The objection
Veganism reduces the number of animals born to be exploited and killed. But some say it would have a bad side effect for wild animals:
- with veganism, we'd need less farmland (because we wouldn't need to grow feed for animals);
- that land could turn into forests and fields;
- and, as we've seen, nature produces huge numbers of animals born only to suffer.
So, according to this objection, veganism could increase total suffering.
A link that isn't required
The author shows that the link between veganism and more green areas isn't necessary. Land that's no longer used for animal feed doesn't have to become forest. It can be used in many other ways.
Something curious
The author notices something curious: often, the fact that animal agriculture shrinks green areas (for example, when forests are turned into pasture) is pointed to as a negative of animal exploitation. But if nature produces a lot of suffering, that criticism would also need to be rethought.
What to do
The most consistent approach would be to support veganism and make sure the freed-up land isn't turned into environments where huge numbers of animals are born to suffer.
In short
- Some say veganism would increase natural areas and wild animal suffering.
- But freed-up land doesn't have to become a natural area.
- We can support veganism and also think carefully about how land is used.