Five generations comprise today’s workforce — how can they all get along? Colene Elridge, a.k.a. "Coach Colene," CEO of Be More Consulting, joins the Ag Future podcast to discuss why leaders need to exercise empathy, inclusion and listening to grow their businesses and foster future leaders.

The following is an edited transcript of the Ag Future podcast episode with Yasir Khokhar hosted by Tom Martin. Click below to hear the full audio or listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Google Podcasts.

Tom:             Welcome to Ag Future, presented by Alltech. Join us from the 2022 Alltech ONE Conference as we explore opportunities within agri-food, business and beyond.

                      In many industries, five generations now comprise the workforce: traditionalists, baby boomers, Generation X, millennials, Generation Y and Generation Z. Most traditionalists have retired. Baby boomers are following suit, (or are) at least trying to figure out how to retire. Gen Xers are in high demand for their unique abilities to bridge generations. Millennials are approaching 40. Gen Z is entering the workforce. Can they all get along?

                      I'm Tom Martin. In this episode of Ag Future, we put the question to Colene Elridge, CEO of Be More Consulting and vice chair of the Board of Regents at Transylvania University. Thanks for joining us, Colene.

Colene:          Thank you so much for having me.

Tom:              Let's begin with that burning question: Can these generations — given the vast differences in their lived experiences — can they all get along?

Colene:          They can. It's so interesting because I think, most of the time, the conflict isn't rooted in the generational difference; it's rooted in the different expectations that we have. That can happen with people of the same generation or with people of a different generation. I think part of the key is just that awareness and that empathy and understanding that we can bring into a workplace that we all bring different strengths and weaknesses and skill sets into an organization.

Tom:              When you have the combination of skill sets and so forth under one roof, somebody has to lead, has to pull it together, make it coalesce. Can that be taught? Are some people born leaders?

Colene:          I think some people are natural leaders, but I do think that there are skill sets that have to be learned in order to be successful at being a leader. I think all of us are leaders in some way. Some of us just do it a little bit better than others based off of our own experiences and our ability to learn and resources that we've had (access to). Some people are definitely born leaders. I think you can see kids on the playground and you can pick them out, right? But some people really do have to learn and hone and polish those skill sets to be great leaders.

Tom:              What are the non-negotiables of being a good leader?

Colene:          Communication skills, flexibility in how I communicate — I think that's probably one of the top things that I hear from organizations or from exit interviews of people from organizations: “My boss didn't listen to me.” So not just “How do I communicate out?” but “How do I receive communication?” That communication piece is key — building trust as a leader. I don't think we spend enough time actively and intentionally trying to build trust between leadership and employees. We trust the people that we work the closest with. If I'm two seats up on the hierarchy, it's really hard for me to trust you, because I don't know you. Building that trust, intentionally building that trust, I think, is a non-negotiable.

                      Then, having some flexibility. Oftentimes, I talk about communication and I talk about policies as either it's like you're running into a wall or you're running into cotton. How do I have that flexibility that — we need the structure here, but I also understand that circumstances happen and people are people. I can't just blanket a policy on every person equally.

Tom:              You have said that established leaders who want to grow their businesses and foster their successors need to unlearn and relearn their management practices to better exercise empathy, inclusion and listening — the things you're talking about. That sounds like a major change. That sounds like the “old dog, new trick,” that conundrum. What do leaders need to start and stop doing in order to find common ground across generations and to maximize returns from that?

Colene:          I have to share a funny story. I was doing a training for one-star generals that were about to be promoted to two-star generals. We're talking about generational differences in the workplace. I said, “The way that you've always done bootcamp probably will not have the same outcome now as it had 30 years ago. You need to be thinking about, ‘Where can we make some changes to bootcamp?’” What kind of reception do you think I got from that? They were like, “No, no, we've always done it this way. We've never let people have phones.” Well, right, because in 1970, people didn't have cell phones. How do we look at the policies that we have in place and ask ourselves, “Is this still relevant? Is this still necessary?”

                      I think some of the things that leaders have to unlearn is this thought process that just because it's there that it should be there. Just because we've done it this way that we should continue to do it this way. Recognizing that, “I, maybe, have built the ship, but now it's time for me to update the ship.” That's, I think, one of the biggest things that we have to be willing to unlearn, is the thought process of “I've always done it this way.” 

Tom:              A great leader that I once worked under said that the key to everything is flexibility. But again, being flexible, making yourself flexible, opens you to the possibility that things are not going to go your way. It’s very important to learn that skill of flexibility, isn’t it? How important to the success of a business are effective communication skills? You mentioned that among leaders.

Colene:          Yeah. It will make or break an organization. Lack of effective communication mixed with a lack of trust, which — those two things go hand in hand (and) can really make or break an organization. I often joke about communication. One — this part is not a joke — but if information can be shared, it should be shared. I think that that’s so important, because when leaders choose to not share information, employees, we're human, we go to worst-case scenario. No one ever comes to you and says, “Tom, I need to talk to you,” and you think, “They're just going to tell me how great I am.” You think, “What did I do wrong? What do I need to fix?”

                      I think, when we look at that on a massive scale of an organization, each of us are left to our own devices to make up worst-case scenarios. Then I'm going to go to my friend, and we're going to come up with an even worse-case scenario together. I think, when we think about how we communicate in organizations, there's this thought of “I should not communicate a message until it's polished, until it's shiny, until I know 100% that this is the outcome.” People want to be brought along on the journey. You can get better buy-in if they've seen the process versus (if) you just give them the end result. Transparent communication and progressive communication, I think, can do tremendous good in an organization.

Tom:              Where that gets you is probably the ultimate goal, and that's trust. What are some hallmarks, the kinds of communication skills between employers and employees, that can make a real positive difference in a company's performance?

Colene:          Checking for understanding. It goes back to that listening skill. I think there is a thought with leaders sometimes: “I'm going to tell you what I need you to do, and then I’m going to send you off to do it. I’m not going to give you an opportunity to ask questions. I’m not going to give you an opportunity for feedback.” Then, you present me with this final result, and it's nothing at all that I wanted. Now I'm frustrated as a leader. Now you're frustrated as an employee, because you've spent all this time, energy and resources. How could we have avoided that?

                      Number one would have been transparent communication along the way. Before I sent you off, I could have checked in. “Do you have any questions? Is there anything that you don't understand? Anything that you need clarity on?” (I could) use that as an opportunity to get the feedback. Maybe you weren't as clear as what you thought you were. I think we're just in such a rush to get things done that we forget that getting things done the right way matters as well.

Tom:              Colene, the question for the times — I think a lot of people would like to hear your thoughts on this, (and) that is: How do we lead remotely, digitally? Is it even possible?

Colene:          It is. I think it requires a lot of effort and way more intention than what it would be in a traditional workplace. I think, when we look at what good remote leaders do is they do have that personal connection with their employees as well. They're making the time to ask questions about how their family is doing. They're checking in with them as a person. “How are you doing?” Seeing me as a person, not just the machine. I think that's really one of the keys when it comes to remote leadership: It's still building those relationships and those connections.

Tom:              Back to communications for just a second, and that is gaining those skills. How often should people be trained on communication skills in order for them to become effective and impactful?

Colene:          Communication skills are a practice, much like people go to the gym. You don't get fit by just working out one time. You have to actively practice it. I think the difference with communication skills is people think, “Well, I talk all the time. I'm good at communicating.” There's a difference between talking and effectively communicating. You have to practice that. You have to be open to getting feedback. Oftentimes, you have to be willing to ask for that feedback on my communication skills. “Hey, was I clear in that meeting? Is there anything that you feel like I could have done better to have gotten my point across more succinctly?” What are the skills that you really want to work on? Then, you have to be able to create measurable goals towards that. That way, you can see the progress that you're making.

Tom:              Sometimes, pride and ego can get in the way.

Colene:          One hundred percent. Yeah. People like themselves a lot. When I like myself, sometimes it's hard to hear that feedback.

Tom:              It can be. Well, what is the one thing that everybody can be better at when working in a multigenerational team, which just gets us back to where we began with the conversation?

Colene:          The one thing — can I give you two instead?

Tom:              Absolutely. Three or four, if you’ve got them.

Colene:         The two things — the two things I would say is, one, to pause, to pause and think before you speak. Think before you interact. I think that applies not just across generational differences but any differences that any of us bring to a workplace. Pause and try to not necessarily put yourself in the other person's shoes, but wonder what might be causing their reaction, how they said something, before you react. That pause is a game-changer for a lot of people.

                      The second thing is to recognize that generational difference is just one piece of the differences that we bring into work. I love talking about generational differences, but it's probably not even the most exciting piece of who you are and who you bring to work. That one dimension does mean something, but that one little attribute of diversity is one piece of who you are as a person. Get to know people and not just the perceptions of the generational difference that they might bring into the workplace. 

Tom:              Sometimes I think we forget that, in thinking about the pause — that even that, that moment of silence while you're sitting there processing, that's communication. It can be interpreted in a lot of ways.

Colene:          Yes. There is no need to react. There is no need to respond as quickly as what everyone thinks they need to. The pause is a gift.

Tom:              Given the experiences that you’ve had in training and working with people in these roles, what's your takeaway today about the state of leadership? Are we doing it well? How are we progressing as a community of leaders?

Colene:          I think it's so interesting, because COVID hit, and I think what we saw was a humanization of leadership. That was very appreciated on the employee side. They got to see their leaders in their kitchen with their cats running up (beside them). They got to see them as people and not just the person in the big office that's making the decision. I think what is not helping us right now as leaders is this rush to try to revert back to February 2020. Those leaders that are trying to do that, trying to make things exactly what it was like pre-COVID, I think, are not going to be successful, because people just have different expectations now of, “What does it even mean to be a leader?”

Tom:              Would you say that genie's out of the bottle?

Colene:          Absolutely. I often say, it's like once you squeeze the toothpaste out; you can't get it back in. A lot of leaders are now walking around with messy hands because they're trying to get the toothpaste back in the tube instead of just saying, “Okay, now what? How can I continue along this path?” I know it made so many of them uncomfortable to have that vulnerability and that transparency, but that is now what people want. It's what people wanted beforehand. I think people just got to see that it could be a reality, and now that's the expectation.

Tom:              Well, it's not every day that the whole world goes through a paradigm shift at once.

Colene:          Absolutely.

Tom:             That's what we've been through. It's pretty incredible.

Colene:         That one thing, I think, has exponentially increased the speed of change at work.

Tom:             Colene Elridge, CEO of Be More Consulting. Thank you, Colene.

Colene:         Thank you so much.

Tom:             For the Alltech Ag Future podcast series, I'm Tom Martin. Thank you for joining us. Be sure to subscribe to Ag Future wherever you listen to podcasts.

Sustainability – you have probably been hearing this word a lot lately. It is a hot topic around the globe right now, and beef industry sustainability is at the center of the conversation. As Dr. Jude Capper puts it, “all of us within the industry, regardless of what our role is, have to think about and have to be talking about [sustainability] going forward, because it really isn’t an issue that is ever going away.”

Capper, who has been working in the sustainability space for about 15 years, shared some thought-provoking insights into what should be considered going forward in the world of sustainability during the Alltech ONE Conference (ONE). Let’s discuss four key points Capper made in her presentation.

1. We need to define “sustainability”

“There are honestly as many definitions of this word as there are people in the universe, almost,” Capper stated. “But from a scientific point of view, and particularly when we’re talking about food and farming systems, it’s generally considered to be a balance between three things. And those are environmental responsibility, economic viability and social acceptability. And all of those things, in the long term, have to balance.”

Right now, however, the global focuses are clear: greenhouse gas emissions, climate change and net zero. This is demonstrated by companies worldwide regularly announcing some degree of net-zero-type commitment. However, what this has led to, according to Capper, are graphs and metrics being produced that attempt to measure sustainability but that neglect to accurately represent the global beef industry and its various systems around the world.

“We see a huge variation,” Capper said. “We can’t make global averages, or global commitments or globally say we’re going to implement practice ‘x,’ whatever that might be because there’s so much variation in the system.”

To further this point, she cited some data from Gerber et al. in 2013, showing a global lifecycle assessment of beef systems. The bar chart is partitioned out by region and represents greenhouse gas emissions/carbon footprint in terms of carbon per kilo of deadweight. True representation is difficult here — when you look at the world average compared to each region, it supports the opinion that we cannot expect the same systems and practices to work globally.

“We can have very clear goals, but the way that we achieve those goals is always going to vary according to the system, the region, the market, the culture and the opportunities we have there,” Capper explained. “We should always see, if we do it in a carefully considered, well-thought-out way, the positive correlation between improving efficiency, having lower carbon footprint, lower resource use and at a lower cost as well. So, there’s a positive correlation between the economics and the environment.

“But the thing that we always have to bear in mind is that just because it’s environmentally beneficial or at a lower economic cost doesn’t always mean that it’s socially acceptable.” 

2. Beef producers are utilizing sustainable practices

Capper went on to lay out ways to improve the productivity of our systems and stated that most producers are already actively pursuing these goals. However, she reiterated that there is no “one size fits all” system. 

When it comes to system efficiency, Capper touched on a few data points to put it into perspective. In her calculations, one cow in a cow-calf system needs just under 4,000 kilograms of feed, takes in just over 20,000 liters of water, and emits almost 2,500 kilos of carbon dioxide every single year. With this in mind, it could be easy to promote cutting cattle numbers and assume the world would benefit.

But, as Capper states, we must consider all of the positives that we get in terms of biodiversity, landscape maintenance, soil quality and using land where we simply cannot grow anything else to produce high-quality, nutritious food. The opportunity for showing the benefit cattle have on the environment is hard to quantify right now, but it is there. And even so, there are still ways beef producers can improve sustainability (converting crop land to grazing land, focusing on genetics, etc.).

3. Cattle can contribute to global cooling

Capper shared some data from Oxford University that clarifies some of the differences between methane and other greenhouse gases.

“In the past, we assumed that, as with carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, any methane that we emitted into the atmosphere just builds up and builds up and builds up over time,” Capper explained. “So that was under a metric called ‘Global Warming Potential,’ or GWP 100.”

GWP 100 got us one step closer to standardizing the effects of greenhouse gases. However, it did not consider the differences between methane (a short-lived climate pollutant) and carbon dioxide (a long-lived climate pollutant). GWP*, the new metric, is seen as an improved way to measure the effect individual greenhouse gases have on global warming. This is important as methane emissions from beef production are recycled as part of the biogenic carbon cycle. To keep it simple: the biogenic carbon cycle is when plants take in and store carbon dioxide that is consumed by cattle and released as methane. Then, after a dozen years or so, that methane is converted back into carbon dioxide, and the cycle continues. Because plants need carbon dioxide and cattle can consume plants like grasses, cattle are vital to this cycle. And it is even possible that cattle can contribute to global cooling through this. 

“Methane can only contribute to global cooling if methane emissions actually decline over time,” Capper stated. “And it only has to decline by a tiny bit, but they have to keep coming down rather than getting more and more and more every year (…) So that means that if we do things to improve productivity, fertility, pasture management, all of those things that I talked about earlier, such that we can make the same amount of beef, for example, with [let’s say 1% fewer cattle], then we could have a really positive effect in terms of global cooling.” Even with this approach, it is important to account for beef cattle's vital role in balancing our ecosystem and utilizing otherwise unproductive lands.

4. We need a standard carbon footprinting tool

A challenge the industry faces is creating a standard carbon footprinting tool. Ideally, one that can transcend across global regions and various production systems. There are tools out there, but we need one that is standardized and more all-encompassing. If we can accomplish this as an industry, we can confidently not only contribute to global cooling but also give producers more opportunities to market their cattle as consumers ask for data-backed sustainability claims in the meat at the grocery store.

By addressing this and the other points Capper mentioned in her presentation, she believes that the beef industry can accurately represent itself in the global sustainability space and properly demonstrate its positive impact, now and into the future.  

I want to learn more about nutrition for my beef cattle.

The International Society of Neurogastronomy (ISN) brings together chefs, agriculture experts and scientists to better understand the brain's influence on what we eat, why we like what we eat and how we eat. Bob Perry, ISN co-founder and chef in residence at the University of Kentucky, joins the Ag Future podcast to discuss the science of taste, community-supported agriculture and his research work aimed at supporting Kentucky farms through Ubatuba peppers, wheat varieties and rose veal.

The following is an edited transcript of the Ag Future podcast episode with Bob Perry hosted by Tom Martin. Click below to hear the full audio or listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Google Podcasts.

Tom:            Welcome to Ag Future, presented by Alltech. Join us from the 2022 Alltech ONE Conference as we explore our opportunities within agri-food, business and beyond.

                     I'm Tom Martin for the Alltech Ag Future podcast series, (and I'm) here with Bob Perry, chef in residence at the University of Kentucky, where he also conducts food system research and teaches courses on quantity food production and civic gastronomy. Bob has served as a chef in a wide variety of restaurant operations. He's a past board member of Chefs Collaborative and many other sustainable agricultural organizations and a co-founder of the International Society of Neurogastronomy.

                     Right now, he's exploring the production of paprika from Ubatuba peppers grown on Kentucky farms, and he's searching for a variety of wheat that can be grown in Kentucky for bread flour. He's consulting with the Wendell Berry Center on their rose veal project to support Kentucky farms, so lots of ground to cover on a subject that's near and dear to us all: food. Welcome, Bob.

Bob:              Thank you, Tom.

Tom:            First, some terms to understand here. What is the science of neurogastronomy?

Bob:              I'm trying to figure out how to make this short and sweet. It's basically the study of taste, but you have to differentiate between flavor and taste. Flavor is purely objective. You can measure flavors in foods, the different chemicals and aromatics that provide what you smell. Taste is created in the brain, so taste is completely subjective. You and I could eat the same thing. You love it; I hate it. Flavor-wise, it's exactly the same. The difference is in our minds whether you like it or not.

Tom:            So, it's all in our minds. What is civic gastronomy?

Bob:              Civic gastronomy, it's a class that I taught in the honors program at UK. I took ten freshmen honors (students), and each week, we prepared a meal from a community-supported agriculture share from the UK organic farm. The goal of the class was to cook every single item in the share every week. Each week, we looked at a topic in sustainable agriculture. I brought an expert on that topic to class, except instead of a lecture, the expert was our dinner guest. We all sat down at the table and had a lovely meal, and the students had to ask questions of the guest over dinner and then write a reflection paper.

Tom:            So, signing up for a CSA, or a community supported agriculture subscription, is that a good way to make that farm-to-table connection?

Bob:              That's a great way. It really is, because you're guaranteed to get something different every week, and you're not going to get food any fresher than a CSA.

Tom:            What other ways to connect with local farms can you recommend?

Bob:              Well, obviously, the farmers' market. I'm really pleased; I've been in this place about 20 years now, and it's really heartening to see more and more local products in more and more places. They pop up all over the place, especially in restaurants — which, 20 years ago, it was hard to get local food in restaurants. The infrastructure was just really not there. Now, we've done a lot for the infrastructure. We've got new meat processing plants across the state. We've got a whole lot more produce going through local wholesale channels that can get to restaurants easily.

Tom:            Now, I guess it's a marketing plus to be able to say that you are farm-to-table.

Bob:              Yeah. All the best restaurants are promoting what local foods they carry.

Tom:            The course title Quantity Food Production probably speaks for itself, but what ground do you cover in teaching this course?

Bob:              This is a capstone course for two majors at UK, for the dietetics and human nutrition students and for the hospitality management students. So, we bring those two majors together, and the students actually operate a restaurant on campus two days a week. They rotate through every possible position you could have in a restaurant, both front of the house and back of the house. We serve a three-course meal, mostly with local food, all cooked from scratch in two and a half hours. I tell people that understand restaurants, I say it's like opening a new restaurant with a new staff and a new menu every single day.

Tom:            For those of us who are here in the Lexington area, can we come and dine at that restaurant?

Bob:              I can always get a couple more people in, but you're on your own with parking at UK.

Tom:            As a chef, how does the scientific understanding of the interactions between food and psychology influence or inform the choices that you make in the kitchen?

Bob:              That's a big question. There are so many factors that go into making a plate of food. First is visual. You're always going to look at the food visually first; then, you've got the smells, (and) then you've got texture to consider. Then you've got the interplay of the different flavors to consider. What are you going to drink with that, also, whether it's wine or any other beverage?

                     There's a really interesting gentleman at Oxford, Charles Spence, at the Crossmodal Lab at Oxford. He has done hundreds of experiments playing around with food and eating. For instance, he found that dessert tastes sweeter on a blue plate than it does on a white plate. Coffee tastes less bitter in a black cup than it does in a white cup. He's played with some interesting — that's the reason for the name of his lab, Crossmodal. He's served people seafood dishes with and without sounds of the sea in their headphones to see whether they liked it more or less. So, it's a really fascinating field, and that's a large part of neurogastronomy, too.

Tom:            I'm going back to the blue plate and the black cup. Is that all in our heads?

Bob:              Yes, just strictly psychological.

Tom:            Wow. Bob, you're doing research into making paprika from Ubatuba peppers. How do these peppers differ from the sweet red pepper that's typically used to make paprika?

Bob:              Ubatuba is a sweet red pepper. Actually, it's very sweet. It's hard to describe on the radio. It's sort of a star shape with two domes. It's about the size of a half dollar, if anybody remembers what a half dollar looks like. We've been playing with this for several years. All peppers are from South America, obviously, and it takes a long growing season, so we don't get these peppers until right before frost. The first year I had them, I think I did 12 different treatments. We tried drying them whole, drying them split, with seeds, without seeds, different temperatures.

                     The method we found that worked the best was to dry the peppers (and) cut (them) in half (with the) seeds intact at less than 120 degrees so you don't cook the peppers. It takes about a week to dry them. I've got a commercial dehydrator. Then we grind them into a fine powder using a big Vitamix blender. When we did this without the seeds, my chef friends that I sampled this out to thought it was actually too sweet. It was very sweet. It's a really interesting flavor. It's kind of hard to describe. It's been a lot of fun. It's just something completely different.

Tom:            What happens if you leave the seeds in? How does that change it?

Bob:              It adds a little bit of heat. The seeds can be hot. There are a number of peppers: the shishito peppers from Japan and the Padron peppers from Spain. The Padron peppers, I call the lottery peppers because not all of them are hot, but occasionally, one will be quite hot.

Tom:            That's a great term. Is this paprika commercially available yet?

Bob:              No. We've had a hard time actually commercializing the growing of the peppers. It's a very long-season pepper, and we're not really quite warm enough here in Kentucky to really make a go of it.

Tom:            Oh, I see. I know that you're also searching for a variety of wheat that can thrive here in Kentucky. What conditions present in Kentucky are similar to those in other areas where farmers might benefit from your wheat research?

Bob:              Well, you need to look at that a different way. What grows well in Kentucky is soft red winter wheat, which is the perfect wheat for biscuits, dumplings, pies, cookies — things that you don't want to rise. Things that you want to rise, like breads, you want something that has a lot more protein. The hard white winter wheats and hard spring wheats have a lot more protein and, thus, a lot more starch and a lot more gluten. That makes a good bread. We're trying to find one that straddles both worlds, so it's really an agricultural problem first, but we're approaching it as a taste problem first.

                     Dr. David Van Sanford at UK, our wheat geneticist, grows thousands of varieties of wheat every year. His grad students come to my lab and grind the wheat into flour and bake breads and we taste them. (The) first thing we're looking for is a wheat that tastes good and makes a good bread. (In) the next step, David will work with the Halcombs down in Southern Kentucky on their farm and actually grow the wheat to see if it's — the term we use is “agronomically profitable”. Does it grow well? Does it yield well? Can the farmer make money with it? Because if the farmer can't make money with it, what's the point?

Tom:            Exactly. Well, tell us about your work with the Wendell Berry Center.

Bob:              Oh, I love the Wendell Berry Center. The folks up there are nice, and the work they do is incredible. Of course, most people know Wendell's work. I've known Wendell for 30 years or more. They had the idea of doing rose veal, which is done in other parts of the world. France has a fairly robust rose veal, and some other countries, too.

                     When they explained this to me, the way I thought about it is (that) this might be the most ecologically gentle way to produce beef possible. In the traditional beef market, the cow gives birth, the calf stays with the mama for about six months, (and) then it's weaned. Then it's fed out for another year. Then it goes to a feedlot, where it's fattened. It goes to processing, and then you get it.

                     (With) the rose veal, the difference is when you wean the calf at six months, you harvest it then. There are no feedlots. There's no carryover. You don't have to carry these calves through the winter, so you don't have to feed them. You cut your hay down. It doesn't take any more infrastructure on the farm. You're not building any more buildings. You're not building any houses. It's really just taking the calf at weaning and making a rose veal out of it. It's a lovely product.

Tom:            This is a completely different subject here, but what are some recognizable ways, some ways that we would notice that food advertisers use the science of neurogastronomy to influence our choices, to make us want to buy something?

Bob:              There's something called a structure function claim that the FDA allows food manufacturers to use. The structure function claim means you can say that your product may alleviate some condition. You're not saying it does, but you're saying it might. If you eat this cereal, it might lower your risk of heart disease. They can't prove it. No studies have ever been done. They let them get away with that.

Tom:            So, a good, solid grasp of the science of neurogastronomy, is that something that a budding professional chef wants to have in their toolkit?

Bob:              Oh, definitely. Gordon Shepherd's book that started it all, “Neurogastronomy,” is a fascinating read. Gordon really wrote the book for the layperson, so I encourage anybody that's really passionate about food to look into his book first. He explains how we develop our taste in our minds, but it's not just in your mind. Everything affects taste: your past, did you have a good experience with food, a bad experience with food. The one way we tell students so it's easy to understand is, “You ate something, and you got sick. You generally are not going to eat that food again for a long time, because even thinking of that reminds you that you got sick.” That's one way that your past affects taste. Also, maybe your grandmother made the best snickerdoodle cookies ever, and every time you have a snickerdoodle cookie, you love it because it reminds you of your grandmother.

Tom:            Interesting. Bob, I know that you've been a chef on private yachts in the Caribbean, on My Old Kentucky Dinner Train, the Belle of Louisville, and in the kitchens of various other restaurants, including your own French bistro. From these experiences, what stands out in your mind as having been the most impactful on your growth and development? What really made a difference?

Bob:              I was working to build a French country inn for an investor in the Blue Ridge Mountains, and it was going to be a French Provençal bistro. It's a style that I've been cooking in for a while. It's just a style that I like, and I've read everything I could get my hands on. Prior to opening this operation, I decided that if I was going to cook Provençal cuisine, I'd better go to Provence and see what it was really like.

                     In the early days of the internet — this would have been about 1997 — I went online, found a website in Provence that promoted hotels, and I put it out there. I said, “I'd like to come and work (for) anybody that would trade room and board for labor,” which was not really legal, but I got a call a couple of weeks later. This nice gentleman that owns this little, tiny hotel in Provence says, “You seem like a nice young man on the internet. When do you want to come? How long do you want to stay?” I talked to him, I think, twice on the phone. I bought a ticket. I stepped off the plane in Marseille, France, and they had a sign that said, “Chef Bob”. Pierre and his English-speaking waiter picked me up at the airport, whisked me off to this tiny little town in the French Alps called Monastère Sainte-Marie, the Monastery of St. Mary's. He and his wife owned a little hotel there.

                     The story of them is fascinating. Pierre retired. He was an electrical engineer. He retired from the French national electric company. He and his wife took over her parents' hotel that they had started right after World War II. This hotel was Picasso's favorite stop on the way to Nice in the winter. In the fall, all the artists would leave Paris (and) go to Nice for the light. If you've been to Provence in the fall, the light is really amazing. So, before the interstates (were built), it took three days to get there. The second night — this was Picasso's favorite hotel to stay in — he drew on a tablecloth a caricature of her mother and father, so they have an original Picasso of her parents.

                     Pierre's father in World War II was a Charles de Gaulle aide-de-camp. I got to meet his father. He was a very tiny man, but he was de Gaulle's right-hand man and went into exile with Charles de Gaulle; just fascinating. What I realized once I got there, in my luck — I've had this kind of luck for a lot — the chef they had at the time at the hotel had spent his three-year mandatory military training in France in the Navy stationed in Jacksonville, Florida. He spoke excellent English, which — I did not speak excellent French. So, I lived and worked in the hotel for a month straight. My wife was still teaching at Clemson at the time.

                     It struck me that the chefs over in France, they didn't have any great talent above what all the chefs I've worked with in the U.S. (had), but they had access to so much better food. The food access over there, it was really mind-blowing. We had one woman that did nothing but bring us eggs. She rotated them, and they were never refrigerated. Madame Tosh brought us goat cheese. Her family has been making goat cheese in the mountains for centuries, truly centuries. We had another man that did nothing but bring us potatoes. We had a huge potato pile in one of the basement rooms. It was things like that. All the meat came from the next town over, from a butcher shop wrapped in paper.

                     My first day there, the chef was trying to find something for this American to do. “What can I make him do?” The chef goes, “Oh, mayonnaise. Make mayonnaise.” I'm like, “Okay, that I can do.” I get the ingredients. I've got the mustard, and I've got the vinegar and shallots. I've got it all going. I'm looking for the olive oil, and I'm looking for a gallon tin can of olive oil, which is pretty much the only way I'd ever seen it commercially, and I can't find it. I'm like, “Chef, where's the oil?” He points up a high shelf around the entire circumference of the kitchen, and there are all sorts of bottles and jars filled with this deep, dark green oil. He says, “It’s everywhere.” Martine and Pierre, not only did they own the hotel; they owned an olive grove and made their own olive oil. So, it was just an amazing experience.

Tom:            What a fascinating time. That's Bob Perry, chef in residence and instructor at the University of Kentucky. Thank you so much, Bob.

Bob:              Thanks, Tom. It's a pleasure.

Tom:            For the Alltech Ag Future podcast series, I'm Tom Martin. Thank you for joining us. Be sure to subscribe to Ag Future wherever you listen to podcasts.

How can beef genetics improve sustainability on dairies? Philip Halhead, a third-generation dairy farmer and the founder, owner and CEO of Norbreck Genetics, Ltd., joins the Ag Future podcast to discuss how dairies can utilize beef genetics to protect the planet, create jobs and increase profitability.

The following is an edited transcript of the Ag Future podcast episode with Philip Halhead hosted by Tom Martin. Click below to hear the full audio or listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Google Podcasts.

Tom:            Welcome to Ag Future, presented by Alltech. Join us from the 2022 Alltech ONE Conference as we explore our opportunities within agri-food, business and beyond.

                     I'm Tom Martin for the Alltech Ag Future podcast series, and I'm here with Philip Halhead, founder, owner and CEO of Norbreck Genetics, Ltd., based near Lancaster in the United Kingdom. Philip founded the company to improve the beef-on-dairy offerings for global dairy farmers. He's with us today to focus on beef genetics and how genetics play a role in the sustainability of dairies. Welcome, Philip.

Philip:           Yes, good afternoon.

Tom:            Tell us about your work. What does Norbreck Genetics bring to the cattle industry?

Philip:           Well, (I’d like to give) a little background, if you will, if you'll just forgive me for a second.

Tom:            Please do.

Philip:           (It’s) a really interesting, passionate story. I'm a third-generation dairy farmer at Norbreck Farm, and it's the unique ability, I think, of the family and myself to understand dairy farming. I am a dairy farmer myself. I'm also unusually in the beef space. We've bred beef cattle. We have a small Aberdeen Angus herd, a small British Blue herd, (and have been) involved across multiple breeds of beef cattle over 25 years now. It's that ability to understand what the dairy farmer requires, how the industry has changed (that’s crucial). Sexed semen technology has rolled into the industry since the year 2000, and it's taken a number of years to develop and become popular and successful.

                     On the back of that, beef genetics have become imprinted into the dairy herd. We've talked extensively over the last two days about dairy-beef. It's the ability of the dairy cow and its miraculous genetic potential to produce high volumes of luxurious, highly nutritious milk, (and it’s) also producing, now, a beef calf. Ordinarily, we would require some replacements for our dairy herd. Around 25% a year would be replaced, and the sexed semen does that for us. That leaves a lot of cows to carry a beef calf, and the income stream, critically, for the dairy farmer that that provides — and the sustainability piece, which is a big piece of Alltech this week. We're talking sustainability, longevity and, ultimately, supply chains.

Tom:            How can beef genetics improve a dairy cow?

Philip:           So, it's not about improving the dairy cow; forgive me. It's more a case of producing beef from the dairy herd. What the supply chain and, ultimately, the consumer enjoys is a consistent product. So, if we imagine for a minute the 1,000-cow dairy herd, the 500-cow dairy herd, that beautiful Holstein cow, which carries little flesh — it's using its metabolizable energy and its reserves to produce that milk. When you cross that with an Aberdeen Angus or British Blue or Longhorn beef bull, you'll get this almost perfect beef animal that you can then follow through rear to possibly 12 months or a two-year-old grass-fed beef animal that then, ultimately, ends up on somebody's plate.

                     I've talked today during my piece at (the) Alltech (ONE Conference) about food with a story. That's the exciting piece in the future, is providing red meat to a consumer who wants to enjoy a consistent, tasty meat-eating experience and understand the provenance of what they're eating.

Tom:            I'm a layman, so this is a layman's question. Is beef-on-dairy a relatively recent opening up of the industry?

Philip:           That's a great question. If we look back to the U.K., I've been doing this business now for over 25 years, and beef-on-dairy has been something that's been in Europe and in the U.K., particularly, for a long time. Certainly, we could look back 40 to 50 years, and there’s been a small percentage of beef in the supply chain coming from dairy cows. But as I explained previously, it’s now accelerating, and it's accelerating all around the world with the advent of sexed semen allowing just the very best cattle genetics, the very best dairy cows to be bred for replacements on that dairy herd and allowing beef semen to be used across the rest of the herd.

Tom:            So, how is beef-on-dairy changing things in the dairy and the beef industries?

Philip:           Well, I think, again, at the cutting edge of this and the stark reality of sustainability in Europe and in the U.K., we're seeing what you call cow-calf operations; here in the U.S., (that’s) what we would call a suckler herd. Keeping one cow for a whole year just to produce one calf is questionable at best. Now, there are opportunities in more arid areas, in more rugged areas; we think about Montana and states where there are vast ranges of grassland. There's little ability to produce milk in those areas, so the cow-calf operation will survive, and it will be a major part and an important part of the beef industry.

