09 Apr Thu 2009
March from Water
Recently while on deliveries, we noticed a farmer in the valley who was carrying on a trailer a sign bearing the message that water was essential for farms. We didn't get the chance to talk with him - he was going the other direction at more than a mile per minute - but we had to laugh when we imagined his impression of the beautiful farms of the desert, or of those so-called "less fortunate" farms without water.
While it is true that water is necessary in most of California for the most popular foods in demand, it is important to remember that water is not needed for food itself. Many wild plants and fungi grow without any help from human hands that are edible, nutritous staples of the human diet, delicious treats, energy, fiber and medicine. Many animals grow - without help from human hands - that produce necessary fiber, food, medicine, treats and draft power.
It is inconcievable to suppose that huamnity would have thrived so long and so well on this planet if there was not enough food to do so, and a sin to doubt that the good earth cannot continue to provide for our needs. As one of our customers pointed out to us ina discussion on the subject, "it is our own fault if we are hungry in this world of plenty."
Farmers depend on others for their livelihood. We depend on our laborers to work hard, we depend on our customers to tell us what they want. But we also depend on either nature for water - or upon our government. That the drought is causing so much concern among farmers for water demonstrates that they have not only sinned by fearing for their customers' hunger, but that they are dependent upon unnatural governmental action for their water.
At every meal before we eat, we take a moment to remember that all things are given to those who need them when they are needed most. Though we do enjoy our cabbages - a water loving plant - we also enjoy our dandelions, our dates, our oats, our beans, our squashes... the innumerable other things that require less or no water.
We take a moment to remember that irrigation improves yields of these foods, but is not necessary for their production, and that the total production is not incresaed more than the value of that water. Even if we had access to subsidized water from a ditch (our well would not be subsidized by taxpayers), it still would not change the basic fact that the water is not producing more food than it is worth. The water belongs to the river and the city, as the farmer does: the farmer serves their nation by protecting natural resources and providing food to their neighbors.
It is this unwillingness to serve nature and their neighbors that has led to this agricultural crisis. Do we continue to produce oranges when there is no water to do so, when other fruits are more wholesome? Do we listen to our customers when they - out of ignorance - demand that which would strip their children's children of a great inheritance?
Many farmers say yes. They carry signs. They are terrified to produce against market demand, afraid that their customers will buy somewhere else. They are terrified that if they do the right thing they will be punished.
We at Re Rustica are now at a crisis of our own. How can we produce those foods which endanger our water resources? How can we afford the risk of our customers preferring to buy from those farms which would not look after the earth as much as the market demand?
And our customers are in crisis too: the desert's foods, while less expensive, are less demanded for lack of familiarity. The customers simply don't know they want them - when would they have tried them? How can the customer risk trying them - supporting a farm with their limited money - when they don't even know they will like what they buy?
Together we stand in the sin of doubt, the correct path laid before us, waivering as if there was reason for confusion. Drought will destroy us if we choose wrongly or hesitate too long.
As we write this, our coyote friend - who hunts in our fields - is playing friendfully with our geese. After a long time of distrust, they have come to terms of friendship. Through our help there is plenty of good food for the coyote, and our geese have no reason to fear him. We work along side him - though he is not tame. By confronting our fears, our courage earns us greater rewards than we could have imagined.
And so we ask you, our customers and friends and our fellow farmers, how can we lead each other towards what we must do? We, on our part, provide free samples of desrt foods and foods that need less water (though they are not asked for, we do provide them periodically to our customers). When we occasionally and radomly follow up as to why they are not ordered again, it is because they are not the foods they are familiar with.
How can we work together to ensure that there will never again be a drought crisis? To ensure that farmers never need to fear for lack of water? How can we bring these foods to be an essential part of the daily diet? These foods are loveable and nutritious, enjoyed throughout other parts of the world. Why can't they be enjoyed here?
08 Apr Wed 2009
Nature Provides All We Need
Food can have amazing effects on you. Some foods make you happy, others make you sad, some make you healthy, others can kill you. Some foods make you hallucinate, others clarify your mind. Food is a magical thing, and it is important to remember that - as enjoyable as the daily meals are - they are important to your mind, body and soul.
What we eat we eat for pleasure, but also for nutrition. We balance our diet upon the reccomendations of nutritionists, following the USDA food pyramid religiously. A varied diet of grains, fruits, vegetables, beans, nuts, oils and sugars is so important to us - the "treats" at the top of the pyramid no less so than the "staples" on bottom. How could we go a day without delicious beans? Or skimp on our favorite olive oil? Our oats are as important as our fruits and nuts and veggies.
Every once in a while, we don't feel well. Or perhaps a friend doesn't feel well. We give them some foods to make them better. It's magic: eating the right food can make you strong!
Nature provides for our needs by giving to us at the right time those things we need most. In the autumn we recieve our oils, our heavy carbohydrates, our foods we need to hold us through winter. In winter, we feast upon the bounty of autumn, but also seek out those vitamin and mineral rich trees and berries nature preserved for us to find. Digging through the snow, we find joy for our plates: the ruby red rosehip is a treasure for the palate. In the spring, the taraxacum and the other spring greens and roots give us the health to make the most of summer's bounty.
When we are overborne by the weariness of the world, we make a special and interesting dinner. Nature already makes sure we vary our diet, keeping our love for natural foods alive with constant and pleasant surprises. Nature cares for our needs, and provides for us.
As farmers, we work with nature. We help those plants that are our friends grow bigger and stronger, so that those friends we feed them to are made stronger still. We give our friendship to the birds that lay our eggs.
By providing food and shelter to all the animals of our world, we fear no hardship. The coyotes leave our birds alone to hunt rabbits in our fields, singing us beautiful songs at night. The foxes eat grasshoppers. The worms, ants and various insects tend our crops. Life is not spent at leisure, but upon completing that most essential job that none of the animals can do:
the love of all living creatures.
13 Mar Fri 2009
Getting enough sleep?
Half of us get more than the average amount of sleep, half of us get less, but more than half of us get more than the minimum sleep reccomended
The animals, we sometimes joke, are smarter than us - at night they go to sleep.
One of our neighbors noticed we’re always working and told us to go to bed. Are we sleep deprived at Re Rustica?
For guidance, we look to our doctors, who reccomend 8 hours of sleep every night. Eight hours! Goodness, it seems like too much. Is anyone else sleeping that much? We looked to our fellow Americans. The US Dept. of Labor says that folks our age are getting 8.5 to 8.7 hours of sleep! On average, working-age Americans are getting 8.47 hours!
Wow. We are sleep deprived. How much are we sleep deprived?
The sun rises in January at about 7AM, letting us get 6 hours of sleep (we go to sleep a bit later in winter, at about 1ish). In June, the sun rises at about 4AM, letting us get about 5 hours sleep (we go to sleep a bit earlier in summer - about 11ish). By sunrise, we of course mean twilight…
So, on average we’re getting 5.5 hours of sleep. Looks like we ought to get to bed 2-3 hours earlier.
07 Mar Sat 2009
What we are doing about the drought
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
04 Mar Wed 2009
Delivering Poetry
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.
28 Feb Sat 2009
Is it a rooster?
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!
21 Feb Sat 2009
Calling all farmers!
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
20 Feb Fri 2009
Hulling with a pistol
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!
14 Feb Sat 2009
Why is an acre 43560 square feet?
The word “acre” is derived from Old English æcer (originally meaning “open field”, cognate to west coast Norwegian language “ækre” and Swedish “åker”, German Acker, Latin ager and Greek ????? (agros). -Wikipedia
An acre is 43,560 Square Feet, but why?
Here is a great answer from YourHub.com:
Neolithic Megalithic Measurements
By about 5,000 BC, all sorts of things were being invented, not least among them a standardized unit of measurement. This unit of measurement was based on the circumference of the Earth.
