Environmentalists and Vegetarians

Are they mutually exclusive?

http://www.peta.org.uk/feat/UKvegkit/environment.asp

http://www.vsc.org/environment1.htm

http://www.vegsource.com/how_to_win.htm

I believe you cannot claim to be an environmentalist if you aren't a vegetarian.

What do you think?

 

and why do you have to be a vegetarian to be an enviromentalist?

 

Are they mutualy exclusive? No.

Your links show that vegetarianism is compatible with environmentalism.

On the other hand, totaly removing animal products from your life frequently leads to dependance on non-renewable products. Plastics replace leather and vitamin supliments (with their added transportation eco-costs) replace some animal based nutients. I suspect that veganism can be done in an environmentaly sound fashion, but it is for the truely committed.

One problem with linking environmentalism and vegetarianism is that vegetarians can be very absolute about their practice. In the Veg. forum, there is great outrage at fish eaters who call themselves vegetarian.

Environmental awareness is not absolute. It is a question of balance. Everything that we do has consiquences for the environment. (That's almost a definition of "ecology.") When faced with options, an environmentaly aware person will be aware of the different effects of the different options and make a choice, knowing that all of the options have environmental impact.

Would you say that a vegetarian who shops at Safeway was being an environmentalist?

Would you call a person who ate only organic local food (including meat) environmentaly challanged?

(By the way, organic farming can be done on corporate farms. Is there a specific term for non-corporate organic farming?)

 

Poor wording no...

Tell me, can someone with type I diabetes follow a vegetarian diet?

 

I think that the 2 go hand in hand, but aren't mutually exclusive. I think a lot of vegetarians are enviromentalists, and vice versa. However, I have met vegetarians that didn't really care about the enviroment. At least not in any noticeable fashion, or more than anyone else. I myself am trying to get back into a vegetarian lifestyle (I was for a while, and gave it up). When I was a vegetarian before, I wasn't an enviromentalists. I am now an enviromentalists, and not a vegetarian (well, I haven't eaten meat today, and don't plan on doing so anymore, but one day without meat isn't exactly qualifying a person to be a vegetarian). I think they are both lifestyle choices, that can be made separately, or mutually. I don't think vegetarianism is a preresiquit to enviromentalism.

 

I whole heartedly disagree


I don't claim to be an environmentalist, though I do have a great deal of respect for the environment.

My brother on the other hand has a phd in environmental engineering. He happens to eat meat. He also was the one who drafted the plan to clean up the Hudson River in NY. He's on the board of Directors for an up and coming non-profit environmental group that is growing and making a difference in ways that are incredible with many projects around the country. One of them is a lawsuit against the National Park System for their Park Management plan for the Grand Canyon. He helped develop hydrogen technology for cars during the early stages of research. I could go on and on.

I'm aware of the resources it takes (water specifically) to raise cattle, chicken, etc. Its not a good thing, but you pick and choose in life where you make a difference.

If you're going to limit the 'criteria' to being an environmentalist such that those who are not vegetarians are excluded, then go all the way with it.

Do you heat your home with fossil fuels or even a wood stove?
Do you drive a car?
Do you buy any product in the world that consists of plastic? How about the buttons on your hemp shirt?
Are the vegetables you consume purely organic, harvested by hand and grown without irrigation on soil that was tilled by hand
Do you only eat these vegetables raw?
Are the soles of your shoes made out of rubber? How about the tires on your bike?
Is the computer you are making this thread on made from recycled bat guana and operated by peddles?
Is the water that you drink collected from a cool mountain stream in a wooden bowl?
Do you drink juice or any other beverage for that matter that comes in a , plastic jug, can or glass bottle and is processed at a plant?
Is the septic system of your home a 'living system' where waste is broken down and clean water generated only through natural processes?


Obviously some of these examples are extreme, but one cannot argue that all of them have a negative impact on the environment.

To say that someone like my brother, considering all that he's done, the 12 years of college study and the passion he goes about correcting the wrongs that others do in this world through enourmous remidation projects and the educating he offers to others through his non-profit; is less of an environmentalist than some tofu eating PETA ativist stumping outside the local Kentucky Fried Chicken (which ironically they were doing just up the road from me today) because he happens to eat meat, is a bit retarded if you ask me.

Before you counter arguement my disagreement with you, mind that I am not attacking you, just your opinion on the matter. I repect you and your choices, I just disagree with such a strong and exclusive statement.

Think about the statement. "You cannot claim to be an environmentalist if you are not a vegetarian"

That's a strong statement isn't it? What makes it so strong is that its an exclusive statement, its black or white, no gray area. Life doesn't work like that. There are very few things that are simply black or white. There's a lot of grey area, which all of us, no matter how committed we are to the earth we live in everyday with our choices and sacrifices, have a negative impact on in some way.

I have tremendous repect for those who are vegetarians and part of the reason they choose to be is for philosophical reasons such as it being better for the environment and prevents inhumane treatment of animals. Its a great thing. However, there are people out there who do not make such a sacrifice in their everday life that care and help our planet just as much.

The meat eater obviously isn't an Environmentalist and Vegetarian like this forums' namesake, but they can be an Environmentalist

 

One of the faulty underlying assumptions in how meat in and of itself is "bad" for the environment is the idea that all meat is "produced."

For example, what can be said about wild game meats? Is it detrimental to the environment when people eat deer or wild turkeys?

Hence, meat production (notably, factory farming) is harmful to the environment - not meat in and of itself.

 

Not just diabetes!

People with certain food allergies and intolerances are unable to eat a vegetarian diet without having deleterious health effects.

Let's say for example, a person with gluten intolerance, a high sensitivity to lectins in legumes, and insulin resistance...

 

I have nut allergies myself so vegetarians preaching to me that nuts are high in protein and an alternative to meat does no good. For me eating meat is a healthier choice than eating nuts and that's a fact. My bro is type I diabetes and he's an environmentalist. He looked into a greener diet but with his diabetes he can't.


On a separate note, vegetarians that substitute PCB for leather are fooling themselves if they think they've made a greener choice.

 

I agree with Domesticated when he says that it's the meat production that is harmful to the environment, and not the eating of the meat.

Im vegan as far as diet and I am concerned about the environment. But I would see it more un-environmentally friendly if I was buying soft drink bottles every day than if I was buying steak.

 

Here is where I agree with Annie's opinion:

Environment has a lot to do with the creatures that live in it. And if you care about the environment you should care about those things that live in the environment as well. And with THAT, why would you eat something you desperately care about?

I don't know...it's like to me an animal activist, who isn't veggie doesn't make much sense.... and to me environment goes hand in hand with that.

Environment is a BROAD topic.

To me, your environment isn't only the earth around you, and concerns with pollution and plant life, but the animals as well, and to me that definitely includes "livestock" animals.

But....that's coming from a vegan's perspective, so maybe I'm just biased.

 

I couldn't say more or less.... to me they are fairly equal in un-enviromentally friendly terms...

However, I see what you're saying.

To me, it still seems pretty hand in hand---
If someone who was a self-proclaimed environmentalist chowed down on a steak, it wouldn't make them any less of an environmentalist, but it wouldn't make a lot of sense to me...
just as if someone who cared deeply about the animals and was veggie, just went and threw a bunch of trash on the side of the road, wouldn't make sense to me either and here's why:

Animals need the earth to survive [and so do we] and the environment often relies on animals as well, to stay alive.

The transportation of plant seeds are often carried through the fur of animals and such, which helps the environment.... animal dung can act as good fertilizer for plants and grasses as well.... both rely on each other very much, which is why I DO see them going hand in hand. If a vegetarian, still decides to litter and religiously pollute the air, then that's not very animal friendly either, considering that earth damage kills off animals as well. Tons of fish die every year because of water pollution. Many animals are endangered because the earth is being destroyed.... so yeah. To me, I don't see how you can't see the two being closely knit with each other.

But that's just me.

 

Whether your a vegetarian has nothing to do with environmentalism. Taking that extra time to see where your meat comes from maybe. Im not a massive environmentalist but I try to do a bit I recycle, only drive very occasionally and check to see where my food comes from, the obvious things. But I would never think of not eating meat. After all taking the environment as a whole, meat eating is a key part of ecology. This whole eating meat is cruel, is a very human thing, I dont see meat eating as any more cruel than eating vegetables, nor do many species on this planet.

 

Other species hunt for their food.

We mass produce, and WASTE tons everyday.

 

While I agree that eating and participation in the factory farmed meat industry are environmentally unfriendly, I wholly disagree that generally eating meat excludes one from being an environmentalist. My wife and I have spent the better part of our adult life trying to leave to smallest footprint on the earth we could through self-sufficient living.

