genetically altered meat birds

[eatmorechicken]

deleted... I should have stopped typing a long time ago...

 

[cloudswinger]

A.T. Hagan :

Well, I do call it factory farming because for some types of agricultural production it has become factory like. I pass a large layer operation (Humpty Dumpty in Hoboken, Georgia) on the way to visit family. Four (and more being built) enormous metal barn with tens of thousands of birds each inside. Feed comes in on a conveyor belt, manure and eggs go out on separate belts. The birds go into the cages en masse and never see the light of day again until they are all taken out again en masse. Simple living cogs in an intricate machine. But they can produce clean, wholesome, eggs for a lot less money than I can produce my grass raised eggs even if they don't look or taste as nice so they have their necessary place in our agricultural industry. My system cannot be made to produce the number of eggs this nation needs unless agricultural land and labor goes back to what it used to be back in the nineteen forties and earlier. It's one thing to do this sort of thing because one likes it and another thing entirely because you must do it for lack of any better way to make a living. My grandparents used to expound upon that quite a lot. My parents too for that matter since it's the way they grew up.

I question whether the eggs of that factory farm are clean and wholesome. Yes, they may be cheap. That's about the only redeeming feature. Use to be that soft boiled eggs and sunny side up were fine, but now there's so much contamination that everything needs to be hard cooked.

Which leads me up to your second point here - fat Americans? Why are we so fat? (And I am fat myself.) Because we spend too much time sitting on our butts. Plain and simple. Factory farming did cause that in a way in that modern day agriculture needs a heck of a lot less labor than once it did and most folks would not willingly go back to the sort of ag labor that needed all those hands in the first place not even with modern day ag wages. We sit on our butts too much and we have access to plentiful, cheap food so the natural end result is that we get fat. The Japanese have some of the most expensive food in the world for reasons that they cannot produce enough for themselves so must import it and a great many other necessities of life to their islands. That naturally runs up the costs considerably. But don't worry, American food prices are rising too. And American energy and fuel prices too. Soon we'll all be eating less and walking a great deal more because we have to.

We'll be thinner, healthier, and happier then, right?

No, our society is based on being dissatisfied with what you have. That is the core value of a consumer society. People will not be eating less, they will be eating the cheapest food. And the cheapest food is not what comes directly off farms, but what comes out of factories. Check out this page http://www.mymoneyblog.com/what-does-200-calories-cost-the-economics-of-obesity.html

I work in IT, aka sit on my butt all day. If I snacked on chips and soda all day then I probably would be fat too. Since I snack on fruit and water all day I don't seem to be getting fat. I don't think that it would even be possible to get really fat if you ate a lot of fruits/veggies since you'd probably get full before you'd get too much calories. I know that you know that too many calories in and not enough calories spent will make you gain weight. I'm just saying that certain foods have a higher caloric density making it easier to eat more calories.

The Japanese value food. They eat food in season and generally locally. Every area has some speciality. They savor each bite, and don't mindlessly stuff their faces in front of a tv. They are willing to pay for the best, like $1000 for the first perfect melon of the season. Yea, they also have expensive food, but that's usually imported stuff. But local food is not all that expensive.

And other countries have cheap food without it being all processed food. I went to Vietnam, food is very cheap there. Fruits and veggies are local and fresh, meat is freshly butchered or even still alive for you to take home. Labor is cheap there so that probably keeps the costs down. But then again they're still doing old style manual labor ag, not many machines in use there.

Oh and portion sizes are smaller in both countries.​

 

[Brunty_Farms]

Quote:
Do you not see the contradiction in what you are saying? The economics of them are what makes them sustainable. More meat for less feed in less time.

No there is no contradiction. CX are unsustainable options for farms at any level. Sustainablillity requires three pilars.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ent.svg/300px-Sustainable_development.svg.png

CX are very economical but drastically swing away from the environmental (biological) pillar, leaving a small margin for sustainability. How? We, the common folk, cannot reproduce them, they are hybrids. F1 Cornish cross cannot reproduce without human assistance. CX require higher input methods or more baby sitting to make them work. Brunty claims his CX losses are because of simple management mistakes (hope I'm not taking your words out of context Brunty

). I would argue that a true chicken can live without its owner in reasonable conditions. CX are becoming increasingly disliked by society because of even the minor problems associated with them. That city person who has no farm experience has the final say, because they have the money to keep little niche markets going. remember when organic was just a niche market. Now its a huge economic force. I think pastured poultry and other locally grown foods will continue to increase in popularity. when it comes down to it people will not want CX. One of the few criticisms of Poly face farm that I have heard of, was that he uses chickens that are derived from the industrial system. Not saying that he is wrong for using them, but the people of the niche market do no want anything with "industrial" attached.

That said I still use CX, and I still try to make them work in low input conditions. However this year I had a hard time finding a hatchery that had them in supply. most places were sold out for a couple months in advance. I talked to several of the ladies at strombergs, hoover, meyer, ect and they all said that their chicks come from about the same place. That "place" was experiencing problems with their birds. they were not laying well because of a cold wet spring, then a sudden shift to hot weather. Because people were not buying chicks during the wettest part of spring, they got a huge surge in demand when the weather warmed. I think that there is something seriously wrong with this picture. I was set a month back because the hatcheries I called were sold out. One wet spring threw of huge system. what would happen if an ALF idiot were to burn down breeder coops? We would all be SOL.

I agree with this to an extent. Anyhow with the CX being connected with big agribusiness is not really a huge issue. It's like saying that corn is used for both agribusiness and backyard enthusiast. The heritage breeds are the chickens that will be filling the niche markets you're referring to. Keep in mind Salatin does well over his 20,000 bird limit by sub contracting growers that exclusively grow for him. I would hardly say that 20,000 plus birds is a niche market because that's a statement for the pasture raised movement, more like a milestone.

One of the big issues with management that a lot of small flock raisers on this forum don't understand is that the issues many pastured poultry producers face is economy of scale. How do you take care of 1,000 broilers in a brooder with the same quality as if you would just 20? I can care for 20 broiler chicks from start to finish and could almost guarantee that I have less than 1% loss if any. However when you take in 1,000 it's a whole new monster. One screw up leads to 20-50 dead, in just seconds. Too hot, too cold, too much draft, not enough draft, ect. However in all fairness the same issues are with layers too. Twenty layers in a brooder is an enjoyable experience. However 2,500 in a brooder could be a nightmare if you make a mistake. Both could be raised with the same quality, however it's much easier to make a costly mistake with 2,500 than it is with just 20.

CX's are getting less desirable reviews from customers but like anything else it still comes down to money. Ethically and morally the pasture raised birds are raised to perfection and economically it's affordable. So to a customers point of view, it's a win...win...win. However there are customers that still will not be satisfied ethically and will seek out a heritage type chicken due to the fact of the their beliefs. But, it will be nothing more than a very small niche market. What most people see on our farm is a chicken (cx), in a pen with grass, with fresh water and feed and they look happy running around eating bugs and grass or happily being lazy while the breeze blows through their feathers. This is raised to perfection from a customers standpoint, especially when they know me, their farmer... and have seen the processing facility.

As for the chicks not being available.... that's because of the popularity of pasture raised producers. For small hatcheries, this means big business. I for one get 600 chicks in every other week from a hatchery. That's huge when they can count on my order, and they know that I'm good for it. Times that by the thousands of pastured poultry producers that are now coming into business. That means less chicks for the guy that's only getting 25 or even a 100. These hatcheries, everyone of them that you listed I've tried... have a good deal of their broiler business dedicated to smaller producers that get 500-5,000 / month. So if there is any kind of shortage it's going to be for the backyard enthusiast, not the producers. I for one have my orders locked in, a year in advance. If they oversell, or have a shortage, I never know.

 

[Brunty_Farms]

A.T. Hagan :

I find your reasoning to be somewhat sophistic. F1 Cornish Cross, by which I take it you mean the broiler chicks that many folks order from the commercial hatcheries, are NOT SUPPOSED to reproduce themselves. That is not their purpose. If you want birds that can reproduce themselves naturally they are freely available to any who want them. But there are trade offs in using them. There are always trade offs.

"True chickens" can and do live without any human intervention whatsoever. The original Red Jungle Fowl that all domestic chickens descend from are still to be found in the wild. There are many places in the world where domestic chickens have gone feral and live without any human help and often enough in spite of human attempts to curtail them. They are quite hardy and adaptable creatures. Which is fine for their own purposes. But for human purposes we need them to provide eggs and meat which is what they cannot do in an economical fashion. Once you start taking nutrients out of the system (the meat and eggs) you either eventually run the system dry (as in the chickens disappear) or you start having to putting nutrients into the system in order to keep it sustainable (there's that word again). It's as simple as that. And once you have to start putting nutrients into the system you run face first into the need for their efficient use because ineffciency will run you broke. Not sustainable. And for efficient production of meat and eggs then the modern day hybrids have it all over the older heritage breeds which puts a different complexion on "sustainability."

I think "heritage" breeds (I dislike that word) have their place and I keep them myself. But not for commercial purposes except for those folks that value them. For my commercial needs I keep modern Leghorns and ISA Browns because they'll outlay any heritage breed going and do it on less feed which makes them a heck of a lot more "sustainable" than the old fashioned breeds.

BUT, and it is a big but, I cannot produce those birds myself and there's the rub. Which is why I continue to fool with the old breeds, selecting and reproducing them myself. For as long as I can get them I'm going to keep ordering the modern hybrids. It's the only way to produce those eggs at a reasonable cost. They pretty much carry the older birds that I'm selecting and breeding from for my own purposes. They'll never feed the world, but they may well feed me and my neighbors if one day we for whatever reason cannot get the modern hybrid birds. At that point "sustainability" is going to undergo a drastic evolution. One day. Maybe.

I really like this post. Very well said and couldn't agree more, good job writing this...​

 

[jasonm11]

Quote:
I will let you in on a well known ( or little known) secret . Mission San Louis Rey in S. Cal has an annual Bar-B-Que and one of the dishes is a pit cooked burro. I had a delicous and heafty helping several years ago only it didn't taste like chicken. I will also let you in on another well known secret... This planet existed for millions of years without any living organisms. By some random act ( or by God's will )there was a combination of inorganic molecules and organic chemicals were formed. Time passed and some of these organic chemicals randomly came together and formed living forms. Time passed and some of these living forms came together and formed new living organisms. Could this be considered genetically altered organisms ? More time passed and enter the age of dinasours. Could this be considered as genetically altered orgainsms? Again time passed and some catastrophic event happened and caused their massive extinction. More time passed and their was the rise of mammals. Could this be considered as genetically altered organisms? More time passed and we now have millions of new species. How did this happen? could there have been the exchange of genetic material between species to create new ones? Could radiation from the sun alter and/ or create new genetic material to create a new life form? Could this be considered to be as genetically altered organisms? There is now scientific proof that our beloved chicken decended from the dinasaours. Could this be considered to be genetically altered organisms? So how different has Mother Nature created new life forms than our present day scientists are now doing using the very same natural materials and methods? Mother Nature has tried many different life forms ...some succeded and many others have become extinct because they couldn't compete for food, mates or environment. Do you own a microwaveand use it daily to heat your food? In nature Microwaves can and more than likely cause genetic mutations. Did you know that the scientists have been using irradiation teckniques to genetically alter and create triploid and tetraploid crops for over the last half century and all of us are benefiting from them? Did you know that we irradiate fruits, vegatables, and meats to kill organisms that may contaminate our food supplies for the past half century? Without that many people all over the world would starve to death. The only difference is that now man has gained the knowledge to assist Mother Nature to speed up evolution in the test tube.

Please expain the Cambian explosion. How about non reducible machines? Lack of fossil record? Just saying, you can't unless you KNOW that God is the reason.

 

[Neil Grassbaugh]

My thoughts-

GMOs are just another form of evolution. It may work (cockroaches, they can stand anything and have since forever), it may not (dinosaurs, they couldn't stand a little rock being thrown at them from space). GMOs are not unnatural occurances. Forces native to this planet (human effort) caused them to happen. There is nothing unnatural about that.

I fail to see why so many consider the entire human race to be so so unatural, so despicable. Sure there are some bad ones but then there are bad chickens too but we still love them as a whole.

 

[AlbionWood]

Quote:
I can agree with everything else you said, but not that. I'm a geologist, so evolution is something I'm pretty familiar with, and genetic engineering isn't similar to that. Evolution depends on natural mutations of existing genetic material, not the transference of material from completely different lifeforms. Not passing any value judgement on that - just that it's not the way evolution works.

Otherwise we're on the same page. Humans are a native species, part of Earth's natural ecosystem. We are neither good nor bad for the planet; Earth is indifferent to us.

In any case, we're getting pretty far off-topic, since (as far as I know) there has not yet been any genetic engineering of chickens. (Despite the misleading title of this thread!)

 

[paduanchook]

just passing some ineresting facts told by a geneticist:
broilers all around the world have been tested and found to have a genetic fat gene mutation that contributes to people being over weight
that the fat in cx is omega 6 (the bad fat) vs omega 3 in range chickens. as i understand it: due to lack of exercise and such a short lifespan, the omega 6 doesnt have time to convert to omega 3. it takes 6 cx to equal the omega 3 in 1 range bird. and because of the gene mutation in cx, no matter how you raise them they never will be healthy to eat. so, is this sustainable?

 

[AlbionWood]

Quote:
Facts, or factoids? Cite references.

Here's a fact for you: Overeating (taking in more calories than you expend) is the principal cause of obesity. Most people eat most of their chicken meat in the form of McNuggets, KFC, etc - salted, injected with HFCS, breaded, and deep-fried. You really think it's the fat genes in the chicken than are causing the weight problem?

Can't figure out how "sustainable" figures into any of that, anyway. If you don't like CX, don't raise them.

 

[paduanchook]

ill try and get name of geneticist asap. there are many causes to obesity, and i wasnt trying to imply that cx were the sole prob, just a cog in the wheel. and i was just passing info that i thot was interesting, u didnt have to be so rude