Beef is Not to Blame
The Extraordinary Environmental Benefits of Regenerative Cattle Agriculture, and How to Identify Regeneratively Farmed Beef Products
by Saadat Faiz
The negative effects of industrial animal agriculture on the environment are a major conservation issue I would like to tackle head-on, not only because I am highly passionate about the subject matter but also because agriculture has a massive impact on our environment. In fact, agriculture is the number one cause of environmental destruction on our planet! How we farm affects biodiversity levels, the spread of pollution and dangerous chemicals, the health and sustainability of our soil, and greenhouse gas production. Animal agriculture, in particular, emits greenhouse gases at levels so high they are on par with the entire global transport sector! Animal agriculture is also the largest driver of biodiversity loss. As a lifelong animal lover, first-year graduate biology student, and independent writer and filmmaker, advocating for regenerative animal agriculture is something I am fiercely passionate about. I have a deep respect for nature’s cycles and a genuine fascination with how domesticated animal species and agriculture impact existing ecosystems in nature.
Cattle agriculture, in particular, is a hot topic- the consumption of beef has been highly demonized by mass media with the not-so-accurate notion that consuming beef contributes to environmental degradation. In reality, the situation is not as simple as “beef=bad.” In this article, I will discuss the environmental benefits of regeneratively farmed, grass-fed beef and explain how to determine the “eco-friendliness” of beef products. One of the primary goals of this piece is to explain to consumers the different farming styles of beef products and how to determine if a particular beef product is helping or harming the environment. So, let’s get right into it!
IT'S NOT THE COW, IT’S THE HOW
Beef can be very harmful to the environment, but it all depends on how and where the cows are raised. Many consumers believe plant-based products are automatically better for the environment simply because they’re made of plants. The truth of the matter is not so black and white. For example, a vegan diet consisting of plant-based food products grown using industrial monocultural farming methods contributes to biodiversity loss, soil degradation, water pollution, and more negative environmental consequences. Whereas a steak from a cow raised on natural pastures using rotational grazing methods is not only a carbon-neutral product, but it is also carbon-negative!
So, how do we determine whether a food product is good for the environment? The crucial factor to consider here is the environmental impact of growing, harvesting, processing, and packaging the food product. How can the rather complicated task of determining this environmental impact be done accurately? The answer is simple: Comparing life cycle assessments (LCA). An LCA is a tool to determine the environmental impact and resources used throughout a product’s entire life cycle. LCA scores are based primarily on net carbon emissions. High LCA scores indicate products that are worse for the environment because it means that the product has a larger net carbon footprint. Comparing LCA scores is an unbiased, science-based procedure that precisely determines which products are the best environmental options (Thorbecke & Dettling, 2019).
Consumers often choose foods based on extremely broad facts, such as whether or not they are plant-based. They are not to blame, as popular media and advertising have pushed this narrative for many years now.
Figure 1: An infographic showcasing the difference between conventional cattle agriculture (left) and regenerative cattle agriculture (right). Image obtained from sacredcow.info/helpful-resources
CATTLE AGRICULTURE AND CARBON EMISSIONS
Cow burps are ruining the planet. As an individual reading that statement, does it sound true or somewhat ridiculous? For me, it’s a bit of both. Cows do indeed exhale greenhouse gases, and there are over 90 million cows in the United States alone. That’s a lot of gas! A carbon molecule in the atmosphere traps heat from the sun. A methane molecule traps even more heat. Cows exhale both carbon and methane almost every second. So, it would make logical sense to conclude that cows are contributing to climate change and the melting of the poles. However, there is one important factor to consider as well- the effect cows have on grasslands. In short, cows cause grasslands to sequester more carbon than they would without cows.
Before humans spread throughout North America in the millions and deteriorated nature for the sake of civilization, back when nature was pristine with just tribes of Indigenous Peoples, were there any cows on the continent at all? Or any hooved animals similar to cows? Yes, yes, there were, and that is an understatement. North America was teeming with 30-60 million bison, tens of millions of elk, deer species, and other hooved creatures. But then, why were greenhouse gas emissions and climate change not an issue back then? The answer is simple.
