• cymbal_king@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I was agreeing until the part where the water goes out to the sea. Less than 1% of the Colorado River reaches the sea. More than half is used for irrigating fields of live stock feed. So reducing beef consumption/cattle raising would have an outsized impact on water issues out west. As you mention, bison naturally work better with the environment of the western plains than European cattle.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      15 hours ago

      There’s less water, and more than half of that lesser amount of water goes to cows thru their feed. If the environment recovered, they could just fucking graze. Even filling the nice of the buffalo

      If we had more water retention, that would be a smaller percentage, and water would be flowing till the end. Increasing the less than 1%.

      Like…

      I’m talking about increasing flow by gallons, you’re talking percents…

      Do I need to explain why that is always bad or has it clicked yet?

      Quick edit:

      And as always, if you think someone didn’t think of an obvious thing, it’s worth asking questions instead of just assuming anything that’s not mentioned wasn’t accounted for.

      I didn’t say the earth orbits the sun, but it’s true.