Loading...

“Change” Is Not A Switch-On Action

“Change” Is Not A Switch-On Action
Posted by on 17 January 2017 and filed under

What influences our decisions making process? Why do we repeat practices within our farming business, nevertheless the fact that we are through such difficult times already once!

This change process is more complex that one imagine as this derives from aspects that are not commonly investigated by ourselves nor that we make time to learn these aspects as these are not tangible, unknown to us or because it needs another level of intervention and understanding with which we are not familiar of.

Our thinking and action is shaped by our past (near or far) and also applies to farming practice we implement. Customarily, certain actions were done on a farm that is carried over to the next generation and for obvious reasons continued to be implemented that way. However, as time went by and development agents researched better options and techniques, of which these findings were published and communicated in various ways, the focus is still on the past. With constant new challenges emerging in the farming industry, it demands a much more scientific approach to farming as compared to the past subsistence/less intensified farming practice from the past, and we need to take note of that.

Farmer study group results indicate that Namibian cattle farmers has to grow by 7.7% and sheep farmers by 2.6% to break even between income and expenditures. Figures were made available by the NLU (2016).--

Since new development within farming took place and is available for acceptance, where do we as farmers find ourselves in implementing these practices? Did we also grow with it or are we still lacking behind? Did our skills improved over time? This on the technical side but what about the other side of the coin, the psychical forces? The latter aspect is very complex and requires specific attention to analyse it. Did we put time aside to do some “maintenance” on ourselves to cope with the changes in time? What are we referring to here? This would be beside other aspects understanding oneself through personal reflection to answer-“why do we act as we do?”-This places the individual in person, in the centre of change, and not the technical aspects.

“Those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” ― George Bernard Shaw (Nobel prize winner in literature 1925)

In order to create change, energy is needed to do so. Less physical strength, but therefore energy to get the change process started e.g. identifying problems, analysing, planning, listening, thinking, re-designing etc. Put aside the entrenched thinking and take a critical look at new technology available, pre-drought practices, new approaches, new way of thinking, how to improve production output, adhere to sustainable agricultural practices to mention a few. Question: Do I explore change or do I follow just the popular thinking and talking?

What does the literature tell us on animal nutrition through research done in Namibia? Below are a few results from a 15 month long trail conducted by Walter Roodt (2012) looking at the nutritional status and performance of lick supplemented beef cattle in Namibia.

  • Salt for animals is important in a sense that it regulates metabolism, neurological and cellular functions in the body of an animal.
  • Salt blocks however only provide sodium and chloride for animals but no phosphorus, where phosphorus is the most important element to be supplemented.
  • Providing phosphorus supplementation through balanced formulations available is widely researched and found crucial to building the bone structure of the animal, increasing milk production and increasing fertility which will benefit the production parameter of increased calving and lambing percentage.--

Agra Ring Change

The above figure illustrates results from Walter Roodts’ trail. The 6% phosphorus treatment (6%PT) generated a 52% higher gross profit than the rock salt treatment (RST) cattle group. Only 16kg more of phosphorus licks was consumed than that of rock salt. A 6% phosphorus lick generated also the highest return of investment and will suits any farming expenditure situation.

  • Rock salt animals had depraved appetites and chewed on a number of foreign non-grazable objects such as bones, lime stones and branches. This behaviour is called pica. When this is observed, farmers need to supply phosphorus licks to their animals on continues basis.

Other research results:

Dr Jasper Coetzee: (http://landbou.com/bedrywe/diere/fosfor-n-natuurlike -groeistimulant-vir-vee/)

An increase of the calving percentage from 51% to 80% resulted from providing animals with a phosphorus lick. An increase of 27.5% in the weaning mass of calves was recorded.

Final remark: The wide variety of research topics and its respective results available gives us guidance for implementation. The question is now how do we deal with it through-CHANGE?

  • Print this article
  • Email this article
  • Share this article