food animals

wowfabgroovy said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous? i know people eat dogs in
some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals that are used for food?

I'd say food chain issues make keeping carnivourous animals for food even more wasteful. Energy is
lost, the further up the food chain you go - Feeding a cow a ton of veggies than eating it will give
you less energy than eating the veggies yourself, as some of the energy in the veggies has gone into
the cow moving, breathing, circulating blood etc. Feeding the cow to a dog, or a set of dogs, then
eating the dogs gives you even less energy because the dogs will have used some of that energy too.
This is stuff I remember from biology; there's probably something similar in place regarding
nutrients.

--
Alex Pounds (Creature) .~. LGBTSoc Comms Person CS2 Student /V\ Website working group chair // \\
Environmental committee member "Variables won't; Constants aren't" /( )\ ^`~'^

wowfabgroovy said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous? i know people eat dogs in
some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals that are used for food?

Personally, I would rather herd a sheep or a cow than a bear. My guess is that food animals are
such because they are docile. Carnivores are rarely docile. Lazy sometimes, like lions, but not
often placid.

I imagine the thinking went something like, "When I try to brand that animal, will it turn my torso
into confetti?"

Tangentially related, I recall reading a SF story (by CJ Cherryh, maybe?) that featured a race of
beings that ate only carnivores that also ate only carnivores. This was supposed to imply ultimate
superiority on the food chain. -Vioxel

[email hidden] Just remove all the spam and such.

wowfabgroovy said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous?

I'm going to agree with Vioxel on this one. Most large carnivorous animals are too aggressive for
husbandry.

Quoted message said:

i know people eat dogs in some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals
that are used for food?

Cats are also eaten in some cultures. Other omnivorous/carnivorous animals used for food would
include raccoon, opossum, snake, alligator, bear, turtle, monkey, etc.

wowfabgroovy <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous? i know people eat dogs in
some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals that are used for food?

Probably because most carniverous animals were to feirce to be domesticated. Herbivores are more
docile - especially after their testicles have been cut off without anaesthetic.

And look what happened when the idiots fed dead sheep to cows. Mad Cow Disease and New Variant CJD!
Are farmers and fodder producers naturally thick as two short planks or do they take special lessons
paid for by the Min of Ag?

Nemo.

"wowfabgroovy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous? i know people eat dogs in
some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals that are used for food?

Herbivores of the bovidae and ungulate families have historically been the easiest to domesticate
and raise in captivity for food, plus they have other benefits such as wool, leather, or as work
animals. Domesticating carnivores for food would not make much sense since both human and animal
would be competing for the same food. In recent times though, salmon and trout which are carniverous
are now raised in farms commercially. There are also a number of domesticated food animals which are
not herbivores, like chickens and pigs which are omnivorous.

"Creature" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

wowfabgroovy said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous? i know people eat dogs in
some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals that are used for food?

I'd say food chain issues make keeping carnivourous animals for food even more wasteful. Energy is
lost, the further up the food chain you go - Feeding a cow a ton of veggies than eating it will
give you less energy than eating the veggies yourself, as some of the energy in the veggies has
gone into the cow moving, breathing, circulating blood etc.

====================
Really? How well do you process grass? I'd say you're lying. there is no way that you can convert
grass to protein to keep yourself alive. A cow can and does just that, and makes for a delicious
steak when done...

Feeding the

Quoted message said:

cow to a dog, or a set of dogs, then eating the dogs gives you even less energy because the dogs
will have used some of that energy too. This is stuff I remember from biology; there's probably
something similar in place regarding nutrients.

==================
Sure, only you can convert the nutrients that cows can, so your spew about waste is just that,
wastflu spew...

Quoted message said:

--
Alex Pounds (Creature) .~. LGBTSoc Comms

Person

Quoted message said:

CS2 Student /V\ Website working group

chair

Quoted message said:

// \\ Environmental committee

member

Quoted message said:

"Variables won't; Constants aren't" /( )\ ^`~'^

Creature said:

Quoted message said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous? i know people eat dogs in
some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals that are used for food?

I'd say food chain issues make keeping carnivourous animals for food even more wasteful. Energy is
lost, the further up the food chain you go - Feeding a cow a ton of veggies than eating it will
give you less energy than eating the veggies yourself, as some of the energy in the veggies has
gone into the cow moving, breathing, circulating blood etc. Feeding the cow to a dog, or a set of
dogs, then eating the dogs gives you even less energy because the dogs will have used some of that
energy too. This is stuff I remember from biology; there's probably something similar in place
regarding nutrients.

That's a fair grasp of entropy, but grossly exaggerated since the energy loss isn't as direct a
comparison as you've explained it.

Cattle usually don't eat veggies, but silage, grains, legumes -- and almost always stuff completely
unsuitable for human consumption. Game animals also rarely eat food intended for humans, unless they
trespass into someone's garden, orchard, etc. Pigs are often fed with scraps and other non- and
unconsumable (by humans) feed. Most poultry can also convert stuff humans normally wouldn't eat.

Question: Take any of those animals out of the equation, and what's the net gain/loss in the system?
Answer: A gain of usable protein for humans.

"usual suspect" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

wowfabgroovy said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous?

I'm going to agree with Vioxel on this one. Most large carnivorous animals are too aggressive for
husbandry.

Quoted message said:

i know people eat dogs in some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals
that are used for food?

Cats are also eaten in some cultures. Other omnivorous/carnivorous animals used for food would
include raccoon, opossum, snake, alligator, bear, turtle, monkey, etc.

===============
chickens, by the millions....

Vioxel <[email hidden]> went:

Quoted message said:

Personally, I would rather herd a sheep or a cow than a bear. My guess is that food animals are
such because they are docile. Carnivores are rarely docile. Lazy sometimes, like lions, but not
often placid.

that would make sense. and in the days when we were hunters, cows and sheep would be easier to hunt
than lions and tigers and bears. so it would make sense that someone would eventually have the idea
of rearing such animals to make them easier to hunt.

i was wondering if maybe it was becuase carnivorous animals didn't taste very nice or something? has
anyone here ever eaten one?

"nemo" <[email hidden]> went:

Quoted message said:

And look what happened when the idiots fed dead sheep to cows. Mad Cow Disease and New Variant CJD!
Are farmers and fodder producers naturally thick as two short planks or do they take special
lessons paid for by the Min of Ag?

it's more likely just down to greed/looking for ways to save money.

"Creature" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

wowfabgroovy said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous? i know people eat dogs in
some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals that are used for food?

I'd say food chain issues make keeping carnivourous animals for food even more wasteful. Energy is
lost, the further up the food chain you go - Feeding a cow a ton of veggies than eating it will
give you less energy than eating the veggies yourself, as some of the energy in the veggies has
gone into the cow moving, breathing, circulating blood etc. Feeding the cow to a dog, or a set of
dogs, then eating the dogs gives you even less energy because the dogs will have used some of that
energy too. This is stuff I remember from biology; there's probably something similar in place
regarding nutrients.

I suppose a ton veggies requires no expenditure of energy and effort to grow? Raising cattle for
food is very efficient - the animal does most of the work for you - but growing vegetables is labour
intensive and not always successful. Having had the experience of growing both for personal
consumption, I have found raising a tonne of beef is far less work than growing a tonne of
vegetables.

"rick etter" <[email hidden]> went:

Quoted message said:

Sure, only you can convert the nutrients that cows can, so your spew about waste is just that,
wastflu spew...

what is it with you carcass munchers that makes you so agressive? if you can't answer the original
question, don't bother replying because you're really not adding anything to the thread at all.

rick etter said:

"Creature" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

wowfabgroovy said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous? i know people eat dogs
in some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals that are used for
food?

I'd say food chain issues make keeping carnivourous animals for food even more wasteful. Energy
is lost, the further up the food chain you go - Feeding a cow a ton of veggies than eating it
will give you less energy than eating the veggies yourself, as some of the energy in the veggies
has gone into the cow moving, breathing, circulating blood etc.

====================
Really? How well do you process grass? I'd say you're lying. there is no way that you can convert
grass to protein to keep yourself alive. A cow can and does just that, and makes for a delicious
steak when done...

Normally I have you killfiled, and it's posts like this that make me realise why. Really, come on
now. Think this through. We're talking GCSE biology here, it's not that complex. The point is not
that a cow can or cannot process grass better than I can (of course it can). The point is that the
more stages in the food chain there are, the smaller the amount of the original energy remains. All
energy comes from the sun; filter that energy as sun -> plant -> you and you'll get x energy. Filter
it as sun -> plant -> animal -> you, and you'll get less energy, as the animal will have used some
to heat its body, move around, moo, think, respire, etc.

--
Alex Pounds (Creature) .~. LGBTSoc Comms Person CS2 Student /V\ Website working group chair // \\
Environmental committee member "Variables won't; Constants aren't" /( )\ ^`~'^

< Really? How well do you process grass? I'd say you're lying. there is no way that you can convert
grass to protein to keep yourself alive. A cow can and does just that, and makes for a delicious
steak when done... >

Let me preface this with saying I am neither vegan nor vegetarian. While humans cannot process grass
into protein(and maybe they can, I just do no have the time to research this) there are other grains
and beans that we can such as soy. Soy, per pound, provides more protein than beef(and with less
health risks too). Soy is often used as feed for farm animals because of its inexpensive nature to
be produced.

It is a very simple fact that each level of processing(i.e., cow eats soy, we eat cow) sacrifices
some of the nutrients and energy in the food. If some creature above us were to eat us, they would
only gain a partial benefit of what we gained from the cow.

Christopher

"rick etter" <[email hidden]> went:

Quoted message said:

"usual suspect" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

wowfabgroovy said:

is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous?

I'm going to agree with Vioxel on this one. Most large carnivorous animals are too aggressive for
husbandry.

Quoted message said:

i know people eat dogs in some countries, but are there any other naturally carnivorous animals
that are used for food?

Cats are also eaten in some cultures. Other omnivorous/carnivorous animals used for food would
include raccoon, opossum, snake, alligator, bear, turtle, monkey, etc.

===============
chickens, by the millions....

which was one of the reasons for the phrase naturally herbivorous. most food sheep are carnivorous
now, but not naturally so.

wowfabgroovy said:

Vioxel <[email hidden]> went:

Quoted message said:

Personally, I would rather herd a sheep or a cow than a bear. My guess is that food animals are
such because they are docile. Carnivores are rarely docile. Lazy sometimes, like lions, but not
often placid.

that would make sense. and in the days when we were hunters, cows and sheep would be easier to hunt
than lions and tigers and bears. so it would make sense that someone would eventually have the idea
of rearing such animals to make them easier to hunt.

i was wondering if maybe it was becuase carnivorous animals didn't taste very nice or something?
has anyone here ever eaten one?

I had bear once as a kid. It was really tasty, I must admit. It was very different from beef, darker-
flavored and a little greasier. I don't know how much of that was due to preparation, though.

-Vioxel

[email hidden] Just remove all the spam and such.

wowfabgroovy said:

Quoted message said:

Personally, I would rather herd a sheep or a cow than a bear. My guess is that food animals are
such because they are docile. Carnivores are rarely docile. Lazy sometimes, like lions, but not
often placid.

that would make sense. and in the days when we were hunters, cows and sheep would be easier to
hunt than lions and tigers and bears. so it would make sense that someone would eventually have
the idea of rearing such animals to make them easier to hunt.

i was wondering if maybe it was becuase carnivorous animals didn't taste very nice or something?
has anyone here ever eaten one?

I've had everything on the list in my previous post, with the possible exception of monkey. One
can't be sure what one has actually eaten in certain regions.

"wowfabgroovy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"nemo" <[email hidden]> went:

Quoted message said:

And look what happened when the idiots fed dead sheep to cows. Mad Cow Disease and New Variant
CJD! Are farmers and fodder producers naturally thick as two short planks or do they take special
lessons paid for by the Min of Ag?

it's more likely just down to greed/looking for ways to save money.

=================
Imagine that, the same reasoning that goes into growing your monoculture crops using massive inputs
from the petro-chemical industry. All just to provide you with the cheapest veggies you can buy.
Welcome to the club, killer.

While frolicking around in alt.food.vegan, Xaximus of Shaw Residential

Internet said:

I suppose a ton veggies requires no expenditure of energy and effort to grow? Raising cattle for
food is very efficient - the animal does most of the work for you - but growing vegetables is
labour intensive and not always successful. Having had the experience of growing both for personal
consumption, I have found raising a tonne of beef is far less work than growing a tonne of
vegetables.

and where did you get the food for the cattle from? or did they take care of that, themselves, too?
--
Nikitta a.a. #1759 Apatriot(No, not apricot)#18 ICQ# 251532856 Unreferenced footnotes: nut.house.cxcgiOpen ↗
bin/nemwiki.pl?ISFN Hi, I'm the .signature virus. Copy me into your .sig file and help me spread!