Eggs from 'pet' chicken

[Spencer]

I was just wondering... if you kept chickens as pets, would you eat their unfertilised eggs? If not, why not? Do you think that it would be better to let their eggs go rotten than to eat them?

[RubyDuby]

why would anyone need a pet chicken?

Do u mean like farm sanctuary>?

[Spencer]

Why would anyone "need" a pet anything?

In the UK it's not that uncommon (although obviously not popular) for people to keep a few chickens as "pets" in their garden.

[missbettie]

i like little chickadees!

I don't think I would eat their eggs even if I did rescue the chicken, but I don't know what I would do with them though. I have heard of people feeding the eggs to their other animals like dogs.

[boatsteem1]

If you kept a pet cow would you drink its milk?

Like you said, why would anyone keep pets if not for their own pure joy. I don't believe the "I just rescued it" talk. If you wouldn't want to dominate something then you probably wouldn't have "saved" the animal in the first place.

I wouldn't own a pet and thus the question doesn't apply to me. I'm interested in seeing what others will say, though.

[Maisiepaisie]

I'd give the eggs to someone who would otherwise buy eggs. I've no desire to eat eggs, even if they were cruelty free.

[RubyDuby]

I guess if you're rescuing them and have a proper place for them... I'm not sure about the whole dominating comment... good idea about feeding the eggs to ur dogs tho, missbettie. havent really thought about the topic though, but wouldnt eat them myself.

[missbettie]

I don't believe the "I just rescued it" talk. If you wouldn't want to dominate something then you probably wouldn't have "saved" the animal in the first place.

Well what about a dog that is laying in the middle of the street dying? would you rescue it then? I know that sounds mean and I am sorry I am not trying to be mean I am just curious. I guess I really mean what do you mean by "rescue"

I wouldn't take a chicken straight out of a forest, or where ever they really live but if I found one starving and dying I would definately try to help it, and let me just say now, my animal friends are above everyone else in my house I treat them better than I treat my boyfriend. lol

[Spencer]

(I only just noticed the long thread about this subject in another section, so I'm sorry for bringing it up again.)

I wouldn't eat eggs if I had chickens and I wouldn't drink the milk of a cow that I owned. However, I can't think of any rational arguments as to why I wouldn't (or "shouldn't") do so. I have been vegan for a while and I have no desire to consume products of animal origin again, as the thought of doing so makes me feel quite sick and guilty. So the only thing that would stop me is the anticipation of this undesireable emotional reaction to what I perceive as being "wrong". Lately I've been thinking about my reasons for being vegan, and as I do not believe in objective moral truths, I'm finding it hard to justify some things. I haven't heard a convincing argument as to why I shouldn't eat the eggs of a chicken that I owned, although I wouldn't eat them regardless of that argument anyway.

Mazatael, what do you think is wrong with keeping pets? Humans are obviously animals, and symbiotic relationships are found in many parts of nature. Is it really so bad that humans give dogs/cats/whatever food and shelter, and in return get back happiness/company?

[twinkle]

Don't worry, Spencer, I expect a mod will merge this soon with that one (and maybe give you a lecture about using "search" )

[absentmindedfan]

I'd harboil the eggs and give them back to the chickens to replace the protein and calcium they lost producing them.

Whether I rescued them or not, their products are not mine to take. If I rescued a woman off the street I wouldn't eat her period for breakfast and I extend the same logic to chickens.

It's not food, it's not ours to eat so that's that.

[harpy]

I'd harboil the eggs and give them back to the chickens to replace the protein and calcium they lost producing them.

Hmm, would they like that, or would they feel the same way as I do about eating my placenta (if I had one)?

I wouldn't leave them to rot though - I'd give them to an egg-eating friend to stop them buying supermarket eggs. Or to another animal, such as a hedgehog.

I don't personally see eating that sort of egg as a big moral issue, but one may as well be consistent, where possible, and in this case it's easy.

[absentmindedfan]

Chickens often eat addled/infertile eggs anyway to get the nutrients back, and vegan farm sanctuarys do it.

Placenta omelette maybe?

[Pob]

Chickens don't lay so many eggs if you don't remove them. They only lay so many eggs to replace the ones that have been stolen.

[Noogle]

Chickens don't lay so many eggs if you don't remove them. They only lay so many eggs to replace the ones that have been stolen.

If this is true, then I would leave the eggs there. I wouldn't however see a moral objection to eating the eggs otherwise, although I wouldn't from a health perspective.

Veganism for me is about ending animal suffering, not making sure I'm 100% animal free. If the egg was simply something left behind by a chicken and it had no want/need/use for it, then I wouldn't see the problem eating it instead of letting it rot. The problem comes when people abuse and exploit the chickens to get eggs and make profit.

[boatsteem1]

Well what about a dog that is laying in the middle of the street dying? would you rescue it then? I know that sounds mean and I am sorry I am not trying to be mean I am just curious. I guess I really mean what do you mean by "rescue"

Indirect thinking leads me to ask: what about all the animals that are being slaughtered to provide food for the dog?

Even if the above mentioned only applies to meat eating pets, even vegetarian pets indirectly consume land, water, and resources in order to be fed. Most pet species can't live solely off of grass. This leads more to an environmental argument than a ethical one. Pets consume huge amounts of resources (try counting the number of pets in the world and you'll likely end up with 100+ millions). In most parts of the developed world we have almost no natural environments left, leaving thousands of species endangered due to habitat loss. Not just mammals! Insects, plants and many other invisible species are affected by this. It takes a lot of resources to feed 100+ million pets.

If I saw a dog dying on the street I would have it be put to sleep. The problem (the pet owner) has already been done. The dog's presumably terrible life can't be undone. But we can change the future. Actually, just by owning pets you promote pet owning to non-pet owners. Getting fewer people to own pets in the first place is the right way to tackle the situation.

[boatsteem1]

Mazatael, what do you think is wrong with keeping pets? Humans are obviously animals, and symbiotic relationships are found in many parts of nature. Is it really so bad that humans give dogs/cats/whatever food and shelter, and in return get back happiness/company?

Please see my reply above for a few very good reasons.

In symbiotic relationships two (or more) species have evolved over, some times, millions of years together to form this relationship. Evolution has done this to them because it favoured the genes that cooperated. In our case we have taken the animals to us. There is not much evolution involved because we forced them by taking their young and raising them to recognize humans as masters.

Granted, some argue that wolves came to man by looking for spoils from our slaughtered animals, and that eventually a mutual relationships developed where we had them in our camps and started to use them as hunting partners. I don't think this theory has been proven, though.

No matter the background. We take animals into our homes without leaving them with a choice. They are born and raised with humans. If they don't like humans they are killed. Most importantly, this is on our terms only which means that this is not a symbiotic relationship. They have no choice.

[Hemlock]

I would let my cats have them or the local hedgehogs rather than let them rot. I personally wouldn't eat them as I have to watch my cholesterol levels - there is a history of stroke disease in my family.

[missbettie]

Indirect thinking leads me to ask: what about all the animals that are being slaughtered to provide food for the dog?

Even if the above mentioned only applies to meat eating pets, even vegetarian pets indirectly consume land, water, and resources in order to be fed. Most pet species can't live solely off of grass. This leads more to an environmental argument than a ethical one. Pets consume huge amounts of resources (try counting the number of pets in the world and you'll likely end up with 100+ millions). In most parts of the developed world we have almost no natural environments left, leaving thousands of species endangered due to habitat loss. Not just mammals! Insects, plants and many other invisible species are affected by this. It takes a lot of resources to feed 100+ million pets.

Well regardless if the meat eating animal is dying and taking up natural resources I would still do all I could to help it survive. Everything that happens in the world is taking up our resources, and we all know that humans are very guilty of using up natural resources. I do agree however that we are also to blame for the over population of animals, however it is not their fault and I still feel that it is my duty to protect these animals from whatever else I can. Which is WHY we should fix our animal friends!

Any way this is getting way off topic. I wouldn't eat the chickens eggs, its just way icky. lol

[Sandy777]

I'd harboil the eggs and give them back to the chickens to replace the protein and calcium they lost producing them.

Whether I rescued them or not, their products are not mine to take. If I rescued a woman off the street I wouldn't eat her period for breakfast and I extend the same logic to chickens.

It's not food, it's not ours to eat so that's that.

I like that - that's the whole thing isn't it? It's not food.

[fondducoeur]

I would not eat the eggs, although I would have no problem with someone else eating them. I would gladly give them to people who are going to buy eggs anyway. And, I would feed them back to my chicken to restore the nutrients if it would eat it. However, unless I saved one from a farm or found a chicken dying, I do not think I would have a pet chicken.

[missbettie]

However, unless I saved one from a farm or found a chicken dying, I do not think I would have a pet chicken.

I agree.

[harpy]

Rescued hens apparently do well as companion animals. I've read battery farms don't want them after their "productivity" has declined and will often give them away or sell them for next to nothing.

If I didn't live right in the middle of town I'd love to have some. These people rehome battery hens:

http://www.thehenshouse.co.uk/rescuework.html

[boatsteem1]

I'd like to post an interesting side question. If you kept a pet, be it a chicken, hen, dog, cat, hare, horse or whatever, and the animal died. Would you eat the meat, assuming you know its not poisonous? Maybe give it away?

A lot of people seem to feel its okay to give away the eggs, so I'm interested to hear what you think about this.

[RubyDuby]

do u really equate giving away eggs to giving away the dead chicken?

Even if the above mentioned only applies to meat eating pets, even vegetarian pets indirectly consume land, water, and resources in order to be fed. Most pet species can't live solely off of grass. This leads more to an environmental argument than a ethical one. Pets consume huge amounts of resources (try counting the number of pets in the world and you'll likely end up with 100+ millions). In most parts of the developed world we have almost no natural environments left, leaving thousands of species endangered due to habitat loss.

ppl cant live off just grass either.

If a dying person were in the street would you have them killed?

Should we go around killing meat eaters or others who do things that we believe in our heart of hearts is wrong?

I don't believe we should be adding to the pet population, but the ones who are alive deserve to be given a happy life. It isn't their choice per se... but I can promise you that my pets are happy. Children dont choose to be born (and I will never give birth) but that doesnt mean that the ones who are here shouldnt be given a chance at a good life.

I get what you're saying about encouraging others to purchase pets just by having them. That makes sense... but I'm definately not afraid of speaking my opinion about that topic to anybody I hear talking about a specific breed, or who is against spaying/neutering.

On topic...

I know a few of you have said you see nothing wrong w eating the eggs, but is there a reason you would eat them? (besides not thinking of a reason why not?) --just curious.

[harpy]

Not sure if people would want to eat an animal that had died of old age, but if they did they would be welcome to mine - that would be one fewer that would be sold in the shops.

Anyone is welcome to eat me after I'm dead as well but I doubt there will be many takers (though I might make a nourishing stock).

[boatsteem1]

ppl cant live off just grass either.

As I assume you are doing, we CAN live off vegetables, which is the most environmental-friendly way of living.

If a dying person were in the street would you have them killed?

Should we go around killing meat eaters or others who do things that we believe in our heart of hearts is wrong?

I don't believe we should be adding to the pet population, but the ones who are alive deserve to be given a happy life. It isn't their choice per se... but I can promise you that my pets are happy. Children dont choose to be born (and I will never give birth) but that doesnt mean that the ones who are here shouldnt be given a chance at a good life.

Pets were litterally created by humans by selective breeding. The dog originates from the wolf and the chicken from the red junglefowl - to mention two examples. We bred them from their wild ancestors. They have both been bred for thousands of years as an egoistic way of getting easy food.

Evolution makes animals follow their stomachs because eating is (in nature) a great way of spreading your genes (even if only a small part of the process). So we tricked the animals by giving them food. We bred the animals with the right features. Animals that were aggressive to humans weren't bred. We wanted (and still do) animals that are friendly to us and that are fairly dumb and give us what we want (often meat or some by-product - nowadays you'll also include love).

This is important because it means pets did never choose. Dogs didn't choose to be with humans. We litterally made them.

A human hurt on the street can be healed and can live an independant life. Pets are totally dependant. We control their lives - where they go, what they do, where they poo and where they pee.

Humans have a choice. That's a huge difference.

[RubyDuby]

As I assume you are doing, we CAN live off vegetables, which is the most environmental-friendly way of living.

so are my dogs

[RubyDuby]

Pets were litterally created by humans by selective breeding. The dog originates from the wolf and the chicken from the red junglefowl - to mention two examples. We bred them from their wild ancestors. They have both been bred for thousands of years as an egoistic way of getting easy food.

Evolution makes animals follow their stomachs because eating is (in nature) a great way of spreading your genes (even if only a small part of the process). So we tricked the animals by giving them food. We bred the animals with the right features. Animals that were aggressive to humans weren't bred. We wanted (and still do) animals that are friendly to us and that are fairly dumb and give us what we want (often meat or some by-product - nowadays you'll also include love).

This is important because it means pets did never choose. Dogs didn't choose to be with humans. We litterally made them.

A human hurt on the street can be healed and can live an independant life. Pets are totally dependant. We control their lives - where they go, what they do, where they poo and where they pee.

Humans have a choice. That's a huge difference.

I did not selectively breed the dogs. I dont even agree with breeding. It doesnt mean that I can't do something (besides killing them) to help them while their stuck in their situation. Not all humans have a choice either... would you advocate the killing of a person who was mentally disabled?

I wonder if there is a more appropriate place to discuss this?

[missbettie]

As I assume you are doing, we CAN live off vegetables, which is the most environmental-friendly way of living.




Pets were litterally created by humans by selective breeding. The dog originates from the wolf and the chicken from the red junglefowl - to mention two examples. We bred them from their wild ancestors. They have both been bred for thousands of years as an egoistic way of getting easy food.

Evolution makes animals follow their stomachs because eating is (in nature) a great way of spreading your genes (even if only a small part of the process). So we tricked the animals by giving them food. We bred the animals with the right features. Animals that were aggressive to humans weren't bred. We wanted (and still do) animals that are friendly to us and that are fairly dumb and give us what we want (often meat or some by-product - nowadays you'll also include love).

This is important because it means pets did never choose. Dogs didn't choose to be with humans. We litterally made them.

A human hurt on the street can be healed and can live an independant life. Pets are totally dependant. We control their lives - where they go, what they do, where they poo and where they pee.

Humans have a choice. That's a huge difference.

Yes "pets" were created by humans, from some stupid person back in the past. It is our fault now as humans that there are WAY to many "animals" or "pets" in the world. BECAUSE it is my species fault I find that it is my duty to do everything I can to help these animals live as good as a life as possible. Just because these animals aren't susposed to be pets and the reason they are is because of some stupid people from the past, doesn't mean that they don't deserve my love and care.

And I would NEVER let someone eat my dead animal friend! just as I would never let someone eat my dead human friend.

GOSH this thread has gone off topic!!! I really like the idea of cooking the eggs and feeding them back to the chickens, would they eat them though?

[RubyDuby]

GOSH this thread has gone off topic!!! I really like the idea of cooking the eggs and feeding them back to the chickens, would they eat them though?

I like that idea best too
(they would)

[flutterby]

For those following the egg talk, there's a whole thread about vegans and eggs.

And for those posts not about 'eggs', it may be better to start another thread. Thanks.

[holliewould]

I became vegan about 2 months ago. Yes I'm starving but I refuse to contribute to factory farming. Anyway, I decided to start a happy hobby rescue farm. I have two chicks that should start laying eggs in a couple of months. They are adorable. They are a little bit too small to be tearing ass in my neighborhood yet, but soon they will be yard birds. They are simply gorgeous and have awesome personalities. They follow me everywhere. I guess what I'm trying to say is, would there be anything wrong with stealing their eggs? They will lay an egg per day automatically and they wouldn't even try to incubate them until they laid at least a half a dozen. Now I can either eat their eggs, or I can chuck em in the woods because a rotting egg is...well it's one of the worst smells on the planet. What do you guys think?

[mogthecat]

My personal view is that there's probably nothing wrong with you eating the eggs, but personally I wouldn't because I now find the idea revolting. I no longer see eggs as food - I see them as a chicken's menstrual product - ick.

That being said, I will have the same problem as you in the future because I aim to rehome some battery hens. I won't eat the eggs myself but my omni husband would and I would give them away to people if they wanted them (not for money).

I also noticed you said you're starving & that's really not OK! Are you replacing the meat and dairy you used to eat with more beans, plant proteins, nuts, seeds, fruit, etc etc? Becoming a vegan doesn't mean you have to starve - quite the opposite! There's masses of yummy vegan food you can make and buy. I'd hate to think you got demoralised about being vegan because of being hungry. There's masses of information and tips on the food & heath sections of these boards.

Welcome!

[harpy]

Hello - have you seen any of the earlier threads about eggs? Here are a couple if not.

http://www.veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18759

http://www.veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1370

I agree with mog that there's no need to feel starving. Do you think you're eating enough calories? I also find that protein-rich foods such as tofu, nuts and beans make me feel less hungry (perhaps because the body takes longer to process them).

[sugarmouse]

I agree..
I wouldnt personally eat eggs, I wouldt eat my own or anybody elses.
But
What you describe is unharmful.
I am against causing harm to animals=why I am vegan.
I however, would be against it if you were calling yourself vegan whilst doing that-not because it is harmful in any way but because folk are stupid.and will get confused and maybe think vegans do eat eggs..and thus make other vegans misunderstood (or misfed!)
Kwim?
Anyways, the starving thing, er why?!
No one else on this forum is!
Unless theyve forgotten their bento or something.

[cobweb]

why are you starving? i need to lose serious amounts of weight!

[RubyDuby]

u should check those other threads harpy listed. i'm pretty sure the chicks will continue to lay continuously if u keep taking the eggs away.

Please don't starve. It makes us look bad.

check out the 'What did you eat today' thread,
'pics of good vegan food you've eaten' thread,
among lots of other food type threads!

[Hemlock]

why are you starving? i need to lose serious amounts of weight!

Me too, there is no need to starve on a vegan diet AT ALL, there is bread, pasta, potatoes as well as all the other stuff.

[Korn]

Hi everybody,

I'll close this thread soon - Holliewould responded to the thread and wrote that she didn't agree in most of the vegan viewpoints in the thread that we suggested that she should have a look at, and continued to defend use of eggs and mentioned a private situation using sentences like "The [insert name of body part here that rarely is exposed to sunlight]*won't get my eggs" - a post that was removed. Please look at this thread if you any of you are uncertain about why we have this section for questions/for new vegans:

Important info for non-vegan visitors

As some of you may have noticed, she wrote in her profile that she was upset (but not about what)... already before she started to post, so I'm not really surpised about her being so upset about not being able to use our site to promote/defend use of animal products, but maybe a little surprised that she seem to have forgotten the rules she agreed in when registering, especially these three, simple rules:

• The Vegan Forum is a site for vegans - in other words, for people who are against killing, harming and exploiting animals (and humans, of course!). Vegans are against using animal products like meat, fur, eggs, milk and honey, and avoid using animal products as much as possible and practical.

• Non-vegans who want to go vegan and have questions or need support are also welcome, and will get access to the Not A Vegan-area (only). When (if) they become vegans, they will get full access to the rest of the forum simply by sending us a message.


• The Vegan Forum is not a public discussion forum 'for everyone'. Consider this forum a friendly dinner party where peaceful and polite people who are into veganism are invited

A person who is 'into veganism' isn't into eating eggs, and we don't really want our site to midwife the birth of ovo-veganism, lacto-veganism, leather-veganism, honey-veganism, passionately-eating-meat-veganism...



In case of any doubt: We do not have a section for discussions pro/con veganism - we have a section for new vegans and for questions. It's not a section for non-vegans who are clear about wanting to continue to use animal products!

A general hint: If someone are losing their posting abilities, or are having they accounts deactivated, it doesn't help much to claim eg. that vegans are extremely nasty, that they should pull carrots out of their [insert name of...], that we make no sense at all, that we are sickening, that they will stay as far away as possible from vegans and their forums, that we are a very unkind class...

[harpy]

that they should pull carrots out of their [insert name of...]

I can see some merit in that idea, it would be an economical way to get carrots anyway...

[cobweb]

[Fuhzy]

I admit I wasn't here for the debate, but Korn, this seems to be treading a bit into censorship? Couldn't the thread have just been moved?

When I joined my first vegan forum (veganfitness) I had quite a large thread arguing the value of organic and free-range vegetarian products, because I thought that was the right way. I was warned, but my thread wasn't closed. If it had been, then other members might not have had the opportunity to convince me that veganism is the correct choice....

[Korn]

censorship

A forum for vegans which wouldn't 'censor' away all the people who are against vegan viewpoints and want to attract our attention to their arguments pro using all kinds of animal products would be a forum for vegans, it would be a meeting place between vegans and non-vegans.

Many of our members have said clearly that they want this to be a place free for the standard discussions where non-vegans defend use if fish, eggs or eg. organic animal products. People who register agree in our rules and our description of what kind of site this is intended to me.

If having a policy about not including people who defend use if animal products on a forum for vegans is considered 'censorship', I'm all for censorship. It's that kind of filtering that makes this site the forum for vegans it is meant to be, and not an everything-goes forum.

If we wouldn't have this policy, we would have had tons of people here starting the same few discussions over and over again. Since I don't want to administrate such a site, and since I'm not interested in handing the site over to someone who want to convert this site to verbal battlefield between vegans and non-vegans, you have no choice really... Take it as it is, or kindly be gone!

The tone/language/ethical content in the followup message from Holliewould made me realize that this wasn't someone who registered to ask questions and was on her way to go vegan - but rather a message from someone who wanted to gain support for her arguments pro using animal products. This time it was about eggs from 'happy, healthy' chicken (we've had exactly the same discussion a number of times before), next time it will be about organic beef from happy healthy cows or eating white meat from happy healthy birds... Do we really need this on a site for vegans?

[horselesspaul]

I guess what I'm trying to say is, would there be anything wrong with stealing their eggs?

The clue is in the word stealing here.

On my Man United forum RedCafé, holliewould would be described as a WUM or wind up merchant, surely.
It's a vegan forum.
I don't want to read posts from people who aren't vegans or who pretend to be vegans.
Perhaps peoplewhoreallyneedtogetoverthemselves.net is still accepting new members..

[Risker]

The clue is in the word stealing here.

Yes, it is odd to use that term when you're trying to support the cause, the kind of language I'd expect from someone who lived under a bridge and waited for goats to cross.

[powder]

We should invite John Mackey here, too. I hear he has the same principles. Seriously, though. Those eggs aren't for us.

[Roxy]

I think the whole thread should just be closed and deleted the whole thread.

WUM is correct horslesspaul.

[Spencer]

3) We're not "meant" or "designed" to eat them, physiologically.

I've never really understood this argument. Natural selection didn't choose specific eating patterns, as such. Our ancestors survived by eating a wide range of foods... including eggs. Our bodies are able to digest them and survive just fine by including them in our diets, so in that sense we are actually "designed" to eat them.

I haven't eaten eggs for many years, and I don't think I will in the future (since I never desire them and never really enjoyed them anyway), but I haven't ever heard a convincing argument as to why eating the eggs of chickens that you keep yourself is bad thing.

[horselesspaul]

I haven't eaten eggs for many years, and I don't think I will in the future (since I never desire them and never really enjoyed them anyway), but I haven't ever heard a convincing argument as to why eating the eggs of chickens that you keep yourself is bad thing.

Not a bad thing per se. Just not vegan. Ask the chickens.