[Carl Russell]

I know it’s a bit like the chicken and the egg, but the current display of achievement that we live amongst, is the direct result of all the hard work and sacrifice of much simpler people using animal power and fishing by hand, who were able to provide enough affluence for the Bill Gates of the world to evolve. I think the jury is still out as to whether the hand line or the computer are going to be more valuable in 100 years.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Quote:

I think that only a small percentage of horses or dogs or cattle or sheep or whatever is born to be THE one to lead and protect a herd (being mentally able for it and being groomed into this task by another herd leader).

Perhaps given the hierarchy of a herd, yes, very few will be inclined to take the initiative, but without the herd they have to be able to use their own initiative, thus developing their own sense of indomitability. By using the clicker and treat, you are in effect “grooming” the animal to use it’s own initiative toward the appropriate behavior for any given situation. All my point was that an animal groomed to express its own initiative is much more courageous than one conditioned to submissive behavior. (I was not trying to criticize clicker training, but trying to express what I think I can see to be a benefit)

Carl

[Carl Russell]

One of the main reasons that i got into horse-logging was because I could see the limitations on big operations. Although log prices are low, I only produce 1-2 loads a week when I’m working full time, and when cutting good quality logs, I generally don’t have a hard time selling them.

That being said, mills are closing here, and prices are dropping, and I know several big operators that are holding onto heir a..es.

I don’t have a lot of faith in the near future, so I am planning to sell split wood from the stack on the farm, and work on custom sawmilling projects. Unfortunately I do have several landowners who want work done, but they know I will not work at a loss, so their stumpage rates are going to be pretty low, so we’re on hold there.

All in all though, I don’t have big bills, my production is low, and I know how to cut the best logs for sale, so with that in mind I’m pretty confident that I can keep poking a few loads in here and there.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

There is a difference between dominance, and indomitability. Humans often get this wrong. We think to control a situation we need to dominate the participants, by being stronger and manipulating them into submission. In nature leaders are indomitable. They are not pushed around by those less able to protect and guide the herd, or pack. A “dominant” horse does not look for a subordinate who needs to be straightened out, they respond to the insubordination by reaffirming their own sense of the order required for success.

When working with horses, I find the key is to have initiative, and to utilize the body language, pressure/release process to maintain that. In other words when a horse goes along with me, I reward them by doing nothing, or at least perhaps praise, but basically demonstrating my acceptance of their behavior. It is when their behavior is not what I want that I apply enough pressure (whatever form it takes) to get them back into line, and then reward.

In the case of fear, or resistance to an expectation, I disregard the fear, and approach the animal as I expect it to allow me. If they are aggressive, or retreat, I do not let that phase me. It doesn’t mean that I apply pressure, but I am not there to cause fear, and they need me to show them that. By allowing them to show fear, or aggression as the “last word” is not a possibility, so I would keep working around them until I get the slightest indication of relaxation/trust from them and then release them. This would be in the barn yard, or in the stall. By watching them closely I can see the point at which as I am approaching them that my presence causes discomfort, and that is the limit of the pressure that I will assert for a while, until I can push a little more.

The biting in the stall when handling the foot can be a wicked eye-opener. I’ve had that same bite. I would work on the stable manners first. Determine that pressure point by experimentation. That experimentation is the initiative, and just being there applying some proximity pressure will begin to address that. Just because an animal has developed a habit of fear from earlier handling, should not put parameters on how you expect to handle the animal, it could also be an opportunity that a smart horse has seized upon to try to get their own way.

My instinct is that their are two things going on here, trust, and behavior. Trying to deal with both at the same time can be pretty complex, and I would break them down. Get the trust, then work on behavior.

The one thing I can see about clicker training is that all horses have the inclination to be indomitable. In other words in the natural hierarchy when given the chance to not live as a subordinate, they will do that. I can see that the clicker training is designed to bring that animal out, which is very different than the animal that comes out of a “dominance” oriented relationship based on submission.

I must say that I don’t want submissive horses either, and although I must be indomitable in my own initiative, I believe that I can produce a relationship with my horses that comes pretty darn close to partnership, without needing submission, but by affirming leadership.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Good points Dan. Also Dennis, when I was young there was an old fellow who would say “Try that”!. I have never varied my command though. I find my animals can tell pretty quickly that they need to continue applying effort.

Also I never let my horses stop on their own. This is why I watch their effort, so that I can stop them while they are still trying hard, even if that means just a very short distance. Often the next time I ask on that load their effort is significantly more.

The attitude I watch for is primarily in the ears. They may be forward, or back at me, but when they start to wobble they’re flagging. It is a matter of practice though, knowing the terrain, so that I stop them while they still have good attitude, and well before they lose interest.

Like Dan (Iron Rose), I mix up those stopping and starting points, because I want to prevent any habitual behavior. I want them to be as present as possible, waiting for my guidance. I also find those times when I choose to push them, or more accurately encourage them to try harder, to go farther, by squeaking/chirping, and calling each horse by name if they need it. I say this because I often watch other teamsters who consistently try to ask for as much as they can get out of the horse, like climbing the whole incline at once, or trying to get as far as they can before the horse stops.

Another point is that if the horses do stop, they often try to reinforce the fact that they wanted them to go farther, by asking for more right away, instead of letting the animals recover. If the horses stop, I say whoa, and let them breath, and try to understand why they stopped, possibly branch stubs, or poor footing, or they’re off their game. Next time I ask them I get a good start, and possibly that’s all, or a short good skid, and I stop them first, even on the steepest inclines. Then work my way back up to maintaining the effort for what I consider to be more appropriate.

There are days when I get a late start, or the only trees are big, or I didn’t get a lot of sleep the night before, when I will ask for too much, or don’t take the time to get them loosened up, and I have to struggle to regain some humility. The fact is that I get more work done, taking the time, and working them light and often, mixing in some heavy pulls, then if all I try is heavy, heavy, heavy.

You are not just conditioning muscles, but Heart.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

There is always the option of taking more time to build the piles with enough coarse material to allow for good air flow, and as long as you can accept more time, good compost can be made without turning. Often this works best if it is done in small mounds that are built in layers, dressed off, and left for about a year.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I train mine so I can put down the line for all those situations.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Rod;6310 wrote:

Their was quite a bit of discussion on this forum in the past about standing horse teams while preparing work, loading etc. The consensus was that it was always prudent and advisable to tie or otherwise secure them until you have the reins in your hands and are ready to take control. My experience is the same ie: either keep the reins in my hands or tie them up. Two separate runaway incidents have reinforced this lesson well.

I wonder if it’s the same with a trained oxen team or can they be trusted to stand while you prepare the load etc. I know oxen are a lot less jumpy and impatient. Does anyone have any words of wisdom on this subject?

I wouldn’t necessarily agree with that logic. If you are tying them instead of training them to stand, then they are going to be more apt to run away. If you train them to stand while you are working them, they will be less likely to run away. This is not to say that you are not ultimately responsible for any trouble they may get into, which is the biggest reason to hitch them.

When cutting trees, I always chained my steers out of harm’s way, but loading manure, or wood, or generally working around them, I always expected them to stand. I wouldn’t walk off and leave them, that is not the purpose for my wanting to work with them, but I could easily perform supporting tasks associated with the work at hand, without having to tie them.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Thanks, We’ll learn what works and what doesn’t. I hope the focus remains the awesome discussions, Carl

[Carl Russell]

I spoke with my neighbor today. He’s been dairy farming for 30 years, with a very sharp pencil, just a reasonable herd of Jerseys, paid as they went. They will ride this out, but I told him about this discussion, and he said that sometimes the bull calves actually cost him to ship. He also volunteered that he’d probably be smarter to just pop them and compost them, but he has a really hard time justifying the killing, even though he knows the animal is going to be under-utilized. He offered that he would love to see those calves go to an operation raising beef for people who need the quality food, but with limited resources that have to be prioritized for the cows that are keeping the cash flowing, it just can’t be him.

Anyway, back to the calve composting. Seeing as the portion of an animal that is yielded for consumable meat is about 30-40% of the body weight, and seeing as when the animal is sold, all the energy and nutrients in the offal is also lost, I still think that there is a much higher recovery to composting, especially if the value of that meat is near, or below zero dollars.

I am not assigning that value, it is a product of the market. And the market for these animals is in fact not a group of interesting people who want to see the animal raised into a valuable resource and shared with people in need, but multi-national corporations that take advantage of the producers and consumers as they create a homogeneous low cost product with very little nutritive value sold in fast food restaurants. Nothing against ground meat, just the marketing strategy that uses it in this case.

[Carl Russell]

In January GMDHA agreed to be a sole sponsor of DAP for one year at a rate of $600, which represents the basic operational expenses, at least at current rates, which have been pretty reasonable.

So, no it shouldn’t change. My idea was to have one primary very accessible sponsor ad space, worth more $, and providing visual continuity and aesthetic decency.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Disagreement is not bad thing. In fact, I try to engage in discussion just to hear/read other view points. It’s intolerance of differing views and negative personal appraisal that squelch the chance to learn from each other.

I know that if you are looking to find answers to help you make decisions, disagreement can seem unproductive, but it is reality, and there are as many answers as there are people doing a particular thing.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I’ve got to agree with humble1 to some degree (the tone is unacceptable though). There are some pretty ridiculous individuals out there, who really ruin it for many others, and although I am not impressed by them, I probably should get madder than I do. There really is no excuse for those who do nothing but train their animals for pulling, and in many cases they do more harm than good for the public opinion about working animals.

The truth of the matter is though that horses that are called upon to move heavy loads in the woods can pretty much pull their guts out, especially given the terrain. Teamsters who do this kind of work, and get this kind of willing commitment from their horses, or cattle, can show up at a pull, but are usually lost in the mix. The men I learned from were/are from this school and have little or no use for the horse pulls of today, for exactly the reasons mentioned by humble1.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

The point I was making is not that I would replace meat value with compost, but when faced with the “economics” of a market/use for an animal that is as poor as beef is from unwanted bull calves, the real return to the nutrient cycle on the farm is much greater if they are composted, then if they are sold for next to nothing, letting everything go, and eventually most likely not used to feed hungry people, but to be ground into mystery meat and sold to wasteful kids of busy parents at a fast food joint.

(It is very similar to the market for pulp or chipwood. These low grade forest products can definitely be sold, the market is there, but the financial return is just barely better than the cost of getting it out. The end products are electricity and paper, which are wasted in huge quantities. Killing these trees when they compete with higher quality trees, and leaving them to rot IS their highest and best use, but most people see that as wasteful.)

Carl

[Carl Russell]

That is true about the structure, but in order to turn the compost effectively using something other than fossil fuel machines, pigs for example, the material needs to be in a confined area, so that it doesn’t get spread thin across the barn yard.

The structure can be built into existing buildings such as cordoning off portions of free stall, or barn basements, or unused box stalls.

Also the structure will provide a container so material can be stacked deep enough to maintain heat, as well as providing insulation against the winter climate that can stifle biological activity.

This strategy can ad some cost, but a building can be amortized much further into the future than a tractor, especially if you believe that the fuel to run it will become limited.

My personal plan is to build a manure containment structure. Three sided foundation into the bank, with an insulated removable wall for unloading. Above the basement will be a greenhouse structure on the southern end, and a pig house on the northern end. There will be two compartments, one for accumulating ingredients, and one for working. Pigs will only have access to the working side, by gated alley. Moisture will be added, but using straw for bedding, and an urine drain below the stables will capture a lot. Also being a closed structure will capture some moisture, which will be transferred directly upstairs to the green house, where co2 and nitrogen in the air will be available to the plants. I know that all the details are rough, but that’s a rough plan.

This is just an example of how certain things need to be rethunk when trying to continue practices into the future that have been developed in a fossil fuel economy.

Carl

[Author]

Posts