Dear #RegenerativeAgriculture community,

Maybe your efforts to promote improved farming techniques would be taken more serious if you'd use less hyperbole.

JFK. It should be possible to present the benefits of regenerative agriculture _without_ selling hot air.

Without ploughing, regenerative farming encourages glyphosate herbicide use. "92% of readers planned to use glyphosate for weed control this year"
#RegAg #herbicides #pesticides #farming
Is Glyphosate Harming Your No-Tilled Soils? (no-tillfarmer.com)

The Stock-based Regenerative Agriculture claim is that de-intensifying animal agriculture is 'good for the environment'. No. At scale, it requires more space, more loss of wild habitat, and alters ecology with fake animals. The answer is not eating meat.

Tofu trumps any kind of beef production for carbon emissions.

Grass-fed cows grow slower and burp methane and crap in the environment for longer.

All cattle occupy land from nature and often from indigenous people.

Animals convert food to muscle inefficiently.

Less land is taken up by plant crops grown to be eaten directly eaten by people instead of this unnecessary intermediary stage. That includes soy.

Greenwashing regenerative farmers claim they need livestock for poo to improve soils.

So, let's start asking them whether they'll remove the animals when that job is done, or whether they're making the land dependent on fake animals, and people dependent on cancer-causing meat (refs available).

Stock-based (so-called) 'regenerative' agriculture advocates say "But lots of land has poor soil. It needs cows and manure. It's like a desert. All that grows is native grasses.' Bullshit! Use them and respect traditional landowners.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d42473-022-00428-z?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=SSCR_BRCON_ENGM_GL_CEAP_UnvQL_CF-spinfx&fbclid=IwAR34I-gAp-r0F7Nw3fG5Bk8XSUYq92dfKlIlnluQGEgbEKWdRnkWDZCCkpc

Research on stock-based regenerative agriculture: the carbon cowboys.

https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/tran.12555

#RegAg #Farming #regenerativeagriculture #veganic
#ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #ClimateEmergency #Biodiversity #BiodiversityCrisis #BiodiversityLoss #Extinction

Arguing cattle replace bison is poor. They were never present on most of the globe. Hooves are different. We almost hunted bison to extinction and stock-based '#regenerative' #farming now seeks to maintain this unnatural environment. #regag #meat #vegan #climate #biodiversity

Stop this stock-based regenerative farming greenwashing. Stop bullshitting about cows replacing bison. If you wanted to replace bison, you'd argue for bison. You want a reason to keep farming meat while making it sound cosy and green. It's not. Tell the truth.

The pro-stock regenerative agriculture movement doesn't mention much about cattle burping significant amounts of the potent greenhouse gas, methane.

They say cattle sequestrate 'the carbon' in soils via manure. The methane was freed long before.

As for carbon in the soil, much of this is released by ploughing, even after many years in the soil, undoing benefits. No-till methods are not usually on offer anyway.

Regenerative agriculture might look good compared with industrial farming but:

- withholds land from nature.
- burping cattle > methane emissions > climate change.
- water use & pollution.
- medications in the environment, affecting wildlife.
- parasites & zoonotic diseases affecting wildlife.
- if roaming, grazing of wild plants.
- poo pollution.
- delaying systemic change to plant-based living.

You can't polish a turd.