Re Rustica

How are we responding to the drought emergency?

We are announcing a VERY big change in response to this long-term water crisis.

The water crisis has been worsening for the last hundred years or more, and shows no signs of getting better. This is not solely some emergency of the present and requires fundamental changes to our farm and our business.

However, we are not being forced to choose – as some people would wrongly suggest – between the life and death of our rivers, and our beautiful farms and cities that depend on those waters. The death of the rivers and the survival of our farms and cities is inevitable and unavoidable. Though the waters will cease to flow through the banks, our people are wise enough to grow crops and towns in the coming desert.

But we must adapt now.

DESERTIFICATION OF AMERICA

The desertification of America is inevitability, and the result of the climate changes of our biosphere as it enters a new epoch. Yet the fear and dread some people hold of deserts is wrong: deserts are cheerful, wholesome and bounteous lands, good for human life and culture. According to climatologists and biologists like Dr. James Lovelock and others, they are even necessary to maintaining our planet’s healthful temperature and environment.

Strangely, it is easiest to comprehend the joy of deserts when looking at rivers. Lovelock and other scientists encourage us to look at rivers as living organisms. Rivers are healthiest when at their maximum and minimum flows. Like every living creature, rivers use alternating minimum and maximum flows of water to cycle nutrients from one part of their “body” to others. Recently, the Dammed Colorado has been allowed to restart this interrupted cycle, because the impact of its absence on wildlife was perceived to be severe.

At their height, waters rip soil from their banks and aerate the waters, encouraging a cleansing of the water and a feeding of the aquatic animals and plants in the water. At their lowest, they are easily accessible to land and amphibious creatures. This cycle is fed by the natural cycles of the larger biome, usually by snowmelt and rainfall, dry seasons and wet seasons.

Likewise – but much, much slower – deserts and rainforests ebb and flow, entire grasslands migrate uphill and downhill across continents like birds, oceans rise and fall over mountains and valleys like fish. Though this current change in climate is marked by many differences – especially the dangerously high Carbon Dioxide levels in the atmosphere – the process is essentially similar to all those previously undertaken. The deserts that are coming are not strangers to this land, but returning friends.

Already the sand dunes form on the Great Plains and the wildfires scorch our favorite trees, but we must remember that such change is not necessarily bad if we adapt to our planet’s new environment.

DROUGHT NOT TO BLAME FOR DECREASED RIVER FLOW

With the State requiring the wildering of the rivers in response to decreasing river flow, the drought in rainfall is being blamed – wrongly – for a fall in the amount of river flow by those farmers and cities most affected by the forced use reductions. Don’t believe the lies: reduced river flow is largely the result of human activity. Rightly, farmers and cities are not being allowed by our government to divert as much water as they normally would for domestic purposes.

When the average water flow along random points of the San Joaquin are considered, it is clear that there is a decreasing amount of water in the rivers over the last century. In fact, the rate at which the rain is decreasing and the amount that the water flow is decreasing seem identical in pace: the rain decreases at 6.7 hundredths of an inch per year, and the water flow decreases at 7.5 cfs per year.

Let’s take the “Olympic” average and remove the highest and lowest data sets.

Now that the extreme examples are removed, it is a bit more clear that the rate is not similar. Those who would argue against human-causes to reduced river flow love to use extreme examples, but doctoring the facts doesn’t change the truth.

Just because the slope of the decrease is the same is no reason to argue that they decrease at a correlative pace, or that rainfall is to blame for the decreasing water flow, or that farmers should not be starved of their fair share of the river. When examined mathematically and scientifically, it is clear
that there is more at play than just rainfall.

The 54% correlation between rainfall and water flow tells us that rain is only half the story. Especially when extreme examples (high and low) are taken out.

The other half lies in the factors within human control, especially water diversion for farming and for cities.

Water flow is reduced when water is diverted for irrigation and for the numerous uses cities find for it. In California, cities use a lot of water, and this has been use – wrongly – by some agricultural interests to argue that farmers should be spared the pain of reducing their water use, that cities alone should be made to feel the burden of the drought. Don’t believe the lies - farms use almost as much water as cities.

Here’s the same graph again, with the “Olympic” averages. Notice the trinomial water flow trend is even more pronounced without the extreme examples.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FARMS AND CITIES

That the farmers would be so quick to abandon the false argument that humans are not to be blamed for reduced river flow in favor of an even more erroneous argument that cities are more to blame for reduced river flow demonstrates some antagonism between farms and cities. But this antagonism is a false one, sown by those agricultural interests bent on continuing a method of farming dangerous to their own long-term selfish interests and the interests of their consumers.

