QUESTION:
I am looking for parts for a kamatsu international tractor model #284?
the tractor is a 4 cylender gas mazda n471g motor
I am looking for replacement or salvaged parts,currently I'm in the market for a radiator for a kamatsu

• ANSWER:
  go to crosscreektractor.com its in alabama

QUESTION:
help with u.s. history?
Washington signed the Treaty of Greenvile with 12 Native American tribes. What was NOT included in the treaty? A) Land where Chicago, Detroit, and Vincennes are currently
B) An annual payment to the Native Americans of ,000
C) The southern part of Ohio and Indiana
D) The ability of Native Americans to govern themselves as their own nation.
2. Members of the Federalist Party supported a strong national government and manufacturing and trade, while the Democratic-Republicans
A) believed in agrarianism and states’ rights.
B) fought for the rights of merchants and bankers.
C) lobbied for greater division between the wealthy and ordinary wage-earners.
D) favored the politics of the Northern states.
3. President Washington selected which man to become the first chief justice of the United States?
A) James Madison
B) John Jay
C) Alexander Hamilton
D) John Adams
4. What deal was struck to persuade the South to support Alexander Hamilton’s financial plan?
A) The Northern states would pay additional tariff and tonnage fees.
B) A national bank would be created and based in the South.
C) The South would not be required to repay any bonds.
D) The U.S. capital was moved to the District of Columbia.
5. When Congress split into two factions during the debate over Hamilton’s financial programs, the opposing sides
A) became hostile and refused to work together in Congress.
B) caused a series of rebellions to erupt.
C) became the first political parties in the country.
D) voted to impeach Washington as president.
6. Southern planters opposed the Tariff of 1789 because
A) they were afraid trade with Europe would become too expensive.
B) they would be charged higher tonnage rates to ship their goods.
C) they would be required to plant specific crops.
D) they would pay taxes on their farms and farm equipment.
7. In 1789, President Washington selected heads for the newly created departments of State, Treasury, War, and the Office of the Attorney General. This group of advisors to the president was called
A) the Aides.
B) the Justices.
C) the Cabinet.
D) the Court.
8. The debate over whether the government had the authority to establish a national bank was based on what issues?
A) Whether to have paper money or gold coins in circulation
B) Enumerated versus. implied powers in the Constitution
C) Southerners wanting to establish their own banks
D) Judicial versus legislative powers in the Constitution
9. Alexander Hamilton proposed all of the following to help the federal government produce revenue, EXCEPT
A) an excise tax on whiskey.
B) establishing a national bank.
C) import tariffs.
D) an excise tax on corn.
10. The development of the first political parties split the country along geographic lines. Which of the following is true?
A) The Southwest supported the Federalists, while the Northeast supported the Democratic-Republicans.
B) The South and West supported the Democratic-Republicans, while the Northeast supported the Federalists.
C) The Northern and Western states supported the Federalists, while the Southern and Eastern states supported the Democratic-Republicans.
D) The Northern and Southern states supported the Federalists, while the West supported the Democratic-Republicans.

• ANSWER:
  1-b
  2-c
  3-b
  4-d
  5-c
  6-a
  7-c
  8-a
  9-d
  10-b

QUESTION:
What are the major farming/ag publications?
I'm trying to find out which publications farmers read. I have been told Farm Show is a common one around Indiana (where I am based).

I am interested in equipment/machinery based publications where I could market my company's new tissue digester. Farm Show Mag is writing an article on the equipment now, but I'd like to branch out a bit more.
Thank you in advance.
The tissue digester processes 500-3500 pounds of tissue through a process of alkaline hydrolysis. Our markets in the past have been laboratory facilities, veterinary hospitals, universities, and other high-budget operations. Since this unit is MUCH less costly (much, much), our markets will now include farmers, rendering facilities, meat packing plants, poultry operations, highway departments, co-ops, etc. I'm still determining our market. It will be determined, in the end, by the cost of the chemical. I should have a partnership with a major chemical company in the next couple weeks, then we can hit these other markets.
Garnet, forgot to mention cost. Depending on custom specifications, we're talking as low as ,000 (as opposed to 0,000+ previously). This is why it has opened markets for us. It is also mobile (trailerable behind a pickup truck, instead of a permanant stationary install, though we offer that as well...).

• ANSWER:
  Farm & Ranch Living Magazine
  Successful Farming
  Farm Journal
  Farm Show Magazine
  Prairie Farmer
  organic and sustainable farming magazines
  Small Farm Today
  Acres U.S.A.
  Homesteader
  Mother Earth News

QUESTION:
something worth knowing? and a free cookie.?
hmm...something worth knowing? how about...within 10 to 50 years america will...how should i put this..conquer the middle east. but not by military but by economics. currently there are about 75 ethanol producing refineries being built in america. and next growing season there is projected to be more corn grown than there has been since 1946 when we were feeding europe after WWII. And corn prices are also expected to shoot up. i'm not sure but i also heard that 99% of indiana's corn is going straight to the refineries. But with this new ethanol fuel comes change. soon there will be cars mass built that run on ethanol fuel. And also since we use like 85% less crude oil in the production we might be able to produce enough crude oil that we don't have to import much if at all from the middle east. Also with the mass production of ethanol fuel and new cars are going to run on ethanol and you have to have corn to make ethanol fuel. the middle east doesn't grow enough corn for that. and all the arid desert means they don't have much more room in which to grow corn. the only major corn grower in the middle east able to meet the demands for corn production is..INDIA. Which, is currently being taken over by AMERICAN corporations. The middle east might start making thier own cars that still run on gasoline or diesel fuel but they'll be using thier own oil to run thier cars so their economies will become stagnant due to lack of exported goods and they'll have to import things like steel to make those cars. its a win win situation. and if the middle east starts using ethanol fueled cars, where do you think they're going to get that fuel from? America,India, and i currently don't know any other countries that can produce it. they'll be sending us tankers filled with crude oil and we'll be sending it back filled with ethanol fuel. And also imagine what if China starting making ethanol fueled cars? imagine how much of it they'd have to import. and they definetly can't make much of thier own because they can't even feed some of their own people. In a few years we'll be growing more corn than has ever been grown before. which means a major economy boost. with all that new corn there are going to have to be more and bigger farms to make it. more equipment to maintain and harvest it. more trains to haul it. and also where i work we make clutches for lawnmowers and other things one of them being a clutch that goes into a thing on a corn silo that shoots the corn into the hauling trains. and also i think we also make a clutch for combines. So there's going to be more work for steel companies to make railroad ties and train cars and corn silos and other equipment that needs to be made for these refineries and corn fields. and there'll also be jobs for workers for the ethanol plants. then we get to export it for a massive profit. and on top of that we'll be manufacturing our own ethanol cars. and i'm sure japan will make them too. Should we still worry about social security?

also..looks like there's going to be a trans fat foods ban in new york. i think there needs to be a nation wide ban on that stuff.

• ANSWER:
  Ethanol is the way to go, but maybe not for the reasons you give.
  It's a renewable resource and better for the planet (and us!) than gasoline.
  It would be great if U.S. companies made ethanol more important and less expensive. The auto and farming industries would really benefit, and that would help people in the U.S. get good stable jobs. It's true that China has difficulties feeding her people, but so do we! There are a lot of working class people right here in the country of plenty that can't feed their kids.

  The best part about manufacturing our own fuel is that we can finally turn our attention back to ourselves! Our country isn't going to be worth beans if we can't feed and educate our children. The drop out rate in U.S. high schools is shameful!
  Why can't our government drop a billion dollars on education instead of Iraq? And....How about all of the brave and loyal soldiers who lost their lives there? Their loss is incalculable!

  Trans fats? I don't think that a ban is going to work. People need to boycott the foods and the companies that make them. If no one buys that stuff the companies will stop making it!

QUESTION:
where can i find information about tractor implements?
iv searched the internet and all that comes up is , power harrow for sale or combi drill for sale .... i want to know how they work, diagrams and reconstruction videos of how they work and fit into the PTO shaft and such .... is there anywhere i can view this sort of information

• ANSWER:
  This might be what you're looking for.
  http://www.tractordata.com/

QUESTION:
How difficult is it to restore a truck?
I have a 1980 something GMC sierra rusting away in the back yard. It belonged to my dad and he says it is "locked up." How difficult would it be to restore this truck to working order and possibly drop a 454 in it? I have never done a restoration project before but i have done plenty repair work to implements, trucks and tractors on the farm so I am not new to the tool box. Body work isn't my main concern right now i would just like to get the truck running for now.

• ANSWER:
  That's a really nice truck, I have a 1985 Chevy C-20 Custom DELUXE that im trying to restore, and I think the best idea to keep it and put a Chevy straight 6, (aka in line 6) in, because those engines last a long time and their definitely better on gas than a 454, easier to work on and cheaper to buy. You could probably find one for under 0 with not a lot of miles. Or just keep the 454 and let WD-40 or penetrating oil soak into and around the pistons for a few days. Im thinking of getting a straight 6 for my truck. The body on my truck probably has the same rust since our trucks are basically the same but the emblems are different.On the rocker panels, bed frame and the back of the rear fenders. You should probably put new steering arms, exhaust, front and rear springs and shocks too. Im not sure if you know this already but to start it you have to choke the engine by pushing the gas pedal down about 6 times, turn the key, and keep reving it until it runs smoothly and when it runs fast, then just let it idle.

QUESTION:
which tractor implement is used for making rows in a garden?

• ANSWER:
  plow

QUESTION:
Which would be better an older tractor or a newer tractor?
I am looking to buy a tractor, but am so confused. I have been looking at older models (late 50's-60's). I want to make sure that this older tractor can run the implements I need for a small farm, I am confused with PTO. Some models have them and some don't. Can I get a conversion kit for any model, and are all implements universal. Say I have a Ford tractor, do the implements have to be ford.?

• ANSWER:
  It all depends on your needs, here are some tips for buying an old tractor.

  Those that need a machine for working their acreage are in a better position to get what they need quickly but it is amazing how many folks buy the wrong type of tractor and become disillusioned with old machines. The first thing to look at is not the tractor but rather the lay of your land and the implements you will need. If you have visions of cultivating corn after it is "knee high in July" but buy a Ford N-series or Case VAO, you will learn just how far corn stalks bend because these machines may be too low to the ground for your expectations (and your corn). On the other hand if you have side-hills to traverse, like we do in the Northwest, you may be slightly displeased with your nifty hi-crop Farmall or AC (did I mention terrified every time you have to use it because of the deadly possibly of a hillside rollover). On your implements, if you look at the implement first, you can calculate your horsepower requirements and make sure the tractor model you select has the weight and power to do the job. If you see the need for a 10 foot disk harrow, you will be unhappy with a Farmall Cub (or should I say immobile, these don't have the power to pull that large of disk). Thorough research is good insurance in avoiding the wrong purchase.
  Once the model is selected, your preview of the available machines is almost entirely an exercise in mechanics, the cosmetics should probably be placed low on the list. Many good working tractors haven't seen paint in years (though I am not an advocate of this practice) and have some of the ugliest welds in the oddest places. Your machine must be mechanically sound from the onset and have few problems in the near future (at least till winter when you have time to work on it). Even if you are willing to work on it right away, you probably won't be interested in a complete restoration for sometime and need to minimize the number of upfront jobs. It has to start easily, run well when hot, charge the electrical system, pick up implements, brake well, steer well, and get good traction. This conjures up the image of going out for a preview armed with a toolbox containing a compression tester, expensive Fluke digital multimeter, hydrometer, and other specialty tools. Unfortunately most of us don't own them and wouldn't even know what to do with them. We have to rely on our eyes, ears, and common sense. Anyway the tools would end up costing more than the tractor.
  Even though you are probably going to use your basic senses and common sense to evaluate the machine, you should be armed with the critical knowledge on the operation of the tractor you are previewing. Borrow or purchase the owners manual prior to going out for the preview so you are familiar with its operation and basic specs.
  Here is a partial checklist for a simplistic preview of a working tractor:
  •Does it start easily? - A tractor that starts easily may eliminate several items in one shot. Good Battery, compression, ignition wiring / magneto, tune up, fuel flow, carb are implied (not guaranteed) by this. If it doesn't start easily, it still may be a good machine but you won't escape some work on it. If the tractor is out and warmed up prior to your arrival, you lose an important checklist item, namely the cold start.
  •Does it run well when hot - Getting it hot is a must if you want to find out how it will work after you plowed the first row. There are simple and complex problems that can cause the tractor to run poorly after it warms up. Plan on spending a half-hour running it. After running look for leaks, both oil and antifreeze. Lastly after warm up, shut it down and see if it will start.
  •Do the brakes work well - Although the brakes are inexpensive to replace, they are inaccessible on many tractors and will require extensive teardown to get the new ones in. You can test the brakes by locking one wheel and cranking the steering to that side. The tractor should spin and the wheel should not rotate.
  •Does it smoke - Blue smoke indicates many potentially difficult problems like rings, pistons, or valve guides. White or black smoke can frequently be corrected with carburetion or ignition changes but still represent work.
  •Does it make clunking noises from inside the engine - A simple ticking from the top of the engine may be a simple valve adjustment but a deep thunk from the bottom or middle of the engine would indicate very serious and expensive repairs. The clunk should be more pronounced under load. This may be an indication of problems with the crankshaft, bearings, or piston rods.
  •How does the oil look - After you have run it for awhile, stop the engine and check the oil for foaming or presence of water. This is a show stopper.
  •Is there head seepage - look for signs that fluids are seeping out the head gasket. If the tractor is encrusted with grease and dirt, it may cover obvious signs of seepage.
  •Is the cl

QUESTION:
looking for john deere 855 add on hydraulic control valve?
1996 JD 855 NEED TO FIND A HYD. CONTROL VALVE AND HOSES FOR FRONT END IMPLEMENTS .MY TRACTOR DID NOT HAVE THIS . JD HAD THIS IN A KIT FORM BUT I CANT FIND ONE . HELP

• ANSWER:
  A 96' J.D. is not that old ! get ahold of the nearest J.D. dealer and get the factory kit for it ! Hell It's alittle more expensive but it is well worth it to have the right stuff and do the job one time.
  instead of having to go here and there trying to fit miss matched crap and make it work !

