Nuffield #11 Feedlot Safari
And so on to the part of my trip that I was looking forward least to- and where I knew I’d have to put to one side my pre conceived ideas.
Let’s start this with some transparency. I am a spring block calving dairy farmer who firmly believes that cows (and horses) should be outside as much as possible. Their natural diet is grass, and I believe they should eat as much of it as possible. They have social structures, and so I really dislike calf hutches and any sort of solitary housing. I love animals, and once cried because a farm I mobility scored at had so many lame cows. I spent my university years and most of my early 20s following a 95% vegetarian diet (I basically ate meat when someone else cooked it) and I still have reservations about eating pig or chicken meat unless I know the source.
I’m also very aware that we have a growing population and growing demand for protein. We live in an unequal society where making red meat a luxury product is dubiously ethical for humans although it might be the best option for the planet and for animals. Grass fed beef takes longer to finish, requires more space on the holding, and depending on which carbon calculator you use might be worse for GHG emissions than that which is intensively reared. We need better ways to measure carbon sequestration, to link GHG emissions to nutritional value rather than yield, and to attach value to meat.
As I said in an Instagram post earlier today; the cows I saw in these pens were black and white, but I really struggle to draw a binary opinion on the feedlots. My personal reaction to feedlots was negative, and I wouldn’t want to work on one. But in the bigger scheme of farming and food, they currently have a place- and a lot will need to change on a structural and societal level before that is different. And as part of my Nuffield scholarship they play a huge role; in North America they mop up the bull calves produced by the dairy industry, and are the main route for finishing beef to feed the population. They do so efficiently and in a way driven by data (way beyond what the average beef farmer in the UK does) and their constant search for marginal gain undoubtedly drives lower emissions per kg of meat produced.
Maintaining biosecurity!
I visited two feedlots today, and was shown around by the agronomist who works with both sites. They grow their own feed, and one also grows crop for sale. Feedlots produce huge amounts of nutrient dense manure, but I was told that the local crop farmers are slow to embrace it as a nutrient source for their fields. The agronomist was working to change that, citing the benefits to soil health as well as the cost of bagged fertiliser! I don’t think we can cover feedlots without touching on the important role they could play in increasing soil organic matter and reducing emissions from synthetic fertiliser in the adjoining arable farms.
The two farms I visited were described as very good and very well set up. The first had capacity for 24,000 cattle (all beef- although they admitted that some would have some dairy blood) and the second reared between 13,000 and 14,000, and focused on Holstein steers,
Both farms sourced calves at between 450 and 700lbs. The beef feedlot bought weaned calves, which meant that they had to fill their pens in the autumn to fit in with the calving period of cow calf operations. By buying dairy calves the other had all year round supply.
The sourcing route had big implications for health. The beef feedlot bought calves in different sized batches from auction lots across western Canada. They had no way of knowing where their calves came from, the diseases they had been exposed to, or their vaccination protocols. In contrast the dairy feedlot bought from a farm in Idaho, and from calf ranches in Alberta. Because these farms bought very young calves from dairy farms and immediately put them onto the same protocols, the dairy feedlot knew what their animals had been vaccinated against and were reducing their disease risk as they had fewer sourcing farms. As a result the beef feedlot had to blanket treat all new arrivals with antibiotics and had a 3-4% mortality rate target with the main causes being pneumonia and Mycoplasma haemofilus- both infectious diseases. The dairy feedlot said that they experienced a range of mortality rates from 1-5%, but their main causes of death were metabolic causes such as liver abscesses. However, they did point out that mortality at the calf ranches was probably a lot higher, and estimated it would be between 10 and 15%.
The dairy feedlot also liked that their animals had been handled from birth and so were very quiet- I noticed when walking around that the beef animals had a very wide flight zone whereas the dairy animals let me stand right in front of them
At the feed barrier
Both farms sold to abattoirs in Alberta, but there were some differences in age and weight. The beef feedlot finished most of their cattle at 16-24 months and 1300 to 1400lb. The dairy feedlot were finishing around 20 months, but had to get to 1475 to 1500 lbs in order to grade well. Both farms used growth hormone implants- the dairy feedlot had tried not using them for a scheme but it didn’t work out well. Due to the different growth rates of the different breeds the dairy steers were on a different protocol to the beef.
Interestingly the dairy feedlot said that their American animals tended to grade better than the Canadians; due to the genetics used within the dairy industry. Some retailers were now refusing dairy carcasses, so they were ID’d at the abattoir to avoid going where they weren’t wanted. With a push for sexed semen, the dairy feedlot anticipated that finishing Holstein steers would become a thing of the past as dairy x beef animals came through.
Rations were cereal based; there was no grass in sight. As well as growing their own crops they were buying in from America; mostly Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana, due to the drought in western Canada.
A beef feedlot- around 320 animals in each pen. A clay abase with manure swept up into a pile which is later spread as fertiliser
For all the technology used- and these farms really utilised it- both had horses on site who were used to ride up and down the lines and check (or scout) the cattle. In the industry this job is being replaced with drones, but a human eye is still needed to check animals in the flesh.
The industry is still labour intensive, and is facing challenges with recruiting and retaining staff. This was attributed to lack of practical skill (frequently they would have to teach people to ride and to handle cattle), lack of people nearby, and general shortages across the rural economy. One was trying to solve the issue by going into the local high school and taking on weekend and holiday staff, converting them to full time workers. However, the ageing workforce is a real threat to feedlots.
“The cowboy got old and rode off into the sunset”
A long avenue of pens
Carbon taxes in Canada will drive up input costs on feedlots, and won’t be reflected in an increase in meat price. One feedlot has already very publically sold up in anticipation of their implementation, and it will be a huge challenge to the industry. The farmers I spoke to pointed out that what they are doing through increasing efficiency is of course driving down GHG emissions, but they aren’t able to market it.
It does bring us to a pressing moral dilemma. The use of growth hormones shaves (I was told) a month off the finishing age of a Holstein steer. That is a month less that that animal is eating a high energy cereal ration. If you think of the inputs to grow that crop, to (in some cases) freight it thousands of miles, and then to mix it into a ration and feed it out, that is a lot of carbon. It is also of course resources that would be used up- land, fertiliser, fuel, labour- that are saved by the use of the hormone. Where do we put the value of reduced GHG emissions versus growing animals without growth hormones?
Where do we put the right (if there is one) of people to have access to protein at an affordable price against our desire to see grass finished animals living a free range life?
The dairy feedlots are picking up a by product of the dairy industry and turning it into an economically viable output. Their existence gives dairy farms in North America social licence to continue to operate. It is this integration that we will increasingly rely on as evidence continues to come to light of the reduced carbon footprint of dairy beef- and in the UK traditional suckler farms either radically change or sell up in a world without subsidies.
I might not like the look of feedlots, or want to work on one, but I have to admit that they are well run, driven by data, and the animals are well cared for. I’ve certainly seen small scale family dairy farms who have welfare standards far below what I saw today. The cows were in social groups, they could move around, they had a carefully managed diet, and they had veterinary intervention before when they needed it.
Layout of a feedlot- equally sized pens on a grid system to maximise efficiency in feeding out etc
So what was it that I didn’t like? Why isn’t it an approach to rearing dairy beef that I’d push on UK producers?
There’s something about scale and animal agriculture that I think we fundamentally dislike. It’s why large scale dairy farms- even those that have high welfare standards- face public backlash. There’s a lack of personal attention, and animals become a number.
For me I think my main turn off was the lack of access to forage, and the lack of movement. I like cows to have different environments to explore and grass to eat. In fields and paddocks they encounter interesting things like herbs, animals, trees, and variations in soil and water. These enrich their lives and give them an approximation of what is natural. In a feedlot they are in a bland and uniform surround. Unlike some housed dairy herds they don’t have cow brushes or any sort of distraction, and they don’t have the twice or thrice daily diversion of going to the parlour.
And for the future? Are we going to see a world where red meat production is divided into cheap meat coming from intensive systems, and expensive meat (out of the reach of most people in a global population) coming from extensive grassland systems? Or will we find some sort of balance which gives equal access to meat, at a price that makes it attainable yet inspires some level of respect for the animal that died for its production, and makes meat something that is savoured rather than devoured absent mindedly in a petrol station sandwich?
Those are questions for someone else’s Nuffield (!) but I think I’ll have more to write about feedlots later this week when I visit a research centre that collects and analyses data on health and growth rates.
