To boycott establishments that sell halal meat?

[penguinpear]

www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/food/article4333133.ece

I don't eat meat and am aware that a lot of meat in this country has been produced with dubious animal welfare standards, but for halal abattoirs to trade on the fact that their meat is 'stun free' ie the animal dies in panic and agony and they promote this, seems very wrong to me.

The British Veterinary Association objects to it too.

Moan your position is totally sensible - you don't agree with not stunning animals so you avoid all meat that might not be stunned and other meats that you feel might have good animal welfare standards.

Choosing to boycott shops that sell one religions meat when in fact mass production meat from that religion is routinely stunned and totally ignoring the fact that all of a different religions meat is unstunned does look to the naked eye a little illogical and influenced by media hysteria against that religion.

I was told many years ago if I wanted to eat meat with the highest welfare standards to buy only pork and chickens small small scale free-range (properly free range not sees the light of day briefly in a 1 foot square space) but most lamb and beef is much harder to farm intensively so is probably OK (this may have changed with the bigger cattle and sheep farms I'm not sure.

I try where possible to buy less meat from small scale producers and like you avoid (as much as I can processed meat)

Good point about why it's always Halal that's the focus: I say that as someone who was raised Jewish, btw.

I don't agree with the way in which cereals are packed in boxes: it's outrageous that the contents settle. Therefore, I am boycotting cornflakes.

Chazs.... are you me? [suspicious emoticon]

MoanCollins
Of course you can tell the difference between stunned and non-stunned!
Non-stunned is sold in specialist muslim butchers who advertise it as non-stunned so they can charge a premium
It is a 'premium' product in the eyes of those who value it above non-stunned meat. It isn't going to just get slipped into the food chain

Kew
Great minds think alike etc.

fight
Semantics.
Use is limited in organic farming in the same way it is limited by doctors - you have to need antibiotics before they are taken. They aren't used routinely as a possibly preventative. Mastisis affects humans as well, but I doubt many people call for new mums to be routinely given antibiotics on the off-chance they develop it. That's what happens in conventional farming.

You said farmers either can't use antibiotics, or have very limited use (your words) and that results in animals suffering because they can't be treated for simple disease and then die.

This is just not true. Not. True.

Animals can be treated with antibiotics when their use is appropriate:
"If disease does occur then organic farmers are encouraged to use natural and complementary therapies. If these are not appropriate then medicines, including antibiotics, may be used.

Under organic principles, routine use of antibiotics is prohibited. Routine drug use weakens an animal’s immune system and so increases its long-term reliance on drugs. When any animal is given antibiotics, its meat or milk cannot be sold for human consumption for a specified period – the 'withdrawal period'."
www.soilassociation.org/animalwelfare

If you're vegetarian for animal rights reasons, I am of the belief that 'If you're not vegan, you're not vegetarian' as quoted by somebody I forget who.

Dairy production is every bit as cruel as meat production and then some.

With halal, I am on the fence. Can we really compare pain and suffering like that? Non-halal methods are horrendous, barbaric. So are some Halal methods. I can't say I have much to say about which is worse, they're both very bad.

I refuse to go in restaurants with Halal meat and to buy anything halal, both because I refuse to indirectly give money to an imam, and because of the stubborn refusal to stun the animal.

YANBU

Well, what a lot of deeply amusing posts. Cornflakes...hee hee

OP...your concerns regarding halal slaughter are, in fact, shared by lots of people...the RSPCA, British Veterinary Society, various farming societies, not to mention entire countries like Denmark, Norway and others.

But dare to mention it on MN? You're an ignoramus, for some reason. You're quite lucky not to have been called a racist islamophobe. (Wish I was joking).

The issue is religious exemption. In the above countries, there is no religious exemption, stunning is a legal requirement.

Not here. While most halal meat is stunned, a sizeable minority (10-20%) is not.

Boycotting won't make much difference because you probably won't be shopping in the places that freely and openly sell unstunned halal meat.

But you can campaign against it. Plenty of organisations you can join to do that.

And take no notice of arguments like, "Oh, well, all slaughter is inhumane anyway". Erm, no, that's bollocks. And if that was true, there's such a thing as degree.

Whoever said they won't eat lamb because they won't eat a baby animal - check out how old your free range chickens are. A long life it is not. Lambs get a longer crack of the whip and are a lot less likely to be farmed intensively. Odd stance generally though. Either you eat meat or you don't, surely?

Yes to the lamb thing. Each time you consume milk, you support an industry that causes a lot of suffering to baby calves-male calves killed, dairy cows forced to become pregnant-but you won't eat lamb?

and that results in animals suffering because they can't be treated for simple disease and then die.

Agree, I phrased that very badly. I meant that a cow with repeated mastitis/udder infections that cannot be used for milking will likely be shipped off to the slaughterhouse.

The other issue is that organic farmers are less likely to treat with ABs (unless life threatening) as the milk cannot be certified as organic whilst being treated and for a considerable time after the treatment has finished. The 'withdrawal period' is twice as long in organic farming. A cow on ABs is not making money for the farmer hence they are less likely to treat them unless it is legally required (life threatening). I think the cow would rather have ABs and clear the infection quickly than remain in pain/discomfort.

Re: GP's not doling out AB's - not quite the same as farmers. The difference between humans and dairy cows is that the cows don't live out a natural life so being treated with ABs for infected udders isn't the same as women being given ABs for mastitis and thereby risking long term resistance.

Organic cows are still impregnated artificially, their calves are still removed shortly after birth, they are still sent to the same slaughterhouses as non-organic cows once they are deemed no longer financially viable. Organic milk is not as animal welfare friendly as some people like to believe was the point I was making, albeit rather badly.

You'd have to boycott subway too. To be fair to most food outlets they tend to state somewhere on the door/window/menu that the meat is halal in that particular store

I don't think it's unreasonable to boycott them.

But I think that this is one among many, many issues about the politics and ethics of food, which is a whole area that is generally swept under the carpet and ignored as 'too difficult' or 'too inconvenient' to deal with. We shouldn't really be shopping in Tesco, Sainos etc. for all kinds of reasons to do with human, animal and environmental welfare. I'm not saying this in a sanctimonious way - I am far from perfect and I still go and use those place if I get stuck, but I know it's wrong.

If you can find a veggie greengrocer that works with local farms in your area, or maybe use a veg box scheme, you'll possibly be doing more good. Growing your own, perhaps even more so!

its a long time ago but I used to work in abboitoirs on the line 'dressing' cattle, pigs and sheep. I've also been into poultry abboitoirs. I only did it for a few years but it didn't put me off meat.

If it's done properly I can't see any reason why non-stun slaughter should be any worse than stunning. The biggest reason animal suffer is because of the speed at which the animals/carcasses are raced through the process which causes mistakes to get made. However,I understand that with non stun meat there is a limit to the rate at which the animals are killed. - I would have thought that would make for a more humane kill.

I don't see much of a difference with a captive bolt or a throat being slit. I don't see being hung up and instantly having their throat cut more or less fuel than being pushed into a narrow walkway and having a captive bolt in their head. The animal is going to be panicked either way although It would only be for a few moments.

In my opinion a far, far bigger animal welfare issue is that animals are now transported ridiculous distances to be slaughtered - due to regulations and commercial considerations abboitoirs now tend to be massive and serve huge areas. Animals from the UK are sometimes sent abroad to be killed as it's cheaper.
I think that's horribly cruel and unessecery.

'Buying local' doesn't mean the animals are killed locally Unless you know where the animal has been killed then the animal may have been shipped hundreds of miles to be slaughtered -

Having said all that. I think all meat should be clearly labelled with details about HOW and WHERE it's been killed.

BTW - I know it was a long while ago but not of the slaughter men I ever worked with were cruel to the animals. Keeping the animals calm made things easier - they could work faster and get finished faster.

Caffe
Concerns about halal slaughter or concerns about unstunned halal slaughter?

Stunned halal slaughter is still thought by a very large number of muslims to be halal slaughter - are there really concerns about it?

YANBU. Its not really good enough that "most halal meat is stunned" - it should be all halal meat, and kosher meat too. And I don't want other people's religious practices affecting my choices, or affecting animal welfare when they represent a minority in this country. I know perfectly well that most halal meat is stunned, and that this even happens in less extreme countries outwith the UK such as Indonesia, but its still not good enough.

So YANBU as a means of raising awareness of animal welfare and poor slaughter practices from a consumer point of view, theres not really any excuse for doing things (farming, slaughter) as humanely as possible when the technology is there. ie animal welfare should be the focus, not religious practices (particularly when those religious practices are often representative of what goes on in countires which have appalling animal welfare and disregard for animals - ever been on holiday to Egypt?)

And I also boycott halal and kosher.

Fight
Glad we cleared that up
I agree that dairy farming is so far from ideal, and that includes organic
But I do believe there is a marked contrast with a lot of organic meat production vs conventional, and the gap is most stark in chicken production.

Personally, if someone is really motivated to improve the lot of chickens, they'd make more impact by supporting the small scale producers who give kind lives and deaths to their birds than mounting some theoretical boycott of something they were never ever going to buy in the first place

I completely agree that tax payers money should not be used to support a 'no-stun' abattoir.

Most of the halal meat - the vast majority, and all used in the big chains - is pre-stunned and so the only difference to the live animal is that it has a tape of the prayers played on a loudspeaker on loop.

No-stun shouldn't be allowed in this country, IMO. Animal welfare standards have to be absolute and apply across all abattoirs for all markets.

I think that many people use an anti halal stance as a mask for their anti Islam.
Only thechandler and one or two others also 'boycott' Kosher. Why is that?
If you think that a traditional british slaughter house is a lovely fluffy place free of pain and fear then.....carry on.
Also the dairy industry and industrial chicken production is pretty much eating from a concentration camp for animals.
so regarding halal, meh.

TheEfficiencyMovement I don't see much of a difference with a captive bolt or a throat being slit. I don't see being hung up and instantly having their throat cut more or less fuel than being pushed into a narrow walkway and having a captive bolt in their head. The animal is going to be panicked either way although It would only be for a few moments.

I do. I think hanging animals up by their feet to bleed out, swinging in the air next to other animals similarly treated, where they are still alive for several minutes and able to do the animal equivalent of screaming in terror is barbaric. Theres no need for it in this day and age. The other thing we need to work on is not allowing beasts to see other beats being killed.

In my opinion a far, far bigger animal welfare issue is that animals are now transported ridiculous distances to be slaughtered - due to regulations and commercial considerations abboitoirs now tend to be massive and serve huge areas. Animals from the UK are sometimes sent abroad to be killed as it's cheaper. I think that's horribly cruel and unssecery.

Very true. Theres no official statistics even taken on how many cattle and sheep arrive at slaughter with broken limbs or necks. And the duration of the journey, especially in hot conditions, is just unacceptable. But its because we are all in thrall to supermarkets...

Only thechandler and one or two others also 'boycott' Kosher. Why is that?

Because kosher meat is even less likely to be pre-stunned than halal.

Nothing to do with religious discrimination - I got many of facts from Muslim and Jewish friends. What a stupid thing to say. Not all Muslims have the same hardline attitude to halal slaughter, and the reasons behind certain animals never being halal make sense in certain environments, even if more so in the past.

oh no you misunderstood me, Chandler. I just meant that it would seem that only you and one or two others have thought it through, whereas for a lot of people the anti halal thing is just anti Islam and they have not even thought about Kosher.

kosher meat is NEVER stunned - hth

I would eat both Kosher and Halal because I don;t but the arguments that it's crueller than other forms of killing animals for food

but if you don;t want to eat it don't not sure it requires such hysteria

YABU misinformed and idiotic.

Majority HALAL meat especially from large abbatoirs is:

• stunned

• hung by the back legs
• throat slit with prayer

Non-halal meat

• stunned
• hung by back legs
• throat slit

All kosher and very little halal meat (mainly for specialist halal butcher shops

• walked in 1 by 1
• throat slit
• hung

So if its the method of slaughter that's the issue not religion then feel free to boycot specialist halal and kosher butchers