To wonder if you know that the meat you buy could have been raised in a factory farm...

[MsWonderful]

And that the animals could also have been subjected to horrific cruelty even if the farm is Red Tractor approved?
www.daventry.radio/daventry-farm-suspended-from-red-tractor-scheme-amid-animal-welfare-concerns/

Would still love to know why you’re absolved of responsibility for the unpleasant realities of crop farming just because you also, in addition, participate in the unpleasant realities of animal farming.
Have I said anywhere that I am? Nope.

I just dislike being guilted about animal deaths by people who are also responsible for animal deaths.

I have not seen anyone on a plant based diet claim that there are no casualties in the making of their food.
You've never, ever come across a vegan talking about how the vegan diet is, miraculously, 'cruelty-free'?

I just dislike being guilted about animal deaths by people who are also responsible for animal deaths.

Do you have the same attitude about everything? Like, a certain number of whales are killed every year by commercial shipping, so should we give the a-ok to Japanese and Norwegian whalers to hunt them for food and sport?

TheHappyHerbivire don't be so disingenuous. Thats the point most if us meat eaters have been making, have stated really plainly: ALL food production is based on manipulating the environment.

Have a read back and see if you can find m/any veggie/vegan posters who have acknowledged that... without using words like accidentally!

Have a read back and see if you can find m/any veggie/vegan posters who have acknowledged that... without using words like accidentally!

I’ve acknowledged it openly and without qualification, as you can see from reading my posts.

What did I say that’s disingenuous?

I am on my phone but it was your post at about 9pm last night... Meat eaters thinking they are absolved from any issues arising from crop production. Not a fair comment given the previous posts by myself, derxa, scrowy etc.

Your point had been made by others, the other way round and was exemplified by the 'killed accidentally' comment that has been replied to a few times.

Happy
Whales being killed by commercial shipping is like animals being killed by vehicle strikes: it's not deliberate.

Animals are deliberately killed during crop production. That is not the same as raising and slaughtering animals, but it is still deliberate killing.

So you are making a false comparison.

Yes,their are casualties involved in the way we process our food, so should we not at least try to stop killing the 2.7 trillion killed every year that are destined for our tables?

Animals are deliberately killed during crop production. That is not the same as raising and slaughtering animals, but it is still deliberate killing.

So you are making a false comparison.

It’s a totally fair comparison. Saying ‘whales are unavoidably killed by commercial ships so it’s no problem to kill them for food’ is the same as saying ‘some animals are unavoidably killed for crop production so it’s no problem to kill them for food’.

Meat consumption is responsible for the deaths of trillions of animals per year. The figure is even higher if you include the animals which are unavoidably killed as a consequence, like dolphins and sea turtles caught in fishing nets. And then if you include all the animals killed by discarded fishing equipment (which is responsible for 50% of all ocean plastic), and habitat loss due to climate change (polar bears) or loss of habitat (jaguars etc) you really see what an orgy of carnage it is.

I just can’t see the logic in saying ‘vegans have no right to call meat eaters cruel when they eat plants which cause x amount of animal deaths’ when meat eaters are equally responsible for the x, but on top of that bear responsibility for y and z animal deaths as well.

It’s not possible to completely exclude all animal death and suffering from our diets, but I do think there is a vast moral difference between making whatever decisions you can to reduce that death and suffering as far as possible, and just deciding that because you can’t achieve 100% cruelty free you’re entitled to just wreak whatever level of death and destruction you like.

@MsWonderful

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.plantbasednews.org/.amp/culture/rspca-dairy-farm-footage-abuse

Here’s another example of animal cruelty exposed by animal rights activists, this time on a dairy farm so not covered by the red tractor scheme.

Sorry I’ve been lurking since my hands are too busy raping and murdering my animals, but thought I’d swing on by to correct this statement for anyone who cares (not farmers though, we’re uncaring animal abusers!)

Most U.K. dairy farms will be Red Tractor farm assured as a requirement of their milk contract. Certainly if they sell their milk to any of the large processors they will be (talking Arla, Muller, Dairycrest, First Milk- basically the processors who provide milk, cheese and dairy products to any and all supermarkets, including the likes of Lidl, Aldi and Spar). If you fancied you can even look up our minimum standards on the Red Tractor website, along with all the guidance that they provide. If you still don’t believe me I’m happy to provide a copy of our inspection we had only a few months ago.

And to add a little more to this- Red Tractor is the bare minimum. We exceed those standards because, as an Arla supplier, our contract and their own welfare targets stipulate that we have to. Many of the other large processors also have similar in house assurance schemes. We are inspected every 12-18 months with 2 weeks notice by RT (so that they can see our system at different times of year) and every 12 months by Arla’s Climate Check and Arlagarden teams. We are also subject to potential no-notice spot checks by RT, Arla, Arla’s independent assessors, Arla’s climate check assessors and the AHDB Dairy Inspectors. That’s before you even consider that we are also subject to animal passport checks (where they turn up and inspect each and every animal to make sure that our record keeping is correct, subject to penalties from our basic payment if found lacking) and also from the VAT man.

But yes, perfectly understandable why no one would trust these assurance schemes. They aren’t thorough enough you know

Ok, so you’re saying that this farm probably was a member of the red tractor scheme? I’m not sure that’s going to be much of an endorsement of the scheme then? What’s your point??

But yes, perfectly understandable why no one would trust these assurance schemes. They aren’t thorough enough you know

But surely the fact that cruelty has been discovered on some farms that are governed by these schemes is pretty irrefutable proof that they aren’t thorough enough? That more could be done, since some farms where cruelty is practiced are slipping through the net?

That all sounds very reassuring and impressive. I wonder how the farm in the OP managed to pass their inspections?
And the other farms the OP has linked to later in the thread (I've not been able to bring myself to look at the details so I don't know if they were also part of any assurance schemes).
I really want to be able to trust that the dairy cows and chickens who produce the food that i eat are treated well and live comfortable lives.

You evidently comply with all the requirements made of you to meet the standards of the various schemes you need to. It sounds like you care about your animals and do your best for them. I am understand that it would make you unhappy for people to doubt you based on abuse and transgressions being uncovered.
Can you understand how finding that such abuse has happened and not been uncovered by the schemes themselves is worrying for consumers and rocks our trust in the schemes effectiveness?

Red tractor isn't worth anything. There are many farms who write down what they are meant to be doing rather than what they are and have the place presentable on the day of the audit. They know exactly how long it takes to get to to minimum acceptable residues or what excuses to use. This is not to take away from those who work their fingers to the bone through endless hoops to never make ends meet doing things correctly

It’s a totally fair comparison. Saying ‘whales are unavoidably killed by commercial ships so it’s no problem to kill them for food’ is the same as saying ‘some animals are unavoidably killed for crop production so it’s no problem to kill them for food’.
Did you miss the word 'deliberately''?

'Unavoidable' killing is insects being chopped up by the plough or field mice being chopped up by the combine or rabbit kits being scooped up by the spud picker (and then put through the chipper - it happens. DH used to have to pick them out when he worked on a veg production line).

The deliberate killing of insects, birds and mammals is what I'm talking about.

If we are prepared to countenance the deliberate killing of animals for crop production, it's not a vast ethical step to be prepared to deliberately kill animals to eat.

I have made a different ethical call from you. I respect your right to make a different choice.

habitat loss due to climate change (polar bears) or loss of habitat (jaguars etc)
Climate change is driven by the burning of fossil fuels more than anything else. Habitat loss is driven by many, many things, mostly underpinned by a growing human population (we've just lost a great swathe of skylark habitat near me to a new housing estate, built to house the growing British population).

and just deciding that because you can’t achieve 100% cruelty free you’re entitled to just wreak whatever level of death and destruction you like.
Did I say that anywhere? I'm all in favour of only having meat which is extensively produced on grass, with any supplementary feed being from silage, food wastes etc not grains grown specifically for them (except in limited cases). I'm in favour of high-welfare systems and clean slaughter and sustainable fisheries.

I get fed up of the sweeping generalisations. Vegans and veggies don't like meat-eaters generalising about them all being clueless urban tree-huggers preaching cruelty-free from a position of ignorance, because it isn't true, and carnivores don't like being monstered as ignorant, unthinking, brutal bastards who are happy to wreak whatever level of death and destruction you like because, oddly, that isn't true either.

yanbu OP. Sadly most people don't give a shit about this. Their 'right' to eat meat every day justifies the torture, terror and agony of millions of animals.

@MsWonderful

Ok, so you’re saying that this farm probably was a member of the red tractor scheme? I’m not sure that’s going to be much of an endorsement of the scheme then? What’s your point??

My point was to illustrate that you don’t know what you’re talking about. You make statements like “dairy farm so not covered by the red tractor scheme” like it’s the gods honest truth and off you go with your brush again. I’m correcting your lack of understanding on dairy farms. Not that farm specifically, although I do know the wife of the farmer which owns the farm. I remember her sharing with us the blackmail and abuse the AR lot had subjected them to once they revealed they’d been filming. I’m not going to elaborate further on their behaviour towards that farm, because I know as well as you do that no matter what I say you’ll tell me I’m lying. But that footage is not what it seems.

@TheHappyHerbivore

But yes, perfectly understandable why no one would trust these assurance schemes. They aren’t thorough enough you know

But surely the fact that cruelty has been discovered on some farms that are governed by these schemes is pretty irrefutable proof that they aren’t thorough enough? That more could be done, since some farms where cruelty is practiced are slipping through the net?

Ah there’s that brush and your tar again. No. It’s not. You cannot assume that the whole scheme is dysfunctional because of the behaviour of an incredibly tiny minority. We didn’t brandish all doctors as the same as Harold Shipman, nor do we brand all parents as neglectful as those of baby P. So why on earth would one supposed example of poor conditions ever be assumed to be applicable to all members of the same schemes?

And I say supposed because these AR exposeé type situations rarely produce any actual concrete evidence of the alleged wrong doing. There’s always damning photos or videos accompanied by some vegan narrating things in a sad voice to tell you what’s going on and we are just supposed to swallow it as the truth of life as a farm animal? Like the article in the OP shows what 3/4 stills from an unknown video? Apparently there was a video but they’ve now removed it? And all that was from a 5 month period? And we are expected to believe that it is true 24/7? Why is there not more? If something was so systematically abusive there should be hours and hours of footage from those 5 months you’d think wouldn’t you? Yet here we are, some stills with an AR activist telling us what’s happening. I saw a video yesterday from a similar AR activist showing how the “fharmers” (catchy, like it) abuse their cows with blowtorches and use them to frighten the animals into submission. Do you know what they were actually doing? Singeing the cows bags to remove hair and to keep them clean. It’s good husbandry practice and we do it regularly. But joe public don’t know that do they? They see what the AR activists want them to- farmers abusing animals for money. Another vegan group yesterday posted some photos of some calves “trapped” in a feeder and being forced to eat in order to get fatter more quickly. It went viral, people condemning farmers and calling them abusive. The best bit? It was a creep feeder. It has a bar across the back to stop those which are too tall (ie mum) getting in and eating all the food and leaving none for the calves. The animals were free to come and go as they please. But the amount of comments and shares that were generated which actually believed what they were being told was insane. Vegans claiming that they have saved the calves because they went back and they were all out of the feeder. But because people don’t know any better than what is being put in front of them with a sad commentary they will believe it and anyone who says different is just condoning the abuse.

Can you not see how this makes everyone a little jaded and sick of the whole AR exposeé situation? There’s all these dodgy clips and stills being thrown round and everyone is being told that this is what happens every day in every farm across the country when those that know know it’s not, but their voice is never as loud as the AR activists, and even if it is you get branded as excusing abuse. Which is not in any way what any one is doing, but you shouldn’t be subjected to abuse for trying to use your common bloody sense to explain why what they’re seeing isn’t as black and white as the AR lot would like to believe.

Sorry that was long. But I hate this narrative that has cropped up several times over several threads that farmers are abusive and that vegans and AR activists are beyond reproach. You say nothing and you’re complicit, say something and you’re condoning it. We literally cannot win regardless of what we do because there’s always someone willing to tell a tall tale to further their own agenda.

Yup! The anti vivisection leaflets are a case in point. Just last year I was handed one, again.

It had pictures a man being unutterably cruel to a small furry animal. This was, apparently, just weeks ago, it is still happening, the laws are being ignored, animals still being tortured.

That man was the father of a friend of mine. He was a government inspector and responsible for closing down a number of places.

And he died in the mid 90s!!

So I'm another that always questions the pictures that are used to highlight awareness... especially if it's from PETA!!

And yes, I have posted this same info a few times here, over the last decade or so

But what about the animals choice? They would choose not to stand in a kill line.

I’m not going to elaborate further on their behaviour towards that farm, because I know as well as you do that no matter what I say you’ll tell me I’m lying. But that footage is not what it seems

I wouldn’t tell you that you’re lying. How could I possibly prove or disprove your statement. They do say the camera never lies though. But of course I’m glad that the abuse that was filmed didn’t happen, according to you.

Yes, this thread has really made me think about just how easy it would be for someone to come onto our farm and make out we are being cruel with a few carefully posed shots and videos.

We have a cow grazing in a paddock near the house who the vet thinks has managed to eat something at some point over summer whilst it's been outside grazing in the fields that has caused it some liver damage. It's now experiencing photosensitisation and all the white patches on its skin and round it's mouth are literally peeling away as a result. It looks horrible and really sore. The cow itself is eating and drinking fine, and seems happy enough and we are treating it and it seems to be making a recovery.

In the same field is another cow that seems to have an infection in its foot which again we are treating. We call that paddock 'hospital field' for obvious reasons.

But someone could easily come and take a photo of the two animals in that field and use it to claim we are abusing them, that we are bad farmers.

Similarly we had (we assume) some boy racers racing around and doing donuts on some open land we have sheep on on Thursday night/ Friday morning and they (we assume) hit a sheep and smashed the fence. The sheep died, is not a pretty sight, and is awaiting collection sometime today from the 'knackerman'. But all a passerby will see is a dead sheep in a farmyard.

Similarly if e.g. a calf is born stillborn it will have to wait in the yard until the knackerman comes to collect it. If that happened we could cover it up with something to avoid people seeing it but what a great opportunity for someone to video AR types sneaking in and 'discovering calves shot at birth hidden under tarpaulin' etc etc.

Easy enough for anyone keeping an eye on us to now have pictures of a scabby looking cow, a limping cow, a dead sheep and a dead calf and subsequently claim we are abusing and neglecting animals.

That's without all the bonkers stuff that's complete and utter lies like the creep feeder type stuff that NoParticularPattern references.

In the same field is another cow that seems to have an infection in its foot which again we are treating. We call that paddock 'hospital field' for obvious reasons. Yes we've also got a hospital field and could give similar examples.

But what about the animals choice? They would choose not to stand in a kill line.

No they wouldn't any more than insects would choose to be sprayed with insecticides during crop production.

I don't understand why one is more worth protection than the other in some people's mind.

Production of food of any sort will lead to deliberate animal death. It seems a little all animals are equal but some are more equal than others.

@Fatted

Well most meat I eat has existed solely in the first place purely to be eaten, has then been killed, cooked and eaten. It's a bit hypocritical to then get uppity about how said animal has been treated prior to ending up on my plate.

We will all end up dead but I think it matters a lot what sort of life someone has had. I don't want humans to have awful lives. I don't want animals I eat to have had awful lives. In my opinion it matters.

There is no way to eat ethically any more either vegan vegetarian, pescatarian, carnivore or flexitarian. You can choose organically or not but the majority of food has been through some sort of processing even if it's just the water consumptions used in the process and that's just for starters that's the actual food

The manufacturers and corporate owners are worse Oatly has sold out to Blackstone for 200 million

www.facebook.com/674077623/posts/10157239780497624/?extid=YIXc5rdTLrR5LJpa&d=n

Alls you can do it eat what you need and try know who you're buying from

You could buy directly from the farmers or use local butchers and green grocers but there's no guarantees