Thanks to the Center for Consumer Freedom, without which I would not have read this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- threecollie
- Embracing agricultural diversity, one species at a time. All rights reserved
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
Weather Button
Friends and Mentors
-
-
-
-
Winter is here18 hours ago
-
Stat Counter
StatCounter
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
8 comments:
Excellent article.
Ironic that those very "compassionate and humane" organizations continue to promote the killing of thousands of healthy dogs and cats in our nation's shelters.
Things aren't as black and white as the radicals on both sides like to pretend they are.
Jan, I have been watching with interest the Katrina money thing. I don't think much of that is going to do animals any good, but I'll bet it will be buying new cars and nice vacations
Cubby, I thought Baxter was about as well-reasoned as anyone I have read. he is quite a guy
I suppose I need to write to the person that wrote the article, but I'll start here since I "know" you a little from a year or so of blog reading.
1. Although not a strict vegetarian, I have eaten that way for a few years and had no problems with it other than finding it difficult to get enough protein. That being said, it's true that I cannot relate to a juicy steak or spareribs. Sushi is exotic enough that I have only had it a few times and have no strong feeling about it one way or another. Ice cream? Well I could do without but don't want to. On the other hand, what is sold as ice cream in the store is really a bunch of chemicals that have almost no relation to real ice cream other than it is cold. I occasionally make ice cream from milk, eggs, cream, sugar and a bit of vanilla and really love the product. Nothing is "killed" in making of ice cream other than some potential life in eggs and, somehow, I manage to not feel too guilty about breaking an egg. Killing a chicken does make me a bit queasy.
2. Guilty as charged. I do think of animals in terms of how I would feel in similar conditions. Obviously this may be a problem on my part. Egg production, pounds of milk, etc. for financial gain has no interest for me. That is why I left farming for a living.
3. I grew up on a farm, went through the 4-H program, kept records of food in vs product produced for rabbits, chickens, pigs, and all of one dairy cow. I do have at least a vague working knowledge of some of what goes into farming livestock.
4. If more expensive, less efficient means more caring, I am in favour. Consumer "demands" are not of interest to me. Needs yes, demands no.
On the other side:
1. I know that many farmers enjoy their lifestyle and the land. I have the privilege of living on a small rural property and growing some of my own vegetables.
2. I am not sure about the seriousness of meeting public demands as stated in #4 above.
3. I believe animals have rights! I am an animal and feel that I have rights. I believe that mankind has taken dominion but not been given it. If this is lunacy then I shall accept it.
The point not made anyplace in the article is the study of how much energy is put into growing animals as food as compared to growing plants for food. I have read that it is 40 to 1 in terms of energy but have not the ability to find this out for myself but judging from the amount of grain that goes into one cow to produce that little bit of steak, I suspect that 40 to 1 may be accurate or possibly an under estimation. I won't even begin to speculate on how much corn is currently going into making fuel as opposed to food.
I have probably taken too much space on this blog but felt that another view should be aired.
Just for the record, I just sent the above comment, plus a couple more paragraphs, to the publication where the article was first presented. I do feel strongly about mistreating animals.
Oh and Jan, I suspect that better use of all those healthy dogs and cats in the shelters might be for food so they are not wasted. (Yes our dogs and cats have been spayed. I would rather have a friend than a meat meal or more dogs and cats.)
OW, one thing that is missed in the 40 to 1 energy ratio (which I do not exactly believe) is that cows can eat things people can't and turn them into food. You simply can't grow vegetables in a lot of places where cows are grown.That land would not be producing food if it weren't for animal agriculture....thanks for taking time to make such an interesting comment. I don't agree, obviously, but I certainly respect your thoughts and your right to them.
Yes, I recently read that some cows in Africa are fed some kind of trees. I will give you that point for sure. I too wonder about the 40 to 1 but can't argue intellegently for or against. As a species, we have chosen to eat only a few vegetables and plants among the many that could be eaten. That too is a problem that sooner or later we shall have to address. Please keep feeding your cows. I still drink lots of milk and love other dairy products. I remember from earlier blogs that your cows do get out into the fields. (I do hope that you are not keeping chickens in wall to wall cages or veal calves in 3 x 4 boxes.)
OW, nope, our only chicken lives in a four by eight cage and our rooster takes free range to the limit, having just that. The Northview cows go to pasture every single summer day and night and live in the barn only in winter weather...and most of them honestly like us. You can walk up to a number of them in the pasture and scratch their ears.
On the eating thing...there is much land that is suitable for growing only grasses, even here in the American west, that if plowed or tilled would simply blow away, not to mention land that is too steep for cultivation etc. Cows love plain old grass, which is pretty indigestible to the human inner workings.
Post a Comment