So Our Pets Pollute. Are You Willing to Give Up Yours?
Today, we’re turning over our forum for an op ed piece by Susan, one of our co-workers, who is an ardent animal lover (two German Shepherds and counting) and a foster Mom for her local German Shepherd rescue organization.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMax & Mittens
A
A
Two New Zealanders have begun what I believe is, on their part, an unwinnable war. Their book, Time to Eat the Dog: the Real Guide to Sustainable Living, contends that the carbon pawprint of our pets is double that of a “gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle,” and we should reconsider our love and care for the fellow creatures that make our lives complete.
Yahoo! News reports that Robert and Brenda Vale, specialists in sustainable living at Victoria University of Wellington, “analyzed popular brands of pet food and calculated that a medium-sized dog eats around 164 kilos (360 pounds) of meat and 95 kilos of cereal a year.
Combine the land required to generate its food and a “medium” sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares (2.07 acres) — around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4×4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 
miles) a year, including energy to build the car.”
In their book, the Vales also site dog and cat poo as toxic, “causing high bacterial levels in rivers and streams, making the water unsafe to drink, starving waterways of oxygen and killing aquatic life.”
To this I say, so what? Humans are far more responsible for polluting our planet in an ever-expanding variety of ways. Maybe we should eliminate all the polluting humans, too. Good luck with that. Living in a world without SUVs is eminently doable. Living in a world without our beloved pets would be devastating. As a matter of fact, the Vales go so far as to say that other animals are not good for the environment either. I guess they conveniently forgot that humans are also animals, a fact frighteningly proven every day in newspapers, television, radio and on the Internet every day.
The Vales suggest that, if you must have a pet, get one that’s dual purpose—like a chicken that lays eggs or, as Robert Vale recommends, “Rabbits are good, provided you eat them.” You have got to be kidding me. Clearly, this couple doesn’t get the concept of pets. I feel sorry for any kids they may have, who get a precious bunny they fall in love with, only to wind up chomping away on its lucky rabbit’s foot during Sunday dinner.
As you can imagine, animal rights activists and pet owners are up in arms—but they don’t have to be. The diversity of life—wild, and otherwise—is the very essence of our world. And with the need for unconditional love becoming greater and greater, our pets aren’t going anywhere.
But there is a place Robert and Brenda Vale can go where they’ll be happy, because there will be no loving, cuddly pets or animals there to affect their environment. Not even a rabbit to roast over the fire…
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
