Author Topic: mules versus tractors  (Read 2255 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline franksolich

  • Scourge of the Primitives
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58699
  • Reputation: +3072/-173
mules versus tractors
« on: March 25, 2010, 11:28:38 AM »
I was looking through some old family photographs the day before yesterday, in this case photographs from the original [franksolich] homestead in northwestern Pennsylvania (Clarion County), from the 1870s through the 1960s.

There were many photographs of a paternal great-uncle ploughing and cultivating fields using mules.....as late as the time of his death, 1967.

When talking with a local tractor enthusiast, I mentioned that, well, this great-uncle was apparently eccentric.

He said not; he said there were probably very good reasons he was using mules rather than a tractor, and insists that even today, many farms in western Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio use mules (and we're not talking the Amish here).

That threw me for a loop.

Can anyone think of why mules would be more effective than tractors?

Maybe because it was only a small farm, 182 acres?

This great-uncle was mostly before my own time; I do not recall him at all; I was at the [franksolich] homestead only one time in my life, when a little tiny lad, and all I remember is that there were so many people around I hid behind my mother.

This great-uncle was actually pretty impressive, a B.S.M.E. from Penn State, BMOC, Phi Delta Theta, and worked for a big engineering firm in Philadelphia for a decade or so, before going back to the family farm (because nobody else in the family wanted it).

The youngest in his family, he had a tendency towards the single life, bachelorhood, but somewhere along the line married a widow with two tiny children, a boy and a girl.  The wife had to shortly thereafter be sent away to an insane asylum (where she lived until she was nearly 100 years old), and so my great-uncle raised the two children; the boy later became a Foreign Service Officer and U.S. ambassador to Chile, and the girl married a Pittsburgh banker.

I get the impression he was eccentric because people who remembered him oftentimes commented that he got along better with mules than with people.

But on this one thing--using mules rather than a tractor--was he in fact eccentric, or just practical?

One can only speculate, but speculate, please.
apres moi, le deluge

Offline The Village Idiot

  • Banned
  • Probationary (Probie)
  • Posts: 54
  • Reputation: +96/-15
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #1 on: March 25, 2010, 11:56:06 AM »
Interesting question.

Soil type? Maybe a farm thats far from level?

I dunno. I never thought about this before.

Offline franksolich

  • Scourge of the Primitives
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58699
  • Reputation: +3072/-173
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #2 on: March 25, 2010, 12:00:26 PM »
Interesting question.

Soil type? Maybe a farm thats far from level?

I dunno. I never thought about this before.

Sort of hilly terrain, but not overly so.

I don't see any rocks in the photographs, so surely it was pure dirt.
apres moi, le deluge

Offline AprilRazz

  • I love my...
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2705
  • Reputation: +202/-16
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #3 on: March 25, 2010, 04:45:03 PM »
Mules are still used quite a bit for logging. They can get into areas that are not that accessible to tractors, they have less of an impact and are surprisingly reliable. The only issue is the occasional "donkey time" and basic upkeep. But even the upkeep is not that bad as a mule can survive on less quantity and quality feed than a horse can. Mules can also work longer as well. They are really amazing animals and I do have a soft spot for them.

Interesting historical note is that George Washington is almost singularly responsible for the proliferation of mules in farm work in this country. He was given 2 jacks (boy donkeys) and started breeding mules and spreading the word.
Proud Navy Wife and Veteran

"How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual... as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of." Suzanna Hupp


racist – A statement of surrender during an argument. When two people or disputants are engaged in an acrimonious debate, the side that first says “Racist!” has conceded defeat. Synonymous with saying “Resign” during a chess game, or “Uncle” during a schoolyard fight. Ori

Offline Carl

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19742
  • Reputation: +1491/-100
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #4 on: March 25, 2010, 04:57:58 PM »
I simply can`t think of any reason that would make it practical to farm with them.

Offline JohnnyReb

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32063
  • Reputation: +1997/-134
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #5 on: March 25, 2010, 05:12:59 PM »
Some crops get to tall for a tractor to plow but with a mule you can plow right up to harvest time. Corn and tall cotton come to mind.

Tractors plow deeper but compact the soil...mules, you only scratch the surface and don't pack the soil so much.

The only real reason I can think of is....he was like my granddaddy's, set in his ways.

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of ‘liberalism’, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” - Norman Thomas, U.S. Socialist Party presidential candidate 1940, 1944 and 1948

"America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."  Stalin

Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28493
  • Reputation: +1707/-151
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #6 on: March 25, 2010, 05:38:36 PM »
Farming for competitive income versus subsistence-farming-with-truck-garden (or selling surplus) are entirely different propositions.  If you are living off the farm rather than its profits, draft animals have the advantage of not needing fuel or parts, however tractors do not have a mind of their own (Farmers' opinions on that notwithstanding) and tractors only hurt you if you actually do something stupid instead of just deciding to kick you in the head because they're having a pissed-off day.   

Having said that, there was a gent back in Indiana my sister (Who does some goat farming) knew back in the 70s and 80s, who had a commercial farm going using just draft animals for prime power.  Don't know the size but I doubt it was much more than the standard 160 acres.  He made a pretty successful go of it over 20 years or so, in a profession where 'Not going bankrupt' is successful, and eventually retired.  He told her the bottom line on the experience was that it worked out reasonably well for him, but the only way it was really sustainable was with a whole raft of kids you could put to work for just their room and board.
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline franksolich

  • Scourge of the Primitives
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58699
  • Reputation: +3072/-173
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2010, 09:30:17 AM »
Farming for competitive income versus subsistence-farming-with-truck-garden (or selling surplus) are entirely different propositions.

I get the impression that the farm, originally set up in the 1870s, was for competitive income, under my great-grandfather, a veteran of the Civil War.

But he died in 1901, when this last great-uncle was an infant less than a year old, and the older sons, then in their late teenaged years, took off to see the world (and to make non-agricultural careers).  This left the farm under the management of his wife, my great-grandmother, and the daughters, plus the infant son.

Women have proven throughout history that they can run a farm; unfortunately, not quite as well as better-muscled males.  The daughters ultimately all went off to their own careers and marriages.  Apparently my great-grandmother ran the place with the help of hired hands, but as time went on, it eroded down to a truck-garden/subsistence operation.

Getting old and decrepit, she gave up the farm in 1931, moving to the town of Clarion.  None of her older sons wanted it, and only one daughter was naturally inclined towards the agricultural life, and was married to another farmer.  Her husband, with his own acreage, decided adding this farm would be too much for him to handle.

Then out of the blue, this youngest great-uncle, a professional engineer in Philadelphia at the time, offered to take the farm, and so it was given to him.  At first, until the beginning of the 1960s, he did the whole thing all by himself.  But as he got older, he rented out some of the land to other farmers.

By the time he died in 1967, he had rented out all but 55 acres of it, still using mules.

This great-uncle had made some good investments while in Philadelphia, and prospered even during the Great Depression, so he wasn't dependent upon the farm for income.  But as he was alleged to have said, "Well, somebody has to farm this land."

From photographs, it appears he grew mostly corn, but from reminescences of elderly relatives who spent their childhoods there, it was essentially just an enormous garden, all sorts of "crops."

In the beginning (say, through the late 1940s), his "manpower" consisted of his stepson and stepdaughter, and lots and lots of nieces and nephews who spent springs and summers there, until they too were old enough to go out into the world on their own.

It appears to have worked out well, but of course with his increasing age, its scope gradually lessened.  But the day he died, he still had nine mules in the barn.

The farm was then sold to someone from Pittsburgh, who later turned it into a hippie commune.

The last I heard of its fate, circa the late 1990s, no one lives out there any more, and it's now reverted back to its wild state.
apres moi, le deluge

Offline longview

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3292
  • Reputation: +224/-34
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #8 on: March 26, 2010, 09:56:43 AM »
I hear low start-up costs for smaller producers and versatility as primary reasons to use draft animals for farming.  You may only need one animal for one specific task and up to four and even 20 for others.  With machinery if you only have a large tractor, it may not be suited to a job in a small area and a small tractor may not be able to handle large implements.  Which is why we see many farm yards that look like used implement dealer lots.  Most "maintenance" on draft animals can be done by the farmer, although they are also good at working on machinery, that done on draft animals is usually less expensive and less time intensive.  Draft animals also help grow their own fuel.

I've done haying on outfits both ways.  Both have benefits and drawbacks.  I will say I prefer to feed hay in the winter with a team.  You can set them on a path and they will continue eliminating the need for a driver as most teams are trained to simple verbal commands.

Besides, the jingle of harness buckles and the sounds of hooves on hard packed snow lends a bit to the chore.

Offline micmac

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Reputation: +15/-2
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #9 on: March 26, 2010, 12:20:22 PM »
They require very little feed compared to a horse and they are hybrids.  They are healthier and are sterile.  They also do not spook like horses do.  They are half donkey so they will stand and fight rather than run away.

