Protection Farms -- mature units - assumption responses

[Guest guest]

> Ø Dandavad. Prabhupada kijaya!

> >

> > Mark wrote:

> >

> > > Also is a continuous loop of animals being born

> and

> > > dying. You should remember that I teach

> Geography, so

> > > this is all to do with population dynamics.

> > > If 3 calves are born each year, then after 20

> years

> > > the first 3 cows will now be 20 and will be

> ready to

> > > die, if not already dead. So at year 20 (average

> > > (depends on species and breed)) the herd will

> mature

> > > as the new 3 calves will replace the oldest

> cows, so

> > > the population will not increase more, but stay

> the

> > > same. The population should be 60 cows - 3 cows

> in

> > > each year form 0 to 20.

> >

> Ø Pancaratna das

> > I am confused by your math. The new calves would

> not all be female so they

> > could not replace the female cows. I assume

> therefore that there are

> > actually six animals born of which three are

> female. Also, since your

> three

> > cows are milking for four years and the heifers

> are generally not bred

> until

> > they are 3 years old, how can you add 3 calves

> each year? I would like to

> > see a a spreadsheet showing the actual development

> of the herd over time.

 

>From Mark:

 

I would love to send spreadsheet material, but the

system on cow com does not accept them!!!!

 

For the sake of mathematical theory I neglected to

mention how the system must be primed. The model above

has its maths correct, as in 3 calves born per year,

but the system needs priming. This means bringing in 3

pregnant cows for the first 4 years, thus yeilding the

3 calves. The priming cows will add to the overall

systems numbers but will then cancel itself out when

they have fed through the system on dying after 20

years.

 

In terms of there being enough cows to impregnate in

this closed system, it can be seen that in the mature

theoretical model there would be a ratio of 12 milking

cows to 60 animals - 30 cows, 30 oxen (including 1

bull).

So out of 30 cows, with 1.5 cows in each age of the

20-year cycle, 12 would be "working" and 18 "not

working". The latter would include 3 years as a calf

and 5 years retired, meaning 3 + 5 = 8 * 1.5 = 12 cows

either retired or as a calf.

18 "not working (NW)" cows - 12 who are out of the

system = 6 "NW" cows as surplus to working

requirements. This is where bifurication of systems

can occur (see Protection Farms discussion document).

 

 

> I

> > made my own (see attached). By my calculation,

> based on the following:

> >

> > a) Start with 3 cows (3 years old), 2 heifers, 1

> bull calf, 1 bull

> > b) Breed heifers when they are 3 years old

> > c) Breed milking cows every 5th year (4 year

> lactation)

> > d) retire cows after 12 years

> > e) cows die after 20 years

 

This gives 2 lactations of 4 years per cow per

lifetime. I had the assumption of 3, meaning the cow

to retire at 15, with some modification of the system

to ensure the cow is not exhausted, but pleasantly

happy.

 

> Comment:

> Assumptions:

> 1. That we have proper (willing to take on the

> responsibility) well trained

> persons (who have worked with animals on a day to

> day basis for at least

> three years and who have shown they are capable) to

> act as milkers and

> teamsters to care for the animals produced.

>

 

>From Mark:

 

My model asks milkhands to milk 12 cows twice a day

pulling 100 litres. This requres a lot of skill and

hard work, especially to not lose a lactation to

mastitis, etc.

The ability to find such people, and to pay them, or

be paid, well, with stakeholder responsibility and

commitment is vital to the success of the initiative.

Changing milkhands in a chaotic environment will only

lead to the collapse of a very fine-tuned system.

 

But the above should not limit the workings of the

system. As well as priming the herd, it will take a

few years for the workers to settle in to this system

and to be sufficiently proficient to follow the

mathematical model to optimise efficiency.

Such initial deviations from the pure model, plus

training costs, must be costed into the system.

 

 

2. We are dealing with a breed of cow that matures

> at six years. Bos taurus

> breeds mature at this age, Bos indicus and its

> first generation crosses do

> not mature until nine years.

 

Yet we are breeding before maturity, how does this

affect both species?

 

 

> 3. That the breed we are dealing with has a sex

> ratio of 1::1. Young bulls

> give a ratio 6 females :: 1 male, as the bull

> reaches maturity the ratio

> approaches 1::1. This fits the Bos taurus breeds the

> Bos indicus and first

> generation crosses have a ratio of male to female of

> 3:1.

 

I'm not sure to limit breed selection by sex ratios is

necessary. I think most breeds could be used, as they

have through history, considering the local

environment. For examples Jerseys, known for the

bull's temprement - yet this breed has been bred for a

long time. If "they" can do it, then surely "we" can.

The deviations from the pure model must be taken in to

account, and subsequently costed as such.

 

 

> 4. That the breed in question is capable, given the

> proper feeding of forage

> from highly productive land, of milking for a

> lactation period of four

> years.

 

Again, this fits in to breed selection. Of course,

what you say would aid in the system, but to make it a

requirement limits producer and consumer choice, as

well as breeds "able" to be protected. I would prefer

the producer to analyse the costs and benefits, choose

breed based on the findings, and establish costs and

prices accordingly.

 

 

> 5. A bull should not be used for breeding before it

> is four years old; that

> by the time this bull is six years old he can be use

> on no more than twenty

> cows per season. That the bull shall be retired at

> the age of ten. This fits

> the Bos taurus pattern, Bos indicus and crosses push

> maturity back three

> more years - so they can not do heavy work until

> nine and can be worked

> until 13. Same applies for cows. Their life span is

> longer, with the calves

> taking longer to develop.

 

I thought Bos Indicus lived shorter lives!

In reality BI are worked from a much earlier age, are

they not?

 

I am not too expert on bulls. Syam used to impregnate

cows using calves before they were castrated. He did

not think this to be the best, but it was preferable

to AI, and meant he did not need to keep a bull. I

think this to be a moral hazard, but an understandable

one.

 

 

> 6. All animals introduced into the herd should not

> be related any closer

> than same ancestry four generations back.

> 7. Because we are not familiar at this time with the

> bloodlines of our

> animals in question, the bull should be replaced by

> another bull of

> unrelated heritage, beginning with the first bulls

> daughters who should not

> be bred until they are five years old. If the herd

> we are working with has

> been under the same breeding management for more

> than four generations of

> animals and experienced breeder can with discretion

> practice some inbreeding

> provided no malefic characteristics are observed in

> order to strengthen

> beneficial characteristics.

 

OK.

Though I didn't get why wait until 5 years old with

the bulls daughter?

 

> 8. That we have a facility that is capable of

> handling three bulls.

 

Why 3 bulls?

3 bulls per 30 cows is too many. Should it not be one?

Should farms not share bulls?

 

> 9. We are breeding three cows every year and that

> over a three year period

> we are working with a total of nine cows.

 

I don't follow the need for this, as it is already

stated! With a 4-year lactation we would work with 12

cows, milked be 1 milkhand twice a day.

 

> 10. That there is proper housing, water and feed

> (pasture set up for rapid

> rotational grazing, supplementary sources of feed-

> hay, silage, green feed

> according to local conditions and the structures to

> store supplementary

> feeds) to maintain a herd of 57 animals.

 

I am not keen on excessive conserved food, nor silage.

I prefer extensive grazing in agroforestal pasture

grounds, with zero fodder cultivation. Here in

Argentina is the "best" beef in the world (so they

say) grass fed on extensive pasture lands. For me the

best feed is grass, extras can come in the form of

agricultural waste - but not specifically produced for

them (except for sentimental reasons).

 

I read some comments form the devotees in the US, and

it seems you include intensive practices in your

thinking. I believe extensive free ranging is better.

In terms of housing - what is the minimum. Here, in

Arg, there is little need of housing, except for trees

for shade. Why set 1st world targets when they are not

necessary?

 

 

> 11. That we have sufficient personnel capable of

> maintaining all tack and

> machinery.

> 12. That we have a capable person to process dairy

> products and the proper

> facility to do so. This facility must be maintained

> according to local

> health codes.

> 13. That you have capable medical personnel to care

> for the animals health,

> this person must be experienced in naturopathy and

> in modern veterinary

> medicine.

 

The latter does not need to be in-house, but can be

outsourced.

 

> 14. That no animals die until 18 years of age. That

> initially home bred

> heifers are not bred until the age of five.

 

When an animal dies, all being equal, is out of our

hands. Why wait until 5, is not 3 sufficiently old?

 

> 15. That there is a manager that is capable of

> directing all personnel under

> his charge.

 

100%. This will only work with a fully costed

systematic process. And the manager must be expert in

fulfilling the requirements. Though, as with the

milkers, this requirement will be difficult to find,

therefore a few years must be given for the manager to

find hir feet.

 

> 16. That there be sufficient funds to establish and

> maintain the facility,

> cows and personnel to meet the above assumptions.

 

 

This is the lynch pin.

 

My opinion is that the more the workers are the

owners, or heavily involved stakeholders, then the

better. I also think this is true of the consumers.

 

For example. If the price of milk is paid for

full-herd-maturity cost then there will be a sizable

surpus from years 4 onwards, diminishing as herd

maturity is met. If this excess could be seen as

investment in land or charitable assurance funds, then

the consumers could be shareholders as well.

 

This way all parties are involved stakeholders, both

as producers, consumers, owners and overseers of a

system payed for and worked for to bring forth

protected farm animals and their products and

services.

 

 

Thank you all for keeping this up. If and when we

agree on the workings of the procedural system, then

we can cost it more thoroughly, and then prepare a

business plan.

 

 

Yours gratefully,

 

Mark Chatburn.

 

 

 

Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.

http://auctions./