AIBU to think most people don’t realise reducing meat will not save the planet and may in fact cause more climate issues.

[TreeLoverr]

I’m a farmer, but before you dismiss this as bias, I don’t have any livestock so do not sell meat.

We own a purely arable based farm and pretty much exclusively grow grain and cereals.

My family had beef cattle on the farm , but they’re sold the heard years before I was born due to lack of profits.

The reason why I say this is due to a few reasons. The soils on our farm are suffering. Especially due to lack of organic content. The soil must be replaced with actual organic matter (like in a garden, it erodes over time and you have to put compost on)

When most farms operated by rotating grazing animals this happens naturally. The grass putting roots down also stops soil erosion, and the dung from the animals too. There are other things that we are just beginning to understand like the important impact of hooves trampling and the delicate micro biome that the cows eating and pooping replenishes.

Just putting dung onto the fields is not enough. Firstly the nutritional balance gets off kilter very quickly (in a way that doesn’t really happen with livestock rotation) and secondly it is difficult to get hold of when you don’t have your own animals.

The alternative to this is fertiliser. Fertilisers are made using fossil fuels. This is far worse for the environment than animals on grassland.

Many farmland is not suitable for cropping. Too hilly/steep, rocky etc. but it is suitable for raising animals, turning otherwise wasted land into human food.

When we have a bad harvest, it often means the crops are not suitable for human consumption. This is then sold for animal feed, turning this into food further down the line as we can then eat the animals. This crop would otherwise have to be destroyed or just left in the field.

But what about greenhouse gases you might be wondering? Animals are PART of the natural cycle. They are not the same as greenhouse gasses released during fossil fuels being burned. Greenhouse gasses are trapped in the soil and plants that they eat, they release and the plants absorb again. plants literally live off carbon dioxide and methane.

How we farm can absolutely negatively affect climate change, but grass fed British beef and lamb is actually important to our ecology and an important food source in order to maximise our environment without destroying it.

I'm sorry, but your OP is absolute misinformed rubbish.

There are so many studies out there that show eating a predominately vegetarian diet results in significantly lower carbon emissions. Fundamentally adding another step in the chain of growing food to feed animals and then feeding humans results in significantly higher carbon emissions, requires significantly more water and leads to habitat loss and destruction. Even for grass-fed cattle.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/20/vegan-diet-cuts-environmental-damage-climate-heating-emissions-study

And they say vegans are the preachy ones 🫠

Not quite.
The researcher actually says "My speculation is there may be lipid components present in meat that some people need" Note the words 'speculation' and 'may be'.
The researcher goes on to speculate that vegetarians 'may be' (again!) able to make the lipid components themselves, hence some people find it easier to not crave meat than others.
Its an interesting study, but you have misrepresented it as proving what you claim.

https://vegsoc.org/what-we-do/policy-work/future-farming/

You don’t understand what climate change is really.
Not much point continuing this thread if you think climate is isolated to regions

I mean, this is patent nonsense as well.

Don't tell me, you think wind farms and EV's are harmful too, don't you.

The farmer watching it unfold is wrong?

carbon emissions are not the only issue with the climate.

you are viewing things to simplistically.

it’s not all about what is the most efficient from a to b. It’s about the whole picture and process.

if you are correct can you answer these questions?
-what happens to the crops that are deemed too poor quality for human consumption (I’m not talking wonky carrots, I’m talking grain that is sprouting due to the weather, it cannot be made into bread, but livestock can eat it)

-what habitat loss is more severe? A field of wheat, or a diverse meadow of grass for sheep or cattle?

-what about the places unsuitable for crops too steep, too rocky etc.

-what about the issues with soil depletion I posted about, what is the solution to this?

OP I'd be interested to know if you've read Regenesis by George Monbiot. I'm not a vegan but his arguments seemed very well researched and very compelling. The environmental damage done by livestock farming appears to be not only massive but wildly underestimated (e.g. in polluting our rivers).

Lots of people say things like "well the land isn't good enough to grow crops so why not put sheep on there". When actually what we should be saying is "the land isn't good enough to grow crops so we need to be planting trees".

you’re welcome for the information

This is a really interesting thread OP and thanks for your answers to my questions. I am a meat eater occasionally and have worked on farms in the past so I'm not anti your case.

However, I think the biggest factor driving the turn away from meat is not climate change but animal welfare.

How animals are kept, bred, fed, raised, transported and killed is something people, not unreasonably, have issue with. Every day on the motorway I see hens being crated one on top of the other. We hear about animals traveling long distance for slaughter and see films of cruelty at abattoirs.

Also the vehement support of trail hunting (and its multiple ways around the law) and stag hunting from the agricultural community is bloody hard to bear.

This is where the work needs to be done if the farming industry wants to win customers for meat.

I haven’t but I’ll look into it.

because firstly we have people to feed, who can’t eat trees, secondly why trees when grassland is an excellent carbon store and vast amounts of the uk was grasslands with massive grazing ruminants. Grasslands are amazing for wildlife too.

Just because you are a farmer doesn't mean you know what you are talking about when it comes to global climate change. You very clearly do not.

I think I'll trust the climate experts, who almost completely uniformly have shown that meat production is one of the most harmful things we do for the environment, both in terms of climate change and damage to local environments.

One farmer saying "oh, but having sheep on my land is good" is not evidence of anything.

Definitely animal welfare in my opinion is the only argument for veganism, but I personally believe we are a part of nature and not above it, and therefore are a part of the cycle of life and death. However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do our best to promote welfare as a priority.

the uk is absolutely one of the top counties globally for animal welfare, although there’s outliers and room for improvement in every sector. Unfortunately many consumers either don’t want or can’t afford to pay for it and get their food from abroad where we cannot be sure of their standards.

I don’t really get involved in hunting, it’s not really big where we are. Deer can cause issues though as there are no predators other than humans.

Please answer my questions

Do you genuinely believe this? Because a blanket approach is exactly what is needed, detailed in any number of journals and scientists reports to governments and international bodies. What makes you think your credentials are superior?

Literally my thought as well.

JBS meat scrambling to tell people their product isn’t killing the planet.

Don't tell me, you think wind farms and EV's are harmful too, don't you.

Yup.
All the wind turbine blades go for landfill because they aren't biodegradable and no-one has found a way to repurpose them yet.

EVs weight a ton and create road damage. You think potholes are a problem? - it would be worse with EVs. That's assuming they actually get driven and don't catch fire while being charged 🙄

There’s a difference between grassland for wildlife and grassland for grazing cattle - one is far far more nature rich than the other and it’s not the one that cows are fed on….

and grass being the same value carbon sink as equivalent tree acreage? Please explain to me how you’ve figured that out! 🤣🤣

How can we apply a blanket approach to farming when the world has such vast differences in environments?

can you refute any of my points?

The biggest load of climate emissions come from billionaires in their private jets and building works. I’ll enjoy my steak thanks

This may help answer some of your questions.

www.wri.org/insights/6-pressing-questions-about-beef-and-climate-change-answered

Yeah I'm sure growing mono-crops and having herds of cows compacting the soil is great for the environment. Cows and sheep do loads of damage to trees, too.

Absolutely agree.

I live on Exmoor though and the hunting of deer with dogs there is an inhumane disgrace. It's just pure sport for the riders. There has to be a better way.

Grassland for cattle is still wonderful for wildlife and if left for multiple years then often very diverse and full of wildlife.

I didn’t say they were the same, however grasslands are actually considered more secure and resilient. 90% of carbon is stored underground in grassland making it more resilient to forest fires etc.