sustainability...

[crowsashes]

its a word everyone seems to be using these days!

i was having a chat with a (very) vegan friend of mine about the meat industry and that ( as far as hes concerned veganism is the way to solve the worlds ills) - for the record im not anti-vegan just confused!

now he insists on avoiding all animal products, that i understand - opting for synthetic products in place of those that would be made of leather (shoes etc) now ive often wondered surely a pair of well cared for leather boots are MORE sustainable than a synthetic pair of shoes that are lucky to last 1-2 years at most? not to mention the chemicals/raw materials use in such a pair of shoes?

thats not to mention the fact he purchases out of season fruits and veg to supplement his chosen diet.

so is it possible to be vegan AND care for the environment/ practice sustainability or is this just some pipe dream and we need to find a middle ground?

[greenorelse]

You don't have to buy plastic shoes. There's hemp, cotton, recycled tyres even!

Even so, plastic is largely a by-product of the oil industry, so...I dunno about that one. There are vegetable-derived plastics too.

As for out-of-season stuff, that's not just veg*ns you know! In fact, I'd say a greater proportion in the general population are conned into buying things like that, as veg*ns generally tend to be aware of the issues.

You can have an extremely healthy and varied animal-free diet all-year-round by sourcing food within the EU; pulses from around the world, though, aren't too bad as they tend to be dried and shipped.

[crowsashes]

You don't have to buy plastic shoes. There's hemp, cotton, recycled tyres even!

ah yes i have canvas and cork shoes i forgot about those , but couldnt tyres also be considered in part to be a by product of the oil industry? we wouldnt have so many were it not for cars i know there are other tyres that could be recycled (bicycle)... but thats not taking into account all the other products 'we' insist on having.

but what i meant was locally sustainable, in the uk for example is living a completely vegan lifestyle sustainable and in the long term? i really need to be clearer but my mind goes at 100 miles a minute

i agree with the out of season stuff too, many people are conned into the idea of it all year round, i for one dont fancy salad so much in the winter but crave veg like cabbage, spuds and stews etc.

i apologise if i seem a little all over the place im just trying to figure out things in my own head as, firstly i dont buy in to his idea that a vegan lifestyle for everyone will save the planet from world hunger (amongst many others) and secondly can not see how his lifestyle is more sustainable than a friend who lives almost entirely off his own land by keeping hens, shooting rabbits for meat, growing veg etc as far as i know he only buys oats, flour and sugar.

[greenorelse]

But why restrict a diet to the UK? Even without fossil fuels, there's sail! We've had food from round the world for hundreds of years and why not?

A vegan lifestyle won't prevent world hunger; there's loads of food in the world already. Equitable distribution of it might though.

But there again, further down the line, the green revolution which has enabled such an explosion in population is going to fail through depleting aquifers and depleting fossil fuels. Who knows what kind of world we'll live in then.

Your last point about your friend - that's fine, so long as all 70 million in the UK don't try it! What veganism does show is that it's perfectly possible to be eat healthily without exploiting other sentient creatures.

Also, it takes less land, water and resources to feed a vegan than just about any other diet. Actually, that's the answer to your question, isn't it? I mean, how can feeding food to an animal be more sustainable for humans than feeding it directly to humans?

[dave45]

In a 20-year old documentary - Legacy by Michael Wood - he covered the Marsh Arabs of Iraq.
Their lifestyle has lasted unchanged over several thousand years so is by definition sustainable.
AIRI the only difference between then and now is that their standard of living was higher 5000 years ago.

Food for thought....

as is this http://www.amazon.co.uk/Long-Descent-Us ... 503&sr=8-1

[dave45]

greenorelse: "how can feeding food to an animal be more sustainable for humans than feeding it directly to humans?"

That is the John Seymour question. In "The Complete book of Self-Sufficiency"... he argues for mixed farming especially on marginal land. Try growing your wheat, beans and pulses on Welsh hillsides.

[KathyLauren]

As a vegan, I would love it if I could both be vegan and live sustainably. And I try my best at both. However, I understand the implications of sustainability well enough that, when circumstances eventually force us to live truly sustainably, complete veganism may be an unreachable ideal.

As an example, does it make sense to avoid using horse manure on your garden? Does it make sense not to use horses for agricultural work?

While I am committed to being vegan, if it ever comes down to an either-or choice between veganism and sustainability, I think I would have to go with sustainability.

[The Riff-Raff Element]

But why restrict a diet to the UK? Even without fossil fuels, there's sail! We've had food from round the world for hundreds of years and why not?

This is true, but the amount of food stuffs being shifted was tiny and limited to high value items - spices, tea, sugar (when that was rare) and so on.

Virtually everything else was locally sourced.

I don't think veganism is compatable with truly sustainable living, but it is (generally) closer to it, I suppose, than the average.

Small-scale mixed farming taking full advantage of everything worthwhile we've learned in the past two hundred years (including selective use of plastic in things like polytunnels and irrigation when veiwed as investments, not as disposable items) could be, though.

[greenorelse]

Try growing your wheat, beans and pulses on Welsh hillsides.

That presupposes that we've no choice but to exploit every inch of land.

[greenorelse]

I don't think veganism is compatable with truly sustainable living, but it is (generally) closer to it, I suppose, than the average.

This is a point generally ignored in the frenzy to belittle veg*ns, something to do with moral equivalence, I believe. Thank you for stating it, TRRE.

[greenorelse]

As a vegan, I would love it if I could both be vegan and live sustainably. And I try my best at both. However, I understand the implications of sustainability well enough that, when circumstances eventually force us to live truly sustainably, complete veganism may be an unreachable ideal.

Do you grow your own food, KeithBC? We do and it makes up a very significant portion of our diets, making our draw-down on the outside world noticeably smaller than average. Food for thought indeed.

As an example, does it make sense to avoid using horse manure on your garden? Does it make sense not to use horses for agricultural work?

We don't but there again we recycle everything back to the soil, including human waste. I don't like 'resources' leaving the gate! We do have ducks and geese as companion creatures and their waste (straw and the like) goes into the compost. A horse treated as a companion, sharing the work in return for safety and food, I think has to be acceptable.

The real problem is not this nitpicking stuff of local decisions. The big problem is that the world cannot sustain this population and maintain the western lifestyle, which we're encouraging more and more people to aspire to.

This makes a good read, KeithBC - I think you'd enjoy it. It's a long piece but superbly written and it certainly sums it up for me:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/paul-kings ... nmentalist

[Odsox]

Try growing your wheat, beans and pulses on Welsh hillsides.

That presupposes that we've no choice but to exploit every inch of land.

No it doesn't, and this is what I can't understand about people putting forward this argument.
There simply is not enough good arable land between the sprawling cities to grow enough food to feed the population if veganism was the compulsory.
Down this end of the country for instance there is no "arable" land for about 30 miles and then it's marginal. Surely it's more sustainable to allow sheep to range over the hills eating heather and coarse grasses and then eat the sheep, rather than "import" vegetables from hundreds of miles away.
While I respect vegetarians and vegans for their lifestyle and ethics, I sometimes despair over their arguments.

[crowsashes]

As a vegan, I would love it if I could both be vegan and live sustainably. And I try my best at both. However, I understand the implications of sustainability well enough that, when circumstances eventually force us to live truly sustainably, complete veganism may be an unreachable ideal.

As an example, does it make sense to avoid using horse manure on your garden? Does it make sense not to use horses for agricultural work?

While I am committed to being vegan, if it ever comes down to an either-or choice between veganism and sustainability, I think I would have to go with sustainability.

thank you for that. i have often wondered if it is sustainable as i guess im a part-time carnivore and considering switching to a completely veggie lifestyle but have often wondered about all these sustainability issues - those regarding soya bean etc.
i know a couple who class them selves as vegan but still eat eggs, by their logic they only keep hens and thus the eggs are un-fertilised and not a 'living creature' so dont see the problem otherwise it would go to waste. but is that out weighed because they use soya milk ?

Also, it takes less land, water and resources to feed a vegan than just about any other diet. Actually, that's the answer to your question, isn't it? I mean, how can feeding food to an animal be more sustainable for humans than feeding it directly to humans?

that is true but what about small domestic set ups that many of us have where we keep hens for eggs? yes they require food but as has been said also provide a valuable resource ( manure) and they eat up kitchen scraps, clear grubs from the garden and help clear beds etc. cattle are probably the worst- i can live without beef and pork. but then theres sheep - again another duel purpose animal providing us with both wool and meat? yes we dont need to eat them to make use of the wool but does it really make sense to graze sheep all year and not to use them to provide food after all the can live where we cant necessarily grow food?

But why restrict a diet to the UK? Even without fossil fuels, there's sail! We've had food from round the world for hundreds of years and why not?

for a truly sustainable lifestyle to food we eat would need to be local, the types we grow fit with the local environment- for thousands of years we lived on local plants this would help preserve the local ecology, by growing food specific to its area we limit the need for pesticides, it would take time but it is possible.

some imports would be beneficial but these would have to be incredibly long life goods such a sugar, tea, herbs and spices. not dairy or perishable foods . so everything else would have to be restricted to the uk ( or whatever country you live in.

[greenorelse]

Try growing your wheat, beans and pulses on Welsh hillsides.

That presupposes that we've no choice but to exploit every inch of land.

No it doesn't, and this is what I can't understand about people putting forward this argument.
There simply is not enough good arable land between the sprawling cities to grow enough food to feed the population if veganism was the compulsory.
Down this end of the country for instance there is no "arable" land for about 30 miles and then it's marginal. Surely it's more sustainable to allow sheep to range over the hills eating heather and coarse grasses and then eat the sheep, rather than "import" vegetables from hundreds of miles away.
While I respect vegetarians and vegans for their lifestyle and ethics, I sometimes despair over their arguments.

It goes back to the fact that intensive grazing requires large amounts of land so really you're reinforcing my point, Odsox.

Most of the world's soil erosion, groundwater depletion and deforestation - factors now threatening our food system - are the result of this particularly destructive form of food production.

Again, it's not isolated pockets that's the worry - though a good example is worth achieving - it's the bigger picture.

And please don't use words like 'compulsory' - a debate is fine. Nothing need be compulsory, we just need clearly defined boundaries. See my tagline.

[gregorach]

I don't see how you could have a truly sustainable agriculture at any kind of scale here in Scotland without involving livestock. We've got huge amounts of rough hill grazing which can produce high-quality animal protein (plus wool, sheepskin, and leather) with little or no inputs, but which is absolutely useless for growing crops of any kind. I'll take Scottish venison over Brazilian soya any day of the week, thanks.