From: swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Scott Wood - EVENSONG)
Subject: Re: Methane/Environment Issue
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 02:05:55 GMT

alexpace@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Alex L. Pace) writes:

`Global warming may or may not even exist as a result of human activity.

I think, more acurately, 'global warming may or may not even exist!'
At least not long term anyway, I have already done two research programs
on this, and the only firm arguements pro to global warming are recent
(two years worth) increases in global mean temperature which can be
reflected by a cyclical sun process just as easily as atmospheric gas,
and in computer models that can't even predict today's conditions based
on those from ten years ago.

`Carbon based organisms release methane when they decay or are digested.
`Even if the grain is left to rot and is eaten by nobody it will release
`  methane as it rots.
`The methane/natural gas/petrol/coal/fossile feuls in the ground are all a
`  result of decaying matter, mostly decaying VEGETABLE matter.

Interesting point.  In an economically supported culture such as the world
has and the U.S. has, we have seen the government of the U.S. buy grains
only to let them rot because the prices to not support the farmers.  This
in fact would lead to an increase in methane.  Using an economical/social
arguement, you could say that an increase in vegan diets might increase
the demand for grains thus increasing market prices.  However, an increase
in vegan diets would mean a decrease in meat diets.  The obvious solution
(to prevent severe unemployment in the beef industry) would be to spend
government funds to retrain cattle farmers and provide loans for equipment
to convert pastures to crop land - if in fact that land would support crops.

All matters of "wasted money" aside, if Russell's figures are correct, that
would mean that the increases in supply would greatly surpass the increases
in demand.  More warehousing, more rotting, more methane.

I think any would agree, judged by the great number of studies and articles
and recent events (ie Somalia) that one of the main reasons famine struct
countries are so is due to governmental interference or a lack of self-
sufficiency due to poor socio-economic structures in their operating
governments.  Otherwise, instead of stock-piling grains and dishing out
monetary aide, we could cut the middle man and just ship grains over seas.

I would be willing to suggest that a great majority of the lands famed to
be used for cattle farming would not support crops with out a major over
haul of the environment and other environments. (Texas famous for its oil
and STEER industries wanted to extrapolate water from Michigans Great
Lakes a few years back as a viable water source - the project was turned
down due to the potential damage it could cause to the great lakes region.
I can just imagine the demand in an arid environment like Texas if wide
scale grain farming was implemented)  This line of reasoning makes much
less viable the arguement that lands are being wasted on 'Cattle Ranching'.

In fact, many of the local cattle in my home state of Michigan are graze-fed
on lands that otherwise COULD support planting, but I would doubt that
these animals require as much supplication to their diets from the 70%
of all grains figures Russell spewed forth.  In fact, the areas with
concentrated cattle farming and lack of natural feed are the most responsible
for any large usage of grains.  The farmers are just taking advantage of
a market desire for their produce to support themselves and their farms.

I don't like to use econimical or monetary principles to justify an
industry, but they are exactly the "real world" concepts that I think most
of the AR-sensationalists purposefully and exclusively overlook to help
further their ideolistic interests.  There are far more political and
economical as well as environmental constrictions that prevent the feeding
of world populations than AR-groups picking on the beef industry shows.

It is a very complex world that infrastructure of humanity has created and
mere ideolism has NEVER made a significant change in that complexity.  Real
solutions must take on real means and take all options in effect - including
vanity, desire and reality.  Animals die - that is reality.  Other animals
besides man eat meat.  That is reality.  Man can survive without meat - that
is perhaps reality.  But man doesn't have to if he chooses not to and that
is fact ladies and gentleman.

swood

`Since Russ reads "cut back" as "remove completely" then all vegans should
`  cease to eat and breathe and face the fact that when they decay, they will
`  still release methane.

round about logic, but quite intriguing
-- 
 All Month  Rabbit and Crow are legal to hunt all month in Michigan
  Current   Michigan Canada Goose special late season still open
      (Southern Michigan Game Management unit only w/stamp)
         <<<<<<  Only nine months until bow season!!! >>>>>>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals