6 ms·

The problem is not so much their poop, it's the pets themselves. For example, in USA, 25% of the meat production is meant for pets [1], it's huge, given also th

The problem is not so much their poop, it's the pets themselves. For example, in USA, 25% of the meat production is meant for pets [1], it's huge, given also that meat production is not environmental-friendly. The whole pets products industry is really large, there are maybe close to 1 billion pets worldwide. Other example, cats affect negatively ecosystems (birds, little reptiles, some important insects, ..) My proposition is simply to cut down pets population, how? I don't know, a law if necessary, nowadays the environment comes before having a toy animal in your home. It's an easy thing to do with a significant impact, there are others, like cosmetic products, plastic wrappings, .. [1]: https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/503376/all-meat-pet-food-has-big-environmental-impact https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/503376/all-meat-pet-food..., https://www.treehugger.com/pets/cats-dogs-meat-environmental-impact-in-US.html https://www.treehugger.com/pets/cats-dogs-meat-environmental...

LoSboccacc 7y ago
this went from being environmentally sensitive to culling species wholesale real fast remember last time we culled cats what happened?
- gojomo 7y ago
  I don't "remember" what happened last time "we" culled cats, so what happened? (If you're alluding to the idea that the "black death" plagues were worsened by cat culls, that's an oft-repeated story but somewhat dubious with regard to verifiable facts. Cats themselves can carry the plague bacteria & transmit it to humans – eg https://www.nytimes.com/1994/04/08/us/house-cats-spread-human-plague-in-southwest.html https://www.nytimes.com/1994/04/08/us/house-cats-spread-huma... – and even regions where cats are superstitiously cherished suffered repeated plague outbreaks.)
  - LoSboccacc 7y ago
    lol no first of all you have to control prey population because pests will balloon with the increased safety and consume resources, strangling the prey population. secondly if you can't control the whole area Predator population will follow the pest increase, often resulting in larger problems or an out of control spiral of environmental issues you don't have to go back to pre scientific anecdotes like the stories around the pest, just check the Australia history with cats and rabbits here's a substantial population study with ferrets in UK https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10530-011-9965-2 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10530-011-9965-2 mainland control is only worse
    - gojomo 7y ago
      I still can't follow what you meant by the "last time we culled cats". Was that referring to some action by Australians? (Are they the "we"?) Is there a canonical reference to how extensive this "cull" was? Which "prey" have to be controlled, or else which "pests" will balloon? Is the capitalization of 'Predator' significant, indicating some sort of sovereignty on a scale matching that of your only other capitalized entities, 'Australia' and 'UK'?
      - LoSboccacc 7y ago
        > Australians? (Are they the "we"?) I also linked a uk study, but this works the same everywhere they tried, including wolves in italy etc > Which "prey" have to be controlled, or else which "pests" will balloon? the food chain sits at an equilibrium that's under dampened. the population of opportunistic/scavenger will grow sharply going over capacity. that will cause harm to animals down the food chain (i.e. attack to bird nests) and will cause immigration of nearby predator population, which will again be underdampenend and will grow over capacity. heck I even linked a paper explaining this, there's plenty references around too. > Predator now you're just being an hardass. it was autocorrect.
        gojomo 7y ago
