Also, I echo the sentiment that Tom and Zaia are some of the finest folks out there!

It is clear to me that industrial agriculture, and the globalised model of trade it has given birth to, is by far the biggest culprit in environmental destruction out of all other human activities. And, as the colour-by-numbers type of agriculture we practise has freed 98% of the western population to do anything other than work the land, we’re now free to do all the ‘other’ destructive activities too (like creating consumption-based goods and services that we do not need, but cannot live another day without). If you want to argue of relative merits, if you compare a meat based industrial diet with a vegetarian based industrial diet, the vegetarian one does come out superior in terms of being ‘less bad’. For example, although tofu eaters have a part to play in Amazon destruction, 90% of the soybeans produced on land ‘retrieved’ from the Amazon forest are actually used to feed livestock. See the clip at bottom of this post. Most of the corn grown in the U.S. is used for either livestock or cars. The conversion ratio of land/water/soil used to feed a person directly (i.e. vegetarian) via feeding them indirectly (via livestock), is ridiculous (about 1:8 for beef when considering land use alone – and water use differences are far more astronomical). For more details on the implications of a meat-based diet on our planet, check out John Robbins’ excellent ‘Food Revolution‘ (parts here, here, here, here and here).

The reality is that to eat a ‘moral’ diet depends on a lot more than just whether you eat meat or not. Eating locally is critical. Eating locally is one of the ways for how we will shift agriculture, and thus our social constructs, and put it back onto a path towards maximum diversity – which in turn gets us out of the pesticide treadmill, and enables us to rebuild our soils and our communities. Now, if you choose to eat only local – from your own garden and your immediate local region – you certainly have your work cut out for you. This is true whether you’re a vegetarian or a meat eater.

In times past, traditional people in different places developed societies and economies that were based around the need to produce the food items that would maintain them. They also worked with limited seed stocks from their local region. Today we base our society and our economies around arbitrary schedules set by industry instead. The clock on the wall runs our lives, not the needs of our bodies or our environment. The oil era has brought massive change to our perceived priorities. Food has been devalued over the last several decades, as the true cost of producing food has been externalised – instead of maintaining/investing in our land, we’ve raped and devoured it – which has given us several decades of stupidly cheap food. That era is over, and I anticipate prices to steadily increase over the ensuing years. Now we must start reinvesting in our land. But how to rebuild/reshape an economy and society that allows us to do so is the challenge at hand. For those with a 40 or 60 hour working week, the thought of growing and processing wheat, in a sustainable fashion, for example, is inconceivable – particularly as almost none of us have the necessary space/land/time to do so.

Arguing over the ethics of being vegetarian or eating meat is thus a distraction. Learning how to get the best nutrition – sustainably – from the least amount of land should really be our subject of study. If that is our aim, I think the usefulness of animals (i.e. their habits – like ‘weed’-eating, ‘pest’-eating, nitrogen-supplying chickens, or ground-compacting but manure-supplying cattle, etc.) will start to be objectively examined for their relative merits, and weighed accordingly. If we live in limited space, why would we keep cows when we can get much more nutrition from far less land via plant foods? At the same time, if our specific climate makes growing certain essentials difficult, we may have no choice but to eat animals (try telling an Inuit to go veg). Questions of what we can grow in our climate must come into play. And when I say ‘what we can grow’, I mean what we can grow without excessive energy inputs. I’m sure we could find a way to grow bananas in Alberta if we really had a mind to. It might be clever, but it certainly wouldn’t be sensible or sustainable. We can stretch latitudes with Permaculture systems, by creating warmer or cooler microclimates through use of sensible design – making use of aspect, bodies of water, trellising, etc., and we today have the possibility of developing the kind of diversity that traditional folk from days gone by could only dream of (due to our ability to share seed strains from similar climate zones around the world) but at the end of the day, we want to aim at eating those foods that will give the most output for the least inputs of energy and labour. Unless we learn to do this, we will fail, and the greater the difference between our inputs and outputs, the sooner it will happen.

The reality is we really do not realise how hard it is to eat only what we and our neighbours grow ourselves. It entails working, functionally, with a community around you. It entails a little more than just working in the back yard on Saturday afternoons to harvest a few tomatoes and apples, before driving down to the supermarket for the rest.

Those of you with land (hankerchief sized or otherwise) you have the possibility of a post-peak oil rehearsal. (We have wedding rehearsals, so why not survival rehearsals?) Start thinking about the land you have, and how you can stack functions and maximise diversity and output, whilst keeping a careful check on what inputs are coming into the system. Aim at reducing these as quickly as possible so the system begins to maintain itself. Arguments over whether to eat meat or be vegetarian will give way to deliberating over the benefits of fertilisation between a leguminous cover crop and your cow’s manure, in relation to space constraints, water consumption, biomass, beneficial insect habitat, etc. etc. If a vegetarian diet is part of your game plan – great! But, find a way to make it work in a way where its production is not a subtraction from the global resource bank. Same goes for meat eaters. Consider the space/water/energy requirements of your desired animal, and contrast this with the potential services of plants and/or less energy intensive animals.

The solution for one location will be different for another. Nobody can get on a high horse here, as what’s good for one, won’t be good for another. We’re so used to the one-size fits all approaches of conventional agriculture, that our massive loss of precious, hard-learnt, traditional, localised knowledge is barely noticed by most of us. Regain this knowledge! Then once you have a system that works, please tell us about it. If you can provide for you and yours from a small plot of land, with or without animals in the system, you’ll be better qualified to tell us your thoughts on the morality of diet. — Craig Mackintosh

That does not have to be true; it is true because of the way they are produced. Use organic, no-till in permanent beds. I will mail a free dvd to anyone who request it. minifarms@gmail.com

I can appreciate your views Julie. I was a vegan for a while with a strong feeling for what was right and fair. Our dietary choices can be so closely linked with our beliefs and morals it’s something that can easily turn into a hot topic!

My experience over the past year has changed some of my views and I look back on my strong attachment to veganism with interest now. I think what Geoff was explaining, was not the fact it’s been done for centuries makes it morally acceptable, but the way that cows have been bred to produce enough milk for both the calf and humans. On a small scale like Tom’s, the calf doesn’t miss out.

I think we all would take issue with broad-scale dairy production where the calves are mistreated (or the most awful: withheld any iron so they can be sold as veal). It’s good you are concerned for animals. It’s something that at its heart, Permaculture addresses in a much more humane way than modern factory farming and the like. People will always have different views about what is acceptable treatment for animals, but I tend to like Permaculture’s methods far more than contemporary farming.

Tom really is a top block. One of the best I’ve met and he treats his animals with love and respect. All the best to you and thanks for commenting!