Hacker News Reader

Comment by myshpa | Hacker News Reader

Cows or animal husbandry? Let's blame cows ... people are innocent here.

This seems like a bizarre conversation. Blaming people is about the divvying of moral burden. Blaming cows is about causal understanding, unless somehow you thought that discussing the moral responsiblities of cows was on the table.

I assume that most people on the internet don't read. Maybe the title, first paragraph, skim the rest, look into the discussion, move on.

Are you sure that 100% o people who seen this title will know that the article is talking in fact about humans, about our preferences eating cows and dairy, about our mega farms conveniently hidden of our sight, and not some wild creatures bringing havoc to the coastal areas?

I'm not so sure.

This article is more talking about some semi-wild creatures bringing havoc to a coastal area than mega farms conveniently out of site. The Spanish imported livestock, left them out to graze, their population exploded leading to overgrazing that caused erosion.

Yeah, humans are ultimately responsible, but not really for the reasons you listed.

There may have been semi-wild creatures 150 years ago. That btw doesn't mean they were not farmed, or does it? Are there cow herds running free still there? If not, why is not the marine ecosystem regenerating? If the problem persists, what's the problem now? Maybe those mega farms and associated runoff?

I believe the livestock grew far past what was planned/usable.

The cows are gone, but it's not like we've left the vegetation alone for centuries to let it reach it's previous levels, and it's not like the marine life can spontaneously reappear after being wiped out. It's hard to restore a destroyed ecosystem.

Nobody thinks blaming cows means blaming their existence. Everybody understands it means "cow agriculture". You're coming across as intentionally argumentative and willfully obtuse.

You're absolutely right. Thank you for taking the time to point out my failings. I will spend some time over the weekend to contemplate my failures, and try to do better in the future!

Cows basically don’t exist in the wild, I think. So saying “cows” is fairly understood to mean that.

I’m not sure there’s much confusion if someone were to say that “coal is contributing to climate change.“

I can't agree with you. It's the same as saying that slaves were responsible for deforestation by working the cotton fields.

It's shifting the blame away from real culprits.

> It's the same as saying that slaves were responsible for deforestation by working the cotton fields.

How?

The point of a cotton field isn't to provide a habitat for your slaves. By the time the slaves are there in the field, the deforestation has already occurred.

I see how my example can be perplexing. My bad.

To blame the destruction of the marine ecosystem on those cows is misleading.

The marine ecosystem is not the only victim in this situation. Those cows were placed there by humans, for human consumption, and are also victims. We chose to breed and eat them.

So my point is, that by formulating it in this way (Cows destroyed ...) instead of slightly more specific way (like Animal husbandry practices destroyed ...) the real problem is hidden, and that it could be a hinderance in undrestanding of the problem, delaying the necessary changes in our behaviour for more responsible handling of the matter in the future.

Sorry for my english.

Except, AFAICT, it wasn't the husbandry of the cows that caused the destruction. The cows were left to roam free and their population exploded and damaged the ecosystem in unexpected ways like has happened with many other invasive species.

> more specific way (like Animal husbandry practices destroyed

This is less specific. It doesn't clarify which species shouldn't have been introduced or should have been managed better.

> The cows were left to roam free

I think they mean that a farmer had a herd and let it roam free over a vast area. Then he sent some cowboys to take the herd to the city / town with a train and sell them. Just like in Red River movie ;)

> It doesn't clarify which species shouldn't have been introduced

It may be the cows 150 years ago. Now the species mix would be probably different, with similar effects on the marine ecosystems. Does it really matter if the river of urine and excrements is from cow, pigs or chickens? I don't know.

The thing about semantic pedantry is that it doesn’t really serve any goal and it consumes oxygen that’s better spent on the substance of the issue.

Reasonable people aren’t confused by the use of “cows.” It’s just low-hanging fruit, ripe for fabricated outrage.

> Cows basically don’t exist in the wild

Elephant, whale, seal, etc. cows are quite commonly found in the wild. Cattle cows, not so much.

Damn it. And I already started legal proceedings against Ms Bessie! Thanks, dude.

Well, it seems the bulls don't pose a problem.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com