![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dragonlady7via http://ift.tt/2kzc7oY:
Eating Meat Is Bad For The Planet: But What About Just Eating Less Meat?:
rjzimmerman:
Excerpt:
With the idea that any variety of meat reduction—whether it be veganism, vegetarianism, or just deciding to cut out meat one day a week—still benefits the planet, [Brian] Kateman founded the Reducetarian Foundation in 2014 while studying conservation biology at Columbia University. In The Reducetarian Solution, a new anthology edited by Kateman, thought leaders from Singer to economist Jeff Sachs to environmentalist Bill McKibben sound off on the reasons why less meat is a good thing for humans and the planet we inhabit—and why it’s more important to focus on gradual cutbacks and their benefits than forcing yourself into a category like vegan or “flexitarian,” where the focus might drift more toward obeying a set of rules than focusing on a specific global outcome.
The reasons, according to The Reducetarian Solution, are legion. The anthology contains no less than 72 short essays, organized into three overarching categories of mind, body, and planet that traverse every possible argument for meat reduction, from the moral-ethical (large-scale livestock operations expose animals to inhumane conditions), to the health and productivity focused (red meat is linked to sluggishness, heart disease, and cancer), to the environmental (meat production pollutes the air and is an inefficient use of resources). “I love the idea of all these different thought leaders coming together and being united on a single front,” Kateman says. “We don’t have to agree on everything. We don’t have to agree on what the ideal reduction is; we don’t have to agree on the most important cause areas. But we all agree that reducing societal consumption of animal products absolutely has to happen. And we’ll reach that common goal much faster if we work together than continuing to work in silos.”
Reducetarianism, Kateman says, differs crucially from categories like “flexitarian” and “semi-vegetarian” because while the latter describe people who primarily consume plant-based diets and occasionally “cheat” on their commitments (a concept for which Kateman has little patience—punishing yourself for taking the occasional bite of burger distracts from the fact that eating less meat overall is still a net positive), reducetarianism aims for inclusivity, and an acknowledgement, as Kateman writes in the anthology, “that people are at different stages of willingness and commitment to eating less meat.”
Oh this describes a lot of our chicken and pork customers though. They all have different reasons why they’re eating less meat, but really what it comes down to is that primarily, they’re being pickier about the meat they eat, and the first step in that is to stop buying the $5 whole chickens at Wal-Mart. When they buy chickens from us, well, the rock bottom price we can manage is more like $5 per pound, so necessarily, if you keep your food budget low, you can’t afford much meat. But that’s for an animal that you can know everything about– including, in some cases, killing it yourself. Some customers are so determined to take control of their meat eating that that’s one of the ways we get volunteers to help out on processing days. (Two of our most reliable assistants work in exchange for chicken feet so they can make their own bone broth. We don’t sell the feet, but they clean and process them while we’re cleaning up at the end of the slaughter, and that’s what they take home instead of money.)
So a lot of people in my acquaintance have joined the above-described movement out of their own independent realization. It’s not that meat eating is in itself the problem (though for some of them, it is spurred by dietary issues; and some of their interest in locally-processed meat is just that they can be sure it’s free from contaminants), but that they want to be more deliberate about their consumption and purchasing in general, and meat is an excellent cornerstone issue for that.
An omnivorous diet is the most efficient one to pursue if you want to eat local, and if you can get your meat from a mixed-use operator, you know that slaughter waste becomes organic fertilizer on-site, and the waste the animals produced in life is also fertilizer immediately. That’s the whole ethos behind pastured animals. (The egg chickens are spending the winter tilling one of the hoop houses with their feet and beaks; we’ll move it, and them, in spring, and let the ground rest, and next year that will be excellent growing ground.)
(Your picture was not posted)
Eating Meat Is Bad For The Planet: But What About Just Eating Less Meat?:
rjzimmerman:
Excerpt:
With the idea that any variety of meat reduction—whether it be veganism, vegetarianism, or just deciding to cut out meat one day a week—still benefits the planet, [Brian] Kateman founded the Reducetarian Foundation in 2014 while studying conservation biology at Columbia University. In The Reducetarian Solution, a new anthology edited by Kateman, thought leaders from Singer to economist Jeff Sachs to environmentalist Bill McKibben sound off on the reasons why less meat is a good thing for humans and the planet we inhabit—and why it’s more important to focus on gradual cutbacks and their benefits than forcing yourself into a category like vegan or “flexitarian,” where the focus might drift more toward obeying a set of rules than focusing on a specific global outcome.
The reasons, according to The Reducetarian Solution, are legion. The anthology contains no less than 72 short essays, organized into three overarching categories of mind, body, and planet that traverse every possible argument for meat reduction, from the moral-ethical (large-scale livestock operations expose animals to inhumane conditions), to the health and productivity focused (red meat is linked to sluggishness, heart disease, and cancer), to the environmental (meat production pollutes the air and is an inefficient use of resources). “I love the idea of all these different thought leaders coming together and being united on a single front,” Kateman says. “We don’t have to agree on everything. We don’t have to agree on what the ideal reduction is; we don’t have to agree on the most important cause areas. But we all agree that reducing societal consumption of animal products absolutely has to happen. And we’ll reach that common goal much faster if we work together than continuing to work in silos.”
Reducetarianism, Kateman says, differs crucially from categories like “flexitarian” and “semi-vegetarian” because while the latter describe people who primarily consume plant-based diets and occasionally “cheat” on their commitments (a concept for which Kateman has little patience—punishing yourself for taking the occasional bite of burger distracts from the fact that eating less meat overall is still a net positive), reducetarianism aims for inclusivity, and an acknowledgement, as Kateman writes in the anthology, “that people are at different stages of willingness and commitment to eating less meat.”
Oh this describes a lot of our chicken and pork customers though. They all have different reasons why they’re eating less meat, but really what it comes down to is that primarily, they’re being pickier about the meat they eat, and the first step in that is to stop buying the $5 whole chickens at Wal-Mart. When they buy chickens from us, well, the rock bottom price we can manage is more like $5 per pound, so necessarily, if you keep your food budget low, you can’t afford much meat. But that’s for an animal that you can know everything about– including, in some cases, killing it yourself. Some customers are so determined to take control of their meat eating that that’s one of the ways we get volunteers to help out on processing days. (Two of our most reliable assistants work in exchange for chicken feet so they can make their own bone broth. We don’t sell the feet, but they clean and process them while we’re cleaning up at the end of the slaughter, and that’s what they take home instead of money.)
So a lot of people in my acquaintance have joined the above-described movement out of their own independent realization. It’s not that meat eating is in itself the problem (though for some of them, it is spurred by dietary issues; and some of their interest in locally-processed meat is just that they can be sure it’s free from contaminants), but that they want to be more deliberate about their consumption and purchasing in general, and meat is an excellent cornerstone issue for that.
An omnivorous diet is the most efficient one to pursue if you want to eat local, and if you can get your meat from a mixed-use operator, you know that slaughter waste becomes organic fertilizer on-site, and the waste the animals produced in life is also fertilizer immediately. That’s the whole ethos behind pastured animals. (The egg chickens are spending the winter tilling one of the hoop houses with their feet and beaks; we’ll move it, and them, in spring, and let the ground rest, and next year that will be excellent growing ground.)
(Your picture was not posted)
