Octopus farming (1 Viewer)

[Strontium Dog]

That's what it means when one claims right to determine that others need to stop doing whatever it is that he objects to. In one broad stroke he condemns a large swath of humanity.

Where was that in any of the post you quoted?

 

[Trinovid]

Where was that in any of the post you quoted?

It's the gist of the entire thread - people that eat octopus are a new low. The first post was centered on how the octopus are killed and if the total output of his posts were assembled, he's somewhat okay with eating animals that he sees as historically consumed, but never having eaten octopus himself, he sees it as problematic.
"we are currently looking at farming a predatory species for food, not a herbivorous species that mankind domesticated millenia ago. Hence the 'new low' concept*. Farming them because 'we like the taste of them' not because we need to for food. *(I imagine boiling cats and dogs alive for food also pretty low - not in Europe however)"

He apparently sees fit to emotionally condemn groups of people with "a new low" who have historically eaten animals based on whether they are predator (hands off, they can kill but not be killed) or prey, particularly if they've been unafraid of death through thousands of years of conditioning), which is pragmatically more okay than the precious predator and historically undomesticated groups.

The whole thread would have attracted a lot less unwanted attention from me if it had been less arrogant and pretentious in its willingness to find more reasons to hate humanity. It's a very common superioristic mindset to accuse others of being lowly because they don't eat in the accepted fashion.

Really problematic also to assume that other sentient species view death in the same way as spoiled first world human beings posit that they do. There are facts, the unknown, and everything in between is the vast realm of supposition and hypothesis.

 

[01101001]

That's what it means when one claims right to determine that others need to stop doing whatever it is that he objects to. In one broad stroke he condemns a large swath of humanity.

Much has been said about wrongs committed by people crossing the oceans and forcing their views on others, only to continue doing the same thing, very often by those willing to most vociferously condemn those who came before. It's bad when people they disapprove of do something, but completely acceptable when the done by oneself. Not cool, but being the politically correct view, it gains the support of others, to vilify the ones not chanting the same mantra.

As an only relatively recent vegeterian (for a few months), but I grant that arguments in favour of veganism are even stronger, and I appreciate that some people manage to maintain a healthy and varied diet thus. I also recognise that, due to its geography, Alaska relies on fishing more than some other regions.

 

[Strontium Dog]

It's the gist of the entire thread - people that eat octopus are a new low.

I thought it was the industrial farming of octopus that he described as a "new low".

I still think you are reading between the lines somewhat, but I acknowledge your viewpoint.

 

[Trinovid]

I thought it was the industrial farming of octopus that he described as a "new low".

I still think you are reading between the lines somewhat, but I acknowledge your viewpoint.

Here's a couple of the pertinent statements.
"...farming octopus for consumption as a new low for humanity." "Better news to me would be a decision not to eat octopus, maybe at the UN level or something..."

I have no problem with people holding differing views than mine, but when they start to condemn then they are the ones proving that they themselves have the problem. This type of judgemental posturing reminds me of my friends wife destroying a Thanksgiving dinner by screaming at the people, who bought all the food and invited them in the first place, because it angered her beyond control that they were eating a bird. I ended up having to find a quiet corner to eat and it formed a permanent rift between the hosts and the food bigot.

 

[vergan]

It's the gist of the entire thread - people that eat octopus are a new low. The first post was centered on how the octopus are killed and if the total output of his posts were assembled, he's somewhat okay with eating animals that he sees as historically consumed, but never having eaten octopus himself, he sees it as problematic.
"we are currently looking at farming a predatory species for food, not a herbivorous species that mankind domesticated millenia ago. Hence the 'new low' concept*. Farming them because 'we like the taste of them' not because we need to for food. *(I imagine boiling cats and dogs alive for food also pretty low - not in Europe however)"

He apparently sees fit to emotionally condemn groups of people with "a new low" who have historically eaten animals based on whether they are predator (hands off, they can kill but not be killed) or prey, particularly if they've been unafraid of death through thousands of years of conditioning), which is pragmatically more okay than the precious predator and historically undomesticated groups.

The whole thread would have attracted a lot less unwanted attention from me if it had been less arrogant and pretentious in its willingness to find more reasons to hate humanity. It's a very common superioristic mindset to accuse others of being lowly because they don't eat in the accepted fashion.

Really problematic also to assume that other sentient species view death in the same way as spoiled first world human beings posit that they do. There are facts, the unknown, and everything in between is the vast realm of supposition and hypothesis.

There is nothing new about farming and eating predators. First, anyone going to a coastal seafood market will see the shelves full of amazing predatory animals, followed by opportunistic (predator/scavenger/grazer) ones. Second, and from a western society perspective, some of our star farmed fishes are clearly amazing predators, like atlantic salmon, but also sea bass or Gilt-headed breams (note these two predators have been "raised" since ancient times, at least from the old days of the Roman empire), widely eaten and farmed along the Mediterranean shores.

