GYO WANTS TO KNOW YOUR OPINION - please read this post, then take part in our poll

[Hilary B]

I don't actually CARE whether 'climate change caused by human activity' is a reality.
I do know that the human species is using up resources faster than the planet can replace them (15 months worth of replacement used every year I believe) and that we need to USE LESS of most things, but what between the import of veg we could grow in the UK, the assumption by many people that they are 'entitled' to a cheap foreign holiday, and air-fuel prices rising would deprive them of such things, the excessive amount of meat eaten is just a drop in the bucket!
Eating LESS (and more ethically produced) meat, for a variety of reasons, would be my preference, but that isn't an option in the poll either.
Ultimately the only long-term solution to what we are doing to the planet is LESS PEOPLE, being LESS GREEDY. Meat production ('factory farming') is only one aspect.
BTW, wrt China producing rubbish (and pollution) for the 'developed world', they want to trade, and they haven't got much else to sell us, so it IS for their benefit too, indirectly.

Madasafish, you posted while I was typing. I agree!

[Brengirl]

We don't eat a LOT of meat. I read the report: it was fantasy world stuff.. We need protein for our brains and bodies. Can't grow enough nuts (lead times of decades for trees), can't grow enough soya and sheep graze where nothing can be farmed.

I expect that grain fed meat will become much more expensive WHEN grain demand exceeds supply but as grain production can be rapidly increased whilst oil exists for tractors and fertilisers...

Anyway , the solution is population control. But that's unacceptable...

Now that makes sense to me.. A total cull might possibly solve the problem. Till next time.

[TEB]

Didn't vote as couldn't see
This is a load of twaddle option.

From what I have read elsewhere, then Sterns figures of 18% is wholly incorrect against other supposedley official figures that the global combined agricultural impact is only 14% and a lot of that cimes Rice growing. Cannot imagine the Hindu's would be overly pleased as they have an estimated 400 million sacred cows

[rustylady]

Didn't vote as couldn't see
This is a load of twaddle option.

Me too didn't vote - didn't like the options given. Certainly wouldn't give up eating meat to "save the planet" although I don't eat a lot of meat anyway, but do enjoy the odd bit of steak when I can afford it. I would think that a person's diet has less impact on climate than their overall lifestyle (cars, TVs, clothes, holidays abroad by plane, etc)

[jacob marley]

What about the 2 new coal fired power stations that open up in China each week nothing to do with it i suppose.
It is all a big con to get more tax on the fuel that we buy...jacob

[bluemoon]

Well I said I'd only eat it as an occasional treat, but we're sort of heading in that direction anyway because we're only buying organic, locally produced stuff and it's expensive.
I do try and do everything I can to combat our CO2 emissions, we also actively try to do as much as is possible to protect the environment in other ways, including using Ecover, planting wildlife areas etc. I have to say though that I'm a bit of a sceptic when it comes to blaming animals. Until a couple of centuries ago Africa had vast numbers of herbivores which we have since largely wiped out, North America had bison which numbered in the millions to each herd, I suspect we've simply replaced the natural herbivores with farmed ones.

I heartily agree with everything HilaryB says.

[Alison]

BTW, wrt China producing rubbish (and pollution) for the 'developed world', they want to trade, and they haven't got much else to sell us, so it IS for their benefit too, indirectly.

Never said that the business men in China didnt' benefit also, just said that we in the West should take our part of the blame.

[coreopsis]

I chose "I enjoy meat too much to stop eating it".They mention just cows and sheeps,nothing about poultry so I wouldn't have to be vegetarian.This is the other discussion when somebody tries to suggest me how to live my life and I'm getting annoyed because "some animals are equal but some are more equal".Unfortunately I'm one of those"less equal".Would Lord S become a vegetarian as well?I don't think so.Look at yourself first and then take care of the others.

[beefy]

I want to say something but no matter what way I try it keeps ending up as something that will probably get me banned from here.
I'll go with what TEB says - it's a load of twaddle.

Another observation - this is a gardening website . I'd prefer if it was kept that way and not turned into a tool for pushing the opinions of the latest bunch of jonnie come latelys that think they have the solutions to saving the world.

Why do our opinions on this matter but yet on the subject of advertising/layout which has started many threads on the forum never once has our opinion been asked?

[Alison]

I want to say something but no matter what way I try it keeps ending up as something that will probably get me banned from here.
I'll go with what TEB says - it's a load of twaddle.

Another observation - this is a gardening website . I'd prefer if it was kept that way and not turned into a tool for pushing the opinions of the latest bunch of jonnie come latelys that think they have the solutions to saving the world.

Why do our opinions on this matter but yet on the subject of advertising/layout which has started many threads on the forum never once has our opinion been asked?

Whilst I disagree whole heartedly about your feelings on the topic itself and find a lot of the views here incredibly selfish, the second part of your post is very pertinent. Hadn't really thought about it but it is a strange thing for the mag to ask. Could understand more a discussion re will you grow more veg or even raise your own lifestock as a result of food price increases associated with climate change but this is rather odd.

[Hazel at the Hill]

Hadn't really thought about it but it is a strange thing for the mag to ask.

I guess the mag sees this as a 'live' topic - after all, it is quite topical, and every now and again a grape puts forward something similar for discussion (whereby it's either ripped around a bit and dies down, or the thread gets closed if we're too rowdy about it).

As ever, none of us are obliged to read the thread or comment if we don't want to, or to vote in the poll - even if it is the mag who is asking our opinion (presumably for a future article) and we are being asked in BIG SHOUTY LETTERS!

[Alison]

I guess the mag sees this as a 'live' topic - after all, it is quite topical, and every now and again a grape puts forward something similar for discussion (whereby it's either ripped around a bit and dies down, or the thread gets closed if we're too rowdy about it).

Lol, fair point, however what I was trying to say (rather randomly!) was that it's strange for the mag itself to venture more into the chat section rather than stick to gardening related things. Doesn't bother me as to me it's something which far more merits discussion than some of the topics and agree you don't have to post, just curious.

Hadn't thought about the shouty thing though, always just assume that somebody has left caps lock on by accident as it's something I do from time to time

[beefy]

I guess the mag sees this as a 'live' topic - after all, it is quite topical, and every now and again a grape puts forward something similar for discussion (whereby it's either ripped around a bit and dies down, or the thread gets closed if we're too rowdy about it).

As ever, none of us are obliged to read the thread or comment if we don't want to, or to vote in the poll - even if it is the mag who is asking our opinion (presumably for a future article) and we are being asked in BIG SHOUTY LETTERS!

Then give us a set of answers/opinions that cover all the options from "Yes I'll grow more veg " right the way through to "It's a load of twaddle". To me it looks like a set of loaded answers to provide an answer that they (whoever they are) want . The "results" will then be trotted out as more "proof" that the Stern Review is the way forward because we "all" voted this way.
Or am I just turning into a grumpy old man

[Hazel at the Hill]

Or am I just turning into a grumpy old man

Well, yes, obviously, big man , but that aside, you've a good point about the poll options.

Personally (sorry Ruth!) I don't think that the categories are terribly well set - many grapes on the thread have said the same, that there isn't an option available to reflect their view, but have stated their view in the thread (hopefully) instead of voting for an option that doesn't fit.

I'm not sure that this will add a great deal of argument for or against the Stern Review, even if that is why we are being asked - the magazine poll is hardly rigorous research with 41 votes out of - what - 20,000 registered members?

[SarzWix]

I'm not voting either - there isn't an option for supporting local or home produced meat, which is the way we've gone. As someone else pointed out, lots of the land in my area isn't suitable to support arable crops - I've never seen wheat etc on the moors, but there's plenty of sheep!
Also, and this is a big point that always seems to get missed - if we're supposed to be cutting down on meat to reduce the amount of animals produced, then we're also going to have to reduce dairy consumption!! Cows don't just produce endless milk, they have to calve each year to do so. And what happens to the calf if no-one's going to eat it?! Should they just be culled at birth? I think not...
Seems to me that if each country took some responsibilty for the production of food for their own nation, and stopped all this shipping of stuff around the globe, it might make more of a difference? Or maybe that's just me being naive.

Beefy, well done for biting your tongue mate, I probably totally agree with everything you didn't say