Fan in San Diego Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 Jboy I didn't see anybody mention loss of future revenue from the land taken. That is revenue for next 50 years that you wont earn from the loss of the land. You should be compensated for that as well.
boyst Posted June 14, 2012 Author Posted June 14, 2012 Jboy I didn't see anybody mention loss of future revenue from the land taken. That is revenue for next 50 years that you wont earn from the loss of the land. You should be compensated for that as well. The most disappointing part is that the land being taken includes 1.4 acres they already own but gave my gramps an easement on from taking the old bridge down and retaining possession of the land. So I am losing almost 3. There are three ways to do appraisals, future value, current value and something else. It gets very touchy - there is no loss of business recovery. There is only damages. Those damages are going to be important but losing that land over the next 3 years during construction is going to hurt us bad.
Fan in San Diego Posted June 14, 2012 Posted June 14, 2012 The most disappointing part is that the land being taken includes 1.4 acres they already own but gave my gramps an easement on from taking the old bridge down and retaining possession of the land. So I am losing almost 3. There are three ways to do appraisals, future value, current value and something else. It gets very touchy - there is no loss of business recovery. There is only damages. Those damages are going to be important but losing that land over the next 3 years during construction is going to hurt us bad. I think you should get a lawyer to fight for fair compensation. Loss of future revenue should definitely be compensated.
boyst Posted June 14, 2012 Author Posted June 14, 2012 I think you should get a lawyer to fight for fair compensation. Loss of future revenue should definitely be compensated. Initial appraisal is tomorrow; wont get #'s for a few weeks. Lawyer now just means higher bill at the end because there isn't much to "fight" for yet as they have officially done anything other proposal after proposal.
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 15, 2012 Posted June 15, 2012 Not to derail this thread, but I was reading the June 18th edition of Time magazine and noticed a thing about the "word of the week." Low and behold it was about: Cattle drones! Flying surveillance device that monitors ranching practices; a.k.a cow spybot. "The EPA uses these eyes in the sky to observe cattle farmers and look for Clean Water Act violations in NB and IA. Ranchers say the flyovers invade privacy, and five Congressman have asked the EPA to explain them by June 10th." What do you think jboyst? Saving us from the "tragedy of commons," if in fact grazing is taking place on public lands? Why clean water?
Pete Posted June 15, 2012 Posted June 15, 2012 That sucks JBoyst. Good for you for grass fed beef. God bless the small farmer. Power to the farmers! And good luck to you!
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 15, 2012 Posted June 15, 2012 Pete... I mean good for him, good for the small guy. I am not sure what to think just yet.... How "green" is grass fed. This sounds stupid... But kinda like golf courses... Pretty and all, but highly land intensive and wasteful. I am not saying jboyst is doing anything bad... But man, how many acres to ONE cow? How much water? Is it wasteful like I do when I divert a million gallons of Great Lakes water, never to return, for the one little bass boat that wants to "sport fish?" Is there a tragedy in all this? Is it all smoke and mirrors, PR? What really is the 'common good?' Again, in my profession, I long for the day to see major change... Water vs. more fossil fuels (as in trucks and trains) is very much up for debate... How do you manage that against other enviro problems. I don't know who's side to take... We all gotta look deeper I do agree.
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted June 15, 2012 Posted June 15, 2012 Not to derail this thread, but I was reading the June 18th edition of Time magazine and noticed a thing about the "word of the week." Low and behold it was about: Cattle drones! Flying surveillance device that monitors ranching practices; a.k.a cow spybot. "The EPA uses these eyes in the sky to observe cattle farmers and look for Clean Water Act violations in NB and IA. Ranchers say the flyovers invade privacy, and five Congressman have asked the EPA to explain them by June 10th." What do you think jboyst? Saving us from the "tragedy of commons," if in fact grazing is taking place on public lands? Why clean water? If the FAA requires the drones to fly fairly low to avoid interference with air traffic, I wonder if they would be within shotgun range? My guess is the EPA is gonna find out. I've read that some realtors have been warned by the FAA to fly the camera drones they use to take aerial photos of high end city properties at lower altititudes, but I don't remember the height limitation. Might be a higher altitude limit out in cow country. Deer rifle with a scope if they hover in place? Remember Ruby Ridge!
boyst Posted June 15, 2012 Author Posted June 15, 2012 (edited) Intial appraisal was this morning and went well. Nothing close to the real deal getting numbers running, though. Just background, what I will need to do, a walk thru of the process. It'll be 3 or 4 weeks before a guy is here to go over all of this, another 3 or 4 weeks before a report is ready on that, and another 2 weeks until a number is made. I wish I worked for the state. Pete... I mean good for him, good for the small guy. I am not sure what to think just yet.... How "green" is grass fed. This sounds stupid... But kinda like golf courses... Pretty and all, but highly land intensive and wasteful. I am not saying jboyst is doing anything bad... But man, how many acres to ONE cow? How much water? Is it wasteful like I do when I divert a million gallons of Great Lakes water, never to return, for the one little bass boat that wants to "sport fish?" Is there a tragedy in all this? Is it all smoke and mirrors, PR? What really is the 'common good?' Again, in my profession, I long for the day to see major change... Water vs. more fossil fuels (as in trucks and trains) is very much up for debate... How do you manage that against other enviro problems. I don't know who's side to take... We all gotta look deeper I do agree. Link1 Link2 It can be smoke and mirrors but we are what we eat and it goes back to what they eat and what they eat before that. If we put chemicals on corn that are not safe for consumption and we then feed that to cows - which are not able to eat corn unless it is processed then we eat that cow that has been filled with animals designed to get them as fat and heavy as quickly as posible in the cheapest easiest way...do I really need to say more? Cows cannot eat soybeans, corn, etc. They have to be processed in to a food that can be digested by cattle. I have a million links, my own research papers, and a lot of information on the difference. Is there a difference in taste? Of course, some people just like grainfed beef...for a good reason, it is pretty good. The benefits of grassfed beef far exceed grainfed and have a unique amazing taste. Go to a farmers market, find a grassfed beef farm and buy their ground beef. I will mail you a check for it. Not to derail this thread, but I was reading the June 18th edition of Time magazine and noticed a thing about the "word of the week." Low and behold it was about: Cattle drones! Flying surveillance device that monitors ranching practices; a.k.a cow spybot. "The EPA uses these eyes in the sky to observe cattle farmers and look for Clean Water Act violations in NB and IA. Ranchers say the flyovers invade privacy, and five Congressman have asked the EPA to explain them by June 10th." What do you think jboyst? Saving us from the "tragedy of commons," if in fact grazing is taking place on public lands? Why clean water? This is about the same as that idiot Cali legistlature wanting to tax farmers because cows contribute more of a carbon footprint then cars. The farts contain a bunch of stuff bad for the enviroment and he wanted a tax of like $25/yr per animal on cattle impossible by the feds. F'n idiot, I would love to kick him in the balls...frickin brickhead - it'd kill small farms. Why clean water? Because people are idiots. Fertilizer and lawn care companies are strictly monitered they say; but they're not. People who own a house can spill oil in their driveway, fertilize their lawn with too much and let it run off and do a ton of damage to grey water which ends up in creeks and tributaries. People see a beer can in a creek and think "oh the poor fishies." It is no joke, though, that our creeks are being poluted. However, they are also designed by nature to filter out the debris. Part of an issue with feedlot farming is that the cattle have such horrible fecal matter. It is not as valuable as grassfed manure because it contains a lot less nutrients and digestible fibers. The conditioners in the manure are built to carry the food to the stomach and do not go away after. Hog farming, chicken farming, all similar. I think farming needs to step up to the plate and be at the forefront of these issues. Step up and be there to spearhead these issues before there is an outrising. However, the more you give in on these the more someone is going to be there to push you further. Before long when you promise to raise cattle with a fan on them to reduce stress you'll be required by PETA to put AC's in the field. (BTW, it REALLY pisses