Re OSU article

[Guest guest]

Hey there,

This is in reply to OSU article that claims that

animal suffering will be reduced if we only consume

beef and dairy products from cattle raised in

pastureland.

 

Well I'm sorry to say, but there really isn't any flaw

in their logic, it just seems like a slightly

simplistic idea that has omitted a number of factors.

 

To begin with, feeding the world's population with

free-range cattle would require an enormous increase

in the size of pastureland. This would most likely

have to be done through deforestation, where the death

toll for wild animals would be enormous and greatly

increase the rate of extinction for endangered

species. This can be seen by the fact that the main

cause of deforestation in the Amazonian forest is not

for agriculture but for the raising of cattle (the

majority of which are destined for North American fast

food chains). Therefore, if we considered wildlife

(which is what the researchers base the death toll

on), we would quickly see that crop agriculture

produces many times more calories per acre than would

the raising of cattle. This would in turn minimize the

rate of deforestation and certainly spare millions of

wild animals.

 

Furthermore, I hardly see how a diet based on

free-range cattle would cause less suffering than say

organic farming with hand picked crops, the which is

still practiced is many parts of the world.

 

Nevertheless the article also raises a very important

issue, namely that those who claim that a meat based

diet is not sustainable must also acknowledge that

neither is modern crop agriculture. Soil erosion,

desertification, and the killing of wildlife through

herbicides and pesticides are only a few of the

consequences of modern farming. Unfortunately, given

the amazingly high human population on this planet I

am afraid that unless radical changes are implemented,

few alternatives will be available.

 

And, although everyone switching to a vegan diet would

certainly alleviate some of our current environmental

problems, in reality it would ultimately merely

postpone them. South-East Asia is a perfect example of

a population causing incredible environmental

destruction not because of their diet (as the wide

majority are vegan) but simply by the sheer number of

people required to overexploit their small parcel of

land and forcing others to cut the battered remains of

tropical forests, thereby permanently eliminating a

number of species and ecosystems.

 

Vegans must therefore understand that the present

condition is surely not as black and white as some

would have you believe and that fundamental

modifications are required not in not only diet, but

also in our relationship to the natural world and our

responsibilities towards it.

 

In a nutshell, if you truly this planet and all its

inhabitants, please don't breed... Human beings have

become a remarkably parasitic nuisance to this planet,

and it only by significantly lowering our numbers and

altering our perspective on life that we will ever be

able to live in harmony with the earth... And perhaps

eventually return to sustainable and organic vegan

farming that few argue would cause any form of

suffering.... I've seemed to have gone terribly off

topic so i believe i'll stop here. So basically an

important but simplistic article that needs to be put

in perspective... But i welcome any other form of

criticism (including of my own ideas)...

 

Kamrinn Roy

PS: Isabelle, if you're reading this, that last

paragraph was for you

 

 

 

 

Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®

http://movies./