Remix.run Logo
qq99 2 days ago

As someone who once built a large coop [1] then just bought a pre-built shed for the 2nd coop, it's definitely _not_ the _monetary_ solution. You will probably lose money overall for quite some time. I'm still probably underwater.

BUT, there are definite upsides:

- Chickens are very sweet animals, and are quite intelligent. You will grow to love all the silly things they do. You can pet them, they are super soft, and can become quite tame. They can purr.

- I'm told the eggs taste way better, I don't really notice it because I really only eat my own eggs, but perhaps I just got used to them

- It's fantastic to get ~8 free eggs per day (from 13, 3 are not laying this winter)

- Morally/ethically, it seems like the best way to eat eggs if you're caring for them in a loving manner (compare to factory farms)

Consider the downsides:

- You may have to euthanize a chicken, likely by hand (literally) via cervical dislocation. It still ranks among the worst things I've ever had to do in my life. Imagine euthanizing your dog or cat by hand...

- Predators, foxes and hawks, you need defenses

- Veterinary services can be harder to find. Most vets don't want to deal with chickens. However, it also tends to be cheaper than a vet for a dog/cat.

- Your wife may one day want a chicken to live inside the house. You may one day agree to this, and then miss it when the chicken is living outside the house again...

- If you really like eating chicken, you may end up finding it difficult to eat them again in the future after you develop a bond with them.

I think there are more upsides than downsides, but you should think about these downsides before taking the plunge. Don't let it dissuade you. Overall, they have enriched our lives immensely and I would recommend it to others!

1: https://www.anthonycameron.com/projects/cameron-acreage-chic...

pjerem 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I do own two chickens since maybe 6 months for random reasons. Before that I thought they were pretty "stupid"/"uninteresting" animals but I was really wrong.

They are in fact very lovable little beings. They have interestingly complex relationships between them, they are very social and I do have a special bond with the first I got, especially because we hadn’t the necessary hardware to keep her hot enough for multiple days, we had to literally keep her warm between our hands.

Now she is a grown up chicken and she loves it when I go outside.

Also they are in fact pretty intelligent animals, and they are really curious about what happens around them.

I’d ever go as far as saying that they could be the perfect household pets if only the evolution gave them sphincters.

That was a nice personal discovery.

whycome 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It’s not the egg industry that will lose out if more people have backyard hens. It’s the poultry industry and the eating general. More people will start to find eating intelligent emotional animals as abhorrent as eating dogs or cats.

crazygringo 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

People have been keeping intelligent animals like chickens, pigs, and cattle for millennia. And continuing to eat them.

Ironically, vegetarianism really only started to become popular in the Western world once people lost their connection to farms, and meat and poultry were something you bought in pieces, plastic-wrapped.

erellsworth 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It makes sense to me. If you grow up seeing animals slaughtered on the regular you probably won't think much of it, especially when the adults around you treat it as completely normal. You grow up in an environment where you might think meat comes from the magic meat factory, when you see an animal slaughtered for the first time it's likely to be shocking enough to turn a lot of people away.

tmerc 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I grew up buying meat and never seeing farms. About 7 years ago, I helped my sister/BIL raise a flock from hatchling to food. We did everything.

Having actually slaughtered and butchered chickens I raised, I'd rather raise my own. I know the chickens I raised had a better life and death than factory farmed chickens.

munificent 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Put another way: If 99% of the animals you see on a day to day basis are pets and not livestock, it's hard to not think of all animals as potential pets instead of resources.

deepvibrations 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Very true. Just like when slaves were commonplace, it was 'normalised' and many people just turned a blind eye.

georgeecollins 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Everything biological is going to be eaten. Your dog or cat would eat you if you were dead and they were hungry enough. I am not saying we shouldn't evolve past eating meat, it would be great for the environment. But to say that one biological creature eating another biological animal is unethical is an indictment of nature.

vengefulduck 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I think the problem with this argument is the assumption that nature is inherently good. Nature is cruel and uncaring. Moving beyond it is a good thing imo. We’re just lucky that as a species by the roll of the dice we were given the power by nature to usurp it.

dowager_dan99 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

>> Nature is cruel and uncaring

These are not the same thing. You're interpreting "uncaring" as inherently cruel, but it's not; just uncaring.

freejazz 2 days ago | parent [-]

That's not what "and" means

kelnos 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nature is not cruel, don't anthropomorphize it. Nature has no free will or emotions or intelligence. It is indeed uncaring, because it doesn't have the capacity to care. Nature is neither good nor bad. It just is.

Whether or not it is moral or ethical to eat animals is an arbitrary decision made by emotional beings. There is no right or wrong there, only what people feel.

Someone who is vegetarian or vegan for moral reasons is making a choice, not living some sort of universal truth. Someone who eats meat is also making a choice.

Someone who eats meat but criticizes others for eating the "wrong" kind of meat is a hypocrite.

Certainly the way we farm animals for food can be sustainable or unsustainable. I wish people would focus more on that aspect than pointing fingers and making it a moral issue.

Reasoning a day ago | parent [-]

> Nature is not cruel, don't anthropomorphize it.

You're defining the word cruel to narrowly. Per Merriam-Webster "causing or conducive to injury, grief, or pain" and Cambridge "(of an event) causing suffering". Natural forces can be cruel. So can fate and life.

simplify 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You really need to define "good" in this sentence. How can nature move beyond nature?

Psillisp 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Literally picking a fight with Nature, what a trope.

What will they think of next man versus self? What if the thing that man creates in his hubris isn’t actually better?

jamiek88 2 days ago | parent [-]

What if it is? We transcend nature and evolution because of our culture and foresight.

We are the ultimate result of 4 billion years of evolution. Nature has made itself redundant in some ways.

Actually, transcend is the wrong word we are still a part of nature of course but we can literally leave the planet and have the ability to irradiate this globe to erase most macroscopic life.

We are an outside context problem as an Iain Banks Ship Mind would say.

It’s a huge responsibility and opportunity that we will almost certainly squander.

jack_pp 2 days ago | parent [-]

We are nowhere near being able to live outside this planet without significant struggle. It would be far easier to live in a submarine in the ocean than anywhere else in this solar system.

Our culture and foresight has brought us into such misalignment that 25% of the US population is on psychiatric drugs, you have a lot of homeless, a drug epidemic, there's a general crisis of meaning, males have given up on finding partners, women are all competing for a few men or think they're all animals and stay away from them. To be able to eat quality food costs a lot and few people have the time or energy to cook anyway because city life is so stressful to most.

We are living in a profoundly sick society and economy all over the world. WW3 is knocking on the door, one wrong move and we fuck up the only ecosystem we have in the galaxy.

I'd bet if people were given the choice between living in a small fishing village from 2000 years ago and modern lower middle class the choice would be obvious.

So to say we have mastered nature and we know better requires a lot of hubris.

aziaziazi 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I agree with you but think you miss that the common concern is with the farming process. The fact to eat another animal usually comes as

- a shortcut : “I don’t eat animals” instead of “I avoid encouraging the farming process by consuming the product of those farms: […]”

- and/or a following philosophic stance, that seems logical (debatable) when someone avoid encouraging the farming process.

Few are the vegans that claims that an animal eating another animal is not natural, or that they cats wouldn’t eat them in the condition you describe (which to be honest, rarely happens).

meowface 2 days ago | parent [-]

There are plenty of great moral arguments for why animals (or humans) shouldn't be eaten unless they died of purely natural causes. Factory farming is just the strongest to argue against and the main source of both suffering and death, so it's what people focus on. If factory farming were abolished overnight, vegans and vegetarians would (rightly) immediately move onto hunting and small farms.

(I personally think there's nothing wrong with home/farm egg laying as long as the animals are taken care of well and the male ones aren't killed. That's why I'm vegetarian rather than vegan.)

erellsworth 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This seems like a category error. We don't typically assign moral agency to animals the same way we do to humans. No one is saying "one biological creature eating another biological animal is unethical." Some people are saying it is unethical for humans, who we typically do believe have moral agency, to eat other animals. Just as no one would say it is unethical for a snake to kill someone with its venom, but we would say it is unethical for a human inject someone with snake venom in order to kill them.

meowface 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

What's wrong with indicting nature? Male animals regularly rape female animals. We shouldn't hold animals morally culpable, as they aren't moral agents, but humans are moral agents. There is no human act in this world for which "this is commonplace in nature" is a moral defense.

xpe 2 days ago | parent [-]

Nature can be harsh and cruel indeed.

I think we agree the term “natural” should almost always be questioned and unpacked. It often serves as a rhetorical device instead of a nugget of wisdom.

Dismissing an idea solely for being “unnatural” is premature. Or vice versa.

At the same time, there is wisdom in being curious about weirdness that seems nonsensical. Some weird things have a backstory and even rationale that is non-obvious. Or maybe their benefit is subtle or hidden to those who only look narrowly. (Chesterton’s Fence)

Slight topic shift, but conceptually related: I hope the slash and burn “reformers” we’re seeing have the humility to recognize that institutional knowledge is diffused in ways they do not understand as outsiders. It doesn’t grow back quickly. Just because Chaos Monkey works at Netflix doesn’t mean it works for Congressionally-authorized government agencies. Rapid destruction can be far worse than measured reprioritization.

I get it though — as a programmer I sometimes prefer to throw out a previous code base and start a-fresh, and this can help with clearing out technical debt. Such a rewrite is risky though, as is well known. Besides, technical abstractions are often orthogonal to domain knowledge and expertise.

0xdeadbeefbabe 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The people who think meat comes from a magic meat factory are blind.

partitioned 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Why do people always think its the killing? Almost every vegan/vegetarian has most of their issues with how its raised and treated its whole life. The constant meat eater trolling about how its natural to eat meat and animals do it, ignore the fact that its not natural to keep animals in pens where they cant turn around for their entire life that is basically pure torture from birth to death.

If all meat was produced the way it was farmed 100 years ago, youd see way less vegans.

driverdan 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Peter Singer makes this argument in Animal Liberation, one of the seminal works on modern animal ethics. One of Singer's points is that it's ethical to eat animals so long as they are raised and killed in a way to minimize suffering.

IMO everyone should read it, regardless of your stance on eating animals.

erellsworth 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I mean, it can be both.

Factory farming has been around for more than 100 years. Upton Sinclair published The Jungle in 1906.

The meat industry has done a pretty good job keeping the horrors of slaughter houses out of the public eye, especially in the days before almost everyone was walking around with a video recorder in their pocket.

I'm sure exposure to what's really involved in modern meat production has increased the popularity of veganism, but veganism has been around for at least a thousand years.

animal-husband 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Were that the case, you’d see vegans advocating for eating classically-husbanded animals. But I for one have never seen such a thing. And when I’ve spoken with vegans about this very topic, they’ve insisted that no animal can possibly be raised/slaughtered humanely – the belief seems almost axiomatic to them.

bluebarbet 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

This conflates animal rights with animal welfare. The vegans who are motivated by the latter might do as you suggest. But a strict interpretation of animal rights means respecting the right to live. This underpins religious vegetarianism too.

Still other vegans are motivated by concerns about the environment. For them too, "classical husbandry" will not be a winning argument. If anything the opposite, since it requires more land.

gbear605 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I’m generally a vegetarian, but I eat chicken, beef, and pork from local farms that raise the animals ethically.

GJim 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> its not natural

Neither is using fire to cook food.

Your point? (Or are you recommending a raw food diet?)

aziaziazi 2 days ago | parent [-]

As I read their message, the point is that non-meat eaters have more problems with the unethical ways to farms than the killing itself or the process to eat another animal. Those two last points may be used in punchlines but if you discuss with the speaker you’ll ear way more about the raising condition that the instant they animal is killed.

Reasoning a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Why do people always think its the killing? Almost every vegan/vegetarian has most of their issues with how its raised and treated its whole life.

But definitionally a vegetarian is someone who abstain from eating meat period, regardless of the source. Someone can avoid eating unethically sourced meat but still eat ethically sourced meat and thus definitionally not be a vegetarian. So it's fair to assume that ethical vegetarians (those who practice it for ethical reasons) believe that all meat consumption is unethical. Otherwise they wouldn't be vegetarians.

I acknowledge there is probably a caveat of people who practice vegetarianism because they don't believe they can find ethically sourced meat and thus forgo meat consumption entirely. I find that strange though as cage free meat is pretty widely sold, at least in the USA per my experience.

jorvi 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You're a reasonable / pragmatic vegan. Vegans that won't eat meat because of the kill are ideological / dogmatic vegans.

There's even a small amount of vegans that consider lab meat to be something immoral (how they loop their head around that one, I do not know).

I'm currently dating a girl that's vegan and is super chill about it, but when I was 16 I dated a vegan girl also. My mother made two separate dishes for her, one specifically with esoteric stuff she would like (Christmas being special and all that). Then my mother made the mistake of quickly flipping some burning food with some meat in it, then using the same spatula to muddle the vegan dish. That girlfriend immediately said she would not eat that dish.

I nearly decided to break up with her at that moment.

I'm never quite sure it it's anecdata, but it always feels like there are much more obnoxiously stringent vegans than there are obnoxious meat eaters.

On the other hand, I've seen firsthand how vegans have to consistently defend their lifestyle choice, because by making that choice they reveal the "default" was never really that. Same with those who chose to be sober.

r00fus 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

These dogmatic vegans aren't born that way - they're created by a completely unethical farming environment and detachment from farm life as /u/partition mentioned.

As I grow up I am beginning to realize just how many "bad personalities" and "horrible life choices" are really just driven by a poor environment - and that speaks more of our society and governance than the individuals.

dowager_dan99 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

part of Western society ethos is our quick action within any sort of realm to "pick X; be a dick about it"

papertokyo a day ago | parent [-]

I absolutely love this characterization of modern discourse.

SoftTalker 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Vegans that won't eat meat because of the kill are ideological / dogmatic vegans

I've never met any other kind of vegan person. If they were concerned only about the living conditions of the animals, then they would eat free-range ethically-raised meat. They don't. Even if it's really free-range and not what the government allows to be called "free-range."

kelnos a day ago | parent [-]

Eh, not sure I buy that interpretation. Ensuring that the meat you eat only comes from ethical sources is hard, especially if you eat at restaurants, or if you eat food that other people have cooked. (Do you really want to be that person who goes to someone's house for dinner and on-the-spot refuses to eat because their host isn't sure of the provenance of the meat?) It can also be significantly more expensive. It would be entirely reasonable to decide to give up meat rather than deal with all that, if it matters to you.

And on top of that it does make a statement about one's values. Even if someone was ok with doing all that homework, they might want to give up meat as a form of protest against all the factory animal farming out there.

meowface 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I think I and most vegans also wouldn't eat it. It has nothing to do with rudeness or even the specific ethics of that situation or something. Just I wouldn't be able to physically stomach it. I would feel guilty but I wouldn't be able to eat it.

jack_pp 2 days ago | parent [-]

Best course of action imo is watch yourself in that moment, understand that people are going above and beyond for you even though they don't fully understand you, they are trying to accept you. I'd go to the bathroom, try to reason with myself that no animals are being killed specifically for you, the accidental touch won't give any flavour to your dish and it's all in your head. There's no ethical issues whatsoever in that situation.

If after that you still can't make yourself eat it then you should apologize, explain it to them, tell them you tried to make yourself but couldn't and I bet you'd get a LOT more sympathy.

deepvibrations 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Surely this is more a case that it used to be much harder to be vegetarian and almost impossible to be vegan! Now we actually have a clear choice given the development and availability of so many other foods and supplements. Hence for me to value my enjoyment of foods above the life of another animal seems pretty harsh at best.

Even chicken eggs really are not cruelty free - if you truly love animals, you would stop eating all animal products imo. Otherwise you are simply lying to yourself.

Converse opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YFz99OT18k

__turbobrew__ 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> it used to be much harder to be vegetarian

Millions of Indian people have been vegetarian for hundreds (if not thousands) of years now. I guess there are manufactured meat replacements now, but I prefer to just eat things like legumes over factory made vegan food.

kelnos a day ago | parent | next [-]

I assume GP meant "... in the West". I grew up in the US in the 80s and 90s, and I can't imagine being a vegan, or even a vegetarian then. Certainly it would be doable if you always cooked your own food, but restaurants would mostly not accommodate you (unless you'd be fine with just a boring, flavorless salad), and if you went over to anyone's house for a meal, they'd think it was weird that you didn't eat meat.

2 days ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
engineer_22 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Thousands of nations, billions of people. If only they knew the gnostic truth you hold in your breath...

Workaccount2 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

To be fair, food was very difficult to come upon historically. Killing an animal and not eating it was equivalent to burning money for fun.

Vegetarianism (voluntary) didn't become more than an edge case until food was heavily commoditized and readily available.

amonon 2 days ago | parent [-]

This rings more true for me. Food simply used to be a lot more expensive.

"Between 1960 and 2000, the average share of Americans’ disposable personal income (DPI) spent on food fell from 17.0 percent to 9.9 percent." [1]

I am not going to look for a source right now but I would venture that since the 1960's were part of the industrial era that food was even more expensive before the creation of the Haber process and gas powered farm tools.

[1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2020/november/average-s...

gadabout 2 days ago | parent [-]

> I am not going to look for a source right now but I would venture that since the 1960's were part of the industrial era that food was even more expensive before the creation of the Haber process and gas powered farm tools.

You are correct that it used to be even higher. The US BLS estimates around 40% of DPI was spent on food at the turn of the century (1901). [1]

[1] https://www.bls.gov/opub/100-years-of-u-s-consumer-spending....

janalsncm 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

When you’re hungry, you tend to care less about deep ethical questions and more about being fed. There’s the old trope about wealth and food:

Poor people ask if you got enough to eat. Middle class people ask if it tasted good. Wealthy people ask if it looked good.

Which correspond to points on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. I think we can use that framework to understand where vegetarianism and veganism fit in. You might say that they are either related to personal feelings of being ethical or status symbols, or both.

dbtc 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is about when people starting realizing such farms are contributing to planetary environmental harm.

Also, as gruesome as a backyard slaughter might seem, it's nothing compared to the industrial equivalent.

rthomas6 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But unless you were nobility, meat wasn't available at every meal, or even every day. It cost too much. Meat for most people was a special occasion kind of thing.

Ever notice how the English words for animals have Germanic roots but the words for their meats have French roots?

Chicken -> poultry

Cow -> beef

Pig -> pork

That's because the peasantry, the ones raising the animals, spoke Old English, and the nobility, the ones eating the meat, spoke French.

kelnos a day ago | parent [-]

I always wondered about that. I thought it was just for euphemistic purposes to create more separation between the food we eat and the animal that it came from.

conjectures 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Ironically, vegetarianism really only started to become popular in the Western world once people lost their connection to farms

As did dental care and cars. Correlation is not causation.

scotty79 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

People also have been publicly maiming and killing other people for vengeance and entertainment for millennia. Morality really does evolve. That includes animals as well.

p_j_w 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Ironically, vegetarianism really only started to become popular in the Western world once people lost their connection to farms

A classic case of mixing up correlation with causation?

JKCalhoun 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It didn't stop me and my family. (Chicken katsu is still one of my favorites dishes.) To be sure, we did not eat our own chickens (just their eggs). Somehow we were able to still mentally distance ourselves from ours and "the others".

I was living in San Jose in a dense suburban neighborhood. It became legal to have backyard chickens so I jumped at getting three chickens. (We had three young daughters, see.)

One mysteriously died. Of the remaining two, the bossy one decided she was a rooster and started crowing, of a sort, in the morning hours.

So we had one asshole neighbor complain and I was obliged to send them off to live with a friend who had some property in the Santa Cruz mountains. Sad. And afterward, neighbors strolling by said they missed the chicken sounds in the neighborhood.

I'll spare you the unfortunate ends for the two. I'll say the Santa Cruz mountains represent more predators and require someone with a little more responsibility than my friend showed. (I don't blame him. It was really my fault — having more or less dumped them on him.)

stickfigure 2 days ago | parent [-]

Everything loves a chicken dinner. Unless you live in a city where the predator population has already been driven out, you are faced with the decision to either let them free roam (and accept a small but steady rate of predation) or keep them penned when not under direct supervision. There's not a third option.

thijson 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

We had racoons, skunks, and foxes paying nightly visits. Occasionally one would find a way into the coop and there would be a massive kill off. We got a dog, and just the scent of the dog around the coop has been enough to eliminate the skunks and racoons anyway. The fox still does come by from time to time. We had to put a net over the roof of the coop because of hawks.

stickfigure 2 days ago | parent [-]

Our coop is impenetrable; we never lost any chickens that way. But they would get picked off during the day by hawks, coyotes, and bobcats. One every month or two.

We've given up and are switching to bantams in an enclosed run.

noah_buddy 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Some sort of goat maybe?

alistairSH 2 days ago | parent [-]

Goats can be territorial, but I'm not aware of them having any particular inclination to guard chickens or livestock.

Livestock guard dogs work better, but then you're dealing with a large dog that isn't a pet and isn't socialized like a house dog.

BobaFloutist 2 days ago | parent [-]

Can't your livestock guard dog also be a pet that's socialized like a house dog? Are the two mutually exclusive?

alistairSH 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Based solely on what I've read and experience with them when I'm on a bicycle...

Not really, because you want to dog to be bonded to the livestock, not the humans. The dog lives outside amongst the other farm animals. They tend to be more territorial and protective than pet dogs. All that said, I've seen them used more with sheep than poultry.

stickfigure 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

If your dog is hanging out with you, it's not guarding the henhouse.

belorn 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have grown up with chickens through out my childhood and I strongly disagree with that take. If anything, it makes it more reasonable to eat chicken given that backyard hens are more sustainable and more natural than processed food bought in the store. Chickens reproduce at a very fast pace, and it is not like one is going to eat the oldest and nicest ones.

It does however makes factory farmed animals much less fun to eat, both in term of taste and the knowledge of how much better backyard hens has it. It is like buying clothes manufactured from countries with less-than-stellar working environment.

PaulHoule 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Some people get used to it. We did some work to prepare our barn for chickens but never quite 'pulled the trigger' because between our tenants and other friends we are swimming in eggs. (It was funny as hell that some of our chicken-keeping friends had a fox family living in a stump in front of their house. Their chicken house was solid but they'd catch the mama fox on the game camera every night bringing home a chicken from somebody else's flock every night.)

Our favorite meat lately has been roadkill deer. Two days ago a friend was traveling to a job site up route 89 on the side of the lake when they hit a deer. He called us on his cell but we didn't want to drive that far that day. The next day my wife was planning to drive out in that direction to help a friend, the friend welched out but she went to see if the deer was still there, it was, so she loaded it into the back of our Honda Fit and I was told, when she picked me up at the bus stop, to stash all my stuff with me in the passenger seat.

Turned out the intestines didn't splatter, it was cold, and there wasn't serious tissue damage from the crash so we're going to get a huge amount of meat out of it. Between roadkill deer and deer my son hunts and deer other people hunt on our land we might need to get a bigger freezer.

um1 a day ago | parent | next [-]

I know a guy who does similar. He gives the messed up parts that got damaged to his dog.

cindylmcindy 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

nsxwolf 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My aunt names all her chickens. She will also grab one and twist its head of with her bare hands while carrying on a casual conversation with you.

jkestner 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I told the kids not to name the roosters, but we eat them regardless. Once again, humans excel at holding contradictory thoughts.

solarmist 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The only reason we don't eat dogs or cats is because they don't taste good. Predators don't make for good eating. They have to work too hard physically for their food. It makes their meat tough.

That said there are places where dog is eaten usually as a stew because that makes it more tender.

kelnos a day ago | parent | next [-]

Speak for yourself. I would never eat a cat or dog because to me they are pets, and I would feel terrible doing it.

Whatever they taste like is very very secondary to that.

solarmist a day ago | parent [-]

I’m speaking as a human looking at the historical context of eating animals. Predators taste terrible because they are high effort, low reward in terms of nutritional value.

I am absolutely not advocating that we start eating pets. I would feel terrible about it too. And if I have an option, besides starving to death, I would take it.

The other reason why predators have become pets is because they had a strong additive value in terms of hunting or protection. Dogs in term protection, and hunting and cats in terms of pest control. Groups with these kind of pets tended to fair better.

mharig 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

stickfigure 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> More people will start to find...

...that roosters are total assholes.

There's room for exactly one in the flock, and I have no emotional difficulty turning the rest into stew. The "chickens are cute" narrative only works in a carefully curated frame.

nothercastle 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Have chickens and they are dumber than fish. Have no qualms about eating them.

Psillisp 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’m from a rural area. I have formative memories of raising caring for and slaughtering animals. Hunting and fishing, literally put food on the table. I don’t remember anyone complaining that the chicken in the gumbo came from the yard.

nemo44x 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don’t know, farmers always had dogs on the farm but they didn’t eat them and continued to eat the chickens. Chicken is really great and succulent. Hard to resist frying one of them up and sucking the meat off the bone. Absolutely no desire to do that with a dog.

abdullahkhalids 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Almost no culture routinely eats meat-eating animals. It is very easy to determine, even in ancient times, that it is incredibly easy to get sick from eating meat-eating animals. This is because predators often catch and eat diseased prey, and end up having a lot of parasites and such.

Not to mention the meat of such animals tastes much worse.

nemo44x 2 days ago | parent [-]

Yeah plus the whole they eat things I can't and turn it into something I can eat.

yndoendo 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I say the smartest hunters are the farmers.

nemo44x 2 days ago | parent [-]

I read about these Hawaiians that would use stones to wall in an area of water but leave gaps big enough to let smaller fish in. They’d create an environment that was safe (appeared so to the fish) and provide food. This would keep most of them reliably inside the wall. Eventually the fish mature and can’t escape due to their size. And now you have ocean fish that are easy to harvest.

scotty79 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Dogs are hard to keep for meat at any scale. We only eat easy animals. Sympathy has very little to do with it.

adolph a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> More people will start to find eating intelligent emotional animals as abhorrent as eating dogs or cats.

Why do you think that people abjuring consumption of emotionally observable animals is more likely that the opposite: growing an acceptance of eating other sentient beings as part of the cycle of life?

HumblyTossed 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Wait until we find out how intelligent broccoli is.

LightBug1 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Considering the bizarro world we're now living it, I wouldn't put it beyond us for it to go the other way.

If people realise they are still comfortable eating intelligent emotional animals like chickens, the dogs and cats of this world should watch their backs!

solarmist 2 days ago | parent [-]

The only reason we don't eat dogs or cats is because they don't taste good. Predators don't make for good eating.

That said there are places where dog is eaten usually as a stew because that makes it more tender.

watwut 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Given people grew animals for eating for centuries and generally were more cruel to them then we are , I doubt.

adriand 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> and generally were more cruel to them then we are

Strongly disagree with this part of your statement. The scale of suffering from industrial animal processing far exceeds anything from past centuries. The one-on-one cruelty of past centuries exists today as well (there are plenty of hidden camera videos to that effect), but what's really different is that now we treat animals as if they are mere inputs to industrial processes, as if they have no feelings or emotions or capacity for suffering.

In past centuries, chickens roamed free, sheep and cattle grazed on fields, etc. It was an idyllic experience compared to today's factory farm hellscape.

veidr 2 days ago | parent [-]

That's so keenly true I wonder how we've ended up with a society where it's not only non-obvious, but even dubious, to such a significant percentage of people.

There's not really any human analogue to industrial meat factories, except maybe like Nazi concentration camps, or ... I mean really only that, right? Maybe something Genghis Khan did might occupy that same space.

Like Eazy-E famously said, it's not how you die, it's how the moments from your birth, all the way through to the end of your life in this world, add up. Do you get a positive number?

Chicken/horse born on a ranch? Yeah.

Chicken/horse/cow born in a concrete meat factory? I mean, I don't think so...

partitioned 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We are orders of magnitude more cruel to factory farmed animals than farming at any other point in history.

NineStarPoint 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Those people were a lot more desperate for food than we were too, though.

InDubioProRubio 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't eat sunflower-seeds, as sunflowers murder one another by throwing shade.

adrian_b 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

As a small child, I used to spend a part of the summer vacations with my grandparents, who had some land cultivated with a variety of crops and trees and they also raised some animals, including chicken which roamed freely through a big garden.

I liked to play with the chicken, and by rewarding them with maize grains I have succeeded to train some of them to respond to a few simple commands, like coming to me when called and sitting down, waiting to be petted, and standing up upon commands. (Because those chicken were used to roam freely, they were shy of human contact. Normally it was difficult to catch any one of them.)

My grandparents and their neighbors were astonished, despite the fact that they have kept chicken for all their lives, because they believed that chicken are too dumb to act like this.

PaulHoule 2 days ago | parent [-]

My understanding is that birds are about as intelligent as mammals.

Funny I know some people who grew up with chickens who think they are nasty, aggressive and disagreeable. Like little dragons.

alwa 2 days ago | parent [-]

Depends how they’re raised… impressionable creatures. Though IME some roosters especially are just plumb mean.

A mean rooster has a surprisingly high terror-to-size ratio, and can easily draw blood with its spurs. And they carry grudges, and they’ll stalk you.

lsaferite 2 days ago | parent [-]

Can confirm. We used to own a mean rooster and he would certainly stalk me when he was out of the run. Not sad that a fox ate him. Would have preferred the hens not also been eaten though. Our current rooster is pretty chill and just ignores me. He even consents (begrudgingly) to my young daughter picking him up and holding him.

PaulHoule 2 days ago | parent [-]

We used to have one around the barnyard who hated me and hated my son (maybe 5 years old at the time) and hated it even more when I was carrying my son on my shoulders.

I learned from that, and other experience of hand-to-hand combat with birds, wildcrafting eggs [1], and such, to "never let a bird see your back". I like it how those little red-wing blackbirds like to sit on POSTED: NO TRESSPASSING signs because that is their attitude. They'll dive bomb you but also flap really hard up high at the sky to nip at the wings of hawks who are lazily cruising. You might not even notice they have a nest to protect if they weren't getting in your face about it.

[1] at least seven years ago, I think...

bagels 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The kinds of intelligence they display is really interesting.

They can't figure out obstacles very well if they can see where they want to go, but are impeded. They just pace back and forth, frustrated, instead of walking around the obstacle.

They are very social, recognize people, and can be trained in some limited ways (eg. to return to the coop with whistles, if you associate it with treats).

com2kid 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I'm told the eggs taste way better, I don't really notice it because I really only eat my own eggs, but perhaps I just got used to them

At 2 years old my son could blind taste test tell the difference between my neighbor's chicken's eggs and store bought eggs.

He refused to eat eggs (still doesn't) until we convinced him to try one of the eggs from our neighbor's chicken's. He liked that egg. Every time we've tried to pass (fancy!) store eggs off to him as our neighbor's eggs he's called us out for lying to him.

He'll reliably eat eggs from the chickens across the street and nowhere else.

So yes, there is a difference in taste!

prepend 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I think you demonstrated that eggs taste different, but not better.

My 2 year old would only prefer to eat frozen chicken nuggets. That doesn’t mean they are superior to actual whole chicken.

CharlieDigital 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

    > That doesn’t mean they are superior to actual whole chicken.
Taste is subjective. Sounds like his son preferred the taste of one over the other.

My kids prefer nuggets over the whole roast chicken my wife and I eat. The salt, MSG, and seasoning of the nuggets along with the fat from the oil tastes better to them. Sadly, nothing I say will convince them otherwise.

johnla 2 days ago | parent [-]

Try making nuggets from scratch. It’s so good and easy to do. Chicken tenders from breast meat. Egg seasoned with salt, pepper. Dunk into seasoned breading. Dunk into egg again and back to the breading. Pan fry. Yummy.

crazygringo 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Chicken tenders are chicken tenders, not nuggets.

And there's absolutely nothing wrong with nuggets. Nobody criticizes Italian meatballs, which are ground-up beef in balls. But then for some reason ground-up chicken in a different shape isn't "real chicken"?!

marcus0x62 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You’ll find the “ground chicken” in a typical industrially produced chicken nugget to be quite different than the ground meat found in a traditional Italian meatball.

1234letshaveatw 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

correct, the "ground chicken" is much less wasteful and a more cost effective way to feed the masses with a reduced environmental impact

morsch 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

McNuggets are 45% meat (specifically: Chicken Breast Meat) -- at least they are in the UK, where they have to give out this information. Presumably the US recipe is at least similar.

https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/chicken-mcnuggets...

