The recent British Society of Animal Science conference, held in Birmingham, highlighted the continued need for quality science to underpin improvements in dairy productivity and herd welfare.

By PHIL EADES

The scientific and farming communities will need to work more closely together to meet the demands that are increasingly being placed on the industry.

That was a view shared by all speakers with delegates at the recent British Society of Animal Science (BSAS) conference, who said dairying - and other livestock sectors - should make full use of the science already available and rapidly pick up new developments that will help to drive efficiency.

NFU President Minette Batters stressed that producers have to be responsive to market demands, be they about welfare, the environment, or food security. She said that, increasingly, consumers want local, sustainable, and top­ quality food that tastes great.

"This means the agricultural sector has to evolve, but it has repeatedly shown it is capable of change when given the tools to do so. Increasingly, science will be able to drive how we produce food in the UK, something that will become more important when food security is taken seriously. For years, the attitude has been that 'we are a wealthy nation and can just import want we need', but is this still true?

"UK producers have been seen to be doing a good job on welfare. They have managed to achieve a 55% reduction in antibiotic use since 2014, including an 83% reduction in critically important antibiotics for human health.

This has been achieved through farm health planning and research."

Ms Batters added that the development and uptake of disease surveillance, combined with innovation in diagnostics and preventative health care, including vaccines, will further demonstrate high-welfare farming systems.

"There is a huge opportunity to produce more food in the UK - food that is affordable and sustainable. This will require producers to search for information, and for researchers and scientists to respond to industry needs. This can only be helped by producers and researchers working more closely together."

David Hughes from London's Imperial College pointed out that turbulence for the sector is the new norm, as demonstrated by the COVID-19 pandemic, increased incidence of animal diseases, and the war in Ukraine with its impact on input costs.

Cost-of-living crisis

He said that while the cost-of-living crisis persists, and food­ price inflation remains, consumers won't be as influenced by the environment and welfare. But eventually theses aspects will become more important again, and consumers will look more closely at how food is produced.

"By 2030, the livestock and meat industries will be substantially different to how they are now and this will be influenced by consumers, retailers, and the Government. The good news is that consumers trust producers more than retailers, manufacturers or the Government. It will be vital to retain this trust, to tell the story of food production and to tie it back to farms. And good science will be a vital part of this process."

He stressed that it was important to recognise that big food businesses are driving the agenda. Tesco, for example, makes big 'corporate' promises about reducing the carbon footprint of its supply chain, yet it produces very little direct carbon. So achieving these ambitions will require the supply chain to react, right down to farm level.

David cautioned that there are still some fundamental questions / that need to be addressed, before the technologies can be successfully applied on farm.

"We have products based on seaweed, essential oils, nitrates and enzyme inhibitors, all with variable rates of success," he says. "We know some require rumen adaptation before they are effective, and some can be toxic. There are certainly issues on how they can be included practically in diets across the range of dairy­ production systems seen in the UK, for example grazing­ based systems.

"The first big question to answer is how we measure how effective they are in reducing methane in on-farm situations, as it is not something that can be currently clone. The second big question is: who will pay for these additives? It is unlikely the processors and retailers can or will absorb the costs as they fight to keep consumer milk prices clown. And how do we ascribe a value to a reduction in methane?

"Science has a huge role to play in developing effective ways to reduce methane, through a combination of diet formulation, genetics and additives. There is plenty of good research that can already be applied on farm and further work will help to answer questions regarding efficacy and measurement. But it will not be able to solve the economic issues," he adds.

BSAS' Maggie Mitchell believes the conference highlighted the need for an acceleration in the flow of practical science onto farms. "Economic, environmental and consumer pressures aren't going to go away, so the science community and supply industry needs to bring forward practical solutions.

"Producers, researchers and the supply trade need to work closely together. Research must be market driven and producers must be prepared to adopt science quickly to demonstrate they are listening to what the market wants, and are evolving their systems to meet new challenges. "But, as this conference demonstrates, there is plenty of good science akeady out there which many producers would benefit from adopting into their systems, showcasing the high standards in UK food production."