Fighting back against Big Ag onclimate change and clean meat

The cattle-ranching segment of Big Ag is putting out more and more stories, including on places like The Conversation, about how they can actually be part of healthy ecosystems.

One statement is that, if cattle didn't graze grasslands unfit for farming, who or what would?

Bison and pronghorns, for starters off the top of my head. Bison, at least, are likely parts of healthier prairie ecosystems than cattle. Badgers, rabbits and hares, with a bit more thought.

Elk, which used to populate the Great Plains second only to bison. Mule deer.

Especially if all of them were parts of a grazing rotation, it would be much healthier for grasslands, especially mixed-height and shortgrass prairie, than would be cows. Plus, such animals aren't fattened on corn at the end of their lives, meaning more for people to eat.

Bison could be large-scale ranched, if we wanted to commercialize some of that. But, per Ted Turner's dream, much of the land could be made a buffalo commons.

Ditto in intermountain valleys and such. Let either desert or mountain bighorns do some repopulation.

For anything other than ranched bison, hunters who want new opportunities would now have them. (Ideally, they'd be competing with some reintroduced wolves.)

Beyond that, of course, the Big Ag flackers, whether at universities with major ag programs within the land-grant system, ranchers' groups, or elsewhere, don't note that only a small portion of the beef of today is grass-fed. Most of it starts its life on grass, of course, but then gets sent to a feedlot to eat corn, and maybe some soybeans. Not grass at all. (Note: Some commercial bison meat is also finished on corn; look for grass-fed labels on it, too, and avoid what isn't so labeled.)