In California, the amount of farms have been decreasing and those which use water are using the water more efficiently. As cities grow – and use water inefficiently – they grow at the expense of farms. This process of urbanization began in earnest shortly after the Victory of World War II as suburbs exploded.

In 1940, 57% of the population of the USA lived in urban areas, by 1990, 75% of Americans lived in urban areas. At the beginning of this explosion, there were virtually no suburbs. The pause in growth of suburbs during the middle of this period (due to oil shortages and economic recession) water flow, especially considering that high farm commodity prices in the 1970’s increased agricultural activity when urban activity was reduced.

Let’s examine the correlation between rainfall and the expected water flow during these three periods of suburban growth. In the earliest periods when cities and farms are economically active (but cities are just slightly more so), an increase in rain increases water flow considerably. When farms are more economically active than cities, an increase in rain actually cannot stop the decreased flow of water! In later periods when cities are more economically active than farms, increases in rain increases water flow more – even though there is now less total rain than there was previously.

BACK TO THE RIVER

Water flow is impacted by humans. Our agriculture, our cities, our laws. But especially our agriculture.

And yet, our agriculture is driven by the demand in our cities. People demand foods that need lots of water. The high commodity prices in the 1970’s were in part reactionary to the currency’s activity, but rooted in consumer preferences that continue to require farmers plant those things which require the most water.

By demanding farmers grow those oranges and tomatoes and melons, the cattle and the hogs, those things which are not suited for the desertifying American continent, consumers force farmers to decrease water flow.

Turning off the water to farms will improve river flow and help wildlife, but decreasing the amount of water the cities use will improve river flow more. And the biggest way cities use water is in the growth of the food they import from the farms.

Cities and farms are not separate entities. Farms feed cities, cities employ farms.

WE WORK FOR YOU

It bears being said again. Cities and farms are not separate entities. Farms feed cities, cities employ farms.

We work for you.

We will continue to service your demand for water-loving crops, but will begin to phase out the growth of these damaging plants over the next few years as we plant perennials, domesticate annuals and trial xeric varieties. This will likely

• Reduce the cost of your food
• Increase your choices for ingredients
• Improve the nutritional quality of your food
• Improve the flavor of your food

PLEASE SUPPORT OUR DECISION

During this transition we hope that you will not buy from other farms who do not reduce their water use. Sooner or later, they, too, will change what they grow – out of the necessity of emergency! But we risk adapting before we must because our job is twofold: we not only serve you, but the land itself.

You pay us not only to grow your food, but to make sure the land will bear food for your children’s children. If we continue the irresponsible use of water – even using our very efficient methods – there will be no food for future generations.

The desert is a cheerful, bounteous and kind place to people, full of delicious and wholesome, healthy foods. Please let us know your support for our decision by buying from us today, or by letting us know you’d like a free sample of some of the desert’s most delicious foods.

Your farmers,

Aaron and Mary
Re Rustica
559-977-7539
consultus@rerustica.com

WHAT TO LOOK FOR ON OUR INGREDIENTS IN SEASON LIST
>>>To see our ingredients in season list, click here!<<<

Look for these symbols next to our products when making your next decision on with what you will fill your box!

>>> Water-Efficient arrows <==
ALL our products are water efficiently grown, using weeds and tillage. However, these are
especially so, with ...This product was grown using
* no or limited irrigation and
* water-efficient techniques of weeds, mulch and/or hilling

>>> Desert-Adapted crosses +++ This product is naturally adapted to grow with
* no irrigation in the increasingly desert conditions

>>> Biospheric All-Stars pounds ###
ALL our products result in negative carbon gain and increased biodiversity.
But these products are especially good for the environment and if selected help decrease carbon gain and improve biodiversity more by…
* Resulting in a return of more than 75% of their carbonmass to the soil
* Resulting in the support of at least 2 keystone species
* Reducing the overall moisture needs of its surrounding environment

Our geese know today's different!  We're travelling 1000 miles!

The geese know today's different. Our truck is fueled with biofuel and ready to roll! They walk up to us and make their gossling begging call, asking us to pick them up and hold them. The chickens are sometimes worse. Patrick, our Rhode Island Red Rooster, flies up into our arms. All the birds cry, "Don't go!"

Though our customers elsewhere already know we're experimenting with a new delivery method designed to reduce our time on the road (more about that later!), in the Valley Area we're still driving our truck door to door with fresh, delicious affordable food in the back. Straight to your door. Ready for cooking! Meals. Now!

