• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Interesting viewpoint re. 'factory or industrial" farmi

mrj

Well-known member
The current issue of Top Producer magazine carries a column by John Phipps stating why he is proud to be an 'industrial' producer despite the contempt generated among some people by the term.

Basically, he questions the morality of a system, the 'agrarian model' for agriculture when those promoting it never point our how their way could be extended to 'the multitudes'.

Phipps believes, while simplicity may be a virtue, industrialism, though not perfect, does reward innovation and is far more scrutinized and regulated than are 'small' farms which receive blanket exemptions from many reg's such as OSHA.

Consider this: which type farm systems have the most child fatalities?

Phipps also notes that 'agrarian' agriculture is one beneficiary of the great wealth made possible by 'industrial' farming!

What I get from his essay is that we who do practice agriculture in a manner demeaned, even damned, by some practicing the agrarian model as being "factory farming", we will abide by decisions of the marketplace on our differences. But we should no longer silently allow them to go unchallenged in their often faulty assertions against our methods.

I believe he has many valid points.

MRJ
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Have you ever been in a broiler house or smelled the exhaust coming out of one(the air these birds live their entire lives in)? Our morale obligation as producers of food is to raise healthy animals and deliver safe food to the consumer. Neither side of this issue should be painted with the broad brush of condemnation.

Have you noticed how the food industry is quietly backing away from the 'long promoted healthy' vegetable oils?
 

mrj

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
Have you ever been in a broiler house or smelled the exhaust coming out of one(the air these birds live their entire lives in)? Our morale obligation as producers of food is to raise healthy animals and deliver safe food to the consumer. Neither side of this issue should be painted with the broad brush of condemnation.

Have you noticed how the food industry is quietly backing away from the 'long promoted healthy' vegetable oils?

Certainly neither side should be "painted with the broad brush of condemnation"!

The "painting" has been quite one-sided, IMO. How many articles have you read previous to this that gave the point of view and positive attitude of an individual involved in the 'industrial' side of agriculture production?

Are you saying there are no 'industrial' type poultry producers? Don't you believe the value of treating animals well so they will produce better has any value to them?

Yes, I have noticed, and believe I have commented on the lessening promo of veg oils as the most "healthful" of the fats.

Coincidentally or not, that has happened since some of the research with checkoff dollars and other resources has shown the truly healthful values of naturally occuring animal fats.

MRJ
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
MRJ said:
RobertMac said:
Have you ever been in a broiler house or smelled the exhaust coming out of one(the air these birds live their entire lives in)? Our morale obligation as producers of food is to raise healthy animals and deliver safe food to the consumer. Neither side of this issue should be painted with the broad brush of condemnation.

Have you noticed how the food industry is quietly backing away from the 'long promoted healthy' vegetable oils?

Certainly neither side should be "painted with the broad brush of condemnation"!

The "painting" has been quite one-sided, IMO. How many articles have you read previous to this that gave the point of view and positive attitude of an individual involved in the 'industrial' side of agriculture production?

Are you saying there are no 'industrial' type poultry producers? Don't you believe the value of treating animals well so they will produce better has any value to them?

Yes, I have noticed, and believe I have commented on the lessening promo of veg oils as the most "healthful" of the fats.

Coincidentally or not, that has happened since some of the research with checkoff dollars and other resources has shown the truly healthful values of naturally occuring animal fats.

MRJ

MRJ, you must be living in an alternative universe or your bias has you so blinded that you can't recognize reality when it slaps you in the face! :? :???:

The vast majority of ag publication are on "the 'industrial' side of agriculture production". The advertisers in those publications are the suppliers to "the 'industrial' side of agriculture production"...that's why you don't pay for those publication.

I'll give you the chance to reread my post so maybe you can come back with something coherent.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Yes, RM, I did have a glitch in my post. It was very late for me to be up when I wrote it.

Where I wrote: "are you saying there are no industrial type poultry producers?"......I intended to write: Are you saying there are no industrial type poultry producers who understand the value of treating birds (applies for animals, too) well so they will produce better?

What about that question is biased or weird?

Industrial, or "factory farming" is based upon studying the animals, birds, crops, etc. and managing them in scientifically sound ways to gain the maximum production from the minimum inputs, isn't it?

Treating birds or animals inhumanely is not likely to accomplish that end.

How much more do you think consumers would be willing to pay for their food if it were produced only in the old fashioned, pastoral, peasant-type agriculture systems and at modern income levels for the producers that you seem to be promoting?

I have always understood that magazines were sent to producers free of charge in order to give the advertisers the OPPORTUNITY to try to sell their products to us. Did you just figure that out?

They can't force anyone to buy those advertised products, you know. We can judge for ourselves the veracity of the stories and articles in the magazine. We can determine if our individual business would be likely to benefit from their products, or not.

I have no problem with that pastoral type agriculture, except for their penchant for selling their ag products by instilling fears about competiting products into the minds of consumers. I believe they should be required to prove their point with tests of each 'batch' (random sample of each crop at least one or more times each year, whether animals, poultry, or grains, etc.) of product by an independent agency to verify that their product is superior to the competing products if they are going to make those claims when marketing their product.

MRJ
 

Latest posts

Top