[Carl Russell]

Looking good Josh. My 7 yr old Timber wants a team just like that.:eek:
Carl

[Carl Russell]

There are plenty of people who do just that Rod.

My only feed-back is that working with unpredictable loads on uneven ground is dangerous work, no matter how you do it. There is risk of falling and being stepped on, or run over, or at least not having adequate control of the horse if you are leading it.

I find driving the horse with reins that are long enough (20′) for me to be off to the side and behind the evener is the most safe and comfortable place for me. I find the horses to be most responsive this way, and I can see everything that is going on with the horses, and with the log.

The danger really comes when the driver hasn’t got a picture in their mind of how the horses will travel, where the obstacles are, and how to drive the animals to deal with these issues.

Driving while skidding logs should involve stages. Advancing to a point, stopping to avoid an obstacle by changing position, gathering lines, advancing again, stopping, and so on. It should not be one long fluid motion of ducking, jumping, and constantly looking over one’s shoulder.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

“To promote the use of draft animal powered timber harvesting methods that support positive impact forest management”

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Yep, that is black locust. I can see the distinct early/late wood in each growth ring, cherry is more diffuse porous. Also it looks like there are rays that are more distinct than black cherry. The shiny character to the end grain of black locust makes it different than the logs that biglug had.

Boy, but from the bark it really looks like cherry.

Thanks, Carl

[Carl Russell]

Yes we could use the poll feature, but I like to see people’s comments, not just a straight vote. I’m sure if you used the poll feature it would be a simple way to compile results of choices, but it won’t help us to ensure that we get as much involvement as possible. I think by having to post, it gives us a chance to see who we have heard from.

I didn’t mean to to suggest that encouraging the use and development of equipment that facilitates the use of draft animals in forestry would not be part of our goal. It should be an important part of what we do. I just think that including it in a mission statement in such terms will be problematic.
Perhaps it would make sense to just rephrase that portion of the goals to be more specific to that intent.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

This is a new class.

[Carl Russell]

Bumpus;12456 wrote:

.Boy Oh Boy: This thread which started out being something really simple at the first couple of posts, has drifted into a whatever others want to discuss … type of a subject.

When people don’t understand a topic, or remark made in the beginning statements, they usually attack what they do not agree with,
( including the poster ) even if it does not make sense to them.

Now by missing the point of this thread it has gone into what
others have turned into, which is all together different.

Which proves my point.

Going around and around in circles of :confused:
and where it will stop … only God knows for sure.

I have had my coffee today,
and my signature at the bottom tells the rest of my story. 🙂

.

Which is exactly the point. Your assumption that this is a subject that can be “simplified” has been proven faulty. The folks who visit this site tend to be serious about the topics they discuss. They have given you a perfect example of how there are no simple answers, nor do most of us demand that from each other. We are willing to go around the table as long as there is interest. When we are done we may not have complete answers, but we always have a lot more to think about.

And by the way Bumpus, you actually have not shared your opinions, other than that you think other opinions are confusing, but nothing substantive about the topic you have raised.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Before you slice that baby up, I would love to see a close up of the end grain of that log. If I could see the pore structure, late/early wood in the growth rings that would help me a lot. Otherwise, nice mystery!!!

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Scyther;12439 wrote:

Excellent, and true points made here. The human/economic factor is the big sticking point. This is one of a couple reasons I’m not trying to farm for a living anymore. To do it “right”, by my way of thinking, I found near impossible to be profitable under the economic system we have in place. So I work “away” to produce money, and farm the way I think it should be done at home. I only produce for self sufficientcy, and in that venue the economics work just fine. I’d like to scale up some at some point to a part-time commercial operation if I can do it “right”, that being my way, but don’t know if that will really happen or not. So I think you can farm in a self contained, or nearly so, way. To do it and make money is a much more challenging undertaking though. It proved to be beyond my abilities anyway. Good luck to all who venture in that area.

