# tri-purpose mixed breeds?



## TroutRiver (Nov 26, 2010)

Hey everyone,

I am new to the world of dairy goats, but I had angora goats when I was growing up. I also had 2 angora/saanen cross does and I remember that they had a very interesting fleece (closer to cashmere than angora fleece). I didn't milk them at all, they were just pets. 

Now I am wondering if I can "create" a tri purpose milk/fleece/meat breed. I have 3 does that I'm looking to breed this year (a nubian, a nubian/alpine and a nubian/boer) and I am thinking about breeding the purebred nubian to an angora buck. Have any of you experimented with fleece/dairy hybrids? I am interested in learning more about it before I jump in with both feet, but I have not been able to find any information anywhere, or any people who have done this...?


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

People have TRIED....there was one farm that bred "Cashmilks", another that did Nugoras....

I am VERY interested in a fleece/milk goat, but it is difficult to get. You CAN try and breed them for yourself, but unless you have other people interested also, or unless you are rich enough to afford a spread to support thousands of animals, you end up with a depleted gene pool and all the problems inherent in that.

As soon as I win the lottery, I will be developing that all purpose breed. I plan to use Saanans as my dairy line, then add in two lines, one cashmere, one angora. If I can, I will attempt to throw in some Boer, and them do intense breeding for the purpose of sex-linking meat production. Once I get that stabilized, I will miniaturize it for backyard homesteaders.... creating standard size and mini size fleece/milk/meat goats.

After 20 years, and thousands and thousands of goats, I should have herds of white, darling, FLUFFY milking goats in which the males (and males only) tend to a dense meat production.

See why I need to win the lottery? 

E.T.A. And before I sell a single goat or breeding herd, I will write an entire book on them and write the breed standard. One of the things that will be part of that standard will be horn characteristics.....and de-horned or disbudded goats will be disqualified from showing. ~nodsnodsnodsnodsnodsnods~ I will call them "Taameres" [TAY- meyrz] and "Taagoras" [TAY-gor-ahz]. They will be white to cream colored, with blue eyes. (Double recessive blue eyes, so that it will be difficult to out-cross without the resulting offspring showing up as a cross, rather than a pure-bred.) Does will be conformation judged for dairy characteristics, but bucks will be conformation judged for meat characteristics. (I will be aiming for meat-looking bucks and dairy character does.)

Yep, yep, yep, yep....come ON lottery!


----------



## Caprice Acres (Mar 6, 2005)

I have several issues with the idea of dual purpose - not to mention TRI purpose goats. 

First, dairy character and production drops when you add in meat breed qualities. Even if you can get the extended lactations for a long time, they won't produce a lot. Boer blood will also add extra teats and generally poor udder attachments, too. 

Secondly, I don't think you can get chunky bucklings with lots of meat characteristics, but still get dairy type doelings (and by that I mean dairy character). You'd either get chunky kids or dairy type kids, or maybe a mix or middleground - but not specifically dairy character does and meat type bucklings. Either way you'd be able to eat the culls, though. 

Thirdly, the demands on the dairy/fiber does would be pretty extreme. They'd need abundant, high quality feed to produce fiber AND milk at the same time. I imagine the growth time for their fiber would be longer and lower quality, because they'd be milking and therefore not able to put as much protein towards growing hair while they are trying to keep up with the milk demand.

So, you COULD possibly produce a breed that may do OK as all three. Likely, they'd be only marginal at best at all three, and it would likely be best to just have all three breeds separately.


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

Tsk, tsk, tsk! mygoats, you are acting like there are not ALREADY fiber/dairy breeds that produce a good fiber as well as good milk characteristics. How American of you! (I am teasing you, but what I am saying is true, none-the-less.)

Might I introduce you to the most common breed of goat in Tibet? Herd of fiber/dairy goats.

These goats are purported to be easy, docile milkers, produce a fine fiber that used to be used for robes and felts in the temples, and also have a decent carcass.

Nepal also has tri-purpose goats. Actually, look at the native species of nearly any Old World Country that experiences a rough cold seasons (northern latitudes, high altitudes, etc.) and you will find tri-purpose goats.

Of course, you can't bring any of them HERE unless you *smuggle* them in. We have very strict laws when it comes to that. Look at what a pain it was to get Boer goats here!

Fiber production does not effect milk production very much. That's like telling a woman with a thick, heavy mane of hair that she is going to have difficulty breast-feeding twins because too much of her resources are going into her HAIR! Both Cashmere and Mohair breeds are simply the results of a long time of selecting for thick, fine coats. It does NOT mean that they require a huge amount of feed to grow out their normal winter coats! (How much feed does the average LGD need to grow out a winter coat? I know my LGD is producing FAR more fiber than even the BEST Cashmere Goat! He has to be, I keep having to sweep it up in mounds!)

Sex linking meat production is NOT difficult. We have done it with many other animals for centuries...and in some areas, it has become a problem. One area I am thinking of is dogs...particularly the mastiff breeds.

For the longest time, mastiff breeds were judged differently based on sex. Dog were supposed to have a heavy, meaty, buff form, whereas bi--- eer, females were supposed to have a more refined and feminine appearance. 

Then some bright person came along and said that ALL of them should be heavy, meaty and buff...and there the problems started. When breeders started going for a more doggy look in their females, there started to be whelping problems, fertility problems, etc., etc.

Enter a bunch of reproductive scientists who said, "Duh! In all mammals, from dogs to humans to horses to cows to sheep to goats, masculine traits such as heavy musculature, thick skeletal systems to hold up that extra musculature, etc., etc., are sex linked traits. When you start breeding for such things in your females, you are adding male characteristics to them and increasing male attributes, including hormones..._which decreases reproductive productivity."_

You can look up the numbers yourself, but meat goats, overall, have lower percentages of reproduction than dairy goats. It is believed that this is because meat goats are bred to have both bucks and does dress out hearty carcasses.

Now, it WOULD be tricky to breed both weight gain AND milking ability into a single doe....which is why I think that taking advantage of the natural tendency to sex-link would be the way to go. Not to mention infinitely easier. 

It can be done. It would not even be all that difficult to do, IF one had the money. Lessee, this is how I would go about it.

I would start off with 2000 Saanan does, good producers. I'd likely lease them. Breed those does to 2000 Alashanzuoqi Cashmere bucks. (Breed the best producing to the best producing, right?) Figuring a low, 150% herd increase, I'll end up with 3000 kids. Half of those will be male. So, 1500 does.

Cross back to 1500 unrelated Saanan bucks. Same expectations. 1125 does. Cross them BACK to unrelated Alashanzuoqi bucks again...

I end up with approximately 1600 F3 Saanan/Alashanzuoqi crosses. Half male and half female....that I breed to EACH OTHER.

I do this for 2 years...this means at the end of year five, I have 4900 goats. 2450 males and 2450 females.

I cull that down to my BEST 1000 goats, 500 males and 500 females. The ones that are exhibiting the BEST traits I am looking for. In this case, I am looking for the meatiest and best fiber producing males, and the best milk and fiber producing females of the bunch.

Breed for 5 more years. Except now, I am culling half of my stock after every season. Realize that this will take a LOT of record keeping.

At the end of that first 10 years, I should have what I am looking for, and the next 10 years of breeding is simply to stabilize the standards.

Now, all I need is the money for those first few years of buying, leasing and breeding thousands of goats.


----------



## TroutRiver (Nov 26, 2010)

thanks for the input. I am definitely not running off to experiment with this right away, like I said I would like to learn more about it. Right now I have a nubian buck with a good dairy background who I was originally planning to use for all 3 does, and that may very well be how it ends up playing out for this year (we are breeding late to plan for kids in late May). I have heard that fleece/dairy crosses would not produce as high quality or quantity milk or fiber as a pure dairy breed or pure angora. This alone isn't a huge concern for me, since I'm working on a very small scale and having a doe that produces 2-3 gallons per day isn't really important, but I am interested in health concerns and other issues that might arise. 

On a slightly different note, I have heard that mixing meat and dairy breeds will lead to less quantity of milk but higher butterfat. Not sure if that's just an old wisetale or if it's true. The nubian/boer that I have was given to me for free by a friend. Her dam (nubian) has very good dairy lines and a great udder and her sire (boer) was from a commercial meat goat farm. 

EDIT: I hadn't seen the last post when I wrote this...thanks!

anyone else with more input or experiences to share, feel free. I'm all ears :gromit:


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

Out-crossing dairy with meat or fiber breeds, your first F1 cross should give you a goat that MIGHT produce some decent meat or fiber, likely WILL produce milk, the milk will be about half of what the nearest dairy dame produces, and yes, WILL BE higher in butterfat and milk solids....but you will also have a shorter lactation cycle...of about 6-8 months instead of the 10+ months that full dairy breeds will give you.

Now, your Nubians are *already* a dual purpose breed. They were bred to be meat and milk producers. They also USED TO BE sex linked, and those in Europe still are, with buff, meaty bucks and wethers, and does with more refined dairy features. (Want to really screw up a breed of something? Give that breed to the U.S. show circuit for a couple of decades and you won't be able to recognize it! Look what U.S. breeders did to German Shepherds, Persian kitties, and Thoroughbred horses!)

I don't know of a breed of fiber goat that isn't also dual purpose, either meat and fiber (like cashmeres and angoras) or mainly milk and fiber (like the Tibetans and Nepals).

Now, with your Nubians, you don't really need to out-cross unless you want REALLY meaty kids and plan on eating them all, be they male, female or hermie. If you just plan on eating excess bucklings, keep breeding to Nubian bucks. The bucklings will certainly be meaty enough.

Because Nubians ARE a dual purpose breed, they are the lowest milk producing breed common in the U.S. That might be problematical if you are a 500+ goat dairy and need super high production....but the Nubian is also the most popular breed of dairy goat in the U.S., despite their low production.

Seems small herd owners, which are the main people who get goats, don't NEED 2 gallons per day per goats, and are happier with lower production, higher milk quality and the dual purpose of the breed.


----------



## TroutRiver (Nov 26, 2010)

I have been told that angoras are dual purpose meat/fleece breed and I do recall hearing that about nubians too. My nubian buck is BIG and meaty for being only in his first year, he is almost as tall as my 5 year old nubian doe and has a lot more body mass (and a beautiful THICK winter coat). I am planning on using the bucklings for meat, so hopefully that is a trait that will be passed on. 

Like I said in my first post, I am very new to goats (I had them when I was younger, but they were only backyard pets. I am new to the production side of it, and to the responsible breeding side) I obviously want to be bettering my animals as I breed them, and I would like to breed hardy animals that will be good for my setup/climate in Vermont. That is more important to me than having purebreds or breeding for maximum production. However, if I'm going to be making hybrids I want it to be to better the herd. Hence, I'm here to learn from you folks. Thanks


----------



## Caprice Acres (Mar 6, 2005)

There may be tri-purpose breeds, but are they super efficient at production at all three goat products? Probably not.  As I said, most likely the most efficient way to produce the products would be to have a herd with all three purebred breeds. You'd also gain more money because GENERALLY, purebreds are more consistant and are therefore worth more at sale time. Culls can always be butchered but some are at least breeding/sale quality, and purebreds will sell for more than crosses, generally.


----------



## HappyFarmer (Jun 17, 2006)

CalianneG looks like you got it all worked out! lol

I have a hard time imagining any one goat offering all 3 traits at a level that would be beneficial also. I have a few meat goats that have a cashmere type coat in winter, never micron ed it but it sure is nice in winter, I consider it an extra. Can't imagine those goats keeping the meat, fiber if I added milk qualities though. Seems like 1 or 2 would traits would dominate.

I hope you win the lottery!

HF


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

How many SPECIALIZED breeds can you name that are super-efficient at what they do? Seriously?

Saanans are super efficient milkers...on average producing over 2000 lbs of milk per year. Do I think a tri-purpose goat is going to do that? No, I don't. However, Nubians produce the LEAST of the recognized dairy goat breeds in this country, and they are 500lbs behind the Saanans. They are also well known for the QUALITY of their milk and the high milk solids content. Crossing with meat and fiber breeds increases milk quality for certain. That's documented.

Do I expect the highest producing fiber goat? No. The highest AVERAGE Cashmere is the Alashanzuoqi from China, at 261 grams per year. Do I think my prospective tri-purpose is going to average that? No.

However, a goat that produces a good 5 ounces is not going to be culled from a U.S. cashmere herd. It won't be the top of the list, but it won't be BBQ either. 

The same goes for meat production. Boers aren't the ONLY meat breed in the world. But I am not expecting top-of-the-line commercial Boer production from my tri-purpose. Yanno, many parts of the world don't even HAVE Boers. They must get by on the equivalent of Spanish goats, and Kikos, and sometimes just "goats". As a woman of my acquaintance who was born and brought up in the Philippines once told me:

"We don't have goats for milking where I grew up. We only drink cows milk. We eat the goats."
"What kind of goats are they?"
"Goat goats...they have been the same kind for as long as my grandmother can remember. They are just goats."

I'd like my tri-purpose goats to be better meat producers than goat goats...whatever kind of goat goats they are. Possibly on par with, say, Spanish goats? 

What I want is average milkers, average fiber producers and average meat producers. I leave top-of-the-line, HUGE producers to commercial industry. Why are Nubians the preferred breed among homesteaders? They are the LOWEST producing of the recognized standard sized breeds. (Lamanchas are the second-lowest producers, but they are catching up in popularity.) Nigerians and Minis are becoming increasingly more popular, and you can't tell me that they are hitting that 1900-2000 lb per year mark of the highest producing breeds! 

I don't need to breed that into my tri-purpose. What I need is a goat that will produce between a quart and a 1/2 gallon per day for a 10 month lactation cycle. I need it to breed true for cashmere production, preferably producing 7+ ounces per year. I need it to produce a carcass weight and bone-to-meat ratio for males that is comparable to that of Spanish goats.

And I need two goats to do the work of three goats. That is what it is about. 

If I had three top-producing breeds:

1 Saanan would give me app. 2000 lbs milk a year.
1 Boer would give me app. 100lbs dressed and packaged weight meat per year. 
1 Cashmere would give me approx. 9.3 ounces of cashmere per year.

So, total, I would have 2000lbs of milk, 100lbs of meat, and 9.3 ounces of cashmere from feeding 3 goats.

Now, if my tri-purpose are the LOWEST average producers in each of their areas compared to the other breeds of that type:

1500 lbs of milk per goat, is 3000lbs of milk each year.
75lbs of meat per goat, making 150lbs of meat per year.
5-7 ounces of cashmere...let's say 5, making 10 ounces of cashmere per year.

I have 3000lbs of milk, 150 lbs of meat and 10 ounces of fiber at the end of the year, but I only had to feed TWO goats, rather than three.

Ummm, who has saved some money here?
Oh, and mygoat, you showed a bit of your ignorance about cashmere goats in there. One of the reasons that the U.S. is not a top producer of cashmere down is because we refuse to *starve our goats*. Yes, that is right. Top production of cashmere, at least, of the fineness required, means goats go hungry. That is the opposite of putting mass amounts of body resources into the fiber. 

What we produce in the U.S. is mainly a fiber named cashgora. It's not REALLY a cross between cashmere and mohair, but it kinda has properties of both. When cashmere producing, single purpose, goats are well fed and well cared for, their undercoats tend to grow thicker and coarser. To be considered "cashmere", it cannot be any larger than 19 microns...and GOOD cashmere is 15-16 microns.

Cashmere goats on good diets produce fiber in the 22-28 micron range. Certainly as good as, say, a nice merino...but NOT fine cashmere.

Which is one of the reasons that I think a milk/fiber breed, sex linked to cause meaty bucks, would do WONDERFULLY. Tibet produces wonderful cashmere, AND they feed their goats....but a lot of the goats' resources goes into milk production, meaning they also produce the quality cashmere.

:shrugs: The odd things that makes animals produce!

HF, if YOU win the lottery, will you promise to fund my breeding program?  I can promise you ALL of the goats you can possibly want for your very own out of the deal.


----------



## Caprice Acres (Mar 6, 2005)

You'd still have to develop your fancy tri purpose breed, or import them.  So technically, you'd be much, much further in the money pit if you got the tri purpose breeds. And, I bet there would be drastically reduce demand for the tri purpose breeds - so you'd likely have trouble selling, and likely for low prices if you can find a place for them to go. So where purebred boers/dairies/cashmere goats can sell for hundreds of dollars apeice as breeding stock, you might make a hundred dollars, if you're lucky. I know I don't want fiber goats - too much work and not enough demand for the product, IMO. 

And of course, this is all based on theory. I still don't think that a 'sex linked' meatiness/dairyness is possible in goats. At least not to any distinguishable degree. You might be able to get to a mid-weight goat with decent dairy qualities but heftier than swiss breeds, but not a breed that consistantly throws chunky, meat type bucklings and dairy type doelings. 

And you're right, I had no idea about quality cashmere being from poorly fed goats. Just one more reason I have little interest in cashmere.


----------



## HappyFarmer (Jun 17, 2006)

CalianneG won't have to worry about money when I win the lottery. 
A non issue.

I'll buy a ranch, and while I'm playing with all the cute baby goats, she can manage it, lol. 

Seriously someone somewhere has to have some actual data on how these crosses actually fared, and if so why havn't we heard more on it? Looks great on paper anyways.

Now I'm gonna have to go look up cashmere goats, and microns too.

HF


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

Oh, I'd certainly be in the hole *developing* the breed. NO ONE has EVER, in the entire history of mankind, even broke even by DEVELOPING a new breed of *anything*. In fact, most people who have developed new breeds have gone broke doing so.

No, if I were to win the lottery and go on to pour money into a new, tri-purpose breed of goat (all speculation, of course) then it would be a labor of love, not of profit. In fact, once I got the breed fully developed, I'd likely suffer a horrific LOSS due to the fact that I would want the outcome of my years of hard work (meaning thousands of goats) well distributed with people who share the same passions. 

People with passion seldom tend to have it accompanied by money....and, in the end, I would likely be more careful to insure that the result of my years of effort went to people willing to devote time and love to the newly established breed.

And THEY would be the ones to profit from my work. ~chuckles~ Also, considering they would be a limited breed, able to do so much, they might surprise me and do the Boer thing when they first started out. When I FIRST saw Boers advertised, at $25,000 a pop, I was shocked and called up the breeder:

"What makes these goats worth so much? Do they milk molten gold? Have fleece made of silver wire? What? Do they poop gemstones?"
Man laughs and says, "No. What they have is an exceptionally dense muscular system and they gain weight fast. They are meat goats."
I ask, "Well, okay. How do they taste?"
More laughter, "At $25,000 a goat, do you honestly think I have ever once considered KILLING one to find out?"

I happen to know for a fact that sex-linked *meatiness* is more than possible in goats, or in any other animal. Dairy-ness, I guess I will find out. Although it seems to be working fine for Nubians and for Dairy Sheep. Forgive me if I am getting you mixed up with someone else; but mygoats, aren't you planning on majoring in this stuff? If so, you'll be well schooled up in sex-linked genetic traits by the time you finish your second semester of microbiology.

YOU may not want goats that are dual or triple purpose. YOU may not want to bother with fiber producing goats.. YOU probably don't want milk sheep either. That does not mean that other people are not interested in these things. If people WEREN'T interested in such things, then we wouldn't be getting three or four thread a month with people asking about "What is a good multi-purpose breed?"

Don't you think it is simply kinda mean and nasty to basically tell folks, "You are idiots for wanting something like that. It will never happen. You can't do it. Even if you manage to find a way to do it, no one will want it and you'll lose money. YOUR dream is worthless."

My best friend wants to design and build a *diesel* race bike...so he can have a race bike that he can make bio-diesel for.....

No matter WHAT I, personally, might think about it (not into racing, not really into motorcycles, certainly not into racing motorcycles), do you think it would be kind of me, or well mannered, or even polite to tell him that his hopes and plans are worthless, that you can't build a racing, diesel motorcycle and that even if you could, no one would want it so his dreams are worthless?

However, I forgive you. And while you are being negative, nasty, and trying to smile about it because you have a personal prejudice against multi-purpose goats, I think that instead of waiting on the lottery, I'll go make some plans on how to accomplish this goal on a smaller scale that is repeatable.

After all, semen is cheap.


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

The problem, HF, is that there is not a lot of information available to us HERE, in the U.S., on goat breeds other than our common ones.

Heck, think of other things we don't have a lot of information on. Until a few months ago, I did not know there were breeds of sheep _and horses_ that were developed specifically for commercial DAIRY production.

Huh? Sheep milk? Mare's milk? But yes....and some of those breeds of milk sheep are producing numbers to rival our goats. (I might add that they are also producing fleece and meat)

There are so many things we aren't away of simply because we don't have those things HERE.

And yes, you get to play with ALL the baby goats. I'll run the ranch and breeding program.


----------



## rootsandwings (Apr 20, 2004)

my friend milks her pygora. She gets about a pint a day of sweet, rich, buttery milk (once a day milking) and is very happy with the fiber (she spins) I don't know about the meat aspect, but aren't pygmies meaty for their size?

anyway, she keeps trying to get me to breed my fuzzy mini-nubian to the pygora's sire for mini-nubiangoras. So far I've resisted.


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

LOL Well, rootsandwings, once I get my dream breed developed and the genetics all stabilized (and I hope to have two breeds in one...one that gives cashmere fiber, and one that gives mohair fiber...and the twain shall NOT interbreed!), I had hoped to miniaturize them.

So, in 20 years or so, look for Mini Taameres and Mini Taagoras.

And they WON'T be crossbreeds by then...they will be breeds in their own right, throwing the standard true.

And yes, Pygmies are a meat breed.


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

~mutter, grumbles, complains, and otherwise acts unpleasant~ And this is exactly what I mean by information not being available....

I have come across a few more breeds that are *supposedly* dual and triple purpose...but I can't get any numbers and statistics on them. NOT because there haven't been studies done on them and experiments documented about them, but because:

1. I don't read Russian.
2. I don't read Chinese.
3. Nope, I don't read Arabic either!

The information is out there, but not in a form that makes it available to me.


----------



## Oat Bucket Farm (Jul 28, 2006)

Wow, Caliann, this has been extremely interesiing to read. I want to help intertain fuzzy baby goats on this ranch of yours. As far as milk sheep (some places use yaks milk and in Peru guinea pigs are a major source of meat) over in France the milk of the Lacaune is used to make the country's famous Roquefort cheese. It isn't considered really Roquefort cheese if it doesn't come from the milk of a Lacaune sheep.


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

~laughs~ Fuzzy, blue-eyed, white-to-cream colored, silky soft baby goats.

I mean, if I am going to do a huge, multi-thousand animal breeding program, I might as well fix ALL the traits I want, right? And white-to-cream colored fiber is easier to dye a multitude of shades...which is why many breeds of sheep have been bred for thousands of years to be white. 

You see, NOW I know about milk sheep. I even know that Lacaune is the major breed in France, but the other high-producing, major breed is the East Friesian.

But, having been born and bred here in the U.S., it wasn't until recently that a bit of internet research led me to a mention of that, and then off on a tangent that taught me more than I wanted to know about milk sheep. 

It's not that I was prejudice about them, it was simply that the idea of dairy sheep and horses _hadn't occurred to me._ Sheep are something you eat or shear....and you ride horses. The idea of hooking them up to a milking machine just wasn't something that my experience encouraged me to consider.

Now, I also know that my cheesy sweetie, Ricotta, also comes from sheep.

I'm even thinking of maybe getting a couple of dairy/merino crosses maybe. I *am* one of those people that likes to play with fiber and textile arts, so fiber-producing animals are a bonus to me. 

<--- all for a milk/meat/fiber producing menagerie if I can have one.

A LONG time ago, I remember mentioning that I was seeking fiber/milk breeds, that I was interested in dual purpose, fiber producing animals, and did anyone also know a good dual purpose Angora Rabbit too?

My DH, as well as the forum, busted up laughing....simultaneously.... with DH swearing that NOTHING was going to induce him to milk rabbits...and the forum asking how I was planning on milking rabbits.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

I think my brain hurts now, and I forgot what I was going to reply here.

:grit:

Edited to add: Sorry for the debate coach moment, but the King Ranch in south Texas developed the Santa Gertrudis cattle breed. They aren't exactly in the red in their bookkeeping. 

http://santagertrudis.com/


----------



## PotBellyPigs (Jul 27, 2010)

"YOU may not want goats that are dual or triple purpose. YOU may not want to bother with fiber producing goats.. YOU probably don't want milk sheep either. That does not mean that other people are not interested in these things. If people WEREN'T interested in such things, then we wouldn't be getting three or four thread a month with people asking about "What is a good multi-purpose breed?"

LOL, in fact I STARTED a thread like that(dual purpose though) just a month ago....
In fact, I have bred my Kiko/Boar buck to my Saanen doe and their offspring will be bred to my Saanen buck.
My plan will be the best of dairy and meat.
Greg Zeigler
Alger, Ohio


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

~laughs~ Alice, shhhhhhhhh! I am working on the expectation that I would be spending a lot of money for very little return. If it turns out I do this thing and become insanely wealthy from it, well....God is good, loving, and kind.  If not, then I am not disappointed, am I?

PBP, what I *mainly* want to develop is a dairy/fiber breed. The meaty bucks would be nice, but if all I manage to attain is a strong dairy/fiber breed, I'll be content with that.

All, soft-hearted people will be CLAMORING to buy my Taagoras...as then they can have their does for milking, and a PERFECT excuse to keep all the wethers. 

"But honey! The boys give me fiber! Of course I need 58 of them!"


----------



## Caprice Acres (Mar 6, 2005)

I'm not being mean or snotty, in fact I'm not even flustered. I'm just saying that I doubt you'll profit from them, and that's just my opinion. I'm not being a naysayer - just my honest opinion. I have never once in 10 years of owning goats, EVER had ANYONE ask for a fiber goat or if I knew anybody who raised them. Nor have I met anybody who owned them because they wanted to - though I did know someone who had a whether that they were given that was likely a cross of an angora and who knows what else. Also, I see crossbred goats going for dirt cheap all the time. I'll have to ask some of the dairy people I talk to but I don't think very many dairy people have time or desire to also have to keep fleeces in good condition. 

I did buy some t-posts from a farmer who said he used to raise Angoras - had several hundred at one time. He said the market fell out on the angoras and he sold out of them many years ago. He said the market here hasn't been the same because it can be produced cheaper and imported elsewhere. So essentially you'd be breeding a mediocre animal for meat, milk, and fiber - and one of those markets doesn't have a strong demand. 

and no, I don't want dairy sheep, either... mainly because I don't like sheep, though. And also because I wouldn't want to have to shear, them, too. And also because they are often untested flocks that could carry CL/Johne's etc. 

I guess I'm saying, if you win the lottery, develop your breed and all the power to you. The likelyhood of developing or getting a tri purpose breed that is CONSISTANT and worthwile is, in my opinion, NOT possible without importing good stock OR developing our own over generations and huge herds. And that was the original answer to the question. 

As for sex linked traits - microbes are much different than goats.  It'd be interesting to learn that goats could be sex linked in the way you describe, but I've not heard of it yet.


