Farmers are the custodians of the countryside and it has been their practices over many generations that have played a major role in shaping the landscape that we see today.
However, it is also the protection of these ecosystems and how we face the challenges of improving water quality, reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) and maintaining and enhancing biodiversity that will heavily influence the future of the beef industry, as can be seen in emerging Irish and European policy.
At present, there is a particular focus on greenhouse gas emissions, given that the agricultural sector accounts for approximately one-third of the total national emissions. Furthermore, beef meat production tends to have a higher carbon footprint (the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions generated for each unit of beef produced) than most other food products.
However, beef cattle farming is a part of the natural ecosystem in rural environments and plays a crucial role in converting grass and other feed sources that are not edible for humans into high-quality protein and energy food. There is also evidence to suggest that Irish beef has a low carbon footprint, when compared to beef produced in other countries.
Therefore, on Wednesday 8 July, Teagasc, as part of the Virtual Beef Week, will layout the main environmental issues and focus on some of the key technologies available to reduce beef farming’s impact on the environment. On Friday 10 July, a panel of experts will look at future policies that are likely to impact day-to-day beef farming.
Cathal Buckley, Teagasc Athenry
The recently published Teagasc sustainability report considers Irish farm systems in terms of their economic, environmental and social sustainability, through data collected by the Teagasc National Farm Survey in 2018. This report also focused on the environmental sustainability dimensions of cattle farms, specifically regarding greenhouse emissions associated with cattle production.
Per hectare emissions were higher for the more profitable cattle farms
It found that the average cattle farm was responsible for emitting 4.5t of CO2 agricultural GHGs equivalents per hectare in 2018. Per hectare emissions were higher for the more profitable cattle farms.
However, the more profitable beef farms produced liveweight beef at a lower CO2 footprint per kg. Indeed, the carbon footprint of beef production has been following a general declining trend.
Sinead Waters, Teagasc Grange
Livestock production faces challenges in reducing GHGs to meet EU and national targets. Methane, a GHG 28 times more potent than carbon dioxide, is released as a by-product of feed digestion in the rumen of cattle and sheep and from stored manure and slurry on-farm.
Under EU legislation, Ireland has committed to reduce GHGs by 40% by 2030, compared to its 2005 levels. Thus, there is an urgent requirement for innovative strategies to reduce agricultural methane emissions in Ireland.
On Wednesday, July 8, we will discuss the on-going research in Teagasc that focuses on reducing methane emissions from beef production, which includes the development of farm-ready technologies to reduce methane emissions from animals digesting their feed, including a number of feed supplements (such as 3-NOP, halides, seaweeds and oils), and from stored manure and slurry.
Paul Smith, Teagasc Grange and Stephen Conroy, ICBF
Tully is the national progeny test centre, located in Kildare town. The main purpose of the centre is to collect data on progeny from AI bulls of interest. Twenty progeny (a mix of steers, bulls and heifers) are selected from each AI sire to be evaluated. Data is collected on traits used in €uro-Star indexes, such as feed intake and growth rate.
However, traits that are not currently used in genetic evaluations – such as meat-eating quality and GHGs – are also being evaluated.
Methane data collected on animals from the same breed shows a 17% variation per kilo of liveweight produced
Methane data is captured using a Greenfeed system (pictured). Animals are enticed to use the system with small amounts of meal that drop at set intervals. The animal is then identified by the Greenfeed machine through its RFID tag.
As the animal consumes the feed, the air surrounding the animal’s head is extracted via a fan. It is then passed by sensors and a value for each animal’s methane emissions is determined. Methane data collected on animals from the same breed shows a 17% variation per kilo of liveweight produced.
The increase in replacement index for suckler cows nationally from €78 in 2015 to €100 in 2020 will result in GHGs reducing this year by 0.56% per cow. Early research is showing that breeding will play an important role in reducing the carbon footprint of animals, without compromising production traits.
Dominika Krol, Teagasc Johnstown Castle
The second-most important agricultural GHG is nitrous oxide, which is 265 times more potent than carbon dioxide. It is released during application of organic manures, synthetic fertilisers and excreta deposited by grazing cattle. Another gas that can be produced from these sources is ammonia.
Ammonia is an air pollutant that has a negative impact on animal and human health and ecosystems.
