Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs?

<dh_ld.RemoveThis@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:vc1ojv43b3su09u1ehig3e8fjn47ccdia9@4ax.com...
> Last night, while enjoying a half a chicken and a bowl of
> rice, I was wondering whether the rice caused more CDs
> than the chicken. The chicken ate grain for about six
> weeks, but it wasn't grain grown in fields that were flooded
> and drained like rice fields.

Chickens eat grain, but they also need animal protein. That animal protein
could come from a variety of sources, inlcuding ground up chicken feathers,
fish meal, animal fat...who knows....

It is possible to raise chickens on pure vegetable matter, but they don't do
so well that way. Chickens are omnivores, not herbivores.

Then there's the fact that the
> chicken had what was probably a decent life imo, so that
> adds a plus to eating the chicken.

Most broilers are raised in total confinement. Whether you call that a
decent life is up to you. Me, personally...I think chickens are really too
dumb to care.

It didn't have a broken
> leg or any bruises, so there's no reason to believe the
> bird suffered except maybe from the throat cut during the
> final few moments of its life.
> Of course if it was grass raised beef it's safe enough
> to believe the rice would involve more CDs than the
> beef. And even regular beef might involve fewer CDs
> than rice since most beef cattle are grass raised for
> the majority of their lives, and only contribute to the
> CDs of grain production during the final days of their
> lives.

Well, that depends alot on who's raising them and where. My cattle eat
grass until they are weaned at six to eight months of age. After that, they
get grain and lots of it. They eat grain for twice the time and in much
larger quanities as they are bigger at the end. I live in the midwest,
where grain is abundant and cheap. What works here, might not work other
places, so maybe they eat more grass. Of course, once they go in the
feedlot, it's all about grain and they should be in a feedlot by 800 pounds,
heading for 1200.

I think it is a safe bet that the VAST majority of cattle raised for beef
eat a lot more grain than grass during their lives. Learn how to figure a
feed ration and figure it out. That can easily be done and compared, pound
for pound and also using various scenarios of when they are put on grain.

Old rule of thumb...takes 100 bushels of corn to finish a calf. Around
here, we get about 140 bushels of corn to acre.

Also, cows are pretty destructive as far as a "natural" grassland goes.
They don't leave alot for habitat for birds and small animals. If no one is
managing the pasture, they can also reduce it to nothing but weeds in a few
years or less. Pasture management includes re-seeding, harrowing, mowing
and other pretty destructive things like that.

And again the cattle get life out of the deal, and
> much longer life than do fryers. Two years of life is a
> *lot* longer than nothing.

Death is probably alot scarier to a cow than a chicken. Chickens are pretty
dumb. They don't have the mental ability to understand that something is
up. Cows do. They may not understand what is going to happen, but they
know something is and that it's not going to be good.

Also, two years is an outside estimate for a beef animal's life. I shoot
for 18 months, the big feedlots for shorter than that. They have better
feed conversion than I do because they are willing to feed them just about
anything and also have nutritionists who get those rations down to precise
details.

The biggest difference
> between meat eating and veg*nism in regards to
> animals raised for food, is their lives.

Animals die either way. Animals that would have existed, will not, either
way. Animals that would not have existed might exists for meat animals, but
how many other animals are in the trade? Is one cow worth a single other
life...or is it not equal? Is one cow's life worth one rabbit's life? Or
does it take 10 rabbits to equal a cow?
 >> Stay informed about: Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs? 

<dh_ld RemoveThis @nomail.com> wrote in message
news:vc1ojv43b3su09u1ehig3e8fjn47ccdia9@4ax.com...
> Last night, while enjoying a half a chicken and a bowl of
> rice, I was wondering whether the rice caused more CDs
> than the chicken.

Crossposting bozo
 >> Stay informed about: Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs? 

"JMartin" <antares1947.RemoveThis@comwares.net> wrote in message
news:bhh5s3$ob2$0@12.166.20.63...
>
> <dh_ld.RemoveThis@nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:vc1ojv43b3su09u1ehig3e8fjn47ccdia9@4ax.com...
> > Last night, while enjoying a half a chicken and a bowl of
> > rice, I was wondering whether the rice caused more CDs
> > than the chicken. The chicken ate grain for about six
> > weeks, but it wasn't grain grown in fields that were flooded
> > and drained like rice fields.
>
> Chickens eat grain, but they also need animal protein. That animal
protein
> could come from a variety of sources, inlcuding ground up chicken
feathers,
> fish meal, animal fat...who knows....
>
> It is possible to raise chickens on pure vegetable matter, but they don't
do
> so well that way. Chickens are omnivores, not herbivores.

But to raise them on pure vegetable matter they HAVE to be confined.
 >> Stay informed about: Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs? 

I thought CDs were like, music and stuff.
You men eat your dinner
Eat your pork and beans
I eat more chicken
Than any man ever seen.

Anyone ever heard that on CD?
 >> Stay informed about: Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs? 

"William Hershman" <bhhershh4.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote
> I thought CDs were like, music and stuff.
> You men eat your dinner
> Eat your pork and beans
> I eat more chicken
> Than any man ever seen.
>
> Anyone ever heard that on CD?

"The Doors" 13.99 on amazon.com
 >> Stay informed about: Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs? 

On 17 Aug 2003 03:53:43 GMT, "JMartin" <antares1947.RemoveThis@comwares.net> wrote:

[...]
>I use rotational grazing now. I've also seen my pastures in their "natural"
>state...not having been grazed in years. The ungrazed pastures had graze
>four or five feet tall (and some taller). Grazed pastures do not.

From what little I've seen about it, it appears that usually there's enough
height for some animals to live in. What I saw was a video showing mostly
fields being spit up into a few acre sections, and the cattle were moved
every day or few days.

[...]
>I don't know if cows are afraid for their lives or not. What do you call
>fear in a prey animal?

It's likely enough to be more intense for them than it is for us.

>I do agree that most of the fear and stress comes
>from being in new surroundings up to the point of slaughter.
>
> >
>> Do the big feedlots raise there own calves?
>
>No. A cow/calf producer raises calves. That's what I do. Some sell the
>calves at weaning, some don't.

If you don't, then it must be worth your money to buy feed to feed them up
to, what, about 800 pounds? But then you sell them off. Why is it worth the
money to feed them up to 800 pounds, but not all the way to 1200?

>The next step is a stocker. They buy weaned calves, put them on grass until
>they are about 800 pounds.

From my ignorant position that seems like the best deal then... You don't
have to feed cows all year when you would only make money from them once
a year, you buy some calves for one price, and after they've gained how
many pounds by eating grass in your field you sell them and make a profit.

>In some areas of the country, these small calves
>go straight to a feedlot, depends on what feed is available.

Somehow it still seems that if you raise them all the way on grass you're
better off, since you don't have to pay for feed. If you were turning them
over as fast as possible, and the ones you have are in the way, then I
understand the hurry. It seems that feed lots would be in that position. But
if you only have so many cows, and can only raise so many calves each
year regardless of how fast they grow, it would be best to just let them get
to their weight on grass. But then you maybe could raise less calves because
larger animals are eating your grass? But then again it seems like a larger
animal eating an amount of grass could be better than several smaller ones
eating the same grass, since the larger one is closer to paying off. I'm sure
you have to balance *many* factors in order to be successful.

>The last stage is finishing, which is in the feedlot, on a high energy diet.
>Lots of grain.

I wonder if they like it there? If they had a choice of leaving the feedlot
for a grassy pasture, which do you think they'd take? A friend told me once
you start feeding them grain, they don't want to go back to just grass again.

> Or maybe buy weened
>> ones? It is customary to stick a calf in the feedlot right after weening?
>> Does it sometimes depend on when in the year it was born?
>>
>> >The biggest difference
>> >> between meat eating and veg*nism in regards to
>> >> animals raised for food, is their lives.
>> >
>> >Animals die either way. Animals that would have existed, will not,
>either
>> >way. Animals that would not have existed might exists for meat animals,
>but
>> >how many other animals are in the trade? Is one cow worth a single other
>> >life...or is it not equal? Is one cow's life worth one rabbit's life?
>Or
>> >does it take 10 rabbits to equal a cow?
>>
>> I try to take it life by life. I kill spiders in my house all the
>time, and even
>> so could spend an hour or more hunting down the ones I haven't gotten
>> around to yet. New ones get in all the time, and I'm not going to just put
>> them outside and let them reproduce. Or let them do it inside. But should
>> I not feel something for taking each life? Should I feel worse for killing
>> a rat than a spider, or a raccoon than a rat, or a deer than a racoon?
>> When we see a pile of dead bugs on a sindowsill, should it trigger the
>> same mental feelings we'd have for a pile of dead deer?
>> The animals we raise for food only live for that reason, regardless
>> of what happens to different groups of animals. I don't see farm
>> animals who have decent lives, as being much different from wild
>> animals who have decent lives, in regards to which is better. To me
>> the "ARAs" might just as well be trying to prevent the birth of all life
>> on Earth, because it will all eventually be killed by something.
>>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs? 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:05:01 -0700, "Dutch" <no.DeleteThis@email.com> wrote:

>"William Hershman" <bhhershh4.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote
>> I thought CDs were like, music and stuff.
>> You men eat your dinner
>> Eat your pork and beans
>> I eat more chicken
>> Than any man ever seen.
>>
>> Anyone ever heard that on CD?
>
>"The Doors" 13.99 on amazon.com

Damn. You got to it first. "Soul Kitchen." Good tune.

--swamp
 >> Stay informed about: Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs? 

<dh_ld RemoveThis @nomail.com> wrote in message
news:4af0kvojs3ijpjsbatrpjg7i8v3tnqoum3@4ax.com...
>>
> If you don't, then it must be worth your money to buy feed to feed
them up
> to, what, about 800 pounds? But then you sell them off. Why is it worth
the
> money to feed them up to 800 pounds, but not all the way to 1200?

I can keep them all the way to slaughter, or I can sell them any time along
the way. Different people and operations have different capabilities. If I
keep them, they are fed corn silage and soybean meal through the growing
stage, then fed corn until they are finished.

The decision to keep them or not is based on markets, my harvest, what debts
I have due, etc.
>
> >The next step is a stocker. They buy weaned calves, put them on grass
until
> >they are about 800 pounds.
>
> From my ignorant position that seems like the best deal then... You
don't
> have to feed cows all year when you would only make money from them once
> a year, you buy some calves for one price, and after they've gained how
> many pounds by eating grass in your field you sell them and make a profit.

You can make money on stockers, just like you said. Another benefit is that
you buy them in the spring, sell in the fall and get the winter off.
>
> >In some areas of the country, these small calves
> >go straight to a feedlot, depends on what feed is available.
>
> Somehow it still seems that if you raise them all the way on grass
you're
> better off, since you don't have to pay for feed.
If you were turning them
> over as fast as possible, and the ones you have are in the way, then I
> understand the hurry. It seems that feed lots would be in that position.
But
> if you only have so many cows, and can only raise so many calves each
> year regardless of how fast they grow, it would be best to just let them
get
> to their weight on grass. But then you maybe could raise less calves
because
> larger animals are eating your grass? But then again it seems like a
larger
> animal eating an amount of grass could be better than several smaller ones
> eating the same grass, since the larger one is closer to paying off. I'm
sure
> you have to balance *many* factors in order to be successful.

I don't have enough pasture to feed all my calves on grass. I have 120
cows. I have to feed them all year round. If I kept this year's calves and
put them back on pasture next spring, I'd have twice as many animals on my
pasture. Can't do it. I suppose I could sell off half my cows, but then
I'd have half as many calves next year.

I know of a lady who sells grass-finished beef to consumers. She raises 12
animals a year. I don't know what acerage they own, but it must be enough.
They also have jobs and the beef business is not their primary income. It
pays for their cattle, but that's it.
>
> >The last stage is finishing, which is in the feedlot, on a high energy
diet.
> >Lots of grain.
>
> I wonder if they like it there? If they had a choice of leaving the
feedlot
> for a grassy pasture, which do you think they'd take? A friend told me
once
> you start feeding them grain, they don't want to go back to just grass
again.

They always would rather have something green to munch on throughout the
day! I have a feedlot at my farm and when there are calves in there, they
don't seem unhappy at all. They play with each other, eat, sleep, etc. They
are not overcrowded (at my place), and I work hard to keep it cleaned up.
>
> > Or maybe buy weened
> >> ones? It is customary to stick a calf in the feedlot right after
weening?
> >> Does it sometimes depend on when in the year it was born?
> >>
> >> >The biggest difference
> >> >> between meat eating and veg*nism in regards to
> >> >> animals raised for food, is their lives.
> >> >
> >> >Animals die either way. Animals that would have existed, will not,
> >either
> >> >way. Animals that would not have existed might exists for meat
animals,
> >but
> >> >how many other animals are in the trade? Is one cow worth a single
other
> >> >life...or is it not equal? Is one cow's life worth one rabbit's life?
> >Or
> >> >does it take 10 rabbits to equal a cow?
> >>
> >> I try to take it life by life. I kill spiders in my house all the
> >time, and even
> >> so could spend an hour or more hunting down the ones I haven't gotten
> >> around to yet. New ones get in all the time, and I'm not going to just
put
> >> them outside and let them reproduce. Or let them do it inside. But
should
> >> I not feel something for taking each life? Should I feel worse for
killing
> >> a rat than a spider, or a raccoon than a rat, or a deer than a racoon?
> >> When we see a pile of dead bugs on a sindowsill, should it trigger the
> >> same mental feelings we'd have for a pile of dead deer?
> >> The animals we raise for food only live for that reason, regardless
> >> of what happens to different groups of animals. I don't see farm
> >> animals who have decent lives, as being much different from wild
> >> animals who have decent lives, in regards to which is better. To me
> >> the "ARAs" might just as well be trying to prevent the birth of all
life
> >> on Earth, because it will all eventually be killed by something.
> >>
> >
>
 >> Stay informed about: Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs? 

"swamp" <swamp DeleteThis @adelphia.net> wrote
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:05:01 -0700, "Dutch" <no DeleteThis @email.com> wrote:
>
> >"William Hershman" <bhhershh4 DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote
> >> I thought CDs were like, music and stuff.
> >> You men eat your dinner
> >> Eat your pork and beans
> >> I eat more chicken
> >> Than any man ever seen.
> >>
> >> Anyone ever heard that on CD?
> >
> >"The Doors" 13.99 on amazon.com
>
> Damn. You got to it first. "Soul Kitchen." Good tune.

I've got the whole Doors collection on high quality vinyl. You should
hear Soul Kitchen on my Lynn Sondek/Meridien system, purchased long
before I knew the value of money ;>)
 >> Stay informed about: Chicken or rice, which causes more CDs?