me off that you can go to Lowes and buy outdoor AC's for your deck.) You might try to send an e-mail to the Institute of Justice in DC. They take a lot of eminent domain cases pro bono, like Mrs. Kelo's infamous case against the City of New London. http://www.ij.org/ Another option is your local ACLU chapter: http://www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/ I'm a lawyer and have done some property rights cases on behalf of churches, teamed with the ACLU, working pro bono. When you have someone who is representing you for free, you'd be stunned at how much leverage you have in fighting the man. We've never lost one of these cases. If those options don't work out, PM me. I could maybe hook you up with my colleagues in RTP and Charlotte who could help you. Our concern is finding the lawyer who has the experience in real property knowing the admin laws specifically and how all of this relates to agricultural and livestock. There are a few dirt lawyers around that deal with croplands but few of them around who deal with livestock. I really just need Johnny Cochrane and his Chewbacca defense. Edited June 15, 2012 by jboyst62
Fan in San Diego Posted June 15, 2012 Posted June 15, 2012 Yup you need a lawyer who has dealt with eminent domain issues and hopefully farmers.
Fan in San Diego Posted June 16, 2012 Posted June 16, 2012 I was wondering will the trains speeding by affect the health of your cows? what will keep them from wandering onto the tracks and getting hit?
boyst Posted June 16, 2012 Author Posted June 16, 2012 I was wondering will the trains speeding by affect the health of your cows? what will keep them from wandering onto the tracks and getting hit? It will not, as long as they do not get thru the fences. There is a creek between the main part of the pasture, then about 100' in most areas serving as a buffer between creek and the next side of the fence. Then another 100' until the railroad. I've done some more research, it began with ICSWID's post, but a lot of these cases end up in front of a NCDOT lawyer and when it does it is always for the better. The lawyers are behind a desk not in the field and know the costs of going to court and putting the big bad state on trial in front of a jury.
Pete Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 (edited) Pete... I mean good for him, good for the small guy. I am not sure what to think just yet.... How "green" is grass fed. This sounds stupid... But kinda like golf courses... Pretty and all, but highly land intensive and wasteful. I am not saying jboyst is doing anything bad... But man, how many acres to ONE cow? How much water? Is it wasteful like I do when I divert a million gallons of Great Lakes water, never to return, for the one little bass boat that wants to "sport fish?" Is there a tragedy in all this? Is it all smoke and mirrors, PR? What really is the 'common good?' Again, in my profession, I long for the day to see major change... Water vs. more fossil fuels (as in trucks and trains) is very much up for debate... How do you manage that against other enviro problems. I don't know who's side to take... We all gotta look deeper I do agree. Not to hijack this thread-but I understand what you are saying. Grass fed cows are not very utilitarian to feed the mass's. And some studies state that cows cause 31% of global warming(18% methane, 13% transportation, pesticides, etc) and contribute more to global warming then all cars, planes, trains combined. It's on my conscious - just as Coltan on my cell phone is. But people need to eat. And the cows are treated much better then factory farming. Not to mention we need the small farmers. So yes indeed, power to the small farmer! Edited June 17, 2012 by Pete
boyst Posted June 17, 2012 Author Posted June 17, 2012 Not to hijack this thread-but I understand what you are saying. Grass fed cows are not very utilitarian to feed the mass's. And some studies state that cows cause 31% of global warming(18% methane, 13% transportation, pesticides, etc) and contribute more to global warming then all cars, planes, trains combined. It's on my conscious - just as Coltan on my cell phone is. But people need to eat. And the cows are treated much better then factory farming. Not to mention we need the small farmers. So yes indeed, power to the small farmer! The resources required to raise a grassfed animal are also much higher. Generally, around 2 years of time and 3 acres of land per animal, vs 16 months and enough room to stand.
