George Monbiot’s fear of the few remaining British farmers (Goodbye – and good riddance – to livestock farming, 4 October) reached new levels when he wrote that the “rich mosaic of rainforest and other habitats that once covered our hills has been erased” and blamed us for the tectonic drift that moved Britain from the equator towards the Arctic, perhaps 300m years ago. In the rest of his article he mixed unrelated science from all over the globe with the peculiar claims of noted eccentrics, and suggested that we should plough unsuitable land to grow soya, which will not grow in this climate, to produce artificial meat in urban factories.

He didn’t mention inconvenient features of the British ruminant livestock industry, such as the fact that most feed that animals get other than grass is made up of byproducts of the human food industry such as brewers’ grains, sugar beet and fruit-juice pulp, most of which would have to go to landfill if cows and sheep did not recycle it. Without the income from this form of recycling, the price of food in the shop would increase. We do need to moderate excessive meat consumption, and we do need to act on climate change, but this article sows confusion that will delay necessary change.

Huw Jones

St Clears, Carmarthenshire

• Livestock has long formed part of the warp and weft of our countryside, and the issue of its potent role in greenhouse gas emissions and other forms of pollution cannot be ducked. Compared to other sectors, farming has done poorly. Emissions have risen since 2010, despite the increasing urgency to act. That does not mean that we should get rid of all livestock. The issues are complex. Even the Food Climate Research Network, cited by George Monbiot, concludes that grazing livestock has a limited place in a sustainable food system.

For us, this limited place means people in the UK should eat less but better-quality animal produce, whether dairy, eggs or meat. It also requires eating many more plants and challenging rising demand for animal-based proteins. The challenge for the farming sector is to make the shift to more sustainable and resilient systems, much less dependent on fossil fuels and set up to support a healthier population. We know this is possible because some farmers are doing this already, and very successfully too.

Graeme Willis

Food and farming campaigner, Campaign to Protect Rural England

• On this occasion George Monbiot’s evangelical zeal obscures some fundamental practicalities. First, much grazing land is simply unsuitable for growing crops. For example, an organic farmer friend on Dartmoor tells me his land will successfully grow only grass. He farms organically and the manure allows insects to flourish, encouraging a high number and variety of farmland birds. Many arable farms, with their vast acres of monoculture, are often deserts where wildlife is concerned.

Second, the implication that livestock farming is cruel is unfair and insulting. Like many farmers, my friend cares greatly about both the natural environment and the welfare of his animals. Third, would rewilding always be such a good idea? It would most likely produce impenetrable scrubland. We have a profound love of our farmed landscape, shaped in large measure by livestock grazing. Surely few of the 99% who are not vegans would consider veganism a price worth paying for its destruction.

In any case, replacing meat with vegetables is a second-order priority beside the existential issues of population growth and global warming. And, yes, I am a meat-eater and the vast majority of people are firmly of the opinion that the tastiest dishes are those based on meat.

David Thomas

Hereford

• Our dependence on meat is mirrored by the Vikings who colonised Greenland during the Middle Ages. Although fish was readily available, they continued to raise cattle as this conferred social status. When the climate turned colder they perished. By contrast, the inhabitants of Tikopia, a small Pacific island, abandoned pig-rearing in the 17th century as they were rooting up vegetables and competing for food. This may be the only example of a society voluntarily abandoning meat consumption, and it allowed the Tikopians to maintain a population of 400 inhabitants per square mile without any recourse to modern agricultural technology. The question posed in my book The Gilgamesh Gene is whether humanity is behaving like the Vikings or the Tikopians.

Dr Robin Russell-Jones

Stoke Poges, Buckinghamshire

• This is another stimulating article, but I wonder why George Monbiot does not make the point that the essential reason for not eating animal products is that the breeding, rearing and killing of sentient and intelligent animals is cruel and brutal, and unnecessary for human beings to survive and thrive. Of course, the supplementary point that the evidence shows that it is also potentially damaging to the future wellbeing of humanity is also relevant, but it is not the essential reason for avoiding animal products.

Roger Gibbs

Loughton, Essex

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters