Honest Meat

Good Science or Political Agenda?

Today is Easter and I imagine a lot of people in the Christian world are eating pork today, probably in the form of ham.  So, if you are eating ham or perhaps favor some other form of piggy goodness, which of the above pictures did that pig come from?  The one on the left, where it spent its short five months of life living in crowded pens with slatted floors, where the stench of manure, the heat, and the high-pitched screeching noise is a fact of its miserable life?  Where the tails are cut off and the eye teeth removed so they can't nibble as effectively on each others behinds, since there is nothing else to do to occupy their days.  The pigs are pumped full of antimicrobials (antibiotics and other drugs) in their feed to prevent disease and enhance growth.  The flavor of the pork from these animals is a cross between dry cardboard and texturized vegetable protein.  But hey- at least they are lean, right?  Isn't that what Americans 'need' (but probably don't want)?
Or did your ham come from the picture on the right (one of our first batches of pigs) who started out their life bred for leanness and confinement production, but were brought to our farm as wieners and encountered a completely different way of life.  They were raised for six or seven months to a hearty size of 300-350 pounds live weight.  They were fatty and the meat was marbled, even though they got copious quantities of exercise (which you couldn't tell by the lazy nature of their afternoon dozing in this picture, tired from all the rooting and munching they were doing).  They never got sick, and never got antibiotics.  They were moved frequently to new pastures to keep their parasite loads down, and their livers were the picture of health after slaughter, which is a sign of low parasite pressure.  As one would expect, we get rave reviews for the taste of our pork (just see some of the Local Harvest reviews as proof).  Now tell me, which ham do you prefer?

So along comes a short, preliminary study in the Journal of Foodborne Pathogens & Disease in April, 2008 and a history professor from the prestigious* Texas State University who gets a Op-Ed in the NY Times to proclaim that pigs raised outdoors are a ticking time-bomb, full of potential pathogens waiting to destroy the foodies clamoring to eat it.  First off, as an ecologist and agriculturist, I wonder, what does a history professor from a no-name school in Texas have to say about a scientific study in agriculture?  How does one get an Op-Ed in the NY Times without any expertise? Mmm...I must dig deeper.

The Real Dirt on Lamb

No, this is not a post about my favorite lamb recipe, although this mint crusted rack of lamb recipe from The Grassfed Gourmet cookbook sure was fabulous.  This is about my growing awareness of the seriously overlooked meat that is lamb.  We have raised a few lamb here and there, not exactly enjoying the experience because their wool insulates them from the shock of our super-charged electric fence, so we constantly caught flack from our neighbors when they escaped.  We found an amazing supplier of grassfed lamb for our farmers' market booth, so we now buy the lamb fully grown and arrange for the slaughter and cut & wrap, but not the production.

I was naively under the impression that most lamb was grassfed, being that it grows fairly quickly (8-10 months) and can thrive on even marginal rangeland.  To my surprise, I found out that over half of American lamb is actually confined and fed grain and hay for the last 2-3 months of their lives.  What about all that fabulous grassfed lamb coming from New Zealand and Australia?  Turns out that our friends down under have had some poor grass years and are turning to grain finishing their lamb as well. It is estimated that approximately 10% of lambs in Australia are completely lot fed, while around 50% or more are now receiving grain finishing or supplementary feeding (According to the Sheep Meat Council of Australia).

Some friends and I conducted an informal taste test of grain finished Australian rack of lamb, purchased at Costco for $10.99/lb. and the grassfed American rack of lamb, which we retail for $21/lb.  The grain finished lamb had a thicker layer of mostly inedible fat, there was more meat on the rack, yet the taste and consistency were quite different.  There were larger pore spaces in the meat, making it actually feel mushy on the tongue.  The grassfed lamb had less fat that was actually soft enough to eat (not gristly) and the meat was dense, rich, and sweet. 

So the California raised grassfed lamb tasted better, but why does it cost so much more?  Some of the reasons include the cost of land in California and the price of irrigating pastures.  The slaughter and cut & wrap charges are much higher than other states as well.  Grassfed lamb has a lower meat to bone ratio and the yield is smaller, making the meat more expensive.  Also good ol fashioned economics mean that a product that is not readily available (California grassfed lamb) will fetch a higher price.  Rather than thinking about the price of the California lamb, let's wonder about the price of the Australian lamb.  How can it possibly be that cheap ($10.99/lb.)???  When you factor in the transportation and all of the middle men involved, what is that Australian producer actually making per pound?  Row crop producers in this country average about .8 cents for every dollar of food they produce.  If that same proportion holds true for the Australian sheep farmer, they make about .88/lb. of lamb.  My math might be wildly off, but I doubt the Aussie producer is making a fair wage for that cheap Costco meat.

The Salad Bowl of Destruction

So here is a picture of an ACTUAL corporate farm in the Salinas Valley that has destroyed between 20-40 acres of wetlands, ponds, and sloughs that border their vegetable fields over the last year.  Why did they do this?  Who is pressuring them to rid their farms of wildlife habitat?  And why are consumers allowing it to happen under the ruse of 'food safety'?

