Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
Biodiversity conservation The key, reducing meat consumption
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment
Author 
 Message
Ty Gwyn



Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 4196
Location: Lampeter
PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 15 8:14 am    Post subject:  Reply with quote    

This seems like a theme the labour party often go through,

No wonder they don`t get the rural vote.

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 8407
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 15 8:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

The poll is interesting.
77% say we should eat less meat.
As she says her views are her own & she doesn't expect the country to turn vegan.
Rob R wrote:
Thanks, that illustrates my point perfectly! 1.5bn cattle divided by a world population of 6.8bn is 0.22 cows per person, meanwhle in the UK we have 9.7 million cattle giving a rate of 0.15 per person, and dropping.
It doesn't illustrate anything of the sort.
There are so many types of system & environmental considerations there is no way you can extrapolate in that way.
I'm sure there are more cattle per head of population in the USA than the UK. But as the majority are in corn fed feed lots it does nothing to prove your theory we need more cattle not less.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 15 9:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Thanks, that illustrates my point perfectly! 1.5bn cattle divided by a world population of 6.8bn is 0.22 cows per person, meanwhle in the UK we have 9.7 million cattle giving a rate of 0.15 per person, and dropping.
It doesn't illustrate anything of the sort.
There are so many types of system & environmental considerations there is no way you can extrapolate in that way.
I'm sure there are more cattle per head of population in the USA than the UK. But as the majority are in corn fed feed lots it does nothing to prove your theory we need more cattle not less.


No, the proof is in the Ings, your figures just demonstrate it in numerical terms.

Again, let me ask you, what is your issue with reversing the order of the solutions and consuming/producing only food from sustainable systems and letting that govern how much and what we eat? And please don't just try to change the subject again.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 15 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

crofter wrote:
Quote:
I really believe that meat should be treated in exactly the same way as tobacco, with public campaigns to stop people eating it.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/agriculture/food/11887317/Treat-meat-eaters-like-smokers-warns-Jeremy-Corbyns-new-vegan-farming-minister-Kerry-McCarthy.html


She couldn’t have come across as more old-school “loony left” if she’d tried

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 8407
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 15 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Rob R wrote:
Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Thanks, that illustrates my point perfectly! 1.5bn cattle divided by a world population of 6.8bn is 0.22 cows per person, meanwhle in the UK we have 9.7 million cattle giving a rate of 0.15 per person, and dropping.
It doesn't illustrate anything of the sort.
There are so many types of system & environmental considerations there is no way you can extrapolate in that way.
I'm sure there are more cattle per head of population in the USA than the UK. But as the majority are in corn fed feed lots it does nothing to prove your theory we need more cattle not less.


No, the proof is in the Ings, your figures just demonstrate it in numerical terms.

Again, let me ask you, what is your issue with reversing the order of the solutions and consuming/producing only food from sustainable systems and letting that govern how much and what we eat? And please don't just try to change the subject again.
Quoting a ratio of head of cattle to numbers of population has nothing whatsoever to do with the numbers of cattle per acre/hectare.
There's no relationship, complete fantasy, codswallop.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 15 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Thanks, that illustrates my point perfectly! 1.5bn cattle divided by a world population of 6.8bn is 0.22 cows per person, meanwhle in the UK we have 9.7 million cattle giving a rate of 0.15 per person, and dropping.
It doesn't illustrate anything of the sort.
There are so many types of system & environmental considerations there is no way you can extrapolate in that way.
I'm sure there are more cattle per head of population in the USA than the UK. But as the majority are in corn fed feed lots it does nothing to prove your theory we need more cattle not less.


No, the proof is in the Ings, your figures just demonstrate it in numerical terms.

Again, let me ask you, what is your issue with reversing the order of the solutions and consuming/producing only food from sustainable systems and letting that govern how much and what we eat? And please don't just try to change the subject again.
Quoting a ratio of head of cattle to numbers of population has nothing whatsoever to do with the numbers of cattle per acre/hectare.
There's no relationship, complete fantasy, codswallop.


So answer the question then, dont justpost a link that contains a relationship that you later describe as codswallop when I discuss it.

Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 10538

PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 15 5:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

If we are talking of land suitable for the purpose, they were ploughing the field opposite the woods yesterday. It produces quite good crops, but we kept hearing clanging noises. I went out that way and there were some huge flints lying all over the field. I think that would be better as pasture, and some of our local fields are even worse.

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 8407
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 15 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Rob R wrote:
Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Thanks, that illustrates my point perfectly! 1.5bn cattle divided by a world population of 6.8bn is 0.22 cows per person, meanwhle in the UK we have 9.7 million cattle giving a rate of 0.15 per person, and dropping.
It doesn't illustrate anything of the sort.
There are so many types of system & environmental considerations there is no way you can extrapolate in that way.
I'm sure there are more cattle per head of population in the USA than the UK. But as the majority are in corn fed feed lots it does nothing to prove your theory we need more cattle not less.


No, the proof is in the Ings, your figures just demonstrate it in numerical terms.

Again, let me ask you, what is your issue with reversing the order of the solutions and consuming/producing only food from sustainable systems and letting that govern how much and what we eat? And please don't just try to change the subject again.
Quoting a ratio of head of cattle to numbers of population has nothing whatsoever to do with the numbers of cattle per acre/hectare.
There's no relationship, complete fantasy, codswallop.


So answer the question then, dont justpost a link that contains a relationship that you later describe as codswallop when I discuss it.
The quote from the article that I highlighted is relevant (IMHO) to the original post in that there are more domestic livestock now than ever before, & a lot less wildlife.
You on the other hand seem to be saying because the world average is 0.22 cattle per person but only 0.15 here in the UK we are somehow deficit in cattle.
It's way to vague an argument to hold any water.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 15 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Thanks, that illustrates my point perfectly! 1.5bn cattle divided by a world population of 6.8bn is 0.22 cows per person, meanwhle in the UK we have 9.7 million cattle giving a rate of 0.15 per person, and dropping.
It doesn't illustrate anything of the sort.
There are so many types of system & environmental considerations there is no way you can extrapolate in that way.
I'm sure there are more cattle per head of population in the USA than the UK. But as the majority are in corn fed feed lots it does nothing to prove your theory we need more cattle not less.


No, the proof is in the Ings, your figures just demonstrate it in numerical terms.

Again, let me ask you, what is your issue with reversing the order of the solutions and consuming/producing only food from sustainable systems and letting that govern how much and what we eat? And please don't just try to change the subject again.
Quoting a ratio of head of cattle to numbers of population has nothing whatsoever to do with the numbers of cattle per acre/hectare.
There's no relationship, complete fantasy, codswallop.


So answer the question then, dont justpost a link that contains a relationship that you later describe as codswallop when I discuss it.
The quote from the article that I highlighted is relevant (IMHO) to the original post in that there are more domestic livestock now than ever before, & a lot less wildlife.
You on the other hand seem to be saying because the world average is 0.22 cattle per person but only 0.15 here in the UK we are somehow deficit in cattle.
It's way to vague an argument to hold any water.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 15 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Come on, it's not that difficult - stop avoiding it.

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 8407
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 15 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

What am I avoiding?

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 15 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Tavascarow wrote:
The quote from the article that I highlighted is relevant (IMHO) to the original post in that there are more domestic livestock now than ever before, & a lot less wildlife.
You on the other hand seem to be saying because the world average is 0.22 cattle per person but only 0.15 here in the UK we are somehow deficit in cattle.
It's way to vague an argument to hold any water.


OK, lets just recap my point of view;

1) I believe that we should not import beef
2) I think we should eat more beef from cattle produced here in the UK
3) I don't think we should feed cattle on grain nor increase our reliance on grain fed animals.
4) I do think that the under grazed pastures could be better utilised both in terms of food production and biodiversity.
5) I think that much more marginal land & wetlands, much of it currently drained and used for vegetable/arable production, should be converted back to pasture, especially alongside major watercourses.

What you, perhaps purposefully, failed to mention is that your link compared the biomass of humans to domestic livestock, as well as wildlife. I didn't have biomass of British wildlife to hand, but I did have the populations of both cattle and humans.

Biomass is a good indicator of relative consumption, as it's difficult to consume something that isn't there, so it is relevant to the debate on eating less meat and it indicates that we, as a nation, do not represent the average figures quoted in your worldwide papers.

As I have previously said, numerous times, we can't eat negative meat to compensate for China, so consumption must be taken in context of the country where it is happening and where the supplies are coming from. Someone turning vegan in this country will not impact upon the production of meat in China one little bit, unless they were previously buying their meat from China. If that were the case, switching to sustainably produced British meat would be a better alternative than switching to imported, intensively grown vegetables/products, as there is scope to produce more of the former on British soils without increasing pressure on the land resource at home or abroad.

There is no mechanism in your (original) paper's solutions to ensure that people cutting down on meat consumption (solution 1) switch to my type of farming - it's is equally possible, and more likely, that they would simply go over to more intensive non-animal products. If, however, you reverse the solutions, and put supporting sustainable production systems at the top of the list, you are far more likely to achieve solution 1, eating less, by default.

You haven't even attempted to answer why you are so resistant to this alternative way of looking at it. When I asked you again to answer this query you posted the second link, which I took to be some kind of attempt to justify it.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 15 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Tavascarow wrote:
What am I avoiding?


I've read every word of your sources, and you don't seem to have even read every word of my posts. Perhaps my question was too ambiguous the first few times, I hope my above post has made it clear

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 8407
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 15 4:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

So what is the question I'm avoiding?
Your above post is very worthy & wordy, but I don't see a question mark there anywhere.
I repeat what am I avoiding?

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 15 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Rob R wrote:
What is your problem with the notion that we should switch over to sustainable production and let that be the limitation on what we eat?

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment All times are GMT
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 3 of 9
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright © 2004 marsjupiter.com