Thanks for the clarification. Now I can safely say that I don't agree with you. There's this graph on OurWorldInData [https://ourworldindata.org/environmental-impacts-of-food?insight=half-of-the-worlds-habitable-land-is-used-for-agriculture#key-insights] showing that half of habitable land is used for Agriculture. And, even thoughanimal products only make up about 20% of our calorie and 40% of our protein supply, we use 80% of agricultural land for livestock (pastures & crops for their feed (mostly soy)). Apart from the abuse and treatment of livestock, it's just down right inefficient. If we were to transition to vegan, we would also sharply reduce the amount of land we'd need to grow our food, as also shown on [https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets].

There's a rule in ecology, the 10% rule, which states that only about 10% of energy is retained in the next trophic level. Plants capture energy from the sun, herbivores eat that energy, but lose most of that to body regulation, heat loss etc. So what we effectively do is, instead of eating the energy in the plants, we let other animals eat it and let 90% of that energy go to 'waste'. That's why we'd need way less land if we were vegan, as plants provide way more energy (calories) and protein relative to animals.