Benifets Livestock Have on Industries Beef Industry

Abstract

Accelerating global demand for beef offers great opportunity to the predominantly beef-exporting nations of Australia and New Zealand. However, Australasian industries confront serious challenges in their ability to capitalize on this opportunity sustainably, including, merely not express to,

The need to mitigate the environmental bear on by reducing greenhouse gas emissions (mostly enteric methane) and threats to the stability and biodiversity of pastoral ecosystems.
The increasing risk of incursions of devastating exotic diseases, such as human foot-and-rima oris disease, and the consistent loss of preferential access to export markets.
Increasing public awareness and concern nigh management, transport, and slaughter practices that, if not addressed proactively, could negatively affect domestic and export markets.
Effective responses to these challenges, and therefore to industry sustainability, will require a combination of innovations in inquiry and development, public and private investment in manufacture infrastructure, and development of well-informed public policy and trade diplomacy initiatives

Introduction

Within the broader geopolitical region of Australasia, only Australia and New Zealand take significant beefiness industries. These industries share many of the challenges and drivers that are influencing other beef industries around the globe, equally discussed in other papers in this effect of Animal Frontiers. However, in Commonwealth of australia and, to a lesser extent, New Zealand, the internal diversity of the beef industries is a distinctive characteristic, influenced by wide climatic and biogeographic variation, and consequent variation in management systems, cattle genotypes, impact of owned diseases, supply concatenation infrastructure, and market opportunity. The Australasian industries also are distinctive in their freedom from most potentially devastating exotic diseases that plague many other beef-producing countries, their substantial dependence on export markets, and their relative lack of public subsidy and tariff protection.

This paper discusses some of the near serious challenges to the economic, environmental, and social sustainability of the beefiness industries in Australia and New Zealand and comments on opportunities to overcome these challenges, especially those with a regional flavor that are amenable to innovative solutions.

Background

A Cursory History of the Australian and New Zealand Beefiness Industries

Cattle were commencement introduced to Australia and New Zealand at or soon later on European settlement in 1788 and 1814, respectively. Growth in numbers was initially tiresome only accelerated in the latter half of the 19th century in response to the Australian gold rushes and the advent of refrigerated ship. By 1900, the Australian beef herd numbered 8.6 one thousand thousand animals (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2005) and extended to near regions of Australia, including very big pastoral holdings in fundamental and northern Commonwealth of australia. Growth of the beef breeds during this menstruum was slower in New Zealand and was outstripped by that of meat sheep numbers.

During the outset one-half of the 20th century, productivity in northern Australia was express past the inability of British breed cattle to conform to extreme heat, seasonal variations in feed quality and availability, and, in the moisture tropics, tick infestation. This inverse in the 1950s with the introduction of heat-tolerant, tick-resistant Bos indicus breeds, especially the American Brahman (Figure 1). In the 1960s, large-framed European breeds such as Limousin, Charolais, and Simmental were introduced to Australia and New Zealand and were crossed with British brood stock to produce larger, afterwards finishing animals. Soon later on, with the admission of the United Kingdom to the (now) European Matrimony, most beef exported from Australasia was diverted to emerging markets in the United States and East asia (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2005).

Figure 1.

Brahman moo-cow and calf in northern Commonwealth of australia (source: CSIRO Livestock Industries).

This led to rapid growth in the Australian industry, with cattle numbers peaking at about 30 one thousand thousand in 1976. Since and then, cattle numbers in Australia and New Zealand have fluctuated with climatic atmospheric condition and world beef prices; in 2010, the Australian beef herd numbered 24.3 1000000 animals, excluding dairy cattle used for meat.

Manufacture Structures in Australia and New Zealand

The beefiness production manufacture extends over nigh one-half the land mass of Australia, beyond all climatic zones. During the period from 2001–2002 to 2008–2009, it included an average of twoscore,200 beef cattle farms, excluding major feedlots (Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 2010). Of these, almost x,500 were located in northern Commonwealth of australia (Queensland, the Northern Territory, and northern Western Australia) and about 29,700 were located in southern Commonwealth of australia. The calibration of operation and market share is strongly influenced by climatic region, with many more large, extensive operations accounting for a much larger marketplace share in the northern than in the southern regions (Table 1).

Table i.

Distribution of Australian beefiness cattle farms by region and number of cattle¹

The Australian beef production industry also includes most 700 accredited feedlots, which in 2009–2010, accounted for two.4 million cattle slaughtered (33%; Australian Agency of Agronomical and Resources Economics, 2010). These operations are located mostly in areas close in proximity to cattle and grain, such equally southeast Queensland, the northern tablelands, and Riverina of New South Wales. The number of feedlots and cattle finished on grain has fluctuated widely in contempo decades because of major variations in grain costs and cattle prices.

The New Zealand beefiness industry is principally characterized past its interrelationships with both the sheep and dairy industries. Near beefiness is produced on mixed-livestock farms (sheep, beef, and sometimes deer), and often the beefiness enterprise has multiple purposes, including pasture comeback for other livestock classes as well as generating income in its ain right. Hence, beefiness cows and, to a lesser extent, finishing cattle often are a low-priority stock class in the farming system, with implications for fauna performance and supply chain management.