Here the main argument I see (and I have seen in the past on this topic) is on the side of industrial farming, and what is going to happen. It is a reasonable concern So far, it is unknown how it will results so in my opinion it should be tested. I won't increase my octopus intake, but if the project is not as apocalyptic as pointed out by some people, and the quality is good enough, I may switch to captive.

 

[dantheman]

I do find the accusations on this thread that I'm forcing people to eat in a certain way or imposing my views on others with some kind of sense of superiority as fairly ridiculous to be honest!!

It's a forum, and was really just sharing the story in post #1.

If people are getting to get angry then that is up to them and how they deal with their own emotions/guilt (?), not really much to do with me, and I've certainly not criticised anyone personally for eating meat or not (with the exception of Opisska in post #xx, tongue in cheek). I mean, 90%+ of people eat meat, so any general criticism cannot be targeted, surely? If someone posted up a story about, say, some fur farming issue, and included something about their personal opinion on it then they would be entitled to do so, surely?

I have no problem with people holding differing views than mine, but when they start to condemn then they are the ones proving that they themselves have the problem. This type of judgemental posturing reminds me of my friends wife destroying a Thanksgiving dinner by screaming at the people, who bought all the food and invited them in the first place, because it angered her beyond control that they were eating a bird. I ended up having to find a quiet corner to eat and it formed a permanent rift between the hosts and the food bigot.

That sounds like a pretty awful food-based family experience, and you have my sympathies! Sounds absolutely dire.

 

[dantheman]

This thread has been a bit weird almost from the get-go to be honest. After the first few posts ...

That people were so offended by my statement that it 'was a new low for humanity' does surprise me somewhat. I still stand by the statement. Other lows have occurred, and will occur ...

The comparisons to eating cow (for example) and other creatures being sentient too did strike me as rather 'whataboutism' tbh. What was funny/strange was both meat-eating people and non-meat eating people* (vegetarians and vegans?) all wading in with the same kind of criticism. As someone somewhere in the middle perhaps, to be accused of hypocrisy from both sides when I hadn't even stated where I stood did seem rather unfair and demoralising. Hardly encouraging when coming from more hard-core vegetarian types.

I posted links to two other recent threads on 'meat-eating' as I didn't want this thread to be another that descended into that kind of thing (ie I was saying - it's been discussed before, >here<, no need to repeat). It is perhaps rather ironic that this thread did, especially if it was thought that I posted them to be 'preachy' when my intent was the exact opposite lol!!


As to having opinions on the rights of humanity/superiority of the human race etc ... well, that's all a bit awkward to discuss further if as sensitive a subject as it seems to be, so ... and maybe a bit deep?? It is however rather a central concept in the idea of humans eating other intelligent life forms, which some cultures/religions treat differently. We have barely touched on here.


*(I think - ie people haven't all explicitly stated what they are, but think that is correct?)

 

[Trinovid]

There is nothing new about farming and eating predators. First, anyone going to a coastal seafood market will see the shelves full of amazing predatory animals, followed by opportunistic (predator/scavenger/grazer) ones. Second, and from a western society perspective, some of our star farmed fishes are clearly amazing predators, like atlantic salmon, but also sea bass or Gilt-headed breams (note these two predators have been "raised" since ancient times, at least from the old days of the Roman empire), widely eaten and farmed along the Mediterranean shores.

Here the main argument I see (and I have seen in the past on this topic) is on the side of industrial farming, and what is going to happen. It is a reasonable concern So far, it is unknown how it will results so in my opinion it should be tested. I won't increase my octopus intake, but if the project is not as apocalyptic as pointed out by some people, and the quality is good enough, I may switch to captive.

Great post, and I'm already in agreement with all of this.

 

[Trinovid]

This thread has been a bit weird almost from the get-go to be honest. After the first few posts ...

That people were so offended by my statement that it 'was a new low for humanity' does surprise me somewhat. I still stand by the statement. Other lows have occurred, and will occur ...

It was weird from the get-go with the "new low" assertions and most likely you'd have never even seen a post from me here if not for that condemnation. I also stand by my statement. If you don't like being harshly judged, how about not started threads with such harsh judgement for others.

You seem like a nice guy, except for in this light.

 

[Original PaulE]

It was weird from the get-go with the "new low" assertions and most likely you'd have never even seen a post from me here if not for that condemnation. I also stand by my statement. If you don't like being harshly judged, how about not started threads with such harsh judgement for others.

At what point would you harshly judge someone? These are highly intelligent animals which, even with best practice will be kept in crammed tanks, when they are usually a solitary animal, 15% mortality, caused by the stress of this, is apparently acceptable to the owners of this company. I personally feel that these people should be harshly judged? Various Whataboutisms and comparisons to other forms of industrialised farming most of which are pretty disgusting as well, seem to me to be pointless, the amount they aim to produce will be a tiny amount in comparison to the wild take so the conservation arguments seem to be bogus and no doubt when it is ramped up the standards will fall even further. This is being done purely for profit with zero consideration to the effect on the animal.
I think the phrase new low for Humanity is pretty accurate to be honest.

It feels like you are judging someone harshly for starting a thread on Birdforum whilst supporting already rich people exploiting an intelligent creature for no other reason than making money? Seems a strange position to take!

 

[Andy Lakin]

Will this put smaller scale fishermen out of business in that area surely the farmed octopuses are going to be cheaper otherwise people wouldn't invest vast amounts of money just to get this off the ground. If it is a similar situation as the U.K and the smaller scale fishermen they are barely getting by as it is. Its O.K saying quality costs but your average person is on a tight budget.

 

[Trinovid]

It feels like you are judging someone harshly for starting a thread on Birdforum whilst supporting already rich people exploiting an intelligent creature for no other reason than making money?

It appears that you like denigrating people when they don't think as you and your kind designate they should. A new low keeps getting established and you're now saying that all the poor and middle class people eating octopus in the world are "rich people" in order to change the narrative and justify your animosity.

 

[Richard D]

Putting aside the ethics of eating sentient creatures, I can't off the top of my head, think of any other solitary creature that is regularly farmed. Most creatures farmed are either herd/flock or shoal forming - are there other exceptions?

 

[Frank van Drogen]

Putting aside the ethics of eating sentient creatures, I can't off the top of my head, think of any other solitary creature that is regularly farmed. Most creatures farmed are either herd/flock or shoal forming - are there other exceptions?

(Atlantic) Salmon.

 

[Original PaulE]

It appears that you like denigrating people when they don't think as you and your kind designate they should. A new low keeps getting established and you're now saying that all the poor and middle class people eating octopus in the world are "rich people" in order to change the narrative and justify your animosity.

I said the people making money out of it were rich people no mention of the people eating it. And let's not pretend they give any more of a toss about the starving millions than they do the sentient animals they will be exploiting for profit. Why should poor people be fed crap food, created by exploitation of sentient creatures? Same as why should poor people be fed crap food from industrial farming while the rich eat well ? Seems like you are just promoting the status quo, got shares in it maybe? Perhaps we should be raising standards across the board so poorer people can have decent food instead of indulging in a race to the bottom,.what next for you?industrial farming of Dolphins, will that be acceptable to you, will a 20% mortality in that be ok ?justified cos its for the poor?

 

[vergan]

Putting aside the ethics of eating sentient creatures, I can't off the top of my head, think of any other solitary creature that is regularly farmed. Most creatures farmed are either herd/flock or shoal forming - are there other exceptions?

From a terrestrial perspective, what about quail, mink?
Then turbot, sea bass, sturgeon and other fish tend to be solitary during most of their lives.

 

[Richard D]

From a terrestrial perspective, what about quail, mink?
Then turbot, sea bass, sturgeon and other fish tend to be solitary during most of their lives.

Quail can form winter flocks, but yes they're solitary (or paired) in summer. Hadn't thought about Mink, but was really thinking about animals farmed for food. I honestly didn't know Turbot or Sea Bass were farmed - always asssumed they were caught in the sea.

 

[Andy Lakin]

What was the mortality rate before they devised a more successful system that reduced deaths
rates? They seem to have conveniently left that info out. I was very surprised to read that c9% of chickens reared for food die before being ready for slaughter, which obviously isn't massively different to the 15% mortality rate quoted for this project. The problem is every little thing which would improve welfare for these animals costs money which means either higher costs for the consumer or reduced profits and usually the margins are very tight in any factory farming set up. Obviously not defending the investors in this project only saying how these things work

I believe that that they putting in some serious effort into being able to farm Cod, Tuna etc but their temperament is totally unsuited to intensive farming. I don't know how far away they are from being able to do this as it was in a documentary I was watching a while back. God knows what will happen if this takes off.

 

[Trinovid]

Why should poor people be fed crap food, created by exploitation of sentient creatures? Same as why should poor people be fed crap food from industrial farming while the rich eat well ? Seems like you are just promoting the status quo, got shares in it maybe? Perhaps we should be raising standards across the board so poorer people can have decent food instead of indulging in a race to the bottom,.what next for you?industrial farming of Dolphins, will that be acceptable to you, will a 20% mortality in that be ok ?justified cos its for the poor?

Maybe we should raise the standards and not be so judgemental of others. The arrogant denigration of what other people choose to eat as crap is a bigger concern, not to mention your introduction of poor people, rich people, dolphins, shares, the social justice warrior in you just can't have a conversation without bringing in every other issue you can think of.