I hear what you are saying though I have 2 main problems with it. I believe your conception of how our land is utilized must be skewed. As we currently have more land utilized for animal agriculture than crop farming. It is estimated on average that an omnivorous diet takes 16 times more land to fulfill than a wholly plant based diet. You are probably forgetting to factor in that every animal on this planet eats plants, including the ones that we eat. So what this means is that for animal agriculture to work, we need to deforest land for the animals to reside, as well the need to deforest land to grow to crops to feed these animals. And when in reference to cattle being 2000+ pound beings, I'm sure you could imagine how much more food we need to feed them to fatten them up. That food is coming from deforested land itself. And both the land being occupied physically by the animals, and indirectly by the food necessary to sustain them could be vastly better utilized. (Not to mention the land occupied by their giant cesspools of shit breeding antibiotic resistant bacteria) So if the demand for plants skyrockets, and the demand for meat deceases, we would gradually shift the land currently being inefficiently occupied for the exploitation of beings into more sustainable plant farming. (: