Meat, etc

barth@ncatfyv.uark.edu
Wed, 12 Jan 1994 11:35:27 -0600 (CST)

Lara -

I hate to say it, but you're way off base on your feed conversion
ratios. Pigs and poultry are about 3:1 grain to gain. Beef and sheep
are a lot more variable (depending on how much grass they eat), but
at worst it won't be over about 6:1 even if all they get is grain.

Most of the grain that is fed to critters isn't fit for human
consumption in one way or another (frost damage, mould, weedy, etc).

The real problem is that we take good grass-eating animals like
cattle and try to feed them as if they are pigs (corn and soya).
We cram them in at 10,000 per five acres, spend $260 each putting fat
("finish") on them that the consumer doesn't want but USDA grades
demand, pump them up with hormones and antibiotics to make them grow
faster in such a horrible environment, and *then* we wonder why
people are skeptical about eating the stuff. Yech.

Grass heals and builds soil. Corn and soybeans lead to erosion and
loss of soil structure. Cattle are mobile. Grass stays put. So why
in the name of all that is good and holy do we take these mobile,
sun-powered grass combines and make *them* stay put while we bring
the pig-food to them?

Some 70% of the minerals that go in the front end of a cow come out
the back. In a pasture or on a sustainable farm this is a great
advantage. In a feedlot it's a problem, both from the manure waste
point of view and the fact that the nutrients are not returned to
build the soil that produced them.

There is a financial component, too. I grew a lot of oats, as a nurse
crop for my hay fields, and because my beef needed the straw for
proper conservation of manure nutrients. I could feed a calf five
pounds of crimped oats and get one pound of calf worth about 90
cents; that is the equivalent of 18 cents per pound for the oats.
Put another way, about $7.00 per bushel. Oats themselves sell for
about $1.50 per bushel.

I such cases, the farmers financial interest, the animal's dietary
interest, biodiversity's interest, and the land's interest (good
manure management) all coincide. Starts to sound like sustainable
agriculture, eh?

Please don't blame cattle for the abysmally bad management that
defines current production practices...

Meat *can* be healthy, tasty, and environmentally appropriate.
Industrially raised meat cannot, and once we're clear on that
fundamental difference, a lot of things fall into place.

Regards,

Bart Hall-Beyer ):*
Fayetteville, Ark.