"The livestock sector is currently the single major driver of habitat loss and degradation, which is in its turn a leading cause of species decline and extinction worldwide."

Important study + 🧵thread on this main driver of biodiversity loss:

sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
"The production of livestock alters natural habitats not only via land-use change, but also through its outputs of agrochemicals, nutrients, sediments, antibiotics and hormones into natural environments."
"The multiple, synergetic, and ubiquitous past and present processes by which human carnivory threatens the world's biodiversity makes it arguably the most detrimental aspect of our ecology, from a conservation point-of-view."

#WorldEnvironmentDay
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Carnivory is the most impacting aspects of human ecology in terms of the proportion of vertebrate species they affect (26.1%), followed by forestry (23.5%), infrastructure (17.2%), pollution (11.1%), and invasive species (10.4%).

Let's address all, but we need awareness of #1!
To address the biodiversity crisis, we need shifts to plant-based.

"Across all animals, livestock exclusion increased abundance and diversity"

Meta-analysis of 109 ind. studies on the response of animals or plants to livestock grazing vs. exclusion:
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.11…
Rewilding and allowing native grasses and animals to thrive again in protective areas is an obvious yet underutilized solution.

Exactly this was documented here:
No doubt there are also many other drivers of biodiversity loss, as these studies also make clear, but as we strategize to address this crisis, to leave the gluttony and subsidization of animal-sourced foods out of the discussion is complete denial.

#WorldEnvironmentDay2022

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Nicholas Carter

Nicholas Carter Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @NicholasDCarter

Jul 4, 2021
Rewilding and allowing native grasses and animals to thrive again has huge ecological benefits. 🧵/1

@WilliamJRipple's et al. measurements as documented in 'Rewilding a Mountain' outlines this well in the semi-arid Hart Mountain antelope refuge in Oregon:
rewildingamountain.com ImageImageImageImage
In 1990, contrary to pressures by cattle groups, the land conservation stewards here voted to ban cattle grazing based on the science showing its ecological degradation to this riparian land. The result:

/2 ImageImageImageImage
The biodiversity increases, including much more birds and antelope, were clearly visualized and measured, further highlighting potentials in addressing the biodiversity crisis through rewilding land dedicated to grazing cattle.

/3 ImageImageImage
Read 6 tweets
Jun 3, 2021
There's huge variability in GHG estimates from animal agriculture.

Groups game the numbers to suit one's confirmation bias. The FAO has engrained corporate interests (Meat Secretariat) and use the lowest estimate (14.5%) and advocacy groups are drawn to the highest (51%+)

🧵 Credit: Martin Mueller
What's important is knowing how the numbers are influenced so you can critically analyze it. And in reality, there's uncertainty and a huge amount of data that's missing to truly make an exact figure accurate.

Helpful breakdowns by Martin Mueller:
bayern.landwirtschaft.jetzt/en/klimawandel/
This new study just out contributes to the clarification of the quantification of emissions, and asks why the dominant framing from the FAO avoids calls for reductions in animal consumption and the systematic changes needed to influence it.

mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/1… @richardtwine
Read 6 tweets
Dec 7, 2020
No, methane from cattle are not just part of the natural carbon cycle.

50-75% of all biogenic increases in CH4 since 2007 were from livestock (Wolf, 2017).

CH4 is a short lived gas, but potent, so reducing the # of cattle farmed will quickly reduce its atmospheric impacts.
🧵 Image
No, shifting to all grass-fed cattle won't necessarily reduce its footprint because a more fibrous diet, and about 1 year 'longer' life.

The extra land use is rarely factored into the footprint. Even if it's marginal land, there's missed sequestration and biodiversity benefits. Image
Even if methane is excluded completely, the footprint of beef from dairy herds (for the same amount of protein) is:

• 5x higher than tofu
• 10x higher than beans
• 20x higher than peas
ourworldindata.org/carbon-footpri…
Read 6 tweets
Oct 28, 2020
Livestock production is often said to be responsible for only 4.2% of total U.S. GHGs. This is an EPA figure so many assume it's accurate.

But this calculation doesn't account for several direct and indirect GHGs, and this narrow metric fails to show the full picture.

THREAD
Firstly, the 4.2% figure *does not* include the production of animal feed and forage.

That's like saying the GHGs from trucks are minimal, without mentioning that the emissions from gasoline weren't included in the estimate.

Feed and forage, according the USDA and FAO:
This isn't a minor forgotten aspect since it includes vast amounts of N2O emissions, land use change, and deforestation, some of which is in other countries.

And growing crops, to cycle through animals, is often assumed as an efficient process. It's not:
Read 10 tweets
Sep 26, 2020
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There's no reason to exaggerate an anecdote. Just replicate and measure it for its truthfulness.

Which brings me to the thread on my initial thoughts of the new #KissTheGroundMovie now on Netflix. They claim soil is a: Image
I don't know how one can spend 7 years on a project like this and not be shown the science that there's measurable limits to carbon that can be sequestered in soils, and it's easily reversible, especially in pastureland:
fcrn.org.uk/sites/default/… Image
But holistic grazing leader Allan Savory makes many appearances with the usual "grazing reverses desertification/climate change" claims, failing to mention grazing is also the major driver of deforestation & topsoil loss globally. Image
Read 9 tweets
Sep 17, 2020
We should be concerned about soil issues, but these concern me more:

- 68% drop in animal populations since 1970
- Lost C sinks with 42% of pastureland that used to be forest/wooded savannas
- Deforestation in March 2020 jumped 150%
- Unnecessarily large agricultural footprint
We continue to exploit and destroy nature at an unprecedented scale.

See the 2020 Living Planet Report, one of the most comprehensive assessments of global biodiversity available and was complied by 134 experts from around the world.
amp.theguardian.com/environment/20…
Pastureland, at the core of the issue, has replaced forests at unprecedented scales over the last decades.

Learn more about these missed opportunities for nature based solutions:
nature.com/articles/s4158…
nature.com/articles/s4189… ImageImage
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(