These millions of animals were freely roaming the landscape and grazing the grasslands they stumbled upon. They weren’t being stuffed into feedlots or fed corn and grain to be fattened up for our plates and palates- they were grazing. They were doing what they were biologically designed to do. On top of that, the grasslands they grazed on actually benefited from the grazing! The grass grew quicker and stronger and, in the process, absorbed more carbon from the atmosphere than it would have without any animals grazing it! Think about that for a second. Grasslands and pastures sequester more carbon when being grazed upon by herds of ungulates than they do without any kind of animals impacting them! So much so that beef from regenerative farms have far lower carbon footprints than beef from conventional farms that practice industrial farming techniques. It is a miracle of nature that such a wonderful balance exists between animals and plants. However, it is a system that modern industrial cattle agriculture has not taken advantage of.
Figure 2: An infographic revealing the differences between holistically managed (regeneratively farmed) land and conventionally managed (industrially farmed) land regarding carbon emissions and sequestration. Image obtained from savory.global/science_library/holistic-vs-conventionally-managed-land/.
The modern industrial farming system relies on grains to feed livestock. In fact, much of the farmland you see while using satellite imagery on Google Maps is farmland that is being used to grow grain for this purpose. Meaning we are farming food not to eat it but to feed it to animals that we will eventually eat. This system of farming land to grow food to feed animals that feed us is astronomically inefficient. To make matters worse, the method of farming required to grow grains, industrialized monoculture agriculture, is very harmful to the environment. It calls for the usage of harmful pesticides, herbicides, and insecticides, which have a lasting effect on species that unknowingly ingest or become exposed to them. Industrialized monoculture agriculture also requires large swathes of forest and biodiversity hotspots to be destroyed so rows upon rows of a single species of grain or corn can be planted. To make matters worse, this species is often a genetically modified one that is routinely coated with layers of pesticides and herbicides. All in all, industrial monoculture agriculture is devastating for the environment. It is the primary cause of the destruction of Borneo’s ancient forests, a huge biodiversity hotspot, and one of the largest carbon sinks on our planet. A carbon sink is a natural environment, such as a forest or ocean, with the ability to absorb large quantities of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. In the case of Borneo, natural forests are being deforested to make space for monoculture palm farms that produce palm oil. In the case of beef, we have to ask ourselves, HOW was this beef product produced?
We shouldn’t be destroying nature to grow food to feed animals to feed us. Whoever started this style of farming (there were many money-motivated individuals in the early 20th century who helped kickstart this method of farming) clearly was not thinking in the long term. Instead, we should be farming by using nature to feed animals that feed us. Instead of growing corn to make highly processed grains that will fatten up our farm animals and turn them into unhealthy, obese organisms, we should just let our domestic animals graze on natural pastures and feed on natural resources that come from nature.
This is what they are biologically and evolutionarily designed for, and it has been proven by science to not only be an infinitely sustainable form of food production but also to enhance the health and function of pastures! A pasture, by definition, is land that is covered in grass and low plants suitable for grazing animal species. It’s essentially a grassland meant for grazing. One of nature’s most beautiful cycles is how pastures are able to grow faster and sequester more carbon from the atmosphere when they have animals grazing on them at natural levels.
In regenerative cattle agriculture, this means allowing animals to graze on the pasture, but not for too long, to where the pasture becomes overgrazed. A delicate balance must be struck by the farmer. Growing food this way calls for a deep understanding and partnership with nature. A real relationship. Trust me, it’s far less complicated than it sounds. American farmer and author Will Harris is a pro at it. I was given the opportunity to see firsthand how easy and routine it is for him to cycle his herds of cattle from one paddock to another on his 3000-plus acres of land in Bluffton, Georgia. It was a sight to behold. The inspiration for his cattle farming system came from studying Africa's ecosystems under the tutelage of Zimbabwean farmer and author Allan Savory. By producing beef this way, Will Harris and his team at White Oak Pastures are sequestering carbon out of the atmosphere and locking it away into the roots and soil of their pastures 24/7! This style of cattle farming is known as rotational grazing, and it is one of many styles of regenerative agriculture. LCAs performed on beef from White Oak Pastures by the company Quantis reveal shocking results. The LCA results indicate that White Oak Pastures’ beef has a carbon footprint that is quite literally 111% lower than beef from the average conventional US beef system.
When you really understand the science and beauty behind Will Harris’ farming system and all the natural processes going on at White Oak Pastures, you begin to realize that this entire farm has the potential to become one big carbon sink! Quantis' studies prove it; all sources can be found in the references section below.
Figure 3: Quantis: Carbon Footprint Evaluation of Regenerative Grazing at White Oak Pastures, Results Presentation
Figure 4: Quantis: Carbon Footprint Evaluation of Regenerative Grazing at White Oak Pastures, Results Presentation
Figure 5: Quantis: Carbon Footprint Evaluation of Regenerative Grazing at White Oak Pastures, Results Presentation
WHEN BEEF IS BAD FOR THE PLANET, PERIOD
Due to its importance, I couldn’t publish this article without including this section. So, let’s get right into it. Even the most organic, grass-fed beef is not great for the environment in some regions. In fact, it is quite harmful- it’s tricky, but stick with me here. It all goes back to LCA scores. For instance, many sources of grass-fed beef from South America are NOT environmentally friendly because tropical rainforests are being deforested to create cattle pastures. Yes, tropical rainforests are being replaced by cattle farming operations. This is a grave concern because tropical rainforests are one of the largest carbon sinks in existence. Very few things are better at absorbing atmospheric carbon and locking it away underground than dense forests. So when you deforest a healthy forest in order to farm cows, that same land is now sequestering far less carbon than it was when it was a forest, and the beef products produced from that land will inevitably have higher LCA scores when the tropical forest’s carbon sequestering levels are taken into account. Not to mention, tropical forests harbor the highest levels of biodiversity on Earth. Deforesting them leaves millions of species homeless. Sacrificing slices of the Amazon Rainforest for beef is NOT worth it.
However, if an existing grassland or pasture is chosen for a cattle farming operation, this is great for the environment and is the best way to farm cattle. It’s the most natural way to raise cattle- on vast swathes of pasture that are already existing in nature, and there is no need to deforest existing plant communities in this situation. Studies such as Quantis’ have revealed that rotational grazing on that land can produce beef products with a negative LCA score. Producing beef on an existing grassland will actually take more carbon out of the atmosphere because of the impact that cattle are having on the pasture and on that grass’ ability to sequester carbon. The grass will grow better and more naturally, as it was meant to grow with the laws of nature; animal activity on grasslands and pastures is good for grasslands and pastures. Earth does not have ecosystems where it’s just grasslands and plants and no animals. Animals are a HUGE part of the equation for a large, fully functional ecosystem. And animals are an essential part of the equation when it comes to producing food for humanity. There are studies that reveal that a vegan world, a vegan food production system, would be absolutely disastrous for our planet due to the environmental dangers of mass monoculture agriculture. “Environmental dangers” is putting lightly.
Regenerative agriculture, on the other hand, is about creating and supporting natural ecosystems that produce food for humanity. It does not call for removing existing ecosystems to produce beef, especially not ecosystems as complex and diverse as tropical rainforests! A tropical rainforest is not the correct ecosystem for a large ungulate such as a cow, and regenerative agriculture recognizes that. The correct ecosystem for large ungulates is grassland ecosystems. Regenerative farming seeks those kinds of ecosystems in nature (grassland ecosystems) to start a cattle farming operation. Other parties don’t mind eradicating an existing forest ecosystem to try and construct a human-made grassland ecosystem. In this day and age, we must protect our remaining forests to the best of our ability, especially if we wish to solve our climate issues.
HOW TO DETERMINE THE ECO-FRIENDLINESS OF A BEEF PRODUCT
This guide is geared primarily toward consumers living in the US, or in an area where existing grasslands are being used for cattle agriculture. Manipulation is a key strategy many food companies use to get consumers to purchase their products. These companies are not thinking about the future of our environment- they are concerned with selling as many units of their products as possible. Not all food companies have this mentality- certainly not companies that work with regenerative farms. However, many companies claim or outwardly showcase their “love” of natural food and the environment through meaningless labels and names such as “Farm Fresh” or “All Natural.” However, these same farms support food production methods that destroy the environment. Such as industrialized monoculture agriculture and raising cattle in feedlots instead of pastures. They do this to cut down on their costs and acquire higher immediate financial gains. Whether it’s a steak, sausage, patty, or jerky, here are a few key criteria you should look for when deciding to purchase a beef product:
Grass-fed: This signifies that the cow you are eating ate grass at least for a period of its life.
Grass-fed and Finished: This signifies that the cow ate grass for the majority of its life. Pasture-raised is often added beside this label.
Transparency: The brand or farm is willing to share the production process of their beef either through having physical farm locations that can be visited by consumers or social media pages where videos of their exact animals and how they spend their lives are shared with the public.
Organic: Although this term is often used to greenwash food products, it’s still a term to look for when purchasing food products. Organic food products tend to have lower LCA scores and are better for the environment than non-organic food products.
No Antibiotics Used: There were no harmful antibiotics used on the cows. Antibiotics are often required on cattle that have unhealthy lives, without access to pastures, and a primarily grain-based diet.
Animal-Welfare Certified: It’s still quite hard to find beef products with this label, but it is the most important physical label on this list. This label is approved by AGW (agreenerworld.org) and guarantees that the cattle/livestock were raised outdoors their entire lives. Smaller regenerative farms, such as Serendipity Farms in Wolverine, MI, tend to have this label.
Usually, you would want to see a combination of the above list of criteria on a single product to be sure its production benefits the environment. For instance, having a single label reading “grass-fed” on the packaging of a beef product does not necessarily mean the product has a great LCA score or is contributing to the health of the environment. On the other hand, a combination of labels such as “grass-fed and finished,” “pasture-raised,” “organic,” and “no antibiotics” all on one beef product almost ensures that it is a great product that was farmed using regenerative farming practices. Nowadays, some labels even state that the meat has been “regeneratively raised.” Again, it’s a good idea to make sure the beef product you are purchasing has more than just one of the criteria I covered here. If you see the Animal-Welfare Certified label on the packaging of a beef product, it is highly likely that most, if not all, the other criteria will be labeled on that product as well. But even the Animal-Welfare Certified label isn’t the absolute best criteria to look for when purchasing a beef product.
That criterion is transparency. Transparency is the most important criterion on this list, and it is also the hardest one to find for a beef product in the USA. As a consumer, if you want to know the source of your beef product, such as the exact farm and the exact animals, there will most likely be many hurdles and middlemen between you and your desired answer. This is because most beef companies would rather not share how they are raising their cattle because their process of producing beef is not a pretty sight to see. These tend to be the same companies that support industrial cattle agriculture and maximize immediate profits without consideration for the long-term sustainability of their system, the environment, and the health of their consumers.
For consumers who do not have access to this information, choosing which brand of beef to support can be a very confusing matter. Especially with all the manipulation in the labeling. Please share this article with anyone you believe might benefit from this knowledge! Not only does supporting regeneratively farmed beef contribute to the health of our environment, but it is also a far healthier product for our bodies! It is also a moral choice to support the humane treatment of livestock, which, at the end of the day, are living creatures with souls. I can go deeper into this aspect in another article, as it is quite a heavy subject on its own.
For readers wishing to dive even further into the terminology and nomenclature of food products (not just beef), I highly recommend reading this book: Feeding You Lies: How to Unravel the Food Industry’s Playbook and Reclaim Your Health.
An accompanying video for this article I created. The handsome young man in this video is me.
NOTE: Will Harris was recently interviewed by the legendary Neil deGrasse Tyson and Russel Brand! Check these interviews out!
