Industry (subsidies) reduce subsidies from meat industry to more local organic vegan farming for human crops

Subsidies for animal live stock were intended to be a temporary solution for collapsing farms of the 1930s (part of the “NEW DEAL” )which afflicted approximately 25 percent of the population living on farms. Today, farmers only account for a 1 percent of the population with an income of 200,000 thousand yearly, well over the national average. Farm subsidies should be assisting the small local organic crop family farmers and not the large agribusinesses.(25)

Many of these businesses receive conservation payments aiming to strike a balance between the needs of farmers and the reduction of the negative environmental effects associated with agriculture. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified agricultural runoff containing pesticides and fertilizers used on farm lands as the primary source of water pollution. This approach is intended to allow farmers to set aside lands for restoration or to practice no-till agriculture to reduce topsoil erosion.(26)(27)

By redirecting subsidies from the animal production industry and cooperate farming, it will allow organic farming for human crops to tackle the environmental and health issues found with commercial farming to name a few soil erosion, water contamination and air pollution. Organic farming is sustainable, therefore it’s not only healthier for the environment and land but also advantageous in producing healthier food and a safer jobs.

In the United States for instance, Farm subsidies are intended to alleviate farmer poverty, but the majority of subsidies go to commercial farms with average incomes of $200,000 and net worth of nearly $2 million.Farm subsidies are intended to raise farmer incomes by remedying low crop prices. Instead, they promote overproduction and therefore lower prices further. Farm subsidies are intended to be consumer-friendly and taxpayer-friendly. Instead, they cost Americans billions each year in higher taxes and higher food costs.

In addition farmers receive crop disaster compensation regardless if crops were destroyed or not.

Subsidy eligibility is based on the crop. More than 90 percent of all subsidies go to just five crops-wheat, cotton, corn, soybeans, and rice- while the vast majority of crops are ineligible for subsidies. Once eligibility is established, subsidies are paid per amount of the crop produced, so the largest farms automatically receive the largest checks. Again, the small farmers manage to make it by while the subsidies benefit large corporations.
Corn and soy are produced at massive levels, in the U.S corn is used in animal feed for livestock, the U.S actually produces over 40 percent of the worlds corn.(28)

All the meanwhile, with over 1 Billion people today suffering from hunger major corn producing countries like United states , China and Brazil can find more efficient ways to use their lands and hep the hungry within their nation as well as in the global community. U.S. farmers were producing around 119 million metric tons of corn using 26 million hectares. Last year, they cranked out 334 million metric tons using 35 million hectares-a 180 percent increase, using only 34 percent more land.(29) (30)
The actual amount of land we need to feed ourselves is surprisingly small. All the vegetables grown in this country are produced on slightly more than 3 million acres of land. Fruit and nut production occupies another 5 million acres. Potatoes and grains are grown on nearly 100 million acres of land

Other unnoticeable subsides are directed in financing various parts of the operating expenses of the meat industry. Examples include research, meat inspection, environmental cleanup, predator control for ranchers, and the expediting of trade in meat. (31)

NOTE:
Some developing nations or poverty stricken regions require and additional approach due to the terrain or lack of natural resources. Although this may be the case sustainable organic farming for human crops is still feasible. Organizations like USAID and local partners in Ethiopia operate programs developing urban gardens bringing the opportunity of: knowledge of a trade, additional or basic regular food and improving financial income. (32)

(25) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal
(26) http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/economics/
(27) http://www.ehow.com/facts_5943152_conservation-payments-farmers_.html
(28) http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/06/how-farm-subsidies-harm-taxpayers-consumers-and-farmers-too
(29) http://worldofcorn.com/pdfs/WOC-Stat-Book-SinglePG.pdf
(30) http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=31197
(31) http://www.navs-online.org/environment/cattle_ranching/welfare_ranching.php
(32) http://www.usaid.gov/stories/ethiopia/cs_et_urbangardens.html