Livestock often are vilified for producing more greenhouse gases than automobiles. Methane gas and the amount of water and grain required to produce meat and milk frequently are cited as environmentally disastrous.
What’s consistently ignored, however, is the failure of most research to distinguish between animals raised in confined feedlots and animals grazing on rangeland as nature intended in a holistic system. Research on holistic land management is, in fact, showing that large grazing animals are a vital and necessary part of the solution to climate change and carbon sequestration.
I found a quote along these lines before, which this article rounds out. Drove through the Palouse in Eastern Washington recently, and saw the signs for the Conservation Reserve Program, and now I know what it is!
The big "aha!": folks can actually be paid carbon credits for this type of thing!
Has anyone else heard of carbon credits being paid to those raising livestock with paddock shift or rotational grazing systems? The new farm income forum has me wondering whether this is or could be viable farm income.
Pre columbian livestock numbers have little bearing on greenhouse gasses today.
Unfortunately grassfed livestock produce more methane than feedlot do. I don't have the data in front of me but it's unfortunately true. Methane is 20 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon is, so I'm not sure of the logic behind this one