Pete ‹(•¿•)› wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Feb 2007 20:00:18 +0000, Martin Willett
> > wrote:
>
>> Pete ‹(•¿•)› wrote:
>>> On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 10:50:45 -0600, Alan Moorman >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:31:45 -0500, dh@. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
>>>>> steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
>>>>> get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
>>>>> over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
>>>>> get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
>>>>> machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
>>>>> draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
>>>>> likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
>>>>> derived from grass raised animals. Grass raised animal products
>>>>> contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
>>>>> better lives for livestock than soy or rice products. ·
>>>> I'm not a vegetarian, but here are some thoughts:
>>>>
>>>> Most cattle, be they meat or milk sources, are NOT raised on
>>>> grass. They are raised on grain which costs a LOT in terms
>>>> of all the machinery used to plant, cultivate, and harvest
>>>> them. Lots of petroleum burned.
>>>>
>>>> Not to mention all the pesticides and fertilizer which are
>>>> sprayed on the grains to help them grow. Some of these are
>>>> made from petroleum, and all that factories which burn lots
>>>> of energy to make.
>>>>
>>>> Likewise for most other animals we eat -- chickens, pigs,
>>>> etc. The amount of energy expended to feed and raise
>>>> animals for meat is incredible, and unnecessary!
>>>>
>>>> Eating vegetarian food eliminates COMPLETELY the vast waste
>>>> and expense involved in raising meat animals for human
>>>> consumption.
>>>>
>>>> I still eat meat, but there are VERY good arguments for all
>>>> of us eating vegetarian (only).
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>
>>> Makes sense.
>>> --
>>>
>> So what would happen to the farmer growing the crop that feeds the
>> animals?
>
> He would need actually do some work for a change, but if he was
> prepared to, he could go organic and feed all of us with veggie
> produce.
>
>

You can't have it all ways you know. If feeding animals is less
efficient than feeding us cattle food then what will happen to all the
land that is currently "wasted" feeding cattle? Where will the money
come from to pay to use that land? The starving haven't got any money.

What will happen to all the land that can only be used to grow grass?
Will we abandon it or will we learn how to eat grass?

There are good arguments for eating less meat and only eating less
intensively raised meat but there are not good practical health,
economic or environmental reasons to stop eating all meat all together.

The only reason to give up meat all together is to feel smug and
superior, a feeling that can only be maintained if "the great fight" is
never actually won. That is why vegetarians come up with such lame ideas
trying to persuade other people to make the same decision they did but
for different reasons.
--

Martin Willett


http://mwillett.org/