July 14, 2010
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Brian Clark, Marketing, News, and Educational Communications
509-335-6967, bcclark@wsu.edu
Source Contact
Jude Capper, assistant professer of animal sciences
capper@wsu.edu, 509-335-6192
Environmental Sustainability of Beef Production Has Improved Considerably over Last 30 Years, WSU Expert Says
DENVER, Colo. – Advances in productivity over the past 30 years have reduced the carbon footprint and overall environmental impact of U.S. beef production, according to a new study presented today by a Washington State University researcher.
In “Comparing the environmental impact of the US beef industry in 1977 to 2007,” assistant professor of animal science Jude L. Capper revealed that improvements in nutrition, management, growth rate and slaughter weights, have significantly reduced the environmental impact of modern beef production and improved its sustainability.
“These findings challenge the common misconception that historical methods of livestock production are more environmentally sustainable than modern beef production,” said Capper in her presentation today at the American Society of Animal Science meeting in Denver.
“It’s important to note that all food production has an environmental impact, but significant improvements in efficiency have clearly reduced the greenhouse gas emissions and overall environmental impact of beef production,” said Capper. “Contrary to the negative image often associated with modern farming, fulfilling the U.S. population’s requirement for high-quality, nutrient-rich protein while improving environmental stewardship can only be achieved by using contemporary agricultural technologies and practices.”
In 2007, there were 13 percent fewer animals slaughtered than in 1977 (33.8 million vs. 38.7 million), but those animals produced 13 percent more beef (26.3 billion lbs. of beef versus 23.3 billion lbs. in 1977). By producing more beef with fewer resources, Capper found that the total carbon footprint for beef production was reduced by 18 percent from 1977 to 2007.
“As the global and national population increases, consumer demand for beef is going to continue to increase,” Capper says. “The vital role of improved productivity and efficiency in reducing environmental impact must be conveyed to government, food retailers and consumers.”
When compared to beef production in 1977, each pound of beef produced in modern systems used:
- 10 percent less feed energy
- 20 percent less feedstuffs
- 30 percent less land
- 14 percent less water
- 9 percent less fossil fuel energy
- 18 percent decrease in total carbon emissions (methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide)
The study used a whole-system environmental model that integrated all resource inputs and waste outputs within the beef production system, from crop production to beef arriving at the slaughterhouse.
This project was supported by the Beef Checkoff Program through a research grant from state beef councils in Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota and Washington.
-30-
Tags Beef, Jude Capper, Sustainability
Bill Best said on December 20, 2010:
Greetings Dr. Capper,
On John Stossel’s network show on 11/20/2010 he reported on your research that concluded, perhaps I’m over-simplifying, that grass-fed beef production is far more environmentally harmful (Food, energy, water, land, fecal waste, greenhouse gas emissions) than traditional beef production; and that the meat product is little different in taste, texture, and nutrition. As both a resident of Snohomish County, WA, and a river dweller, I sit on the Stillaguamish Watershed Council and the county Stillaguamish River Clean Water District Advisory Board. Your research is very relevant to some issues and concerns that we are facing; however I am only speaking for myself, not these groups.
As you know, the dairy industry in this area is a shadow of what it used to be. It is my observation that many of the historical dairy operations in the valley, and other farms, have been converting to grass-fed beef cattle raising. I am only shallowly knowledgeable in the specifics of State dairy regulation versus beef ranch regulation, but I understand that only dairies are mandated by State law to develop and implement Farm Plans based on environmental BMP’s. In Snohomish County, enforcement action under our Snohomish County Codes (SCC), including 7.53 SCC dealing with water quality, is principally triggered by signed citizen complaints; while the complainant may elect to have their name remain anononymous following submittal, that is only as secure as the county system and procedures and personnel allow. Ergo, very very few complaints, which could otherwise include, for example, a number of known local situations where maybe 100 beef cattle at each site are free to wander in salmon spawning tribs and the Stilly forks and mainstem, for watering, and fecal deposition as well.
I am, in the above, only trying to give you an understanding of my personal desire to better understand the science and especially the en vironmental impacts of grass-fed beef raising. I am seeking this information as a private individual, not as a member of the aforementioned groups.
If you could provide me with a link(s) to your appropriate papers, and any others relevant to this inquiry, I would be most grateful.
Sincerely,
Bill Best
10233 SR 530 NE
Arlington, WA 98223
360-403-9203
Pingback: Farmers and Ranchers in the Beef Industry Care | Pearl Snaps' Ponderings
Pingback: Farmers and Ranchers in the Beef Industry Care « Cattle Call
Pingback: Lessons Learned–Animal Agriculture « Under the Crown of Agriculture