Regenerative Agriculture: the belief in ‘less and better meat’
Less is good but none would be far far better
‘Better’ means ‘grass-fed’ as opposed to pellet-fed animals
This assumes that that cows, should eat grass because grass is ‘naturally’ what a cow eats, ignoring the obvious point that there is nothing ‘natural’ about modern agricultural methods. It also skirts round the reason for the feeds in the first place as it helps somewhat with the release of methane from cows.
‘Better’ means reared on grass-land because cow manure improves the soil.
Because it is argued that cow manure is ‘essential’ to the restoration of previously marginal land because the manure increases the bio-diversity of the soil.
Lobbyists posing as experts do seem to have the ear of the government.
But Vicki Hird, of Food and Farming Alliance Sustain, told a Westminster forum on Wednesday (21 April) that there was a need to look at the ‘bigger picture’.
She assumes ‘a really well-managed pasture system’ for cows represents a solution yet putting all cows on pasture would require more land than the earth has available, and really should be considered as green technology a solution for a different world with different less urgent problems:
- The sequestration of carbon using ‘really well managed pasture systems’ rests upon a single study of a single tiny “White Oaks Farm” The main proponents of this view are from a book ‘Sacred Cow’ here is an explanation and debunking:
- Turning marginal land to crops does NOT require manure
🔗 Source: Thinking about planting crops into marginal land?
- Biodiversity is not aided by the continuance of current farming models “wild mammal biomass has declined by 85%” as meat production of all kinds has increased