Protection Farms -- demand for value-added protection

[Guest guest]

Pancaratna ACBSP wrote:

 

> A business model for this would have to start with:

>

> Mortgage free land placed in a trust in which the cows are the beneficiaries

> and with trustees who are not proprietors of the business. The trust would

> contract with the business to manage the farm on certain principles and take

> the profit, less 25% which would go back into the trust. The trust would

> keep this fund in an endowment to guarantee the protection of the cows by

> hiring cow herds in the future if the business fails.

>

> IN no case, should the protection of the cows be at risk in the business

> model.

>

> The main thing here is market research. Mark is postulating a niche market

> for "Happy COw" milk and milk products. I happen to agree that there could

> be a good market here. However, I don't believe there is enough profit in

> this to bring the returns on investment that venture capitalists look for,

> especially when the initial investment in the cow trust is irrecoverable.

 

Hare Krsna dasi comments:

 

I think Pancaratna is addressing a key point here: What is the level of market

demand?

 

There are two unknown variables in this equation:

 

************

 

1. What is the cost of 1 unit (gallon, liter or whatever) of milk from a cow

in

a *mature* protected herd? Mark Prabhu is hoping that this information would

be

available from ISKCON's farms. Unfortunately, systematic record keeping is

very

skimpy on most ISKCON farms. On farms with more than 20 animals, it is quite

common that we don't even know the names and ages of all the cows and bulls

produced in the last ten years -- what to speak of having an analysis of the

costs of running a farm on any given year.

 

ISKCON's law 507 would a valuable world-wide database in this regard -- if we

could only convince the GBC to follow Section 14 by filing quarterly Cow

Protection Reports

 

2. What is the market demand for milk at the actual cost per unit in a

*mature*

protected herd? This is the market research that Pancaratna refers to above.

 

*************

 

Let's say that we could figure out the cost of a unit of milk from a cow in a

*mature* protected herd: The closest I've been able to come is $10 per gallon

based on practical experience and actual figures at Gita-nagari Farm about

1988. Others have said that it might be much less -- say $5 per gallon.

Whatever this figure is, it would constitute our first variable.

 

But the second figure is demand. You may be able to find at least some

consumers

who will pay a very high price for protected milk. Some years ago I read in

Hoard's Dairyman a letter from a man who was a Vietnam veteran. He said that

over in Vietnam, many U.S. soldiers would have been willing to pay $100 for one

quart of cold real milk (not reconstituted powdered milk). So, even for milk

from unprotected cows, there are people somewhere in the world who would be

willing to pay a very high price. However, the critical factor is the strength

of the demand for milk at, say $100 per quart.

 

And, if we look at this question, we will find that even though there is a some

market demand for milk priced at $100 per quart ($400 per gallon, $200 per

liter), the strength of that market is very weak. And, we will find that any

farmer who attempts to start up a business with the expectation of selling a

high volume of milk at $100 per quart will be out of business within a year,

and

probably selling his land and his cows. [And on the other hand, he will also

go

out of business if he sets up a business based on selling milk for $.50 per

gallon -- at least in the U.S.]

 

So, it is important 1) to determine what the cost of a unit of milk from a cow

in a *mature* protected herd would be (and of course this will vary with local

conditions, etc.) -- and 2) whether the strength of demand is sufficient to

meet this cost on a farm of a size large enough to be a commercial venture.

 

****************

 

One last note should be made about demand for milk from protected cows -- and

also demand for grains produced by protected oxen. This demand could be

increased if our spiritual leadership demonstrated that cow protection was a

priority for them.

 

For example, I remember one devotee recalling the old Bhagavan days of New

Mayapur, "He set the tone. He was in a position then to promote the growth of

farming at New Mayapur -- but he was not interested. He sat there on his

vyasasan receiving many costly gold watches and rings for his vyasapuja. I

thought of what a great difference it would have made to the direction of our

development in France, that if instead of focussing on gold watches and rings,

he showed the greatest appreciation for things that devotees produced from the

land -- milk from protected cows, grains and wood harvested by protected oxen,

woolen cloth grown and spun by our own devotees. If he had set that tone, then

the farm would have actually developed. But he demonstrated that the project's

priorities were somewhere else -- in a castle in the clouds. In the end, the

castle collapsed and the whole dream came to a bitter end."

 

So, that's just one person's analysis. But you can see the point. If a devotee

who has funds is actually willing to subsidize another devotee who has no

funds,

but plenty of energy for hard work -- then the two of them can cooperate to

provide a rare gift to Krsna and guru -- of products of simple living and high

thinking, products of protected cows and oxen. As Srila Prabhupada stated in

France, "Anything grown in a garden is worth a hundred times if it is purchased

at the market." Let's show where the real value is -- in things produced from

the land. But it is our spiritual leaders who need to lead by setting this

tone. Things homegrown for Krsna are the most valuable. I can go into

hundreds

of stores and purchase one Rolex watch -- but what store can I go into and

purchase on bag of cookies made with flour grown and ground by protected oxen?

It is truly a priceless offering. Our spiritual leaders should showcase it as

such.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

To Hare Krsna Devi Dasi and other cow conference

devotees.

 

Thank you for answering to my proposals, and taking an

interest in something you have adamantly attacked for

many years. I hope you will continue to help in this

endeavour, as it seems that you can now see that there

is an obvious market here, whether or not it is viable

at this moment in time. Still, I think it is our job

to go down this route, at the worst it would show the

dificulties involved, at the best it could be a new

door of oportunity to our whole endeavour.

 

HKDD wrote:

 

> I think Pancaratna is addressing a key point here:

> What is the level of market

> demand?

>

> There are two unknown variables in this equation:

>

> 1. What is the cost of 1 unit (gallon, liter or

> whatever) of milk from a cow

> in

> a *mature* protected herd? (and of course

> this will vary with local conditions, etc.)

 

> 2. What is the market demand for milk at the actual

> cost per unit in a *mature* protected herd on a farm

of a size large enough to

> be a commercial venture?

 

> Let's say that we could figure out the cost of a

> unit of milk from a cow in a

> *mature* protected herd: The closest I've been able

> to come is $10 per gallon (=$2 litre?)

> based on practical experience and actual figures at

> Gita-nagari Farm about

> 1988. Others have said that it might be much less

> -- say $5 per gallon (=$1.25 litre?)

> Whatever this figure is, it would constitute our

> first variable.

 

So, we have initial figures, which are very close to

my figures - between $1-2 a litre (I can't deal with

gallons very easily).

 

Does this relate to the 12/60 model, with 3 cows

milking in different stages of the 4-year lactation?

This allows for a greater deal of exploitation of the

available resources withinthe Quality System that

provides for this niche market.

Does this cost in the land, or are we talking about

farms in conversion who already own land, or is the

land rented?

Have you counted in bifurication of the system?

 

I think it would be dificult to lower the costs any

further, except in a heavily subsidised system - but

where does that come from?

But if it comes it's welcome.

If the oxen stopped being an economic burden, or even

an asset, then that would lower the costs.

 

The thing is that we are all in the dark on this one,

yet it is an extremely important thing to know if a

plan is to be worked out, as Prabhupada wanted, that

is necessary for a working system.

 

So, the thing to accept here is that the farm-gate

price will be between $1-2 per litre, compared to

$0.30 in the present system - a 300 - 700% premium.

 

 

> But the second figure is demand. You may be able to

> find at least some consumers

> who will pay a very high price for protected milk.

There are people somewhere in

> the world who would be

> willing to pay a very high price. However, the

> critical factor is the strength

> of the demand for milk.

 

> And, if we look at this question, we will find that

> even though there is a some

> market demand for milk priced at $10 per gallon, $2

per litre, the strength of that market is very weak.

 

So, let's give up, forget the battle of Kuruksetra,

and go to our houses renounced from action!!!!!

 

All around us some clever dick has found ways to sell

us all sorts of rubish that we don't need. Why are we

so reluctant to sell to devotees and "karmis" alike

something that we do need?

Whilst we spend so much of our time looking at the

faults of past leaders etc, (which is valuable in its

own right), if we could unite around the ideal that

goods and services from lifetime protected farm

animals is something very valuable across a broad

range of factors - health, morals, religion, spirit,

animal welfare, etc., - then at least the marketing

aparatus could go into action.

I understand the devotees have had a hard time, and

are full of cynisism to easy solutions. I am not

putting forward an easy solution though, but a

realistic one. It is realistic to say that now the

market is different to 30 years ago, and in ten,

twenty years time too it will change. All new

paradigms are leading our way.

So, it is realistic to say that such a farming system

is in the cards. We need to cost it and then PAY THE

PRICE. We need to market the system so people value

it. With a better valuation appreciation then ít will

be easier for them to pay the price. What we do not

need though is failures in the system.

How can we convince people to pay the price for a

quality (lifetime protection) if the project fails and

the premium price comes to nothing - what to say of

the animals themselves.

 

 

> > And, we will find that any

> farmer who attempts to start up a business with the

> expectation of selling a

> high volume of milk at $100 per quart will be out of

> business within a year, and

> probably selling his land and his cows. [And on the

> other hand, he will also go

> out of business if he sets up a business based on

> selling milk for $.50 per

> gallon -- at least in the U.S.]

