Defense 3: Freegan

Recap: sources of meat (and other animal products)

1. factory farms
• blog post
• also this-- new Nicholas Kristof column about slaughter of chickens -- undercover video 
• 22 killed per minute per person slaughtering -- 175 killed per minute by the whole line (increased speed proposed by Trump administration) -- these speed limits are based on human safety, not animal welfare
2. humane farms
• blog post
• how are they slaughtered? -- video of slaughter at polyface farm -- 4 killed per minute per person slaughtering
• exempt from federal regulations based on small size and on-site sales
3. rivers, oceans -- commercial fishing -- sport fishing (module 6)
4. wilderness -- hunting (module 6)
5. roads (roadkill)

_________________________

Arguments depend on source of animal products

Factory farm animal products

1. Rachels: wrong to consume
2. Budolfson: permissible to consume when (a) can't save animals and (b) harm inessential

Humane farm animal products

1. Zangwill: you should consume humanely raised animals -- being created is good for these animals, even if later killed
2. Replies
• What would Singer say?
• What would Regan/D&K say?
• Creating farm animals --> reduces habitat for wild animals --> fewer wild animals 
• Zangwill says that's ok, because farm animals are happier than wild animals ...we will discuss in Module 6

Road kill/Accidental meat

_________________________

Do people really eat roadkill?  Not in Texas. It's illegal here but legal in many states.

_________________________

Donald Bruckner, "Strict Vegetarianism is Immoral"

• Eating factory farmed meat is immoral
• Strict vegetarianism is immoral
• The moral diet = plant based plus some roadkill

Factory Harm argument (quotes on p. 2 and 3)

P1 "Factory farming causes extensive harm to animals." 

P2  "This harm is unnecessary. It is unnecessary in the sense that we humans do not need to cause it in order to gain adequate nutrition for healthy bodies and to preserve our lives." 

C1  "The practice of factory farming causes extensive, unnecessary harm to animals." 

P3   "It is wrong (knowingly) to cause, or support practices that cause, extensive, unnecessary harm to animals."

C2 "Purchasing and consuming meat from factory farms is wrong."

Note: easiest to follow argument assuming he thinks our food choices have efficacy. He discusses this issue later in article.

_________________________

What's wrong with a strict vegetarian (vegan) diet?

Problem: plant farming causes harm too

Steven Davis, "The least harm principle may require that humans consume a diet containing large hervibores, not a vegan diet" 

Bruckner

"Picking up road-killed animals does not harm any animals. Road-killed animals are already dead, so they are not harmed by picking them up as livestock are harmed by common husbandry practices. And no animals are killed in the process of picking up roadkill, as field animals are killed in the process of crop farming. So on the very standards of the Factory Harm Argument, we are obligated to collect and consume roadkill." (p. 9)

3 eaters

1. OMNIVORE (eats all foods)  -- most unnecessary harm
• causes deliberate deaths of food animals 
• PLUS causes accidental deaths of field animals
2. VEGAN (eats plants only)  -- less unnecessary harm than omnitore
• causes accidental deaths of field animals
3. FREEGAN (plants plus roadkill) - least unnecessary harm
• causes no deaths by picking up roadkill 
• PLUS causes fewer accidental deaths of field animals compared to vegan   

Conclusion: It's not just permissible to be a freegan; it's obligatory!

Objections/Questions/Comments

1. Would a freegan try to cause fewer accidental deaths of field animals by foraging in forests? Maybe.  Impact on wild animals might be an issue.
2. By taking roadkill off of roads, wouldn't that harm wild animals that eat them? Possibly they're removed before they're eaten because they're a danger to drivers.
3. What about animals accidentally shot? Bruckner would probably see them as similar to roadkill.
4. Wouldn't his reasoning lead to the idea that we should eat human roadkill? Not clear whether he would want to just say that's taboo or go along with it. 
5. Plant foods don't all have the same connection to accidental deaths of field animals. We could try to eat plant foods grown in greenhouses.  Bruckner would probably say we should, since he thinks we should cause the least possible unnecessary harm.
6. Should we just eat lab grown food if that causes the least unnecessary harm? That does seem to be where this view leads.
7. Roadkill seems worse than plant food because it's inherently bound up with death, whereas it just happens to be true that farm machinery kills field animals.  We could use Budolfson's concept of essential harm to express this idea.