Hacker News Reader

Comment by a8da6b0c91d | Hacker News Reader

Grain farming is less sustainable than pastured animal raising. You're welcome to a discussion about supportable human populations, but the idea that grain and legume farming is more ecologically sustainable is flat out wrong.

View on HN

Good point. But we should be thinking about supporting the masses.

If I have a hillside that isn't being used for anything else, than fair enough, I could throw a couple of sheep/goats on it and later reap the rewards.

I'm not sure how many of these romantic pastures continue to exist though. I live in a green fertile valley, where sheep farming is rife. The sheep get additional feed on top of their grazing. I'd prefer acres of trees or some other arable crop instead. Sadly most of us won't ever get access to the land to do so.

Less than 1% of the population owns 70% of the land, running Britain a close second to Brazil for the title of the country with the most unequal land distribution on Earth. - http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/17/high-ho...

I can see that, though then you run into all manner of ethical questions of eating animals as well. What we eat is a pretty complex social, environmental, and moral problem.

Also, is it possible that grain farming is worse for the planet in some circumstances and better in others? I am sure that a small rice paddy is much better for the environment than a barn full of chickens in cages too small for them to stand up.

> ethical questions of eating animals as well

Grain and legume farming kills massive numbers of amphibians, birds, and rodents, with huge knock on ecological consequences. When you slaughter a pastured cow or sheep it's one life. During their lives the hooved animals serve a vital role in grassland ecology. The 1930s American dustbowl desertification happened in substantial part because of the preceding elimination of bison and steer.

> a barn full of chickens in cages

If chickens are caged in barns they're eating mostly grain. Historically normal chickens ran around outside and ate mostly bugs, in season.

Don't forget fish kills from fertilizer runoff. Depending on what part of the country you live in. Locally runoff fish kills means vegetarians are in the running with fish eaters in terms of total dead fish per year.

That's interesting, I've actually never heard this before. Do you have a source?

Cost of industrial non-organic grain production, herbicides, insecticides and the whole lot vs hey cow, here's some natural prairie, now go eat it, which doesn't cost as much environmentally.

This cows on natural prairies idea is pretty much bullshit. Unless you are talking about some maasai tribes that bleed out their cattle for protein shakes. Cattle farming is huge agricultural business. And for most people their meat is farmed (with additional inputs).

Europeans decimated the Americas for their corn fed fatty marbled cattle. The rainforests are being cleared for soy, as with most arable crops a high percentage are grown as animal feeds. So there isn't any escape. Eating a cow has collateral damage too.

Take a fraction of those arable crops, don't bother meat farming and move over to better farming methods that are more in tune with nature. It's a balancing act.

If you haven't any ethical qualms about meat eating then you can still farm those fringe places pastorally - reindeer, goats, kangaroos etc.

I have a freezer full of pastured beef & game venison and that's pretty much all I eat in terms of protein. I have piles of grass fed butter in my fridge. What's bullshit about that?

I think though you're an exception. What a luxury. It sounds like you've weighed up the environmental pros and cons for your locale, which is more than most do.

I still think there's better use for that land than raising cattle on it. I can't help but think that good meat is reserved for the luxury of a few, that includes well raised organic meats. It's only the wealthy people that I know that can afford such.

The cost argument is bunk. I spend much less than most people on food. The average westerner blows thousands of dollars on expensive processed food and garbage restaurant meals. There is nothing but consumer preference preventing most people in western countries from eating like I do.

"I still think there's better use for that land than raising cattle on it."

Are you claiming cowboys are herding cattle in the streets of Manhattan? Or "everyone" wants to move to a cattle ranch in the middle of nowhere in Texas but they just don't know it yet? You could work your argument either direction but I don't think either will work very well. Farmers and ranchers like money just like anyone else. If they could subdivide their land to city slickers at SFO/SV square footage prices I think they would...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com