News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:18PM (#12654732)
As I mentioned in another thread, I live on a farm.

(I hack Ruby and C++ as a day job, the farm is just a hobby).

One major reason for doing so is animal welfare. I'm a meat eater and will staunchly defend it...but factory farming is terrible.

At this point we get most of our meat from our own pastures: chicken, goat, lamb, pork.

It's much more expensive than buying factory farmed meat, and even more expensive (in labor, if not dollars) than shopping at Whole Foods. It is wonderful, however, to not merely know that the animals are being treated well, but to watch them every day, enjoying their animal lives: chickens pecking at the pumpkins and squash we grow and feed them, pigs rolling around and enjoying themselves in the mud, sheep chewing contentedly in the pasture. And, of course, at the end of the season, when it's time to turn living creatures into meat, doing it yourself ensures that it's done well, and with minimal stress and pain.

This lifestyle isn't for everyone, but for those who are interested in it, it's becoming more and more possible because of remote work (and soon, driverless cars).

Pictures of processing one of three 500+ lb pork carcasses below:

https://goo.gl/photos/6rzXQXL23esitdh76

https://goo.gl/photos/gZqXZ2ENXfNZv9xL9

(Btw, I'm in civilization, on a client site, today. I packed my lunch, as I always do. It was pulled pork and home-made cole slaw. The pork came from that very critter in the above photos.)

If anyone has any questions about the farm life, feel free to email me. My user name @ my user name . com

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by HSO on Thursday October 06, 2016 @03:18PM (#12655261)
You've just put a new idea about "the good life" into my head… This sounds positively delightful, to combine tech with rural living. I just might give that a try someday!

As someone who has struggled with his diet for ethical reasons for a long time, I have a question though. You say

> at the end of the season, when it's time to turn living creatures into meat, doing it yourself ensures that it's done well, and with minimal stress and pain.

How does this work? Do you not get cognitive dissonance from killing "your children"?

In the abstract, I completely agree with you that 1) eating meat can be done in a good, respectful way and 2) that perhaps the best, most honest way is to do it your way. But I would imagine that once I actually raise a chicken, I could probably not bring myself to kill it with my own hands (let alone eat it). Hell, I'm probably soft enough that even spending just enough time with a chicken to get a sense of its personality would make this impossible for me. Well, maybe if it's a particularly nasty personality, I could kill it but then how could I put such a revolting character in my body? Either way, it seems undoable to me… So how does it actually work, in practice?

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by eric_the_read on Thursday October 06, 2016 @07:02PM (#12656851)
There's a great anime on Netflix called Silver Spoon (http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/encyclopedia/anime.php?id=15...) about a kid from an urban background who goes to an agricultural high school as a way to give the middle finger to his type-A father.

Anyway, one thing I thought was interesting is all the kids who grew up on farms know you basically don't name your livestock, and they even told him this, and he does it anyway (naming the pig he's raising for class Pork Bowl). A good chunk of the plot of the first dozen or so episodes is him dealing with the reality that he's going to have to slaughter and break down the carcass of what is more or less a pet.

I think the most interesting part is that the kids who grew up on a farm (I'm halfway there; I spent my summers on my grandfather's farm, but he only had a hundred or so head of cattle. Mostly he farmed the Holy Trinity: corn, beans, and wheat.) didn't even think about it; livestock is livestock, pets is pets. Watching him come to grips with it was very well-done and very interesting.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by scentedmeat on Thursday October 06, 2016 @10:01PM (#12657621)
> livestock is livestock, pets is pets

I had a Korean friend that explained dog meat in basically the same way: pet dogs are pets, food dogs are food.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:01PM (#12655610)
Glad you're intrigued! Feel free to reach my by email with any questions!

> Do you not get cognitive dissonance from killing "your children"?

Well, first, they're not my children. I don't mean that flippantly, and it's a great question to ask, it's just that my answer is: my wife is my wife, my dogs are my dogs (and, yes, family), pigs are livestock...and chickens are sort of walking squawking vegetables. :)

I shouldn't joke about chickens tho. The first time I had to dispatch one it put a deep pall over the rest of the day. Taking a life, even of something with a brain the size of a peanut, is a big deal.

The first year on the farm my wife gave all of our goats names, played with them, took them on walks, etc. I cautioned her against it...but I also used their names. Slaughter was ... not fun. Still, I did it. A .22 to the brain, and they dropped like sacks of cement.

