I think that I've got the answer on this whole chicken thing. Obviously if you want less animal cruelty then you need to eat less animals. So Isuggest that we only eat really massive animals from now on.
Think how long a whale would last if you had one butchered and stuck in in the freezer. You would have to kill thousands of chickens to get that much meat.
I made this argument a few years ago in the article below. It's good to see that Hugh and Jamie have finally caught up with me. Another slice of giraffe neck, anyone?
I was sitting next to someone at a dinner party a few weeks ago who explained to me, "I'm a vegetarian; I only eat fish". It is some time since I was in the education system, but I am pretty certain that fish wasn’t a vegetable back then.
There are an increasing number of “vegetarians” that eat fish in the vain belief that it is somehow more merciful. Thinking logically, if you want less cruelty to animals then you should be eating very large animals and fewer of them. Schools of thought, and indeed schools of cod, would tell you that eating a part of a cow is more humane than eating a whole fish.
A sausage is the smallest percentage of a pig and so you will only taste a tiny proportion of that pig’s disappointment with the way of the world. A tin of sardines, however, could contain up to half a dozen separate unhappy endings. Just consider the numerous atrocities you are ordering when you ask for a bowl of whitebait.
This is only one of the baffling inconsistencies that the modern food producer has to ponder. My favourite statistic of the week is that in the last 10 years, RSPB membership has increased at roughly the same rate as the consumption of chicken meat. It would be unfair and perhaps untrue to suggest that it is the RSPB members that are tucking into all the extra chickens and then filling out their subscriptions because of guilt and self-loathing.
The RSPB is significant body to farmers. It shares many of our aims and it is also a very powerful lobbying organisation. With ten times more members than the National Farmers Union, the RSPB’s impact on government policy is ten times weightier. When they raise a point, it generally gets a fair hearing.
I was therefore shocked to hear Graham Wynne, the RSPB's chief executive, recently say that there was no case for protecting food production in the UK. He said that market forces dictate that food should come from the cheapest supplier, wherever they are in the world.
The farmer in me is disappointed by this remark. The environmentalist in me is stunned. The consumer in me wonders if food from the other side of the world can taste as good as the food from down the road. My basic grasp of economics tells me that importing some food is good for our balance of payments and offers support to under-developed countries. It also tells me that if Mr Wynne’s statement is true, then market forces would have to apply to the birds as well. Would they be prepared to fly off to Hungary to find the cheapest food? They would have to avoid the turbines of the jets bringing in food in the opposite direction but would at least generate less carbon.
The government is pursuing a policy of discouraging food production and instead paying for environmental “benefits” through the Single Farm Payment. I cannot see where this is necessary, helpful or sustainable. Unless species are seriously threatened, there is no good reason to involve the taxpayer. The government is creating a situation which reduces our environment and fellow species to tradeable commodities. This subjects them to the laws of the market place. Why would a government pay British Farmers to produce lapwings that it could have produced more cheaply abroad?
We have a falling level of food self-sufficiency in the UK. It is now at 65%. When currency changes mean that we need to increase UK food production, we will be unable to train people or create infrastructure in time. We should learn to value home-produced food and support it with our custom. The careful maintenance of our environment and the habitats within it can come as a no cost by-product of intelligent and profitable food production. Eating a small piece of a UK-reared cow is a practical and humane contribution to the welfare of the British countryside.
Recent Comments