What would happen to the soil if everyone became a vegetarian?

Question

So I am doing a little bit of research on being a vegetarian as an environmentalist and I have hit a problem. I know that a lot of fossil fuels are used up in the production of animal feed, it causes an efficient use of grains and the soil is being over worked, but don't you think the soil would be facing a lot more over harvesting if everyone gave up meat and switched to grains and legumes? Wouldn't more forests have to be cut down for more harvesting?

Answer 1

no. everyone becoming a vegetarian would be great for the environment.

Plants are on the lowest level of the food chain. every time you move up the food chain 90% of the energy is lost. this means that if a cow eats 10 plants. and then a person eats the cow. the person will only get 10% of the energy originally put into the system.

it takes a lot more grain to fuel the meet market than it would to feed humans. If everyone became a vegetarian. we would have 10 times the available food crops than we do now.

Answer 2

well i'm not sure what to say about the soil but it would be best for the environment if everyone became a vegetarian because cattle eat 14 pounds of grain to make 1 pound of meat. Its affecting the whole environment =[

Answer 3

catfish hogs and chicken produce more protein per pound with less resources than any plant we can grow that yields protein.  It a protein game in feeding Humans, we would die off with no proteins.  So, pure vegetarians can be worse for the environment.

Answer 4

the majority of farmland that is now on this earth is used for feeding livestock. if everyone became vegetarian, those fields of livestock-feed, could be used to grow human food. way better!

Answer 5

Er... what do the cattle (and other animals) feed on?

Answer 6

That's a very good and interesting question. I can't say that I have a definite answer for you, but I can perhaps offer some insight.

I don't think that the soil would suffer more over harvesting than it is now. More forests are currently being cut down to raise corn and soy to meet the rising demand for meat. If demand for meat decreased, there would be much more land available for raising millions of extra pounds of vegetables, which would have positive environmental and social effects. Reducing our addiction to meat is simply socially responsible.

from a land use aspect, it takes much more land acreage and resources than it does to raise vegetables. On one acre of land, you can raise something like 60,000 lbs of grains and 40,000 lbs of vegetables, but only 250 lbs of beef (a single cow weighs about 1,000 lbs). Also, "On irrigated land, 1lb of vegetables uses 25 gallons of water, while 1lb of beef uses 5,214 gallons." (University Of California.). Also, two to five (sometimes up to 10) times more grain is required to produce the same amount of calories through livestock as through direct grain consumption. Consequently, a growing demand for meat directly results in an increase in demand for corn and soy to feed the livestock, which does lead to cutting down more forests to grow grains for the animals.

On the other hand, many feedlots and CAFOs are located in areas that are not the best suited for agriculture, but in my opinion, the water used for irrigation of farmland is the lesser of the evils, and not as terrible as all of the resources used in, and consequences that come from livestock growing.

There are so many problems associated with livestock farming that haven't been mentioned, like water quality problems, methane emissions from livestock flatulence, you mentioned fossil fuels in every step of the process, ethical treatment issues, etc...

Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily advocate for a world full of vegetarians or vegans. Humans have evolved to be the top predators, and if we changed our niche in the world, the ecological consequences would be profound. I think we can eat meat and harvest livestock in a sustainable way, but I do not believe that our behavior in it's current state is in any way constructive, sustainable, or responsible.

Check out this movie! It's excellent and packed full of useful information (There are  parts I think). it's kindof silly, but a great, award winning film. http://www.themeatrix.com/

Answer 7

There are a variety of ways that what we eat affects the environment. Basically if you lived on an organic farm and raised grass fed cattle pigs and chickens you would have less of a negative impact than a Vegan or Vegitarian who ate imported produce and plant protiens.

Conventional agriculture has a lot of negative impacts, pesticides, fertilizers, the depletion of nutrients in the soil, snd transportation. There is also a lot of wast, if the produce doesn't look pretty enough for market it is often tossed. For the health of out planet and our bodies, we should strive learn where and how our food is produced. If we eat a local organic diet from farms using sustainable practices we will all benifit.  

Answer 8

Yep well we people that aren't vegetarian are great environmentalists after all. For one thing we eat all the cattle that pollutes the atmosphere. And yeah I do think this has already happened to the soil. It used to be that one year they would let the soil rest and replenish it's nutrients.  

Answer 9

I used to grow my own chickens (and hope to again soon).   They ate grass and bugs from the back field and leftover garden and orchard waste.   They drank from the mud puddles in the driveway and from the duck pond.   At the end of summer they fit nicely in the freezer.     In that way, you are correct.   But most people don't have the land  to raise chickens (or rabbits or cows or ??), so it would be better for them, environmental wise,  to be vegetarians.

Answer 10

Don't forget about the cow p**p to fertalize the veggies.

Allso how are you reaping org stuff with out mechanization ..using fossil fuels again.

We're being forced to use ethonol. check out the extra land being used for that, other crops are being displaced to grow the money crop (subsidized on top of it ).......what effect does that have on your issue.

From an ag veiw point crop rotation takes care of soil replenishment for the most part

Go a Farm Beuarue site and check out the farm guidelines at the ground level.

Answer 11

All lands are not planted and harvested all at the same time. Farmers who own their land realize that, in order for it to be profitable, they must allow it to go fallow for a season in order that it produces the next season.

The assumptions vegans and many environmentalist greens use, that resources must be managed from a central, top-down authority speaks to the fundamental reasons we non-vegans and capitalists generally disagree so strongly with vegans/communitarians. We believe in the freedom and liberty to conduct our lives, which includes but is not limited to, how we spend our time earning our livings, and they believe it is a strong government which should be in charge of us and which should make all our decisions for us.

We believe in peaceful coexistence and they believe in using force to accomplish their social and political goals.

The irony is that they fancy themselves "peace loving" and "fair" when really the opposite is true.

So to answer your question succinctly: No. The soil would not be facing a lot more harvesting if everyone gave up meat. More forests, owned by individuals and corporations (as opposed to governments) may or may not have to be cut down, but the decisions to do so would fall upon the shoulders of those who own that land, which really is the only fair option.

Answer 12

I'm not necessarily a proponent of universal vegetarianism but...

soil leaching would be less of a problem. For meat you have to feed the animal, the animals are fed grain products like wheat, corn, or alfalfa. They tend to eat much more vegetable matter in a day than the humans they feed would, plus the crops for a vegetarian human would be more diversified which reduces the leaching process and if done correctly can even replenish the soil.  As far as space and cutting down forests, acreage has to be made available for both vegetable crops and meat animals. Since animals eat more vegetable matter than the humans they feed that space would be reduced plus we wouldn't need the space for livestock.

Answer 13

You would use less land and water for a Vegetarian based diet.

Look at the ranches all that land how many animals. Now how many people would that feed. Now plant crops on that land. you could feed everyone. you would still have plenty of land and water left over.

Answer 14

Is it the same thing that would happen if corn becomes our primary fuel?