[Jacob-list] What is a Jacob? and "the plague of sameness"

[Linda]

The following was written by Anita Evangelista years ago.  I'm not sure of just when, but maybe Mark can furnish that information.  This should be required reading for anyone thinking of conserving the breed------ (the formatting errors are mine)

When I survey the many different types of Jacobs in other people's
flocks,
I am driven to two unmistakeable conclusions: first, that all Jacobs bear certain superficial similarities, such as having horns and spots; and
second, that all Jacobs don't really look alike.

This is one of the finer things about the breed - that wherever I go, I
see
examples of individual owner's preferences. Here, an owner has
consciously
selected for a tall, leggy, lean animal - over here, someone else prefers
a
short, stocky, meaty type. One breeder  is particularly concerned with
having
a fine, long-staple fleece for spinning, another breeder is
more interested in
the positioning and size of the animal's horns.

Yet, given these differences, I can still see the unmistakeable stamp of
Jacobness" on these animals - a certain type of head carriage, a loose
flocking behavior, ease of lambing, a hardy resiliance. Even though these
traits can also be selected for, or against, most breeders seem to be
less
concerned with these qualities.

It is considerably easier to determine an animal's worth by what is
immediately visible than by these more elusive qualities. In the
commercial
breedshowring, today, sheep are not judged by their mothering abilities,
their
capacity for multiple birth, or their toughness - they are judged by a
fairly arbitrary set of standards that are velieved to indicate the qualities of
a good meat-producing animal. These qualities consist of traits we seldom
see in Jacobs - such as a long, straight loin, filled and solid haunches, and a speedy daily weight gain.

It is fairly common knowledge in the sheep production industry that prize
winning animals which show these traits don't necessarily make good
breeding animals. Sterility dogs a number of top show Suffolk lines, for
instance, a characteristic which makes the animals a production failure.
In essence, there are "show" lines, and there are "production" lines.
What
a shame that the showring does not favor the traits for which the animal
is
actually used! What a shame that we sheep producers have let our fanati-
cal desire for personal acclaim override our animal's basic health and
our own
common sense!

Perhaps it is nothing more or less than human nature which makes the
showring so important to some people. Our entire Western civilization has
risen from a concept of "progress", the movement toward an ultimate
goal - and
we all seem driven to determine our own goals and then make efforts to
achieve
them. It makes no difference if our goals fit in with the requirements of
simple survival for our livestock - witness the number of breeds ofshow
and
commercial sheep which must have a third of their lambs pulled, which
must
have excessive grain inputs to merely rear their young, which develop
foot rot
and become easily parisitized.

It is the covert decisions we have made about American livestock produc-
tion that guide the acceptance of these goals. We want fast-growing,
meaty animals - so we pour in the grains. We want 120 pound lambs going
to
market at 5 months of age. So we attach a little steroid implant
to each animal's ear. We want a cash return for uniformity of our "crop",
so we make sure that every animal in our flock is line-bred back to a
desired "type". These are the traits we Americans secretly admire in our
sheep.
Thankfully, Jacobs are not in a position to become 5-month growth
wonders.
They can do well enough without grain inputs to be a fine
strictly-pasture animal. But there is still that great danger, what Carey
Fowler and Pat Mooney have called "The Plague of Sameness". We
secretly want all our Jacobs to look alike, completely alike. We
individually
carry a mental picture of what an "ideal Jacob" is.

Whose "ideal Jacob" is the real Jacob sheep? Is an animal with only two
horns a "real" Jacob? How about one with coarse, kempy wool? What
about a sheep with heavy quilting in its fleece - even if it has four
glorious
horns and well placed 60/40 spotting? Does a "real" Jacob ever produce
a very dark lamb, or a lamb with "apricot" or "lilac" fleece? Do true
Jacobs
have freckles? Will a "real" Jacob ever have white horns?

How can we decide what constitutes a "real" Jacob? One method is to
seek out old photographs or drawings of the breed. Unfortunately, even
a good selection of illustrations will only show the animals individual
breeders raised - not the whole spectrum of the breed. Mr. Jones' 1850
type of Jacobs are only Mr. Jones' version of what the sheep should be.
Is that the type we should use to determine what a "real" Jacob is? If we
are to rely on old illustrations, we should also medicate and feed our
animals in the same way they did then - no vaccinations, no atibiotics,
no
AI, no grain, little or no housing - otherwise they are not the same as
the
old breed, no matter how superficially they appear the same.
The true old breed of Jacobs was a tough, hardy, resiliant animal. If this
is
not the first priority in our day-to-day selection, we have already veered
off
from the original type. Mr. Jones undoubtedly knew, as we do today, that it
only took three generations to fix a particular trait in this sheep, so he
might have outbred to other breeds of sheep to secure a certain
characteristic. How do we even know that Mr. Jones old Jacobs are "real"?
The fact is, all breeds are "manufactured", made by the process of
selection of specific characteristics from the vast gene pool that is
"sheep". When that genetic base is limited to certain traits, such as size
or coloration, other traits are lost. Lost, no set aside, stored, or kept in
abeyance.
DNA sequencing can only hold so much genetic "information". If you
select for growthiness in your lambs, you select away from the ability
to thrive on scant forage. If you select for size, you lose mothering
abilities and multiple birth. Therefore, the "real" Jacob sheep must not
have lost its most important characteristics. It must have intact, the
highest possible number of elements which define and set apart the
breed.
I already know what the "ideal" Jacob is, anyway: the type of sheep that
constitutes the "real" breed. It is all the sheep in my pasture.
It is the short, tubby ewe with the loose open fleece. It is the rangy
jumper
with the close, coarse wool. It is the ewe that sheds in the spring, and the
one that grows a tight, closed fleece which is impossible to shear cleanly.
It is the ewe that produces dark lambs no matter who she is bred to; the
one that takes an occasional swim in the pond; that one who wants to
bear her twins, alone, in the woods; the one that likes to eat water plants;
the one that prefers cedar bark; the one that will tackle any dog in a
one-on-one fight; the one that climbs fences; the one with blue eyes; the
one
with five horns; the polled one born of multiple-horned parents; the
old one who lost her teeth three years ago and still produces lambs; the
one with split eyelids; the one with nearly-nonexistent ears; the one with
freckles; the one without freckles; the one with great, huge spots; the one
with tiny, circular spots.
These are all "real" Jacobs, because individually and en masse they
carry the characteristics of the breed. If I eliminate that freckled ewe
based on her freckling, I have just lost a piece of true Jacobness - and
an entire assortment of other traits that sheep carry. Any one of these
sheep could fit a specific breed standard based on a certain "look" -
and in three generations I could make all of their descendents fit any
standard, merely by selecting appropriate rams.
But these and other traits will utterly cease to exist if they are not
protected - protected by keeping the individual sheep who bear the
traits alive. If these sheep are eliminated from our breeding programs
because of arbitrary selection standards, their unique characteristics
will be irrevocably and irretrievably lost forever.
But, I can assure you that there will be no options in this breed, if only
one specific type is considered "true", if one look is defined as "ideal".
Will this be the Painter line? The Hescock line? The Laseaux? Or Evan,
Reynold, or Hardy sheep? Or the Thaxton version of the breed?
If we truly love the diversity and uniqueness of the Jacob sheep, we must
be willing to tolerate - no, to encourage - the individual breeder's
 tastes,
desires and spectrum of types. Given a loose breed standard, such as
the one originally used by the AMBC and the one offered by the Card
Grading system, we can still retain those traits we most desire in our
own flocks - yet continue to have access to distinct qualities in other
owner's flocks.
We must battle the "plague of sameness" which threatens to swamp
other breeds. Sameness and uniformity are the characteristics of those
breeds which have few choices for the future; they are stuck with only
what they have and are already stressed to the ultimate capacity of
their adaptability. We must insist that Jacobs remain diverse - if only
because diversity ensures survival options.
And keeping the breed alive and thriving is what owning Jacobs is
all about.
 
www.patchworkfibers.com
Registered Jacob Sheep, Angora Rabbits, Handspun Yarn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/jacob-list/attachments/20070601/97f59231/attachment-0001.html>