No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Water use intensity of Canadian beef production in 1981 as compared to 2011
Abstract
The amount of beef produced per animal in Canada increased significantly from 1981 to 2011, due to enhanced production efficiency and increased carcass weight. This study examined the impact of improvements in production efficiency on water use intensity over this period. Temporal and regional differences in cattle categories, water use for drinking, feed production and meat processing, feeding systems, average daily gains, and carcass weight were considered in the analysis. Potential evapotranspiration (PET) was estimated by the National Drought Model (NDM) from 679 weather stations across Canada using the Priestley and Taylor equation. To adjust PET estimates for each crop included in cattle diets, FAO crop coefficients were used to calculate total feed water demand. Estimates of drinking water consumed by a given class of cattle accounted for physiological status, body weight and dry matter intake as well as ambient temperature. In both years, drinking water accounted for less than 1% of total water use with precipitation (i.e., green water) included for feed and pasture production. With exclusion of green water, drinking water accounted for 24% and 21% of total water use for Canadian beef production in 1981 and 2011, respectively. The estimated intensity of blue water (surface and groundwater) use per kilogram of boneless beef was 577 L in 1981 and 459 in 2011, a 20% decline. The observed reduction in water use intensity over the past three decades is attributed to an increase in average daily gain and slaughter weight, improved reproductive efficiency, reduced time to slaughter as well as improvements in crop yields and irrigation efficiency. Given that feed production accounts for the majority of water use in beef production, further advances may be achieved by improving feeding efficiencies and reducing water use per unit of feed crop and pasture production.
... The boundaries were not extended to the processors and packers because emissions from the processing and packaging stages generally represent less than < 2% of beef chain emissions and beef companies are reluctant to share proprietary information (Li et al., 2020). However, the water footprint analysis included the total amount of water used within the production system including that used for feed production, consumed by animals, and at the processing plant to produce a kilogram of boneless beef (Legesse et al., 2018a). The simulated model farm was located in Strathmore Alberta, Canada, within the same Ecodistrict (798) as the feedlot. ...
... Grains and silage were assumed to be produced on-farm, while all other ingredients (mineral and vitamin supplement) were purchased and shipped to the feedlot. Grains (barley and corn) and barley silage were seeded on May 05 and May 08 (Aboagye et al., 2019(Aboagye et al., , 2021b and were assumed to be harvested after 135-146 and 76 d, respectively (Allen et al., 1998;Legesse et al., 2018a;Supplementary Table S1). The crops were irrigated and managed under zero tillage and grown in the soil type in Ecodistrict 798 (Black/Gray Chernozem with a medium texture). ...
... Potential and actual evapotranspiration were estimated using the National Drought Model (Chipanshi et al., 2013) and data from 2009 to 2019 (Strathmore ADGM weather station; ID 3036205) were used in the simulation. The Kc for each crop was adapted from the literature and separated into initial, mid, and end Kc (Kc ini , Kc mid , and Kc end ; respectively) to correspond to the length of the initial (L ini ), fast development (L dev ; in-between Kc ini and Kc mid ), maturity (L mid ), and late season (L late ) growth stages; and then used to develop a Kc curve over the growing season for each crop (Allen et al., 1998;Legesse et al., 2018a). The length of the growing season (sum of L ini , L dev , L mid , and L late ) for each crop was sourced from Legesse et al. (2018a), while the seeding dates of the crops (typical of southern Alberta, Canada) were adapted from Aboagye et al. (2019Aboagye et al. ( , 2021b. ...
The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of using conventional productivity-enhancing technologies (PETs) with or without other natural PETs on the growth performance, carcass traits and environmental impacts of feedlot cattle. A total of 768 cross-bred yearling steers (499 ± 28.6 kg; n = 384) and heifers (390 ± 34.9 kg; n = 384) were offered a barley grain-based basal diet and divided into implanted or non-implanted groups. Steers were then allocated to diets that contained either: (i) no additive (control); natural feed additives including (ii) fibrolytic enzymes (Enz), (iii) essential oil (Oleo), (iv) direct fed microbial (DFM), (v) DFM + Enz + Oleo combination; conventional feed additives including (vi) Conv (monensin, tylosin, and beta-adrenergic agonists [βAA]); or Conv with the natural feed additives including (vii) Conv + DFM + Enz; (viii) Conv + DFM + Enz + Oleo. Heifers received one of the first three dietary treatments or the following: (iv) probiotic (Citr); (v) Oleo + Citr; (vi) Melengesterol acetate (MGA) + Oleo + βAA; (vii) Conv (monensin, tylosine, βAA, and MGA); or (viii) Conv + Oleo (ConvOleo). Data were used to estimate greenhouse gas (GHG) and ammonia (NH3) emissions, as well as land and water use. Implant and Conv-treated cattle exhibited improvements in growth and carcass traits as compared to the other treatments (P < 0.05). Improvements in the performance of Conv-cattle illustrated that replacing conventional feed additives with natural feed additives would increase both the land and water required to satisfy the feed demand of steers and heifers by 7.9% and 10.5%, respectively. Further, GHG emission intensity for steers and heifers increased by 5.8% and 6.7%, and NH3 emission intensity by 4.3% and 6.7%, respectively. Eliminating the use of implants in cattle increased both land and water use by 14.6% and 19.5%, GHG emission intensity by 10.5% and 15.8%, and NH3 emission intensity by 3.4% and 11.0% for heifers and steers, respectively. These results demonstrate that use of conventional PETs increased animal performance while reducing environmental impacts of beef production. Restricting use would increase the environmental footprint of beef produced for both domestic and international markets.
... Recent global estimates indicate that livestock consume 6 billion tonnes of feed (dry matter, DM) annually, of which 86% is unfit for human consumption (Mottet et al., 2017). Technological advances in crop production practices such as nutrient management, breeding and irrigation (Bennett et al., 2013;Bennett et al., 2015;Duvick, 2005;Legesse et al., 2018) have contributed to generating sufficient feed for livestock. However, expansion of livestock production will increase feed demand globally from 11% to 17% for human-edible crops and from 6% to 15% for feed suitable only for livestock (Mottet et al., 2017). ...
... This development could be particularly relevant to beef production systems which rely on a combination of intensive crop and extensive rangelands to meet feed demands. Moreover, feed production accounts for most of the environmental footprint of beef production systems (Legesse et al., 2015;Legesse et al., 2018;Rotz et al., 2019) and as such, deeply impacts the environmental sustainability of the beef industry. ...
... This includes assessments of the environmental impacts of producing feed within specific regions and of transporting feed from surplus to deficit regions. Previous studies both within and outside of Canada have shown that the production of the feed required to support beef cattle throughout their production lifecycle accounts for a significant proportion of the total environmental footprint, in relation to water use (Legesse et al., 2018;Mekonnen and Hoekstra, 2012), land use (Broom, 2019) and fossil energy consumption within production systems (Rotz et al., 2019). However, more detailed assessments might be required as the feed sources for beef production become more diverse (e.g., plant-based protein byproducts) and are transported over longer distances. ...
CONTEXT
Feed insecurity caused by increases in animal inventories and variability in feed production due to climate change is an emerging issue in livestock production. Regional feed transfers are one strategy used to address local feed shortages and minimize feed insecurity.
OBJECTIVE
This study assessed the importance of regional feed transfers for beef production in Alberta, Canada, by estimating regional feed production and demand based on livestock (beef, dairy, poultry, swine, sheep, bison, and horses) numbers and categories, enabling calculation of regional deficits and surpluses.
METHODS
Transfers from crop-producing regions in Alberta were estimated to address potential feed shortages for beef production in 2001, 2006, 2011 and 2016. The analysis included feeds that could be cost-effectively transported, namely, barley grain, wheat grain, grass hay, and grass-legume hay. Feed demands of beef and other livestock were estimated at the county level and aggregated to seven land-use framework (LUF) regions. Feed balances available for beef production were estimated for the four feeds based on crop yields in each year. Feed transfers from surplus to deficit LUF regions were hierarchically estimated based on transport distance. Feed inputs from outside the province were not considered in the analysis due to the lack of data on cross-boundary imports.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
The average feed demand for beef production between 2001 and 2016 in Alberta was 2.71, 0.68, 2.21, and 1.95 M tonnes of dry matter (DM) for barley grain, wheat grain, grass hay, and grass-legume hay, respectively. The results indicated that the South Saskatchewan region of Alberta had the greatest feed deficit and required transfers from other regions in all years. Feed balances were consistently negative in this region between 2001 and 2016, with barley grain ranging from −97.2% to −34.2% (deficit), wheat grain from −31.4% (deficit) to 19.3% (surplus), grass hay from −147.2% (deficit) to 1.6% (surplus), and native grass-legume hay from −167.7% to −15.7% (deficit). Unmet demand of barley grain (2006), grass hay (2001) and grass-legume hay (2001, 2006) at the provincial level were likely met by importing these feedstuffs from outside of the province.
SIGNIFICANCE
The methodology presented here can be adapted to other intensive livestock producing regions to assess feed security issues associated with climate change and devise effective feed transfer strategies and provide information that can be used for future consideration of the regional impact of these practices on greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity, as well as other environmental indices.
... Although increases in cattle slaughter weight, reduced time to slaughter, improved crop yields and reproductive and irrigation efficiencies reduced the GHG intensity (kg CO 2 eq. kg liveweight −1 ) of Canada's beef sector by 14% (Legesse et al., 2016) and surface and ground water consumption by 20% per kg beef (Legesse et al., 2018a) from 1981 to 2011, total emissions and water consumption increased because of higher overall production. Beef cattle are also a significant source of ammonia (NH 3 ), accounting for almost one-third of total national agricultural emissions in 2011, originating mostly from feedlot manure from production to land application (Sheppard and Bittman, 2016). ...
... Specific beef SES under examination should have clearly defined characteristics to provide a more solid basis for the provision of management recommendations to producers in these areas, and the development of more effective policy options that can encourage the adoption of beneficial on-farm management strategies. These assesments should include all agricultural stages of beef production, an approach used in the assessment of GHG emissions (Beauchemin et al., 2010;Legesse et al., 2016;Alemu et al., 2017), water consumption (Legesse et al., 2018a), NH 3 emissions (Legesse et al., 2018b) and N dynamics (Sheppard et al., 2018) within Canadian beef production systems. This is emphasized in our framework, which includes all agricultural stages of production and the linkages between them. ...
... Larney et al., 2003;Manyi-Loh et al., 2016; Overview of prairie beef systems with management practices that affect farm ecological structures and processes that underpin ecosystem services. Modified fromLegesse et al., 2018a. ...
Producing food to meet rising global demand requires a more thorough understanding of how farming systems can ensure food security without compromising economic, environmental, and social sustainability. This dilemma can be addressed through a social-ecological systems approach to ecosystem service assessment, which assesses the linkages between the different components of an agricultural social-ecological system – beef production in the Canadian Prairies. Using this framework, we documented the relationships between governance and management, social and ecological structures and processes, ecosystem services and human well-being for these systems. We also examined how this framework could aid in the greater integration of ecosystem services into decision-making and management practices for these systems. The framework was applied to all stages of the prairie beef production cycle, consisting of the cow-calf, backgrounding, finishing and feed production stages. The benefits, shortcomings and limitations of such an approach as well as the state of knowledge on relationships between the components of the system are discussed, and recommendations for future research directions, farm management strategies and policy are proposed. Overall, the high degree of heterogeneity in biophysical and socio-economic conditions across the prairie landscape underscores the need for more site-specific ecosystem service assessments and environmental stewardship policies that are tailored to these specific contexts.
... Over a 30 yr time period , Canadian beef producers have reduced GHG emissions (kg −1 carcass) by 15% (Legesse et al. 2016), ammonia emissions by 17% (Legesse et al. 2018a), water use by 20% (Legesse et al. 2018b), while using 24% less land (Legesse et al. 2016). Similarly, in another study conducted in the US, the nation's beef industry in 2007 required 30% fewer beef cattle, 22% less water, and 33% less land, with a 16% decline in the carbon footprint per kilogram of beef than in 1977 (Capper 2011). ...
... Improvements in emission intensities in all livestock sectors have occurred as a result of improvements both in animal productivity (reproductive efficiency, weaning weight, and carcass weight) and crop yields (barley grain, barley silage, corn grain, and corn silage), irrigation efficiency (Legesse et al. 2016;Legesse et al. 2018b), as well as improved genetic selection, disease management, precision feed formulation, and feeding technology. Production intensity and emission intensity are inversely related, and therefore, the use of precision technologies that enhance the efficiency of livestock production systems can improve sustainability. ...
Food waste is a global dilemma with environmental, social and economic consequences. Environmental impacts of wasted food are substantial as it comprises the single largest category of organic matter in municipal landfills. Therefore, redirection of food waste from landfills is necessary to improve global food security and environmental sustainability issues. Livestock, with their capacity to “up-cycle” relatively low-quality feedstuffs into high quality protein, are an essential element of this solution. However, challenges regarding utilization of food waste for livestock production include regulatory restrictions, safety concerns and logistics associated with collection, transport and handling. Moreover, identifying industries with significant loss and waste resources along the supply chain, quantifying availability, and effective communication and coordination are necessary steps for large-scale diversion of food loss and waste to livestock feed. In Canada, Loop Resources is a one-of-a-kind organization that enables food wholesalers, retailers, and producers to divert unsaleable food away from landfill to local food banks and livestock farmers. They are working with retailers to divert 2.5 – 3.5 million kg of food waste/month to over 2500 farms across Canada. However, today’s diversity of by-products and urban setting for much of our food waste requires a diversity of solutions. Producer and processor incentives to recover more food will require investment to improve infrastructure and create market opportunities. Research to facilitate safe incorporation of food waste in animal feed is also a critical step toward changes in policy and regulation. In addition, comprehensive LCA-type assessments will shed light on the environmental benefits of replacing feed grains or forages with by-products or food waste. Finally, a coordinated approach requiring input from producers, food processors, feed suppliers, researchers, policy makers and retailers, is critical for the development of successful strategies for inclusion of food loss and waste in livestock diets.
... Over a 30-year time period , Canadian beef producers have reduced GHG emissions (kg -1 carcass) by 15% (Legesse et al. 2016), ammonia emissions by 17% (Legesse et al. 2018a), water use by 20% (Legesse et al. 2018b), while using 24% less land (Legesse et al. 2016). Similarly, in another study conducted in the US, the nation's beef industry in 2007 required 30% fewer beef cattle, 22% less water, and 33% less land, with a 16% decline in the carbon footprint per kg of beef than in 1977 (Capper 2011). ...
... For example, organizations involved in Canada's National Beef Strategy which include the Beef Breeds Council, Beef Cattle Research Council, Canada Beef, The National Cattle Feeders' Association, Canadian Meat Council and Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (Canadian Beef Strategy 2020) recently announced a new set of industry goals for 2030 in the areas of GHG and carbonsequestration, animal health and welfare and land use and biodiversity. These steps to benchmark current practices and develop and implement best management practices that further heighten environmentally favorable and clearly sustainable outcomes will be key to retaining the social license needed for livestock production.Improvements in emission intensities in all livestock sectors has occurred as a result ofimprovements both in animal productivity (reproductive efficiency, weaning weight, carcass weight) and crop yields (barley grain, barley silage, corn grain, and corn silage), irrigation efficiency(Legesse et al. 2016;Legesse et al. 2018b), as well as improved genetic selection, disease management, precision feed formulation and feeding technology. Production intensity and emission intensity are inversely related, and therefore the use of precision technologies that enhance the efficiency of livestock production systems can improve sustainability.An additional outcome of these studies is an examination of the use of human-edible vs inedible ingredients in livestock diets.Legesse et al. (2016) estimated that approximately 80% of the feedstuffs that cattle in Canada consume over their lifetime are forage-based. ...
Global drivers such as the growing human population, evolving consumer preferences, globalization, and climate change have put pressure on the agri-food sector to produce more livestock products with less land, feed and water. Taste, nutritional value, cost, convenience, source, animal welfare and environmental sustainability of food are criteria upon which purchasing decisions are made. In response, an environmental footprint analysis composed of greenhouse gas emissions, nutrient and water use efficiency, water quality, carbon storage and biodiversity has been completed for many commodities. However, as livestock production systems occur within complex agro-ecosystems, it is extremely challenging to formulate a single overall sustainability metric. There is no “silver bullet” to solve the environmental concerns of all livestock production systems as they operate under different constraints on different landscapes, with different water and nutrient cycles, and soil types. Furthermore, the lack of scientific evidence regarding the interactions between livestock production, human nutritional adequacy and the health of our environment makes it difficult for consumers to interpret this information and make informed food choices. This review examines these complex interactions and trade-offs, as well as the potential impacts of changes in consumer dietary choice on environmental sustainability, nutritional adequacy and land use.
... The use of water for agriculture changes along the stretch of this widely non-uniform region concerning weather, soil, and the environment that favors different agriculture sectors. For example, the Prairie provinces of western Canada, where most of the arable land and cattle herds are found, are predominantly semi-arid, and therefore pressure on water resources can be substantial [147]. About three-quarters of irrigated land in Canada is in the Prairies, primarily Alberta and Saskatchewan, where in Alberta alone, with its large base of cropland, the beef cattle sector needs one-quarter of the water, leaving threequarters for crop irrigation use [148]. ...
Non-arid region countries, including Canada, enjoy abundant water resources, while arid countries such as Qatar struggle to meet their water needs. However, climate change threats to water resources are similar for both climatic regions. Therefore, this article discusses water dimensions, security, and governance for these different regions, i.e., non-arid Canada and arid Qatar, that distinctly respond to their water-related challenges. Limitations of the article include lesser water-related literature availability for Qatar than for Canada. Canada’s water resources appear vulnerable to climate change as it is projected to face >0.6 °C above the global average of 1.6 °C for the 20th-century temperature. Qatar is extremely vulnerable to dust storms, and rising sea levels, with the maximum temperature approaching 50 °C during the summer, and flooding during the winter. The sustainable use of water resources needs to address social, economic, political, climate change, and environmental dimensions of water. Other than climate change impacts and high per capita consumption of water, Qatar faces challenges of a rise in population (~29 million as of now), acute shortage of freshwater from rainfall (~80 mm per annum), high evapotranspiration (~95% of the total rainfall), depletion of groundwater, and low agricultural productivity due to infertile lands and water scarcity, all leading to food insecurity. The sustainable use of water resources requires improved regulations for water governance and management. Comparisons of water sustainability issues, dimensions, security, and governance facilitate discussions to improve water governance structures for resource sustainability, food security, and climate change adaptability, and show how one country could learn from the experiences of the other.
... This was confirmed by study of Caro et al. (2014) systems (Mekonnen & Hoekstra, 2012). Furthermore, the efficiency of water use was associated with feed production, adopting water conservation management practices and improved irrigation techniques (Legesse et al., 2017;Legesse et al., 2018). In the current study, through analyzing sustainability reports, it was noticed that companies mainly start with water saving, from streamlining operations and implementing cleaner technologies to recycling and reusing process water. ...
We investigate the availability and extent of environmental performance and objectives data reported in corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports published by the world largest food companies. Methods for content analysis that recognize two types of environmental information were implemented for reviewing 75 sustainability reports. Plant‐ and animal‐origin food companies responded to requirements of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards to communicate about their sustainable development. It was found that plant‐origin food companies' reporting was more compliant with GRI requirements. Information gaps within greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions data have been identified as a common characteristic for both food sectors. The most frequent performance indicators reported by companies were about water withdrawal. Average annual reductions in four major environmental dimensions such as energy consumption, GHG emissions, water withdrawal, and total waste were calculated. These results reveal patterns of food companies' behavior in CSR reporting.
... Beef cattle production has been deemed to be the most environmentally unsustainable among the major livestock production systems [16] as its land, water, and carbon footprints are 28-, 11-, and five-fold higher, respectively, than pork or chicken production [17]. However, studies in Brazil [18], Australia [19], United States (US [20]), and Canada [21,22] have demonstrated that modern intensive cattle Table 1. Productivity-enhancing technologies commonly used in beef production. ...
Use of productivity-enhancing technologies (PET: growth hormones, ionophores, and beta-adrenergic agonists) to improve productivity has recently garnered public attention regarding environmentally sustainability, animal welfare, and human health. These consumer perceptions and increased demand for PET-free beef offer opportunities for the beef industry to target niche premium markets, domestically and internationally. However, there is a need to critically examine the trade-offs and benefits of beef raised with and without the use of PETs. This review contains a summary of the current literature regarding PET products available. The implications of their use on resource utilization, food safety and security, as well as animal health and welfare are discussed. Furthermore, we identified gaps in knowledge and future research questions related to the sustainability of these technologies in beef production systems. This work highlights the tradeoffs between environmental sustainability of beef and supplying the dietary needs of a growing population.
... Investigación, Desarrollo e innovación en gestión y administración del recurso hídrico Tecnologías para la conducción eficiente del agua al lote. Debido a que el mantenimiento de las pasturas y el uso para beber son algunas de las actividades que demandan mayor consumo de agua, son necesarios mayores avances para mejorar la eficiencia de alimentación y reducir el uso del agua por unidad de cultivo forrajero y producción de pastos (Legesse et al., 2018). ...
Las cadenas productivas agropecuarias a nivel nacional son un eje clave para la productividad y la competitividad de las regiones y de sus pobladores, por lo que el desarrollo productivo, la modernización y el desarrollo empresarial ambientalmente sostenible y con impacto social de las zonas campesinas, son aspectos de particular interés para los diferentes actores, tanto locales como nacionales, comprometidos con la investigación, el desarrollo tecnológico, la innovación y la transferencia de tecnología y conocimiento. Lo anterior se sustenta en la complejidad de las cadenas de valor, los cambios en las tendencias de consumo y la alta volatilidad de los mercados, que plantean el desarrollo de nuevos productos y mejores procesos para impactar en los eslabones de producción, transformación y comercialización, y de esta forma, ser más competitivos en un mercado global.
Desde el año 2002 y con el apoyo del Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación como entidad rectora del Sistema Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación - SNCTI, fue promovido el “Programa nacional de prospectiva tecnológica e industrial - PNP”. Esta apuesta interinstitucional buscaba fortalecer las capacidades nacionales en prospectiva tecnológica en empresas privadas, instituciones públicas, cámaras de comercio, centros de desarrollo y universidades del país, mediante la trasferencia de conocimiento sobre las herramientas y metodologías para el desarrollo y construcción de planes prospectivos de calidad e innovación (CAF, 2006).
A partir de la experiencia acumulada en el PNP, para el año 2006, el Ministerio de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural adelantó el programa “Agendas prospectivas de Investigación y Desarrollo tecnológico para cadenas productivas”. Este proyecto fue desarrollado en 3 ciclos, con un total de 19 agendas prospectivas definidas con el apoyo de más de 14 instituciones a nivel nacional. Las cadenas priorizadas fueron: lácteos, piscicultura: tilapia, forestal, cacao-chocolate, uchuva para exportación, mango criollo procesado para exportación, papa (énfasis papa criolla), palma (oleaginosas, grasas y aceites), caucho natural y su industria, fique, camarón de cultivo, aromáticas, carne bovina, panela, flores y follajes (clavel), porcicultura, ovino - caprina: cárnicos, hortalizas: salsa de ají, apicultura (énfasis miel de abejas), algodón, textil - confecciones y seguridad alimentaria en Colombia.
Sin embargo, se hace necesario identificar desde el orden regional los retos actuales y futuros que pueden enfrentar las cadenas de prioridad departamental y que pueden afectar de manera negativa o positiva el escenario deseado para el desarrollo productivo y competitivo de las mismas. Por lo anterior, mediante el proyecto “Desarrollo de ventajas competitivas mediante actividades de I+D+i en ocho cadenas del sector agropecuario en el departamento del Tolima”, financiado a través del Fondo de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación del Sistema General de Regalías, se planteó la construcción de ocho agendas prospectivas de Investigación y Desarrollo tecnológico para las siguientes cadenas productivas: aguacate, café, arroz, algodón, cárnica-bovina, cacao, caucho y cítricos.
Las agendas prospectivas de Investigación y Desarrollo tecnológico para ocho cadenas productivas en el departamento se formularon con la articulación de los grupos de investigación, los empresarios, los productores y el Estado, para reconocer las problemáticas de cada una de las cadenas desde sus diferentes eslabones bajo una mirada sistémica, focalizando esfuerzos orientados a la gestión de Ciencia, Tecnología e innovación. Estos documentos tienen como principal objetivo aumentar la competitividad a través de la transferencia y generación de conocimiento para demandas tecnológicas, así como estrategias estructurales para la solución de demandas no tecnológicas.
Estas agendas permitirán mejorar los procesos de toma de decisiones en cada uno de los eslabones, con el objetivo de aumentar la eficiencia de los procesos, mejorar la calidad de los productos intermedios y finales, desarrollar nuevas formas de agregación de valor y alcanzar nuevos nichos de mercado, con el fin último de lograr el desarrollo sostenible y competitivo de las cadenas productivas al año 2030.
... Water usage goes far beyond providing for live animals and the production of their feed. Using beef as an example, and applying average dressing percentages and carcass weights, the estimated water used in processing one carcass is 11 L per kilogram of boneless beef but can vary depending on the size and capability of plants (Legesse et al., 2018). By applying the estimated meat loss/waste of 22% annually, and the estimated beef demand of 54,957 metric tons by 2027 (OECD-FAO, 2018), the world would be losing 12,090 metric tons of beef, and therefore wasting more than 860 million liters of water just in the processing stages (Fiala, 2008). ...
Limiting meat waste is a significant factor that can help meet future needs to provide high-quality animal protein while maximizing the utilization of natural resources. Fresh meat waste occurs during production, processing, distribution, and marketing to various points of consumption. Consumers' expectation for muscle food quality is often associated with its appearance, and a bright-red color of red meat is an indicator of freshness and wholesomeness. Meat discoloration is a natural process resulting from interactions between the physical structure of meat and the oxidation of the ferrous forms of myoglobin. Understanding the biochemical processes that influence discoloration such as oxygen consumption, metmyoglobin reducing activity, lipid oxidation, and microbial growth help to develop innovative strategies to limit meat waste. The focus of this chapter is to discuss the factors involved in meat discoloration and any other color deviations that may lead to discounted pricing and/or meat loss. The impact of meat waste, economic loss, the role of packaging, and the application of high-throughput techniques to understand the biochemical basis of meat discoloration are also discussed.
... The first stage in the analysis entails extracting the characteristic consumption pattern for each building, which will subsequently be used to cluster the buildings. Several metrics can be used to characterize building efficiency, such as average annual consumption, annual water use intensity and energy use intensity [69,70,71]. The resolution at which a particular metric is assessed depends upon the desired outcomes of the analysis. ...
As the threat of climate change grows alongside a continual increase in urban population, the need to ensure access to water and energy resources becomes more crucial. In the context of the water-energy nexus in urban environments, this work addresses current gaps in understanding of coupled water and energy demand patterns and reveals apparent dissimilarities between utilization of water and energy resources for heterogeneous buildings. This study proposes a data-driven approach to identify fundamental water and energy demand profiles, cluster buildings into groups exhibiting similar water and energy use, and predict their demand. The clustering problem was cast as a two-stage cluster ensemble problem, in which several clustering methods with different settings were employed, and then the results obtained from partial view of the data were combined to achieve consensus among the partitionings. The influential drivers for water and energy consumption were identified, parametric and non-parametric prediction models were developed and compared, utilizing high and low temporal data resolution. The clustering analysis performed in this work revealed that water and energy consumption patterns of heterogeneous buildings are not exclusively characterized by general building characteristics. Analysis of the predictive models showed that an overall non-parametric model provides better predictions for water and energy compared with parametric models and that models with high and low data resolution provide comparable demand predictions. The results of this study highlight the value of data-driven modeling for revealing meaningful insights into usage patterns and benchmarking buildings’ performance to provide a meaningful measure of comparison to facilitate multi-utility management. Overall, the methods outlined in this study provide another step towards building greater resiliency within urban areas in preparation for future changes in population and climate.
... The study of water resource utilization efficiency mainly includes evaluation methods, evaluation index systems and influencing factors. The evaluation methods of water resource utilization efficiency mainly include single index evaluation and total factor evaluation. Single index evaluation is the ratio of water resources input to a certain indicator to reflect water resources utilization efficiency in a certain field [6][7][8], but this method has limitations, such as one-sided result and strong subjectivity. The total factor evaluation method is based on the input-output ratio of the overall factors in the production process, which can evaluate the efficiency objectively and truly. ...
High-quality economic development and the realization of ecological civilization have become the main goals of China’s economic development. This study constructed a global reference Malmquist–Luenberger productivity index model of directional distance function from the perspective of mixed disposability and divided water resources green efficiency into pure technical efficiency change (PEC) index, scale efficiency change (SEC) index, pure technology change (PTC) index and scale technology change (STC) index. The results show the following: (1) The value of China’s water resources green efficiency increased by 1.1% from 2000 to 2016. The central region improved the most (1.4%), followed by the western (1%) and eastern (0.9%) regions. The water resources green efficiency improved in all provinces except Guangxi and Yunnan. (2) The water resources green efficiency is significantly affected by national policies, and there may not be a significant positive correlation with economic development. At present, the water resources green efficiency in most provinces still needs to be improved. (3) From 2000 to 2016, China’s water resources green efficiency decomposition index showed an upward trend except for SEC, and PTC was the main driving force for improving China’s water resources green efficiency. (4) The variation of PEC among provinces showed an inverted “N” trend, while the differences of SEC and STC showed an ascending trend, and PTC showed an inverted “U” trend. The proportions of provinces in which PEC, SEC, and STC indices improved were 40%, 46.67%, and 60%, respectively.
... Hadjikakou et al. (2015) compared water intensity for various tourist types in Cyprus. And more recently, Legesse et al. (2018) examined the impact of more efficient beef production on water use intensity in Canada. ...
This paper proposes a new method for decomposing temporal changes in water use intensity (i.e. quantity of water consumption divided by GDP) into various explanatory factors. Specifically, the changes are decomposed into three elements that clarify some of the hidden reasons behind changes in water use over time. The first one captures changes in water intensity due to sectoral uses, showing the effects of modifying water intensity in the various production sectors. The second shows the changes in sectoral output intensity, showing how altering the production structure affects water consumption. Finally, the third quantifies the effects of changes in residential water intensity, showing how changing the final water uses affects water intensity. The empirical application corresponds to the Spanish region of Catalonia. The results show a reduction in regional water intensity due to a negative contribution from the production structure and residential uses of water, which were greater than the increase in sectoral water intensity. This decomposition shows that the reduced importance of agricultural production had the greatest influence on the reduction in water intensity in this region. The directions and magnitudes of the components identified in this paper highlight the importance of using precise and detailed methods to study water issues.
... With the technological improvement since 1981 Canadian beef production has reduced its environmental impacts per one kg beef produced. Specifically, CF and WF of one kg beef decreased by 14% and 20%, respectively (Legesse et al., 2016;Getahun Legesse et al., 2018). However, these improvements are still not enough to mitigate the absolute environmental impacts of beef production. ...
What humans eat can have a significant impact on ecosystems and the climate. In order to attain the climate targets to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, it is important to reduce consumption of carbon-intensive food products. Many studies have quantified the environmental impacts of food consumption. However, most of these prior diet-related environmental assessment studies have evaluated impacts based on a snapshot of food consumption, instead of evaluating the changes in food-related environmental impacts over a period of time. Understanding these changes is important in determining what factors affect consumer food consumption behaviours that would shift their food consumption patterns towards less resource intensive products.
This thesis evaluates the changes in food, nutritional value, and carbon footprint (CF) of dietary patterns in Ontario in the last decade, broadly in three steps. First, change assessment is conducted by comparing the overall food consumption based on the 24-hour recall food intake data from the Canadian Community Health Survey-Nutrition in 2004 and 2015. Then seven dietary patterns are identified by analyzing the food types of each survey participant and Life Cycle Assessment is used to quantify CF of these dietary patterns. Canada’s Food Guide is used to assess the nutritional quality of actual dietary patterns, and then alternative nutritionally-balanced and low carbon dietary patterns are formulated and their CF is determined.
The results suggest that: 1) overall, Ontarians are eating less red meat and more poultry and drinking less beverages high in sugar content; 2) Ontarians continue to overconsume daily protein, possibly because they do not consider protein from non-meat products, such as milk and cheese; 3) the CF of Ontarians food consumption has decreased in the last decade, specifically due to reductions in beef, which is the most carbon-intensive food product; and 4) also, the CF of nutritionally-balanced diets has decreased for all dietary patterns, only exception is Pescatarian that showed a slight increase.
Changes in types and amounts of food consumed could be a result of health concerns, increase in climate change awareness, economic or cultural fluctuations. Overall, this thesis improves our understanding of the CF and nutritional assessment of Ontarians’ current food consumption and how this has changed in the last 10 years. By determining and understanding changes, this research could also be helpful to identify strategies to shift Ontarians’ food consumption behaviors towards nutritionally-balanced and low carbon-intensive food choices.
Updating the static model by Beckett and Oltjen (1993), we determined that from 1991 to 2019, U.S. beef cattle blue water consumption per kg of beef decreased by 37.6%. Total water use for the U.S. cattle herd decreased by 29%. As with the 1993 model, blue water use included direct water intake by animals, water applied for irrigation of crops that were consumed by beef cattle, water applied to irrigated pasture, and water used to process animals at marketing. Numbers of cattle, crop production, and irrigation data were used from USDA census and survey data. On January 1, 2019, a total of 31.7 million beef cows and 5.8 million replacement heifers were in U.S. breeding herds, and 26 million animals were fed annually. In total, the U.S. beef cattle herd (feedlot and cull cows) produced 7.7 billion kg of boneless beef, an increase of 10% since 1991. Beef cattle directly consumed 599 billion L of water per year. Feedlot cattle were fed various grain and roughage sources corresponding to the regions in which they were fed. Feeds produced in a state were preferentially used by cattle in that state with that state's efficiency; any additional feedstuffs required used water at the national efficiency. Irrigation of crop feedstuffs for feedlot cattle required 5,920 billion L of water. Irrigated pasture for beef cattle production required an additional 4,121 billion L of water. Carcass processing required 91 billion L of water. The model estimated that in the U.S. 2,275 L of blue water was needed to produce one kilogram of boneless meat. As with the previous model, the current model was most sensitive to changes in dressing percentage and percentage of boneless yield in carcasses of feedlot cattle (62.8 and 65, respectively). In conclusion, with more beef, fewer cows, and lower rates of irrigation, beef cattle’s water intensity has decreased at an annual rate of 1.34% over a 28-year period.
Evolutionary, meat consumption has meant a great step for humankind, even today, despite the different culinary options, meat is still a fundamental protein source for humans. Nonetheheless, and especially after Industrial Revolution, meat production has become an important source of environmental deterioration, fundamentally due to the handling practice developed since then. In this work, the impacts that animal husbandry has on the environment, the tools developed to measure the impacts, and the mitigation strategies that have been proposed by the scientific community have been reviewed. To reach sustainable meat production three objectives must be proposed: 1) Reduction in the use and contamination of water; 2) Avoid soil degradation, and 3) Reduce greenhouse gas emission. These goals can be reached through the change of handling practices. In some countries, these strategies have been already carried out tending to emissions reduction from 26% until 112%. Authors like Allan Savory and Frank Mitloehner suggest that husbandry can be a mitigating situation facing environmental change.
Humans have relied on cattle for production of food and work, as a source of capital, for dung, for fuel, building, and many other uses, for a period of about 10000 years. As a result, cattle biomass is now approximately twice that of humans on the planet. However, in the face of diminishing natural resources for the expanding human population and evidence of livestock pollution, cattle farms are currently criticized widely for their inefficient use of resources, the poor cattle welfare in modern farming systems, and their impact on human health amongst other problems. This chapter explores the reasons why cattle farming may ultimately cease in response to these issues. The replacement of cattle on farms began in the industrial revolution, when traction engines superseded many cattle in field operations. However, the replacement of cattle as food products is only now beginning to accelerate. The acceptability of alternative milks is growing rapidly and that of alternatives to meat products is also increasing. However, the major advance in replacing bovine meat products is under development in the laboratory as cultured meat, grown from a biopsied muscle sample on an edible scaffold in a nutrient media. Significant investment has been made in the process, which is technically feasible but is currently too expensive. This chapter explores current concerns about cattle farming as well as current difficulties in the development of meat alternatives, such as plant-based and clean meat. Through this exploration, the authors examine the potential for cattle farming to survive in the wake of alternatives offered by advanced food technology. Given anticipated success in bringing suitable alternative products to the market, most of the functions of cattle in developed countries are likely to be replaced. The process in developing countries will be much slower. Nonetheless, the authors anticipate that ultimately—perhaps in the far future—food technology developments will end the reliance on traditional cattle farming practices.
This study evaluated the impact of diet as a mitigation action to improve the water efficiency of lactating cows. An intensive pasture dairy system was considered to calculate direct and indirect water use. Group 1 was fed with a diet containing 20% crude protein content. The crude protein content of Group 2 was adjusted according to milk production, ranging from 23% to 14.5%. The total water footprints had a value of 502.4 L kg-1 fat protein corrected milk for Group 1 and 451.2 L kg-1 fat protein corrected milk for Group 2. The diet with the adjusted protein provided a reduction of 10% in the footprint value. The green water footprint was the most representative of consumption in the total value of the water footprint, 86.4% and 85.5% for Groups 1 and 2, respectively. The animals in Group 1 had a mean total drinking water consumption of 83.3 L animal-1 day-1 and those of Group 2, 80.4 L animal-1 day-1. This study demonstrated that high crude protein content in the diet provided a greater water footprint, therefore lower water efficiency. The proposed nutritional practice proved viable as a water-mitigating action, making the ratio of liters of water per liter of milk more advantageous. The results of this study could be considered a validation of a nutritional mitigation practice to improve water efficiency and could be used as best management for the dairy supply chain.
Globally, consumption of bovine meat is projected to increase by 1.2% per annum until 2050, a demand likely met in part by increased Canadian beef production. With this greater production on a finite agricultural land base, there is a need to weigh the contribution of this industry to the Canadian economy against the full range of positive and negative ecological and social impacts of beef production. This review, focussing on the prairie provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, which collectively support just over 80% of the Canadian beef herd, examines the social and ecological footprint of the cow-calf, backgrounding, finishing and forage/feed production stages of beef production within an ecosystem services framework. We summarise the literature on how beef production and management practices affect a range of services, including livestock; water supply; water, air and soil quality; climate regulation; zoonotic diseases; cultural services; and biodiversity. Based on 742 peer-reviewed publications, spanning all agricultural stages of beef production, we established a framework for identifying management practices yielding the greatest overall socio-ecological benefits in terms of positive impacts on ecosystem service supply. Further, we identified research gaps and crucial research questions related to the sustainability of beef production systems.
The disposal of food waste is a large environmental problem. In the United Kingdom (UK), approximately 15 million tonnes of food are wasted each year, mostly disposed of in landfill, via composting, or anaerobic digestion (AD). European Union (EU) guidelines state that food waste should preferentially be used as animal feed though for most food waste this practice is currently illegal, because of disease control concerns. Interest in the potential diversion of food waste for animal feed is however growing, with a number of East Asian states offering working examples of safe food waste recycling – based on tight regulation and rendering food waste safe through heat treatment. This study investigates the potential benefits of diverting food waste for pig feed in the UK. A hybrid, consequential life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to compare the environmental and health impacts of four technologies for food waste processing: two technologies of South Korean style-animal feed production (as a wet pig feed and a dry pig feed) were compared with two widespread UK disposal technologies: AD and composting. Results of 14 mid-point impact categories show that the processing of food waste as a wet pig feed and a dry pig feed have the best and second-best scores, respectively, for 13/14 and 12/14 environmental and health impacts. The low impact of food waste feed stems in large part from its substitution of conventional feed, the production of which has substantial environmental and health impacts. While the re-legalisation of the use of food waste as pig feed could offer environmental and public health benefits, this will require support from policy makers, the public, and the pig industry, as well as investment in separated food waste collection which currently occurs in only a minority of regions.
The characteristics of the slaughterhouse effluents and current wastewater treatment practices in the province of Ontario, Canada are analyzed. Meat processing plants are found to produce large amounts of wastewater due to the slaughtering process and cleaning of their facilities. Further-more, the composition of the wastewater varies according to the type and number of animals slaughtered and the water requirements of the process. However, the slaughterhouse wastewater usually contains high levels of organics and nutrients. Several slaughterhouses in Ontario dis-charge their wastewater into the municipal sewer system after primary pretreatment at the meat processing plant. Therefore, due to the high-strength characteristics of the slaughterhouse efflu-ents, an extensive treatment for a safe discharge into the environment is required. Thus, the com-bination of biological processes and advanced oxidation technologies for slaughterhouse waste-water treatment is evaluated in this study. Results show that the application of combined biologi-cal and advanced oxidation processes is recommended for on-site slaughterhouse wastewater treatment.
The present study compared the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and breeding herd and land requirements of Canadian beef production in 1981 and 2011. In the analysis, temporal and regional differences in feed types, feeding systems, cattle categories, average daily gains and carcass weights were considered. Emissions were estimated using life-cycle assessment (cradle to farm gate), based primarily on Holos, a Canadian whole-farm emissions model. In 2011, beef production in Canada required only 71% of the breeding herd (i.e. cows, bulls, calves and replacement heifers) and 76% of the land needed to produce the same amount of liveweight for slaughter as in 1981. Compared with 1981, in 2011 the same amount of slaughter weight was produced, with a 14% decline in CH 4 emissions, 15% decline in N 2 O emissions and a 12% decline in CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel use. Enteric CH 4 production accounted for 73% of total GHG emissions in both years. The estimated intensity of GHG emissions per kilogram of liveweight that left the farm was 14.0 kg CO 2 equivalents for 1981 and 12.0 kg CO 2 equivalents for 2011, a decline of 14%. A significant reduction in GHG intensity over the past three decades occurred as a result of increased average daily gain and slaughter weight, improved reproductive efficiency, reduced time to slaughter, increased crop yields and a shift towards high-grain diets that enabled cattle to be marketed at an earlier age. Future studies are necessary to examine the impact of beef production on other sustainability metrics, including water use, air quality, biodiversity and provision of ecosystems services.
Beef production in Canada is diverse in many dimensions with numbers of cattle per operation ranging over 10 000-fold, pasture usage from nil to 100%, and types of operations from solely cow-calf to exclusively feedlot finishing. This study summarizes management information obtained from a survey conducted in 2012 (about 2011) on 1009 beef operations in Canada. Many of the results clearly differentiate the practices in the Prairies from those in Ontario and Quebec. Compared to eastern Canada, the Prairies had earlier and shorter calving seasons, higher weaning weights, utilized more winter grazing with a variety of strategies, grew and fed more barley than corn, used more seasonal feeding areas and feedlots (and hence fewer barns), and more commonly spread manure in the fall. Many of the management practices used by cow[1]calf operations would have low environmental impact, including extensive use of grazing even in winter, low fertilizer inputs and feeding perennial forages with a high content of legumes. Some practices such as not covering forages or manure storage structures were common and could be changed to improve forage quality and reduce manure emissions. Most forage was harvested 3-7 d after full bloom. Earlier harvest has the potential to improve forage quality, which could reduce dependence on arable crops. Finishing operations used more housing, fed more arable-land crops and less perennial forages, and practiced little grazing. Rationale regarding the adoption of many of the management strategies was reported by the producers. For example, winter grazing was adopted primarily to reduce costs and labour, but for some it was also linked to a late calving season. Preferred sources of technical information included their own experience, farm print media, producer organisations and demonstrations at field days. The survey also identified several areas in which the industry may realize improved sustainability.
A spring calving herd consisting of about 350 beef cows, 14-16 breeding bulls, 60 replacement heifers and 112 steers were used to compare the whole-farm GHG emissions among calf-fed vs. yearling-fed production systems with and without growth implants. Carbon footprint ranged from 11.63 to 13.22 kg CO₂e per kg live weight (19.87-22.52 kg CO₂e per kg carcass weight). Enteric CH₄ was the largest source of GHG emissions (53-54%), followed by manure N₂O (20-22%), cropping N₂O (11%), energy use CO₂ (9-9.5%), and manure CH₄ (4-6%). Beef cow accounted for 77% and 58% of the GHG emissions in the calf-fed and yearling-fed. Feeders accounted for the second highest GHG emissions (15% calf-fed; 35-36% yearling-fed). Implants reduced the carbon footprint by 4.9-5.1% compared with hormone-free. Calf-fed reduced the carbon footprint by 6.3-7.5% compared with yearling-fed. When expressed as kg CO₂e per kg carcass weight per year the carbon footprint of calf-fed production was 73.9-76.1% lower than yearling-fed production, and calf-fed implanted was 85% lower than hormone-free yearling-fed. Reducing GHG emissions from beef production may be accomplished by improving the feed efficiency of the cow herd, decreasing the days on low quality feeds, and reducing the age at harvest of youthful cattle.
While water requirement for livestock is widely perceived as daily drinking water consumption, similar to 100 times more water is required for daily feed production than for drinking water. Increasing livestock water productivity can be achieved through increasing the water-use efficiency (WUE) of feed production and utilisation. The current paper briefly reviews water requirements for meat and milk production and the extent of, and reason for, variations therein. Life-cycle analysis (LCA) can reveal these variations in WUE but LCA are not tools that can be employed routinely in designing and implementing water-use-efficient feed resourcing and feeding strategies. This can be achieved by (1) choosing agricultural by-products and crop residues where water applications are partitioned over several products for example grain and straw (or food and fodder) contrary to planted forage production where water and land have to be exclusively allocated to fodder production, (2) select and breed WUE crops and forages and exploit cultivar variations, (3) increase crop productivity by closing yield gaps; and (4) increase per animal productivity to reduce the proportion of feed (and therefore water) allocated for maintenance requirement rather than productive purposes. Feed-mediated WUE of dairy buffalo production on almost completely (94%) by-product-based feeding systems could be reduced from 2350 to 548 L of water per kg of milk by the combined effect of increasing basal ration quality in a total mixed ration, which resulted in increased milk yield of similar to 30%, and by increasing crop productivity from 1 t (actual crop yield) to 3 t (potential crop yield). Exemplary, multi-dimensional sorghum improvement using staygreen quantitative trait loci (QTL) introgression for concomitant improvement of WUE of grain and stover production and stover fodder quality showed opportunities for further linked improvement in WUE of crop and livestock production. Metabolisable energy (ME) yield under water stress conditions measured in lysimeters, (which measure crop water transpired) ranged QTL dependent from 16.47 to 23.93 MJ ME per m(3) H2O. This can be extrapolated to 8.23-11.97 MJ ME per m(3) H2O evapotranspired under field conditions. To mainstream improvement in WUE of feed resourcing and feeding, the paper suggests the combination of feed resource databases with crop-soil-meteorological data to calculate how much water is required to produce the feed at the available smallest spatial scale of crop-soil-meteorological data available. A framework is presented of how such a tool can be constructed from secondary datasets on land use, cropping patterns and spatially explicit crop-soil-meteorological datasets.
From 2009 to 2011, the Canadian Prairies were subjected to exceptionally variable precipitation regimes, ranging between record drought and unprecedented flooding. Adjacent regions concurrently experienced droughts and floods, and individual areas transitioned rapidly from pluvial to drought conditions and vice versa. Such events had major impacts; for example, damages from floods in the Assiniboine River Basin (ARB) have exceeded $1 billion, and forest fires ravaged the town of Slave Lake, Alberta. This study first characterizes, and then assesses, these devastating natural hazards in terms of their physical processes (across multiple spatial and temporal scales) related to both the spatially contrasting precipitation states and rapid temporal transitions between these states. Subtle differences in large-scale atmospheric flow had marked impacts on precipitation. Primary factors controlling the distribution and amount of precipitation included the location and persistence of key surface and upper-air features, as well as their interaction. Additionally, multiple events—rather than individual extremes—were responsible for the flooding over the Saskatchewan River Basin and the ARB. Very heavy rainfall events (C25 mm d-1) accounted for up to 55 % of warm season rain at some locations, and the frequency of heavy rainfall events was critical for determining whether a region
experienced drought or pluvial conditions. This study has increased our knowledge of the characteristics, impacts and mechanisms of rapidly transitioning disparate precipitation states on the Canadian Prairies and will aid in better understanding both past and projected future hydro-climatic extremes in the region.
Agriculture accounts for 92% of the freshwater footprint of humanity; almost one third relates to animal products. In a recent global study, Mekonnen and Hoekstra (2012) [31] show that animal products have a large water footprint (WF) relative to crop products. We use the outcomes of that study to show general trends in the WFs of poultry, pork and beef. We observe three main factors driving the WF of meat: feed conversion efficiencies (feed amount per unit of meat obtained), feed composition and feed origin. Efficiency improves from grazing to mixed to industrial systems, because animals in industrial systems get more concentrated feed, move less, are bred to grow faster and slaughtered younger. This factor contributes to a general decrease in WFs from grazing to mixed to industrial systems. The second factor is feed composition, particularly the ratio of concentrates to roughages, which increases from grazing to mixed to industrial systems. Concentrates have larger WFs than roughages, so that this factor contributes to a WF increase, especially blue and grey WFs, from grazing and mixed to industrial systems. The third factor, the feed origin, is important because water use related to feed crop growing varies across and within regions. The overall resultant WF of meat depends on the relative importance of the three main determining factors. In general, beef has a larger total WF than pork, which in turn has a larger WF than poultry, but the average global blue and grey WFs are similar across the three meat products. When we consider grazing systems, the blue and grey water footprints of poultry and pork are greater than those for beef.
A methodology was developed and used to determine environmental footprints of beef cattle produced at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (MARC) in Clay Center, Nebraska with the goal of quantifying improvements achieved over the past 40 yr. Information for MARC operations was gathered and used to establish parameters representing their production system with the Integrated Farm System Model. The MARC farm, cow calf, and feedlot operations were each simulated over recent historical weather to evaluate performance, environmental impact, and economics. The current farm operation included 841 ha of alfalfa and 1,160 ha of corn to produce feed predominately for the beef herd of 5,500 cows, 1,180 replacement cattle, and 3,724 cattle finished per year. Spring and fall cow calf herds were fed on 9,713 ha of pastureland supplemented through the winter with hay and silage produced by the farm operation. Feedlot cattle were backgrounded for 3 mo on hay and silage with some grain and finished over 7 mo on a diet high in corn and wet distillers grain. For weather year 2011, simulated feed production and use, energy use, and production costs were within 1% of actual records. A 25-yr simulation of their current production system gave an average annual carbon footprint of 10.9 ± 0.6 kg of CO2 equivalent units per kg BW sold, and the energy required to produce that beef (energy footprint) was 26.5 ± 4.5 MJ/kg BW. The annual water required (water footprint) was 21,300 ± 5,600 liter/kg BW sold, and the water footprint excluding precipitation was 2,790±910 liter/kg BW. The simulated annual cost of producing their beef was $2.11 ± 0.05/kg BW. Simulation of the production practices of 2005 indicated that the inclusion of distillers grain in animal diets has had a relatively small effect on environmental footprints except that reactive nitrogen loss has increased 10%. Compared to 1970, the carbon footprint of the beef produced has decreased 6% with no change in the energy footprint, a 3% reduction in the reactive nitrogen footprint, and a 6% reduction in the real cost of production. The water footprint, excluding precipitation, has increased 42% due to greater use of irrigated corn production. This proven methodology provides a means for developing the production data needed to support regional and national full life cycle assessments of the sustainability of beef.
The increase in the consumption of animal products
is likely to put further pressure on the world’s
freshwater resources. This paper provides a comprehensive
account of the water footprint of animal
products, considering different production systems
and feed composition per animal type and country.
Nearly one-third of the total water footprint of
agriculture in the world is related to the production
of animal products. The water footprint of any
animal product is larger than the water footprint of
crop products with equivalent nutritional value.
The average water footprint per calorie for beef is
20 times larger than for cereals and starchy roots.
The water footprint per gram of protein for milk,
eggs and chicken meat is 1.5 times larger than for
pulses. The unfavorable feed conversion efficiency
for animal products is largely responsible for the
relatively large water footprint of animal products
compared to the crop products. Animal products
from industrial systems generally consume and
pollute more ground- and surface-water resources
than animal products from grazing or mixed systems.
The rising global meat consumption and the
intensification of animal production systems will
put further pressure on the global freshwater
resources in the coming decades. The study shows
that from a freshwater perspective, animal products
from grazing systems have a smaller blue and grey
water footprint than products from industrial systems,
and that it is more water-efficient to obtain
calories, protein and fat through crop products than
animal products
The projected increase in the production and consumption of animal products is likely to put further pressure on the globe’s freshwater resources. The size and characteristics of the water footprint vary across animal types and production systems. The current study provides a comprehensive account of the global green, blue and grey water footprints of different sorts of farm animals and animal products, distinguishing between different production systems and considering the conditions in all countries of the world separately. The following animal categories were considered: beef cattle, dairy cattle, pig, sheep, goat, broiler chicken, layer chicken and horses. The study shows that the water footprint of meat from beef cattle (15400 m3/ton as a global average) is much larger than the footprints of meat from sheep (10400 m3/ton), pig (6000 m3/ton), goat (5500 m3/ton) or chicken (4300 m3/ton). The global average water footprint of chicken egg is 3300 m3/ton, while the water footprint of cow milk amounts to 1000 m3/ton. Per ton of product, animal products generally have a larger water footprint than crop products. The same is true when we look at the water footprint per calorie. The average water footprint per calorie for beef is twenty times larger than for cereals and starchy roots. When we look at the water requirements for protein, we find that the water footprint per gram of protein for milk, eggs and chicken meat is about 1.5 times larger than for pulses. For beef, the water footprint per gram of protein is 6 times larger than for pulses. In the case of fat, we find that butter has a relatively small water footprint per gram of fat, even lower than for oil crops. All other animal products, however, have larger water footprints per gram of fat when compared to oil crops. The study shows that from a freshwater resource perspective, it is more efficient to obtain calories, protein and fat through crop products than animal products.
Most pastures in Atlantic Canada are classified as permanent and contain primarily native species. Well-managed native swards have the potential of supporting profitable animal output. Productive cultivars of cool-season perennial grass species such as timothy (Phleum pratense L.), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.), tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) and legumes such as white clover can increase pasture productivity in the region and ameliorate seasonal fluctuations in dry matter yield associated with native swards. Improved swards gradually revert to native species, partly because forage cultivars and mixtures are not assessed for persistence under grazing.Soil acidity and deficiencies in soil nutrients were shown to reduce herbage yield, legume content of the grazed swards and mineral content of the herbage, all of which may adversely affect livestock performance. High concentrations of K, observed in swards heavily fertilized with N, are likely to c...
larly well adapted for grazing, but are sometimes used for hay in the western parkland of Alberta (Baron and Grasses adapted to both hay and pasture are lacking in the prairie Knowles, 1984; Knowles and Baron, 1990; Knowles et parkland. 'Regar' meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), 'Manchar' smooth bromegrass (B. inermis Leyss.), S9044 (a smooth- al., 1993). Meadow bromegrass-smooth bromegrass meadow bromegrass cross), common meadow foxtail (Alopercurus crosses have been made to develop dual-purpose graz- pratensis L.), and 'Kay' orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.) were ing/hay type cultivars for the Canadian Prairies evaluated for traits useful in dual purpose grass species at early (late (Knowles and Armstrong, 1984). During the late 1980s May), late (late June), and regrowth (early September) harvests. and through the 1990s, orchardgrass has been grown Herbage, leaf, and stem nutritive value; mass; and leaf/stem ratio were extensively in the more moist areas of Alberta. These determined. Differences among species were related more to herbage genotypes have been compared for seasonal herbage mass and morphology than to leaf and stem quality. Early harvest mass when cut frequently and infrequently (Knowles orchardgrass herbage mass was low at 55% of meadow foxtail (2.9
Although water is a renewable natural resource, it has become insufficient at the global level. Unless the current efficiency level of water use can be increased, the trend of water shortages will become more serious. Among agricultural activities, livestock production is mostly considered an intensive water consuming operation although the knowledge and information related to livestock-water interaction appears to be limited in scope. The present review focused on the livestock-water interaction with the following objectives: 1) to strengthen the current understanding of the concept of livestock water productivity and relate it to life cycle assessment analysis framework; 2) to provide insights on the methodology of livestock water productivity estimation using water foot printing approach; 3) to assess the potential integrative intervention options towards improving livestock water productivity pertinent to the contexts of rain fed mixed farming. The concept of water accounting for livestock production is reviewed to reflect feasible options for improving animal productivity, income, livelihood and ecological benefits per unit of water input, especially the practical implications of these options for the rural poor in Sub-Saharan Africa. Utilising the rainfed mixed farming endowment as a relatively less competitive water scenario is also emphasised. In line with the intention for increased livestock water productivity, the likelihood of its negative impact on the environment and possible mitigating methods are outlined.
Consumers often perceive that the modern beef production system has an environmental impact far greater than that of historical systems, with improved efficiency being achieved at the expense of greenhouse gas emissions. The objective of this study was to compare the environmental impact of modern (2007) US beef production with production practices characteristic of the US beef system in 1977. A deterministic model based on the metabolism and nutrient requirements of the beef population was used to quantify resource inputs and waste outputs per billion kilograms of beef. Both the modern and historical production systems were modeled using characteristic management practices, population dynamics, and production data from US beef systems. Modern beef production requires considerably fewer resources than the equivalent system in 1977, with 69.9% of animals, 81.4% of feedstuffs, 87.9% of the water, and only 67.0% of the land required to produce 1 billion kg of beef. Waste outputs were similarly reduced, with modern beef systems producing 81.9% of the manure, 82.3% CH(4), and 88.0% N(2)O per billion kilograms of beef compared with production systems in 1977. The C footprint per billion kilograms of beef produced in 2007 was reduced by 16.3% compared with equivalent beef production in 1977. As the US population increases, it is crucial to continue the improvements in efficiency demonstrated over the past 30 yr to supply the market demand for safe, affordable beef while reducing resource use and mitigating environmental impact.
Evapotranspiration (ET) calculation guidelines are based on the crop coefficient-reference evapotranspiration method (Kc ETref). Equations for the ASCE-EWRI standardized Penman-Monteith method are provided for grass and alfalfa references, where the grass reference standardization follows the FAO Penman-Monteith procedure. Linearized FAO-style crop coefficients from FAO-56 and curvilinear coefficients from Wright are presented as both mean and as dual (basal) crop coefficients. ET coefficients for landscape utilize a decoupled procedure similar to that summarized by the Irrigation Association Water Management Committee. Guidelines for calculating irrigation water requirements and peak system design rates are described.
A static model of developed water use for U.S. cattle production was constructed on a spreadsheet. Water use included that consumed directly by various classes of animals, water applied for irrigation of crops that are consumed by the cattle, water applied to irrigated pasture, and water used to process animals at marketing. Government statistics were consulted for numbers of cattle and crop production. The most recent statistics available for numbers of cattle and crops in individual states were used. On January 1, 1992, a total of 33.8 million beef cows and 5.7 million replacement heifers were in U.S. breeding herds, 12 million animals were on feed, and approximately 28 million animals were fed annually. Thus, the U.S. beef cattle herd produced 6.9 billion kg of boneless beef. Beef cattle directly consumed 760 billion L of water per year. Feedlot cattle were fed various grain and roughage sources corresponding to the regions in which they were fed. Feeds produced in a state were preferentially used by cattle in that state with that state's efficiency; any additional feedstuffs required used water at the national efficiency. Irrigation of crop feedstuffs for beef cattle required 12,991 billion L of water. Irrigated pasture for beef cattle production required an additional 11,243 billion L of water. Carcass processing required 79 billion L of water. The model estimates 3,682 L of developed water per kilogram of boneless meat for beef cattle production in the United States. The model was most sensitive to the dressing percentage and percentage of boneless yield in carcasses of feedlot cattle (62 and 66.7, respectively).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
The depletion of water resources, in terms of both quantity and quality, has become a major concern both locally and globally. Ruminants, in particular, are under increased public scrutiny due to their relatively high water use per unit of meat or milk produced. Estimating the water footprint of livestock production is a relatively new field of research for which methods are still evolving. This review describes the approaches used to quantify water use in ruminant production systems as well as the methodological and conceptual issues associated with each approach. Water use estimates for the main products from ruminant production systems are also presented, along with possible management strategies to reduce water use. In the past, quantifying water withdrawal in ruminant production focused on the water demand for drinking or operational purposes. Recently, the recognition of water as a scarce resource has led to the development of several methodologies including water footprint assessment, life cycle assessment, and livestock water productivity to assess water use and its environmental impacts. These methods differ with respect to their target outcome (efficiency or environmental impacts), geographic focus (local or global), description of water sources (green, blue, and gray), handling of water quality concerns, the interpretation of environmental impacts, and the metric by which results are communicated (volumetric units or impact equivalents). Ruminant production is a complex activity where animals are often reared at different sites using a range of resources over their lifetime. Additional water use occurs during slaughter, product processing, and packaging. Estimating water use at the various stages of meat and milk production and communicating those estimates will help producers and other stakeholders identify hotspots and implement strategies to improve water use efficiency. Improvements in ruminant productivity (i.e., BW and milk production) and reproductive efficiency can also reduce the water footprint per unit product. However, given that feed production makes up the majority of water use by ruminants, research and development efforts should focus on this area. More research and clarity are needed to examine the validity of assumptions and possible trade-offs between ruminants' water use and other sustainability indicators.
The depletion of water resources, in terms of both quantity and quality, has become a major concern both locally and globally. Ruminants, in particular, are under increased public scrutiny due to their relatively high water use per unit of meat or milk produced. Estimating the water footprint of livestock production is a relatively new field of research for which methods are still evolving. This review describes the approaches used to quantify water use in ruminant production systems as well as the methodological and conceptual issues associated with each approach. Water use estimates for the main products from ruminant production systems are also presented, along with possible management strategies to reduce water use. In the past, quantifying water withdrawal in ruminant production focused on the water demand for drinking or operational purposes. Recently, the recognition of water as a scarce resource has led to the development of several methodologies including water footprint assessment, life cycle assessment, and livestock water productivity to assess water use and its environmental impacts. These methods differ with respect to their target outcome (efficiency or environmental impacts), geographic focus (local or global), description of water sources (green, blue, and gray), handling of water quality concerns, the interpretation of environmental impacts, and the metric by which results are communicated (volumetric units or impact equivalents). Ruminant production is a complex activity where animals are often reared at different sites using a range of resources over their lifetime. Additional water use occurs during slaughter, product processing, and packaging. Estimating water use at the various stages of meat and milk production and communicating those estimates will help producers and other stakeholders identify hotspots and implement strategies to improve water use efficiency. Improvements in ruminant productivity (i.e., BW and milk production) and reproductive efficiency can also reduce the water footprint per unit product. However, given that feed production makes up the majority of water use by ruminants, research and development efforts should focus on this area. More research and clarity are needed to examine the validity of assumptions and possible trade-offs between ruminants’ water use and other sustainability indicators. © 2017 American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved.
Background
While the demand for food and water is growing, water shortages are already occurring in many of the world's major food production areas. Irrigation is unarguably the most water demanding operation among the food supply chain, however, efforts from different sectors will collectively secure food for the world's population. Food processing is a key component of the food supply chain and its water footprint is of great consideration, not only because of the high-quality water used in the manufacturing of products but also for the significant volumes of pollutant wastewater generated. Different food sectors produce wastewater of different qualities, but for all cases water reconditioning and reuse offer opportunities to reduce water consumption and to contribute to a better water management in the food processing industry.
Scope and approach
The factors converging to implement such initiatives including, regulations in place, available technologies, food safety considerations, risk perceptions, water quality, environmental impacts and research needs are discussed herein. The goal of this review paper was to bring to the forefront of the debate the challenges and opportunities that water conservation initiatives offer, in order to produce more food with less water.
Key findings
Water reconditioning and reuse are technologically-feasible alternatives for the food processing industry to incorporate better water management and sustainability in food processing operations that are lacking. Successful implementation of conservation strategies is associated with the holistic evaluation of the intervention, providing information related to cost, risk, and environmental performance.
Forage grasses play a major role in the production of beef in western Canada. However, their production is limited by nitrogen (N) which is the highest single economic input. Urea is the most dominant dry N fertilizer, but surface-applied urea is vulnerable to loss by ammonia volatilization. Field experiments on bromegrass in central Alberta showed that surface-broadcast urea was less effective in increasing forage and protein yield than similarly applied ammonium nitrate. The effectiveness of urea was increased when the fertilizer was disc-banded below the soil surface.
The diverse nature of beef production was captured by establishing a farm typology based on an extensive survey of 1005 Canadian farms in 2011. The survey provided information on the type of operation, cattle numbers, feed storage and management, manure management, land use, producer demographics and attitudes to risk, and technology adoption. Principal component analysis and cluster analysis were used to understand the relationships among variables and to statistically identify farm types. A total of 41 diagnostic variables from 133 survey questions were used to define 16 principal components explaining 68% of the variation. Cluster analysis yielded eight major clusters as distinct farm types. The largest number of farms (37%) was grouped as small-scale, part-time cow–calf operations. Mixed operations (crop–beef) were next most frequent (22%), followed by large cow–calf backgrounding (18%) and diversified cow–calf operations that included crop–beef mixed operations as well as off-farm activities (11%). Cow–calf operations that finished calves comprised 8% of the total farms surveyed. Extensive cow–calf backgrounding operations, large backgrounding/finishing operations, and large finishing operations represented the remaining 3% of the farms. The typology not only provides a strategy by which the Canadian beef cattle industry can be characterized, but also improves understanding of the diversity of farm management practices to help develop policies and beneficial management practices.
Efficiency gains from on-farm irrigation system upgrades and canal rehabilitation in southern Alberta irrigation districts are influenced by weather variability. The Irrigation Demand Model was used to estimate differences in on-farm demand and conveyance losses based on irrigation district characteristics in 1999 and 2012 using weather data from 1928 to 2012. Monte Carlo simulations were subsequently performed to determine the magnitude of potential efficiency gains at different chances of exceedance. Changes in irrigation systems and water conveyance infrastructure reduced gross demand by 74 mm from 1999 to 2012, with a 55-mm reduction in on-farm demand and a 19-mm decrease in conveyance losses at a 10% chance of exceedance. Reductions in gross demand on a volume basis from 1999 to 2012 ranged from 170 to 200 million m3, even with about 30,300 ha of irrigation expansion. Conveyance loss reductions were stable at about 50 million m3, so 70 to 75% of the potential water savings were achieved through reduced on-farm demand. Mean seasonal naturalized flows available for use in southern Alberta from 1912 to 2009 ranged from 2.08 billion m3 in high-demand years to 3.95 billion m3 in wet years. Gross demand based on irrigation district characteristics in 2012 varied from 1.73 billion m3 in wet years to 2.83 billion m3 in high-demand years. Additional gains in efficiency from on-farm irrigation system upgrades and rehabilitation of conveyance infrastructure in the future will help mitigate the increased risk of water scarcity as irrigation districts expand with current licensed water allocations.
Knowing the amount of herbage on rangeland is basic to management decisions related to livestock grazing. However, the amount of herbage available for grazing changes seasonally. Therefore, changes in herbage biomass were examined in different communities of the fescue prairie. The study was conducted at 2 sites in southwestern Alberta. In the Porcupine Hills near Stavely, changes in herbage biomass components were examined in 3 communities: rough fescue (Festuca campestris Rydb.), Parry oat grass (Danthonia parryi Scribn.)-Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.), and Kentucky bluegrass-sedge (Carex spp.) by sampling at monthly intervals from April or May to late September. Observed trends among the rough fescue, Parry oatgrass-Kentucky bluegrass, and Kentucky bluegrass-sedge communities were, for peak current year's standing production, 398, 305, and 226 g m-2, respectively; for spring current year's standing production as a percent of its peak, 73, 50, and 35%, respectively; and for percent losses of total herbage biomass, from fall to spring, 24, 43, and 56%, respectively. In the foothills near Pincher Creek, the standing crop of grasses and forbs was sampled using paired subplots. One subplot was harvested in October and the other in April. Dry matter losses over winter averaged 27 and 58% for grasses and forbs, respectively. Of the 3 communities examined, production on the rough fescue community was the greatest, least dependent on precipitation during the growing season, and least susceptible to weathering losses and, therefore, had the greatest forage values. The Kentucky bluegrass-sedge community had the lowest forage values.
The present paper aims to estimate the areas equipped for irrigation and desirability of agricultural water management in the world. For this purpose, all necessary information was gathered from Food and Agriculture Organization and checked using World Bank Group. The selected 18 indices were analysed for all 26 regions in the area studied, and the extent of area equipped for irrigation to cultivated area was estimated by 2 different formulas and other 9 indices. In addition, an average index was calculated using various methods to assess region conditions for agricultural water management. The results show that Central Asia is the best region for agricultural water management and the value of relative error is less than 20%. The capability of irrigation and drainage systems was studied using other eight indices with more limited information. The results indicated that trial-and-error policies should be avoided and expert comments be applied to irrigation systems for any crop.
A soil cover days (SCD) model has been developed by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada for use as an agri-environmental indicator to monitor the relationship between agricultural production activities and agri-environmental quality. The SCD indicator integrates information on crops, soils, climate, and field activities to estimate the total equivalent number of days that agricultural soils are covered by crop canopy, crop residue and snow in a given year. Daily cover fractions of plant and residue for a given crop in an ecoregion are simulated using typical crop calendar and field management practices, and the equivalent number of days that soil is covered by snow in winter is derived from long term climate normals. The equivalent SCD for a spatial unit is then derived as the area-weighted sum of different crops and different management practices within the unit. This paper presents the SCD framework, details an assessment of the accuracy of the model and outlines future improvements. Annual snow days derived from 30-year climate normals as used in the model was strongly correlated (excluding mountain areas) with that derived from satellite data (R2 = 0.45, n = 48), even though the remote sensing product showed significant temporal and spatial variability. Crop residue fraction estimated by the model was strongly correlated with field data collected over major crop areas and crop types (R2 = 0.74, n = 55), and modelled plant cover fraction was well correlated with that derived from remote sensing data (R2 = 0.57, n = 57). Large discrepancies were observed for some samples due to deviation of the actual crop calendar from that estimated using climate normals. National map showing the change in the indicator from 1981 to 2011 reveals changes in crop and residue management practices.
A study was conducted to assess the farm financial impact and risk of two irrigation expansion scenarios based on the potential for water supply deficits in the irrigation districts of southern Alberta. The Irrigation Demand Model (IDM) was used to determine irrigation water demand based on annual crop water requirements, crop mix, irrigation system types and application efficiencies, irrigation district infrastructure, and the level of irrigation management within each irrigation block defined in the Water Resources Management Model (WRMM). Irrigation water supply values each year were then established for each irrigation block using the WRMM. The Farm Financial Impact and Risk Model (FFIRM), a farm financial simulation model that tracks farm finances (assets and liabilities) with time, subject to variability in crop water demand and crop prices, was used to determine the optimum allocation of water among fields within each farm operation during years of water supply deficits. Three scenarios were examined with the FFIRM – a baseline scenario and two irrigation expansion scenarios. Irrigation expansion was found to have negligible or very small adverse impacts on the financial well-being of typical farms in all six irrigation regions. Representative farms experienced essentially no change in net farm income (NFI) in the recent expansion (EXP1) scenario, and very small reductions in NFI in the future expansion (EXP2) scenario. Water conserved through irrigation efficiency gains in the next decade will likely offset the increased risk of negative impacts on NFI with irrigation expansion to the current limit.
The National Drought Model (NDM) is an amalgamation of the atmospheric component of the original Palmer Drought and Versatile Soil Moisture Budget (VSMB) models. The NDM uses locally derived coefficients from the station or gridded climate data to calculate a calibration factor for comparing locations in time and space. A modular approach is used to model major processes such as evapotranspiration, biometeorological time, snowmelt, and the cascading of soil moisture down to the root zone. The modular approach allows modifications to be made to specific sections without making structural changes to the entire model or the data inputs. The NDM is an operational tool, integrating data from the climate, soil, and plant sciences to monitor agroclimatic risks such as drought and excess moisture. In this paper, the capacity of the NDM to monitor extreme agroclimatic risks, such as drought and flooding of agricultural soils, was assessed. Using the Palmer Drought Severity Index component of the NDM, the mapping of the spatial extent and severity of the 2001 and 2002 droughts across Canada and the excess moisture conditions on the Canadian Prairies in 2010 agreed with other assessments. The validation study of soil moisture at two Alberta locations (Lethbridge and Beaverlodge) showed that the VSMB tracked the soil moisture flux in the root zone successfully in response to changing environmental conditions. The VSMB explained about 70 and 60% of the variance in observed soil moisture at the two respective locations.
Understanding the state and trends in agriculture production is essential to combat both short-term and long-term threats to stable and reliable access to food for all, and to ensure a profitable agricultural sector. In 2007, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) took its first steps towards the development of an operational software system for mapping the crop types of individual fields using satellite observations. Focusing on the Prairie Provinces in 2009 and 2010, a Decision Tree (DT) based methodology was applied using optical (Landsat-5, AWiFS, DMC, SPOT) and radar (Radarsat-2) imagery. For the 2011 growing season and further years, this activity is extended to other provinces in support of a national crop inventory. At present, this approach can consistently deliver a crop inventory that meets the overall target accuracy of at least 85% at a final spatial resolution of 30m. To achieve full operational status, however, further development is required to optimize the data processing chain. Crop maps covering Canada's entire agricultural region are typically delivered eight months following the end of the growing season. To better meet the needs of AAFC and its partners, as well as those of potential new users, map delivery needs to be more timely. Indeed, there is considerable demand for two map products: an estimated within-season inventory (released during the growing season) as well as a final end-of-season inventory (released shortly after the end of the growing season). To this end, Earth Observation Service (EOS) staff is implementing a new and fully automated crop classifier that should significantly reduce production time. In 2012, the lack of affordable optical data forced AAFC to rely mostly on RADARSAT-2 data. This brings new challenges, given a doubling of the number of images as compared to 2011. In the coming years, new EO data (Landsat 8, Radarsat Constellation Mission, Sentinel-2) will have a significant positive impact on the quality of the- AAFC crop inventory.
Bioperformance of two summer pasture and four winter feeding cow-calf production strategies in the western Canadian Parkland was evaluated. Diet composition and animal data were collected over 5 production years. Each production year began with fixed-time artificial insemination (TAI) of cows and turnout of cow-calf pairs (n=288 yr-1 including 76 primiparous replacement cows) assigned to either alfalfa-grass (AG, n = 9 paddocks) or grass (G, n = 9 paddocks) pastures until weaning. Post-weaning, pregnant cows (n = 240 yr-1) were assigned to either extended-grazing (EG, n = 120) of dormant regrowth of perennial pastures and swathed annual crops, or one of three diets fed in a drylot (DL): hay (HY, n = 40), straw/barley (SB, n = 40; 70% oat straw:30% steam-rolled barley grain DM), and silage/straw (SS, n = 40; 40% barley silage:60% oat straw DM). Common diets were used for all treatment groups between the weaning and winter feeding period, as well as between the pre-calving and summer grazing period. Cow and calf body weight (BW) gains were higher (P<0.05) for AG than G pasture until the third production year and the advantage diminished as the carrying capacity declined. The latter may be attributed to a lack of spring/summer moisture. Further, G pastures required more nitrogen fertilizer to achieve the same level of bioperformance as that of AG pastures in years 4 and 5. Cows in the EG treatment maintained BW better than those in the DL treatment (especially those cows receiving the SS diet) except in year 5 (P<0.05) in which drought resulted in lower body weights for cows in the EG treatment. On all treatments, cows maintained BCS that supported reproductive function; however, fertility to TAI was lowest (P<0.05) in years 4 and 5. Cows in the DL group had a 1.8 times greater risk of being culled before turnout and as a result lower (P<0.05) rates of calf survival to weaning. In conclusion, AG pastures and EG are important alternatives to further develop for cow-calf production in western Canada.
Data on post-weaning gains and final test weights are reported for 2010 Limousin-sired steer and heifer calves from cows of 15 different F1 cross and back-cross breed types incorporating Charolais, Simmental, Hereford, Angus and Shorthorn breeding. Calves representing all 15 dam breed types were born and weaned under semi-intensive management at Brandon, Manitoba, then finished there on a self-fed all-concentrate diet. A subset representing eight dam breed crosses was born and weaned under extensive range management at Manyberries, Alberta, then fed at Lacombe, Alberta, on a lower energy diet of silage and concentrate mixed and fed to appetite in bunks. A comparison of common breed types revealed that the Brandon calves were lighter at weaning but gained more rapidly in the post-weaning test than the Manyberries/Lacombe calves. Under the Lacombe feeding regime, there were no significant differences in rate of gain on the feedlot test, but progeny of breed types containing some Simmental breeding generally reached a higher final weight than progeny of Hereford × Angus cows because of differences in weight at the beginning of the test. Under the higher energy feeding regime at Brandon, progeny of breed types containing Charolais or Simmental generally gained faster and attained higher final weights than progeny of Hereford × Angus cows. Progeny of Charolais × British and Simmental × British F1 cross cows generally performed as well as, or better than, the progeny of either backcross. Key words: Beef cattle, post-weaning gain, crossbred dam, back-cross dam, European cross
In an experiment to investigate the relationship between nitrogen fertilization and forage yield, four grass species, bromegrass (Bromus inermis Leyss.), intermediate wheatgrass (Agropyron intermedium (Host) Beauv.), crested wheatgrass (A. cristatum (L.) Gaertn.) and Russian wild ryegrass (Elymus junceus Fisch.), were sown in each of 3 yr on two soil types, a clay loam and a sandy loam. Five N treatments up to 252 kg N∙ha ⁻¹ ∙year ⁻¹ were imposed and data were collected for each of the 3 yr following the seeding year on each plot. There was considerable variation in the dry matter yields between seeding years and postseeding years. On the clay loam soil, the first year after seeding was generally the most productive whereas on the sandy loam the second harvest year produced the most. Intermediate wheatgrass was the most productive grass on the clay loam soil, crested wheatgrass on the sandy loam soil. Bromegrass produced well on both types while Russian wild ryegrass was the least productive on both soils. All species responded well to additional N. There was no advantage to split N application. The N content of forage was similar in all four species and on both soil types but was increased by fertilizer N.Key words: Bromegrass, wheatgrass, Russian wild ryegrass, nitrogen, forage yield, establishment year.
Preweaning performance was evaluated for calves out of first-cross and reciprocal back-cross cows maintained under two contrasting environments. All cows were bred to Limousin bulls and the calves were born between 1982 and 1986, inclusive, at Brandon, Manitoba (semi-intensive management) and Manyberries, Alberta (extensive range management). Dam cross comparisons revealed that calves out of Hereford × Angus dams were inferior to calves out of European continental × British dams for all preweaning traits at both locations. Comparisons between calves out of F1 dams and calves out of backcross (1/4 or 3/4 European continental) dams generally favored the calves out of F1 females. Specific and nonspecific comparisons between the reciprocal backcrosses demonstrated that calves out of dams with 3/4 European continental breeding were heavier and grew faster than calves out of dams with 1/4 European continental breeding. Male calves exceeded female calves for all preweaning traits and calves born at Manyberries were heavier and grew faster than calves born at Brandon. Key words: Beef cattle, preweaning growth, crossbreeding, backcrosses
Growth records of 281 744 calves born from 1971 to 1978 were used to calculate annual phenotypic and genetic trends for weaning weight and yearling weight. Genetic trends were computed as the weighted average of sire-transmitting abilities obtained from the Record of Performance National Beef Sire Monitoring Program. There were no significant differences between the genetic trends of all calves vs. calves which made a yearling weight for either weaning weight or yearling weight. Annual trends were positive for Angus, Hereford, and Shorthorn breeds, and were negative for Charolais, Limousin, Maine-Anjou and Simmental breeds. The interpretation of annual trends was complicated by the declining enrollment of herds on the test program which could have artificially altered the averages.
This study reports agricultural water use, measured in terms of water intake, for selected regions of Canada. Agricultural areas of Canada were divided into 55 regions based on administrative boundaries, with implicit consideration of soil type. All major agricultural water uses, such as dryland agriculture, irrigated agriculture, livestock production, greenhouse production and domestic water use, were included. Aquaculture-related water use was excluded due to limited information. Total water use in Canada for agricultural purposes was estimated at 2.34 million dam3 per annum. Supplementary irrigation is the largest water user within agriculture, claiming 86% of the total use, followed by livestock water use, which accounts for 10% of the total. Agricultural regions with supplementary irrigation, such as southern Alberta and Saskatchewan, and eastern British Columbia, are the regions with heavier use of water.
Although the impact of Canada thistle (CT) on annual crop production is relatively well established, few investigations report on this weed's impact within perennial pastures. This field study assessed herbage yield losses within eight central Alberta pastures from 1999 to 2001. Each pasture was sampled in 1999 to quantify thistle and herbage biomass within 25 permanent plots. CT was controlled in 2000 and the response of vegetation measured in 2000 and 2001. Before removal, significant negative relationships (P < 0.05) between thistle abundance and herbage were noted at six sites. After thistle removal, herbage at several sites displayed positive responses. Both thistle density and biomass adequately predicted herbage yield loss. Yield losses due to CT can be substantial, peaking at 2 kg/ha for each kilogram of standing thistle biomass and 4.3 kg/ha with each additional thistle stem per square meter. Demonstrated yield losses were variable among sites however, likely due to factors such as heterogeneity in soils, available moisture, and variation in disturbance history or pasture vegetation composition. CT management in perennial pastures of western Canada may enhance pasture production, but further research is required to reliably predict the ability of pastures to respond.
Nomenclature: Canada thistle, Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop #³ CIRAR.
Additional index words: Forage biomass, pasture heterogeneity, precipitation, sward composition, weed density.
Abbreviations: CT, Canada thistle; N, nitrogen; OM, organic matter.
Maize (Zea mays L.) yields have risen continually wherever hybrid maize has been adopted, starting in the U.S. corn belt in the early 1930s. Plant breeding and improved management practices have produced this gain jointly. On average, about 50% of the increase is due to management and 50% to breeding. The two tools interact so closely that neither of them could have produced such progress alone. However, genetic gains may have to bear a larger share of the load in future years. Hybrid traits have changed over the years. Trait changes that increase resistance to a wide variety of biotic and abiotic stresses (e.g., drought tolerance) are the most numerous, but morphological and physiological changes that promote efficiency in growth, development, and partitioning (e.g., smaller tassels) are also recorded. Some traits have not changed over the years because breeders have intended to hold them constant (e.g., grain maturity date in U.S. corn belt). In other instances, they have not changed, despite breeders' intention to change them (e.g., harvest index). Although breeders have always selected for high yield, the need to select simultaneously for overall dependability has been a driving force in the selection of hybrids with increasingly greater stress tolerance over the years. Newer hybrids yield more than their predecessors in unfavorable as well as favorable growing conditions. Improvement in the ability of the maize plant to overcome both large and small stress bottlenecks, rather than improvement in primary productivity, has been the primary driving force of higher yielding ability of newer hybrid.
Typewritten mss. Thesis (M.Sc.)--McGill University, 1979. Bibliography: leaves 116-124.
CowBytes Beef Ration Balancer Program. Version 5. Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development
AARD, 2011. CowBytes Beef Ration Balancer Program. Version 5. Alberta Agriculture and
Rural Development, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Nutrient content of native forages. Final Report on ADF Project #94000114. Grazing and Pasture Technology Program, Regina, SK. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
- Z Abouguendia
Abouguendia, Z., 1998. Nutrient content of native forages. Final Report on ADF Project
#94000114. Grazing and Pasture Technology Program, Regina, SK.
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2017. Red Meat Conversion Factors -Agriculture and
Agri-Food Canada (AAFC). [WWW Document]. URL. http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/industry-markets-and-trade/statistics-and-market-information/by-product-sector/redmeat-and-livestock-sector/red-meat-and-livestock-market-information/carcassweight/conversion-factors/?id=1415860000020, Accessed date: 6 June 2017.
Estimation of water use in Canadian agriculture in 2001. Agriculture and Rural Working Paper Series
- M S Beaulieu
Beaulieu, M.S., 2007. Estimation of water use in Canadian agriculture in 2001. Agriculture
and Rural Working Paper Series. Statistics Canada, Agriculture Division, Ottawa,
Canada.
Irrigation Water Management: Irrigation Scheduling, Training Manual. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
- C Brouwer
- K Prins
- M Heibloem
Brouwer, C., Prins, K., Heibloem, M., 1989. Irrigation Water Management: Irrigation
Scheduling, Training Manual. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
Boosting crop yields in the next century
- T Bruulsema
- M Tollenaar
- J Heckman
Bruulsema, T., Tollenaar, M., Heckman, J., 2000. Boosting crop yields in the next century.
Better Crop. 84, 9-13.
Irrigation Areas Sheet
- Url Rome
FAO, 2017. Irrigation Areas Sheet. (WWW Document). AQUASTAT, Food Agric. Organ.
(FAO), Rome URL. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/irrs/readPdf.html?f=
CAN-IRR_eng.pdf, Accessed date: 2 June 2017.