                     But for the supply chain, for the retailer, it's almost been like a gold rush for dairy farmers to buy into the whole supply chain piece. Those herds can provide big numbers of very consistent calves that then go through the chain, and they are finished, critically, quite fast on reasonably intensive diets. Therefore, that sustainability piece, again, that is ticked, and the metrics are met that we're looking to lower imports. We have a phrase in the U.K.: sustainable intensification.

Tom:            How has this impacted the economics of the business?

Philip:           For the cow-calf operation in the U.K. and in various parts of Europe now, it's catastrophic, and that's not just the beef-on-dairy story. That's just the economics of keeping a cow for a whole year to produce one calf. We also think about (how) not every cow has a calf every year, so there's an impact of that on profitability.

                     Subsidies in Europe, as you may well be aware, have been a big piece of that pie. Subsidies are now getting withdrawn, going into environmental schemes. Some of these farmers, their land, they're rugged, so there are more arid areas. (They’re) planting trees, thinking about the ecology and actually destocking — so no sheep, no beef cattle — again, driving that change for getting the beef from the dairy herd and accelerating the change. The profitability in the dairy is an extra income, so it ticks all the boxes. Beef farmers are finding new ways to operate and looking at new environmental stewardship schemes.

Tom:            When selecting beef bulls to breed the dairy animals, which breeds are the most in demand and why?

Philip:           Well, in the U.K., it's the British Blue. It's the quite extreme double-muscle animal that was created from the Beef Shorthorn many years ago. Once the Beef Shorthorn was taken out to Belgium, the myostatin gene was identified, and this incredible animal, which is double-muscled, was developed called the Belgian Blue — now the British Blue. When you cross that onto a Holstein dairy cow, it gives an easy carving (and a) short gestation period, (and you get) the ultimate beef-cross-dairy animal because of the two extremes. You're putting a Holstein cow together with the animal and the breed that has the most amount of meat.

                     The efficiencies that are around that, the killing-out percentages we talk about in the supply chain, those British Blue-cross-Holstein would typically kill out 5% to 10% more carcass yield at a set given time. Those sorts of metrics hooked onto price create an added value both for processor and retailer. Those are the important percentages that we talk about.

                     But also, today, I've talked about the Longhorns. We think about Robert Bakewell, who is the godfather of cattle breeding. He was born in the early 1700s. In 1760, I believe, he took over his father's tenanted farm in Leicestershire and developed this Longhorn breed, which was originally a cart animal for plowing and for doing all sorts of strange things in the fields, as they did back then in the 1760s. But today, it's an animal with a great story. It's a wonderful beef animal. It's got the long horns, as the name suggests.

                     When we think about the higher-end consumer who is maybe eating less red meat but they want meat with a story — so they go to Chicago or they go to New York or they're in London for a high-end, red meat-eating experience in a restaurant. They know they're going to pay a whole heap more for that choice compared with chicken or a vegetarian dish, but they're prepared to do it because they're reading about the Longhorn, maybe about Robert Bakewell, maybe about the fact that it was produced in the Lake District fells. It creates a lovely story. They're comfortable with the provenance and the consistency of the product. It eats well, and then (there’s) that nice bottle of Malbec, Argentinian Malbec, to go with it.

Tom:            You touched on this earlier, but to zero in on it, what is the role of genetics in supporting the sustainability of the dairy operation?

Philip:           For me, the three pillars are planet, people and profit. Sustainability can be talked about in many different formats. I think there's a need to talk about the sustainability of the planet, of course, and that's the mission. Farmers, we are the solution. We're not the problem. I think that narrative is something — it's a story. We have a great story to tell about how we manage the landscape, produce food in a sustainable manner and its efficiencies. It's producing food in a more efficient way. If we can use less artificial fertilizer, think about a greater output from a similar area. Think about the genetic potential of crops and animals. That's a wonderful story.

                     But around sustainability on the dairy and the beef piece, if we can get that extra income from selling beef-cross calves from dairy cows, it puts more finance on the table. It gives, hopefully, a slightly more profitable business. The third piece of that sustainability is people; therefore, we can employ the best people in ag. One of my big things is encouraging young people to come into agriculture. It's an amazing and an exciting future for many, many young people. We need people, certainly a lot younger than I am, to teach me about technology, data and some of those wonderful tools we're going to need in the future.

So, attracting people, protecting the planet and creating more profits at farm level — and the sharing of the profit. I talked about that this morning. In the past, I think it's been a bit disproportionate. We found the retailers taking a disproportionate margin for some of these food products that the farmer produces. Possibly, the processor also tries to capture some margin, and it leaves the poor farmer quite often with either a negative margin or a very small margin. So, we have to close the supply chains down. We have to have a more open dialogue, and the sustainability comes from that.

Tom:            Buyers tend to dislike uncertainty. How would you rate the predictability and the consistency of the beef-on-dairy concept?

Philip:           We heard yesterday from the Texas university professor about the scientific evidence around beef-cross-dairy animals. There's a hormone — well, I say hormone, but it's a natural hormone; this isn't an artificial thing — around dairy cows that gives extra flavor and consistency. There's a certain pack size as well. In the U.K. — I'm not too au fait with the USDA standards, but in the U.K., typically we're looking for a 350-kilo carcass. It's a standard pack size.

                     When I talk to retailers, they try and fit a pack size to a price. Typically, in the U.K., you need a 4.99- or 4.95-pound price tag, just below the five-pound level. People are happy to pick that up so that the thickness of the steak they're collecting off the shelf, the look of that steak — in Europe, we would have less requirement for intramuscular fat, whereas in Asia, the wagyu breed is very popular. It's quite a greasy meat-eating experience but one that's sold as the ultimate meat-eating experience. So, really understanding your consumer, really understanding what it is you're trying to provide, for whom, and at what price level.

Tom:            You collaborate closely with supply chains. And in these times that we're in, many of the world's supply chains are backlogged (or) even overwhelmed right now. How are supply chains that are essential to beef and dairy operations performing in this environment?

Philip:           Certainly, there's some challenge around carcass balance. We see some of those prime cuts, the filet steak, some of those higher-end cuts are needed (and) provided — we just talked about that — in some of the higher-end restaurants and (for) the wealthier consumer. The danger is that a bigger proportion of the carcass is devalued into the minces and the smaller primal cuts that just end up in a really discounted format. That's a challenge for processes, but we've got a slightly bigger challenge, and I think that is one of supply and supply disruption.

                     We are seeing record prices in the auctions for cattle. We're seeing record demand. I'm certainly looking and thinking, “Globalization.” Whilst it's still alive and well, it's possibly been looked at as not the solution for the future. There's a sort of realization — and some countries are actually preventing exports of food products, so that creates disruption in supply and availability. There's an opportunity for farmers to capitalize on that, but not in a greedy way. We need these supply chains to run efficiently.

                     It's a very tight-margin business we're all in, but we also have to capture more value because just in the same way that beef prices are at a record level, all our commodity products that we're buying into the farm are also. We think about fertilizer, wheat and some of the major products that we buy into our dairy units, into our beef supply chain, (our) beef finishing units. They are seeing record price increases. Unfortunately, we're all just moving up a level to a higher reality of expensive food.

Tom:            In your work, do you follow consumer trends? If you do, what are you seeing happening out there?

Philip:           Yeah, very much so. The early signs are of a distressed consumer. Energy and food poverty is going to be on the increase. The worry there is not really too much for a European (or) U.K. consumer and some of those wealthier, more developed countries, but I think my worry is for less developed nations around the world and the potential for literally malnutrition and starvation on a scale we haven't seen — or we thought we'd solved, to some degree — over the last 10 or 15 years. I think that's really back on the table. It's going to give a lot of people thinking time. The Arab Spring, of course, was caused by disruption to food supply and increases in commodities, and it wasn't at anywhere near the levels we're seeing now, (with) 200% and 300% increases in some food staples.

                     There's a political instability that we're going to have to watch and be very nervous about. But ultimately, we can also turn and be positive about where we are. As farmers, I've said it before, we have got the solutions. We've got the tools. We've got the knowledge. We've got the education. We've got a wonderful story to tell. I think we have to be brave about doing that and making sure that investment is continuing into good production systems that are sustainable for the planet and ultimately feed more people.

Tom:            All right. That's Philip Halhead, founder, owner and CEO of Norbreck Genetics, Ltd. Thank you very much, Philip.

Philip:           Thank you very much.

Tom:            For the Alltech Ag Future podcast series, I'm Tom Martin. Thank you for joining us. Be sure to subscribe to Ag Future wherever you listen to podcasts.

As we roll through the summer months, signs of heat stress in beef cattle become an increasing concern for those in the industry. An inability to dissipate heat causes heat stress in beef cattle and can lead to reductions in growth rate, health, milk production, reproductive efficiency and survival associated with heat stress. These contribute to significant losses to producers. While the cost of heat stress to the livestock industry is difficult to calculate accurately, several estimates have been made. St-Pierre et al. (2003) estimated up to $2.4 billion dollars in heat stress-related losses across all species within the US, with more than $350 million associated with the beef industry.

Typically, feedlot cattle are more susceptible to heat stress than cattle on pasture. In the feedlot, heat stress-related animal death costs ~$5,000 per head (Mader, 2002). Since those estimates were made, heat waves have become more frequent. A heat wave in 2006 resulted in the death of 25,000 cattle in California (Nienaber & Hahn, 2007), costing the dairy industry $1 billion (CDFA, 2006). In June 2009, more than 2,000 cattle died during a heat event in Nebraska. Farmers in Iowa reported upwards of 4,000 head of cattle lost in a 2011 heat wave. There have continued to be heat stress related incidents affecting cattle.

As research has delved into the effects of heat stress that reach far beyond production measures, it has become clearer that even when cattle do not show signs of heat stress, they may still be negatively impacted. Some hidden costs of heat stress include greater incidence of rumen acidosis, laminitis and dark cutting beef. Further, conception rates, sperm quality, milk yield, gut barrier integrity and immune function are adversely affected.

What factors can lead to beef heat stress?

While beef cattle are more resilient to heat stress than many other species, they still suffer negative effects. Even cattle exposed to the same environmental conditions and management practices vary widely in their ability to handle high environmental temperatures. Below are some key areas identified as indicators of an animal’s ability to cope with heat stress and suggestions on how to address them.

1. Genetics

• Bos indicus breeds have greater heat tolerance than continental breeds. Choosing location-appropriate breeds or crossbreds and timing breeding to best suit local conditions can mitigate many heat stress problems for calves.
• Cattle with dark hides are more susceptible to heat-related issues. In a group of closely related cattle with different hide colors, researchers found a 2°F higher core body temperature in cattle with dark hides. 
• Hair length is considered a moderately heritable trait. The slick gene found in Senepol cattle and Spanish-origin breeds results in a shorter coat and correlates to heat tolerance in cattle. 
• In addition to coat length, the timing of shedding is also a factor. Adjusted 205-day body weight was 24.1 pounds higher in calves from dams that shed by May in a trial by researchers at Mississippi State University and North Carolina State University.
• Calmer cattle have been shown to be more heat tolerant than excitable ones. This is likely due to reduced stress response to handling, leading to lower metabolic activity and heat production in the animal.

2. Health

• As cattle do not sweat effectively, they primarily use respiratory cooling to regulate body temperature. Thus, respiratory health is critical to managing a high heat load. Research at the Meat Animal Research Center (MARC) shows that cattle treated for pneumonia any time between birth and slaughter have a 10.5% higher respiration rate under stressful conditions in the feedlot.
• Cattle undergoing heat stress are more susceptible to illness, but the converse is also true. Cattle in poor health going into a heat event may not have adequate energy reserves to adjust metabolic activity to facilitate body cooling.

