original

Globalized Factory Farms a Major Threat to Public Health & Environment

Science Vol. 310. no. 5754, pp. 1621 - 1622
December 9, 2005
(pay site)
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/310/5754/1621

AGRICULTURE:
Losing the Links Between Livestock and Land

Rosamond Naylor,1,2* Henning Steinfeld, 4 Walter Falcon,2 James
Galloway,5 Vaclav Smil,6 Eric Bradford,7 Jackie Alder,8 Harold Mooney,3

The industrial livestock sector has become footloose--no longer tied
to a local land base for feed inputs or to supply animal power or
manure for crop production. Spatially clustered within and among
countries, this sector is expected to meet most of the income-driven
doubling in meat demand forecast for developing countries by 2030
(1). Large-scale, intensive operations, in which animals are raised
in confinement, already account for three-quarters of the world's
poultry supply, 40% of its pork, and over two-thirds of all eggs (2).
International trade in meat is also expanding; during the past 15
years, annual trade volumes have increased by 5.5% for pork and 8%
for poultry (3). Livestock remains the world's largest user of land,
but its use has shifted steadily from grazing to the consumption of
feed crops. Unfortunately, environmental and resource costs of
feed-crop and industrial-livestock systems--often separated in space
from each other and from the consumer base--remain largely
unaccounted for in the growth process.


Industrializing and globalizing livestock systems have hinged on
declining real prices for feed grains; advances that have improved
feed-to-meat conversion efficiencies, animal health, and reproduction
rates; relatively cheap transportation costs; and trade
liberalization. The most dramatic shift has been toward the
production of monogastric animals, such as chickens and hogs, which
use concentrated feeds more efficiently than cattle (or sheep) and
which have short life cycles that accelerate genetic improvements.
The average time needed to produce a broiler in the United States was
cut from 72 days in 1960 to 48 days in 1995, and the slaughter weight
rose from 1.8 to 2.2 kg (4). Meanwhile, feed conversion ratios (FCR,
kg feed per kg meat) were reduced by 15% for broilers and over 30%
for eggs (5). Annual growth in hog and poultry production in
developing countries was twice the world average in the 1990s (2). By
2001, three countries--China, Thailand, and Vietnam--accounted for
more than half the hogs and one-third the chickens produced worldwide
(1). Brazil is also a major producer and is expected to become the
world's leading meat exporter.

Virtually all of the growth in livestock production is occurring in
industrial systems-- a trend that has been evident in the United
States for several decades. Industrial poultry and pork operations
are largely uniform worldwide, which facilitates a rapid transfer of
breeding and feeding innovations. Larger firms typically control
production from animal reproduction to the final product, mainly to
minimize economic and pathogen risks. As these firms increasingly
supply major retail chains, corporate attention is directed toward
food safety and the production of homogeneous (yet diverse),
high-quality products. In addition to scale, industrial livestock
operations have become concentrated geographically in areas where
input costs are relatively low; infrastructure and access to markets
are well developed; and in many cases, environmental regulations are
lenient (6).

The most striking feature of this geographic concentration is the
delinking of livestock from the supporting natural resource base.
Feed is sourced on a least-cost basis from international markets, and
the composition of feed is moving up the chain from agricultural
by-products to grain, oil-meal, and fish-meal products that have
higher nutritional and commercial value. Although FCRs for chickens
and hogs on an edible weight basis are roughly one-fifth and
one-third, respectively, that of cattle (whose diets include
rangeland forage, crop residues, and by-products) (7), monogastric
diets are richer in cereal and legume feeds, which compete with food
crops for land and water.
~snip~

.
.
complete articlehere

in the diet compared to plants.

Nonetheless flesh tastes good and is energy dense.

cruel, unhealthy and unsustainable. i'm not a strict vegetarian myself, nor do i advocate for anyone else. but i only meat that has ben humanely/organically/pasture raised. and i eat very little of it. mostly i use meat to flavor a dish, not as a main course. and i never eat an animal that has been feedlotted or raised in industrial conditions. it all comes down to leading an examined life, for me. am i part of the problem or am i gonna do what i can to be part of the solution?

while I'm not yet a vegetarian (some habits are hard to break), I have greatly reduced my meat intake (and cut out beef altogether) and try to shop for meat raised outside the factory farm system whenever possible . . . eating less meat actually makes you feel better, and protein can be gotten from lots of other sources . . .

to educate yourself about food and factory farming, a good start is John Robbins' book . . .

The Food Revolution: How Your Diet Can Help Save Your Life and Our World . . .
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1573247022/qid=1134275554/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/103-8612771-6007050?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

Grass fed beef, try that. There's a guy near Philadelphia who does grass fed, and it's the best I've ever tasted.
As to the OT I'm fully aware of the dangers of factory farming.