I would only add that livestock as a diversification to a grain operation has
traditionally been a reasonable risk management strategy for farmers as poulrty,
beef & pork are on different business cycles from corn/soy & wheat- so thats
quite rational. The time demands for managing traditionally sized livestock
enterprises (100 sows not 10,000) were complementary enough not to cause a
conflict with the grain operation. The problem is, we have- at the same time-
urban consumers who expect their dirt-cheap food to come from "Old Mcdonald had
a Farm" & well capitalised conglomerates controling genetics, inputs &
ultimately prices who expect to have the same (low) level of regulation for
10,000 sow industrial production units as Old Mcdonald had for 10 sows.
< Indeed, it
<could be argued that confinement feeding systems were, at least at one time, a
<logical solution to the problem of overproduction. The only problem is that
<capacity to absorb livestock products is saturated, and grain overproduction
<even overshot this solution, yet we continue to produce still more that we
I wont argue with the point, but I personally think that confinement systems &
factory hens are the product of externality. That is, society (or future
generations) & not the operator absorbs the costs of pollution and nuisance from
the feedlots & stink factories. If the price of factory pork included the
actuarial costs for liability for all future environmentally based lawsuits,
they would not be competitive with free-range pork.
<It is important to look closely at causality in these kinds of disputes, to
<the pitfalls of false assumptions - intentional (a la Avery) or otherwise.
Bang on Ann!
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: