Animal rights

[ozleicester]

Have you tried Soylent Green, oz? its a cheap, tasty and nutritious substitute for meat.

What a fantastic question... no i havent tried it... again i dont agree with something dying for my pleasure......more importantly have YOU..or any of the Meat eaters here?... and Would you? whats the difference really?

[ozleicester]

If Man evolve into vegitarians, we have to expect some species of animals to become extinct like farm animals. They will have outlived their usefulness. There will still be wild animals but others will mutate to adapt to conditions as they have done for millions of years. We may even adapt and change as more and more of us stop eating meat. We may grow rabbit teeth suitable for eating carrots.

It won't be for a while yet though.

It is a possibility, though to be fair we are wiping out animals on a pretty regular basis already and slowly we are acting to stop doing that, lets be honest we have kept Panda's alive for years... for what benefit?

[ozleicester]

Been eating a lot more raw beef lately. Great taste, great texture. Tonight I'm gonna buy 500g mince and make a couple of massive burgers. Looking forward to fish and chips tomorrow, and I like to decorate my weekends with plenty of chicken wings and legs. I seriously can't understand why anyone would want to be vegetarian. Eating meat is one of life's great pleasures, and can even be a finer pleasure if your wife knows how to cook.

You need to get out more

[ozleicester]

I'm sure I'm not the only one who's thought you should both get together for some sort of meatfest/sausage party.

Meatfest no problem, I only have sausage when there no other meat option.

Any port in a storm i guess

Edited 3 August 2012 by ozleicester

[ozleicester]

So a question for you fine folk...

When can something be considered an animal and suitable for eating? what are the limits and rules as to what you can and cant eat. is it cuteness, intellect, size, shape?????

Is it body shape..cows, chickens are fine... dogs cats not ok.

Is it intellect, ducks and rabbits arent too bright so ... hmm but what about Monkeys, chimps, gorillas etc.. they are more intelligent than many forest fans... can we eat Monkeys and forest fans? lets not even begin on Jeremy Kyle guests... where do they fit on the food chain?

and the biggest area of hypocrisy that i see... will you eat fish.... but complain about the Japanese eating whale?

Or maybe its just about farming... is it ok to eat anything as long as its farmed. The business of the future, whale farms, monkey farms...people (lets face we already have an oversupply of them) farms.

Edited 3 August 2012 by ozleicester

[MPH]

I go deer Hunting.

I have done 3 13 hour days so i'll explain as best as i can... really quite tired but here goes...

There is a difference between Preservation and conservation..... Over here Preservation basically means they would not kill any of the animals... conservation means they maintain a healthy heard/ flock or whatever you call it... of that specific animal

say you have an area of 1000 square miles.. in that area would be a couple of cities... few large farms, couple of small farms and tons of homes all over the place... say you start with 5000 deer in that area all eating along nicely.. If you do not shoot any of the deer, there are very few animals that are able to kill them - alot of their natural predators bears/ mountain lions ect are just not in this area... the mountains are a couple of hundred miles away and so there is nothing here to naturally kill them... anyway.. if you do not shoot them then you would have a population explosion. ( like what has been happening recently!!).. yet, as they are not meat eaters, they would be competing for the exact same amount of vegetation.. In this area they have started eating more and more of the crops the farmers grow - especially the corn .if you didnt have hunting then those 5000 would soon become 10,000 ( and infact the numbers are STILL increasing- in 2007 the department of transporation actually issued a warning for motorists to be on the look out because of the increased numbers of deer... its not like hitting a rabbit!) and as I said they are then competing for the same amount of food... Its like, if you have 1 kid and cook a panful of food... well... if you have three more kids, then you'll need to cook more food , right? If not you'll at worst lose a kid due to malnutrition or at best you'll have four skinny kids.. who could suffer health complications, ect... you get the idea.. There is a state park here in North Carolina called Morrow Mountain state Park. You are not allowed to hunt in there yet the deer population has grown so much.. and remember they have to fight for that same amount of vegetation.. if anything there is less vegetation for them as the clover doesnt get a change to grow to maturity , ect...... every time we go there , there are lots of deer ... and ALL of them are so skinny... all you see are the bones and rib cages, ect... reminds me of those lions in africa you seeon tv that cant hunt.. and they are just so skinny...

Anyway... the idea of conservation is to keep the deer levels down, yet every deer shot has to be by a liscenced hunter ( who has to go to a hunter safety class before being allowed a liscence) who then has to report the shooting so that the game warden dept can keep a very close eye on the numbers and make sure they are not being hunted out of existence... which has no chance of happening right now.. Right now there are approximately 1.25 million deer in North Carolina... a state that has about 7 million people in. Last year there were 170,000 deer killed in North Carolina... so you have approximately 500,00 does available and able to conceive and give birth to a deer every year .. not all do of course, but its easy to see why the number of deers are increasing every year , here in NC. The meat is yours when you shoot it - its free ( im no trophy hunter and you'll never see a deer head in my house or a photo of me standing next to a deer or anything like that..) and a big deer can keep you stocked full of meat for a very long time - i still have a couple of shelves in my freezer full of it

I do not know of any other solution to the increase every year of deer population. I would be intrested to know if anyone else has any ideas...?

The deer live a good life, they roam free, and yet i get very high quality, low in fat meat that is absolutely delicious ( when cooked right!) I have made deer meat sausage, i own a dehydrator and made my own deer meat Jerky... And really enjoy being able to hunt with my own rife ( safely! you have to go through hunter safety classes before they will give you your liscence!)

Anyway sorry for my tired ramblings. Goodnight

Found a little bit of info on the deers and the problems we face with them if anyone is at all intrested. . its not the info i was talking about earlier but anyway.... http://www.ncwildlife.org/Portals/0/whitetaildeer.pdf

[ozleicester]

I go deer Hunting.

I have done 3 13 hour days so i'll explain as best as i can... really quite tired but here goes...

There is a difference between Preservation and conservation..... Over here Preservation basically means they would not kill any of the animals... conservation means they maintain a healthy heard/ flock or whatever you call it... of that specific animal

say you have an area of 1000 square miles.. ......... . its not the info i was talking about earlier but anyway.... http://www.ncwildlif...itetaildeer.pdf

thanks for your time and i understand and appreciate what you are saying, but i think you are only looking from a single perspective (as i am sure i am also) if we dont shoot them and allow an increase in mountain lions and other predators this would reduce the populations, if we control through sterilisation or some of the other tools that our incredible brains have developed.

We can ensure that the overpopulation doesn't become a problem. But we need to focus on solving it...we don't do anything like that currently because its much easier to allow the indiscriminate killing of them.

Im sure they do live a good life....it is just ended prematurely and violently.

[MPH]

thanks for your time and i understand and appreciate what you are saying, but i think you are only looking from a single perspective (as i am sure i am also) if we dont shoot them and allow an increase in mountain lions and other predators this would reduce the populations, if we control through sterilisation or some of the other tools that our incredible brains have developed.

We can ensure that the overpopulation doesn't become a problem. But we need to focus on solving it...we don't do anything like that currently because its much easier to allow the indiscriminate killing of them.

Im sure they do live a good life....it is just ended prematurely and violently.

But there are no mountain lions in this area? what do we do in the 20-30 years it could take them to reach this area? you would have so many deer and so little food for them that millions of deer each year would slowly and agonisingly starve to death. As someone concerned with the rights of animals, is that a solution you would really want?

If they are allowed to reach this area of course...the minute they attack anyones kids, people will do whatever it would take , as you would expect any species to do - defend their children. The problem with the mountain lion solution you suggest is that the human population is conttinuously growing and it just isnt a viable solution to have them mixing in the same areas humans populate.

There are approximately 50,000 hunters in North Carolina and it takes all of those to kill the 170,000 deer each year.. to catch a deer to steralise it... and the deer population is still increasing... that means you would need at least 250,00 paid government workers ( each year) to even begin to catch/ steralise them/ control them... Do you REALLY think thats a plausable solution? 250,000 extra workers that approximately 3 million working adults in this state would have to pay for... thats a huge cost.... and dont forget this is just one animal... we would then need to do the same for rabbits... wild hogs... wild turkeys.. and all other animals that are hunted in this state which helps to control their population.. You would most likely need every adult in this state just to control the animal population...

I would also respectfully disagree with the idea that deers die a violent death when shot. as an aside, with your suggestion that the mountain lions increase in population, would your idea not also result in a violent and premature death for the deer ?. Mountain lions eat their pray alive.. sometimes after a long / traumatic chase that is terrifying for the deer. I dont mean to offend/ upset you with this description but once caught they then use sharp claws and teeth to rip into the animal.. whilst it is still alive.. I use a rifle with a scope on ( which ensures accuracy) and the deer if shot accurately through the heart or lungs can be completly dead within 7 seconds.

whilst you suggested the mountain lion , would you not agree that, in contrast, as a solution to the deer problem.. that hunting, when done properly would be a much better end of life for the deer?

[ozleicester]

But there are no mountain lions in this area? what do we do in the 20-30 years it could take them to reach this area? you would have so many deer and so little food for them that millions of deer each year would slowly and agonisingly starve to death. As someone concerned with the rights of animals, is that a solution you would really want?

If they are allowed to reach this area of course...the minute they attack anyones kids, people will do whatever it would take , as you would expect any species to do - defend their children. The problem with the mountain lion solution you suggest is that the human population is conttinuously growing and it just isnt a viable solution to have them mixing in the same areas humans populate.

There are approximately 50,000 hunters in North Carolina and it takes all of those to kill the 170,000 deer each year.. to catch a deer to steralise it... and the deer population is still increasing... that means you would need at least 250,00 paid government workers ( each year) to even begin to catch/ steralise them/ control them... Do you REALLY think thats a plausable solution? 250,000 extra workers that approximately 3 million working adults in this state would have to pay for... thats a huge cost.... and dont forget this is just one animal... we would then need to do the same for rabbits... wild hogs... wild turkeys.. and all other animals that are hunted in this state which helps to control their population.. You would most likely need every adult in this state just to control the animal population...

I would also respectfully disagree with the idea that deers die a violent death when shot. as an aside, with your suggestion that the mountain lions increase in population, would your idea not also result in a violent and premature death for the deer ?. Mountain lions eat their pray alive.. sometimes after a long / traumatic chase that is terrifying for the deer. I dont mean to offend/ upset you with this description but once caught they then use sharp claws and teeth to rip into the animal.. whilst it is still alive.. I use a rifle with a scope on ( which ensures accuracy) and the deer if shot accurately through the heart or lungs can be completly dead within 7 seconds.

whilst you suggested the mountain lion , would you not agree that, in contrast, as a solution to the deer problem.. that hunting, when done properly would be a much better end of life for the deer?

No, i do not think that hunting is a better end.

The mountain Lion option was one i presented as a very very simplistic option, in regard to the sterilisation alternative, you are only looking at this from our existing viewpoint, a move toward a vegetarian society would take place over many years.. many generations, it will require a diversion of dollars away from meat farming and into more sustainable alternatives, this channeling of money will bring about better more efficient forms of sterilisation or...other control methods.

Im not saying i have the answers, but if you will indulge me ill refer to a story i was told when i visited London back in the 90's.

We went to the Tower bridge tour, and sat through the stories as how and why it was built, one of the things they mentioned was.... that in the late1800's the leaders of London had grave concerns about the increasing number of horses, and horses and carts that were coming into London, the major concern was that if the increase continued at the current rate over a couple of decades, then the city would become over run with horse manure and they would be unable to manage the disposal of it... health and the city itself would be at risk.

Of course within about 20 years, the car had been invented and become a replacement for horses, therefore the perceived problem never eventuated.

Hoepfully that makes sense... the point being that, we cant just assume that what is happening today, will continue along the same axis in the future. There is always the idea from left field that sets us off on a completely new tangent.

[Rincewind]

I went into Leicester Centre yesterday and there was the Monthly Farmers Market on Gallowtree Gate. On one stall (the one I posted the beaver photo) they had samples and one of them was penquin. Whether it was penquin or a fancy name I don't know. Had a taste though. Tasted a bit fishy and that's not a pun. Sort of like salmon. Wasn't keen on it tbh and unless I was stuck in an Artic region where they frollock happily and I was starving Ib would not pick up a penquin and eat it.

They also had the usual hand made pork oies, venison and game pies but the prices were too much for me.

Edited 3 August 2012 by Nightguard

[Captain...]

So a question for you fine folk...

When can something be considered an animal and suitable for eating? what are the limits and rules as to what you can and cant eat. is it cuteness, intellect, size, shape?????

Is it body shape..cows, chickens are fine... dogs cats not ok.

Is it intellect, ducks and rabbits arent too bright so ... hmm but what about Monkeys, chimps, gorillas etc.. they are more intelligent than many forest fans... can we eat Monkeys and forest fans? lets not even begin on Jeremy Kyle guests... where do they fit on the food chain?

and the biggest area of hypocrisy that i see... will you eat fish.... but complain about the Japanese eating whale?

Or maybe its just about farming... is it ok to eat anything as long as its farmed. The business of the future, whale farms, monkey farms...people (lets face we already have an oversupply of them) farms.

I will try pretty much any meat I get the chance to, regardless of size or cuteness, mainly out of curiosity, apart from human, if some cultures think it is tasty who am I to argue.

The difference between fishing and whaling is that whale numbers are very low, and whale meat is, by all accounts, not very tasty, I disagree with whaling from a conservation point of view, in the same way I try to buy line caught fish, dolphin friendly tuna etc. To agree with the death of abundant animals for food, is not the same as agreeing with wiping out species.

To be honest I think the opposite is more true about farming, I would much rather eat something wild and hunted than as a result of battery/intensive farming, the truth is I don't actually eat a huge amount of meat, mainly because of farming methods and would much rather eat fish or seafood, I try to buy only free range chicken and eggs, but I can't deny myself a good bit of red meat every now and again.

...and MPH is spot on about hunting to control populations, adding to that I would much rather be shot than sterilised, or eaten by a mountain line, or starve to death prematurely.

Edited 3 August 2012 by Captain Shrapnel

[Zingari]

Consider the point that the grain it takes to feed one cow can feed a hundred people. With all the starving people on the planet, it would make sense to have them eat grain and not meat.

The problem with this statement is that those people aren't starving because there isn't enough food--they're starving because they don't have access to the food. When you say 'We could feed all the starving people with the ', ask yourself 'but would we?' One recent study found that half of all food in America goes to waste. If we had twice as much, wouldn't we simply waste the increase too?

Wouldn't such a monoculture food supply be easier to manipulate politically .

"Banana Republics" seem to be just that , controlled much too easily

It's really very misleading to ask things such as , 'Well, how would you feel if you were slaughtered and eaten?' How you would feel may not be comparable to how a lower life form feels. Similarly, if i was kept in a field all day eating grass I'd soon get bored and I reckon even I could work out that I was being kept as a slave to the master's needs and would do some rabble rousing.

I've got to admire your stamins and steadfastness in your beliefs though oz , is it all the nut cutlets that you eat that fortifies your constitution ?

Sorry if you feel you're going over the same old stuff oz

"illegitimi nil carborundum" as they used say in Rome ( or maybe they didn't)

[fleckneymike]

I've joined this debate somewhat late so apologies if I am making points which have already been covered.

1. If we were to make the switch the a vegetarian lifestyle then there would obviously be a dramatic reduction in animal population. Now I am aware that this is not necessarily a bad thing as one can rightly argue that maintaining a large population of animals purely for the purposes of consumption is not humane and therefore makes the large population not much of a bonus. However there would be little point in keeping, treating and maintaining livestock as their is no financial incentive to do so and this could see a great deal of suffering (albeit natural) amongst huge swathes of the animal population.

2. Small amounts of livestock would need to be kept to feed the domestic pets which people have, this would raise certain ethical issues over which animals should be selected to maintain a healthy dog and cat population.

3. In terms of clothing and other items which rely on animal carcases there would again need to be a proportion of animals bred for the leather industry, bedding/clothing (feathers etc for pillows and duvets) plus others for cleaning and cooking products. Again this raises issues over which animals should/could be kept for these purposes.

4. Are we accepting that it is ok to keep animals for their milk and eggs or is that too undesirable?

Edited 3 August 2012 by fleckneymike

[MooseBreath]

You need to get out more

Typical and expected reaction. But the truth is I'm right. We are genetically programmed to enjoy eating food and especially food which is good for us in a fundamental sense. The desire to eat is as strong as the desire to procreate and like procreation offers a satisfaction mechanism.

But anyway, I really don't give a ****. Vegetarians are like religious people. Pointless arguing with them when they're so obviously deluded.

I do have a question though - what are your thoughts on insects as a food source? There was an article on the BBC the other day about a possible solution to expensive meat being grinding down insects like crickets and making them into sausages, burgers etc. Are you ok with eating insects?

[Zingari]

There's a few good points from FleckneyMike and Moosey for you to get your teeth into today ( not the canines obviously)

This should keep you busy for a while today oz

[Babylon]

In truth, i think as the most dominant...and (as everyone seems so pleased to point out) intelligent, evolved creatures on the planet, i think we would be capable of working out how to manage the problem.

We have... we kill and eat them.

Problem solved.

[Babylon]

So a question for you fine folk...

A question for you, if you got rid of mass produced meat, slaughterhouses etc. How would you feel about people living off the land, ie. killing a wild dear and eating it?

If that's not ok, are you not ok with the thought of a lion eating a Zebra?

You're asking for man to treat animals like humans, so presumably you ask the same of them? Or is that different because we can verbally express our enjoyment of eating meat. Where as they can't?

Edited 3 August 2012 by Babylon

[Rincewind]

If you come face to face with a hungry lion would you try and convince it that it is cruel to eat a human or take your rifle ( if you had one) and blast the bugger between the eyes?

[Trav Le Bleu]

I noticed this thread just underneath the I'm a Celebrity thread and I was wondering,

what about the rights of animals appearing on I'm a Celebrity?

[OzFox]

But that is thousands of lions, thousands of tigers and thousands of bears, oh my!

Not to mention sharks, crocs, hyenas, etc.

Hardly big numbers though are they, compared to 7 billion? And most of them are penned into reserves or national parks, so I don't think you've got much too worry about, Tigers have lost over 90% of their habitat to humans and will probably be gone in our lifetimes. That's a great shame in my opinion.

On the subject of meat, I went to a restaurant in Cairns tonight serving "Australian" cuisine. The menu was a carnivores wet dream. Kangaroo terrine, salt and pepper crocodile, char grilled kangaroo, slow roasted wallaby etc. I bet they all taste like chicken.

[OzFox]

Well I hope none of the fookers catch up with me !

Not likely unless you're planning a surfing trip to Western Australia. The sharks seem to have got a taste for the locals

[Zingari]

Not likely unless you're planning a surfing trip to Western Australia. The sharks seem to have got a taste for the locals

i've seen some of the locals in WA and me and the sharks have something in common there

[OzFox]

But there are no mountain lions in this area? what do we do in the 20-30 years it could take them to reach this area? you would have so many deer and so little food for them that millions of deer each year would slowly and agonisingly starve to death. As someone concerned with the rights of animals, is that a solution you would really want?

If they are allowed to reach this area of course...the minute they attack anyones kids, people will do whatever it would take , as you would expect any species to do - defend their children. The problem with the mountain lion solution you suggest is that the human population is conttinuously growing and it just isnt a viable solution to have them mixing in the same areas humans populate.

There are approximately 50,000 hunters in North Carolina and it takes all of those to kill the 170,000 deer each year.. to catch a deer to steralise it... and the deer population is still increasing... that means you would need at least 250,00 paid government workers ( each year) to even begin to catch/ steralise them/ control them... Do you REALLY think thats a plausable solution? 250,000 extra workers that approximately 3 million working adults in this state would have to pay for... thats a huge cost.... and dont forget this is just one animal... we would then need to do the same for rabbits... wild hogs... wild turkeys.. and all other animals that are hunted in this state which helps to control their population.. You would most likely need every adult in this state just to control the animal population...

I would also respectfully disagree with the idea that deers die a violent death when shot. as an aside, with your suggestion that the mountain lions increase in population, would your idea not also result in a violent and premature death for the deer ?. Mountain lions eat their pray alive.. sometimes after a long / traumatic chase that is terrifying for the deer. I dont mean to offend/ upset you with this description but once caught they then use sharp claws and teeth to rip into the animal.. whilst it is still alive.. I use a rifle with a scope on ( which ensures accuracy) and the deer if shot accurately through the heart or lungs can be completly dead within 7 seconds.

whilst you suggested the mountain lion , would you not agree that, in contrast, as a solution to the deer problem.. that hunting, when done properly would be a much better end of life for the deer?

Mountain lions used to be common in the eastern US, until they were driven out by hunting and habitat loss. Whenever humans remove a predator from the food chain, you then get an explosion in the population of their prey, which is why your backyard is now crawling with deer. The same thing happened in Britain, and in other parts of the US where wolves and bears have been pushed out.

Personally I'd rather see deer controlled naturally by mountain lions than shot for pleasure by hunters. A quick glance at Youtube will show you that a lot of hunting is far from ethical...there's some sickening stuff on there. I've personally seen hunters in Minnesota & Wisconsin shooting bears and deer, often with bow and arrow. Half the time the animal isn't killed outright and limps off into the woods to die slowly, or is tracked by the blood trail then finished off. It ain't pretty and it ain't pleasant (to me at least).

[OzFox]

i've seen some of the locals in WA and me and the sharks have something in common there

You must have seen the same beach volleyball team that I did.

[OzFox]

You need to get out more

I'd just like to say you're doing a stirling job here mate, weeding out the carnivores and zoosadists

And nobody has called you a tree-hugging, granola-munching greeny (yet)