h a l f b a k e r yI never imagined it would be edible.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Full life cycle salmon
have you ever had a lamb curry, etc., where the lambs obituary would read. he died peaceful in his sleep and will be deeply missed by his many grand-lambs.
FLC foods make a virtue of letting the food that we eat have as full and wild a life as it is possible for an animal
of that species to have.
sort of a supper free range.
In order to show what I mean I give you FLC salmon.
At a suitable site. either, where a tributary joins a stream, or the site of an old watermill, or other location where there is reliable supply of water above the hight of a clear stream gravel beds will be built, and arranged such that the water flowing down first flows very gently up through the gravel. This water then flows down a fish ladder to the stream
For the first couple of years, fertilized salmon eggs will need to be added to the gravel. This will hatch and the fry will need no more looking after. They will swim down to the sea, were they will discover its a fish eat fish ocean out there.
After an appropriate interval some of them will return to spawn and die. Unlike conventional salmon farming the raising of these fish costs nothing. Unlike convention salmon fisheries witch attempts to wipe out its resource by preventing them from spawning, the conditions should be made as ideal for spawning as possible.
After they have spawned but before they die they are picked up by cheap migrant labour and thrown into a flume or a leat which caries them quickly to be gutted etc. very cheep fresh “wild” salmon.
[link]
|
| |
How easy is it to differentiate between salmon about to spawn and salmon just completed spawning? Likewise, does the accelerated breakdown following spawning cause any problems in the quality of the meat? |
|
| |
For animals other than pacific salmon (which do have a programmed death) two problems occur. The first is that if the animal requires care for its entire life, it will be prohibitvely expensive. Second is that "natural" death frequently involves many things that make the meat unfit for consumption. |
|
| |
a salmon full of roe is easy to distinguish from an empty one, it's about 1/3 of the body volume. if caught live after spawning both female and male salmon are very tasty. On the other hand attempts to establish artificial spawns have a marked history of failure. To get a good genetic match the fish need to originate in a similar site on the same river, preferably at the same location. |
|
| |
// before they die they are picked up by cheap migrant labour and thrown into a flume // |
|
| |
Which is all very well, but in some localities, bears will be competing for the salmon. And when a bear competes with you for something, you better be up for a fight. |
|
| |
I did initially read this as FTL salmon, and was reassured that this was not the case. Kind of tricky to catch. |
|
| |
I think it's a good idea, the wait for the animal to peg out first and then eat, it's better on my conscience. |
|
| |
This goes back to the 'creulty-free' meat post, where
somebody suggested letting cows and other meat animals
live their full lifespans and die of old age before we eat
them, rather than slaughter them at the prime of their
tastiness. I dunno if farmed salmon will develop the same
nasty health problems that domestic meat cattle face if
allowed to live out their years, but I do know that farmed
salmon have gone through at least one spawn cycle before
they are harvested- that's how the salmon farm gets more
salmon. Anyway, here in Maine, the IF & W is working on a
very similar project involving Atlantic Salmon and semi-
wild Rainbow Trout (minus the cheap migrant labor;
they're using graduate students instead). |
|
| |
I went looking for this program's info page on the state
website, but it has been deleted along with many others in
a round of budget cuts. The program is still running,
though. I'll try to find some info and link to it if I can. |
|
| |
Most herbivorous animals in a natural environment do not die of old age, but rather have a bad day and are eaten. If this is considered natural the expense of caring for an animal for its entire life could be reduced by having a special pen with trained tigers for animals nearing the end of their life expectancy, which might turn out to only be a year or so. |
|
| |
Or we could just kill them instantly with a boltgun and
feast upon their bloody, uncooked flesh like the horde of
evil savages we meat-eaters are. |
|
| |
//Or we could just kill them instantly with a boltgun and feast upon their bloody, uncooked flesh// |
|
| |
If that's the tigers I think the WWF would like to have a chat.. |
|
| |
"Running around, robbing banks, all whacked, on the
salmon snacks!" |
|
| |
Baked (or at least it used to be) at the Rapid River fish hatchery in Riggins, Idaho. I don't know about now, but back in... what, 1970? 71? or so, I went there to watch the salmon coming up the river to get back where they were spawned - which was, of course, the hatchery. The hatchery workers would net the salmon out of the holding pool, strip them of their roe or milt for use in the hatchery, and then the spectators could purchase the fish on the spot. If the fish were released back into the river, it would be dead within a few days as [MechE] noted. |
|
| |
If the salmon had already started to go a little bit weak, it was still a very good candidate for the smokehouse. (A little seasoning salt, and tag alder chips for the smoke - much more gentle than a hickory or mesquite incineration.) |
|
| |
There's a huge argument for making animals happy
while they live, but if they're then killed
humanely, I don't see why that is a problem. |
|
| |
In other words, you have two scenarios: |
|
| |
A) Happy animal, happy animal, happy animal,
happy animal, sick animal, dead animal. Or: |
|
| |
B) Happy animal, happy animal, dead animal. |
|
| |
Assuming that there's no animal afterlife where
they can feel bitter about their demise, why is (A)
better than (B)? |
|
| |
FLC animals are living an essentially wild existence so low costs and any animal welfare issues are taken care of by predators. |
|
| |
The FLC animal brings its self to the slaughter, by exploiting its natural behaviour. In the case of salmon that’s near the end of their life, but that need not be the case for all suitable species. |
|
| |
The FLC process should provide the animals involved a reproductive advantage over the fully farmed brethren, many of whom are eaten at a tender age. And over their wild cousins by providing protection to their young. |
|
| |
If it was baked in the 70's, its baked! |
|
| |
FTL salmon, now that’s a different kettle of fish. |
|
| |
I do like the idea of getting nature to rear your
animals, but there are also very good reasons why
this is a bad idea. You'll be limited to animals that
can make it in the wild (bye bye cow), and you'll also
be doing a lot more damage to the ecosystem.
Ecologically, it's probably better to raise food at high
density in defined areas. |
|
| |