Page MenuHomePhabricator

Discussion points on using animals for land management
Updated 298 Days AgoPublic

Discussion points on keeping animals for the purpose of land management.

In the meantime, the current rules apply for Animal Husbandry: no new animals without prior discussion. Existing pets may come with new residents, if they are properly cared for / fenced as appropriate :)

Note Chesterton's fence: we should only be trusted to keep animals if we know all of the reasons why we shouldn't.

General points

Pros

  • manages grass
  • no fossil fuel use (except for relocation, acquisition of food, tools, infrastructure, vet, etc.)

Cons

  • all-year round responsibility when grass is only difficult to manage during Summer rains
  • requires handling, taming and management commitment
  • requires excrement management
  • requires feeding when the grass is not prolific
  • animals discriminate based on taste, so do not target only weeds (and may ignore weeds for fruit trees or natives)
  • constant greenhouse gas emissions
  • requires fencing, water and infrastructure
  • competitive exclusion generally encourages attitude of keeping out native wildlife (e.g. snakes etc.)

Natives

Wallabies

Kangaroos

Exotics

Hooves are not present in Australian native conditions and cause additional disturbance to the soil layer.

Guinea Pigs

Goats

Cows

Horses

🐎

Last Author
Timotheos
Last Edited
Mar 31 2021, 3:38 PM

Event Timeline

Timotheos created this object.Mar 29 2021, 6:09 PM
Timotheos created this object with edit policy "Trusted Contributors (Project)".
Timotheos edited the content of this document. (Show Details)Mar 29 2021, 6:13 PM
Timotheos edited the content of this document. (Show Details)

Instinctively - I'm not supportive of introducing a herd of animals.
I am supportive of perhaps horses in the future if appropriate stables and fencing were able to be built. Everything else no.

Totally agree and support the above mandate - as long as owners take full responsibility of their care when not on the property like holidays away etc.

Timotheos edited the content of this document. (Show Details)Mar 31 2021, 3:38 PM
Grace added a subscriber: Grace.Mar 31 2021, 4:28 PM

my perspective on keeping animals on the land for grazing purposes, is as my own pragmatic response to fossil fuels and waste. i feel that the amount of lost effort that goes into constantly cutting the grass that only supports its increasing presence, strangling out native plant opportunities and just bandaids the problem. that effort could go into higher service. like more nuanced land management including gardens which grow food. my understanding is that grazing animals are a part of the system that has been created by this earth to maintain itself.
to me, focusing on one single area of native only is a little bit ludicrous in the face of evolution. machines run off of fuel, which only comes from mining areas which are often held by indigenous people as sacred. if we want to demonstrate a value system which does not support continuous mining, then something else needs to be done that is practical and realistic. people are not going to scythe 40 acres of land by hand every few weeks endlessly, let alone manage weedy forests and land much larger than that. animals have their place, and we are all on this land to do a job, not just give each other nice feelings, that includes animals. we evolved together to work in this system.
i understand when it is said that it should be thought through before acquisition, i am totally on board, which is why i highlight the potential for hypocrisy if one ignores a useful fact in favour of an ideology which is not cohesive with a secondary ideology (animal use vs coal mining).
"exotic animals" not okay but 90% of ones diet being made overseas and shipped overseas. i am not trying to shame or uninspire here, just being an advocate for transparency in values.
blessings x