What meat is most environmentally responsible?

[Rhythmdvl]

Hmm…

If I read this:

@figure9

Human is currently the most environmentally friendly meat. Humans are the largest cause of ecosystem damage so the more you remove from the planet the better shape the planet will be in. For maximum environmental friendliness eat humans from developed nations. Note: cannibalism is illegal in some areas so check with your local law enforcement agency before consuming human flesh.

… and this:

@Getheren

My two cents on this subject (which you get for free) are that eating lower on the food chain, while it superficially seems more environmentally sound, actually has the effect of diverting more of the planet’s biomass and resources to human consumption, thereby decreasing total biomass and driving further reduction in biodiversity.

together, it seems we should be grinding up humans to make cattle feed. To make more humans. To feed more cattle…

[Mangetout]

Probably the most environmentally responsible kind of meat would be from wild-living animals that have been caught in an area where they don’t belong - for example:
Grey Squirrel shot anywhere in England
Mitten Crab caught from the river Thames
Nile Perch fished from Lake Victoria

(assuming, that is, that the process of harvesting them does not itself cause unacceptable environmental damage, or that catching individuals causes the species as a whole to proliferare - as may be the case with signal crayfish in the UK - catching the big males allows more juveniles to survive, because the big males are partly cannibalistic)

[Gary_Robson]

[moderating]
I added spoiler tags to post 15. Yes, there are people who don’t know the premise of that story. No sense ruining it for them if they don’t want to read the ending.
[/moderating]

[Superfluous_Parentheses]

@Mangetout

Probably the most environmentally responsible kind of meat would be from wild-living animals that have been caught in an area where they don’t belong - for example:
Grey Squirrel shot anywhere in England
Mitten Crab caught from the river Thames
Nile Perch fished from Lake Victoria

(assuming, that is, that the process of harvesting them does not itself cause unacceptable environmental damage, or that catching individuals causes the species as a whole to proliferare - as may be the case with signal crayfish in the UK - catching the big males allows more juveniles to survive, because the big males are partly cannibalistic)

Oh yes. In the Netherlands, the Pacific Oyster is going very strong. It also eats the
“seed” of the native shellfish. Apparently, they’re pretty tasty, but demand for them as food is very low at the moment.

[Sailboat]

@Getheren

Consider how many species of plants and animals live on an acre of cattle pastureland (in the hundreds) versus how many live on an acre of well-managed soybean farm (one).

I agree with your point generally, but want to point out that the amount of cattle raised purely on pastureland is statistically insignificant. In reality, it would be an acre of pastureland and several acres of grain/corn/soybeans to feed those cattle. There are also antibiotic abuse, animal waste, and various other considerations.

[Shot_From_Guns]

@Getheren

Consider how many species of plants and animals live on an acre of cattle pastureland (in the hundreds) versus how many live on an acre of well-managed soybean farm (one).

1.) How many cattle are raised in pastures?
2.) How diverse is each acre of all the farmland used to feed each acre of cattle? And how many acres of farmland are required to support that acre of cattle?
3.) What if we move away from the single-crop model of farming and go to a system of planting several different crops on each plot?

[Thudlow_Boink]

Road kill.

[Quercus]

@Getheren

My two cents on this subject (which you get for free) are that eating lower on the food chain, while it superficially seems more environmentally sound, actually has the effect of diverting more of the planet’s biomass and resources to human consumption, thereby decreasing total biomass and driving further reduction in biodiversity. Consider how many species of plants and animals live on an acre of cattle pastureland (in the hundreds) versus how many live on an acre of well-managed soybean farm (one).

As others have pointed out, the problem is that an acre of soybeans will produce a lot more food than an acre of pastureland. So the question is really: which is more diverse, ten acres of pastureland, or one acre of soybeans plus nine acres of wilderness?

@coremelt

wild game would have to be the answer. There’s no land dedicated to growing crops for them. From an environmental point of view as long as the numbers allowed to be hunted are controlled there isn’t an issue. (cruelty and suffering obviously still is)

I generally agree, but there can be an issue with hunting, when the land is actively manged to maximize hunting. For instance, in the last century, federal land managers would routinely kill off as many predators as they could, in order to boost the population of game animals.