September/October 1999

On-the-ground data must be gathered and analyzed in order that the progress report is valid, and it must be long on objective data and short on testimonials. Where will these data be gathered? Channels of trade will surely provide some data, as they have in the past, but it seems to me that it will be important to include on-farm/ranch/feedyard/processor data; i.e., so that each link in the production and post-production stream is represented. We can’t leave any rock unturned; we must present enough examples of improvement to make a convincing case. That’s why it’s important that the on-the-ground happenings of a representative sample of sheep production units be identified now and studied closely in the months to come. The price melt-down that the industry has weathered has surely brought about readjustments in many flocks; these new ways of doing things must be documented. Following that, we will have barely a calendar year in which to put in place widely the changes in on-site production practices that look promising.

WHY CHANGE ANYTHING? So you did notice that naughty word, "change"! Indeed, it is necessary to make changes in every aspect of sheep production, processing and marketing, in order that the industry can make a convincing case that efficiency is improving. Granted, there are measures of efficiencies already being made, both within and across geographical regions and types of production systems. For example, a small stream of farm budget data on a few sheep flocks have been gathered by agricultural economists and sheep extension specialists for a number of years. The news has often been discouraging, for lack of profitability in many enrolled flocks. However, those data may prove to be a life-saver, insofar as they provide a retrospective basis for the interim report. If nothing else, such historical data may be useful in the short-run as a way of identifying inefficient practices that must be changed.

THE BRAVEHEARTS: It’s going to require that a number of producers step out in front of the ranks and say, "I’m willing to be one of the test-cases; I’m committed to improving the efficiency of my sheep enterprise! Check out the changes that I’m making". Boy howdy, do we need those folks to speak up! Their second statement should be in the form of a question, "And……Who’s going to help me?"

I’m suggesting that for every Braveheart who steps forward, there must be a closely-knit team of skilled support people close at hand. Those of us who have ‘nattered’ at producers for years for being behind the times are now being called into the dock to show our wares. We ‘natterers’ cannot fail to answer, because it might be the last call!

It’s a job worthy of Hercules. The Bravehearts will probably be limited to those who have maintained some sort of records, or whose tax returns can be mined for a believable but retrospective ‘Year I’ data set, so that comparisons can be made with better data gathered in Year II (the first year of changed production practices), which coincides with the first year of the Adjustment Plan on which the report will be based. Fortunately, those who depend on their sheep as their primary enterprise will have some hard data, otherwise they wouldn’t have survived to this point.

WHAT ROLE, IF ANY, WILL SHEEP HEALTH MANAGEMENT HAVE IN THE REPORT?: Having healthy sheep is not a guarantee that the flock enterprise will be demonstrably more efficient. However, the reverse is a more dependable estimator, because unhealthy sheep are more likely to be less efficient than are healthy sheep. We must identify measures of flock health, such as industry standards for abortion and pregnancy wastage (e.g., <3%) and death loss through weaning (e.g., <5-7% of live births), as objective production criteria to which we can aspire.

Widely-accepted production standards, such as those cited above, can form part of the basis for a sheep flock with a DEFINED HEALTH STATUS with respect to certain specific diseases. Scrapie has been at the head of the list for a decade, and an operating plan, with dollars, is in place. Of more importance to profitability across the industry are infectious footrot and the chronic, presently-incurable diseases that elicit clinical signs of wasting late in the course of the disease: Johne’s (paratuberculosis), OPP (progressive pneumonia), and caseous lymphadenitis ("boils"). Some sheep flocks are now free of evidence of one or more of these diseases, having used rigorous test-and-cull procedures, to which advertisements in sheep publications attest. Brucella ovis can be controlled and ultimately eradicated by this same approach.

TO BE OR NOT TO BE; THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION!: Every flock, feedyard, and processor in the country will appear in the report, for good or ill. The report will have to encompass the entire industry. Will you and I be on the positive or negative side of the ledger in that report? Simply put, it won’t be good enough to stand on the sidelines and cheer for the Bravehearts! All sheep owners who regard their flock as a for-profit enterprise have an obligation to participate in improving the productivity of the industry. The time for soliloquizing as Hamlet did is past; we must band together and take action.

HOW TO DO IT?: That’s where leadership comes into play. Ours is a democratic society, so whatever is done must be voluntary. However, there is a difference between voluntary participation and scattershot free-lancing; i.e., there must be some general agreement within the industry segments, some category into which each can fit, in order that outcomes can be measured. The Lamb Meat Industry Adjustment Plan (1) addresses comprehensively what needs to be done. This plan may not cover all possibilities for everybody, but one would have to be pretty contrary-minded not to be able to find something in it that could help improve efficiency in their unit.

The voluntary good management practices that dairy and swine producers have incorporated into their business strategy in response to food safety concerns may serve as a guide for the sheep industry. Given good ideas, we must go all the way to wholehearted implementation locally, in order that real change takes place.

HOW ABOUT SOME EXAMPLES OF CHANGE THAT WILL HELP FLOCKS BECOME MORE EFFICIENT!: At the SPECIES level, focusing on fecundity far outstrips other issues. Suffolk breeders have a good record of emphasizing fecundity. As to FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT, we must show that a minimal investment will suffice for a more efficient production unit. For ENVIRONMENTAL AND PASTURE MANAGEMENT, sheep producers must show that managed grazing, stored (standing) forage, non-traditional forages, and trees and topography make positive contributions to ewe-flock efficiency. Insofar as HEALTH MANAGEMENT is concerned, knowing what health risks exist and moving toward a defined health status for the flock appear to be the place to begin. The above items should each be part of the business plan but, based on the 65-70% of total yearly production inputs that are assigned to NUTRITION AND FEED COSTS, this topic far outstrips in importance all the items cited above for the short term.

Grain feeds are rightly a mainstay of the lamb feeding sector, but breeding ewe flocks must focus on forage as the mainstay nutrient source for their sheep. To be truly effective in lowering the cost of feedstuffs, we must maximize the proportion of forage eaten where it grows or has grown.(2) Firstly, regardless of where our flock is located geographically, we must extend the grazing season as much as possible. A mix of cool- or warm-season perennial grasses, legumes, warm-season annuals, Brassica species for root or top-growth, stored forage and crop aftermaths must all be aggressively sought.(2) Our sheep must eat minimally from a bunk and maximally while walking around, if we are to produce lamb meat at greater efficiency. Fortunately, it is in the area of nutrition that flock owners can make changes the most rapidly. By keeping accurate records of the new forage program, and by documenting changes in those areas where longer time-frames prevail, it will be possible to demonstrate some improvement in efficiency for your sheep flock by the end of the year 2000!

This report to the ITC Monitoring Committee is beginning to shape up as being even more important than Y2K! Let’s get aboard!

1. LAMB MEAT INDUSTRY ADJUSTMENT PLAN, by Rosenthal, Howard, Kershow, Hermann for Collier, Shannon, Rill and Scott,PLLC, Wash., D.C. 20007, 1/29/99.