Musing

[regolith]

I thought organic farming was supposed to be an animal friendly, high welfare system.

So why is it that the deadset organic farmer who owns this farm tells me I *cannot* have a reliable water supply for my cattle because the water supply in question is chlorinated... I asked the certifiers months ago and they told me they had no objections to chlorine in the water, but I suppose it goes against the farm owner's principles. Like things like growing grass and good management and all that stuff are against his ideals.

... I was ready to call in the animal welfare cops on my own herd yesterday, knowing full well that he's been through such investigations before.
I'd like to believe it's just him and not the whole organic paradigm... but this whole farm is turning me right off organics because to me animal welfare is paramount. I just heard of another organic farmer building tracks out of dirt claiming he wasn't allowed to put rock down... told the guy who said that to bring him here, look at my tracks, look at my lame cows, watch a milking on a wet day...

 

[pdfangus]

It has been my observation that the organic thing has been particularly attractive to those who have zealot tendencies.

sounds like your guys are zealots about not spending any money.

 

[john250]

The entire "organic" movement is crazier than a hog in beer slop.
Your guy, as PDF opines, is just cheap. Bacteria in the water is cured by chlorine. Mankind learned that a few years ago, but...some folks feel we should die from things easily fixed.
I wish everyone who shops the organic section could be made to spend a day (12 hrs) chopping weeds out of crops.

 

[lavacarancher]

Yep, and the cafeteria at work sells organic eggs for breakfast. I asked the cook how she knew they were organic and was told (Indignantly) "because they are brown".

No Clue.

 

[regolith]

Just what you said John250... I really feel this guy would rather I culled a cow or left her suffering than gave her penicillin for footrot... and that's not even approaching the issue that his badly formed tracks are causing the footrot to begin with.

I agree with all of the above

I've done plenty of that weed-chipping this year. Failed to control the thistle though that's what every one local says when they see me "I see you've got the weeds under control" - just a hint of how bad it used to be.
Took an hour or two a day while the cows were across the fence eating turnips, for nearly a fortnight to clear about an acre of hemlock; now I just keep an eye out for seedlings any time I pass. Let's hope I don't have to do the same again next year.

 

[Jogeephus]

I've ranted enough for a week but lets just say I agree. I do think it funny to observe actual production methods to what is listed in a particular website of the same. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[tsmaxx47]

i suspect pd angus is correct in part (zealot tendancies), also those that have a need for an attention getting device, like some of us use this forum. however; they're not totally without some merit. in reports like the one yesterday (ny times,4/3/12) that worldwide the levels of residual "Roundup" herbicide in human beings was between 5-20% above levels found to be safe, gives these folks plenty of ammunition..........

 

[Commercialfarmer]

i suspect pd angus is correct in part (zealot tendancies), also those that have a need for an attention getting device, like some of us use this forum. however; they're not totally without some merit. in reports like the one yesterday (ny times,4/3/12) that worldwide the levels of residual "Roundup" herbicide in human beings was between 5-20% above levels found to be safe, gives these folks plenty of ammunition..........

The first problem is NY times. Second, who did the sampling? Third, what level are they designating as safe? News paper articles require a journalist to interpret scientific data- even if they could, which most can't, you can't depend on it being done without them trying to slant it to their purpose. Being the NY times, you will see the above.

Now lets look a little deeper:

Even from the EPA, http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/factsh ... 78fact.pdf

Several chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity studies using rats, mice and
beagle dogs resulted in no effects based on the parameters examined, or
resulted in findings that glyphosate was not carcinogenic in the study. In June
1991, EPA classified glyphosate as a Group E oncogen--one that shows
evidence of non-carcinogenicity for humans--based on the lack of convincing
evidence of carcinogenicity in adequate studies.
In developmental toxicity studies using pregnant rats and rabbits,
glyphosate caused treatment-related effects in the high dose groups including
diarrhea, decreased body weight gain, nasal discharge and death.
One reproductive toxicity study using rats showed kidney effects in the
high dose male pups; another study showed digestive effects and decreased
body weight gain. Glyphosate does not cause mutations.3
In one metabolism study with rats, most of the glyphosate administered
(97.5 percent) was excreted in urine and feces as the parent compound; less
than one percent of the absorbed dose remained in tissues and organs,
primarily in bone tissue. Aminomethyl phosphonic acid (AMPA) was the
only metabolite excreted. A second study using rats showed that very little
glyphosate reaches bone marrow, that it is rapidly eliminated from bone
marrow, and that it is even more rapidly eliminated from plasma.
Dietary Exposure
The nature of glyphosate residue in plants and animals is adequately
understood. Studies with a variety of plants indicate that uptake of glyphosate
or AMPA from soil is limited. The material which is taken up is readily
translocated throughout the plant and into its fruit. In animals, most
glyphosate is eliminated in urine and feces. Enforcement methods are
available to detect residues of glyphosate and AMPA in or on plant
commodities, in water and in animal commodities.
85 tolerances have been established for residues of glyphosate and its
metabolite, AMPA, in or on a wide variety of crops and crop groups, as well
as in many processed foods, animal feed and animal tissues (please see 40
CFR 180.364, 40 CFR 185.3500 and 40 CFR 186.3500). EPA has reassessed
the existing and proposed tolerances for glyphosate. Though some
adjustments will be needed, no major changes in existing tolerances are
required. EPA also has compared the U.S. tolerances with international
Codex maximum residue limits (MRLs), and is recommending certain
adjustments to achieve greater compatibility.
EPA conducted a dietary risk assessment for glyphosate based on a
worst-case risk scenario, that is, assuming that 100 percent of all possible
commodities/acreage were treated, and assuming that tolerance-level residues
remained in/on all treated commodities. The Agency concluded that the
chronic dietary risk posed by glyphosate food uses is minimal.
A reference dose (RfD), or estimate of daily exposure that would not
cause adverse effects throughout a lifetime, of 2 mg/kg/day has been proposed
for glyphosate, based on the developmental toxicity studies described above.

To reach any where near 2 mg/kg/day would take a LOT!. If you weigh 220 you are 100kg so you could ingest up to 200 mg per day.

 

[tsmaxx47]

dear commercial farmer,
how does your information change the reason people gravitate to organic food?

 

[Jogeephus]

It won't. Facts have little affect on emotions driven decisions.

 

[Commercialfarmer]

dear commercial farmer,
how does your information change the reason people gravitate to organic food?

I apologize that I was not clearer in what I was referring to.

i suspect pd angus is correct in part (zealot tendancies), also those that have a need for an attention getting device, like some of us use this forum. however; they're not totally without some merit. in reports like the one yesterday (ny times,4/3/12) that worldwide the levels of residual "Roundup" herbicide in human beings was between 5-20% above levels found to be safe, gives these folks plenty of ammunition..........

Wasn't saying that people weren't gravitating toward organic, just stating that it is not with merit

Kinda like all the time and money spent trying to regulate CO2, something that had far higher levels in the beginning of the earth and is absolutely necessary for life.

 

[1wlimo]

Fully understand regolith on the lack of sensible spending. :bang:

How can farm tracks being made of stone be an issue?

Some of the organics people are nuts, but so are the chemical guys too. Commercial farmer you seam to be heading this way, Roundup is a disaster and getting worse. It was a really useful product and it has been abused, and politicized. Now who knows what is the truth, but it is no longer working, and we have no replacement. The product of big business and dumb ass farmers not using their brains :dunce: :dunce:

If more commercial farmers looked at the organic farming methods and tried them then they would learnt to farm a whole lot better. Why some of the organic people are so stupid when it comes to the use of medication I do not know. I understand the backlash against the profilactic use, but if an animal is ill that is a different story.

 

[Commercialfarmer]

Edited to fit the parameters requested of "coffee shop"

If you would like to start another thread so that this one won't be hijacked further, I'm your Huckleberry. We can discuss all the failings of a few dumb ass farmers that produce enough food to feed the world. Silly rabbit, tricks are for kids. Go back to your hole and try to come up with another false emergency to save us from.

 

[Kingfisher]

Edited to fit the parameters requested of "coffee shop"

If you would like to start another thread so that this one won't be hijacked further, I'm your Huckleberry. We can discuss all the failings of a few dumb ass farmers that produce enough food to feed the world. Silly rabbit, tricks are for kids. Go back to your hole and try to come up with another false emergency to save us from.

Step up..............start the thread.

 

[pdfangus]

round up can not be laid at the door step of farmers.

anyone can buy it in multitudess of retailers daily with no training requirement at all

 

[regolith]

We have rules?

My biggest problem with everything I've read/heard on the organic issue since moving to this farm is sorting out the BS from the parts that have merit. Some areas I've got enough experience in to identify BS immediately, others are harder to distinguish. I do think some of it has merit. I also think it's dressed up in a pack of lies and emotive stuff.

My new quip, have used it at least four times already and it sometimes draws a laugh. Biggest selling point of organic livestock farming is that you'll never see the vet again. You know why? You can't afford to pay him like you used to when you farmed the conventional way.

 

[1wlimo]

I do not know about your certification board regolith, however when I was growing organic crops it was certified by "The Soil Association". Lots of the emotive stuff and BS comes from the fact that most of the board is not made up of farmers.

We found that where as there are lists of things you can use and lists of things that you must never use, then the list of thing that you may use with permission, there was also the ability to make a case for special use of some of the things from the must never use list.
You would not be allowed to use roundup or prilled urea, but we were able to get permission to use some things. The issue being that it takes time and lots of paper work. If you waited until there was an issue then it is too late.

 

[Commercialfarmer]

Step up..............start the thread.

You can find it here: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=76961

 

[regolith]

I do not know about your certification board regolith, however when I was growing organic crops it was certified by "The Soil Association". Lots of the emotive stuff and BS comes from the fact that most of the board is not made up of farmers.

We found that where as there are lists of things you can use and lists of things that you must never use, then the list of thing that you may use with permission, there was also the ability to make a case for special use of some of the things from the must never use list.
You would not be allowed to use roundup or prilled urea, but we were able to get permission to use some things. The issue being that it takes time and lots of paper work. If you waited until there was an issue then it is too late.

We are the same here with regard to the lists of things.
One problem I've had... and after the whole water thing I've just had enough of the nonsense with this guy... is that the certifier has an 'organic management plan' for this farm which outlines normal practise. Another farmer gave me the hint when I started, 'ask the farm owner for a copy of his organic management plan.' I did ask. He claimed he didn't have one. He does have one - I've seen it in the inspector's hands but still have not had a chance to look at it. Without that, without any sort of support from the certifier I'm effectively farming blindfolded... and not only that but I'm supposed to request permission to use permitted products because they're not in the management plan. The inspector who checked the farm said he would be in touch about drawing up a new management plan according to my system, but have never heard back from him.
I see for sure why so many supporters of organics follow 'biological farming' methods and never bother with certification.

 

[1wlimo]

I do not know about your certification board regolith, however when I was growing organic crops it was certified by "The Soil Association". Lots of the emotive stuff and BS comes from the fact that most of the board is not made up of farmers.

We found that where as there are lists of things you can use and lists of things that you must never use, then the list of thing that you may use with permission, there was also the ability to make a case for special use of some of the things from the must never use list.
You would not be allowed to use roundup or prilled urea, but we were able to get permission to use some things. The issue being that it takes time and lots of paper work. If you waited until there was an issue then it is too late.

We are the same here with regard to the lists of things.
One problem I've had... and after the whole water thing I've just had enough of the nonsense with this guy... is that the certifier has an 'organic management plan' for this farm which outlines normal practise. Another farmer gave me the hint when I started, 'ask the farm owner for a copy of his organic management plan.' I did ask. He claimed he didn't have one. He does have one - I've seen it in the inspector's hands but still have not had a chance to look at it. Without that, without any sort of support from the certifier I'm effectively farming blindfolded... and not only that but I'm supposed to request permission to use permitted products because they're not in the management plan. The inspector who checked the farm said he would be in touch about drawing up a new management plan according to my system, but have never heard back from him.
I see for sure why so many supporters of organics follow 'biological farming' methods and never bother with certification.

Fully agree with that one,