Canadian Seafood Boycott
Steve Pope
Canadian fishermen, the Canadian Seafood Boycott is once again
in place. This boycott is sponsored by the Humane Society
of the United States, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society,
and dozens of other organizations. Hundreds of restaurants
participate in the boycott. Local restaurants which are FOR
the boycott and SUPPORT baby seals include:
Blue Mermaid Chowder House & Bar (Chef: Chandon Clenard)
Cafe Pescatore
Caffe Espresso
The Franciscan (Chef: Adam R. Jones)
Grand Cafe (Chef: Fabrice Roux)
Harry Denton's Starlight Room
Kuleto's (Chef: Sharyl Seim)
Kuleto's Trattoria (Chef: John Ruane)
Postrio (Chefs: Wolfgang Puck, Mitchell and Steven Rosenthal)
Ponzu (Chef: Michelle Mah)
Puccini & Pinetti
Scala's Bistro (Chef: Staffan Terje)
Seal products including pelts and Omega-3 capsules are banned
from the United States, but many of the same individuals and
processors who conduct the harp seal hunt are part of the larger
seafood industry in Canada, hence supporters of the broader
boycott feel they can send the strongest possible message that
the hunt must be stopped.
Thank you
Steve
Geoff Miller
Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
> Due to the ongoing unnecessary slaughter of baby harp seals by
> Canadian fishermen, the Canadian Seafood Boycott is once again
> in place.
Oh, Christ...
> This boycott is sponsored by the Humane Society of the United
> States, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, and dozens of
> other organizations. Hundreds of restaurants participate in
> the boycott. Local restaurants which are FOR the boycott and
> SUPPORT baby seals include:
> Blue Mermaid Chowder House & Bar (Chef: Chandon Clenard)
> Cafe Pescatore
> Caffe Espresso
> The Franciscan (Chef: Adam R. Jones)
> Grand Cafe (Chef: Fabrice Roux)
> Harry Denton's Starlight Room
> Kuleto's (Chef: Sharyl Seim)
> Kuleto's Trattoria (Chef: John Ruane)
> Postrio (Chefs: Wolfgang Puck, Mitchell and Steven Rosenthal)
> Ponzu (Chef: Michelle Mah)
> Puccini & Pinetti
> Scala's Bistro (Chef: Staffan Terje)
I'll be sure and boycott all these restaurants. (Restaurants
making political statements is *so* Bay Area...)
> Seal products including pelts and Omega-3 capsules are banned
> from the United States, but many of the same individuals and
> processors who conduct the harp seal hunt are part of the larger
> seafood industry in Canada, hence supporters of the broader
> boycott feel they can send the strongest possible message that
> the hunt must be stopped.
I'd give it a rest if I were you. The bunnyhuggers have been
whining about the Canadian seal hunt for years, and yet every
spring, there it is again. Maybe it's time to cut your losses
and move on to some other bleeding-heart cause. But then, I
suppose that to people like you, being seen making a Statement
is as important as getting results.
Personally, my only misgiving about the hunt is that I didn't have
the foresight to bid on the Louisville Slugger franchise for northern
Canada...
Geoff
--
"Nothing says 'I love you' like 100 kilotons." -- Jim Hill
Cut off his head! We will call on the people to pull him into pieces so there's nothing left!
> I'd give it a rest if I were you. The bunnyhuggers have been
> whining about the Canadian seal hunt for years, and yet every
> spring, there it is again. Maybe it's time to cut your losses
> and move on to some other bleeding-heart cause. But then, I
> suppose that to people like you, being seen making a Statement
> is as important as getting results.
And why single out seafood? Why boycott Canadian fish and not
other Canadian products?
Steve Pope
>And why single out seafood? Why boycott Canadian fish and not
>other Canadian products?
Because the seal "hunt" is conducted by the Canadian Department
of Fisheries, the seal "hunters" are in many cases fishermen,
and the seals are processed in facilities owned by large
Canadian seafood packers.
Depending on the activist, the action applies to either all
Canadian seafood, or only that produced in the regions where
the "hunt" is conducted. Probably there are also activists boycotting
anything from Canada.
I forgot to mention both Whole Foods and Wild Oats are honoring
the boycott, as well as Marks and Spencer in the U.K.
Steve
Ian MacLure
news:e06ile$gkt$1...@blue.rahul.net:
> Due to the ongoing unnecessary slaughter of baby harp seals by
> Canadian fishermen, the Canadian Seafood Boycott is once again
How heartless of you to deprive these poor folk of their
flipper pie.
Besides which if they weren't clubbing seals they'd be
looking for something else to club.
IBM
Steve Pope
> if they weren't clubbing seals they'd be
> looking for something else to club.
Yeah, each other, which I have no problem with.
S.
Four-Way Windowpane
Has anyone wondered why killing the seals is so horrible but
not the fish? Far more fish are being slaughtered but that
is ignored, and the fish simply become a political tool to
stop the slaughter of the much cuter baby seals.
Or is the value of an animal's life dependent on how attractive
it is to humans?
Todd Michel McComb
Four-Way Windowpane <sh...@blotter.org> wrote:
>Or is the value of an animal's life dependent on how attractive
>it is to humans?
I think it mainly depends on the taste. If it tastes good, time
to eat it. Seal don't seem so appealing.
PeterL
I am starting a cockroach protection league.
Dan Abel
Four-Way Windowpane <sh...@blotter.org> wrote:
> Has anyone wondered why killing the seals is so horrible but
> not the fish?
I would imagine that every thinking person has wondered this.
> Or is the value of an animal's life dependent on how attractive
> it is to humans?
That's pretty obvious. And it isn't just looks, it's behavior. Cows,
sheep and fish are really stupid. Seals look intelligent, even if they
aren't.
--
Dan Abel
da...@sonic.net
Petaluma, California, USA
Reg
You are so right. I've had it in Alaska, and it's awful.
Those poor eskimos.
--
Reg
Dennis
a different method. The fish are food. Thought the seals are for fur.
Industrial fishing happens out of sight and is industrial so individual
killing is minimal and far from the cameras. But they get their protests
too - usually against the non-selective nets.
PeterL
Dan Abel wrote:
> In article <QjfWf.6521$4L1....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>,
> Four-Way Windowpane <sh...@blotter.org> wrote:
>
>
> > Has anyone wondered why killing the seals is so horrible but
> > not the fish?
>
> I would imagine that every thinking person has wondered this.
>
> > Or is the value of an animal's life dependent on how attractive
> > it is to humans?
>
> That's pretty obvious. And it isn't just looks, it's behavior. Cows,
> sheep and fish are really stupid. Seals look intelligent, even if they
> aren't.
Pigs are intelligent, but no one is protesting pork consumption. It's
also the cuteness factor. Cows sheep and fish are mostly not cute.
Baby seals are.
notbob
> Pigs are intelligent, but no one is protesting pork consumption. It's
> also the cuteness factor. Cows sheep and fish are mostly not cute.
> Baby seals are.
Egg-zactly! They keep talking about seal skin coats, but I'll be
darned if I can find one. Where can I get one?
nb
Todd Michel McComb
There's someone protesting everything, if you look for them.
>It's also the cuteness factor. Cows sheep and fish are mostly not
>cute. Baby seals are.
"Cuteness" is an interesting concept. It means nothing to me.
Anyway, my daughters have a saying that goes, most canonically,
"Deer are cute *and* delicious." The choice of animal can vary.
I believe "lamb" is also found in that category, and is eaten often.
Quail is another.
Steve Pope
>Pigs are intelligent, but no one is protesting pork consumption.
Huh?
Which planet have you been living on?
S.
PeterL
I made two statements. Which one are you referring to?
>
> S.
PeterL
Some high end designers apparently use them (fur and skin).
> nb
Steve Pope
>Steve Pope wrote:
>> >Pigs are intelligent, but no one is protesting pork consumption.
>> Huh?
>> Which planet have you been living on?
>I made two statements. Which one are you referring to?
The false one of the two. (That no one is protesting pork
production.)
Prok production has drawn far more protest than has seal
hunting.
Steve
Steve Pope
>Steve Pope wrote:
>> PeterL <po....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Huh?
The false one.
Seriously, if you haven't encountered any opposition to
pork consumption, you haven't been looking very hard.
Steve
Jon Nadelberg
I never hear about pork production protests. I hear this nonsense about
the seal hunt every year, though.
Why don't you go figure out how to help some starving and sick people
who live on the streets of SF. Do someone some good instead of this
nonsense.
Steve Pope
>Why don't you go figure out how to help some starving and sick people
>who live on the streets of SF. Do someone some good instead of this
>nonsense.
Fact is, I do give money to the Berkeley Emergency Food Project
and some similar groups, but it's reading statements like yours
that make me lean towards helping animals instead.
Steve
Dan Abel
spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
Are you a vegetarian, Steve?
Steve Pope
>Are you a vegetarian, Steve?
No. Does one need to be a vegetarian to help animals?
Steve
Ian MacLure
No, I'm thinking of some other folks.
IBM
Dan Abel
spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
No, it just makes you look less like a hypocrite. Did you know that
before you eat an animal, they have to kill it?
What is so more horrible about killing these seals than killing
defenseless chickens? Do you think those chickens have a fair chance?
Do you know how old the typical meat chicken is when it is brutally
killed, just to feed people who could just as well eat beets?
Have you ever killed a beet?
Steve Pope
> spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
>> Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
>> Does one need to be a vegetarian to help animals?
>No, it just makes you look less like a hypocrite.
Well, you'll just have to live with the fact that some
sincere, non-hypocritical people who want to help animals
in various ways might not be vegetarians in all cases.
Steve
Dan Abel
spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
> Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> > spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
> >> Does one need to be a vegetarian to help animals?
>
> >No, it just makes you look less like a hypocrite.
>
> Well, you'll just have to live with the fact that some
> sincere, non-hypocritical people who want to help animals
> in various ways might not be vegetarians in all cases.
I was somewhat sincere in my question, Steve, but you haven't answered
it. What are these "various ways" that you want to help animals?
Steve Pope
> spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
>> Well, you'll just have to live with the fact that some
>> sincere, non-hypocritical people who want to help animals
>> in various ways might not be vegetarians in all cases.
>I was somewhat sincere in my question, Steve, but you haven't answered
>it. What are these "various ways" that you want to help animals?
Please retract the "hypocritical" comment, which is purely
name-calling, and I'll answer.
Steve
Todd Michel McComb
Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
>I was somewhat sincere in my question, Steve, but you haven't answered
>it. What are these "various ways" that you want to help animals?
We have actually been over this with Steve before. I don't agree
with some of his positions, but I don't think he's particularly
inconsistent either.
One thing we do agree about is better treatment of food animals.
My reason is it makes a better product.
Jon Nadelberg
How nice.
Of course me suggesting that you help your less fortunate fellow man
would cause you to want to help animals. That's only completely logical.
And as long as you give a couple bucks to a food project, I'm sure your
conscience is assuaged enough so that you can devote more of your time
to efforts that don't involve ending the suffering of people. People
who live in your neighborhood, in the gutters at your feet.
Quite the humanitarian, you and every other animal rights crusader.
Dan Abel
spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
OK, consider it retracted. I don't believe in name-calling, and didn't
intend it to be taken that way. I don't think we solve anything at all,
or exchange useful information, by name-calling. I am sorry that I
threw out that label without finding out more about what you believe in
and are trying to do.
Steve Pope
> spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
>> Please retract the "hypocritical" comment, which is purely
>> name-calling, and I'll answer.
>OK, consider it retracted. I don't believe in name-calling, and didn't
>intend it to be taken that way. I don't think we solve anything at all,
>or exchange useful information, by name-calling. I am sorry that I
>threw out that label without finding out more about what you believe in
>and are trying to do.
Thank you. As Todd mentioned I have talked about this subject
at length here in the past, and I don't want to want to
drone on too much about what I believe, but to answer your
question, animal welfare is an area where I believe incremental
improvement is possible (and in some cases, has been achieved). I
support animal rescue operations, and anti-fur advocacy. Opposing
the seal hunt is a subset of the latter. Regarding the food
industry, my interest is mostly in seeing conditions improve for the
animals. I believe their is zero channce of eliminating
consumption of meat, at least anytime soon, but better practices
are possible.
Steve
Mark Mellin
> On 2006-03-28, PeterL wrote:
>
> > Pigs are intelligent, but no one is protesting pork consumption. It's
> > also the cuteness factor. Cows sheep and fish are mostly not cute.
> > Baby seals are.
>
> Egg-zactly! They keep talking about seal skin coats, but I'll be
> darned if I can find one. Where can I get one?
In the forty-ninth state:
<http://alaskanativearts.org/shop/ArtItemDetails.aspx?ArtInventID=2092>
- Mark
--
Mark Mellin San Mateo Village, CA 94403 USA
Ciccio
> How heartless of you to deprive these poor folk of their
> flipper pie.
> Besides which if they weren't clubbing seals they'd be
> looking for something else to club.
It's not just a matter of pure morality. It's also a matter of aesthetics.
No need to apologize for it either. Aesthetics plays a large part in
people's significant decisions Hell, a DA in Florida just declined to put
on trial a school teacher for child molestation, because she was beautiful
and men may not convict her. Thus, if she we're an ugly skank, she'd be
en route to prison. So, it's not, at all, surprising, that aesthetics plays
a large part in deciding which animals to save from slaughter. To most
people, seals are very aesthetically appealing. I agree.
Ciccio
notbob
> people, seals are very aesthetically appealing. I agree.
Need a campaign to convince they're commie pinko seals.
nb
PeterL
That's interesting because Google certainly don't have anything on pork
protest, unless it's the protest against the kind of pork projects our
Congress dole out every year. Can you give me a reference to a pork
production protest? And that it has "drawn far more protest than has
seal hunting"?