 

We have to plan a water tight system. I have ex-ISKCON

friends who bought cows sentimentality and now all

their energies are lost in their maintanance, with no

production. Sounds familiar? Yet none of us ever had,

or have, a costed plan. It's so much sentimentality

with very little pragmaticality.

 

Yes HKDD et al, it is an upward battle, but we need to

do it, or if you don't want to do it then help me to

get the numbers and systems processes so that I can

get a full plan together.

 

>From HKDD:

 

One last note should be made about demand for milk

from protected cows -- and also demand for grains

produced by protected oxen. This demand could be

increased if our spiritual leadership demonstrated

that cow protection was a priority for them.

But it is our spiritual leaders who need to lead by

setting this tone.

> It is truly a priceless offering. Our spiritual

> leaders should showcase it as

> such.

 

My answer:

 

Look, if they're not doing it, do it yourself. You,

HKDD, have consistently stated that money-making from

farm animal protection is a devilish activity, when in

all Prabupada's books he shows how wealthy were the

cow-herders. I can not understand this paradox, other

than by the profit-mentality. If profit is made as a

natural process, with no attachment to the results

then it is different to profit soley for profits sake.

Yet, for this business to work it must make surplus

and profit - the duty must be performed disattached

yet with enough force to practically ensure success.

 

If the "leaders" are not behind this then Ciao. If

brahmanas are not interested in cow protection then

they are fools and should be seen as such - ask

Prabhupda in his instructions. Hanuman Prasek Swami is

very interested in my approach. Yet I think, how can I

- a beer-swilling, dope-smoking karmi - be influincing

someone so learned to concentrate their energies on

understanding the intricacies of cow protection. You

must think the same. Yet, we see it all around us -

the leaders are not interested, or have a token

interest.

We should take the bull by the horns and stand up for

what we believe in.

Obviously, I am one of those who think ISKCON is

approaching dinosaur status. Yet, I would love to see

from the ashes a pheonix arise. But this pheonix must

have farm animal protection as its core, along with

spiritual education (brahmanas) that fully supports

the latter.

 

To HKDD, I hope you appreciate that on email I have an

aggressive tone, but I have nothing against you as a

person. Your (and others) views are the lighthouse of

ISKCON for cow protection.

Whilst you put forward arguments showing the limiting

factors for the more commercial version of cow

protection that I expouse, it would be better for me

if you make it clear which side of the fence you are

on - or to be on both sides. Yet, if you see value in

what I want to do, then please put forward possible

solutions to the limiting factors, or we will be

delaying the inevitable by ever more years.

Prabhupada sat under a tree and chanted. From that

within 12 years he had thousands of followers ready to

give their lives, money, ideas, everything to follow

his guidance.

I obviously am no Prabhupada, but for every problem

there is a solution. To be problem-focussed only

brings problems, solution-focused brings possible

solutions.

 

Thankyou for continuing this discourse,

 

Mark.

 

 

 

 

Get email at your own domain with Mail.

http://personal.mail./

[Guest guest]

mark chatburn wrote:

 

> To Hare Krsna Devi Dasi and other cow conference

> devotees.

>

> Thank you for answering to my proposals, and taking an

> interest in something you have adamantly attacked for

> many years.

 

You won't win supporters if you continue with an adversarial approach to

this issue.

 

I can only speak for myself, but suspect it may be an issue with other

devotees here, as to why I stopped trying to talk to you after you

presented your proposal. You came in here all uppity that cow

protection could work based on commercial production. Numerous very

valid difficulties were put to you, that you simply brushed aside,

insisting on the potential success of a commercial model. Then you

present the proposal and, although it utilizes a commercial aspect as

one of it's components, it still uses a nonprofit approach to create a

setting for that commercial segment. Now while I agree completely with

that, it just was so off putting that you don't seem to even understand

what your own proposal is saying.

 

>

> I think it would be dificult to lower the costs any

> further, except in a heavily subsidised system - but

> where does that come from?

 

That has been discussed here, if you took the trouble to actually try

to understand what devotees here are saying rather than just try to jam

your perspective through.

 

Idea 1 - ISKCON wide committement that trust funds be established in

every temple for a milk buying program for the Deities, where the full

cost of protected milk would be paid to the producer out of the proceeds

of a the trust fund, with market price of the milk going to the

producer himself for personal expenses and the balance goes into a trust

fund at the farm level that assures the future maintanence of the cow

and her calf.

 

Idea 2 - One or two days a month in ISKCON where devotees are only

allowed to eat things produced on devotee farms. This would create a

very visceral link and a premiumly priced market for devotee farmer

goods.

 

>

> > And, if we look at this question, we will find that

> > even though there is a some

> > market demand for milk priced at $10 per gallon, $2

> per litre, the strength of that market is very weak.

