On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:48:06 +0900, Tom <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Actually the similar go for other forms of Ag, even
>vegan. Most of the energy value of the plant is lost as it
>is indigestible for humans. Cows can actually improve this
>if they are eating things humans do not.

If you feed crops to animals (which is done with some 50% of all grains)
the 90% loss comes in addition to "losses" before and in harvesting.
Cows eat what humans wouldn't eat, but there are few areas where you
wouldn't be able to grow something directely for humans.
However there are big areas better suited for grazing animals.
Like higher regions - like in the Alps.

The space limitation works in the US like in denser populated areas. The
available space is used as intense as possible, to feed more animals.
Unfortunately that's bad for food (fedder) quality.
"50% unfit for human consumption" Ray told.
I think this should better not be fed to animals as well.
Animals accumulate many toxins of their lifetime - pesticid residues,
ultratoxins (dioxins PCB), heavy metals, also radioactivity, fungitoxins.

A less intense agriculture should be the goal.
By feeding less to animals and produce better quality.
And have animals grazing.


>Actually most countries are as thinly populated as the US.
>Africa for example is about equal to North America in pop
>density. Only Europe, the Indian subcontinent, and a few
>other places are really overpopulated.

Maybe you didn't take the amount of into account the percentage of land
that's unsuitable for agriculture (deserts, swamps, mountains). I think
then the Europe/USA relation wouldn't be 10:1.
Would you consider Brazil as light populated? I think Barzil people would
consider their country as very densely populated, despite the vast
rainforest areas.

>But fortunately Europe's populations are predicted to
>plummet in the next few decades. Soon Germany will be back
>to pre-industrial-revolution levels. So no problem. Right?

But that's also a big headache for popiticians.
Soon 2/3 of the country will be retired.
Agriculture is only a small field of business and for most business they
need workers.

>So...where is the problem. Seems you have plenty of space,
>especially if you import meat from superior producers, the
>vast uninhabited spaces of the earth.

You mean Argentinia for example? Gauchos etc?
But I've been told that Argentinia Grassland cattle are a legend now.
They produce soybeans and feed the cows in farm-houses now.

>We only need to produce enough animals to feed
>those who want to eat them. No problem.

What do you imagine would happen if 1.2 billion Chinese people started to
eat only one steak per weak (more). Big problem.

>Yep. That is a sheep's proper place in the ecosystem, food
>for me.

If you prefer.

>..It is possible that a lion could
>have eaten me, ... Silly, perhaps. And not something the average
>European can identify with, living in long since tamed lands.

There are areas with wolfes again (We have 1/3 wood, 1/3 farm space and 1/3
rest which much of it is streets).

On Sun, 21 Jul 2002 22:02:35 -0700, Wally Day <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>The area I refered to in my 'story' is not even close
>to the legendary American plains. It is, in fact, an
>alpine region with 10,000 foot peaks. Cattle and sheep
>do just fine grazing there. (Lot of deer, elk, moose
>too).

That would indeed be a much more acceptable way to get food.

>...I don't believe you are a big corn
>eater. Therefore, I think you and I could compromise
>on using that corn acreage for something else. Perhaps
>raise a few pigs or goats for me, and some 'wilder'
>veggies and grains for you, eh?

Yes ok. Deal.
And I want a lot of nut and fruit trees please.

>You get a few
>ears of corn out of the bargain, knowing that you
>could have raised 'tons' of short season veggies instead.

Vegetable yields are about 10-fold in weight per space as denser items
(e.g. grains). And about the same in terms of energy and protein.
And *much* more in vitamins and minerals.

Sorry, I know this talk is offtopic.
We should be talking about everyones food and not care about the world's
ecological problems.
However the topic *is* linked to food quality.
And I think (at least) in this aspect we should care about the way our food
items are produced.

Amadeus