What if we were all vegan?
Opponents of vegetarianism often predict dire consequences for our countryside
"if everyone went vegetarian" or, even more calamitously, "if everyone
went vegan". Such prognostications ignore the obvious fact that the UK is
not, alas, going to turn vegetarian, let alone vegan, overnight, and consequently
that any changes to the landscape will be gradual, reflecting a decreasing dependence
on food from animals. They also suppose that the existing landscape is sacrosanct,
and that any widespread change in diet or lifestyle that threatens the status
quo should be viewed with suspicion, if not totally opposed. This kind of argument
is used by proponents of 'field' sports, who eagerly point out that this copse
or that spinney would not exist were it not required to provide cover or safe
breeding ground for animals to be hunted or birds to be shot.
The British landscape has been shaped by human hands ever since Bronze Age man
began clearing the native deciduous woodland for timber and farming several thousand
years ago. Change has accelerated over the past 50 years as the push for greater
productivity led to the removal of many traditional but 'unproductive' landscape
features such as ponds and hedgerows, and farmed animals were increasingly reared
indoors in 'factory farms'. Thus, the 'demand' for cheap food (and meat in particular)
has already had a dramatic (and, some would argue, catastrophic) effect on our
landscape. Therefore, it is reasonable to ask what the consequences for the British
countryside would be if the demand for meat and other animal products were to
fall, perhaps to zero.
Such a question was asked on the BBC Radio 4 Farming Today programme broadcast
on 27 December 2003. The assembled panel of experts predicted that there would
be a "dramatic effect on upland and lowland grazing", that if grassland
were to be ploughed in all at once "there would be massive nitrogen pollution",
"large areas of arable land may be abandoned" and that there would be
"detrimental effects to waders like lapwings and curlews". Luckily,
Jenny Hall of the Vegan-Organic Trust was among the listeners. Her response to
the panel is instructive:
If livestock were to be taken out of agriculture over a period of time then much
more land would be available to grow food. A person consuming a plant-based diet
uses about one eighth of the land as a meat eater does. Therefore the current
situation, where 80% to 90% of the 46 million acres of UK agricultural land is
used to feed animals, could be reversed and we could stop importing food for human
and animal consumption. Most of the affiliated farms in the Vegan-Organic Trust
run vegetable box schemes which are ultra efficient ways of feeding and educating
people about sustainable food production and rural land issues; connecting urban
populations to the countryside. VOT advocates a 'people-orientated' food sector
where local producers can get fair pay. The efficient use of the countryside for
grains, vegetables, fruits, nuts, pulses and bio energy would mean that more bio-diverse
wildlife habitats could be integrated into farming which would reduce the need
for pesticides.
If all grassland were to be ploughed in there would indeed be massive nitrogen
pollution. However, grassland and particularly nitrogen fixing leys using clover
and lucerne are an integral part of 'stock-free organic' systems. Interestingly,
many of our affiliated farms have populations of ground nesting birds. Crops can
be brought to the grassland through rotation, or hay can be removed from the grassland
to make plant-based compost or hay mulches. Researchers at the Co-operative Wholesale
Society have found that this form of nitrogen transfer is more efficient than
mixed farming and, of course, uses less land. Also, linking vegan farming to pollution
overlooks the massive pollution and health costs of the livestock industry that
are borne by the water consumer, NHS and tax payer.
So much for the cultivable areas of lowland Britain, but what about the upland
areas that are generally unsuitable for arable farming. At present these areas,
comprising some of the wildest and most beautiful parts of Britain, are mainly
used for rearing hardy breeds of sheep and cattle. Commercial forestry is an obvious
and widely used alternative, but in tackling this question Jenny Hall chose to
quote Sir Martin Holdgate, former UK government chief scientist and Director of
the World Conservation Union. Writing in the journal of the UK Wildlife Trusts,
Sir Martin considered alternatives to sheep farming in the English Lake District
following the foot and mouth disease epidemic:
During the foot and mouth epidemic there have been claims that the Lake District
will become a 'wilderness', loss of sheep 'would make the Lake District a desert'.
I sympathise with those who have suffered the consequences of FMD, but these claims
are simply untrue.
Had we inherited Lakeland as it was before its settlement by pastoral and agricultural
people some 5,500 years ago, it would be a land of unpolluted lakes, teeming with
fish and rich in waterfowl. The lake margins and valley flats would be covered
by extensive tracts of fen woodland. Alder woods would flank the wild rivers.
Ospreys would breed in trees around the shores. Forests, dominated by oak, would
mount the valley sides.
The retreat of heather moor can certainly be linked
to overstocking. What we now have is a cultural landscape created by the interplay
of terrain, wildlife, and human use over the centuries. Would it be a disaster
if, following the sad loss of many flocks, farmers decided not to re-stock? The
ecosystems, eaten out of existence by the sheep, would slowly begin to reclaim
their ancient realm. Hawthorn, birch, hazel, rowan, holly, juniper, oak and ash
would slowly extend their refuges in the gills and crags to take over more land.
It is customary to attack such embryonic woodland as 'scrub', but it is nonetheless
rich in birds and insects and is high forest in the making.
No one can predict with certainty what the landscape of a vegetarian or vegan
Britain would look like. Perhaps we will never know. However, it seems certain
that such a landscape would have more room for wildlife, not less, and that doom
laden scenarios of cabbage monocultures bereft of animal life are plainly nonsensical.
Paul Appleby