Tuesday, August 26, 2014

The Dog Days of Summer

In Ancient Egypt, the new year began when the star Sirius (the dog star) appeared on the horizon just before the Sun.  5,000 years ago this happened somewhere around the first part of June.  Nowadays, this star does an opening show for the Sun somewhere around the middle of July and continues to do so until about the 2nd week of August, depending upon your lattitude.  This period of time in the summer, when the temperatures seem to be at their hottest and the days tend to loll along without any real sense of urgency has often been referred to as the 'Dog Days'.

In many ways, the 'Dog Days' signify a significant transition period for large animal veterinarians.  All the cows are out to pasture, most of the colts have been castrated, and aside from the odd cut up horse there's not a lot going on for a large animal veterinarian this time of year.  There are several days when I show up to work and there's nothing on the books at all.  At first I try to occupy the time by catching up on all of the things I've put off during calving, bull testing, and managing the inevitable outbreaks of disease that occur in young calves.  When those tasks peter out, I start looking for other outlets and soon remember that I have a blog.

The Dog Days also makes me think about, well, dogs.  Even though the large animal clinic is slow, I work out of 2 clinics, and the other clinic does a sizeable amount of small animal medicine.  For the most part, small animal medicine makes for a very enjoyable and fulfilling break from large animal medicine.  I especially enjoy working with family pets.  Helping an animal recover its health always seems much more rewarding when there is a little boy or girl attached to it.  However, there are times when small animal medicine can make me want to pull my hair out.  Most of these instances involve people whose attachment to their animals surpasses the boundaries of common sense, many times to the detriment of animal welfare.

Over the past 50 some odd years, the values and priorities or our western society have been in a state of flux.  When my Grandfather was my age, the majority of pet dogs and cats lived outside.  It seemed only the very wealthy and/or eccentric had dogs and cats actually living in the house.  The loss of a pet was certainly a sad occasion, but for the most part was marked by a minimum of ceremony, and was often regarded as a necessary part of growing up.  Family relations were considered paramount to whatever bonds may connect man and beast.  Gradually this scale of priorities has shifted; almost to the point of inversion.  Pets have moved from the backyard, to the living room, to the bedroom, and finally to the bed.  It is not uncommon for people who are estranged from their family members to have a pet that they love and cherish more than their own children, siblings, or parents.  Pet loss has gone from being a necessary and expected part of owning a pet to a major ordeal where persons involved may experience feelings of loss akin to the death of a spouse, parent, or child.

This shift in values has been both a boon and a bane to veterinary medicine.  When a person ascribes greater value to their pet, they are more willing to expend resources to diagnose and treat pet illness.  Preventing illness through vaccination, dental cleaning, and routine check-ups has also become more common place.  However, there are times when a pet owner's affection can be detrimental to their pet's health.  For instance, many people equate feeding their pet with showing it love, resulting in widespread pet obesity.  A large portion of the disease that we see in small animal patients could be prevented simply by feeding pets only as much food as they need.  Treats are also a major culprit, and can take on the form of milk bones, which are relatively harmless if given in sufficiently small quantities, to portions off of the dinner plate which really have no place in a pet's diet.  Some people feel the need to cook for their pets, or conversely, feed them raw basic ingredients.  Often times these programs are elaborate and difficult to follow, and as such, mistakes in formulating rations are common.  Ironically, many dogs and cats on homecooked or raw diets become deficient in nutrients that are commonly found in most commercial pet foods.

Another way that affectionate pet owners do their pets a disservice is through end of life decisions.  Many times pets are allowed to languish and suffer through chronic, terminal diseases because their owners simply cannot bring themselves to let go.  Sometimes these diseases are left untreated due to financial constraints.  However, even when finances permit an aggressive diagnostic and treatment regimen, there comes a point when keeping your pet alive because you cannot bear to let it go becomes inhumane.

Along with this rise in grief over pet loss, has come a rise in the number of litigation cases over the loss of pets to medical errors.  For the bulk of modern history, pets have been considered chattel by the law, thus relegating any litigation to a matter of the intrinsic value of the animal.  However recently there have been court cases where bereaved pet owners have sued for emotional losses. While these types of cases may seem like a victory for animal rights to some, their existence puts the animal health industry on a very slippery slope.  Once a 'free to a good home' puppy that has no intrinsic market value begins to carry a treatment liability exceeding tens of thousands of dollars, the cost of obtaining the puppy remains small while the cost of performing veterinary medicine will grow exponentially.  Fewer veterinarians will be able to afford keeping the doors to their clinics open, which will mean a scarcity of veterinary clinics with no change in the pet population.  As the demand for veterinary services increases with this scarcity, so too will the price of obtaining those services.

While I am not advocating that we love our pets less, I am advocating a little bit of perspective.  First, as pet owners, we need to cope with the fact that we are almost certainly destined to outlive our pets.  As such, we should expect, and be prepared for the day when our beloved pet either goes of its own accord or has to be humanely euthanized.  We also need to understand that loving a pet means its welfare comes before the gratification we receive from spoiling it.  We live in a time when there is an abundance of pet foods that are formulated to fulfill all of the nutritional needs of our pets.  Most of these pet foods come with a comprehensive feeding guide that allows us to zero in on an ideal weight for our dog or cat.  While the quality of ingredients and an individual animal's preference for a particular food may vary, once you find a pet food that works for your budget and your pet's preferences, it is a very simple matter to only feed only as much of it as is required.

Regarding the legal shift of animals going from chattel to individuals with rights, there are volumes devoted to the pros and cons of that argument.  For this post, sufficeth to say that if our goal is to increase the overall welfare of animals in our society, it is my belief that meeting that goal will be much more economically feasible if animals are defined as property under the law.  Whether that is moral or not, whether it is socially acceptable or not, I will leave for another day.  However, I will conclude by predicting that defining animals as members of society with rights will invariably raise the cost of owning and caring for them to the point where only the very wealthy and/or eccentric will be able to afford legitimate care.  It may be that we come full circle and return to a time when the relationship between most humans and their dogs and cats will be reduced to infrequent encounters with strays that somehow fell through the cracks, but for whatever reason cannot fully enter our lives.

Saturday, December 7, 2013

A Few Good Vets

Today was the first day off I've had in over 2 months.  The first day that I haven't either had appointments scheduled or been on call since September.  Sundays don't count since I spend a good chunk of those days working on ecclesiastical duties.

It's always hard to know what to do on a day off when you've been going mach chicken for weeks on end.  Even though it was a day off, I still had to attend to some church stuff first thing in the morning, but after that I found myself nervously fidgeting and looking for something to do.  I was actually supposed to be working today but we've had a real cold snap this week and nobody really wants to preg check when it's 30 below outside.  In fact the cold has slowed things down at the clinic in general, leaving us all with time on our hands. Time to reflect.  Several months worth of problems, inconsistencies, impressions and insights have been floating around in the ether and now the atmosphere is supersaturated.  Conditions are right for condensation.

After making token contributions to varying projects, by the end of the day all I really wanted to do was watch a movie.  My wife and I are house sitting for a couple while they are away for a year, and they happen to have a large collection of movies.  One of these is 'A Few Good Men' starring Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson.  I hadn't seen it in a long time, and my wife had never seen it, so we fired up the old VHS and did our best to get a handle on the truth.

For those of you reading this who haven't seen it, I will summarize the basic premise of the movie, though I warn you there may be a spoiler or two to follow.  Tom Cruise portrays Lt. Daniel Kaffee, a young, talented navy lawyer who has a flair for plea bargaining.  Through a series of events, he is assigned to be lead counsel for a couple of marines who are on trial for murdering a fellow marine.  The victim in question died soon after being bound and gagged by the defendants as part of a disciplinary ritual known in the marine corp as a 'Code Red'.  The marines on trial claim that they carried out the Code Red as a result of a direct order from their superior officer(s).  The superior officers claim that the marines acted on their own with intent to kill.  The plot line clearly shows that the superior officers are lying as part of a cover up to spare the commanding officer of the base, Colonel Jessop, played by Jack Nicholson, a career ending blemish on his record.  Jessop uses his high up connections to get the Judge Advocate General to assign Kaffee to the case, knowing that he will go for a plea bargain that will minimize jail time for the marines, avoid the publicity of a trial, and ultimately spare Jessop from any connection to the death.  Kaffee, who has never seen the inside of a courtroom thanks to his prodigious ability to negotiate ridiculous plea bargains, knows that the marines are innocent, knows that Jessop is lying, but also knows that his clients stand no chance if the case goes to trial.  He uses his mad skills to negotiate a plea bargain that will see his clients home in 6 months, after a dishonorable discharge of course.  However, to his chagrin, his clients refuse the plea bargain.  They are marines, they've got honor, they've got code, and they followed their orders.

What follows next is an edge of your seat series of courtroom events, where the defense mounts a courageous attempt to prove to the jury with no evidence and little more than conspiracy theories, that the marines in fact followed orders and that the death of the victim was a direct result of Jessop's poor judgement.  Their luck goes from bad to worse as every possible avenue is exhausted, until finally, Daniel Kaffee has only one alternative if he is to succeed: place Jessop on the stand and use his skill as a trial lawyer to induce this proud Colonel to confess.  Oh, but wait, there's a catch.  If Kaffee accuses a ranking officer of a felony without sufficient evidence, he faces the possibility of court martial and disbarment.  Futhermore, if he fails his clients will spend the rest of their lives in Forth Leavenworth.  The only evidence he has will be the Colonel's confession.  Pretty serious stuff.

Those of you who have seen the movie already knows what happens.  Those of you who don't know are about to find out. Amidst cries of 'I want the truth!!!!' and 'Did you order a code red?!!!!' Kaffee extracts a confession from a very bellicose Jessop and the Marines are exhonerated of all charges except one; conduct unbecoming a marine.  The penalty for which is dishonorable discharge and time already served.  So in essence, after risking his career, his reputation, and the lives of his clients to overcome insurmountable odds, Daniel Kaffee has bought his clients 6 extra months of freedom but no change in their status as marines.

So here I sit, with months worth of vaporized meaning floating above my head, asking myself the question, "Was it worth it Kaffee?"  When a hit by car dog comes into the clinic after hours in respiratory distress, and I know that his only chance of survival is a surgery that I have never performed, do I trust in my surgical instincts and try it anyways?  Even though I know that he probably won't survive the anesthetic and I could be exposing myself, my family, and the practice to the consequences of a malpractice hearing?  Do I punt it on up to the referral surgeon?  Even if I know the dog probably won't survive the drive up there?  Do I just throw in the towel and euthanize?  Protocol dictates that I inform the owners of their options and let them decide, let it rest on their shoulders.  But are they really capable of making that decision?  Are they capable of advocating for their animal in that moment?  Where does honor come in?  What about code?  Am I truly acting as the ultimate advocate for the animal?  Is that even my responsibility?

I don't have answers to these questions, and I don't think I need to have the answers right now.  But I do need to ask the questions.  I have had my moments of glory in success and defeat, when all options come down to either kill or cure and that's it.  I'm the man.  Referral isn't an option.  Either I save this animal or I don't and I'll live with the consequences either way.  But what about when referral is an option?  Kaffee could have petitioned the court that his clients be assigned to a different lawyer, but he didn't.  Why didn't he?  He could have washed his hands of the whole matter and walked away; far, far away from the responsibility and risk associated with putting your neck on the line for somebody or something, even if it's an ideal.  Thanks to the magic of screenwriting, Lt. Daniel Kaffee emerged from his foray victorious, but in real life there is a very real chance of failure.  What then?  Even if he is victorious, his clients' situation isn't that much improved.  They still get dishonorably discharged.  The only thing that brings any kind of sense to it all is knowing that they can hold their heads high.  Knowing that, as Lt. Kaffee eloquently put it, 'you don't need a patch on your shoulder to have honor'.

You don't need to have letters behind your name to have honor either; though those of us who do have acronyms should strive to embody such principles as honor and code.  There is a need in this world for people who are willing to make that choice, to risk it all for the sake of the truth.  This is not an excuse for recklessness, and when you are dealing with serious issues, you definitely need to know your limitations and know when to refer.  However, I hope I can find myself counted among those few brave souls who put their faith in the power of truth, who honestly believe that right will prevail if we are willing to sacrifice for it.  I hope that in the future, when I am faced with a difficult decision between honor and dishonor, that I will choose the better part.  That I will choose honor, even if the results of a successful outcome are marginal at best.  In the meanwhile, I think it's time to get busy again.

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

The Little Fluter Boy

I just came back from a Christmas musical presentation at our local church; it was wonderful.  I really do enjoy good Christmas music.  Whether it be George Strait singing Away in a Manger, Karen Carpenter singing No Place like Home for the Holidays, Johny Mathis singing Sleigh Ride, or the Mormon Tabernacle Choir singing O Holy Night, it always brings back happy memories and really puts me in a Christmassy mood.

However, there is one Christmas Song that I have never liked; in fact I despise it.  Most of you know it.  It usually starts out with a children's choir singing very solemn tones of "pum, pa-pa-pa-pum, pa-pa-pa-pum, pa-pa-pa-pum-pum . . ." to the steady beat of a marching drum, followed by a very over the top musical narrative of a little shepherd boy who doesn't have any thing to give the new born king . . . but he has a drum! . . . .

GAG!!!!

That's right, I do not like 'The Little Drummer Boy', not at all.  Never have.  First of all, why a drum?  I mean, why would a poor little shepherd boy have a drum in the first place?  Wouldn't it scare the sheep?  As a mixed animal veterinarian, I have several clients with sheep, and none of them tote their drums around with them while their out checking the flocks.  To be fair, I guess the song never actually says that he was a shepherd boy, but what other kind of boys were there in Bethlehem at the time?  Other than innkeepers son's?  I guess he could have been an innkeeper's son . . . maybe he played a drum for the lounge singers?  But then he probably wouldn't be poor, because innkeeping was apparently pretty profitable in Bethlehem at the time.  I don't know.  I just never have liked it.  I don't like the overly serious tone of the music, the fact that a drummer needs an ox and a lamb to keep time, and the incessant ra-pa-pum-pums scattered hither and yon throughout the lyrics.  I especially don't like how it gets into your head.  There are few things more annoying than having a song stuck in your head that you don't like in the first place.

Nonetheless, because 'tis the season to be jolly, I have come up with a few improvements for the song that might make it a little more historically correct and entertaining to listen to.  First of all, we've got to get rid of the drum.  Shepherds were more likely to have flutes!  So we call it 'The Little Fluter Boy'.  Because we need some lyrics that rhyme with 'flute', I suggest that instead of 'Pa-ra-pa-pum-pum' we should sing 'A-root-a-toot-toot!'.  That way, when you find yourself inadvertently ra-pa-pumping you can just say 'root-a-toot-toot!' and kablewy!  No more stupid little drummer boy in your head.  Add a few minor modifications to make everything jive together and I present to you, "The Little Fluter Boy"!

(Children's Choir singing in the Background)

Root! Root-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot-a-ta-toot-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot-a-ta-toot-a-ta-toot!

Coooooommmmme they told me
A-root-a-toot-toot!
A new born king to see
A-root-a-toot-toot!

Our finest gifts we bring
A-root-a-toot-toot!
To lay before the King
A-root-a-toot-toot-root-a-toot-toot!

So to honor him
A-root-a-toot-toot!
with our loot!

Little baby
A-root-a-toot-toot!
I am a poor boy too
A-root-a-toot-toot!

I have no gift to bring
A-root-a-toot-toot!
That's fit to give our King
A-root-a-toot-toot! Root-a-toot-toot! Root-a-toot-toot!

Shaaaaalllll I play for you?
A-root-a-toot-toot!
On my flute!

Mary nodded
A-root-a-toot-toot!
The ox and lamb felt fine
A-root-a-toot-toot!
I played my flute for Him
A-root-a-toot-toot!
I played my best for Him
A-root-a-toot-toot! Root-a-toot-toot! Root-a-toot-toot!

Then He smiled at me
A-root-a-toot-toot!
Me'n my flute!

(Children's Choir singing, slowly fades into the Background)

Root! Root-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot-a-ta-toot-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot! Root-a-ta-toot-a-ta-toot-a-ta-toot!

Merry Christmas everyone!

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

Beef Cattle Handling Techniques and Facilities

Introduction:

I have spent hours working on this article.  I've agonized over it, revised it, rewritten it, and I have had several close friends read it.  I feel that this topic is a very important one that deserves our full attention (by 'our' I am referring to myself and other animal health professionals).  My hope is that this article will give those who work with cattle some useful information, and those who don't but would like to some valuable insight.

One of the many things I enjoy about my profession is the opportunity to visit different ranches.  In fact I get to visit LOTS of different ranches, each one with its own way of moving and handling cattle.  To be sure, I don't think I have ever seen two ranches that do things exactly the same way.  Each one has its own unique blend of techniques and facilities to get the job done, though they usually all share a few commonalities.  For instance, I remember going to a ranch just outside of town to do some pregnancy checks, and the rancher's daughter had brought some of her high school friends out to help.  Some of these girls had never been around cattle before, so in an effort to distill things down to an easy to understand level the rancher's daughter handed one of the girls an electric cattle prod and said, "here, when my dad starts yelling at you press the button and touch the cows with the end . . ."  I couldn't help but laugh because she had very succinctly described how it was done on far too many cattle operations; lots of yelling, lots of confusion, lots of electricity, and lots of stress for both man and beast.  There are, however, a few practices and designs that tend to get the job done with less stress on the cattle and fewer headaches for the handlers.  However, in order to understand these practices and designs, it is first necessary to understand a few basic principles about cattle.

Natural Cattle Behavior:

First and foremost, cattle are a prey species that live in herds.  In order to understand cattle behavior, it is important to understand these two basic facts, because they dictate how cattle process the world around them.  Most of the behaviors that frustrate the would be stock handler stem from an inadequate understanding of how cattle think.  Cattle have not been blessed with many of the defenses that come standard on other animals, but they use the ones they do have quite effectively.  For instance, cattle only have a lower set of incisors so biting their predators isn't really an option.  Instead they gore, bludgeon, and blow snot with their massive heads that sometimes have horns.  Cattle are designed to thrive on poor quality forages grown in rough terrain; a key component of this design is a rumen that can hold upwards of 50 gallons of material supported by short, muscular, cloven-hooved limbs.  The trade off to this design is a greatly decreased lung capacity and an awkward loping run that makes flight only a slightly more desirable option to fight.  Their stout figure also makes cattle pretty easy to spot out in the open; they aren't as stealthy as other herbivores like deer or elk.  However, their short muscular legs do give them the ability to kick a perceived attacker into next week, and they certainly have a personality for confrontation.  Their immune system has an unmatched capacity for fighting off infection, so they can take a pretty good licking from a predator, deliver a crushing response, and have at least a fair chance of survival.  All of these factors have created an animal that can be stubborn, belligerent, and aggressive if needs be, especially when protecting their offspring.

Being a prey species, their eyes are set on the sides of their head giving them nearly a 360 degree field of vision when their heads are lowered to graze.  The trade-off here, however, is a decreased ability to perceive depth and distances, and a blind spot directly in front of their faces and behind their tail.  These blind spots will often cause cattle to balk at openings that are directly in front of them, and are also part of the reason why cattle tend not to run directly away from a threat but rather circle around it.  Another reason for the circling pattern is that cattle find strength in numbers, and when separated from the main group they will attempt to double back at the first opportunity to run back to the herd.  Cows see colors very differently from humans.  They have a much higher percentage of rod receptors in their retinas than cone receptors, making them more sensitive to shades of black and white.  They also have a reflective membrane in their retinas called the tapetum lucidum, which coupled with their higher number of rod receptors gives them much better night vision than humans.  Being herd animals, they have a well established social order and a group of cows will generally have a 'boss cow' in the middle directing traffic.  They also tend to group together when pressured, which is nice if you are trying to gather them together out on the prairie, but can make sorting individuals away from the herd challenging.  Cattle have highly sensitive hearing and skin sensation, so much so that they can hear the sound of a twig breaking a mile away, and can pinpoint the location of a gnat on their back with their tail.  Their tails can be vicious towards larger pests as well, especially when soaked with manure and urine.

Despite assertions by many cattle owners to the contrary, cattle are actually very intelligent and have a keen memory.  If they go through the chutes and get poked, prodded, and yelled at, they will surely resist going through the chutes on every subsequent attempt.  To their credit, they are not very vindictive, though again I am sure there are many cattle owners who would disagree with me on that as well.  I say they are not vindictive, because I don't think cows remember a fearful or painful experience and then behave in such a way so as to repay the fear and pain.  More likely, I think, they remember fearful and painful experiences then behave in such a way so as to prevent them from happening again.  I think it is important to make this distinction, because too many times cattle handlers take things personal when cattle get on the fight, or stubbornly refuse to move, or swat them in the face with a manure sodden tail, or wreck fences/alley ways/corrals etc.   To be sure, there are innumerable ways that cattle can turn even the most mild mannered individuals into swearing, snarling maniacs.  I myself have been guilty of this type of behavior many times, and I have to constantly remind myself not to take it personal, they're just cows being cows.  If a handler takes the time to understand them on their level, then he or she can begin to create a system that is less stressful for the cows and ultimately for the handler.

Natural Human Behavior:

Even though many may grasp these basic concepts academically, when it comes to moving cows it seems like the standard instinct for most people is to get behind the cattle and 'drive' them.  This often involves lots of yelling, hand waving, and in more extreme cases, flailing, swearing, whipping, and prodding.  Certainly you can get cows to move this way, and often it may seem like the only way they will move at all, but in many ways these driving techniques tend to make life harder down the line.  The end result of these techniques is a cow that is stressed and agitated.  Once a cow becomes stressed she will not respond well to any cues.

One of the first things you can do to alleviate this stress is to lower your voice.  There are few things that will raise a cows stress hormones as quickly or as rapidly as the sound of the human voice, especially at a yell.  A cow's world is one of bucolic scenes where sounds are limited to the wind running through the grass along the babbling brook; punctuated only by the occasional lowing of an old momma cow, the bawl of a hungry calf, or the beller of a rutting bull.  Recall as well, that their hearing is actually quite sensitive.  The sound of a human voice grates on their nerves much like the sound of incessantly bawling calves grates on ours.  Even in situations where the cows world is limited to a pen or feedlot, the sound of the human voice is not the norm.  This is one of the hardest things for people to understand about cattle.  After all, what fun is working with cattle if you can't swing your arms in the air and yell "HEE-YAWWW!!!" every so often?  Isn't that how John Wayne did it?  Actually, that is how John Wayne did it, and lots of real cowboys even do it, but that doesn't make it okay.  The human voice stresses cattle out and should be kept to a minimum.

Placing yourself directly behind a cow can also be counterproductive because it makes her want to turn and look at you; because she can't see you in her blind spot.  This response is exacerbated when you separate a cow from the main group; not only does she want to turn and watch you, but she doesn't like the fact that you are between her and the rest of the cows.  You may be able to keep her from breaking back with a sufficient number of people and/or whacks to the face with a sorting stick.  However, even if you are successful in the short term with these methods, you will more than likely have escalated the cows disposition from one of quiet avoidance towards one of aggressive confrontation.

Stockmanship:

A better solution to driving cows, is to work cows from the front of the herd; slowly applying quiet pressure, then releasing it, with your body position and eyes on the cow that appears to be directing traffic on that end.  By alternating between applying pressure and releasing it on this cow, a cattle handler will induce a slow, linear movement of cows past him or her.  It is helpful when applying this pressure, to rock from side to side.  This technique is called the 'wiggle walk', and it works because it helps the cow know exactly how far away from her you are.  Recall that because the cow's eyes are set in the sides of their heads, they don't perceive depth as easily as we do.  Anything you can do to help them know where you are will put their bovine minds at ease.

As you continue to apply pressure and release it, and the herd begins to move together in the same direction, motion by the handler(s) in the opposite direction will coax the cows to move more earnestly in their original direction.  This method of working cattle from the front of the herd is sometimes referred to as 'working off the eye' of the cow.  If this procedure is performed against the side of a corral near an open gate, the ensuing procession of cattle will move willingly through the open gate with a minimum of stress and confrontation.  Sadly, I see very few handlers use this technique.  Instead the going trend is to get as many whooping and hollering humans as you can behind the cows and push them through the system.  Trying to push a herd of cows this way soon becomes like trying to push a rope.  You can push a short piece of rope, depending upon its stiffness, but if a rope has any length to it, you won't get it very far just from pushing.  Likewise, if you get behind a small group of cows (say 5-6), they will move away from you alright.  However, a larger group will bunch up, and the cows at the front of the herd will not feel your pressure until the cows at the back of the herd push on them.  This type of pressure often creates panic and disorganized movement.  In fact, one of my fellow veterinarians once witnessed a group of heifers trample and kill 4 of their herdmates during a similar panic in an alley way.

If you get the cattle at the front of the herd to lead the way, the motion becomes much more like a rope being pulled to its destination and chances are everyone involved will be a lot less frazzled.  All that being said, there are times when it is necessary to apply pressure from behind.  For instance, you may be able to initiate motion from the front of the cow, but the distance to their destination may be such that in order to continue their movement you need to follow behind for awhile.  If you have the cattle up against a fence, pushing from behind works best if you keep yourself slightly to the side where they can see you.  Out in the open this will not work as the cow will break back to the opposite side, so it then becomes necessary to stay directly behind to keep balanced pressure on both sides.  In this situation, it is still preferable to keep your voice low and you demeanor calm.

A major obstacle to developing skill with these techniques is that in order for them to work well, you have to invest some time into them.  A handler may try these techniques, but get frustrated when they don't work well initially and revert to old habits.  It is important to realize that getting the cattle to move well off of pressure on the front of the herd works best when the cattle have had some practice before hand.  The easiest way to do this is to move the cattle along one side of the fence using the same technique mentioned earlier, then reverse direction and do the same thing over again.  This helps the cattle to know that if they respond to your pressure by moving past you, the pressure will be removed.  It takes about 15 minutes, but I have found that doing this will pay dividends in decreased handling time down the road.  After teaching the cattle how to respond to pressure, you can create a lineup of handlers between the front of the herd and their intended destination, and they will move calmly and quietly past each one until they have passed through the gate or into the alley way that you desire.  This may not be practical when moving cattle across long distances, but it works well in large pens or when moving cattle through the corners of large pastures.

Cattle Handling Facilities:

Once the cattle have learned how to move correctly off of pressure in the open, they will move better through small enclosures as well.  However, once the cows have entered the corral or alley way, the onus for low stress handling shifts partially from the technique of the handlers to the design of the facilities.  This is only a partial shift, because good handling technique will make up for a mediocre facility.  However, if stressful handling techniques are employed, excellent facilities can only decrease the amount of time in which the cattle are stressed, but not eliminate the stress.   Facilities in and of themselves cannot lower the stress level of cattle if the handlers employ stressful techniques.  I have seen hundreds of different cattle handling facilities, and each one has been unique.  Even systems that use components from the same manufacturer tend to have their own individual efficacy as these components usually have to be integrated into a pre-existing system.  In my mind, cattle handling systems usually consist of 5 basic components: holding pens, loading pens, alley ways, sorting gates/in-line gates, and chutes/restraining devices.  I will discuss each of these components individually, and will attempt to focus on designs over brands as it is not my intention to promote one company over another.  However, I may mention some specific, well-known designs for illustrative purposes, and when it comes to squeeze chutes, all bets are off.

Holding Pens:

Holding pens are larger enclosures that usually accommodate anywhere from 20-30 animals on up to several hundred.  Holding pens are usually the first enclosure that cattle see when they are brought in from pasture, and can vary in design from square/rectangular to rounded.  The one thing holding pens must be able to do for sure is hold the animals.  The fences should be high enough and sturdy enough to keep cattle from jumping out.  The pen should also have decent footing, and should be large enough to accommodate a good proportion of the cattle that are going to be processed in a given day.  As some places may have multiple holding pens, what qualifies as a 'good proportion' may vary, however if you have to ride out and bring cattle in from the pasture more than once or twice for processing, it will make for a long day.  Holding pens should also be small enough that one or two handlers can bring small groups of cattle out of the holding pen into loading pens.  Sometimes holding pens will be used to sort cattle, especially when sorting calves off of their mothers.  Sometimes there will be a series of holding pens that go from large to small.  Whatever the case may be, the bottom line is holding pens need to keep the cattle in, and should be designed so that the flow of movement provides a steady stream of cattle into the processing facility.

Loading Pens:

A loading pen is essentially a small enclosure where a small group of cattle (say 5-10) are placed after being sorted and brought up from the holding pen(s).  Usually cattle go from a loading pen into an alley way, however this may not always be the case.  I have seen 3 basic types of loading pens: crowding tubs, bottle-necks, and Bud Boxes.  Crowding tubs are usually semi-circular or quarter-circular pens with a swing gate originating from the center of the circle; though I have seen tubs that almost encompass an entire circle.  They can be purchased as pre-manufactured units, or built from scratch.  One common design element that I have observed in virtually every crowding tub is that the swing gate has a mechanism that prevents the gate from coming back against pressure from cattle inside the tub.  The purpose of this feature is to allow the tub space to get smaller and smaller as cattle exit the tub into the alley way, and also to protect the handler(s) from cattle coming back out of the tub.  This swing gate essentially 'crowds' the remaining cattle into a position where they have no other alternative but to exit the tub.  The advantage of crowding tubs is they make entrance into the alley way inevitable for the cows; no matter how ornery or stubborn they may be, they eventually have to leave the tub, and usually they can be forced out if they are pointed in the right direction.  Another advantage to crowding tubs is safety for the handler; almost all crowding tubs are designed to work with the handler on the outside of the tub.  Crowding tubs are used almost exclusively for handling wild game type animals such as bison and elk, as attempting to get in a small pen with one of these animals will almost certainly lead to injury for the handler.  The downside to crowding tubs is that they don't always work off of the cows natural inclinations for movement.  To be sure, there are crowding tubs that have been designed to cater to the cows natural instincts for movement.  But I have seen a lot of tubs that only work well if there is someone on the outside poking and prodding the cows through it.  I would say the majority of cattle I deal with that are fed into the alley way out of a crowding tub are at least moderately stressed.

Most tubs that I have dealt with have high solid walls and a solid walled swing gate.  This is great for keeping the cattle from jumping out of the tub, but it has been my experience that cattle will move through a system better if they can see out; if they can know where the handler is in relation to themselves.  At the very least, the crowding gate in a tub should be see through, and if a portion of the outside radius of the tub can be see through it really helps.  One of my favorite crowding tub designs is the Morand quarter circle tub.  It's outside wall are solid for the about the first 5 feet up, then there is a gap followed by 3 bars across the top; the swing gates both leading into the tub and that crowd the cattle are see through, and the cattle tend to move in and out of them better than other solid walled tubs.  In truth, the Morand quarter circle tub is actually a hybrid between a crowding tub and a Bud Box, but before I go into the elements of a Bud Box I need to talk about bottle necks.

A bottle neck loading pen is essentially a small 4 sided pen where the cattle enter on one side and exit out the other.  The main feature of a bottle neck is that instead of a square enclosure the wall adjacent to the exit extends obtusely off of the sides of the pen.  Imagine a square house with simple peaked roof and a chimney slightly off center to the apex.  If the house were seen from the side in profile, then cut in half at the apex, the resulting shape would resemble a bottle neck pen.  When using a bottle neck pen, the handler stands on the side of the pen opposite the exit into the alley; the handler can either stand inside the pen with the cows, on the outside of the pen, or on a catwalk.  The handler applies pressure to the cows in the pen in such a manner so as to guide them into the bottle neck and then the alley.  The bottle neck pen should be wide enough at its entrance to allow the handler to apply pressure to the cattle at a safe distance, but narrow enough that the handler can stand in the cows flight zone.  If you have somebody that knows what their doing in a bottle neck pen, you can move cows into the alley very quickly and with a minimum amount of stress.  However they can be very frustrating for the uninitiated, or for those cattle handlers that have cut their teeth on forcing cattle through a crowding tub.

A Bud Box is kind of like a bottle neck loading pen, however it has an ingenious design that plays off of a cow's natural instinct to break back towards the herd.  The basic Bud Box has a long, wide alley way that comes off of the holding pens, with a narrow alley way exiting perpendicular to the wide alley way.  The wider alley way extends past the narrow alley a distance that is a little bit longer than the wider alley's width; this creates a sort of dead end that will fit a small group of cattle.  There is a swing gate that hinges off of a post at the entrance to the narrow alley way that swings out across the wider alley way so as to form a diagonal barrier.  When cattle are brought up the wide alley from the holding pens, they move past the entrance to the narrow alley, and the swing gate is brought back across the wide alley way behind them.  When they stop at the dead end and break back towards where they came from, they naturally want to move along the fence and will usually enter the narrow alley willingly.  In this instance, it is preferable for the swing gate to be solid, so that the cattle cannot see back to where they came from, but instead will think the narrow alley is the way to go.  I've made it sound more complicated than it really is, it is actually a very simple, very easy to use design, and you don't have to be an expert stock handler to get it to work.  The Bud Box is name in honor of a man name Bud Williams, who designed the box and who has had a vast influence on the field of Stockmanship.  Many of the ideas I present in this article were taught to me in continuing education courses by a veterinarian named Tom Noffsinger, who worked extensively with Bud Williams and is recognized as an expert in cattle handling.

I mentioned earlier that the Morand quarter circle crowding tub was actually a hybrid between a crowding tub and a Bud Box.  It is unique in that it actually has two swing gates, both hinging on either side of the entrance to the narrow alley.  The first swing gate blocks the return down the wider alley way, however instead of entering a box, the cows enter a quarter circle tub that has a radius equal to the length of the second swing gate.  Once the cattle are in the tub, they can be crowded up into the narrow alley way.  Because of the shape of the tub and the limited space, it doesn't work quite as well as a regular Bud Box, but for most cattle it works better than a standard crowding tub.  It actually works pretty well for handling wild horses as well, but that's a topic for another day.

Alley Ways:

Alley ways are actually very simple components, but there seems to be a lot of debate as to which designs work best.  Some argue that they should be strait, while others say they should be curved.  Some say they should have solid walls, and others say they should be see through.  Some prefer wood to metal, and vice versa.  Lots of alley ways have catwalks running alongside high walls; others have lower walls with overhead bars and arches to keep the cattle from jumping out.  I've seen alley ways of all different designs work well, however if I had to choose, I would say lower walled alleys that allow the cows to see where the handlers are tend to work best, especially if the cows are not stressed when they exit the loading pen.  In my experience, it doesn't really matter if they are straight or curved, wood or metal; if the sides of the wall are too high, the cattle will not be able to see what's going on and they will not move well.  If you need to put archways and bars over head to keep the cattle from jumping out, go right ahead, but they need to see where the handler is if he or she is going to move them off of the eye.

Sorting Gates/In-line Gates:

Sorting gates are a very important part of the cattle handling system that often gets overlooked.  A sorting gate can be something as simple as a swing gate that leads into a side pen, or it can be a component of a split alley that directs cows either right or left.  Some of the most effective sorting gates are in-line gates that stop movement of cattle in an alley, thereby allowing the cattle to be brought into the chute and then released individually.  Some of the older in-line gates on alleys resemble a guillotine.  They include a vertical track system and a pulley that allows the gate to be dropped into place at the appropriate time.  These guillotine gates work okay, but I have found that many cattle can nose their ways under them pretty effectively, and they are not always easy to use.  Other sorting gates have pieces that come in from the side to separate cows in an alley; these could be referred to as scissor gates or accordion gates.  These also can work okay, but there are lots of cows that will get their nose in between the the two halves of the gate and pry it open before the operator can stop them.  My personal favorite design when it comes to in-line gates is the roller gate.  This gate has a heavy door that rolls into the alley on an overhead track.  I can stop just about any cow I want to with a roller gate, even if she gets her head in between the edge of the roller gate and the alley wall.  The reason these gates are so effective is that the pressure of the roller gate redirects the cows momentum into the side of the alley with less kinetic energy being transferred to the edges of the gate than a scissor/accordion gate or guillotine gate.

There is one other type of sorting gate that bears mentioning.  This is a type of gate that has affectionately been dubbed, 'The Preg Box'.  It has been named thus because it is the component used most often by veterinarians to check cows for pregnancy via trans-rectal palpation.  A basic preg box has a door that opens into the alley way and blocks it off entirely.  Think of a Elmer Fudd running down a hallway then being stopped suddenly as Bugs Bunny opens a hidden door that flattens poor Elmer's Face.  That's pretty much how a preg box works.  I prefer to work in a system that has some other form of in-line gate behind the preg box, as I am not strong enough to keep a cow from pushing through the gate if she gets her nose between the edge of the door and the opposite alley wall.  Also, I don't necessarily like to have to flatten the face of every cow that attempts to come through the door while I am swinging it across the alley; though most cows will stop when they see me open the door.  Notwithstanding, I feel fortunate that most systems have a preg box at all, so I try not to complain if a system doesn't have an in-line gate right behind it.

Chutes and other Restraining Devices:

Now for the Piece de Resistance of a cattle handling system, the squeeze chute.  I refer to this section as Chutes and other Restraining Devices because not all systems I have worked in actually have what we might refer to as a 'squeeze chute'.  However most of them do, and if a rancher is going to boast about anything in his handling system, it will likely be about his squeeze chute.  I could write a book on all of the different squeeze chute designs.  The first squeezes were designed, as one seasoned vet I know eloquently put it, 'primarily to kill people'.  As squeeze chutes evolved, they became safer for the people using them, but not always for the cattle.  I know I said I didn't want to pick on or promote specific companies, but when it comes to killing cattle, I think the old Powder River scissor catch chutes have earned a place in the annals of history.  Not that Powder Rivers are alone in this category, any squeeze that doesn't have a straight edged head restraint can apply sufficient pressure on a cows carotid artery to stop all blood flow to the brain and result in death in 30 seconds or less.  A good squeeze chute should be able to catch a cows head, squeeze her up so that she can't move, allow access to the neck, lung field, flank, sheath, scrotum, back end, and feet, and prevent other cows from coming into the chute at the same time.  It should do these things with minimum stress and/or injury to the cow and the handler.  A good squeeze should also allow for multiple exit points.  For instance if a cow won't or can't go out of the front of the chute, at least one side of the chute should be able to open wide enough for her to make an exit.

There are lots of chutes out there that can get the job done, especially when you start throwing hydraulic rams into the mix.  In my mind, the Cadillac of squeeze chutes is the Silencer hydraulic chute.  They are quiet, powerful, and effective; they also cost a small fortune.  The average ranch cannot justify the expense of owning a Silencer, though I never complain when they decide to splurge on one.  Stampede Steel makes a pretty good hydraulic that is a little more cost effective than the Silencer, but is still quite an expense for an outfit that might only run cattle through 3 or 4 times a year.  If I had to pick a favorite manual squeeze chute, I would have to say the clear winner is the Morand.  Morands are built to last, and they work really well.  Cattle seem to go into a Morand better than many other chutes, and the rugged, simple design of a Morand seems to ensure that its components function like new over a period of several years.  I have several clients who have Morands that are at least 20 years old and still work very well.  You'll pay a little bit more for a Morand than some manual squeezes, but they tend to hold their value better than other chutes.  That being said, there are a host of other squeeze chutes that I have worked in that work well.  There is a company out of Manitoba that makes a big yellow chute called a 'Tuff' chute.  We have one of these at the clinic and it gets the job done, and is more affordable than a Morand.  Hi-Hogs, HiQuals, and Pearsons are very common in our area, and other than an occasional cable breakdown, they work fairly well.  Perhaps one of my favorite manual squeeze chutes is the red Thorson chute out of Corvallis, Montana.  The company closed its doors in the past decade, so you can't go out and buy a new Thorson.  But, if you get a chance to purchase a used Thorson don't pass it up, or if you do, let me know so I can buy it.

I mentioned earlier that not all systems I work in have a squeeze chute.  For a lot of the jobs I do, I really only need access to the cow's back end, and in this situation a simple box with a door on the front of it and slot for a back post will work just fine.  I have several clients with setups like this, and for artificially inseminating cows,  preg checking, and even semen testing bulls they work great.  One advantage these simple setups have is that since the cow's head is not caught, she is less prone to kneel down on her front legs, which usually makes my job a lot easier and is safer for everyone involved.  That being said, there is one feature that you can install in just about any chute that will prevent this from happening; that is a brisket bar.  A brisket bar is a device that extends up from the floor of the chute to a height level with an average cow's brisket.  It is usually a round bar that comes up at an angle from the middle of the chute and then ends abruptly at the front of the chute.  They can easily be welded into the floor of any metal chute, or better yet, slots and pin barrels can be welded into the floor that allow the brisket bar to be removed as needed.  Our Tuff chute at the clinic has a detachable brisket bar that can be removed even with a cows full weight is on it.  I find them to be a handy component to a good squeeze, and would not hesitate to install one in a chute that didn't have it as a standard feature.

Along with the main components of a cattle handling system, there are several accessories that make the job go a lot easier.  One of the most basic and vital is a good sorting stick.  A sorting stick can be made of anything.  Some of the more common sorting sticks are wooden canes, fiberglass rods, or plastic pipes.  I prefer to use a fiberglass rod with a good rubber grip and a white plastic bag taped to the end.  The white stands out to cattle much like blaze orange stands out to humans, and having it on the end of a stick allows me to put pressure on a cow over a much wider area than what I can do on just my feet.  I also feel that I can move the cows a lot better with the white plastic bag than say a rattling paddle or a whip.  The only problem with having a sorting stick, is that it creates the temptation to beat on the cows when they start to get ornery.  That's not to say you shouldn't be able to defend yourself against a mean cow, and a good whack to the face with a sorting stick has deterred many a would be aggressor.  However I have seen far too many cattle get stressed out because the only way their handlers know how to move them is by yelling and smacking them with sorting sticks.  So use sorting sticks, but use them judiciously.

There is one cattle handling accessory that many cattle handlers have developed an almost addictive dependence for: the electric cattle prod or 'hotshot'.  I have gone through a range of emotions and opinions regarding the hotshot.  When I was a 4th year veterinary student I purposefully zapped myself in the leg with a hotshot because I wanted to know what if felt like before I used it on a cow.  It really hurt!  If felt like a pitbull had bitten me on the quadriceps!  Since then I have gone back and forth on the ethics and practicality of the hotshot.  There are times when a cow goes down in an alley or chute and you have to either get her up with the hotshot or she dies.  There are other times when a cow is just going to plant her feet and make up her mind that she ain't movin'.  Your alternatives at that point are to wait her out (which may take several minutes), beat on her with a sorting stick, twist her tail to its breaking point, or zap her with the hotshot; and none of them will get the job done as quickly as the hotshot will.  I have come to the conclusion that it is more humane to zap her with the hotshot than to beat on her with a sorting stick or twist her tail.  It's true that it might be more humane to wait her out, but anyone who has worked cattle through a chute will tell you that you really don't have that much time to waste.  If you spend more than a 1, or maybe 2 minutes on each cow, you won't be able to get through them all in a day.  When you consider the amount of coordination and resource allocation that it takes for an average sized ranch to be able to work cows through the chutes, spending more than a day or two doing it becomes very impractical.  I will say this however, if you find yourself reaching for the hotshot more than once or twice in a day, that may be a sign that there is something about your cattle handling technique or system that is slowing you down.  A little time invested early on in teaching cattle how to move off of pressure will prevent most of these dilemmas, and many times some minor modifications can turn a poor system into a functional one.  Because we aren't perfect people, and we don't live in a perfect world, I think there needs to be a place for the hotshot.  However, if there is one thing I have learned in my career as a veterinarian, you never stop learning, and there is almost always a better way to do something than what you have been doing in the past.  The principles, techniques, and designs I have outlined in this article are by no means exhaustive.  They are based largely on my own observations and opinions, though much of what I have written is based on things I have learned from others. However, if you'll consider the fact that I help process more than 20,000 cattle every year in over 100 different cattle handling systems, then perhaps it will help you think about some ways that you might be able to do things a little better.  If that's all it accomplishes then it will have been worth the effort.

Thursday, November 21, 2013

On puppies, parvo, and being a small animal breeder

There was a time in my life where I thought I would only ever work in the cattle industry, but then I got a job at a mixed animal practice in Southern, Alberta and gained a new perspective on life.  I still enjoy working with cattle, in fact I spend more time in this sector of veterinary medicine than any other.  But sometimes a little change is as good as a vacation, and one of my favorite things about working in a mixed animal practice is the chance it gives me to play with puppies.  I love puppies.  How could anyone not love puppies?  A litter of puppies will transform me from a straight talkin', no nonsense cattle vet into a baby gibberish spouting suck in 2.7 seconds or less.  I love their little puppy grunts, the way their little puppy eyes get all anxious and worried when you pick them up, and their general fluffiness.  It doesn't really matter what breed they are, a litter of healthy puppies always makes my day.

Puppies can also break my heart.  Things don't always go smoothly when it comes to the business of bringing puppies into the world, and even after they are out and breathing there are a lot of things that can go wrong.  In my career, I have examined and treated hundreds of puppies for parvovirus infection; a deadly virus that causes severe diarrhea, dehydration and death.  In our area, we even see the occasional canine distemper outbreak.  This virus attacks the central nervous system and is nigh untreatable in unvaccinated pups.  Puppies are also susceptible to ingestion of foreign objects, malnutrition, hernias, rectal prolapses, and a whole host of other problems.  The truth is, dead puppies really aren't much fun.    

In veterinary practice, we see puppies that come from a wide variety of circumstances.  Some puppies are the result of careful planning and selection on the part of a breeder that is producing dogs with specific traits, mainly because they find dog breeding rewarding and satisfying.  Others are the results of accidents caused by a moment of unsupervised 'socializing' with the neighbor's dog, but are treasured members of the family nonetheless.  There are those individuals who breed dogs purely for profit, and base many, if not all of their decisions on whatever will require the fewest out of pocket expenses.  Lastly, there are far too many puppies that are born into neglect and apathy because their owners can't be bothered to spay or neuter their pets.

I get to deal with them all in our practice.  I would say that most of the people that bring us their puppies fit into the categories of caring and responsible pet owners.  There are also those who come to us from situations of neglect, usually by caring individuals who have taken on the burdens of someone else's poor decisions and are now trying to make things right.  However I deal with a lot of puppies that come to me in the middle of a wreck because their owners nickled and dimed their ways into one.  It is to these individuals that I wish to address some remarks; those individuals who got into breeding dogs because they thought they could turn a fat profit with few inputs.

First, trying to make money on dog breeding is kind of like playing the futures market.  While there are examples of people who have succeeded, there are also many people who have lost big.  The difference here, is that when you lose big in the puppy breeding market, it doesn't only affect you, it also affects living, feeling animals that are otherwise incapable of sustaining themselves.  Many people think that the input costs for breeding dogs are limited merely to the purchase price of breeding animals, however these individuals have not taken the time to look at the big picture.  If you want to make money breeding and selling dogs, that is fine, but you should be financially prepared for the worst.  The worst may include having to care for all of your pups until a suitable home can be found for them, even if they have to stay for longer than you anticipated.  The worst may include having to re-home puppies when things don't work out at their intended destination.  The worse may include behavioral problems that you are not able to deal with.  The worst may include veterinary bills for birthing complications, injury, and/or disease.  You need to ask yourself before you start breeding dogs if these are worst case scenarios that you can live with and afford, because if they are not, you SHOULD NOT BREED DOGS!!!!  Or any animal for that matter.

In addition to the worst case scenarios, there are the risk management costs to consider when breeding dogs.  Can you afford to vaccinate your female and her pups?  Can you afford adequate nutrition for a lactating female?  Can you afford the adequate living space for a female and her puppies?  Do you have time to care for all these animals?  If the answer is no, do not be fooled into thinking that you can just do without.  You may get lucky and get along fine for awhile, but sooner or later reality will catch up with you, and then you will be faced with a tough decision.  Either you will have to come up with large sums of money to clean up your mess, or you will join the ranks of those slimebags who let their animals suffer and perish from neglect.  Neither option is desirable.  I have seen way too many animals suffer needlessly, at great costs to their owner, from diseases that could have been easily prevented with good management, good nutrition, and proper vaccination.  I have seen even more that have become the victims of apathy and irresponsibility.  It is heartbreaking, and it can give otherwise responsible breeders a bad name.

I know many veterinarians and other animal lovers who look disdainfully on breeding dogs.  They feel that there are already too many unwanted pets that need homes, and that adding to the pet population is irresponsible and inhumane.  While I can certainly see their point of view, I have also seen plenty of dog breeders that do things the right way and I feel that there should be a place for responsible dog breeding.  I feel there is a place for dog breeders who genuinely care for their dogs and who would never intentionally place a puppy in a poor home situation.  I feel there is a place for breeders who educate themselves, and who work closely with their breed associations, veterinarians, and other industry professionals who have the dogs best interest in mind.  I look forward to many more years of coming in out of the large animal barn, or in from the field, just to act a little bit goofy for the newest litter of furry monsters to come through the door.  Each one is precious, and has a right to a good home where they will be loved and cared for responsibly.  When considering whether to breed your dog, please consider this, and choose wisely.

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

The currency that never goes out of style

I had a disturbing experience the other day.  I tried to exchange some of my hard earned Canadian dollars for U.S. dollars, and lost a couple of hundred dollars in the process.  Either the value of the Canadian dollar had gone down, or the value of the U.S. dollar had gone up; whatever the cause I lost money.

This experience highlights an ever growing concern with  how our society functions: the value of our money.  It really is quite a fragile thing.  Money is only as good as the economy that produces it, and more and more the North American economy is losing its competitive edge in the World.  There are several knowledgeable individuals who predict that China's economy will outpace the U.S. economy by the end of this decade; they certainly have history on their side to back up that assertion.  The 17th century was dominated by the Spaniards, the 18th by the French, the 19th by the British, the 20th by the U.S.A.  The world is due for an economic shift, and more than likely century 21 will go to the Chinese.  There may be a day when the monetary standard for the world is the Renminbi not the Dollar; in that day people across the world, but especially in North America, will be looking for a more secure means of protecting the value of their investments.

There has been a trend in the U.S. that bears mentioning as we consider the future of the world economy.  Ever since the industrial revolution, agriculture in North America has been in a state of flux; farmers are becoming fewer in number and older in age while output has increased dramatically.  In 2007, less than 2% of Americans lived on farms, and only 1% claimed farming as their primary source of income; compare that to roughly 12% in 1950.  In 1969, roughly 15% of farmers were 65 years and older; in 2002 the figure was 25%.  I have seen other figures that show similar trends.  Despite these trends, over the same time period food production in the United States has increased over 250%.  I don't know of too many corporations, or entire industries for that matter, that can decrease their labor force from 12% of the population to less than 2% and still increase production by more than triple.  Much of this has been due to advances in mechanization, genetic improvements in crop strains, and improved farming techniques.  Todays tractors and combines are so advanced that they literally drive themselves through the use of GPS.  For the past 2 years the U.S. has experienced the worst drought since the dust bowl, yet corn and wheat production were barely phased due to the widespread use of drought resistant, high yielding strains.

The result of all these advancements is a food supply that is readily available, inexpensive, and relatively safe.  In 2011, Americans spent less than 10% of their income on food and drink.  Compare this to 23% in Mexico, 31% in Russia, and 41% in Kenya.  In countries in the throes of economic ruin (think Zimbabwe and Somalia) the percentage can be even higher (think 80% to 100%).  Ironically, the simultaneous condition of an increase in food production with a decrease in farmers has caused a large percentage of the consuming public to eschew advancements in agriculture for trending methods such as 'Organic', 'All Natural' and 'Hormone/Antibiotic Free'.  People feel less connected to their food than ever before, but they don't know how to reconnect so clever marketers have developed feel good schemes to ease their anxiety.

All of these figures and trends illustrate some important points for consideration.  The world is experiencing an economic shift; the times they are a-changing.  Our current food production system has outpaced itself to the point that it is cost prohibitive for new producers to enter the industry, and the average Joe is too far removed from agriculture to even know where to begin anyways.  If there were ever a major disruption in food production, or if the value of our currency every took a serious hit, the relative value of a steady food supply would skyrocket.  Even if the global food supply remains constant, localized conditions such as natural disasters can disrupt the food supply sufficiently to increase the value of food and water significantly.  Any savvy investor will tell you that the key to coming out ahead in a state of economic flux is to buy low and sell high.  Though in most instances an ordinary person would not consider selling food that he or she bought on the cheap, there may never be a better time to invest in something so inexpensive at a point in time where its value is likely to rise so dramatically.

Now is the time to invest in food.  In a world where the population continues to grow, and the acres of arable land continue to shrink, food may very well be the currency of a not too distant future.  I'm not talking about investing in futures markets, or hedging on fat steers or pork bellies, I'm talking about investing in a supply of non-perishable food that can be stored and accessed as needed.  I'm talking about investing in agricultural knowledge, starting with the basics of gardening and possibly even animal production.  I'm talking about investing in nutritional knowledge with a heavy dose of reality.  Organic farming and heirloom crops have their place, especially when we consider that most gardeners and hobby farmers cannot afford to buy equipment that drives itself and crops that blossom even in the midst of a dearth.  However, the future of food production is not in its past; we won't be able to feed the world by reverting to agricultural techniques from the 1800s.  Abstaining from conventionally grown food because it came from GMOs or was grown with the use of pesticides, hormones or antibiotics has no real, measurable health benefits that I'm aware of.  Technology has made food cheaper, but has also made the production of food a very foreign concept to most people in Western society.  Now is the time to capitalize on that fact by investing in something that you can eat, regardless of how the stock market behaves.  Now is the time to buy food.

Sunday, November 3, 2013

A seasoned veterinarian once told me that I could either be an inch wide and a mile deep, or a mile wide and an inch deep.  He was referring to how veterinarians developed their professional skills.  Some focus on one particular area and become so knowledgeable that they become experts.  This focus often produces individuals who are indeed an inch wide and a mile deep.  If the entire body of veterinary knowledge known to man could be quantified into a width of 1 mile, that would mean there would be no fewer than 63,360 inches worth of material to become familiar with, thus providing a niche for a virtually unlimited number of specialists.  Perhaps this is why so many universities boast faculty members who know more about their areas of expertise than any one else in the world.  With so many areas of expertise to choose from, there will always be a demand for those individuals who have the hunger to dive deep into the chasms of scientific knowledge.  Then there are those who take a broader approach, that seek to comprehend a wide variety of topics and but in the process fail to achieve deep comprehension.  After 4 years of being a veterinarian I find myself subscribing more and more to this approach; the approach of the mixed animal veterinarian.

As a mixed animal veterinarian, I see whatever comes through the door whether it be a cherished member of the family or a valued unit of production.  In my career I have dealt professionally with cattle, horses, dogs, cats, sheep, goats, llamas, alpacas, lizards, snakes, water buffalo, reindeer, musk oxen, bears, wolves, elk, deer, hawks, and guinea pigs.  Every animal encounter I have had as a veterinarian was facilitated by a human; each one with a slightly different attachment to their animal.  This variety of situations has resulted in the development of a broad knowledge base that not only has medical components, but also emotional, economic, social, political and even spiritual aspects.  It has also resulted in a career in which I never live the same day twice; everyday presents its own unique set of challenges and opportunities.  I feel very privileged, and perhaps even blessed, to have such a career.

Because I have been given access to a wide array of experiences and insights, I have decided to start a blog.  My motivations stem partly from feelings of obligation to share what I have gained from my particular situation, partly from a desire to find expression for the multitude of thoughts and impressions that I receive from it, and partly because I have heard that writers can make a lot more money than veterinarians so it wouldn't hurt me to learn how to write. (ever hear of James Herriot?)

For me, getting started has been a big obstacle.  My time is split between my work, my family, my religion, my community, and my hobbies.  I don't want blogging to be merely the latest addition to a long list of neglected hobbies that I have accumulated, though it more than likely will be neglected at different points in time.  Nonetheless, now that I have gotten the first post down I hope the next one will come a little easier.