3 ms·
I disagree entirely. 200 years ago we had herds of Bison roaming the great American plains that were so large it would take the herd five days to pass a camp s
by jononomo 6y ago
I disagree entirely. 200 years ago we had herds of Bison roaming the great American plains that were so large it would take the herd five days to pass a camp site. We can go back to that kind of herding if we want to. It is agriculture that is destroying our environment with pesticides and destroying human health with carbohydrates. Meat is also not as big an impact of global warming as people think it is -- the health care industry has a far greater carbon emission problem and the health care industry would be decimated if our society turned to eating red meat in massive quantities and avoided sugar and grains entirely.
- SketchySeaBeast 6y ago200 years ago we weren't trying to feed hundreds of millions of people, and the small population that was there managed to kill them all off. That would a massive scale up of animals and they couldn't just roam - if you want to work at industrial levels you need to use industrial methods - to be viable they'd need to continue to be factory farmed, which requires a larger supporting infrastructure of grain.
- jononomo 6y agoI say that we start by adding 60 million bison to our national capacity and then solve problems as they arise. I'm okay with feeding the cattle some grain toward the end in feed lots. I wouldn't describe this as "factory farming", though, which is a term more appropriately used to describe how pigs and chickens are often raised and which I do think is cruel. But we don't have this problem with larger ruminants.