Enlist an army of chickens to fight the locust plague

There seems to be a level of panic in Victoria about the possibility of a locust plague and farmers are being urged to dump tonnes of insecticides on them - chemicals which are just about guaranteed to get into our food chain.

A far better control method is chickens. Chickens love eating locusts and grasshoppers – so if all the millions of chickens in this State are let out of their cages and sheds they could clean up the problem. As each chicken could eat 100 locusts a day, 6 million chickens could account for 600,000,000 locusts every day.

But unfortunately that wouldn't work because the birds have been de-beaked – in fact even the birds on most so-called 'free range' farms have been de-beaked (or beak trimmed is the term the industry prefers to use) and they are unable to graze properly and pick up things like insects or even eat grass.

So its yet another argument not to beak trim chickens.

Locusts tend to lay their eggs in damp, alkaline soils so ducks could also help to eradicate the problem because both chooks and ducks love to eat locust eggs.

Chickens as a method of locust control is not a new idea.  The BBC had this up on their website in 2006:
Pest control officials in North-West China have resorted to desperate measures to tackle a plague of locusts which is infesting a huge area of grassland.

They have brought in an army of 10,000 chickens - backed by air support from thousands of starlings - to gobble up some of the millions of locusts which have descended on Xinjiang in the Uygur autonomous region.
According to Xinhua newsagency, the elite fowl undergo 60 days training shortly after they hatch to prepare them for battle with the locusts.
Worst infestation
And battle it is, because this year's infestation is said to be the worst in the region for a decade, with a quarter of Xinjiang's grasslands affected.
There were no details given of the chicken training programme.
The newspaper China Youth Daily said the chickens had succeeded in taking on the pests where all else failed.
But the insect-eating chickens are only one prong in the region's assault on the swarms of locusts.
Xinjiang pest control officials are also encouraging starlings to settle in the area by placing nests in the grassland area.
Pesticide alternative
Last month environmentalists in the port city of Tianjin released five million wasps to attack insects which had been damaging crops.
The BBC Correspondent in Beijing, Colin Blane, says it is thought Chinese scientists are being encouraged to find ways of reducing the use of chemical pesticides.
The introduction of chickens and starlings as instruments of pest control is a reverse of the disastrous experiment of the 1950s when the whole nation was urged to scare sparrows away from crops by beating drums for hours on end.
Unable to land, the sparrows died from exhaustion and the crops were then destroyed by a booming insect population.

Fraud at the supermarkets

The Sunday papers are carrying a story about the mislabelling of food (including eggs) in supermarkets. The article says: 'AUSTRALIANS are being duped at the supermarket, with one in 10 products the subject of "food fraud".

In some cases, eggs from caged hens are being sold as free range and fresh fruit and vegetables sprayed with pesticides are selling as organic, according to researchers at the University of Western Australia’s forensic research centre.
Professors John Watling, Cameron Scadding and Garry Lee are leading a project to expose producers who fraudulently label their products, as the cost of food fraud tops an estimated $7 billion a year nationally.'
Of course the Australian Egg Corporation will vigorously deny there is any substitution going on. It always defends the big operators.
But it's clear that unless the Federal Government steps in with some real 'truth in labelling' legislation the problem will continue and will even get worse if the Egg Corportion gets away with its proposal to introduce new misleading standards for 'free range' production.

Raising orphan koalas

Raising baby marsupials is always a challenge, especially when they are very young like the little koala on the left. Constant feed and warmth are essential and it takes many long hours of care - including interrupted nights to achieve a good outcome.
You have to start with a dilute low lactose milk formula delivered into the mouth slowly by syringe or pipette every hour or so. Then build up the formula strength to the required level.
Here's a series of pictures which shows that you can have great results in a wildlife shelter.

How could anyone not think that this little fellow is cute?

And here, he's just about ready to get back into the wild!

Egg wars - the Egg Corporation's 'free range' plans

There is an excellent article on Google News about the Australian Egg Corporation's planned changes to 'free range' standards. Here's the link
Egg Wars - The Australian Egg Corporation changes "Free Range" Rules

Hopefully, once we have a new federal government in place we may actually get someone in Canberra to listen!!!

Getting hens out of cages is a good idea, but producers need to be honest about they are doing and the way they describe their production systems.

The Dalai Lama has now clmed intothe debate with a letter to the Humane Society nternational and the Humane Society of the United States.

The Dalai Lama Condemns Cage Confinement of Egg-Laying Hens

WASHINGTON (Aug. 31, 2010) – His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama has issued a statement in the wake of the largest egg recall in United States history. In a letter, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate decries the egg industry’s cruel treatment of hens and urges egg buyers to switch to cage-free eggs:

“The abuse we inflict on hens has always been particularly disturbing to me and I have always been particularly concerned toward how these animals are treated in industrial food production. I am troubled to learn about the practice of confining egg laying hens in tiny cages. In these cages, birds cannot engage in their natural behaviours, such as spreading their wings, laying eggs in a nesting area, perching, scratching at the ground, even standing on a solid surface. Each hen has less space to live than the very sheet of paper I have written this letter on. Turning these defenseless animals into egg-producing machines with no consideration for their welfare whatsoever is a degradation of our own humanity. Switching to cage free eggs would reduce the suffering of these animals.”

The Dalai Lama’s statement comes as a major U.S. movement against cruel and inhumane cages on factory egg farms is taking root. Prominent U.S. corporations from Burger King to Safeway are switching to cage-free eggs. Michigan and California have passed laws to phase out the use of cages to confine hens. California has also passed a law requiring that all whole eggs sold statewide be cage-free by 2015. In Ohio, agriculture leaders agreed to a moratorium on the construction of new cage egg facilities.

Equilibrium Farming - What is sustainability?

At the Freeranger Farm we have a totally sustainable approach to the way we operate and we often refer to it as Equilibrium Farming. Here's some info I published on the Bassbush website.

Over millions of years a wide variety of life forms and processes have evolved on the earth. We haven't yet discovered them all and some will inevitably disappear before we know what they are. We certainly don't understand them but we humans have developed an agricultural and industrial system which takes little notice of the balance generated by nature. We are control freaks, determined to develop ever-more complex equipment and processes which ignore our natural environment and try to change it.

We produce farm products which require unsustainably high volumes of fresh water, whilst ignoring the methods which nature developed to maintain biodiversity. Is it any wonder that many people are becoming increasingly concerned about our impact on climate change? We seem to have a great need to build machines which rely on the continuity of resources designed to maintain the economic imperative. Of course there are plenty of politicians (and others) who don't accept the effect we are having. They (like tobacco company executives arguing that there was no link between smoking and lung cancer) insist that global warming is just a cycle and there is nothing we can do about it. Perhaps they are right! But perhaps not. Are we all prepared to risk irreversible damage to our atmosphere, our soils and our waterways? We believe that Equilibrium Farming is the way to go - minimum inputs, reduced costs and simple production methods will ensure that a farm can operate sustainably for generations.

Chemical Farming

Industrialisation has allowed our civilisation to develop artificial farming techniques. We are now able to take almost any landscape, destroy what is there and turn it into what we see as important – if we are too dumb to think about the consequences. The deliberate destruction of forests, grasslands and even swamps is just mind-boggling. But we have done it and we are still doing it. We see fertile areas and systematically remove all vestiges of plant and animal life before ploughing the ground, without any thought for the consequences of destroying the microflora and microfauna in the soil.

