[Andy Carson]

@Robert MoonShadow 39093 wrote:

But me dogs roam around outside their netting (as well as the chickens’) and the coyotes don’t come near, so I’m wondering why you think having the dog(s) outside their area wouldn’t help?

Perhaps it is sufficient, I certainly have no proof that the dog NEEDS to be in with the goats. If there were some type of gate, though, I would be interested in it. This is probably an impossible arrangement. The goats can already jump better than the dog, which eliminates “over.” It sounds like “under” is not going to work. “Through” might hold some sort of possibility if it takes advantage of a thing goats could not learn to do like a dog. Not sure what that’s going to be… It sounds like this might exist because it’s not possible… Again, please share any thoughts.

[Andy Carson]

@Carl Russell 39044 wrote:

The truth of the matter is that there are great researchers, and professors, who have been sharing this stuff with foresters and resource managers for generations, but it has been relegated to academicians, research botanists, and ecologists, and industrial foresters have been allowed to refer back to it, as though it applies to what they are doing, while basically ignoring it.

I think many of these concepts have only started to be investigated in a careful way. In the Gamfeldt paper, you might notice that nearly all the references were in the last decade and many were in the last 5 years. I have no doubt that many researchers had an intuitive sense about the value of biodiversity and probably communicated this intuitive sense for years. Intuition is a great source of ideas that can be tested, and I value intuition a lot. It does not, however, make a very compelling argument when faced with an opponent who has (or at least states they have) a different intuitive idea. I think to bring these studies out of the completely acedemic realm and into the real world, researchers must be sure to communicate clearly to a wide audience, recognizing non-acedemics will be present. Also, non-academics must read and discuss some of these papers and ask questions if they don’t understand some terminology. Nearly all academics I know are willing (damn near excited!) to explain how thier findings, esp when thier work is actually going to have an impact in the real world. I think discussions like the one we are having serve a valuable purpose in translating (literally and figuratively) these sort of acedemic works to a wider audience.

Also, I would encource people who are out in the woods to carefully think about they base thier intuitive understand on. Perhaps it is based partly on how many different animal/plant species are present? Maybe it’s based on how many rare species are seen? Maybe on how many steps you have to take before you see deep ruts? Maybe one notes how many acorn caps or cherry pits you see? All of these probably add up to an intuitive sense, and all are individually measureable and quantifiable. Those out in the worlds every day would know to measure best, and everyone should demand that this science reflect observable experience. I do think this type of study is in its infancy and measuable criteria have not been developed and established. The process of establishing good measuables might start by comparing a “balanced” (by intuition) ecosystem with one that is not “balanced” (again by intuition). List the obvious differences. Which of these can be measured? Which would go hand in hand (IE, why deer if you can count deer droppings, why count squirrels if you can count nuts)? Of these, which are easist to measure? I like the methology used in the Gamfeldt paper where they measure the percent of the forest floor covered by Bilberry (as an example). Compare this to a technique where one simply tries to see if bilberry is present in a 100 acre area. Both methods place a value on Bilberry, but because of the measurement methods used (percent coverage vs present/absent) they are going to support very different forest management techniques. My understanding is that he USFC uses a present/absent type method to make provisions for indicator species, which I do not think makes much sense.

[Andy Carson]

I used to work right along the side, but slowly moved ahead a step as I got used to them and the work got repetative. I think my team has learned that when I am out in front, I just want them to go forward. When I’m next to them, I might ask for forward, stop, back, gee, or haw, or some other signal and pay attention. I also have to pay more attention in that position because they are expecting I am going to ask something of them and watch me closely for that signal. I end up walking more freely out in front. I do not know if this is good, bad, or indifferent. It’s just what I ended up doing…

[Andy Carson]

I used to be very interested in a rough cut mower of some sort before I got goats. Either alone or mixed with cattle, goats clean large areas weeds and brush, and make meat while doing it. Cattle alone eat alot of weeds and some brush if rotationally grazed through the weedy areas. These concepts might not work out for your situation, but thought I would mention them anyway.

[Andy Carson]

Several comments.

1. I believe many food borne illnesses are a result of people or organizations not following current food safety precautions. I do not think we need more laws, we just need to enforce those we have and consumers need to take a more active role in understanding where their food comes from.

2. Producers who average less than $500,000 in sales per year and sell most of their produce to end users are “partly exempt” from this rule if they clearly label thier produce. Great, but I am not clear on what “partly exempt” means… exempt from which parts? Not clear…

3. One interpretation of “establish and maintain horse paths that are segregated from produce” is that you should walk your horse between crop rows (the “path”) exactly as you normally would when cultivating. There is an ackowledgement that some people will use draft animal for produce production in this rule, which is wonderful, and an ackowledgement that these animals will enter the field. If I were interpretting this rule, I would say it means you shouldnt drive your horse over your veggies. No one wants to do this anyway. Problem is, I am not interpretting this rule and it may be in the hands of buearocrats with no knowledge and a lot of power. The law should be more clear.

4. Part of the justification from making this law was to create enforcable rules, yet many these rules are completely impossible to enforce. Who is going to loom over your shoulder to make sure you don’t harvest the lettuce with bird poo on it? Who is going to watch you work your animals to make sure they stay between crop rows? Are we living in a police state? This is not practical.

[Andy Carson]

This is interesting, back-forty, and useful. Let us know what you figure out. With the setup I use, I simply lay the chains out in front of the runners and run over them to set the chains. I suppose you could simply do that twice, but one of the chains might get kinda long (if you want them at different locations). Not sure if this matters… What are you planning?

[Andy Carson]

That is a lot of land. Are you doing this full-time or as a side job? If I had that much land, I devote a substantial portion to hay for animals, as least until I was convinced I could handle that much in cropland. Are you going to be no-tilling into sprayed ground every year? Are you going to till every other year? If you are going to till as part of your long term management, you will want to account for that. This is a big deal. Tillage takes a lot of power and time. It is your choice, of course, what to grow, but I don’t know why you would choose to grow crops to sell at commodity prices with animal power. You are going to have a lot more human labor into these crops no matter what you do. Why not grow something that the tractor guys doing want to grow? Many crops have to be hand picked. Force those tractor guys to get out of thier cabs to compete with you. It’s a pain to crawl down off a tractor when are used to the “cush” and us animal folks are walking next to the plants anyway. Grow it using methods you have thought about and believe in, direct market so you can explain why “organic” isn’t what they might think it is, and you will get a premium. Try several crops, see what grows well on your land with your practices. Keep some animals around that you can feed “failed” crops to and sell for a profit. You failures might give you your biggest profits. Remain flexible, responsive to the market and weather, and keep your capital investment low. Maintain a diverse biological and financial porfolio. The diversity and flexibilty that animal power forces you to adopt is, I believe, one of the its best aspects.

[Andy Carson]

When I first started using bridle chains on my sled, I had one pull loose due to the way I attached it when I was headed down a hill that was moderately steep, but quite long. I have since fixed the way I attach the chains, but that’s another story. Instead of asking for a faster pace, I turned sharp to the right and kept going along the elevation contour. There was at least 100 yards leaft to the hill and it would have turned into a death gallop. This action put me and my horse off the trail into a brushy patch that was essentially a dead end, but it stopped the momentum of the load and gave me time to fix the chain. It was an adventure getting out of that spot, but at least no one was hurt. I suppose it was the better of “dead end,” if you know what I mean. 🙂

[Andy Carson]

@Carl Russell 38729 wrote:

I am not sue that we need to have a “measure” for Ecological Integrity, as much as we establish the “value” of Ecological Integrity. We are faced with a culture that measures the functional value of land-use through economic return. Pure and simple. We are held hostage by this, needing to somehow show that ecological services, that pay material dividends to biological entities miles and years away from the “here and now”, are equally economically valuable.

I see a somewhat different world. In my world, I am aware of the ecological disasters created by purely profit oriented businesses and people. The damage from this was undeniably widespread, but it also produced countless positive things, including the computer I am writing on now. I have also known several people whose lifestyles were modeled by their environmental beliefs. One of them even lived in a makeshift house made of hay bales and mud so as to save the trees. Predictably, this lifestyle didn’t last long, and the direct positive impact was very very tiny. Still, i, as well as many others, are impressed by this level of commitment and listen to the ideas and arguments. Many people in my generation (I am not saying all) attempt to balance economic gain and ecologic impact. Catalytic converters, Conservation easements, wetlands protection, smokestack scrubbers, etc all attest to a culture than responds to environmental and ecological impacts when they are measured and steps can be taken to reduce impact (even when they add cost). IMO measuring impact is a weapon for the movement, not a distraction. Think about why fracking companies won’t release a list of the chemicals in thier fracting solutions. If they owned the scientists and tests there would have no fear. But they don’t, so they live in fear that specific chemicals will leak, or leach, and will be detected and measured by a community they have no control over and communicated to a population that is susoecious that this is a problem. The companies know that once chemicals are detected, their goose is cooked. Is this what you would expect from a culture totally motivated by profit??? I think not. I think this is what you would expect from a culture that listens to evidence, and probably poo-poo concerns when they are not backed up with data.

