**4.2 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions**

It was mentioned in a previous study [18] that livestock production such as the production of beef and bovine milk contributed 14.5 % of global GHG emissions. However, since the human population is expected to be increased from 7.2 to 9.6 billion by 2050, there could be increased demand for livestock products. Therefore, the raising of beef and dairy cattle could be found to contribute less in the mitigation (making less severe) of GHG emissions. Another researcher [19] stated that the raising of fewer numbers of more genetically productive breeds of cattle under an intensive system could have positive impact on the mitigation of GHG emissions. Other previous researchers [20] also predicted that methane emissions from domesticated ruminants such as beef and dairy cattle in sub-Saharan Africa could have increased by 40% between 2008 and 2030 due to an increased livestock population. It was however explained [21] that probably the only effective way of methane mitigation in pastoral systems could be through reducing livestock numbers by promoting the intensive livestock production systems.

Another research finding [22], outlined that substantial amounts of carbon could be sequestrated through improvement in the management of grasslands. This would involve the conversion of low degraded cropland or woodland into grasslands. These processes of grazing lands transformation into grasslands could also be enhanced by ensuring reduction in grazing intensities, reduced biomass burning, improvement in the degraded lands, thereby bringing about reduced land erosion. Thus, there could be improved growth in the grass species mixture and these could contribute to GHG mitigation [22].

#### **4.3 The use of decision support tools in beef and dairy cattle management**

The measurement of various variables needed in taking decision on cattle performance, health and welfare parameters were carried out by making use of automated devices as outlined by Gonzalez *et al*. and Greenwood *et al*. [23, 24]. Parameters such as cattle liveweight, muscling or body composition could be measured. On-animal sensor devices were also developed to estimate behavioural variables in cattle such as time spent grazing or feeding, ruminating, walking, lying, drinking water and other cattle performance related to health and general animal welfare. Greenwood *et al*. [25] also reported that there were decision support tools for measuring traits in grazing cattle which could be used in genomic and quantitative genetic selection in cattle.

This information could be made available to consumers and policy makers who have influenced in the way that beef and dairy cattle production industries globally were operated for profitable management and to improve productivity, efficiency and sustainability.

#### **4.4 Antibiotic use and health related impacts**

The use of antibiotics in the beef and dairy cattle industry as growth promoters needs to be carried out with caution due to anxiety globally over microbial antibiotic resistance [26]. Tona [26] mentioned that the use of antibiotics such as bacitracin, spiramycin and tylosin phosphate as animal feed additives was banned in the European Union (EU) in 1998 and in 2006.

Gott [27] explained that antimicrobial resistance (AMR) occurred when microorganisms, like bacteria were no longer affected by antimicrobial substances (antibiotics) that had previously worked to inhibit their growth or killed them completely.

However, since different organizations world-wide had established rules and regulations to control the use, or to totally ban the application of antimicrobial treatment in livestock in order to reduce the risk of AMR, there were other alternatives suggested as hereby outlined. Cattle should be fed adequate amounts and well balanced feed to support production and to promote good health. The feeding of mycotoxin contaminated feed or feed ingredient, that could hamper the immune function and impair health of the animal should be avoided. It was also suggested that education could be given to livestock farmers or animal health extension agents on the need to practice improved hygiene and good sanitation. The provision of clean water and the observation of farm bio-security practices might also minimize the need for antimicrobial use in livestock. There should also be improved infectious disease control through preventive vaccination. Other researchers [28] stated that in dairy cows, a four layered strategy to reduce antimicrobial use included the following: (i) Appropriate management of animals, farm and soils. (ii) The strategic use of local breeds for cross-breeding with the appropriate exotic breeds. (iii) The conduct of

## *A Global Overview of the Intensification of Beef and Dairy Cattle Production Systems DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106062*

research on the use of herbal and other natural products for the treatment of infected cows. (iv) The feed quality improvement and control.

Beef and dairy cattle health could also be influenced by climatic condition such as temperature related illnesses and deaths [29]. Das *et al*. [30] explained that such temperature related effects could be caused by changes in the immune and endocrine systems. Testa *et al*. [31] also mentioned that seasonal influence on milk somatic cell counts (SCC) could occur in milking cows with increasing SCC values during the summer months. There could also be indirect climatic effects on health due to changes in the intake of concentrate feeds and a decreased forage intake in cattle. These could enhance the development of acidosis which could lead to the development of lameness in cattle. Additionally, the reduction in feed intake in high milk producing cows could increase the risk of experiencing sub clinical ketosis during the summer months [32]. These could be attributed to the fact that high milk yielding cows have high energy requirements for body maintenance and performance that could be frequently mobilized from body nutrients and thus these could lead to lowered level of glucose in the blood and general body weakness in the lactating cows.

### **4.5 Production cost and returns**

McDonald and McBride [1] reported the observation that most of the large dairy enterprises had gross returns that exceeded total cost as compared to mid-sized and small sized farms. These authors [1] further outlined that there were strong incentives for existing large dairies to expand and for producers entering the dairy business to enter in at a large size level. Therefore, it could be deduced that larger farms had substantial cost advantages on the average over smaller operations.

#### **4.6 Governmental policy issues**

Some earlier researchers [33] had explained that genomics alone might not bring solutions to genetic improvement needs on the short-term to the developing sectors. However, national strategies such as putting in place adequate livestock extension support services could first of all be required to address the socio-economic issues existing in the various countries.