Yes on Prop. 2 (if you are a Californian!)

We are one of hundreds of livestock producers in California encouraging voters to vote YES on Proposition 2, which is the "Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act".  Following in the footsteps of the European Union, Florida, Oregon and Arizona, Californians will have the opportunity to ban three of the most horrific practices that domestic animals are forced to endure.  Those three practices are: 1) gestation crates for pregnant sows, 2) veal crates, and 3) battery cages for laying hens.

Not only will this proposition ban three of the worst animal production practices, it will help to reduce disease and pathogens when animals are not lying and standing on their feces day and night.  While it may increase prices by a few pennies per egg or per pound of meat, it will hardly be noticeable since many of the major food services companies and retailers are already only stocking cage-free eggs and crate free pork and veal (Wendy's, Burger King, Compass Group, and more).  Even the largest pork producer in this country, good ol' Smithfield, has phased out over half of their gestational crates and will completely phase it out in the next few years. Producers will have over seven years to retool their operations to comply with this law, a very generous time frame.  The European Union, on the other hand, will completely phase out caged layers by 2012.  Contrary to the opposition's argument (which by the way is receiving lots of funding from out of state factory farms), this proposition will not hurt California farmers nor just encourage out-of-state cheap imports to fill the void.  California producers will help lead the nation in creating a more humane, higher-quality food supply, and as usual with nearly all our industries here, these producers will profit from more sustainable practices.

So even if you are reading this from Boston or Denver or Tulsa or anywhere in between, let your Californian friends & family know about Proposition 2 (and why they should vote YES!). 

Where is the Range in "Free-Range"?

What is the definition of range exactly?  According to Webster's, range can be "an open region over which livestock may roam and feed" or "the region throughout which a kind of organism or ecological community naturally lives or occurs" or "the act of ranging about".  For these laying hens above, which of these definitions apply?  I don't see a lot of roaming here since each hen has about 1 square feet of space.  If they move at all, it is towards the feeder or towards the waterers.  I know that chickens don't naturally live in large, football-field size buildings, so that definition is out.  So maybe it is the "act of ranging about", which doesn't really mean much except they are not kept seven to a cage, so maybe their short lives are marginally better.  It is possible they have a small outdoor area covered with gravel and surrounded by shade cloth or mesh fencing.  However, there is no feed or water outside, nor any growing vegetation, so why bother?  Maybe the chickens need a little Vitamin D from the sun or something....

Free-range currently has no legal definition in this country, therefor there are no standards.  Really any egg producer that doesn't cage their chickens could call their operation "free-range".  However, consumers think that free-range means the chickens are outside roaming about on grass and pasture.  If you think this word rings hollow, organic is just as bad.

Organic laying hens cannot be in cages and have to be fed organic feed from the second day of their life.  That is about it.  Even though they are supposed to have some undefined outdoor space, there is no definition as to the size, the amount of time that outdoor space has to be accessible, and whether or not the outdoor space has green vegetation, feed, or water in it.  According to Mark Keating, who formerly worked for the USDA National Organic Program for three years,

"Translating a written standard into a consistent set of practices in the field is challenging.  This is further illustrated by the range of conditions that different certifying agents allow for providing poultry with the required "access to the outdoors".  According to testimony at the latest National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) meeting, the land that birds have access to is sometimes certified, but sometimes not.  On other farms, flocks are kept indoors their entire lives under a "temporary confinement" allowance.  Some of these operations don't even include the capacity for birds to go outdoors, indicating that temporary is indeed going to mean permanent."

When is the NOSB going to realize that consumers want the real deal and they want transparency. 

Now I'm sure your local farmers' market might have an egg vendor or two.  However, a lot of small-scale operations use a permanent outdoor area.  That means that after a couple weeks of chicken impact, there is nothing but dirt (& manure).  It is not exactly a healthy environment for the chickens.  So what you really want to look for are "Pasture-Raised" eggs the come from chickens on pasture.  To have well growing pasture, you have to periodically move your chickens so the vegetation has a time to rest and regrow.  Pasture-raised chickens, just like grass-fed beef and lamb, have naturally high levels of Omega 3 fatty acids, iron, Vitamin A, and a slew of other healthy fats, vitamins, and minerals.

Most stores don't carry pasture-raised chicken eggs, so I recommend searching out your local farmers first.  Ask to see pictures of the operation so you can verify that the chickens are actually outdoors on pasture.  This may seem like a lot of work for an egg, but your body and the planet will thank you.

Big Hog: Part Two

The gently rolling hills, the forests and woodlands hugging the creeks that stitch together the landscape, the verdant green pastures- all sounds and looks rather bucolic doesn't it?  Look closer and what do you see?  At least six hog factories just in the one little slice of country in the picture frame.  Thanks to the amazing ecoaviator photojournalist extraordinaire Rick Dove, hundreds of pictures of the North Carolina hog factories are available for the public to witness the exploitation of this hidden chunk of North America where land was cheap and residents not powerful enough to prevent the complete upheaval of their communities.

This is what the inside of one of these hog factories might look like.  Some producers allow the pigs to walk around within the building while others cage each individual animal, such as these sows in gestational crates (they say this is to prevent the pigs from biting at each other, which any animal would do if they felt cramped, neglected, and bored).  I'm sure most of you are already grossed out by the way the pigs are treated in these hog warehouses.  This post is supposed to be about the human health problems with these huge hog factories.  But if a hog farmer (or vertically-integrated pork corporation) will treat animals with complete disregard, how do you think they treat their human workers and neighbors?

A multi-author scientific review in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives called "Community Health & Socioeconomic Issues Surrounding Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations" listed some of the following dire realities of CAFOs, especially pig factories, on human communities:

• Economic concentration of livestock farms removes a lot of money from rural areas.  Lots of small, independent farms keeps more money circulating in the region.
• At least 25% of CAFO workers have respiratory diseases
• Surrounding neighbors of CAFOs have similar levels of respiratory ailments as the CAFO workers themselves
• Neighbors also exhibit higher levels of anxiety, depression, and sleep disorders
• Higher asthma rates in children that live near CAFOs
• Toxic levels of hydrogen sulfide and ammonia found in the communities near CAFOs
• CAFOs are disproportionately located in low-income and non-white areas
• Property values decrease and low-income areas become lower-income as they loose any and all equity in their homes

For some reason that defies logic, pig factories nearly all get located near wetlands, waterways, and flood-prone areas.  Maybe it is because they use so much water to wash down all the feces-covered concrete or to mix with the pig manure in order to spray it on the fields.  Yes, that's right.  This pink, Pepto-Bismo colored crap gets sprayed onto thousands of acres of crops, some of it destined for human consumption.  Now this isn't just regular crap- it is full of antibiotics, growth hormones, heavy metals,  and pathogenic bacteria (much of which is resistant to antibiotics).  So every time these regions flood (which in Iowa and North Carolina it seems to be every other year), the pig manure ponds get full of rainwater, overtop, and spill out their contents into the surrounding forests, waterways, and drinking water wells.  After the last big hurricane in North Carolina, their governor promised to buy up and close down all of the pig factories that sustained 50% or more damage since they were too flood-prone.  Not a single pig factory was shut down since none of them claimed the 50% or higher damage (that way they could stay in business!).  The Government Accountability Office (GAO) estimated that over 60% of CAFOs in this country are not regulated by the EPA.  Why is it that the little 5 acre vegetable farmer next door to me is regulated by the Clean Water Act (for his potential non-point source pollution coming off his irrigated acreage) but hundreds of animal factories around the country with thousands of livestock confined into buildings and feedlots are only asked to voluntarily comply with Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act regulations?  It turns out it is not the pigs that smell, rather it is the politicians and judges who turn a deaf ear and a blind eye to the devastated communities, destroyed ecosystems, and unclean 'food' that these factory farms are churning out.

Aerial photos courtesy of Rick Dove, www.neuseriver.com (all rights reserved).

Big Hog: Part One

First off, this is not a great picture, I know.  Not too many photographers get access to the inside of hog factories, and finding high resolution photos of them on the Internet is difficult.

This is the beginning of a three-part series I am writing about "Big Hog" or industrial pig production in this country.  I am going to emphasize the impact of this production system particularly on the ecosystems and human communities of North Carolina.

Thanks to information I gleaned from the Neuse River Foundation in North Carolina, there are 10 million hogs in North Carolina being raised industrially (there are a few honest producers in N. Carolina, whom I will feature later).  Most all of these hogs are located in the environmentally sensitive area of N. Carolina's Coastal Plain, an area with frequent flooding, high water table, and numerous wetlands, creeks, and estuaries.  Each and every day, those 10 million hogs produce the amount of manure equivalent to all the humans in the following states combined: N. Carolina, California, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, New Hampshire, and N. Dakota (100 million people).  Now that is a lot of shit.  The map below shows the concentration of these hog factories in about 10 counties in the southeast portion of the state.  In the next post, I will talk about what it is like to live in one of those counties covered in red dots, but I'm sure you can start visualizing and smelling it already...

 

You Can Get With This or You Can Get With That

Seven chickens in one cage the size of a few sheets of paper, 59 sq inches per bird to be exact. Sound cramped? Just exactly how healthy could an egg from one of these chickens possibly be?  CRAP IN=CRAP OUT.  Caged layers, otherwise known as battery cage production (appropriate name, eh) is the norm in this country. The European Union is moving towards a complete ban on conventional caged layers by 2012 for reasons of health and ethics. If we ban cage production in this country, there won't be anymore $2.29/dz. eggs out there, but do we want those eggs anyways?

This hen, a production red hybrid to be exact, enjoys her own nest box lined with fresh straw.  Sometime other hens come in her box and try to lay their eggs there too - she can choose to stake her ground or let them in. The caged layers above have no choice about laying together and they have nowhere else to go. This gal here can lay her egg, then walk down a small ramp onto some lush, irrigated pasture. She can wander around and peck at some of her sisters, duck under a shade house and drink some water, make a dust bath, find some plantain or clover to nibble on, or hang out at one of the range feeders and fill herself up.

So which production system do you prefer?