Comments for MountainTips http://mountaintips.com Learning and Exploring the Blue Ridge and Southern Appalachian Mountains. Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:31:27 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 Comment on What a great winter it is! by larry pritchard http://mountaintips.com/2010/02/05/cross-country_skiing_on_roan/comment-page-1/#comment-94 larry pritchard Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:31:27 +0000 http://mountaintips.com/?p=311#comment-94 looks great! wish i could have joined you! looks great! wish i could have joined you!

]]> Comment on What’s your Barn Score? by David http://mountaintips.com/2009/07/10/whats-your-barn-score/comment-page-1/#comment-10 David Wed, 26 Aug 2009 14:13:53 +0000 http://mountaintips.com/?p=87#comment-10 I would like to appeal to the International Rules Committee for a ruling about chicken houses. Is the BS based on intended use of the structure, its size, or solely on its shape? I’ll grant you that the classic barn shape adds a serene or homey touch to the landscape and is quickly dwindling. Is it then the intent of the BS to hold in esteem only these classic structures? I think not! While the classic barn is a scenic addition to most landscapes we need to also consider pole barns, tobacco barns, too. Not just diary barns. If prejudice is applied to the shape of the barn then where will it stop? Will we next disallow a submission just because it’s not pained red? I’m not looking to artificially inflate my BS by counting non-compliant structures, however I feel that the omission of chicken houses is a practice of unfair BS profiling. Many of our local chicken houses exceed the capacity of many so called barns. Just because the structure houses poultry and not livestock that is no reason to limit my BS. My BS is just as good or better than many others BS. This practice of husbandry profiling should be stopped. Sure, chicken are among the smallest farm animals commonly raised but their sheer numbers more than make up for their lack in stature. Now I’m not advocating counting every rabbit hutch in the BS just because it contains a few fertile bunnies but due to the enormous size and numbers of chicken houses in some areas they should be considered towards the BS. I look forward to presenting my appeal at the next meeting of the Rules Committee. I would like to appeal to the International Rules Committee for a ruling about chicken houses. Is the BS based on intended use of the structure, its size, or solely on its shape? I’ll grant you that the classic barn shape adds a serene or homey touch to the landscape and is quickly dwindling. Is it then the intent of the BS to hold in esteem only these classic structures? I think not! While the classic barn is a scenic addition to most landscapes we need to also consider pole barns, tobacco barns, too. Not just diary barns. If prejudice is applied to the shape of the barn then where will it stop? Will we next disallow a submission just because it’s not pained red?

I’m not looking to artificially inflate my BS by counting non-compliant structures, however I feel that the omission of chicken houses is a practice of unfair BS profiling. Many of our local chicken houses exceed the capacity of many so called barns. Just because the structure houses poultry and not livestock that is no reason to limit my BS. My BS is just as good or better than many others BS.

This practice of husbandry profiling should be stopped. Sure, chicken are among the smallest farm animals commonly raised but their sheer numbers more than make up for their lack in stature. Now I’m not advocating counting every rabbit hutch in the BS just because it contains a few fertile bunnies but due to the enormous size and numbers of chicken houses in some areas they should be considered towards the BS.

I look forward to presenting my appeal at the next meeting of the Rules Committee.

]]>