Grazing Cattle as Being Less Efficient than Growing Crops
"The beef in just one Big Mac represents enough wheat to make five
loaves of bread." This just shows that growing wheat is more efficient
than grazing cattle as the five loaves lasts, on average for a family
of four, about three weeks whereas a Big Mac only lasts one person a
matter of ten minutes, if that! In this essay I am going to discuss
whether or not grazing cattle is less efficient than growing crops.
There are many perspectives to this argument. From a biologists point
of view, plant foods are far more energy efficient than animal
products because when you eat meat, a vast amount of energy is lost
through the food chains, whereas when you eat plant foods such as
wheat, no energy is previously lost because plants are the producers
of the food chains. On the other hand, meat is easy to digest and
therefore, eating meat is also a way of converting energy that we
actually can't eat, such as the energy from grass, even though there
is not much energy left.
A recent report released by vegetarians stated; "Growing crops is at
least five times more energy efficient than crazing cattle, twenty
times more efficient than raising chickens, and over fifty times more
efficient than raising feedlot cattle! In this way, eating animal
products clearly wastes energy resources that were naturally formed
over millions of years, and in the process spews pollution into the
environment we live in." Vegetarians maybe biased because they are
already against eating meat, but these results do back up the point
that this essay is based upon. Another point of view of vegetarians
and animal rights supporters is that grazing cattle just for food is
inhumane as the animals then have to be killed. Vegetarians also are
concerned with the matter of space, "It takes ten times as much land
to maintain a carnivorous diet than to support a vegetarian one."
On a farmer's perspective, they could argue on both sides; crops are
The United States of America has always been held in high regards by immediate neighboring countries as well as a host of other countries. In comparison to a majority of other countries in the globe the US holds superior living standards, stronger economy and expert technology. This was case for mina Anderson who immigrated to the US in search of Green pastures in terms of better pay and better living standards in comparison to the condition back in her native Sweden. Based on the evidence from the assigned reading text, the conditions are ripe for the picking but success depends on a host of other factors. Mina Anderson found greener pastures in the United States of America subject to individual effort and other external factors. In the context of life
From 1865 to 1900, production of crops increased, and prices dropped. (Document A) These crops were shipped east, where they were eaten and exported to other countries. This was due to technology, but government policy caused economic conditions in the west barely improved as a result. In fact, despite the success many farmers experienced, many in the west still struggled to put food on the table.
My starting point for this paper was the movie Food Inc. directed by Robert Kenner. Although the film’s main purpose was to expose how detrimental today’s food industry is to our health, at the same time I found myself wondering how the food industry and our diets affect the environment. The film mentions how the meat industry takes heavy tolls on the environment because of the land that must be devoted in order to raise livestock—both to grow the food for the animals to eat and to provide a place for the animals to reside. The film also mentions how there are only 4 or 5 major crops that are grown in America—including corn, wheat, and soybean, which are used a lot for animal feed—which decreases America’s biodiversity (Food). All of these things led me to pursue the question: how does our consumption of animal products affect the environment?
In the book Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer, the author talks about, not only vegetarianism, but reveals to us what actually occurs in the factory farming system. The issue circulating in this book is whether to eat meat or not to eat meat. Foer, however, never tries to convert his reader to become vegetarians but rather to inform them with information so they can respond with better judgment. Eating meat has been a thing that majority of us engage in without question. Which is why among other reasons Foer feels compelled to share his findings about where our meat come from. Throughout the book, he gives vivid accounts of the dreadful conditions factory farmed animals endure on a daily basis. For this reason Foer urges us to take a stand against factory farming, and if we must eat meat then we must adapt humane agricultural methods for meat production.
There is much to be said about how exactly meat is being produced. In the present day, there are hardly any farms out there that still practice the traditional and environmental - friendly way. Animal agriculture is widely used all over the world and greatly contributes to climate change. Meat production leads to global warming because of the combination of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. The process of raising animal is the major source to these harmful gases. It is vital to save the world from the worst impacts of climate change by reducing meat consumption. However stopping this meat eating system is extremely difficult, given that we had been consuming meat ever since our ancestors domesticated animals for that purpose. Over the decade Animal agriculture has been getting worse and worse. In 1973 when the Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz announced ‘’ what we want out of agriculture is plenty of food’’, overproduction was encouraged and lowering the price of meat was carried out; this originally started when there was a massive increase in corn (Wolfson). In order to keep up this mass production of meat, multiple pounds of grains are fed to livestock. Livestock industries depended on corn and soy based food and used over half of the artificial fertilizer used in the United States (McWilliams).
