home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!noc.near.net!hri.com!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!uwvax!meteor!tobis
- From: tobis@meteor.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis)
- Newsgroups: sci.environment
- Subject: Re: Historic levels of methane by bison (was Re: Perot ad and methane from cattle)
- Message-ID: <1992Nov10.013911.10934@meteor.wisc.edu>
- Date: 10 Nov 92 01:39:11 GMT
- References: <13045@optilink.UUCP> <3NOV199215330779@pearl.tufts.edu> <JMC.92Nov3175950@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
- Organization: University of Wisconsin, Meteorology and Space Science
- Lines: 24
-
- In article <JMC.92Nov3175950@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
- >We do other things with the land than just grow cattle. However, I am
- >skeptical about the high estimates, 30, 60, 150 million. Is this the
- >estimate of the Nature Conservancy itself or just some enthusiast?
- >Why not just one million?
- >
- I suggest that the comparison between bison and cattle is not as simple as
- it might appear, as the bison biomass was _supported_ by the territory, while
- the cattle biomass is regularly _exported_ (every three years is it?) It
- would be very surprising to see that after a century of breeding the
- efficiency of deliberate cattle ranching were only comparable to that
- of natural buffalo herds (enormous though they were). But it seems to me
- that directly comparing the populations of the beasts is not an appropriate
- way to measure it.
-
- On the other hand, there is no doubt that the buffalo herds were really
- enormous. A recent and fascinating book on the human effects on the
- landscape of the middle and western US, _Nature's Metropolis_, has an
- evocative account of the sudden and spectacular disappearance of the
- buffalo, succumbing to the railroad and the rifle in a period of hunting
- that was enormously lucrative and hardly more difficult than shooting fish
- in a barrel. (Sorry, the author's name escapes me just now.)
-
- mt
-