CONCLUSION
I hope that after reading this article, you have a clear understanding of the differences between regenerative cattle agriculture and industrial cattle agriculture. Seeing past the manipulative labels and determining which beef product is best for you and the environment is also something I hope you learned from my article. If you understand the benefits and beauty of regenerative cattle agriculture, I hope you choose to support this method of beef production from the consumer end. I personally consume regeneratively farmed meats from White Oak Pastures, Polyface Farms, Seven Sons Farms, and Serendipity Farms by ordering from their online catalog. I recommend these farms from which to purchase meat, but these are definitely not the only ones. Check your local region for small regenerative farms, and support them by trying their products! Below are some documentaries and books to look into for further knowledge on this subject:
Documentaries:
Food Inc. (2008) directed by Robert Kenner
Kiss the Ground (2020) directed by Josh Tickell, and Rebecca Harrell Tickell
Sacred Cow (2020) directed by Diana Rodgers
Books:
Dirt To Soil by Gabe Brown
A Bold Return to Giving a Damn by Will Harris
Folks, This Ain’t Normal by Joel Salatin
Sacred Cow by Diana Rodgers and Robb Wolf
For the Love of Soil by Nicole Masters
Regenerative Farms to Support:
More resources: savory.global
References:
Attenborough, D., & Hughes, J. (2022). A Life on Our Planet: My Witness Statement and a Vision for the Future. Grand Central Publishing.
Boscardin, L. (2018). Greenwashing the animal-industrial complex: Sustainable intensification and the Livestock Revolution. In Contested sustainability discourses in the agrifood system (pp. 111-126). Routledge.
Cusworth, G., Lorimer, J., Brice, J., & Garnett, T. (2022). Green rebranding: Regenerative agriculture, future‐pasts, and the naturalisation of livestock. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 47(4), 1009-1027.
Fardet, A., & Rock, E. (2020). Ultra-processed foods and food system sustainability: what are the links?. Sustainability, 12(15), 6280.
Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M. Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S., ... & Suh, S. (2009). Recent developments in life cycle assessment. Journal of environmental management, 91(1), 1-21.
Gerber, P. J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., Mottet, A., Opio, C., Dijkman, J., ... & Tempio, G. (2013). Tackling climate change through livestock: a global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
Harvey, F. (2019). Can we ditch intensive farming-and still feed the world. The Guardian.Lal, R. (2004). Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change. Geoderma, 123(1-2), 1-22.
Land to Market. Force of Nature. How Regenerative Farming Works. Infographic. (n.d.). https://forceofnature.com/pages/about-us
Meijaard, E., Brooks, T. M., Carlson, K. M., Slade, E. M., Garcia-Ulloa, J., Gaveau, D. L., ... & Sheil, D. (2020). The environmental impacts of palm oil in context. Nature plants, 6(12), 1418-1426.
Monbiot, George (2022). Regenesis: Feeding the World Without Devouring the Planet. Penguin Books.
Northen, G. (2011). Greenwashing the organic label: abusive green marketing in an increasingly eco-friendly marketplace. J. Food L. & Pol'y, 7, 101.
Rodgers, D. & Wolf R. (2020). Sacred Cow: The Case for (Better) Meat: Why Well-Raised Meat Is Good for You and Good for the Planet. BenBella Books.
Rodgers, D. (Director). (2020). Sacred Cow [Film]. n.d.
Rowntree, J. E., Stanley, P. L., Maciel, I. C., Thorbecke, M., Rosenzweig, S. T., Hancock, D. W., ... & Raven, M. R. (2020). Ecosystem impacts and productive capacity of a multi-species pastured livestock system. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 4, 544984.
The Sacred Cow Project. Sacredcow.info
Salatin, J. (2022). Landscape management: ecological engineering in temperate areas. In Managing Healthy Livestock Production and Consumption (pp. 129-136). Academic Press.
Savory Institute. Holistically Managed Land vs. Conventionally Managed Land. Infographic. (n.d.).https://savory.global/science_library/holistic-vs-conventionally-managed-land/
Thorbecke, M., & Dettling, J. (2019). Carbon footprint evaluation of regenerative grazing at White Oak Pastures. Georgia: White Oak Pastures ve General Mills.
Vaartnou, T. (2017). In good conscience: fast food, greenwashing and advertising.
Weis, T., & Ellis, R. A. (2020). ANIMAL FUNCTIONALITY AND INTERSPECIES RELATIONS IN REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE. Routledge Handbook of Sustainable and Regenerative Food Systems.
Thank you for reading this article. Considering subscribing to my blog and my YouTube channel! Also, you can support me as a creator by purchasing a copy of my book! Stay tuned for more blogs and videos, and remember, KEEP IT WILD!
- Saadat Faiz
