Why to become vegetarian?

not for grazing animals

 

"Some proponents of grass-fed beef argue that cattle could be raised on “marginal” lands – lands that cannot be used for growing crops but can be used for growing grasses – so that the cows are not taking land away from human food production. Again, this is an infeasible solution. If the land is marginal, it will not be the high quality pasture that can support a cow on a mere 2.5 acres. We are likely looking at the high end of the acreage estimate, and would require 35 acres per cow, requiring approximately 3.5 billion acres of marginal land on which to raise 94.5 million grass-fed cows. This is 5.5 million square miles, more than the entire area of the United States."

"Grass-fed cattle must eat crops when grass is unavailable in the winter or during droughts. The crops will consist of hay and grasses, but will still take land away from the production of crops that could be fed to people directly."

http://animalrights.about.com/od/animalsusedforfood/a/WrongGrassFedBeef.htm

 

eggsprog,and what happens in the slaughterhouses your jam is made?
what about the cruel way they're treated?At least,the animals killed for ''my crops'' live like they should,free,in the nature.
''they die. painfully.''
Trust me,animals used for food feel much more pain than those.

 

my jam? i don't understand what you mean.

 

hmmm, interesting. i wonder what the stats would be like for rabbits. i've heard that they're a very inexpensive food to raise because they eat very little and just need a small area to graze. although i don't think that i could ever eat rabbit after having them as pets.


edit: this article disagrees (http://theconversation.edu.au/order...l-theres-more-animal-blood-on-your-hands-4659):

so does this study (http://www.morehouse.edu/facstaff/nnobis/papers/Davis-LeastHarm.htm):

 

So you think accidental death over mechanical intentional death is a whole lot better?

 

Both of your links are bunk.

 

no? i think less death is better.

 

why?

 

because they don't work.


edit: Nevermind, working now.

 

fixed, thanks

 

Nice in theory. Terrible in practice.

 

care to elaborate?

 

So here is an academic response to your argument, eggsprog. Davis argues that meat kills less animals per acre, which may be true, but the fact is that it is much more efficient per acre to grow crops than to graze livestock. Besides the fact that it is cheaper to use factory farms to raise animals than to graze them, and so most animals go through a much more torturous life than in Charlotte's Web.

Link: http://www.veganoutreach.org/enewsletter/matheny.html

 

Less veg more factory farming more mechanical slaughter.

 

interesting, i'm still not sure who i really believe on this issue, lots of people on both sides who all throw out different numbers. i haven't really looked into it in depth enough to form an opinion yet.

 

.

 

Factory farming and the environment:

http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/environment/

 

oops ,sorry I mean ham.

 

i don't eat meat myself, but if i did, there are ways to procure meat that don't involve slaughterhouses and involve very minimal amounts of suffering to the animal.