# Good multi purpose livestock?



## lisankd (Mar 8, 2013)

In homesteading I like having livestock that can have more than on purpose. Chickens and ducks for meat and eggs, guinea hens for rodent and bug control and eggs, sheep for wool, meat and milk, etc.
What good multi-purpose livestock does everyone have?


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

There are several combinations you can use. Some benefits will allow you to reduce the number of animals you have or at least the number of types of animals

Slug control, bug control, eggs and meat = Ducks
Buckeye chickens are great insect controllers, dual purpose meat and eggs and they are also excellent mousers.
cows = milk, cheese, meat, butter, hides etc.
Sheep = wool, meat, milk, cheese, butter, hides etc.
goats = meat, milk, butter, cheese, hides etc.
hogs = Meat and they are great at clearing underbrush and tilling the soil, hides
turkey = eggs and meat
rabbits = meat and hides
horses = transportation, heavy work, meat, hides

I would personally not have guinea foul. I am sure that I missed some but those are the basic farm animals. Other than exotic stuff.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

Cattle are the ultimate imo. 
Think about it, the list of dairy products is huge, giving all the protein, fats and carbs a person needs, and most of the vitamins and minerals.
Then you have the meat, a great source of many nutrients and complete protein.
The fat can be used for many things including making candles.
The bones can be boiled down to make a very nourishing stock with many health benefits. Also gelatin has been shown to have health benefits.
The leather can be used for so many things beyond just very durable clothes and upholstery. They used to make harnesses, bindings and even machinery parts out of leather. Pump jack pumps still use leather baffles sometimes.
One important and often overlooked fact is that cattle make great draft animals. Even just one milk cow can easily pull a small cart to town. Cattle, often in the form of castrated males(oxen) have done more draft work throughout history than horses.

We also have dual purpose chickens of course, they are great, ducks and geese can be wonderful as well. Don't forget to save your feathers and down


----------



## oif_ghost_tod (Sep 25, 2012)

Goats seem best suited for post-shtf life because they do not need a special diet, they simply keep your yard trimmed, and can give milk, meat, and hides.
Their smaller size and general hardiness makes them a favorite of preppers as well.


----------



## valannb22 (Jan 6, 2012)

I have rabbits and chickens right now. Planning on getting some dwarf goats this summer.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

Sorry if this sounds harsh, I love goats they are great animals but some misconceptions drive me crazy.
I never understood how goats got portrayed as hardy, compared to cows they are definitely not, imo, and the opinion of vets and people who have raised both. Cows can handle some of the hottest places on earth, particularly Brahma types and Texas longhorns, they also can handle -40 with no shelter just fine, goats cannot. Goats are also subject to predators that cows are not due to their size.
Cows just need grass, absolutely no grain is necessary. Goats should not eat only grass, they are browsers not grazers.


----------



## Toffee (Mar 13, 2012)

cowboyhermit said:


> Sorry if this sounds harsh, I love goats they are great animals but some misconceptions drive me crazy.
> I never understood how goats got portrayed as hardy, compared to cows they are definitely not, imo, and the opinion of vets and people who have raised both. Cows can handle some of the hottest places on earth, particularly Brahma types and Texas longhorns, they also can handle -40 with no shelter just fine, goats cannot. Goats are also subject to predators that cows are not due to their size.
> Cows just need grass, absolutely no grain is necessary. Goats should not eat only grass, they are browsers not grazers.


Well, if you have big expanses of grass and lots of water then cattle are fine. But if you don't have a ton of room, then goats are better, especially if you have a lot of scrub brush as they really go to town on anything even sort of resembling a weed. I've heard that if you let the goats go a bit wild, then they tend to acclimate well. Everyone I've talked to says the same sort of thing which is don't take them to the vet unless absolutely necessary.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

Toffee, I agree with what you are saying, full size cattle need a quite a bit of grass. 
Less than one out of 100 of our cows EVER get treated by a vet in there lifetime (excluding a preg check here and there for selling purposes). We have raised goats in the past and found many more health problems, parasite issues, and also predator problems than with cattle. 
That being said I would encourage anyone to get goats if they are what they want.


----------



## AuroraHawk (Sep 12, 2012)

Goat hides, meat and milk have been listed but there are 2 types of goats that can add another purpose to that list.

"Fiber Goats

The soft, fine hair of Angora and cash mere goats is highly prized by hand spinners. Both fibers have lots of "crimp" or waviness, making them easy to spin, even for a beginner.

Angoras are sheared twice a year, like sheep. Their hair, called "mohair," is approximately 6 inches long. A mature commercial grade goat averages 6 ½ to 7 ½ pounds per year. A purebred may produce 12 pounds or more.

Mohair can be either combed into "top" and spun into worsted yarn for making sweaters and scarves, or carded into "roving" and spun into woolen yarn for coats and rugs.

Mohair from purebred Angoras is creamy white. Any other color comes from crossbred goats. Although crossbred mohair is generally inferior, it is appreciated by hand crafters who prefer natural colors.

Cashmere is not a breed but the downy undercoat of some 68 different breeds having origins in cold climates. Good cashmere is at least 1 ½ inches long and comes in a variety of colors, including white. A commercial-grade goat averages a pound per year; some animals produce three times that.

Cashmere begins growing after the summer solstice on June 21st, and begins shedding after the winter solstice on December 21st. It is harvested either by combing as fibers shed or by shearing before shedding starts.

Combed cashmere has fewer coarse primary hairs to remove than sheared cashmere. After cashmere has been dehaired (by shaking out coarse hairs and picking out those that remain), it may be either teased or carded for spinning."

