New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: We've recently made changes to our user database and have removed inactive and spam users. If you can not login, please re-register.

#1 2016-02-19 00:12:24

IanM
Member
From: Chicago
Registered: 2015-12-14
Posts: 174

Cattle

Cattle is a pretty important animal in the western world. Not only do steers provide beef, prevalent in such meats as filet mignon and the ubiquitous hamburger, cows provide milk, a dietary staple in many cultures, and butter, the most energy-dense food that explorers often eat and which can come in handy during expeditions of the outback from a mature colony.

The high of annual per-capita milk consumption is around 350 kg/person (http://chartsbin.com/view/1491), excluding butter. The high of annual per-capita butter consumption is around 4 kg/person (http://www.dairyinfo.gc.ca/index_e.php? … o&s4=tb-bt), with each kg of butter deriving from 19.38 L of milk (https://www.ilri.org/InfoServ/Webpub/fu … essing.htm), leading to 193.8 L of milk to make butter for a colony of 100. The density of milk is around 1030 kg/m^3 (1.03 kg/L), leading to 199.614 kg of milk for strictly butter purposes, in addition for the 3,500 kg of the non-butter milk for the colony, leading to a total of 3,699.614 kg of milk, rounded up to 3,700 kg. The average cow produces around 21,000 lb of milk every year (http://www.dairymoos.com/how-much-milk-do-cows-give/), which comes out to 9,534 kg, almost triple the colonists' needs, but a surplus they can perhaps make into cheese, yogurt, or perhaps even export as buttermilk for some financial profit.

Now let's look at beef. The high end of annual per-capita beef consumption is around 100 lb (45.4 kg)/person, leading to 454 kg needed for the whole colony. A single 1,200 lb steer yields a low of 740 lb of beef (335.96 kg), leading to 2 steers needed for the colony, or a total of 3 cattle, though there would likely be slightly more for breeding.

A herd of 45 cattle need around 275 bales of hay per feeding period (http://www.iqbeef.org/TBC/Documents/Cal … _Needs.pdf), which is 150 days, resulting in 670 bales/year for the herd of 45. For the sake of defensive pessimism, let's assume the colony has a herd of 10 cattle total, even if that's already well above their needs. This comes out to 150 bales a year (again, rounding up for defensive pessimism). The bales average 1200 lb (idem) each, or 545 kg, leading to 180,000 lb (or 81,720 kg) of hay a year. Hay is dried alfalfa, and there are around 3.5 tons/acre of alfalfa (http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_ … _08_14.pdf), which, given 90 tons for the herd as stated prior, results in 25.7142857 acres needed for cattle alfalfa, or around 1,120,114.3 sq. ft./104,062 m^2, or 2.6 Chicago city blocks, to grow for hay for a herd of 10 cattle.


The Earth is the cradle of the mind, but one cannot live in a cradle forever. -Paraphrased from Tsiolkovsky

Offline

#2 2016-02-19 11:32:01

Excelsior
Member
From: Excelsior, USA
Registered: 2014-02-22
Posts: 120

Re: Cattle

The specific breed plays a big role in feed conversion. Dexters, for example, are more efficient, and a fraction of the size, which makes them much easier to manage.

And if you really want red meat, ostrich is far more efficient. But you can't milk it.


The Former Commodore

Offline

#3 2016-02-19 11:56:13

IanM
Member
From: Chicago
Registered: 2015-12-14
Posts: 174

Re: Cattle

Dexter cattle are smaller, yielding only 400 lb (181 kg) of meat (http://www.motherearthnews.com/homestea … jzgoe.aspx) each and only 1-2 gallons of milk a day, or around 300 gallons (1,135.62 L), or 1,170 kg, leading to the colony needing 4 milk cows and 3 beef steers. Though, with such numbers, a herd of 10 can still suffice with breeding specimens factored in, with presumably lower feed. I actually support having Dexters now.


The Earth is the cradle of the mind, but one cannot live in a cradle forever. -Paraphrased from Tsiolkovsky

Offline

#4 2016-02-19 20:48:12

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 10,637

Re: Cattle

Husbandry will all come under the same transport needs to allow for a safe transit to mars. That said we will want artificial gravity to keep the animals sort of comfortable along the way. Which when we look at right sizing the ship for transport, I find that its going to be even larger than the ones we are planning to use for manned flight to mars.

