80% of farmland in the US is used to grow grain for animals, if everyone stopped eating meat presumably the last farm animals would be eaten by desperate meat eaters, freeing up 80% of the farmland of which maybe only 25% would be needed for the new demand of vegetarian food, that means 50% of the farmland could be returned to forest,
Clw UK you full well know that and yet you insist on your fallacious arguements in favour of meat eating, if you're going to make an arguement stick to ones backed up by scientific facts not nonsense.
Even if we give your first line of argument the benefit of the doubt and assume its true, that still means that 25% would be needed to supply the food. Therefore there is still a percentage of woodland that would still need to be kept free from pests, and so would result in supporting a system that kills animals (only this time its more insects).
You would then need to transport the food which involves killing animals via the pollution, destruction of habitat to get the fuel, killing of insects to get it too you and occasional road kill.
And so on
I'm merely extending your line of Jainistic thought, which you applied to the meat eating production line, to the vegetarian one.
You would be financially responsible for supporting a system that results in the killing of animals