QUESTION:
I need one million for my project (Arable Farming) How do I get the money?
I have access to land measuring >200 hacters, 150 debushed ready for ploughing, own a small tractor (Merssy Ferguson 135). Therefore I need financial support to purchase a bigger tractor plus its implements to part-take in the ecconomic diversification, employment creation and contribute to food security in Botswana (Southern Africa).

• ANSWER:
  I don't think that you need a bigger tractor, or a pile of money to get started.

  Use what money you have to buy as much seed as you can, and fuel, and plant a crop on as much land as you can afford. After you harvest that crop and sell it take the money and buy more seed for your next crop.

  If this farm is going to make a go of it you will be plowing and planting more acres for each crop until you are farming all of the land available. Then you can look at more land. And bigger equipment.

  Larger equipment costs a lot of money and the only way to get a loan for it from a reputable lender is to do two things:

  First you need to prove beyond any doubt that you can repay the loan. You need to have a track record of successful farming and crops.

  Second you need to have collateral. An unplowed field shows the potential, but it is just a field. It is not collateral. Now a 40 acre farm that is producing crops at a profit is collateral.

QUESTION:
Have you ever wished you had listened to your parents more when they were teaching you things?
Such as basic things; fixing a car, preparing meals, cleaning house, yardwork, working on machinery, sewing, caring for animals, farmwork, planting a garden, how to talk to people, listening, manners, how to get out of scrapes, and more.

Now that you're older, you're having to learn on your own cuz you didn't listen much as a kid.

My Dad taught us to work with tractor implements, and I only learned it cuz we did it over and over and over. But there were a few other things that I didn't catch onto cuz I didn't listen very well, and now I'm paying the price.

• ANSWER:
  giggle, i can remember when i was younger, mom parents use to tell me, when you get older you will see what i am telling you will benefit you, i keep wondering why, or when my little sister would need her nose wiped she would look around for a tissue and could not find it, and then just wipe it on the bottom of her shirt, i was like i will never do it, that's not right,

  mom would say to me when you have kids you will see that its that her it runn ing all over the place, or when i would watch daddy chance the oil and i did not watch good and know i cant recall how to do it, and that's just grrrrrrrrr.

  yes i should of payed more attention when daddy was doing things, so i would not wonder know how to do it.

  what a cool question )))))))))))))))))))))))))))

QUESTION:
What tractor implement would be best to break up hard Ga clay to a loamy soil?
I race motocross and recently built my own track and it is rock hard ga clay. I want to plow it about twice a month to keep it somewhat soft but im not sure which way to go. My thoughts are either a disc plow or a 3pt hitch tiller i have a 50hp new holland tractor and i have been using a box scrape with the teeth down but this leaves strips of hard dirt and the wheel follows the grooves. If i use a tiller or plow should i break up the soil first? I would like an implement that can do it all with as little effort as possible. Will a disc plow leave a somewhat loamy ground. I have ridden tracks that are tilled and like this type of surface but these tillers are not cheap and i hear that when used in Ga clay they wear the tines out quickly. And finally how big could i go I was thinking about a 6-7ft disc plow or a 5-6 ft tiller. Thanks for you thought and if you have any questions to better answer my question please let me know
Hey i will be adding sand and sawdust to keep some moisture and fluff in the soil and i understand it will re compact with time i expect to have to plow it every few rides. I have a sub soiler that can rip it down 2 feet or more but i do not understand how this would help the top 3-5 inches stay plowed. I understand clay has very little loamy properties i just want to know what device would work best to break it up a to a somewhat less rock hard surface, disc plow, tiller or other device. thanks

• ANSWER:
  I don't believe you can turn hard, clay soil into loamy soil with any tractor implement alone.
  You may be able to loosen it up temporarily, but not make it stay loose long-term.
  Loamy soil is made up of sand, silt, and clay, in relatively equal concentrations, but I suspect your hard clay soil is mostly just clay.

  Short of adding a lot of soil conditioners - sand and silt (organic matter) or gypsum, to your hard clay soil - and mixing it into the top foot or so of your clay soil by plowing, then disking or tilling, there is not much you can do to make your soil stay loamy or retain tilth (looseness).

  If you don't try adding the soil conditioners, then you should probably try a deep chisel plowing, if it's even possible to do that in your hard soil.
  Assuming it is, that will reach down about 2 feet deep and loosen up your soil deep down.

  Next I think I would plow, then disk your soil. Hope this helps..

  Edit: If you've got a heavy disk that will cut as deep as you want to go, that's what I'd use to work your soil conditioners into the ground. If you do not have that, I'd say use a tiller.
  The chisel plowing step was mentioned to make it easier to plow, disk, or till by cracking up the soil from the very top all the way down deep, and to make your soil have better drainage.

QUESTION:
What is value of toy farm implements?
I have some toy farm implements, truck, wagon, that were given to me in the early 1960's. I just wondered about their value now, as I may sell them...Included, toy farm truck, wagon, plow, spreader, baler, elevator ,and tractor, all are John Deere, McCormick and IH(international harvester) thanks for any replies.They are all stamped as "MAde in USA". and all moveable parts are working.

• ANSWER:
  True value is limited only to what another person is willing to pay to have them. That being said, the truest indicator of current value is to search completed auctions on ebay. I will say that old toys, from the 60's on back have the highest resale value and specialized items such as yours carry even more value on the secondary market.

QUESTION:
In the UK, what are the laws governing tractors on our roads.?
When do tractors have to have an escort. When travelling down narrow country roads, some only 16ft wide I am frequently coming almost face to face with tractors with twin wheels, carrying implements like ploughs or drills behind them. many do not have escorts and they take up almost all of the road forcing me to get onto the grass verge and try to wriggle by. Surely there must be some legal restriction to the width of these vehicles using our roads or the necessity for them to have some sort of escort. Please help me to clarify this situation before I end up getting hurt. Thank you.
Right to answer the idiots who have attempted to answer my question....first and foremost I am not a city dweller going out into the countryside for a jolly, i actually do live in the counrtyside, to those who think I do not accept the smell of horse and cow shit, plus the deposits of such on the road, rubbish i own four horses of my own, to those who think that i must drive at excessive speed, rubbish, as i live in the countryside I know full well what is a sensible speed to drive around in. To the idiot who thinks that just because Mr Farmer owns the land on either side of the road he is entitled to own the road as well, you are just an idiot. I bet you are someone who thinks you have a legal entitlement to park your car outside your own house, just because you own the house you think you own the road as well. I know full well that tractors over a certain width, when travelling on public roads have to have an escort, my question was hoping someone knew what these widths were. IDIOTS!

• ANSWER:
  Agricultural Vehicle Information...

  UK - England, Scotland & Wales

  http://www.johnexley.co.uk/agri.htm

QUESTION:
Looking for someone who manufactures replica steel tractor or implement seats.?

• ANSWER:
  Do you need them in quantity or just a few? I have a China source that makes them.

QUESTION:
good welding position?
hey all, i just graduated from high school with three years of shop class. I have been working at AGCO sunflower for about two months making around 14, with two more raises coming soon. I know how to stick weld, but I mig weld tractor implement frames, so I'm getting pretty good at it. just to give you an idea, I weld on 0k equipment, so i must be doing alright... I was wondering if anyone knows of any better paying jobs that don't require any previous experience. location is not really an issue, the more hours the better same with benefits. any info will be appreciated, thank you.

• ANSWER:
  look up welding companies in your area. you may be able to get into an apprenticeship arrangement with them. many industrial companies need welders

QUESTION:
i am looking to locate troy bilt lawn and garden tractors. and impletments?
front bumpers, lawn and garden implements for the troy bilt

• ANSWER:
  Lowe's usually sale Troy Bilt tractors and their implements.

QUESTION:
i want to make an spring puller, needs help...............?
u hv heard the name cultivators, it is an implement attached with tractors. during cultivation the springs get removed and it is very difficult for a single person to place it in a place. so i need idea to save man power and time

• ANSWER:
  There are many types of harrows.

  You can make a spike-tooth drag harrow yourself. Use railroad ties as the cross members, and run spikes through the ties. When you go to use it, add weight in the form of scrap concrete, cinder blocks, etc.

  You do NOT want to make a spring-tooth harrow. Just buy a used one. Farmers are switching to wider and wider bed preparation tools, so the narrow harrows go pretty cheap at farm auctions.

  If you want something with a 3-point hitch, you'll pay through the nose,. Normally, spring-tooth or spike-tooth harrows are dragged behind a disk harrow.

QUESTION:
Question about tractors and "live" PTO conversions.?
I have two tractors that I enjoy very much. One is a 1949 Farmall Cub, the other is a 1952 Farmall Super M.

The Cub has a Woods belly mower on it and I use that tractor to mow my lawn, pull trees and wood around, etc...

The Super M is a restoration project and is at my Dad's farm.

I want to have both of them run with live PTO. That is, when I push the clutch in or stop, the PTO keeps going.

For the Cub, when I get into thick grass I want to be able to slow down and let it keep "chewing".

For the Super M, even though its going to be a show tractor, I want to be able to rake and bale hay with it and our implements are all PTO operated (no wheel operated hay rakes).

So, whats the trick here? Is there a kit? Some parts I need to buy? Or do I just change the setup?

Please tell me the ins and outs of this, and if you have done it, on which tractor and how well does it work?
There is no way I'm going to sell my FARMALLs. They are family heirlooms.

• ANSWER:
  I'm not positive, but both tractors will be gear to gear. They have been designed to work the way they work, and no other way!!! Do they have hydralics? if so could you use a hydralic motor to drive the equipment? Sorry I can't be more help

QUESTION:
Do you argee with the "Least Harm" theory?
"Introduction

Although the debate over the moral status of animals has been going on for thousands of years (Shapiro, 2000), there has been a resurgence of interest in this issue in the last quarter of the 20th century. One of the landmark philosophical works of this period was the book by Regan (1983) called “A Case for Animal Rights.”

In that book, Regan concludes that animals do have moral standing, that they are subjects-of-a-life with interests that deserve equal consideration to the same interests in humans, and therefore have the right to live their lives without human interference. As a consequence, he concludes that humans have a moral obligation to consume a vegan (use no animal products) diet and eliminate animal agriculture.

However, production of an all vegan diet also comes at the cost of the lives of many animals, including mice, moles, gophers, pheasants, etc. Therefore, I asked Regan, “What is the morally relevant difference between killing a field mouse (or other animal of the field) so that humans may eat and killing a pig (or chicken, calf or lamb) for the same purpose? Animals must die so that humans may eat, regardless whether they eat a vegan diet or not. So, how are we to choose our food supply in a morally responsible manner?”

Regan’s response could be summarized by what may be called the “Least Harm Principle” or LHP (Regan, Personal Communication). According to LHP, we must choose the food products that, overall, cause the least harm to the least number of animals. The following analysis is an attempt to try to determine what humans should eat if we apply that principle.

Regan’s Vegan Conclusion is Problematic

I find Regan’s response to my question to be problematic for two reasons. The first reason is because it seems to be a philosophical slight of hand for one to turn to a utilitarian defense (LHP) of a challenge to his vegan conclusion which is based on animal rights theory. If the question, “What is the morally relevant difference?” can’t be supported by the animal rights theory, then it seems to me that the animal rights theory must be rejected. Instead, Regan turns to utilitarian theory (which examines consequences of one’s actions) to defend the vegan conclusion.

The second problem I see with his vegan conclusion is that he claims that the least harm would be done to animals if animal agriculture was eliminated. It may certainly be true that fewer animals may be killed if animal agriculture was eliminated, but could the LHP also lead to other alternative conclusions?

Would pasture-based animal agriculture cause least harm?

Animals of the field are killed by several factors, including:

1. Tractors and farm implements run over them.

2. Plows and cultivators destroy underground burrows and kill animals.

3. Removal of the crops (harvest) removes ground cover allowing animals on the surface to be killed by predators.

4. Application of pesticides.

So, every time the tractor goes through the field to plow, disc, cultivate, apply fertilizer and/or pesticide, harvest, etc., animals are killed. And, intensive agriculture such as corn and soybeans (products central to a vegan diet) kills far more animals of the field than would extensive agriculture like forage production, particularly if the forage was harvested by ruminant animals instead of machines. So perhaps fewer animals would be killed by producing beef, lamb, and dairy products for humans to eat instead of the vegan diet envisioned by Regan.

Accurate numbers of mortality aren’t available, but Tew and Macdonald (1993) reported that wood mouse population density in cereal fields dropped from 25/ha preharvest to less than 5/ha postharvest. This decrease was attributed to migration out of the field and to mortality. Therefore, it may be reasonable to estimate mortality of 10 animals/ha in conventional corn and soybean production.

There are 120 million ha of harvested cropland in the US (USDA, 2000). If all of that land was used to produce a plant-based diet, and if 10 animals of the field are killed per ha per year, then 10 x 120 million = 1200 million or 1.2 billion would be killed to produce a vegan diet.

If half of that land (60 million) was converted to forage production and if forage production systems decreased the number of animals of the field killed per year by 50% (5 per year per ha), the number of animals killed would be:

1. 60 million ha of traditional agriculture x 10 animals per ha = 0.6 billion animals killed.

2. 60 million ha of forage production x 5 animals of the field = 0.3 billion.