Jim in Anchorage Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 Not to hijack this thread-but I understand what you are saying. Grass fed cows are not very utilitarian to feed the mass's. And some studies state that cows cause 31% of global warming(18% methane, 13% transportation, pesticides, etc) and contribute more to global warming then all cars, planes, trains combined. It's on my conscious - just as Coltan on my cell phone is. But people need to eat. And the cows are treated much better then factory farming. Not to mention we need the small farmers. So yes indeed, power to the small farmer! More methane than the now gone millions of bison that lived from the artic to mexico in 1850?
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 More methane than the now gone millions of bison that lived from the artic to mexico in 1850? Interesting point. Does the type of grass matter? There is only one indigenous type of grass to North American (at least what I always thought?). Buffalo grass, right? Not disputing what you say... Most likely what jboyst has to plant AND keep on planting. Which leads me to another question... jboyst, do you have to keep on planting the grass... And what type is it? Shallow roots?
boyst Posted June 17, 2012 Author Posted June 17, 2012 Interesting point. Does the type of grass matter? There is only one indigenous type of grass to North American (at least what I always thought?). Buffalo grass, right? Not disputing what you say... Most likely what jboyst has to plant AND keep on planting. Which leads me to another question... jboyst, do you have to keep on planting the grass... And what type is it? Shallow roots? common rescue was not available early on pre 1931. It was discovered on a Kentucky hillside in 1931 in a farmers pasture - why we call it KY31. the rest of the grasses found their way across the country. There are no native grasses in the SE USA. They are all transplants. The plains are full of native grasses and small grains which grow well. From KY bluegrass, to wheat they grow their wild. Sorghum, rye, etc most came from other countries. Grass grows where it is too dry for trees to grow. I don't have to keep planting unless I choose to do so. I plant sorghum sudan because it grows well in the hear with roots over 6'. I also use rye and wintergrazers.
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 (edited) common rescue was not available early on pre 1931. It was discovered on a Kentucky hillside in 1931 in a farmers pasture - why we call it KY31. the rest of the grasses found their way across the country. There are no native grasses in the SE USA. They are all transplants. The plains are full of native grasses and small grains which grow well. From KY bluegrass, to wheat they grow their wild. Sorghum, rye, etc most came from other countries. Grass grows where it is too dry for trees to grow. I don't have to keep planting unless I choose to do so. I plant sorghum sudan because it grows well in the hear with roots over 6'. I also use rye and wintergrazers. Interesting jboyst. On another note... A lot of soybeans are leaving South Chicago... Headed south... I wonder what's up with that? We are talking a good 8 barges (12-15,000 tons) A DAY... Heading south? Been like that for about a week. Kinda odd... I don't usually see that much soy... Maybe corn, but not soy. Somebody is trading it. Edited June 17, 2012 by ExiledInIllinois
Beerball Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 Not to derail this thread, but I was reading the June 18th edition of Time magazine and noticed a thing about the "word of the week." Low and behold it was about: Cattle drones! Flying surveillance device that monitors ranching practices; a.k.a cow spybot. "The EPA uses these eyes in the sky to observe cattle farmers and look for Clean Water Act violations in NB and IA. Ranchers say the flyovers invade privacy, and five Congressman have asked the EPA to explain them by June 10th." What do you think jboyst? Saving us from the "tragedy of commons," if in fact grazing is taking place on public lands? Why clean water? bunk link
boyst Posted June 17, 2012 Author Posted June 17, 2012 Interesting jboyst. On another note... A lot of soybeans are leaving South Chicago... Headed south... I wonder what's up with that? We are talking a good 8 barges (12-15,000 tons) A DAY... Heading south? Been like that for about a week. Kinda odd... I don't usually see that much soy... Maybe corn, but not soy. Somebody is trading it. The soy and corn will be processed in to feeds for livestock animals. Soy is very popular this year, a lot of people are growing it; there is a push by those in the powerful places to do soy this year, next year back to corn, and etc.
Recommended Posts