Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
^ You need to start owning up to the fact that so much of what you say is being thoroughly refuted.
You claim, for instance, that 30% of the land once farmed in Iowa is no longer able to be farmed. Pure and total BS. So why not make account for that huge lie?
Where in the hell you've found me saying that? 30% refers to USA not Iowa. I just copy pasted the text. Your RRR skills should be sufficient to comprehend text written by an Iowa state professor if my English is not adequate.
Quote:
Regarding hog manure... Where, pray tell, do you think it goes? You've admitted that you don't have any idea what is done with hog manure.
How, where?
Quote:
You've admitted that you don't even know what the "disposal equipment" looks like (chances are there were slurry tanks all over, but you just don't know what they are).
Again, I didn't say that. I've told that "I've not seen any disposal equipment on site". It was new site with only one building occupied. That huge concrete manure pit can hold a lot of manure for quite a while. Here is a pic of a pig CAF being constructed.
Here is a finished CAF:
Quote:
Though it will not sink into your head - as nothing else has - I can assure you that my dad has liquid hog manure KNIFED into ALL his land EVERY YEAR. That's another way of saying it is INJECTED into the ground. This method of application assures us that there is NO run-off. Do you understand what I'm talking about? Yes, or No?
There is plenty of research on that. For example Minimizing Nutrient Movement from Injected Liquid Swine Manure (http://www.farmwest.com/index.cfm?method=library.showPage&librarypageid=14 1 - broken link)
While injection of liquid manure reduces runoff, volatilization of ammonia and odour, it requires increased horsepower and application time, and costly equipment. Injection can be difficult where there is a lot of residue and may leave soil surfaces rough for no-till planting. The disturbed surfaces left by some injection systems leaves these soils exposed to wind erosion. On some soils there is a risk that contaminants from injected manure will move directly into tile drains and surface waters.
Again, liquid manure can be applied within a small radius of the facility, if it's HUGE CAF holding thousands of pigs - it doesn't matter much how you apply it.
Quote:
Also, do you understand how/why animal manure is a BETTER for the ground than applying commercial fertilizers? Liquid hog manure, though poison if you DRINK IT, is actually an OUTSTANDING fertilizer. Do you understand this? Yes, or No?
Uncomposted manure is as bad for soil as chemical fertilizer or WORSE (due to all kind of garbage being fed to pigs). It takes just a bucket and spade to double check what your preconceptions. Do you understand this? Yes, or No? Take a bucket of liquid manure and a bucket of composted manure. Dump it on the ground, spade, plant something. It doesn't matter how much composted stuff you dump in the ground, it doesn't damage crop. Not so with a bucket of liquid manure, IT KILLS soil and everything in it if overapplied, IT TRANSFORM soils into HYDROPONIC sponge, chemical fertilizers do the same.
Quote:
Also, I am VERY familiar with "Contract Livestock Production". I used to do it. It is NOT - as you claim - "share-cropping." It is a system whereby the farmer owns the buildings, and provides the labor for raising the livestock. The "company" said farmer contracts with provides the livestock, the feed, veterinary care, etc. There is NO FARMER that is REQUIRED to do this. It's much like buying a new car. You don't have to do it. But if you do buy the car, you're required to abide by the terms of the contract. It's the exact same with Contract Livestock Production. Do you understand this? Yes, or No?
I don't think I said something much different about contract farming. Of course you don't have to accept a low wage job, for example, you can just crawl under bridge and die. Do you think sharecropper had to accept sharecropping arrangements? Starving was always an option. Options in rural America are kind of limited, agrobiz dominates meat markets, small farmers cannot profitably sell a pig that was grown independently, more exactly one can't sell an "independent" pig period. But let's brush up on sharecropping little bit: land owner provides land, seeds, fertilizers, lodging, grocery credit, sharecropper provides labor, sharecropper will be lucky to break even at the end of a season. Contract farmers owns land, he pledges that land as collateral for the loan to build CAF, until loan is paid off contract farmer pays "rent" to a loan issuer. "Contract farmer" resembles sharecropper quite a bit.
Quote:
Now... Regarding what "the brass" from Tyson Foods eat: I don't know and I don't care. It has absolutely nothing to do with anything.
Is that so? If a gardener doesn't eat produce he grows for a farmers market, I would care to know why.
Quote:
By the way, you need to read that PBS article you linked a little more closely!
I cited PBS because, despite its "liberal" image, it's becoming a pro corporate mouthpiece going above and beyond to smooth out sharp edges. I'm aware that a PBS article must consist of a mild attempt on criticism and tonnes of counterbalancing required to please corporate sensitivities.
^ Wow, you're having trouble with your reading and comprehension aren't you?
And thanks so much for posting those pretty pictures of a hog confinement building being built. Did it ever dawn on you that maybe the reason there was no manure equipment around is because there were no hogs in the building?
By the way, the soil does the composting when you knife in the manure. That's how it works "in the real world".
I don't think I said something much different about contract farming. Of course you don't have to accept a low wage job, for example, you can just crawl under bridge and die. Do you think sharecropper had to accept sharecropping arrangements? Starving was always an option. Options in rural America are kind of limited, agrobiz dominates meat markets, small farmers cannot profitably sell a pig that was grown independently, more exactly one can't sell an "independent" pig period. But let's brush up on sharecropping little bit: land owner provides land, seeds, fertilizers, lodging, grocery credit, sharecropper provides labor, sharecropper will be lucky to break even at the end of a season. Contract farmers owns land, he pledges that land as collateral for the loan to build CAF, until loan is paid off contract farmer pays "rent" to a loan issuer. "Contract farmer" resembles sharecropper quite a bit.
I'm trying really hard not to laugh about this.
Sharecroppers were the RENTERS. They did not own the land. So by your comparison, it's the big corporations that would be the sharecroppers in this scenario.
By the way, my dad still raises cattle and sells them. 100% independent. Sells his cattle whenever and wherever he wants. And he's made a LOT of money selling cattle the past 10 years. So there goes another of your proof-positive assertions. Blown to bits. Sorry.
Sharecroppers were the RENTERS. They did not own the land. So by your comparison, it's the big corporations that would be the sharecroppers in this scenario.
Since contract farmer's ownership of land is intimately connected with repayment of a loan he took out to build CAF, in some ways a contract grower is worse off than a sharecropper. A sharecropper had little to lose except his sweat. Sharecropper is NOT a renter since he worked for a share of crops he tended. Sharecropper worked with owner's land and crops, a contract grower works with corporate pigs&chickens. Sharecropping and and contract growing are not identical schemes but they have more in common than not.
Quote:
By the way, my dad still raises cattle and sells them. 100% independent. Sells his cattle whenever and wherever he wants. And he's made a LOT of money selling cattle the past 10 years. So there goes another of your proof-positive assertions. Blown to bits. Sorry.
I never mentioned cattle as far as I remember. I was talking about "independently grown" pigs and chickens ONLY. Small scale cattle herds tended by small & part -time farmers are still visible. Independent hog & chicken operations are nearly extinct. I don't know want to speculate why corporate beef didn't thrive to the same extent as corporate poultry. Unfortunately, small scale cattle growing is not a fortune maker unless one found a specialty niche like growing organic grass fed beef for Tyson Foods etc. brass. I don't doubt your father money making success, he could be an exception to the rule of barely breaking even.
Quote:
Sells his cattle whenever and wherever he wants.
Of course your father is free to try to sell his cattle whenever, wherever, to whomever he wants, it doesn't mean that whomever will buy it if your father's cattle doesn't meet whomever' expectation of age, breed, mass etc. Large corporate buyers are especially picky. The only difference is that large poultry and hog players don't buy independently grown animals period, while large beef operations may buy independently grown cattle to fatten. If overnight large beef corporations will decide against buying independently grown cattle for fattening "whenever, wherever" will become extremely narrow.
Last edited by RememberMee; 01-02-2010 at 10:47 PM..
^ Wow, you're having trouble with your reading and comprehension aren't you?
And thanks so much for posting those pretty pictures of a hog confinement building being built. Did it ever dawn on you that maybe the reason there was no manure equipment around is because there were no hogs in the building?
By the way, the soil does the composting when you knife in the manure. That's how it works "in the real world".
I was not inside of the occupied building, sound of pigs biting each other left no doubt it was occupied.
Application of concentrated liquid manure does NOT occur in the natural world. Cow peeing and "carpet" anaerobic sludge spreading are worlds apart.
Released poisonous gases and toxic substances endanger the life in the soil, resulting in damage to soil structure and plant growth. Massive losses of nutrients, especially of nitrogen, occur by leaching and in gaseous form (ammonia). After spreading liquid slurry, considerable numbers of dead earthworms may appear (if there were any alive to begin with). This is caused by a combination of drowning the worms and gassing them out with lethal doses of ammonia ("natural" composting without worms, huh?). The earthworms are visible members of the soil life; just imagine what it does to the rest of the countless different species contained in the soil.
Liquid manure slurry should be aerobically "fermented" prior to application.
The aerobic bacteria which break down carbon material, feed on the ammonia, thereby tying it up biologically in their bodies (protein compounds) and stabilizing H. So the balance between carbon, nitrogen and air is essential and depends a lot on the type and consistency of the slurry.
Manure from cattle on high grain rations, as well as pig manure, often lacks carbon and also has a higher ammonia content than slurry from animals on a high roughage diet. This influences the C/N ratio dramatically. Ideally we would like to see this ratio between 12 and 14:1 to start out with. It will narrow down during the process to 3-4:1 in the finished product.
Carbon-source materials, such as finely ground-up straw or partially decomposed manure, are best suited to solve the ratio imbalance. It is a good practice to provide a source of readily available carbon such as feed grade molasses at a low rate each day of the processing period. This measure has an explosive-like impact on the growth of the microbial activity in the slurry.
Since contract farmer's ownership of land is intimately connected with repayment of a loan he took out to build CAF, in some ways a contract grower is worse off than a sharecropper. A sharecropper had little to lose except his sweat. Sharecropper is NOT a renter since he worked for a share of crops he tended. Sharecropper worked with owner's land and crops, a contract grower works with corporate pigs&chickens. Sharecropping and and contract growing are not identical schemes but they have more in common than not.
I never mentioned cattle as far as I remember. I was talking about "independently grown" pigs and chickens ONLY. Small scale cattle herds tended by small & part -time farmers are still visible. Independent hog & chicken operations are nearly extinct. I don't know want to speculate why corporate beef didn't thrive to the same extent as corporate poultry. Unfortunately, small scale cattle growing is not a fortune maker unless one found a specialty niche like growing organic grass fed beef for Tyson Foods etc. brass. I don't doubt your father money making success, he could be an exception to the rule of barely breaking even.
Of course your father is free to try to sell his cattle whenever, wherever, to whomever he wants, it doesn't mean that whomever will buy it if your father's cattle doesn't meet whomever' expectation of age, breed, mass etc. Large corporate buyers are especially picky. The only difference is that large poultry and hog players don't buy independently grown animals period, while large beef operations may buy independently grown cattle to fatten. If overnight large beef corporations will decide against buying independently grown cattle for fattening "whenever, wherever" will become extremely narrow.
Good grief. So much wrong, so little time.
1. Stop trying to spin your way out of your self-made sharecropper debacle. I know what I'm talking about, you don't. I used to contract-raise hogs, you don't know the front end of a hog from the back. Sharecroppers did not own the land, contract farmers do. End of story.
2. Cattle farming went corporate long before hog farming. In fact, hog production was the LAST form of livestock production to "go corporate." End of story.
3. Local independent farmers sell their livestock to packing plants all the time - whether that livestock be hogs or cattle. With cattle, they most often are run through a "sale barn" where packing plant buyers compete to buy small lots of cattle, in order to make a large truck-load to take to the packing plant. Also, you might consider asking Marmac - whose family owns & operates a dairy in Minnesota. I'll guarantee you they are able to market their cattle any time they want. The bottom line is that you don't know what you're talking about. End of story.
There's really not a lot to say about this other than that you are dead wrong. I know you don't believe that, but it's because you simply do not know what you're talking about.
Released poisonous gases and toxic substances endanger the life in the soil, resulting in damage to soil structure and plant growth. Massive losses of nutrients, especially of nitrogen, occur by leaching and in gaseous form (ammonia). After spreading liquid slurry, considerable numbers of dead earthworms may appear (if there were any alive to begin with). This is caused by a combination of drowning the worms and gassing them out with lethal doses of ammonia ("natural" composting without worms, huh?). The earthworms are visible members of the soil life; just imagine what it does to the rest of the countless different species contained in the soil.
Liquid manure slurry should be aerobically "fermented" prior to application.
The aerobic bacteria which break down carbon material, feed on the ammonia, thereby tying it up biologically in their bodies (protein compounds) and stabilizing H. So the balance between carbon, nitrogen and air is essential and depends a lot on the type and consistency of the slurry.
Manure from cattle on high grain rations, as well as pig manure, often lacks carbon and also has a higher ammonia content than slurry from animals on a high roughage diet. This influences the C/N ratio dramatically. Ideally we would like to see this ratio between 12 and 14:1 to start out with. It will narrow down during the process to 3-4:1 in the finished product.
Carbon-source materials, such as finely ground-up straw or partially decomposed manure, are best suited to solve the ratio imbalance. It is a good practice to provide a source of readily available carbon such as feed grade molasses at a low rate each day of the processing period. This measure has an explosive-like impact on the growth of the microbial activity in the slurry.
First of all, your link doesn't work.
Second, you're ignoring MOUNTAINS of evidence, proving that you are WRONG about the benefits of livestock manure as fertilizer. You still haven't Googled it, have you?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
