Simple Summary Consumers increasingly demand sustainable food production, including using world resources efficiently, avoiding environmental damage and ensuring good welfare of animals. Reports have suggested that beef production is costly in relation to world resource use and greenhouse gas production, so some consumers avoid beef. However, many reports refer mainly to feedlot systems. Ruminants can eat leaves that humans cannot eat, so if they are not fed grain, systems can be sustainable and valuable. This paper presents an analysis of the production of beef comparing all aspects of the use of land and conserved water for four production systems. It is suggested that conserved water use is a useful measure. Land use was the highest in extensive unmodified pasture systems, especially if the land became degraded. Less land was used in both feedlot and fertilised pasture systems and much less in semi-intensive silvopastoral systems. Conserved water use was the highest in feedlot systems, partly because of the grain fed to the cattle, lower in pasture systems and lowest in semi-intensive silvopastoral systems. This research indicates that, when beef production systems are being selected or consumers are deciding which beef to buy, extensive systems that degrade the land should be avoided, and well-managed extensive systems, especially semi-intensive silvopastoral systems, should be preferred to feedlot systems.
Abstract This analysis, using published data, compared all land and conserved water use in four beef production systems. A widespread feedlot system and fertilised irrigated pasture systems used similar amounts of land. However, extensive unmodified pasture systems used three times more land, and semi-intensive silvopastoral systems used four times less land, so the highest use was 13 times the lowest. The amount of conserved water used was 64% higher in feedlots with relatively intensive rearing systems than in fertilised irrigated pasture; in extensive unmodified pasture systems, it was 38% and in semi-intensive silvopastoral systems, it was 21% of the fertilised irrigated pasture value, so the highest use was eight times the lowest. If there was no irrigation of pasture or of plants used for cattle feed, the feedlot water use was 12% higher than the fertilised pasture use and 57% higher than that in semi-intensive silvopastoral systems. These large effects of systems on resource use indicate the need to consider all systems when referring to the impact of beef or other products on the global environment. Whilst the use of animals as human food should be reduced, herbivorous animals that consume food that humans cannot eat and are kept using sustainable systems are important for the future use of world resources.