SHEEP BREEDING.

Colonist, Volume II, Issue 120, 14 December 1858, Page 3

SHEEP BREEDING.

A discussion has been going on lately in the columns of the Melbourne Argus, on the subject of the best method of cross-breeding sheep; find we do not doubt a view of the arguments adduced in the controversy will be both interesting and useful to flock-owners generally. But in truth, the question has more than a mere theoretical and ephemeral interest to us, for there are two aspects in which it may be regarded, which make it one of supreme and growing importance here. Of these, its bearing on the progress of the settlement of our, as yet, unoccupied country is one, and its connection with our meat supply is another. The discussion to which we have referred was carried on by Mr. W. L. Lees, a wool stapler and grazier from Herefordshire; Mr. Thomas Shaw, jun., of Wooriwyrite; Mr. Win, Lyall, of Frogmore; and Mr. W. J. T. Clarke, of Australian celebrity. Connected as these individuals are with pastoral affairs, their opinions deserve attention. Mr. Shaw patronises the pure Merino; Mr. Lees advocates the Southdown cross; Mr. Lyall contends for the greater suitability of the Leicester and Cotswold cross; Mr. Clarke's experience sustains the opinion of Mr. Lyall, particularly with regard to the Leicesters. The Argus, which has more than one article on the subject, strongly supports the argument for crossing with the coarse wool and larger carcase sheep, as more profitable

and better adapted to the wants of the colony. We shall allow each party in the discussion to spealc for himself. Mr. Lyall asserts he can prove that cross-bred sheep are more perfect and more profitable than the Merino. Mr. Shaw addresses himself to the task of controverting this, and we ask our readers to observe his admissions. He says :— With regard to the cross-bred sheep being more profitable than the merino, I will ask, are they healthy ? So far as my information and observation go, I cannot charge the first cross in this colony with any particular unhealthiness ; nor can I charge it against the produce of the half-bred Leicester and merino ewe. It is the further crossing—the persevering in crossing—the attempts to " fix a new type of sheep," that results in disease and death. Mr. Lyall points out that the fanners of the Lothians have half-breds and three-qnarteifebred sheep. Were he inquire further, he would find that to half-bred Leicesters they put a Leicester ram. They are careful that it is young, viz., two-toothed. The produce of this cross are bred and sold principally as lambs for the market. He. would also find that on a " bleak and cold farm," the farmer must rear pure Chevoit lambs—a satisfactory proof to my mind that the cross-bred is confessedly a delicate sheep. The farmers of the Lothians are too cautious to pursue a " headlong course of crossing" to attempt to " fix a new type of sheep," by using what I last week heard termed by a gentleman—who, I understand, has been many years a practical farmer in the Lothians—a great, course, ugly brute —the Cotswold. But to return to our own flocks, listen attentively to the words of a friend of mine : "We have ewes,,the produce of half-bred Leicester rams and merino ewes; this season they had lambs; the season was very favorable. Many of the lambs were weak, a great many died a few hours after birth, others in two days. There were among them all sorts of colors, some being marked like a native cat; many of them were mis-shapen. So dissatisfied were we with them, that we are determined not to breed from them again, nor the like of them." Again: he asks:— Are the cross-bred sheep more profitable than the Merino ? For the purpose of raising a fairsized sheep out of light, inferior, and objectionable ewes, I should say tiiat the first cross are at present more profitable than the Merino. . These cases are exceptions to (he general rule. I draw a wide distinction between a moderate, judicious crossing, and a general, indiscriminate, and headlong course of crossing. Some persons may argue thus: I have sold 50,000 cross-bred sheep to Mr. Lyall for 17s. each ; had I Merinos I should have only received say 9s. each, thus shewing a profit over the Merino of £20,000. There are, however, other points to consider. What loss was there in the weight and value of wool ? How many more Merino sheep could have been fattened on the same amount of pasture ? For instance, a friend of mine weighed last wool season the fleeces of half bred Leicester rams, and the fleeces of as many Merino rams—both kinds of sheep had been running together in the same ilock —and he found the Merino fleeces weighed the heaviest. In another letter Mr. Shaw undertakes to find flocks of Merino sheep that are as heavy in carcase as any equal number of cross breds; and lie offers the following advice :— When the admirers of English sheep prove satisfactorily that the cross with it is beneficial and profitable, then by all means let vis "import lavgcly." But, in the meantime, let me urge our shcep-farmera to shun Mr. Lyall's new track—to keep the old '; beaten track," which is so " easy to fallow"—a track that has been made so plain you cannot lose yourselves. Now for Mr.^Lyall's opinions. He observes :— I have made a discovery, which is this, that we (without the advantage of'n, favorable season) can in this colony produce a sheep, fed on native grass, that will give, at 12 months old, from 70 to 801b of mutton, and a fleece of more value than that of a merino of the same age. I cannot say how many blades of grass this sheep will consume, but 1 am prepared to say less than a full-grown merino. I recommend, to increase our meat supplies, the cross with the Cotswold. In the localities where I recommend the- cross to be tried, you will produce a sheep 50 per cent, more valuable fhan the Australian merino, and one that will fatten where the merino would perish. Professor Low says:— "The entire form of the merino as a fattening animal is bad, and the return in mutton deficient both in quantity and value." " Disposition to fatten and early maturity are the properties most required in sheep to be reared for food."—l copy from M. Novel, and overlooked by Mr. Shaw.— "Through the improvement in machinery, new stuffs are now produced from coarse wool, as delicate as hitherto from fine." From the Patent Report on Agriculture in the United States, 1850. I take the fallowing:—" Each of the different varieties of sheep grown in the United States may be found in the State of New York. Woolgrowers located in the vicinity of our large cities and towns, who have hitherto "bred fine Saxony sheep, have to a great extent within the past five years changed their flocks for large framed coarsewoolled sheep, whose carcasses are valuable for mutton ; and they derive a greater profit from the Leicester, Southdown, and Cotswold sheep, and their crosses." Mr. Lees thus states his experience:— I have bred and fed pure Leicesters, cross-bred Leicester and Southdown, Ryland and Leicester, taking particular pains to ascertain the quantity and quality of both wool and mutton on each distinct breed. I have been a close observer of the merinos in this colony and New South Wales during a ten year's residence, and in the capacity of a wool broker few clips of wool have escaped my notice, the greater portion having been yearly examined by me, and in many cases I have traced the Cotswold and Leicester blood deteriorating the value, and not increasing in weight in proportion. On some of the present pasturages of this colony the merino is the only sheep that can be profitable, for in mild climates no other sheep can bear the same degree ot fatigue in search of food with so little injury to carcase and wool. On the other hand there are some districts suitable to a much better producing animal as to quantity of mutton and wool, but what sort of sheep is that to be ? The larger and heavier the sheep, the better pasture it requires; the wider, more open fleece, the I more delicate the frame. The pure Shropshire Southdown is a large sheep, finer in its wool than the general breed of Southdowns: this is, I believe, attributable to the pasturage. The wool of some of these sheep is superior to many colonial merinos, more apt to fatten, more wool, more mutton, great lambers. I have purchased ewes for lambing of this breed whose produce the first year sold as fat lambs, have covered the first cost of the ewes, leaving wool and ewes clear profit in one season. This is a sheep to cross with the merino, and would improve the carcase of the merino without detracting value from the fleece; the wool itself would be wider in the hair, but greater weight would make up the slight deficiency in price. Mr. Clarke gives his experieace in the following terms: — 1 have been an extensive sheep breeder for upwards of 30 years, having experimented on every breed in the colonies, with the exception of Cotswolds, and from what I have seen of them I think favorably. I can say I have crossed more with Leicesters than any other man in the colonies, and 1 have never had occasion to regret it, my fleeces being increased fully SO per cent, in weight, and from the'length and elasticity of the wool the price per pound was not reduced more than ten per cent.; in many cases my wool sold at higher prices than the average of Port Phillip wools. 1 am also certain that no sane man will dispute the value of the carcase. My sheep before the boilingdown took place on all occasions brought in the Melbourne market nearly double the price of fine-woolled sheep, and in boiling down they produced on an average upwards of 40 lbs. of tallow of superior quality to that produced from fiae-

woolled sheep. I have further to add that I have bred both kinds, fine-woolled and Leicester, in Van Diemen's Land, with an advantage in favor of the Leicester equal to the result in Victoria. I have also found that cross-bred sheep thrive well on the poor arid land of the Pyrenees as well as on the rich lands. Cross-breds are. hardier, better mothers for rearing lambs, and I believe consume but little or no more food than fine sheep, as a coarse sheep will eat and thrive on such grass as | fine-woolled sheep would starve on. The coarse sheep are also much less liable to foot rot. In my opinion the activity of the fine-woolled sheep is ' not an advantage, but the contrary, as coarse sheep j will eat coarse food, and rest, which tends to pro- j duce mutton, when the merino' or saxon are j travelling the whole day, and destroying more food with their feet than they consume ; and from the constant exercise they take I believe require more grass to keep them, even in good store condition, than would fatten coarse sheep of nearly double their weight.— Launceston Examiner.