Copyright © 2015 Bert N. Langford (Images may be subject to copyright. Please send feedback)
Welcome to Our Generation USA!
Agriculture
includes the farming and processing of different crops for market, as well as livestock, and dairy products in the United States and Abroad, including government programs that support/regulate agriculture as well as the science of agriculture today.
Agriculture in the United States including advancements in Agricultural Machinery used in farming, as well as Agricultural Commerce: from the farm to your local supermarket!
YouTube Video: Farm to Market: Cotton (clips)
Pictured: LEFT: Modern Farming Equipment: L-R: John Deere 7800 tractor with Houle slurry trailer, Case IH combine harvester, New Holland FX 25 forage harvester with corn head. RIGHT: Different Breeds of Dairy Cattle include Holstein, Jersey, Brown Swiss, Guernsey, Ayrshire, and Milking Shorthorn.
Agriculture is a major industry in the United States, which is a net exporter of food. As of the 2007 census of agriculture, there were 2.2 million farms, covering an area of 922 million acres (3,730,000 km2), an average of 418 acres (1.69 km2) per farm.
Although agricultural activity occurs in most states, it is particularly concentrated in the Great Plains, a vast expanse of flat, arable land in the center of the United States and in the region around the Great Lakes known as the Corn Belt.
The United States has been a leader in seed improvement i.e. hybridization and in expanding uses for crops from the work of George Washington Carver to the development of bioplastics and biofuels.
The mechanization of farming, intensive farming, has been a major theme in U.S. history, including John Deere's steel plow, Cyrus McCormick's mechanical reaper, Eli Whitney's cotton gin to the widespread success of the Fordson tractor and the combine harvesters first made from them.
Modern agriculture in the U.S. ranges from the common hobby farms, small-scale producers to large commercial farming covering thousands of acres of cropland or rangeland.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for further amplification:
___________________________________________________________________________
Agricultural equipment is any kind of machinery used on a farm to help with farming. The best-known example of this kind is the tractor.
Click on any of the following for amplification:
Agricultural Marketing: includes the services involved in moving agricultural product from the farm to the consumer.
Numerous interconnected activities are involved in doing this, such as planning production, growing and harvesting, grading, packing, transport, storage, agro- and food processing, distribution, advertising and sale.
Some definitions would even include “the acts of buying supplies, renting equipment, (and) paying labor", arguing that marketing is everything a business does. Such activities cannot take place without the exchange of information and are often heavily dependent on the availability of suitable finance.
Marketing systems are dynamic; they are competitive and involve continuous change and improvement. Businesses that have lower costs, are more efficient, and can deliver quality products, are those that prosper. Those that have high costs, fail to adapt to changes in market demand and provide poorer quality are often forced out of business.
Marketing has to be customer-oriented and has to provide the farmer, transporter, trader, processor, etc. with a profit. This requires those involved in marketing chains to understand buyer requirements, both in terms of product and business conditions.
In Western countries considerable agricultural marketing support to farmers is often provided.
In the USA, for example, the USDA operates the Agricultural Marketing Service. Support to developing countries with agricultural marketing development is carried out by various donor organizations and there is a trend for countries to develop their own Agricultural Marketing or Agribusiness units, often attached to ministries of agriculture. Activities include market information development, marketing extension, training in marketing and infrastructure development.
Since the 1990s trends have seen the growing importance of supermarkets and a growing interest in contract farming, both of which impact significantly on the way in which marketing takes place.
For more about Agricultural Marketing, click on any of the following blue hyperlinks:
Although agricultural activity occurs in most states, it is particularly concentrated in the Great Plains, a vast expanse of flat, arable land in the center of the United States and in the region around the Great Lakes known as the Corn Belt.
The United States has been a leader in seed improvement i.e. hybridization and in expanding uses for crops from the work of George Washington Carver to the development of bioplastics and biofuels.
The mechanization of farming, intensive farming, has been a major theme in U.S. history, including John Deere's steel plow, Cyrus McCormick's mechanical reaper, Eli Whitney's cotton gin to the widespread success of the Fordson tractor and the combine harvesters first made from them.
Modern agriculture in the U.S. ranges from the common hobby farms, small-scale producers to large commercial farming covering thousands of acres of cropland or rangeland.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for further amplification:
- Major agricultural products
- Farm type or majority enterprise type
- Governance
- Employment
- Occupational safety and health
- Women in agriculture
- See also:
- 2010 United States tomato shortage
- Agribusiness
- Beekeeping in the United States
- Electrical energy efficiency on United States farms
- Genetic engineering in the United States
- Poultry farming in the United States
- Soil in the United States
- History of agriculture in the United States
- List of largest producing countries of agricultural commodities
- List of turkey meat producing companies in the United States
- Banana production in the United States
___________________________________________________________________________
Agricultural equipment is any kind of machinery used on a farm to help with farming. The best-known example of this kind is the tractor.
Click on any of the following for amplification:
- Tractor and power
- Soil cultivation
- Planting
- Fertilizing & Pest Control
- Irrigation
- Produce sorter
- Harvesting / post-harvest
- Hay making
- Loading
- Milking
- Animal Feeding
- Other
- Obsolete farm machinery
Agricultural Marketing: includes the services involved in moving agricultural product from the farm to the consumer.
Numerous interconnected activities are involved in doing this, such as planning production, growing and harvesting, grading, packing, transport, storage, agro- and food processing, distribution, advertising and sale.
Some definitions would even include “the acts of buying supplies, renting equipment, (and) paying labor", arguing that marketing is everything a business does. Such activities cannot take place without the exchange of information and are often heavily dependent on the availability of suitable finance.
Marketing systems are dynamic; they are competitive and involve continuous change and improvement. Businesses that have lower costs, are more efficient, and can deliver quality products, are those that prosper. Those that have high costs, fail to adapt to changes in market demand and provide poorer quality are often forced out of business.
Marketing has to be customer-oriented and has to provide the farmer, transporter, trader, processor, etc. with a profit. This requires those involved in marketing chains to understand buyer requirements, both in terms of product and business conditions.
In Western countries considerable agricultural marketing support to farmers is often provided.
In the USA, for example, the USDA operates the Agricultural Marketing Service. Support to developing countries with agricultural marketing development is carried out by various donor organizations and there is a trend for countries to develop their own Agricultural Marketing or Agribusiness units, often attached to ministries of agriculture. Activities include market information development, marketing extension, training in marketing and infrastructure development.
Since the 1990s trends have seen the growing importance of supermarkets and a growing interest in contract farming, both of which impact significantly on the way in which marketing takes place.
For more about Agricultural Marketing, click on any of the following blue hyperlinks:
United States Department of Agriculture and Food and Drug Administration
YouTube Video about Food Safety Audit*
*--The University of California Small Farm Program serves a diversity of small family farms. For more information please visit our website at: http://sfp.ucdavis.edu/
Pictured: LEFT: Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Services: RIGHT: Nutrition Facts label required by the Food and Drug Administration
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), also known as the Agriculture Department, is the U.S. federal executive department responsible for developing and executing federal laws related to farming, agriculture, forestry, and food. It aims to meet the needs of farmers and ranchers, promote agricultural trade and production, work to assure food safety, protect natural resources, foster rural communities and end hunger in the United States and internationally.
Approximately 80% of USDA's $140 billion budget goes to the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) program. The largest component of the FNS budget is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as the Food Stamp program), which is the cornerstone of USDA's nutrition assistance.
Many of the programs concerned with the distribution of food and nutrition to people of America and providing nourishment as well as nutrition education to those in need are run and operated under the USDA Food and Nutrition Service. Activities in this program include the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which provides healthy food to over 40 million low-income and homeless people each month. USDA is a member of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, where it is committed to working with other agencies to ensure these mainstream benefits are accessed by those experiencing homelessness.
The USDA also is concerned with assisting farmers and food producers with the sale of crops and food on both the domestic and world markets. It plays a role in overseas aid programs by providing surplus foods to developing countries. This aid can go through USAID, foreign governments, international bodies such as World Food Program, or approved nonprofits.
The Agricultural Act of 1949, section 416 (b) and Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, also known as Food for Peace, provides the legal basis of such actions. The USDA is a partner of the World Cocoa Foundation.
For further amplification, click on any of the blue hyperlinks below:
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or USFDA) is a federal agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, one of the United States federal executive departments. The FDA is responsible for protecting and promoting public health through the control and supervision of the following:
The FDA was empowered by the United States Congress to enforce the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which serves as the primary focus for the Agency; the FDA also enforces other laws, notably Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and associated regulations, many of which are not directly related to food or drugs.
These include regulating lasers, cellular phones, condoms and control of disease on products ranging from certain household pets to sperm donation for assisted reproduction.
The FDA is led by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Commissioner reports to the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
The FDA has its headquarters in unincorporated White Oak, Maryland.
The agency also has 223 field offices and 13 laboratories located throughout the 50 states, the United States Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. In 2008, the FDA began to post employees to foreign countries, including China, India, Costa Rica, Chile, Belgium, and the United Kingdom.
Click here for Department of Health and Human Services
Click here for further amplification about the FDA.
Approximately 80% of USDA's $140 billion budget goes to the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) program. The largest component of the FNS budget is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as the Food Stamp program), which is the cornerstone of USDA's nutrition assistance.
Many of the programs concerned with the distribution of food and nutrition to people of America and providing nourishment as well as nutrition education to those in need are run and operated under the USDA Food and Nutrition Service. Activities in this program include the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which provides healthy food to over 40 million low-income and homeless people each month. USDA is a member of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, where it is committed to working with other agencies to ensure these mainstream benefits are accessed by those experiencing homelessness.
The USDA also is concerned with assisting farmers and food producers with the sale of crops and food on both the domestic and world markets. It plays a role in overseas aid programs by providing surplus foods to developing countries. This aid can go through USAID, foreign governments, international bodies such as World Food Program, or approved nonprofits.
The Agricultural Act of 1949, section 416 (b) and Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, also known as Food for Peace, provides the legal basis of such actions. The USDA is a partner of the World Cocoa Foundation.
For further amplification, click on any of the blue hyperlinks below:
- History
- Origins
Formation and subsequent history
- Origins
- Organization, budget and tasks
- Discrimination
- Pigford v. Glickman
Reopening of case
- Pigford v. Glickman
- Related legislation
- See also:
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- Endangered Species Act
- Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations
- Title 9 of the Code of Federal Regulations
- Migratory Bird Treaty Act
- National Transportation Safety Board
- The Wildlife Society
- United States Agricultural Society
- US Fish and Wildlife Service
- USDA home loan
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or USFDA) is a federal agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, one of the United States federal executive departments. The FDA is responsible for protecting and promoting public health through the control and supervision of the following:
- food safety,
- tobacco products,
- dietary supplements,
- prescription and over-the-counter pharmaceutical drugs (medications),
- vaccines,
- biopharmaceuticals,
- blood transfusions,
- medical devices,
- electromagnetic radiation emitting devices (ERED),
- cosmetics,
- animal foods & feed
- and veterinary products.
The FDA was empowered by the United States Congress to enforce the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which serves as the primary focus for the Agency; the FDA also enforces other laws, notably Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and associated regulations, many of which are not directly related to food or drugs.
These include regulating lasers, cellular phones, condoms and control of disease on products ranging from certain household pets to sperm donation for assisted reproduction.
The FDA is led by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Commissioner reports to the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
The FDA has its headquarters in unincorporated White Oak, Maryland.
The agency also has 223 field offices and 13 laboratories located throughout the 50 states, the United States Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. In 2008, the FDA began to post employees to foreign countries, including China, India, Costa Rica, Chile, Belgium, and the United Kingdom.
Click here for Department of Health and Human Services
Click here for further amplification about the FDA.
History of Agriculture, including a Timeline of Agriculture and Food Technology
YouTube Video about the History of Agriculture Technology
Pictured: Clockwise, from Upper Left: ancient farming techniques; horse-drawn farming; picking cotton by hand; and an early tractor used for plowing a field.
Click here for historical timeline of agriculture and food technology.
The history of agriculture covers the domestication of plants and animals and the development and dissemination of techniques for raising them productively.
Agriculture began independently in different parts of the globe, and included a diverse range of taxa. At least eleven separate regions of the Old and New World were involved as independent centers of origin.
Wild grains were collected and eaten from at least 20,000 BC. From around 9,500 BC, the eight Neolithic founder crops--emmer wheat, einkorn wheat, hulled barley, peas, lentils, bitter vetch, chick peas, and flax—were cultivated in the Levant.
Rice was domesticated in China between 11,500 and 6,200 BC, followed by mung, soy and azuki beans.
Pigs were domesticated in Mesopotamia around 13,000 BC, followed by sheep between 11,000 and 9,000 BC. Cattle were domesticated from the wild aurochs in the areas of modern Turkey and Pakistan around 8,500 BC.
Sugarcane and some root vegetables were domesticated in New Guinea around 7,000 BC. Sorghum was domesticated in the Sahel region of Africa by 5,000 BC.
In the Andes of South America, the potato was domesticated between 8,000 and 5,000 BC, along with beans, coca, llamas, alpacas, and guinea pigs. Bananas were cultivated and hybridized in the same period in Papua New Guinea.
In Mesoamerica, wild teosinte was domesticated to maize by 4,000 BC. Cotton was domesticated in Peru by 3,600 BC. Camels were domesticated late, perhaps around 3,000 BC.
In the Middle Ages, both in the Islamic world and in Europe, agriculture was transformed with improved techniques and the diffusion of crop plants, including the introduction of sugar, rice, cotton and fruit trees such as the orange to Europe by way of Al-Andalus.
After 1492, the Columbian exchange brought New World crops such as maize, potatoes, sweet potatoes, and manioc to Europe, and Old World crops such as wheat, barley, rice, and turnips, and livestock including horses, cattle, sheep, and goats to the Americas.
Irrigation, crop rotation, and fertilizers were introduced soon after the Neolithic Revolution and developed much further in the past 200 years, starting with the British Agricultural Revolution.
Since 1900, agriculture in the developed nations, and to a lesser extent in the developing world, has seen large rises in productivity as human labor has been replaced by mechanization, and assisted by synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and selective breeding.
The Haber-Bosch process allowed the synthesis of ammonium nitrate fertilizer on an industrial scale, greatly increasing crop yields. Modern agriculture has raised social, political, and environmental issues including water pollution, biofuels, genetically modified organisms, tariffs and farm subsidies.
In response, organic farming developed in the twentieth century as a consciously pesticide-free alternative.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about the History of Agriculture:
The history of agriculture covers the domestication of plants and animals and the development and dissemination of techniques for raising them productively.
Agriculture began independently in different parts of the globe, and included a diverse range of taxa. At least eleven separate regions of the Old and New World were involved as independent centers of origin.
Wild grains were collected and eaten from at least 20,000 BC. From around 9,500 BC, the eight Neolithic founder crops--emmer wheat, einkorn wheat, hulled barley, peas, lentils, bitter vetch, chick peas, and flax—were cultivated in the Levant.
Rice was domesticated in China between 11,500 and 6,200 BC, followed by mung, soy and azuki beans.
Pigs were domesticated in Mesopotamia around 13,000 BC, followed by sheep between 11,000 and 9,000 BC. Cattle were domesticated from the wild aurochs in the areas of modern Turkey and Pakistan around 8,500 BC.
Sugarcane and some root vegetables were domesticated in New Guinea around 7,000 BC. Sorghum was domesticated in the Sahel region of Africa by 5,000 BC.
In the Andes of South America, the potato was domesticated between 8,000 and 5,000 BC, along with beans, coca, llamas, alpacas, and guinea pigs. Bananas were cultivated and hybridized in the same period in Papua New Guinea.
In Mesoamerica, wild teosinte was domesticated to maize by 4,000 BC. Cotton was domesticated in Peru by 3,600 BC. Camels were domesticated late, perhaps around 3,000 BC.
In the Middle Ages, both in the Islamic world and in Europe, agriculture was transformed with improved techniques and the diffusion of crop plants, including the introduction of sugar, rice, cotton and fruit trees such as the orange to Europe by way of Al-Andalus.
After 1492, the Columbian exchange brought New World crops such as maize, potatoes, sweet potatoes, and manioc to Europe, and Old World crops such as wheat, barley, rice, and turnips, and livestock including horses, cattle, sheep, and goats to the Americas.
Irrigation, crop rotation, and fertilizers were introduced soon after the Neolithic Revolution and developed much further in the past 200 years, starting with the British Agricultural Revolution.
Since 1900, agriculture in the developed nations, and to a lesser extent in the developing world, has seen large rises in productivity as human labor has been replaced by mechanization, and assisted by synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and selective breeding.
The Haber-Bosch process allowed the synthesis of ammonium nitrate fertilizer on an industrial scale, greatly increasing crop yields. Modern agriculture has raised social, political, and environmental issues including water pollution, biofuels, genetically modified organisms, tariffs and farm subsidies.
In response, organic farming developed in the twentieth century as a consciously pesticide-free alternative.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about the History of Agriculture:
American Farm Bureau Federation
YouTube Video: President Donald Trump speaks at American Farm Bureau Federation's convention (ABC News)
Pictured below: American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF)
Click here for a List of Farm Bureaus:
The American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), more commonly referred to as Farm Bureau (FB), is an independent, non-governmental, voluntary organization governed by and representing farm and ranch families united for the purpose of analyzing their problems and formulating action to achieve educational improvement, economic opportunity and social advancement and, thereby, to promote the national well-being.
Farm Bureau is local, county, state, national and international in its scope and influence and is non-partisan, non-sectarian and non-secret in character. Farm Bureau is the voice of agricultural producers at all levels. AFBF is headquartered in Washington, D.C. There are 50 state affiliates and one in Puerto Rico.
Advocacy
Policy is changing constantly, and it has a direct impact on farmers and ranchers. Having a voice – a seat at the table and an impact on policy – is critical. Beginning at the grassroots level and involving Farm Bureau members' advocacy efforts across the country, all of agriculture speaks with one voice through the American Farm Bureau Federation.
Education
The American Farm Bureau Foundation for Agriculture works to build awareness, understanding and a positive perception of agriculture through education. The Foundation is creating agriculturally literate citizens through our educational programs, grants, scholarships, classroom curriculum, and volunteer training.
The Foundation also builds relationships with educational institutions to introduce agricultural education tools and resources, and encourages adoption at the community, county, state, and national level.
Empowerment:
From its beginnings nearly a century ago, Farm Bureau has existed to give members the tools they need to succeed. That can mean financial expertise, communication skills, advocacy opportunities, training and opportunities to network with and learn from fellow farmers and ranchers. It all adds up to helping America's farmers and ranchers stay strong and prosperous.
Membership:
For nearly a century Farm Bureau members have joined together from coast to coast and become the Voice of Agriculture. Farm Bureau continues to evolve to serve the needs of members and their families on and off the farm or ranch.
The Farm Bureau legacy includes leadership within local communities, advocacy on rural issues, public service and outreach, agriculture literacy and environmental initiatives that protect the environment and preserve its productive beauty for the next generation to utilize and enjoy.
Joining Farm Bureau provides your family with exclusive discounts on national brands, plus valued member benefits.
Lobbying
AFBF made The Hill's 2017 list of top association lobbying groups and was dubbed a "farm policy powerhouse" for tracking issues like crop insurance, voluntary labeling requirements for bioengineered foods and disease surveillance response. "And that only scratches the surface of its work," according to The Hill.11
AFBF supported the Fighting Hunger Incentive Act of 2014 (H.R. 4719; 113th Congress), a bill that would amend the Internal Revenue Code to permanently extend and expand certain expired provisions that provided an enhanced tax deduction for businesses that donated their food inventory to charitable organizations. AFBF argued that without the tax write-off, "it is cheaper in most cases for these types of businesses to throw their food away than it is to donate the food".
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about the American Farm Bureau Federation:
The American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), more commonly referred to as Farm Bureau (FB), is an independent, non-governmental, voluntary organization governed by and representing farm and ranch families united for the purpose of analyzing their problems and formulating action to achieve educational improvement, economic opportunity and social advancement and, thereby, to promote the national well-being.
Farm Bureau is local, county, state, national and international in its scope and influence and is non-partisan, non-sectarian and non-secret in character. Farm Bureau is the voice of agricultural producers at all levels. AFBF is headquartered in Washington, D.C. There are 50 state affiliates and one in Puerto Rico.
Advocacy
Policy is changing constantly, and it has a direct impact on farmers and ranchers. Having a voice – a seat at the table and an impact on policy – is critical. Beginning at the grassroots level and involving Farm Bureau members' advocacy efforts across the country, all of agriculture speaks with one voice through the American Farm Bureau Federation.
Education
The American Farm Bureau Foundation for Agriculture works to build awareness, understanding and a positive perception of agriculture through education. The Foundation is creating agriculturally literate citizens through our educational programs, grants, scholarships, classroom curriculum, and volunteer training.
The Foundation also builds relationships with educational institutions to introduce agricultural education tools and resources, and encourages adoption at the community, county, state, and national level.
Empowerment:
From its beginnings nearly a century ago, Farm Bureau has existed to give members the tools they need to succeed. That can mean financial expertise, communication skills, advocacy opportunities, training and opportunities to network with and learn from fellow farmers and ranchers. It all adds up to helping America's farmers and ranchers stay strong and prosperous.
Membership:
For nearly a century Farm Bureau members have joined together from coast to coast and become the Voice of Agriculture. Farm Bureau continues to evolve to serve the needs of members and their families on and off the farm or ranch.
The Farm Bureau legacy includes leadership within local communities, advocacy on rural issues, public service and outreach, agriculture literacy and environmental initiatives that protect the environment and preserve its productive beauty for the next generation to utilize and enjoy.
Joining Farm Bureau provides your family with exclusive discounts on national brands, plus valued member benefits.
Lobbying
AFBF made The Hill's 2017 list of top association lobbying groups and was dubbed a "farm policy powerhouse" for tracking issues like crop insurance, voluntary labeling requirements for bioengineered foods and disease surveillance response. "And that only scratches the surface of its work," according to The Hill.11
AFBF supported the Fighting Hunger Incentive Act of 2014 (H.R. 4719; 113th Congress), a bill that would amend the Internal Revenue Code to permanently extend and expand certain expired provisions that provided an enhanced tax deduction for businesses that donated their food inventory to charitable organizations. AFBF argued that without the tax write-off, "it is cheaper in most cases for these types of businesses to throw their food away than it is to donate the food".
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about the American Farm Bureau Federation:
- The American Farm Bureau Federation Web site
- Farm Bureau Historical Highlights, 1919-1994
- Link to state Farm Bureaus
- History
- Personnel
- See also:
4-H Youth Organization
YouTube Video: 4-H Club: Healthy and Hands-on
Pictured below: 4-H Youth Programs at a glance
4-H is a global network of youth organizations whose mission is "engaging youth to reach their fullest potential while advancing the field of youth development". Its name is a reference to the occurrence of the initial letter H four times in the organization's original motto ‘head, heart, hands, and health’ which was later incorporated into the fuller pledge officially adopted in 1927.
In the United States, the organization is administered by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
4-H Canada is an independent non-profit organization overseeing the operation of branches throughout Canada.
Throughout the world, 4-H organizations exist in over 50 countries; the organization and administration varies from country to country. Each of these programs operates independently but cooperatively through international exchanges, global education programs, and communications.
The 4-H name represents four personal development areas of focus for the organization: head, heart, hands, and health. As of 2016, the organization had nearly 6 million active participants and more than 25 million alumni.
The goal of 4-H is to develop citizenship, leadership, responsibility and life skills of youth through experiential learning programs and a positive youth development approach. Though typically thought of as an agriculturally focused organization as a result of its history, 4-H today focuses on citizenship, healthy living, science, engineering, and technology programs.
The 4-H motto is "To make the best better", while its slogan is "Learn by doing" (sometimes written as "Learn to do by doing").
Pledge:
The 4-H pledge is:
The original pledge was written by Otis E. Hall of Kansas in 1918. Some California 4-H clubs add either "As a true 4-H member" or "As a loyal 4-H member" at the beginning of the pledge. Minnesota and Maine 4-H clubs add "for my family" to the last line of the pledge.
Originally, the pledge ended in "and my country". In 1973, "and my world" was added.
It is a common practice to involve hand motions to accompany these spoken words. While reciting the first line of the pledge, the speaker will point to their head with both of their hands. As the speaker recites the second line, they will place their right hand over their heart, much like during the Pledge of Allegiance.
For the third line, the speaker will present their hands, palm side up, before them. For the fourth line, the speaker will motion to their body down their sides. And for the final line, the speaker will usually place their right hand out for club, left hand for community, bring them together for country, and then bring their hands upwards in a circle for world.
Emblem:
The official 4-H emblem is a green four-leaf clover with a white H on each leaf standing for Head, Heart, Hands, and Health. The stem of the clover always points to the right.
The idea of using the four-leaf clover as an emblem for the 4-H program is credited to Oscar Herman Benson (1875–1951) of Wright County Iowa. He awarded three-leaf and four-leaf clover pennants and pins for students' agricultural and domestic science exhibits at school fairs.
The 4-H name and emblem have U.S. federal protection, under federal code 18 U.S.C. 707. This federal protection makes it a mark unto and of itself with protection that supersedes the limited authorities of both a trademark and a copyright.
The Secretary of Agriculture is given responsibility and stewardship for the 4-H name and emblem, at the direct request of the U.S. Congress. These protections place the 4-H emblem in a unique category of protected emblems, along with the U.S. Presidential Seal, Red Cross, Smokey Bear and the Olympic rings.
Youth development research:
Through the program's tie to land-grant institutions of higher education, 4-H academic staff are responsible for advancing the field of youth development. Professional academic staff are committed to innovation, the creation of new knowledge, and the dissemination of new forms of program practice and research on topics like University of California's study of thriving in young people.
Youth development research is undertaken in a variety of forms including program evaluation, applied research, and introduction of new programs.
Volunteers:
Volunteering has deep roots in American society. Over half of the American people will volunteer in some capacity during a year's time. It is estimated that 44% of adults (over 83.9 million people) will volunteer within a year. This volunteerism is valued at over $239 billion per year. These volunteers come from all different age groups, educational levels, backgrounds and socioeconomic statuses.
Volunteer leaders play a major role in 4-H programs and are the heart and soul of 4-H. They perform a variety of roles, functions and tasks to coordinate the 4-H program at the county level and come from all walks of life, bringing varied and rich experiences to the 4-H program.
With over 540,000 volunteers nationally, these leaders play an essential role in the delivery of 4-H programs and provide learning opportunities to promote positive youth development.
Every year, volunteer leaders work to carry out 4-H youth development programs, project groups, camps, conferences, animal shows and many more 4-H related activities and events.
4-H volunteer leaders help youth to achieve greater self-confidence and self-responsibility, learn new skills and build relationships with others that will last a lifetime.
Volunteers serve in many diverse roles. Some are project leaders who teach youth skills and knowledge in an area of interest. Others are unit or community club leaders who organize clubs meetings and other programs.
Resource leaders are available to provide information and expertise. 4-H volunteers work under the direction of professional staff to plan and conduct activities and events, develop and maintain educational programs, and secure resources in support of the program.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about 4-H Youth Organizations:
In the United States, the organization is administered by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
4-H Canada is an independent non-profit organization overseeing the operation of branches throughout Canada.
Throughout the world, 4-H organizations exist in over 50 countries; the organization and administration varies from country to country. Each of these programs operates independently but cooperatively through international exchanges, global education programs, and communications.
The 4-H name represents four personal development areas of focus for the organization: head, heart, hands, and health. As of 2016, the organization had nearly 6 million active participants and more than 25 million alumni.
The goal of 4-H is to develop citizenship, leadership, responsibility and life skills of youth through experiential learning programs and a positive youth development approach. Though typically thought of as an agriculturally focused organization as a result of its history, 4-H today focuses on citizenship, healthy living, science, engineering, and technology programs.
The 4-H motto is "To make the best better", while its slogan is "Learn by doing" (sometimes written as "Learn to do by doing").
Pledge:
The 4-H pledge is:
- I pledge my head to clearer thinking,
- my heart to greater loyalty,
- my hands to larger service,
- and my health to better living,
- for my club, my community,
- my country, and my world.
The original pledge was written by Otis E. Hall of Kansas in 1918. Some California 4-H clubs add either "As a true 4-H member" or "As a loyal 4-H member" at the beginning of the pledge. Minnesota and Maine 4-H clubs add "for my family" to the last line of the pledge.
Originally, the pledge ended in "and my country". In 1973, "and my world" was added.
It is a common practice to involve hand motions to accompany these spoken words. While reciting the first line of the pledge, the speaker will point to their head with both of their hands. As the speaker recites the second line, they will place their right hand over their heart, much like during the Pledge of Allegiance.
For the third line, the speaker will present their hands, palm side up, before them. For the fourth line, the speaker will motion to their body down their sides. And for the final line, the speaker will usually place their right hand out for club, left hand for community, bring them together for country, and then bring their hands upwards in a circle for world.
Emblem:
The official 4-H emblem is a green four-leaf clover with a white H on each leaf standing for Head, Heart, Hands, and Health. The stem of the clover always points to the right.
The idea of using the four-leaf clover as an emblem for the 4-H program is credited to Oscar Herman Benson (1875–1951) of Wright County Iowa. He awarded three-leaf and four-leaf clover pennants and pins for students' agricultural and domestic science exhibits at school fairs.
The 4-H name and emblem have U.S. federal protection, under federal code 18 U.S.C. 707. This federal protection makes it a mark unto and of itself with protection that supersedes the limited authorities of both a trademark and a copyright.
The Secretary of Agriculture is given responsibility and stewardship for the 4-H name and emblem, at the direct request of the U.S. Congress. These protections place the 4-H emblem in a unique category of protected emblems, along with the U.S. Presidential Seal, Red Cross, Smokey Bear and the Olympic rings.
Youth development research:
Through the program's tie to land-grant institutions of higher education, 4-H academic staff are responsible for advancing the field of youth development. Professional academic staff are committed to innovation, the creation of new knowledge, and the dissemination of new forms of program practice and research on topics like University of California's study of thriving in young people.
Youth development research is undertaken in a variety of forms including program evaluation, applied research, and introduction of new programs.
Volunteers:
Volunteering has deep roots in American society. Over half of the American people will volunteer in some capacity during a year's time. It is estimated that 44% of adults (over 83.9 million people) will volunteer within a year. This volunteerism is valued at over $239 billion per year. These volunteers come from all different age groups, educational levels, backgrounds and socioeconomic statuses.
Volunteer leaders play a major role in 4-H programs and are the heart and soul of 4-H. They perform a variety of roles, functions and tasks to coordinate the 4-H program at the county level and come from all walks of life, bringing varied and rich experiences to the 4-H program.
With over 540,000 volunteers nationally, these leaders play an essential role in the delivery of 4-H programs and provide learning opportunities to promote positive youth development.
Every year, volunteer leaders work to carry out 4-H youth development programs, project groups, camps, conferences, animal shows and many more 4-H related activities and events.
4-H volunteer leaders help youth to achieve greater self-confidence and self-responsibility, learn new skills and build relationships with others that will last a lifetime.
Volunteers serve in many diverse roles. Some are project leaders who teach youth skills and knowledge in an area of interest. Others are unit or community club leaders who organize clubs meetings and other programs.
Resource leaders are available to provide information and expertise. 4-H volunteers work under the direction of professional staff to plan and conduct activities and events, develop and maintain educational programs, and secure resources in support of the program.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about 4-H Youth Organizations:
- 4-H Website Official website for more information about 4-H on all levels of the 4-H system
- History
- Additional programs
- Conferences
- Civil Rights issues
- Alumni
- See also:
Agronomy
YouTube Video: What is an Agronomist?
Pictured below: International Journal of Agronomy and Agricultural Research (IJAAR) publish high-quality original research papers together with review articles and short-communications.
Agronomy is the science and technology of producing and using plants for food, fuel, fiber, and land reclamation.
Agronomy has come to encompass work in the areas of plant genetics, plant physiology, meteorology, and soil science. It is the application of a combination of sciences like biology, chemistry, economics, ecology, earth science, and genetics.
Agronomists of today are involved with many issues, including producing food, creating healthier food, managing the environmental impact of agriculture, and extracting energy from plants.
Agronomists often specialize in areas such as crop rotation, irrigation and drainage, plant breeding, plant physiology, soil classification, soil fertility, weed control, and insect and pest control.
Plant Breeding:
Main article: Plant breeding
An agronomist field sampling a trial plot of flax.This area of agronomy involves selective breeding of plants to produce the best crops under various conditions.
Plant breeding has increased crop yields and has improved the nutritional value of numerous crops, including corn, soybeans, and wheat. It has also led to the development of new types of plants. For example, a hybrid grain called triticale was produced by crossbreeding rye and wheat. Triticale contains more usable protein than does either rye or wheat. Agronomy has also been instrumental in fruit and vegetable production research.
Biotechnology:
Agronomists use biotechnology to extend and expedite the development of desired characteristic. Biotechnology is often a lab activity requiring field testing of the new crop varieties that are developed.
In addition to increasing crop yields agronomic biotechnology is increasingly being applied for novel uses other than food. For example, oilseed is at present used mainly for margarine and other food oils, but it can be modified to produce fatty acids for detergents, substitute fuels and petrochemicals.
Soil Science:
Main article: Agricultural soil science
Agronomists study sustainable ways to make soils more productive and profitable throughout the world. They classify soils and analyze them to determine whether they contain nutrients vital to plant growth.
Common macronutrients analyzed include compounds of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, and sulfur. Soil is also assessed for several micronutrients, like zinc and boron. The percentage of organic matter, soil pH, and nutrient holding capacity (cation exchange capacity) are tested in a regional laboratory.
Agronomists will interpret these lab reports and make recommendations to balance soil nutrients for optimal plant growth.
Soil conservation
In addition, agronomists develop methods to preserve the soil and to decrease the effects of erosion by wind and water. For example, a technique called contour plowing may be used to prevent soil erosion and conserve rainfall.
Researchers in agronomy also seek ways to use the soil more effectively in solving other problems. Such problems include the disposal of human and animal manure, water pollution, and pesticide build-up in the soil. As well as looking after the soil for future generations to come, such as the burning of paddocks after crop production. As well as pasture [management] Techniques include no-tilling crops, planting of soil-binding grasses along contours on steep slopes, and contour drains of depths up to 1 metre.
Agroecology:
Agroecology is the management of agricultural systems with an emphasis on ecological and environmental perspectives. This area is closely associated with work in the areas of sustainable agriculture, organic farming (next), and alternative food systems and the development of alternative cropping systems.
Theoretical modeling:
Theoretical production ecology tries to quantitatively study the growth of crops. The plant is treated as a kind of biological factory, which processes light, carbon dioxide, water, and nutrients into harvestable products. The main parameters considered are temperature, sunlight, standing crop biomass, plant production distribution, and nutrient and water supply.
See also:
Agronomy has come to encompass work in the areas of plant genetics, plant physiology, meteorology, and soil science. It is the application of a combination of sciences like biology, chemistry, economics, ecology, earth science, and genetics.
Agronomists of today are involved with many issues, including producing food, creating healthier food, managing the environmental impact of agriculture, and extracting energy from plants.
Agronomists often specialize in areas such as crop rotation, irrigation and drainage, plant breeding, plant physiology, soil classification, soil fertility, weed control, and insect and pest control.
Plant Breeding:
Main article: Plant breeding
An agronomist field sampling a trial plot of flax.This area of agronomy involves selective breeding of plants to produce the best crops under various conditions.
Plant breeding has increased crop yields and has improved the nutritional value of numerous crops, including corn, soybeans, and wheat. It has also led to the development of new types of plants. For example, a hybrid grain called triticale was produced by crossbreeding rye and wheat. Triticale contains more usable protein than does either rye or wheat. Agronomy has also been instrumental in fruit and vegetable production research.
Biotechnology:
Agronomists use biotechnology to extend and expedite the development of desired characteristic. Biotechnology is often a lab activity requiring field testing of the new crop varieties that are developed.
In addition to increasing crop yields agronomic biotechnology is increasingly being applied for novel uses other than food. For example, oilseed is at present used mainly for margarine and other food oils, but it can be modified to produce fatty acids for detergents, substitute fuels and petrochemicals.
Soil Science:
Main article: Agricultural soil science
Agronomists study sustainable ways to make soils more productive and profitable throughout the world. They classify soils and analyze them to determine whether they contain nutrients vital to plant growth.
Common macronutrients analyzed include compounds of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, and sulfur. Soil is also assessed for several micronutrients, like zinc and boron. The percentage of organic matter, soil pH, and nutrient holding capacity (cation exchange capacity) are tested in a regional laboratory.
Agronomists will interpret these lab reports and make recommendations to balance soil nutrients for optimal plant growth.
Soil conservation
In addition, agronomists develop methods to preserve the soil and to decrease the effects of erosion by wind and water. For example, a technique called contour plowing may be used to prevent soil erosion and conserve rainfall.
Researchers in agronomy also seek ways to use the soil more effectively in solving other problems. Such problems include the disposal of human and animal manure, water pollution, and pesticide build-up in the soil. As well as looking after the soil for future generations to come, such as the burning of paddocks after crop production. As well as pasture [management] Techniques include no-tilling crops, planting of soil-binding grasses along contours on steep slopes, and contour drains of depths up to 1 metre.
Agroecology:
Agroecology is the management of agricultural systems with an emphasis on ecological and environmental perspectives. This area is closely associated with work in the areas of sustainable agriculture, organic farming (next), and alternative food systems and the development of alternative cropping systems.
Theoretical modeling:
Theoretical production ecology tries to quantitatively study the growth of crops. The plant is treated as a kind of biological factory, which processes light, carbon dioxide, water, and nutrients into harvestable products. The main parameters considered are temperature, sunlight, standing crop biomass, plant production distribution, and nutrient and water supply.
See also:
- The American Society of Agronomy (ASA)
- Crop Science Society of America (CSSA)
- Soil Science Society of America (SSSA)
- European Society for Agronomy
- The National Agricultural Library (NAL) – Comprehensive agricultural library.
- Information System for Agriculture and Food Research
- Agricultural engineering
- Agricultural policy
- Agroecology
- Agrology
- Agrophysics
- Food systems
- Green Revolution
- Vegetable farming
Organic Farming
YouTube Video: Is Organic Food Better for Your Health?
Pictured below: U.S. Organic Farmland Hits Record 4.1 Million Acres in 2016
Organic farming is an alternative agricultural system which originated early in the 20th century in reaction to rapidly changing farming practices.
Organic farming continues to be developed by various organic agriculture organizations today. It relies on fertilizers of organic origin such as compost manure, green manure, and bone meal and places emphasis on techniques such as crop rotation and companion planting.
Biological pest control, mixed cropping and the fostering of insect predators are encouraged. In general, organic standards are designed to allow the use of naturally occurring substances while prohibiting or strictly limiting synthetic substances. For instance, naturally occurring pesticides such as pyrethrin and rotenone are permitted, while synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are generally prohibited.
Synthetic substances that are allowed include, for example, copper sulfate, elemental sulfur and Ivermectin. Genetically modified organisms, nanomaterials, human sewage sludge, plant growth regulators, hormones, and antibiotic use in livestock husbandry are prohibited.
Reasons for advocation of organic farming include advantages in sustainability, openness, self-sufficiency, autonomy/independence, health, food security, and food safety.
Organic agricultural methods are internationally regulated and legally enforced by many nations, based in large part on the standards set by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), an international umbrella organization for organic farming organizations established in 1972.
Organic agriculture can be defined as an integrated farming system that strives for sustainability, the enhancement of soil fertility and biological diversity whilst, with rare exceptions, prohibiting synthetic pesticides, antibiotics, synthetic fertilizers, genetically modified organisms, and growth hormones.
Since 1990 the market for organic food and other products has grown rapidly, reaching $63 billion worldwide in 2012. This demand has driven a similar increase in organically managed farmland that grew from 2001 to 2011 at a compounding rate of 8.9% per annum.
As of 2016, approximately 57,800,000 hectares (143,000,000 acres) worldwide were farmed organically, representing approximately 1.2 percent of total world farmland.[14]
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Organic Farming:
Organic farming continues to be developed by various organic agriculture organizations today. It relies on fertilizers of organic origin such as compost manure, green manure, and bone meal and places emphasis on techniques such as crop rotation and companion planting.
Biological pest control, mixed cropping and the fostering of insect predators are encouraged. In general, organic standards are designed to allow the use of naturally occurring substances while prohibiting or strictly limiting synthetic substances. For instance, naturally occurring pesticides such as pyrethrin and rotenone are permitted, while synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are generally prohibited.
Synthetic substances that are allowed include, for example, copper sulfate, elemental sulfur and Ivermectin. Genetically modified organisms, nanomaterials, human sewage sludge, plant growth regulators, hormones, and antibiotic use in livestock husbandry are prohibited.
Reasons for advocation of organic farming include advantages in sustainability, openness, self-sufficiency, autonomy/independence, health, food security, and food safety.
Organic agricultural methods are internationally regulated and legally enforced by many nations, based in large part on the standards set by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), an international umbrella organization for organic farming organizations established in 1972.
Organic agriculture can be defined as an integrated farming system that strives for sustainability, the enhancement of soil fertility and biological diversity whilst, with rare exceptions, prohibiting synthetic pesticides, antibiotics, synthetic fertilizers, genetically modified organisms, and growth hormones.
Since 1990 the market for organic food and other products has grown rapidly, reaching $63 billion worldwide in 2012. This demand has driven a similar increase in organically managed farmland that grew from 2001 to 2011 at a compounding rate of 8.9% per annum.
As of 2016, approximately 57,800,000 hectares (143,000,000 acres) worldwide were farmed organically, representing approximately 1.2 percent of total world farmland.[14]
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Organic Farming:
- History
- Terminology
- Methods
- Standards including Composting
- Economics
- Disadvantages
- Regional support for organic farming
- See also:
- Organic Farming at Curlie
- Organic Eprints. A database of research in organic food and farming.
- Organic Agriculture. eOrganic Community of Practice with eXtension: America's Land Grant University System and Partners.
- Advance sowing
- Biodynamic agriculture
- Biointensive
- Biological pest control
- Certified Naturally Grown
- Companion planting
- Crop rotation
- Do Nothing Farming
- French intensive gardening
- Holistic management (agriculture)
- Integrated pest management
- List of organic food topics
- List of organic gardening and farming topics
- No-till farming
- Organic clothing
- Organic farming by country
- Organic Farming Digest
- Organic food
- Organic movement
- Permaculture
- SRI
- Organic food culture
- Zero Budget Farming
EcoAgriculture
YouTube Video: Windmills and Water Pumps for Livestock Water
YouTube Video: How can farming and renewable energy work together?
Pictured below: Elements in an eco-agriculture landscape (Courtesy of CC BY-SA 3.0)
Eco friendly agriculture describes landscapes that support both agricultural production and biodiversity conservation, working in harmony together to improve the livelihoods of rural communities.
While many rural communities have independently practiced eco-agriculture for thousands of years, over the past century many of these landscapes have given way to segregated land use patterns, with some areas employing intensive farming practices without regard to biodiversity impacts, and other areas fenced off completely for habitat or watershed protection.
A new eco-agriculture movement is now gaining momentum to unite land managers and other stakeholders from diverse environments to find compatible ways to conserve biodiversity while also enhancing agricultural production.
Approach and practitioners:
The term "eco-agriculture" was coined by Charles Walters, economist, author, editor, publisher, and founder of Acres Magazine in 1970 to unify under one umbrella the concepts of "ecological" and "economical" in the belief that unless agriculture was ecological it could not be economical. This belief became the motto of the magazine: "To be economical agriculture must be ecological."
Eco-agriculture is both a conservation strategy and a rural development strategy. Eco-agriculture recognizes agricultural producers and communities as key stewards of ecosystems and biodiversity and enables them to play those roles effectively.
Eco-agriculture applies an integrated ecosystem approach to agricultural landscapes to address all three pillars—conserving biodiversity, enhancing agricultural production, and improving livelihoods—drawing on diverse elements of production and conservation management systems.
Meeting the goals of eco-agriculture usually requires collaboration or coordination between diverse stakeholders who are collectively responsible for managing key components of a landscape.
Landscape scale:
Eco-agriculture uses the landscape as a unit of management. A landscape is a cluster of local ecosystems with a particular configuration of topography, vegetation, land use, and settlement.
The goals of eco-agriculture—to maintain biodiversity and ecosystem services, manage agricultural production sustainably, and contribute to improved livelihoods among rural people—cannot be achieved at just a farm or plot level, but are linked at the landscape level.
Therefore, to make an impact, all of the elements of a landscape as a whole must be considered; integrated landscape management is an approach that seeks to achieve this.
Defining a landscape depends on the local context. Landscapes may be defined or delimited by natural, historical, and/or cultural processes, activities or values. Landscapes can incorporate many different features, but all of the various features have some influence or effect on each other.
Landscapes can vary greatly in size, from the Congo Basin in west-central Africa where landscapes are often huge because there are vast stretches of apparently undifferentiated land, to western Europe where landscapes tend to be much smaller because of the wide diversity of topographies and land use activities occurring close to each other.
Importance of agriculture areas for biodiversity conservation:
Agriculture is the most dominant human influence on earth. Nearly one-third of the world’s land area is heavily influenced by cropland or planted pastures. An even greater area is being fallowed as part of an agricultural cycle or is in tree crops, livestock grazing systems, or production forestry.
In addition, most of the world’s 100,000+ protected areas contain significant amounts of agricultural land. And over half of the most species-rich areas in the world contain large human populations whose livelihoods depend on farming, forestry, herding, or fisheries.
Agriculture as it is often practiced today threatens wild plant and animal species and the natural ecosystem services upon which both humans and wildlife depend. Over 70% of the fresh water withdrawn by humans goes to irrigation for crops, causing a profound impact on the hydrological cycles of ecological systems.
Moreover, fertilizers, pesticides, and agricultural waste threaten habitats and protected areas downstream. Land-clearing for agriculture also disrupts sources of food and shelter for wild biodiversity, and unsustainable fishing practices deplete freshwater and coastal fisheries.
Additionally, an increase in the planting and marketing of monoculture crops across the globe has decreased diversity in agricultural products, to the extent that many local varieties of fruits, vegetables, and grains have now become extinct. Given that demands on global agricultural production are increasing, it is imperative that the management of agricultural landscapes be improved to both increase productivity and enhance biodiversity conservation.
Wild biodiversity increasingly depends on agricultural producers to find ways to better protect habitats, and agriculture critically needs healthy and diverse ecosystems to sustain productivity.
Bridging conservation and agriculture:
Traditionally there has existed a divide between conservationists, who want to set land aside for the protection of wild biodiversity, and agriculturalists, who want to use land for production.
Because more than half of all plant and animal species exist principally outside protected areas –- mostly in agricultural landscapes –- there is a great need to close the gap between conservation efforts and agricultural production. For example, conservation of wetlands within agricultural landscapes is critical for wild bird populations. Such species require initiatives by and with farmers.
Ecoagriculture provides a bridge for these two communities to come together.
Farmers as ecosystem partners:
Farming communities play a vital role as managers of their ecosystems and biodiversity. As Ben Falk points out, they are often viewed as stewards. In his understanding, "Stewardship implies dominion, whereas partnership implies co[-]evolution; mutual respect; whole-archy, not hierarchy. A partner is sometimes a guide, always a facilitator, always a co[-]worker."
Since a farmer's dependence on their land and natural resources necessitates a conservation ethic, their farm productivity critically demands their assistance in delivering a range of ecosystem services.
Wild species often also play an important role in providing livestock fodder, fuel, veterinary medicines, soil nutrient supplements and construction materials to farmers, as well constituting an essential element of cultural, religious, and spiritual practices.
The dominance of agriculture in global land use requires that eco-agriculture approaches be fostered by rural producers and their communities on a globally significant scale. To do this, farmers need to be able to conserve biodiversity more consistently in ways that benefit their livelihoods.
Experiences from around the world suggest that there are a number of incentives to encourage and enable farmers and their communities to preserve or transition towards eco-agriculture landscapes:
Ecoagriculture land management practices:
Agricultural landscapes that aim to achieve the objectives of ecoagriculture –- enhanced biodiversity conservation, increased food production, and improved rural livelihoods –- should be managed in ways that protect and expand natural areas and improve wildlife habitats and ecosystem functions, in collaboration with local communities to insure their benefit.
Specific land management practices that may be incorporated include:
Role of traditional and local knowledge:
Many indigenous peoples and rural communities have developed, maintained, and adapted different types of ecoagriculture systems for centuries.
Local farmers, pastoralists, fishers, forest users, and other community members are the foundation of rural land stewardship. Their knowledge, traditions, land use practices, and resource-management institutions are essential to the development of viable ecoagriculture systems for their landscapes.
The mainstreaming of ecoagriculture approaches will be crucially dependent upon mobilizing local communities to become leaders in ecoagriculture, as teachers and as advocates for political and institutional change.
Communities facing similar challenges can share questions, ideas, and solutions with each other. Local communities also need effective processes for sharing their expertise with national policymakers and the international community and thus play a more central role in settinge coagriculture objectives in policy and program development.
Contribution of ecoagriculture to the Millennium Development Goals:
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), eight ambitious targets which range from halving extreme poverty to halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and providing universal primary education, were put forth by the United Nations in 2000, to be achieved by 2015.
Ecoagriculture strategies will be essential to achieving the MDGs, particularly for hunger and poverty, water and sanitation, and environmental sustainability.
The MDGs will not be reached without securing the ability of the rural poor to feed their families and gain income, while at the same time protecting the biodiversity and ecosystem services that sustain their livelihoods.
Of the estimated 800 million people who do not have access to sufficient food, half are smallholder farmers, one-fifth are rural landless, and one-tenth are principally dependent on rangelands, forests and fisheries. For most of them, reducing poverty and hunger will depend centrally on their ability to sustain and increase crop, livestock, forest, and fishery production.
A key opportunity for enhancing progress towards the MDGs is investment in locally-driven land management approaches –- such as ecoagriculture strategies –- that build upon synergies between rural livelihoods, environmental sustainability, and food security.
Related fields:
The values and/or principles of eco-agriculture have much in common with existing concepts, such as:
In fact, ‘ecoagriculture’ landscapes often feature many of these approaches. Ecoagriculture draws heavily on these and many other innovations in rural land use planning and management.
The landscape management framework defined by ecoagriculture has four particularly important characteristics:
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about EcoAgriculture:
While many rural communities have independently practiced eco-agriculture for thousands of years, over the past century many of these landscapes have given way to segregated land use patterns, with some areas employing intensive farming practices without regard to biodiversity impacts, and other areas fenced off completely for habitat or watershed protection.
A new eco-agriculture movement is now gaining momentum to unite land managers and other stakeholders from diverse environments to find compatible ways to conserve biodiversity while also enhancing agricultural production.
Approach and practitioners:
The term "eco-agriculture" was coined by Charles Walters, economist, author, editor, publisher, and founder of Acres Magazine in 1970 to unify under one umbrella the concepts of "ecological" and "economical" in the belief that unless agriculture was ecological it could not be economical. This belief became the motto of the magazine: "To be economical agriculture must be ecological."
Eco-agriculture is both a conservation strategy and a rural development strategy. Eco-agriculture recognizes agricultural producers and communities as key stewards of ecosystems and biodiversity and enables them to play those roles effectively.
Eco-agriculture applies an integrated ecosystem approach to agricultural landscapes to address all three pillars—conserving biodiversity, enhancing agricultural production, and improving livelihoods—drawing on diverse elements of production and conservation management systems.
Meeting the goals of eco-agriculture usually requires collaboration or coordination between diverse stakeholders who are collectively responsible for managing key components of a landscape.
Landscape scale:
Eco-agriculture uses the landscape as a unit of management. A landscape is a cluster of local ecosystems with a particular configuration of topography, vegetation, land use, and settlement.
The goals of eco-agriculture—to maintain biodiversity and ecosystem services, manage agricultural production sustainably, and contribute to improved livelihoods among rural people—cannot be achieved at just a farm or plot level, but are linked at the landscape level.
Therefore, to make an impact, all of the elements of a landscape as a whole must be considered; integrated landscape management is an approach that seeks to achieve this.
Defining a landscape depends on the local context. Landscapes may be defined or delimited by natural, historical, and/or cultural processes, activities or values. Landscapes can incorporate many different features, but all of the various features have some influence or effect on each other.
Landscapes can vary greatly in size, from the Congo Basin in west-central Africa where landscapes are often huge because there are vast stretches of apparently undifferentiated land, to western Europe where landscapes tend to be much smaller because of the wide diversity of topographies and land use activities occurring close to each other.
Importance of agriculture areas for biodiversity conservation:
Agriculture is the most dominant human influence on earth. Nearly one-third of the world’s land area is heavily influenced by cropland or planted pastures. An even greater area is being fallowed as part of an agricultural cycle or is in tree crops, livestock grazing systems, or production forestry.
