Robert Plamondon's Poultry Newsletter, August 19, 2007
you didn't ask for this newsletter, or don't want it anymore,
please scroll down
to the bottom of the message for easy instructions to make your
subscription go away.
News From the Farm
Cure for Crows?
Several people wrote in with suggestions for dealing with my crow problem. As you'll recall, the crows have been stealing eggs
from the nests, dropping them on the road, and eating the contents. Shoals of shells along the road are embarrassing!
Do crows avoid places where dead crows can be seen? I received a couple of variations of the advice that crows
freak out if they see dead crows, so displaying dead crows will drive them off. I tried two different methods,
including the "hang 'em from a string and let them swing in the wind" trick. Didn't work.
Don't crows hate cayenne pepper? Another suggestion was the old
"fill an egg with cayenne pepper" trick. I didn't try this -- people also believe it works with chickens, too,
but it doesn't. Birds don't think cayenne pepper is "hot" at all. (People have tried controlling
rodents by mixing chicken feed with enough cayenne pepper to make it inedible to mammals, without
affecting birds at all.)
How about scarecrows? I also built a scarecrow with an old pair of overalls, flannel shirt, and straw
hat I had lying around. The thing startled
me a couple of times but had no effect on the crows.
Maybe tricks like dead crows or scarecrows work if the crows have a lot of equally good places to go. For example,
if everyone in the neighborhood had just planted their cornfields, and only one field had scarecrows, the crows
might leave that one with the scarecrows
alone -- Plenty more where that came from. But I'm the only one around
running a 24-hour egg buffet, so they keep coming back.
How about shooting them? What worked was shooting them. After shooting two crows on my main pasture,
they've kept away. The back pasture has fewer
crows but is still something of a problem, since it's much harder for me to sneak up on them over there.
Boring solutions work; colorful ones don't. This is my usual experience.
People love colorful solutions because they make a great story, and they'll repeat the story to other people even if
they're pretty sure it doesn't work.
Simple, direct, unaesthetic solutions have nothing going for them except that they work. They don't get repeated so much
because they're not very interesting to a general audience.
Apparently, a passing score
is 50%: if it sounds good, lots of people repeat it whether they try it or not, and the method (true or not) will be remembered.
If it works but doesn't sound good, some people will still know about it, but not so many -- "the people who are in the know, know."
Or, to put it another way, superstitions are
part of our cultural heritage, while methods that actually work are known only by specialists. Which, in
a nutshell, is what's wrong with the world.
Predators are smart and observant. I rarely hear people mention this, but predators are smarter and more observant than
people give them credit for. Now that
I've killed two crows, at least a hundred are avoiding my farm. I've seen the same effect with four-footed predators:
when the farmers and the federal trapper are on their toes about livestock-eaters,
the predators not only get the message, they pass it on
to their young, and a balance is struck. Practically all the predators are eating wildlife rather than livestock, and this means that
both predators and livestock get to have a normal lifespan. But if you don't kill any predators, their caution fades. After a couple
of generations, the mothers
stop teaching farm-avoidance to their young, and then the clueless young predators kill
a lot of livestock before inevitably being killed themselves. Which is a bad deal all around. To misquote the song, "Mamas, don't let your
babies grow up to be livestock eaters!"
Summer Book Doldrums
The last time I auctioned off a book, it sold for less than three bucks. Summer's a terrible time to sell poultry books. But I'm a slow
learner sometimes, and I'm auctioning off a copy of "Success With Baby Chicks."
Keeping it Cool
It's funny how often you can come up with a new application for facts that have been generally known for ages. One of
the problems we have at the farmers' market is to keep our products cool. With fresh broilers, the use of coolers with
of ice is the right answer -- nothing can beat ice for this, and we're glad we bought an ice machine, even though it seems
like we have to spend $500 in repairs every two or three years.
Eggs are more difficult. Putting them in coolers is a good start, and they keep pretty cold all day long if the
cooler is full and you keep the lid closed, but they don't stay cold during the market when the cooler is half-empty
and the lid is going up and down. If we use "blue ice" or a container full of ice, water condenses on the outside and
tends to make the cartons wet. Wet cartons are bad for the eggs and bad for business.
