agriculture Archives - Best Food Facts

What is agriculture’s role in the issue of antibiotic resistance?

Best Food Facts — Fri, 14 Oct 2016 15:53:58 +0000

The emergence of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics is a public health concern. The United Nations recently addressed the issue when leaders from 193 countries agreed in a declaration to combat the proliferation of antibiotic resistance.

Antibiotics aren’t just vital for keeping people healthy – they also play a role in producing food. Dr. Keiji Fukuda, an American physician who serves as the World Health Organization’s Special Representative for Antimicrobial Resistance, said of the importance of having effective antibiotics for food animal production, “If we lose that ability [to treat animals when they are sick], we perhaps begin to lose the ability to have adequate food supplies in the world.”

To learn more about the issue, we went to Dr. John Prescott, professor emeritus in the Department of Pathobiology at the University of Guelph in Guelph, Ontario.

What are your thoughts on the United Nations choosing to address the antibiotic resistance issue?

Dr. Prescott: The issue of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has now generated unprecedented international interest, at the highest political levels nationally and internationally. AMR is regarded as a threat to humanity on a par with climate change. It’s reassuring and rewarding to see movement on this issue.

What is animal agriculture’s role in the issue of antibiotic resistance?

Dr. Prescott: How much is agriculture contributing to antibiotic resistance? No one really knows. There’s a finite contribution but it’s probably relatively selective, and perhaps rather hidden. It’s been a complex issue to sort out, but all the evidence points to some contribution. I hate to put numbers on it because it’s so complex but perhaps 4-to-8 percent overall.

What would be the consequences of overly-restricting antibiotic use in food animals?

Dr. Prescott: Depends on what you mean by overly-constricting. There are different types of antibiotics which are very important for animals but unimportant for people, such as the ionophores used to control coccidiosis, a disease in chickens that chiefly affects the intestines. Removal of ALL antibiotics would make intensive agriculture difficult and would considerably raise the price of animal protein. I don’t think the intention is to do this, just to use antibiotics where their benefits are clear and substantial and not associated with adverse resistance effects in humans.

What do you think is the biggest misconception among consumers on antibiotic use in agriculture?

Dr. Prescott: The biggest misconception is that agricultural use of antibiotics is responsible for most resistance in human bacterial pathogens. There is no evidence for this conception.

Is the food animal sector responding appropriately on the antibiotic resistance issue?

Dr. Prescott: I think so, generally yes, they are very concerned, knowledgeable and able to act. It’s a work in progress, since they will respond to consumer demand and regulation. Government and regulation is playing catch up in North America, and this governance aspect is more chaotic and needs far more work.

The use of antibiotics, resistance and the impact on health and the food supply are important issues that will continue to be researched and analyzed.

The post What is agriculture’s role in the issue of antibiotic resistance? appeared first on Best Food Facts.

5 Things You Didn’t Know About Farming

Best Food Facts — Mon, 08 Aug 2016 12:30:34 +0000

Cows and chickens, fields of corn, a big red barn, green tractors and dusty jeans – these are just a few of the images that come to mind when people hear the word “farming.” But for today’s farmers, there is much more to agriculture than meets the eye. We spoke with three farmers for their insights on how and why they’re committed to producing safe, nutritious and affordable food.

Here are five things we learned:

1. Most farms are owned and operated by families.
The 2012 Census of Agriculture shows that 97 percent of the 2.1 million farms in the United States are family-owned operations. Most farmers would tell you that working with their family is key to why they are so passionate about what they do.

“The biggest misconception I’ve heard would be that, as farms have gotten bigger, they have been labeled as factory farms. That we just use the land and move on. Yet, every farmer I know is very family-oriented. I love that our farm is something I can pass on to my family, a legacy, a business and a way of life that my kids love,” said William Layton, a third-generation Maryland farmer and owner of Layton’s Chance Vineyards and Winery.

Jenny Rhodes, University of Maryland Extension Educator in Agriculture and Natural Resources, who owns and operates a grain and broiler chicken farm with her family, said, “I love the whole family aspect and wanted my children to grow up the way I did. Instead of rushing home to spend a few hours with my family, we can spend time together working together. We are all family farms and at the end of the day it’s families working.”

#DYK 97 percent of the 2.1 million farms in the U.S. are family-owned operations?
Click To Tweet

2. Farming is efficient because it is high tech.
Farmers use technology to make advances in producing more food that is more safe, affordable, and produced more efficiently than ever before. Layton said, “Many people have an idea of the old-fashioned farmer, but in reality I spend half of my time in the office making GPS maps for what is going on in the field at any given point. We also have tractors that drive themselves, so we are very technology-based, and technology creates efficiency.”

“Everything you do in farming has to be efficient and sustainable and I love working to improve the resources on our farm so that we can do that,” explained Jenny Schmidt, a registered dietitian and Maryland farmer, whose family produces corn, soybeans, wheat, barley, hay, tomatoes, green beans and wine grapes. “When I talk to people about pesticide usage on our farm, I explain that our sprayer for our tomatoes, green beans, wheat, corn and soybeans sprays at the rate of 15-20 gallons per acre for herbicides. It is a 750-gallon tank so using 15 gallons per acre, this sprayer can cover 50 acres per tank – that’s only 0.04 ounces per square foot. This type of efficiency wouldn’t be possible without technology. Also, many people think we are dousing our fields with pesticides, but that would be inefficient. Spraying isn’t dousing.” Learn more about how the “dose makes the poison” in pesticide usage in “Should You Be Concerned with Pesticides On Produce?”.

3. Farmers are passionate about producing food.
“The thing that I love most about farming is working hard and seeing the results of that hard work. At harvest, I love quitting at dark after a 14-hour day and seeing all that I’ve harvested right in front of me. It’s a great feeling to see that,” said Layton.

“Farming is a passionate job and requires patience to weather through the ups and downs. Ultimately, I love being able to care for the soil and land with the available resources and set the stage for the next generation,” said Schmidt.

Farming is a lifestyle, not just a job. It is 24 hours a day, seven days a week and every day of the year! (Yes, this means vacations are nearly impossible to take!)

4. Farmers use a variety of production methods.
Debates about “organic” and “conventional” crops suggest there are only two ways to grow food: a “good” way and a “bad” way. But an important question to think about is, “What is the best way to feed a growing population, while reducing the amount of resources required?” To address this, farming will need multiple approaches, not just one.

“Many farmers don’t want to be seen as one thing; for me, I want to be seen as both holistic and sustainable. For example, there are trade-offs with all production methods. And each provide different benefits: it’s not an either/or, it’s more about melding the practices together,” added Schmidt. Want to learn more about organic versus conventional? Check out “Organic versus Conventional Foods: Is There a Nutritional Difference?”.

5. There are many ways to become involved with agriculture.
Farm and ranch families make up just two percent of the U.S. population, while most people are at least three generations removed from agriculture. However, the farmers we chatted with all agreed that getting involved in agriculture is for everyone.

Rhodes said it’s important to know what your goal is: Do you want to learn more? Do you want to own your own farm? “After you figure out your goals, then you can decide how to reach them through things like farm tours, working with different national councils, talking with your University extension programs and, of course, talking with the farmers in your area.”

“Social media is a great place to start and to seek out transparent farmers if you have questions about food. I love sharing information about my farm and interesting news articles that are related to the happenings on my farm,” Schmidt added.

Layton concluded, “Agritourism, corn mazes, farm stands, community-supported agriculture (CSA) programs, farmers markets – these are all ways to connect with farmers. Talk with the farmers – they are happy to chat with you! I give tours twice a day every day at the winery and people ask questions not only about the grapes and wines but about our crops, too. I love answering these questions.”

Our food supply is abundant, affordable overall and among the world’s safest, thanks in large part to the efficiency and productivity of America’s farm and ranch families. Want to learn more about growing food? Reach out to a local farmer or let us know and we can connect you with one!

The post 5 Things You Didn’t Know About Farming appeared first on Best Food Facts.

How Much Pesticides Are Used on Crops?

Best Food Facts — Fri, 05 Aug 2016 16:34:23 +0000

Growing up, we were told at least a thousand times to eat our fruits and vegetables. While we know they are good for us, there have been questions about their safety because of pesticide use. A pesticide is defined as a substance used for destroying insects or other organisms harmful to plants or animals. We asked Dr. Ruth MacDonald, chair of the Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition at Iowa State University, why farmers use pesticides.

Why do farmers use pesticides? A food science expert, a registered dietitian and a farmer explain.
Click To Tweet

“Modern pesticides have been developed that target very specific plant or insect metabolic pathways to reduce damage to plants or humans,” Dr. MacDonald said. “How they are used also varies greatly by the way they work… both weeds and insects can do significant damage to a crop.”

Dr. MacDonald added that in general, farmers try to use as few pesticides as possible and the United States Department of Agriculture carefully monitors pesticide use. Just how much pesticide is used varies by the crop and the purpose. Jennie Schmidt, registered dietitian and farmer, said the amount is probably less than you think. “Spraying isn’t dousing like many people believe,” Schmidt said. “In fact, what many people don’t know is that when they see a farmer spraying their crops, the majority of what they are spraying is actually water.”

William Layton, a third-generation Maryland farmer and owner of Layton’s Chance Vineyards and Winery, explained that on his farm, they have been working for generations to learn about plants, pesticides and what happens in the soil. “Farmers are very conscious about what they put on the land. Pesticides don’t hurt soil; they are taking care of the things that hurt crops,” he said.

Organic and conventional are two methods of farming that generate a lot of conversation and debate in regards to chemicals used and overall comparisons. What’s the difference between these two?

Dr. MacDonald said, “Farmers must follow the National Organic Program guidelines to be certified to produce organic foods. In practice, there is actually a great deal of commonality between organic farming and conventional farming.”

One thing they have in common is that both methods use pesticides. Sometimes it is believed that organic fruits and vegetables are healthier because they don’t use pesticides, but that’s not the case.

“Agriculture of any kind requires effective use of pesticides to ensure a high quality product,” said MacDonald. She added, “Organic farmers battle the same pests as conventional farmers. Therefore, chemicals are needed to produce a crop… Generally, natural substances are allowed and synthetic substances are not.”

Dr. MacDonald said foods that are grown using conventional methods are safe. “There are very limited reports of health effects caused by pesticide exposure in humans,” she said. “The main reports are of acute overexposure from accidents. The types and amounts of pesticides used in the U.S. today are well monitored and have been tested for safety.”

That’s why experts encourage individuals to eat more fruits and vegetables – whether they are conventionally or organically raised – because they are all safe and nutritious.

If you’re concerned that pesticide residue on fruits and vegetables may cause health problems, we’ve put together this infographic to represent just how much pesticide is used and how many servings of an individual product you can have in a single setting without any effects.

The post How Much Pesticides Are Used on Crops? appeared first on Best Food Facts.

“Small farms and increased consumer purchases of locally-produced food products are better for the future of American agriculture and the environment.”

Best Food Facts — Tue, 29 Oct 2013 20:56:58 +0000

Many consumers are nostalgic for the bucolic scenes associated with the small farms of generations past and have embraced farmers markets and other opportunities to buy their food from “local” producers. Consumers might be surprised to find that this approach may not provide the long-term benefits to agriculture or the environment as they believe.

_{True or Not? “Small farms and increased consumer purchases of locally-produced food products are better for the future of American agriculture and the environment.”}

Jude Capper, PhD says:

Small farms and increased consumer purchases of locally-produced food products are better for the future of American agriculture and the environment.

The popular agrarian vision of US livestock farming involves a small family farm with animals grazing on sunlit pasture, a farmer in bib coveralls and a gable-roofed red barn in the background. Self-proclaimed food experts and activist organizations often embrace this vision, suggesting that a return to the agricultural systems of yesteryear will provide solutions to current economic, environmental and nutritional issues ranging from the energy crisis (Pollan, 2008) to global warming (Koneswaran and Nierenberg, 2008) and obesity (Pimentel et al., 2008).

During the 20th century, average farm size increased from 146 acres to 487 acres and US farm numbers decreased from 5.7 million to 1.9 million (USDA/NASS, 2009). Small farms account for 91 percent of all farms, however, due to low productivity, these farms only account for 23% of total US agricultural production (Hoppe et al., 2010). Interestingly, in recent years the agricultural industry has seen a reduction in the number of medium-sized farms (Ahearn et al., 2005) while the numbers of large and small farms have increased. It is worth noting that despite changes in farm size, 98% of US farms are currently classified by the USDA as family farms, and these farms account for 85% of production (USDA/ERS, 2007). Just as moving from draft horse-power to mechanized tractors and equipment allowed farmers to produce greater crop yields using considerably less manual labor and time, increased farm size allows for financial and physical economies of scale (McDonald and McBride, 2009) and greater profit margins (MacDonald et al., 2006, USDA/ERS, 2007). Large and small farms fulfill differing roles – large farms produce significant volumes of food for widespread consumption, whereas small farms often cater to niche markets or are considered retirement/lifestyle farms (USDA/ERS, 1999), with heavy reliance on off-farm income (Hoppe et al., 2007).

Individual farms may differ in terms of efficiency, but the overall effect of changing from small-scale to large-scale production is to improve productivity (McDonald and McBride, 2009). This is exemplified by the poultry and swine industries, where vertical integration has allowed for specialization and improved efficiency within every tier of the production system (Ahearn et al., 2005). Within the non-integrated dairy and beef industries, increasing farm size has also had a positive effect on productivity. The USDA National Animal Health and Monitoring Service reported an 3,965 lb increase in annual milk production per cow in large herds (>500 cows) vs. small herds (<100 cows). This is largely driven by specialized management – a 100 cow dairy herd may have two or three farm workers (owners or employees) who are responsible for all tasks, a 1,000 cow herd can employ specialized labor to improve the efficiency of each component of the system. Moving back towards an agricultural system containing many small farms would have a major impact on the amount of labor required per unit of food produced – it is no coincidence that as average farm size increased, the percentage of the population employed in agriculture decreased from 39% in 1900 to less than 2% in 1990 (USDA/NASS, 2009). The question thus remains, in a society largely disconnected from agricultural production, if farm size regresses, where will the extra labor be found?

Productivity is a crucial contributor to the environmental impact of food production. Regressing from a highly efficient feedlot beef system to a low-input pasture-based system may appear to be more eco-friendly, but due to reduced growth rates, pasture-finishing increases energy use by 2.8x, methane production by 2.5x and land use by 12.6x per lb of beef (Capper et al., 2009a). Over the thirty years between 1977 and 2007, beef production (expressed as lb beef per animal slaughtered) increased from 604 lb to 774 lb, allowing the industry to produce 2.9 billion lb more beef from 5 million fewer slaughter animals. Within the dairy industry, annual milk yield per cow increased from 4,800 lb in 1944 to 20,300 lb in 2007 allowing 59% more milk to be produced using 64% fewer cows. Reducing the herd size required to produce a set amount of milk or beef reduces resource use and GHG emissions per gallon of milk or lb of beef. Indeed, the productivity improvement between 1944 and 2007 reduced the US dairy industry’s total carbon footprint by 41% (Capper et al., 2009b). As noted by a recent FAO report, in order to reduce environmental impact there exists “a need for continued efficiency gains in resource use for livestock production” (Steinfeld et al., 2006).

The reduction in productivity (yield per acre, per animal or growth rate) associated with small farms increases the environmental impact of food production. This would be further exacerbated if the current popularity of ‘locovorism’, i.e. purchasing food produced within the local area (often defined as a 100 mile radius from home) continues to grow. Relying upon ‘food miles’ (i.e. the distance food travels from production facility to consumer) as a measure of environmental impact has significant negative consequences, as transport accounts for a relatively small percentage of total energy use and GHG emissions and is directly dependent upon the productivity of the system. Capper et al. (2009a) compared the fuel use associated with purchasing one dozen eggs under three scenarios: the local chain grocery store supplied by a large-scale production facility some miles away; 2) a farmer’s market supplied by a source much closer than the grocery store’s source; or 3) directly from a local poultry farm. The total ‘food miles’ associated with the grocery store eggs were considerably higher (1,603 miles) compared to the farmers market (186 miles) or local poultry farm (54 miles) and the fuel efficiency was lowest in the grocery store example which employed a refrigerated tractor-trailer compared to the local farm example (average passenger car. However, the productivity of the refrigerated trailer as a mode of transport (23,400 dozen egg capacity) compared to the passenger car reduced the fuel use per dozen eggs from 2.4 gallons when buying from the local poultry farm, to 0.63 gallons for the farmers market to 0.14 gallons for the grocery store eggs.

Changes in the structure and regional location of different food production systems have occurred in response to differing land resources, animal species and climate (Diamond, 2005). Moving towards a small farm system whereby all foods are produced locally would mean that consumer food choice would be severely curtailed and food production decoupled from resource availability. The potential inefficiencies associated with such a system would have a significant environmental and economic impact as well as retarding the ability of US agricultural producers to fulfill the population’s demand for food.

The small-scale, extensive farming systems of yesteryear were ideally suited to supply the milk and meat requirements of the US population in the 1930’s and 1940’s. As the population grows and competes with agriculture for land, energy and water resources, the need to improve efficiency and productivity becomes ever more crucial. This can only be achieved by continuing specialization and intensification. Small farms will continue to occupy a small niche within food production, but are not a sustainable or practical solution for the economic and environmental issues currently facing US agriculture.

_References

_{Ahearn, M. C., P. Korb, and D. Banker. 2005. Industrialization and contracting in US agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 37:347-364.}

_{Capper, J. L., R. A. Cady, and D. E. Bauman. 2009a. Demystifying the environmental sustainability of food production. in Proceedings of the Cornell Nutrition Conference. Cornell University, Syracuse, NY.}

_{Capper, J. L., R. A. Cady, and D. E. Bauman. 2009b. The environmental impact of dairy production: 1944 compared with 2007. J. Anim. Sci. 87:2160-2167.}

_{Diamond, J. 2005. Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies. W. W. Norton & Co., New York, NY.}

_{Hoppe, R. A., P. Korb, E. J. O’Donoghue, and D. E. Banker. 2007. Structure and Finances of U.S. Farms – Family Farm Report 2007. USDA/ERS, Washington, DC.}

_{Hoppe, R. A., J. M. MacDonald, and P. Korb. 2010. Small Farms in the United States: Persistence Under Pressure. USDA/ERS, Washington, DC.}

_{Koneswaran, G. and D. Nierenberg. 2008. Global farm animal production and global warming: impacting and mitigating climate change. Environ. Health Perspect. 116:578-582.}

_{MacDonald, J. M., R. A. Hoppe, and D. Banker. 2006. Growing Farm Size and the Distribution of Farm Payments. USDA/ERS, Washington, DC.}

_{McDonald, J. M. and W. D. McBride. 2009. The Transformation of U.S. Livestock Agriculture: Scale, Efficiency, and Risks. USDA/ERS, Washington, DC.}

_{Pimentel, D., S. Williamson, C. E. Alexander, O. Gonzalez-Pagan, C. Kontak, and S. E. Mulkey. 2008. Reducing energy inputs in the US food system. Hum. Ecol. 36:459-471.}

_{Pollan, M. 2008. Farmer in Chief. in New York Times. New York, NY.}

_{Steinfeld, H., P. Gerber, T. Wassenaar, V. Castel, M. Rosales, and C. de Haan. 2006. Livestock’s Long Shadow – Environmental Issues and Options. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.}

_{USDA/ERS. 1999. Agricultural Outlook: What Makes a Small Farm Successful? USDA/ERS, Washington, DC.}

_{USDA/ERS. 2007. America’s Diverse Family Farms. USDA/ERS, Washington, DC.}

_{USDA/NASS. 2009. Trends in U.S. Agriculture. http://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Trends_in_U.S._Agriculture/. Accessed: March 2010.}

_{Image: “DSC01426 – Ross Farm” by Dennis Jarvisis licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.}

The post “Small farms and increased consumer purchases of locally-produced food products are better for the future of American agriculture and the environment.” appeared first on Best Food Facts.

What Do Cows Eat?

Best Food Facts — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 14:47:13 +0000

Ever wonder what went into the steak that winds up on your dinner table? It’s common knowledge that corn is a dietary staple for food animals, but what else do they eat? We contacted Dr. Danelle Bickett-Weddle, lecturer and associate director at the Center for Food Security and Public Health, Iowa State University, to find out more.

What, in general, are diets of beef cattle comprised of?

Dr. Bickett-Weddle: “The common ingredient across all beef cattle diets is grain – typically corn or corn products – as it is an excellent source of energy (calories) for animals. However, different animal species have different digestive systems and can utilize other feedstuffs for energy, protein, vitamins and minerals. As living beings, animals have a daily requirement for energy, protein, vitamins and minerals. Animals such as cattle, sheep, goats and bison are called ruminants, which means their stomachs have multiple compartments to facilitate their unusual digestive system (more on this later). These animals can utilize forages like hay, corn silage and oat silage as an energy and protein source. Silage is created by harvesting a crop while it is still green, chopping it finely and packing it tightly in a silo for storage. Protein sources for all animals can also come from soybeans, canola, sunflowers and many other plants. Those also provide essential amino acids that animals need for growth and development. Vitamins and minerals come from natural plant sources, organic sources (limestone, bicarbonate), and many other supplements, much like people meet their daily vitamin and mineral requirements.”

We saw a report about cows eating candy. Should consumers be concerned about the use of alternative ingredients such as candy and baked goods in these diets?

Dr. Bickett-Weddle: “Candy and other baked goods provide an energy source for animals, just like they do for people. However, it is the balance of those energy sources with the right amount of protein and minerals that ensures animals meet their daily requirements for growth and development. Just like too much candy on Halloween upsets a child’s stomach (or their parents’!), too much of one thing in an animal’s diet can have the same effect. That is why so much care goes into growing feed, harvesting it at the right time, and offering a balance of different nutrients to our animals to meet their needs.

How animals digest feed is different than humans – let’s look at the digestive tract of cattle for instance. They have a four-compartment stomach, of which the biggest section is the rumen. The rumen is an amazing digestion environment – think of it as a fermentation vat, much like what is used to brew beer or whiskey. The rumen has millions of living microbes in it that need to be fed. Rumen microbes can utilize a variety of sugars, such as the fines from cereal production or whole candy bars, that would otherwise be a waste product filling up our landfills. Their rumen microbes turn it into sugar that can be utilized by their body for growth and development. Those microbes require a balance of feedstuffs though – they also need forages and protein. It is the byproducts of rumen microbe digestion of forages, sugars, grains, starches, and proteins that provide the essential nutrients a cow or other ruminant (sheep, goats, bison) needs for energy and growth.

Much like a master brewer needs to ensure there is the right mixture of yeast and sugars, a farmer ensures the animals receive the right balance of feed ingredients for proper muscle development.”

Are there regulations covering what can be fed to animals raised for food?

Dr. Bickett-Weddle: “Yes, there are regulations on animal feed. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is in charge of inspecting feed mills to ensure quality ingredients are going into animal feed. There are regulations on what types of feed can be given to different animal species. For instance, because of concerns over Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (sometimes called Mad Cow Disease), the U.S. has banned feeding ruminant products back to ruminants since 1997. Nutritionists, livestock producers and feed company personnel have a shared responsibility to ensure good quality feed is offered to our food-producing animals.”

Want to hear from farmers directly about what they feed their turkeys, cattle, sheep and dairy cows? Check out these videos!

Annie Link, a Dairy Farmer from Michigan:

Kent Meschke, a turkey farmer from Minnesota:

Abby Nichols, a cattle farmer from Indiana:

Stan Poe II, a sheep farmer from Indiana:

Stephanie Dykshorn, a dairy farmer from Iowa:

Bret Schapman, a cattle farmer from Michigan:

_{“20130712-AMS-LSC-0436” by U.S. Department of Agriculture is licensed under CC BY 2.0.}

The post What Do Cows Eat? appeared first on Best Food Facts.