The New Zealand dairy industry (iv.iv one thousand thousand cows; DairyNZ, 2011) is considerably larger than its beefiness convenance industry (ane.14 million cows; Beef+Lamb NZ, 2010). It contributes to beefiness supply both as a source of surplus calves for beef finishing and also equally a direct source of beef from cull dairy cows. This creates significant multifariousness in terms of product systems (surplus dairy calf, prime beefiness, balderdash beef, and cull moo-cow beef) and genetic background (dairy and beefiness × dairy breeds), as well as influencing which markets are targeted (e.k., lean beef for the North American hamburger market versus prime table beef markets). The dairy industry also causes pregnant seasonal peaks in the catamenia and type of cattle slaughtered, with implications for supply concatenation infrastructure.

Most beef production in New Zealand occurs on loma land because both dairy and, to a lesser extent, the sheep industry compete with beef for more productive country. Dissimilar Australia, New Zealand does not have a large grain resources and virtually beef is finished on pasture. This limits the ability of the industry to buffer seasonal variations in forage availability and therefore beefiness supply patterns.

Value of the Australian and New Zealand Industries

In 2009, Australia was the eighth largest producer of beef and veal in the world, and afterward Brazil, was the second largest beefiness exporter, accounting for 2.1% of the global cattle inventory, 3.5% of global product, and 19% of global trade. In that year, Australia produced 2.12 million tonnes of beef, valued at AU$7 billion, of which 1.37 million tonnes (65%), valued at AU$4.1 billion, was exported to more than 100 countries, but predominantly to Japan (39%), the United States (27%), and the Republic of korea (12%). A further 921,000 cattle, valued at AU$590 million, were exported for slaughter in Asia and the Centre E, with Republic of indonesia accounting for approximately 80% of this trade. The 0.75 1000000 tonnes of beefiness and veal going to the Australian domestic marketplace was valued at AU$ii.ix billion and amounted to an annual apparent consumption of well-nigh 35 kg of fresh meat per person. Its total consign and domestic earnings make the beef manufacture one of the most important agricultural sectors in Australia, bookkeeping for 18% of full farm gate receipts and 17% of agricultural export earnings in 2009–2010 (Australian Agency of Agricultural and Resource Economic science and Sciences, 2010).

The New Zealand industry accounts for only one% of globe beef product, only considering most is exported, information technology contributes 8% to global trade in beef (Peden, 2009). In 2009–2010, approximately ii.3 million cattle (one.5 one thousand thousand of dairy origin) were slaughtered, producing about 362,000 tonnes of beef. Of this, approximately 25,000 tonnes was chilled, with the remainder frozen. The value of the sector to New Zealand is approximately NZ$2.i billion per annum, with NZ$1.viii billion in export income accounting for approximately 8% of the primary sector export income of New Zealand. The most significant market destination for New Zealand beef is the The states (45% by volume, 40% past value), which is predominantly manufacturing-grade beefiness. Other significant markets include Korea (9% by volume, 8% by value), Indonesia (9%, 7%), Japan (viii%, 11%), Canada (6%, 5%), and Taiwan (6%, vi%; Meat Industry Association, 2010).

Opportunities for Growth and Increased Profitability

Increasing Demand for Fauna Poly peptide

The relationship between national affluence and need for animalsource foods is well established (FAO, 2009; Figure 2). The growing prosperity of many developing nations, coupled with regionally varying rates of population growth, is driving accelerating demand for meat in East and Southeast Asia and Latin America (FAO, 2009). In Asia, much of this growth has been in poultry and pork consumption. Still, long-term projections of increased opportunity for beef exporters seem reasonable, particularly if the manufacture can cater to a probable increase in need of Asian consumers for beefiness with higher quality and safety attributes (Dalton and Keogh, 2007), such every bit those assured by the Meat Standards Australia plan (http://www.mla.com.au/Marketing-red-meat/Guaranteeing-eating-quality/Meat-Standards-Australia).

Figure 2.

Per capita gross domestic product (Gross domestic product) and meat consumption by land, 2005 (source: FAO, 2009). PPP = purchasing power parity in constant 2005 international US dollars.

In addition to their general focus on increasing quality and safety, Australian exporters have sought to exploit niche markets in Asia and elsewhere. A striking example has been major growth in Japanese imports of extremely marbled Wagyu beef after the introduction of this traditional Japanese breed to Australia in 1991. Notwithstanding, more than one-half of Australian beef exported to Japan and Korea is grass fed, and recent growth in the n Asian fast food industries has strengthened need for manufacturing beef (MLA, 2011).

Taking Advantage of the Make clean, Green Prototype of Australasian Pastoral Industries

The pastoral industries of Commonwealth of australia and New Zealand have benefited directly from trade advantages considering of their relative liberty from infectious animal diseases that have either the potential to crusade devastating economic loss, such as foot-and-mouth affliction (FMD), or the potential to pose frightening zoonotic consequences, such equally bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). These industries too take sought to take reward of the fact that, in both countries, the majority of cattle are raised and finished on pasture under "natural" conditions. New Zealand, in detail, seeks to differentiate products, including beef, by highlighting the environmental attributes of New Zealand.

These real and perceived advantages may continue to offer trading advantages into the future. However, as discussed beneath, the disease-gratis status of the Australasian industries could be challenged at any time. In add-on, the nowadays affliction-related trade advantages volition be lost if competitors such as Brazil and Argentina can successfully eradicate FMD and if the global risk of BSE continues to wane.

Opportunity for Sustainable Growth of the Beef Manufacture in Commonwealth of australia and New Zealand

A recent report based on scientific assay and views of industry leaders has suggested there may be scope to more than double production from Australia's northern beef cattle herd, building on a record of productivity growth over several decades (Cribb et al., 2009). Even so, every bit noted by these authors, such development will depend heavily on increased access to reliable supplies to fresh water. This will exist essential to overcome seasonal feed shortages through evolution of irrigated pastures and fodder cropping, possibly based on mosaic irrigation systems. Other significant barriers include lack of ship and processing infrastructure, especially in far north Queensland, the Northern Territory, and northern Western Australia.

In New Zealand, beef production has declined past approximately 10% since 1990, largely because of irresolute state utilise with the growth of the dairy industry and a decreased role for less assisting beef breeding in mixed farming systems. Opportunities for growth volition depend on increased availability of dairy calves and cull cows, and possibly on innovations to ameliorate the value of co-products and lower-value portions of the carcass.

Major Challenges

Environmental Bear on

The introduction of grazing ruminants to Commonwealth of australia and New Zealand afterwards European settlement has had a dramatic and oft negative outcome on the rural landscapes of both countries. The introduction of cattle and sheep was generally associated with land clearing to reduce competition between trees and pasture for water and nutrients and to allow greater stocking densities (Ash and McIvor, 1998). Combined with overgrazing, this had especially negative impacts on delicate tropical rangelands and savannas, which came under increasing force per unit area later the introduction of B. indicus cattle after the 1950s. For example, an estimated ii.ane 1000000 hectares of Brigalow woodland was cleared in Queensland between the 1960s and mid-1990s, leaving only 14% of the original stocks (Lindenmeyer, 2007). All the same, contempo legislation (e.thou., Land of Queensland, 2009) has curtailed land clearing for cattle product and the prospect of the involvement of Australian agronomics in the carbon economic system may farther offset the drivers for land clearance. Like policies in New Zealand volition probably reduce the state available for beefiness production in the hereafter. In addition, growth in the carbon economy may drive changes in the employ of marginal land from beef production to forestry.

The introduction of improved, non-native pasture species has had a substantial, positive influence on Australasian beef productivity. This has been largely uncontroversial in temperate regions, where improved pastures accept been productive and environmentally stable for many decades. However, the introduction of productive pasture species in the torrid zone and subtropics, such equally buffelgrass (Cenchrus ciliaris) and leucaena (Leucaena leucocephala), has raised environmental concerns because of their aggressive growth habits and negative furnishings on native flora biodiversity (Friedel et al., 2007). This has led to the establishment of buffelgrass as a pasture species existence prohibited in Western Australia and the Northern Territory, nevertheless its undoubted value for cattle feeding.

The erratic climate and poor soils of Australia contribute to periodic overgrazing, loss of pasture ground comprehend, and consequent soil erosion, especially in the northern regions. Assessment tools based on ground encompass and other factors, such every bit the ABCD Land Condition guide (Effigy iii), take been introduced to assistance graziers in managing the country. Of detail environmental concern is the runoff of sediments from adjacent grazing lands into the Great Barrier Reef lagoon, threatening this world heritage site and tourist magnet (Bully Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, 2009).

Effigy 3.

Since 1950, average temperatures in Australia accept increased by 0.9°C, and most of the continent has experienced major declines in rainfall. These climatic trends are predicted to continue (CSIRO, 2007). Such changes will affect the remainder between tropical (C4) and temperate (C3) grasses and the seasonal growth patterns of pastures across the continent (FAO, 2008). Although increased atmospheric CO₂ concentration may increase constitute growth and water use efficiency, it will also decrease the nutritional quality of both tropical and temperate forages.

The Australian beef cattle industry is estimated to business relationship for near 7% of full greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Australia, or almost twoscore Mt CO_two-equivalents (eq.) per year, nearly entirely derived from enteric emissions of marsh gas (∼39 Mt). All the same, because of the extensive nature of the grazing lands in Australia, information technology is estimated that improved country condition caused by reduced stocking rates could sequester more than than 120 Mt CO₂-eq. per year (Gifford and McIvor, 2009). The potential carbon sequestration from increased tree embrace in the grazing lands is as well significant, only both options imply reduced cattle numbers in the rangelands (Eady et al., 2009). Proposed legislation in Australia would reward producers with carbon credits for abatement of emissions via recognized mitigation and sequestration direction practices.

In New Zealand, with an economy more heavily reliant on ruminant livestock production, enteric methane is estimated to account for 32% of full GHG emissions (Ministry building for the Environment, 2011). Options for cess and mitigation of these highly dispersed emission sources are discussed below.

In the long term, water availability and use may be a more important environmental issue for the Australian beef industry than will its carbon footprint. Recently, life bike analysis was used to judge that h2o utilize for beefiness production in southern Commonwealth of australia was 27 to 540 L/kg of carcass weight, depending on the production system, reference year, and use of source or discharge menstruation characteristics (Peters et al., 2010). These values are orders of magnitude less than some much-publicized American estimates attributable to differences in the treatment of rainfall and the fact that most all Australian cattle feed is produced in dryland systems.

Preservation of Disease-Gratis Status

Commonwealth of australia and New Zealand are essentially gratis of 20 of the 33 notifiable infectious diseases of cattle listed by the Globe System for Animal Health (OIE). Among these, FMD poses the greatest potential threat, with the estimated cost of an Australian outbreak amounting to as much as AU$13 billion and with the greatest predicted touch on the beef cattle manufacture, especially in Queensland (Productivity Committee, 2002).

A recent comprehensive review of the Australian quarantine and biosecurity systems identified numerous risks and challenges to preserving the disease-complimentary status of the country (Beale et al., 2008). Risk categories include incursion of truly exotic diseases, such equally FMD; reemergence of owned diseases, such as bovine tuberculosis; emergence of previously unknown diseases, such as BSE in Europe; and human being-induced risks, either inadvertent (e.yard., laboratory escapes) or deliberate (bioterrorism). Major challenges of business are the increasing globalization of trade, including that of animal genetic material; the human spread into new habitats; increasing tourism and the movement of cargo across national boundaries; climate change; a looming shortage of accordingly trained animal health professionals; and physical constraints to quarantine barriers (e.g., at airports).

The export and domestic markets of the Australasian beefiness industries as well are at take a chance from food-borne pathogens that tin can enter the food chain at various points, virtually notably Salmonella spp., Escherichia coli (particularly E. coli O157:H7), Campylobacter jejuni, and Listeria monocytogenes. The increased scale, intensification, and complexity of both on-farm operations and the postfarm processing and distribution concatenation accept contributed to the increased risk of food-borne disease despite the introduction of command systems such as the Take chances Analysis Disquisitional Control Points System and major advances in pathogen diagnosis and traceability. Interestingly, recent evidence suggests that the relatively low incidence of E. coli O157-associated disease in Australia may be related to the prevalence of less virulent genotypes of East. coli O157 in Australian cattle compared with those in several other countries (Whitworth et al., 2008).

Static or Shrinking Resources

Limited availability of state suitable for beefiness production in Australia and New Zealand means that improvement of the feed base, especially in northern Commonwealth of australia, and the efficiency of brute production systems will be essential to hereafter increases in industry productivity (see below).

The availability and cost of input resources, such equally nonrenewable energy sources and fertilizer, too will increasingly claiming the Australasian industries. For example, predictions that global supplies of accessible stone phosphate will elevation in the foreseeable future (Figure four) are of business concern considering of the widespread, often astringent phosphorus deficiency of most soils in Australia and New Zealand. This is driving research and development into new technologies for recycling phosphorus from human and livestock wastewater, and for increasing the efficiency of phosphorus utilization through establish breeding, precision agricultural practices to optimize fertilizer application, and the apply of microbial inoculants to enhance the availability of soil phosphorus (Cordell et al., 2009). The latter approaches to increasing efficiency will be less applicable to the extensive pastoral industries, where an affordable supply of phosphate fertilizer combined with direct supplementation of cattle with phosphorus will continue to be necessary.

Figure iv.

Peak phosphorus Hubbert curve, indicating that production will eventually reach a maximum, later which information technology will turn down (source: Cordell et al., 2009).

Animate being Welfare Concerns

The power of public reaction to animal welfare issues was dramatically demonstrated by the recent Australian government suspension of live cattle export from Australia to Republic of indonesia, triggered by a public affairs boob tube program showing distressing images of cruel and inept slaughter practices in some Indonesian abattoirs. This disruption of trade worth $350 million per year occurred despite significant, testify-based improvements in welfare standards for the transport of cattle by land and sea and efforts by Meat and Livestock Australia to improve practices in Indonesian abattoirs.

Industry awareness of changing public attitudes is driving enquiry into more than humane alternatives to a number of traditional husbandry practices. For instance, the development of cistron markers to place bulls probable to sire horned offspring should significantly reduce reliance on concrete dehorning, especially of older B. indicus cattle in northern Australia. Nonsurgical approaches such as immunocastration are being investigated as alternatives to the surgical castration of immature bulls and flank spaying of heifers. Recent concerns nearly withholding nutrient from surplus dairy calves during send has sparked the Australian Primary Industries Continuing Committee to commission a review of these practices, with potential to touch the segment of the beef and veal industries that relies on this by-product of the dairy industries in Australia and New Zealand.

Other Challenges

The Australasian industries are challenged past numerous other external and internal factors. Some, such as the shortage of skilled labor, are at least partially acquiescent to research and evolution solutions, as discussed below in the section on smart farming. Social policy to facilitate reengagement of ethnic Australians with the pastoral beef industry too could help address the labor shortage in key and northern Australia. Other factors, such as the lack of ship, processing, and shipping infrastructure in northern Australia, will crave meaning public and private investment and take chances mitigation strategies. Still others, such as the touch of currency commutation rates on export market demand and terms of trade, are largely outside the command of the Australian and New Zealand governments beyond ongoing international trade diplomacy efforts.

Research and Development Opportunities

Improving the Feed Base

The Australasian beef industries rely heavily on pasture, which varies widely in availability and quality, especially in northern Commonwealth of australia. Intensive management of improved pastures offers the opportunity to manipulate forage quality, with positive effects on the intake and growth operation of cattle. Withal, this is limited mostly to the climatically favored parts of southern Australia and New Zealand. Options to amend performance on extensive, largely native pastures in northern Commonwealth of australia may depend more on exploitation of selective grazing behavior, decreased grazing pressure, and encouragement of legumes in the sward than on introduction of new, "improved" provender varieties. For example, inclusion of leucaena in tropical pastures has been critical to the ability of many producers to attain almanac body weight gains of up to 300 kg in cattle on pasture (R. A. Hunter, unpublished observations).

Proposed expansion of irrigated cropping systems in the wetter tropical and subtropical regions of Commonwealth of australia should generate new opportunity feeds (Cribb et al., 2009). Collocation of intensive beef finishing enterprises likewise could take advantage of new and existing (east.g., sugarcane, assistant) residues and co-products in northern Australia. For example, in almost years, sugar mills in north Queensland produce more than one million tonnes of molasses, of which but almost 15 to 20% is used for stock feed. Enquiry has demonstrated that feedlot diets containing up to 65% molasses every bit a primary free energy source can support body weight gains of 1.5 kg/d in Brahman steers, with no negative effects on cattle wellness or product quality (R. A. Hunter, unpublished observations).

Genetic Improvement of Cattle Performance and Health

Genomic selection, now widely used in the European and Northward American dairy industries, offers great promise for increasing the rate of genetic improvement of beef cattle, especially for complex, hard-to-mensurate traits such as feed efficiency, environmental adjustability, reproductive performance, and affliction resistance. In addition to expanding the complexity and range of traits that could be included in breeding indices, molecular convenance should greatly accelerate genetic progress through the opportunity to place superior animals at birth, or even at the embryonic phase.

The price of genotyping, although still prohibitive to widespread industry adoption, is rapidly declining. Of greater business organisation is the availability of phenotypic data of sufficient quantity and quality across multiple traits to validate reliable molecular genetic selection tools. The difficulty and expense of assembling these information is exacerbated by the likely demand to create breed-specific tools because of the substantial genetic variation among the major beef cattle breeds. In the meantime, mark-assisted selection tools for individual traits such as meat tenderness and polledness are already available. Others, such every bit those for age at puberty and postpartum anestrus interval, are in advanced stages of development and validation.

Reproductive technologies for delivery of superior germplasm, such every bit bogus insemination and embryo transfer, are not practicable for use in the extensive beef sector. Australian researchers are investigating the alternative possibility of modifying the genetic profile of balderdash semen by direct injection of testis germ cells from desirable donor bulls into the testes of recipient bulls. An example application would be the use of Brahman bulls with a portion of Bos taurus (e.g., Angus) sperm to achieve a partially crossbred calf crop under tropical weather in which poorly adapted taurine bulls could not survive, allow lone work (Figure five).

Figure 5.

Depiction of how cattle testis cell transfer could be used to produce crossbred calves from natural matings (source: courtesy of Sigrid Lehnert, CSIRO Livestock Industries).

Improved Systems for Detection of and Response to Exotic Disease Incursions

The development of molecular diagnostic tools based on polymerase chain reaction engineering has profoundly increased the speed, sensitivity, and accuracy of diagnosis of infectious diseases in livestock, including the exotic viral diseases most feared past the Australasian industries. Tests for almost of these pathogens, such as the multiple strains of bluetongue virus, have been developed locally at the Australian Fauna Wellness Laboratory and other Australasian laboratories. A major exception is the need to develop diagnostics for FMD in Southeast Asian laboratories because of a ban on introduction of the live virus into Commonwealth of australia and New Zealand. Ongoing inquiry seeks to farther improve the laboratory techniques and develop kits that are sufficiently authentic and specific for rapid, early diagnosis in the field.

The challenge of affliction surveillance across the vast, sparsely populated landscape of Australia, especially at the northern edge, demands increased public investment and improved integration of federal and land or territory resources. An emerging enquiry focus is the development of techniques for the targeted surveillance and predictive modeling of risk factors that forecast disease emergence. For example, Australian scientists are using atmospheric dispersion models to develop a spatially and temporally explicit chance analysis for the movement of insect vectors known to carry bluetongue virus into northern Australia (Eagles et al., 2011). The capacity for affliction surveillance and response also volition exist enhanced past the development of increasingly sophisticated National Livestock Identification System ear tags that can identify affliction through changes in beast behavior and track animal motility.

Improved diagnostic tools and surveillance systems for detection of exotic diseases must be complemented by robust rapid-response strategies involving isolation of infected animals and targeted vaccination of potentially vulnerable populations. These strategies crave the establishment of reliable and sophisticated communication networks among producers, veterinarians, diagnostic laboratories and public wellness government. An ongoing enquiry priority is to develop improved vaccines that are prophylactic, stable, effective, affordable, and capable of differentiating infected from vaccinated animals.

Minimizing Environmental Impacts

Electric current research to minimize the environmental impacts of the beef industry, particularly in northern Australia, has several major goals. First is the development of grazing and pasture management systems that are resilient to climatic extremes, that raise cattle productivity, and that minimize land degradation and threats to biodiversity. For example, a 10-twelvemonth grazing trial in the tropical savannas of north Queensland has clearly demonstrated the financial benefits as well as the multiple environmental benefits of proficient pasture management through long-term use of stocking rates more than moderate than those used past many producers (O'Reagain et al., 2008).

Another major research goal is to reduce the contribution of enteric methane emissions by beef cattle to Australia and New Zealand's total GHG inventories. Current work is focused on both assessment and mitigation of methane emissions. Contempo research has shown that emissions from tropical forages are really 30% less than previously thought (P. Kennedy, CSIRO Livestock Industries, St Lucia, Australia, and E. Charmley, unpublished data).

Australia and New Zealand take pregnant research programs on manipulation of rumen fermentation (due east.thou., Attwood and McSweeney, 2008), vaccination against ruminal methanogens (Wright et al., 2004), and genetic selection for low emissions in cattle (Hegarty et al., 2007) and sheep.

Although these strategies could have a major long-term impact, in the short term, real gains are existence made in reducing the intensity of methane emissions, especially in all-encompassing systems. Currently, Australian rangeland systems are associated with emission intensities of betwixt 30 and twoscore kg of CO₂-eq./kg of salable product. However readily adoptable changes in management practices, such as increased weaning and growth rates, are reducing the intensity of emissions, sometimes by upward to 50% (Hunter and Niethe, 2009). Over the last xx years, progress has already been made. Implementation of the Carbon Farming Initiative, currently going through the Australian parliament, should advance these gains.

Smart Farming Systems for Remote Management of Pastures and Animals

The isolation, scale, and employment challenges of the Australasian pastoral industries brand remote direction technologies an attractive proposition. Limitations in information applied science and remote ability generation are being overcome. In addition, necessary access of Australian properties to high-speed broadband will exist achieved by a combination of fiber-optic connectivity via the National Broadband Network (http://www.dbcde.gov.au/broadband) and other solutions, such as CSIRO'southward Ngara technology (http://www.csiro.au/science/Broadband-to-the-bush.html).

Existing technologies include the National Livestock Identification System, which relies on a depression-frequency, passive radio-frequency identification ear tag with a unique identification number linked to a national database. This mandatory organisation enables trace-back and tracking of animals between farms, sale yards, and abattoirs. Development of a "smart tag" that carries all data almost the animate being will farther ameliorate this system for cattle monitoring and let for the integration of various technologies on the farm.

Other technologies include satellite imagery to enable almost real-fourth dimension monitoring of pasture growth and atmospheric condition on individual farms (Figure 6; e.thousand., Pastures from Space, http://www.pasturesfromspace.csiro.au/index.asp); devices for remote control, functioning, and monitoring of watering points to enable automated drafting of cattle; and use of unmanned aerial vehicles for pasture assessment, weed control, and even mustering. We anticipate that the integration of information from these sources with remotely sensed data on animate being beliefs, atmospheric variables, and soil atmospheric condition volition inform a wide range of direction decisions, including cattle motility and grazing pressure, nutritional supplementation, veterinarian interventions, breeding strategy, and marketing.

Figure vi.

Linking remotely sensed feed resources with remotely sensed animate being behavior and remote creature control in a smart farming system (source: Due east. Charmley).

Whereas brute monitoring can be used to inform direction decisions, remote animal control devices can be used for implementation (Figure 6). This engineering science relates the GPS position of the animate being to spatially fixed coordinates on the basis (the control barrier) and modifies the behavior of the animal as it approaches the invisible barrier past elicitating an sound or electrical cue from a neck-mounted device. Current research is focused on reducing the size and optimizing the power supply and usage of these devices.

Conclusions

The projected continuation of increasing global demand for animal protein offers slap-up opportunities for beef-exporting nations such every bit Commonwealth of australia and New Zealand during the side by side few decades. However, the ability of the Australasian beef industries to have advantage of these opportunities while remaining environmentally and socially sustainable volition face up some formidable challenges and uncertainties.

Among these, the potential impact of climatic change on the already dry and erratic climate of much of pastoral Australia looms big. If, as charily predicted, northern Australia maintains or increases its present average rainfall without becoming too much hotter, there may exist significant opportunity to aggrandize beefiness production in the tropics and subtropics. Nevertheless, this will crave widespread adoption of sustainable grazing direction practices and, where advisable, selective introduction of technologies such every bit mosaic irrigation to support the production of provender and grain crops for intensive feeding of growing and finishing cattle.

Other major challenges include the urgent need for the industry to address heightened public visibility and concerns almost direction, transport, and slaughter practices. In this regard, the Australian live export industry is particularly vulnerable. Some of these welfare issues can be addressed past research and evolution, just the long-term solution also will require trade affairs to encourage beefiness-importing nations such equally Indonesia to switch from live import to boxed beef. This, in turn, will require substantial investment in the transport and processing infrastructure in northern Australia.

Finally, prospects for growth in New Zealand beef and veal product will depend heavily on the future growth and structure of the dairy industry, by-products of which are the major source of cattle slaughtered for meat.

Alan Westward. Bell was educated at the University of New England (B Rur Sc, Hons, 1969) and the University of Glasgow (PhD, 1976) and has held research and teaching positions in Commonwealth of australia, Scotland, and the United States. He was chairman of the Department of Creature Science at Cornell University from 1997 to 2007, with responsibilities for teaching, research, and extension in livestock biology and direction. Since 2007, he has been chief of CSIRO Livestock Industries, with responsibility for research operations in Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, and Western Australia. Bell is internationally known for his inquiry on the nutritional physiology of pregnancy, lactation, and growth in ruminants.

Edward Charmley received his BSc in Agriculture from the University of Aberdeen in 1980 and a PhD from Reading Academy in 1985. He worked in livestock inquiry in Canada for 20 years before emigrating to Commonwealth of australia in 2005. He is currently working in CSIRO Livestock Industries in tropical Queensland. With a background in ruminant nutrition, Charmley's enquiry interests are directed toward sustainable beef production.

Robert A. Hunter gained an honors degree in agricultural science (1970) and a PhD (1980), both from the Academy of Queensland. His professional person career was spent with CSIRO serving at the Beef Unit (Townsville), at the Minerals Unit (Perth), and for 26 years at the Tropical Cattle Research Eye (Rockhampton). He was a deputy director of the Cooperative Research Heart for the Cattle and Beef Industries, and from 1993 to 1996 and then 2001 until his retirement in 2007 was officeholder-in-charge of the CSIRO Laboratories in Rockhampton. Hunter'south major areas of scientific expertise are in the fields of ruminant nutrition and the metabolic regulation of growth in beef cattle.

Jason A. Archer has qualifications from the University of Adelaide (B Ag Sc, Hons, 1992; PhD, 1996) and the University of New England (Grad Cert Direction, 2000). Later completing his PhD, he was employed equally a research scientist in NSW Agriculture, based at Trangie, New South Wales, where he worked on beef cattle genetics. He was projection leader for Feed Efficiency inside the Australian CRC for Beef Quality from 2000 to 2002. In 2002, he joined AgResearch Ltd., New Zealand, where he worked on genetics, nutrition, and management of deer and beefiness cattle and was team leader of Farm Systems. Archer has recently been appointed as portfolio leader of Meat & Fibre Paddock to Consumer, with responsibility for overseeing the AgResearch portfolio of piece of work relating to on-farm and off-farm inquiry and evolution for the sheep, beef, and deer sectors in New Zealand.

Literature Cited

Ash

A. J.

McIvor

J. K.

1998

Forage quality and feed intake responses to oversowing, tree killing and stocking rate in open eucalypt woodlands of north-east Queensland

J. Agric. Sci. (Camb.)

131

211

–

219

Attwood

McSweeney

2008

Methanogen genomics to discover targets for methyl hydride mitigation technologies and options for alternative H_ii utilisation in the rumen

Aust. J. Exp. Agric.

–

Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics

2010

Australian beef: Fiscal performance of beef cattle producing farms, 2007–08 to 2009–10. ten.one.

Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics

Canberra, Commonwealth of australia

Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences

2010

Australian commodity statistics 2010.

Australian Bureau of Statistics

2005

Australia's beef cattle industry. 1301.0—Year Book Commonwealth of australia, 2005.

Australian Bureau of Statistics

Belconnen, Australia

Beale

Fairbrother

Inglis

Trebeck

2008

I biosecurity: A working partnership

The contained review of Australia's quarantine and biosecurity arrangements study to the Australian Government.

Beef+Lamb

NZ.

2010

Stock number survey as at 30 June 2010

Economical Service Publication P10034.

Cordell

Drangert

J.-O.

White

2009

The story of phosphorus: Global food security and food for idea

Glob. Environ. Modify

292

–

305

Cribb

Harper

Stone

2009

Sustaining growth of the northern beef industry

Chapter v in Northern Australia Land and Water Science Review 2009.

CSIRO

2007

Climatic change in Australia

Technical Report 2007. Front Thing and Executive summary.

Dairy

NZ.

2011

New Zealand Dairy Statistics.

Dalton

Keogh

2007

The implications for Australian agriculture of irresolute demand for brute poly peptide in Asia

Inquiry Written report

Australian Subcontract Institute

Surry Hills, Commonwealth of australia

Eady

Southward.

Grundy

Grand.

Battaglia

Chiliad.

2009

Overview

Page 1 in An Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Carbon Sequestration Opportunities from Rural Land Use.

CSIRO Publishing

Canberra, Australia

Eagles

Durr

Walker

Zalucki

Hall

Deveson

2011

Modelling the airborne spread of vectors and insect pests into nothern Australia within a risk analysis framework

EcoHealth

(

Suppl. one

S142

(Abstr.)

FAO

2008

The genetic comeback of forage grasses and legumes to heighten adaptation of grasslands to climate change.

Food and Agronomics Organization of the United Nations

Rome, Italy

FAO

2009

The state of food and agriculture.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the Un

Rome, Italy

Friedel

Chiliad.

Bastin

Brock

Butler

Clarke

Eyre

Fox

Grice

van Leeuwen

Pitt

Puckey

Smyth

2007

Developing a research agenda for the distribution and rate of spread of buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris) and identification of landscapes and biodiversity assets at nearly risk from invasion

A report to the Department of the Surround and Water Resource, December 2007.

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

Australian Authorities, Canberra, Australia

Gifford

McIvor

2009

Rehabilitate overgrazed rangelands, restoring soil and vegetable carbon residual

Pages 70–93 in An Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Carbon Sequestration Opportunities from Rural Land Use.

CSIRO Publishing

Canberra, Commonwealth of australia

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority

2009

Swell Barrier Reef Outlook Report 2009.

Hegarty

R. S.

Goopy

J. P.

Herd

R. 1000.

McCorkell

2007

Cattle selected for lower residuum feed intake have reduced daily methane product

J. Anim. Sci.

1479

–

1486

Hunter

R. A.

Niethe

K. Eastward.

2009

Efficiency of feed utilisation and methane emissions for diverse cattle breeding and finishing systems

Rec. Adv. Anim. Nutr. Aust.

–

Lindenmeyer

2007

On Borrowed Time: Australia'southward Environmental Crisis and What Nosotros Must Practise About It.

Penguin Australia, Camberwell, Australia

Meat Industry Clan

2010

Beef exports by market place.

Meat and Livestock Commonwealth of australia

2011

Cherry-red Meat Market Written report

Composition of Australian ruddy meat exports March 2011.

Ministry for the Environment

2011

New Zealand's Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990–2009.

New Zealand Government

Apr

O'Reagain

P. J.

Bushell

J. J.

Holloway

C. H.

2008

Testing and developing grazing principles and management guidelines for the seasonably variable tropical savannas

Final report: B.NBP.0379.

Meat and Livestock Commonwealth of australia

Sydney, Australia

Peden

2009

Beefiness farming in New Zealand

Te Ara—The Encyclopedia of New Zealand.

Peters

G. M.

Wiedemann

South. G.

Rowley

H. 5.

Tucker

R. Due west.

2010

Accounting for water use in Australian red meat production

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

311

–

320

Productivity Commission

2002

Touch of a foot and rima oris disease outbreak on Australia

Enquiry Report.

AusInfo

Canberra, Commonwealth of australia

State of Queensland

2009

State Policy for Vegetation Management—Version 2

October

Whitworth

J. H.

Fegan

North.

Keller

Gobius

Bono

J. Fifty.

Phone call

D. R.

Hancock

D. D.

Besser

T. E.

2008

International comparison of clinical, bovine, and environmental Escherichia coli O157 isolates on the ground of Shiga toxin-encoding bacteriophage insertion site genotypes

Appl. Environ. Microbiol.

7447

–

7450

Wright

A. D.

Kennedy

O'Neill

C. J.

Toovey

A. F.

Popovski

Rea

Southward. Thousand.

Pimm

C. 50.

Klein

50.

2004

Reducing methane emissions in sheep by immunization against rumen methanogens

Vaccine

3976

–

3985

This is an Open Access article distributed nether the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits not-commercial reuse, distribution, and reproduction in whatever medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-utilise, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

brzozowskibectionet.blogspot.com

Source: https://academic.oup.com/af/article/1/2/10/4638606

Benifets Livestock Have on Industries Beef Industry

Abstract

Introduction

Background

A Cursory History of the Australian and New Zealand Beefiness Industries

Manufacture Structures in Australia and New Zealand

Value of the Australian and New Zealand Industries

Opportunities for Growth and Increased Profitability

Increasing Demand for Fauna Poly peptide

Taking Advantage of the Make clean, Green Prototype of Australasian Pastoral Industries

Opportunity for Sustainable Growth of the Beef Manufacture in Commonwealth of australia and New Zealand

Major Challenges

Environmental Bear on

Preservation of Disease-Gratis Status

Static or Shrinking Resources

Animate being Welfare Concerns

Other Challenges

Research and Development Opportunities

Improving the Feed Base

Genetic Improvement of Cattle Performance and Health

Improved Systems for Detection of and Response to Exotic Disease Incursions

Minimizing Environmental Impacts

Smart Farming Systems for Remote Management of Pastures and Animals

Conclusions

Literature Cited

0 Response to "Benifets Livestock Have on Industries Beef Industry"

Post a Comment

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel