Country Gal, I'm sorry, but intensive pig, meat chicken and battery hen farming are egregiously cruel, and there can never be any justification for the wretched lives these creatures are forced to endure. If farmers are doing it tough, too bad - nothing justifies such cruelty, including the mutilations that Dickie has mentioned. I think these places should be open to the public, so they can see what they are choosing to buy and eat.

PF seems to be able to farm in a welfare friendly environment, and one which I would suggest would meet community expectations. It's about moral standards. No living creature should be "produced" under these atrocious intensive conditions, regardless of how much more "control" the "farmer" wants to have over the operation. If humane, sustainable farming is beyond these people, who are clearly impervious to the terrible suffering of these animals, I suggest that they should be doing something else.

PF, great website. What can we do about getting it more "out there"?

Cheers
Nicky

Nicky, you've still not told us how you propose farmers should meet your objectives to be "humane" and yet produce the same volume of end product at a similar cost to intensive farming. You continue to ignore me when I ask for specifics. Perhaps it has been discussed previously, but if so, I haven't seen it.

If you want the practise to be changed, you need to be specific as to how you want it changed. simply waving your arms and saying "it's bad" won't accomplish anything.

Antiseptic. To produce animals extensively, and on such a scale as they do, would not be possible under the current approach. eg massive piggeries carrying 30,000 sows - that could not be done on one farm. But, 300 family farms with 100 sows each? That would be easily managable. 300 families then producing an income and a diversifying their farm.

As for the question of cost. At present millions are poured into research on how to keep pigs alive in factory farms and how to make them grow as fast as possible under unnatural conditions. Some of that money should be diverted into research on how to grow the best marketable pig under extensive conditions. That said, free ranging means there are minimal expenses for medications and growth enhancers - a huge cost to the intensive industry, less deaths, a fraction of the need for resources like water and power.

Yes free range is more labour intensive than factory farming but when you consider that we currently have units with thousands of sows being managed by two people?? If you are going to farm these animals they deserve better. Intensive producers get lazy. ( another story)

40 years ago we produced pork mostly under extensive conditions on many farms. Today the numbers are not that different but the production method sure is. Yes, we produce a faster growing, super lean product - but who wants it? Give the consumers what they ask for. Put some of those millions into researching the best free range management systems.

Interesting the way this thread's developed. When it began as a blatant farmer-bashing exercise by one of OLO's religious nutters, I predicted it would become feeding frenzy of frootloops - but fortunately, with one or two notable exceptions, most posters have steered away from a generalised idiotic hatred of farmers towards a far more reasonable antipathy towards the worst of intensive livestock and poultry practices.

I agree that animal production that involves battery hen cages, indoor piggeries, feedlots etc is generally too cruel to be allowable. These practices are unnecessary to produce eggs, chicken meat, pork, beef etc, and only exist to increase the profits of the corporate farming sector.

However, this by no means implies that the majority of farmers are cruel towards their animals. Yes, some are and this minority should be prosecuted, but Gibo's call for a Royal Commission into farming practices is way over the top. Those who think they can achieve change in farming culture by vilifying farmers in general will achieve very little.

Country Gal:
Let us not lose sight of the fact that farming animals, crops, or any other product is ALL about making money! Any form of expenditure directed towards easing or avoiding pain to an animal/bird will reduce the final profitability of the particular industry!

I think that regardless of the so-called progress that we have made in "modernising" farming, we need to go back to a system of DNR Veterinarians available to carry out the neccesary "medical" necessities on animals across the country, and performed at a realistic price ( affordable to the farmer!.....not some exotic price that is currently charged by most of the private Vets!) I would envisage a very modest charge to cover the cost of materials, travelling and a small component towards the wages.

As an example of dubious farming methods, an aquaintance visited me during a "dry period" ( which later became the last drought in Queensland!) he chastised me for feeding my cattle, stating: "If you feed your cattle you will never make any money!" As the drought worsened I was purchasing $50 rolls of Silage and driving 100klms each day to feed the few remaining cattle, costing around $150 per day, ( John Howard had introduced his GST and wiped us from the Primary Producers list, because we weren`t turning over $50,000 of cattle per year!)

My aquaintance was right, however his cattle started dying, virtually starving to death! Reality dawned, I had no option than to sell my cows and calves to a friend in a better area, realising a decent price at the time, rather than eventually sacrificing them to the knackery if the situation didn`t improve!

The few remaining stock left on my property will probably die here as I refuse to continue playing the idiots game, and considering I bred them and spent a lot of time with them, I will NOT send them to be killed, nor will I gamble with nature, using livestock as "chips" to assist a Government backed Primary Industries system that seems intent on driving all the small farmers from the land!

If an intensive producer allowed themselves to step back and take the blinkers off, forget all the spin put out there by industry bodies, and studied their animals for a little while, and actually learnt a little on the natural behaviour of these animals - they would have to conclude that what they are doing is cruel. So many of these people are oblivious to what they are doing right down to the drugs they use. If it doesnt actually say antibiotic on the label, it says Tylan instead, they think its harmless. These are the people that will swear blind that there are no hormones etc used in the intensive industry!

We hear all the hype about how 'of course our farmers care about the welfare of their animals, the wouldnt produce if they didnt'. Its crap. Pigs for instance can only survive these concentration camps with the aid of antibiotics, sedatives, hormones etc. They are simply propped up to get them to their 22 weeks of age and out the door. How long do their breeding animals last? Maybe 2 litters and they break down. How stupid - sows dont reach their peek production until litters 3 or 4.

Dont know that we need a royal commission, just robust animal welfare legislation and some of these industries need to start listening to consumers. Their product is getting harder and harder to sell.

Anyone attending the conference on the Gold Coast?