Martin & Kiri Rupert - South Canterbury Advance Party Project
IMPROVING R2 HIND FAWNING SUCCESS
INTRODUCTION
For the past 12 years the family farm has been based at “Leamington”, an 185ha eff.
property in Peel Forest. The land is flat but close enough to the hills to not require irrigation.
In 2012 a further 141ha eff. block was added to the property, situated 6km down the road.
The two properties are run as one farm but each block has a specific role, with all velvetting
stags kept on the home farm and all hinds run on the new breeding block, named “Scotland”.
After increasing deer numbers for the past 3 seasons, numbers are likely to settle at about
600 velvetting stags, 450 hinds and 500 dairy heifers grazed on an annual contract.
We see our property as high quality land and accordingly aim to produce a return on this
investment that competes with the dairy farms next door. As a result our farming operation is
relatively intensive; effective pasture utilisation is the key driver with a major emphasis on
maintaining pasture quality. To achieve this deer are run at a high stocking rate and dairy
heifers are used to control excess feed. Whilst the velvetting stags easily rival dairy returns
on a per KGDM consumed basis, the hinds struggle to achieve the same efficiencies.
Up until we purchased Scotland, hind numbers were kept relatively low, as they had to
compete with the velvetting herd and heifers for feed and space on the home farm. Once we
were able to expand the operation, we soon realised that although having the hind block
dramatically improved returns from the business as a whole, the hinds themselves didn’t
quite perform as well as our other livestock classes. In early 2014 we joined the South
Canterbury Advance Party, which we saw as an opportunity to challenge our current farming
system and discover whether or not breeding hinds were the optimal use for our new block.
OUR PROJECT
As a purely velvet-focussed operation, we were mindful of the need to choose a project that
the wider deer farming industry could relate to. After examining our farm business by
ourselves and with the Advance Party group during a farm visit on 8 July 2014, we identified
R2/first fawner hind fawning performance as an opportunity to improve the efficiency and
profitability of our business.
Like many Canterbury Plains deer units, our overall breeding performance has often been
somewhat disappointing when compared to what hill farms are achieving. Much of this loss
was attributed to our flat, square paddocks with only perimeter hedges for shelter and a
comparatively high stocking rate. However when we broke down previous fawning results
into mobs, it become clear that whilst the older hinds seemed to cope with these conditions
pretty well, it was the R2 hinds that consistently had the poorest performance.
During the farm visit we presented this issue to our group and showed them a typical
fawning paddock. From the resulting discussion, it was decided that although the paddocks
weren’t “ideal” fawning paddocks, our stocking rate (8 hinds/ha) and tree shelter was
adequate. We had a look at the R2 hinds and agreed that they were in good condition,
although we had no weights to quantify this. We discussed our animal health programme
and acknowledged that the majority of fawn losses were likely occurring before tagging and
not due to parasites or clostridial diseases.
The group did identify a number of ideas where we could improve our R2 fawning system
and we made a concerted effort to implement these changes for 2014, as follows:
CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT:
Pasture cover The group felt that we probably put too much emphasis on maintaining
pasture quality in the fawning paddocks and subsequently fawns would not have enough
cover to hide in, resulting in more mis-mothering. We decided to sacrifice the pasture quality
in fawning paddocks and set stocked with a cover of at least 2500kgDM/ha on 25th October.
R2 hinds set stocked for fawning. Photo taken 10 November 2014.
As expected, the pasture growth soon exceeded demand and consequently become long
and rank. In order to provide decent feed for the hinds during lactation we focussed on
having high quality pasture in the paddock next to the fawning paddocks. Once most of the
fawns were on the ground we were able to open the gate and leave it open for the hinds to
move back and forth as they pleased.
Copper supplementation We explained to our group that in previous years we had found
many dead fawns in the fawning paddocks and it seemed like they simply never got up after
birth. We were told that copper is a very important trace element for fawn survival and like
most of Canterbury, our soil copper levels are very low. Liver-biopsies from cull hinds killed
on 26th September showed they were well below the target range. Our traditional method of
copper supplementation for the hinds was to add copper sulphate to their water troughs, but
we had to admit that we had been getting a bit slack with this. We decided to give all the
hinds a copper bolus on 5th October 2014. We used a crush to administer the bullets but
struggled to get them down properly; it was not really a satisfactory solution as a great deal
of the hinds spat theirs out again. In the coming years we will use an injectable supplement.
Fawn proofing The group had mixed reactions regarding fawn proofing, with some feeling
that it was better to allow fawns to easily move back into paddocks if they wandered out,
rather than focussing on keeping them in. However in our experience, paddocks without
fawn proofing were far more likely to have fawns out wandering the tracks or getting stuck in
shelter belts, where they usually died. The losses in paddocks which we had attempted to
fawn proof (namely running an extra two high tensile wires along the lower sections of deer
netting to reduce the hole size by half) were much lower. We decided to fawn proof all of the
fawning paddocks, an expense which would soon be justified if we managed to save even
one fawn per paddock. This season we saw far fewer fawns out on the tracks or dead in the
shelter belts.
RESULTS:
We were very pleased to see a significant improvement in this seasons R2 fawning
performance when compared to previous years, as can be seen in the table below:
2010-2014 FAWNING RESULTS
Season
2014
2013
2012
Age
R2
MA
R2
MA
R2
MA
Numbers
108
324
101
301
114
261
Fawning success 83% 90% 71% 93% 73% 91%
Total fawning %
87%
82%
82%
*Fawning % calculated as hinds to the stag (pre-scanning)
2011
R2
MA
112
148
72% 95%
84%
2010
R2
MA
62
200
85% 96%
91%
We feel that the most important change in management was to lift the target pasture covers
in the fawning paddocks prior to set stocking. Although this created a situation where we had
a large amount of low quality feed tied up in paddocks that we couldn’t access until the
fawns were up and running (around early January), this pasture proved to be a valuable
resource when the weather turned dry in mid-summer, as bulk feed for heifers.
One of our initial concerns about allowing the hinds access to higher pasture covers was that
they would get too fat and have more fawning trouble. Our approach to monitoring hinds
during the calving season is fairly hands-off, but we do drive past most days to make sure
there are no issues. There was no real increase in fawning problems in the young hinds this
year compared to other years, with two hinds (out of 108) dying and one hind requiring
calving assistance.
The most pleasing part about the R2 hinds’ fawning performance was the large numbers of
live fawns available to be counted at first vaccination. Because we had scanned the hinds
this season, we were able to remove the dries prior to set stocking. With these gone, the
remaining R2 hinds achieved 92% fawning, with very few dead fawns in the paddock from
mis-mothering or misadventure. One of the most important lessons we learnt from the
previous few years (when we were increasing hind numbers with virtually no culling) is that is
does not pay to keep dry R2 hinds; of the 20 dry first fawners carried over from the year
2013, 14 (70%) were dry again in the following 2014 season. If we hadn’t retained these
repeat offenders, our total hind fawning performance this season would have been 94%.
IN SUMMARY:
1. Project or Opportunity Objective:
Improve fawning percentage in R2 hinds from around 70% to around 90% (to match MA
hinds)
2. Tactics to get there/points to find out




Set stock hinds for fawning in paddocks with higher pasture cover to provide more
shelter/hiding places for fawns
Focus on maintaining pasture quality in the paddock next to the fawning paddock, to
be opened after most of the fawns were born and provide hinds with quality feed for
lactation
Supplement hinds with copper boluses
Ensure fences are fawn-proof to minimise deaths from misadventure
3. Major Deliverables
Increased fawning percentage in R2 hinds
4. Information collected to show impact of this change


Scanning results to confirm pregnancy and rule out in-utero fawn losses
Fawn numbers at first vaccination (16 January 2015)
5. Project Results
We implemented the tactics listed above before and during the 2014 fawning season. This
resulted in a lift in our R2 fawning performance from the previous 4-year average of 75% to
83%. There was a noticeable drop in fawn losses in the paddock, with a post-scan fawning
success of 92%.
Was it hard to do? The most challenging tactic was the copper supplementation using
boluses. We used a crush to restrain the hinds, however still struggled to administer the
boluses effectively and estimate that about a third of the boluses were regurgitated within a
short time. Next season we will try an injectable copper supplement, which will work for a
shorter length of time but administration will be easier and more effective.
We don’t usually pregnancy diagnosis scan our hinds (as we usually achieve conception
rates around 90%) so double scanning the hinds was an extra job due to the project,
however we thought it was important show exactly when our losses were occurring.
Was it hard to record? No extra record keeping was required above what we would
normally do
What tools did I use/need? Our Vet Noel Beatson kindly offered to double scan hinds free
of charge for the project
What advice did I seek? We asked our advance party members what they were achieving
as R2 fawning rates and what systems they used to achieve these.
What was easy? Allowing for higher covers in the fawning paddocks was easier than our
usual management system, which would involve much more of an effort to match pasture
growth with hind demand (i.e lower covers at set stocking), to reduce the amount of pasture
that would then go to seed. Although initially it seemed like a waste to let the pasture grow
long and rank, in the mid-term this bulky feed would prove to be a valuable buffer for the dry
summer ahead. It was easier to focus on pasture quality in the paddock next to the fawning
paddocks, as we were able to use dairy heifers to prepare the pasture in time for the hinds’
lactation.
What was the result? More fawns from our youngest hinds, which theoretically should have
the greatest genetic potential.
What will I do next year?





Continue to sacrifice the pasture quality in fawning paddocks to allow for more cover
for fawns to hide in.
Focus on providing a next-door paddock of high quality feed for hinds during
lactation, with greater emphasis on strategically drilling new pastures with mixed
herbs next to fawning paddocks
Supplement hinds with injectable copper solution
Weigh all R2 hinds prior to mating and see if there is a correlation between body
weight and conception
PD Scan R2 hinds and cull empties prior to set stocking. We have seen that there is
no benefit from keeping these hinds and culling them will free up more feed/space for
remaining hinds during fawning