3 ms·
I assume pets are mostly getting the parts of the animal that humans don't want to eat, so this doesn't necessarily imply that pets increase the scale of animal
by centimeter 6y ago
I assume pets are mostly getting the parts of the animal that humans don't want to eat, so this doesn't necessarily imply that pets increase the scale of animal agriculture.
- whatever1 6y agoBut it does mean that you cannot reduce the meat production without affecting the pet food.
- coding123 6y agoMost likely the human consumed meat amounts will change very little. But let's say for some reason 50% of humans suddenly started only eating Impossible Foods style meat - I would imagine that along with that sea change would be pet food. (And when I say suddenly I would say expect at least 25 years - 50 years)
- gsteinberg 6y agoThat's interesting. I wonder if that is in fact the case. There could also be a surplus of meat waste in the meat industry, some of which could go to pet food if the overall production decreased. I admittedly know very little about the meat industry.
- bewareandaware 6y agoIt can increase, because by selling unwanted parts as animal food we are getting a 30% price decrease in wanted parts. We can't raise beef cattle with no limbs to shorten our expenses.