It's all done in the name of progress – and creating an agricultural monoculture. We replace native species with exotics in the belief that they will perform 'better' (or at least will put more dollars in our pockets). Monocultures often thrive in the short term. It doesn't make much difference if its wheat, potatoes, grapes, olives or just rye grass and clover, the traditional outputs don't keep pace with population growth, and we chase ways to maximise production. This usually means dumping truckloads (or plane loads) of synthetic fertilisers to boost production. Insecticides and herbicides are spread like confetti to try to stop all the little bugs and things from spoiling our fun. There's no doubt it works and makes farmers and governments heaps of money (for a while). But it all comes crashing down when the reality hits that you can't keep doing this!

Agriculture driven by chemical inputs increases short term productivity and nutritional levels to unprecedented levels but the cost is the destruction of our soils.

Our farming practices mean that throughout the world, we use more water than falls naturally as rainfall.

The area of soils which is productive is gradually reducing every year while the population increases exponentially.

In Australia, we have one of the world’s most difficult agricultural environments – semi-arid in most parts, shallow topsoils, low nutrient levels and high salinity levels in subterranean soils. In the first 200 years of European settlement, Australians reduced the fertility of much of the landscape by inappropriate farming practices, increased soil and water salinity to near catastrophic levels and reduced biodiversity.

The levels of carbon in soils was once measured in thousands of years, but apparently now span only 2 to 3 years – a testament to the decreasing levels of life in soils.

It has been shown that chemical fertilisers harm and kill plant micro-organisms, thus eliminating the possibility of natural nutrient cycling. Combined with the application of pesticides and herbicides in an irrigated monocultural environment, the chemicals are aiding the desertification and salinisation of productive lands.

Erosion effects – the elimination of natural flora (not to mention the microflora) has caused enormous damage to the structure of Australian soils. Together with wholesale tilling, our soils are routinely badly eroded, to the point where a major rain season (orhigh winds in a dry season) may result in catastrophic removal of topsoil. Serious erosion can be readily viewed in any dryland area of Australia – ranging from minor to extreme – and the problem is worsening with all major attempts at redressing the problem being largely ineffective.

Our complex political and economic systems have developed so far that often our balance of payments is in negative territory (importing far more than we export).

A significant proportion of that imbalance is the result of importing chemical fertilisers to feed our naturally 'poor' soils. The fertilisers, while allowing for profitable crops in the short term, are contributing to the acidification and salinisation of our soils. Their use produces excess levels of soluble nutrients in soil - which has two effects, increased nutrient stored in subsoils, and increased nutrient loads in waterways. The former is just a waste, the latter is the cause of untold pollution of waterways in a world with an increasing freshwater deficit.

What's the cost to human health?

While we are feeding an unprecedented number of people, there are still significant shortcomings. Ours may be the only generation in recorded human history to not live longer than our parents – a testament to the falling food values of our diet, overeating and obesity-related illnesses in some parts of the world, and malnutrition, starvation in others. How did we get it so wrong?

The natural process

There are no chemical fertilisers or pesticides or herbicides in nature.

Organic wastes in natural forests fall to the ground where they are consumed by a plethora of micro-organisms. No-one has gone close to calculating how many species exist today, let alone what existed before human intervention, but some estimate them to be in the millions.

In a complex and poorly understood web, these species interact with each other and one organism’s byproduct is another’s food. From the competitive melange that makes up our soils, nutrients and energy are constantly and sustainably returned to so-called higher plants where the process of capturing the sunlight and gases from the atmosphere results in even more life – a perfectly sustainable ecosystem, with increasing biomass. Compare this to our man-made system in which biodiversity and biomass are spiralling ever-downwards. Unfortunately our intervention is growing - the clamour for clearing understorey in our native forests in the name of  'fire control' will lead to even greater decline.

There have been numerous studies of practical farming techniques utilising natural systems and it has been demonstrated that the elimination of chemical fertilisers, reductions in the use of pesticides and herbicides, show little or no loss in productivity. The net result – which should be relished by farmers – is that profitability can go up, not down, by using these natural methods. Unfortunately most will keep doing what they have always done. And eventually go broke!

There are no irrigation channels in the natural Australian landscape. Instead, there are chains of ponds – swamps and wetlands, sometimes covering hundreds of square miles – connected only during floods by intermittent streams. Water is retained in the landscape and does not flow 'unused' to the ocean. Plant and animal forms have adapted to this natural sequence, and thrive in what often appears as a barren and inhospitable landscape. As plant biomass increases, the flow of water is slowed, causing water levels in the swamplands to increase, thus providing more opportunity to grow more plants – and on goes the cycle. The result – increased biomass, and increased biodiversity.

In nature, waste is always re-used locally. Everything is inter or co-dependent, and synergies abound. Plants and animals don't live in isolation, instead they are part of complex, diverse and inter-related communities. Monocultures seldom exist, and by-products are processed then consumed where they fall.

An organism's by-products are exuded in a way to maximise the benefit to the organism. Plants, for example, exude simple sugars from their roots to eliminate their “wastes” - and micro-organisms convert these sugars into water soluble nutrients which are then used by the plant.

Everything is cycled and re-used in an upward spiral – increasing biomass and biodiversity. Nothing goes unused.

We are not as smart. In our industrial, chemical model, we create foods and other products, transport them vast distances to markets, in order to participate in a 'market economy'. Then we deal with our waste as a separate commodity, not part of our production cycle. What a con!

More info on Sustainability, Deep Ecology, Brittle Landscapes and heaps more can be found at http://bassbush.htmlplanet.com/

This would alert consumers to false 'free range' claims

Here's something that would help identify the cheating egg producers who charge customers a premium for claiming their eggs are 'free range' when they are from intensively managed flocks often endorsed by the Australian Egg Corporation. At least it would alert consumers as long as 'name and shame' provisions are included in the process.

It was posted a while ago on World Poultry Net - a credible industry forum - but so far the major producers have shown no interest in having their practices under such scrutiny. I wonder why?!!!!!!

A New Zealand researcher has developed a technique to identify the difference between eggs from caged hens and those from free-range and organically-raised hens.

It is believed to be the first time that eggs from different farming systems have been distinguished by using isotope analysis.

The system can have potential within the egg industry to avoid mis-labelling.

Karyne Rogers, of Geological and Nuclear Science's National Isotope Centre in Lower Hutt, New Zealand, compared different brands of off-the-shelf eggs from cage, barn, free range and organic farming regimes.

Using isotope analysis, she found almost all the eggs could be differentiated by relating the carbon and nitrogen found in the egg to the hen's diet.

This was possible as diet directly reflected the type of farming environment where the hens were raised, Dr Rogers said.

Different foods

''Free-range and organically farmed hens normally have access to a wider range of food sources than caged hens, such as insects, vegetation or organic feeds, and this changes the isotope fingerprint of their eggs,'' Dr Rogers said.

The findings, recently published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, showed isotope analysis was a potentially useful technique for identifying eggs from different farming regimes.

The research was performed on egg yolk, albumen and egg membrane to see which egg components gave the best information about the hen's diet.

Effective verification tool

Dr Rogers said the technique held considerable promise for the egg industry as an effective verification tool to guard against mis-labelling.

''The next step is to seek industry funding to work directly with egg producers to further refine the technique so it can be fully tested and applied in the industry.''

We can't wait. It could be a great tool to weed out the shonky operators who run large, industrial farming operations and de-beak their birds. And of course things will get even worse for consumers if the Egg Corporation manages to get its planned 'free range'standards up and running.

