Hello Ken
Keith Addison wrote:
You'll find societies that ate mostly vegetables and not much meat,
and others that ate mostly meat and very little vegetables or
grain, but none that only ate vegetables and grains and no meat.
Again, I don't think that I suggested that anyone else should eat
only vegetables and grains and no meat. I recommended reduction of
the dependence of meat and dairy in the American culture from
current levels that I perceive as excessive.
It's the general direction, hence the separate discussion in the
thread of the merits of vegetarianism. The drift of the discussion is
(or was) the idea of replacing livestock production so that the land
used to grow livestock feed (grain) can be used to better purpose,
viz. food for humans and biofuels crops for energy. But without the
livestock, properly managed, as they most certainly aren't now with
industrial "farming", the fertility of the soil will sooner or later
run down and you won't be able to produce the vegetable/grain crops
either. At least not without resort to ever-larger inputs of
fossil-fuel based "fertilizers" and chemicalized crop "protection", a
lousy solution in every way, a non-solution.
The point is that if you don't produce the gallon of milk you'll be
less likely to able to produce the grain sustainably.
What principles make this statement a true one?
See below. And above and previous.
Not at all - less dairy means less grazing livestock, less grazing
livestock means less manure and less fertile soil. Without a dairy
market as well as a meat market, ley farming becomes much more
difficult.
But WHY is dairy a necessity for grazing?
You say this below:
I understand the concept that you propose - that animals are
essential to a farms overall soil health but, I really don't
understand how dairy products increase the
So you accept the cows but not the milk? Are you proposing that
cattle should be raised strictly for beef? Why would you propose that?
I keep stressing that farms that practise ley rotations or something
similar are mixed, integrated farms, not specialised battery farms.
You have a herd, cows and a bull, the cows calve and then you have
milk and milk products, much more than the calf needs. And you have
calves. Half of them will be bulls, but you only need one bull for a
herd, the rest are beef on the hoof. So you're going to produce the
milk anyway as well as the beef. I suppose you could feed it to pigs
if there's some pressing reason not to sell it, but the rational
thing to do is to sell it, or you risk cutting the profitability of a
major segment of the farm to perhaps below economic levels. It's the
sustainability aspects that will suffer first.
Why do you object to milk production? Or is it, again, that you're
objecting to industrialised milk production?
True, but she's not the only cow on the block, and even depleted,
her manure contains a hell of a lot more fertility potential than a
bit of wheat straw does. Or a fertiliser bag. Anyway the calf is
also producing manure.
However, if the milk is going to humans instead of the calf, there
is no calf to produce manure.
There's a calf in the first place, then the milk. No calf every year,
no milk either. Industrial operations remove the calf after two or
three days and feed it a commercial brew instead (often containing
cattle blood, IIRC). No need for that, there's enough milk for the
calf and plenty for the market as well.
Also, even with the calf in the equation, the calf is growing and
using more of those nutrients so ITS manure is of a lesser quality
than that of a cow that was not lactating.
It doesn't make any difference. Read this bit again:
"Sow a piece of land with a good pasture mixture and then divide it
in two with a fence. Graze one half heavily and repeatedly with
cattle, mow the other half as necessary and leave the mowings there
in place to decay back into the soil. On the grazed half, you've
removed the crop (several times) and taken away a large yield of milk
and beef. On the other half you've removed nothing. Plough up both
halves and plant a grain crop, or any crop. Which half has the bigger
and better yield? The grazed half, by far. "Ley Farming" explains why
"grass is the most important crop" and how to manage grass leys. Leys
are temporary pastures in a rotation, and provide more than enough
fertility for the succeeding crops: working together, grass and
grazing animals turn the land into a huge living compost pile."
So it doesn't much matter how much the cows remove or which of them
removes it. The grazing herd consists of ALL the cattle, cows in all
conditions, calves of all ages, and the bull.
And we're not using human manure for fertilization.
Why not? With ley farming there's no need for anything extra, you'd
use the humanure elsewhere on the farm. It's only part of an overall
composting operation anyway, and of course ley farms do composting as
well.
I understand the concept that you propose - that animals are
essential to a farms overall soil health but, I really don't
understand how dairy products increase the sustainability of
agriculture.
It doesn't increase it, it's PART of it. If you remove it, if you're
somehow forbidden to sell milk, the whole sustainable farming
operation becomes less feasible.
Maybe the answer is provided in one of the links you've provided but,
You're separating things into different categories that are
integrated, parts of the same category.
I'm still reading (and probably will be for quite a while). Doesn't
a lactating cow consume more water and food?
So what?
Isn't that an increase in the competition for resources that you
mentioned previous?
What competition for resources did I mention? I'm not thinking in
terms of competition but of symbiosis, collaboration among parts of a
whole.
Frankly, though, if the cow or sheep beneifits my soil which
produces more nutritious fruits and vegetables, I can't see how that
is really to be considered competition.
Neither can I.
It sounds more symbiotic to me especially if I am getting wool from
a sheep, for instance.
Sure it is. The example above with the grazing-no grazing test is
symbiosis. "Pasture and grazers can almost be viewed as a composite
creature, the one an aspect of the other." The whole operation relies
on symbiosis.
For what its worth, I have read a bunch of information from the
links that you have provided. They seem to be very valuable.
Thanks!
You're most welcome.
I must admit, though, that it is often very difficult to decide who
to believe.
The more you read, the more things begin to corroborate each other
and fall into place, then it's easier. This is the place to start:
Introduction to "An Agricultural Testament"
http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/howardAT/AT1.html
An Agricultural Testament - Albert Howard - 1
Take care,
You too Ken.
Best wishes
Keith
Ken
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
