3 ms·

What does "large" in this case mean? Are we talking about factory farm style CAFO? What I've read, which may admittedly be outdated, is that these kinds of farm

What does "large" in this case mean? Are we talking about factory farm style CAFO? What I've read, which may admittedly be outdated, is that these kinds of farms are where the majority of meat, dairy and eggs comes from (in the US).

randomdata 14y ago
We're talking hundreds, possibly thousands, heads of cattle, but it wouldn't fit my definition of a factory farm. Those aren't really a thing around here. There is only one a wide radius I would even begin to consider a factory farm. But we weren't talking about factory farms anyway, we were talking about typical farms, free range, cage free, etc. and whether they are still providing a comfortable environment for animals, or not.
- spacemanaki 14y ago
  A few comments up thread pyre suggested that it is not possible to meet the demands of cheap, plentiful meat while providing animals reasonable quality of life. This seems to be born out by the fact the factory farms are the norm, and smaller farms like the one you mentioned are the exception (note that I'm specifically talking about in the US, where meat consumptions is ultra high, and from what I've read factory farms are the norm).
  - randomdata 14y ago
    Factory farms are most certainly not the norm by any stretch, but their scale does naturally allow them to provide more product than everyone else, as your previous post indicates. A "factory farm" with 10,000 cows is obviously going to supply more milk than 999 other farms with 100 cows, if we can assume, for argument's sake, a constant output from each animal. The farms with 100 cows in that example are much more prevalent by a wide margin though. If I recall correctly, the average herd size for a dairy farm is somewhere around 40 cows. pyre, in the post I responded to, suggested that even free range farms that put focus on animal care were not providing sufficient care for animals, leaving them still tightly packed and stressed. And maybe that is true, but I am still left wondering how we measure which farms are providing sufficient care? If we want to strive towards a better life for animals, we need to start setting definitions and targets to work towards. Otherwise, every change towards the better will be met with equal criticism by somebody.
    - spacemanaki 14y ago
      Sorry, you're right, by "the norm" I meant that the majority of meat etc consumed comes from factory farms. I agree with you that setting unreasonable or unrealistic goals is problematic. Although I personally stick to a 99% vegan diet, I've never been an abolitionist and I think setting reasonable goals and working towards them within the system is probably more productive, such as Temple Grandin's work. Pushing for legislation like this doesn't make me very sympathetic towards the industry though.

randomdata 14y ago

We're talking hundreds, possibly thousands, heads of cattle, but it wouldn't fit my definition of a factory farm. Those aren't really a thing around here. There is only one a wide radius I would even begin to consider a factory farm. But we weren't talking about factory farms anyway, we were talking about typical farms, free range, cage free, etc. and whether they are still providing a comfortable environment for animals, or not.

spacemanaki 14y ago
A few comments up thread pyre suggested that it is not possible to meet the demands of cheap, plentiful meat while providing animals reasonable quality of life. This seems to be born out by the fact the factory farms are the norm, and smaller farms like the one you mentioned are the exception (note that I'm specifically talking about in the US, where meat consumptions is ultra high, and from what I've read factory farms are the norm).
- randomdata 14y ago
  Factory farms are most certainly not the norm by any stretch, but their scale does naturally allow them to provide more product than everyone else, as your previous post indicates. A "factory farm" with 10,000 cows is obviously going to supply more milk than 999 other farms with 100 cows, if we can assume, for argument's sake, a constant output from each animal. The farms with 100 cows in that example are much more prevalent by a wide margin though. If I recall correctly, the average herd size for a dairy farm is somewhere around 40 cows. pyre, in the post I responded to, suggested that even free range farms that put focus on animal care were not providing sufficient care for animals, leaving them still tightly packed and stressed. And maybe that is true, but I am still left wondering how we measure which farms are providing sufficient care? If we want to strive towards a better life for animals, we need to start setting definitions and targets to work towards. Otherwise, every change towards the better will be met with equal criticism by somebody.
  - spacemanaki 14y ago
    Sorry, you're right, by "the norm" I meant that the majority of meat etc consumed comes from factory farms. I agree with you that setting unreasonable or unrealistic goals is problematic. Although I personally stick to a 99% vegan diet, I've never been an abolitionist and I think setting reasonable goals and working towards them within the system is probably more productive, such as Temple Grandin's work. Pushing for legislation like this doesn't make me very sympathetic towards the industry though.