2009 ASU Performance Test Results
We sent 27 of our fullblood and purebred buck offspring to the 2009 Meat Goat Performance Test at the Angelo State University Management, Instruction and Research Center in San Angelo, TX.  The test began May 28, 2009 and ended September 4, 2009, and accepted bucks born between January 1, 2009 and March 31, 2009.

One of our bucks was injured during the test.  The remainder performed well.  We produced 3 of the top 5 bucks at this year's test, and 13 of the top 28.

We also had the top herd sires (sires had to have 4 or more sons on test to be ranked) for the 5th year in a row, and our herd wound up second overall in ADG  (to be ranked herds had to have 4 or more entries on test).

Click the links below to view the performance test results.  The abbreviation ADG means average daily gain (reported in lbs/day) and REA means ribeye area (reported in square inches). 

Please note that a 135 lb. goat with a ribeye area of 2.4 is not necessarily superior to a 100 lb. goat with a ribeye area of 2.1. The ribeye areas of goats with significantly different weights are difficult to compare, although it would probably be safe to say that a 100 lb. goat with a ribeye area of 2.4 is superior to either a 135 lb. goat with the same size ribeye or another 100 lb. goat with a ribeye area of 2.1.

I have included a REA % Avg column and rankings based on that statistic.   REA % Avg is the REA as a percentage of the average REA for a buck of the same weight from a table I created using nine years worth of test data.   Click here to view the table showing average ribeye areas for different size goats.

The sire results only include sires that had 4 or more sons on test, and the herd results only include herds that tested 6 or more bucks this year.  Prior to 2005 I included all entries in the sire and herd rankings, but it has become clear that some breeders are picking one or two of their best animals to send to the test, while the rest of us are testing every buck we produce.  In essence, counting all the entries resulted in the breeders who are doing it right comparing the performance of their average animal to the performance of the top animal from the other breeders.  Since the objective of those rankings is to determine the best sires and herds, it doesn't seem accurate or useful to include results that are not a complete representation of the production of the sires and herds being measured. 

2009 Herd Results, 2009 Breed Results, 2009 Sire Results, 2009 Individual Animal Results