'Insect apocalypse' more complicated than thought

Re:'Insect apocalypse' more complicated than thought by JetSetWilly on Friday April 24, 2020 @05:06AM (#22966067)

Around here land of good quality is used to grow crops for human consumption, and land of marginal or poor quality can't grow many crops so is used as grazing land.

Is it "70% of farming" by area of land? That doesn't sound so bad because most farmed land isn't all that great. Can we really say that 70% of the yield of high quality farming land is going to feed animals?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:'Insect apocalypse' more complicated than thought by Mvandenbergh on Friday April 24, 2020 @05:33AM (#22966211)

In some parts of the world, marginal quality land is used for monocropping of animal feedstock using intensive exogenous inputs (fertiliser and pesticide).

Raising animals for meat on meadowland, depending on the level of intervention used on that land, can actually be good for biodiversity although if those animal are excreting larvicides everywhere they go, it's not so good.

In the English context, the richest habitat with the best biodiversity is a complex mix between meadows, hedgerows, and woodland. The exact historical balance, especially between meadows and woods is hotly contested and an open research topic.

[ Parent | on HN ]