What about the facts?

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Podshell

The amount of space and food is not relevant

No point reading any further.
Farming and especially cattle farming is directly responsible for most deforestation, now and in history, exacerbating biodiversity loss, droughts (and floods) and climate change. If we didn't eat and milk them we'd need to use far less land worldwide.

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Podshell

So in a natural state,no problems with ants+aphids and population growth,ditto with trees and their partner species,ditto with native Americans and buffalo,ditto with most natural native and wild herd systems.

You may be a vegetarian but you talk no different from a meat eater that denies the environmental impact of the meat industry.

[Podshell]

Don't you realise that the problem lies with our farming methods? also if lots of people ate or overconsumed meat in the past they would have been making the mistake of consuming the food producers.Because the meat and dairy industry are farming wrongly the solution would be to go back to basics and rectify it ,instead we have abominations like altering the genes to curb burping! Are they crazy,lets see what wonderful knock on effects that has.

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Podshell

Don't you realise that the problem lies with our farming methods?

Yes... pesticides, herbicides, and too many livestock (require additional space and water, which means it's not going to either us or wildlife).

Because the meat and dairy industry are farming wrongly

And there is too much livestock. You can have a few cows here and there, as part of a sustainable civilization, but numbers would be drastically lower and as a consequence the price of meat and dairy would go up. That's cows. Chickens are easier, requiring less resources. Many gardens could keep chickens for the eggs.

[kris]

Originally Posted by Altair

No point reading any further.
Farming and especially cattle farming is directly responsible for most deforestation, now and in history, exacerbating biodiversity loss, droughts (and floods) and climate change. If we didn't eat and milk them we'd need to use far less land worldwide.

This is one reason why I am vegan.

[Redchic12]

Not to mention the methane they put out.!

[Podshell]

This is usual of the problems I encounter when some have come to such a conclusion.The cows can be part of a sustainable eco-system so numbers are not really relevant at all.In fact to propagate these non faulty systems you will need more cows and bulls to aid in running them,they will be essential-a simpler example of genuinely smart farming is the Rice-duck-perch and human method,where the perch and duck keeps pests down whilst fertilising the rice,the humans manage this system and get food of duck, rice and fish,their own bodily waste is utilised also,so how do we propagate this brilliant system?we simply seed another paddy,don't you see? (I keep trying to explain the simple beauty of these tried and tested methods to a lad I know but is stock reply to this and other succesful systems is'That can't be true otherwise we would all be doing it,' then he goes a bit doey eyed talking about gm golden rice.He needs shooting,it's a good job he is idle as he could be a danger to the planet.

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Podshell

The cows can be part of a sustainable eco-system so numbers are not really relevant at all.

Yes they can, but only marginally. So there is a place for dairy, but it would be small and price would go up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enviro...al_agriculture

More cows means more food, water and space required. More resources on a finite planet, more space that comes at the cost of marshland and forest.
There are over a billion cows.

Bulls? Most bulls aren't needed, so they get slaughtered. A few remain, only in order to keep the system going. In the past, other bulls were used in the fields. Only need a few for that. Bulls were already replaced by horses back in the late Middle Ages. Horses were more reliable as beasts of burden.

[Podshell]

This is just not correct,it is like thinking we need loads of extra water for the ducks and fish in the paddy fields and terraces when the creatures are essential. What is going to turn vegetable waste into manure?What is going to pull the plow?what will transport the produce? And who will supply the milk? All the answers are there,no need for loads of concoctions and destructive machinary.The perect system already existed we just need to grasp it-consider the consequences of our continued consumption on the planet if we do not do this,robot bees are being considered rather than just stopping wild flower habitat destruction,what will less cows mean? More flower and tree varieties cleared to grow nuts for milk,more use of chemical fertilisers,more price rises due to fertilizer costs.

[Altair]

We no longer need beasts of burden. People have built civilizations without cows.