4 ms·
> they mostly graze on infertile land This is true during the first year of life. After that, most cattle are moved to dense feedlots. Further, the infertile l
by tspike 6y ago
> they mostly graze on infertile land
This is true during the first year of life. After that, most cattle are moved to dense feedlots. Further, the infertile land they're grazing on, in many cases, is infertile precisely because of the way it's grazed. In the scenario where herds graze huge tracts of unbroken native grasslands, the result is increasingly fertile soil.
When grazing animals are confined to small lots, the resulting erosion of topsoil and over-grazing reduce the fertility of the land.
> the plants a cow is eating are inedible to humans
> Most food they are fed in the finishing stage is farm byproduct that would otherwise get thrown out.
True in many cases, but missing the larger point. This waste would typically be scattered over huge tracts of land, sequester carbon and re-fertilize the soil over long time horizons. Instead, we turn it into methane and artificially fertilize.
> What a cow is really doing is turning inedible sources of food into nutritious human food.
True, but fails to consider the negative externalities.
- seanmcdirmid 6y agoThere are exceptions where meat makes sense. At higher than 4000 meters, you aren’t going to grow much more than barley, so meat is pretty much it. I’ve never been so sick of meat than during a trip on the Tibetan plateau. Likewise for dry scrub land (Nevada, Wyoming, Arizona, irrigation can only do so much). Then there is the efficiency at which food for livestock can be grown vs for people.
- tspike 6y agoYes, absolutely. It's difficult to argue for nuance in approach. I really have no idea how to make the general argument effectively.
- thorin 6y agoThat's interesting, as on the Nepal side you get only Dahl Bhat (rice and lentils), with maybe some pickles and luxury, a fried egg! However in Mendoza, Argentina near to Aconcagua, you are inundated with beef steak and red wine, which sounds great, but after a few days of that you're feeling pretty heavy!
- seanmcdirmid 6y agoNepal has much more agriculture than Tibet given that much of their land is much lower (Kathmandu is 1,400 meters, Lhasa is 3,655 meters). So most Nepalese are Hindu and can be vegetarians, while vegetarianism simply can’t exist in traditional Tibet (you won’t survive, so even Buddhist monks eat meat, incidentally the one thing Tibetans most like about being apart of China is easy access to agriculture imports). South America I wonder if it’s more about converting nutrient poor jungles to grazing land?