From experiments and observation, people understood that the earth was a sphere and that it rotated on its axis. Rather than measuring the time of rotation based on either the moon or the sun (the sun and moon rise and set at different times each day and are not constant), people measured a “day” by the time it took for a star to return to its original position in the sky: stars do not “move” in the same observable way that the sun and moon do.
Well, as soon as it was decided that stars were better to measure the rotation of the earth by, it was observed that the earth rotated around the sun: a star would not return to its original position for 366 days! Thus, in original geometry, the circle had 366 degrees, not 360 (it was shortened by 6 degrees by the Sumerians to make math easier).
A person could stand outside at night and divide the horizon into 366 degrees, and then observe the time it took for a star to pass between that one degree by use of a pendulum. If the pendulum’s length was “correct” (a standard size), it would take 366 swings for a star to pass between the two degrees on the horizon. The star they used was Venus (actually a planet), and because Venus had a changing speed during the year, they calibrated their pendulums on the day of the year when Venus moved the slowest.
The length of this pendulum was the foundation of all modern units of measurement, and is known to archeologists as the “Megalithic Yard.” The Megalithic Yard is similar in size to the Meter, and measures roughly 2.722 Feet (82.966 Centimeters). The Megalithic Yard was divided into 40 units, called “Megalithic Inches.”
By making a cube with each side the length of 1/10 of these Megalithic Yards (4 MI) and filling the cube, standardized units of volume was developed. This unit of volume is now called the Pint. A cube with a length of 8 MI is called the Gallon. A cube with a length of 16 MI is called the Bushel.
If the same volume is filled with water or seed, units of weight can be found. Grain (Barley seed was used by the ancients) occupies about 125% of the volume of water when placed in a cubical container. When a Pint is filled with barley, it weighs one pound. However, some of the ancients filled the Pint with water, and called it a pound. The difference between a Pound Avoirdupois and a Pound Troy is thus explained.
When 40 MY are squared, the resulting area is known as the Irish Acre (23,520 square feet). 75 MY x 100 MY equals the Scottish Acre.
A Sumerian Wheel of 360 Degrees
So where does the modern acre come in? As the megalithic peoples based all numbers off of the 366 degrees of the earth’s rotation, the Sumerians based all their numbers off 360 degrees of the earth’s rotation.
6 MY described a “Megalithic Rod.” When an area is made measuring 4 MR x 40 MR, you get the modern Acre. This can also be described as being 16 sections measuring 360 MY in area. The modern acre originated from a time after the Sumerian improvement of rounding down from 366 degrees to 360 degrees.
Further evidence of the modern acre being the result of Sumerian improvement can be seen in how the modern acre of 43560 square Feet may be divided evenly into 121 sections of 360 square feet: 11 sections of 360 feet is 3,960 Feet, and 11 sections of 3,960 feet is an Acre.
11 sections of 11 sections seems arbitrary, but many units of area are designed on this number: the square Mile may be divided into 121 (11 x 11) sections of 230,400 square Feet, with each section’s side equal to 1/11 of a mile (480 Feet). These 121 pieces may be divided into 640 sections of 360 feet, similar to how an American Square Mile is divided into 640 Sections (each section equaling an acre).
Modern units of measurement are based on older, Sumerian-influenced methods of measurements.
Though the Sumerian-influenced descendants of the megalithic peoples attempted to simplify the megalithic accounting, they still used the same methods of dividing land into sections of 360 square feet.
French, American and Minoan Wheels
The ease of the Sumerian system was eventually improved by bringing it into conformity with a base-ten system. The French are usually given credit for this “metric” system. The Meter was developed using the Sumerian 360 degree circle as a starting point. Thus, the metric system is based off of the Sumerian improvement to the megalithic system.
Thomas Jefferson, like the French when they developed the metric system, wanted to improve the Sumerian system by bringing it into conformity with a base-10 system. He attempted to introduce to the newly formed United States his better form of measurement based on a 360 degree circle. But, unlike the Meter in France, the Jeffersonian Units of measurement never caught on.
Was Thomas Jefferson’s improvement new? 1,000 Jefferson Feet (Jefferson’s units were to be referred to as Jefferson Feet, Jefferson Miles, etc.), was set to equal 360 MY. However, 1,000 Minoan feet had equaled the same distance for thousands of years before Jefferson: the ancient Minoans had the same idea as Jefferson and ought to be given credit for bringing the Sumerian improvement into a base-ten system.
Suggested Reading:
1) Alexander Thom, including the Megalithic Sites in Britain (1955), Megalithic Sites in Britain (1967), Megalithic Sites in Britain (1968) and A Statistical Examiniation of Megalithic Remains in Britain and Brittany (1978).
2) D. C. Heggie, Megalithic Science (1981).
3) J.W. Graham, Palaces of Crete (1962)
4) Christopher Knight, Civilization One. A good review of the literature can be found in this book, but, while this book serves as a good review, the reader is cautioned: Knight’s ability to succinctly compile the vast body of archeological research is amazing, but the last few chapters of his book (which resort to explaining the knowledge of the ancients as being due not to their own ingenuity, but through the actions of angels and other daemons) is highly questionable.
04 Feb Wed 2009
adopted chickens
Today we adopted two chickens and one duck from the Stanislaus Animal Shelter. They were brought into the shelter together, and were inseparable friends there even when provided with a huge field and barn to eat and play in. Though we’ve never raised ducks before, we’re glad to give this sweet bird a home with our chickens and geese.
We love raising day-old chicks and goslings, but it is equally rewarding rescuing birds from animal shelters. From a business perspective, adopting older birds can be an advantage by saving us five months (for chickens) or a year (for geese) for the birds to lay eggs. It can also be a risk if you get a sick or too-old bird: chickens stop laying eggs after a few years, and while we don’t mind giving “retired” chickens a home, it is better for business if they earn their keep. Sick birds, of course, can be dangerous to your entire flock, but are typically easy to tell if they are sick. Stressful living situations, such as living at an animal shelter, will tend to exasperate any underlying illnesses so that when you adopt from a shelter you can more easily see if the chicken is sick.
We also just rescued seven two-month old chicks. Their previous owner had raised them (inadvertently) to be cannibalistic. Chickens are curious and omnivorous; when they are young, especially, they will peck at each other for various reasons. If one chick gets injured and bleeds, the other chicks will naturally peck at the blood. If one catches the problem quickly, it is simple to apply a bad tasting ointment to the wound and/or isolate the injured bird until it recovers. Depending on why the bird got injured in the first place, other measures may need to be taken to prevent a reoccurance (for example, fixing a dangerous cage, eliminating overcrowding, or relocating an overly aggressive chick).
The problem with the chicks we bought seems to be that early in their chick-hood they tasted blood and no retraining was undertaken. As a result, they learned to make each other bleed (just a little, on the tailhead) and appear to have been “tasting” each other ever since. Only one of them has a tail; the rest have been pulled out and scabbed over from repeated injury. This is an easy problem to fix, though it would have been better if it had been prevented in the first place. If they had been younger, or if we had no rooster to retrain them, we would have applied bad-tasting ointment to all their tailheads (actively bleeding or not), to teach them that eating tails is gross. Luckily for us, though, we have a good rooster and could take the easier path: we simply put all the chicks in the coop with him and let him teach them how to behave like proper grown up chickens. With a few days of discipline (he never hurts them, just demands obedience), they have all but quit their bad pecking habit.
One of the more challenging parts of adopting chickens is introducing them to the flock. In most cases (excepting situations like the cannibalistic chicks that needed quicker intervention from our rooster) we keep the new chicken(s) in a cage in the coop for a day or two, so that they can introduce themselves without fighting. Then they are let loose in the coop, but all chickens (new and old) are made to stay in the coop for a few days to get well bonded. This is greatly aided by having a good rooster. Skipping this step tends to lead to the new chickens wandering off and getting lost or eaten. Finally, the chickens are let loose like normal to free range around our farm. If the training was successful, they’ll stay together as a flock and return to the coop in the evening. If not, we try locking the flock up for a few more days together in the coop to bond a little more.