Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T01:08:32.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The environmental impact of intensive systems of animal production in the lowlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

D. Atkinson  and
C. A. Watson
D. Atkinson
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
C. A. Watson
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Land Resources Department, Craibstone Estate, Aberdeen AB2 9TQ
Get access

Abstract

Environmental issues, linked to the production of animals in lowland farming systems, are reviewed, using pigs, poultry and dairy cattle as examples. The principal livestock production factors influencing their environmental impact are identified as the balance between different farm animal types and the husbandry practices used for these species, the variable potential which exists for the recycling of wastes and the modification of inputs to systems, the extent to which animal production can be integrated into more holistic farming systems and the impact of livestock on 'wildlife' (plant and animal) biodiversity. The production of large quantities of nitrogenous waste, resulting from the importation of large quantities of nitrogen to intensive animal production units, is identified as the major environmental problem for lowland animal production. The development of-systems which allow these waste products to be re-used at sites of primary crop production is seen as a sustainable solution to this problem.

Keywords

animal productionenvironmental impact
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 63 , Issue 3 , December 1996 , pp. 353 - 361
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, T. D. 1995. Environmental benefits from grassland farming. In Grassland into the 21st century (ed. Pollott, G. E.), pp. 135–142. Symposium 29, British Grassland Society.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1995a. Rural England: a nation committed to a living countryside. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1995b. Rural Scotland: people, prosperity partnership. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1995c. Watt Poultry Statistical Yearbook for 1995.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1995d. Biodiversity: the UK steering report. 1. Meeting the Rio challenge. Her Majesty's Office, London.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1996. Indicators ofsustainable developmentfor United Kingdom. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Atkinson, D. 1990. Biological factors influencing the growth of trees in agroforestry systems: the significance of root system effects. In Ecological options and benefits of agriforestry in temperate zones, pp. 131–143. Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
Atkinson, D. 1991. Farm forest systems: some implications for nutrient conservation, soil conditions and root development. Soil. 8: 50–60.Google Scholar
Atkinson, D., Watson, C. A., Younie, D. and Armstrong, G. 1996. The environmental benefits and disbenefits of organic farming systems. In Crop science: SAC research for 1995, pp. 6–9. Scottish Agricultural College.Google Scholar
Brouwer, F. M., Godeschalk, F. E., Hillegers, P. J. G. J. and Kelbolt, H. J. 1995. Mineral balances at farm level in the European Union. Research report 137. Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI-DLO) The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Dewhurst, R. J. and Thomas, C. 1992. Modelling of nitrogen transactions in the dairy cow and their environmental consequences. Livestock Production Science 31: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrant, J. 1995. Making a revolution in poultry and egg production. Farmers Weekly.Google Scholar
Halberg, N., Kristensen, E. S. and Sorensen, J. T. 1994. Ethics and environmental aspects of mixed farming: finding sustainable solutions by case studies. In Biological basis sustainable animal production, pp. 123–132. Publication European Association of Animal Production, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Hartog, L. A. den. 1992. Towards integrated pig production i n The Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science. 4: 315–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, R. B., Ingram, D. L. and Wathes, C. M. 1992. Scientific and technical options for sustainable livestock production. In Sustainable livestock farming into the century (ed. Marshall, B. J.), pp. 13–30. Centre for Agricultural Strategy, Reading.Google Scholar
Hermans, C. M. L. and Vereijken, P. H. 1994. Grazing husbandry based on sustainable nutrient management. In Biological basis of sustainable animal production, pp. 113–122. Publication 67, European Association for Animal Production, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Kanis, E. 1993. Sustainable pig production? A scenario for pig breeders. Pig News and Information. 14: 101–104.Google Scholar
Meer, H. G. van der and Putten, A. H. J. van der. 1995. Reduction of nutrient emissions from ruminant livestock farms. In Grassland into the 21st century (ed. Pollot, G. E.), pp. 118–134. British Grassland Society.Google Scholar
Meikle, A., Finch, R. P. and Marshall, G. 1995. Genetic diversity in susceptible and herbicide resistant Sinapis arvensis. Proceedings of the Brighton crop protection — Weeds, pp. 439–444.Google Scholar
Millard, P. 1996. Assimilate partitioning and internal cycling. In Macaulay Land Use Research Institute annual for 1995, pp. 24–25.Google Scholar
Mitchelson, K. R., Knox, O., Cheng, J., Ford, M. A., Wilson, F. and Atkinson, D. 1995. Molecular markers for genetic diversity in cleavers (Galium aparine). Proceedings the Brighton crop protection conference — Weeds, pp. 451–458Google Scholar
Sibbald, A. R. 1996. Silvopastoral Agroforestry Systems. In Macaulay Land Use Research Institute annual report for 1995, pp. 14–15.Google Scholar
Sibbald, A. R. and Sinclair, F. L. 1990. A review of agroforestry research in progress in the UK. Agroforestry Abstracts. 3: 149–164.Google Scholar
Tamminga, S. 1992. Nutrition management of dairy cows as a contribution to pollution control. Journal of Dairy Science. 75: 345–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voermans, J. A. M., Verdoes, N. and Hartog, L. A. den. 1994. Environmental impact of pig farming. Pig News and Information. 15: 51–54.Google Scholar
Watson, C. A. 1996. Nitrogen budgets in Pleuri compartmental systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of Aberdeen.Google Scholar
Wiseman, J. 1993. The use of exogenous enzymes in relation to nutrition and pollution. Proceedings of the 19th World Poultry Congress, volume 2, pp. 223–226.Google Scholar
Younie, D., Carr, G. W. and Yackiminie, D. S. 1993. A 3-year comparison of profitability of organic and conventional beef production systems. Animal Production 56: 472 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Younie, D., Heath, S. B., Yackiminie, D. S. and Carr, G. W. 1986. Development of a low input beef system based on white clover. In Grazing, pp. 230–232. Occasional symposium no. 19. British Grassland Society.Google Scholar