Vegetarian Discussion: "collateral Included Deaths In Organic Rice Production [faq]"

"collateral Included Deaths In Organic Rice Production [faq]"
Posts: 47

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)

4*@thanks2diderot.com
2006-08-28 14:08:04 EST
____________________________________________________________
From: diderot <tamerln@wcnet.net>
Subject: collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:21:44 EDT
Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,rec.food.veg
Message-ID: <3790844B.34A3@wcnet.net>

>faq: collateral included deaths in organic rice production
>posting frequency: monthly to a.a.e.v., t.p.a., r.f.v. and other
>newsgroups as requested. corrections or additions are solicited
><tamerln@wcnet.net>.
>
>a.a.e.v. and t.p.a. are regularly visited by a number of vegetarians who
>believe(?) their dietary choice: 'saves animals' or is, somehow, 'less
>cruel' than an omnivorous diet.
>
>simply, this assertion does not pass even the most cursory, minimally
>applied logic, not to mention any degree of even the simplest research.
>
>the facts are that modern, large-scale cereal grain production comes at
>a minimum cost of _several deaths per pound_, whereas grass-fed meat
>production, whether from production agriculture or hunting is counted
>_several pounds per death_. it is absolutely inescapable that: from
>death comes life, and agriculture: is, always has been, and always will
>be a bloody, bloody business. anybody who believes that by eating a
>pound of pasta instead of a pound of venison they are 'saving a life' is
>delusional.
>
>evaluating organic production is instructive for several reasons: many
>well-meaning, good-at-heart people believe organic = 'better, healthier'
>(it is not, necessarily), and the number of included collateral deaths -
>while considerably fewer than in 'conventional' production - are much
>more visible; more personal; more illustrative for those who favour
>responsibility and information.
>
>this analysis of collateral included deaths is a refinement and
>extension of an earlier abbreviated case study posted to a.a.e.v. in
>october 1998. additional information and analysis based on further
>interviews and observations is included in this iteration.
>
>---------
>
>although i no longer straddle a tractor or herd a combine, i have driven
>both - literally - thousands of miles. i am still engaged in
>agribusiness, and we have organic as well as conventional farms, organic
>'truck farms' and ranching operations. in production agriculture, i am
>most familiar with: rice, grain sorgham, cotton, sunflowers and
>soybeans. the facts, data, assumptions and conclusions, while developed
>on two organic rice farms (900 and 160 acres) and one 'conventional'
>rice farm of 1340 acres in colorado county, texas, are probably
>more-or-less applicable to other cereal grains grown in other localés.
>
>production on the organic farms is about 3500-4000 pounds/acre for the
>jasmine farm (900 ac) and the shortgrain farm (160 ac), while on the
>'conventional' longrain farm, it is 9000-11000 pounds, annualised. our
>organic operations produce seed rice and none of it goes (directly) from
>our farm to your table (although it does indirectly and we thank you for
>your partonage). because of economics and ability to produce, we will
>be adding an additional 1500-2000 acres of organic rice production
>within the next three years. although organic is considerably more of a
>pain-in-the-ass to grow, the r.o.i. is better than twice that of
>conventional rice.
>
>a very conservative annualised estimate of vertebrate deaths in organic
>rice farming is ~20 pound (arithmetic follows). this works out a bit
>less than two vertebrate deaths per square foot, and, again, is *quite*
>conservative. for conventionally grown rice, the gross body-count is
>*at least* several times that figure. collateral included deaths from
>'conventional' agriculture are more inferential than from 'organic'
>production (explained later) and, although the number of deaths is fewer
>in organic v. conventional, they are far more visible in organic
>production.
>
>the vertebrate deaths come from: frogs (5+ species), toads (common
>bufo), anole lizards, shrews (3 species), voles, mice, rats, snakes, a
>couple of kinds of turtles, cats, rabbits, skunk, nutria & muskrats,
>raccoons, possums, deer (never less than a pair of fawns harvested per
>50 acres), pheasants, quail, pigeons, cattle egrets, sparrows,
>starlings, waxwings, .... although all of these are not harvested
>*every* time, they are the 'regulars.' occasionally a canvasback, teal,
>heron, mallard, black duck, coot, spoonbill, crow, hawk, kite, eagle,
>buzzard ... is shredded, as is the occasional feral pig or lost calf,
>coyote or dog.
>
>for information, an acre has 43,264+ square feet. the vast majority of
>the deaths are (as one would imagine): frogs, toads and anole lizards;
>rodents and insectivores.
>
>- when cutting the rice, there is a - literal - green waterfall of frogs
>and anoles moving in front of the combine. sometimes the 'rain' is just
>a hard shower (± 10,000 frogs per acre) crossing the header, other times
>it is a deluge (+50,000 acre). never is it a drought; never a mist.
>sometimes, the number of frogs swimming across the cutter-bar is so
>massive, we have to reduce travel speed of the combine - there is just
>too much rice lost by being pressed into the rather thickish 'arroz con
>gracielà paté' which travels across the screens, rather than falling
>into the hopper as good grain should.
>
>these numbers may sound extreme to those who believe there is a wildlife
>de-population crisis, but considering one can easily see 10-20-30+ frogs
>(and several anoles) within the top few inches of a foot stand of rice,
>the numbers making gracielà paté are trivial.
>
>most times, judging from the visible continuious population swimming
>across the header, it is somewhere between 10K & 50+K per acre
>harvested. a good, reasonable, annualised (but still conservative)
>number of amphibian and anole deaths through the combine is 35,000 of
>all species harvested per acre, combined average for two cuttings. in
>spite of these seemingly large numbers, far, far more frogs & lizards
>escape than are combined. i would guess that the 35,000 amphibian
>deaths represents less than 20% of the total population, and probably
>far less, but that is just a guess - plenty, plenty, plenty are not
>killed.
>
>most amphibians are harvested during the first cutting in mid-summer.
>during the early fall second cutting, the population is not as great, so
>the body count is lower during the second bite at the apple (so to
>speak), so the 35,000 (conservative annualised average) is front-loaded,
>probably 25,000 + 10,000 deaths.
>
>- rodents and insectivores get hammered pretty much year-round, with all
>the dirt work, cultivation and harvesting activities and, for rice
>specifically, the near-continuious cycle of flooding and drying the
>fields. i have seen responsible estimates of rodent/insectivore
>population of 9-35 square meter, and i think the 35/meter is probably
>more accurate (in this area, anyhow) judging from the 500 yard-long,
>foot-wide windrows of drowned grey and brown on the lee-side levee
>whenever the rice is flooded. very conservatively - since nobody sees
>plowed-up or planed-in mice (whose deaths have to be substantial in
>number) assume 3/4th of one collateral included death per square foot,
>or ±33,000 rodents and insectivores killed per acre of production.
>again, this is a *very* conservative measure and covers a lot of
>activity year-round. the *real* number of rodent/insectivore deaths
>probably well exceeds two/square foot.
>
>- a lot of birds get combined-up, and nutria, and more than one or two
>deer, but another substantial source of death during all operations is
>being crushed & buried. the tires on tractors and combines are 42"
>wide, and there are two on each side. there is no way to tell how many
>frogs, toads, snakes, turtles, ... get blended into the mud, but it is
>not an insignificant number. other than amphibians and
>rodents/insectivores, the numbers of other deaths is difficult to assign
>a competent number, but the number is not small.
>
>the arithmetic: for 3,500 pounds/acre harvested, there is a toll of
>35,000 amphibians and 33,000 rodents and insectivores, or 68,000, plus,
>say, (to make the math easy while still being conservative) 2,000 from
>mud-mixed frogs and snakes + birds + nutria and muskrats and cats and
>coons and possums + ... + ..., or ± 70,000 deaths per acre of harvested,
>production-farmed organic rice. this works out to ~20 deaths per pound
>of rice - conservatively.
>
>---------
>
>for conventional farming, using every _________icide when needed, the
>body count is at least an order of magnitude higher, although the deaths
>are far less visible.
>
>one can stand between the larger organic field and the 1340 any time
>between april and june and hear the difference. in the organic field,
>you cannot discern an individual frog. it is an overgrown, jumbled
>layered cacaphony of croaks, cheeps, grunts and miscellaneous ribbets.
>on the 1340, one can hear and identify individual frogs and toads. the
>difference is that the billions of amphibian eggs that were laid when
>the 1340 was flooded at the same time and in the same fashion as the 900
>didn't make many tadpoles and fewer frogs due to applications of
>pesticides, insecticides, herbicides and fungicides.
>
>closer to harvest, after the application of other _________icides, the
>1340 is nearly mute and still.
>
>the rodents and insectivores go the same route. at the end of a row, in
>the 1340, rarely does one see any significant number of small fuzzies
>scurrying over the levee; in the organic fields, the end of the row
>looks like a scene from ~ben~.
>
>one can tell the difference after harvest, also. on the organic field,
>as the combine passes, the wall of birdlife: hawks of several varieties,
>crows, kites, buzzards, egrets, herons, ... descends to glean both
>escapees and paté. on the 1340, there are still quite a number of
>birds, but nowhere near the solid covering of the organic side.
>
>---------
>
>none of these figures include displacement or deaths due to
>transportation or infrastructure, nor any pest control measure during
>storage or transporation.
>
>nor are insect deaths counted, and insects are animals, too, but most
>involved-in-body-count vegetarians prefer to ignore or minimise deaths
>of other than cute or furry critters.
>
>are there ways to reduce collateral included deaths in modern production
>agriculture? not really. reductions can be made with more hand-work in
>smaller fields using 'appropriate technology', but when tractors and
>combines get involved, deaths go up. the overall animal population and
>mix in the area farmed has a lot to do with what kind of deaths are
>seen, too. this case study references a semi-tropical mixed-use area
>with short-grass prarie, woods, row-crop farming and rice cultivation.
>there are more large vertebrates of different species in this ecosystem
>than there will be in an area that is horizon-to-horizon monoculture.
>where we will regularly harvest deer, nutria and wild pigs, etc., all of
>these would not normally be expected in northern california, for
>example.
>
>from death comes life. agriculture: is now, always has been and always
>will be a bloody business.
>
>buon apetité.
>
>cordially,
>diderot

Whining, Crying, Bawl
2006-08-28 14:22:17 EST

4*.@thanks2diderot.com wrote:
> ____________________________________________________________
> From: diderot <tamerln@wcnet.net>
> Subject: collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:21:44 EDT
> Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,rec.food.veg
> Message-ID: <3790844B.34A3@wcnet.net>
>
> >faq: collateral included deaths in organic rice production
> >posting frequency: monthly to a.a.e.v., t.p.a., r.f.v. and other
> >newsgroups as requested. corrections or additions are solicited
> ><tamerln@wcnet.net>.
> >
> >a.a.e.v. and t.p.a. are regularly visited by a number of vegetarians who
> >believe(?) their dietary choice: 'saves animals' or is, somehow, 'less
> >cruel' than an omnivorous diet.
> >
> >simply, this assertion does not pass even the most cursory, minimally
> >applied logic, not to mention any degree of even the simplest research.



LOL!!!

Where's the photographic evidence?


Scented Nectar
2006-08-28 15:12:51 EST
Whining, Crying, Bawl wrote:
> 4URi...@thanks2diderot.com wrote:
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > From: diderot <tamerln@wcnet.net>
> > Subject: collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]
> > NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:21:44 EDT
> > Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,rec.food.veg
> > Message-ID: <3790844B.34A3@wcnet.net>
> >
> > >faq: collateral included deaths in organic rice production
> > >posting frequency: monthly to a.a.e.v., t.p.a., r.f.v. and other
> > >newsgroups as requested. corrections or additions are solicited
> > ><tamerln@wcnet.net>.
> > >
> > >a.a.e.v. and t.p.a. are regularly visited by a number of vegetarians who
> > >believe(?) their dietary choice: 'saves animals' or is, somehow, 'less
> > >cruel' than an omnivorous diet.
> > >
> > >simply, this assertion does not pass even the most cursory, minimally
> > >applied logic, not to mention any degree of even the simplest research.
>
>
>
> LOL!!!
>
> Where's the photographic evidence?

And why is my rice never covered in blood and fur?

The cd counting war goes on.....:)

Scented Nectar
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/


D*@.
2006-08-28 15:29:45 EST
On 28 Aug 2006 11:22:17 -0700, "Whining, Crying, Bawl" <bunghole-jonnie@lycos.com> wrote:

>
>*.@thanks2diderot.com wrote:
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> From: diderot <tamerln@wcnet.net>
. . .

>> >a.a.e.v. and t.p.a. are regularly visited by a number of vegetarians who
>> >believe(?) their dietary choice: 'saves animals' or is, somehow, 'less
>> >cruel' than an omnivorous diet.
>> >
>> >simply, this assertion does not pass even the most cursory, minimally
>> >applied logic, not to mention any degree of even the simplest research.
>
>
>
>LOL!!!
>
>Where's the photographic evidence?

To me there's nothing really funny about it, but we see that
the environment goes through this:

http://tinyurl.com/hpq43
http://tinyurl.com/j8v5c
http://tinyurl.com/gplhs
http://tinyurl.com/jom73
http://tinyurl.com/zkw32
http://tinyurl.com/j7lsx

and through this:

http://tinyurl.com/gt56j
http://tinyurl.com/fyh73

and later through this:

http://tinyurl.com/klkfv
http://tinyurl.com/czo32
http://tinyurl.com/fbfcm

and eventually to this:

http://tinyurl.com/epdad
http://tinyurl.com/zupzg
http://tinyurl.com/j5ckj

Even though we don't see photos dedicated to animals
being killed, anyone who knows anything at all about
animals can easily understand how the machinery,
spraying and complete changes of environment kill them.
If any person can't, that necessarily means they have no
understanding at all about how the processes influence
animals, probably because they're afraid to think about
it for some personal reason(s). It undoubtedly shows that
they have no understanding or interest in how humans
influence animals during rice production.

Brother
2006-08-28 17:13:25 EST
4*o@thanks2diderot.com wrote:
> ____________________________________________________________
> From: diderot <tamerln@wcnet.net>
> Subject: collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:21:44 EDT
> Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,rec.food.veg
> Message-ID: <3790844B.34A3@wcnet.net>
>

This is seven year old uncorroborated hearsay, from a hunter, come book
seller called Robert (Bob) A Sykes. - It has no validity.

Brother
2006-08-28 17:19:51 EST
brother wrote:
> 4URinfo@thanks2diderot.com wrote:
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> From: diderot <tamerln@wcnet.net>
>> Subject: collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]
>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:21:44 EDT
>> Newsgroups:
>> alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,rec.food.veg
>> Message-ID: <3790844B.34A3@wcnet.net>
>>
>
> This is seven year old uncorroborated hearsay, from a hunter, come book
> seller called Robert (Bob) A Sykes. - It has no validity.

Sikes not Sykes.

D*@.
2006-08-28 19:20:46 EST
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:13:25 +0100, brother <see@you.move.com> wrote:

>*o@thanks2diderot.com wrote:
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> From: diderot <tamerln@wcnet.net>
>> Subject: collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]
>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:21:44 EDT
>> Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,rec.food.veg
>> Message-ID: <3790844B.34A3@wcnet.net>
>>
>
>This is seven year old uncorroborated hearsay

It's first hand observation from a rice farmer.



Pearl
2006-08-29 06:02:46 EST
<*h@.> wrote in message news:vhu6f2p265b6tdame2q1gemkbri81frer2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:13:25 +0100, brother <see@you.move.com> wrote:
>
> >4URinfo@thanks2diderot.com wrote:
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> From: diderot <tamerln@wcnet.net>
> >> Subject: collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]
> >> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:21:44 EDT
> >> Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,rec.food.veg
> >> Message-ID: <3790844B.34A3@wcnet.net>
> >>
> >
> >This is seven year old uncorroborated hearsay
>
> It's first hand observation from a rice farmer.

"There is an "article" circulating on the Internet that describes how
thousands of frogs and other animals are killed in the mechanized
harvesting of grain crops. This "collateral animal deaths" story is an
elaborate hoax. The author, a "Texas organic rice farmer" is a gifted
writer, but he should use his talents elsewhere.

The author's numbers describe a plague of frogs of biblical
proportions. However, it is questionable if he has even been on a rice
farm. The major point that our author has missed is that rice fields
are harvested dry. The irrigation water is drained, and the ground is
left to dry before the harvesters go out in the field (otherwise, they'd
sink in the mud). There just aren't that many amphibians in the field.

Regrettably, there probably are some small animal deaths. However,
the number of deaths in a mile of rice harvesting pales in comparison to
the road kill on a mile of highway. Harvesters move slowly, and they
are not the high speed machines described in this article.

At Lundberg Family Farms, we care deeply for the animals that we share
our fields with. For example, every spring before field work begins, we
search the fields for nests, rescuing eggs for a local incubation
centers (mature pairs re-nest when the nests are disturbed like this).
After hatching, the fledglings are raised and released back into the
wild. Last year, we rescued over 3,000 duck eggs. After harvest, we
flood our fields to provide habitat for winter migratory birds and
waterfowl. They eat the rice that is left in the fields and contribute
fertilizer for next spring. There are autumn days when the sky is
blackened by canadian geese (and the sound is beautiful)! We see ducks,
geese, cranes, rails, pheasants, egrets, herons, swans, and even bald
eagles resting in our fields.

We are committed to sustainable and organic farming techniques. We
see our farming operation as a "partnership with nature," and would
not continue if rice harvesting resulted in the "death toll" that this hoax
suggests.

--> Kent Lundberg.

Kent Lundberg
Lundberg Family Farms
http://www.lundberg.com




Florida
2006-08-29 09:11:43 EST
Hey, Kent Lundberg, how are you? We buy your rice. Organic is
good. Interesting that there are no collateral included deaths in
commercial rice production.
I hope you're making some digicam photos or videos of the birds
you're growing along with all the rice.
.
> At Lundberg Family Farms, we care deeply for the animals that we share
> our fields with. For example, every spring before field work begins, we
> search the fields for nests, rescuing eggs for a local incubation
> centers (mature pairs re-nest when the nests are disturbed like this).
> After hatching, the fledglings are raised and released back into the
> wild. Last year, we rescued over 3,000 duck eggs. After harvest, we
> flood our fields to provide habitat for winter migratory birds and
> waterfowl. They eat the rice that is left in the fields and contribute
> fertilizer for next spring. There are autumn days when the sky is
> blackened by canadian geese (and the sound is beautiful)! We see ducks,
> geese, cranes, rails, pheasants, egrets, herons, swans, and even bald
> eagles resting in our fields.
>
> We are committed to sustainable and organic farming techniques. We
> see our farming operation as a "partnership with nature," and would
> not continue if rice harvesting resulted in the "death toll" that this hoax
> suggests.
>
> --> Kent Lundberg.
>
> Kent Lundberg
> Lundberg Family Farms
> http://www.lundberg.com


Pearl
2006-08-29 10:59:25 EST
Hello Florida. The message posted was a forward of an email I
received from Kent Lundberg in response to a query re: collateral
deaths in rice production. You'll find an email address at their site.

"Florida" <demeter547opine@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1156857103.494565.7850@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hey, Kent Lundberg, how are you? We buy your rice. Organic is
> good. Interesting that there are no collateral included deaths in
> commercial rice production.
> I hope you're making some digicam photos or videos of the birds
> you're growing along with all the rice.
> .
> > At Lundberg Family Farms, we care deeply for the animals that we share
> > our fields with. For example, every spring before field work begins, we
> > search the fields for nests, rescuing eggs for a local incubation
> > centers (mature pairs re-nest when the nests are disturbed like this).
> > After hatching, the fledglings are raised and released back into the
> > wild. Last year, we rescued over 3,000 duck eggs. After harvest, we
> > flood our fields to provide habitat for winter migratory birds and
> > waterfowl. They eat the rice that is left in the fields and contribute
> > fertilizer for next spring. There are autumn days when the sky is
> > blackened by canadian geese (and the sound is beautiful)! We see ducks,
> > geese, cranes, rails, pheasants, egrets, herons, swans, and even bald
> > eagles resting in our fields.
> >
> > We are committed to sustainable and organic farming techniques. We
> > see our farming operation as a "partnership with nature," and would
> > not continue if rice harvesting resulted in the "death toll" that this hoax
> > suggests.
> >
> > --> Kent Lundberg.
> >
> > Kent Lundberg
> > Lundberg Family Farms
> > http://www.lundberg.com
>


Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron