3 ms·

> Can different style of cow farming be carbon negative? Maybe, but with much less animals and a mix of animals (not just cows, but ducks, chicken, ..) and mos

> Can different style of cow farming be carbon negative? Maybe, but with much less animals and a mix of animals (not just cows, but ducks, chicken, ..) and mostly vegetable, that's how it's meant to be in nature Currently animal farms are disastrous: https://www.google.com/search?q=why+is+animal+farm+impact+on+environment%3F https://www.google.com/search?q=why+is+animal+farm+impact+on... total weight of farm animals is 10 times the one of wild animals, which itself is about the same as pets, this is nonsensical

ch4s3 3y ago
There isn’t a way “farming is meant to be in nature”. There are all domesticated animals and plants.
- hinkley 3y ago
  This is how farming is meant to be in nature: https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/797805.Tending_the_Wild https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/797805.Tending_the_Wi...
  - ch4s3 3y ago
    This is just the noble savage myth. There is no “meant to be”.
    - hinkley 3y ago
      No, it really isn’t. They had their own stuff going on but they clearly had low input farming dialed in. I think you should read the book. Or, you know, stay flippant. It’s your circus not mine.
      - ch4s3 3y ago
        There is no singular they. I’ve read a few books on the topic. You’re ultimately drawing from at best a snapshot of when the Spanish arrived or otherwise when English settlers or their American descendants were encountering populations wrecked by successive waves of disease. So it’s hard to know what things looked like prior and whether there was a stable equilibrium. We certainly know the Yucatán had at one point been basically stripped of trees for slash and burn agriculture. The forest agronomy that may have been practiced in the eastern woodlands probably relied heavily on both burning vast swaths of the land periodically and low population density. I’m not sure what that really does for us. Supporting really small numbers of people with vast swaths of highly fertile land has never really been a big problem.
        11235813213455 3y ago
        For sure we should reduce the total meat & fish production, people eat and waste far too much, just the fact that 1/5th of that production goes to pets say it all After that, I was talking about the equilibirum in nature or permaculture farms between animals and vegetals, which looks nothing like current intensive farming, which produce poor quality anyway. We don't need to eat meat once a day, even once a week isn't needed, more than half people are overweight in rich countries So it'd make sense to do those 2 changes

ch4s3 3y ago

There isn’t a way “farming is meant to be in nature”. There are all domesticated animals and plants.

hinkley 3y ago
This is how farming is meant to be in nature: https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/797805.Tending_the_Wild https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/797805.Tending_the_Wi...
- ch4s3 3y ago
  This is just the noble savage myth. There is no “meant to be”.
  - hinkley 3y ago
    No, it really isn’t. They had their own stuff going on but they clearly had low input farming dialed in. I think you should read the book. Or, you know, stay flippant. It’s your circus not mine.
    - ch4s3 3y ago
      There is no singular they. I’ve read a few books on the topic. You’re ultimately drawing from at best a snapshot of when the Spanish arrived or otherwise when English settlers or their American descendants were encountering populations wrecked by successive waves of disease. So it’s hard to know what things looked like prior and whether there was a stable equilibrium. We certainly know the Yucatán had at one point been basically stripped of trees for slash and burn agriculture. The forest agronomy that may have been practiced in the eastern woodlands probably relied heavily on both burning vast swaths of the land periodically and low population density. I’m not sure what that really does for us. Supporting really small numbers of people with vast swaths of highly fertile land has never really been a big problem.
      - 11235813213455 3y ago
        For sure we should reduce the total meat & fish production, people eat and waste far too much, just the fact that 1/5th of that production goes to pets say it all After that, I was talking about the equilibirum in nature or permaculture farms between animals and vegetals, which looks nothing like current intensive farming, which produce poor quality anyway. We don't need to eat meat once a day, even once a week isn't needed, more than half people are overweight in rich countries So it'd make sense to do those 2 changes