Mother Earth News/Sustainable Farming/Goats for Milk, Meat And More


----------



## Wellrounded (Sep 25, 2011)

On our farm we have dexter cattle, dual purpose chickens (a number of breeds), ducks, geese, pigs, self shedding sheep (dorpers) and horses. We look at a lot of points when deciding on what we should have on the farm. What feed do we have and what is sustainable long term, how hard are they on fences, do they need protection from predators, what do they produce and how reliably, how much of that product do we actually need. There are plenty of other things we think about too. 
We have dexters (actually dexter jersey cross) as we can have more on the same acreage (than large breeds) and spread lactations over the year as well as top quality beef. We don't keep goats as they don't do as well on the feed here, are hard to fence in and just not productive enough (we need at least 6 gallons of milk a day, 12 or more is better). Chickens and ducks for eggs, meat and good nitrogen manure, as well as bug control. Geese are great at keeping weeds/grass down in the orchard and vineyard and will do really well on a 100% forage diet as well as improving soil with the large amount of pooping they do. Pigs will eat anything we grow on the farm, they can be eaten from day old to any age, they have large litters often, excess piglets can be used as a barter item, they can be used to clear ground, their manure is a great addition to the compost pile and their meat is really versatile. The sheep will eat shorter pasture than the other livestock (except horses, but we graze them in other areas), they do provide some wool and we use that for bedding for other animals as well as insulation in the barns/kennels etc, they are quick and easy to butcher and it's nice to vary our meat diet. The horses are the most expensive animals on the farm at the moment, we buy in most of their feed. But we need that manure, horse poop is easy to handle and we can dig it into the garden only a week or two before planting. 
We have a pretty closed system here, buying in hay for the horses and some grain to supplement the poultry and pig diets. We're still working on our pastures and cropping areas and getting stocking rates right. This is only a small farm and we are in a low summer rainfall area, we want to have enough livestock to supply us with all our household needs and a bit to trade but also want to be able to carry them through dry/poor years. It's more important to us that the whole system works rather than looking at each animal on it's own.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

AuroraHawk brings up a good point with the fiber goats. An important thing to consider though is how well individual breeds do with the multi-purpose, typically with goats and sheep ones you will get 2 decent traits at most, to find a good producer of milk, meat, and fiber is very difficult. For instance while technically you can milk an angora goat it isn't going to be the most rewarding exercise

With regards to cattle many breeds were traditionally considered triple purpose such as the Dexter Wellrounded mentioned, they were bred for meat, milk and draught. Most multi-purpose animals were abandoned by large scale agriculture 100 years ago which has resulted in many animals losing certain traits. Traditional Simmentals for example are a great triple purpose breed, particularly for northern areas however for the last few decades the focus has been exclusively on meat, resulting in a very different animal (if it is black or solid red it is NOT a Simmental!). Some meat breeds like Angus though are pretty firmly single purpose, you don't want to milk one, trust me
Buff Orpingtons also used to lay far more eggs than they typically do today, but they were largely preserved for several decades by "poultry fanciers" as show birds who cared nothing about rate of lay. They are still a great bird though and I am glad someone kept them around


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

Yeah many folks go for pretty in their livestock. They have forgotten what the original purpose was and that is being lost quickly.


----------



## Wellrounded (Sep 25, 2011)

cowboyhermit said:


> AuroraHawk brings up a good point with the fiber goats. An important thing to consider though is how well individual breeds do with the multi-purpose, typically with goats and sheep ones you will get 2 decent traits at most, to find a good producer of milk, meat, and fiber is very difficult. For instance while technically you can milk an angora goat it isn't going to be the most rewarding exercise
> 
> With regards to cattle many breeds were traditionally considered triple purpose such as the Dexter Wellrounded mentioned, they were bred for meat, milk and draught. Most multi-purpose animals were abandoned by large scale agriculture 100 years ago which has resulted in many animals losing certain traits. Traditional Simmentals for example are a great triple purpose breed, particularly for northern areas however for the last few decades the focus has been exclusively on meat, resulting in a very different animal (if it is black or solid red it is NOT a Simmental!). Some meat breeds like Angus though are pretty firmly single purpose, you don't want to milk one, trust me
> Buff Orpingtons also used to lay far more eggs than they typically do today, but they were largely preserved for several decades by "poultry fanciers" as show birds who cared nothing about rate of lay. They are still a great bird though and I am glad someone kept them around


Traditional breeds that no longer meet old standards is a pain in the $%#! The Dexters here in Australia have been breed almost exclusively for beef, that's why we have crosses here. Our poultry breeds have suffered the same fate and I've spent a lot of time hunting down farms with 'old' bloodlines. I'd love to see poultry breeders following breeding standards of the 1920's, including live weight and eggs laid no.s. It annoys me that 'heritage' breeds are no longer bred to met those heritage needs, defeats the purpose of bringing the breeds back into production.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

That is a good point with the crosses too, these days hybrid is almost a bad word in some circles but it is not always so simple. With cattle in particular it is very well documented that the F1 crosses generally outperform purebreds. As a rule we buy purebred bulls and use them on crossbred cows, this maintains the "hybrid vigor". Similar results can also be gained within a breed if enough diversity can be found, basically just finding a very unrelated animal. The problem is, once the purebreds are actually hybrids you lose the F1 and many of the traits that the breed was supposed to have in the first place, like with black Simmentals which are actually part Angus yes, I am bitter.


----------



## Bobbb (Jan 7, 2012)

cowboyhermit said:


> Some meat breeds like Angus though are pretty firmly single purpose, you don't want to milk one, trust me


I'm trusting you but that still leaves me in the dark. What exactly is the problem? Is it that Angus are just uneconomical in terms of milk production or that they're very ornery or that they produce so little milk that it all has to go to the calf?


----------



## AuroraHawk (Sep 12, 2012)

Other than show and breeding stock (especially the bulls), Angus aren't handled much. They are turned out on pasture (or penned in feedlots) so milking them can be difficult. The cows have been bred to produce meaty animals rather than multipurpose animals so they don't produce enough milk to do much more than feed their calves.


----------



## kappydell (Nov 27, 2011)

Bees. Pollination and honey.


----------



## Toffee (Mar 13, 2012)

Well, you definitely want to at least start with a breed that meets your goals, but as long as you don't care about maintaining that breed, then you can breed for what you want. My great-grandfather did that and his bulls were some of the most sought after ones on the market. He would breed to his standard, which was pure meat production.


----------



## stanb999 (Nov 14, 2011)

Goats are good after you cull the junk/pedigree out. The milkers make too much milk to thrive on just hay, the meat don't make enough milk and get too meaty. Cull hard. I've been breeding/raising my herd for 6 years. Now the kids are hardy, the girls give good milk, about 1/2 gallon a day, The boys grow big and meaty, but do it slow. Finally now I'm breeding for a bit of gentleness in the males. The boys are a bit rammy.

If you think you will just get your stock after SHTF and have it work. Your in for the ride of your life.

FYI for people storing water. Milking cattle need 30 gallons a day each. Just one is a bit of a gamble, No? So you should have two. Now you need to get her bred, Are you keeping a Bull? I hope you have a spring or pond, a good strong enclosure, and are quick footed to avoid that bull. This is just a few of the reasons I went with goats.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

Bobbb said:


> I'm trusting you but that still leaves me in the dark. What exactly is the problem? Is it that Angus are just uneconomical in terms of milk production or that they're very ornery or that they produce so little milk that it all has to go to the calf?


Yeah AuroraHawk hit on most of it. They are not very docile when being worked on but that can be overcome with training. They tend to have very poor teats for milking and produce very little milk, just enough for their calf really.

stanb999, have you raised cattle? I am glad you have had good luck with goats and I agree about the constant selection, that should be a part of any livestock.
The statement that milking cattle need 30 gallons of water a day is false. Maybe a Holstein in terrible heat and eating dry feed (not grass) could drink that, but in all my life I have never seen a cow drink that much. 20 gallons would be the max in my experience with most breeds. Cattle come in all shapes and sizes, if you have seen miniature jerseys, tell me those would drink 30 gallons By the way I would not recommend Holsteins to anyone inexperienced, we are talking about dual purpose animals here.

The quick footed comment upsets me because that would a very foolish strategy. I have been hit by goats and by sheep many times, that is the way they behave. Cattle should NOT act like that, do you honestly think people with cattle are hopping out of the bulls way? A good bull that has been raised half decently will not cause any problems for people. I have kids come with me all the time, it is just a matter of acting properly, never run away:eyebulge: that would be the one way to teach them to be aggressive to people. Go to a purebred breeder and ask to see his bulls, they will usually take you into a pen full of them, nothing like the cartoon stereotype.
As for fencing, all I need for cows is three wire barb, or even an old log fence, will that hold goats?








Edited to add, not my picture, got it from the miniature jersey site.


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

I have to agree with your statement about bulls. I have a friend that has highlanders and if you have seen them, they have some impressive horns. His 5 year old daughter can walk right up to his 4 year old bull and pet him without any problems. Now a stranger may be another thing. I have seen the aftermath of wolves and stray dogs when the bull got a hold of them after going after a calf.


----------



## AuroraHawk (Sep 12, 2012)

My brother, Doug, worked on the neighbors' farm from the time he was big enough to reach the pedals on the tractors (about 10 years old) until he went into the Army (age 22ish). The Holstein bulls were coddled, petted and gentle. One farmer's son was supposed to help my brother with milking but he managed to disappear most evenings. One evening my brother went looking for Mike and found him taking a nap, sprawled across the back of the bull. Doug has a bit of a temper and he decided to make certain that Mike didn't use the bull for a bed again. Doug moved to the back of the bull and kicked him in the testicles. The bull broke out of his stanchion, throwing Mike off his back, trampled him, and ran out of the barn. After that anyone, other than Mike, could handle that bull.


----------



## stanb999 (Nov 14, 2011)

cowboyhermit said:


> Yeah AuroraHawk hit on most of it. They are not very docile when being worked on but that can be overcome with training. They tend to have very poor teats for milking and produce very little milk, just enough for their calf really.
> 
> stanb999, have you raised cattle? I am glad you have had good luck with goats and I agree about the constant selection, that should be a part of any livestock.
> The statement that milking cattle need 30 gallons of water a day is false. Maybe a Holstein in terrible heat and eating dry feed (not grass) could drink that, but in all my life I have never seen a cow drink that much. 20 gallons would be the max in my experience with most breeds. Cattle come in all shapes and sizes, if you have seen miniature jerseys, tell me those would drink 30 gallons By the way I would not recommend Holsteins to anyone inexperienced, we are talking about dual purpose animals here.
> ...


I'd love a mini jersey, or better a dexter, or better yet for my climate a small Scottish highland. The issue I've had with specialty breeds is the hi to outrageous cost. I agree that a mini will use less inputs. They will also produce less which from a homestead prospective is preferred. At twice the cost of a standard with half the produce, makes them 4 times as expensive to start. At least this has been my experience.

To extend my remarks about mini breeds. Without the prospect of maintaining good genetics due to limited numbers in your area or limited travel after SHTF would you not be better fostering a standard size heritage breed with the combined traits you want without the dwarf factor? It could be easier to find a mate for your animals. No?

Keeping goats "in" is an art, a science, and takes a bit of religion. LOL I have found they do stay near home even when they get out. They just never go far.

My point on bulls is that for a homesteading operation to keep one or two you should have a backup. Is an expensive proposition. Today we have readily available AI. When SHTF this will likely not be the case. Dairy bulls... Especially jersy bulls aren't known for their temperament.

P.S. Love your girl.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

oif_ghost_tod said:


> Goats seem best suited for post-shtf life because they do not need a special diet,.


It is actually much easier to malnourish a goat than many people think!


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

The "mini" versions may not produce as much on a per head basis but they do have a better dress out percentage than the larger animals. Now the MINI for most breeds are not really mini but more of the breed standard before selection for larger animals. Dexter's are not mini cattle but naturally small. Even Angus has been selectively bred for larger frames than the original.

Maybe instead of mini we should be calling today's cattle giants.


----------



## stanb999 (Nov 14, 2011)

cnsper said:


> The "mini" versions may not produce as much on a per head basis but they do have a better dress out percentage than the larger animals. Now the MINI for most breeds are not really mini but more of the breed standard before selection for larger animals. Dexter's are not mini cattle but naturally small. Even Angus has been selectively bred for larger frames than the original.
> 
> Maybe instead of mini we should be calling today's cattle giants.


There are mini and small cattle. They aren't the same. I agree that some Dexters are "full" size. The jersey in the picture is a mini. Minis are made with breeding in a dwarfing gene. It is critical to know your genetics to breed mini's. You will get a bullbog if you double dwarf. 

Check it out.
http://www.minicattle.com/index.cfm?select=bulldog


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

stanb999 said:


> I'd love a mini jersey, or better a dexter, or better yet for my climate a small Scottish highland. The issue I've had with specialty breeds is the hi to outrageous cost. I agree that a mini will use less inputs. They will also produce less which from a homestead prospective is preferred. At twice the cost of a standard with half the produce, makes them 4 times as expensive to start. At least this has been my experience.
> 
> To extend my remarks about mini breeds. Without the prospect of maintaining good genetics due to limited numbers in your area or limited travel after SHTF would you not be better fostering a standard size heritage breed with the combined traits you want without the dwarf factor? It could be easier to find a mate for your animals. No?
> 
> ...


Oops, I should have cited that picture, it came from the miniature jersey site, definetly not me. I don't raise mini breeds I was just showing there are a lot of options in cattle. My cow herd is the product of our family raising them for over 100 years on this property.
I agree Holsteins are know for being some of the absolute Worst bulls to deal with, that bull must have been worked with a lot!
The only dairy breed I would personally recommend for a homestead would be a jersey, I think a good dual/triple pupose animal will serve most people much better.


----------



## Wellrounded (Sep 25, 2011)

We have a bull on the farm, pure dexter, he's not a lot bigger than the mini jersey you have pictured there Cowboy. He's a good boy, you can give him a nice scratch and feed him out of your hand. Like all large animals you still need to be respectful of him but I won't have an animal on the farm I'm scared of. I milked in commercial dairies for 15 years and on a lot of farms they would run a 'mop up' bull in the herd to catch any cows that had missed when AI'd, these bulls were usually Jerseys and they have a reputation for being mean. Never ever had a problem, every one of them was a quiet calm old gentleman. As far as water goes our two girls drink less than 10 gallons a day between them, even in the hot weather. Not that it matters we have ponds, wells and huge storage tanks. 
Fencing isn't a problem, one strand of electric fence will keep the cows where we put them. Most of our fences are what we call sheep and lamb, a large hole mesh that's pretty cheap. It keeps the cows, sheep and horses in no problem. Goats on the other hand will wriggle through it or under it or climb a tree and jump over it. I love goats, have kept them most of my life but we decided a year ago that we would no longer have them here as they were too hard on fences and I don't like goat milk anyway. 
Before anyone goes off and says it wasn't the goat is was cleanliness, you need to look up goat taint and pig taint and you'll find that some people are much more sensitive to both, it's genetic. We had to get rid of one bloodline of pigs because I could smell them from 200 yards away, no one else could but there was NO WAY I was going to eat their meat. I can also smell the pork section of the supermarket as soon as I walk through the door, it stinks like a randy boar. It's the same with goats milk, never had any from anywhere, even award winning diaries, that didn't taste like billy goat. Even cows milk has a strong 'cowy' flavour to me but I can put up with it. 
At the end of the day you need to find the livestock that suits you and your family, your experience and your patch of ground. What suits this farm/family isn't going to suit the next farm. Like I said in my previous comment, we tend to pick livestock that is multipurpose but it's more important that they fit the farm as a whole.


----------



## stanb999 (Nov 14, 2011)

cowboyhermit said:


> Oops, I should have cited that picture, it came from the miniature jersey site, definetly not me. I don't raise mini breeds I was just showing there are a lot of options in cattle. My cow herd is the product of our family raising them for over 100 years on this property.
> I agree Holsteins are know for being some of the absolute Worst bulls to deal with, that bull must have been worked with a lot!
> The only dairy breed I would personally recommend for a homestead would be a jersey, I think a good dual/triple pupose animal will serve most people much better.


It's all good!


----------



## Wellrounded (Sep 25, 2011)

stanb999 said:


> I'd love a mini jersey, or better a dexter, or better yet for my climate a small Scottish highland. The issue I've had with specialty breeds is the hi to outrageous cost. I agree that a mini will use less inputs. They will also produce less which from a homestead prospective is preferred. At twice the cost of a standard with half the produce, makes them 4 times as expensive to start. At least this has been my experience.
> 
> To extend my remarks about mini breeds. Without the prospect of maintaining good genetics due to limited numbers in your area or limited travel after SHTF would you not be better fostering a standard size heritage breed with the combined traits you want without the dwarf factor? It could be easier to find a mate for your animals. No?
> 
> ...


I've been lucky with my dexters. I've wanted them for 20 years but they were way too expensive for me. I found 2 dexter cross calves for sale a while ago and got them for $150 each, they are in calf now and looking beautiful. Our bull is registered and I only paid $600 for him, he was just about working age so I think a good buy. A dexter cow with calf at foot costs about $1800 here and a 'retired' holstein or jersey (ex commercial with one dead quarter or possibly lame) will set you back about $1700. A house cow maybe into her third lactation with no milk record etc is worth anywhere from $1500 to $2500, reguardless of breed. I've got no idea how my girls will milk, if they don't produce what I need, I'll probably get a Jersey as well, we need that 12 gallons......


----------



## stanb999 (Nov 14, 2011)

Wellrounded said:


> I've been lucky with my dexters. I've wanted them for 20 years but they were way too expensive for me. I found 2 dexter cross calves for sale a while ago and got them for $150 each, they are in calf now and looking beautiful. Our bull is registered and I only paid $600 for him, he was just about working age so I think a good buy. A dexter cow with calf at foot costs about $1800 here and a 'retired' holstein or jersey (ex commercial with one dead quarter or possibly lame) will set you back about $1700. A house cow maybe into her third lactation with no milk record etc is worth anywhere from $1500 to $2500, reguardless of breed. I've got no idea how my girls will milk, if they don't produce what I need, I'll probably get a Jersey as well, we need that 12 gallons......


Your prices are a little Hi but not crazy so. Here a Heifer milk breed is 800 or so from proven lines. A three year old with average milk 1000-1200. A good one could cost 2000. Culls and other less than desirable cows can be had cheap to a good home.

Folks want 1500 - 2000 for dexter girls and slightly less for the boys, these are calfs. Course you can find a cull bull or cow for 1000. 

P.S. Having the livestock you like and getting the production you want will be great. I wish you the very best of luck!


----------



## Navajo (Mar 4, 2013)

Sheep, we are raising Icelandic and they are doing great in Montana...no problems down to -30 even. And have been fine when in southern Idaho at over a 105 degrees

Take less food per pound of meat produced, eat weeds for you, loves weeds... will leave the grass for after the weeds are gone. 

Wool, meat, milk.

Icelandic's are easy to have twins with no problem and are good mothers. A little grain and you get triplets too.

Defend themselves against coyotes...Rams have massive curled horns, females have pointed horns they swing side to side.

They have so much long hair a coyote can't get a bite on them and do anything then the other sheep jump in and if a ram hit a yote, ... flying yote...then yelping yote running for it's life.

Next is chickens...nice hybrid birds are available...really liked the Sigattes from Idaho.

Chickens are great for bug control and even in a some areas of a mature garden they help with bugs. ( corn, melons, etc)

Chickens love to tear apart sheep piles to help break down the mess...





Cats...but that would be a later discussion about Chinese cooking



Cattle are not for survival...and this is from someone who grew up around them and has been managing a ranch for two years before I had enough fun and got a job that actually pays. Don't get me wrong, love to eat beef, we have a whole beef in our freezer, beef is canned and jerked ready for use....but unless you can somehow, have idea land with enough extra grass to harvest and get thru a long winter how will you keep them alive? Very few people can have the land necessary to raise cattle...land that is still viable in a TEOTWAWKI situation.


----------



## *Andi (Nov 8, 2009)

Navajo, You had better luck with the Icelandic than I did. (I'm down to one) We have to worm her with every season, (every three months) unlike my Jacob that get wormed when sheared. (once a year)

I "check" the Jacobs feet when we shear and we check and nip her feet twice a year. (we shear her twice a year ... spring and fall) I love her wool for spinning but I think I must have gotten a hold of "city Icelandic sheep" ... they would stay in the pasture (grass) not give a weed a second glance.

And for some reason our guard donkey loves to pick on her ... :ignore: Give me a Jacob sheep any day.

(sorry)


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

Navajo, I try to treat everyone with respect and consider their opinions and experience.
Your statement that "Cattle are not for survival" is followed by the facts that you "managed" a ranch for 2 years and didn't make much money at it.
I am coming from the perspective of someone who is operating a farm that has been exporting food for the past 100 years on this property, we make a good living at it. I know absolutely what it takes to put up food for cattle, we have been doing it a LONG time, originally by hand and also with horses and ... cattle to do most of the work. Like I mentioned before there is a huge difference between a Holstein and a Dexter in how much food they consume.
I LOVE sheep, they are adorable and useful in many ways. 
Despite all the hair they cannot handle the same degree of cold that cattle can (even the worst suited breed of cow will have no problem with -30), they also can have trouble with heat, some breeds are better than others but the right cattle can handle even further extremes. 
Parasites are a never ending issue with sheep, some breeds are better than others.
Defending against coyotes is great, I have heard others have less luck and lost Icelandic sheep even with guardian dogs, particularly around lambing time. Our cows calve out on pasture and have no problems with coyotes, wolves, grizzly and black bear, mountain lion, etc.


----------



## Navajo (Mar 4, 2013)

Hope you don't take disagreement or someone having a different set of experiences as a personal attack...really hadn't read much of what you had written to be honest...just posting my experiences and what has worked for my family and myself in a variety of environments...AZ deserts, Idaho "desert", Montana mountains and plains. There are more ways to skin a cat and people need to find out what works for them.

I grew up on the on the Navajo reservation , sheep, goats, cattle, horses...very familiar with what close to survival living entails...real life having to know what it takes to live in dirt houses, and cook over a fire, no electricity, running water etc.

Also know city life and prosperity...

Also know ranching in Montana winters and pastures and land.

I also know what it takes to keep cattle alive and how many tons it takes to feed and water a single cow in a year.

I can raise 9 head of sheep off 10 acres and have enough feed to get thru a Montana winter and not have to use a piece of petro powered fuel to do it. That was my little experiment to see if it could be done.

Water isn't a real problem either takes about 5 gallons a day to keep them all happy how many gallons of water do you need for one cow per day? And how do you get it to them when the river is frozen over, when the SHTF and you don't have electricity for pumps and such?

9 head of sheep , will produce about 400 pounds of meat for me a year... approx... along with fiber, and barrels of milk...with out petro powered equipment.

Now these sheep have never needed dewornming or vet service..nor have their babies...and we have had them roaming around in the desert country outside of Boise for a couple years and in 5000 foot mountain side in Western Montana...

I have been on a a ranch, *I did not say I didn't say "didn't make much money at it." *those are words you added to what I said in an effort to discredit what I said.

I just happen to be able to make a whole lot more doing what I do as a salaried manager with a company car and expense accounts and such...doing better than most ranchers I know who have several hundred head of cattle and all the ongoing cost of gambling each and every year...

What is being talked about is survival..in a world with out haying machinery, both for harvesting and spreading it out in the winter, much less vets, and meds...I know how much meds go into treating calf's in the springtime... along with chemicals to keep the grass growing and keep the weeds down...

Now if you have figured out which cattle don't need meds and you have a place where grass grows year round and all you do is switch animals between pastures without haying equipment...well count your self fortunate... because that place isn't available to most anyone I know, or have heard about. Much less having water that don't need pumping for the cattle or irrigation of the grass...

I'm responding to the little guy might have a few acres, a well which can have either a small solar pump or just a hand pump, land which can grow native grass and yes weeds...cause you won't have pesticides or an ability to get rid of them after a while...

Tell us what would be the least number of cattle to have a viable restockable herd, how much land would someone need, how much water do they have to have , even in the dead of winter when creeks and rivers are frozen over...and even with running water the lines 6 feet down freeze for a day or two when it is -30 below for a few days? Or how much room you need, heated room when they start calving in the snow at 2am? And you don't have petro powered equipment to go get it in...so now add a horse to help out and how much food and water they take per day.

"Didn't make much money"... didn't have to work any job for two years and did just fine...just found it easier to work 40 hrs a week and stay in nice hotels as I travel on someone elses dime, have full medical and enough time and money to travel and go on vacation and go to spend time with the family when ever I want...chores now take less than 20 mintues twice a day...and can even be skipped for a day or two with proper planning... not having a animal that destroys fence lines or just bumps into something and breaks it, or rubs on everything to scratch an itch.

Didn't say ranching wasn't for when times are good and we have power in the form of electricity and petro powered equipment...

But when times are hard and you don't have running water, and the only feed you have is native grow without irrigation and without spraying, when you don't have a vet or medical to stop disease that will make every animals sick in a week if left untreated quickly with a drug.

And with out .... how much land did this survival herd of cattle need?


----------



## Navajo (Mar 4, 2013)

Oh I forgot to add, on our five acres...setting aside 1 acre for food for us and the corn and some other grain for the chickens to make it thru the winter without buying anything....

Yes using power everything now...need to to have time to go to work and the kids have school.

But SHTF and guess what we have manual equipment and yes we have used it before...but then we will have the time to "work the land" 

It's not easy doing it manually...but it is doable...grew up doing it....and this land up here is way better than what I grew up with.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

vract: I did not intend to discredit your opinion, far from it, if that is how it seemed I apologize. 
I was taking issue with your statement, not presented as an opinion, that "cattle are not for survival". I agree that there are many ways to skin a cat, that is why I would never say "sheep are not for survival" even if personally they would not be my choice of livestock to rely on.
Now I feel you put out a bunch of potentially misleading info that I should respond to

First of all, we are several hundred miles north of the U.S/Canada border with Montana, so grass doesn't exactly grow year round and we have a bit of winter
You asked how much water a cow uses, that depends on the cow, the temperature etc but anywhere from under 5 gallons for a small breed, (Wellrounded says 10 gallons for her 2 Dexters and she is in Australia where it gets warm) to 20 gallons.
As to how to water them without electricity, the same way they have been watered for thousands of years. When the water freezes in the winter you cut a hole in the ice, has worked forever and always will. We use wells too when convenient and just like my great grandfather I can pump by hand or use a windmill or any other means of spinning a pumpjack. Many studies have also shown that cattle have no problem getting all their water needs from eating snow.

There is no exact equation, especially because there is so much variation between breeds, but if you can feed 9 sheep with lambs you can certainly feed a cow or more depending on the size. 
Said cow(s) will produce either barrels of milk or tons of meat or a combination thereof, plus most likely make a good draught animal.
So all your statements about petroleum fueled equipment etc do not apply if you use equivalent numbers, 1-2 cows versus 9 or so sheep.
Then you say this;
"What is being talked about is survival..in a world with out haying machinery, both for harvesting and spreading it out in the winter, much less vets, and meds...I know how much meds go into treating calf's in the springtime... along with chemicals to keep the grass growing and keep the weeds down..."
Whatever methods employed to feed the sheep could also be used to feed the cows. Sheep typically use much more medication than cattle, especially for internal parasites. As for chemicals to keep grass growing and weeds down we use no fertilizer and have never sprayed for weeds in pasture or hay. Cattle fill the same role as buffalo here and do not harm the grass and soil, they enhance it, sheep can severely damage native species by grazing them too close to the ground.
We give NO meds to our calves, meds for what exactly?
Our cows calve in June or later, when there is green grass.

As for how many animals to make it viable, in terms of genetic diversity 9 animals just doesn't cut it imo. There will have to be outside genetics eventually so whether you have 9 sheep or a cow or two doesn't make much difference.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

Navajo does make a good point about making hay. I shudder at the thought of trying to make enough hay to keep 10 cows alive through a "typical" Montana/North Dakota/Manitoba winter without any modern hay equipment. We used to use a 7' sickle mower, a small side-delivery rake and a "dump" rake, and used a Farmall M with front mounted hay sweeps. It took weeks, even with that stuff available to us.

Cutting, raking, gathering, loading, hauling - none of this is easy, and takes a lot of labor to accomplish. The horse drawn machinery is not readily available in quantity (some of it is "out there", but mostly owned by Amish and NONE of it is cheap!!!) ... and that is "assuming" you already have horses that know how to pull.

So, - - - in a "survival" situation, Navajo is correct - - unless you are already doing it without any powered equipment, all of us with cows that need to make it through the winter would be really far up $hhhhht creek without any powered hay making equipment.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

Navajo said:


> ....but unless you can somehow, have ideal land with enough extra grass to harvest and get thru a long winter how will you keep them alive?


Its a hell of a lot of work, but here's a start!

Making hay by hand:
http://www.scytheconnection.com/adp/hay/turner.html


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

LincTex said:


> Navajo does make a good point about making hay. I shudder at the thought of trying to make enough hay to keep 10 cows alive through a "typical" Montana/North Dakota/Manitoba winter without any modern hay equipment. We used to use a 7' sickle mower, a small side-delivery rake and a "dump" rake, and used a Farmall M with front mounted hay sweeps. It took weeks, even with that stuff available to us.
> 
> Cutting, raking, gathering, loading, hauling - none of this is easy, and takes a lot of labor to accomplish. The horse drawn machinery is not readily available in quantity (some of it is "out there", but mostly owned by Amish and NONE of it is cheap!!!) ... and that is "assuming" you already have horses that know how to pull.
> 
> So, - - - in a "survival" situation, Navajo is correct - - unless you are already doing it without any powered equipment, all of us with cows that need to make it through the winter would be really far up $hhhhht creek without any powered hay making equipment.


My great grandfather farmed before tractors, steam engines were never popular in our area or in the places in Europe where he grew up. At times, the great depression in particular, the family kept hundreds of animals, many of which they bought for next to nothing. They put up the hay primarily out of sloughs and the cattle ate a lot of straw piles. Farming was less often a solitary thing at the time, it was a family activity at the least and boys learned early what work was Haying was what you did between seeding and harvest, time wasn't really an issue.
He LOVED horses and was absolutely amazing with them, but he always said that horses were a luxury.
A pair of dual/triple purpose cows can do most jobs that a work horse can do but also give gallons of milk and raise at least a calf each every year, they don't need any grain, just grass. A pair of oxen can do an incredible amount of work and they also need only grass but they produce nothing else.

