The nutritional needs for goats are shown in a booklet, "Nutrient
Requirements of Goats", published by the National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
(NRC, 1981). It is also available commercially for about $8. Please note that the figures
given as recommendations are "approximate"; at this time they should be
considered as guidelines only. Further research and field experience will eventually
increase the reliability of future published figures.
Nutrient Requirements of Goats
All breeds, sexes and ages of goats require the same basic nutrients:
protein, energy, minerals, vitamins and water. The diet must contain adequate protein; no
other nutrient can substitute for it. However, energy needs may be derived from dietary
carbohydrates (starches and/or fiber) or fats or even from excessive protein. Nutrients
are required by the goat for: maintenance, growth, gestation, lactation, and fattening.
Maintenance requirements are used for basal metabolism (maintain body temperature and
support vital functions) and for physical activity. The daily maintenance requirements may
range from 50 to 100% of total daily nutrient requirements, depending on whether the
animal is also growing, lactating, gestating or fattening.
The nutritional requirements of goats
managed primarily for milk production and those managed primarily for meat production are
quite similar with perhaps two notable differences. First, dairy goats are expected to
milk at relatively high and persistent levels throughout a 9-10 month lactation; meat
goats need only achieve a 4-7 month lactation with high initial milk flow, persistency
beyond 4 months being of lesser concern. Secondly, dairy goats are typically fed
considerable concentrates (grain mixtures) to encourage maximum and persistent milk flow.
In contrast, lactating meat goats are not usually fed concentrates in addition to their
forage diet because the extra kid growth achieved from the extra milk may well not repay
the added costs. As always, special circumstances may occasionally alter normal
cost-benefit calculations.
Forage Supplementation
To be economically viable, meat goats must get most of their required
nutrients from forages. See the related chapter for detailed information on types of
forage, nutritive value and stocking rates.
In those situations in which the
available forage is insufficient in protein or energy or minerals to support desirable
levels of goat performance, proper supplements should be offered in adequate quantities
but, as always, with due respect to the likely cost-benefit exchange involved. In actual
practice, most owners provide extra minerals to their goats year round. Typically these
may be in the form of trace mineralized salt (loose or block), individual sources of
calcium and/or phosphorus (offered separately or in combination with salt), or commercial
mineral mixtures. Phosphorus content of forages is usually much lower than calcium
content. Adequate phosphorus being necessary for reproduction and milk production,
supplementation is usually economical. Goats apparently have a much higher tolerance to
copper than sheep so typical cattle mineral mixes are usually safe for goats.
In those grazing situations in which
the plants are too low in protein (or in which forage quantity is much reduced),
additional protein must be offered to maintain acceptable goat performance. Protein
supplementation may take many forms and cost per unit of protein may vary widely.
Experienced goat feeders compare protein costs, presence of other dietary components,
palatability, feeding facilities required, labor cost/convenience, and likelihood of
achieving fairly uniform intake per animal. Feeding a hay of sufficient protein level is
frequently the optimum solution. In other cases, a lb or so of 20% crude protein (CP)
cubes or 0.5 lb of 40% CP supplement or 0.5-1.0 lb of whole cottonseed may be economically
sound and nutritionally adequate. Protein blocks of about 37% CP are widely used during
southwestern winters. Some owners have observed that grazing small grain pastures for only
1-2 hours per day will provide adequate supplemental protein (and energy) to their dry
pastures or, lower quality hays. The continuous availability of roughage, even poor
quality hay, is important during such protein supplementation; it allows the animals to
economically use the protein supplied.
High protein supplemental feedstuffs,
used only occasionally by meat goat owners, are cottonseed meal and soybean meal. Whole
cottonseed, cull pea seed and cracked mungbeans have also been used when conveniently
available and priced competitively. Other protein feeds, such as gluten feeds, mill feeds
and urea (in range blocks), are used as sources of protein. Choosing between alternative
high protein feedstuffs is largely an economic decision. Dividing the price of a cwt of
feed by its protein content (lb protein/cwt of feed) will yield the cost of 1 lb of
protein and thus facilitate comparisons.
When existing pastures and/or browse
are unacceptably low in energy, experienced goat owners offer good quality hays to
maintain performance; 0.5 to 1.0 lb of shelled corn is also used, as is whole cottonseed.
Cost per unit of energy is always a consideration but, without adequate energy, conception
rates, milk flow, and kid growth rates will be compromised and gross income reduced. Some
producers compensate in advance for expected declines in forage quality and availability
by keeping protein blocks and hay available free choice, noting rises in consumption as
pasture conditions worsen.
Concerning the composition of high
energy feeds, experienced livestock owners know that there are only small differences
between corn, milo, barley, and wheat. Choosing one over the other is mostly a question of
relative costs per cwt. However, some goat producers feel that milo should be used only
sparingly, if at all, as it can promote urinary calculi in males (Ca:P ratio lower than
about 1.5:1 predisposes the formation of calculi). In the absence of definitive research,
wheat should probably not constitute over 50% of a grain mixture. Price frequently may
preclude the use of oats, even though it is an excellent goat feed. Costly grinding of the
grains for goats is seldom necessary.
The use of salt-limited protein
and/or energy feeds for goats is rarely practiced. However, we have found a mixture of
ground milo, cottonseed meal and 8 - 15% salt to be useful. This 16% (or 20%) protein feed
will supplement open, pregnant, and lactating goats on either dry grass or hay or late
summer or limited grazing. Consumption is slow initially but then rises to 0.75/1.25
lb/hd/day depending on roughage intake.
"Flushing" is the practice
of feeding breeding age goats supplemental protein and/or energy for 30 days prior to and
30 days following the introduction of bucks to achieve a weight gain during this period.
This weight gain is usually accompanied by improved fertility, increased conception and
twinning. Flushing may or may not be necessary for meat goat production, depending on
quantity and quality of available forage. If flushing is necessary, 0.5 lb or corn and/or
0.5 lb of protein supplement day/head will usually suffice.
When planning grazing and
supplementation practices, it is prudent to always remember that a meat goat enterprise
generates cash income from the sale of surplus kids and cull adults as well as non-cash,
but real, benefits from brush control and pasture improvement--perhaps $10 - 15 per
breeding female per year. Obviously, adequate year round grazing with only mineral
supplementation is the optimum option; all other options increase costs but likely would
be economically wise.
Creep Feeding
Commercial meat goat raisers do not ordinarily creep feed their kid
crops on the premises that: a) their does are capable of weaning kids acceptable to the
market, b) it would not be cost-beneficial, and c) the logistics would be unworkable or at
least inconvenient. Relatively recent changes in goat marketing strategies (premium prices
for high quality kids and potential need for heavier, better conditioned kids for the
supermarket and restaurant trade) may come to alter one or more of these premises.
Widespread use of the newly arrived Boer bucks on Spanish does of limited milk production
capability may also encourage creep feeding to support the well-known rapid pre-weaning
gaining ability of Boer kids.
Should you elect to creep feed your
kids, a number of commercial feed mixtures are available, e.g., lamb grower, beef calf
creep, dairy calf starter or grower, and horse/mule feed. For best results, the percent
protein should be 12-14 (as-fed basis) and the percent fiber should be no more than 18.
However, simple grain mixtures of corn, oats, barley, or milo would probably also suffice.
The crucial characteristic of a creep feed is that it be palatable enough to promote
adequate intake; coarse grinding or pelleting (3/16") may improve intake over meal
forms.
Research on creep feeding of
range-raised kids is virtually non-existent and dairy goat kids are only infrequently
raised on their dams. Dairy kids weaned at 8 wks have been shown to eat 2-4 oz of
concentrate/hd/day and increase intake rapidly thereafter with feed efficiencies on the
order of 6 lb feed/lb of gain depending on body weight.
Conditioning Goats
There are very few goat enterprises that are analagous to beef cattle
feed-lots. The explanations are several: 1) the market does not want "fat"
goats, 2) goats are not very efficient in converting high energy feeds to body weight
gains, and 3) the likely cost-benefit ratio is such that it would be seldom profitable.
As always, there are exceptions.
Lightweight weanling goats that are in poor condition due to poor nutrition or parasite
load could possibly be put through a form of feed-lotting which might be called
"conditioning". To reduce costs and avoid problems commonly associated with
animal density, a controlled grazing scheme, with no or limited grain might be
economically viable.
Experienced stockmen know the
principle and practice of compensatory gain, i.e., a more mature animal that has been
nutritionally deprived and has a low weight-to-frame ratio can, if healthy, make very
rapid and efficient gains--for a short while, prior to beginning fat deposition. Some
producers with the right blend of feed and other resources might make a fair return on
this type of conditioning program.
A third example of conditioning has
been only infrequently practiced but, with excellent management, could likely be
done profitably in special circumstances. This program, as demonstrated by Dr.
Robert Herr of Narvon, PA, uses underweight young kids or weanlings from traders,
auctions, and local sources. The kids are put through a series of medical and dietary
treatments featuring, initially, high roughage, and thereafter increases in concentrates.
All are fed in loose housing with exercise lots. There are two key features to this
program: the health practices and the marketing practices. The kids must survive and do
well and they must be bought cheaply and sold any time the nearby market provides a
profitable price level. This program is not for everyone; the opportunities for disaster
are everywhere and always present.
One last observation on conditioning
of meat goats. The typical long and stressful haul from production areas to slaughter
plants yield a goat in very poor physical condition--so much so they may well die before
they can be scheduled for slaughter. During a recent marketing study, we found no one in
the New York trade who though it would be possible, much less profitable, to off-load and
recondition such goats for a few days or weeks prior to slaughter (Pinkerton, et al.,
1993).
A possible exception comes to mind.
If the animals were properly handled prior to shipment and if the haul was less than 24
hrs, it might be feasible to condition goats in the Carolinas and Virginia prior to sale
to the NYC and South Florida areas, either live or in carcass form. Probably the only
economically feasible program would be a grazing strategy plus mostly corn and mineral
supplement.
Unfortunately, universities rarely
engage in the type of research needed to generate the needed information for decision
making of this kind. Producers may well have to do it by trial and error and stand the
cost personally or perhaps get a slaughter plant to provide partial assistance. But, the
potential seems to warrant a further look.
References
NRC. 1981. Nutient Requirements of Goats: Angora, Dairy, and Meat Goats
in Temperate and Tropical Countries. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
Pinkerton, F., R.L. Harwell, N. Escobar, and W. Drinkwater. 1993.
Marketing channels and margins for slaughter goats of southern origen. Southern Rural Development Center, Mississippi State University.