[Carl Russell]

Countymouse;16792 wrote:

….. At any rate, I am curious if the type of practices demonstrated in this video are “normal” for horse farming on a small (less than 10 acre) scale. …..

One of the beauties of this system is it points out how adaptive we need to be when considering animal power. If we just calculate horse power needs based on the tractor model, then substitute horses, we can get the work done, but we don’t take advantage of the flexibility that animal power can provide. When we use animal power we need to think holistically about the farming system that we are setting up in order to capitalize on the natural power available in earth-based life systems. Horses cannot be expected to supply the power to overcome nature, so looking at the big picture of how nature plays a role on your farm will not only make using horses more functional, but will invigorate your whole farming enterprise.

I don’t think Eric and Anne would care if we thought they were “normal”. They are such down to earth people that we would be living in a rare time if they were. Let’s hope for the future.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Simple Living;16813 wrote:

Carl,

I hope that one doesn’t come back to bite ya!!! It sure made me laugh out loud!

Gordon

Gotta take’em the way they come out of the box, right? No alterations, just pure and natural.

An animal is an animal no matter how we try to dress it up. We can’t possibly truly think that after millions of years of innate genetic expression that somehow it should be different.

:DCarl

[Carl Russell]

I actually had a horse with a twisted gut from colic roll and un-twist his gut.

It’s kind of like thinking that women shouldn’t have hair on their legs, to think that horses shouldn’t roll.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Shoeing horses is getting to be a lot like the Law. Although there is no doubt a lot of knowledge required, and experience, and skill, this is not rocket science… nor Law. Farmers used to shoe their own horses all the time.

When I started out, it cost me $100 per horse for shoes and setting. Now it would cost $200+.

Although I agree that the natural hoof is the best condition for a horse, shoeing does not have to be detrimental. If you trim accurately, and re-set within appropriate time frames, a healthy and functional foot can be maintained while providing both protection and traction.

I give my horses some barefoot time every year, but the truth of the matter is that working them barefoot can lead to splits and cracked edges, especially in stony fields, gravel roads, and ledgy woodlands. These conditions do make it difficult to get shoes on because of hoof shape and nailing surface, and since I swear by having working horses with significant traction capability, I pay a lot of attention to these situations and try to keep the foot in a way that will allow me the best opportunity to set a shoe when I need it.

There is no way that anyone I know can afford to pay for this type of hoof maintenance. That is why I encourage people to get some training and learn to shoe their own horses. I don’t think you need to go to school in order to shoe your own. If you want to sell professional services, then yes by all means, but to provide yourself with competent hoof care it really can be accomplished by spending time with your farrier, reading, and practicing.

I started as soon as I bought my first horse. All of my mentors shod their own horses, and being made like I am, both physically and mentally, I never questioned it. I could easily see the money I would save, and I could also see the value that the skill could bring to my care of my animals. Not to mention that I use hoof work as one of my integral handling techniques.

I have never hot-shod my horses. I use pre-made pulling shoes and shape them on my anvil, sometimes using the forge if I have to shorten a heel, or something significant, but I always let the shoe cool before nailing it on. I know everybody is all about hot shoeing, and there is another layer of protectionism that goes into the profession, but I have great luck with seating the shoe, and I rarely lose shoes.

Also doing it myself, I can replace thrown shoes, and when it comes to resetting shoes, I can do 2 one afternoon, 2 the next, or wait a week, whatever makes sense for me in the current schedule.

Anyway over nearly 25 years I have saved thousands of dollars, and I have gained thousands of dollars worth of functionality in my working horse operation.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Welcome Andrea. I can’t fill you in on your question, just wanted to welcome you. Hope you get some answers, otherwise enjoy yourself.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I also have a few personal contacts in Quebec, NB, NS, and PEI. I can share those with you.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I would have to agree with this sentiment. I have so many balls in the air, which is the way I have always lived my life, that the amount of time I can give to each is extremely variable.

I think it is easy to get big ideas fast, and that is one of the reasons why these types of effort implode, or more accurately “Seem” like they implode.

I share the sense that the time is appropriate for such a network, and organization, but truthfully we have been living in our own little world here on DAP. It will take some time to reach out to others in the global community. We should just protect this seed, and continue to take the foundational ideas seriously, and over time we can make something happen.

