Animals Australia Unleashed
Change the World Who Cares? Videos Take Action! The Animals Community Forum Shop Blog Display
1 2 3
Your E-Mail: O Password:
Login Help     |     Join for Free!     |     Hide This

Is going veg a good idea?

... moving Cassie3's discussion away from kikumeri's thread...

1 - 10 of 80 posts (locked)   1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7  


Jesse Jesse VIC Posts: 1117
1 7 Sep 2011
Unleashed Admin
So as not to sidetrack kikumeri's thread, I'm moving the discussion about whether going veg makes sense to here. Here's a recap on the discussion (please, please please don't quote this whole thing!!):


Cassie3 said:
Oh well little Kiki aren't you a lucky little vegemite that you live in a country where you have the self indulgent, ignorant, selfish choice to be a vegetarian. Fast for a week my friend and you won't give a fig what food you eat. Bloody Australians, spoilt to the nth degree.
===============================================

kikumeri said:
You dont know who I am, or were I come from
So please dont be rude
===============================================

Yeti Woman said:
Self indulgent, ignorant, selfish... ?
Interesting. These are the words I would use to describe a typical meat eating human. Most don't care what (or who) they're eating, as long as it tastes good.

Do you realize this is a forum for compassionate people that care about Earth and the lives of animals?
If you can't be nice, do us all a favor and go away.
===============================================

Jesse said:
Hi Cassie3, I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from here. Are trying to say that since there are people starving in the world, we shouldn't use the fortunate position we're in to make choices that help other animals and the environment?

I don't get why you would call it a selfish/self-indulgent choice to abstain from eating meat to help animals. Wouldn't you say that when someone's intentions are to help others it is actually the opposite of being selfish/self-indulgent?

I agree, it's not a good idea to make a decision when ignorant of the issue. It's very heartening to see many people these days taking the time to inform themselves about food production, so that they can make more well informed decisions about what they choose to eat.

Interestingly, on the topic of world hunger, it in fact generally requires far less land and resources to produce a plant based diet. So aside from the benefits for animals and the obvious health benefits, there is also quite a strong argument to be made for adopting a plant based diet to ensure there is enough land and resources to grow food for everyone on the planet.

I agree, it is very sad that there are many people who go hungry in the world. I feel very fortunate to be in a position where I not only have enough to eat, but can also make food choices that help reduce the suffering of other animals, reduce environmental impacts and can go some way to reducing resource demands that may make it difficult for others less fortunate in the world to eat. Wouldn't you say, that when we can make a choice with so many positives that it would be a well-informed decision to make?
===============================================

Jesse said:
PS. While it'd be great to have a discussion and get to understand your point of view on this issue, please be careful with how you put your point across. Name calling is against our house rules, and is more likely to turn the conversation into an argument than it is to foster any sort of understanding.
===============================================

Abbiesaurus said:
Cassie3, You should watch this: http://vimeo.com/8812686
If given the option a vegetarian diet is one of the best things you can do for both the environment and world hunger.
You will also find that in poorer countries they live off more fruit, vegetables and grains as they are easier to grow and cost less money to produce. It is only in more wealthy countries such as America, Australia and England that people have the choice to eat meat on a regular basis.
===============================================

Cassie3 said:
Point taken Jesse.  However I am afraid that this planet simply could not sustain it's population on a plant based diet.  It has ( and has always !!) far too many barren spots to grown agriculture.  My history is as follows.  I am a beef producer from Queensland.  I have been involved with beef production and the land for my whole life.  I have a respect for animals regardless of whether they end up on my plate or not.  Along with that respect I also care for  my animals.  I have some very serious issues with Australians who choose to become vegetarians for reasons other than an allergy to meat, in other words ethical reasons.  We are indeed fortunate to live in a country whereby a visit to our local supermarket will offer several differents choice of peanut paste as well as other obscene numbers of indulgences.  
Like it or not we are at the top of the food chain and we humans are carnivores from forever ago.  If it weren't for the human race the animals would self distruct.  Fact.  
I acknowledge that there are some very pathetic excuses for humans who are not at all kind to animals.  Mind you these very people are unable to be kind to their fellow human so what chance has an animal got.  
I have many issues with your extremist views but for now I must go and tend to the weaner cattle we have just weaned off their mothers.  Rest assured they look pretty happy and their mothers likewise, no big things hanging off the udders.  Cheers for now.
===============================================

