Sometimes an ag news item comes across my notification feed and lingers in the back of my head. This is not intended to be an ag news-brief summary. It’s the “other” ag news – the ridiculous, the impossible, the you’ve-got-to-be-kidding-me news.
Item 1: A Spanish firm wants to kill 1 million octopuses a year using 'ice slurry' baths at first-ever factory farm
From: Business Insider
A proposed commercial octopus farm in Spain has sparked outrage after a leaked plan suggested the operator intends to kill up to 1 million of the animals a year by submerging them, alive, in freezing water. Companies have for years strived to produce octopuses at a commercial scale in captivity, citing growing demand and pressure to find more sustainable alternatives to fishing.
Just my opinion
Outrage is the “emotion of our day” and here’s one more example. Those expressing opposing opinions to this farming practice cite not only harvest methods but also strike once again at raising any animal in captivity. Not surprising. What else is new? So I’ve always wondered – if a mosquito landed on these folks’ arm, would they slap it? Gently nurture it? Just asking. There is no reasoning with outrage.
Item 2: Insect farming – is it cruel?
From: Wired
Insect farming is booming in a major way. By one estimate, between 1 trillion and 1.2 trillion insects are raised on farms each year as companies race to find a high-protein, low-carbon way to feed animals and humans. In terms of sheer numbers of animals impacted, this is a transformation of a speed and scale we’ve never seen before.
It’s a weird twist in our already strange relationship with bugs. We squash them, spray them, eat them and crush them to make pretty dyes. But we also fret about plummeting wild insect populations and rely on them to pollinate the crops we eat. Can they feel? And if so, what should we do about it?
Just my opinion
This is really the same questions raised with the article on octopus farming. Commonly farmed insects include crickets, beetles and flies for pet and animal food. And yes, they’re “factory farmed.” So what welfare laws should apply? And if we’re going to harvest them, what is least painful for the insect? Is it humane? Well … we have some of the brightest minds in research given over to this task – no wonder we can’t solve weightier problems. And I think it’s always interesting when we use the word “humane” to describe actions toward livestock (showing compassion or benevolence). Since when was one animal eating another ever benevolent? Have you ever seen one animal take down another? Whether it’s microwaved, parboiled, fried or crushed, that’s got to be quicker and more compassionate than being torn apart by a predator. Aren’t we overthinking this?
Illustration by Kristen Phillips.
Item 3: Should Utah be exporting its alfalfa?
From: The Salt Lake Tribune
Utah’s most successful and prolific alfalfa processor is Bailey’s father, Tom, a Sanpete County native who started as an alfalfa grower in the 1980s and is now among the West’s leading exporters. Bailey Farms International now handles up to 150,000 tons a year, serving as a major conduit of high-quality alfalfa to dairies in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan and several Middle Eastern nations …. While the Baileys and their associates are proud of their success in establishing an export market for Idaho- and Utah-grown alfalfa, this practice has been increasingly criticized, fairly or not, as “exporting” the West’s scarce water resources.
Just my opinion
Guess who their “expert” on alfalfa, water use and exports is for this article – a geography professor. Not a specialist in economics, water usage or anything remotely related to the issue. Stunning. The argument isn’t new (although it may just now be filtering through to Utah?), it’s been around for awhile. And when you have the appropriate experts weigh in, the argument “doesn’t hold water.” Thanks, geography professor – but stick to your expertise.
Item 4: Vegans won’t snuggle goats
From: Fox Business
Vegan extremists are taking aim at one Pennsylvania farm over its supposed exploitative side hustle: goat snuggling (not smuggling but snuggling). [It was] argued that because the Steinmetz Family Farm is using their goats for monetary gain, the extremists are labeling it as "exploitation." The Steinmetz Family Farm charges a mere $5 for its goat snuggling services. Customers are able to snuggle with the goats for an unlimited amount of time, at a minimal cost.
Just my opinion
Vegans are upset – again. Still? (I think they started the whole outrage culture.) It makes me wonder if this is their permanent condition. I wonder how many of these protesting folks are dog or cat owners, who pay hundreds and sometimes thousands for the animals, so they can “snuggle” them? Isn’t that exploitation by the same definition? Instead of each snuggle costing $5, like the goat setup, they just pay money on the front end of dog/cat ownership for “unlimited snuggles.” Really, people? You don’t see the hypocrisy here?
