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?

@Empanadas

This argument about killing plants or vegetables - talk about clutching at straws. . I can’t even bring myself to engage with that “argument” I’m afraid.

People will make their own decisions. If someone chooses to cut out meat, why is it then assumed that they have to be holier-than-thou militant types and be held to impossible standards and nonsense statements such as, “Well don’t drive on the roads then because that was once an animal habitat.” This type of argument is so defensive as to be utter nonsense. Nobody can be expected to live in a way that is “perfect.” But, if people decide, based on the information they have, that they’re going to cut out chicken, for instance, well good for them. It doesn’t mean they’re hypocrites if they don’t “go the whole hog” and avoid all meat and fish and, for that matter, grain in case any wildlife were harmed in that production. I find people who make these extreme points very peculiar. I mean most humans don’t eat dogs or horses, but they might eat pork, for instance. Are they militants? Of course not. It’s a very personal thing and it’s just about where you draw the line. Some people might cut out one type of meat. Some people might cut out all meat, but still eat fish. Others make different decisions.

And will you respect those decisions that others make, Empanadas? Np you won't.

You'll start goady threads about the "kind of people" who eat meat or work in farms, claim that we all just need to be "better educated" and watch a few Netflix documentaries, or pop round your city farm to see the darling ickle calfs.

You have ZERO respect for people who choose to eat meat, so unsurprisingly, many of us who DO choose to eat meat, have zero respect for you and your preachy, militant evangelising.

Femme99 You absolutely can have a choice made by one party even if that affects the other, it’s obviously just not a shared choice! In your example the criminal chooses to commit a crime (or you’re saying the rapist has no free will and we should exonerate them!). The victim has no choice.

Anyway there are lots of things you can Google, stick to reliable and varied sources, farming isn’t “one” industry or set of people/ practices, consider farming practices abroad inc even in the EU (some v poor worker rights) and America (industrial farming, obscene at times)

@Throckmorton

Thanks Backstreetsback, I actually think this has helped me re-consider my choice to eat meat for a few years after 13 years as a pescatarian. I think I will go back to that diet for now.

Why is it OK to eat fish if you think it's bad to eat mammals? Especially given the horrendous environmental impact of over-fishing.

I'm not thinking about the environmental impact. It's not my main consideration when considering whether or not to eat meat.

I'm thinking about the complexity of an animal's brain, its ability to feel fear/terror (particularly in anticipation of being slaughtered) and about the actual process of their death (a fish is taken out of water and dies, they are not taken to a slaughterhouse that smells of dead animals and fearing for their lives before being killed) and about how prematurely their life is ended (a fish is likely to have a slightly shortened life, a cow or pig is likely to have their life shortened by several years).

Pigs are as intelligent as dogs- they don't really just live in the present, they have social lives and personalities.

I don’t live in the UK, I’m in Australia. This wasn’t recent but I used to spend a lot of time at a family members farm but my understanding is nothings changed for us here, could be wrong. Also watched on a few occasions as a beef cow or sheep (they kept a couple for household consumption) was cleanly killed on farm, then afterwards hung to bleed on a pulley. After a few days a butcher would come take the carcass and then deliver it back chopped up into cuts, for a fee of course. It was also standard practice to grab a chook when one was required for cooking. There was a hatchet type thing built into the fence for chopping the head off and a hook to hang it to bleed before dressing it. I buy meat from the supermarket but am not blind to the source.

Yes it's really different in Australia (that's where my family are, and where they farm). Here in the UK, sexed semen for dairy herds is expected to totally replace conventional semen by 2024, in large part due to the new standards around male dairy calves.

I find people who make these extreme points very peculiar.

Yet here you are OP, disingenuously "wondering" about the people involved in farming and slaughter.

This argument about killing plants or vegetables - talk about clutching at straws. grin. I can’t even bring myself to engage with that “argument” I’m afraid.

You think you've slapped me down there, but all that you've actually done, by sneering and not offering any counter-argument, is confirm that what I said must be true. Unless you somehow don't actually believe that plants and crops are actually living organisms and/or you arrogantly believe that their only purpose in life is to be killed to preserve your life.

It's the oldest trick in the book to say that you won't dignify a thought-out, clearly presented argument (as opposed to, say, a drunken insult screamed out of a moving car window) with a reply. It just gives people no option but to assume that you cannot argue with it. Politicians do it all the time, and we all know how widely trusted they are....

If you want to take the moral high ground, who are you to say that the life of a cow should be protected at all costs, but that the life of a plant only has worth in its value to you as food - and that it's there for the taking at any time that suits you?

In the absence of your being able bothering to argue my point, I can only assume your answer is that, well, you have to eat something - which means that you agree with the concept of killing living things for food to sustain our own lives, which is how all life on earth continues naturally.

SherlockandJohn - I have never said cattle farming should just end tomorrow and all herds out down As if! When you say you are a vegan people assume all sorts of nonsense frankly.

I guess what I would like to see is a gradual winding down of this industry. At present, too much meat is produced and going to waste. Even dealing with that would be a massive step forward. People don’t need to eat meat every day, in packet sandwiches or in junk-food form. I think demand for meat is already falling in the U.K. and this is a trend that will continue. In the meantime, make the industry as ethical as possible and this will hopefully entail a shift away from reliance on mass farming techniques. People will meat less frequently perhaps, but choose well. That is what I hope to begin with.

Obviously if it were up to me I’d like to see things going much further than this over time, but I’m not going to get into that. Its pointless on this type of thread so I’ll leave that to sporadic chats within my “circle of bigots.”’

The Highlands will exist whether there’s cattle or not. Times change, people evolve, demand changes. Just as we used to rely solely on coal for energy, we no longer do. I’m not saying it was easy for people in those communities, but they adapted. Communities adapt all the time. Nothing has to be inevitable.

@Backstreetsbackalrightdadada - Where does it end, female mutilation, 50 year olds marrying 10 year old girls, child slavery?
Do we just accept it’s part of their culture, standards of living etc because it’s their choice to impose these on victims.
Or do we only pick the ones that fit our ideologies?

WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll - oh. my. god. Are we even having this discussion? Does a plant have a nervous system, warm blood, bones and a brain. Animals may not be as intelligent as humans but they are the same flesh and blood and they feel pain EXACTLY as we do. They feel fear and yes, I do believe animals can anticipate things. In fact, they are more instinctive than humans in many ways. They have to be.

A plant is a plant.

I don't think you quite understand, OP, that when you go on the offensive against other people's life choices, it isn't a valid response when they challenge you to just say "Well, nobody's perfect - I'm just making the best choices that I can" - especially when there are objectively 'more moral choices that you could be making.

@Norked

*I think the “horror” of animals being sent to slaughter is connected to the disconnect we as a society have to where our food actually comes from as well as death and dying in general. It’s something we fear, rarely see and outsource.*

I think it's actually the mass and intense scale slaughter takes place at, actually.

Gone are the days where people ate meat once a week as a luxury because the price of it reflected the cost and care that had gone into raising and slaughtering the animal.

How anyone can justify the horror show of farming for animals to end up queing up in a conveyerbelt of death is beyond me.

Do slaughtermen/women have to pass any sort of background checks to hold such a responsible position?

That would be the olden days when malnutrition was rife, would it?

@Empanadas

“After all, being put down by a vet when sick is no different to the animal that being killed for meat “

Did I just read that?

Yes you did, and it's true. An animal being put down by a vet is stressed and frightened because it is away from its home environment. If you think animals having a stressful death means they would be better off not having existed at all, then why are you not against the keeping of pets?

@Empanadas, actually, there have been some research studies which have proven that plants have responses similar to animals.
Think about that next time you have your lunch.

www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170109-plants-can-see-hear-and-smell-and-respond

Yes you did, and it's true. An animal being put down by a vet is stressed and frightened because it is away from its home environment. If you think animals having a stressful death means they would be better off not having existed at all, then why are you not against the keeping of pets?

Well that's obviously different, isn't it, because when a pet is put down it's usually towards the end of it's life and necessary to prevent pain.

Can you imagine if people took their pets to the vet to be put to sleep and they were slaughtered like a farm animal? Who actually thinks that happens?

I take it you've not seen pet horses being put down then? Gunshot to the head is pretty standard - much like a captive bolt gun in a slaughterhouse or the mallet to the head described somewhere up thread.

Some animals do plan for the future. Even a squirrel buries nuts for the winter. I imagine this is mainly instinctive, but as I don’t know what an animal is thinking, I can’t be sure.

I suspect that a lot of human behaviour is driven by basic instincts, even if we try to come up with a better-sounding reason. For example, anthropologists have argued that sport is a “displaced hunting behaviour”.

It just struck me that not many people - vegan, vegetarian or meat eater - would be able to take that kind of attitude and it got me thinking.

Many people who weren't raised with it or didn't choose and learn it and have other options may not have that kind of attitude because it's not something they've ever had to face -- some here have faced and dealt with and talked about that. Pretty much all of us have ancestors that faced and dealt with it in many different ways - maybe not to mass produced scale, but the kill or die is how we've all got here.

And again, this is a documtainment piece where we've no idea what was said off camera or left on the editing room floor because it didn't fit the image the director wanted to convey. We have to be aware of that - this is entertainment packed as informative, not peer reviewed, it doesn't care what the farmer actually thinks or feels either.

Muslims don’t eat pork, even where there is poverty. It’s not true that we simply HAVE to have all these types of meat available cheaply at all times or well all be malnourished.

You're aware that some Muslim countries, due in part to the history of repeated conquering that happened in Central Asia and the control of and issues with arable land, have a tradition of eating horse meat and drinking horse milk among other animal products not usually used in the UK? True, it's not pork, but people will find something that available to eat, it will be different depending on many factors, but it's what we do, and - while I haven't discussed this with imams, I have discussed this with more than a few rabbis - if it's a choice of eating pork (or other nonkosher food) or dying, it's a mitzvah to eat and live.

Many are lucky to have more options now, though those options have their own issues and yes I agree those using the most resources should be encouraged to show more restraint, but it doesn't mean our attitudes are better or would be if in the same situation.

I could probably do without 'cheap meat', outside of medications that are derived from them, I don't eat much meat - it's heavy on the stomach which is hard for my digestive system, but I am heavily reliant on dairy. I had 48 hours just in the last week where the only thing I could 'eat' was fortified milkshake -- and no, no vegan alternative are yet available that have the calories and nutrition required. If I'd fasted instead, my only other option, I'd also have had to abstain from my medications, and painkillers post surgery which can't safely be taken on an empty stomach (I did that accidentally once, not an experience I'm looking to repeat).

Faced with that reality, I drank the milk - and am grateful there are dairy farmers that enable me to do that. Sure, we can lobby for better conditions, but it's not by acting like farmers are an entirely different species of people.

@aSofaNearYou

Yes you did, and it's true. An animal being put down by a vet is stressed and frightened because it is away from its home environment. If you think animals having a stressful death means they would be better off not having existed at all, then why are you not against the keeping of pets?

Well that's obviously different, isn't it, because when a pet is put down it's usually towards the end of it's life and necessary to prevent pain.

If the quality of life is good, then I don't think animals care much about the length of it. Arguably, a pet has poorer end of life quality as most pet owners don't have their pets put down until they are old and sick, meaning the animal experiences at least some period of sickness prior to its death.

Empanadas those mountains would still exist but not the landscape - none of it would be passable without farming.

Femme99 You’re talking about changing values as if yours is the right one. You may think that, but you’re talking to the wrong group. Farmers are not a monolithic group which you can communicate with, even if they were I’d guess 99% would not pre-empt change to …arable? And do what with their animals? Again, this is assuming your position is correct. I’m vegan (are you?) and know veganism isn’t “correct” as it is either, for loads of reason to do with the environment and workers rights abroad.

Find out what you want, and talk to consumers. They are what shapes the market - supermarkets too.

Just to add… think about animals (any animals) facing old age. This isn’t an “answer” to any question, just something to bear in mind. Their old age isn’t like ours, where we have comforts to see us through - eg cows simply “go off their legs” and need to be shot, sheep too, and they go blind. Old age to them is just disintegrating until they die painfully and in ultimate discomfort, on their own with no help, literally until they can’t take life anymore, they don’t just “slip away”, they have birds circling to take their eyes while they’re still alive. At least that’s what happens if you don’t call the knackerman to shoot them cleanly and cart them off. That’s just the truth.

“Does an octopus? Does an oyster? Do you have to have warm blood to be important, so you eat fish and amphibians and invertabrates?”

Here we go.., good spot, GorekyPark and guess what.., this is the very reason some people choose to eat fish, but not meat. Imagine the audacity! Bloody hypocrites! Because fish are cold-blooded and don’t feel pain as mammals do.

As I say, different people draw the line where they feel comfortable.

Would you eat your dog / cat? Or horse? Why not?

Far more difference between a cow and a haddock, than a cow and a dog, don’t you think?

And yes mammals (which is what we’re talking about here) do feel pain the same as humans. They are the same blood, flesh, bone and nervous system. How could you possibly imagine they don’t?

WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll - oh. my. god. Are we even having this discussion? Does a plant have a nervous system, warm blood, bones and a brain. Animals may not be as intelligent as humans but they are the same flesh and blood and they feel pain EXACTLY as we do. They feel fear and yes, I do believe animals can anticipate things. In fact, they are more instinctive than humans in many ways. They have to be.

A plant is a plant.

Yes, as I already said, a plant is not animate - but it is still a living organism. That's the point I was making.

The fact that animals can feel pain (whether or not exactly the same way that we do) is exactly why I am not in favour of inhumane slaughter. If, after being looked after for however long their life lasts, their brains and nervous systems are stunned before they are immediately killed, how is it different from if somebody crept up whilst somebody was asleep and instantly put a bullet right into their brain, so that the police/doctor's report would say 'died instantly'? I'm obviously not talking about the ethics of their being killed in the first place, but the instant, efficient manner of how it happened.

Yes, they feel fear if the occurrence and method of their death is not very swift, but they don't live in fear of death the way many humans do. Yes, they can anticipate things - usually based on learned behaviour - but they still don't think and plan into the future. If a pig sees the farmer drive up with a massive bucket of pig food on a trailer on a Monday morning, they realise from learned experience that they're about to be fed, but I seriously doubt whether they're thinking ahead right then about being fed on the Tuesday or Wednesday as well, and wondering whether the food will vary over the next few weeks and months - maybe depending on what seasonal vegetables will be in any leftovers, if that's what constitutes any of their normal feed.

As they've never died before, as long as the point of slaughter of other animals is hidden from their view, how could they possibly fear death? Yes, they might realise that their 'friends' have gone, but how would they know (and would they actually care?) whether they've gone on to nicer pastures or to become food? If ewes can routinely abandon their lambs for what would seem to us like very arbitrary reasons, or sows don't care/notice if the runt of their litter isn't allowed by their siblings to come close to feed from mum, I can't personally see proof that animals all deeply love and care about their fellow animals - they often don't even seem to notice that anybody else is there with them, unless they're fighting them off to get to the food.

I totally respect your rationalising and subsequent choices for you, but others don't always see things the way you do. You quite happily dismiss plants with "a plant is a plant"; others think likewise and say "an animal is an animal". They're both living organisms, neither of them are human; I don't see where you can categorically proclaim the one view completely right and the other completely wrong.

If the quality of life is good, then I don't think animals care much about the length of it. Arguably, a pet has poorer end of life quality as most pet owners don't have their pets put down until they are old and sick, meaning the animal experiences at least some period of sickness prior to its death.

Perhaps not, I just thought it was a bit of a false equivalency to say it's the same as pets being put down. The motive is very different.

Communities adapt all the time. Nothing has to be inevitable. Lovely. I'd love to know how you make your living. I'm a sheep farmer. What do you do? Or your partner? I bet you won't say.