New sheds and new chooks

Here are some of our latest Isa Brown pullets in their new shed. This flock is 280 birds and will help us to keep up with local demand for genuine free range eggs - not the version the Australian Egg Corporation wants you to have!

And this is their shed - but they will only go in there when they want to. They are shut in today because they have only just arrived and we have found that by keeping them in the shed for 24 hours or so, they get to know that is their home. (If you look closely at the picture on the right you can see some of the pullets under the shed - it has no floor so even when they are inside they have access to grass).  From tomorow they will be out grazing and chasing bugs! We won't ever lock them up again. The shed has nest boxes for them to lay their eggs as well as food and water.
As with all our sheds, it is on skids so we can move it around the paddock to ensure the hens always have access to fresh pasture.
This is one of the two new sheds we have bought to increase our flock numbers in the face of insatiable demand for real free range eggs. We still have no intention of chasing the mass market and we will maintain our food miles policy of only delivering within one hour of the farm.

More proof of nutritional differences with free range eggs

There is now more evidence that free range eggs have a higher nutritional value than factory farmed eggs.  Recent research by the US Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences compared caged bird eggs with those laid by free range flocks  – and it found that that free range chickens eggs are indeed better for you.

Researchers examined how the levels of omega-3 fatty acids and concentrations of vitamins A and E differed in eggs from actively pastured hens able to eat legumes or mixed grasses compared with eggs from hens in cages.

Lead Investigator Heather Karstan said, “Compared to eggs of the commercial hens, eggs from pastured hens eggs had twice as much vitamin E and long-chain omega-3 fats, more than double the total omega-3 fatty acids, and less than half the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids,” she said. “Vitamin A concentration was 38 percent higher in the pastured hens’ eggs than in the commercial hens’ eggs.”

The six week study was compared to caged birds which were fed their usual diet of commercial egg mash.

“The chicken has a short digestive tract and can rapidly assimilate dietary nutrients,” said Paul Patterson, Professor of Poultry Science, who was a co-investigator in the project. “Fat-soluble vitamins in the diet are readily transferred to the liver and then the egg yolk. Egg-nutrient levels are responsive to dietary change.

“Other research has demonstrated that all the fat-soluble vitamins, including A and E, and the unsaturated fats, linoleic and linolenic acids, are egg responsive, and that hen diet has a marked influence on the egg concentration.”

Anyone who keeps chickens with full beaks knows how the birds like to peck on pasture. It's a natural way of getting a vitamin boost.Some plants such as Purslane are high in Omega 3 fatty acids and when the chooks eat them the food values are transferred to the eggs. But of course if the hens are de-beaked they can't forage properly and there is little if any nutritional difference between factory farmed cage eggs and factory farmed 'free range' . Chickens need full beaks and quality fresh pasture with a variety of mixed grasses and other vegetation as well as a balanced ration of grains, to gain all their essential vitamins and nutrients.

Nutritional differences between cage and free range eggs

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=98183091&blogId=316013614

I still get heaps of enquiries about nutritional diferences between real free range eggs and those laid by caged hens. Unfortunately there has been very little research here in Australia, but the Australian Egg Corporation is always quick to claim that the food values are identical between cage and free range.

They ignore evidence such as that produced by Mother Earth News in the US (see a link above).

The AECL may well be right about the eggs labelled as 'free range' which it endorses because they are mostly the same breeds of birds as found on cage farms, they eat the same feed, they are de-beaked so they can't forage properly and they are kept in intensive conditions.

But if the hens are truly free range and are allowed to roam over pasture where they can eat things like worms, spiders and grasshoppers, as well as leafy greenstuff such as grass and purslane, the eggs have been shown to have a higher nutritional value.

Ethical Food

There were some interesting comments on ethical food by Steve Spencer in this week's Weekly Times
Part of his discussion, which related to supermarket changes to pork supplies, is here:

'Our analysis suggests consumer demand is well ahead of supply. By far the greatest impact of this ethical foods trend has been around animal welfare issues.
The egg category has seen strong gains in shares won by free-range and barn-laid eggs. Pork will follow the same path as consumers respond to market offers.
Crucial to maintaining that consumer support, as demand expands, are production systems that are backed with credible, uniform standards that consumers can recognise, understand and trust.'

This demonstrates the clear problem that the egg industry will face if the Australian Egg Corporation implements its new draft standard for 'free range' egg production. AECL will bring the industry into further disrepute if it endorses a scheme which misleads consumers and destroys what little trust they have left.
Because of the actions of the Egg Corporation in promoting 'minimum' standards, consumers already distrust industry claims because they are not backed by credible standards which can be trusted.

The proposed standard has no credibility in the free range industry and responses to consumer surveys demonstrate clearly that buyers of free range eggs don't want the new standard either.

Shame on you Australian Egg Corporation

"This is outrageous and should never be allowed. I thought this type of mentality was on it's way out. It's a sad day when this amount of chickens could be termed 'free range'. Shame on you Australian Egg Corporation."

This is just one of the comments by the more than 3000 respondents to our consumer survey following the Egg Corporation's draft standards designed to allow a massive increase in the number of chickens on 'free range' farms.

The AECL wants to approve an increase from 1500 birds per hectare to 20,000.

The Free Range Farmers Association has approached the Federal Minister for Agriculture and the Shadow Minister seeking a commitment to properly define the term 'free range' once a new Government has been elected.

The only response so far has been from the Greens who support a clear national definition and truth in labelling legislation.

Frosts cutting production

We've had a few frosty nights and mornings recently and the chooks don't seem to like it. Our egg production has dipped to around 84% in the last few days and feed intake has gone up.
The hens obviously need to eat more to boost their energy levels and keep warm!
We are still able to keep up with most of the demand although we can't take on the new enquries which come in almost every day.
It also means we don't have quite as many eggs as usual to take to our Farmers' Markets so some of the late customers there miss out,
We will have a new flock of pullets arriving in a couple of weeks and they should be in full production by the end of Auust.
Before they arrive I hope to have a couple of new sheds in place too!

The Age Epicure shows the reality of 'free range' production

Petition: What Does Free Range Mean?

This week The Age in Melbourne published an excellent article in Epicure about the way chickens should be kept on real 'free range' farms. The key question for anyone to ask if they want to know if the birds really are 'free range' is to find out if the hens are de-beaked (or beak trimmed is the industry's preferred term because they think it sounds more acceptable).
There is absolutely no need for hens to be debeaked if they are truly free range - it's only when they are kept in intensive conditions that they become aggressive and attack each other.
The timing of this article was perfect as it reinforces the current fight by genuine free range farmers with the Australian Egg Corporation over its outrageous proposal to redefine standards for stocking rates to allow massive factory farms to call their eggs 'free range'. Part of that new standard also allows de-beaking as a normal practice.
If you buy eggs from any producer who is not a member of the Free Range Farmers Association (or is a certified organic producer) - the hens who laid those eggs have probably been de-beaked.
The Epicure article listed the differing standards of various accreditation bodies and the Free Range Farmers Association Inc and the organic certification bodies are the only organisaisations which prohibit debeaking.
The Australian Egg Corporation's Egg Corp Assured program, the RSPCA and Free Range Egg and Poultry Australia Ltd allow de-beaking in their versions of 'free range'.

An open letter to the Egg Industry and politicians

What is Free Range ?  Petition  http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/freerange/

The issue of farm stocking densities is essentially an agricultural matter, but proposals by the Australian Egg Corporation to increase chicken stocking densities to 20,000 birds per hectare and still allow the farm to be classified as 'free range' also has serious implications for animal welfare and consumer expectations. At a time when most countries are tightening their farm animal welfare standards, here, the Australian Egg Corporation is floating ideas for new standards for free range egg production which will allow de-beaking or beak trimming of hens as a matter of course, stocking densities on farms to increase from 1500 hens per hectare to a massive 20,000 and hens to be kept locked in sheds for up to 25 weeks.


Understandably, the free range industry and consumers are in turmoil. We agree with the Egg Corporation that the current standards for free range egg production need to be changed - but they need to be tightened up to ensure that consumers are not misled. The changes proposed by the Australian Egg Corporation will allow large producers to charge customers a premium for branding their eggs as 'free range' without incurring the additional costs of genuine free range production methods. The proposed AECL stocking density equates to a DSE (Dry Sheep Equivalent) of 400 per hectare which would be a totally unsustainable land use.

Impacts on adjoining landholders and on our waterways are likely to be huge if the proposed stocking densities are implemented. Quite apart from environmental damage and animal welfare issues, these proposals will mislead consumers about what they are buying and will further alienate them, making them even more suspicious of the egg industry.
We are getting some terrific responses on the on-line petition and they clearly demonstrate that the Australian Egg Corporation talks nonsense when it says animal welfare is a minor issue in a buyers' decision to purchase eggs. The egg corporation's consumer research deliberately targetted buyers who had no interest in, and therefore no understanding of free range standards. The research was clearly flawed and was designed to provide a pre-determined result.

Petition still powering away

The 'free range' definition petition is still up and running at

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/freerange/

Help us show the Australian Egg Corporation Ltd and The Hon Tony Burke, Minister for Agriculture what consumers really think free range standards should be!

On a lighter note, how about participating in a competition being run by the on-line newsletter Green Times designed to help raise awareness of environmental issues and promote Australian green businesses.

All you have to is click on
http://www.greentimes.com.au/competitionGreenTimes.html
and “In 25 words or less tell us what would you give up today to be greener and why?”
First prize is a trip with an eco friendly car, 2 nights in an Eco-lodge, a wine hamper, organic chocolate gift basket.

Runners up receive: Organic wine, waterless carwash packs!

Do you want to dump standards for free range eggs?

This is the petition site. Let the Australian Egg Corporation hear your voice!

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/freerange/

At a time when most countries are tightening their farm animal welfare standards, here, the Australian Egg Corporation has launched plans for new standards for free range egg production which will allow de-beaking or beak trimming of hens as a matter of course, stocking densities on farms to increase from 1500 hens per hectare to a massive 20,000 and hens to be kept locked in sheds for up to 25 weeks.

Understandably, the free range industry and consumers are in turmoil over this proposal. We agree with the Egg Corporation that the current standards for free range egg production need to be changed - but they need to be tightened up to ensure that consumers are not misled. The changes proposed by the Australian Egg Corporation will allow large producers to charge customers a premium for branding their eggs as 'free range' without incurring the additional costs of genuine free range production methods.

The proposed stocking rate equates to 400 DSE per hectare - totally unsustainable.

Information about beak-trimmingBeak trimming or de-beaking of laying hens is still a widespread practice in Australia – even in 'free range' flocks of birds with the currentstandards approved by the Australian Egg Corporation. The majority of so-called free range farms are intensive production systems with flocks of many thousands of hens.

The Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals (Domestic Poultry),which provides the only widely accepted national definition of the term 'free range' states that every effort should be made to avoid beak trimming by selecting birds which have more docile tendencies.

But the reality is that intensive free range farms beak trim their birds as a matter of course because they want to run large numbers and they chose to use high producing hens developed for the cage industry. These hens have been selectively cross bred for only two traits – maximum egg production and minimum feed intake. This often means they are aggressive and cannibalistic.

It is important to select a strain of bird that is less aggressive, and to get breeders to breed birds that are more docile. Research has shown that breeding for low aggression can have a marked effect in only 4 or 5 generations. Dr Mike Gentle, a U.S. researcher in this area, has concluded:

" In the long term, beak trimming should be phased out and undesirable behaviour controlled by environmental means and by increased effort being devoted to the genetic selection of commercial stocks which do not engage in damaging pecking, either in cages or when floor-housed in large flocks. "

Hens must be kept in groups small enough to be able to recognise each other.
Beak trimming

•Beak-trimming involves cutting off around a third of a chick’s beak with a red-hot blade or an infra-red beam. Scientific studies show that this is a painful mutilation which results in acute pain and may also lead to prolonged pain.

•Scientific research and practical experience also show that the correct way to prevent feather-pecking is not to beak-trim birds, but to keep them in good conditions – in particular by providing opportunities for them to forage and perch – and to select for birds that are less prone to feather-pecking.

•Australian farmers should learn from the experiences of Switzerland and Sweden, where beak-trimming has been banned for many years and Austria,where beak trimming has been phased out. If farmers in these countries do not find it necessary to beak-trim, Australian farmers must also be able to manage without using this mutilation.

Egg farmers need to make a much greater effort to control aggression without de-beaking. From our experience talking with consumers at Farmers' Markets, they do not believe that 'free range' production should involve the de-beaking of birds. Aggression and cannibalism is a behavioural problem which is easily solved by effective poultry management and selection of birds.

Current plans of the Australian Egg Corporation to allow a huge increase in the stocking density on 'free range' farms will make the problem even worse.

What Does 'Free Range' Mean

As a result of the Australian Egg Corporation Ltd's decision to try to introduce new standards for 'free range' egg production, we have set up a petition at
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/freerange/

If you know anyone who thinks that free range hens should not be de-beaked (or beak trimmed), that a stocking density of 20,000 hens per hectare is ridiculous, and that free range hens should not be locked in sheds until they are 25 weeks old - please ask them to sign the petition.
We will send it to the Australian Egg Corporation and to the Federal Minister for Agriculture, the Hon Tony Burke.

Good hearing from the Australian Egg Corporation

Seven free range egg farmers met with James Kellaway, managing director of the Australian Egg Corporation on Wednesday and we had a good hearing.
There was very strong discussion about the AECL's new draft standards for free range egg production and vocal concern that the proposed stocking density was not based on any scientific assessment. Mr Kellaway was unable to demonstrate that any standards anywhere in the world allowed a stocking density of 20,000 or even 10,000 birds per hectare. This proposal was seen as an example of the reasons for a high level of mistrust of the egg industry amongst consumers.
To put it in perspective, the proposed stocking rate would allow as many as 2000 hens on an average quarter acre suburban block.

Mr Kellaway took away with him our views that

• The maximum stocking density should remain at 1500 birds per hectare even though we all believe that density is already too high. (The Free Range Farmers Association stocking density is 750 birds per hectare)
• A stocking density of 20,000 birds per hectare is unsustainable and is likely to cause severe erosion and contamination problems
• Hens should have access to an outdoor range once they are six weeks old (not locked in sheds until they are are 25 weeks old as in the AECL proposal)
• No beak trimming of birds designated as free range
• If the AECL adopts the draft standards they should not use the term 'free range' – they should use the existing terminology of 'Barn Laid' or adopt a term such as 'Lot Fed' or 'Cage Free'.
• The AECL's consumer research was not qualitative and the proposed definition of free range production does not reflect the views of people who actually buy free range eggs.

The meeting lasted almost three hours and James Kellaway undertook to ensure that our concerns were discussed prior to any decision being taken to adopt new standards. That still did not give us a great deal of confidence in the outcome because the AECL's voting system is based on the number of birds owned by each member. So the big operators always get through what they want and the new proposed standards will enable major producers to mislead consumers by legally labelling their eggs as 'free range' and charging a premium even though they do not bear the additional costs of genuine free range production methods. Even if a 'one vote per farm' was allowed the big operators would still have the numbers because some own 20 or 30 farms or even more.

Stocking densities:
750 birds per hectare equals a Dry Sheep Equivalent of 15.
1,500 birds per hectare equals a DSE of 30
20,000 birds per hectare equals a DSE of 400

More nonsense from the Egg Corp

The Australian Egg Corporation's media release yesterday (28.6.2010) was complete spin. They were obviously attempting to counter a growing groundswell of publicity against their proposed changes to the definitions of 'free range'.

Without going into all the details of their release, about the only accurate statement it contained was the need for commercial reality – something which we all accept but for major egg producers the bottom line is all that counts and to hell with consumers, farm sustainability or animal welfare.

Just to demolish a few points raised by AECL in an attempt to defend its position:

•  10 known national and international standards may have been considered in the process of developing this plan, but none of the standards we have seen allows anything approaching 20,000 hens per hectare to be called 'free range'.
• Independent and robust consumer research into understanding and expectations of consumers was in reality a matter of seeking opinions from people who do not normally buy free range eggs. It would be rather like Rolls Royce conducting a survey about consumer perceptions of luxury cars and asking members of the Holden Car Club.
• Australian egg farmers have been heavily criticised for the lack of universally recognised definitions for all methods of egg production. The heavy criticism hasn't been for that, it's been because of the misleading definitions approved by the AECL.

Unreal 'free range' definition highlighted in Sydney Morning Herald and The Age

This is the article which apeared in today's SMH and The Age. More to come in the Weekly Times this week and we have done a few radio interiews.
The publicity will keep rolling until the AECL withdraws this ridiculous proposal. A few free range farmers have a meeting with AECL managing director, James Kellaway this Wednesday.

Objections raised over free-range eggs plan
MELISSA SINGER


June 28, 2010

CHANGING the definition of free-range eggs and lifting the maximum number of hens in an area would put Australia behind the rest of the world, critics say.
Discussions between the Australian Egg Corporation and farmers could see the maximum number of hens per hectare increase from 1500 to up to 20,000. A free-range farm the size of Centennial Park could have its hen population jump from 330,000 to 4.4 million.
Smaller farmers say the discussions unfairly favour large-scale producers.
''It will install a factory system for free-range eggs,'' Phil Westwood, a spokesman for the Free Range Farmers Association, said. ''To call it free range puts in the minds of consumers that the chooks are out in lush green grass and having a great time.''
NSW Greens MP John Kaye is drafting a bill to standardise the definition for free range. He said even at current densities, the behavioural patterns of chickens prevent all the hens from venturing out even if the door is open for eight hours a day and that increasing densities would only compound the problem.
The bill would also limit egg labelling to cage or free range.
''We don't buy the nonsense about barn-laid,'' Mr Kaye said. ''It's a euphemism of what happens to birds in high-stocking densities.''
Egg Corporation communications manager Jacqueline Baptista said a survey of consumers it conducted about hen densities found on average 10,200 per hectare was an acceptable population.
Nearly two-thirds of consumers surveyed supported beak-trimming if it reduced pecking and cannibalism. Both the Greens and the FRFA reject beak-trimming on any grounds.
Mr Westwood urged the Egg Corporation to adopt a tiered labelling system that would prevent eggs produced in high-density environments from being labelled ''free range''. He said terms such as ''intensive free-range'' or ''cage-free'' would be more appropriate.

De-beaked and full beaked chickens

On the left is an example of a beak-trimmed or de-beaked hen and on the right is a hen with a full beak. In many cases the 'trimming' is much more severe.

It's obviously easier for a hen with a full beak to pick up worms, spiders and grubs etc than for a young one with some of her beak cut off. To see more click here

Some in the industry claim that nowadays birds just have a light 'trim' with a laser. But that sort of comment ignores reality. Most of the 'beak-trimmed' birds I have seen in cage, barn or so-called 'free range' farms (other than members of the Free Range Farmers Association)  have been severely 'trimmed'. There is only one 'quasi free range' farm I have inspected where it was difficult to tell that the hens' beaks had been 'trimmed'.

The dumb thing is that there is no need for this mutilation of birds that are genuinely free range. Some operators choose to inflict this on their hens because it is regarded as industry practice and they think it will improve their bottom line. But if the hens have plenty of room and they are kept in relatively small flocks, they can escape from their aggressive bretheren and cannibalism is not a significant issue.

However, the farms which are chasing big dollars don't want the work and costs associated with doing the job properly. They want to run many thousands of birds and they choose to de-beak their birds 'just in case' there is a cannibalism problem. To see some of the alternatives to de-beaking click here

Great Farmers' Market weekend

We had a good day at the Inverloch Farmers' Market on Sunday and it capped-off a great weekend  following our first venture into the Wheeler's Hill Farmers' Market on Saturday at Jells Park.

We sold out of eggs at both markets and we also did well with our garlic and chillies. So well in fact that we now have no more garlic until the new crop is available in November/December.

I took along the 150 gram egg featured in our local newspaper, the South Gippsland Sentinel Times (left) and I was very pleased that the logo of the Free Range Farmers Association appeared in the published photo.

With all the nonsense about the egg industry dumping standards, the only way way for anyone in Victoria to be sure that they are buying free range eggs from a real free range farm is to look for that logo.
If the farm selling their version of 'free range' eggs isn't a member of the Free Range Farmers Association, be suspicious. The reason they are not a member is not usually that they don't to be - it's because we won't have them as a member.

There will be heaps more national and state publicity about the Australian Egg Corporation's dumb move to trash their already inadequate standards for so-called free range eggs.

We have been told that we should keep quiet about the proposed changes to the definitions because it will damage the industry - but it is these proposals which will damage the industry. We are aware that the big boys will almost certainly win because Federal and State Governments will dance to their tune, but we believe that we should fight for honesty and integrity. Money talks and the big egg producers will 'laugh all the way to the bank' if this definition is adopted..

Free Range Con

The Australian Egg Corporation revealed plans on Wednesday night to relax rules for free range egg production and con consumers into paying for eggs labelled as 'free range' even though they are clearly laid in a factory farming environment. Needlesstosay, this has generated extreme anger amongst genuine free range egg producers.

Under the proposal outlined in Melbourne, hens will be allowed to be de-beaked as a matter of course, they can be locked up in sheds for 25 weeks and the stocking density can increase from 1500 to an incredible 20,000 birds per hectare!

The Victorian-based Free Range Farmers Association had two members at the meeting but Anne, president of FRFA, was locked out of the meeting (probably inadvertently - the lifts were shut down at 6.30 when the meeting was due to start and the stairwell doors were locked). The proposed amendments designed for major industry players reinforce the need for a national definition for 'free range' eggs that doesn't mislead consumers into thinking they are buying welfare-friendly eggs.

The AECL, which is about to publicly launch its Egg Corp Assured scheme, set up a working group some time ago to develop words which will allow major farms to continue to produce eggs which can be labelled as 'free range'.

This stupid proposal demonstrates contempt for consumers as the AECL and the big producers clearly believed they would fall for it!

The current definition of 'free range' used by AECL and the big boys in the industry is contained in the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals – Domestic Poultry 4th Edition. It officially limits the number of birds to 1500 per hectare and requires farmers to manage the outdoor range to avoid muddy or unsuitable conditions – but there is little enforcement of those conditions and some so-called 'free range' farms have more than twice the number of allowed birds.

Apart from the numbers of hens, a fundamental difference between industry practice and FRFA requirements is the issue of de-beaking. The Free Range Farmers Association prohibits de-beaking (or beak trimming) which is standard practice on most big farms. The Model Code states that 'Every effort should be made to avoid beak trimming by selecting chickens for reduced feather pecking and cannibalism'

The AECL's Egg Corp Assured program says it requires accredited farms to  meet the standards of the Model Code, but it does not require those farms to demonstrate any attempt to address the potential problem of feather pecking or cannibalism before resorting to de-beaking the birds.

As well as permitting 20,000 hens per hectare, which will be a totally unsustainable farming practice, the proposed change will allow hens to be permanently locked in sheds until they are 25 weeks old. (They currently must be allowed to range outside once fully feathered at around 6 weeks).

On a real free range farm with a low stocking density, cannibalism is not a problem, because the hens have enough room to escape from any aggressors.

Consumer views appear to have been ignored by the AECL. It seems to us that to protect consumers, there is now a real need for a dual definition. Leave the term 'free range' for traditional low density egg farming such as practised by members of the Free Range Farmers Association and introduce a term like 'Intensive Free Range' 'Factory Free Range' or 'Cage Free' for the major players who don't meet the same standards. Currently the only way consumers in Victoria can be sure they are buying real free range eggs is to only buy from a FRFA accredited farm.

The Egg Corp Assured program currently has 19 accredited farms in Victoria. There is a total of 140 throughout Australia out of an estimated 500 – 600 commercial egg farms and many thousands of backyard operators who sell their eggs illegally.

What is free range?

The Australian Egg Corporation is about to publicly launch its Egg Corp Assured program which currently has about 140 accredited producers throughout Australia (only 19 in Victoria) out of over 500 commercial egg farms. The AECL says the program will give consumers confidence in the eggs they buy. It's a tremendous program to ensure food safety but it will do little if anything to smooth the debate over community perceptions of 'free range' eggs.

From consumer research carried out at Farmers' Markets, a definition that most buyers seem to accept is: 'Free-range chickens are able to spend most of their time outdoors. They should not be de-beaked. The hens should not be confined to small areas. True free-range flocks are generally fed and watered inside and outside their roosting sheds'.

This encourages the birds to scratch around outdoors and keeps the laying sheds cleaner and drier. If fences confine the birds to very small areas, the farm shouldn't be described as free-range, and neither should those where the hens are de-beaked, large numbers are in each flock and feed and water is only provided in sheds to keep the birds inside most of the time.

The broader egg industry view is that the term 'free range' applies to any poultry with access to an outdoor area, no matter how few birds actually go outside and how uninviting their outdoor paddock is.

What's the problem with a yard egg system?

It comes down to the amount of manure the land can handle, and the geometry of chicken yards. An acre of productive grassland can handle about four tonnes of chicken manure per year. That's roughly the output of up to 100 chickens. So, unless you want to kill off the grass and pollute the area with run-off, the limit is around 100 – 150 outdoor chickens per acre – unless you remove the manure.

What's worse is that the droppings are never evenly distributed across the yard. The manure is concentrated near the chicken house. This kills off all plant life near the chicken shed (if its a fixed shed) even if the chickens don't destroy the grass sod by scratching.

100 hens per acre equates to about 400 square feet per hen. Hens don't usually travel long distances. They'll go 100 - 200 metres from the hen houses in good weather, if properly encouraged by outdoor feeders, waterers, vegetation and shade.

How the Europeans manage 400 hens per acre in their 'free-range' flocks.

EU regulations allow 400 hens per acre but require that the yards remain green. If that many hens actually went outdoors, the grass would be destroyed in no time. The manure load of 400 outdoor hens is unsustainable on one acre, killing the grass, producing high nutrient run-off levels, and a muddy yard unless the nutrients are removed from the ground. But as the hens spend most of their time indoors, the grass can remain green. It's similar in Australia where the current Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals – Domestic Poultry sets out a maximum stocking density of 1500 birds per hectare (600 per acre). The Code doesn't limit flock sizes, so large farms have been established with sheds containing tens of thousands of birds – and they are classified as 'free-range' as long as they have 'access' to an outdoor run.

The Model Code states that 'Every effort should be made to avoid beak trimming by selecting chickens for reduced feather pecking and cannibalism'

But we would challenge anyone to find a big 'free range' farm in Victoria which has anything but de-beaked (or beak trimmed birds). The industry is geared to beak trim all chicks at day old or soon after, and no big egg producer considers an alternative. The selection of laying hens is based solely on production and all major 'free range' farms buy hibrid hens which were developed for the cage industry and which were bred for one characteristic - to lay the maximum number of eggs. The AECL's Egg Corp Assured program does not require farms accredited to the program to demonstrate any attempt to address the potential problem of feather pecking or cannibalism before resorting to de-beaking the birds.
Chickens eat and drink many times during a day, so their movements can be managed by careful placement of feeders and waterers. The basic scam in Australia (and in Europe) involves only having feeders and waterers in the sheds as far from the outside doors as possible, installing only a few doors and making them as small as possible. Some hens will go outside, providing window dressing for gullible observers, but most hens stay indoors.

The reality is that most 'free-range' hens are really confined in barns surrounded by nice lawns. To produce the coloured yolks associated with free-range flocks, many producers add special colouring ingredients to the feed. Some of these additives are claimed to be 'natural' but nearly all are produced in laboratories by men in white coats. If the hens eat grass, other green vegetation and a corn-based ration, the yolks will be a vibrant golden colour. But yolk colour in eggs from real free range farms will vary depending on the time year and the availability of green feed. If yolk colour never varies, you can be sure that colouring additives are being fed to the hens. Another indicator that shows that the flocks aren't free range at all is if the hens are de-beaked. With true free-range flocks, feather-picking and cannibalism are rare. Those behavioural problems are caused by intensive farming, confinement, farm management and choice of birds. Which is why the majority of Australia's 'free-range' commercial flocks are beak-trimmed as a matter of course.

It's disappointing that the RSPCA encourages the de-beaking of birds by accepting royalty payments for the barn laid and 'free range' eggs which it accredits.

Some of the big producers even claim, after doing everything to discourage the hens from ever venturing outside, that 'chickens don't like to go outdoors.' Everyone who has ever had a small flock knows that chickens will spend most of their time outdoors if the weather isn't too bad and feed and water are provided outside.

The regulations have been written for major operators who have transfered large-scale factory farming techniques to a version of 'free range' farming which provide opportunities for the businesses to maximise profits by allowing them to charge a premium for eggs which should be classified as 'cage-free' rather than 'free range'.

So how do you do it right?

Traditional free-range egg production is just part of a diversified farm. It enables a farm to make full use of the nutrients from the chicken manure. And it adds to the sustainability of the farming enterprise.

Many free range farms use portable hen houses, either on wheels or on skids. They can be moved around with a tractor to prevent the ground around the houses becoming muddy. This is the traditional approach we use at the Freeranger Farm. There is a trend towards using mobile electric poultry netting combined with frequent shed moves probably every 1-3 days. Moving the sheds is labour intensive but it helps to maintain pasture growth. With low stocking density, even if the houses are left in place for several weeks at a time, a scattering of bare rectangles every now and then on the pasture is not significant. The grass will regrow over the season. By feeding the hens outdoors and moving the feeders regularly, it's possible to get most of the effect of moving the houses, but with less effort.

It's clearly much more labour-intensive than the pretend 'free-range' techniques most big operators use, so it's not worth doing unless prices are substantially higher than for eggs produced by other methods – which is why the big producers don't want a legal definition of 'free range' to prohibit de-beaking and limit flock sizes.

It's often possible to get away with infrequent house moves as the manure under a chicken house becomes drier and less obnoxious the longer the house sits in one place. For the first few days a house is in a new spot, the manure can be wet and smelly. If the house has been in one place for a month, the manure is quite dry and there is no smell. Moving the houses too frequently seems to maximize the wetness and smell. Some operators have trays under the sheds to catch the manure and allow it to be spread where it is required rather than simply dropping through to the ground under the chicken house.

On clay soil, the mud problem makes it important to keep a solid turf at all times. Permanent pasture is the simplest way of achieving this, though a crop rotation with grasses or clover as one phase will also work. On sandy or gravely soils, cultivating the soil does not lead to an instant mud problem, so keeping the chickens among growing crops is a viable alternative.

Chickens love shade. It keeps them cool, out of the wind, and protects them from eagles, hawks and owls. Plantings of things like Kangaroo Apples, corn, kale, and sunflowers are suitable in the range areas, and native grasses can help to boost protein levels (as well as being drought tolerant to maintain green feed for most of the year). Adding plants like purslane in the pasture can boost Omega 3 levels in the eggs. To be sure that the eggs you buy realy are free range, look for the logo of the Free Range Farmers Association. Member farms are required to meet all food safety standards, all packaging and labelling requirements and maintain production and sales records to ensure truth in labelling - as well as a strict welfare code which prohibits the de-beaking of birds.

http://www.freeranger.com.au/
http://bassbush.htmlplanet.com/
http://www.freerangefarmers.com.au/

New career on the speaker circuit?

Anne had an interesting day at Pearcedale on Saturday talking with a group of smallholders about free range egg production as part of a diversified farming operation.
It was one of the days organised by the Department of Primary Industries as a key element of its AgFutures program. We have hosted these sorts of days on the farm for various groups to show how things are done but there's obviously a pretty substantial demand out there for information on farming alternatives. It was a group of around 15 people, which is an ideal size to generate interaction.
There were four speakers at the forum, Anne talking about chooks, garlic and chillies - discussing things like setup costs, sustainability and marketing, Dugald Cameron from Phillip Island, talking about fodder crops, contracting and agistment, Kevin Wilkinson dealing with composting and Tony Gill on setting up a co-operative.
It was apparently a good day.

Controlling aggression in hens without de-beaking

Beak trimming or de-beaking of laying hens is still a widespread practice in Australia – even in 'free range' birds. The majority of so-called free range farms are intensive production systems with flocks of many thousands of hens.

The Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals (Domestic Poultry), provides the only national definition of the term 'free range' which is accepted by the big players in the industry. But it states that every effort should be made to avoid beak trimming by selecting birds which have more docile tendencies.

The reality is that intensive free range farms de-beak their birds as a matter of course because they want to run large numbers and they chose to use high producing hens developed for the cage industry. These hens have been selectively cross bred for only two traits – maximum egg production and minimum feed intake. This often means they are aggressive and cannibalistic.

It is important to select a strain of bird that is less aggressive, and to get breeders to breed birds that are more docile. Research has shown that breeding for low aggression can have a marked effect in only 4 or 5 generations. Dr Mike Gentle, a U.S. poultry researcher, has concluded:
" In the long term, beak trimming should be phased out and undesirable behaviour controlled by environmental means and by increased effort being devoted to the genetic selection of commercial stocks which do not engage in damaging pecking, either in cages or when floor-housed in large flocks. "

Hens need to be in groups small enough to be able to recognise each other. At Freeranger Eggs we run maximum flock sizes of 250 birds.

Hens must be able to express their natural behaviour, including the strong urge to peck. They must have material in which to forage and dust bathe.

Good husbandry is a major factor in reducing aggression, especially preventing conditions that cause frustration in hens. They also need an adequate and well-balanced diet, easy access to food and water, enough space, and minimum disturbance.

Customers should push egg farmers into making greater efforts to control aggression without de-beaking. From our experience, talking with consumers at Farmers' Markets, the public does not believe that 'free range' production should involve the de-beaking of birds. Aggression and cannibalism is a behavioural problem which is easily solved by effective poultry management and selection of birds.

In Victoria, the easiest way to ensure that you are buying genuine free range eggs from hens who have not been de-beaked is to only buy from a farm accredited by the Free Range Farmers Association. All member farms carry the logo on their cartons. If your egg producer doesn't have the FRFA logo its probably not because he or she doesn't want to  -  they can't get it because they don't meet the standards.

We are hoping that when a review is undertaken of the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals (Domestic Poultry) and of labelling laws that a real definition of the term 'free range' will emerge. Many buyers of 'free range' eggs are currently being mislead by cartons which depict birds on lush green pasture and show hens with full beaks. It may be that two definitions of free range are needed - traditional free range such as practiced by Freeranger Eggs and other members of the Free Range Farmers Association and intensive free range which is the large-scale factory farming approach.

Talk to the Animals

There will be a video segment about the Freeranger farm on Channel Nine's Talk To The Animals program at 4.30 pm this Saturday (at least in Melbourne).
Des Dowling came down to the farm with his crew to have a look at the way we run our hens and how they interact with their Maremma bodyguards.Should be good

Good weekend sales

We had Churchill Island Farmers' Market on Saturday and Red Hill (for the first time) on Sunday so I didn't spend much time on the farm over the weekend.
Churchill Island was good but Red Hill was a bit slow so hopefully it will improve over the next few months. I was able to do a delivery on the way home on Sunday so it wasn't a wasted day.
It's just under an hour from the farm to Red Hill and that makes it within our food miles policy. It's on the Mornington Peninsula which means I have to drive around to the 'other side' of Westernport.
Everyone says it's a small world - and it certainly is. On the stall next to me at Red Hill was a lady who used to work with the Department of Sustainability and Environment, promoting Landcare on Phillip Island and in West Gippsland. I hadn't seen her for almost 10 years and I had no idea she's now into making goat cheese.

Farm sustainability

Farm sustainability is a term which has been flung around with gay abandon for some years. It means different thing to different people and even farms which are certified organic need not necessarily have any more long-term sustainability than non-organic farms.

Landcare groups, particularly those associated with networks, have been scrambling for Federal cash from the Natural Heritage Trust and, more recently, the Caring For Our Country programme. The race to grab as much funding as possible has clouded thoughts about what the funding was supposed to be for. It was never to create jobs - it was expected to have beneficial environmental outcomes.

Now that lucrative funding stream has started to dry up, the networks (and other environmental groups) are squealing about their jobs. That's all it is. They've had little thought for sustainability or biodiversity conservation and their actions have had little impact. Their main concern has been about maintaining and increasing job opportunities. Some of the networks and groups have become big businesses with millions of dollars churning through every year – but virtually nothing to show for it.

A portion of the funding has been used for things like erosion control and planting native vegetation but there has been a relatively small return for the many hundreds of millions of dollars which has spent.

Has the money decreased the environmental footprint of many farms? The answer is no. Has the money halted the biodiversity decline in this country? Again the answer is no.

It's not possible to have an impact on these things when huge slabs of funding are swallowed up in increasing employment opportunities rather than being spent on-ground works carried out as part of a 'whole of landscape' plan.

There's a need to look at the way a farm and any business operates to determine overall sustainability. What are the inputs and where do they come from? If feed is trucked thousands of kilometres it will have a negative impact even if it is from a certified organic mill.

Here at Freeranger Eggs our biggest environmental issue is transport. We minimise our footprint by imposing a food miles policy (all our deliveries must be within one hour of the farm). The feed for our chooks comes from a Victorian mill – but there is still a significant transport element which we offset with the permanent protection of native vegetation on the farm. A large slab of the vegetation on the farm is protected by a Trust for Nature covenant so it can never be destroyed which makes the property an effective carbon sink and more than offsets our carbon footprint.
For more on sustainability have at a look at Friends of Bass Valley Bush Inc Landcare Group

Little White Van

A few months ago I replaced the windcreen in our little white van which we use for deliveries and I wasn't too happy when stones from a passing car caused a couple of chips in the new screen.
So I thought I'd find out if I could repair it. Most of the windscreen repair companies seem to charge around one third of the cost of a new screen!!
And yes, Do It Yourself kits are available. You simply stick a patch over the chip, attach a syringe filled with the repair liquid, pull the syringe plunger back to suck out air from the crack then release the plunger. The liquid is sucked into the crack. Wait 15 minutes or so, remove the syringe and the patch and sunlight cures the repair.
Worked a treat. I bought the kit from the UK on Ebay for under $20 including postage.

20,000 pullets wanted

I've had some strange 'phone calls over the years, but one this morning was pretty good. A bloke rang me asking for 20,000 pullets because he wanted to start a free range egg farm!
I actually mis-heard him and said "two dozen?" to which the answer was "No - 20,000".
He obviously hadn't looked at our website http://www.freeranger.com.au/ or at this blog because he would have known that we couldn't possibly meet that sort of order.
We do sell some pullets when we have them available but it's usually 3 or 4 at a time. I think our largest order has been 20 - yes 20 not 20,000!!!With individual flocks of around 200 birds and overall laying hen numbers of 1000 or so, we are running a business but it's hardly big time.
I suggested he contact Baiada who should be able to help him as he wanted delivery in September.
It's another indication of big players getting involved because they can see a dollar in producing eggs they can label 'free range'. It's a safe bet that this bloke, if he goes ahead, will have de-beaked birds and will not meet the requirements of the Free Range Farmers Association  but he will still call the eggs 'free range' and will charge unwary consumers a premium.

The free range and organic debate rolls on

Yet another academic voice has been raised to try to defend conventional farming by claiming that there is no nutritional difference between food from conventional, free range or organic farms. This is part of an article which was published in Melbourne's Sunday Herald-Sun.


Despite the claims of advocates, independent studies that compare the nutritional value of conventional produce with organic fare remain open-ended about the differences between the two.


Associate Professor Samir Samman, from the School of Molecular Bioscience at the University of Sydney, says there is little evidence to suggest that organic food is nutritionally better than conventional food, especially in relation to fresh fruit and vegetables.


In a yet-to-be released major study that has been accepted for publication in the international scientific journal Critical Reviews In Food Science And Nutrition, Professor Samman and his team “surveyed the international literature and critically evaluated the results” – and they aren’t heartening for the organics industry.


“Our review showed that when all the published articles on this topic are considered, organic food is reported to contain more vitamin C and phosphorous than conventionally produced food,” Professor Samman says. “But when the articles are scrutinised for scientific quality, and only
the better-quality articles are considered, only phosphorous remained significantly higher in organic food as compared with conventional foods.


“Phosphorous is not in any way a limiting nutrient in the diet. The presence of higher amounts in organic food has probably little significance. We conclude from the analysis that the nutrient composition differs very little between foods that are produced by organic and conventional methods.”


Professor Samman’s team also analysed the nutritional content of food bought from conventional shops and organic stores, and found that with oils such as olive, peanut and canola, “the method of production [organic or conventional] has no real impact on the composition” of the fatty acids contained in the food. The same result was found for eggs. His team is now conducting research on nuts, dairy foods and meat.


“Some health professionals believe that organic foods have more nutrients and elicit favourable effects on health,” Professor Samman says.


“This advice is given despite the lack of scientific evidence to support it.”
He says it’s more important to simply consume as many fruit and vegetables as possible rather than worrying about whether they are organic.


“The really important thing for consumers is that they continue to consume fruits and vegetables regardless of the source, because this is going to bring about health benefits,” he advises. “If you only eat one organic apple because that’s all you can afford, instead of having two conventional apples, surely you’re better off having two.”


So how does all that explain those eggs that tasted and looked so great? Perhaps it’s not so much a matter of the eggs being organic, but is more about the way the chickens were raised, organically or otherwise. Like any product that’s more expensive, it is probably more a quality issue.

It would be interesting to find out who funded this research and which studies were chosen for these 'independent' studies. Did they compare things like Vitamins A and E, folic acid or Omega 3 fatty acids. Have a look at some research in the US. It seems that Professor Samman likes pesticide and herbicide residues with his food.
I've conducted quite a few farm audits recently and at least six veggie growers/orchardists have said that they don't eat the conventionally-grown produce from their farms. They either have a separate garden where no hebicides or pesticides are used or they buy certified organic food for their own families. 

Egg yolk colour

Here's a great example of the different coloured yolks found in free range eggs from hens who are not fed colouring additives.  The yolks should vary quite considerably, depending on what each bird has been eating.

If the colour is always the same deep yellow or almost orange you can be sure that colouring additives are mixed into the hens' diet.

Most of the additives used are synthesised in laboratories and even those which are claimed to be 'natural' are actually only based on natural products - such as capsicum and marigold. They are still processed and refined by men and women in long white coats!

The eggs in the picture were being prepared in our farm kitchen to help make a Sachertort.

Sunday Pakenham Market

The sunday market at Pakenham racecourse was pretty much a waste of time. I only sold aound 30 dozen eggs so it would have been more productive to stay on the farm and work!

But it was worth trying to see if any of the old customers who used to go to the Cardinia Ranges Farmers' Market went along to this one. They didn't - which clearly demonstrates the difference between Farmers' Markets and trash and treasure markets. Dedicated food markets are always going to attract customers who like food rather than people just trying to kill a couple of hours or looking for a second hand clock or electric frypan.
Won't be doing that again!!!

Great to have a Saturday without a market!

Lying in bed until 6.30 on a Saturday seems like luxury. Usually I'm up at five getting ready for a farmers' market.
But it's a short-lived luxury. I have to rotary hoe the rest of our garlic patch today to get next season's crop planted (that's before I start collecting today's eggs).
And tomorrow (Sunday) will be a 5am start anyway as I'm doing a market at Pakenham Racecourse - where the old Pakenham Farmers' Market used to be. It wll be interesting to see if many of the old customers turn up there as heaps of them haven't gone to the new venue at the Cultural Centre in Pakenham.
The general consensus amongst stallholders and customers seems to be that it was a mistake to change the venue.

Chook images

An artist from Thorpdale in Gippsland sent these images of chooks, She is Janette Arnold Collins