CHAPTER V. 



THE ECONOMICS OF THE PRODUCTION OF 

 ANIMAL FOODSTUFFS IN RELATION 

 TO CONSUMPTION. 



IN Part I. above, attention was drawn to the fact that in all 

 cases, and especially when agricultural resources are limited 

 with reference to the tributary population, the requirements 

 in food crops have a prior claim to animal industries for the use of 

 land. In other words, the latter tend to be residual and to that 

 extent are in a weak position relatively. Nevertheless, even without 

 the pressure of a strong demand for animal foodstuffs, to whatever 

 extent animal industries are incidental to the production of food 

 crops, they tend to remain permanent, and any development that 

 increases this incidental feature strengthen their position. The 

 present chapter is devoted mainly to a study of this question of 

 incidental production. 



The whole subject can be most conveniently studied by supposing 

 for the time being that the demand for animal foodstuffs were non- 

 existent, that the foodstuffs necessary for human subsistence were 

 derived entirely from the plant kingdom, thus rendering food- 

 producing animals also superfluous. 1 For added convenience meat 

 may be taken to represent the whole class of animal foodstuffs in 

 this study. 2 



The temperate regions of the world, together with the tropical 

 highlands, contain in their natural state vast areas of native pasture 

 lands, which under the above supposition would represent so much 

 waste land till taken over for crop production, except so far as a 

 small proportion of it might be used for the maintenance of horses. 

 Much of this land, however, consisting of mountain slopes, would 

 not be easily cultivated and might remain unutilised for an inde- 

 finite period of time. In any case, the needs of the world's existing 

 population in the matter of plant foodstuffs could be abundantly 

 satisfied without bringing the whole of even the easily cultivated 

 surface into use. Such animals as might live on the unoccupied 

 grasslands would have no food value and might be left in their 

 natural habitat, more or less undisturbed ; if they came to be 

 killed for any reason or purpose, the meat derived from them would 

 be practically a waste by-product under our supposition. 



1 For the purpose of simplicity the demand for wool and leather, met at 

 the present largely from food-producing animals, is neglected under the 

 supposition. 



2 The suppositions made have no claim to historical accuracy, as no account 

 is taken in the various stages suggested of the domestication of animals for 

 meat production ; they are entirely hypothetical and represent a method of 

 analysis common in economic writings. 



