Pats a hundred percent right. There are many factors to take into consideration - what one does and finds works may not be good for all. It may not be good for them, either, but they don't see it.
I tend to go with things that have been done before, standing on the shoulders of others. On that score, here are the words of Mr. Charles Weeks from his book, "Egg Farming in California":
"The old adage, "Learn to do by doing," holds good in the raising of poultry as in all other things, but the successful men in the world are keen to make use of the accumulated knowledge on their line and thus save years of toiling and experimenting.
That the man that has the ability to start in where the other man leaves off is the man that is able to progress. "Learn to do by doing" is the only practical way to become an expert poultryman, but by using the accumulated experience of others we are able to start doing the right thing instead of groping blindly for a right system. There is a way to do the right thing in the right place and at the right time, and if we can make this "doing" count while we are getting experience, then we save time."
Secondly, it seems prudent to rely on the methods from the time we didn't have the benefits of antibiotics, electricity, modern chemicals and so on. These are transitory things and can be taken away. Better to know how to get along without them.
This is why I'm a staunch proponent of the old adage "More Space is Best." It alleviates so many problems. On the other hand, "going with the numbers" is one step away from confined commercial rearing as Pat alludes. That's where those much repeated numbers originated, in fact. This means, to me, that the problems inherent in those confinement methods are also just one step away.
SO many people think that a thing is invalid unless you have done it... well, I don't need to be hit by a truck to know it hurts.
Having too little space for livestock is asking for trouble, or at least a lot of extra work. Same thing, to me. It may not get you today or tomorrow, but I'm certain it's gonna get you, somehow, somewhere along the line.
I tend to go with things that have been done before, standing on the shoulders of others. On that score, here are the words of Mr. Charles Weeks from his book, "Egg Farming in California":
"The old adage, "Learn to do by doing," holds good in the raising of poultry as in all other things, but the successful men in the world are keen to make use of the accumulated knowledge on their line and thus save years of toiling and experimenting.
That the man that has the ability to start in where the other man leaves off is the man that is able to progress. "Learn to do by doing" is the only practical way to become an expert poultryman, but by using the accumulated experience of others we are able to start doing the right thing instead of groping blindly for a right system. There is a way to do the right thing in the right place and at the right time, and if we can make this "doing" count while we are getting experience, then we save time."
Secondly, it seems prudent to rely on the methods from the time we didn't have the benefits of antibiotics, electricity, modern chemicals and so on. These are transitory things and can be taken away. Better to know how to get along without them.
This is why I'm a staunch proponent of the old adage "More Space is Best." It alleviates so many problems. On the other hand, "going with the numbers" is one step away from confined commercial rearing as Pat alludes. That's where those much repeated numbers originated, in fact. This means, to me, that the problems inherent in those confinement methods are also just one step away.
SO many people think that a thing is invalid unless you have done it... well, I don't need to be hit by a truck to know it hurts.
Having too little space for livestock is asking for trouble, or at least a lot of extra work. Same thing, to me. It may not get you today or tomorrow, but I'm certain it's gonna get you, somehow, somewhere along the line.
Last edited by a moderator: