<dh@.> wrote in message ...
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 00:36:02 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:
>
> ><dh@.> wrote in message ...
> >> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 02:28:14 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:
> >>
> >> ><dh@.> wrote in message ...
> >> >> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 10:19:46 +0100, Derek > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> >>> Claim and Standard:
> >> >> >>> [sbull] Grass Fed.--Grass, green or range pasture, or
> >> >> >>> forage shall be 80% or more of the primary energy
> >> >> >>> source throughout the animal's life cycle.
> >> >
> >> >> I don't doubt it in regards to the grass fed label, but
> >> >> if you're right that ALL cattle in the feed lot are 80% grass
> >> >> fed, that is GREAT! I already felt good about eating beef,
> >> >> and if you're right we can all feel even better about it :-)
> >> >
> >> >'The 7 billion livestock animals in the United States consume
> >> >five times as much grain as is consumed directly by the entire
> >> >American population.
> >>
> >> The American population would consume a lot more
> >> grain if we didn't eat meat.
> >
> >Americans are already consuming too much grain in their diet.
> >
> >15.75m hectares in total would be needed for a vegan population.
> >
> >> >..
> >> >More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to
> >> >producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about
> >> >272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million hectares
> >> >for cultivated feed grains.
> >>
> >> Good enough.
> >
> >No.. very bad indeed.
> >
> >'The Forest Service defines range as "land that provides or is capable
> >of providing forage for grazing or browsing animals [read: 'livestock']."
> >By this definition more than 80% of the West qualifies as range,
> >including a complex array of more than 40 major ecosystem types,
> >all of which have been significantly degraded by ranching. ..
> >..
> >Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic, detrimental changes
> >in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions throughout most
> >of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock grazing as
> >the biggest single perpetrator of these changes, particularly considering
> >that it was the only significant land use over most of the West.
>
> How would it be better if they were growing corn and soy beans
> instead....if they could?

15.75m hectares in total would be needed for a vegan population.

30 million hectares are at present used just to produce feed grains.

In addition, 272 million hectares are grazed - over 50% overgrazed,
and/or forage crops like hay (which is fertilized, sprayed, harvested..)

Over 302 million hectares land is used for the U.S. livestock industry.

15.75m hectares in total would be needed for a vegan population.

That would leave 299 million hectares of US land to revert to Natural
habitat, allowing N. American native species / ecosystems to recover.


Read that a few times before replying dh. Try to understand it..