> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:57:20 +0100, "pearl"
> wrote:
>

>>"Mel Rowing" btinternet.com> wrote in message news:1192658983.374732.170410@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

>>> On Oct 17, 7:45 pm, "pearl" wrote:

>>>> "Mel Rowing" btinternet.com> wrote in messagenews:1192642471.212123.46510@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

>>>>> On Oct 16, 7:10 pm, "@@^>" devnull.com> wrote:

>>>>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:47:51 -0700, Mel Rowing

>>>>

>>>>>>>As it is in return for the pre-
>>>>>>>determined end of their physical lives they are assured, food, welfare
>>>>>>>and guaranteed species survival.

>>>>

>>>>>> Crap.

>>>>

>>>>> Then do tell us which of the following stands the better chance of
>>>>> surviving extinction over the next 100 years.

>>>>

>>>>> a). A Holstein Friesian

>>>>

>>>>> or

>>>>

>>>>> b). a Bengal Tiger

>>>>
>>>> Chance has nothing to do with it.
>>>>
>>>> '"Many extinctions attend the human harvest of food." World
>>>> Resources Institute. [4]
>>>>
>>>> In a report commissioned by the UN Food and Agriculture
>>>> Organisation (FAO), the United States Agency for International
>>>> Development (USAID), and the World Bank, de Haan et al.
>>>> concluded that industrial livestock production contributes to
>>>> species loss through, "its demand for concentrate feed, which
>>>> changes land use and intensifies cropping. The production of
>>>> feed grains, in particular, adds additional stress on biodiversity
>>>> through habitat loss and damages in ecosystem functioning." [5]

>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> There's no need to teach either me or your grandmother to suck eggs.

>>
>>I wouldn't dream of doing that.
>>
>>Avian Influenza A (H5N1): Travel Health Advisory: Travel Health ...
>>The Public Health Agency of Canada continues to closely monitor for
>>... to avoid undercooked or raw poultry dishes, including eggs and
>>egg products. ...
>>www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/tmp-pmv/2007/h5n1070504_e.html
>>
>>NSW Health advisory - Salmonella - NSW Department of Health
>>Epidemiological data from NSW Health shows that consuming raw
>>eggs and undercooked ... your local Public Health Unit or go to the
>>NSW Health or NSW Food ...
>>www.health.nsw.gov.au/news/2007/20070503_04.html
>>
>>The new food code states that if you serve raw or undercooked meat ...
>>5. The Wisconsin Department of Public Health advises that eating
>>raw or. undercooked meat, poultry, eggs, or seafood poses a
>>health risk to everyone, but ...
>>www.co.pierce.wi.us/public_health/Environmental%%20Health/Consumer%%20Advisory.p...
>>
>>What a success!!
>>

>>> I am fully aware of the threats facing wildlife.

>>
>>Then why talk about "standing a better chance"?
>>

>>> I am not conducting any crusade against wildlife (there are a couple
>>> of badgers on my lawn feeding their faces on peanuts provided by me at
>>> this moment)

>>
>>BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Badger culls among anti-TB plans
>>Chairman David Williams said: "The results of the Krebs Trial
>>show that badger culling can never be a part of a sane or viable
>>bovine TB control strategy." ...
>>news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4531052.stm
>>
>>Badgerwatch Home Page
>>"The grotesque extent of this extermination proves that killing
>>badgers does not control or eradicate bovine TB in cattle.
>>Badgers are a scapegoat for bad farming practices...
>>www.badgerwatch.ie/html/shame.htm
>>

>>> My point, that you have avoided, is that the underlying purpose behind
>>> all species is procreation. In that sense farm animals, soley by
>>> virtue of their usefulness, have suceeded and will continue to succeed
>>> in that struggle.
>>>
>>> Just that! No more!

>>
>>I'd hardly call the sick selectively-bred mutants you call farm animals
>>"a success". You breed them, so there are lots of them - but at the
>>expense of wild species. No big mystery, .. just ignorant primates.
>>The point you have avoided is that *wildlife* was a success before
>>humans became addicted to fat and 'livestock' took over the world.
>>See: http://www.wasteofthewest.com/Chapter6.html . Get a clue.
>>

>>> There is another point that you have missed or ignored. Of the two
>>> types of farming arable and livestock it is surely the arable that is
>>> the most invasive in the sense that your article indicates. A properly
>>> prepared and managed corn field is a bio desert that supports nothing
>>> but the crop sown. It's a monoculture.

>>
>>Another point that you have missed or ignored.
>>
>>'In a report commissioned by the UN Food and Agriculture
>>Organisation (FAO), the United States Agency for International
>>Development (USAID), and the World Bank, de Haan et al.
>>concluded that industrial livestock production contributes to
>>species loss through, "its demand for concentrate feed, which
>>changes land use and intensifies cropping. The production of
>>feed grains, in particular, adds additional stress on biodiversity
>>through habitat loss and damages in ecosystem functioning." [5]'
>>
>>Did you read what you snipped? Looking below, apparently not.
>>
>>'Habitat destruction is the single greatest factor in species being
>>lost forever. Deforestation, land degradation and intensive arable
>>farming all represent the destruction of ecosystems, resulting in
>>massive loss of biodiversity.
>>
>>Tropical rainforests, although covering only 10%% of the world's
>>surface, are thought to contain about 90%% of all species - many
>>of which have never been studied. [6] The wholesale destruction
>>of forest environments to provide grazing land for cattle and
>>land to grow feed for livestock directly contributes to loss of
>>biodiversity.
>>
>>Other factors affecting species depletion include pollution,
>>climate change, over-exploitation and invasion by introduced
>>species. All of these factors relate directly to livestock production.
>>
>>"The roots of the biodiversity crisis are not "out there" in the
>>forest or on the savannah, but embedded in the way we live." [7]
>>
>>http://www.vegansociety.com/html/environment/land/biodiversity.php
>>

>>> Livestock on the other hand graze open fields. Other fields have to be
>>> set aside for the production of winter forage like hay and silage.
>>> This grassland is an environment in itself. Yes there will be a
>>> certain amount of produce from the arable sector that will be
>>> dedicated to livestock sustinance. The alternative, in your utopia,
>>> would presumably be to dedicate all agricultural land to arable
>>> farming.

>>
>>'From Technological Trajectories and the Human Environment.
>>1997. Pp. 56-73. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
>>"How Much Land Can Ten Billion People Spare for Nature?"..
>>'By eating different species of crops and a more or less vegetarian
>>diet people can change the number that a plot can feed. And large
>>numbers of people do change their diets. The calories and protein
>>available from present cropland could provide a vegetarian diet to
>>ten billion people. A diet requiring food and feed totaling 6,000
>>calories daily for ten billion people, however, would overwhelm
>>the capability of present agriculture on present cropland. The
>>global totals of sun, CO2, fertilizer, and even water could
>>produce far more food than what ten billion people need.
>>..'
>>http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=4767&page=56
>>
>>Note that what is being referred to is cropland. Excluding
>>the one-third plus of all land, that's currently pasture, which,
>>in the above scenario could (and should) be natural habitat.
>>
>>

>
>
> LOL well done Pearly.