Carol writes:
<<I can't tell for sure but you all sound like northern hemisphere sheep
raisers who can look at your flock almost daily.>>
In the winter we do, because we have to hay feed. In the summer, we see
very little of the sheep--Zack moves them from paddock to paddock every
few days, and that's about the extent of our contact (we have water
lines that keep their water tank automatically full). One basic goal in
my view of organic/sustainable raising of sheep (and other farm animals,
for that matter) has got to be hands-off management. If someone *wants*
constant personal contact, fine, but as you say, large commercial flocks
can't be run that way. Organic/sustainable raising means less hands-on
is necessary, not more.
<<While there are organic woolgrowers here raising organic wool (being
the largest source of the organic wool sold in the US), most are after
the greatest return on investment and sell their wool in huge bales to
overseas buyers.>>
Organic products have a far greater return on investment than standard
products. The main difference is more marketing time is spent. Organic
products are not, yet, much of a commodity, but are for niche marketing,
which means more of the profit is kept in the farmer's pocket. Organic
wool has a definite upscale appeal and monetary return. Organic meat is
very popular, too, and commands a price commensurate with the actual
work that goes into raising *any* animals, not just organic. I don't
know about Australia, but in the US, government subsidies to farmers
keep meat (and vegetable) prices lower than the *real* cost (including
health care to farmers poisoned by the chemicals they use) of production.
<<They routinely drench for worms and liver fluke because rotating
paddocks (fields) isn't really an option especially in drought conditions.>>
Actually, moving the animals is all the more important in drought
conditions--after all, they're being fed SOMETHING, so move them to
where that something is being grown, if their usual fields are too dry.
If that's not possible, it's time to look at the overall situation and
decide if sheep are really the best choice under those conditions.
<<Yes, they dock their tails (sorry PETA) because otherwise the sheep
would die from the inside out by flies laying eggs>>
I doubt fly-strike is new to most of us :) The obvious response to the
need to dock is to select sheep for naturally-short, functional tails.
I don't know whether docking is allowed under the organic standards set
by the US. We raise Shetlands, which have short tails, so we've never
needed to dock. But there's nothing to stop people from crossing to
shorten the tails so docking isn't necessary, if that's an issue. My
primary feeling on docking is that it shouldn't be so short that it
leads to prolapses.
<< I raise organic veggies and fruit but as a nation we have the problem
of too many cleared acres to raise sheep on, and we now are suffering
soil erosion, dry land salinity, and loss of habitat for our native
birds and animals.>>
I've read quite a bit about Australia's environmental crisis. You have
the chance to lead the world from Canberra in dealing with the
crisis--to set an example for the moribund US government for sure,
though as we're so dominated by Big Business, it probably wouldn't work
here without a huge grassroots effort. It's quite possible that, in
your environment, sheep are simply not sustainable. It's a good example
of the long-term costs of management without thinking of a future other
than profit. In the case of starting out with sheep, no one knew about
long-term costs or the fragility of the environment there. Now we know,
and it's not wise to keep doing the same things that caused the damage
to start with.
<<In the situations you describe, raising organic sheep is possible and
I hope profitable but we are concerned with the national economy.>>
Again, organic meat and wool would bring in far more money per sheep
than standard meat and wool. With the national emphasis on wool in
Australia, it wouldn't take much of a marketing effort to make the most
of a switch. Flocks could reduce in size, allowing some land to recover
from overgrazing, while still bringing in the same amount of money, and
probably taking less time to manage.
<<I've been thru this argument on various spinners list and if the world
depended on the wool grown organically by northern hemisphere shepherds
we'd be very cold.>>
Chemical dependency is only since about the end of WWII--60 years ago,
tops. Australia's wool industry was well established long before
that--within living memory, flocks were managed without chemicals. So
was that of the US, for that matter. Selecting sheep that are easy to
manage, not overstocking marginal land, and getting more profit per
animal by smart marketing are all ways out of the hole that's been dug
by dependence upon chemicals. In the short and long run, we all benefit.
I have a special fondness for Australia, Carol, as I lived in Alice
Springs for 2 years in the 70s. I visited Adelaide and the vinyards, I
visited Queensland and a research station on the Great Barrier Reef back
when the worst threat was the Crown-of-Thorns starfish--a hint of
environmental changes already getting started, perhaps? I visited (but
didn't climb, though I got the tshirt! :) Uluru and camped all over in
the real bush. I don't think I ever saw a sheep while living there,
ironically, but I came to love almost everything about Australia. I
feel for the environmental crisis there--like the Crown-of-Thorns
starfish, it's a hint of what we'll be going through before long.
Organic and sustainable management of the land offers a real hope, but
it's like the surgeon's knife to start with when the situation has
reached a crisis already.
Holly
To stop mail temporarily mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the message: set nomail To restore send: set mail
