The Ecologist




 
Bottle of milk

Modern dairy farming has become increasingly removed from the traditional image of small dairy farms dotting the countryside

More articles about
Related Articles

Special report Milk: why the white stuff leaves a bad taste in the mouth

Tom Levitt

13th April, 2011

Unlike tea and sugar, the fresh milk we drink with our cuppa is likely to come from farms in the UK. But as Tom Levitt reports, there are still serious environmental and animal welfare problems associated with the UK dairy sector

Animal welfare campaigners claimed it as a victory but in truth the recent defeat of plans to build a gigantic 8,100-cow dairy farm near the village of Nocton in Lincolnshire had nothing to do with the animals.

The main obstacles from the start had been the Environment Agency and Anglian Water who could not see how the farm could safely dispose of the tens of thousands of tonnes of slurry expected to be produced by the cows every year. As such, with a major acquifer nearby, they feared it posed an 'unacceptable risk to groundwater supplies'.

Although many feared the Nocton farm, if accepted, would lead to an influx of US-style mega dairy farms, the reality is the UK has been moving towards larger scale and zero-grazing units of the type seen in US states like California for some years. As a recent Ecologist investigation showed, the dairy farms there are so vast they spread over thousands of acres in enormous open air sheds, surrounded by mountains of feed and million-gallon pools of slurry.

In the UK, modern dairy farming has, in the past two generations, become increasingly removed from the traditional image of small dairy farms dotting the countryside. In fact around 60 per cent of the milk consumed in the UK now comes from farms with 150 or more cows and it's changing fast. As dairy farmer and activist David Handley told the Ecologist, 8,000 cow units today could well be 16,000 cow units in 10 years time. 'Everybody is now trying to cut costs and unless you can control costs and go big by scaling up with cows you won't last.'

Expansion

Unsurprisingly, this pressure to expand has created a number of environmental and welfare problems, which even the industry itself admits are becoming critical. In the high-yielding breeds used to produce milk today, a cow produces more than ten times the milk she would need to feed her calf. The push to create higher and higher yielding breeds is leading to an increase in disease and illness amongst cows that simply cannot cope. The lifespan of a dairy cow is now often less than three lactations.

Industry analysts DairyCo say the pressure to keep yields high means farmers face a 'daily dilemma' about whether to maintain and treat, or cull a cow with health problems. Culling rates in UK herds are now between 18-35 per cent a year, according to DairyCo, with the proportion of cows culled increasing with herd size and milk yield. Likewise, cow mortality also increases with herd size.

'Long term genetic selection for high milk yield is the major factor causing poor welfare, in particular health problems, in dairy cows,' concluded a report from the European Food Safety Authority on the welfare of dairy cows. 'The milk yield of dairy cows has risen steadily over the last thirty years in Europe with approximately 50 per cent of this increase estimated to be attributable to genetic selection for milk production efficiency...the genetic component underlying milk yield has also been found to be positively correlated with the incidence of lameness, mastitis, reproductive disorders and metabolic disorders.'

As well as the welfare ethics this also has an environmental impact, as Tara Garnett from the Food Climate Research Network (FCRN) points out. 'If a cow goes to slaughter and you have to rear a new heifer in its place then that cow is going to be eating lots of protein and producing lots of methane for two years before it produces any milk, which is in a sense a waste of methane.'

Waste and pollution

Perhaps, given this insight, it is less surprising to know that the dairy sector now accounts for 4 per cent of the world's total greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). The vast majority of those emissions, 93 per cent, take place on the farm from the cows themselves and from demand for animal feed, fertiliser and pesticides.

The high-yielding dairy cows require huge amounts of animal feed. Under its original plans, the Nocton farm was going to require 14 HGV deliveries a day for animal feed and milk collection. Increasingly, this animal feed, particularly the protein element of it required by high-yielding cows, is being imported as soya. More than a million tonnes of soya is being imported and fed to livestock in the UK every year and 98 per cent of this is coming from South America. Campaign groups say the expansion of soya production there is linked to deforestation in the Amazon and grassland regions of Brazil. The vast soya plantations in neighbouring Paraguay have been found responsible for a host of local social and ecological problems including the forced eviction of rural communities and excessive use of pesticides.

As the Environment Agency's objections to the Nocton proposal reveal, there are also a number of ecological problems surrounding modern dairy farming in the UK. In the main the problem is about the slurry waste and the problems dairy farms have in disposing of it, without it being washed off by rainfall into water sources. In 2002, Defra estimated that agriculture was responsible for about 50 per cent of phosphorus inputs to surface waters. Excess levels of phosphorus in water contributes to the process known as eutrophication, whereby certain species, for example algae, thrive and rapidly begin to dominant the river at the expense of other species, including fish. Anglian Water admitted it spent £80 million between 2005-10 in treating nitrate-polluted water, with 60 per cent of this pollution attributed to agriculture.

In some cases the pollution has led to criminal prosecutions. The Environment Agency has estimated that the dairy sector accounts for half of all its recorded agricultural pollution incidents. Even one of the farmers behind the Nocton proposal had a previous conviction for polluting a stream with milk waste and killing fish.

Health issues

In the US, concerns have been raised from residents living near large-scale dairy farms of an influx of flies and higher levels of particulate pollution. Dairy counties in the US such as Tulare and Bakersfield have equal or sometimes higher rates of ozone and fine particulate matter than the smog-infested city of Los Angeles. In its objections to the Nocton dairy, the Environment Agency said there were, 'significant uncertainties regarding the impacts and control of odour from the operation of the dairy, and associated land spreading, and its effects on residential amenity'.

The health problems of high-yielding dairy cows and use of antibiotics is now also being linked to antimicrobrial resistence both in the UK and around the world. The Health Protection Agency (HPA) say the widespread use of antibiotics in animals is thought to have led to resistant strains of some bacteria being transmitted to humans through food. It has also said that a new type of antibiotic resistance in E. coli had spread to more than one in three dairy farms in England and Wales. 'The intensification of agriculture...and dairy cattle pushed harder and harder to produce more milk, has led farmers to rely on hugely important antibiotics to treat the diseases this is causing. We are now getting the evidence that this has real implications for human health too,' says Compassion in World Farming CEO Philip Lymbery.

Dairy is not necessarily the healthy choice for humans either. Although the dairy industry has been very successful in lobbying on the nutritional benefits of milk and dairy products, there is a significant amount of research about its negative health effect, including links to diabetes and prostrate cancer. Many nutritionists now argue that fish and green vegetables are a much better source of calcium than milk. Fearing the consequences of losing its 'healthy' tag, some of the world's biggest dairy companies joined forces in 2006 to form the Global Dairy Platform. Its objective continues to be to fight any attempts to question the health benefits of dairy and increase demand for milk and dairy around the world.

DOWNLOAD THE FULL 'WHAT'S IN YOUR CUPPA?' SPECIAL INVESTIGATION HERE (PDF)

 

 

Add to StumbleUpon
  READ MORE...
NEWS ANALYSIS
Special report PG Tips and Lipton tea hit by 'sexual harassment and poor conditions'
Unilever and the Rainforest Alliance deny female employees at the Kericho tea plantation in Kenya are subjected to sexual harassment. But Dutch research outfit SOMO paints a very different picture of life for some working at the plantation? Verity Largo visits Kenya to investigate
NEWS ANALYSIS
Special report Revealed: the bitter taste of Cambodia’s sugar boom
Sugar may seem innocuous enough, but sweet-toothed Western consumers could be fuelling conflict between poor farming communities and big business with every spoonful. Sam Campbell reports from Phnom Penh
NEWS ANALYSIS
Special report Milk: why the white stuff leaves a bad taste
Unlike tea and sugar, the fresh milk we drink with our cuppa is likely to come from farms in the UK. But as Tom Levitt reports, there are still serious environmental and animal welfare problems associated with the UK dairy sector
NEWS ANALYSIS
Special report Sugar: why our favourite sweetener is not so sweet
Sugar can be produced from both sugar beet and sugarcane. Sugarcane production is of particular concern in terms of environmental degradation and human rights abuses, reports William McLennan
NEWS ANALYSIS
Special report Environmental damage and human rights abuses blight global tea sector
Human rights violations have been reported at plantations in virtually all major tea producing countries, while tea growing itself has a profound effect on the local environment. William McLennan reports

 

Previous Articles...

Users Comments

Re: Milk: why the white stuff leaves a bad taste in the mouth
Posted By JBryans 1 April 13, 2011 07:38:29 PM

Dairy products have NOT been shown to cause diabetes or cancer. These chronic diseases are complex and involve a plethora of genetic and environmental factors. As for calcium - dairy calcium is highly bioavailable i.e. it's present in milk in a form that the body can easily absorb. There are of course other sources of calcium in the diet and these include green leafy vegetables and fish where you eat the bones such as sardines. Green leafy vegetables are nutritious foods and should be consumed, however, these plant sources of calcium typically contain acids such as phytates and oxalates which bind calcium making it less available than the calcium from dairy foods. Fish is also a very nutritious food but an individual would have to eat a large amount of sardines to get the same amount of calcium as they would get from a glass of milk! One of the best ways for any person to meet their nutrient needs is to eat foods from all food groups including dairy foods. Dr J Bryans The Dairy Council

Re: Milk: why the white stuff leaves a bad taste in the mouth
Posted By fmcreynolds 1 April 14, 2011 10:34:05 AM

The dairy industry in the UK takes its environmental responsibilities very seriously. Through the Dairy Roadmap, dairy farmers, processors and retailers have made public and measurable commitments to reducing their impact across a wide range of environmental issues. The third Dairy Roadmap report, to be published in a month’s time, will demonstrate that the dairy sector continues to achieve significant improvements, including reductions in emissions, improved use of fertiliser and a reduction in pollution incidents. Dairy processors have also established an environmental benchmarking scheme and in 2010 once again beat the Climate Change Agreement target set by the Government for reductions in energy usage. Your readers should also be aware that the 4% of GHG emissions figure quoted in the article refers not just to dairy cows, but also to the production of beef from the dairy sector, which accounts for almost 60% of total beef production. Removing the beef component reduces the figure to 2.7%. In Western Europe, this figure is smaller still, as efficient production helps the EU supply 25% of the world’s milk for just 15% of the total emissions. It is clear that dairying has an impact on the environment, but the dairy sector understands its responsibility to address these issues, and has already achieved significant improvements. Fergus McReynolds Dairy UK

Re: Milk: why the white stuff leaves a bad taste in the mouth
Posted By DairyCo 1 April 14, 2011 01:58:17 PM

The idea that large dairy farms could be a nail in the coffin for pasture-based farmers is a myth. Whilst there is a significant number of dairy farmers who have left the industry, research funded by British dairy farmers shows that the reasons given do not include competition from large dairy farms. Yes, there is a long-term trend towards fewer, larger farms in Britain as dairy farmers become more efficient but the dairy industry is incredibly diverse. There are more than 13,000 dairy farms in Britain, producing more than 30 million litres of milk a day, so even large scale farms would produce a tiny proportion of this. We import more dairy products than we export which shows there is plenty of scope to increase UK milk production, given our costs of production are competitive internationally. It is also incorrect to imply that the current UK breeding strategy is leading to an increase in disease and illness. In fact, the reverse is true. Cow health, welfare and longevity have been a focus of the national breeding strategy for the past 10 years and Britain is acknowledged as a world leader in this area. The average lifespan of dairy cows is 6.5 years and data suggests that the incidence of lameness and mastitis in cattle has been declining as a result of measures introduced by British dairy farmers. The article states that the decision to cull or treat is a daily occurrence on dairy farms. Regardless of size of farm, dairy farmers take this difficult decision very seriously in consultation with vets and other experts and rarely is it such a stark black and white choice. In terms of environmental impact, official figures show that greenhouse gases from dairy farms account for less than 2% of the UK’s annual total greenhouse gas emissions, and 2.7% of global green house gas emissions – not 4%. The amount of soya consumed by British dairy cows is very small - less than 0.2% of the world’s total annual production. The proportion of soya in UK diets should decline further as alternative protein sources are increasingly used. Dairy farmers take their responsibility towards the environment very seriously and all farms, large or small, have to comply with legislation which controls the quantity and timing of slurry being spread on the land. These restrictions on spreading also protect the environment from risk of pollution of air, soil and water. There is no risk to human health as any gasses produced following spreading are quickly diluted by the air. It is misleading to claim that there is a connection between supposed “health problems” of high-yielding dairy cows and the risk of antibiotic resistant bacteria in milk. The use of veterinary medicines is very carefully controlled by law and when veterinary medicines or antibiotics do need to be used, the cow’s milk is not allowed to enter the food chain for a stipulated period. If any bacteria were present in milk, they would be killed by the pasteurisation process, so there is absolutely no danger to human health from the consumption of pasteurised milk and dairy products. We need to develop our production systems and business models to ensure a vibrant future for the British dairy industry. Dairy cow health and welfare is of paramount importance to all British dairy farmers. We should embrace the diversity of dairy farms in Britain as regardless of the size of the farm or production system they produce healthy, nutritious products that people in this country enjoy every day. Amanda Ball, DairyCo

Got Pus?
Posted By EcoHustler 1 April 14, 2011 04:51:55 PM

The dairy industry spends a lot of money to persuade you, me, and everyone, to drink cow’s milk. ‘Be like a celeb and get the healthy goodness!’ Unfortunately, if you are buying milk from an industrially farmed, dairy herd then you are drinking up to 10% pus in every serving… Yum! http://ecohustler.co.uk/2011/04/13/got-pus/

Re: Milk: why the white stuff leaves a bad taste in the mouth
Posted By jody 1 April 15, 2011 10:32:54 AM

There is a lot of estrogen in the milk from a pregnant cow. This poses many health problems for humans. Not to mention the inhumane treatment of these poor suffering animals. My 2 cents.

Re: Milk: why the white stuff leaves a bad taste in the mouth
Posted By jody 1 April 15, 2011 10:36:17 AM

Oh and another thing, great responses from the posters above from the dairy industry. You all seem like intelligent people. Did you ever hear of the word paragraph? It works like this. Unless this board doesn't allow paragraphs in which case, my mistake.

Re: Milk: why the white stuff leaves a bad taste in the mouth
Posted By judya 1 April 15, 2011 03:10:36 PM

Is organic milk ok ? Or is it not much better than ordinary milk ? I always drink organic milk !

Re: Milk: why the white stuff leaves a bad taste in the mouth
Posted By Thevvf 1 May 21, 2011 04:09:46 PM

Dairy consumption has indeed been shown to be linked to a number of diseases and health problems such as allergies, arthritis, cancer, diabetes, digestive problems, heart disease, ear infection, food poisoning, gallstones, irritable bowel syndrome, kidney disease, migraine, osteoporosis and weight gain. For more information see the fully referenced scientific report White Lies at: http://www.vegetarian.org.uk/campaigns/whitelies/wlreport01.shtml Dairy products have been shown to contribute to the development of these diseases (see the report mentioned above). Moreover, milk contains a wealth of hormones and growth factors, of which specifically IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor) is known to be directly linked with an increased risk of cancer, namely breast, prostate, lung and colon cancer. Yes, indeed, these diseases are complex etc but after genetics food plays the biggest 'decider' on cancer. Milk is in fact not a good source of calcium. The digestion of animal protein from dairy products creates acidic environment in the body and to neutralise this imbalance, the body’s own calcium is leached from the bones. Plant sources of calcium are often more easily digestible than milk – for example, calcium absorbability from kale was demonstrated to be considerably higher than that from cow’s milk. Apart from green leafy vegetables (broccoli, kale, spring greens, cabbage, bok choy, parsley watercress), many other foods are good sources: pulses (soya, beans, chick peas, lentils, etc.), nuts and seeds such as almonds, Brazils, hazelnuts, pistachios, sesame seeds (which are also used as sasema paste in hummus), dried fruits such as figs, dates and currants, olives, parsnips, swede, turnips. There is one exception – spinach. It contains a substance called oxalate which hinders calcium absorption. The author of an above comment probably isn’t up to date with the latest research because oxalate is only problematic in spinach and phytic acid (or phytate) found in grains, nuts and seeds is now considered to have only minor influence on calcium absorption. To be healthier and not contribute to animal suffering (of forced and repeated artificial inseminations, separation from young and metabolic problems with excessive milk production) get your calcium from plant foods. Please read the White Lies report: http://www.vegetarian.org.uk/campaigns/whitelies/wlreport01.shtml And: http://www.milkmyths.org.uk/ Or get in touch: The Vegetarian and Vegan Foundation 0117 970 5190 Dairy Campaigns direct on 01179704636
Post a Comment
Security Code* Get another image
 
 

Members





Follow the Ecologist