BIODIVERSITY

"Conservation International has identified 35 global hotspots for biodiversity, characterized by exceptional levels of plant endemism and serious levels of habitat loss. Of these, 23 are reported to be affected by livestock production."

So, what is habitat destruction?

THIS IS HABITAT DESTRUCTION.

Habitat destruction is altering the environment in which organisms live such that the conditions of the environment is no longer fit for their requirements. This may lead to them moving to other more suitable areas that suit their needs to survive, or could ultimately lead to extinction. Habitat destruction is currently ranked the highest in causing animal extinction worldwide.

Although the above quote suggests that 23 out of 35 of the global hot spots for biodiversity is affected by livestock production, the website does not then go on to explain how the country is classified as 'affected' and does not include an explanation as to how it is measured. Nonetheless, it is a very significant figure and should not be ignored.

World Conservation Union (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species shows that most of the world's threatened species are suffering habitat loss where livestock are a factor.

If you're interested, hop onto the website: http://www.iucnredlist.org/ and refine your search by changing the categories (to find out about livestock production affects, choose the option 'Threats' and then choose 'Agriculture').

Possible solutions:

Wild areas need to be protected as much as possible, either through buffer zones which can protect a conservation area or civil or criminal penalties. An example of this is the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 written by the Australian Government under the Department of the Environment. They have enforcement mechanisms for suspected non-compliances which include such penalties to deter individuals or corporations from harming biodiversity. 

Additionally, more incentives should be created by the government, for example through subsidies which can help the livestock producers to be more willing to conserve such areas and protect biodiversity.

Happy Meatless Monday! Tune in next Monday for a new post on a wrap up of the environmental harm of livestock

LAND DEGRADATION

The livestock sector is by far the single largest anthropogenic user of land; it accounts for 30% of the land surface of the planet.

After a refreshing weekend, I'm back for a new post on our Meatless Monday's! I hope you had a great weekend too! In today's post, we will be discussing land degradation as a consequence of the livestock sector, so get ready for some important info!

Land degradation is a direct result of the following:

i) Extensive grazing

Extensive grazing leads to a degradation of vast areas of land. Livestock production is shifting geographically, first from rural areas to urban and peri-urban, to get closer to consumers, then towards the sources of feedstuff. Due to convenience and to cut costs, this has expanded the areas affected by extensive grazing. Finally, grazing reduces the fertility of the land. This is important because it means that the quality of the soil is greatly reduced, such that plants would be supplied with less nutrients when grown on this soil. As a result, humans need to turn to other ways of production for good quality produce such as through organic farming.

ii) Deforestation

Since demand for meat production is increasing for various reasons, the land that we have for livestock also needs to be increasing. Countless acres of forest and rainforest land have had to have been cleared as an opportunity cost of raising livestock in large areas. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the UN has estimated that 70% of previously forested land in South America has been converted for grazing land. As a result, it leads to further problems such as a loss in habitat as well as affecting global warming by reducing the trees available to convert carbon dioxide to oxygen.

Solutions to overgrazing:

If you read the previous post, you would have come across the 'free rider problem'. Again, it pops up here. Grazing is not really priced at... well, anything. Because of this, there is a high chance of exploiting this resource. The best solution to this is to introduce grazing fees. Perhaps removing obstacles to mobility on common property pastures will allow pasture sustainability as pastoralists can rotate the crop areas whilst the degraded land can be regenerated. Finally, soil conservation methods should be put into practise more often, this may be maintained through incentives, and by placing limits to uncontrolled burning by pastoralists.

Solutions to deforestation:

Some possible solutions outlined by Greenpeace include the help from companies who have the power and control to introduce zero deforestation policies. This is where the production of the goods are based on minimalising the negative impacts on forests. Furthermore, more emphasis on the bad environmental impacts created by these companies should be put into light by consumers.

Overall, many of us may dismiss overgrazing and deforestation because we are not directly affected by these impacts; the negative knock on effects are gradual such that humans do not see the issues as urgent. However, these issues are affecting the plants, animals and the quality of our lives and future generations. I hope you took something away from this week's post, we will focus on the negative effects on animals next week, so don't forget to come back next Monday!

Happy Meatless Monday! Tune in next Monday for a new post on Biodiversity

WATER'S YOUR PROBLEM?

A new report from FAO says livestock production contributes to the world's most pressing environmental problems, including global warming, land degradation, air and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity.

This week I was able to cosy up to read 'Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options'; a United Nations report released by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. So far we have focused on the issues surrounding greenhouse gas emissions as a result of meat production and the responsibility of the consumers in contributing to the meat consumption and trend. 

Having read the report, it has highlighted a few important things on the correlation between the livestock sector and global environmental change. I will be writing about other vital environmental problems related to meat production in later posts, and will be looking at possible solutions outlined by the report. These solutions are mainly focused on the technical and political levels in reducing the environmental harm that has and will be caused as a result of meat production.

Today we will touch upon water use and the solutions from a political level to cover how global environmental change can be reduced.

The world is slowly opening their eyes to more issues from freshwater shortage, scarcity and depletion. 64% of the world'spopulation is expected to live in water-stressed basins by 2025. Thelivestock sector accounts for up to 8% of the global human water use (mainly through irrigation for feedcrops).

i) Water Overuse

It is estimated that it takes 2,500 gallons of water to produce one pound of meat (about 5-8 servings of meat). For comparison it takes only 25 gallons of water to produce one pound of wheat (enough to make one loaf of whole wheat bread). Irrigation for feed crops contributes significantly to this overuse of water. Soy and corn are heavily irrigated crops in the U.S. and are used extensively for livestock feed. Most of the grain produced in this country is for livestock production.

Since a large proportion of the grain produced is feed for livestock shows precisely how the grains could be instead, directly created into food for humans. Thus the extra step of feeding livestock (along with the negative environmental impacts associated) could be skipped. 

ii) Water Contamination and Pollution:

The main contributors to water pollution include animal waste, antibiotics and hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilisers and pesticides used in feed production and sediments from eroded pastures.

Livestock operations overuse water and may lead to water contamination. The large amount of waste pro­duced on factory farms exceeds the capacity of nearby cropland to absorb it. As a result, manure goes from being a valuable agricultural resource to what is essentially toxic waste. Nitrates, heavy metals, and antibiotics present in manure can seep into groundwater and pollute surface water. Furthermore, when manure lagoons leak or burst, again, nitrates become exposed to the water we drink. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has warned that E. Coli, salmonella, and Giardia found in dairy cattle waste can contaminate drinking water and cause acute gastroenteritis, fever, kidney failure, and even death. It not only affects humans,  but also the sea animals too. There have been numerous instances where this has killed off thousands of fish. No wonder people are saying fish are becoming more scarce!

Water pollution leads to fish death

Water pollution can lead to several undesired results, it contributes to eutrophication; a process where water bodies receive excess nutrients that stimulate excessive plant growth. It could also lead to "dead" zones/hypoxia in coastal areas, this is causes regions of water that lack oxygen necessary to support animal life and as a consequence, become a cause for extinction. Not only does water pollution affect animal life, but also degrades coral reefs. Apart from affecting animals and plants, water pollution causes human health problems due to reusing water in the water cycle and can cause an emergence of antibiotic resistance.

Livestock also affects the replenishment of freshwater by compacting soil, reducing infiltration, degrading the banks of watercourses, drying up floodplains and lowering water tables.

Please save us...

How can water pollution be avoided?

The best way to mitigate water pollution would be to better manage animal waste. This is important as animal waste can cause excess nutrients and pathogens to enter and harm water quality; instead the waste could be reused as a natural fertiliser for crops. Furthermore, better diets for the livestock can improve nutrient absorption.

Possible solutions:

Since water pollution is a problem for not only plants and animals, but humans too, it means humans should put more care into reducing water pollution where possible. I have broken down some possible solutions in improving efficiency of water  use. The first solution is to improve the efficiency of irrigation systems such that there are no unnecessary water losses.

The fact that water is often free and easily available causes the 'free rider effect' used in Economics, where a resource may be over exploited since it is priced at 0. To avoid this, water should be priced at a level that takes the externality into account. Similarly, there should be regulatory quantitative frameworks to limit usage. 

To reduce concentrated areas of livestock rearing especially near cities, zoning regulations and taxes can help to control this. As a result, the harmful effects on human health can be restricted too. 

Happy Meatless Monday!

Tune in next Monday for a new post on Land Degradation.

MAYBE WE'RE WRONG? NITROUS OXIDE DEBATE

Nitrous oxide is about 300 times more potent as a global warming gas than carbon dioxide. According to the U.N., the meat, egg, and dairy industries account for a staggering 65 percent of worldwide nitrous oxide emissions.

Nitrous oxide has been pinpointed as third most important contributor to global warming. Extensive research shows that large quantities of nitrous oxide is emitted as a result of livestock. This is evident in numerous scientific literature such as in the Soil Biology and Biochemistry journal, page 597, 'Nitrous Oxide Emissions from soils due to inputs of nitrogen from excreta returned by livestock on grazed grassland in the UK.'

There are also very detailed explanations on the N₂O emission calculations for each component of livestock production systems, i.e. animal houses, manure stores, following application of manures to land and during grazing in 'Atmospheric Environment', under 'A UK inventory of nitrous oxide emissions from farmed livestock'. If you are interested in the statistics related to each of these stages in the livestock production, head over HERE!

Naturally, nitrous oxide is emitted. This can be seen in the nitrogen cycle as shown below:

The actual nitrous oxide is emitted through feed production and the management of the manure. The former occurs due to the nitrogen based fertilisers used in the soil which leads to nitrous oxide releasing in the atmosphere.

According to new research however, Professor Klaus Butterbach-Bahl from the Atmospheric Environmental Research Division of the KIT Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research (IMK-IFU) in Garmisch-Partenkirchen said, 'this was a big error'.

Founded by scientists from the Atmospheric Environmental Research Division of the KIT Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research, studies in China show that livestock breeding does not lead to an increase in nitrous oxide. “In fact, areas not used for livestock breeding emit much larger amounts of nitrous oxide over the year.” 

The website also states that nitrous oxide emissions have been overestimated by 72%.

Supported by the 'Nature study' shows evidence pointing towards the link between grazing and the reduction in nitrous oxide emissions in some areas. 

Despite this opposing view on whether livestock is the root cause of nitrous oxide emissions or not, increasing nitrous oxide in the atmosphere is still a fact, and nitrous oxide is being emitted due to human-related agricultural factors.

Furthermore, Authors of the paper, published in Nature, say the research does not mean that producing livestock to eat is good for the environment in all countries. However in certain circumstances, it can be better for global warming to let animals graze on grassland.

What do you think?

Happy Meatless Monday! Tune in next Monday for a new post on Water Usage