weaning moon

[HerefordSire]

We can absolutely agree on that last statement!


Excellent! Can we also agree that if the risk of failure is zero, then the cost is also zero?

 

[nap]

We can absolutely agree on that last statement!


Excellent! Can we also agree that if the risk of failure is zero, then the cost is also zero?

I can't agree that the cost is zero. If you figure in the time and effort that goes into supporting a basically unsupportable hypothesis, than the cost in definitely not insignificant. To me, it makes a lot more sense to spend that time and effort on trying to improve our enterprise, by concentrating on things that have been shown to be effective. I think that the sentiment "because that's the way granddaddy did it" , is an underlying theme for many people in our business. Maybe granddaddy was right a lot of the time, but I don't think he was infallible. I believe in experimentation based on some degree of supportable scientific evidence. I regard anything less as pure fantasy that I can't afford to waste time on.

 

[HerefordSire]

I can't agree that the cost is zero. If you figure in the time and effort that goes into supporting a basically unsupportable hypothesis, than the cost in definitely not insignificant. To me, it makes a lot more sense to spend that time and effort on trying to improve our enterprise, by concentrating on things that have been shown to be effective. I think that the sentiment "because that's the way granddaddy did it" , is an underlying theme for many people in our business. Maybe granddaddy was right a lot of the time, but I don't think he was infallible. I believe in experimentation based on some degree of supportable scientific evidence. I regard anything less as pure fantasy that I can't afford to waste time on.

Please allow me to reword my same point so we can agree. For example, if I take out a loan @ 5% fixed interest rate, the risk of failure is higher than a 4% fixed interest rate and my cost differential is 1% fixed interest rate. Likewise, if my fixed interest rate is 0% (failure rate of zero), such as in "no risk at all", my cost is also zero because there is no interest. Do you now agree?

 

[nap]

I can't agree that the cost is zero. If you figure in the time and effort that goes into supporting a basically unsupportable hypothesis, than the cost in definitely not insignificant. To me, it makes a lot more sense to spend that time and effort on trying to improve our enterprise, by concentrating on things that have been shown to be effective. I think that the sentiment "because that's the way granddaddy did it" , is an underlying theme for many people in our business. Maybe granddaddy was right a lot of the time, but I don't think he was infallible. I believe in experimentation based on some degree of supportable scientific evidence. I regard anything less as pure fantasy that I can't afford to waste time on.

Please allow me to reword my same point so we can agree. For example, if I take out a loan @ 5% fixed interest rate, the risk of failure is higher than a 4% fixed interest rate and my cost differential is 1% fixed interest rate. Likewise, if my fixed interest rate is 0% (failure rate of zero), such as in "no risk at all", my cost is also zero because there is no interest. Do you now agree?

I don't think your analogy is applicable. There is a cost to be encumbered if one weans calves based purely on whim, without considering other factors that have a good deal more merit.

 

[rocket2222]

Scientist, arn't they the same folks who said the earth was flat, the sun revolves around earth. Science [ knowledge] is directly related to time, a hundred years from now scientist will make what we know today seem elementary, they will not be any smarter than the scientist we have today they will have just had more time to work on it. Thankfully there are scientist out there who are willing to acknowledge that all of what we know today is not "fact" and everything we don't know is not "fiction". Those are the ones who learned something today that leads to the discoveries of tomorrow. As for me, I'm going to give it a try, if I see that the cows and calves are less stressed because I weaned them on March 6 and not March 16 or they do better weaning on a Friday instead of Monday, I'll do it. Thats not hocus pocus, that better management. Oh, I tried doing a "rain dance" too when we were in a drought, didn't rain that day though, :shock: :roll: but it did about 3 weeks later.

 

[HerefordSire]

Scientist, arn't they the same folks who said the earth was flat, the sun revolves around earth. Science [ knowledge] is directly related to time, a hundred years from now scientist will make what we know today seem elementary, they will not be any smarter than the scientist we have today they will have just had more time to work on it. Thankfully there are scientist out there who are willing to acknowledge that all of what we know today is not "fact" and everything we don't know is not "fiction". Those are the ones who learned something today that leads to the discoveries of tomorrow. As for me, I'm going to give it a try, if I see that the cows and calves are less stressed because I weaned them on March 6 and not March 16 or they do better weaning on a Friday instead of Monday, I'll do it. Thats not hocus pocus, that better management. Oh, I tried doing a "rain dance" too when we were in a drought, didn't rain that day though, :shock: :roll: but it did about 3 weeks later.

There is a strong electro-magnetic force due to the moon's mass as all things contains atoms which in turn contain electrons, neutrons, and protons, not to mention the stronger and weaker nuclear forces. Additionally, space time is curved such that space is displaced when an object is in motion. It is certainly plausible that biological systems, including neurological brains (electrical impulse emitting devices), to act or react to stronger forces within one's environment, including the moon.

 

[JHH]

We can absolutely agree on that last statement!


Excellent! Can we also agree that if the risk of failure is zero, then the cost is also zero?

I can't agree that the cost is zero. If you figure in the time and effort that goes into supporting a basically unsupportable hypothesis, than the cost in definitely not insignificant. To me, it makes a lot more sense to spend that time and effort on trying to improve our enterprise, by concentrating on things that have been shown to be effective. I think that the sentiment "because that's the way granddaddy did it" , is an underlying theme for many people in our business. Maybe granddaddy was right a lot of the time, but I don't think he was infallible. I believe in experimentation based on some degree of supportable scientific evidence. I regard anything less as pure fantasy that I can't afford to waste time on.

Didnt say he was right 100% of the time. Just said he used to go by the moon and it seemed to work for him.

Your going to wean calves anyway so if you choose to wean by the moon or by wim it all works out.JHH

 

[Ned Jr.]

I've noticed that when I wean my calves they start bawling when it starts getting light. I'm not sure about this but I always thought it was recommended to wean on the dark of the moon.

 

[6M Ranch]

Friend of mine castrates and dehorns by the phase of the moon. Grew up on a dairy, so he has a lot of experience with it. For whatever reason, works out better. Worst case, you wait an extra 28 days. If you can't, go ahead and wean/castrate/dehorn.

 

[grannysoo]

Does anybody wean calves related to the phases of the moon, if so what moon phase are you supposed to be in. Thanks.

Is this a serious question? If it is, I can understand why many cattle producers are in trouble. No disrespect, but I think science trumps myth everytime.

If you don't want to be disrespectful, then don't act that way. Science does not trump "myth" every time. I don't know the reasons behind many of the things that our ancestors did, but they did them for a reason and it kept them alive long enough to bring you and I into this world.

Science is a great thing, but science has had to change when proven wrong. Remember.... years ago, science taught that the world was flat.

Perhaps "myth" is not the correct word. How about faith that something out there is bigger and more powerful than science?

No disrespect intended my friend...

 

[nap]

Does anybody wean calves related to the phases of the moon, if so what moon phase are you supposed to be in. Thanks.

Is this a serious question? If it is, I can understand why many cattle producers are in trouble. No disrespect, but I think science trumps myth everytime.

If you don't want to be disrespectful, then don't act that way. Science does not trump "myth" every time. I don't know the reasons behind many of the things that our ancestors did, but they did them for a reason and it kept them alive long enough to bring you and I into this world.

Science is a great thing, but science has had to change when proven wrong. Remember.... years ago, science taught that the world was flat.

Perhaps "myth" is not the correct word. How about faith that something out there is bigger and more powerful than science?

No disrespect intended my friend...

No disrespect taken. My point is that I would consider other factors first in deciding when to wean a calf. These factors would include the health of the calf, the well-being and health of the cow, weather conditions, the availability of pasture etc. Faith is a wonderful thing, but I think it is foolish not to consider a number of other factors, that I believe are more germane then the phase of the moon, when making a decision about when to wean.

 

[gberry]

No disrespect taken. My point is that I would consider other factors first in deciding when to wean a calf. These factors would include the health of the calf, the well-being and health of the cow, weather conditions, the availability of pasture etc. Faith is a wonderful thing, but I think it is foolish not to consider a number of other factors, that I believe are more germane then the phase of the moon, when making a decision about when to wean.

I don't think the people asking these questions would fail to take the above mentioned points into consideration when weaning their calves. Do you know of any scientific evidence that says the signs don't have any effect on the number of days calves spend walking the fence and bawling after weaning? If not, perhaps you could do a study and let us all know how it goes. If I were planning to wean around Oct. 1, I would not mind waiting until the 3rd or 4th if I thought it would save me 2 days of bawling and get the calves on feed faster.

Just because something is not scientifically proven doesn't mean that it is not true. Could be that it just hasn't been studied.

 

[Rustler9]

Damn, I swear I think some people just like to argue for the heck of it. Weaning by the signs does work-and yes, my dad did it and so did my grand pa. They also planted by the signs as well as set egss, fished and most everything else. But, I've been weaning by the signs all of my adult life and it does work. My partner isn't a southerner (not that you have to be a southerner but we do tend to do a few things differently down here) and he thought I was crazy when we first went into partnership and I wanted to wean by the signs. But, since we've done it both ways he acknowledges that there is a big difference.
I suggest that our scientist get himself a copy of the Farmer's Almanac and conduct an experiment-he can wean a group of calves at random, no try this. Wean a group of calves when the sign is in the head or heart and wean the next group when the sign is in the feet. Complile the data and get back to us. Compare the length of time that the cows and calves walk the fence and bawl incessantly and stay off their feed and let us know the out come. In the mean time, I'll keep checking the calendar and doing as I have been in the past since it works for me and most everyone else that I know who have tried it and I'll just say to hell with science.

 

[HerefordSire]

be nice, I swear I think some people just like to argue for the heck of it. Weaning by the signs does work-and yes, my dad did it and so did my grand pa. They also planted by the signs as well as set egss, fished and most everything else. But, I've been weaning by the signs all of my adult life and it does work. My partner isn't a southerner (not that you have to be a southerner but we do tend to do a few things differently down here) and he thought I was crazy when we first went into partnership and I wanted to wean by the signs. But, since we've done it both ways he acknowledges that there is a big difference.
I suggest that our scientist get himself a copy of the Farmer's Almanac and conduct an experiment-he can wean a group of calves at random, no try this. Wean a group of calves when the sign is in the head or heart and wean the next group when the sign is in the feet. Complile the data and get back to us. Compare the length of time that the cows and calves walk the fence and bawl incessantly and stay off their feed and let us know the out come. In the mean time, I'll keep checking the calendar and doing as I have been in the past since it works for me and most everyone else that I know who have tried it and I'll just say to be nice with science.

I am still considering this issue from both points of view. I am thinking about swapping sides to the scientific side and agreeing with nap...but not yet.

 

[dun]

Or you could just fenceline wean and not worry about the OFA

 

[nap]

be nice, I swear I think some people just like to argue for the heck of it. Weaning by the signs does work-and yes, my dad did it and so did my grand pa. They also planted by the signs as well as set egss, fished and most everything else. But, I've been weaning by the signs all of my adult life and it does work. My partner isn't a southerner (not that you have to be a southerner but we do tend to do a few things differently down here) and he thought I was crazy when we first went into partnership and I wanted to wean by the signs. But, since we've done it both ways he acknowledges that there is a big difference.
I suggest that our scientist get himself a copy of the Farmer's Almanac and conduct an experiment-he can wean a group of calves at random, no try this. Wean a group of calves when the sign is in the head or heart and wean the next group when the sign is in the feet. Complile the data and get back to us. Compare the length of time that the cows and calves walk the fence and bawl incessantly and stay off their feed and let us know the out come. In the mean time, I'll keep checking the calendar and doing as I have been in the past since it works for me and most everyone else that I know who have tried it and I'll just say to be nice with science.

I actually spent a few minutes trying to research this issue this afternoon. All I could find was unsubstantiated folklore. All of it anecdotal. Apparently some people even wean human babies according to the phases of the moon, full moon for males no moon for females. Look, if you actually believe that the zodiac is an important issue for weaning, I suggest that you stick with it. I, however, will not consider it a serious issue until you can show me the data. By the way, I spent another part of my life as a molecular biologist and I have a very limited knowledge of animal husbandry. Finally, I am receptive and will experiment with other ideas if they make some sense and have some experimental validity, otherwise my time and effort are limited.

 

[grannysoo]

Another thought.... if you don't think the moon makes a difference in behavior, go to any emergency room at any hospital on a night when it is a full moon.

Ask any er doctor or police officer if there is a difference too.

Might not can prove it with science, but it's there.

 

[Rustler9]

nap,
I have no scientific data to present to you nor do I need any. Sounds like you are much more educated than I am therefore I certainly would have thought that you would have already known about the phases of the moon and it's impact on our environment. I don't spend my time conducting scientific experiments I just do what works for me. You make it sound as if I consult Taro cards or a palm reader before weaning-not true. Never been to a palm reader or had my cards read.
Not sure how long you've owned cattle, had them all of my life and have learned a few things from them and from nature. I guess you would also say that it's BS that if a cow is about ready to drop a calf that more than likely she'll give birth when the moon is full. I've seen it happen hundreds of times, as a matter of fact I usually predict that Bessie will drop it on a certain night if she's really close and there's a full moon. I'll bet there's other cattle folks on here who have seen the same thing happen and no, I don't have a psychic friend. Also, have a friend who's a nurse, works the night shift at the local ER-she says it's absolutely crazy during a full moon-they always have several women giving birth. Guess this is just a coincidence??? I don't think so.
But anyway, we usually try to wean when the moon is in the feet or legs, the calves will bawl about one to two days, the cows will bawl about a day or two and then it's all over. The few times that we've weaned when the moon was in the heart or head we've had calves walk the fence restlessly, not eat and bawl until they're hoarse. I don't need any added stress on my cows or calves so I try to avoid this type of situation. We also like to wean our calves and let the cows and calves see each other through the fence-seems like if they can touch noses and smell each other it's a little easier on both parties-the only thing is that we have five different farms that we wean calves off of and those calves are brought to one central location to be worked and cared for. So, the lucky calves I guess you'd say still get to see their mamas through the fence but not those from the other four farms. But hey, if what you're doing is working for you by all means you'd be a fool to change.

 

[yme]

I worked in a group home for kids years ago and things were almost always crazier at a full moon and now I work in a law enforcement role with kids and the full moon "theory" in dead on IMO. I try to work my cattle with the moon sign when I can and again IMO it makes a difference but I also have a full time job so I work cattle when I can get the time off to do so.

 

[nap]

Thanks for all the thoughtful responses. I am aware that the phase of the moon has effects on many different phenomena. I remain skeptical, however, that the moon phase actually affects weaning ease. But there are lot of things I don't understand, even after close to thirty years in the cattle business. I do know that there are people on this board that know a whole lot more about cattle then I do. If you believe that the phase of the moon has some inexplicable influence on your weaning experiences, far be it from me to try to change your minds.
I fence wean my calves, as dun has mentioned twice above, and I never have trouble with balling calves or crazy mothers, no matter what is happening with the moon.