... farms. As for the argument that pasture-raised livestock take up too much time, this is actually incorrect because livestock are mainly self-sufficient in pastures. The livestock feed themselves mainly on grass and may require fewer workers than factory farms. The benefits of organic farming will outweigh the negatives caused by factory farms in the end.
For years organic farmers and conventional farmers have feuded over which is superior. Organic farmers argue that their product is more eco-friendly because they do not use the synthetic chemicals and fertilizers conventional farmer’s use. Conventional farmers argue that their product is healthier and yields more. People tend to have stereotypes regarding the two types of farmers. Organic farmers are usually thought of as liberal, hippy, tree-huggers while conventional farmers are usually thought of as right-wing, industrialists. Obviously, some do adhere to this stereotype, but a majority of these farmers are normal, hardworking people. Although these farmers, both believe in their methods, one is no better than the other. There are advantages and disadvantages to both, but there is no true superior method of crop farming.
Farms are being bought and destroyed at a fast rate. Farmland is being bought by big business so they can expand. Farmland is being subdivided and sold to individuals to buy land for homes. Farmland is also destroyed to start animal reserves. This could eventually have an effect on the economy of the United States. If the United States keeps losing farms at this rate there may not be enough food produced to support the United States. This would mean our imports would increase and our exports would decrease in the food industry. If that were to happen the price of food would increase making it even harder for low-income families to feed themselves.
Domesticated Cattle belong to the family Bovidae and sub family Bovinae, which appeared in the Miocene approximately 20 million years ago. There are more than 800 different cattle breeds recognized worldwide. Cattle are considered the most important and significant domesticated economic animal (Loftus et al. 1994). In addition to milk, cattle contribute other important commodities including meat, hides, traction and dung. The taurine and zebu cattle were probably domesticated and kept around for easy access to food, including meat, milk & their products and for their use as load-bearers and plows. The many archaeological records for domestication of wild forms of cattle (Bos primigenius) indicated that the process
Albert Einstein once said, "Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances of survival for life on earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet." As people move into a more health conscious society, vegetarianism is becoming a popular choice. While some people cannot imagine a day without meat, others are convinced that a vegetarian lifestyle is the better option. There are numerous benefits of being a vegetarian. Some of the reasons are as follows: vegetarianism has multiple health paybacks, is far better for the environment, and is morally sound. Most people believe that vegetarianism is unhealthy, goes against our natural diet, and unnecessary, however, a vegetarian diet offers many health benefits and is more ethical than an omnivorous existence.
per year of farm products, it is 16% of the farms in the US. It also produces
For several years the issue of eating meat has been a great concern to all types of people all over the world. In many different societies controversy has began to arise over the morality of eating meat from animals. A lot of the reasons for not eating meat have to deal with religious affiliations, personal health, animal rights, and concern about the environment. Vegetarians have a greater way of expressing meats negative effects on the human body whereas meat eaters have close to no evidence of meat eating being a positive effect on the human body. Being a vegetarian is more beneficial for human beings because of health reasons, environmental issues, and animal rights.
The global population in the year 2050 is expected to be nine billion and the agricultural demand is expected to double. With the current population already over seven billion people, there are hunger issues all around the world (“New” par. 1). How are we going to deal with food shortages in the future? With less land to work with, strains on the soils, and the lack of water, it is getting harder for the farmers of the world to support our growing population. These complications are making it harder for farmers to produce quality, affordable food. To help the crops grow better, farmers use fertilizers and chemical sprays to enhance growth and control the weeds. Farming in the United States is a relevant business because it supplies people with food, provides people with jobs maintaining the used equipment with the new equipment being much more expensive, and it provides research for more efficient ways on how to feed the world.
Livestock farming plays an integral role in the lives of individuals all over the world. Despite the magnitude of animal agriculture, research on its environment effects has been severely lacking in the past. Recent studies have shown that greenhouse gas emissions from livestock play a much bigger role in global warming than was once thought (Gill, 2009; Miller et. al 2013). The session that I propose will look at the greenhouse gasses emitted by livestock farming and the effects that this has on the ecological environment. Topics will include human reliance on domesticated animals, greenhouse gasses emitted by livestock farming, indirect ecological effects of animal agriculture relating to biodiversity and the water supply, and
and also supply lamb to local butchers. This can sometimes prove to be a costly enterprise for