How many chickens would you need to keep to supply all the meat and eggs your family eats?

[ChocolateMouse]

All I am trying to demonstrate is the difficulty of supplying the average meat eater their protein solely from chickens.

If that were true you wouldn't be such a judgey mc judgerson and you wouldn't say;

I stand by the statement that by keeping back yard chickens one is not going to make a dent in the commercial chicken production so if that is your goal then I have produced some numbers to support my point.
Argue with the numbers

Why on EARTH would anyone argue with numbers that are patently false? Debate me using literal fake numbers I pulled out of thin air. What?

The truth is a dozen chickens could easily provide a household of four with a massive quantity of eggs and meat if you hatched out the eggs not using a broody. If the average american eats 25 chickens a year, even assuming a heritage breed at half the size, that's 50 birds a year? If only half hatch that's 100 eggs. A single hen had BETTER be giving me 100 eggs a year. 200 is more likely. So a single trio, hatching chicks in an incubator produces enough meat for a household of 4. A small flock of hens SUPER easily meets a family's egg needs for a year too.

And again, "impact" is pretty loosely defined by you. You better believe that if every family bought even 2-3 less chickens a year from major companies it would make an impact. They would notice a 10% drop in sales. In fact they HAVE noticed drops in sales to small holdings. Which is why even large companies like Tyson are trying to move to more sustainable practices. More people are ordering free range turkeys for thanksgiving than ever before, organic sales are spiking and nearly every grocery store in the country carries free range eggs. That didn't happen because companies grew a conscious and thought 'Weeeell maybe we shouldn't be killing bees and should let our animals move." That happened because they were losing a tiny percentage of sales to small growers with a higher quality product and wanted it BACK. Who was taking those profits away? Small holders and local small farms and homesteads. Who was encouraging the desire for those products? Not Tyson or Pilgrims Pride, that's for sure...

For example! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_range#Chicken_Meat
"In Australia, free range and organic chicken accounts for about 16.6% of value in the poultry market. This percentage is expected to grow to up to 25% in the next 5 years." and "In Australia... free-range eggs accounted for 44% of value" of all eggs produced. "Increased demand for free range eggs due to customer concerns over animal welfare has led to a number of different standards developing in relation to three core welfare measures - indoor stocking density, outdoor stocking density, and beak trimming. " In the USA? "In 2018, nearly 18% of all (egg) hens were in cage-free production, up from 12% in 2016 and 4% in 2010. According to USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service, approximately 71% of U.S. hens must be in cage-free production by 2026 to meet projected demand."

A quarter of all meat chickens and half of all egg hens being free range in a whole country is a big deal. I would call that making an impact. A 450% increase in the number of eggs being sold being free range in the USA? I'm not sure what YOU think making an impact is.... But I'll take it. I'll take it a million times over.

Additionally, you don't get to a whole country switching to smaller scale or better food choices without having those choices available. To do that people have to be raising birds under those conditions. People have to be doing that work. And it's a growing movement so... Yes, I do think it makes a difference and it's a real possibility for a small scale producer to feed a lot of people and for it to add up.

Not to even begin to mention that qualitative value is real even if you chose to ignore it.

You didn't mention economics and money previously, if you wanna argue money making that's another post and moves the goal posts. I wouldn't even try to debate you, making money's not my goal. But even then, bigger companies making more responsible choices are still making money from it. It's still economically feasible and it's built on the backbone of smaller holdings.

In some weird exclusively-chicken-eating, no-incubators, unchanging-companies, specifically crafted so you can complain about people fantasy land you're right no impact happens. In reality, you're just literally wrong. And the numbers - the REAL numbers, not made up ones - show it.

 

[Shadrach]

Why on EARTH would anyone argue with numbers that are patently false? Debate me using literal fake numbers I pulled out of thin air. What?

Lets start with this, which numbers are false?

 

[ValerieJ]

I haven't read a lot of discussions on BYC about trying to interrupt the commercial chicken farms, except for this one, and I stopped reading this one on page 4. What I have heard is people wanting to raise their own food because of the health benefits. If they have the acreage and inclination I think that's great.

I am going to assume eek:not a smart thing, I know) that people who raise chickens to feed their families most likely also raise beef, pork, etc. to supplement their nutritional needs.

This is what folks around here do that want to raise all their own meat. And many don't buy any commercial chicken or meat. In fact, living on a salmon river, they don't buy fish either.

That's not how I do it, but I wish I were that adventurous.

Each person has to make decisions on what is best for their family, and live by their own conscience.

 

[aart]

It's something I should do here but don't. I make bone an bits stew occasional. I don't have canning equipment here. How long does it last in a sealed jar?

I cook the whole bird(cut into pieces) in the pressure cooker, take the meat out after 30-60 minutes, cook the rest for another couple hours, strain out the solids for the stock/broth. If I don't eat it within a week I toss it in the freezer. Resulting meat and broth can make many different meals.

 

[Shadrach]

I cook the whole bird(cut into pieces) in the pressure cooker, take the meat out after 30-60 minutes, cook the rest for another couple hours, strain out the solids for the stock/broth. If I don't eat it within a week I toss it in the freezer. Resulting meat and broth can make many different meals.

I might give it a try next time I eat one of the chickens here; Christmas looks likely.

 

[ChocolateMouse]

Lets start with this, which numbers are false?

Sure!

"So, for one person this amounts to 52 chickens a year to cover their meat consumption (only eating chicken meat reared at home). For a family of four that’s 208 chickens per year."
But later it's shown that in reality people eat on average 25 chickens a year per person. So 100 for a family of four. Very few people in the country eat the amount of chicken you're proposing, let ALONE all of their protein? So why would I operate under the false assumption that people eat twice the chicken they do let alone all of their protein? That's just not representative of reality.

"This means rooster and some stock to breed next years chickens from; say a minimum of a further 100 hens going broody each year and producing four chicks per hen, plus of course the roosters needed to fertilize the eggs."
That's wack. Even if you have to use broodies (which is part of that weird no incubators assumption you've made) why only four chicks each? What broody can only raise four at a time? Seramas? I've had broodies hatch out 10 chicks from 14 eggs. And we only need to produce 100 chickens per year. If your hens have 8 chicks each and only raise one brood each per year that means you need about 13 hens and maybe 1 rooster for a family of four. For your whole breeding stock to replace everything with broodies. In reality though most people don't need to use broodies. Incubators exist and they're fine. Before electric ones there were gas. Before that they were often hatched near wood stoves in hard times.
Even with the broodies accounted for, you'll have a ton of eggs as well if they only go broody once a year. And that's not even under ideal conditions like broodies multiple times a year. So eggs are a no brainer but I'll cover it more later.

"That gives a flock size of roughly 500 chickens to supply a bit over half a families protein from meat requirement each year."
Actually it gives someone a flock size of 114 for a family of four, a still exaggerated number for several reasons. The average household in the USA is a little over 3 people and dropping. So for the realistic average household you need even less. About 90 chickens a year.

"providing for the family and not supporting the meat industry are self righteous delusional nonsense....unless of course you have 500 chickens."
And this is of course where it gets judgey, the summation of the bad numbers and goes off the rails.
Even accounting for extreme error average household in america would need a maintained flock of at most 25 chickens for 8 months of the year and then an additional 75 maintained only for 3-4 months.
I would argue you can also use incubators and keep your numbers of broodies lower and maintain a small flock of 25 total chickens year round, hatching out chicks regularly without broodies. And that "impact" is not defined as "every ounce of your chicken comes from your lawn" so half is PLENTY of your meat from your own land so raising out only 30 or so birds a year is a big impact. Or you could just buy CX and only keep them for 10 weeks and do only one batch a year. (This is what I do in addition to my old egg chickens and cockerels.)

"An egg a day per person works out as 28 eggs every week 52 weeks of the year. That’s 1456 eggs a year."
Technically true. But who on EARTH eats that many eggs!? (Maybe Gaston? ) The average american eats less than 300 eggs per year. That's SUCH an easy figure to reach. A bit more than one chicken per person per year should meet those numbers with ease. SUPER easy for the average household to get ALL their eggs from back yards.

So. Based on your deeply exaggerated numbers, you're right. But they're not based in reality. With all these very real easy to cite numbers that produce a more accurate profile not so much any more.

 

[Shadrach]

https://www.backyardchickens.com/th...your-family-eats.1340151/page-3#post-21951255

There are no wrong numbers. What you actually mean is the numbers are right but the model doesn't fit the reality of how people feed themselves. Yep, I agree with that 100%. I never meant it to.
You're working on the data that Americans eat 25 chickens a year. I stipulated that the model I was using was for eating chickens only and I set half their protein requirement as an arbitrary average.
The data you are using doesn't take into account the other sources of animal protein these people use.
Just to make it totally clear the model is based on if you only ate chicken you produced as your source of meat protein.
The rest of your post is just ranting.
It's consumers and/or legislation that influence the meat and egg producers. When you rear chickens for meat you are no longer a consumer if you rear enough so you have no influence.
Part of your argument rests on if everybody did and everybody wont do. Yes if everybody bought 3 less chickens it would have an impact on the US market. They'll make up for that by selling to another market.
I don't know any backyard chicken keepers that produce enough excess chickens to be selling a sufficient quantity to make a noticeable contribution to the overall chicken consumption.
You keep losing sight of the model and spinning off on a tangent trying to deal with lots of other things that the model makes no attempt to deal with.

 

[FortCluck]

Honestly playing devil's advocate for a bit I don't think a large percentage of keepers are trying to make a dent in the industrial meat/egg market.
Myself nor my family ever did, the main reason for our own birds was simply due to market products being disgusting and flavorless.
When you see the condtions provided and understand the very basic needs of the birds you're quite certain that wont be improving so you have your own and do your best for them.
Paying for inedible food and having it suffer to boot was and never will be a card on the table

I live near a Tyson supplier. The day I saw a truck filled with the chickens, I stopped eating meat. I haven't touched meat since whenever I think about eating meat I see those nasty looking chickens!

 

[Shadrach]

Sure!

"So, for one person this amounts to 52 chickens a year to cover their meat consumption (only eating chicken meat reared at home). For a family of four that’s 208 chickens per year."
But later it's shown that in reality people eat on average 25 chickens a year per person. So 100 for a family of four. Very few people in the country eat the amount of chicken you're proposing, let ALONE all of their protein? So why would I operate under the false assumption that people eat twice the chicken they do let alone all of their protein? That's just not representative of reality.

"This means rooster and some stock to breed next years chickens from; say a minimum of a further 100 hens going broody each year and producing four chicks per hen, plus of course the roosters needed to fertilize the eggs."
That's wack. Even if you have to use broodies (which is part of that weird no incubators assumption you've made) why only four chicks each? What broody can only raise four at a time? Seramas? I've had broodies hatch out 10 chicks from 14 eggs. And we only need to produce 100 chickens per year. If your hens have 8 chicks each and only raise one brood each per year that means you need about 13 hens and maybe 1 rooster for a family of four. For your whole breeding stock to replace everything with broodies. In reality though most people don't need to use broodies. Incubators exist and they're fine. Before electric ones there were gas. Before that they were often hatched near wood stoves in hard times.
Even with the broodies accounted for, you'll have a ton of eggs as well if they only go broody once a year. And that's not even under ideal conditions like broodies multiple times a year. So eggs are a no brainer but I'll cover it more later.

"That gives a flock size of roughly 500 chickens to supply a bit over half a families protein from meat requirement each year."
Actually it gives someone a flock size of 114 for a family of four, a still exaggerated number for several reasons. The average household in the USA is a little over 3 people and dropping. So for the realistic average household you need even less. About 90 chickens a year.

"providing for the family and not supporting the meat industry are self righteous delusional nonsense....unless of course you have 500 chickens."
And this is of course where it gets judgey, the summation of the bad numbers and goes off the rails.
Even accounting for extreme error average household in america would need a maintained flock of at most 25 chickens for 8 months of the year and then an additional 75 maintained only for 3-4 months.
I would argue you can also use incubators and keep your numbers of broodies lower and maintain a small flock of 25 total chickens year round, hatching out chicks regularly without broodies. And that "impact" is not defined as "every ounce of your chicken comes from your lawn" so half is PLENTY of your meat from your own land so raising out only 30 or so birds a year is a big impact. Or you could just buy CX and only keep them for 10 weeks and do only one batch a year. (This is what I do in addition to my old egg chickens and cockerels.)

"An egg a day per person works out as 28 eggs every week 52 weeks of the year. That’s 1456 eggs a year."
Technically true. But who on EARTH eats that many eggs!? (Maybe Gaston? ) The average american eats less than 300 eggs per year. That's SUCH an easy figure to reach. A bit more than one chicken per person per year should meet those numbers with ease. SUPER easy for the average household to get ALL their eggs from back yards.

So. Based on your deeply exaggerated numbers, you're right. But they're not based in reality. With all these very real easy to cite numbers that produce a more accurate profile not so much any more.

Seriously, all you need to mention is that the model doesn't represent the reality of how people consume and rear chickens and I would agree with you. It was never meant to and this is what you don't seem to understand. It's a model.

 

[ChocolateMouse]

arbitrary average. You mean an incorrect average.

There are no wrong numbers. There are if you're making conclusions based on your numbers.

The data you are using doesn't take into account the other sources of animal protein these people use. Neither does yours? ???

Just to make it totally clear the model is based on if you only ate chicken you produced as your source of meat protein. You keep losing sight of the model. Your model is wrong and therefore no conclusions can be drawn from it. That's literally how you get terrible pop sci garbage like "vaccines cause autism" or "pumpkin cures serious worm problems" or "weed cures cancer". Wrong models produce only wrong conclusions.
Your model is wrong and your conclusions are wrong as a result. Even ignoring how small farms push socio/economic issues. It's that simple.

You're trying to make definitive claims though.

Potatoes need an acre to make 10lbs because I said so. Therefore, nobody should bother growing their own potatoes because I said this.

This is your argument.
This argument is stupid.

Produce an accurate model that reflects reality and not whatever garbage your model is and make your argument from there.