Hopefully our birds will miss us less if our new tricks work out - we miss them too. But we're glad to take the drive. We actually love to drive.  It sounds funny - we're farmers, shouldn't we yearn to stay put like our plants and animals?  But we farm not only for them, not only for us, but for our customers.  We love to see them all!

Our fuel is clean, our conscience clear, our hearts long for the journey of a thousand miles that takes us past your door back home to our tents. Sometimes, we joke, Robert Frost should have been a Re Rustica delivery driver:

"Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth."  - The Road Not Taken

Ha ha!  We hate to laugh at the venerable poet, but when on deliveries, we take them both!

In farming, we take Frost's lesson and have no regrets, what we do we do for love - for love of our customers, our farm, ourselves.  And, as Chretien de Troyes reminds us,

"those who love love truly, truly need no fear, for all will be forgiven of them, for love's sake."

Yet we try to "take the road less traveled" so we get there and back quicker, because - as with rush hour, as with our clean fuel, as with our affordable food and kindness to our animals and attention to the needs of nature, our low water use, as with all of our lives - it is how we take the journey, not the destination that in the end matters most.

We got a question from CBS (Washington, DC) on how CSA’s feed the poor.

CBS Writes:
My name is Valerie [last name omitted for privacy] with CBS Evening News in Washington DC and I’m working on a story about how despite the terrible economy people are still investing in Community Supported Agriculture (CSA’s) - many of them locally are sold out. CSA’s are not the cheapest way of getting local produce - no one does this to save money. They do it to participate in the local food movement. But it’s something of a luxury, so my question is, why do people keep participating when they’re giving up so much else? If you could reply and give me your thoughts on this issue that would be great.

Thank you for your time,

Valerie
CBS Weekend Evening News Intern

We Reply:
Dear Valerie,
we’re sorry if this seems rude, but your question is a fair one and demands honesty. The reason why the situation is so puzzling is because you and CBS are approaching the story with the false premise of bias.

we submit to your consideration that
1): CSA’s are some of the most affordable ways to get food.
2): Fresh food is not a luxury.

Let’s do the numbers with two of our boxes.

Our cheapest box (per meal) is our 37 gallon (about 4 bushel) box. It is designed to feed a family of 5-1/3 moderately active people (based on USDA nutritional guidelines). Yes, it is bizzare, but keep in mind that some children and elders eat anywhere from 1/3 to 3/4 as much as adults and in a family that size, there will be an assortment of children and elders. It costs $1227.40 per month, $43.84 per day, $21.92 per meal (if two meals are prepared at home), and $4.11 per person per meal. And that’s a complete, nutritionally balanced meal! Quite affordable, considering the cost of fast food or grocery stores.

Our cheapest box (per box) is our 2 gallon (about 6/16 bushel) box. It is designed to feed a sedentary individual who cooks only one meal per day (based on USDA guidelines). It costs $96.67 per month, that is $3.45 per meal (with one meal per day). A balanced, complete, square meal. $3.45.

Now, we have some customers who complain our prices are too high. They shop at Costco, at Walmart or Sam’s Club, or get the old food off the discount shelf at the supermarket. We don’t deny that there are cheaper sources of food. The cheapest way of getting food is becoming the farmer yourself and growing it! But, through a combination of fresh and quality product, ease of acquisition (we’ll deliver it fresh to your doorstep while you’re at work or at play using negative-carbon gain fuels!), and ease of preparation (we can help you prepare your quality meals in less than 5 minutes!), we think our CSA offers a combination that is ideally suited for not only hard economic times, but for the best of times as well.

We don’t deny, either, that some CSA’s are overpriced. Some restaurants are overpriced, too. In any market - whether it is food or clothing or anything at all - there will be overpriced and underpriced options. Our customers appreciate that they get much more than what they pay for.

But is fresh food a luxury?

There’s three ways to look at this.

First, let’s look at it from a monetary standpoint. Disregarding that fresh food can be as cheap - pound for pound - as rotten, spoiled or damaged food, fresh food is used to more efficiency in the home than unfresh food. Simply said, more of it is eaten, more of it is digested and it is enjoyed better. Unfresh food is a source of disease, which is costly to any family in economic crisis. Families in crisis need their strength, they need to eat every last morsel of food. Nothing should be thrown out or wasted because it is damaged, spoiled or rotten. Though parents can prepare all the food - without carving away spoiled parts - and can require children eat all their food, there is simply no reason to do this when it costs the same to provide fresh food.

Second, examine it from societal perspectives. Children need to learn to love their food. They need to learn to eat well, to become strong, smart, beautiful citizens. They need to look forward to meals at home - with or without their parents. Fresh food does just that. Food is love, and we should all love our food.

Third, consider nutrition. Old, tasteless, dry beans make all of life seem old and tasteless. Rotten cabbages make life stink. Lettuce that is blooming with bacteria tints life with a lurid glow. Stale eggs in your pancakes are a killjoy. Oats should be flavorful and fresh! Tomatoes should be ripe all the way through. The nutritional quality of old food is inferior to fresh food. Water and fat soluable vitamins and minerals, essential proteins and other nutrients degrade in storage. Eating disease makes you sick. You would not choose unfresh food to fresh food if they costed the same or nearly so.

Please, if you have any doubts, let us send you a box of our food UPS. It can arrive tomorrow. If you have not tasted a farm fresh meal, it will be an honor and a pleasure to show you once again how you can love your food.

your farmers,
Aaron Brachfeld and Mary Choate
Re Rustica
559-977-7539

At early stages of chicken life, it is sometimes hard to tell whether the bird is a rooster or a hen. Behavioral differences and morphology aren't necessarily reliable, but in some breeds color differences help identify a rooster.

JL writes

My wife hatched a chick from some fertile eggs she purchased at the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op. The chick is now five weeks old and I am concerned that it is looking much more like a cockerel than a pullet. My wife has grown very attached to the bird, but we live in downtown Sacramento and could not possibly keep a rooster.

I read your blog and it sounds as though your chickens live very happy and fulfilling lives. If our chicken ends up being a rooster I was wondering if you would accept it as a donation to your flock. I believe it is a white leghorn. If you are not interested, perhaps you could refer me to someone else who would allow the rooster to live and treat it with care.

We respond

We do sometimes adopt roosters from those who can't keep them anymore... before we agree to adopt yours or help find it a good home, though, we would ask a few things.  First of all, five weeks is sometimes too young to tell for sure if it's a rooster, though sometimes you can tell by then. It depends both on the individual and the species: some species mature quicker, and some individuals within a species mature quicker.  However (and please excuse me if you already know this, its a common enough mistake) many hens will develop combs and waddles early, though they will never get so large as a roosters it can be hard to tell wha they'll look like later.  A better sign is the feathering they'll get at age 6wks plus (again, depending on the bird): most roosters get long, swooping tails, sometimes get extra color on their feathers, and get "saddles" of longer feathers on their backs.  Another better sign is crowing (though we once had a hen that crowed from age 5 weeks until she was old enough to lay eggs, that is very unusual). If you'd like us to have a look at it ourselves, the best we can offer at the moment is via photos (we deliver via UPS to Sacramento; otherwise we'd have offered to drop by and look at it).  Or, you can take it to someone who may be able to tell better (such as UCDavis's vet school).  Or, keep an eye on it for another few weeks (some chickens don't "tell" if they're male or female till a good four months of age, though you can usually tell at 6 to 8 weeks) and let us know what you think then. 

We hope this helps: we would hate to adopt your rooster only to find out that it was a hen that you could have kept!  We almost had this happen when we adopted our rooster Scuttle: his previous family had five chickens, four of which they were sure were going to be roosters... we looked at them, guessed that Scuttle was a rooster (based on behavior and coloration, mostly, though it was an educated guess at best because he was only about 6 weeks old), and encouraged them to call if the others ended up being roosters.  Turns out the rest were hens after all, despite early comb growth and one having aggresive behavior, and their owners were very glad we didn't take all the chickens they asked us to...

If you want to send a photo we'd be happy to look, or just keep us posted if you decide to watch your chicken longer!  

Sleep.  What we take for granted with animals and microorganisms to some people seems outrageous when considered a behavior associated with plants and fungi.  But it is a fact that the metabolism of plants and fungi changes periodically during the day or night to allow them rest. 

Plants explore their environment, communicate threats and opportunities with each other using chemcial and electrical signals, undertake interspecies communication, and have even sometimes been known to train each other and members of other species to adapt unnatural behavior (a process of domestication - especially common with sunflowers and ants, which can be summoned to a particular part of the plant under attack when the plant uses "ant" chemical language). 

Some flowers close and open as the temperature changes so their reproductive organs aren't damaged by the freezing or baking temperatures.  Some plants move very quickly: carnivorous plants like the Venus Fly Trap are quick enough to catch flies, and the Kudzu plant, the friend to all travelers needing shelter for the night, will grow you a house if you ask it nicely, or return your embrace at night.  

But, usually, plants move very slowly.  So slowly that most people don't even think about it.

Yet farmers have to think at plant-speed.  We trim the roots of our plants so they can eat better, we pile fresh delicious soil on them from the aisles so they have good food to eat where they want it.  We "listen" to their communications and meet their needs.  We help them get to where they are trying to forage, and even shepherd our vines and canes about our fields. 

Some of our plants need friends, others like to be left alone.  Some like friends of different species, others prefer the company of their own kind.  Some plants are male and others are female, others are both male and female, others are neither male nor female.  Of course, sexual plants get lonely if they are only among their own sex, and require a particular ratio of male to female for proper socialization. 

When we walk among our trees at night, we like to talk softly - not because our trees will wake up if they hear us (trees cannot hear sound vibrations), but because we like to listen to them sleep.  We listen to the grasses and the trees - those mortal enemies - resting in peace, the joyful songs of the coyotes and bobcats as they work in our fields, protecting our crops from the herbivores that would destroy them.  In the heat of the day we listen to the screams of the eagles defending our plants against the herbivores, the roars of the lions, the clucking of our insect-hungry birds, the symphony of singing arachnids (yes, spiders sing various songs of victory, hunger, loneliness, territory, homemaking, and others). 

Herbivores ourselves, we like to look at our fellow herbivores as enemies, but they do offer essential services to our garden, fertilizing and controlling weeds, thinning our crops to proper densities, and other things that we would otherwise have to do.  Every creature is our friend, and if left to do their work, they leave little for us to do but walk among them in awe, glad to offer what little assistance we can.

We can and do offer the hospitality of food and shelter to all the plants, animals, microorganisms and fungi in our fields; we medicinally treat all the creatures that require aid.  This is our job.  None of our friends can do it.  Humanity was born to serve the world, which so patiently provides us food.

Our geese will knock their beaks against our ford, tapping off a rythm that is actually quite groovy.  They also like to bite on the tailpipe and the fenders to make a grinding sound.  Harmonizing like this occupies our geese for quite some time.  They used to like to tap on the roof of the chicken coop (especially when chickens were inside - then even better noises are made!), and on the wheel barrow, and on any other hard, noisy surface.  But the truck, they've discovered, is best.  One or two of them will honk out rythmically as the others tap and grind.  We're going to try to get an audio recording of it...

Chickens will burrow out holes for bathing

Chickens rely on us to provide clean, dry, safe coops, to take care of them if they get sick or injured, and occasionally provide a healthy and delicious treat or a hug. However, chickens also need us to allow them the space to play and run around so they can digest their food (exercise is as important for people as it is for chickens and other animals), the nutritious pasture for them to find grass and other vegetables (and the occasional mouse or insect). They also need dirt for baths. They LOVE baths.

Rodney, our new Head Rooster, the first day of his freedom reacted as most (recently) cooped birds do upon liberation. He cowered inside the coop, then gradually began to explore with the other birds, and then relaxed. He romped and tasted new things, and then he had a VERY execllent bath. Chickens like to bathe with friends, and his new sweetheart, the crazed Americana we call “Crazy,” came by and splashed him with dust. He splashed her with dust and they then had a good sun nap, laying on their backs, sunning their bellies.

Our former head rooster, Scuttle, likes to hide behind the bathing tree and pounce on unsuspecting bathers. He gets a lot of enjoyment out of scattering the hens and other roosters.

Baths are as fun as they are important for the health of our birds. Dirt baths reduce disease and improve egg production.

Quick! Catch her!  Our Head Goose almost makes her getaway with the collards!

What do the geese like almost as much as our specially mixed bird feed? Collards.

The geese love the flavor so much that, while they normally share EVERYTHING they find (except for the bird food we mix them), they refused to share the delicious collards.

A chase game quickly developed when our Head Goose’s sisters grew envious. Though there were enough collards to go around, they loved to chase the Head Goose! She eventually was pursuaded to share. Reluctantly.

We take time every day to learn, and when we saw some poppies growing along the roadside, we couldn’t resist the opportunity to learn. Out comes the camera! Look at how they grow together, what crops - er - wild plants grow between them, the way the wild boar has tilled the magnificent bed to improve the yield - er - show, and the innumerable creatures that depend on the beautiful blooms for their lives! Farmers study from nature because She is the best teacher!

Notice the biodiversity? We do. In our fields we encourage biodiversity for a reason!

Ivana and the other chickens decided they didn't want to be wet so they went inside their coop.  But they didn't want to spend the day inside, so they perched just outside or on the lip of their coop, where they continued to get wet.  They weren't cranky for their wetness, and our roosters got everyone inside properly before bedtime, early enough to dry off so nobody would catch cold.

FA Farm of Washington State just wrote in their blog that they estimate farmers can feed, on average, 5 people per acre. 

We love the thought - let us farmers do a bit better than 5 people per acre, though. How about a friendly competition between us - and whatever other farms on LH want to join in?

How much food can we produce on a trial 1/5 acre?

We can all track how many calories and grams of protein we can produce in 1/5 acre, with bonus points for growing without irrigation, fertilizers, herbicides or pesticides. We'll all share our techniques and maybe learn something.

If we manage to get more than 1 person's needs met, we'll have done a good thing.

Besides offering a chance for everyonen to improve their averages, it'd be interesting to learn whether we could all produce similar quantities of food over a 12 month period despite differences in climate.

Let us know if you're interested! 559-977-7539

Everyone needs a hug sometimes.  Today, our goose with no hat came up and asked to be picked up and hugged.  After she got her fill, she told us she wanted down and wandered off to join her friends. 

Dear Andrea,

Andrea writes:
Hi. I have recently been given a large amount of oats and I am having trouble finding an effective way to hull them. Any suggestions?? Thanks.

We respond:
though, of course, it would be easiest for you to avoid hulling the oats by buying Re Rustica hulless oats (a variety that has, as the name implies, no hull for hulling), to hull the oats you have will require a mill or a pestle (not a pistol, though that might work too).  We can ship you hulless oats very affordably anywhere you may be - let us know if you'd like a quote.

We do sell grain mills, they start at about $300 and also ship well.  The pestles are easy to make, or can be bought for about $20, and ship very well.  A pistol we actually don't suggest because you risk lead poisoning.

You will then have the choice of keeping the hulls or throwing them out.  When we eat our hulled oats, we keep the hulls in because they are very nutritious sources of fiber.  Fiber is one of the most important nutrients as it helps with the digestion of other nutrients! 

To crush the oats with a pestle, grind the grains firmly until the hull is broken. You can grind them firmer and roll them to make rolled oats.  A mill is a machine that does this for you.

We then suggest baking the oats to a golden brown - they're great toasted in yogurt, or scrambled eggs with some dandelion and purslane and cabbage.

let us know if you have any other questions, or if we can help you!

A brief break in the weather resulted in a delicious pond of water.  Our duck-rooster (he thinks he is a chicken, talks like a rooster and has bonded with 3 hens) swam about and excitedly brought his hens to the water.  He nudged his big red hen into the water, but she did not seem to appreciate this, squawking and flying back to shore.  Alas, perhaps soon they will learn to swim... but not today.

We had written to the Bee a news tip after hearing some perncious piffle on the radio.  We posted our objections previously to our blog under the same. 

Today we got a response back from Mr. Downing, of the Bee:

Rustica, Thanks for the tip.  I question your calculations, and ask you: If pastured eggs are so cheap to produce, why do they sell for $7-$8 a dozen?  I completely agree that they are a superior product, but I do think they're expensive to produce. Best, Jim

Dear Mr. Downing,

Thanks for your question - it is your willingness to follow through to report truth that earns our respect for the Bee!

The two questions are somewhat unrelated and will be addressed independently. 

<strong>The answer to your second question first, </strong>

in free markets, commodities will sell at the highest price the market will bear and for the lowest price the producer can afford IN A GIVEN MARKET.

Demand side first.

If you take a trip of even a few miles outside of Sacramento, you'll find that the relative supply of pastured eggs to caged eggs is reversed and there is a surplus of pastured eggs.  Eggs sell for as low as $1 per dozen in some places!  This is because the cost of producing eggs by pasture is so low and easy that the producers have to sell cheaply to compete with the home grown article.  The cost of caged eggs is increased by shipping, and may sell as high as $4-$8 per dozen.

In the city, it is quite the opposite.  Transportation systems from centralized production centers (which specialize in cage production) reduce the cost of transporting caged eggs and the laws that prohibit the production of pastured chickens within city limits increase the scarcity of the pastured egg, and raising the price accordingly.

<strong>Now, supply side.</strong>

Economists generally agree that there are two efficiencies of scale in any industrial production.  The first, made possible by roboticization and mechanization, is the efficiencies of "mass production."  The second, made possible by biological training, is the efficiencies of "small run production."  Mass production and small run production enjoy the same efficiency when undertaken at the proper scale of production: the marginal cost for small run producers has its minimum far earlier than the marginal cost for mass producers due to the variability of production.

An objection which should be dealt with very first and before discussion of the production efficiency of grazing versus caging chickens is that small run production cannot produce the same TOTAL eggs as mass production.  This is true, however, it does not account for the market encouraging a cooperative of many small run producers.  This cooperative system is more common in plant production.  Examples are many: many small wheat producers organize to feed the nation, sunmaid buys from many small producers, coors buys from many small barley producers, etc. 

This was the principle mode of industrial production until the industrial revolution.  It is still common in many industries today, examples can be given upon request but will be witheld from this particular discussion to simplify our response.  Many small run producers create the same TOTAL eggs as one mass producer, and for the same PER UNIT cost.

Mass production is preferred by noncooperative ("designed") market systems that aim to monopolize markets for the interests of the State, whereas in "free" markets, the high cost of machines and robots encourages mutualistic cooperation to "capitalize" and overcome the would-be inability of small run production to meet TOTAL demand: in capitalist systems, demand is high and prices are higher until the cooperative producers begin to fill total demand.

"Cooperative" does not imply communist marketing, where various small producers are enpartnered.  However, "cooperative" does suggest natural mutual production and marketing goals and interests.

Back to the supply side discussion:

Cages require a system of mechanization and roboticization.  (Definition: mechanization is the process of using machine labor, which is a methodical, tireless laborer - usually inorganic - designed to use a particular tool repeatedly.  Roboticization is the process of using robots, which is a mechanized manager of machines).  The cage is a tool used by the biological laborer (chicken) (the egg falls into a predictable, tireless, methodical location regularly), and the human and inhuman labor undertakes processes of robotization by collecting, standardizing, and otherwise processing eggs, feeding chickens, cleaning waste, culling birds, etc.  The birds cannot be allowed to act even semi-randomly, and none of the processes from feed to chicken to egg carton and broiler can be variated.

Grazing is a small run system.  The chicken can be taught to lay eggs in one place every day, and trained roosters and human labor are relied upon much the same way that machines and robots are relied upon in mass production.  The producer increases their flock size until such point as pasture is maximized or other resource constraints (more usually labor) is overwhelmed.  For us, this cap is about 500-800 hens, a production level of about 250 dozen per month on average.

Much more than that and it becomes too expensive (for our own operation's constraints) to produce eggs at a profit.  However, by advances in technique, we are becoming more efficient and are gradually increasnig production.  Yet we will never produce by ourselves as many eggs as a roboticized and mechanized farm and rely on contracts with our neighbors to supply what surplus demand is to be had.

Advances in transportation technology (especially recent advances in biofuels) have reduced our costs of transportation so we can bring our eggs to markets where they are in even higher demand, allowing us to capitalize upon the efficiency of our production and transportation by selling at a market price above the economic equilibrium of our home economy.

At peak efficiency, both large scale and small scale production will employ similar laborers per hen.  The efficiency per laborer is held constant by the limitations of husbandry not yet overcome by technological advance.

Now, to your first question about feed.

We raise chickens and are diversifying currently into ducks and geese.  We have excellent data for our chickens, and only national statistics for our ducks and geese.  Our data for the chickens meshes fairly well with national expectations, and so we trust the national statistics generated by veterinary schools and can provide those to you if you like - but the question for the voters was on chickens, so we'll stick to that for simplicity.

In a cage, each bird will eat 0.18 pounds of feed per day using our high energy feed that we mix ourselves.  This meets all caloric and nutritional needs at a cost of $0.36 per day.  This works out, at current prices, to be $131.40 per year.  With grain prices doubling last year and expected to perhaps double this coming year and perhaps not, a high expectation (~60% of doubling) we would budget about $210.

Each of our birds eats a combination of pasture and grain.  The grain is used primarily for training, and suppliment food in the winter (we have snow and there is little for these tropical birds to eat).  Our birds eat about 1/4 as much on average (for those keeping score at home, a total of ~$52 per bird per year).  When we maintain in our flock a popultion of about 1/3 roosters, the price PER HEN increases to about $80.

The machine of cage producers cannot rest, so they heat their birds and provide artificial light in the winter.  Our hens lay much more in Spring and Autumn than they do in Summer and Winter and so we need no heat.  The birds don't idle in those periods, but build up their strength to lay eggs cyclically, raise baby chicks (we do sometimes get a few broody hens, though training can reduce or nearly eliminate the risk of chicks, and harvesting eggs daily certainly eliminates chicks.  However, our customers demand we treat our birds ethically in such a way that broody hens are allowed to brood).  Mortality rates are equivilant between pasture and cage production. 

There are innumerable minor differences, adding costs to cages or to pasture, and resulting in greater returns to cages or pasture.  These are held to be equivilant in our data, and not seeing professional researchers at universities undertake the necessary tests, we encourage you and all other amateur scientists to undertake independent trials.  By the nature of the production, we are sure that the data will agree: small run grazing is as efficient and profitable as large scale mechanized egg production.  The price per egg when the State does not interfere (beyond city limits) bears this truth.

If you have further questions please let us know

Please let us know if we can provide more support.  We hesitate to take up your time, but the strong lobby of the large producers in this State are endangering both the will of the people and the interests of a free capitalist society.  By flooding the market of ideas with half-truths (yes, mass production is cheaper, but so is small run production on certain scales, etc.) they demonstrate that their monopolistic interests lie in the dominance and extermination of their competitors, not in the well being of society, the free market place or our national economy.

These large producers, having enjoyed special privilage from a socialist State that encouraged their monopolization through the illegalization of small scale production near to centers of demand and through other fees, taxes and regulations that only are compensated by large scales of production, are obviously terrified at losing their competitive edge by regulations that now, insetad of helping them, discourage them in favor of small producers. 

That the State is now promoting the small scale producer instead is only marginally better than the fostering of monopolies: at least the capitalist system will be freely preserved under the new law.  However, the sooner the people and State of California recognize that a free economy is the best way to secure their interests, the better it will be for all producers.  And the sooner that larger producers recognize that their interests lie in the betterment of all producers - large and small - the sooner they will profit better.  There is plenty of room in a free market for small and large producers.  The greed that motivated them to influence the public towards regulating the market for their benefit has come to bitter fruit, but it is not too late to undo the damage - if journals like the Bee will only investigate the whole truth of the matter for the advisement of the public.

please let us know if you'd like to borrow our personal books on economics, or would like references for your own access at the public library.  We are

at your service,
Aaron and Mary

We have a new head rooster. He’s more mature thant the other roosters, but smaller because of his breed. It’s very confusing to everyone.

The hens give him no respect. He can’t get the time of day from anyone except the baby birds. What a misundestood rooster! He sings a lot in a sad, proud sort of way, clucking and chuckling with disgruntlement even as he sings the head-rooster song. He can’t get no respect. We’re calling him Rodney.

Scuttle let him become head rooster without a fight the moment he was introduced to the flock. Too many hens for Scuttle. Good luck to the new guy.

In the first photo is the second of our 3 new roosters. He and his brother are almost identical - black and white and very large. Though younger than the other birds, they are much larger. Large and mel-low!

Here’s something that seems overlooked recently. It costs less to produce eggs outside of cages than within.

Add it up and compare for your self.

OUTSIDE CAGES (grazing)
FEED (per bird/year) - $78 (high estimate, based on increasing feed prices)

INSIDE CAGES
FEED (per bird/year) - $208 (same high estimate)

Housing can be held constant because grazing birds still need a coop at night.

Heat and other environmental care in California simply doesn’t matter much unless you’re trying to force production, in which case it would be constant whether the birds grazed or not.

Mortality rate for grazing birds may get as high as 1% per year under normal conditions if roosters are employed, and if hormones are NOT used. This rate is not different from those experienced by cage conditions and reflects the skills of good scientific management. The cost of 1/3 roosters in the flock increases feed costs, but that is accounted for above.

Discussion:

After hearing so many other producers bemoan the condition of the State, we had to point out that this is perhaps one of the kindest things the State has ever done for an agricultural industry.

To serve the consumer, farmers have to know what the consumer wants. So often it is a challenge to understand exactly what the consumer desires. The loud and clear message is a signal: and when, by our experience, the cost of producing eggs is cheaper when the animals are outside cages than within, we couldn’t be happier.

If the State were asking something onerous, we might object. But to be requierd to produce a product that costs less to make and is in higher demand is no hardship. We suspect those producers who object loudest either do not know how to produce eggs without cages, and would make ourselves available to any chicken farmer who wants to learn how to adapt to the new, good law.

If the larger producers cannot, there are many smaller producers who can. This will result in greater employment because of a demonopolization of the industry. Chicken farming is already a thriving hobby among enthusiasts, and as the larger producers find themselves unable to adapt to market demands, these enthusiasts will become tomorrow’s leaders. These enthusiasts are usually amateurs, recently consumers, and are attuned to the demands of the market.

As professional farmers, we’re proud to stand among these amateurs as their body of experience proves itself useful to California.

This morning we saw in the snow that the coyote walked up to our coops and sat down for what had to have been an interesting converstion with our birds.  After a while (the snow began to fill in the tracks), the coyote circled and made fresh tracks over its older ones and backtracked... only to smell and see how a family of quail had made tracks over its own while he was trying to entice our birds out of their home!  The quail made for a safer hiding place after the coyote passed.

After circling in distress, the coyote left for an entirely differnt direction.

What a dissapointing night (for the coyote)