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.

Attenborough disagreed with you

Go vegetarian to save wildlife and the planet, Sir David Attenborough urges | The Independent | The Independent https://share.google/hyTfL29RFbfb3SsPo

Please reread my og post, it mentions methane.

there is a bigger picture at stake than just what is most efficient.

there are so many factors to consider.

we are trying to cheat nature, I’m saying (and many others) that we must work with nature to protect the environment, biodiversity, our soils etc.

You’ve swallowed someone else’s cool aid. Farmers are not the problem. The problem is big lobbying groups including big ag and some of the names I gave above that produce misinformation, which , because I assume you think they have your back/speak from your position in society, smaller farmers repeat because it validates what you do and how you feel, and maintains the moral and economic and cultural logic of your livelihood.

I don’t even know where to start with the wildfires. So don’t bother with trees cos if they might burn they’ll release more carbon and yet grassland somehow stores more carbon than woodland (which also has -far more complicated root system) so grassland is a better carbon store? It makes no sense…

Then if your posts are about nature, why are you saying cattle is good for climate?

climate needs nature, nature needs climate. You can’t have a healthy natural environment if you have a severely degraded climate. Cattle farming plays a huge role in degrading climate, because of the emissions in its production.

decide which point you are arguing.

And my final point, please read this and see how the arguments you are making align with those from major ag and food industries which are creating the narratives that you are reposting here. Because. They. Have. Money. To. Lose. In. The. System.

influencemap.org/report/The-European-Meat-and-Dairy-Sector-s-Climate-Policy-Engagement-28096

I've lived in countryside all my life. Farmers rarely rotate arable and livestock land but more often specialise in one or the other - they tend to stick to to the type of farming that they have the equipment for. Fields are usually used for either arable or livestock year after year, with fertiliser and/or muck spread on them. Quite often farmers dont even rotate the type of arable crop but just allow the soil to degrade.

We absolutely should be working with nature, not against it and applaud you if you are practising that - it makes you a minority in farming. But there's a lot of climate research, some of which have already been linked by others on this thread, show that plant based diet is more climate friendly. Not to mention the cruelty that goes with so much modern farming. I wouldn't cage, gas and then 'humanely' kill my dog for Sunday lunch, nor would I a lamb, a pig or a cow.

You are all too stuck in your bubbles to think outside of it, spouting what you’ve heard, completely dismissing anything different from your worldview.

pretty much no one is engaging with my actual points, thank you to those that have.

everyone who thinks they are more educated, yet have likely never set foot on a farm.

so happy to talk down to farmers as usual instead of listening. Complaining about the horrible uk farmers while eating fruit shipped across seas 👍

That is my point, most farmers do not rotate arable land and live stock grazing, but they need to.

those links only talk about certain cherry picked areas and do not refute the points I am making.

are you sure they don’t rotate? Barley/wheat/oats look very similar.

You have to register to download.

who do you think has more power and influence in the world? Farmers or huge fossil fuel corporations. Airlines companies? The transportation and fashion sectors?

farmers are independent small businesses, they have no control and no influence. More and more are seeing the damage of farming without livestock rotation, it’s coming from the ground up.

please feel free to dispute my points one by one.

And what do big Agriculture want? Huge corporation farms, mono crops, over reliance on sprays and fertiliser.

big ag owns the seed, spray and often controls the fertilisers too. Do you really think they are pro small farmers using their own circular methods and returning to traditional methods in a more sustainable way?

we have to farm something and regenerative farming is a part of helping the climate.

Many of your points are fair, but don't address the fact that on average, people globally or in the UK, are not eating grass fed beef raised on the nearby farm. If you are simply constraining your argument to the UK, fine, but what solution are you actually proposing and how is it going to help global climate change?

I don't think this is fair. You're asking people to take the word of a farmer on Mumsnet over scientists who have spent years and years researching this subject and then getting annoyed that people don't agree with you.

We have been engaging with your posts and you've said a number of things that just aren't true e.g. grazed land is just as good at storing carbon and providing biodiversity as woodland, that livestock farmers can just let cows graze without supplementing with feed, that grazing animals don't negatively effect land etc.

These are all the classic ways that the impact of livestock on the environment is underestimated. And we haven't even mentioned other issues e.g. antibiotics, the pollution caused by run off from poultry / pig farms etc.

the vast vast majority of uk cattle are grass fed.

each country should farm food in a way that protects and preserves the environment as much as possible.

I propose the uk leads by example and focuses on soil conservation and wildlife diversity with a mixture of regenerative farming and continue with small pockets of rewinding and un harvested margins.

if we prioritise uk grown food, this will drastically lower air-miles too.

we cannot control what other countries do unfortunately.

We're mostly not engaging with your "points" because they're a load of incoherent nonsense, and, when challenged to back one up, you usually claim that that's not what you were talking about at all.

It's difficult to respect farmers' arguments when they're a load of rambling science denial and half truths, and I know quite a few like this who, although otherwise intelligent, are taking care not to educate themselves on animal agriculture and climate change- because they don't want to know. Far more comforting to regurgitate a load of truisms about eating local that wouldn't stand up to scrutiny.

Not all farmers. Guy Singh- Watson and Isabella Tree are a couple worth listening to, for starters.

As a farmer, you should know that very very few cattle in the UK are 100% grass fed. Beef cattle are usually "finished" on supplementary food (grains and soya mostly), and of course working dairy cows need supplementary feeding with the enormous strain placed on their bodies of producing those unnaturally high volumes of milk.

You knew that, right?

This sounds like the issue is farming method rather than individual diet choices. Brits are eating a hell of a lot of meat overall, but that meat isn’t coming from farms which use rotational grazing. You’re not even doing rotational grazing despite advocating for it here.

I never said it was just as good, but it is still a fantastic carbon store and is considered more stable.

AND you can get food from it, you cannot from woodland

regenerative farming is a growing movement, not just by me

You’re very confused.

Hmmm....yes and no.

If all the meat that British people ate was 100% grass fed and regenerative, they'd be eating a hell of a lot less unless they were extremely rich.

The longhorns at Knepp are a good example of truly regenerative beef, and their meat is very much in demand- I dread to think how much it costs.

Wow, I guess it’s hard to type with my 6 fingers from being an inbred uneducated farmer. My apologies. 🙃

isabella tree is similarly aligned to my opinion. She advocated for the importance of cattle on her rewinding estate. Her book is fascinating.

rewilding is great, but you also have to balance it with feeding large populations.

Grass fed is different from rewilded cattle. But it’s still how the majority of cattle are fed in the uk.

many people buy foreign beef. This is where the problem lies, cost. Do we want to have cheap food, or do we want good quality food grown locally with fair practices. This is why subsidies were originally introduced, but mostly gone now.

Little tip here:

If you don't want to be thought of as stupid, don't say stupid things.

Hth.

Not doing it because of how much money we would loose. We cannot farm for free and meat farming is even less economically feasible than crops.

Where did the subsidies go ? What caused them to go ?

So that should be your focus, rather than antagonising people by saying reducing meat consumption causes climate issues. You’ve created a debate which is a side show to the actual issue / root cause of the issue. Having fewer vegetarians won’t solve this.