At 11:43 AM 1/11/99 -0500, Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
>Organized agriculture imposes far greater harm on the environment than either
>subsistence or sport hunting or fishing. Just because agriculture does its
>by slowly, methodically tearing up the wilderness, burning the flora,
>under, then poisoning it to death with artificial fertilizers and pesticides,
>which drain off into undeveloped wildernesses within the same watersheds
>it no different, and even more heinous and underhanded than the sporting
>of animal (who happens to be human) hunting animal. The major part of
>sentiment which I object to is the continued insistence that man is separate
>from nature. It is not, nor will it ever be. We evolved as bilateral
>(male hunters, female gatherers), so being carnivorous is as much a part
>nature as eating plant matter.
>Vegetarianism also damages the environment because it displaces other
>the pyramid of life. The prairies which could be supporting millions of
>prairie hens, quail, wolves, coyotes, and eagles are instead feeding
>city dwelling corn flake eaters. This practice decreases diversity, creating
>monocultures both in the species being preyed upon (the plants, as hybrid
>corn, etc) and in the species doing the preying (homogenized humanity).
IAN: The massive hole in that argument is that over 70% of agriculture land is devoted to the production of food for livestock, for meat! So the argument you make against vegetarianism is in fact properly directed at meat eating. I did a detailed report on this years ago and can dig it up (plus other research) if that's disputed. The stopping of meat eating would reduce the overall use of lands for food production. Also, cattle eat 9 lbs of protein for every 1 lb they yield. Meat eating is a wasteful luxury.
"The more restrictions and prohibitions in the world, the poorer people get." Lao Tzu, "Tao Te Ching"