Most of the environmental impact for animal protein is embedded in the feed that animals eat. By reducing feed impacts, food companies have an opportunity to make significant progress toward climate and sustainability goals.
Ever wondered what science-based targets really are or why they may be relevant to animal food? We’ve got a webinar opportunity for you to listen and learn.
On Sept. 28-29, the Institute for Feed Education and Research (IFEEDER) and World Wildlife Fund (WWF) will be bringing together the full feed value chain for a Feed Systems Sustainability Summit. The goal is for us to bring a diverse group of participants from upstream and downstream entities together to hold conversations around four critical components of sustainable feed systems: circularity, innovation, regenerative agriculture and responsible sourcing.
Fuel prices. That’s all I have to say to put somebody in a bad mood nowadays. With gasoline prices well over $4 a gallon and diesel prices over $5 a gallon in many areas of the country, there is no question as to why people get upset—especially if they are involved in agriculture. Since many farmers and ranchers rely on diesel fuel to run their operations, the agriculture industry has been taking an extremely hard hit during this period of price inflation.
In 1991, Dr. Mike Hutjens, emeritus professor in the Department of Animal Sciences at the University of Illinois, defined four key factors for evaluating feed additives: Response, Returns, Research and Results (Hutjens, 1991). Dr. Hutjens later added 3 additional Rs for industry professionals to consider: Repeatability, Reliability and Relativity. Feed additives that claim to reduce methane emissions from cattle will emerge as potential tools to mitigate climate change. The pressure to consider their use will be significant. However, we must consider these seven Rs when evaluating the efficacy, economics and safety of feed additives to inhibit enteric methane emissions from cattle without impacting animal performance, farm profitability or consumer acceptance of the technology.
Every year, the agricultural community comes together on National Ag Day to celebrate those who work tirelessly to keep our food supply stable and Americans fed. As a sponsor of this event, the American Feed Industry Association works to educate consumers about how the feed industry is working with farmers and ranchers to improve nutrition for their herds and flocks and reduce animal agriculture’s environmental footprint.
When it comes to reducing enteric methane emissions in ruminant livestock, there is a “robust body of knowledge waiting to be implemented” on U.S. farms, but challenges getting these novel ingredients approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use continue to stymie progress. That was the take-home message the American Feed Industry Association’s Paul Davis, Ph.D., delivered at last week’s U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Outlook Forum.
Unfortunately, last week brought another misleading attack on the American agriculture community. The New York Times used its platform to dish out a one-sided opinion video that paints the entire food industry in a negative light. The title alone, “Getting Paid to Kill Our Planet,” is disappointing, given it defies everything I know about those who work in this industry and have dedicated their lives to improving the world in which we live for current and future generations.
Dr. Joseph McFadden’s opinion piece in The Hill this week was a good reminder to me how there is no simple answer to “fixing” the climate issues our world faces. There is no one “silver bullet” identified yet that will fix the situation. However, that is not for lack of trying.
Attention to our own health and the health of our planet has given rise to an array of diet recommendations that have advice for optimizing both. Relative to the planet, advocates for reduced meat diets point to the environmental impacts attributed to animal production as a key issue, whereas advocates for meat as a good protein source point to the beneficial role that animal production plays in better soil health and conservation agriculture. Like many concepts, the truth is unclear, understanding the issues around diets and agriculture is complex and many options may be viable, depending on your goals.