vegan agriculture and animals

Vegan message board for support on vegan related issues and questions.
Topics include philosophy, activism, effective altruism, plant-based nutrition, and diet advice/discussion whether high carb, low carb (eco atkins/vegan keto) or anything in between.
Meat eater vs. Vegan debate welcome, but please keep it within debate topics.
User avatar
charlotte-reva
Newbie
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:21 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: vegan agriculture and animals

Post by charlotte-reva »

NonZeroSum wrote: Thu Jul 13, 2017 11:18 am

Veganism isn't just a diet like vegetarianism, it's useful to think about how even unnecessary fossil fuel use will hurt all animals via climate change, quantifying the suffering in everything you directly contribute to, that's not to say you should become a hermit. Buying vegan, being zero waste and not using fossil fuels would probably be the neutral moral baseline, but just being vegan as an example to others is massive, and breaking with social conformity a chore that can leave you feeling isolated, so it's important to only do what you can feel comfortable doing, and don't take any more steps unless you're ready to handle the changes. Like brimstoneSalad said above, modelling sustainable behavior is a big ethical win.
Indeed. It 's big time depressing to have strong ethical ideals for one , unknown, not in power, isolated person where as the elits of society is showing the exact opposite. :D
User avatar
charlotte-reva
Newbie
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:21 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: vegan agriculture and animals

Post by charlotte-reva »

new argument, this time a beef raiser. Here is in french :

J'apprécie vos commentaires disant à tous bout de champ que les animaux sont tous élevé en batterie et souffre le martir, ou encore son nourrir de céréales et soja, responsable de déforestation... Belle image d'ensemble, pas trop de préjugé.... Combien d'entre vous ce sont fait une idée en allant voir dans des fermes et non en écoutant ce qu'on leur a dit ou ce qu'on a bien voulu leur montrer ? Pourquoi vouloir dénigrer les personnes mangeant de la viande ou élevant des animaux ? Et ce que on fait des reportages sur vous pour essayer de prouver que vous êtes dérangé ou non ? Alors peut-être serait-il possible de continuer à ne plus manger de viande sans pour autant la dénigrer et laisser les gens ce faire leur propre idée sans aucune mise en scène ! Pour la question de l'écologie et la consommation d'eau je vous rejoins oui et non, certes actuellement à
Une grande partie des productions végétale de type céréales est destiné à l'alimentation animal mais il existe différents types d'agriculture où certains produisent toute l'alimentation de leur troupeau (c'est mon cas) et n'engendre pas de transport et de déforestation ou encore de monoculture, produit et commercialisé localement je ne pense pas que mon steak de viande pollu plus qu'un steak de soja d'Argentine . Et pour finir je vous affirme que la où pousse l'herbe on ne peut que faire pousser de l'herbe qui plus est cette dernière est un piège à carbone et évite l'érosion des sols contrairement aux cultures annuel. Essayez donc de ne pas faire l'amalgame entre les différents types d'agriculture et de moyens de production car toute vos attentes ne sont pas réalisable sur le terrain et de réel moyen sont mis en oeuvre sur le terrain pour améliorer le bien être animal au quotidien et les contrôles sont nombreux. Pour la question de l'émotion, je suis agriculteurs, je m'occupe du mieux que je peux de mes animaux, je leur donne de l'attention tout les jours mais oui je fais la part des choses au moment de les amener à l'abattoir. Ça peut paraître cruel pour certains mais je ne pense pas changer de métier tout de suite et fait mon possible pour avoir des animaux le plus heureux possible tout le long de leur vie.

Basically, he is a pasturizing beef, and he says that his beef cattle is needed because it can pasturise the land and use this grass to feed the cattle and thus is less polluting that a imported soy steack. He also sas that mountains landscapes are not propoer to any cultures at all and can be made profit of beef pasturizing . Thus, as his cattle is grass fed it is not consumping cerals.... He says vegans are not provinding solutions agriculture wise for the world and if he wouldnt do that, the mountains will just returns to forest and close themselfves thus no benefits for food would be made of thoses lanscapes.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: vegan agriculture and animals

Post by brimstoneSalad »

charlotte-reva wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2017 3:07 am new argument, this time a beef raiser. [...]
Basically, he is a pasturizing beef, and he says that his beef cattle is needed because it can pasturise the land and use this grass to feed the cattle and thus is less polluting that a imported soy steack.
That's incorrect.

1. Whether eating grass or grain, cows produce methane.
2. Cows may produce more methane over a lifetime on grass because they grow more slowly, so per steak the carbon footprint is probably higher.
3. Soy protein yield per acre is WAY higher than cows ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edible_protein_per_unit_area_of_land ), which means we need less farmland. We're probably dealing with something like:
A. 10 acres of managed pasture vs.
B. Over 9 acres of forest or wild grasslands (wild land captures more carbon) and less than one acre of soybeans
Intensive grazing is very harmful to the environment, locally and world-wide due to greenhouse gas emissions.
3. The embodied energy of transporting food is relatively low both by land and sea, which is typically how food reaches you. It's a widely believed myth that the energy cost of food transportation is at all comparable to production. Even a soy steak made in Taiwan and shipped to you frozen would likely be better for the environment than locally produced beef. The only exception might be air transportation if you ordered overnight shipping or something (it's no easy task to calculate; you should ask him to show his math and sources rather than make assumptions).
charlotte-reva wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2017 3:07 amHe also sas that mountains landscapes are not propoer to any cultures at all and can be made profit of beef pasturizing.
Just let them grow forest, and grow your soybeans somewhere else. There is much more farmland than we need. We should allow most of it to return to forest, which could capture more greenhouse gasses.

But also, it's not true that we can not grow food on mountains. There are many ancient technologies that allow that easily.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrace_%28agriculture%29
We should only do this if we need to, otherwise let it return to forest completely.
charlotte-reva wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2017 3:07 amThus, as his cattle is grass fed it is not consumping cerals.... He says vegans are not provinding solutions agriculture wise for the world and if he wouldnt do that, the mountains will just returns to forest and close themselfves thus no benefits for food would be made of thoses lanscapes.
We have plenty of farmland already, without any growing on any mountains or deserts, to feed the whole world vegan. All we have to do is convert a small part of the existing farmland which grows grain for animals to grow food for humans. If we stop eating meat we can do that easily. The rest of the land can returned to forest. He is harming the environment by not allowing it to regrow forest and instead raising cows on it. He is not helping human beings have more food. We already waste so much. We do not need more beef, we need more forest and fewer polluting cows.
User avatar
charlotte-reva
Newbie
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:21 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: vegan agriculture and animals

Post by charlotte-reva »

thanks for replying
Post Reply