We have come to the same understanding. In fact I never saw business opportunities as rationale for mining the resources on my family land. Many people will not consider you a “true” farmer, or full-time logger, but our current economic system is created to put pressure on resources to deliver raw product. That is why it is so difficult to actually develop a sustainable process. We see our land-use enterprise as much as an investment as it is a source of livelihood. We make the most dollars from selling services, as well as valuable product, but reserve the bulk of the operation to provide for our own use, both farming and forestry. We are also investing in the land-use pattern, livestock, nutrient availability, structures, access, equipment, and skills that will set this place up without indebtedness, and capable of providing an even greater portion of the necessary livelihood for subsequent residents, possibly several family units.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I would like to suggest that we all try to pitch in on this discussion. The lack of response may indicate agreement, but it also might mean no one has had the time to respond.

I would feel a lot better about using this medium for making decisions if we just agree that everyone in this group needs to at least throw in a yep, or a nope.

This is not something that we have talked about yet, but it seems right that we should set up some mechanism so that we can be sure that we have gotten some consensus on an issue before we move on. I don’t like rigidity, but it might be plausible that we agree to all weigh in on a question, so that even if it is just a whole lot of agreement, at least we can see that.

What do you think?? And if you take the time to answer me, make a statement about “appropriate technology” while you’re at it.:D

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Looks a lot like black cherry on the left, and white ash on the right, to me.

[Carl Russell]

And I agree. But that is exactly why it ISN”T sustainable. The human factor is real, and we all have to make our own personal appraisal of it, but that is exactly what we need to learn how to balance against the natural reality of the resources we depend on. Sustainability is not just about managing resources, but also about managing ourselves.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

near horse;12353 wrote:

Here’s one shot at defining sustainability – apply it toward farming, forestry or whatever –

For any single farm to truly be sustainable, it must produce adequate yields of high quality and be resource conserving, environmentally sound, economically profitable, and socially just. In a sense, it’s a goal and a utopian concept.

So, if an organic or conventional farm is not economically profitable, it’s not sustainable. If it’s either polluting the groundwater or eroding the soil, it’s not sustainable …. If you high grade timber, there’s nothing but low quality left to reproduce = short term profit but long term unsustainable…..

I can’t disagree with this, but I will just say that for many people, including me, “sustainable” land-use has to do with sustainable practices. By employing methods in the operation that mimic, or embrace, natural ecological processes, with minimal human inputs and intervention, the operation becomes “sustainable” because it is supported by something other than the owners ability to pay, produce, or participate.

The affordability issue is often thrown in there as a way to dilute the attempt to arrive at ecological sustainability. I understand how important the financial question is in a person’s ability to “keep going”, but the human factor is one of the most unsustainable aspects of our attempts at land-use.

That is not to say that every operation is able to become sustainable, each of us has our own variables, like Geoff wrote, it is a bit utopian, but the emphasis must not be on how sustainable can we be, rather on how to modify our approaches to become more in line with naturally sustainable processes.

This is why I haven’t taken seriously the intent of this thread. It seems the emphasis here is to try to get someone to make an unbreakable argument describing “sustainability”, as a sales pitch, to convince people that they should follow a particular path. If a person’s view is that they can disregard the importance of the ecological processes that support life on Earth, while using land for their own personal gain, then there will be no argument that will be valid enough for them to endorse.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Scott G;12395 wrote:

Carl,
Even when I run 3/4″ calks for ice I have balling issues without pads if the snow has any moisture in it. I get really tired of picking up feet and smacking the balls loose.

You must have “magical” snow in Vermont… 😉

Nothing magical. The only time I have problems is on snow on thawed dirt, early in the season, or late, but usually working in snow on frozen ground I have very little problem.

These look like an easy solution, and I know they work, just worked for 23 years and have never felt that I needed them enough to go get them.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

On the other hand I have never used them, and only rarely in certain snow types do I have a problem. I usually have my horses shod with caulked shoes so this may make the difference for me. If the snowballs get big, I usually just rap the foot with the peavey, or felling hammer, or pick out the balls with my knife, or ignore them, they usually come out on their own.

Carl

[Author]

Posts