Fake meat and future of animals for food.

PrairieHunter · Jan 10, 2019

TrickyTross said:
Its amazing what happens when folks demand a difference in the food they buy. In 2005 Western NC was criticized for "pushing" the buy local movement for foods and local ag. Farm Bureau criticized the idea and said that 'grassfed beef" was a fad and not sustainable economically. Here we are in 2019 leading the SE in it and have other areas coming in to discuss not only the beef side of it, but the local ag. Helped a famer the other week look at a conservation plan that farms on 2 acres with raised beds focusing on salad greens, Just got contracted to a large grocer in our area. Seen a lot of my traditional guys switching because of how the local and regional market is transitioning.

More an more people are asking questions about where their food comes from and what it contains. More and more people are becoming aware of how our food supply works. We can't trust these huge foreign or American companies with our food security. As you mentioned more and more farmers and ranchers are looking to get out of the commodity game and find other places to market their products. Around here farmers are looking to ancient grains, hops and other grains grown specifically for beer/wine manufacturers and distillers, hemp, grass seed crops, food for local restaurants, etc... are discussed at every event I attend.

What kind of specialty crops are getting popular in NC?

VAspeedgoat · Jan 10, 2019

Prairie hunter, you post on here and are abrasive to even a moderate amount of skepticism for something completely unrelated to the o.p. Then you have the nerve to tell another poster they've made a fool out of themselves or that I somehow had no valid point. If you want to brag about China's environmental record then be my guest. You've obviously lost objectivity when you hijack a thread and then get bent out of shape when people skoff at it. Who's the fool? Sadly you can't figure it out.

VikingsGuy · Jan 10, 2019

PH - I don’t know why I am even responding, as you obviously have a skewed view that isn’t likely to change. But for others who may be a little more open to how the food industry really works, here goes.

I have been in food plants from 5 head a day shops to the largest facilities in the world. I have seen food produced first hand in over 25 countries. There is no doubt in my mind that my kids are safer eating a pound of hamburger bought at a local Walmart than any local grown artisan product and certainly safer than any product they could buy in china - and even safer than a ground venison burger shot with lead bullet and butchered by some clueless uncle. Yes, I feed my kids my wild game, but I don’t shoot high velocity lead, I don’t shoot through bone in shoulders, and I am OCD around microbial safety from kill to table. And in the end, biologically their bodies don’t know they are eating my elk vs. “big food” steak.

I am all in favor of consumers having fads and whims (variety is the spice of life) and smart business people, including small farmers, cashing in on those fads and whims, but the sustainability/health rationales are BS. A while back MN Dept. of health had a cool study that the single highest food safety risk for a MN consumer was shopping at a local “farmer’s market”. And local produce has a much higher carbon and water footprint than mainstream ag.

As for more govt regulation of meat production in China as compared to US, you simply have got to be kidding. I have first hand experience in both locales and you are way off. US companies are over regulated and over taxed, but are still great investments because they are high volume, highly efficient, super safe (and for meat that points to self life and customs access for profitable exports) and have access to high value, low cost, near proximity feed.

“Big Ag” over the last 50 years has fed an extra billion people. The greatest humanitarian accomplishment in history (unless you want to give that award to “Big Pharma” for vaccinations and antibiotics). Americans and Europeans with full stomachs and minimal actual understanding of food production, food chemistry and human biology can complain all they want, but a hungry world is glad to be fed by Big Ag. GMOs feed the world, large scale food production feeds the world, modern ag practices of the green revolution feed the world. The fact that I have hunting as a hobby so my kids get wild game, and that my wife and I are fortunate enough to afford the luxury of shopping at Whole Foods is a complete anomaly - less than a tenth of a percent of people in the world can afford our monthly food budget. Hundreds of millions will starve to death if the anti-ag folks have their way, but conveniently for them no-one they know will be on that list. I always suggest to the anti-ag folks that they first list the 20% of their immediate family and close friends they are happy to watch starve to death in order to pursue their vision for ag — interestingly they rarely do. This is not a game. Millions of people you don’t know and will never meet need us to get this right - and the various internet foodies aren’t the ones to do it.

beginnerhunter · Jan 10, 2019

Nah I get that people want to know where their food comes from. That's part of the fun of hunting! But I'm concerned that going non-GMO organic will lead to a greater use of land for growing crops (which takes away from wildlife habitat in many cases, not always).

