How do farmers reconcile themselves to the volumes of animals they send to slaughter over the course of their lifetimes?

[Empanadas]

Hi, this is something I’ve always wondered. However, I was watching that Netflix series about Prince Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall and there was a farmer showing a whole barn of cattle he has obviously reared from birth, but quite blithely saying, “oh they'll all be off next week.”

AIBU to think being a cattle / sheep / chicken farmer takes a certain type of person and to wonder how they deal with their conscience in this depressing business?

Well, yes. Given they are male dairy calves what would you do with them? No point raising them for meat a they are not beef cattle. Sitting them in a paddock to eat pasture and watch rainbows is a loss no one could afford

Hasn't this changed? Aren't the majority of male dairy calves in the UK now raised for beef (though as others have said, it's a smaller number due to sexed semen).

And as a PP said, to comply with Red Tractor by the end of the year they will need to prove to have stopped the practice. 95% of UK milk is red tractor and a number of retailers have already banned the practice from their milk products (Sainsbury's, Co-op, Waitrose, M&S).

Notably those where the prices are higher - but as PPs have said, we need to recalibrate away from food that is below the cost of humane production, and eat fewer animal products in consequence.

I’m not. If you want to share the all the joys of pig farming, feel free to fire away.

You are, rather - when I asked you upthread why you'd focus on removing beef farming rather than chickens in particular - where the UK environmental footprint is higher and the baseline welfare is objectively much lower, you ignored it altogether and kept asking about cattle and sheep. I'm curious why they're your main interest if welfare is your primary driver?

Because calves and lambs are cute and fluffy while chickens look like tiny T-Rexs who would have your throat out if they were bigger?

To add to @Backstreetsbackalrightdadada 's excellent list, I'd include:

The RSPCA on farm animal standards
and
The individual Codes of Practice for farm animal welfare on gov.uk.

And as I mentioned upthread, Compassion in World Farming take a campaigning stance so you might find their explanations align closer with your existing views, but they tend to be pretty fact-based.

Because calves and lambs are cute and fluffy while chickens look like tiny T-Rexs who would have your throat out if they were bigger?

I've often heard it suggested that people care more about animals if they have eyelashes....

And the medications that rely on animal farming? Or would you be willing to forgo those too for everyone? Many alternatives are in the works, but we're not there yet - so whose blood are you willing to trade for your utopia?

I clearly remember a TV documentary from well over a decade ago, which focused on a vivsection lab (so we're not even talking humanely kept and killed animals used for meat). There were noisy campaigners permanently stationed outside the labs and the TV crew spoke to one of the most vociferous protesters. It turned out that she had cancer and was being kept alive with drugs that had been tested on animals. The reporter asked her if she didn't think her actions very hypocritical, and she answered in disbelief, almost open-mouthed, as if the reporter must be simple, "But if I don't use these drugs, I WILL DIE!" She really didn't get it - and I think there are many more like her.

Chicken is the meat I never eat when I'm out unless the restaurant has really clear provenance.

The variation in standards in the UK is just too wide and the baseline isn't something I want to contribute to. But that's my own personal view.

"They don't see them as living, breathing, individual beings. They certainly don't see them as having any intrinsic rights or worth beyond financial.

To them it's the same as if they were growing crops and then sending them off to distributers. They don't see themselves as having anything to come to terms with or reconcile themselves to.

And I agree, it definitely takes a certain sort of person. But I think it takes a certain sort of person to be able to eat animal products, work in an abattoir, or carry out animal testing too."

Completely agree.

OP and Femme99 you need to be really careful as you’re likely scaring off potential vegans. We don’t need extreme statements to turn people vegan, also current veganism isn’t a fix to current “farming”. Farming is such a varied market and set of practices - some you’d love and some you wouldn’t, but making it seem like we treat animals like foie gras geese and batter them all to death is alienating people as it simply isn’t true. We have people on this thread telling you how they farm, they’ve given time to answer a lot of questions and it’s no use if any of our responses are “well you just don’t care” or “all farmers are like xyz”. These are also the same farmers that would need to help change the market if it was ever possible to
adopt different practices. You need to see the nuance in farming, it really is a total range of work and practices. If you want things to change and you want others to be vegan, there’s no need to resort to silliness - not everyone will be converted, for whatever reason, and we need to know the truth and nuance about the decisions we make.

I’m frustrated as a member of a farming family (who farms beautifully) and as a vegan of five years. The IG pages are probably as helpful as any - if you Google “farm butcher” there are probably pages showing how slaughter works on site. Google the UK slaughterhouses to see how they work.

Generally I would implore anyone interested in farming to be very careful where you get your info from - the answer isn’t McDonalds or PETA. If you can see - maybe on IG - what real farmers are doing that might help. Know that we’re all completely different, as you are. Know that farming is totally different by climate and landscape, there is no “solution” to green/ ethical/ vegan food production and won’t be for 20 years at least. Food production abroad has particularly bad accountability, eg slave labour even in Italy.

Take an interest (we love a genuine interest!) and do decent research. Whichever side you’re on listen and don’t impose your views.

Been following this thread and have noticed people all talking about cows and sheep. What about caged birds and pigs?. There's surely nothing ethical about keeping animals penned up,denying them even their basic natural habit? Pigs are intelligent creatures. I

As I pointed out previously, your ancestors drove mammals over cliffs etc. I think they would scratch their heads over your horror of farming.

Completely missing the point - days gone by are not comparable to modern day industrial scale farming. It just isn't.

Today's industry is a horror show, even more so when you consider the fact that we don't don't need to eat animal products to survive anymore.

Also ignoring the fact that having the luxury of progressing in ease of survival means humankind has been able to progress in its treatment of each other and animals.

One day people will look back on farming today as a backwards time in our history.

What would your ideal world look like Empanadas?

It doesn’t matter what my ideal world would look like as it’s not going to happen and I would be accused of being an extremist anyway.

By the way, in real life I don’t think I ever talked about my vegetarianism, except maybe to friends who I knew were similar. I never really ate meat from the age of about 6, so there was nothing to talk about. It wasn’t a “choice” as such - more that it never really occurred to me to eat beef, chicken or pork in the first place, any more than it would occur to a meat eater to eat a horse or dog, for instance. To me it’s all the same thing because, for whatever reason, I never made the distinction most people seem to do. Then the shift to veganism was very gradual. Nothing to declare, just a personal choice about what I personally eat. Even my family didn’t realise I was essentially vegan. Its very personal.

Just because I asked one question on MN, it does not follow that I go around with an agenda or berate people in real life. This has literally never happened, ever. Once again, this thread was not about veganism. On the contrary, I think most meat-eaters would have great difficulty participating in actual slaughter. No judgement there whatsoever from me - in modern society there is a cognitive dissonance going on and this is hardly surprising. This is why I asked the question. Because obviously, some people make a living from the slaughter of animals and it’s not a mindset or way of life that’s easily relatable to, if you weren’t born into that world. This is true, to some extent, whether you eat meat or not.

Btw this is also the reason we don’t want corporation-owned farms. Corporates will never know the land like people who’ve lived it/ seen it and their particular patch for generations - I don’t just mean one farmer, I mean everyone that works the land too. It literally takes a village on some farms, they all have expert knowledge.

Plus it’d create a monopoly on a literally vital resource, food - how they supply it, what they put on it, how they price it. Total lack of food security. Look at America - maybe less than 20 corporations own most of middle America and its crops. They industrial farm, use weird chemicals and hormones on animals, live-stock them inside for life, and use tech rather than workers (so no employment) - and then get hacked by Russia as just happened, so no food security.

What you want, is diverse farming owned by a range of farmers - yes even some corporations, but also mostly “normal” farming families and smallholders. The variety of skills and practices gives us security at least and a range of produce on offer at a variety of prices.

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll

And the medications that rely on animal farming? Or would you be willing to forgo those too for everyone? Many alternatives are in the works, but we're not there yet - so whose blood are you willing to trade for your utopia?

I clearly remember a TV documentary from well over a decade ago, which focused on a vivsection lab (so we're not even talking humanely kept and killed animals used for meat). There were noisy campaigners permanently stationed outside the labs and the TV crew spoke to one of the most vociferous protesters. It turned out that she had cancer and was being kept alive with drugs that had been tested on animals. The reporter asked her if she didn't think her actions very hypocritical, and she answered in disbelief, almost open-mouthed, as if the reporter must be simple, "But if I don't use these drugs, I WILL DIE!" She really didn't get it - and I think there are many more like her.

I understand her response. For the current time we live in, it's impossible to do all or nothing. There has to be a scale.

I disagree with animal testing, however I don't think my belief can align to the soiecty we live in. I'd use drugs tested on animals if I needed to as I want to live. But it doesn't have to be that way forever. We could start by looking at the cosmetics industry. We could provide cosmetics not tested on animals. We could advance the science to enable no testing on animals for drugs. Yes, it could be decades plus away. But it could be done.

I don't think we should shut down peoples voice just because they have a belief that is near impossible to live by in todays society. It doesn't make their belief invalid. Everyone has a right to protest. And it's hard to aim for a different society when an individual has so little power.

I'm pretty sure that if a farmer didn't care about his / her livestock, they would introduce the sick livestock to a loaded shotgun, rather than spend a fortune on vets fees!
Most farmers are born into it I would think. I can't imagine a psycho waking up one morning and thinking, ' hmmm, I think I'll become a farmer and raise cattle so I can laugh manically as they're taken off to slaughter'!
Everything is in the food chain, even us humans. When we're buried, the underground dwelling creatures have a right banquet on us.
Humans have been eating meat since time began. This is why we have incisors, to tear at meat ( because obviously steak knives weren't invented at the same time )
Somewhere in life, even a vegan will have used or abused an animal without realising it.
Live in a building? That used to be a field where happy bunnies once hopped about.
Wear clothes? The cotton to make the material was grown in a field where insects flew happily around.
Use the toilet? That used to flow into the sea where fish and sealife spent their times dodging the turds.
Etc, etc.

OP absolutely no offence but the “cognitive dissonance” - if ANY - is with consumers who don’t link that what they’re eating was a life. But a lot of them are well informed and have made a personal decision about their food.

Norked which part of the “industry” are you talking about? Name the farm you are concerned about? We’ve just spent 24 pages explaining how varied farming is and how it’s made up of completely unrelated and un-unified businesses from single farmer farms, family-run farms, smallholdings, organisations and corporations. Industrial farming, organic farming, hillside farming, animal farming and arable. The UK has probably the most splintered market in the world, so which part are you talking about? If you’re talking about industrial farming then I agree, but “farming” as an “industry” cannot be talked about as if one practice.

@Backstreetsbackalrightdadada the new Jeremy Clarkson show on Amazon gave a really good beginners guide to realistic farming rather than something like countryfile. Worth a watch.

Been following this thread and have noticed people all talking about cows and sheep. What about caged birds and pigs?. There's surely nothing ethical about keeping animals penned up,denying them even their basic natural habit? Pigs are intelligent creatures.

Totally agree. It's very odd.

From my own research, based on the main UK animal products, from a purely baseline welfare POV my hierarchy of welfare would go beef, sheepmeat (though they're pretty close), dairy, pigmeat and then poultry. The gap between the first three and the last two is huge.

Please do note I'm talking about baselines - similar to my own cattle farmer familyin another country with lower welfare standards, but they farm Wagyu cattle and more or less read bedtime stories to them.... They are massively cosseted because it increases the value of the meat.

21Flora ooh I’ll try it! I don’t really like him but will give it a go!

The IG pages up thread are ok to use, at least you’re seeing first hand what SOME farming looks like.

@Backstreetsbackalrightdadada - How is what I said extreme and silly, it is the truth.
When you eat meat you are only considering your choice to eat meat, so it really isn’t a choice, when there’s a victim involved.

Somewhere in life, even a vegan will have used or abused an animal without realising it.
Live in a building? That used to be a field where happy bunnies once hopped about.
Wear clothes? The cotton to make the material was grown in a field where insects flew happily around.
Use the toilet? That used to flow into the sea where fish and sealife spent their times dodging the turds.
Etc, etc.

These kind of arguments suggest you don't believe in bothering with change. Why bother changing even any thing if you point out everything else that is wrong.

If these animals weren't raised for food, they wouldn't exist...

Why does this keep being put forth as an argument in defence of industrial scale farming?

Its quite clear that it would be better they didn't exist than to be here, destined for slaughter and human consumption.

It's not 'quite clear' at all. As a PP explained it, animals live instinctively, in the now, and they don't understand/plan for/care about the future. If you could ask them for their opinions (which you obviously couldn't) as to whether they would have liked to have however many months/years of life or none at all, you simply have no way of knowing that their personal viewpoints would favour no life at all.

Going on the fact that most farm animals (at decent, humane farms) seem to be quite happy and content standing/lying there, eating, rolling in mud, communicating with each other etc. on a daily basis, and don't look in any way stressed, I would guess that, if they had the ability to rationalise it, they would, on balance, choose the opportunity to live for however long they get; but none of us have any way of knowing for certain.

I still don't recall seeing an answer to the PP who asked about the attitudes of the militant vegans to the huge number of small animals and insects who are killed either by pesticides, by getting ripped up by combine harvesters or even by being humanely prevented from getting to the food that they need to survive, but which we have decided that we are going to have and keep for ourselves.

Food production includes death and survival of the fittest/strongest/most intelligent, even if humans don't actually consume any meat. The only way we can personally play no part in this is if we selflessly decide to sit out of eating altogether and starve to death.

I also think it's very disingenuous when some vegans scoff at those who ask "what about the plants and crops?" Just because they don't have brains or nervous systems, they're still living organisms whose lives you are happy to end in order to continue yours.

Plenty of people anthropomorphise animals and assume they actively want to live as long as possible and/or fear not being alive - or alternatively that, had they the ability to understand, they would prefer to never be born at all; all this when we have no evidence at all that they think or care about their own futures (nor do we have any conclusive proof that crops don't feel stress when ripped up/cut down). Why do we value the lives of animals and impute human attributes to them but then have such total disregard for the lives of non-animate organisms? Either we humans prioritise ourselves or alternatively we refuse to kill any living thing for our food.

Femme99 well my family have their own produce slaughtered and eat them from the freezer, that’s their choice. They see the whole process, and make that decision. Not all consumers will ever get the chance, but I think most would still choose to eat meat if they did see the process. For loads of reasons - but we live in a very open world where you can discover all of this, and they still choose to buy animal produce. Meat, cheese, milk, all of it.

Do you mean no one can make a choice to kill another being, because it overrides that being’s wants? I’m vegan but recognise humans are animals, and I don’t see how your principle works with us or in the animal world. FYI if we’re being really ethical you also shouldn’t keep pets, I hope you don’t wear leather, I hope you don’t take medicine… I’m hoping you’re vegan too!

Free range doesn’t change the fact you’re taking away the right to live of that animal, also you have no clue how they meet their death, unless you are there present whilst the animals is being slaughtered.

Free range doesn't always mean better care either and 'free range' status can be lost whilst caring for animals in their own best interest eg if there is avian flu in an area the best thing for hens is to be inside, but this means their eggs can no longer be sold as 'free range' depending on how long they are indoors.

We could advance the science to enable no testing on animals for drugs. Yes, it could be decades plus away. But it could be done.

There are two issues here

1. a drug has to be tested on an animal at some point even if that animal is human

2. sometimes animals are better than humans for studies eg insects breed quickly and you can see how something will work in three generations is as many days, in humans that would take decades.

Zebra fish are a good model for some cardiac arrhythmias, they can also repair the heart after a heart attack, we can't, but studying zebra fish might lead to a breakthrough that could repair a human heart.