> Steve
PeterL
I wasn't looking at all. But a cursory search at Google don't turn up
anything.
> Steve
PeterL
Besides, I don't have to look at all to know that there is a protest
against seal hunting. If I have to look hard to find anything about
pork protest, than my original statement is close to the truth. That
is, seal hunting protest is news. Pork protest is way below the radar.
> Steve
PeterL
Ciccio wrote:
> "Ian MacLure" <i...@svpal.org> wrote in message
>
> > How heartless of you to deprive these poor folk of their
> > flipper pie.
> > Besides which if they weren't clubbing seals they'd be
> > looking for something else to club.
>
> It's not just a matter of pure morality. It's also a matter of aesthetics.
> No need to apologize for it either. Aesthetics plays a large part in
> people's significant decisions Hell, a DA in Florida just declined to put
> on trial a school teacher for child molestation, because she was beautiful
> and men may not convict her.
No it's because her victim's mother refuses to let him testify.
> Thus, if she we're an ugly skank, she'd be
> en route to prison.
There was another good looking teacher who was tried and convicted of a
similar crime.
Mark Mellin
"PeterL" wrote:
> Steve Pope wrote:
> > >Steve Pope wrote:
> >
> > >> >Pigs are intelligent, but no one is protesting pork consumption.
> >
> > hunting.
>
> That's interesting because Google certainly don't have anything on pork
> protest,
Try "pork boycott".
- Mark
--
Mark Mellin ULmar 9 - 5470
Mailstop 408-85 Menlo Park, CA 94025-3493 USA
Dennis
really lucky. But then justice isnt suppose to be hostage to the male mind.
Dennis
"pork production" protest
as to your second qualifying clause the above search will show that pork
protests, in part, are part of peta but it also draws protests from the
industrial waste group so the protesting group is larger.
PeterL
Mark Mellin wrote:
> In article <1143649781....@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>,
> "PeterL" wrote:
> > Steve Pope wrote:
> > > PeterL wrote:
> > > >Steve Pope wrote:
> > >
> > > >> >Pigs are intelligent, but no one is protesting pork consumption.
> > >
> > > Prok production has drawn far more protest than has seal
> > > hunting.
> >
> > That's interesting because Google certainly don't have anything on pork
> > protest,
>
> Try "pork boycott".
OK, I got an item about an Australian boycott. Another item from an
organization that's organizing a pork boycott. I don't have any news.
No one is throwing themselves in front of pig delivery trucks. No
butcher is battling protesters in the streets.
That certainly don't tell me that "Pork production has drawn far more
protest than has seal hunting."
>
Dennis
60 minutes has had segments on both. Need to tune your radar.
PeterL
Dennis wrote:
> Just shows you dont know how to use google. try
>
> "pork production" protest
>
> as to your second qualifying clause the above search will show that pork
> protests, in part, are part of peta but it also draws protests from the
> industrial waste group so the protesting group is larger.
What I got are pig farmers protesting government cuts. If there are
any pork boycott, which I am sure there are as long as PETA is in
existence, it's way below the radar as compared to seal hunt protests.
PeterL
Dennis wrote:
> Which is only indicative of your background knowledge and nothing else.
> 60 minutes has had segments on both. Need to tune your radar.
>
Ask any man or woman on the street. I'll bet a lot more people know
about the seal hunt protest than anything specific about a pork
boycott.
I am not talking about me. I am talking about the knowledge of the
general populace. If you go to Iowa I am sure they know all about pork
boycott. Outside of Iowa, most people know more about the seal protest
than any pork boycott.
Steve Pope
>Mark Mellin wrote:
>> "PeterL" wrote:
>> > That's interesting because Google certainly don't have anything on pork
>> > protest,
>> Try "pork boycott".
>OK, I got an item about an Australian boycott. Another item from an
>organization that's organizing a pork boycott. I don't have any news.
>No one is throwing themselves in front of pig delivery trucks. No
>butcher is battling protesters in the streets.
Try googling on: pork "factory farming" activist. You'll get
a lot of material from both sides of the issue.
I personally believe that, in total, there is more action related
to pork than to seals but that's just my impression, I could
be wrong.
Steve
Dennis
argument, just went for number 4 in the google results:
Kemplog
Natural Pork Production II LLP of Harlan, Iowa, the firm responsible for
Wayne ... So no, I do not think Indiana needs an anti-protest provision
in place. ...
www.kemplog.com/ - 91k - Mar 27, 2006 - Cached - Similar pages
voiceless : the fund for animals - Media Highlight
... earlier this week when it launched a campaign urging consumers to
boycott the traditional Christmas ham in protest against intensive pork
production. ...
www.voiceless.org.au/Media_Section/Misc/Media_Highlight_20051205123.html
- 11k - Cached - Similar pages
Ban Cruel Farms
Pregnant pigs commonly live up to 3 or 4 years in these crates, and with
the industrialization of pork production, these cruel crates are
becoming more and ...
www.bancruelfarms.org/faq.htm - 6k - Cached - Similar pages
The Militant - 10/19/98 -- Pork Farmers In Canada Protest Gov't Cuts
The hog farmers began their protest September 11 to draw attention to
the ... the collapse of the demand from Asia and increased pork
production worldwide, ...
www.themilitant.com/1998/6237/6237_7.html - 5k - Cached - Similar pages
Dennis
post. Still not sure what that means. I know I havent sought out either
story but have definitely read/heard about both.
Ciccio
> No it's because her victim's mother refuses to let him testify.
I'm only stating what I heard somebody from that office say on the news,
that her good looks was a factor. Also, they don't need the mother's
consent. If the prosecutor really wanted to pursue it, there's a thing
called a subpoena...
> There was another good looking teacher who was tried and convicted of a
> similar crime.
She wasn't that good looking. Nevertheless, that was a different prosecutor,
different location, etc.
Ciccio
Geoff Miller
Cut off his head! We will call on the people to pull him into
pieces so there's nothing left! <izla...@insane.com> writes:
> And why single out seafood? Why boycott Canadian fish and not
> other Canadian products?
How about because boycotts don't work? They're just feelgood
measures for the participants.
In this case a boycott would certainly be ineffective, because
only small segment of the American population has any emotional
investment in the annual seal-smacking.
Geoff
--
"All the boys think she's a spaz; she's got Bette Davis eyes"
-- Kim Carnes
Geoff Miller
Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
> I forgot to mention both Whole Foods and Wild Oats are honoring
> the boycott, as well as Marks and Spencer in the U.K.
Well, one would expect that. Pretty much any busines with "whole"
or "wild" in its name caters to a hippie-dippy, leftish clientele,
so it's incumbent on them to "honor" this boycott as a ploy to
curry favor with their customers.
Steve Pope
>Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
>> I forgot to mention both Whole Foods and Wild Oats are honoring
>> the boycott, as well as Marks and Spencer in the U.K.
>Well, one would expect that. Pretty much any busines with "whole"
>or "wild" in its name caters to a hippie-dippy, leftish clientele,
>so it's incumbent on them to "honor" this boycott as a ploy to
>curry favor with their customers.
Yesterday the government of Croatia joined those countries
banning seal imports. Those are hippy-dippy Croatians, do
you figure?
S.
Bob Barnett
> Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
>
>
>>I forgot to mention both Whole Foods and Wild Oats are honoring
>>the boycott, as well as Marks and Spencer in the U.K.
>
>
>
> Well, one would expect that. Pretty much any busines with "whole"
> or "wild" in its name caters to a hippie-dippy, leftish clientele,
> so it's incumbent on them to "honor" this boycott as a ploy to
> curry favor with their customers.
>
>
>
> Geoff
>
Have you seen the prices-and the MB500s parked in front?
Geoff Miller
Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> writes:
> That's pretty obvious. And it isn't just looks, it's behavior. Cows,
> sheep and fish are really stupid. Seals look intelligent, even if they
> aren't.
I'd agree with that, as far as it goes. But I think the "cuteness factor"
is a bigger part of it. Ever noticed that the overwhelming majority of
animal "rights" wackos are women? That should come as no surprise, since
women respond more strongly to "cuteness" than men do.
Todd Michel McComb
Personally, I've been looking forward to the local Whole Foods
opening precisely because of the very positive comments here on the
Neal's Yard cheeses they're said to carry. Is this hippy cheese?
I hope it's not hairy at least....
Geoff Miller
PeterL <po....@gmail.com> writes:
> No one is throwing themselves in front of pig delivery trucks. No
> butcher is battling protesters in the streets.
Exactly. There's whining about meat consumption generally, but I've
not heard about protests against pork consumption specifically. Beef,
yes; pork, no.
Steve Pope
>Personally, I've been looking forward to the local Whole Foods
>opening precisely because of the very positive comments here on the
>Neal's Yard cheeses they're said to carry.
Unfortunately, not all Neal's Yard cheeses are equally good.
I find the Neal's Yard Stilton sold at The Cheeseboard is
consistently excellent. I forget the name of the farm it
comes from.
Speaking of Whole Foods, based on the glance at the construction
site for the WF in Adam's Point, it's going to be one gigantic
store.
Steve
Todd Michel McComb
Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
>Speaking of Whole Foods, based on the glance at the construction
>site for the WF in Adam's Point, it's going to be one gigantic
>store.
The one on El Camino in Los Altos also looks to be enormous. I had
asked what else was going in there, but I guess it's only Whole
Foods.
On Neal's Yard, thanks for the warning. It was the Montgomery
cheddar I particularly recall from here, but I'll try the stilton
too.
Al Eisner
> Todd Michel McComb <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote:
>
> >Personally, I've been looking forward to the local Whole Foods
> >opening precisely because of the very positive comments here on the
> >Neal's Yard cheeses they're said to carry.
>
> Unfortunately, not all Neal's Yard cheeses are equally good.
> I find the Neal's Yard Stilton sold at The Cheeseboard is
> consistently excellent. I forget the name of the farm it
> comes from.
Colston-Bassett is the one I've had, and it's the only one they list
on their web page. It is indeed excellent, and the price isn't as
outrageous as that of some other cheeses -- such as the also-excellent
Montgomery cheddar. I've tried two or three other cheddars from them
(Isle of Mull and Westcombe), but while good they don't have the unique
flavor of the Montgomery. (Thus, while a bit less expensive than the
Montgomery, there's less motivation to get them instead of a good Canadian
or US cheddar, IMO.) I also like the Appleby's cheshire - a bit crumbly,
but very nice flavor -- and the Caerphilly (I've forgotten which, the
web site lists two).
> Speaking of Whole Foods, based on the glance at the construction
> site for the WF in Adam's Point, it's going to be one gigantic
> store.
Oakville Grocery at Stanford has had a nice range of Neal's Yard cheeses.
Oakville usually (not always) has better informed staff at the cheese
counter than the WFs I've tried. My impressions of the products and
prices are all based on Oakville. Unfortunately (and only partly due
to the exchange rate), all the Neal's Yard prices have gone up appreciably
in the past couple of years, and I don't buy it as much as I used to
(apart from the Stilton, which I find is satisfying in smaller servings).
--
Al Eisner
San Mateo Co., CA
Steve Pope
>On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, Steve Pope wrote:
>> Unfortunately, not all Neal's Yard cheeses are equally good.
>> I find the Neal's Yard Stilton sold at The Cheeseboard is
>> consistently excellent. I forget the name of the farm it
>> comes from.
>Colston-Bassett is the one I've had, and it's the only one they list
>on their web page.
Yes, yes that's the one. My memory is so shot these days.
>It is indeed excellent, and the price isn't as
>outrageous as that of some other cheeses -- such as the also-excellent
>Montgomery cheddar. I've tried two or three other cheddars from them
>(Isle of Mull and Westcombe), but while good they don't have the unique
>flavor of the Montgomery.
A favorite is the Cotherstone, but because its only aged
70 days it is not imported. One must be in London to get
ahold of it.
Steve
Geoff Miller
Reg <r...@nospam.com> writes:
[seal]
> You are so right. I've had it in Alaska, and it's awful.
> Those poor eskimos.
On the other hand, they have those wonderful ice cream pies...
Geoff
--
"I think the standard unit of agony is the mengele." -- the Vrydolak
Steve Pope
>Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
>>Speaking of Whole Foods, based on the glance at the construction
>>site for the WF in Adam's Point, it's going to be one gigantic
>>store.
>The one on El Camino in Los Altos also looks to be enormous. I had
>asked what else was going in there, but I guess it's only Whole
>Foods.
The newest one in Denver, on Hampden (sp?) is also enormous,
dwarfing the one nearby in Cherry Creek.
I've come to appreciate grocery stores that are smaller-sized
but still have most everything you need, such as Farmer Joe's
in Oakland, or El Cerrito Natural Grocery.
Steve
Geoff Miller
Dennis <nw...@yahoo.com> writes:
> She is really hot. Would be hard not to think that the
> 14 year old was really lucky. But then justice isnt
> suppose to be hostage to the male mind.
Then again, the beauty of laws is that they can be changed.
And with a Republican in the White House, the odds of their
being changed to be hostage to the male mind exceeds the odds
of their being changed to be hostage to the *female* mind.
Can we on the Dark Side count on your vote next er^hlection?
Geoff Miller
Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
> Unfortunately, not all Neal's Yard cheeses are equally good.
> I find the Neal's Yard Stilton sold at The Cheeseboard is
> consistently excellent. I forget the name of the farm it
> comes from.
Parchman.
Geoff "...and all I did was shoot my wife" Miller
Ian MacLure
> On 2006-03-29, Ciccio <franc...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> people, seals are very aesthetically appealing. I agree.
>
> Need a campaign to convince they're commie pinko seals.
Nuke The Seals!
IBM
Geoff Miller
Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
: Well, one would expect that. Pretty much any busines with "whole"
: or "wild" in its name caters to a hippie-dippy, leftish clientele,
: so it's incumbent on them to "honor" this boycott as a ploy to
: curry favor with their customers.
