but it turns out organic, grass-fed animals actually contribute more to greenhouse gases and water usage than factory farmed ones. to meet demand, scaling up factory-farmed beef isn’t the answer, either, according to a june 2015 mother jones article. and with those disconcerting facts, consuming large amounts of meat, in general, is getting harder to reconcile.

animal agriculture comprises 18% of greenhouse gas emissions. to give a comparison, transportation exhausts make up only 13% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. that means that meat production contributes more to the destruction of our planet than all of the cars, buses and trains combined.

it also takes about 2,500 gallons of water to produce just one pound of beef.

(photo by scott bauer/usda ars)

the average american consumes more than 70 pounds of meat each year, which is 10 to 12 times more than the meat intake of the average person in other countries, such as mozambique or bangladesh.  

vegetarians and vegans have made the decision to completely cut animals and their byproducts from their lives. while these diets are both accepted and understood in our culture, a lot of people don’t have the time, money, or inclination to completely eliminate meat.

is there an alternative? introducing: reducetarianism.   

what does it mean to become a reducetarian? simply reduce your meat intake. the concept is as simple as it sounds. for a variety of reasons, including environmental impact, health benefits and animal advocacy, reducetarians find the middle ground between passionate carnivore and vegetarian.

choose one day each week designated to limiting your meat consumption. many restaurants have certain meatless meals or specials; and many whole foods market locations participate in meatless mondays, where customers can fill a tray with any mix of fruit, vegetables and other vegetarian food items for $8.

 
(photo by ralph h. daily/wikimedia commons)

following this trend, consider eliminating meat from your diet on specific days of the week, or perhaps pledging to only eat meat on the weekends or when you go out for meals with friends. if meat is a large part of your diet that would be difficult to reduce to once or twice a week, another option is to consume animal meat once a day if you would usually have it with two meals, or limiting to half portions.

another way to reduce meat consumption is to substitute animal meat for other proteins such as tofu, seitan, legumes and whole grains. there are also a variety of fake meats to replace animal meat in common recipes.

(photo by andrea nguyen/creative commons)

besides the health benefits of becoming a reducetarian, which include reducing heart disease and stroke, curbing obesity, helping fight against diabetes, and limiting cancer risk, the environmental impact involves saving resources worldwide.

are you able to cut back?

(image at top by kevin walsh/creative commons)

there are few people alive today who can remember a time without antibiotics. ever since alexander fleming discovered penicillin in 1928, we’ve relied on antibiotics to save us from all sorts of dangerous bacterial infections. a professor at the milken institute school of public health at the george washington university with a ph.d. in environmental health sciences from johns hopkins university, price warns that we might be losing the power of these life-saving drugs.

we’re already seeing the ramifications of antibiotic resistance. the centers for disease control reports that every year at least 2 million people in the united states become sick with infections caused by antibiotic resistant bacteria — infections that kill 23,000 americans each year.

this is a problem. and according to price, the solution is on your plate.

antibiotics are used in food animals for three different reasons: to treat sick animals (therapeutic use), to prevent the spread of infections (preventive or control use), and to promote growth and production in food animals. few people argue against therapeutic use; even price agrees that drugs are needed to treat infections. but as much as 70 percent of all antibiotics sold in the united states end up going to healthy animals.

defenders of large-scale antibiotic use in food animals say that restricting the use of antibiotics in the agricultural industry would make it harder for veterinarians and farmers to do their jobs. it could limit veterinarians’ ability to treat sick animals, and make it harder for food distributor’s to ensure food safety in the meat we feed to our families.

thankfully, consumers have the ability to make their own decisions about antibiotic use in food production, and act on these decisions in their daily lives.

consumers can make a difference. we’re already seeing the power of supply and demand first hand; walmart, the icon of big food business, began offering organic food at affordable prices when the retailer teamed up with wild oats earlier this year.

here’s what concerned consumers can do:

• look for “organic” and “antibiotic free” labels in the grocery store.
• talk to distributors at your local farmers market. ask how they use antibiotics on their farm.
• don’t be afraid to ask restaurants where their food comes from. restaurants are in the service industry — let suppliers know that there is a demand for sustainable food.
• use the hashtag #stopsuperbugs to join the conversation on social media. 

ranchers in the area fear that contact with free-roaming bison will jeopardize the health of their herds. “as long as we have the disease proliferated in the wildlife, our ranchers will have to undergo heightened surveillance, testing and management procedures, which do cost money, not to mention the sanctions that are put on montana’s cattle by our trading partners,” says errol rice of the montana stockgrowers association.

so far, bison have not transmitted the disease to cattle, but elk, which freely roam outside of yellowstone’s borders, have been known to infect cattle. unlike elk, when bison leave yellowstone, officials attempt to herd them back into the park, and when that fails, they corral them in a capture facility.

mark pearson of the greater yellowstone coalition says, “we’re facing this spring what we’ve feared we would face for the last couple of years, which is a large out-migration of bison from yellowstone, because of the more severe winter we’re having.” during the last migration, in 2008, over 1,400 bison were captured and sent to slaughter.

bison once numbered in the millions in north america, but unregulated hunting and mass slaughter all but eliminated the species. just 25 bison survived in yellowstone in 1901. thanks to restoration efforts, the yellowstone herd today numbers well over 3000. it is the largest free-roaming wild bison herd in the country, but their freedom to roam has a limit.

“in past years, as part of our component of the inter-agency bison management plan, we have captured bison and we have handed them over to other ibmp partners, and they have been taken to slaughter in the past,” explains al nash of yellowstone national park.

recently, montana governor brian schweitzer put a 90-day ban on shipping bison to slaughter. the federal government has also eased pressure on the billion-dollar montana cattle industry by changing regulations regarding brucellosis. ranchers are no longer required to slaughter their entire herd if a few animals are infected, and the whole state doesn’t risk losing it’s disease-free status over the infection of a few animals. with the new rules in place, state and federal officials have agreed to allow these bison to move into tens of thousands of acres outside yellowstone which were previously off-limits to the bison. this allows the bison to roam more freely, while relying on the steep canyon to keep them from roaming too far beyond this area.