PHOTO BY DAN KIDD

Necessity is the mother of invention, so it is said, and Dan Kidd of Maine has proved the point with his successful home business.

Three years ago, Dan was installing an outdoor wood furnace and was using PEX plumbing lines, which necessitated the use of crimpers for connections. Since, he only needed to crimp two joints, it didn’t make sense to buy a crimping tool at a cost of over $100. Renting seemed like the best option. So off to town he went, accomplishing the task and returning the tool. The crimper worked like a champ, but a couple of days later Dan discovered he needed the tool again, so back he went to town and the rental shop.

It was at this point that Dan, owner of a machine shop, had an epiphany – why not fabricate his own PEX crimper tool? So he did! He started selling the PEX Pocket Crimper on ebay two and a half years ago and, according to Dan, they have sold like hotcakes. But the cherry on this home business sundae is the order from Home Depot for thousands of Dan’s Pocket Crimpers.

Who would have thought that a simple tool-rental experience could morph into such a successful home business? Do you have a home business success? If so, please share it in the comments section, below.

PHOTO BY FREDERICK J. DUNN

Understanding the traits of a particular breed of animal you're considering (dog, cat, cow or in this case, chickens) will lead to a much better experience in the end. Different breeds will be more or less successful in each situation.

The advantage of obtaining purebred stock is that you will be making use, in some cases, of hundreds of years of selective breeding. Each breed emerged for a specific purpose: appearance, melodious crow, propensity to fight, rapid weight gain or regular production of eggs. Some people even rear chickens for their colorful feathers that will be used by fly-tying enthusiasts. You wouldn’t get a teacup poodle to guard an estate, so why would you start with d’Uccles if your goal were productive farming?

I keep both ornamental and dual-purpose poultry. Ornamental birds are just that, nice to look at and be entertained by — or even to show in competition for those interested in the “poultry fancy." My recommendations for dual-purpose (meat and eggs) are traditional breeds: the Rhode Island red and barred Plymouth rock. Both (rocks and reds) are independent on open range, forage well, produce eggs in abundance and (if you choose) will make flavorful table fare. In fact, the ALBC hosted Renewing America’s Food Traditions blind taste test, and the barred Plymouth rock was most preferred. The “commercial” Cornish rock cross was least preferred.

I simply don’t have the space to introduce you to each breed of particular merit. For specifics on traditional breeds, visit the American Livestock Breeds Conservancy (ALBC). They emphasize chickens with utilitarian value to the farmer/homesteader.

If you are a traditionalist and would like to support hatcheries which maintain heritage breeds, consider obtaining and keeping those on the “critical” list and unique to North America. Some North American breeds in the critical category (fewer than 500 breeding flocks in the United States) would be buckeye, chantecler, Delaware, Holland and Java. Even if you do not start and maintain your own breeding flock, your purchase will support those who do.

After you choose the breed of interest to you, I recommend two methods of obtaining your birds.  One is to purchase day-old chicks from a nearby hatchery or via the U.S. Mail. This method ensures a certain quantity of chicks. Another method is to purchase fertile hatching eggs and incubate them.

Incubating eggs is a wonderful learning experience.  If you intend to perpetuate your own flock, owning an incubator will be a sound investment. If you incubate eggs, you don’t need to start with 25 chicks, as is the case with most mail order hatcheries. I have reviewed several tabletop incubators and posted videos demonstrating their use on my website.

If you'd like to learn more about raising chickens, check out the DVD, Regarding Chickens.

PHOTO BY FREDERICK J. DUNN

Whatever the season, it seems that folks are always looking forward to the next one and anticipating the exciting activities they will engage in. Well, we have a suggestion for your advanced-activity planning – check out our green-living Events Calendar.

You can find shows, fairs and workshops from Maine to Texas, and even a few off-shore events like the Permaculture class held in Nicaragua. There are events on every topic we cover in Mother Earth News: Do-It-Yourself, Renewable Energy, Green Homes, Organic Gardening, Natural Health, Green Transportation, Nature & Community, Modern Homesteading, Sustainable Farming and Real Food.

Here are just a few of the great green events you can find on the Event Calendar to make your spring, summer, fall and winter worth anticipating. Sign up now!

International Master Gardener Conference - March

Environmental Film Festival - March

Green Drinks International - March

Home Energy Efficiency - April

Permaculture Design Course - April

Heritage Harvest festival - September

While all over the country farms are failing or being bought up for new housing developments, in Pennsylvania Amish country farms are flourishing and more acreage is being bought each year. How is this possible? How is it that a segment of the population that does not use electricity and works the land with horse and not tractors is continuing to grow and prosper?

For more on this atypical phenomenon, read the blog, Did the Amish Get it Right After All?, posted by author and farmer Gene Logsdon.

Of using horses rather than tractors to farm, Logsdon says, “The dollars and cents, the Amish will tell you, are on your side if you enjoy being at home and would rather work hard physically on occasion rather than pay for exercise at a fitness center.”

SARE

Experienced crop farmers know that if they want to keep their soil fertile and healthy from year to year, they should enlist the help of a good cover crop. Cover crops such as rye grass or alfalfa, planted in unused plots over the non-growing season, provide a host of benefits: reduced erosion, fewer pests, increased mineral content (thanks to their deep roots), and valuable organic matter (when converted to mulch or compost). Plus, they reduce the need for synthetic fertilizers and other expensive amenities.  

Managing Cover Crops Profitably, 3^rd Edition, published by the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education program, can be downloaded from their website, and includes expert advice from researchers and farmers nationwide. There are farm profiles, seed sources, and region-specific recommendations. Print copies are available here. 

For more advice on cover crops and soil health, read Build Better Garden Soil, and 8 Strategies for Better Garden Soil.

ISTOCKPHOTO/ROYCE DEGRIE

The USDA has proposed a rule to require all farms and ranches where animals are raised to be registered in a federal database under the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) for existing disease control programs. The draft rule covers programs for cattle, sheep, goats and swine. It also sets the stage for the entire NAIS program to be mandated for everyone, including anyone who owns even one livestock animal (for example, a single chicken or a horse). Learn more about the legislation in The Truth About the Animal ID Plan.

It’s critical that the USDA and Congress hear from the hundreds of thousands of people who will be adversely affected by the NAIS program. This includes not only animal owners, but also consumers who care about local and sustainable foods, taxpayers who object to wasteful government programs and advocates for a safer food system.

STEP 1: Submit comments to USDA online or by mail. The comments must be received by the USDA by March 16, 2009. 

Submit comments on the federal regulations website (click on the yellow balloon under “add comments”). 

Or mail two copies of your comments to the USDA at the address below. Clearly state that your comments refer to Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096. (See the sample comments at the end of this post.)

Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS
Station 3A-03.8
4700 River Road Unit 118
Riverdale, MD 20737-1238 

STEP 2: Send a copy of your comments to your representative and senators. 

You can find who represents you and their contact information at www.congress.org. 

BACKGROUND

The USDA has been working for over five years to force NAIS onto American animal owners. NAIS is designed to identify and track each and every individual livestock and poultry animal owned by family farmers, hobby farmers, homesteaders and pet owners across the country.

The USDA claims that NAIS is a disease tracking program, but has refused to provide any support for its claims. In reality, NAIS will:

• Replace states’ existing, well-functioning disease response and brand inspection programs with an untested, expensive and unreliable system
• Impose high costs and government surveillance on every farmer and animal owner for no significant benefits, and will likely force many small producers out of business 

NAIS does nothing to improve food safety for consumers or prevent animal diseases. This program is a one-size-fits-all program developed by and for big Agribusiness. NAIS will increase consolidation of our food supply in the hands of a few large companies and put the brakes on the growing movement toward local food systems with its high costs. 

Despite promises to the contrary, the USDA’s new proposed rule would make portions of the system mandatory for thousands of people in every state. Anyone who participates in federal disease control program for cattle, sheep, goats or swine will have their premises registered. The NAIS Premises Identification Number (PIN) will become the only form of premises identification acceptable for USDA animal health purposes, with no opt-out provision. 

The proposed rule would also limit official Animal Identification Numbers to the NAIS-compliant 840-numbering system, laying the groundwork for future regulations that would limit the types of tags that can be used. 

The proposed rule is not final yet. You can help stop NAIS by visiting the Federal Registry and making a comment. Visit their website and click on the yellow balloon under “add comments.” And don’t forget to send a copy of your comments to your elected officials, letting them know how you feel about NAIS. 

The grassroots movement has already successfully stalled the USDA’s plans for NAIS, which originally called for the entire program — premises registration, animal identification and tracking — to be mandatory by January 2009. The proposed rule is an opportunity to get thousands of objections in the formal record, and have an even greater impact. It is imperative that people speak up to protect our right to farm and our food supply! 

FOR MORE INFORMATION 

Go to www.FarmAndRanchFreddom.org or contact Judith McGeary, (512) 243-9404 or Judith@FarmAndRanchFreedom.org.

Read more about NAIS and how it will affect small scale and sustainable farms in The Truth About the Animal ID Plan. 

SAMPLE COMMENTS 

Date: ____________________ 

Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS
Station 3A-03.8
4700 River Road Unit 118
Riverdale, MD 20737-1238 

Re: Docket No. APHIS–2007–0096

I urge the USDA to withdraw its proposed rule to implement portions of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096.

I am a _____________________________________________________________________ 

___________________________________________________________________________

[State who you are — for instance, are you a farmer, consumer, or horse owner — and why this issue matters to you.] 

The proposed rule mandates the NAIS Premises Identification Number (PIN) as the sole means of identifying properties for USDA animal health purposes. The proposed rule also mandates the use of the NAIS numbering system (i.e. the “840 numbering system”) for ear tags using official animal identification numbers. Tags using other numbering systems would be required to be linked to a NAIS PIN.

The draft rule is seriously flawed for multiple reasons:

1.  Does not substantiate the alleged benefits to animal health: The USDA makes general claims about the benefits of identifying locations where animals are kept, but the agency does not address the ability of existing programs to meet this purpose, nor how the proposed rule would improve the capability to identify locations.
2. Ignores the costs and burdens: The proposed rule would substantially increase costs for livestock owners and taxpayers. Costs include the development and maintenance of a massive database; purchase of 840-numbered tags by animal owners; changes by state agencies to make existing programs consistent with the rule; and increased federal government intrusion into the lives and daily activities of farmers and other animal owners.
3. Violates individuals’ religious beliefs: Amish, Mennonite and some other individuals have religious objections to the universal numbering system under NAIS.
4. Creates disincentives for people to seek veterinary care for their animals and participate in existing disease control programs: The proposed rule lists four animal disease programs —tuberculosis , brucellosis, scrapie and Johne’s — and will also impact others. These programs include provisions for veterinary care through vaccinations and testing. Animal owners who object to NAIS may avoid participating in these programs, thereby increasing health risks to the public and farm operations.
5. Adds to the confusion: This rule is the latest in a series of ambiguous and often contradictory documents that the USDA has issued on NAIS. This has created enormous confusion over the intent of the USDA and problems for both animal owners and state agencies.

The proposed rule is a significant step towards implementing the entire NAIS program. Thus, the agency should address the fundamental question of whether it should be implementing NAIS at all. In addition to the problems with the draft rule listed above, there are many additional objections to the entire NAIS program:

1. USDA’s assertions that NAIS will provide benefits for animal health are not supported, and actually contradict basic scientific principles.
2. High costs for animal owners and taxpayers: These costs include: (1) the development, maintenance, and update of massive databases; (2) the costs of tags, most of which will contain microchips; (3) the labor burdens for tagging every animal; (4) the paperwork burdens of reporting routine movements; and (5) the costs of enforcement on millions of individuals. 
3. Impracticality: The databases to register the properties, identify each animal, and record billions of “events” will dwarf any system currently in existence.
4. Waste of money: The USDA has already spent over $130 million on NAIS implementation, but has yet to develop a workable plan for the program.
5. Diverts resources from more critical needs such as disease testing, disease prevention through vaccination and improved animal husbandry practices, and disease detection in currently uninspected livestock imports.
6. Damage to food safety efforts: NAIS will not prevent foodborne illnesses, such as E. coli or salmonella contamination, because the tracking ends at the time of slaughter. Food safety is better served by focusing on programs such as increased testing for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE or Mad Cow), improved oversight of slaughterhouses and food processing facilities, and increased inspections of imported foods. Programs such as NAIS that burden small, sustainable farmers will hurt efforts to develop safer, decentralized local food systems
7. Discourages involvement in farming or animal husbandry: Because of costs and government intrusion, some people will choose not to stay in farming or go into farming. This will result in less competition, greater reliance in foreign imports and poor quality at higher prices.

I urge the USDA to withdraw the proposed rule to implement portions of the National Animal Identification System, Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096.

Sincerely,

Name: ___________________________________
Address: _________________________________
City, State Zip: _____________________________

Additional Comments:

By Jenna Woginrich

If you’re the first of your friends to move to the country, get some chickens and plant an organic garden there will be some inevitable social fallout. It’s not your fault, but you’re going to raise the eyebrows of some of your more cynical friends. While there are plenty of people out there excited about self-reliance, there are just as many folks jaded by the hype and greenwashing that society has been slinging at us ever since Al Gore shared his slideshow. As green living gets trendier, it can’t help but jump the shark. You just can’t blame people for rolling their eyes when oil companies air commercials about sustainability.  

Around the time your coffee table starts to fill up with seed and hatchery catalogs you can expect the occasional jab for subscribing to the country cliché. The suspicious will cross their arms and peg you as just another converted-starry-eyed-back-to-the-lander. With an air of certainty and rib-nudging judgment, they’ll announce that at the end of all your dirty fingernails and feed sacks you’ll learn nothing that hasn’t been learned a million times before. That the merits of country living have already been printed in thousands of books, seen in endless movies, and are currently being spouted as gospel by hundreds of others just like you, probably even at the same farmers market. They’ll start doling out references from old episodes of Green Acres. There will be melting glacier jokes. You know the drill, you’ve been there. These otherwise wonderful folks will point their fingers at your western shirt and call you another sucker for the country life.

Here’s the thing. They’re right.

Of course they’re right. Agriculture isn’t exactly new to the scene, and deciding to turn your life from consumer to producer (even if it’s just a few gardens and some chickens) is a step taken by throngs before us. There is nothing new, or special, or innovative about it. The Simple Life has been experienced by humanity since the fertile crescent, was, well... fertile. The results are ridiculously cliché. If you join the coverall club you’re not going to have any experiences that many of us haven’t already had, and will continue to have indefinitely. Sorry kids, this show is always a rerun.

But you know what I say to all this? So what. I mean isn’t that the point of all this? To get your hands dirty and join the secret society of tractors and baling wire? To be able to nod your head around the campfire when other gardeners talk about blight and potato beetles, and to learn the same sense of satisfaction of growing your own food? There is comfort in knowing you’re living a cliché. It means the results of the lifestyle are so stereotypical they’re guaranteed. And while it may not be clever — it’s clear that there are a reason some clichés stick around. Some are good enough to be true. Roll your eyes all you want son. This stereotype’s got some eggs to collect.