In my mind it is not so much how many, or who can really take the time, but how serious we are, and how hard we hold onto the idea. There are several of us here from divergent regions, and knowing that there is this kernel of an organization will begin to have affect within smaller networks.

So far most of us have not invested too much, so we don’t have a lot to lose, but we can only make it work if we keep thinking about the possibilities.

Thanks Scott, Carl

[Carl Russell]

Joel;16646 wrote:

….I think it is great that you have the opportunity to work animal & machine extraction sites.

You are talking a Europeon model, Carl. Individual tree management is practiced alot over there.

Joel I just need to reply to clarify for others who may be reading this.

I don’t have “the opportunity” to do anything. I make it all happen. I am a self-employed private forestry consultant. I have a couple of thousand acres of forest land that I manage for several dozen clients. I decide whether I am going to work with machines or horses based on the operators and not based on the sites.

There are always aspects of every site that are challenging. I have not found a site yet that I didn’t see how it could be done with horses. In fact in our area, they all were done at least once already with horses. I have found a few mechanical operators who have sensibilities and skills that they can apply to the type of forestry I want to practice, so in some cases I actually use them.

As far as the European forestry, for someone who has a hard time with people generalizing….

My approach to forestry is not based on any style that I picked up from any cultural or educational sources. I practice silviculture based on 30 years of experience working in the forest with an eye toward ecological factors. The reason why my approach is not commonly found in USA is because of the industrial support for research that is the underpinning for silvicultural stocking guides. The practices that are based on these guides are mostly developed to facilitate what are typically thought of as modern harvesting systems. This has led to widespread mismanagement of our forests. And this is not just my generalized opinion. There is broad consensus on this.

I see draft-animals playing an extremely important role in the practice of silviculture that focuses on forest ecology, silvics, and the improvement of growing stock. Using draft animals allows for those objectives to be paramount, rather than becoming compromised by the logistical requirements for large scale mechanical harvesting.

I feel like the time is right that we develop some studies that could sort out some of these factors, so that we don’t have to continually debate apples and oranges.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Joel;16632 wrote:

Help me understand why several long logs on a turn is going to damage leave trees.

A cowboy skidder operator can screw up skidding 16’s.

A wanna be horselogger can do just as much damage.

I get really tired of folks dissing commercial logging on here. Not ALL machine loggers are cowboys. Not ALL horse loggers are the 2nd coming of the man.

Joel, I supervise several mechanical timber harvesters, and I completely agree. My comments were not about the operators but about the way my silviculture changes to facilitate the different operations.

In the above example, I knew that the wood was coming out with horses, so I marked it for cut-to-length, with only a few distinct skidding corridors. The way I marked the stand there is no way that even a forwarder could have cut in there without a small twitching device. Sure it could have been a small 4wd tractor, or it could have been something like a remote control skidding winch.

The point I was making was that because it was done with horses, I could mark trees to cut, and leave trees, based on what horse-logging could deliver in this stand. If I marked it for a skidder or a crawler, I would have had to mark for skid trails, and hitches that could be turned to those trails.

The distinction is not between the mind set of one operator vs. another, but more around the limitations and capabilities of the mechanics of the operation, and how that relates to the timber and the lay of the land.

That in a nut-shell is the basis of the study I would like to see. Marking forests for surgical removal of trees, specifically adhering to the silvicultural requirements of the procedure to make the best use of the residual stand without having to compromise the long-term forest improvement because of the type of cutting and removal system that skidders require. Instead, taking advantage of what are typically seen as liimitations of animal-power, but in this case are in fact advantages, because of how they mesh with the forestry objectives that I am trying to impliment.

Now that being said, if I were to make the stumpage reflect the cost of a skidder actually taking the time to do this job using cut-to-length, then it might be a different case, but we would still have to mark to open the stand to the machine travelling around which could also compromise some portions of it.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Here is a link to RFD-TV show tonight about using snow shoes on mules. Might have some application to using something similar in mud.

http://www.rfdtv.com/schedule_search.asp?searchText=Rural Heritage&show=

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Countymouse;16607 wrote:

… How much manuverability is it reasonable to expect without your hands on the reins?

I know that when I’m plowing with lines over one and under the other shoulder, I can get pretty subtle directions to the horses. While plowing is more exact perhaps than slip-scooping, I don’t really see how you could be getting so much action out of you body moving. It sounds like your method requires a lot of controlled movement to get the message though the lines, but what ever works for you is important.

I don’t think it is necessarily any more dangerous the use your neck than your shoulders. I just have become more comfortable with the shoulders.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I’m not sure how they would work in the situation, but “they” used to use “Bog shoes” in the salt marshes for hauling hay, seaweed, and cranberries. They were simply small planks that had caulks attached to the bottom, and they were strapped onto the foot. They were cut enough larger than the foot to give some flotation, and to eliminate the suction caused by the shape of a horses foot.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Just so you know, his privacy concerns included internet, and he is reacting to real issues that he is suffering from. He feels he needs to clean his slate, and star over.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Tying a horse is definitely preferable to letting them walk off. Before I developed a more comfortable working understanding, I would tie my horses whenever I was using a saw or handling logs. It is definitely a time suck, but in the long run it is better for the horse and the teamster.

That said, now I work my horses exclusively without a halter under the bridle. Whether I am ground skidding or using an arch I will hitch the choker to a tree and have them stand like that. If I feel that I need to tie them, I take off the bridle, put on a halter and tie them.

I really believe that a horse hitched by a evener can get in a lot less trouble than one that is tied by the head while hitched to a cart. In fact I never tie my animals by the head while hitched to any conveyance. I can see such a horrific mess associated with that combination.

It is much better to tie them than to let them walk away, but the truth is that to get actual work completed the time is wasted. Working animals should be able to stand for the teamster to walk around them, run a saw, move brush, roll logs, clean water-bars, load wagons,etc., heading to or from the landing. It takes time, and should be measured (George’s method seems interesting), because a walk-off is not a habit that you want to allow to get started.

I will hitch mine to a tree by the choker when felling, then hitch them to the load and skid it out to the trail in a place out of the felling area(headed toward the landing), go back cut another hitch, skid the one they’re hitched to, stop them at the landing, unhitch, cut the logs to length, ask them to step up, and roll the logs up onto the pile, all without touching the lines or tying them.

If I am skidding to a sled, I expect them to stand while I load the logs onto the sled. There are times when I leave a load at the header so when I come back with the empty sled, they stand while I load those logs, sometimes 20-30minutes. Same goes for wood wagons, and manure spreaders. We are working after all. They understand that their job is to stand because I am busy with something else. The job will be to move when I turn my attention back to them and ask them to move.

I work to get my horses to stand while I am harnessing them, or handling their feet in the pasture, and this translates to working in the woods. I expect them to stand even if I have to run the saw under their noses.

None of this is to dismiss the importance of tying a horse instead of letting it walk off, only to illustrate what I have learned to expect from working animals in the woods.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Back haw/gee involves one (the one on the inside of the turn) stepping back while the other moves in the spoken direction.

I don’t get too complicated with vocal commands. Come up, back, gee/haw, whoa, put in/out. The degree of passing, or crossing over, or the tightness of a turn has more to do with my body language, or how I use the whip.

I believe that the animal is capable of reading a physical signal that augments a vocal command better than they can decipher the distinction between complimentary vocal commands. Which do you say first, back, or gee? Which do they respond to? And how do you guide them if this time you mean something slightly tighter, or different in some way?

I use back gee/haw to mean anything from sweeping to pivoting, anytime one needs to step back while the other needs to step over. I just give the subtle guidance with the whip and by where I stand or move to. I say back to one, and gee/haw to the other.

When I say gee/haw i mean they both move in that direction. If I raise my whip it means while moving forward. If I crowd the nigh ox, it means to move more gee-ward, and if I step away then it means more haw-ward.

This is not to say that I couldn’t get the desired result while standing still out of the way. Especially in the woods, there are times when I just stand still and have them back haw/gee around in the brush, or I may want them to step over gee when I am behind them. In these cases I am not asking for a complicated maneuver.

I also work with a whip with a four foot lash and if I need a more specific placement I will use the whip on a shoulder or flank or knee to get the fine focus.

Carl

[Author]

Posts