which breed or breeds?

[kountryboy]

I have boer goats but was wondering if theirs a goat that is produces milk but also is for meat?

 

[Roll farms]

Old style Nubians were considered "dual purpose"...meat and milk.

They are far removed from the streamlined dairy Nubs of today, though...although there are still some out there.

Personally, I like to cross Nubs and Boers, both b/c you keep the ear length, improve udders, and usually end up w/ a taller, yet meaty...goat.

And the crosses seem hardier than purebreds of either strain. We milk many of our Boer x Nubs.

 

[currycomb]

i agree with roll, cross a nubian buck on boer does, get cleaner udders and good milkers.

 

[lupinfarm]

Very common here is to cross and Boer and Nubian. Lots of farms sell on the babies to hobbiest out here and they're fairly popular.

 

[cmjust0]

i agree with roll, cross a nubian buck on boer does, get cleaner udders and good milkers.

I love me some boer/nubi crosses.

 

[no nonsense]

I don't agree at all. By crossing, you're getting a combination of both traits, but neither will be as efficient milk or meat producers as the purebred parents. If you must have both meat and milk animals in your herd, why not just keep the pure Boers, and add a few pure Nubian does for milk? Or even better, get a more stable tempered dairy breed. You would breed the dairy does to your Boer buck every year to freshen, and have their mediocre kids to finish as suitable albeit not substantial meat animals. You do not get the best of both worlds by crossing breeds, you get a dilution of the best traits, in this case, because meat type and dairy type are at two different ends of the spectrum. You can't have it all in one animal, and do it well. You can produce animals which may be used for both purposes, if you have plenty of pasture, feed and time to spend in growing them to slaughter weight, or if you like feeding and caring for more milkers than you need to, in order to get the same amount of milk which you would get from less animals.

 

[cmjust0]

I don't agree at all. By crossing, you're getting a combination of both traits, but neither will be as efficient milk or meat producers as the purebred parents.

I've got a couple of boer/nubi cross does that I gaurandamntee would dress out better than a registered boer doe I have the misfortune of still owning.

If you must have both meat and milk animals in your herd, why not just keep the pure Boers, and add a few pure Nubian does for milk? Or even better, get a more stable tempered dairy breed. You would breed the dairy does to your Boer buck every year to freshen, and have their mediocre kids to finish as suitable albeit not substantial meat animals.

You seem to have had different experiences with boer/nubi crossing than most of us..

You do not get the best of both worlds by crossing breeds, you get a dilution of the best traits, in this case, because meat type and dairy type are at two different ends of the spectrum. You can't have it all in one animal, and do it well.

You're provably wrong there, and I'm speaking in regard to genetics.. If there's a flaw in your boer's genetics and a flaw in your nubian's genetics, you may see that flaw come out in their offspring if they're mated to another purebred.

If, however, you crossbreed the two, you get something very well known and documented in the livestock world....hybrid vigor.

BTW...I'd love to see you make this argument to someone crossing, say, hereford cows to a black angus bull. Those offspring are called "black baldies" and they're like GOLD at the market.

You can produce animals which may be used for both purposes, if you have plenty of pasture, feed and time to spend in growing them to slaughter weight, or if you like feeding and caring for more milkers than you need to, in order to get the same amount of milk which you would get from less animals.

Do you have any experience at all with intentional crossbreeding, or are you just speculating?

 

[no nonsense]

I don't agree at all. By crossing, you're getting a combination of both traits, but neither will be as efficient milk or meat producers as the purebred parents.

I've got a couple of boer/nubi cross does that I gaurandamntee would dress out better than a registered boer doe I have the misfortune of still owning.

If you must have both meat and milk animals in your herd, why not just keep the pure Boers, and add a few pure Nubian does for milk? Or even better, get a more stable tempered dairy breed. You would breed the dairy does to your Boer buck every year to freshen, and have their mediocre kids to finish as suitable albeit not substantial meat animals.

You seem to have had different experiences with boer/nubi crossing than most of us..

You do not get the best of both worlds by crossing breeds, you get a dilution of the best traits, in this case, because meat type and dairy type are at two different ends of the spectrum. You can't have it all in one animal, and do it well.

You're provably wrong there, and I'm speaking in regard to genetics.. If there's a flaw in your boer's genetics and a flaw in your nubian's genetics, you may see that flaw come out in their offspring if they're mated to another purebred.

If, however, you crossbreed the two, you get something very well known and documented in the livestock world....hybrid vigor.

BTW...I'd love to see you make this argument to someone crossing, say, hereford cows to a black angus bull. Those offspring are called "black baldies" and they're like GOLD at the market.

You can produce animals which may be used for both purposes, if you have plenty of pasture, feed and time to spend in growing them to slaughter weight, or if you like feeding and caring for more milkers than you need to, in order to get the same amount of milk which you would get from less animals.

Do you have any experience at all with intentional crossbreeding, or are you just speculating?

Well, since you've demonstrated that you'll argue with just about anything that I post, simply for the sake of taunting an argument, I'll respond with that well in mind.

One poor quality example of a purebred animal compared to several good quality crossbreds does not exactly make for a generalization which will hold true for all other members of the breed. I once had a Nubian which was a terrible milker, yet I've seen several of you extoll the virtues of the dairy qualities of the breed. By following your example, using that one doe, I should be able to conclude that all Nubians are terrible milkers, but NubianXSaanens are great. Also by your example, if I crossed my doe with a great milkiing Saanen, by the wonder of hybrid vigor, I should get some grades which are better milkers than any pure Saanens. Absurd.

I'm also speaking in regard to genetics. Yes, breeding two purebred animals of the same breed, both of which have a recessive fault, may show the trait in their offspring. If they both have superior traits, those too may also come out. A knowledgeable breeder understands how to select for the good, concentrate it, and cull for the bad. You seem to ignore the possibility that crossing two unrelated breeds may also bring out undesireable traits, if both parents are carrying it. The only difference is that it is less likely, because the parents are obviously less closely related, BUT, the superior traits of each side are also less likely to be expressed. Genetics isn't about combining what we want because we like a trait found in each parent, and expecting only what we want, to pop up in the offspring, but not what we don't, no matter how much we LOVE the traits of the parent breeds, and how strongly we wish for it.

You show a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between hybrid vigor and production traits as determined by body type. Your example also shows that you don't understand the difference in type that a dairy animal must have in order to be an efficient milker, vs that of a meat animal to become also a good producer. A dairy animal's body type is lean and angular, with good capacity to eat and drink well, while not wasting those resources in putting on flesh in areas of it's body that it doesn't need them. A meat or beef animal on the other hand has a very different body type, square or rectangular, designed to add flesh where it can do the most good to produce meat. This is really just cattle science 101, but the same applies to goats, as far as body type and production goes. Your example of the hereford X angus shows your lack of familiarity with this concept. Yes, hybrid vigor does take affect here, but the difference between that and the BoerXNubian example is that BOTH cattle breeds you mentioned are beef breeds, and so already have a similar type which is conducive to beef production. Add hybrid vigor to the equation, and, yes, of course you get a superior animal. A more accurate comparison would have been to cross a hereford with a black DAIRY breed, let's say a Kerry, for lack of any other purebred dairy breeds which are normally all black. (OK, maybe a Canadienne, if you can find one, or know what they are.) Color genetics being mainly the same within species, the color pattern of that cross should also be a baldie, yet I defy anyone to make it, and see if the market still clamors for your animals. To put it another way, if you cross a greyhound with a collie, you don't get a race winner that will still herd for you. You'll get an intermediate mix, lean dogs, some of which may have some herding instinct, some which may just want to run off, but neither as good as the parents at their original purpose. All will probably be robust, due to to the lessening of the inbreeding coefficient.

 

[Roll farms]

I don't really want to join the peeing contest you fellas have going, but if crossing Boers and Nubs, or Boers and Kikos, or Boers and....wasn't a good idea, there wouldn't be a place in ABGA or USBGA or IBGA for percentage does.

Having big, meaty does who I can milk if needed, and who make me big fat (10-14#) kids, and who don't need wormed as often, or babied during kidding....isn't wrong.

The trick is breeding the right doe to the right buck, regardless of breed...to get the trait(s) the breeder is after. You may not agree, and that's your right.

The OP asked if there's a dual purpose breed....I stressed the OLD STYLE Nubians. Not the skinny, higher-maintenance DAIRY Nubian.

I have a doe who's an American Nubian who, when bred to a Boer buck, makes market wethers who win their class every year.
She would never win in a dairy class, she's not just not 'dairy'.
Yet she produces 8-10# of milk per day out of an ugly, but capacious udder.
I will never breed her "pure" Nubian, as I do not want a 'dairy' goat w/ an ugly udder...or her big legs...and those are traits I'm afraid she'd throw.

Since she makes some awesome cross kids, that's what I use her for.

The fact of the matter is, Boer x kids sell VERY well to kids for 4-H, and as market kids...
MANY big show dairies use boer bucks on their dairy doe first fresheners so that they can get "more marketable" kids while they evaluate their udders.
MANY big boer breeders, both show and market producers, add dairy does to their herds, as grafting mothers / milkers to feed orphans, and to improve udders.

I have plenty of purebreds of many breeds, and I breed plenty of purebreds every year...but the fact remains that every year I get some cross kids that are better than their purebred counterparts.

Would I cross an Oberhasli to a Boer? No...there's just too much conflict there for it to make sense. But the Nubs? Maybe the occasional big Togg doe? Yes, I will.

 

[no nonsense]

I don't really want to join the peeing contest you fellas have going, but if crossing Boers and Nubs, or Boers and Kikos, or Boers and....wasn't a good idea, there wouldn't be a place in ABGA or USBGA or IBGA for percentage does. Well, there's always going to be some people who are satisfied with less than the best, those who don't understand the details and concepts behind stock improvement, and, yes, those with legitimate, well thought out upgrading or crossing programs. The registries aren't stupid. They receive income from issuing those pieces of paper. Might as well allow as many sources as possible.
Having big, meaty does who I can milk if needed, and who make me big fat (10-14#) kids, and who don't need wormed as often, or babied during kidding....isn't wrong. Not at all, as long as you understand that you're settling for the middle of the road. You could have a much higher dress out percentage, and a higher milk yield, if you kept pure animals of breeds which are designed for each purpose.
The trick is breeding the right doe to the right buck, regardless of breed...to get the trait(s) the breeder is after. You may not agree, and that's your right. Agreed. Most people don't understand that. They think that by crossing milk with meat, you get the best of both worlds. Doesn't work that way..

The OP asked if there's a dual purpose breed....I stressed the OLD STYLE Nubians. Not the skinny, higher-maintenance DAIRY Nubian. I got it. At least YOU understand the difference between dairy and meat type, and I agree, that the early Nubians may have had a slightly beefier type compared to today's dairy animals, and to other dairy breeds. Slightly, and some may still be found. That doesn't change the fact that he's still be better off, efficiency wise, if he bred pure meat animals, and kept pure dairy animals for milk, getting the same amount of meat and milk from less animals. I can haul hay in the back of my Toyota Corolla if I want, and it's no one's business if I do, but if asked which is the best, the Corolla or my F350 pick up, of course I'm going to tell them. They can argue about how much more efficient my fuel mileage will be per trip with the Corolla, ignoring the fact that I'd have to make 10 times as many trips than with the Ford, but it doesn't change the facts.
I have a doe who's an American Nubian who, when bred to a Boer buck, makes market wethers who win their class every year.
She would never win in a dairy class, she's not just not 'dairy'.
Yet she produces 8-10# of milk per day out of an ugly, but capacious udder.
I will never breed her "pure" Nubian, as I do not want a 'dairy' goat w/ an ugly udder...or her big legs...and those are traits I'm afraid she'd throw.

Since she makes some awesome cross kids, that's what I use her for.

The fact of the matter is, Boer x kids sell VERY well to kids for 4-H, and as market kids... This is probably topic for a completely different thread, but 4h children are hardly a good barometer for what is best or most efficient in livestock production. I'll say no more about it here, and would gladly continue on another thread if you care to, but 4h by and large is a joke.MANY big show dairies use boer bucks on their dairy doe first fresheners so that they can get "more marketable" kids while they evaluate their udders. Excellent idea. They're producing larger meat kids than they would with pure dairy breeding, kids that will not be used in the breeding herd anyway,a nd so are basically wasted. Now, if they're looking to improve their dairy lines, or to establish a meat line, they don't continue using these crosses for either purpose, do they, unless it's to save the does to breed up?
MANY big boer breeders, both show and market producers, add dairy does to their herds, as grafting mothers / milkers to feed orphans, and to improve udders. Another good idea, but, again, they do so and select for good milking ability, while breeding back up to purebred status. They'd go broke as meat producers if they just kept on with 50/50 crosses.

I have plenty of purebreds of many breeds, and I breed plenty of purebreds every year...but the fact remains that every year I get some cross kids that are better than their purebred counterparts.

Would I cross an Oberhasli to a Boer? No...there's just too much conflict there for it to make sense. Exactly, so you understand what I was getting at all along. But the Nubs? Maybe the occasional big Togg doe? Yes, I will. OK, good. Maybe it makes slightly more sense. Slightly. But you'd still be better off keeping a few high milking purebred dairy does, and your pure Boers, using them to freshen your dairy does and at least getting some better meat kids than you would out of pure dairy breedings, as you admit yourself. That's all I'm trying to say.

I hesitate to bring it up for fear of causing even more confusion, but for those of you who must favor crossbreeding, the idea of terminal crosses, such as the baldies, and some other examples in cattle, or as in broiler chickens or turkeys, does take advantage of the concept of hybrid vigor. We're now also getting away from the concept of breeds altogether, and are talking more about strains, especially in hogs and poultry. It's a good example though, because the offspring are not designed to be kept as breeders, because the producers understand that from there on in, the benefits, especially of feed conversion efficiency will be diluted out. Sex-link chickens are another example. The offspring are used as terminal layers, not kept further for breeding. To produce more, the breeders go back to the original breeds to cross, always taking advantage of the hybrid vigor in the one generation, knowing that it will be lost further down the line.

To put it another way, look back on livestock breed history. Why do you think all of these so-called dual purpose breeds have faded away over the years? It's because they just are not sustainable for those multiple purposes. Simply because something can used for something, doesn't mean that it is good at it. Jack of all trades, master of none. Either pure bred animals bred for a single purpose, or intentional terminal hybrids are what most serious producers are doing. We see it in cattle, hogs, poultry, sheep, because that's what works in the long run. This is just basic livestock production science.