6 ms·

Well that's not true. Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life at which point they will have them eat at feed lots to fatten up. Second, feed lo

Well that's not true. Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life at which point they will have them eat at feed lots to fatten up. Second, feed lots can use things like by-products of sugar production (molasses, beet pulp pellets, etc...) for feed. These are not human consumable and require no extra food to be grown. I've worked with a company that does over half a billion in revenue on this alone. There is a lot more to this than your comment is indicating.

slothtrop 4y ago
> Well that's not true. Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life at which point they will have them eat at feed lots to fatten up. In the West, or globally? Because commercial agriculture here relies on corn/grain feed most of their life.
- comte7092 4y ago
  You may want to check your sources, because that’s not how commercial at works in the west. Cattle are indeed raised on grass for the majority of their life, however they are fed grain to make weight for slaughter. In a sense, both positions are incorrect, because the image of cows grazing on grass most of their lives with little grain at the end is a very skewed picture (without grain the lifecycle would be substantially longer), but it is also the case that all cows do start off on grass. The whole narrative that cows are “good for the environment” because they eat grass is fairly absurd though. The amount of land they require alone in the US is absolutely massive, and you can just take a look at the many fights over western water rights to see that even the impact of grass feeding is substantial.
  - unity1001 4y ago
    > because that’s not how commercial at works in the west You dont seem to be aware of factory farming... https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-factory-farmings-planetary-destruction-animal-feed https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-fac... > It is estimated that livestock consume 70% of the grain grown in the US, and that half of the water consumed in the US is used to grow grain for cattle.
    - comte7092 4y ago
      I am aware of factory farming. As I explained in my statement, cows are finished at factory farms. It’s very clear that you have a very surface level understanding of how the American cattle industry works. At no point did I claim anything about how cows don’t consume a massive amount of grain. Unlike chickens and pigs, the American cattle industry is decentralized. Cows are raised on a series of different types of ranching operations, traded along the way, until they end up at a factory farm at the end where they rapidly gain weight due to grain feeding.
      - unity1001 4y ago
        > As I explained in my statement, cows are finished at factory farms No. They live there from birth to death. A factory farm is not a slaughterhouse. You seem to mistake them for it. https://thehumaneleague.org/article/factory-farmed-cows https://thehumaneleague.org/article/factory-farmed-cows > At no point did I claim anything about how cows don’t consume a massive amount of grain. You actually did. You said in repeated comments to me and others that in the west the cows consume grass. And showed it as an argument against the food inefficiency criticism.
        comte7092 4y ago
        > They live there from birth to death. Citation needed, no where in your source does it substantiate your claim that cows are reared on factory farms, where they subsequently live out their lives. > You actually did. You said in repeated comments to me and others that in the west the cows consume grass. Because they do feed on grass. Look I get it, you clearly care about animal welfare, which is a good thing, but I was not making the argument you think i was making. Disagreeing with a factually incorrect statement does not mean I am an advocate for the meat industry. The story is more complicated than you make it out to be, and it is important to have it right. Cows in America start on grass and finish on grain, this is a fact. This does no imply that there isn’t a huge amount of grain used in the process. The food inefficiency criticism is true, it is, however, untrue to say that cows spend their entire lives in CAFOs.
unity1001 4y ago
> Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life Nope. The majority of cattle industry has transitioned to factory farming and the cattle in factories are fed with edible produce. Not grass. The current meat demand is not something that mere grazing can support. Even if it was possible to do with mere grazing, that's still not an argument: Grazing is done on land that could be used for many other purposes ranging from residential urbanization to vertical farming. Its not done in the Sahara desert or Siberian taiga where the land is actually not usable for anything else. Regarding byproducts: Such biological products are still valuable for many other purposes, leaving aside that many of them can be easily made edible through different processes. It again boils down to this: We are turning more food into less food. That's not a rational thing to do.
- comte7092 4y ago
  Nope, the majority of the industry has transitioned to factory farming, however cattle are still fed grass for the majority of their lives. It’s not any less wasteful though. The system requires a massive amount of rangeland and grain to produce beef.
- bequanna 4y ago
  > Grazing is done on land that could be used for many other purposes ranging from residential urbanization to vertical farming. Huh? Most land used for grazing and hay production is rural, remote, not suitable for crop agriculture and has little other use. Either we feed livestock with that grass or do nothing with it.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
jknoepfler 4y ago
Now account for the energy, land, labor, materials, and environmental externalities required to bring a cow from birth to the table at industrial scale (all the way from birth, through the animal's ~1.5 years of life (?), through slaughter, butchering, packing, distribution to the consumer, etc.), and compare that to a proportionate amount of beans and rice.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- nightski 4y ago
  1. Energy - The renewable folks would have us believe this is incredibly cheap 2. Land - Most of this land is not usable for other purposes. At least in the U.S. I am not speaking about globally because the problems there are largely political 3. Labor - Creating jobs and opportunities is not a bad thing 4. Environmental - With the wars going on I think we have a lot more to worry about than the 3% of emissions coming from animal husbandry in the U.S. Other than climate change impacts (which could be minimized even further with feed supplements), animal husbandry is actually beneficial to the environment.
  - DangitBobby 4y ago
    Your 1. here is a bit of a copout.

slothtrop 4y ago

> Well that's not true. Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life at which point they will have them eat at feed lots to fatten up. In the West, or globally? Because commercial agriculture here relies on corn/grain feed most of their life.

comte7092 4y ago
You may want to check your sources, because that’s not how commercial at works in the west. Cattle are indeed raised on grass for the majority of their life, however they are fed grain to make weight for slaughter. In a sense, both positions are incorrect, because the image of cows grazing on grass most of their lives with little grain at the end is a very skewed picture (without grain the lifecycle would be substantially longer), but it is also the case that all cows do start off on grass. The whole narrative that cows are “good for the environment” because they eat grass is fairly absurd though. The amount of land they require alone in the US is absolutely massive, and you can just take a look at the many fights over western water rights to see that even the impact of grass feeding is substantial.
- unity1001 4y ago
  > because that’s not how commercial at works in the west You dont seem to be aware of factory farming... https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-factory-farmings-planetary-destruction-animal-feed https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-fac... > It is estimated that livestock consume 70% of the grain grown in the US, and that half of the water consumed in the US is used to grow grain for cattle.
  - comte7092 4y ago
    I am aware of factory farming. As I explained in my statement, cows are finished at factory farms. It’s very clear that you have a very surface level understanding of how the American cattle industry works. At no point did I claim anything about how cows don’t consume a massive amount of grain. Unlike chickens and pigs, the American cattle industry is decentralized. Cows are raised on a series of different types of ranching operations, traded along the way, until they end up at a factory farm at the end where they rapidly gain weight due to grain feeding.
    - unity1001 4y ago
      > As I explained in my statement, cows are finished at factory farms No. They live there from birth to death. A factory farm is not a slaughterhouse. You seem to mistake them for it. https://thehumaneleague.org/article/factory-farmed-cows https://thehumaneleague.org/article/factory-farmed-cows > At no point did I claim anything about how cows don’t consume a massive amount of grain. You actually did. You said in repeated comments to me and others that in the west the cows consume grass. And showed it as an argument against the food inefficiency criticism.
      - comte7092 4y ago
        > They live there from birth to death. Citation needed, no where in your source does it substantiate your claim that cows are reared on factory farms, where they subsequently live out their lives. > You actually did. You said in repeated comments to me and others that in the west the cows consume grass. Because they do feed on grass. Look I get it, you clearly care about animal welfare, which is a good thing, but I was not making the argument you think i was making. Disagreeing with a factually incorrect statement does not mean I am an advocate for the meat industry. The story is more complicated than you make it out to be, and it is important to have it right. Cows in America start on grass and finish on grain, this is a fact. This does no imply that there isn’t a huge amount of grain used in the process. The food inefficiency criticism is true, it is, however, untrue to say that cows spend their entire lives in CAFOs.

unity1001 4y ago

> Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life Nope. The majority of cattle industry has transitioned to factory farming and the cattle in factories are fed with edible produce. Not grass. The current meat demand is not something that mere grazing can support. Even if it was possible to do with mere grazing, that's still not an argument: Grazing is done on land that could be used for many other purposes ranging from residential urbanization to vertical farming. Its not done in the Sahara desert or Siberian taiga where the land is actually not usable for anything else. Regarding byproducts: Such biological products are still valuable for many other purposes, leaving aside that many of them can be easily made edible through different processes. It again boils down to this: We are turning more food into less food. That's not a rational thing to do.

comte7092 4y ago
Nope, the majority of the industry has transitioned to factory farming, however cattle are still fed grass for the majority of their lives. It’s not any less wasteful though. The system requires a massive amount of rangeland and grain to produce beef.
bequanna 4y ago
> Grazing is done on land that could be used for many other purposes ranging from residential urbanization to vertical farming. Huh? Most land used for grazing and hay production is rural, remote, not suitable for crop agriculture and has little other use. Either we feed livestock with that grass or do nothing with it.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

jknoepfler 4y ago

Now account for the energy, land, labor, materials, and environmental externalities required to bring a cow from birth to the table at industrial scale (all the way from birth, through the animal's ~1.5 years of life (?), through slaughter, butchering, packing, distribution to the consumer, etc.), and compare that to a proportionate amount of beans and rice.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nightski 4y ago
1. Energy - The renewable folks would have us believe this is incredibly cheap 2. Land - Most of this land is not usable for other purposes. At least in the U.S. I am not speaking about globally because the problems there are largely political 3. Labor - Creating jobs and opportunities is not a bad thing 4. Environmental - With the wars going on I think we have a lot more to worry about than the 3% of emissions coming from animal husbandry in the U.S. Other than climate change impacts (which could be minimized even further with feed supplements), animal husbandry is actually beneficial to the environment.
- DangitBobby 4y ago
  Your 1. here is a bit of a copout.