vegan agriculture and animals

[charlotte-reva]

Dear members of the forum,
i am on a french animal rigths facebbo page, and a lot of omnivore replies.
A few days ago a guy said , i am killing my own meat ( i suppose he is a hunter) and at least i am just killing one life, whereas you vegan you kill ton of small animals ( insects, small mice and rats that lives in the fields) , why make a fus about me killing a big animal when your agriculture is a mass destroyer of smaller lives?

I dont know what to reply him. If anyone can help...
Thanks

[NonZeroSum]

A few days ago a guy said , i am killing my own meat ( i suppose he is a hunter) and at least i am just killing one life, whereas you vegan you kill ton of small animals ( insects, small mice and rats that lives in the fields) , why make a fus about me killing a big animal when your agriculture is a mass destroyer of smaller lives?

I dont know what to reply him. If anyone can help...
Thanks

If it's a public page could you link the discussion? We have some French speakers on the forum and can google translate to get a general sense of how the conversation got started and why he is responding in the way he is.

You could ask them why are they complaining about vegans complaining if you both agree on the number one fundamental concern, exploitation in the animal agriculture industry. It wouldn't be pragmatic for everyone to go out and hunt invasive species in order to eat meat, so veganism is the pragmatic moral baseline.

Then you could ask them why they get a pleasure from taking life in a disorganized manner of the first animal they come across hunting, and they don't want to understand how to preserve habitats that can sustain the most life without the need for humans involvement? How they could spend their time buying from small farmers markets who keep their hedgerows intact and preserve wildlife corridors, lessen the damage of huge monoculture grain fields going to feed farm animals.

Hope that helps

[charlotte-reva]

A few days ago a guy said , i am killing my own meat ( i suppose he is a hunter) and at least i am just killing one life, whereas you vegan you kill ton of small animals ( insects, small mice and rats that lives in the fields) , why make a fus about me killing a big animal when your agriculture is a mass destroyer of smaller lives?

I dont know what to reply him. If anyone can help...
Thanks

If it's a public page could you link the discussion? We have some French speakers on the forum and can google translate to get a general sense of how the conversation got started and why he is responding in the way he is.

You could ask them why are they complaining about vegans complaining if you both agree on the number one fundamental concern, exploitation in the animal agriculture industry. It wouldn't be pragmatic for everyone to go out and hunt invasive species in order to eat meat, so veganism is the pragmatic moral baseline.

Then you could ask them why they get a pleasure from taking life in a disorganized manner of the first animal they come across hunting, and they don't want to understand how to preserve habitats that can sustain the most life without the need for humans involvement? How they could spend their time buying from small farmers markets who keep their hedgerows intact and preserve wildlife corridors, lessen the damage of huge monoculture grain fields going to feed farm animals.

Hope that helps

Regis Moiraud "Je répondais seulement à l'aspect santé au travers de mon propos.

Pour les gentizanimo qui ne doivent pas souffrir de l'omniréglage de notre système digestif, essayer d'imaginer le nombre de morts en terme d'insectes, de petits rongeurs du sol assassinés à la binette ou au poison pour vous assurer un mois d'alimentation végétale.

Pour ma part, lorsque je tue un chevreuil, c'est une seule vie, et qui me nourrira longtemps."

here is the link of what he said. He commented this on a comment about the general vegan way of life, he sayed in the first place that it is only throught chemistry that one can survive on a vegan diet and that are body needs to have animal products if it want to function naturally.
Nonerosum, thanks much for answering , althought i am not fully convinced by your answers. I am not a hudge fan of answering a question by an another question. In fact, his concern is not the exploitation in the animal agriculture industry. He is a hunter, i guess, and he is just afraid to see veganism rise as he wants to continue hunting. I am not sure that he is thinking of pragmatism and he is not saying everyone should hunt ...I dont think neither it is about the pleisure of killing in a disorganized manner, i think he feels legitimate to do that as others animals in the wild life do that and he doesnt care about preserving wild animals habitats. I cannt personnally attest that event small farmers markets dont interfere or destroy wild life animals ( i just dont know how each farmer function individually). Hunting has no link to monoculture grain going to feed farm animals as animals in the wild life are not fed grains as farm animals.

[NonZeroSum]

here is the link of what he said.

Thank you that helps, you could also invite them to discuss here if you think they'd be interested. Sorry my last response wasn't too helpful, take what is useful to you and discard the rest, just titbits as to how I approach advocacy, let us know how you feel you're doing and your approach also, often most important is developing a rapport with the person and establishing a level playing field for friendly discussion.

I was only responding to the health aspect through my remarks. For gentizanimo who do not have to suffer from the omniregulation of our digestive system,

He commented this on a comment about the general vegan way of life, he said in the first place that it is only through chemistry that one can survive on a vegan diet and that our body needs to have animal products if it wants to function naturally.

You could point out that how we got B12 in our evolution was through the dirt on plant-food, D3 from the Sun etc. What should matter is what is healthiest, and a properly planned wholefoods vegan diet with some processed foods is that, taking supplements is simply an easy way of making sure you are not missing out which is a good idea for everyone, not to live in hope that if your lifestyle is closest to what is most 'natural' that you will be happiest, the more primitive you go the less likely this is to be the case.

. . .try to imagine the number of deaths in terms of insects, small rodents of the soil murdered with the hoe or the poison to assure you a month of plant feeding.

. . .his concern is not the exploitation in the animal agriculture industry. He is a hunter, I guess. . . I dont think neither it is about the pleasure of killing in a disorganized manner, I think he feels legitimate to do that as others animals in the wild life do that and he doesnt care about preserving wild animals habitats.

They needed to use more petrol to get far into the countryside to hunt the dear, they needed to expend a lot of energy stalking their prey, what you eat to have that store of energy depends on how moral you are, if you eat almost only roadkill and invasive species as part of a properly planned conservation strategy, you might be more moral than a vegan, these are very extreme exceptions to the general rule that use = abuse, and wouldn't go against the definition of veganism which is to do with exploitation. It's important to state as they are drawing a distinction along moral lines about vegans indirectly causing the death of small animals.

For my part, when I kill a deer, it is one life, and that will nourish me for a long time.

. .he is just afraid to see veganism rise as he wants to continue hunting. I am not sure that he is thinking of pragmatism and he is not saying everyone should hunt. . .

Why should he be worried? For pragmatic vegans unnecessary hunting is probably on the very last order of business to tackle exploitation of sentient life, maybe he's right, even after large monoculture farming. But if he is concerned about sentient animal suffering he should call himself an environmental vegan or freegan and advocate as such.

[brimstoneSalad]

It's conceivable that some forms of hunting kill fewer in rare cases... but not managed hunting. And it's not something the world's population can do.

Wildlife services make money from hunting licenses, and as such they clear a lot of land and manage grazing areas to artificially increase the population of the animals they want to sell like deer.

As for hunting "natural" populations, you're probably messing up the environment, but even if you aren't, it's not certain that you're actually killing fewer. Animal visuals has a good chart:
http://www.animalvisuals.org/projects/data/1mc

Take out the feed portion (in orange) and you get closer to a "natural" comparison.
Deer are smaller than cows, so the number from direct slaughter would be higher by about ten times.
So, with deer or anything smaller than a cow, I do not think hunting would be likely to kill fewer than agriculture based on the numbers we have. That would be a huge stretch, even for vegetables.
If you're hunting moose, maybe, but still probably not.

[Jebus]

Another point to consider is sentience. Larger animals are usually more sentient than the smaller ones killed by vegan agriculture. In any case, I suspect the guy was referring to the BS reports that came out 15 years ago concerning the number of animals killed during harvesting. A number of errors were made in these counts and the numbers came out greatly exaggerated. You should also mention to the guy that a large percentage of grains is used to feed livestock.

[charlotte-reva]

Thanks for your replies. This is an interesting topic and that asks me a lot of focus

here is the link of what he said.

They needed to use more petrol to get far into the countryside to hunt the dear, they needed to expend a lot of energy stalking their prey, what you eat to have that store of energy depends on how moral you are, if you eat almost only roadkill and invasive species as part of a properly planned conservation strategy, you might be more moral than a vegan, these are very extreme exceptions to the general rule that use = abuse, and wouldn't go against the definition of veganism which is to do with exploitation. It's important to state as they are drawing a distinction along moral lines about vegans indirectly causing the death of small animals.


Why should he be worried? For pragmatic vegans unnecessary hunting is probably on the very last order of business to tackle exploitation of sentient life, maybe he's right, even after large monoculture farming. But if he is concerned about sentient animal suffering he should call himself an environmental vegan or freegan and advocate as such.

you mean the petrol he uses to go fat in the woods kills other animals than the deer?
Since i became vegan (and sometimes freegan )i 've considered my self morally good , this sometimes lead me to a path that is called intolerance ( that 's another topic i will talk another time), although intolerance disgusts me.I kind of not thought about those small animals or insects killed for agriculture, and if i thought about it , i would think about the sentience not not knowing exactly what is the cost of my way of life in term of animal lives. I feels like i am seing the world only in my own limited point of view not having access to the whole picture( which by the way is impossible) and thus is difficult to label me as this or that... I know i am against animal exploitation and specially intensive farming but now i feel perplexed about individual hunting .

It's conceivable that some forms of hunting kill fewer in rare cases... but not managed hunting. And it's not something the world's population can do.

I think the guy was talking about his moral and his actions individually

It's conceivable that some forms of hunting kill fewer in rare cases... but not managed hunting. And it's not something the world's population can do.

Wildlife services make money from hunting licenses, and as such they clear a lot of land and manage grazing areas to artificially increase the population of the animals they want to sell like deer.

As for hunting "natural" populations, you're probably messing up the environment, but even if you aren't, it's not certain that you're actually killing fewer. Animal visuals has a good chart:
http://www.animalvisuals.org/projects/data/1mc

I dont know how it 's like in here ( France). I know for example that in the south of France a lot of people complains about the over massive amount of boars that destroys gardens, fences, and go nears living habitations thus giving the hunterts the idea that they are needed .The chart doesnt mention insect comsumption and it 's impact if that eating habit would rise.

Another point to consider is sentience. Larger animals are usually more sentient than the smaller ones killed by vegan agriculture. In any case, I suspect the guy was referring to the BS reports that came out 15 years ago concerning the number of animals killed during harvesting. A number of errors were made in these counts and the numbers came out greatly exaggerated. You should also mention to the guy that a large percentage of grains is used to feed livestock.

he doesnt care, the prey he kills and eat is not eating grain

[brimstoneSalad]

I think the guy was talking about his moral and his actions individually

Yes, but you can't just do that. Modeling sustainable behavior is important.

For example, while freeganism is fine if just a few people do it, a freegan could not judge a vegan as wrong because not everybody can be freegan (because if they were, we would quickly run out of waste and nobody would be making any more, so nobody could be freegan).
So veganism is the only sustainable option which everybody could do.

An important question in ethics is "what would the world be like if everybody did what I'm doing?"

We can't all eat hunted meat. We can't all live freegan. But we could all live vegan.

I dont know how it 's like in here ( France). I know for example that in the south of France a lot of people complains about the over massive amount of boars that destroys gardens, fences, and go nears living habitations thus giving the hunterts the idea that they are needed .

They aren't needed. Population control can be accomplished with birth control, like the pill humans take, as well as sterilization.
If the hunters switched from bullets to tranquilizers, then they could be needed

Boar are smaller than cows, so killing boar should kill around ten times as many animals as eating vegan per calorie.

The chart doesnt mention insect comsumption and it 's impact if that eating habit would rise.

Insects are not a common food source, but it's not something I worry much about because most insects are only slightly sentient.
Insect farming is also less harmful to the environment.

If somebody wants to eat vegan + insects, it's not really something I'll spend time arguing about because I think it's a smaller harm, and we have bigger issues.

[charlotte-reva]

Thank you very much for all your answers!

[NonZeroSum]

You mean the petrol he uses to go fat in the woods kills other animals than the deer?
Since i became vegan (and sometimes freegan )i 've considered my self morally good , this sometimes lead me to a path that is called intolerance ( that 's another topic i will talk another time), although intolerance disgusts me.I kind of not thought about those small animals or insects killed for agriculture, and if i thought about it , i would think about the sentience not not knowing exactly what is the cost of my way of life in term of animal lives. I feels like i am seing the world only in my own limited point of view not having access to the whole picture( which by the way is impossible) and thus is difficult to label me as this or that... I know i am against animal exploitation and specially intensive farming but now i feel perplexed about individual hunting.

Veganism isn't just a diet like vegetarianism, it's useful to think about how even unnecessary fossil fuel use will hurt all animals via climate change, quantifying the suffering in everything you directly contribute to, that's not to say you should become a hermit. Buying vegan, being zero waste and not using fossil fuels would probably be the neutral moral baseline, but just being vegan as an example to others is massive, and breaking with social conformity a chore that can leave you feeling isolated, so it's important to only do what you can feel comfortable doing, and don't take any more steps unless you're ready to handle the changes. Like brimstoneSalad said above, modelling sustainable behavior is a big ethical win.

I dont know how it 's like in here ( France). I know for example that in the south of France a lot of people complains about the over massive amount of boars that destroys gardens, fences, and go nears living habitations thus giving the hunterts the idea that they are needed .

They aren't needed. Population control can be accomplished with birth control, like the pill humans take, as well as sterilization.
If the hunters switched from bullets to tranquilizers, then they could be needed

Agree it's like catch and release with cats, as difficult a life they lead, you can never be sure you caught every cat so it's best to release them so the sterilized ones can self-regulate the population by policing territory, I guess that would also be a scenario in which tubal litigation would be better.

This looks good:

Squirrel Birth Control: To Stop Invasion, Science Gets Seedy
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/10/121024-squirrels-birth-control-animals-weird-science/