Regenerative Grazing

[benkostka]

Avant de connaitre Laura, j'étais végétarienne depuis des années parce que j'aime vraiment les animaux et je ne supportais pas qu'il leur faille mourir pour moi...
Dans mes prières du matin, ils ont leur place chaque jour : "Oh Divin Esprit Cosmique, je remets entre tes mains tous les animaux que nous avons tués, à qui on a pris leur chair, leur fourrure, leurs plumes, leur vie, leur amour, leur confiance pour nous les humains"...

Before I met Laura, I was a vegetarian for years because I really love animals and I couldn't stand that they had to die for me...
In my morning prayers, they have their place every day: "Oh Divine Cosmic Spirit, I place in your hands all the animals that we have killed, from whom we have taken their flesh, their fur, their feathers, their life, their love, their trust for us humans"...

I understand, there just needs to be a distinction made between all the senseless death and suffering we cause animals, things like getting hit by cars or birds flying into glass(that’s easily fixed) and the natural course of things with us eating them.

I don’t agree that we’ve taken an animal’s love or trust by ethically raising them and ending their lives. It’s a mutually beneficial relationship for animals such as cattle with the proper farmer. The farmer moves them as needed to new pasture, monitors them for disease, tends to that disease if seen. The cows in fact are happy to see the farmer, which is evident in their behavior.

I personally can’t remove my responsibility to Creation by placing the sufferings into the hands of the Universe. What I can do is face the facts and essentially remove that suffering to a very small moment in time, that’s in the natural order of things and I’m not writing any of the above as a personal attack on you Perlou, just giving my perspective after thinking about things. I understand why you pray.

 

[PERLOU]

Merci pour votre réponse, "Si" ces animaux ont la chance de tomber sur un bon éleveur, je comprends aussi de tuer sans le moins possible de souffrances mais vous savez tout comme moi que les animaux dans les abattoirs ne son pas respectés ce qui explique le refus des cameras pour filmer les mises à mort...
Les Amérindiens respectaient les animaux et les remerciaient d'accepter de donner leur vie pour les humains, tout comme la terre mère...
C'est sans doute de la sensiblerie, mais je me suis sentie coupable chaque fois qu'il a fallu euthanasier mes petits amours de compagnons de vie dont le dernier, mon petit Ugo, Yorkshire de 20 ans, le 13 juin dernier... Eux aussi sont dans mes prières chaque jour...
J'apprécie votre page car ce que vous écrivez va dans le sens du respect de la Terre Mère qui nous porte et nous nourrit...

Thank you for your answer, "If" these animals are lucky enough to find a good breeder, I also understand killing without as much suffering as possible, but you know as well as I do that animals in slaughterhouses are not respected, which explains the refusal of cameras to film the killings...
The Amerindians respected animals and thanked them for giving their lives for humans, just like mother earth...
It's probably sentimentality, but I felt guilty every time I had to euthanize my little friends of life, the last one being my little Ugo, a 20 year old Yorkshire, on June 13th... They too are in my prayers every day...
I appreciate your page because what you write goes in the direction of the respect of the Mother Earth which carries us and nourishes us...

 

[Maya]

In short this is always a pain.

Small animals we butcher ourselves, bigger animals go to professional butcher. With the costs involved for processing these days, we will be moving towards self reliancy.
Either way, for me personally killing an animal is the hardest part. Not the blood, not the smells, but the act of taking life. Makes me feel down for the rest of the day. It is a part of the circle of life on the farm. A farmer sees things come to this world, takes care of them as best as they can, and in the end, they see their demise.

I was vegetarian for 10 years but thankfuly I found out, admit to myself that my body needs meat
because I was not well.
First step after meat eating again was to arrange a little farm so my family would be as much as possible selfsustainig with all food.
So besides garden and little greenhouse we keep free range chickens and we had rabbits and sheeps. And a fishpond.

I thought that it's the most honest and humble way to eat.
You feed their life with love, respect and care you give so that they could give you back that energy.
You provide the happiest sunniest life they could have. And I think they somehow know. Just like we know.

I'd rather that we do not have to do all that, that we could all just live from sunlight or whatever.
But this reality and body lessons are here and now. We are 3D and as long as we do not transform to 4D we must
unfortunately consume others energy. Life feeds life.

So for me, the greatest lesson was gratitude. And guts to take others life with own hand.
Their blood is like our blood, their spirit will go back to their source ( collective soul for particular animal species as Cass said )
like our will to 5D and beyond.

So before I kill chicken or lamb I will hug them, kiss them, say POTS,
ask they to please forgive me and say thanks that their body will feed my body to be well and healthy.

The fastest way to do it is to cut jugular vein as @benkostka said.
It was true horror for the first time. I was shaking and crying... but after it gets 'easier' - when you accept
that's just how things work. But, yeah - gratitude and awareness of life circles at least.

3D sucks...

 

[Sol Logos]

Yup, sure have (erosion-wise especially, which also impacts water and fish). Lierre Keith does a good job on bringing some of this to light (The Vegetarian Myth: Food, Justice, and Sustainability) - see the thread on the forum, too.



Speaking of Alan Savory, a planner to boot who got it all wrong - and then opened back up grazing to reinvigorate what had been destroyed. Savory also has his detractors wherein the C02 brush keeps attaching the scene, and there are some landscape nuances mixed in:

Agree, likewise in forests do animals disturbed the forest litter and soils and open up seed beds.

This article looks at the debate on Savory’s regenerative farming theory, Holistic Management (HM). It concludes that the contexts are varied and so the “proof” of reversing desertification is not as simple as it sounds. Also talks about how HM has been studied in the past without considering the social and ecological aspects of the farming system, leading to a lack of appreciation for local knowledge. It argues too that scientific knowledge should be reorganized to give more power to farmers and that an SES lens could be beneficial to understand how social and environmental elements interact to affect farm ecosystems, and provide us with better decision-making tools.

https://www.herdingacademy.co.za/Resources/Gosnell2020_Article_AHalfCenturyOfHolisticManageme.pdf

This Life-affirming model described in this series has proven to be a useful way of balancing considerations of good land stewardship, individual health and well-being (for humans and animals), and fairness with social groupings. Even though there are some issues with sustainable development goals and donut economics, particularly the focus on carbon, it is still a helpful tool for approaching these factors in a holistic manner.

Exploring a Life-Affirming Future: An Introduction

Welcome to a series of blog posts exploring what it takes to create a life-affirming future, and the practical steps we can take to make this happen. We will be looking at the concept of life affirming ESG investing, new ways of assessing organizations' performance, and creating meaningful metrics t

www.linkedin.com

 

[benkostka]

This Life-affirming model described in this series has proven to be a useful way of balancing considerations of good land stewardship, individual health and well-being (for humans and animals), and fairness with social groupings. Even though there are some issues with sustainable development goals and donut economics, particularly the focus on carbon, it is still a helpful tool for approaching these factors in a holistic manner.

Well, one thing is for certain. The PTB use this sort of “Life-Affirming” BS just the same way they use terms like “Gender Affirming”, but it’s all like reading Ulysses by James Joyce. One comes away confused and perhaps puzzled, and then can waste more time and effort trying to decipher something that isn’t there.

I’d rather focus on pragmatic things that work and understand Nature’s cycles. Any article that has a green utopia city header produced by AI is a red flag for me.

These guys don’t want to get down to anything practical, they’re too busy affirming their lives. Don’t take it as an attack, it’s just my take after reading this article and glancing at the other ones that were linked.

 

[Sol Logos]

Well, one thing is for certain. The PTB use this sort of “Life-Affirming” BS just the same way they use terms like “Gender Affirming”, but it’s all like reading Ulysses by James Joyce. One comes away confused and perhaps puzzled, and then can waste more time and effort trying to decipher something that isn’t there.

I’d rather focus on pragmatic things that work and understand Nature’s cycles. Any article that has a green utopia city header produced by AI is a red flag for me.