In addition, most of the world’s 100,000+ protected areas contain significant amounts of agricultural land. And over half of the most species-rich areas in the world contain large human populations whose livelihoods depend on farming, forestry, herding, or fisheries.
Agriculture as it is often practiced today threatens wild plant and animal species and the natural ecosystem services upon which both humans and wildlife depend. Over 70% of the fresh water withdrawn by humans goes to irrigation for crops, causing a profound impact on the hydrological cycles of ecological systems.
Moreover, fertilizers, pesticides, and agricultural waste threaten habitats and protected areas downstream. Land-clearing for agriculture also disrupts sources of food and shelter for wild biodiversity, and unsustainable fishing practices deplete freshwater and coastal fisheries.
Additionally, an increase in the planting and marketing of monoculture crops across the globe has decreased diversity in agricultural products, to the extent that many local varieties of fruits, vegetables, and grains have now become extinct. Given that demands on global agricultural production are increasing, it is imperative that the management of agricultural landscapes be improved to both increase productivity and enhance biodiversity conservation.
Wild biodiversity increasingly depends on agricultural producers to find ways to better protect habitats, and agriculture critically needs healthy and diverse ecosystems to sustain productivity.
Bridging conservation and agriculture:
Traditionally there has existed a divide between conservationists, who want to set land aside for the protection of wild biodiversity, and agriculturalists, who want to use land for production.
Because more than half of all plant and animal species exist principally outside protected areas –- mostly in agricultural landscapes –- there is a great need to close the gap between conservation efforts and agricultural production. For example, conservation of wetlands within agricultural landscapes is critical for wild bird populations. Such species require initiatives by and with farmers.
Ecoagriculture provides a bridge for these two communities to come together.
Farmers as ecosystem partners:
Farming communities play a vital role as managers of their ecosystems and biodiversity. As Ben Falk points out, they are often viewed as stewards. In his understanding, "Stewardship implies dominion, whereas partnership implies co[-]evolution; mutual respect; whole-archy, not hierarchy. A partner is sometimes a guide, always a facilitator, always a co[-]worker."
Since a farmer's dependence on their land and natural resources necessitates a conservation ethic, their farm productivity critically demands their assistance in delivering a range of ecosystem services.
Wild species often also play an important role in providing livestock fodder, fuel, veterinary medicines, soil nutrient supplements and construction materials to farmers, as well constituting an essential element of cultural, religious, and spiritual practices.
The dominance of agriculture in global land use requires that eco-agriculture approaches be fostered by rural producers and their communities on a globally significant scale. To do this, farmers need to be able to conserve biodiversity more consistently in ways that benefit their livelihoods.
Experiences from around the world suggest that there are a number of incentives to encourage and enable farmers and their communities to preserve or transition towards eco-agriculture landscapes:
- Many management practices that improve ecosystem health also benefit farmers by reducing production costs, raising or stabilizing yields, or improving product quality. Intensive rotation grazing systems practiced in Europe, the United States, and Zimbabwe have been shown to reduce dairy production costs compared to stall-fed systems, while also reducing risks of land degradation and improving wildlife habitat.
- Farming communities are especially motivated to conserve biodiversity and ecosystem services critical to their own livelihoods and cultural, spiritual, or aesthetic values. To protect their access to local water sources and medicinal plants, for example, farmers in western Kenya have mobilized to protect threatened forests in and near their communities. And in some agricultural landscapes in West Africa, 'sacred groves' are the principal remaining areas of native forest.
- Farmers are seeking new income opportunities from product markets that value supplies from biodiversity-friendly production systems. More than 80 eco-certification programs now provide opportunities for farmers to receive higher prices for products produced with environmentally friendly practices.
- Farmers can gain new income opportunities from payment for ecosystem services provided by non-farm beneficiaries of their ecological partnership. These opportunities include carbon emission offset payments for carbon sequestration in soils and trees and water quality protection, among others.
- Farmers are seeking ways to comply with the goals of environmental regulation, in ways that also maintain or improve their agricultural livelihoods. In the US, farmers in the Chesapeake Bay watershed are incorporating perennial vegetative buffer strips around stream banks, which provide habitat niches for birds and wildlife, to both help meet water quality regulations and to diversify their output.
Ecoagriculture land management practices:
Agricultural landscapes that aim to achieve the objectives of ecoagriculture –- enhanced biodiversity conservation, increased food production, and improved rural livelihoods –- should be managed in ways that protect and expand natural areas and improve wildlife habitats and ecosystem functions, in collaboration with local communities to insure their benefit.
Specific land management practices that may be incorporated include:
- Plan and manage protected areas together with local farming, pastoralist, and forest communities in their landscapes. Community-conserved areas on lands owned by farmers and pastoralists are important for ecosystem-wide management of biodiversity. The more ownership/engagement these communities have in the management of protected areas, the more successful the landscape will be overall in contributing to the three goals of ecoagriculture.
- Link un-farmed areas, forest fragments, and wetlands within agricultural landscapes to develop habitat networks and corridors that support and expand the range of wild species. This approach is particularly useful to migratory species, which can include pollinators and natural enemies of agricultural pests.
- Reduce or reverse conversion of natural areas to agricultural areas by improving the productivity of currently utilized agricultural, forestry, grazing lands and fisheries.
- Modify farming systems so they mimic natural vegetation and ecological processes. Integrating trees, shrubs, and grasses into agricultural production systems can improve ecosystem services across the whole landscape.
- Manage agricultural wastes to protect the surrounding ecosystem by encouraging shifts from input-intensive to ‘knowledge-intensive’ agricultural practices. These may include integration of crop, livestock, and nutrient systems; more precise application of organic and non-organic fertilizers; and crop rotations to improve soil fertility.
- Encourage soil, water, and vegetation management strategies that limit negative impacts on surrounding ecosystems. These practices include conservation tillage, improved fallow systems, on-farm crop or fertilizer trees, inter-cropping, and livestock diversification.
Role of traditional and local knowledge:
Many indigenous peoples and rural communities have developed, maintained, and adapted different types of ecoagriculture systems for centuries.
Local farmers, pastoralists, fishers, forest users, and other community members are the foundation of rural land stewardship. Their knowledge, traditions, land use practices, and resource-management institutions are essential to the development of viable ecoagriculture systems for their landscapes.
The mainstreaming of ecoagriculture approaches will be crucially dependent upon mobilizing local communities to become leaders in ecoagriculture, as teachers and as advocates for political and institutional change.
Communities facing similar challenges can share questions, ideas, and solutions with each other. Local communities also need effective processes for sharing their expertise with national policymakers and the international community and thus play a more central role in settinge coagriculture objectives in policy and program development.
Contribution of ecoagriculture to the Millennium Development Goals:
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), eight ambitious targets which range from halving extreme poverty to halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and providing universal primary education, were put forth by the United Nations in 2000, to be achieved by 2015.
Ecoagriculture strategies will be essential to achieving the MDGs, particularly for hunger and poverty, water and sanitation, and environmental sustainability.
The MDGs will not be reached without securing the ability of the rural poor to feed their families and gain income, while at the same time protecting the biodiversity and ecosystem services that sustain their livelihoods.
Of the estimated 800 million people who do not have access to sufficient food, half are smallholder farmers, one-fifth are rural landless, and one-tenth are principally dependent on rangelands, forests and fisheries. For most of them, reducing poverty and hunger will depend centrally on their ability to sustain and increase crop, livestock, forest, and fishery production.
A key opportunity for enhancing progress towards the MDGs is investment in locally-driven land management approaches –- such as ecoagriculture strategies –- that build upon synergies between rural livelihoods, environmental sustainability, and food security.
Related fields:
The values and/or principles of eco-agriculture have much in common with existing concepts, such as:
- integrated landscape management,
- sustainable agriculture,
- permaculture,
- agroecology,
- integrated natural resource management,
- organic agriculture,
- agroforestry,
- conservation agriculture,
- protected area management,
- and others.
In fact, ‘ecoagriculture’ landscapes often feature many of these approaches. Ecoagriculture draws heavily on these and many other innovations in rural land use planning and management.
The landscape management framework defined by ecoagriculture has four particularly important characteristics:
- Large scale: Ecoagriculture moves beyond the management of individual farms and/or protected areas to help detect and plan for interactions among different land uses at the landscape scale. In addition, important attributes such as wildlife population dynamics and watershed functions can be meaningfully understood only at the landscape scale. Also, in recognition of the fact that short-term trade-offs may lead to long-term synergies, ecoagriculture advocates conducting analyses over longer temporal scales than is commonly done.
- Emphasis on synergies: Eco-agriculture emphasizes both the need and the opportunity to foster synergies among conservation, agricultural production, and rural livelihoods. The ecoagriculture research and monitoring agenda seeks, in part, to identify and document these synergies.
- Emphasis on stakeholder collaboration: Eco-agriculture can not be achieved by individual land managers. The management of eco-agriculture landscapes requires processes that support a variety of land managers (within the landscape) with diverse environmental and socio-economic goals to collaboratively develop coordinated conservation and production management approaches that collectively achieve conservation, production, and livelihood goals at a landscape scale.
- Importance of both conservation and agricultural production: Building on the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, eco-agriculture brings conservation fully into the agricultural and rural development discourse by highlighting the importance of ecosystem services in supporting continued agricultural production. Eco-agriculture also identifies the conservation of native biodiversity and ecosystems as an equally important goal in its own right. It also supports conservationists to more effectively conserve nature within and outside protected areas by working with the agricultural community and developing conservation-friendly livelihood strategies for rural land users.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about EcoAgriculture:
- History
- Agriculture in Concert with the Environment
- Ecological farming
- Fertilizer tree
- Integrated landscape management
- EcoAgriculture Partners
- EcoAgriculture with no fertilizers or pesticides
Agricultural Science
YouTube Video About The Master of Agricultural Sciences
Agricultural science is a broad multidisciplinary field of biology that encompasses the parts of exact, natural, economic and social sciences that are used in the practice and understanding of agriculture. (Veterinary science, but not animal science, is often excluded from the definition.)
Agriculture, agricultural science, and agronomy:
The three terms are often confused. However, they cover different concepts:
Agricultural sciences include research and development on:
Agricultural biotechnology:
Agricultural biotechnology is a specific area of agricultural science involving the use of scientific tools and techniques, including genetic engineering, molecular markers, molecular diagnostics, vaccines, and tissue culture, to modify living organisms: plants, animals, and microorganisms.
Fertilizer:
One of the most common yield reducers is because of fertilizer not being applied in slightly higher quantities during transition period, the time it takes the soil to rebuild its aggregates and organic matter. Yields will decrease temporarily because of nitrogen being immobilized in the crop residue, which can take a few months to several years to decompose, depending on the crop's C to N ratio and the local environment
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Agricultural Science:
Agriculture, agricultural science, and agronomy:
The three terms are often confused. However, they cover different concepts:
- Agriculture is the set of activities that transform the environment for the production of animals and plants for human use. Agriculture concerns techniques, including the application of agronomic research.
- Agronomy is research and development related to studying and improving plant-based crops.
Agricultural sciences include research and development on:
- Plant Breeding and Genetics
- Plant Pathology
- Horticulture
- Soil Science
- Entomology
- Production techniques (e.g., irrigation management, recommended nitrogen inputs)
- Improving agricultural productivity in terms of quantity and quality (e.g., selection of drought-resistant crops and animals, development of new pesticides, yield-sensing technologies, simulation models of crop growth, in-vitro cell culture techniques)
- Minimizing the effects of pests (weeds, insects, pathogens, nematodes) on crop or animal production systems.
- Transformation of primary products into end-consumer products (e.g., production, preservation, and packaging of dairy products)
- Prevention and correction of adverse environmental effects (e.g., soil degradation, waste management, bioremediation)
- Theoretical production ecology, relating to crop production modeling
- Traditional agricultural systems, sometimes termed subsistence agriculture, which feed most of the poorest people in the world. These systems are of interest as they sometimes retain a level of integration with natural ecological systems greater than that of industrial agriculture, which may be more sustainable than some modern agricultural systems.
- Food production and demand on a global basis, with special attention paid to the major producers, such as China, India, Brazil, the US and the EU.
- Various sciences relating to agricultural resources and the environment (e.g. soil science, agroclimatology); biology of agricultural crops and animals (e.g. crop science, animal science and their included sciences, e.g. ruminant nutrition, farm animal welfare); such fields as agricultural economics and rural sociology; various disciplines encompassed in agricultural engineering.
Agricultural biotechnology:
Agricultural biotechnology is a specific area of agricultural science involving the use of scientific tools and techniques, including genetic engineering, molecular markers, molecular diagnostics, vaccines, and tissue culture, to modify living organisms: plants, animals, and microorganisms.
Fertilizer:
One of the most common yield reducers is because of fertilizer not being applied in slightly higher quantities during transition period, the time it takes the soil to rebuild its aggregates and organic matter. Yields will decrease temporarily because of nitrogen being immobilized in the crop residue, which can take a few months to several years to decompose, depending on the crop's C to N ratio and the local environment
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Agricultural Science:
- History
- A List of Prominent agricultural scientists
- Fields or related disciplines
- See also:
- Agricultural Research Council
- Agricultural sciences basic topics
- Agriculture ministry
- Agroecology
- American Society of Agronomy
- Genomics of domestication
- History of agricultural science
- Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
- International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development
- International Food Policy Research Institute, IFPRI
- List of agriculture topics
- National FFA Organization
- University of Agricultural Sciences
- Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)
- Agricultural Research Service
- International Institute of Tropical Agriculture
- International Livestock Research Institute
- The National Agricultural Library (NAL) - The most comprehensive agricultural library in the world.
- Crop Science Society of America
- American Society of Agronomy
- Soil Science Society of America
- Agricultural Science Researchers, Jobs and Discussions
- Information System for Agriculture and Food Research
- South Dakota Agricultural Laboratories
- NMSU Department of Entomology Plant Pathology and Weed Science
Crop Farming including Intensive Crop Farming
YouTube Video: Organic Sustainable Farming is the Future of Agriculture - The Future of Food
Pictured below (Clockwise from Upper Left): Why Biological Farming?; Buy Crop Insurance, Double Your Money; UAV-based crop and weed classification for future farming; Autonomous Robots Plant, Tend, and Harvest Entire Crop of Barley
A crop is a plant or animal product that can be grown and harvested extensively for profit or subsistence. Crop may refer either to the harvested parts or to the harvest in a more refined state. Most crops are cultivated in agriculture or aquaculture.
A crop is usually expanded to include macroscopic fungus (e.g. mushrooms), or algae (algaculture).
Most crops are harvested as food for humans or fodder for livestock. Some crops are gathered from the wild (including intensive gathering, e.g. ginseng).
Important non-food crops include horticulture, floriculture and industrial crops:
Important food crops:
The importance of a crop varies greatly by region. Globally, the following crops contribute most to human food supply (values of kcal/person/day for 2013 given in parentheses):
Note that many of the globally apparently minor crops are regionally very important. For example in Africa, roots & tubers dominate with 421 kcal/person/day, and sorghum and millet contribute 135 kcal and 90 kcal, respectively.
In terms of produced weight, the following crops are the most important ones (global production in thousand metric tonnes):
See also:
Intensive crop farming is a modern form of intensive farming that refers to the industrialized production of crops.
Intensive crop farming's methods include innovation in agricultural machinery, farming methods, genetic engineering technology, techniques for achieving economies of scale in production, the creation of new markets for consumption, patent protection of genetic information, and global trade. These methods are widespread in developed nations.
The practice of industrial agriculture is a relatively recent development in the history of agriculture, and the result of scientific discoveries and technological advances. Innovations in agriculture beginning in the late 19th century generally parallel developments in mass production in other industries that characterized the latter part of the Industrial Revolution.
The identification of nitrogen and phosphorus as critical factors in plant growth led to the manufacture of synthetic fertilizers, making more intensive uses of farmland for crop production possible.
Similarly, the discovery of vitamins and their role in animal nutrition, in the first two decades of the 20th century, led to vitamin supplements, which in the 1920s allowed certain livestock to be raised indoors, reducing their exposure to adverse natural elements.
The discovery of antibiotics and vaccines facilitated raising livestock in larger numbers by reducing disease. Chemicals developed for use in World War II gave rise to synthetic pesticides. Developments in shipping networks and technology have made long-distance distribution of produce feasible.
Crops:
Certain crops have proven more amenable to intensive farming than others.
Features:
Criticism:
Critics of intensively farmed crops cite a wide range of concerns. On the food quality front, it is held by critics that quality is reduced when crops are bred and grown primarily for cosmetic and shipping characteristics.
Environmentally, industrial farming of crops is claimed to be responsible for loss of biodiversity, degradation of soil quality, soil erosion, food toxicity (pesticide residues) and pollution (through agrichemical build-ups and runoff, and use of fossil fuels for agrichemical manufacture and for farm machinery and long-distance distribution).
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Intensive Crop Farming:
A crop is usually expanded to include macroscopic fungus (e.g. mushrooms), or algae (algaculture).
Most crops are harvested as food for humans or fodder for livestock. Some crops are gathered from the wild (including intensive gathering, e.g. ginseng).
Important non-food crops include horticulture, floriculture and industrial crops:
- Horticulture crops include plants used for other crops (e.g. fruit trees).
- Floriculture crops include bedding plants, houseplants, flowering garden and pot plants, cut cultivated greens, and cut flowers.
- Industrial crops are produced for:
- clothing (fiber crops),
- biofuel (energy crops, algae fuel),
- or medicine (medicinal plants).
Important food crops:
The importance of a crop varies greatly by region. Globally, the following crops contribute most to human food supply (values of kcal/person/day for 2013 given in parentheses):
- rice (541 kcal),
- wheat (527 kcal),
- sugarcane and other sugar crops (200 kcal),
- maize (corn) (147 kcal),
- soybean oil (82 kcal),
- other vegetables (74 kcal),
- potatoes (64 kcal),
- palm oil (52 kcal),
- cassava (37 kcal),
- legume pulses (37 kcal),
- sunflowerseed oil (35 kcal),
- rape and mustard oil (34 kcal),
- other fruits, (31 kcal),
- sorghum (28 kcal),
- millet (27 kcal),
- groundnuts (25 kcal),
- beans (23 kcal),
- sweet potatoes (22 kcal),
- bananas (21 kcal),
- various nuts (16 kcal),
- soybeans (14 kcal),
- cottonseed oil (13 kcal),
- groundnut oil (13 kcal),
- yams (13 kcal).
Note that many of the globally apparently minor crops are regionally very important. For example in Africa, roots & tubers dominate with 421 kcal/person/day, and sorghum and millet contribute 135 kcal and 90 kcal, respectively.
In terms of produced weight, the following crops are the most important ones (global production in thousand metric tonnes):
- Sugarcane:
- 2000=1,256,380
- 2013=1,877,110
- Maize:
- 2000=592,479
- 2013=1,016,740
- Rice:
- 2000=599,355
- 2013=745,710
- Wheat:
- 2000=585,691
- 2013=713,183
- Potato:
- 2000=327,600
- 2013=368,096
See also:
- guerrilla gardening
- General topics and economics:
- Management practices:
- Cover crop
- Crop destruction
- Crop residue
- Crop rotation
- Crop weed
- Kharif crops (crops specific to South Asia)
- Nurse crop
- Rabi crops (crops specific to South Asia)
- Genetic diversity:
- Origin:
Intensive crop farming is a modern form of intensive farming that refers to the industrialized production of crops.
Intensive crop farming's methods include innovation in agricultural machinery, farming methods, genetic engineering technology, techniques for achieving economies of scale in production, the creation of new markets for consumption, patent protection of genetic information, and global trade. These methods are widespread in developed nations.
The practice of industrial agriculture is a relatively recent development in the history of agriculture, and the result of scientific discoveries and technological advances. Innovations in agriculture beginning in the late 19th century generally parallel developments in mass production in other industries that characterized the latter part of the Industrial Revolution.
The identification of nitrogen and phosphorus as critical factors in plant growth led to the manufacture of synthetic fertilizers, making more intensive uses of farmland for crop production possible.
Similarly, the discovery of vitamins and their role in animal nutrition, in the first two decades of the 20th century, led to vitamin supplements, which in the 1920s allowed certain livestock to be raised indoors, reducing their exposure to adverse natural elements.
The discovery of antibiotics and vaccines facilitated raising livestock in larger numbers by reducing disease. Chemicals developed for use in World War II gave rise to synthetic pesticides. Developments in shipping networks and technology have made long-distance distribution of produce feasible.
Crops:
Certain crops have proven more amenable to intensive farming than others.
Features:
- large scale – hundreds or thousands of acres of a single crop (much more than can be absorbed into the local or regional market);
- monoculture – large areas of a single crop, often raised from year to year on the same land, or with little crop rotation;
- agrichemicals – reliance on imported, synthetic fertilizers and pesticides to provide nutrients and to mitigate pests and diseases, these applied on a regular schedule
- hybrid seed – use of specialized hybrids designed to favor large scale distribution (e.g. ability to ripen off the vine, to withstand shipping and handling);
- genetically engineered crops – use of genetically modified varieties designed for large scale production (e.g. ability to withstand selected herbicides);
- large scale irrigation – heavy water use, and in some cases, growing of crops in otherwise unsuitable regions by extreme use of water (e.g. rice paddies on arid land).
- high mechanization – automated machinery sustain and harvest crops.
Criticism:
Critics of intensively farmed crops cite a wide range of concerns. On the food quality front, it is held by critics that quality is reduced when crops are bred and grown primarily for cosmetic and shipping characteristics.
Environmentally, industrial farming of crops is claimed to be responsible for loss of biodiversity, degradation of soil quality, soil erosion, food toxicity (pesticide residues) and pollution (through agrichemical build-ups and runoff, and use of fossil fuels for agrichemical manufacture and for farm machinery and long-distance distribution).
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Intensive Crop Farming:
List of Most Valuable Crops and Livestock Products
- YouTube Video: How To Make the Perfect Burger - Gordon Ramsey
- YouTube Video: How To Make Chinese Fried Rice
- YouTube Video: Discover the Art of Making Wine
Click here for a List of most valuable crops and livestock products:
________________________________________________________
* -- What is the true cost of eating meat? (by The Guardian May 17, 2018)
As concerns over the huge impact on the environment, human health and animal welfare grow, what future is there for the meat industry, asks Bibi van der Zee (The Guardian)
What are the economics of meat?
Food and farming is one of the biggest economic sectors in the world. We are no longer in the 14th century, when as much as 76% of the population worked in agriculture – but farming still employs more than 26% of all workers globally.
And that does not include the people who work along the meat supply chain: the slaughterers, packagers, retailers and chefs.
In 2016, the world’s meat production was estimated at 317m metric tons, and that is expected to continue to grow. Figures for the value of the global meat industry vary wildly from $90bn to as much as $741bn.
Although the number of people directly employed by farming is currently less than 2% in the UK, the food chain now includes the agribusiness companies, the retailers, and the entertainment sector.
According to the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, in 2014 the food and drink manufacturing sector contributed £27bn to the economy, and employed 3.8 million people.
It is not simple to separate out the contribution that meat production makes to this – particularly globally. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization states that livestock is about 40% of the global value of agricultural output and supports the livelihoods and food security of almost a 1.3 billion people.
What about its cultural and social importance?
Cooked meat may have been partially responsible for the large brains that characterise Homo sapiens and have put humans where we are now. Cooking made calories from meat (and from vegetables) easier to consume and absorb than in a raw form.
And the domestication of certain animals – along with the domestication of wild grains and vegetables – marked the beginning of human agricultural history in the “fertile crescent”.
Throughout human history the hunting and farming of meat has been part of our stories and mythologies and some of our legal and religious systems; the fatted calf for the prodigal son; the medieval forest laws that created areas where no one but English royalty could hunt; the sacrifical sheep to mark the beginning of Eid Al-Adha; even the roasted wild boars consumed at the end of every adventure by Asterix and Obelix.
But is meat still crucial to human life? Some argue that, just because we’ve always eaten meat, that doesn’t mean we always have to. If we can get all the dietary nutrients and protein that we need elsewhere, should we?
How has meat production changed?
The old-fashioned vision of a mixed farm with wheat and chickens and pigs still exists. More than half of the farms in the US, for example, were small enough in 2012 to have sales of less than $10,000 dollars. But the 20th century saw the application of the principles of the industrial revolution to agriculture - how could inputs be minimised and profits be maximised?
The result was the factory farm, first for chickens, then pigs, and more recently cattle.
Producers discovered that animals could be kept inside, and fed grain, and could be bred to grow more quickly and get fatter in the right places. Since 1925, the average days to market for a US chicken has been reduced from 112 to 48, while its weight has ballooned from a market weight of 2.5 pounds to 6.2.
Pig and cattle farming has followed suit. Sows are held in gestation crates for up to four weeks once they are pregnant, and then put into farrowing crates once they’ve had their piglets to prevent them accidentally crushing their young. Industrially reared pigs spend their lives in indoor pens. Cattle farming is now being similarly streamlined, with cows in the last few months of their lives being fattened in feedlots with no access to grass and sometimes no shelter.
What is the environmental impact of our current farming model?
It is extremely difficult to separate out the different impacts of different farming models and types. Many measurements look at agricultural impact without making a distinction between arable v livestock, or industrial v small farms. However, the following information begins to indicate the scale of the problem.
Water use:
An influential study in 2010 of the water footprints for meat estimated that while vegetables had a footprint of about 322 litres per kg, and fruits drank up 962, meat was far more thirsty: chicken came in at 4,325l/kg, pork at 5,988l/kg, sheep/goat meat at 8,763l/kg, and beef at a stupendous 15,415l/kg. Some non-meat products were also pretty eye-watering: nuts came in at 9,063l/kg.
To put these figures into context: the planet faces growing water constraints as our freshwater reservoirs and aquifers dry up. On some estimates farming accounts for about 70% of water used in the world today, but a 2013 study found that it uses up to 92% of our freshwater, with nearly one-third of that related to animal products.
Water pollution:
Farms contribute to water pollution in a range of ways: some of those are associated more closely with arable farming, and some with livestock, but it’s worth remembering that one-third of the world’s grain is now fed to animals. The FAO believes that the livestock sector, which is growing and intensifying faster than crop production, has “serious implications” for water quality.
The types of water pollution include: nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilisers and animal excreta); pesticides; sediment; organic matter (oxygen demanding substances such as plant matter and livestock excreta); pathogens (E coli etc); metals (selenium etc) and emerging pollutants (drug residues, hormones and feed additives).
The impacts are wide-reaching. Eutrophication is caused by excesses of nutrients and organic matter (animal faeces, leftover feed and crop residues) – which cause algae and plants to grow excessively and use up all the oxygen in the body of wate at the expense of other species. A review in 2015 identified 415 coastal bodies already suffering these problems.
Pesticide pollution can kill weeds and insects away from the agricultural area, with impacts that may be felt all the way up the food chain. And although scientists do not yet have full data on the connection between antibiotic use in animals and rising levels of antibiotic resistance in the human population, water pollution by antibiotics (which continue to have an active life even after going through the animal and into the water) is definitely in the frame.
Land use and deforestation:
Livestock is the world’s largest user of land resources, says the FAO, “with grazing land and cropland dedicated to the production of feed representing almost 80% of all agricultural land.
Feed crops are grown in one-third of total cropland, while the total land area occupied by pasture is equivalent to 26% of the ice-free terrestrial surface”.
Climate change:
It’s hard to work out exactly what quantity of greenhouse gases (GHG) is emitted by the meat industry from farm to fork; carbon emissions are not officially counted along entire chains in that way, and so a number of complicated studies and calculations have attempted to fill the gap.
According to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, agriculture, forestry and other land use accounts for 24% of greenhouse gases. Attempts to pick out the role of animal farming within that have come up with a huge range of numbers, from 6-32%: the difference, according to the Meat Atlas, “depends on the basis of measurement”. Should it just be livestock, or should it include a whole lot of other factors?
Different models of farming have different levels of emissions: this has generated an energetic discussion around extensive versus intensive farming, and regenerative farming – a model that aims to combine technologies and techniques to regenerate soils and biodiversity levels while also sequestrating carbon.
What about the giant companies that dominate the sector? A 2017 landmark study found that the top three meat firms – JBS, Cargill and Tyson – emitted more greenhouse gases in 2016 than all of France.
What next?
Some argue that veganism is the only sane way forward. A study last year showed, for example, that if all Americans substituted beans for beef, the country would be close to meeting the greenhouse gas goals agreed by Barack Obama.
But there are some alternatives. Reducing the amount of meat you eat while improving its quality is advocated by many environmental groups. But where do you find this meat? The organic movement was founded on the pioneering work of Sir Alfred Howard. It is still relatively small - in Europe 5.7% of agricultural land is managed organically - but influential.
There are other agricultural models, such as biodynamic farming and permaculture. More recently some innovators have been fusing technology with environmental principles in the form of agroforestry, silvopasture, conservation farming, or regenerative agriculture to create farming methods which all encompass carbon sequestration, high biodiversity and good animal welfare.
A recent study showed that managed grazing (a technique which involves moving cows around to graze) is an effective way to sequester carbon. However, while organic and biodynamic meats have labels, regenerative farming, as yet, does not - so you need to investigate your farmer yourself.
Further reading:
________________________________________________________
* -- What is the true cost of eating meat? (by The Guardian May 17, 2018)
As concerns over the huge impact on the environment, human health and animal welfare grow, what future is there for the meat industry, asks Bibi van der Zee (The Guardian)
What are the economics of meat?
Food and farming is one of the biggest economic sectors in the world. We are no longer in the 14th century, when as much as 76% of the population worked in agriculture – but farming still employs more than 26% of all workers globally.
And that does not include the people who work along the meat supply chain: the slaughterers, packagers, retailers and chefs.
In 2016, the world’s meat production was estimated at 317m metric tons, and that is expected to continue to grow. Figures for the value of the global meat industry vary wildly from $90bn to as much as $741bn.
Although the number of people directly employed by farming is currently less than 2% in the UK, the food chain now includes the agribusiness companies, the retailers, and the entertainment sector.
According to the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, in 2014 the food and drink manufacturing sector contributed £27bn to the economy, and employed 3.8 million people.
It is not simple to separate out the contribution that meat production makes to this – particularly globally. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization states that livestock is about 40% of the global value of agricultural output and supports the livelihoods and food security of almost a 1.3 billion people.
What about its cultural and social importance?
Cooked meat may have been partially responsible for the large brains that characterise Homo sapiens and have put humans where we are now. Cooking made calories from meat (and from vegetables) easier to consume and absorb than in a raw form.
And the domestication of certain animals – along with the domestication of wild grains and vegetables – marked the beginning of human agricultural history in the “fertile crescent”.
Throughout human history the hunting and farming of meat has been part of our stories and mythologies and some of our legal and religious systems; the fatted calf for the prodigal son; the medieval forest laws that created areas where no one but English royalty could hunt; the sacrifical sheep to mark the beginning of Eid Al-Adha; even the roasted wild boars consumed at the end of every adventure by Asterix and Obelix.
But is meat still crucial to human life? Some argue that, just because we’ve always eaten meat, that doesn’t mean we always have to. If we can get all the dietary nutrients and protein that we need elsewhere, should we?
How has meat production changed?
The old-fashioned vision of a mixed farm with wheat and chickens and pigs still exists. More than half of the farms in the US, for example, were small enough in 2012 to have sales of less than $10,000 dollars. But the 20th century saw the application of the principles of the industrial revolution to agriculture - how could inputs be minimised and profits be maximised?
The result was the factory farm, first for chickens, then pigs, and more recently cattle.
Producers discovered that animals could be kept inside, and fed grain, and could be bred to grow more quickly and get fatter in the right places. Since 1925, the average days to market for a US chicken has been reduced from 112 to 48, while its weight has ballooned from a market weight of 2.5 pounds to 6.2.
Pig and cattle farming has followed suit. Sows are held in gestation crates for up to four weeks once they are pregnant, and then put into farrowing crates once they’ve had their piglets to prevent them accidentally crushing their young. Industrially reared pigs spend their lives in indoor pens. Cattle farming is now being similarly streamlined, with cows in the last few months of their lives being fattened in feedlots with no access to grass and sometimes no shelter.
What is the environmental impact of our current farming model?
It is extremely difficult to separate out the different impacts of different farming models and types. Many measurements look at agricultural impact without making a distinction between arable v livestock, or industrial v small farms. However, the following information begins to indicate the scale of the problem.
Water use:
An influential study in 2010 of the water footprints for meat estimated that while vegetables had a footprint of about 322 litres per kg, and fruits drank up 962, meat was far more thirsty: chicken came in at 4,325l/kg, pork at 5,988l/kg, sheep/goat meat at 8,763l/kg, and beef at a stupendous 15,415l/kg. Some non-meat products were also pretty eye-watering: nuts came in at 9,063l/kg.
To put these figures into context: the planet faces growing water constraints as our freshwater reservoirs and aquifers dry up. On some estimates farming accounts for about 70% of water used in the world today, but a 2013 study found that it uses up to 92% of our freshwater, with nearly one-third of that related to animal products.
Water pollution:
Farms contribute to water pollution in a range of ways: some of those are associated more closely with arable farming, and some with livestock, but it’s worth remembering that one-third of the world’s grain is now fed to animals. The FAO believes that the livestock sector, which is growing and intensifying faster than crop production, has “serious implications” for water quality.
The types of water pollution include: nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilisers and animal excreta); pesticides; sediment; organic matter (oxygen demanding substances such as plant matter and livestock excreta); pathogens (E coli etc); metals (selenium etc) and emerging pollutants (drug residues, hormones and feed additives).
The impacts are wide-reaching. Eutrophication is caused by excesses of nutrients and organic matter (animal faeces, leftover feed and crop residues) – which cause algae and plants to grow excessively and use up all the oxygen in the body of wate at the expense of other species. A review in 2015 identified 415 coastal bodies already suffering these problems.
Pesticide pollution can kill weeds and insects away from the agricultural area, with impacts that may be felt all the way up the food chain. And although scientists do not yet have full data on the connection between antibiotic use in animals and rising levels of antibiotic resistance in the human population, water pollution by antibiotics (which continue to have an active life even after going through the animal and into the water) is definitely in the frame.
Land use and deforestation:
Livestock is the world’s largest user of land resources, says the FAO, “with grazing land and cropland dedicated to the production of feed representing almost 80% of all agricultural land.
Feed crops are grown in one-third of total cropland, while the total land area occupied by pasture is equivalent to 26% of the ice-free terrestrial surface”.
Climate change:
It’s hard to work out exactly what quantity of greenhouse gases (GHG) is emitted by the meat industry from farm to fork; carbon emissions are not officially counted along entire chains in that way, and so a number of complicated studies and calculations have attempted to fill the gap.
According to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, agriculture, forestry and other land use accounts for 24% of greenhouse gases. Attempts to pick out the role of animal farming within that have come up with a huge range of numbers, from 6-32%: the difference, according to the Meat Atlas, “depends on the basis of measurement”. Should it just be livestock, or should it include a whole lot of other factors?
Different models of farming have different levels of emissions: this has generated an energetic discussion around extensive versus intensive farming, and regenerative farming – a model that aims to combine technologies and techniques to regenerate soils and biodiversity levels while also sequestrating carbon.
What about the giant companies that dominate the sector? A 2017 landmark study found that the top three meat firms – JBS, Cargill and Tyson – emitted more greenhouse gases in 2016 than all of France.
What next?
Some argue that veganism is the only sane way forward. A study last year showed, for example, that if all Americans substituted beans for beef, the country would be close to meeting the greenhouse gas goals agreed by Barack Obama.
But there are some alternatives. Reducing the amount of meat you eat while improving its quality is advocated by many environmental groups. But where do you find this meat? The organic movement was founded on the pioneering work of Sir Alfred Howard. It is still relatively small - in Europe 5.7% of agricultural land is managed organically - but influential.
There are other agricultural models, such as biodynamic farming and permaculture. More recently some innovators have been fusing technology with environmental principles in the form of agroforestry, silvopasture, conservation farming, or regenerative agriculture to create farming methods which all encompass carbon sequestration, high biodiversity and good animal welfare.
A recent study showed that managed grazing (a technique which involves moving cows around to graze) is an effective way to sequester carbon. However, while organic and biodynamic meats have labels, regenerative farming, as yet, does not - so you need to investigate your farmer yourself.
Further reading:
- The UN Food and Agricultural Organization has a huge collection of data, and has also published some crucial reports on this issue, including the groundbreaking Livestock’s long shadow.
- The Meat Atlas.
- Some institutions doing interesting research include:
- Farming bodies: :
- the National Farmers’ Union,
- the Farm Bureau,
- Copa-Cogeca.
Cattle, including a List of Cattle Breeds
- YouTube Video: All 400 Cattle Breeds | Showing all Cow breeds in the World A to Z
- YouTube Video: Mini Milkers - The Miniature Jersey Cow
- YouTube Video: How to Milk a Cow by Hand
Click here for a List of Cattle Breeds
Below, more about Cattle:
Cattle, or cows (female) and bulls (male), are the most common type of large domesticated ungulates. They are a prominent modern member of the subfamily Bovinae, are the most widespread species of the genus Bos, and are most commonly classified collectively as Bos taurus.
Cattle are commonly raised as livestock for meat (beef or veal, see beef cattle), for milk (dairy cattle), and for hides, which are used to make leather. They are used as riding animals and draft animals (oxen or bullocks, which pull carts, plows and other implements).
Another product of cattle is their dung, which can be used to create manure or fuel. In some regions, such as parts of India, cattle have significant religious meaning. Cattle, mostly small breeds such as the Miniature Zebu, are also kept as pets.
Around 10,500 years ago, cattle were domesticated from as few as 80 progenitors in central Anatolia, the Levant and Western Iran. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), there are approximately 1.5 billion cattle in the world as of 2018. In 2009, cattle became one of the first livestock animals to have a fully mapped genome.
Taxonomy:
See also: Bos and Bovinae
Cattle were originally identified as three separate species: Bos taurus, the European or "taurine" cattle (including similar types from Africa and Asia); Bos indicus, the zebu; and the extinct Bos primigenius, the aurochs. The aurochs is ancestral to both zebu and taurine cattle. These have been reclassified as one species, Bos taurus, with three subspecies: Bos taurus primigenius, Bos taurus indicus, and Bos taurus taurus.
Complicating the matter is the ability of cattle to interbreed with other closely related species. Hybrid individuals and even breeds exist, not only between taurine cattle and zebu (such as the sanga cattle, Bos taurus africanus), but also between one or both of these and some other members of the genus Bos – yaks (the dzo or yattle), banteng, and gaur.
Hybrids such as the beefalo breed can even occur between taurine cattle and either species of bison, leading some authors to consider them part of the genus Bos, as well. The hybrid origin of some types may not be obvious – for example, genetic testing of the Dwarf Lulu breed, the only taurine-type cattle in Nepal, found them to be a mix of taurine cattle, zebu, and yak. However, cattle cannot be successfully hybridized with more distantly related bovines such as water buffalo or African buffalo.
The aurochs originally ranged throughout Europe, North Africa, and much of Asia. In historical times, its range became restricted to Europe, and the last known individual died in Mazovia, Poland, in about 1627. Breeders have attempted to recreate cattle of similar appearance to aurochs by crossing traditional types of domesticated cattle, creating the Heck cattle breed.
Etymology:
Cattle did not originate as the term for bovine animals. It was borrowed from Anglo-Norman catel, itself from medieval Latin capitale 'principal sum of money, capital', itself derived in turn from Latin caput 'head'. Cattle originally meant movable personal property, especially livestock of any kind, as opposed to real property (the land, which also included wild or small free-roaming animals such as chickens—they were sold as part of the land).
The word is a variant of chattel (a unit of personal property) and closely related to capital in the economic sense. The term replaced earlier Old English feoh 'cattle, property', which survives today as fee (cf. German: Vieh, Dutch: vee, Gothic: faihu).
The word "cow" came via Anglo-Saxon cū (plural cȳ), from Common Indo-European gʷōus (genitive gʷowés) = "a bovine animal", compare Persian: gâv, Sanskrit: go-, Welsh: buwch. The plural cȳ became ki or kie in Middle English, and an additional plural ending was often added, giving kine, kien, but also kies, kuin and others. This is the origin of the now archaic English plural, "kine". The Scots language singular is coo or cou, and the plural is "kye".
In older English sources such as the King James Version of the Bible, "cattle" refers to livestock, as opposed to "deer" which refers to wildlife. "Wild cattle" may refer to feral cattle or to undomesticated species of the genus Bos. Today, when used without any other qualifier, the modern meaning of "cattle" is usually restricted to domesticated bovines.
Terminology:
In general, the same words are used in different parts of the world, but with minor differences in the definitions. The terminology described here contrasts the differences in definition between the United Kingdom and other British-influenced parts of the world such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland and the United States:
Singular terminology issue:
"Cattle" can only be used in the plural and not in the singular: it is a plurale tantum. Thus one may refer to "three cattle" or "some cattle", but not "one cattle". "One head of cattle" is a valid though periphrastic way to refer to one animal of indeterminate or unknown age and sex; otherwise no universally used single-word singular form of cattle exists in modern English, other than the sex- and age-specific terms such as cow, bull, steer and heifer.
Historically, "ox" was not a sex-specific term for adult cattle, but generally this is now used only for working cattle, especially adult castrated males. The term is also incorporated into the names of other species, such as the musk ox and "grunting ox" (yak), and is used in some areas to describe certain cattle products such as ox-hide and oxtail.
Cow is in general use as a singular for the collective cattle. The word cow is easy to use when a singular is needed and the sex is unknown or irrelevant—when "there is a cow in the road", for example.
Further, any herd of fully mature cattle in or near a pasture is statistically likely to consist mostly of cows, so the term is probably accurate even in the restrictive sense. Other than the few bulls needed for breeding, the vast majority of male cattle are castrated as calves and are used as oxen or slaughtered for meat before the age of three years.
Thus, in a pastured herd, any calves or herd bulls usually are clearly distinguishable from the cows due to distinctively different sizes and clear anatomical differences. Merriam-Webster and Oxford Living Dictionaries recognize the sex-nonspecific use of cow as an alternate definition, whereas Collins and the OED do not.
Colloquially, more general non-specific terms may denote cattle when a singular form is needed. Head of cattle is usually used only after a numeral. Australian, New Zealand and British farmers use the term beast or cattle beast. Bovine is also used in Britain.
The term critter is common in the western United States and Canada, particularly when referring to young cattle. In some areas of the American South (particularly the Appalachian region), where both dairy and beef cattle are present, an individual animal was once called a "beef critter", though that term is becoming archaic.
Other terminology:
Cattle raised for human consumption are called beef cattle. Within the beef cattle industry in parts of the United States, the term beef (plural beeves) is still used in its archaic sense to refer to an animal of either sex. Cows of certain breeds that are kept for the milk they give are called dairy cows or milking cows (formerly milch cows). Most young male offspring of dairy cows are sold for veal, and may be referred to as veal calves.
The term dogies is used to describe orphaned calves in the context of ranch work in the American West, as in "Keep them dogies moving". In some places, a cow kept to provide milk for one family is called a "house cow". Other obsolete terms for cattle include "neat" (this use survives in "neatsfoot oil", extracted from the feet and legs of cattle), and "beefing" (young animal fit for slaughter).
An onomatopoeic term for one of the most common sounds made by cattle is moo (also called lowing). There are a number of other sounds made by cattle, including calves bawling, and bulls bellowing. Bawling is most common for cows after weaning of a calf. The bullroarer makes a sound similar to a bull's territorial call.
Characteristics:
Anatomy:
Cattle are large quadrupedal ungulate mammals with cloven hooves. Most breeds have horns, which can be as large as the Texas Longhorn or small like a scur. Careful genetic selection has allowed polled (hornless) cattle to become widespread.
Digestive system:
Further information: Digestive system of ruminants
Cattle are ruminants, meaning their digestive system is highly specialized to allow the use of poorly digestible plants as food. Cattle have one stomach with four compartments, the rumen, reticulum, omasum, and abomasum, with the rumen being the largest compartment.
The reticulum, the smallest compartment, is known as the "honeycomb". The omasum's main function is to absorb water and nutrients from the digestible feed. The omasum is known as the "many plies". The abomasum is like the human stomach; this is why it is known as the "true stomach".
Cattle are known for regurgitating and re-chewing their food, known as cud chewing, like most ruminants. While the animal is feeding, the food is swallowed without being chewed and goes into the rumen for storage until the animal can find a quiet place to continue the digestion process. The food is regurgitated, a mouthful at a time, back up to the mouth, where the food, now called the cud, is chewed by the molars, grinding down the coarse vegetation to small particles.
The cud is then swallowed again and further digested by specialized microorganisms in the rumen. These microbes are primarily responsible for decomposing cellulose and other carbohydrates into volatile fatty acids cattle use as their primary metabolic fuel.
The microbes inside the rumen also synthesize amino acids from non-protein nitrogenous sources, such as urea and ammonia. As these microbes reproduce in the rumen, older generations die and their cells continue on through the digestive tract. These cells are then partially digested in the small intestines, allowing cattle to gain a high-quality protein source. These features allow cattle to thrive on grasses and other tough vegetation.
Gestation and size:
The gestation period for a cow is about nine months long. A newborn calf's size can vary among breeds, but a typical calf weighs 25 to 45 kg (55 to 99 lb). Adult size and weight vary significantly among breeds and sex. Steers are generally killed before reaching 750 kg (1,650 lb). Breeding stock may be allowed a longer lifespan, occasionally living as long as 25 years. The oldest recorded cow, Big Bertha, died at the age of 48 in 1993.
Reproduction:
On farms it is very common to use artificial insemination (AI), a medically assisted reproduction technique consisting of the artificial deposition of semen in the female's genital tract. It is used in cases where the spermatozoa can not reach the fallopian tubes or simply by choice of the owner of the animal. It consists of transferring, to the uterine cavity, spermatozoa previously collected and processed, with the selection of morphologically more normal and mobile spermatozoa.
A cow's udder contains two pairs of mammary glands, (commonly referred to as teats) creating four "quarters". The front ones are referred to as fore quarters and the rear ones rear quarters.
Synchronization of cattle ovulation to benefit dairy farming may be accomplished via induced ovulation techniques.
Further information: Bull § Reproductive anatomy
Bulls become fertile at about seven months of age. Their fertility is closely related to the size of their testicles, and one simple test of fertility is to measure the circumference of the scrotum: a young bull is likely to be fertile once this reaches 28 centimeters (11 in); that of a fully adult bull may be over 40 centimeters (16 in).
A bull has a fibro-elastic penis. Given the small amount of erectile tissue, there is little enlargement after erection. The penis is quite rigid when non-erect, and becomes even more rigid during erection. Protrusion is not affected much by erection, but more by relaxation of the retractor penis muscle and straightening of the sigmoid flexure.
Weight:
The weight of adult cattle varies, depending on the breed. Smaller kinds, such as Dexter and Jersey adults, range between 272 to 454 kg (600 to 1,000 lb). Large Continental breeds, such as Charolais, Marchigiana, Belgian Blue and Chianina adults range from 635 to 1,134 kg (1,400 to 2,500 lb). British breeds, such as Hereford, Angus, and Shorthorn, mature at between 454 to 907 kg (1,000 to 2,000 lb), occasionally higher, particularly with Angus and Hereford.
Bulls are larger than cows of the same breed by up to a few hundred kilograms. Chianina bulls can weigh up to 1,500 kg (3,300 lb); British bulls, such as Angus and Hereford, can weigh as little as 907 kg (2,000 lb) to as much as 1,361 kg (3,000 lbs).
The world record for the heaviest bull was 1,740 kg (3,840 lb), a Chianina named Donetto, when he was exhibited at the Arezzo show in 1955. The heaviest steer was eight-year-old 'Old Ben', a Shorthorn/Hereford cross weighing in at 2,140 kg (4,720 lb) in 1910.
In the United States, the average weight of beef cattle has steadily increased, especially since the 1970s, requiring the building of new slaughterhouses able to handle larger carcasses. New packing plants in the 1980s stimulated a large increase in cattle weights. Before 1790 beef cattle averaged only 160 kg (350 lb) net; and thereafter weights climbed steadily.
Cognition:
In laboratory studies, young cattle are able to memorize the locations of several food sources and retain this memory for at least 8 hours, although this declined after 12 hours. Fifteen-month-old heifers learn more quickly than adult cows which have had either one or two calvings, but their longer-term memory is less stable.
Mature cattle perform well in spatial learning tasks and have a good long-term memory in these tests. Cattle tested in a radial arm maze are able to remember the locations of high-quality food for at least 30 days. Although they initially learn to avoid low-quality food, this memory diminishes over the same duration. Under less artificial testing conditions, young cattle showed they were able to remember the location of feed for at least 48 days.
Cattle can make an association between a visual stimulus and food within 1 day—memory of this association can be retained for 1 year, despite a slight decay.
Calves are capable of discrimination learning and adult cattle compare favorably with small mammals in their learning ability in the Closed-field Test.
They are also able to discriminate between familiar individuals, and among humans. Cattle can tell the difference between familiar and unfamiliar animals of the same species (conspecifics). Studies show they behave less aggressively toward familiar individuals when they are forming a new group.
Calves can also discriminate between humans based on previous experience, as shown by approaching those who handled them positively and avoiding those who handled them aversively. Although cattle can discriminate between humans by their faces alone, they also use other cues such as the color of clothes when these are available.
In audio play-back studies, calves prefer their own mother's vocalizations compared to the vocalizations of an unfamiliar mother.
In laboratory studies using images, cattle can discriminate between images of the heads of cattle and other animal species. They are also able to distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics. Furthermore, they are able to categorize images as familiar and unfamiliar individuals.
When mixed with other individuals, cloned calves from the same donor form subgroups, indicating that kin discrimination occurs and may be a basis of grouping behaviour. It has also been shown using images of cattle that both artificially inseminated and cloned calves have similar cognitive capacities of kin and non-kin discrimination.
Cattle can recognize familiar individuals. Visual individual recognition is a more complex mental process than visual discrimination. It requires the recollection of the learned idiosyncratic identity of an individual that has been previously encountered and the formation of a mental representation.
By using 2-dimensional images of the heads of one cow (face, profiles, 3⁄4 views), all the tested heifers showed individual recognition of familiar and unfamiliar individuals from their own breed. Furthermore, almost all the heifers recognized unknown individuals from different breeds, although this was achieved with greater difficulty.
Individual recognition was most difficult when the visual features of the breed being tested were quite different from the breed in the image, for example, the breed being tested had no spots whereas the image was of a spotted breed.
Cattle use visual/brain lateralisation in their visual scanning of novel and familiar stimuli. Domestic cattle prefer to view novel stimuli with the left eye, i.e. using the right brain hemisphere (similar to horses, Australian magpies, chicks, toads and fish) but use the right eye, i.e. using the left hemisphere, for viewing familiar stimuli.
Temperament and emotions:
In cattle, temperament can affect production traits such as carcass and meat quality or milk yield as well as affecting the animal's overall health and reproduction. Cattle temperament is defined as "the consistent behavioral and physiological difference observed between individuals in response to a stressor or environmental challenge and is used to describe the relatively stable difference in the behavioral predisposition of an animal, which can be related to psychobiological mechanisms".
Generally, cattle temperament is assumed to be multidimensional. Five underlying categories of temperament traits have been proposed:
In a study on Holstein–Friesian heifers learning to press a panel to open a gate for access to a food reward, the researchers also recorded the heart rate and behavior of the heifers when moving along the race towards the food. When the heifers made clear improvements in learning, they had higher heart rates and tended to move more vigorously along the race. The researchers concluded this was an indication that cattle may react emotionally to their own learning improvement.
Negative emotional states are associated with a bias toward negative responses towards ambiguous cues in judgement tasks. After separation from their mothers, Holstein calves showed such a cognitive bias indicative of low mood. A similar study showed that after hot-iron disbudding (dehorning), calves had a similar negative bias indicating that post-operative pain following this routine procedure results in a negative change in emotional state.
In studies of visual discrimination, the position of the ears has been used as an indicator of emotional state. When cattle are stressed other cattle can tell by the chemicals released in their urine.
Cattle are very gregarious and even short-term isolation is considered to cause severe psychological stress. When Aubrac and Friesian heifers are isolated, they increase their vocalizations and experience increased heart rate and plasma cortisol concentrations. These physiological changes are greater in Aubracs.
When visual contact is re-instated, vocalizations rapidly decline, regardless of the familiarity of the returning cattle, however, heart rate decreases are greater if the returning cattle are familiar to the previously-isolated individual. Mirrors have been used to reduce stress in isolated cattle.
Senses:
Cattle use all of the five widely recognized sensory modalities. These can assist in some complex behavioral patterns, for example, in grazing behavior. Cattle eat mixed diets, but when given the opportunity, show a partial preference of approximately 70% clover and 30% grass. This preference has a diurnal pattern, with a stronger preference for clover in the morning, and the proportion of grass increasing towards the evening.
Vision:
Vision is the dominant sense in cattle and they obtain almost 50% of their information visually.
Cattle are a prey animal and to assist predator detection, their eyes are located on the sides of their head rather than the front. This gives them a wide field of view of 330° but limits binocular vision (and therefore stereopsis) to 30° to 50° compared to 140° in humans. This means they have a blind spot directly behind them. Cattle have good visual acuity, but compared to humans, their visual accommodation is poor.
Cattle have two kinds of color receptors in the cone cells of their retinas. This means that cattle are dichromatic, as are most other non-primate land mammals. There are two to three rods per cone in the fovea centralis but five to six near the optic papilla.
Cattle can distinguish long wavelength colors (yellow, orange and red) much better than the shorter wavelengths (blue, grey and green). Calves are able to discriminate between long (red) and short (blue) or medium (green) wavelengths, but have limited ability to discriminate between the short and medium. They also approach handlers more quickly under red light. Whilst having good color sensitivity, it is not as good as humans or sheep.
A common misconception about cattle (particularly bulls) is that they are enraged by the color red (something provocative is often said to be "like a red flag to a bull"). This is a myth. In bullfighting, it is the movement of the red flag or cape that irritates the bull and incites it to charge.
Taste:
Cattle have a well-developed sense of taste and can distinguish the four primary tastes (sweet, salty, bitter and sour). They possess around 20,000 taste buds. The strength of taste perception depends on the individual's current food requirements. They avoid bitter-tasting foods (potentially toxic) and have a marked preference for sweet (high calorific value) and salty foods (electrolyte balance). Their sensitivity to sour-tasting foods helps them to maintain optimal ruminal pH.
Plants have low levels of sodium and cattle have developed the capacity of seeking salt by taste and smell. If cattle become depleted of sodium salts, they show increased locomotion directed to searching for these. To assist in their search, the olfactory and gustatory receptors able to detect minute amounts of sodium salts increase their sensitivity as biochemical disruption develops with sodium salt depletion.
Hearing:
Cattle hearing ranges from 23 Hz to 35 kHz. Their frequency of best sensitivity is 8 kHz and they have a lowest threshold of −21 db (re 20 μN/m−2), which means their hearing is more acute than horses (lowest threshold of 7 db). Sound localization acuity thresholds are an average of 30°.
This means that cattle are less able to localize sounds compared to goats (18°), dogs (8°) and humans (0.8°). Because cattle have a broad foveal fields of view covering almost the entire horizon, they may not need very accurate locus information from their auditory systems to direct their gaze to a sound source.
Vocalizations are an important mode of communication amongst cattle and can provide information on the age, sex, dominance status and reproductive status of the caller. Calves can recognize their mothers using vocalizations; vocal behaviour may play a role by indicating estrus and competitive display by bulls.
Olfaction and gustation:
Cattle have a range of odiferous glands over their body including interdigital, infraorbital, inguinal and sebaceous glands, indicating that olfaction probably plays a large role in their social life.
Both the primary olfactory system using the olfactory bulbs, and the secondary olfactory system using the vomeronasal organ are used. This latter olfactory system is used in the flehmen response. There is evidence that when cattle are stressed, this can be recognized by other cattle and this is communicated by alarm substances in the urine.
The odor of dog feces induces behavioral changes prior to cattle feeding, whereas the odors of urine from either stressed or non-stressed conspecifics and blood have no effect.
In the laboratory, cattle can be trained to recognise conspecific individuals using olfaction only.
In general, cattle use their sense of smell to "expand" on information detected by other sensory modalities. However, in the case of social and reproductive behaviours, olfaction is a key source of information.
Touch:
Cattle have tactile sensations detected mainly by mechanoreceptors, thermoreceptors and nociceptors in the skin and muzzle. These are used most frequently when cattle explore their environment.
Magnetoreception:
There is conflicting evidence for magnetoreception in cattle. One study reported that resting and grazing cattle tend to align their body axes in the geomagnetic north–south (N-S) direction. In a follow-up study, cattle exposed to various magnetic fields directly beneath or in the vicinity of power lines trending in various magnetic directions exhibited distinct patterns of alignment. However, in 2011, a group of Czech researchers reported their failed attempt to replicate the finding using Google Earth images.
Behavior:
Under natural conditions, calves stay with their mother until weaning at 8 to 11 months. Heifer and bull calves are equally attached to their mothers in the first few months of life.
Cattle are considered to be "hider" type animals, but in the artificial environment of small calving pens, close proximity between cow and calf is maintained by the mother at the first three calvings but this changes to being mediated by the calf after these. Primiparous dams show a higher incidence of abnormal maternal behavior.
Beef-calves reared on the range suckle an average of 5.0 times every 24 hours with an average total time of 46 min spent suckling. There is a diurnal rhythm in suckling activity with peaks between 05:00–07:00, 10:00–13:00 and 17:00–21:00.
Studies on the natural weaning of zebu cattle (Bos indicus) have shown that the cow weans her calves over a 2-week period, but after that, she continues to show strong affiliatory behavior with her offspring and preferentially chooses them for grooming and as grazing partners for at least 4–5 years.
Reproductive behavior:
Semi-wild Highland cattle heifers first give birth at 2 or 3 years of age, and the timing of birth is synchronized with increases in natural food quality. Average calving interval is 391 days, and calving mortality within the first year of life is 5%.
Dominance and leadership:
One study showed that over a 4-year period, dominance relationships within a herd of semi-wild highland cattle were very firm. There were few overt aggressive conflicts and the majority of disputes were settled by agonistic (non-aggressive, competitive) behaviors that involved no physical contact between opponents (e.g. threatening and spontaneous withdrawing).
Such agonistic behavior reduces the risk of injury. Dominance status depended on age and sex, with older animals generally being dominant to young ones and males dominant to females. Young bulls gained superior dominance status over adult cows when they reached about 2 years of age.
As with many animal dominance hierarchies, dominance-associated aggressiveness does not correlate with rank position, but is closely related to rank distance between individuals.
Dominance is maintained in several ways. Cattle often engage in mock fights where they test each other's strength in a non-aggressive way. Licking is primarily performed by subordinates and received by dominant animals. Mounting is a playful behavior shown by calves of both sexes and by bulls and sometimes by cows in estrus, however, this is not a dominance related behavior as has been found in other species.
The horns of cattle are "honest signals" used in mate selection. Furthermore, horned cattle attempt to keep greater distances between themselves and have fewer physical interactions than hornless cattle. This leads to more stable social relationships.
In calves, the frequency of agonistic behavior decreases as space allowance increases, but this does not occur for changes in group size. However, in adult cattle, the number of agonistic encounters increases as the group size increases.
Grazing behavior:
When grazing, cattle vary several aspects of their bite, i.e. tongue and jaw movements, depending on characteristics of the plant they are eating. Bite area decreases with the density of the plants but increases with their height.
Bite area is determined by the sweep of the tongue; in one study observing 750-kilogram (1,650 lb) steers, bite area reached a maximum of approximately 170 cm2 (30 sq in). Bite depth increases with the height of the plants. By adjusting their behavior, cattle obtain heavier bites in swards that are tall and sparse compared with short, dense swards of equal mass/area.
Cattle adjust other aspects of their grazing behavior in relation to the available food; foraging velocity decreases and intake rate increases in areas of abundant palatable forage.
Cattle avoid grazing areas contaminated by the faeces of other cattle more strongly than they avoid areas contaminated by sheep, but they do not avoid pasture contaminated by rabbit feces.
Genetics:
Further information: Bovine genome
On 24 April 2009, edition of the journal Science, a team of researchers led by the National Institutes of Health and the US Department of Agriculture reported having mapped the bovine genome. The scientists found cattle have about 22,000 genes, and 80% of their genes are shared with humans, and they share about 1000 genes with dogs and rodents, but are not found in humans.
Using this bovine "HapMap", researchers can track the differences between the breeds that affect the quality of meat and milk yields.
Behavioral traits of cattle can be as heritable as some production traits, and often, the two can be related. The heritability of fear varies markedly in cattle from low (0.1) to high (0.53); such high variation is also found in pigs and sheep, probably due to differences in the methods used. The heritability of temperament (response to isolation during handling) has been calculated as 0.36 and 0.46 for habituation to handling.
Rangeland assessments show that the heritability of aggressiveness in cattle is around 0.36.
Quantitative trait loci (QTLs) have been found for a range of production and behavioral characteristics for both dairy and beef cattle.
Domestication and husbandry:
Cattle occupy a unique role in human history, having been domesticated since at least the early neolithic age.
Archeozoological and genetic data indicate that cattle were first domesticated from wild aurochs (Bos primigenius) approximately 10,500 years ago. There were two major areas of domestication: one in the Near East (specifically central Anatolia, the Levant and Western Iran), giving rise to the taurine line, and a second in the area that is now Pakistan, resulting in the indicine line.
Modern mitochondrial DNA variation indicates the taurine line may have arisen from as few as 80 aurochs tamed in the upper reaches of Mesopotamia near the villages of Çayönü Tepesi in what is now southeastern Turkey and Dja'de el-Mughara in what is now northern Iraq.
Although European cattle are largely descended from the taurine lineage, gene flow from African cattle (partially of indicine origin) contributed substantial genomic components to both southern European cattle breeds and their New World descendants. A study on 134 breeds showed that modern taurine cattle originated from Africa, Asia, North and South America, Australia, and Europe.
Some researchers have suggested that African taurine cattle are derived from a third independent domestication from North African aurochsen.
Usage as money:
As early as 9000 BC both grain and cattle were used as money or as barter (the first grain remains found, considered to be evidence of pre-agricultural practice date to 17,000 BC).
Some evidence also exists to suggest that other animals, such as camels and goats, may have been used as currency in some parts of the world. One of the advantages of using cattle as currency is that it allows the seller to set a fixed price. It even created the standard pricing.
For example, two chickens were traded for one cow as cows were deemed to be more valuable than chickens.
Modern husbandry:
Further information: Animal husbandry
Cattle are often raised by allowing herds to graze on the grasses of large tracts of rangeland. Raising cattle in this manner allows the use of land that might be unsuitable for growing crops. The most common interactions with cattle involve daily feeding, cleaning and milking.
Many routine husbandry practices involve ear tagging, dehorning, loading, medical operations, vaccinations and hoof care, as well as training for agricultural shows and preparations.
Also, some cultural differences occur in working with cattle; the cattle husbandry of Fulani men rests on behavioral techniques, whereas in Europe, cattle are controlled primarily by physical means, such as fences.
Breeders use cattle husbandry to reduce M. bovis infection susceptibility by selective breeding and maintaining herd health to avoid concurrent disease.
Cattle are farmed for beef, veal, dairy, and leather. They are less commonly used for conservation grazing, or simply to maintain grassland for wildlife, such as in Epping Forest, England. They are often used in some of the most wild places for livestock.
Depending on the breed, cattle can survive on hill grazing, heaths, marshes, moors and semidesert. Modern cattle are more commercial than older breeds and, having become more specialized, are less versatile. For this reason, many smaller farmers still favor old breeds, such as the Jersey dairy breed.
In Portugal, Spain, southern France and some Latin American countries, bulls are used in the activity of bullfighting; Jallikattu in India is a bull taming sport radically different from European bullfighting, humans are unarmed and bulls are not killed. In many other countries bullfighting is illegal.
Other activities such as bull riding are seen as part of a rodeo, especially in North America. Bull-leaping, a central ritual in Bronze Age Minoan culture (see Sacred Bull), still exists in southwestern France. In modern times, cattle are also entered into agricultural competitions. These competitions can involve live cattle or cattle carcases in hoof and hook events.
In terms of food intake by humans, consumption of cattle is less efficient than of grain or vegetables with regard to land use, and hence cattle grazing consumes more area than such other agricultural production when raised on grains.
Nonetheless, cattle and other forms of domesticated animals can sometimes help to use plant resources in areas not easily amenable to other forms of agriculture. Bulls are sometimes used as guard animals.
Sleep:
Further information: Sleep in non-human animals and Cow tipping
The average sleep time of a domestic cow is about 4 hours a day. Cattle do have a stay apparatus, but do not sleep standing up, they lie down to sleep deeply. In spite of the urban legend, cows cannot be tipped over by people pushing on them.
Economy:
The meat of adult cattle is known as beef, and that of calves is veal. Other animal parts are also used as food products, including blood, liver, kidney, heart and oxtail.
Cattle also produce milk, and dairy cattle are specifically bred to produce the large quantities of milk processed and sold for human consumption. Cattle today are the basis of a multibillion-dollar industry worldwide.
The international trade in beef for 2000 was over $30 billion and represented only 23% of world beef production. Approximately 300 million cattle, including dairy cattle, are slaughtered each year for food.
The production of milk, which is also made into cheese, butter, yogurt, and other dairy products, is comparable in economic size to beef production, and provides an important part of the food supply for many of the world's people.
Cattle hides, used for leather to make shoes, couches and clothing, are another widespread product. Cattle remain broadly used as draft animals in many developing countries, such as India. Cattle are also used in some sporting games, including rodeo and bullfighting.
About half the world's meat comes from cattle.
Dairy: See next topic below
Hides:
Most cattle are not kept solely for hides, which are usually a by-product of beef production.
Hides are most commonly used for leather, which can be made into a variety of product, including shoes. In 2012 India was the world's largest producer of cattle hides.
Feral cattle:
Feral cattle are defined as being 'cattle that are not domesticated or cultivated'. Populations of feral cattle are known to come from and exist in:
Chillingham cattle is sometimes regarded as a feral breed. Aleutian wild cattle can be found on Aleutian Islands. The "Kinmen cattle" which is dominantly found on Kinmen Island, Taiwan is mostly domesticated while smaller portion of the population is believed to live in the wild due to accidental releases.
Other notable examples include cattle in the vicinity of Hong Kong (in the Shing Mun Country Park, among Sai Kung District and Lantau Island and on Grass Island), and semi-feral animals in Yangmingshan, Taiwan.
Environmental impact:
See also: Environmental effects of meat production and Milk § Environmental impact
Gut flora in cattle include methanogens that produce methane as a byproduct of enteric fermentation, which cattle belch out. The same volume of atmospheric methane has a higher global warming potential than atmospheric carbon dioxide,
Methane belching from cattle can be reduced with genetic selection, immunization, rumen defaunation, diet modification, decreased antibiotic use, and grazing management, among others.
A report from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) states that the livestock sector is "responsible for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions". The IPCC estimates that cattle and other livestock emit about 80 to 93 Megatonnes of methane per year, accounting for an estimated 37% of anthropogenic methane emissions, and additional methane is produced by anaerobic fermentation of manure in manure lagoons and other manure storage structures.
The net change in atmospheric methane content was recently about 1 Megatonne per year and in some recent years there has been no increase in atmospheric methane content. While cattle fed forage actually produce more methane than grain-fed cattle, the increase may be offset by the increased carbon recapture of pastures, which recapture three times the CO2 of cropland used for grain.
One of the cited changes suggested to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is intensification of the livestock industry, since intensification leads to less land for a given level of production. This assertion is supported by studies of the US beef production system, suggesting practices prevailing in 2007 involved 8.6% less fossil fuel use, 16.3% less greenhouse gas emissions, 12.1% less water use, and 33.0% less land use, per unit mass of beef produced, than those used in 1977.
The analysis took into account not only practices in feedlots, but also feed production (with less feed needed in more intensive production systems), forage-based cow-calf operations and back-grounding before cattle enter a feedlot (with more beef produced per head of cattle from those sources, in more intensive systems), and beef from animals derived from the dairy industry.
The number of American cattle kept in confined feedlot conditions fluctuates. From 1 January 2002 through 1 January 2012, there was no significant overall upward or downward trend in the number of US cattle on feed for slaughter, which averaged about 14.046 million head over that period.
Previously, the number had increased; it was 12.453 million in 1985. Cattle on feed (for slaughter) numbered about 14.121 million on 1 January 2012, i.e. about 15.5% of the estimated inventory of 90.8 million US cattle (including calves) on that date. Of the 14.121 million,
US cattle on feed (for slaughter) in operations with 1000 head or more were estimated to number 11.9 million. Cattle feedlots in this size category correspond to the regulatory definition of "large" concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) for cattle other than mature dairy cows or veal calves.
Significant numbers of dairy, as well as beef cattle, are confined in CAFOs, defined as "new and existing operations which stable or confine and feed or maintain for a total of 45 days or more in any 12-month period more than the number of animals specified" where "crops, vegetation, forage growth, or post-harvest residues are not sustained in the normal growing season over any portion of the lot or facility."
They may be designated as small, medium and large. Such designation of cattle CAFOs is according to cattle type (mature dairy cows, veal calves or other) and cattle numbers, but medium CAFOs are so designated only if they meet certain discharge criteria, and small CAFOs are designated only on a case-by-case basis.
A CAFO that discharges pollutants is required to obtain a permit, which requires a plan to manage nutrient runoff, manure, chemicals, contaminants, and other wastewater pursuant to the US Clean Water Act. The regulations involving CAFO permitting have been extensively litigated.
Commonly, CAFO wastewater and manure nutrients are applied to land at agronomic rates for use by forages or crops, and it is often assumed that various constituents of wastewater and manure, e.g. organic contaminants and pathogens, will be retained, inactivated or degraded on the land with application at such rates; however, additional evidence is needed to test reliability of such assumptions .
Concerns raised by opponents of CAFOs have included risks of contaminated water due to feedlot runoff, soil erosion, human and animal exposure to toxic chemicals, development of antibiotic resistant bacteria and an increase in E. coli contamination.
While research suggests some of these impacts can be mitigated by developing wastewater treatment systems and planting cover crops in larger setback zones, the Union of Concerned Scientists released a report in 2008 concluding that CAFOs are generally unsustainable and externalize costs.
An estimated 935,000 cattle operations were operating in the US in 2010. In 2001, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tallied 5,990 cattle CAFOs then regulated, consisting of beef (2,200), dairy (3,150), heifer (620) and veal operations (20). Since that time, the EPA has established CAFOs as an enforcement priority.
EPA enforcement highlights for fiscal year 2010 indicated enforcement actions against 12 cattle CAFOs for violations that included failures to obtain a permit, failures to meet the terms of a permit, and discharges of contaminated water.
Another concern is manure, which if not well-managed, can lead to adverse environmental consequences. However, manure also is a valuable source of nutrients and organic matter when used as a fertilizer. Manure was used as a fertilizer on about 6,400,000 hectares (15.8 million acres) of US cropland in 2006, with manure from cattle accounting for nearly 70% of manure applications to soybeans and about 80% or more of manure applications to corn, wheat, barley, oats and sorghum.
Substitution of manure for synthetic fertilizers in crop production can be environmentally significant, as between 43 and 88 megajoules of fossil fuel energy would be used per kg of nitrogen in manufacture of synthetic nitrogenous fertilizers.
Grazing by cattle at low intensities can create a favourable environment for native herbs and forbs by mimicking the native grazers who they displaced; in many world regions, though, cattle are reducing biodiversity due to overgrazing.
A survey of refuge managers on 123 National Wildlife Refuges in the US tallied 86 species of wildlife considered positively affected and 82 considered negatively affected by refuge cattle grazing or haying.
Proper management of pastures, notably managed intensive rotational grazing and grazing at low intensities can lead to less use of fossil fuel energy, increased recapture of carbon dioxide, fewer ammonia emissions into the atmosphere, reduced soil erosion, better air quality, and less water pollution.
Health:
The veterinary discipline dealing with cattle and cattle diseases (bovine veterinary) is called buiatrics. Veterinarians and professionals working on cattle health issues are pooled in the World Association for Buiatrics, founded in 1960. National associations and affiliates also exist.
Cattle diseases were in the center of attention in the 1980s and 1990s when the Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease, was of concern. Cattle might catch and develop various other diseases, like blackleg, bluetongue, foot rot too.
In most states, as cattle health is not only a veterinarian issue, but also a public health issue, public health and food safety standards and farming regulations directly affect the daily work of farmers who keep cattle. However, said rules change frequently and are often debated. For instance, in the U.K., it was proposed in 2011 that milk from tuberculosis-infected cattle should be allowed to enter the food chain.
Internal food safety regulations might affect a country's trade policy as well. For example, the United States has just reviewed its beef import rules according to the "mad cow standards"; while Mexico forbids the entry of cattle who are older than 30 months.
Cow urine is commonly used in India for internal medical purposes. It is distilled and then consumed by patients seeking treatment for a wide variety of illnesses. At present, no conclusive medical evidence shows this has any effect. However, an Indian medicine containing cow urine has already obtained U.S. patents.
Digital dermatitis is caused by the bacteria from the genus Treponema. It differs from foot rot and can appear under unsanitary conditions such as poor hygiene or inadequate hoof trimming, among other causes. It primarily affects dairy cattle and has been known to lower the quantity of milk produced, however the milk quality remains unaffected.
Cattle are also susceptible to ringworm caused by the fungus, Trichophyton verrucosum, a contagious skin disease which may be transferred to humans exposed to infected cows.
Effect of high stocking density:
Stocking density refers to the number of animals within a specified area. When stocking density reaches high levels, the behavioural needs of the animals may not be met. This can negatively influence health, welfare and production performance.
The effect of overstocking in cows can have a negative effect on milk production and reproduction rates which are two very important traits for dairy farmers.
Overcrowding of cows in barns has been found to reduced feeding, resting and rumination. Although they consume the same amount of dry matter within the span of a day, they consume the food at a much more rapid rate, and this behavior in cows can lead to further complications.
The feeding behavior of cows during their post-milking period is very important as it has been proven that the longer animals can eat after milking, the longer they will be standing up and therefore causing less contamination to the teat ends. This is necessary to reduce the risk of mastitis as infection has been shown to increase the chances of embryonic loss.
Sufficient rest is important for dairy cows because it is during this period that their resting blood flow increases up to 50%, this is directly proportionate to milk production. Each additional hour of rest can be seen to translate to 2 to 3.5 more pounds of milk per cow daily. Stocking densities of anything over 120% have been shown to decrease the amount of time cows spend lying down.
Cortisol is an important stress hormone; its plasma concentrations increase greatly when subjected to high levels of stress. Increased concentration levels of cortisol have been associated with significant increases in gonadotrophin levels and lowered progestin levels.
Reduction of stress is important in the reproductive state of cows as an increase in gonadotrophin and lowered progesterone levels may impinge on the ovulatory and lutenization process and to reduce the chances of successful implantation.
A high cortisol level will also stimulate the degradation of fats and proteins which may make it difficult for the animal to sustain its pregnancy if implanted successfully.
Animal welfare concerns:
Further information: Cruelty to animals § Welfare concerns of farm animals
Animal rights activists have criticized the treatment of cattle, claiming that common practices in cattle husbandry, slaughter and entertainment unnecessarily cause fear, stress, and pain. They advocate for abstaining from the consumption of cattle-related animal products and cattle-based entertainment.
Livestock industry:
The following husbandry practices have been criticized by animal welfare and animal rights groups:
There are concerns that the stress and negative health impacts induced by high stocking density such as in concentrated animal feeding operations or feedlots, auctions, and during transport may be detrimental to their welfare, and has also been criticized.
The treatment of dairy cows faces additional criticism. To produce milk from dairy cattle, most calves are separated from their mothers soon after birth and fed milk replacement in order to retain the cows' milk for human consumption.
Animal welfare advocates are critical of this practice, stating that this breaks the natural bond between the mother and her calf. The welfare of veal calves is also a concern. In order to continue lactation, dairy cows are bred every year, usually through artificial insemination.
Because of this, some individuals have posited that dairy production is based on the sexual exploitation of cows. Although the natural life expectancy of cattle could be as much as twenty years, after about five years, a cow's milk production has dropped; at which point most dairy cows are sent to slaughter.
Leather:
While leather is often a by-product of slaughter, in some countries, such as India and Bangladesh, cows are raised primarily for their leather. These leather industries often make their cows walk long distances across borders to be killed in neighboring provinces and countries where cattle slaughter is legal.
Some cows die along the long journey, and sometimes exhausted animals are abused to keep them moving. These practices have faced backlash from various animal rights groups.
Sport:
Animal treatment in rodeo is targeted most often at bull riding but also calf roping and steer roping, with the opposition saying that rodeos are unnecessary and cause stress, injury, and death to the animals.
In Spain, the Running of the bulls faces opposition due to the stress and injuries incurred by the bulls during the event.
Bullfighting is opposed as a blood sport in which bulls are forced to suffer severe stress and death.
Oxen:
Main article: Ox
Oxen (singular ox) are cattle trained as draft animals. Often they are adult, castrated males of larger breeds, although females and bulls are also used in some areas. Usually, an ox is over four years old due to the need for training and to allow it to grow to full size.
Oxen are used for plowing, transport, hauling cargo, grain-grinding by trampling or by powering machines, irrigation by powering pumps, and wagon drawing. Oxen were commonly used to skid logs in forests, and sometimes still are, in low-impact, select-cut logging. Oxen are most often used in teams of two, paired, for light work such as carting, with additional pairs added when more power is required, sometimes up to a total of 20 or more. Oxen used in traditional ploughing – Karnataka
Oxen can be trained to respond to a teamster's signals. These signals are given by verbal commands or by noise (whip cracks). Verbal commands vary according to dialect and local tradition. Oxen can pull harder and longer than horses. Though not as fast as horses, they are less prone to injury because they are more sure-footed.
Many oxen are used worldwide, especially in developing countries. About 11.3 million draft oxen are used in sub-Saharan Africa. In India, the number of draft cattle in 1998 was estimated at 65.7 million head. About half the world's crop production is thought to depend on land preparation (such as plowing) made possible by animal traction.
Religion, traditions and folklore:
Main article: Cattle in religion
Islamic traditions:
Further information: Animals in Islam
The cow is mentioned often in the Quran. The second and longest surah of the Quran is named Al-Baqara ("The Cow"). Out of the 286 verses of the surah, seven mention cows (Al Baqarah 67–73). The name of the surah derives from this passage in which Moses orders his people to sacrifice a cow in order to resurrect a man murdered by an unknown person.
Hindu tradition:
Further information: Cattle slaughter in India
Cattle are venerated within the Hindu religion of India. In the Vedic period they were a symbol of plenty and were frequently slaughtered. In later times they gradually acquired their present status.
According to the Mahabharata, they are to be treated with the same respect 'as one's mother'. In the middle of the first millennium, the consumption of beef began to be disfavored by lawgivers. Although there has never been any cow-goddesses or temples dedicated to them, cows appear in numerous stories from the Vedas and Puranas.
The deity Krishna was brought up in a family of cowherders, and given the name Govinda (protector of the cows). Also, Shiva is traditionally said to ride on the back of a bull named Nandi.
Milk and milk products were used in Vedic rituals. In the post-vedic period products of the cow—milk, curd, ghee, but also cow dung and urine (gomutra), or the combination of these five (panchagavya)—began to assume an increasingly important role in ritual purification and expiation.
Veneration of the cow has become a symbol of the identity of Hindus as a community, especially since the end of the 19th century. Slaughter of cows (including oxen, bulls and calves) is forbidden by law in several states of the Indian Union.
McDonald's outlets in India do not serve any beef burgers. In Maharaja Ranjit Singh's empire of the early 19th century, the killing of a cow was punishable by death.
Other traditions:
Legend of the founding of Durham Cathedral is that monks carrying the body of Saint Cuthbert were led to the location by a milk maid who had lost her dun cow, which was found resting on the spot.
An idealized depiction of girl cow herders in 19th-century Norway by Knud Bergslien:
In heraldry:
Cattle are typically represented in heraldry by the bull.
Population:
For 2013, the FAO estimated global cattle numbers at 1.47 billion. Regionally, the FAO estimate for 2013 includes:
See also:
Below, more about Cattle:
Cattle, or cows (female) and bulls (male), are the most common type of large domesticated ungulates. They are a prominent modern member of the subfamily Bovinae, are the most widespread species of the genus Bos, and are most commonly classified collectively as Bos taurus.
Cattle are commonly raised as livestock for meat (beef or veal, see beef cattle), for milk (dairy cattle), and for hides, which are used to make leather. They are used as riding animals and draft animals (oxen or bullocks, which pull carts, plows and other implements).
Another product of cattle is their dung, which can be used to create manure or fuel. In some regions, such as parts of India, cattle have significant religious meaning. Cattle, mostly small breeds such as the Miniature Zebu, are also kept as pets.
Around 10,500 years ago, cattle were domesticated from as few as 80 progenitors in central Anatolia, the Levant and Western Iran. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), there are approximately 1.5 billion cattle in the world as of 2018. In 2009, cattle became one of the first livestock animals to have a fully mapped genome.
Taxonomy:
See also: Bos and Bovinae
Cattle were originally identified as three separate species: Bos taurus, the European or "taurine" cattle (including similar types from Africa and Asia); Bos indicus, the zebu; and the extinct Bos primigenius, the aurochs. The aurochs is ancestral to both zebu and taurine cattle. These have been reclassified as one species, Bos taurus, with three subspecies: Bos taurus primigenius, Bos taurus indicus, and Bos taurus taurus.
Complicating the matter is the ability of cattle to interbreed with other closely related species. Hybrid individuals and even breeds exist, not only between taurine cattle and zebu (such as the sanga cattle, Bos taurus africanus), but also between one or both of these and some other members of the genus Bos – yaks (the dzo or yattle), banteng, and gaur.
Hybrids such as the beefalo breed can even occur between taurine cattle and either species of bison, leading some authors to consider them part of the genus Bos, as well. The hybrid origin of some types may not be obvious – for example, genetic testing of the Dwarf Lulu breed, the only taurine-type cattle in Nepal, found them to be a mix of taurine cattle, zebu, and yak. However, cattle cannot be successfully hybridized with more distantly related bovines such as water buffalo or African buffalo.
The aurochs originally ranged throughout Europe, North Africa, and much of Asia. In historical times, its range became restricted to Europe, and the last known individual died in Mazovia, Poland, in about 1627. Breeders have attempted to recreate cattle of similar appearance to aurochs by crossing traditional types of domesticated cattle, creating the Heck cattle breed.
Etymology:
Cattle did not originate as the term for bovine animals. It was borrowed from Anglo-Norman catel, itself from medieval Latin capitale 'principal sum of money, capital', itself derived in turn from Latin caput 'head'. Cattle originally meant movable personal property, especially livestock of any kind, as opposed to real property (the land, which also included wild or small free-roaming animals such as chickens—they were sold as part of the land).
The word is a variant of chattel (a unit of personal property) and closely related to capital in the economic sense. The term replaced earlier Old English feoh 'cattle, property', which survives today as fee (cf. German: Vieh, Dutch: vee, Gothic: faihu).
The word "cow" came via Anglo-Saxon cū (plural cȳ), from Common Indo-European gʷōus (genitive gʷowés) = "a bovine animal", compare Persian: gâv, Sanskrit: go-, Welsh: buwch. The plural cȳ became ki or kie in Middle English, and an additional plural ending was often added, giving kine, kien, but also kies, kuin and others. This is the origin of the now archaic English plural, "kine". The Scots language singular is coo or cou, and the plural is "kye".
In older English sources such as the King James Version of the Bible, "cattle" refers to livestock, as opposed to "deer" which refers to wildlife. "Wild cattle" may refer to feral cattle or to undomesticated species of the genus Bos. Today, when used without any other qualifier, the modern meaning of "cattle" is usually restricted to domesticated bovines.
Terminology:
In general, the same words are used in different parts of the world, but with minor differences in the definitions. The terminology described here contrasts the differences in definition between the United Kingdom and other British-influenced parts of the world such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland and the United States:
- An "intact" (i.e., not castrated) adult male is called a bull.
- An adult female that has had a calf (or two, depending on regional usage) is a cow.
- A young female before she has had a calf of her own and is under three years of age is called a heifer. A young female that has had only one calf is occasionally called a first-calf heifer.
- Young cattle of both sexes are called calves until they are weaned, then weaners until they are a year old in some areas; in other areas, particularly with male beef cattle, they may be known as feeder calves or simply feeders. After that, they are referred to as yearlings or stirks if between one and two years of age.
- A castrated male is called a steer in the United States; older steers are often called bullocks in other parts of the world, but in North America this term refers to a young bull. Piker bullocks are micky bulls (uncastrated young male bulls) that were caught, castrated and then later lost. In Australia, the term Japanese ox is used for grain-fed steers in the weight range of 500 to 650 kg that are destined for the Japanese meat trade. In North America, draft cattle under four years old are called working steers. Improper or late castration on a bull results in it becoming a coarse steer known as a stag in Australia, Canada and New Zealand. In some countries, an incompletely castrated male is known also as a rig.
- A castrated male (occasionally a female or in some areas a bull) kept for draft or riding purposes is called an ox (plural oxen); ox may also be used to refer to some carcass products from any adult cattle, such as ox-hide, ox-blood, oxtail, or ox-liver.
- A springer is a cow or heifer close to calving.
- In all cattle species, a female twin of a bull usually becomes an infertile partial intersex, and is called a freemartin.
- A wild, young, unmarked bull is known as a micky in Australia.
- An unbranded bovine of either sex is called a maverick in the US and Canada.
- Neat (horned oxen, from which neatsfoot oil is derived), beef (young ox) and beefing (young animal fit for slaughtering) are obsolete terms, although poll, pollard and polled cattle are still terms in use for naturally hornless animals, or in some areas also for those that have been disbudded or dehorned.
- Cattle raised for human consumption are called beef cattle. Within the American beef cattle industry, the older term beef (plural beeves) is still used to refer to an animal of either sex. Some Australian, Canadian, New Zealand and British people use the term beast.
- Cattle bred specifically for milk production are called milking or dairy cattle (next topic); a cow kept to provide milk for one family may be called a house cow or milker. A fresh cow is a dairy term for a cow or first-calf heifer who has recently given birth, or "freshened."
- The adjective applying to cattle in general is usually bovine. The terms bull, cow and calf are also used by extension to denote the sex or age of other large animals, including whales, hippopotamuses, camels, elk and elephants. See also: List of animal names
Singular terminology issue:
"Cattle" can only be used in the plural and not in the singular: it is a plurale tantum. Thus one may refer to "three cattle" or "some cattle", but not "one cattle". "One head of cattle" is a valid though periphrastic way to refer to one animal of indeterminate or unknown age and sex; otherwise no universally used single-word singular form of cattle exists in modern English, other than the sex- and age-specific terms such as cow, bull, steer and heifer.
Historically, "ox" was not a sex-specific term for adult cattle, but generally this is now used only for working cattle, especially adult castrated males. The term is also incorporated into the names of other species, such as the musk ox and "grunting ox" (yak), and is used in some areas to describe certain cattle products such as ox-hide and oxtail.
Cow is in general use as a singular for the collective cattle. The word cow is easy to use when a singular is needed and the sex is unknown or irrelevant—when "there is a cow in the road", for example.
Further, any herd of fully mature cattle in or near a pasture is statistically likely to consist mostly of cows, so the term is probably accurate even in the restrictive sense. Other than the few bulls needed for breeding, the vast majority of male cattle are castrated as calves and are used as oxen or slaughtered for meat before the age of three years.
Thus, in a pastured herd, any calves or herd bulls usually are clearly distinguishable from the cows due to distinctively different sizes and clear anatomical differences. Merriam-Webster and Oxford Living Dictionaries recognize the sex-nonspecific use of cow as an alternate definition, whereas Collins and the OED do not.
Colloquially, more general non-specific terms may denote cattle when a singular form is needed. Head of cattle is usually used only after a numeral. Australian, New Zealand and British farmers use the term beast or cattle beast. Bovine is also used in Britain.
The term critter is common in the western United States and Canada, particularly when referring to young cattle. In some areas of the American South (particularly the Appalachian region), where both dairy and beef cattle are present, an individual animal was once called a "beef critter", though that term is becoming archaic.
Other terminology:
Cattle raised for human consumption are called beef cattle. Within the beef cattle industry in parts of the United States, the term beef (plural beeves) is still used in its archaic sense to refer to an animal of either sex. Cows of certain breeds that are kept for the milk they give are called dairy cows or milking cows (formerly milch cows). Most young male offspring of dairy cows are sold for veal, and may be referred to as veal calves.
The term dogies is used to describe orphaned calves in the context of ranch work in the American West, as in "Keep them dogies moving". In some places, a cow kept to provide milk for one family is called a "house cow". Other obsolete terms for cattle include "neat" (this use survives in "neatsfoot oil", extracted from the feet and legs of cattle), and "beefing" (young animal fit for slaughter).
An onomatopoeic term for one of the most common sounds made by cattle is moo (also called lowing). There are a number of other sounds made by cattle, including calves bawling, and bulls bellowing. Bawling is most common for cows after weaning of a calf. The bullroarer makes a sound similar to a bull's territorial call.
Characteristics:
Anatomy:
Cattle are large quadrupedal ungulate mammals with cloven hooves. Most breeds have horns, which can be as large as the Texas Longhorn or small like a scur. Careful genetic selection has allowed polled (hornless) cattle to become widespread.
Digestive system:
Further information: Digestive system of ruminants
Cattle are ruminants, meaning their digestive system is highly specialized to allow the use of poorly digestible plants as food. Cattle have one stomach with four compartments, the rumen, reticulum, omasum, and abomasum, with the rumen being the largest compartment.
The reticulum, the smallest compartment, is known as the "honeycomb". The omasum's main function is to absorb water and nutrients from the digestible feed. The omasum is known as the "many plies". The abomasum is like the human stomach; this is why it is known as the "true stomach".
Cattle are known for regurgitating and re-chewing their food, known as cud chewing, like most ruminants. While the animal is feeding, the food is swallowed without being chewed and goes into the rumen for storage until the animal can find a quiet place to continue the digestion process. The food is regurgitated, a mouthful at a time, back up to the mouth, where the food, now called the cud, is chewed by the molars, grinding down the coarse vegetation to small particles.
The cud is then swallowed again and further digested by specialized microorganisms in the rumen. These microbes are primarily responsible for decomposing cellulose and other carbohydrates into volatile fatty acids cattle use as their primary metabolic fuel.
The microbes inside the rumen also synthesize amino acids from non-protein nitrogenous sources, such as urea and ammonia. As these microbes reproduce in the rumen, older generations die and their cells continue on through the digestive tract. These cells are then partially digested in the small intestines, allowing cattle to gain a high-quality protein source. These features allow cattle to thrive on grasses and other tough vegetation.
Gestation and size:
The gestation period for a cow is about nine months long. A newborn calf's size can vary among breeds, but a typical calf weighs 25 to 45 kg (55 to 99 lb). Adult size and weight vary significantly among breeds and sex. Steers are generally killed before reaching 750 kg (1,650 lb). Breeding stock may be allowed a longer lifespan, occasionally living as long as 25 years. The oldest recorded cow, Big Bertha, died at the age of 48 in 1993.
Reproduction:
On farms it is very common to use artificial insemination (AI), a medically assisted reproduction technique consisting of the artificial deposition of semen in the female's genital tract. It is used in cases where the spermatozoa can not reach the fallopian tubes or simply by choice of the owner of the animal. It consists of transferring, to the uterine cavity, spermatozoa previously collected and processed, with the selection of morphologically more normal and mobile spermatozoa.
A cow's udder contains two pairs of mammary glands, (commonly referred to as teats) creating four "quarters". The front ones are referred to as fore quarters and the rear ones rear quarters.
Synchronization of cattle ovulation to benefit dairy farming may be accomplished via induced ovulation techniques.
Further information: Bull § Reproductive anatomy
Bulls become fertile at about seven months of age. Their fertility is closely related to the size of their testicles, and one simple test of fertility is to measure the circumference of the scrotum: a young bull is likely to be fertile once this reaches 28 centimeters (11 in); that of a fully adult bull may be over 40 centimeters (16 in).
A bull has a fibro-elastic penis. Given the small amount of erectile tissue, there is little enlargement after erection. The penis is quite rigid when non-erect, and becomes even more rigid during erection. Protrusion is not affected much by erection, but more by relaxation of the retractor penis muscle and straightening of the sigmoid flexure.
Weight:
The weight of adult cattle varies, depending on the breed. Smaller kinds, such as Dexter and Jersey adults, range between 272 to 454 kg (600 to 1,000 lb). Large Continental breeds, such as Charolais, Marchigiana, Belgian Blue and Chianina adults range from 635 to 1,134 kg (1,400 to 2,500 lb). British breeds, such as Hereford, Angus, and Shorthorn, mature at between 454 to 907 kg (1,000 to 2,000 lb), occasionally higher, particularly with Angus and Hereford.
Bulls are larger than cows of the same breed by up to a few hundred kilograms. Chianina bulls can weigh up to 1,500 kg (3,300 lb); British bulls, such as Angus and Hereford, can weigh as little as 907 kg (2,000 lb) to as much as 1,361 kg (3,000 lbs).
The world record for the heaviest bull was 1,740 kg (3,840 lb), a Chianina named Donetto, when he was exhibited at the Arezzo show in 1955. The heaviest steer was eight-year-old 'Old Ben', a Shorthorn/Hereford cross weighing in at 2,140 kg (4,720 lb) in 1910.
In the United States, the average weight of beef cattle has steadily increased, especially since the 1970s, requiring the building of new slaughterhouses able to handle larger carcasses. New packing plants in the 1980s stimulated a large increase in cattle weights. Before 1790 beef cattle averaged only 160 kg (350 lb) net; and thereafter weights climbed steadily.
Cognition:
In laboratory studies, young cattle are able to memorize the locations of several food sources and retain this memory for at least 8 hours, although this declined after 12 hours. Fifteen-month-old heifers learn more quickly than adult cows which have had either one or two calvings, but their longer-term memory is less stable.
Mature cattle perform well in spatial learning tasks and have a good long-term memory in these tests. Cattle tested in a radial arm maze are able to remember the locations of high-quality food for at least 30 days. Although they initially learn to avoid low-quality food, this memory diminishes over the same duration. Under less artificial testing conditions, young cattle showed they were able to remember the location of feed for at least 48 days.
Cattle can make an association between a visual stimulus and food within 1 day—memory of this association can be retained for 1 year, despite a slight decay.
Calves are capable of discrimination learning and adult cattle compare favorably with small mammals in their learning ability in the Closed-field Test.
They are also able to discriminate between familiar individuals, and among humans. Cattle can tell the difference between familiar and unfamiliar animals of the same species (conspecifics). Studies show they behave less aggressively toward familiar individuals when they are forming a new group.
Calves can also discriminate between humans based on previous experience, as shown by approaching those who handled them positively and avoiding those who handled them aversively. Although cattle can discriminate between humans by their faces alone, they also use other cues such as the color of clothes when these are available.
In audio play-back studies, calves prefer their own mother's vocalizations compared to the vocalizations of an unfamiliar mother.
In laboratory studies using images, cattle can discriminate between images of the heads of cattle and other animal species. They are also able to distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics. Furthermore, they are able to categorize images as familiar and unfamiliar individuals.
When mixed with other individuals, cloned calves from the same donor form subgroups, indicating that kin discrimination occurs and may be a basis of grouping behaviour. It has also been shown using images of cattle that both artificially inseminated and cloned calves have similar cognitive capacities of kin and non-kin discrimination.
Cattle can recognize familiar individuals. Visual individual recognition is a more complex mental process than visual discrimination. It requires the recollection of the learned idiosyncratic identity of an individual that has been previously encountered and the formation of a mental representation.
By using 2-dimensional images of the heads of one cow (face, profiles, 3⁄4 views), all the tested heifers showed individual recognition of familiar and unfamiliar individuals from their own breed. Furthermore, almost all the heifers recognized unknown individuals from different breeds, although this was achieved with greater difficulty.
Individual recognition was most difficult when the visual features of the breed being tested were quite different from the breed in the image, for example, the breed being tested had no spots whereas the image was of a spotted breed.
Cattle use visual/brain lateralisation in their visual scanning of novel and familiar stimuli. Domestic cattle prefer to view novel stimuli with the left eye, i.e. using the right brain hemisphere (similar to horses, Australian magpies, chicks, toads and fish) but use the right eye, i.e. using the left hemisphere, for viewing familiar stimuli.
Temperament and emotions:
In cattle, temperament can affect production traits such as carcass and meat quality or milk yield as well as affecting the animal's overall health and reproduction. Cattle temperament is defined as "the consistent behavioral and physiological difference observed between individuals in response to a stressor or environmental challenge and is used to describe the relatively stable difference in the behavioral predisposition of an animal, which can be related to psychobiological mechanisms".
Generally, cattle temperament is assumed to be multidimensional. Five underlying categories of temperament traits have been proposed:
- shyness-boldness
- exploration-avoidance
- activity
- aggressiveness
- sociability
In a study on Holstein–Friesian heifers learning to press a panel to open a gate for access to a food reward, the researchers also recorded the heart rate and behavior of the heifers when moving along the race towards the food. When the heifers made clear improvements in learning, they had higher heart rates and tended to move more vigorously along the race. The researchers concluded this was an indication that cattle may react emotionally to their own learning improvement.
Negative emotional states are associated with a bias toward negative responses towards ambiguous cues in judgement tasks. After separation from their mothers, Holstein calves showed such a cognitive bias indicative of low mood. A similar study showed that after hot-iron disbudding (dehorning), calves had a similar negative bias indicating that post-operative pain following this routine procedure results in a negative change in emotional state.
In studies of visual discrimination, the position of the ears has been used as an indicator of emotional state. When cattle are stressed other cattle can tell by the chemicals released in their urine.
Cattle are very gregarious and even short-term isolation is considered to cause severe psychological stress. When Aubrac and Friesian heifers are isolated, they increase their vocalizations and experience increased heart rate and plasma cortisol concentrations. These physiological changes are greater in Aubracs.
When visual contact is re-instated, vocalizations rapidly decline, regardless of the familiarity of the returning cattle, however, heart rate decreases are greater if the returning cattle are familiar to the previously-isolated individual. Mirrors have been used to reduce stress in isolated cattle.
Senses:
Cattle use all of the five widely recognized sensory modalities. These can assist in some complex behavioral patterns, for example, in grazing behavior. Cattle eat mixed diets, but when given the opportunity, show a partial preference of approximately 70% clover and 30% grass. This preference has a diurnal pattern, with a stronger preference for clover in the morning, and the proportion of grass increasing towards the evening.
Vision:
Vision is the dominant sense in cattle and they obtain almost 50% of their information visually.
Cattle are a prey animal and to assist predator detection, their eyes are located on the sides of their head rather than the front. This gives them a wide field of view of 330° but limits binocular vision (and therefore stereopsis) to 30° to 50° compared to 140° in humans. This means they have a blind spot directly behind them. Cattle have good visual acuity, but compared to humans, their visual accommodation is poor.
Cattle have two kinds of color receptors in the cone cells of their retinas. This means that cattle are dichromatic, as are most other non-primate land mammals. There are two to three rods per cone in the fovea centralis but five to six near the optic papilla.
Cattle can distinguish long wavelength colors (yellow, orange and red) much better than the shorter wavelengths (blue, grey and green). Calves are able to discriminate between long (red) and short (blue) or medium (green) wavelengths, but have limited ability to discriminate between the short and medium. They also approach handlers more quickly under red light. Whilst having good color sensitivity, it is not as good as humans or sheep.
A common misconception about cattle (particularly bulls) is that they are enraged by the color red (something provocative is often said to be "like a red flag to a bull"). This is a myth. In bullfighting, it is the movement of the red flag or cape that irritates the bull and incites it to charge.
Taste:
Cattle have a well-developed sense of taste and can distinguish the four primary tastes (sweet, salty, bitter and sour). They possess around 20,000 taste buds. The strength of taste perception depends on the individual's current food requirements. They avoid bitter-tasting foods (potentially toxic) and have a marked preference for sweet (high calorific value) and salty foods (electrolyte balance). Their sensitivity to sour-tasting foods helps them to maintain optimal ruminal pH.
Plants have low levels of sodium and cattle have developed the capacity of seeking salt by taste and smell. If cattle become depleted of sodium salts, they show increased locomotion directed to searching for these. To assist in their search, the olfactory and gustatory receptors able to detect minute amounts of sodium salts increase their sensitivity as biochemical disruption develops with sodium salt depletion.
Hearing:
Cattle hearing ranges from 23 Hz to 35 kHz. Their frequency of best sensitivity is 8 kHz and they have a lowest threshold of −21 db (re 20 μN/m−2), which means their hearing is more acute than horses (lowest threshold of 7 db). Sound localization acuity thresholds are an average of 30°.
This means that cattle are less able to localize sounds compared to goats (18°), dogs (8°) and humans (0.8°). Because cattle have a broad foveal fields of view covering almost the entire horizon, they may not need very accurate locus information from their auditory systems to direct their gaze to a sound source.
Vocalizations are an important mode of communication amongst cattle and can provide information on the age, sex, dominance status and reproductive status of the caller. Calves can recognize their mothers using vocalizations; vocal behaviour may play a role by indicating estrus and competitive display by bulls.
Olfaction and gustation:
Cattle have a range of odiferous glands over their body including interdigital, infraorbital, inguinal and sebaceous glands, indicating that olfaction probably plays a large role in their social life.
Both the primary olfactory system using the olfactory bulbs, and the secondary olfactory system using the vomeronasal organ are used. This latter olfactory system is used in the flehmen response. There is evidence that when cattle are stressed, this can be recognized by other cattle and this is communicated by alarm substances in the urine.
The odor of dog feces induces behavioral changes prior to cattle feeding, whereas the odors of urine from either stressed or non-stressed conspecifics and blood have no effect.
In the laboratory, cattle can be trained to recognise conspecific individuals using olfaction only.
In general, cattle use their sense of smell to "expand" on information detected by other sensory modalities. However, in the case of social and reproductive behaviours, olfaction is a key source of information.
Touch:
Cattle have tactile sensations detected mainly by mechanoreceptors, thermoreceptors and nociceptors in the skin and muzzle. These are used most frequently when cattle explore their environment.
Magnetoreception:
There is conflicting evidence for magnetoreception in cattle. One study reported that resting and grazing cattle tend to align their body axes in the geomagnetic north–south (N-S) direction. In a follow-up study, cattle exposed to various magnetic fields directly beneath or in the vicinity of power lines trending in various magnetic directions exhibited distinct patterns of alignment. However, in 2011, a group of Czech researchers reported their failed attempt to replicate the finding using Google Earth images.
Behavior:
Under natural conditions, calves stay with their mother until weaning at 8 to 11 months. Heifer and bull calves are equally attached to their mothers in the first few months of life.
Cattle are considered to be "hider" type animals, but in the artificial environment of small calving pens, close proximity between cow and calf is maintained by the mother at the first three calvings but this changes to being mediated by the calf after these. Primiparous dams show a higher incidence of abnormal maternal behavior.
Beef-calves reared on the range suckle an average of 5.0 times every 24 hours with an average total time of 46 min spent suckling. There is a diurnal rhythm in suckling activity with peaks between 05:00–07:00, 10:00–13:00 and 17:00–21:00.
Studies on the natural weaning of zebu cattle (Bos indicus) have shown that the cow weans her calves over a 2-week period, but after that, she continues to show strong affiliatory behavior with her offspring and preferentially chooses them for grooming and as grazing partners for at least 4–5 years.
Reproductive behavior:
Semi-wild Highland cattle heifers first give birth at 2 or 3 years of age, and the timing of birth is synchronized with increases in natural food quality. Average calving interval is 391 days, and calving mortality within the first year of life is 5%.
Dominance and leadership:
One study showed that over a 4-year period, dominance relationships within a herd of semi-wild highland cattle were very firm. There were few overt aggressive conflicts and the majority of disputes were settled by agonistic (non-aggressive, competitive) behaviors that involved no physical contact between opponents (e.g. threatening and spontaneous withdrawing).
Such agonistic behavior reduces the risk of injury. Dominance status depended on age and sex, with older animals generally being dominant to young ones and males dominant to females. Young bulls gained superior dominance status over adult cows when they reached about 2 years of age.
As with many animal dominance hierarchies, dominance-associated aggressiveness does not correlate with rank position, but is closely related to rank distance between individuals.
Dominance is maintained in several ways. Cattle often engage in mock fights where they test each other's strength in a non-aggressive way. Licking is primarily performed by subordinates and received by dominant animals. Mounting is a playful behavior shown by calves of both sexes and by bulls and sometimes by cows in estrus, however, this is not a dominance related behavior as has been found in other species.
The horns of cattle are "honest signals" used in mate selection. Furthermore, horned cattle attempt to keep greater distances between themselves and have fewer physical interactions than hornless cattle. This leads to more stable social relationships.
In calves, the frequency of agonistic behavior decreases as space allowance increases, but this does not occur for changes in group size. However, in adult cattle, the number of agonistic encounters increases as the group size increases.
