The Cowspiracy Film Farce
By Joanie Blaxter, founder of Follow Your Gut (Also see comments from Allan Savory in the comments below.)
Don't worry! Just because your teenager (or friend or family member) has watched the movie Cowspiracy: The Sustainability Secret and announced that they are now vegan, there is no reason to panic.
Why not?
Because despite its sophisticated use of infographics, the movie's statistical assertions are not based on sound environmental science and Cowspiracy will be largely discredited by experts over time.
What is the Cowspiracy Film?
It's a 2014 environmental film made by the vegan abolitionist organization, Animals United Movement (A.U.M.) which is making the rounds especially with the Millennials and ecologically conscious adults. The film describes animal agriculture, including fishing, but cows in particular, as singularly responsible for climate change and various kinds of environmental disasters.
The filmmakers, all long time vegans, include Kip Andersen and Keegan Kuhn, and for the 2015 revised version, well known actor Leonardo Di Caprio.
What does the Cowspiracy movie do well?
Technically very sophisticated, this movie manipulates a mountain of eye-catching, color-coded graphs, charts and cartoons in such a way that the viewer is left feeling overwhelmed by strobe-like data bits and wondering, ‘If there's so much of this information, it must be true, right?'
Wrong. Just having a lot of data doesn't make it accurate or correct, especially if it's been carefully cherry-picked.
The real reason the Cowspiracy film is NOT worth watching, besides the mountains of misinformation in it…
The film never grasps a simple environmental concept based on easily observed natural cycles in nature. (My note: Eating vegan is not a natural, long term diet for humans. Never in the history of this planet have there ever been vegan societies. There's a biological reason for that. For peak health, our omnivorous digestive tract and nutritional needs require both animal and plant foods. See Why You Should Think Twice About Vegetarian and Vegan Diets by Kresser.) But back to the environmental reasons…
The problem is not cows. The problem is humans incorrectly managing cows.
Grazing livestock have been critical to the health of range lands since long before the appearance of homo sapiens. Think of gazelle on the savannah and bison on the prairie. What we now understand is that without the presence of natural grazers and their predators, the land will rapidly deteriorate and desertify.
Once we domesticate livestock or poultry, but particularly herbivores, humans must learn how to manage them in a manner that imitates this natural cycle in order to protect the health of the soil. Meat is just a byproduct of this environmental animal-soil cycle.
Animals are not the problem. ANIMALS are THE SOLUTION. Where people get confused is…
It's not WHAT you eat. It's HOW it's grown or raised.
The reality is that the industrial model of food production – of either animals or plants – is damaging to the soil, toxic, unhealthy, inefficient, unprofitable to the farmer, environmentally dirty and basically disastrous at every level.
Holistic Management of livestock, however, is actually REGENERATIVE. It restores soil fertility, the springs return and communities begin to thrive again. The presence of properly managed, domestic animals on the land is critical to this equation.
The areas of land managed under (Savory's Holistic Management) methods are turning from arid, degraded land, which can no longer support the communities living from it, back to:
- Productive grasslands that have
- Flowing watercourses (drinking water) and
- Healthy regenerative grasslands (food and fertility) – all through careful controlled grazing management.
(Source, emphasis mine: An Ethical Meat Eater's Response to the Film)
The obvious solution? Never eat feedlot beef, only 100% grass fed/grass finished and preferably from a Holistic Management rancher.
Hard to believe? Just watch this 22-min TED Talk with Allan Savory: How to Fight Desertification and Reverse Climate Change.
After all, seeing is believing.
Or for something even shorter, but still demonstrably to the point, look at this YouTube clip (3min 40sec) showing how holistically managed livestock help the soil to retain water: Effective Rainfall Demo.
As a former 29-year vegetarian myself, it wasn't that long ago I would have enthusiastically applauded the Cowspiracy movie.
But I speak from experience on this topic. Passion without true, mature discrimination will rob you of nuance, blind you, and propel you far, far down a dead end road.
Eating vegan is an overly simplistic, ineffective “solution” to an incredibly complex environmental situation.
And it reminds me of a comment made to me at a dinner party back in the late 80's when I was still eating a meatless diet.
In response to my enthusiastic review of a just published, environmentally pro-vegan book, the person I was speaking with looked searchingly at me and said “Sounds like you think everyone should be vegetarian.”
Feeling unexpectedly “outed,” I responded that, um, well, yes, I suppose I did think that. Long pause. Before walking away, he said…
“Try telling that to all the indigenous peoples of the world.”
Wow… hadn't really considered that aspect in my fiery enthusiasm.
Are we, the white, industrialized world that made this environmental mess to begin with, now dictating to tribes globally that they can no longer eat their local, traditional foods or produce items if they involve animals?
Cowspiracy's single pointed, abolitionist vegan position is the essence of black-or-white thinking and extremism and does little to foster dialog.
Furthermore, three aspects of Cowspiracy in particular just plain offended my sensibilities of both fairness and credibility.
1. The filmmakers' biased treatment of Allan Savory
Since Savory's principles of Holistic Management concretely present probably the biggest documented challenge to Cowspiracy‘s promotion of veganism, I was looking forward to how the movie would attempt to statistically “disprove” what is already being successfully done using Holistic Management methods on millions of acres in dozens of countries around the world.
In a nutshell, Cowspiracy deals with the reality of grazing cows measurably reversing climate change by… NOT addressing this hot button topic at all!
(Huh. Could this be the real conspiracy behind the filmmakers' invented word Cowspiracy?)
Instead, the film spends exactly 2 minutes, from 51:00 to 53:00, engaging in shameless, unfounded character assassination.
Allan Savory confesses in his now very famous TED talk… that as part of the ‘conventional’ thinking about overgrazing, he authorised the shooting of thousands of elephants to try to reverse desertification on National Parks in South Africa.
As an animal lover this was a tragic moment in his life, made worse by the fact that the desertification process actually got worse following the removal of the grazing animals.
Savory admits this was the biggest mistake of his life and has entirely dedicated his life to finding a solution.
(Source: An Ethical Meat Eater's Response to the Film)
Did you carefully read that last sentence? Savory has spent his entire life since, openly atoning for the destruction of those elephants.
Furthermore, Savory was not alone in the decision to eliminate the elephants.
His recommendation, before a single animal was even shot, was analyzed first by a team of government-appointed wildlife experts who ultimately approved the go-ahead.
Nevertheless, Savory describes this experience as “The saddest and greatest blunder of my life. And I will carry that to my grave.”
However, it was out of the horror of that turning point moment that Savory eventually came to believe that the conventional university wisdom of the time, that grazers destroy rangeland, was fundamentally wrong.
As a result, he began to develop the principles of Holistic Management which stand in direct opposition to conventional environmental thinking by stressing the absolute necessity of grazers, including elephants, on the land for healthy maintenance of the soil.
This is public knowledge and clearly addressed in Savory's now world famous TED Talk with more than 4.4 million views.
And how does Cowspiracy relate that story?
Allan Savory is graphically presented as nothing more than a violent, relentless elephant killer. The two-minute segment ends with Andersen saying, “This is not someone I would ever take ecological advice from.”
Why would Cowspiracy's filmmakers choose this manipulative, inaccurate approach?
Simple. If viewers can be tricked by the film into believing that Savory is untrustworthy, then they will never educate themselves about Holistic Management's extraordinary environmental successes replicated around the world.
The filmmakers must have found the quality of Savory's environmental work to be incontrovertible. Why else would they not dare address it concretely in any way in their film?
When Cowspiracy had its official opening, Allan Savory surprised everyone by standing up in the audience and publicly questioning their characterization of him in their film. He also met with the filmmakers later in private in an attempt to emphasize their common ground as environmentalists.
Unfortunately, despite re-editing their film a year later, Andersen and Kuhn failed to amend Cowspiracy to present a more accurate picture of Savory and the teachings of the Savory Institute.
In direct contrast, Savory, even when pressed in public, will not say a single negative word about Andersen and Kuhn except that he believes their film is factually inaccurate. He still, to this day, hopes to create a bridge with the filmmakers through their common desire for a better world.
That kind of behavior is why Allan Savory is one of my heroes.
Knowing this background has boomeranged Andersen's own words right back on to himself and his own film, rather than Savory:
“This is not someone I would ever take ecological advice from.”
2. The movie's delusion of a conspiracy against the entire vegan movement, including the filmmakers
It's important to understand that this movie is not actually a documentary, but in fact, it is what's known in the industry as a mock documentary or docu-drama.
It has a pretend plot line designed to funnel the viewer into a particular conclusion.
Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with using the ‘mock-doc' form to get across a specific agenda. I do, however, have a problem with using a film to fabricate threats against the lives of actual people, in this case, the filmmakers.
About an hour into the movie, the ‘star,' Andersen, plays back an answering machine message from an unidentified person saying that “due to the growing controversial subject matter” a major funder has decided to withdraw financial support from the production of the film.
From this point on, the mock-doc moves into pure fantasy presented disingenuously as something real.
Andersen's explanation of why his film is perceived as “too controversial” is not, of course, because his data is skewed, but because he's actually being targeted as a vegan for telling the truth.
Lacking the reality of actual death threats, nevertheless Andersen talks about being frightened he may be killed and, of course, considers stopping production on the film, until… (silent drum roll) the HERO realizes he must “live for something, or die for nothing!”
Oh, please.
The filmmakers invented that entire sequence for nothing more than fictional dramatic purposes.
We're supposed to believe Andersen and Kuhn were afraid for their lives simply because someone decided NOT to give them money???
3. The film's deliberate use of misinformation and skewed data to frighten viewers into adopting their political agenda
Wouldn't you love to know the real reason that financial backer pulled their money from the film? My guess? The funder learned that:
Cowspiracy's real agenda is to promote abolitionist veganism… This strand of veganism is pretty much fundamentalist veganism, meaning it allows for no alternatives or compromises.
The real goal of Abolitionist vegans is to get rid of all livestock. They oppose any form of livestock management.
To achieve this goal, such advocates pretty much use any means necessary to reach their goal including:
- Gross oversimplification of complex issues,
- Finding “scape cows,”
- Cherry picking the worse statistics,
- Spinning those statistics, and in some cases
- Downright lying to further their cause.
… absolutism is counterproductive, and doesn't lead to real meaningful debate or solutions. Absolutism stifles dialogue.
(Source, emphasis mine: LA Chefs movie review – Cowspiracy: truth or propaganda?)
Furthermore, there is no conspiracy amongst environmental organizations to deny the effects of animal agriculture on the environment.
Animal ag is one element in an extremely complex cycle of interlocking consequences. Despite what the film states, in fact, 100% grass-fed cattle have been shown to have NO carbon footprint and some studies have even demonstrated that grazing cows can cause a decrease in greenhouse gases.
You can't simply replace meat with plant foods and expect to produce a reduced carbon footprint, particularly not if that vegan food grows in giant, industrial, monoculture fields.
Besides, does anyone ever munch on uncooked wheat kernels or lentils?
“High-protein” plant foods all require some degree of processing – think of the energy, water and chemicals needed to produce soy “hot dogs.” The more processing required to make something edible, the higher the carbon footprint.
Ask yourself this the next time someone offers you a tofu burger or fake egg made of yellow peas:
Does this food enhance soil health? Is it beneficial to the carbon cycle? How was it produced? Am I supporting what I want for the planet when I buy it?
…It’s not the type of food one eats that will determine the future, it’s how it was produced.
(Sourc: What Is Soil Health Food?)
Cowspiracy film: Exactly how inaccurate is it?
The entire section on sustainable ranching is flat out wrong because the statistical projections used, among other errors and omissions, do not include the fact that even conventionally produced cattle spend the majority of their lives on grass before being brought into the feedlot.
In an almost comical moment during the film… Kip fails to realize or mention that over 3/4 of cattle in the US are already on grass…
There is obviously no reference to the Union of Concerned Scientists 2011 report that states: “Climate-friendly beef production practices reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions while increasing carbon sequestration…
(Similarly, Kip states) there are a billion “cows” in CAFO's… (when in fact) 66 mill head of US inventory including bulls, cows, calves and replacement heifers are on GRASS…
In reality, city dweller Kip is clueless.
(Emphasis mine, Source: LA Chefs review – Cowspiracy movie: truth or propaganda?)
Another major omission from the film is that globally most pasture land is too mountainous, too wet or too dry, too exposed or inaccessible, etc. to be plowed up for agriculture. This same land, however, is ideal for grazing livestock.
In fact, the movie fails to address many environmental realities that a vegan diet can either NEVER resolve, or will make worse, as Julie Finigan Morris describes:
The film’s water statistics are equally crazy… especially in the case of pastured animals, at least some of this water returns to the land immediately – it is not ‘locked up’ in the animal! If a cow grazes it drinks very little anyway, but even what it drinks from a stream or trough will be passed directly back onto the pasture within a few hours!
Veganism will not eliminate dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico. In fact much of those are the result of nitrogen fertilizers flowing from soybean (read: tofu, fake meat) and corn monocrops covering the Midwest. Corn and soy crops reported record production levels in 2014, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Nor does veganism solve the problems of deforestation or desertification, also symptoms of poor land management. Palm oil farming takes out rain forests too. Soybean fields blanketing the Midwest and the bare soil – soil loss – associated with large-scale vegetable monocultures have their own massive environmental consequences.
(Source: What Is Soil Health Food?)
In regards to the Cowspiracy movie, Nicolette Hahn Niman, former environmental attorney, industrial farm animal production model expert and author of Defending Beef, said to me heatedly, “Oh, don't get me going about that film!!!”
Niman said there are so many factual errors in the Cowspiracy movie that she didn't even know where to begin talking about them all.
An interesting aside about Niman is that, as a lifelong vegetarian married to a rancher, her writings clearly discriminate between the evils of factory farming while recognizing that animal management is key to reversing desertification and increasing soil fertility.
I also highly recommend her first book, Righteous Porkchop: Finding a Life and Good Food Beyond Factory Farms, for a refreshingly balanced, yet incisive look at the inherent weaknesses of the industrial model of food production.
Niman pointed out that most of the statistical projections presented by the Cowspiracy film is built directly upon the discredited ‘Livestock’s Long Shadow’ report by the United Nations Food and Agriculture organization.
Only a year after its publication in 2006, multiple statistics and conclusions in this report were corrected by:
…a more credible organisation; the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) – a Nobel Prize-winning body of scientists who’s opinions are considered indisputable on facts relating to global warming.
(Source: An Ethical Meat Eater's Response to the Film)
Seven years later, the authors for Livestock's Long Shadow subsequently published their 2013 Revisions which considerably lowered their emissions estimates from the original report:
… that lower the prior report's livestock emission numbers from 18% down to 14.5%… (and) also states that agricultural emissions can be cut an additional 30% with better “intensified” management practices.
(Source: LA Chefs movie review – Cowspiracy film: truth or propaganda?)
Nevertheless, Andersen and Kuhn deliberately chose to not include any of this published, more credible data in their Cowspiracy film, not in the original 2014 version, nor even in the 2015 revised version.
Remember how I said the movie leaves the viewer feeling overwhelmed by a mountain of data?
Once I understood that much of that “mountain” consists of cherry-picked information from discredited, outdated and questionable sources, it left me wondering about those famous words.
If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it…
people will eventually come to believe it.
While this sensationalized and technically savvy movie initially made a splash, I do believe the filmmakers' deliberate use of:
- Contemptible, baseless character assassination,
- Fictionalized conspiracy dramas, and
- Outdated and skewed statistics
…will become apparent over time as farming, ranching and environmental experts increasingly respond to this distorted dramatization.
I must confess to my personal disappointment in Leonardo. *Sigh* But, after all, even (especially?) movie stars make mistakes.
Probably it makes the most sense for viewers to rely on them for what it is they are best known which is… to act in movies.
For more information on the environmentally questionable “statistics” used in the Cowspiracy film, see:
- An Ethical Meat Eater's Response to the Film by Caroline Watson
- LA Chefs review – Cowspiracy movie: truth or propaganda? by Stephen Zwick
- What Is Soil Health Food? by Julie Finnegan Morris
Want to reverse climate change AND save the grasslands?
The Savory Institute is doing just that working with ranchers and farmers all over the globe…
Check out their indiegogo page and consider them in your year-end giving: CLICK HERE.
***Also, see Allan Savory's insightful words here in the comment section below!
More Resources on True Sustainable Farming
- Click here for a safe, healthy source for pastured meats if you don't have a good local source.
- Digestive gas is a warning sign and not just for vegans!
- Nicolette's book, The Righteous Porkchop
- The Vegetarian Myth by Lierre Keith
- Cows Save the Planet by Judith Schwartz
- How to Stop the Drought in California… And Everywhere? by Joanie Blaxter
- Are Vegetarians Moral Heros? by Joanie Blaxter
- What You Never Even Knew You Should Ask About Grass Fed Beef by Joanie Blaxter
- Are Meat Eaters Ruining the Earth? by Kelly
- Why We Eat Humane by Kimberly Hartke
- What Is a CAFO and Safe Alternatives by Kelly
- Why Eat Local Organic Sustainable Foods by Kelly
This was a post by my sweet friend, Joanie Blaxter, now a regular writer around here!
Joanie is the founder of Follow Your Gut and a health coach who has been in sales and education in the natural foods and products industry since the early 70’s, with her most recent six years spent as a vitamin specialist in a natural foods store.
For dietary consultations, Joanie can be contacted here. Joanie’s past articles are located here.
Caryl Elzinga says
Thank you for writing this well researched article and for giving Savory the recognition he is due. It’s exciting to see more and more people recognizing that grazing can be a powerful positive ecological tool that people can support with their food choices.
Joanie Blaxter says
@ Caryl You’re welcome! And, to tell you the truth, the sole reason it got written is because I attended HMI’s annual conference a couple years ago and in a Q&A asked his assistant when was Allan going to produce a piece of writing refuting the misinformation in Cowspiracy? Lo and behold, Allan S himself stood up in the front row, turned to me and said he thought it was best to ignore it, that it would die under the weight of its own inaccuracy. So, I decided that SOMEBODY had to defend Allan against the ridiculous characterization in that movie.
Miriam Caceres says
I know people that watched forks over knives and have declared veganism. And they really have no clue on real facts
Joanie Blaxter says
@ Miriam Yup! This article is a good place for those kind of people to start to educate themselves on how veganism is NOT the best solution for the environment. For a good article on why vegan/vegetarianism is a poor choice for health, check out Chris Kresser’s Why You Should Think Twice about Vegetarian and Vegan Diets: https://chriskresser.com/why-you-should-think-twice-about-vegetarian-and-vegan-diets/
Allan Savory says
Joanie not sure if I am repeating ( have difficulty keeping tabs on so much on internet!) but here is a blog that will help any sincere vegan or vegetarian I believe https://savory.global/allanUncensored/Vegan-and-Vegetarian-Environmentalism-and%20Ethics
Joanie Blaxter says
Oh thank you Allan! I will check that article out!
KitchenKop says
Allan, that’s a great post and I’ll be sharing it on my social media, thank you!
Kelly
Allan Savory says
Thanks Kelly. Although long unfortunately this latest flare up from New York Magazine is what we all need to be focussing on – not sure if you have studied it https://www.savory.global/uncensored/hope-future-first-real-hope-centuries/
Linnaea says
Hi Kelly,
I’m Linnaea from Alderspring Ranch Grass Fed Organic Beef, and I can attest that the Holistic Management practices do work. We’ve started a practice we call “inherding,” which involves living with the cattle 24/7 to keep them out of sensitive ecological areas and endangered species habitats, and to prevent them from grazing too long in one area, moving the cattle in the same way bison used to move in our area years ago. This year is the third year running we’ve done the project, and as I ride behind the cattle I’ve noticed that I have never seen the landscape this vibrant and alive. The desert we ride in is literally blooming, and I think it’s because it hasn’t been heavily grazed for three years now.
What I’ve seen at the ranch I work at is, I know, a very small step in a big problem. I’m glad we have advocates like Allan Savory, Joel Salatin, and you to inform people and push for more sustainable agricultural practices. It is very frustrating that our culture tends to adopt a band-aid fix for our agricultural issues. For example, creating fertilizers to keep overworked land productive and thereby causing a whole slew of additional problems. I sense a shift in the cultural mindset today in that a lot of people these days demand to know where their food comes from. But the whole situation is so screwed up it can be kind of depressing. Oh well. Small steps, right?
Thanks for helping us make those steps. And for clearing up the fog and misinformation surrounding these issues. I’ll continue to keep up with your blog.
Rebecca Stone McCue says
Hope you read Sierra magazine this month. Savory’s proposition does not hold up to scientific scrutiny and probably doing much damage to the environment.
Joanie Blaxter says
@ Rebecca I will go read that article. Don’t know who wrote it or what their agenda is, but I’ve personally met dozens of rancher/farmers who will tell you from personal experience over decades that Holistic Managment is NOT damaging the soil and environment, but improving it. See Peter Donovan’s work measuring soil carbon increases: Managing Wholes https://www.managingwholes.com/
Caitlin Horning says
When we were still farming, it took 2 years before the vegan who was helping us admitted that you NEED animals in order to have a proper farm eco-system.
Judith Ann Conigliaro says
Duh?
Caitlin Horning says
You would think it was that simple, Judith. Ha, ha. The ignorance was willful.
Joanie Blaxter says
@ Caitlin and Judith – Yes, I think that perspective also applies to the filmmakers behind Cowspiracy. They knew about Allan Savoury’s statistics when they made the film, but chose to resort to baseless character assassination as a distraction, rather than address the truth of what Allan has accomplished. Also willful.
Kate Bowen says
yes! this is just what we do in our pasture…it is insane. our soil was depleted after just being hayed for 40 years…finally it’s getting some manure on it and happy!
Joanie B says
@ Jennifer Lindahl and Kate Bowen – Thank you so much for your comments from the “real life” world of those who actually produce our food and improve the soil from which it comes! It is so easy for eaters to create criticisms and solutions from an abstract Ivory Tower of statistics. I love hearing from farmers who grapple with the reality of how thier actions can improve the world. Keep on!
Jennifer Lindahl says
We have seen the same thing happen in our pasture. The pasture was in CRP, it was in desperate need of proper management. We have run the goats, sheep and cows through it with some success but with the meat birds rotated through some parts the last two years, it’s AMAZING.
Veganism says
There is no humane slaughter, and that is enough reason. The only way I can see a “good” way to eat meat is if the animal died naturally, not killed. I mean if you family were killed do you want to hear “they were killed humanly.” No! And as for the “natural” argument, well molestation is natural. Does that mean we should do it? No! And for the people that just absolutely hate the documentary….so what! That’s not the only reason to go vegan! Even if the documentary was wrong does that mean veganism as a whole is wrong? make the connection and make the change. And don’t bullshit me with the “stop forcing religion on me!” Respect existence or expect resistance.
mariana says
I guess I totally misunderstood cowspiracy or maybe you did. When I watched it what I learned was: the only way to save the planet is to start eating less meat and animal products because we are eating more than we need!!! If all cows were all grown in extensive fields it wouldn’t be enough, theres just no enough space! The only solution is moderation!!! Moderate your consumption of any animal product, if we all cut it half we will see improvement!
No one said stop eating meat completely and I can’t remember hearing meat is poison in the documentary… I do remember listening that to continue growing livestock the way it is right now is not sustainable… in order for it to be sustainable we need to stop eating so much meat! Balance is the key to everything, always.
If you watch o listen to someone or something, and you don’t even give it a chance you won’t learn anything good from it.
Allan Savory says
There is more information at https://savory.global/newsroom Just scroll down to Allan Savory Uncensored and view blogs on why it is essential to address what is complex, and to use livestock properly managed to address climate change. Cowspiracy producers knew this but still went ahead doing great damage unfortunately
ijustdontwannabeignorant says
There is no “how”. Whatever best way you use to raise the cows, they still produce METHANE, and that alone is enough to ruin the environment. And then you might think because they produce methane, we shall stop them from ruining the environment by slaughtering them. But no, the reason that there’s so much methane in the air is because we overpopulate them. We did this, for the sake of their tasty corpse flesh. And about populating the cows so they wouldn’t go extinct: Cows are not ours to dominate. We all know the reason for animal extinction, or at least endangered species. Elephants slaughtered for ivory. Sharks killed for their fins. Bees for honey (Yes, the population of bees are plummeting at an alarming rate.). Look around you, THE REASON ANIMALS WENT EXTINCT ALWAYS INVOLVES THE ACT OF HUMANS. We just keep looking for absurd excuses to not stop eating meat, from “we need protein” to “it’s my personal choice to eat meat”. Well, yes, it’s your personal choice, but when your “personal choice” involves the safety risk of men working in slaughterhouses AND the destruction of the environment AND the suffering of animals, it’s just not personal anymore. Let’s be honest. We’ve all noticed the climate changes, the extinction of animals and the going-to extinctions. The acidic rain. Even oceans are acidic now. And WE ALL KNOW its the doings of humans that caused all of these. But we just keep making up stupid excuses to make ourselves feel better.
The welfare of animals and the state of environment are both interconnected. One thing leads to another. I’m not saying everyone MUST go vegan, but reducing the intake of meat could make a huge difference. Thank you for your patience.
Joanie B says
@ ijustdontwannabeignorant “Whatever best way you use to raise the cows, they still produce METHANE, and that alone is enough to ruin the environment.” Actually, that is not true because we know for a fact that “vast herds of wild ruminants existed for thousands of years without causing significant increases in atmospheric spikes in methane levels.” For more information, see How Does Livestock Produce Methane? https://www.examiner.com/article/la-chef-editorial-food-issues-how-does-livestock-produce-methane?CID=examiner_alerts_article
Abigail Tuha Moli says
I haven’t watched Cowspiracy yet, but I seen FOOD INC on PIVOT! I’m just done eating meat & poultry for life sis. And I’m not judging anyone who does.. My dad is tha #1 meat lover our there lol I just had to change tha way I eat for myself 🙂
Joanie Blaxter says
Carolyn, re: “Eating meat is just plain not necessary”
As a former lacto-vegetarian for 29 years, I can tell you from experience that low-level malnutrition is a very slow, but, nevertheless, incredibly destructive process that affects one’s hormones, emotional state, cognitive and processing abilities, and health at every level. Over a decade later I am STILL trying to repair the damage I did to my body from my long term vegetarian diet.
You don’t notice in the beginning because you are steadily using up reserves. Then after awhile you tell yourself it couldn’t possibly be your diet because look at all the healthy vegetarians in the world!
The ONLY way to know for sure that your body is not suffering from what you are putting into it is to get the right kind of TESTING done. Please read Why You Should Think Twice About Vegetarian and Vegan Diets https://chriskresser.com/why-you-should-think-twice-about-vegetarian-and-vegan-diets/. And if you would like to work with an excellent nutritionist who will offer you a diet designed for optimum health while remaining vegan/veg, contact Denise Minger at https://rawfoodsos.com/for-vegans/.
stephanieholbrook2012 says
Allan Savory is my hero too!!! Love him! Cows save the planet!
Mike Miller says
I do believe that processed meat does cause cancer, it’s not cause of the meat. It the chemicals the put in it.
Carolyn Serebreny says
The cruelty involved is reason enough to stop eating meat.
Kelly the Kitchen Kop says
Carolyn Serebreny, I agree with you regarding cruelty if you are referring to CAFO farms, which force animals to live in very crowded, unhealthy, unnatural conditions. But pasture-based farming not only allows animals to live a natural, happy, healthy life, but also restores soil vitality and can actually reverse desertification. A natural, healthy ecosystem requires grazing animals as an integral part of the whole, but CAFO farms remove that element and contribute to environmental destruction in several ways outlined in the post.
Carolyn Serebreny says
Yes, there are indigenous grazer species, but it would have been nice if we’d left them alone. It’s great that those raised for food lead what they think are natural lives, until they are slaughtered.
Kelly the Kitchen Kop says
Carolyn Serebreny — well the other option, if they’re not humanely slaughtered for food (as was God’s plan for humans and animals), is to let predators rip them to shreds out in nature.
Carolyn Serebreny says
I do not invoke God to allow me to inflict cruelty upon other creatures when there are other food options available. Aren’t there enough horrors committed in His name already? There is no humane way to end the life of a creature who wants to live. Predators and prey in Nature always strike their own balance. I’m surprised by your response in light of other knowledge shown in your blog.
Kelly the Kitchen Kop says
Carolyn Serebreny Just so you know, my tone is only conversational, I’m not trying to come off rude. This is how I see it though, humans have eaten the meat of animals since time began, and I don’t see it as cruel. Now CAFO farms? THAT is cruel and wrong, which is why we don’t eat that meat. Take care!
Carolyn Serebreny says
No rudeness perceived, just trying to promote a new way of thinking that excludes violence and killing of any kind. Eating meat is just plain not necessary, and our bison are even being “culled” so that they won’t infringe upon ranching operations.
Allan Savory says
Mic the vegan.
You state 99% of meat is factory farmed. I am not sure of the exact amount, but it is shocking as you say. As a sensible citizen I hope you will protest this as I have for many years. Condemn such industrial agriculture, please, whether vegan or not, and get everyone you can doing so because this is so damaging to our health, environment and economy.
But why condemn the animals or eating meat? That really is a case of getting the bull by the udder. Unfortunately most people make the mistake of not condemning our reductionist management and policies, but instead react against the animals that are innocent and desperately needed back on the land to reverse desertification and save civilization as we know it. Land is turning to deserts because it is overrested with insufficient animal impact to prevent desertification, desertification resulting from the same reductionist management that leads to industrial animal production. So management is the issue but you seem to ignore that.
You feel that my TED talk explaining desertification, and finally getting to millions of people for the first time, with about 96% of people responding gratefully to the hope of doing something simple, practical and based entirely on sound science, I have done damage. You feel I am having them feel justified eating more meat with a whitewashed positive environmental view. What would you suggest to deal with agriculture producing twenty times as much dead eroding soil as food we need per year? Agriculture leading to global (and U.S.) desertification? Desertification leading to increasing frequency and severity of droughts and floods, poverty, social breakdown, violence spreading from North Africa, and climate change? What is wrong with humans eating far more meat that is produced by livestock managed humanely and loved as pastoralists and ranchers do, while saving civilization? No technology can do what is required. We have tried hard to do that for ten thousand years, resting the land cannot and burning the land cannot – so what would you do?
It is easy to be a critic but different if we hold ourselves accountable for results.
I respect your view, but believe you are wrong when you praise that film focused mainly on industrial meat production and should be outlawed in my view. Please rethink if you are serious about a world with less suffering and violence. You say with millions watching the film they get a wider environmental view of meat that becomes more deservedly negative, and that less meat is consumed, less animals die and the current (NOT theoretical) environmental impact of livestock is reduced.
Apart from highlighting the evils of industrial factory production of animals, almost everything in the film is misinformation. Water use and other statistics from factory farming applied to all livestock management on the land thus hindering recognition that management, not the animals we desperately need on the land, is the problem while millions of people suffer and die due to desertification.
And there is absolutely nothing theoretical about Holistic Planned Grazing reversing desertification. It has been doing so since the first tentative efforts in the 1960’s – 45 years. It has been consistently successful where done and is now being practiced on millions of hectares on six continents. There are now thirty locally led and managed training hubs around the world, and even the first such hub developed by the first university to change – all places where people, be they vegan or omnivore, pastoralist, rancher, farmer, townspeople, researchers or whatever are simply starting to lead the way to a better world. Maybe one day you will join them and do please remain vegan as long as you believe it is good for your health.
I will leave your other points as there is nothing new. I am aware of Geof Lawton’s great project in Jordan. As you know that involved thousands of dollars, machinery and plastic etc. to harvest water running off desertifying land and he grew wonderful figs. Nothing wrong with that other than the need to recognize that wonderful result was on a few acres of land amongst billions of acres desertifying. People were doing that using labour before machinery and furrows before plastics, a thousand years before Christ. It enabled a few people to live longer in the expanding desert and it will do so again, but not reverse desertification as we need to do.
Allan Savory says
Lyndi I am familiar with Elaine Ingram’s work, as well as that of Christine Jones in Australia – two outstanding soil scientists, with whom we collaborate. Elaine we had as a speaker at our London conference. I do believe neither would claim, as you do that I am simply ignorant, and that composting with extracts would reverse global desertification, or even that of N.Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, etc. While such composting is wonderfully helpful in many situations this simply does not address the cause of desertification but only a symptom (damaged or reduced biological communities in the soil).
You are right disturbance IN soil disrupts soil life. That is why we do not do that when managing holistically. But what you miss is that lack of disturbance ON the soil leads to excessive bare soil and dying of soil life and desertification in seasonal and especially low rainfall environments. Probably not where you live in a more perennially humid environment, I imagine.
You ask why we can’t just let livestock live out their lives. We can if we are not humane and prefer them to die of disease, predation or accidents that are all unpleasant deaths. Most pastoralists and ranchers love their animals and prefer that they have a more humane death – just as I myself would prefer it I could arrange it. Fortunately we humans can be given sedatives and pain killers in our final moments but livestock do not have medical aid or what it would take.
You call me ridiculous quoting some soy figures. I have no idea where that comes from, certainly not from me.
I make no attempt to change your choices and desire to be vegan. Just be glad you live in the U.S. or some country where people have choices. I only ask that you think more deeply and show empathy and humanity for mothers under thorn trees in Africa trying to raise their families amidst violence due to ever increasing desertification. Mothers with almost no choices and in situations where only their livestock and Holistic Planned Grazing can address the cause of their suffering – desertification. As some pastoralists, being subjected to cultural genocide from policies of governments, environmental organizations and development agencies, have said to me, “this (Holistic Planned Grazing) is the only thing that can save our families and culture”. Hear their plea.
Lyndi says
My comment about soy was to the author of the article, not to you. The animals you talk about grazing were brought into this world to kill, they would not exist on this scale without the demand for meat consumption. Natural predation is not the same as breeding and slaughtering animals, whether that’s done by grazing or otherwise. It makes no difference as to the purpose and outcome. Eating meat is entirely unnecessary, for human health or otherwise. As for saying I’m lucky because I have the choice to be vegan. I eat fruits and vegetables, grown for pennies on the dollar. The cheapest source of calories for any human, regardless of their nationality is grains and legumes. the healthiest, longest living cultures on the planet such as the Okinawans ate almost entirely plants, the healthiest studied group were the 7th day Adventist, which were also vegetarians and vegans. You are putting all this effort into something that is entirely unnecessary when the true solution is stopping consumption of animals all together.
As for your logic on killing animals more humanely than their natural lives, that’s like saying it’s ok if I want to murder babies because I’m saving them from one day dying in an accident or in some other horrific way. I cannot concede to someone who sees no harm in killing another species. I wonder if you had ordered the extermination of people instead of elephants, if people would be so quick to forgive you then.
Joanie Blaxter says
Lyndi, in regards to your comment “Eating meat is entirely unnecessary, for human health or otherwise.”
At no time in 2.9 million years of evolution have humans ever eaten anything even close to a vegan diet. For example, Okinawans have traditionally always eaten fish at least 3 times per week, see: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/19/japanese-diet-live-to-100.
All I can say is, if you find yourself feeling at all nervous or anxious, please consider it may be your diet. Not even John Robbins eats 100% vegan any more because he found the price to one’s nervous system and brain to be too high.
If you have any doubts about what I’m saying please consider reading Chris Kresser’s Why You Should Think Twice About Vegetarian and Vegan Diets: https://chriskresser.com/why-you-should-think-twice-about-vegetarian-and-vegan-diets/.
If you wish to remain vegan, but would like nutritional assistance on how to do that in the best possible way, consider a consultation with Denise Minger https://rawfoodsos.com/consulting/ who specializes in “Vegan diet optimization.”
While you’re on her site, you might also want to check out Denise’s lengthy (and yet funny!) analysis of T. Colin Campbell’s The China Study: https://rawfoodsos.com/the-china-study/
Good luck!
Mic the Vegan says
Thank you for taking the time to respond Allan. As someone who studied sustainability I was familiar with your work well before your TED talk was released.
I do not have an issue with reintroducing animals to restore the landscape, but I do have an issue with using grazing techniques as an excuse to consume more meat in a system where 99% of meat is factory farmed and where animal agriculture is still, as you know, the leading cause of desertification.
This is the current impact of promoting your grazing techniques:
1. 3 million people watch your TED talk and many millions hear about the premise second hand.
2. People feel more justified and even encouraged in their meat consumption, creating a wider, whitewashed positive environmental view of meat.
3. More meat is consumed in our current system, more animals die, and we continue to feed the majority of the worlds grain inefficiently to animals.
Here is the impact of Cowspiracy:
1. Millions of people watch Cowspiracy.
2. The wider environmental view of meat becomes deservedly more negative.
3. Less meat is consumed, less animals die, and the current (NOT theoretical) environmental impact of livestock is reduced.
Greening the Desert with Geoff Lawton was not done in California, it was done in the SALTED deserts of Jordan. Not only did they not have to kill animals in the process, but by using discarded organic matter they were able to grow figs within 4 months (thought to be impossible). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1rKDXuZ8C0
The inputs were only necessary to seed the operation, to start an oasis of sorts.
A wider use of such permaculture techniques could be the answer to economic hardship for small scale farmers in desertified areas. Best of all, no animals are exploited in the process. No animals are bred to die. Which brings me to how the longest lifespan of any commonly farmed livestock animal is cattle at about 1 year. If we stop breeding altogether animal agriculture could be phased out and no, we will not all die of disease from left over animals.
Economies based off of animal products will have to change, much like how economies based off of fossil fuels will as well. It’s fair to say that there are desert cultures that rely heavily on oil reserves. It is no different in the sense that these systems both need to be eliminated if we want to survive on this planet.
As for compost itself, a massive application is not necessary if techniques like compost extract are used. It is not a linear fertilizer-like relationship. You merely need an inoculum of fungi and other microbes. The oxalate crystals on soil fungi neutralize salt and fungi creates soil structure that holds water. Finally, glomulin in fungi currently holds 1/3 of the world’s soil carbon.(https://agresearchmag.ars.usda.gov/2002/sep/soil)
People like Kip and other vegans will never support your position as long as it is a means to and end that involves killing animals – especially when there are solutions to desertification that don’t. Reintroducing natural herds and apex predators is a different situation since vegans support the predation in a natural system. To be honest, I would not be entirely against your techniques if:
A – The animals weren’t being raised for meat.
B – There weren’t other solutions that didn’t involve killing animals.
In the end, it’s kind of like saying the solution to drowning is more water because there is oxygen in water. You can spend your last moments rigging up an electrolysis machine, or you can just get out of the water. Animal agriculture as it is stands is the most destructive force – even more than climate change itself currently. But to say there is no point in mitigating climate change is a slap in our grandchildren’s face. We need to do everything that we can to reduce our carbon impact and veganism is THE BEST place to start. https://shrinkthatfootprint.com/food-carbon-footprint-diet
KindFoodFarm says
FYI Mic the Vegan, Geoff Lawton is not a vegetarian; I did my PDC with him in Australia this April. He doesn’t tell the indigenous people he works with around the world not to eat their native diet. He doesn’t tell people what to eat. And as I remember it, he has expressed respect for the work of Allan Savory. Both men have made great contributions to sustainability.
Allan Savory says
Mic please try to understand the magnitude of the problem when commenting in a constructive discussion. The situation humanity faces is more dangerous than all the wars ever fought. We cannot mitigate or adapt to climate change, while we have for thousands of years been able to live in pockets of expanding deserts. An Oxford group of scientists and philosophers did not include climate change as one of the greatest dangers to human survival, because as they explained “some parts of our planet would still be inhabitable”.
I doubt you looked at either my TED talk on desertification, or the Schumacher lecture above in this string of responses. Please do. Global desertification is a major component in climate change and without addressing that and agriculture producing twenty times the amount of dead eroding soil as food we need every year, the planet will be fine but we will not.
You state that I am wrong about only livestock properly managed being able to reverse man-made desertification. You state it will not stop industrial animal production. Of course not because commonsense tells us that can only be stopped by a more informed and active public. Industrial animal production is something that no sane person managing holistically would do because it is so damaging to our health, environment and economy and so inhumane. You must know that, so why use that argument against the use of livestock on the land to save civilization as we know it?
You state desertification can be addressed by using composting and micro-organisms as is promoted on the more humid west coast of America. Let’s simply use commonsense. We would be composting about half the world’s land area – just the most problematic region Africa going into Asia is far larger than the U.S. We would have to do it every year. When grass grew composting would not deal with oxidation in sunlight in the absence of grazing animals. To make and distribute compost would entail enormous use of energy. Compost cannot feed people and last it would not address the cause so you know right now that it would fail. So why suggest that while ridiculing the one tool that can address the cause, deal with oxidation by restoring the essential rapid biological annual decay, and feed people? Please let’s be practical and sensible.
Your statement that we breed animals to kill them is not quite correct. We manage animals to feed and clothe people and we need many millions more to be able to reverse desertification – whether we use, or do not use, the products such as meat, milk, cheese, leather, hair or wool. We could as you say decide never to use those products from enormous areas of the world’s land that cannot provide food or any other of those products, and we simple let them die. They would die of disease, accident or predation – there being almost no predators left most would die of disease. A terrible death usually. That is not humane or ethical to either the animals or to the millions of mothers and starving children living on that land, let alone what suffering takes place in cities as those environmental refugees flood them. Again let us try to be sensible, practical, ethical and humane to humans, animals and environment.
Finally your suggestion to look at greening the desert is something I have done. Suggest you relook at it with more realism as you gain more knowledge about desertification. There is not a single measure there that does anything to address desertification. All are aimed at greening small areas of land that can sustain a few people in ever expanding desertification. I do not see any measure that is new as most were developed and practice thousands of years ago by civilizations like the Nabataeans – who failed. I do hope you will ponder these points because the future of humanity and civilizations depends on finding solutions. Until enough humans recognize that management is the problem and not the animals we are doomed to face increasing suffering. Look at the recent 17 UN new Sustainable Development Goals. Almost all address symptoms of desertification and not a single dollar of those many millions invested addresses the cause. So doomed as were their Millennial Goals before them. This lack of institutional commonsense is disturbing indeed facing greater dangers than all wars ever fought.
Lyndi says
Dear Allan
Clearly YOU are the one who isn’t familiar with biologically correct composting. My degree specializes in this and I studied unde dr Elaine Ingham, the woman who pioneered this method. you do not need a large amount of compost, as what you are actually growing is a base set of microorganisms. These organisms can be diluted in carrier medium of water and used at a ratio of 5 gals of compost tea to one acre. I highly recommend that you familiarize yourself more with dr inghams work. You expressing doubts about it working in different climates also reveals you haven’t done much research about this method. Compost piles breed microorganism that are specific to that region. It is the ratio of fungi to bacteria that then determines which succession of plant is best suited for that soil, aka highly fungal soils denote old growth forests while bacteria dominated soils mean more barren or weed prone soil. Even if your method did improve soil health, which I find doubtful since disturbances in soil ALWAYS set microorganism back to an earlier successional stage. But let’s pretend it does, then why is the end goal still to kill these animals?! Why couldn’t you have them graze and live out their life. There seems to be no reason to end with killing them other than the conventional thinking of needing meat to be healthy or selling it for a profit, one of which has been disproven many times over by an immense amount of scientific data and the other is unethical. As for this article trying to link the deadzones to tofu and other vegan meat alternatives. How completely outrageous. Vegans make up less than 1% of the population which doesn’t compute to the amount of soy grown. Soy is used mostly for animal feed and secondly for fuel. You claim how disgusted you were with cowspiracys tricks but how can I take this article seriously when you make a ridiculous claim like that. i find it especially interesting you don’t seem to list new data about the effect of animal agriculture on climate change. Perhaps because it is well known by now that those figures were accurate and in some cases even conservatively reported.
KindFoodFarm says
Elaine Ingham was at the forefront of discovering the soil-food web as a grad student and has done important work since, for which she deserves great credit, but there are serious critiques of her methodology. In short, applying compost and keeping soil covered (and planted) is far more effective than applying compost tea (which I have lots of experience brewing and using). Here’s another viewpoint on her work:
https://www.gardenmyths.com/compost-tea/
Slater The Nutrition Raider says
smoke and mirrors, as with everything that begs manipulation
Justin says
I haven’t seen the film but it’s obvious that you are trying to discredit the makers and their use or skewing of data. Put simply the effects of animal farming on the environment are obviously not improving it. Tong Wang, Richard Teague, Seong C. Park and Stan Bevers paper which you say proclaims zero emissions from particular grazing strategies doesn’t and I’m sure they will contact you about misrepresentation of their data. Animal farming and treatment can’t be justified with pleasure or soil qualities or any other principle. It is unethical and immoral to harm an animal unnecessarily. If you’re a tribesman you probably don’t have access to the information and variety of food that’s afforded to us do they.. How bout we feed those people instead of your captive animals who you just wait on til they are big enough to slaughter, real humane, wait til it’s reached its desired weight then it’s time.. It’s people like you who give reassurance and moral permission to an uninformed public which perpetuates the cycle. Benjamin Franklin once said that justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.
Trisha Matthijs Sveistrup Perk says
It’s always about the How!
Mic the Vegan says
Did you really just try to blame tofu for the dead zones? You realize that the majority of the grain in the US is fed to livestock, right? (Cornell)
So the majority of fertilizer is released into the environment via the production of animal products…so veganism would reduce the dead zones by roughly HALF.
Due to the land required to graze, meat demands can not be met by grazing. Therefore Allan Savory’s approach will not eliminate grain fed factory farming which everyone here is admitting is horrible for the environment.
Also to Allan Savory’s comment dismissing the ethics of veganism because “all animals die” is absolutely ridiculous since we literally breed them to kill them. We artificially inseminate them and bring them into this world for the sole purpose of eating their dead body. This is ethically bankrupt thinking.
Any desertification remediation that Savory has promised can and has been achieved through the use of microbially correct composting techniques that utilize fungi. Look up Greening the Desert. No need to breed and kill animals there.
Finally, as of today Savory’s techniques only act to further justify a highly destructive system…to encourage guilt free meat consumption because of a far off possibility of obscure grazing practices that by definition can’t meet demand. One more ounce of good news about your bad habits.
KindFoodFarm says
Meat demand absolutely can be met by grazing. All those mono crop fields in what used to be the Great Plains could be turned back into pasture/prairie instead of growing soy, corn and wheat (or even just less of each would be a boon). How land is managed is the key point. Holistic Management and also the experience of farmers like Joel Salatin of Polyface Farm in Swope, Virginia, show that herbivores raised on pasture and rotated properly can be raised with multiple species, including poultry and wildlife, for much higher food production than if used as cropland — and all the while restoring soil fertility, sequestering carbon at a rapid rate, and providing wildlife habitat. Michael Pollan provides some stunning statistics on the productivity of Polyface Farm in his book, The Omnivore’s Dilemma.
Paul Hardiman says
Good post.
Flo LaDuke Richards says
I THINK I have a disagreement. I’m just wondering if I’m reading it correctly. Here’s the section I’m looking at:
“This report, cited at the very beginning of Cowspiracy, forms the basis for much of the film’s statistical perspective. Nevertheless, only a year after Livestock’s Long Shadow‘s publication, it was clearly discredited by:
“a more credible organisation; the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) – a Nobel Prize-winning body of scientists who’s opinions are considered indisputable on facts relating to global warming.
(Source: An Ethical Meat Eater’s Response to the Film)”
———————————————————————————-
I’m pretty sure it was the IPCC that was discredited, too. That was the one in East Anglia (sp?) with Michael Mann at the helm, wasn’t it? The one that was skewing temperatures to “prove” climate change until a whistleblower brought things to light.
I have a link that’d help in this, probably, if necessary — but want to read it all before reposting.
Flo LaDuke Richards says
It’s a UN entity, too.
Lorraine Meray Thomas says
Thanks for sharing this.
Joanie Blaxter says
You’re so welcome, Bekah! I think the one thing we can all agree on is that conventional agriculture and livestock grazing are destroying soil fertility and causing widespread global desertification.
PLEASE encourage as many of your friends as you can to SHARE the post on Kelly’s facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/KellytheKitchenKop/posts/10153161529626262
Joanie Blaxter says
Loren, you’re so welcome! Having been through the very painful experience of watching the film, writing the critique was really quite cathartic.
PLEASE encourage as many of your friends as you can to SHARE the post on Kelly’s facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/KellytheKitchenKop/posts/10153161529626262
Joanie Blaxter says
The only reason I finished it was because I promised Nicolette Hahn Niman I would look for distortions. It was painful, like drowning in multi-colored lies that were packaged so artfully that I couldn’t quite figure out where they really came from, I just knew they were wrong.
It wasn’t until later I realized the film is really NOT worth watching because most of it is wrong, and what little may be accurate, is all mixed in with the wrongness.
The one thing I didn’t talk about in the post was how shamefully the film treated that lovely ranching family in northern California, folks who are doing the right thing for all the right reasons. And the filmmakers deliberately set out to make them look ignorant.
Brandi Hernandez says
I couldn’t bring myself to finish the film…
Bekah Laurain says
Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!!!!
Allan Savory says
Joanie thanks for doing this. If you look at a recent Schumacher lecture of mine you will see my views on vegans. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrBauQO2sI4
I admire vegans – generally young, intelligent, well-read, caring about the future and, most of all, not apathetic as are most people. They want to actually do something and they mean it. Cowspiracy unfortunately damages their credibility. As I speak to my vegan friends I try to explain that if the wish to be vegetarian for health or spiritual reasons they believe in, then by all means that is personal choice. But if they are doing it for ethical or environmental reasons and persuading the world to follow their lead, then they need to give it deeper thought.
Let me simply illustrate looking at the vast desertifying regions in the U.S. and particularly the most troubled violent region in the world – right across N. Africa to China and to India. In that troubled desertifying region only about 5% of the land can grow crops to feed people, while 95% can only feed people from animal products.
Because institutions follow societal beliefs, currently funders, governments and agencies are planting trees and reducing or removing livestock – where rainfall is low, erratic and unsuited to trees, that are also not able to feed millions of people. Pastoral genocide based on no known science but beliefs vilifying livestock as the cause of desertification and climate change.
And yet only livestock with Holistic Planned Grazing (or better process if developed) can reverse the desertification. Millions of people, especially women and children, are suffering and dying, droughts increasing, social breakdown, recruitment environment ideal for fanatic rogue religious groups, people drowning trying to reach Europe and all the while that desertification is playing a significant role in climate change.
When young people in wealthy countries, who have a choice as to what they eat, oppose eating meat and, thus, managing livestock to address desertification, violence and climate change, this action does not show empathy for the millions without choice who need animals to both sustain them and address the root cause of their suffering.
To be truly ethical we need to be not only empathetic and ethical to other humans, but also our environment. To believe it is ethical to oppose eating meat because it involves killing animals again needs more thought. All animals die and do so in three ways – disease, accident or predation because even before starving one of these usually ends life. None of these are generally humane deaths, although how Nature functions.
Livestock managed humanely, as most pastoralists and ranchers do, and ending their lives killed humanely is to my way of thinking better than dying from the other three alternatives. I continue to believe that once thoughtful intelligent vegans, as well as the well-meaning people using the power of their celebrity status, understand, they, not being apathetic, will be a major power for good.
Joanie Blaxter says
Allan, thank you so much for doing me the honor of commenting directly on my article. And, once again, you show the breadth and depth of your character by welcoming your greatest critics into the discussion.
I agree. Vegans and vegetarians are some of the most thoughtful and sensitive people I know. They truly care and, as a result, we can all at least agree that we want a better world. I absolutely believe that time will bring the greatest good forward.
Thank you so much for the work you have unflaggingly pursued for close to six decades now, the results of which now cover the globe. But most of all, thank you for your heart-filled vision that includes all.
Justin says
Wow, of course the people who are trying to stop the horrors of enslaving and murdering living animals wouldn’t care about the rural people. You’re a joke. Sustainable production and humane killing are not terms that should be associated with the preservation of life. How can you humanely kill something? It’s a lie that you selfish people have to tell yourselves to carry on thinking you’re good ethical and moral people. If your true concern is soil quality and rural groups starvation perhaps you would agree that the solution is in educating these groups not using their necessity for food and their economic based struggle to support your unethical and immoral behaviour. I would suggest that the largest producers and consumer nations of animal products have no such necessity for animal products and that those countries not only weren’t malnourished but conversely suffering from obesity issues. I wouldn’t worry about the poor farmers either these people own huge lands and have an assortment of machinery and equipment due to the profits from the slavery, trade and genocide of whole lifeforms… What did they do to the nazis who were convicted of facilitating such atrocities… If it’s true that you’re responsible for the killing of elephants in attempt to achieve an end and you say you’ll take it to the grave how is enabling and excusing the plethora of minions who justify themselves with your obviously misguided opinions remorse.
watchmom3 says
Justin, please stop pushing your religion on everyone. Open your eyes and take an unbiased look.
Linda says
I agree about climate change. It is being forced down our throats because it is an agenda.
Joanie Blaxter says
@ Linda and Kimberly
Setting aside the issue of whether or not global climate destabilization is real, I’m hoping we all can agree that conventional food production destroys soil fertility and increases desertification, yes?
Also, if you accept the U.S. Department of Defense as a credible source on climate change, you may want to look at this: “DOD Releases Report on Security Implications of Climate Change – July 29, 2015”
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/612812
Kimberly says
The only way the method of cattle production will change is from the consumer. It is too expensive for the farmer to try to drive the change.
And on the climate change portion, science does not support it, and the fact that we still discuss it as if it is fact makes me want to scream.
Justin says
So you see there’s a problem with the market economy, eating shouldn’t depend on your purchasing power..
lorenesauro says
The question I have always wanted to ask a vegan: If we all stopped eating cow products, what would we do with all the dairy cows – Turn them loose in the streets? Let them go extinct? There does seem to be a bit of a disconnect between the reality of the world and vegan ideals. I am so glad Joanie has written this article as people really need to understand that “how it is grown” whether it is plant or animal, is the real conversation we should be having.
Kimberly says
Dairy Cattle actually go into our food supply when they are too old to produce.
Justin says
You don’t grow animals, they grow themselves.. You’re really thinking about it when you propose they’ll become extinct, perhaps you could send them to people who can’t afford or have access to the things you do..