PowerSwitch

Steve Newlove is reported by the BBC as auctioning off his modern farm machinery and going back to horses.

That will be an interesting and backbreaking experiment. Anecdote tells me that ploughing an acre a day meant walking 11 miles behind your horses.

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:Steve Newlove is reported by the BBC as auctioning off his modern farm machinery and going back to horses.

That will be an interesting and backbreaking experiment. Anecdote tells me that ploughing an acre a day meant walking 11 miles behind your horses.

Humans are built to be able to walk 11 miles every day. Arguably, humans are capable of consistently walking further in a day than a horse is. Very few horses could walk 26 miles day after day, but humans can do this (including one one-legged man who did it every day for 143 consecutive days). Humans evolved to hunt down big game in the same way packs of dogs do - by chasing them until they become so exhausted that they just sit down and give up.

Mr Newlove said: "I want to go back to what people said were the 'good old days'.

Good luck to the man but if it's a commercial farm I don't see how he can possibly make the numbers make sense, in the short-term at least. It will be like someone opening a coal mine, using a pick axe and hoping to turn a profit. The phrase he uses - 'good old days' – makes me think this is more of a marketing thing than a serious business plan.

Prince Charles does the same at Highgrove, I believe. But I assume that isn't a commercial farm.

What does 'commercial' mean? Giving a rate of return on the capital value of the land that exceeds the return obtainable on other investments?

If the guy owns the land freehold he may only be interested in providing himself with enough to fund his chosen lifestyle. And spending most of one's time walking up and down fields may not leave much time for shopping so why shouldn't it work just fine.

He will probably leave the land in better heart for the next generation than if it were farmed in the 'normal' way.

Bit of a back- story.

Last year:

http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/5045603 ... 1_2m_plan/

and more recently:
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/com ... _1_3312715

Good luck to him.

biffvernon wrote:What does 'commercial' mean? Giving a rate of return on the capital value of the land that exceeds the return obtainable on other investments?

If the guy owns the land freehold he may only be interested in providing himself with enough to fund his chosen lifestyle. And spending most of one's time walking up and down fields may not leave much time for shopping so why shouldn't it work just fine.

He will probably leave the land in better heart for the next generation than if it were farmed in the 'normal' way.

I agree. The 'normal’ way you mention is unsustainable in the long-term and very destructive for a variety of reasons. If he’s in a financial position to work this way and provide for himself and his family, I’m envious and wish him luck.

But the dice is loaded against most farmers who might want to do this – they are in competition with people using intensive, high energy farming and are likely to find themselves undercut on price.

From that Yorkshire post article it looks like he's 'diversifying' into other potentially money raising schemes involving education, heritage and tourism.

But a lot of farmers get money from beyond the market place for their produce.

UndercoverElephant wrote:

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:Steve Newlove is reported by the BBC as auctioning off his modern farm machinery and going back to horses.

That will be an interesting and backbreaking experiment. Anecdote tells me that ploughing an acre a day meant walking 11 miles behind your horses.

Humans are built to be able to walk 11 miles every day. Arguably, humans are capable of consistently walking further in a day than a horse is. Very few horses could walk 26 miles day after day, but humans can do this (including one one-legged man who did it every day for 143 consecutive days). Humans evolved to hunt down big game in the same way packs of dogs do - by chasing them until they become so exhausted that they just sit down and give up.

I don't doubt a word of that but it misses the point. It's not the distance that's the limiting factor but the time taken to travel it. If he has a lot of acres he'll have to have a lot of ploughmen and plough teams in order to get the job done in time. He'll also be limited on the land he can plough as horses can't work the work as many heavy soils as machines.

As said above, likely to be a show farm.

Good luck to him, it'll be hard work.

biffvernon wrote:From that Yorkshire post article it looks like he's 'diversifying' into other potentially money raising schemes involving education, heritage and tourism.

But a lot of farmers get money from beyond the market place for their produce.

So he's a hobby farmer?
You can build a golf course in a desert if you can find people willing to fund it.
If he can con local schools into schools into funding his hobby farm....

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:Steve Newlove is reported by the BBC as auctioning off his modern farm machinery and going back to horses.

That will be an interesting and backbreaking experiment. Anecdote tells me that ploughing an acre a day meant walking 11 miles behind your horses.

Humans are built to be able to walk 11 miles every day. Arguably, humans are capable of consistently walking further in a day than a horse is. Very few horses could walk 26 miles day after day, but humans can do this (including one one-legged man who did it every day for 143 consecutive days). Humans evolved to hunt down big game in the same way packs of dogs do - by chasing them until they become so exhausted that they just sit down and give up.

I don't doubt a word of that but it misses the point. It's not the distance that's the limiting factor but the time taken to travel it. If he has a lot of acres he'll have to have a lot of ploughmen and plough teams in order to get the job done in time. He'll also be limited on the land he can plough as horses can't work the work as many heavy soils as machines.

As said above, likely to be a show farm.

Good luck to him, it'll be hard work.

I doubt that completely as I have spent more than a day or two walking behind a work horse with the lines in my hands. Out walk a horse? you have to be kidding. Humans can do four minute miles horses can do two minute miles. Even at walking speed it is a matter of stride length. they just cover more ground with each step. They take eight and you take sixteen to keep up. That is why plow horses are the slowest and calmest that can be bred so that the plowman can keep up.
Now to the math? An acre is about 210 feet square. A horse drawn plow turns over at least a foot and a half furrow with each pass and even with a very primitive one way plow you can plow up one side of the field and down the other so figure 300 feet of walking to get 315 square feet upside down. 43560/315*300/5280= 7.85 miles. A long way from eleven miles. The horse drawn plows I have used flop over from one side to the other so you can plow both ways of the field and roll the sod down hill with out any extra walking for you or the team and in anything other then new ground could be set to turn over two feet at a time if your team was heavy enough to do it.
Given all that if I have to grow a crop on a given piece of ground I'll use a tractor or a rototiller as long as their is a gallon of liquid fuel left to run it.

vtsnowedin wrote:

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote: Humans are built to be able to walk 11 miles every day. Arguably, humans are capable of consistently walking further in a day than a horse is. Very few horses could walk 26 miles day after day, but humans can do this (including one one-legged man who did it every day for 143 consecutive days). Humans evolved to hunt down big game in the same way packs of dogs do - by chasing them until they become so exhausted that they just sit down and give up.

I don't doubt a word of that but it misses the point. It's not the distance that's the limiting factor but the time taken to travel it. If he has a lot of acres he'll have to have a lot of ploughmen and plough teams in order to get the job done in time. He'll also be limited on the land he can plough as horses can't work the work as many heavy soils as machines.

As said above, likely to be a show farm.

Good luck to him, it'll be hard work.

I doubt that completely as I have spent more than a day or two walking behind a work horse with the lines in my hands. Out walk a horse? you have to be kidding. Humans can do four minute miles horses can do two minute miles. Even at walking speed it is a matter of stride length. they just cover more ground with each step. They take eight and you take sixteen to keep up. That is why plow horses are the slowest and calmest that can be bred so that the plowman can keep up.
Now to the math? An acre is about 210 feet square. A horse drawn plow turns over at least a foot and a half furrow with each pass and even with a very primitive one way plow you can plow up one side of the field and down the other so figure 300 feet of walking to get 315 square feet upside down. 43560/315*300/5280= 7.85 miles. A long way from eleven miles. The horse drawn plows I have used flop over from one side to the other so you can plow both ways of the field and roll the sod down hill with out any extra walking for you or the team and in anything other then new ground could be set to turn over two feet at a time if your team was heavy enough to do it.
Given all that if I have to grow a crop on a given piece of ground I'll use a tractor or a rototiller as long as their is a gallon of liquid fuel left to run it.

Four legs good, two legs better!

UndercoverElephant wrote:[Four legs good, two legs better!

Certainly ! But how did you come to that conclusion?

If a man consumes 3,000 calories and the horse 25,000 to plough the field we get 28,000.

It takes about 10ltrs of fuel if you used a tractor and that 71,000,000 calories. So using a tractor is 2840 times more energy intensive.

But the work rate is a lot higher, around 30/1 so the work rate is 2840/30 = about 100/1

So its 100 times less energy efficient to use a tractor. The only thing that makes it possible is the availability of almost free energy.

10lts of fuel = £6.80 (Red Diesel)
equivalent in sugar
17,000 kg = £14,000

If you use sugar as the energy source for the man and horse it take £4.20 to plough the acre where it takes £6.80 per acre with the tractor but 30 times faster

As the energy value of a fuel is not represented by price the market is distorted.

ziggy12345 wrote:If a man consumes 3,000 calories and the horse 25,000 to plough the field we get 28,000.

It takes about 10ltrs of fuel if you used a tractor and that 71,000,000 calories. So using a tractor is 2840 times more energy intensive.

But the work rate is a lot higher, around 30/1 so the work rate is 2840/30 = about 100/1

So its 100 times less energy efficient to use a tractor. The only thing that makes it possible is the availability of almost free energy.

10lts of fuel = £6.80 (Red Diesel)
equivalent in sugar
17,000 kg = £14,000

If you use sugar as the energy source for the man and horse it take £4.20 to plough the acre where it takes £6.80 per acre with the tractor but 30 times faster

As the energy value of a fuel is not represented by price the market is distorted.

Yes but the horse has to be fed and cared for every day of the year not just the days you have work for it. The tractor can just be parked in the shed using no fuel until you have work for it. Tractors also have a handy parking brake that horses lack.

vtsnowedin wrote:Yes but the horse has to be fed and cared for every day of the year not just the days you have work for it. The tractor can just be parked in the shed using no fuel until you have work for it.

Isn't that accounted for in the 30/1 work rate?