Indiana Correspondent

ARLINGTON, Va. – Removing farm animals as a food source in the United States would reduce greenhouse gas emissions just slightly while producing a shortage of nutrients plant-based foods alone cannot replace. That was among the conclusions of the latest “Sustainability Impact Report” from Animal Agriculture Alliance (AAA), based in Arlington.

The 33-page report, released on the 50th anniversary of Earth Day on April 22, also highlighted the contributions the animal sector of agriculture has made to sharply reduce its share of all U.S greenhouse gas emissions. The carbon footprint of dairy farmers, for example, decreased 63 percent from 1944 to 2007. Emissions and water consumption of pig farmers dropped 7.7 percent and 25.1 percent respectively from 1960 to 2015, the report said, citing information from the EPA. The egg industry since 1960 also reduced its carbon footprint by 71 percent and water use by 32 percent.

Producing the same amount of chickens today as 1965 has 50 percent less impact on the environment, the report stated.

“The animal agriculture community is constantly evolving and looking for innovative ways to improve the environmental sustainability of farming and ranching,” said Kay Johnson, president and CEO of AAA.

Forty nine percent of the emissions of agriculture in the United States are from animals, but removing livestock from the food supply would reduce total emissions in the country by just 2.6 percent while creating nutritional deficiencies for the population, the report noted. Animal-derived foods supply 48 percent of the protein, 23 percent of the essential fatty acids and at least one-third of the essential amino acids available for human consumption in the United States. The report also said more than 50 percent of the food-derived vitamins such as A, B12 and D come from animal products.

While the total amount of food would increase 23 percent from producing more of the other foods to make up for the loss of farm animals, there would be increased nutrient deficiencies because of the essentials such as protein that meat brings to the table.

“A lot of times when people make comparisons between animal protein and other products it’s really not a simple calorie for calorie exchange,” said Hannah Thompson-Weeman, AAA spokesperson. “You have to talk about nutrients as well.”

The report also casts doubt on whether enough fruits and vegetables could be grown to replace the food lost by eliminating farm animals to meet the needs of a growing population. Land vacated by animals and then used for growing crops would have production limitations in soil quality and climate, according to the report. A lot of ground used for raising cattle, for example, is too rocky for raising healthy crops.

“Given the tremendous demand for fruits and vegetables, if it was viable to produce more of these high value crops in the current system this would already be occurring,” the report stated.

Animals vanishing from the U.S food chain would also bring negative economic consequences because of the dollars from exports and employment tied to meat and poultry, according to the report. “It’s not so simple to say remove animals from our food supply chain,” Thompson-Weeman said. “It’s a very complex system.  Our food supply needs plants and it needs animals and it all works together.”

The nonprofit AAA says its mission is to bridge the communication gap between farm and fork by helping people better understand modern agriculture and combating misinformation threatening the nation’s food security.