An Article: Dogs are not environmentally friendly...!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
1,020
Reaction score
0
Points
114
DianeB said:
FarmerChick said:
If people could be more responsible for their own lives and well being and sufficiency....the impact would be incredible.

But---the big old bad city. where no one produces truly anything to credit to their survival on the basic level.

The basic natural world is gone. It isn't coming back any time soon either.
Cities are not the environmental evil that most people assume them to be. If planned correctly, cities have a much lower impact per person than living in the country.
I was talking to a city planner once and he made that point quite well. After living in the country for 7 years now I don't think I could handle being stacked in a high rise with a thousand other people. I need flies in my face and the smell of horse manure wafting in the window. Stars in the sky. Foals chasing each other in the pasture. Schools that are so small that all the boys have to join the football team in order to play a game.
 

reinbeau

Moderator Extraordinaire
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
1,815
Reaction score
7
Points
124
Location
Hanson, MA Zone 6a
Wifezilla said:
Wonder if these people are connected to PETA. That may sound counter-intuitive, but PETA would rather kill all pets than have them live as "our slaves". PETA has been caught killing pets turned it to them for "rescue" more than once.
For the PETA crowd, honeybees are our slaves, too. True vegans won't eat honey :rolleyes:
 

Blackbird

Goat Whisperer
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
3,461
Reaction score
2
Points
154
Location
Many-snow-ta
FarmerChick said:
If people could be more responsible for their own lives and well being and sufficiency....the impact would be incredible.

But---the big old bad city. where no one produces truly anything to credit to their survival on the basic level.

The basic natural world is gone. It isn't coming back any time soon either.
Right on FC.

If the 'author' or whoever it is, is so concerned about the environment and sustaining energy, etc. then he or she would be producing their own meat to feed their pets that raw diet, and most likely be using more natural ways and self vet care. THEN those pets would more environmentally friendly. The author is a hypocrite at best.

"The most ecologically useful person is one who is dead and composting away." Excellent ETR.
 

xpc

Doubled and twisted
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
1,113
Reaction score
0
Points
114
Location
KFC
reinbeau said:
For the PETA crowd, honeybees are our slaves, too. True vegans won't eat honey :rolleyes:
I seldom eat meat, not for the vegetarian or vegan reasons but for trying to lose weight, I almost never eat honey but would like to keep that option open, and if need bee gobble them whole. The wings are high in fiber and the stinger can be used as a tooth pick (not in Kentucky).
 

DrakeMaiden

Sourdough Slave
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
2,421
Reaction score
6
Points
148
enjoy the ride said:
The most ecologically useful person is one who is dead and composting away. Not everything needs to be evaluated according to it's use.
LOL
 

patandchickens

Crazy Cat Lady
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
3,323
Reaction score
6
Points
163
Location
Ontario, Canada
Blackbird said:
If the 'author' or whoever it is, is so concerned about the environment and sustaining energy, etc. then he or she would be producing their own meat to feed their pets that raw diet, and most likely be using more natural ways and self vet care. THEN those pets would more environmentally friendly. The author is a hypocrite at best.
Where ARE y'all getting these things???

How on earth do you know how the authors of the book (that's authors *plural*) are feeding their cats or taking care of their health needs??? You have no idea. You are just making that up as something to complain about.

And anyhow what does that have to do with the authors totting up the impact of what MOST PEOPLE in the Western world do in terms of feeding and equipping and caring for their pets? Which is what the book is ABOUT, not what they personally do.

I am really surprised by the venom being directed at the basically-reasonable ideas that a) keeping pets uses resources and has an environmental impact, and b) many people would be surprised at how *much* resources and impact.

And while I have not read the book -- and neither have you folks!! -- the article certainly does not bill it as containing an urgent request that all pets be euthanized and pet ownership discontinued. It's just pointing out another thing we do that affects other people in the world, that ya might not really think about unless it was pointed out.

Sheesh.


Pat, all in favor of pet ownership, and not feeling in any way threatened by this book, man oh man.
 

xpc

Doubled and twisted
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
1,113
Reaction score
0
Points
114
Location
KFC
Good gravy, dogs are not the problem humans are - check out the carbon footprint of a new born baby, it is ridiculously high. Cloth or disposable the diapers are single handily responsible for global warming - Scientists call it "The Poopy Pants Effect" and will attempt to blow up the moon to counter the vile creatures milorganite expenditures.

When James Watt invented the steam engine (Newcomb) people asked what good is it?: he replied what good is a new born baby? The dog has many more uses and unlike a child will never ask if you want fry's with that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top