In this file:
· Time to take on anti-ag forces
· Biden should’ve gone after beef
· Epicurious Chops Beef to ‘Encourage More Sustainable Cooking’
· New culture war: the meat you eat
Time to take on anti-ag forces
Glenn Brunkow, Opinion, Midwest Messenger
via AgUpdate - May 4, 2021
Brunkow is a fifth-generation farmer in the Northern Flint Hills of Pottawatomie County in Kansas
It is hard to know what is true these days. It’s hard to decipher if a source of information is completely correct.
I try not to fall into the trap of internet conspiracy theories and extreme views. It is easy to get yourself worked up about something that is either twisted bits of fact or complete falsehoods put out there just to stir things up, so I am always slow to jump on any bandwagon until I have more facts.
That being said, I think it is more than time for those of us beef producers to stand up to the overzealous climate change movement. They have really been spreading propaganda, and it has my blood boiling.
I am a proud beef producer, and I am also one who is very conscientious about our natural resources and how to best protect them. In addition to my personal convictions, I hold a master’s degree in range management, so I believe that I have the credentials to be an expert on the matter.
I think the current trend of blaming beef production for climate change and the subsequent push to reduce or eliminate red meat consumption is one of the most baseless, senseless and shameful campaigns I have ever seen.
The claim is that if we reduce our beef consumption to 4 pounds a year or eliminate it totally that we will greatly reduce greenhouse gases and lessen climate change. I call bull pucky on this.
The fact is that methane emissions by beef animal is a very minute percentage of the total greenhouse gases, and if we could eliminate beef animals it would not have any measurable impact on climate change.
If we want to have a real impact...
Biden should’ve gone after beef
By Jessica Scott-Reid, Opinion, New York Daily News
May 03, 2021
No, despite what Fox News, Donald Trump Jr. and some Republican members of Congress have claimed in recent days, President Biden is not actually planning to pass a law to make Americans reduce their red meat consumption by 90% in order to save the planet.
It’s too bad though. He really should.
The false claim stemmed from a very real study conducted last year by the University of Michigan and Tulane University. The research found that if beef consumption was reduced by 90% in the U.S., along with a 50% reduction in other animal products, more than 2 billion tons of greenhouse gas pollution would be saved from the atmosphere.
“That’s roughly equivalent to taking nearly half the world’s cars off the roads for a year,” reads a statement released by NGO The Center for Biological Diversity.
The center’s population and sustainability director Stephanie Feldstein says, “Reducing meat intake isn’t part of Biden’s climate plan, but it should be,” explaining that the cumulative saving from replacing 90% of beef and 50% of other animal products with plant-based foods, would “add up to more than one-third of current U.S. annual emissions. And importantly, if we don’t change our eating habits, food-related emissions would increase 9% by 2030, moving us further from our climate goals.”
Of course, this is not the only study to come to the conclusion that humans must reduce our consumption of animal products in order to thwart climate chaos. A 2018 report published in the journal Nature also included a call to Western countries to reduce beef and pork consumption by 90%, poultry and milk by 60%, and to replace that with four to six times more beans and similar plant-based products, in order to keep current food systems within environmental limits.
But so far, the notion of pending climate doom just hasn’t been enough to motivate most Americans to simply cut their 24 ounces of beef per week down to a burger every other week...
more, including links
Epicurious Chops Beef to ‘Encourage More Sustainable Cooking’
May 4, 2021
Last week, Epicurious — the most award-winning food site on the web; and a wildly popular resource for home cooks with thousands of daily kitchen tips, cooking videos and recipes —announced that its content would no longer include beef. In fact, the site had stopped featuring beef over a year ago and no one seemed to notice.
As Epicurious’ Maggie Hoffman and David Tamarkin explained, climate and sustainability concerns drove behind the decision — and the reception from readers had reinforced it:
“We know that home cooks want to do better. We know because we actually pulled the plug on beef well over a year ago, and our readers have rallied around the recipes we published in beef’s place. For every burger recipe we didn’t publish, we put a vegetarian recipe into the world instead. And last summer, when America’s annual grilling holiday rolled around, we set our fires on cauliflower and mushrooms, not steaks and hot dogs.
“The traffic and engagement numbers on these stories don’t lie: When given an alternative to beef, American cooks get hungry.”
Epicurious’ decision is just the latest in a long list of indicators of a consumer paradigm shift around the food we produce and eat: With Gen Z the most climate-conscious (and soon to be the largest) market segment, more and more consumers have grown wise to the fact that, thanks to a range of factors — including land clearance for pastures, animal-feed production and the methane produced by cows and sheep — meat and dairy production accounts for around 14.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
“This decision was not made because we hate hamburgers (we don’t!),” Hoffman and Tamarkin insist. “Instead, our shift is solely about sustainability, about not giving airtime to one of the world’s worst climate offenders. We think of this decision as not anti-beef but rather pro-planet.”
So, going without meat could have a big impact on averting a climate crisis — and more discerning diners are demanding healthier options and more information...
more, including links
New culture war: the meat you eat
Andrew Freedman, Axios
May 4, 2021
The role of food in climate change is having its time in the spotlight, though advocates for eating less red meat probably weren't hoping for it to happen quite like this.
Why it matters: The food system, including raising cattle for consumption, accounts for greater than 30% of worldwide emissions of heat-trapping gases. How to reduce those emissions is an increasingly urgent question as the world remains off track to meet the temperature targets set in the Paris agreement.
Driving the news: The move by a prominent food website to forego meat recipes, a baseless conservative media panic over President Biden's climate plan, and Monday's decision by a high-profile New York restaurant to shift to a meat-free menu have drawn new attention to the role the food system plays in climate change.
On Monday, the iconoclastic, much-celebrated restaurant 11 Madison Park (also known as "EMP") announced that its post-pandemic return to in-person dining will come with a twist: a meat-free menu...
more, including links