kk.man wrote: » Ok answer this ! a friend of mine was charged for clipping last year. He rang the factory and demanded as to why. They told him his lambs were dirty. Ok says the friend thats odd...i had them sheared a week ago. Refund was demanded and promptly paid. I totally agree with a dirty sheep policy but it was blatantly applied as a money grabbing exercise by the big 3 factories last spring.
greysides wrote: » To be honest, farmers have been getting away with it for a long time. Even the people in the lairage who should be holding up sheep for a while have been throwing a blind eye to it. They know a lot of the farmers coming in, they are farmers or farmers sons themselves. Or they have a rapport with the larger suppliers. The problem has been that if they were to insult a supplier they were afraid he'd take his sheep elsewhere. It has always been the case that any rules had to be applied by all factories together and equally. Maybe this will happen this time. I don't know if docking is involved or not. In the case of really bad or persistent offenders I'd be for some form of sanction. I've seen the hardship and toll it takes on workers for too many years to be soft on the issue.
greysides wrote: » km man, I can't comment on that as even if I was in the lairage all that happened there would be nothing I'd have anything to do with. That would be factory rather than Dept. business.
eorna wrote: » So they penalise you if they are shorn (=clean) and they penalise you if they have wool and are 'dirty' in the factories eyes.. Fair enough all the explanations and yes i have seen lambs which are desperate looking in some factories which is unfair to the workers and would need penslised, but still i think its a money collection for the factory.. If they were that worried about cleanliness they would encourage shorn lambs as they would be 100% clean but they would loose the wool and they can b loosing..
Sheep breeder wrote: » Is there not a TVi in the lairage on duty doing a pre kill inspection and it is him who holds lambs for clipping or time to cool off, dry.
greysides wrote: » The shearing takes place in the lairage where I work. No room on the line.
Willfarman wrote: » But they are hanging by their hind legs on a line as such?
TheDoc77 wrote: » I would say 14-15 ewes but it would also depend on how much trough space they have in that size pen
DJ98 wrote: » Would be divided using walk-through troughs.
Cran wrote: » Would depend on size of ewes, but I'd wouldn't wang to give any less than 18 inches feed space if not shorn. So 15 fed trough would be 10 ewe, if other side trough as well 14/15 based on space in pen
390kid wrote: » Seen some Romney lambs in the mart Monday night. Anyone here have any experience with them or know much about them?
LambMaster wrote: » I don't know much about them. They're said to be somewhat resistant to foot-rot and liver fluke as well as some other problems.
razor8 wrote: » They originated in Romney marsh in U.K. Afaik and we're exported to New Zealand. I've started using them to breed replacements. Finding them very good so far but have only Lambed off spring this year
Green farmer wrote: » did your first batch of Romney x ewe lambs wean decent lambs compared to rest of flock ? Did you notice any difference ?
White Clover wrote: » Lads, have a few cull ewes for the Mart soon. Do I have to fill out a dispatch docket for them?
roosky wrote: » sold culls last nigh, big ewes but 70 was all i could get for them, Ill factory them anymore. I also had 48 kg ram lambs, well fleshed 85 was all i was getting, they will go to ICM monday trade very poor last nigh in Elphin
