James McWilliams, in his current article (http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/09/the-locavore-movements-m…) at The Atlantic Monthly, raises valid questions about some consequences of the growing movement to produce meat in our own backyards. However, the logic of his conclusion is flawed and, at its worst, arrogantly paternalistic. Here’s why.
He identifies the core problem as a lack of individual expertise and skill with raising and slaughtering animals and therefore, his argument goes, it should continue to be outsourced to the “experts” and “professionals.” Such lack of skills results in greater animal neglect and suffering. It results in “nothing short of a bloody mess.”
Let’s unpack that a bit:
Outsourcing vs. Re-Skilling
If the core problem is lack of skills and expertise, would the most effective solution be to say “No more backyard meat production” as he seems be advocating? I would argue that if people are going to eat meat and have an interest in animal husbandry, it behooves them to really study up – and not just from books. Moreover, it behooves all of us to support one another in getting a heck of a lot better at ultra-local food production of the meat and non-meat varieties. One should ideally work with an experienced person – preferably multiple times – before ever taking the life of an animal for food. Fortunately, there are more and more ways to (re)gain such skills in community, rather than in isolation, that are true to our human roots as participants in our ecosystem. We happen to live at a time unique in the history of our species right now in much of the US: As individuals and households we have essentially outsourced all our major life support systems for food, water, energy, etc. to centralized “experts” and given away any participation in (and typically connection to, and certainly control over) those systems and no longer understand and appreciate them. We live lives almost completely moderated by others. Part of why I think urban homesteading and its cousins are picking up steam right now is that people are craving unmoderated life. That, and the economy has been the kick in the pants they’ve needed to get started.
Rates and Aggregate Amount of Neglect and Suffering
No amount of human-inflicted neglect and suffering is okay, of animals or of humans or of the earthly systems that will ultimately decide the fate of both. That said, there is life and there is death. Without going too far down a metaphysical rabbit hole, I will say that I acknowledge that there is suffering in the world. I neither justify nor defend it and I do as much as I can to ameliorate such suffering. However, McWilliams is saying that households or communities being involved in producing their own meat (perhaps less than 1% of the population by any accounting that I can find) will….what? … result in MORE suffering and neglect than that currently invoked by our industrial slaughterhouses? That is laughable. He cites an anecdotal example of a woman blogging about a job poorly done. How about we expose the millions of jobs poorly done at America’s slaughterhouses every month of every year in a system now regulated (allegedly) part and parcel by our corporate-controlled agencies? If the goal were to reduce animal neglect and suffering, such places might be outlawed. We might even examine the working conditions created for the folks who are essentially forced to find employement in such places now that we’ve wrecked the working economies of many rural areas. The list of ills grows from here. But instead of examining those ills, attempts are made to pass a law that makes it illegal to document conditions in such places. If we want a much larger bang for our buck in terms of animal welfare, I would not be aiming my ire at the person who keeps livestock in their backyard (who, by the way, has a much higher rate of treating animals well through their entire life cycle that the suppliers of animals to CAFOs nationwhide).
Conclusion
If McWilliams wants to advocate for veganism or vegetarianism, there are several grounds on which his argument would be much better based. However, he is completely wrong-headed to deduce that the solution to unskilled backyard meat production is to eliminate it and relegate it to the secret halls of corporate slaughterhouses. First of all, as people get hungrier and local governments are less able to enforce, well, anything, there’s going to be no way to stop people from feeding their families (and I’d rather they raise chickens and eggs than steal from their neighbor, wouldn’t you?). Second, people are going to eat meat and animal products in some form. They are going to be eating a lot less and, for long stretches, perhaps none at all as our highly-subsidized, fossil-fuel-driven food system continues to unravel. I’ve come to terms with that fact. However, the meat they do occasionally eat in a post-peak oil world will likely be produced very locally – in backyards, neighborhoods and towns where it will be consumed. It will be produced against a context of community-based re-skilling, compassion and, indeed, sacrament if I have anything to do with it. We are lucky that many of us still live in places that have a living lineage to the traditions that we can re-kindle and enhance. I like to say that Maine still has “19th-century bones” in both the physical sense and the cultural sense.
So the answer is not “prohibition of” or “enforcement against” backyard meat production; that is the paternalistic, arrogant response, the “You bad children have no idea what you’re doing” mentality. The solution can certainly be one of working together to get it right. There will be imperfections in any system and mistakes will be made. But I’ll take the scale of mistakes that is possible with a well-connected community of thoughtful backyard homesteaders than the scale of mistakes and “disaster” we have on our hands right now.
While I completely respect choices around a diet with minimal or no animal products, it would be for entirely different reasons than the ones cited by James McWilliams. In this article he does a grave disservice to veganism and vegetarianism. If he believes that no animals should be killed for food whatsoever, he should just say that. At least his logic would have integrity that I could respect.
Lisa Fernandes is the organizer and founding member of Portland Maine Permaculture and The Resilience Hub. Her full bio can be found here: http://about.me/lisa.m.fernandes
