Comments on: 80% of Amazon Deforestation Stems from Cattle Ranching

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:10:00 +0000

Fruits & vegetables require dozens of times less land than livestock production.

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:10:00 +0000

In reply to Jason. Fruits & vegetables require dozens of times less land than livestock production.

By: ali

ali — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 23:39:00 +0000

Jason, what do you think all the cattle would be eating?

By: ali

ali — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 23:39:00 +0000

In reply to Jason. Jason, what do you think all the cattle would be eating?

By: idiot

idiot — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 19:22:00 +0000

By: idiot

idiot — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 19:22:00 +0000

By: becka

becka — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 14:28:42 +0000

we cant keep distroying the rainforest

By: Name (required)

Name (required) — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 14:25:26 +0000

In reply to Matt. but by distroying the rainforest your distroying our planet

By: Nathan

Nathan — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:03:57 +0000

God made cows for us to eat them. End of story.

By: nathan

nathan — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:54:41 +0000

i love me

By: steven

steven — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 22:28:13 +0000

The problem is that we did cultivated all natural rich land, the land that is cultivated in Brazil is rain forest. After a few years the soil get washed away by monsoon, remember rain forest. And at that point the ground is nothing more than barren. So what can you do to keep growing your cattle, cut & burn more forest. If you can’t see this is a downturn than you’re not ever waking up to global warming.

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 12:49:03 +0000

It takes much more land to produce 1000 calories of beef than it does 1000 calories of plant food. Much more! This is the difference.

By: deusexmachina

deusexmachina — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 09:26:19 +0000

Jason-
Brazil is raising cattle to sell to america. they need massive amounts of land to graze and they strip the soil of all nutrients in a very short amount of time. Rainforest land can’t be used for farming it can only sustain really one crop before becoming useless. Also, if we didn’t need to feed cattle, land used for feed could be used for growing human food. I don’t remember the exact number but a pound of beef requires like, 8-15 pounds of grain (mixed with the beef of sick cows).

Anyone interested in this who should read Mad Cowboy. It’s written by a reformed rancher and it explains the detrimental effects of cattle farming on the environment, health and etc.

Also if you can’t understand the difference between climate change and GLOBAL WARMTH…go die. Or don’t procreate. It’s the best thing for the environment.

By: Jason

Jason — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 08:11:10 +0000

Wouldn’t we have to clear land to grow and harvest fruit and vegetables. Sorry if repetitve. I only read the first few comments.

By: Taryn

Taryn — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 04:57:28 +0000

I think that people should do what they can. Try some veggie burgers. Have some chili with just beans and no beef. You don’t have to cut out animal products altogether to do your part. It is often healthier (no cholesterol, etc) so it benefits you in more than one way! I think that people don’t want to admit that their consumption of animals and animal products (and other activities) can be so harmful (ex. people like Dave) because they are just that selfish. Just get over yourself already.

I am vegan but do not support PETA. I am also open minded to the fact that not all people want to give up meat. I don’t agree with meat eating, but that’s fine – people disagree. What’s important is that people care enough to do what they can and admit that they aren’t perfect. I personally am vegan not because I am extreme, but because I can. I am a poor student, but because I live in an affluent country, I have the choice to eat vegan. If I have the benefit to make small choices that are better for the world, I will.

Rainforests are primarily cut down for cattle and soy. The soy, however, is mostly used to feed cattle. Adopting a diet with less meat is less harmful to the environment, your health, and the animals themselves. Do the research for yourself. People really should stop just saying random things that they have no idea about. For goodness sakes, read a book.

By: herb

herb — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 02:47:31 +0000

is this real 80 %

By: interesting

interesting — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 02:16:15 +0000

I dont think people have to stop eating meat to solve this problem because the forest is also cleared to grow vegetables and other plants. The best thing to do is to find a better way of farming.

By: rfjason

rfjason — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 02:14:23 +0000

Rainforests are overrated. Aside from making themselves thrive, they don’t actually do much for the planet. Habor interesting species? Big deal. Sink carbon? The ocean is 100x better at it. Control temperature? NOT REALLY!

Seriously, crying over the loss of rainforests is like crying over the loss of your childhood: grow the $%^! up.

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 00:22:46 +0000

Lol thetruth, you don’t raise cattle in the woods. You clear the woods so that you can raise cattle.

Besides, global warming? Minnesota’s winter is lasting like 8 months this year! Bring on the heat!

Oh, and “killing the planet” is silly. The planet was fine before we got here, and it’ll be fine long after we’re gone. By “harming the environment”, what we really mean is harming our own ability to survive. Carbon output would definitely go down if humans were suddenly extinct…

This comment sponsored by PETA (People for the Eating of Tasty Animals) 🙂

By: Matt

Matt — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 00:18:35 +0000

I for one am more than willing to give up millions of acres of rainforest in exchange for a Wenday’s Extra Value Meal. It’s a sacrifice, but you do what you gotta do.