|
|
Author |
|
Message | |
|
dpack
Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 46220 Location: yes
|
|
|
|
|
Bodger
Joined: 23 May 2006 Posts: 13524
|
|
|
|
|
Rob R
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 31902 Location: York
|
|
|
|
|
dpack
Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 46220 Location: yes
|
|
|
|
|
Pilsbury
Joined: 13 Dec 2004 Posts: 5645 Location: East london/Essex
|
|
|
|
|
dpack
Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 46220 Location: yes
|
Posted: Sun Mar 27, 16 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
perhaps the way to go is to get the consumer to chose welfare and quality .
perhaps the daftest thing is that welfare and quality does not have to be expensive it can be that better welfare actually works out to be cheaper as happy critters are more productive and simple stuff like enough space to move about, a bit of sunshine and fresh air make for less mortalities ,less need for expensive supplements/vet medicines etc etc .
even within an industrial model there is scope for zero or positive cost effects from improving welfare.
it might be that thai industrial chicken is cheap to produce compared to uk industrial chicken has quite a lot to do with labour costs rather than welfare standards as both use similar birds ,stocking levels,environmental controls,buy soya feed in a global market and pay for similar chemical inputs,use similar killing routines etc etc but their staff get a tenner a week rather than a tenner an hour.
the welfare component of slightly less stock density, a little environment enrichment and the odd inspection is possibly evened up by the transport costs .
im against industrialisation of any critter based production and dont see much difference between 50000 birds in a dimly lit overcrowded local or foreign shed, in either the job is to keep enough alive and growing to make a profit once they reach a specified size at a minimum cost per kilo.
i do see a big difference between caged and pastured birds and that does have a big cost difference due to the system.if the market demanded very free range high welfare etc etc im sure the thai farmers would be able to do it to high standards cheaper than the uk ones .
perhaps one option is to get their wages up rather than uk ones down as to compete on price on such an uneven field will put uk producers out of the game.
while most consumers are ill educated about most aspects of food they choose by price and marketing, producers and consumers are exploited by the big suppliers etc etc etc ,welfare is low on their list of priorities but to abandon uk welfare standards will not win a price war with those who have much lower labour costs or even slow the globalisation of prole food production. |
|
|
|
|
Rob R
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 31902 Location: York
|
|
|
|
|
Hairyloon
Joined: 20 Nov 2008 Posts: 15425 Location: Today I are mostly being in Yorkshire.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob R
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 31902 Location: York
|
|
|
|
|
dpack
Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 46220 Location: yes
|
|
|
|
|
sean Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 42219 Location: North Devon
|
|
|
|
|
dpack
Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 46220 Location: yes
|
|
|
|
|
|