Offline

#5 2016-02-19 21:33:28

IanM
Member
From: Chicago
Registered: 2015-12-14
Posts: 174

Re: Cattle

That is true, and indeed any husbandry would come in a somewhat mature colony. That being said, hopefully this Noah's Ark of sort will be helped by miniature versions of the animals such as Dexter cattle.


The Earth is the cradle of the mind, but one cannot live in a cradle forever. -Paraphrased from Tsiolkovsky

Offline

#6 2016-02-20 10:07:15

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 2,712
Website

Re: Cattle

I have long contended that the colonization ships should be nuclear pulse propulsion.  This technique works better in the larger sizes,  say,  10,000 tons ignition mass and up.  Ships like that are huge:  spin gravity is easy. 

Because of the side effects,  very few of these should be built and launched.  Once up there,  we should use them for decades. 

There are two side effects to be very careful of:  fallout and EMP.  Once launched,  EMP is the more restrictive.  I do not think we ought to base them in LEO.  Higher orbits should be OK.  Or possibly base from the moon. 

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#7 2017-08-11 11:14:39

Oldfart1939
Member
Registered: 2016-11-26
Posts: 972

Re: Cattle

Just going through the older life support threads and came across this one. I may be one of the few members of the Mars Society with some cattle ranching background. From 1996 through 2013, I operated a small cattle ranch in Wyoming with an average herd size of 60 mother cows and 2-3 bulls. This was what is called within the beef industry a "cow-calf operation." The cows were all retained for breeding purposes for an average of 12-14 years, and bulls were replaced every 3 years for genetic diversity. This was necessary, since selected heifer calves were retained as "replacements' for aging mother cows who would be sold when no longer breedable.

One thing to note about transport of cattle to Mars is the gestation period, which is nearly that of humans. It would make good sense to transport pregnant heifer cows--those bearing their calves from the first pregnancy. This would give an average of 10 calves during their breeding lifetime of 12 years, although we don't have a clue as to the effects of reduced gravity on bovine lifespans and reproductive potential.

Others have suggested transport of Irish Dexter cattle because of smaller weight and ease of transportation. Also lower feed requirements. For the first go-around, this makes sense, but as time passes, more efficient breeds for milk production, such as Jersey cows, would be good. The key to evaluation for dairy cows is actually butterfat production and not sheer volume of milk produced, and the Jersey breed is one of the top butterfat producing breeds. Thankfully, Jerseys are a smaller breed, and are frequently crossbred with Irish Dexters for their first calves, which are generally utilized as veal calves. As time passes, more efficient beef production could be gradually introduced. The breed I raised was superb, the German Alpine breed: Gelbvieh. Also the Black and Red Angus cattle are renowned for excellent meat, and the cross between Angus and Gelbvieh is one of the major products bringing top dollar at the cattle auctions because of the heterozygous hybrid growth enhancement. These are named Balancers, since they supposedly "balance" carcass quality against increased size of the steers. My last Balancer steer that I had slaughtered and processed weighed 1875 pounds when brought to the processor's facility. I sold half of him and still had wonderful  beef for 3 + years as a result. A half carcass, hanging on the rail, weighed nearly 600 pounds.

In a Mars scenario, a lot of the by-products such as the organs normally eaten by humans, trimming wastes, etc. could be utilized for chicken feed. A nice hide provides leather, which would be one less thing to import from Earth.

Transportation of cattle would not be a problem, if spin-artificial gravity is available. For these larger breeds, I would suggest transportation of recently weaned calves, ~ 5-6 months of age. They would gain roughly 400-500 pounds on the transit to Mars over 7-8 months. Figure on a weight gain of a pound a day or a bit less with the smaller breeds. With regard the Irish Dexters, they could be started on their journey in an already pregnant state and arrive with a calf ready to hit the ground. I haven't addressed the production of cattle feed in this thread, but that can be done elsewhere.

Offline

#8 2017-08-11 11:42:03

elderflower
Member
Registered: 2016-06-19
Posts: 557

Re: Cattle

Probably would be better to ship your small heifers and implant frozen embryos when they get there. I wouldn't be surprised if the stress involved in transporting them will cause them to abort.
Later you can introduce frozen semen for genetic diversity as well. You would want bulls selected for docility. A rampant large bull is capable of doing a lot of damage.
I do think Jerseys would be a good choice as they are fairly easy to manage. Also they are beautiful.

Offline

#9 2017-08-11 12:11:13

Oldfart1939
Member
Registered: 2016-11-26
Posts: 972

Re: Cattle

I would not bother to ship frozen embryos, since semen take up  lot less space and apparatus for doing so. Bulls are an issue that is horribly misunderstood. Certain breeds of bulls are pretty feisty, especially Jersey bulls, who have the worst record of attributable deaths associated with them. My Gelbvieh bulls--they would allow my wife to get on their backs and ride around the ranch. They were all her pets and dearly loved her. We even had a Black Angus bull who was super friendly and was a "licker;" would come up to people and raise his head and lick their faces. Bulls are just fine when properly managed and treated. Most of my bulls would take food from my hand.

I have 2 views about transport of cattle; the first to go could be the Dexters, already bred. If the calf makes it to full term and survives, we're 9 months ahead of our plan for herd construction. If the cow aborts, we then have a 28 day delay in re-impregantion by AI. The larger, meat oriented breeds, send them out as heifer calves, possibly as bottle fed pre-weaner cattle.

Offline

#10 2017-08-11 13:55:30

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 2,712
Website

Re: Cattle

You all are talking about real colonization here.  This presumes that you have already solved the problems of constructing habitable agricultural spaces on otherwise hostile-to-Earth-life Mars.  It also renders irrelevant the notion of being restricted in size or design of your colonization transport vessels. 

So build the giant nuclear pulse-propulsion ships.  Spin them slowly for artificial gravity,  and build a habitable feedlot/pasture space on board for live animal transport at simulated Earthly conditions.  These will have hulls made of marine-grade steel plate (1" and thicker),  so it's got a lot of radiation-shielding properties to it,  too. 

You can "burn" extra at departure to shorten the journey by accelerating partway there,  and decelerating extra at the end.  Think Isp > 10,000 sec at 2-4 gees vehicle acceleration during the burn.  Closer to 20,000 sec at 20,000+ tons.  The bigger,  the higher the Isp,  and the easier it is to lower acceleration gees to a more acceptable 1-2 gees. 

This also "simply presumes" there is some sort of large lander available to take stuff from orbit to the surface.  You really do not want to attempt to land a 10,000+ ton ship.  But when you talk major colonization efforts,  this really is the ballpark you are playing in. 

Yeah,  I can think big,  too!

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#11 2017-08-11 14:18:23

Terraformer
Member
From: Lancashire
Registered: 2007-08-27
Posts: 2,506
Website

Re: Cattle

Once we have a heifers on Mars, can we introduce new breeds by repeatedly backcrossing them with the breed we want to introduce using stored semen, without having to bring over any new animals? So they wouldn't be pure bred, but they'd only be say 1/16 whichever breed we used. So we'd start with Irish Dexters, then we'd have Jersey-Dexter hybrids, then cross those with Jerseys, then again...


"I guarantee you that at some point, everything's going to go south on you, and you're going to say, 'This is it, this is how I end.' Now you can either accept that, or you can get to work." - Mark Watney

Offline

#12 2017-08-12 06:06:11

louis
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2008-03-24
Posts: 2,675

Re: Cattle

Artificial womb technology is proceeding at a fast pace...

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6042 … cial-womb/

It's quite likely that within a couple of decades you won't need to take an animal to Mars to start up a herd.

However, as far as beef goes, we also have the vegetarian option, which delivers everything meat eaters like about beef:

https://www.impossiblefoods.com/burger/


Let's Go to Mars...Google on: Fast Track to Mars blogspot.com

Offline

#13 2017-08-12 07:49:07

Oldfart1939
Member
Registered: 2016-11-26
Posts: 972

Re: Cattle

What all Vegans and most Vegetarians seem to ignore is something very basic: TASTE!
Yeah, it's conceivable that we can make a "meat-like" synthetic protein produced by genetic engineering, but it will just be a blob of some unappetizing slime, as far as I'm concerned. To get the benefit of the beef industry, simply think about this. A 24 ounce prime Porterhouse, charbroiled on the grill to medium rare, then served up with a fresh green salad and a loaded baked potato. Served with a fine Burgundy or Oregon Pinot Noir. It would even make a Vegan think twice about their "commitment to a healthier life style." Which of course, is total BS.

