4 ms·

...And what happens when we no longer need cows? It's not going to be happy fun time for the species, because as soon as there's not a reason to breed them then

...And what happens when we no longer need cows? It's not going to be happy fun time for the species, because as soon as there's not a reason to breed them then we'll have a few cows kicking around in zoos and that's it. Good for the environment, possibly, but bad for the species.

mtgx 13y ago
We don't need hundreds of millions of cows, do we? I think they contribute a lot to Earth's pollution, too.
- geebee 13y ago
  http://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2013/08/05/taste-testers-sample-325000-test-tube-hamburger-funded-by-googler/ http://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2013/08/05/taste-testers-sa... I've read that methane emissions from cattle contribute substantially to global warming and other pollution problems. According to the link above, this method could reduce methand emissions from cattle by 96%, and reduce the amount of land needed by 99%. I haven't followed the link to the study at Oxford and Amsterdam University (always a good idea if you start to get excited about general science coverage). I plan to do this later.
lttlrck 13y ago
Do you think they are having fun now? They are bred to be eaten, if we don't need them we'll stop breeding them.
- Ives 13y ago
  A lot of them are bread for milk too... (Whether they're having fun is another question, the ones that are allowed to graze outside probably are, the ones that never see the light of day probably aren't).
- corresation 13y ago
  Do you think they are having fun now? That's a very existential question that doesn't have an easy answer. Is a somewhat brief existence worse than no existence at all? If we eradicate fruit flies (or the many species that live short, brutish existences), have we done them a favor? I am a huge fan of the Omnivore's Dilemma and recommend it wholeheartedly because while Pollan faces these serious questions, he doesn't simply resort to the easy answer.
  - NSMeta 13y ago
    > Is a somewhat brief existence worse than no existence at all? This would apply to local farms perhaps, but from what I read industrial livestock production is causing suffering to many animals to lower the costs. Disclaimer: I am not a vegan.
- jeltz 13y ago
  Why wouldn't they have fun? They get a comfortable life up until the horrible end. Most cattle is not kept inside huge industrial buildings like chickens or pigs.
  - Someone 13y ago
    Comfortable life: if it weren't made illegal, cows bred for meat would be locked in cages where they can barely move. After all, all energy spent on movement can't be spent on gaining weight. Also, cows bred for their meet are slaughtered at 7-8 months of age. If cared for, a cow could live for 20 years, but economics prevail. Cows held for their milk have it a bit better, as they get to live for 5-6 years. Also, things have improved. For example, the milking robot not only improved yield, but also allowed each cow to select the time it wanted to be milked, and does not require farmers to chase their cows towards their milking place two or three times a day. Not kept in buildings: That depends on the level of industrialization of the farms and on the quality of your grassland. For example, in the Netherlands, mowing grass mechanically and feeding it to your cattle which is kept inside year round is the way to go, if you look at this purely economically (cows destroy too much grass by trampling it and by dropping cow peas on it) Consequently, there is now talk of paying farmers to let their cows go out on the meadows. Not in huge buildings? Go to https://www.google.nl/search?q=cow+stable+design https://www.google.nl/search?q=cow+stable+design and click on 'Images'. Fewer cows per stable than we do with pigs or chicken, but not small stables, either.
iak8god 13y ago
We can worry about that when they figure out how to make milk in the lab. Industrial meat production is a pretty brutal affair. It's not quite clear what it might mean for something to be good or bad for a species, but I'd think that having a large population suffering constantly under shockingly inhumane conditions would fall on the bad side.
grey413 13y ago
I find it highly unlikely that vat meat would totally replace livestock. For starters, a large portion of the world doesn't have refrigeration or reliable transport infrastructure, let alone industrial labs. Even in developed areas, you have to take into account the large existing demand for pasture raised meat. Vat meat simply has externalities associated with it – civil infrastructure, educational overhead, perception issues, etc – that make it so that it can't compete with traditional livestock models in many areas. Realistically, vat meat competes with factory farming, and not a whole lot else. Which, don't get me wrong, is fantastic all on it's own.
warfangle 13y ago
I doubt the market for "real" meat will ever die completely.
evan_ 13y ago
The cow is already extinct in the wild. It's not an animal that gets along well outside of human care. An argument could be made that the kindest thing to do is let the species, twisted and distorted by humanity into a ghoulish parody of a once-mighty beast, regain its dignity in extinction. I have a feeling though that however easy faux-beef gets, there will always be people who won't eat it- just look at the "pink slime" controversy, or the anti-GMO movement.
Lockyy 13y ago
My prediction: There will always be a market for real meat and real leather. If/when the major sources of the two are "not-real" the producers of real meat and leather will be seen as a luxury, so the remaining cows bred to produce meat and leather will be cared for well to produce high quality outputs. So the population will drop but those that remain will be bred to produce luxury goods and so be kept in better conditions.

mtgx 13y ago

We don't need hundreds of millions of cows, do we? I think they contribute a lot to Earth's pollution, too.

geebee 13y ago
http://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2013/08/05/taste-testers-sample-325000-test-tube-hamburger-funded-by-googler/ http://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2013/08/05/taste-testers-sa... I've read that methane emissions from cattle contribute substantially to global warming and other pollution problems. According to the link above, this method could reduce methand emissions from cattle by 96%, and reduce the amount of land needed by 99%. I haven't followed the link to the study at Oxford and Amsterdam University (always a good idea if you start to get excited about general science coverage). I plan to do this later.

lttlrck 13y ago

Do you think they are having fun now? They are bred to be eaten, if we don't need them we'll stop breeding them.

Ives 13y ago
A lot of them are bread for milk too... (Whether they're having fun is another question, the ones that are allowed to graze outside probably are, the ones that never see the light of day probably aren't).
corresation 13y ago
Do you think they are having fun now? That's a very existential question that doesn't have an easy answer. Is a somewhat brief existence worse than no existence at all? If we eradicate fruit flies (or the many species that live short, brutish existences), have we done them a favor? I am a huge fan of the Omnivore's Dilemma and recommend it wholeheartedly because while Pollan faces these serious questions, he doesn't simply resort to the easy answer.
- NSMeta 13y ago
  > Is a somewhat brief existence worse than no existence at all? This would apply to local farms perhaps, but from what I read industrial livestock production is causing suffering to many animals to lower the costs. Disclaimer: I am not a vegan.
jeltz 13y ago
Why wouldn't they have fun? They get a comfortable life up until the horrible end. Most cattle is not kept inside huge industrial buildings like chickens or pigs.
- Someone 13y ago
  Comfortable life: if it weren't made illegal, cows bred for meat would be locked in cages where they can barely move. After all, all energy spent on movement can't be spent on gaining weight. Also, cows bred for their meet are slaughtered at 7-8 months of age. If cared for, a cow could live for 20 years, but economics prevail. Cows held for their milk have it a bit better, as they get to live for 5-6 years. Also, things have improved. For example, the milking robot not only improved yield, but also allowed each cow to select the time it wanted to be milked, and does not require farmers to chase their cows towards their milking place two or three times a day. Not kept in buildings: That depends on the level of industrialization of the farms and on the quality of your grassland. For example, in the Netherlands, mowing grass mechanically and feeding it to your cattle which is kept inside year round is the way to go, if you look at this purely economically (cows destroy too much grass by trampling it and by dropping cow peas on it) Consequently, there is now talk of paying farmers to let their cows go out on the meadows. Not in huge buildings? Go to https://www.google.nl/search?q=cow+stable+design https://www.google.nl/search?q=cow+stable+design and click on 'Images'. Fewer cows per stable than we do with pigs or chicken, but not small stables, either.

iak8god 13y ago

We can worry about that when they figure out how to make milk in the lab. Industrial meat production is a pretty brutal affair. It's not quite clear what it might mean for something to be good or bad for a species, but I'd think that having a large population suffering constantly under shockingly inhumane conditions would fall on the bad side.

grey413 13y ago

I find it highly unlikely that vat meat would totally replace livestock. For starters, a large portion of the world doesn't have refrigeration or reliable transport infrastructure, let alone industrial labs. Even in developed areas, you have to take into account the large existing demand for pasture raised meat. Vat meat simply has externalities associated with it – civil infrastructure, educational overhead, perception issues, etc – that make it so that it can't compete with traditional livestock models in many areas. Realistically, vat meat competes with factory farming, and not a whole lot else. Which, don't get me wrong, is fantastic all on it's own.

warfangle 13y ago

I doubt the market for "real" meat will ever die completely.

evan_ 13y ago

The cow is already extinct in the wild. It's not an animal that gets along well outside of human care. An argument could be made that the kindest thing to do is let the species, twisted and distorted by humanity into a ghoulish parody of a once-mighty beast, regain its dignity in extinction. I have a feeling though that however easy faux-beef gets, there will always be people who won't eat it- just look at the "pink slime" controversy, or the anti-GMO movement.

Lockyy 13y ago

My prediction: There will always be a market for real meat and real leather. If/when the major sources of the two are "not-real" the producers of real meat and leather will be seen as a luxury, so the remaining cows bred to produce meat and leather will be cared for well to produce high quality outputs. So the population will drop but those that remain will be bred to produce luxury goods and so be kept in better conditions.