There is a new tool out there in the effort to define—and measure—sustainable beef.
During the annual general assembly meeting of the U.S. Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (USRSB), held April 30-May 2, the group adopted the U.S. Beef Industry Sustainability Framework (Framework). The Framework is “a voluntary resource” seeking to help improve the sustainability of U.S. cattle and beef production.
“We agreed sustainable beef is socially responsible, environmentally sound and economically viable,” explained the Framework authors in the plan’s summary. “This means sustainable beef comes from profitable farmers, ranchers, and businesses committed to optimizing resources and caring for animals, employees, and communities.”
In general, the Framework outlines “high-priority indicators, sector-specific metrics, and sustainability assessment guides” with outcome-based goals tailored for each segment of the cattle and beef supply chain.
“The framework is a set of tools and resources intended to be voluntarily utilized by individuals and businesses throughout the supply chain to further enhance efficiency, improve profitability and demonstrate an ongoing commitment to managing natural resources and supporting employees and communities,” summarized Ben Weinheimer, Texas Cattle Feeders Association vice president, who was also elected as the 2019 USRSB Chairman during the recent meeting.
“Quite simply, the goal is to maintain and expand our reputation as the global leader in beef production—producing healthy and delicious beef that people all over the world enjoy.”
Indicators and metrics
The Framework outlines six “high-priority indicators” of sustainability. These are water resources, land resources, air and greenhouse gas emissions, efficiency and yield, animal health and wellbeing, and employee safety and wellbeing.
For each segment of the industry, the Framework offers questions and outcome-based goals related to each of the indicators. For example, the section dealing with water within the cow-calf sector asks, “Is a grazing management plan (or equivalent), being implemented that maintains or improves water resources?”
The following possible desirable outcomes were listed as a sort of metric of improved sustainability:
• Improved ground cover and root systems of forages, growing or dormant;
• A slowed rate of water runoff following precipitation events;
• Increased rates of water infiltration into soil;
• Reduced soil erosion;
• Increased water availability in plant rooting zones and percolation into the water table or aquifer;
• Protected and enhanced flows in groundwater-dependent springs, creeks, and other riparian areas.
Every segment of the industry—cow-calf, auction market, feedyard, packer/processor, retail/foodservice—has similar questions and metric goals for each one of the high-priority indicators.
Some goals are obvious from a sustainability standpoint, such as increased carrying capacity on sustainably-managed lands and tracking feed efficiency in sustainable feedyards, but other goals are not.
For example, “reduced stress in cattle” is listed as a metric goal for employee safety and wellbeing in several segments of the cattle industry. While this makes business sense—lower-stress cattle are less likely to injure ranch hands—things like employee and animal wellbeing are not usually part of the wider “sustainability” conversation.
USRSB and the Framework
The USRSB is a nonprofit group formed in 2015 and is composed of members who are ranchers, packers, retail representatives, cattle- and beef-industry companies, and “civil society members.”
This latter group includes some members that have raised eyebrows and suspicions among some ranchers, particularly the Nature Conservancy and the World Wildlife Fund.
Another area that has drawn industry criticism is the association with the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (GRSB). USRSB and GRSB are often confused as being the same group, but this is not the case, though there are considerable overlaps in mission, structure, and member groups.
GRSB is an international organization, of which USRSB is a member, but they are not the same entity. Other country- or area-specific roundtables exist for Canada, Europe, Brazil, Paraguay, and Colombia and they are also members of the GRSB.
The Framework was developed by ranchers, feedyard operators, auction markets, packers and processors, retail and foodservice companies, veterinarians and nonprofit groups for U.S. production. The USRSB was created in large part to produce the Framework.
According to the Framework, draft versions were presented to the roughly 100 USRSB members and several rounds of comments were collected.
“Now that the framework has gone through a rigorous comment period and been adopted, it’s time to make it available to all members of the beef supply chain, including feedyards, to use as they see fit on their own operation,” said Weinheimer.
Both Weinheimer and USRSB stressed that the Framework is a voluntary resource “developed to identify opportunities for continuous improvement in all types of operations and companies throughout the beef industry.” — WLJ
