In article ,
"David Hare-Scott" wrote:

Billy wrote:
In article ,
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
FarmI wrote:
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message

Salatin does not claim this level of productivity because there
is 450ac of woods as well as the 100ac of pasture. The woods
make a sizeable contribution to the farm, it produces much pig
feed and biomass that is used for a variety of purposes and
assists in other ways. So to be more accurate the above
production is from 550ac.

I would be interested to know what can be done by conventional
means. The comparison would be very difficult to make fair I
think because the conventional system uses many external inputs
and would have trouble matching that diversity of outputs. I
suspect that just measured in calories per acre the intensive
monoculture might win. The whole point of this is that you can
only do that for a limited amount of time with many inputs and
many unwanted side effects. Not to mention that man does not
live by bread (or high fructose corn syrup) alone.

Fair comment David, but then there is a much higher cost to the
quality of life for the animals? I'm sure that you, like me, have
seen intensive operations such a feed lots and caged chooks.


That was one of the side effects I had in mind. We have chook
sheds for meat birds in the district. Ten thousand or twenty in a
shed with a dirt floor with just enough room to move between the
feed and the water. Lights on half the night to get them to eat
more. The workers wear breathing apparatus to clean out the sheds
and it will make you puke at 400m on a hot night. The eagles dine
well on those who get trodden under. Nuff said.


Indeed. I've been to a feed lot and I had the same reaction
although this was probably one of the better run ones. I'd turn
vegetarian if our local buthcer sourced his meat at places like that
but I can see his 'feed lot' (for want of a better description as
it's jsut his farm) from the road and his cattle have quite a nice
spot for the final finish on feed before they take the trip to the
abattoir. (sp?)

I grew up on a poultry farm and my mother refused to have any cages
on the place with the exception of a row of 10 where she used to
put birds that were off colour and needed to be taken away from the
bullying tactics of the rest of the flock. In the 50s and 60s when
other poultry farmers were moving to cages and proud of it, we were
free ranging. We once had a city person come back to us and
complain about the eggs they bought off us. According to them, the
eggs were 'off' and had to be thrown out because they had 'very
yellow yolks'.

In those days it meant the chooks had a varied diet not just pellet
chook food. A question that you would know, is the yellow yolk
still such an indicator or is it emulated these days by diet
additives?

That is one of those 'it depends' answers as in, it depends ont he
feed.

If you feed them on kitchen scraps (not recommended as that isn't
nutritious enough) then free ranging (as opposed to keeping
confined) will change the colour of the yolk. Pellets contain a
yellowing agent, but apparently that yellow isn't carried through so
that in baked goods show up the yellowing. Yolks that are yellow as
a result of the feed they find outside does hang on through the
baking process so that the baked goods (like say a butter cake) will
appear more yellow. I've not done these tests myself but there was
a long article on it (with comparative pics) in one of the
'Australasian Poultry' mags a couple of years ago. A great little
magazine and as cheap as chips.


My food books say the yellow of the yolk is due to xanthophylls which come
from plants, typically lucerne and corn. Not having chook books I do this
backwards. Apparently corn feed is also responsible for the yellow skin and
fat found in some "organic" meat birds.

Besides having a yoke that looks like an apricot, instead of a lemon,
real eggs have a viscosity to them that factory produced eggs don't.

Is the height and viscosity of the egg contents a result of diet and health
of the chook or a sign of freshness, or both? The same ref (McGee 'On Food
and Cooking') says freshness has much to do with it.

Come on chook people - give me the scoop before I build the chook house.

David

Xanthophylls come from plants to be sure, but typically lucerne and
corn? That seems like more of a production setting. They should get the
same thing just scratching on a meadow.

How much land do you have? Does the mobile chicken coop offer you any
advantages? It seems that if you can build top soil à la Salatin, it
would be worth your while, since it would be better at holding water.

All I know from eggs is that we get our eggs from a friend who turns her
chickens out to pasture during the day. They get a supplement to replace
calcium, and to my understanding that is all they get. The eggs are
fresh, and as I said, the yolks are the color of apricots. My biggest
surprise was when I had my blood work done (at least once a year) while
I was eating the eggs, my cholesterol had dropped. The eggs were the
only variable that came to mind.

Anyway, if you look at p.265 in Omnivore's Dilemma, you'll see a
description of "real" eggs, and it is what I'm used to. If we can't get
out friend's eggs, I stop eating eggs.

I don't know what it is with Garden Banter, either. I'm used to Brits in
other groups, and they aren't nearly as, . . uh, rustic as the ones that
we attract.

Later,
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/m...515308172.html

"Dan L." wrote in message

Why I have my own chickens and a Jersey milk cow.

Mmmmmm.. A Jersey. How much does she produce a day?

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
Billy wrote:
In article ,
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
FarmI wrote:
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message

Salatin does not claim this level of productivity because there
is 450ac of woods as well as the 100ac of pasture. The woods
make a sizeable contribution to the farm, it produces much pig
feed and biomass that is used for a variety of purposes and
assists in other ways. So to be more accurate the above
production is from 550ac.

I would be interested to know what can be done by conventional
means. The comparison would be very difficult to make fair I
think because the conventional system uses many external inputs
and would have trouble matching that diversity of outputs. I
suspect that just measured in calories per acre the intensive
monoculture might win. The whole point of this is that you can
only do that for a limited amount of time with many inputs and
many unwanted side effects. Not to mention that man does not
live by bread (or high fructose corn syrup) alone.

Fair comment David, but then there is a much higher cost to the
quality of life for the animals? I'm sure that you, like me, have
seen intensive operations such a feed lots and caged chooks.


That was one of the side effects I had in mind. We have chook
sheds for meat birds in the district. Ten thousand or twenty in a
shed with a dirt floor with just enough room to move between the
feed and the water. Lights on half the night to get them to eat
more. The workers wear breathing apparatus to clean out the sheds
and it will make you puke at 400m on a hot night. The eagles dine
well on those who get trodden under. Nuff said.


Indeed. I've been to a feed lot and I had the same reaction
although this was probably one of the better run ones. I'd turn
vegetarian if our local buthcer sourced his meat at places like that
but I can see his 'feed lot' (for want of a better description as
it's jsut his farm) from the road and his cattle have quite a nice
spot for the final finish on feed before they take the trip to the
abattoir. (sp?)

I grew up on a poultry farm and my mother refused to have any cages
on the place with the exception of a row of 10 where she used to
put birds that were off colour and needed to be taken away from the
bullying tactics of the rest of the flock. In the 50s and 60s when
other poultry farmers were moving to cages and proud of it, we were
free ranging. We once had a city person come back to us and
complain about the eggs they bought off us. According to them, the
eggs were 'off' and had to be thrown out because they had 'very
yellow yolks'.

In those days it meant the chooks had a varied diet not just pellet
chook food. A question that you would know, is the yellow yolk
still such an indicator or is it emulated these days by diet
additives?

That is one of those 'it depends' answers as in, it depends ont he
feed.

If you feed them on kitchen scraps (not recommended as that isn't
nutritious enough) then free ranging (as opposed to keeping
confined) will change the colour of the yolk. Pellets contain a
yellowing agent, but apparently that yellow isn't carried through so
that in baked goods show up the yellowing. Yolks that are yellow as
a result of the feed they find outside does hang on through the
baking process so that the baked goods (like say a butter cake) will
appear more yellow. I've not done these tests myself but there was
a long article on it (with comparative pics) in one of the
'Australasian Poultry' mags a couple of years ago. A great little
magazine and as cheap as chips.


My food books say the yellow of the yolk is due to xanthophylls which come
from plants, typically lucerne and corn. Not having chook books I do this
backwards. Apparently corn feed is also responsible for the yellow skin
and fat found in some "organic" meat birds.

Yep, corn does give yellow fat. dunno what gives the yoldk it's yellow
colour in pellets though. do you want me to dig out my A'Asian Poultry mag
with that article in it about yolk colour and give you a precis?

Besides having a yoke that looks like an apricot, instead of a lemon,
real eggs have a viscosity to them that factory produced eggs don't.

Is the height and viscosity of the egg contents a result of diet and
health of the chook or a sign of freshness, or both?

I'd say it's more freshness than anything. Duck eggs are even more so of
both.

The same ref (McGee 'On Food
and Cooking') says freshness has much to do with it.

Come on chook people - give me the scoop before I build the chook house.

Before you even start that, pay strict attention to rats and how to control
and exclude them. But really chooks are easy. Keep the foxes away and wild
birds out of the night yard/feed area. Keep the pullets confined when you
get them till they get used to their night house and yard and then let them
out to range (Ours range in an orchard which is prolly about a quarter of an
acre). I wouldn't fully free range if you want to have veg though or
toehrwise you wont' have veg. They will do a good job of spreading horse
plops.

"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:
"Dan L." wrote in message

Why I have my own chickens and a Jersey milk cow.

Mmmmmm.. A Jersey. How much does she produce a day?

Nothing yet, impregnated the cow last week. She should produce more than
I can drink. Will learn to make my own cheese products with the extra.
The cheese making equipment is not cheap. I read, not done it yet, it
takes 17 pounds of milk and one year to make one pound of parmesan
cheese. Bessy plays like a dog, wants to be petted and runs and romps
around. Sometimes I get a little nervous around her with her playfulness
and hope I do not get hurt.

--
Enjoy Life... Dan L

"Dan L" wrote in message
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:
"Dan L." wrote in message

Why I have my own chickens and a Jersey milk cow.

Mmmmmm.. A Jersey. How much does she produce a day?

Nothing yet, impregnated the cow last week. She should produce more than
I can drink.

I'm sure she will :-))

Will learn to make my own cheese products with the extra.
The cheese making equipment is not cheap.

You can make soft cheese very easily and wouldn't need anything more than
you'd have in your kitchen. Either make yoghurt or make junket using
Hansen's junket tablets (although I seem to recall that USian for Junket is
something else - curd perhaps???). Line a colander with an old soft tea
towel, pour in the yoghurt or junket and tie up the towle and hang it up and
leave it to drip overnight. if I ever have to let soemthign drip overnight
then I upturn and old stool that I keep just for this purpose and hang
whatever has to drip off a long handled wooden spoon place horizontally
across the bottom of the stool.

I read, not done it yet, it
takes 17 pounds of milk and one year to make one pound of parmesan
cheese.

Yeah I think that'd be about right. I've read up on it to as it's something
that's always interested me, but we don't have a dairy cow, I've only ever
made soft cheese but they are delicious and easy to do.

Bessy plays like a dog, wants to be petted and runs and romps
around. Sometimes I get a little nervous around her with her playfulness
and hope I do not get hurt.

Yeah. I'd be a bit nervous too. If she ever does start throwing her weight
around and pushing you, get rid of her instantly and replacce her.

Dan L wrote:
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:
"Dan L." wrote in message

Why I have my own chickens and a Jersey milk cow.

Mmmmmm.. A Jersey. How much does she produce a day?

Nothing yet, impregnated the cow last week.

How was it for you? At least she wouldn't want to share your cigarette
afterwards.

She should produce more
than I can drink. Will learn to make my own cheese products with the
extra. The cheese making equipment is not cheap. I read, not done it
yet, it takes 17 pounds of milk and one year to make one pound of
parmesan cheese. Bessy plays like a dog, wants to be petted and runs
and romps around. Sometimes I get a little nervous around her with
her playfulness and hope I do not get hurt.

I have the same worry when Mootilda bangs her face into the feed bucket I am
holding. Cows seem very rough compared to horses. I am pretty sure she
won't deliberately hurt me but the horns come close.

David

Dan L wrote:
FarmI wrote:
Dan L.wrote:

Why I have my own chickens and a Jersey milk cow.

Mmmmmm.. A Jersey. How much does she produce a day?

Nothing yet, impregnated the cow last week. She should produce more
than I can drink. Will learn to make my own cheese products with the
extra. The cheese making equipment is not cheap. I read, not done it
yet, it takes 17 pounds of milk and one year to make one pound of
parmesan cheese.

sterilized buckets, cheese-cloth and a culture of some kind.
none of these are majorly expensive. some heat source during
the cooler months if your place of production is not insulated
well... the most expensive part is the time it takes to finish or
age and that means storage space. the people who use caves
have it right. mmm!


Bessy plays like a dog, wants to be petted and runs
and romps around.

uhoh,


Sometimes I get a little nervous around her with
her playfulness and hope I do not get hurt.

you gotta show her who's boss. physics, otherwise,
will not be your friend, in this equation.


songbird

FarmI wrote:
Billy wrote:

Well, in this case, it would be prairie grass (reflecting Salatin's
pasture),

What sort of species are you talking about when you say 'prairie
grass'? The reason why I ask is that the You-tube clips of Salatin's
place doesn't look like anything I'd call a 'prairie'. He looks like
he's got a farm on quite rich land in a well protected area.
'Prairies' to me suggest very open and exposed locations and the
grasses there would, TMWOT, be much tougher and less nutritious than
in good pasture land. I might be talking through my hat 'cos I
haven't got a clue about US farms, but that's what I'd expect here in
Oz if we were looking at farms of differing capacities.

right, anyone talking about grassland production in
the eastern seaboard of the USA being equivalent
to what happens on the prairies is full of it. the time
scale difference isn't minor and probably heavily
depends upon the average annual rainfall.

the soil of the prairies was probably produced over
the period of time after the last ice-age. it isn't that
thick. if it could accumulate at a rate of an inch a
year it would be much deeper...

ok, so let's return to the eastern seaboard and
wonder why the topsoil in unmolested places isn't
deeper? if it can be so productive why isn't it?
because it is woodland and not grassland and
unmanaged woodlands cycle carbon but do not
sequester once it's reached maturity. very little
is sequestered and that would be because of fires
that char and thus turn the carbon into a form not
easily consumed...

if trees and forests were so good for carbon
gathering and keeping the soils of the Amazon would
be deep and fertile, but they are not unless you
find the places that were altered by the natives in
prehistorical times.

so this says that reforestation is barking up the
wrong tree when it comes to CO2 sequestration
and rebuilding topsoil. (but i won't argue that
it's bad for species preservation and diversity
because that's needed too in many places -- so
there has to be the tradeoff there).


songbird

In article ,
"songbird" wrote:

FarmI wrote:
Billy wrote:

Well, in this case, it would be prairie grass (reflecting Salatin's
pasture),

What sort of species are you talking about when you say 'prairie
grass'? The reason why I ask is that the You-tube clips of Salatin's
place doesn't look like anything I'd call a 'prairie'. He looks like
he's got a farm on quite rich land in a well protected area.
'Prairies' to me suggest very open and exposed locations and the
grasses there would, TMWOT, be much tougher and less nutritious than
in good pasture land. I might be talking through my hat 'cos I
haven't got a clue about US farms, but that's what I'd expect here in
Oz if we were looking at farms of differing capacities.

Having another bi-polar day? I just loves the way you flog that strawman.
right, anyone talking about grassland production in
the eastern seaboard of the USA being equivalent
to what happens on the prairies is full of it.
If you take the time to read the quote, you will notice that it says,
"similar enough". That takes us from "equals" to "approximates" which, a
sane person would agree, don't mean the same thing.
the time
scale difference isn't minor and probably heavily
depends upon the average annual rainfall.
Time scale for what?

the soil of the prairies was probably produced over
the period of time after the last ice-age. it isn't that
thick. if it could accumulate at a rate of an inch a
year it would be much deeper...
Best guess is 500 years/inch to produce prairie topsoil which was
approximately 10" thick when Europeans showed up..

ok, so let's return to the eastern seaboard and
wonder why the topsoil in unmolested places isn't
deeper? if it can be so productive why isn't it?
because it is woodland and not grassland and
unmanaged woodlands cycle carbon but do not
sequester once it's reached maturity.
Actually, it takes a pine forest, roughly, 50 years to develop 1/16" of
topsoil.
very little
is sequestered and that would be because of fires
that char and thus turn the carbon into a form not
easily consumed...
The sequestered CO2 in eastern forests is charcoal?

if trees and forests were so good for carbon
gathering and keeping the soils of the Amazon would
be deep and fertile, but they are not unless you
find the places that were altered by the natives in
prehistorical times.
And don't forget the warm weather, and heavy rains that wash the quickly
decomposing organics out of the laterite soils, unless you find the
places that were altered by the indigenous prior to 1492.

so this says that reforestation is barking up the
wrong tree when it comes to CO2 sequestration
and rebuilding topsoil.

Ah . . . hmmmm? Who said anything about reforestation? Not that it's a
bad idea, and we do need to stop cutting them down. You silly goose, the
proposition was returning the farm soil to permanent ground cover, like
you might use to graze cattle on, and then run out some hypothetical
mobile chicken coops (hypothetical chickens included) to do clean up
duty on the cow flops from the hypothetical cattle.

So we got our farmers switching from grain crops to meat production.
This in turn leads to:
1) cessation of the use of chemical fertilizers, which encourage some
bacteria to devour the organic material in the soil (topsoil)
2) stops the release of NO2 from the fertilizer, which is a greenhouse
gas.
3) stops the pollution of ground and run off water, thus improving
the quality of drinking water, and cutting off the cause of ocean
dead zones.
4) At the very least, what remaining topsoil would be protected by the
permanent ground cover, and the is the expectation that we may add to
it.
5) Additional topsoil (because there is more of it, and it is made from
organic material) would effectively sequester CO2 to some extent.
Again the question is where to put the decimal point, not "if one is
needed". Peter Bane (google the name) puts the sequestration
potential at being equivalent to the US production of CO2.
6) Increased topsoil leads to increased absorption of rain fall,
recharging aquifers, and reducing chances of flooding.
7) Increased meat production on grassland instead of in CAFOs, means that
70% of antibiotics in this country won't go into meat animals,
thereby creating antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria.
8) Less grain will be needed to divert into CAFOs
9) Fewer CAFOs means fewer stinking lagoons of animal excrement, that
won't be dumped into public water ways, or find its way into ground
water.
10) Gives us a good source of complete proteins (beef and chickens), for
healthy, growing kids.

So to summarize; permanent ground cover on existing farms, which is used
to raise beef, more or less along the lines of Joel Salatin's paradigm,
results in clean food, clean air, clean water, and just might save the
world.

Other than the above points, I think you made a very cogent response,
where you had your facts straight ;O)

(but i won't argue that
it's bad for species preservation and diversity
because that's needed too in many places -- so
there has to be the tradeoff there).


songbird
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/m...515308172.html

"songbird" wrote:
Dan L wrote:
FarmI wrote:
Dan L.wrote:
Why I have my own chickens and a Jersey milk cow.
Mmmmmm.. A Jersey. How much does she produce a day?
Nothing yet, impregnated the cow last week. She should produce more
than I can drink. Will learn to make my own cheese products with the
extra. The cheese making equipment is not cheap. I read, not done it
yet, it takes 17 pounds of milk and one year to make one pound of
parmesan cheese.

sterilized buckets, cheese-cloth and a culture of some kind.
none of these are majorly expensive. some heat source during
the cooler months if your place of production is not insulated
well... the most expensive part is the time it takes to finish or age
and that means storage space. the people who use caves have it
right. mmm!

Soft cheeses are low cost and can be made in short time, from what i
read. Hard cheeses are not, price a cheese press? Might modify a fridge
for storage.

you gotta show her who's boss. physics, otherwise,
will not be your friend, in this equation.


songbird
Physics is my friend along with his sidekick calculus.

--
Enjoy Life... Dan L

"David Hare-Scott" wrote:
Dan L wrote:
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:
"Dan L." wrote in message

Why I have my own chickens and a Jersey milk cow.

Mmmmmm.. A Jersey. How much does she produce a day?

Nothing yet, impregnated the cow last week.

How was it for you? At least she wouldn't want to share your
cigarette afterwards.
No smoker here, however the vet was up to his armpit and cost me $80

She should produce more
than I can drink. Will learn to make my own cheese products with the
extra. The cheese making equipment is not cheap. I read, not done it
yet, it takes 17 pounds of milk and one year to make one pound of
parmesan cheese. Bessy plays like a dog, wants to be petted and runs
and romps around. Sometimes I get a little nervous around her with
her playfulness and hope I do not get hurt.

I have the same worry when Mootilda bangs her face into the feed
bucket I am holding. Cows seem very rough compared to horses. I
am pretty sure she won't deliberately hurt me but the horns come
close.

David
HORNS!!!!!! Bessy was dehorned from day one! The holes filled in within
a week. The feed buckets are next to the summer shelter. She does not
see me put feed in the bucket. If she sees me she runs at full speed to
me. She has a two acre pasture to play in. I will create another two
acre pasture by next spring next to it. Same feeling here, if I get
hurt it was not intentional. I do not want her to be afraid when it
comes time for milking. She has a good friend, a chocolate labrador that
comes over and plays and romp together.

Currently she is milking me for money like there is tomorrow. Which
worries me a little. I call this the infrastructure cost that should
last a long time. One major cost is concerning me. I would love to get a
mini hay bailer, but they are extremely expensive. Right now my neighbor
bails hay for me.

--
Enjoy Life... Dan L

Billy wrote:

the soil of the prairies was probably produced over
the period of time after the last ice-age. it isn't that
thick. if it could accumulate at a rate of an inch a
year it would be much deeper...

Best guess is 500 years/inch to produce prairie topsoil which was
approximately 10" thick when Europeans showed up..

There are two separate time spans here. One is the 13,000 years of
prarie since the last ice age. One is 5000 years to build 10 inches of
top soil.

Either the process eventually maxed out at 10 inches of top soil or
something very dramatic happened 5000 years ago to scour the top soil to
very thin. Let's check back in meteorology - Nope, nothing that
impressive that long ago. Conclusion, once the top soil reached 10
inches it maxed out and no longer grew.

So the article is about a guy who can grow an inch a year. Excellent.
Let's see how deep it is when it maxes out. Even better let's purchase
the stuff by the truckload and move it elsewhere so it never does max
out.

In article
-se
ptember.org,
Dan L wrote:

"David Hare-Scott" wrote:
Dan L wrote:
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:
"Dan L." wrote in message

Why I have my own chickens and a Jersey milk cow.

Mmmmmm.. A Jersey. How much does she produce a day?

Nothing yet, impregnated the cow last week.

How was it for you? At least she wouldn't want to share your
cigarette afterwards.
No smoker here, however the vet was up to his armpit and cost me $80
Wow, talk about service. You both got . . .ummm . . ah . oh, never mind.

She should produce more
than I can drink. Will learn to make my own cheese products with the
extra. The cheese making equipment is not cheap. I read, not done it
yet, it takes 17 pounds of milk and one year to make one pound of
parmesan cheese. Bessy plays like a dog, wants to be petted and runs
and romps around. Sometimes I get a little nervous around her with
her playfulness and hope I do not get hurt.

I have the same worry when Mootilda bangs her face into the feed
bucket I am holding. Cows seem very rough compared to horses. I
am pretty sure she won't deliberately hurt me but the horns come
close.

David
HORNS!!!!!! Bessy was dehorned from day one! The holes filled in within
a week. The feed buckets are next to the summer shelter. She does not
see me put feed in the bucket. If she sees me she runs at full speed to
me. She has a two acre pasture to play in. I will create another two
acre pasture by next spring next to it. Same feeling here, if I get
hurt it was not intentional. I do not want her to be afraid when it
comes time for milking. She has a good friend, a chocolate labrador that
comes over and plays and romp together.

Currently she is milking me for money like there is tomorrow. Which
worries me a little. I call this the infrastructure cost that should
last a long time. One major cost is concerning me. I would love to get a
mini hay bailer, but they are extremely expensive. Right now my neighbor
bails hay for me.
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/m...515308172.html

In article ,
Doug Freyburger wrote:

Billy wrote:

the soil of the prairies was probably produced over
the period of time after the last ice-age. it isn't that
thick. if it could accumulate at a rate of an inch a
year it would be much deeper...

Best guess is 500 years/inch to produce prairie topsoil which was
approximately 10" thick when Europeans showed up..

There are two separate time spans here. One is the 13,000 years of
prarie since the last ice age. One is 5000 years to build 10 inches of
top soil.
I fear that you are using a linear rate of growth instead of a geometric
rate of growth. My reading of the situation is that it maxed out at an
inch every 500 years, but started at a much slower pace.
Either the process eventually maxed out at 10 inches of top soil or
something very dramatic happened 5000 years ago to scour the top soil to
very thin. Let's check back in meteorology - Nope, nothing that
impressive that long ago. Conclusion, once the top soil reached 10
inches it maxed out and no longer grew.
Your inability to to find a causation doesn't exclude a causation.
So the article is about a guy who can grow an inch a year. Excellent.
Let's see how deep it is when it maxes out. Even better let's purchase
the stuff by the truckload and move it elsewhere so it never does max
out.
GUY!!? Google Polyface Farms and/or Joel Salatin.

You want topsoil? Say no more.

Topsoil depth varies from place to place. In the Nile River valley,
built by eons of flooding and deposits of sediment, it is tens of feet
thick.
http://www.kerrcenter.com/HTML/green_excerpt1.html
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/m...515308172.html

Dan L wrote:
"David Hare-Scott" wrote:
Dan L wrote:
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:
"Dan L." wrote in message

Why I have my own chickens and a Jersey milk cow.

Mmmmmm.. A Jersey. How much does she produce a day?

Nothing yet, impregnated the cow last week.

How was it for you? At least she wouldn't want to share your
cigarette afterwards.
No smoker here, however the vet was up to his armpit and cost me $80



Did you ever read the books or see the TV series "All creatures great and
small"? It's about country vets in the UK and quite delighful. In it the
chief vet declares (truthfully) "there is much good information to be had up
a cow's arse". This was on prime-time TV about 30 years ago, I nearly fell
off my chair laughing.

She should produce more
than I can drink. Will learn to make my own cheese products with the
extra. The cheese making equipment is not cheap. I read, not done it
yet, it takes 17 pounds of milk and one year to make one pound of
parmesan cheese. Bessy plays like a dog, wants to be petted and
runs and romps around. Sometimes I get a little nervous around her
with her playfulness and hope I do not get hurt.

I have the same worry when Mootilda bangs her face into the feed
bucket I am holding. Cows seem very rough compared to horses. I
am pretty sure she won't deliberately hurt me but the horns come
close.

David
HORNS!!!!!! Bessy was dehorned from day one! The holes filled in
within a week. The feed buckets are next to the summer shelter. She
does not see me put feed in the bucket. If she sees me she runs at
full speed to me. She has a two acre pasture to play in. I will
create another two acre pasture by next spring next to it. Same
feeling here, if I get hurt it was not intentional. I do not want her
to be afraid when it comes time for milking. She has a good friend, a
chocolate labrador that comes over and plays and romp together.

Currently she is milking me for money like there is tomorrow. Which
worries me a little. I call this the infrastructure cost that should
last a long time. One major cost is concerning me. I would love to
get a mini hay bailer, but they are extremely expensive. Right now my
neighbor bails hay for me.

Many people find it cost effective to pay a contractor to cut and bail hay
instead of owning the machinery.

David