Much of the equipment still in use is easily adapted to animal power, for instance a small side delivery rake can easily be pulled by a couple cows. A pull type sickle mower can be pulled by anything, including cows, obviously a dump rake as well. As for hauling the feed pulling a cart or wagon is one of the things that cattle still are used for all around the world. All of the equipment made to bull behind atv's recently can be pulled by a cow.

In terms of feeding 10 cows over winter, yes it is difficult but it must be put into perspective. 10 cows will produce a tremendous amount of food and potentially draught work, this would be extremely valuable but way more than a person could use themselves. It would be the equivalent of like *100 sheep*, except that cows can graze in the snow more effectively. Things like swath grazing, where you just cut the crop and leave it in the field work much better with cattle than sheep.http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex9239

I am not saying that people shouldn't plan on raising 10 cows or 100 sheep in a SHTF scenario, quite the opposite, but it must be realized that this goes beyond self sufficiency and into feeding many people. Keeping a small dual purpose cow or two is much more easily accomplished in most people's situations and will produce a huge amount of food for a normal family.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

Oh, I agree it could be done... 
I just shudder to think of actually DOING it that way!

I haven't seen a pull type sickle mower for sale in over 20 years. Either they all became lawn ornaments, or the Amish bought them all. (or got scrapped  )

I still see dump rakes around. They are better (in this situation) than a side delivery rake. You would need a spare to rob teeth from. A large tooth wheel rake would also do well... the hyd cylinder could be replaced with a screw and crank.

Our old hay wagons were made from car/truck chassis, no biggie there. Getting the hay up into the wagon, and then up into the hayloft would be a LOT of work. That would suck. Not impossible (any of it) but it is all a lot of work.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

Yup, good to have a couple hand crank hydraulic cylinder replacement things either for animal powered or pulling with atv/truck etc. 
Also they make some pretty sweet 12V electric over hydraulic units that can easily be used with a small solar panel as long as the duty cycle is low.


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

We had 2 head year round sometimes 3 and we put ALL of our hay up by hand. We used a scythe and a wooden tooth rake, pitchforks and bean poles. It took us less than 2 weeks to completely cut the hay for the winter with only 2 people working. My grandpa and I and sometimes my grandmother. 10 head would take 6-8 weeks depending on how much grass you have to cut. We had a small plot that we cut 2-3 times per year.

We cut the grass and let it dry, turning it with the rakes. We then put up a bunch of hay stacks about 12' high. We then put 2 bean poles under the stack and picked up the whole thing and carried it into the barn.

It was work but the most tiring was the cutting itself. The rest of the work was relatively easy.

What I see is an aversion to work rather than the fact of it not working. What else do you have at this time than time itself? You going to laze around the house instead of keeping busy?

People used to run tens of thousands of head of cattle with very few employees (cowboys) and they had to cut their hay by hand. 

It's like the people that say that they can not live in their car. It's not that they can not but that they will not. My great grandmother crossed this beautiful country in 1897 in a covered wagon. Now that was roughing it.

Granted, it would be easier to do this in Portland than it would be in Montana but each location has it's own challenges that you have to adapt to. Montana it is the cold, snow and the sparse grass while Portland would be dry days to put the hay up.

One key is to have cattle that can survive the winters will little input from yourself. I have a friend that has highland cattle and he does not have to feed very often because they also browse.

You also don't have to have a hay loft, we didn't. We just had a low barn with pallets for the floor to keep the hay off the ground.

People have gotten too soft in today's world. Heaven forbid they should get a blister. Know any carpenters that still use a framing hammer instead of a nail gun? We have speed and efficiency now but it comes at a cost of other things. We are losing our know how.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

cnsper said:


> What I see is an aversion to work rather than the fact of it not working. What else do you have at this time than time itself?
> 
> People have gotten too soft in today's world. Heaven forbid they should get a blister.


I think the biggest concern will be ALL the "smaller jobs" that need to be done in a "survival situation" at the same time... You have to tend the garden, fix fence, save food, mend clothes, provide security, etc... it is "death by 1000 cuts". Putting up hay is just one of those "cuts", and if someone is not already homesteading currently the learning curve is very steep. And all of the "cuts" are competing for your time and attention.

No disrespect to the O.P... she was looking for "multipurpose critters". I guess no matter what critters a person has, there will be a fair amount of work to do in order to keep them alive, healthy and productive. Due to economic cost of scale, I currently buy layer pellets at $15 a sack, so the extra $5 a sack of feed I pay is the price for not owning my own feed mill (that is about to change!)

Everything associated with prepping for survival is a major investment of time, resources, and labor.


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

LincTex said:


> I think the biggest concern will be ALL the "smaller jobs" that need to be done in a "survival situation" at the same time... You have to tend the garden, fix fence, save food, mend clothes, provide security, etc... it is "death by 1000 cuts". Putting up hay is just one of those "cuts", and if someone is not already homesteading currently the learning curve is very steep. And all of the "cuts" are competing for your time and attention.
> 
> No disrespect to the O.P... she was looking for "multipurpose critters". I guess no matter what critters a person has, there will be a fair amount of work to do in order to keep them alive, healthy and productive. Due to economic cost of scale, I currently buy layer pellets at $15 a sack, so the extra $5 a sack of feed I pay is the price for not owning my own feed mill (that is about to change!)
> 
> Everything associated with prepping for survival is a major investment of time, resources, and labor.


You are correct and we did all that with 5.5 acres. cows, chickens, pigs, garden. Rarely did we buy anything, including nails. I remember sitting for hours and straightening nails so that grandpa could use them. The only nails he bought new were roofing nails.

We once tore down a neighbors house that was gutted by fire and we saved every nail we pulled using a slide hammer and the boards. We then added on to the house with this lumber and nails and it is still there today, 30 years later.

Grandpa was given some old walls and he made a garage out of them with storage.

Fences don't need as much work as people tend to think. Everything takes longer to do but you set a schedule and you can get it all done. Planting is done in the spring, hay is done in the summer while the garden is growing.

People tend to make things over complicated and thing that a garden needs tending every day or a fence needs to be repaired every day or the livestock needs feeding every day. We checked water daily, the eggs were gathered but the feed was as needed.

As for security, you do what you situation entails. Dogs help with that. But I also believe that most people are blowing this out of proportion. People lived for over a hundred years with the threat of indian attacks and survived. Now they knew how to sneak up on someone. Urban settings are going to be different than rural settings but neighbors will band together in urban settings for protection also.

The biggest issue is that you can be attacked from a much farther distance but give me a deer hunter over a street thug any day. Hell for that matter, give me a hunter over most LEO. Did you count the bullet holes in the truck that was driven by those 2 women delivering papers that they attacked?

As to whether a military trained person would be any better is a toss up. Some will be very good but others will be no better than a street thug in a fire fight.


----------



## Wellrounded (Sep 25, 2011)

LincTex said:


> Navajo does make a good point about making hay. I shudder at the thought of trying to make enough hay to keep 10 cows alive through a "typical" Montana/North Dakota/Manitoba winter without any modern hay equipment. We used to use a 7' sickle mower, a small side-delivery rake and a "dump" rake, and used a Farmall M with front mounted hay sweeps. It took weeks, even with that stuff available to us.
> 
> Cutting, raking, gathering, loading, hauling - none of this is easy, and takes a lot of labor to accomplish. The horse drawn machinery is not readily available in quantity (some of it is "out there", but mostly owned by Amish and NONE of it is cheap!!!) ... and that is "assuming" you already have horses that know how to pull.
> 
> So, - - - in a "survival" situation, Navajo is correct - - unless you are already doing it without any powered equipment, all of us with cows that need to make it through the winter would be really far up $hhhhht creek without any powered hay making equipment.


Navajo maybe correct about his situation but it doesn't follow that he is about everyones. We don't all live in the same climate or run farms using conventional methods. We don't get winter snow, we take fields out of our rotation to reserve feed for the cold and hot months. Yes we do buy in hay but we are over stocked, the extra animals would go as the purchased feed ran out, unless we could barter the neighbour for extra grazing. We don't have any tractor driven farm implements, ours are either man pulled/pushed or just plain hard tools. This is seriously marginal country, a patch of ground the farmers didn't think was work while working, we have built it up enough to feed all the livestock we need and some we don't . All without the help of anything that uses fuel.



cnsper said:


> What I see is an aversion to work rather than the fact of it not working. What else do you have at this time than time itself? You going to laze around the house instead of keeping busy?
> 
> People have gotten too soft in today's world. Heaven forbid they should get a blister. Know any carpenters that still use a framing hammer instead of a nail gun? We have speed and efficiency now but it comes at a cost of other things. We are losing our know how.


Agree with you there cnsper. I'm half crippled and still work twice as fast as anyone I've ever worked along side. I was going to say work twice as hard as anyone but that's not true, the work isn't hard for me I'm used to it. Physical work is like any other sort of work, it takes time to become good at it. I work long hours but I love it, my only down time is on the internet and that's usually while I'm waiting for the sun to come up, a timer in the kitchen or if the weather is too bad to work outside. 
I look at things like OH&S (Occupational Health and Safety) here in Australia and the limits it imposes on the way people can work in despair. I'm not saying that it doesn't have it's place, we need to look after each other. But shaping the work place to suit the weakest and stupidest is not good for us. I have no problem unloading a couple of ton of 65lb bags of feed and running them into the barn (yep one feed company here still uses these bags), I've done it all my life. But the fit looking gym goers we get here can't lift em off the ground, they never will be able to because they aren't allowed to. This generation will never learn to work physically hard because they have been told it's wrong, it's bad for you and any physical labour should be avoided (unless it's in the gym where you have to pay someone for the privilege).
We've had dozens of people working here and out of them all we've only had TWO that liked the physical side of the work, one was already a hard worker the other loved the way her fitness and strength improved. Most people we have helping here get angry and offended when we ask them to use their hands and muscles to get a job done. They think it's old fashioned and distasteful to labour at anything, "Why don't you buy a machine to do that" is the common complaint. 
Everything others did in the past (and some of us still do) is still possible and the idea that they/we had/have miserable lives is not true. Working hard has it's own rewards. It's true that I'm wearing out now, it takes me a bit longer to get going in the morning but I'm also used to working while in pain, another thing a lot of people can't or won't do. I take pride in every aching joint, lol, they were well earned.


----------



## OHprepper (Feb 21, 2012)

i realize its a different topic for a different thread, but you put a deer hunter over a LEO and a soldier?? i am throwing the ******** flag on this one my friend. you see the fact is (from a soldier and a hunter), shooting another human being is absolutely nothing like shooting an animal. most people choke when presented with the choice of having to do it. Fact is, thats why they train soldiers and LEOs in basic rifle marksmanship with e type silhouttes and why we do drills over and over, so that we WILL NOT hesitate to shoot someone when we have too. here is a reference i found for percentages if needed http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/jscope/kilner00.htm


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

I did not say all soldiers, but most of them, yes. After seeing over several decades the lack of ability of LEO being able to hit the broad side of a square barn from the inside with a shotgun, Yeah I will take a hunter over them. There will be hunters that can not pull the trigger on a man but there will be more that are willing to when it comes to kill or die and I would trust their bullets to hit their targets.

I counted 47 bullet holes in the back of that little truck full of newspapers. I don't care if you shoot at silhouettes or not, 47 shots is way out of line. Who knows how many missed. Also, hitting a target is a great deal different from hitting a moving animal or human... LOL

I know more hunters with the willingness to pull the trigger and the ability to hit what they are aiming at without the need for a bunch of lead to fly around.

What changed the course of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan? Snipers... 'nough said.


----------



## *Andi (Nov 8, 2009)

Back to the OP ...

:thankyou:


----------

