Truth Revealed: Our dogs and cats are killing the planet!!!

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:32 pm

PostSun Nov 08, 2009 2:26 pm » by Thewindycity


So apparently Rover whizzing on the carpet isn't the worst thing he does. Not by a long shot. He's also killing the planet.

Image

Maybe that's a little harsh. But, at the very least, he's not helping matters.

That's according to a study titled Time to Eat the Dog: The real guide to sustainable living, which finds that dogs have a greater eco-footprint than gas-guzzling SUVs.

Robert and Brenda Vale, two sustainable-living researchers from New Zealand, authored the study, which was reviewed in the New Scientist. Their conclusions are based on the amount of resources expended to feed household pets - in a medium-sized dog's case it takes slightly more than 2 acres of land to produce the roughly 360 pounds of meat and 210 pounds of grain they consume each year.

In contrast, less than half that amount of land would be required to produce the energy to power an SUV driven a modest 10,000 miles a year, according to the study.

Larger dogs would obviously have a greater eco-footprint; smaller dogs a lesser one.

Cats, meanwhile, have a smaller footprint - roughly a third of an acre - but that doesn't mean they're environmentally friendly either. As the New Scientist notes, "cat excrement is particularly toxic" and has been known to cause brain disease in sea otters off the California coast. (Thanks to cat owners flushing used kitty litter down the toilet, which makes its way out to sea).

But some other scientists are dubious of the study's primary findings.

"When I saw the study I ran some quick numbers," Clark Williams-Derry, chief researcher at a the Sightline Institute, a Seattle-based sustainability thinktank, told the Seattle Times. "The average dog has to eat at least twice as much as the average person for this to be right. People are just heavier than dogs so, I just had to scratch my head at that.

"It doesn't mean dogs don't have a big impact," he said. "But I view it with a healthy dose of skepticism."

But short of getting rid of your pets, what can be done to minimize their environmental impact? The Vales' study suggests modifying their diets to be less resource-intensive.

Were these people actually paid money to do this research?
By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. George Carlin
"Dont ever lose your sense of humor". John Belushi

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2469
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 2:18 am

PostSun Nov 08, 2009 3:12 pm » by Proto


* reads thread *
* reads other thread * :
"PLEASE READ: NEW DANGER TO YOU & YOUR PET-RELEASED TODAY"
please-read-new-danger-to-your-pet-released-today-t11404.html
:headscratch:

if you combine both of this topics ,combined with the right dose of paranoia, it may
sounds like a twisted marketing plot to sell Doggie Delight and Pet Carousel and Choo Hooves dog food .

:P

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:32 pm

PostSun Nov 08, 2009 4:33 pm » by Thewindycity


lol :)
But the salmonella thing is no laughing matter. All four of my dogs got it 3 weeks ago and I almost lost two of them. They all ate pigs ears, they love em. I just now heard about this and really wanted to get the word out before someone looses their baby. We call our dogs children, and they get spoiled like babies do. We love them unconditionally, and thats how they love us in return. I really do think its important for people to know this.

Question though. If salmonella was not contageous to humans, would the FDA have even gotten involved? I can't imagine the FDA releasing this info to the general public if it was "only dogs" being hurt or killed.
By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. George Carlin
"Dont ever lose your sense of humor". John Belushi



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook