You might want to get familiar with the term “Bud Box”. It may change the way you work your cattle.
In a recently sponsored Stockmanship and Stewardship event, guest speaker Dr. Ron Gill, Extension Beef Specialist with Texas A&M discussed safe and effective cattle handling techniques and facilities. Some of the goals are to have cattle owners be more successful at handling cattle and to be able to safely restrain cattle for veterinary work.
One term that Dr. Gill used was ‘Bud Box’. You may or may not be familiar with this term. Bud Box refers to a basic facility of rectangular shape that is used as a flow through leading to a chute or a trailer load-out area. The concept was developed by the late Bud Williams. Mr. Williams was known for his unique ability to effectively handle animals in a low stress manner. For many years he taught workshops around the country for people interested in learning his philosophies.
The Bud Box takes advantage of two natural instincts of cattle. First, when pressured, cattle typically want to return to where they came from. And second, cattle typically go around something causing them pressure (eg., people).
Cattle are brought into the box and immediately allowed to flow back out, except that a few gate changes on the entry/exit area causes the flow back out to be re-directed to a chute or load-out chute. Animals will go down the chute seeking to escape back to where they came from. Dr. Gill suggests that most cow/calf operations will need a Bud Box that is at least 12 feet wide and 20 feet deep.
Learning where to position yourself is critical in making the Bud Box concept successful. People with little cattle experience and people who tend to not be successful working cattle may fail to make the Bud Box effective. Before constructing a Bud Box make sure you understand cattle movement and handling. Standard curved chute systems and systems with solid sides may still work better for many operations.
Source: PennState Extension and National BQA
Murray N. Rothbard was the father of what some call Radical Libertarianism or Anarcho-Capitalism which Hans-Hermann Hoppe described as “Rothbard’s unique contribution to the rediscovery of property and property rights as the common foundation of both economics and political philosophy, and the systematic reconstruction and conceptual integration of modern, marginalist economics and natural-law political philosophy into a unified moral science: libertarianism.”
This book applies the principles of this “unified moral science” to environmental and natural resource management issues.
The book started out life as an assigned reading list for a university level course entitled Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian View.
As I began to prepare to teach the course, I quickly saw that there was a plethora of textbooks suitable for universal level courses dealing with environmental and natural resource economics. The only problem was that they were all based in mainstream neo-classical (or Keynesian) theory. I could find no single collection of material comprising a comprehensive treatment of environmental and natural resource economics based on Austrian Economic Theory.
However, I was able to find a large number of essays, monographs, papers delivered at professional meetings and published from a multitude of sources. This book is the result. It is composed of a collection of research reports and essays by reputable scientists, economists, and legal experts as well as private property and free market activists.
The book is organized into seven parts: I. Environmentalism: The New State Religion; II. The New State Religion Debunked; III. Introduction to Environmental and Natural Resource Economics; IV. Interventionism: Law and Regulation; V. Pollution and Recycling; VI. Property Rights: Planning, Zoning and Eminent Domain; and VII. Free Market Conservation. It also includes an elaborate Bibliography, References and Recommended Reading section including an extensive Annotated Bibliography of related and works on the subject.
The intellectual level of the individual works ranges from quite scholarly to informed editorial opinion.