7.

Future prospects for meat and milk from grass-based

systems

by

I.A. Wright1

Abstract

There are three key drivers that are likely to affect the production of meat and
milk from grass-based systems in the next 20 years. These are: (i) a general
increase in global demand for milk and meat; (ii) concern about the
environmental impact of agricultural practices; and (iii) an increasing concern by
consumers about food quality, including food safety and animal welfare,
especially in the developed world. The global demand for animal products is
projected to increase considerably, driven mainly by population growth,
economic growth and urbanization in China and Southeast Asia. The
environmental impacts of grazing systems vary considerably depending on the
climatic conditions, but are likely to be an increasingly important factor. Food
quality, food safety and animal welfare will also probably continue to be an
important aspect in the market for milk and meat in developed countries,
providing an opportunity for producers of meat and milk from grass-based
systems.

Introduction

Grassland-based meat and milk production systems account for a large proportion of both the
global land area and of the production of meat and milk. Approximately 60 percent of the
worlds pasture land (just less than half the worlds usable surface) is classified as grazing
land (de Haan, Steinfeld and Blackburn, 1997). In addition, grassland plays an important part
in many mixed agricultural systems, providing a break in rotational cropping systems and
providing feed to livestock in systems in which the diet comprises both crop residues or by-
products and grazed or conserved grass.

The annual production of meat and milk products from grazing systemsand mixed farming
systems is shown in Table 7.1. Only about 9% of global meat production comes from grazing
systems (defined by de Haan, Steinfeld and Blackburn (1997) as systems based almost
exclusively on pasture with little or no integration with crops, mainly based on native
pasture). Mixed farming systems account for 54% of meat production and 90% of milk
production. A considerable proportion of the feed consumed by livestock in these mixed
systems will be from grazed and stall fed pasture.

However, these global figures hide a huge range in the importance of grassland-based
systems in different regions and countries. In temperate regions, grass-based systems of
milk production predominate. For example, in New Zealand, virtually all dairy production is
based on grassland, with over 90 percent of the total nutrient requirements coming from
grazing (Hodgson, 1990). In the European Union, over 95 percent of milk production is based
on grassland (Plate 7.1), often managed relatively intensively. Even although the level of
supplementary feeding may be relatively high in dairy systems, grazed or conserved grass
still accounts for 5070 percent of the nutrient requirements of the cows, and 75100 percent
of requirements in most beef and sheep systems can be met from grazed or conserved grass.

Many of the worlds arid and semi-arid rangelands are grazed by domestic livestock, and
although the stocking density may be relatively low, animals provide livelihoods for
pastoralists and are often central to their cultural heritage.

Compared with other sources of fodder for meat and milk production, grass, especially grazed
grass, can provide a cheap source of feed (Table 7.2). The costs of grazed grass are generally
about half of those of conserved hay or silage. In addition, the support-energy requirements
for harvesting and storing conserved grass, especially as silage, are often considerable
(Wilkins, 1990).
While the above gives an indication as to the current state of meat and milk production from
grasslands, the objective of this chapter is to look forward and to try to analyse future
prospects. There are a number of recent trends and developments that might give some
pointers as to future trends. Observers and commentators have identified three important
drivers that are likely to have a bearing on the production of meat and milk from grass in the
next 20 years. These are:

1. A general increase in global demand for milk and meat.

2. Concern about the environmental impact of agricultural practices.
3. An increasing concern by consumers about food quality, including food safety and
animal welfare, especially in the developed world.

Plate 7.1 Dairying on perennial white clover-ryegrass pastures in Scotland

[Photograph by John Frame]

Table 7.1 Total world meat production (000 tonne) from grazing systems

Region Beef Sheep and goat meat Milk

Sub-Saharan Africa 1 380 390 9 827

Asia 765 656 308
Central and South America 5 652 231 13 553
West Asia and North Africa 88 237 1 191
Eastern Europe and CIS n/a n/a n/a
OECD and other developed 4 396 1 466 17 647

Note: n/a = not available.

Source: de Haan, Steinfeld and Blackburn, 1997.

Table 7.2 Costs of different ruminant feeds

Feed Cost (US$ tonne-1)

Grazed grass 3656

Maize silage 4860
 Maize silage 4860
Alfalfa haylage 70100

Source: Hlukik and Smith, 1988

Changing global demand for animal products

There is a huge range in the amount of meat consumed by the population in different regions
in the world. Meat consumption in the developed world is much higher than in developing
countries. In the early 1990s, the per capita consumption of meat in the developed world was
78 kg, with higher amounts in the United States of America and lower amounts in Europe. In
developing countries of Asia, 18 kg of meat was consumed per capita, while in Latin America
consumption was 46 kg. In sub-Saharan Africa, the equivalent figure was only 9 kg (Delgado
et al., 1999).

Milk consumption per capita in Latin America is higher than in other developing countries:
four times higher than in Africa and three times higher than in developing countries in Asia.
However, even in Latin America, milk consumption per capita is about 40 percent less than in
developed countries.

Per capita consumption in developed countries is likely to be relatively static over the next 20
years. The levels of consumption in developed countries are already relatively high and so the
scope for further increases is limited. However, per capita consumption of meat and milk is
forecast to increase considerably over the next 20 years in developing countries since
demand for meat tends to increase more rapidly than disposable income (Ahmed and Gruhn,
1995). Thus, as countries become richer, meat consumption tends to increase quickly. The
rate of increase in per capita income is much higher in some developing regions, e.g. China
and Southeast Asia with rates of economic growth of 69 percent, whereas in developed
countries economic growth rarely exceeds 3 percent and is often less. Urbanization is also
thought to be a key factor in driving up demand for livestock products. The urban population
in developing countries is growing at 3.5 percent per annum, compared with only 0.75
percent in developed countries, which are already highly urbanized (United Nations, 1995).

A further important factor is that changes in per capita consumption in the developing world
are likely to have a much greater global impact than changes in the developed world. This is
because, first, the developing countries have a much greater proportion of the worlds
population (about 77 percent in the 1990s), and, second, they have much higher rates of
population growth (1.9 percent per annum, versus 0.4 percent in developed countries).

The International Food Policy Research Institute has developed a global food model (IMPACT;
Delgado et al., 1999) and used it to predict the growth in demand for a range of foodstuffs in
different regions of the world. Delgado et al., (1999) have produced estimates in the demand
for different livestock products up to the year 2020. They predict considerable increases in
demand for livestock products as a consequence of population growth, economic growth,
higher income per capita and increased urbanization. Much of this increased demand is
predicted to take place in China and Southeast Asia, where levels of economic growth are
high. The IMPACT model predicts that in China, for example, meat consumption will reach
63 kg per capita, approaching the current consumption in developed countries. Total world
meat production is predicted to increase by 63 percent by 2020 compared with the early
1990s. China alone is projected to account for almost 30 percent of global supply (including
pig and poultry meat).

While much of the increased demand will be for white meat (pig meat and poultry), there will
also be a considerable increase in the growth in demand for milk and beef (Table 7.3).
Although the demand for beef will remain relatively constant up until 2020 in the developed
world, there is predicted to be a doubling of beef production and a 2.5-fold increase in milk
demand between 1993 and 2020. A number of assumptions are built into the IMPACT model,
including the continued growth of the economies of developing countries, especially in Asia,
and the continued supply of relatively cheap fossil fuel. Given the known levels of global fossil
fuel reserves, this seems a reasonable assumption, at least over the twenty-year time period
for the projections.

While there are a number of assumptions built into the IMPACT model and the absolute
increases in consumption that are predicted might be questioned, there does appear to be
considerable evidence to support the view that the global demand and production for meat
and milk is likely to increase in the next 20 years. A major factor that will affect whether the
predicted increases in demand can be satisfied will be the ability of the natural resources to
support them, in the light of the increased demand that will be placed on those natural
resources, upon which the production systems depend to cope with the environmental
pressures that such an increased demand will place upon them.

Table 7.3 Projected trends in production of selected livestock products

Projected annual
Total production (million tonne)
Region/Product growth in production
(19932020) 1993 2020

Developed world
Beef 0.6 35 38
Milk 0.4 348 371
Developing world
Beef 2.6 22 44
Milk 3.2 164 401

Environmental impact of grazing livestock production

Types of grazing system

The form of the environmental impact of grazing livestock is determined to a large extent by
the environmental conditions in which the grazing system is located, and especially the
climatic conditions. From an environmental perspective, de Haan, Steinfeld and Blackburn,
(1997) classified grazing systems into a number of broad types, including:

arid grazing systems;

semi-arid grazing systems;
subhumid tropical grazing systems;
temperate grazing systems; and
mixed farming systems.

Grazing systems are defined as livestock systems in which more than 90 percent of the dry
matter fed to the animals comes from rangelands, pastures, annual forages and purchased
fodder. In terms of total production, these grazing systems supply only 9 percent of global
meat production. Livestock provide the sole source of income for 20 million pastoral families.

There are also mixed systems in which crop and livestock production are much more closely
linked. In many cases, the contribution of grazed or conserved fodder from grassland is
limited.

Arid and semi-arid grazing systems

Arid grazing systems have been defined as having an average growing season of less than 75
days, with rainfall limiting production. Semi-arid areas have a growing season of 75180
days, with less variability in rainfall than in arid areas. Examples of these areas include parts
of the Sahel and central Asia. These ecosystems are often important habitats for a range of
plant and animal species and there is competition for resources between domestic animals
and wildlife, although sometimes occupying different niches.

The higher rainfall in the semi-arid regions means that the grazing pressure on these
resources can be considerable. The greater concentration of water points in semi-arid zones
can also lead to high levels of local degradation. Historically, it was thought that many of
these arid and semi-arid rangelands were degraded and that significant desertification had
taken place. UNEP (1992), for example, suggested that about 20 percent of the world's
rangelands had been degraded, and Gilmanov (1996) estimated that about one-third of the
rangelands in the Former Soviet Union were degraded. More recently, there has been
considerable debate as to both the definition and extent of degradation and desertification
(e.g. Skarpe, 2000). Studies that have taken a long time frame (decades rather than years)
suggest that many of the observed changes are climatic-driven rather than due to the effects
of grazing livestock. The expansion of the Sahara desert in the 1970s and 1980s was
probably a result of climatic changes rather than due to the impact of human activity.

The concept of degradation has also been questioned. The idea of degradation emerged from
rangeland science in North America, based on the assumption that rangeland vegetation
moved through a series of states to a climax in the absence of grazing, i.e. Clemensian
succession. Degradation was then considered as the extent to which the rangeland differed
from this climax state. This model still dominates much rangeland management policy,
especially in the United States of America. In ecology, this model has given way to the
concept that rangelands can exist in a range of stable states depending on weather conditions
and management regimes. The state and transition model (Westoby, Walker and Noy-Meir,
1989) implies that there is no longer a simple state against which degradation can be
measured. Rather the implication is that the desired state can only be defined in relation to a
particular set of management objectives.

Behnke and Scoones (1993) argued that the condition of arid and semi-arid rangelands where
there is considerable variation in rainfall is climatically driven rather than driven by grazing
pressure, i.e. the non-equilibrium model. However, recently Illius and OConnor (1999)
have questioned the view that rangeland systems can be conveniently classified as
equilibrium or non-equilibrium and consider that there is a range of coupling mechanisms
of plant and animal dynamics. Certainly Fernandez-Giminez and Allen-Diaz (1999) found that
neither of these two models fitted data collected from Mongolia. Nevertheless, there are
undoubted examples of degradation of arid rangelands in certain areas caused by grazing
pressure, notably around settlements and water points where the vegetation can be
completely absent as a consequence of pressure from grazing livestock.

Thus there needs to be a reassessment of the environmental impacts of livestock grazing on

arid and semi-arid rangelands. In practical terms this is proving difficult, as currently the
state and transitional model and the non-equilibrium models do not provide any conceptual
basis for the development of monitoring techniques. Recently Stolte et al. (2004) have tested
a field methodology for assessing temperate rangeland condition that is based on both a
consideration of a desired state and a sound understanding of the interaction between the
vegetation and the grazing herbivores. Whether such as approach is more generally
applicable remains to be seen.

Sub-humid tropical grazing systems

In these zones, vegetation growth, stimulated by rainfall normally lasts for six to nine
months, sometimes in two separate periods with one or two dry seasons. In the sub-humid
tropics, the wetter climate leads to a range of diseases being endemic (e.g. river blindness,
African sleeping sickness, tick-borne diseases, and tsetse fly, which spreads
trypanosomiasis), which can limit the exploitation of the resources. With progress in tsetse
and tick control, and with better medicinal treatment against animal diseases, many
pastoralists from the semi-arid regions of Africa are entering wetter areas during the dry
season to find grass regrowth, either after savannah burning or in the wet lowlands. Eradica
tion or control programmes for tsetse fly in Zimbabwe and Cameroon, for example, have
opened up new pasture areas to pastoralists. The main environmental issues in relation to
grazing of these areas are the change in vegetation, especially bush encroachment, the
dissemination of invasive plants, the long-term consequences of the bushfires on open
pastures, and the consequences for wildlife.

Temperate grazing systems

Temperate grazing systems, based on natural permanent pastures, account for 13 percent of
the worlds pasture lands (de Haan, Steinfeld and Blackburn, 1997), mainly in China,
northern United States of America and South America. Much of these temperate rangelands
appear to be in a relatively healthy state (USDA, 1988), as domestic livestock have replaced
the wild herbivores under which these ecosystems have evolved. However, there are areas of
the world where the pressure from domestic livestock may be high, such as parts of the
western United States of America, the Former Soviet Union, China and Mongolia. Zhong
(1993) suggested that 40 percent of Inner Mongolias rangelands were degraded.
In extensive grazing systems in Europe there is concern about the impact that grazing by
domestic livestock has had on the biodiversity of what are often relatively fragile
habitats. Thus, grazing by sheep and the replacement of natural vegetation with sown species
has reduced the area of heather (Calluna vulgaris) in many part of upland Britain (Mowle and
Bell, 1995).

Mixed farming systems

Mixed farming systems occur in both the developed and developing world. They supply over
90 percent of the worlds milk, 70 percent of the sheep and goat meat, and approximately
35 percent of the beef. They have the potential to be the most integrated of the livestock
systems because of the opportunities for the efficient use of resources and in particular the
integration of cropping and livestock systems to maintain soil fertility and biodiversity, better
use of wastes and the opportunities for intensification of production without resorting to high
levels of external inputs. However in developing countries with high population growth (e.g.
the Sahel, Ethiopia, Nepal, Bangladesh) there is increased pressure on the pasture
component of the system, with pasture land being converted to cropping, with a resultant
increase in stocking rate on the remaining pasture. In the developed world, mixed systems
usually entail pasture, grazed by ruminant livestock as part of a crop rotation, or the
integration of the use of areas of natural pasture with cropping land. In the past few decades
the levels of external inputs, especially fertilizers, has increased dramatically. Between the
1960s and 1990s, the amount of nitrogen fertilizer used by agriculture in the United Kingdom
rose from about one-third of a million tonnes to over one-and-one-half million tonnes. While
by 1986 some grassland was receiving over 300 kg N ha-1, over half was receiving less than
100 kg ha-1 (Wilkins, 2000). However, nutrient surpluses have had a major impact on surface
and groundwater, resulting in particular in high levels of nitrate in drinking water and
eutrophication of surface waters. This has led to a series of nutrient control measures being
applied to farms in some parts of the European Union and the United States of America. As
mixed farming systems have become more intensive, with higher stocking densities and
reliance on sown pasture with fewer plant species, biodiversity has probably decreased.

Food quality, food safety and animal welfare

In many developed countries, consumers are becoming increasingly aware of issues such as
the quality and safety of food, as well as of the conditions under which animals are kept for
food production. The impact that food safety can have on consumer confidence in products
and on consumption was dramatically illustrated in the United Kingdom in 1996, when the
British Government announced that there was a possibility that new variant Creutzfeldt Jacob
Disease (CJD) in humans could be linked to Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). Beef
consumption in the United Kingdom fell by 16 percent in 1996 compared with 1995
(Figure 7.1) and in the European Union by 10 percent, although by 1998 consumption levels
in the United Kingdom had recovered. A recent survey of Irish consumers showed that
64 percent were concerned about beef. Concerns included freshness of food, BSE/CJD,
antibiotic residues, hygiene standards and bacteria (Riordan, Cowan and McCarthy, 2002).

In developed countries, where consumers have high levels of disposable income, many are
increasingly concerned about the conditions under which animals are kept for food
production. Legislation often provides for a minimum standard of animal welfare that is
considered by society as being acceptable.
 Figure 7.1 Beef consumption in the United Kingdom, 1992 to 1998.
Source: Eurostat, Luxembourg

p>Most concern has been expressed about intensive production methods for pigs and poultry,
where animals are kept indoors at high stocking densities. At the same time, animal products
that are produced from grass-based systems are seen as being more natural by consumers,
and to pose fewer welfare problems for the animals concerned.

Nutritive value of meat and milk from grass

The importance of animal products in the human diet has long been recognized. Much of the
research on animal production in the early half of the twentieth century was stimulated by the
need to increase the amount of animal protein in the diet of a mainly urban, industrialized
population, with diseases such as rickets being prevalent in children in many of the
industrialized towns in Britain, for example.

In the latter part of the twentieth century many human health problems, such as
cardiovascular disease, have been linked to an overconsumption of fats, especially saturated
fats, mainly derived from animal products such as meat and milk. Official government advice
in many developed countries has been to reduce saturated fat intake, and considerable
progress has been made through breeding and nutrition programmes in reducing the fat
content in meat from cattle and sheep. In the 1960s, typical fat contents for beef and lamb as
sold retail were 25 and 31 percent respectively, while by 2000 the equivalent figures were 5
and 8 percent.

The fatty acid composition of ruminant products has become the focus of considerable
research attention in recent years, because of the link between saturated fat consumption
and cardiovascular disease. The UK Department of Health, for example, has recommended a
reduction in the intake of saturated fats and an increase in the intake of unsaturated fatty
acids, especially the omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFA). These are known to be
beneficial, especially in protecting against heart disease. It is recommended that the ratio of
polyunsaturated to saturated fatty acids (P:S) in the human diet should be about 0.4 and that
there should be an increase of the relative intake of n-3 compared with n-6 PUFA
(Department of Health, 1994).

The fatty acid composition of beef is partly determined by the animals diet. Grass is rich in -
linolenic acid and recent research has shown that the fatty acid composition of beef from
cattle which have been fed on a grass diet differs from that in cattle fed in concentrates
(Table 7.4). In particular, the grass-fed animals had a higher concentration of -linolenic acid
(C18 : 3 n-3) and its n-3 long chain derivatives, while concentrate feeding resulted in higher
amounts of linoleic acid (C18 : 2 n-6) and long-chain derivatives.

Meat and milk from ruminants also represents a major source of conjugated linoleic acids
(CLA) in the human diet, which have a number of health promoting benefits such as anti-
carcinogenic activity, anti-artherogenic activity, the ability to reduce the catabolic effect of
immune stimulation, enhanced growth promotion and reduction in body fat (Banni and
Martin, 1998). Recently, it has been shown that there is a positive relationship between the
concentration of CLA in milk and the proportion of fresh forage in the diet of dairy cows (Ward
et al., 2003).

Recent research in Kenya has shown, for the first time using a controlled feeding intervention
study, a link between meat and milk intake in children and a range of physical and
behavioural measurements (Global Livestock CRSP, 2001). Children of 6 to 9 years of age
were supplemented with meat or milk and a range of measures of cognitive function, physical
measurements, physical activity and behaviour were monitored. Supplementation with meat
promoted cognitive function, leadership behaviour and initiative, as well as physical activity
and improved biochemical micronutrient status of iron, zinc, vitamin A, vitamin B12 and
riboflavin, while supplementation with milk promoted linear growth and vitamin A, vitamin
B12 and riboflavin status. This study highlights the importance of animal products in the diet
of children, not only for physical development, but also in psychological development. These
findings could have far-reaching consequences for development in developing countries, since
learning capacity and the development of human potential may be being stifled by a lack of
animal foods in the diet.

Thus in both the developed and developing world, the role of meat and milk in the human
diet may receive more attention in the future. In the developed world there may be
considerable health benefits from the inclusion in the human diet of meat and milk from cattle
reared on grass. However, the extent to which this may significantly and practically improve
human health remains to be determined, but may become an important factor in the
promotion of meat from grass-based systems in the future. In developing countries there is
clearly benefit from inclusion of animal products in situations where the diet is sub-optimal.

Table 7.4 Effect of diet on fatty acid composition (mg g-1 muscle) of longissimus dorsi
muscle from cattle fed grass or concentrates.

Fatty acid P-value

Diet
Grass Concentrates

C16 : 0 6.98 4.88 0.01

C18 : 0 4.56 2.79 0.001
C18 : 1 n-9 10.1 6.22 0.001
C18 : 2 n-6 0.65 1.62 0.001
C18 : 3 n-3 0.33 0.10 0.001
C20 : 4 n-6 0.21 0.44 0.001
C20 : 5 n-3 0.13 0.004 0.001
C22 : 6 n-3 0.02 0.01 0.001

Total 28.6 21.7 0.01

Technological Developments

Genetic improvement of livestock

Considerable research and development effort has been devoted to genetic improvement in
livestock in past decades. There have been some spectacular improvements in some
production traits, but these, in the main, have been when animals have been kept in
relatively intensive systems, such as in the pig and dairy cow sectors in developed countries.
Pittroff, Cartwright and Kothmann (2002) have argued that in extensive systems, as
exemplified by much of the worlds grazing land, the opportunity for genetic improvement is
much limited. Hammond (1947) stated that, in general, variability in quantitative characters
is greatest under good nutritional conditions. Many grazing systems offer relatively low levels
of nutrition, and animals may undergo annual cycles of weight gain and loss. In such
circumstances, rates of reproduction are often limited by nutrition. Attempts to improve
productive traits, such as milk yield or growth rate, may exacerbate the low levels of
reproduction because of negative phenotypic correlations between these productive traits and
reproductive traits, even although there may be no genetic correlation (Baptist and Carles,
1989). Thus, attempts to increase traits such as milk yield or growth rate in environments
that offer relatively low levels of nutrition usually result in reduced reproductive success.
Reproductive traits usually have low levels of heritability, and so attempts to improve them
genetically are usually limited.

A further complicating factor is the variability in the environment in many grazed systems,
even within a single location. Intra- and inter-annual variations in climate result in variability
in the level of nutrition. The genetic ranking of animals that have been selected in one
environment often changes in another, less favourable environment. Even at a single site, the
effect of genotype environment interactions can be important (Wright et al., 1994).

There may be cases where genetic selection for disease resistance may be important, and
could yield important benefits, but the interaction with other production traits will always
need to be considered (Vagenas et al., 2002).

It is not clear at this stage what role transgenics may play in the future. There is considerable
public resistance to the introduction of transgenic crops, especially in Europe. Research on
transgenic livestock has, to date, mainly been focused on the production of animals with the
ability to express novel proteins in their milk for pharmaceutical use. Whether transgenic
livestock will be acceptable in the food chain has yet to be tested, but given the limitations to
genetic improvement in extensive grazing systems, discussed above, it is unlikely that
transgenic technology in livestock will have an impact on the production of meat and milk
from grassland in the next couple of decades.

Genetic improvement of plants

Advances in plant breeding have the potential to both increase productivity and improve the
environmental impact of grassland-based systems. The development of varieties of grass with
higher water soluble carbohydrate concentrations, for example, can lead to a better ratio of
nitrogen and energy yielding compounds in the rumen. This can result in higher levels of
production, increased efficiency of nitrogen use and reduced nitrogen excretion (Miller et al.,
2001). Transgenic technology could play an important part in the future, by allowing the
introduction of genes into forage plants that confer traits that make them more suitable for
harsh environments. The introduction of genes that enhance drought tolerance or cold
tolerance (Thomas, 1997) could potentially have beneficial implications for livestock
production from grassland.

Animal nutrition

One of the keys to the more efficient and sustainable production of meat and milk from
grass-based systems is a better understanding of the nutritional resources available to
grazing animals. While much is known about the way in which ruminants utilize nutrients for
conversion to meat and milk, based on several decades of research (e.g. NRC, 1996; ARC,
1980), there are large gaps in our knowledge of the nutritional value of much of the world's
grazing resources, especially tropical forages. Although conceptual models of diet selection
have been developed (O'Reagain and Schwarz 1995), in practical terms it is extremely
difficult to predict both the quantity and the composition of the diet that grazing animals will
select when faced with a complex array of plants. This lack of understanding and predictive
ability represents a major limitation to the development of more efficient grazing systems.
For temperate systems, based on relatively simple monocultures of ryegrass or simple
mixtures of a few plant species, some progress has been made in the past two decades in
understanding these complex plant-animal relationships, leading to the development of
predictive models, but for much of the rest of the worlds grasslands, such predictive models
do not exist.

Grazing management

The increasing global demand for meat and milk, environmental concerns about the
sustainability of intensive production systems and, in the western world at least, issues of
food quality, safety and animal welfare are increasingly having an impact on the buying
patterns of consumers. These factors, coupled with the fact that grass is a relatively cheap
source of feed for ruminants and that grassland-based systems are seen as being
environmentally sustainable and welfare friendly, suggest that there is considerable scope
for the continuing production of meat and milk from grass-based systems. However, there is
a real challenge to develop production systems that maximize the utilization of grass per unit
of animal product, commensurate with sound environmental practice. This necessitates
developing grazing management systems that maximize the use of grass and forage in the
diet of animals.

The main aim of grazing management is to convert forage resources to animal products such
as meat and milk, in the most efficient way possible. To achieve this, it is necessary to supply
the animals with high quantities of high quality forage to ensure acceptable levels of animal
performance. It is also important to ensure that the herbage is utilized effectively, with low
levels of wastage. All this must be done within the context of sustainable farming systems, to
ensure that the grazing resources are maintained and that the management practices to not
have unacceptable deleterious impacts on the environment, in terms of soil, water, air and
wildlife habitats.

At one level there are few management options available to managers for the management of
grazing systems. The basic factors that can be altered by grazing management are (i) the
species of livestock, (ii) the timing or seasonality of grazing, and (iii) the grazing pressure.
The distribution of animals on grasslands is often quoted as an important factor, but as
pointed out by Walker and Hodgkinson (1999), it can be affected by the three factors already
mentioned. In practice, there are a multitude of ways in which these three principle factors
can be manipulated, and grazing research has focused on how their manipulation affects both
plants and animals.

In temperate regions, grassland systems are usually part of a mixed grassland-arable

rotation or based on permanent pasture. The grass species, especially those used in sown
swards, usually have relatively high nutrient contents, especially if they are grazed before the
formation of seed heads (Frame, 1992). For example, if perennial ryegrass is defoliated
regularly, the sward can be maintained in a vegetative state by continuous grazing, with a
high dry matter digestibility. However, growth is often limited by low temperatures in winter
and may often cease for six months or more in winter. In such situations the aim of grassland
management is to maximize the utilization of grazed grass in summer, while ensuring
sufficient grass can be conserved as hay or fodder to feed the herd or flock in winter.

The level of performance achieved by grazing livestock is primarily a consequence of their

daily level of herbage intake. Efficient grazing systems should, therefore, aim to maximize the
intake of grass by grazing cattle. In temperate swards, of relatively high digestibility, intake is
not constrained by the digestibility of the diet and it is the three-dimensional structure of the
sward canopy that determines the size of a grazing bite, and therefore, to a large extent,
daily intake. The sward structural characteristics that determine bite size have been the
subject of considerable research effort, and factors such as the bulk density of the grazed
horizon, leaf-to-stem ratio, green leaf mass and the height of the pseudostem have all been
implicated in determining bite size (Rook, 2000). However, many of these variables are highly
correlated in a temperate sward, and they are often correlated with sward height. Sward
height is therefore a simple measure that is related to daily herbage intake. When cattle
grazed continuously on a perennial ryegrass dominated sward, maximum daily intake of
herbage was achieved at a sward height of about 1011 cm (Figure 7.2). At heights of below
1011 cm, intake is progressively reduced (Wright, 1988), and this is reflected in the
liveweight gain of the animals. Maximum liveweight gain of continuously grazing beef cows
and growing/finishing cattle occur at sward heights of 810 cm. Above that height, liveweight
gain decreases because of the reduction in the digestibility of the herbage, especially in late
summer (Wright and Whyte, 1989; Swift et al., 1989). For sheep, the maximum intake on
perennial ryegrass dominated swards is around 46 cm (Figure 7.3).
 Figure 7.2 The herbage intake of beef cows continuously grazing swards of different
height.
Source: From Wright, 1988.

Table 7.5 Target sward heights (cm) for cattle and sheep grazing perennial ryegrass-
dominated pasture.

Continuous stocking Rotational grazing

Early summer Late summer (post grazing height)

Dairy cows 7-8 10-12 8-10

Growing/finishing cattle
7-8 10-12 7-10
and beef cows
Sheep 4-6 6-8 -

Source: From Mayne et al., 2000

Figure 7.3 The herbage intake of ewes grazing swards of different heights.
Source: From Penning et al., 1991.

This sward height information has been used to develop target sward height profiles for dairy
cows (Mayne, Wright and Fisher, 2000), beef cattle (Wright, 1988) and sheep (Maxwell and
cows (Mayne, Wright and Fisher, 2000), beef cattle (Wright, 1988) and sheep (Maxwell and
Treacher, 1987) (Table 7.5). In spring, beef cattle should be turned out to pasture before
sward height reaches 8 cm. If turnout is delayed until sward height is over 8 cm, it can be
difficult to control sward height thereafter, because of high rates of herbage growth. In spring
and early summer it is important to keep the sward surface height of continuously grazed
swards to 78 cm because above that height there is increased development of flower heads
in grass and this leads to a reduction in the digestibility and feeding value of the grass. Once
the risk of seed head development has passed, then sward height can be allowed to increase
to 1012 cm in late summer. The same heights are recommended for mixed grass/white
clover swards, although the clover component may benefit from a rest period followed by a
conservation cut.

In New Zealand, mixed grass/white clover (Trifolium repens) swards have been central to the
development of the pastoral agricultural industry. As concern grows about the impact of
nutrient surpluses on surface water and groundwater, there is increased interest in the use of
legumes in pasture in areas that have in recent decades relied on the application of high
levels of nitrogen fertilizer Mixed grass/white clover swards are becoming more common, and
offer considerable potential. In the United Kingdom, up to 280 kg nitrogen ha-1 year-1 can be
fixed by white clover in a mixed grass/white clover sward (Cowling, 1982), although a more
usual figure might be 200 kg, and mixed grass/white clover swards with about 30 percent
white clover can produce the same amount of herbage as all-grass swards receiving 200 kg
nitrogen fertilizer ha-1 year-1 (Morrison, 1981). Incorporation of white clover into a sward can
improve the nutritive value of the pasture, with increased intake and nutrient supply,
especially protein (Ulyatt, et al., 1980). Levels of animal performance are generally higher on
grass/white clover swards than on all-grass swards (Davies and Hopkins, 1996) and Clark
and Jans (1995) suggested that for each 10 percent increase in white clover in the sward,
milk yield from dairy cows increases by 0.300.45 kg per day. Management systems based
on mixed grass/white clover swards are being developed for environments where white clover
is at the limit of its environmental range (Sibbald et al., 2002) and mixed grass/legume
systems will probably play a more important role in temperate grassland systems in the
future. Several other legumes, such as red clover (Trifolium pratense) and birdsfoot trefoil
(Lotus corniculatis) are currently being studied (Wilkins and Jones, 2000). Alfalfa (Medicago
sativa) already plays a very important role as a source of conserved forage in many parts of
the world.

The level of production of meat and milk from the arid grazing systems of the world is
severely limited by climatic conditions. The levels of production rarely exceed that which can
support subsistence levels, and the main grazing management tool is mobility of herd or
flocks in response to the high spatial and temporal variability in rainfall. Herders move their
animals, following water and pasture resources.

In semi-arid grazing systems, the level of biomass production is higher, although the stocking
density is still relatively low. Traditionally, these areas have been grazed extensively by
nomadic pastoralists, producing a range of meat, milk and fibre products, moving their
animals seasonally. Where sedentarization of the population has occurred, this has often led
ultimately to an increase in the stocking rate, sometimes stimulated by the ability to produce
fodder for feeding during the dry season and an increase in the grazing pressure to the extent
that the rangeland resources have become locally degraded.

The benefits of mobility in semi-arid grazing systems have been dramatically illustrated in
Central Asia. In Kazakhstan, forced sedenterization of the nomads in the 1930s during
collectivization in the Soviet Union led initially to a massive decline in animal numbers, due to
starvation, as the animals were not moved to the traditional winter grazing areas. Gradually a
form of centrally-organized flock mobility was re-introduced, with each collective having
access to large areas of seasonally grazed pastures. At the break up of the Soviet Union
sheep numbers collapsed in those countries where agriculture was p rivatized in the early
1990s, e.g. Kazakhstan (Behnke, 2003). Farmers did not have the resources to move their
flocks to the traditional seasonal grazing areas and so most animals spent all year grazing
around the villages, putting considerable pressure on the vegetation within 510 km of the
village. Recently, larger farmers have started to become mobile and to move their flocks
seasonally. These farmers have the resources, e.g. a truck and the ability to pay hired labour,
to move their flocks of 300 or more. The benefits of doing so are twofold. The flocks that
move seasonally incur much lower winter feed costs than those that stay around the village
all year (US$ 0.24 compared with US$ 0.78 per sheep). The sheep in the mobile flocks also
gain weight over winter (+3.7 kg) compared with a weight loss (-10.8 kg) in the non-mobile
flocks (Kerven et al. 2003). These differences demonstrate dramatically the benefits, from a
flocks (Kerven et al. 2003). These differences demonstrate dramatically the benefits, from a

production efficiency perspective, of flock mobility in these semi-arid systems.

Conservation of forage

Forage conservation will continue to play an important role in meat and milk production in
some parts of the world to overcome seasonal shortages of feed supply. Forage can be
conserved as hay, where weather conditions are such that the probability of rain occurring is
relatively low. In higher rainfall areas, advances in silage-making technology in the past few
decades have allowed a huge increase in the amount of silage made. For example, in the
United Kingdom from 1970 to 1994, the amount of conserved fodder produced doubled from
8.2 to 16.3 million tonnes of dry matter .with a sixfold increase in the amount of silage
produced and a halving of the amount of hay made (Wilkinson, Wadephul and Hill, 1996). In
Western Europe, about 70 percent of the fodder conserved is in the form of silage (Wilkins
and Stark, 1992).

Recent advances in silage technology have included (i) the development of machinery,
including mower design, conditioning and chopping equipment, and for producing big bale
silage; (ii) the development of a range of chemical and biological additives to enhance and
encourage fermentation; (iii) enhancement of silo design to reduce aerobic fermentation and
effluent losses; and (iv) feeding technologies to reduce secondary fermentation.

While the costs per hectare of producing hay tend to be lower than for silage, the cost per
unit of dry matter of fodder are similar because of higher yields of silage, related in part to
lower field losses (Wilkins, 1990).

Future developments in silage making technology are likely to include the development of
more effective inoculants, possibly by genetic engineering to produce lactic acid bacteria that
can use a wider range of substrates, including cellulose. It may also be possible to breed
varieties of grass that are particularly suited for ensiling, with, for example, a higher sugar
content and lower protein degradation (Merry, Jones and Theodorou, 2000).

Organic meat and milk production

In developed countries, where many consumers have high levels of disposable income,
consumer concerns about food safety and quality and the environment have led to an
increase in the production of organic or biological farming. A simple definition of organic
farming has eluded practitioners, commentators and scientists. As pointed out by Lampkin
(1990), organic farming has often been defined by stating what it is not, but, as he points
out, definitions such as farming without chemicals misses out several key characteristics
that are of fundamental importance. The most comprehensive definition of organic farming is
provided by the guidelines to which producers have to adhere to qualify as organic farming.
Internationally, standards for organic farming are set by the International Federation of
Organic Agriculture Movements. These standards are then interpreted by certifying
authorities in different countries, taking account of local conditions and customs. Thus the
precise standards may vary. For ruminant livestock production, the key standards are that no
soluble mineral fertilizers can be used, animals may not be treated routinely with drugs, and
there must be a minimum level of forage in the diet. The proportion of organic meat and milk
sold in developed countries is increasing, partly due to an increase in the demand, but also in
some cases partly due to financial incentives from governments to persuade farmers to
convert production systems from conventional to organic because of the environmental
benefits. The proportion of organic meat and milk production varies hugely in different
countries, and although the market is increasing, it is not clear to what extent it will continue
to do so.

The level of individual animal performance achieved in organic meat and milk systems is
comparable to that in conventional systems, but the stocking rates are generally about
80 percent of those of conventional systems (Wright, Zervas and Louloudis, 2002). Thus
because of the lower output per hectare, to be financially competitive with conventional
systems the price for organic products must be higher than that for conventional products.
For example, Figure 7.4 shows that for a beef production system in the United Kingdom, the
price of organically produced beef must be at least 23% more than that of conventionally
produced beef if the gross margins are to be comparable. While such premiums can be
obtained, it is not clear if these can be sustained in the long term. While the price of organic
milk in the United Kingdom is approximately 60 percent higher than conventional milk, the
milk in the United Kingdom is approximately 60 percent higher than conventional milk, the

market may have reached saturation, as it is increasingly difficult for new organic producers
to find a market.

Thus, while extensive production of meat and milk from extensive grassland systems are
amongst the easiest to convert to organic production, because the levels of input have
traditionally been relatively low, the long-term prospects for organic systems are not clear. As
there is continued pressure to ensure that all livestock systems, and agriculture in general,
develop in a way that has minimal environmental impact, the difference between organic and
conventional systems may become less and so the growth in demand for organic products
may slow.

Conclusions

There is considerable opportunity for producers of meat and milk to benefit from a number of
future developments. In the developed world there is a real prospect that milk and meat,
particularly from grassland-based systems, will increasingly be seen as an important
component of a healthy human diet. Although this is not likely to result in significant
increases in consumption, it may result in a stabilization of consumption. The projected
increase in global demand potentially could result in opportunities for producers in developing
countries. Whether they can take advantage of these opportunities will depend on a number
of factors. These include the degree to which trade in meat and milk is liberalized and the
extent to which markets are opened up. While there is a general move towards the reduction
and removal of import tariffs, there may be a number of non-tariff barriers that prevent trade
in agricultural products. These include sanitary standards, animal health and welfare
requirements, and product quality and traceability (Holden, 2002). The increasing concerns
about the environmental impact and animal welfare standards of intensive livestock
production systems may provide increasing opportunities for the marketing of animal
products from grass-based systems, which are seen by consumers as being more benign
environmentally and offering a higher standard of animal welfare.

Figure 7.4 The effect of organic price premium on the gross margin from beef
production.
Source: From Wright, Zervas and Louloudis, 2002.

References

ARC [Agricultural Research Council]. 1980. The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock.
Slough, UK: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.

Ahmed, R. & Gruhn, P. 1995. Selected issues in the supply of and demand for red meat
and poultry products in developing countries. In: R.T Wilson (ed). Supply of livestock
and poultry products in developing countries. In: R.T Wilson (ed). Supply of livestock

products to rapidly expanding urban populations. Proceedings of the joint FAO/WAAO/KAAS

symposium, Hoam Faculty Club, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea, 16-20 May 1995.
FAO, Rome.

Banni, S. & Martin, J.C. 1998. Conjugated linoleic acid and metabolites. pp. 261302, in:
J.L. Sebedio and W. Christie (eds). Trans fatty acids in human nutrition. Dundee, UK: The
Oily Press.

Baptist, R. & Carles, A.B. 1989. How can litter size affect wool production with zero genetic
and phenotypic correlations? pp. 124130, in: Proceedings of the Small Ruminant
Collaborative Research Project Workshop. Nairobi. VII,

Behnke, R.H. 2003. Reconfiguring property rights and land use in pastoral Kazakstan. In:
C. Kerven and S. Akiner (eds). Prospects for Pastoralism in Kazakstan and Turkmenistan:
From State Flocks to Private Farms. Routledge Press (in press).

Behnke, R.H. & Scoones, I. 1993. Rethinking rangeland ecology: Implications for
rangeland management in Africa. pp. 130, in: R.H. Behnke, I. Scoones and C. Kerven (eds).
Rangeland Ecology at Disequilibrium. London: Overseas Development Institute.

Clark, D.A. & Jans, F. 1995. High forage use in sustainable dairy systems. pp. 497526,
in: M. Journet, E. Grenet, M.-H. Farce, M. Theriez and C. Demarquilly (eds). Recent
Developments in the Nutrition of Herbivores. Proceedings of the VIth International
Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores. Paris: INRA Editions.

Cowling, D.W. 1982. Biological nitrogen fixation and grassland production in the United
Kingdom. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 296: 397404.

de Haan, C. Steinfeld, H. & Blackburn, H. 1997. Livestock and the environment. Finding
a balance. European Commission Directorate General for Development.

Delgado, C., Rosegrant, M., Steinfeld, H., Ehui, S. & Courbois, C. 1999. Livestock to
2020: the Next Food Revolution. IFPRI Food, Agriculture and the Environment Discussion
Paper, No. 28. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC.

Davies, D.A. & Hopkins, A. 1996. Production benefits of legumes in grassland. pp. 234
246, in: D. Younie (ed). Legumes in Sustainable Farming Systems. British Grassland Society
Occasional Symposium No. 30.

Department of Health. 1994. Nutritional aspects of cardiovascular disease. Report on

health and social subjects, No. 46. London: HMSO.

Enser, M., Hallet, K.G., Hewitt, B., Fursey, G.A.J., Wood, J.D. & Harrington, G. 1998.
Fatty acid content and composition of UK beef and lamb muscle in relation to production
system and implications for human nutrition. Meat Science, 49: 323341.

Fernandez-Giminez, M.E. & Allen-Diaz, B. 1999. Testing non-equilibrium models of

rangeland vegetation dynamics in Mongolia. Journal of Applied Ecology, 36: 871885.

Frame, J. 1992. Feeding value of grass. pp. 146160, in: Improved Grassland
Management. Ipswich, UK: Farming Press.

Gilmanov, T.G. 1995. The state of rangeland resources in the newly independent states of
the former USSR. pp. 1013 (Vol. 2), in: N.E. West (ed). Rangelands in a Sustainable
Biosphere. Proceedings of the Fifth International Rangeland Congress. Denver CO: Society for
Range Management.

Global Livestock CRSP. 2001. Role of animal source foods to improve diet quality and
growth and cognitive development in Kenyan school children. pp. 7790, in: Global Livestock
CRSP Annual Report 2001. Davis CA: University of California.

Hammond, J. 1947. Animal breeding in relation to nutrition and environmental conditions.

Biological Review of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 22: 195213.

Hlukik, J.G. & Smith, T.R. 1988. Economics of pasture systems. Proceedings: Pasture in
the Northeast Region of the United States. NRAES-36. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.

Hodgson, J. 1990. Grazing Management: Science into Practice. Harlow, UK: Longman.
Hodgson, J. 1990. Grazing Management: Science into Practice. Harlow, UK: Longman.

Holden, S. 2002. How do trade regimes make livestock producers vulnerable? pp. 78, in:
Responding to the Increasing Global Demand for Animal Products. Penicuik, UK: British
Society of Animal Science.

Illius, A.W & OConnor, T.G. 1999. When is grazing a major determinant of rangeland
condition and productivity? pp. 474476, in: D. Eldridge and D. Freudenberger (eds). People
of the Rangelands. Building the Future. Proceedings of the VI International Rangeland
Congress. Townsville, Australia, 1923 July 1999.

Kerven, C., Alimaev, I., Behnke, R., Davidson, G., Franchois, L., Malmakov, N.,
Mathijis, E., Smailov, A. Temirbekov, S. & Wright, I. 2003. Retraction and expansion of
flock mobility in Central Asia: Costs and Consequences. pp. 543556, in: Rangeland in the
New Millennium. Proceedings of VII International Rangeland Congress. Durban, South Africa,
28 July1 August 2003.

Lampkin, N. 1990. Organic Farming. Ipswich, UK: Farming Press.

Mayne, C.S., Wright, I.A. & Fisher, G.E. 2000. Grassland management under grazing and
animal response. . pp. 247291, in: A. Hopkins (ed). Grass, its Production and Utilization. 3rd
ed. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.

Maxwell, T.J. & Treacher, T.T. 1987. Decision rules for grassland management. pp. 67
78, in: G.E. Pollot (ed). Efficient sheep production from grassland. British Grassland Society
Occasional Symposium, No. 21.

Merry, R.J., Jones, R. & Theodorou, M.K. 2000. The conservation of grass. pp. 196
228, in: A. Hopkins (ed). Grass, its Production and Utilization. 3rd ed.. Oxford, UK: Blackwell
Science.

Miller, L.A., Moorby, J.M., Davies, D.R., Humphreys, M.O., Scollan, N.D., Macrae, J.C.
& Theodorou, M. K. 2001. Grass and Forage Science, 56: 383394.

Morrison, J. 1981. The potential of legumes for forage production. pp. 1.11.9, in:
Legumes and Fertilizers in Grassland Systems. British Grassland Society, Winter Meeting
1981.

Mowle, A. & Bell, M. 1995. Rural policy factors and land use change. pp. 165182, in:
M.B. Usher and D.B.A Thompson (eds). Ecological Change in the Uplands. Special Publication
No. 7 of the British Ecological Society. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Scientific Publications.

NRC (National Research Council). 1996. Nutrient requirements of beef cattle. 7th edition
(revised). Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Nolan, A.J., Hope I. & Scott, R. 2002. Rapid assessment of grazing and trampling impacts
on upland habitats. In: The Macaulay Institute Annual Report 2001. Macaulay Institute,
Aberdeen, United Kingdom.

O'Reagain, P.J. & Schwartz, J. 1995. Dietary selection and foraging strategies of animals
on rangeland. Coping with spatial and temporal variability. In: M. Journet, E. Grenet, M.-H.
Farce, M. Theriez and C. Demarquilly (eds). Recent Development in the Nutrition of
Herbivores. Proceedings of the VIth International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores.
Paris: INRA Editions.

Penning. P.D., Parsons, A.J., Orr, R.J. & Treacher, T.T. 1991. Intake and behaviour of
responses by sheep to changes in sward characteristics under continuous grazing. Grass and
Forage Science, 46: 1528.

Pittroff, W., Cartwright, T.C. & Kothmann, M.M. 2002. Perspectives for livestock on
grazinglands. Archivos Latinoamericanos de Produccin Animal, 10: 133143.

Riordan, N., Cowan, C. & McCarthy, M. 2002. Safety of Irish beef concerns, awareness
and knowledge of Irish consumers. Journal of Food Safety, 22: 115.

Rook, A.J. 2000. Principles of foraging and grazing behaviour. pp. 229246, in: A. Hopkins
(ed). Grass, its production and utilisation. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.

Sibbald, A.R., Maxwell, T.J., Dalziel, A.J.I. & Agnew, R.D.M. 2002. The implications of
controlling grazed sward height for the operation and productivity of upland sheep systems in
controlling grazed sward height for the operation and productivity of upland sheep systems in

the UK. 5. The effect of stocking rate and reduced levels of nitrogen fertilizer. Grass and
Forage Science, 57: 3347.

Stolte, A.M., Nolan, A.J., Brewer, M.J., Duff, E.I, Elston, D.A. & Henderson, D.J.
2004. Rapid assessment of grazing and trampling impacts over large areas of rangeland; a
sampling approach. Biological Conservation (in press).

Skarpe, C. 2000. Desertification, no-change or alternative states: Can we trust simple

models of livestock impact in dry rangelands? Applied Vegetation Science, 3: 261268.

Swift, G., Lowman, B.G., Scott, N.A., Peebles, K., Nelson, D.R. & Hunter, E.A. 1989.
Control of sward surface height and the growth of set-stocked finishing cattle. Research and
Development in Agriculture, 6: 9197.

Thomas, H. 1997. Plants for all seasons. IGER Innovations. Institute of Grassland and
Environmental Research, Aberystwyth, UK.

Ulyatt, M.J., Beever, D.E., Thomson, D.J., Evans, R.T. & Haines, M.J. 1980.
Measurement of nutrient supply as pasture. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 39: 67A.

United Nations. 1995. World Urbanization Prospects: the 1994 Revision. United Nations,
New York.

UNEP [United Nations Environment Programme]. 1992. Status of Desertification and

Implementation of the United Nations Plan of Action to Combat Desertification. UNEP, Nairobi.

USDA [United States Department of Agriculture]. 1988. Second RCA Appraisal: Soil, water
and related resources on non-federal land in the US. Analysis of condition and trends. Natural
Resource Conservation Service, Washington DC.

Vagenas, D., Jackson, F., Russel, A.J.F., Merchant, M., Wright, I.A. & Bishop, S.C.
2002. Genetic control of resistance to gastro-intestinal parasites in crossbred cashmere
goats: responses to selection, genetic parameters and relationships with production traits.
Animal Science,
74: 199208.

Walker, J.W. & Hodgkinson, K.C. 1999. Grazing management: new technologies for old
problems. pp. 424430, in: D. Eldridge and D. Freudenberger (eds). Proceedings of the VI
International Rangeland Congress. Townsville, Australia, 1923 July 1999.

Ward, A.T., Wittenberg, K.M., Froebe, H.M., Przybylski, R. & Malcolmson, L. 2003.
Fresh forage and solin supplementation on conjugated linoleic acid levels in plasma and milk.
Journal of Dairy Science, 86: 17421750.

Westoby, M., Walker, B. and Noy-Meir, I. 1989. Opportunistic management for

rangelands not at equilibrium. Journal of Range Management, 42: 131138.

Wilkins, R.J. 1990. Grass utilisation for animal production. pp. 2234 (Vol. 1), in: Soil-
Grassland-Animal Relationships. Proceedings 13th General Meeting of the European Grassland
Federation. Banska Bystica, June 1990.

Wilkins, R.J. 2000. Grassland in the twentieth century. IGER Innovations. Institute for
Grassland and Environmental Research, Aberystwyth, United Kingdom.

Wilkins, R.J. & Stark, B.A. 1992 Silage in Western Europe. Second Edition. Canterbury,
UK: Chalcombe Publications.

Wilkins, R.J. & Jones, R. 2000. Alternative home-grown protein sources for ruminants in
the United Kingdom. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 85: 2332.

Wilkinson, J.M., Wadephul, F. & Hill, J. 1996. Silage in Europe. Lincoln, UK: Chalcombe
Publications.

Wright, I. A. 1988. Suckler beef production. pp. 5164, in: J. Frame (ed). Efficient Beef
Production from Grassland. British Grassland Society Occasional Symposium, No. 22.

Wright, I.A., Jones, J.R., Maxwell, T.J., Russel, A.J.F. & Hunter, E.A. 1994. The effect
of genotype environment interactions on biological efficiency in beef cows. Animal
of genotype environment interactions on biological efficiency in beef cows. Animal

Production,
58: 197207.

Wright, I.A. & Whyte, T.K. 1989. Effects of sward height on the performance of
continuously stocked spring-calving beef cows and their calves. Grass and Forage Science,
44: 259266.

Wright, I. A., Zervas, G. & Louloudis, L. 2002. The development of sustainable farming
systems and the challenges that face producers in the EU. pp. 2737, in: I. Kyriazakis and G.
Zervas (eds). Organic Meat and Milk from Ruminants. EAAP Publication, No. 106.
Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

Zhong, M. 1993. Inner Mongolia grassland resources and its management. In: Proceedings
of International Symposium on Grassland Research. Huhehot, China.

1Macaulay Institute, Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen, AB15 8QH, Scotland, United Kingdom