Sponsored by
Peter Kendall: Let's have joined-up thinking on climate change... and not more hot air from politicians
IT may be that MEP and vegetarian Edward McMillan-Scott – and celebrities like Sir Paul McCartney – feel meat should be off the menu in the interests of climate change, but if there's one thing guaranteed to ruin anyone's appetite, it is the hotpotch of half-baked ideas being dished out in the run up to the Copenhagen summit.
Does anyone really believe that decimating Britain's livestock industry (Yorkshire Post, November 27) is the answer to an incredibly complex subject like climate change, as the MEP intimated?
Or that browbeating consumers into swapping a fillet steak or lamb chop for the vegetarian alternative, whatever that might be, is the answer to the obesity epidemic?
There is still a wide ranging debate about climate change and its causes, but what everyone surely does agree on is that there are many factors at play and simplistic, ill-thought out claims and statements are unhelpful in
the extreme.
It is imperative that in tackling our emissions here in the United Kingdom we do not simply export production and emissions to other countries – which would then import their foods into this country.
In view of that, we need to draw a distinction between the issues around meat production elsewhere in the world, and the ways in which our agricultural industry is already stepping up to the mark in making its contribution to the nation's greenhouse gas emissions target for 2018-2020.
The United Kingdom's livestock industry is already making real improvements in nutrient management, for example, the Environmental Plan for Dairy Farming and the Milk and Meat Roadmaps. This has a direct impact on emissions.
Agricultural production is responsible for about seven per cent of the country's overall greenhouse gas emissions.
The food chain as a whole is sometimes blamed for as much as 18 to 20 per cent of Britain's greenhouse gas emissions, but much of this total arises "beyond the farm gate" in food processing, consumption or waste disposal, or indirectly through changes in land use attributed to agriculture elsewhere in the world.
Nitrous oxide emissions in England have decreased by 21.5 per cent since 1990. Overall fertiliser use in agriculture has reduced by some 30 per cent in recent years, with a reduction in nitrogen application to dairy farms of 46 per cent.
Methane emissions from production in the United Kingdom have already fallen by more than half since 1990, and practical measures to further reduce emissions through improving efficiency are being considered.
Many farmers are interested in the potential of anaerobic digestion, for example, which cuts down on the methane emissions of manures and slurries and produces a renewable energy source.
To quote figures on erosion from US livestock production systems, or cite issues such as deforestation, is misleading in the context of this country's livestock production. Much of the production of beef and lamb in Britain takes place in the hills and uplands, and makes use of land unsuited for any other alternative agricultural production, as well as directly contributing to the beauty and biodiversity of these treasured landscapes.
These landscapes, along with the large swathes of grassland of all types, are also essential for carbon sequestration – effectively acting as a giant sink for CO2 – which would be lost to the atmosphere should this grassland also be lost, without the grazing livestock which makes use of it.
As with so many issues, policy-makers have a duty to recognise the unintended consequences of their actions; in this instance, the destruction of our livestock industry would change our landscapes, damage the rural economy irrevocably and have real and lasting impacts on biodiversity, all with a negligible impact on climate change. A bit more joined-up thinking in Whitehall would also be welcome – while the car industry is, rightly, encouraged by Government to invest in smart technology which reduces emissions, why is that enlightened approach not rolled out to agriculture?
It is no coincidence, of course, that many of those making the loudest claims about livestock production and its impact on both climate change and our health are vegetarians. Choosing to eat meat or not is just that, a choice, but it should not be a licence to make wild claims, nor to ignore the fact that meat and dairy play an important and recognised role as part of a healthy diet.
I believe absolutely that agriculture in all its forms has a vital role to play in tackling the challenges that face modern society, whether climate change, food security, environmental management or healthy eating.
To fulfil that role, our industry will need the solutions that a properly-funded research and development programme can and should deliver, and the continuing support of the British public in looking for and buying its produce – easily done by looking for the Red Tractor.
What is does not need is more hot air from pop stars and politicians.
Peter Kendall is president of the National Farmers' Union.
Email to a friend
Print this page- Leeds lose Ward to Palace: Is there anyone they can afford now?
- Sheffield Wednesday leaving it late to hijack Leeds United over Ward
- As Snodgrass dithers over Leeds, Warnock throws a lifeline
- Ball is in Leeds United’s court over contract - Snodgrass
- Police turning blind eye to Asian voter fraud, says MP
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Yorkshire
Saturday 26 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 8 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 17 mph
Wind direction: East
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 13 mph
Wind direction: East