As dedicated vegans for years we realized we were relying on non-renewable, man made products to substitute for animal products, or relying on someone else to provide us the vegan foods we needed for a balanced diet. One thing I think vegan environmentalists tend to overlook is all that is involved in getting the food to their table. Getting that pack of tofu to you involves growers, transportation, manufacturing, packaging, more transportation, and distribution. With all this comes executive salaries, network costs, local and federal taxes, triplicate copies of invoices and purchase orders, marketing budgets etc., etc.

In my opinion the moose I killed with one bullet and processed by hand has less environmental impact that anything store bought. I love animals and have great respect for them, even more so that through their death I bring life to my family.

 

We only waste meat? We never waste anything vegetable? Again I dont see how wastage has anything to do with eating meat. Anything can be wasted, its true that farming has become somewhat more mechanical but that applies to arable and pastural. Cutting down rainforests for farming again arable and pastural. Im not pretending that we stalk and hunt our prey in the time honoured way (though I did try it once, the feeling of self sufficiency is very satisfying) but I think we've grown beyond the point where thats feasable.

You seem to take a lot of our environmental faults and blame it on pastural farming. We produce far too much of most types of food in the west (particularly in the EU thanks to the CAP) and then we destroy the excess because poor countries can't afford to buy it. At the same time the Saharan sahel has invaded previously fertile land and the Amazon is disappearing. These are nothing to do with whats being farmed its to do with how we're farming.

 

Animal rights activism is NOT synonymous with environmentalism, there are many overlaps that go hand in hand but there are key differences as well. ARA is first and foremost concerned with ethics whereas environmentalists are primarily concerned with ecological balance, this also overlaps with ARA’s concerns over ethics.

You can care about animals and the ecology and still consume meat. What about aboriginal ppl who sing eulogies to the animal they hunted, traditional hunters who feel a close link to the animals are often your most ardent defenders for conservation.

The problem with meat production today is that it’s intensive, and that’s cos of the need for a feasible way to feed a ridiculously large human population. With over 6 billion ppl and 1 billion heads of cattle diverting resources from other species and affecting bio-diversity environmentalists have reasons to be vegetarians but also have valid concerns about human pop. And that has more to do with ecological balance than just ethics.

The Earth does possess a natural ability to replenish itself and sustain a relatively small meat eating pop., just look at any other large omnivorous and carnivorous species like bears and wolves, humans are no different, we’re just overpopulated.

If the human pop. wasn’t so large then meat and seafood production can be done on a scale that’s more environmentally sound and ethical. With fewer ppl there would be fewer heads of cattle, and with that we can afford to let them out free on pasture instead caged, or just hunt, and there would be less deforestation etc – at least on a level where the Earth can recover from.

So the problem is not just consumption but also population. To care about the ecology is to care about the Earth’s carrying capacity. If ur gonna push vegetarian diets than tis only fair you also push for sustainable family sizes cos both affect carrying capacity.
Someone told me ‘oh we don’t need to slow down pop. growth, we just need to eat lower on the food chain’.
F*ck that, if I’m sacrificing by going vegetarian, and it is a sacrifice, I’m not gonna do it so that some woman elsewhere can have 8 kids.

I wish the pop. issue was not so overlooked cos not everyone can go vegetarian. I tried it, was mostly vegan for a year and a half about 10 years ago, was even making my own nut milks, HAH little did I know I was allergic to nuts… I never did feel right.

And that’s what gets me about some of the righteous attitudes here… a vegetarian diet CANNOT be taken lightly, indeed it can make one very sick if not monitored. There must be some medical supervision. Even then not everyone can or will go vegetarian so preach all you want on vegetarianism but plz note you will meet some strong resistance so might as well as focus also on population size. Human pop. if it continues its upward trend, will eventually wipe out any benefit of a vegetarian diet to the environment anyhow.

 

Farming them vegi's has done far more damage to rivers, land and air quality then any cow has. Farms deplete soils, kill animal wildlife, create soil errosion (spelled wrong likely) this is the damages from normal production farming done without thought. The same goes for the production of meat. Meat can be renewable too if you allow the animal to breed first, the same as a plant, if it is cut down before it seeds and the seeds are not harvested with the intent to rplant then you cant renwew it either. I would say any group can be enviromental freindly if you are responsible with your actions.

 

(About the first post) These arguments make me sad and often cause environmentalists to lose credibility.

Vegetarianism is a MORAL issue, not an environmental one.

Before you hippify me, know that I don't support the meat industry and or its methods which are environmentally unsustainable, which is why i try to eat kangaroo, a wild and overpopulated species here.

Again, it saddens me that so many environmentalists carry the same annoying characteristics....why does environmentalism have to be about subculture and morality?