Quote Originally Posted by GradStudentLeper View Post
Why? How do you justify that ethically? Because we live in a capitalistic society? Have you considered that perhaps we shouldnt? Or that, perhaps the needs of humans can be outweighed by the needs of other organisms.
You'd be amazed at how often species disappear from habitat set aside for them but remain on privately owned property. National Parks really screwed up, for example, by planting sport fish to attract tourists - while many private land owners, including ranches, did not do such things and thus still have native rana species.

Your position would have us Slash and Burn the entire country of Brazil to make room for additional cattle, and the destruction of entire river deltas and all of the life they possess for rice patties.
Nothing was said about completely unregulated farming.

Moreover, farming takes a LOT of water. Fresh water is very limited, so if we ALWAYS gave into the demands of farmers we would have water shortages more severe than we already have.

Your own state of CA has severe water shortages because the local farmers cant be bothered to conserve water, and they have single handedly destroyed not just the Central valley, but everything down stream and downwind.
Much of the water shortage currently going on is artificial, caused by a small minnow in the Delta. Seems they sometimes get killed in the pumps, so they turned the pumps off.

Our politicians are too stupid to figure out the unemployment costs are likely higher than the cost of a captive breeding program to supplement the wild minnow population.

If I bulldoze a plot of land, I destroy that plot. If I turn it into farmland, not only do I destroy the vast majority of life there (the above example is poor because animals can migrate to area turned into public land, it did not support that life before, those organisms recolonized it afterward), but I must take water from the surrounding countryside, and when that water leaves my plot of farmland it is polluted, killing or otherwise harming everything up stream. The wind blows the same chemicals elsewhere, and due to Evolution, the pest insects I have pesticides for become resistant to pesticides, including natural compounds native plants use for defense. As a result, I create super-insects that devastate local plants.
When people starve, you end up with revolution. War does a lot of damage.
I suspect, btw, that you'll find most ecological damage actually comes from lawns and pesticides used to keep lawns green aphids off the roses.

Farmers use science for the application of their fertilizers and pesticides, often they are required to by law but it also is cheaper for them. Use too much and the cost of excess hurts their bottom line, it is worthwhile for them to do frequent soil samples, etc.

Joe Six Pac does not use science, his runoff probably does more damage.

Yes, agriculture has ecological impact. Yes, methods continue to improve reducing that impact. We do need to change the way we farm and go more organic, but keep in mind, the less pesticides used the lower the crop yield, thus more land needs to be turned into farmland to feed the population.