Brian E Schreiber

No, I did NOT know, until speaking with a cattle farmer yesterday, that fermented grass(hay in his case) was used. . . He explained how in the winter here in Minnesota he feeds 2 to 1 ratio of dry / "wet" bales to his cows.  The wet round bales were wrapped in plastic so they did not dry over the winter months.
My concern, mold, you address by hand picking it out.  Somehow that does not seem very time / cost effective for a big operation so I figure you only are keeping a couple cows vs this guy's 150.  Also, your hand bagging, double bagging . . . just too . . . MUCH!

Jim Fry wrote:I mow three times a day   . . . Every single bit of grass I mow goes to our milk cows and other farm animals

Interesting!
I have never heard of this, not being a farmer.  
-- How do you prevent all that cut grass from almost instantly fermenting in warm weather?  Do the cows eat it before it overheats?
-- You mow 3x / day?  Could you expand on that!  Wow!

I own a relatively new home in a forest.  All my wood is FREE other than the cost to myself for the time and chainsaw maintenance.  So, on first pass the RM heater described here, sounds pretty good.  But, my house heating experience strongly believes that this simple central heat method has no ability to transport the heat any distance at all.
On the other hand ALL other heat sources mentioned (heat pumps, some wood stoves with heat transfer tubes in them, gas and propane furnaces and boilers) have such capability using air or water to move the heat from the generator to remote points.

The comparison you make really sounds good but is simply not fairly comparing these heat generators because of this simply fact.

NOW.  If the RMH was expanding or modified by providing a water tube jacket inserted into the "mass" a simple pump could be used to utilize that heat to remote points.  However, this presupposes that there is some way to RE-transfer that heat once more.  The best way that comes to mind is to combine a RMH with a water tube transfer system that moves the heated water to a concrete pad under a single floor home-- a VERY common and comfortable way to heat a home.  In fact, the way I use in my home with a propane boiler.  The other shortcoming I see with the RMH is its size.  If its design could be such that more of it could be below ground(but insulated) and with a much smaller foot print this idea will surely "take off" as you appear to be hoping for and see widespread adoption.  But hold it.  There is ONE other thing: automatic feeding and control.  I won't go into that but you get the point.  The RMH is great for a cabin, not so much for modern adoption for what most humans expect in a comfortable home.

Lana Berticevich wrote: Does anyone have any experience with this? The land is 80 acres, and I need a stream, not a floodplain.

Advice, please!

I own 80 acres on a small river in Minnesota.  Beavers usually like softwood and have taken a few aspens from my land near the river.  However, instead of damming a river, beavers will build a hutch on the side and reproduce from there.  Once they started cutting down OAK trees, mostly just ringing them and then the oaks died, I had had enough.  Oak roots hold back the soil from spring river erosion.

Trapping them is easy with a body trap and I have trapped about 5 or 6 in the last 3 years.  Tanned some of them.  I do NOT feel bad at all about doing so.  The question is what do you value or tradeoff for one harm vs another?   I traded off the harm to vibrant oak trees holding back the soil and preventing river erosion on my shoreline for beaver proliferation.  YEP.