Are you sure about those numbers? Sure I read somewhere that there are less ruminants than 30 years ago?
AHDB can feck right off.
- Thread starter delilah
- Start date
Uk numbers yes, down. Worldwide? Gone up in all likelihood, but finding these numbers isn’t easy from reliable sources.
Maybe I'm getting mixed up but it was a fairly detailed column that mentioned bison numbers among other things.
With cattle, there are 942 million worldwide, ten years earlier it was over 1,000 million, that was just a quick look as I'm off to bed soon.
That is just cattle, it may be what I was thinking of but it's worth quoting as cattle are always the focus of the antis.
Statista?
Cattle numbers in decline, but worldwide total ruminants increased
"Lies, damn lies, and statistics"
86.3% of them are made up, apparently
Nah, it’s 110%.Cattle numbers in decline, but worldwide total ruminants increased
"Lies, damn lies, and statistics"
86.3% of them are made up, apparently
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
Do you mean like all the programs that have demonstrated extra (measured) grass growth where rotational grazing has been implemented with ruminant livestock? AHDB, Farming Connect and QMS have all been at it for years now, and that's just in the UK.
A regular figure that is quoted is growing 30% more grass under rotational grazing as opposed to set stocking.
Somebody not a million miles from here has been measuring carbon (as soil OM) for a Farming Connect project. He has been showing higher levels in rotationally grazed and improved grassland, compared to the adjoining land that has been ungrazed in a Glastir environmental scheme for the last decade, which you could say looks like a huge amount of biomass/cr*p on top.
Rotational/set stocking/strip grazing differences are ancient history. We were looking at studies that had already been done when I was at Uni 35 years ago FFS.
In the words of Walter Jehne, the work’s already been done and the knowledge accrued, but then they pat you on the head and ignore you.
I think what @ollie989898 was saying was how much extra biomass is grown if cattle graze a parcel of land vs. simply rewilding it (i.e. leaving it ungrazed).
In the context of pasture, I suspect his point is valid, and pasture preforms better than scrub in terms of tonnes DM grown (i.e. tonnes biomass).
From replies to this thread, it seems that the AHDB is missing a trick, once again
Instead of repeating intensive rotational grazing trials (which my father began doing here in the hills near 50 years ago), shouldn't the likes of the AHDB be funding research that would benefit both farmers and the world environment?
For example, proving that far greater carbon is captured when grazing pasture efficiently, rather than removing stock to fulfill some idiot agri-environment condition?
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
Now they need to promote the environmental benefits of livestock farming, instead of promoting meat free diets!!!!That's just the kind of work that the second part of the post you quoted refers to.
They don't have a freaking clue. Totally obsessed with telling the public about the carbon footprint of milk. If anyone was bored enough to look up the reference for those figures, you can guarantee that enteric methane is in there.
https://www.facebook.com/WeEatBalanced/
edit: from that post
diversifying land management to capture more carbon.
How can I diversify from PP to capture more carbon ? If you asked the AHDB, pound to a penny they would say 'plant trees'. Muppets.
Yes I was keen on rotational, but not dogmatic rotational grazing 30 years ago when I first took on the tenancy.
What I was meaning, and there might be similar answers above, was an investigation into maximising soil sequestration of carbon by using different husbandry methods of growing and feeding grass.
Or at a more basic level, what is the best way of removing the most carbon from the atmosphere by growing grass.
Which, if I’d read your post properly you are saying in the second part. Agreed, but why isn’t a lot more work being done on it?
Last edited:
No point studying which grazing strategy sequestrates the most carbon if carbon audits don't include it within their calculations
Perhaps the AHDB could also look at spending our levy money lobbying for audits that are worth the expensive money they're printed upon?
Like we said, they aren’t interested in grass as a means of CO2 control - it’s not part of the current narrative.No point studying which grazing strategy sequestrates the most carbon if carbon audits don't include it within their calculations
Perhaps the AHDB could also look at spending our levy money lobbying for audits that are worth the expensive money they're printed upon?
We shall have to push harder, it’s our money they are spending.
- Location
- People's Republic of South Yorkshire
No money to be had by using already collected data...
- Location
- Derbyshire
https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/the-best-additive-to-reduce-methane-is-high-quality-grass/
for some reason, in Ireland, there is a joined up thinking approach that has realised methane additives are not really needed for ruminants. Tie that in with a wholesome marketing image of a ruminant industry being fed forage and bingo!
There's a story to sell to the consumer that ruminants are food for the environment.
Now, if only we had a co-ordinated approach that had positive research linked with positive marketing , maybe there would be more positive farmers!
for some reason, in Ireland, there is a joined up thinking approach that has realised methane additives are not really needed for ruminants. Tie that in with a wholesome marketing image of a ruminant industry being fed forage and bingo!
There's a story to sell to the consumer that ruminants are food for the environment.
Now, if only we had a co-ordinated approach that had positive research linked with positive marketing , maybe there would be more positive farmers!
- Location
- Essex
Unfortunately for some reason (maybe the promise of future appointments) the benefits of producing livestock without expensive and polluting (but profitable to the supplier) inputs like bought in feed and fertiliser, don't seem to feature heavily in ahdb promotions.https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/the-best-additive-to-reduce-methane-is-high-quality-grass/
for some reason, in Ireland, there is a joined up thinking approach that has realised methane additives are not really needed for ruminants. Tie that in with a wholesome marketing image of a ruminant industry being fed forage and bingo!
There's a story to sell to the consumer that ruminants are food for the environment.
Now, if only we had a co-ordinated approach that had positive research linked with positive marketing , maybe there would be more positive farmers!