Vegan life is not bloodless – Steven Davis January 13, 2007
Posted by fleshisgrass in vegan.trackback
Finished a deeply flawed and though-provoking paper while procrastinating about finishing my own on academic boycotts.
Davis SL (2003). The concept of least harm may require that humans consume a diet containing large herbivores, not a vegan diet. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16: 387–394.
It presented data about the number of arable field-dwelling animals (actually, just the vertebrates) which are killed, injured and displaced during human field operations such as harvesting. He calculates that at 15 animals per hectare, 1.8 billion animals would be killed annually in producing a vegan diet for the US. He proposes that if half of the land currently used for arable were used for what he calls pasture-forage-ruminant production – whereby large ruminant animals ‘harvest’ what is grown there and are then themselves killed and eaten – 0.3 billion lives would be saved. By eating the largest-possible – which he then amends to the largest acceptable – animal, the maximum number of lives would be saved.
In the US the annual figure is thought by the USDA to be more than the 8.4 billion animals intentionally killed for human consumption (incidentally chickens really are the proletariat of the farming world – 8 billion of those killed are chickens and only 37 million are cows and calves).
A depressing read in which the unit of analysis was death alone, ignoring issues about animal sentience and consequently quite grotesque in its discrimination between large and small animals, and unquestioningly accepting of the inevitability of the field animals’ deaths. Neither does he offer calculations about whether the ruminant animals on half of the arable land would feed an equivalent number of people to the other half. Feeling that this is a starkly utilitarian approach to the problem, and that the other alternatives to do with small-scale, demechanised, no-till systems of production have worrying implications for female emancipation and material security among other things, I wonder about saving the lives of the animals currently crushed by the machinery and poisoned by the pesticides. In the UK we are already paying farmers to leave the borders of their fields alone, or to create islands within them – might there be case for extending these, and explore methods of driving the animals into these – allbeit inhospitable – sanctuaries? On the pesticide front, I’m not sure about the state of symbiotic measures such as companion planting. It’s working for my dad on the small scale, for example.
Some comments on “Vegan life is not bloodless”:
Does the author take into account that a significant part of a vegan’s diet (varies from vegan to vegan) can be hand-harvested, not mechanically harvested? Hand-harvesting naturally results in a lot less collateral field kill.
Also, vegans are certainly not solely responsible for the killing of field animals and insects. Even the most carnivorous of us wants tomato, pickle, onion, mustard, relish, bun and fries (all plant foods) with our burgers. Even if you eat meat, modern dieticians stress the health benefits of a large intake of plant-based foods.
Hello Michael,
The author didn’t really take into account the diversity of vegans – he was more concerned statistics.
It’s true that vegans aren’t solely responsible for the deaths of field animals – practically all of us eat plants, and the animals many of us eat often eat harvested plants.
I’m still stroking my chin and wondering what the value is of pointing out the inconsistency in vegan/vegetarian attitudes to animal deaths (ignoring the incidental deaths while scrupulously avoiding the deliberate ones).
I don’t think there is an inconsistency in vegan/vegetarian attitudes to animal deaths. All living creatures (whether spiders, lions, vegans or omnivores) have to eat something that’s alive, or was alive, to survive. Being a vegan is about causing the least harm possible, not about starving yourself to death. Anyway, a lot of the grain grown in the States is specifically earmarked for cattle feed. Responsibility for collateral field kill in harvesting these particular grains rests solely on meat-eaters’ shoulders. All of us, by the mere fact of our existence, are responsible for killing other organisms. A vegan tries to minimize the extent of these killings.
I hear you and it goes without saying that we either kill or die. I think the oblique point this particular paper makes is about the turning of blind eyes. Minimising the deaths of some types of animals at the expense of other types is ethically spurious and/or illogical. In order for a vegan to make good decisions about minimising suffering and killings, we have to be fully aware of the entire array of agricultural processes involved in bringing food to our tables, including techniques for cultivation, harvest, transport, who knows what else. The reason this paper got to me is that, to a certain extent, my veganism is an ignorant gesture, even if it has honourable reasons. What I can do to keep it as a live issue for myself is limited, in the face of time shortages, by my dedication to veganism. The paper needled me into an honest consideration of my priorities which led me to conclude that in many ways I was happy to stop thinking about the suffering and killing of animals once I became a vegan, as if I’d “done my bit” and could now relax into the habit. It’s a subject that’s almost too painful for me to think about much, and that’s not so good. You sound somewhat more reflective Michael, and that’s good.
“And please don’t be depressed. Don’t dwell on the big picture. Because that’s more than any sensitive person can ever endure.” —Ingrid Newkirk
I understand what you’re saying. I found the above words helpful. All anyone can really do is to try and cause less harm. I would still say a vegan certainly causes far fewer deaths, incidental or otherwise, to other living organisms than a meat-eater. In a time-constrained society, even if you’re “only” a vegan, you’re doing a lot. I found myself, that a commitment to veganism made me more active to the cause. The trick is to just do your small bit and hope everyone else does theirs. Then progress will be made, and no single person will get “down” from taking on too heavy a load.