People have this idea that it is better to eat dairy than beef, because the cow didn't die for the dairy, but that cow will be slaughtered when her milk production falls off and to keep the milk flowing she must be impregnated once per year and if the last calf she produced was a male, he has been killed already, either discarded or slaughtered immediately for bob veal or kept in a veal crate for a period of time to make regular veal.
So a cow has already died for the dairy, if her last calf was a male, and she herself will die someday for that dairy, because she will be of no use after she is spent so will then be made into hamburger.
Also, she has a comparatively long miserable life as a dairy cow, having her babies ripped from her year after year for three years, compared to a shorter slightly better life for a beef cow.
Sometimes, people who think dairy is less cruel than beef claim it is because in theory it is possible to let mother and child stay together and not kill either, and still get the milk.
However, the cow would give milk for less than a year, and then she would have to get pregnant again to keep the milk flowing. Without slaughter and without allowing predators to thin the herd, what would keep the population of breeding cows in check? Even in a hypothetical, idyllic setting, the cows would out breed their food source. So I don't see how slaughter free milk is possible, or how it is possible even in theory in an ideal setting to have milk for which a cow has not or will not die(d) to produce.
The only way I can see it being slaughter free is if you have milk for one year and then have all your cows spayed or neutered and keep them as pets for the next 20 years. And I don't see how that being possible in theory makes eating factory farmed dairy better than factory farmed beef, because cows die to produce both but factory farmed dairy cow suffer more.
So a cow has already died for the dairy, if her last calf was a male, and she herself will die someday for that dairy, because she will be of no use after she is spent so will then be made into hamburger.
Also, she has a comparatively long miserable life as a dairy cow, having her babies ripped from her year after year for three years, compared to a shorter slightly better life for a beef cow.
Sometimes, people who think dairy is less cruel than beef claim it is because in theory it is possible to let mother and child stay together and not kill either, and still get the milk.
However, the cow would give milk for less than a year, and then she would have to get pregnant again to keep the milk flowing. Without slaughter and without allowing predators to thin the herd, what would keep the population of breeding cows in check? Even in a hypothetical, idyllic setting, the cows would out breed their food source. So I don't see how slaughter free milk is possible, or how it is possible even in theory in an ideal setting to have milk for which a cow has not or will not die(d) to produce.
The only way I can see it being slaughter free is if you have milk for one year and then have all your cows spayed or neutered and keep them as pets for the next 20 years. And I don't see how that being possible in theory makes eating factory farmed dairy better than factory farmed beef, because cows die to produce both but factory farmed dairy cow suffer more.