Environmental effects of Farming

Snowfire

As if our British market hadn’t enough going on...
https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/12/goldsmiths-bans-beef-from-university-cafes-to-tackle-climate-crisis



Off-topic posts moved to their own thread.

alps

Snowfire wrote: »

As if our British market hadn’t enough going on...
https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/12/goldsmiths-bans-beef-from-university-cafes-to-tackle-climate-crisis

Scientists behind the most comprehensive analysis to date of the damage farming does to the planet found that avoiding meat and dairy products was the single biggest way to reduce humans’ environmental impact.

How the hell can we counter this?

Truth, lie, fact or fiction doesn't matter anymore...

dzer2

alps wrote: »

Snowfire wrote: »

As if our British market hadn’t enough going on...
https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/12/goldsmiths-bans-beef-from-university-cafes-to-tackle-climate-crisis

Scientists behind the most comprehensive analysis to date of the damage farming does to the planet found that avoiding meat and dairy products was the single biggest way to reduce humans’ environmental impact.

How the hell can we counter this?

Truth, lie, fact or fiction doesn't matter anymore...

Stop cutting down the rain forests to produce beef we have here, would be a good start

Water John

It is countered by much more research into carbon sequestration in farming. Then put those principles into practice in this country. We are not responsible for what is happening in the rainforrest of Brazil.

dmakc

It's worrying that moral hippies in power are gaining carbon neutral points for banning meats. This misguided thinking needs to be countered and fast before the rest follow. Thankfully it seems there is uproar over the move

Say my name

alps wrote: »

Scientists behind the most comprehensive analysis to date of the damage farming does to the planet found that avoiding meat and dairy products was the single biggest way to reduce humans’ environmental impact.

How the hell can we counter this?

Truth, lie, fact or fiction doesn't matter anymore...

Tell said scientists to read about the works of Gabe Brown and his carbon measurements and David R Montgomery who travelled the world on a mission to find out about growing soil and improving soil health. Both had no agendas but to report on what they did and found.

Said scientists are not the definitive voice on soil but said scientists like all scientists are paid to do what they're told to keep the funding coming.


But said scientists can't be told by you or me so your best defense is to show them they're wrong and what you do on social media. With a particular emphasis on carbon sequestration and soil health and wildlife protection. It's your duty young Alps. Don't expect a helping hand from anyone.

emaherx

dzer2 wrote: »

Stop cutting down the rain forests to produce beef we have here, would be a good start

It's a good point but maybe we need to say no to animal feed imports from the same regions also, even if it only makes up a tiny percentage of cattle feed it would be better for us to leave it out completely.

Water John

Go GMO free also.

patsy_mccabe

Cutting down on Beef and Dairy products will lead to a reduction in cattle numbers. This in turn will reduce the amount of organic fertiliser produced. This deficit will be made up with an increase in chemical fertiliser usuage. And this is our model going forward for sustainability.

Water John

Patsy, I think it'll have to be a bit better than that.

Birdnuts

Extensive beef farming is the most Environmentally Friendly type of farming in Ireland and most of the EU. EG. Putting cattle back on the hills is one of the key requirments for the success of the new results based HH scheme which appears to be popular with participating farmers and the birds themselves have had one of their better breeding seasons this year according to the projects Blog.

Mooooo

Are there figures out there for carbon sequestration of our grasslands, crops and ditches etc?

_Brian

Mooooo wrote: »

Are there figures out there for carbon sequestration of our grasslands, crops and ditches etc?

Teagasc are working on this but are asleep at the wheel. By the time they have any meaningful information so much damage is done that it will be too late.

What we are seeing is a double negative impact. We have both ill informed environmentalists and extremist vegans in positions to publicise these mistruths and make decisions based on sketchy data because it suits their personal addenda.

Look back at the first thing our Taoiseach said when asked “eating less red meat”, it’s being peddled from every angle and they have the momentum against farming with them.

I would genuinely feel that traditional farming is well on the back foot on this, so far back that putting out correct information may not really do any good, in this social media age the first story is remembered as truth, and we certainly lost that.

coolshannagh28

Joe Healy made good points on newstalk this morning re carbon sequestration in Irish farming and contended that if hedgerows , margins and carbon stored in grassland was correctly accounted for Irish farming could be carbon neutral.
If the forestry carbon was allocated to individual farmers instead of the Govt the picture would change and If the carbon stored in peatlands was included it would be easy to prove that Irish farmers were the best in the world on carbon footprint.

wrangler

I don't know anything about Climate Change but I do know that the environment is too important to have the civil servants in the Dept. of the Environment looking after it

emaherx

_Brian wrote: »

Teagasc are working on this but are asleep at the wheel. By the time they have any meaningful information so much damage is done that it will be too late.

What we are seeing is a double negative impact. We have both ill informed environmentalists and extremist vegans in positions to publicise these mistruths and make decisions based on sketchy data because it suits their personal addenda.

Look back at the first thing our Taoiseach said when asked “eating less red meat”, it’s being peddled from every angle and they have the momentum against farming with them.

I would genuinely feel that traditional farming is well on the back foot on this, so far back that putting out correct information may not really do any good, in this social media age the first story is remembered as truth, and we certainly lost that.

Look at the way media reported the UN IPCC report last week, they all focused on how we need to reduce meat even though the report barely mentioned meat and was more focused on reducing food waste.

The Irish Times and Irish independent both reported on what seemed to be an entirely fictional version of the IPCC report, it was nearly like they didn't bother reading it but just assumed it would be anti meat.

It looks like the Guardian was the only paper to actually read the report as they went and got upset about how meat was not the main focus of the report.

Upstream

emaherx wrote: »

Look at the way media reported the UN IPCC report last week, they all focused on how we need to reduce meat even though the report barely mentioned meat and was more focused on reducing food waste.

The Irish Times and Irish independent both reported on what seemed to be an entirely fictional version of the IPCC report, it was nearly like they didn't bother reading it but just assumed it would be anti meat.

It looks like the Guardian was the only paper to actually read the report as they went and got upset about how meat was not the main focus of the report.

I expected higher standards from the Irish Times

The Regenerative Farming Ireland Facebook page had a few posts noting the misinformation in the Irish Times article.

The Irish Times article had a quote from the IPCC report stating

The consumption of healthy and sustainable diets, such as those based on coarse grains, pulses and vegetables, and nuts and seeds… presents major opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

See the ...
Wonder what the Irish Times omitted from the original IPCC report?

and animal sourced food produced in resilient, sustainable and low -GHG emission production systems

So even though we have an extensive beef production system that fits this description and could be improved further with regenerative agricultural practices, they have chosen to ignore it as a solution.

gozunda

alps wrote: »

...
How the hell can we counter this?
Truth, lie, fact or fiction doesn't matter anymore...

Well for a start let people know that the reportage of that story was provided by the Guardian - a newspaper funded by the Open Philanthropy Project 

You can learn a little about this group here

https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/open-philanthropy-project/

OPP also funds “journalism” at the website of The Guardian, a major paper in the UK. Predictably, the articles are heavily slanted.

Yet the Guardian claim editorial independence.

Hard to reconcile the details of the
Open Philanthropy Project funding above  and the Guardian Editorial note included in their newspaper articles tbh ..

Our editorial independence means we set our own agenda and voice our own opinions. Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias and not influenced by billionaire owners or shareholders. This means we can give a voice to those less heard, explore where others turn away, and rigorously challenge those in power.

Interesting comments here from some UK farmers on same ...

https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/watch-out-watch-out-the-guardians-about.278002/

emaherx

Interesting article in the National Geographic.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/08/fracking-boom-tied-to-methane-spike-in-earths-atmosphere/?fbclid=IwAR1kUIq3GZNAJBElpLt2sZIpIbtsic5BH7mpkdzugjSQXx0KdUF2GVzgzUg

_Brian

Literally every day I’ve been looking at the photos and reports of the intentional burning of the pristine Amazon jungle, and yet everyone seems focused on the negative effects of beef and dairy farming. Brazil are now destroying it at twice the rate they were this time last year, nearly 900 sq miles a month being destroyed in Brazil

It’s like some bizarre “the emperors new clothes” thing where governments don’t want to call out the utter disgusting act it is.

A nation have taken it upon themselves to literally burn and cut down the lungs of the planet and.... nothing, literally nothing in response.

Say my name

_Brian wrote: »

Literally every day I’ve been looking at the photos and reports of the intentional burning of the pristine Amazon jungle, and yet everyone seems focused on the negative effects of beef and dairy farming. Brazil are now destroying it at twice the rate they were this time last year, nearly 900 sq miles a month being destroyed in Brazil

It’s like some bizarre “the emperors new clothes” thing where governments don’t want to call out the utter disgusting act it is.

A nation have taken it upon themselves to literally burn and cut down the lungs of the planet and.... nothing, literally nothing in response.

Probably shouldn't say it but if it were rabbits doing damage on a crop you'd be looking for a myxso rabbit to throw into the middle of them.

There's a protest outside the Brazilian embassy tomorrow if you're interested?
Well there could be three different protests.
https://twitter.com/think_or_swim/status/1164564634860498950?s=20

Only thing you can do bar taking arms and going to Brazil is lobby your MEP.

Gawddawggonnit

I gave a Brazilian guy a spin home from the races a few months back. Interesting fella, degree in environmental sciences and quite knowledgeable on that whole side of things.
His point was very interesting and hard to refute...why should Brazil not be allowed to cut down its forests? Europe did.
How can Europe (etc) dictate to Brazil about cutting down its forests when us Europeans have been historically the biggest polluters and drastically reduced our own forests?
Why should Brazil, a country of vast natural resources, be expected to remain a second world country when the first world countries were the ones that got us where we are in the first place?

Hard to disagree with his perspective.

jaymla627

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

I gave a Brazilian guy a spin home from the races a few months back. Interesting fella, degree in environmental sciences and quite knowledgeable on that whole side of things.
His point was very interesting and hard to refute...why should Brazil not be allowed to cut down its forests? Europe did.
How can Europe (etc) dictate to Brazil about cutting down its forests when us Europeans have been historically the biggest polluters and drastically reduced our own forests?
Why should Brazil, a country of vast natural resources, be expected to remain a second world country when the first world countries were the ones that got us where we are in the first place?

Hard to disagree with his perspective.

Valid opinion but the fact that only a few inches of top soil are on a forest floor and once cleared it has maybe a 7 year productive cycle till it reverts to dust is the crux of the matter.....
The 1st world leaders would need to basically pay Brazil set aside payments like the Eu done with tillage back in the day to halt it, but you’d be talking crazy amounts of money to achieve it

Say my name

It's a numbers thing.

The tropical forests are vastly larger than Europe and have no winter/dormancy period like our forests would. So they continue producing oxygen when the northern hemisphere shuts down for the winter.
It wouldn't be so bad if there was a large southern landmass to counteract the northern hemisphere winter but there's not. We just have the tropics.
Which at the moment are being funded by Dutch and U.S. money to clear the rainforest for quick gain.
We've only the one planet and the tropic rainforests have been our main stable oxygen producers since mankind evolved.
Bolsonaro lovers will point out the European forests as a distraction but what they don't understand is our tree cover is expanding and there's is being burnt and chopped at a rate never seen in mankind's history. They can try and deny it and they have vehemently, even Bols fired his environmental minister and replaced him with his military advisor when he pointed out what was happening from viewing their satellite footage. But in this day and age it can't be hidden, the Copernicus satellite that keeps an eye on European farmers keeps an eye on Bolsonaro and his doings, whenever he calls for a day of fire.

Oxygen trumps euros any day of the week.

Say my name

As i said numbers.

20% of the world's oxygen is produced by the Amazonian rainforest.

https://youtu.be/nYlnoxgqEWo

If there was an alien looking down on Earth and thinking of invading for resources, they'd quickly move on.
We're all connected on this blue ball except for some enough is never enough.

Say my name

I picked up a hippy one time on the way home from a protest.
Anyways we got talking about the Amazonian rainforest and the current destruction and how it's the world's most important stable lungs for the planet.
Anyways he points out to me how farmland degradation and forest destruction is reducing the atmospheric oxygen quantities. I was a little sceptical.
However he showed me this graph.

https://images.app.goo.gl/vU8NW2NqSRJZMbYB8

I couldn't argue with him tbh.

Buford T. Justice XIX

This discussion is worth listening to.
https://twitter.com/farmruralag/status/1163849464383234049?s=19

_Brian

Thing is farming has essentially lost the social Media skirmish with its opponents.

The vegans and extremist eco nut jobs got their catchy headlines out first, and splattered across the news.

Truth and evidence don’t matter in that war, clickbait and being first to press win public opinion.

Heck I don’t support live export any more myself after seeing the conditions reported on some of the ships, Imagine what non farming folk think.

Das Reich

_Brian wrote: »

Literally every day I’ve been looking at the photos and reports of the intentional burning of the pristine Amazon jungle, and yet everyone seems focused on the negative effects of beef and dairy farming. Brazil are now destroying it at twice the rate they were this time last year, nearly 900 sq miles a month being destroyed in Brazil

It’s like some bizarre “the emperors new clothes” thing where governments don’t want to call out the utter disgusting act it is.

A nation have taken it upon themselves to literally burn and cut down the lungs of the planet and.... nothing, literally nothing in response.

So do you remember the big fire in 2010 on Bananal Island? Or the 1998 fire that Brazil had to employ more than 1.000 men to fight it. How is it only the last days people got worried about it, before Bolsonaro no one even know which continent Brazil is. And what you have to say about those fires in Spain and Portugal that every year burn thousands of hectares? Lets make some sanctions against them.

Waternotsoda

The hypocrisy around this is astonishing. Check this out on Agriland Taoiseach will ‘rule out’ EU-Mercosur deal if Amazon blaze continues https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/taoiseach-will-rule-out-eu-mercosur-deal-if-amazon-blaze-continues-varadkar/

Buford T. Justice XIX

Say my name wrote: »

I picked up a hippy one time on the way home from a protest.
Anyways we got talking about the Amazonian rainforest and the current destruction and how it's the world's most important stable lungs for the planet.
Anyways he points out to me how farmland degradation and forest destruction is reducing the atmospheric oxygen quantities. I was a little sceptical.
However he showed me this graph.

https://images.app.goo.gl/vU8NW2NqSRJZMbYB8

I couldn't argue with him tbh.

Just said I'd quote this post to show the embedded image of the drop in O2 levels.