I'm sure there are many traditional Italian meatball recipes, but as one example, I had an AI convert the US measurements from Chef John's recipe, and it estimated 900g meat and 494g other ingredients, so 65% meat.

https://www.allrecipes.com/recipe/220854/chef-johns-italian-...

Of course the ingredients differ in a lot of other ways than just the percentage of meat. That's just what I looked at.

crazygringo 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Will you find it to be different?

Honestly, ground meat is ground meat. What makes you think ground chicken is "quite different"? Why are you putting it in scare quotes? The chicken breasts used to make McNuggets are literally no different from the standard chicken breasts sold at your average grocery store.

And in both cases the ground meat/chicken is mixed with binders and flavorings to keep it together and keep it moist and make it even tastier -- variously including flour, breadcrumbs, water, salt, spices, etc. depending on the recipe.

Obviously nuggets are battered and fried. But then so are traditional Italian delicacies like arancini.

marcus0x62 a day ago | parent | next [-]

> Will you find it to be different?

Yes.

> Honestly, ground meat is ground meat. What makes you think ground chicken is "quite different"?

Because when people who don't sell chicken nuggets have looked closely, they have found that to be the case.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/10/11/232106472/wh...

https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(13)00396-3/fulltex...

> And in both cases the ground meat/chicken is mixed with binders and flavorings to keep it together and keep it moist and make it even tastier -- variously including flour, breadcrumbs, water, salt, spices, etc. depending on the recipe.

Sure, or textured soy protein concentrate[0] to fill out the meat or soy lecithin [1] to emulsify the unholy mixture

0 https://www.tysonfoodservice.com/products/tyson/chicken/nugg...

1 - https://www.walmart.com/ip/Great-Value-Fully-Cooked-Chicken-...

CharlieDigital a day ago | parent | prev [-]

My understanding: there actually is some difference in some cases (not saying it's true for McNuggets). But basically, a lot of time, they need special processing techniques to remove the meat close to the bone and this type of meat is then used in products that require ground meat (nuggets, meatballs, sausages, hot dogs).

cma 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Not all nuggets are ground, chick fil a nuggets I think are just a chunk of tenderloin or something. But I wouldn't call a fried complete tenderloin a nugget.

CharlieDigital 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I do make fried chicken for them occasionally and I season with a bit of curry, cumin, and smoked paprika.

    - 1 pack of 6 thighs or 3 breasts
    - 4 tbs corn starch + 1 tsp salt + 1/2 tsp each of curry powder, cumin, smoked paprika to coat
    - slice chicken thinly and use a mallet to flatten to make it even and cook faster (this also increases the ratio of breading to chicken which they like)
    - coat each slice in the corn starch mix
    - beat 2 eggs and then dredge the coated slices in egg
    - coat the now egg coated chicken with bread crumbs of your choice
    - fry in a flat pan with just about 4-6mm of oil
    - about 60-90 seconds each side
They love it! But it also takes me almost 2 hours to do! So it's a once in a while thing in these busy times.
mapt 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You're still going to come back to a child who's learned "Real chicken nuggets come in dinosaur shapes, are very salty, have a uniform breading, and don't require teeth to chew". He's going to think your dish doesn't quality.

CharlieDigital 2 days ago | parent [-]

Going through the school system (private pre-K/K and public) was really what changed my kids' eating habits. Once they get used to the school nuggets and pizza, it's hard to "unlearn". They were more diverse eaters as young kids and ended more picky and narrow in their food choices. It's why pizza is the staple of every kids' birthday party.

shagie 2 days ago | parent [-]

I believe this is a difficult problem for schools. They need to have food that meets the standards (as they are defined), appealing enough to 6 through {age} range to have them eat it, something that can be prepared with relatively low skill demands, and something that can be prepared easily in the quantities needed with the kitchen staff provided.

That really gets down to reheated chicken nuggets, pizza, and other classic school lunches.

The alternative would be to have a school that has a sufficiently large and trained kitchen staff to prepare diverse food, make sure that the food selection that they have meets the requirements (and that the kids aren't just eating the deserts).

I'm recalling back to my school food eating days and the kitchen had four people - two serving, one cooking, one cleaning.

High school had two or three in the cafeteria - and they were constantly putting out the fast food equivalent food items. I can't even remember if there were salads (if there were, I don't think I ever ate them). [Burger, deep fried [fish, shrimp, chicken], French fries] was my lunches for four years.

Though I'm also not entirely sure that schools are to blame for the narrowing of food preference with kids. They don't help, but I'm not entirely sure they are to blame.

CharlieDigital 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

100%; I'm not blaming schools, just pointing out to non-parents how this happens. A lot of non-parents don't have the context.

The kids get used to eating it at schools and birthday parties where people go for "safe" choices like pizza.

I, too, remember in my elementary school days in the 80's, that we had real, cafeteria prepared lunches (shep's pie was my favorite). But it was also a small rural school.

    > They don't help, but I'm not entirely sure they are to blame.
Well, I also believe that there is a biological/evolutionary reason from what I've read. Generally, when kids become mobile, their dietary preferences narrow (so the idea goes) because now that they are mobile, it is more dangerous if they are willing to put anything in their mouth!
shagie 2 days ago | parent [-]

That is an interesting rabbit hole to go down...

https://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2003/10/07/fussy-eating-ma...

> Scientists at the Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Unit, University College London, wondered if children were reluctant to eat any unfamiliar foods, or whether they were selectively rejecting certain types – perhaps those most likely to pose a threat to heath. Early in human history, the presence of toxins within many plants made eating fruit and vegetables risky for children, while meat carried a high risk of food poisoning.

That was from 2003... article from the same author in 2005: Age and gender differences in children's food preferences - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15975175/

And the term to look for is Neophobia (related article from 2022 Neophobia—A Natural Developmental Stage or Feeding Difficulties for Children? https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9002550/ )

> 4. Causes of Food Neophobia The source of food neophobia can be traced back to evolution when a neophobic attitude protected mammals from consuming potentially poisonous food. As an omnivorous species, to survive, humans had to distinguish between safe and poisonous food. Although this ability has lost its value today, it can still be observed in children around 2 years of age (sometimes earlier), when unfamiliar foods or foods served differently than before cause anxiety in the child, and a relative preference for familiar foods is apparent.

mapt a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Other nations don't find it difficult. You just throw money at the problem, and the problem goes away. Like most problems.

Deciding that we need to serve food at a minimum of cost with a minimum of staff who is minimally trained according to a minimalistic nutritional guidelines, and charge children for the privilege of choosing to eat, and you aren't getting a feast full of fresh produce.

Japan is a decent model in making meals more communal and spreading the labor requirements around to students so that staff can focus on back of house work, but it starts with a higher budget basis to start with, makes meals mandatory, and provides significant subsidies.

jkestner 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think it's like the rest of the school experience—your parents are the major influencers here. Our kids like what we like because we've fed them what we eat, from sardines to Sichuan to sushi. They take leftovers to school — cheaper and they don't like most of the cafeteria food anyway.

thatfrenchguy 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I mean, no it is not difficult, look at French school menus. You just have to not have the bad options on stock.

Kids eat better in a lower-middle-class area preschool in France than they do in the most expensive daycare in the Bay Area.

CharlieDigital 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

US food supply chain is highly, highly industrialized.

I visited Taiwan recently. Small island, semi-tropical with a long growing season. Stuff grows year round. Lots of markets with fresh fruits and veggies so lots of stuff is "local". The supply chain is short.

You go to even a random food stall and it can be just a few steps removed from true "farm to table".

The US is huge (logistical challenges that favor large scale, industrial food handling for economics) and many parts have short growing seasons.

In the US, the schools have Sysco and ConAgra trucks rolling up loading pallets of prepared foods. Depending on where you are, the food prep workers are contracted out to some third party private company. In my children's school -- in a fairly affluent area -- I'd guess that almost all of the food is prepared and heated from a bag.

shagie 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

They do... https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/01/24/no-more-nuggets-schoo...

> ...

> Not many schools can afford gourmet offerings like Mount Diablo’s, which also benefits from California’s year-round growing season. But school menus in several places have improved in the past decade, with fresher ingredients and more ethnic dishes, said School Nutrition Association spokesperson Diane Pratt-Heavner.

> In a national survey of 1,230 school nutritiondirectors, nearly all said the rising costs of food and supplies were their top challenges this year. More than 90% said they were facing supply chain and staffing shortages.

> The survey by the nutrition association also found soaring levels of student lunch debt at schools that have returned to charging for meals. The association is urging Congress to resume free breakfast and lunch nationwide.

> “This is the worst and fastest accumulation of debt I’ve seen in my 12 years in school nutrition,” said Angela Richey, nutrition director for the Roseville and St Anthony-New Brighton school districts in Minnesota, which serve about 9,400 students. They don’t turn away a hungry child, but this year’s school meal debt has surpassed $90,000, growing at a rate of over $1,000 a day.

> Making food from scratch isn’t just healthier, it’s cheaper, many school nutrition directors say.

> But that’s only possible when schools have kitchens. A national shift away from school kitchens began in the 1980s, which ushered in an era of mass-produced, processed school food. Pre-made meals delivered by food service companies meant schools could do away with full-time cafeteria staff and kitchens.

> ...

Los Gatos High School Hires Chef Consultant to Improve Student Meals - https://youtu.be/nMMO9fBWnjc

xattt 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> That doesn’t mean they are superior to actual whole chicken.

It will depend on whether the whole chicken is chicken proper, or one reassembled from nuggets.

throwmeme888 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

eggs are homogenous in nature, so a blind test between two eggs can reveal the superior quality of one type of homogenous product. Especially when it is an egg, which is entirely "natural"

a chicken nugget is not the same thing as whole chicken, because it has many chemicals, additives, flavouring agents, msg, organ meat, etc and is then battered or crumbed and deep fried before being packed. It also has a different texture altogether, and is eaten with the hands which children find easier than using cutlery.

compare a child tasting two different varieties of dark chocolate in comparison to a milk chocolate with caramel filling, or two varieties of whole milk to chocolate skim milk, et cetera.

prepend 2 days ago | parent [-]

You are right. My point wasn’t that chicken and eggs are the same or even similar.

What I wanted to convey is just because kids have a preference for something doesn’t mean it is better. So more a flaw in the syllogism.

cluckindan 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Nuggets are mostly skin and cartilage, so maybe that preference stems from the nutritional needs of a growing child.

crazygringo 2 days ago | parent [-]

Where do you get this total misinformation?

You're trying to propagate an urban legend. HN is not the place for that.

cluckindan 2 days ago | parent [-]

What are you referring to? Sure, chicken nuggets made mostly of breast or other muscle flesh exist, but you can bet your buns the majority of frozen nuggets are mostly ground skin and mechanically separated meat.

In the United States, mechanically separated poultry has been used in poultry products since 1969, after the National Academy of Sciences found it safe.

crazygringo a day ago | parent [-]

Chicken nuggets are primarily chicken muscle tissue, end of story.

Yes they can include mechanically separated chicken, which is basically a fancy name for saying they scraped all the meat off the bones. But that isn't "mostly skin and cartilage", it's meat. There may be trace amounts of cartilage and small amounts of skin in it, but they are nowhere near the main components.

If you're still not sure, just look at the protein content of chicken nuggets. The quantity of protein can only come from actual chicken muscle. Skin has little protein and cartilage has virtually none.

There are a lot of urban legends out there about what chicken nuggets are made of. But they're precisely that -- urban legends. They're false.

cluckindan 21 hours ago | parent [-]

https://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/what-are-chicken-nuggets-...

Seriously, do you think researchers are wrong on this?

crazygringo 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, actually. Completely wrong. That "study" looked at a sample size of... 2 nuggets. And they drew totally unwarranted conclusions. It was junk science that helped to propagate the entire urban legend.

cluckindan 16 hours ago | parent [-]

Okay. Junk science. Explains everything and the experts are surely wrong.

Meanwhile, other studies show that inclusion of 40% mechanically separated meat does not change the appearance, taste or desirability of chicken nuggets. Do you really think the majority of producers are not going to turn that waste stream into more product and profit?

Maxion 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My 2 year old daughter never liked eggs. We started buying some from a neighbor who pasture raises his lay hens (and feeds them more chicken-appropriate feed).

She eats her eggs and asks for more. If we run out and I fry up some store bought ones, she refuses to eat them - even when I don't tell her where they're from.

Same goes for chicken meat from the grocery store vs. pasture raised broilers from another neighbor.

When it happened the first time it was something of a canary-in-the-coalmine situation for me.

bilsbie 2 days ago | parent [-]

Taste (and health) are two things the market doesn’t select for.

tptacek 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

People say that all the time, but professional cooks have run triangle tests on backyard/farm eggs vs. store bought eggs and people can't tell the difference. At this point, I don't believe there's a difference in taste. The psychological effects that would lead people to believe that difference exists --- a kind of culinary placebo effect --- are so strong that I just attribute everything to that.

glenneroo 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Anecdotally I have regularly switched between store-bought eggs and eggs from my friend's little farm over the last 20+ years, and try as I might, regardless of consumption method, I have yet to taste a difference. I have also asked many friends over the years if they notice any difference and all have agreed with me.

It doesn't matter though, I still prefer my friend's eggs to store-bought ones, I'd rather not support that dirty industry.

NoGravitas 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I cannot tell the difference between backyard eggs and fancy store bought (organic, free-range) eggs, but I can tell the difference between that set and industrial store bought eggs.

tptacek 2 days ago | parent [-]

My expectation is that what you're tasting is the difference between a very fresh egg and an older egg; there's no doubt that's real (older eggs aren't even functionally the same as fresh eggs).

adrian_b 18 hours ago | parent [-]

I doubt that there can be any difference in the egg whites, but the egg yolks certainly have a composition in fatty substances that varies with the kind of food used for the chicken, which should lead to noticeable differences.

While there are some taste differences in egg yolks, the taste difference in meat, between chicken that ate mostly what they had found themselves in a large area with abundant vegetation, insects and worms, and chicken that had been raised in industrial complexes, is huge.

tptacek 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, the constitution of the chicken's feed matters enough to change the color of the yolk, so much so that organic chicken farms introduce additives to feed specifically to color the yolks. And yolk color may indeed cause you to enjoy the egg differently! But there is apparently no discernible taste difference, once you control for egg age.

Multiple groups have done tests on this. Kenji did a somewhat informal test, where he dyed the eggs so you couldn't discern the farm egg. The Japanese have done expert panel chicken feed tests. It's interesting stuff!

I think people want this "farm egg" thing to be true more than it really is true. People got mad at me on Twitter when I griped about those Vital Farms eggs (don't buy those eggs! they cost more than 2x as much as commodity organic eggs!).

arkey 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Anecdata also, but I can compare the eggs at home (homegrown) vs. any normal restaurant around and there definitely is a notable difference in looks and taste.

That said, this applies to scrambled or fried eggs.

Omelettes not so much, as seasoning might play quite a big part, and even less with cakes, baked goods, etc. in which eggs are just one more ingredient.

ysavir 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Honestly, does it matter? If raising the chickens that yield your eggs makes your breakfasts more enjoyable, is physical vs psychological causality relevant? The important thing here is enjoyment of our food.

tptacek 2 days ago | parent [-]

It does not matter, outside of the context of a message board, where it is of grave importance.

watwut 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This backyard chicken and that backyard chicken does not have to be the same tho

GeoAtreides 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

vluft 2 days ago | parent [-]

https://www.seriouseats.com/what-are-the-best-eggs

GeoAtreides 2 days ago | parent [-]

i beg you to read my second paragraph

gusgus01 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Not just that, unless you are eating them blindfolded or using food dye or in a more complex dish, a preference was shown to exist for pasture raised eggs. Visual stimuli is still part of the eating process and influences taste, it should not be ignored.

tptacek 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Right, the one that says your claim can't be falsified. Dumb of them to have missed that!

GeoAtreides 2 days ago | parent [-]

meta studies exist

wonderwonder 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I wonder how much of this is due to there simply being different types of chickens. I would guess that most commercial egg layers are from a specific or small subset of optimized chicken types. While there is a larger variety in the type of chickens people raise in their back yards. My brother has 3 different types of chickens and each lays visually different eggs.

DeepSeaTortoise 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Quails. Even cuter than chickens and much more easy to keep. Might be one of the easiest to keep animals overall. Not even ant colonies, fish, cats or dogs are as happy with as little as quails.

Housespiders and cacti might be easier.

You need to use quail proof feeders, tho, or you're going to spend a fortune on kitchen scraps or whatever you intend to feed them. They eat just about anything peckable except oats (if you didn't end up with picky ones). Cookef rice, seeds, peas, boiled eggs, sometimes nibbling on each other (-.-), or dirt cheap quail feed. Also mealworms ... its catnip for quails.

> You may have to euthanize a chicken, likely by hand (literally) via cervical dislocation.

I recommend cutting the head off with a pair of high quality, large and well maintained scissors.

Put a bucket in front of you, put the scissors from behind on the neck, just below the head, and cut in a single strong motion.

The lil birdy will not understand what is happening and wont feel uncomfortable during the process. Its head then looses consciousness in sbout 15 seconds, compared to about 30 seconds for the cervical dislocation method. (It'll loose the ability to feel pain MUCH faster than 15s, but I dont think we know how quickly. But probably faster than it'll realize that there's pain in the first place. You've probably cut yourself before and noticed that the pain only kicks in after a moment.)

It is also way easier to not screw up. Just remember to ALWAYS cut the head off completely, as fast as possible. Lil birdie wont die from bloodloss, but sudden loss of spinal fluid, which is WAY faster.

The cervical dislocation method is also very effective, but also much easier to screw up, a bit more uncomfortable for the birdy and could introduce quite some anxiety for the birdy if you hesitate for even but a moment.

On the other hand the cute little critters dont understand how scissors work or what they're for. Even if the method is much less pretty, it's by far the most peaceful method for the birdy.

gadders 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I've had chickens for probably 15 years now, starting with 3 and ending up with about 20 (mixture of hybrids, pedigrees and rescued battery/farmed hens) and 2 geese. This happens a lot with chickens. Chickens are a gateway drug to more chickens. If you have a few chickens, they take about as much looking after as a rabbit - keep their food and water topped up, and clean them out once a week.

I agree that you won't make money or a profit. The coop money you will probably never earn back, but I can cover the cost of a sack of feed (£12 or so) by selling boxes to colleagues for £1 each.

I think the eggs taste better because a) what the hens eat and b) because they are much fresher.

I've had to kill chickens (and hate doing it), which is sad, but I've never taken one to a vet. It makes no sense to get a £80 vet bill on a chicken that cost £20.

We've brought chickens inside the house when they're ill (we have tiled floors) but don't do it on a regular basis. If chickens weren't incontinent, though, they would make great indoor pets. Surprisingly smart and pleasant animals. This will also sound weird but if you pick one up, they also smell nice - kind of like a new puppy smell.

Vinnl 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Sounds like the true answer is having a colleague you can buy £1 eggs from.

world2vec 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

£1 egg is quite expensive tho: 10 free range eggs at Tesco cost like £3 or so.

Vinnl 2 days ago | parent [-]

Heh I meant £1 egg boxes of course, like GGP mentioned.

Peanuts99 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Eggs are still pretty cheap in the UK, free range ones for £1.50 or so.

gruez 2 days ago | parent [-]

For one or a dozen?

chronogram 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's about €0.35 per organic egg in the Netherlands (€3.19/10 in one store or €5.99/15 at another). The organic eggs have better shells and are so cheap it's not worth bothering with free range eggs, even if you don't care for the chickens. It helps that they're not refrigerated and last a long time, so you don't have to pay for spoilage.

jonatron 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

6

gadders 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Hahaha - possibly!

qq99 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It makes no sense to get a £80 vet bill on a chicken that cost £20.

I guess it depends on how you look at it. By analogy, it makes no sense to have my cat go to the vet either (and pay thousands of dollars for a ~$50 cat lol), but they still go. I guess it's all about personal choice and perspective. It does feel a bit silly in a way though

> but if you pick one up, they also smell nice

Agreed, a clean chicken can smell really good!

> If chickens weren't incontinent, though, they would make great indoor pets

That's the big thing! On Japanese twitter, chicken diapers are a popular item!

latexr 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It makes no sense to get a £80 vet bill on a chicken that cost £20.

This logic is confusing. You are taking a purely transactional view when it comes to the chicken’s health, but you also admitted they don’t turn a profit. In that vein, it makes no sense to get the £20 chicken in the first place.

Your utilitarian view is also the opposite of what the person you’re replying to is describing. Do you believe that if one gets a pet cat or dog for free from the street and they get sick, “it makes no sense to get an £X vet bill on a pet which was free”? And if not, what’s the difference? Neither is making you money.

gadders 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I think it is the distinction between "livestock" and "pets".

I would also be very surprised if any vets ever managed to treat a hen successfully. They tend to hide any illness until very sick.

latexr 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I would also be very surprised if any vets ever managed to treat a hen successfully.

I know for a fact it is possible. I am acquainted with veterinaries and have kept chickens temporarily while they were recuperating.

> They tend to hide any illness until very sick.

Indeed. So do rabbits and other “exotic” pets. It does make treatment harder, but experienced people tend to develop a sense to notice it sooner. You yourself have probably already developed that skill to some extent and might be able to identify “strange” behaviour is specific individual chickens.

gadders 2 days ago | parent [-]

>>You yourself have probably already developed that skill to some extent and might be able to identify “strange” behaviour is specific individual chickens.

That might be hard to do with a flock of 20. If they were pets the calculation might be different.

johnbatch 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My neighbor‘s dog bit one of our chickens. We ended up taking her to the vet and got some antibiotics. she made a full recovery.

And yes, there’s a bit of the mix of pets and livestock. We only have five hens, and they all have names. If you’re naming your animal, is it a pet?

atq2119 2 days ago | parent [-]

Farmers around here have a few dozen cows and they still all have names. They're not pets.

qq99 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Our hen was treated successfully, but it wasn't for a sickness, in this case it was an injury:

She somehow got one of her talons very loose and it ripped off, naturally becoming infected. The treatment was antibiotics and later full amputation of the toe in question + chicken house rest. She's still living happily, but would've died without treatment. Overall, it was a surprisingly cheap treatment ($130CAD?)

mrbadger 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Really? I have taken chickens to the vet twice (in 8 years).

First was one taken by a fox. My wife chased the fox and he dropped the chicken (she was too heavy for him). She had a broken leg and a broken wing. Both perfectly treatable and she went on to make a full recovery, resumed laying. As result of her closer contact with people during her recuperation she became very tame and socialized with visitors on the deck in the evening. Arguable she became a pet after her vet treatment.

Second was one with an eye infection (eyelids swollen so she couldn't see). She also made a full recovery.

I don't take every sick chicken to the vet, but if you've kept chickens for long enough you get an idea when it's likely to be mworthwhile (it's never financially worthwhilte). What's worthwhile will vary according to what you can afford and how you relate to your flock generally, the age and health of the hen and likelihood of recovery.

gadders 2 days ago | parent [-]

We do take our geese to the vet. They don't have names, but they live for 40 years. Not sure why that is a factor but it definitely is.

im3w1l 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It makes sense if someone likes chickens in general but doesn't care much about any individual chicken.

jkestner 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have two geese as well—have you found they help against predators? Anecdotally, we've had no predators steal any chickens since we added them (though a coyote got some goose tail feathers at first), though our neighbors down the street have been decimated by foxes.

Never considered the ROI, but I built a big walk-in coop for maybe $200 in materials. Think that'd pay off with the current price of eggs, if we sold them.

gadders a day ago | parent [-]

The geese we put to bed every night, and let out in the morning so they are generally locked away when a fox would come. A friend of ours has about 15 geese and pretty sure they have lost goslings to foxes.

They good at deterring delivery drivers though, and generally alerting people.

cjrp 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Is the paperwork in the UK (I'm assuming you're UK-based, hence £) particularly onerous? I heard things were getting more complicated if you just wanted a few chickens in your garden.

n4r9 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

According to this website [0] you just need to register with the Animal and Plant Health Agency.

[0] https://www.gardenersworld.com/how-to/maintain-the-garden/ke...

gadders 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

There is some paperwork now in that you have to register your flock. I dread the day though that we are told to kill our hens because of an outbreak.

It was bad enough keeping them undercover for one winter.

belorn 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The taste is definitely different, and the reason for its is the diet. Small scale chickens tend to eat a lot of grass, rather than the cheaper feed given to factory farms.

A upside that was not mention is that chickens are excellent in cutting grass and keeping weed out of bushes, especially roses bushes. They generally don't eat fruits on bushes like raspberries, but our strawberries was not safe so we used a gardening net over those (also keeps other birds out). Smaller plants/seed may also need a net until they grown in size large enough that the chickens are not interested anymore.

A major big upside we also got is that they hunt down slugs and other insects that otherwise can cause major damage to a garden or lawn. Even ant colonies, which can often be a pain to remove and a major annoyance if they invade your home.

On the downside, chicken hierarchy is a very real thing and they can get into quite bloody fights with each other.

pulkitsh1234 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> If you really like eating chicken, you may end up finding it difficult to eat them again in the future after you develop a bond with them.

I used the believe the same, but as I found out on HN, there are a lot of people who won't bat an eye killing animals raised on their own land. Maybe they just never develop a bond with these animals.

But then the question should be is it just the "bond" which is holding someone back from killing animals? Why can't we just not kill without relying on bonds?

somenameforme 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's just the circle of life. Live in a remotely rural area with animals around and you're going to see pretty regular death. For instance foxes are beautiful, extremely intelligent, and amazing animals. They'll also systematically and sadistically kill literally every single chicken inside a henhouse, one by one, if they get in. In another instance a dog I loved more than anything as a child to young adult was killed by a wild boar - tusk straight into the lungs.

The same, by the way, applies to vegetarian stuff. The amount of critters being killed to keep them away from the veggies would probably shock you, especially in the rather inhumane way its sometimes done in industrial farms. Shooting, for some baseline, is considered one of the most humane ways of dealing with large pests.

I simply see nothing wrong, at all, with eating meat. It's a natural and normal part of life and also, by far, the easiest way to ensure you hit all your necessary nutrients without going overboard on calories - especially if you live an active life and/or are into things like weight training.

addicted 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Murder is also part of the “circle of life”, whatever that may mean, given that it’s pablum that means nothing. As is disease.

We rightfully find these immoral and don’t engage in them.

That’s not a defense of the immoral act. It’s just words to describe the immoral act.

amanaplanacanal 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Try this then: every animal eats other living things to survive. We have been doing it for a billion years. Is a basic drive built into it DNA. After that, is just a question of which living things you are going to eat.

42772827 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

The key difference between humans and every other animal that has ever existed is our ability to reason about systems and the morality of actions.

Some birds will abandon weaker chicks to focus on the ones most likely to survive. Others will allow siblicide. That these behaviors exist and have existed for billions of years is a fact orthogonal to morality because birds don’t have the capacity to reason about systems and the mortality of actions.

“Living things” is a sleight of hand, logically. When it comes down to it, everything is just atoms in the end. So why not murder? Why not steal? Why not exploit the poor? Reductionism leads us down some very dark paths indeed.

AlexandrB 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Some birds will abandon weaker chicks to focus on the ones most likely to survive. Others will allow siblicide. That these behaviors exist and have existed for billions of years is a fact orthogonal to morality because birds don’t have the capacity to reason about systems and the mortality of actions.

There's something missing from this analysis. Namely that animals that have many offspring generally expect most of them to die and this is part of selective pressures that keeps the population healthy. If, for example, a mouse could reason morally it might still let many of its weaker babies die because keeping them alive would not be good for mouse-kind. It's inappropriate to assume that the child rearing morals of a low-fecundity, high-parental-investment species like ourselves applies to other species with different reproductive strategies.

42772827 2 days ago | parent [-]

> If, for example, a mouse could reason morally it might still let many of its weaker babies die because keeping them alive would not be good for mouse-kind.

I agree. If a mouse could reason morally and inside the system it currently inhabits, it might reason that way because it was unconscious of or had no access to alternatives for survival.

It’s is absolutely inappropriate to assume any morals on a species that has no capacity for reason.

sethammons 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Some birds. And some people.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Children_for_Sale

slothtrop 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Morality is arrived at through value judgement. We have a social contract with each other, not animals.

People generally dislike gratuitous pain and cruelty, hence we're seeing a push for cage-free hens and the like. They don't oppose slaughter in and of itself.

42772827 2 days ago | parent [-]

What people generally oppose today is a function of their consciousness and ability to access alternatives. They don’t oppose slaughter because they don’t think there’s an alternative, the same way that a person who is on the verge of starvation will steal food. They also don’t oppose slaughter because it’s hidden away from them, and done by others.

Slavery is an excellent cognate to this.

It’s a slippery slope, isn’t it? If you’re not careful with your compassion, you’ll end up having it for all sorts of beings you’ve come to see as like yourself.

AlexandrB 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Slavery is an excellent cognate to this.

No it's not. I always find the idea that humans are not in some way special (at least to other humans) off-putting. Even animals treat members of their own species generally better than they treat other species.

I love animals, I think we should treat them with dignity and respect as much as possible. At the same time I would not hesitate to kill an animal for food or if it endangered another human.

42772827 2 days ago | parent [-]

The cognate here is about how attitudes about systemic actions can change due to a shift in consciousness and access to alternatives. Many people saw black people as not their own kind, and saw no reason — beyond economic imperative - to treat them with compassion.

You said yourself:

>I think we should treat them with dignity and respect as much as possible.

It becomes more possible to treat animals with more respect and dignity every day. For vast portions of the population (Not all! Not yet!) the slaughter of animals for food is becoming less and less necessary.

So the question becomes, given that you believe we should treat animals with as much respect and dignity as possible, do you believe you have a moral imperative to take advantage of these systemic advances?

AlexandrB 2 days ago | parent [-]

Good points.

I think where we disagree is the question of whether slaughter is necessarily undignified or disrespectful. When I say "treat them with dignity and respect" I think the experience of the animal up to the point of death is what's most important. The slaughter, if done humanely and quickly, is not inherently immoral to me. For example, I think most people would agree that it's better to "put down" a suffering pet than let them die of natural causes.

My problem mainly lies with industrial farming practices like battery cages.

42772827 2 days ago | parent [-]

> My problem mainly lies with industrial farming practices like battery cages.

Yeah, we definitely have common ground here. I’ll also mention that industrial farming practices are also cruel to people. Slaughterhouses in the US are overwhelmingly staffed by migrant laborers who work in unsafe conditions, for low pay, being exposed to antibiotics that damage their long term health.

We can and should do better.

slothtrop 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> They don’t oppose slaughter because they don’t think there’s an alternative

That's clearly not true, and a projection.

They don't oppose slaughter because they find no objection with killing an animal for nourishment, "necessity" having no bearing.

erfgh 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's factually incorrect. You don't have to kill a plant to get the fruit and/or the seeds it produces.

paulcole 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you follow every basic drive built into DNA?

sigzero 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Killing is part of the "circle of life". Murder is not. They are two very different concepts.

slothtrop 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You skipped a step. Immoral acts are immoral because we deem them so. Animal slaughter in itself is not generally thought as such. Unless you think aboriginal / hunter-gatherer tribes who maintain their traditions are immoral for not modernizing.

sneak 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It's a natural and normal part of life

So is dying of smallpox.

Wikipedia:

> Smallpox is estimated to have killed up to 300 million people in the 20th century and around 500 million people in the last 100 years of its existence.

Completely natural, and completely normal.

That doesn’t mean we should be engaging in it in 2025.

The naturalistic fallacy is not justification for killing living things.

erfgh 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Ease cannot be used to ethically justify an action. But even so, you ignore that, according to research, people who eat meat have worse health than people who don't.

2 days ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
slothtrop 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It's not that simple. High consumption of animal saturated fat can raise total blood cholesterol, but animal consumption in and of itself does not necessitate that. Notwithstanding, with a balanced diet high in vegetables and fiber, omnivores do not fare any worse than vegans in acm.

aziaziazi 2 days ago | parent [-]

While that’s true in theory, we don’t observe a sufficient fiber intake for most human omnivore. That is Erfgh point : the classic diet don’t meet nutrients goals when studied on the field by researchers.

slothtrop 2 days ago | parent [-]

> we don’t observe a sufficient fiber intake for most human omnivore.

This has no bearing on the argument. That is just as true of vegans who purchase boxed products.

It's also fairly US-centric. If you observe countries with the longest lifespan, lowest CVD incidence and overall best health outcomes, they consume a more varied whole-foods diet with animal products.

> the classic diet

This is the Americanized diet of ultra-processed foods. Whole foods are the solution, which is in no way shape or form contingent on whether animal products are included (unless the diet is "carnivore" which is not representative, and even there you can find traditional societies who fare ok even if not completely optimally).

aziaziazi 2 days ago | parent [-]

I agree that a whole food diet is better than the “boxed” one but I have no comparaison point for the US. I’m from France and many people value whole food, “good products” and cook at home however even those gets diabetes, intestinal and blood cancers and other problems that would be easily avoided with more vegetable consumption. The fact is meat is often the central peace of the dish, second the carbs and then salads, cabbages and roots. People say they loves them but when they are on the plate it’s more a decoration that a portion.

slothtrop 2 days ago | parent [-]

> diabetes

This scales principally with excess weight gain.

> The fact is meat is often the central peace of the dish, second the carbs and then salads, cabbages and roots.

This is one meal, dinner, and the fact that it is more protein-heavy is not the problem. Nevermind ratio, some diets are devoid of fiber. The secondary "carbs" are just pasta, white bread, crackers, etc.

If you consume a whole-foods diet, with a dinner that has a larger meat component, you will easily, easily have enough fiber.

aziaziazi 2 days ago | parent [-]

> If you consume a whole-foods diet, with a dinner that has a larger meat component, you will easily, easily have enough fiber.

I mostly agree but not with the easy part: you thirst has a maximum and people can’t ingest as much food they want without a limit. If you have a large meat component there’s less space in your belly for the vegetables. The point for carbs is the same (they cut your satiety and you’ll be less hungry for the cauliflower). Thought I get your point that a diet including meat isn’t bad in itself, but if you look around the biggest meat eaters are not the fittest, however the opposite might often be true.

christophilus 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Look up Sepp Holzer on YouTube, or really any permaculturist that eats meat. They treat their animals well, but also eat them. I think it’s healthy to feel a twang when you kill anything. It can contribute to the gratitude you have when sitting down to a meal. The native cultures seem (at least in pop culture caricatures) to have understood this.

I have a farmer friend who occasionally has to kill one of his milk cows. He names them, pets them, cares for them like a pet. It pains him to kill them, and I always know when he’s had to do it— I can see it on his face. I’ve bought some of the meat form his cows, and I was grateful for the meat, and the man who raised the cow with such care.

burnished 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Past generations of my family used to name animals that they raised for meat after dishes they could end up in. There are practices people can engage in to distance themselves from the animals they interact with.

But also some people who raise animald for meat hire a person to collect them for slaughter in part because of the emotional toll involved.

As to your last question.. I think you might be confused? People don't like to kill in general. Go outside and ask people how they felt getting their first kill on a hunt as a kid, you're going to realize that a unifying element is learning to deal with harming another animal.

Bonus: being vegetarian doesn't exclude you from the necessity of killing in order to live. You're just killing forms of life that you emphasize with less, which is very reasonable and rational but also not materially different.

latexr 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> being vegetarian doesn't exclude you from the necessity of killing in order to live. You're just killing forms of life that you emphasize with less, which is very reasonable and rational but also not materially different.

That’s like saying you kill chickens to eat eggs. You don’t kill a plant to eat its fruit. In fact, plants benefit from animals eating what they produce, be it oranges or tomatoes or something else and crapping the seeds somewhere else for proliferation.

AlexandrB 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

The dark truth about keeping chickens and many other poultry is that they hatch in an approximately 1:1 male:female ratio, but can't be kept in that ratio without severe conflict and stress. Thus, hatching chickens to keep for egg-laying requires killing most of the male chicks. So yes, you have to kill chickens to eat eggs.

veidr 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

The "severe conflict and stress" part may be hard to understand for the cityfolk; you have to kill chickens to eat eggs, or else they will do it.

osullivj 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Same for dairy cattle: males are redundant. My grandfather was an AI pioneer in the UK in the 1940s. AI being artificial insemination of dairy cattle....

lotsofpulp 2 days ago | parent [-]

I mean, dairy cattle also have the issue of keeping the female pregnant and then taking the baby anyway. And then, once they are done producing milk, what do you do with a giant animal?

Same with chickens that lose the ability to produce eggs.

thijson 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

We put the redundant roosters in the woods, let nature do the killing for us. They didn't last one night.

sethammons 2 days ago | parent [-]

Getting eaten alive makes you feel better than euthanizing them quickly?

0x457 2 days ago | parent [-]

Well, at least a wild animal had something to eat?

I'd say main benefit is not doing it youself.

burnished a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That is pretty much just fruit. Vegetables are typically either the whole body of the plant (like carrots) or a vital part.

6510 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I killed so many slugs eating my broccoli it started to get to me. I technically didn't kill them myself, I put the cannibals in a bucket together. 1/3 to 1/2 bucket per day. About 30 full buckets for 20 broccoli plants of which about 8 were ruined.

j-krieger 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Same. Buckets upon buckets. You can’t even feed them to the chickens, critters who eat literally anything won‘t eat slugs.

latexr 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I have seen a cat gobble a slug, so your mileage may vary.

taeric 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Ducks love slugs, oddly.

latexr 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The conversation is about the necessity of killing what you eat. Those slugs have nothing to do with either argument nor were they a necessary casualty.

burnished a day ago | parent | next [-]

I think in practice pest control does require killing the pest, and in that example was a necessary part of growing broccoli to harvesy

amanaplanacanal 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Not sure how killing things and then not eating them is morally superior. If you aren't eating meat you are probably getting most of your calories from grains and legumes. The people that grow and store those for you are killing a lot of animals to get them to your grocery store.

latexr 2 days ago | parent [-]

This response feels quite emotional, so I’ll start by saying there was no judgement in my comment. At no point have I made a comment on the morality of the matter. Furthermore, not only do grocery stores not even enter into the conversation, you are assuming to know what the people who grow and sell the food at my local markets eat. I assure you, you do not.

I think you’ll benefit from this video. Don’t let yourself be consumed by emotions of an imaginary argument. The entirety of your point is a response to something you imagined I said and not my words or intentions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExEHuNrC8yU

amanaplanacanal 2 days ago | parent [-]

I think you misunderstood me, perhaps I didn't express myself well. You said the slugs were not a necessary casualty. Growing the acres and acres of grain and pulses necessary for a vegan diet necessitates the killing of way more animals (insects and rodents, etc) than the few cows, chickens, or pigs necessary to feed a carnivore. Every kind of agriculture requires killing. There is no other way to do it at scale.

The real problem is the sheer number of humans we have to feed. Hopefully another couple centuries of low birth rates will help.

wrigby 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Admittedly this is pedantry on my part, but isn’t this only true for fruits? GP’s argument seems perfectly valid for e.g. carrots or mushrooms.

latexr 2 days ago | parent [-]

Mushrooms are “fruits”. The “plant” itself is the mycelium underground and the mushroom is the “fruity” part which is produced to spread the “seeds” (spores).

And fruits are broader than most people think. Many of the things you think as vegetables are fruits: pumpkins, zucchinis, tomatoes. But even outside fruits there is food you can harvest without harming the plant, like potatoes. And we haven’t even gotten into seeds and grains, like rice.

So you can definitely live without killing what you eat.

wrigby 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Hah of course you're 100% right on mushrooms - that totally slipped my mind. Am I completely out to lunch on root vegetables though?

ThePowerOfFuet 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Mushrooms are “fruits”. The “plant” itself is the mycelium underground and the mushroom is the “fruity” part which is produced to spread the “seeds” (spores).

They are the "fruiting body" of the fungus, but biologically they are not fruit.

latexr 2 days ago | parent [-]

That is correct, which is why I used quotes. It is important to not get bogged down in pedantry and lose sight of the argument, though. The matter being discussed is if you need to kill what you eat, and I’m using “fruit” as a shorthand for the thing a plant produces to be eaten but is not the plant itself.

fragmede 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

aren't plants alive?

latexr 2 days ago | parent [-]

They are, and you don’t kill them or harm them to eat the things they produce with the purpose of being eaten and spread. If you want to engage in the conversation, please make an effort to do so in good faith and actually address the arguments. If you’re only going to make basic queries everyone already agrees with, we’re just wasting time and space.

y-curious 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

"Aren't plants alive?" is such a bad faith argument that I don't know why you even bother replying. It's legitimately on the level of "internet troll". I eat meat btw, but I wouldn't even entertain someone that pretends there's no difference between a sentient mammal and a stalk of broccoli

latexr 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You are right, of course. But I have noticed as of late that I sometimes became unkind in my replies, which I don’t like and didn’t use to happen. I want to do better.

Surely the right move here is not to play, but if you don’t get annoyed trolls can’t win either.

burnished a day ago | parent | prev [-]

The point is that you're still killing that broccoli, not that the two acts have equal moral value. It doesn't normally need to be said but you know, someone was wrong on the internet

phito 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Ever ate a carrot? The whole plant has to be "killed". Killing doesn't even make sense in the context of plants, a lot of them can just be cloned from a leaf, stem or root. Where do you draw the line between damaging and killing a plant, the termination of the apical meristem? The plant will stop growing but it can still clone itself, or grow more apical meristems...

This whole argument is absolutely meaningless.

edit: just pointing out I'm not directly replying to you but to the whole thread.

fragmede 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> purpose of being eaten and spread

why do you get to decide that it isn't the purpose of a cow to be eaten?

You're arguing on the Internet, it's already a waste of time and space.

0x457 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> why do you get to decide that it isn't the purpose of a cow to be eaten?

Pretty sure it is the cow's purpose. Humans first domesticated a wild animal and then with selective breeding cows were "made". That has no weight on ethics tho.

addicted 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Also, this is a ridiculous argument.

If someone raises their human kid “to be eaten”, that would be the purpose of the kid.

Does that make it ok to eat the kid?

addicted 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Here’s a compromise.

Neither you nor I get to decide what the purpose of another sentient being is.

svieira 2 days ago | parent [-]

Absolutely. But while I cannot declare its ultimate "final cause", perhaps I have some right to declare a penultimate one? I have my reasons for believing this is the case. What are your reasons for believing it is not (or do you believe that we do have some right to declare penultimate final causes for living creatures, and if so, what are the limits?)

latexr 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> why do you get to decide that it isn't the purpose of a cow to be eaten?

Clearly you’ve never experienced the sight of animals in a slaughterhouse, as they realise what is happening to the animals in front and begin to panic and violently bellow and push back.

> You're arguing on the Internet, it's already a waste of time and space.

That is only true for people who don’t engage in good faith and don’t have a genuine desire to learn and are open to changing their minds. For everyone else, it can and does provide value.

fragmede 2 days ago | parent [-]

your attempt to evoke an emotion doesn't answer my question though.

Why do you get to decide that the purpose of a cow isn't to be eaten?

latexr 2 days ago | parent [-]

Why do you get to decide it is? The onus of proof is on the one making the claim.

I guess someone could also repeatedly bash you over the head with a tire iron and break your legs, and when criticised reply “how do you know their purpose isn’t to get hurt?”

“Well, when I approached them to hit them, they cowered in fear, asked for mercy, and tried to flee.”

“Your attempt to evoke an emotion doesn’t answer the question though. How do you know their purpose is not to be ravaged?”

fragmede 2 days ago | parent [-]

> They are, and you don’t kill them or harm them to eat the things they produce with the purpose of being eaten and spread.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43113489

latexr 2 days ago | parent [-]

There is a chasm of difference between your purpose and the purpose of something you do.

If you build a chair, the purpose of doing so could be to sit or to earn money by selling it. We can derive exactly which from your actions and the outcomes, but there is still an identifiable purpose. However, it is entirely different to claim your purpose is to build chairs.

Similarly, in my previous example someone can hit someone else with the purpose of harming them, but it doesn’t mean that person’s purpose is to cause harm.

Do you see the difference? I do kind of feel like I’m discussing middle school philosophy here. I surely hope that is not my purpose. This whole conversation was unnecessary with a tiny bit of steel manning on your part, don’t you think? Does it truly seem reasonable to you to claim an entire species’ purpose is to do something they do not only not pursue but actively avoid? I’m confident you are able to see the point by now.

2 days ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
mattlutze 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Harvesting crops is materially different from slaughtering animals, and calorie for calorie, plant-based nutrition involves less termination of life than getting calories from animals (if you're grouping insects and non-animal life into the "forms of life" being killed).

If people don't like killing in general, or killing animals more specifically, they can live a wonderfully health(y|ier) life by going plant-based, be responsible for less killing, and today do it without having to give up the textures and experiences they've be conditioned on.

It's difficult in 2025 to conclude that a person who doesn't choose to eat this way is particularly opposed to killing, in the way that you propose.

vinhcognito 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Less termination of life based on numbers or some version of (sentience * number of individuals)? I find it hard to believe the sheer number of individual insects killed during harvest could match the killing of one cow, calorie for calorie.

Also, what if we increase the calories of the animal we choose to slaughter, say we start raising massive whale-sized animals instead, would that tip the scales?

erfgh 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Insects do not have the same level of sentience as birds and mammals.

However, do keep in mind that a large proportion of agricultural output is used to feed animals.

zargon 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It takes 20 to 40 plant calories to raise one calorie of beef. So slaughtering a cow kills 20 to 40 times the number of lives as eating plants directly.

burnished a day ago | parent [-]

Number of calories !== number of lives

zargon a day ago | parent [-]

If anything, I would expect the number of insects, small mammals, etc. killed by harvesting animal feed to be higher than that of harvesting crops grown for people, on a caloric basis.

y-curious 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

What makes my wife and I fail every time is protein intake. We are both active and require a lot of protein. We drink whey protein 1x a day, have quinoa for salads and occasionally eat eggs. The problem is come dinnertime, we have few options. We can't eat: - beans: Yes, I rolled my eyes too. My wife gets bloated painfully and it's happened so many times that I've stopped preparing bean-primary dishes - beyond meat: it's expensive, gas and bloat is still an issue, a big one

Tofu, seitan and TVP are all good, but they're extremely boring (user error attributes to this I'm sure).

Every vegetarian/vegan I've talked to is just not into weightlifting, so they sort of dismiss the diet needs we need. We always go back to chicken because of this

asoneth 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> We are both active and require a lot of protein.

I'm curious what your targets are. I've found getting 0.8g of protein per kg of bodyweight (USDA recommendation) is easy on any diet whereas 1.5g/kg or higher on a vegan diet can be hard depending on your target macro ratio. If you're bulking or doing long-distance running/biking (i.e. carbs aren't a limiting factor) then it's totally doable. Besides tofu, seitan, and beans there's lentils, chickpeas, edamame, spinach, nuts, seeds, nooch, etc.

> beans: ... My wife gets bloated painfully

If she's committed to making beans work you could experiment with varieties and preparation methods that are more digestible, or she could try Beano. But honestly that seems like a lot of work.

> beyond meat: it's expensive, gas and bloat is still an issue, a big one

Same, I just can't digest it. I'm glad the faux meats exist for folks who want them, but I'm sad at how it's displaced other veggie burgers at restaurants.

> Tofu, seitan and TVP are all good, but they're extremely boring (user error attributes to this I'm sure).

I've come to appreciate the blank canvas they provide but that did take a lot of trial and error to get to the point where I knew what to do with them. Similar to beans it depends on how committed you are. (In my case it took a long time for the incongruence between my food choices and my ethics to grow big enough to overcome my innate laziness and affinity for barbecue.)

> Every vegetarian/vegan I've talked to is just not into weightlifting, so they sort of dismiss the diet needs we need.

I know a few vegans into powerlifting/streetlifting, and as mentioned above bulking isn't too hard -- the real issue is cutting. Every one of them supplements with protein powders, especially while cutting. Then again, so do all the omnivore lifters I know.

viraptor 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> beans

Have you tried various types? cannellini beans don't seem to have the same effect as others in my experience.

aziaziazi 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Perhaps have a look of tempeh, it’s more digestible that beans (because pre disgusted by shroom) and already comes with a slight nutty flavor but that stuff is a songe (shroom…) and get impregnated sigh any marinade very quickly.

The tvp are tasteless by design, my way is to use them to mimic sliced beef recipes therefore 1) they get different flavors depending on what I cook 2) they trigger my memories and those makes me feel more taste that they are.

For the beans digestability another tip is to remove/by dehulled beans, that’s the hardest part to digest. Also soaking them overnight is a big help for digestion.

addicted 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Being against child slavery doesn’t exclude you from benefitting from child slavery when you use your phone.

I guess you should just be pro child slavery and enslaved some kids to do your housework then?

Cars kill 50k Americans a year. I guess we are just ok with killing peoplr and therefore shouldn’t be against murder either?

It doesn’t even take philosophy 101 to understand there’s a significant moral gulf between killing deliberately and incidentally.

mcny 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> People don't like to kill in general.

I used to believe this.

Then I came up with a twisted question to ask people (I am fun at parties)

The question is something like, if you had to come up with a name for someone to kill within twenty four hours can you do so? The conditions are you get a full and unconditional pardon. It won't be held against you at all. If need be, we will even arrange it such that the person can't protest. However, once you agree, you must come up with a name and you must follow through. You must kill this person no matter what within a short time frame (make something up like a month).

I expected people to answer no. You can't come up with a name in a day! However, over half the people I have asked have said they have a name right now.

rsynnott 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I expected people to answer no. You can't come up with a name in a day! However, over half the people I have asked have said they have a name right now.

I don't think that's surprising, and it doesn't meant that people are okay with or blasé about killing people. Like, arguably this is just the trolley problem rephrased; there exist people whose death would clearly be a vast net benefit and would save many other lives. So is it okay to kill them? It's not an easy question.

I think it's more or less unrelated to the issue of killing one's own chickens; there is no such thing as an evil chicken who death will save thousands.

arkey 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If you got that person in front of them and put a gun in their hand, do you think they'd follow through?

Your question is like a game, and people you ask will most probably treat it as such. People 'kill' in videogames, but most would not like to actually kill in real life.

rcxdude 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I feel like that's a different question though. Most people have at least one person they think would make the world a better place by their absence, but that's not quite the same thing as wanting to kill them, even if they would guaranteed get away with it.

(for a pithy version: "I've never wished anyone dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure")

wruza 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But why? You can easily come up with a whole list. I’d ask for a week to perform research on more names I wasn’t aware of. There’s so many bastards in this world I’d specifically choose a less sharp weapon for and skip the can’t protest part. The only thing I’d worry about is getting physically exhausted and mentally unstable after such marathon, but it has to be done.

DeepSeaTortoise 2 days ago | parent [-]

Kinda disagree on the latter part. If there's no chance to toss them in prison, but other opportunities, do whatever is necessary to prevent further suffering.

But then there's the question on whether you could trust your own judgement.

E.g. I wonder how many people would choose Kim Jong Un without realizing how EXTREMELY progressive the guy is on the scale of the hell hole that is North Korea.

Allowing just anyone who wants access to the countrwide intranet with some curated and heavily censored information from the outside and ending the crackdown on user generated content? Blasphemy! Allowing a selected few foreign restaurants to open up? Witchcraft! Building semi-normal housing in the prison camps you toss entire families together with their children, grand-children and elders in? Cracking down on systematic rape and arbitrary mass executions in those camps? He's going to come for our (prison) children next! Trying to shut down the practice of high ranking officials forcing young girls into sex slavery squads? And even after inflicting an "undisclosed physical ailment" on him, he still only barely agreed to restart the squad, controls the selection of girls himself instead of allowing us to force anyone we like into it, requires parental consent, makes us wait until the girls receive an education and doesn't recruit anyone under 14 anymore? SCREW HIM!

And many other things that seem absurd to us and the Juche system for exactly opposite reasons. Like allowing other countries but China and Russia to offer work in their special economic zones, agreeing to a meeting with the US President at the border inside NK, considering negotiations with South Korea and allowing very limited cultural exchange, giving some priority to increasing living conditions for anyone but those who have the priviledge of living in the capital, turning a blind eye to tiny private markets selling some less controversial contraband, ....

The guy is just barely holding on in a system that completely vaporized anyone with even but a tiny bit less than utmost loyality to the Juche ideology. For several generations. All institutions, government bodies, civic organizations, education and corporations are under complete control of Juche extremists. And then there's this one basketball obsessed fatty raised in Switzerland.

His greatest achievement so far is probably opening up their intranet to about a quarter of their population (less than 1% were allowed to use it before him) and slowly expanding the group of people who have access to the outside internet. At this point more people have access to smartphones than to television or radio. And now social media and chatrooms are apparently being reopened after the previous government took those from the 0.1% elite who had access to the intranet back then in 2005, because they organized a spontaneous sport event with a few hundred people.

And not long ago the NK government became very worried about people accessing the global internet through their intranet enabled devices, extending the application used to connect to the intranet with spyware trying to detect foreign network accesses. So it seems VERY likely to me someone hard to stop is currently hooking their intranet to the global internet in the background. And the NK establishment is not very happy about it.

Maybe the life of North Koreans will become much better within one or two generations.

wruza 2 days ago | parent [-]

That’s why I say we need a detailed list, and a long one. Most bastards are in the middle of these structures, not on top (with notable exceptions).

burnished a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Your game doesn't test what you say it does, but someone else already covered that.

I'm not saying people have an inbuilt moral objection to the idea of killing, I'm saying most people find hurting other living things emotionally difficult.

Lanolderen 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This doesn't sound like "liking to kill" but more so like an "I know someone who's an absolute piece of shit and the world would be better off without them" kind of deal.

wruza 2 days ago | parent [-]

The curse of a poll. You always get more than you asked for because any question is too flat.

christophilus 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Putin and Xi immediately jumped to my mind.

amanaplanacanal 2 days ago | parent [-]

There are autocrats all over the world I could name. Unfortunately there are most likely a whole list of people ready and waiting to step into their place.

Lanolderen 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's different perspectives.

For a lot of people it's an exchange thing. You give the chicken a place to stay, food and care and in exchange you get to eat it when it gets old. They do bond with them but there's this understanding from day 1.

If you don't get that out of it it'd turn into an omlette so instead of turning into an omlette it gets to enjoy a large percentage of its life.

arkey 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

One needs to decide if an animal is a product or a pet. It's difficult to have them be both.

Having them as a product does not mean you don't care for them, on the contrary, but I would say it's a completely different type of bond.

> But then the question should be is it just the "bond" which is holding someone back from killing animals? Why can't we just not kill without relying on bonds?

I would argue it's about the purpose, not the bond. You don't kill a pet, but you do kill food. And you should never kill for the sole sake of killing.

pqtyw 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> but as I found out on HN, there are a lot of people who won't bat an eye killing animals raised on their own land

You needed HN to figure that out? I assume this is obvious sarcasm but almost none of the domesticated animals species would exist if almost all humans throughout history weren't willing to do that.

Even eating dogs was perfectly standard in most more "primitive" and/or destitute societies.

sergers 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My wifes family was wicked as they would let the children bond with the animals, without letting them know they gonna be dinner.

She tells a story of a wonderful pet goat. Until one day it was "gone to another farm", and they enjoyed goat curry for dinner.

The older siblings knew... and now they dont talk lol.

modo_mario 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I grew up the same for much of my childhood tho it was never hidden or explicitly stated all the time. I bear absolutely 0 resentment about any of that tbh. I just fed the chickens, petted the goats, waved the bees away from fruits and helped pluck the chickens

In the end it makes me feel like the people eating their nuggets but have a traumatic reaction to what created them are the odd ones.

swiftcoder 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

My friend would spend summers at the family farm, and the youngest kids would be issued a rabbit as a pet for the duration. They'd then make the kids watch the rabbits be slaughtered and cleaned, and serve them up at the end of the vacation...

Straight psychopath approach to child raising. The adults were all convinced this is how you made kids grow up tough

TeMPOraL 2 days ago | parent [-]

That's straight from the TV trope book, this is how movies/shows portray Evil Organization training ruthless spy assassins (except usually it's a dog, and they have to kill it themselves).

swiftcoder 2 days ago | parent [-]

Most tropes have some basis in reality. I've met a few farm-owning parents who view any kind of sentimentality towards animals as counterproductive.

TeMPOraL 2 days ago | parent [-]

But that's normal - emotionally boding with a farm animal you intend to slaughter and eat is indeed counterproductive.

The trope is about something different - it's about intentionally making a subject bond with an animal over long time, as with a close friend, and then finally making them kill the animal as a final test of loyalty.

Doing that in real life, and for no good reason, is just sick.

0x457 2 days ago | parent [-]

It is, those people think this practice will speed up process of that bond being understood as counterproductive.

hattmall 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Or why should the "bond" cause us to not eat animals? They aren't pets we eat in a panic, but animals we raise with the intention of eating but still bond with them and continue the process through consuming them and letting the animal go on to fulfill a higher purpose of providing sustenance to the humans they bonded with.

xaldir 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Maybe they just never develop a bond with these animals.

I love my chickens and I'm really sad when I lose some to predators. Yet I have no issue to harvest them for eating. They are not pets, I raise them for eggs and meat.

Maybe it's because I was raised on a farm, but I make a difference between pets and farm animals and that does not mean that I don't have a "bond" with some of the latter.

pulkitsh1234 2 days ago | parent [-]

The first step is to acknowledge that there is something wrong here. This categorization of "pets" and "farm animals" as different sets is completely virtual. In real life, both are just animals.

0x457 2 days ago | parent [-]

It is completely virtual, but are you going to include humans into animal group too? Because we're just animals with ties and anxiety.

You have be arguing in bad faith if you claim that you don't see difference between a random cat and a cattle.

2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
protonbob 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why should they "bat an eye" about killing animals raised on their own land? It's how we've lived since the dawn of time. Death is a part of life.

If you think it's wrong to kill animals to eat, I would ask you "By what moral standard?"

pulkitsh1234 2 days ago | parent [-]

This argument would be valid if humanity would continue all practices it has done "since the dawn of time".

We have dropped some practices and we continue with some. We no longer leave the dead to rot, we bury/burn them, and so on. We developed religions, science, etc, and we are in a different era now, our lifestyle has completely changed, we don't have to hunt, don't have to build our own shelters, and we are no longer nomadic.

I am of the opinion that `killing animals` is a practice we can safely stop now, it was a necessity at that time, but right now it is completely optional.

There are various angles to look at this. One is sustainability and another one is morality.

Sustainability: Do you think we have enough animals to feed 8 Billion people on earth meat daily? I hope you know why we had to fallback to agriculture as a source of nutrition. Why most early settlements were started on river banks?

Morality: My moral standard is: Don't kill animals for my own sake of pleasure, kill only what's necessary for my survival, kill only what is there to kill me/hurt me.

So can I "kill" plants?: Yes (Using the term 'kill' wrt plants is just wrong, but I will continue with it for the sake of argument).

How is it morally okay to kill a plant but not okay to kill an animal?:

Let's agree on the definition of an animal. By animal, we all mean the set of (humans, pets, goat, horse, pig, lion, etc), there are no plants in this set. They are in a set called `living_beings`, which will have bacteria, viruses, insects as well (who can be further clubbed into smaller sets). Now my moral standard is "Not kill animals" (Not 'don't kill living beings'). It is on this entire set, not selectively for X or Y, which will be hypocritical. I am applying the same level of morality to everyone in this set. Now coming to plant-based food. First of all vegetarian food is not just plants. It is fruits, vegetables (akin to fruits), seeds, leaves, and other different parts. The plants are not always "killed" unlike when producing meat-based food (except eggs). The plants are "evolutionary hardened",i.e. built for harvesting, they don't die if you pluck a fruit (moreover they drop it naturally). They don't die when you take a flower or take a bunch of leaves (as long as you are within limits). The same can't be said for any animal.

Is the use of pesticides, deforestation, and killing of insects/rodents okay for producing large amounts of vegetarian food?:

No, I am against that but I don't see any other alternative to feed the calorific needs of 8 Billion people on earth. Of course there are other farming practices but they can't be commercialized or don't have high yields. As much as we can, we should try to eat locally sourced items to avoid carbon emissions due to transportation over large distances.

So what will be my ideal world that is according to my moral standards?: Ideally, everyone has a backyard where they can grow their own plant-based food. If you want better nutrition coverage, keep some chicken and eat the eggs. Let the chickens enjoy their lives, doing chicken things.

Will I eat an animal if I am stranded on an island with nothing else to eat?: Yes, at my current level of ego, I would prefer to stay alive by killing and eating the said animal.

protonbob 2 days ago | parent [-]

Just so you know I agree the "counterargument" about killing plants makes no sense at all. But thank you for your thoughtful reply. My ethical framework is different than yours but I respect how well thought out yours is.

theshackleford 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> I used the believe the same, but as I found out on HN, there are a lot of people who won't bat an eye killing animals raised on their own land. Maybe they just never develop a bond with these animals

You develop bonds, just different ones and you learn to place limits because you know what the purpose of the animal is.

I still felt it when I was really little, but that was gone by the time I was a teenager and the reality that this was our living set in.

thaumasiotes 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Chickens are very sweet animals

My father asked for, and got, a chick for Easter once.

It grew into a rooster that took over the backyard by terrorizing the whole family. Only my grandmother, who had grown up on a farm, was willing to go into the yard.

> Your wife may one day want a chicken to live inside the house. You may one day agree to this, and then miss it when the chicken is living outside the house again...

A friend of mine complained to me a few years ago that the people in the apartment next to hers were raising a chicken. The crowing woke her up in the morning. But she consoled herself that soon enough they'd eat it.

I was pretty amused at the whole idea of raising a chicken inside an apartment.

SideburnsOfDoom 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Check your local regulations. Keeping roosters (adult male chickens) in many city areas is actually illegal; i.e. against the byelaws. It is considered antisocial because of the noise that they make and the early hours when they make it. i.e. literally "at cockcrow"

daotoad 2 days ago | parent [-]

If only it was only the early hours. The damn things scream pretty much all the time. I've had two neighbors over the years that accidentally kept roosters.

So, if you want to keep backyard chickens, save yourself the trouble and get the red sex linked chicks. They are hybrids whose color is very reliably determined by color, so you can be pretty sure you aren't getting a rooster chick.

It's either that or brace yourself for the process of turning the occasion young rooster into fried chicken before it gets too obstreperous.

fransje26 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It grew into a rooster that took over the backyard by terrorizing the whole family.

When I was a kid, we also had chickens and roosters around. At one point we had a smaller, white rooster who would take any chance he could at terrorizing the family as soon as we brought them food.

Unfortunately for the bully, we also had a second, bigger rooster, who would keep an eye on him, and come running to beat his ass and chase him away as soon as he spotted nastiness.

The white bully ended up in the soup. The grey defender died of old age.

DonHopkins 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

My friend had a racist rooster who abused the brown chickens and got along with the white ones.

He traded it in for a more "woke" one.

seizethecheese 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I grew up with backyard chickens. It was great, but youre missing one downside: the smell. Chickens shit a lot. Also, the predator thing is understated. You don’t just need defenses, your defenses are likely to fail. If this happens, you may wake up to the sound of your pet being mauled to death and your yard covered in feathers.

PastorSalad 2 days ago | parent [-]

The two-decade war between my Dad and the local foxes cannot be understated. The chickens are fully enclosed, naturally. They currently have a (completely buried) overturned concrete igloo under their feet. There’s a dual perimeter fence, the outer one is regularly coated in all manner of larger mammal’s urine he buys online. Team Fox is currently tunnelling to map out the concrete igloo, convinced there’s an opening. They’ve gone full mole.

With some distance it’s quite amusing, but it’s claimed a large part of his life, being the obstinate bugger he is.

digitallis42 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Pea gravel. Lots of pea gravel in the holes. Blow it in with water.

You can't tunnel in pea gravel.

PastorSalad 2 days ago | parent [-]

I will pass this on to the general, he appreciates the intel.

joenot443 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

That's awesome. My father has been waging a similar war with the coyotes in the woods behind our farm for maybe 5 years now. Your foxes sound way more intrepid though, the coyotes here haven't tried burrowing, yet...

ozmodiar 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My neighbor has chickens and the predators are no joke. Raccoons constantly trying to weaken their coop, weasels always ready to slip into any little hole, hawks and other birds of prey circling overhead. They've lost a lot of chickens despite keeping a close eye on them and trying to keep a very sturdy coop. It's like a signal goes out to all the wild animals "COME GET TASTY CHICKENS HERE!" Of course we are in a pretty rural area. You can get some pretty cute fluffy chickens though.

cluckindan 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Tell them to get a farm dog or two. That’s pretty much the only working answer to predators on a farm.

ozmodiar 2 days ago | parent [-]

We're a bit rural but still too tightly packed for farm dogs. They've got a regular dog but it doesn't have quite the free rein a farm dog requires to keep chickens locked down. Kind of the worst of both worlds as far as the chickens are concerned.

NoGravitas 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That was my problem with backyard chickens. The raccoons are too clever. They never got into the coop, but they were persistent about weakening the run, and eventually learned our schedule for putting them in the coop for the night, and got up early to beat us to it. Chickens are a tragic pet just because absolutely everything wants to eat them.

j-krieger 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I lived with backyard chickens for a time. It‘s surprisingly hard to keep predators away. These animals are clever and very determined when it comes to a freely presented meal. After all, better enclosures also give chickens no means of escape.

ozmodiar 2 days ago | parent [-]

Yep, this is a problem right here. Once something does make it in it's a massacre.

seanmcdirmid a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> - You may have to euthanize a chicken, likely by hand (literally) via cervical dislocation. It still ranks among the worst things I've ever had to do in my life. Imagine euthanizing your dog or cat by hand...

I visited a farm as a kid and we had fresh chicken for dinner one day. They had one of those orange road cones with the top cut off a bit to fit the chicken in upside down so they could easily chop off its head. They then run around for awhile after that because their nervous system is still working for a minute or so. Just something to interesting to learn as a 5th grader, I guess.

fransje26 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Chickens are very sweet animals, and are quite intelligent.

They did tests on chickens, and apparently they understand the concept of showing restraint on a current action, with the view on having a larger reward later.

Something along the lines of: "If you don't eat these grains now, we'll reward you with twice as many grains later".

That's something that dogs can't do, for instance.

echoangle 2 days ago | parent [-]

Maybe the dog just values immediate reward higher even though it understands it could get even more later? How would you control for that?

awongh 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> it's definitely _not_ the _monetary_ solution

Does this also take into account the current price of eggs in the same product category? i.e., organic, free-range eggs?

For current Erewhon prices, 8 eggs a day is $11.30 in free eggs a day, so $339 in eggs a month?

https://erewhon.com/subcategory/33022/eggs - $16.99 a dozen

nightfly 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I'm not who you're replying to... but: it cost me $2-2.5k to build my coop two years ago which houses 5 hens, and they cost roughly $10-20 per month to feed, change bedding, etc. Realistically my household eats 4 dozen eggs a month. Even with current egg prices I'm not saving any money for a long, long time.

Still absolutely worthwhile for my mentally though and one of my major life goals

ramesh31 2 days ago | parent [-]

>I'm not who you're replying to... but: it cost me $2-2.5k to build my coop two years ago which houses 5 hens

These numbers are absurd. You need a wooden box and some chicken wire, and chicks cost less than $1/bird. I don't understand why this always comes up on HN, where people are spending thousands of dollars on chickens. It's the simplest animal you can possibly own and they should pay for themselves almost immediately.

Larrikin 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Can you post your chicken coop and instructions on how you built it?

rstuart4133 a day ago | parent [-]

It's probably best not to get specific instructions. They constrain you too much.

The cheapest way to build a chicken coop is to go to the local rubbish tip, or tip shop if the top doesn't let you fossick. Be a little imaginative with your design. For example, you can build them out of PVC water pipes. They are light, don't rot, wire can be pop riveted to them, and they are very easy to glue.

I also turned a 80 litre rubbish bin into a chicken feeder. Getting the design reliable was a few of weekends work of trail and error. However once done my time was paid back over and over again. A rubbish bin can hold an entire 30kg bad of food. It takes my chickens 3 months to go through a bag, so the reduces feeding to once per month. (We also gave then table scraps, which is a daily chore.) I also built a automatic water station out of an old office bin and a toilet inlet valve. The net result of all that is the chickens can got for months without you touching them, which is far longer than any family holiday.

Like some others here, I don't quite get the cost aspect. A carton of 12 eggs in about $6 here, and 3 chickens produce about 2 cartons a week. The food costs about $10/month. If you have a yard, food costs can be reduced by about 1/2 allowing them out during the day. Allowing them to graze can automated too - you just need a 12v electric car window opener connected to a battery, solar cell and timer. Again, if you get these things second hand they will cost you less than the $60 of food they save in a year.

All that said, yes it will take a few years to repay the costs, and even if you automate to the degree I did taking the table scraps out to them and getting the eggs remains a daily chore. To me the engineering project of "how can I automate this at least cost" was as interesting as the chickens themselves.

nightfly 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Chicken wire doesn't actually protect chickens from predators... Half inch or smaller hardware cloth is needed to keep them safe. The coop itself is a 4x8 (about 4' tall) building on stilts because that's roughly the minimum space that's healthy to keep in the winter if they get snowed out of their run. And I dont know where/when you've seen chicks for less than $1 per bird lately, last time I saw that was on broilers last year when the local feedstore accidentally ordered like 3000 instead of 300 and they were literally giving them away. Otherwise chicks are $4-5 each

wiredfool 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Your first egg is $1000. After that, Free Eggs! Except for the feed, and the work.

pipe2devnull 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Free range isn’t that much space still. Pasture raised is better and at my local grocery store I can get a dozen for like $8/dozen.

maxdoop 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Erewhon is probably THEE most expensive place lol

0x457 2 days ago | parent [-]

Yeah, using erewhon to gauge price of anything isn't going to yield anything good. Well, it will reveal how much people willing to overpay to avoid seeing "poor" people.

GuB-42 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I'm told the eggs taste way better, I don't really notice it

I didn't notice a significant difference in taste either. Eggs taste like eggs, it is one of the foods where there is the fewest difference between home grown and store bought, and also between different grades of store bought. And if there is any difference, I think that freshness is more significant.

One big difference, though it doesn't matter much when you eat it is the shell. Good quality eggs, including those from backyard chicken tend to have a stronger shell that breaks cleanly.

Maybe if you give your chicken specific food, your eggs can have a specific taste. How you feed them can affect the color of the yolk, which can matter for presentation, but it doesn't tell much else.

ciconia 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Chickens are really smart and curious animals. They can also learn from each other new behaviour, like eating unfamiliar food, or hunting for small animals (the cries of joy from our cock once he finally got a frog!!!) They also have really marked personalities, once you spend some time with them.

stinos 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> a large coop

It's large compared to the average, but the longer we've had chickens the more we're convinced they thrive better when given appropriate space (anecdata about average age of our chickens vs all other people with chickens we know), leading me to think something like yours is still too small even for 2 chickens.

For us the minimum is now such that there's at least some of the gras/moss left throughout the year instead of the puddle of mud we used to get. Plus I'm not gonne lie: seeing their (and their ancestors) behavior 'in the wild' it feels morally/ethically better as well. Especially the younger ones are keen explorers: easy to see when let ranging free - they'll go in a radius of like 100m around their nest, but not much further than that. Apart from that one mandatory weirdo obviously.

qq99 2 days ago | parent [-]

The one I built was definitely too small on all accounts (coop space and run space).

For the second coop, we bought a pre-built shed that's about 8'x12' (much taller and roomier than the first), and even that is starting to feel too small for 13 chickens with all their various items. They have a much larger run now, but even that still feels like it might not be enough for them!

MichaelRo 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Definitely it's not about the cost and convenience.

And I haven't seen it discussed much, which tells a lot that the HN-ers are city dwellers with little experience in the countryside life. But the biggest, nastiest, deepest problem with anything animal is ... shit.

Animals produce shit and lots of animals produce loads of shit. And chickens don't have the notion of "this area is for eating, this one's for shitting", they will shit all over the place. So if you don't enclose them and can run to your porch, they'll shit it up so gotta be careful where you step or sit on. If you enclose them, better be prepared to wipe shit of your boots coze no way you can avoid it forever. Then the "pleasant" activity of cleaning up loads of shit from the chicken coop and dispose it somewhere.

Overall, having lived on a farm, my childhood memories of interaction with animals resume to "lots and lots of shit everywhere" :)

christophilus 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

At the backyard scale it’s not so bad. My neighbor just mixed it into a big dirt pile that we all use for fertilizing our flowers and shrubs.

KineticLensman 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> But the biggest, nastiest, deepest problem with anything animal is ... shit.

Yes. I volunteered at a Raptor conservancy. Fantastic animals and being trusted to help fly them in a display was one of the best things I've ever done. It made up for all of the poop cleaning. At least owls have the courtesy to cough up pellets containing the little bones of their prey - it reduces the poop volume and the pellets dry into hard nuggets that easy to pick up (and fun to pull apart later). Black Kites were okay-ish - most of their poop ended up on easily cleanable wall sheets behind their (outward facing) perches. But vultures. yeech. They are fascinating from a social perspective and some were very playful - pulling on your bootlaces until they were knotted, for example, but their poop is gross and voluminous. They also can use defensive projectile vomiting if they feel threatened, which is as (un)pleasant as it sounds.

But overall, great animals to be around.

technothrasher 2 days ago | parent [-]

> At least owls have the courtesy to cough up pellets containing the little bones of their prey

As soon as somebody showed me this as a kid, I would constantly be looking in pine groves for pellets. There was something fascinating about pulling them apart and finding the little mouse bones. Whenever I have a chance now, I point it out to kids. Some of them are fascinated like I was, some of them can't understand why I showed them something dirty and boring <shrug>.

KineticLensman 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Some of them are fascinated like I was

At the Raptor place, we used owl pellets as part of kid-focussed activities. We'd give them a couple of pellets, a pair of tweezers and a chart of bone outlines, and say "see what animals you can identify". Tiny little jawbones were always popular.

JamesLeonis 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My mom has a dozen backyard chickens and I agree with all of these. I'll tack on two bits from my own experience:

Good: Fresh unwashed eggs don't need to be refrigerated. They are perfectly safe at room temperature on the shelf for days.

Bad: You can't leave them with other pets without supervision. One of the dogs got himself a taste for chicken and already ate at least three. You can't train this out of the dog, unfortunately. I had to put down one poor chicken that was deeply injured but still alive. We constantly stay vigilant to keep the dogs and chickens separate.

Propelloni 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> You can't train this out of the dog, unfortunately.

Speaking from experience, I can say "Yes, you absolutely can train this out of a dog." However, it is not easy and it is only marginally more easy if you start at a young age of the dog. Furthermore, there are breeds that have no interest in chickens at all, anyway. LGD may actually even protect them.

cameronh90 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Depends on the nature and breed of the dog too.

My GR goes into livestock guardian mode whenever the rabbits are free roaming in the garden (even though he's a bit scared of them ever since one bit him on the nose), but some dogs, terriers especially, will just instinctively chase and kill a rabbit.

I assume it's fairly similar with chickens.

JamesLeonis 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Totally fair. Unfortunately this dog is a 4 years old black lab and we don't have the capacity to train him out of it. We manage it by keeping him indoors when we let the chickens free range in the yard.

sparsely 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Lots of countries don't wash their commercially grown eggs (and have a much lower % from factory farms), which greatly improves shelf life in shops etc.

AlexandrB 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Yes. It was quite a culture shock to see eggs stacked up in the middle of the aisle in Mexican grocery stores. I also find that, in general, Mexican store-bought eggs taste better and have a much darker-yellow yolk.

mrexroad 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Iirc, it’s only the US and Japan that acid wash their eggs, thus stripping the natural protective layer, and require refrigeration.

burnished 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I used to get tipped in eggs by this wonderful human at a bar I worked at and while I'm not sure I could tell them apart in a blind taste test I can say that the variety of pretty colors the egg shells came in and the richness of the yolk combined to make them noticeably more satisfying. I have a lot of experience tasting things though, I could absolutely see someone having a similar experience to mine and chalking it up to a superior taste. Or maybe there is a regional component to basic grocery store eggs and I live in a high quality zone, idk.

lewispollard 2 days ago | parent [-]

> I used to get tipped in eggs by this wonderful human at a bar

As someone who lives in a country where tipping culture doesn't extend to bars, I was imagining something quite different at first

127 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The ancestors of chickens used to eat our ancestors for hundreds of millions of years, so I have no issues with eating them as much as I want.

phpnode 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For me the biggest downside is that they reliably attract vermin. I tried a bunch of things to deter rats but they were ever present when we had hens

koverstreet 2 days ago | parent [-]

You want a rooster, too. A rooster will also keep predators away.

crystal_revenge 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> - I'm told the eggs taste way better, I don't really notice it because I really only eat my own eggs, but perhaps I just got used to them

I eat fresh laid eggs very rarely (though have been thinking of raising my own), but can confirm that every time I've had truly fresh chicken eggs the taste is notably superior.

jolmg a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> You may have to euthanize a chicken

Looking online on reasons to euthanize chickens, it seems to be about not prolonging their suffering when ill.

I don't really know much on farming practices, and I'm not commenting to say that things should be one way or the other. However, I do note that with a human, euthanasia is not a common practice, specially without consent, and one would typically just numb the pain until they pass on their own, i.e. hospice care.

Maybe that's not possible with animals because chickens can't really communicate on the effectiveness of drugs...

Still much better treatment than factory farming.

sandermvanvliet 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Some other downsides:

- The smell… Chicken crap is horrible. Our neighbour has chickens, we have flies. Lots of black flies.

- Bye bye garden… My dad has two chickens (did I mention the smell?) that free roam and absolutely tear up everything looking for a tasty bite.

- Can’t eat the eggs This isn’t necessarily a chicken problem but mostly a problem with chemical industry. We’ve had a lot of PFOA/PFAS contamination and public health advise says to not eat eggs from backyard chickens

werdnapk 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

If there's a smell then the coop isn't being cleaned enough... simple as that. Ours coop is cleaned every day or two and there's zero smell.

It's like a cat's litter box. If it smells, then clean it more often.

AllegedAlec 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> - Can’t eat the eggs This isn’t necessarily a chicken problem but mostly a problem with chemical industry. We’ve had a lot of PFOA/PFAS contamination and public health advise says to not eat eggs from backyard chickens

The research done was mid at best. They just went "oh yeah there was huge variance in the hobby chicken PFAS data so we took the average". Most of the hobby eggs had little to no PFAS in them.

Furthermore, because of privacy laws, they weren't allowed to know where the eggs came from. They say they found no correlation between PFAS contaminations in eggs and known high PFAS areas but that's actual bullshit if you can't look at location data.

It's absolutely attrocious they were allowed to publish like this and that no one called them on their bullshit.

Overall, unless you are in a place where you know you have high PFAS concentrations, it's most likely fine? You could send off a few eggs for testing to make sure, that's a 200 euro test or something. Do that once per year just to make sure and you should be OK.

throwaway2037 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

    > We’ve had a lot of PFOA/PFAS contamination and public health advise says to not eat eggs from backyard chickens
Where?
AllegedAlec 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Purportedly the Netherlands, but the research was badly performed.

KNOWN PFAS contamination was around heavy industry, and yeah, if you live near those regions, maybe don't. Otherwise proceed with scepticism and/or some testing.

sandermvanvliet 2 days ago | parent [-]

Netherlands indeed. We live downriver from known contamination in Dordrecht and around heavy industry in Rotterdam area

brnt 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Everywhere that is never tested. How do you know for sure you are on good soil, and that no contaminated soil was used under your house and garden, which no doubt were levelled before construction started?

This includes feed. Commercial animal foods literally contains waste, such as plastic, due to waste food recycling not being required to be unpacked.

Sure, you _can_ control these things, but more often than not, people don't. Semi commercial hobbyists don't have the money.

belorn 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We used them to manage the garden. It much easier to put down nets/steel wire around problem areas, then it is to clear out weed and insects, and the chicken bring their own fertilizers to the mix. They are also great at managing grass lawns.

