mama goat rejected babies

[Beekissed]

I'm curious as to why you didn't place her in a stanchion and make her feed the babies anyway? She had milk and they needed milk, so why not immobilize her and let them nurse? Of course, now it's a moot point but maybe in the future, if this happens again?

 

[drumstick diva]

hope the babies will continue to do well for you.

 

[FishMtFarm]

I'm curious as to why you didn't place her in a stanchion and make her feed the babies anyway?  She had milk and they needed milk, so why not immobilize her and let them nurse?  Of course, now it's a moot point but maybe in the future, if this happens again? 

That may seem to be the way to do it but the babies nurse a little and frequently so you would have to immobilize her every half hour. That's just not practical and would be stressful on mama. If she doesn't want them it's just happier for everyone in the end to bottle feed. Besides, in a stanchion she can still kick them. Not a safe idea.

 

[oldhenlikesdogs]

I have tried immobilizing a doe who has rejected her kids and she would kick viciously. A goat can't be made to cooperate in that instance and the kids get beat around.

 

[cassie]

Is it possible to immobilize a doe so she can't kick her kids? Yes. Is it worth it? Probably not. I once had a Nubian doe who would not voluntarily allow her kids to nurse. She also had a fit when I milked her by hand or machine. It was a chore but I managed to milk her anyway. I had some calves and one day they got in with the goats. I went out to put them back where they belonged and found that doe standing there chewing her cud contentedly with a calf on each side sucking vigorously. Those calves weighed a good 250# and dwarfed her. Go figure.

 

[ShrekDawg]

Is it possible to immobilize a doe so she can't kick her kids?  Yes.  Is it worth it?  Probably not.  I once had a Nubian doe who would not voluntarily allow her kids to nurse.  She also had a fit when I milked her by hand or machine.  It was a chore but I managed to milk her anyway. I had some calves and one day they got in with the goats. I went out to put them back where they belonged and found that doe standing there chewing her cud contentedly with a calf on each side sucking vigorously.  Those calves weighed a good 250# and dwarfed her. Go figure.

Wow, that's so funny! LOL

 

[Beekissed]

That may seem to be the way to do it but the babies nurse a little and frequently so you would have to immobilize her every half hour. That's just not practical and would be stressful on mama. If she doesn't want them it's just happier for everyone in the end to bottle feed. Besides, in a stanchion she can still kick them. Not a safe idea.

I have tried immobilizing a doe who has rejected her kids and she would kick viciously. A goat can't be made to cooperate in that instance and the kids get beat around.

If it can be done with a cow, it can be done with a goat...and they don't have to nurse every half hour as that would be just as inconvenient as having to bottle feed every half hour. I've put bottle/bum calves on a milk cow and made her feed them, we've even held down a rabbit and made her nurse her kits until they were weaned.

Hobbles can keep them from kicking, even just tying one leg up can keep them from kicking. It's a goat...easily confined and restrained compared to a big ol' cow. Who cares if it's stressful on mama...she rejected them in the first place and she needs stripped out to avoid possible mastitis, so it's good for all concerned. The babes get natural milk and the all important colostrum, the goat gets to remain healthy and no cost for expensive milk replacement. And, after a bit, there's a good chance she'll let them nurse without being restrained, so it's well worth the trying.

 

[FishMtFarm]

You wouldn't need milk replacer cause the doe would have to be milked so you would bottle feed her milk. And everything be should care if it's stressful. They would need to feed frequently cause if you stick em on there every few hours, she would have time to fill up tight again and that's painful. We tried that game when we first got into goats and it wasn't worth it. I'm sorry but to say who cares about animal stress is careless and irresponsible. They are dictated by Mother Nature and survival and if she rejected them, you can't make her love them. Just not how it works in the animal world. With breeding comes the reponsibilty of knowing things could go wrong and that you may have a chore on your hands.

 

[Beekissed]

You wouldn't need milk replacer cause the doe would have to be milked so you would bottle feed her milk. And everything be should care if it's stressful. They would need to feed frequently cause if you stick em on there every few hours, she would have time to fill up tight again and that's painful. We tried that game when we first got into goats and it wasn't worth it. I'm sorry but to say who cares about animal stress is careless and irresponsible. They are dictated by Mother Nature and survival and if she rejected them, you can't make her love them. Just not how it works in the animal world. With breeding comes the reponsibilty of knowing things could go wrong and that you may have a chore on your hands.

What's more stressful....having a tight bag that's painful and just letting that happen until she dries up...as was suggested in the posts here? Would be interesting to find out why the goat died, BTW. And, yes, milk replacer was mentioned in the posts as to what was being fed to the kids in this case.

What YOU perceive as stress and what a goat perceives as stress are two different things. If it stressed a goat to milk her would you just not do so, for fear of stressing the little darling? There are many "stressful" situations when it comes to livestock to which they have to adapt and, once adapted, are no longer stressful. When I said, who cares if it stresses her I wasn't talking about stress that would affect her health in any way, just something that would irritate her...and irritation is momentary stress that passes. It's not a bit irresponsible to expect a mother to nurse her kids, even if it takes restraining her to accomplish it.

What I find irresponsible is treating animals like humans, attributing human emotions to them and acting like anyone who offends a goat and dare ties her up and expects her to be milked or to nurse a kid is just a big ol' meanie. See? We all have our opinions on what is careless and irresponsible and we don't have to agree on them.

The original suggestion to restrain her and let the kids nurse was a valid one and I've seen it done...so you have a cranky goat on your hands, so what? She'll get over it as soon as the kids are done nursing. She won't have to see a therapist or have anti-depressants for the rest of her life if someone makes her do something she doesn't want to do and being nursed is more healthy for her than not being nursed.

 

[ShrekDawg]

I can see how in some situations restraining a goat (or cow or whatever) may be necessary but at the same time, with all the effort you go through restraining them and forcing her to let them nurse, and having to go out there every few hours or half hour or whatever anyway, you may as well just bottle feed them. It'd be a lot faster and simpler. But it might be useful sometimes, I don't know, and if she could get sick from not then it might be bad?

That said, I think it works with certain animals but not all so for instance, even if it could be necessary in goats, I don't really agree with holding the rabbit down. Especially since rabbits are especially prone to stress and can suffer heart attacks and stuff from stress.

But I guess it worked in that particular situation.

But I think there should be some middle ground. Sometimes animals need to go through stress and there's no avoiding it - you need to milk them, move them somewhere, catch an escapee, etc. - and that's fine but sometimes I think if there's an easier or faster way that won't stress them out, that's what should be done or at least, it's okay to do that. I don't think that they have to be forced to do every thing, sometimes it's okay to do things a different way, and I also think you don't have to never consider their feelings or what they want. That's valid too, despite what some might say. So I guess I'm kind of in the middle. But I'm also not going to say one way is wrong or attack someone for doing it their way, which seems to be happening on both sides here, because I do things my way and they might do things there way and in the end, does it really matter how it gets done as long as ot gets done/if the end result is the same?