The future of the dairy cow??

[dlskidmore]

@near horse 19637 wrote:

The “buzz” now is all about “pounds of animal” stocked per area rather than animal number.

You could always go for a small breed if you wanted to increase headcount for behavioral reasons. I’ve heard tell that sheep and cows will herd together too. Will a mixed mob show the same behaviors?

[Nat(wasIxy)]

Ummm, we have about 60, but they’re not all grazing with the main herd and that is less than 50 head. It doesn’t seem to be a problem, never really thought about it? They sometimes make a bit of noise around feeding time…but it’s hardly the end of the world?

I think you could eventually work up to 50 dexters or something similar on 25acres – not overnight, but I’d think it was possible unless you’re on a mountaintop or in a desert or something….

[clayfoot-sandyman]

It’s not looking far off a desert at present with all this continuing hot spell and our sand-loam…..!

[Nat(wasIxy)]

I bet! We have cracks to lose a sheep down but not as bad as ‘down there’ – we were driving through dorset on saturday and were both surprised to see some kind of arable crop, grown on the steep hillsides, so we were peering over to see what it was, and then we both realised – it was golden, crispy dead grass!!!

[bivol]

@jac 19428 wrote:

I think the car did dismantle communities but not till much later. over here we have small rural villages that were populated by farm workers and folks connected with local trades ie wheelwrites and blacksmiths not to mention small butcher, bakery and grocers shops… now they are filled with lawyers and doctors who just sleep there and dont even use any local shops{nearly all gone} because they buy their food at “Crapco” on the way home. And because they can afford to buy houses so easily the prices have skyrocketed and real country folk cant afford to stay.. We had a local silage contractor told to stop by the police because of the noise !!! these people have no sense of urgency at harvest time….
I like the idea of a beef x for a house cow.. Ayrshire/Angus mabey…
John

i’l try to read though all the pages, just cought up, but i can’t miss this part!

a similar thing happened in istria, where an old farmer and Boskarin lover kept his cattle in traditional wooden stables in the countryside.

now, istria is becoming more of a tourist destination with rich people buying pitoresque traditional farms stables and converting them to weekend houses.

so, this old man’s stable was “semi-deteached” to another stable that was bought by some well-standing man (think a foreigner), and he started complaining to the old farmer that he sould get rid of the cattle because they stink and bellow. the old man told him:” these cattle were here well before me, and well before you. they have the right of stay.”

so the guy backed off, there was no way he could make the ld man give up his cattle, legally or otherwise.

the prices are sky-rocketing there, too. with same consequences.

[bivol]

@clayfoot-sandyman 19351 wrote:

Hello all.

Had a chat last week to a friend who works for an organic ag. research institute who told me about a conference on sustainability in agriculture he recently went to.
He came away very depressed from a presentation on sustainable futures in dairy farming – the dairy farm being the most fossil fuel consuming and CO2 ommitting of all aspects of farming.
The speaker put forward that the only way to decrease dairy farming’s carbon footprint was to push the cow harder – projecting milk yields of 30% more in the next 20 years through breeding practises and the use of GM crops for feed (supposedly cutting down on the need for as much fertiliser/tractor work and upping proteins etc).
The interesting thing that my friend told me was that the ‘model’ used to project how much carbon is ommitted in a cow’s life including fuel to heat water in the dairy, run machinery, electricity etc which this whole proposition of further pushing the dairy cow harder is based upon does not offset the outputs with the soils natural ability to sequester CO2 because the science is not ‘robust’ – i.e too many unpredictables for strict numerical analysis. However some researchers have proposed that by maintaining herds of cattle grazed outdoors in summer and housed in winter large areas of grassland are required which offset all CO2 outputs from cattle plus sequestering up to 60% of human made carbon.
So the poor old dairy cow will be further enslaved to business interests at the
expense of her health and ability to express her natural instincts. Being a friend of cows this makes my heart heavy I have to say.
What we really need to do is look at our diets in relation to land use, this is mere speculation but I think there is a milk/meat ratio in our diet which would correlate to a productive capacity of a given locality, farmed in a way which would keep the land vital and abundant for eternity and would equally preserve our integral health through the right quantity and quality of meat/dairy intake….:)

Ed

the speaker is either payed to talk like this, or has the inelligence of a averige politician from my country.

or both.

and i’m also sad to see good cattle, or any other animal, spending their lives without ever seeing something natural.

i red a similar thing in “One-straw revolution” a book i would warmly encourage everyone to read, where the author was also on one such conference, after his remarks he was silenced, and he came to the conclusion such conferences were funded by big business who had no interest in going bankrupt themselves when natural, low input-(but still good-yield) farming would have a comeback- so my idea is that they form conferences to channel the worries of people to their own benefit-and profit.

it’s unfortunate (for these big companies), but they will inevitabelly have to disappear, simply because there is no use for them in low-input farming.
but i guess they’ll fight viciously, and with their money, manipulation of public via media, and influence being big in politics too, we have some problems, i guess.

although the problems are not as huge as they seem. people forget that history is seldom a straight line, and that other, unexpected things happen that knock the powerful off. like shortage of fossil fuels, through war, or otherwise…

that would solve most problems i guess, even if it looks like it would only enlarge them.
without fossil fuels transporting food long distances will become uneconomical, so it will have to be grown more-or-less locally. because of no fossil fuels big machinery and chemical fertilisers will become unavailable, and if quick and sincere enough a shortage, i see the government requisitioning the vast farmlands because they can’t pay the taxes, and allotting land to citizens to make their farms on it. local farming. with animals, wee need fertilizer.

while we’re at it, out animal sciences professor told us, when he got a bit drunk in company of an american analyst back in the ’80s, that this guy told him some interesting stuff.
american politics plans everything in 40 years cycles, and they work on making these things true. like a cow that’s constantly producing the same amount of milk with no calvings.
but i don’t think it’s going to go that way.

out civilization is the only one who created an illusion that mankind can go forever on upward course, to presumably some eternal bliss, but it simply isn’t true.
the politicians and big bussiness feeds people with such illusions, or something else to keep their minds off it. and people gladly eat it, because it’s easier to believe in an obvious but nice illusion, than dig for the ugly truth.

with the entire scheme out, lots of people would choose to go back to the countryside, buy land, and “dig in”, and effectively stop being consumers!
and that scares our politicians the most, if we cut our spending! which we will have to.

natural cycles of both nature and human society are those of prosperity and disaster, and to deny this is not realistic.

[dlskidmore]

@bivol 19768 wrote:

out civilization is the only one who created an illusion that mankind can go forever on upward course, to presumably some eternal bliss, but it simply isn’t true.

I took these classes in college that kept talking about sustainable growth, and I could never accept that. There is only so much land, only so many resources, growth will eventually reach a limit no matter what speed you move at. Reuse and renewal is sustainable, but not growth.

[bivol]

unfortunatelly growth is in minds of people indistinguishable from material gain.

but you said right, there is only so much land. i’d only add that land is getting less and less, so we’ll have to think of something.

now, i don’t think there’s a problem in growth itself, but in how it’s achieved: we do it (as a species) so it hurts us all and everywhere we live.

if we’d do it “sustainably”, i guess there would be no reason we couldn’t travel to the stars one day, no to say.

i guess sustainable growth is theorethically possible, if we as a society:
1. produce food locally and without waste energy
2. use every renewable energy source possible.
3. wisely distribute energy without unnecessary waste (hospitals and such institutions would have the supply priority.
4. use the remaining resources, once the basic society needs are satisfied, to fund and develop new technologies.
that’s the nearest thing i can imagine to sustainable growth. here growth being a small but sophisticated high-tech industry, not material growth of the entire society.

[dlskidmore]

Well, yes, we can always grow spiritually, personal development, in technology in productivity, but there is a limit to population and city sprawl size.

[bivol]

@dlskidmore 19874 wrote:

Well, yes, we can always grow spiritually, personal development, in technology in productivity, but there is a limit to population and city sprawl size.

and why is it necessary to have big cities? and who said it’s good that we have most of people in living cities? i believe we have to have a good balance between countryside and city population.
IMO it is better to have a substantial population living in the countryside.

don’t forget huge cities are a product of our highly-industrial and specialized way of life, and ALSO of government efforts in all the first world to keep the food producing population to about 10% of society.

[dlskidmore]

@bivol 19888 wrote:

IMO it is better to have a substantial population living in the countryside.

I agree, but there is still a limitation on growth in that sector as well. After you break big agriculture back down into little family farms that are just a step above self-sufficiency (make enough extra to pay taxes and have a few nice things) you will still run out of land if the population continues to grow.

The really sad part is, that you can’t limit population growth and remain a viable culture, as the other cultures out-breed you and replace you. This is a no-win for a peaceful society that’s trying to become sustainable with a neighbor that is not. But if neither neighbor is sustainable, that’s also a problem in that neither can spread it’s excess population to the less populated country, and there will be either war, disease, or famine to decrease the population and restore balance as nature always does (or in the last such cycle end the world.) Even if you convince your neighbor to be sustainable and you overpopulate into their territory, you will only prolong the inevitable.

Bah. I’m just being depressing now. We can only do the work that’s in front of us, that God gave each of us to do, and contribute our small parts. The big picture thinking gets overwhelming and gets in the way of providing the world what love and hope we can.

[Stable-Man]

@bivol 19766 wrote:

i’l try to read though all the pages, just cought up, but i can’t miss this part!

a similar thing happened in istria, where an old farmer and Boskarin lover kept his cattle in traditional wooden stables in the countryside.

now, istria is becoming more of a tourist destination with rich people buying pitoresque traditional farms stables and converting them to weekend houses.

so, this old man’s stable was “semi-deteached” to another stable that was bought by some well-standing man (think a foreigner), and he started complaining to the old farmer that he sould get rid of the cattle because they stink and bellow. the old man told him:” these cattle were here well before me, and well before you. they have the right of stay.”

so the guy backed off, there was no way he could make the ld man give up his cattle, legally or otherwise.

the prices are sky-rocketing there, too. with same consequences.

This is an annoying situation, and all it takes is for one expatriate or rich person to start the move toward sleep or vacation or weekend communities. I just read an article about Bulgaria and all the British semi-retired people moving in, and no doubt they will renovate and eventually resell, driving up the prices. They want a slower lifestyle which apparently can’t be achieved at home. A situation I see close to home (and this is sort of unrelated) is a few people in the run-down Appalachian towns (formerly mining/manufacturing towns) try to revitalize by bringing in tourist traps, especially art oriented businesses, resulting in a few minimum wage jobs. This isn’t going to prop up a community that just lost thousands of jobs or even begin to cover the problems, and even long term it’s a poor choice.

Growth economics, too, is sort of a losing game. We need to grow the economy for the growing workforce…but if you don’t have a growing workforce, there’s no need for more jobs. So far we don’t account for environmental degradation in the GDP (check out Herman Daly’s books for info on that). Our electrical demand is going up and what people don’t seem to realize is we need to mine material for our solar panels and wind turbines and rebuild infrastructure to deliver it. We use so much oil in everything that life without it is incomprehensible.
😀

[mother katherine]

Bivol, I love your arguments! I’m reading a book called “12 by 12” having to do with people getting “off the grid” and leaving the carbon footprint of a Bangladeshi.
I’ll see if I can locate the book you’re talikng about.
About the conferences: I’m beginning to suspect that big business has these things to find where the opposition is, their names, etc – so they can go after specific pockets(people) of resistance.
I don’t think I’m all that paranoid.
oxnun

[Nat(wasIxy)]

@dlskidmore 19889 wrote:

I agree, but there is still a limitation on growth in that sector as well. After you break big agriculture back down into little family farms that are just a step above self-sufficiency (make enough extra to pay taxes and have a few nice things) you will still run out of land if the population continues to grow.

The really sad part is, that you can’t limit population growth and remain a viable culture, as the other cultures out-breed you and replace you. This is a no-win for a peaceful society that’s trying to become sustainable with a neighbor that is not. But if neither neighbor is sustainable, that’s also a problem in that neither can spread it’s excess population to the less populated country, and there will be either war, disease, or famine to decrease the population and restore balance as nature always does (or in the last such cycle end the world.) Even if you convince your neighbor to be sustainable and you overpopulate into their territory, you will only prolong the inevitable.

Bah. I’m just being depressing now. We can only do the work that’s in front of us, that God gave each of us to do, and contribute our small parts. The big picture thinking gets overwhelming and gets in the way of providing the world what love and hope we can.

I agree, and probably when it comes down to it, I farm the way I do due to the economic and labour saving benefits as a priority over the environmental benefits. We can all only do our best at the end of the day…

[bivol]

@dlskidmore 19889 wrote:

I agree, but there is still a limitation on growth in that sector as well. After you break big agriculture back down into little family farms that are just a step above self-sufficiency (make enough extra to pay taxes and have a few nice things) you will still run out of land if the population continues to grow.

The really sad part is, that you can’t limit population growth and remain a viable culture, as the other cultures out-breed you and replace you. This is a no-win for a peaceful society that’s trying to become sustainable with a neighbor that is not. But if neither neighbor is sustainable, that’s also a problem in that neither can spread it’s excess population to the less populated country, and there will be either war, disease, or famine to decrease the population and restore balance as nature always does (or in the last such cycle end the world.) Even if you convince your neighbor to be sustainable and you overpopulate into their territory, you will only prolong the inevitable.

Bah. I’m just being depressing now. We can only do the work that’s in front of us, that God gave each of us to do, and contribute our small parts. The big picture thinking gets overwhelming and gets in the way of providing the world what love and hope we can.

wise words you said there! sometimes it’s better not to see the entire picture. do what you can, be as marry as you can, and have trust in God!

it is true other cultures have a higher birth rate than ours, but that’s just because we in the west have a horribly low one. everyone now lives in the cities and they all want something for themselves, my job my career, my clothes, my expense, we have hyper-individualism, to our own long term damage.
still, i guess these people push for this individualism because they don’t know better. maybe i’m naive, maybe i’m just like so, but pictures of a local neighborhood and community, neighbors going about popping up for a visit, helping each-other, peaceful existence, they are burnt in my head as the very best means to live is to live with others, is the people around are good.

one way an equilibrium of positive birth rates in the country could be sucked up by cities with negative birth rates can keep a country with stable population.don’t worry about hyper-population here in the west, we can take a lot more, but we first have to even get a positive birth rates nationally.

and we have to go from this horrible hyper-individualism to a more neighborhood-like community, be it in the city or countryside.

this shift to local community and countryside can happen and it will happen (if something worse doesn’t).
the “best thing” is that such a shift already happened in recent history so we know it can work: in- Cuba.
up until 1989. cuba was a russian-tailored society with emphesis on all the thing an industrial society should have, and with all the effects of city life in the west, alienation, no local community in the cities, diminishing countrydise population, industrialized agirculture based on export while importhing food from eastern block…

it all came to a sudden halt (better, a crash) then the soviet union fell apart: no oil, no chemical fertilizers, no tractor parts, no food imports from eastern europe!
this whole period was came to be known as the “special period”,(there was famine, shift in agricultural policy, to organic farming, city gardens, smaller farms) and long story short, the people started leaving the cities for countryside and farming occupation, in the cities the local a tightly-knit community was again established.

raising children in the cities is very expensive indeed. they all need food you have to buy, they all need activities (because you’re not there as a parent; you’re working), they all need their own room ,they all need cellphones, this, that, etc,…
and they’re more exposed to trends etc, they want to fit in, and it all now costs money.

in the countryside the culture and needs are vastly different, even if i might say, more basic at least for needs. it is sure more economical to have more children in the countryside than in the city.
real estate id mostly cheaper, food can be locally grown, children can help with the work (useful, they learn, and they spend time with parents)

*looks up* oh man, i really go of the hook above….

[Author]

Posts