There were several lessons that we learned. Chicken will find dry earth to use as a bath. If one do not want that then you need to remove access and solve the underlying need. They will also dig up seeds and eat seedlings, so any fresh worked soil need to be covered/restricted. They also eat some fruits and herbs, but not others.

In term of total work they did save a lot of time and the garden was in much better shape than before.

kimixa 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I also read something saying that roads are one of the biggest sources of microplastics, with tyre wear, and that being next to one (as most suburban houses are) significantly increases the amount in microplastics in foods grown in backyards. I imagine Chickens would be worse as pollutants tend to accumulate as they go up trophic levels.

Though like many discussions about microplastics today, where "higher levels", and what microplastics, cross over into actual health issues is vague.

2 days ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
numba888 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> You may have to euthanize a chicken, likely by hand (literally) via cervical dislocation. It still ranks among the worst things I've ever had to do in my life.

Traditionally it's done by decapitation. Head dies instantly. No need to suffer. Body runs for a while. Don't forget to ask for forgiveness...

arkey 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

If you properly dislocate it (thus severing the nerve) it doesn't even get to twitch. In theory it's slightly cleaner and better even for the chicken.

It does require a bit of technique though, and the consequences of not doing it right at first can be very upsetting.

dotancohen 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's what cervical dislocation is. The cervix is the neck. You're dislocating the head from the body, via the neck.

raisedbyninjas 2 days ago | parent [-]

AFAICT, biologists didn't screw up and give two different body parts the same name. Neck bones are called cervical vertebrae.

fransje26 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Don't forget to ask for forgiveness

And thank them for their help and for providing you with food.

groos 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Right! The first egg our chickens laid cost $500, the second $250, etc. It would take a lot of laying for the cost to come even close to grocery store prices (back then) but we quit after a couple of years.

josefresco 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> - Your wife may one day want a chicken to live inside the house. You may one day agree to this, and then miss it when the chicken is living outside the house again...

This made me smile very wide, thank you for sharing :-)

dylanz 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Great points! I agree with everything you said here with exception to the point about it not being a monetary solution. I've built an "extremely" janky coop for almost no cost in the past. At one point I got absolutely sick of eggs because there were so many than I ended up trading neighbors for other goods. The whole thing ended up making/saving me a ton of money in the end. Let me reiterate how unsafe this coop was however... it was as spacious as it was dangerous (very).

giantg2 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"If you really like eating chicken, you may end up finding it difficult to eat them again in the future after you develop a bond with them."

Or you might find them delicious and need to raise more of them.

threetonesun 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Raising animals to eat for meat is a very different endeavor than raising them for milk/eggs. Especially if you eat meat daily (or more than once a day!), do some mental math on how many animals you'd need to sustain yourself.

lsaferite 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Not to mention, raising meat chickens is sad. We've bread them to gorge themselves so they bulk up fast. That results in essentially morbidly obese chickens. We ended up with two on accident and they couldn't even climb the ramp into the coop after a few weeks. The just gorged and sat around in the dirt. It was very sad. Raising non-meat chickens takes a lot longer and the meat output is much lower.

giantg2 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There are such things as heritage and forager breeds, not to mention dual purpose breeds. The industrial meat birds are the only ones that really have the issues you describe. Look into Kosher Kings or Freedom Rangers and you'll see they don't have those problems. As others have mentioned, raising them yourself is much more humane than buying it in the store. The only reason it would be more sad is because the suffering of the birds in the store is hidden from you.

canucker2016 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Picture in the following article shows the difference in size of chickens since the 1950s.

see https://www.zmescience.com/feature-post/how-chickens-tripled...

giantg2 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

Anyways, one buck and 2-3 doe rabbits can give you something like 300+ pounds of meat per year. Close to a pound a day would be sufficient for most people. Of course you aren't going to eat only one thing, so you will have other sources of meat for variety

ilikecakeandpie 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you know anyone where this has been the case?

giantg2 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, I know people who raise chickens for dual purpose. There are entire breeds of chickens that are dedicated to dual production.

slothtrop 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

* gestures to most of recorded history *

Before the industrial revolution, 80% of us worked the land, most familiar with animal agriculture.

ilikecakeandpie 2 days ago | parent [-]

This is irrelevant. Do you bring up that before the industrial revolution that grown men used to marry children when people talk about modern views on grooming?

slothtrop 2 days ago | parent [-]

Did you miss the context? The other user questions whether people have ever been unperturbed by slaughter when raising animals. It's a strange sentiment when you consider that historically we have been much, much closer to the animals we consume and intimately familiar with the process of how they get to the table.

hasbot 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Seems to me another downside is the increased difficulty in traveling. As in, if I want to go away for a few days, I'll have to find someone to feed and water the chickens.

eleveriven 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sounds like a classic case of -not the cheapest option, but definitely the most rewarding-. The ethical aspect is a huge plus: knowing exactly how your eggs are produced and giving the chickens a good life.

arkey 2 days ago | parent [-]

> not the cheapest option, but definitely the most rewarding

It's not that much more expensive if you were to compare with store-bought eggs that actually match the quality.

reverendsteveii 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>I'm told the eggs taste way better

Can confirm. My dad's cousin is a little bit country and has had meat and egg chickens for years. She comes to visit sometimes, and always brings eggs. Store-bought quite literally pales in comparison, which is to say that the dandelion yellow yolks of store bought eggs have nothing on the rich, flavorful orange-as-a-child's-drawing-of-the-sun yolks from her eggs.

portaouflop 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My dad used to have around 15 chickens — but then a fox somehow burrowed under the fence - which was buried in the ground around 20 cm - and slaughtered them all.

throwaway2037 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You make no mention of feed cost. Do you just depend upon free range "pecking" in the grass, or kitchen scraps... or what? 13 chickens is a lot of daily feed!

qq99 2 days ago | parent [-]

I view the feed cost as being the yin to the egg production's yang. I'm not keeping a spreadsheet, but I do believe they produce more value in eggs than they ingest in feed.

In the warmer months, they also supplement their food from the yard when they eat a lot of grasses and fruits

Eric_WVGG 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My sister has been keeping a coop in her backyard for over a decade now. She got the, because “I find the sound soothing.” (It really is quite nice)

One other advantage is that they will absolutely hoover up the ticks out of a yard. I’ve tried to talk my various friends who move upstate into getting some for this reason… but yeah it’s a couple grand up front and a new hobby.

switch007 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Your wife may one day want a chicken to live inside the house. You may one day agree to this, and then miss it when the chicken is living outside the house again

Whenever someone mentions how unique you can be with language and come up with amazing unique sentences never uttered by anyone before...I shall think of this

kypro 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I also own chickens. Before I got them I thought chickens were pretty stupid animals and wasn't particularly fond of them, but I liked the idea of keeping them for eggs and some entertainment.

I've had mine for about 6 months now and they've totally won me over...

They're far more friendly and intelligent than ever I imagined. Mine love hanging out with me in the garden. One of them is very affectionate and will sometimes decide to sit on my shoulder and is happy to be held. They're all totally different and have very unique personalities which I didn't expect. Their personality will depends a lot on the breed of chicken you get too and some are much more tame than others so it's worth thinking about the type of chicken you want.

I've trained mine to come to me when I whistle which can be super useful when I need to get them back in the run. Obviously you can't train them like dogs, but they're surprisingly smart and will learn things.

They've very curious animals. Mine like to fly up onto my window sill to watch us in the kitchen which is quite sweet.

They'll eat pretty much anything so they're very cheap to keep once you have your coop built. I have 3 (getting a 4th soon) and it's costing us about £3 per month for their feed which makes up about half of their diet, and for that they'll give us about 60-90 eggs. I wouldn't get them for the price of eggs though. If you want to give them a good home it's going to cost you. They're also quite a lot of work. I need to clean mine weekly, feed them daily and provide them general care. Buying an automatic coop door is a good way to reduce some of the hassle of having to let them out and shut them in every day.

I don't eat mammal meat, but I do eat chicken and fish and its been hard for me to eat chicken recently. I'm trying to reduce the amount of chicken I eat in favour of eggs.

deepvibrations 2 days ago | parent [-]

Thanks - that's amazing that you have reduced your meat consumption, I really do think we need to take more responsibility and care about animals more. This video converted me, may offer some insights for you too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YFz99OT18k

ushiroda80 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The concept is kind of analogous in many ways on if one should have solar power to hedge against power outages. I.e definitely can be worth it but will take up time and investment with long payback period.

eckmLJE 2 days ago | parent [-]

To hedge against increasing electric utility prices, maybe. I installed solar recently and the cost of batteries to cover a decent power outage didn’t make sense to me. I just got a transfer switch and a portable propane generator instead. The battery tech / price is just not there yet IMO. And in case this isn’t well known, when there is a power outage and you don’t have battery backup, the solar generation shuts off — you’re not using solar AS the backup in most cases unless you have a very particular setup.

thesuitonym 2 days ago | parent [-]

> the cost of batteries to cover a decent power outage didn’t make sense to me.

Are you trying to power your whole house during a power outage, or just a few necessities like a space heater, a few lamps, and maybe a hotplate?

TuringNYC 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Thanks for the detail. I never thought about vet needs for chickens. How would you know they are sick? I know with my cat, her mood and activity would shift. Is it apparent when a chicken is sick?

qq99 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You can kinda tell based on their actions (sometimes). We haven't really needed to bring them to the vet for illness, but once for amputation of an infected + hurt toe. Additionally, if they get parasites (typically mites), they need anti-parasitics. My wife has done a ton of research into identifying chicken issues so she is always on the lookout.

We've had other times where one might appear a bit sluggish, but then the next day are back to normal. Probably ate something bad?

arkey 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There are several conditions that have visible consequences, such as injuries, malformations, anomalies or a general affectation of their appearance. Plenty of those can be quite disturbing for someone with no experience.

svieira 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Storey's Guides are a good starting point: tohttps://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/storeys-guide-to-raising-ch...

horrible-hilde 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The eggs do taste better but that depends on what you are feeding them.

You don't have to eat your chickens, it’s up to you.

predators and rats and avian flu are the tough problems.

dcchambers 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How does one travel/vacation if they have chickens? Are they self-managing enough to be left alone for 1-2 weeks a couple times a year?

sethammons 2 days ago | parent [-]

With room, food, and water, we have left chickens on their own for 2wks. The challenge is keeping clean water and food and predators. We had 30 gallon buckets of water with nipples on the exterior, and food towers (home made). They had the entire interior of our barn.

I wouldn't leave them in a small coupe without a run for that long.

dgacmu 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Your hypothetical children may tell stories for decades about how they were the ones who had to scoop the poop into the outdoor composting area and that the strong smell of urea lives with them to this day.

uh, speaking hypothetically and not at all of our own family chicken adventure when I was a kid/teen.

Also, if you have to kill a chicken, study how to do it and practice beforehand. Botching it will also live with you - I learned this one the hard way.

All that said, I'm glad I had the experience of (helping) raise chickens. It was an adventure, and the eggs were great. I've pondered it on and off again as an adult but have thus far resisted the temptation.

2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
cactusplant7374 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> - Your wife may one day want a chicken to live inside the house. You may one day agree to this, and then miss it when the chicken is living outside the house again...

Isn't the more likely case that they shit everywhere but the family loves them so much they won't let you put it back outside?

everdrive 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A big upside; with chickens you have the best possible composting system. They will eat almost all food waste. (but, please be careful to avoid the small number of foods which are unhealthy for chickens) And, they turn that waste into compost. Depending on volume, they can also completely handle leaves, grass clippings, and other yard waste. For leaves, they love to scratch through them and will poop on them. They'll break down the leaves in record time.

jermberj 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Ignorant question: why might one need to euthanize a chicken?

qq99 2 days ago | parent [-]

I think typically as a solution to serious injury (e.g. result of a predator attack or otherwise) that can't be mended.

In my case, we had too many roosters and their competitive/protective behaviour was causing serious injuries to the hens, so we had to make the tough decision to reduce their numbers. Being in the middle of nowhere, there weren't many options for the rooster in question, so it seemed like the most humane thing to do at the time.

2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
wonderwonder 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"Predators, foxes and hawks, you need defenses"

This one is something I think people maybe don't consider. My brother has chickens, they have a coop but pretty much have the run of his property in a rural area. He has had to kill a coyote and a bob cat so far. Not a reason not to get them, but something to consider before doing so.

koolba 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Chickens are very sweet animals, and are quite intelligent. You will grow to love all the silly things they do. You can pet them, they are super soft, and can become quite tame. They can purr.

Chickens are ruthless and will not hesitate for a moment to kill and then cannibalize their coop mates. The best way to avoid it is to have a single breed as they tend to start by attacking anything different, literally spots or discolorations, on other birds.

Yes, chickens will eat other chickens.

> I'm told the eggs taste way better, I don't really notice it because I really only eat my own eggs, but perhaps I just got used to them.

All eggs taste the same. Which is great because eggs taste great.

> Your wife may one day want a chicken to live inside the house. You may one day agree to this, and then miss it when the chicken is living outside the house again...

Chickens are filthy animals and the thought of having one indoors is disgusting.

Yiin 2 days ago | parent [-]

You write in absolutes when talking about your own opinion as if it's generally accepted to be a fact, which makes even interesting looking bits look suspicious when you encounter something clearly biased.

koolba 2 days ago | parent [-]

Cannibalistic behavior in chickens is not an opinion: https://extension.psu.edu/poultry-cannibalism-prevention-and...

It’s one of the reasons factory farms clip the beaks.

And regarding egg taste, have fun reading this: https://www.seriouseats.com/what-are-the-best-eggs

arkey 2 days ago | parent [-]

I generally agree with what you are saying, however I'm quite surprised at the pushback about homegrown eggs tasting better than mass-produced.

Send me as many papers as you want, but respectfully, I have empirically tasted the difference. I have no interest on imposing my opinion on anyone, but to me it's pretty obvious and easy to understand and accept that a better fed, better cared for chicken will produce better eggs.

A bit like with Wagyu steak, no?

koolba 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I generally agree with what you are saying, however I'm quite surprised at the pushback about homegrown eggs tasting better than mass-produced.

There have been many studies on this and in true blind tests people do not prefer one over the other. The Kenji tests are interesting as he even dyes the eggs green to prevent the color from giving it away.

> Send me as many papers as you want, but respectfully, I have empirically tasted the difference.

You think it tastes better because you know the provenance of the egg. It's like a placebo effect. Try your own blind study and see if you can actually tell the difference.

> I have no interest on imposing my opinion on anyone, but to me it's pretty obvious and easy to understand and accept that a better fed, better cared for chicken will produce better eggs.

There's plenty of non-taste reasons that they're better. You might care about the welfare of the animal. And the vitamins or balance of fatty acids might be different. But they all taste the same.

> A bit like with Wagyu steak, no?

A Wagyu would be significantly more marbled than your off the shelf USDA Choice steak. So of course it would taste different. The balance of protein v.s. fats and distribution throughout the meat would be completely different.

bigstrat2003 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm not the person you are replying to, but I have empirically not tasted the difference. The only difference between store bought eggs and farm fresh ones is that the yolk is vividly yellow on the ones from the farm. I am willing to bet that the people who taste a difference are imagining it because of the superior aesthetics, and that they wouldn't taste anything different in a double blind taste test. Which is fine, nothing wrong with the placebo effect. But I don't think there's any substance to the claim that the eggs actually taste better.

algo_trader 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

good luck with this

how hard would it be to break even with 200 chickens in a typical European town (excluding land costs)? i am just imagining if a small company decides to raise its own chickens-eggs for lunch time...

kvakerok 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"We can't build a bigger coop - Joey's going into soup."

torbengee a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Inside the house? How? They shit wherever they happen to be ...

softwaredoug 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’ve hear another downside is the sheer amount of poop to clean up.

r00fus 2 days ago | parent [-]

you mean free fertilizer to gather and use.

nemo44x 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> - Chickens are very sweet animals

Personally, I find them rather savory. Although deep fried with a bit of honey is good too.

ilikecakeandpie 2 days ago | parent [-]

Did you find out about hacker news from Reddit?

theshackleford 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Chickens are very sweet animals, and are quite intelligent.

I hated chickens, the only animal I may have disliked more were sheep and that’s only because sheep are so unbelievably annoying.

Chickens to me were nothing more than noisy garbage disposals.