I would've said "eat beans" but then we replace the corn fead cattle. So yeah, frogs legs, escargot and crickets, with a bit of sauce on 'em and Bob's your uncle!
On a very serious note, it is my opinion that grazing stock should graze as was intended.
However this then doesn't allow for the consumers who want all their "rights to a choice" with absolutely no RESPONSIBILITY to be satisfied as prices will be high and the shelves/freezers won't be full with as much of a choice.
People are the problem, as usual.
& on a not so serious note, if we were to resort to beans, damn the corn stuffed cattle wouldn't be able to compete with us on the methane issues!
PS. I don't judge, just state it as I see it (and back it up if need be, that is, if the logic doesn't get through without a diagram or dot to dot!)
Intended by whom? Cattle never evolved to graze the Amazon forest. They are not that efficient at turning plants into meat, but then we cannot eat all they can. Apparently feeding them on seaweed massively reduces their methane emissions, but why would farmers bother when grass is 'free'.
We have got used to very cheap food that we never see being produced. Relatively few people have to work all day to produce the food they need these days.
Business cares about profit regardless of the planetary cost. Consumers can go for more sustainable options, but they will generally be more expensive and for many that is not an option.
eat more beef, less emissions. i'm saving the planet one steak at a time
More methane, more destruction of natural habitats. Not sustainable at current consumption.
and there was a loud voice that said unto the shepherds, piss off this is cattle country :)
And then there was no more forest...
Eat frog legs and escargot instead, that should fix all the beefyissues!
Crickets r not bad with chili sos
Posted using Partiko Android
I would've said "eat beans" but then we replace the corn fead cattle. So yeah, frogs legs, escargot and crickets, with a bit of sauce on 'em and Bob's your uncle!
Never had frogs, but I have eaten snails some time ago. I'm mostly veggie, but have some fish. Gave up meat nearly 30 years ago and don't miss it.
On a very serious note, it is my opinion that grazing stock should graze as was intended.
However this then doesn't allow for the consumers who want all their "rights to a choice" with absolutely no RESPONSIBILITY to be satisfied as prices will be high and the shelves/freezers won't be full with as much of a choice.
People are the problem, as usual.
& on a not so serious note, if we were to resort to beans, damn the corn stuffed cattle wouldn't be able to compete with us on the methane issues!
PS. I don't judge, just state it as I see it (and back it up if need be, that is, if the logic doesn't get through without a diagram or dot to dot!)
Intended by whom? Cattle never evolved to graze the Amazon forest. They are not that efficient at turning plants into meat, but then we cannot eat all they can. Apparently feeding them on seaweed massively reduces their methane emissions, but why would farmers bother when grass is 'free'.
We have got used to very cheap food that we never see being produced. Relatively few people have to work all day to produce the food they need these days.
Business cares about profit regardless of the planetary cost. Consumers can go for more sustainable options, but they will generally be more expensive and for many that is not an option.
Cheap food has a price.
Oh and I can fart as well as anyone ;)