kikumeri said:
Cassie3, I was just wondering how you felt about people that eat puppies, horses and other humans? And how is sheep, cow, pig any different from the first 3 meats that I stated?
===============================================

Abbiesaurus said:
Humans have actually been scavengers for the longest part of our existence - we have NEVER been carnivores. We would mainly live off whatever plants we could forage, and also would occasionally eat animal remains and eggs when available (occasionally being maybe once or twice a fortnight).
With the invention of tools saw a rise in human meat consumption, but still humans would only eat on average about 1-2 small servings of meat a week. Nothing compared to the huge servings of meat that people eat now.
===============================================

Cassie3 said:
Kiki I am a spoilt Australian who doesn't have to eat puppies, horses or whatever.  I can indulge my taste buds to eat only the foods I like.  This country has never gone hungry thus our peoples are quick to bring the food producers down.  Sad.
===============================================

Cassie3 said:
With all due respect I think you are not quite right with that one.  Just ask our indigenous.  No industrialized tools for them and plenty of meat consumption.
===============================================

Abbiesaurus said:
Cassie3 said:
Kiki I am a spoilt Australian who doesn't have to eat puppies, horses or whatever.  I can indulge my taste buds to eat only the foods I like.  This country has never gone hungry thus our peoples are quick to bring the food producers down.  Sad.
Exactly you don't have to eat puppies, horses or whatever...does that make you selfish because you have a choice?
Like yourself,  we all are very lucky that we live in a country where we get to choose what we eat. I don't see how my decision not to eat meat is any more 'selfish' than your decision to choose what species of animal that you eat.
We can still support local food producers without having to buy meat. Most fruits and vegetables sold in Australia are grown here.
===============================================

DaveQB said:
Cassie3 said:
Like it or not we are at the top of the food chain and we humans are carnivores from forever ago.
Did you mean omnivore? Either way, we haven't the equipment to deal with meat or catch it. If we were carnivores then we would use our carnivorous instincts and chase that rabbit and pounce on it and eat it, tail, legs, body, ears, brain....raw! That is what a carnivore does. Our intestines are 7-13 times longer than our bodies...like all herbivores. Carnivores intestines are 3-6 times their body length...shorter to push through the decaying carcases faster.

Our jaw can side to side in grinding motion, like all herbivores. Carnivores can not. Their only goes up and down, rip and swallow. We have a carbohydrate saliva, like all herbivores meaning we are meant to eat lots of carbohydrates.

And like I said before, we do not have carnivorous instincts like true carnivores.
We haven't claws, fangs, speed or anything to indicate we are able to hunt down animals as prey.
Cassie3 said:
I have many issues with your extremist views but for now I must go and tend to the weaner cattle we have just weaned off their mothers.  Rest assured they look pretty happy and their mothers likewise, no big things hanging off the udders.  Cheers for now.
How is this natural? Cows milk is for other cows (calves) like cat's milk is for cat's, Rhino milk is for rhino's, giraffes milk is for giraffes and human milk is for humans. We are not meant to drink the milk from another species.