Grazing behavior:
When grazing, cattle vary several aspects of their bite, i.e. tongue and jaw movements, depending on characteristics of the plant they are eating. Bite area decreases with the density of the plants but increases with their height.
Bite area is determined by the sweep of the tongue; in one study observing 750-kilogram (1,650 lb) steers, bite area reached a maximum of approximately 170 cm2 (30 sq in). Bite depth increases with the height of the plants. By adjusting their behavior, cattle obtain heavier bites in swards that are tall and sparse compared with short, dense swards of equal mass/area.
Cattle adjust other aspects of their grazing behavior in relation to the available food; foraging velocity decreases and intake rate increases in areas of abundant palatable forage.
Cattle avoid grazing areas contaminated by the faeces of other cattle more strongly than they avoid areas contaminated by sheep, but they do not avoid pasture contaminated by rabbit feces.
Genetics:
Further information: Bovine genome
On 24 April 2009, edition of the journal Science, a team of researchers led by the National Institutes of Health and the US Department of Agriculture reported having mapped the bovine genome. The scientists found cattle have about 22,000 genes, and 80% of their genes are shared with humans, and they share about 1000 genes with dogs and rodents, but are not found in humans.
Using this bovine "HapMap", researchers can track the differences between the breeds that affect the quality of meat and milk yields.
Behavioral traits of cattle can be as heritable as some production traits, and often, the two can be related. The heritability of fear varies markedly in cattle from low (0.1) to high (0.53); such high variation is also found in pigs and sheep, probably due to differences in the methods used. The heritability of temperament (response to isolation during handling) has been calculated as 0.36 and 0.46 for habituation to handling.
Rangeland assessments show that the heritability of aggressiveness in cattle is around 0.36.
Quantitative trait loci (QTLs) have been found for a range of production and behavioral characteristics for both dairy and beef cattle.
Domestication and husbandry:
Cattle occupy a unique role in human history, having been domesticated since at least the early neolithic age.
Archeozoological and genetic data indicate that cattle were first domesticated from wild aurochs (Bos primigenius) approximately 10,500 years ago. There were two major areas of domestication: one in the Near East (specifically central Anatolia, the Levant and Western Iran), giving rise to the taurine line, and a second in the area that is now Pakistan, resulting in the indicine line.
Modern mitochondrial DNA variation indicates the taurine line may have arisen from as few as 80 aurochs tamed in the upper reaches of Mesopotamia near the villages of Çayönü Tepesi in what is now southeastern Turkey and Dja'de el-Mughara in what is now northern Iraq.
Although European cattle are largely descended from the taurine lineage, gene flow from African cattle (partially of indicine origin) contributed substantial genomic components to both southern European cattle breeds and their New World descendants. A study on 134 breeds showed that modern taurine cattle originated from Africa, Asia, North and South America, Australia, and Europe.
Some researchers have suggested that African taurine cattle are derived from a third independent domestication from North African aurochsen.
Usage as money:
As early as 9000 BC both grain and cattle were used as money or as barter (the first grain remains found, considered to be evidence of pre-agricultural practice date to 17,000 BC).
Some evidence also exists to suggest that other animals, such as camels and goats, may have been used as currency in some parts of the world. One of the advantages of using cattle as currency is that it allows the seller to set a fixed price. It even created the standard pricing.
For example, two chickens were traded for one cow as cows were deemed to be more valuable than chickens.
Modern husbandry:
Further information: Animal husbandry
Cattle are often raised by allowing herds to graze on the grasses of large tracts of rangeland. Raising cattle in this manner allows the use of land that might be unsuitable for growing crops. The most common interactions with cattle involve daily feeding, cleaning and milking.
Many routine husbandry practices involve ear tagging, dehorning, loading, medical operations, vaccinations and hoof care, as well as training for agricultural shows and preparations.
Also, some cultural differences occur in working with cattle; the cattle husbandry of Fulani men rests on behavioral techniques, whereas in Europe, cattle are controlled primarily by physical means, such as fences.
Breeders use cattle husbandry to reduce M. bovis infection susceptibility by selective breeding and maintaining herd health to avoid concurrent disease.
Cattle are farmed for beef, veal, dairy, and leather. They are less commonly used for conservation grazing, or simply to maintain grassland for wildlife, such as in Epping Forest, England. They are often used in some of the most wild places for livestock.
Depending on the breed, cattle can survive on hill grazing, heaths, marshes, moors and semidesert. Modern cattle are more commercial than older breeds and, having become more specialized, are less versatile. For this reason, many smaller farmers still favor old breeds, such as the Jersey dairy breed.
In Portugal, Spain, southern France and some Latin American countries, bulls are used in the activity of bullfighting; Jallikattu in India is a bull taming sport radically different from European bullfighting, humans are unarmed and bulls are not killed. In many other countries bullfighting is illegal.
Other activities such as bull riding are seen as part of a rodeo, especially in North America. Bull-leaping, a central ritual in Bronze Age Minoan culture (see Sacred Bull), still exists in southwestern France. In modern times, cattle are also entered into agricultural competitions. These competitions can involve live cattle or cattle carcases in hoof and hook events.
In terms of food intake by humans, consumption of cattle is less efficient than of grain or vegetables with regard to land use, and hence cattle grazing consumes more area than such other agricultural production when raised on grains.
Nonetheless, cattle and other forms of domesticated animals can sometimes help to use plant resources in areas not easily amenable to other forms of agriculture. Bulls are sometimes used as guard animals.
Sleep:
Further information: Sleep in non-human animals and Cow tipping
The average sleep time of a domestic cow is about 4 hours a day. Cattle do have a stay apparatus, but do not sleep standing up, they lie down to sleep deeply. In spite of the urban legend, cows cannot be tipped over by people pushing on them.
Economy:
The meat of adult cattle is known as beef, and that of calves is veal. Other animal parts are also used as food products, including blood, liver, kidney, heart and oxtail.
Cattle also produce milk, and dairy cattle are specifically bred to produce the large quantities of milk processed and sold for human consumption. Cattle today are the basis of a multibillion-dollar industry worldwide.
The international trade in beef for 2000 was over $30 billion and represented only 23% of world beef production. Approximately 300 million cattle, including dairy cattle, are slaughtered each year for food.
The production of milk, which is also made into cheese, butter, yogurt, and other dairy products, is comparable in economic size to beef production, and provides an important part of the food supply for many of the world's people.
Cattle hides, used for leather to make shoes, couches and clothing, are another widespread product. Cattle remain broadly used as draft animals in many developing countries, such as India. Cattle are also used in some sporting games, including rodeo and bullfighting.
About half the world's meat comes from cattle.
Dairy: See next topic below
Hides:
Most cattle are not kept solely for hides, which are usually a by-product of beef production.
Hides are most commonly used for leather, which can be made into a variety of product, including shoes. In 2012 India was the world's largest producer of cattle hides.
Feral cattle:
Feral cattle are defined as being 'cattle that are not domesticated or cultivated'. Populations of feral cattle are known to come from and exist in:
- Australia,
United States of America,
Colombia,
Argentina,
Spain,
France - and many islands, including
- New Guinea,
Hawaii,
Galapagos,
Juan Fernández Islands,
Hispaniola (Dominican Republic and Haiti),
Tristan da Cunha
and Île Amsterdam,
two islands of Kuchinoshima
and Kazura Island next to Naru Island in Japan.
- New Guinea,
Chillingham cattle is sometimes regarded as a feral breed. Aleutian wild cattle can be found on Aleutian Islands. The "Kinmen cattle" which is dominantly found on Kinmen Island, Taiwan is mostly domesticated while smaller portion of the population is believed to live in the wild due to accidental releases.
Other notable examples include cattle in the vicinity of Hong Kong (in the Shing Mun Country Park, among Sai Kung District and Lantau Island and on Grass Island), and semi-feral animals in Yangmingshan, Taiwan.
Environmental impact:
See also: Environmental effects of meat production and Milk § Environmental impact
Gut flora in cattle include methanogens that produce methane as a byproduct of enteric fermentation, which cattle belch out. The same volume of atmospheric methane has a higher global warming potential than atmospheric carbon dioxide,
Methane belching from cattle can be reduced with genetic selection, immunization, rumen defaunation, diet modification, decreased antibiotic use, and grazing management, among others.
A report from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) states that the livestock sector is "responsible for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions". The IPCC estimates that cattle and other livestock emit about 80 to 93 Megatonnes of methane per year, accounting for an estimated 37% of anthropogenic methane emissions, and additional methane is produced by anaerobic fermentation of manure in manure lagoons and other manure storage structures.
The net change in atmospheric methane content was recently about 1 Megatonne per year and in some recent years there has been no increase in atmospheric methane content. While cattle fed forage actually produce more methane than grain-fed cattle, the increase may be offset by the increased carbon recapture of pastures, which recapture three times the CO2 of cropland used for grain.
One of the cited changes suggested to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is intensification of the livestock industry, since intensification leads to less land for a given level of production. This assertion is supported by studies of the US beef production system, suggesting practices prevailing in 2007 involved 8.6% less fossil fuel use, 16.3% less greenhouse gas emissions, 12.1% less water use, and 33.0% less land use, per unit mass of beef produced, than those used in 1977.
The analysis took into account not only practices in feedlots, but also feed production (with less feed needed in more intensive production systems), forage-based cow-calf operations and back-grounding before cattle enter a feedlot (with more beef produced per head of cattle from those sources, in more intensive systems), and beef from animals derived from the dairy industry.
The number of American cattle kept in confined feedlot conditions fluctuates. From 1 January 2002 through 1 January 2012, there was no significant overall upward or downward trend in the number of US cattle on feed for slaughter, which averaged about 14.046 million head over that period.
Previously, the number had increased; it was 12.453 million in 1985. Cattle on feed (for slaughter) numbered about 14.121 million on 1 January 2012, i.e. about 15.5% of the estimated inventory of 90.8 million US cattle (including calves) on that date. Of the 14.121 million,
US cattle on feed (for slaughter) in operations with 1000 head or more were estimated to number 11.9 million. Cattle feedlots in this size category correspond to the regulatory definition of "large" concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) for cattle other than mature dairy cows or veal calves.
Significant numbers of dairy, as well as beef cattle, are confined in CAFOs, defined as "new and existing operations which stable or confine and feed or maintain for a total of 45 days or more in any 12-month period more than the number of animals specified" where "crops, vegetation, forage growth, or post-harvest residues are not sustained in the normal growing season over any portion of the lot or facility."
They may be designated as small, medium and large. Such designation of cattle CAFOs is according to cattle type (mature dairy cows, veal calves or other) and cattle numbers, but medium CAFOs are so designated only if they meet certain discharge criteria, and small CAFOs are designated only on a case-by-case basis.
A CAFO that discharges pollutants is required to obtain a permit, which requires a plan to manage nutrient runoff, manure, chemicals, contaminants, and other wastewater pursuant to the US Clean Water Act. The regulations involving CAFO permitting have been extensively litigated.
Commonly, CAFO wastewater and manure nutrients are applied to land at agronomic rates for use by forages or crops, and it is often assumed that various constituents of wastewater and manure, e.g. organic contaminants and pathogens, will be retained, inactivated or degraded on the land with application at such rates; however, additional evidence is needed to test reliability of such assumptions .
Concerns raised by opponents of CAFOs have included risks of contaminated water due to feedlot runoff, soil erosion, human and animal exposure to toxic chemicals, development of antibiotic resistant bacteria and an increase in E. coli contamination.
While research suggests some of these impacts can be mitigated by developing wastewater treatment systems and planting cover crops in larger setback zones, the Union of Concerned Scientists released a report in 2008 concluding that CAFOs are generally unsustainable and externalize costs.
An estimated 935,000 cattle operations were operating in the US in 2010. In 2001, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tallied 5,990 cattle CAFOs then regulated, consisting of beef (2,200), dairy (3,150), heifer (620) and veal operations (20). Since that time, the EPA has established CAFOs as an enforcement priority.
EPA enforcement highlights for fiscal year 2010 indicated enforcement actions against 12 cattle CAFOs for violations that included failures to obtain a permit, failures to meet the terms of a permit, and discharges of contaminated water.
Another concern is manure, which if not well-managed, can lead to adverse environmental consequences. However, manure also is a valuable source of nutrients and organic matter when used as a fertilizer. Manure was used as a fertilizer on about 6,400,000 hectares (15.8 million acres) of US cropland in 2006, with manure from cattle accounting for nearly 70% of manure applications to soybeans and about 80% or more of manure applications to corn, wheat, barley, oats and sorghum.
Substitution of manure for synthetic fertilizers in crop production can be environmentally significant, as between 43 and 88 megajoules of fossil fuel energy would be used per kg of nitrogen in manufacture of synthetic nitrogenous fertilizers.
Grazing by cattle at low intensities can create a favourable environment for native herbs and forbs by mimicking the native grazers who they displaced; in many world regions, though, cattle are reducing biodiversity due to overgrazing.
A survey of refuge managers on 123 National Wildlife Refuges in the US tallied 86 species of wildlife considered positively affected and 82 considered negatively affected by refuge cattle grazing or haying.
Proper management of pastures, notably managed intensive rotational grazing and grazing at low intensities can lead to less use of fossil fuel energy, increased recapture of carbon dioxide, fewer ammonia emissions into the atmosphere, reduced soil erosion, better air quality, and less water pollution.
Health:
The veterinary discipline dealing with cattle and cattle diseases (bovine veterinary) is called buiatrics. Veterinarians and professionals working on cattle health issues are pooled in the World Association for Buiatrics, founded in 1960. National associations and affiliates also exist.
Cattle diseases were in the center of attention in the 1980s and 1990s when the Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease, was of concern. Cattle might catch and develop various other diseases, like blackleg, bluetongue, foot rot too.
In most states, as cattle health is not only a veterinarian issue, but also a public health issue, public health and food safety standards and farming regulations directly affect the daily work of farmers who keep cattle. However, said rules change frequently and are often debated. For instance, in the U.K., it was proposed in 2011 that milk from tuberculosis-infected cattle should be allowed to enter the food chain.
Internal food safety regulations might affect a country's trade policy as well. For example, the United States has just reviewed its beef import rules according to the "mad cow standards"; while Mexico forbids the entry of cattle who are older than 30 months.
Cow urine is commonly used in India for internal medical purposes. It is distilled and then consumed by patients seeking treatment for a wide variety of illnesses. At present, no conclusive medical evidence shows this has any effect. However, an Indian medicine containing cow urine has already obtained U.S. patents.
Digital dermatitis is caused by the bacteria from the genus Treponema. It differs from foot rot and can appear under unsanitary conditions such as poor hygiene or inadequate hoof trimming, among other causes. It primarily affects dairy cattle and has been known to lower the quantity of milk produced, however the milk quality remains unaffected.
Cattle are also susceptible to ringworm caused by the fungus, Trichophyton verrucosum, a contagious skin disease which may be transferred to humans exposed to infected cows.
Effect of high stocking density:
Stocking density refers to the number of animals within a specified area. When stocking density reaches high levels, the behavioural needs of the animals may not be met. This can negatively influence health, welfare and production performance.
The effect of overstocking in cows can have a negative effect on milk production and reproduction rates which are two very important traits for dairy farmers.
Overcrowding of cows in barns has been found to reduced feeding, resting and rumination. Although they consume the same amount of dry matter within the span of a day, they consume the food at a much more rapid rate, and this behavior in cows can lead to further complications.
The feeding behavior of cows during their post-milking period is very important as it has been proven that the longer animals can eat after milking, the longer they will be standing up and therefore causing less contamination to the teat ends. This is necessary to reduce the risk of mastitis as infection has been shown to increase the chances of embryonic loss.
Sufficient rest is important for dairy cows because it is during this period that their resting blood flow increases up to 50%, this is directly proportionate to milk production. Each additional hour of rest can be seen to translate to 2 to 3.5 more pounds of milk per cow daily. Stocking densities of anything over 120% have been shown to decrease the amount of time cows spend lying down.
Cortisol is an important stress hormone; its plasma concentrations increase greatly when subjected to high levels of stress. Increased concentration levels of cortisol have been associated with significant increases in gonadotrophin levels and lowered progestin levels.
Reduction of stress is important in the reproductive state of cows as an increase in gonadotrophin and lowered progesterone levels may impinge on the ovulatory and lutenization process and to reduce the chances of successful implantation.
A high cortisol level will also stimulate the degradation of fats and proteins which may make it difficult for the animal to sustain its pregnancy if implanted successfully.
Animal welfare concerns:
Further information: Cruelty to animals § Welfare concerns of farm animals
Animal rights activists have criticized the treatment of cattle, claiming that common practices in cattle husbandry, slaughter and entertainment unnecessarily cause fear, stress, and pain. They advocate for abstaining from the consumption of cattle-related animal products and cattle-based entertainment.
Livestock industry:
The following husbandry practices have been criticized by animal welfare and animal rights groups:
- branding,
- castration,
- dehorning,
- ear tagging,
- nose ringing,
- restraint,
- tail docking,
- the use of veal crates,
- and cattle prods.
There are concerns that the stress and negative health impacts induced by high stocking density such as in concentrated animal feeding operations or feedlots, auctions, and during transport may be detrimental to their welfare, and has also been criticized.
The treatment of dairy cows faces additional criticism. To produce milk from dairy cattle, most calves are separated from their mothers soon after birth and fed milk replacement in order to retain the cows' milk for human consumption.
Animal welfare advocates are critical of this practice, stating that this breaks the natural bond between the mother and her calf. The welfare of veal calves is also a concern. In order to continue lactation, dairy cows are bred every year, usually through artificial insemination.
Because of this, some individuals have posited that dairy production is based on the sexual exploitation of cows. Although the natural life expectancy of cattle could be as much as twenty years, after about five years, a cow's milk production has dropped; at which point most dairy cows are sent to slaughter.
Leather:
While leather is often a by-product of slaughter, in some countries, such as India and Bangladesh, cows are raised primarily for their leather. These leather industries often make their cows walk long distances across borders to be killed in neighboring provinces and countries where cattle slaughter is legal.
Some cows die along the long journey, and sometimes exhausted animals are abused to keep them moving. These practices have faced backlash from various animal rights groups.
Sport:
Animal treatment in rodeo is targeted most often at bull riding but also calf roping and steer roping, with the opposition saying that rodeos are unnecessary and cause stress, injury, and death to the animals.
In Spain, the Running of the bulls faces opposition due to the stress and injuries incurred by the bulls during the event.
Bullfighting is opposed as a blood sport in which bulls are forced to suffer severe stress and death.
Oxen:
Main article: Ox
Oxen (singular ox) are cattle trained as draft animals. Often they are adult, castrated males of larger breeds, although females and bulls are also used in some areas. Usually, an ox is over four years old due to the need for training and to allow it to grow to full size.
Oxen are used for plowing, transport, hauling cargo, grain-grinding by trampling or by powering machines, irrigation by powering pumps, and wagon drawing. Oxen were commonly used to skid logs in forests, and sometimes still are, in low-impact, select-cut logging. Oxen are most often used in teams of two, paired, for light work such as carting, with additional pairs added when more power is required, sometimes up to a total of 20 or more. Oxen used in traditional ploughing – Karnataka
Oxen can be trained to respond to a teamster's signals. These signals are given by verbal commands or by noise (whip cracks). Verbal commands vary according to dialect and local tradition. Oxen can pull harder and longer than horses. Though not as fast as horses, they are less prone to injury because they are more sure-footed.
Many oxen are used worldwide, especially in developing countries. About 11.3 million draft oxen are used in sub-Saharan Africa. In India, the number of draft cattle in 1998 was estimated at 65.7 million head. About half the world's crop production is thought to depend on land preparation (such as plowing) made possible by animal traction.
Religion, traditions and folklore:
Main article: Cattle in religion
Islamic traditions:
Further information: Animals in Islam
The cow is mentioned often in the Quran. The second and longest surah of the Quran is named Al-Baqara ("The Cow"). Out of the 286 verses of the surah, seven mention cows (Al Baqarah 67–73). The name of the surah derives from this passage in which Moses orders his people to sacrifice a cow in order to resurrect a man murdered by an unknown person.
Hindu tradition:
Further information: Cattle slaughter in India
Cattle are venerated within the Hindu religion of India. In the Vedic period they were a symbol of plenty and were frequently slaughtered. In later times they gradually acquired their present status.
According to the Mahabharata, they are to be treated with the same respect 'as one's mother'. In the middle of the first millennium, the consumption of beef began to be disfavored by lawgivers. Although there has never been any cow-goddesses or temples dedicated to them, cows appear in numerous stories from the Vedas and Puranas.
The deity Krishna was brought up in a family of cowherders, and given the name Govinda (protector of the cows). Also, Shiva is traditionally said to ride on the back of a bull named Nandi.
Milk and milk products were used in Vedic rituals. In the post-vedic period products of the cow—milk, curd, ghee, but also cow dung and urine (gomutra), or the combination of these five (panchagavya)—began to assume an increasingly important role in ritual purification and expiation.
Veneration of the cow has become a symbol of the identity of Hindus as a community, especially since the end of the 19th century. Slaughter of cows (including oxen, bulls and calves) is forbidden by law in several states of the Indian Union.
McDonald's outlets in India do not serve any beef burgers. In Maharaja Ranjit Singh's empire of the early 19th century, the killing of a cow was punishable by death.
Other traditions:
Legend of the founding of Durham Cathedral is that monks carrying the body of Saint Cuthbert were led to the location by a milk maid who had lost her dun cow, which was found resting on the spot.
An idealized depiction of girl cow herders in 19th-century Norway by Knud Bergslien:
- The Evangelist St. Luke is depicted as an ox in Christian art.
- In Judaism, as described in Numbers 19:2, the ashes of a sacrificed unblemished red heifer that has never been yoked can be used for ritual purification of people who came into contact with a corpse.
- The ox is one of the 12-year cycle of animals which appear in the Chinese zodiac related to the Chinese calendar. See: Ox (Zodiac).
- The constellation Taurus represents a bull.
- An apocryphal story has it that a cow started the Great Chicago Fire by kicking over a kerosene lamp. Michael Ahern, the reporter who created the cow story, admitted in 1893 that he had fabricated it for more colorful copy.
- On 18 February 1930, Elm Farm Ollie became the first cow to fly in an airplane and also the first cow to be milked in an airplane.
- The first known law requiring branding in North America was enacted on 5 February 1644, by Connecticut. It said that all cattle and pigs had to have a registered brand or earmark by 1 May 1644.
- The akabeko (赤べこ, red cow) is a traditional toy from the Aizu region of Japan that is thought to ward off illness.
- The case of Sherwood v. Walker—involving a supposedly barren heifer that was actually pregnant—first enunciated the concept of mutual mistake as a means of destroying the meeting of the minds in contract law.
- The Fulani of West Africa are the world's largest nomadic cattle-herders.
- The Maasai tribe of East Africa traditionally believe their god Engai entitled them to divine rights to the ownership of all cattle on earth.
In heraldry:
Cattle are typically represented in heraldry by the bull.
Population:
For 2013, the FAO estimated global cattle numbers at 1.47 billion. Regionally, the FAO estimate for 2013 includes:
- Asia 497 million;
- South America 350 million;
- Africa 307 million;
- Europe 122 million;
- North America 102 million;
- Central America 47 million;
- Oceania 40 million;
- and Caribbean 9 million.
See also:
- 1966 anti-cow slaughter agitation
- Category: Individual cattle
- British Cattle Health Initiative
- Bull-baiting
- Bullocky
- Bulls and Cows (game)
- Cattle age determination
- Cowboy
- Intensive animal farming
- List of domesticated animals
Dairy Farming and Processing
- YouTube Video: How to Make Cheddar Cheese
- YouTube Video: How to Make Skim Milk
- YouTube Video: How to Make Yogurt
A dairy is a business enterprise established for the harvesting or processing (or both) of animal milk – mostly from cows or buffaloes, but also from goats, sheep, horses, or camels – for human consumption. A dairy is typically located on a dedicated dairy farm or in a section of a multi-purpose farm (mixed farm) that is concerned with the harvesting of milk.
As an attributive, the word dairy refers to milk-based products, derivatives and processes, and the animals and workers involved in their production: for example dairy cattle, dairy goat. A dairy farm produces milk and a dairy factory processes it into a variety of dairy products. These establishments constitute the global dairy industry, a component of the food industry.
Terminology:
Terminology differs between countries. in the United States, for example, an entire dairy farm is commonly called a "dairy". The building or farm area where milk is harvested from the cow is often called a "milking parlor" or "parlor", except in the case of smaller dairies, where cows are often put on pasture, and usually milked in "stanchion barns".
The farm area where milk is stored in bulk tanks is known as the farm's "milk house". Milk is then hauled (usually by truck) to a "dairy plant", also referred to as a "dairy", where raw milk is further processed and prepared for commercial sale of dairy products. In New Zealand, farm areas for milk harvesting are also called "milking parlours", and are historically known as "milking sheds".
As in the United States, sometimes milking sheds are referred to by their type, such as "herring bone shed" or "pit parlour". Parlour design has evolved from simple barns or sheds to large rotary structures in which the workflow (throughput of cows) is very efficiently handled. In some countries, especially those with small numbers of animals being milked, the farm may perform the functions of a dairy plant, processing their own milk into salable dairy products, such as butter, cheese, or yogurt. This on-site processing is a traditional method of producing specialist milk products, common in Europe.
In the United States a dairy can also be a place that processes, distributes and sells dairy products, or a room, building or establishment where milk is stored and processed into milk products, such as butter or cheese. In New Zealand English the singular use of the word dairy almost exclusively refers to a corner shop, or superette. This usage is historical as such shops were a common place for the public to buy milk products.
Industry Structure:
While most countries produce their own milk products, the structure of the dairy industry varies in different parts of the world. In major milk-producing countries most milk is distributed through whole sale markets.
In Ireland and Australia, for example, farmers' co-operatives own many of the large-scale processors, while in the United States many farmers and processors do business through individual contracts.
In the United States, the country's 196 farmers' cooperatives sold 86% of milk in the U.S. in 2002, with five cooperatives accounting for half that. This was down from 2,300 cooperatives in the 1940s. In developing countries, the past practice of farmers marketing milk in their own neighborhoods is changing rapidly.
Notable developments include considerable foreign investment in the dairy industry and a growing role for dairy cooperatives. Output of milk is growing rapidly in such countries and presents a major source of income growth for many farmers.
As in many other branches of the food industry, dairy processing in the major dairy producing countries has become increasingly concentrated, with fewer but larger and more efficient plants operated by fewer workers. This is notably the case in the United States, Europe, Australia and New Zealand.
In 2009, charges of antitrust violations have been made against major dairy industry players in the United States, which critics call Big Milk. Another round of price fixing charges was settled in 2016.
Government intervention in milk markets was common in the 20th century. A limited antitrust exemption was created for U.S. dairy cooperatives by the Capper–Volstead Act of 1922. In the 1930s, some U.S. states adopted price controls, and Federal Milk Marketing Orders started under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 and continue in the 2000s.
The Federal Milk Price Support Program began in 1949. The Northeast Dairy Compact regulated wholesale milk prices in New England from 1997 to 2001.
Plants producing liquid milk and products with short shelf life, such as yogurts, creams and soft cheeses, tend to be located on the outskirts of urban centres close to consumer markets. Plants manufacturing items with longer shelf life, such as butter, milk powders, cheese and whey powders, tend to be situated in rural areas closer to the milk supply.
Most large processing plants tend to specialize in a limited range of products. Exceptionally, however, large plants producing a wide range of products are still common in Eastern Europe, a holdover from the former centralized, supply-driven concept of the market under Communist governments.
As processing plants grow fewer and larger, they tend to acquire bigger, more automated and more efficient equipment. While this technological tendency keeps manufacturing costs lower, the need for long-distance transportation often increases the environmental impact.
Milk production is irregular, depending on cow biology. Producers must adjust the mix of milk which is sold in liquid form vs. processed foods (such as butter and cheese) depending on changing supply and demand.
Milk supply contracts:
In the European Union, milk supply contracts are regulated by Article 148 of Regulation 1308/2013 - Establishing a common organization of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007, which permits member states to create a requirement for the supply of milk from a farmer to a raw milk processor to be backed by a written contract, or to ensure that the first purchaser of milk to make a written offer to the farmer, although in this case the farmer may not be required to enter into a contract.
Thirteen EU member states including France and Spain have introduced laws on compulsory or mandatory written milk contracts (MWC's) between farmers and processors. The Scottish Government published an analysis of the dairy supply chain and the application of mandatory written contracts across the European Union in 2019, to evaluate the impact of the contracts where they have been adopted.
In the UK, a voluntary code of best practice on contractual relationships in the dairy sector was agreed by industry during 2012: this set out minimum standards of good practice for contracts between producers and purchasers. During 2020 the UK government has undertaken a consultation exercise to determine which contractual measures, if any, would improve the resilience of the dairy industry for the future.
The Australian government has also introduced a mandatory dairy code of conduct.
Farming:
Main article:
When it became necessary to milk larger cows, the cows would be brought to a shed or barn that was set up with stalls (milking stalls) where the cows could be confined their whole life while they were milked.
One person could milk more cows this way, as many as 20 for a skilled worker. But having cows standing about in the yard and shed waiting to be milked is not good for the cow, as she needs as much time in the paddock grazing as is possible.
It is usual to restrict the twice-daily milking to a maximum of an hour and a half each time. It makes no difference whether one milks 10 or 1000 cows, the milking time should not exceed a total of about three hours each day for any cow as they should be in stalls and laying down as long as possible to increase comfort which will in turn aid in milk production. A cow is physically milked for only about 10 minutes a day depending on her milk letdown time and the number of milkings per day.
As herd sizes increased there was more need to have efficient milking machines, sheds, milk-storage facilities (vats), bulk-milk transport and shed cleaning capabilities and the means of getting cows from paddock to shed and back.
As herd numbers increased so did the problems of animal health. In New Zealand two approaches to this problem have been used. The first was improved veterinary medicines (and the government regulation of the medicines) that the farmer could use.
The other was the creation of veterinary clubs where groups of farmers would employ a veterinarian (vet) full-time and share those services throughout the year. It was in the vet's interest to keep the animals healthy and reduce the number of calls from farmers, rather than to ensure that the farmer needed to call for service and pay regularly.
This daily milking routine goes on for about 300 to 320 days per year that the cow stays in milk. Some small herds are milked once a day for about the last 20 days of the production cycle but this is not usual for large herds. If a cow is left unmilked just once she is likely to reduce milk-production almost immediately and the rest of the season may see her dried off (giving no milk) and still consuming feed.
However, once-a-day milking is now being practiced more widely in New Zealand for profit and lifestyle reasons. This is effective because the fall in milk yield is at least partially offset by labour and cost savings from milking once per day. This compares to some intensive farm systems in the United States that milk three or more times per day due to higher milk yields per cow and lower marginal labor costs.
Farmers who are contracted to supply liquid milk for human consumption (as opposed to milk for processing into butter, cheese, and so on—see milk) often have to manage their herd so that the contracted number of cows are in milk the year round, or the required minimum milk output is maintained. This is done by mating cows outside their natural mating time so that the period when each cow in the herd is giving maximum production is in rotation throughout the year.
Northern hemisphere farmers who keep cows in barns almost all the year usually manage their herds to give continuous production of milk so that they get paid all year round. In the southern hemisphere the cooperative dairying systems allow for two months on no productivity because their systems are designed to take advantage of maximum grass and milk production in the spring and because the milk processing plants pay bonuses in the dry (winter) season to carry the farmers through the mid-winter break from milking.
It also means that cows have a rest from milk production when they are most heavily pregnant. Some year-round milk farms are penalized financially for overproduction at any time in the year by being unable to sell their overproduction at current prices.
Artificial insemination (AI) is common in all high-production herds in order to improve the genetics of the female offspring which will be raised for replacements. AI also reduces the need for keeping potentially dangerous bulls on the farm. Male calves are sold to be raised for beef or veal, or slaughtered due to lack of profitability. A cow will calve or freshen about once a year, until she is culled because of declining production, infertility or other health problems. Then the cow will be sold, most often going to slaughter.
Industrial processing:
Main article: Dairy products
Dairy plants process the raw milk they receive from farmers so as to extend its marketable life. Two main types of processes are employed: heat treatment to ensure the safety of milk for human consumption and to lengthen its shelf-life, and dehydrating dairy products such as butter, hard cheese and milk powders so that they can be stored.
Cream and butter:
Today, milk is separated by huge machines in bulk into cream and skim milk. The cream is processed to produce various consumer products, depending on its thickness, its suitability for culinary uses and consumer demand, which differs from place to place and country to country.
Some milk is dried and powdered, some is condensed (by evaporation) mixed with varying amounts of sugar and canned.
Most cream from New Zealand and Australian factories is made into butter. This is done by churning the cream until the fat globules coagulate and form a monolithic mass. This butter mass is washed and, sometimes, salted to improve keeping qualities.
The residual buttermilk goes on to further processing. The butter is packaged (25 to 50 kg boxes) and chilled for storage and sale. At a later stage these packages are broken down into home-consumption sized packs.
Skimmed milk:
The product left after the cream is removed is called skim, or skimmed, milk. To make a consumable liquid a portion of cream is returned to the skim milk to make low fat milk (semi-skimmed) for human consumption.
By varying the amount of cream returned, producers can make a variety of low-fat milks to suit their local market. Whole milk is also made by adding cream back to the skim to form a standardized product. Other products, such as calcium, vitamin D, and flavoring, are also added to appeal to consumers.
Casein:
Casein is the predominant phosphoprotein found in fresh milk. It has a very wide range of uses from being a filler for human foods, such as in ice cream, to the manufacture of products such as fabric, adhesives, and plastics.
Cheese:
Main article: Cheese
Cheese is another product made from milk. Whole milk is reacted to form curds that can be compressed, processed and stored to form cheese. In countries where milk is legally allowed to be processed without pasteurization, a wide range of cheeses can be made using the bacteria found naturally in the milk.
In most other countries, the range of cheeses is smaller and the use of artificial cheese curing is greater. Whey is also the byproduct of this process. Some people with lactose intolerance are surprisingly able to eat certain types of cheese. This is because some traditionally made hard cheeses, and soft ripened cheeses may create less reaction than the equivalent amount of milk because of the processes involved. Fermentation and higher fat content contribute to lesser amounts of lactose.
Traditionally made Emmental or Cheddar might contain 10% of the lactose found in whole milk. In addition, the aging methods of traditional cheeses (sometimes over two years) reduce their lactose content to practically nothing. Commercial cheeses, however, are often manufactured by processes that do not have the same lactose-reducing properties.
Ageing of some cheeses is governed by regulations; in other cases there is no quantitative indication of degree of ageing and concomitant lactose reduction, and lactose content is not usually indicated on labels.
Whey:
In earlier times, whey or milk serum was considered to be a waste product and it was, mostly, fed to pigs as a convenient means of disposal. Beginning about 1950, and mostly since about 1980, lactose and many other products, mainly food additives, are made from both casein and cheese whey.
Yogurt:
Yogurt (or yoghurt) making is a process similar to cheese making, only the process is arrested before the curd becomes very hard.
Milk powders:
Milk is also processed by various drying processes into powders. Whole milk, skim milk, buttermilk, and whey products are dried into a powder form and used for human and animal consumption.
The main difference between production of powders for human or for animal consumption is in the protection of the process and the product from contamination. Some people drink milk reconstituted from powdered milk, because milk is about 88% water and it is much cheaper to transport the dried product.
Other milk products:
Kumis is produced commercially in Central Asia. Although traditionally made from mare's milk, modern industrial variants may use cow's milk. In India, which produces 22% of global milk production (as at 2018), a range of traditional milk-based products are produced commercially.
Milking:
Originally, milking and processing took place on the dairy farm itself. Later, cream was separated from the milk by machine on the farm, and transported to a factory to be made into butter.
The skim milk was fed to pigs. This allowed for the high cost of transport (taking the smallest volume high-value product), primitive trucks and the poor quality of roads. Only farms close to factories could afford to take whole milk, which was essential for cheesemaking in industrial quantities, to them.
Originally milk was distributed in 'pails', a lidded bucket with a handle. These proved impractical for transport by road or rail, and so the milk churn was introduced, based on the tall conical shape of the butter churn. Later large railway containers, such as the British Railway Milk Tank Wagon were introduced, enabling the transport of larger quantities of milk, and over longer distances.
The development of refrigeration and better road transport, in the late 1950s, has meant that most farmers milk their cows and only temporarily store the milk in large refrigerated bulk tanks, from where it is later transported by truck to central processing facilities.
In many European countries, particularly the United Kingdom, milk is then delivered direct to customers' homes by a milk float.
In the United States, a dairy cow produced about 5,300 pounds (2,400 kg) of milk per year in 1950, while the average Holstein cow in 2019 produces more than 23,000 pounds (10,000 kg) of milk per year.
Milking machines:
Main article: Automatic milking
Milking machines are used to harvest milk from cows when manual milking becomes inefficient or labour-intensive. One early model was patented in 1907. The milking unit is the portion of a milking machine for removing milk from an udder. It is made up of a claw, four teatcups, (Shells and rubber liners) long milk tube, long pulsation tube, and a pulsator.
The claw is an assembly that connects the short pulse tubes and short milk tubes from the teatcups to the long pulse tube and long milk tube. (Cluster assembly) Claws are commonly made of stainless steel or plastic or both.
Teatcups are composed of a rigid outer shell (stainless steel or plastic) that holds a soft inner liner or inflation. Transparent sections in the shell may allow viewing of liner collapse and milk flow. The annular space between the shell and liner is called the pulse chamber.
Milking machines work in a way that is different from hand milking or calf suckling. Continuous vacuum is applied inside the soft liner to massage milk from the teat by creating a pressure difference across the teat canal (or opening at the end of the teat).
Vacuum also helps keep the machine attached to the cow. The vacuum applied to the teat causes congestion of teat tissues (accumulation of blood and other fluids).
Atmospheric air is admitted into the pulsation chamber about once per second (the pulsation rate) to allow the liner to collapse around the end of teat and relieve congestion in the teat tissue. The ratio of the time that the liner is open (milking phase) and closed (rest phase) is called the pulsation ratio.
The four streams of milk from the teatcups are usually combined in the claw and transported to the milk line, or the collection bucket (usually sized to the output of one cow) in a single milk hose. Milk is then transported (manually in buckets) or with a combination of airflow and mechanical pump to a central storage vat or bulk tank. Milk is refrigerated on the farm in most countries either by passing through a heat-exchanger or in the bulk tank, or both.
Milking machines keep the milk enclosed and safe from external contamination. The interior 'milk contact' surfaces of the machine are kept clean by a manual or automated washing procedures implemented after milking is completed. Milk contact surfaces must comply with regulations requiring food-grade materials (typically stainless steel and special plastics and rubber compounds) and are easily cleaned.
Most milking machines are powered by electricity but, in case of electrical failure, there can be an alternative means of motive power, often an internal combustion engine, for the vacuum and milk pumps.
Milking shed layouts:
Bail-style sheds:
This type of milking facility was the first development, after open-paddock milking, for many farmers. The building was a long, narrow, lean-to shed that was open along one long side. The cows were held in a yard at the open side and when they were about to be milked they were positioned in one of the bails (stalls).
Usually the cows were restrained in the bail with a breech chain and a rope to restrain the outer back leg. The cow could not move about excessively and the milker could expect not to be kicked or trampled while sitting on a (three-legged) stool and milking into a bucket. When each cow was finished she backed out into the yard again.
The UK bail, initially developed by Wiltshire dairy farmer Arthur Hosier, was a six standing mobile shed with steps that the cow mounted, so the herdsman didn't have to bend so low.
The milking equipment was much as today, a vacuum from a pump, pulsators, a claw-piece with pipes leading to the four shells and liners that stimulate and suck the milk from the teat.
The milk went into churns, via a cooler.
As herd sizes increased a door was set into the front of each bail so that when the milking was done for any cow the milker could, after undoing the leg-rope and with a remote link, open the door and allow her to exit to the pasture. The door was closed, the next cow walked into the bail and was secured.
When milking machines were introduced bails were set in pairs so that a cow was being milked in one paired bail while the other could be prepared for milking. When one was finished the machine's cups are swapped to the other cow. This is the same as for Swingover Milking Parlours as described below except that the cups are loaded on the udder from the side.
As herd numbers increased it was easier to double-up the cup-sets and milk both cows simultaneously than to increase the number of bails. About 50 cows an hour can be milked in a shed with 8 bails by one person. Using the same teat cups for successive cows has the danger of transmitting infection, mastitis, from one cow to another. Some farmers have devised their own ways to disinfect the clusters between cows.
Herringbone milking parlours:
In herringbone milking sheds, or parlours, cows enter, in single file, and line up almost perpendicular to the central aisle of the milking parlour on both sides of a central pit in which the milker works (you can visualise a fishbone with the ribs representing the cows and the spine being the milker's working area; the cows face outward).
After washing the udder and teats the cups of the milking machine are applied to the cows, from the rear of their hind legs, on both sides of the working area. Large herringbone sheds can milk up to 600 cows efficiently with two people.
Swingover milking parlours:
Swingover parlours are the same as herringbone parlours except they have only one set of milking cups to be shared between the two rows of cows, as one side is being milked the cows on the other side are moved out and replaced with unmilked ones. The advantage of this system is that it is less costly to equip, however it operates at slightly better than half-speed and one would not normally try to milk more than about 100 cows with one person.
Rotary milking sheds:
Rotary milking sheds (also known as Rotary milking parlor) consist of a turntable with about 12 to 100 individual stalls for cows around the outer edge. A "good" rotary will be operated with 24–32 (~48–50+) stalls by one (two) milkers.
The turntable is turned by an electric-motor drive at a rate that one turn is the time for a cow to be milked completely. As an empty stall passes the entrance a cow steps on, facing the center, and rotates with the turntable. The next cow moves into the next vacant stall and so on.
The operator, or milker, cleans the teats, attaches the cups and does any other feeding or whatever husbanding operations that are necessary. Cows are milked as the platform rotates.
The milker, or an automatic device, removes the milking machine cups and the cow backs out and leaves at an exit just before the entrance. The rotary system is capable of milking very large herds—over a thousand cows.
Automatic milking sheds:
Automatic milking or 'robotic milking' sheds can be seen in Australia, New Zealand, the U.S., Canada, and many European countries. Current automatic milking sheds use the voluntary milking (VM) method. These allow the cows to voluntarily present themselves for milking at any time of the day or night, although repeat visits may be limited by the farmer through computer software.
A robot arm is used to clean teats and apply milking equipment, while automated gates direct cow traffic, eliminating the need for the farmer to be present during the process. The entire process is computer controlled.
Supplementary accessories in sheds:
Farmers soon realized that a milking shed was a good place to feed cows supplementary foods that overcame local dietary deficiencies or added to the cows' wellbeing and production.
Each bail might have a box into which such feed is delivered as the cow arrives so that she is eating while being milked. A computer can read the eartag of each animal to ration the correct individual supplement.
A close alternative is to use 'out-of-parlour-feeders', stalls that respond to a transponder around the cow's neck that is programmed to provide each cow with a supplementary feed, the quantity dependent on her production, stage in lactation, and the benefits of the main ration
The holding yard at the entrance of the shed is important as a means of keeping cows moving into the shed. Most yards have a powered gate that ensures that the cows are kept close to the shed.
Water is a vital commodity on a dairy farm: cows drink about 20 gallons (80 litres) a day, sheds need water to cool and clean them. Pumps and reservoirs are common at milking facilities. Water can be warmed by heat transfer with milk.
Temporary milk storage:
Milk coming from the cow is transported to a nearby storage vessel by the airflow leaking around the cups on the cow or by a special "air inlet" (5-10 l/min free air) in the claw. From there it is pumped by a mechanical pump and cooled by a heat exchanger. The milk is then stored in a large vat, or bulk tank, which is usually refrigerated until collection for processing.
Waste disposal:
In countries where cows are grazed outside year-round, there is little waste disposal to deal with. The most concentrated waste is at the milking shed, where the animal waste may be liquefied (during the water-washing process) or left in a more solid form, either to be returned to be used on farm ground as organic fertilizer.
In the associated milk processing factories, most of the waste is washing water that is treated, usually by composting, and spread on farm fields in either liquid or solid form. This is much different from half a century ago, when the main products were butter, cheese and casein, and the rest of the milk had to be disposed of as waste (sometimes as animal feed).
In dairy-intensive areas, various methods have been proposed for disposing of large quantities of milk. Large application rates of milk onto land, or disposing in a hole, is problematic as the residue from the decomposing milk will block the soil pores and thereby reduce the water infiltration rate through the soil profile.
As recovery of this effect can take time, any land-based application needs to be well managed and considered. Other waste milk disposal methods commonly employed include solidification and disposal at a solid waste landfill, disposal at a wastewater treatment plant, or discharge into a sanitary sewer.
Associated diseases:
Dairy products manufactured under unsanitary or unsuitable conditions have an increased chance of containing bacteria. Proper sanitation practices help to reduce the rate of bacterial contamination, and pasteurization greatly decreases the amount of contaminated milk that reaches the consumer.
Many countries have required government oversight and regulations regarding dairy production, including requirements for pasteurization.
Animal welfare:
A portion of the population, including many vegans and Jains, object to dairy production as unethical, cruel to animals, and environmentally deleterious. They do not consume dairy products. They state that cattle suffer under conditions employed by the dairy industry.
Bovine growth hormone:
Main article: Bovine somatotropin
In 1937, it was found that bovine somatotropin (BST or bovine growth hormone) would increase the yield of milk. Several pharmaceutical companies developed commercial rBST products and they have been approved for use in the US, Mexico, Brazil, India, Russia, and at least ten others.
The World Health Organization, and others have stated that dairy products and meat from BST-treated cows are safe for human consumption. However, based on negative animal welfare effects, rBST has not been allowed in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Israel, or the European Union since 2000 - and in the U.S. has lost popularity due to consumer demands for rBST-free cows, with only about 17% of all cows in America now receiving rBST.
See also:
As an attributive, the word dairy refers to milk-based products, derivatives and processes, and the animals and workers involved in their production: for example dairy cattle, dairy goat. A dairy farm produces milk and a dairy factory processes it into a variety of dairy products. These establishments constitute the global dairy industry, a component of the food industry.
Terminology:
Terminology differs between countries. in the United States, for example, an entire dairy farm is commonly called a "dairy". The building or farm area where milk is harvested from the cow is often called a "milking parlor" or "parlor", except in the case of smaller dairies, where cows are often put on pasture, and usually milked in "stanchion barns".
The farm area where milk is stored in bulk tanks is known as the farm's "milk house". Milk is then hauled (usually by truck) to a "dairy plant", also referred to as a "dairy", where raw milk is further processed and prepared for commercial sale of dairy products. In New Zealand, farm areas for milk harvesting are also called "milking parlours", and are historically known as "milking sheds".
As in the United States, sometimes milking sheds are referred to by their type, such as "herring bone shed" or "pit parlour". Parlour design has evolved from simple barns or sheds to large rotary structures in which the workflow (throughput of cows) is very efficiently handled. In some countries, especially those with small numbers of animals being milked, the farm may perform the functions of a dairy plant, processing their own milk into salable dairy products, such as butter, cheese, or yogurt. This on-site processing is a traditional method of producing specialist milk products, common in Europe.
In the United States a dairy can also be a place that processes, distributes and sells dairy products, or a room, building or establishment where milk is stored and processed into milk products, such as butter or cheese. In New Zealand English the singular use of the word dairy almost exclusively refers to a corner shop, or superette. This usage is historical as such shops were a common place for the public to buy milk products.
Industry Structure:
While most countries produce their own milk products, the structure of the dairy industry varies in different parts of the world. In major milk-producing countries most milk is distributed through whole sale markets.
In Ireland and Australia, for example, farmers' co-operatives own many of the large-scale processors, while in the United States many farmers and processors do business through individual contracts.
In the United States, the country's 196 farmers' cooperatives sold 86% of milk in the U.S. in 2002, with five cooperatives accounting for half that. This was down from 2,300 cooperatives in the 1940s. In developing countries, the past practice of farmers marketing milk in their own neighborhoods is changing rapidly.
Notable developments include considerable foreign investment in the dairy industry and a growing role for dairy cooperatives. Output of milk is growing rapidly in such countries and presents a major source of income growth for many farmers.
As in many other branches of the food industry, dairy processing in the major dairy producing countries has become increasingly concentrated, with fewer but larger and more efficient plants operated by fewer workers. This is notably the case in the United States, Europe, Australia and New Zealand.
In 2009, charges of antitrust violations have been made against major dairy industry players in the United States, which critics call Big Milk. Another round of price fixing charges was settled in 2016.
Government intervention in milk markets was common in the 20th century. A limited antitrust exemption was created for U.S. dairy cooperatives by the Capper–Volstead Act of 1922. In the 1930s, some U.S. states adopted price controls, and Federal Milk Marketing Orders started under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 and continue in the 2000s.
The Federal Milk Price Support Program began in 1949. The Northeast Dairy Compact regulated wholesale milk prices in New England from 1997 to 2001.
Plants producing liquid milk and products with short shelf life, such as yogurts, creams and soft cheeses, tend to be located on the outskirts of urban centres close to consumer markets. Plants manufacturing items with longer shelf life, such as butter, milk powders, cheese and whey powders, tend to be situated in rural areas closer to the milk supply.
Most large processing plants tend to specialize in a limited range of products. Exceptionally, however, large plants producing a wide range of products are still common in Eastern Europe, a holdover from the former centralized, supply-driven concept of the market under Communist governments.
As processing plants grow fewer and larger, they tend to acquire bigger, more automated and more efficient equipment. While this technological tendency keeps manufacturing costs lower, the need for long-distance transportation often increases the environmental impact.
Milk production is irregular, depending on cow biology. Producers must adjust the mix of milk which is sold in liquid form vs. processed foods (such as butter and cheese) depending on changing supply and demand.
Milk supply contracts:
In the European Union, milk supply contracts are regulated by Article 148 of Regulation 1308/2013 - Establishing a common organization of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007, which permits member states to create a requirement for the supply of milk from a farmer to a raw milk processor to be backed by a written contract, or to ensure that the first purchaser of milk to make a written offer to the farmer, although in this case the farmer may not be required to enter into a contract.
Thirteen EU member states including France and Spain have introduced laws on compulsory or mandatory written milk contracts (MWC's) between farmers and processors. The Scottish Government published an analysis of the dairy supply chain and the application of mandatory written contracts across the European Union in 2019, to evaluate the impact of the contracts where they have been adopted.
In the UK, a voluntary code of best practice on contractual relationships in the dairy sector was agreed by industry during 2012: this set out minimum standards of good practice for contracts between producers and purchasers. During 2020 the UK government has undertaken a consultation exercise to determine which contractual measures, if any, would improve the resilience of the dairy industry for the future.
The Australian government has also introduced a mandatory dairy code of conduct.
Farming:
Main article:
When it became necessary to milk larger cows, the cows would be brought to a shed or barn that was set up with stalls (milking stalls) where the cows could be confined their whole life while they were milked.
One person could milk more cows this way, as many as 20 for a skilled worker. But having cows standing about in the yard and shed waiting to be milked is not good for the cow, as she needs as much time in the paddock grazing as is possible.
It is usual to restrict the twice-daily milking to a maximum of an hour and a half each time. It makes no difference whether one milks 10 or 1000 cows, the milking time should not exceed a total of about three hours each day for any cow as they should be in stalls and laying down as long as possible to increase comfort which will in turn aid in milk production. A cow is physically milked for only about 10 minutes a day depending on her milk letdown time and the number of milkings per day.
As herd sizes increased there was more need to have efficient milking machines, sheds, milk-storage facilities (vats), bulk-milk transport and shed cleaning capabilities and the means of getting cows from paddock to shed and back.
As herd numbers increased so did the problems of animal health. In New Zealand two approaches to this problem have been used. The first was improved veterinary medicines (and the government regulation of the medicines) that the farmer could use.
The other was the creation of veterinary clubs where groups of farmers would employ a veterinarian (vet) full-time and share those services throughout the year. It was in the vet's interest to keep the animals healthy and reduce the number of calls from farmers, rather than to ensure that the farmer needed to call for service and pay regularly.
This daily milking routine goes on for about 300 to 320 days per year that the cow stays in milk. Some small herds are milked once a day for about the last 20 days of the production cycle but this is not usual for large herds. If a cow is left unmilked just once she is likely to reduce milk-production almost immediately and the rest of the season may see her dried off (giving no milk) and still consuming feed.
However, once-a-day milking is now being practiced more widely in New Zealand for profit and lifestyle reasons. This is effective because the fall in milk yield is at least partially offset by labour and cost savings from milking once per day. This compares to some intensive farm systems in the United States that milk three or more times per day due to higher milk yields per cow and lower marginal labor costs.
