Wednesday, March 25, 2015

Factory Farming: Friend or Foe? Countries Across the Globe Claim Foe

By Isabelle Naimo

Industrial livestock production, more commonly known as factory farming, refers to the modern methods of keeping and raising livestock at larger scales and in higher densities than in more old-fashion traditional ways of animal agriculture. Animals such as cattle, poultry, hogs, and even fish are crammed in confinement until they’re slaughtered for their meat.

Factory farming has become a widespread practice in developed nations. It has become the more popular option compared to smaller scaled animal agriculture (for example, local family owned farms) due to its ability to produce the highest output while still keeping costs low, a benefit its supporters view as essential for feeding the ever growing global population. But it’s not without faults – artificial methods, such as growth hormones and vitamin supplements, are usually needed to maintain the health of the animals, as well as to improve production. And in regard to overcrowded living conditions, factory farming usually requires the use of antibiotics and pesticides to control the spread of infection and disease amongst the animals. Such practices have caused factory farming to go under fire with much speculation and debate in recent years due to growing health concerns, animal cruelty and welfare issues, and the potential environmental impact. Several different media outlets across the world have addressed these topics in recent years.

TIME Magazine is an American weekly news magazine based out of New York City. Bryan Walsh addressed meat production’s environmental concerns in his 2013 article “The Triple Whopper Environmental Impact of Global Meat Production.” In his article, Walsh addresses that 40% of the world’s land surface is used for food production and 30% of it is not utilized for harvesting fruits, vegetables, and grains but to support the mass amounts of farm animals that we ‘eventually’ eat. 

While livestock production feeds the population’s demand for animal products and provides financial income for billions of people, Walsh states that it uses “one-third of the world’s fresh water” and “there may be no other single human activity that has a bigger impact on the planet than the raising of livestock.” However, not all livestock production is created equal. Walsh turns to the International Livestock Research Institute in Kenya, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) in Australia and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in Austria and their research of livestock production from different regions around the world, from factory farming in developed nations to other approaches used in lesser-developed nations. One staggering fact is,
“The highest total of livestock-related greenhouse-gas emissions comes from the developing world, which accounts for 75% of the global emissions from cattle and other ruminants and 56% of the global emissions from poultry and pigs.”

But despite the huge environmental hit factory farming causes and setting aside criticism of animal cruelty and public health risks due to air and water pollution, he suggests, “it can be remarkably efficient.” 
In the end, it all resorts back to the vast differences in animal agriculture depending on the region. For example, in some regions grain is too precious that it wouldn’t be feasible to use them for the animals but in other developing areas of the world, livestock production can be tremendously economically beneficial. When it comes to America though – factory farming and levels of meat consumption need to change in the future in order to prevent further environmental and health impact. Overall, Walsh effectively presents factual data and statistics to his readers. As a reader, whether your stance is for or against, he’s convincing that factory farming is anything but a black or white issue.

I came across an older 2011 interview with Bryan Walsh by CNN – a mainstream news media outlet – regarding the threat factory farming poses in a live segment entitled “Move To End Factory Farms.” I typically don’t watch mainstream news so I was pleasantly surprised to see them addressing these issues. It was refreshing to hear such a popular, renowned television outlet leaving the sugar coating in the cabinet and exposing not only inside footage of factory farms but the effect cheap and unhealthy meat is having on America’s health and waistlines. It’s easier for the common audience to simply “hear” or “read” about an issue and brush it off, maybe because they’re a conspiracy theorist or were only reading but not absorbing facts. But when it’s aired across the country and they’re seeing the reality, it’s much harder to deny.

BBC News, or the British Broadcasting Corporation, is a broadcasting news organization hailing from the United Kingdom. Matt McGrath, an environmental correspondent for the corporation, in 2014 focused on the environmental damage beef production alone has on the planet – claiming “Beef environment cost 10 times that of other livestock.” McGrath gets his information from a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences where researchers used data over a decade from the US department of agriculture as a way to calculate the total resources needed for livestock production. McGrath cuts down the research into quick and painless summaries, cutting to the chase so fast I couldn’t formulate an opposition even if I wanted.

The study cited not only included greenhouse gas emissions from the production of the animal’s feed but those that resulted from digestion and manure. Scientists found that due to the cattle’s low energy conversion from what they eat that it results in beef having the biggest environmental impact. McGrath points out, “Cattle release five times more greenhouse gas and consume six times more nitrogen than eggs or poultry.” Although the exact numbers found refer to US livestock, the carbon footprint of cattle in Europe would still be much more than that of poultry, pork, and eggs.  

His solution? Well, it would be a herbivore’s dream to see a mainstream media outlet urge it’s viewers to adopt an exclusive plant-based diet but it’s not necessary. A professor involved in the study says, "In fact, eliminating beef, and replacing it with relatively efficiency animal-based alternatives such as eggs, can achieve an environmental improvement comparable to switching to plant food source."

In 2013 Michael Kirby wrote “Factory farming masks meat’s true costs” for ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). The piece differs from those found in TIME Magazine and BBC News because Kirby focuses on incorporating his own personal opinion instead of relaying strictly on scientific data and research studies. Kirby notes that animals were raised in a traditional way in Australia a few decades ago but now close to 95% of livestock is factory farmed. Factory farming decreases the value of meat, making cheap meat a right and furthermore, allowing the common Australian to eat meat at least three times per day. Kirby poetically writes, “The sticker price is far from the real price. There are enormous costs to be paid, by the environment, by our health, and by the 500 million animals suffering on Australian factory farms. If those costs are considered, we are facing some very important questions.”

Kirby is able to shock readers into agreeing with his opinions when he writes in details about factory farmed turkeys. The typical factory farmed turkey lives only 12 weeks out of their natural lifespan of 10 years. In those short weeks leading to slaughter, they’re bred to pack on the pounds as fast as possible. They grow so large that their joints are often painful and their own legs can’t support their body weight. Kirby notes that they’re also susceptible to heart disease and questions, “Who would consider that eating those unfortunate animals could be part of a healthy diet?” 

I found the most powerful part of Kirby’s article to be when he addresses the reality that most people don’t consider what their meat really once was. “They prefer not to consider that it is at the cost of the life of a sentient being. They prefer not to acknowledge that those animals, who feel pain and fear as we do, are forced to be our food, or to acknowledge that most are kept in appalling conditions and endure a life of immense deprivation, with no compassion to alleviate their pain.” It’s a sad reality that billions of animals are brought into this world to live a sufferable life just to die for human consumption. As a result our environment is declining, as well as, our health. 

As of 2014, The New Zealand Labour Party seems to be taking a proactive approach to factory farming issues, announcing it would ban all factory farming by 2017. The Labour Party came to this conclusion, however, not because of the environmental devastation being caused or because of health concerns, instead because animal activists have been releasing footage of the horrors found on factory farms. In this particular case, the horrors of hog farms.

Rachel Parkin of 3 News reports that every time a new piece of footage is released the pork board claims, “This is a rogue farm. This is not typical of the industry.”  The Labour Party finally declared that would be enough excuses. Despite the video footage provided that would make any viewer turn their heads in disgust, the reader sees a business perspective in this piece. MP Trevor Mallard is quoted as saying, “If people in Europe see this then we will have trouble getting any of our meat into Europe.” Certainly, this would be fatal for those who earn their income off the pork industry. 

According to the Primary Industries Minister, Nathan Guy, New Zealand aims to have sow stalls gone within a year and hen battery cages out by 2022. Even if they’re successful at banning all factory farms by 2017, that’s still a lot of time the damaging consequences to take affect. Admittedly, it’s better than keeping their blinders on though.

It was surprisingly hard to come across a source supporting factory farming. I did stumble upon a website called Texas Agriculture Talks that had an older 2010 piece suggesting “Factory farming not so bad after all.” I gathered from the website title alone that this wouldn’t be the best place to find a valid argument in support of factory farms and I was exactly right. While the previous news sources had loads of scientific evidence or footage to back up their statements, Gene Hall of Texas Agriculture Talks merely resorted to a few dictionary definitions and vague numbers supporting the low cost and jobs factory farming brings. Hall boasts, “There would be consequences for outlawing this kind of agriculture.” It can be conjured that these consequences refer to a loss in jobs, increase in food costs, and shortages of food. Though, he completely lacks supporting evidence and doesn’t even attempt to debunk environmental and health risk claims. It’s very clear that Texas Agriculture Talks wants to target an audience that’s already set in their ways and not critical thinkers.

I researched various different archives for articles or news stories around the world in attempt to bring more diversity to this argument but it appears that factory farming supporters are few and far between. Usually I can trust the Internet to give me a number of different opinions that are backed up by some study or another, and yet all my google searches came up empty handed. On the contrary, there were endless articles, blogs, YouTube videos, documentaries (Cowspiracy, anyone?) and activism sites bringing awareness to the issues of factory farming. So the verdict seems to be out – factory farm accusations are anything but a false alarm.


It’s pretty unanimous from developed countries around the world that the cons of factory farming far out weight the pros. So, what’s the solution? Luckily, we have a few options and the best way is to stop supporting factory farms by purchasing their meats. Instead, consumers should seek out organic local farms that practice more sustainable agriculture methods. Vendors such as these can be found at your local farmers markets and meeting the people handling your meat face-to-face gives you the opportunity to ask any important questions regarding how they raise their animals. But aside from purchasing local, organic, grass-fed meat and dairy, and organic eggs, there’s always the option to adopt a plant-based meat-free diet. 

1 comment:

  1. Isabelle,

    First off, I like your title- it shows your opinion on factory farming immediately, as well as the world’s. I think your topic is really important especially when connected to hunger issues, but I think that the top farms don’t even care about that anymore. It’s definitely all about the low costs and high outputs, with a lot of money coming in, just like you put it. Your sources are credible and well known, which makes it easy to see that these are real facts that show factory farming is a horrible idea. I really liked that you included a source that does support factory farming because it shows the opposing opinion, even if very few support it. Also, I like what you say about how difficult it was to even find such a source (“factory farm accusations are anything but a false alarm.”) The search results show that the world views it negatively, so I don’t understand why we still do it.

    I like that you include solutions to the issue in the last paragraph. It really ties together your main idea with what we can do to maybe stop factory farming. I especially enjoyed your last sentence, as every day I’m closer and closer to adopting such a diet!

    Overall, your media project was very well written. Your opinions on the sources are well thought and interesting to read. The information was presented very nicely and really informs the reader about different ideas on this huge issue.

    Cathy

    ReplyDelete