I know we can derive our protein from plants and fish and such. And large scale cattle production is a proven environmental hazard. But…
I tire quickly of contrived grievance and outsized passion, i.e. certain animal rights folks who need to tone things down a bit. Species who can’t speak for themselves may need advocates, but let’s take a closer look.
The beef, pork, and poultry lobbies will argue that they’re just responding to demand for their products, perhaps as an attempt to redirect the blame and the conversation. But they’re not wrong, as far as the demand piece goes.
I guess what I’m getting at is that, personally speaking, I might be willing to evolve in my understanding of protein consumption if someone can present an argument that reconciles the myriad small-scale meat processors– i.e. hunters– who are basically engaged in the same endeavor of killing for food (and sport) but don’t carry all the extra baggage of methane production and possibly inhumane living conditions and treatment.
Humans are at the top of the food chain. We’re omnivores. Maybe there is no other argument that needs to be made, except for a focus on the stewardship of resources. Meat has been a means of survival and part of our diet for a long time, albeit not as long as foraging for twigs and berries. I see no reason for looking askance at someone simply because they enjoy a nice medium porterhouse.
What would become of the huge numbers of cattle and hogs and turkeys and chickens if they weren’t slaughtered? They’d still need to be fed and housed. Do they then become someone’s pets, or just released to fend for themselves?
And what of local deer populations, or the numbers of other wild animals who aren’t on any endangered species list? It seems hunting seasons make sense for at least two reasons: population control and food on families’ tables.
Going meatless is a tough sell, for various reasons.
3 Cents' 