3. Production stage

• A feedlot is generally hotter than pasture due to radiant heat from dirt and concrete pads and the lack of shade and water typically available to pastured cattle.
• Heavier cattle are at more risk. The development of fat cover reduces the efficacy of heat dissipation mechanisms, with more heat from digestion and metabolism retained in the body. Cattle at the end of finishing should be watched closely for heat stress, as should cows with higher BCS.
• Adult animals can become heat-stressed at temperatures as low as 80°F if there is high humidity or little air movement. While calves are more heat-tolerant than mature animals, they are still susceptible to heat stress-related reductions in feed digestibility and energy redistribution, leading to lower growth and immunity.

4. Previous exposure to heat

• Cattle previously exposed to high temperatures are better able to tolerate additional heat events. Cattle producers in southern regions should be aware that cattle brought in from northern areas are likely to be much more sensitive to heat stress.
• Heat stress can negatively affect the immune function, growth, milk production and metabolic resiliency of cattle, even after the high temperatures have passed.

The local environment also plays a role in how well cattle handle the heat. Cattle do not dissipate heat as effectively as other species when temperatures are high. They accumulate a heat load during the day and dissipate heat at night as temperatures decline. When making management decisions in hot weather, remember that a cow’s core temperature peaks two hours after environmental temperature peaks, and it takes at least six hours for cattle to dissipate their heat load. Thus, if nighttime temperatures do not drop sufficiently, cattle will accumulate heat they cannot disperse. Therefore, a temperature-humidity index (THI) alone may not predict cattle heat stress because it does not account for this accumulated heat load.

How to manage heat stress in beef cattle

The best ways to manage heat stress in cattle involve planning practices that limit stress and provide cattle with cooling methods when needed. The USDA-ARS has excellent resources for forecasting and managing heat stress. Below are some suggestions to keep in mind:

• When possible, a shaded area should be provided to allow 20–40 square feet per animal, with the shade placed at least eight feet above the ground to allow good airflow. 
• Cattle increase respiration with temperature rises, necessitating higher water intakes. For growing animals, a temperature increase from 70–90°F nearly doubles water requirements. Ensure clean, cold water is available, with at least three linear inches of water space per head.
• Heat production from digestion peaks 4–6 hours post-feeding. Adjusting feeding times to provide 70% or more of feed in the evening allows cattle to digest during the coolest portion of the day.

• While windbreaks can be beneficial in the winter, if possible, they should be removed during the summer to allow for better air circulation. Similarly, limiting brush height in pastures can aid in keeping cattle cool.       
• Heavy fly loads will cause cattle to bunch together, exacerbating heat issues. A strong fly control problem is critical for management during hot weather.
• Watch the weather and, when possible, avoid working cattle on the hottest days and limit holding times where they are bunched or away from shade and/or water. If cattle need to be worked, do so in the early morning while they have low body temperatures and work slowly and calmly to help them manage the multiple stressors of heat and working.
• Sprinklers can be used to soak animals and aid evaporative cooling. Sprinklers should have a large droplet size, be used intermittently to limit mud formation and positioned away from bunks and feeders. Sprinklers should be considered preventative and require acclimation (once used, they must stay in use).

Some aspects of nutrition can also be considered to aid cattle in managing hot weather. Dietary protein should be examined as urea/urine production from excess protein is energetically costly and heat-generating. Similarly, high-forage diets can be problematic, as the heat produced from digesting fibrous material is much higher than that from grains and concentrates. However, cattle are more susceptible to acidosis during heat stress, so concentrate intake should be closely managed. Research indicates that lowering the energy content of the diet will decrease the heat load on the animals, with a general recommendation to reduce the diet energy content by 5–7%. Some feed additives have been proven to aid cattle during heat stress by helping maintain rumen pH balance, supporting digestion and through other actions. These additives can help maintain feed intake and health during heat stress.

Ultimately, managing beef cattle is a multi-faceted challenge that requires balancing the specifics of the cattle, environment and facilities of each individual production program.

I want to learn more about nutrition for my beef cattle.

The research behind food security suggests that only a handful of nations are protein-insecure. But is the data overlooking the importance of protein quality? Dr. Vaughn Holder, ruminant research director at Alltech, joins the Ag Future podcast to discuss the role digestibility plays in getting an accurate gauge of global protein security and the positive impact that cattle have on the health of people and the planet.

The following is an edited transcript of the Ag Future podcast episode with Dr. Vaughn Holder hosted by Tom Martin. Click below to hear the full audio or listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Google Podcasts.

Tom:            Welcome to Ag Future, presented by Alltech. Join us from the 2022 Alltech ONE Conference as we explore our opportunities within agri-food, business and beyond.

                     I'm Tom Martin with the Alltech Ag Future podcast, talking with Dr. Vaughn Holder, director of the Ruminant Research Group at Alltech, and he joins us to talk about the contribution of beef to global food security. Welcome, Dr. Holder.

Vaughn:        Thanks, Tom. Great to be here.

Tom:            How would you characterize world food security today?

Vaughn:        This is a really important question to start this conversation, Tom, because it's important to know where you are before you can decide whether we need to do something about the situation. I think it's a really important thing that we look at this.

Now, Paul Moughan is a researcher from a university in New Zealand, and he was the one who actually discovered that the way that we're looking at food security in the world today is probably incorrect, which is quite the realization to come to in 2022 — or this was probably 2021 when it was published. Basically, what it is is that they've been looking at the amount of protein that populations get and using that on what they call a gross protein basis. What that means is essentially the total amount of protein that those populations are getting and comparing it to how much we need.

Now, the problem with that is that we've known this in animal nutrition for a long time, so that's what makes it kind of entertaining for an animal nutritionist, but you need to correct the protein that you're eating to the amount that you can actually absorb and the amount that your body can actually use at the end of the day. When you do that, you go from a small handful of nations being protein-insecure to probably almost half of the planet being protein-insecure, because you are correcting for the poor digestibility primarily of plant proteins, because plants are quite difficult for us to digest as a species.

Tom:            Why is it important when we're talking about food security to include protein quality in the equation?

Vaughn:        That's just it, is that the requirement of our body is in a certain amount that can get into our body and that we can utilize.

Tom:            Is a protein a protein no matter where it comes from, or are there differences between proteins derived from plants versus animals?

Vaughn:        No. Certainly, that's the point. Proteins coming from animal origin are usually complete proteins. They are usually highly digestible because they're in the form that the body needs them. It's how the animals store them.

Tom:            What are your views on plant-based meats and milks and so forth and talks that they will someday replace conventional products?

Vaughn:        This is a really interesting conversation because we need to be very careful about how we talk about them replacing it. I think it's fine if you talk about them replacing it in terms of the food that we eat, the taste of the food. But we need to be really careful to not make the statement that the plant-based meats and milks are actually being produced. In other words, they are not a source of food production. They are made from existing food that we have within our systems and essentially mixed in recipes to taste like meat and milk. That's no problem in and of itself, but if we start replacing protein production with protein processing, we're going to end up with a starving planet pretty quickly.

Tom:            So how do ruminants fit into this world's food supply picture?

Vaughn:        I'm a little biased as a ruminant nutritionist, but ruminants are essentially the natural recycling centers of the world. They turn all the things that we can't use, all the nutrients in the world that are locked up in these plants —  particularly in grasses, byproducts and also food waste — it allows us a second crack at those nutrients. It allows us another way of getting those nutrients back into our systems and actually being able to utilize them through the ruminants themselves.

Tom:            We've touched on this a little bit a few seconds ago, but I want to just take it a little bit further. There may be only a handful of countries in the world that are experiencing protein malnutrition, but for many of the rest, are there issues and concerns around the quality of the protein that their populations are consuming?

Vaughn:        Yeah. That's at the center of Paul Moughan's work, and that's saying that on a gross protein basis, there are only a handful that are protein-insecure. But when you factor quality into it, the amount that people are actually getting into their systems means that probably more than half the world is protein malnourished.

Tom:            What are the implications of that on human health?

Vaughn:        There are dramatic implications, particularly on development in children. We had a speaker at the conference now this week who spoke specifically about the role of protein, protein quality and brain development in infants. It's critically important both to brain development and in terms of development of the body itself. Stunting is obviously a very, very big issue in nations where protein security isn't what it should be.

Tom:            It's been interesting. In the course of the interviews that we've done over the past several days, there's been something of a recurring theme about how we're awakening to just how really profoundly food — what we take in — really does govern how we feel, our actual overall health. I don't think we think of it that way day-to-day.

Vaughn:        No, we certainly don't, but it is at the heart of everything. It's the interaction, it's the direct interaction between us and our environment.

Tom:            It should make sense, but I just don't think we realize it.

Vaughn:        It doesn’t take a lot to step back and just think about why it should make so much sense, Tom, because that's everything that goes into our bodies.

Tom:            Right. Many food production industries generate byproducts. Rather than allowing those byproducts to become waste to be tossed aside, are some provided to the livestock industry as feed?

Vaughn:        Yeah. I was just giving a talk today about the dairy industry's use of these byproducts. There are two factors with that. The byproducts — about 40 metric tons a year — are all fed into the dairy industry, and those byproducts have another crack at entering our food system, at being nutrients that we can actually utilize.

                     But the second piece of that, Tom, is that if there aren't cattle utilizing those byproducts, those byproducts end up in compost heaps or landfills. And as byproducts entering compost heaps, they will end up generating five times the amount of greenhouse gases that they would if they went through a cow and 49 times as many greenhouse gases if they actually went into a landfill as if they went into a cow. So, the role that cattle play at keeping those byproducts out of the environmental greenhouse gas picture is one that we don't really talk about very much.

Tom:            When we're talking about byproducts, are there dominant byproducts in the industry?

Vaughn:        Yeah. It depends on where you are regionally, but if we're talking about North America, probably the biggest one would be distillers grains. We put a lot of infrastructure and funding into ethanol production in this country to subsidize the fuel industry. There's a ton of byproducts that come out of that. That's probably the most dominant one, but then you go back to the more traditional ones, like soybean meal, canola meal. These are the things that we use as the basis of many animal nutrition rations.

Tom:            What are the advantages and the benefits of using byproducts in countering the effects of greenhouse gas emissions in climate change?

Vaughn:        I referred to it a little bit earlier on in the conversation, but it's essentially keeping those things out of landfills and compost heaps. It reduces the greenhouse gas footprint of those. It seems counterintuitive, right? We're all told, “We feed cattle, and when we feed cattle, that makes methane,” but those products that are going through those cattle will make a lot more methane if they don't go through the cattle and get a lot of those nutrients actually captured up.

Tom:            Any unintended consequences of the process?

Vaughn:        Of the use of byproducts by cattle?

Tom:            Yeah.

Vaughn:        I think that it's been in use long enough that we know pretty well what they do in the cattle, and it really is quite well-quantified.

Tom:            Back to quality protein. I seem to be stuck on that, but it's interesting. When a society that has been protein-deficient transitions to higher-quality protein sources, what happens? What sorts of changes take place among the consuming population?

Vaughn:        It's interesting. We had a speaker speak in our beef session earlier in the week. He actually spoke about (how) if we could fix the protein insufficiency in the nations of Earth that are protein-deficient, that the IQ of the world population would go up by ten points. We're talking about the world population as a whole. The entire world population's IQ would go up by an average of ten points. You can imagine the knock-on effects on economies of stunting and brain development and these types of things in the poorer nations. You expect these nations to lift themselves out of poverty, but if they are stuck with a situation where they have improper physical and brain development, that becomes quite difficult.

Tom:            I have a question here that, if you have the answer for it, I think the world will beat a path to your door, but let's go for it. Agriculture, food and climate join at the hip pretty much. How do we fix food insecurity while staying mindful of the climate crisis and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

Vaughn:        I think the world assumes that these things are in diametrically opposite directions, and they are not in diametrically opposite positions. As we learn how to do food production better, it involves the elimination of waste necessarily. The better we get at this, the less waste (that) gets generated through the process of generating protein. We've been doing this all along. I know it sounds like a cop-out for agriculture to say, “This is what we've been doing all along,” but it is what we've been doing all along. We just have to now become a little bit more deliberate about the environmental side of things to say that, now, (it) becomes very much a primary part of our consideration alongside food security.

Tom:            Can environmental impact provide a new value proposition for agriculture?

Vaughn:        I think that that will happen eventually. There is going to be a situation with — agriculture sits in a unique position in that we actually capture carbon to produce food as our industry. Our industry is capturing carbon and turning it into food, so we're halfway there. We're the only industry that captures carbon for a living. I think, certainly, there's no other industry that exists at the scale and at the interface between carbon and the Earth as agriculture does, so I think we certainly will. It's just going to take carbon credit systems to come into place to fund a lot of this stuff.

Tom:            How close to that are we?

Vaughn:        Very certainly, by marketplace, I think there are some market drivers that will push that forward. Places like Europe have active carbon trading systems. Places even like California are actively trading carbon, so it's happening at varying degrees in different places, but I think it's not going to really take off the way the world envisions until everybody gets onto the same program (of) this trading carbon internationally.

Tom:            What's going on out there in your world, in your field, right now that really excites you?

Vaughn:        We're a group of ruminant nutritionists at Alltech. That's my group, and that's our major role. As ruminant nutritionists, we look very, very closely at the cow. A major mind shift that's occurred with us probably in the last two years, since we've been working with an ecology group down in Florida, is to change our mindset a little bit as to what the unit of production is. Instead of looking at the cow as the unit of production, we are looking at an ecosystem as a unit of production, because not only do we want to look at what the cow is doing — what's coming in and out of the cow — but the most important thing is what's coming in and out of the ecosystem.

                     If we're talking about carbon, how much carbon is captured? How much carbon is going out? We need to know what the ecosystem is doing, so we have to really have a mind shift in how we think about this and think about (the) ecosystem production of protein with cows as a piece of that ecosystem.

Tom:            That's fascinating. Dr. Vaughn Holder, director of the Ruminant Research Group at Alltech. Thank you so much, Dr. Holder.

Vaughn:        I appreciate it very much, Tom.

Tom:            I'm Tom Martin for the Alltech Ag Future podcast series. Thank you for joining us. Be sure to subscribe to Ag Future wherever you listen to podcasts.

During the 38^th annual Alltech ONE Conference (ONE) in Lexington, Kentucky, Alltech was pleased to host 65 journalists from approximately 20 countries. Another 213 were in attendance virtually, representing nearly 35 countries. In a presentation on Monday, several awards were presented to honor a few of those international agricultural journalists for their excellence and leadership in sharing the stories of agriculture.

“Compelling, fact-based communication has never been more important for society, and that holds especially true for agriculture,” said Dr. Mark Lyons, president and CEO of Alltech. “No other business sector is as integral to planetary health. The stories of agriculture production, industry innovations and sustainability efforts must not only be told, but told well, which underscores the importance of the work of agricultural media.”

In partnership with the International Federation of Agricultural Journalists (IFAJ), Alltech is pleased to announce Lindi Botha of South Africa as the recipient of the 2022 IFAJ–Alltech International Award for Leadership in Agricultural Journalism. This recognition honors Alltech’s late founder, Dr. Pearse Lyons, who was a passionate storyteller with a great respect for agricultural journalists.

Botha is an agricultural journalist and communications specialist and serves as the deputy chairperson of Agricultural Writers South Africa. She has an unrelenting passion for agriculture and for writing stories that serve to enhance the sector and arm farmers with the knowledge they need to succeed in these times of political, climatic and economic uncertainty. The fast pace at which the agricultural landscape is changing necessitates an increased awareness to ensure that journalists are up to date with the latest trends and technology, and Botha prides herself on effectively and timeously communicating these advancements to farmers. A core focus of her work is communicating success stories within agriculture and ensuring that the sector is seen as a positive contributor to social change and economic upliftment.

Alltech is also proud to partner with the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Agricultural Communicators (Red CALC). The ninth annual Innovation and Quality Awards in Agricultural Journalism were presented to Sofia Neumann of Chile and Nicolás Gómez Bernal of Ecuador.

Neumann’s winning article, entitled “5 Chilean innovations that will impact the agricultural industry,” was published in Chile’s Financial Journal and addressed the impact of the adoption of research and development in the fruit sector of Chile.  Neumann highlights how the country has positioned itself as the main fruit exporter in the Southern Hemisphere with advances in areas such as breeding technologies, the automation of labor and fruit processing. Today’s biggest challenge is the transfer of knowledge to medium and smallholder farmers.

Gómez Bernal’s award-winning report, “RAZA 4 joins Latin American countries in defense of their plantations,” published in the newspaper El Productor de Ecuador, focuses on the banana industry as the first export area of many Latin American countries. However, the new Fusarium fungus, known as Tropical Race 4, could directly affect this sector. As such, different regional agencies and governments have begun taking proactive steps to help prevent the spread of this plague.

The IFAJ–Alltech International Award for Leadership in Agricultural Journalism and the Red CALC Innovation and Quality Award in Agricultural Journalism align with Alltech's vision of Working Together for a Planet of Plenty^TM, in which a world of abundance is made possible through the adoption of new technologies, better farm management practices and human ingenuity within agriculture. Alltech is proud to partner with these organizations and to support the mentorship and education of these communicators, who connect agriculture to a global audience and share the stories of agriculture through balanced, independent, evidence-based information.

“IFAJ and Red CALC share our commitment to supporting journalists who give a voice to the farmers and producers, the innovators and change-makers, and the scientists and scholars all working toward a Planet of Plenty,” said Lyons. “On behalf of Alltech, I congratulate Lindi Botha, Sofia Neumann and Nicolás Gómez Bernal as the well-deserving recipients of these awards.”

For more information about the IFAJ–Alltech International Award for Leadership in Agricultural Journalism or the Red CALC awards, contact press@alltech.com.

-Ends-

Contact: press@alltech.com

Jenn Norrie

Communications Manager, North America and Europe

jnorrie@alltech.com; (403) 863-8547

Video download: https://bcove.video/3kM8Sct

Image download: https://photos.alltech.com/pf.tlx/w2dw2cXwdGbR5

Image caption: Lindi Botha of South Africa is the recipient of the 2022 IFAJ–Alltech International Award for Leadership in Agricultural Journalism.

Image download: https://photos.alltech.com/pf.tlx/5wM5I2v5oabsc

Image caption: Steve Werblow (left), vice-president of the International Federation of Agricultural Journalists, accepted the 2022 IFAJ–Alltech International Award for Leadership in Agricultural Journalism on behalf of Lindi Botha of South Africa from Dr. Mark Lyons (right), president and CEO of Alltech at the 2022 Alltech ONE Conference.

Image download: https://photos.alltech.com/pf.tlx/2W2yDd2yI4jf6

Image caption: Sofia Neumann of Chile was recognized by Alltech and the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Agricultural Communicators (Red CALC) with an Innovation and Quality Award in Agricultural Journalism.

Image download: https://photos.alltech.com/pf.tlx/H3EH84MH8PQs2Z

Image caption: Nicolás Gómez Bernal of Ecuador was recognized by Alltech and the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Agricultural Communicators (Red CALC) with an Innovation and Quality Award in Agricultural Journalism.

Image download: https://photos.alltech.com/pf.tlx/yDEycYdyi9zoN

Image caption: Dr. Mark Lyons (left), president and CEO of Alltech, presented the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Agricultural Communicators (Red CALC) Innovation and Quality Awards in Agricultural Journalism to Sofia Neumann (right) of Chile and Marlene Bernal Munoz (middle), accepting on behalf of Nicolás Gómez Bernal of Ecuador, at the 2022 Alltech ONE Conference.

Image download: https://photos.alltech.com/pf.tlx/vwvZcvXIhnod

Image Caption: Alltech is proud to partner with the International Federation of Agricultural Journalists (IFAJ) to recognize excellence and leadership by young journalists with the IFAJ–Alltech International Award for Leadership in Agricultural Journalism.

Image download: https://photos.alltech.com/pf.tlx/VzGVtfVfnjMD

Image Caption: Alltech is pleased to partner with the Network of Agricultural Communicators of Latin America and the Caribbean (Red CALC) to recognize the winners of the Innovation and Quality Award in Agricultural Journalism.

About Alltech:

Founded in 1980 by Irish entrepreneur and scientist Dr. Pearse Lyons, Alltech delivers smarter, more sustainable solutions for agriculture. Our products improve the health and performance of plants and animals, resulting in better nutrition for consumers and a decreased environmental impact.

We are a global leader in the animal health industry, producing specialty ingredients, premix supplements, feed and complete feed. Strengthened by more than 40 years of scientific research, we carry forward a legacy of innovation and a unique culture that views challenges through an entrepreneurial lens.

Our more than 5,000 talented team members worldwide share our vision for a Planet of Plenty™. We believe agriculture has the greatest potential to shape the future of our planet, but it will take all of us working together, led by science, technology and a shared will to make a difference.

Alltech is a private, family-owned company, which allows us to adapt quickly to our customers’ needs and maintain focus on advanced innovation. Headquartered just outside of Lexington, Kentucky, USA, Alltech has a strong presence in all regions of the world. For more information, visit alltech.com, or join the conversation on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.

[Ciudad de Serdán, Mexico] – On April 5, Alltech took steps to advance its leadership in sustainability through the company’s first global renewable energy project, a photovoltaic solar energy system, located in its production plant in Serdán, Mexico. The plant also presented its new source of compressed natural gas, which will help to considerably mitigate its environmental impact.

During the event, which was attended by local authorities, industry representatives and Alltech’s president and CEO, Dr. Mark Lyons, it was highlighted that this new energy system — designed by the company Iberdrola — will cover 46% of the Alltech Serdán plant’s energy needs. This will result in an energy savings of 22% in the first year, and an annual reduction of 20% of its CO₂-eq emissions (665 fewer tons of CO₂-eq emissions).

 “Alltech strives to have a positive impact in the 350 global communities in which we live and work, and our team in Serdán has long been exemplary in this regard,” said Dr. Mark Lyons. “Today, they have taken a tremendous step forward in advancing our efforts to reduce the environmental impact of our operations.

“The milestone completion of these energy projects was also a celebration of this team’s long-standing spirit of ‘making a difference.’ The products produced at this facility are at the core of our Planet of Plenty™ vision, which aims to improve animal welfare and feed efficiency, while ensuring nutrition for all and reducing environmental impact. For example, the Serdán team is committed to replanting yucca plants — three for each one harvested in the production of our De-Odorase® product — and they consistently put the community at the forefront of their endeavors. This facility and our local team members are truly a testament to our vision of Working Together for a Planet of Plenty™.”

Alltech Serdán also inaugurated a new system for the use of compressed natural gas, a more environmentally friendly fuel, which will further contribute to a reduction in its environmental impact. Designed with the company Enepres, this new energy source, unlike liquified petroleum gas, emits 30% less carbon dioxide (CO₂) and 65% less carbon monoxide (CO). The result is an annual reduction of 17% of its CO₂-eq emissions (570 fewer tons of CO₂-eq).

"These projects readily demonstrate Alltech's interest in investing significantly in energy efficiency and renewable energy," said Paul Kilgallen, Alltech Serdán plant manager. "The initiatives support our efforts to offer sustainable solutions that optimize the productivity of livestock producers, and at the same time, uphold the social responsibility we have as a business and as an industry."

Alltech Serdán’s new energy system and transition to natural compressed gas are also representative of Alltech’s efforts to achieve its emission reduction goals by 2030, deliver on its commitment to several UN Sustainable Development Goals, and achieve its vision of a Planet of Plenty™.

The Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (GRSB) has ambitious goals for the global beef industry. Ruaraidh Petre, executive director of the GRSB, joins Ag Future to discuss their mission to advance, support and communicate continuous improvements in the sustainability of the global beef value chain through leadership, science, and multi-stakeholder engagement and collaboration.

The following is an edited transcript of the Ag Future podcast episode with Ruaraidh Petre hosted by Tom Martin. Click below to hear the full audio or listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Tom Martin:             I’m Tom Martin.

                                 Alltech recently became a member of the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, which is leading the global conversation on beef sustainability.

                                 And joining us for this episode of AgFuture is its executive director, Ruaraidh Petre.

Welcome, Ruaraidh.

Ruaraidh Petre:       Thank you. Pleasant to be here.

Tom Martin:             And, for context, first, if you could, give us a bit of information about your background.

Ruaraidh Petre:        My background? I grew up in Scotland in a farming community. And from a young age, I aimed to get involved in agriculture, mostly livestock agriculture, in that part of Scotland.

                                 I used to work on farms as a schoolkid and later went on to study agriculture at a university; did a master’s degree as well and took up farm management. And my only career was in farming, both in Scotland but also further afield, in New Zealand, where I now live, and in Australia.

                                 And following that, I really went on a step past, more toward agricultural development in lower- and middle-income countries. I spent a lot of time in Asia, Central Asia — so India, Pakistan, Afghanistan — and subsequently in Africa. So, I spent several years in Southern Africa as well. And all of that gave me quite a sort of broad view of, particularly, livestock systems, because that’s what I was always working on and (had) a real desire to try and improve and contribute to, particularly to produce livelihoods and to ensure that they were getting the best out of what they could do.

Tom Martin:             And so, how did you become involved with the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, the GRSB?

Ruaraidh Petre:        I was living in Botswana at the time and there was an announcement, there was going to be a meeting — his was in 2010 — and in Denver, Colorado, to discuss the sustainability of the beef industry. And that was close to my heart. Botswana is a beef producer and exporting country, a very arid country with its own sustainability challenges.

                                 And so, I attended that meeting and was really impressed by the number of organizations who are committing to this and getting involved. So, I got involved as well as one of the founding members; the organization I was working for at that time became one of the founding members of GRSB, and it really moved on from there.

                                So, when I left Botswana and I was back in Europe, I was only back in Europe for a couple of months when GRSB contacted me and asked me if I would like to join as the executive director, which I’ve been doing since 2012 now.

Tom Martin:            Well, since that initial gathering in Denver, how many members or companies have joined up with the GRSB globally?

Ruaraidh Petre:       We’ve got very good global coverage. We’re now over 100 companies and organizations. So, some of them are producer organizations, for example, which represent a very large number of people, and some are just individual companies. So, yeah, over 100 and still growing.

Tom Martin:            The mission and the vision of the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef are concentrated in three areas: climate, nature-positive production, and animal health and welfare.

                                 Let’s look at each of these issues. First, climate.

Ruaraidh Petre:       We set three goals last year. Our members have all committed to following these goals. And the one on climate is to reduce the net global warming impact of beef by 30% by 2030 on a pathway to climate neutrality.

                                And that’s quite an ambitious goal, particularly for the global beef industry. Many of our member countries have already got a goal. And so, for example, Australia and New Zealand have already got the goals, and for example, the NCBA in the United States also has a climate goal.

                                 So, we wanted to take all of those and show the commitment of the global industry. It’s a big challenge, because there are some countries where the emissions are still growing, so we need to reverse that trend, and we need to really start getting the whole industry on a pathway toward neutrality.

Tom Martin:             Well, (with) 2030 just under eight years away, what do you think — can that goal be met?

Ruaraidh Petre:        I think it can be met. It is ambitious, and I think goals are only worth setting when they’re ambitious, because you have to have something to measure yourself against and really demonstrate you’re — you’re seeing change.

                                There are a number of reasons why I think it can be met. There are increasing numbers of technologies available to help reduce the climate impact of beef production, but there are also — there’s increasing recognition of the role of things just like good grazing management and sequestering carbon in the soil.

And that has been almost discounted from the discussion on the climate impact of beef up to now. So, people recognize that it’s a possibility, but beef livestock assessments really don’t take carbon sequestration into account. And that has to change, because we have to be able to show the full system impacts of beef production and the fact that there are some very positive impacts of doing things well.

So, I’m not saying it’s an automatic thing, but when people improve their grassland and grazing management, they really can turn around from being an emitter of carbon to being a sequester-er of carbon.

Tom Martin:            I mentioned that there are three pillars of the GRSB vision and mission. We just talked about climate. Another is nature-positive production. What is meant by that?

Ruaraidh Petre:       So, nature-positive production — and this really relates, again, back to climate — but it’s also really focused on biodiversity. And it won’t have escaped any producer’s attention that the beef industry has been in the spotlight very frequently — particularly in Latin America, but also in some other parts of the world — for being responsible for deforestation, land conversion and generally having an impact on biodiversity.

                                So, we would like to see that trend being reversed. Ever since we set our principles and criteria back in 2014, we said we want to enhance biodiversity and restore ecosystems. So, this is a commitment to doing that, again, by 2030.

                                So, becoming nature-positive really means that the production system is enhancing soil health and enhancing biodiversity, and it’s contributing to good ecosystem function.

Tom Martin:            How is the roundtable looking out for animal health and welfare?

Ruaraidh Petre:       The animal health and welfare is, obviously, a critical one, in social terms. It’s also critical, really, to the performance for producers. Good health and welfare will contribute to a productive and efficient system.

                                And producers, you know — this is no secret to anybody who’s been involved in it — they really respect their animals, and they want to look after them. They want to give them a good life.

                                Of course, there are sometimes bad examples that we see, and they tend to get a lot of exposure when there are bad examples. So, it’s not that we thought that was something systemically wrong, but we do need to make sure that we can demonstrate (that) we’re improving animal health and animal welfare.

                                 And there are particular things, you know, in some parts of the world where there’s still excess mortality for various reasons — and, sometimes, not even well-understood reasons.

So, this particular goal will involve research and working with producers in different regions to work at what the issues are and to help resolve those issues.

And with all of our — with all of our goals, and with all of our principles and criteria, we have to recognize that production systems are really varied (around) the world. And you have numerous different ways of solving problems, and you have a different set of problems in each place.

Tom Martin:            Sustainability is a really hot topic rig ht now, and the definition can feel very broad (and) very elusive, actually. How does the GRSB define sustainability?

Ruaraidh Petre:       Well, it’s interesting you should ask that because, as I’ve said, we defined this really quite some years ago — in 2014 was when we put out our definition, and it’s not short. Our definition of sustainable production, sustainable beef, is actually 12 pages long. So, it’s not something that trips off the tongue exactly.

Sustainability is defined as socially responsible, economically viable and environmentally sound. Those are the three starting pillars for sustainability. And then, GRSB defines five core principles on which we’re built. So, they are: natural resources, which I’ve already talked about in terms of nature-positive and climate impact.

And we have people in the community; that one really focuses on how people are treated within the system. So, employees need to be employed with a fair wage and reasonable conditions. We need to make sure that local communities are not negatively impacted by the beef industry, etc. So, there’s a number of social criteria in there.

                                Then, we have animal health and well-being, as you’d expect. And I’ve already talked a little bit about that.

We, then, have a principle on food, which is really about food. Of course, naturally, food safety, that’s a prerequisite for any food system, but also transparency along the food chain, so that people have access to information about: Where is their food coming from? And how is it produced?

                                           And then, the fifth of our principle of — for sustainable beef is efficiency and innovation. And this may sound like something of an outlier, but we feel it’s important to recognize that there are going to be opportunities in the future for improving things that we don’t yet have available (that) are going to become available. And data sharing is one of those innovations around, for example, feed additives that can improve performance for cattle or can reduce emissions, for example. These are all going to be important things in the future.

 So, we wanted to recognize that there’s a role for technology and efficiency and innovation and not prescribe something that comes from the past. We also need to look at the future.

Tom Martin:             Has the GRSB set sustainability goals? And if it has, could you tell us about them?

Ruaraidh Petre:       So, the three goals that we set last year are focused on climate, on nature-positive production, and on animal welfare, the ones I already talked about. And they — they’re all goals that have a date of 2030, so to keep us time-bound, and they’re all quite ambitious.

                                 Again, it’s important that we, we really keep ourselves on our toes. It’s also important that we measure what we do. It’s no good just having a set of, say, guidelines, for example, which are optional. We really need to hold ourselves to the level of ambition to demonstrate that we’re actually making a difference.

So, that is why we set those goals. And we were fortunate that our members voted overwhelmingly in favor of those three goals, and it’s possible that we’ll add more goals in the future on the basis of our principles and criteria.

Tom Martin:            Ruaraidh, how can sustainable beef production have a positive impact on nature itself?

Ruaraidh Petre:       Well, beef production — particularly going back to what I was talking about grazing management, grazing systems, they encompass very large areas of the planet — often, areas where there is still quite a large abundance of wildlife. Even starting at the soil, the soil is usually bio-diverse, and healthy soils are more bio-diverse than unhealthy soil.

                                And then, going right up through all the species of plants that grow on that soil and that are available in well-managed grazing system — if you are doing things right, you’ll have a healthy insect population, you’ll have a healthy bird population, you’ll have a healthy ungulate population or wild herbivores. There are huge numbers of species that can co-exist in a well-managed and sustainable beef system.

                                So, when we talk about being nature-positive, we’re talking about all of those kinds of things: incorporating, for example, areas of trees. They could just be shade trees, or they could be preserved areas of forests and farms that protect biodiversity.

                                Having a mosaic of grazing system, trees, etc., on a property can really contribute a lot to nature and to biodiversity.

Tom Martin:            We talked earlier about animal health and welfare, but how can sustainable beef production specifically have a positive impact on animal health and welfare?

Ruaraidh Petre:        I think, without good animal health and welfare, you can’t have sustainable beef production. That will be the way I would put it. You know, we must respect the animals that we manage all the way through their life. We must ensure that we’re giving them the best lives we can.

                                So, one of the things that we specifically call out in our goal for animal health and welfare is pain mitigation and the adoption of that. Now, that’s complicated in some countries, because these are pharmaceutical drugs which are not always approved for use in different countries.

                                So, then, we must look for a method to allow the registration of those for use or we must look for alternative. And there’s a good example of an alternative through genetics and breeding. You know, one of the most painful procedures which is often used on cattle is dehorning. And there is, of course, (the) polled gene: we can breed cattle without horns, and that avoids the need for dehorning.

                                So, where we can introduce the polled gene into a cattle breed, that is a welfare improvement that contributes to sustainability and to animal welfare.

Tom Martin:            Interesting.

                                What kind of outreach are you doing now? You, of course, responded to a call twelve years ago, and so, conversely, what’s going on now?

Ruaraidh Petre:       So, we continue to build our networks of companies. We bring in producers, we bring in processing companies. We’re really built on a whole-chain approach.

                                So, we have six constituencies; that starts with the producer, and that’s really fundamental for what we do. If we don’t have the buy-in and the collaboration with producers, I don’t think we can achieve much. So, the producers are really fundamental to us.

                                The next one along the chain is the processors — so, the people, the meat packers, who are buying cattle off those producers. And then, we have a constituency which we call commerce, which is really a bag full of input providers, including financial services.

                                So, you’ve got pharmaceutical companies, you’ve got banks, etc. And they’re an important adjunct to the industry; they can really help with sustainability. Banks, for example, can finance sustainability initiatives, but also, the input providers, technology providers, have a role to play.

                                Further up the chain, we have the retailers. So, that would be the restaurant chains but also the supermarket chains who are buying beef. They’ve got a direct link to the consumer, of course, and they know what the consumer is asking in terms of sustainability, so they’re important to have around the table to translate what we can do and what we can deliver into language that consumers can understand — and vice versa, so they can tell us what consumers are asking.

                                We also have civil society, which means non-government organizations — people like World Wildlife Fund, but also academics. And we have a number of university departments that are involved, and they can give advice on what’s feasible and has a science that can back up things that we want to do.

                                 And then, the final two, actually — we have national roundtables (and) 24 countries represented in our, in our global roundtable. There are 12 national or regional roundtables, some of them covering more than one country, and that’s how we got up to a total of 24.

                                And then, finally, we have allied industries — people like the leather industry and dairy and so on. So, (they) can definitely support what we’re doing; they can take information from the beef industry into their own industry. Leather, of course, is also something that — the fashion industry is often challenged on the sustainability of what they’re doing, and they have an important role to play as well.

                                So, with that whole-chain approach, we can, we can really reach a lot of people and drive change (and) create demand for and recognition of sustainable goods.

Tom Martin:            Ruaraidh, what do you enjoy most about this work?

Ruaraidh Petre:       I enjoy the interaction with people all over the world. And I guess my career over 25, nearly 30 years now has been quite international. I really still enjoy that interaction with people from different places and learning about the different ways people do things. For the past couple of years, that has been quite tricky. It meant a lot of new goals, of course.

But the world is starting to open up again, and I’m looking forward to being able to visit more people. We’ve got an innovation field tour for our Latin American members in Paraguay later this year. We’re going to have our global conference in November in Denver, and there are many other opportunities for me to visit different countries and to learn more about what’s happening in each part of the world. So, that’s what I really enjoy about it.

Tom Martin:            All right. That’s Ruaraidh Petre speaking to us from New Zealand, where he is executive director of the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef.

                                Thank you, Ruaraidh.

Ruaraidh Petre:       Thank you.

Tom Martin:            And for Ag Future, I’m Tom Martin.

The Alltech ONE Conference (ONE) will feature tracks that will uncover the challenges and opportunities in agriculture, business, health and wellness, and professional development. Now in its 38^th year, Alltech’s global agri-food conference continues to be an invaluable resource, uniting thought leaders and changemakers in an exploration of the power of science, sustainability and storytelling. This annual flagship event will be held May 22–24, both in person in Lexington, Kentucky, and virtually on a first-class platform, with live-streaming keynote and select on-demand track presentations available to ensure accessibility to everyone, everywhere.

Many topics* are slated for discussion at ONE, including:    

Aqua

• Holistic Gut Health: The Latest Improvements in Fish Nutrition
• Inside Out: Developing Healthy Skin, Guts and Gills
• Wave of the Future: Exciting New Developments in Aqua-Tech
• Aqua Investors: The Big Bad Wolves — or Our Rescuers?
• Aqua On Top: Building on Aquaculture's Unfair (Sustainable) Advantage

Beef

• Beef and Global Food Security: Resource-Use Efficiency for Protein Production
• Looking Ahead: Consumer Trends and Beef Production Systems
• Beef x Dairy: A Growing Link in the Supply Chain
• Beef and Global Food Security: Resource-Use Efficiency for Protein Production
• Better Connection: Why This Telecommunications Company Invests in Beef
• Better Beef: Exploring the Need for Innovation in the Beef Industry
• A New Day for Beef: Turning Sustainability Challenges Into Opportunities
• A Blueprint for Success: Getting Team Buy-In for New Products
• Organic Trace Minerals and Their Impact on Fetal Programming

Crop Science

• Little Bugs, Big Impact: Soil Microbes and Fertility
• Planting the Seed: Growing Through Strategic Partnerships
• The Growing Field of Crop Science: Performance, Sustainability and Innovation
• Bridging the Gap: Merging Conventional and Biological Innovations to Drive Crop Productivity
• Soil Biological Analysis: A Simple Tool for On-Farm Soil Health Assessments

Dairy

• Dairy Market Trends: Making Predictions During a Pandemic
• Dairy Gone Digital: Sustainability and On-Farm Technologies
• Planning for Success: Animal and Human Welfare on Dairy Operations
• Crème de la Crème: Large Herd Management in the Desert
• Predictions and Positioning for the Next 10 Years
• Chewing the Cud: Transparency and Communication in the Dairy Industry
• Sharing the Plate: Exploring Byproduct Utilization
• Bringing Data to Sustainability: Alltech E-CO₂
• Lessons Learned: Sustainability Goals for the Dairy Industry
• Transition to a Successful Lactation Cycle

Equine

• Exceptional Equines: All About Regenerative Medicine for Horses
• Taking Flight: Finding a Niche in the Horse Business
• Forage Quality: How Is It Measured, and Why Is It Important for Your Horse?
• Recipe for Success: How Mrs. Pastures Became the Top Horse Treat in America
• Achieving Greatness: Olympic Dreams — and A Lot of Hard Work
• Start 'Em Young: Building the Equine Bone Matrix
• Not Just a One-Trick Pony: 10 Great Social Media Strategies
• The Significance of Selenium: Exploring A Decade of Research

Pet

• The Golden Years: Strategies for Senior Pet Health
• Your Pet and You: Pet and Human Crossover Trends and Insights
• Brain Power: Supporting Our Pets' Cognitive Health at All Life Stages
• The Truth About Pet Food Mergers and Acquisitions: Revelations from an Industry Insider
• Planet-Friendly Pets: Sustainability Hot Topics in the Pet Industry

Pig

• The Zinc Oxide Ban: Nutritional Ramifications and Global Implications
• Caring for Disease-Challenged Pigs: Can Changing Nutrient Sources Affect Their Performance?
• The Buzz About Xylanase: Is It Here to Stay?
• Transformational Trends: How Can the Swine Industry Meet Consumers' Demands?
• Pork Producer Panel: The Challenges and Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
• Long Live the Sow: Protecting Your Herd
• Sustainability in Pork Production: The New Normal
• Developing a Productive Gilt: How Nutrition Affects Lactation
• Sow Mortality: Addressing an Industry-Wide Issue
• Smart Farms: Integrating AI and IoT Into Commercial Pig Operations

Poultry

• Protection Through Immunity: A Holistic Approach to Poultry Production
• Leveling Up: Improving Sustainability at Each Stage of Poultry Production
• Knowing Poultry Consumers and Delivering What They Want
• Antibiotic Resistance: A Hidden Problem for Poultry Production
• We're All in This Together: How COVID-19 Impacted the Poultry Industry
• Poultry Innovations: Where Are We Now, and Where Are We Going?
• Driving Demands: Shifting the Focus to Poultry Welfare
• Efficient, Sustainable Performance: The Impact of Organic Trace Minerals
• Balancing Animal Welfare and Sustainability: A Global Panel Discussion
• Understanding Coccidiosis: A Proactive Approach to a Major Poultry Challenge

Business

• The Power of Why: Aligning Business With Purpose
• Price Pressure: Doing Business During a Pandemic
• Business as (Un)usual: Embracing New Models
• From the Great Resignation to the Great Re-Engagement
• From Soil to Slainté: Making Irish Whiskey
• Echoes of War: The Global Impact of Conflict
• Making Moves: Turning a Vision Into Reality
• Partnering for Success: Why Business is Better Together

Health and Wellness

• The Science of Happiness: How to Make it Work for You
• Eating for Health and the Planet: A Guide to a Sustainable Diet
• Managing Stress and Overcoming Burnout: How to Live With Intention and Purpose
• It's Not Just Your Genes: Understanding the Equation That Drives Your Health
• Migraines and the Diet: The Myths vs. the Facts
• The Promise of Health Through Agriculture

Neurogastronomy

• Neurogastronomy: A Road to Global Health and a Planet of Plenty
• The Neuroscience of Flavor and Flavor Manipulation
• Extraordinary Eating: Enhancing Food Health and Flavor Through Neurogastronomy
• Food, Farming and You: What Neurogastronomy Can Teach Us About the World
• How We Eat is Who We Are: Gastronomy as a Shared Destiny

Stay Curious

• Redefining Resilience: Know Your Achilles Heel
• Crossed Wires: Culture and Communication
• Pitch With a Purpose: Innovation Driven by Compassion
• If I Can: Limitless Potential In Practice
• Pulling Up a Chair: Inclusion as a Key to Success
• Safety First: The Non-Negotiable of Psychological Security
• Do Things, Tell People: The Power of Personal Branding and Social Media Storytelling
• The Power of Purpose
• Meaningful Career Connections
• XYZ: Leading the Alphabet Soup of Generations
• Winning Body Language for a Successful Career

*Topics are subject to change. Some track topics are virtual or in-person only. Check the agenda for details.  

In addition to the many track topics, ONE attendees will be inspired by keynote speakers who have unleashed the power of innovation and courageous leadership to make a positive impact, including:

• Mick Ebeling, founder and CEO of Not Impossible Labs and author of “Not Impossible: The Art and Joy of Doing What Couldn’t Be Done,” will take the ONE mainstage in person, and his presentation will also be live-streamed for those joining virtually.
• Paul Polman, presenting virtually at ONE, has been described by the Financial Times as “a standout CEO of the past decade”. While serving as the CEO of Unilever, he stopped reporting quarterly earnings to focus on a long-term strategy that would successfully double revenues while reducing the company’s environmental impact by half.   
• Heather White, author, founder and CEO of “OneGreenThing,” will present on the mainstage at ONE, and her presentation will also be live-streamed for those joining virtually. She brings two decades of environmental advocacy work and national nonprofit leadership to life with her joyful and practical book, "One Green Thing: Discover Your Hidden Power to Help Save the Planet".
• Dr. Mark Lyons, president and CEO of Alltech, will welcome all ONE attendees, both in-person and virtually. Based on Alltech’s belief that agriculture has the greatest potential to shape our world’s future, he launched the company’s vision of Working Together for a Planet of Plenty™ in 2019. He has called for collaboration to improve nutrition, human and animal well-being, and the replenishment of natural resources.
• Nikki Putnam Badding, will present in-person and virtually during ONE about the crucial importance of making nutrition accessible to all. As a registered dietitian nutritionist, she brings human health expertise to her role as managing director and chief dietitian of Acutia, Inc., an Alltech company.

• Dr. Karl Dawson, scientific advisor with Alltech, will join the keynote lineup in person and virtually to discuss how animal agriculture can be part of the solution to improving sustainability.

As the Alltech ONE Conference returns live to Lexington, Kentucky, after being a virtual-only event for the past two years, it will also feature a weekend of fun-filled activities for all. For more details about the ONE Weekend activities and tours, visit one.alltech.com/one-weekend.

Registration for the Alltech ONE Conference is open at one.alltech.com. Join the conversation across social media with #AlltechONE.