Why feedlot cattle are better for the planet

Over the past half-century, feedlots have continued to improve efficiency-wise, generating more beef per animal in a shorter period of time, and this higher productivity has resulted in lower environmental impacts per pound of beef, especially when compared with grass-finishing systems.

With greenhouse gas emissions, in particular, intensive systems of beef production tend to beat extensive systems that finish cattle on pasture. Consider that the majority of emissions from beef production stem from enteric fermentation — or in lay terms, cow belches. As a result, raising cows in a shorter amount of time reduces emissions considerably.

Since cows on feedlots are also usually larger than cows on pasture, they produce more beef per animal and thus fewer emissions in the aggregate. These efficiency gains win out even if we factor in the added emissions that come from producing feeds. One environmental downside of feedlots is that the way they concentrate and store manure often leads to high levels of local air and water pollution.

Policy and technologies such as anaerobic digesters, which convert manure to energy, can reduce such impacts. Denmark, for example, cut nitrate leaching from intensive livestock systems in half through a mix of regulation, subsidies, and the adoption of various technologies.

Innovations in veterinary science, animal nutrition and genetics have driven remarkable environmental gains in intensive systems as well. Today, for example, animal nutritionists design diets with the exact ratios of protein, fiber, nutrients and fat that will optimize digestion and weight gain.

Digital ear tags closely monitor animal health, which has the potential to reduce the use of antibiotics. These practices boost bottom lines and environmental performance alike. Selective breeding, too, has improved productivity. Current technology allows animal scientists to use DNA samples from individual calves to determine their likelihood of having productivity-boosting traits like high birth weights and to select for them using artificial insemination or in-vitro fertilization.

Farmers and scientists in the U. One recent experiment successfully reduced the methane emissions of dairy cows by 30 percent, without negatively impacting milk production and feed intake. This is still a new technique, but if deployed commercially, it could play a huge role in reducing methane output without touching productivity.

Of course, greater sector regulation and oversight will also be required to implement and scale many of these environmental upgrades. The U. Environmental Protection Agency regulates manure management in feedlots, for instance, but state-level records indicate that some do try to skirt the rules.

Cattle entering the finishing phase are typically 12 to 16 months old, and remain in this phase until they have achieved a level of fatness, or finish, that will provide a positive eating experience for consumers. The main difference in carbon footprints between grass- and grain-finished beef occurs as a result of the time spent in the finishing phase, the type of feed consumed and the body weight of the cattle at the end of the finishing phase.

Figure 1. Beef cattle life cycle for grass-finished and grain-finished beef in the U. Cattle entering the feedlot for finishing eat a diet containing corn along with byproducts such as distillers grains leftover after ethanol production and corn gluten feed after corn fructose production , vitamins and minerals, and small quantities of forage or roughage such as hay.

Grain-finished cattle remain in the feedlot for approximately four to six months and are sent for harvesting at 14 to 22 months of age. Grain-finished cattle reach market weight faster than grass-finished 1,2 cattle because the diet received is higher in energy, which results in rapid and efficient weight gain. In contrast, grass-finished cattle gain at a slower rate due to the forage-based diet they eat and typically go to harvest at 20 to 26 months of age and at a lower weight than grain-finished animals.

Grass-finished cattle may finish either faster or slower than this age range, depending on the forage and grass resources available to the beef producer e. The difference in harvest weights translates into different numbers of U. Utilizing forage as the primary source of feed also contributes to an increased carbon footprint for grass-finished beef 2 , because high forage diets e. Rowntree, David K. Beede, Marcia S.

DeLonge, Michael W. Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems. Agricultural Systems , ; DOI: ScienceDaily, 19 March Michigan State University. Environmentally friendly cattle production really. Retrieved November 14, from www. Cattle Vs. This can change aquatic A feedlot is defined as keeping more than standard cattle units in a yard or enclosure, where the animals are fed entirely by hand or mechanically and cannot graze.

Beef production in feedlots needs less land and fewer cattle than pasture grazing. Less stress is placed on the environment and fewer greenhouse gases are emitted to produce the same amount of beef. You can place cattle in feedlots to ensure adequate nutrition during seasonal changes such as drought. Before establishing or buying a cattle feedlot, you should investigate your legal obligations to protect the environment.