Save the Planet - Eat Less or No Meat

According to one estimate, humans kill and eat one hundred fifty billion animals every year.   Farmed livestock, animals like chickens, cattle, hogs,  have been reduced from living creatures to industrial commodities. With rare exceptions, these living creatures are propagated, raised, and ultimately slaughtered with only one thing in mind; minimize costs, maximize profit, the suffering of the animals be damned.

The public indifference to this brutal brand of industrial efficiency diminishes us all. Too often, compassion only extends to other humans, and that is only some of the time.  For too many people, a slab of meat is just something for sale in a supermarket.  Like I said, that attitude diminishes us all.

The article below is from the Huffington Post. It offers the conclusions of a study that puts sobering perspective on the cost of our heavily meat dependent eating habits. According to the U.N. Food and Agriculture  organization, about 18 percent of all greenhouse gases contributing to climate change come from the billions of large animals raised industrially for human consumption.  That's nearly a fifth of the total. 

A conclusion that's easy to draw is that eating less meat will reduce the production of greenhouse gases. It's a simple step that every thoughtful person can take.  Not only is  reducing meat consumption good for one's health, it's also a very good thing for the planet. 

Eat less meat. Without question, it is an act of compassion Good for your health, good for the planet, good for your soul. 

_________________________

A new study on the environmental burdens of beef, pork, chicken, eggs, dairy and plant products finds that beef is by far the worst offender.

According to the study, published Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, a prominent scientific journal, beef production releases five times the amount of greenhouse gas emissions as the average of other meats and animal products. Nor is that all: Beef requires 28 times more land, 11 times more water, and six times as much reactive nitrogen as the average of the other categories, according to the study.

To calculate the impact of different animal products, the study's authors looked at the environmental effects of producing feed for animals, taking into account land use, water consumption and the potential for nitrogen pollution from fertilizers. (When excess nitrogen leaches into a body of water, it can cause algal blooms that deplete local levels of oxygen and cause harm to other marine organisms.) The researchers also calculated the amount of greenhouse gas given off by the animals themselves, including methane from manure. Ultimately, for each meat or animal product, the researchers were able to determine the amount of resources used to produce one calorie of that product.

When asked about the easiest and most effective way to make one's diet more sustainable, Gidon Eshel, a research professor at the Bard Center for Environmental Policy and the study's lead author, told The Huffington Post: "Really, there's no question about it. Reduce beef whenever possible."
Past research has shown that meat production contributes to global warming at a much higher rate than the cultivation of grains and vegetables. A recent study in the U.K. analyzed the diets of 55,000 people and found that the meat-eaters had twice the carbon footprint of the vegans. But if you're not ready to give up meat entirely, Eshel's study shows that you can have a big impact by just forgoing beef.

The no-beef lifestyle has its high-profile proponents. Earlier this month, business mogul Richard Branson wrote a blog post about his decision to cut beef out of his diet, noting that it was surprisingly easy to accomplish and has made him feel healthier. "I never feel like I'm missing out on anything," Branson wrote.

Eshel told HuffPost that despite a wealth of research into the benefits of a plant-based diet, "people seem unfazed by that in their consumption." Actually, though, meat consumption, and beef consumption in particular, have been on the decline in the United States in recent years. The USDA is projecting that this year, consumption of beef will be the lowest per capita since the 1950s. Whether that's because of rising meat costs, health considerations or growing pro-environment sentiment is difficult to say.

Eshel told HuffPost that maintaining an environmentally friendly diet is harder than marketers often make it seem.

"I really appreciate the good intentions of many individuals who strive in their personal choices to lessen their environmental impact," he said. "I would just caution ... against adhering to canned solutions that are purported to make matters better with little or no evidence that they in fact do."
Just because the meat in your meal is "grass-fed" or "local" doesn't necessarily mean it's good for the planet, said Eshel. More important are details like: Where was the animal raised? What was the climate of that area? What were the specific farming methods used? Someimes, Esehl said, "grass-feeding" can be even worse for the environment than the traditional corn-fed approach.
If the idea of swearing off meat turns your stomach, you can try the "vegan till 6" plan favored by New York Times food writer Mark Bittman. Or you can experiment with the popular Meatless Mondays. One thing's for sure: With animal agriculture responsible for about one-fifth of all greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, there's a lot of room for improvement.

Grocery Stores Without Bees

Found this piece on the net. We depend on bees to pollinate the plants that provide much of our food. Bees and other beneficial insects are in big trouble. Very likely, our use of dangerously toxic pesticides and herbicides has a lot to do with it. Yet another example of how out of step we humans are with the rhythms of nature. It doesn't have to bee that way.

________________________

PROVIDENCE, R.I., June 12, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- One of every three bites of food comes from plants pollinated by honeybees and other pollinators. Yet, major declines in bee populations threaten the availability of many fresh ingredients consumers rely on for their dinner tables.

(Photo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20130612/DA27199)

(Logo:  http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20121015/DA92273LOGO)

To raise awareness of just how crucial pollinators are to our food system, the University Heights Whole Foods Market store temporarily removed all produce that comes from plants dependent on pollinators. They pulled from shelves 237 of 453 products – 52 percent of the department's normal product mix.

Products removed included:

• Apples
• Onions
• Avocados
• Carrots
• Mangos
• Lemons
• Limes
• Honeydew
• Cantaloupe
• Zucchini
• Summer squash
• Eggplant
• Cucumbers
• Celery
• Green onions
• Cauliflower
• Leeks
• Bok choy
• Kale
• Broccoli
• Broccoli rabe
• Mustard greens

 

"Pollinators are a critical link in our food system. More than 85% of earth's plant species – many of which compose some of the most nutritional parts of our diet – require pollinators to exist. Yet we continue to see alarming declines in bee numbers," said Eric Mader, assistant pollinator conservation director at The Xerces Society. "Our organization works with farmers nationwide to help them create wildflower habitat and adopt less pesticide-intensive practices. These simple strategies can tip the balance back in favor of bees."

 

Whole Foods Market offers four more ways to "bee part of the solution." Details are online at www.wholefoodsmarket.com/sharethebuzz.

• Bee organic: Buying organic is an easy way to support pollinators.
• Bee savvy at home: Most pest problems can be solved without toxic and persistent pesticides.
• Bee a gardener: Plant bee-friendly flowers and fruits.
• Bee a smart shopper: Look for the "Share the Buzz" signs throughout stores to support vendors also donating to The Xerces Society.
  • "Queen Bee" partners ($25,000): Mrs. Meyer's Clean Day and Hain Celestial (MaraNatha, WestSoy, Terra Chips, Arrowhead Mills)
  • "Worker Bee" partners ($5,000): Attune Foods, Cuties, Kashi, Sweet Leaf Teas, Muir Glen Organic, Talenti Gelato, So Delicious, Udi's Gluten Free.

 

SOURCE Whole Foods Market

Never Seconds

In Scotland in a small town named Lochgilphead, a nine year old school girl from named Martha Payne took an interest in the lunches served at her school.  She began photographing them and posting the photos along with a rating on a blog she created called 'Never Seconds'.  She soon found many other young students from other countries sending in photos and reports about what they were eating at their school lunches. Her blog became such a sensation that one day the authorities at her school called her in to the 'office',  and told her she could no longer photograph her school lunches and write about them. 

Martha Payne

Martha reported to her blog followers that she was being shut down.  What followed was a minor firestorm, with internet followers from around the world coming to Martha's defense.  The school board backtracked and gave their blessing to Martha to resume her daily ritual of photographing and reporting on her meals at school. 

Now Martha's blog is largely focused on the stories of students and school lunches around the world.   Martha has a donation link on her page to a group called Mary's Meals that is raising money to build kitchens at schools in places like Malawi in Africa.  Martha's effort has raised a lot of money for Mary's Meals.

Martha Payne and her father have co-authored a book about her experience.  Next, they will travel to Malawi to visit students there who were touched by her blog.


Here is a story from the U.K. Guardian newspaper about Martha's story...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jun/16/martha-payne-never-seconds-blog-climbdown


Here is the link to Martha Payne's Never Seconds webpage...
http://neverseconds.blogspot.com

I love stories like this.  They give me hope...

Bushmeat

In West Africa, people depend on bushmeat for survival. We're talking about wild animals hunted and killed for human consumption.  Professional hunters armed with snares and rifles fan out in the heavily vegetated jungle in places like the Congo and the Cameroon  to collect every kind of warm blooded vertebrate for sale in the 'meat' sections of local village markets. In West Africa, villages don't have supermarkets with the latest packaged edibles.  They don't have McNuggets  or frozen pizza they can heat up in the oven. They don't have ovens either. Even if they did, the people have no money to buy food.  The average person survives on less than two dollars a day in West Africa.   They get along the traditional way, subsisting on what nature provides,  plants like cassava root and bushmeat.

Subsistence living has worked in West Africa for tens of thousands of years of human evolution.  It does not work anymore.  There quite simply are too many people trying to survive on nature's rapidly dwindling reserves.

As much as twenty percent of the bushmeat trade is in wild primates. We're talking gorillas, chimps, colobus, and various other kinds of monkeys. These creatures have hands like ours, and large brains in relation to body size. The evidence shows they are sentient beings, able to experience pleasure and pain.  They can't speak like humans, but the closest primate relatives to humans - the great apes like gorillas and chimps - can be trained to communicate to a remarkable degree using sign language. Koko the gorilla is wonderful testament to that fact.  She understands  more than a thousand hand signs and more than two thousand spoken words.

In West Africa, we humans are eating our closest relatives; consuming them as food.  There is little or no malevolence involved.  It's just a fact. It's all they have ever known in West Africa, and there is no alternative.  Corporations that provide an abundance of food for developed nations have little presence in West Africa, mostly because there is no money in it.

Eating our closest relatives is not new to humans.   A hundred thousand years ago, 'Australopithicus' - a close human relative that walked erect, but had a smaller brain -  shared the landscape with humans. Guess who hunted the lesser species and ate them.  If you haven't seen the 1981 movie, Quest for Fire, check it out. See who's tied up, hanging from a tree limb, waiting to be put on the dinner menu.

In 2012, the bushmeat trade in West Africa is an abhorent fact of life.

Eating off the land is the way it's always been in Africa. In fact, before developed nations were developed, that's how it was in those places as well. Humans were hunter/gatherers before they became farmers.  In much of Africa, it's still that way. Estimates suggest up to 90% of animal protein consumed by people living in the Congo Basin comes from bushmeat. Only now, the human population is exploding. Humans are taking more and more of the land, the water, and other resources for themselves.   The massive wild animal slaughter that is taking place is devastating.

It's easy to apply lazy logic and place all the blame on the Africans for the demise of their wildlife. That would be very wrong.

Rapacious multi-national corporations covet the still largely untapped natural resources in Africa.   In the Congo, Cameroon, and other West African nations, we're talking timber and a whole range of valuable rare earth minerals that have already been substantially exploited in other parts of the world.  Killing off the wildlife that currently occupy the lands these outside forces covet is the first step to opening up rampant exploitation.

It's hard to see much hope for the wild creatures of West Africa.  There are already parts of the landscape in the Congo basin that have largely been stripped of their wildlife.

The bushmeat trade is heartbreaking.  I so wish there was a way to stop it, or at least reduce it to a level that nature can manage.

Much of the world's human population growth is taking place in Africa.  That's because we gave them modern medicine but have not helped them manage their fertility.  The Democratic Republic of the Congo currrently has a human population of about 75 million.  That is expected to mushroom to 180 million by 2050.   With all those people dependent on bushmeat, what chance do the wild animals have?  It pains me in the deepest way to think that gorillas, chimpanzees,   other primate species - in fact all the wildlife - in Africa are doomed to extinction, to a great degree from being eaten by humans.

Since the earliest days of colonialism, Europeans have manipulated the African continent.  One thing we haven't done is provide access to family planning.   By focusing mostly on what we can take from Africa rather than what we could do for it, we are complicit in its demise. Africa's expanding human populations will eat their wildlife legacy to survive, and when that legacy is gone, and there is nothing left to eat, the people will starve.  As devastasting as it is to consider, the entire African continent is caught up in a death spiral... not just the animals, but for the  humans who live there as well.

Here is a link to a study about the impact of the bustmeat trade...
http://www.culturallandscapes.ca/blahdocs/uploads/2003bushmeat_and_food_security_1758.pdf


Here is a link to the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force
http://www.bushmeat.org/

Mostly Vegetarian Fifty Years From Now

Some consequences of unchecked human population growth are becoming ever more apparent. World population exceeds seven billion, with the total increasing about 70 million annually.   That's, in effect, the addition of six more cities the size of Los Angeles every year.  At least two billion more people will be on Earth by 2050. 

An article in the Guardian (U.K.) reports that the current portion of human food consumption from animal protein is about twenty percent.  Given the planet's increasing water and food scarcity, the only way to feed a human population expanded to nine billion would be to reduce consumption of animal protein to about five percent of total food intake.

It takes about ten pounds of grain and a huge amount of water to produce one pound of meat for human consumption. The Guardian article quotes Malik Falkenmark at the Stockholm International Water Institute ,  "There will be just enough water if the proportion of animal-based foods is limited to 5% of total calories and considerable regional water deficits can be met by a … reliable system of food trade."

Eating lower on the food chain allows water and grain resources to be used much more efficiently.  It's the only way to avoid mass starvation in the poorest parts of the world.  Beyond that, a transition to a mostly vegetarian lifestyle would have substantial health benefits. It would also mean that the slaughter of literally billions of animals raised now as industrial commodities would be dramatically curtailed. The latter consequence, in itself, is reason enough for me to embrace this inevitable change in human lifestyle.


Here is the link to the article in the Guardian newspaper...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/aug/26/food-shortages-world-vegetarianism