Anyway the OP was concerning the idea that even non-vegans could have "meat" without indirectly killing animals and that it would further erode hunting acceptance. Maybe it's too far down the line I shouldn't be concerned. Just seems like tech is moving and breakneck speed.

VikingsGuy · Jan 10, 2019

beginnerhunter said:
Nah I get that people want to know where their food comes from. That's part of the fun of hunting! But I'm concerned that going non-GMO organic will lead to a greater use of land for growing crops (which takes away from wildlife habitat in many cases, not always).

Anyway the OP was concerning the idea that even non-vegans could have "meat" without indirectly killing animals and that it would further erode hunting acceptance. Maybe it's too far down the line I shouldn't be concerned. Just seems like tech is moving and breakneck speed.

beginner, just for clarity - my little rant wasn’t about your OP. Your OP raises an interesting question and is a reminder that a majority of Americans don’t understand what we do and why we do it, and changes in the world may make hunting feel even more remote and unnecessary to them.

PrairieHunter · Jan 10, 2019

VAspeedgoat said:
Prairie hunter, you post on here and are abrasive to even a moderate amount of skepticism for something completely unrelated to the o.p. Then you have the nerve to tell another poster they've made a fool out of themselves or that I somehow had no valid point. If you want to brag about China's environmental record then be my guest. You've obviously lost objectivity when you hijack a thread and then get bent out of shape when people skoff at it. Who's the fool? Sadly you can't figure it out.

Funny, I made a statement, severl of you claimed I was wrong. As it turned out I was right, and now you are upset trying to go personal and not talking about meat. So predictable.

The poster claimed my wired were crossed, so I suggested he made a fool of himself as it turned out I was absolutely correct.

Topic is meat in the USA, this is absolutely related but apparently you don't want to talk about meat as you keep coming back to personal chatter.

So did you have anything to add on the meat?

PrairieHunter · Jan 10, 2019

VikingsGuy said:
PH - I don’t know why I am even responding, as you obviously have a skewed view that isn’t likely to change. But for others who may be a little more open to how the food industry really works, here goes.

I have been in food plants from 5 head a day shops to the largest facilities in the world. I have seen food produced first hand in over 25 countries. There is no doubt in my mind that my kids are safer eating a pound of hamburger bought at a local Walmart than any local grown artisan product and certainly safer than any product they could buy in china - and even safer than a ground venison burger shot with lead bullet and butchered by some clueless uncle. Yes, I feed my kids my wild game, but I don’t shoot high velocity lead, I don’t shoot through bone in shoulders, and I am OCD around microbial safety from kill to table. And in the end, biologically their bodies don’t know they are eating my elk vs. “big food” steak.

I am all in favor of consumers having fads and whims (variety is the spice of life) and smart business people, including small farmers, cashing in on those fads and whims, but the sustainability/health rationales are BS. A while back MN Dept. of health had a cool study that the single highest food safety risk for a MN consumer was shopping at a local “farmer’s market”. And local produce has a much higher carbon and water footprint than mainstream ag.

As for more govt regulation of meat production in China as compared to US, you simply have got to be kidding. I have first hand experience in both locales and you are way off. US companies are over regulated and over taxed, but are still great investments because they are high volume, highly efficient, super safe (and for meat that points to self life and customs access for profitable exports) and have access to high value, low cost, near proximity feed.

“Big Ag” over the last 50 years has fed an extra billion people. The greatest humanitarian accomplishment in history (unless you want to give that award to “Big Pharma” for vaccinations and antibiotics). Americans and Europeans with full stomachs and minimal actual understanding of food production, food chemistry and human biology can complain all they want, but a hungry world is glad to be fed by Big Ag. GMOs feed the world, large scale food production feeds the world, modern ag practices of the green revolution feed the world. The fact that I have hunting as a hobby so my kids get wild game, and that my wife and I are fortunate enough to afford the luxury of shopping at Whole Foods is a complete anomaly - less than a tenth of a percent of people in the world can afford our monthly food budget. Hundreds of millions will starve to death if the anti-ag folks have their way, but conveniently for them no-one they know will be on that list. I always suggest to the anti-ag folks that they first list the 20% of their immediate family and close friends they are happy to watch starve to death in order to pursue their vision for ag — interestingly they rarely do. This is not a game. Millions of people you don’t know and will never meet need us to get this right - and the various internet foodies aren’t the ones to do it.

My opinion was backed up with facts. You said you were not aware of what I said, so I showed you. Now you claim to be an expert, yet you had no clue why foreign companies own the biggest meat producers in the USA?

Foreign companies own our biggest meat production, and they do this because it's cheaper for them to pollute in the USA then in China. And yes the Chinese government is pushing all this. Yet you think this is our safe and secure food supply. Amazing.

What is it you think I am wrong about specifically?

.

VikingsGuy · Jan 10, 2019

PrairieHunter said:
My opinion was backed up with facts. You said you were not aware of what I said, so I showed you. Now you claim to be an expert, yet you had no clue why foreign companies own the biggest meat producers in the USA?

Foreign companies own our biggest meat production, and they do this because it's cheaper for them to pollute in the USA then in China. And yes the Chinese government is pushing all this. Yet you think this is our safe and secure food supply. Amazing.

What is it you think I am wrong about specifically?

.

First of all, my remark was sarcastic, not a real statement of surprise. And like my opinion or not, I am in fact an expert in this field.

Second, one Rolling Stone hackjob is not facts. You said the system was run by gangsters - show me the RICO convinctions and ties to the mafia. You said the food system is a mess - a very broad statement that you did nothing to prove. You throw out china as a boggy-man just like when I was a kid and the evil Japanese where going to buy all of America. China buys companies in the US to learn how to do things better or because we have access to key raw materials/inputs in some circumstances not because we are less regulated. That may not be a good thing for America long term but it does not make our food less safe or make the industry a mess.

On a per unit basis US food production has never been safer, cheaper, use less energy or less water. You bring actual facts/numbers (not journalistic opinions) and I will speak to them, but so far you just have absurd allegations.

For others - here is one quick link I had handy. While on the Op-Ed page - it is from a more serious publication (NYTimes),is by a University professor and cites peer reviewed data. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/...trial-farms-are-good-for-the-environment.html

2rocky · Jan 10, 2019

VikingsGuy said:
First of all, my remark was sarcastic, not a real statement of surprise. And like my opinion or not, I am in fact an expert in this field.

Second, one Rolling Stone hackjob is not facts. You said the system was run by gangsters - show me the RICO convinctions and ties to the mafia. You said the food system is a mess - a very broad statement that you did nothing to prove. You throw out china as a boggy-man just like when I was a kid and the evil Japanese where going to buy all of America. China buys companies in the US to learn how to do things better or because we have access to key raw materials/inputs in some circumstances not because we are less regulated. That may not be a good thing for America long term but it does not make our food less safe or make the industry a mess.

On a per unit basis US food production has never been safer, cheaper, use less energy or less water. You bring actual facts/numbers (not journalistic opinions) and I will speak to them, but so far you just have absurd allegations.

For others - here is one quick link I had handy. While on the Op-Ed page - it is from a more serious publication (NYTimes),is by a University professor and cites peer reviewed data. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/...trial-farms-are-good-for-the-environment.html

Thank you for stating what I was going to say. We are 100% on the same page.

VAspeedgoat · Jan 10, 2019

VikingsGuy said:
beginner, just for clarity - my little rant wasn’t about your OP. Your OP raises an interesting question and is a reminder that a majority of Americans don’t understand what we do and why we do it, and changes in the world may make hunting feel even more remote and unnecessary to them.

PrairieHunter said:
Funny, I made a statement, severl of you claimed I was wrong. As it turned out I was right, and now you are upset trying to go personal and not talking about meat. So predictable.

The poster claimed my wired were crossed, so I suggested he made a fool of himself as it turned out I was absolutely correct.

Topic is meat in the USA, this is absolutely related but apparently you don't want to talk about meat as you keep coming back to personal chatter.

So did you have anything to add on the meat?

As a matter of fact yes, the op was on fake meat and how it may eventually have an effect on hunting. It was not on meat in the USA. As I was sarcastically pointing out, your wires were crossed. Tried to do it even less tacfully but you still haven't figured it out

To the op, I am sorry your thread got hacked by this and I am sorry I had a part in it. I should have just left it alone. Sorry

beginnerhunter · Jan 10, 2019

I enjoy debate, no reason to apologise for a hijack!

One thing that does make me a bit nervous about "Big AG" is the recent merger of Bayer and Monsanto. Very few players in that market right now which is not something I like to see in general. The feds have been pretty laissez-faire about approving big mergers as of late.

VAspeedgoat · Jan 10, 2019

beginnerhunter said:
I enjoy debate, no reason to apologise for a hijack!

One thing that does make me a bit nervous about "Big AG" is the recent merger of Bayer and Monsanto. Very few players in that market right now which is not something I like to see in general. The feds have been pretty laissez-faire about approving big mergers as of late.

Agreed, this is not good for anyone but the executives at the top. Only competition will benefit producers and consumers. I'm not opposed to anything that is a so called niche or fad. It usually moves the bar of what is considered conventional. Mergers however eliminate competition therefore leading to a practically authoritarian production system. IE, this is the seed you will buy, this is the spray you must use, this is how you will have to fertilize and manage it, thank you for the money.

Many farmers resent this approach but just like fighting Walmart, money (production) wins in the end.

This merger should never have been approved.

VikingsGuy · Jan 11, 2019

beginnerhunter said:
I enjoy debate, no reason to apologise for a hijack!

One thing that does make me a bit nervous about "Big AG" is the recent merger of Bayer and Monsanto. Very few players in that market right now which is not something I like to see in general. The feds have been pretty laissez-faire about approving big mergers as of late.

Over consolidation can have its problems, but I am not sure seed is there just yet. Global Ag/Food is far more fragmented than a cursory look might suggest.

Watching the news and the stock market this merger has been a disaster for Bayer so far -- I wouldn't worry about them ruling the world for now. Markets generally work, and if their products aren't the best, there are ready alternatives from pioneer, syngenta, etc.

VAspeedgoat · Jan 11, 2019

VikingsGuy said:
Over consolidation can have its problems, but I am not sure seed is there just yet. Global Ag/Food is far more fragmented than a cursory look might suggest.

Watching the news and the stock market this merger has been a disaster for Bayer so far -- I wouldn't worry about them ruling the world for now. Markets generally work, and if their products aren't the best, there are ready alternatives from pioneer, syngenta, etc.

I will only disagree with a little so I guess it's nitpicky. Pioneer hasn't been able to compete with Monsanto for years and there are no outward signs moving forward. Syngenta has done the best as far as technology but they are still behind in genetics. Just my opinion, no hard data to back that up. Inputs seem to always cost just what you can afford and I don't see that getting better with consolidation. As you pointed out this is not to a crisis level yet but I fear once we are on that road we may not be able to turn around.

VikingsGuy · Jan 11, 2019

VAspeedgoat said:
I will only disagree with a little so I guess it's nitpicky. Pioneer hasn't been able to compete with Monsanto for years and there are no outward signs moving forward. Syngenta has done the best as far as technology but they are still behind in genetics. Just my opinion, no hard data to back that up. Inputs seem to always cost just what you can afford and I don't see that getting better with consolidation. As you pointed out this is not to a crisis level yet but I fear once we are on that road we may not be able to turn around.

I agree, Monsanto has probably had the best product for a while, and as such I am fine with them capturing value for that. And I agree, it can be tough to be a producer. Without leverage smaller producers have a hard time grabbing a share of the overall "profit pool". It feels like value is created by the tech but you aren't able to catch much value for it when you implement it - the value flows to the tech provider. Not unique to small farmers, but tough none-the-less. I think that is one reason some producers are moving towards "organic"/"artisan" - it is easier for them to extract a bigger part of the profit pool that consumers are willing to pay for these "labels".

beginnerhunter · Jan 11, 2019

The dicamba and Roundup stuff may knock Bayer down a peg or two in the short term. But the market overall doesn't seem very competitive. Hopefully more players will take a greater share in the future.

Irrelevant · Jan 11, 2019

Whether it's cheaper or not to grow/pollute in the US vs China I won't say. But I do believe the raising livestock in this country has serious adverse effects on human health and the environment (not the actual meat itself though). Is it better here, probably. But it still has negative effects and industry and those to preach the dollar over all else still keep regulations low enough that negative effects continue.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...0f81cc58c5d_story.html?utm_term=.3a2caf3c8b9c

I know if I was one of the people who had my well contaminated I'd want increased regulations for stock operations in floodplains. And in terms of Organic food taking over the market and leading to more land under ag. I'll take 10x more this:

Over this:

VikingsGuy · Jan 11, 2019

neffa3 said:
Whether it's cheaper or not to grow/pollute in the US vs China I won't say. But I do believe the raising livestock in this country has serious adverse effects on human health and the environment (not the actual meat itself though). Is it better here, probably. But it still has negative effects and industry and those to preach the dollar over all else still keep regulations low enough that negative effects continue.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...0f81cc58c5d_story.html?utm_term=.3a2caf3c8b9c

I know if I was one of the people who had my well contaminated I'd want increased regulations for stock operations in floodplains. And in terms of Organic food taking over the market and leading to more land under ag. I'll take 10x more this:
View attachment 92804

Over this:
View attachment 92805

The real world challenge is that you would have to have 15 times more of your pastoral picture to even get close to feeding the population, and I am guessing if 15 times as much land was used that way we would have even more problems (even if different problems) - more water usage, more carbon emissions, more land usage, higher prices (which is an issue for many Americans). I am not saying the current state of ag is without problems, but too many of the supposed solutions don't actually feed the people who need to be fed.

As for the greed angle, "big ag" is one of the least profitable major industries - if it was really run to wring every dollar out of society and nature I would expect to see way better profit margins.

VAspeedgoat · Jan 11, 2019

neffa3 said:
Whether it's cheaper or not to grow/pollute in the US vs China I won't say. But I do believe the raising livestock in this country has serious adverse effects on human health and the environment (not the actual meat itself though). Is it better here, probably. But it still has negative effects and industry and those to preach the dollar over all else still keep regulations low enough that negative effects continue.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...0f81cc58c5d_story.html?utm_term=.3a2caf3c8b9c

I know if I was one of the people who had my well contaminated I'd want increased regulations for stock operations in floodplains. And in terms of Organic food taking over the market and leading to more land under ag. I'll take 10x more this:
View attachment 92804

Over this:
View attachment 92805

Can't argue with the premise one bit. Problem is how many people can eat with one verses the other and at what cost to the end consumer. Poverty and low incomes can't be choosy. But environmentally/aesthetically I won't argue one bit.

My philosophy has always been this. As a country if we want to make organic or any other type of farming practice mandatory fine, I will make money as long as the playing field is even. Just don't import cheap food from Brazil or Mexico because they don't have the same constraints as I do.

2rocky · Jan 11, 2019

Neffa that picture of the pastured pigs is the Disney version for sure. I'm in the heart of the Pastured meat belt of CA, and Most often I see poorly managed paddocks that look at best like this at the best:

Now I've done Intensive rotational grazing since the 80's in 3 states so I've managed grazing livestock and I've dealt with Fish and Game, and the Clean Water Act. I've done cost share projects with NRCS. I've sampled soils and water for compliance, and I've formulated diets to address excess N and P in manure...

From a nutrient (manure) Management standpoint ONLY, the bottom picture production system will have less impact on riparian waterways, provided they have an adequate manure lagoon system. Even with the higher density of animals.

Now if the pastured pigs shown above have paddocks arranged to capture sediment and manure, and the farmer can get the additional margin necessary to maintain a good quality of life for his family and the community so much the better. But in both pictures they are out of context, so you can't take anything at face value.

There is room for all types of production systems to provide both affordable food for the masses (9 billion by 2050) and premium markets. Just like we can be Meat Hunters or Trophy hunters or both.

Fake meat and future of animals for food.

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Forum statistics

Share this page