While nitrous oxide falls under the GHGs reduction targets, ammonia is regulated by different legislation. We are required to reduce emissions of ammonia by 1% from 2020-2029 compared to 2005 levels, and by 5% from 2030 onwards. This is an extremely challenging target for agriculture, since it is responsible for 99% of ammonia produced in Ireland.
Teagasc research has shown that many measures which improve nitrogen use efficiency will also help reduce our nitrous oxide and ammonia emission
Moreover, ammonia targets have been breached every year since 2016. It is crucial that agriculture as a sector acknowledges the issue and adopts technologies available to lessen our contribution. Teagasc research has shown that many measures which improve nitrogen use efficiency will also help reduce our nitrous oxide and ammonia emissions.
The main measures that can aid with our emissions targets are low emissions slurry spreading (LESS), protected urea, liming and clover. On Wednesday July 8, we will endeavour to explain these gases and detail how different technologies play a role in reducing their losses.
Gary Lanigan, Teagasc Johnstown Castle
Soil carbon sequestration is a term often referenced when GHGs and climate change are discussed but what is it? Soil carbon sequestration is the process of capturing CO2 from the atmosphere and storing it in plant material or the soil.
Therefore, increasing carbon sequestration can offset the emissions associated with livestock production and reduce the carbon footprint of livestock production. Increasing soil organic carbon also improves soil workability, water holding capacity and nutrient availability.
The principal ways to increase sequestration are:
Improve soil nutrient status: Optimal pH and soil N and P status will improve grass productivity, which in turn will enhance soil carbon by increasing C inputs into soil.Hedgerows and shelterbelts: Letting existing hedges and trees grow wider and taller, while also planting new hedges and trees can increase sequestration and biodiversity. Clover and multi-species swards: Sowing clover and deep-rooting species such as plantain can increase soil carbon by increasing root biomass.Optimise grazing: Paddock-based, moderate grazing intensity (1.5 LU per hectare) can increase soil carbon by increasing litter incorporation in soil and stimulating shallow root growth.These are not onerous tasks and many have the potential to increase output while reducing costs, for example improved soil nutrient status, clover etc. Using the average NFS suckler beef farm (stocking rate = 1.35 LU/ha), preliminary analysis indicates that carbon sequestration could offset 46% of on-farm emissions.
Daire O Huallachain and John Finn, Johnstown Castle
Sustainability assessments need to include biodiversity and farmland habitats, and international sustainability accreditation standards expect this.
On Wednesday morning, we will discuss recent Teagasc research on improving methods to include biodiversity in sustainability measurement. We will also discuss results-based payments for biodiversity conservation. Results-based payments are expected to be used more and more, and give opportunities to focus not just on the quantity of habitats, but also on their quality.
Conservation and protection of farmland wildlife and habitats are an important dimension of environmental sustainability. The recent EU Biodiversity and Farm to Fork strategies clearly indicate a need for effective methods for biodiversity conservation, as part of the development of sustainable production systems.
Every farmer can take action to improve biodiversity
This was also underpinned by the recent EU Court of Auditors Special Report on farmland biodiversity, which concluded that agricultural policy has failed to halt the decline in biodiversity.
Every farmer can take action to improve biodiversity. We will also discuss management of farmland habitats, with a focus on retain, enhance, and create. We will highlight the importance of retaining existing wildlife areas, in light of the recent EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, which has indicated that at least 10% of agricultural area should be dedicated to high-diversity landscape features.
These habitats (e.g. buffer strips, hedges and ponds) have the highest value for farmland wildlife. So, it is typically more benefical to retain existing habitats, rather than establishing new ones.
Once existing habitats have been retained, we will discuss how management practices can be undertaken to maintain or enhance the quality of these habitats, ensuring the delivery of multiple ecosystem services (biodiversity, carbon storage, water quality).
Finally, where there is a lack of existing habitats, we will discuss how newly created wildlife habitats play an important role. We will highlight how new measures could be targeted to less productive areas of the farm (such as wider field margins or awkward field corners), without replacing existing habitats.
Eddie Burgess, Johnstown Castle
I often get asked what the water quality is like in a river and have to ask myself: “What does that person mean by ‘water quality’? Is it safe to drink? Has there been a fish kill? What are the nutrient levels? (N and/or P). Is there chemical contamination? Is there good ecology (life) in the river bed?”
Recent reports from the EPA have described a falling trend in the quality of water bodies in Ireland and agriculture has been identified as a major contributing factor. This does not correspond with the longer-term reduction of polluting from farmyard point sources and the lower number of badly-polluted waterbodies.
The current trend of falling water quality is mostly attributed to nutrient enrichment of our water bodies, leading to excessive algae growth, which in turn lowers the amount of dissolved oxygen in the water. This process is called eutrophication and has a direct impact on the life in our river beds.
good nutrient management is applicable to all soil types and farming systems
Nutrient enrichment can be caused by Nitrogen (impacting our estuaries and the sea) or Phosphorous (affecting streams, rivers and lakes). Potash (K) does not cause a problem. The locations where N is problematic (free draining soils with lower rainfall) usually contrast with where P is the issue (heavy and wet soils).
However, good nutrient management is applicable to all soil types and farming systems. It benefits water quality in addition to reducing fertiliser cost. Good nutrient management is not just about limiting the amount of N, P, or K. Fertiliser timing, source, placement and rate are all important, both for water quality and farm profitability.
This is often called the 4Rs: The right fertiliser source at the right rate, at the right time and in the right place.
Andrew Cromie, ICBF
Despite a somewhat fractious start, the Beef Data and Genomics Programme has been hugely successful in re-positioning the Irish suckler herd regarding key sustainability metrics, such as calves/cow/year, age at first calving, weanling efficiency and herd carbon footprint.
All of these metrics are now moving in the correct direction, which is a massive benefit to our industry as we face the increasing challenges regarding the future sustainability of our national cattle herd.
Genetic improvement will continue to be a core aspect
Crucially, the programme has also allowed us establish a solid platform upon which new and synergistic programmes, such as the Beef Environmental Efficiency Pilot, can be developed.
Ensuring further alignment with other programmes, such as the Teagasc/Bord Bia carbon footprint models, will also be helpful for farmers and industry as we seek to minimise duplicity of work and maximise the value of these programmes in the future.
Genetic improvement will continue to be a core aspect, with clear evidence now that genetic gain is delivering a cumulative reduction in GHG output/cow of approaching 1%/year, while at the same time, increasing the profitability of the suckler cow for farmers.
Increasing this rate of gain further will therefore be a key objective of ICBF in the future, through enhanced genotyping and performance recording by farmers and the industry.
Farmers are the custodians of the countryside and it has been their practices over many generations that have played a major role in shaping the landscape that we see today.
However, it is also the protection of these ecosystems and how we face the challenges of improving water quality, reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) and maintaining and enhancing biodiversity that will heavily influence the future of the beef industry, as can be seen in emerging Irish and European policy.
At present, there is a particular focus on greenhouse gas emissions, given that the agricultural sector accounts for approximately one-third of the total national emissions. Furthermore, beef meat production tends to have a higher carbon footprint (the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions generated for each unit of beef produced) than most other food products.
However, beef cattle farming is a part of the natural ecosystem in rural environments and plays a crucial role in converting grass and other feed sources that are not edible for humans into high-quality protein and energy food. There is also evidence to suggest that Irish beef has a low carbon footprint, when compared to beef produced in other countries.
Therefore, on Wednesday 8 July, Teagasc, as part of the Virtual Beef Week, will layout the main environmental issues and focus on some of the key technologies available to reduce beef farming’s impact on the environment. On Friday 10 July, a panel of experts will look at future policies that are likely to impact day-to-day beef farming.
Cathal Buckley, Teagasc Athenry
The recently published Teagasc sustainability report considers Irish farm systems in terms of their economic, environmental and social sustainability, through data collected by the Teagasc National Farm Survey in 2018. This report also focused on the environmental sustainability dimensions of cattle farms, specifically regarding greenhouse emissions associated with cattle production.
Per hectare emissions were higher for the more profitable cattle farms
It found that the average cattle farm was responsible for emitting 4.5t of CO2 agricultural GHGs equivalents per hectare in 2018. Per hectare emissions were higher for the more profitable cattle farms.
However, the more profitable beef farms produced liveweight beef at a lower CO2 footprint per kg. Indeed, the carbon footprint of beef production has been following a general declining trend.
Sinead Waters, Teagasc Grange
Livestock production faces challenges in reducing GHGs to meet EU and national targets. Methane, a GHG 28 times more potent than carbon dioxide, is released as a by-product of feed digestion in the rumen of cattle and sheep and from stored manure and slurry on-farm.
Under EU legislation, Ireland has committed to reduce GHGs by 40% by 2030, compared to its 2005 levels. Thus, there is an urgent requirement for innovative strategies to reduce agricultural methane emissions in Ireland.
On Wednesday, July 8, we will discuss the on-going research in Teagasc that focuses on reducing methane emissions from beef production, which includes the development of farm-ready technologies to reduce methane emissions from animals digesting their feed, including a number of feed supplements (such as 3-NOP, halides, seaweeds and oils), and from stored manure and slurry.
Paul Smith, Teagasc Grange and Stephen Conroy, ICBF
Tully is the national progeny test centre, located in Kildare town. The main purpose of the centre is to collect data on progeny from AI bulls of interest. Twenty progeny (a mix of steers, bulls and heifers) are selected from each AI sire to be evaluated. Data is collected on traits used in €uro-Star indexes, such as feed intake and growth rate.
However, traits that are not currently used in genetic evaluations – such as meat-eating quality and GHGs – are also being evaluated.
Methane data collected on animals from the same breed shows a 17% variation per kilo of liveweight produced
Methane data is captured using a Greenfeed system (pictured). Animals are enticed to use the system with small amounts of meal that drop at set intervals. The animal is then identified by the Greenfeed machine through its RFID tag.
As the animal consumes the feed, the air surrounding the animal’s head is extracted via a fan. It is then passed by sensors and a value for each animal’s methane emissions is determined. Methane data collected on animals from the same breed shows a 17% variation per kilo of liveweight produced.
The increase in replacement index for suckler cows nationally from €78 in 2015 to €100 in 2020 will result in GHGs reducing this year by 0.56% per cow. Early research is showing that breeding will play an important role in reducing the carbon footprint of animals, without compromising production traits.
Dominika Krol, Teagasc Johnstown Castle
The second-most important agricultural GHG is nitrous oxide, which is 265 times more potent than carbon dioxide. It is released during application of organic manures, synthetic fertilisers and excreta deposited by grazing cattle. Another gas that can be produced from these sources is ammonia.
Ammonia is an air pollutant that has a negative impact on animal and human health and ecosystems.
While nitrous oxide falls under the GHGs reduction targets, ammonia is regulated by different legislation. We are required to reduce emissions of ammonia by 1% from 2020-2029 compared to 2005 levels, and by 5% from 2030 onwards. This is an extremely challenging target for agriculture, since it is responsible for 99% of ammonia produced in Ireland.
Teagasc research has shown that many measures which improve nitrogen use efficiency will also help reduce our nitrous oxide and ammonia emission
Moreover, ammonia targets have been breached every year since 2016. It is crucial that agriculture as a sector acknowledges the issue and adopts technologies available to lessen our contribution. Teagasc research has shown that many measures which improve nitrogen use efficiency will also help reduce our nitrous oxide and ammonia emissions.
The main measures that can aid with our emissions targets are low emissions slurry spreading (LESS), protected urea, liming and clover. On Wednesday July 8, we will endeavour to explain these gases and detail how different technologies play a role in reducing their losses.
Gary Lanigan, Teagasc Johnstown Castle
Soil carbon sequestration is a term often referenced when GHGs and climate change are discussed but what is it? Soil carbon sequestration is the process of capturing CO2 from the atmosphere and storing it in plant material or the soil.
Therefore, increasing carbon sequestration can offset the emissions associated with livestock production and reduce the carbon footprint of livestock production. Increasing soil organic carbon also improves soil workability, water holding capacity and nutrient availability.
The principal ways to increase sequestration are:
Improve soil nutrient status: Optimal pH and soil N and P status will improve grass productivity, which in turn will enhance soil carbon by increasing C inputs into soil.Hedgerows and shelterbelts: Letting existing hedges and trees grow wider and taller, while also planting new hedges and trees can increase sequestration and biodiversity. Clover and multi-species swards: Sowing clover and deep-rooting species such as plantain can increase soil carbon by increasing root biomass.Optimise grazing: Paddock-based, moderate grazing intensity (1.5 LU per hectare) can increase soil carbon by increasing litter incorporation in soil and stimulating shallow root growth.These are not onerous tasks and many have the potential to increase output while reducing costs, for example improved soil nutrient status, clover etc. Using the average NFS suckler beef farm (stocking rate = 1.35 LU/ha), preliminary analysis indicates that carbon sequestration could offset 46% of on-farm emissions.
Daire O Huallachain and John Finn, Johnstown Castle
Sustainability assessments need to include biodiversity and farmland habitats, and international sustainability accreditation standards expect this.
On Wednesday morning, we will discuss recent Teagasc research on improving methods to include biodiversity in sustainability measurement. We will also discuss results-based payments for biodiversity conservation. Results-based payments are expected to be used more and more, and give opportunities to focus not just on the quantity of habitats, but also on their quality.
Conservation and protection of farmland wildlife and habitats are an important dimension of environmental sustainability. The recent EU Biodiversity and Farm to Fork strategies clearly indicate a need for effective methods for biodiversity conservation, as part of the development of sustainable production systems.
Every farmer can take action to improve biodiversity
This was also underpinned by the recent EU Court of Auditors Special Report on farmland biodiversity, which concluded that agricultural policy has failed to halt the decline in biodiversity.
Every farmer can take action to improve biodiversity. We will also discuss management of farmland habitats, with a focus on retain, enhance, and create. We will highlight the importance of retaining existing wildlife areas, in light of the recent EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, which has indicated that at least 10% of agricultural area should be dedicated to high-diversity landscape features.
These habitats (e.g. buffer strips, hedges and ponds) have the highest value for farmland wildlife. So, it is typically more benefical to retain existing habitats, rather than establishing new ones.
Once existing habitats have been retained, we will discuss how management practices can be undertaken to maintain or enhance the quality of these habitats, ensuring the delivery of multiple ecosystem services (biodiversity, carbon storage, water quality).
Finally, where there is a lack of existing habitats, we will discuss how newly created wildlife habitats play an important role. We will highlight how new measures could be targeted to less productive areas of the farm (such as wider field margins or awkward field corners), without replacing existing habitats.
Eddie Burgess, Johnstown Castle
I often get asked what the water quality is like in a river and have to ask myself: “What does that person mean by ‘water quality’? Is it safe to drink? Has there been a fish kill? What are the nutrient levels? (N and/or P). Is there chemical contamination? Is there good ecology (life) in the river bed?”
Recent reports from the EPA have described a falling trend in the quality of water bodies in Ireland and agriculture has been identified as a major contributing factor. This does not correspond with the longer-term reduction of polluting from farmyard point sources and the lower number of badly-polluted waterbodies.
The current trend of falling water quality is mostly attributed to nutrient enrichment of our water bodies, leading to excessive algae growth, which in turn lowers the amount of dissolved oxygen in the water. This process is called eutrophication and has a direct impact on the life in our river beds.
good nutrient management is applicable to all soil types and farming systems
Nutrient enrichment can be caused by Nitrogen (impacting our estuaries and the sea) or Phosphorous (affecting streams, rivers and lakes). Potash (K) does not cause a problem. The locations where N is problematic (free draining soils with lower rainfall) usually contrast with where P is the issue (heavy and wet soils).
However, good nutrient management is applicable to all soil types and farming systems. It benefits water quality in addition to reducing fertiliser cost. Good nutrient management is not just about limiting the amount of N, P, or K. Fertiliser timing, source, placement and rate are all important, both for water quality and farm profitability.
This is often called the 4Rs: The right fertiliser source at the right rate, at the right time and in the right place.
Andrew Cromie, ICBF
Despite a somewhat fractious start, the Beef Data and Genomics Programme has been hugely successful in re-positioning the Irish suckler herd regarding key sustainability metrics, such as calves/cow/year, age at first calving, weanling efficiency and herd carbon footprint.
All of these metrics are now moving in the correct direction, which is a massive benefit to our industry as we face the increasing challenges regarding the future sustainability of our national cattle herd.
Genetic improvement will continue to be a core aspect
Crucially, the programme has also allowed us establish a solid platform upon which new and synergistic programmes, such as the Beef Environmental Efficiency Pilot, can be developed.
Ensuring further alignment with other programmes, such as the Teagasc/Bord Bia carbon footprint models, will also be helpful for farmers and industry as we seek to minimise duplicity of work and maximise the value of these programmes in the future.
Genetic improvement will continue to be a core aspect, with clear evidence now that genetic gain is delivering a cumulative reduction in GHG output/cow of approaching 1%/year, while at the same time, increasing the profitability of the suckler cow for farmers.
Increasing this rate of gain further will therefore be a key objective of ICBF in the future, through enhanced genotyping and performance recording by farmers and the industry.
This is a subscriber-only article
SHARING OPTIONS: