7 ms·

I recently took part in a course on doing farm work with horses. It was a large garden where all the farm work had been done exclusively with horses for about 1

by exDM69 9y ago

I recently took part in a course on doing farm work with horses. It was a large garden where all the farm work had been done exclusively with horses for about 10 years, after decades of using tractors. The tractors had turned the soil into hard, clumpy clay which yielded bad crops and required more and more fertilizers every year. In about a decade of using horses, manure and traditional methods, the topsoil had turned nice and soft and nutrient-rich. Not at all like the hard clay my grandparents' farm and the owners of the garden were more than happy with the results. Working with horses was slow, hard and laborious work but it was a lot of fun! Much more fun than doing the same with tractors (which I also think is quite fun). Unfortunately, going back to horses or oxen never going to be viable in a large scale. The recent trends in agriculture have been making machines larger and larger to reduce the amount of labor required, causing the soil to be packed even harder, requiring more tilling for the next crop. Maybe autonomous farm equipment could reverse the trend, as machines could be made smaller without increasing the amount of human labor.

dredmorbius 9y ago
I've been looking into the history and mechanisation of agriculture over the past 200 years or so, it's a pretty fascinating history. As of 1800, you still had largely wooden plough, with an iron ploughshare, drawn by a horse or oxen. The acre is actually a unit of work -- the amount of land a man and horse could work in a day, and the German term, Tagwerk (literally, "day's work") directly reflects that. The working time wasn't a full 8-hour day, as the animals would both tire and needed to forage. I believe ~4 hours was more typical. By the mid-19th century, all-iron, and finally, steel, ploughs were available. In the United States, the first combination ("combine") harversters were drawn by teams of up to 40 horses. (Simply managing the daught of those animals, distributed through swingletrees, was a significant undertaking.) As of 1900 or so, the U.S. had a population of ~20 million horses, peaking at 25 million by 1920. These consumed 20% of the agricultural production of the country. Cities such as New York had populations upwards of 200,000 horses, with concommitant impacts on street pollution and hygiene. (Interestingly: railroads increased the demand for horses and mules as these were the best solution to the "last mile" problem of bringing goods and people to and from railway depots.) http://www.cowboyway.com/What/HorsePopulation.htm http://www.cowboyway.com/What/HorsePopulation.htm The first viable tractors started appearing shortly after 1900, and didn't have tremendous power by modern standards (20hp is pretty common). (There were some earlier mobile designs, and even stationary traction distribution systems based on steam power.) Once reliable, these were popular as they could be worked all day, fuel was cheaper than feed, and there were no vet bills. I find the history of this (and other ag elements) pretty fascinating. Much of the information is drawn from Vaclav Smil's Energy in World History (1992) which discusses the evolution of history from a lens of energy and fuel sources. He's revised the book tremendously with Energy and Civilization, out just this year. https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/energy-and-civilization https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/energy-and-civilization
- exDM69 9y ago
  > The working time wasn't a full 8-hour day, as the animals would both tire and needed to forage. I believe ~4 hours was more typical. This was actually one of the most surprising takeaways of doing farm work with a horse, needing to take frequent breaks to let the horse and the farmer rest for a while. Of course I knew there was going to be breaks, but their frequency and duration surprised me. It was much harder work for the horse than I had anticipated (but it's good exercise and not harmful to the animal). And it was perhaps what made it so much more enjoyable than working with machines. Even though it's hard physical labor, you take a break for oats, drinks and scratchies for a while and bond with the animal and the rest of the crew. It wasn't the least bit monotonous or boring the same way as doing 2x4h stints in the cabin of a tractor or in front of a computer.
roel_v 9y ago
"The tractors had turned the soil into hard, clumpy clay which yielded bad crops and required more and more fertilizers every year." Mechanization is of course the main driver of soil compaction, but here too there are advances in technology that mitigate issues without having to revert back to horses (or needing revolutions like swarms of small autonomous bots). For example, soil compaction can be reduced to the point where it doesn't affect plant growth significantly any more by using the correct tire pressure on tractors; i.e. (much) lower pressure when the tractor is on the field. But those pressures are not suitable for riding on roads or longer distances, so many farmers (actually, generally the contractor doing the work, although this varies by region/country) don't deflate their tires because it takes so much time to adjust them every time. So, modern tractors have automatic inflate/deflate installations, making it much easier to use the right pressure for every task and on every soil type. Of course this costs extra, so you still need to convince people of the need for it, and enforce the habit on those actually doing the work.
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago
  It's not practical to deflate a liquid filled tire. Most tractors run liquid filled tires for weight/traction.
  - roel_v 9y ago
    Not sure if you're saying I'm just making things up - here are some of the first links off a quick google: - http://www.fwi.co.uk/machinery/tractor-tyres-make-sure-your-pressures-are-right.htm http://www.fwi.co.uk/machinery/tractor-tyres-make-sure-your-... - https://www.agribrink.com/ https://www.agribrink.com/ - http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/field/news/croptalk/2013/ct-1113a1.htm http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/field/news/croptal... Now I'm not a soil scientist, but I am a programmer who's for the last year or so been programming models for assessing soil threat risks, including soil compaction (one of the biggest soil threats in agriculture); and work with some of the world's foremost expert scientists in this field, as well as with representatives of e.g. machine manufacturers. They all say that compaction is mostly due to increases in weight of machinery, and that proper tire pressure is the most important mitigation measure we have available. Liquid-filled tires are never mentioned in this context, it's a rarity. You claim that 'most' tractors run liquid filled tires - I'm not sure what you're basing that on, or what locality you're talking about, but while I do not have any numbers at hand, I have never heard of this being something other than an incidental thing. For example, the Michelin site (http://agricultural.michelinman.com/us/Properly-use-your-tires/Ballasting-tyres-for-better-use http://agricultural.michelinman.com/us/Properly-use-your-tir...) mentions it as a possibility, but not as something that 'most' tractors would have.
jlebrech 9y ago
i'm sure the horses pooping on the soil helped too.
- exDM69 9y ago
  Well we did shovel a big cart full of manure to the field, that sure did help. But the horses pooping during the work is pretty negligible in comparison.
cvsh 9y ago
What is it exactly about the way horses till that leaves the soil in better shape? I'm pretty sure the ship has sailed as far as tractors being used over horses, but surely there are ways to improve tractors' technique by drawing lessons from horse tilling, so it leaves the soil in better shape.
- exDM69 9y ago
  It is mostly weight and pressure packing the soil too dense, and then getting tilled to expose it to air. The soil loses nutrients and the ability to hold moisture and organisms like worms, bugs and bacteria. The article describes these issues better than I can. Crop rotations and other things matter but the weight and pressure are the biggest difference as far as I know.
  - milesvp 9y ago
    There's a planet money episode about a guy who started raising chickens due to noticing soil differences on 2 sides of a fence. I wouldn't rule out the increase in horse poop as a significant factor in soil health for this farming method.
    - exDM69 9y ago
      The amount the horses poop while doing work is completely negligible. We did haul a big cart of manure from the stables, like half a ton or so. Yes, manure is a good fertilizer and promotes a good ecosystem of microbes but it needs animals on pasture (an element in good crop rotation) or bringing it from elsewhere to get the kind of quantities needed.

by exDM69 9y ago

dredmorbius 9y ago

I've been looking into the history and mechanisation of agriculture over the past 200 years or so, it's a pretty fascinating history. As of 1800, you still had largely wooden plough, with an iron ploughshare, drawn by a horse or oxen. The acre is actually a unit of work -- the amount of land a man and horse could work in a day, and the German term, Tagwerk (literally, "day's work") directly reflects that. The working time wasn't a full 8-hour day, as the animals would both tire and needed to forage. I believe ~4 hours was more typical. By the mid-19th century, all-iron, and finally, steel, ploughs were available. In the United States, the first combination ("combine") harversters were drawn by teams of up to 40 horses. (Simply managing the daught of those animals, distributed through swingletrees, was a significant undertaking.) As of 1900 or so, the U.S. had a population of ~20 million horses, peaking at 25 million by 1920. These consumed 20% of the agricultural production of the country. Cities such as New York had populations upwards of 200,000 horses, with concommitant impacts on street pollution and hygiene. (Interestingly: railroads increased the demand for horses and mules as these were the best solution to the "last mile" problem of bringing goods and people to and from railway depots.) http://www.cowboyway.com/What/HorsePopulation.htm http://www.cowboyway.com/What/HorsePopulation.htm The first viable tractors started appearing shortly after 1900, and didn't have tremendous power by modern standards (20hp is pretty common). (There were some earlier mobile designs, and even stationary traction distribution systems based on steam power.) Once reliable, these were popular as they could be worked all day, fuel was cheaper than feed, and there were no vet bills. I find the history of this (and other ag elements) pretty fascinating. Much of the information is drawn from Vaclav Smil's Energy in World History (1992) which discusses the evolution of history from a lens of energy and fuel sources. He's revised the book tremendously with Energy and Civilization, out just this year. https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/energy-and-civilization https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/energy-and-civilization

exDM69 9y ago
> The working time wasn't a full 8-hour day, as the animals would both tire and needed to forage. I believe ~4 hours was more typical. This was actually one of the most surprising takeaways of doing farm work with a horse, needing to take frequent breaks to let the horse and the farmer rest for a while. Of course I knew there was going to be breaks, but their frequency and duration surprised me. It was much harder work for the horse than I had anticipated (but it's good exercise and not harmful to the animal). And it was perhaps what made it so much more enjoyable than working with machines. Even though it's hard physical labor, you take a break for oats, drinks and scratchies for a while and bond with the animal and the rest of the crew. It wasn't the least bit monotonous or boring the same way as doing 2x4h stints in the cabin of a tractor or in front of a computer.

roel_v 9y ago

"The tractors had turned the soil into hard, clumpy clay which yielded bad crops and required more and more fertilizers every year." Mechanization is of course the main driver of soil compaction, but here too there are advances in technology that mitigate issues without having to revert back to horses (or needing revolutions like swarms of small autonomous bots). For example, soil compaction can be reduced to the point where it doesn't affect plant growth significantly any more by using the correct tire pressure on tractors; i.e. (much) lower pressure when the tractor is on the field. But those pressures are not suitable for riding on roads or longer distances, so many farmers (actually, generally the contractor doing the work, although this varies by region/country) don't deflate their tires because it takes so much time to adjust them every time. So, modern tractors have automatic inflate/deflate installations, making it much easier to use the right pressure for every task and on every soil type. Of course this costs extra, so you still need to convince people of the need for it, and enforce the habit on those actually doing the work.

dsfyu404ed 9y ago
It's not practical to deflate a liquid filled tire. Most tractors run liquid filled tires for weight/traction.
- roel_v 9y ago
  Not sure if you're saying I'm just making things up - here are some of the first links off a quick google: - http://www.fwi.co.uk/machinery/tractor-tyres-make-sure-your-pressures-are-right.htm http://www.fwi.co.uk/machinery/tractor-tyres-make-sure-your-... - https://www.agribrink.com/ https://www.agribrink.com/ - http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/field/news/croptalk/2013/ct-1113a1.htm http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/field/news/croptal... Now I'm not a soil scientist, but I am a programmer who's for the last year or so been programming models for assessing soil threat risks, including soil compaction (one of the biggest soil threats in agriculture); and work with some of the world's foremost expert scientists in this field, as well as with representatives of e.g. machine manufacturers. They all say that compaction is mostly due to increases in weight of machinery, and that proper tire pressure is the most important mitigation measure we have available. Liquid-filled tires are never mentioned in this context, it's a rarity. You claim that 'most' tractors run liquid filled tires - I'm not sure what you're basing that on, or what locality you're talking about, but while I do not have any numbers at hand, I have never heard of this being something other than an incidental thing. For example, the Michelin site (http://agricultural.michelinman.com/us/Properly-use-your-tires/Ballasting-tyres-for-better-use http://agricultural.michelinman.com/us/Properly-use-your-tir...) mentions it as a possibility, but not as something that 'most' tractors would have.

jlebrech 9y ago

i'm sure the horses pooping on the soil helped too.

exDM69 9y ago
Well we did shovel a big cart full of manure to the field, that sure did help. But the horses pooping during the work is pretty negligible in comparison.

cvsh 9y ago

What is it exactly about the way horses till that leaves the soil in better shape? I'm pretty sure the ship has sailed as far as tractors being used over horses, but surely there are ways to improve tractors' technique by drawing lessons from horse tilling, so it leaves the soil in better shape.

exDM69 9y ago
It is mostly weight and pressure packing the soil too dense, and then getting tilled to expose it to air. The soil loses nutrients and the ability to hold moisture and organisms like worms, bugs and bacteria. The article describes these issues better than I can. Crop rotations and other things matter but the weight and pressure are the biggest difference as far as I know.
- milesvp 9y ago
  There's a planet money episode about a guy who started raising chickens due to noticing soil differences on 2 sides of a fence. I wouldn't rule out the increase in horse poop as a significant factor in soil health for this farming method.
  - exDM69 9y ago
    The amount the horses poop while doing work is completely negligible. We did haul a big cart of manure from the stables, like half a ton or so. Yes, manure is a good fertilizer and promotes a good ecosystem of microbes but it needs animals on pasture (an element in good crop rotation) or bringing it from elsewhere to get the kind of quantities needed.