eating your pet open discussion

[saltandpepper2]

I'll be honest, I couldn't eat my dogs or cats... However, where I live, I don't think it would be necessary. I live on enough acreage to grow a sustainable garden, and grain for the birds, and there is enough streams and ponds, and woods to hunt and fish for food for the dogs and my family, I would most likely start raising rabbits as well, since they eat little, and produce a lot, I would make a way, but in my mind, the indoor pets are off the menu! Ps: I hate Black Friday, ironic that the day after you're supposed to be thankful, you gorge yourself with unnecessary items!

 

[Oliver Douglas]

At my age, Black Friday shopping has no appeal. And you make a good point regarding the de-evolution of society reacting to "perceived" shortages, or great deals, or savings on a pair of socks or a big screen television. If this country ever had to suffer through a severe depression like the 1930's, urban areas would become war zones. New York City grocery stores are constantly re-supplied....costs too much to main a large inventory of perishable items. Same with most big cities. Disrupt supply lines, hyper-inflation, the loss of the dollar's value, loss of government assistance, be it EBT cards, S/S checks, etc..would all lead to Bedlam. Glad I live in the Sierra Foothills and keep a six month supply of vittles on hand. No, they don't include my chickens. Will feed them the neighbor's chihuahua if need be...

 

[donrae]

I've told my Honey if the Apocalypse happens, his horse will be first on the grill lol. I just don't care for her, never have. Plus, look at the butt on her....talk about some big ol' roasts....

 

[Mini Meat]

Pets are a luxury. We are blessed to be able to afford them, and I think that is why we hold them so dear. At most times in history, with the exception of the very rich, all animals were tools that had a job and served a purpose.

If circumstances changed radically for people I think the concept of keeping pets would cease.

 

[saltandpepper2]

Pets are a luxury. We are blessed to be able to afford them, and I think that is why we hold them so dear. At most times in history, with the exception of the very rich, all animals were tools that had a job and served a purpose.

If circumstances changed radically for people I think the concept of keeping pets would cease.

But my pets do have a function. two dogs are livestock guardians, one is the household guard... two I'm trying my best to get rid of.. I'm sure they would make great hunting dogs though.

My cats keep away the ferals, possums, and mice.

I might have a few extra, but for the most part, they are useful.

I think the practice of useless pets would cease, but you can still have a working animal that you hold dear.

 

[Beekissed]

I've told my Honey if the Apocalypse happens, his horse will be first on the grill lol. I just don't care for her, never have. Plus, look at the butt on her....talk about some big ol' roasts....

Pets are a luxury. We are blessed to be able to afford them, and I think that is why we hold them so dear. At most times in history, with the exception of the very rich, all animals were tools that had a job and served a purpose.

If circumstances changed radically for people I think the concept of keeping pets would cease.

I agree! Nowhere is that more evident than the contrast between America and many third world countries. I love my dog dearly but if he didn't perform a valuable function here, I would not have a dog at all. I just don't have that luxury, nor would I allow myself that luxury. It helps me to keep my head and heart well grounded in practicality and reality by keeping luxuries to a minimum and keeping more versatile and useful things in my life. It's just how I practice good stewardship of what God has given me in this world.

 

[Mini Meat]

Quote: I think we are on the same page here. You have working animals. I would suggest they are working animals first and pets second, and I would think they are happier for having a job.

All my animals contribute and do work.

My comment was directed more at the useless pets. The millions of apartment cats and back yard dogs that exist only to give their owners pleasure.

 

[CrazyChickLady7]

This is my personal opinion. Let's look at two chickens. One of them lives in an industrial setting on a wire cage or open floor crammed with other chickens. It never sees sunlight or has a chance to scratch in the dirt. It can't roost, nest, or even flap it's wings because it's so crowded. Once it reaches prime size, it is sent to the slaughter house on one of those crowded trucks stuffed with chickens blowing in the wind. I live in an area with a lot of these chicken trucks and I even see chickens in the road who fell out. The other chicken lives on my small farm. He's an extra rooster. He is raised with plenty of space, sunshine, and food. Not just commercial food, but he can scratch for worms in the dirt. At night he roosts in a nice dry, safe place, just like his instincts tell him to. He gets to scratch around in the grass and find all sorts of goodies, and gets treats from my kitchen. He'll even get to try his hand mating with some of my hens before his time comes. But, I only need one rooster, so eventually, he will be humanely slaughtered by someone who cares about his individual well-being, right up until the end. Which scenario is more "right" or ethical? That's my answer about eating chickens. But, if your chicken is truly a pet and not a farm animal, as they are for many backyard keepers, I completely understand if you don't want to. My chickens are beloved farm animals but not exactly pets. I would eat them, but I wouldn't eat my cat. My question for myself has been - If I can't eat this chicken that I know, who has been well treated and had a nice life, how can I in good conscience eat a different chicken who had a miserable life, just because I happened not to know that chicken personally?

That is exactly how I feel. All of the birds that we have butcher have had sunshine, ladies, and a little bit of scratch grains. Which is better short and happy or short and miserable.

 

[saltandpepper2]

I think we are on the same page here. You have working animals. I would suggest they are working animals first and pets second, and I would think they are happier for having a job.

All my animals contribute and do work.

My comment was directed more at the useless pets. The millions of apartment cats and back yard dogs that exist only to give their owners pleasure.

Definitely happier for having a job, My male Great Pyr guards the chickens, and for a while we were having bad weather, so he almost became an "inside dog" because I felt bad for him... he was sooooo miserable, couldn't wait to go back outside and chase all the dangerous squirrels from his flock. Needless to say, I gave up, and let him do his thing.

I agree that city pets would mostly disappear. I say city pets, because where I live, most animals do have a job, simply because it's expected of them. I'm looking to get an aussie soon, and it will be used to herd up any of the larger animals, but I also think I will enjoy having a slightly more affectionate animal... my others are just so business like!

And I suppose my chickens are almost like that, though not as well cherished. I enjoy them, they become useless, they become meat.

 

[CrazyChickLady7]

I also believe that it is ok to eat your chickens if they are killed humanely. But it is kind of sad when you have to butcher a hen that has layer consistently its whole life and now the production is over to its got to go. I also understand that alot of people don't want to have a bird with no purpose. I wouldn't butcher one of my girls that had been a beloved pet that is totally imprinted on people, but then again the only cute thing i eat is cow. (pigs aren't that cute)