Killing Trees, Destroying the Land

I stopped the pickup truck abruptly, jumped out and outraged shouted at the tree cutters: “Where is your license?!!!” Bewildered the three of them looked at me, threw away their axes and fled; leaving clothing and an empty whiskey bottle behind. And, of course, a trail of destroyed trees.

Notes out of Zambia no 5: An incident of environmental devastation.

Photo 1. Recently lobbed tree at plot 2 of Harmony Settlement Scheme.

We have a small piece of land at Harmony settlement, 14 km out of Choma, along the Great North Road towards Lusaka. It is a settlement scheme with over 200 lots ranging from a few to over twenty hectares. Many people acquire such plots for very little money when they are given out not with the intention to develop the land into small farms, but to sell them sometime later with considerable profit. This thing happens all the time when government hands out plots for free as is the case with settlement schemes.

Our late neighbour at Lot no 2 at Harmony was such a man. He had another piece of land somewhere else and that land he did work on. Lot 2 was some kind of investment, or just something to hold on to. Not something to work on or with.

People who do nothing with settlement plots given out for free run the risk of losing them by repossession. One rule is that there must be occupancy of the land; meaning that there should be a house on it. The place must be inhabited. It does not have to be the owner, living in that house, it may be a caretaker. Sometimes this dweller is employed by the owner, especially when the owner does grow crops, plant trees and indeed needs labour to do such things. Quite often this dweller is not paid and therefore has to fend for himself. Surely, caretakers can grow some crops in the rainy season, but it is hard to sustain oneself all year around by agricultural production without resources such as a borehole, traction animals, a plough or even a wheel barrow. The agricultural equipment of these people is limited to one hoe and one axe and that is it.

Such is the case for the caretaker of lot no 2. Our late neighbour just offered him a place to stay and the obligatory resident never had the resources and perhaps the opportunity or desire to transform his residence into a viable economic venture.

But he did have his axe and the trees.

At settlement schemes in forest areas you are allowed to “clear land” by cutting trees when such “cleared land” is used to grow crops on. You are not allowed to cut trees just for the purpose of selling the wood as firewood or for charcoal production unless you have obtained the obligatory license. When Harmony settlement scheme started it looked like a war zone. Trees were burning everywhere for the sake of agricultural development; the proceeds of charcoal production had to provide working capital.

Our resident at Lot 2 did not have to clear land. The only useful part of Lot 2 had already been cleared on acquisition and was best for grazing. The other part of the land was dambo – low land - flooded with water from January to June. Because of all this water it also was good for cows, but not for crops. Remarkably it had a number of mature trees on it which made the land look beautiful. Over the years the number of these trees had been diminishing. One by one they went down, losing the battle for survival from our resident tenant. Just one of these big trees yields hundreds of thousands of Kwacha as malasha (charcoal) and even as plain firewood the takings are considerable. A heap of money in an environment where piece work yields only Kwacha 10,000 (2 USD) in a day.

At Harmony the procedure of replacing the Offer of Land with a genuine title deed has advanced and is said to near completion. To be accepted as a future title deed holder one needs approval of the local settlement office (resorting under the Office of the Vice President) and such approval only is given if indeed there has been development and agricultural activity. At Lot 2 there was neither development nor agricultural activity. Rumour has it that such Lots are to be repossessed.

The passing away of the former holder of the Offer of Land meant that there was effectively no control over what happened at Lot 2 and its tenant/caretaker. Our man, not accountable to anyone, rose to the occasion. He decided to kill the remaining the big trees, make a big bash and hopefully get away with it.

Photo 2. Tree before lobbing. The next in line?

He started on this brilliant project a few months ago. I drive past Lot 2 at least once a week. When I saw one of the last full grown trees mutilated and reduced to a bare trunk I asked our employed and salaries farm man to tell the neighbour to stop killing trees on pain of action being taken against him. He did not heed the advice; on the contrary, he decided to scale up his sordid business by cutting down whatever was left to cut down in as short a time as possible by bringing in two other desperado’s in the destruction exercise.

I have reported the matter to the Section Chairman of Harmony settlement scheme and will do so on Monday at the government office at Choma.

The rate of devastation of land by deforestation and cutting or lobbing of trees along roads is both alarming and appalling. This development seems to grow exponentially with ever increasing demand and ever reducing resources. The outcome is sickeningly obvious.

The big question is why so little is done to arrest this trend. Why is it that when you drive from Lusaka to Choma your vehicle is inspected multiple times and your driving behaviour controlled by camera traps; but at any point along the way you are free to get out of the vehicle and bring a tree down with impunity. Indeed, if you have a truck you can also load the fire wood thus obtained; put paying passengers on top and instruct them to start singing funeral dirges as soon as a road block comes in sight. This cleverness is called coping ability.

Now what would happen in Zambia if this amazing talent “to cope” would not be used to get what rightfully does not belong to you but in a constructive and socially responsible manner?

Be Aware of the Chicken You Eat! Part 2: Malpractices.

Agriculture in Zambia issue 7: Greed and/or ignorance by suppliers of inputs, broiler producers, distributors and consumers alike account for the bulk of malpractices in the broiler industry; a situation aggravated by excessively lenient legislation or regulation and non-compliance with whatever regulation there might be.

The common commercial broiler at 6 weeks.

The first issue of this series of three posts on broiler chickens outlined some dangers and drawbacks of eating broiler chickens. This posts lists malpractices of input suppliers, growers and consumers. The final posts is about remedial action resulting in responsible behaviour of all players in the broiler business.

Input suppliers mostly are companies offering packages of growth enhancers and vitamins, pharmaceuticals and medication, and stock feed. Input suppliers, directly or indirectly, also are farmers growing the grains for feed and the soya bean for protein; producers of fish (meal), bone meal and salt; and any other ingredient that may be part of the composition of stock feed for broilers.

Typical malpractices of input suppliers are/might be:

1. Inclusion of growth hormones and antibiotics in “growth enhancer” packages or in feed.
2. Production of “growth enhancer” packages without specified content. This might be done in countries with lack of legislation as regards permitted enhancers and hence contain harmful materials.
3. Lack of specification of content of stock feed, including of the “additives.” Quality control of animal stock feed should be as good as that of food for human consumption – after all we are at the end of the food chain.
4. Lack of information to the grower about the period of time that each feed maximally or minimally should be given.
5. Careless sale by agro shops in cases when customers (farmers) should be properly informed about usage of the materials purchased.
6. Sale of materials in agro shops that should not be sold at all; opportunistic use of lack of regulation and implementation as regards hazardous feed supplements.

The Zambian broiler farmer roughly can be divided into three types:

1. The backyard chicken farmer. This farmer keeps chickens as a source of extra income, numbers ranging from 100 to a few hundred, kept in one or a few runs in the garden. The neighbourhood (individuals and usually small businesses) is the market, the outlet is at home.
2. The smallholder farmer having a number of runs continuously producing chickens in numbers ranging of a few hundred to a few thousand monthly. The smallholder depends mostly on a market composed of retailers (marketers, groceries, supermarkets) and larger consumers such as hotels, restaurants, snack bars and guesthouses. The small holder usually has packaging facilities and deep freezers for storage. Some smallholders make their own feed, by growing most of the ingredients and purchasing the supplements.
3. The industrial or large scale producer producing up to ten thousands of packaged chickens for retailers, retail chains and other customers buying in bulk. An industrial producer such as Zambeef also produces feed for the small scale and backyard farmer and retails frozen chickens in its own shops.

Zambia may have a few thousand backyard chicken farmers and these supply a considerable part of the local market. This farmer offers usually a competitive price  by being both producer and retailer, non-payment of turnover tax or VAT and low labour costs. They often have poor understanding of technical management. Small holders, unlike the backyard grower, are genuine farmers; and like the industrial producers, usually know what they are doing and why they do what they do. The bottom line is production for profit, and that may be by farming methods that may be unfriendly for both chicken and consumer.

Typical malpractices of growers are:

1. Over dosage of “growth enhancers” by providing these when already added to the feed by the stock feed company.
2. Usage of harmful growth enhancers such as growth hormones and “pre-therapeutic” antibiotics.
3. Excessive usage of “stress pack,” i.e., vitamin packages. Only excess vitamins B and C leave the body in urine, the others are stored.
4. Non-observance of the withdrawal period before slaughter following treatment with antibiotics.
5. Skipping of the “finisher phase” in rearing chickens that are slaughtered when 3 to 4.5 weeks (the typical supermarket chicken), resulting in chickens possibly containing undesirable “growth enhancers.”
6. Resorting to inferior feed. Feed is by far the main cost in raising chicks and very expensive.
7. Keeping birds in poor conditions (overcrowded, unhygienic, lack of ventilation, wrong temperature) resulting in need for medication, high mortality rate and the slaughter of unhealthy birds.
8. Unsuited housing affecting temperature, ventilation, hygiene and pest control (mosquitoes, flies, rats and mice).
9. Non-observance of cleaning, disinfecting and resting procedures prior to re-usage of the chicken house.
10. Poor slaughtering.
11. No rapid cooling of the carcass after slaughter, cleaning and packaging.
12. No proper storage: insufficient capacity of deep freezers, wrong packing inside the freezers resulting in (too) slow decrease of temperature.
13. Lack of interest in and understanding of proper technical management. This may apply especially to the backyard farmer.
14. Unwillingness to invest in proper infrastructure: the farmer wants to make money without making the necessary investments.
15. Cash flow problems inhibiting the timely purchase of feed. The capital layout until point of sale of broiler chickens is considerable (about ¾ of the sales price). Cash flow problems are common and result in premature sales, wrong feeding, and other undesirable “short cuts.”
16. Poor and/or irresponsible waste disposal. Chicken litter is a desirable fertiliser but slaughter waist is not and must be disposed of responsibly.

Almost all Zambian love eating chicken. Most of the chickens consumed are broilers, especially in municipal and urban areas.

Typical malpractices of the consumer are:

1. Buy cheaply without consideration for quality.
2. Ignorance about the product and its production.
3. Ignorance of and lack of interest in the ecology of the chicken business.

The next and last issue on broilers is about Remedial Action addressing malpractices in the industry. 

Be Aware of the Chicken You Eat! Part 1: Hazards.

Agriculture in Zambia no 6. Broiler chickens: Cheap meat at what price? This first issue of three lists potential dangers of eating broiler chickens and describes briefly how these birds are reared.

Note: The sequel to this post is about malpractices of input suppliers, growers and consumers. Part 3 is about remedial action.

Photo 1. The 6 week old broiler in characteristic posture: sitting next to feeder.

The so-called broiler (or broiler chicken) is by far the main source of chicken meat worldwide. The broiler comes in two types. The minority type is a chicken that needs about 12 weeks to grow to its optimum weight. This type is suited for free range or organic chicken rearing. The majority type, and an overwhelming majority it is, is the regular white broiler sold in a dressed weight range of 0.9 to 2.5 kg. Its life is short: about 3½ week to 7 weeks at the most. That broiler is the subject of this post.

The broiler is produced in many different ways: small scale or large scale; animal friendly or with utter disregard for the wellbeing of the bird; with competent and responsible technical management or without it; by abiding regulations and proper procedure or by flouting and ignoring them; in a sophisticated high tech fashion or simply and manual; for maximum profit or optimum profit; eco friendly or totally unfriendly; in respect of the health of the consumer or in disregard of it.

I shall approach the broiler chicken business firstly from the viewpoint of the consumer, and highlight the dangers of irresponsible growing and consumption. What are the dangers and drawbacks of eating broilers?

1.      Eating broilers may constitute a health hazard.

1.1.  You are eating what has been fed into the bird and a number of these materials are pertinently not meant for you. Industrially produced broiler feed contains “growth enhancers” of usually unspecified composition. Growth enhancers are or may be composed of antibiotics, growth hormones, minerals, vitamins, plant and herbal extracts. Some growth enhancers are residual and/or present in excessive quantities in the chicken, meaning that you eat them with the chicken.

1.2.   The maize (in Zambia about 65% of the feed) or other grain or organic matter that is a constituent of the feed may be contaminated with insecticides or other poison.

1.3.  There is in the bio-industry a tendency to feed “waste” of one form of animal husbandry into another line. Who guarantees you that the bone meal fed to your chicks comes from healthy animals? It might even be that the slaughtering waist of the very chickens themselves is “recycled” back into the chicken feed.

2. Danger of food poisoning by eating chickens that are slaughtered improperly (notably by exposing the carcases to flies, lack of hygiene generally); or by eating dressed chickens that have been stored wrongly (taking too long to cool or freeze, or that have been refrozen after defrosting, or simply been stored too long).

3.   You may (unknowingly) be supporting forms of chicken farming that are “chicken unfriendly” and possibly downright cruel. Examples are overcrowding of the chicken house, poor feeding (e.i., farmers saving on the cost of feed by supplying the chickens with inferior food), poor hygiene, poor slaughtering.

4. You may be supporting forms of chicken farming that pose environmental hazards. A chicken house, for example, is a perfect brooding place for flies and mosquitoes, attracts rats and mice; may develop into a transmitting station of diseases to neighbouring chicken growers and may be the source of foul odours.

Some observations about the life of the broiler

Major problematic issues in broiler production are a direct consequence of the very reasons for which these birds were engineered. Broilers are hybrid birds, bread in the first place for their ability to produce much meat tissue in a short time. The weight gain of these chickens indeed is spectacular. According to one Zambian breeder the broiler should have a live weight of 2.626 kg at the end of week six when ready for slaughter. That means an average weight gain of over 60 gram/day. Other factors also inform the genetic design: the chicks should be docile, suited for the artificial living environment they grow up in and have a favourable feed-meat conversion rate. The chicks are produced on an industrial scale; here in Zambia by Hybrid, Ross and Panda breeders. Chicken farmers need to purchase the chicks from these suppliers or their agents. The chicks are raised in flocks ranging from as small as 50 to as large as several thousands. The mini-birds live under fully artificial conditions; at night light is switched on to entice the chicks to go on eating. Industrial producers have houses with automated temperature, ventilation, feed and water control: the chicks have been incorporated in a mechanical system of manufacture. The broilers live in closed and crowded rooms (up to 10 birds to 1 square meter is accepted practice), constantly excrete, and produce especially after week three a great deal of body heat in an increasingly humid atmosphere.

This strange bird, even if provided with the opportunity to walk about on pasture around the chicken house is usually not keen to do so; hence the notion of a free range commercial broiler of this type is non-sense. The chick, actually, as it gets older is increasingly reluctant to walk. Its muscular development is at odds with the rate of increase in weight. As of the age of four weeks this eating machine prefers to sit close to a feeder to eat in that position. It does not require much imagination to understand that this animal is prone to diseases and stress.

In order to grow at maximum speed the broiler needs special food for each of the three feeding phases of its live. The chick starts with starter, moves on to grower and finishes with finisher. How long (and therefore how much of each type of feed) depends on the desired end product; be it a spring chicken of less than 1 kg to a fully developed bird of some 2.5 kg dressed weight, or anything in between. The three types of feed differ mostly in the amount of protein (starter having most and finisher less) and in the so-called “food supplements” or “growth enhancers.” The composition of the supplements and enhancers is not specified on the bags containing the commercial stock feed. These are or might be vitamins, minerals, growth hormones, prophylactic medication (including antibiotics), and plant and herbal extracts. The “growth enhancer” speeds up the weight gain of the broiler, meaning that the grower needs less time to arrive at a target weight; reduces chances of disease and generally cuts the cost of production.

A responsible chicken stock feed producer eliminates those elements of the “growth enhancers” out of the finisher feed composition that are harmful to the human consumer. Finisher should, for example, not contain antibiotics. The broiler at finisher stage should have ten days to flush out substances which should not be consumed by humans. And a better feed producer would not introduce any antibiotics or growth hormones at all in any of the feeding stages of the bird.

Broilers, for reasons mentioned above, are vulnerable to a range of diseases. The day-old-chicks as supplied by the breeder may or should be vaccinated and the chicken farmer should treat the chickens with lasota and gumboro vaccines. An industrial feed producer such as Tiger Feed routinely adds anti-coccidials to the feed. Chicken farmers have unrestrained access to chicken medication (vaccines and antibiotics) as well as factory made packages of growth enhancers without specified content. It appears that in Zambia there is no regulation in place concerning “permitted” growth enhancers, or the usage and sale of antibiotics. All these things are sold over the counter to anybody wanting to buy them. A withdrawal period, usually of five days, should be observed following the application of antibiotics – only then may the bird be slaughtered for consumption. Such responsible observance is very costly when antibiotics are applied to 5 or 6 week old birds ready for slaughter. At this stage a chicken eats some 200 gr / day costing about K 600 (10 E-cent). For a flock of 200 this amounts to K 600,000 (E 100) in a 5 period and that reduces the profit significantly.  

The drive towards cheap production by chicken farmers and the desire by the consumer to buy cheaply create a situation in which abuses and malpractices can thrive. These are the subject of the next post on broiler chickens.

Italian Reactions: It Takes Two to Tango

Art Historical Reflections no 3. The celebrated Rosa di Pomplona argues eloquently that innovation in Italian art springs from the fortuitous combination of ingenious engineering and an excellent cuisine.  Great art arises from the union of opposites, ultimately the physical and the metaphysical, she says, as is exemplified in Les Mademoiselles d’Avignon by Picasso. The act of its painting metaphorically is a form of cooking and practically of engineering: this act transforms the raw model into an object of culture. The painting itself is a sublime union of opposites inaugurating and epitomising a new style in art.

Initiated: 3 September 2012
Written by: Bert Witkamp

Rosa di Pomplona is, as one might expect of the leading Florence based Instutio della Bella Artes, a renowned specialist of the Italian renaissance. She knows, however, also her way in the tempera painting that preceded oil painting.

Figure 1. Rosa di Pomplona, celebrated art historian and great granddaughter of a model that posed for Picasso when he painted his classic Les Demoiselles d'Avignon.

"The problem of what brings about innovation in art is a fundamental one," she affirms, "and I have pleasure in voicing my appreciation for professor Heinrich Von Schwaben and professor Craigh Cleavens for bringing this topic up in international popular and academic fora. In my contribution to this debate I shall scrutinise innovation in Italian art and that what brought it about. First, let me comment briefly on what my colleagues have put forth. Cleavens attributes innovation in British painting to rationalism and empiricism as grounded in the British philosophical tradition and in the British way of life. Unfortunately, both painters who he presents as illustration for his contention hardly, if at all, can be considered rational in a philosophical sense; though indeed one must concede that they were empiricists in that they learned from experience." 

Rosa notes, in reference to Bacon, that we may indeed say that for a man who has no money it makes sense rationally to steal a loaf of bread as that action, if successful, shall satisfy his hunger. Similarly, it was rational for Turner to paint for the wealthy as they could pay for his work, and they did it well. Whether the wealthy would have paid for pictures of starving children, emaciated mothers or exploited labourers is doubtful. It is not clear, she states,  whether such opportunistic rationalism gives rise to creative innovation.

In philosophy rationalism and empiricism must be guided by moral principles which are not necessarily rational themselves; or may be rational for some but not for others. “Craig,” she concludes, “does not go deep enough.”

"As far as Von Schwaben is concerned," she continues, "his theory of physical determinism, has certain merits and demerits. Surely, the demerits are the most obvious. How could one hold seriously, for example, that a physically large painter would become a great painter; or is likely to develop an appetite for large paintings, or would be inclined towards the painting of grandiose scenes? If, however, we incorporate the self-perception of the artist in this theory we might arrive at something more sensible. The artist who perceives of himself as small might be inclined to compensate for this by huge paintings; or obey his self-perception by the painting of miniatures; or develop a predilection for grand imagery or grand subjects." She notes, however, that if a theory keeps giving you multiple options in similar situations a label such as “determinism” is a misfit. "I should say," she observes, "that Von Schaben’s theory should be expanded to include the mental aspect of the body and subsequently more aptly be labelled the Psychosomatic Theory of Innovation in Art."

Italians, according to Di Pomplona, generally attribute innovation in art, and actually, of all spheres of human endeavour, to two factors. The first factor is technical. It is a question of technique, of engineering, that opens up new ways of artistic construction and hence of expression and perception. Rome could not have been built without its engineers, she argues convincingly. Rembrandt could do what he did because he did it in oil paint. And, she admonishes, he could do that because he had good eyesight and not, as Von Schwaben suggests, because he lacked good eyesight! Oil painting is painting in layers; and these layers may have substantial thickness causing unique kinds of reflection of light and perception of reflected light by the observer. He could not have created these perceptions in tempera, she emphasized, though tempera also is applied in layers; but those are thin and lack the body of an oil paint paste. This gets us to the second factor. The second factor is the national cuisine, and more precisely that what the artist eats and drinks. It is well known that the Italian cuisine is excellent and that is a fundamental reason why our artists produce such appetizing art. It’s our pasta, olive oil, chianti, not to mention the cheeses and meats. The idea that great art is produced on an empty stomach is pure non-sense. Good food is the basis for our physical, sensory and intellectual well being; and our personal well-being is a precondition for our ability to do good for others, i.e., our social well-being.

“If there were an art of the gods” Rosa proclaims powerfully, “it would be the art of cooking, as in it all things are combined that sustain life and make it worthwhile. It is technical, it is sensory, it is a skill, it requires good taste, it is social; it is culture sprung from  agriculture and hence ultimately from the land, the seasons and the cosmos.”

Readers, it is clear indeed that Rosa speaks with the wisdom and authority of what chronologically was Europe’s second great civilisation, the Roman Empire, and arguably its greatest state ever. And she has more to say. The fate of Italy, she says, as of its earliest days, has always been determined by the balance between the arts of engineering and of cooking; of the technical and the sensory. Too much engineering is exemplified in the philosophy of amoral political expediency named Machiavellian; too much cooking in gluttony, debauchery and hedonism. A poor state of cooking usually leads to excessive engineering; and a poor state of engineering leads to overcooking. Present society has too much of both; as demonstrated by excessively engineered food and its massive consumption. The technical and the cooking need to be in harmony. It takes two to tango. Heaven and earth, male and female, life and death, light and darkness, saints and sinners, movement and immobility, determinism and the random, ruler and ruled, the wise and the ignorant: one can’t do without the other.

"Lastly," she confides, "let me tell you a funny anecdote to illustrate the fundamental importance of multiple coinciding inspiring forces to bring about innovation; be these contrary, supplementary or complementary. My great grandmother was a model who posed for Picasso when he did his trailblazing work “Les Mademoiselles d’Avignon.” She, the great grandmother, had said: “Pablo was cooked when he painted that thing and I was raw. He was cooked to the point of double vision, and I was raw to the point of being in my natural state. The painting is the combination of the raw and the cooked; a sublime union of opposites inaugurating and epitomising a new style in painting.”

Consequences of the Von Schwaben Doctrine

Art Historical Reflections, issue 2: British reactions to Von Schwaben’s Theory of Physical Determinism as prime mover of innovation in art. Sir Craigh Cleavens, of the Courtauld Institute of Art, at London, holds that innovation in art is by reason and experience and not by any kind of defect, be it physical or mental.

Initiated: 25 August 2012
Updated: 29 january 2014
Written by: Bert Witkamp

Figure 1. Sir Craigh Cleavens as a graduate student. 
Destined for Oriental Studies indeed!

The controversy sparked of by Von Schwaben’s Art Historical theories, and in particular his predilection for physical or, more precisely, bodily determinism in the development of (Western) art has reached unprecedented heights now that the prestigious London based Courtauld Institute of Art felt it should make its well considered stand known. Resident professor Sir Craigh Cleavens, spokesman of the world famous institute, is mostly known for his extensive studies of shadows in the baroque style of painting; an effort which culminated in his classic Shadows in the Dark (Winsor Press, 1989). In this landmark opus he traces shadows in baroque painting back to the influence of early Middle Eastern mystery cults on Greek philosophy. (Dear reader, more on this at another occasion, intriguing as the subject is. For now let us first sort out the business of the Von Schwaben’s theories).

Sir Cleavens critically observes that, in line with Von Schwaben’s thinking, the theory of physical determinism equally well might be applied to scientists, including art historians. He notes, not entirely without malice, that, in this line of thinking Newton formulated his law of gravity because he fell out of a tree as a child; that Archimedes thought of the Law of Archimedes because he slipped on the marble bathroom floor causing him to splash into the bath; that Einstein’s Theory of Relativity must have been inspired by the dizziness Einstein experienced when swirling in the merry-go-round; and that Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection sprang from the sexual deprivation Darwin experienced during his expeditions at sea.

He asks, in his delightful civil manner, what ailment or trauma it is that made Von Schaben formulate his theory of physical determinism. Is it, perhaps, he ventures, because Von Schwaben perceives of himself as a nobody? And then, he continues, if it is an ailment that lead to the formulation of the theory of physical determinism in art, what confidence should we have in it? Why not look closer home, at this side of the Channel, at the great philosophers that this great nation has brought forth? Locke, Hume, well eh, and Russel, he added somewhat reluctantly. Might they not provide the answers, or at least ideas for answers about the causes of innovation in art?

Let us, Cleavens proposes, for example, examine the work of our great painter Turner. It is well known that Joseph Mallord William Turner changed the art of landscape painting and took it to unprecedented lucid heights. There has been no master before or after him who made you feel that you could almost touch the light that shaped the objects he was rendering. Now, why and how did Turner develop this outstanding ability? Because  he grew up as a child in a small room? Or does his virtuosity in rendering light emanate from the dreadful darkness of an English winter? Nonsense! Turner was not only a brilliant painter, he also was a rational man. A man shaped by Locke and Hobbes. Like most of us British. Yes, we are not only rationalist and realists; we are also clever and practical men, taking experience as our master. Turner, Cleavens explained, did two things to achieve his unrivaled luminescence in oil painting. He studied the Dutch masters before him, such as seascape painter Willem van de Velde (Jr.), and he used water colour techniques in oil painting. He applied oil paint as a thin wash, as is done in watercolour, to achieve incredible yet real luminosity. When you start painting seascapes it is only rational to look at worthy predecessors; and his innovative use of glace in oil painting was the outcome of an empiricist, scientific approach to painting, transferring a certain technique from one field to another. Surely, Cleavens concludes "..valid reasoning from sound principle can not lead to error."

"Turner", insists professor Craigh Cleavens, "was not a sick man. On the contrary, he was as sane as a genius can be. Innovation in art is not the result of physical defect or psychic trauma. It comes about by thrift, desire and ambition; and is realized by rational, experiential, empiricist means. Let us, as the cherry in the cake, consider the case of Francis Bacon. No, not the seventeenth century philosopher and what else he was, but the twentieth century painter; arguably Britain’s greatest modern painter. Bacon, on one hand, represents all sorts of things which are British and better not spoken off, and, on the other hand, represents things so great they no longer are merely British. An outrageous character indeed; a gambler, queer and a petty thief, intemperate and extravagant. Yet a great artist whose tormented soul produced works iconic of the torment inflicted on us by the very sort of society we live in. A society not natural hence creating human beings not natural; and he, Francis Bacon, developed in visual imagery the language to express these distortions, perversions and alienations. Not because he was short of vitamin A. Not because he was short of trauma of whatever kind. Not because he had too much trauma of whatever kind. No! He painted what he wanted to painted by his own volition indeed. And he did it well; and that has nothing to do with us liking him as a person or not."  

Dear readers, you may gather that this is not the end of the story. There are rumblings heard in the political theatre. And professional reaction from Florence: yes indeed who would think that such an eminent centre of the study of art as the Institutio della Bella Arte, could keep quiet over such a deep issue....... We’ll keep you informed!

The Art Historical Views of Heinrich von Schwaben

Art Historical Reflections no 1. A brief exposé of the insights of Herr Professor H. von Schwaben as regards innovation in Western pictorial art. He attributes Rembrandt’s innovative painting technique to the deteriorating eyesight of the 17^th century master; and states that the post WW II abstract expressionist painters basically were eye patients subconsciously and inarticulately crying out for vitamin A.  Hence the predominance of the colour orange in their painting.

Initiated: 23 August 2012
Updated: 29 January 2014
Written by: Bert Witkamp

Herr Professor Heinrich von Schwaben
as portrayed during his BBC interview by the author.

Von Schwaben made the international media with his intriguing article titled Rembrandt’s painting: Short- or Long-sighted? BBC World News, under the heading, BREAKTHROUGH IN REMBRANDT STUDIES! informed us that Herr Professor Heinrich von Schwaben, of Das Institut für die Klassieke Malerei (the Institute of Classical Painting) of the University of Munich, published in The Classical Art Historical Journal (2012, Volume XVI, issue 2, pp. 79-84) his contention that the innovative painting technique developed by famous 17^th century Dutch painter Rembrandt van Rijn was not in the first place the result of Rembrandt’s attempt at the creation of naturalistic perception in the brain by non-realistic representation of the subject on the canvas. Professor von Schwaben holds that Rembrandt’s eyesight was deteriorating (he needed specs) and possibly his motor control over his hands as well, resulting in shaky imagery on the canvas. He does confirm, however, the genius of Rembrandt, who, he says, “managed to turn physical disability into pictorial supremacy.”

Von Schwaben postulates that generally the effect of the physical and mental state of the artist on his work is underestimated by scientists. Les Fauves (the Fauves), he holds, exploited their colour blindness by creating outrageously colourful paintings.

Kandinsky, he says, never recovered from his fall from his favourite horse (portrayed  on canvas for posterity under the title “The blue Rider”), after which, he says, Kandinsky’s work mostly is composed of dissociated elements.

Picasso et al. “invented” cubism because of their love of sugar cubes avant-la-lettre. “First these Paris based artists distorted their perception of the world by the intake of mind altering substances,” Von Schwaben tells us, “and next they painted these distortions. Some even went further,” he discloses, “they would take mind altering drugs in order to look at the distorted imagery they had painted so as to generate perceptual distortions of the second order and paint these.”

No wonder, he notes, that modern art lost track of its destiny. Its founding fathers could not see straight. This trend culminated in artists, such as or Pollock and members of the post WW II Cobra group, literally throwing paint at the canvas; in a denial of any kind of representation save that of their own glorification. “Das ist jadoch Scheisse!,” (i.e., That surely is shit!) asserts Von Schwaben astutely.

The picture – here meaning a sensible image – disappeared for some time out of the picture after WW II because the first generation post WW II artists had suffered serious vitamin A deficiencies. Vitamin A is vital for good eyesight, and, according to the professor, during WW II all available vitamin A was channeled towards the war effort. All these so-called abstract expressionist painters basically were eye patients subconsciously and inarticulately crying out for vitamin A.  Hence the predominance of the colour orange in their painting. (By the way, remarked the professor, this also explains why the USA won WW II. They had more vitamin A than any other state). “Who would have thought that growing pumpkins and carrots would determine the fate of the world and of modern art?” von Schwaben asks rhetorically.

“Things only improved when a new generation of artists born after WW II took the stage. At least these guys were healthy,” he affirms, ”and they could see what they were doing.” But an old problem resurfaced. “Concepts like destiny, function or direction mean very little for many of these modern artists. Could be something missing in their diet,” he speculates in conclusion.

The Zamfactor Improved Improved Chicken Brooder

Initiated: 20 August 2012
Updated: 29 January 2014
Written by: Bert Witkamp

Agriculture in Zambia no 5. Thousands of Zambians rear chickens in the back yard. In this issue ideas to improve the life of young chicks and save on your electricity bill.

Fig 1. The Z-factor chick brooder. Note feeders and drinkers at the border, insulation material on top and freedom of movement for chicks.

Browsing the Internet on chicken rearing I came across an interesting publication dating back to 1942.  It is titled New Electric Lamp Brooder; written by D. C. Kennard and V. D. Chamberlin. You can find the publication at: http://www.plamondon.com. The site is about farming and poultry rearing. Below pictures of the original brooder*.

 Figure 2. The Ohio hover inside, equipped with a light bulb and a heating bulb. Size 120 x 120 cm; meant to accommodate 150 to 200 chicks.

Figure 3.  The Ohio hover in use. Note the freedom the chicks have in choosing their location, including on top of the hover. The litter on top at the same time is isolating material.

The hovers were developed by the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station during World War II. Its purpose in part was to reduce on electricity usage.

The brooder or hover serves to provide a comfortable environment for baby chicks in a cost efficient manner. It basically is a shallow box on low posts with heating bulb(s) and possibly a light bulb inside. Chickens can move in and out of the brooder as they like and hence choose the environment that they feel comfortable in.

Chicken rearing in Zambia is a major backyard agricultural activity. Both broiler and layer chickens are purchased from industrial breeders and come in as “one day olds.” The body temperature of a chicken is 41 ⁰C (109 ⁰F). These baby chickens, lacking a mother hen, need artificial warmth until they have developed feathers – some three weeks after arrival. The provision of a suitably warm environment is not so easy and always costly. 

The usual choices are electrical heating using suspended infrared bulbs and/or charcoal using the baula (charcoal stove). Both methods are extremely wasteful as the heat generated is freely dispersed in the chicken house, also if the chicks are raised in a nursery. The heat of the burning charcoal is sent upwards, while the chicks are on the floor where it is coldest. The infrared bulbs (see picture) do send the heat they generate downwards, but even then much of the thermal energy winds up in the air above the chicks.

 Figure 4. Suspended infrared bulbs providing warmth for baby chickens.

The electricity cost of a 250 Watt lamp in Zambia presently (January 2014) is ZMW 0.125/hour  (0.02 €); and hence ZMW 3 (0.4 €) daily. You need one bulb for 100 chicks. A flock of 200 chicks therefore requires 2 bulbs at a cost of ZMW 6 daily.

The need for artificial heat in the chicken run varies seasonally considerably. In the Zambian cold season night temperature may drop to close to zero C with day time temperature rising to over 20 ⁰C. In the hot season night temperature may be around or over 20 ⁰C with day time temperature rising to about 35 ⁰C. Practically a run of chicks in the winter in Zambia roughly need about 400 hrs of additional heat; and during the hottest time of the year some 300 hours – part of it with less or lighter bulbs.

The electricity cost with conventionally suspended bulbs for a flock of 200 chicks in the winter is in the order of 2 x 400 x 0.125 = ZMW 100 (€ 15). In the hot season the cost roughly is half of that (ZMW 50 or € 8) and the average is somewhere in the middle – ZMW 75 or € 12.

The hover, by retaining the artificially generated heat within the box, saves electricity. In addition the hover retains heat generated by the chicks themselves, which also saves electricity. At this point my estimate is a saving in electricity of about 50%.

The other major advantage of the hover is the immediately observable effect on the well being of the chicks. Chicks crowd and sometimes trample each other under open, suspended bulbs. Also the dispersal of heat is uneven, rapidly declining away from the centre below the bulb. The hover provides plenty of space as the heat disperses over a much larger area.

The original Ohio brooder is 40 cm high; its bottom edge is 10 cm from the ground, the sides are internally 20 cm and externally 10 cm (this is the area on top of the brooder with isolation material, see figure 3.) The bulbs are placed at opposing sides using porcelain lamp holders. Each lampholder should have its own cord, plug and socket. The sides and top are made of plywood or similar material. The hover can be made higher as need be by placing blocks or bricks under the corner posts. In the event of draft sacks can be tacked to one or two sides. Initially drinkers and feeders are placed just outside the hover. The design indeed is simple, efficient, and low cost. You can make it yourself, though a carpenter will do a better job of making the joints for the frame.

We keep chickens and I decided to make a hover after looking at my monthly electricity bill. I did make the thing almost entirely myself – involuntarily as the Zamfactor carpenter did not show up. At the onset I decided to increase the height of the hover from 40 to 47.5 cm; to reduce the “rim” at the top from 10 cm to 5 cm (to create higher interior sides) and to raise the bottom edge from 10 to 12.5 cm. I wanted higher sides because of the kind of heat bulbs we use (I thought rightly that the top otherwise would get too hot). I increased the bottom edge by 2.5 cm to allow for the grass litter that we use. I stuck to the Ohio hover width of 120 cm (4 feet) – which conveniently is the standard width of plywood. I made two hovers, one 6 feet long for 200-300 chicks and one 8 feet long for 300-400 chicks.

Apart from a slight increase in height the Improved Zamfactor Chicken Brooder has:

1. Cross planks at the bottom of the short side that a) allow for proper mounting of the lamp holders, b) increase the structural strength of the apparatus, c) enable the screwing in of a hook (ceiling hook type).

2. The option of lifting a (short) side by means of a chain (in our case a dog leash) the end of which can be slotted into the hook mentioned above. Very practical, certainly in the case of Big Hovers, to easily check what’s happening inside, refill drinkers you may want to put inside during the first days and change or add litter.

3. The application of a coat of aluminium paint to enhance refraction of light and heat rays, and also to facilitate cleaning of the interior. Indeed inside its all glitter!

4. Using screws rather than nails in assembly. More work but longer lasting.

5. Optional: Hooks in the corner posts so that the hover after use can be lifted and suspended from the ceiling. This is practical in case of the X-large hover.

My initial suspicion that the sides of the Ohio hover are to shallow in view of heat generated by the bulbs was confirmed at the test: the top of the hover above the bulbs, despite increased height and aluminium paint coat, became uncomfortably hot. I had to lower the lamp holders to a few cm above the edge of the sides. I am also going to glue aluminium foil on one side to see of that helps in heat refraction away from the top. It also is possible to mount the lamp holders slightly slanted downwards, but that is not really necessary. In the second hover we added a cross bar in the middle of the two long sides to support the ply wood “roof” better.

In conclusion: The cost of a large hover in Zambia is about ZMW 650 (USD 100,€ 85), plus cost of the bulbs. It is a worthwhile investment both in terms of electricity cost saving and chicken comfort.

*    The black and white pictures are reproduced from the web site published article of 1942 by D. C. Kennard and V. D. Chamberlin.

Additional notes after four weeks of use:

1. Benefits exceed expectations. Mortality rate is very low: after 4 weeks only 2%. For the first time since we keep chickens there are no runts (stunted growers) or chicks with deformed legs.

2. Three weeks appears to be a sufficient period of time for hover use.  

3. One could use an improvised variety using sticks and sacks when for village chicken keeping.

4. There is more you can and should do to keep your chicks happy and healthy. Such as:

Put mosquito gauze screens in the windows, create an isolated ceiling by for example plastic sheet (prevents condensation on roofing sheets in the winter and excessive heating in the summer), ensure that no rats can enter the chicken house, adequate ventilation, clean litter, daily cleaning of drinkers and quality food.

Malaria & Blown Fuses

Notes out of Zambia 4: Malaria usually blows some fuses in my mind. To deal in such a condition with car electrical faults is asking for trouble…….

Written by: Bert Witkamp

Blown fuse of the old Caldina. Doesn't it look like an ill fated molar?

Went down with malaria. Took coartem. Car could not start. Found out a major fuse had blown. Called in Mr Mpundu, the local car electricity wizard. Elderly man, know him for years, cashes in on being called only when desperately needed. Upon arrival Mpundu set out to look for faults. I walked into town looking for a 100 Amp fuse. Found it. Upon return Mpundu had removed the faulty fuse. He opened up the alternator and checked wiring and brushes. Disappeared to look for new brushes with my Kwacha 30,000. Came back, put some tape here and there at loose connections. Put the battery on the charger, things seemed ok, dropped down a bill of Kwacha 295,000. That is what a maid makes in an entire month. Brought it down to 250,000 – his bills are drafted in anticipation of negotiations.

Following day continue with malaria pills and checking of the car electrical system. Seems things work only half/half. Phone Mpundu with request for re-check. Put the charger on again, think maybe the battery was not charged enough. Check bulbs, replace two, at night everything works. Eat, take malaria pills, go to bed.

Charging them pills........

Morning, this Thursday morning, start the car, it does so with difficulty, the electric power has dropped. Ok, keep it running for a while. Am out of malaria pills and still need more for tonight. To doctor Jain, just two blocks away. Walk or drive? Opt for drive; following doctor Jain I may then revisit Mpundu & take care of some other chores. I drive but fortunately am sane enough to go with gardener Kim. At doctor Jain I am requested to show box of now depleted medicine. Need to go back home. Get in car, car won’t start. Get some guys to push – it is a no no. Now even the indicators on the panel won’t come on screen. Park the car at doctor Jain, walk home, retrieve packaging, walk to clinic, get more Coartem. Walking into the clinic I had seen some men slashing the long grass along the road – we are in the rainy season. Send Kim to fetch them for the get-the-car-home pushing job. They come and push. Most of the road fortunately has a slight downward slope. Relieved to be at the gate, park the car. Give each man Kwacha 5,000; which pleases them very much. It is enough for a lunch at the market. That also made me feel better; to see that one bad luck produces a good luck somewhere along the line. The waiting now is for Mpundu, the old fox.