Comments on: the question of meat

By: Anthea

Anthea — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 09:58:09 +0000

I have also looked at your selection of organic meat and wished that I could put in the occasional order. We have enjoyed a large box of vegetables every week for several years now and have introduced Riverford veg to friends. We are on a low income and do not have a freezer or space for a freezer so a bulk order is out of the question.

By: riverford

riverford — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:36:39 +0000

Thanks for your comments. The cost of chilled packaging is the challenge for us when trying to get the minimum order down. We’re not able to split the packaging as the boxes are often left on customers’ doorsteps.

By: Karen Thomson

Karen Thomson — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:09:17 +0000

Just responding to Moy’s post – I wondered whether riverford might encourage customers to “buddy” up. I occasionally order meat boxes and would be happy to let a pensioner know in advance that I am putting in a meat order if by having two customers in a postcode area you could deliver to both with one small order for the pensioner but over the minimum for the other, if you had at least one order? What’s the challenge – is it the number of orders in an area or the packaging?

By: moy paterson

moy paterson — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:38:10 +0000

A few lateral thoughts in reaction to the blog’s Question of Meat…
There ARE those of us – many millions of us – who indeed engage with eating meat most frugally and economically. Which is all that a state pension allows.
I was therefore wryly amused at the dichotomy between your advocating the use of thrifty cuts (those of us who lived as children of the war years are already quite versed in this), and the Riverford £25 minimum order for meat (a quarter of a pensioner’s entire week’s income). I am an ardent, if occasional, Riverford customer who has only bought meat once or twice from you, for the fact that such produce can be frozen and stored is somewhat irrelevant if one cannot manage the considerable outlay in the first place. (All finance is relative.)
With a race between the drug companies and the food companies to poison the planet and those of us on it, I have had a long-term hope that your ‘minimum order’ charge for ethically-raised meat might reduce. Although I am sure you have sound economics behind your decisions, I feel a lower charge might be balanced a tad by a possible resultant increase in your customer base. I for one wd like to be a far more regular customer. I, too, wd like to eat less and better!
And as a customer who was caught in a previous “organic” home-delivery fraud several years ago, and who now tracks the still-prevailing deceits within the “organic” food supply, I am aware that it is to Riverford’s credit that you are so highly regarded.

By: Dave Stewart

Dave Stewart — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:50:51 +0000

I agree that are use of meat needs to change. Mainly we need to show people what can be done with some of the more unpopular cheaper cuts. I am a big fan of liver and onions, and slow cooking a casserole whilst at work. I would also like to see more use in this country of animals that are a pest, rabbits, deer, pheasants, although obviously this cannot be organic. Now if only my house deeds allowed keeping chickens, I would be adding a run to my garden.

By: Vivien Cruickshank

Vivien Cruickshank — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:57:36 +0000

I’m sure that the livestock at Riverford is as well looked after as any and much better than most, but my problem is the inevitable abbatoir. Many years ago I kept a few pigs and took them to the abbatoir at Caernafon. The experience was not to be repeated. I don’t eat much meat and was a vegetarian for years, (although this is hypocritical, as eating dairy produce is the same thing) but I do hanker after some meat now and then and buy some game. I have been known to pick a pheasant off the road if it is in good order.

By: Sarah

Sarah — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:14:38 +0000

Hear hear! I don’t eat meat myself, but I applaud meat-eaters who are sensible about it.