Therefore, in this hypothetical example, the change to include some forage-based animal agriculture would result in the loss of only 0.9 billion animals of the field instead of 1.2 billion to support a vegan diet. As a result, the LHP would suggest that we are morally obligated to consume a diet of ruminant products, not a vegan diet, because it would result
Sorry. Looks like the article was too long. Here's the link:

http://www.letstalkfarmanimals.ca/2009/07/13/least-harm-principle-suggests-meat-dairy-diet/

• ANSWER:
  I read this before based on a few links you posted that referred to it.
  The problems with it are:
  1. It is One article based on on pure speculation. The example is a postulation based on a hypothetical example. Additionally, the few references it has are incredibly biased ones which would be no different than if I wrote an article and used PETA as my references.
  2. It is not an actual scientific study - again - it is theoretical and hypothetical.
  3. It is based on numbers taken Once on one species of mice in One field at One point in time with One crop type and One amount of pesticides applied and One type/group of pesticides applied..etc..There are FAR too many variables to call that anything vaguely close to a representative sample.
  4. It clearly knows little about veganism as it states that 'corn and soy' are the basis of a vegan diet. Corn and soy make up a huge percent of the non-grass-fed cattle diet (which is what a Vast majority of the cattle people consume). Corn however has nothing to do with a vegan diet for pretty much all vegans and there are many vegans who avoid soy.
  5. This postulation also assumes that non-vegans consume no crops. And that all grain crops are being used to fed vegans. Meanwhile, as noted in point 4, 66% of US produced grain is used for animal feed (http://www.jhsph.edu/clf/PDF_Files/Susta…
  6. Additionally, it is based on the "hypothetical example" in which the animals are 100% grass fed. It doesn't in the slightest touch on the concept of 'do we have enough land to properly rotate and grass feed all cows' while continuing to sustain the level of meat consumed by the western animal protein based diet? Let alone the fact that 100% grass fed cows would not be as profitable to companies that are currently going on the 'get em big fast and give me my money' model. Less profits = not going to happen.
  7. It makes an assumption that vegans Have to have corn and soy. Aside from what I mentioned in #4, if the author were in fact truly concerned with the application of LHP, would the alternative not be to strive for a vegan diet that focused on fruits/nuts/vegetables with minimal consumption of crops that involve intensive machine-oriented cultivation? Would the author not propose (or even mention a vegan diet where the person grows most of their own food and supports their local small CSAs (which do a lot of sustainable, organic, hand cultivated production)? It strikes me that this author has no interest in LHP and is merely looking to promote meat/dairy consumption.
  8. It refers to pesticides as one of the killers and overlooks the fact that most vegans strive for Organic products as they cause less harm than pesticide laden ones.
  9. Between 1996-2006, 80% of the Amazon land that has been cleared by deforestation has been used to create cattle pastures. (http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0129-brazi… (And note - 70% of the soy grown goes to animal feed)). Even if this number were half of that - does wiping out the rainforest not have both immediate and residual impacts upon animal life? This too is completely overlooked in said article.

  I could go on, but in short, this is anything but a scientific study or as you like to say 'FACTS'. It is one persons brief theory of a possibility that is not very well thought out, nor is it inclusive of much of any (let alone All) of the variables.

  All we are trying to do is make choices in our lives that cause the least harm. We recognize that whether directly or indirectly, no one can be alive in this world and not take the lives of others (plant or animal). We also recognize that we have choices and as a result, we strive to make the choices that have the least impact possible.
  If in fact there was actual unbiased scientific proof that it would cause the least harm for us to eat grass fed cows and lettuce, many of us would do so. It would be hard at first, but many of us would. Given the ample variables that enter into the equation (such as land requirements to feed a growing population, the environmental degradation caused by livestock, etc etc), I don't see it happening - but if it did, there are a lot of vegans who would consume 100% grass-fed, Very Humanely treated, Properly killed beef.
  Thus again, we are making a Huge effort to do whatever we can to cause the least harm possible. Why is that so wrong? What is so horrible about that concept that seems to stir up the attack mode?

QUESTION:
Its on a fictional town named McMinden for my sociology class?
Fictional Narrative: Living in McMinden.

I’m a reporter for the Beacon-Register, writing a feature story about small town living. Today, I am walking around McMinden asking people to tell me a little about themselves and their lives here. First, let me describe the history and demographics of McMinden.

History and Demographics

McMinden is a small city in the farm belt, with a population of 20,000, along the Gilligan river. German immigrants began populating the Gilligan river valley beginning in the 1880’s, along with other white settlers moving west from Kentucky and Indiana, as well as a few black settlers from the South. The racial composition of the community has remained fairly steady over the past 130 years, except that there has been a significant increase in the Hispanic population over the past 25 years. As of the last census, the racial composition of the community breaks down as follows: 75% White; 12% Hispanic; 8% Black; 3% Native American; 2% Asian.

Twenty miles north of McMinden, there is a meat packing plant that employs a large work force, including many immigrant workers. There is also some light manufacturing which provides employment for unskilled workers. Given that McMinden is surrounded by farmland, there are quite a few businesses that provide agribusiness goods and services. For instance, there are dealerships for tractors and agricultural implements, chemical dealers, and grain storage facilities where farmers can sell commodity crops such as corn and wheat. Retail sales have always been a significant part of McMinden’s economy, as it serves as a regional center for commerce, drawing shoppers from smaller rural communities within a 70 mile radius. Some of that business has dried up, however, as adjoining areas have lost population. Yet business from workers at the packing plant makes up for those losses, so far.

The richest part of the town is a subdivision built around Lake Elmo. Most of the owners in the Lake Elmo district are bankers, business owners and professional people. A similar demographic also makes up the less ritzy district known as Apple Hill. The main part of the town is primarily middle class or working class, a mix of persons in various white collar, blue collar, retail, service and agribusiness employment. The oldest part of town, which lies north of the Gilligan river, is primarily blue collar, including a large number of people who work at the meat packing plant.

• ANSWER:
  Sounds like average American town today, but what are you to conclude from this

QUESTION:
Can I still use a soil plow and disc if hydraulics of tractor not good?
Do you absolutely need the hydraulic system to hitch and operate implements, espcially a plow for tilling and some kind of disc or cultivator?

• ANSWER:
  Not really. However you will have to do what the hydraulic system used to do. Like raise and lower implements. etc...

  But as long as any drive gears or anything that will cause problems or damage should be disconnected.

  Then give it all ya got Scotty..

QUESTION:
I am being fined the wrong amount on a seat belt violation. How do i get it fixed?
I was on my way to class the other day and was waiting for a red light to change when an officer asked me to pull over when the light changed green; mind you I had been at the red light for at least a minute or two before he hit his siren and tapped on my window. After we pulled into the parking lot of the nearby apartment complex, the officer cited me with a 3.00 seat belt violation, no other violations were mentioned what so ever.

I looked it up, and a seat belt violation for a driver in Florida is only supposed to cost .00 and they can only get you for the violation if they stop you for a different traffic violation first.

What can I do to argue this fine amount, either to get it thrown out entirely or at lest reduced. I don't mind paying but 3 is excessive especially since I am a poor college student.
"316.614 Safety Belt Usage

(1) This section may be cited as the "Florida Safety Belt Law."

(2) It is the policy of this state that enactment of this section is intended to be compatible with the continued support by the state for federal safety standards requiring automatic crash protection, and the enactment of this section should not be used in any manner to rescind or delay the implementation of the federal automatic crash protection system requirements of Federal Motor Safety Standard 208 as set forth in S4.1.2.1 thereof, as entered on July 17, 1984, for new cars.

(3) As used in this section:

(a) "Motor vehicle" means a motor vehicle as defined in s. 316.003 which is operated on the roadways, streets, and highways of this state. The term does not include:

1. A school bus.

2. A bus used for the transportation of persons for compensation.

3. A farm tractor or implement of husbandry.

4. A truck having a gross vehicle weight rating of more than 26,000 pounds.

5. A motorcycle, moped, or bicycle.

(b) "Safety belt" means a seat belt assembly that meets the requirements established under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, 49 C.F.R. s. 571.208.

(c) "Restrained by a safety belt" means being restricted by an appropriately adjusted safety belt which is properly fastened at all times when a motor vehicle is in motion.

(4) It is unlawful for any person:

(a) To operate a motor vehicle in this state unless each passenger and the operator of the vehicle under the age of 18 years is restrained by a safety belt or by a child restraint device pursuant to s. 316.613, if applicable; or

(b) To operate a motor vehicle in this state unless the person is restrained by a safety belt.

(5) It is unlawful for any person 18 years of age or older to be a passenger in the front seat of a motor vehicle unless such person is restrained by a safety belt when the vehicle is in motion.

(6)(a) Neither a person who is certified by a physician as having a medical condition that causes the use of a safety belt to be inappropriate or dangerous nor an employee of a newspaper home delivery service while in the course of his or her employment delivering newspapers on home delivery routes is required to be restrained by a safety belt.

(b) The number of front seat passengers of a pickup truck required to wear a safety belt pursuant to this section shall not exceed the number of safety belts which were installed in the front seat of such pickup truck by the manufacturer.

(c) An employee of a solid waste or recyclable collection service is not required to be restrained by a safety belt while in the course of employment collecting solid waste or recyclables on designated routes.

(d) The requirements of this section shall not apply to the living quarters of a recreational vehicle or a space within a truck body primarily intended for merchandise or property.

(7) It is the intent of the Legislature that all state, county, and local law enforcement agencies, safety councils, and public school systems, in recognition of the fatalities and injuries attributed to unrestrained occupancy of motor vehicles, shall conduct a continuing safety and public awareness campaign as to the magnitude of the problem and adopt programs designed to encourage compliance with the safety belt usage requirements of this section.

(8) Any person who violates the provisions of this section commits a non moving violation, punishable as provided in chapter 318. However, except for violations of s. 316.613 and paragraph (4)(a), enforcement of this section by state or local law enforcement agencies must be accomplished only as a secondary action when a driver of a motor vehicle has been detained for a suspected violation of another section of this chapter, chapter 320, or chapter 322.

(9) By January 1, 2006, each law enforcement agency in this state shall adopt departmental policies to prohibit the practice of racial profiling. When a law enforcement officer issues a citation for a violation of this section, the law enforcement officer must r
I called the county clerks office and it ends up that if you are given a seat belt violation in Tallahassee, Florida issued by a city cop, the fine IS 3.

http://www.clerk.leon.fl.us/sections/clerk_services/faqs/traffic/fines_list.pdf

• ANSWER:
  The statute you cited above is correct however Section 316.614(9) used to read in part;
  "as a secondary action when a driver of a motor vehicle has been detained for a suspected violation of another section of this chapter, chapter 320, or chapter 322."
  As of June 30, 2009, that section was removed and the seat belt law is now a primary offense, meaning a law enforcement officer can stop and cite you for not wearing a seat belt without having to witness another traffic violation.
  The dollars is the state fine however, counties and municipalities can add their own fines and court costs to the total.

QUESTION:
I am being fined the wrong amount on a ticket. How do i get it fixed?
I was on my way to class the other day and was waiting for a red light to change when an officer asked me to pull over when the light changed green; mind you I had been at the red light for at least a minute or two before he hit his siren and tapped on my window. After we pulled into the parking lot of the nearby apartment complex, the officer cited me with a 3.00 seat belt violation, no other violations were mentioned what so ever.

I looked it up, and a seat belt violation for a driver in Florida is only supposed to cost .00 and they can only get you for the violation if they stop you for a different traffic violation first.

What can I do to argue this fine amount, either to get it thrown out entirely or at lest reduced. I don't mind paying but 3 is excessive especially since I am a poor college student.
"316.614 Safety Belt Usage

(1) This section may be cited as the "Florida Safety Belt Law."

(2) It is the policy of this state that enactment of this section is intended to be compatible with the continued support by the state for federal safety standards requiring automatic crash protection, and the enactment of this section should not be used in any manner to rescind or delay the implementation of the federal automatic crash protection system requirements of Federal Motor Safety Standard 208 as set forth in S4.1.2.1 thereof, as entered on July 17, 1984, for new cars.

(3) As used in this section:

(a) "Motor vehicle" means a motor vehicle as defined in s. 316.003 which is operated on the roadways, streets, and highways of this state. The term does not include:

1. A school bus.

2. A bus used for the transportation of persons for compensation.

3. A farm tractor or implement of husbandry.

4. A truck having a gross vehicle weight rating of more than 26,000 pounds.

5. A motorcycle, moped, or bicycle.

(b) "Safety belt" means a seat belt assembly that meets the requirements established under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, 49 C.F.R. s. 571.208.

(c) "Restrained by a safety belt" means being restricted by an appropriately adjusted safety belt which is properly fastened at all times when a motor vehicle is in motion.

(4) It is unlawful for any person:

(a) To operate a motor vehicle in this state unless each passenger and the operator of the vehicle under the age of 18 years is restrained by a safety belt or by a child restraint device pursuant to s. 316.613, if applicable; or

(b) To operate a motor vehicle in this state unless the person is restrained by a safety belt.

(5) It is unlawful for any person 18 years of age or older to be a passenger in the front seat of a motor vehicle unless such person is restrained by a safety belt when the vehicle is in motion.

(6)(a) Neither a person who is certified by a physician as having a medical condition that causes the use of a safety belt to be inappropriate or dangerous nor an employee of a newspaper home delivery service while in the course of his or her employment delivering newspapers on home delivery routes is required to be restrained by a safety belt.

(b) The number of front seat passengers of a pickup truck required to wear a safety belt pursuant to this section shall not exceed the number of safety belts which were installed in the front seat of such pickup truck by the manufacturer.

(c) An employee of a solid waste or recyclable collection service is not required to be restrained by a safety belt while in the course of employment collecting solid waste or recyclables on designated routes.

(d) The requirements of this section shall not apply to the living quarters of a recreational vehicle or a space within a truck body primarily intended for merchandise or property.

(7) It is the intent of the Legislature that all state, county, and local law enforcement agencies, safety councils, and public school systems, in recognition of the fatalities and injuries attributed to unrestrained occupancy of motor vehicles, shall conduct a continuing safety and public awareness campaign as to the magnitude of the problem and adopt programs designed to encourage compliance with the safety belt usage requirements of this section.

(8) Any person who violates the provisions of this section commits a non moving violation, punishable as provided in chapter 318. However, except for violations of s. 316.613 and paragraph (4)(a), enforcement of this section by state or local law enforcement agencies must be accomplished only as a secondary action when a driver of a motor vehicle has been detained for a suspected violation of another section of this chapter, chapter 320, or chapter 322.

(9) By January 1, 2006, each law enforcement agency in this state shall adopt departmental policies to prohibit the practice of racial profiling. When a law enforcement officer issues a citation for a violation of this section, the law enforcement officer must

• ANSWER:

QUESTION:
Is there any unselfish reason to have a child now? Food stocks mushroomed after 1900 with oil-powered tractors?
, electric implements, rail transport (coal, then diesel), refrigeration (electric) etc.

Before these cataclysmic shifts, fewer than 1,500,000,000 ppl could even EAT!

Through the chapter of their existence, mass-quantities of cheap food (made possible by cheap oil) tricked 5 generations (now totaling nearly 7 Billion) into assuming that food is no problem. We'll never have too little.

To a reasonable extent, only:
- I know farms.
- I know farming.
- I know fuel.

Marine Corps officers (typically very conservative) delivered a lecture in the late eighties to the members of my squadron detailing how the cost of protecting those crucial shipping lanes (that bring foreign oil to the U.S.) is no lower than per *Gallon!* and often more than per GALLON.

Our secretive government has, for years, paid this anti-free-market cost by spending in deficit.

Fact is this: Once the oil is most certainly not cheap, food-availability is shot. Call it a distant memory.

Inevitably, then, that newly acquired 5.5 billion will be eating 2 X 4's. Which means they'll have nothing to eat. That they'll most likely starve.

We Conservatives had a chance to show where we really shine - thinking independently and finding solutions to problems, demanding free-markets, ending subsidies (including this /gallon of gas military assistance), preserving the wisdom of our ancestors (Henry Ford hated gasoline and insisted on ethanol, which his cars burned so efficiently as to make modern cars look bad), giving it the "old College Try".

Enter Al "I am God and my love of self is justified" Gore and his "I can't view my Tooth" mocumentary.

He vilified all who were not mindless supporters of his party. I dare say he even went on an anti-hunger strike - eating caviar and donuts non-stop until the entire world became clintonites.

Suffice it to say that, after that TP-toss, few conservatives could stomach the idea of doing good if it meant disintegrating the reasons behind having Gore committed.

.So, then, back to the question. With no one really to blame, how can one justify adding natural, real humans into the mix at a time when very genuine concerns for availability of affordable food are looming?

...

• ANSWER:

QUESTION:
Recommendations for cleaning up 65 acres of overgrown forest?
I just purchased 110 acres in Western Washington.

45 acres is beautiful level pasture. 65 acres is forest heavily overgrown with scrub trees, brush, blackberries etc., and has varying degrees of slope from gentle to steep.

Do you have any equipment recommendations for cleaning this up? I want to leave the timber and pretty much remove everything else.

General purpose tractor? John Deere? Recommended type and brand of implements?

Bobcat T300? Recommended implements?

Has anyone ever used a Fecon Bullhog? Is this overkill? Is there a more suitable implement for cleaning up blackberries and light brush?

Thank you in advance for any guidance you can provide.

• ANSWER:
  I would actually recommend goats.

  I don't know your plans for the land but it you we're planning on farming goats would be great to start with. Goats are extremely destructive and are well suited towards that type of work. They would destroy all brush and shrubs within reach. They would even munch on the grass and smaller plants somewhat. When all done, the goats could be sold, butchered or kept.

  Goats would be considerably less expensive that power equipment. The goats would appreciate (increase in value) while providing a service while the machinery would depreciate (decrease in value) over time. Also, the machinery seems like a large investment for a one time use machine.

QUESTION:
during my husband's recent very life threatening illness, his parents started a war!, what would you do?
while he was still in the hospital, his parents took care of my son. the one rule we gave them other than basic instructions (like he's lactose intolerant, so don't give him milk...etc) was that he wasn't allowed on their tractor w/ running implements on the back, i.e. "no baling hay w/ my 2 year old on the tractor". well, while my husband was recovering, they called the hospital and his dad said, "Hey, guess what I did?" and told me he'd put my son on the tractor while baling hay. i remained calm, but said i was disappointed they'd done it and for them not to do it again. this incident came after my husband had been in a coma for a month and had recently woken up...i didn't have the energy to turn it into a fight, and i didn't want my husband to know because the added stress could have hurt him. well, when my inlaws came to visit w/ my son, my father in law yelled at me in the parking lot, cussed me while holding my son, saying i didn't trust him. i calmly took my son and
left. i went to their house to retrieve his things, and got a hotel room for the remainder of my husbands hospital stay, and my close friend flew in from FL to watch my son so that i could be w/ my husband. now this all could have been resolved, but while i was with my son at the hotel, my inlaws started telling my husband i'd been mistreating my son (the example they gave was that i'd given him two rolls when we went out to dinner) and that i had been disagreeble to them so my father in law had had to have a talk w/ me (lying, because he'd just yelled at me) well, i told my husband what had happened because he got mad at me for taking my son from them because they'd made it sound like i just did it to be mean. my husband was released a week later, and only heard from his parents when he had enough strength to call them himself. when he recovered, he went to their house to get the rest of my son's things a few months later (we'd had 2 phone calls since last we saw them)
they told my husband that among other things, i'd partied the entire time he was in his coma, that i mistreated my son and he needed to "watch me" meaning they thought i would abuse him very badly (i was sexually and physically abused as a child and they believe anyone who was abused will abuse) they told him that i was inappropriate w/ my father in law because during a buffet line, i'd brought him some silverware. (that is actually the example they gave to mean i was hitting on him) they told him i wouldn't listen to any of the doctors, that i was overly upset, yet not upset enough.

okay, this has been long enough, and this is just the tip of the horrible things they told him. my husband is very sad because he has lost his whole family. i know what it's like to lose family, and i don't want that for him, especially in his current condition. it's been almost six months, and we havent' heard from them except once and that was to call and gripe at us. what should we do?
my husband is very angry w/ them and told them if they couldn't respect his family then we'd have nothing more to do with them. one of the biggest problems is that our two year old loves them very much and misses them. they were told they could still call and talk to him so that he wouldn't be so upset, but they've ignored him through christmas and his birthday.
also they have a 265 acre farm they told my husband he'd get no part of w/ me around. he told them they could have it and he'd get his own farm, because his family came first.
any ideas on why they would choose this time to do this?
i promise this is the last detail i know i am not perfect. I did grow up in a very abusive household though, and learned very quickly how to keep a cool head in rough situations. i know it sounds like i'm icing my side of it, but i swear this is how it happened. it's just absolutely insane i struggled a long time for normalcy in my life, and thought his parents were the type of grandparents my son could really get close to. they treated him like gold for a long time (in fact my father in law is a preacher) they have always treated my husband badly (for example, he's a very talented engineer, and they said he could never make it as one) but as far as my role in this, i don't like them, and i now don't think i can ever regain anything more than the civility you'd show a stranger, but my husband, even though he made the right decision is still hurt because this is his family, and they once were very close.

• ANSWER:
  Tell your father in law that you make the rules and if he every yells like that again, you'll get a restraining order, and his visitation with your son will be ZERO. End of story. Putting a 2 yr old on a tractor is dangerous, and if he wants to take chances with someone's kids, then he needs to go make one of his own, adopt, or otherwise. It's probably child endangerment even. What an idiot. Does your husband know now? Does he have an opinion?

  Well, looking at the rest of it now, looks like your husband agrees with you and he should. First, your inlaws are manipulative. Second, they can't be trusted to follow your instructions. Third, they callously used your son against you. Fourth, they lie....they LIE. You can't deal with that when you have a real issue going on (like your husband's health). Fifth, they don't deserve any more chances at all. Look, they lied to you when they said they'd follow the rules. Then they lied to your husband about what's going on. Compare your respective behaviors...they think you giving your son an extra roll is worse than them putting a 2 yr old on a baling tractor. Sounds like they have a screw loose.

  They are right, you don't trust them and for good reason. You can't believe them. If your husband can deal with it, then shut them out. Really. I'd feel different if this wasn't child safety...but they care more about their own egos than they do about your son, their son, your marrage or the truth. Losers. Dump them.

  The deeper question that you and your husband have to answer is, do you want this influence in your child's life? Is it worth it? Silverware as a come-on? Sounds like an old man desperate to feel that he's still "got it". Sounds like a danger sign from every single angle. I know it's hard. I had to break from my family as well...it wasn't permanent, but it also has never been the same...but it was either that, or let them barge into my life, my marriage, my family, and run things the way they wished. It meant putting MY life on hold to satisfy what THEY wanted. It meant not HAVING a life of my own. No way.

  These folks sound seriously disturbed. Accusations of abuse, philandering, partying, child abuse, etc....they have all the hallmarks of a toxic family. I have been where your husband is now. It's not easy, but you can make new family. Cherish your own family. Make friends. Forge forward. He'll get pressure from siblings...he'll get pressure from aunts and uncles (if he has any of these relatives)...but, they don't have to deal with the mess, you guys do. You have to be firm, and you have to maintain your right to do as you wish and have your wishes respected. And you have to be able to say "this is the line, and if you cross it, there are consequences". These people are acting like spoiled children. You don't need them.

  by the way...I grew up completely without grandparents...and I'm fine. Don't let anyone use that argument, either. You don't need some mean old man putting ideas into your child's head about you either....and you can be guaranteed, if he'll do that with your husband, he'll have no problem with your son. I would NOT make phone calls available. He'll soon get used to it, and he'll move on. He'll, in fact, forget. That's ok. It is extremely difficult, but you will find that he'll eventually stop thinking of them. And that's good. Extending this contact sounds like it would be very ill advised...and they sound looney.

  Lastly...good for you husband. Those were my exact words. If you can't respect my rules, you aren't welcome in my home or in my family. They didn't respect them, so they weren't welcome. You have to be that way. You and your son ARE his family...I'm glad he realizes it.

QUESTION:
How does the engine of a Pasquali walking tractor link to the drive unit of the rotovator?
I had to send my Pasquali walking tractor for service. For ease of transport I disconnected the rotovator. On return of the unit I seem to be missing the connection that drives the rotovator unit. When the engine is turning without the rotovator connected I can see the drive mechanism turning but I now don't seem to have a link between the drive mechanism and the rotovator. Can anyone tell me what the connecting implement should look like.
Thanks.

• ANSWER:
  you might be missing a CV joint or a prop shaft

QUESTION:
In the market for an implement trailer, any suggestions?
I am looking at a Donahue Implement trailer like this: http://www.donahue-trailers.com/implement.html .

I am using it for a side-dress tool bar that attaches to a three-point. I don't want to drag a tractor or a fork lift, and I want it highway legal.

Any other ideas?
Any companies out west?

• ANSWER:
  There's an implement trailer made that is better than a Donahue. It's called a self loading implement trailer and will take any 3pt hitch implement lift it, and turn it sideways to be transported. No need to drag along a tractor or forklift, the trailer has it's own motor to power the hydrolics. I'm not sure where to get them though but I've seen one or two around here I'll have to ask and see.

QUESTION:
give examples of rural environment of wasting their money on court cases and lavish marriage expenses......?
give examples of rural environment of wasting their money on court cases and lavish marriage expenses instead of buying better implements for cultivation like investing in tractor ,tube well etc

• ANSWER:
  In America or elsewhere? I know of no cases of rural farmers in third world countries "wasting" their money on court cases. I'm sure there are some, but I'm not aware of them. In terms of marriage ceremonies and celebration expenses, the best example is probably in India, where families buy gold for the bride.

  In Kenya, farmers will frequently slaughter a goat and send it home with a visitor just for visiting, and celebrations like a marriage or graduation may require multiple slaughtered goats. A lot of farmers can't afford that type of expense but they feel they must do it anyway due to social norms. Whether that is "wasting their money" I can't say, but it certainly hurts their ability to invest in their own farms at times.

QUESTION:
I-Given the traditional way in which the tractor market is segmented, what scope do you think there is for us?
The David Brown Company has roots in and around Huddersheld, West Yorkshire. It was at one time best known for the production of high quality gears for use in machinery in a variety of industries. Later, David Brown, the proprietor, was associated with Aston Martin, the world-famous manu¬facturer of sports car saloons. The David Brown Company’s talents, however, were more widely based and it developed expertise in producing agricultural tractors.

The agricultural tractor market is typical of most automotive markets. The majority of sales for products are achieved in export markets throughout the world. The geographic dispersal of markets leads auto¬matically to some form of geographic segmentation. This sometimes disguises the fact that it is the end-use to which the tractors are put, rather than the geographic area itself, which creates the market segmentation. For example, the Canadian and Italian markets are clearly geographically distinct markets, but each of which has a preference for a distinct type of agricultural tractor. The Canadian market requires especially powerful tractors, capable of operating on the prairies with maximum efficiency. In the wine-growing areas of Italy, however, narrow track, low horsepower tractors are required.

David Brown Tractors produces a number of different sized models of varying horsepower capacity. The more powerful tractors are naturally physically larger than the smaller horsepower tractors. Size of tractor required is also associated with the size of fields that tractors have to plough and the number and size of implements which they have to drive, as well as the nature of the terrain which they have to work. Different horsepower tractors, with varying sizes of tracks, are suitable for different uses.

While end-use is clearly the dominant way in which the tractor market is segmented, the market is not without its quirks. The David Brown tractor is very distinctive compared with competitors’ product. The David Brown tractor is white in colour, and considered ‘the white Mercedes of the corn¬fields’. Another interesting point is that despite the obviously utilitarian nature of the agricultural tractor in most world markets many farmers’ exhibit great pride in their ‘iron horses’. It is just as much a status symbol to have a brand new large horsepower tractor parked in full view of neighbours in the farmyard, as it is to have a new Mercedes parked on the drive of a suburban house
II.What other bases of market segmentation do you think agricultural tractor manufacturers could employ?III.Gears are sold to a large number of firms operating in many different industries. What do you consider to be suitable methods for segmenting theses markets?

• ANSWER:
  1 - scope is still great. try china market. tractors there dont last 10years. they always admire german, british, european and western products.
  2 - agricultural produce, physical landscape, terrain, choice of individual farmers. use those who have it to talk about it. advertizement.
  3 gears may need to be reconfigured to suit terrain, power etc? invent a new gear or modify it. show new performance for italian or canadian farms
  ??

QUESTION:
What do you use to clean your tractor? Do you clean your bull with it too?
Yesterday I caught my prize bull drinking some of the industrial solvent I use to clean my tractors -- dihydrogen monoxide, and, remembering the unfortunate incident with solubull, I rushed him to the vet. Unbeatabull seems fine now, but I'm taking no chances.
As you know, dyhydrogen monoxide is a major constituent of acid rain, and prolonged exposure to it's solid form will cause severe tissue damage. That and the increasing scarcity of this solvent has led me to look for more viable options.

What do you guys use to clean your farming implements that's bull safe?
He's second generation, the offspring of Unbeatabull and Impregnabull, I believe.

• ANSWER:
  Yes dihydrogen monoxide is certainly a major constituent of acid rain , however recent research has shown that it is in fact harmless and it is the various sulfhates and sulphides in the acid rain that are the problem. Having said that dihydrogen monoxide by itself is not an efficient cleaner it works much better if a little detergent is added. Ordinary dishwashing detergent will suffice in a ratio of 5% for normal levels of grime or 10% for very dirty tractors. Dihydrogen monoxide it must be remembered has life supporting capabilities and even though often in short supply and likely to become increasingly expensive every effort must be made to obtain adequate supplies of this vital liquid..Although I hardly ever wash my bulls when I do I always use dihydrogen monoxide and so sure am I of it's safety that I even use it to wash myself.

QUESTION:
Can I sue my neighbor if he ruin my dog?
Well you see the neighbor was burning some trash and it sort of got out of hand and catches the other neighbors garage on fire. This is the same garage where his new John Deer tractor was. So the neighbor #2 sees his garage and new John Deer tractor on fire and he freaks out, goes in his house and comes out with a 12ga. Shotgun and shoots neighbor # 1. It doesn’t kill him it only hits him in a few places, most notably 2 buckshot that went through his left ear. They get in a fistfight, rolling around on the ground like two little boys. Neighbor # 1's wife gets a water hose to put out the fire but ended up hosing down both neighbors like two dogs making love. Neighbor # 2's wife comes running out of the house with a bucket of water but slips in the mud and pours most of the water on neighbor #1' wife. She thinks it was done on purpose and turns the hose on neighbor #2's wife. While they are all playing in the mud the garage and the new John Deer tractor burns down. This lights off a bottle of gas that looked like the best fireworks ever, only it lands behind my house and catches a grass field on fire. Finally someone in the next county sees the smoke and calls the fire dept. The fire dept. had a flat on the way to the seen and had to send there crew in on foot. So we all took shovels and rakes and other implements of destruction and put out the fire. Well you see all that smoke from the fire has ruin “Old Blue” my best coon dog. That poor old dog breathed so much smoke that when he farts he blows smoke rings and I was just wandering if I could sue somebody for that sort of thing and would you sue neighbor #1 or neighbor #2.?

• ANSWER:
  Sue your dog for causing you an unnecessary anxiety every time it farts. All dogs have a natural fear of fire and this dog didn't get out of the way of the smoke. Is his nose still wet?

QUESTION:
Men, Is my husband being selfish?
In the last 3 years, I have sat back and watched my husband buy 2 tractors, a 660 4-wheeler, a trencher, 56 acres of land, an F-350 truck, a combine, several farm implements that I can't even name, a few trailors, and there is probably more that I can't think of right now. He always has the money for his projects. However, when there is a project I'd like to work on at home, he never has the time nor the money to do it. I've been asking him since we have been together to finish the baseboards in our home. That was 3 years ago. They haven't been touched. I work full time, and so does he. He has a part-time business and says all of this equipment he has bought can be written off. Maybe so. All I know is that in the last 3 years, we have taken the kids on one day trip to an amusement park and that was only because he had to go to that town anyway to pickup one of his "business purchases". We have been to the movies only once. Am I being selfish?

• ANSWER:
  I would not say that your husband is being selfish, but rather he is self absorbed in what he thinks is important. So many times, men will (and women can do this too) put all their effort into what they think is best providing for their family, forgetting that what the family really needs is the daddy/husband. It is great to have a business and make it go and all that, but so many times the cost in lost time with the family and tending to the things at home is too high. Sounds like you need to sit him down and tell him how complete focus on his work and business is hurting you and the kids, sometimes all it takes is to point it out.

QUESTION:
Making zerk fittings stay in place?
This is for a disk, an implement that is towed behind a tractor to till the ground. It has 16 disks, and 16 zerk fittings. The holes for the zerks are in the axle bearing housings. The housings are cast. The holes are not threaded, and they are more than 3/16" in diameter, but I can not put a 1/4" drill bit in them. The closest zerks that I can find are 3/16" In the past, I had to cut a little piece of copper wire to put in the hole with the zerk and then pound it in. But they still come out. What's another way of keeping them in place? Could I tack weld them in place? I can pick the fittings up with a magnet.

• ANSWER:

QUESTION:
Does yahoo have a third party escrow setup from western union?
Overview : 2004 John Deere 5420 4WD Tractor with 22' Load Trail trailer/all implements

Dear customer,

After verifying the trustworthiness of the seller and the availability of the Vehicle for immediate shipping, we have approved your buy it now transaction and offered you, as the buyer, full purchase protection for the amount you agreed on with the seller.

The seller ***** ****** ****, started the transaction over the Yahoo U.S. Army Service & Safety Service. Yahoo requires the payment to be done through wire transfer service to a Yahoo verified agent.

You are receiving this e-mail because you are going to buy a vehicle and your seller requested to use Yahoo U.S. Army Service & Safety Service. The Yahoo U.S. Army Service & Safety Service offers a set of services that build protection into every step of the vehicle buying process. Some of the elements are automatically included when you buy a vehicle covered by the program element (not all elements are available for all vehicles) while some of the elements are available for a small fee. The Yahoo U.S. Army Service & Safety Service Program is your safety net in the rare circumstance that something goes wrong.

Is this real?

• ANSWER:

QUESTION:
Do I need a thermostat for my Ford 2000 diesel tractor? The owners manual say yes. Tractor dealership said no.?
My Ford 2000 tractor overheated. Once it cooled down it started and I moved it into my workshop to check it out.
When consulting the dealership, the owner said I did not need the thermostat but my manual says "IMPORTANT: Do not remove and discard the thermostat in an attempt to improve the cooling. This will cause the engine to run below normal working temps resulting in excessive engine wear.
I have done a complete maintenance update..oil change, oil filter, flushed coolant system and added new coolant, belt, replaced radiator and air breather hoses, cleaned oil bath air filter system, changed fuel filter, added a diesel injector cleaner to fuel, changed starter and solenoid ... but I left the thermostat out because I was told to by the dealer. He said I only needed it if I had a cab to heat.
I am not a beginner mechanic. I'm not looking for an obvious answer such as "Of course you need the thermostat, it keeps your engine at it's optimum operating level." I know what a thermostat is for, what it does and how it works.
I'm trying to figure out if the dealer told me I didn't need it so I wouldn't put it back in which would cause problems that he could charge me for if I gave up and had them "fix" it. I hate thinking someone would do that but I have to consider all of the possible solutions.
Currently, my tractor takes forever to start and I have to jump start it because the battery dies from trying to start it so many times. The battery on it is a car battery. I'm saving up for a new battery. (yes, I know a diesel tractor motor needs more cranking power than a car but a new battery is between 0-0)
Usually takes 20-30 minutes of turning it over to get it to start. Once started, it idles oddly, as if someone is revving it up every few seconds. It will run ok without any implements attached to PTO but it died yesterday after bush-hogging for only 15-20 minutes. It also does not have the power that it had before it overheated. If it was a gas engine, I would think it was running with too much air.
I got it started again last night and after driving it for awhile it started up easily every time I shut it off and restarted it. I haven't tried it today yet?
The tractor is an early 1970's model and has not been maintained for years. When I moved back to my farm and got it running, it spewed up a black liquid (carbon) out of the exhaust for a few days then stopped. It is now spewing up the black liquid again.
A knowledgeable serious answer would be much appreciated.
I'd be happy to exchange emails with someone who knows or has a good educated guess as to the problem.

• ANSWER:
  Know the tractor well, 70s would make it a 3 cyl if I'm not mistaken, and I'm usually not, the reason its hard to start and spewing black crap is the head gasket is blown, and if I'm not mistaken you'll notice there's no glow plugs, meaning start up relies entirely on compression. its not a very hard or expensive fix, and a very common occurrence with the old Fords, as far as a thermostat if you plan to run the crap out of it say with a rotory mower or disking you'll actually cause it to get hot as the radiator cant keep up with the flow, seen that one a few times as the thermostats fail on those things quite frequently also and the owner removes it and calls me out or brings it in complaining it gets hot. its actually a very popular little tractor here in Northern CA. seems every vineyard has one. and we just happen to be the Ford New Holland dealer repair shop in the area.

QUESTION:
Impact Wrench wanted for very occasional work on wheels and tractor parts.?
I change 20 wheels a year (summer to winter and back again) on a car and a light truck (Ford Transit) and occasionally undo stuck nuts on agricultural implements such as harrows if a tooth needs replacing, etc.

I have a compressor, no idea of cfm or tank volume at the moment but it is on wheels and there is no way I can lift it on my own, although two people would manage easily.

The thing is I can get a cheap 1/2" impact wrench with a variety of sockets, but then I would have to lug the compressor around to wherever it is being used. I have a big yard and the compressor stays in a heated space. That's the other thing, when the compressor is cold it always throws the fuses when first starting and I am forever moving it morning and night, front and back from, warm space to outside working area.

Would it therefore be better to look at electrically driven (240V ac) or battery impact wrenches? If so what could you recommend? The compressed air impact wrench is 30€ (£25) new so any other option would have to be pretty cheap.

Thanks in advance.

• ANSWER:
  Depends on your budget. All the big specialty tool makers have a line of electric impact wrenches. I personally find SnapOn to have the best battery life, although even those are low, at best.

  http://buy1.snapon.com/catalog/item.asp?P65=yes&tool=power&item_ID=89671&group_ID=24645&store=snapon-store&dir=catalog

  This is their best product at the moment, 400 ft-lbs constant with 640 ft-lbs burst. My air gun is a bit more powerful, and struggles at times with really stubborn nuts, but if you crack these nuts every year, there shouldn't be a problem.

  They are all quite pricey, no matter who you buy from, but bear in mind that you get what you pay for, when it comes to tools. Not to mention you will be the envy of all your mechanically inclined friends.

QUESTION:
What would be a good job for me?
My name is nick. I've been trying to find a job that would fit me and my lifestyle. So I decided to ask the question of what job others think may be a good one for me.

Im twenty two years old.

I've traveled all over the world. Since my father was in the military.

I've spent three years in college.

I worked as a pool manger for a total of three years.

I've played the trumpet for six years.

I enjoy skydiving.

I am extremely computer savvy.

I am an experienced outdoors survival enthusiast.

I have attended professional driving school.

As well as the John o. Mosley school of leadership.

I can build nearly anything using a hammer rope and a knife. Case and point. Built a porchswing set.

I have perfect vision. 10/20.

I have an amazing ability to talk to people and relate to them.

I've worked for the military as a naf employee for a total of five years.

I like to have a good time with friends.

I can completely disassemble an engine and put it back together in working order.

I am an orv enthusiast. Including fourwhelers and dirt bikes.

I don't have a car.

I've been to every contry in Europe except for Portugal and Greece.

I have worked as an business end user care representative for two and a half years.

I can instal any sort of electrical device. Tv DVD player. subs. Speakers. Electric motors You name it.

I can built anything that has instructions and many things that don't.

I've designed built and implemented a full size bridge on the farm that spans a twenty five foot span that is used by our tractors and combines.

I am extremely well organized.

Ive moved every three years of my life to a new place.

I'm well traveled and can become accustom to new surrounding fast.

I enjoy hunting.

I've helped built a house from nothing. Including the ordering of materials. Pouring concrete. Erecting walls. And installation of electrical and plumbing.

If you have any ideas let me know. And I'm avail. for work if you have an opening.

• ANSWER:

QUESTION:
Would you like to see this program implemented to end the unemployment rate?
A job voucher that would end unemployment rate in the United States. The food stamp program ended starvation in the United States. The job voucher would end unemployment. Now, the food stamp program didn't end hunger or poverty. The job voucher wouldn't be a means to end hunger or poverty either, but it would accomplish the end of the unemployment rate.

Basically, how I would imagine it would work is, people would go to Social Services and sign up. Must not be employed by a business. You will get minimum wage and 40 hours a week. You will work at a business in a job for two weeks, then you will move on. This would prevent businesses from taking advantage of free labor. If you want to keep someone that does a really good job, then you must hire them. This would create more experience for people that would increase their talents and marketability the economic environment.

How would this be paid for? Well, since there would be no unemployment or unemployed anymore, there would be no need for an unemployment office. Since people would be making minimum wage and getting 40 hours a week, there would be huge cuts in the food stamp program. There would be huge cuts in food pantries as more people would be more financially self-sufficient (there income would be too high (especially for a single person to qualify for food pantries and food stamps). There would be less people that would qualify for Medicaid. There would be less people that would qualify for housing assistance. There would be less people that would qualify for energy assistance. There would huge cuts to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) as they would be signed up for the job voucher.

I just don't see how something like this could fail. Of course, they would be subjected to the same level of job security as everybody else in terms of work hard at that particular job for two weeks. If you don't work hard, then you will be sent home with less hours on your paycheck. So it isn't a guaranteed 40 hours a week, but if you work hard, you will get 40 hours. But no more than 40 hours at minimum wage. That would be the incentive to want to try to get a higher wage job. No advancement in pay what-so-ever. You get experience that will allow you to compete in the rigorous employment market to land those higher than minimum wage jobs.

It just seems like to me it would be a huge win-win for the United States, because one could learn how to operate a tractor for two week and have that experience put on the resume. Or, they could learn how to load steers up in trailer and sell them at an auction. They could learn how to do anything that anybody needs to have done and the United States would once again have everybody being very skilled.

Should I have been a politician?
I just wanted to add that instead of giving Anthony Weiner 1.2 million dollars or whatever the amount was. I would have told him to go to Social Service and sign-up for a job voucher. That job voucher would have been less expensive than that 1.2 million dollar check, so see, the job voucher would save a ton of money. Anthony Weiner admitted that he couldn't resign from being a politician, because he didn't have any marketability skills that could land him a job. The job voucher would fix that for him. He would get a job voucher from Social Services and build a huge array of experience and would become a very skilled future worker.
JoeBob: read my post. There would be huge cuts to social service to implement this program. There would be huge cuts to government assistance. There would be huge cuts to food pantries as the demand for their services would be down greatly because of a lack of people that qualifies to get a bag of groceries. The cost of homeless shelters would go down and wouldn't need to be funded as much as they are needing to funded now. They could also look at eliminating all tax deductions and credit and exchange that out with an unemployment rate free nation.
Nomad: So are you saying that temp agencies are highly inefficient? The job assignments last anywhere from 2 weeks to the most 6 weeks, then they let them go and let the temp agencies find another employment opportunity. Wouldn't it be better to allow every unemployed person to earn minimum wage and get 40 hours if they worked hard, learn skills, so they could eventually be qualified for higher waged jobs. Two weeks may not sound like a lot, but if in two weeks, one person could break into an apartment complex and strip the apartment complex bare from all of it goods and luxuries. That is a lot of accomplished work.
I just want to add. I did some calculations. This program would tax the paychecks that the job vouchers provided. So it would cost .5 trillion dollars a year to implement this, but the government (state and federal) would receive 312 billion dollars in tax revenue. I just figure up the gross income times 20 percent. I also used approximated figuring. But right now, government assistance can't be taxed. So through my eyes, I'm seeing a win-win situation. Maybe businesses don't need help, but their will come a day when they need someone that is experience and don't feel like training someone.

I think it should be encouraged to find employers that are needing help instead of using the job voucher at McDonalds or Wal-Mart. I think fast food chains or Wal-Mart and other big retail box stores shouldn't be allowed to participate in the job voucher program. Maybe as part of a participation in the job voucher program, a person needs to show that they are applying at Wal-Mart and Mc

• ANSWER:
  who would pay for it ? are u saying the gov. would pay or should the business pay even though they don't need the help

QUESTION:
Can you still drive farm equipment with a revoked illinois driver's license?

• ANSWER:
  As long as you're not on a public road, ever. Sure.

  And driving on the shoulder, still counts. As long as you're operating them on your own property, no license needed.

QUESTION:
can you drive farm equipment such as tractors in Illinois without a drivers license?

• ANSWER:
  On private property you can drive anything. On the road, nah.

QUESTION:
Offended by Trespassing Signs?
So in the South, here, they drive around, farming, with this really antiquated farm equipment.

In Illinois, where I used to live, we think antique tractors are cool.

So, where I live now, there's always this super-cool, old tractor in this field by this road. I thought I would stop and take pictures of it and email them to an old-tractor friend (and his antique tractor club) back home.

I pulled up to this tractor in my glaring white mini-van (the tractor was parked/deserted in a little copse of trees), and took pictures of it. I didn't touch a thing. I left a note under the seat cushion with my name and number, explaining what I had done and why.

Now, there are like 50 no trespassing signs nailed up on the trees that face the road. It totally infuriates me whenever I drive by. My husband laughs and says that I broke the law, and that that (apparently crotchety old) farmer has every right to be irritated.

I say he's an ass. What's the big deal? What if I want to take pictures of dilapidated tobacco drying houses (or whatever they are), and now I'm hesitant?

Is it necessary to ask permission for stuff like that? No one's ever wanted to take pictures of my old crap, but, if they did, I don't think I would care.

• ANSWER:
  taking a picture from the road is fine, but going on the property and leaving your name and number was just wrong, you should have know better.
  People are very private, especially in the South and West, if you would have driven up to the farmers house and asked I'm sure he would have said yes, take the pic.
  Take as many pics as you want from the road but ask permission to go on someones property.

QUESTION:
What to konw about Ethanol Industry ? and the result of this political idea? another state plan ?
Each year in early October my grandfather summoned my entire family to come to his farm and harvest potatoes. Hunched over on all fours, each person quietly filled their buckets with these "earth apples." Each year he used a different field for his crop. One year he would plant potatoes, the next year beets or wheat. The potato replaced the grain diet on the European continent. It became survival food, especially during the two World Wars. Dumplings, potato salad and mashed potatoes are only a few potato dishes found in a long list in the European cuisine. The easy adaptability of the potato to grow almost anywhere in the world can produce an annual crop of 322 million tons of potatoes. Many African countries greatly benefit from growing the potatoes because they make them more self-sufficient in their food production.

In the age of nation building, stamping out of global warming, and driving for energy self-sufficiency, the new state appointed rival of the potato is maize, which is better known as corn – the yellow cob-born grain used in the production of ethanol fuel. As a blend with gasoline, biofuel powers automobiles and farm equipment. Its environmental friendly side effect is to reduce greenhouse gases, and some say it is the key to everlasting energy security in the future.

Ethanol fuel production received its first stimulus after the Arab oil crisis in 1973. During 1978 the US federal government sealed the project with the Energy Tax Act authorizing tax exemptions by blending gasoline with 10 percent ethanol. A floodgate of free money opened up for farmers and ethanol producers as the energy and agricultural departments spent billions of dollars on subsidies. This year’s estimates are between .5 billion to .3 billion of our tax dollars to be handed out to corn growers.

The incentives for farmers to grow corn in the US is not to meet the needs of a market that entails a healthy profit. Instead, they plant corn because they get paid to do so by a federal government interested in ethanol production. And as it turns out, producing ethanol is an expensive process. Archer Daniels Midland Corporation (ADM) out of Illinois, one of the largest producers of ethanol, received as much as billion in subsidies between 1980 through 1997 along with favorable tax breaks costing taxpayers an average of for every dollar ADM earns in profits. Add to that the 0 of federal and state subsidies it takes to reduce one metric ton of CO2-equivalent, one can literarily say that it is governments who heat up the globe by burning cash.

This year corn production has already increased by 15 percent over last year. Even President Bush, not a green lover but excited about ethanol, is expecting that farmers will plant 90.5 millions of acres of corn in 2007 in order to meet the demands of ethanol production of 132 billion liters by 2017. Corn prices already went up by 50 percent. The average price per bushel of .95, which had held steady over the past eight years, jumped up to .05 in January of this year, and is expected to rise as high as .40.

Corn is feedstock. It is consumed not only by humans but also by hogs, chickens and cattle. The drastic side-effect of higher corn prices is now reflected in the higher prices in the grocery store. The price of food went up 3.9 percent last year – faster than the inflation rate, which ranges around 2.7 in 2007. In particular, pork, beef, milk, eggs and poultry show drastic increases in their prices. So do fruits and vegetables. Considering that most people spend an average of 10 percent of their disposable income on food, higher prices in grocery reduces the spending on cars, homes or clothing. Health Nazis should also be concerned, since these higher prices drive people to cheaper processed foods that add to increased health risks in the poor segment of the population.

The US Federal Government’s targeted goal is to replace gasoline with corn-based fuel as an alternative energy source. This has caught the attention of poorer countries. Mexico, for example, is gradually replacing agave, a spiky-leaved, large plant which grows on high and arid land and takes eight years to reach maturity, with corn. Agave is the main ingredient for Tequila. Mexico produced 25 to 35 percent less agave this year and farmers take less care of their agave crop in favor of higher corn prices. The World Food Program (WFP), which recently stated that it can no longer feed the poor due to the impact of biofuel demand on food prices, is foolishly encouraging African and Latin American countries to take advantage of the rising demand of biofuels by planting corn; a popular world practice that is now devastating 900 million of the world’s poorest which rely on the UN feeding program.

It is quite clear that the state-inflated demand for corn is causing a global imbalance in food production. Farmers are replacing a variety of vegetables and fruits with corn due to the higher profit-per-acre corn brings. The two-year practice of crop rotation for corn drains the soil and requires more fertilizers on the following soybean crop. The additional cost ends up with the consumer. As food prices rise, it is the poor who suffer most from this inflated demand for biofuel. It is a burden that most people cannot afford as inflation keeps rising because of irresponsible spending and government debt.

The federal budget for the fiscal year beginning this October called for .9 trillion dollars in government spending. It includes increases for all the various cabinet-level departments. Among them were a 5.4 percent increase for the Department of Energy and 3.6 percent increase for Agriculture. According to Richard M. Ebeling, President of The Freeman, the average US household would have to shell out approximately ,845 in taxes to cover the budget. Include with it the US federal government’s pre-existing liabilities of several trillion, and the average US household would have to pay an additional ,000 a year for 75 years to pay off the debt already incurred by government spending. How can an average income household cover the basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter when tax burdens already devour the wages of a lower income population? Poor people only become poorer as spending continues.

Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul seems to be the only congressional member who understands the global effects of subsidies. During his second presidential debate the question came up about oil profits. His response was: "I don’t think the profits are the issue. The profits are okay if they’re legitimately earned in a free market. What I object to are subsidies to big corporations when we subsidize them and give them R&D (Research & Development) money. I don’t think that should be that way. They should take it out of the funds that they earn..."

Here lies the answer to many of the energy questions. Let the private sector find a solution to new energy sources. Already technology advances at a rapid speed and its products remain ultimately competitive on the market where prices drop and become affordable to the average consumer. Just think of recent changes from VCRs and phonograph records to DVD’s and CD players, and the addition of cell phones and portable computers to modern life. All are now available at reasonable prices to low-income households. Industry continually comes up with new inventions that contribute highly to communication, organization and entertainment. The only sectors that remain high in cost with outrageous prices are sectors that are under government regulation and control: health care, medicine, education, housing, and now food prices. It would be a life-saving act of mercy to close these various departments of government, if people want to have a future for the next generation.

The trouble caused on the global market by the federal government’s sponsored ethanol industry increasingly outweighs the good it does. The idea of sacrificing food production in the name of biofuel as a future source of energy is an irrational concept. The consequence of higher food prices due to corn production hasn’t come from consumer choice but from government coercion. If the demand for energy is increasing, and biofuel is the answer, then where will the world grow its food? The big believers in a government supported biofuel industry might have to prepare for another big tsunami to hit the shores of Third World countries and at home if this insanity isn’t stopped. Just don’t blame capitalism if and when it comes.

July 21, 2007

Sabine Barnhart

• ANSWER:
  Ethanol fuel is ethanol (ethyl alcohol), the same type of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages. It can be used as a fuel, mainly as a biofuel alternative to gasoline, and is widely used in cars in Brazil. Because it is cheap, easy to manufacture and process, and can be made from very common materials, such as corn, it is steadily becoming a highly respected and researched alternative to gasoline throughout much of the world.

  Anhydrous ethanol, that is, ethanol with at most 1% water, the same alcohol as found in alcoholic beverages, can be blended with gasoline in varying quantities up to pure ethanol (E100), and most spark-ignited gasoline style engines will operate well with mixtures of 10% ethanol (E10).[1] Most cars on the road today in the U.S. can run on blends of up to 10% ethanol,[2] and the use of 10% ethanol gasoline is mandated in some cities where harmful levels of auto emissions are possible.[3]

  Ethanol can be mass-produced by fermentation of sugar or by hydration of ethylene from petroleum and other sources. Current interest in ethanol mainly lies in bio-ethanol, produced from the starch or sugar in a wide variety of crops, but there has been considerable debate about how useful bio-ethanol will be in replacing fossil fuels in vehicles. Concerns relate to the large amount of arable land required for crops,[4] as well as the energy and pollution balance of the whole cycle of ethanol production.[5][6] Recent developments with cellulosic ethanol production and commercialization may allay some of these concerns.[7]

  According to the International Energy Agency, cellulosic ethanol could allow ethanol fuels to play a much bigger role in the future than previously thought.[8] Cellulosic ethanol can be made from plant matter composed primarily of inedible cellulose fibers that form the stems and branches of most plants. Dedicated energy crops, such as switchgrass, are also promising cellulose sources that can be produced in many regions of the United States.[9]

  In the U.S., there is potential to expand the market for ethanol fuels beyond the farm states where they have been most popular to date. Flex-fuel vehicles are assisting in this transition because they allow drivers to choose different fuels based on price and availability. The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which calls for 7.5 billion US gallons of biofuels to be used annually by 2012, should also help to expand the U.S. marketThe top five ethanol producers in 2005 were Brazil (4.35 billion US gallons per year), the United States (4.3 billion US gallons per year), China (530 MMgy), the European Union (250 MMgy) and India (80 MMgy). Brazil and the United States accounted for 90 percent of all ethanol production. Also, it should be noted that the United States, now producing at a rate of about 4.6 billion US gallons per year, is widely considered the world’s largest ethanol producer. Strong incentives, coupled with other industry development initiatives, are giving rise to fledgling ethanol industries in countries such as Thailand, the Philippines, Columbia, the Dominican Republic and Malawi. Nevertheless, ethanol hasn't yet made much of a dent in world oil consumption.[32]

  [edit] Brazil
  Main article: Ethanol fuel in Brazil

  Gasoline on the left, alcohol on the right at a filling station in BrazilBrazil has one of the largest bio-fuel programs in the world, involving production of ethanol fuel from sugar cane, and ethanol now provides 18 percent of the country's automotive fuel. As a result of this, together with the exploitation of domestic deep water oil sources, Brazil, which years ago had to import a large share of the petroleum needed for domestic consumption, recently reached complete self-sufficiency in oil.[33][34][35]

  Brazil produced around 16.4 billion liters of ethanol in 2004 and used 2.7 million hectares of land area for this production (4.5% of the Brazilian land area used for crop production in 2005[36]). Of this, around 12.4 billion liters were produced as fuel for ethanol-powered vehicles in the domestic market. In Brazil, ethanol-powered and flexible-fuel vehicles are manufactured for operation with hydrated ethanol, an azeotrope of ethanol (around 93% v/v) and water (7%).

  Production and use of ethanol has been stimulated through: (1) low-interest loans for the construction of ethanol distilleries; (2) guaranteed purchase of ethanol by the state-owned oil company at a reasonable price; (3) retail pricing of neat ethanol so it is competitive if not slightly favorable to the gasoline-ethanol blend; and (4) tax incentives provided during the 1980s to stimulate the purchase of neat ethanol vehicles.[37]

  Guaranteed purchase and price regulation were ended some years ago, with relatively positive results. In addition to these other policies, ethanol producers in the state of Sao Paulo established a research and technology transfer center that has been effective in improving sugar cane and ethanol yields.[38]

  [edit] United States

  A Ford Taurus "fueled by clean burning ethanol" owned by New York City.Main article: Ethanol fuel in the United States
  Most cars on the road today in the U.S. can run on blends of up to 10% ethanol, and motor vehicle manufacturers already produce vehicles designed to run on much higher ethanol blends. Ford, DaimlerChrysler, and GM are among the automobile companies that sell “flexible-fuel” cars, trucks, and minivans that can use gasoline and ethanol blends ranging from pure gasoline up to 85% ethanol (E85). By mid-2006, there were approximately six million E85-compatible vehicles on U.S. roads.[39]

  There is potential to expand the market for ethanol fuels beyond the farm states where they have been most popular to date. Flex-fuel vehicles are assisting in this transition because they allow drivers to choose different fuels based on price and availability. The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which calls for 7.5 billion US gallons of biofuels to be used annually by 2012, should also help to expand the U.S. market.[40]

  It should also be noted that the growing ethanol and biodiesel industries are providing jobs in plant construction, operations, and maintenance, mostly in rural communities. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, the ethanol industry created almost 154,000 U.S. jobs in 2005 alone, boosting household income by .7 billion. It also contributed about .5 billion in tax revenues at the local, state, and federal levels.[41]

  [edit] Sweden
  Main article: Ethanol fuel in Sweden
  All Swedish gas stations are required by an act of parliament to offer at least one alternative fuel, and every fifth car in Stockholm now drives at least partially on alternative fuels, mostly ethanol.[42]

  Stockholm will introduce a fleet of Swedish-made electric hybrid buses in its public transport system on a trial basis in 2008. These buses will use ethanol-powered internal-combustion engines and electric motors. The vehicles’ diesel engines will use ethanol.[43]

  [edit] Australia
  Main article: Ethanol fuel in Australia
  Legislation imposes a 10% cap on the concentration of fuel ethanol blends. Blends of 90% unleaded petrol and 10% fuel ethanol are commonly referred to as E10. E10 is available through service stations operating under the BP, Caltex, Shell and United brands as well as those of a number of smaller independents. Not surprisingly, E10 is most widely available closer to the sources of production in Queensland and New South Wales. E10 is most commonly blended with 91 RON "regular unleaded" fuel. There is a requirement that retailers label blends containing fuel ethanol on the dispenser.

  [edit] China
  China is promoting ethanol-based fuel on a pilot basis in five cities in its central and northeastern region, a move designed to create a new market for its surplus grain and reduce consumption of petroleum. The cities include Zhengzhou, Luoyang and Nanyang in central China's Henan province, and Harbin and Zhaodong in Heilongjiang province, northeast China. Under the program, Henan will promote ethanol-based fuel across the province by the end of this year. Officials say the move is of great importance in helping to stabilize grain prices, raise farmers' income and reducing petrol- induced air pollution.[44]

  [edit] Environment

  [edit] Energy balance
  Main article: Ethanol fuel energy balance
  All biomass needs to go through some of these steps: it needs to be grown, collected, dried, fermented and burned. All of these steps require resources and an infrastructure.

  Opponents of corn ethanol production in the U.S. often quote the 2005 paper [45] of David Pimentel, a retired Entomologist, and Tadeusz Patzek, a Geological Engineer from Berkeley. Both have been exceptionally critical of ethanol and other biofuels. Their studies contend that ethanol, and biofuels in general, are "energy negative", meaning they take more energy to produce than is contained in the final product.

  A 2006 report by the U.S. Department Agriculture compared the methodologies used by a number of researchers on this subject and found that the majority of research showed that the energy balance for ethanol is positive. In fact, a large number of recent studies, including a 2006 article[46] in the prestigious journal Science offer the consensus opinion that fuels like ethanol are energy positive. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that fossil fuels also require significant energy inputs which have seldom been accounted for in the past.

  It is also important to note that ethanol is not the only product created during production, and the energy content of the by-products must also be considered. Corn is typically 66% starch and the remaining 33% is not fermented. This unfermented component is called distillers grain, which is high in fats and proteins, and makes good animal feed. [47]

  In Brazil where sugar cane is used, the yield is higher, and conversion to ethanol is somewhat more energy efficient than corn.[14] Recent developments with cellulosic ethanol production may improve yields even further.[48]

  [edit] Air pollution
  Compared with conventional unleaded gasoline, ethanol is a particulate-free burning fuel source that combusts cleanly with oxygen to form carbon dioxide and water. The Clean Air Act requires the addition of oxygenates to reduce carbon monoxide emissions in the United States. The additive MTBE is currently being phased out due to ground water contamination, hence ethanol becomes an attractive alternative additive.

  Use of ethanol, produced from current (2006) methods, emits a similar net amount of carbon dioxide but less carbon monoxide than gasoline.[49] If all bioethanol-production energy came from non-fossil sources the use of bioethanol as a fuel would add no greenhouse gas.[50]

  [edit] Manufacture
  In 2002 , monitoring of ethanol plants revealed that they released VOCs (volatile organic compounds) at a higher rate than had previously been disclosed.[51] The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) subsequently reached settlement with Archer Daniels Midland and Cargill, two of the largest producers of ethanol, to reduce emission of these VOCs. VOCs are produced when fermented corn mash is dried for sale as a supplement for livestock feed. Devices known as thermal oxidizers or catalytic oxidizers can be attached to the plants to burn off the hazardous gases. Smog causing pollutants are also increased by using ethanol fuel in comparison to gasoline.

  [edit] Greenhouse gas abatement
  Corn ethanol has received much support on environmental grounds primarily because of its role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, the evidence for this claim is mixed.

  A recent ten-year forecast of ethanol production by the USDA places 2017 corn ethanol production at 12 billion US gallons and growing at only 2% per year. This estimate, together with a parameter publishing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), indicates that this near-maximum level of ethanol production will abate GHG emissions by 0.13% (~1/10 of 1%) of current US GHG emissions. However, this does not hold for all greenhouse gases. Another study has suggested that replacement of 100% petroleum fuel with E85 (a fuel mixture comprised of 85% ethanol and 15% petroleum) would significantly increase ozone levels, thereby increasing photochemical smog and aggravating medical problems such as asthma.[19][20]

  This value reflects increases in corn area and the use of 30% of the corn crop for ethanol. It also apparently takes into account anticipated improvements in corn yields and ethanol production. The PNAS value is a 12% reduction in greenhouse gas emission relative to the "net emissions of production and combustion of an energetically equivalent amount of gasoline."

  The January 2006 Science article from UC Berkeley's ERG, estimated this parameter to be 13% after reviewing a large number of studies. However, in a correction to that article releases shortly after publication, they reduce the estimated value to 7.4%. None of the other values needed to complete the calculation are controversial.

  GREET model maintained by Argonne National Labs in Chicago has produced a series of publications on GHG abatement through ethanol. The latest of the studies is [21]

  [edit] Land use
  Large-scale 'energy farming', necessary to produce agricultural alcohol, requires substantial amounts of cultivated land. Some have claimed that land is acquired through deforestation, while others have observed that areas currently supporting forests are usually not suitable for growing any sort of crops.[52][53] Related concerns have been raised regarding a decline in soil fertility due to reduction of organic matter[54], a decrease in water availability and quality, an increase in the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and potential dislocation of local communities.[55]

  As demand for ethanol fuel increases, food crops are replaced by fuel crops, driving food supply down and food prices up. Growing demand for ethanol in the United States has increased corn prices by 50% in Mexico.[56] Average barley prices in the United States rose 17% from January to June 2007 to the highest in 11 years. Prices for all grain crops trend upward, reflecting a progressive increase in farm land devoted to corn for the production of produce ethanol fuel.[57] Prices for U.S. corn-based products, including animal feed, also rise. This translates to higher prices for animal products like chicken, beef, and cheese. June 2007 cheese prices rose to per pound on average, increasing 65% over the same period in 2006. As milk prices in the United States, approached .00 per US gallon, [58] many American restaurant franchises announced price increases for their products to compensate for rising food costs.[59] [60] [61]

  Alternatively, cellulosic ethanol can be produced from any plant material, potentially doubling yields, in an effort to minimize conflict between food needs versus fuel needs.[62] Instead of utilizing only the starch bi-products from grinding wheat and other crops, cellulosic ethanol production maximizes the use of all plant materials, including gluten. This approach would have a smaller carbon footprint because the amount of energy-intensive fertilisers and fungicides remain the same for higher output of usable material.[63] While the enzyme technology[64] for producing cellulosic ethanol is currently in developmental stages, it is not expected to be available for large-scale production in the near future.[65] Moreover, the production of ethanol for fuel raises a number of land scarcity issues, regardless of what production method is employed. Many analysts suggest that biofuel strategies must be accompanied by fuel conservation restrictions. [66]

  [edit] Renewable resource
  Ethanol is considered "renewable" because it is primarily the result of conversion of the sun's energy into usable energy. Creation of ethanol starts with photosynthesis causing the feedstocks such as switchgrass, sugar cane, or corn to grow. These feedstocks are processed into ethanol (see production).

  The environmental and economic benefits of non-cellulosic ethanol - including corn ethanol - have been heavily critiqued by many, including Brad Ewing of Environmental Economics & Sustainable Development[67] and Lester R. Brown of Earth Policy Institute.[68] The main criticism dwells on the increasing costs of corn for food as the demand for ethanol production increases. It remains to be seen [vague] if ethanol production can overcome these problems.

  Current, first generation processes for the production of ethanol from corn use only a small part of the corn plant: the corn kernels are taken from the corn plant and only the starch, which represents about 50% of the dry kernel mass, is transformed into ethanol. Two types of second generation processes are under development. The first type uses enzymes to convert the plant cellulose into ethanol while the second type uses pyrolysis to convert the whole plant to either a liquid bio-oil or a syngas. Second generation processes can also be used with plants such as grasses, wood or agricultural waste material such as straw.

  [edit] Replacement of petroleum
  Only about 5% of the fossil energy required to produce ethanol from corn in the United States is obtained from non-US petroleum.[69] Current (2006) United States production methods obtain the rest of the fossil energy from domestic coal and natural gas. Even if the energy balance were negative, US production involves mostly domestic fuels such as natural gas and coal so the need for non-US petroleum would be reduced. Developed regions like the United States and Europe, and increasingly the developing nations of Asia, mainly India and China, consume much more petroleum and natural gas than they extract from their territory, becoming dependent upon foreign suppliers as a resultThe science of Economics is generally defined as the study of scarcity management. Absent scarcity and alternative uses of available resources, there is no economic problem. As such, the subject of economics involves the study of choices as they are affected by incentives and resources.[70] Since land and agriculture have historically served the world as utilities for food production, many believe the alternative use of agricultural resources for ethanol fuel production imposes an artificial scarcity of food on a global scale.[71] [72] [73] [74]

  Meanwhile, the United States Department of Energy, finds that for every unit of energy put towards ethanol production, 1.3 units are returned.[75] Another study found that corn-grain ethanol produced 1.25 units of energy per unit put in.[76] As yields improve or different feedstocks are introduced, ethanol production may become more economically feasible in the US. Currently, research on improving ethanol yields from each unit of corn is underway using biotechnology. By utilizing hybrids designed specifically with higher extractable starch levels, the energy balance is dramatically improved. Also, as long as oil prices remain high, the economical use of other feedstocks, such as cellulose, become viable. By-products such as straw or wood chips can be converted to ethanol. Fast growing species like switchgrass can be grown on land not suitable for other cash crops and yield high levels of ethanol per unit areaCritics argue that ethanol is a fancy way of using solar power. The processing and production, as well as burning of ethanol would not significantly improve carbon emissions over the current use of gasoline. Instead, critics propose the widespread adoption of battery electric vehicles (zero emissions vehicles) combined with increased use of nuclear power and solar power.

  [edit] Problems
  Fuels with more than 10% ethanol are not compatible with some fuel system components.[81][82]
  Examples of extreme corrosion of ferrous components,[82] and internal separation of portions of rubber fuel tanks have been observed in some vehicles using ethanol fuels.[citation needed]
  Formation of salt deposits, jelly-like deposits on fuel strainer screens
  Can negatively affect electric fuel pumps by increasing internal wear[82] and undesirable spark generation. [83]
  Is not compatible with capacitance fuel level gauging indicators and may cause erroneous fuel quantity indications in vehicles that employ that system.[84]
  Not always compatible with marine craft, especially those that use fiberglass tanks.[85][86]
  Decreases fuel-economy by 15-30%; this can be avoided using certain modifications that would, however, render the engine inoperable on regular petrol without the addition of an adjustable ECU, or use of multiple ECUs to run the engine on multiple fuel types. [87][20]
  Support for biofuels could keep petroleum prices high in the USA (NY Times - [27])
  Tough materials are required to overcome ethanol's corrosive nature, and the high compression ratio needed to make an ethanol engine as efficient as it would be on petrol; these would be similar to those used in diesel engines (which typically run at a CR of 20:1[88], versus about 8-12:1 for petrol engines [89].) Diesel engines cost significantly more than similar-sized ordinary petrol engines as a result of the more advanced materials used in their construction.
  Whether the energy balance of ethanol - that is, whether the fuel contains more energy than was used to produce it - is positive or negative is debatable [90][91], as is whether or not the land used to grow the crop was obtained by, say, chopping down a rainforest, in which case the ethanol produced is just as unenvironmentally-friendly as fossil fuel due to the carbon released by the dead plants. [92]

QUESTION:
How can we can get grants to build a playground in our small community?
We live in a small farming community in Illinois. My husband is on our town board. We have quite few children but nothing to do. We are wanting to find a way to buy the equipment. We already have the space to build it. If anyone has info please share if we could just get the money to get started that would be great.

• ANSWER:
  Our community sounds much like yours....we did a fundraising project and partnered with Kids Kingdom to create the playground equipment. We couldn't find grants either, but when everyone got together and donated a little, it all came together. Hope this helps.

QUESTION:
Can a lawyer advise buyer and do the contract for his own property in Illinois and not include a disclosure?
My husband bought a property from a lawyer not using a real estate agent. The lawyer was a neighbor of his brother. The lawyer told my husband he would take care of all the paperwork. I was not in my husband life at that time and he never bought a property before. The lawyer knew before my husband that he had been approved for the loan(small community). The bank did not have my husband get an appraisal nor was there a disclosure signed. (plus other paperwork) The lawyer had my husband meet him and his wife at the house to sign the papers. He sprang an easement paper on my husband to have access to the land he still owned behind the house. He signed it. The lawyer never mentioned it before that day. The lawyer did not specify the easement. (what type) The lawyer passed away 6 months later and his wife sold the land. At that time the easement was signed, the road had been abandon but now it has been opened again. It may be difficult for the new owner to get agriculture equipment to it even though he doesn't farm it at this time. He has in the past so he may in the future. My husband wants the easement removed. Do you have any suggestions? Also, we live in a small community so all the lawyers know or knew each other.

• ANSWER:
  First of all, easements are very difficult to extinguish, especially if this easement is the only legal access to the neighbor's property. It sounds like what the lawyer did wasn't illegal or unethical, although it probably would have been a good idea for him to let your husband know about it beforehand. Access easements are pretty common for properties that don't have direct frontage on a road, so it shouldn't have been unexpected.

  If this easement is the only access to the property, then I think it will be impossible to extinguish it, because the judge will rule in the neighbor's favor, in keeping with the common legal principle that everyone should be able to access their property. Because your husband signed the easement, I don't think you'll be able to show it was a invalid document.

  As to what to do, the first step would be taking the deeds and the easement to a surveyor, and ask him if the easement is in the place you think it is. It is possible that the old road is in a different location than the easement, in which case there is a possibility of two easements in existence, one recorded and one prescriptive.

  The next thing you might want to consider is if there is another place you'd rather have the easement. If so, you could grant an easement to the neighbor in a new place in exchange for the extinguishing of the old one.

  If you don't want any easement on the property, and the neighbor is unwilling to sell it back to you, you'll have to file a lawsuit. That would cost a lot of money and I seriously doubt you would prevail. The case you described sounds like a normal situation, and the only problem is that you don't like the easement.

  In any case, a talk with a good land surveyor and/or a good real estate attorney would go a long ways towards getting this situation cleared up one way or another.

QUESTION:
Do you agree that our elected Republicans are right on wasteful list of spending?
Your Question
Do you agree w/ the house Republicans-List of wasteful provisions...?
On Monday, House Republican leaders put out a list of what they call wasteful provisions in the Senate version of the nearly _0 billion_ stimulus bill that is being debated:

• billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.

• A 6 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion picture film.

• 0 million for the digital television converter box coupon program.

• million for the Coast Guard to design a new polar icebreaker (arctic ship) (global warming equipment?)

• 8 million for constructing the Department of Homeland
Security headquarters.

• 8 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters.

• 0 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees.

• 0 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's.

• .4 billion for rural waste disposal programs.

• 5 million for the Washington sewer system.

• 0 million for Smithsonian museum facilities.

• billion for the 2010 Census, which has a projected cost overrun of billion.

• million for "smoking cessation activities." (what's that?)

• 0 million for public computer centers at community colleges.

• million for salaries of employees at the FBI.

• million for tribal alcohol and substance abuse reduction. (I thought they were exempt from the Fed. government)

+500 million for flood reduction projects on the Mississippi River.

• million to inspect canals in urban areas.

• billion to turn federal buildings into "green" buildings.

• 0 million for state and local fire stations.

• 0 million for wildland fire management on forest service lands.

• .2 billion for "youth activities," including youth summer job
programs. (Obama's youth?)

• million for renovating the headquarters of the Public Health Service.

• 2 million for CDC buildings and property.

• 0 million for building and repairing National Institutes of Health
facilities in Bethesda, Maryland.

• 0 million for "paid volunteers" at the Corporation for
National and Community Service. (paid volunteers?)

• .5 million for "energy efficiency initiatives" at the
Department of Veterans Affairs National Cemetery Administration.

• 0 million for Amtrak, a business that's been losing money for the past 20 years. ( I think Amtrak should be revamped)

• 0 million for reducing the hazard of lead-based paint.

• million to construct a "security training" facility for State
Department Security officers when they can be trained at existing facilities of other agencies.

• 0 million to the Farm Service Agency to upgrade computer systems.

• 0 million in funding for the lease of alternative energy vehicles for
use on military installations. (but O wants to cut our nukes by 80 percent?)

*If you were voting to spend _our_ money, is this how you would be doing it under the guise of "stimulus"?*

*Kentucky wisdom: "If it smells like a pig, and squeals like a pig, and
eats any slop that you serve it, then it is certainly a politician that is
pushing pork into what they would argue should be a legitimate bill.*

*Note: House Republicians have identified the above as wasteful.

What do you think?***

• ANSWER:
  The thing with these earmarks is that they will temporarily help the economy but will hurt it more in the future. Just like the housing bubble that was bound to burst, all these 'green jobs' will go away because people will not buy 'green cars' because the technology is not good yet and they are much more dangerous to drive. As for these contract jobs, they will employ people for awhile, but when the contracts are over, the jobs are over. Amtrak is just stupid, if a business is meant to fail, propping them up is only delaying the inevitable. I say put the money back in the peoples pockets, we know how to fix the economy, not the Govt. The difference in Bush and Obama is even though they are both big spenders, Bush wanted to give the money back to the people, Obama wants to use OUR money to control US. Haven't the Dems in Washington figured out what most of America knows, if you create a false 'bubble' then it will burst and it will hurt EVERYONE. If they would stop trying to 'help' everyone live the American dream and step back and give us the lea-way to do so, we will prosper again. Just like the housing market is already recovering, we needed to stop building new homes until the demand caught up with the supply(just like it's doing) and everything will go back to normal

QUESTION:
Do you agree w/ the house Republicans-List of wasteful provisions...?
On Monday, House Republican leaders put out a list of what they call wasteful provisions in the Senate version of the nearly _0 billion_ stimulus bill that is being debated:

• billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.

• A 6 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion picture film.

• 0 million for the digital television converter box coupon program.

• million for the Coast Guard to design a new polar icebreaker (arctic ship) (global warming equipment?)

• 8 million for constructing the Department of Homeland
Security headquarters.

• 8 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters.

• 0 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees.

• 0 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's.

• .4 billion for rural waste disposal programs.

• 5 million for the Washington sewer system.

• 0 million for Smithsonian museum facilities.

• billion for the 2010 Census, which has a projected cost overrun of billion.

• million for "smoking cessation activities." (what's that?)

• 0 million for public computer centers at community colleges.

• million for salaries of employees at the FBI.

• million for tribal alcohol and substance abuse reduction. (I thought they were exempt from the Fed. government)

+500 million for flood reduction projects on the Mississippi River.

• million to inspect canals in urban areas.

• billion to turn federal buildings into "green" buildings.

• 0 million for state and local fire stations.

• 0 million for wildland fire management on forest service lands.

• .2 billion for "youth activities," including youth summer job
programs. (Obama's youth?)

• million for renovating the headquarters of the Public Health Service.

• 2 million for CDC buildings and property.

• 0 million for building and repairing National Institutes of Health
facilities in Bethesda, Maryland.

• 0 million for "paid volunteers" at the Corporation for
National and Community Service. (paid volunteers?)

• .5 million for "energy efficiency initiatives" at the
Department of Veterans Affairs National Cemetery Administration.

• 0 million for Amtrak, a business that's been losing money for the past 20 years. ( I think Amtrak should be revamped)

• 0 million for reducing the hazard of lead-based paint.

• million to construct a "security training" facility for State
Department Security officers when they can be trained at existing facilities of other agencies.

• 0 million to the Farm Service Agency to upgrade computer systems.

• 0 million in funding for the lease of alternative energy vehicles for
use on military installations. (but O wants to cut our nukes by 80 percent?)

*If you were voting to spend _our_ money, is this how you would be doing it under the guise of "stimulus"?*

*Kentucky wisdom: "If it smells like a pig, and squeals like a pig, and
eats any slop that you serve it, then it is certainly a politician that is
pushing pork into what they would argue should be a legitimate bill.*

*Note: House Republicians have identified the above as wasteful.

What do you think?***

• ANSWER:
  There's a few things in there that I could go along with such as the rural waste disposal development and maybe the CDC stuff but the rest no. Maybe flood reduction on the Mississippi excepting Louisiana because Nagin had that money already and blew it on ball parks and stuff.

QUESTION:
Do It Yourself Antelope Hunting?
I have hunted whitetails in Wisconsin and Illinois and hunted Sitka-Blacktails in Alaska.

I was looking at doing an unguided Antelope hunt one of these years. I currently live in Illinois so I was thinking of a Wyoming hunt as it wouldn't be that bad of a drive.

Does anyone have any tips on finding publicly accesible land? Any suggestions on a good place to go on a first Antelope hunt? Any tips from experienced Prairie Goat Hunters (equipment needed...4 wheel drive, ATVs, just walk, spotting scopes, binoculars, etc...)

I think the two big things I would like to find out is how to find public land (Federal, state, etc..), where people suggest a good Antelope hunt, and what you take with you when you go hunting on the Prairie.

(To the anti-hunters...spare me the comments, I don't care. I kill and I eat what I kill. Wild game is much better and cleaner than the crap bought at a super market. The animals I kill had a life at one point, unlike at corporate farms)

• ANSWER:
  The Bureau of Land Management maps show what is public (by agency) and what is private land. It has been several years since I hunted Wyoming, but the harder to draw units north of Rock Springs and north of Douglas had big bucks. You can camp on BLM or Forest Service land, or if a reasonable distance from a town stay in a motel. Spot and stalk is a good way to hunt. Look to the west in the mornings as the sun will be behind you and make the white on the pronghorn very visible. In the afternoon spot to the east. If you find sign just sit on the top of a rise and wait for them - particularily if there is water from a windmill nearby. I've found that if I follow a fenceline until I find a crossing (the pronghorn always crawl under, never jump over) indicated by a depression under the fence and usually some hair on the bottom strand, if I back away from the crossing along the fence about 80 yards and sit against a fencepole, I can often get a close shot when they come to cross - they will follow the fence to the crossing.

  Since the weather probably will be warm, it is necessary to butcher, or at least gut and skin, the animal as soon as possible and get it on ice or at least in the shade. Consider getting additional antlerless tags if they are available as they are (were) much less expensive than the buck tags. You will get less than half the meat from a pronghorn as you get from a same sex northern whitetail. A trophy buck will have horns that look about 3 times as long as the ears with fairly large prongs.

  Pronghorn antelope are a lot of fun to hunt as you see many in the distance. Four wheel drives are useful, when we hunted north of rock springs, we were about 60 miles from nowhere and took 2 or 3 vehicles. One year we had an early snowstorm and in another one of the vehicles got stuck in an alkali flat and had to be pulled out with another truck. Be sure to take warm clothing in case the weather turns bad, although it will probably be warm. I use 10x42 binoculars and keep a spotting scope with a window mount in the truck. A brimmed hat and a knapsack or backpack with water should be carried. If using your vehicle or ATV to scout, stay on the 2-tracks or roads as neither the land management agencies nor wardens look kindly on driving across the prairie at random and don't shoot from the vehicle.