My wife ended up not wanting to eat goat, so I ate a fair bit of goat after that. ...and she learned never to name or play with the livestock.

When we started raising pigs, we had learned from our lesson. It also helped that several times pigs escaped from our farm and had to be chased around the block and herded back to the farm, which is a huge amount of work. That put the kibosh on overly warm feelings.

Still, pig slaughter again hit me hard. Sure, I gave the pigs freshly picked apples to eat, and even their last minutes of life were better than the best day of a factory farmed pig's life, but killing is killing.

The way you slaughter a pig is [ squeamish people, please stop reading ] shoot them in the forehead. This gives them a concussion and drops them, but does not kill them. You then roll the pig on its side or back and stick a 12+" knife into its chest until it scrapes the spine, then you pivot the knife to slice the aorta and other arteries.

The pig is still technically alive at this point, although it is insensate. Because of my ethics re animals, if I'm going to take a life, I want to use every last bit of the animal. This meant capturing the gallons of blood in a five gallon bucket.

This is the most visceral thing ( no pun intended ) that I have ever done. I don't want to oversell it and say that it's "spiritual", but there is absolutely no escaping the reality of exactly that you're doing and what's going on. The act of sliding a 12" knife deep into a living, breathing thing is irrevocable, undeniable, and challenging.

Eventually even the neurological echoes stop and the animal is still.

At that point the animal is 100% gone, and you can tell. It still *looks

Photo (again, not for the sqeamish):

https://goo.gl/photos/No2xyddwDMGfLn6f6

At this point you have to slice slots in the pigs rear angles, hook a gambrel through, and then lift it (tail up, head down). You then skin in, disembowel it, and skin it.

I had a dissociative event the first time I did this. I was elbows deep in a creature that was about 4 minutes from having been completely alive, and it was still 98.6 degrees (or whatever pigs runs at), and it was in that uncanny valley between "alive" and "foot". I was quite lucid, and eloquent, as I spoke to people around me, but I felt like I was doing something that was in an entirely different realm.

I realize that lots of people here probably hunt and killed deer when they were 10, or whatever, but this was the first large animal (larger than a goat) that I had ever killed.

Hunters often say things like "I respect the animal and feel a deep kinship with it and blah blah blah" and that's easy to hear and not really appreciate, but killing and processing a large animal really is a transformational event, and one that I'm glad I've had. There is no denying exactly what you're doing, and - to me, at least - this created or strengthened my commitment to (a) raise animals as ethically as I possibly can, (b) use every bit of them without waste.

I think that killing and eating animals is fundamental to who we are (and I don't mean "we've evolved incisors"; I mean "the rituals and process are encoded in our minds". The hand shapes the tool and the tool shapes the hand).

If anything, this belief that humans have a deep connection with raising animals makes my revulsion against factory farming even stronger.

Just as dog fighting isn't merely horrific in its own right, but extra horrific because it is a perversion of something good, factory farming takes something good and inherently human and replaces it with something cruel and inhumane. I see that as a perversion.

I hope this answered your question; I seem to have rambled a fair bit.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by nkoren on Thursday October 06, 2016 @05:01PM (#12656076)
Thank you for writing this. If one is going to eat meat, this is how one should do it.

I myself would not do this, and therefore (and for a few other tangential reasons), I'm a vegetarian. But I fully respect how you're living. If you're going to be a carnivore, BE a carnivore. Don't be under any illusions to the contrary.

You talk about having a dissociative experience, but it sounds like, on the whole, you're having a far more associative experience than most people. When I see people casually munching on cheap store-bought ham sandwiches, having no particular concept of what they're eating or how it got there -- and who would in fact recoil in horror if confronted with that reality -- then it seems to me like they are the ones who are being fundamentally dissociative. Not you.

Anyhow, ramble ramble, but from a person with a very different approach to life: respect.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Friday October 07, 2016 @05:59AM (#12659388)
FWIW, even though I choose to live an omnivorous life, I have the highest respect for vegetarians.

I've met people who say "I enjoy meat, but I could never kill an animal".

Fuck you. You kill animals every day by eating meat; you're just too squeamish to face up to the ethics of what you're doing.

So, hats off to all the vegetarians out there. You reached an ethical conclusion and you do the hard work to live it. Mad respect.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by kazagistar on Thursday October 06, 2016 @11:41PM (#12657994)
I don't think he was using the word that way. I interpreted "dissociation" as the more clinical and formally defined psychological term for a mental state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissociation_(psychology)

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Friday October 07, 2016 @07:20AM (#12659744)
exactly
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by asciimo on Thursday October 06, 2016 @06:23PM (#12656622)
> The act of sliding a 12" knife deep into a living, breathing thing is irrevocable, undeniable, and challenging.

It's amazing what some people are willing to do for pleasure. I wish that everyone who consumed animal products had to do it your way. I couldn't do this, so I don't eat animal products. (Yet, I don't suffer a pleasure deficit or any other ill effects, but that's my personal experience.)

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by HSO on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:24PM (#12655788)
This was a beautiful answer. Thank you! :-)

(I especially liked the line "Just as dog fighting isn't merely horrific in its own right, but extra horrific because it is a perversion of something good, factory farming takes something good and inherently human and replaces it with something cruel and inhumane.")

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by countingteeth on Thursday October 06, 2016 @09:30PM (#12657517)
> Because of my ethics re animals, if I'm going to take a life, I want to use every last bit of the animal.

If you're going by raw efficiency, you can hardly beat factory farming. Besides the minimization of inputs, even the feathers and shit of chickens are digested to their amino acid components and used for animal feed and fertilizer. There is the unspeakable cruelty aspect... but then, I've bought ridiculously expensive "free range" turkey from a hyperlocal organic poultry farm, but, judging from appearances, the barren, rather crowded turkey yard is a far cry from a cartoon happy-animal sleepy farm.

It's nice that you're privileged enough to run your own hobby farm, but even the most artisanal of commercial farms is a business and their animals are commodities. Many of the worst cases that organizations like Farm Sanctuary encounter are cases of neglect or bankruptcy in small family-run farms.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by korethr on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:38PM (#12655899)
> Because of my ethics re animals, if I'm going to take a life, I want to use every last bit of the animal. This meant capturing the gallons of blood in a five gallon bucket.

I buy whole chickens and part them out myself, and I do use every bit of the chicken that comes in the package. The bones are used for stocks, skin gets rendered for fat, etc. So I like to think I (can?) get using every last bit of the animal.

But I'm curious, what use(s) does the blood have? I was of the impression that like the viscera, the blood is something that necessarily must be disposed -- it cannot safely be used. Is that not the case?

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by gumby on Thursday October 06, 2016 @05:46PM (#12656398)
> I buy whole chickens and ... do use every bit of the chicken > But I'm curious, what use(s) does the blood have?

When I was a kid, my dad used to take me sometimes to a street vendor (this was in a small city in Malaysia, late 60s/early 70s) who ran his business from a bicycle. He had a small gas ring, a crate on the back of the bike with a couple of chickens in it, and some veggies and noodles.

My dad would order a meal and the guy would grab a chicken out of the box, wring its neck, drain the blood into a bucket, burn off the feathers, dismantle the chook and fry it up with mein and veggies. Yum!

But after handing us our food he would boil and eat the then congealed blood (and the other stuff we didn't eat). The food was great (especially since my mum did not approve) but I was always fascinated by this last step.

As I got older I appreciated that he had us pay for the meal and then still got a meal himself out of the deal.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by endisukaj on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:55PM (#12656035)
Not the parent but I have some knowledge on this.

[Blood sausage][1] is made using pork blood. I have never tried it myself though. What I have tried is [Sanguinaccio][2] made in southern Italy. It's absolutely delicious. I imagine there are plenty of other recipes that use pork blood as an ingredient too.

[1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_sausage)

[2](http://www.chicagonow.com/cooking-cop/2014/03/sanguinaccio-d...)

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @08:10PM (#12657199)
Yes. If you see that dive gallon bucket of blood in the photo? I made bood sausage with it.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by countingteeth on Thursday October 06, 2016 @09:37PM (#12657554)
There's Taiwanese-style pig blood cake (made with rice and fried); or Cantonese-style pig blood curd, which is nothing more than solidified pig's blood.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by logfromblammo on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:50PM (#12655987)
Black pudding (blood sausage) would be my pick, but there are also a lot of good Chinese recipes that include pork blood curd.

The only danger I am aware of--beyond the risks of eating pork products in general--is iron overdose, which means you have to ration your consumption appropriately.

The viscera may also be used, though not necessarily for food. Whatever cannot be eaten can likely be turned into glue, leather, fertilizer, string, etc.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by bane on Thursday October 06, 2016 @09:41PM (#12657560)
Many cultures use most of the animal. For example, in Korea a popular dish is called Sundae (soon-day), basically a kind of pork blood sausage. It's often served with pig ears and snouts as a side dish to alcohol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundae_(Korean_food)

Pig liver is a popular in dishes the world over: pate, various sausages, etc.

It's surprising how much of a pig is useful as food.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by countingteeth on Thursday October 06, 2016 @09:42PM (#12657566)
Where on earth did you get the idea that the viscera must be disposed or cannot be safely eaten?

Pig intestines, heart, lungs are all part of traditional cuisine. Even the kidneys and liver are "viscera," and those are completely mainstream organ meat. Brain is also eaten (head cheese).

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Friday October 07, 2016 @07:26AM (#12659772)
Agreed.

Photo of making blood pudding

https://goo.gl/photos/fUkkcmUxLXmopAQf6

Photo of preparing the heart before marinating it in olive oil and spices, then grilling it.

https://goo.gl/photos/T4MQZDpyEDVLgy7o7

Photo of pressed, sliced, and fried pig ears as a side to a sausage sandwhich

https://goo.gl/photos/me1rguNxWKXrmNLQ9

Photo of head cheese

https://goo.gl/photos/kHpyoDWJRxvDgHxW9

Photo of dog enjoying pig spine

https://goo.gl/photos/Wwpf9npvyvoKiBQN8

I use absolutely everything (well, except for the intestines. Not worth my time or energy to wash the feces out and scrape the mucousal lining off).

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by countingteeth on Friday October 07, 2016 @09:47PM (#12665223)
Pig guts is actually the only porcine viscera I've eaten before. It's not bad at all. The prep does sound rather unpleasant and smelly, but it can't be worse than the butchering you've already done. I believe the colon is nastier than than the small intestine and less eaten. But then, in my high school bio class we were given a lab book for fetal pigs, and came to class and our crazy teacher had a fully-grown, fresh dead sow on the lab island for a group dissection. When we opened the abdominal cavity, the smell was so foul we just about vomited; teacher helpfully told us that the human abdomen smells the same during surgery. This was without having dissected the intestines.

Curious, what did you do with the lungs? That's one part that I think was commercially banned for human consumption in the USA in the '70s. Even if it wasn't, it's rarely sold fresh as I understand it does not keep well at all even under refrigeration. Pork lungs are used used in Fillipino (bopis, kilayin) and Cantonese cuisine; Europeans certainly use sheep and cow lungs (Greeks, French, Scottish; haggis, anyone), but I'm not aware of western recipes specifically calling for pork lungs.

Pork intestine, on the other hand, is ubiquitous.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by kbart on Friday October 07, 2016 @01:51AM (#12658482)
"But I'm curious, what use(s) does the blood have? "

Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaszanka

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by dpeck on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:52PM (#12656002)
| The hand shapes the tool and the tool shapes the hand

I really like that line a lot. I've used a similar phrase to describe the relation between the data you're generating and consuming and the code doing so.

Very eloquent, I'm going to have to remember that one.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by _wmd on Thursday October 06, 2016 @05:44PM (#12656379)
This is probably the most rewarding and insightful thing I've read on HN in 5 years
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tluyben2 on Thursday October 06, 2016 @09:16PM (#12657446)
Good answer, still makes no sense why you don't eat your dogs. It's hypocritical not to; pigs are smart and they respond to you like dogs do (if you let them of course). It's fine, many people do it and at least you look them straight in the eyes while most buy something in plastic 'which taste nice' and they don't have to think.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by maxerickson on Friday October 07, 2016 @03:24PM (#12663293)
It isn't necessarily hypocritical.

For instance, someone might prefer the look of hair on dogs and the feed conversion ratio of swine and thus keep dogs to pet and swine to eat.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by sedachv on Thursday October 06, 2016 @11:17PM (#12657893)
> My wife ended up not wanting to eat goat, so I ate a fair bit of goat after that. ...and she learned never to name or play with the livestock.

So treat the animals like objects to make it easier to kill them? That also works for humans:

https://www.amazon.com/Eternal-Treblinka-Treatment-Animals-H...

> I had a dissociative event the first time I did this.

Dissociation happens for a reason. Slaughterhouse workers get PTSD.

> I think that killing and eating animals is fundamental to who we are (and I don't mean "we've evolved incisors"; I mean "the rituals and process are encoded in our minds". The hand shapes the tool and the tool shapes the hand).

The same argument could have been made for cannibalism, but somehow we managed to get over that.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by kbart on Friday October 07, 2016 @02:00AM (#12658513)
"The way you slaughter a pig is <...> shoot them in the forehead. This gives them a concussion and drops them, but does not kill them."

I'm not a farmer (though your lifestyle is a dream of mine), but couldn't you just use bigger caliber? I'm sure .45 would do the trick. Shooting and killing a pig instantly in one blow is one thing, but putting a knife through a still living creature.. that would be too much for me.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Friday October 07, 2016 @06:03AM (#12659403)
You don't want the pig to die instantly; you want it unconscious and unable to feel pain... but you want the heart still alive. The heart pumps blood which exsanguinates the animal after you slice it's aorta.

This allows you to collect the blood for some other use, and removes it from the veins and arteries in the muscle tissue.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by kbart on Friday October 07, 2016 @07:44AM (#12659852)
Doesn't hanging a carcass with open veins drain enough blood?
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Friday October 07, 2016 @09:49AM (#12660616)
No.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by howling on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:27PM (#12655821)
If you have to force yourself not to name and play animals to be able to kill them eventually, it is probably wrong to kill them.

Disclaimer: I am a vegetarian.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by ewzimm on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:50PM (#12655983)
Some people might say that our instincts are often wrong. A lot of people use tricks to do something other than what their emotions are telling them. They get angry and contain it. They feel jealous that someone else is getting attention and ignore it. We tend to divide emotions into bad ones like that and good ones like empathy, but there's an argument to be made that the natural empathy we feel toward animals is wrong in some cases and should be suppressed. Taken to its extreme, we'd end up with a world where we tried to save everything, even every insect, and we'd end up with an unsustainable world or at best a planet-sized zoo where everything was controlled and coddled. Maybe the natural world, as messy and bloody as it is, is better than one in which every living thing is protected and loved. Maybe empathy is an emotion that was beneficial to our evolution as mammals but has grown out of control as we gained intelligence and the ability to see beyond our family and clan needs and we're better off slaughtering animals which we raise because at least they get to live better lives than any animal would live in the wild before that slaughter comes, making way for a new generation to be raised in a pastoral situation.

I'm only speaking in hypotheticals because I'm also a vegetarian and don't personally subscribe to that idea, but I think it's not necessarily cut and dry that avoiding killing for food is absolutely the right thing to do. Personally, I think the normalization of dominating animals is what led to a lot of bad behaviors toward humans like slavery and subjugation and that we would be better off cultivating more empathy rather than accepting the order of nature as we were born into it. There was a time before hunting and slaughtering, and I think there will be a time after it, and I think we will be better of once we have moved past it. But I also have to consider that I might be wrong.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by 1457389 on Thursday October 06, 2016 @05:45PM (#12656383)
>Taken to its extreme, we'd end up with a world where we tried to save everything, even every insect, and we'd end up with an unsustainable world or at best a planet-sized zoo where everything was controlled and coddled

We are in the middle of the largest extinction event in this planet's history, and it's our fault as a species. A major causative factor is our dependence on needless animal slaughter to get our jollies. I'd say we are at the opposite extreme to the one you hypothesize, and perhaps some extreme thinking to rectify this is needed. Don't let conciliation become collusion, even rhetorically.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by ewzimm on Thursday October 06, 2016 @05:56PM (#12656468)
This is true. Especially South American slash and burn of the rainforest for cattle grazing is a huge contribution. We're burning through our largest carbon sinks and also the most diverse ecosystem to raise meat. Switching to alternatives like lab-grown meat and vegetables would do more than anything to stop both climate change and species extinction. It's insane that we're dancing on the edge of the extermination of life on Earth because of flavor. I do think that it'a important to look at the other side though to understand why we're following these kinds of practices. There'a a lot of culture tied up with meat, and we won't be able to get past it unless we address the reasons for doing it on all levels.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by Falling3 on Thursday October 06, 2016 @06:26PM (#12656645)
>Taken to its extreme, we'd end up with a world where we tried to save everything, even every insect

That's a Nirvana Fallacy. I can only imagine you'd never try to apply the same reasoning to humans. That since it's wrong to cause harm to them, you're now responsible to ensuring that no harm of any kind comes to any human anywhere.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tomp on Thursday October 06, 2016 @09:55PM (#12657607)
Doesn't the same apply to plants?! I don't know about you, but I'm quite attached to my indoors plants... Obviously I won't eat them (I don't know any recipes involving orchids), but I'd be quite sad if they died.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by bane on Thursday October 06, 2016 @09:35PM (#12657539)
Humans also have to learn to swim, not fear fire, and many other things that our instincts say we shouldn't do.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by jessaustin on Thursday October 06, 2016 @07:50PM (#12657096)
I find it gets easier, the older I get. Right now we're bottle-feeding a hydrocephalic calf named "Georgie". He can't stand up for more than 30 seconds or walk in a straight line (and therefore would have died if left with his mother), but he will produce a fair amount of veal. Probably not enough to make up for the $3500 we could have gotten selling him as a young bull!
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by psj on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:57PM (#12656046)
I just logged in for the first time in forever to say thanks for a really interesting and thought-provoking read.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by andreareina on Thursday October 06, 2016 @11:39PM (#12657986)
We tried the gun, it didn't at all work that way for us -- we had a terrified pig running around with a hole in its forehead. Would you mind me picking your brain? Let me know your preferred method and I'll reply with my handle.

EDIT: just saw the email address on your first post.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by archagon on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:23PM (#12655777)
Wow, that was an amazing read. Thank you for sharing!
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by korethr on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:15PM (#12655713)
I've not raised animals for food, so I am hypothesizing here. It seems to me the key is to be honest with oneself that you are intending to kill this creature for food, and not allow yourself to form emotional attachments to it like one would with a pet. Now, having not done this, I don't know how easy or hard it would be. Were I to have the opportunity to do so, I would be willing to try it.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by kbenson on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:31PM (#12654850)
As someone who raises animals for food, how would or wouldn't your behavior change if sufficiently cheap and adequately tasty cultured (i.e. var-grown) meat were available?

I ask as someone who eats meat quite regularly, but would prefer not to contribute to the raising of animals for slaughter if I don't have to. I understand that the death of one animal to feed another is part of the natural way our ecosystem functions, but factory farming makes me extremely uneasy. Animals raised in conditions resulting in relatively the same level of comfort or discomfort they might experience in the wild until they are slaughtered is one thing, but being born into an existence that appears to consist of nothing but confusion, fear and pain until death is not something I wish on anything that can feel those.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:36PM (#12654882)
If my choices were factory farming or vat grown food, I'd choose vat grown in an instant, to minimize suffering.

If my choices are vat ground vs home ground...that's complicated. There's a lot to be said for small scale farming. It brings animals into the world and lets them enjoy life, which I see as actively good. We don't have to go remotely near the Repugnant Conclusion Paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere_addition_paradox and can just note that the pigs seem to enjoy being alive.

I also think that it's in man's nature to interact with the natural environment. This is really a book-sized topic, not a news.yc comment one !

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by kbenson on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:59PM (#12655083)
Sure, I understand it's a complex topic, I just figured I would source some info from someone involved in farming at your level. :)

I'm for farm raised animals, I think that results in a fairly good life for the animals. I understand there's not a lot of incentive for people to raise certain animals without some sort of pay-off at that end, and that's usually eating them. That makes it somewhat complex.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by hx87 on Thursday October 06, 2016 @03:59PM (#12655580)
If vat grown meat contains fat as well as muscle, I'd take in a heartbeat too, but if it's just muscle...I would have to turn it down. Lean meat is tasteless meat, IMHO.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tluyben2 on Thursday October 06, 2016 @09:11PM (#12657429)
We started out making our own farm for animals (pigs + chickens) but we figured we actually liked the little buggers (what you describe as watching them grow etc, for me, especially with pigs, makes them the same level as dogs and the hypocritical west is as the hypocritical west does which I couldn't really stomach) and went vegetarian anyway. Don't miss meat at all (don't actually like it anymore), but that's not the point; the life is good if you like that kind (nature, fresh air, quiet usually if you have a small farm) of thing with or without eating meat. We have fresh eggs from our chickens and fresh fruit and veg without pesticides and water from our own well.

We started growing hops (& more apples) for the brewery and it is really nice. It isn't for everyone but if you like it then there is no reason not to if you are a programmer (which I am). You don't have to go full in with a complete farm, just growing / rearing your food partly is a nice feeling. It also is, at least here in the EU, much cheaper if you don't go full in (and you wouldn't have to if you don't have to make money); everyone wants to live in cities (I feel left out as I hate them :), so the country is empty and land is cheap. As are houses (depending on the location). In a lot of countries you would not even need a house per se; just a container or caravan would suffice (if only I had known this when I was young).

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Friday October 07, 2016 @09:50AM (#12660620)
Sounds great!

We also grow hops and apples.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by Synaesthesia on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:25PM (#12654796)
I don't see why, for example, chickens couldn't be humanely farmed for not much more expense. If you let them wander about freely in a field, they will voluntarily go back to the coop at night. The current battery system, besides being awful for the animals, is very unhygienic with the chickens cramped together, pooping on each other. Consequently the chickens are given large amounts of antibiotic which encourages superbugs to develop. It's not good for public health, surely!
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:30PM (#12654840)
I'm not defending factory farming of chickens (I actually just adjusted our fencing to double the size of the chicken run), but the answer is: cost.

Chickens in modern factory farms are stacked deep. Each has < 1 ft^2, and their cages are stacked vertically perhaps 10 deep, so they get around 0.1 ft^2 of farm land each.

We have around 15 chickens in our flock. They share a 144 ft^2 coop and have a little chicken door that gives out onto a 400 ft^2 outdoor run.

That's ~550 ft^2 for 15 chickens, or 45 ft^2 per chicken.

That's 450 times as much space as a factory farmed chicken gets.

That costs money.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by Synaesthesia on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:36PM (#12654884)
I understand that the space is the big thing, but that is the only additional cost. You may actually save on antibiotics and deaths to illnesses. I think you could maybe have your chickens slightly more dense than the example you mention. For example here in South Africa we have plenty of space, and I see vast warehouses go up.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by illumin8 on Thursday October 06, 2016 @03:40PM (#12655415)
Currently, the farmers are not paying for any of the externalities(1) of their operation, including harm to the environment from waste runoff, antibiotic resistant bacteria, and the overall health consequences of eating factory-farmed meat, which are still little understood.

This needs to change in order to make humane farming methods more viable, however, it is in direct conflict with the USDA's goals of reducing the price of food for consumers.

It's a tough problem to solve, but I've gotten to the point where I don't even know what meat to buy any more. So-called "grass fed beef" can be any beef, since all cows eat grass during at least part of their lives, even factory-farmed cows, and the rules are so lax that there is zero enforcement. This has to change.

1. a side effect or consequence of an industrial or commercial activity that affects other parties without this being reflected in the cost of the goods or services involved, such as the pollination of surrounding crops by bees kept for honey.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:42PM (#12654935)
Chickens need to be protected from predators, need to be sheltered from the sun, need to be protected from the cold, need to be fed in a way that minimizes waste, need to be watered in the same way, etc.

Also, don't underestimate the cost of land. Even if it's just $5,000 per acre, if scheme one packs chickens in at factory farming levels, and scheme two packs them in the way I do (remember: 450 times less densely), then we need an additional 449 acres of land.

That's $2,245,000 in land costs.

Plus, how do you distribute food and water over those 450 acres?

Factory farming may be cruel, but it's not dumb. Farmers are smart micro-optimizers.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by randomdata on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:47PM (#12654972)
I'm just a grain farmer, but in the highly competitive agriculture world, fortunes are made and lost on seemingly small efficiencies. If the savings on antibiotics and deaths were actually greater than the alternative costs, someone would quickly exploit the gains, and everyone else would eventually be forced into that model to compete.

Which is the same reason why you see barns going up everywhere instead.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by yourapostasy on Thursday October 06, 2016 @02:48PM (#12654975)
In the US, and for much of the developed world, you are touching upon a very messy, complex, inter-related mesh of issues, all revolving around land-as-an-asset. Throw in population pressure, how debt is used to acquire land by different economic actors, etc., and it gets...complicated. Basically, anytime someone says the cause of a set of ills is cost, and if you can tie it back in any way to land cost as an input cost, it will be a Gordian Knot-impenetrable intermingled mess of issues that prevents one from characterizing space as "the only additional cost".
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by alva on Thursday October 06, 2016 @03:04PM (#12655141)
Fantastic. I would love to do what you are doing. A long term goal of mine is to have a few acres in the UK, raising animals for meat in my spare time. 1. So I know I can give the animals an peaceful and happy life 2. The quality of well raised meat is many orders of magnitude tastier than the supermarket stuff imo.

Could you point me towards any resources that you found helpful when you were starting out? One of my concerns is long term storage of the meat. 3 pigs yield a massive amount of meat, even for a large family. Raising some pigs for beautiful meat, it would seem like a shame to lose some of the quality by freezing 90% of it.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:04PM (#12655631)
No time to answer this now. Send me an email and I'll respond in detail. Email addr is in my original comment above.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by angryredblock on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:00PM (#12655597)
Do you generally work 'normal' (9-5) hours? Do you have help on the farm or are you the primary caretaker? I'd not have thought of farming as low-time-commitment enough to be a hobby.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:03PM (#12655624)
We have a 1,000 ft^2 greenhouse, a 3,000 ft^2 corn field, and a 3,000 ft^2 pumpkin patch.

We do not have 10 or 50 or 5000 acres of crops.

Basically, large gardens, not real farming.

That said, we ALSO delegate some chores to farm hands. I installed fencing the first year, then realized how stupid this was given comparative advantage. Now I code, code, code, and then get some extra work and code some more, and let farm hands do other work.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by pillowkusis on Thursday October 06, 2016 @03:06PM (#12655159)
you seem concerned with animal welfare, or at least the minimization of suffering; how do you justify willfully killing animals (which undoubtedly creates suffering)?
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by sambobeckingham on Thursday October 06, 2016 @03:14PM (#12655223)
Humane killing, I imagine?

Stun gun or that bolt hammer thing right to the brain, over in a flash as far as the animal is concerned.

Far more pleasant than the natural way - 6 of us chasing it round the prairie chucking spears.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by Falling3 on Thursday October 06, 2016 @06:29PM (#12656663)
Just because it's better than "the natural way" doesn't make it humane. How is the idea of humanely killing someone unnecessarily who wants to live not an oxymoron?
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by Guvante on Thursday October 06, 2016 @03:35PM (#12655385)
There are ways to kill that minimize suffering. To counter your point, he only raised the animals to eat them, if he could not kill them they would never have existed. Is that superior?
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by douche on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:05PM (#12655638)
If you lead a pig to a trough and feed it something tasty, then bonk it on the head from behind with a sledge hammer, they're dead before they even know it.

I hope I get to go out that easy.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by hx87 on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:15PM (#12655712)
Yep, it seems perverse that we force humans to die in ways (e.g. chemotherapy on late-stage cancers, irreversible brain damage) that we would be horrified by if we inflicted them on animals.
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by ldehaan on Thursday October 06, 2016 @03:12PM (#12655209)
Super cool! My family and I are also looking to buy a small farm and basically do the same thing, use it to provide good healthy food for our kids and hopefully at some point setup a program for other food conscious programmers and do a hackathon every couple months to improve on farming equipment.

Did you get a govt loan for your farm? If so did they require a certain amount of food to be sold or grown?

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @04:06PM (#12655646)
No, I bootstrapped into a farm by being lucky enough to have bought a small house in Arlington, MA just before it hugely gentrified.

I sold a 1,500 square foot house on 0.1 acres of land and traded laterally into a 5,000 square foot house on 56 acres of land.

I've worked in tech for 25 years and never hit a good IPO; I guess this is my one big karma win!

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by jasonparallel on Thursday October 06, 2016 @03:57PM (#12655568)
I'm not sure if they are still active, but this group was hacking together some cool stuff for the farm: opensourceecology.org
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by jasonparallel on Thursday October 06, 2016 @06:56PM (#12656816)
Also check out farmhack.org/tools
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by macandcheese on Thursday October 06, 2016 @07:17PM (#12656928)
Curious what your thoughts on Joel Salatin + Polyface farms are? I've read a small handful of his books and found them enlightening - if a bit preachy. From the perspective of never really farming for profit and only volunteering / taking urban farm courses in college, his writing seems prophetical to me. Any thoughts?
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Friday October 07, 2016 @09:52AM (#12660636)
I've read one or two of his books.

I'm tentatively a fan. I need to dig in deeper.

Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by jessaustin on Thursday October 06, 2016 @07:58PM (#12657132)
That second photo has me wondering... do you use the table saw for butchering? I only ever use hand tools (with the exception of the electric grinder), but I was under the impression that big meat saws are band saws rather than table saws... it seems it would make a huge mess!
Re:The fight over transparency in the meat industry by tjic on Thursday October 06, 2016 @08:48PM (#12657354)
Oh, no! Im just doing it NEAR the tablesaw. I do it all by hand with knives.