an alternative to cow slaughter milk

[Guest guest]

Dear Niscala Devidasi and all,

 

Thank you for putting forward viable proposals for cow

protection. I agree with your sympathies, which follow

very much my angle on things. Plan A & B & C

(whatever) cow protection is better than a

non-functioning absolute that few can make.

 

You state:

> I think it is a viable alternative for a family

with land enough for 5- 6 cows, given the worst

drought, to breed one cow and have it lactating for

around 4 years, which is quite possible, before

another calf is born. The most cows one would ever

have is 5 or 6. So a cow in the first year, gives MUCH

more milk than a family can consume. So the devotees

in the area, or vegetarians/conditional vegans, can

purchase at an increased price, to support cow

protection. And ALL the money from the milk sales

would go into the cow trust account, to be used ONLY

for the upkeep of the cows and offspring into their

old age.

 

Yes, it should be viable this model, if properly

managed and worked out financially. My main concern is

its feasibility with having so many different families

milking so few animals. This of course is the Vedic

ideal, but I doubt its feasibility in todays social

climate in developed countries, and I mean here with

idealogically convinced devotees. That is why I do for

a more contralised version as far as milking is

concernced. Not only are the economies of scale

better, but the social/labour factor is more feasible.

to milk 1 cow for 4 years means very few holidays,

cows are very sensitives to cahnges in routine, and

keeping a 4-year lactation going is an art in itself.

 

> The figures for the milk price I have yet to work

> out, but as the cows do

> not need feed during the winter, except the milking

> one, then I think the

> price would be much lower than Mark's price of $5 a

> litre. It should cover

> veterinary expenses, etc.

 

Please do help to work this out. I never quoted $5 a

litre, that was HKDD I believe. Personally I think it

could get as low as 1-2$ a litre, but that depends on

introducing other factors to the equation.

 

 

> Another point is, that the market should be

> established before the breeding.

> If there are a few families in the area, with farms

> like this, then they

> could coordinate their breeding, so that when one

> cow starts to dry a

> little, another on another farm is getting ready to

> give birth, and the

> supply to the community does not dwindle.

 

Yes, agreed, both on a small-scale and large-scale

breeding/milking program.

 

 

> I think that if we go this way, at least we are

> doing something to go

> against the cow slaughter culture, and rather than

> wait for someone to crop

> up who is willing to train bullocks, while we in the

> meantime, buy shop

> milk, there should be an alternative.

 

My point exactly.

 

 

> Another qualification for certification is that they

> breed no more than 1

> cow every 4 years if they have land enough for five

> only. If they have more

> land than that, they can breed more, provided they

> have the market, but not

> too much more, because more than 5 cows are

> difficult for one family to care

> for.

 

Again, the family model will run into problems, as

unless the land is secured and most needs are taken

from the land then there will be a need to seek income

from outside and the milk/cow system could become an

ordeal. More of a reason to suggest a centralised milk

& ox/crop system, with decentalisation of housing and

care for instance, if practical.

 

> I think that it is more viable in areas where grass

> grows all year around,

> but if there is a market willing to buy for a higher

> price, in other colder

> climates, than it is also possible.

 

I think its viable when people put their minds to it

in most situations. Costs will vary between locations,

but so be it.

 

Mark

 

__________

 

Get your free @.co.uk address at http://mail..co.uk

or your free @.ie address at http://mail..ie

[Guest guest]

>Again, the family model will run into problems, as

>unless the land is secured and most needs are taken

>from the land then there will be a need to seek income

>from outside and the milk/cow system could become an

>ordeal.

 

Its hardly an ordeal, milking one cow, and caring for four others. A job

easily done by mum, or even the older kids, while dad works fulltime on

something else, either a job or cropping- either with tractor or with

preferable bullocks. But the benefit is, it does not require any lifestyle

change, or very little. It is not that much work, does not require much

land, and is manageable by a family. You say "what about holidays", but

every dairy farmer has this problem. But with such a small amount of

animals, it is possible a neighbour will help, in return for milk. Very

possible.

 

I prefer this going small, because one can be sure of the market first. The

future of the cows is safer, as all their food requirements are provided by

the land they are on. I am really really wary of large-scale production, but

at the same time, this sort of small-time thing is happening anyway in

Australia, so its not pie-in-the-sky. Devotees with land every now and then

breed a cow, and give milk to the neighbours. But they don't put money aside

for their lifetime protection. So when the cow is non-productive, and the

person wants to sell or move, then the cows future is uncertain. Sometimes

it is neglected. Usually there is a nice devotee somewhere who takes all the

unwanted cows, but its a very uncertain enterprise, and milk is still so

hard to come by. And the point is, the cows are unwanted, because they are a

financial burden in their old age.

 

But if from the outset, all milk sale money goes into a trust account, they

are not a financial burden. They have paid their way in life, and are a most

wonderful pet and supplier of manure for the garden in their old age...if

they are passed onto another devotee, their trust fund is also passed on, so

that devotee can care for them without feeling burdened.

 

I wonder if you have taken everything into account with your large scale

theory. It sounds impersonal to me. Where is the love that accompanies a

family-owned cow? What if the market dwindles? What if your figures are

wrong? What about inflation, dollar devaluation, rise in the cost of feed

and so many other factors? What about your huge barn needing repairs? What

about the workers demanding a rise in pay? And if you raise the price of

milk in response, then the market dwindles...better to go small, with no one

relying on milk sales for their livelihood or for their jobs, and the cows

being highly useful pets of the family.

 

Does this make any sense? I'd be interested in feedback from others too.

 

ys, Niscala

 

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

Dear Niscala devi;

Please accept my obeisances, all glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

When Srila Prabhupada visited New Talavan in 1975 he described how the cow

was to be care for in a village setting. What you have described is similar

except he also told how to process the milk in a communal manner. Each

family having a few cows, that are collected up in the morning, after

milking, by a few of the children and taken to graze. Then in the evening

returned to their family who then milked them.

 

However, there is one discrepancy, that cow is not a pet.

 

Perhaps you have chosen the wrong word. In the English Dictionary 'pet ' is

described as,

1. An animal kept for amusement or companionship.

2. Any object of the affections.

3. A person especially cherished or indulged, a favorite.

 

The second and third meanings are not applicable as the second refers to an

object and the third to human beings. In reference to animals it is used to

imply amusement and companionship.

 

A cow that is kept by a family must be seen as a member of that family and

cared for as if it was such. It is a distinct family member with its own

requirements, likes and dislikes just as any other member of the family.

Pets you may tire of and give/sell to someone else, but not a family member!

Could you give your daughter away just because she does not come up to the

standards you have set for her in your mind - I think not! No you love her,

she may have some fault - but to you that fault is one of the things that

makes her distinct - it is part of her character, part of what you love.

Similarly with a cow to send her away because she eats too much or any other

apparent fault, no - you will undergo so much austerity to met her need.

ys,

Rohita dasa

 

-

"Niscala Devidasi" <niscala89 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com>

<markjon11 >

Cc: "Cow (Protection and related issues)" <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Sunday, September 09, 2001 8:21 AM

Re: an alternative to cow slaughter milk

 

 

>

>

>

>

> >Again, the family model will run into problems, as

> >unless the land is secured and most needs are taken

> >from the land then there will be a need to seek income

> >from outside and the milk/cow system could become an

> >ordeal.

>

> Its hardly an ordeal, milking one cow, and caring for four others. A job

> easily done by mum, or even the older kids, while dad works fulltime on

> something else, either a job or cropping- either with tractor or with

> preferable bullocks. But the benefit is, it does not require any lifestyle

> change, or very little. It is not that much work, does not require much

> land, and is manageable by a family. You say "what about holidays", but

> every dairy farmer has this problem. But with such a small amount of

> animals, it is possible a neighbour will help, in return for milk. Very

> possible.

>

> I prefer this going small, because one can be sure of the market first.

The

> future of the cows is safer, as all their food requirements are provided

by

> the land they are on. I am really really wary of large-scale production,

but

> at the same time, this sort of small-time thing is happening anyway in

> Australia, so its not pie-in-the-sky. Devotees with land every now and

then

> breed a cow, and give milk to the neighbours. But they don't put money

aside

> for their lifetime protection. So when the cow is non-productive, and the

> person wants to sell or move, then the cows future is uncertain. Sometimes

> it is neglected. Usually there is a nice devotee somewhere who takes all

the

> unwanted cows, but its a very uncertain enterprise, and milk is still so

> hard to come by. And the point is, the cows are unwanted, because they are

a

> financial burden in their old age.

>

> But if from the outset, all milk sale money goes into a trust account,

they

> are not a financial burden. They have paid their way in life, and are a

most

> wonderful pet and supplier of manure for the garden in their old age...if

> they are passed onto another devotee, their trust fund is also passed on,

so

> that devotee can care for them without feeling burdened.

>

> I wonder if you have taken everything into account with your large scale

> theory. It sounds impersonal to me. Where is the love that accompanies a

> family-owned cow? What if the market dwindles? What if your figures are

> wrong? What about inflation, dollar devaluation, rise in the cost of feed

> and so many other factors? What about your huge barn needing repairs? What

> about the workers demanding a rise in pay? And if you raise the price of

> milk in response, then the market dwindles...better to go small, with no

one

> relying on milk sales for their livelihood or for their jobs, and the cows

> being highly useful pets of the family.

>

> Does this make any sense? I'd be interested in feedback from others too.

>

> ys, Niscala

>

>

> _______________

> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Rohita,

 

The reason I put the word "pet"

in, is that the cow fulfills all the functions of a pet, she is a wonderful

companion. Plus of course she does so much more, so I said a highly useful

pet.

 

In my mind a pet is a member of a family, as much as any other. They are not

a convenience thing, and are not to be done away with when inconvenient.

Ever. And the majority of people are this way with pets. Irresponsible

owners are in the minority (I think)

 

I was trying to stress love, when I used the word "pet" Sorry if it seemed

otherwise.

People love their pets, but cows have so little love in this world, They're

exploited, and seen as providers of meat. No one in the west would view a

dog in that way, or a cat. Yet cows are every bit as loving and

reciprocative.

 

So that is the point I was trying to make.

 

Also,pets teach love and responsibility to children, and having a cow

fulfills that function too.

 

Its a thing that maybe is not stressed enough, but people benefit greatly

from animal contact. It has been shown to have beneficial effects on the

mind and even the body- lowering blood pressure etc. Also people are less

likely to be aggressive to each other in the preence of an animal. This has

been clinically proven.

 

ys, Niscala

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

Dear Niscala Devidasi,

 

you say:

 

> Its hardly an ordeal, milking one cow, and caring

> for four others. A job

> easily done by mum, or even the older kids, while

> dad works fulltime on

> something else, either a job or cropping- either

> with tractor or with

> preferable bullocks. But the benefit is, it does not

> require any lifestyle

> change, or very little. It is not that much work,

> does not require much

> land, and is manageable by a family. You say "what

> about holidays", but

> every dairy farmer has this problem. But with such a

> small amount of

> animals, it is possible a neighbour will help, in

> return for milk. Very

> possible.

 

Yes, I agree. My point is if it is not such an ordeal

how come so few devotees actually do it? And, what

about the karmi who is vegetarian, how will they get

their cruelty-free milk?

 

> I wonder if you have taken everything into account

> with your large scale

> theory. It sounds impersonal to me. Where is the

> love that accompanies a

> family-owned cow? What if the market dwindles? What

> if your figures are

> wrong? What about inflation, dollar devaluation,

> rise in the cost of feed

> and so many other factors? What about your huge barn

> needing repairs? What

> about the workers demanding a rise in pay? And if

> you raise the price of

> milk in response, then the market dwindles...better

> to go small, with no one

> relying on milk sales for their livelihood or for

> their jobs, and the cows

> being highly useful pets of the family.

 

True, there are many things to take into account. My

whole point here though is that if the family model is

a non-starter due to lack of adoption by the devotees

then it is mainly a nice idea with little practical

results. You have already moved from class A cow

protection, meaning non-engagement of oxen, to class

B, family model without ox engagement. I have never

claimed to have a class A model, but I have claimed to

have a model adapted to a situation where producers

can adopt it to at least move away from the present

system. Yes, of course it is more impersonal than the

family model, but what is more impersonal is taking

blood milk and saying it is OK because it's offered,

when it could be perfectly possible to get the produce

from a small or large-scale operation, with or without

oxen working or family care.

 

I do not dispute that Prabhupada's model and any minor

deviation is better, I'm just talking about adapting

to a format that people will adopt. Their are almost 6

million vegetarians in the UK, with present rates of

adoption of the family model it could take many

centuries for their needs to be satisfied, as well as

therefore having millions of protected farm animals.

 

My points are to do with the different systems that

can be classified as cow protection, to aide in their

formation, just as one aids devotees in their

different stages, and to allow them to flourish. Not

that just because we are not class A then we should be

shunned. There are many points to answer in the

large-scale model, but they will only be answered on

attempting the system or with prior research, and this

conference should allow both, especially the latter

for now, because class C cow protection is better than

none or the present system.

 

I hope you see my perspective. In terms of your ideas,

I find them entirely laudable and logical. I hope they

bring forth fruit.

 

Mark.

 

__________

 

Get your free @.co.uk address at http://mail..co.uk

or your free @.ie address at http://mail..ie

[Guest guest]

>True, there are many things to take into account. My

>whole point here though is that if the family model is

>a non-starter due to lack of adoption by the devotees

>then it is mainly a nice idea with little practical

>results. You have already moved from class A cow

>protection, meaning non-engagement of oxen, to class

>B, family model without ox engagement.

 

I termed class A to be with engagement of oxen.

 

I am wondering why there is no feedback from the other devotees, even though

this is the cow conference. Are we getting the cold shoulder or is everyone

busy?

 

I think its very important for your model to work, that there be some

certification authority. Some definite reassurance for all of us, including

the customers that the cows will receive adequate care right up to their

last breath. So there must be a) carefully monitored breeding, and b)

regular and sufficient amounts of money put aside into a retirement fund for

the cow involved in giving the milk. It must be worked out meticulously what

a cow will need financially- the maximum cost. If she does not use it and

dies without NEED for veterinary care, the left-over funds can be used to

expand the facility for other cows.

 

So financial reports must be made regularly for all to see, health reports,

and maybe even to make it more personal, a customer is made aware which cow

his milk is coming from, her name and background, and what she is like. He

can come to visit her. If he gets milk from a particular cow, he will feel

he has adopted her, can be sent her photo and health reports. Naturally he

will develop attachment for her.

 

So this is combiming the attraction of adopt-a-cow with working out how to

supply cruelty free milk. He is not exactly buying, but giving donations,

and getting something back, which can't really be compared in cost to other

milk, because of the satisfaction the customer receives, in personal union

with "his cow"...

 

Of course, when that cow dries up, he can adopt another cow, and receive her

milk instead, but he can still consider all the cows he adopts as his...

 

I don't know if this is economically feasible with your idea. I'm thinking

it might work in co-operative style- like when you join a co-op, you buy

their products, and that is your service to the co-op- so the customers all

become members of VEDA and become personally involved with their cows,

personally responsible for their welfare.

 

I hope you see my perspective. In terms of your ideas,

>I find them entirely laudable and logical. I hope they

>bring forth fruit.

>

Well we don't have so many vegos here, but we have a better climate, so I am

going to do it small. We have more land than we know what to do with, as all

the neighbours practically beg us to use their land for grazing- they are

all ex-farmers, or retired people. All the cows we have- 8- have been given

to us by devotees. So now we plan to start very careful breeding- so that no

more than 5 extra are produced. And ALL money from milk sales will go into a

trust account for their future care. We don't plan to profit from milk

sales, as we are getting income from our business. Nearby there is a large

number of devotee families. Most have left ISKCON for various reasons, but

they're still devotees, so there is no lack of a market.

 

There are still details to work out, but it should be OK.

 

As for us training the oxen produced, my daughter is keen presently, and

possibly my son, there is no guarantee, but I think we will be trying to

train them to plough- at least enough land for a few veggies! And pulling a

cart around, say their manure to the garden and other stuff. I often wish I

had a trained bullock on hand when collecting manure- it can be quite

back-breaking! There will probably be only 2 or 3 bullocks out of our herd

of 5 and all at vastly different ages, which will make pairing difficult,

but I think we can do small-time plowing and pulling with one.

 

Anyway, I hope you have luck in your endeavour.

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

>

>Here, I presume you have read the document I sent you.

 

I got about half way through but I saved it and will read the rest too.

 

>The case may be different in your neck of the woods,

>especially if it is highly rural, but I would not shun

>a business-type approach, not to be cut and thrust,

>but to understand the nature of work to reward on top

>of pure service. That is vaisya mentality.

 

What about the type of people who can't afford the high price that will come

from paid labour PLUS lifetime protection? Could they receive free milk in

return for x labour hours at the farm?

 

On the other hand memebers of the co-op could provide free labour anyway, to

keep costs down. They could be given the option of cheaper milk and spending

some time working with the cows in their holidays- which they would probably

thoroughly enjoy anyway, or a higher priced milk for those who are not

attracted to hands-on work.

 

This would mean that you should have some guest accomodation. So you could

advertise for sympathetic people who are builders to come forward. If that

doesn't work for free, maybe they will come forward at a reduced price, or

for so much milk in the future.

 

With 6 million vegos, that should be possible.

 

I'll leave your suggestions aside, as I don't think they would work over

here. We only want to keep it small. Diversity, right?

 

ys, Niscala

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

>

> I am wondering why there is no feedback from the other devotees, even

though

> this is the cow conference. Are we getting the cold shoulder or is

everyone

> busy?

 

Busy personally, just reading these and previous today, Sept. 13. As per

pet thing, yes, unless there is more to cow protection than just economic

considerations, it will be difficult to make it work, and semantics aside,

cows will have to be seen as pets or family members for all to work. Then

when the economic benefit of milk or labor from oxen is exhausted, still

the animals are kept on because of personal relationship.