Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sounds like the OP wants us all to go vegan. What would be the results of everyone in the U.S. going vegan, lets look at some simple facts: According to the USDA there are 98.4 million head of cattle in the U.S. out of those 9.3 million produce dairy milk and 30.5 million are beef cattle. According to the USDA in 2012 there were 6.6 million cattle slaughtered in the U.S.
So out of the 1.5 billion cattle on the planet, the U.S. accounts for a little more than 5%. So if we all in the U.S. decided to go vegan and never raise or kill another animal, it wouldn't make a dent in the results of the OP's opening video.
Sounds like the OP wants us all to go vegan. What would be the results of everyone in the U.S. going vegan, lets look at some simple facts: According to the USDA there are 98.4 million head of cattle in the U.S. out of those 9.3 million produce dairy milk and 30.5 million are beef cattle. According to the USDA in 2012 there were 6.6 million cattle slaughtered in the U.S.
So out of the 1.5 billion cattle on the planet, the U.S. accounts for a little more than 5%. So if we all in the U.S. decided to go vegan and never raise or kill another animal, it wouldn't make a dent in the results of the OP's opening video.
Good point.
But more importantly, we could only all go vegan by relying more heavily on petroleum. It's been said that American Agriculture is the process of turning petroleum into food. Even if we went back to mules and plowboys, you still gotta transport the stuff to the consumers, and that means the fresh stuff comes all the way from South America for six months of the year.
At any given time, there is X amount of fresh and drinkable water on this planet. We are not talking about ocean water.
This X amount is limited and if they are consumed by cattle, there is less left for human consumption.
Go back to post #9: the population of only LA & NYC alone utilize more than 5x the water than the entire US cattle herd. each year.
Secondly, reverse osmosis turns sea water to fresh water at competitive prices. Israel does it on an industrial scale and now has excess water to sell to the rest of the desert countries around them. California could easily be doing it too, except state "green laws" make it economically unfeasible.
The most efficient source of protein for people food is soybean Tofu. The problem is most prefer a rare steak to a lump of grilled Tofu.
.
For the TreeHuggers among us worried about use of hormones in producing meat: a pound of tofu has over 16,000,000 times (!!) the "growth hormone" (really estrogen) in it than a pound of commercially produced beef. The facts about hormones and beef | Cattle Network
It is apparent the OP started with the assumption that eating beef, and probably all animal based protein, is bad for you and the environment. That is a belief and, only at best, a provable fact.
While I think there are ways of improving our animal protein supply I do not advocate eliminating it at all. I have noted that despite the availability of beef from somewhere in the supermarket there is a slow return of cattle farming in the Northeast. This includes farming bison as well as hardy breeds of beef. This meat is expensive also very tasty.
Maybe our Agricultural policy could do more to encourage marginal Western Dry land ranches to switch from beef cattle to Bison and Elk (see Ted Turner's ranches in New Mexico) as well as pay private rates for government owned rangeland. That policy could also encourage Midwestern family farmers to switch from commodities to specialty beef and bison. One advantage of cattle farming in the East is there is generally plenty of water available.
The most efficient source of protein for people food is soybean Tofu. The problem is most prefer a rare steak to a lump of grilled Tofu.
We could provide more efficient meat by buying up all the marginal cattle ranches in Montana and free ranging Bison. Less ecological damage and better tasting burgers.
"We" don't need an army of bureaucrats (pandering to the fears of overgrown children seeking helicopter parents) to decide anything for the rest of us: let the workings of human interaction -- also called a free market-- sort things out.
It is apparent the OP started with the assumption that eating beef, and probably all animal based protein, is bad for you and the environment. That is a belief and, only at best, a provable fact.
While I think there are ways of improving our animal protein supply I do not advocate eliminating it at all. I have noted that despite the availability of beef from somewhere in the supermarket there is a slow return of cattle farming in the Northeast. This includes farming bison as well as hardy breeds of beef. This meat is expensive also very tasty.
Maybe our Agricultural policy could do more to encourage marginal Western Dry land ranches to switch from beef cattle to Bison and Elk (see Ted Turner's ranches in New Mexico) as well as pay private rates for government owned rangeland. That policy could also encourage Midwestern family farmers to switch from commodities to specialty beef and bison. One advantage of cattle farming in the East is there is generally plenty of water available.
There's plenty of evidence in the medical literature that diets based on higher animal protein intake have measurably improved outcomes on blood sugar levels, cholesterol levels, heart attack rates, etc etc than diets based on higher carb intakes. --The OP may have a belief, but it's not supported by the scientific evidence.
Raising buffalo is pretty difficult in the traditional ranch/farm setting. They are not docile like domesticated cattle. They require much heavier, durable, expensive fencing to keep them contained and are difficult to round up to get 'em into the trucks. They do require less custodial care in drought or blizzard, or with calving, but that usually doesn't offset the other drawbacks.
In regards taste: how they are fed influences that much more than differences in genetics from cattle. Cattle & bison can, after all, interbreed and produce viable offspring-- that meets the definition of a single species in many circles. Don't confuse the drier, less marbled meat from a grass-fed bison from the heavily marbled meat from a corn-fed feedlot steer. Raise them together and they'd taste the same.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
