Eat and live healthier


Vegetarianism and Sustainable Agriculture

Most food would be organic and non-GMO, andCornell University, 'The "National Animal
much more food would be locally grown, ratherIndentification System (NAIS)": A new threat
than imported and trucked thousands of milesto rural freedom?' appeared in Countryside &
– those things tend to be important toSmall Stock Journal, a homesteading magazine.
vegetarians. Processed food would be reduced,NAIS is a system in the planning stages by
because optimum vegetarian nutrition comesthe National Institute for Animal Agriculture
from whole foods in their natural state, and(NIAA), made up of the big corporate players
most vegetarians are interested in a healthyin U.S. meat production (the National Pork
diet. So, much of the energy that goes intoProducers, Monsanto, Cargill, etc), and the
producing, packaging, warehousing andmakers and marketers of high-tech animal ID
transporting  processed food would be saved.equipment.
Vegetables and grains need much less land andAny person owning even one agricultural
water than animals, so it wouldn't beanimal, like a horse, cow, chicken or duck
necessary to destroy rain forests or irrigatewould have to register in a federal database,
arid land, or create deserts with overand report any time the animal left the
pasturing. Perhaps just enough animals couldowner's property. The expense of registering,
be raised to satisfy the ovo-lactoreporting etc, as well as the GPS tracking,
vegetarians, and those few people who haven'twould be born by the animal owners. NAIS
quite made the vegetarian transition, butwould be enforced through seizure and fines.
even they would consume far less meat, for
the  sake  of  their  health.This system would make it difficult and
expensive for people who raise their own
This idea isn't necessarily obvious toanimals for food, or for small local
sustainable ag experts, mainly because theyproducers to continue, and strike a heavy
aren't vegetarian, and can't pictureblow not only at sustainable agriculture and
agriculture without lots of animals. They arelocal organic production, but at individual
reluctant to be associated with what theyfreedom as well. As the article points out,
regard as a fringe group of cranks,it will also be completely ineffective in
eccentrics and wierdos. In other words, theycontrolling disease and infection in the food
can't  think  outside their meat-eating box.supply.
Some  Interesting  ExamplesThere's a movement afoot, spearheaded by the
National Cattlemen's Beef Association, to
1.  CAFO's:'privatize' the database, which means they
would have complete access to all the
A couple of months ago, I attended ainformation, and control over enforcement.
community meeting, held to organizeSince this system is too big and widespread
opposition to CAFO's (contained animalto be effectively enforced, they would most
feeding operations, or hog lots) in SE Iowalikely just practice selective enforcement,
– a serious environmental threat). Onethrough fines and seizure, against anyone
of the speakers stated that while he wasthey  wanted  to  drive  out  of  business.
against having a CAFO anywhere near his
country property, of course he himself didn'tThis scheme goes right along with Monsanto's
intend to stop eating pork. The audience waspractice of suing farmers for patent
polite – they didn't boo him off theviolation when their GMO seed propagates
stage!uninvited on the farmer's land. NAIS is quite
disturbing to anyone who values individual
2.  The  Ties  That  Blindfreedom. For me, as an ovo-lacto vegetarian,
after this system goes into effect, I'll no
John Ikerd, Professor Emeritus, U MO, highlylonger be able to buy free-range organic eggs
respected and passionate sustainabilityfrom my neighbor, whose chickens are family
expert, wrote Meeting the Challenge of Peakpets. And our local organic dairy, with its
Oil with Sustainable Agriculture. In hisblissful pampered jersey cows, could be
article, Prof Ikerd states: 'Shifting to adriven out of business. The Amish, who have a
vegetarian diet would be one obvious means ofseparate social and economic system, would
reducing energy use in agriculture, sincealso  be  seriously  affected.
most food crops are net energy producers
– possibly cutting the food energyWhat will NAIS do to vegetarian sustainable
input/output ratio in half. However, (andagriculture? Not a lot, except that there
here's where he lost me) processing andwon't be as much organic manure available.
distribution would still leave about aAnd animal manure isn't strictly necessary to
five-to-one net fossil energy deficit fororganic growing – all you really need
total food production. In addition, the 20%are lots of green manure and worms. Since
fossil fuel equivalent produced by pasturegrowing vegetables and grains doesn't require
and forage plants – large net energyanimals, it could be quite tempting for small
producers  â€“  would  be  lost.'meat producers to focus instead on raising
grains and vegetables, and herbs. There are
I can see that processing and distributionquite a few high demand organic crops with
would still be a problem, unless there was nowhich small farmers do well. And the scarcity
processing, and the food was distributedof organic free range and pastured animal
locally. And I don't see what the 20% fossilfoods will mean that more health conscious
fuel equivalent produced by pasture andand environmentally aware people will turn to
forage plants has to do with beingvegetarianism. And that local organic
vegetarian. If you didn't have the animals toproduction will continue to grow and thrive,
pasture and forage in the first place, thereas demand for vegetarian foods increases
would be 100% fossil fuel equivalent, notexponentially.
20%. Apart from that lapse in logic,
attributable to the meat-eating bias, IMs. Zanoni doesn't mention those
recommend this article and all of Johnpossibilities, as the silver lining in this
Ikerd's other writing, available on hisblack ugly cloud, and the way that NAIS will
websitebackfire on these nefarious schemers. But
never mind – the less they know about
3.  NAIS:it the better! Of course, if we're forced to
go back to horse powered farm machinery, that
Another article, by Mary Zanoni, Ph.D.,could be a problem.



1 A B C D E F 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135