Hi guys,
The clock's ticking, our cow is still suffering, what's the consensus.
Remember this is a real 24/7 job. You still have to do this AM's milking, clean out the bedding and put down fresh and feed the cows. You have to feed and clean over in the calf barn, they're a real drain on your ledger! All they do is eat and produce nothing for a couple of years. Then it's over to the "maternity" barn for the heifers that are calving for the first time next spring. Hope there's no difficult pregnancies.
When that's done it's time to spread the manure on your fields, provided you can get that tractor started! And gee, just think you get to milk, feed and clean all over again tonight! So what are we going to do with our cow?
In the meantime guys I'm off to my cushy real life job🙂 Let's see if we come up with some good ideas while I'm at work. See you tonight!
Regards and Happy New Year,
Charlie
I wonder how much damage it will do to the North American Beef industry? Considering the UK has never fully recovered and many EU contries, most notibly our friends the French wont lift their ban on British Beef, despite it being declared "safe" and being ordered to.....
Originally posted by fjordi have to keep removing '?' because when i copy and paste from the web onto the forum, certain characters (particularly the single quote) show up as question marks.
Prad, I noticed you removed a question mark at the end of your article. Maybe you should have left it there for a while longer
I don't read anywhere about a better treatment of these animals. It might even get worse.
Downers are taken away from the human food chain. Good for us! But what happens to these downers? To the animal food chain? Do you think they will be better treated now all control can be abandoned?
Or am I too cynical?
Fjord
the reason animal welfare groups believe there will be better 'treatment' is because they will no longer generate profit for the industry. because 'downers' will not be allowed for sale:
1. there will be no reason to keep them around so presumably they will be killed off sooner
2. the cattle may presumably be better treated so that they don't get to the 'downer' stage
i think animal welfare groups see this purely as a step in a better direction - that's all.
you are right though, it probably will not have a great impact on the treatment in general, but the only way to make changes seems to be through the pocket books of the industry and concern for human health actually does seem to prompt some action. banning 'downers' should eliminate one link in this hideous chain.
however, as chaswray will tell you, making the law is one thing - enforcing it is quite another 😠
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by chaswrayHi Charlie,
Hi fjord,
That's a noble thought, but remember you're a small independent dairy farmer. The price of milk is controlled by the government which in turn is controlled by agribusiness, Due to last summer's drought you've had to buy feed to supplement poor crop production and that 30, 000 dollar tractor is on it's last legs! To top it off the twins ...[text shortened]... .if you even have insurance!
Have you seen what that vet charges also😲
Regards,
Charlie
I lived for some years next to a small farm. The farmer had 8 cows, a wife, and 2 sons He was in that area the only farmer, who milked his cows by hand.
To support his family he had to do night shifts for a railway company. Really tough life, beautiful warm-hearted people. In the eyes of the big farmers and financial banks they were losers.
(Great was their moment of subtle revenge when the electricity collapsed in their neighborhood and the udders were everywhere at the point of bursting. So my neighbor and his sons were running from farm to farm to help their colleagues and the cows out of their misery.)
My neighbor just didn't want to change his way of living. Then one of his cows died and he had no money to buy a new one. The banks refused to help and he had to give up. Damned!
No, I don't have the solution for that. My farmer lost his battle and cattle. He was right but it went wrong.
With the BSE drama, a lot of farmers will suffer again, small ones and big ones. I think it would be fair in a cultivated society that there should come help from that society.
At the same time I would like to see a good and honest analysis why we have al these plagues. Could it have to do with the scale of agriculture and with the depersonalizing and deanimalizing of the present cattle breeding?
Happy New Year
Fjord
Originally posted by fjordHi Fjord,
Hi Charlie,
I No, I don't have the solution for that. My farmer lost his battle and cattle. He was right but it went wrong.
Happy New Year
Fjord
Unfortunately there is probably no solution to the problems. There will be a lot of posturing by the retail grocers and restaurant chains and the beef industry, but in the end very little will be done of any consequence. You are right, the big food conglomerates have demeaned the food chain.
I was raised on a small dairy farm, more years ago than I care to think about. In the 1950's here in America the public screamed for milk price controls and the government made it so. There are very few small dairy farmers like my example left here in the states.
I think the point I was trying to make here was if people from the city are out traveling about and see a farmer selling his wares from the back of his pickup truck, stop and buy from him rather than supporting Kraft or Tyson foods at your local grocer. Or if you have a local farmers market support it.
Maybe if enough people did that, the small farmer could make a comeback...well I can dream can't I?🙄
Happy New Year
Charlie
here is a word from farm sanctuary, one of the leading groups working to ban downed animals:
"The USDA ban on downed cattle would not have been possible without the commitment of our members. From the first day in 1986 when we found "Hilda," a downed sheep, to our state legislative efforts that banned downed animal cruelties, to our lawsuit against the USDA to ban downed animal slaughter, you have been by our side every step of the way ...
The USDA's ban on the slaughter of downed cattle is a complete reversal of USDA policy, and is a major development for farm animal welfare. We will be monitoring the situation closely to ascertain how the ban will be implemented, and to gain assurances that the ban is permanent. We will also be proceeding with our No Downers Campaign, which includes field investigations, research and documentation, legislation to ban downed animal cruelties, and our current, pending lawsuit against the USDA to ban the sale of all downed animals.
Many members are also inquiring about the effect of the downed cattle ban and its impact on animals. For more information, please visit http://www.nodowners.org/faqs.htm for the FAQ section on our No Downers Campaign website. "
farm sanctuary was featured in the new york times for their efforts in an excellent article::
Where the Cows Come Home
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/02/nyregion/02COW.html?ex=1073624400&en=9b020bafe049e997&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
in firendship,
prad
Originally posted by pradtfThanks Prad,
here is a word from farm sanctuary, one of the leading groups working to ban downed animals:
"The USDA ban on downed cattle would not have been possible without the commitment of our members. From the first day in 1986 when we found "Hilda," a downed sheep, to our state legislative efforts that banned downed animal cruelties, to our lawsuit against the ...[text shortened]... on/02COW.html?ex=1073624400&en=9b020bafe049e997&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
in firendship,
prad
Your article gave the answers on the questions I had:
The vast majority of downed animals, between 75% and 90% according to industry experts, can be prevented with improved care and management. We believe the ban on slaughtering downed animals for human food will lead to improved care and fewer downed animals overall.
and
While the USDA ban on using downed cattle in human food does not specifically address the pet food and rendering industries, there is no question that the agency’s action will immediately prevent significant animal suffering. In order for downed animals to be used for human food, they must arrive at the slaughterhouse alive, and that is why it has been common for downed animals to suffer for hours or days, and then to be cruelly dragged to slaughter. If they cannot be used for human food, there is no need to keep these animals alive and they can be euthanized, since dead animals can be used for animal food, fertilizer and other ‘rendered’ products.
and something to reflect on:
For years, downed and diseased animals have been used for food for dogs and cats and this is a common practice for dog/cat food manufacturers.. For that reason, many people are choosing to feed their companion animals vegetarian food.
Fjord
Originally posted by pradtfEat beef. What's the worst that can happen? Turn into a democrat... unable to move or think? Hell... they already outnumber me. Eat beef.
it's here folks
hot off the press:
reuters Wed 24 December, 2003 00:57
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=healthNews&storyID=4039600§ion=news
cnn Wednesday, December 24, 2003 Posted: 0054 GMT ( 8:54 AM HKT)
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=healthNews&storyID=4039600§ion=news
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by biggA damned good meal and the ability to say that I am not afraid of being an omnivore. Chickensh*t!
We live in a unique world we seem to come off as so intelligent yet many do so un-intelligent things.
Eating beef right now would qualify as a un-intelligent thing.
You are playing russian roulette and for what?
You don't need meat to live.
Big G.
You don't need to do a lot of things to live. So? Russian Roulette is spinning the dice on 1 in six odds. Eating beef is spinning the odds on 17 (Total known cases in human history) in 6.5 billion (approx. population of earth). Don't expect you to see the difference, but what the hell. Idiots are not expected to know math.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyHi!
A damned good meal and the ability to say that I am not afraid of being an omnivore. Chickensh*t!
You don't need to do a lot of things to live. So? Russian Roulette is spinning the dice on 1 in six odds. Eating beef is spinning the odds on 17 (Total known cases in human history) in 6.5 billion (approx. population of earth). Don't expect you to see the difference, but what the hell. Idiots are not expected to know math.
I can see that you are offended. Who says you are afraid.
Why the need to tell anyone that you are a omnivore. I really don't care to be honest.
By the way Chicken*** is what you have eaten if you eat chicken.
It is impossible to remove fecal matter from the meat.
Just curious where did you get this info.
the odds on 17 (Total known cases in human history) in 6.5 billion (approx)
Thanks,
Big G.😀
below is a very interesting article from the washington post that just came my way. it is an interview with howard lyman, an ex-cattle rancher who along with Oprah Winfrey the cattle association attempted to sue a few years ago because they spoke out against the dangers of beef.
in friendship,
prad
washingtonpost.com
Ex-Cattleman's Warning Was No Bum Steer
Rancher Raised Flag on Mad Cow Long Ago
By Reilly Capps
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 2, 2004; Page C01
There's a stereotype about vegans. That they're zealots, loud-mouthed people who throw blood on meat-fattened CEOs, who ridicule people who wear leather shoelaces, who corner you at parties and assault you with diatribes about cruelty.
Howard Lyman, 65, is not like that. For 40 years, he raised cattle on his family ranch in Montana, where steak and hamburger were regular courses. Then one day he quit. A tumor in his spinal column helped him make the decision. Meat, he was convinced, was killing him.
And beyond that, he began to believe that meat, as it is produced today, is snuffing out small farms and possibly even opening the door to strange and terrifying diseases.
Back then he was a quiet man, not one to make a fuss over other people's food choices. But all the while he kept reading more and more about a strange disease they'd seen in Britain, one that made cattle collapse and, in a few cases, sent humans into spasms, eventually causing death. Lyman went to talk to the families of the dead and became even more convinced that it was the way humans were treating the animals that was at the root of it.
He became an expert on the way animals are raised and slaughtered. And he feared that the U.S. food chain was also at risk. He knew that animals were being fed to animals and that some scientists believed that diseases like mad cow could be transmitted by other species as well.
It was, he thought, an ugly picture. And he said so on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" in 1996. He said he thought that things could go wrong in the United States as they had in Britain, and if they did, mad cow disease could make AIDS look like the common cold.
For six years he said what he thought to anyone, from community groups to members of Congress.
Few were convinced.
On Dec. 23, it became a whole lot easier to believe.
Nobody knows how big the mad cow disease problem is, and if you say there is a substantial risk the meat industry would offer a strong rebuttal. But there is a problem, and it turns out Lyman may have been ahead of his time when he raised a red flag about it in 1996, when he claimed that mad cow disease had already come to the United States. The discovery of one downed Holstein in Washington state last month makes even more plausible that there may be another, Lyman believes.
"Anybody who thinks we only have one mad cow in America," he says, "is smoking the number one crop out of California."
Those are fighting words to the agriculture industry. And although Lyman will tell you he's never uttered a mean word in his life about celery or animals or cows, the Texas legislature was sympathetic to the industry. In the early '90s, it passed the False Disparagement of Perishable Food Products Act.
What Lyman said was that the modern, factory-style method of churning out millions of tons of meat each year lacked quality controls that would have caught and prevented diseases such as mad cow from entering the food stream. Modern meat production, Lyman said, was a death machine.
He told Oprah Winfrey and her viewers that on the 1996 show. She vowed: "I will never eat a burger again."
Two weeks later, Lyman and Winfrey became the first to be charged with making false and disparaging statements about food.
He was hated in Texas.
Bumper stickers blared: "The Only Mad Cow in Texas is Oprah."
In 1998, a jury said that Lyman and Winfrey were not liable, but a group of livestock owners filed a second suit. The case dragged on for four years.
Finally, a U.S. District Court judge laid the matter to rest.
Lyman had not said anything knowingly false about the meat industry, the judge determined. "Every word Howard Lyman said was true," she wrote in her 2002 decision.
The typical person who had spent the past six years in court might have celebrated his vindication at that point. Not Lyman.
So when the headlines proclaimed what the industry said was not possible, that mad cow disease had once again struck, Lyman was circumspect.
In his mind, it was hardly cause for celebration.
"That's not my style," says Lyman, who has given up not only ranching but also lobbying. He now lives in Alexandria.
If you ask him, he will suggest that we are looking at the possibility of a terrible epidemic. "Do the math," he says. "Any scientist will tell you that one mad cow tells you there are thousands more."
He says this quietly. The facts, he believes, will ultimately speak for themselves.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
