iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
GET UPDATES FROM Daniel Klein

Even Farmers are Saying 'Eat Less Meat'

Posted: 08/16/11 02:10 PM ET

The way we eat seems to be in constant flux: eat no meat, eat lots of meat, everyone has their opinion. But when a family that actually raises sheep for meat suggests we change our meat consumption, that's pretty interesting. Such was the case at Magnolia Farm where Elissa raises her sheep with such love and attention that each death is a challenge. And the price of this coddled meat makes it a treat for all but a few. We filmed this short video on our way across Oregon. Usually episodes are comprised of a couple days of filming, this was just an hour. But the beautiful setting and inspired words made this into a special episode. Watch for a unique farm as well as a recipe for lamb chops.

For more videos and recipes, visit www.theperennialplate.com
 

Follow Daniel Klein on Twitter: www.twitter.com/perennialplate

The way we eat seems to be in constant flux: eat no meat, eat lots of meat, everyone has their opinion. But when a family that actually raises sheep for meat suggests we change our meat consumption, ...
The way we eat seems to be in constant flux: eat no meat, eat lots of meat, everyone has their opinion. But when a family that actually raises sheep for meat suggests we change our meat consumption, ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 111
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:07 PM on 08/23/2011
I visited a "humane" animal farm like this one this weekend. In theory yes, it seems better than factory farming, but what isnt? In reality these are sweet baby animals. They are killed when they are weeks or months old. The farmer talked about slitting their throats and 'the younger the better' while the baby goats gathered around me being playful and sweet and silly as their moms carefully watched over. My eyes filled with tears because I knew there was nothing I could do for them. I believe that each death is hard for these farmers (as it says in the article) but I just wish they could realize that it's unnecessary.
02:01 AM on 08/24/2011
Oy to the vey. Have you ever sifted through dead baby mice, dead baby birds, and dead baby rabbits after a field was plowed for the shallow-rooted annuals of plant ag? More than a million creatures can live on a single acre of perennial grassland. When that land is plowed to put veggies on your plant, the habitat for all of those creatures is obliterated, with many of them dying horrific deaths in the process, being ripped apart at the seams, crushed, and plowed under.

And I hate to have to be the one to inform you, but virtually all commercially grown plant foods are either grown with animal inputs (organic agriculture) or toxic and completely unsustainable chemical inputs, largely derived from petrochemicals (industrial ag). It is not some magical coincidence that animals are essential to every major form of sustainable agriculture!

It's great that you visited a farm over the weekend and got to see how cute the goats were. Now maybe you can take the time to actually learn something about sustainable agriculture instead of spouting off misinformed, polyannish nonsense about how unnecessary you think animal agriculture is and how much more you think you know than sustainable farming than the farmers because you visited one on the weekend.
11:18 AM on 08/24/2011
(sorry for the typos)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
sabelmouse
i love to tumble , ask me why .
11:56 AM on 08/19/2011
this looks interesting. american meat. trailer at the bottom
http://www.grist.org/sustainable-farming/2011-08-15-grass-is-good-natural-meats-benefit-the-economy-and-family-farms
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
sabelmouse
i love to tumble , ask me why .
11:18 AM on 08/19/2011
this made me think of the vegan/omnivore dilema
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/11/swastika-kids-meal_n_924925.html#s327679&title=Disemboweled_Mouse_In
12:21 PM on 08/18/2011
If you want to respect the life of the humanely, sustainably raised animal that you are eating, prepare it well and enjoy it in full. There is nothing nothing more disrespectful to the animal than the guilty-meat approach of people like Mark Bittman. No wonder Bittman has repeatedly argued that we should focus more on eating less meat rather than on where the meat came from and how it was raised. He has it completely backward.

If you want to respect the life of humanely, sustainably raised animals, the last thing in the world that you should be doing is cutting back out of misguided guilt. The single most powerful thing that you can do to help more animals to be raised humanely and sustainably is to support humane and sustainable farms. The stronger the market is for humane, sustainably raised meat, the more meat will be raised that way. There is no shame in eating sustainably raised meat.

Conversely, cutting back on perfectly healthy, humanely, sustainably raised meat out of some sort of misplaced guilt actually takes demand away from that market, which weakens it, leaving more animals to be factory farmed. Eating meat with guilt rather than enjoyment and appreciation is not respecting the animals. You only hurt sustainable farms. Abstaining from sustainably produced animal foods has a negative impact on sustainable farming, but it has absolutely no effect whatsoever on factory farms. That is a fact.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
onionboy
Blessed are the Cheese Makers
12:00 PM on 08/19/2011
Nicely put.
12:26 PM on 08/19/2011
Thank you :)
11:14 PM on 08/23/2011
You seem to be implying that the animals you're eating wants you to enjoy your meal out of respect for him/her. That makes no sense. I just really doubt that that feeling of happiness matters to anyone or anything but you.
01:48 AM on 08/24/2011
No, you are imagining things, or just creating a straw man argument. I did no such thing. I can respect an animal without thinking that it wants to be dinner. I respect the animals that die for animal agriculture, and I respect the animals that die for plant agriculture.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
laurawp
01:37 AM on 08/18/2011
If there is no demand for brutally raised, drugged and tortured animals eating corn that could feed the entire planet for Americans to shove in their obese and diabetic mouths, there will be no supply.
02:12 AM on 08/18/2011
That's true, but since Americans are not going to magically stop eating meat, and international demand for meat is skyrocketing, there is literally no chance of there being no demand for meat. However, there is a growing demand for humanely, sustainably raised meat, so supporting that market actually increases demand for sustainably raised meat in place of factory farmed meat.

As for blaming meat for diabetes, that is more than a bit absurd. Meat has virtually no effect on blood sugar. Meat consumption has been somewhat static for decades, and diabetes has been skyrocketing! That is because the consumption of simple carbohydrates from plant foods has greatly increased.

The country with the most vegetarians in the world, India, also happens to be both the heart disease and diabetes capital of the world, so the notion that if we all just became vegetarians our health problems would vanish is utter nonsense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jumbotron16
a slight improvement over jumbotron15
12:56 PM on 08/18/2011
http://school.discoveryeducation.com/schooladventures/soil/field_guide.html

Hey Laura...look at this link and see how many creatures live in the soil...what do you think happens to all these little guys when land is cleared and plowed to grow crops?

When ruminants are raised on pasture, all these soil critters are safe! When land is plowed, they're dead meat.
10:46 PM on 08/17/2011
I really appreciate this video. As a fellow shepherd, you reflect my sentiments exactly. Wish I had four border collies though! I have 3 Great Pyrenees who watch and protect our flock and I didn't see any in your flock area. Are predators not a problem there? Just wondering.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carroll Straus
04:00 PM on 08/17/2011
I like lamb.. but not thinking of how it gets on my plate!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
laurawp
12:56 AM on 08/18/2011
Then don't eat it. If you can't handle that you are eating a living, sentient being, then just don't put it in your mouth or pay people to kill the poor little thing for you.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
sabelmouse
i love to tumble , ask me why .
07:06 AM on 08/19/2011
very few people do eat living sentient beings. the kill them first. sorry, but i couldn't help myself.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
laurawp
01:11 AM on 08/18/2011
Then why would you eat it? Gross!
01:37 AM on 08/18/2011
laurawp, you might want to take your own advice. If you don't want any animals to die for your food, you should probably stop eating asap. If you spent two minutes walking through the organic vegetable farm on my land after it has been plowed after resting for a while, you would quickly be disabused of the ignorant notion that animals do not die to put food on your plate. The particularly gruesome sight of a turtle that was torn in half and crushed baby field mice comes to mind.

In fact, more than a million creatures can live on a single acre of perennial grassland. When that acre is plowed for rows of the shallow-rooted annuals of plant ag, the habitat for all of those creatures is obliterated, with many of them dying horrific deaths in the process; being crushed, plowed under, and ripped apart at the seams, and the trillions of microorganisms in the soil are annihilated by oxidization. Conversely, if that same acre was used to sustainably pasture a ruminant, soil vitality and biodiversity can actually increase, resulting in a significant net gain of life!

You pay plant farmers to obliterate the habitat of a million+ creatures per acre for you, so get off your high horse.
03:38 PM on 08/17/2011
Uugh. That is not an argument for eating less meat, it is an argument for eating less food. Like it or not, the only unhealthy part of the meal that Daniel prepared was the tagliatelle. Increasing the percentage of the tagliatelle to the percentage of meat in that meal would not make it healthier; it would make it significantly less healthy.

Yes, absolutely, the life of a farm animal is to be profoundly respected and taken seriously. And the lives of all of the creatures whose habitat is obliterated by plant agriculture are to be taken every bit as seriously, so turning it into another "meat bad, vegetables good" diatribe is a severely misguided mistake.

There are several posters here who raise sheep, who don't think that reducing the percentage of sustainably raised meat in one's diet is more healthy or environmentally responsible. So why is Daniel always trying to put a guilty meat spin on the issue? Maybe he should interview some of the people who raise there own sheep who post here. The vast majority of sustainable farmers that I know feel that you should eat a balanced, healthy diet of meat and vegetables, and many of them would be financially devastated if their customers started treating meat as a condiment or an occasional indulgence.
04:14 PM on 08/17/2011
In fact, the single most effective thing that you can do to help more animals to be raised humanely and sustainably is by supporting humanely and sustainably raised meat. Abstaining has absolutely no effect whatsoever, because the last thing in the world that the market cares about are the wishes of people who aren't even their customer base. Conversely, the more demand for sustainably raised meat there is, the more animals will be raised that way.

I have repeatedly defied those pushing the notion that "eating less sustainable meat helps for less animals to be industrially raised" to provide a cogent argument to back up that absurd claim, and even the most visible public figures pushing that argument have failed miserably. That's because there is no cogent argument for it! Eating less sustainably raised meat most certainly does not help to keep animals from being raised on factory farms. To the contrary, eating more sustainably raised meat has a huge effect on the market, and is the single most powerful effect that anyone can have.

Please stop demonizing meat. Respect the lives affected by the production of all of your food, animal and vegetable, and stop feeding the misguided polemics that are part of the problem, not the solution.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
laurawp
01:01 AM on 08/18/2011
You are ignoring basic rules with your argument. No demand, no supply. Yes, they do care about those of us who choose not to eat dead animals. Your argument makes no sense and you are trying to justify your own habits even though you know better.
09:26 AM on 08/17/2011
We need to clarify all this about eating "less meat". The woman in the video says that a lamb chop or two is plenty - we don't need a "giant piece of meat that covers your whole plate". But I don't know anyone who eats meals that are just giant pieces of meat covering the whole plate. The only total carnivore I happen to know personally is my cat.

We can talk about whether there are, or aren't, any benefits to eating less meat - but let's at least not resort to exaggerations. The average meat consumption in the U.S. has barely budged over the last several decades.
photo
Salanry
We are what we pretend to be, so we must be carefu
11:58 AM on 08/17/2011
Apparently you have never been to Texas... Everything is bigger in the Lone Star State, including the portions of meat that people pretty much eat at every meal.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DebbyM
07:28 PM on 08/17/2011
Since 1950, total meat consumption in the US has gone from an average of 138 total pounds of meat (of various sorts) to 195 pounds in 2000 so suggesting that the average consumption hasn't budged in several decades is wrong.
09:01 PM on 08/17/2011
I was referring to the fact that, according to the USDA, meat consumption in the U.S. between 1970 and 2005 - the time during which we seen the exponential growth (pardon the pun) of the obesity epidemic, total annual per capita meat consumption has risen only around 17 pounds, and most of that is chicken (which is supposedly "healthier") - red meat consumption has actually DECREASED. This is during a time when our total CALORIE consumption has gone up, and I've seen no evidence that meat consumption is up at all during that time as a PERCENTAGE of total calories.

What has increased dramatically is the consumption of refined carbohydrates, sweeteners (HFCS consumption is up 4000%), and added oils, primarily of vegetable origin.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
inmyelement
11:21 PM on 08/17/2011
No wonder obesity is a growing problem.
06:10 AM on 08/17/2011
Do you know that farmed animals produce more greenhouse gas emissions (18%) than the entire transport system. It is also known that cows and sheep are responsible for 37% of the total methane generated by human. The vast amounts of land used to raise animals cause environmental issues such as habitat destruction and deforestation. Going vegetarian will halve the land-use of our diet. There are 400 million people suffering hunger. If every american and european man would keep a vegetarian diet even once a week, this number will drop to 370 million!
photo
FaunaAndFlora
Daughter of Pan
12:57 AM on 08/18/2011
Wrong.

1. "Livestock's Long Shadow" has been thoroughly debunked. Even one of the authors has admitted that the report contained some serious flaws.

2. The number of ruminents on the planet have remained the same during the last 1,000 years, if not longer. Only the type of ruminents have changed (i.e., more cattle, fewer bison).

3. Rice paddies produce more methane than all livestock combined. And unlike ruminents, rice paddies are a new source of methane.

4. Most of the land on this planet can only be used to raise livestock. There isn't much in the way of arable land on Planet Earth. Only 18% to 25% (depending on the source) of the land can support large-scale crop production. And most of that arable land can't produce crops all year long because of climate.

5. People don't go hungry because there is a lack of food. People are hungry because they don't have money to buy food. There is more than enough food for every person on Planet Earth.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
laurawp
01:16 AM on 08/18/2011
There is certainly more than enough food to feed everyone on the planet several times over. The problem is, most of these vegetables are being fed to cows and other "livestock" that are murdered for Americans for meat. So that they can become fat diabetics who have never eaten a real vegetable. It's gross, it's cruel, and sadly, it is true.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hugatree
Retired teacher, writer
06:08 PM on 08/21/2011
Your argument only stands if pasture land is recyced into agricultural land capable of growing vegetable crops. Here in Northern California, for instance, where we produce lots and lots of sustainable cows, sheep, and pigs (grass fed on pasture), the steep hills where animals are raised is in no way suitable for vegetable growing. These grassy hills are perfectly suited for grass fed meat production.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Targetdog
Remembering recent history...
10:48 PM on 08/16/2011
Last night I made a Massaman curry beef stew that contained 1lb of meat. It had plenty of veggies, and served four. Meatless Mondays and moderation the rest of the week. Good advice.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
TomP100
Got elk?
05:38 PM on 08/16/2011
Eat less quantity and more quality of meat. If you eat meat that is mostly muscle and low fat, like buffalo or lean grass-fed beef, you need less of it to fill you up.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
laurawp
01:06 AM on 08/18/2011
Or eat vegetables and then you don't need to put rotting flesh inside your body. Gross.
09:58 AM on 08/18/2011
Using dysphemisms like "rotting flesh" to describe meat does nothing to bolster your argument. Given enough time, unless properly preserved or otherwise stably kept ANY food (well, except Twinkies, perhaps) will go bad. But this no more means that a piece of fresh meat is "rotting flesh" than that some fresh spinach is "slimy wilted plant matter".

If you are personally put off by the idea of eating meat, that's certainly your own business. But there's no need to project your likes and dislikes onto other people.
11:12 PM on 08/18/2011
I've known people that ralph at the sight of broccoli. I guess it takes all kinds to make the world go round... :)
04:30 PM on 08/16/2011
I'm not disagreeing, but I would like to point out that the title is a great example of the Argument from Authority fallacy.

We should eat less meat because farmers say we should.

Why should a farmers suggestion about dietary habits be taken more seriously than say, a doctor? Because farmers raise animals for food? Why does growing food automatically make someone an authority on what to eat? If this were a farmer saying "eat more meat", then everyone would just say "they only say that because they have a financial stake in your meat-eating habits".

On another note, love The Perennial Plate!
photo
Salanry
We are what we pretend to be, so we must be carefu
12:03 PM on 08/17/2011
Her argument about eating less meat is a philosophical and moral argument, not one based on health concerns. She is concerned about the environmental and societal implications of large agri-business meat production, which as someone who is involved in local food production, makes her more than qualified to offer a critical analysis of the system.
12:59 PM on 08/17/2011
Salanry said:

"...which as someone who is involved in local food production­, makes her more than qualified to offer a critical analysis of the system."

The logical fallacy is not that a farmer is qualified, but that a farmer is more qualified than anyone else.

You should also take note that I never said a farmer is not qualified.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
laurawp
01:21 AM on 08/18/2011
If you want health concerns then see the argument delivered by the documentary, "Forks over Knives."
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
laurawp
01:19 AM on 08/18/2011
Because doctors will admit that they do not receive schooling on how to PREVENT disease, only treat them. And the pharmaceutical companies line their pockets for that. You want to prevent obesity, diabetes, kidney disease, etc? Look at your diet. Doctors only treat. Watch the documentary Forks Over Knives if you are truly interested.
07:19 AM on 08/18/2011
I'll keep that documentary in mind, but I have to disagree about doctors not receiving or giving instructions on how to prevent disease. If that were true, the doctor's would never suggest patients exercise or change their diet. If doctor's never tried to prevent disease, then they would never prescribe daily aspirin to prevent heart disease. Sure, doctors primarily treat disease, just like a mechanic primarily fixes car problems, and a plumber primarily fixes broken plumbing, but it would be false to say that none of those professions can work prophylactically.
11:24 PM on 08/18/2011
As a doctor, I whole-heartedly disagree. As a matter of fact, generally the first thing we learn about diseases is what causes them and how to prevent it. The second thing? Non-medical interventions (diet, exercise). The third: drugs. Which one do you think patients adhere to the most? People want a pill. They want to be able to eat what they want, watch TV and still be healthy. They don't want diet and exercise.
04:01 PM on 08/16/2011
Industrialized meat production is bad for the environment and for the consumer. The callousness in our harvesting this meat is soulless and without reverence...and the waste is unheard of in any time. We need old fashioned butcher shops to remind us of an animal's sacrifice--a hermetically sealed package of meat on a polyurethane plate is surreal at best.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DavidMG
OWS Senior
11:15 PM on 08/16/2011
These are good reasons to cutdown/eliminate meat. But there are many other good reasons - I think one of the best is that meat-centered diets tend to have little variety - and variety is the best route to good nutrition.
03:59 PM on 08/17/2011
That's not an argument for not eating meat, it's an argument for eating a varied diet, and no matter how you slice it, a varied diet with meat is vastly more varied than a diet without meat, because you are eliminating most of the dishes in the world, but an omnivore doesn't have to eliminate any. I certainly eat a lot more varied of a diet than any vegetarian that I have ever known, and ironically, I eat a lot more vegetables than most of them too.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Karl Wilder
Chef Stirring The Pot Harlem
03:16 PM on 08/16/2011
Good article. It is true, if we eat natural meat and not factory farmed we have to eat less.
photo
FaunaAndFlora
Daughter of Pan
01:06 AM on 08/18/2011
I'm not sure if that's true. It may simply mean there will be more beef or lamb or goat and less chicken or pork. It may also mean that more people will have to start eating liver, heart, tongue, tripe, cheeks and so on. They may even find that these are the best "cuts" of meat when properly prepared. At least I think so. ;-)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hugatree
Retired teacher, writer
06:14 PM on 08/21/2011
Chicken and pork can just as easily be pasture raised as beef, lamb, and goat. In fact, chickens that are free ranged in pasture lay better (and safer) eggs as well. Pasture raised pork is unbelievably good and actually doesn't require an adjustment in taste familiarity the way grassfed beef does.