With frozen broilers, it's even tougher. Brolers start to thaw at around 26 F, so ice doesn't really help. Dry ice works great
and isn't terribly expensive, but our source of dry ice is a one-hour round-trip from our farm. Inconvenient.
A couple of months ago, a bit of Freshman Chemistry came back to me. A saturated salt solution melts at 0 F. This used
to be the coldest temperature that could be produced in the laboratory, which is why the Farenheit scale puts zero at this
point. With less salt, you get a temperature that's intermediate between 0 and 32 degrees. (By the way, my experience with
saturated salt solutions is that it stays pretty slushy even at -5 or -10 F, so don't worry if this happens to you.)
I tried mixing a random amount of salt in some convenient containers (20 oz. soda bottles and two-quart plastic pitchers)
and the results were gratifying. When water condensed on the outside of these containers, it didn't drip, it froze into a thick
layer of frost. I can put one of these containers on
top of an egg carton and it won't become damp at all.
With frozen broilers, the results are also good. I'll end the market with my salt-water ice mostly melted, but the broilers
are as hard as a rock.
The inspector from the Oregon Dept. of Agriculture Food-Safety Inspection Service was impressed!
Using Salt-Water Ice In Your Cooler
To make a saturated salt solution, use one cup of salt per quart and add water to make one quart (or liter). This
will not freeze unless your freezer is at 0 F or below, which a lot of freezers aren't.
If you only use half as much salt, the freezing point should be around
15 F, which will be plenty for refrigerated stuff.
Soda bottles make good salt-water ice container. When filling them, squeeze the sides a little so they aren't really full,
to ensure that expansion won't split them. A 20 oz. soda bottle of salt-water ice is okay for a tiny cooler, like you'd put a
six-pack of soda cans into. A two-liter bottle is better for larger coolers.
Sterlite makes a nice oblong 2-qt. pitcher that is the same width as an egg carton, and is about three cartons high. So once
I've sold three dozen eggs, I can put ice in the cooler.
Salt-water ice works fine for everything I use coolers for -- the eggs and broilers we sell, the market produce we buy,
picnics, and so on. It's less wet and messy than regular ice and works infinitely better than "Blue Ice," which claims to be
colder than ice, but isn't. Condensation drips off Blue Ice rather than freezing, so who are they trying to kid? A few minutes spent making some
salt-water ice bottles will come in handy and cost next to nothing.
Armchair General Disease: Is There A Cure?
I've noticed that everyone knows how to farm except farmers. If you ask a farmer about the right way to farm, he'll
pause and tell you what he's doing this year -- and how it's not working out the way he expected. Then he'll tell you
what he did last year,
and how that was no picnic either. And, if you haven't run away yet, he'll let you know
what he's thinking about doing next year. He lives in a world with plenty of
options, but no certainties.
Non-farmers, on the other hand, know all about farming. To them, farming is a world with plenty of certainties and
no options. There are no options because there's a one-size-fits-all solution for everything. They read about it in a magazine.
They can't understand how real farmers can be so stupid. If you don't farm, farming is the simplest thing in the world.
For a long time I held the following theory about armchair experts: "They're morons." This seemed to fit the
facts well enough.
Later, though, I changed
my mind. Whle the armchair experts had ignorant, idiotic opinions in areas where I'm expert, I noticed that they're
often competent enough in their own areas of expertise.
Maybe they're a bunch of idiot savants? Naw -- that won't wash either. Then I realized the chilling
truth: every single one of us is like that. We're all morons when we move outside our own fields.
The trick, I've decided, is to try to avoid opening my yap except where I have some kind of personal
knowledge. )Not that I'm good at following through on this or anything, but the principle is sound.)
For example, I have never saved the world. Because I've never done it, I'm not an expert. My opinions are
probably ignorant and unworkable, and I shouldn't foist them on people without some kind of prominent
Similarly, most other people have never saved the world, either. So when someone else describes a foolproof
plan to save the world, I figure he's a moron, just like everyone else (unless he's already saved the world two
or three times and established a track record). The visionary plans of such non-experts probably
contain nuggets of wisdom as well as foolishness, but I can't tell which are which, and neither can he.