Not meaning to be rude Cassie3 but that's the way it is.[/quote]
===============================================

Abbiesaurus said:
Cassie3 said:
With all due respect I think you are not quite right with that one.  Just ask our indigenous.  No industrialized tools for them and plenty of meat consumption.
Yeah like I said humans were scavengers before the invention of basic tools, and with the invention of tools saw an increase in meat consumption.
Indigenous people would eat what foods were available to them. So if there was an abundance of a certain plant, then they would eat that, likewise if there was an abundance of a certain animal then they would eat more of that.
They ate whatever was available to survive, but at the same time they were also very careful not to over hunt a certain species of animal and lead it to extinction. They also did not farm animals and keep them for months or even years in horrendous living conditions. Which is one of many reasons why people choose not to eat meat, modern day farming methods are a lot more cruel and resource intense than traditional hunting methods.

Unlike previous indigenous Australians we do have a choice what we eat, so if someone chooses not to eat meat then I don't see why you should have a problem with that (maybe it's just the fact your not getting our money). You don't have to become vegetarian but if someone else chooses to then that is their decision.
===============================================

Catryen said:
Cassie3 said:
With all due respect I think you are not quite right with that one.  Just ask our indigenous.  No industrialized tools for them and plenty of meat consumption.
tools doesn't have to mean "industrialised" in this it is referring to spears, knives, clubs etc. But intensive farming didn't exist until last century, before that even the western world only ate meat when they could afford it. It is only the inherently cruel practices of factory farming that allow westerners to eat meat in massive quantities that is not only destroying the planet but also the health of those that consume it. Your idea that the world population couldn't be sustained on a vegetarian diet is nonsense. There is currently enough plant food in production to sustain the entire human population and then some. Unfortunately for the people of the developing nations the 50 billion animals that the world consumes each year (204 countries in the world and the USA alone consumes 1/5 of these animals) need to be fed, and they eat a lot more than people do. Interestingly the UN is calling for westerners (that means you and me) to cut their meat intake in half because meat production cannot be increased and demand is growing for meat is growing as developing nations become wealthier and are able to afford meat. Intensive farming needs to stop, it is destroying the planet (leading cause of greenhouse emissions, greatest cause of land degradation and habitat loss and therefore the mass extinction we are experiencing right now) and is eliminating jobs. Something like only 2 percent of Australians work in agriculture today, that number was closer to 90 percent a century ago, until the creation of factory farming that meant fewer people were needed to create more product that ever before. I think every member on unleashed would like to see a return to family farming over factory farming since it is unlikely that meat consumption will completely stop any time soon. Veg(etari)anism is good for your health, better for the planet, puts less pressure on resources in a world that is already stretched far too thin and means that fewer animals had to suffer or give their lives for a few moments of enjoyment by a human.
===============================================

Cassie3 said:
No Catyren I'm afraid you are so wrong when you claim that the world could live on a vegan diet but you know what I am not going to argue with a fool.  Somebody watching may not know the difference.  I really had felt that AA would be receptive to a healthy debate but no you are just as my friends told me ' unabashed extremists with rediculous expectations and no credibility'.  I rest my case and leave you preaching to each other.  Oh my what fun that will be.
===============================================

Cassie3 said:
Most fruit and vegetables sold here in Australia " Abbiesaurus.  In your dreams baby.  And if we all chose the path of vegan there is no way the agricultural lands could feed all of our population.  Where were you lot educated ( or not maybe ).
===============================================

Cassie3 said:
Dave QB I don't think the poddy calf, lamb, pup, kitten gives a rat's backside which mammal it's milk comes from when I am feeding it.  But to reassure you I will attempt to ask my next poddy as he/she bowls me over to get that feed of milk.  Sorry but you are in lala land.
===============================================

