Is it time to kill and eat your pets?

Remove all ads!

This is amazing. I have to send this to some of my eco-freak friends (who also happen to be pet lovers). Although I will be sad if they end up eating their rabbits.

Spoiler

Pet dogs as bad for planet as driving 4x4s, book claims

Owners should consider doing without, downsizing or even eating their pets to help save the planet, according to a new book.

By Paul Stokes
Published: 7:35PM BST 23 Oct 2009

It claims that the carbon footprint left by domesticated animals is out of proportion to the size of their paws.

A medium-sized dog has the same impact as a Toyota Land Cruiser driven 6,000 miles a year, while a cat is equivalent to a Volkswagen Golf.

But rabbits and chickens are eco-friendly because they provide meat for their owners while a canary or a goldfish has little effect on the environment.

At the same time a pair of hamsters do the same damage as running a plasma television, suggests the book Time to Eat the Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living.

New Zealand-based authors Robert and Brenda Vale base their findings on the amount of land needed to grow food for pets ranging from budgerigars to cats and dogs.

They say an average Collie eats 164kg of meat and 95kg of cereals a year, giving it a high impact on the planet.

But a pair of rabbits can produce 36 young annually, which would provide 72kg of meat and help decrease the owner's carbon footprint.

Mr Vale, an architect who specialises in sustainable living, said: "There are no recipes in the book. We're not actually saying it is time to eat the dog.

"We're just saying that we need to think about and know the (ecological) impact of some of the things we do and that we take for granted."

He explained that sustainability issues require us to make choices which are "as difficult as eating your dog".

Mr Vale added: "Once you see where cats and dogs fit in your overall balance of things, you might decide to have the cat but not also to have the two cars and the three bathrooms and be a meat-eater yourself."

 

Not a lot of meat on some dogs though. I mean, it's fair enough if you have a Great Dane or something but you're screwed if you have a Greyhound

 

Never understood the criteria used for which animals are ok to eat and which arent (not counting vegeratians of course). Why is it ok to eat pig but not dog or cat in the western world? To my knowledge pigs are as social and intelligent as dogs. I am a real dog person but I can't but feeling it is awfully hyporcritical to refuse to eat dog while chomping on a nice porkchop. For the record, I actually ate dog once. My social science teacher had brought it from Vietnam and it tasted like, well you can probably guess, chicken.

If you have problem with eating dog, cat, dolphin or whatever go vegetarian. Crying foul over deboned puppies but not minding eating veal is just wrong.

 

Nothing will get me to drop steak off my diet.

 

Is this a joke? Even if it's not, it's hilarious.

I'm not morally opposed to eating any animal save homo sapiens, but in terms of culturalization, I don't know if I could bring myself to eat dog or cat. Just a matter of socialization, I suppose.

Because of the huge impact animals have on my pocketbook, I choose not to have pets.

 

Rabbits are delicious. Especially in civet when you cook them with red wine and season to taste. I know many people have rabbits as pets but they're too tasty.

Thinking of which, if cat or dog meat tasted that great, we would eat them. After all when you consider that over here snails and frog's legs are delicacies then it's only fair to assume that we wouldn't cringe at eating Kitty or Rover if we knew they would taste good. But we don't so that should speak volumes about why eating pets is probably not a good choice. Except for rabbits. Yummy! :

Seriously, cows pollute a lot but don't expect people to give up meat and cheese especially when there are other ways to pollute less. I'd sooner get rid of my car than change my diet.

 

This is making me think of King Rat, wherein some enterprising souls started farming rats for food (and profit!) in a WW2 POW camp run by the Japanese. That book made me sick, let me tell you.

 

Please, anyone of you who has eaten at an American chinese takeout has eaten cat and dog. There is no way that the chicken options are actually chicken... but if I was forced, I would order St. Bernard, they have to have the most meat on them! St. Bernard, the other Redmeat!

 

Typically, in the western world, our food animals are herbivores while our pets are carnivores. Really, it comes down to what the animal was useful for. Dogs helped us hunt, guard our homes, and handle other animals. Cats controlled pests like rats. Cows gave us milk, but that's already eating part of it. Sheep give us wool, but that's wearing part of it. Pigs, well, pigs just give us meat and things to test (they respond about the same way to foods as humans do, so if you think something is poisonous, give it to a pig first).

Aside from that, if this book is at all serious, they're basically arguing that the complete extermination of all life on earth would be good for the environment, right?

 

Then the Chinese must be really better at hunting than Europeans.

It would probably be a good thing, provided you retain enough living creatures to ensure pollination.

 

... Caradhas, typically speaking, the environment is the living creatures. We don't worry about nuclear waste because it would spoil the rocks, or chemicals dumped in the ocean because it'd change the color of the water, but because of the impact on life. It's like arguing wiping out humanity would be good for humanity.

 

No need to try and lecture me NOG.

I stand by my point, you still need enough life to ensure pollination if you want any life at all.

Sometimes when you see what humanity is capable of, it's hard not to think that it would indeed be for the best.

Fortunately that impression doesn't last long.

 

/me drools

I'm going to have to bring some hot dog buns the next time I see my buddy's Weiner Dog!

 

The thought of eating an animal that is primarily a carnivore disgusts me. But given what many pigs likely eat, it probably shouldn't, logically speaking. However, food and diet are very touchy and emotional subjects.

 

Re-read that one Kit. You might want to re-phrase that one!

 

Do you like shellfish? Do you know what they eat? How about catfish?

 

Is there a term for those who are cannibals and only eat animals that are cannibals themselves? Super-Cannibals?

 

Yeah, I know -- I just try not to think about it too much

 

Pigeon is nice... they eat pasty