Want to change the world? Eat like you mean it! 🙂

The real problem is that we (humans) feel entitled to take by force what they want from the animals. We do this to the animals and to the entire ecosystem. We all need to change this outlook if we are to survive as a species and if we care about the planet we live on. Veal and milk are not necessary in our diets and cause more harm, to our health and the planets than good. If we think past our own little wants and cravings and think of the big picture, and if you do that you will realize there is no such thing as humane veal.

Yes, the eco movement is about exploring alternatives and changing habits. It’s about shades of grey – *more* humane, *more* eco-friendly. And it’s about giving people reasons to change their habits, not trying to force them into it. That’s the tone of EcoSalon, and we always welcome anyone who disagrees because, at the end of the day, there is no right or wrong way to live a life.

And there’s certainly no eco rulebook (for which I’m very glad – because when something is unquestionably right, it’s never discussed).

Like Sara, I disagree that there is no such thing as a meat-eating environmentalist. I am not advocating meat eating over and above vegetarianism and personally I believe EcoSalon is very good at promoting vegetarian and vegan eating. I do advocate meat reduction and organic or humane (or at least MORE humane) meat over rampant consumption over factory-farmed meat. That’s not absurd at all.

Meat production (and all food production to varying degrees) has a number of purely environmental issues associated with it aside from animal welfare, such as pollution, habitat destruction and climate change. If you want to reduce that, you need to engage the whole population and the fact is that only around 5% of the US population is vegetarian (let alone vegan).

Not everyone is going to become vegetarian by choice, however much you might want them to. As an environmentalist, I’m focused on outcomes as much as principles and I know that getting the 95% of meat eaters to cut back and make better choices would be more effective than even doubling the 5% to 10% if the other 90% doesn’t make any change at all. For some people it’s about baby steps and we need to bring them with us.

I’m afraid that I don’t see ethics in such absolute terms – very often in life and as environmentalists we are choosing the lesser of two evils.

Caitlin’s last blog post..Podcast fiction for The Bookseller

http://www.audubonmagazine.org/features0901/viewpoint.html

Best!

Secondly, my phrase “gently petting animals to death” was an allegory. It was meant to point out the absurdity of saying that needlessly slaughtering animals is humane or ethical. Just because the calves are allowed to eat grass and nurse from their mothers for a little while, doesn’t mean that they don’t suffer when they are ripped away from their mothers and have their throats sliced open. The cows who have their babies taken away from them and killed also suffer emotional distress before they too are eventually “used up” and killed for their flesh.

I don’t object to Eco Salon pointing out various ways that people can help save the planet and be ethical consumers. I do object to Eco salon using words like “ethical” or “humane” to describe something that is neither. This article explicitly states that there is nothing wrong with needlessly killing animals and that doing so can be referred to as ethical or humane. That is simply absurd. It is more absurd that such a position would be taken by a website that is supposed to be about being environmentally friendly.

Why not promote SUV’s as environmentally friendly because they are more fuel efficient than Hummers? Because that would be absurd when you could promote bio-diesel or hybrids, or bicycles instead.

I am sorry if my opinion upsets you or seems comical, but I feel it is much more reasonable than the make-believe position that needlessly causing animals to suffer is ethical.

Is a vegan environmentalist who flies around the world to deliver speeches on veganism better, environmentally speaking, than someone who eats organic meat from time to time? I don’t know. But if Eco Salon does an article saying that flying around the globe to give speeches is environmentally friendly then you can bet I will have an objection.

Is it even possible to consider oneself an environmentalist if one is a parent? After all, rearing a child, especially in the United States, has a massive carbon impact. It depends. Is the child adopted? Again, if Eco Salon does an article about how people who have 12 kids are environmentally friendly, then I’ll object to that too.

In short, if Eco Salon is about being environmentally friendly, then you can’t go around promoting industries that needlessly destroy the environment and not expect to be called absurd.