[Andy Carson]

I was talking to Jim a few week ago, and he brought up that he likes to read primarily on paper rather than on the computer. He loves to forum content, but simply prints out threads he in intersted in and reads them at his leasure. I wonder if if other people would enjoy reading the forum in this way… I am not suggesting that we create a new catagory now, but I would be curious what some others think about reading these discussion, perhaps just printed out and mailed to them by volunteers or friends. I am not saying this is better than formal articles, but ti does provide multiple points of view, already exists, and has a voice that is rare to find in in print media. It might be a hit. Just a thought.

[Andy Carson]

I see your point, Erika. I can see how the eNews is useful in the ways you note. As long as it is not a newsletter (IE no articles) I think it will be easy to produce and reach an audience that has indicated some interest but may not have joined.

[Andy Carson]

I love these comparisons to other organizations. They are very revealing.

NOFA has a quarterly journal and an eNewsletter that is sent out to anyone who signs up for it. NOFA also has a staff of 14. Let me repeat this. NOFA has a staff of 14!!! NOFA has 5600 paid subscribers to thier quarterly journal. They have about 5000 subscribers to thier eNews. All together, this represents an organization that is roughly 10 times bigger than ours. I believe it is clear that our vastly smaller organization will have to pick and choose which parts we can do, because we simply dont haev the labor or money to do the same amount of work.

[Andy Carson]

If the eNews is not much of an effort and doesn’t take people away from other tasks, I have no problem with it. The email issue is a technical problem that is being fixed in the next iteration of the website. We will be able to mass email the membership or any other group wihtout cutting a pasting 50 people at a time. Ouch…

[Andy Carson]

I don’t think this is really a misdirection and future draft animal related research may help inform what goes into the balance sheet. It may even support it. For example, if a landowner decided that they want 90% of thier woodlot to remain “forested” (by whatever definition you want to use) 90% of the time, then these budget sheets and forestry research may help that landowner decide the most cost effective way to do this. How long does it take for a cut area to become “forest” to the point that it can be counted in the spreadsheet? Does the size of the removed area effect recovery time? What are the ecological consequences of leaving the woodlot untended? I believe research can give insight into all these questions. It is highly possible, given these goals and accurate research, that a spreadsheet produced by an economist would recommend small, frequent thinning. Financial advisors are usually at a loss with what to recommend unless you tell them your goals. Like Geoff points out, economist know the cost of a lot of stuff, but do not neccesarily know your values. “I think what we have here is a failure to communicate” 😉

[Andy Carson]

I think an email would accomplish the goal of reminding people that there is an upcoming event. We have difficulty getting everything done already, and we have to make cuts to be realistic in what we can do. It’s not about what does nothing, it’s about what can be done in other forums and be less work.

[Andy Carson]

I don’t have a problem with the concept of opportunity cost, I just think people need to apply this concept to all goals and resources (not just money). Clear cut on a large scale, for example, are you have lost the opportunity to make a sustainably ecosystem for X years. This is an opportunity cost, just not one calculated in dollars. How much is this opportunity cost worth to you? This is an individual choice based on the cost of different opportunities, and taking into account the financial and ecological impacts of each. My point being the logic of opportunity cost is sound if all relavant values and principles are included. Here’s a quote from wikipedia “…opportunity costs are not restricted to monetary or financial costs: the real cost of output forgone, lost time, pleasure or any other benefit that provides utility should also be considered opportunity costs.”

[Andy Carson]

This is such a great trick using tools you have in hand already. The math works out pretty well when you form a right angle between the line from your eye to the top of your hand and the goad. If the goad tips forward or backward, though, the estimate will be off. Again, I know this is just an estimatation tool, but if it was really important to get this exactly right, I might be tempted to use a makeshift sextant made from a straw to sight through, a grade school protractor, and a string and weight to use as a plumb bob (see below). These things cost less than $10 (and might be hanging around the house already) and it still fits in a bag of tools. Sight the top of the tree (through the straw) at 45 degrees and you have the same height estimation technique used by Tim without the potential confounders brought on by assuming a right angle by eye and reconing.

[IMG]http://minnesotahillbilly.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/surveyors-compass-and-815-cent-sextant.jpg?w=490[/IMG]

Note: I am not saying that Tim’s method doesn’t work, I am just thinking about how accuracy might be improved in situations where this was important.

Note 2: Using the sextant method also allows you to estimate height if you are at a significalty different elevation than the base of the tree. This involves trigonometry though, so you would have to pack a calculator too. In the example below, the distance from the tree (D) has to be known. One thing I really like about using a 45 degree angle is that one does not have to measure the distance from the tree as D=A, so the measure is essentially unitless. It is clear in the illustration below that the distance (B) is pretty small and can be ignored if you are on mostly flat ground. On a slope, though, this is not so true. One could calculate B as a percent of A and remain unitless, but on a steeper hillside I would probably just bring a 100 foot long string and a calculate off of that, with D=100. On a shallower hillside I might make a mark on the tree at 6 feet off the ground and estimate B by sighting from your current position to the tree on the level (as judged by the sextant). The 6 foot mark would let you gauge how much more of less B is compared to the measure. (IE, I am sighting about twice as high as my mark, so B is about 12 feet). Then you can step back 12 feet and you still don’t have to bring a string.

Note 3: The illustration above makes clear that even on flat ground the angle between the eye and base of the tree, and the base of the tree is not exactly 90 degrees, even on flat ground. For tall trees on flat ground this is probably not that big of a deal, but greater accuracy would be achieved if one sighted at the tree in at 5.5 feet off the ground (or whatever your eye height is), and then stepped back 5.5 feet once the measurement is taken. Again, I know its just an estimate, but this increases accuracy and is easy to do.

Note 4: I just made something very simple very complicated, didn’t I? 🙂

[Andy Carson]

Hi Tracey and welcome,
I love thinking about these types of new applications and inventions. I have seen wheels for moving sleds around like in the link (they even sell kits), but I do not think this is not exactly what you are describing. http://www.buggy.com/pneumaticwheel.html

I think what you are describing makes good sense, but I am guessing the devil is going to be in the details with this design. How much wheel clearance do you need in the road or sled position? If I understand this design correctly, the weight will have to be lifted to assume either the road or sled position (wheels come down or sleds come down). How much weight are we talking about? Will you need a jack to lift this much weight? Will you allow the front wheels to turn? If so, how? Free swivel (loss of control?) or linked to the pole (does this interfer with raising and lowering sleds/wheels)? If the wheels do not turn, do you expect the limited turning radius to be important in your application?

I might be tempted to use a wagon. If the snow is too deep off road, how about setting up some detachable skis to fit over the wagon wheels? I have attached a link to some for an airplane below. You could set these out in front of the wagon, drive over them, and then strap them on. If you are clever about making them attachment and detachment might be quick and easy. They look pretty easy to build and you might already have a wagon you could strap some of these onto. Note: these don’t have brakes, so you’ll probably want to set some of these up for bridle chains or similar. Just an idea…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wheel_skis.jpg

Good luck no matter what you decide, and be sure to keep us all posted. There are a lot of folks here who appreciate new designs and applications.

[Andy Carson]

Hey Jared,
Check out this thread. http://www.draftanimalpower.com/showthread.php?3719-seeder-recommendations&highlight=seeder+recommendations. I ended up making a single row no till drill. It worked, but in my hands I was not able to achieve an appropriate level of weed control to use it without significant tillage. When I completed enough tillage to control weeds, I had enough of a seed bed to use a more conventional seeder. Not sure if this will be the case for you, but that’s what I found.

[Andy Carson]

@near horse 39770 wrote:

I think perhaps a positive note from the ad is that those “values” assigned to farmers are something the public appreciates…AND are marketable…it behooves us to take advantage of that.

This is an excellent point that I had not appreciated. I agree this is a very good sign.

[Andy Carson]

@Carl Russell 39764 wrote:

Of course, I think we lose ground when faced by ads like this one…… well maybe not lose ground, but this cultural phenomenon of advertising messages and market share is pretty complex for sure…

I hear you. We can lose ground when observers look at the ads and say “I want to do everything like that guy.” It seems more logical to say, “isn’t it great how that guy does X, and I want ot do X too.” The ads are not supposed to work that way, of course. You are supposed to think that these people are so admirable, you copy everything they do, right down to the pickup they drive. Is this like wearing a cowboy hat to go to a country music concert held indoors? In some cases its hard to seperate the fundamental parts of a culture from its accoutrements… On top of that, it’s hard to sell the fundamentals and easy to sell the accoutrements. Tell people that if they drive a Dodge then they are a farmer, and you will sell some pickups. Tell people that if they wear a Stetson then they are a cowboy, and you will sell some hats. Tell people that if they wear patuli then they love the earth, and you will sell some oil. These are all fantasies perpetued by ads like this one that miss the point of who these people really are and what they really bring to the table. I wish so strongly that the public was not swayed so much by the marketing schemes of these slick salesmen. I am not sure how we get there from here. For me, I demand facts and substatiation of advertizers claims rather than poetry and testimonials. I recognize that not everyone thinks like me… I do think what ever way you think, you should put some thought into how you defend yourself from slick salesmens and the products they hock. I don’t believe this has to be by demanding facts and scientific studies (like me), but I think it is wise to have some defense that works for you and your mindset.

[Andy Carson]

For sure, JL. I certainly didn’t mean that all old timers were like that, but most of the ones I knew were, so this is just what comes to my mind. Its a totally subjective personal experience, and i am not saying this is why other ought to feel. Just sharing my feelings.

[Andy Carson]

This ad made me sad, but also conflicted. Many of my family were farmers and most have moved off the far either entirely or thier farm income is heavily supported by off the farm income. The word seems to have moved on from a situation where the lifestyle represented makes sense. I am not going to pass a value judgement on the world, as I mostly feel conflicted about it. I do believe that this ad romantices the “farmer of old,” but the aspects that are emphased do not differ greatly from my experience. I have to say, the farmers I knew did not purposefully abuse the land, but they did not have some romantic idea that they were stewards of the land. This job as clearly was given over to God with little personal responsibility. Also, all the ones I know and knew struggled to make a profit every year, and saving money and making money was an ever present concept in thier mind. These were not monks or priests, but practical men living in a real world driven by the dollar.

I believe some modern farmers still fit this mold, but many do not and I am not hung up on it. It seems they have gotten split into two groups, one that got larger and larger and deals with spread sheets, amortization tables, and commodity market prices and hires people to take care of the “day to day” farming. The other that has gotten small and niche. These small niche farmers are, let’s face it, salesmen to a some extent. Really good salesmen are good at creating short quotes and memorable sales pitches. Many salemen are short on facts and data, but some are educated as to this aspect too. Either way, this is pretty much the opposite of many of the old time farmers I have known with thier direct, turse communication style, thier “my way or the highway” attitude, and thier negative view of “stuff they tell you in school.” How many of you can picture one of the guys in that ad pitching organic vegetables to yuppies? The ones I have known would view this as the ultimate humiliation, just a step above begging in the streets… Am I glad this attitude is dying off? Well, kinda… These guys had a lot of share, but they were far from saints. I believe we have to honor the good parts, but some of the parts simply do not fit into the world anymore. I attempt to improve, not emulate. Because of this, I have no desire to drive the same truck. Moreover, I feel that those that would want to drive the same truck are missing the point.

[Andy Carson]

How deep are you going to run it? Do the tips have sweeps? If so, how wide? If we don’t have data on this tool directly, we could probably get close by adding up similar implements. IE, cultivator at X depth + rolling basket harrow at X width.

PS. Are you using this in already tilled soil? Is so, how was it worked (plow, disc, chisel)?

[Author]

Posts