alexbono February 27, 20081

Great article - but sadly the author failed to mention the chef and restauranteur who is credited with beginning the 'nose to tail' movement - Fergus Henderson, owner of St. John Restaurant in London. Fergus' book, Nose to Tail Eating, helped begin a cultural and food revolution in England that has since been exported to great restaurants and butchers around the world, including Toronto. His restaurant opened in 1994, his book followed in 1999.

maierichards February 28, 20082

I'm a Canadian living in England, where there are still some traditional butchers left, and in fact the 'know your animal' ethos is alive and well, at least among us chattering middle classes. Treating all manner of beasties - pork, beef, poultry, sheep - is more than just good for the soul. My motto is 'a happy beastie is a tasty beastie'.

epskionline March 2, 20083

This article made me sick to my stomach. Regardless of how nonhuman animals are treated, it is still incomprehensible that we continue to selectively breed and kill them for no good reason. And, no, taste is not a good enough reason to use an animal as property and kill him or her as we see fit. When it is unnecessary to use an animal--a sentient being with intrinsic value and his or her own interests--as a means to our own ends, to do so is unjust and barbaric. No amount of grass-feeding will change that.

CColors March 3, 20084

Here is a sentiment I'm very tired of reading and hearing:

"...less of the animal is wasted.." Factory Farms have always used the whole body; all but the squeal and screams. Go read The Jungle written by Upton Sinclair in 1906 be sure to pick up the most recent edition printed in 2006.
Do people honestly think that a whole subset of animals are being slaughtered just to make soaps, camera film and myriad of other animal by-product items? People have no idea to what extent animal by-products are used. If they did they wouldn't be so proud of this butcher. This butcher isn't doing anything new or different. He is just willingly telling people unlike the meat and dairy industry.
If the same people who use the 'waste' phrase applied it to everything else in their lives, the world would be a better place and we wouldn't have an ocean full of plastic.

Frankly the bottom line here is that a life has been snuffed out for an insignificant taste bud and other things that we do not need what-so-ever. I call that a waste.

likesgoodfood March 3, 20085

Hi;

I too wanted to eat guilt free meat. We went to Cowbell for dinner and I ordered the 38 dollar rib steak. I expected it to be leaner and a little firmer. What I didn't expect was to pay 38 dollars for about 2 inches of fat right in the middle of my steak. Shameful. A batallion of reviewers are falling over themsleves to praise this restaurant. Yes, it's a great idea. No I don't like to be ripped off.

MaryF March 5, 20086

Please don't delude yourself. There is no such thing as guilt-free meat, at least not to any knowledgeable person with a functioning conscience. See: http://tinyurl.com/22ggu4

DrBehavior March 20, 20087

http://www.offalgood.com/site/blog/resou...

Read what was happening in California and be thankful that if you're going to eat meat at least with conscientious butchers like the one's you've chosen to mention doing either the butchering and/or selection and overseeing - the sort of thing that was happening to us (and has now been stopped) isn't happening to you.

torontocitizen June 3, 20088

Hate to say it, but the mass food industry is better at using all the "scrap" parts of animals, for pet food, soap, etc. whereas giving extra animal parts to consumers guarantees that much of it will be thrown into landfill or green bin.

And slaughtering a cow is okay, as long as you use every part of her body? Can the same argument be made about other animals, like rabbits, dogs or cats? Is killing more "moral" if you find uses for every bit of the corpse?

At least it's nice to know that these animals are theoretically treated better than in industrial farming. But why not work on reducing meat consumption, which will be better for health, environment, and animals?