Fido And Fluffy Are Ruining The Environment, UCLA Study Says

  • Thread starter Thread starter Theo520
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Theo520

Guest
Fido And Fluffy Are Ruining The Environment, UCLA Study Says

America’s beloved dogs and cats play a significant role in causing global warming, according to a new study by UCLA.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

LOS ANGELES, CA — When it comes to global warming, Fido and Fluffy are part of the problem, a new study by UCLA indicates.

Most cat or dog lovers would say they can’t imagine living in a world without pets, but as the threat of global warming increases, environmentally conscious pet lovers may need to make some tough choices, according to the study.

Pet ownership in the United States creates about 64 million tons of carbon dioxide a year, UCLA researchers found. That’s the equivalent of driving 13.6 million cars for a year. The problem lies with the meat-filled diets of kitties and pooches, according to the study by UCLA geography professor Gregory Okin.

Dogs and cats are responsible for 25 to 30 percent of the impacts of meat production in the United States, said Orkin. Compared to a plant-based diet, meat production “requires more energy, land and water and has greater environmental consequences in terms of erosion, pesticides and waste,” the study found.

And what goes in, must come out. In terms of waste, Okin noted, feeding pets also leads to about 5.1 million tons of feces every year, roughly equivalent to the total trash production of Massachusetts.

“Given the significant environmental impact of meat production, the contributions of our omnivorous and carnivorous pets deserve special attention,” according to Okin’s study, published in the journal PLOS ONE. “The U.S. has the largest population of pet dogs and cats globally, with an estimated 77.8 million dogs and 85.6 million cats in 2015.”
…
 
I knew the enviro-Nazis would go after our pets soon enough.

I have no dog in this fight, pun intended, but I hope every dog-parent, cat lady, etc, on this system sees environmentalists for the plot from Hades that they are.

ICXC NIKA
 
Oh boy…climate change vs. peta grudge match! Watch em’ get hot under the collar! Watch the fur fly!
 
johnnyc176 said:
Oh boy…climate change vs. peta grudge match! Watch em’ get hot under the collar! Watch the fur fly!
Click to expand...
No, they are on the same side – PETA wants to get rid of all domestic pets as well.
 
johnnyc176 said:
Oh boy…climate change vs. peta grudge match! Watch em’ get hot under the collar! Watch the fur fly!
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing! I started another thread because I didn’t see one had been started.

I did not post this, but was thinking along the same line as you posted here: The animal rights wackos are now going to fight with the environmental wackos! In some ways it could be entertaining to watch, but somehow, some way, conservative Christians will end up being the bad guy.
 
I don’t see the problem. We all know meat production is an environmental mess. This just assigns a part of it to pets.
 
Does this mean I should make my dogs go vegan? 🤷


I didn’t even know cats (carnivores) could be vegan.
 
I will say I do agree with PETA on most things, as Im a stronger opponent of animal rights, but I do not agree with them on owning pets, shelters all over are full of cats and dogs that have no home, they need us as much as we need them.

I do think some people should not have pets though, the people that chain them up in the yard or an enclosure where they remain for life…that is not a pet, families like this should get a statue of a dog instead…a pet should be part of the family, live indoors, interact with other family members daily. They are very rewarding to own, the emotional bonds become very strong if you own a pet for the right reason.

However, I will say I have seen my cat turn down meat in favor of green beans, and on numerous occasions!! the dog though, not so much!
 
“However, without large-scale reduction in their number and changes to the food system that drastically reduces the per-capita animal product consumption, the environmental and energetic impact of these animals will remain significant.”
Click to expand...
Let’s start with the animals that produced this study, they do think of themselves as animals don’t they. And then move on to all those who think that having people (exceptions for themselves) on the earth is bad for the earth.
 
Pet food is almost entirely made of byproducts that humans won’t eat or can’t eat, but get produced in the process of making human food.

An example would be chicken entrails. Almost nobody would buy them at any price, and USDA would probably condemn them as too contaminated for human consumption. They go into pet food.

You could kill all the cats and dogs in the country, and that wouldn’t change the production of the raw product at all, because people generate the raw material in the course of producing human food. Nobody produces chickens, turkeys, cattle, sheep or any other food animals just to feed them to pets.

And a dog might survive for quite awhile on a vegan diet, but you’ll kill your cat in short order with one.

So, if not for pets, what would we do with the byproducts? Dump them on the ground? We wouldn’t have cats or dogs, but we would sure have lots of rats, raccoons, opossums, coyotes, feral hogs and buzzards.

But the PETA types won’t be satisfied until the whole country returns to a pre-Columbian (but vegan, the Indians weren’t vegans) state with a handful of us wandering around with bellies distended by kwarishorkor, hunting poke greens, with untouched edible wild animals all around us.
 
mikekle said:
I will say I do agree with PETA on most things, as Im a stronger opponent of animal rights, but I do not agree with them on owning pets, shelters all over are full of cats and dogs that have no home, they need us as much as we need them.

I do think some people should not have pets though, the people that chain them up in the yard or an enclosure where they remain for life…that is not a pet, families like this should get a statue of a dog instead…a pet should be part of the family, live indoors, interact with other family members daily. They are very rewarding to own, the emotional bonds become very strong if you own a pet for the right reason.

However, I will say I have seen my cat turn down meat in favor of green beans, and on numerous occasions!! the dog though, not so much!
Click to expand...
I don’t like to see a dog tied up all the time and nobody ever interacting with him. But I don’t think pets have to live indoors. We have dogs and cats both. We have barn cats, that live in the barn, and 2 cats that come in the house, but they come in and out as they please. Sometimes my daughter wants to keep them in and they about go nuts trying to sneak out whenever we open a door. Our dogs, come in sometimes and stay out sometimes. They are in charge of patrolling and keeping varmints from eating my chickens. They wouldn’t be able to do their job if they’re inside all the time. Even on very cold days, they will stand at the door waiting to be let out because they think it’s too hot in the house. (We heat with wood) We love our pets, and take good care of them, but they aren’t my family. I’d never let my kids chase coyotes through the woods on a cold winters night. Well, come to think of it, I guess I would. My son does love to go coon hunting!
 
I think the drastic increase in carbon footprint caused by environmental studies is ruining the environment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top