How Sensors and Software Turn Farms Into Data Mines 62
Nerval's Lobster writes that business intelligence tools have come to agribusiness, with farmers and cattle ranchers using many of the same tools found in numerous corporate cubicles, but fed by sensors you won't find in cubeland. "Machines (such as this one from DeLaval) keep track of all kinds of data about each cow, including the chemical properties of its milk, and flag when a particular cow is having problems or could be sick. The software can compare current data with historical patterns for the entire herd, and relate to weather conditions and other seasonal variations. Now a farmer can track his herd on his iPad without having to get out of bed, or even from another state. And Farmeron attempts to aggregate all farm-related data in a single Web portal. The company was started by Matija Kopi, the CEO who calls himself the 'Main Cowboy in the Saddle' and Marko Dukmeni, the CTO who is their Chief Tractor Hacker. They offer monthly accounts (starting at 25 cents per animal per month) to track animal physical characteristics along with milk production, medical treatments, and even particular feeding group schedules."
Re:Automatic Milking Systems (Score:5, Informative)
Anyway, what's the cost of these things?
Like most farm equipment, not cheap, especially new. Think loan. Big. Loan. I know you're looking for a more exact number, but there isn't one. They're usually custom built systems; sold one at a time. The larger the capacity, the lower the individual component cost.
Cost of maintenance per year? Do they have ongoing problems?
Like any customized solution, the answer is "it depends". It depends on how big the herd is, how many stations it has, etc. And as far as ongoing problems... well, it's automated. It makes the job easier, but you still have to watch it. You can't just set one up and walk away. These are live animals. Sometimes they do things that aren't predictable.
Also, any different between the major makers? Delaval, Lely, GEA?
Same as the difference between a Dell and a Compaq. Some of the parts are interchangeable, some aren't. Some pride themselves on service, some on cost. Some cater to very large farms, others to medium sized. Some have blue hoses, and others clear. Farm equipment is purpose built... tell me about the purpose, and I can tell you what equipment would be best. Like, for example, you'll notice I didn't say automatic milking machines cater to small farms. That would be because the equipment costs more than the savings in labor. A lot more.
Healthier cows = less suffering? (Score:5, Informative)
One thing the dairymen told me was that one of the first signs of an animal getting sick was that it would usually eat less. Our system at the time each animal had a collar with a transponder on it-- an unpowered device about the size of two decks of cards. Something like a very primitive RFID chip. How much each animal ate was recorded and any unusual patterns were brought to the attention of the owners or managers. As soon as such pattern developed, the animal could be examined and treated. This makes good economic sense, because healthy cows produce more. But it struck me as compassionate as well.
We also discovered that some cows would game the system, realizing that every time they stuck their head into the feeder, that auger would start up and dump grain into the trough. We fixed it so they would only get a healthy amount at a crack. They figured out that putting your head in, pulling it out, and putting it in again would get you another pile of goodies. We modified it again, so it wouldn't do that. The cows that had been gaming the system were fine, but certain others would never go back after it stopped delivering feed for them. So we modified it again so that even if you'd already had your allocation, sticking your head in again would still net you another handful. Just enough to keep them coming back when they got hungry, and more importantly, the next day, and the day after that, etc.
It was really fun trying to outthink cows. It wasn't nearly as easy as you'd think.
Re:Farmers don't need iPads (Score:4, Informative)
Farmers don't need iPads. They need to have the government stop screwing up the markets and inadvertently creating monopolies like Monsanto. They created genetically altered seeds that, when they blow into neighboring fields, they sue those farmers, forcing them into bankrupcy, and thus getting a cheap new addition to their mega farm.
The other problems caused by government is they're endangering the food supply -- look it up online, we're about one drought away from a food shortage right now, the corn supply is down to about 6 months now, the lowest its been since the 50s. Part of it is because 40% of our corn gets turned into ethanol (a non-viable alternative to gas, used presently as an additive, at a premium), instead of food. Part of it is because the mega farms don't do proper crop rotation, but instead follow the market -- leading to diminishing yields and land overuse. And part of it is, ironically -- subsidies. The government steps in and says that there are certain price floors and ceilings for farming... and since eventually every farmer has a bad harvest, and they can't pay their mortage or whatever, they go bankrupt. It's inevitable; Just a matter of time. And then their land is bought up by the next door mega farm.
The consolidation of the agricultural industry is going to screw us; and iPads are not going to help. Not in the slightest. What's even more funny... not many younger people want to work on a farm. A lot of family farms are closing up because the kids moved away. Not much money in it... So you're asking people in their 50s and 60s "Hey, wanna use an iPad to do something you've been doing for the past, uhh... forever?" No. They don't. They're worried about making the next mortgage payment and repairing the roof of the barn. an iPad is not high on the list, and it offers no real benefit in productivity or return on investment. It's a convenience, nothing more.
I'll give a bit of background so you'll understand where I get my info. I currently work for a company that underwrites the USDA's Federal Crop Insurance as a software developer. We don't sell this insurance, but contract with various insurance agents around the country who do. The way that this program works is we underwrite the insurance, and assign a % premium and risk to the USDA, the rest is ours. Farmers do not have to purchase crop insurance, but if they do not they won't qualify for certain disaster relief. My particular job has included working on software that maps a farmer's fields and allows him/her & their agent to report what is planted on each field.
Wow, where to begin. I guess I'll start with how farmers don't want this iPad stuff. This is one area where I know for a fact that you are wrong. Yes, the older farmers aren't nearly as interested in it as your average teenager. But that does not mean that they don't appreciate what it can and does do for their farming operation. The older generation of life long farmers who own their land usually aren't the ones farming it. Most of the fields we insure are multi-shareholder setups. Basically, a "farmer" leases a field from a landholder for a % of the profits. These younger farmers who are leasing the land are the ones who are using this new tech. We've seen a large demand for the ability to use this precision farming information when reporting what was planted. Farmers are demanding more & more tech in their farming operations. Yes, the older generation who now mostly lease their land don't have any need for it, but the younger generation loves it.
Next, Monsanto's "wind blown" lawsuit was in Canada. I say that because I'm assuming that by "government" you mean the US government, although all governments create some sort of monopolies. Their other lawsuits were clearer cases of infringement, either by resellers knowingly selling gen-mod grown seed or farmers reusing grown seed instead of disposing/selling like they contracted to do. While I don't agree with what they patented or how they've c