Surprisingly, I've found this concept to be liberating. I used to assume that smart people who yammered
about pie-in-the-sky stuff had to be con men, because smart people couldn't possibly be so stupid. Now I realize
that no one is stupider than a smart person who's wandered outside of his area of expertise. They are more to be
pitied than blamed.
It also explains why politics and the media are such freak shows. Politicians and reporters spend their time
repeating other people's conclusions, rather than sticking to areas where they have hands-on experience. This means
that they don't really undertand what's going on. Eveything they say is at least a little bit dumbed-down and inaccurate.
And politicians and reporters repeat each other's stuff endlessly, losing a little bit of truth each time,
until it's as dumbed-down and inaccurate as it's possible to
be. For both professions, a good story is more useful than truth anway.
While I find politicians and reporters easy to ignore, it's harder with dumbed-down, inaccurate views of rural issues,
since this impinges on my own field.
What could be more fantasy-based
than someone who learns for a country lifestyle he has never experienced?
Rural issues are powerful. There's something fundamental about
rural life. Prehistoric cave paintings don't depict village life or consumer goods: they depict animals and the
hunt. I would not be surprised if a love of the hunter/gatherer lifestyle were built-in somehow. In any event, city
people yearn for the country, even when they don't know anything about it. Sometimes this yearning takes odd forms.
Save The Redwoods!
I had a vivid set of experiences along these lines when I was growing up. When I was a kid, my parents
had a lovely campground in the redwoods north of Crescent City, California. This was on the northern extreme of the
Redwood Country, which extends down the coast about four hundred miles, going well south of San Francisco. The highway
goes right through many miles of enormous redwoods. I'm fond of redwoods, but even I could get pretty tired of looking
at them after four hundred miles.
Nevertheless, we'd occasionally get campers from Southern California who would arrive at our campground,
park in the shade of our redwood trees, and ask in some anxiety if they were "too late." You see, they'd heard that
the redwoods were endangered, and that the last one might have been cut down already!
It's hard to come up with a simple explanation for this pheomenon. The redwoods had never been in any danger.
The Save the
Redwoods League had been steadily buying up and protecting the best stands of old-growth redwoods since 1908, and had
quite a portfolio
of lovely, untouched sites, including long stretches along the highway where they were impossible to miss. If you
felt that more acreage should be preserved, you could give them money and they'd use it to buy more stands of
old-growth redwood as they came on the market. Yet it was fashionable in the early Seventies to
be wracked with anxiety for the "last of the old growth" and even the survival of redwoods as a species. Loggers
and logging companies
were vilified, and in particular the practice of clear-cutting was held out as an act of ecological vandalism --
something that the forests couldn't possibly survive.
When we moved to the Crescent City area, our campground
was near two large tracts of timberland that had been clear-cut within the last year. My brothers and I liked to play
in one of them, which had a certain churned, lunar-landcape appearance and a lot of small pollywog ponds. The other, larger
property wasn't used by us, but it was clearly visible form the highway and was the ugliest swath of devastation you'd ever seen in your life.
By the time we went away to college, a decade later, both properties had changed completely, having become thriving
redwood forests entirely through natural regrowth -- neither property had been replanted. Redwood forests
re-establish themselves with incredible speed. New trees sprout from the root systems of cut trees and even
from downed branches. Redwoods put out prolific amounts of seed. They grow very fast, with new trees sprouted
from root systems growing up to six feet the first year. In a few years, the pollywog ponds
were gone from our old playground. There were even trees growing out of the logging roads.
First we couldn't take an ATV there, then we couldn't get through on bikes, and
finally it was difficult to use the old roads even as footpaths.
The larger property had also changed from wasteland into a vigorous young redwood forest.
When they built the Pelican Bay State Prison in the middle of this forest, the trees around
the fringe, now quite tall, completely hid the enormous installation from view.
That's what clear-cutting does to redwood forests -- almost overnight, they turn back into a redwood forest.
Even all the boo-hooing about erosion didn't seem to have much basis in fact.
The stand we used for a playground was bordered by the creek that passed through our own property, and it
wasn't any siltier and didn't have any fewer fish right after the clear-cut than it was when the forest had
grown up. I know this for certain, because I played in that creek all the time. There are some things where kids
are a lot more observant than adults, and that's one of them.
Not that there isn't erosion in redwood country. There's tons. The piles of driftwood on the beaches must be seen
to be believed. Most of it comes from timber that topples into the rivers during heavy winter rains. It's a
very wet part of the world. The rivers in flood are amazing, carrying huge volumes of mature timber out to
sea, and sometimes piling up in dangerous logjams against bridges. But this lumber doesn't consist of struggling
little saplings; it's largely mature trees from hillsides that slid into the river in spite of being fully forested.
be enough to clue in a thoughtful person that what we're looking at is not the result of logging, but is a natural
So I have concluded that "saving the redwoods" in the Seventies was a fantasy-based activity, not a reality-based one.
The problem wasn't real, so neither were the solutions. The movement wasted the time and efforts of its adherents and threatened
the livelihood of its victims -- anyone associated with the forest-products industry. This seems awfully irresponsible.
I'm all for having a rich fantasy life, but you're supposed to limit it to people who want to play, not inflict it
on innocent bystanders.
It's True of Poultrykeeping, Too
So I've come to the conclusion that much of what people believe is fantasy-based, except for topics they are intimately
familiar with, from direct personal experience. What you have not done with your own hands, you do not truly know.
I certainly found this to be true of poultrykeeping. I've found much of the material written by non-farmers to be
harmful. It's loaded with Pollyanna-ish assumptions that everything that the mainstream industry does is wrong, and that anything
the mainsteam industry doesn't do is right, and will work like a charm. In my experience, this is wildly inaccurate. Because I had read
a lot of contemporary material before I moved back to the country, I had a lot of unlearning to do. It was a slow, painful
For example, I read in several places that there was something wrong with commercial White Leghorns and other modern
hybrids, and that a "real" farm would use heritage breeds. I tried it, and all the heritage breeds were crummy layers,
and many of them had nasty temperaments as well. On the other hand, commercial hybrid layers took to low-density free range
like ducks to water. While some of these hybrids were just as nasty as the nastiest heritage breeds, others were just
as tame and docile as the best heritage breeds. So the whole issue was pure superstition. (Not that you shouldn't raise
heritage breeds if you want to -- I always have a few -- but choose a breed with a reputation for being fun to have around,
and don't expect to make
Speaking of ducks to water, my experience with ducks was that their eggs were always covered with wet poop and the ducks
themselves refused to come inside on moonlit nights, preferring to stay out and be eaten by raccoons. This wasn't the
happily-ever-after outcome I had been promised!
The same kind of wishful thinking could be found in the Great Emu Boom of the early Nineties, which had already turned into
the Great Emu Bust by the time we moved to the country. The Emu boom had no basis in reality. It grew until there weren't
any suckers left who were willing to pay astronomical prices for so-called "breeding stock" (that is, any emu with a pulse).
The crash was pretty nasty -- you couldn't give emus away, and it even depressed the prices for non-emu-specific
poultry equipment. We bought some nearly new GQF Sportsman incubators for ten cents on the dollar, for example.
So I've seen a lot of fads, superstitions, and wishful thinking in the alternative poultry field. Many people have lost
their life's savings by believing this stuff, whether in a flashy way, such as pouring all their retirement savings into
an emu farm in 1993, or more quietly, by moving to the country and trying to make a living according to the methods advocated
by the non-farmers who promote alternative lifestyles.
On the other hand, I found books by hands-on professional farmers such as Joel Salatin to be very helpful -- though only when
they're talking about their own farms. Works by poultry scientists
(all of whom seem to have managed many flocks of poultry), are great, too. In fact, anything that consists of people writing about
their actual experience is good, provided that they've kept at it for at least three or four years. Stuff by people who are just
starting out can be inspirational, but their farms often fail after a few years. They'll take you with them if you're not careful.
I have also found that books written 50-100 years ago by farmers and poultry scientists are especially useful.
The books are old, but they
were written when small farms and free range were the norm, so a lot of it can be cut out and pasted down without modification.
The newer stuff is either aimed at factory farms, which makes the techniques hard to use as presented, or is written by enthusiasts,
which makes it unreliable.
I also place more trust in experts who have become wealthy in their area of expertise than in people who have gone broke.
The millionaire up the road,
Hal Schudel, reinvented the Oregon Christmas Tree industry by introducing a more attractive tree (the Noble Fir) and by using all
kinds of innovative, low-environmental-impact techniques, such as hauling out the trees by helicopter, eliminating the need for roads.
His story was compelling in itself, but the fact that it made him wealthy adds a lot of extra credibility.
Similarly, T. J. Starker had a good
idea when he started buying up cut-over timberland for almost nothing and replanting it.
Sounds good on paper, but the fact that his descendents are
rolling in dough, that his timberland (which borders my farm on two sides) is very well maintained, and that Starker Forests is
sincere about his good-neighbor policy mean a lot more to me than theory. Everyone has a theory.
I figure that techniques that have made at least one person a millionaire can probably make me a thousandaire -- but techniques that
haven't made anyone rich will make me poor.
"Show me the money" isn't romantic, but it's a good way to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Of course, profit and loss sum up the viability of an operation as a whole, but the nuts and bolts of any activity will include
many individual techniques that can just as easily be developed by a hobbyist as a commercial operator. The nice thing about
nuts and bolts techniques is that they don't cost much, so you
can afford to give them a try without betting the farm. And you probably should try different things until you find something that
works well for you. For example, I tried a lot of different brooding setups before I settled on the forgotten insulated heat-lamp brooder
I describe in
Success With Baby Chicks.
If you buy into my observations, it means that many people who are normally considered experts are just enthusiastic amateurs.
What they say may have some good stuff in it, but it's probably not worth the bother of sifting it for nuggest of wisdom.
I never pay attention to
the news anymore. (I'll bet that, if you ignore the news for a month, upon your
return you'll find it unbearably ignorant and childish.)
Ignoring fake experts has freed me to look for true experts. They're all around us! Everyone's an expert in
the things they pay close attention to.
The Internet has made it particularly easy to find out what the hands-on experts think about anything. Google and wikipedia are a good start.
For local products and services, it's hard to beat reputation. When you want to know which custom butcher to use or which VW repair
shop to trust
(in my area, that's "The Farmer's Helper" and "Independent Bug Werks," respectively), just ask for recommenations from people you respect.
You only have
to ask a few people, and the same names will start coming up over and over. Give those people your business. Works like a charm.
Saving the World
But what about saving the world? The folks who were busily saving the redwoods in the Seventies got a wonderful glow from their
activities. They felt they were caring and wise and heroic.
Of course, they were really just armchair generals who were doing harm rather than good,
but wouldn't it be nice to do some actual good? Even if reality doesn't provide as good a high?
My wife Karen is a card-carrying hero. After a logger was badly injured in the woods and Karen
(along with the other Emergency Medical Technicians
on the Blodgett Volunteer Fire Department and several other emergency organizations)
helped out with the difficult extrication. Getting injured loggers out of the deep woods is difficult, and
in this case the Coast Guard helicopter that tried to lower a stretcher was defeated by the tall trees, and the logger had to be carried some distance by
hand and pickup truck and ambulance before he could be put on a second helicopter. The logger was very badly injured and it took the combined
efforts of five different agencies to get him out. In the end, he walked out of the hospital under his own power.
Of course, what made this effort noteworthy is mostly that it was fancy enough to be worth writing up for a citation. Karen's other work with
the department is mostly unsung: chimney fires, car crashes, heart attacks, and plenty of false alarms. But she never has to wonder whether
or not she's being conned by some charlatan's nutty save-the-world vision.
She can see the effect that road flares have on alerting drivers to
an accident on the road ahead, or of standing at the end of a dirt road to wave in an ambulance whose
driver doesn't know our Blodgett back roads.
If you can save the world by thinking locally and acting locally, then there are any number of ways to save the world.
Most of them aren't particularly romantic,
but they're real, and that's what counts. Also, after
a while you can tell whether your contribution is helping or not. If not, you can try something else. Plenty to choose from.
August To-Do List
Inspired by a similar list in Jull's Successful Poultry Management, McGraw-Hill, 1943.
- Seek better paying egg markets (egg prices rise at this time of year).
- House early pullets (move them into permanent quarters before they start layign).
- Replace litter.
- Cull molters.
- Isolate any sick chickens.
- Provide additional ventilation.
- Gather eggs more frequently in warm weather.
- Cull weak or unthrifty individuals.