[Andy Carson]

Good point, Mark. 1/3 of the way to Rural Heritage is strong work. Here’s another comparison. http://siteanalytics.compete.com/smallfarmersjournal.com/
Note the difference between a site that has a strong message board and one that does not. All these comparisons are apples to oranges to some degree, but there is still much we can learn from them.

[Andy Carson]

It was -3 degrees this morning and there was a thin film of ice in the bucket. This waterer seems to stay ice free down to about 5 degrees. It doesn’t get colder than that very often around here… This is good enough for me. The valve is still slow, but it is fast enough to keep the bucket full. Solar power would be neat, but buying the panel, battery, and heater triples the price of this thing. At the cost of $3 a month to run, this improvement would take decades to pay itself back. I am pretty happy with this as is. Having a good way to provide clean ice-free water is a HUGE labor saver. This system won’t work for everyone, but it might be helpful to some. It is well worth the effort to think about how to provide water in everyones unique situation. Any improvements are a big deal.

[Andy Carson]

Hmmm… Rearing is not cute… When a horse is scared or nervous, I expect them to want to go forward. This has been a very natural response that is consistant with every horse I have worked with. If they are scared/nervous but DON’T want to go forward, I investigate what is blocking them very carefully. Horses that are scared but don’t have anywhere to go and nothing to do can as dangerous as a stick of dynamite. I like whipping a horse in this situation about as much as I like tapping on a stick of dynamite (I don’t like either!). If the harness is adjusted improperly, pulling might be uncomfortable and might be acting as a physical block. This is why I thought this was a good thing to check. It might also be that when you drive, you put more pressure on the bit than when you ride. The horse might be feeling “stop” in it’s mouth, but “go” from your voice or buggy whip and might rear as a response. How else can a horse move it’s butt forward and get it’s head back? I done some driving with my wifes arab/andalusian and was lucky that this horse had dressage training and was used to working on the bit (rather than working with loose reins). Personally, I like to work with a horse that is on the bit. I dont like them pulling the reins out of my hands, but to always have a solid but gentle contact. There are schools of thought that drive with less contact. I find that less contact reduces my ability to accurately and instantly communicate, but I have not spent much time trying to work with this technique. If this is your goal, you had better talk to someone else…

[Andy Carson]

My feeling is that I would first make sure the harness, breeching, shafts, etc fit well and are adjusted properly when your horse is in the cart. If you can’t fine anyone to evaluate this, post some pics and we might be able to see something. If the setup is not adjusted properly, you might be asking for things that are difficult. If everything looks good, I would ground drive her with the cart hitched up. Act like you are pulling anything else, and let her get used to the shafts. Tight turns take some practice and its OK to go straight and make gentle turns until your horse gets used to the shafts. Tight turns are kinda a sidepass and kinda a pivot on the haunches, but done at the same time. Hard to duplicate in a saddle completely. I know it might not seem like it, but having a horse be disciplined and well behaved pulling a light two wheeled cart or sled at a walk is one of the hardest tasks I have done. Real work pulling “horse sized” loads tires a horse out, whcih goes a long way towards making them compliant and relaxed. If you are making strong progress with your light cart/sled, you are doing a good job.

[Andy Carson]

Did something bad happen when you got her in the cart? Anything we can help with?

[Andy Carson]

It is not an easy task to train a horse to drive for the first time. This goes for a light horse and a draft horse. I do think that drafts tend to be less reactive, which is helpful, but there is alot of variation within all breeds. If someone gives up on training an animal because they are having troubles, they will likely end up giving up on animal after animal without learning how to address problems and, more importantly, that they CAN address problems. It could be that your particular horses are not suited to what you want to do, but I don’t think this is because of breed. If you think that your horses aren’t making progress, or you feel unsafe, I would recommend hiring or befriending someone experianced and open minded who might be able to help. This is a lot faster, cheaper, etc compared to selling your pair and buying a good draft or pair. Perhaps this is what you were doing with this friend. I am sorry to be blunt, but I would say that if your friend says your horses can’t drive or work because they are light horses, than they are simply not going to be a qualified mentor. My opinion: keep your horses and find a different friend to help.

[Author]

Posts