These internet discussions can get downright burdensome (what with the typing and the turning quotes into italics, etc.). Anyway, here goes:

Try to bear in mind the Taoist maxim that the sharpest blade is the one that gets chipped.

Indeed, and as a student of T'ai Chi, I will resort first and last to using the Earth's gravity against mine oppressors. That, and a quick kick in the nuts.

My main problem is that you seem to consider vegetarianism to be a catch-all solution for the world's ecological ills. Your answer appears to me to be primarily oriented toward personal diet. Vegetarianism in and of itself is not going to swing the planet away from the toxic effects of out-of-control addiction to petroleum products...

You misunderstand my position. My advocacy of vegetarianism if first and foremost one of compassion for animals. Environmentalism and personal health and world food supplies, while very important, are secondary considerations.

What I'm criticizing is not vegetarianism per se- it's the eerie disconnection from the natural balance of the world that often appears to me to emphasize a fastidious disdain for the hunters and fishers...

Again, you misunderstand me, but given that you know me and I know you only through the letter pages of this website, that's not surprising. My position on hunting and fishing and wearing fur and leather has always been that if these things are the only practical way for a person to survive, then so be it. I wouldn't tell a subsistence hunter in Greenland or Borneo that he or she should go vegan; at least, not until they get a local Whole Foods. And if you read through my letters you'll see, as recently as a few days ago in the letters section of the article about the writer raising goats, that I had praise for people who consciously choose to obtain their meat either from humane operations (or I should say, as humane as it gets in the animals-for-food business), or by ethical hunting. I respect ethical hunters who make it their business to kill quickly and cleanly, and eat what they kill. They know where their meat comes and the true price of getting it.

I've seen too many vegan/vegetarian urban and suburban kids who seem to me to be wholly dependent on artificial worlds...Many of them seem to be afflicted with a sense of superiority morality and entitlement that they frankly have done very little to earn.

Again, if their veganism is done for the sake of animals, I don't care if they live on the International Space Station. Also, have you forgotten what it is to be a teen, especially one who adopts a new cause? Be it anti-racism or environmentalism or freedom for Burma or animal rights, teens and young adults are bound to be smug and superior at first; hell, they're smug and superior about the music and movies they like. You should see the look of condescension on my niece's face when I try to argue that "Psycho" is a great movie. Moreover, when a person learns about terrible things, be it factory farms or oil companies' rape of the Third World, often at first that person is filled with an overwhelming and urgent need to do something now, and to try to convince everyone around them that action must be taken now. It requires maturity and time to understand that awful things are happening, and that we are usually powerless to stop them immediately. Think of the hero at the end of the original, "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," running frantically through the streets yelling for people to stop and listen. That's not unlike what it feels like to be a new activist to a cause, especially a cause that entails ending the torture of animals.

I have a hunch that isn't going to work out very well as a survival strategy...The diet thing doesn't resolve a wider vacancy.

To repeat, they're just kids, and we adults always think that of them. On the other hand, I share you concerns with what seems to be a growing disconnect between young people and reality, in every way. And on the other side of the coin, did you know that there are literally people who think that animals do not die to provide the meat they see in the supermarket? It's true.

Vegetarianism isn't going to stop or replace the abuses of petrochemical agriculture all by itself. In fact, if that's the only value pursued as an ecological solution, it's liable to make things worse.

Agreed.

As a resource, fish and shellfish grow themselves in sustainable harvest quantities as their own natural permaculture- no additives needed; a healthy habitat is sufficient. Fish and shellfish already provide an estimated 15% of the protein food consumed by humans. Frankly, I think that amount could be doubled without subjecting vulnerable species to the pressures of depletion and extinction.

Agreed on the first part; unsure whether the last part is true.

The result would be a healthier and more diverse natural world.

Not for the fish! Really, not for the fish.

Conversely- take away that 15% from the diet of humans, and see what results.

If you take it away overnight, then what results will be awful. However, with the exception of my wildest dreams, people are not going to turn vegetarian overnight. We are a smart species and can, if we so choose, graduate to a vegetarian or vegan diet. However, I've said this before and I truly mean it, we as a smart species seem hellbent on destroying the very environment that sustains us, and I believe we will suffer terrible consequences of a ruined world long before we get around to becoming vegetarians.

Good chatting with you, but my vegan wife is nagging me to get my vegan ass off the internet and to the track. Gotta go!