Climate fanatics, you will not eat our dogs

Global warming zealots, leave our beloved dogs out of it. Why are you even studying the carbon pawprints of our pets? Hmmm. First, it was the greenhouse gas emissions of cows, and now it’s moved on to our beloved pets – our babies in fur. What animals are next? And even more horrendous, are human kids on your radical radar?

In “Time to Eat the Dog, the Real Guide to Sustainable Living,” Robert and Brenda Vale proclaim that a medium-size dog has a footprint of 2.1 acres compared with slightly more than one acre for a standard sport utility vehicle.

Sounds like hype to sell their new book! The Vale authors won’t be eating my dogs. And I won’t be buying their book.

A 2017 article in Forbes discussed the research on the impact of climate change concerning our pets and greenhouse gas emissions. “Dogs tend to eat meat, after all, and meat production is a major contributor of greenhouse gas emissions. By one estimate, it's even the largest. And dogs tend to eat highly processed meat, so their carbon pawprint grows as their food is manufactured, and again as it is transported.”

According to Forbes, Seth Wynes of Sweden's Lund University and Kimberly Nicholas of the University of British Columbia found “conclusive evidence” that dog ownership contributes substantially to climate change.

Who funded this study and why? Are cats next? What about horses, goats, and pigs?

Visit www.lunduniversity.lu.se/article/four-lifestyle-choices-most-reduce-your-carbon-footprint where Wynes found that “having fewer children” was one of four actions that would have the “greatest impact” on greenhouse gas emissions.

Folks, do you comprehend where this is going? Fewer pets. Fewer animals. Fewer kids. Here comes the slippery slope. No pets. No animals. No kids.

“There are two types of “pawprints” that your pet leaves: carbon and ecological. Your dog's carbon pawprint considers the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the creation and transportation of products he uses, the resources needed to grow the meat and vegetables that are found in his food, and the waste that he creates. Ecological pawprint (EPP) is an accounting tool based on the ecological footprint (EF) that is used to measure environmental sustainability. It measures how much biologically productive land and water is used for your companion animals’ food consumption.” Visit www.academic.oup.com.

“What’s worse for the climate crisis: Your child or your pet?” That question prefaces an article you can read at www.euronews.com/green/2021/04/28/what-s-worse-for-the-climate-crisis-your-child-or-your-pet.“Both owning a pet and having a child can increase your carbon footprint in different ways, but which one is worse?”

So, now there’s a comparison between your pet and your child concerning the warming of the earth. Who will be next on the list? I guess, the climate scientists get to decide or the globalists at the United Nations.

Follow the money trail and you may find a carbon tax for pet ownership in the future. Will we have to fight for freedom of dog ownership? Will the killing of our beloved pets be a government mandate? A global mandate?

But, more imperative, will the political powers demand or mandate a one-child policy. It happened in China. Could this happen in free countries?

I invite readers to write a Letter to the Editor and share their views on this topic.

Melissa Martin, Ph.D., is a syndicated opinion-editorial columnist. She lives in USA.