# What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders.



## firelight27 (Apr 25, 2009)

I finally have some pretty nice photos of Dakota and Pearl. I was wondering what your opinions are on their conformations, and on Dakota's udder. I forgot to take photos of Pearl's before I started to dry her off. I will absolutely not be offended by criticism. Specifics would be nice as well. Thanks!

Pearl:










Dakota:


















She kept dancing around, so getting this was ridiculous.


----------



## kannm (Mar 18, 2009)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

I do not know much about conformation, but at least to me they look really good. They look really nice down the back and look deep (really dairy). Their lines look nice to me.

The udder looks nice and the teat placement is near perfect (as far as I know). It looks like the back attachment of the udder is a little low.

Ok, now for the real experts...


----------



## pelicanacresMN (Dec 29, 2009)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

The first one looks like a pygmy short in body & blocky from the photo imo. Dakota is pretty nice though--nice length to her body & very nice topline. Her rump has a nice angle, shoulders blend nicely into her nice long dairy neck. Nice medial in the udder..pretty nice udder, nothing majorly detracting from the appearance.


----------



## firelight27 (Apr 25, 2009)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

Thanks guys!

kannm - I do think her rear attachment is a little low. But more than that, I think it could stand to be wider. Thats my own personal opinion. For some reason, I have a much harder time judging udders than the rest of the goat. Her teats are really nice to milk. Right in the bowl (I use stainless steel mixing bowls, buckets are too tall.) Now if she would stop trying to stomp her foot in it at random moments. She is a ninja stomper. She is really still for me and the out of the blue, WHACK, right in the bowl.

Pelican Acres- I do prefer Dakota over Pearl. But then I like the more elegant look. On the other hand, Dakota is too narrow bodied for my taste, but you can't see that in these photos. Pearl is actually only a tad shorter bodied than Dakota but she definitely is blockier. She is super wide and deep though and kids so very easy. I am thinking about selling/trading one of these girls after they kid next spring because I have too many closely related does right now. I keep flip-flopping but think I might let Pearl go. Thats why the input from people in this forum really helps!


----------



## StaceyRosado (Oct 5, 2007)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

Pearl: nice long neck, good level topline, Could use a little help in the rear angulation department. Her teats look to point straight down but there is no rear udder shot so I dont know how it looks from the rear. Could use more of a brisket so her neck doesnt blend right into her legs.

Dakota - nice long bodied doe that shows off her self more in this picture but is a bit weak in the chine as she stretches out. Is a bit posty in the back legs - would like to see more rear angulation. Her brisket is more pronounced then Pearl making her front end look more proportionate. She might be a bit loose in the elbows but it could also just be the picture (would need to see her on the move to know). Her udder has nice medial division and good teat placement. Would like to see more rear height and if shaved I could see her lateral attachments but for now I cant say how they are (to much hair hiding). Is this her FF? She needs to fill the rear part of her udder so for show be sure she gets a good 12+ hour fill so she shows off that 3,3,3 (1/3 in front of the leg, 1/3 hidden behind the leg and 1/3 behind the leg).

Things you cant tell from a picture: ribbing, dairy skin - and those loose elbows or not.


----------



## firelight27 (Apr 25, 2009)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

Stacey - Thanks! That was very in depth. Pearl definitely could us more extension in her brisket. I keep telling myself that she is the one to go next year, especially since I've kept a daughter from her that is showing her good qualities with some improvements from the sire. I guess we'll see how her kids turn out next year, and how smoothly the process goes. Its hard to give up a girl who kids without problems or assistance, and has big strong kids from the get-go.

Dakota's major weaknesses for me are her narrow build when viewed from the top/behind and that weakness you spotted over her chine. You can definitely see it when she is standing alert and stretched. Which is why I keep flip-flopping. I'd love to have an improved daughter out of her and then go ahead and sell her. I'm hoping for exactly that from Tomahawk. He has a strong topline and is wider bodied, both traits of his dam and sire. I don't want to give up that elegance though...so here are fingers crossed for all of those traits wrapped up in a gorgeous doeling. Now I've jinxed myself and everyone else will have all does, and Dakota will have another pair of bucks. Knock on wood or whatever you are supposed to say to ward away jinxes....Blah, I don't have any wood to knock on.

And yup, furry udder. That photo is also after her kids had been weaned for a couple of weeks. I have been milking her daily, but only once instead of twice, so she has lost a little capacity. That udder is filled almost 24 hours. I only milk in the evening, about the same time. I did a lousy job of keeping up with pictures and taking them when I planned. I was going to take some of both Pearl and Dakota's udders filled to 12-14 hours when their kids were a month old and two months old and pick whichever ones were better. Before I knew it, it was time to wean and I didn't have the time for a photo shoot with dancing, fidgety goats. Udders are so hard with my girls. They hate it when I tie them up and then try to stand behind them, and I have no one to help me hold them.

Oh, and this is her 2nd freshening. She has kids last year with the breeder. She weaned the kids at 2 months and never milked her. Same with Pearl. They are half-sisters from 2008. If I have doe kids I'll leave them on mom until she weans them herself or its close enough to her next kidding that her udder needs to dry up and take a break. And I milk. If I wean at 2 months to sell the kids or if they are bucklings, I keep milking mom until it's time to dry her off for her next kidding. I've heard it really helps their next udder be nicer. I don't know what happens if you only let them have an udder for a couple of months...I mean, if it means the improvement the next year won't be as good.


----------



## StaceyRosado (Oct 5, 2007)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

If your doe consistently throws nicer kids then themselves thats always a plus in keeping.

As to the udder - the longer they are in lactation and the more often you fill them with a 12 hour fill the udder stretches out and the texture gets better which is good for showing :thumb:


----------



## liz (Oct 5, 2007)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

Totally agree with Stacey as far as texture and capacity improving with each freshening...a consistant milking schedule regardless of a doe being a FF or not really benefits from the constant fill/empty/fill of routine milkings.


----------



## kannm (Mar 18, 2009)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

Stacey or Liz, what is texture?


----------



## StaceyRosado (Oct 5, 2007)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

texture = feel


----------



## liz (Oct 5, 2007)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

Texture of the udder is how it feels when full and empty, the skin will feel soft,loose and sorta glide over the mammary glands.


----------



## kannm (Mar 18, 2009)

*Re: What do you think of these two does? Conformation/udders*

Ah! Thank you.


----------

