Hi Folks,

Had lots of ideas for a post this week. Ironically, this one wasn’t on the list and has given me a real headache in terms of how to structure the piece and what is the point I want to make?  Even now, as I am starting to write, I am not entirely certain how its going to come out. I should stress, this is very much an opinion piece. My opinions are being represented here and my opinions may very well be biased and even naive. But I am still entitled to them.  So this may end up being a bit of a muddled disaster, but let’s see where it takes us as I talk about Food Glorious Food.

I like food. Well, I like eating.  I have stated before, I  have a terrible diet.  Mainly meat based with the odd bit of fish thrown in, carbohydrate in the form of potatoes, rice or pasta and very few veggies.  I don’t like them. I don’t like the taste or the texture. As for salad. Nope. Just doesn’t do it for me.  I once read a quote; I forget where from, which said that salad isn’t food, its what food eats. Turns out that’s a very incendiary statement in this day and age.

 

 

 

The Twitter Incident

Last week, I wrote about Twitter. It wasn’t a favourable write up. None the less, earlier this week I found myself scrolling through Twitter and a post caught my attention. In fact,  it irritated me.  It concerned a lady called Rachel Carrie who happens to be a game hunter, a game cook and strong advocate of game as food. She has published cook books on the subject and is quite active on social media.  It was on Instagram that she had seen her posts censored and  issued with a warning message that the content might be offensive.  The posts in question where of feathered game being readied for the table, or game meat, either cooked or oven ready.  She wasn’t happy about this and had complained.

A National newspaper had picked up on the story and published a piece about the glamorous hunter, her experiences with Instagram and also her experience with trolls. It seems she is often trolled by anti hunting/vegan types, and these were painted in a far less favourable light. Mind you, if true, some of the trolling messages were particularly vile and extreme.

 

The Argument

I hadn’t seen the article beforehand and I don’t know Rachel, but I do know her father. I know he is a nice guy, a passionate advocate of conservation and country born and bred.  What irritated me after reading the article, was a perceived bias in the post attacking Rachel, whilst legitimising the anti’s.

My first mistake was to be on Twitter in the first place. My second mistake was to fire off a comment on this post. It wasn’t a clever comment, nor a helpful one and I regretted posting it as soon as I hit the return key.   Inevitably, I got a lot of responses and this was where I made my 3rd mistake. I should have just moved on, but no, I replied to the comments. Trying to maintain a polite and objective stand, justifying why I believe we should be allowed to choose our own belief system, including diet.  Don’t  think I did a good job and the replies started to get more angry and accusative.

Again,  I should have just walked away, but now it seemed not only was I in favour of animal cruelty, I was also in favour of stoning homosexuals and female genital mutilation.   At which point, ego and testosterone took over and I was damned if I was going to let these people have the last word, claiming some kind of moral victory.

So I set about looking into the subject. Not just veganism, but sustainable food production, agriculture and a whole bunch of other, related topics.

Sustainable Food Diets

As you might expect, there is a lot of literature out there. Much of it very partisan, either very pro vegan, or pro omnivorous diet. I found one I thought was well balanced, if long winded.  The writer is a former vegan and an aspiring farmer. He has sank his life savings and his families future into making his farm a viable proposition on a sustainable basis.  He covered a whole raft of issues to do with not only a sustainable vegan diet, but alternative diets too. Where possible, he cited references in support of arguments and positions and stressed it wasn’t intended to be pro or anti vegan.  It tried to look at the issues of which type of diet might be the most efficient when looking at globally sustainable agriculture and food supply methods.

The comments he has received were if anything longer than the original article and for the main part very critical, attacking his assumptions and accusing him of anti vegan bias.  Some did offer counter positions supported by their own references and I am still wading through all the citations. There were dozens. Some are very partisan on both sides of the question. Others pertained to be scientific studies and hence more factual and less opinionated, but not always unbiased one way or the other, I have to say.

Its Complex

What I got from this article is just how complex an issue sustainable food supplies is.  Just how big a challenge we face in order to adequately feed a growing world population.  I seem to be one of the few people who thought this.  From the comments it was mainly perceived as an attack on the vegan diet.

I actually shared the link with some of the people I had been sparring with on Twitter, not in a”I told you so” way. But as a,  ‘this is really complex with multiple challenges we need to consider carefully.’  way.   Here it is :

First replies I received were not good, although it was evident that the responders hadn’t actually read the article. They had assumed it was a piece to justify meat eating.  After challenging them on this, (when will I learn??), some did read it. And responded to it as an attack on being vegan and the vegan diet.  Actually, the majority of the criticisms had already been made in the many comments to the article.  I thought the responses to these comments by the author were thorough, thoughtful and fully cited.  Again, I was in the minority thinking this.

More Research Required

So where does this leave me and the issue of Food Glorious Food?  Well, to do a thorough analysis of the many, many associated issues, gather objective data, test models and hypothesis and then draw conclusions, will take years.  Far more time, effort or resource than I have available.  So, I have to go on my best judgement, my own probably biased opinions and my own personal beliefs.

Just to talk through the issues, even without going into any detail would take pages and pages.  And I am not sure I even understand that many of them yet.  I certainly don’t have solutions.   Moreover, even amongst the more scientific studies and assessments, there is no consensus.  It would be nice to have a definitive and totally objective document that offers THE TRUTH. It doesn’t exist.   Depending on your position, you can find information that will support your view.  But to do so; to wade through reams and reams of data and papers to prove your position whilst attacking another position you disagree with, well it seems pointless and destructive.

I find it disappointing that the majority of the people I was speaking to assume that if you are not 100% aligned with them, then you are attacking them.  So they attack back. They criticise and will point out that what you are saying is all rubbish based on biased opinions. No mention of the reference material and they offer none of their own. They just ‘know’ they are right and you are  wrong. There is no middle ground, no compromise. It’s very black or white.

Consensus

One area of consensus is, that as a species, we do need to move to a more plant based diet. A totally vegan diet doesn’t appear to be the most efficient diet.  But meat production is wasteful and polluting aside from the ethical or moral considerations.  But there is a finite amount of arable land available.  Some estimates think we have passed the critical point where we have enough arable land to support a primarily plant based diet.  So why not use grazing land?  For fellow Scots, they will know that much of the grazing land in Scotland, for example, is just not suited for arable farming.  Rocky, mountainous and with poor topsoil. OK for animal grazing, not so much for crops.  And this is applicable around the world.

Land Usage

In his article, my farming friend, discussed how to reclaim pasture land to make high quality arable land. It is possible in theory, but expensive. Farming is a business and in some corners of the world a necessity to feed your family.  Commercial farmers want to make money. Investment in improving land that is going to result in a crop costing a multiple of what it costs from existing, good quality arable land, doesn’t make commercial sense.  And at this stage in our  socio-economic development, we have to consider the economics.  Thats just one example. The logistics of moving food around the globe, impact of crop failure in an entirely plant dependent world. Water and irrigation, pest control, use of genetically modifed plants.   The list goes on and on.

The Moral Question

Of course many vegans don’t choose the diet for sustainability.  For most it’s a moral choice.  As one said to me on Twitter, there is no reason why any animal should suffer or die to become food for us.   I think that’s an honourable position.

Someone else suggested to me that nothing we eat gets to us without an animal death.

I found studies that investigated rodent deaths as result of harvesting.  Most seemed flawed to me, with figures ranging from very high to very low.  Again, from a layman’s perspective, if I were a mouse in a cornfield and bloody big harvester was trundling towards me, I would be legging it out of there as quickly as I could. Indeed some data suggested a very small percentage died as a direct result of harvesting.  Anecdotally, I was horrified one time when mowing my own grass land, after unknowingly running over a field mouse nest, causing several casualties. So it can happen.

Pests

Again based on my own experience, I have been invited by farmers to shoot pigeons, corvids and rabbits over their land. Why?Because these are all pests to the farmer that attack his crops, lowering his yield and impacting his bottom line.  Then there are moles, rats in the grain storage, slugs and other insects. All attacking the crops. Whilst a special licence is now required to shoot pigeons and corvids, it still happens.  Maybe not be in huge numbers.  I am sure animals are killed to preserve cattle too. In fact look at badgers, another sore point for animal rights supporters.

The point is, if you are claiming Moral Superiority for your vegan diet, how many animals or birds or insects or slugs,  dying to protect your supper is acceptable?  Saying it doesn’t happen is a fatuous argument.  Yes it does. Perhaps alternative ways might be found to effectively control these pests, but as far as I can see, it will still adversely impact these animals. Increasing arable land will destroy habitat impacting bio diversity, won’t it?  And what of the plants themselves? They are living and they have to die to feed you?  It’s argued, plants are not sentient. Some ongoing research would beg to differ concluding plants have a form of sentience, just different to ours. And the plants have been here longer than us.

Food

But this is all moot.  We have to eat to survive.  I am not suggesting we shouldn’t kill plants or we really are in trouble.  I suppose my point is, the morality question seems to be subjective and a little arbitrary. Put bluntly, rats and beetles, etc, are mainly hidden from sight,  are not cute and cuddly so do they not count? It’s where do you draw the line?  Then there is the issue of choice. In the developed countries, we are lucky we can choose a preferred diet for whatever reason.  In other parts of the world, there is no choice. You eat what you can to survive. I have worked in some very poor regions and seen hungry children. The morality of eating animals is well down on their priority list. In reality, there are all kinds of arguments around this and it’s an absolute minefield.

For my vegan Twitter friends, nothing short of 100% animal free diet is acceptable.  They will not accept that any animals are ever hurt in their diet and will accuse me of bias and hypocrisy for suggesting it. I am sure they will find data to support their position, just as I could find data to support my assertion, on top of my own actual experience.  We end up in that perpetual claim v counterclaim, I said, they said loop. It’s pointless. But they may be onto something with the hypocrisy claim.  I Profess to like animals. I wrote a glowing piece about horses recently and have two cats and dog at home that are seriously spoiled.  But I also enjoy eating meat. Its a contradiction, but is it hypocrisy?

The Crux of the Issue

Here for me is the crux.  Whilst they are filled with absolute certainty that they are right and possess the moral high ground,   I am far from certain about my own position and beliefs. This leaves me conflicted. I cannot become a vegan as I like meat and I don’t like the alternatives or veg’.  I like eating and want to carry on enjoying meals.  But does this make me a monster?

Looking into some of the links supplied to me from Twitter concerning Intensive Farming techniques, or factory farms if you prefer, I was horrified.  The conditions and suffering inflicted on some animals is appalling.  If it is legal, it shouldn’t be, if it isn’t legal, it should be stopped or at least better controlled.

This then, is where I am at the moment.  My research suggests that the most efficient diet to allow a globally sustainable food supply is a dairy friendly vegetarian diet.   Sadly this still doesn’t entirely do it for me.   I like meat and so……

And the Future

After discussing with Wifey, we are going to reduce our meat consumption and only source meat from Certified Humane producers and suppliers. I am also going to increase the amount of game we eat. When I am shooting it, I know its provenance. Fish is a whole other area I haven’t touched upon, but we will aim to eat more ethical, sustainable, fish produce.  I will have to try and eat more fruit and vegetables. I have heard that ratatouille can be very tasty, I shall give it a concerted go.

Of course, I realise this won’t be anywhere near enough for many vegans.  My own vegan friends are comfortable with this approach. In fact, knowing me as they do,  they are quite surprised I am going even this far, as am I, to be honest, and that will have to do for now.  I still advocate that we should all be allowed to make our own decisions, based on our beliefs and yes, our conscience.  It would be nice if we would respect each other’s decisions and try not to be judgemental. That rarely helps.

Until next time,

Graham