Farmers who are contracted to supply liquid milk for human consumption (as opposed to milk for processing into butter, cheese, and so on—see milk) often have to manage their herd so that the contracted number of cows are in milk the year round, or the required minimum milk output is maintained. This is done by mating cows outside their natural mating time so that the period when each cow in the herd is giving maximum production is in rotation throughout the year.
Northern hemisphere farmers who keep cows in barns almost all the year usually manage their herds to give continuous production of milk so that they get paid all year round. In the southern hemisphere the cooperative dairying systems allow for two months on no productivity because their systems are designed to take advantage of maximum grass and milk production in the spring and because the milk processing plants pay bonuses in the dry (winter) season to carry the farmers through the mid-winter break from milking.
It also means that cows have a rest from milk production when they are most heavily pregnant. Some year-round milk farms are penalized financially for overproduction at any time in the year by being unable to sell their overproduction at current prices.
Artificial insemination (AI) is common in all high-production herds in order to improve the genetics of the female offspring which will be raised for replacements. AI also reduces the need for keeping potentially dangerous bulls on the farm. Male calves are sold to be raised for beef or veal, or slaughtered due to lack of profitability. A cow will calve or freshen about once a year, until she is culled because of declining production, infertility or other health problems. Then the cow will be sold, most often going to slaughter.
Industrial processing:
Main article: Dairy products
Dairy plants process the raw milk they receive from farmers so as to extend its marketable life. Two main types of processes are employed: heat treatment to ensure the safety of milk for human consumption and to lengthen its shelf-life, and dehydrating dairy products such as butter, hard cheese and milk powders so that they can be stored.
Cream and butter:
Today, milk is separated by huge machines in bulk into cream and skim milk. The cream is processed to produce various consumer products, depending on its thickness, its suitability for culinary uses and consumer demand, which differs from place to place and country to country.
Some milk is dried and powdered, some is condensed (by evaporation) mixed with varying amounts of sugar and canned.
Most cream from New Zealand and Australian factories is made into butter. This is done by churning the cream until the fat globules coagulate and form a monolithic mass. This butter mass is washed and, sometimes, salted to improve keeping qualities.
The residual buttermilk goes on to further processing. The butter is packaged (25 to 50 kg boxes) and chilled for storage and sale. At a later stage these packages are broken down into home-consumption sized packs.
Skimmed milk:
The product left after the cream is removed is called skim, or skimmed, milk. To make a consumable liquid a portion of cream is returned to the skim milk to make low fat milk (semi-skimmed) for human consumption.
By varying the amount of cream returned, producers can make a variety of low-fat milks to suit their local market. Whole milk is also made by adding cream back to the skim to form a standardized product. Other products, such as calcium, vitamin D, and flavoring, are also added to appeal to consumers.
Casein:
Casein is the predominant phosphoprotein found in fresh milk. It has a very wide range of uses from being a filler for human foods, such as in ice cream, to the manufacture of products such as fabric, adhesives, and plastics.
Cheese:
Main article: Cheese
Cheese is another product made from milk. Whole milk is reacted to form curds that can be compressed, processed and stored to form cheese. In countries where milk is legally allowed to be processed without pasteurization, a wide range of cheeses can be made using the bacteria found naturally in the milk.
In most other countries, the range of cheeses is smaller and the use of artificial cheese curing is greater. Whey is also the byproduct of this process. Some people with lactose intolerance are surprisingly able to eat certain types of cheese. This is because some traditionally made hard cheeses, and soft ripened cheeses may create less reaction than the equivalent amount of milk because of the processes involved. Fermentation and higher fat content contribute to lesser amounts of lactose.
Traditionally made Emmental or Cheddar might contain 10% of the lactose found in whole milk. In addition, the aging methods of traditional cheeses (sometimes over two years) reduce their lactose content to practically nothing. Commercial cheeses, however, are often manufactured by processes that do not have the same lactose-reducing properties.
Ageing of some cheeses is governed by regulations; in other cases there is no quantitative indication of degree of ageing and concomitant lactose reduction, and lactose content is not usually indicated on labels.
Whey:
In earlier times, whey or milk serum was considered to be a waste product and it was, mostly, fed to pigs as a convenient means of disposal. Beginning about 1950, and mostly since about 1980, lactose and many other products, mainly food additives, are made from both casein and cheese whey.
Yogurt:
Yogurt (or yoghurt) making is a process similar to cheese making, only the process is arrested before the curd becomes very hard.
Milk powders:
Milk is also processed by various drying processes into powders. Whole milk, skim milk, buttermilk, and whey products are dried into a powder form and used for human and animal consumption.
The main difference between production of powders for human or for animal consumption is in the protection of the process and the product from contamination. Some people drink milk reconstituted from powdered milk, because milk is about 88% water and it is much cheaper to transport the dried product.
Other milk products:
Kumis is produced commercially in Central Asia. Although traditionally made from mare's milk, modern industrial variants may use cow's milk. In India, which produces 22% of global milk production (as at 2018), a range of traditional milk-based products are produced commercially.
Milking:
Originally, milking and processing took place on the dairy farm itself. Later, cream was separated from the milk by machine on the farm, and transported to a factory to be made into butter.
The skim milk was fed to pigs. This allowed for the high cost of transport (taking the smallest volume high-value product), primitive trucks and the poor quality of roads. Only farms close to factories could afford to take whole milk, which was essential for cheesemaking in industrial quantities, to them.
Originally milk was distributed in 'pails', a lidded bucket with a handle. These proved impractical for transport by road or rail, and so the milk churn was introduced, based on the tall conical shape of the butter churn. Later large railway containers, such as the British Railway Milk Tank Wagon were introduced, enabling the transport of larger quantities of milk, and over longer distances.
The development of refrigeration and better road transport, in the late 1950s, has meant that most farmers milk their cows and only temporarily store the milk in large refrigerated bulk tanks, from where it is later transported by truck to central processing facilities.
In many European countries, particularly the United Kingdom, milk is then delivered direct to customers' homes by a milk float.
In the United States, a dairy cow produced about 5,300 pounds (2,400 kg) of milk per year in 1950, while the average Holstein cow in 2019 produces more than 23,000 pounds (10,000 kg) of milk per year.
Milking machines:
Main article: Automatic milking
Milking machines are used to harvest milk from cows when manual milking becomes inefficient or labour-intensive. One early model was patented in 1907. The milking unit is the portion of a milking machine for removing milk from an udder. It is made up of a claw, four teatcups, (Shells and rubber liners) long milk tube, long pulsation tube, and a pulsator.
The claw is an assembly that connects the short pulse tubes and short milk tubes from the teatcups to the long pulse tube and long milk tube. (Cluster assembly) Claws are commonly made of stainless steel or plastic or both.
Teatcups are composed of a rigid outer shell (stainless steel or plastic) that holds a soft inner liner or inflation. Transparent sections in the shell may allow viewing of liner collapse and milk flow. The annular space between the shell and liner is called the pulse chamber.
Milking machines work in a way that is different from hand milking or calf suckling. Continuous vacuum is applied inside the soft liner to massage milk from the teat by creating a pressure difference across the teat canal (or opening at the end of the teat).
Vacuum also helps keep the machine attached to the cow. The vacuum applied to the teat causes congestion of teat tissues (accumulation of blood and other fluids).
Atmospheric air is admitted into the pulsation chamber about once per second (the pulsation rate) to allow the liner to collapse around the end of teat and relieve congestion in the teat tissue. The ratio of the time that the liner is open (milking phase) and closed (rest phase) is called the pulsation ratio.
The four streams of milk from the teatcups are usually combined in the claw and transported to the milk line, or the collection bucket (usually sized to the output of one cow) in a single milk hose. Milk is then transported (manually in buckets) or with a combination of airflow and mechanical pump to a central storage vat or bulk tank. Milk is refrigerated on the farm in most countries either by passing through a heat-exchanger or in the bulk tank, or both.
Milking machines keep the milk enclosed and safe from external contamination. The interior 'milk contact' surfaces of the machine are kept clean by a manual or automated washing procedures implemented after milking is completed. Milk contact surfaces must comply with regulations requiring food-grade materials (typically stainless steel and special plastics and rubber compounds) and are easily cleaned.
Most milking machines are powered by electricity but, in case of electrical failure, there can be an alternative means of motive power, often an internal combustion engine, for the vacuum and milk pumps.
Milking shed layouts:
Bail-style sheds:
This type of milking facility was the first development, after open-paddock milking, for many farmers. The building was a long, narrow, lean-to shed that was open along one long side. The cows were held in a yard at the open side and when they were about to be milked they were positioned in one of the bails (stalls).
Usually the cows were restrained in the bail with a breech chain and a rope to restrain the outer back leg. The cow could not move about excessively and the milker could expect not to be kicked or trampled while sitting on a (three-legged) stool and milking into a bucket. When each cow was finished she backed out into the yard again.
The UK bail, initially developed by Wiltshire dairy farmer Arthur Hosier, was a six standing mobile shed with steps that the cow mounted, so the herdsman didn't have to bend so low.
The milking equipment was much as today, a vacuum from a pump, pulsators, a claw-piece with pipes leading to the four shells and liners that stimulate and suck the milk from the teat.
The milk went into churns, via a cooler.
As herd sizes increased a door was set into the front of each bail so that when the milking was done for any cow the milker could, after undoing the leg-rope and with a remote link, open the door and allow her to exit to the pasture. The door was closed, the next cow walked into the bail and was secured.
When milking machines were introduced bails were set in pairs so that a cow was being milked in one paired bail while the other could be prepared for milking. When one was finished the machine's cups are swapped to the other cow. This is the same as for Swingover Milking Parlours as described below except that the cups are loaded on the udder from the side.
As herd numbers increased it was easier to double-up the cup-sets and milk both cows simultaneously than to increase the number of bails. About 50 cows an hour can be milked in a shed with 8 bails by one person. Using the same teat cups for successive cows has the danger of transmitting infection, mastitis, from one cow to another. Some farmers have devised their own ways to disinfect the clusters between cows.
Herringbone milking parlours:
In herringbone milking sheds, or parlours, cows enter, in single file, and line up almost perpendicular to the central aisle of the milking parlour on both sides of a central pit in which the milker works (you can visualise a fishbone with the ribs representing the cows and the spine being the milker's working area; the cows face outward).
After washing the udder and teats the cups of the milking machine are applied to the cows, from the rear of their hind legs, on both sides of the working area. Large herringbone sheds can milk up to 600 cows efficiently with two people.
Swingover milking parlours:
Swingover parlours are the same as herringbone parlours except they have only one set of milking cups to be shared between the two rows of cows, as one side is being milked the cows on the other side are moved out and replaced with unmilked ones. The advantage of this system is that it is less costly to equip, however it operates at slightly better than half-speed and one would not normally try to milk more than about 100 cows with one person.
Rotary milking sheds:
Rotary milking sheds (also known as Rotary milking parlor) consist of a turntable with about 12 to 100 individual stalls for cows around the outer edge. A "good" rotary will be operated with 24–32 (~48–50+) stalls by one (two) milkers.
The turntable is turned by an electric-motor drive at a rate that one turn is the time for a cow to be milked completely. As an empty stall passes the entrance a cow steps on, facing the center, and rotates with the turntable. The next cow moves into the next vacant stall and so on.
The operator, or milker, cleans the teats, attaches the cups and does any other feeding or whatever husbanding operations that are necessary. Cows are milked as the platform rotates.
The milker, or an automatic device, removes the milking machine cups and the cow backs out and leaves at an exit just before the entrance. The rotary system is capable of milking very large herds—over a thousand cows.
Automatic milking sheds:
Automatic milking or 'robotic milking' sheds can be seen in Australia, New Zealand, the U.S., Canada, and many European countries. Current automatic milking sheds use the voluntary milking (VM) method. These allow the cows to voluntarily present themselves for milking at any time of the day or night, although repeat visits may be limited by the farmer through computer software.
A robot arm is used to clean teats and apply milking equipment, while automated gates direct cow traffic, eliminating the need for the farmer to be present during the process. The entire process is computer controlled.
Supplementary accessories in sheds:
Farmers soon realized that a milking shed was a good place to feed cows supplementary foods that overcame local dietary deficiencies or added to the cows' wellbeing and production.
Each bail might have a box into which such feed is delivered as the cow arrives so that she is eating while being milked. A computer can read the eartag of each animal to ration the correct individual supplement.
A close alternative is to use 'out-of-parlour-feeders', stalls that respond to a transponder around the cow's neck that is programmed to provide each cow with a supplementary feed, the quantity dependent on her production, stage in lactation, and the benefits of the main ration
The holding yard at the entrance of the shed is important as a means of keeping cows moving into the shed. Most yards have a powered gate that ensures that the cows are kept close to the shed.
Water is a vital commodity on a dairy farm: cows drink about 20 gallons (80 litres) a day, sheds need water to cool and clean them. Pumps and reservoirs are common at milking facilities. Water can be warmed by heat transfer with milk.
Temporary milk storage:
Milk coming from the cow is transported to a nearby storage vessel by the airflow leaking around the cups on the cow or by a special "air inlet" (5-10 l/min free air) in the claw. From there it is pumped by a mechanical pump and cooled by a heat exchanger. The milk is then stored in a large vat, or bulk tank, which is usually refrigerated until collection for processing.
Waste disposal:
In countries where cows are grazed outside year-round, there is little waste disposal to deal with. The most concentrated waste is at the milking shed, where the animal waste may be liquefied (during the water-washing process) or left in a more solid form, either to be returned to be used on farm ground as organic fertilizer.
In the associated milk processing factories, most of the waste is washing water that is treated, usually by composting, and spread on farm fields in either liquid or solid form. This is much different from half a century ago, when the main products were butter, cheese and casein, and the rest of the milk had to be disposed of as waste (sometimes as animal feed).
In dairy-intensive areas, various methods have been proposed for disposing of large quantities of milk. Large application rates of milk onto land, or disposing in a hole, is problematic as the residue from the decomposing milk will block the soil pores and thereby reduce the water infiltration rate through the soil profile.
As recovery of this effect can take time, any land-based application needs to be well managed and considered. Other waste milk disposal methods commonly employed include solidification and disposal at a solid waste landfill, disposal at a wastewater treatment plant, or discharge into a sanitary sewer.
Associated diseases:
Dairy products manufactured under unsanitary or unsuitable conditions have an increased chance of containing bacteria. Proper sanitation practices help to reduce the rate of bacterial contamination, and pasteurization greatly decreases the amount of contaminated milk that reaches the consumer.
Many countries have required government oversight and regulations regarding dairy production, including requirements for pasteurization.
- Leptospirosis is an infection that can be transmitted to people who work in dairy production through exposure to urine or to contaminated water or soil.
- Cowpox is a virus that today is rarely found in either cows or humans. It is a historically important disease, as it led to the first vaccination against the now eradicated smallpox.
- Tuberculosis is able to be transmitted from cattle mainly via milk products that are unpasteurised. The disease has been eradicated from many countries by testing for the disease and culling suspected animals.
- Brucellosis is a bacterial disease transmitted to humans by dairy products and direct animal contact. Brucellosis has been eradicated from certain countries by testing for the disease and culling suspected animals.
- Listeria is a bacterial disease associated with unpasteurised milk, and can affect some cheeses made in traditional ways. Careful observance of the traditional cheesemaking methods achieves reasonable protection for the consumer.
- Crohn's disease has been linked to infection with the bacterium M. paratuberculosis, which has been found in pasteurized retail milk in the UK and the USA. M. paratuberculosis causes a similar disorder, Johne's disease, in livestock.
Animal welfare:
A portion of the population, including many vegans and Jains, object to dairy production as unethical, cruel to animals, and environmentally deleterious. They do not consume dairy products. They state that cattle suffer under conditions employed by the dairy industry.
Bovine growth hormone:
Main article: Bovine somatotropin
In 1937, it was found that bovine somatotropin (BST or bovine growth hormone) would increase the yield of milk. Several pharmaceutical companies developed commercial rBST products and they have been approved for use in the US, Mexico, Brazil, India, Russia, and at least ten others.
The World Health Organization, and others have stated that dairy products and meat from BST-treated cows are safe for human consumption. However, based on negative animal welfare effects, rBST has not been allowed in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Israel, or the European Union since 2000 - and in the U.S. has lost popularity due to consumer demands for rBST-free cows, with only about 17% of all cows in America now receiving rBST.
See also:
Precision Agriculture including Top Ten Technologies
- YouTube Video: How precision agriculture optimizes crops
- YouTube Video: What is precision agriculture? Why it is a likely answer to climate change and food security?
- YouTube Video: From Drone To Tractor – How Using a Precision Farming UAV Can Improve Crop Management
Top 10 Technologies below (9/2016):
1. GPS/GNSS
1. GPS/GNSS
It’s hard to tell exactly where the state of precision agriculture today would be without GPS — literally. From virtually the moment agriculture gained access to position locating satellites in the 1990s, operators and manufacturers have found various ways to tie into these tools to make managing field work much easier and accurate. “In North America and Europe, growers can turn on the tractor and get to work almost immediately,” says T.J. Schulte, Marketing Manager for Trimble Agriculture Division.
Looking beyond these capabilities, experts say that satellite technology is truly deserving of its “global” moniker. “No longer can we refer to all these systems as GPS — that’s not an accurate description when referring to new Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) receiver technology today,” says Greg Guyette, President of Insero. Instead, he adds, GNSS covers all countries’ satellite constellations including GPS, GLONASS, and Galileo.
2. Mobile Devices
Looking beyond these capabilities, experts say that satellite technology is truly deserving of its “global” moniker. “No longer can we refer to all these systems as GPS — that’s not an accurate description when referring to new Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) receiver technology today,” says Greg Guyette, President of Insero. Instead, he adds, GNSS covers all countries’ satellite constellations including GPS, GLONASS, and Galileo.
2. Mobile Devices
After figuring out where precision agriculture stands on the planet, the next most important innovation these past 20 years would have to be the development of mobile devices. The world today would be an entirely different place without them, according to Illinois Grower John Reifsteck. “Without the cell phone, we probably would still be sitting in the barn a lot, waiting for someone to come to the barn and make things work,” says Reifsteck.
Today, cell phones have morphed into a whole host of useful mobile devices including smartphones and tablets. So ingrained has this technology become that experts estimate that there are more mobile devices on today — 7.25 billion — than people (around 7.2 billion).
As of 2016, most precision agriculture manufacturers that dabble in the mobile devices market have spent most of their time trying to expand the capabilities these products can offer to users. “We run our business on the 20-minute rule when it comes to getting information to the user,” says Dr. Marina Barnes, Vice President of Marketing for FarmersEdge. “If you can’t get your technical data to work for the farmer within the first 20 minutes after he receives it, he’s probably never going to use it.”
3. Robotics
Today, cell phones have morphed into a whole host of useful mobile devices including smartphones and tablets. So ingrained has this technology become that experts estimate that there are more mobile devices on today — 7.25 billion — than people (around 7.2 billion).
As of 2016, most precision agriculture manufacturers that dabble in the mobile devices market have spent most of their time trying to expand the capabilities these products can offer to users. “We run our business on the 20-minute rule when it comes to getting information to the user,” says Dr. Marina Barnes, Vice President of Marketing for FarmersEdge. “If you can’t get your technical data to work for the farmer within the first 20 minutes after he receives it, he’s probably never going to use it.”
3. Robotics
Robots are taking on many tasks in agriculture these days (with varying levels of success), including planting greenhouse crops and pruning vineyards. And there’s been no shortage of activity in agronomic crops. The biggest push has been for autonomous machines that are remotely controlled using telematics. Kinze engineers have created an autonomous grain cart system (designed to plug into any tractor) in which the cart follows a combine through the field at safe distance.
Launched in 2011, AGCO’s Fendt Guide Connect leader-follower technology also connects two machines by means of GNSS signal and radio, so that both can be controlled by just one driver. AGCO is continuing to develop the concept based on customers’ input on their farming needs, says Sepp Nuscheler, Fendt Senior Communications Manager at AGCO.
In a different approach, the Fendt MARS (Mobile Agricultural Robot Swarms) project utilizes small corn seeding robots that are lightweight, energy-efficient, highly agile, cloud-controlled and operated from a tablet app.
There’s no cab but one off-field operator managing a fleet of multiple MARS units. They can work around the clock and have low maintenance needs. “Look for some exciting developments to be shared on the MARS project in Q4 of this year,” says Nuscheler. “This is one direction we see the future of ag robotics heading — small but smart and many.”
4. Irrigation
Launched in 2011, AGCO’s Fendt Guide Connect leader-follower technology also connects two machines by means of GNSS signal and radio, so that both can be controlled by just one driver. AGCO is continuing to develop the concept based on customers’ input on their farming needs, says Sepp Nuscheler, Fendt Senior Communications Manager at AGCO.
In a different approach, the Fendt MARS (Mobile Agricultural Robot Swarms) project utilizes small corn seeding robots that are lightweight, energy-efficient, highly agile, cloud-controlled and operated from a tablet app.
There’s no cab but one off-field operator managing a fleet of multiple MARS units. They can work around the clock and have low maintenance needs. “Look for some exciting developments to be shared on the MARS project in Q4 of this year,” says Nuscheler. “This is one direction we see the future of ag robotics heading — small but smart and many.”
4. Irrigation
Innovations in precision irrigation technologies are growing even more crucial as growers face water scarcity due to drought, aquifer depletion, and water allocations. One recent advance is telemetry, says John Campbell, Manager of Technology Advancement and
Adoption with Valley Irrigation. Products now allow growers to remotely monitor and control nearly every facet of their irrigation operation. The systems save water, time, fuel, and wear and tear on vehicles.
In the future, Campbell says producers will be integrating soil moisture monitoring, weather data and variable-rate irrigation (VRI) into their systems.
Ze’ev Barylka, Director of Marketing and Sales at Netafim USA, adds Precision Mobile Drip Irrigation as another major advance. PC dripline is pulled through the field by a center pivot or linear move irrigation system. As the driplines are pulled behind the system, the integrated emitters deliver a uniform pattern across the full length of the irrigated area. Because the driplines deliver water directly to the soil surface, evaporation and wind drift are virtually eliminated, allowing more water to reach the root zone.
5. Internet Of Things
Adoption with Valley Irrigation. Products now allow growers to remotely monitor and control nearly every facet of their irrigation operation. The systems save water, time, fuel, and wear and tear on vehicles.
In the future, Campbell says producers will be integrating soil moisture monitoring, weather data and variable-rate irrigation (VRI) into their systems.
Ze’ev Barylka, Director of Marketing and Sales at Netafim USA, adds Precision Mobile Drip Irrigation as another major advance. PC dripline is pulled through the field by a center pivot or linear move irrigation system. As the driplines are pulled behind the system, the integrated emitters deliver a uniform pattern across the full length of the irrigated area. Because the driplines deliver water directly to the soil surface, evaporation and wind drift are virtually eliminated, allowing more water to reach the root zone.
5. Internet Of Things
One of the newest buzzwords to hit precision over the past few of years is the “Internet of Things” (IoT). Simply defined, it’s the concept of connecting any device with an on/off switch to the Internet (and/or to each other). This network of connected things could also include people with wearable devices.
The idea has been demonstrated in the consumer market in the “connected home,” for instance, where appliances, security systems, and the like communicate with each other and the homeowner.
Craig Houin, Data Management Lead at Sunrise Cooperative, says connected components in agriculture could include field sensors (for logging real-time weather, soil moisture, and temperature data) and aerial/satellite imagery for field monitoring. Such device communications could also be used in dispatching programs, sales interaction tools, and other business management applications.
Most recently, a number of ag start-ups and component suppliers (hardware, software, etc.) are using LPWANs (Low Power Wide Area Network) in place of or to augment cellular networks in wireless data transmission. “These networks are designed to carry small amounts of data transmitted intermittently over long ranges,” says Paul Welbig, Director of Business Development at Senet Inc.
Because the devices that communicate with the LPWA networks do so with very low power, their battery lives are substantially longer than the current cellular offerings. This coupled with low cost network usage provides a very compelling total cost of ownership advantage over other options.
6. Sensors
The idea has been demonstrated in the consumer market in the “connected home,” for instance, where appliances, security systems, and the like communicate with each other and the homeowner.
Craig Houin, Data Management Lead at Sunrise Cooperative, says connected components in agriculture could include field sensors (for logging real-time weather, soil moisture, and temperature data) and aerial/satellite imagery for field monitoring. Such device communications could also be used in dispatching programs, sales interaction tools, and other business management applications.
Most recently, a number of ag start-ups and component suppliers (hardware, software, etc.) are using LPWANs (Low Power Wide Area Network) in place of or to augment cellular networks in wireless data transmission. “These networks are designed to carry small amounts of data transmitted intermittently over long ranges,” says Paul Welbig, Director of Business Development at Senet Inc.
Because the devices that communicate with the LPWA networks do so with very low power, their battery lives are substantially longer than the current cellular offerings. This coupled with low cost network usage provides a very compelling total cost of ownership advantage over other options.
6. Sensors
Wireless sensors have been used in precision ag and/to gather data on soil water availability, soil compaction, soil fertility, leaf temperature, leaf area index, plant water status, local climate data, insect-disease-weed infestation, and more. Perhaps the most advanced and diverse technologies to date are found in water management.
Across the country, increased regulation of water use and water scarcity will continue to drive improvements in this area. In fact, BCA Ag Technologies’ Ben Flansburg says soil moisture and rainfall sensors have been some big sellers. And many more producers in California are using moisture sensors to help irrigation scheduling.
On-the-go sensor information has become more valuable as well. On-board applicator options developed over the past few years include GreenSeeker (Trimble), OptRx (Ag Leader), and CropSpec (Topcon). They communicate real-time crop health conditions to help immediately tailor product applications.
Another innovation? WeedSeeker, Trimble’s weed detection sensor made for precise site-specific application of herbicides. “Its use is growing in geographic regions where weeds have developed a tolerance to standard glyphosate-based broad-spectrum herbicides,” notes Mike Martinez, Marketing Director.
7. Variable Rate Seeding
Across the country, increased regulation of water use and water scarcity will continue to drive improvements in this area. In fact, BCA Ag Technologies’ Ben Flansburg says soil moisture and rainfall sensors have been some big sellers. And many more producers in California are using moisture sensors to help irrigation scheduling.
On-the-go sensor information has become more valuable as well. On-board applicator options developed over the past few years include GreenSeeker (Trimble), OptRx (Ag Leader), and CropSpec (Topcon). They communicate real-time crop health conditions to help immediately tailor product applications.
Another innovation? WeedSeeker, Trimble’s weed detection sensor made for precise site-specific application of herbicides. “Its use is growing in geographic regions where weeds have developed a tolerance to standard glyphosate-based broad-spectrum herbicides,” notes Mike Martinez, Marketing Director.
7. Variable Rate Seeding
Given all the newer/exciting technologies for precision agriculture on this list, it might be a surprise to see variable-rate application (VRA) seeding here. According to Sid Parks, Manager of Precision Farming for GROWMARK, this has been able to maintain its importance in part because of its nature.
“It appeals to a growers’ natural inclination to try to maximize a field to take advantage of all of the possibilities of increasing the yields possible by paying extra attention to the factors that impact seed growth,” says Parks. “It’s a little different than variable-rate fertilizer because VRA seeding relies on your ability to gather accurate data for the start of the agricultural process, the seed itself.”
Another factor working in VRA seeding’s continued importance to overall precision agriculture is the fact it as a category has plenty of room to grow. “Although folks have been using VRA seeding practices since the mid-1990s, it still is probably only being used on 5% to 10% of the planted acres today,” says Parks. “But the ability to gather good, useful data for VRA seeding is getting much better, so the chances of more growers using this practice in their yearly operations will continue to improve going forward.”
8. Weather Modeling
“It appeals to a growers’ natural inclination to try to maximize a field to take advantage of all of the possibilities of increasing the yields possible by paying extra attention to the factors that impact seed growth,” says Parks. “It’s a little different than variable-rate fertilizer because VRA seeding relies on your ability to gather accurate data for the start of the agricultural process, the seed itself.”
Another factor working in VRA seeding’s continued importance to overall precision agriculture is the fact it as a category has plenty of room to grow. “Although folks have been using VRA seeding practices since the mid-1990s, it still is probably only being used on 5% to 10% of the planted acres today,” says Parks. “But the ability to gather good, useful data for VRA seeding is getting much better, so the chances of more growers using this practice in their yearly operations will continue to improve going forward.”
8. Weather Modeling
Visit most of the nation’s ag retail locations and chances are some kind of weather tracker will be on display. Perhaps no other variable is as important — and completely unpredictable — as the weather.
But help is on the way. “Over the past 25 years, you’ve gotten a lot of important technologies developed that would be even more valuable with quality weather modeling, but we are now at a point where assuring good crop yields is key to making certain the world has food solutions that work,” says Jeff Keiser, Vice President of Strategic Sales and Marketing for Iteris.
“Here at Iteris, we’ve been in the data modeling business for more than 30 years. Our first agricultural system, ClearAg creates a platform for agriculture and expands into other modeling areas such as water use, soil properties, and crop growth.”
An example of this, says Keiser, involved a potato grower in the Northern Plains that found harvesting his crop at a certain temperature was key for maintaining crop quality and integrity.
In the past, this grower sent scouts out into the field to manually assess soil temperatures before sending in the harvest equipment. “But by using ClearAg, this grower was able to take all their soil readings remotely and he was able to accomplish his harvest a lot more efficiently than ever before,” he says.
9. Nitrogen Modeling
But help is on the way. “Over the past 25 years, you’ve gotten a lot of important technologies developed that would be even more valuable with quality weather modeling, but we are now at a point where assuring good crop yields is key to making certain the world has food solutions that work,” says Jeff Keiser, Vice President of Strategic Sales and Marketing for Iteris.
“Here at Iteris, we’ve been in the data modeling business for more than 30 years. Our first agricultural system, ClearAg creates a platform for agriculture and expands into other modeling areas such as water use, soil properties, and crop growth.”
An example of this, says Keiser, involved a potato grower in the Northern Plains that found harvesting his crop at a certain temperature was key for maintaining crop quality and integrity.
In the past, this grower sent scouts out into the field to manually assess soil temperatures before sending in the harvest equipment. “But by using ClearAg, this grower was able to take all their soil readings remotely and he was able to accomplish his harvest a lot more efficiently than ever before,” he says.
9. Nitrogen Modeling
Although some forms of variable-rate fertilizer have been used for decades, nitrogen modeling has become more pronounced recently. “Our clientele has been using variable-rate technologies for fertilizer applications since the mid-1990s,” says Matt Waits, CEO for SST Software. “However, the complexity of the nitrogen cycle and how it is in a constant state of flux has always made managing nitrogen difficult.”
Recently, SST Software has partnered with Agronomic Technology Corp. (ATC) to introduce Adapt-N. According to ATC CEO Steve Sibulkin, Adapt-N was first introduced in 2014 and is becoming an important tool for properly managing nitrogen use.
“There’s a belief in agriculture that today’s environmental pressures will only get worse as the industry moves forward,” says Sibulkin. “The vast of majority of growers want simple methods to use to be able to address these concerns. That’s what Adapt-N and other nitrogen modeling processes are currently bringing to the table.”
10. Standardization
Recently, SST Software has partnered with Agronomic Technology Corp. (ATC) to introduce Adapt-N. According to ATC CEO Steve Sibulkin, Adapt-N was first introduced in 2014 and is becoming an important tool for properly managing nitrogen use.
“There’s a belief in agriculture that today’s environmental pressures will only get worse as the industry moves forward,” says Sibulkin. “The vast of majority of growers want simple methods to use to be able to address these concerns. That’s what Adapt-N and other nitrogen modeling processes are currently bringing to the table.”
10. Standardization
The call for compatibility across equipment manufacturers’ components — primarily through ISOBUS standards — continues to go out. Official initial efforts to implement this began about eight years ago with the formation of the Agricultural Industry Electronics Foundation. The group now includes more than 170 companies, associations, and organizations that are actively collaborating to make the standards work.
Industry participants that have to deal with equipment compatibility “on the ground” continue to be frustrated, however. Third-party tech experts often struggle to manage competing suppliers’ products. Says Tim Norris, CEO of Ag Info Tech, LLC, Mount Vernon,
OH: “There will be a point hopefully where components get to be pretty much plug-and-play — and it’s a lot better than it was — but it’s still a real issue.”
[End of Article]
___________________________________________________________________________
Precision agriculture (PA), satellite farming or site specific crop management (SSCM) is a farming management concept based on observing, measuring and responding to inter and intra-field variability in crops. The goal of precision agriculture research is to define a decision support system (DSS) for whole farm management with the goal of optimizing returns on inputs while preserving resources.
Among these many approaches is a phytogeomorphological approach which ties multi-year crop growth stability/characteristics to topological terrain attributes. The interest in the phytogeomorphological approach stems from the fact that the geomorphology component typically dictates the hydrology of the farm field.
The practice of precision agriculture has been enabled by the advent of GPS and GNSS. The farmer's and/or researcher's ability to locate their precise position in a field allows for the creation of maps of the spatial variability of as many variables as can be measured (e.g. crop yield, terrain features/topography, organic matter content, moisture levels, nitrogen levels, pH, EC, Mg, K, and others).
Similar data is collected by sensor arrays mounted on GPS-equipped combine harvesters.
These arrays consist of real-time sensors that measure everything from chlorophyll levels to plant water status, along with multispectral imagery. This data is used in conjunction with satellite imagery by variable rate technology (VRT) including seeders, sprayers, etc. to optimally distribute resources. However, recent technological advances have enabled the use of real-time sensors directly in soil, which can wirelessly transmit data without the need of human presence.
Precision agriculture has also been enabled by unmanned aerial vehicles like the DJI Phantom which are relatively inexpensive and can be operated by novice pilots.
These agricultural drones can be equipped with multispectral or RGB cameras to capture many images of a field that can be stitched together using photogrammetric methods to create orthophotos.
These composite maps contain multiple values per pixel in addition to the traditional red, green blue values such as near infrared and red-edge spectrum values used to process and analyze vegetative indexes such as NDVI maps.
These drones are capable of capturing imagery and providing additional geographical references such as elevation, which allows software to perform map algebra functions to build precise topography maps. These topographic maps can be used to correlate crop health with topography, the results of which can be used to optimize crop inputs such as water, fertilizer or chemicals such as herbicides and growth regulators through variable rate applications.
History:
See also: Timeline of agriculture and food technology
Precision agriculture is a key component of the third wave of modern agricultural revolutions. The first agricultural revolution was the increase of mechanized agriculture, from 1900 to 1930. Each farmer produced enough food to feed about 26 people during this time.
The 1960s prompted the Green Revolution with new methods of genetic modification, which led to each farmer feeding about 156 people. It is expected that by 2050, the global population will reach about 9.6 billion, and food production must effectively double from current levels in order to feed every mouth. With new technological advancements in the agricultural revolution of precision farming, each farmer will be able to feed 265 people on the same acreage.
Overview:
The first wave of the precision agricultural revolution came in the forms of satellite and aerial imagery, weather prediction, variable rate fertilizer application, and crop health indicators. The second wave aggregates the machine data for even more precise planting, topographical mapping, and soil data.
Precision agriculture aims to optimize field-level management with regard to:
Precision agriculture also provides farmers with a wealth of information to:
Prescriptive planting:
Prescriptive planting is a type of farming system that delivers data-driven planting advice that can determine variable planting rates to accommodate varying conditions across a single field, in order to maximize yield. It has been described as "Big Data on the farm." Monsanto, DuPont and others are launching this technology in the US.
Tools:
Precision agriculture is usually done as a four-stage process to observe spatial variability: Precision agriculture uses many tools but here are some of the basics: tractors, combines, sprayers, planters, diggers, which are all considered auto-guidance systems. The small devices on the equipment that uses GIS (geographic information system) are what makes precision ag what it is.
You can think of the GIS system as the “brain.” To be able to use precision agriculture the equipment needs to be wired with the right technology and data systems. More tools include:
Data collection:
Geolocating:
Geolocating a field enables the farmer to overlay information gathered from analysis of soils and residual nitrogen, and information on previous crops and soil resistivity.
Geolocation is done in two ways:
Variables:
Intra and inter-field variability may result from a number of factors. These include:
Permanent indicators—chiefly soil indicators—provide farmers with information about the main environmental constants. Point indicators allow them to track a crop's status, i.e., to see whether diseases are developing, if the crop is suffering from water stress, nitrogen stress, or lodging, whether it has been damaged by ice and so on.
This information may come from weather stations and other sensors (soil electrical resistivity, detection with the naked eye, satellite imagery, etc.). Soil resistivity measurements combined with soil analysis make it possible to measure moisture content. Soil resistivity is also a relatively simple and cheap measurement.
Strategies:
Using soil maps, farmers can pursue two strategies to adjust field inputs:
Decisions may be based on decision-support models (crop simulation models and recommendation models) based on big data, but in the final analysis it is up to the farmer to decide in terms of business value and impacts on the environment- a role being taken over by artificial intelligence (AI) systems based on machine learning and artificial neural networks.
It is important to realize why PA technology is or is not adopted, "for PA technology adoption to occur the farmer has to perceive the technology as useful and easy to use. It might be insufficient to have positive outside data on the economic benefits of PA technology as perceptions of farmers have to reflect these economic considerations."
Implementing practices:
New information and communication technologies make field level crop management more operational and easier to achieve for farmers. Application of crop management decisions calls for agricultural equipment that supports variable-rate technology (VRT), for example varying seed density along with variable-rate application (VRA) of nitrogen and phytosanitary products.
Precision agriculture uses technology on agricultural equipment (e.g. tractors, sprayers, harvesters, etc.):
Usage around the world:
The concept of precision agriculture first emerged in the United States in the early 1980s. In 1985, researchers at the University of Minnesota varied lime inputs in crop fields. It was also at this time that the practice of grid sampling appeared (applying a fixed grid of one sample per hectare).
Towards the end of the 1980s, this technique was used to derive the first input recommendation maps for fertilizers and pH corrections. The use of yield sensors developed from new technologies, combined with the advent of GPS receivers, has been gaining ground ever since. Today, such systems cover several million hectares.
In the American Midwest (US), it is associated not with sustainable agriculture but with mainstream farmers who are trying to maximize profits by spending money only in areas that require fertilizer. This practice allows the farmer to vary the rate of fertilizer across the field according to the need identified by GPS guided Grid or Zone Sampling. Fertilizer that would have been spread in areas that don't need it can be placed in areas that do, thereby optimizing its use.
Around the world, precision agriculture developed at a varying pace. Precursor nations were the United States, Canada and Australia. In Europe, the United Kingdom was the first to go down this path, followed closely by France, where it first appeared in 1997-1998.
In Latin America the leading country is Argentina, where it was introduced in the middle 1990s with the support of the National Agricultural Technology Institute.
Brazil established a state-owned enterprise, Embrapa, to research and develop sustainable agriculture. The development of GPS and variable-rate spreading techniques helped to anchor precision farming management practices.
Today, less than 10% of France's farmers are equipped with variable-rate systems. Uptake of GPS is more widespread, but this hasn't stopped them using precision agriculture services, which supplies field-level recommendation maps.
One third of the global population still relies on agriculture for a living. Although more advanced precision farming technologies require large upfront investments, farmers in developing countries are benefitting from mobile technology. This service assists farmers with mobile payments and receipts to improve efficiencies.
For example, 30,000 farmers in Tanzania use mobile phones for contracts, payments, loans, and business organization.
The economic and environmental benefits of precision agriculture have also been confirmed in China, but China is lagging behind countries such as Europe and the United States because the Chinese agricultural system is characterized by small-scale family-run farms, which makes the adoption rate of precision agriculture lower than other countries.
Therefore, China is trying to better introduce precision agriculture technology into its own country and reduce some risks, paving the way for China's technology to develop precision agriculture in the future.
Economic and environmental impacts:
Precision agriculture, as the name implies, means application of precise and correct amount of inputs like water, fertilizer, pesticides etc. at the correct time to the crop for increasing its productivity and maximizing its yields.
Precision agriculture management practices can significantly reduce the amount of nutrient and other crop inputs used while boosting yields. Farmers thus obtain a return on their investment by saving on water, pesticide, and fertilizer costs.
The second, larger-scale benefit of targeting inputs concerns environmental impacts.
Applying the right amount of chemicals in the right place and at the right time benefits crops, soils and groundwater, and thus the entire crop cycle. Consequently, precision agriculture has become a cornerstone of sustainable agriculture, since it respects crops, soils and farmers.
Sustainable agriculture seeks to assure a continued supply of food within the ecological, economic and social limits required to sustain production in the long term.
A 2013 article tried to show that precision agriculture can help farmers in developing countries like India.
Precision agriculture reduces the pressure on agriculture for the environment by increasing the efficiency of machinery and putting it into use. For example, the use of remote management devices such as GPS reduces fuel consumption for agriculture, while variable rate application of nutrients or pesticides can potentially reduce the use of these inputs, thereby saving costs and reducing harmful runoff into the waterways.
Emerging technologies:
Precision agriculture is an application of breakthrough digital farming technologies. Over $4.6 billion has been invested in agriculture tech companies—sometimes called agtech.
Robots:
Self-steering tractors have existed for some time now, as John Deere equipment works like a plane on autopilot. The tractor does most of the work, with the farmer stepping in for emergencies. Technology is advancing towards driverless machinery programmed by GPS to spread fertilizer or plow land. Other innovations include a solar powered machine that identifies weeds and precisely kills them with a dose of herbicide or lasers.
Agricultural robots, also known as AgBots, already exist, but advanced harvesting robots are being developed to identify ripe fruits, adjust to their shape and size, and carefully pluck them from branches.
Drones and satellite imagery:
Drone and satellite technology are used in precision farming. This often occurs when drones take high quality images while satellites capture the bigger picture. Light aircraft pilots can combine aerial photography with data from satellite records to predict future yields based on the current level of field biomass. Aggregated images can create contour maps to track where water flows, determine variable-rate seeding, and create yield maps of areas that were more or less productive.
The Internet of things:
The Internet of things is the network of physical objects outfitted with electronics that enable data collection and aggregation. IoT comes into play with the development of sensors and farm-management software.
For example, farmers can spectroscopically measure nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in liquid manure, which is notoriously inconsistent. They can then scan the ground to see where cows have already urinated and apply fertilizer to only the spots that need it. This cuts fertilizer use by up to 30%.
Moisture sensors in the soil determine the best times to remotely water plants. The irrigation systems can be programmed to switch which side of tree trunk they water based on the plant's need and rainfall.
Innovations are not just limited to plants—they can be used for the welfare of animals. Cattle can be outfitted with internal sensors to keep track of stomach acidity and digestive problems. External sensors track movement patterns to determine the cow's health and fitness, sense physical injuries, and identify the optimal times for breeding.
All this data from sensors can be aggregated and analyzed to detect trends and patterns.
As another example, monitoring technology can be used to make beekeeping more efficient.
Honeybees are of significant economic value and provide a vital service to agriculture by pollinating a variety of crops. Monitoring of a honeybee colony's health via wireless temperature, humidity and CO2 sensors helps to improve the productivity of bees, and to read early warnings in the data that might threaten the very survival of an entire hive.
Smartphone Applications:
Smartphone and tablet applications are becoming increasingly popular in precision agriculture. Smartphones come with many useful applications already installed, including the camera, microphone, GPS, and accelerometer.
There are also applications made dedicated to various agriculture applications such as field mapping, tracking animals, obtaining weather and crop information, and more. They are easily portable, affordable, and have a high computing power.
Machine Learning:
Machine learning is commonly used in conjunction with drones, robots, and internet of things devices. It allows for the input of data from each of these sources. The computer then processes this information and sends the appropriate actions back to these devices. This allows for robots to deliver the perfect amount of fertilizer or for IoT devices to provide the perfect quantity of water directly to the soil.
Machine learning may also provide predictions to farmers at the point of need, such as the contents of plant-available nitrogen in soil, to guide fertilization planning. As more agriculture becomes ever more digital, machine learning will underpin efficient and precise farming with less manual labor.
Conferences:
See also:
Industry participants that have to deal with equipment compatibility “on the ground” continue to be frustrated, however. Third-party tech experts often struggle to manage competing suppliers’ products. Says Tim Norris, CEO of Ag Info Tech, LLC, Mount Vernon,
OH: “There will be a point hopefully where components get to be pretty much plug-and-play — and it’s a lot better than it was — but it’s still a real issue.”
[End of Article]
___________________________________________________________________________
Precision agriculture (PA), satellite farming or site specific crop management (SSCM) is a farming management concept based on observing, measuring and responding to inter and intra-field variability in crops. The goal of precision agriculture research is to define a decision support system (DSS) for whole farm management with the goal of optimizing returns on inputs while preserving resources.
Among these many approaches is a phytogeomorphological approach which ties multi-year crop growth stability/characteristics to topological terrain attributes. The interest in the phytogeomorphological approach stems from the fact that the geomorphology component typically dictates the hydrology of the farm field.
The practice of precision agriculture has been enabled by the advent of GPS and GNSS. The farmer's and/or researcher's ability to locate their precise position in a field allows for the creation of maps of the spatial variability of as many variables as can be measured (e.g. crop yield, terrain features/topography, organic matter content, moisture levels, nitrogen levels, pH, EC, Mg, K, and others).
Similar data is collected by sensor arrays mounted on GPS-equipped combine harvesters.
These arrays consist of real-time sensors that measure everything from chlorophyll levels to plant water status, along with multispectral imagery. This data is used in conjunction with satellite imagery by variable rate technology (VRT) including seeders, sprayers, etc. to optimally distribute resources. However, recent technological advances have enabled the use of real-time sensors directly in soil, which can wirelessly transmit data without the need of human presence.
Precision agriculture has also been enabled by unmanned aerial vehicles like the DJI Phantom which are relatively inexpensive and can be operated by novice pilots.
These agricultural drones can be equipped with multispectral or RGB cameras to capture many images of a field that can be stitched together using photogrammetric methods to create orthophotos.
These composite maps contain multiple values per pixel in addition to the traditional red, green blue values such as near infrared and red-edge spectrum values used to process and analyze vegetative indexes such as NDVI maps.
These drones are capable of capturing imagery and providing additional geographical references such as elevation, which allows software to perform map algebra functions to build precise topography maps. These topographic maps can be used to correlate crop health with topography, the results of which can be used to optimize crop inputs such as water, fertilizer or chemicals such as herbicides and growth regulators through variable rate applications.
History:
See also: Timeline of agriculture and food technology
Precision agriculture is a key component of the third wave of modern agricultural revolutions. The first agricultural revolution was the increase of mechanized agriculture, from 1900 to 1930. Each farmer produced enough food to feed about 26 people during this time.
The 1960s prompted the Green Revolution with new methods of genetic modification, which led to each farmer feeding about 156 people. It is expected that by 2050, the global population will reach about 9.6 billion, and food production must effectively double from current levels in order to feed every mouth. With new technological advancements in the agricultural revolution of precision farming, each farmer will be able to feed 265 people on the same acreage.
Overview:
The first wave of the precision agricultural revolution came in the forms of satellite and aerial imagery, weather prediction, variable rate fertilizer application, and crop health indicators. The second wave aggregates the machine data for even more precise planting, topographical mapping, and soil data.
Precision agriculture aims to optimize field-level management with regard to:
- crop science: by matching farming practices more closely to crop needs (e.g. fertilizer inputs);
- environmental protection: by reducing environmental risks and footprint of farming (e.g. limiting leaching of nitrogen);
- economics: by boosting competitiveness through more efficient practices (e.g. improved management of fertilizer usage and other inputs).
Precision agriculture also provides farmers with a wealth of information to:
- build up a record of their farm
- improve decision-making
- foster greater traceability
- enhance marketing of farm products
- improve lease arrangements and relationship with landlords
- enhance the inherent quality of farm products (e.g. protein level in bread-flour wheat)
Prescriptive planting:
Prescriptive planting is a type of farming system that delivers data-driven planting advice that can determine variable planting rates to accommodate varying conditions across a single field, in order to maximize yield. It has been described as "Big Data on the farm." Monsanto, DuPont and others are launching this technology in the US.
Tools:
Precision agriculture is usually done as a four-stage process to observe spatial variability: Precision agriculture uses many tools but here are some of the basics: tractors, combines, sprayers, planters, diggers, which are all considered auto-guidance systems. The small devices on the equipment that uses GIS (geographic information system) are what makes precision ag what it is.
You can think of the GIS system as the “brain.” To be able to use precision agriculture the equipment needs to be wired with the right technology and data systems. More tools include:
- Variable rate technology (VRT),
- Global positioning system and Geographical information system,
- Grid sampling,
- and remote sensors.
Data collection:
Geolocating:
Geolocating a field enables the farmer to overlay information gathered from analysis of soils and residual nitrogen, and information on previous crops and soil resistivity.
Geolocation is done in two ways:
- The field is delineated using an in-vehicle GPS receiver as the farmer drives a tractor around the field.
- The field is delineated on a basemap derived from aerial or satellite imagery. The base images must have the right level of resolution and geometric quality to ensure that geolocation is sufficiently accurate.
Variables:
Intra and inter-field variability may result from a number of factors. These include:
- climatic conditions (hail, drought, rain, etc.),
- soils (texture, depth, nitrogen levels),
- cropping practices (no-till farming),
- weeds and disease.
Permanent indicators—chiefly soil indicators—provide farmers with information about the main environmental constants. Point indicators allow them to track a crop's status, i.e., to see whether diseases are developing, if the crop is suffering from water stress, nitrogen stress, or lodging, whether it has been damaged by ice and so on.
This information may come from weather stations and other sensors (soil electrical resistivity, detection with the naked eye, satellite imagery, etc.). Soil resistivity measurements combined with soil analysis make it possible to measure moisture content. Soil resistivity is also a relatively simple and cheap measurement.
Strategies:
Using soil maps, farmers can pursue two strategies to adjust field inputs:
- Predictive approach: based on analysis of static indicators (soil, resistivity, field history, etc.) during the crop cycle.
- Control approach: information from static indicators is regularly updated during the crop cycle by:
- sampling: weighing biomass, measuring leaf chlorophyll content, weighing fruit, etc.
- remote sensing: measuring parameters like temperature (air/soil), humidity (air/soil/leaf), wind or stem diameter is possible thanks to Wireless Sensor Networks and Internet of things (IoT)
- proxy-detection: in-vehicle sensors measure leaf status; this requires the farmer to drive around the entire field.
- aerial or satellite remote sensing: multispectral imagery is acquired and processed to derive maps of crop biophysical parameters, including indicators of disease. Airborne instruments are able to measure the amount of plant cover and to distinguish between crops and weeds.
Decisions may be based on decision-support models (crop simulation models and recommendation models) based on big data, but in the final analysis it is up to the farmer to decide in terms of business value and impacts on the environment- a role being taken over by artificial intelligence (AI) systems based on machine learning and artificial neural networks.
It is important to realize why PA technology is or is not adopted, "for PA technology adoption to occur the farmer has to perceive the technology as useful and easy to use. It might be insufficient to have positive outside data on the economic benefits of PA technology as perceptions of farmers have to reflect these economic considerations."
Implementing practices:
New information and communication technologies make field level crop management more operational and easier to achieve for farmers. Application of crop management decisions calls for agricultural equipment that supports variable-rate technology (VRT), for example varying seed density along with variable-rate application (VRA) of nitrogen and phytosanitary products.
Precision agriculture uses technology on agricultural equipment (e.g. tractors, sprayers, harvesters, etc.):
- positioning system (e.g. GPS receivers that use satellite signals to precisely determine a position on the globe);
- geographic information systems (GIS), i.e., software that makes sense of all the available data;
- variable-rate farming equipment (seeder, spreader).
Usage around the world:
The concept of precision agriculture first emerged in the United States in the early 1980s. In 1985, researchers at the University of Minnesota varied lime inputs in crop fields. It was also at this time that the practice of grid sampling appeared (applying a fixed grid of one sample per hectare).
Towards the end of the 1980s, this technique was used to derive the first input recommendation maps for fertilizers and pH corrections. The use of yield sensors developed from new technologies, combined with the advent of GPS receivers, has been gaining ground ever since. Today, such systems cover several million hectares.
In the American Midwest (US), it is associated not with sustainable agriculture but with mainstream farmers who are trying to maximize profits by spending money only in areas that require fertilizer. This practice allows the farmer to vary the rate of fertilizer across the field according to the need identified by GPS guided Grid or Zone Sampling. Fertilizer that would have been spread in areas that don't need it can be placed in areas that do, thereby optimizing its use.
Around the world, precision agriculture developed at a varying pace. Precursor nations were the United States, Canada and Australia. In Europe, the United Kingdom was the first to go down this path, followed closely by France, where it first appeared in 1997-1998.
In Latin America the leading country is Argentina, where it was introduced in the middle 1990s with the support of the National Agricultural Technology Institute.
Brazil established a state-owned enterprise, Embrapa, to research and develop sustainable agriculture. The development of GPS and variable-rate spreading techniques helped to anchor precision farming management practices.
Today, less than 10% of France's farmers are equipped with variable-rate systems. Uptake of GPS is more widespread, but this hasn't stopped them using precision agriculture services, which supplies field-level recommendation maps.
One third of the global population still relies on agriculture for a living. Although more advanced precision farming technologies require large upfront investments, farmers in developing countries are benefitting from mobile technology. This service assists farmers with mobile payments and receipts to improve efficiencies.
For example, 30,000 farmers in Tanzania use mobile phones for contracts, payments, loans, and business organization.
The economic and environmental benefits of precision agriculture have also been confirmed in China, but China is lagging behind countries such as Europe and the United States because the Chinese agricultural system is characterized by small-scale family-run farms, which makes the adoption rate of precision agriculture lower than other countries.
Therefore, China is trying to better introduce precision agriculture technology into its own country and reduce some risks, paving the way for China's technology to develop precision agriculture in the future.
Economic and environmental impacts:
Precision agriculture, as the name implies, means application of precise and correct amount of inputs like water, fertilizer, pesticides etc. at the correct time to the crop for increasing its productivity and maximizing its yields.
Precision agriculture management practices can significantly reduce the amount of nutrient and other crop inputs used while boosting yields. Farmers thus obtain a return on their investment by saving on water, pesticide, and fertilizer costs.
The second, larger-scale benefit of targeting inputs concerns environmental impacts.
Applying the right amount of chemicals in the right place and at the right time benefits crops, soils and groundwater, and thus the entire crop cycle. Consequently, precision agriculture has become a cornerstone of sustainable agriculture, since it respects crops, soils and farmers.
Sustainable agriculture seeks to assure a continued supply of food within the ecological, economic and social limits required to sustain production in the long term.
A 2013 article tried to show that precision agriculture can help farmers in developing countries like India.
Precision agriculture reduces the pressure on agriculture for the environment by increasing the efficiency of machinery and putting it into use. For example, the use of remote management devices such as GPS reduces fuel consumption for agriculture, while variable rate application of nutrients or pesticides can potentially reduce the use of these inputs, thereby saving costs and reducing harmful runoff into the waterways.
Emerging technologies:
Precision agriculture is an application of breakthrough digital farming technologies. Over $4.6 billion has been invested in agriculture tech companies—sometimes called agtech.
Robots:
Self-steering tractors have existed for some time now, as John Deere equipment works like a plane on autopilot. The tractor does most of the work, with the farmer stepping in for emergencies. Technology is advancing towards driverless machinery programmed by GPS to spread fertilizer or plow land. Other innovations include a solar powered machine that identifies weeds and precisely kills them with a dose of herbicide or lasers.
Agricultural robots, also known as AgBots, already exist, but advanced harvesting robots are being developed to identify ripe fruits, adjust to their shape and size, and carefully pluck them from branches.
Drones and satellite imagery:
Drone and satellite technology are used in precision farming. This often occurs when drones take high quality images while satellites capture the bigger picture. Light aircraft pilots can combine aerial photography with data from satellite records to predict future yields based on the current level of field biomass. Aggregated images can create contour maps to track where water flows, determine variable-rate seeding, and create yield maps of areas that were more or less productive.
The Internet of things:
The Internet of things is the network of physical objects outfitted with electronics that enable data collection and aggregation. IoT comes into play with the development of sensors and farm-management software.
For example, farmers can spectroscopically measure nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in liquid manure, which is notoriously inconsistent. They can then scan the ground to see where cows have already urinated and apply fertilizer to only the spots that need it. This cuts fertilizer use by up to 30%.
Moisture sensors in the soil determine the best times to remotely water plants. The irrigation systems can be programmed to switch which side of tree trunk they water based on the plant's need and rainfall.
Innovations are not just limited to plants—they can be used for the welfare of animals. Cattle can be outfitted with internal sensors to keep track of stomach acidity and digestive problems. External sensors track movement patterns to determine the cow's health and fitness, sense physical injuries, and identify the optimal times for breeding.
All this data from sensors can be aggregated and analyzed to detect trends and patterns.
As another example, monitoring technology can be used to make beekeeping more efficient.
Honeybees are of significant economic value and provide a vital service to agriculture by pollinating a variety of crops. Monitoring of a honeybee colony's health via wireless temperature, humidity and CO2 sensors helps to improve the productivity of bees, and to read early warnings in the data that might threaten the very survival of an entire hive.
Smartphone Applications:
Smartphone and tablet applications are becoming increasingly popular in precision agriculture. Smartphones come with many useful applications already installed, including the camera, microphone, GPS, and accelerometer.
There are also applications made dedicated to various agriculture applications such as field mapping, tracking animals, obtaining weather and crop information, and more. They are easily portable, affordable, and have a high computing power.
Machine Learning:
Machine learning is commonly used in conjunction with drones, robots, and internet of things devices. It allows for the input of data from each of these sources. The computer then processes this information and sends the appropriate actions back to these devices. This allows for robots to deliver the perfect amount of fertilizer or for IoT devices to provide the perfect quantity of water directly to the soil.
Machine learning may also provide predictions to farmers at the point of need, such as the contents of plant-available nitrogen in soil, to guide fertilization planning. As more agriculture becomes ever more digital, machine learning will underpin efficient and precise farming with less manual labor.
Conferences:
- InfoAg Conference
- European conference on Precision Agriculture (ECPA) (biennial)
- International Conference on Precision Agriculture (ICPA) (biennial)
See also:
- Agricultural drones
- Geostatistics
- Integrated farming
- Integrated pest management
- Landsat program
- NDVI
- Nutrient budgeting
- Nutrient management
- Phytobiome
- Precision beekeeping
- Precision livestock farming
- Precision viticulture
- Satellite crop monitoring
- SPOT (satellites)
- Variable rate technology
- Media related to Precision farming at Wikimedia Commons
- Precision agriculture, IBM
Agricultural Cooperative
- YouTube Video: What is an Agricultural Cooperative?
- YouTube Video: How to stop poverty: start a worker-owned cooperative | Jim Brown | TEDxTuscaloosa
- YouTube Video: How Cooperatives Fit into Agriculture
An agricultural cooperative, also known as a farmers' co-op, is a cooperative where farmers pool their resources in certain areas of activity.
A broad typology of agricultural cooperatives distinguishes between 'agricultural service cooperatives', which provide various services to their individually farming members, and 'agricultural production cooperatives', where production resources (land, machinery) are pooled and members farm jointly.
Examples of agricultural production cooperatives include collective farms in former socialist countries, the kibbutzim in Israel, collectively governed community shared agriculture, Longo Mai co-operatives and Nicaraguan production co-operatives.
The default meaning of 'agricultural cooperative' in English is usually an agricultural 'service' cooperative, which is the numerically dominant form in the world. There are two primary types of agricultural service cooperatives, 'supply cooperative' and 'marketing cooperative'.
Supply cooperatives supply their members with inputs for agricultural production, including seeds, fertilizers, fuel, and machinery services. Marketing cooperatives are established by farmers to undertake transportation, packaging, distribution, and marketing of farm products (both crop and livestock). Farmers also widely rely on credit cooperatives as a source of financing for both working capital and investments.
Purpose:
Cooperatives as a form of business organization are distinct from the more common investor-owned firms (IOFs). Both are organized as corporations, but IOFs pursue profit maximization objectives, whereas cooperatives strive to maximize the benefits they generate for their members (which usually involves zero-profit operation).
Agricultural cooperatives are therefore created in situations where farmers cannot obtain essential services from IOFs (because the provision of these services is judged to be unprofitable by the IOFs), or when IOFs provide the services at disadvantageous terms to the farmers (i.e., the services are available, but the profit-motivated prices are too high for the farmers).
The former situations are characterized in economic theory as market failure or missing services motive. The latter drive the creation of cooperatives as a competitive yardstick or as a means of allowing farmers to build countervailing market power to oppose the IOFs.
The concept of competitive yardstick implies that farmers, faced with unsatisfactory performance by IOFs, may form a cooperative firm whose purpose is to force the IOFs, through competition, to improve their service to farmers.
A practical motivation for the creation of agricultural cooperatives is related to the ability of farmers to pool production and/or resources. In many situations within agriculture, it is simply too expensive for farmers to manufacture products or undertake a service.
Cooperatives provide a method for farmers to join together in an 'association', through which a group of farmers can acquire a better outcome, typically financial, than by going alone.
This approach is aligned to the concept of economies of scale and can also be related as a form of economic synergy, where "two or more agents working together to produce a result not obtainable by any of the agents independently". While it may seem reasonable to conclude that larger the cooperative the better, this is not necessarily true. Cooperatives exist across a broad membership base, with some cooperatives having fewer than 20 members while others can have over 10,000.
While the economic benefits are a strong driver in forming cooperatives, it is not the sole consideration. In fact, it is possible for the economic benefits from a cooperative to be replicated in other organisational forms, such as an IOF.
An important strength of a cooperative for the farmer is that they retain the governance of the association, thereby ensuring they have ultimate ownership and control. This ensures that the profit reimbursement (either through the dividend payout or rebate) is shared only amongst the farmer members, rather than shareholders as in an IOF.
As agricultural production is often the main source of employment and income in rural and impoverished areas, agricultural cooperatives play an instrumental role in socio-economic development, food security and poverty reduction. They provide smallholder farmers with access to natural and educational resources, tools, and otherwise inaccessible marketplaces.
Producer organizations can also empower smallholders to become more resilient; in other words, they build the capacity of farmers to prepare for and react to economic and environmental stressors and shocks in a way that limits vulnerability and promotes their sustainability.
Research suggests that membership in a producer organization is more highly correlated with farmer output or income than other standalone investments such as training, certification, or credit.
In agriculture, there are broadly three types of cooperatives: a machinery pool, a manufacturing/marketing cooperative, and a credit union.
Alternatively, the credit union can raise loans at better rates from commercial banks due to the cooperative having a larger associative size than an individual farmer. Often members of a credit union will provide mutual or peer-pressure guarantees for repayment of loans. In some instances, manufacturing/marketing cooperatives may have credit unions as part of their broader business. Such an approach allows farmers to have a more direct access to critical farm inputs, such as seeds and implements. The loans for these inputs are repaid when the farmer sends produce to the manufacturing/marketing cooperative.
Origins:
The first agricultural cooperatives were created in Europe in the seventeenth century in the Military Frontier, where the wives and children of the border guards lived together in organized agricultural cooperatives next to a funfair and a public bath.
The first civil agricultural cooperatives were created also in Europe in the second half of the nineteenth century. They spread later to North America and the other continents. They have become one of the tools of agricultural development in emerging countries. Farmers also cooperated to form mutual farm insurance societies.
Also related are rural credit unions. They were created in the same periods, with the initial purpose of offering farm loans. Some became universal banks such as Crédit Agricole or Rabobank.
Supply cooperatives:
Agricultural supply cooperatives aggregate purchases, storage, and distribution of farm inputs for their members. By taking advantage of volume discounts and utilizing other economies of scale, supply cooperatives bring down the cost of the inputs that the members purchase from the cooperative compared with direct purchases from commercial suppliers.
Supply cooperatives provide inputs required for agricultural production including seeds, fertilizers, chemicals, fuel, and farm machinery. Some supply cooperatives operate machinery pools that provide mechanical field services (e.g., plowing, harvesting) to their members.
United States:
Marketing cooperatives:
See also: category: agricultural marketing cooperatives
Agricultural marketing cooperatives are cooperative businesses owned by farmers, to undertake transformation, packaging, distribution, and marketing of farm products (both crop and livestock.)
United States:
A broad typology of agricultural cooperatives distinguishes between 'agricultural service cooperatives', which provide various services to their individually farming members, and 'agricultural production cooperatives', where production resources (land, machinery) are pooled and members farm jointly.
Examples of agricultural production cooperatives include collective farms in former socialist countries, the kibbutzim in Israel, collectively governed community shared agriculture, Longo Mai co-operatives and Nicaraguan production co-operatives.
The default meaning of 'agricultural cooperative' in English is usually an agricultural 'service' cooperative, which is the numerically dominant form in the world. There are two primary types of agricultural service cooperatives, 'supply cooperative' and 'marketing cooperative'.
Supply cooperatives supply their members with inputs for agricultural production, including seeds, fertilizers, fuel, and machinery services. Marketing cooperatives are established by farmers to undertake transportation, packaging, distribution, and marketing of farm products (both crop and livestock). Farmers also widely rely on credit cooperatives as a source of financing for both working capital and investments.
Purpose:
Cooperatives as a form of business organization are distinct from the more common investor-owned firms (IOFs). Both are organized as corporations, but IOFs pursue profit maximization objectives, whereas cooperatives strive to maximize the benefits they generate for their members (which usually involves zero-profit operation).
Agricultural cooperatives are therefore created in situations where farmers cannot obtain essential services from IOFs (because the provision of these services is judged to be unprofitable by the IOFs), or when IOFs provide the services at disadvantageous terms to the farmers (i.e., the services are available, but the profit-motivated prices are too high for the farmers).
The former situations are characterized in economic theory as market failure or missing services motive. The latter drive the creation of cooperatives as a competitive yardstick or as a means of allowing farmers to build countervailing market power to oppose the IOFs.
The concept of competitive yardstick implies that farmers, faced with unsatisfactory performance by IOFs, may form a cooperative firm whose purpose is to force the IOFs, through competition, to improve their service to farmers.
A practical motivation for the creation of agricultural cooperatives is related to the ability of farmers to pool production and/or resources. In many situations within agriculture, it is simply too expensive for farmers to manufacture products or undertake a service.
Cooperatives provide a method for farmers to join together in an 'association', through which a group of farmers can acquire a better outcome, typically financial, than by going alone.
This approach is aligned to the concept of economies of scale and can also be related as a form of economic synergy, where "two or more agents working together to produce a result not obtainable by any of the agents independently". While it may seem reasonable to conclude that larger the cooperative the better, this is not necessarily true. Cooperatives exist across a broad membership base, with some cooperatives having fewer than 20 members while others can have over 10,000.
While the economic benefits are a strong driver in forming cooperatives, it is not the sole consideration. In fact, it is possible for the economic benefits from a cooperative to be replicated in other organisational forms, such as an IOF.
An important strength of a cooperative for the farmer is that they retain the governance of the association, thereby ensuring they have ultimate ownership and control. This ensures that the profit reimbursement (either through the dividend payout or rebate) is shared only amongst the farmer members, rather than shareholders as in an IOF.
As agricultural production is often the main source of employment and income in rural and impoverished areas, agricultural cooperatives play an instrumental role in socio-economic development, food security and poverty reduction. They provide smallholder farmers with access to natural and educational resources, tools, and otherwise inaccessible marketplaces.
Producer organizations can also empower smallholders to become more resilient; in other words, they build the capacity of farmers to prepare for and react to economic and environmental stressors and shocks in a way that limits vulnerability and promotes their sustainability.
Research suggests that membership in a producer organization is more highly correlated with farmer output or income than other standalone investments such as training, certification, or credit.
In agriculture, there are broadly three types of cooperatives: a machinery pool, a manufacturing/marketing cooperative, and a credit union.
- Machinery pool: A family farm may be too small to justify the purchase of expensive farm machinery, which may be only used irregularly, say only during harvest; instead local farmers may get together to form a machinery pool that purchases the necessary equipment for all the members to use.
- Manufacturing/marketing cooperative: A farm does not always have the means of transportation necessary for delivering its produce to the market, or else the small volume of its production may put it in an unfavorable negotiating position with respect to intermediaries and wholesalers; a cooperative will act as an integrator, collecting the output from members, sometimes undertaking manufacturing, and delivering it in large aggregated quantities downstream through the marketing channels.
- Credit Union: Farmers, especially in developing countries, can be charged relatively high interest rates by commercial banks, or credit may not even be available for farmers to access. When providing loans, these banks are often mindful of high transaction costs on small loans, or may refuse credit altogether due to lack of collateral – something very acute in developing countries. To provide a source of credit, farmers can group together funds that can be loaned out to members.
Alternatively, the credit union can raise loans at better rates from commercial banks due to the cooperative having a larger associative size than an individual farmer. Often members of a credit union will provide mutual or peer-pressure guarantees for repayment of loans. In some instances, manufacturing/marketing cooperatives may have credit unions as part of their broader business. Such an approach allows farmers to have a more direct access to critical farm inputs, such as seeds and implements. The loans for these inputs are repaid when the farmer sends produce to the manufacturing/marketing cooperative.
Origins:
The first agricultural cooperatives were created in Europe in the seventeenth century in the Military Frontier, where the wives and children of the border guards lived together in organized agricultural cooperatives next to a funfair and a public bath.
The first civil agricultural cooperatives were created also in Europe in the second half of the nineteenth century. They spread later to North America and the other continents. They have become one of the tools of agricultural development in emerging countries. Farmers also cooperated to form mutual farm insurance societies.
Also related are rural credit unions. They were created in the same periods, with the initial purpose of offering farm loans. Some became universal banks such as Crédit Agricole or Rabobank.
Supply cooperatives:
Agricultural supply cooperatives aggregate purchases, storage, and distribution of farm inputs for their members. By taking advantage of volume discounts and utilizing other economies of scale, supply cooperatives bring down the cost of the inputs that the members purchase from the cooperative compared with direct purchases from commercial suppliers.
Supply cooperatives provide inputs required for agricultural production including seeds, fertilizers, chemicals, fuel, and farm machinery. Some supply cooperatives operate machinery pools that provide mechanical field services (e.g., plowing, harvesting) to their members.
United States:
- Landisville Produce Co-op, established 1914
- Rockingham Cooperative, established in 1921
- MFA Incorporated
- Darigold
- Organic Valley
- National Council of Farmer Cooperatives
- Southern States Cooperative
- Farmers Cooperative Association, Inc.; Frederick, Maryland
- Ocean Spray (cooperative)
- Land O'Lakes
- Michigan Sugar
- Sunkist
- Wilco stores (Oregon)
- Grange Cooperative
Marketing cooperatives:
See also: category: agricultural marketing cooperatives
Agricultural marketing cooperatives are cooperative businesses owned by farmers, to undertake transformation, packaging, distribution, and marketing of farm products (both crop and livestock.)
United States:
- American Legend Cooperative (mink fur) "Blackglama" brand
- Blue Diamond Growers (almonds)
- Cabot Creamery (dairy)
- Darigold
- Diamond of California (nuts), formerly a cooperative
- Dairylea Cooperative Inc. (Dairy), formerly Dairymen's League
- Dairy Farmers of America
- Edible Garden
- Florida's Natural Growers (citrus fruit)
- GreenStone Farm Credit Services [financial products and services]
- Humboldt Creamery (dairy), formerly a cooperative
- Land O'Lakes (dairy and farm supply)
- Maine’s Own Organic Milk Company (dairy)
- Michigan Milk Producers Association (dairy)
- Michigan Sugar Company (sugar beets)
- Ocean Spray (cranberries and citrus fruit)
- Organic Valley (organic milk, cheese, eggs, soy, butter, yogurt, snack items)
- Riceland Foods (rice, soybeans, corn and wheat)
- Snokist Growers (pears, apples, cherries)
- Sunkist Growers, Incorporated (citrus fruit)
- Sun-Maid (raisins)
- Sunsweet Growers Incorporated (dried fruit, especially prunes)
- Tillamook County Creamery Association (dairy)
- Lone Star Milk Producers (dairy)
- United Egg Producers
- Welch Foods Inc. (Welch's)
- See also:
Agricultural Machinery, including a List of Agricultural Machinery Pictured below: YouTube Videos:
Click here for a List of Agriculture Machinery
Agricultural machinery is machinery used in farming or other agriculture. There are many types of such equipment, from hand tools and power tools to tractors and the countless kinds of farm implements that they tow or operate.
Diverse arrays of equipment are used in both organic and nonorganic farming. Especially since the advent of mechanized agriculture, agricultural machinery is an indispensable part of how the world is fed.
Agricultural Machinery Types:
Combines:
Combines might have taken the harvesting job away from tractors, but tractors still do the majority of work on a modern farm. They are used to push/pull implements—machines that till the ground, plant seed, and perform other tasks.
Tillage implements prepare the soil for planting by loosening the soil and killing weeds or competing plants. The best-known is the plow, the ancient implement that was upgraded in 1838 by John Deere. Plows are now used less frequently in the U.S. than formerly, with offset disks used instead to turn over the soil, and chisels used to gain the depth needed to retain moisture.
Planters:
The most common type of seeder is called a planter, and spaces seeds out equally in long rows, which are usually two to three feet apart. Some crops are planted by drills, which put out much more seed in rows less than a foot apart, blanketing the field with crops.
Transplanters automate the task of transplanting seedlings to the field. With the widespread use of plastic mulch, plastic mulch layers, transplanters, and seeders lay down long rows of plastic, and plant through them automatically.
Sprayers:
After planting, other agricultural machinery such as self-propelled sprayers can be used to apply fertilizer and pesticides. Agriculture sprayer application is a method to protect crops from weeds by using herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides. Spraying or planting a cover crop are ways to nix weed growth.
Balers and other Agriculture Implements:
Planting crop Hay balers can be used to tightly package grass or alfalfa into a storable form for the winter months. Modern irrigation relies on machinery. Engines, pumps and other specialized gear provide water quickly and in high volumes to large areas of land. Similar types of equipment such as agriculture sprayers can be used to deliver fertilizers and pesticides.
Besides the tractor, other vehicles have been adapted for use in farming, including trucks, airplanes, and helicopters, such as for transporting crops and making equipment mobile, to aerial spraying and livestock herd management.
New technology and the future:
Main articles: Digital agriculture and Precision agriculture
The basic technology of agricultural machines has changed little in the last century. Though modern harvesters and planters may do a better job or be slightly tweaked from their predecessors, the US$250,000 combine of today still cuts, threshes, and separates grain in the same way it has always been done.
However, technology is changing the way that humans operate the machines, as computer monitoring systems, GPS locators and self-steer programs allow the most advanced tractors and implements to be more precise and less wasteful in the use of fuel, seed, or fertilizer. In the foreseeable future, there may be mass production of driverless tractors, which use GPS maps and electronic sensors.
Open source agricultural equipment:
Many farmers are upset by their inability to fix the new types of high-tech farm equipment. This is due mostly to companies using intellectual property law to prevent farmers from having the legal right to fix their equipment (or gain access to the information to allow them to do it).
In October 2015 an exemption was added to the DMCA to allow inspection and modification of the software in cars and other vehicles including agricultural machinery.
The Open Source Agriculture movement counts different initiatives and organizations such as Farm Labs which is a network in Europe, l'Atelier Paysan which is a cooperative to teach farmers in France how to build and repair their tools, and Ekylibre which is an open-source company to provide farmers in France with open source software (SaaS) to manage farming operations.
In the United States, the MIT Media Lab's Open Agriculture Initiative seeks to foster "the creation of an open-source ecosystem of technologies that enable and promote transparency, networked experimentation, education, and hyper-local production".
It develops the Personal Food Computer, an educational project to create a "controlled environment agriculture technology platform that uses robotic systems to control and monitor climate, energy, and plant growth inside of a specialized growing chamber".
It includes the development of Open Phenom, an open source library with open data sets for climate recipes which link the phenotype response of plants (taste, nutrition) to environmental variables, biological, genetic and resource-related necessary for cultivation (input).
Plants with the same genetics can naturally vary in color, size, texture growth rate, yield, flavor and nutrient density according to the environmental conditions in which they are produced.
Notable manufacturers:
Historical: Active:
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Agriculture Machinery:
History See also:
Agricultural machinery is machinery used in farming or other agriculture. There are many types of such equipment, from hand tools and power tools to tractors and the countless kinds of farm implements that they tow or operate.
Diverse arrays of equipment are used in both organic and nonorganic farming. Especially since the advent of mechanized agriculture, agricultural machinery is an indispensable part of how the world is fed.
Agricultural Machinery Types:
Combines:
Combines might have taken the harvesting job away from tractors, but tractors still do the majority of work on a modern farm. They are used to push/pull implements—machines that till the ground, plant seed, and perform other tasks.
Tillage implements prepare the soil for planting by loosening the soil and killing weeds or competing plants. The best-known is the plow, the ancient implement that was upgraded in 1838 by John Deere. Plows are now used less frequently in the U.S. than formerly, with offset disks used instead to turn over the soil, and chisels used to gain the depth needed to retain moisture.
Planters:
The most common type of seeder is called a planter, and spaces seeds out equally in long rows, which are usually two to three feet apart. Some crops are planted by drills, which put out much more seed in rows less than a foot apart, blanketing the field with crops.
Transplanters automate the task of transplanting seedlings to the field. With the widespread use of plastic mulch, plastic mulch layers, transplanters, and seeders lay down long rows of plastic, and plant through them automatically.
Sprayers:
After planting, other agricultural machinery such as self-propelled sprayers can be used to apply fertilizer and pesticides. Agriculture sprayer application is a method to protect crops from weeds by using herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides. Spraying or planting a cover crop are ways to nix weed growth.
Balers and other Agriculture Implements:
Planting crop Hay balers can be used to tightly package grass or alfalfa into a storable form for the winter months. Modern irrigation relies on machinery. Engines, pumps and other specialized gear provide water quickly and in high volumes to large areas of land. Similar types of equipment such as agriculture sprayers can be used to deliver fertilizers and pesticides.
Besides the tractor, other vehicles have been adapted for use in farming, including trucks, airplanes, and helicopters, such as for transporting crops and making equipment mobile, to aerial spraying and livestock herd management.
New technology and the future:
Main articles: Digital agriculture and Precision agriculture
The basic technology of agricultural machines has changed little in the last century. Though modern harvesters and planters may do a better job or be slightly tweaked from their predecessors, the US$250,000 combine of today still cuts, threshes, and separates grain in the same way it has always been done.
However, technology is changing the way that humans operate the machines, as computer monitoring systems, GPS locators and self-steer programs allow the most advanced tractors and implements to be more precise and less wasteful in the use of fuel, seed, or fertilizer. In the foreseeable future, there may be mass production of driverless tractors, which use GPS maps and electronic sensors.
Open source agricultural equipment:
Many farmers are upset by their inability to fix the new types of high-tech farm equipment. This is due mostly to companies using intellectual property law to prevent farmers from having the legal right to fix their equipment (or gain access to the information to allow them to do it).
In October 2015 an exemption was added to the DMCA to allow inspection and modification of the software in cars and other vehicles including agricultural machinery.
The Open Source Agriculture movement counts different initiatives and organizations such as Farm Labs which is a network in Europe, l'Atelier Paysan which is a cooperative to teach farmers in France how to build and repair their tools, and Ekylibre which is an open-source company to provide farmers in France with open source software (SaaS) to manage farming operations.
In the United States, the MIT Media Lab's Open Agriculture Initiative seeks to foster "the creation of an open-source ecosystem of technologies that enable and promote transparency, networked experimentation, education, and hyper-local production".
It develops the Personal Food Computer, an educational project to create a "controlled environment agriculture technology platform that uses robotic systems to control and monitor climate, energy, and plant growth inside of a specialized growing chamber".
It includes the development of Open Phenom, an open source library with open data sets for climate recipes which link the phenotype response of plants (taste, nutrition) to environmental variables, biological, genetic and resource-related necessary for cultivation (input).
Plants with the same genetics can naturally vary in color, size, texture growth rate, yield, flavor and nutrient density according to the environmental conditions in which they are produced.
Notable manufacturers:
Historical: Active:
- AGCO
- Amazonen-Werke
- ARGO SpA
- Art's Way
- Apache Sprayers by Equipment Technologies
- Caterpillar Inc.
- Claas
- CNH Industrial
- Industry of Machinery and Tractors (IMT)
- JCB
- John Deere
- Kubota
- Mahindra & Mahindra
- Minsk Tractor Works
- Mirrlees Blackstone
- Rostselmash
- SDF Group
- TAFE
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Agriculture Machinery:
History See also:
- Hay Harvesting in the 1940s instructional films, Center for Digital Initiatives, University of Vermont Library
- Worldwide Agricultural Machinery and Farm Equipment Directory
- Economic Situation of the agricultural machinery sector—VDMA Report
- Mechanized agriculture
- Agricultural robot
Vertical Farming
- YouTube Video: This Vertical Farm of the Future Uses No Soil and 95% Less Water
- YouTube Video: Why Vertical Farming is the Future of Food
- YouTube Video: How to Grow Microgreens from Start to Finish (COMPLETE GUIDE)
Vertical Farming: Growing Up?
(Article by By Croptracker)
Imagine if you had the ability to control exactly how much sun, and rain your crops got. What if you could set the ideal temperature for everything you grow, and could control the humidity and air flow with perfect precision? Grappling with the effects of the environment while producing food has always been the farmer’s biggest challenge. But Vertical Farming takes all the uncertainty out of growing by creating and maintaining the perfect climate for whatever you’re growing.
By growing indoors and controlling all the environmental factors, vertical farms are able to grow all year round, even in urban areas. The indoor farming industry is generating a lot of buzz and is growing fast, with a projected market value of around $3 billion by 2024.
This all sounds like a dream, but is vertical farming really all it’s stacked up to be? In this article we will talk about some of the growing methods used in vertical farming, and the benefits it provides as well as some of the drawbacks and disadvantages impeding the industry.
Vertical Farming is generally used to refer to high-density, indoor operations where crops are grown using climate control. It differs from large scale greenhouse growing in that it requires much less surface area or land and uses artificial lighting, usually high efficiency LEDs, as opposed to sunlight. Plants are typically grown on shelves/in layers using either hydroponics, aeroponics or substrate/soil systems.
In hydroponic growing, a plant is fed using a water and nutrient mix and is not supported in soil. Sometimes the roots of the plants will be suspended in an inert substance like volcanic glass or coconut husk mixtures that retain water and structure to support the plant roots.
Aeroponics is similar to, and often sub-categorized under hydroponics. Plants are fed using water and nutrient mixtures, but it is applied via mist or vapour on the exposed roots of the plant.
Using soil and substrate mixtures for planting is a method well known to any farmer. In vertical farming however, instead of requiring large surface areas exposed to the sun, plants are grown on shelves using high-efficiency LED lights and hydrated using a water recycling system.
Vertical farming innovations are being created to address the needs of increasingly urban populations. In the last 40 years, the world has lost a third of its arable land. By the year 2050, over 80% of the world’s population will be living in cities. This population shift is putting more strain on supply chains that need to move food from the fields to the cities.
Demand for fresher products is creating greater a need for food to be produced closer to where people live. Urban farms, like Farm.One, seek to fulfil the needs of restaurants and consumers in their area with fresh greens that do not have to travel across the country or from overseas.
The migration of people into cities has also created an incredible shortage of available labour on farms in rural areas. It is very hard to get people to commute out of cities to work on farms (often for lower wages than jobs in the city). Growing food where people live eliminates this problem. There is a large pool of skilled labour for vertical farms to pull from in the city. The density at which crops are grown on vertical farms also allows for more efficient work-flows, meaning there can be fewer employees compared to traditional farms with similar output rates.
One of the biggest selling points of vertical/indoor farming is the perceived benefit to the environment. On average, vertical farms use 95% less water than open field farming. On the most efficient indoor farms, water is recycled and reused in a nearly closed system. Many indoor farms use existing infrastructure to house their farms, like unused manufacturing facilities, saving resources on building new facilities.
The close proximity to cities also save enormously on fuel, saving both money and contributing less to carbon emissions. Additionally, produce grown indoors needs far less pesticide and disease protection. Many crops are sealed off and hardly handled by humans, protecting them from contamination. This means pesticides and chemicals to manage disease and pests don’t need to be used as often or at all. Many vertical farms grow greens and lettuces because there is a lesser risk of contamination than with field grown and fertilized greens.
Another motivator for developing better indoor farming techniques is the worsening climate and environmental conditions worldwide. As farmland is lost to growing cities, pollution and climate extremes, many companies are developing vertical farming systems to feed growing populations.
In Japan, after the 2011 tsunami and nuclear power plant meltdown, much of the country’s farm land was contaminated and unusable. The vertical farming industry in Japan is now one of the largest in the world, home to one of the most profitable indoor farming companies, Spread. Spread’s newest facility, Techno Farms, is so efficient it can grow 30,000 heads of lettuce a day.
Not all of Japan’s vertical farming companies are faring as well as Spread, though. 60% of the indoor farms in the country are not turning a profit, and many more rely on government subsidies to operate. This problem of profitability with indoor farming is not limited to Japan.
In many places the costs of vertical farming make the produce extremely expensive.
Real estate prices within cities are significantly higher than land in rural areas making the upfront investment and continuing property taxes too high. The utility rates within cities can also be prohibitive.
The operating costs for the extensive lighting and climate control systems necessary to vertical farming are huge. There are extra labour costs with indoor farming as well due to the nature of growing inside. All pollination needs to be done manually.
Additionally, long term cost saving solutions, like robotic pickers and pollinators, are often too expensive to be implemented. And while being in total control over the environment your plants are grown in is great, it also means vertical farms are entirely dependent on technology that could fail. Power outages or software crashes could have catastrophic consequences.
It is also important to note that long term studies on the environmental impact and efficiency of vertical farming have yet to be released. Some farmers and experts believe it is still more useful to build horizontal green houses as opposed to vertical and artificially lit operations.
Louis Albright, a controlled climate farming expert from Cornell University, proposes that a better solution for creating more local food would be to build green houses just outside of urban areas.
Controlling and adapting to environmental factors is an ongoing problem for growers, but is vertical farming the solution? In order for vertical farms to stay manageable, and to become profitable, companies will need to continue to experiment, innovate, and analyze every aspect of their processes.
Data management will play a huge role in refining vertical farming practices. Production practices, material, electricity and water use, and labour expenses, are all factors that will need to be measured and assessed to determine the best processes for a new style of farming.
Farm management software helps growers to keep accurate records, enhance traceability and food safety, and to store and analyze data from every aspect of your operation. Vertical farming has yet to prove itself in the market but the possibilities and innovations it provides will push agriculture technologies toward the future.
Interested in learning more about Croptracker? Learn more about our Farm Management Software, or book a demonstration to schedule a meeting with our product experts.
And as always, if you're ever stuck, never hesitate to e-mail us at support@croptracker.com or Live Chat with us by clicking the green speech bubble in your bottom right-hand corner. We're always happy to help, so Croptracker can make your farm more efficient, safer, and more profitable!
[End of Article]
___________________________________________________________________________
Vertical farming is the practice of growing crops in vertically stacked layers. It often incorporates controlled-environment agriculture, which aims to optimize plant growth, and soilless farming techniques such as hydroponics, aquaponics, and aeroponics.
Some common choices of structures to house vertical farming systems include buildings, shipping containers, tunnels, and abandoned mine shafts. As of 2020, there is the equivalent of about 30 ha (74 acres) of operational vertical farmland in the world.
The modern concept of vertical farming was proposed in 1999 by Dickson Despommier, professor of Public and Environmental Health at Columbia University. Despommier and his students came up with a design of a skyscraper farm that could feed 50,000 people.
Although the design has not yet been built, it successfully popularized the idea of vertical farming. Current applications of vertical farmings coupled with other state-of-the-art technologies, such as specialized LED lights, have resulted in over 10 times the crop yield than would receive through traditional farming methods.
The main advantage of utilizing vertical farming technologies is the increased crop yield that comes with a smaller unit area of land requirement. The increased ability to cultivate a larger variety of crops at once because crops do not share the same plots of land while growing is another sought-after advantage.
Additionally, crops are resistant to weather disruptions because of their placement indoors, meaning less crops lost to extreme or unexpected weather occurrences. Because of its limited land usage, vertical farming is less disruptive to the native plants and animals, leading to further conservation of the local flora and fauna.
Vertical farming technologies face economic challenges with large start-up costs compared to traditional farms. In Victoria, Australia, a “hypothetical 10 level vertical farm” would cost over 850 times more per square meter of arable land than a traditional farm in rural Victoria.
Vertical farms also face large energy demands due to the use of supplementary light like LEDs. Moreover, if non-renewable energy is used to meet these energy demands, vertical farms could produce more pollution than traditional farms or greenhouses.
Techniques of vertical farming:
Hydroponics:
Hydroponics refers to the technique of growing plants without soil. In hydroponic systems, the roots of plants are submerged in liquid solutions containing macronutrients, such as nitrogen, phosphorus, sulphur, potassium, calcium, and magnesium, as well as trace elements, including iron, chlorine, manganese, boron, zinc, copper, and molybdenum.
Additionally, inert (chemically inactive) mediums such as gravel, sand, and sawdust are used as soil substitutes to provide support for the roots.
The advantages of hydroponics include the ability to increase yield per area and reduce water usage. A study has shown that, compared to conventional farming, hydroponic farming could increase the yield per area of lettuce by around 11 times while requiring 13 times less water. Due to these advantages, hydroponics is the predominant growing system used in vertical farming.
Aquaponics:
The term aquaponics is coined by combining two words: aquaculture, which refers to fish farming, and hydroponics—the technique of growing plants without soil. Aquaponics takes hydroponics one step further by integrating the production of terrestrial plants with the production of aquatic organisms in a closed-loop system that mimics nature itself.
Nutrient-rich wastewater from the fish tanks is filtered by a solid removal unit and then led to a bio-filter, where toxic ammonia is converted to nutritious nitrate. While absorbing nutrients, the plants then purify the wastewater, which is recycled back to the fish tanks.
Moreover, the plants consume carbon dioxide produced by the fish, and water in the fish tanks obtains heat and helps the greenhouse maintain temperature at night to save energy. As most commercial vertical farming systems focus on producing a few fast-growing vegetable crops, aquaponics, which also includes an aquaculture component, is currently not as widely used as conventional hydroponics.
Aeroponics:
The invention of aeroponics was motivated by the initiative of NASA (the National Aeronautical and Space Administration) to find an efficient way to grow plants in space in the 1990s.
Unlike conventional hydroponics and aquaponics, aeroponics does not require any liquid or solid medium to grow plants in. Instead, a liquid solution with nutrients is misted in air chambers where the plants are suspended.
By far, aeroponics is the most sustainable soil-less growing technique, as it uses up to 90% less water than the most efficient conventional hydroponic systems and requires no replacement of growing medium.
Moreover, the absence of growing medium allows aeroponic systems to adopt a vertical design, which further saves energy as gravity automatically drains away excess liquid, whereas conventional horizontal hydroponic systems often require water pumps for controlling excess solution. Currently, aeroponic systems have not been widely applied to vertical farming, but are starting to attract significant attention.
Controlled-Environment Agriculture:
Controlled-environment agriculture (CEA) is the modification of the natural environment to increase crop yield or extend the growing season. CEA systems are typically hosted in enclosed structures such as greenhouses or buildings, where control can be imposed on environmental factors including air, temperature, light, water, humidity, carbon dioxide, and plant nutrition.
In vertical farming systems, CEA is often used in conjunction with soilless farming techniques such as hydroponics, aquaponics, and aeroponics.
Types of vertical farming:
Building-based vertical farms:
Abandoned buildings are often reused for vertical farming, such as a farm at Chicago called “The Plant,” which was transformed from an old meatpacking plant. However, new builds are sometimes also constructed to house vertical farming systems.
Shipping-container vertical farms:
Recycled shipping containers are an increasingly popular option for housing vertical farming systems. The shipping containers serve as standardized, modular chambers for growing a variety of plants, and are often equipped with LED lighting, vertically stacked hydroponics, smart climate controls, and monitoring sensors. Moreover, by stacking the shipping containers, farms can save space even further and achieve higher yield per square foot.
Deep farms:
A “deep farm” is a vertical farm built from refurbished underground tunnels or abandoned mine shafts. As temperature and humidity underground are generally temperate and constant, deep farms require less energy for heating. Deep farms can also use nearby groundwater to reduce the cost of water supply.
Despite low costs, a deep farm can produce 7 to 9 times more food than a conventional farm above ground on the same area of land, according to Saffa Riffat, chair in Sustainable Energy at the University of Nottingham. Coupled with automated harvesting systems, these underground farms can be fully self-sufficient.
Advantages:
Efficiency:
Traditional farming's arable land requirements are too large and invasive to remain sustainable for future generations. With the rapid population growth rates, it is expected that arable land per person will drop about 66% in 2050 in comparison to 1970.
Vertical farming allows for, in some cases, over ten times the crop yield per acre than traditional methods. Unlike traditional farming in non-tropical areas, indoor farming can produce crops year-round. All-season farming multiplies the productivity of the farmed surface by a factor of 4 to 6 depending on the crop. With crops such as strawberries, the factor may be as high as 30.
Vertical farming also allows for the production of a larger variety of harvestable crops because of its usage of isolated crop sectors. As opposed to a traditional farm where one type of crop is harvested per season, vertical farms allow for a multitude of different crops to be grown and harvested at once due to their individual land plots.
According to the USDA, vertical farm produce only travels a short distance to reach stores compared to traditional farming method produce.
The United States Department of Agriculture predicts the worldwide population to exceed 9 billion by 2050, most of which will be living in urban or city areas. Vertical farming is the USDA's predicted answer to the potential food shortage as population increases. This method of farming is environmentally responsible by lowering emission and reducing needed water. This type of urban farming that would allow for nearly immediate farm to store transport would reduce distribution.
In a workshop on vertical farming put on by the USDA and the Department of Energy experts in vertical farming discussed plant breeding, pest management, and engineering. Control of pests (like insects, birds and rodents) is easily managed in vertical farms, because the area is so well-controlled. Without the need of chemical pesticides the ability to grow organic crops is easier than in traditional farming.
Resistance to weather:
Crops grown in traditional outdoor farming depend on supportive weather and suffer from undesirable temperatures, rain, monsoon, hailstorm, tornado, flooding, wildfires, and drought. "Three recent floods (in 1993, 2007 and 2008) cost the United States billions of dollars in lost crops, with even more devastating losses in topsoil. Changes in rain patterns and temperature could diminish India's agricultural output by 30 percent by the end of the century."
The issue of adverse weather conditions is especially relevant for arctic and sub-arctic areas like Alaska and northern Canada where traditional farming is largely impossible. Food insecurity has been a long-standing problem in remote northern communities where fresh produce has to be shipped large distances resulting in high costs and poor nutrition.
Container-based farms can provide fresh produce year-round at a lower cost than shipping in supplies from more southerly locations with a number of farms operating in locations such as Churchill, Manitoba, and Unalaska, Alaska. As with disruption to crop growing, local container-based farms are also less susceptible to disruption than the long supply chains necessary to deliver traditionally grown produce to remote communities.
Food prices in Churchill spiked substantially after floods in May and June 2017 forced the closure of the rail line that forms the only permanent overland connection between Churchill and the rest of Canada.
Environmental conservation:
Up to 20 units of outdoor farmland per unit of vertical farming could return to its natural state, due to vertical farming's increased productivity. Vertical farming would reduce the amount of farmland, thus saving many natural resources.
Deforestation and desertification caused by agricultural encroachment on natural biomes could be avoided. Producing food indoors reduces or eliminates conventional plowing, planting, and harvesting by farm machinery, protecting soil, and reducing emissions.
Traditional farming is often invasive to the native flora and fauna because it requires such a large area of arable land. One study showed that wood mouse populations dropped from 25 per hectare to 5 per hectare after harvest, estimating 10 animals killed per hectare each year with conventional farming. In comparison, vertical farming would cause nominal harm to wildlife because of its limited space usage.
Problems:
Economics:
Vertical farms must overcome the financial challenge of large startup costs. The initial building costs could exceed $100 million for a 60 hectare vertical farm.
Urban occupancy costs can be high, resulting in much higher startup costs – and a longer break even time – than for a traditional farm in rural areas.
Opponents question the potential profitability of vertical farming. In order for vertical farms to be successful financially, high value crops must be grown since traditional farms provide low value crops like wheat at cheaper costs than a vertical farm. Louis Albright, a professor in biological and environmental engineering at Cornell stated that a loaf of bread that was made from wheat grown in a vertical farm would cost US$27.
However, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average loaf of bread cost US$1.296 in September 2019, clearly showing how crops grown in vertical farms will be noncompetitive compared to crops grown in traditional outdoor farms. In order for vertical farms to be profitable, the costs of operating these farms must decrease.
The developers of the TerraFarm system produced from second hand, 40-foot shipping containers claimed that their system "has achieved cost parity with traditional, outdoor farming".
A theoretical 10-storey vertical wheat farm could produce up to 1,940 tons of wheat per hectare compared to a global average of 3.2 tons of wheat per hectare (600 times yield).
Current methods require enormous energy consumption for lighting, temperature, humidity control, carbon dioxide input and fertilizer and consequently the authors concluded it was "unlikely to be economically competitive with current market prices".
According to a report in The Financial Times as of 2020, most vertical farming companies have been unprofitable, except for a number of Japanese companies.
Energy use:
During the growing season, the sun shines on a vertical surface at an extreme angle such that much less light is available to crops than when they are planted on flat land. Therefore, supplemental light would be required. Bruce Bugbee claimed that the power demands of vertical farming would be uncompetitive with traditional farms using only natural light.
Environmental writer George Monbiot calculated that the cost of providing enough supplementary light to grow the grain for a single loaf would be about $15. An article in the Economist argued that "even though crops growing in a glass skyscraper will get some natural sunlight during the day, it won't be enough" and "the cost of powering artificial lights will make indoor farming prohibitively expensive".
Moreover, researchers determined that if only solar panels were to be used to meet the energy consumption of a vertical farm, “the area of solar panels required would need to be a factor of twenty times greater than the arable area on a multi-level indoor farm”, which will be hard to accomplish with larger vertical farms. A hydroponic farm growing lettuce in Arizona would require 15,000 kJ of energy per kilogram of lettuce produced.
To put this amount of energy into perspective, a traditional outdoor lettuce farm in Arizona only requires 1100 kJ of energy per kilogram of lettuce grown.
As the book by Dr. Dickson Despommier "The Vertical Farm" proposes a controlled environment, heating and cooling costs will resemble those of any other multiple story building. Plumbing and elevator systems are necessary to distribute nutrients and water. In the northern continental United States, fossil fuel heating cost can be over $200,000 per hectare.
Research conducted in 2015 compared the growth of lettuce in Arizona using conventional agricultural methods and a hydroponic farm. They determined that heating and cooling made up more than 80% of the energy consumption in the hydroponic farm, with the heating and cooling needing 7400 kJ per kilogram of lettuce produced. According to the same study, the total energy consumption of the hydroponic farm is 90,000 kJ per kilogram of lettuce. If the energy consumption is not addressed, vertical farms may be an unsustainable alternative to traditional agriculture.
Pollution:
There are a number of interrelated challenges with some potential solutions:
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Vertical Farming:
History See also:
(Article by By Croptracker)
Imagine if you had the ability to control exactly how much sun, and rain your crops got. What if you could set the ideal temperature for everything you grow, and could control the humidity and air flow with perfect precision? Grappling with the effects of the environment while producing food has always been the farmer’s biggest challenge. But Vertical Farming takes all the uncertainty out of growing by creating and maintaining the perfect climate for whatever you’re growing.
By growing indoors and controlling all the environmental factors, vertical farms are able to grow all year round, even in urban areas. The indoor farming industry is generating a lot of buzz and is growing fast, with a projected market value of around $3 billion by 2024.
This all sounds like a dream, but is vertical farming really all it’s stacked up to be? In this article we will talk about some of the growing methods used in vertical farming, and the benefits it provides as well as some of the drawbacks and disadvantages impeding the industry.
Vertical Farming is generally used to refer to high-density, indoor operations where crops are grown using climate control. It differs from large scale greenhouse growing in that it requires much less surface area or land and uses artificial lighting, usually high efficiency LEDs, as opposed to sunlight. Plants are typically grown on shelves/in layers using either hydroponics, aeroponics or substrate/soil systems.
In hydroponic growing, a plant is fed using a water and nutrient mix and is not supported in soil. Sometimes the roots of the plants will be suspended in an inert substance like volcanic glass or coconut husk mixtures that retain water and structure to support the plant roots.
Aeroponics is similar to, and often sub-categorized under hydroponics. Plants are fed using water and nutrient mixtures, but it is applied via mist or vapour on the exposed roots of the plant.
Using soil and substrate mixtures for planting is a method well known to any farmer. In vertical farming however, instead of requiring large surface areas exposed to the sun, plants are grown on shelves using high-efficiency LED lights and hydrated using a water recycling system.
Vertical farming innovations are being created to address the needs of increasingly urban populations. In the last 40 years, the world has lost a third of its arable land. By the year 2050, over 80% of the world’s population will be living in cities. This population shift is putting more strain on supply chains that need to move food from the fields to the cities.
Demand for fresher products is creating greater a need for food to be produced closer to where people live. Urban farms, like Farm.One, seek to fulfil the needs of restaurants and consumers in their area with fresh greens that do not have to travel across the country or from overseas.
The migration of people into cities has also created an incredible shortage of available labour on farms in rural areas. It is very hard to get people to commute out of cities to work on farms (often for lower wages than jobs in the city). Growing food where people live eliminates this problem. There is a large pool of skilled labour for vertical farms to pull from in the city. The density at which crops are grown on vertical farms also allows for more efficient work-flows, meaning there can be fewer employees compared to traditional farms with similar output rates.
One of the biggest selling points of vertical/indoor farming is the perceived benefit to the environment. On average, vertical farms use 95% less water than open field farming. On the most efficient indoor farms, water is recycled and reused in a nearly closed system. Many indoor farms use existing infrastructure to house their farms, like unused manufacturing facilities, saving resources on building new facilities.
The close proximity to cities also save enormously on fuel, saving both money and contributing less to carbon emissions. Additionally, produce grown indoors needs far less pesticide and disease protection. Many crops are sealed off and hardly handled by humans, protecting them from contamination. This means pesticides and chemicals to manage disease and pests don’t need to be used as often or at all. Many vertical farms grow greens and lettuces because there is a lesser risk of contamination than with field grown and fertilized greens.
Another motivator for developing better indoor farming techniques is the worsening climate and environmental conditions worldwide. As farmland is lost to growing cities, pollution and climate extremes, many companies are developing vertical farming systems to feed growing populations.
In Japan, after the 2011 tsunami and nuclear power plant meltdown, much of the country’s farm land was contaminated and unusable. The vertical farming industry in Japan is now one of the largest in the world, home to one of the most profitable indoor farming companies, Spread. Spread’s newest facility, Techno Farms, is so efficient it can grow 30,000 heads of lettuce a day.
Not all of Japan’s vertical farming companies are faring as well as Spread, though. 60% of the indoor farms in the country are not turning a profit, and many more rely on government subsidies to operate. This problem of profitability with indoor farming is not limited to Japan.
In many places the costs of vertical farming make the produce extremely expensive.
Real estate prices within cities are significantly higher than land in rural areas making the upfront investment and continuing property taxes too high. The utility rates within cities can also be prohibitive.
The operating costs for the extensive lighting and climate control systems necessary to vertical farming are huge. There are extra labour costs with indoor farming as well due to the nature of growing inside. All pollination needs to be done manually.
Additionally, long term cost saving solutions, like robotic pickers and pollinators, are often too expensive to be implemented. And while being in total control over the environment your plants are grown in is great, it also means vertical farms are entirely dependent on technology that could fail. Power outages or software crashes could have catastrophic consequences.
It is also important to note that long term studies on the environmental impact and efficiency of vertical farming have yet to be released. Some farmers and experts believe it is still more useful to build horizontal green houses as opposed to vertical and artificially lit operations.
Louis Albright, a controlled climate farming expert from Cornell University, proposes that a better solution for creating more local food would be to build green houses just outside of urban areas.
Controlling and adapting to environmental factors is an ongoing problem for growers, but is vertical farming the solution? In order for vertical farms to stay manageable, and to become profitable, companies will need to continue to experiment, innovate, and analyze every aspect of their processes.
Data management will play a huge role in refining vertical farming practices. Production practices, material, electricity and water use, and labour expenses, are all factors that will need to be measured and assessed to determine the best processes for a new style of farming.
Farm management software helps growers to keep accurate records, enhance traceability and food safety, and to store and analyze data from every aspect of your operation. Vertical farming has yet to prove itself in the market but the possibilities and innovations it provides will push agriculture technologies toward the future.
Interested in learning more about Croptracker? Learn more about our Farm Management Software, or book a demonstration to schedule a meeting with our product experts.
And as always, if you're ever stuck, never hesitate to e-mail us at support@croptracker.com or Live Chat with us by clicking the green speech bubble in your bottom right-hand corner. We're always happy to help, so Croptracker can make your farm more efficient, safer, and more profitable!
[End of Article]
___________________________________________________________________________
Vertical farming is the practice of growing crops in vertically stacked layers. It often incorporates controlled-environment agriculture, which aims to optimize plant growth, and soilless farming techniques such as hydroponics, aquaponics, and aeroponics.
Some common choices of structures to house vertical farming systems include buildings, shipping containers, tunnels, and abandoned mine shafts. As of 2020, there is the equivalent of about 30 ha (74 acres) of operational vertical farmland in the world.
The modern concept of vertical farming was proposed in 1999 by Dickson Despommier, professor of Public and Environmental Health at Columbia University. Despommier and his students came up with a design of a skyscraper farm that could feed 50,000 people.
Although the design has not yet been built, it successfully popularized the idea of vertical farming. Current applications of vertical farmings coupled with other state-of-the-art technologies, such as specialized LED lights, have resulted in over 10 times the crop yield than would receive through traditional farming methods.
The main advantage of utilizing vertical farming technologies is the increased crop yield that comes with a smaller unit area of land requirement. The increased ability to cultivate a larger variety of crops at once because crops do not share the same plots of land while growing is another sought-after advantage.
Additionally, crops are resistant to weather disruptions because of their placement indoors, meaning less crops lost to extreme or unexpected weather occurrences. Because of its limited land usage, vertical farming is less disruptive to the native plants and animals, leading to further conservation of the local flora and fauna.
Vertical farming technologies face economic challenges with large start-up costs compared to traditional farms. In Victoria, Australia, a “hypothetical 10 level vertical farm” would cost over 850 times more per square meter of arable land than a traditional farm in rural Victoria.
Vertical farms also face large energy demands due to the use of supplementary light like LEDs. Moreover, if non-renewable energy is used to meet these energy demands, vertical farms could produce more pollution than traditional farms or greenhouses.
Techniques of vertical farming:
Hydroponics:
Hydroponics refers to the technique of growing plants without soil. In hydroponic systems, the roots of plants are submerged in liquid solutions containing macronutrients, such as nitrogen, phosphorus, sulphur, potassium, calcium, and magnesium, as well as trace elements, including iron, chlorine, manganese, boron, zinc, copper, and molybdenum.
Additionally, inert (chemically inactive) mediums such as gravel, sand, and sawdust are used as soil substitutes to provide support for the roots.
The advantages of hydroponics include the ability to increase yield per area and reduce water usage. A study has shown that, compared to conventional farming, hydroponic farming could increase the yield per area of lettuce by around 11 times while requiring 13 times less water. Due to these advantages, hydroponics is the predominant growing system used in vertical farming.
Aquaponics:
The term aquaponics is coined by combining two words: aquaculture, which refers to fish farming, and hydroponics—the technique of growing plants without soil. Aquaponics takes hydroponics one step further by integrating the production of terrestrial plants with the production of aquatic organisms in a closed-loop system that mimics nature itself.
Nutrient-rich wastewater from the fish tanks is filtered by a solid removal unit and then led to a bio-filter, where toxic ammonia is converted to nutritious nitrate. While absorbing nutrients, the plants then purify the wastewater, which is recycled back to the fish tanks.
Moreover, the plants consume carbon dioxide produced by the fish, and water in the fish tanks obtains heat and helps the greenhouse maintain temperature at night to save energy. As most commercial vertical farming systems focus on producing a few fast-growing vegetable crops, aquaponics, which also includes an aquaculture component, is currently not as widely used as conventional hydroponics.
Aeroponics:
The invention of aeroponics was motivated by the initiative of NASA (the National Aeronautical and Space Administration) to find an efficient way to grow plants in space in the 1990s.
Unlike conventional hydroponics and aquaponics, aeroponics does not require any liquid or solid medium to grow plants in. Instead, a liquid solution with nutrients is misted in air chambers where the plants are suspended.
By far, aeroponics is the most sustainable soil-less growing technique, as it uses up to 90% less water than the most efficient conventional hydroponic systems and requires no replacement of growing medium.
Moreover, the absence of growing medium allows aeroponic systems to adopt a vertical design, which further saves energy as gravity automatically drains away excess liquid, whereas conventional horizontal hydroponic systems often require water pumps for controlling excess solution. Currently, aeroponic systems have not been widely applied to vertical farming, but are starting to attract significant attention.
Controlled-Environment Agriculture:
Controlled-environment agriculture (CEA) is the modification of the natural environment to increase crop yield or extend the growing season. CEA systems are typically hosted in enclosed structures such as greenhouses or buildings, where control can be imposed on environmental factors including air, temperature, light, water, humidity, carbon dioxide, and plant nutrition.
In vertical farming systems, CEA is often used in conjunction with soilless farming techniques such as hydroponics, aquaponics, and aeroponics.
Types of vertical farming:
Building-based vertical farms:
Abandoned buildings are often reused for vertical farming, such as a farm at Chicago called “The Plant,” which was transformed from an old meatpacking plant. However, new builds are sometimes also constructed to house vertical farming systems.
Shipping-container vertical farms:
Recycled shipping containers are an increasingly popular option for housing vertical farming systems. The shipping containers serve as standardized, modular chambers for growing a variety of plants, and are often equipped with LED lighting, vertically stacked hydroponics, smart climate controls, and monitoring sensors. Moreover, by stacking the shipping containers, farms can save space even further and achieve higher yield per square foot.
Deep farms:
A “deep farm” is a vertical farm built from refurbished underground tunnels or abandoned mine shafts. As temperature and humidity underground are generally temperate and constant, deep farms require less energy for heating. Deep farms can also use nearby groundwater to reduce the cost of water supply.
Despite low costs, a deep farm can produce 7 to 9 times more food than a conventional farm above ground on the same area of land, according to Saffa Riffat, chair in Sustainable Energy at the University of Nottingham. Coupled with automated harvesting systems, these underground farms can be fully self-sufficient.
Advantages:
Efficiency:
Traditional farming's arable land requirements are too large and invasive to remain sustainable for future generations. With the rapid population growth rates, it is expected that arable land per person will drop about 66% in 2050 in comparison to 1970.
Vertical farming allows for, in some cases, over ten times the crop yield per acre than traditional methods. Unlike traditional farming in non-tropical areas, indoor farming can produce crops year-round. All-season farming multiplies the productivity of the farmed surface by a factor of 4 to 6 depending on the crop. With crops such as strawberries, the factor may be as high as 30.
Vertical farming also allows for the production of a larger variety of harvestable crops because of its usage of isolated crop sectors. As opposed to a traditional farm where one type of crop is harvested per season, vertical farms allow for a multitude of different crops to be grown and harvested at once due to their individual land plots.
According to the USDA, vertical farm produce only travels a short distance to reach stores compared to traditional farming method produce.
The United States Department of Agriculture predicts the worldwide population to exceed 9 billion by 2050, most of which will be living in urban or city areas. Vertical farming is the USDA's predicted answer to the potential food shortage as population increases. This method of farming is environmentally responsible by lowering emission and reducing needed water. This type of urban farming that would allow for nearly immediate farm to store transport would reduce distribution.
In a workshop on vertical farming put on by the USDA and the Department of Energy experts in vertical farming discussed plant breeding, pest management, and engineering. Control of pests (like insects, birds and rodents) is easily managed in vertical farms, because the area is so well-controlled. Without the need of chemical pesticides the ability to grow organic crops is easier than in traditional farming.
Resistance to weather:
Crops grown in traditional outdoor farming depend on supportive weather and suffer from undesirable temperatures, rain, monsoon, hailstorm, tornado, flooding, wildfires, and drought. "Three recent floods (in 1993, 2007 and 2008) cost the United States billions of dollars in lost crops, with even more devastating losses in topsoil. Changes in rain patterns and temperature could diminish India's agricultural output by 30 percent by the end of the century."
The issue of adverse weather conditions is especially relevant for arctic and sub-arctic areas like Alaska and northern Canada where traditional farming is largely impossible. Food insecurity has been a long-standing problem in remote northern communities where fresh produce has to be shipped large distances resulting in high costs and poor nutrition.
Container-based farms can provide fresh produce year-round at a lower cost than shipping in supplies from more southerly locations with a number of farms operating in locations such as Churchill, Manitoba, and Unalaska, Alaska. As with disruption to crop growing, local container-based farms are also less susceptible to disruption than the long supply chains necessary to deliver traditionally grown produce to remote communities.
Food prices in Churchill spiked substantially after floods in May and June 2017 forced the closure of the rail line that forms the only permanent overland connection between Churchill and the rest of Canada.
Environmental conservation:
Up to 20 units of outdoor farmland per unit of vertical farming could return to its natural state, due to vertical farming's increased productivity. Vertical farming would reduce the amount of farmland, thus saving many natural resources.
Deforestation and desertification caused by agricultural encroachment on natural biomes could be avoided. Producing food indoors reduces or eliminates conventional plowing, planting, and harvesting by farm machinery, protecting soil, and reducing emissions.
Traditional farming is often invasive to the native flora and fauna because it requires such a large area of arable land. One study showed that wood mouse populations dropped from 25 per hectare to 5 per hectare after harvest, estimating 10 animals killed per hectare each year with conventional farming. In comparison, vertical farming would cause nominal harm to wildlife because of its limited space usage.
Problems:
Economics:
Vertical farms must overcome the financial challenge of large startup costs. The initial building costs could exceed $100 million for a 60 hectare vertical farm.
Urban occupancy costs can be high, resulting in much higher startup costs – and a longer break even time – than for a traditional farm in rural areas.
Opponents question the potential profitability of vertical farming. In order for vertical farms to be successful financially, high value crops must be grown since traditional farms provide low value crops like wheat at cheaper costs than a vertical farm. Louis Albright, a professor in biological and environmental engineering at Cornell stated that a loaf of bread that was made from wheat grown in a vertical farm would cost US$27.
However, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average loaf of bread cost US$1.296 in September 2019, clearly showing how crops grown in vertical farms will be noncompetitive compared to crops grown in traditional outdoor farms. In order for vertical farms to be profitable, the costs of operating these farms must decrease.
The developers of the TerraFarm system produced from second hand, 40-foot shipping containers claimed that their system "has achieved cost parity with traditional, outdoor farming".
A theoretical 10-storey vertical wheat farm could produce up to 1,940 tons of wheat per hectare compared to a global average of 3.2 tons of wheat per hectare (600 times yield).
Current methods require enormous energy consumption for lighting, temperature, humidity control, carbon dioxide input and fertilizer and consequently the authors concluded it was "unlikely to be economically competitive with current market prices".
According to a report in The Financial Times as of 2020, most vertical farming companies have been unprofitable, except for a number of Japanese companies.
Energy use:
During the growing season, the sun shines on a vertical surface at an extreme angle such that much less light is available to crops than when they are planted on flat land. Therefore, supplemental light would be required. Bruce Bugbee claimed that the power demands of vertical farming would be uncompetitive with traditional farms using only natural light.
Environmental writer George Monbiot calculated that the cost of providing enough supplementary light to grow the grain for a single loaf would be about $15. An article in the Economist argued that "even though crops growing in a glass skyscraper will get some natural sunlight during the day, it won't be enough" and "the cost of powering artificial lights will make indoor farming prohibitively expensive".
Moreover, researchers determined that if only solar panels were to be used to meet the energy consumption of a vertical farm, “the area of solar panels required would need to be a factor of twenty times greater than the arable area on a multi-level indoor farm”, which will be hard to accomplish with larger vertical farms. A hydroponic farm growing lettuce in Arizona would require 15,000 kJ of energy per kilogram of lettuce produced.
To put this amount of energy into perspective, a traditional outdoor lettuce farm in Arizona only requires 1100 kJ of energy per kilogram of lettuce grown.
As the book by Dr. Dickson Despommier "The Vertical Farm" proposes a controlled environment, heating and cooling costs will resemble those of any other multiple story building. Plumbing and elevator systems are necessary to distribute nutrients and water. In the northern continental United States, fossil fuel heating cost can be over $200,000 per hectare.
Research conducted in 2015 compared the growth of lettuce in Arizona using conventional agricultural methods and a hydroponic farm. They determined that heating and cooling made up more than 80% of the energy consumption in the hydroponic farm, with the heating and cooling needing 7400 kJ per kilogram of lettuce produced. According to the same study, the total energy consumption of the hydroponic farm is 90,000 kJ per kilogram of lettuce. If the energy consumption is not addressed, vertical farms may be an unsustainable alternative to traditional agriculture.
Pollution:
There are a number of interrelated challenges with some potential solutions:
- Power needs: If power needs are met by fossil fuels, the environmental effect may be a net loss; even building low-carbon capacity to power the farms may not make as much sense as simply leaving traditional farms in place, while burning less coal. Louis Albright argued that in a “closed-system urban farming based on electrically generated photosynthetic light”, a pound of lettuce would result in 8 pounds of carbon dioxide being produced at a power plant, and 4,000 pounds of lettuce produced would be equivalent to the annual emissions of a family car. He also argues that the carbon footprint of tomatoes grown in a similar system would be twice as big as the carbon footprint of lettuce. However, lettuce produced in a greenhouse that allows for sunlight to reach the crops saw a 300 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions per head of lettuce. As vertical farm system become more efficient in harnessing sunlight, they will produce less pollution.
- Carbon emission: A vertical farm requires a CO2 source, most likely from combustion if located with electric utility plants; absorbing CO2 that would otherwise be jettisoned is possible. Greenhouses commonly supplement carbon dioxide levels to 3–4 times the atmospheric rate. This increase in CO2 increases photosynthesis at varying rates, averaging 50%, contributing not only to higher yields, but also to faster plant maturation, shrinking of pores and greater resilience to water stress (both too much and little). Vertical farms need not exist in isolation, hardier mature plants could be transferred to traditional greenhouse, freeing up space and increasing cost flexibility.
- Crop damage: Some greenhouses burn fossil fuels purely to produce CO2, such as from furnaces, which contain pollutants such as sulphur dioxide and ethylene. These pollutants can significantly damage plants, so gas filtration is a component of high production systems.
- Ventilation: "Necessary" ventilation may allow CO2 to leak into the atmosphere, though recycling systems could be devised. This is not limited to humidity tolerant and humidity intolerant crop polyculture cycling (as opposed to monoculture).
- Light pollution: Greenhouse growers commonly exploit photoperiodism in plants to control whether the plants are in a vegetative or reproductive stage. As part of this control, the lights stay on past sunset and before sunrise or periodically throughout the night. Single story greenhouses have attracted criticism over light pollution, though a typical urban vertical farm may also produce light pollution.
- Water pollution: Hydroponic greenhouses regularly change the water, producing water containing fertilizers and pesticides that must be disposed of. Spreading the effluent over neighboring farmland or wetlands would be difficult for an urban vertical farm, while water treatment remedies (natural or otherwise) could be part of a solution.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Vertical Farming:
History See also:
- Arcology
- Development-supported agriculture
- Folkewall
- Foodscaping
- Green wall
- Pot farming
- Terrace (agriculture), Terrace (gardening), and Terrace (building)
- Urban horticulture
Animal HusbandryPictured below: Animals you might find on a Farm
Animal husbandry is the branch of agriculture concerned with animals that are raised for meat, fiber, milk, eggs, or other products. It includes day-to-day care, selective breeding and the raising of livestock.
Husbandry has a long history, starting with the Neolithic revolution when animals were first domesticated, from around 13,000 BC onwards, antedating farming of the first crops.
By the time of early civilizations such as ancient Egypt, cattle, sheep, goats and pigs were being raised on farms.
Major changes took place in the Columbian exchange when Old World livestock were brought to the New World, and then in the British Agricultural Revolution of the 18th century, when livestock breeds like the Dishley Longhorn cattle and Lincoln Longwool sheep were rapidly improved by agriculturalists such as Robert Bakewell to yield more meat, milk, and wool.
A wide range of other species such as horse, water buffalo, llama, rabbit and guinea pig are used as livestock in some parts of the world. Insect farming, as well as aquaculture of fish, molluscs, and crustaceans, is widespread.
Modern animal husbandry relies on production systems adapted to the type of land available. Subsistence farming is being superseded by intensive animal farming in the more developed parts of the world, where for example beef cattle are kept in high density feedlots, and thousands of chickens may be raised in broiler houses or batteries. On poorer soil such as in uplands, animals are often kept more extensively, and may be allowed to roam widely, foraging for themselves.
Most livestock are herbivores, except for pigs and chickens which are omnivores. Ruminants like cattle and sheep are adapted to feed on grass; they can forage outdoors, or may be fed entirely or in part on rations richer in energy and protein, such as pelleted cereals. Pigs and poultry cannot digest the cellulose in forage, and require cereals and other high-energy foods.
Etymology:
The verb to husband, meaning "to manage carefully," derives from an older meaning of husband, which in the 14th century referred to the ownership and care of a household or farm, but today means the "control or judicious use of resources," and in agriculture, the cultivation of plants or animals.
Farmers and ranchers who raise livestock are considered to practice animal husbandry; in modern times, large agricultural companies relying on mass production and advanced technology have largely superseded individual farmers as the chief food-animal producers in developed countries.
Husbandry:
Further information:
Traditionally, animal husbandry was part of the subsistence farmer's way of life, producing not only the food needed by the family but also the fuel, fertiliser, clothing, transport and draught power.
Killing the animal for food was a secondary consideration, and wherever possible its products, such as wool, eggs, milk and blood (by the Maasai) were harvested while the animal was still alive. In the traditional system of transhumance, people and livestock moved seasonally between fixed summer and winter pastures; in montane regions the summer pasture was up in the mountains, the winter pasture in the valleys.
Animals can be kept extensively or intensively. Extensive systems involve animals roaming at will, or under the supervision of a herdsman, often for their protection from predators.
Ranching in the Western United States involves large herds of cattle grazing widely over public and private lands. Similar cattle stations are found in South America, Australia and other places with large areas of land and low rainfall. Ranching systems have been used for sheep, deer, ostrich, emu, llama and alpaca.
In the uplands of the United Kingdom, sheep are turned out on the fells in spring and graze the abundant mountain grasses untended, being brought to lower altitudes late in the year, with supplementary feeding being provided in winter. In rural locations, pigs and poultry can obtain much of their nutrition from scavenging, and in African communities, hens may live for months without being fed, and still produce one or two eggs a week.
At the other extreme, in the more developed parts of the world, animals are often intensively managed; dairy cows may be kept in zero-grazing conditions with all their forage brought to them; beef cattle may be kept in high density feedlots; pigs may be housed in climate-controlled buildings and never go outdoors; poultry may be reared in barns and kept in cages as laying birds under lighting-controlled conditions.
In between these two extremes are semi-intensive, often family-run farms where livestock graze outside for much of the year, silage or hay is made to cover the times of year when the grass stops growing, and fertiliser, feed, and other inputs are brought onto the farm from outside.
Feeding:
Main article: animal feed
Animals used as livestock are predominantly herbivorous, the main exceptions being the pig and the chicken which are omnivorous. The herbivores can be divided into "concentrate selectors" which selectively feed on seeds, fruits and highly nutritious young foliage, "grazers" which mainly feed on grass, and "intermediate feeders" which choose their diet from the whole range of available plant material.
Cattle, sheep, goats, deer and antelopes are ruminants; they digest food in two steps, chewing and swallowing in the normal way, and then regurgitating the semidigested cud to chew it again and thus extract the maximum possible food value.
The dietary needs of these animals is mostly met by eating grass. Grasses grow from the base of the leaf-blade, enabling it to thrive even when heavily grazed or cut.
In many climates grass growth is seasonal, for example in the temperate summer or tropical rainy season, so some areas of the crop are set aside to be cut and preserved, either as hay (dried grass), or as silage (fermented grass).
Other forage crops are also grown and many of these, as well as crop residues, can be ensiled to fill the gap in the nutritional needs of livestock in the lean season.
Extensively reared animals may subsist entirely on forage, but more intensively kept livestock will require energy and protein-rich foods in addition. Energy is mainly derived from cereals and cereal by-products, fats and oils and sugar-rich foods, while protein may come from fish or meat meal, milk products, legumes and other plant foods, often the by-products of vegetable oil extraction.
Pigs and poultry are non-ruminants and unable to digest the cellulose in grass and other forages, so they are fed entirely on cereals and other high-energy foodstuffs. The ingredients for the animals' rations can be grown on the farm or can be bought, in the form of pelleted or cubed, compound foodstuffs specially formulated for the different classes of livestock, their growth stages and their specific nutritional requirements. Vitamins and minerals are added to balance the diet. Farmed fish are usually fed pelleted food.
Breeding:
Main article: Animal breeding
The breeding of farm animals seldom occurs spontaneously but is managed by farmers with a view to encouraging traits seen as desirable. These include hardiness, fertility, docility, mothering abilities, fast growth rates, low feed consumption per unit of growth, better body proportions, higher yields, and better fibre qualities. Undesirable traits such as health defects and aggressiveness are selected against.
Selective breeding has been responsible for large increases in productivity. For example, in 2007, a typical broiler chicken at eight weeks old was 4.8 times as heavy as a bird of similar age in 1957, while in the thirty years to 2007, the average milk yield of a dairy cow in the United States nearly doubled.
Animal health:
Further information: Veterinary medicine
Good husbandry, proper feeding, and hygiene are the main contributors to animal health on the farm, bringing economic benefits through maximized production. When, despite these precautions, animals still become sick, they are treated with veterinary medicines, by the farmer and the veterinarian.
In the European Union, when farmers treat their own animals, they are required to follow the guidelines for treatment and to record the treatments given. Animals are susceptible to a number of diseases and conditions that may affect their health.
Some, like classical swine fever and scrapie are specific to one type of stock, while others, like foot-and-mouth disease affect all cloven-hoofed animals. Animals living under intensive conditions are prone to internal and external parasites; increasing numbers of sea lice are affecting farmed salmon in Scotland. Reducing the parasite burdens of livestock results in increased productivity and profitability.
Where the condition is serious, governments impose regulations on import and export, on the movement of stock, quarantine restrictions and the reporting of suspected cases. Vaccines are available against certain diseases, and antibiotics are widely used where appropriate. At one time, antibiotics were routinely added to certain compound foodstuffs to promote growth, but this practice is now frowned on in many countries because of the risk that it may lead to antimicrobial resistance in livestock and in humans.
Governments are concerned with zoonoses, diseases that humans may acquire from animals. Wild animal populations may harbour diseases that can affect domestic animals which may acquire them as a result of insufficient biosecurity.
An outbreak of Nipah virus in Malaysia in 1999 was traced back to pigs becoming ill after contact with fruit-eating flying foxes, their feces and urine. The pigs in turn passed the infection to humans.
Avian flu H5N1 is present in wild bird populations and can be carried large distances by migrating birds. This virus is easily transmissible to domestic poultry, and to humans living in close proximity with them. Other infectious diseases affecting wild animals, farm animals and humans include rabies, leptospirosis, brucellosis, tuberculosis and trichinosis.
Range of species:
Main articles:
There is no single universally agreed definition of which species are livestock. Widely agreed types of livestock include cattle for beef and dairy, sheep, goats, pigs, and poultry. Various other species are sometimes considered livestock, such as horses, while poultry birds are sometimes excluded.
In some parts of the world, livestock includes species such as buffalo, and the South American camelids, the alpaca and llama. Some authorities use much broader definitions to include fish in aquaculture, micro-livestock such as rabbits and rodents like guinea pigs, as well as insects from honey bees to crickets raised for human consumption.
Products:
Main article: Animal product
Animals are raised for a wide variety of products, principally meat, wool, milk, and eggs, but also including tallow, isinglass and rennet. Animals are also kept for more specialized purposes, such as to produce vaccines and antiserum (containing antibodies) for medical use.
Where fodder or other crops are grown alongside animals, manure can serve as a fertiliser, returning minerals and organic matter to the soil in a semi-closed organic system.
Branches:
Dairy:
Main article: Dairy farming
Although all mammals produce milk to nourish their young, the cow is predominantly used throughout the world to produce milk and milk products for human consumption. Other animals used to a lesser extent for this purpose include sheep, goats, camels, buffaloes, yaks, reindeer, horses and donkeys.
All these animals have been domesticated over the centuries, being bred for such desirable characteristics as fecundity, productivity, docility and the ability to thrive under the prevailing conditions.
Whereas in the past, cattle had multiple functions, modern dairy cow breeding has resulted in specialized Holstein Friesian-type animals that produce large quantities of milk economically. Artificial insemination is widely available to allow farmers to select for the particular traits that suit their circumstances.
Whereas in the past, cows were kept in small herds on family farms, grazing pastures and being fed hay in winter, nowadays there is a trend towards larger herds, more intensive systems, the feeding of silage and "zero grazing", a system where grass is cut and brought to the cow, which is housed year-round.
In many communities, milk production is only part of the purpose of keeping an animal which may also be used as a beast of burden or to draw a plough, or for the production of fiber, meat and leather, with the dung being used for fuel or for the improvement of soil fertility. Sheep and goats may be favored for dairy production in climates and conditions that do not suit dairy cows.
Meat Main articles:
Meat, mainly from farmed animals, is a major source of dietary protein around the world, averaging about 8% of man's energy intake. The actual types eaten depend on local preferences, availability, cost and other factors, with cattle, sheep, pigs and goats being the main species involved.
Cattle generally produce a single offspring annually which takes more than a year to mature; sheep and goats often have twins and these are ready for slaughter in less than a year; pigs are more prolific, producing more than one litter of up to about 11 piglets each year.
Horses, donkeys, deer, buffalo, llamas, alpacas, guanacos and vicunas are farmed for meat in various regions. Some desirable traits of animals raised for meat include fecundity, hardiness, fast growth rate, ease of management and high food conversion efficiency.
About half of the world's meat is produced from animals grazing on open ranges or on enclosed pastures, the other half being produced intensively in various factory-farming systems; these are mostly cows, pigs or poultry, and often reared indoors, typically at high densities.
Poultry:
Main article: Poultry farming
Poultry, kept for their eggs and for their meat, include chickens, turkeys, geese and ducks. The great majority of laying birds used for egg production are chickens. Methods for keeping layers range from free-range systems, where the birds can roam as they will but are housed at night for their own protection, through semi-intensive systems where they are housed in barns and have perches, litter and some freedom of movement, to intensive systems where they are kept in cages.
The battery cages are arranged in long rows in multiple tiers, with external feeders, drinkers, and egg collection facilities. This is the most labor saving and economical method of egg production but has been criticised on animal welfare grounds as the birds are unable to exhibit their normal behaviors.
In the developed world, the majority of the poultry reared for meat is raised indoors in big sheds, with automated equipment under environmentally controlled conditions. Chickens raised in this way are known as broilers, and genetic improvements have meant that they can be grown to slaughter weight within six or seven weeks of hatching.
Newly hatched chicks are restricted to a small area and given supplementary heating. Litter on the floor absorbs the droppings and the area occupied is expanded as they grow. Feed and water is supplied automatically and the lighting is controlled. The birds may be harvested on several occasions or the whole shed may be cleared at one time.
A similar rearing system is usually used for turkeys, which are less hardy than chickens, but they take longer to grow and are often moved on to separate fattening units to finish.
Ducks are particularly popular in Asia and Australia and can be killed at seven weeks under commercial conditions.
Aquaculture:
Main article: Aquaculture
Aquaculture has been defined as "the farming of aquatic organisms including fish, molluscs, crustaceans and aquatic plants and implies some form of intervention in the rearing process to enhance production, such as regular stocking, feeding, protection from predators, etc.
Farming also implies individual or corporate ownership of the stock being cultivated." In practice it can take place in the sea or in freshwater, and be extensive or intensive. Whole bays, lakes or ponds may be devoted to aquaculture, or the farmed animal may be retained in cages (fish), artificial reefs, racks or strings (shellfish). Fish and prawns can be cultivated in rice paddies, either arriving naturally or being introduced, and both crops can be harvested together.
Fish hatcheries provide larval and juvenile fish, crustaceans and shellfish, for use in aquaculture systems. When large enough these are transferred to growing-on tanks and sold to fish farms to reach harvest size.
Some species that are commonly raised in hatcheries include:
Similar facilities can be used to raise species with conservation needs to be released into the wild, or game fish for restocking waterways. Important aspects of husbandry at these early stages include selection of breeding stock, control of water quality and nutrition.
In the wild, there is a massive amount of mortality at the nursery stage; farmers seek to minimize this while at the same time maximizing growth rates.
Insects:
Main articles: Beekeeping, Entomophagy, and Sericulture
Bees have been kept in hives since at least the First Dynasty of Egypt, five thousand years ago, and man had been harvesting honey from the wild long before that. Fixed comb hives are used in many parts of the world and are made from any locally available material.
In more advanced economies, where modern strains of domestic bee have been selected for docility and productiveness, various designs of hive are used which enable the combs to be removed for processing and extraction of honey.
Quite apart from the honey and wax they produce, honey bees are important pollinators of crops and wild plants, and in many places hives are transported around the countryside to assist in pollination.
Sericulture, the rearing of silkworms, was first adopted by the Chinese during the Shang dynasty. The only species farmed commercially is the domesticated silkmoth. When it spins its cocoon, each larva produces an exceedingly long, slender thread of silk. The larvae feed on mulberry leaves and in Europe, only one generation is normally raised each year as this is a deciduous tree.
In China, Korea and Japan however, two generations are normal, and in the tropics, multiple generations are expected. Most production of silk occurs in the Far East, with a synthetic diet being used to rear the silkworms in Japan.
Insects form part of the human diet in many cultures. In Thailand, crickets are farmed for this purpose in the north of the country, and palm weevil larvae in the south. The crickets are kept in pens, boxes or drawers and fed on commercial pelleted poultry food, while the palm weevil larvae live on cabbage palm and sago palm trees, which limits their production to areas where these trees grow. Another delicacy of this region is the bamboo caterpillar, and the best rearing and harvesting techniques in semi-natural habitats are being studied.
Effects:
Environmental impact:
Main articles:
Animal husbandry has a significant impact on the world environment. It is responsible for somewhere between 20 and 33% of the fresh water usage in the world, and livestock, and the production of feed for them, occupy about a third of the earth's ice-free land.
Livestock production is a contributing factor in species extinction, desertification, and habitat destruction. Animal agriculture contributes to species extinction in various ways.
Habitat is destroyed by clearing forests and converting land to grow feed crops and for animal grazing, while predators and herbivores are frequently targeted and hunted because of a perceived threat to livestock profits; for example, animal husbandry is responsible for up to 91% of the deforestation in the Amazon region.
In addition, livestock produce greenhouse gases. Cows produce some 570 million cubic meters of methane per day, that accounts for from 35 to 40% of the overall methane emissions of the planet. Livestock is responsible for 65% of all human-related emissions of the powerful and long-lived greenhouse gas nitrous oxide.
As a result, ways of mitigating animal husbandry's environmental impact are being studied. Strategies include:
Certain diet changes (such as with Asparagopsis taxiformis) allow for a reduction of up to 99% in ruminant greenhouse gas emissions.
Animal welfare:
Main article: Animal welfare
Since the 18th century, people have become increasingly concerned about the welfare of farm animals. Possible measures of welfare include:
Standards and laws for animal welfare have been created worldwide, broadly in line with the most widely held position in the western world, a form of utilitarianism: that it is morally acceptable for humans to use non-human animals, provided that no unnecessary suffering is caused, and that the benefits to humans outweigh the costs to the livestock.
An opposing view is that animals have rights, should not be regarded as property, are not necessary to use, and should never be used by humans. Live export of animals has risen to meet increased global demand for livestock such as in the Middle East. Animal rights activists have objected to long-distance transport of animals; one result was the banning of live exports from New Zealand in 2003.
In culture:
Since the 18th century, the farmer John Bull has represented English national identity, first in John Arbuthnot's political satires, and soon afterwards in cartoons by James Gillray and others including John Tenniel. He likes food, beer, dogs, horses, and country sports; he is practical and down to earth, and anti-intellectual.
Farm animals are widespread in books and songs for children; the reality of animal husbandry is often distorted, softened, or idealized, giving children an almost entirely fictitious account of farm life.
The books often depict happy animals free to roam in attractive countryside, a picture completely at odds with the realities of the impersonal, mechanized activities involved in modern intensive farming.
Pigs, for example, appear in several of Beatrix Potter's "little books", as Piglet in A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh stories, and somewhat more darkly (with a hint of animals going to slaughter) as Babe in Dick King-Smith's The Sheep-Pig, and as Wilbur in E. B. White's Charlotte's Web.
Pigs tend to be "bearers of cheerfulness, good humor and innocence". Many of these books are completely anthropomorphic, dressing farm animals in clothes and having them walk on two legs, live in houses, and perform human activities. The children's song "Old MacDonald Had a Farm" describes a farmer named MacDonald and the various animals he keeps, celebrating the noises they each make.
Many urban children experience animal husbandry for the first time at a petting farm; in Britain, some five million people a year visit a farm of some kind. This presents some risk of infection, especially if children handle animals and then fail to wash their hands; a strain of E. coli infected 93 people who had visited a British interactive farm in an outbreak in 2009.
Historic farms such as those in the United States offer farmstays and "a carefully curated version of farming to those willing to pay for it", sometimes giving visitors a romanticized image of a pastoral idyll from an unspecified time in the pre-industrial past.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Animal Husbandry:
Husbandry has a long history, starting with the Neolithic revolution when animals were first domesticated, from around 13,000 BC onwards, antedating farming of the first crops.
By the time of early civilizations such as ancient Egypt, cattle, sheep, goats and pigs were being raised on farms.
Major changes took place in the Columbian exchange when Old World livestock were brought to the New World, and then in the British Agricultural Revolution of the 18th century, when livestock breeds like the Dishley Longhorn cattle and Lincoln Longwool sheep were rapidly improved by agriculturalists such as Robert Bakewell to yield more meat, milk, and wool.
A wide range of other species such as horse, water buffalo, llama, rabbit and guinea pig are used as livestock in some parts of the world. Insect farming, as well as aquaculture of fish, molluscs, and crustaceans, is widespread.
Modern animal husbandry relies on production systems adapted to the type of land available. Subsistence farming is being superseded by intensive animal farming in the more developed parts of the world, where for example beef cattle are kept in high density feedlots, and thousands of chickens may be raised in broiler houses or batteries. On poorer soil such as in uplands, animals are often kept more extensively, and may be allowed to roam widely, foraging for themselves.
Most livestock are herbivores, except for pigs and chickens which are omnivores. Ruminants like cattle and sheep are adapted to feed on grass; they can forage outdoors, or may be fed entirely or in part on rations richer in energy and protein, such as pelleted cereals. Pigs and poultry cannot digest the cellulose in forage, and require cereals and other high-energy foods.
Etymology:
The verb to husband, meaning "to manage carefully," derives from an older meaning of husband, which in the 14th century referred to the ownership and care of a household or farm, but today means the "control or judicious use of resources," and in agriculture, the cultivation of plants or animals.
Farmers and ranchers who raise livestock are considered to practice animal husbandry; in modern times, large agricultural companies relying on mass production and advanced technology have largely superseded individual farmers as the chief food-animal producers in developed countries.
Husbandry:
Further information:
Traditionally, animal husbandry was part of the subsistence farmer's way of life, producing not only the food needed by the family but also the fuel, fertiliser, clothing, transport and draught power.
Killing the animal for food was a secondary consideration, and wherever possible its products, such as wool, eggs, milk and blood (by the Maasai) were harvested while the animal was still alive. In the traditional system of transhumance, people and livestock moved seasonally between fixed summer and winter pastures; in montane regions the summer pasture was up in the mountains, the winter pasture in the valleys.
Animals can be kept extensively or intensively. Extensive systems involve animals roaming at will, or under the supervision of a herdsman, often for their protection from predators.
Ranching in the Western United States involves large herds of cattle grazing widely over public and private lands. Similar cattle stations are found in South America, Australia and other places with large areas of land and low rainfall. Ranching systems have been used for sheep, deer, ostrich, emu, llama and alpaca.
In the uplands of the United Kingdom, sheep are turned out on the fells in spring and graze the abundant mountain grasses untended, being brought to lower altitudes late in the year, with supplementary feeding being provided in winter. In rural locations, pigs and poultry can obtain much of their nutrition from scavenging, and in African communities, hens may live for months without being fed, and still produce one or two eggs a week.
At the other extreme, in the more developed parts of the world, animals are often intensively managed; dairy cows may be kept in zero-grazing conditions with all their forage brought to them; beef cattle may be kept in high density feedlots; pigs may be housed in climate-controlled buildings and never go outdoors; poultry may be reared in barns and kept in cages as laying birds under lighting-controlled conditions.
In between these two extremes are semi-intensive, often family-run farms where livestock graze outside for much of the year, silage or hay is made to cover the times of year when the grass stops growing, and fertiliser, feed, and other inputs are brought onto the farm from outside.
Feeding:
Main article: animal feed
Animals used as livestock are predominantly herbivorous, the main exceptions being the pig and the chicken which are omnivorous. The herbivores can be divided into "concentrate selectors" which selectively feed on seeds, fruits and highly nutritious young foliage, "grazers" which mainly feed on grass, and "intermediate feeders" which choose their diet from the whole range of available plant material.
Cattle, sheep, goats, deer and antelopes are ruminants; they digest food in two steps, chewing and swallowing in the normal way, and then regurgitating the semidigested cud to chew it again and thus extract the maximum possible food value.
The dietary needs of these animals is mostly met by eating grass. Grasses grow from the base of the leaf-blade, enabling it to thrive even when heavily grazed or cut.
In many climates grass growth is seasonal, for example in the temperate summer or tropical rainy season, so some areas of the crop are set aside to be cut and preserved, either as hay (dried grass), or as silage (fermented grass).
Other forage crops are also grown and many of these, as well as crop residues, can be ensiled to fill the gap in the nutritional needs of livestock in the lean season.
Extensively reared animals may subsist entirely on forage, but more intensively kept livestock will require energy and protein-rich foods in addition. Energy is mainly derived from cereals and cereal by-products, fats and oils and sugar-rich foods, while protein may come from fish or meat meal, milk products, legumes and other plant foods, often the by-products of vegetable oil extraction.
Pigs and poultry are non-ruminants and unable to digest the cellulose in grass and other forages, so they are fed entirely on cereals and other high-energy foodstuffs. The ingredients for the animals' rations can be grown on the farm or can be bought, in the form of pelleted or cubed, compound foodstuffs specially formulated for the different classes of livestock, their growth stages and their specific nutritional requirements. Vitamins and minerals are added to balance the diet. Farmed fish are usually fed pelleted food.
Breeding:
Main article: Animal breeding
The breeding of farm animals seldom occurs spontaneously but is managed by farmers with a view to encouraging traits seen as desirable. These include hardiness, fertility, docility, mothering abilities, fast growth rates, low feed consumption per unit of growth, better body proportions, higher yields, and better fibre qualities. Undesirable traits such as health defects and aggressiveness are selected against.
Selective breeding has been responsible for large increases in productivity. For example, in 2007, a typical broiler chicken at eight weeks old was 4.8 times as heavy as a bird of similar age in 1957, while in the thirty years to 2007, the average milk yield of a dairy cow in the United States nearly doubled.
Animal health:
Further information: Veterinary medicine
Good husbandry, proper feeding, and hygiene are the main contributors to animal health on the farm, bringing economic benefits through maximized production. When, despite these precautions, animals still become sick, they are treated with veterinary medicines, by the farmer and the veterinarian.
In the European Union, when farmers treat their own animals, they are required to follow the guidelines for treatment and to record the treatments given. Animals are susceptible to a number of diseases and conditions that may affect their health.
Some, like classical swine fever and scrapie are specific to one type of stock, while others, like foot-and-mouth disease affect all cloven-hoofed animals. Animals living under intensive conditions are prone to internal and external parasites; increasing numbers of sea lice are affecting farmed salmon in Scotland. Reducing the parasite burdens of livestock results in increased productivity and profitability.
Where the condition is serious, governments impose regulations on import and export, on the movement of stock, quarantine restrictions and the reporting of suspected cases. Vaccines are available against certain diseases, and antibiotics are widely used where appropriate. At one time, antibiotics were routinely added to certain compound foodstuffs to promote growth, but this practice is now frowned on in many countries because of the risk that it may lead to antimicrobial resistance in livestock and in humans.
Governments are concerned with zoonoses, diseases that humans may acquire from animals. Wild animal populations may harbour diseases that can affect domestic animals which may acquire them as a result of insufficient biosecurity.
An outbreak of Nipah virus in Malaysia in 1999 was traced back to pigs becoming ill after contact with fruit-eating flying foxes, their feces and urine. The pigs in turn passed the infection to humans.
Avian flu H5N1 is present in wild bird populations and can be carried large distances by migrating birds. This virus is easily transmissible to domestic poultry, and to humans living in close proximity with them. Other infectious diseases affecting wild animals, farm animals and humans include rabies, leptospirosis, brucellosis, tuberculosis and trichinosis.
Range of species:
Main articles:
There is no single universally agreed definition of which species are livestock. Widely agreed types of livestock include cattle for beef and dairy, sheep, goats, pigs, and poultry. Various other species are sometimes considered livestock, such as horses, while poultry birds are sometimes excluded.
In some parts of the world, livestock includes species such as buffalo, and the South American camelids, the alpaca and llama. Some authorities use much broader definitions to include fish in aquaculture, micro-livestock such as rabbits and rodents like guinea pigs, as well as insects from honey bees to crickets raised for human consumption.
Products:
Main article: Animal product
Animals are raised for a wide variety of products, principally meat, wool, milk, and eggs, but also including tallow, isinglass and rennet. Animals are also kept for more specialized purposes, such as to produce vaccines and antiserum (containing antibodies) for medical use.
Where fodder or other crops are grown alongside animals, manure can serve as a fertiliser, returning minerals and organic matter to the soil in a semi-closed organic system.
Branches:
Dairy:
Main article: Dairy farming
Although all mammals produce milk to nourish their young, the cow is predominantly used throughout the world to produce milk and milk products for human consumption. Other animals used to a lesser extent for this purpose include sheep, goats, camels, buffaloes, yaks, reindeer, horses and donkeys.
All these animals have been domesticated over the centuries, being bred for such desirable characteristics as fecundity, productivity, docility and the ability to thrive under the prevailing conditions.
Whereas in the past, cattle had multiple functions, modern dairy cow breeding has resulted in specialized Holstein Friesian-type animals that produce large quantities of milk economically. Artificial insemination is widely available to allow farmers to select for the particular traits that suit their circumstances.
Whereas in the past, cows were kept in small herds on family farms, grazing pastures and being fed hay in winter, nowadays there is a trend towards larger herds, more intensive systems, the feeding of silage and "zero grazing", a system where grass is cut and brought to the cow, which is housed year-round.
In many communities, milk production is only part of the purpose of keeping an animal which may also be used as a beast of burden or to draw a plough, or for the production of fiber, meat and leather, with the dung being used for fuel or for the improvement of soil fertility. Sheep and goats may be favored for dairy production in climates and conditions that do not suit dairy cows.
Meat Main articles:
Meat, mainly from farmed animals, is a major source of dietary protein around the world, averaging about 8% of man's energy intake. The actual types eaten depend on local preferences, availability, cost and other factors, with cattle, sheep, pigs and goats being the main species involved.
Cattle generally produce a single offspring annually which takes more than a year to mature; sheep and goats often have twins and these are ready for slaughter in less than a year; pigs are more prolific, producing more than one litter of up to about 11 piglets each year.
Horses, donkeys, deer, buffalo, llamas, alpacas, guanacos and vicunas are farmed for meat in various regions. Some desirable traits of animals raised for meat include fecundity, hardiness, fast growth rate, ease of management and high food conversion efficiency.
About half of the world's meat is produced from animals grazing on open ranges or on enclosed pastures, the other half being produced intensively in various factory-farming systems; these are mostly cows, pigs or poultry, and often reared indoors, typically at high densities.
Poultry:
Main article: Poultry farming
Poultry, kept for their eggs and for their meat, include chickens, turkeys, geese and ducks. The great majority of laying birds used for egg production are chickens. Methods for keeping layers range from free-range systems, where the birds can roam as they will but are housed at night for their own protection, through semi-intensive systems where they are housed in barns and have perches, litter and some freedom of movement, to intensive systems where they are kept in cages.
The battery cages are arranged in long rows in multiple tiers, with external feeders, drinkers, and egg collection facilities. This is the most labor saving and economical method of egg production but has been criticised on animal welfare grounds as the birds are unable to exhibit their normal behaviors.
In the developed world, the majority of the poultry reared for meat is raised indoors in big sheds, with automated equipment under environmentally controlled conditions. Chickens raised in this way are known as broilers, and genetic improvements have meant that they can be grown to slaughter weight within six or seven weeks of hatching.
Newly hatched chicks are restricted to a small area and given supplementary heating. Litter on the floor absorbs the droppings and the area occupied is expanded as they grow. Feed and water is supplied automatically and the lighting is controlled. The birds may be harvested on several occasions or the whole shed may be cleared at one time.
A similar rearing system is usually used for turkeys, which are less hardy than chickens, but they take longer to grow and are often moved on to separate fattening units to finish.
Ducks are particularly popular in Asia and Australia and can be killed at seven weeks under commercial conditions.
Aquaculture:
Main article: Aquaculture
Aquaculture has been defined as "the farming of aquatic organisms including fish, molluscs, crustaceans and aquatic plants and implies some form of intervention in the rearing process to enhance production, such as regular stocking, feeding, protection from predators, etc.
Farming also implies individual or corporate ownership of the stock being cultivated." In practice it can take place in the sea or in freshwater, and be extensive or intensive. Whole bays, lakes or ponds may be devoted to aquaculture, or the farmed animal may be retained in cages (fish), artificial reefs, racks or strings (shellfish). Fish and prawns can be cultivated in rice paddies, either arriving naturally or being introduced, and both crops can be harvested together.
Fish hatcheries provide larval and juvenile fish, crustaceans and shellfish, for use in aquaculture systems. When large enough these are transferred to growing-on tanks and sold to fish farms to reach harvest size.
Some species that are commonly raised in hatcheries include:
Similar facilities can be used to raise species with conservation needs to be released into the wild, or game fish for restocking waterways. Important aspects of husbandry at these early stages include selection of breeding stock, control of water quality and nutrition.
In the wild, there is a massive amount of mortality at the nursery stage; farmers seek to minimize this while at the same time maximizing growth rates.
Insects:
Main articles: Beekeeping, Entomophagy, and Sericulture
Bees have been kept in hives since at least the First Dynasty of Egypt, five thousand years ago, and man had been harvesting honey from the wild long before that. Fixed comb hives are used in many parts of the world and are made from any locally available material.
In more advanced economies, where modern strains of domestic bee have been selected for docility and productiveness, various designs of hive are used which enable the combs to be removed for processing and extraction of honey.
Quite apart from the honey and wax they produce, honey bees are important pollinators of crops and wild plants, and in many places hives are transported around the countryside to assist in pollination.
Sericulture, the rearing of silkworms, was first adopted by the Chinese during the Shang dynasty. The only species farmed commercially is the domesticated silkmoth. When it spins its cocoon, each larva produces an exceedingly long, slender thread of silk. The larvae feed on mulberry leaves and in Europe, only one generation is normally raised each year as this is a deciduous tree.
In China, Korea and Japan however, two generations are normal, and in the tropics, multiple generations are expected. Most production of silk occurs in the Far East, with a synthetic diet being used to rear the silkworms in Japan.
Insects form part of the human diet in many cultures. In Thailand, crickets are farmed for this purpose in the north of the country, and palm weevil larvae in the south. The crickets are kept in pens, boxes or drawers and fed on commercial pelleted poultry food, while the palm weevil larvae live on cabbage palm and sago palm trees, which limits their production to areas where these trees grow. Another delicacy of this region is the bamboo caterpillar, and the best rearing and harvesting techniques in semi-natural habitats are being studied.
Effects:
Environmental impact:
Main articles:
Animal husbandry has a significant impact on the world environment. It is responsible for somewhere between 20 and 33% of the fresh water usage in the world, and livestock, and the production of feed for them, occupy about a third of the earth's ice-free land.
Livestock production is a contributing factor in species extinction, desertification, and habitat destruction. Animal agriculture contributes to species extinction in various ways.
Habitat is destroyed by clearing forests and converting land to grow feed crops and for animal grazing, while predators and herbivores are frequently targeted and hunted because of a perceived threat to livestock profits; for example, animal husbandry is responsible for up to 91% of the deforestation in the Amazon region.
In addition, livestock produce greenhouse gases. Cows produce some 570 million cubic meters of methane per day, that accounts for from 35 to 40% of the overall methane emissions of the planet. Livestock is responsible for 65% of all human-related emissions of the powerful and long-lived greenhouse gas nitrous oxide.
As a result, ways of mitigating animal husbandry's environmental impact are being studied. Strategies include:
- using biogas from manure,
- genetic selection,
- immunization,
- rumen defaunation,
- outcompetition of methanogenic archaea with acetogens,
- introduction of methanotrophic bacteria into the rumen,
- diet modification and grazing management, among others.
Certain diet changes (such as with Asparagopsis taxiformis) allow for a reduction of up to 99% in ruminant greenhouse gas emissions.
Animal welfare:
Main article: Animal welfare
Since the 18th century, people have become increasingly concerned about the welfare of farm animals. Possible measures of welfare include:
- longevity,
- behavior,
- physiology,
- reproduction,
- freedom from disease,
- and freedom from immunosuppression.
Standards and laws for animal welfare have been created worldwide, broadly in line with the most widely held position in the western world, a form of utilitarianism: that it is morally acceptable for humans to use non-human animals, provided that no unnecessary suffering is caused, and that the benefits to humans outweigh the costs to the livestock.
An opposing view is that animals have rights, should not be regarded as property, are not necessary to use, and should never be used by humans. Live export of animals has risen to meet increased global demand for livestock such as in the Middle East. Animal rights activists have objected to long-distance transport of animals; one result was the banning of live exports from New Zealand in 2003.
In culture:
Since the 18th century, the farmer John Bull has represented English national identity, first in John Arbuthnot's political satires, and soon afterwards in cartoons by James Gillray and others including John Tenniel. He likes food, beer, dogs, horses, and country sports; he is practical and down to earth, and anti-intellectual.
Farm animals are widespread in books and songs for children; the reality of animal husbandry is often distorted, softened, or idealized, giving children an almost entirely fictitious account of farm life.
The books often depict happy animals free to roam in attractive countryside, a picture completely at odds with the realities of the impersonal, mechanized activities involved in modern intensive farming.
Pigs, for example, appear in several of Beatrix Potter's "little books", as Piglet in A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh stories, and somewhat more darkly (with a hint of animals going to slaughter) as Babe in Dick King-Smith's The Sheep-Pig, and as Wilbur in E. B. White's Charlotte's Web.
Pigs tend to be "bearers of cheerfulness, good humor and innocence". Many of these books are completely anthropomorphic, dressing farm animals in clothes and having them walk on two legs, live in houses, and perform human activities. The children's song "Old MacDonald Had a Farm" describes a farmer named MacDonald and the various animals he keeps, celebrating the noises they each make.
Many urban children experience animal husbandry for the first time at a petting farm; in Britain, some five million people a year visit a farm of some kind. This presents some risk of infection, especially if children handle animals and then fail to wash their hands; a strain of E. coli infected 93 people who had visited a British interactive farm in an outbreak in 2009.
Historic farms such as those in the United States offer farmstays and "a carefully curated version of farming to those willing to pay for it", sometimes giving visitors a romanticized image of a pastoral idyll from an unspecified time in the pre-industrial past.
Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Animal Husbandry:
- History
- See also:
Agribusiness
- YouTube Video: The Most Unique & Innovative Agriculture Startup Ideas | New Business Ideas
- YouTube Video: 5 Keys to a Successful Agribusiness
- YouTube Video: Starting a Farm Business
Agribusiness is the business of agricultural production which involves the production, protection, sales and marketing of the product to satisfy the customers need.
The term is a portmanteau of agriculture and business and was coined in 1957 by John Davis and Ray Goldberg It includes:
All agents of the food and fiber value chain and those institutions that influence it are part of the agribusiness system.
Within the agriculture industry, "agribusiness" refers to the range of activities and disciplines encompassed by modern food production. There are academic degrees specializing in agribusiness, departments of agribusiness, agribusiness trade associations, and agribusiness publications.
In the context of agribusiness management in academia, each individual element of agriculture production and distribution may be described as agribusinesses. However, the term "agribusiness" most often emphasizes the "interdependence" of these various sectors within the production chain.
Among critics of large-scale, industrialized, vertically integrated food production, the term agribusiness is used negatively, synonymous with corporate farming. As such, it is often contrasted with smaller family-owned farms.
Examples:
Agribusinesses include seed and agrichemical producers like:
As concern over global warming intensifies, biofuels derived from crops are gaining increased public and scientific attention. This is driven by factors such as
In Europe and in the US, increased research and production of biofuels have been mandated by law.
Studies and reports:
Studies of agribusiness often come from the academic fields of agricultural economics and management studies, sometimes called agribusiness management.
To promote more development of food economies, many government agencies support the research and publication of economic studies and reports exploring agribusiness and agribusiness practices.
Some of these studies are on foods produced for export and are derived from agencies focused on food exports. These agencies include
The Federation of International Trade Associations publishes studies and reports by FAS and AAFC, as well as other non-governmental organizations on its website.
In their book A Concept of Agribusiness, Ray Goldberg and John Davis provided a rigorous economic framework for the field. They traced a complex value-added chain that begins with the farmer's purchase of seed and livestock and ends with a product fit for the consumer's table. Agribusiness boundary expansion is driven by a variety of transaction costs.
See also:
The term is a portmanteau of agriculture and business and was coined in 1957 by John Davis and Ray Goldberg It includes:
- agrichemicals,
- breeding,
- crop production (farming or contract farming),
- distribution,
- farm machinery, processing, and seed supply, as well as marketing and retail sales.
All agents of the food and fiber value chain and those institutions that influence it are part of the agribusiness system.
Within the agriculture industry, "agribusiness" refers to the range of activities and disciplines encompassed by modern food production. There are academic degrees specializing in agribusiness, departments of agribusiness, agribusiness trade associations, and agribusiness publications.
In the context of agribusiness management in academia, each individual element of agriculture production and distribution may be described as agribusinesses. However, the term "agribusiness" most often emphasizes the "interdependence" of these various sectors within the production chain.
Among critics of large-scale, industrialized, vertically integrated food production, the term agribusiness is used negatively, synonymous with corporate farming. As such, it is often contrasted with smaller family-owned farms.
Examples:
Agribusinesses include seed and agrichemical producers like:
- Dow AgroSciences,
- DuPont,
- Monsanto and Syngenta;
- AB Agri (part of Associated British Foods) animal feeds,
- biofuels,
- and micro-ingredients,
- ADM, grain transport and processing;
- John Deere, farm machinery producer;
- Ocean Spray, farmer's cooperative;
- and Purina Farms, agritourism farm.
As concern over global warming intensifies, biofuels derived from crops are gaining increased public and scientific attention. This is driven by factors such as
- oil price spikes,
- the need for increased energy security,
- concern over greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels,
- and support from government subsidies.
In Europe and in the US, increased research and production of biofuels have been mandated by law.
Studies and reports:
Studies of agribusiness often come from the academic fields of agricultural economics and management studies, sometimes called agribusiness management.
To promote more development of food economies, many government agencies support the research and publication of economic studies and reports exploring agribusiness and agribusiness practices.
Some of these studies are on foods produced for export and are derived from agencies focused on food exports. These agencies include
- the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
- Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC),
- Austrade,
- and New Zealand Trade and Enterprise (NZTE).
The Federation of International Trade Associations publishes studies and reports by FAS and AAFC, as well as other non-governmental organizations on its website.
In their book A Concept of Agribusiness, Ray Goldberg and John Davis provided a rigorous economic framework for the field. They traced a complex value-added chain that begins with the farmer's purchase of seed and livestock and ends with a product fit for the consumer's table. Agribusiness boundary expansion is driven by a variety of transaction costs.
See also:
- Agrarian law
- Agrarian reform
- Agricultural machinery industry
- Agricultural value chain
- Agroecology
- Biofuel
- Contract farming
- Energy crop
- Environmental impact of agriculture
- Factory farming
- Industrial agriculture
- Land banking
- Agribusiness in Kenya
The Family Farm vs. Corporate Farming
- YouTube Video: Why this family have decided to sell their farm
- YouTube Video: How to Start a Farm From Scratch (Beginner's Guide to Growing Vegetables for Profit)
- YouTube Video: Family vs. Corporate Farming - Facts, Not Fear
* -- PEW Research FACT SHEET July 18, 2012
Projects: Reforming Industrial Animal Agriculture
Competition is a critical element of our free market economy and is particularly important in agriculture. Consumers understand almost instinctively that market domination by a single powerful business can lead to higher prices. Less obvious is the role that lack of competition has played in squeezing out small and midsize farms and ranches and in changing the nature of animal agriculture across the country.
Over the past 50 years, the United States has lost more than a million farms, yet more animals than ever are being raised, slaughtered, and processed. The modern operations that raise most animals for food today are far larger than those of years ago, and many specialize in only one type of livestock or even one stage of an animal's life.
The very largest of these now account for a huge proportion of production. In 2002, for example, the average U.S. hog farm produced 2,255 animals, but most of the hogs produced in the country came from operations more than 10 times that large. In the same year, most of the cows sold in the United States came from operations selling more than 34,000 head, and most of the broiler chickens came from operations that produced more than 500,000 birds.
Many large operations have relatively little cropland and are often geographically concentrated in certain areas, particularly around meatpacking and processing plants.
As the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has pointed out, these larger facilities now produce excess amounts of waste and are “also more prone to use antibiotics intensively in order to pre-empt the spread of animal disease and to accelerate animal growth.” This contrasts with more traditional diversified farms, which maintained a balanced mix of crops and livestock.
The Structure of Livestock Agriculture
Projects: Reforming Industrial Animal Agriculture
Competition is a critical element of our free market economy and is particularly important in agriculture. Consumers understand almost instinctively that market domination by a single powerful business can lead to higher prices. Less obvious is the role that lack of competition has played in squeezing out small and midsize farms and ranches and in changing the nature of animal agriculture across the country.
Over the past 50 years, the United States has lost more than a million farms, yet more animals than ever are being raised, slaughtered, and processed. The modern operations that raise most animals for food today are far larger than those of years ago, and many specialize in only one type of livestock or even one stage of an animal's life.
The very largest of these now account for a huge proportion of production. In 2002, for example, the average U.S. hog farm produced 2,255 animals, but most of the hogs produced in the country came from operations more than 10 times that large. In the same year, most of the cows sold in the United States came from operations selling more than 34,000 head, and most of the broiler chickens came from operations that produced more than 500,000 birds.
Many large operations have relatively little cropland and are often geographically concentrated in certain areas, particularly around meatpacking and processing plants.
As the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has pointed out, these larger facilities now produce excess amounts of waste and are “also more prone to use antibiotics intensively in order to pre-empt the spread of animal disease and to accelerate animal growth.” This contrasts with more traditional diversified farms, which maintained a balanced mix of crops and livestock.
The Structure of Livestock Agriculture
Consolidation in the livestock industry has occurred through mergers, acquisitions, and the demise of small businesses, and today's market reflects the dominance of a relative handful of large entities that control the slaughter, processing, and marketing of most livestock.
A look at the “fourfirm concentration”—a common measure of market dominance by the top firms in an industry—shows the long-term trend toward consolidation in the meat industry.
Today, large meatpackers may own livestock outright and hence can manage their inventory to affect and respond to market prices, potentially to the detriment of smaller producers.
Other processors (also known as integrators) use production contracts, under which they retain ownership of the animals and contract with farmers to raise them. This type of contract, which generally allows the processor to dictate how and when animals will be raised, now dominates in the broiler business and is becoming increasingly common with hogs.
At the same time, more of the livestock business has become vertically integrated, with large corporations controlling most or all stages of production, from livestock genetics to grocery store packaging.
The result is the disappearance of open and competitive livestock markets: In 2010, for example, about 35 percent of all cattle were sold on the spot market, down from 45 percent in 2001. In 2010, the spot market for hogs was only 8 percent; just 15 years ago, it was 62 percent. For commercial broiler production, there is virtually no spot market at all.
This transformation in livestock agriculture has led to concerns about the economic leverage that large corporations hold over independent farmers and ranchers. Early in 2010, the USDA and the Department of Justice initiated an unprecedented series of joint public workshops around the country to investigate the state of competition in agriculture markets.
Hundreds of independent livestock producers attended the workshops, and many testified that it is increasingly difficult to survive economically. They urged the USDA's Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) to better regulate the anti-competitive practices of large agribusiness.
Their pleas were echoed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA): “The agriculture industry has consolidated to the point where family farmers, independent producers, and other smaller market participants do not have equal access to fair and competitive markets.”
A look at the “fourfirm concentration”—a common measure of market dominance by the top firms in an industry—shows the long-term trend toward consolidation in the meat industry.
Today, large meatpackers may own livestock outright and hence can manage their inventory to affect and respond to market prices, potentially to the detriment of smaller producers.
Other processors (also known as integrators) use production contracts, under which they retain ownership of the animals and contract with farmers to raise them. This type of contract, which generally allows the processor to dictate how and when animals will be raised, now dominates in the broiler business and is becoming increasingly common with hogs.
At the same time, more of the livestock business has become vertically integrated, with large corporations controlling most or all stages of production, from livestock genetics to grocery store packaging.
The result is the disappearance of open and competitive livestock markets: In 2010, for example, about 35 percent of all cattle were sold on the spot market, down from 45 percent in 2001. In 2010, the spot market for hogs was only 8 percent; just 15 years ago, it was 62 percent. For commercial broiler production, there is virtually no spot market at all.
This transformation in livestock agriculture has led to concerns about the economic leverage that large corporations hold over independent farmers and ranchers. Early in 2010, the USDA and the Department of Justice initiated an unprecedented series of joint public workshops around the country to investigate the state of competition in agriculture markets.
Hundreds of independent livestock producers attended the workshops, and many testified that it is increasingly difficult to survive economically. They urged the USDA's Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) to better regulate the anti-competitive practices of large agribusiness.
Their pleas were echoed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA): “The agriculture industry has consolidated to the point where family farmers, independent producers, and other smaller market participants do not have equal access to fair and competitive markets.”
Reforming Market Policies:
Policymakers have long recognized that livestock markets are particularly vulnerable to manipulation, and the 1921 Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA) was enacted to curtail unfair, fraudulent, or deceptive practices by meatpackers and processors.
Over the years, however, enforcement of the PSA, and its relevance to the rapidly changing meat industry, has been a source of concern for farmers and has fostered vigorous debate among policymakers.
In 2010, the GIPSA proposed rules, as required by the 2008 Farm Bill, intended to protect independent farmers and help reduce the power of consolidated meatpackers. In August 2010, a bipartisan letter from 21 senators to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack urged speedy adoption of these regulations, but the final rule, released in December 2011, contained only a few of the needed reforms.
The initial proposal, for example, would have made it clear that certain agricultural contracting and payment practices could be found to be unfair or deceptive and hence illegal without a showing of harm to the entire marketplace. It would have required justification for packers and processors offering different payment premiums to different producers; banned certain packer-to-packer sales of animals that could suppress the prices received by independent producers; and required disclosure of basic contract provisions to the USDA.
None of those reforms was adopted.
The agriculture industry has consolidated to the point where family farmers, independent producers, and other smaller market participants do not have equal access to fair and competitive markets.
In the final rule, the USDA did include a requirement for processors to offer written notice of intent to suspend delivery of live birds to a poultry grower; disclosure requirements for contracts that call for arbitration to settle disputes; and some limitations on the extent to which processors can demand unnecessary capital improvements to on-farm facilities.
The final rule also required contractors to give growers a reasonable amount of time to resolve any potential breach-of-contract problems.
Unfortunately, some members of Congress are pressing to rescind some of these protections.
Although the final rule failed to provide adequate relief to contract growers and independent operations, Congress and the administration can still act to secure a level playing field for America's animal agriculture industry. The Pew Environment Group's Campaign to Reform Industrial Animal Agriculture is advocating for full enforcement of the PSA, antitrust laws, and other farm fairness laws as a first step in returning fair competition to the livestock market.
In addition, the campaign is working to expose the effects of corporate control by integrators on rural communities and is calling for increased transparency in contracting practices and shared responsibility for CAFO waste management.
___________________________________________________________________________
Family farm
A family farm is generally understood to be a farm owned and/or operated by a family; it is sometimes considered to be an estate passed down by inheritance. Family farm businesses can take many forms, from smallholding farms to larger farms operated under intensive farming practices.
In some geographies, most farm families have structured their farm businesses as corporations, limited liability corporations, and trusts, for liability, tax, and business purposes.
In the United States for example, a 2014 USDA report shows that family farms operate 90 percent of the nation’s farmland, and account for 85 percent of the country’s agricultural production value.
The concept or definition does not easily translate across languages or cultures, as there are substantial differences in the agricultural traditions and histories between countries. Thus, in the United States, a family farm can be of any size, while in Brazil, the official definition of a family farm (agricultura familiar) is limited to small farms worked primarily by members of a single family.
Farms that would not be considered family farms would be those operated as collectives, non-family corporations, or in other institutionalized forms. At least 500 million of the world's [estimated] 570 million farms are managed by families, making family farms predominant in global agriculture.
Definitions:
An "informal discussion of the concepts and definitions" in a working paper published by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 2014 reviewed English, Spanish and French definitions of the concept of "family farm".
Definitions referred to one or more of labor, management, size, provision of family livelihood, residence, family ties and generational aspects, community and social networks, subsistence orientation, patrimony, land ownership and family investment. The disparity of definitions reflects national and geographical differences in cultures, rural land tenure, and rural economies, as well as the different purposes for which definitions are coined.
The 2012 United States Census of Agriculture defines a family farm as "any farm where the majority of the business is owned by the operator and individuals related to the operator, including relatives who do not live in the operator’s household"; it defines a farm as "any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, during a given year."
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations defines a "family farm" as one that relies primarily on family members for labour and management.
In some usages, "family farm" implies that the farm remains within the ownership of a family over a number of generations.
Being special-purpose definitions, the definitions found in laws or regulations may differ substantially from commonly understood meanings of "family farm". For example, In the United States, under federal Farm Ownership loan regulations, the definition of a "family farm" does not specify the nature of farm ownership, and management of the farm is either by the borrower, or by members operating the farm when a loan is made to a corporation, co-operative or other entity. The complete definition can be found in the US Code of Federal Regulations 7 CFR 1943.4.
Developed world:
Perceptions of the family farm:
In developed countries the family farm is viewed sentimentally, as a lifestyle to be preserved for tradition's sake, or as a birthright. It is in these nations very often a political rallying cry against change in agricultural policy, most commonly in France, Japan, and the United States, where rural lifestyles are often regarded as desirable.
In these countries, strange bedfellows can often be found arguing for similar measures despite otherwise vast differences in political ideology. For example, Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader, both candidates for the office of President of the United States, held rural rallies together and spoke for measures to preserve the so-called family farm. On other economic matters they were seen as generally opposed, but found common ground on this one.
The social roles of family farms are much changed today. Until recently, staying in line with traditional and conservative sociology, the heads of the household were usually the oldest man followed closely by his oldest sons. The wife generally took care of the housework, child rearing, and financial matters pertaining to the farm.
However, agricultural activities have taken on many forms and change over time. Agronomy, horticulture, aquaculture, silviculture, and apiculture, along with traditional plants and animals, all make up aspects of today's family farm. Farm wives often need to find work away from the farm to supplement farm income and children sometimes have no interest in farming as their chosen field of work.
Bolder promoters argue that as agriculture has become more efficient with the application of modern management and new technologies in each generation, the idealized classic family farm is now simply obsolete, or more often, unable to compete without the economies of scale available to larger and more modern farms. Advocates argue that family farms in all nations need to be protected, as the basis of rural society and social stability.
Viability:
According to the United States Department of Agriculture, ninety-eight percent of all farms in the U.S. are family farms. Two percent of farms are not family farms, and those two percent make up fourteen percent of total agricultural output in the United States, although half of them have total sales of less than $50,000 per year.
Overall, ninety-one percent of farms in the United States are considered "small family farms" (with sales of less than $250,000 per year), and those farms produce twenty-seven percent of U.S. agricultural output.
Depending on the type and size of independently owned operation, some limiting factors are:
Over the 20th century, the people of developed nations have collectively taken most of the steps down the path to this situation. Individual farmers opted for successive waves of new technology, happily "trading in their horses for a tractor", increasing their debt and their production capacity.
This in turn required larger, more distant markets, and heavier and more complex financing. The public willingly purchased increasingly commoditized, processed, shipped and relatively inexpensive food.
The availability of an increasingly diverse supply of fresh, uncured, unpreserved produce and meat in all seasons of the year (oranges in January, freshly killed steers in July, fresh pork rather than salted, smoked, or potassium-impregnated ham) opened an entirely new cuisine and an unprecedented healthy diet to millions of consumers who had never enjoyed such produce before.
These abilities also brought to market an unprecedented variety of processed foods, such as corn syrup and bleached flour. For the family farm this new technology and increasingly complex marketing strategy has presented new and unprecedented challenges, and not all family farmers have been able to effectively cope with the changing market conditions.
Local food and the organic movement:
In the last few decades there has been a resurgence of interest in organic and free range foods. A percentage of consumers have begun to question the viability of industrial agriculture practices and have turned to organic groceries that sell products produced on family farms including not only meat and produce but also such things as wheat germ breads and natural lye soaps (as opposed to bleached white breads and petroleum based detergent bars).
Others buy these products direct from family farms. The "new family farm" provides an alternative market in some localities with an array of traditionally and naturally produced products.
Such "organic" and "free-range" farming is attainable where a significant number of affluent urban and suburban consumers willingly pay a premium for the ideals of "locally produced produce" and "humane treatment of animals". Sometimes, these farms are hobby or part-time ventures, or supported by wealth from other sources. Viable farms on a scale sufficient to support modern families at an income level commensurate with urban and suburban upper-middle-class families are often large scale operations, both in area and capital requirements.
These farms, family owned and operated in a technologically and economically conventional manner, produce crops and animal products oriented to national and international markets, rather than to local markets. In assessing this complex economic situation, it is important to consider all sources of income available to these farms; for instance, the millions of dollars in farm subsidies which the United States government offers each year. As fuel prices rise, foods shipped to national and international markets are already rising in price.
United States:
In 2012, the United States had 2,039,093 family farms (as defined by USDA), accounting for 97 percent of all farms and 89 percent of census farm area in the United States. In 1988 Mark Friedberger warned, "The farm family is a unique institution, perhaps the last remnant, in an increasingly complex world, of a simpler social order in which economic and domestic activities were inextricably bound together. In the past few years, however, American agriculture has suffered huge losses, and family farmers have seen their way of life threatened by economic forces beyond their control."
However by 1981 Ingolf Vogeler argued it was too late--the American family farm had been replaced by large agribusiness corporations pretending to be family operated.
A USDA survey conducted in 2011 estimated that family farms account for 85 percent of US farm production and 85 percent of US gross farm income. Mid-size and larger family farms account for 60 percent of US farm production and dominate US production of cotton, cash grain and hogs. Small family farms account for 26 percent of US farm production overall, and higher percentages of production of poultry, beef cattle, some other livestock and hay.
Several kinds of US family farms are recognized in USDA farm typology:
Small family farms are defined as those with annual gross cash farm income (GCFI) of less than $350,000; in 2011, these accounted for 90 percent of all US farms. Because low net farm incomes tend to predominate on such farms, most farm families on small family farms are extremely dependent on off-farm income.
Small family farms in which the principal operator was mostly employed off-farm accounted for 42 percent of all farms and 15 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income was $788. Retirement family farms were small farms accounting for 16 percent of all farms and 7 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income was $5,002.
The other small family farm categories are those in which farming occupies at least 50 percent of the principal operator’s working time. These are:
Family farms include not only sole proprietorships and family partnerships, but also family corporations. Family-owned corporations account for 5 percent of all farms and 89 percent of corporate farms in the United States.
About 98 percent of US family corporations owning farms are small, with no more than 10 shareholders; average net farm income of family corporate farms was $189,400 in 2012. (In contrast, 90 percent of US non-family corporations owning farms are small, having no more than 10 shareholders; average net cash farm income for US non-family corporate farms was $270,670 in 2012.)
Canada:
In Canada, the number of "family farms" cannot be inferred closely, because of the nature of census data, which do not distinguish family and non-family farm partnerships. In 2011, of Canada’s 205,730 farms, 55 percent were sole proprietorships, 25 percent were partnerships, 17 percent were family corporations, 2 percent were non-family corporations and <1 percent were other categories.
Because some but not all partnerships involve family members, these data suggest that family farms account for between about 73 and 97 percent of Canadian farms. The family farm percentage is likely to be near the high end of this range, for two reasons. The partners in a [Canadian] farm partnership are typically spouses, often forming the farm partnership for tax reasons.
Also, as in the US, family farm succession planning can use a partnership as a means of apportioning family farm tenure among family members when a sole proprietor is ready to transfer some or all of ownership and operation of a farm to offspring. Conversion of a sole proprietorship family farm to a family corporation may also be influenced by legal and financial, e.g. tax, considerations.
The Canadian Encyclopedia estimates that more than 90 percent of Canadian farms are family operations. In 2006, of Canadian farms with more than one million dollars in annual gross farm receipts, about 63 percent were family corporations and 13 percent were non-family corporations.
Europe:
Analysis of data for 59,000 farms in the 12 member states of the European Community found that in 1989, about three-quarters of the farms were family farms, producing just over half of total agricultural output.
As of 2010, there were approximately 139,900 family farms in Ireland, with an average size of 35.7 hectares per holding. (Nearly all farms in Ireland are family farms. In Ireland, average family farm income was 25,483 euros in 2012. Analysis by Teagasc (Ireland’s Agriculture and Food Development Authority) estimates that 37 percent of Irish farms are economically viable and an additional 30 percent are sustainable due to income from off-farm sources; 33 percent meet neither criterion and are considered economically vulnerable.
Newly industrialized countries:
In Brazil, there are about 4.37 million family farms. These account for 84.4 percent of farms, 24.3 percent of farmland area and 37.5 percent of the value of agricultural production.
Developing countries:
In sub-Saharan Africa, 80% of farms are family owned and worked.
Sub-Saharan agriculture was mostly defined by slash-and-burn subsistence farming, historically spread by the Bantu expansion. Permanent farming estates were established during colonialism, in the 19th to 20th century. After decolonization, white farmers in some African countries have tended to be attacked, killed or evicted, notably in South Africa and Zimbabwe.
In southern Africa, "On peasant family farms ..., cash input costs are very low, non‐household labor is sourced largely from communal work groups through kinship ties, and support services needed to sustain production are minimal." On commercial family farms, "cash input costs are high, little non‐family labour is used and strong support services are necessary."
International Year of Family Farming:
At the 66th session of the United Nations General Assembly, 2014 was formally declared to be the "International Year of Family Farming" (IYFF). The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations was invited to facilitate its implementation, in collaboration with Governments, International Development Agencies, farmers' organizations and other relevant organizations of the United Nations system as well as relevant non-governmental organizations.
The goal of the 2014 IYFF is to reposition family farming at the centre of agricultural, environmental and social policies in the national agendas by identifying gaps and opportunities to promote a shift towards a more equal and balanced development. The 2014 IYFF will promote broad discussion and cooperation at the national, regional and global levels to increase awareness and understanding of the challenges faced by smallholders and help identify efficient ways to support family farmers.
See also:
Corporate farming:
Corporate farming is the practice of large-scale agriculture on farms owned or greatly influenced by large companies. This includes corporate ownership of farms and selling of agricultural products, as well as the roles of these companies in influencing agricultural education, research, and public policy through funding initiatives and lobbying efforts.
The definition and effects of corporate farming on agriculture are widely debated, though sources that describe large businesses in agriculture as "corporate farms" may portray them negatively.
Definitions and usage:
The varied and fluid meanings of "corporate farming" have resulted in conflicting definitions of the term, with implications in particular for legal definitions.
Legal definitions:
Most legal definitions of corporate farming in the United States pertain to tax laws, anti–corporate farming laws, and census data collection. These definitions mostly reference farm income, indicating farms over a certain threshold as corporate farms, as well as ownership of the farm, specifically targeting farms that do not pass ownership through family lines.
Common definitions:
In public discourse, the term "corporate farming" lacks a firmly established definition and is variously applied. However, several features of the term's usage frequently arise:
Family farms:
"Family farm" and "corporate farm" are often defined as mutually exclusive terms, with the two having different interests. This mostly stems from the widespread assumption that family farms are small farms while corporate farms are large-scale operations. While it is true that the majority of small farms are family owned, many large farms are also family businesses, including some of the largest farms in the US.
Additionally, there are large economic and legal incentives for family farmers to incorporate their businesses.
Contract farming:
Farming contracts are agreements between a farmer and a buyer that stipulates what the farmer will grow and how much they will grow usually in return for guaranteed purchase of the product or financial support in purchase of inputs (e.g. feed for livestock growers).
In most instances of contract farming, the farm is family owned while the buyer is a larger corporation. This makes it difficult to distinguish the contract farmers from "corporate farms," because they are family farms but with significant corporate influence. This subtle distinction left a loop-hole in many state laws that prohibited corporate farming, effectively allowing corporations to farm in these states as long as they contracted with local farm owners.
Non-farm entities:
Many people also choose to include non-farming entities in their definitions of corporate farming. Beyond just the farm contractors mentioned above, these types of companies commonly considered part of the term include Cargill, Monsanto, and DuPont Pioneer among others.
These corporations do not have production farms, meaning they do not produce a significant amount of farm products. However, their role in producing and selling agricultural supplies and their purchase and processing of farm products often leads to them being grouped with corporate farms. While this is technically incorrect, it is widely considered substantively accurate because including these companies in the term "corporate farming" is necessary to describe their real influence over agriculture.
Arguments against corporate farming:
Family farms maintain traditions including environmental stewardship and taking longer views than companies seeking profits. Family farmers may have greater knowledge about soil and crop types, terrains, weather and other features specific to particular local areas of land can be passed from parent to child over generations, which would be harder for corporate managers to grasp.
North America:
The 2012 US Census of Agriculture indicates that 5.06 percent of US farms are corporate farms. These include family corporations (4.51 percent) and non-family corporations (0.55 percent). Of the family farm corporations, 98 percent are small corporations, with 10 or fewer stockholders. Of the non-family farm corporations, 90 percent are small corporations, with 10 or fewer stockholders.
Non-family corporate farms account for 1.36 percent of US farmland area. Family farms (including family corporate farms) account for 96.7 percent of US farms and 89 percent of US farmland area; a USDA study estimated that family farms accounted for 85 percent of US gross farm income in 2011.
Other farmland in the US is accounted for by several other categories, including single proprietorships where the owner is not the farm operator, non-family partnerships, estates, trusts, cooperatives, collectives, institutional, research, experimental and American Indian Reservation farms.
In the US, the average size of a non-family corporate farm is 1078 acres, i.e. smaller than the average family corporate farm (1249 acres) and smaller than the average partnership farm (1131 acres).
In Canada, 17.4 percent of farms are owned by family corporations and 2.4 percent by non-family corporations. In Canada (as in some other jurisdictions) conversion of a sole proprietorship family farm to a family corporation can have tax planning benefits, and in some cases, the difference in combined provincial and federal taxation rates is substantial.
Also, for farm families with significant off-farm income, incorporating the farm can provide some shelter from high personal income tax rates. Another important consideration can be some protection of the corporate shareholders from liability. Incorporating a family farm can also be useful as a succession tool, among other reasons because it can maintain a family farm as a viable operation where subdivision of the farm into smaller operations among heirs might result in farm sizes too small to be viable.
Europe:
Family farms across Europe are heavily protected by EU regulations, which have been driven in particular by French farmers and the French custom splitting land inheritance between children to produce many very small family farms. In regions such as East Anglia, UK, some agribusiness is practiced through company ownership, but most large UK land estates are still owned by wealthy families such as traditional aristocrats, as encouraged by favorable inheritance tax rules.
Eurasia:
Most farming in the Soviet Union and its Eastern Bloc satellite states was collectivized. After the dissolution of those states via the revolutions of 1989 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, decades of decollectivization and land reform have occurred, with the details varying substantially by country.
In Russia, some amount of family farming has developed, but many former collective farms (kolkhozy) and state farms (sovkhozy) retained their collective/joint nature and instead became corporate farms with stock ownership, the farmers having incorporated.
Africa:
Corporate farming has begun to take hold in some African countries, where listed companies such as Zambeef, Zambia are operated by MBAs as large businesses. In some cases, this has caused debates about land ownership where shares have been bought by international investors, especially from China.
Middle East:
Some oil-rich middle east countries operate corporate farming including large-scale irrigation of desert lands for cropping, mostly through partially or fully state-owned companies.
Anti–corporate farming laws:
To date, nine US states have enacted laws that restrict or prohibit corporate farming. The first of these laws were enacted in the 1930s by Kansas and North Dakota respectively. In the 1970s, similar laws were passed in Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, South Dakota and Wisconsin.
In 1982, after failure to pass an anti–corporate farming law, the citizens of Nebraska enacted by initiative a similar amendment into their state constitution. The citizens of South Dakota similarly amended their state constitution in 1998.
All nine laws have similar content. They all restrict corporate ability to own and operate on farmland. They all outline exceptions for specific types of corporations. Generally, family farm corporations are exempted, although certain conditions may have to be fulfilled for such exemption (e.g. one or more of: shareholders within a specified degree of kinship owning a majority of voting stock, no shareholders other than natural persons, limited number of shareholders, at least one family member residing on the farm).
However, the laws vary significantly in how they define a corporate farm, and in the specific restrictions. Definitions of a farm can include any and all farm operations, or be dependent on the source of income, as in Iowa, where 60 percent of income must come from farm products.
Additionally, these laws can target a corporation's use of the land, meaning that companies can own but not farm the land, or they may outright prohibit corporations from buying and owning farmland. The precise wording of these laws has significant impact on how corporations can participate in agriculture in these states with the ultimate goal of protecting and empowering the family farm.
See also:
Policymakers have long recognized that livestock markets are particularly vulnerable to manipulation, and the 1921 Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA) was enacted to curtail unfair, fraudulent, or deceptive practices by meatpackers and processors.
Over the years, however, enforcement of the PSA, and its relevance to the rapidly changing meat industry, has been a source of concern for farmers and has fostered vigorous debate among policymakers.
In 2010, the GIPSA proposed rules, as required by the 2008 Farm Bill, intended to protect independent farmers and help reduce the power of consolidated meatpackers. In August 2010, a bipartisan letter from 21 senators to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack urged speedy adoption of these regulations, but the final rule, released in December 2011, contained only a few of the needed reforms.
The initial proposal, for example, would have made it clear that certain agricultural contracting and payment practices could be found to be unfair or deceptive and hence illegal without a showing of harm to the entire marketplace. It would have required justification for packers and processors offering different payment premiums to different producers; banned certain packer-to-packer sales of animals that could suppress the prices received by independent producers; and required disclosure of basic contract provisions to the USDA.
None of those reforms was adopted.
The agriculture industry has consolidated to the point where family farmers, independent producers, and other smaller market participants do not have equal access to fair and competitive markets.
In the final rule, the USDA did include a requirement for processors to offer written notice of intent to suspend delivery of live birds to a poultry grower; disclosure requirements for contracts that call for arbitration to settle disputes; and some limitations on the extent to which processors can demand unnecessary capital improvements to on-farm facilities.
The final rule also required contractors to give growers a reasonable amount of time to resolve any potential breach-of-contract problems.
Unfortunately, some members of Congress are pressing to rescind some of these protections.
Although the final rule failed to provide adequate relief to contract growers and independent operations, Congress and the administration can still act to secure a level playing field for America's animal agriculture industry. The Pew Environment Group's Campaign to Reform Industrial Animal Agriculture is advocating for full enforcement of the PSA, antitrust laws, and other farm fairness laws as a first step in returning fair competition to the livestock market.
In addition, the campaign is working to expose the effects of corporate control by integrators on rural communities and is calling for increased transparency in contracting practices and shared responsibility for CAFO waste management.
___________________________________________________________________________
Family farm
A family farm is generally understood to be a farm owned and/or operated by a family; it is sometimes considered to be an estate passed down by inheritance. Family farm businesses can take many forms, from smallholding farms to larger farms operated under intensive farming practices.
In some geographies, most farm families have structured their farm businesses as corporations, limited liability corporations, and trusts, for liability, tax, and business purposes.
In the United States for example, a 2014 USDA report shows that family farms operate 90 percent of the nation’s farmland, and account for 85 percent of the country’s agricultural production value.
The concept or definition does not easily translate across languages or cultures, as there are substantial differences in the agricultural traditions and histories between countries. Thus, in the United States, a family farm can be of any size, while in Brazil, the official definition of a family farm (agricultura familiar) is limited to small farms worked primarily by members of a single family.
Farms that would not be considered family farms would be those operated as collectives, non-family corporations, or in other institutionalized forms. At least 500 million of the world's [estimated] 570 million farms are managed by families, making family farms predominant in global agriculture.
Definitions:
An "informal discussion of the concepts and definitions" in a working paper published by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 2014 reviewed English, Spanish and French definitions of the concept of "family farm".
Definitions referred to one or more of labor, management, size, provision of family livelihood, residence, family ties and generational aspects, community and social networks, subsistence orientation, patrimony, land ownership and family investment. The disparity of definitions reflects national and geographical differences in cultures, rural land tenure, and rural economies, as well as the different purposes for which definitions are coined.
The 2012 United States Census of Agriculture defines a family farm as "any farm where the majority of the business is owned by the operator and individuals related to the operator, including relatives who do not live in the operator’s household"; it defines a farm as "any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, during a given year."
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations defines a "family farm" as one that relies primarily on family members for labour and management.
In some usages, "family farm" implies that the farm remains within the ownership of a family over a number of generations.
Being special-purpose definitions, the definitions found in laws or regulations may differ substantially from commonly understood meanings of "family farm". For example, In the United States, under federal Farm Ownership loan regulations, the definition of a "family farm" does not specify the nature of farm ownership, and management of the farm is either by the borrower, or by members operating the farm when a loan is made to a corporation, co-operative or other entity. The complete definition can be found in the US Code of Federal Regulations 7 CFR 1943.4.
Developed world:
Perceptions of the family farm:
In developed countries the family farm is viewed sentimentally, as a lifestyle to be preserved for tradition's sake, or as a birthright. It is in these nations very often a political rallying cry against change in agricultural policy, most commonly in France, Japan, and the United States, where rural lifestyles are often regarded as desirable.
In these countries, strange bedfellows can often be found arguing for similar measures despite otherwise vast differences in political ideology. For example, Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader, both candidates for the office of President of the United States, held rural rallies together and spoke for measures to preserve the so-called family farm. On other economic matters they were seen as generally opposed, but found common ground on this one.
The social roles of family farms are much changed today. Until recently, staying in line with traditional and conservative sociology, the heads of the household were usually the oldest man followed closely by his oldest sons. The wife generally took care of the housework, child rearing, and financial matters pertaining to the farm.
However, agricultural activities have taken on many forms and change over time. Agronomy, horticulture, aquaculture, silviculture, and apiculture, along with traditional plants and animals, all make up aspects of today's family farm. Farm wives often need to find work away from the farm to supplement farm income and children sometimes have no interest in farming as their chosen field of work.
Bolder promoters argue that as agriculture has become more efficient with the application of modern management and new technologies in each generation, the idealized classic family farm is now simply obsolete, or more often, unable to compete without the economies of scale available to larger and more modern farms. Advocates argue that family farms in all nations need to be protected, as the basis of rural society and social stability.
Viability:
According to the United States Department of Agriculture, ninety-eight percent of all farms in the U.S. are family farms. Two percent of farms are not family farms, and those two percent make up fourteen percent of total agricultural output in the United States, although half of them have total sales of less than $50,000 per year.
Overall, ninety-one percent of farms in the United States are considered "small family farms" (with sales of less than $250,000 per year), and those farms produce twenty-seven percent of U.S. agricultural output.
Depending on the type and size of independently owned operation, some limiting factors are:
- Economies of scale: Larger farms are able to bargain more competitively, purchase more competitively, profit from economic highs, and weather lows more readily through monetary inertia than smaller farms.
- Cost of inputs: fertilizer and other agrichemicals can fluctuate dramatically from season to season, partially based on oil prices, a range of 25% to 200% is common over a few year period.
- oil prices: Directly (for farm machinery) and somewhat less directly (long distance transport; production cost of agrichemicals), the cost of oil significantly impacts the year-to-year viability of all mechanized conventional farms.
- commodity futures: the predicted price of commodity crops, hogs, grain, etc., can determine ahead of a season what seems economically viable to grow.
- technology user agreements: a less publicly known factor, patented GE seed that is widely used for many crops, like cotton and soy, comes with restrictions on use, which can even include who the crop can be sold to.
- wholesale infrastructure: A farmer growing larger quantities of a crop than can be sold directly to consumers has to meet a range of criteria for sale into the wholesale market, which include harvest timing and graded quality, and may also include variety, therefore, the market channel really determines most aspects of the farm decision-making.
- availability of financing: Larger farms today often rely on lines of credit, typically from banks, to purchase the agrichemicals, and other supplies needed for each growing year. These lines are heavily affected by almost all of the other constraining factors.
- government economic intervention: In some countries, notably the US and EU, government subsidies to farmers, intended to mitigate the impact on domestic farmers of economic and political activities in other areas of the economy, can be a significant source of farm income. Bailouts, when crises such as drought or the "mad cow disease" problems hit agricultural sectors, are also relied on. To some large degree, this situation is a result of the large-scale global markets farms have no alternative but to participate in.
- government and industry regulation: A wide range of quotas, marketing boards and legislation governing agriculture impose complicated limits, and often require significant resources to navigate. For example, on the small farming end, in many jurisdictions, there are severe limits or prohibitions on the sale of livestock, dairy and eggs. These have arisen from pressures from all sides: food safety, environmental, industry marketing.
- real estate prices: The growth of urban centers around the world, and the resulting urban sprawl have caused the price of centrally located farmland to skyrocket, while reducing the local infrastructure necessary to support farming, putting effectively intense pressure on many farmers to sell out.
Over the 20th century, the people of developed nations have collectively taken most of the steps down the path to this situation. Individual farmers opted for successive waves of new technology, happily "trading in their horses for a tractor", increasing their debt and their production capacity.
This in turn required larger, more distant markets, and heavier and more complex financing. The public willingly purchased increasingly commoditized, processed, shipped and relatively inexpensive food.
The availability of an increasingly diverse supply of fresh, uncured, unpreserved produce and meat in all seasons of the year (oranges in January, freshly killed steers in July, fresh pork rather than salted, smoked, or potassium-impregnated ham) opened an entirely new cuisine and an unprecedented healthy diet to millions of consumers who had never enjoyed such produce before.
These abilities also brought to market an unprecedented variety of processed foods, such as corn syrup and bleached flour. For the family farm this new technology and increasingly complex marketing strategy has presented new and unprecedented challenges, and not all family farmers have been able to effectively cope with the changing market conditions.
Local food and the organic movement:
In the last few decades there has been a resurgence of interest in organic and free range foods. A percentage of consumers have begun to question the viability of industrial agriculture practices and have turned to organic groceries that sell products produced on family farms including not only meat and produce but also such things as wheat germ breads and natural lye soaps (as opposed to bleached white breads and petroleum based detergent bars).
Others buy these products direct from family farms. The "new family farm" provides an alternative market in some localities with an array of traditionally and naturally produced products.
Such "organic" and "free-range" farming is attainable where a significant number of affluent urban and suburban consumers willingly pay a premium for the ideals of "locally produced produce" and "humane treatment of animals". Sometimes, these farms are hobby or part-time ventures, or supported by wealth from other sources. Viable farms on a scale sufficient to support modern families at an income level commensurate with urban and suburban upper-middle-class families are often large scale operations, both in area and capital requirements.
These farms, family owned and operated in a technologically and economically conventional manner, produce crops and animal products oriented to national and international markets, rather than to local markets. In assessing this complex economic situation, it is important to consider all sources of income available to these farms; for instance, the millions of dollars in farm subsidies which the United States government offers each year. As fuel prices rise, foods shipped to national and international markets are already rising in price.
United States:
In 2012, the United States had 2,039,093 family farms (as defined by USDA), accounting for 97 percent of all farms and 89 percent of census farm area in the United States. In 1988 Mark Friedberger warned, "The farm family is a unique institution, perhaps the last remnant, in an increasingly complex world, of a simpler social order in which economic and domestic activities were inextricably bound together. In the past few years, however, American agriculture has suffered huge losses, and family farmers have seen their way of life threatened by economic forces beyond their control."
However by 1981 Ingolf Vogeler argued it was too late--the American family farm had been replaced by large agribusiness corporations pretending to be family operated.
A USDA survey conducted in 2011 estimated that family farms account for 85 percent of US farm production and 85 percent of US gross farm income. Mid-size and larger family farms account for 60 percent of US farm production and dominate US production of cotton, cash grain and hogs. Small family farms account for 26 percent of US farm production overall, and higher percentages of production of poultry, beef cattle, some other livestock and hay.
Several kinds of US family farms are recognized in USDA farm typology:
Small family farms are defined as those with annual gross cash farm income (GCFI) of less than $350,000; in 2011, these accounted for 90 percent of all US farms. Because low net farm incomes tend to predominate on such farms, most farm families on small family farms are extremely dependent on off-farm income.
Small family farms in which the principal operator was mostly employed off-farm accounted for 42 percent of all farms and 15 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income was $788. Retirement family farms were small farms accounting for 16 percent of all farms and 7 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income was $5,002.
The other small family farm categories are those in which farming occupies at least 50 percent of the principal operator’s working time. These are:
- Low-sales small family farms (with GCFI less than $150,000); 26 percent of all US farms, 18 percent of total US farm area, median net farm income $3,579.
- Moderate-sales small family farms (with GCFI of $150,000 to $349,999); 5.44 percent of all US farms, 13 percent of total US farm area, median net farm income $67,986.
- Mid-size family farms (GCFI of $350,000 to $999,999); 6 percent of all US farms, 22 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income $154,538.
- Large family farms (GCFI $1,000,000 to $4,999,999); 2 percent of all US farms, 14 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income $476,234.
- Very large family farms (GCFI over $5,000,000); <1 percent of all US farms, 2 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income $1,910,454.
Family farms include not only sole proprietorships and family partnerships, but also family corporations. Family-owned corporations account for 5 percent of all farms and 89 percent of corporate farms in the United States.
About 98 percent of US family corporations owning farms are small, with no more than 10 shareholders; average net farm income of family corporate farms was $189,400 in 2012. (In contrast, 90 percent of US non-family corporations owning farms are small, having no more than 10 shareholders; average net cash farm income for US non-family corporate farms was $270,670 in 2012.)
Canada:
In Canada, the number of "family farms" cannot be inferred closely, because of the nature of census data, which do not distinguish family and non-family farm partnerships. In 2011, of Canada’s 205,730 farms, 55 percent were sole proprietorships, 25 percent were partnerships, 17 percent were family corporations, 2 percent were non-family corporations and <1 percent were other categories.
Because some but not all partnerships involve family members, these data suggest that family farms account for between about 73 and 97 percent of Canadian farms. The family farm percentage is likely to be near the high end of this range, for two reasons. The partners in a [Canadian] farm partnership are typically spouses, often forming the farm partnership for tax reasons.
Also, as in the US, family farm succession planning can use a partnership as a means of apportioning family farm tenure among family members when a sole proprietor is ready to transfer some or all of ownership and operation of a farm to offspring. Conversion of a sole proprietorship family farm to a family corporation may also be influenced by legal and financial, e.g. tax, considerations.
The Canadian Encyclopedia estimates that more than 90 percent of Canadian farms are family operations. In 2006, of Canadian farms with more than one million dollars in annual gross farm receipts, about 63 percent were family corporations and 13 percent were non-family corporations.
Europe:
Analysis of data for 59,000 farms in the 12 member states of the European Community found that in 1989, about three-quarters of the farms were family farms, producing just over half of total agricultural output.
As of 2010, there were approximately 139,900 family farms in Ireland, with an average size of 35.7 hectares per holding. (Nearly all farms in Ireland are family farms. In Ireland, average family farm income was 25,483 euros in 2012. Analysis by Teagasc (Ireland’s Agriculture and Food Development Authority) estimates that 37 percent of Irish farms are economically viable and an additional 30 percent are sustainable due to income from off-farm sources; 33 percent meet neither criterion and are considered economically vulnerable.
Newly industrialized countries:
In Brazil, there are about 4.37 million family farms. These account for 84.4 percent of farms, 24.3 percent of farmland area and 37.5 percent of the value of agricultural production.
Developing countries:
In sub-Saharan Africa, 80% of farms are family owned and worked.
Sub-Saharan agriculture was mostly defined by slash-and-burn subsistence farming, historically spread by the Bantu expansion. Permanent farming estates were established during colonialism, in the 19th to 20th century. After decolonization, white farmers in some African countries have tended to be attacked, killed or evicted, notably in South Africa and Zimbabwe.
In southern Africa, "On peasant family farms ..., cash input costs are very low, non‐household labor is sourced largely from communal work groups through kinship ties, and support services needed to sustain production are minimal." On commercial family farms, "cash input costs are high, little non‐family labour is used and strong support services are necessary."
International Year of Family Farming:
At the 66th session of the United Nations General Assembly, 2014 was formally declared to be the "International Year of Family Farming" (IYFF). The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations was invited to facilitate its implementation, in collaboration with Governments, International Development Agencies, farmers' organizations and other relevant organizations of the United Nations system as well as relevant non-governmental organizations.
The goal of the 2014 IYFF is to reposition family farming at the centre of agricultural, environmental and social policies in the national agendas by identifying gaps and opportunities to promote a shift towards a more equal and balanced development. The 2014 IYFF will promote broad discussion and cooperation at the national, regional and global levels to increase awareness and understanding of the challenges faced by smallholders and help identify efficient ways to support family farmers.
See also:
- United Nations Decade of Family Farming
- United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants
- Agricultural policy
- Agroecological restoration
- Back-to-the-land movement
- Dairy industry in the United States
- Dairy industry in the United Kingdom
- Family farm hog pen
- Farm Aid
- Gentleman's farm
- Hobby farm
- Local food
- Via Campesina
- Peasant movement
- CBC Digital Archives – What's Happening to the Family Farm?
- Found Family Farm Family farm with educational farm tours
- Dairy Farming Today Family Farm Profiles and an educational virtual farm tour
- Agriculture Resource for the secondary school teacher
- Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation's (SDC) newsletter with Focus on Smallholder Family Farming
- Family Farming Knowledge Platform (FFKP) – FAO digital archive with information on family farming from all over the world
Corporate farming:
Corporate farming is the practice of large-scale agriculture on farms owned or greatly influenced by large companies. This includes corporate ownership of farms and selling of agricultural products, as well as the roles of these companies in influencing agricultural education, research, and public policy through funding initiatives and lobbying efforts.
The definition and effects of corporate farming on agriculture are widely debated, though sources that describe large businesses in agriculture as "corporate farms" may portray them negatively.
Definitions and usage:
The varied and fluid meanings of "corporate farming" have resulted in conflicting definitions of the term, with implications in particular for legal definitions.
Legal definitions:
Most legal definitions of corporate farming in the United States pertain to tax laws, anti–corporate farming laws, and census data collection. These definitions mostly reference farm income, indicating farms over a certain threshold as corporate farms, as well as ownership of the farm, specifically targeting farms that do not pass ownership through family lines.
Common definitions:
In public discourse, the term "corporate farming" lacks a firmly established definition and is variously applied. However, several features of the term's usage frequently arise:
- It is largely used as a pejorative with strong negative connotations.
- It most commonly refers to corporations that are large-scale farms, market agricultural technologies (in particular pesticides, fertilizers, and GMO's), have significant economic and political influence, or some combination of the three.
- It is usually used in opposition to family farms and new agricultural movements, such as sustainable agriculture and the local food movement.
Family farms:
"Family farm" and "corporate farm" are often defined as mutually exclusive terms, with the two having different interests. This mostly stems from the widespread assumption that family farms are small farms while corporate farms are large-scale operations. While it is true that the majority of small farms are family owned, many large farms are also family businesses, including some of the largest farms in the US.
Additionally, there are large economic and legal incentives for family farmers to incorporate their businesses.
Contract farming:
Farming contracts are agreements between a farmer and a buyer that stipulates what the farmer will grow and how much they will grow usually in return for guaranteed purchase of the product or financial support in purchase of inputs (e.g. feed for livestock growers).
In most instances of contract farming, the farm is family owned while the buyer is a larger corporation. This makes it difficult to distinguish the contract farmers from "corporate farms," because they are family farms but with significant corporate influence. This subtle distinction left a loop-hole in many state laws that prohibited corporate farming, effectively allowing corporations to farm in these states as long as they contracted with local farm owners.
Non-farm entities:
Many people also choose to include non-farming entities in their definitions of corporate farming. Beyond just the farm contractors mentioned above, these types of companies commonly considered part of the term include Cargill, Monsanto, and DuPont Pioneer among others.
These corporations do not have production farms, meaning they do not produce a significant amount of farm products. However, their role in producing and selling agricultural supplies and their purchase and processing of farm products often leads to them being grouped with corporate farms. While this is technically incorrect, it is widely considered substantively accurate because including these companies in the term "corporate farming" is necessary to describe their real influence over agriculture.
Arguments against corporate farming:
Family farms maintain traditions including environmental stewardship and taking longer views than companies seeking profits. Family farmers may have greater knowledge about soil and crop types, terrains, weather and other features specific to particular local areas of land can be passed from parent to child over generations, which would be harder for corporate managers to grasp.
North America:
The 2012 US Census of Agriculture indicates that 5.06 percent of US farms are corporate farms. These include family corporations (4.51 percent) and non-family corporations (0.55 percent). Of the family farm corporations, 98 percent are small corporations, with 10 or fewer stockholders. Of the non-family farm corporations, 90 percent are small corporations, with 10 or fewer stockholders.
Non-family corporate farms account for 1.36 percent of US farmland area. Family farms (including family corporate farms) account for 96.7 percent of US farms and 89 percent of US farmland area; a USDA study estimated that family farms accounted for 85 percent of US gross farm income in 2011.
Other farmland in the US is accounted for by several other categories, including single proprietorships where the owner is not the farm operator, non-family partnerships, estates, trusts, cooperatives, collectives, institutional, research, experimental and American Indian Reservation farms.
In the US, the average size of a non-family corporate farm is 1078 acres, i.e. smaller than the average family corporate farm (1249 acres) and smaller than the average partnership farm (1131 acres).
In Canada, 17.4 percent of farms are owned by family corporations and 2.4 percent by non-family corporations. In Canada (as in some other jurisdictions) conversion of a sole proprietorship family farm to a family corporation can have tax planning benefits, and in some cases, the difference in combined provincial and federal taxation rates is substantial.
Also, for farm families with significant off-farm income, incorporating the farm can provide some shelter from high personal income tax rates. Another important consideration can be some protection of the corporate shareholders from liability. Incorporating a family farm can also be useful as a succession tool, among other reasons because it can maintain a family farm as a viable operation where subdivision of the farm into smaller operations among heirs might result in farm sizes too small to be viable.
Europe:
Family farms across Europe are heavily protected by EU regulations, which have been driven in particular by French farmers and the French custom splitting land inheritance between children to produce many very small family farms. In regions such as East Anglia, UK, some agribusiness is practiced through company ownership, but most large UK land estates are still owned by wealthy families such as traditional aristocrats, as encouraged by favorable inheritance tax rules.
Eurasia:
Most farming in the Soviet Union and its Eastern Bloc satellite states was collectivized. After the dissolution of those states via the revolutions of 1989 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, decades of decollectivization and land reform have occurred, with the details varying substantially by country.
In Russia, some amount of family farming has developed, but many former collective farms (kolkhozy) and state farms (sovkhozy) retained their collective/joint nature and instead became corporate farms with stock ownership, the farmers having incorporated.
Africa:
Corporate farming has begun to take hold in some African countries, where listed companies such as Zambeef, Zambia are operated by MBAs as large businesses. In some cases, this has caused debates about land ownership where shares have been bought by international investors, especially from China.
Middle East:
Some oil-rich middle east countries operate corporate farming including large-scale irrigation of desert lands for cropping, mostly through partially or fully state-owned companies.
Anti–corporate farming laws:
To date, nine US states have enacted laws that restrict or prohibit corporate farming. The first of these laws were enacted in the 1930s by Kansas and North Dakota respectively. In the 1970s, similar laws were passed in Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, South Dakota and Wisconsin.
In 1982, after failure to pass an anti–corporate farming law, the citizens of Nebraska enacted by initiative a similar amendment into their state constitution. The citizens of South Dakota similarly amended their state constitution in 1998.
All nine laws have similar content. They all restrict corporate ability to own and operate on farmland. They all outline exceptions for specific types of corporations. Generally, family farm corporations are exempted, although certain conditions may have to be fulfilled for such exemption (e.g. one or more of: shareholders within a specified degree of kinship owning a majority of voting stock, no shareholders other than natural persons, limited number of shareholders, at least one family member residing on the farm).
However, the laws vary significantly in how they define a corporate farm, and in the specific restrictions. Definitions of a farm can include any and all farm operations, or be dependent on the source of income, as in Iowa, where 60 percent of income must come from farm products.
Additionally, these laws can target a corporation's use of the land, meaning that companies can own but not farm the land, or they may outright prohibit corporations from buying and owning farmland. The precise wording of these laws has significant impact on how corporations can participate in agriculture in these states with the ultimate goal of protecting and empowering the family farm.
See also: