Organic and free-range meat not ethically viable
I try not to get up on my soapbox too much anymore when it comes to animal rights issues, as I’ve found I am much better at appealing to people’s appetites and inclination to be crafty when it comes to issues related to veganism. I’m an intense and strongly passionate person by nature, and serious issues coming from me seem to be taken as militant when heard by others.
So I’m glad that someone like Becci Gindin-Clarke is better able to gently articulate why organic and free-range animals and the foodstuffs made from their bodies are just not ethically viable alternatives to conventionally raised animals used for human and animal consumption:
The cruel truth about organic and free-range meat and dairy products
Did you know, for instance, that in British Columbia “…there are no special hatcheries for organic egg-laying chickens. That means that they come from the same hatcheries as factory-farmed and free-range chickens…”? Also, “[t]here does not appear to be any special ‘humane’ slaughter for organic animals…” in BC, though there are two exclusively organic slaughterhouses in the province. As well, there are no standards regulating the labeling of free-range and organic meat and dairy in Canada.
Unfortunately, no matter how nice of a life an animal seems to have lived, they are all slaughtered and die in the same ways, which makes it very saddening that many of us cling to the beliefs that free-range and organic animals are treated better, which is almost all cases is completely untrue. And the industries whose dollars rely on us not knowing these truths have a vested interest in keeping these truths secret.
Thanks so much for your nice comments on my article–I’m really glad you liked it!
I did want to say something in regards to your statement that “there are no standards regulating the labeling of free-range and organic meat and dairy in Canada.” There are actually standards and rules regulating organic stuff, like the rules I mentioned regarding daylight and outdoor access, as well as the 24-hours-or-less transport time, and a third party is expected to occasionally check-in to make sure the rules are followed. Not that I’d suggest that this is enough to qualify as humane, obviously, but there are some rules and ideally, a farm will lose its “organic” qualificiation if it breaks any of them.
You’re right, though, in that there aren’t any real standards for free-range, just a comparatively vague sense of what qualifies without any third party verification.
Hi–just wanted to bring up that there are alternatives to factory produced organic or free range animal products. Just like buying spinach direct from your local farmer is better than buying a blister pack of California organic spring mix at the supermarket, eggs from your neighbour are a different proposition from eggs from the organic megafarm.
I do agree that ‘organic’ or ‘free range’ on the label of any product doesn’t give you much information about the practices behind it, and most certainly leaves out a whole lot of information that’s at least as important as what it does claim.
Kevin:
Would you say the same thing about humans? For instance, would you say the labour provided by a prisoner kept in your neighbour’s yard is more acceptable than the labour of a prisoner kept in a concentration camp? There’s little difference between a human and a chicken in this kind of scenario. They both look different, but that’s where the difference ends in terms of consciousness and experience. No matter if we’re talking of a human or a chicken, they’re both kept bound against their will and exploited for a product that serves the self interests of other humans. Just because a chicken cannot speak does not mean its ability to self-determination should be taken away by a human that the means to do so. We rail against this when it happens to us, and this should be no different when it comes to protecting the rights and well-being of any other animal.
There are NO alternatives to exploiting animals for our own self-serving desires.
Calling eggs free-range or organic means nothing when the chickens are still exploited for their eggs. The primary reason why chickens produce eggs is because the eggs are a result of procreation. Eggs were not created to be human food. To say that using eggs that would go to waste anyway is not harming the birds is also irrelevant. Let the chickens lay their eggs and don’t eat them; they’re not yours to take. Let the chickens lay their eggs and don’t eat them; they’re not yours to take.
The fact that anyone keeps a chicken for the purpose of harvesting eggs means that the primary concern is not about the chicken but what the person can take from the chicken. And that anyone believes it okay to impose themselves as the owner of an animal means there is a hierarchy of dominance that makes the interests of the animal less important than that of the interests of the human. The labels “free-range” and “organic” don’t change this; those labels exist as result of human interest in the way their food is produced, not an interest in the ways animals are exploited, abused, and murdered.
Humans take advantage of chickens for their own self-serving needs that are completely selfish and never in the best interests of the birds, no matter how well anyone thinks their chickens are taken care of. People who feel guilt over the exploitation of the birds for their eggs assuage that guilt by believing that “good treatment” justifies that exploitation. Many of these same people wrongly believe free-range or organic means something better for the bird. This couldn’t be more wrong. The birds have the right to exist by their own means and desires and not be manipulated by humans because humans can easily control them. Just because you or your neighbour keeps chickens in their yard and treats them “nicely” (a term defined by what we think is appropriate treatment and not what the birds themselves want) does not make it okay to eat their eggs, eat the birds, or to keep them at all.
Epicurvegan:
To say- anyone keeping a chicken is only exploiting the chicken for selfish purposes-is incredibly judgmental and making claims to know the intentions of every animal owner.
Chickens for example, help tend crops and manage infestations and laying eggs would be a natural by product of living with chickens. Why not utilize their gifts of nature instead of letting them rot? I would never support not allowing the chickens to fertilize their eggs and experience motherhood. Nor would I support manipulating the situation to increase egg production. However, if a human takes care of , provides food, shelter and genuinely loves that chicken. This is a symbiotic relationship and a beautiful expression of mother earth.
I choose to not eat meat and take from animals in any way but that is because it is in my nature to do so. However,I recognize that is not every person’s reality or temperament. We all take and consume life energy to sustain our own, the expressions of life we choose is ours to make. Helping these people recognize that animals are aware, creative individuals that deserve respect is the first step. Mainstreaming free range and organic products is the first step. Now we need to create regulations and hopefully one day the world will make more positive choices about what they eat. But condemning the masses for their choices and acting like you know their intentions is not only not productive but creates division. Creating a battle does not help animals? Awareness, Patience and Faith
With Love