RE: [fukuoka_farming] Re: natives/non-natives
- The number of cattle on the planet may indeed be unsustainable; but
so, probably, is the number of humans.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blugra [mailto:did_not@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 3:31 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [fukuoka_farming] Re: natives/non-natives
> Yes, Carol I do realize this, but the entire industry is
> involved in many levels not just raising of cattle (grain
> or grass fed) but the processing, and the leather tanning
> which is very toxic processing. Also the sheer quantity of
> animals, excrement, water consumption for protein yeild.
> When the Union of Concerned Scientists did the study, as
> others have, it was involved with several levels of
> ecological damage besides just methane. Because of meat
> consumption levels the numbers of cattle raised and
> slaughtered right now are in the billions. Whether grain
> or grass fed that is an unsustainable quantity. Not to
> mention of course the general cruelty of the way they are
> raised and processed in standard commercial production.
> The cows in a more sustainable model would have a better
> existence one might presume...but as to environmental
> impact, the quantity still being demanded by consumers
> presents a complete ecological impass.
> --- In fukuoka_farming@y..., Carol <reggiecs@p...> wrote:
> > blugra said, in part
> > > Cattle are by far the largest contributor to greenhouse gasses
> > > and a major polluter. So much so that the Union of Concerned
> > > Scientists reported that the choice of how much or IF to eat
> > > meat was the next most serious environmental consumer choice
> > > after fuel consumption (which car, public transport etc.)
> > I think it should be mentioned that these super gaseous
> and polluting
> > cattle are your standard, grain-fed, feedlot cattle.
> 100% pastured
> > cattle give off much less methane and do not pollute
> nearly as much,
> > if at all. If cattle eat grasses and their pastures are
> managed to
> > prevent overgrazing, they are not the environmental
> threat that they
> > can be and that the majority of them are today.
> > Carol
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
- Hi all,
I just need to briefly interject one point. While yes I agree there are too
many people in the world, a bigger problem is overconsumption by the few in
the so-called developed world, many of whom actually believe all this stuff
is what they need and are used to, and our push to have the rest of the
world desire and also be dependant on lots of our junk vs. meeting basic
needs naturally and locally without destruction and disrespect.
It is an important note, because it actually places blame and belittles the
rest of the world and is usually us white folks or other from the "developed
world" who focus it that way. Meanwhile we consume 40% of the world's
resources and cause major environmental destruction, depletion, etc. etc.
Someone told me that every one American born is equivalent to 10 individuals
in terms of consumption, etc. I believe it.
I find it important daily to question that which us privileged and spoiled
believe to be reality in terms of needs, actions, thoughts, etc.