Um... Brightstar,

--Again, where is all this water stored? In the udders? They're not THAT big. Do you know how much water 25,000 liters is?

They're saying that the feed needed to feed the cow takes liters of water to farm. You're aware of the process where people plant feed for cows, and they have to water that feed, and the water goes into the earth, and only goes partly into the plants? And the rest of it goes into the earth under the plants? It's a fascinating process, really; I think they call it "watering the plants they feed the cows with..."

I'm going to assume that you're being intentionally ignorant, so as to defend the status quo; as always when someone defends a destructive, unsustainable status quo, I hope that it's because you've at least been intelligent enough to make some money off of it.

There's that "manure thing" happening, too. With the cows, and all.

--There's that "manure thing" happening,

;)

"supposed lost water." Hey, then there's no problem at all!

I think you may be missing the point, or at least that you don't appreciate the nuance of the environmentalist's concerns.

Yes, the water cycle is a zero-sum process. Water goes into cow (whether drunk or through eating water-intensive feed crops like alfalfa). Water leaves the cow as urine, dung, sweat. Yes, this water eventually rejoins the water cycle. Nobody is saying it somehow ceases to exist. The problem is that industrial farming extracts this water from the most convenient source available - from rivers and aquifers. Rain alone isn't always gonna cover it. For example, California, America's bread basket, is naturally arid. Pulling all that water out of the rivers and aquifers has consequences for the natural environment. Sure, the water cycle returns that water, but not necessarily to the same rivers and aquifers that were the source of that water to begin with.

To put it simply, if we could ensure that every drop of water pulled out of River/Aquifer X to feed Cow Y eventually returns to River X, no harm done. But we can't. That water is gonna end up somewhere else, maybe percolating into a different aquifer, maybe dumped (legitimately or otherwise) into a different river or sewage system or different part of the ocean. Maybe that water will be moved by different weather patterns to other locales who presumably would enjoy (?) higher rainfall. That, however, is of no assistance to the ecosystem dependent on the ever dwindling River/Aquifer X.

International treaties are the only way. We beat the hell out of local fishermen with fines and suspension, limiting seasons and time out at sea and there are Russian and Japanese trawlers right over the international line dragging the bottom depleting our native oceans.

Yes, the water cycle is a zero-sum process. Water goes into cow (whether drunk or through eating water-intensive feed crops like alfalfa). Water leaves the cow as urine, dung, sweat. Yes, this water eventually rejoins the water cycle. Nobody is saying it somehow ceases to exist. The problem is that industrial farming extracts this water from the most convenient source available - from rivers and aquifers. Rain alone isn't always gonna cover it. For example, California, America's bread basket, is naturally arid. Pulling all that water out of the rivers and aquifers has consequences for the natural environment. Sure, the water cycle returns that water, but not necessarily to the same rivers and aquifers that were the source of that water to begin with.

RIGHT, as I said, irresponsible industrial scale farming is the problem. Not cows, not organic farming, and not eating meat.

I like cows, I like organic farming, and I like eating meat. But articles that falsely posit that millions of gallons are being destroyed just so we can eat meat only harm the things we ought to be preserving and nurturing, namely cows, organics farms, and meat eating.

Again, industrial corporate farms are more than glad to fan the flames with articles such as this, safe in the knowledge that those hurt MOST will NOT be the filthy irresponsible corporate farms.

I am just trying to implement some chain or responsibility rather than agreeing to the mindless kneejerk liberal fascism that seems to permeate the left.

So you'll be willing to step forward and slit their throats so you can eat them? It's a funny way to show an animal you like it, but hey, it's your movie.

By the way, emulating Michael Savage is no way to be taken seriously.