Customer Sound Off

 

To all members and potential member of the United Suffolk Sheep Association.
From: Ron Alves
Re: Percentage Suffolk Registration
February 18, 2015

I’ve read with interest three letters in response to the U.S.S.A Board recommendation to make 75% Suffolks fully registered Suffolks.  I appreciate the concern, passion, and antipathy the writers of these letters expressed.  All three writers alluded to problems that the Suffolk breed is facing, yet none had any suggestions to rectify any difficulties that the breed is having.  The Board’s decision, a bold and obviously controversial one, is at least an attempt to resuscitate interest in the Suffolk breed.
Why has the Suffolk breed changed from the breed in the lead to the breed in need?  This is a multiple choice question and you can select your answer(s) below.

  1. The spider syndrome.
  2. Few want to fit today, and most of today’s more elevated Suffolks need to be fitted.
  3. Long lanky individuals may have been in vogue in old soap opera westerns, but not in a livestock species that was bred to be a terminal sire of meat animals.
  4. The Suffolks of the hey daze of the late 70’s and the early 80’s were a fad; fads come and go. 
  5. Finally, in the words of Clark Gable in “Gone with the Wind”, “I just don’t give a damn”!

The decline of Suffolk popularity undoubtedly rests upon numerous factors, some of which may be difficult for the Association and its breeders to control.  I will be the first to admit that my livestock evaluation abilities are limited.  However, to my untrained eye the Suffolk breed that dominated the show ring for a period of time is no longer that Suffolk breed of yesteryear.  Selection for frame score has taken the “guts” out of Suffolks.  They are a harder doing sheep, they had less livability, not as structurally correct, and lack the meat and muscle of Suffolks of the past.  Now don’t be offended and state to no one in particular that “my sheep are not like that”.  I am not saying anyone’s sheep are as described above.  I am saying that the Suffolk breed that is being selected in the show ring is a less functional Suffolk than of the past. 

To illustrate; run a group of Suffolk with a group of Katahdin or Dorper ewes as you would normally manage your Suffolks and the hair sheep will get too fat.  Now run those same sheep under a grass based or range condition and many of the Suffolks will have a hard time surviving.  The situation is a dire one and dire circumstances often times need extreme action.  Yes, the Board’s action to allow sheep that is a 75% ancestral Suffolks to be fully registered was a radical action.  Before commenting directly on this recommendation, remember it is at this time only a recommendation, Digressing slightly (or many a wee bit more than that) I would like to philosophize about circumstances that have reoccurred throughout human recorded history. 
I have faith in the circumstance that there is a situation-place-individual(s)-requirement-time (SPIRT) continuum in existence.  Allow me to explain.  Things don’t just happen.  For example, why were Washington, Adams, Franklin, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe all alive at the same time during the formative stages of the creation of the experiment called the United States of America?  Most readers of this memo probably have those kinds of situations in mind or perhaps buried deep in their subconscious.  I believe the SPIRT [sic] for the renaissance for the Suffolk breed is at hand. 
So why is the Suffolk breed now the breed in need, rather than the breed in the lead?  It is no secret that registrations, transfers, and the number of sheep breeders maintaining Association membership have declined for almost three decades.  Registered Suffolk sheep prices have not kept pace with the prices being received by crossbred and Hampshire wether type sheep.   Additionally, there are at least three schools of thought by breeders and multipliers as to what a Suffolk should look like.  There are the wether type Suffolks, the frame type Suffolks which are usually fitted for show or pattern shorn for on farm displaying and the moderate frame production oriented breeders.  This latter group can be further divided into the NSIP (Lamb Plan) disciples and those breeders who collect on-farm records for selection purposes.  The problem is further exacerbated by the circumstance that many of these Suffolk breeders think that for their breeding program that “never the twain shall meet” in respect to these different kinds of Suffolks.  In other words many died in the wool (no pun intended) frame breeder would never acquire a wether type Suffolk.
This current situation of declining Suffolk popularity is nationwide (the situation, time, place portion of the continuum).  What is required to stem and reverse this decline and who will do it are the last two pieces of the continuum (the requirement and the individuals).   It appears that the current USSA board with their 75% registration recommendation has the vision, leadership, and mettle (these are individuals) to structure the requirement.   However, the need to revitalize the popularity of the Suffolk breed will not be fixed with a single act. 
This leads to two points: (1) the early livestock visionaries laid a foundation for our livestock today by developing a breed, not a type. (2) We as an organization need to decide the Suffolk breed standards.  The point is there needs to be a breed standard if the USSA is to remain a purebred livestock organization.  This standard can be very specific and well defined or it can be broader.  For example, there are polled and horned Hereford cattle, there are red and white and black and white Holstein cattle.  The Katahdin breed, which I understand is the leader in purebred sheep registrations, registers white, red and black colored individuals.      
One of the aforementioned letter writer’s points out that crossing two 75% percent registered Suffolks (who, of which, under the new by policy would be considered “full blood” Suffolks) would result in an offspring that is statistically only 56.25% registered Suffolk.  This could be a valid concern to a statistician.  However, if it quacks like a duck, has feathers and paddle feet, and loves the water; it’s a duck!  If two 15/16th Suffolks, which under the current policy are considered full bloods and get a “white” rather than the muted green registration paper; are crossed, (A 15/16th Suffolk is 93.75% Suffolk  the other 6.25% being a Karakul/Dorper cross that someone suggested)  they’re offspring would statistically be 87.89% Suffolk.  Is it still a registered full blood Suffolk?

A 75% to 93.75% registered Suffolk should be considered a bona fide registered Suffolk with caveats attached.  There needs to be criteria attached to what a Suffolk should look like; perhaps a revised breed standard in conjunction with the 75% recommendation.   
If you get some throw back from your Nuevo Suffolks, then, as a breeder, you have some decisions to make.  If a lamb wasn’t Suffolky enough, one would be surprised at the interest youth would have in these more structurally correct, muscular sheep.  You know the genetics of the individual.  If it is an outstanding ewe lamb, register her, put in the back forty and breed her to a ram that will produce that Suffolk enough sheep.  In your own flock you may get more anomalies from the breed character perspective than normal, but manage them as pieces that move in the direction the Suffolk breed needs to go.*  I know that there are those that take offense at the suggestion that the Suffolk breed needs to change.  If you don’t think that the breed changed that get a copy of the 1979 Suffolk Banner that had Walkin’ Tall on the cover.  Find a competitive fitted Suffolk in today’s show ring that looks like that ram.  Suffolks have indeed changed. 
I will make one final point to conclude this already too long treatise.  When the BB Burroughs sheep were introduced in the late 1970’s, what kind of change did they bring to the Suffolk breed?  Were the pedigrees of those sheep on “white paper”?  Breed character, it depended on whether a Hampshire or Suffolk breeder was coming to look for that next stud ram.  There is no doubt there was some quality to the Burroughs sheep, but the concern as to genetic integrity seemed to be minor at most.  Suffolk breeders felt they needed change and those sheep offered the change that was being sought.  The Board and I feel a majority of the membership once again see a need for change. 

*What does Suffolk breed needs to go mean?  Strictly my opinion: frame needs to be moderated; last rib to pin structure needs strengthening – the hip loin junction is often weak and hips to pins needs to be elevated somewhat – the rack is too narrow, foot size needs to be increased, feet an leg structure needs to be a leg at each corner coupled with some base width, bone size needs to be increased, mouth and muzzle width needs to be increased, selection needs be toward a grass rather than grain based diet, harder doing sheep need to rigorously culled, and finally Suffolks need to be saleable from weaning to yearling size without pattern shearing and/or fitting.  If this is what I am trying to do in my program, are there Suffolks, that look like Suffolks, that will offer the genotype and phenotype to accomplish these ends?

    

Bob,

Just wanted to drop you a note to let you know how I made out this lambing season after exposing 75% of our ewes to Kimm 10160-14309, purchased as a ram lamb at your sale last May. Prior to breeding, I was impressed with the growth, muscling, demeanor, libido and easy-keeping nature of this young ram. We have been looking to add these qualities to our ewe base as we work to grow our fledging restaurant/ co-op and farm market endeavor.

We started lambing the first week of February, and this was an extremely cold winter (for New Jersey). I had several lambs born in sub-zero temps in the barn, but lost none to the cold. These lambs hit the ground and within a few minutes are striving to get up. As a group, they are more energetic and “smart” than any we’ve had. Once up, within a few more minutes, they know exactly what to do. This is as close to “effortless lambing” as I’ve experienced.

Both my wife and I noticed very early in February how vigorous and trouble free this years’ lambs are. My ewes haven’t changed, so I can reasonably conclude that the strength, vigor and survivability that we’ve experienced can be attributed to this ram. He won’t be leaving my farm anytime soon, as he continues to be the easiest keeping sheep in our flock.

Thanks for breeding productive sheep, for your dedication to improve genetics , and for providing all the data, support and information for the sheep offered in your annual sale.

One more note, I won’t be attending your sale in person this May, only because in lieu of spending the money to travel, I have confidence to buy via phone, so I hope to be able to add an additional ewe or two that I would have otherwise had to forgo for travel expenses. After seeing the quality from top to bottom last year (the ram lamb I bought was not in the highest priced group) I’d rather add more sheep than pay for airfare. Though I will miss the camaraderie, visiting with other breeders, and you, and of course the great dinner.

Best Regards,
John Peck
Mt. Salem Suffolks
Pittstown, N.J.
.

How should we assess the state of, and prospects for, the Suffolk breed? If we look at 'the numbers,' the answer is 'not good.'

If we extrapolate the ten year trend in registrations, Suffolks will fall into 2nd place among the breeds – below Hampshires – within two to three years. If we consider that, in 1970, Suffolks registered 5x as many sheep as Hampshires, this is sobering indeed. It is not that the Hampshire breed is doing well – far from it, they are in steady decline, too – but that they are doing less badly, since the present fad for Hampshire wether sires is bolstering their registrations.

The reason for the decline in our registrations is not a mystery. Article after article have pointed out and decried the trend, but to little effect. It is quite simple. Since the 1970s, the show ring has taken the breed in its own direction – to a model based on aesthetic considerations rather than on commercial utility. Our breed has not been alone in this; we have merely been the 'Breed in the Lead.' The fact that we have separate 'production classes' speaks eloquently to the fact that our 'breed sheep' are not selected for production traits.

This has happened because our breed associations – NSSA, ASSA, and USSA – long ago abandoned any role in enforcing a breed standard, and effectively turned over the breed to the tastes of judges. An acquaintance of mine, the past president of another meat breed association, put it succinctly – "we don't have breed associations, we have registration associations." We register but don't regulate – certainly not conformation, nor integrity, either, for that matter. Those who have tried to influence Association policies in the direction of promoting carcass and convenience traits have experienced frustration at best, if not outright hostility and abuse.

Over time, this has had its effect. Show ring genetics have progressively found their way into commercial stock, reducing productivity and longevity. Breeders focused on production traits find it increasingly difficult to find outside genetics (at least, with reliable pedigrees) that they can bring into their programs.

It should be noted that there are many who think that this is just as it should be. An editorial in The Banner not too long ago asserted that breed associations have no business enforcing conformational standards, and decried those on association boards who argue for policies promoting production-oriented livestock. The next month, the author of the editorial noted, with evident satisfaction, that the mail response to this editorial was overwhelmingly positive – which probably says more about the readership of The Banner than anything else.

Nor does integrity in the show ring bear close scrutiny. 'Aging' of lambs is so commonplace as to be expected. When a new Suffolk family begins to show sheep, one of the first things they learn is that they will regularly compete against people who lie about the age of their sheep. They are then faced with the ethical dilemma of whether to follow suit (after all, 'everyone does it') or to have their lambs consistently placed down as 'giving up too much size' to the lambs above them. Similarly, pedigrees, particularly in the wether sheep ranks, are frequently questionable or completely fabricated. No serious effort has been made to address these abuses, for fear of offending influential breeders. 'Bully pulpit' appeals to ethics have all the credibility of athletic steroid bans without testing.

So, what should we do? Quit breeding sheep, or give up on keeping registered stock? Of course not! The one thing necessary, for each of us, is to choose to ignore this nonsense – the unproductive sheep, the show ring abuses – and focus on breeding the kind of sheep most of us actually like – thick-muscled, structurally correct, easy-doing, fast-growing, moderately-framed, durable and long-lived. In other words, the kind of sheep that first made the Suffolk the dominant terminal sire in the US and worldwide. Most of us know how to select for this kind of sheep, which is precisely the kind of sheep that US agriculture requires. All we need to do is 'say no' to prevailing show ring fashions, and the conventional wisdom of those who are economically and/or emotionally tied to the show ring. If we can do this, we can focus on producing truly outstanding sheep that any real livestock breeder can be proud of. To find the kind of genetics we want, we may have to search far and wide to identify like-minded breeders, or search for older treasures in semen tanks. But our breed has not yet fallen so far that we cannot produce this kind of animal.

However – make no mistake – having this courage of one's convictions is tough. More than a few long-time breeders, even those with commercial sheep operations, have heeded the siren call of the show ring and changed their stock in ways they know are non-productive, against their own better judgment. I've been struck by the number of times I've heard comments from such veteran breeders, "yes, our sheep in (fill in the blank, 'early 70s', '1950s', etc.) were better" – and then asked myself, "So why did you make them worse?" The answers are not hard to find: peer pressure, a desire for recognition in the show ring, and the lure of big payouts on individual sheep.

So consider this a call to 'do your own thing' – breed the kind of sheep you believe in and can be proud of. And if your neighbor 'disses' your sheep for not being tall enough or elegant enough, or whatever – just smile to yourself, and feel sorry for those who are only 'following the crowd.'

-Jim Baglien
Baglien Suffolks
Corvallis, Oregon

The following was a “Letter To The Editor” sent to the SUFFOLK BANNER back in October of 1984.  Much is still true today!!!!  Thanks to Ron for allowing me to share this with the public again in 2009.

Dear BANNER:
I appreciate your efforts on behalf of the Suffolk Industry.  Enclosed is a $12 expression of that appreciation.  Unfortunately, Suffolk sheep production has become as much a recreational activity as it is a segment of the real agricultural livestock industry.  From my perspective, that is indeed unfortunate because there are a number of people who are misdirected in their Suffolk endeavors.  On the other hand, the “new blood” and big money being attracted to the industry has been a plus for many.  I’m sure THE BANNER has enjoyed the fruits of the Suffolk recreators.
We seem to be straying from the qualities that took the Suffolk breed from obscurity about 70 years ago to where it is today.  Most certainly times and needs have changed, but many of the basics we learned back on the farm and/or in Animal Science 101 are still applicable today.  Many breeders, some multipliers and a few recreators, apply the practices appropriate for the production of meat animals.  But, most set their sites on the glitter of the showing win and the high prices as the basis for a breeding program.  We need to direct ourselves so that the most practical meat animal is also the winner in the show-ring and will command the highest price because of a great demand.
The obvious example is our obsession with height.  There is no practical justification for a 40-inch-tall ram to produce 120-130 pound market lambs; middle-of-the-road, meaty range rams; or highly productive, moderately sized replacement females.  Folks counter by saying that they will bring a lot of money, etc.  This may be true.  But the end result is a self-serving circle.  The only people who demand these kind of sheep are other “seedstock” (I use the word loosely) producers.  The commercial industry has little desire or need for these kind of sheep today.
I see the Suffolk breed heading in three possible directions.  We could become like the Quarter Horse.  The running Quarter Horse bears little resemblance to the arena or stock Quarter Horse.  They have become almost like two different breeds.  Suffolk sheep could find themselves in a similar situation.  Those that win in the showring and bring big bucks and those that the commercial industry needs to exist economically.  If the gap between extreme Suffloks and commercial Suffolks continue to widen, the above could very easily occur.
Secondly, we (the Suffolk breed and breeders) could become a second or third-rate sheep, both from the economic and demand standpoint because the breed no longer serves a practical value.  There would be a group of people who would “trade” these sheep back and forth (because no one else would want them) and that would be the industry.
The third possibility is to weld the showring, economics, the commercial industry, etc., parameters into the basis for our Suffolk breeding programs.  It is a more conservative approach, yet it is much harder to do than just breeding tall sheep.  From the long-term viewpoint, I believe it is much sounder to be more moderate than overboard faddish.  The purebred industry cannot be the tail that wags the commercial sheep industry.  Purebred Suffolk breeders must respond to the comical producer and vice versa, but the former before the latter.
The total sheep industry seems to have numerous organizations.  I do not understand the sum total of their interrelationships, and perhaps should not comment on this.  But… what are the relationships between purebred associations and the ASPC, NWGA, etc.?  Is there formal or informal dialogue?  Does one give the other feedback in terms of directions, needs, etc., I think not.  It was very upsetting to hear that ASPC received a considerable government grant to study marketing lamb as a luxury item to foreign countries, when the per capita consumption of lamb in the United States is so low and declining.  (I’m off the topic, sorry!)
Suggestions for the Suffolk breed:

  1. One breed association.  (If the Horned and Polled Herefords are going to combine, then we darn well better get with the program.)
  2.  Paid breed association representatives.
  3. Association encouraged, sponsored, mandated production testing and record keeping.
  4. Renewed emphasis on pedigrees and bloodlines.
  5. Enforced registration criteria (fleece color, mouth problems, reproductive problems, breed character, etc.)  This would necessitate an inspection program.
  6. Make aging more difficult: (a) Filing of breeding summaries  (when rams in, when out, etc.); (b) Barn (lambing) records duplicated and sent to association; (c) Study on Suffolk teeth loss to develop further criteria; (d) Penalizing violators.
  7. Papers with three-generation pedigrees, birth numbers, birth weights, indexes, production records of sire/dam, estimated breeding values of selected criteria, etc.
  8. An official breed publication be designated (THE SUFFOLK BANNER) and the association representative (field person) work for association and association’s publication.

Your desire for answers to your Suffolk Survey certainly provoked me!  Obviously, my answers did not make the June issue, but here they are for whatever they are worth.  I am currently a member of the American Suffolk Sheep Society.  Most of the contents of this letter are my own ideas and have not been discussed with anyone.  However, I am not so brash to think that all of the above and more have not been discussed and considered by both associations. Once again, thanks for your work on behalf of Suffolks.

Sincerely,
    Ron Alves
    Alves & Chapman Livestock Company
    Oakdale, CA

Dear Mr. Kimm,

We have been buying rams from you since 2004, and have voiced our appreciation of them to you ever since. However this year we were able to buy a ewe lamb from the sale and have been watching her grow out into a wonderful young female. But the thing that has stuck out the most to us, other than the obvious change in the appearance of our flock, is the outstanding dispositions that these young sheep have! They are very quite not flighty at all. Even though they are larger than our old flock was, they are very easy for me to work and handle. No more getting run over or jumped into! The entire flock has really changed since we started using these rams and culling out the old and keeping back the new .That is a major bonus to me. They are outstanding mothers and pretty too. I know it is not just environment that makes these sheep like this after buying this ewe lamb as she acts like all of the others here. It comes from the genes. I just wanted the world to know that this million dollar disposition is the number one reason to buy KIMM SUFFOLKS!! Thank you Bob for all you do. See you in the spring.

Monte & Bambi Merrifield
4-M Farms Salem Missouri.

Mr. Kimm,

You don’t know me, but I wanted to drop you a note because I really appreciated reading your “thoughts” section. I break it out each time we return from the fair without one of those purple ribbons, to keep me from going out and purchasing something that will take us further away from the type of sheep that you refer to as balanced genetics. Your article is very encouraging, and I printed it out to take it home to read with my family.

When my father in law retired from dairy farming, we decided to utilize what was left of the ground and facilities for my six children to keep some dirt under their fingernails. We started to build a flock on our own, and later, with the help of our extension agent, were fortunate enough to acquire the herd of Hampshire sheep which you once owned. We are really happy with how the flock is performing, and what a great experience it has been for our family.

This year my oldest son had missed several shows, and I was worried that discouragement had set in, but when he saw this years flock of replacements ewes, he got them ready to take to the state fair. I prepared him for the inevitable sizing competition that would occur, but he didn’t care, because he was so proud of his accomplishments. This alone was better than a purple ribbon for me, because I was pleased that my son has become man enough to recognize quality, and what he likes, and didn’t particularly care what everyone else thinks.

And I think he is right, in my (totally biased, and largely ignorant) opinion, there was nothing at the fair that compared to his animals in terms of muscling, consistency, and all around eye appeal. They were bright, alert and carried themselves well. We often would stand back and watch how the crowds of people were drawn to them. Too bad there was not a “peoples choice” award. My other children could see it also, and were very proud of their animals, but deep down, I know recognition is important to young people, and wonder how many times I will be able to take them to the fair without them getting discouraged with the whole prospect.

My point I suppose with all of this rambling, is that I am glad that we have not chased after the extremes, although we have been tugged in both directions. I applaud and hope that you have success with the changes you are pushing for with the “PRODUCTION TYPE SUFFOLK”. I am a believer in this concept, and can’t help but think that there is should be recognition for a productive, solid farm animal. I common lament I hear at the show is how there are fewer participants. Surely your approach would encourage more to participate in promoting the breed at our fairs and shows.

Should you have any suggestions for breeders who are following your philosophy in the Hampshire Breed, I would kindly request a referral to them.

Thanks again, for your leadership in the sheep industry, and taking the time to publish your thoughts, which have been both educational and encouraging.


Anonymous

The Mohawk Valley Shepherd

By Jean T. Walsh

Looking Forward

Each year, even if I am not going to purchase a new ram, I look forward to, and study, the sheep that Bob Kimm is offering in his annual production sale. It almost seems to be a rite of spring that the sale happens in early May and that the sheep that will be available are ready for study on the internet in late April. The time between the sale and the complete offering on the net, is quite small, so there is the element of anticipation and excitement about seeing the year’s Kimm crop.

I have never met Bob Kimm, but have spoken to him on the phone and have purchased his rams. It is a goal that someday I will be able to attend the sale in person and meet him and study his way of raising sheep. In the meantime, perusing the sale catalog and making comparisons and choices is entertaining, fun and informative. If there are animals in which I am interested, Bob will take phone bids. Last year, I was interested in several of his rams, but since I would not be at the sale, I placed bids through email, not having any great expectations. I poured over the sale rams for hours before making choices. One ram caught my eye…he was one of the worst looking rams in the catalog, but he was also one of the youngest. His numbers were good and I surmised that part of the reason he was not showing well was how he was being held, however, his legs looked strong and correct. I took a chance and placed a bid on the little ram. It was with great excitement that I read a subsequent email from Bob giving me the sales prices on each of the rams in which I was interested and letting me know that my bid for the smallest ram had been accepted. Bob agreed to take my ram and some others that had been purchased to Ohio where the rams would hitch a ride to their final destinations. The trucker that picked up my ram was enthusiastic about the animal and said that it was a very nice ram. The trucker was right…the ram that was delivered was not only very correct, but he was acceptable in all ways, looking nothing like his photograph.

It is very easy to spend a lot of time perusing and comparing the Suffolks that Bob is offering. All are slick shorn and each has pertinent information like rate of gain and current weight. Codon testing results are also available, although all of Bob’s sheep are now R/R at codon 171, and negative at 136.

It is refreshing to have available a reputable source of animals that are not strictly “show Suffolks”. Bob’s emphasis is on traits that the show ring does not always encourage yet. However, this may be changing, as I have had youngsters who have purchased lambs from me calling to say how well they have done showing, even when their animals were far down the line in height. One young lady said the judge walked right by the taller animals to her ewe lamb because it looked like what he thought a meat animal should be. She was delighted to have the lamb go on to take Champion Ewe, and to do extremely well at 2 other county fairs.

It is obvious that Bob Kimm is committed to his breeding program, and his marketing abilities are truly enviable. I can think of no other Suffolk breeder whose sheep are watched as closely, whose pedigrees are studied as minutely, and whose sheep consistently bring very respectable prices. Yet, it is very possible for those with smaller flocks or tighter budgets to find a good animal that will work for them. Like the next to the youngest 2007 ram in the sale upon which I took a chance, there are good animals in all of Bob’s price categories. Even if a breeder has no interest in purchasing sheep, it is great fun to look at the animals and to compare them to each other and what is in the barn.

This year Bob’s flock will be Certified on the Voluntary Scrapie Flock Certification Program. His certification makes it possible for me, and others with Certified flocks, to be interested in ewes as well as rams. Since my ewe flock has been closed for many years, adding a new bloodline through the ewe side is attractive. Whether I actually place a bid on a few ewes or maybe a new ram, it will be great fun to study the lambs that will be offered…it costs nothing to dream a little bit.

Letter to Bob Wagner, President of the USSA

I thought I would put my two cents in on slick sheared, production, fitted and wether sire classes at Sedalia. We should be trying to get closer at having one kind of Suffolk. I have been breeding Suffolk's since 1950. That maybe makes me old to a lot but I have seen a lot in all those years. If I reflect on the 1950 through the early 1970 there was one Suffolk type. Ewes were weighing 250 pounds and a lot of ewes that weighted 300 pounds or more. They were functional Suffolk's with bone, body capacity, lived till they were eight to twelve years and milked. We had more Suffolk's during that time period than at any time in the history of the Suffolk's. We had more exhibitors young and old at fairs. We sold more sheep to young kids wanting to have one of the most beautiful sheep there was, a Suffolk. Suffolk's were number one even then. We had large Suffolk shows. In California the state fair had more sheep entered than all the other breeds together. Same with the Cow Palace. That was before we had fall born and four spring lamb classes. I can remember at the Cow Palace I was showing in a class of around eighty to a hundred yearling rams. At Louisville the now split show ring was one ring. There was more breeders that lined the out side of the ring and the stands were full of breeders. Now this year there were a handful of breeders in the stands and at anytime you wanted to stand around the ring you could pick your place! Maybe you were not in the business yet but in the mid 70's I started consigning to Sedalia. The yearling ram class had the whole ring, there were no stands in the middle and the ring was full of rams. I mean the whole ring. There were lines and lines and lines of Suffolk rams. It took from eight am till around mid night to finish all the classes. Breeders hung in there to watch the whole show. Then to top that off I can remember showing Hamps after the Suffolk show that night.

We sold terminal sires to range men and the "WORST THING WAS THE RAMS LIVED SO LONG THAT THE RANGE MAN DID NOT REPLACE TILL THE RAM WAS FIVE OR MORE YEARS OLD". Now the range man will say "WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE LONG LIVING RAMS, WE HAVE TO REPLACE EVERY YEAR WITH NEW RAMS DO TO RAMS NOT LIVING MORE THAN A COUPLE OF YEARS AT THE MOST"!

In the mid 70's came the tall, stylish high profile Suffolk. I will admit they were different and beautiful than our old fashion Suffolk's that had not changed in more years than I can say. With that stylish high profile Suffolk away went the bone, body capacity and live ability and in came the hard doing light milking ewes. We ended having spiders and those spiders that lived were class winners. I could go on but I want to say there is the functional Suffolk that a lot of breeders still breed today that are not the high profile show Suffolk's. There is a place for all Suffolk's but we need to take a good look at why we have lost the numbers and membership. Could it be that the little guy wants a Suffolk he loves to raise but knows he does not have the show type or the money to have one fitted. There is a place for those breeders and if it is in the production class or the slick sheared so be it. But I think that we should combine those two classes together and simplify things. As far as the production class they don't have to be members of the NSIP to be in the production class.

The first year of having anything new is hard to have a great show and sale. If anything there was interest in what was going on in the production classes. The worst thing was we had a judge that did not know or care about the numbers that were on a sheet in front of him. He was more interested in his phone calls and getting out of Dodge. Of course even my self, I brought middle of the road ewe lambs and they sold well. The production show and sale brought breeders who wanted to sell and buy sheep that they could look at slick sheared. Yes the production numbers were hard for a lot of breeders to understand. But this coming year will be easier with more information on how to read the information given to them.

We have lost a lot of numbers to other breeds that slick shear. You may think I am totally for slick sheared which I am not. I think we should be able to show our Suffolk's any way we want. GOD knows we have enough rules and regulations now. Why we have lost a lot of Suffolk breeders and new members, be it young kids or older breeders. First kids don't want to learn or don't have time to fit a Suffolk, their for going to a different breed that they can slick, wash and show. Easy, fast and hit a couple of shows that they are only there a day or two. They can still have time to be in sports or do other activities.

The non shower or older person needs a place that they can fit into. They do not have the money to have someone fit and show. They are raising the type of sheep that they can slick off and take to a show or sale and be able to compete slicked. These breeders can compare their sheep to others that are slicked with out having the wool pulled over their eyes. They can compare production numbers with other breeders numbers. Making it easy for them to see either visually or do their home work on production and what they need to do to improve their sheep.

I AM TOTAL FOR COMBINING THE SUFFOLK SLICK SHEARED WITH THE PRODUCTION CLASSES. MOST SLICK SHEARED SHEEP THAT LOOK GOOD SHOULD HAVE NUMBERS ANYWAY! It would make big and better classes, simplify the sales order and bring more consignors and buyers.

-Lost River Livestock Donna Mays

Dear Suffolk News,

I would like to express my admiration and appreciation for the efforts put forth by Mr. Bob Kimm during his time serving on the USSA board of directors. Not to take away from the time and sacrifices made of the other board members, but I am a very small breeder that is producing a moderately framed Suffolk. That is what I will continue to do. I find it refreshing and inspiring to see someone willing to be a voice for what is mostly a silent segment of the industry.

It has been my personal experience in other aspects of life that when you try to do what you feel is the right thing, for the right reasons, that is when you are met with the harshest opposition and criticism. I’m sure that this situation was no different.

We have so far only exhibited at the county fair level. Most individuals that have bought rams from us don’t care about papers, so I sometimes question why I register them. I have no axe to grind, nor do I stand to benefit from flattering anyone. I just decided to not be quite as “silent” today.
A very dear old friend of mine reminded me of something not long ago that I needed to hear. “Success lies not in what you achieve, but in what you overcome.”

Periodically, I have to do a reality check when making breeding decisions, and ask myself the question, what traits do I need to be adding to my genetics that will have a positive impact, from a performance standpoint. This may not always equate to a purple ribbon, but certainly makes life better in the lambing barn and the feedlot.

At the end of the day, we all choose to raise the type of sheep that work the best for us, whether it be Frame fitted, performance, or wether type. That’s the way it should be.

Sincerely,
Tracy Deemer
Lacona , Iowa

THERE IS NOTHING PRETTIER THAN A FITTED SUFFOLK SHEEP!  I have heard that statement made by countless people through the years.  It's true that for many people, the statuesque beauty, the aesthetic contrast of black points and white fleece, the elegant carriage of the head and ear loyally drew them to the breeding and showing of the Suffolk breed.  And what a canvas for a sculptor is an impeccably clean, white, fully carded Suffolk up on a trimming stand.  Why even cattlemen pay significant amounts of money for show cattle, with hair enough, to be able to fashion the ideal steer or show heifer.  What they wouldn't give for hair, something like a carded fleece upon which to work their magic.  With skillful precision, I can take my shears along the sheep's back and make a top line straighter and flatter than a drive across Illinois.  From there, with an eye toward perfection in conformation, I can sculpt a nearly perfect Suffolk.  I can make the animal appear thicker than it is by carefully and sparsely trimming the wool from it's sides.  I can correct any flaws in the shoulder area by taking that wool off the point of the shoulder and shaping it to lay flatter against the rib cage.  In the likely event that the tail and dock set is less than level, I can create a whole new rump and hip structure on my sheep.  I can give more fullness to the leg by taking off some wool above the hock and blending it into the leg wool above.  The finished product can certainly be appreciated for the attention-getting art that it is.  And I can spend hours and hours and days upon weeks on these sheep getting them to this point.  Sure it's fun and addictive, not to mention the satisfaction that I get from realizing what a beautiful creation I have made.  Doesn't it just make you want to trim out more of them and take them to the shows and show everyone what a great job of trimming you can do (or have someone do for you).  And then ultimately, as the ribbons and trophies flow in, you can be really proud of yourself and your accomplishments as a sheep breeder.
 
Now it occurs to me that I just said sheep breeder, a breeder of sheep.  Through time there have been numerous folks whose vision of a Suffolk sheep has been that of a beautiful, thick, meaty, sound, sturdy, functional beast.  People who were revered as men and women of foresight and thought of by their peers as Master Breeders.  Through an understanding of what the animal was designed to do, they have taken a path to forge an animal that would meet it's potential.  With an understanding of the principles of genetics, these people developed the breed in it's infancy and steered it's progress beyond into the future.  In their minds, the form followed the function and the shows were a venue to exhibit these improved animals.  The improvements were in the genetic abilities of these animals to breed true to the type that they were patterned after.  Breeding stock was acquired by others with similar goals in mind, but with the standard goal in mind of breed improvement.  Isn't it this goal of breed improvement, the meeting of the potential that the animals possess as a group, which sustains their popularity and assures their future in an industry?
 
So, I go back to my pretty Suffolk standing on that trimming stand and contemplate what I have just done.  I have to ask myself, does the sheep that I am looking at really represent itself honestly as a breeding piece in my or anyone else's breeding program?  If I slick shear this animal how will it look in comparison to it's fitted form?  No, it won't change the head or the alignment of the feet and legs.  However, that perfect rump, topline and shoulder placement are now unrecognizable.  Depending upon the skill of the work in fitting, how far from reality have I misrepresented my sheep?  Do I really need to so radically alter and misrepresent my animals in order to sell them to someone else?  If my skill in trimming is only to "slightly change" (enhance) the appearance of an animal does that still honestly describe my animal's ability as a breed improver?  If I am selling breeding sheep, I have to assume that another breeder wants to buy my sheep to make an improvement of some kind in their flock.  Will they be disappointed in the outcome if I have misrepresented my sheep, will they value my integrity as a breeder and buy from me again?  Do I value honesty at all?   Would I like for someone to do this to me in the reverse?  If I and others like me put on a show of highly fitted sheep and then pay someone to come in to judge these sheep for us, does it make sense to present these sheep to this judge, in class, in the most misrepresented form that I can possibly artfully create?  At the end of the show does the judge's placing mean anything if the sheep can't breed on something as elemental as their conformation and type?  Does it look foolish to anyone that we advertise our Suffolk sheep as the ultimate meat breed and yet sculpt our show animals out of wool, making sure we keep enough wool over their bodies so that we can't really see the muscle definition or development underneath?  Is it no wonder that few judges of Suffolk sheep shows comment on the muscle depth, thickness, definition, etc., in the sheep in class, since they can't really, clearly see it?  Live animal evaluation is challenging enough in trying to view the animal under it's own hide, let alone a layer of wool, that varies in depth, depending on the conformational flaw lying beneath it.  Does it not appear that we have done just about all that we can do to keep the judge from seeing this important part of a Suffolk sheep, it's musculature and conformation?
 
Now I am not a rocket scientist and this is not rocket science, but how does a breed of sheep move forward genetically and position itself for the future in a competitive market by putting roadblocks in it's path?  If the foundation of a breed is it's underlying unique purpose to exist, then shouldn't all breeders be on the same page?  We are talking about a meat breed of sheep in a meat industry not a fancy poultry or a dog show.  Do you get many requests for pet lambs?  Suffolk sheep offer a unique set of very useful, quantifiable and measurable traits, very much needed in a changing and growing sheep industry.  The declining numbers of registrations tell us that the ship may be sinking.  If as breeders of Suffolk sheep we can seize the opportunity to meet the new realities of the market we have a bright future.  Why are we not capitalizing on our early lean growth superiority, carcass merit or maternal traits such as the high milk flow of our ewes?  Suffolk sheep have tremendous genetic merit and a potentially large genetic base from which to improve and excel.  As a group we don't measure it or use it to our advantage!   Shouldn't we  be setting the pace and standards for other meat breeds in the sheep industry not watching it pass us by.  Do we really need the fluff of a falsely represented show sheep to skip ignorantly into the future of sheep production in this nation?
 
While we all have our own markets to sell to with demands that may differ slightly from each other shouldn't there be some common and fundamental goals shared by all Suffolk breeders?  While some see fitted versus slick shearing issues as mandates, maybe we should view these as wake up calls that may ultimately become mandates as we are phased out of an industry that very well may take itself more seriously than we do.  If we are being honest with ourselves, can't we see the beauty of an honest Suffolk without fitting that is level rumped, straight lined and laid in correctly that shows the stoutness of its constitution and muscling on it's own?  Can't we get excited about this Suffolk's ability to pass these improved genetics on to it's offspring through future generations of sheep?  Will we look back and be glad that we made the needed changes that it took to keep our beloved breed in the lead and positioned for the future?  I think that the honest, slick shorn sheep is looking prettier all the time.

-Bill Zwyers, IN

Our dear and long time friends Bob and Shirley Chapman convinced my wife Thelma and I to take off in the middle of corn and soy bean planting, to attend Bob Kimm’s production sale. Shirley, like my wife, had all things planned from the motel, to where to eat and how to get to Bob’s farm. I couldn’t help but think how lucky Bob and I were, or maybe how brilliant we were to pick such special ladies to look after us and with which to share our lives.

I have been in the purebred livestock business all my life, but never have I attended such an outstanding event or been more impressed. I just felt good being a Suffolk breeder that day. Nobody tells me what I should write about in our Suffolk news, and I’m like an old man on an isolated island. This case was different. The first person I saw at Kimm’s sale was our Suffolk Association president, Bill MacCauley. His remark about the sale was that, “If the great sheep and huge crowd didn’t impress me, nothing will.” He felt I should write about it… so of course I will.

Many things amazed me at Bob Kimm’s 17th annual production sale. I’m not sure it was the huge crowd from 23 different states, or the barn full of “middle of the road” Suffolk sheep that looked like peas in a pod. He had 72 or 73 rams that were going to sell in the sale, then probably 50 more rams in a different barn that you could buy for 250 dollars. You can be sure that many breeders were picking these rams out, especially the commercial breeders. Bob is by far our largest Suffolk purebred breeder. He’s registering 271 sheep, so of course he has many sheep to pick from. He probably sold 40-50 ewe lambs plus maybe 20 yearling ewes. Never have I seen such an intense crowd, trying to pick out the sheep that they were going to buy. Bob had so many data records on his flock. Breeders were doing a lot of reading plus judging the sheep. Many or most of them were repeat buyers so of course they were checking the pedigrees very closely. The sheep all looking alike did not help. One thing that impressed me was the nice heads and big feet with plenty of bone. These rams were not standing on their toes, they actually had pasterns to help them get out and do a lot of walking.

The sale amazed me the most. Talk about a low key approach to a sale- this was it. All sheep had been sheared by a professional shearer probably two weeks before the sale. These sheep had not been put on a trimming stand like the wether sheep are. They had enough wool so that the flies would not bother them. None of them had been washed, yet they were very clean. The sheep had been fed that morning and they were not sucked up like some other show sheep. The auctioneer looked like he had just gotten off a tractor.

Mr. Kimm is a very intelligent man. The teacher and former college judging coach gave a very short talk. He thanked the crowd for coming to his sale, having faith in his genetics and told them he would stand behind every sheep sold. He then said society had not accepted him, meaning the show sheep people wanted nothing do with “middle of the road” sheep. In short, that was his speech. This articulate man hardly said another word during the sale. The 72 or 73 rams sold in an hour or just as fast as they could get them in and out of the ring. The remarkable thing was that only 3 rams sold over $2,000 and none over $3,000. Most of the other rams sold between a $1,000 and $1,500. The 70 or 80 ewe lambs and yearling ewes sold even faster. It was a truly remarkable sale, and a special day for the Suffolk sheep business.

-By George K. Buckham, Sr
Excerpt from Story Telling Time
August/September 2005
Suffolk News

 
 



 

 


 

For more information
Contact:

Kimm Suffolks
Bob Kimm & Family

1055 County Road 1590
Willow Springs, MO 65793


319-290-8997 Bob’s Cell
423-220-0772 Lu’s Cell

[email protected]

 

 

 

 

Web site design by EDJE Technologies
Updated on: