Last year, I wrote a great deal about the rise of “ventilation shutdown plus” (VSD+), a method being used to mass kill poultry birds on factory farms by sealing off the airflow inside barns and pumping in extreme heat using industrial-scale heaters, so that the animals die of heatstroke over the course of hours. It is one of the worst forms of cruelty being inflicted on animals in the US food system — the equivalent of roasting animals to death — and it’s been used to kill tens of millions of poultry birds during the current avian flu outbreak.

As of this summer, the most recent period for which data is available, more than 49 million birds, or over 80 percent of the depopulated total, were killed in culls that used VSD+ either alone or in combination with other methods, according to an analysis of USDA data by Gwendolen Reyes-Illg, a veterinary adviser to the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), an animal advocacy nonprofit. These mass killings, or “depopulations,” in the industry’s jargon, are paid for with public dollars through a USDA program that compensates livestock farmers for their losses.

  • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    intent to slaughter them

    Assuming that’s the intent is an asshole move. What if the primary intent is to extract nutrition from land that is otherwise unproductive?

    • triangle5106@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Is it not the intent? A farmer generally isn’t going to raise an animal for fun. That wouldn’t be profitable, and small farms are already difficult to make a living on.

      I can entertain the idea that I could walk up to a farmer and ask them what their intent is, and they reply, “why it’s to extract nutrition from land that is otherwise unproductive, of course!”. But the end result is the same in either case regardless of stated intent: animals are being killed unnecessarily.

      To be clear, none of this applies to people who rely on animal products to survive (e.g. people in the unproductive land you mentioned). I’m talking about people like myself (and likely many others here) who have access to supermarkets and other products of a globalized food system. Like Uncle Ben said, with great power privilege comes great responsibility.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Land has more value than economic activity, such as natural habitat and biodiversity and recreation (all things farmers destroy lol)