Mobile Slaughtering Questions; from letter to SFJ

DAPNET Forums Archive › Forums › Sustainable Living and Land use › Sustainable Farming › Mobile Slaughtering Questions; from letter to SFJ

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 35 total)
1 2 3
  • Author
    Posts
  • January 28, 2011 at 1:39 pm #42376
    Carl Russell
    Moderator

    I realize that many of you may read this in SFJ, but Moonshadow suggested I post it here to offer opportunity for this community to broaden the discussion.

    So here it is;

    [FONT=&quot]Greetings Lynn,[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] I would like to make a few comments relating to your story about mobile slaughtering and tie them into some of the points you make in your editorial in the latest SFJ. [/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] While I can appreciate the fact that as communities we are lacking the slaughtering and processing facilities that we need to have functional local food systems, I also have reservations about systems such as mobile slaughterhouses. For some, these units will allow new opportunities, but for others, those of us hard-scrabble, back-woods practitioners, it also represents the USDA finding another way to edit our food production stories.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] Right now in Vermont we are involved in a controversial effort to get our meat inspection program to accept contractual agreements with food buyers to raise and slaughter animals on-farm for direct sale. The Vermont Agency of Agriculture is convinced that on-farm slaughter is okay when conducted in a “clean environment”. Unfortunately for people who want to buy meat from me, that means four clean walls, stainless steel, hot running water, and an inspection certificate.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] I say “unfortunately” because without those things, I am not allowed by law to sell anything but live animals to meat customers, and those must leave the farm alive. I see these mobile slaughterhouses as an attempt to solve this problem, by creating a mechanism to bring the “clean environment” to the farm. [/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] Now, I too have always been a storyteller. I believe that the written page is my medium to use language in the way that best suits my creative expression. I have always appreciated your editorial grace of accepting contributions to SFJ as written. However, many other people have been trained to think, and read, in a more culturally standardized way.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] My farming is also a storytelling of sorts, the Earth around me, another medium to express myself creatively. My farming story is how I add value to my products. To me it is not the products, but the process that makes farming successful, and in my small way, it is my story, my creative expression, that people come to our farm to witness, and contribute to.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] One of the stories I tell is about when I picked a new-born Jersey bull out of a rain-filled ditch in the predawn, and carried him to the barn, getting covered in after-birth, so that he could get warm and dry, because his mother had struggled in labor, sliding under a fence-line, and down an embankment, to lay on her back in the ditch, unable to right herself, where she dropped the calf in the cold flow of spring run-off. And how I assisted the mother with getting her feet under her, and convincing her that she still had enough energy to get up and walk back to the barn, where she collapsed in exhaustion, to be revived eventually. But in the meantime I had to dry and clean the calf, and finally, because of the complications, I had to squeeze colostrum from the cow, and bottle-feed the calf, so that he could grow two seasons to become our next beef animal.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] Another is about the sow that our eleven year old daughter bought and paid for herself to raise as her own, to breed, and to sell piggies from, who died as a result of complications during labor, and how after a year, the twelve year old decided we could try again, this time with two sows. These two each had 100% perfect farrowings, with no losses, with the near exception of one piglet that I found limp, smothered under its mother, with just the slightest sense of a heart beat, to whom I performed mouth-to-mouth breathing and CPR, reviving him, to watch him cough, and sputter, and shiver, and within ten minutes not be able to determine which of the fighting, squealing, sucklers he was.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] Now the USDA and VT Agency of Ag say that those stories are fine. And they are fine if I add that the animals are all fed organic feed when fed grain, or that we use only Homeopathy, and pasture them all on good grass. But, you know, they want to edit out one big part of our story here at Earthwise Farm and Forest. They say as long as we are raising animals for our own consumption, I can tell this, but if we want someone else to buy some of our meat, then I have to hire a ghost-writer.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] That part of the story that they want to edit out, is when I walk into the field, right up to the 18 month-old steer, put a rope halter on him, and walk him off to a quite place on the farm under a large tree. Or the part where I walk into the pig-pen, with gun and knife on hand, and all the pigs come to greet me. They don’t want me to be able to tell about patiently finding the opportunity to place a bullet, just of center, into the skulls of these trusting beasts, or how I place my razor-sharp double-edged sticking blade into the throat, and feel for the vessels as they burst under steady pressured movement. [/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] Nor about how I wrestle with the emotions of addressing these animals that I have literally breathed life into, have cared for, and allowed to be a part of my life as living beings. Nor about how I have come to find out that these feelings bring a truth to feeding myself, an intimacy with the circle of Life on my farm. [/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] You know, this is the part of the story that people are fascinated by. Some are definitely uncomfortable with it, but for the few customers we can supply, this is the part of the story that grabs them. They can feel this food. This is real food. They can feel the truth in the personal relationship to the lives of these animals, and they want to take part, if only as a paying customer. Every year we have several who actually want to come and watch, and/or help out, to learn, to be a character in the story of where their food comes from.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] The USDA and VAA don’t want that to be part of the story that I include with the meat I sell to people. In some way, I believe that it is because there is no way that the industry can put that story into their packaging. I could have an unfair advantage. So they concentrate on whether I have four walls, or stainless steel, or a bathroom for the inspector.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] I realize that we are not going to feed the world at our small scale, but I also know that we are not alone in producing food with this kind of story. I also realize that in some ways the mobile slaughterhouses are going to fill voids in communities that lack the processing infrastructure that is required for vital local food systems. However, I also see these units as an excuse by the meat inspection agencies, and their corporate cronies, to be able to do away with, once and for all, the fool-hardy few who want to sell/buy farm-slaughtered meat.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] As we move forward with these important discussions, let’s keep in mind that we can have tiered regulation, so that small, human-scale operations can still produce the kind of real food that people have been providing for each other for hundreds of thousands of years. The food with a story that links the consumers and the animals to the land they all live on, in real ways. The relationships that we have with our customers are profound, and direct, and they are quite different than the relationships between producers and the consumers who buy packages from stores. [/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] We must remember to leave room for these relationships to develop. It isn’t just “Local Food” that people are looking for, it is a story that they can be a part of. There is a truth to the human food story that we are not telling these days. In my Cree Indian Cookbook the recipe for Roasted Rabbit starts, “Kill a Rabbit”. We have allowed ourselves to be socialized away from this on a large scale, but we run the risk of regulating it out of our reach to ever regain it, if we don’t watch out.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot] Thanks for all you do, [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] Carl Russell[/FONT]

    January 28, 2011 at 4:01 pm #65271
    PhilG
    Participant

    Nice reply Carl,
    My question to every one is – Why ? Why do we let them do this to us? how did it get to the point were every part of our lives is so overly regulated, licensed and inspected, to the point that we have to consult an attorney to figure out what the attorney/polititions are throwing at us. This country is bankrupt, the states are bankrupt, the county’s are bankrupt and yet we the people are paying people to make more and more regulations and then to inforce those regulations upon us impedeing our ability to take care of ourselves and our community.
    I was listening to Egypians gettin all rowdy in the streets this morning on the radio and wondering how long till that kind of stuff starts up around here, the problem is my nearest neighbor is 1/2 mile and so on, so to get a mob together and get rowdy on the meat inspecter might take some effort.
    Why don’t we just all sell our meat as needed and let the chips fall where they may? Or get writen consent from the buyer that they are of sound mind and body and are purchasing this here bag of meat on their own free will ,as a free American, to feed their wife and three hungry children, and realize all the risks involved – such as – know one has ever died from Carls meat , unlike the meat at the store- sign the piece of paper, add it to all the other piles of paper’s we have to sign for stuff to appease our attorney/polititions and be done ?
    Why do we let them intimidate us so much, “they” can’t stop a million small farmers and ranchers from doing business unless we let “them”, “they” are all about legal documents, thets give them one, post it on here and every other small- organic-whatever websight and get back to living and doing our thing without having to deal with “them” so much.
    Any attorneys out there willing to add to our freedom instead of take from it?

    January 28, 2011 at 6:02 pm #65268
    jac
    Participant

    Great reading Carl… I think “divide and conquer” is the game they are playing. They did it with the milk, they tried it over here with so called “beef clubs” as an attemt to do away with auction markets. Agriculture and the very farmers that do it are totally fragmented and when the powers that be see a glimmer of people rebelling they bring out new regulations which small producers find harder each year to stick to… mabey a moble slaughter unit on a self drive basis might be the way forward:D.. a bit like a group of folks leasing a milk cow…
    John

    January 28, 2011 at 6:30 pm #65253
    near horse
    Participant

    Carl,

    I have to say you tell a good story but also need to respectfully disagree with your interpretation of the motive(s) behind the mobile slaughter proposal(s). Believe me, most USDA and state inspectors would be glad to not have mobile slaughter operations become available. It would be a lot easier for them to go to 5 or 10 major facilities with decent parking, a cafeteria and restrooms then to travel hither and yon to be present at the slaughter of 2 steers here and 5 over there. This system is viewed as concession to the demands of the small producers and local consumers rather than a power move by big govt.

    I don’t see how processing your 18 month old Jersey in a trailer parked at your place versus in your barn or pasture changes your narrative. While trying to maintain our independence as small farmers/loggers we’ve all made concessions to working within the constraints of a modern society – whether it’s driving motorized vehicles to transport goods using federal, state and county built and maintained highways, seeking grant money from others to help support our causes or using the internet to convey our ideas and find information.

    Carl, I have no doubt that what you do and how you process your animals results in a good and safe product but, having seen the mobile slaughter unit at a nearby farm, I can’t see how it isn’t a positive option in an arena (small local food production) that’s been lobbied against pretty hard. Perhaps in the future, there might be some opportunity to do away with the need for the slaughter unit but there will likely always be some form of accountability (licensing or something) more than just market forces. Remember, we do require that people prove they can operate a motor vehicle safely.

    Funny – while you see this as a negative infringement on your personal freedom to operate, I see it as a positive in allowing consumers access to humanely raised and slaughtered animal products, raised in their own region even. The need for regulation comes from what I see as the negative – people. People will cheat an unregulated system (consumers ….) if they aren’t held accountable – it’s all around us everyday.

    It’s been said before, with so many battles to wage, one must pick and choose wisely when to fight and when to compromise. I see this as one place where compromise looks pretty good.

    January 28, 2011 at 7:38 pm #65247
    goodcompanion
    Participant

    I don’t understand why this must be an either-or choice with on-farm slaughter performed either by a farmer (who we assume to not have facilities) without facilities or by a mobile unit (who we assume to have them). Why not have both?

    The true rub is not so much who slaughters but where it is done–the so-called sterile environment. I think Carl is arguing in part that the sterile environment, as described by the state, is not necessary and an imposition on producers. As I understand it the state is opening up to on-farm slaughter so long as farmers have basic facilities. The requirements seem reasonable enough to me. To me the imposition is slight compared to other yokes we must bear in this business.

    I remember in France they allowed travelling processors to slaughter on-farm with no facilities whatsoever. And this in the hyper-regulated EU. Maybe that is what we should be fighting the good fight to (re)legalize here. I don’t object to Carl holding out for this, I just think it’s probably not an attainable goal in the current environment.

    True enough that the real threats to public health are all large-scale food processors. But probably partly because they dominate the scene so completely, and there aren’t enough small processors to produce a statistically significant number of heath events through bad product. The original legislative path that led us to the current point was started down in an era when not all farmstead products were equally trustworthy.

    I feel like the agency does have a role to play. It’s impossible to leave things just to the free market to regulate…most likely the courts would find the farmer would face consequences beyond having to give a refund for a contaminated batch of meat. Of course we can say we have great methods and nothing like that can ever happen. Until it does.

    I’m fortunate enough to have an established slaughterhouse 3 miles away to do my processing. I’m happy to spread the wealth around, so to speak, so this argument is not life-or-death to me personally. But I have to say that I feel like farmers would be better off and more secure to have agency and/or health dept oversight for their work, if only to establish a track record of sound, vigilant procedure.

    January 28, 2011 at 7:41 pm #65240
    Carl Russell
    Moderator

    Geoff, my point is not against mobile slaughtering units per se. It is against the fact that when they are readily available then those of us who could raise and sell meat the way I do will be REQUIRED to use the mobile facility. This will add cost that I have no control over. It will also mean that my relationship to the animal will be interrupted by the killer on the floor.

    I mentioned several times that I see the potential value of these units. What I want is the ability to sell meat directly to a customer, raised and slaughtered the same way I raise and slaughter for my own consumption, which is on my farm, by my own hand. The meat is not the product, the story is, and I know that I have a market that I could easily supply, at good profit.

    The current regulations forbid me from selling meat this way. We are working to establish on-farm exemptions for small scale operations. I know for a fact from talking with folks in Vermont Agency of Ag that they see the mobile units as a solution that would eliminate the need for such exemptions.

    I have supplied myself with on-farm slaughtered meat for 25 years, meeting all of my needs. I am not looking to expand, I am responding to people seeking me, to buy the meat I raise for myself. Furthermore, these mobile units will not be traveling from farm to farm. They will be parking in central locations regionally, requiring that people will still have to transport animals.

    The problem as I say, is not that many folks won’t find it a great solution, it is that it won’t address the market I am talking about. My freedom to operate is not infringed. I am talking about keeping a human scale to some part of our food system for other people.

    At our scale we would not be able to sell “unregulated” to unsuspecting consumers. Our position is that on-farm slaughtered meat be limited to contractual sales, and by 1/2 and whole animals only, with some maximum number such as there is now for poultry (up to 1000 birds annually, possibly 10 large animals annually).

    It is about choices. We need to protect our right to make choices, as producers and consumers, no one else is going to do it for us.

    Carl

    January 28, 2011 at 11:23 pm #65248
    goodcompanion
    Participant

    @Carl Russell 24245 wrote:

    The meat is not the product, the story is, and I know that I have a market that I could easily supply, at good profit.

    The current regulations forbid me from selling meat this way. We are working to establish on-farm exemptions for small scale operations. I know for a fact from talking with folks in Vermont Agency of Ag that they see the mobile units as a solution that would eliminate the need for such exemptions.

    I have supplied myself with on-farm slaughtered meat for 25 years, meeting all of my needs. I am not looking to expand, I am responding to people seeking me, to buy the meat I raise for myself. Furthermore, these mobile units will not be traveling from farm to farm. They will be parking in central locations regionally, requiring that people will still have to transport animals.a

    The problem as I say, is not that many folks won’t find it a great solution, it is that it won’t address the market I am talking about. My freedom to operate is not infringed. I am talking about keeping a human scale to some part of our food system for other people.

    At our scale we would not be able to sell “unregulated” to unsuspecting consumers. Our position is that on-farm slaughtered meat be limited to contractual sales, and by 1/2 and whole animals only, with some maximum number such as there is now for poultry (up to 1000 birds annually, possibly 10 large animals annually).

    It is about choices. We need to protect our right to make choices, as producers and consumers, no one else is going to do it for us.

    Carl

    Really this discussion isn’t about mobile units at all except in that agency people want to use their introduction to end a long detente with producers like Carl. I agree that if they believe that, they’re probably missing the point and that the issue will not go away in the way they are hoping.

    Carl, you say you are marketing a story, and suggest that the regulators and industry are threatened by the power of the story. Perhaps they are. But perhaps they’re just showing typical inertia, and are reluctant to change a system that pays salaries and more or less does its job of moving product in a “safe” manner. Nobody working for the agency or for the industry can remember the environment that gave rise to this body of regulation in the first place (when one has to assume that farmers like Carl were losing the argument against consolidation). I’d say that mostly they are wary of change, especially change that would entail more work for regulators and (in their view) increased risk.

    The whole argument extends to more than just one man, his animals, and his story. What is the proper role (if any) of the broader society in oversight of the food system? So Carl doesn’t intend to expand, just wants to keep it simple and cut costs, but what if other farmers do expand, get the same exemption, then get sloppy, someone gets sick, and on-farm slaughter (and by extension all local meat) gets a bad name? Is there no possible compromise as to an appropriate level of sanitary facility? It could provide a layer of protection for the participating producer.

    It is a big leap between doing your own slaughtering and butchering and making a sale, whether the object of the sale is considered a story or a side of pork. A sale is a social transaction, and as such is to a certain extent the society’s job to look after.

    I do agree that any move that limits our options is unwelcome. Slaughter in particular is becoming a terrible bottleneck locally, and an opening into approved on-farm slaughter could provide some relief to this problem, perhaps to a greater degree than mobile units could. Carl’s proposed volume limits seem reasonable, I would support such an exemption and advocate for it. I could also see myself wanting to file for such an exemption some day if it gets much harder to get dates for my critters. I would also support working with the agency to work towards a definition of facilities appropriate for such a scale of operations that farmers could afford.

    I have found in my conversations with the Agency and Health dept that starting from a position of acknowledging the importance of public health and recognizing their role in protecting it gets us off on a better footing.

    January 29, 2011 at 12:50 am #65241
    Carl Russell
    Moderator
    goodcompanion;24248 wrote:
    Really this discussion isn’t about mobile units at all except in that agency people want to use their introduction to end a long detente with producers like Carl……

    …but what if other farmers do expand, get the same exemption, then get sloppy, someone gets sick, and on-farm slaughter (and by extension all local meat) gets a bad name? Is there no possible compromise as to an appropriate level of sanitary facility? It could provide a layer of protection for the participating producer.

    …

    I have supplied myself with on-farm slaughtered meat for 25 years, meeting all of my needs. I am not looking to expand, I am responding to people seeking me, to buy the meat I raise for myself.

    I meant that my survival is not limited by a need to expand, and I have not purposefully TRIED to expand, but I have been getting an increasing interest every year….. and yes I am, and have been, selling meat illegally…. and yes there is a huge illegal meat economy all across US now, precisely because these regulation don’t recognize that people are feeding their communities in this manner.

    They don’t enforce the rules because they know they couldn’t stem the tide, and if they do acknowledge that it is happening then the regulatory system that is supposed to prevent it would come under serious scrutiny. They are really in a bind. They want to pretend that meat production at my level does not exist… which is the inertia you mention.

    The question about sloppy slaughter and meat quality is a red herring. Look at the meat that comes through the inspected system:eek:. The point is not whether a cleaner facility can provide better product. The question is how do we address the fact that thousands of people just in Vermont are feeding themselves from meat produced like this?

    Even with mobile units this will continue, and it will continue to be illegal until we find a reasonable solution. I think we need mobile slaughter units AND an exemption for on-farm slaughter.

    I think we can add to the exemption a statutory liability, similar to the equine liability law that states that any person engaging in an equine event must accept their own liability for accident or injury because of the inherent dangers of such activities.

    If I could sell meat to customers who contract with me to raise and slaughter on the farm half and whole animals, with express acknowledgment of the potential inherent risks, with statute to back that up, then we could alleviate a huge burden from USDA and VAA, and let them deal with producers who grow for larger wholesale and pre-cut retail markets, where their oversight is needed.

    My intention when writing this was to highlight these points, as they are often not considered by mobile slaughter advocates.

    Carl

    January 29, 2011 at 2:21 am #65254
    near horse
    Participant

    @Carl Russell 24250 wrote:

    I meant that my survival is not limited by a need to expand, and I have not purposefully TRIED to expand, but I have been getting an increasing interest every year….. and yes I am, and have been, selling meat illegally…. and yes there is a huge illegal meat economy all across US now, precisely because these regulation don’t recognize that people are feeding their communities in this manner.

    They don’t enforce the rules because they know they couldn’t stem the tide, and if they do acknowledge that it is happening then the regulatory system that is supposed to prevent it would come under serious scrutiny. They are really in a bind. They want to pretend that meat production at my level does not exist… which is the inertia you mention.

    The question about sloppy slaughter and meat quality is a red herring. Look at the meat that comes through the inspected system:eek:. The point is not whether a cleaner facility can provide better product. The question is how do we address the fact that thousands of people just in Vermont are feeding themselves from meat produced like this?

    .

    I think we can add to the exemption a statutory liability, similar to the equine liability law that states that any person engaging in an equine event must accept their own liability for accident or injury because of the inherent dangers of such activities.

    If I could sell meat to customers who contract with me to raise and slaughter on the farm half and whole animals, with express acknowledgment of the potential inherent risks, with statute to back that up, then we could alleviate a huge burden from USDA and VAA, and let them deal with producers who grow for larger wholesale and pre-cut retail markets, where their oversight is needed.

    My intention when writing this was to highlight these points, as they are often not considered by mobile slaughter advocates.

    Carl

    I understand your need to tell a story but I can’t even imagine that Cargill, Tyson and friends are concerned in the least that your story (or others like you) is hurting their bottom line. They’re biggest concerns are related to marketing in Asia and how to meet the regulation/inspection requirements to allow them access to those markets. If, in trying to meet those international requirements, the meat industry takes away your opportunity to direct market and tell your story (like the National Animal Identification Program was proposing to do) – I agree that there’s a fight to fight. But mobile animal slaughter doesn’t strike the same note to me.

    Perhaps I don’t know how it’s being presented in VT. Who will/can own the unit? Here, it’s anyone that wants to build or buy one – co-op or a couple farmers or whatever. Who can slaughter? Anyone as far as I can tell. I know that the allow religious guys with ittle knowledge of which side of the knife is sharp to carry out kosher kills.

    “The question about sloppy slaughter and meat quality is a red herring. Look at the meat that comes through the inspected system. The point is not whether a cleaner facility can provide better product.”

    I wouldn’t say it’s a red herring. Anyone slaughtering and processing an animal, be it one or a thousand, can potentially screw up or end up with an animal that has an abcessed liver etc. It can happen. Just seen more often when a plant kills 2000 in a day rather than 2 or 20.

    “The question is how do we address the fact that thousands of people just in Vermont are feeding themselves from meat produced like this?”
    I think the mobile slaughter IS trying to address just this fact. Animals can be killed at their homes, by their owners.

    Also, while there may be a blind eye currently towards “illegal” farm slaughter and sales, I wouldn’t be surprised if that blind eye disappeared once mobile slaughter plants are available. The argument now is there is no option but later on, there will be no excuses.

    IMHO – there’s no way that USDA (and likely VAA) would ever allow someone to “waive their rights” regarding buying meat without some oversight/inspections. For them to support that option exposes them to legal actions as well.

    I really am perplexed by your stand on this Carl. If it’s the money (although based on what you’ve said I really don’t think that’s it at all), most of your clientele would pickup the difference without a second thought, I’m sure.

    Well I hope you can figure out a way to make this work for you.

    If I can ask (and you can PM me if you’d rather or say no comment), how much meat do you handle for others annually. I only saw your 2 milk cows and a steer although I do remember you mentioned a hog or two.

    On a positive note – I doubt that there will ever be a movement toward regulating slaughter for your own use.

    All the best and have a good weekend.

    January 29, 2011 at 3:56 am #65242
    Carl Russell
    Moderator

    You are perplexed by my stance because you think I said I was against Mobile slaughtering units. I have endorsed them.

    I was merely pointing out that before anybody endorses these things wholeheartedly, think about what is being overlooked.

    Obviously I don’t expect, nor need, anybody to agree with me. Most people are very disconnected from the type of relationship that I have with my food. I don’t expect them, or you, to be able to understand, or endorse it. Just be aware that I am not the only one.

    Being able to kill an animal and sell it to an informed party is a part of a manner of food sovereignty that I think we need to protect, and while mobile slaughter units can fit into that equation, they should not preclude slaughter without.

    I would love to see more mobile slaughtering units. I would love to see them invigorate local food systems. Moreover I want to see people able to secure food from their local producers.

    I also want to see free enterprise direct sale farming that is unregulated at a certain scale. This is a huge part of food sovereignty. If we continue to allow even the simplest, and most archaic form of food commerce to be regulated, and somehow mobile units play a role in that, then I don’t want to see them used that way.

    I am not talking about people feeding themselves. I am talking about people buying dead animals direct from the farm. To some it may not matter who does the killing, but to me it does. To a growing number of people, it does. If having a trailer mounted slaughtering facility owned by six or more farms in our area allowed us to engage in this kind of commerce, then that I would consider. These are not the units Lynn was describing. These are not the units that are being proposed, or allowed.

    The units that are being promoted are $250,000 stainless steel and refrigerated 18 wheelers, that will not be traveling from farm to farm, allowing farmers to kill their own animals. This initiative is designed to shorten the hauling distances, and to alleviate scheduling conflicts at stationary facilities, by putting slaughterhouses where there are none, and not tying them down in communities where the demand is not sufficient to support the economy of scale of a brick and mortar facility.

    Actually in VT, for any meat to be purchased by a consumer the animal must be slaughtered in an inspected facility. That could be a mobile unit. I’ve looked into this, but in Vermont for an animal to be custom cut (facility inspected meat is not), it has to be owned by the person before it is killed, and it must be killed on the owner’s property. So I would have to sell the animal to my customer, transport it to their home, take the mobile unit over there, and then kill it for them.

    The proposal that I support is that my sales agreement with the consumer says that they own the animal and have contracted with me to raise and slaughter it, allowing that contract to determine ownership, and acknowledging that the animal will be killed on the land of the raiser, not necessarily owner. The second part of that is that then the animals be allowed to be slaughtered under the exemption that is already afforded to owners of animals, to have it killed in any manner they see fit.

    I really appreciate the feed-back and questions.

    Carl

    January 29, 2011 at 4:03 am #65272
    leehorselogger
    Participant

    maybe the solution is not to sell the meat….”neighbor,I have some meat,you have some hay,how about a trade?”….I neither support nor fight the government….I just figure how to use as little as possible and live.

    January 29, 2011 at 4:14 am #65239
    Gabe Ayers
    Keymaster

    Alright, Lee the Horselogger, UTR

    January 29, 2011 at 5:29 am #65260
    dominiquer60
    Moderator

    Carl,
    I agree with you about many of your concerns, the one in particular is killing the animal where it was raised. The one year that I was involved with sending 2 hogs to a USDA slaughterhouse for retail cuts was the last time that I transport a large animal to be killed. First it stresses the animal greatly, loading, traveling, unloading, waiting, etc. After having a relationship and routine with my animals, it seems like the ultimate betrayal to leave them in the harsh hands of the unknown and unseen handlers right before their death. Second, we sent white hogs not black hogs, we found some suspicious black hairs in our vacuum wrapped cuts, did we get our animals? we will never know.

    There is nothing like having an animal die on your farm, they are calm, trusting and unsuspecting, while a 22 between the eyes is not dieing in your sleep, a 22 to a quite animal is the next best thing to me. I don’t want anyone to take this special moment away from us, and if others want to buy limited quantities of this story they should be able to.

    This past December at the state Farm Bureau meeting I met a man with an interesting idea. He wants the NYS Dept. of Ag & Markets to offer a personal pasteurization license. This would allow anyone after paying for and taking a short course to purchase raw products like milk and cider from a farmer and bring them home to use them, presumably they pasteurize, but the liability is out of the farmers hands so the educated customer does as they see fit. I wonder if it would be possible to create a personal butchering license for consumers (people that don’t raise their own) so that they can purchase and kill an animal on the farm that it was raised. This could take the liability away from the farmer, and as long as the consumer was present to observe, most likely the farmer would do the killing and the consumer could help cut. I am sure that this is easier said than done and would need some fine tuning, but it is a thought.

    I know that in NYS if you want to use a mobile unit you have to first have the animal USDA Slaughtered and then return the carcass to the mobile unit to butcher, this would not solve the on farm problem.

    Erika

    January 29, 2011 at 8:23 am #65255
    near horse
    Participant

    @Carl Russell 24259 wrote:

    You are perplexed by my stance because you think I said I was against Mobile slaughtering units. I have endorsed them.

    Although I didn’t feel your support all that evident in your OP to SFJ, it is the other portion of your posts that I find perplexing. I’m trying to “make room” in my head to understand the story issue. Do your customers require that or is it part of what makes you unique? And how much damage does the mobile setup do to your story? Those are questions that might be driving your opinion on this issue and I guess that would be between you and your customers although it sounds like you’re not hurting for folks interested in what you’ve got to offer.

    I was merely pointing out that before anybody endorses these things wholeheartedly, think about what is being overlooked.

    Carl, I’ll admit that I believe the units are a good opportunity and have made it clear in my posts but I feel you did push a little more the other way than just endorsing others to think about what is being overlooked (which is still unclear to me).

    Obviously I don’t expect, nor need, anybody to agree with me. Most people are very disconnected from the type of relationship that I have with my food. I don’t expect them, or you, to be able to understand, or endorse it. Just be aware that I am not the only one.

    This is what perplexes me right here. I’ll bet everyone is disconnected from the type of relationship you have with your food. And we are disconnected from their experience/relationship with their food as well.

    Being able to kill an animal and sell it to an informed party is a part of a manner of food sovereignty that I think we need to protect, and while mobile slaughter units can fit into that equation, they should not preclude slaughter without.

    What is lost? An animal, raised in whatever story or relationship one chooses, is killed, on farm and sold to an informed party. No offense but when terms like food sovereignty get bandied about, I start to think either paranoid or tax evasion by flying under the radar. Nobody is going to take away your right to produce food.

    I would love to see more mobile slaughtering units. I would love to see them invigorate local food systems. Moreover I want to see people able to secure food from their local producers.

    I also want to see free enterprise direct sale farming that is unregulated at a certain scale. This is a huge part of food sovereignty. If we continue to allow even the simplest, and most archaic form of food commerce to be regulated, and somehow mobile units play a role in that, then I don’t want to see them used that way.

    I am not talking about people feeding themselves. I am talking about people buying dead animals direct from the farm. To some it may not matter who does the killing, but to me it does. To a growing number of people, it does. If having a trailer mounted slaughtering facility owned by six or more farms in our area allowed us to engage in this kind of commerce, then that I would consider. These are not the units Lynn was describing. These are not the units that are being proposed, or allowed.

    The unit I toured and experienced was at a direct marketing operation called “Thundering Hooves Farm” operated by Joel Huesby near Walla Walla WA. Google him – he’d be willing to discuss the whole system. It was a semi box, not stainless steel, mostly washable dairy panels. You bring the animal(s) up to the back of the trailer, kill them and host them up into the rig (winch). If I recall, you end up with sides, not primals or retail cuts and can handle about 6 hd per day. This unit was being promoted as a mobile unit able to go to the farm where the live animals were – zero hauling of live animals.

    The units that are being promoted are $250,000 stainless steel and refrigerated 18 wheelers, that will not be traveling from farm to farm, allowing farmers to kill their own animals. This initiative is designed to shorten the hauling distances, and to alleviate scheduling conflicts at stationary facilities, by putting slaughterhouses where there are none, and not tying them down in communities where the demand is not sufficient to support the economy of scale of a brick and mortar facility.

    Actually in VT, for any meat to be purchased by a consumer the animal must be slaughtered in an inspected facility. That could be a mobile unit. I’ve looked into this, but in Vermont for an animal to be custom cut (facility inspected meat is not), it has to be owned by the person before it is killed, and it must be killed on the owner’s property. So I would have to sell the animal to my customer, transport it to their home, take the mobile unit over there, and then kill it for them.

    This is exactly why they want to have some sort of regulation. What you’re saying is the result of a patchwork response to the “buying shares” thing. The mobile slaughter unit could be used to negate the whole “whose property issue”. I think you would carry a lot more credibility with the powers that be (VAA) regarding custom cutting and ownership if there was some level of continuity and inspection, like they’re shooting for (it seems to me) with the mobile units.

    The proposal that I support is that my sales agreement with the consumer says that they own the animal and have contracted with me to raise and slaughter it, allowing that contract to determine ownership, and acknowledging that the animal will be killed on the land of the raiser, not necessarily owner. The second part of that is that then the animals be allowed to be slaughtered under the exemption that is already afforded to owners of animals, to have it killed in any manner they see fit.

    I hope you can sell them on it.

    I really appreciate the feed-back and questions.

    Sorry if I’m obtuse and abrasive. Tired and can’t find my words right now (or ever).Carl

    Too dumb to figure out the multi-post function:(

    January 29, 2011 at 8:37 am #65256
    near horse
    Participant

    @dominiquer60 24264 wrote:

    Carl,
    I know that in NYS if you want to use a mobile unit you have to first have the animal USDA Slaughtered and then return the carcass to the mobile unit to butcher, this would not solve the on farm problem.

    Erika

    Who in the hell ever came up with the idea that the units would be for cutting up sides of beef/pork/lamb? As I said before, THE NUMBER ONE SELLING POINT on these units originally was NO TRANSPORT & ON FARM KILL AND PROCESS. The guy I mentioned in Walla Walla had one of the first units in the US and used it as stated above.

    The problem is even with a 40ft semi box, space is tight and probably not enough to go from on the hoof to retail cut in that size space. Another point to consider (and I didn’t think of this when I was answering Carl’s post) is hanging carcass storage. Most sides hang for 3 days min (that’s in high production commercial plants) before cutting. 😮

    I think humane transportation of food animals (including horses for slaughter – if that ever gets restarted) is going to be a big issue for producers in the near future. They’re not bales of hay but do get treated as such. Throw in some higher fuel costs and …. well you can guess.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 35 total)
1 2 3
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.