields. We have enough harvested forage for the upcoming winter. Alfalfa harvests were earlier than normal, and we will be able to harvest a fourth cutting this year in late August or early September. Corn and soybeans look good so far. One dryland corn field will have low yields from the recent heat and drought conditions around pollination time. Crop Research Trials include: Alfalfa seed coating trial, Italian ryegrass trial, two switchgrass trials, a new planting of big bluestem grass, corn variety trials, corn silage variety trials, corn ph trial, soybean variety trials, spring wheat nitrogen product and rate trials, oats variety trials and barley variety trials. Horticulture trials include: Organic vegetable trial on broccoli, sweet corn, squash, peas, carrots and beets; wine grapes, fall bearing raspberries in a high tunnel, hazelnuts, and highbush cranberries. Station Management: Most noticeable is that Sheep Day is being held in the shed due to office building remodeling. The heating system went out on December 30, 2011. The rest of the winter the office building was heated with a portable furnace that sat outside and used heated glycol that was sent in hoses to heat converters in the building. We are currently in the construction and installation part of a project to install a new heating system. This project has been delayed due to the need to remove asbestos ceilings and floor tile. Currently all the offices are moved into the large meeting room. Hopefully before fall, we have the heat system installed and construction complete. 2

KEYS TO A SUCCESSFUL INTENSIVE GRAZING SYSTEM Dr. Richard Otto Wiegand Agriculture Agent for Burnett, Washburn and Sawyer Counties UW-Extension Spooner, Wisconsin Adapted from Dr. Rhonda Gildersleeve UW-Extension Grazing Specialist Many older pasturing practices were essentially systems of continuous grazing which led to overgrazing and reduced productivity. A successful grazing system is managed to optimize performance of the plants and animals, reduce economic inputs and labor, and improve environmental outcomes. Successful systems move animals frequently and rest forages judiciously to improve yield and quality. Shifting from pasturing to a rotational, managementintensive grazing system can double or even triple forage yields, mainly through management with minimal added inputs. There is a long list of advantages in managed grazing that include: (1) increased forage yields, (2) animals harvesting their own feed for half or more of the year, (3) animals spreading their own manure for half or much of the year, depending on out-wintering, (4) little or no tillage, (5) constant ground cover with less erosion, (6) increased soil organic matter, (7) increased water retention, (8) improved soil fertility, ph, temperature and micro-climates, (9) natural weed control, (10) reduced purchases of feed, equipment, fuel, fertilizer, and chemicals, (11) reduced overall labor, (12) improved animal condition, health, and longevity, (13) less odors and machinery traffic, (14) improved overall ecology, (15) improved aesthetics, especially regarding non-farm neighbors and visitors, (16) increased profits, and (17) ability to make a living on a smaller operation. There are some disadvantages or restrictions including: (1) added fencing and watering systems, (2) labor to move fencing, (3) need for contiguous land, (4) possible reduced forage yields compared to conventional systems, and (5) possible reduced animal productivity. Advantages can greatly outweigh disadvantages. There are several key practices employed in successful grazing. Animals need to be moved every day, or even twice a day, but at least not more than 3-4 days, to ensure that plants are not eaten twice or cropped too low. Stocking densities need to be high enough to ensure that animals eat most of the material across the entire paddock. In general, animals are brought into a paddock when forages are 8-12 inches high, depending on species, and removed when forages are 3-4 inches. Rest periods need to be long enough, often ranging from 15-50 days depending on rain and season, to restore plant height, vigor and root reserves. Fencing between paddocks can be permanent or movable, depending on stocking and grazing design. If animals cannot keep up with forage growth, as is typical in spring and early summer, extra forage can be made into hay or other stored forage. If forages are not growing fast enough for the animals, typical in later-summer or fall, then stored forage needs to be supplemented. Stockpiling, the practice of allowing forage to grow and accumulate for deficit periods, can be applied to summer slumps or fall, winter or spring periods. Out-wintering is the practice keeping animals outside during the winter and positioning hay or other forage around the field to optimize distribution of manure and residue. Mob grazing is a practice that employs very high stocking densities, often 100,000 3

lbs or more of animal weight per acre. It uses very short grazing periods often measured in hours, and accepts a higher proportion of residue. Multi-species grazing is becoming more popular. Sheep can compliment horses or cattle by cleaning up forbs and weeds, however fencing requirements may be greater. NW Wisconsin has predator issues, especially for small ruminants, including bears, coyotes, wolves and birds of prey. Electric fencing, guard animals and keeping livestock closer to buildings or in at night can avert most problems. Intake is the most important predictor of animal productivity. The quantity of forage that animals eat depends on time spent grazing, often 4-10 hours, bite frequency, often 30-80 bites per minute, and bite size, with an optimal one bite per plant of high-quality forage. Quality components of forage, especially protein and energy, can easily be purchased and supplemented in the diet, but are also expensive. Protein and energy are highest in shorter, immature forage, but yield or quantity is also less. Fiber is a quality factor important for rumen function and is highest in tall or mature forage. There are grazing heights, often between 4-10 inches, which give the best optimal quantity and quality. Water and minerals should be available in adequate amounts. Choice of forage species will vary, but the usual candidates for NW Wisconsin include grasses such as orchardgrass, timothy, Kentucky bluegrass, Reed canarygrass, smooth brome, and tall fescue. Legumes would include red, white, alsike and kura clovers, birdsfoot trefoil, and grazing alfalfa. A good diversity of plant species is recommended, but can be harder to manage. A grazing mix usually includes 2-3 grasses and 1-2 legumes. Orchardgrass and white clover are likely to be found in your fields in any case, and birdsfoot trefoil will be found on heavier soils. Your species selection will depend on factors such as yield, forage quality, establishment, seed cost, fertility and ph, winter hardiness, drought or wet tolerance, grazing tolerance, persistence, and which animal species are grazing. Grasses are typically established with tillage or interseeding in spring, although late summer seeding may work in some cases. Clovers can be frost seeded or spring seeded on the surface. Renovation may be necessary after a few years for older stands, undesired species, or bare or weedy spots. Annual forages such as ryegrass, small grains, sorghum, turnips, corn or teff can be used as temporary supplements for forage emergencies often related to drought or winter kill, stockpiling, transition to renovation, or to add late fall or early spring forage. Managed grazing is a complex yet rewarding system. Each grazier has his or her own specific methods. The best graziers walk their fields and watch their forages daily. 4

RESOURCES FOR SUCCESSFUL GRAZING Laura Paine Grazing Specialist Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection Madison, Wisconsin Brainstorming a resource list A resource is a source of supply, support, or aid, especially one that can be readily drawn upon when needed or one can think of resources as the collective wealth of (a farm operation) or its means of producing wealth. Both definitions are valid. It s in our best interest to think about resources for our farm in the broadest possible sense and consider anything and everything that is available to use in the management of your farm. In an effective managed grazing system, your management is by far your most important resource. The more you focus on managing your system, the better it will function and the more productive it will be. The best managers are characterized by their ability to effectively utilize the resources available to them. So let s talk about what kinds of resources are available to us. In these times of austerity, many state and federal programs have seen cutbacks and there are probably more to come, so taking a broader view of resources is an effective strategy. We will discuss five types of resources: natural resources, personal aptitudes, social networks, financial resources, and technical assistance/education. Natural resources Every farm comes with a unique collection of natural resources. Our goal is to harness those resources to capture the sun s energy at its core, that s what farming is all about. Factors involved in successful pasture management include climate, soil type, pasture plant community, your animals and their behavior, and your management. Making the most of the free resources available on your farm, such as sunlight, rain, and legumes for nitrogen, will help make your farm generate the income you need. Managing the pasture to provide a rest-rotation cycle is the foundation of optimizing the system. Knowing your farm and its capabilities is key to making good management decisions. Soil testing, forage testing, weight gain and other measures are all part of a monitoring system that can help you manage better. Personal aptitudes Another free resource is your skills and aptitudes and those of your family or partners. Many livestock producers also work off the farm and have skills that could be applied to their farm operation. A good resource for considering how to make the best use of these personal 5

resources is an Extension publication called Farming Alternatives: A Guide to Evaluating the Feasibility of New Farm-Based Enterprises (NRAES-32). Through a series of worksheets, this publication helps the reader explore their business qualities, skill sets, goals, interests, risk aversion and other qualities that can contribute to a successful farm business. Social networks A pasture walk combines two of the most effective learning strategies: peer to peer knowledge sharing and real world working examples to see for yourself. Grazing networks also provide an avenue for social interaction and mutual support. Wisconsin has more than 20 grazing networks. Some are large and have a broad, diverse membership; others are small or closed groups that focus on narrow topics like dairy financial management. To get the most out of a grazing network, come to pasture walks with an open mind. There is a common misconception that if one is a dairy farmer, a sheep grazing pasture walk will have nothing of value, and vice versa. A grazier once said that he d never been to a pasture walk where he didn t learn something. Sometimes the more different a farm is from yours, the more likely you are to come away with a novel idea to try out on your farm. Another form of network is a farmer discussion group. These are groups of self-directed farmers who are very deliberate about learning. The topics covered vary among groups, but many of these groups are self-funded. They collect member fees that are used to pay a facilitator to organize meetings and gather resources and topics. A farmer discussion group guidebook is available at the following website: http://fyi.uwex.edu/grazres/educator-resources/. If there is not a grazing network in your area that meets your needs, consider starting one. Resources for managing a grazing network can also be found at the website listed in the previous paragraph. Financial resources There are many sources of federal and state funding available to farmers, but most of the programs are relatively specific in their scope and have other restrictions on eligibility. I ve divided the listings by production related resources versus business and marketing resources, and then within each category, by state and federal sources. This is not a complete list. Federal cost share, grants, and loans for agricultural production. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). A primary source of funding for establishing a grazing system is the NRCS Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). This program provides a 50 to 75% cost share on specific practices installed on farms including fencing, watering systems, and pasture seeding, as well as many other conservation practices from manure storage to pollinator habitat. Applications are accepted through county USDA Service Centers and are ranked and funded based on local priorities. 6

Another NRCS program that graziers should consider is the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP). This program involves a multi-year agreement that provides payments for conservation practices you are already using plus incentives for adding conservation practices and improving management. A third program is the Grassland Reserve Program (GRP). This program currently has little funding in it, but this may change with the next Farm Bill. The GRP provides a per-acre payment for maintaining farmland under grassland cover. The grassland may be hayed or grazed, but not tilled up for annual crops. Options include a multi-year contract or a perpetual easement that is equivalent to a purchase of development rights. Currently, the program has so little funding that NRCS targets only larger acreages in specific areas of the state. Farm Service Agency (FSA). The USDA Farm Service Agency offers two types of financial support that may be of value to sheep producers. One is crop insurance. In addition to conventional crop insurance for commodity production, there are two programs for noncommodity production. The Non-Insured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) and Agr- Lite. The NAP program is a low cost program that provides minimal insurance for crops and forages, including pasture. Agr-lite is a revenue insurance that covers total revenue from a farm regardless of the source of income, so it is able to insure losses from livestock and meat sales as well as from crops. Premiums are relatively high. The second category is loans. FSA loans are available for beginning farmers, for farm acquisition, operating costs, and for storage structures for crops including hay. USDA Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SARE). The USDA Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education program has a Farmer-Rancher grant program that provides funds for research, education, and market development projects. About 50 projects are funded annually in the North Central Region. Applications are accepted in the following categories: Individual ($7,500 maximum), Partner two farms ($15,000 maximum), and Group ($22,500 maximum) grants. The USDA National Organic Program offers an Organic Certification Cost-Share Program. Organic farmers may apply for a 75% cost share reimbursement of their certification costs annually, with a payment cap of $750 per certification category (crops, livestock, wild harvest, and processing). The program is administered by state Departments of Agriculture (I manage this program for Wisconsin). State cost share, grants, and loans for agricultural production. The primary means of providing financial support for farmers for land-based costs is through County Land Conservation Departments (LCDs). The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture provides grants to these local offices to support staffing and provide cost-sharing to farmers. The types of practices eligible for cost share and the availability of funding varies among the counties. 7

Federal programs for business and market development FSA crop insurance and loan programs listed above can be considered among the resources for your business and marketing efforts. In addition, the SARE grant program also funds market development projects. Two other possible sources of USDA funding for business and market development are the Value Added Producer Grant program and the Farmers Market Promotion Program. The Value Added Producer Grant program (VAPG) provides two levels of grants: planning grants and working capital grants. Planning grants are relatively small and are for business planning and feasibility studies, while working capital grants can be up to $300,000 and can be used to help launch or expand farmer-owned value-added businesses. These grants require significant matching funds from non-federal sources. The Farmers Market Promotion program provides funding not just for farmers markets, but also for improving and expanding roadside stands, community-supported agriculture programs, agritourism activities, or other direct producer-to-consumer market opportunities. Award amounts are between $5000 and $100,000. Most federal grant programs are very complicated and challenging to apply for. Especially for the VAPG, many applicants hire a grant writer for assistance. State programs for business and market development The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture has several grant programs to support the growth of the agriculture and food sectors in the state. Unfortunately, several of these programs have been zeroed out as the state grapples with tight budgets. Two of the four programs currently have funds to award. The Dairy 30 X 20 program provides grants up to $5000 for dairy producers (can be sheep dairies) for planning processes including modernization, expansion, farm transfer, etc. as well as for establishing teams of experts to assist with improving milk quality or production, transition to grazing or organic, or other changes. The Producers First program provides grants of up to $3000 for business and marketing efforts of individual producers, such as feasibility studies, development of marketing materials or logos, and product development. Two programs that may be reinstated in future years include the Buy Local Buy Wisconsin program that provides grants up to $50,000 to groups, agencies and organization to build infrastructure for local food systems, and the Agricultural Development and Diversification program that provides up to $50,000 for research and development of new agricultural products and production systems. One private source of funding is the Sheep and Goat Fund, a revolving loan program of the National Livestock Producers Association. 8

Additional sources of funding are listed in two publications, Got Moola, a DATCP publication, and the Blue Sky Greener Pastures Funding Guide, available from the University of Wisconsin Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems. Technical Assistance and Education Sometimes what is needed most is not money, but knowledge. There are a number of sources for technical assistance and opportunities for education on managed grazing. For the past fifteen years, we ve had the good fortune of having a grant program to support a robust network grazing specialists around the state. At its height, the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative Grant Program provided over $1 million per year that funded grants for technical assistance, education, and research on managed grazing. This funding source has been dwindling in recent years and is set to expire in 2013. The good news is that these funds have helped foster creation of some longer lasting resources that will continue to be available for farmers to access. Wisconsin has more than 30 agency staff and grant funded specialists around the state who are able to work one-on-one with farmers to develop a comprehensive grazing plan for their farm or provide technical assistance for design of seeding mixes, fencing, watering, stream crossings and other grazing infrastructure. Many of these technical service providers (TSPs) are NRCS or Land Conservation employees and can be reached through your county government offices. Since 2008, Wisconsin has had a state Extension Grazing Specialist. Dr. Rhonda Gildersleeve has been providing training in managed grazing to county Extension Agents and her expertise is available to farmers through their local Extension office. In addition to many workshops and pasture walks sponsored by GrassWorks and local grazing networks, the premier grazing education event is the Wisconsin Grazing Conference, scheduled for January 17-19, 2013 in Wausau. The event features 20+ workshops, an ever expanding grazing-related tradeshow Thursday-Saturday, silent and live auction, social time, delicious locally raised grass-fed foods, and numerous networking and community building opportunities. Formal educational opportunities include two-day grazing schools held around the state and sponsored by UW Extension, for-credit classes at several of Wisconsin s technical colleges, and several more comprehensive programs for beginning farmers. Northeast Wisconsin Technical College has developed an organic and sustainable agriculture curriculum that includes a grazing module during certain semesters. Some of their classes are offered on-line. The Wisconsin School for Beginning Dairy and Livestock Farmers and the Land Stewardship Project s Farm Beginnings Program both offer a multi-session training program for beginning farmers focused primarily on business planning, organization, and accessing resources. The Dairy Grazing Apprenticeship Program is a more formal dairy farming training that includes a formal apprenticeship on a grazing dairy farm in addition to coursework. In addition to in-person one-on-one assistance and group education opportunities, there are many on-line sources of information. Some are more reliable than others. A safe bet is to start with resources provided by neutral, research-based organizations and institutions such as 9

Extension, the National Center for Alternative Technologies (NCAT), and non-profits like GrassWorks. A partial list of online resources can be found in the resource list below. In summary, there are many, many resources available to farmers to establish or improve your grazing system. The most important is your own management your observation skills and ability to effectively select and implement the tools and resources you need to reach your goals. Resource list NRCS web soil survey: http://www.wi.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/soil/soils_products.htm UW Soil and Forage Testing lab: http://uwlab.soils.wisc.edu/ Farming Alternatives: http://palspublishing.cals.cornell.edu/ Farmer discussion groups: http://fyi.uwex.edu/grazres/educator-resources/ Grazing networks: www.grassworks.org NRCS: http://www.wi.nrcs.usda.gov FSA: http://www.fsa.usda.gov SARE: http://www.northcentralsare.org/ Organic Cost Share: http://datcp.wi.gov/farms/organic_farming/index.aspx Value Added Producer Grants: http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/bcp_vapg.html Farmers Market Promotion Program: www.ams.usda.gov/amsv1.0/fmpp Buy Local Buy Wisconsin: http://datcp.wi.gov/business/buy_local_buy_wisconsin/ Dairy 30 x 20: http://datcp.wi.gov/farms/dairy_farming/index.aspx Sheep and Goat Fund: http://www.sheepandgoatfund.com/ Got Moola: http://datcp.wi.gov/business/business_resources/got_moola/index.aspx Technical College grazing classes: http://www.nwtc.edu/academics/progteamsites/osafe/ University of Wisconsin School for Beginning Dairy and Livestock Farmers: http://www.cias.wisc.edu/dairysch.html Farm Beginnings Program: http://landstewardshipproject.org/morefarmers/ Dairy Grazing Apprenticeship Program: http://grassworks.org/?110120000000 GrassWorks: www.grassworks.org UW Extension Grazing: http://fyi.uwex.edu/grazres/ UW Extension Sheep and Goat: http://fyi.uwex.edu/wisheepandgoat/ UW Extension Forage: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/forage/ UW Extension Grazing Team: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/crops/uwforage/grazing.htm UW Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems: http://www.cias.wisc.edu/category/crops-and-livestock/grazing/ WI Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection: http://datcp.wi.gov/ USDA On-line Resource for Alternative agriculture: https://attra.ncat.org/ 10

EWE AND RAM MANAGEMENT FOR A SUCCESSFUL BREEDING SEASON Justin Luther Assistant Professor of Reproductive Physiology Department of Animal Science University of Wisconsin-River Falls 11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

HIGHLIGHTS FROM 24 YEARS OF SHEEP RESEARCH AT THE SPOONER AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION Yves Berger Researcher Emeritus Spooner Agricultural Research Station University of Wisconsin-Madison Spooner, Wisconsin In 1988, Dr. Art Pope wrote an article published in the Proceedings of the 36 th Spooner Sheep Day summarizing 40 years of Sheep Research at the Spooner Station. It is now my privilege to do the same covering the period of my tenure between 1988 and 2012. Many studies and research were done during this period. None of them would have been possible without the dedication and hard work of many talented students. This article is really just a highlight. For complete results of the different trials, the reader should go to the following web site and go through the proceedings of the different Sheep Days and Great Lakes Dairy Sheep Symposia: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/animalscience/sheep/ Berger 1988-1993 1. Studies of highly prolific breeds Comprehensive comparison of Romanov-Targhee crossbred ewes (RT) with Finn-Targhee crossbred ewes (FT). The main conclusions were: - The combination of fertility, litter size and survivability of lambs gives a clear advantage to RT ewes. RT ewes always wean more lambs than FT ewes. - RT ewes are more able to conceive in the spring than FT ewes, which gives them another clear advantage in an accelerated lambing system. RT ewes have a shorter lambing interval (294 days vs. 323 days for FT), produced more lambs per year (3.22 vs. 2.62 for FT) and produced more weight of lambs at weaning (60 kg vs. 52 kg for FT). - The fleece of RT ewes had significantly more hair and kemp than FT ewes. Those results were later corroborated by a study at the Meat and Animal Research Center in Nebraska where a very large study showed clearly the many advantages of the Romanov breed in a crossbreeding system. 2. Development of a highly successful system of raising lambs on milk replacer. This study was a direct consequence of working with highly prolific breeds. About 15 to 20% of lambs born from those prolific breeds cannot be raised by their dams. A good system for raising the lambs needed to be developed in order to reduce labor input and maximizing lamb survival. The basic system developed at the Spooner Station is still in used (raising close to 600 lambs every year) and has been adopted throughout the country by many producers. 19

1993 present The Dairy Sheep era. Thomas Berger 1. East Friesian crossbred ewes compared to Dorset crossbred ewes (1/2 Dorset, ¼ Romanov (or Finn) ¼ Targhee). This study done between 1993 and 1996 showed that: - East Friesian cross lambs had greater birth, weaning and post weaning growth than Dorset cross lambs. - EF cross ewes gave birth to.27 more lambs per lambing, reared.15 more lambs per ewe mated and produced 1.9 more milk than Dorset cross ewes. The results also showed that the East Friesian breed is an excellent milk improver and that ewes with 50% EF breeding have an overall excellent milk production. 2. East Friesian crossbred ewes compared to Lacaune crossbred ewes. In 1998 UW-Madison imported from Great Britain frozen semen from 3 different Lacaune rams and imported a live Lacaune ram from Canada. EF and Lacaune crossbred ewes have a similar overall milk production and lactation length but the Lacaune crossbred ewes have a significant higher butterfat which is of a considerable advantage in cheesemaking. Lacaune crossbred ewes, however, produce less lamb due to a lower litter size (1.8 vs. 2.2 for East Friesian). 3. Effect of Pasteurella vaccination on the mortality rate of high percentage EF lambs. Lambs of high EF breeding (75% or more) are very susceptible to respiratory problems especially during the post weaning period. Vaccination of the ewes with a Pasteurella vaccine before lambing and vaccination of the lambs at birth with IBR/PI3 does not seem to reduce the pneumonia problem. However, vaccination of the lambs with a Pasteurella vaccine at weaning (30 days of age) might reduce somewhat the incidence of pneumonia. The effect might be very small. 4. Effects of pubertal growth rate of ewe lambs on their subsequent lambs and milk production. In 2004, 2005 and 2006 replacement ewe lambs were given 2 different nutrition treatment (full feeding and 75% of full) during the pre-pubertal growth phase (between 1 and 5 month of age). At 5 months all ewe lambs received the same full feed treatment. At the time of mating between 7 and 8 months of age, all ewe lambs had the same weight. The different nutrition treatments resulted in no difference in reproduction, lactation performance and survival of ewes up to 4 years of age. Producers can raise their ewe lambs the way they see as the best system for them without worrying about affecting the ewe performance. 5. Pasture compared to drylot for lactating ewes. When grazed on excellent quality pastures of orchard grass Kura clover, pastured ewes gave 10.5% more milk than ewes receiving high quality alfalfa hay in dry lots. 20

6. Development of adjustments factors for ewe selection. When selecting replacement ewes on their milk production, adjustment factors for lactation number and type of weaning need to be used to have a true comparison between ewes. Age of ewe and weaning system multiplicative adjustment factors for lactation milk yield. Non-genetic factor Adjustment Age of ewe, years: 1 1.65 2 1.14 3 1.06 4 and older 1.00 Weaning system: DY30 1.33 MIX 1.16 DY1 1.00 7. Comparison of lamb milk replacers with different fat content. Milk replacer with 30 and 33% fat were compared on more than 200 lambs from birth to weaning at 30 days of age. Growth rate and survival of lambs were slightly higher with the 30% fat. 8. Milk production of Katahdin-Lacaune crossbred ewes Results to be published in Fall 2012 Bret McKusick (1998-2002) Bret was a Masters and Ph.D. student under the guidance of Dr. Dave Thomas. He did most of his research at the Spooner Research Station. During his Ph.D. degree, Bret spent a year in France on a Fulbright scholarship to learn lactational physiology techniques before returning to Wisconsin to complete his degree. 1. Comparison of 3 weaning systems Removing lambs from their mothers shortly after birth and milking the ewes twice a day (DY1 system) proved to be the best way for maximum milk production but also the most expensive since all lambs have to be raised on milk replacer. The MIX system consisting of separating the lambs from the ewes overnight and milking the ewes once a day proved to be good although cumbersome and decreasing the amount of fat in the milk collected. The traditional system (DY30) of leaving the ewes raised their lambs for 30 days and then 21

milking the ewes proved to be the least productive system. DY1 and DY30 systems are used widely by producers throughout the country. 2. Fat supplementation Ewes fed a calcium salt of long chain fatty acids during lactation did not produce more milk but their milk had a significantly higher butterfat content. 3. Omission of machine stripping Machine stripping is commonly performed to remove milk left in the cistern at milking time. During the trial ewes that were not machine stripped yielded 14% less milk than the ewes that were stripped. However the percentage decreased when the lactation progressed indicating that ewes were getting habituated in being not stripped and were releasing their milk better. Overall the non stripping method is quite valid not only for reducing over milking but also for increasing the parlor throughput. 4. 16 hour milking intervals Milking 3 times in 48 hours instead of 4 results in significantly less labor and a better life style for the producers. The trial showed that that extending the milking interval from 12 to 16 hours starting in mid lactation did not reduce milk production. 5. Milk flow and udder morphology Very comprehensive study showing that increasing machine efficiency and improving udder morphology traits of dairy ewes should be a priority for North American dairy sheep producers. Linda de Bie (2000) Linda was an intern student from The Netherlands. 1. Three times a day milking Milking 3 times a day during the first 30 days of lactation increased the milk production by 15% during this period but the higher production had no carry over when the ewes were switched back to twice a day milking. Maristela Rovai (2002 2004) Maristela received her PhD from the University of Barcelona (Spain) and came to the Spooner Research Station for Post Doctoral studies. 1. Udder typology in commercial flocks in the US and the University Milk yield was highest in East Friesian-Lacaune ewes, increased with age of ewe, and decreased through lactation. Lacaune ewes had the shortest teats and the highest teat insertion. Cistern height and udder size were larger in Lacaune and East Friesian- Lacaune ewes than in the other two breed groups and corresponded with their greater milk production. Udder size and teat size increased with parity number, reaching their maximum in ewes of three or more lactations. Udder size decreased through lactation while teat angle 22

and cistern height increased. The most significant and repeatable udder traits for a wide sample of sheep dairy breeds are: - Teat dimensions (length) and placement (angle) - Udder height and width - Cisterns height 2. Use of digital pictures to study udder morphology Advantages of the digital picture method are that pictures can be taken faster than the in vivo measurements at the farm, analyzed at our convenience, and it can provide a permanent record for future use. 3. Ultrasonography and milk production capacity By using ultra sound technology the cistern area of lactating dairy ewes can be calculated and therefore their milk production estimated because of the high correlation between cistern milk and overall production. 4. Use of RFID rumen boluses for identification of sheep In collaboration with the University of Barcelona, various rumen boluses were used in a trial for identification of dairy sheep. As of today all ewes at the Spooner Research Station have a RFID rumen bolus for identification which permits a quick and accurate reading. Wendorff and Jaeggi (1995 2005) These scientists were in the Department of Food Science and Center for Dairy Research, respectively, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Their research trials were not performed at the Spooner Research Station but were directly linked to the Station activities. - Study on the quality of frozen sheep milk - Storage of frozen sheep milk - Best methods of freezing and thawing sheep milk - Development of several types of cheeses to be made with sheep milk - Development of a formula to estimate cheese yield from sheep milk - Effect of somatic cell count on cheese yield and cheese quality - Effect of seasonal change in the composition of sheep milk on cheese yield and cheese quality - Claire Mikolayunas (2006-2010) Claire was a Masters and Ph.D. student under the guidance of Dr. Dave Thomas. Most of her research trials were performed at the Spooner Research Station. 1. Supplementation and stage of lactation on performance of grazing ewes. Demonstrated the positive effect of supplementation with grain in both early and late lactation in grazing ewes. Level of supplementation varied from 1 to 3 pounds of whole shelled corn. At all level milk production was higher. However, the study showed that the gain in milk production at the 3 pound level might not be economical. 23

2. Protein utilization in lactating dairy ewes 3 trials were conducted: - an indoor trial with dried feed - an indoor trial with fresh forage in a cut and carry system - a grazing trial with pasture containing 3 levels of legumes. Across the 3 trials, supplementation of RUP increased milk and milk protein yield in low and high producing dairy ewes. Forage composition also affected milk, milk protein yield and nitrogen utilization. Increased milk yield maybe realized by supplementing RUP to graizing dairy ewes and maintaining mixed grass-legume pasture with at least 50% legume. Those results are particularly relevant to dairy sheep producers since the large majority of dairy ewes are grazed. 3. Effect of prepartum photoperiod on milk production The trial was conducted at the Madison Livestock Lab with Spooner ewes. Milk production of dairy ewes is increased when parturition coincides with the shortest days of the year and when lactation occurs during growing day length Carlo Spanu (2009) Carlo was a Ph.D. student from Sardinia (Italy) under the guidance of Dr. Pam Ruegg, Milk Quality Extension Specialist at UW-Madison. 1. Effect of dry treatment on mastitis of dairy sheep Results of this study agree with the effectiveness of dry off therapy for prevention and treatment of mastitis. In this study the dry treatment was effective in reducing the intra mammary infection when used in ewes with high SCC and against gram positive bacteria. Before the dry treatment is recommended on a regular basis, other factors, such as cost benefit ratio, target pathogens (i.e. CNS), implementation of hygienic milking and management strategies must be considered. The results in this study suggest that dry therapy is recommended on the basis of the bacteriology. Others 1. A comparison of market lambs sired by Suffolk rams of the United Kingdom or US origin (Thomas, Berger, McKusick, Gottfredson, Zelinsky and Rosa). In 1998 and 1999 East Friesian crossbred ewes were inseminated with semen from Suffolk rams of U.K. (Suffolk Sire Reference Scheme) and US origin (National Sheep Improvement Program). After insemination, ewes that were open were naturally mated by non-nsip American Suffolk. The conclusions were that there might have been a tendency for poorer growth from non-nsip sired lambs, for greater early growth in U.K. sired lambs and for greater later growth in US NSIP sired lambs. U.K. sired lambs had a superior leg shape than US sired lambs but other carcass traits were remarkably similar among lambs from the three sire groups. 24

2. Growth and carcass traits of lambs sired by Texel or Hampshire rams (Thomas, Gottfredson, Berger, Southey). In 1993 Dorset-type ewes were bred either by Texel rams or by Hampshire rams. Breed of sire did not affect birth and weaning weights, but Hampshire-sired lambs were 7% heavier at 150 days of age. However Texel-sired lambs had greater dressing percentage, higher leg conformation score, larger loin eye area, and lower carcass fat percentage. No differences between sire groups were observed for measures of depth of subcutaneous fat. 3. Correlation between short tail docking and rectal or vaginal prolapses (Thomas, Berger and a consortium of other Universities). In several research centers (Spooner Research Station included), the tail of new born lambs were docked at 3 different location: completely against the rump, in the middle of the caudal folds and after the caudal folds. A strong relationship was found between short length of the tail and an increased incidence of rectal prolapses. The recommendations were that the tail should be docked at or below the caudal folds. In the last 24 years, the Spooner Research Station has been extremely active in sheep research and outreach, and due to the diligence of its crew, the facilities have been kept to the top operational level ready to continue many years of research. Because of its involvement with all parts of the sheep industry, the Spooner Research Station is recognized as a national leader in sheep research and certainly as a beacon to all involved in dairy sheep production. 25

DEALING WITH DROUGHT IN PASTURE SYSTEMS Phil Holman Superintendent Spooner Agricultural Research Station University of Wisconsin-Madison Spooner, Wisconsin This summer, pastures at the UW-Spooner Ag Research Station are just now (August) starting to feel the effects of drought that has hit the rest of the state and much of the United States. Different pasture management strategies for times of drought are: 1) using harvested feed for part of the forage needs, 2) increasing the pasture acres available, 3) decreasing the number of animals grazing, and 4) pasture irrigation (if available and practical). At different times over the years, we have utilized all four of these methods with our sheep flock. 1) Normally the sheep forage is supplied 100% by pasture, but during the hottest part of the summer, we kept the sheep in lots and fed baled hay. 2) In 2005, we had 18 acres of Italian Ryegrass and the additional forage acres allowed us to graze the whole season in spite of the 2005 drought. In 2006 we increased pasture available by planting a nearby seven acre field to Italian Ryegrass. The Italian Ryegrass was planted on April 28 th, and we were able to first graze this pasture in late June. Italian Ryegrass is a fast growing annual (generally) that can provide excellent forage quality and high yields. This increase in acreage can be as simple as using some nearby hay fields as well. 3) Soon we will be reducing the number of ewes grazing as we start our breeding groups. In order to keep ewes and rams separated, some groups will be in the lots and others in the barn. All ewes in the lots or barn will be fed dry hay, and this will reduce the number of ewes on pasture. Another method of reducing the flock size would be to initiate culling earlier in the year. Every flock has some animals that are performing poorly or are already destined to be culls. Sheep producers should move the culls to market early to reduce the amount of pasture forage needed. 4) Lastly, we have the ability to irrigate some of our pasture acreage. One of our pastures is at the end of a center pivot and another pasture is accessible by using portable irrigation pipe to get water there. So far this year we have irrigated with the center pivot fairly aggressively. To summarize, managing pastures in a drought year takes a willingness to use a variety of strategies to maintain productivity of the sheep flock and maintain the long term viability of the pastures. 26

ESTABLISHMENT, LONGEVITY AND USE OF KURA CLOVER-ORCHARDGRASS PASTURES (Reprinted from 2010 Spooner Sheep Day proceedings) Kura Clover Establishment: Phil Holman Superintendent Spooner Agricultural Research Station University of Wisconsin-Madison Spooner, Wisconsin Kura Clover mixed with orchard grass was established on Field #9 at the Spooner Ag Research Station in 1997. In 1996, the north half of the field was corn while the south half was bluegrass and quackgrass pasture. The north half of the field established successfully while the south half had some kura clover but it was a minor component of the pasture mix. In 2005, the south half of field was killed. Kura clover and orchardgrass were seeded in the spring of 2006. Since that time several attempts have been made to add kura clover to existing pastures by no-till interseeding however there has been limited to no success. Four other fields (#2, 3, 4 & 15) all have varying degrees of kura clover. Most often there is a solid stand of kura clover near each pasture gate entrance. We theorize that when the ewes congregate near the pasture entrance, either excessive grazing/trampling of the grass or additional manure is creating conditions where the kura clover is surviving better than the grasses. The remaining portions of these pastures have some kura clover but it is a relatively low percentage. Thus, in order to successfully establish a kura clover-orchardgrass pasture, it is recommended to start with a clean field. 1) Fall killing or full tillage following grain crops will achieve the clean field. 2) Soil test and apply lime or fertilizer as needed. 3) Direct seed in spring without competition of a cover crop. 4) Use appropriate rhizobia inoculant for the kura clover. 5) Control weeds by clipping and removing Grazing could be used if pastures are dry and firm however this will cause some damage to the kura clover 6) Remember that kura clover takes three years or more to fill in so be patient! Kura Clover Longevity: The kura clover established in the north half of field #9 was established in 1997 and appears to be PERMANENT. In fact, this pasture has become 70-90% kura clover in most places. The grass component is mainly Kentucky bluegrass with some orchardgrass remaining. In 2003, much of the orchardgrass was winterkilled. Thus, in 2004 an attempt was made to increase the orchardgrass percentage by using herbicide to weaken the kura clover while interseeding orchardgrass. This appeared to work fine during that year, however, another 27

difficult winter killed much of the newly seeded orchardgrass. No other attempts have been made to change the pasture composition since then. Reasons for Wanting Kura Clover in our Pastures: 1. Kura clover is a long-lived perennial that once established should be a permanent component of the pasture. 2. Clovers reduce nitrogen fertilizer needs and costs for pastures. 3. Kura clover mix pastures have yielded 0.9 ton dry matter per acre more than grass mix pastures in both 2000 and 2001 (Spooner ARS Field Data). 4. Kura clover mix pastures have higher forage quality than grass pastures (see Table 1). Table 1. Forage Analysis of Kura Clover Mix Pasture and Grass Mix Pasture from Spooner Ag Research Station in June of 2004. Pasture 9-SW 9-NW 9-NW 4-South Date 6/8/2004 6/15/2004 7/8/2004 7/13/2004 Species Grass Mix Kura Mix Kura Mix Orchardgrass Crude Protein 19.92 23.39 21.72 17.24 ADF 36.27 30.75 28.67 37.78 NDF 52.32 39.87 37.53 55.03 Relative Forage Quality 174 222 223 184 Reasons for Choosing Orchardgrass for the Kura Mix Pastures: 1. Orchardgrass is a good complementary grass with kura clover by not being overly aggressive during establishment, giving time for kura clover to establish. 2. Orchardgrass survives grazing reasonably well and regrows fairly quickly. 3. Vegetative orchardgrass has fairly good forage quality and palatability. Downsides of Orchardgrass for the Kura Mix Pastures: 1. Orchardgrass sometimes matures quickly too quickly so grazers need to be willing to skip and clip pastures when maturity causes forage quality to decline. 2. Orchardgrass occasionally will winter kill and need re-establishment 28

BODY CONDITION SCORING OF SHEEP Reprinted from: http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/14303/ec1433.pdf;jsessionid= 63787D2FAFBFB96CD730412671658C6F?sequence=1 EC 1433, April 1994 James M. Thompson and H. Meyer Department of Animal Sciences, Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon Throughout the production cycle, sheep producers must know whether or not their sheep are in condition (too thin, too fat, or just right) for the stage of production: breeding, late pregnancy, lactation. Weight at a given stage of production is the best indicator, but as there is a wide variation in mature size between individuals and breeds, it is extremely difficult to use weight to determine proper condition. Body condition scoring describes the condition of a sheep, is convenient, and is much more accurate than a simple eye appraisal. A body condition score estimates condition of muscling and fat development. Scoring is based on feeling the level of muscling and fat deposition over and around the vertebrae in the loin region (Figures 1-3). In addition to the central spinal column, loin vertebrae have a vertical bone protrusion (spinous process) and a short horizontal protrusion on each side (transverse process). Both of these protrusions are felt and used to assess an individual body condition score. Figure 1 - Feel for the spine in the center of the sheep's back, behind its last rib and in front of its hip bone. Figure 2 - Feel for the tips of the transverse processes. Figure 3 - Feel for fullness of muscle and fat cover. 29