> Did you think about fruit trees?
> Including chestnut, hazel, walnut?
> Or vegetable cultures, they give a very big harvest on small space.
All of these are little different. If they are "farmed" then humans
must prevent other animals from taking the majority of the crop. Even
now rodents and birds steal large percentages of crops on many
countries. In advanced countries rats are controlled by poison. I well
remember the excitement we kids had when emptying the corn bins on our
farm, and watching hordes of rats and mice fleeing in every direction,
until my Dad hired a professional "pest removal" service to spread
poison bait every few months. Even then there were always a few too
smart to eat the bait. In my garden now I lose much of my vegetable
crop to crows and rats, in the middle of a city. I had a snake living
there a few years that kept the rats down, but nothing short of a
shotgun keeps crows away. The snake is gone now, and I use poison
bait. Ants are another big problem, and the only reliable control
seems to be poison. I have tried all of the "organic" methods I can,
and they don't do much good. So I have to choose between letting the
ants live and losing most of my vegetables, or spraying them. It is a
dilemma, I do not have a good answer.
>
> In all the idealism favourizing the real nature life of a hunter, hunting
> wild gazelles or deers, we shouldn't forget, that all the cows eaten have
> before eaten a big amount of crops.
Let us separate what is politically driven from what is natural. In
the US since the 1950s, and Europe since the 1960s, the biggest
"problem" facing farmers has been overproduction, which is driven by
politicians who create programs that pay farmers more money for grain
than the market would. Farmers respond by producing more. Then the
government pays university researchers to find new uses for these
crops. What they came up with was feeding them to livestock. Before
the 1950s comparatively little grain was wasted on animal feed. The
entire modern feeder cattle industry is driven by politically
cheapened grain.
> Predominantely grains like maize or wheat or harvested green grass.
> Much more as would have been necessary when the crops would have been eaten
> diretly, about 10 fold as much (actually for pigs it's about 7-fold and for
> cattle its about 15-fold).
These numbers are completely bogus, evangelical vegetarian lies.
Even today cow are not fed pure grain. The great majority of their
diet is roughage, with some grain and soy added to increase energy and
protein percentages. So if a cow eats 15 pounds of green plants to
produce one pound of meat, that certainly does not mean that humans
"lost" 14 pounds of food we could have eaten. Very little of that food
was anything any human, no matter how dedicated a vegetarian, could
eat. We actually GAIN valuable food from the plants we can not
otherwise eat. In the last few weeks or months of their life, just
prior to slaughter, modern feeder cattle are fed concentrated grain
and soy, along with their normal green plant diet, to increase their
muscle fat levels. For most of their lives they eat much less grain.
Adult cattle, except dairy cattle, eat little grain.
You sometimes hear similar stories about how much water is wasted by
cattle production, but since they add in rain water onto the land, how
can anyone take such arguments seriously? It is all predicated on the
assumption that food is scarce and that we need to be producing lots
more of it as soon as possible. Vegetarians need to believe this to
justify their vilification of natural diets. It is a religious
question for them. Eating meat is a sin, and any argument, no matter
how silly, stupid or obviously false can be passed up. The fact is
that we overproduce food, and it goes to rot in enormous quantities in
government grain bins. Europe has mountains of grain and dairy
products that it can not even GIVE away, no one wants them, and so
does the US, Japan, and every other advanced nation.
When I worked in Guatemala as a livestock health promoter, I saw the
local people receive food goods from a dozen different countries. Corn
and flour from the US (this despite the fact the locals are corn
farmers), canned chicken from Denmark and Holland, vegetable oil from
the UN (I think) etc. It was devastating to the local small farmers
when every person was on the international dole, receiving free food
that competes directly with their own products. Poor countries with
food shortages suffer from evil governments, not poor agriculture.
There is NO SHORTAGE of food in the world, and there will not be in
the future. The doom scenarios pushed by some groups support their own
political agendas and pocketbooks, but are not based on any facts.
An animal based diet does not increase the death of animals. All
animals live and die on this earth.
>
> Amadeus
> in a very nice eastern spring sunny atmosphere here
It is very nice here too, almost summer warmth, but not humid yet. I
should be getting into my garden for spring digging, but am feeling
lazy these days.
Sorry for the long and angry rant, Amadeus, it is not directed at you,
but you pushed several of my hot buttons, things that are sure to get
me started.
|
