With his smallholding also home to a variety of livestock MARTIN gets to grips with the ethics of eating meat, and the accountability of animal welfare.
T HE smallholding on which I now live, Tigley Tump just outside Totnes, is also home to chickens, lambs and pigs. Some of which, it probably won’t surprise you, will ultimately make it onto our dining table. The practical, moral and emotional issues surrounding that process seem to come up in conversation with almost everyone who visits us here on the land. It’s a subject that stirs the emotions, as befits something that involves the taking of life. What are those of us who have decided to eat meat really saying? ‘I am the superior animal and choose to kill and eat other lesser creatures’… A tough line, perhaps, but isn’t that essentially our argument? Consequently, once we’ve made our personal meaty decisions, we can get quite evangelical about our view of things. And if you visit someone who is living a matter of metres from his future carnivorous delights… happily we still count both vegans and carnivores among our friends. Personally, although I do eat meat, I feel passionate about animal welfare and I despise the way we abuse creatures in the name of cheap meat. More important, I believe, than what personal decision you make about eating meat, is that you do make a conscious decision. Life, and especially the taking of life, always matters. Please don’t do it, or let others do it on your behalf, without even giving it a thought. But how does my tucking into a bacon sarnie stack up alongside my claim to be an animal lover? I would argue that I am doing my bit for animal welfare by helping ensure our poultry, pigs and lambs live full, and as near natural as possible, lives: they are genuinely free-range, with access to chemical-free pasture (where weather allows – have you seen what pigs do to pasture over the winter?); they have plenty of space, which helps reduce stress and disease; they are fed on non- GM, soya-free feed (better for them, us and the environment); and they are treated naturally using herbs – and no antibiotics. And I am also doing nothing to support the meat factories (I really can’t bring myself to call them farms) that supply many of the supermarkets and fastfood outlets. But what if you want to eat high-welfare meat but can’t raise your own animals? Fortunately, there are an increasing number of local, high-welfare producers – including us here at Tigley Tump. Commercial break: we will have Tigley Tump pork and lamb available over the coming months. If you’d like to be notified about it nearer the time (no obligation to buy), please email me – martin@foster42.eclipse.co.uk. And now, back to the main feature… For maximum accountability around welfare, buy straight from the producer. You can meet some at your local farmers’ market, or check out any meat box schemes in your area. Mr Google will point you in the right direction (other less well-known but ethically superior search engines are available). Your friendly high street butcher will also know all about welfare standards at the farms that supply them: if they don’t, go to another butcher. If you’re shopping in a supermarket (oh come on, we all do), look out for labels that say Outdoor Bred, RSPCA Assured, Free Range or, best of all, Organic. You can see a full rundown on labelling at www.farmsnotfactories.org, whose director Tracy Worcester made the documentary Pig Business. Suffice to say here that: the highest standard is the Soil Association’s Organic (find out more at www.soilassociation. org) – and note too that the much-hailed Red Tractor scheme actually only “assures UK consumers that meat products comply with UK minimum legal requirements”. According to Farms Not Factories: “In 2012, advertisements falsely claiming that British pork sold with the Red Tractor label were ‘high welfare’ were banned by the ASA due to being misleading.” You can read more about Red Tractor in their own (very carefully chosen words) at www.redtractor.org.uk. Of course, the pro-cheap meat lobby will argue that producing affordable food, to feed all the world’s hungry mouths, is more important that animal welfare. Surely it costs lots more to keep animals to higher welfare standards? Yes, it does. And doesn’t that make the meat is more expensive? Yes, it does. And does that mean that many of us wouldn’t be able to afford to eat as much meat? Yes, it does. That, my friends, is the price we pay for not exploiting animals. That’s the cost of deciding that if we are going to eat meat, we should at least keep the animals humanely. And some of the thousands of acres that are currently used to grow animal feed could actually be used to grow veg and grain for people – check out www.grownintotnes.co.uk to find out more about a scheme to encourage local farmers (and retailers and consumers) to do just that. If animal welfare isn’t enough reason for eating less meat, there are huge environmental considerations too. Research published in March says that growing food for the world’s burgeoning population is likely to send greenhouse gas emissions over the threshold of safety – unless we cut our meat consumption. A widespread switch to vegetarianism would cut emissions by nearly two-thirds, said the research, led by scientists at the Oxford Martin School. In three decades, emissions from agriculture and food production will account for about half of the world’s available ‘carbon budget’. We’ve all been made aware of the part energy generation, transport and buildings can play in reducing emissions, but the impact from food production has often been left out. And if you want more stats, try these: if we stick to current health guidelines on meat consumption, more than five million premature deaths could be avoided globally by 2050. More than seven million if we went for a veggie diet. Anyone fancy a Happy Meal?