Offline vesta111

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9712
  • Reputation: +493/-1154
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #10 on: March 28, 2010, 07:59:07 AM »
They require very little feed compared to a horse and they are hybrids.  They are healthier and are sterile.  They also do not spook like horses do.  They are half donkey so they will stand and fight rather than run away.

Dollars to donuts the Mule is more usefull then a horse.

There is a personal side to using a Mule over a tractor, the quiet of the beast one can talk to, little worry about snakes or mean critters when one stops for any reason. Companionship for long days in the sun, easy for someone on a tractor to get heat stroke, a mule will just stop when it gets overheated, too hot for a Mule to work, then it's too hot for a man to be working.

Loyalty is a big trait in a Mule.  If one falls off a mule the beast will stop and come back for the rider where as a horse heads for home riderless.

A mule is smart, it will not take a rider off a cliff as a horse will do, nor go into unsafe areas of a river or stream.

One thing Frank---Your GGG Uncle must have been a kind and loving man, a Mule never forgets any miss handling or bad treatment.  They simply will not work for anyone that does not treat them with respect.

As you may be able to tell, I am a huge fan of Mules, having ridden both horse and Mule I can vouch as to their wisdom.   Not to mention that unlike a Stallion who will kick through a barn to run 10 miles toward a mare in heat, I have never heard of a Mule doing that, there may be some that have but so far I have never heard of this behavior.

Somewhere on you tube there is a video of a party out on horse back and Mules with their hunting dogs and a Cougar attacks them.  One of the horse riders is thrown as is the rider on the Mule.  The horse runs for home but the Mule fights and kills the CAT while the dogs just sit there watching the scene.

     

Offline Woodhick

  • Just Off Probation
  • *
  • Posts: 117
  • Reputation: +0/-0
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2010, 08:24:02 AM »
I was looking through some old family photographs the day before yesterday, in this case photographs from the original [franksolich] homestead in northwestern Pennsylvania (Clarion County), from the 1870s through the 1960s.

There were many photographs of a paternal great-uncle ploughing and cultivating fields using mules.....as late as the time of his death, 1967.

When talking with a local tractor enthusiast, I mentioned that, well, this great-uncle was apparently eccentric.

He said not; he said there were probably very good reasons he was using mules rather than a tractor, and insists that even today, many farms in western Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio use mules (and we're not talking the Amish here).

That threw me for a loop.

Can anyone think of why mules would be more effective than tractors?

Maybe because it was only a small farm, 182 acres?

This great-uncle was mostly before my own time; I do not recall him at all; I was at the [franksolich] homestead only one time in my life, when a little tiny lad, and all I remember is that there were so many people around I hid behind my mother.

This great-uncle was actually pretty impressive, a B.S.M.E. from Penn State, BMOC, Phi Delta Theta, and worked for a big engineering firm in Philadelphia for a decade or so, before going back to the family farm (because nobody else in the family wanted it).

The youngest in his family, he had a tendency towards the single life, bachelorhood, but somewhere along the line married a widow with two tiny children, a boy and a girl.  The wife had to shortly thereafter be sent away to an insane asylum (where she lived until she was nearly 100 years old), and so my great-uncle raised the two children; the boy later became a Foreign Service Officer and U.S. ambassador to Chile, and the girl married a Pittsburgh banker.

I get the impression he was eccentric because people who remembered him oftentimes commented that he got along better with mules than with people.

But on this one thing--using mules rather than a tractor--was he in fact eccentric, or just practical?

One can only speculate, but speculate, please.
I live an hours drive from the village of Clarion.
I can understand why they used them during the time frame you mentioned for this homestead. It seems to me it is pure economics.  A pair of mules would cost today about $4,000 compared to $60,000 for a tractor.. Less maintenance (vet bill) vs. parts than a tractor. Less fuel (feed), I seldom see anyone farming other than a couple non Amish farms here in north western Pa now. I believe  the reason is the subsidies by the government to not grow or raise animals has much to do with it.
GUN CONTROL is Hitting Your Mark The First Shot !!!

Offline JohnnyReb

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32063
  • Reputation: +1997/-134
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2010, 09:48:18 AM »
I live an hours drive from the village of Clarion.
I can understand why they used them during the time frame you mentioned for this homestead. It seems to me it is pure economics.  A pair of mules would cost today about $4,000 compared to $60,000 for a tractor.. Less maintenance (vet bill) vs. parts than a tractor. Less fuel (feed), I seldom see anyone farming other than a couple non Amish farms here in north western Pa now. I believe  the reason is the subsidies by the government to not grow or raise animals has much to do with it.

Yeah, you can "NOT FARM" so many more acres with a tractor.
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of ‘liberalism’, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” - Norman Thomas, U.S. Socialist Party presidential candidate 1940, 1944 and 1948

"America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."  Stalin

Offline vesta111

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9712
  • Reputation: +493/-1154
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #13 on: March 28, 2010, 10:11:53 AM »
Yeah, you can "NOT FARM" so many more acres with a tractor.

Back in the early 1960's we had 25 acres of land, mostly wooded.   

Dad had been talking to a neighbor that was being PAID by the government NOT to plant corn or raise hogs.

Dad got all excited, he could bring in the bulldozers, take down the trees, sell them for the prime wood, and write to the government that he agreed not to raise hogs if they paid him so much.

As he said he would never have to work another day in his life by doing nothing. 

But that idea went the way of his idea to put bleachers in the back yard and charge $2.00 a head for  people that wanted to see UFO"S .




Offline The Village Idiot

  • Banned
  • Probationary (Probie)
  • Posts: 54
  • Reputation: +96/-15
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #14 on: March 28, 2010, 10:24:08 AM »
But that idea went the way of his idea to put bleachers in the back yard and charge $2.00 a head for  people that wanted to see UFO"S .

 :rotf:

Gobucks is going to say "This proves its hereditary" or something.

Offline NHSparky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24431
  • Reputation: +1278/-617
  • Where are you going? I was gonna make espresso!
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #15 on: March 28, 2010, 10:27:20 AM »
:rotf:

Gobucks is going to say "This proves its hereditary" or something.

(sigh)...And here I was, trying to be nice by not making the comment...but then again, it says a lot for the suckers who parted with $2.00...
“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.”  -Henry Ford

Offline vesta111

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9712
  • Reputation: +493/-1154
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #16 on: March 29, 2010, 07:39:36 AM »
(sigh)...And here I was, trying to be nice by not making the comment...but then again, it says a lot for the suckers who parted with $2.00...

This was the early 1960's and we had 2 major books " Incident at Exeter" and interrupted Journey'  a lot of UFO hysteria in this neck of the woods.

Who knows what was going on at that time, we had a huge SAC Base in the area and some of the retiring pilots went into law in forcement and had to admit they themselves could not explain what they saw.

Naturally the SAC command was very interested in not just what the civilians were saying but what their own people were logging in as unexplained.

For months it seems calls to the base resulted in scrambles day and night.  It was a mess, the sellers of telescopes made a fortune as the citizens really wanted to see a UFO, they ate that stuff up.


So much could not be explained, the people reporting sightings were all reputable and believable. 

Offline The Village Idiot

  • Banned
  • Probationary (Probie)
  • Posts: 54
  • Reputation: +96/-15
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #17 on: March 29, 2010, 07:49:04 AM »
I remember reading "Incident at Exeter"

Offline vesta111

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9712
  • Reputation: +493/-1154
Re: mules versus tractors
« Reply #18 on: March 30, 2010, 07:31:27 AM »
I remember reading "Incident at Exeter"

Those were the good old days for me, watching the Adults go nuts.

Lots of storeys about violent bar fights in a near by town over [ are they here ] or not.

Back then the biggest new  adult toy was the CB Radio and when John Fuller the author of Incidence at Exeter arrived by train from Boston and took a cab to his hotel, half the county was listening in to the Cab drivers frequency.

This was how the Author found people to interview, they were calling the cab driver on his radio telling him to bring his passenger to their house to be interviewed.  :rotf:

This area also was home to Betty and Barney Hill, she a librarian, he a mail man. Both are gone now, but up to 10 years ago Betty still gave tours and lectures on their experience.

What ever happend to this couple one night, any way one looks at it caused some really weird problems for the Air Force.

Big difference in how the public handled this information from that of the Exeter sightings.

First off there was the interracial issue of the couple.  Then the fact that both were well educated and pillars of society.    These folk had it seems no idea what had happend to them for a few hours, just nightmares.   

As the story unraveled with the Air Force placing them under hypnosis, the fact their car was radioactive, all the joking about UFO'S died down and people became almost afraid to talk about them.

This was not just lights in the sky, these people described a medical procedure that was not known for another 20 years.   They also drew a picture of what they said was a map that for years went by before someone reversed the picture to look towards our sun not out from it.

Funny that few youth, or the ageing gave any of this a thought, it was the between 25-40 age group that went NUTS over this stuff.