        You've "also linked" a UK study of unclear relevance, but you've still never answered what "cat cull" you were originally referring-to as something we should "remember". Nor is it clear what's the "prey" and "pest" in the case of house pets. What are you referring-to by those words? Similarly, when you say "this works the same everywhere they tried", what's "this"? Yes, I'm being a "hardass", because your tone is one of "everybody knows these clear and simple things", but the actual details you've provided are grossly insufficient to know what you're talking about. Even when asked for exact details, you've moved on to other non-responsive digressions. You are seriously overestimating the clarity of your communication, and overconfident about what anecdotes that others might "remember", and making unwarranted assumptions about what shared-interest/shared-history groups your readers might consider to be part of "we". You're expecting others to intuit lots of specific things in your mind you haven't described in sufficient detail for others to know.
- throwawayhhakdl 7y ago
  What happened?
triceratops 7y ago
"The animal parts used for pet food may include damaged carcass parts, bones, and cheek meat, and organs such as intestines, kidneys, liver, lungs, udders, spleen, and stomach tissue"[1]. These are all byproducts of the meat industry for humans. Humans don't eat any of these animal parts. Pets are doing us a favor by eating all these things that would otherwise simply be thrown away, with a great deal of pollution involved. Eating our leftovers is, in fact, the traditional role that dogs have played in human societies. Reduction in meat consumption has to come from humans, because we actually have a choice. We can (and do) also control pet populations with spaying and neutering programs. 1. http://www.madehow.com/Volume-2/Pet-Food.html#ixzz662tVEXrH http://www.madehow.com/Volume-2/Pet-Food.html#ixzz662tVEXrH
- eMSF 7y ago
  >Humans don't eat any of these animal parts People don't eat liver where you're from?
  - triceratops 7y ago
    It's certainly a less desirable part. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopped_liver#Chopped_liver_as_an_expression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopped_liver#Chopped_liver_as... I'm aware that stomachs are used in haggis, or intestines in sausage. That doesn't represent the majority of human meat consumption though.
  - undersuit 7y ago
    Black Pudding or Blood Sausage is a complete unknown in the US. Liver is reviled. Gizzards are occasionally sold in restaurants as an appetizer, fried. We don't need the offal from our animals because we can just buy a plastic jug of broth from the store.
- 11235813213455 7y ago
  I know that argument, but the more there are markets dependent on meat production (like pets food), the more meat production will be hard to reduce It's like saying "I just give my throwaway to my dogs", this means you'll more or less consciously get more food because you know you need enough throwaway Or it's also somewhat like saying, "I bought this mango at the supermarket, which came in plane, from another continent. But what am I doing wrong? if I don't buy it, it'll be discarded/wasted". Similar reasoning, the idea is to cut down the downstream demand so we're able to cut down the upstream one > that would otherwise simply be thrown away, with a great deal of pollution involved. That's not necessarily true, there may some efficient ways to compost/bury/recycle organic material, I don't know how precisely for this case. But compared to the amount of energy for making and transporting dog food to each final consumer? The latter is certainly more polluting > Reduction in meat consumption has to come from humans, because we actually have a choice Yes, right, well the vast majority people have the choice to not have pets, for those who need a companion, they can try with a plant, it's less talkative but not less sensible

LoSboccacc 7y ago

this went from being environmentally sensitive to culling species wholesale real fast remember last time we culled cats what happened?

gojomo 7y ago
I don't "remember" what happened last time "we" culled cats, so what happened? (If you're alluding to the idea that the "black death" plagues were worsened by cat culls, that's an oft-repeated story but somewhat dubious with regard to verifiable facts. Cats themselves can carry the plague bacteria & transmit it to humans – eg https://www.nytimes.com/1994/04/08/us/house-cats-spread-human-plague-in-southwest.html https://www.nytimes.com/1994/04/08/us/house-cats-spread-huma... – and even regions where cats are superstitiously cherished suffered repeated plague outbreaks.)
- LoSboccacc 7y ago
  lol no first of all you have to control prey population because pests will balloon with the increased safety and consume resources, strangling the prey population. secondly if you can't control the whole area Predator population will follow the pest increase, often resulting in larger problems or an out of control spiral of environmental issues you don't have to go back to pre scientific anecdotes like the stories around the pest, just check the Australia history with cats and rabbits here's a substantial population study with ferrets in UK https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10530-011-9965-2 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10530-011-9965-2 mainland control is only worse
  - gojomo 7y ago
    I still can't follow what you meant by the "last time we culled cats". Was that referring to some action by Australians? (Are they the "we"?) Is there a canonical reference to how extensive this "cull" was? Which "prey" have to be controlled, or else which "pests" will balloon? Is the capitalization of 'Predator' significant, indicating some sort of sovereignty on a scale matching that of your only other capitalized entities, 'Australia' and 'UK'?
    - LoSboccacc 7y ago
      > Australians? (Are they the "we"?) I also linked a uk study, but this works the same everywhere they tried, including wolves in italy etc > Which "prey" have to be controlled, or else which "pests" will balloon? the food chain sits at an equilibrium that's under dampened. the population of opportunistic/scavenger will grow sharply going over capacity. that will cause harm to animals down the food chain (i.e. attack to bird nests) and will cause immigration of nearby predator population, which will again be underdampenend and will grow over capacity. heck I even linked a paper explaining this, there's plenty references around too. > Predator now you're just being an hardass. it was autocorrect.
      - gojomo 7y ago
        You've "also linked" a UK study of unclear relevance, but you've still never answered what "cat cull" you were originally referring-to as something we should "remember". Nor is it clear what's the "prey" and "pest" in the case of house pets. What are you referring-to by those words? Similarly, when you say "this works the same everywhere they tried", what's "this"? Yes, I'm being a "hardass", because your tone is one of "everybody knows these clear and simple things", but the actual details you've provided are grossly insufficient to know what you're talking about. Even when asked for exact details, you've moved on to other non-responsive digressions. You are seriously overestimating the clarity of your communication, and overconfident about what anecdotes that others might "remember", and making unwarranted assumptions about what shared-interest/shared-history groups your readers might consider to be part of "we". You're expecting others to intuit lots of specific things in your mind you haven't described in sufficient detail for others to know.
throwawayhhakdl 7y ago
What happened?

triceratops 7y ago

"The animal parts used for pet food may include damaged carcass parts, bones, and cheek meat, and organs such as intestines, kidneys, liver, lungs, udders, spleen, and stomach tissue"[1]. These are all byproducts of the meat industry for humans. Humans don't eat any of these animal parts. Pets are doing us a favor by eating all these things that would otherwise simply be thrown away, with a great deal of pollution involved. Eating our leftovers is, in fact, the traditional role that dogs have played in human societies. Reduction in meat consumption has to come from humans, because we actually have a choice. We can (and do) also control pet populations with spaying and neutering programs. 1. http://www.madehow.com/Volume-2/Pet-Food.html#ixzz662tVEXrH http://www.madehow.com/Volume-2/Pet-Food.html#ixzz662tVEXrH

eMSF 7y ago
>Humans don't eat any of these animal parts People don't eat liver where you're from?
- triceratops 7y ago
  It's certainly a less desirable part. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopped_liver#Chopped_liver_as_an_expression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopped_liver#Chopped_liver_as... I'm aware that stomachs are used in haggis, or intestines in sausage. That doesn't represent the majority of human meat consumption though.
- undersuit 7y ago
  Black Pudding or Blood Sausage is a complete unknown in the US. Liver is reviled. Gizzards are occasionally sold in restaurants as an appetizer, fried. We don't need the offal from our animals because we can just buy a plastic jug of broth from the store.
11235813213455 7y ago
I know that argument, but the more there are markets dependent on meat production (like pets food), the more meat production will be hard to reduce It's like saying "I just give my throwaway to my dogs", this means you'll more or less consciously get more food because you know you need enough throwaway Or it's also somewhat like saying, "I bought this mango at the supermarket, which came in plane, from another continent. But what am I doing wrong? if I don't buy it, it'll be discarded/wasted". Similar reasoning, the idea is to cut down the downstream demand so we're able to cut down the upstream one > that would otherwise simply be thrown away, with a great deal of pollution involved. That's not necessarily true, there may some efficient ways to compost/bury/recycle organic material, I don't know how precisely for this case. But compared to the amount of energy for making and transporting dog food to each final consumer? The latter is certainly more polluting > Reduction in meat consumption has to come from humans, because we actually have a choice Yes, right, well the vast majority people have the choice to not have pets, for those who need a companion, they can try with a plant, it's less talkative but not less sensible