----------



## jwal10 (Jun 5, 2010)

I milk 3 pygoras, I use the milk for cheese, yogurt, cottage cheese and butter, my wife uses the fiber, we eat the wethers. I wouldn't say they are the best at any one thing, just work for us on 1 acre. Each gives about a quart a day, I make chicken mash with any extra. A 3 goat rotation works well here, I can breed anytime to make the rotation work. They are cute, easy to handle, I shear myself, very little hoof problem. They keep the property trimmed, some oat screenings at milking time and a little hand made hay in the winter. Teats are small but I use the little milker. Cheap to keep and the meat is Gooooood. They are happy, I am happy....James


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

mygoat said:


> As for sex linked traits - microbes are much different than goats.  It'd be interesting to learn that goats could be sex linked in the way you describe, but I've not heard of it yet.


Chromosomes are chromosomes, whether on a microbe or an elephant. Why are bucks SO important to udder improvement?

Because bucks only carry the one X chromosome...and any faulty udder traits carried on that ONE chromosome will basically be doubled. Udder traits aren't spread out among the rest of the chromosomes, because...well, udders are sex linked. *Genotype* is carried by both males and females, but *phenotype* will only show up in females.

In microbiology, you will study gene sequences and stuff like that.. The "micro" in microbiology doesn't only mean the study of small organisms, but also the study of small parts of large organisms.

I want characteristics such as meat production, fiber production and milk production to be carried throughout my new breed. But I want ~PHENOTYPE~ to be specific. Butch, meaty bucks and fine-boned, dainty does.



> The likelyhood of developing or getting a tri purpose breed that is CONSISTANT and worthwile is, in my opinion, NOT possible ....


That's not naysaying? Puhlease.


----------



## Caprice Acres (Mar 6, 2005)

Neither udder type OR meatiness/dairyness is sex linked, nor can it be without biologically engineering. ALL the traits relating to the udder or the dairy/meatiness of the animal would have to be found on the x or y chromosomes, and that is simply not the case. (And there are a LOT for most phenotypes including dairyness/meatiness/udder quality) Sex linked traits are SINGULAR traits (like feather color in chickens or like hemophilia in humans) whereas udder quality and wether or not they are dairy or meat type are definetely not restrained to one gene - udder texture, teat size, fore attachments, rear attachments, and production are NOT wrapped nicely into one gene, nor are they all found on the x/y chromosomes, and therefore CANNOT BE SEX LINKED. Same for meat/dairy traits. 

Why are bucks so important for udder quality? Because they contribute 50% of the genetics of your ENTIRE herd, it has NOTHING to do with being sex linked traits. Traits in general are effected 50% from the dams, 50% from the bucks (unless traits are actually sex linked, which udders are NOT). However, the buck contributes his genetics to your WHOLE herd, instead of a doe who only contributes a relatively small part of the herd genetics. Since your kid crop is influenced so heavily from the single source that is the bucks genetics, is why you need to select a buck for udder quality, and you do so by selecting a buck out of dams and granddams that you admire.


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

To make it simple for you:

Biological Basis of Heredity: Sex Linked Genes

Please notice some little bits of information there. Things such as....

..._X-linked recessive traits that are not related to feminine body characteristics are primarily expressed_......

_There are about 1,098 human X-linked genes._ (Such things are comparable in other mammals also...)

_...... the SRY gene, is responsible for male anatomical traits._

Sorry, mygoats, you are very, very wrong. ALL anatomical traits relating to gender and gender anatomy are sex linked. Every single one.

Explanation of genetic biology and sex linkage.

That might help you understand it a little bit better. If either of those are too simple for you, let me know, and I'll post the meatier stuff that assumes the reader has a background in biology.


----------



## Caprice Acres (Mar 6, 2005)

You continue believing what you want. I'm fairly confidant that I'm correct in my reasoning, and so is my microbiology professor - with whom I had a good and amusing conversation with about this topic. Especially the part about how all dairy traits and meat traits are sex linked, or could be 'made' into sex linked traits. I think you're confusing true sex linked traits with how the sex chromosomes affect hormone production, causing the differences in male and female.

All of those topics were taught in my basic biology courses, and I do believe it is you that needs to re-read the sex linked trait sections. The entire udder is not effected by the x or y gene, nor is diary character, or meat character. Sex linkage is single traits - hemophilia or no, colorblindness or no. Simple as that. You can't make the entire breed 'dairy or not' like you can change ONE gene/one phenotype. 

If this were possible, all goat breeds would be 'dairy or not' according to sex. You cannot MAKE a gene sex linked by breeding selectively.


----------



## FunnyRiverFarm (May 25, 2010)

CaliannG said:


> Sorry, mygoats, you are very, very wrong. ALL anatomical traits relating to gender and gender anatomy are sex linked. Every single one.


What mygoats is saying is that many of the traits you described, such as muscling, dairy character, udder attachments, etc. are NOT ENTIRELY sex linked. Most physical charateristics are not linked to a single gene on a single choromosome...it is much more complex than that. 

To have a single breeding produce fast growing, meat type bucks while producing dairy-type doe kids is not realistic because not all dairy traits are sex-linked and neither are all traits for meatiness. You'd always be more likely to get doe and buck kids with similar physical characteristics...

"...X-linked recessive traits that are not related to feminine body characteristics are primarily expressed......"

I glanced at the first link you posted and don't really see how the info does anything to back up your position...was basically just talking about how males only have one x chromosome and since their much smaller y chromosome does not have a lot of the genes that would correspond with genes on the larger x chromosome there are certain genes on the x chromosome (not related to sex or gender) that males males will always exhibit because there are no corresponding genes on the y chromosome to "cover up" those genes and keep them from being expressed...


----------



## FunnyRiverFarm (May 25, 2010)

Just realized you posted ahead of me, mygoats! Excellent! I think we had the same microbiology class


----------



## TroutRiver (Nov 26, 2010)

This has been very interesting to read. Thanks to everyone for your opinions/replies, it is fascinating. I don't know much about genetics or microbiology. I do know that I had the half brother of my buck (different dams, same sire) and he was much smaller and less meaty than his brother (who I am using for breeding). We never intended to use the smaller one for breeding, he was a meat animal, but I did note the difference in their body types and sizes. Not sure if that means anything...but I thought of it as I was reading these posts. 

So maybe this is opening up a big can of worms...but I'll go ahead and ask it anyway because I am really enjoying hearing all of your opinions. Would it be irresponsible of me to breed my nubian doe to an angora buck without doing more research on this topic? I am going to breed her anyway, whether it be to my nubian buck or to an angora. If I don't like what I get, then the kid will be meat. But it can't hurt to try? I'll never know if I don't try it. Yay? Nay?


----------



## Caprice Acres (Mar 6, 2005)

Irresponsible? No, of course not. Breed to whom you will. Just realize the offspring will likely not be as good or consistant as purebred diary goats at milking, and will likely not be as good or consistant as purebred angoras at producing fiber.  That's my argument. They would make decent meat goats, most likely - and you can technically eat any goat that you don't like. They may even be decent milkers but you may not get the extended lactations of the dairies. They just won't be consistant when they are mutts - some may look more like/perform like the father, some will look/perform more like the mother with first generation crosses. The fuzzy critters will likely be CUTE AS THE DICKENS though, and you must post pictures. 

But, there is nothing WRONG with producing mutts. In fact, they can be fun and perfectly good goats for your own use. I just don't think they're as profitable as an extended breeding venture.


----------



## FunnyRiverFarm (May 25, 2010)

TroutRiver said:


> So maybe this is opening up a big can of worms...but I'll go ahead and ask it anyway because I am really enjoying hearing all of your opinions. Would it be irresponsible of me to breed my nubian doe to an angora buck without doing more research on this topic? I am going to breed her anyway, whether it be to my nubian buck or to an angora. If I don't like what I get, then the kid will be meat. But it can't hurt to try? I'll never know if I don't try it. Yay? Nay?


There's really no way to predict the outcome exactly but you will most likely get an intermediate between the parents...shaggy looking nubians...or shorter haired angoras...LOL! Folks have crossed angora with pygmies (pygora) and get mixed results as far as fiber quality...nothing consistent. I am sure that angoras wouldn't contribute much toward good udder/milking qualities so you might end up with shaggy looking nubians that grow up to be poor milkers...or you could get a decent milker out of it...there's really no way of knowing, just like you said...and you'll most likely get something different with each breeding. That's why most people stick with purebreds or atleast breed dairy to dairy and meat to meat....the result are much more predictable. Buuuttttttt.....if you like surprises then I say go for it!


----------



## HappyFarmer (Jun 17, 2006)

Wow, I love to read about genetics, I have a hard time understanding them unless it's clearly spelled out. 

Anybody want to explain the punnet square, genetic liklihoods, and how to take it to several generations? Please please please? I've been to a couple different sites explaining a simple one (like polledness) it but still don't understand.

Please, please?

HF


----------



## Caprice Acres (Mar 6, 2005)

HappyFarmer said:


> Wow, I love to read about genetics, I have a hard time understanding them unless it's clearly spelled out.
> 
> Anybody want to explain the punnet square, genetic liklihoods, and how to take it to several generations? Please please please? I've been to a couple different sites explaining a simple one (like polledness) it but still don't understand.
> 
> ...


What would you like explained? Keep in mind only certain traits can be explained 'well' by punnet squares, as it has to be a dominant/recessive trait or a trait that is predictable if it is a partially dominant trait.

I guess an example I can do is the basic black dominance to the blue fur color gene in rabbits. 

A black rabbit can be either B/B (two black genes) or B/b (carries blue). Since black (B) is dominant to blue (b), the animal will be black even if it carries the blue gene. Gametes are sex cells, and each animal contributes half of their genetics to each gamete. With B/B rabbits, their gametes can ONLY have B. With B/b rabbits, 50% of their gametes will be B, and 50% of their gametes will be b. Statistically, 50% of their offspring will get B, and the other 50% will get b. 

A blue rabbit can ONLY be b/b. That means all of it's gametes can ONLY have b. 

To determine wether a black rabbit carries blue, you'd have to do a test breeding to a blue rabbit. If a black rabbit DOES carry blue, then 75% of it's offspring (statistically) would be blue. After two litters, you should be fairly confidant wether or not the parent does or does not carry blue. 

Say you have a blue carrier female (B/b) and a blue male (b/b). Offspring would be 75% blue (b/b), 25% black (B/b). Mating two blue carriers (B/b) together would result in 75% black (25% B/B, 50% B/b, impossible to distinguish from one another without test breedings), and 25% Blue (b/b). 

And of course, this is all without modifiers or affect by other genes. OTher genes like agouti banding, albinism, or the 'pointed' gene can affect what the animal looks like. 

By knowing the parent's genotypes you can guess the offspring's genotypes but the only way to know for sure in a lot of cases, is to do test breedings. 

The variablility in most traits and animals in general comes from incomplete dominance that occurs with many traits as well as gene re-arrangement during meiosis... So for most traits, you'll get a generally unpredictable mash-up of genetics from both parents. However, when you breed two animals with desireable traits, they likelyhood that they pass their 'good' genetics on is higher, than if you take two animals with undesireable tratis in an attempt to create a desireable trait.  This explains why you have 'keeper' kids and 'cull' kids even from two top-notch parents - genetic variability.


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

HF, the Punnet Square is easy with two traits....like brown eyes verses blue eyes. Then gets more difficult when you have four genes that affect a trait, like having the likelihood of getting a brindle puppy....

Eye color with humans has been used. Blue eyes in humans are recessive....so if a person has a blue eyed parent and a double-gene brown eyed parent, that person will have brown eyes. That person carries a dominant gene for brown eyes (B) and a recessive gene for blue eyes (b).

If that person married another brown eyed person who has a blue eyed parent:

25% of their children will have brown eyes, and ALL of their children will have brown eyes no matter who they marry.

50% of their children will have brown eyes, but they have a 25% chance of having blue-eyed children if the wed someone who also carried the recessive gene, or a 50% chance of having blue eyed children if they marry someone with blue eyes.

25% of their children will have blue eyes. If they marry someone with blue eyes, 100% of their children will have blue eyes. If they marry someone with brown eyes, that carries the recessive gene, then 50% of their children will have brown eyes and 50% of their children will have blue eyes. If they marry a double-gened brown-eyed person, then ALL of their children will have brown eyes. 

Now, we have the technology at an affordable level for a goat breeder to do genetic testing. I have seen gene sequencers for kids in the couple hundred dollars range.

Unfortunately, we haven't MAPPED all of the genes yet, for goats or for humans....so the gene sequencer isn't very valuable to us......

Yet.

TroutRiver: It's not irresponsible to outbreed. Heck, especially if you are planning on eating what you don't like. One thing mygoats is correct on: You are not going to get CONSISTENT producers and results from a few F1 and F2 crosses. Just ask those folks that are breeding minis! In fact, breeding minis of anything, dairy, meat OR fiber.

It takes time and a large genetic pool to be able to breed from crosses to the point that you get consistent results and are able to establish a standardization.


----------



## Caprice Acres (Mar 6, 2005)

CaliannG said:


> HF, the Punnet Square is easy with two traits....like brown eyes verses blue eyes. Then gets more difficult when you have four genes that affect a trait, like having the likelihood of getting a brindle puppy....
> 
> Eye color with humans has been used. Blue eyes in humans are recessive....so if a person has a blue eyed parent and a double-gene brown eyed parent, that person will have brown eyes. That person carries a dominant gene for brown eyes (B) and a recessive gene for blue eyes (b).
> 
> ...


At least I'm right about one thing. 

Also, of note pertaining to the human genome, which HAS actually been completely mapped since 2003 : 

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

You are right again, mygoats. That was, perhaps, poor diction on my part.

We have the human DNA sequence and genome *mapped*, as in, all of the genes are identified....but we still don't know what most of them DO, or did...or what they are or were for....

Or which combination does what, for that matter.

So, only in my opinion, that means we don't have the thing _mapped_ yet, as that implies that we know what happens if a gene turns left at Albuquerque and goes straight on 'til morning.

Or maybe my nomenclature was correct? Going over the HGP website, they haven't claimed to have mapped human DNA, but that they have identified all the genes and determined the chemical sequences.

:shrugs: When they figure out what all of them do, and how they react to one another, and why, then they will have the human genome {...insert word that I was using the word "mapped" to stand for....)


----------



## HappyFarmer (Jun 17, 2006)

Wow, thank you for all the information. I guess I'd like to know just which traits in goats are dominant, and which are recessive. I read that dark brown bred to black is dominant, medium brown bred to black is soso, and black read to light brown is dominant. How does one know which are dominant & which recessive? Can the rabbit information regarding blue be applied to goats? I got the part that Brown/black goats cannot create red/beige color, I think. 

So, I have brother & sister, father blue eyes, mother brown eyes. One kid has blue eyes, one brown, assuming carrying blue eye gene?? If I breed the blue eyed boy to a brown eye goat, can I get blue eye kids? What about the brown eyed doe whose father had blue eyes? Can she ever throw blue eyed kids if bred to a brown eyed goat?

Also, I have a red & white doe-deep red. Bred 4 times to 4 different black & whtie bucks, all with black & white all the way back in the pedigree. Every time that doe has thrown either red & white or a diluted (almost tan) red & white kids. Can I assume this doe has dominant red & white? 

On the other hand, this does 1/2 sister, lighter though still red & white beltie, has thrown mostly red & white kids, one or 2 black & white. Her daughter, deep red like her aunt, throws black & white. 

How can I get black & white from the 1st doe??? Is it possible, and what would I call her color trait, dominant red? would it be RR on the locus?

THEN I have ticking (same doe). the ticking appears after the goat turns a year old (spots on the white of hte back). Very pretty. Is this a trait I can manage & breed for?


So many questions, maybe some too complicated for the list. I guess my question is just WHAT traits in goats are documented dominant & recessive, what can I somewhat predict, and what might the exceptions be? Can I apply other species studies to goats? 

Also I just red that Angora goats genetics don't quite work the same way as other goats. Is this correct?

Just to keep this on topic, I'm looking to collect the cashmere from these goats this spring, maybe I'll make a hat or two.

Sigh. 

HF


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

HappyFarmer said:


> So, I have brother & sister, father blue eyes, mother brown eyes. One kid has blue eyes, one brown, assuming carrying blue eye gene?? If I breed the blue eyed boy to a brown eye goat, can I get blue eye kids? What about the brown eyed doe whose father had blue eyes? Can she ever throw blue eyed kids if bred to a brown eyed goat?


Okay, eye color in goats is the opposite of humans. The blue eyes in goats is dominant.

That means your little doe will NEVER throw blue-eyed kids if bred to a brown-eyed buck.

Lets get out our square.

Your doe's sire had the Bl/br eye color genes. That means he got one dominant and one recessive gene. For the sake of this exercise, we will say that the dam had double brown, so br/br....and that showed in her phenotype as brown eyes.

In that paring, your buck got the dominant gene, which he had a 50% chance of doing, and it showed up in his phenotype as blue eyes. He, like his sire, would have the Bl/br genes.

His sister, however, to have brown eyes, would HAVE to have the br/br genes. Since any goat that has the dominant gene for blue eyes will actually HAVE blue eyes, then if you breed her to brown eyed bucks, she will always throw brown eyed kids.

Now, for a second exercise, if the dam, as well as the sire, was Bl/br (as would show with her having blue eyes), then your buck may be Bl/Bl, in which case ALL of his offspring will have blue eyes.


----------



## CaliannG (Apr 29, 2005)

Oh, and if you breed the buck to a brown-eyed doe, you have a 50% chance of getting blue eyed kids if his genes are Bl/br, and a 100% chance if they are Bl/Bl.


----------



## HappyFarmer (Jun 17, 2006)

CallianG thanks that was explained very nicely.

HF


----------



## TroutRiver (Nov 26, 2010)

This is all very cool. I called the farm near me that raises angora goats and they just sold their only buck...so it looks like in the interest of time and locality I'll be breeding Mama Red (nubian doe) to my nubian buck. Kind of a bummer...but maybe next year I can get ahold of an angora buck if I start planning earlier. Oh well...I'll have purebred babies if I end up wanting to sell them, which may or may not happen. We'll see.


----------



## macsimonds (Apr 7, 2014)

Im in Vermont too. I have a Boer buck, and 3 Alpine does. 
I'm also interested in a tri purpose breed, and would like to introduce Angora in. 
 CallianG you are awesomely genius, email me sometime. [email protected]


----------



## Wonderland (May 26, 2009)

This has been a very interesting read. I've always found genetics fascinating, though to be honest they make my head spin. :stars:

However, I want to chime in from a slightly different perspective. Maybe some of these points have already been made and reading 3 pages of conversations have buried them in my memory, but here goes anyway.

I think, like mygoats points out, that a tri-purpose breed wouldn't *excel* at any one thing: it's just asking too much from one breed to be able to consistently produce jacks of all trade who are actually also masters of all trades, too. There's a reason the saying "Jack of all trades, master of none" exists, after all. Typically when you try to do too many things at once, the things may be done well but not great. Maybe a few outstanding individuals could fill the bucket, the freezer, and the craft room exceptionally well, but most wouldn't, imo. Thinking of it from a breeding standpoint, it would be difficult to focus on improving so many traits at one time as well. It would be like trying to create a dog breed that could win races, hunt hogs, and guard your farm. 

There's a reason we have the breeds we have that are focused on singular traits/characteristics. One of those reasons is that here in the US (and other more developed countries) most of us no longer want our livestock solely to produce for us and our families. The emphasis has been shifted to production for selling the products produced rather than for making just enough for a single family. This is not a bad thing, in my opinion, except when it's taken too far. I don't mind dual purpose breeds at all (and prefer them in some cases, like poultry), but for my own personal goats, I primarily want milk. We can always eat excess wethers regardless, so technically every goat is dual purpose anyway. 

There's also the problem that, because most of our breeds are developed for only one trait, merging two breeds of different traits would be a crap shoot. Maybe if a person had a meat herd but started paying close attention to the udder quality and milk production within their herd, then out crossed to dairy, it might not be such a bumpy road. But most meat breeders don't give two hoots about milk production because that's not why they have their goats. (And vice versa for most dairy folk.)

All that said, I do think it would be totally doable to create a dual or perhaps even tri purpose breed that was decent in two to three areas. If your goal was to have a herd of goats to provide your own household with fiber, meat, and milk, I think you could do it over time. However, they probably wouldn't be winning any awards or getting lots of money when sold. But, if your main goal was to just provide for yourself, who cares?


----------



## Djhinnwe (Dec 6, 2018)

I know this thread is 8 years old...but you guys know that you just need to start with 5 does to create a new cross-breed right? Not 1000. For a tri-purpose breed you could even go up to 10, and breed half to Angora (5 of the best you can find), half to a Meat Breed (5 of the best you can find), and then cull the babies who don't meet your needs once they reach sexual maturity.

Then you breed the remaining offspring to a billy that will up the production of their worst trait (ie improve udder, or fleece, or build). You cull the second generation, and breed the best of them to billies that will improve their weakest characteristics. You do the same for the third generation, except for the third generation you breed them to each other and see what you get. Then you cull, and breed, and cull, and breed, and add genetic diversity when needed, until you get what you want.

Saanen and Angora both have a dominanting white gene, so you're very unlikely to get colour regardless of what else you breed to.

That being said, Saanen have very-very-very coarse, thick, guard hairs and that's where I think it would cause an issue.

If you look at horse breeds a lot of them are traceable back to 2-5 specific horses. Thoroughbreds and Arabians are even traced back to the same ones. Modern Andalusians can be traced back to 5 specific horses.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Djhinnwe said:


> I know this thread is 8 years old...but you guys know that you just need to start with 5 does to create a new cross-breed right? Not 1000. For a tri-purpose breed you could even go up to 10, and breed half to Angora (5 of the best you can find), half to a Meat Breed (5 of the best you can find), and then cull the babies who don't meet your needs once they reach sexual maturity.
> 
> Then you breed the remaining offspring to a billy that will up the production of their worst trait (ie improve udder, or fleece, or build). You cull the second generation, and breed the best of them to billies that will improve their weakest characteristics. You do the same for the third generation, except for the third generation you breed them to each other and see what you get. Then you cull, and breed, and cull, and breed, and add genetic diversity when needed, until you get what you want.
> 
> ...


But the facts stated in post $45 are still true. What a wonderful world it would be if you could cross a Thoroughbred and a Belgian and win a horse pull and the Kentucky Derby. Look at boat/cars or flying cars. They are neither good cars or good boats or planes.

Crossing an Angora, a breed that has been heavily culled for hair quality, with a breed that has been bred for milk quality, without regard for coat will not result in a dual purpose anything. Expect a loss of both hair quality and milk production. Divide both hair quality and milk production with an additional breed and you lose the traits of all three.

Triple purpose breeds are so unrealistic, since even dual purpose livestock is, at best, a compromise. Dual purpose chickens lack the feed efficiency of both the egg producing breeds and meat breeds. Dual purpose cattle, like Dexters, lack both the milk production of small dairy breeds and growth efficiencies of any of the beef breeds.

If you have a milk breed goat and want to eat her offspring, breeding to a meat type buck might offer an improvement. If you want to start milking and cannot afford to start over, breed your meat type does to a quality milk breed buck and in 20 generations, you'll have top notch milk goats. 

I have high regard for those ancestors that through careful selection have developed specific breeds, with specific purposes and each breeder that has maintained each breed and selected just the best to breed and continue to improve each unique breed. Therefore, I see most cross breeding as willy nilly crap shoots.

If you seek a goat that lacks the quality Angora fibers, disappointing amounts of milk and lacks the meatiness of a meat breed, get out there and disrupt those decades of selective breeding and create your very own whatever.


----------



## Djhinnwe (Dec 6, 2018)

haypoint said:


> But the facts stated in post $45 are still true. What a wonderful world it would be if you could cross a Thoroughbred and a Belgian and win a horse pull and the Kentucky Derby. Look at boat/cars or flying cars. They are neither good cars or good boats or planes.
> 
> Crossing an Angora, a breed that has been heavily culled for hair quality, with a breed that has been bred for milk quality, without regard for coat will not result in a dual purpose anything. Expect a loss of both hair quality and milk production. Divide both hair quality and milk production with an additional breed and you lose the traits of all three.
> 
> ...


I was not arguing any of those points. Angora's can't be compared to dual breeds, etc. I was arguing that if you are going to try to do it, you don't need to start with 1000 goats, triple your numbers, and then cull. You only need to start with 5 animals and cull anything that does not meet the standard you are going for. You start off a little flexible and move into being choosey. That is the more sustainable way for how breeds are made. Getting 1000 and tripling your number, and then culling, is going to flood the market, which isn't something that is desirable as a producer.

Multi-purpose animals are possible, and possible to do pretty well (Draft x Thoroughbreds make really good Eventing, Endurance, and Carriage animals, for instance - the milk would also not be too bad for production due to the likeliness of inheriting a draft udder - and are likely to have the Draft ratio of feed vs the Thoroughbred ratio of feed which means better utilization. In fact many Warmblood types have Draft and Thoroughbred inter-crossed with the type of Warmblood the breeders are going for), BUT that doesn't mean they can be pitted against the ones meant for a single purpose. Those are two separate things. They can only be pitted against other multi-purpose stock.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Djhinnwe said:


> Multi-purpose animals are possible, and possible to do pretty well (Draft x Thoroughbreds make really good Eventing, Endurance, and Carriage animals, for instance - the milk would also not be too bad for production due to the likeliness of inheriting a draft udder - and are likely to have the Draft ratio of feed vs the Thoroughbred ratio of feed which means better utilization. In fact many Warmblood types have Draft and Thoroughbred inter-crossed with the type of Warmblood the breeders are going for), BUT that doesn't mean they can be pitted against the ones meant for a single purpose. Those are two separate things. They can only be pitted against other multi-purpose stock.


Because of deficiencies in Thoroughbreds, out crossing breeds that lack that deficiency is one thing. But the bottom line is that you won't get Angora quality hair, you won't get milk breed production and you won't get meat breed meatiness. Crossing a Draft with a Thoroughbred will get you a horse too slow to race and too weak to compete in a pull. When crossing breeds, you do not get an even blend of both. Cross a Percheron with a Quarter horse, twice, and you may get a large 17 hand riding horse and a small 15 hand draft horse. As you indicated, blending a few animals over several generations does get you some consistency. I didn't mean to question the size needed to create a triple crossed goat.

I'm afraid that fostering hope that by breeding goats with different purposes will get some sort of super all purpose animal is setting someone up for failure.


----------



## altair (Jul 23, 2011)

Now that we bought our first home, I'm thrilled with the idea of getting some cashmere goats. Although they're not super beefy or milk producers, they are a tri-purpose animal. We used to own yak and they were also tri-purpose, though a bit less on the milk side of things. My line of thinking is with the thousands and hundreds of years of animal husbandry, there is most likely a breed already out there meeting your goals, wishes, and circumstances whether horse or poultry or sheep. And if you're into breed preservation like I am, you'll be helping animal genetics be preserved for generations to come.


----------