> Yesterday the government of Croatia joined those countries
> banning seal imports. Those are hippy-dippy Croatians, do
> you figure?
Croatia isn't a business, either with or without "whole" or "wild"
in its name. But whoever in the Croatian grubberment was responsible
for pushing that policy through was obviously a bunnyhugger/"animal
rights" wacko -- otherwise the seal hunt would've been a nonissue to
him/them -- and therefore of the lefty persuausion. In summary: all
hippies are leftists, but not all leftists are hippies.)
Come on, Steve; you could've figured this out for yourself. But
apparently arguing had a higher priority with you. Grasping about
for counterexamples while ignoring the big picture is as strong a
biological imperative among lefties as swimming upstream to spawn
is among salmon.
Geoff
--
"Guitars leaning in the corner threatened folk music."
-- P.J. O'Rourke, _Holidays In Hell_
Geoff Miller
Bob Barnett <bobba...@socal.rr.com> writes:
[Whole Paycheck]
> Hippy dippy my ass
> Have you seen the prices-and the MB500s parked in front?
Being a hippie is a mindset more than it is a lifestyle.
They're not all spare-changing on Telegraph and Pacific
Avenues.
SMS
> In article <e0hnil$ms6$1...@blue.rahul.net>,
> Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
>> Speaking of Whole Foods, based on the glance at the construction
>> site for the WF in Adam's Point, it's going to be one gigantic
>> store.
>
> The one on El Camino in Los Altos also looks to be enormous. I had
> asked what else was going in there, but I guess it's only Whole
> Foods.
The new one going in in Cupertino is also going to be huge. I was at one
in Virginia, that had an underground parking garage with validated
parking, as well as attendants that were directing traffic in the garage
in order to keep traffic flowing.
The present Cupertino store is not that old, but the aisles are very
narrow, and the parking lot is too small, though there is plenty of
parking next to Mervyn's.
JC Dill
>What is so more horrible about killing these seals than killing
>defenseless chickens?
People react emotionally to the sight of pristine white ice floes with
cute white baby seals being clubbed to death and leaving the floes
covered with bright red blood. There's the horror of all the blood,
the idea of clubbing a "baby" to death to preserve the quality of its
fur coat, the idea that the seal is being killed in the name of vanity
(fur coats) rather than as sustenance, etc.
When chickens are killed, it's done in a way that people perceive as
more humane and the animal is killed for sustenance (food) rather than
for vanity (feathers).
I'm not saying that human perception of these two events is accurate,
but that's how it is perceive by those who watch the news.
jc
--
"The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot of different horses without having to own that many."
~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA
Steve Pope
>On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:49:03 -0800, Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>What is so more horrible about killing these seals than killing
>>defenseless chickens?
Generally speaking activists care about both issues.
The Humane Society of the United States is the lead organization
behind the seafood ban / seal protest. Among the other programs
the HSUS is involved in is an action to amend the U.S. Humane Methods
of Slaughter Act to improve methods for slaughtering poultry.
>People react emotionally to the sight of pristine white ice floes with
>cute white baby seals being clubbed to death and leaving the floes
>covered with bright red blood. There's the horror of all the blood,
>the idea of clubbing a "baby" to death to preserve the quality of its
>fur coat, the idea that the seal is being killed in the name of vanity
>(fur coats) rather than as sustenance, etc.
>When chickens are killed, it's done in a way that people perceive as
>more humane and the animal is killed for sustenance (food) rather than
>for vanity (feathers).
I know very few people who believe that commercial chicken killing
in the U.S. at large producers is, at present, humane.
Steve
Geoff Miller
Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
> I know very few people who believe that commercial chicken killing
> in the U.S. at large producers is, at present, humane.
Well, let the other shoe drop: How exactly are chickens slaughtered?
Whatever the method, I doubt it lasts for very long. After all, it's
in the chicken farms' interests to keep their production lines moving
as fast as possible.
Geoff
--
"Why are they called 'people of color?' Because when they're driving,
they cause you to use 'language of color.'" -- Larry
Steve Pope
>Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
>> I know very few people who believe that commercial chicken killing
>> in the U.S. at large producers is, at present, humane.
>Well, let the other shoe drop: How exactly are chickens slaughtered?
>Whatever the method, I doubt it lasts for very long.
In mass production methods they are hung upside down, electrically
shocked, have their throats slit, and then dunked in scalding water.
When in this process they become unconscoius, and when they
become dead, is not well controlled. A significant fraction are not
killed until the scalding step; but some were dead from stress or
environmental conditions (such as freezing temperatures) at
the outset. Poultry is exempt from U.S. laws regarding humane
slaughter.
Steve
JC Dill
(Steve Pope) wrote:
>I know very few people who believe that commercial chicken killing
>in the U.S. at large producers is, at present, humane.
Very few people have any actual *knowledge* of how chickens (or other
meat animals) are killed, but most people innocently (or ignorantly)
believe that it's done in a more humane way than the baby seals are
slaughtered. If it were otherwise there would be a lot more
vegetarians.
There are various stories about families that tried to raise their own
food including slaughtering cows or chickens or pigs or rabbits for
meat. But after their first time slaughtering and processing the meat
themselves and then trying to eat dinner the whole family became
vegetarians. Most people today are too far removed from the processes
that take place to make the food that they eat and they literally
"don't have the stomach" for how it is done, if they have to do it
themselves.
Steve Pope
>On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:09:40 +0000 (UTC), spo...@speedymail.org
>>I know very few people who believe that commercial chicken killing
>>in the U.S. at large producers is, at present, humane.
>Very few people have any actual *knowledge* of how chickens (or other
>meat animals) are killed
Direct knowledge? True. Most people in the U.S. have no direct
knowledge about waging war, space exploration, shoveling slag, or
any number of other topics they might be expected to form political
opinions about.
> but most people innocently (or ignorantly)
> believe that it's done in a more humane way than the baby seals are
> slaughtered.
I do not know if this is true, but I'll agree with a weaker
statement that most people don't think about it much.
If it were otherwise there would be a lot more
>vegetarians.
>There are various stories about families that tried to raise their own
>food including slaughtering cows or chickens or pigs or rabbits for
>meat. But after their first time slaughtering and processing the meat
>themselves and then trying to eat dinner the whole family became
>vegetarians. Most people today are too far removed from the processes
>that take place to make the food that they eat and they literally
>"don't have the stomach" for how it is done, if they have to do it
>themselves.
Most people delegate unpleasant work, such as fighting wars,
being a police officer in an urban area, working in a steel mill,
harvesting the fields, whatever. This does not mean they
develop a political opinion against such activities, only that
they don't want to do it themselves.
Steve
Ernie Klein
JC Dill <jcd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:09:40 +0000 (UTC), spo...@speedymail.org
> (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
> >I know very few people who believe that commercial chicken killing
> >in the U.S. at large producers is, at present, humane.
>
> Very few people have any actual *knowledge* of how chickens (or other
> meat animals) are killed, but most people innocently (or ignorantly)
> believe that it's done in a more humane way than the baby seals are
> slaughtered. If it were otherwise there would be a lot more
> vegetarians.
>
> There are various stories about families that tried to raise their own
> food including slaughtering cows or chickens or pigs or rabbits for
> meat. But after their first time slaughtering and processing the meat
> themselves and then trying to eat dinner the whole family became
> vegetarians. Most people today are too far removed from the processes
> that take place to make the food that they eat and they literally
> "don't have the stomach" for how it is done, if they have to do it
> themselves.
Have you ever seen the turkeys and chickens at the County Fair during
the summer time?
In the old days, not so many years ago, before the Fair became so cowed
by the animal rights groups and such, we used to slaughter, dress, cool
and package the birds right at the fair grounds the day after Fair
closed. With a crew of 15-20 we could process about 150-200 birds in a
few hours. Now days they have to be hauled 100 miles away to be
processed.
Some of the larger animals that didn't go to commercial slaughter houses
we would take to the coast where there are/were several small, custom
slaughter houses with the equipment (hoists, pig scalding vats, saws,
etc.) necessary to handle the large animals. The split carcasses would
then be taken to local butchers to cut and wrap, or to a couple of
places where we could cut and wrap ourselves. Mainly sheep and pigs,
but we did process several steer.
It's too bad that we can't do that any more. I think the youngsters
that raise market animals today, miss out on not seeing the project
through to completion. And, no one who raised the animals was required
or forced to take part in the processing if they didn't want to, but
most did so.
There are still a lot of people in San Mateo County that I know, who
raise much of the meat that they eat. Until about 6 years ago I raised
sheep (never more than 2 ewes which would give us 2-4 lambs a year) in
my back yard and I am located less than a mile and a half from the
Redwood City City Hall. I have a friend who lives even closer to
downtown Redwood City than I do who has 3 ewes and 5 lambs in her back
yard right now.
I think there are more of us who do understand where meat comes from and
how it is processed than you might think.
--
-Ernie-
"There are only two kinds of computer users -- those who have
suffered a catastrophic hard drive failure, and those who will."
Have you done your backup today?
notbob
> I think there are more of us who do understand where meat comes from and
> how it is processed than you might think.
I was lucky as a kid and spent summers on a small ranch in Oakdale.
Got to see chickens get axed and steers butchered on the spot. There
was a weird film made several decades ago and shown on PBS. It was a
2 hour documentary showing cattle going through a fully mechanized
slaughter house. It was very detailed and included no narration, the
spectacular camera shots being more than sufficient. I was never
quite sure if it was meant shock or educate. It did both.
nb
Todd Michel McComb
Ernie Klein <eck...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>I think there are more of us who do understand where meat comes
>from and how it is processed than you might think.
Although I can see where JC is coming from, I did think her tone
was pretty funny. There are families who "tried" to raise their
own food? You don't say! I've adjusted to *not* doing that, but
that was certainly a major topic -- and source of effort -- of my
youth. That and farming and construction, things we did primarily
*outdoors*, I might add.
JC Dill
wrote:
>I think there are more of us who do understand where meat comes from and
>how it is processed than you might think.
I don't doubt that there are a lot of people like you (and me) who
understand, but I equally don't doubt that there are a lot of people
who have never witnessed or participated in slaughter of meat animals
and who haven't ever given the topic much (if any) thought. If it
doesn't make the evening news, then it doesn't occur to them to think
about it.
The evening news isn't likely to go looking for a story on this topic
- too many companies that sell meat products (e.g fast food
restaurants, regular restaurants, frozen food companies, grocery
stores, etc.) that advertise on TV regularly would quickly boycott any
station that did something like this. It's easy to show news footage
about the baby seal slaughter because the products made from baby seal
fur aren't advertised on TV so you don't upset any advertisers over
this coverage.
Steve Pope
>The evening news isn't likely to go looking for a story on this topic
>- too many companies that sell meat products (e.g fast food
>restaurants, regular restaurants, frozen food companies, grocery
>stores, etc.) that advertise on TV regularly would quickly boycott any
>station that did something like this. It's easy to show news footage
>about the baby seal slaughter because the products made from baby seal
>fur aren't advertised on TV so you don't upset any advertisers over
>this coverage.
That's true enough, and it is also true that the annual event
of the seal harvest beginning provides something to create a news
story around. No such event signifies chicken slaughter because
it's year-round.
Even so, the local evening news did cover the protests
against Trader Joe's regarding non-cage-free eggs last year.
I watch very little TV news. (Were they talking about the seal
hunt this past week?)
Steve
Reg
>>Geoff Miller wrote...
>
>>And why single out seafood? Why boycott Canadian fish and not
>>other Canadian products?
>
> Because the seal "hunt" is conducted by the Canadian Department
> of Fisheries, the seal "hunters" are in many cases fishermen,
> and the seals are processed in facilities owned by large
> Canadian seafood packers.
>
> Depending on the activist, the action applies to either all
> Canadian seafood, or only that produced in the regions where
> the "hunt" is conducted. Probably there are also activists boycotting
> anything from Canada.
>
> I forgot to mention both Whole Foods and Wild Oats are honoring
> the boycott, as well as Marks and Spencer in the U.K.
>
> Steve
Here's a book you might like. It has some fairly indepth
background on the various species and the issues surrounding
them. The recipes are pretty good, too.
Ocean Friendly Cuisine: Sustainable Seafood Recipes From
The World's Finest Chefs
by Jean-Michel Cousteau (Foreword), James O. Fraioli
--
Reg
Steve Pope
>Here's a book you might like. It has some fairly indepth
>background on the various species and the issues surrounding
>them. The recipes are pretty good, too.
>
>Ocean Friendly Cuisine: Sustainable Seafood Recipes From
>The World's Finest Chefs
>by Jean-Michel Cousteau (Foreword), James O. Fraioli
Thanks, Reg...
Steve
Geoff Miller
Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
: Well, let the other shoe drop: How exactly are chickens slaughtered?
> In mass production methods they are hung upside down, electrically
> shocked, have their throats slit, and then dunked in scalding water.
> When in this process they become unconscoius, and when they become
> dead, is not well controlled. A significant fraction are not
> killed until the scalding step; but some were dead from stress or
> environmental conditions (such as freezing temperatures) at
> the outset.
It sounds like things could be better from the chickens' point of
view. Then again, there's that "one bad day" philosophy at work.
The unpleasantness doesn't last for very long before the feathered
wretches are drop-kicked into the Great Beyond. Not a lot of time
elapses between being freaked out and resting comfortably 'twixt
styrofoam and plastic film.
> Poultry is exempt from U.S. laws regarding humane slaughter.
Are there any suggestions from the animal-welfare side of the
issue for better, more humane methods of slaughter? If so, are
they cost effective?