These guys don’t want to get down to anything practical, they’re too busy affirming their lives. Don’t take it as an attack, it’s just my take after reading this article and glancing at the other ones that were linked.

Those who wish to support practices that follow natural cycles, but may not have the means or capability to farm themselves or know the farmer’s first-hand, need assurance that the products they purchase are not damaging the land, exploiting people, or containing chemicals that could cause them illness. In other words having good land stewardship, wellbeing for individuals, and fairness in social interactions and groups. Those posts seem to propose ways for providing this information in a way that could work.

Life-affirming in my view is the antithesis of life-denying or anti-life, which many might simply call Nihilism.

 

[benkostka]

Here’s a video of ranching operation from Idaho. They increased the organic matter in their soil from roughly 2% to 7% in 10 years, allowing them to significantly increase the density of the cattle they graze. There’s a small part with a simple water infiltration test from their regular ranch compared to a new ranch they purchased. In short, the land under 10 years of holistic management has significantly better water infiltration than land managed with constant grazing, and the environmental conditions are exactly the same. It’s all very simple stuff to put into practice.

They also graze cattle with horses on federal land, similar to how bison used to graze when there were wolves to move them.

 

[iamthatis]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1618068995923664897

Check out these crazy blow-torch acu-darts for curing bloat in the herd!

 

[Voyageur]

They also graze cattle with horses on federal land, similar to how bison used to graze when there were wolves to move them.

Liked his discussion.

Farmers north of Idaho spring graze on the home farm and summer graze their cattle on crown forested land, so their herds pop up all over the landscape covering thousands of square acres (ha. here) and then fall graze back on the home farm.

His examples of ash clay soil base with horizon development were good.

Those who wish to support practices that follow natural cycles, but may not have the means or capability to farm themselves or know the farmer’s first-hand, need assurance that the products they purchase are not damaging the land, exploiting people, or containing chemicals that could cause them illness. In other words having good land stewardship, wellbeing for individuals, and fairness in social interactions and groups. Those posts seem to propose ways for providing this information in a way that could work.

Can agree with this from the context of the small farmer/community - needing some buffers and good information and support available that they might not have. In a bigger picture, had had an initial experience starting in 1993 for near a dozen years after - albeit farm, range, forest and community. Set up were what looked to be noble goals, with a carrot for certain stewardship groups (who funded) under land management practices that helped sales on an international level. Ecology was a tenured main starting goal with standards laid down, along with outcome that would include selected recognized certification. Some practices were good, especially if kept small it might have had a better outcome, and no doubt elsewhere and under different frameworks it might work well. In this case, though; and it took time to see it, were the socioeconomic steps for communities that never materialized, even though they were stated main pillars. They were also official stewardship findings to deal with. Dare say, it looked like a greenwashing operation in the end, while decades later the communities suffered, the landscape had seen a heavier footprint while operations became more industrialized by select groups who bought out others under a mask of sustainability, while undercutting with low bid. The select groups had the capital to remain sustainable and assert more control, while other stakeholders suffered. Promises made, promises reneged upon.

Some landscape level positives were better riparian management practices by stakeholders and wildlife habitat considerations, yet not all was rosy and there was, unrecognized at the time, a certain ponerogenic process going on underneath by the big stakeholders (again, this is now seen over a 30-year period in this case).

Also, and related from what could be seen and still seen in other examples; which is not to discourage 'sound' stakeholder groups, because sometimes they have excellent people, is in the exponential expansion of stakeholder groups; government is going to get involved at some point - that is a guarantee (which may or may not be okay); the agrologist's will show up (always interesting folks), with biologists who sometimes had strange ideas and could not well understand animal herd movements, including fish habitat. Then the environmental groups would appear from hither and yon that no one seemed to know. Of course, they had all the answers readymade. Other special interests groups where then suddenly at the table while the community looked around and also wondered who these people were. Moreover, and this becomes a big picture, grants suddenly appear out of thin air that were quickly swept up and put to special interest use on a wide range of what would look to be specious issues. Before long, the communities faced meetings that had been hijacked with their hands getting tied. This may not be the norm, yet it happens.

There was and is a lot to this, so that is a nutshell version under this particular guise of land stewardship mentioned over decades of time.

So, perhaps a good rule of thumb is to keep it small, keep it local and aware with good leadership.

 

[Chad]

The following is an unrolled Twitter thread detailing a method of agriculture utilized hundreds of years ago in Hawaii. It takes a slice of the topography of the island, from the mountain peak to the sea, and attempts to use the qualities of each region to harvest what will grow best there, whilst also working holistically.

I hadn't seen this before, and, whilst i had pondered something similar, i hadn't considered how it might work on an island setting (where the consequences of each practise seem like they will be more apparent, and faster), nor did i realise that it had been done so skillfully, and on such a large scale.

Also, the Tweeter (found here) seems to have some interesting posts, so he might be of interest for some reading this thread.

Thread by @samdknowlton on Thread Reader App

@samdknowlton: Today, Hawaii imports 90% of its food. Before Captain Cook landed, the populous Native Hawaiians were entirely self-sufficient and produced more food using less land than modern Hawaiian agriculture. ...…

threadreaderapp.com

Today, Hawaii imports 90% of its food.

Before Captain Cook landed, the populous Native Hawaiians were entirely self-sufficient and produced more food using less land than modern Hawaiian agriculture.

Here is a quick tour.

Native Hawaiians developed the ahupua'a system, a geographic unit used to delineate a specific land management and food production area.

Each ahupua'a started as a narrow point high in the the volcanic peaks, spreading wider like a slice of pie as it descended towards the sea.

A single ahupua'a spanned a cross-section of the island’s ecosystems and resources.

The ahupua'a was organized around the flow of water. Boundaries ran along the natural delineation of watersheds. From the top of the system to the bottom, water was treated with the utmost care.

The upper forests were mostly untouched, with a small portion lightly managed and used to produce hardwoods and building materials

Below this area, Native Hawaiians planted agroforestry plots mixing endemic plants with the canoe plants brought by the first Polynesians

Breadfruit trees and coconut trees shaded bananas and noni trees, and sprinkled throughout the agroforest were Kukui trees. Chickens and pigs ate the fallen fruits.

This served as the Hawaiians' perennial source of starches, fats, protein, and medicinals.

In the zone below the agroforestry, Hawaiians grew their most important staple and culturally significant crop: taro

This zone was terraced and irrigated with water from the mountain streams. Water was diverted into the terraced pools, gently spilling from one to the next

Excess water would return to the stream, where it continued towards the sea.

The freshwater would eventually meet the sea and spill into rock-walled fish ponds in the tidal pools. Fish were captured with sluice gates and fattened up in the nutrient-rich brackish water

A recent study concluded that the ahupua'a system could produce 1 million metric tons of food from just 6 percent of Hawaii's land.

That's enough to feed all of the estimated 1.2 million pre-contact Native Hawaiians, or 86% of the current population of Hawaii, 1.4 million.

In contrast, Hawaii's current farmland covers 3x more land than before 1777, and the total food produced through modern methods is only 151,700 metric tons

That's only 15% of what was produced more than 200 years ago by Native Hawaiians on 3x less land without external inputs

The ahuapua'a system was first conceived around the 15th century. It was successfully used for more than 1,000 years to produce a cornucopia of foods, maximize and sustain precious water resources, preserve a rich ecology, and support a vibrant culture.

Today, we go straight for the shiny technological fix; we've lost track of the whole and focus too much on the individual pieces, resulting in fragile agriculture systems

The ahuapa'a is an example of the kind of agricultural ingenuity that is possible in each unique bio-region

The second to last tweet should read: The ahuapua'a system is believed to have been conceived in the 15 century. However, some evidence shows that it was successfully used for over 1,000 years.

Thanks to all who pointed out my math deficiency. I also mix up my colors.

 

[Sol Logos]

Liked his discussion.

Farmers north of Idaho spring graze on the home farm and summer graze their cattle on crown forested land, so their herds pop up all over the landscape covering thousands of square acres (ha. here) and then fall graze back on the home farm.

His examples of ash clay soil base with horizon development were good.



Can agree with this from the context of the small farmer/community - needing some buffers and good information and support available that they might not have. In a bigger picture, had had an initial experience starting in 1993 for near a dozen years after - albeit farm, range, forest and community. Set up were what looked to be noble goals, with a carrot for certain stewardship groups (who funded) under land management practices that helped sales on an international level. Ecology was a tenured main starting goal with standards laid down, along with outcome that would include selected recognized certification. Some practices were good, especially if kept small it might have had a better outcome, and no doubt elsewhere and under different frameworks it might work well. In this case, though; and it took time to see it, were the socioeconomic steps for communities that never materialized, even though they were stated main pillars. They were also official stewardship findings to deal with. Dare say, it looked like a greenwashing operation in the end, while decades later the communities suffered, the landscape had seen a heavier footprint while operations became more industrialized by select groups who bought out others under a mask of sustainability, while undercutting with low bid. The select groups had the capital to remain sustainable and assert more control, while other stakeholders suffered. Promises made, promises reneged upon.

Some landscape level positives were better riparian management practices by stakeholders and wildlife habitat considerations, yet not all was rosy and there was, unrecognized at the time, a certain ponerogenic process going on underneath by the big stakeholders (again, this is now seen over a 30-year period in this case).

Also, and related from what could be seen and still seen in other examples; which is not to discourage 'sound' stakeholder groups, because sometimes they have excellent people, is in the exponential expansion of stakeholder groups; government is going to get involved at some point - that is a guarantee (which may or may not be okay); the agrologist's will show up (always interesting folks), with biologists who sometimes had strange ideas and could not well understand animal herd movements, including fish habitat. Then the environmental groups would appear from hither and yon that no one seemed to know. Of course, they had all the answers readymade. Other special interests groups where then suddenly at the table while the community looked around and also wondered who these people were. Moreover, and this becomes a big picture, grants suddenly appear out of thin air that were quickly swept up and put to special interest use on a wide range of what would look to be specious issues. Before long, the communities faced meetings that had been hijacked with their hands getting tied. This may not be the norm, yet it happens.

There was and is a lot to this, so that is a nutshell version under this particular guise of land stewardship mentioned over decades of time.

So, perhaps a good rule of thumb is to keep it small, keep it local and aware with good leadership.

That same series, mentions a similar view of requiring small local networks to assure good practices. There’s also a bit on how local networks can link up for further resilience. Here’s a diagram of the same:

Described in this way:

The formation of large, decentralized fractal networks that share common values and principles can be achieved by establishing a network structure composed of various levels, connected by grassroots initiatives that are voluntarily led by a representative from each cluster

 

[benkostka]

Here’s a website for anyone interested of some old books about farming. Two in particular are rather easy reads, Ploughman’s Folly and Fertility Farming. They detail out the damage that’s been done to fields through our industrial agriculture system and show that the effects were well known in the 1940s and 1950s.

Small Farms Library - Journey to Forever

Another decent read that’s been published recently is the book Call of the Reed Warbler by Charles Massy. He’s a sheep farmer in Australia who completely changed his farm to regenerative practices and significantly improved his operation. He was essentially forced to do this because he barely survived a drought in the 1980s and since his conversion has easily weathered other droughts in Australia. He’s got a TEDx talk too.

 

[benkostka]

Short easy video to watch from Greg Judy. He talks about the importance of having the correct size animals on your land so they don’t destroy your pastures when it’s raining. Lotta cows in Merica have gotten very large, but the original cattle brought over tended to be less than 1,000 pounds and were much better at finishing on grass. There’s lots of farmers working with smaller breeds like Dexters, Corriente, Mashona or Florida Cracker cattle. These breeds thrive on grass and some won’t eat grain. Greg Judy raises South Pols which was bred specifically to do well on grass and stay smaller.