Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Cowgate: Animal Agriculture Not a Major Contributor to Global Warming. Any Comments?

From the Washington Post.

 

Forget all that indecorous talk of animal flatulence, cow burps, vegetarianism and global warming. Welcome to Cowgate.

Lower consumption of meat and dairy products will not have a major impact in combating global warming — despite persistent claims that link such diets to more greenhouse gases. So says a report presented Monday before the American Chemical Society.

It is the bovine version of Climategate, complete with faulty science and noisy activists with big agendas.

Cows and pigs have gotten a "bum rap," said Frank Mitloehner, an air quality expert at the University of California at Davis who authored the report. He is plenty critical of scientists and vegetarian activists such as Paul McCartney who insist that livestock account for about a fifth of all greenhouse-gas emissions.

He also is critical of highly-publicized campaigns that call for "meatless Mondays" or push the motto "Less Meat = Less Heat," a European campaign launched in December during the Copenhagen climate summit. Talk of pricey air pollution permits of a "cow tax" for already cash-strapped farmers has surfaced in the U.S. and abroad.

 
Click here to read the whole story on the Washington Post website...

Views: 308

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joann on April 8, 2010 at 2:24am
It just proves once again, that the populace are being herded like a school of fish with an aquarium mind-set.

The UN clearly is focused on shifting the global wealth and has patently found the argument of "climate change" as an easily accepted vehicle that most people can readily buy into. The global warming debate lends a level of empowerment to the average citizen. We are now demanding lifestyle changes without the benefit of global "truths" such as "Producing less meat and milk will only mean more hunger in poor countries." .

How can government turn down demands from their majority of citizens?

Another good article can be found at (24 March 2010)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8583308.stm
"Dr Mitloehner contends that in developed societies such as the US - where transport emissions account for about 26% of the national total, compared with 3% for pig- and cattle-rearing - meat is the wrong target in efforts to reduce carbon emissions."
Permalink Reply by Wayne Black on April 8, 2010 at 3:09pm
From London's Science Museum:
" The scientific community has, with some exceptions, concluded that climate change is real, largely driven by humans and requires a response," said the museum's director Professor Chris Rapley. "Our objective is to minimise the shrill tone and emotion that bedevils discussion of this subject."

with that being said... Let's get on with life and enjoy the upcoming BBQ season.
Permalink Reply by Arik Theijsmeijer on April 9, 2010 at 2:21am
Just a note that emissions from animal agriculture are not just about bodily emissions from the animals themselves, more important is the energy and water expended in growing and transporting grain for those animals. So while the criticism of the UN in report is sound, it is not at all the point of that report. The point of the report still stands, in that reducing the consumption of grain-fed meat overall leads to significantly lower emmissions. Carbon is actually sequestered in grass-fed methods so it is the grain that matters.

It's also important to note that you can just focus on any one sector, like transportation or agriculture, as we have consider the environment in all major aspects of our lives in order to do what it takes to reduce the serious impact of climate change. Finally, to take the UN's mistake and speculate about what either global food policy or individual choices should be as Mr. Mitloehner does in the longer versio of the article, is not his role and is beyond his expertise and his work, as various commentors have stated since this 'sensational' story broke.

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

I’m switching my wheat variety; do I need to change my seeding rate?

The short answer is yes; you will most likely need to change your seeding rate, but this is not just because you are planting a different wheat variety. Rather, seeding rates should be adjusted annually to reflect seed source characteristics (germination, thousand kernel weight [TKW]) and the environment the seed is being planted into, to ensure you can achieve your target plant population.   Let’s dig into why this is. For spring wheat, provincial target plant population recommendations are between 23-28 pl/ft2, with many producers targeting the upper end of this recommendation. Achieving your target plant stands sets your crops up for success, as crop uniformity is improved, weed pressure is combatted and resources are optimized.  Seeding rates should be calculated to achieve your target plant stand, which means accounting for germination percentage, expected mortality and, importantly, your TKW. TKW changes year-to-year and from variety to variety. Let’s consider an example to ill

How much 10-34-0 can be applied with my corn seed?

Oddly, I have had this conversation more this winter/spring than ever before. On paper, there is a finite answer. Anecdotally, there are a few different options and it is all dependent on soil type and soil conditions, moisture, etc. First of all, side-banding any type of fertilizer is much safer than placing it with the seed. Some fertilizers are safe in certain quantities with the seed, but very few. Side-banding is much safer and provides quick access to the roots. Midrow banding is the safest method, but roots take that much longer to access the fertilizer row, which negates the “starter” effect. The other factor that indicates the level of safety is soil moisture; the drier the soil, the more risky it is to place any fertilizer with or near the seed. I’m guilty of thinking that fertilizer toxicity to the seed is mainly due to the nitrogen content and a result of ammonia burn. Salt injury is actually more common and affects germination and early season growth, so applying fertili

AGT Food and Ingredients Inc. Announces Date for Q1 2026 Results and Conference Call

AGT Food and Ingredients Inc. (TSX: AGTF) ("AGT" or the "Company") announces the release of its Q1 2026 results on May 12, 2026 after market close and has scheduled a conference call at 8:30 a.m. Eastern time on May 13, 2026. To join the conference, please dial 1-833-821-0163 (toll free from Canada & the U.S.) or +1-647-846-7232 (from outside Canada & the U.S.). An audio replay of the conference call will be available on AGT's website after the call by visiting www.agtfoods.com. The financial statements and notes thereto for the three months ended March 31, 2026, as well as the related management's discussion and analysis will be filed on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.com and will also be available on the AGT website at www.agtfoods.com prior to the conference call. About AGT AGT is a globally diversified food company that produces high-quality, nutritious products for everyday consumption. Our products reach consumers in 127 countries, and our global footprint consists of 39 state-of-the

Rising Waters on the Canadian Prairies and Beyond

With flooding affecting several Canadian provinces, farmers are being urged to act quickly to protect crops, animals, infrastructure, and long-term soil health.

Is Your Bull Ready? A Year-Round Approach to Bull Management

Every cow-calf producer has either lived it or knows someone who has. Breeding season wraps up and everything looks fine, until fall preg-checks tell a different story: open cows, late calvers and a breeding window that slipped wider than planned. While cow nutrition, body condition and management are frequently evaluated, one critical factor is often underestimated—the bull. Most frustrating is that there are often no obvious warning signs during breeding. The bull was turned out, was covering cows and looked the part. On the surface, everything appeared normal. That’s exactly why a bull breeding soundness evaluation (BBSE) matters more than many producers realize. It is one of the few opportunities to take some guesswork out of bull performance. On a cow-calf operation, bulls get a lot of attention for a couple of months out of the year and very little once breeding season wraps up. The reality is that a bull’s value doesn’t start on turnout day, and it definitely doesn’t end when

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service