I will NEVER be a vegetarian again. I'll hunt the vegetarians for meat if I have to after all the vegans have been picked clean in the first week of 2050.

No. End of story. History is full of those who said the end in neigh, they are always wrong. It is propaganda by people with an agenda. Nothing more. In the 1840's it was the Millerites. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millerism A good nay-sayer always projects doom to a date when they will no longer be held accountable, say 40 years into the future. The book, The Population Bomb was written in 1968. It was wrong yet it still gets quoted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb This is not the last time you will see this story in your life. I remember also in the 1980's stories about us running out of food by the year 2000. Be mindful of true conservation but don't lose sleep over this one.

I posted this on the other thread about this article:

We can't say the same about a well-managed pasture. On a pasture most of the water stays in the local water cycle. The cows drink some water, pee much of it out, perspire, breathe and it all ends up in the grass they eat and in the atmosphere where it falls as rain. You take water out of the system only when the animal leaves to go to slaughter, but I fail to see how that would implicate animals over plants, as by far the most water per calorie in food is from fruits and vegetables!

Simone Fairlie addresses water usage in his book in chapter 7 http://www.scribd.com/doc/94009929/Meat-a-Benign-Extravagance page 142. He is dealing with a different statistic, but he makes some good points about the plausibility of animals on pasture being water-wasters. The history of estimating cattle water usage has been rather...interesting to say the least. He notes that most beef is rain-fed, and if you are feeding cows on highly irrigated crops then that is wasteful, but that isn't the way it has to be.

Also there is substantial potential to improve the efficiency of pasture ranching so whatever figures they're using don't necessarily apply to what's going to happen when the agricultural system changes

Not if you know how to hunt and fish.

I already posted this a few days ago http://paleohacks.com/questions/145357/good-news-for-people-who-like-bad-news#axzz24rwlQe5t

Stupid! It's trendy to blame animals for consuming too much of the crap GMO corn, wheat and soy that could be ruining the health of more humans world wide. If you don't want animals consuming too much of your grains and other crap crops, put them on grass lands where they belong.

Also, listen to the wording of the article:

"So vegetarianism, the scientists say, is one option to combat the water shortage."

So let's hear some other options! Why only report on that one option? Obviously written from the point of view of a vegetarian. Not worried. Should we be more responsible with our water? Of course. Will we all be eating a meatless diet within 40 years? I don't think so.

Crops require vast amounts of water as well- not as much to produce lb per lb but still, tons of water is irrigated to grow crops. It would be so orderly if we were to all somehow become vegetarian (as if that is the solution) but the world simply does not work that way. It is far more likely that there will be wars over water (and whoever has the most will certainly eat whatever they want, meat included)...ever heard this quote: "If you think wars over water are bad, wait until we start fighting over water." Who knows what is going to happen over the course of our lifetimes, but I am sure things are going to be getting pretty crazy by 2050- It's projected there will be 9 billion people on the planet by then- and vital resources, such as water, are finite. (Of course there is always salt water, but that requires tons of energy to desalinate).

This comes back to the persistent question of sustainability of paleo... that's a serious question, no doubt that SAD meat is unsustainable, I question the sustainability of paleo meats/proteins, particularly in the manner and quantity folks are consuming them currently. The next big shift in paleo will be to a more moderate animal product intake, I predict.

The people who write these things have an agenda. That agenda is to commoditize water so they can sell it. It used to be that municipal water supplies were owned by local government and in most cases water was provided for free.

Then, privatization came in, and what was once free, is now a profit center and a monopoly.

Fluff stories like this are designed to get the public to accept a shortage mentality, so that later on, they can be ripe for fleecing. They saw people buying bottled water and it was clear to them that if they're willing to pay for bottled, they'll be willing to pay for tap.

There are already towns where it's illegal to collect rain water, because somehow, doing so is "stealing" from the government. But really, it's competition with with water company that they're protecting against.

It's not about vegetarianism, though the implication there is that pushing this means pushing soy, corn, and wheat, and the same (kind of) people that profit from this, have dollar signs in their eyes as they plan and plan and plan on also owning water.

It won't surprise me one bit to learn that they'll try to tax air next.

Those who follow their advice are sacrificing their health and finances in order to enrich the liars.

Eat less meat but better quality meat should be the message. I know everyone raves about sustainable/grassfed/organic meat but in reality most paleos are still buying factory farmed meat most of the time. I've moved away from a meat heavy diet mainly because of the cost and it's been an easy shift.

The article is based on the assumption that raising meat isn't environmentally friendly (neither though, is raising crops).

I wonder how they would reconcile this with the recent stories about lab-grown meat. If they can pull it off as hoped, then eating meat would become significantly more "green" than being a vegetarian.

Could we see a day in the future when Greenpeace protests vegetarians, because of the damage their lifestyle does to the planet?

They're right in a way....when meat is scarce and expensive people quit eating it. Wild seafood is already scarce and expensive. The question is more whether you can afford to pay the price to eat the way your ancestors did.

If we keep growing in population at this rate the planet wont be able to support all of us vegetarian or no.

I will start killing my own house pets (rabbits, guinea pigs, gerbils) before I become vegetarian...

We will not all be vegetarian...I will find a way if need be

Increasing our capacity to feed more and more people is the fuel of our population explosion. Doing anything to perpetuate it is insanity.

Water rights are a huge concern in the world right now because water has become a scarce resource. Surface water is not usually a problem once rights have been worked out because it is renewable (although this year's drought is causing huge fights and court cases about how the water remaining in rivers and lakes can be used). If climate change and world population growth continues as predicted, however, surface water will become more scarce and we will continue to fight over it and change our population centers and food systems in response to it. Clean surface water is becoming even more scarce and again, rights will need to be worked out and changes made. Ground water, however, is a non-renewable resource and we are using it up fast. As it becomes more scarce, we will have to make huge changes in the way we live, where we live and how most of us eat. This is basic economics. It does not mean doom. It does not mean vegetarianism. It just means change. We will have to change.

This article has taken a very real concern - water shortages - and made a huge, erroneous conclusion - that we will all be forced to become vegetarians. This is not true. As an environmental economist, I work in this field everyday and I hate this type of sensationalism. No doubt change is coming. It has to. But there's no reason to scare people with crazy, false conclusions.

jesusveg:) visit my blog bevegetarianbygod.wordpress.com

What im hearing from people hear is largely 'the article is probably right' I second the post concerning doomsday predictions but then we are in a ecologically unique situation and the result could very well be unique also ... To our detriment.

I really hope they'll get something out of in-vitro meat though and i dont understand all the horror about it. If scientists can grow meat that is biochemically safe to ingest, contains good animal protein and doesn't harm us the way artificial ingredients/processed foods usually do, then i'll happily gobble it down, hell i'll ask for seconds!

We should also remember that the exponential population increase seems to be facing a halt. As poor people attain a better standard of living they will have fewer kids. Also new technologies are coming up all the time and i hope technology can save us and our health as a species. What would really help us at the moment would be a strictly enforced, global one-child policy.

Pfffft. Water shortage my azz. By 2050 the United States Of America will have solved the worlds energy 'problem' and there will be so much clean water, folks will be DROWNING in it. Seriously.