Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten?

"frlpwr" <frlpwr.TakeThisOut@flash.net> wrote
> Dutch wrote:
>
> (snip)
> >
> > A stall is not a crate. A stall is not inherently cruel.
>
> The objective of a veal stall is to restrict exercise and reduce muscle
> development in young animals.

It's still not a crate, as Jon implied earlier in the thread. My
understanding of penning calves that it's not to reduce muscle development,
it's to prevent the flesh from becoming tough and sinewy, as well as to
prevent cross-contaminations.

> Legislative proposals to require veal stalls to be at least as long as
> the length of the animal from nose to base of tail, large enough for the
> animal to turn around and to groom istelf have been defeated, in large
> part because of the lobbying muscle of the meat industry.

The opposition was to making the stalls *wider than* the length of the calf,
not longer, they're already longer.

> Are stalls smaller than the length of an animal from nose to base of
> tail inherently cruel?

I would say so, but I don't believe they're that short. However, in fact I'm
not comfortable with 24/7 tethering either, so I don't eat veal.

> Isn't it bad enough that you sell pets to vivisectors?

I've never sold pets to vivisectors. Animals were donated to the university
research department in the eighties by the government run shelter I worked
for. That reminds me, on more than one occasion a dog owner stumbled into
the shelter long after their dog had gone missing and were able to be
reunited with the animal because the university still had them. Once I
recall it was several months later. If it weren't for the program, those
dogs would have been long gone.

> Now you are
> going to defend the inhumane treatment of calves.

I simply said that stalls aren't crates.

> Is there anything
> that humans do to animals that meets with your disapproval?

Plenty, but raising them for meat is not one of them.

frlpwr wrote:
> Dutch wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
>>A stall is not a crate. A stall is not inherently cruel.
>
>
> The objective of a veal stall is to restrict exercise and reduce muscle
> development in young animals.

Bullshit. Veal IS muscle meat, dummy.

>
> Legislative proposals to require veal stalls to be at least as long as
> the length of the animal from nose to base of tail, large enough for the
> animal to turn around and to groom istelf have been defeated, in large
> part because of the lobbying muscle of the meat industry.
>
> Are stalls smaller than the length of an animal from nose to base of
> tail inherently cruel?

Are they? Do you have proof?

>
> Isn't it bad enough that you sell pets to vivisectors? Now you are
> going to defend the inhumane treatment of calves. Is there anything
> that humans do to animals that meets with your disapproval?
>