I go to the health club 3 days a week (weather permitting), and do a full body workout on the weight machines; last week I returned to the men's locker room to find 4 paramedics treating a guy who appeared to be in his late 50's to early 60's. As I was dressing, I was listening to the conversation and the questions he was being asked. Seems that he'd experienced dizziness, and was unable to stand. His cognition wasn't great and couldn't remember which locker he was using or where his clothes were. He was being given Oxygen and having his BP monitored, but they finally decided no heart attack, but was possibly ketotic. The one Paramedic said that the cure for what was wrong with him was a big Pizza and maybe some beer. "Oh, NO," he proudly proclaimed. He was a VEGAN. The Paramedics all looked at one another and rolled their eyes. They simply waited for the guy's wife to pick him up and take him to his own physician. Thus endeth the epistle of the VEGAN life style.
I personally am 78 years young. I take ZERO  medications, eat red meats, lots of green vegetables and only minimal carbohydrates. My normal BP is 124/72. I eat red meat, eggs, cheese, butter (no margarine), and still am able to rock climb, hike in the Rockies, and will probably be doing so 5-10 years from now.
I would personally LOVE to go to Mars and begin some animal husbandry; but I'd rather be doing hard-core science and the agriculture as a part of the communal work getting a permanent research station up and running.
Final statement: I still fly my own airplane (Piper Dakota) and have a valid FAA Class 2 Medical Certificate (needed for Commercial pilots).

Comment: VEGANS may not live any longer than those eating normal diets, BUT IT WILL FEEL LIKE A LOT LONGER!

Offline

#14 2017-08-12 08:50:49

RobertDyck
Member
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,034
Website

Re: Cattle

I said several times that I expect a permanent Mars base will initially be entirely vegan. Not for an philosophical reason, but just simply because it's practical. It takes several pounds of fodder (today called animal feed) to produce a single pound of meat. Since we have to build pressurized greenhouses for everything we grow, land area is an issue. The website Louis linked for Impossible Burger says:

Compared to cows, the Impossible Burger uses 95% less land, 74% less water, and creates 87% less greenhouse gas emissions. And it’s 100% free of hormones, antibiotics, and artificial ingredients.

Some meat-eaters complained, so my response was once we have a large and rich Mars settlement, say about 1,000 people, then we could afford to transport livestock to Mars. Remember you can't put livestock in a plastic film greenhouse; they would bite/peck/claw/paw their way out. Once they puncture the film, they release pressure and die. You need a hard wall pressurized barn. It has to be heated, oxygen recycled, and all that sewage has to be recycled.

And how do you get livestock to Mars? I suggested transporting calves weaned from milk, because the first cattle won't have milk when they arrive. Calves are lower mass so less expensive to transport. And transport them in hibernation. Experiments with mice and rats found they go into hibernation with hydrogen sulphide gas (H2S). At 80 parts per million, their metabolic activity drops. By dropping ambient temperature, their body temperature drops to +2°C. Oxygen consumption drops to 10% of an active, awake animal. They don't produce urine or feces, and don't eat. You also have to drop O2 and increase CO2 in order to do this. They tried it with rabbits, found they had to increase H2S gas, and only dropped body temperature to +5°C, but it worked. They haven't gotten it to work with larger animals. One researcher tried it with deer, elk, and moose. He replaced 50% of blood volume with saline; that's water with the same salt concentration as blood. He found 10% of animals died, and of those that lived, 30% suffered permanent brain damage. Obviously you can't do that with a human, but with with cattle you can just send extra animals. When the first calves arrive, settlers get a meat meal. Initially I called this "veal", but some vegans pointed out veal is produced by force-feeding calves. These calves will be intended as breeding stock, so won't be force-fed. Not sure if you would call their meat "beef" or "veal". And if surviving livestock do nothing but stand around, eat, shit, and sleep, that's Ok.

But again, look at requirements listed by "Impossible Burger". That means meat will always be a very expensive luxury on Mars.

There was some discussion that this technique could be used to put astronauts in hibernation. Problem is larger animals don't respond as well to H2S, and you can't replace astronaut blood with saline because that causes brain damage. Doing this requires 80 ppm H2s, but with humans any H2S above 50 ppm causes eye damage. And H2S is dangerous, at 800 ppm for 5 minutes or more it's lethal. At 1,000 ppm it causes collapse and loss of breathing after a single breath.

George Tech did an experiment with piglets. They made several changes from what I described: they used piglets instead of calves, failed to reduce O2, failed to increase CO2, and most importantly failed to reduce ambient temperature. They found piglet body temperature did not drop with H2S, but they failed to replicate so many conditions that I consider the experiment invalid.

Back to the point: again look at requirements quoted above. Again on Mars, meat will always be a very expensive.

Offline

#15 2017-08-12 09:42:26

louis
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2008-03-24
Posts: 2,675

Re: Cattle

Think you are missing the point re the Impossible Foods burger...they are looking to replicate excatly taste, mouthfeel, and nutritional content of a meat burger partly by producing constituents that are molecularly the same as those found in meat.

Oldfart1939 wrote:

What all Vegans and most Vegetarians seem to ignore is something very basic: TASTE!
Yeah, it's conceivable that we can make a "meat-like" synthetic protein produced by genetic engineering, but it will just be a blob of some unappetizing slime, as far as I'm concerned. To get the benefit of the beef industry, simply think about this. A 24 ounce prime Porterhouse, charbroiled on the grill to medium rare, then served up with a fresh green salad and a loaded baked potato. Served with a fine Burgundy or Oregon Pinot Noir. It would even make a Vegan think twice about their "commitment to a healthier life style." Which of course, is total BS.

I go to the health club 3 days a week (weather permitting), and do a full body workout on the weight machines; last week I returned to the men's locker room to find 4 paramedics treating a guy who appeared to be in his late 50's to early 60's. As I was dressing, I was listening to the conversation and the questions he was being asked. Seems that he'd experienced dizziness, and was unable to stand. His cognition wasn't great and couldn't remember which locker he was using or where his clothes were. He was being given Oxygen and having his BP monitored, but they finally decided no heart attack, but was possibly ketotic. The one Paramedic said that the cure for what was wrong with him was a big Pizza and maybe some beer. "Oh, NO," he proudly proclaimed. He was a VEGAN. The Paramedics all looked at one another and rolled their eyes. They simply waited for the guy's wife to pick him up and take him to his own physician. Thus endeth the epistle of the VEGAN life style.
I personally am 78 years young. I take ZERO  medications, eat red meats, lots of green vegetables and only minimal carbohydrates. My normal BP is 124/72. I eat red meat, eggs, cheese, butter (no margarine), and still am able to rock climb, hike in the Rockies, and will probably be doing so 5-10 years from now.
I would personally LOVE to go to Mars and begin some animal husbandry; but I'd rather be doing hard-core science and the agriculture as a part of the communal work getting a permanent research station up and running.
Final statement: I still fly my own airplane (Piper Dakota) and have a valid FAA Class 2 Medical Certificate (needed for Commercial pilots).

Comment: VEGANS may not live any longer than those eating normal diets, BUT IT WILL FEEL LIKE A LOT LONGER!


Let's Go to Mars...Google on: Fast Track to Mars blogspot.com

Offline

#16 2017-08-12 10:06:09

RobertDyck
Member
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,034
Website

Re: Cattle

One problem today with alternative foods is companies immediately charge more than traditional foods. Again look at requirements for cattle vs "Impossible Burger". That means veggie burgers should be less expensive than beef. If they were, a lot of people would buy them. There will always be spoiled rich brats who buy expensive stuff just to show off as a status symbol. And there are other who prey on them, selling absolutely horrible crap claiming it's "expensive" or "exclusive". For example: escargot. I haven't tried it, but everyone who has says the butter garlic sauce tastes absolutely delicious, but the snails themselves are rubbery and very little taste. What taste they do have tastes like a swamp. You realize the word "escargot" is simply the French word for "snails".

I live in Manitoba. People are frugal here. There are a disturbing number of spoiled rich brats, like everywhere, and the number of spoiled rich brats appears to be increasing. But average people are frugal. I'm sure if alternative foods were sold at lower price they would sell. Not crap, but good food at low price.

I saw a TV show called "Guns, Germs, and Steel". It was about colonial expansion and why European society spread across the world. One point was using local resources is far more efficient. For example, when Europeans tried to colonize equatorial Africa they tried to grow wheat. They found the crop did not grow well. Settlers tried to plant right beside a river so wheat would have plenty of water, but encountered another problem. They criticized native people because they built villages on high ground, far from the river. But European immigrants didn't understand mosquitoes grow in the water, and carry malaria. Furthermore, the river floods. Locals grew sorghum, a grain that would grow near their villages and in that climate. So I looked for what's local to my province. Elk, bison and moose are native here. Moose are difficult to ranch for a few reasons, however Elk eat plants that grow farther north where traditional food crops will not grow. Elk can be ranched on land that otherwise cannot be used for agriculture. Most people are familiar with Plains Bison (Americans call them Buffalo), but there's also Wood Bison. That variety of bison is actually larger, and eats food in boreal shield eco-zone. It's difficult to grow crops on the east side of Lake Winnipeg, because soil is only a couple inches deep. In places bare bedrock is exposed. You could raise Wood Bison there, in the forest, it's their natural environment. Elk meat and bison meat are available in grocery stores in Winnipeg, but they're more expensive than beef. That's stupid! They should be less expensive. It's red meat, tastes very similar to beef, but elk and bison are slightly leaner. Delicious! But price per pound is higher, so people here don't buy it. They were available in major grocery stores a few years ago, but today you can only find them in specialty grocery stores. Again, stupid! They should be less expensive, grown on land that otherwise cannot be used for agriculture.

This relates to Mars because veggie burgers should be dramatically less expensive. Again, look at resources, veggie products as meat substitutes should be less expensive. But they aren't! That's stupid!

Offline

#17 2017-08-13 07:44:57

Oldfart1939
Member
Registered: 2016-11-26
Posts: 972

Re: Cattle

Other factors regarding meat production need to be considered. One of these often overlooked it time from birth to animal slaughter. For larger and heavier animals, the choice becomes clear: swine, or more frequently called PIGS. By comparison, they mature to useful weight in approximately 1/4th the time of cattle, and have the highest feed efficiency. Feed efficiency is the ratio of feed given the animal per pound of weight gain. For pigs, this is roughly 3, or 3 pounds of feed per pound of pig produced. This, coupled with the time required for birth to mature and fully grown animal of 6 months (or less, if you really want those pork chops NOW!), would seem to make this the livestock animal the first choice. Poultry is even more efficient and faster to mature weight--12 to 14 weeks. As a dedicated carnivore, I am highly skeptical of these miracle meat substitutes having the taste and texture of the real thing. Probably the Tilapia farming would be ahead of the mammalian and avian animal crops, simply due to the ease by which they could be transported as eggs. Fish--I can handle. "Mystery 'meat,'" not so much.

Last edited by Oldfart1939 (2017-08-13 07:58:58)

Offline

#18 2017-08-13 09:43:07

RobertDyck
Member
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,034
Website

Re: Cattle

Reply moved to Crops

Last edited by RobertDyck (2017-08-13 17:21:54)

Offline

#19 2017-08-13 10:33:09

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 10,637

Re: Cattle

So for husbandry needs we would want underground, mural painted walls with artificial lighting and natural sod ground for other needs. Of course fencing and other such between spicies and other augments as we need to be able to make it work.

Offline

#20 2017-08-13 11:13:10

Oldfart1939
Member
Registered: 2016-11-26
Posts: 972

Re: Cattle

I'm going to shift the further comments from cattle thread to both the chickens and swine threads. Maybe the administrator (hint, hint, SpaceNut!!) could combine all these comments under a common "Livestock and Animal Husbandry" thread?

Last edited by Oldfart1939 (2017-08-13 11:27:32)

Offline

#21 2017-08-13 16:25:15

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 10,637

Re: Cattle

I broke chicken and swine out of the crops topic so as to keep it closer to growing of food for human consumption but then again these are animals that eat what we will not in most cases under the husbandry broad category so in that sense food for thought for what we should be eating as well....

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB