I have been a vegan for 10 years now and it suits me, but I don’t force it down other peoples throats(pardon the pun)I talk about politics, environmentalism, having fun the list goes on, I rarely talk about my veganism unless people express and interest when I mention it so I don’t get a meat meal when I go and dine with them.

In fact my husband and son are meat eaters. Live and let Live is my motto, it takes all sorts to make a world and whether you are carnivores, vegetarians or vegans we need to build a new world without too may prejudices, and Transition is the same it is what we do not who we are that makes it work.

My view is that the sustainabiity of animal husbandry depends a great deal on climate and terrain, as well as human population density.

There is a strong argument that the biggest ‘problem species’ is humans ourselves.

As to Bob’s comment, I’d like to think I’ve been in several rooms in my life where the topic has been other than veganism! Chocolate, great beer and fine wine also rate highly on my list

Look at this thread- it started out as a discussion of community decision making- something we desperately all need to re-learn how to do- and turned into the endless chain of “yes it is” “no it isn’t” – that is the ONLY result of discussing veganism I have ever seen.

Put one new vegan in the room- and it’s the only discussion they will allow. Because they “know” they are right, and insist we understand. Sound familiar?

The result is- a lot of people quit listening, when someone says “well, I’m a vegan…” – like me. Just the truth, people.

The issue of veganism came up previously and another posters linked to a report by Cornell University, which indicated that a diet including a small amount of meat would support a larger human population on the same land than a wholly vegan diet.

The key factor is that the only land used for meat production is that which is unsuitable for arable or gardening. As the butcher in Mach protests in his window, the livestock he sell convert inedible grass to the edible meat.

In more northerly climates and at higher altitudes, the proportion of land suitable for nothing other then livestock is higher than in lowland or warmer climates; much of it is not even useful as forestry land. This is true of both cattle and sheep.

“Cattle are a big problem in particular, due to methane production and land degradation (as well as deforestation).”

Extensively grassed animals have a very different response to feed; their fat contained omega 3 rather then omega 6. This mirrors fat production in humans on a high carbohyrdate/GSI diet. I would like to see whether this also impacts on their digestive system in other ways. The other issue being that the current numbers of cattle is very high and sustainable numbers would be much lower.

In many areas cattle are a much more ecologically appropriate grazer because they are less likely to bark strip, and their feeding habits encourage a wider range of plant species. See anything on Limestone Beef in the Yorkshire Dales for more information on this.

The Rare Breed Survival Trust recently published an article in the Ark on very low maintenance beef production. It concluded that some rare breed livestock are capable of fattening on very poor summer pasture, with hay and a very small supplement of oilseed husks over winter.

Based on my own experience and long standing stuff from the RBST, if we removed the Friesian or Holstein from our dairy herds, feed requirements would plummet. So would milk production, but the older breeds are capable of producing more milk from less input than the over bred modern milker. It is a bit like the stuff on industrial fertilisers and miracle plant breeds. They tend to be refered to as high yielders, but actually they are high input and per input produce less than many of the older lower yield varieties.

“On the other hand, I am not aware of any real problems with small numbers of poultry and pigs”

Zero carbon Britain identifies pigs and poultry as the most difficult livestock to continue supporting as they require high inputs of food that could otherwise be eaten by humans. In practice, it is probable that small numbers of stock could be maintained at household or small community level on human left overs/peelings etc (currently banned because of the last major foot and mouth epidemic), supplemented but small amounts of grain. Fowl can be used to clean up harvested crop land and can peck over threshed straw whilst pigs can utilise acorns and other fallen fruits. Chicken meat would only be available as old boilers and possibly as a by-product of flock replacement.

We will also need to replace many of the current oil based products and livestock carcases offer many other raw materials. Wool, hides, leather, sinew, glues, casings, fat, blood, tallow, bladders, bone and, hooves and horns as a starting list. Even brains for making supple leathers.

I’ll comment on this one, as a long-standing vegan with (hopefully) an open-mind.

I think we will need to transition, as a species, to eating less meat. The problem is certain animals more so than others. Cattle are a big problem in particular, due to methane production and land degradation (as well as deforestation), and of course we are overfishing the world’s oceans and turning them into watery deserts.

On the other hand, I am not aware of any real problems with small numbers of poultry and pigs, and to use these animals in combination with sustainable farming methods has been done effectively with benefit to the environment.

Clearly feedlot systems and factory farming are devastating, in human, animal and ecological terms.

In all, it is about balance, respect, and reduction. We cannot consume meat at every meal for six billion people, and may have reduce to being primarily vegetarian, with meat once or twce a month. But we’d be healthier for it, and maybe transition is about transformation of our diets and eating patterns and a return to traditional amounts of meat at the table (i.e. the Sunday roast, not the daily gluttony) instead.

I hope what I have said is worthwhile.

So it looks as if TTT gets the bulk of it’s funding from Sainsbury’s, the Prudential and the legacy of Mr five percent, who made his fortune in the oil industry…It’s an ironic world.

Regards

George Monbiot has an interesting take on this at http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/04/15/the-pleasures-of-the-flesh/

To summarise the article, veganism is helpful but not totally necessary. A sustainable level of meat-eating would be about 40% of what we eat now, but the less the better due to livestock’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The Transition movement has to find a balance between raising a valid issue and not scaring people who see veganism as an extreme lifestyle off.

Cheers.

George Monbiot has an interesting take on this at http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/04/15/the-pleasures-of-the-flesh/

To summarise the article, veganism is helpful but not totally necessary. A sustainable level of meat-eating would be about 40% of what we eat now, but the less the better due to livestock’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The Transition movement has to find a balance between raising a valid issue and not scaring people off by looking like a bunch of hippies.

Cheers.

Only one critic, there is nothing about vegatarianism/vegan lifestyle in the document. While i think it would be one of the most important issues if we are about to make the Transition or not.

Or am i wrong?

Best wishes

from Stefan