Mandatory verification of product claims and independent standards were seen as the way forward for verification, which should ideally be conducted by either independent research universities or college farms or government and their agencies. Financial incentivesįinally, respondents said financial incentives (63% farmers and 90% organisations) would be effective at increasing use of such products, with lower support, especially among farmers for regulatory requirements, supplier contracts, standard accreditations and certifications (for example, Red Tractor), voluntary commitments (industry led targets or roadmaps) or independent advice (consultants, feed advisers). The largest barriers to their use were seen as current farm practice of feeding regime (for example organic), price, consumer perception or no method of monitoring or measuring efficacy. Half of them said substantial or some changes would be needed. The majority of farmers said their livestock were either out all year, grazed with silage-based winter ration or grazed with buffer feeding and silage winter ration. The study looked at current on farm feeding regimes and whether farmers would need to make changes to introduce methane suppressing products. Nearly 70% of organisations felt consumers would definitely or maybe buy such meat but the level fell to just 44% among farmers. The consultation also wanted to gauge thoughts on consumer willingness to purchase meat or dairy products produced by cattle and sheep that are regularly fed methane suppressing feed products. Other comments included consideration of unintended consequences, adequate cost-benefit comparison, and the need for a holistic approach to reducing emissions from livestock farming. Several respondents flagged the need for further scientific evidence, with a few wishing for guaranteed long-term efficacy across varying farm systems. The consultation also asked which attributes respondents thought important when considering such products. Those with a negative view cited the necessity of these products and the need to additional livestock greenhouse gas emissions being placed on the agricultural sector, as well as their cost, naturalness and potential impact on animal welfare. The jury was out over the current perception of using such feed products in livestock diets with just 8% of farmers and 15% of organisations saying they were very positive. Some respondents outlined a wish to trial methane suppressing feed products, but said barriers such as having incompatible farm practice, the need for research on economic benefit and cost, had prevented them so far from undertaking them. There were low levels of specific trials plans within farmer supply chains. There was lower understanding of the role of propionate precursors, such as fumaric acid, malate and aspartate and antimicrobials or ionophores in this area.Īnd 45 respondents providing further information with the majority providing examples of additional feed products, including novel species of grass and legume (or changes in sward composition), biochar, fatty acids and branded products.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |