The future of the dairy cow??

[bivol]

@Stable-Man 19892 wrote:

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.
😀

why just don’t shift the surplus workforce back to the farming? what’s the problem, if a lot of people go self-sufficient, the government wil be unable to conrtol their substinence, and that’s how people are controled today.
the problem i see is that in a democracy, if one party says “we have to reduce energy consumption”, the other will say “no we don’t vote for us!” just so they get to the power, no matter the real needs.
what is needed is a consensus of both parties, but no political party will actually bite the hand of those who feed them. no, i’m not talking about voters, i’m talking about big bussiness.

reduction in energy is needed for everything. we all use so much energy we think life without it is impossible!
just like a kid who knows who to calculate, but he has relied on a calculator his entire life, so now he has to calculate something by hand, he’s afraid, because he’s never done it (he has relied only upon the calculator), although he knows he’d be able to do it.

p.s. thank oxnun, i’ll keep trying to write good ones.
about the conferences, that’s the point! if you’re self-sufficient, there’s not a lot, if anything, they can do to threaten you, you’re not bond to the system they have so much influence over.
and this scares the (both the big bussiness and the government) because they will go bankrupt (industry) and they’ll loose the influence.

the like for the book is here

[Stable-Man]

@bivol 19968 wrote:

why just don’t shift the surplus workforce back to the farming? what’s the problem, if a lot of people go self-sufficient, the government wil be unable to conrtol their substinence, and that’s how people are controled today.
the problem i see is that in a democracy, if one party says “we have to reduce energy consumption”, the other will say “no we don’t vote for us!” just so they get to the power, no matter the real needs.
what is needed is a consensus of both parties, but no political party will actually bite the hand of those who feed them. no, i’m not talking about voters, i’m talking about big bussiness.

reduction in energy is needed for everything. we all use so much energy we think life without it is impossible!
just like a kid who knows who to calculate, but he has relied on a calculator his entire life, so now he has to calculate something by hand, he’s afraid, because he’s never done it (he has relied only upon the calculator), although he knows he’d be able to do it.

It’s a possible solution, though I think we already have enough people in the US to populate the countryside to 80 acres/family like many of us here would like to see.

And good post up above the one quoted here

[dlskidmore]

@bivol 19968 wrote:

why just don’t shift the surplus workforce back to the farming?

Complete lack of desire.

The other day the topic of my farming dreams came up at work. A co-worker commented “You’d give up all this?” All of what? Working for an organization that cares nothing for me? Constant interruptions and changes in priorities? Complete lack of exercise and Vitamin D? Inter-office Memos? But most of the people living that life don’t see it the same way. They can’t let go of the social atmosphere of the office, the reliable money in the regular paycheck, the complete lack of physical labor. They only go outside for sports and tanning, they have no concept of living with and working with nature.

Even to me, making this change feels like a huge risk, that I could go bust and have nothing but some home preserves to show for my investment. Most farmers have trouble paying near what the tech sector does to hire someone on with no risk tolerance.

[OldKat]

From bivol’s post above;

what is needed is a consensus of both parties, but no political party will actually bite the hand of those who feed them. no, i’m not talking about voters, i’m talking about big bussiness.

This is correct, as far as it goes. I have no idea what happens in your part of the world, bivol. I can tell you for sure that a politician bending to the wishes of business is a problem in the USA.

Unfortunately they are not the only special interest group looking to wield political influence. Add in unions, ethnic minority “representatives”, various other special interest groups such as environmentalists (hard core fanatics, not your garden variety type that really only want to see clean air & unpolluted water etc), pro-hunting groups, anti-hunting groups, animal “welfare” groups, etc, etc. There are many, many more, but you get the picture.

All have their place in the political process and that is all well and good. However, we are never going to please 100% of the public because we all have such differing views, wants, agendas. Currently nearly 1/2 of the people in the United States pay NO federal taxes, yet they still have a say in how our taxes are spent. If that number surpasses 50%, how long before the remaining (shrinking) percentage of tax payers says “To heck with this, I’m not going to support a system where I pay all of the taxes and somebody else gets all of the benefits”? The modern political process leaves a lot to be desired, no doubt.

[OldKat]

@Stable-Man 19990 wrote:

It’s a possible solution, though I think we already have enough people in the US to populate the countryside to 80 acres/family like many of us here would like to see.

And good post up above the one quoted here

Just curious Stable-Man; how would you see something like that coming about? (The redistribution of urban and suburban population to rural areas that is)

[dlskidmore]

@OldKat 20000 wrote:

Just curious Stable-Man; how would you see something like that coming about? (The redistribution of urban and suburban population to rural areas that is)

The only way I see it happening is complete unavailability of car fuel. If people can’t travel, or get goods brought to them, they will find better living in the country where they can create everything they need. But even in the animal powered days there were still some big cities and some goods traveling long distance overland.

[Carl Russell]

dlskidmore;19448 wrote:

Rotational grazing makes a lot of sense, and has so many benefits in increased yield, decreased parasite issues, better fat profiles in the meat… But in my area, there’s enough snow on the ground in winter, I think I’ll still have to put up winter feed. The haying problem is the big stickler in my designs for a low-equipment usage farm. Buying hay from a larger producer that can do it more efficiently than I can looks tempting, but leaves me reliant on outside inputs, which I’d like to wean myself off of over time.

I’m just working my way through this thread, and realize you have moved beyond this, but just want ed to say that as we are building a whole farm system here based in large part on grass-fed livestock, we still buy in a lot of hay for feed. We feed hay at least 5 months, but see it as importing nutrients, as we keep our out 365, except for freezing rain events. Hay chaff, seed, and manure from rotating the feeding areas around our open areas is part of our soil building activities.

Carl

[Stable-Man]

@OldKat 20000 wrote:

Just curious Stable-Man; how would you see something like that coming about? (The redistribution of urban and suburban population to rural areas that is)

I pretty much see it the way dls and bivol see it: the availability of things that make modern ag would have to surpass production costs or disappear before anyone made it a priority. It’s been mentioned in other discussions, but integration of agriculture in schools is dead in suburbs and cities, public and private; therefore, nobody except very few would even think to consider it as a career. In my county students have to volunteer 75 hours to graduate from high school, and while volunteering at a CSA nearby I met a couple of students, so opening up more opportunities that way is another route. This is also good because you aren’t just pulling weeds or harvesting in the sun, but have the option of interaction with, potentially, people your own age and it isn’t so much a chore anymore. It’s sad to hear kids in college and upper grade school referring to farmland as the “end of civilization” when really it’s the beginning, but they have no way of appreciating it.

[OldKat]

@Stable-Man 20004 wrote:

I pretty much see it the way dls and bivol see it: the availability of things that make modern ag would have to surpass production costs or disappear before anyone made it a priority. It’s been mentioned in other discussions, but integration of agriculture in schools is dead in suburbs and cities, public and private; therefore, nobody except very few would even think to consider it as a career. In my county students have to volunteer 75 hours to graduate from high school, and while volunteering at a CSA nearby I met a couple of students, so opening up more opportunities that way is another route. This is also good because you aren’t just pulling weeds or harvesting in the sun, but have the option of interaction with, potentially, people your own age and it isn’t so much a chore anymore. It’s sad to hear kids in college and upper grade school referring to farmland as the “end of civilization” when really it’s the beginning, but they have no way of appreciating it.

Fair enough. Specifically what I was asking though is how would the process work (in your mind) where we would go from where we are now to where we would be if there were, as you said, people are living on 80 acre tracts?

I am not baiting you, because quite frankly I use to envision EXACTLY what you are talking about. I have since changed my mind entirely, but I’d rather not go into that until I see where you are going with this.

[dlskidmore]

@Carl Russell 20003 wrote:

we still buy in a lot of hay for feed. … part of our soil building activities.

Thanks for the input. I’m likely to end up going that route, at least in the beginning. I’ll do some experiments with stockpiled forage, but I’m not counting on them.

[Stable-Man]

@OldKat 20006 wrote:

Fair enough. Specifically what I was asking though is how would the process work (in your mind) where we would go from where we are now to where we would be if there were, as you said, people are living on 80 acre tracts?

Eh, what it comes down to is individual choice. But say we have enough interest; already, there are a fair number of farms with intern/job opportunities. Long term employees or interns could then be given a portion of the land, or buy at a discount or something, as long as it’s large enough to suit needs, but of course the owners would need to be opened to that idea. Interested children also get their share of the land. I don’t think the idea is far from possible as I imagine some farmers know by now of the disinterest in the field.

My thinking really hasn’t gone that far since the first part is not yet achieved. :confused:

[Nat(wasIxy)]

@dlskidmore 20002 wrote:

The only way I see it happening is complete unavailability of car fuel. If people can’t travel, or get goods brought to them, they will find better living in the country where they can create everything they need. But even in the animal powered days there were still some big cities and some goods traveling long distance overland.

Not really relevant and not really realistic until oil runs out and we got no choice, but it’d be my dream job to be transporting ‘stuff’ with animals…always had a little ‘thing’ about that 😀 😉 Roll on the day, I’ll be ready to hit to road with my pack oxen!

[dlskidmore]

@Ixy 20316 wrote:

Not really relevant and not really realistic until oil runs out and we got no choice, but it’d be my dream job to be transporting ‘stuff’ with animals…always had a little ‘thing’ about that 😀 😉 Roll on the day, I’ll be ready to hit to road with my pack oxen!

No reason why you can’t do that today. Many people are looking for “green” alternatives. Start with a trendy natural foods store, (preferably one that lists it’s products online so folks can shop from home) and put up ads that you’ll deliver groceries from that store within a certain radius.

Selling Points:

• Lower Greenhouse Gasses
• Convenience of cutting out an errand a week.
• Benefits of the foods available at that store
• Novelty

As you develop a delivery route, note other businesses along it, and add them to your advertised services. If you build up enough clientele to do daily deliveries, you can add in fresh produce and dairy products from a local farmer. Most folks have yet to discover how much better really fresh produce is, but you can educate the consumer and get a premium over the Mexican out of season veggies.

You’ll unfortunately likely have to ship your animals and cart into a more densely populated area, but even that gas spent for one round trip a day is less than the multiple errand trips all your customers would be running without your service.

Or for a really crazy idea, how about the oxen ice cream truck! You’ll already be going the right speed for those crazy kids to be able to run and catch you after begging money off of Mom…

[Nat(wasIxy)]

believe me, I’ve had the idea – beach rides, milk round etc…but the government says no 🙁 too much of a disease risk; we have really strict movement regs – standstill periods, passports and reporting your every move.

If I didn’t have family here, I’d emigrate.

Probably to America. I wanna breed bucking bulls anyway, and there’s no market for them here 😀

[Nat(wasIxy)]

It’s actually the one thing that would make me seriously contemplate going back to horses, and I struggle with it often – you get so much more freedom 🙁

[Author]

Posts