Well, I'm sort of splitting the large-scale industrial method and homestead method. It depends by breed also, but I've raised ducks in the past, and while the schedule was different, the results of who ended up dinner were about the same. Males got 90 days to live their best lives, girls 50/50 depending on how many layers we had.
It depends on the place. In many large industrial egg-laying facilities, yes. They're only focused on eggs to sell and to make more chicken to lay eggs. So the males don't fit the equation. It's easier to turn them into dog food then search for anywhere to put them.
Broilers (chickens for meat) are usually males that just hit maturity. Before they go insane on hormones and fight other males, they become food. That takes around 6-8 weeks. So, at scale like supermarkets, not a ton of food goes into them. Likely more money goes into dressing (slaughter), packaging, and shipping.
Layers (les femmes chickitas) turn out eggs until they don't anymore, and then get turned into dog food or nuggets, or soup. They're turning corn into eggs. My parents have layers and get a 20lb bag of food once a month and get 2-4 eggs a day, depending on the weather.
Hell no. I don't install any extensions for any reason other than uBlock and a pw manager. Just because you say "trust me, bro" doesn't make your extension secure or privacy - focused.
Thanks, and in just glad I didn't get down voted into oblivion.
There's sociopaths on both sides. The insane animal people would rather suicide our species because they can't think any other way. Then there's definitely insane people on the hunting side that think being driven to shoot a sleeping lion is some fundamental human right to which they are entitled by virtue of penning a gun. Both are terrible.
Prefacing this with saying I've previously worked in wildlife conservation for years.
Limited hunting of big game in Africa is perfectly fine. Dipshits willing to pay $100K to shoot something fund entire villages, put kids through school, and define a value of the living animals that make it easier to define how much money anti-poaching efforts need, etc. Even if not well-managed, even with expected corruption, it ends up working out.
Absolutist conservation stances never take into account how ridiculously manipulated these ranges are already. There's not much still natural about an ecosystem in a reserve. Predator/prey relationships are weird, tourism focuses only on charismatic megafauna, and tourist sites bring staff and place humans close to wildlife anyway. Absolutist stances end up being horrible for animals long term because the ecosystems are so messed up, so populations boom, then crash. Why would anyone want to watch hundreds of animals starve to death as a way to "manage" a population when someone is willing to pay to do the same thing in a specifically managed situation?
In most species, the most useless thing there is, is an older male. Humans let them run their counties, which is stupid. Elephants, rhinos, lions and hippos run them off because they get violent and kill their own kind. Humans haven't recognized that's what ours do, too. But when a rich dipshit wants to pay $100K to be brought 30 meters from an old lion and shoot it before it kills 3 cubs from a rival... I'm very OK with that.
Poaching is the real threat, and most people are too ignorant of stupid to know the difference because of an abstract fear of firearms, rather than logically looking at the whole problem.
#goals