• Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Personally… I’d be much more worried about native animal populations if meat is banned. Eg… take away steak at the supermarket, and you might find that people will just start hunting a lot more.

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And somehow I feel like hunting is better, right? A lot more effort, but better meat, and it could be more of a business than now.

      But I can’t even fathom the consequences/ramifications of game-only meat in society. You’re thinking of extinction levels, I assume.

      • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re thinking of extinction levels, I assume.

        Absolutely. When some species go extinct (deer would effectively be completely destroyed in a year as an example), it has much further ringing effects through other species. At the rates we farm meat at the moment, I doubt “nature” could even supply (let alone “keep up”) for a few years. Then we’ll have knock on effects for a few more years before everything is just unrecoverably screwed.

        A lot of people out there cannot do the vegan thing. There are good reasons. Let’s just advocate for a couple of things eat less meat when possible (pick up a salad or something for a couple meals a week. And switch to more sustainable meats when possible, chicken is less ecologically damaging than steak pound for pound as an example.

        The weird push for “vegan only” is one that can never work… and in the process of forcing it to work, will likely cause WAY more damage than we’re currently doing, even if we only look at human behaviors.