Jump to content

Talk:Livestock

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by David Vasquez~enwiki (talk | contribs) at 20:16, 1 September 2004 (Added link to author of unexplained foreign language link.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:AOTW

big changes

Made come big changes to livestock page, including uses and types. Please continue to improve.

EastNile 04:49, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The definition of the Swedish translation livdjur is animals that are useful when alive, such as cows that give milk or stallions used for insemination, as opposed to animals that are only useful when slaughtered, such as swine or cattle raised for beef. Doesn't this distinction exist in the English word livestock?

Not really. In english, pigs or steers are considered to be as much livestock as dairy cows or sheep are. Gentgeen 01:06, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Definition of livestock

I'm not sure the above query is resolved. I suspect that yes, technically livestock is animals useful when alive. I'm not sure all the animals listed should be included. But then again, I think that cattle, regardless of whether for meat or dairy production, are classified as livestock. So in summary, we don't have a good definition of what is, and what is not livestock. Zoney 12:56, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Some might consider catfish and other captive raised fish to be livestock. H2O 04:00, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I suspect we'd have to draw the line before all that - perhaps just a sentence noting such opinions, with a link to fish farming (or whatever it's called). I think most types of fish can be farmed - certainly there's farmed salmon. We don't need a whole list on this page I suggest. It's not as nice/good for you as grabbing what you can out of the water - but it's sort of more sustainable. zoney talk 12:42, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I added a link to aquaculture, we need that at a bare minimum. H2O 14:00, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Other proposed areas of coverage for this article

The following areas should be mentioned, at least briefly, and links given where relevant. Of course this will be general, as there are entire textbooks on the subject. H2O 04:00, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  • Livestock feeds
  • Housing
  • Breeding and typical breed organizations
  • Livestock shows, fairs
  • Expand animal health care, veterinarians
  • Livestock marketing, auctions, commodities markets
  • Transportation of livestock
  • More history and geography
Of course, nothing useful at feed, show (fair), fair, veterinary (doesn't even mention livestock animals - despite a list of other types e.g. companion) or market. It appears not only is livestock not covered well, but unusually there's not even good pages on subtopics. zoney talk 14:11, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • environmental impacts of ranching/farming/raising livestock.Pedant 21:23, 2004 Aug 30 (UTC)

Profit

While the previous wording was perhaps, not careful enough, merely including "economics" as a factor does not go far enough. The whole point to livestock, in this day and age, is profit! That's what the whole shebang boils down to! Now, I suggest we put this across somehow (obviously without implying farmers are greedy).

There's no piece either about the fact that farmers (unless large-scale big farmers) find it hard going in Western countries to make a living from it - so much so that both the EU and US heavily subsidise their farming sectors. Meanwhile, those in the developing world struggle to get their goods sold in these markets, and get a pittance for it. There's no discussion of the whole mad screwed up "system". I mean, really, there's something fundamentally wrong with someone "giving up farming" in Ireland, while there's people going hungry, and people attempting to farm on infinitely poorer land. There's something crazy about farming having to be subsidised in the West!

zoney talk 00:04, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree that the system is screwed up, and I am philosophically opposed to subsidies, as are many farmers I know, but I don't know how to fix the system. It's kind of like trying to kick a drug habit. Most people want cheap food and clothing. There is an article that addresses this issue, agricultural policy, and there is an entire field of study agricultural economics (a teeny stub). It think a mention is warranted as to how ag policy affects livestock production, but it's impossible to adequately cover the subject in this one article. H2O 02:16, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)


subsidies sometimes take the form of "paying farmers to NOT grow tomatoes etc, at least in the US, so subsidies don't really increase food production, just profit...Pedant 21:26, 2004 Aug 30 (UTC)

I think NPOV demands that we treat subsidies with caution. There are justifications for subsidies such as maintenance of the countryside, national security in the event of a war, and even the mere fact that a lot of people in a democratic country want to continue buying subsidised local produce. I'm not going to start a debate, though, just remember NPOV. PhilHibbs 17:19, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Table needs work

Is poultry livestock?

Britannica says poultry isn't livestock, but we're listing it as such. Which is right..? Tom- 21:43, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think in its most general sense, livestock would include poultry, but I think in common practice, poultry is treated as a separate category, with both livestock and poultry falling under the ag category of animal science. I think an even more questionable entry is "dog". --H2O 00:22, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Dict.org says not used technically; any animals kept for use or profit - quite how one interprets the not used technically bit I'm not entirely sure, but I guess it means in the industry and we'd need to note that.
Whereas my Oxford Reference Dictionary says animals kept on a farm regarded as an asset which certainly would seem to rule in chickens etc. --[[User:Bodnotbod|bodnotbod » .....TALKQuietly)]] 01:11, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)
Most of the ag related websites I am seeing, including university ag departments, show poultry as closely affiliated with, but separate from livestock. Here is a typical farmer-oriented website: farmworld -- I made some changes - hope ya'll like 'em. --H2O 02:21, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

On a lighter note - anyone remember the cell phone commercial where the farmer ordered a hundred oxen, and instead got a hundred dachsunds? --H2O 02:35, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

west nile and horses

I heard on CBC radio today that horses can't be the source of human infection of west nile. The host was talking to some vet about why farmers risk not giving their horses the vaccine. This is after several deaths (of horses) due to the virus. The only source is avians, particularly crows. Horses can die of the disease but apparently they can't pass it on to humans because there is a small amount of virus in the blood stream. I don't know if this is accurate but as a whole, humans know little about the virus. I reccomend removing or putting a side note on the horse transmission of disease section. --[[User:Sunborn|metta, The Sunborn ]] 06:16, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

minnan:Cheng-siⁿ

What's that link at the end all about? PhilHibbs 17:14, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

According to the Wikipedia house style guide, links to foreign language pages should be directly germane to the page. There should probably be an English language description to provide some context.
To allow the person who added this link to add the proper explanation, I have moved it here:
de:Vieh
es:ganado
minnan:Cheng-siⁿ
nds:Veehtüch
nl:vee
ru:скотина
Would the author of this link kindly step forward and explain what it is? --DV 07:55, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The author of this link, Donarreiskoffer has added it again with no explanation. I will continue to be courteous and move it back here, with the polite request for an explanation of what it is:
de:Vieh
es:ganado
minnan:Cheng-siⁿ
nds:Veehtüch
nl:vee
ru:скотина
Please see the Wikipedia house style guide, regarding links to foreign language pages.
--DV 20:13, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Stock shows

I inserted a mention about stock shows and fairs, but it needs help from someone else more knowledgeable. --H2O 19:10, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Is the spelling of this article to be in British or American English?

Examples:

  • "labor" or "labour" (currently the latter)
  • "plow" or "plough" (currently the latter)

--DV 07:23, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It began as British spelling, and is not a US topic, so it should remain in British/International spelling. zoney talk 07:58, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)