Factory Farming - Aspects of Factory Farming

Aspects of Factory Farming

• Low monetary cost — Intensive agriculture tends to produce food that can be sold at lower cost to consumers. This is achieved by reducing land costs, management costs, and feed costs through government subsidized agricultural methods. However, critic Michael Pollan argues, "Cheap industrial food, the organic movement has argued, only seems cheap, because the real costs are charged to the environment (in the form of water and air pollution and depletion of the soil); to the public purse (in the form of subsidies to conventional commodity producers); and to the public health (in the cost of diabetes, obesity and cardiovascular disease), not to mention to the welfare of the farm- and food-factory workers and the well-being of the animals.

• Standardization — Factory farming methods permit increased consistency and control over product output. However, this results in less genetic diversity among animals, and weakened immune systems.

• Efficiency — Animals in confinement can be supervised more closely than free-ranging animals, and diseased animals can be treated faster. Furthermore, efficient production of meat, milk, or eggs results in a need for fewer animals to be raised.

• Economic contribution — The high input costs of agricultural operations result in a large influx and distribution of capital to a rural area from distant buyers rather than simply recirculating existing capital. A single dairy cow contributes over US$1,300 to a local rural economy each year, each beef cow over US$800, meat turkey US$14, and so on. As Pennsylvania Secretary of Agriculture Dennis Wolff states, "Research estimates that the annual economic impact per cow is US$13,737. In addition, each US$1 million increase in Pennsylvania milk sales creates 23 new jobs. This tells us that dairy farms are good for the state's economy."

• Food safety — Reducing number and diversity of agricultural production facilities may or may not make oversight and regulation of food quality easier. However, crowding and filthy conditions can make diseases like E.coli easily transferred between animals. Overuse of antibiotics can also result in the development of drug-resistant "superbugs".

• Animal health — Larger farms may or may not require greater resources to maintain a high level of animal health. Larger farms can potentially employ expert employees who devote their working hours to assessing animal health, a task which would be cost-prohibitive for most small farms. Larger farms may or may not be more able to make regular use of veterinarians and the resources of state and federal agricultural extension services. Industrial agriculture generally provides more mechanisms for the use of antibiotics to prevent and treat diseases than non-industrial agriculture. However, being tightly confined with crates and chains can result in bruises and cuts among animals. Also, feeding corn to cattle results in many conditions like acidosis, liver abscesses,

• Diseases – Intensive farming may make the evolution and spread of harmful diseases easier. Many communicable animal diseases spread rapidly through densely spaced populations of animals and crowding makes genetic reassortment more likely. However small family farms are more likely to introduce bird diseases and more frequent association with people into the mix, as happened in the recent 2009 flu pandemic Some evidence suggests that antibiotic use in agriculture has contributed to antibiotic resistance in humans.

• Pollution — Large quantities and concentrations of waste are produced. Lakes, rivers, and groundwater are at risk when animal waste is improperly recycled. Pollutant gases are also emitted. Concentrations of animals can produce unacceptable levels of foul smells as opposed to the tolerable odours of the countryside. In less intensive conditions, natural processes can break down potential pollutants. Large farms can maintain and operate sophisticated systems to control waste products. Smaller farms may or may not be less able to invest in the same standards of pollution control.

• Ethics — Cruelty to animals: Crowding, drugging, and performing surgery on animals. On some farms, chicks may be debeaked when very young, causing pain and shock. Confining hens and pigs in crates no larger than the animal itself may lead to physical problems such as osteoporosis and joint pain, and psychological problems including boredom, depression, and frustration, as shown by repetitive or self-destructive actions. Animal treatment is subject to welfare legislation, though there is not consensus on what is acceptable, and there is virtually no oversight by authorities.

• Destruction of biodiversity — A tendency towards using a monoculture of single adapted breeds in factory farming, both in arable and animal farming, gives uniform product designed for high yields, at the risk of increased susceptibility to disease. The loss of locally adapted breeds reduces the resilience of the agricultural system. The issue is not limited to factory farming and historically the problem is reflected in the rapid adoption of one or two strains of crops across a wide area as seen in the Irish potato famine of 1845 and the Bengal rice famine in 1942. The loss of the gene pool of domesticated animals limits the ability to adapt to future problems.

• Quality of meat produced - The meat produced from factory farms compared to meat from smaller farms may or may not have a difference. For example, beef produced in factory farms sometimes appears to be pinkish and bruised. Also, the meat has a higher fat content. This may be because of vitamin deficiencies and bruising of the meat.