I wonder whether it's really possible to transport and process
chickens on the scale necessary to support the American food
industry and avoid stressing and even occasionally injuring the
merchandise without occurring impractical costs. I doubt that
the people who run the processing plants are unduly bloodthirsty
and uncaring; it's just that there comes a point when overhead
has to be contained. Those places are businesses, after all,
not animal-welfare organizations.
Besides, these are *chickens,* not human beings. There's more
than a slight tendency toward anthropomorphism among the bunny-
hugger set. I think it originated from all those animal-themed
shows (Flipper, Daktari, et al.) that Baby Boomers watched as
children, which would explain the historical timing of the
"animal rights" movement (as distinct from mere animal welfare).
A lot of them were never able to de-internalize that sentimental
stuff.
(A few years back somebody in alt.tasteless wrote about working
in a chicken slaughterhouse as a summer job during college. His
supervisor would put a severed chicken head onto his index finger
and use it as a finger puppet when giving orders to the crew.
Working in a place like that would have to warp people after a
while. Speaking of which, didn't Ozzy Osbourne work on the
killing floor of a Birmingham slaughterhouse as a teenager?)
Geoff
--
"PussyPuddle, I'm not defensive. I'm offensive. Now stick
your nose in the air and trot on out of here while your sense
of superiority is still as intact as your hymen. Or is it?"
-- Jeff Zurschmeide
Ernie Klein
geo...@u1.netgate.net (Geoff Miller) wrote:
> Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
>
> : Well, let the other shoe drop: How exactly are chickens slaughtered?
>
> > In mass production methods they are hung upside down, electrically
> > shocked, have their throats slit, and then dunked in scalding water.
> > When in this process they become unconscoius, and when they become
> > dead, is not well controlled. A significant fraction are not
> > killed until the scalding step; but some were dead from stress or
> > environmental conditions (such as freezing temperatures) at
> > the outset.
>
> It sounds like things could be better from the chickens' point of
> view. Then again, there's that "one bad day" philosophy at work.
> The unpleasantness doesn't last for very long before the feathered
> wretches are drop-kicked into the Great Beyond. Not a lot of time
> elapses between being freaked out and resting comfortably 'twixt
> styrofoam and plastic film.
The part about going into the scalding water alive (160 degree water for
about 30 seconds to loosen the feathers for easier plucking) is what
some would like you to believe.
Poultry is slaughtered upside down, with their throats slit (with or
without the electrical shocking) for a reason; to drain all of the
blood. No one wants to cut (or bite) into a chicken with a lot of
congealed blood in it.
Poultry that has been bleed out isn't alive when it goes into the hot
water, although it might still be twitching (as all dead bodies do that
for a time) which is what might make some observers think the chickens
were still alive.
Someone wanted to know exactly how it's done -- here's one way:
[Hint: if you are slaughtering your own poultry put the bird into a
empty feed sack with a corner cut out for the head to go through (or use
a metal cone so the head comes through the small end) -- that way you
won't get beaten to death with the flapping wings when you slit the
throat -- particularly with turkeys, but chickens can flap a lot also.
Hang the bag or cone from a overhead support with the feet up and the
head down.
Be sure to have a bucket directly under the slaughter station to catch
the blood. Grab hold of the head with one hand and pull it down through
the hole in the sack or the end of the cone and then slit the throat
with a knife in the other hand, and above all DON'T LET GO OF THAT HEAD.
Yea, the blood will flow over and around your hand and fall into the
bucket -- but if you let go of the head before the poultry stops
thrashing around with it's death spasms, you will wish you didn't.
If you let go, that head will swing around at the end of that long neck
like an uncontrolled water hose turned on full force, and you and
everything within 20 feet will be splattered with poultry blood from
head to toe.
If you are doing a turkey in a feed sack, this is where you will find
out if you got the top of the sack tied tight around the legs where the
turkey is hung from. If the sack comes loose and the wings get out, you
are faced with a choice -- stick it out and get beaten by the wings or
run like hell while the blood goes flying everywhere. You will learn to
tie the sack tight.
When it stops thrashing you can let go.]
Steve Pope
>The part about going into the scalding water alive (160 degree water for
>about 30 seconds to loosen the feathers for easier plucking) is what
>some would like you to believe.
You're speculating.
Steve
Geoff Miller
notbob <not...@nothome.com> writes:
> I was lucky as a kid and spent summers on a small ranch in Oakdale.
So there really is an Oakdale? It isn't just a name that was made up
for that hoity-toity little market at Snodfart?
> Got to see chickens get axed and steers butchered on the spot. There
> was a weird film made several decades ago and shown on PBS. It was a
> 2 hour documentary showing cattle going through a fully mechanized
> slaughter house. It was very detailed and included no narration, the
> spectacular camera shots being more than sufficient. I was never
> quite sure if it was meant shock or educate. It did both.
Sounds fascinating, in a "how things work" sort of way.
The only place I've ever seen chickens get axed (ObGetto: "What did
they axe them about?") was at the end of the first "Faces Of Death"
movie. I gained a fresh appreciation for that expression about
running around like a chicken with its head cut off.
Geoff
--
"I don't even buy the dictionary unless 'fist'
is defined as a verb." -- Dan Hillman
Mark Mellin
> notbob writes:
>
> > I was lucky as a kid and spent summers on a small ranch in Oakdale.
>
> So there really is an Oakdale? It isn't just a name that was made up
> for that hoity-toity little market at Snodfart?
You're thinking of Oakville, which is indeed a town along SR-29 in
Napa county.
Oakdale is in the central valley.
- Mark
--
Mark Mellin San Mateo Village, CA 94403 USA
notbob
> So there really is an Oakdale? It isn't just a name that was made up
> for that hoity-toity little market at Snodfart?
Kee-rist, man! ...You've never been East of Escalon (not a Steinbeck
sequel)? Do it quick before the Sierra's wash out to sea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_120
> movie. I gained a fresh appreciation for that expression about
> running around like a chicken with its head cut off.
Oh yeah. Guaranteed to bloody everyone in a golf green gallery.
nb
Ciccio
> Oakdale is in the central valley.
Yep and the Hershey chocolate factory is(was) there. A cool family tour.
Ciccio
notbob
> Yep and the Hershey chocolate factory is(was) there. A cool family tour.
"was" appears to be correct. "We're sorry, but public tours of the
factory are no longer available."
http://www.hersheys.com/discover/oakdale.asp
nb
Geoff Miller
Ciccio <franc...@comcast.net> writes:
[Oakdale]
> Yep and the Hershey chocolate factory is(was) there.
Does the stretch of Hwy. 120 passing through there have any
special name?
notbob
> Does the stretch of Hwy. 120 passing through there have any
> special name?
Cow Polk St?
nb
ll
> Does the stretch of Hwy. 120 passing through there have any
> special name?
Vacationers/skiers caught in weekend traffic jams to and from
Dodge Ridge and Yosemite have lots of special names for it.
Too bad about the chocolate factory. When The Teenager was
kneehigh the Cubs Scouts toured there every year. There are
several interesting and/or excellent places to eat in Oakdale.
For you west-bayers who barely get out of the Palo Alto
Shopping Center, from west to east it's Oakville, Oakland,
Oakley, Oakdale, and Oakhurst.
Steve Pope
>It sounds like things could be better from the chickens' point of
>view. Then again, there's that "one bad day" philosophy at work.
>The unpleasantness doesn't last for very long before the feathered
>wretches are drop-kicked into the Great Beyond. Not a lot of time
>elapses between being freaked out and resting comfortably 'twixt
>styrofoam and plastic film.
>Are there any suggestions from the animal-welfare side of the
>issue for better, more humane methods of slaughter? If so, are
>they cost effective?
The consistent suggestion is that the stunning phase be made
more reliable so that the chickens are with much higher probability
insensate before the slaughter/scalding. Some also recommend
a gas method of killing, but I've also read the industrial-scale
details of that are not worked out.
As for cost, as an affluent nation we can make the decision to
absorb the higher costs of being more humane. There are higher
standards in some other countries, and with some producers in
this country.
>I wonder whether it's really possible to transport and process
>chickens on the scale necessary to support the American food
>industry and avoid stressing and even occasionally injuring the
>merchandise without occurring impractical costs. I doubt that
>the people who run the processing plants are unduly bloodthirsty
>and uncaring; it's just that there comes a point when overhead
>has to be contained. Those places are businesses, after all,
>not animal-welfare organizations.
It's not up to them, it's up to society as a whole to decide
on standards. I would not be opposed to a buy-out of capital
facilities that simply could not be converted to humane use
(such as confinement-method pork-raising structures), on the
basis of the public changing the rules in the middle of the
game. IIRC correctly the government has bought out fishing fleets
that were being used for damaging types of fishing. Same concept.
Steve
Geoff Miller
ll <lksl...@REMOVEcomcastTHIS.net> writes:
> For you west-bayers who barely get out of the Palo Alto
> Shopping Center, from west to east it's Oakville, Oakland,
> Oakley, Oakdale, and Oakhurst.
What is a "hurst?" Aside from a brand of aftermarket gearshift,
I mean?
I used to live on a street in Los Altos called Elmhurst, and there
was a street a block away called Havenhurst. I've seen the suffix
in a number of street and town names since then, almost always names
that started with the name of a tree.
That led me to suspect that "hurst" was a synonym for "grove" or
"glade," but all webster.com has in the way of definitions is
"Sir Cecil James Barrington, 1870-1963, English jurist" and some
town in Texas.
Pete Fraser
news:e117en$e...@u1.netgate.net...
>
>
> What is a "hurst?" Aside from a brand of aftermarket gearshift,
> I mean?
A wooded hillock or rise; a copse; a wood.
OED
Geoff Miller
notbob <not...@nothome.com> writes:
> "was" appears to be correct. "We're sorry, but public tours of the
> factory are no longer available."
> http://www.hersheys.com/discover/oakdale.asp
You've got to like the way they make it sounds as though this is for
reasons beyond their control.
Geoff
--
"There is one evil which...should never be passed over in silence
but be continually publicly attacked, and that is corruption of
the language..." -- W.H. Auden
Geoff Miller
Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
: Are there any suggestions from the animal-welfare side of the
: issue for better, more humane methods of slaughter? If so, are
: they cost effective?
> The consistent suggestion is that the stunning phase be made
> more reliable so that the chickens are with much higher probability
> insensate before the slaughter/scalding. Some also recommend
> a gas method of killing, but I've also read the industrial-scale
> details of that are not worked out.
Maybe the Germans could be enlisted as consultants.
Seriously, I think that would be a nonstarter. I don't know
whether there'd be any real possibility of the meat being
contaminated with whatever toxin were used, but you can bet
your fundament and fedora that that's the first thing a lot of
people would think of. Bearing in mind the past freakouts over
food irradiation and Alar among the more hysterical elements
of consumerdom, it's clear that there'd be an uphill battle,
PR-wise.
> As for cost, as an affluent nation we can make the decision to
> absorb the higher costs of being more humane. There are higher
> standards in some other countries, and with some producers in
> this country.
It's rather high-handed to proclaim that we "can" absorb the
costs. The real issue is whether enough people would be
*willing* to absorb them in order to placate a special-interest
fringe group that many perceive as zealots and eccentrics, to
make the practice <ahem> sustainable.
Remember, the vast majority of people are indifferent to this
sort of thing, at least in this country. You might find a more
sympathetic reception to such changes in the UK, where, insofar
as charitable contributions are any indication, people care more
about animals than about human children. But this ain't England.
: I wonder whether it's really possible to transport and process
: chickens on the scale necessary to support the American food
: industry and avoid stressing and even occasionally injuring the
: merchandise without occurring impractical costs. I doubt that
: the people who run the processing plants are unduly bloodthirsty
: and uncaring; it's just that there comes a point when overhead
: has to be contained. Those places are businesses, after all,
: not animal-welfare organizations.
> It's not up to them, it's up to society as a whole to decide
> on standards.
Like the man said, follow the money. If the profitability of the
poultry industry takes a nosedive because insufficient people are
willing to underwrite the extra expense of higher standards through
higher retail prices, then society as a whole will have decided --
albeit not in the way that you'd have preferred. And the problem
will be self-correcting, in the way that problems in a free-market
economy tend to be -- the standards will be revised, the changes
discarded, and the old ways will return. What's that old saying?
"Be careful what you wish for, 'cause you just might get it?"
Another quotation comes to mind:
"It was Marxism nonetheless because the wildest hippie and the
sternest member of the Politburo shared the same daydream, the
daydream that underlies all Marxism : That a thing might somehow
be worth other than what people will give for it."
-- P.J. O'Rourke, _Give War A Chance_
> I would not be opposed to a buy-out of capital facilities that
> simply could not be converted to humane use (such as confinement-
> method pork-raising structures), on the basis of the public
> changing the rules in the middle of the game.
Thereby diminishing the poultry industry's production capacity and
raising prices still further, concomitantly reducing demand (and
profits for the remaining facilities and with them, jobs). Is
that really what you want? Maybe it is. I'm sure there are people
out there who'd like to see meat phased out of the human diet by
any means necessary, and at any (human) cost.
"If we're not supposed to eat animals, then why are they
made of meat?" -- letter to the editor, _Harper's_
If not, then weigh this: Being a concerned-n-compassionate animal
lover is well and good. But you have to think these things through
and not allow yourself to be led around by your emotions.
> IIRC correctly the government has bought out fishing fleets that
> were being used for damaging types of fishing. Same concept.
This is the first I've heard about that.
Geoff Miller
Pete Fraser <pfr...@covad.net> writes:
: What is a "hurst?" Aside from a brand of aftermarket gearshift,
: I mean?
> A wooded hillock or rise; a copse; a wood.
ObFood: "Cheese it, the copse!"
Thanks. I've gotten so accustomed to using webster.com that it
never occurred to me to try oed.com. I'll add it to my reppertwah.