Catryen said:
Cassie3 said:
No Catyren I'm afraid you are so wrong when you claim that the world could live on a vegan diet but you know what I am not going to argue with a fool.  Somebody watching may not know the difference.  I really had felt that AA would be receptive to a healthy debate but no you are just as my friends told me ' unabashed extremists with rediculous expectations and no credibility'.  I rest my case and leave you preaching to each other.  Oh my what fun that will be.
Honestly, I think that it is you that is unreceptive to healthy debate. You seem to have joined this forum to troll and attempt to upset people. Perhaps you would care to do some research and educate yourself on the issues, though I suspect that in truth you really don't care about the facts. I have put endless hours into educating myself on the issues, in my spare time and also as a part of my university studies. I am not preaching. It is simple fact, that more and more of the world is embracing, that high meat/dairy diets have an adverse affect of human health, that intensive farming causes irreparable damage to the environment, that the high meat diets of western societies is linked to third world hunger and that animals have the capacity to feel pain and suffer. I support a return to family farming. I'm a realist I know that a lot of people don't want to stop eating meat, the least they could do is treat the creatures with respect, increase welfare and give them a quick and painless death. A return to family farming would mean more jobs in agriculture, less automation. It would mean an increase in prices but that's not so much to ask when you consider the massive costs of the current intensive farming system. I went vegetarian because I disagreed with factory farming, I'm staying that way for life for my health. You said you were a cattle farmer was it? Cattle have probably the highest welfare of any animal produced for consumption (with the exception of dairy cattle). A lot of people stop eating red meat first but continue to eat chicken, pork, eggs, dairy and seafood. In terms of welfare it should be the opposite.
===============================================

Abbiesaurus said:
Cassie3 said:
Most fruit and vegetables sold here in Australia " Abbiesaurus.  In your dreams baby.  And if we all chose the path of vegan there is no way the agricultural lands could feed all of our population.  Where were you lot educated ( or not maybe ).
I go to the farmers markets every weekend and buy fresh produce off local Australian farmers. In Coles and Woolworths more than 95% of their fresh produce fruit and veg is Australian grown...so I'm not sure where you are getting your facts from?
But that's beside the point. The point is that to feed livestock you need to grow grain for them to eat. So not only do you need land for the animals to graze, you also need extra land to grow the food for them. Instead we could be using all of that land to grow plants for humans to eat.
===============================================

DaveQB said:
Cassie3 said:
No Catyren I'm afraid you are so wrong when you claim that the world could live on a vegan diet but you know what I am not going to argue with a fool.  Somebody watching may not know the difference.  I really had felt that AA would be receptive to a healthy debate but no you are just as my friends told me ' unabashed extremists with rediculous expectations and no credibility'.  I rest my case and leave you preaching to each other.  Oh my what fun that will be.
Debate away. You have yet to backup any of your claims, you are full of hot air at the moment thus losing this debate badly.

You need to do a little better than that to win a debate.


Just to push the finish line further out of your reach...


Animals fed on grain, and those that rely on grazing, need far more water than grain crops.[179] According to the USDA, growing the crops necessary to feed farmed animals requires nearly half of the United States' water supply and 80% of its agricultural land. Additionally, animals raised for food in the U.S. consume 90% of the soy crop, 80% of the corn crop, and a total of 70% of its grain.[180]

When tracking food animal production from the feed through to consumption, the inefficiencies of meat, milk and egg production range from 4:1 up to 54:1 energy input to protein output ratio. This firstly because the feed first needs to be grown before it is eaten by the cattle, and secondly because warm-blooded vertebrates need to use a lot of calories just to stay warm (unlike plants or insects).[181] An index which can be used as a measure is the efficiency of conversion of ingested food to body substance, which indicates, for example, that only 10% is converted to body substance by beef cattle, versus 1931% by silkworms and 44% by German cockroaches.[181] Ecology professor David Pimentel has claimed, "If all the grain currently fed to livestock in the United States were consumed directly by people, the number of people who could be fed would be nearly 800 million."[182] To produce animal-based food seems to be, according to these studies, typically much less efficient than the harvesting of grains, vegetables, legumes, seeds and fruits. However, this would not apply to animals that are grazed rather than fed, especially those grazed on land that could not be used for other purposes. Nor would it apply to cultivation of insects for food, which may be more environmentally sustainable than eating food coming from cattle farming.[181] Meat produced in a laboratory (called in vitro meat) may be also more environmentally sustainable than regularly produced meat.[183]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism#Environment_and_diet
===============================================

follz said:
Catyren said:
I support a return to family farming. I'm a realist I know that a lot of people don't want to stop eating meat, the least they could do is treat the creatures with respect, increase welfare and give them a quick and painless death. A return to family farming would mean more jobs in agriculture, less automation.
Ah... a welfarist I see. A person who advocates a return to 'local produce', 'better treatment' and 'humane slaughter'... always behind the pretense of 'being realistic'. I will say I have a hard time holding back on people like yourself, as in my eyes you are even worse than a carnist.

Let me just get this question out of the way first off: Whether or not you think it realistic for the world to become vegan, do you support the complete abolition of using animals for food, entertainment, clothing and research - yes or no?

Assuming for a moment your answer is 'yes', my next question would be why on earth do you advocate such things if your ultimate goal is abolition? This only serves to give people a clearer conscience about eating animals and does NOT move them even an inch closer to freedom.

Moving on now, I'd like to get your ideas on how you achieve 'better treatment' and 'humane slaughter' (an oxymoron, but I'll go with it just for the sake argument). Please, lay it on the table. How can you 'better' raise billions of land animals for slaughter? How then can you 'humanely' slaughter those billions of animals? Since you are a big fan of being realistic, you must come up with ways that do NOT harm the bottom line of the agriculture industry. Good luck!

This is where the welfarists' tie themselves into contradictions when they advocate local/family farming. Do you not realise that it can never exist on any sort of scale to satisfy demand? At best, they can supply a local community - not a supermarket in a city. Another thing welfarists' ignore is that 'getting back to family farming' relies on the false presumption that they can A) somehow compete with the giant agriculture industry and that B) said industry would even let it happen in the first place. Take a look at the statistics which show the steep decline of small/family farms over the last 20 years and how so much has been consolidated and condensed into factory farming operations.

I could continue, but for the sake of brevity I'll move on.

Catyren said:
It would mean an increase in prices but that's not so much to ask when you consider the massive costs of the current intensive farming system.
Since you mentioned 'better conditions', I can only assume that each and every animal would be given more space to move, is that correct? If so, tell me your plans for the better treatment and conditions of a single lot of 80,000 chickens being raised for slaughter. Where are they kept now? Outside? Inside a giant shed still? Your views are not only completely unsustainable and impractical, but are also demonstrably contradictory when you talk about the expense of factory farming yet advocate better conditions/slaughter which would ultimately cost a lot more.

Catryen said:
I went vegetarian because I disagreed with factory farming
So let me ask this question: If what you advocate comes to pass, will you then resume your consumption of slaughtered animals?

Catryen said:
I'm staying that way for life for my health.
The carnist has selfish reasons for doing what he does too. At the end of the day, it's really just all about you!
===============================================

Cassie3 said:
Actually Catyren I like what you have to say in this post.  Please remember that a healthy debate is views from both sides accepted.  Dogmatism plays no role in healthy debate. I am sorry that you felt you had to adopt a vegetarian lifestyle because of intensive farming of animals.  I thought that you were able to access organic beef in urban butcher shops, maybe not though.  Cheers
===============================================

DaveQB said:
Abbiesaurus said:
Cassie3 said:
Most fruit and vegetables sold here in Australia " Abbiesaurus.  In your dreams baby.  And if we all chose the path of vegan there is no way the agricultural lands could feed all of our population.  Where were you lot educated ( or not maybe ).
I go to the farmers markets every weekend and buy fresh produce off local Australian farmers. In Coles and Woolworths more than 95% of their fresh produce fruit and veg is Australian grown...so I'm not sure where you are getting your facts from?
But that's beside the point. The point is that to feed livestock you need to grow grain for them to eat. So not only do you need land for the animals to graze, you also need extra land to grow the food for them. Instead we could be using all of that land to grow plants for humans to eat.
Right on Abbiesaurus. Why filer your food through someone else's body? It just doesn't make any sense.
===============================================

DaveQB said:
Cassie3 said:
Dave QB I don't think the poddy calf, lamb, pup, kitten gives a rat's backside which mammal it's milk comes from when I am feeding it.  But to reassure you I will attempt to ask my next poddy as he/she bowls me over to get that feed of milk.  Sorry but you are in lala land.
Talking to me? It is "DaveQB".

Of course an young new born animal does not know where their milk is coming from. But that is not the issue here. Naturally animals feed their own, hence they get the milk designed for their unique systems. As humans we mess with this; drinking calves milk ourselves. This does not make sense and was not how it was designed to work. Consequently it is not healthy for you as evident by the fact the animal protein in milk leaches the calcium from your bones and the high rate of Lactose Intolerance (80% of Asians and Africans and (anecdotally) many white Caucasians around me)

PS what is a potty?
===============================================

Cassie3 said:
Abbiesaurus there 26.6 million head of cattle in Australia.  Of those only 722,444 are grain fed and 822,000 go live export so my friend the rest are pasture fed, organic, grazers whatever you want to call them.  Thus common sense would tell you that much of our land is not adaptable to growing grain for all of these cattle that you claim are grain fed.  Enjoy your meat, most of it is open range grazed.
===============================================

Cassie3 said:
A poddy is a miss mothered baby animal.  Have fed several in my time, whether they be domestic or feral or whatever.  Cheers
===============================================

DaveQB said:
Cassie3 said:
Abbiesaurus there 26.6 million head of cattle in Australia.  Of those only 722,444 are grain fed and 822,000 go live export so my friend the rest are pasture fed, organic, grazers whatever you want to call them.  Thus common sense would tell you that much of our land is not adaptable to growing grain for all of these cattle that you claim are grain fed.  Enjoy your meat, most of it is open range grazed.
Where is this information coming from?
The link you have made does not make any sense at all. I don't know how you come to this conclusion. It would be easy to let cattle to graze, so farmers do. Irrelevant as to whether they CAN grow crops on their land or not.

Additionally, if there is any truth to this there is a thing called importing that countries employ to make up a deficit is anything the country needs. Import/export is how the global economy works.


Again, I think this should be taken to it's own thread(s).
===============================================

Abbiesaurus said:
Cassie3 said:
Abbiesaurus there 26.6 million head of cattle in Australia.  Of those only 722,444 are grain fed and 822,000 go live export so my friend the rest are pasture fed, organic, grazers whatever you want to call them.  Thus common sense would tell you that much of our land is not adaptable to growing grain for all of these cattle that you claim are grain fed.  Enjoy your meat, most of it is open range grazed.
How many cows can live sufficiently of each acre of land? Surely you must need a lot of land for the cows to get enough food without humans feeding them additional food such as grain.
And what about on the pastures which go into drought? I know that a lot of farms in inland Australia need to feed their cattle grain when the pastures are dried up.
Also I'm not just talking about cattle. I know for a fact that the majority (if not all) chickens, turkeys and pigs in Australia are grain fed, so that grain must be coming from somewhere. Whether it is grown in Australia or another country is irrelevant.

kikumeri kikumeri SA Posts: 46
2 7 Sep 2011
Thanks jesse =3 you guys put up a good argument! I suck with trying to prove points, id rather roll up into a little ball haha xD

Nobody Nobody QLD Posts: 593
3 7 Sep 2011
kikumeri said:
I suck with trying to prove points, id rather roll up into a little ball haha xD
Same here. I always struggle to get my words out the way I want them to (written or spoken).
ashamed2

TheSixthStitch TheSixthStitch Aruba Posts: 988
4 7 Sep 2011
I still struggle. Fortunately for all of us, having to debate the points again and again and again with non-vego friends, family and strangers, can help improve debating skills and round out what we know. Practice makes perfect....! (sort of)

xAshlee xAshlee TAS Posts: 722
5 7 Sep 2011
She keeps using things like 'people have always eaten meat' and  'the land couldnt  support everyone being vegan' etc etc etc

OK. just STOP for a minute. its not about any of that shizznit because no, in ther forseeable future not evryone will be vegan. just forget about that and stop making excuses.

If people want to avoid animal products and live on a plant based diet . bloody well let them and dont argue with something that only produces postive  affects. Gosshhhhhhh

I think these omnis come on here to try and sort of re-assure themselves that what they are doing is OK. at the end of the day. (im assuming shes a SHE)  .. she is Omni , we are veg.

Go away, if ya got nothing nice to say !

[ADMIN EDIT: Name calling removed. Please respect the house rules, even if you disagree with someone's opinion. Thanks!]

Lars Lars NSW Posts: 825
6 7 Sep 2011
I think something Cassie3 may never be abe to wrap her/his head around is that people choose not to contributes to the slaughter of animals for emotional reasons. I could never harm a cow....it would break my heart and a peice of my soul would die because I am not capable of taking life for something so trivial as (mostly) nonessential nutrition.

Cassie3's obviously grown up in a cattle raising lifestyle and therefore has grown up with her own version of what is normal, the hardness of people, a certain kind of character is often developed in those situations. I know other girls who have grown up on farms who have a hard arse personalities especially when it comes to dealing with more modern ways of thinking/lifestyle..... they're very  "you're a joke" about anything that that doesn't fit in with the ides thaty've been raised in.

there's no chance that we'll accept any of Cassie3's ideas of what is right... we're just not the same kind of people

follz follz NSW Posts: 105
7 7 Sep 2011
I encourage people to join Unleashed if they would like a healthy debate. If, however, they are just here to troll and post unsubstantiated claims, fallacious arguments and outright lies, then you can be sure they are just here to stir and cause trouble... or perhaps they just genuinely need to acquire better reasoning skills (to put it lightly :p).

I think us members need to be mindful that we don't discourage discourse and dissenting opinions. Remember, there is really no need to get emotional and resort to name calling etc... we have right on our side wink

DaveQB DaveQB NSW Posts: 287
8 7 Sep 2011
I had a hard time believing Cassie3 was for real. I concluded it was a Vegan or Vegan wanna be provoking us for responses as he/she needed them in her/his own arguments with friends and family.
I was happy to oblige.
Maybe Cassie3 will post again in this thread....

Cassie3 Cassie3 QLD Posts: 115
9 7 Sep 2011
Abbiesaurus I am a little concerned about your line of questioning.  It sadly reflects your lack of knowledge re the grazing industry.   I am not sure where to start re how many acres per beast does it take to sufficiently feed them.  That so much depends on where the beef operation is.  However I will use our operation as one example.  On our place the guideline for grazing sustainably is 1:100 DSE or 1: 10 if we talk of sheep.  Of course it very much depends on the season but that ratio is appropos for a normal season.  In tighter times we may reduce stock numbers just as in wetter seasons we may trade some dry stock on and off the place.  Our stock are NEVER fed grain, even in a drought.  The reason being that our property is in the mulga belt and that fodder is equal to none.  We have taken many numbers of cattle through a drought with a dozer and mulga.  I am not sure if you really are interested in this though but I kind of hope you are broadminded enough to be so.  Cheers

Cassie3 Cassie3 QLD Posts: 115
10 7 Sep 2011
No Dave QB I am not a vegan 'wannabe'.  I am just someone who finds many of the unsubstantiated claims on this website forum disturbing to say the least.  I am as previously stated a beef producer.  Mind you some of your issues I am totally for and would be happy to promote.  However I find the misconceptions about the grazing industry positively scary.
Cheers

< Prev
 [ 1 ]  [ 2 ]  [ 3 ]  [ 4 ]  [ 5 ]  [ 6 ]  [ 7 ] 

www.unleashed.org.au