>

> So, let's give up, forget the battle of Kuruksetra,

> and go to our houses renounced from action!!!!!

 

This type of thing where someone tries to communicate some sense of

reality to you, rather than address it you retreat into sarcasm. That

is damaging to your credibility.

 

>

>

> All around us some clever dick has found ways to sell

> us all sorts of rubish that we don't need. Why are we

> so reluctant to sell to devotees and "karmis" alike

> something that we do need?

 

We aren't reluctant to sell, we are reluctant to make a profit based on

the suffering of the cows.

 

>

> Yes HKDD et al, it is an upward battle, but we need to

> do it, or if you don't want to do it then help me to

> get the numbers and systems processes so that I can

> get a full plan together.

 

Again, this demand that we some how magically pluck figures out of the

air that will justify your premise. The reason we don't do it, and

you can't do it, is because without subsidies it is impossible. It is

not cowardice or recalcitrance, it is simple pragmatism.

[Guest guest]

> Pancaratna ACBSP wrote:

>

> > A business model for this would have to start

> with:

> >

> > Mortgage free land placed in a trust in which the

> cows are the beneficiaries

> > and with trustees who are not proprietors of the

> business. The trust would

> > contract with the business to manage the farm on

> certain principles and take

> > the profit, less 25% which would go back into the

> trust. The trust would

> > keep this fund in an endowment to guarantee the

> protection of the cows by

> > hiring cow herds in the future if the business

> fails.

 

Right, to ensure their lifetime protection it would

probably be better for land to be assured, as their

ultimate home if all else fails. Here in Argentina,

all animals are lte loose on enormous tracts of land -

grass-fed beef. Therefore, the basic minimum care is

for land to satisfy their feeding needs summer and

winter. Beyond that what is the basic minimum? A visit

once a month?

 

 

> >

> > IN no case, should the protection of the cows be

> at risk in the business

> > model.

 

This is interesting. All around us farm animals are

100% at risk, yet we fail to move if their is a small

risk. Is not inaction worse than action?

If 0% risk costs 2 times the amount people will pay,

and therefore will not work, would it not be better to

go for a 10% risk where the system can work as people

will pay? Does not a cost/benefit analysis of risks

need to take place, and if no action is recomended

because there might be some risk of failure, how do we

balance the fact that our non-action leaves the object

of our attention 100% at risk but out of our hands?

 

 

 

 

Get email at your own domain with Mail.

http://personal.mail./

[Guest guest]

> Hare Krsna dasi comments:

 

> 1. What is the cost of 1 unit (gallon, liter or whatever) of milk from a

> cow in

> a *mature* protected herd?

 

You have rightly pointed out that ISKCON farm records are insufficient to

use as a base for this calculation. However, perhaps we could understand

what you would mean by "mature"? What is the criteria for judging a

protected herd to be mature?

 

Your servant,

Pancaratna das

[Guest guest]

Comment:

Mature herd is defined, as a herd whose birth rate and death rate are

approaching the same figure or whose population has stablised.

 

Thomas Malthus, a English Christian monk (1766-1834) has also said the

growth of a population is proportional to the food supply as there is a

large quantity of food a population of animals of the same species reacts by

increasing its population and then as the food supply is out striped by a

rapidly growing population there is a delayed reaction of a rapid increase

in deaths (or outward migrations to new sights) and a decline in births.

 

Of course the above is true only when man does not interfere with the

natural

processes. At present the older established farms in ISKCON are in the final

stage of that cycle. Which is a man made interference, to bring herds to

manageable level.

 

The ideal is to have a herd the size that the land can support; provided

there are not drastic climatic changes, i.e. droughts or floods; and that

population of individuals has birth and death rates that are equal, same

number being born as die. Once populations are stablised it easier to have

an appropriate amount of food on hand to feed and regulate all their

activities.

ys, Rohita dasa

 

-

Pancaratna ACBSP <Pancaratna.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Noma T. Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>; Cow (Protection and related

issues) <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Cc: mark chatburn <markjon11 >; Mark Middle Mountain

<gourdmad (AT) ovnet (DOT) com>

Monday, March 05, 2001 7:45 PM

Re: Protection Farms -- demand for value-added protection

 

 

> > Hare Krsna dasi comments:

>

> > 1. What is the cost of 1 unit (gallon, liter or whatever) of milk from

a

> > cow in

> > a *mature* protected herd?

>

> You have rightly pointed out that ISKCON farm records are insufficient to

> use as a base for this calculation. However, perhaps we could understand

> what you would mean by "mature"? What is the criteria for judging a

> protected herd to be mature?

>

> Your servant,

> Pancaratna das

>