Wayne, You nailed it. I doubt if anyone has, but, I suspect that there would just be different environmental problems not a reduction. It is inevitable that every action has a reaction.
(also, the previous post was not a response to your email, I just posted on your thread!) M On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> wrote: > Ecolog: > > What would the actual effect on species diversity of universal > vegetarianism? Has anyone done the math? > > WT > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "James J. Roper" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 11:58 AM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Are ecologists the problem? > > >> A well-known statistic is that there are as many domestic animals bred >> for food for people as there are people in the world, or more. If we >> consider a 10% conversion of food to mass of the consumer, the logic is >> undeniable that if all ate lower on the food chain, we could use less >> land to do it with. Also, we could do it with less energy. Another >> detail is that more land is used to grow food for those animals than to >> grow food for people. Just switching the land to grow food for people >> instead of animals would mean that we could do this on much less land. >> Habitat loss is one of the driving forces of extinctions world wide. >> But also, pollution from high efficiency animal production is another >> huge issue (pigs and chickens). Not to mention land degradation due to >> grazing. >> >> Also well known - vegetarian diets can provide all the nutrients that >> normal people need. >> >> QED - a vegetarian diet would be better for the planet (and we would >> have much smaller problems with obesity!). >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jim >> >> malcolm McCallum wrote on 09-Sep-09 0:50: >>> >>> I tend to believe that any absolute answer that is declared an end all >>> answer >>> is probably not the answer. For example, I'm not convinced that everyone >>> jumping into a vegetarian diet is going to suddenly or even slowly >>> save the world. >>> Especially, considering that some of these stats are based on unrealistic >>> estimates. >>> >>> For example, suggesting that x acres of corn would feed x number of cows >>> and >>> that would feed x number of people whereas the x acres of corn would feed >>> way >>> more people is flawed. Humans cannot survive on a corn diet. Even if >>> we expanded >>> this to grains and soybeans, humans cannot survive on a corn-soybean >>> diet. >>> Why? because vegetables in general are low in two or three essential >>> amino acids >>> that humans must get in their diet. those amino acids are produced by >>> animals >>> and so you must ultimately get them from animals or artificially >>> produced products. >>> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.91/2363 - Release Date: 09/11/09 > 09:15:00 > -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Managing Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology Texas A&M University-Texarkana Fall Teaching Schedule: Vertebrate Biology - TR 10-11:40; General Ecology - MW 1-2:40pm; Forensic Science - W 6-9:40pm Office Hourse- TBA 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, and pollution. 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction MAY help restore populations. 2022: Soylent Green is People! Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
