Bovaer debate: Is popping a pill the solution to the methane problem?

The British Society of Animal Science (BSAS) is one of the latest groups to blow the froth off the overheated debate on milk products linked to Bovaer.

The group, this week, said feed additives like Bovaer, when developed and used responsibly, “offer significant potential to enhance sustainability in livestock production”.

The company behind Bovaer - which is added in small quantities to cow feed - said the supplement can reduce methane emissions by up to 30 per cent.

It is being trialled across 30 farms owned by Arla Foods, a Danish-Swedish company, which owns the UK’s biggest dairy cooperative. Bovaer has been approved for use by UK regulators, and several major supermarkets will stock milk produced by cattle eating feed with the additive.

The announcement faced a backlash, with some customers threatening to boycott dairy products from supermarkets over concern about potential side-effects, and some farmers took to social media to declare themselves Bovaer-free. The manufacturer, DSM-Firmenich, said “mistruths and misinformation” have been spread about its product which it deemed "totally safe" for use.

Amid reassurances over the safety of the supplement for both human and animal, some farmers, however, have questioned the Bovaer approach altogether.

Patrick Holden, an organic dairy farmer and founder of the Sustainable Food Trust, wrote in his blog: “It seems to me that feeding cows potions to reduce emissions is a classic case of the dairy industry, and I use that word advisedly, treating the symptoms rather than the cause of the problem.

“The cause in this case is separating the dairy cow from her natural environment of which she is intrinsically a part. Once this separation has occurred, both physically and in the mindset of society, methane becomes a problem which needs to be addressed by re-engineering the cow instead of ensuring that the ecosystem of which she is a part is restored in such a way that her emissions are counteracted by soil carbon sequestration.”

Similar comments were made by the owners of East Ayrshire Mossgiel Organic Farm, who said the answer is not supplements, but in nature already.

“Yes, methane emissions are a challenge,” they said. “But rather than relying on additives, we focus on creating a system that works with nature.

“Regenerative, organic farming is our fix. Reducing methane isn’t just about what goes into the cow - it’s about what’s happening around her. By improving soil health, sequestering carbon and promoting biodiversity, farmers are tackling emissions in a way that builds a better future for everyone.”

At this year’s Nuffield Farming Conference, Claire Whittle, a Nuffield Farming scholar, spoke about the importance of farming with nature, referencing her study on how regenerative farming can improve the wellbeing and health of livestock.

Ms Whittle spoke about examples where farmers saw input costs, including medical bills and concentrate feeds, evaporate when switching to hardy, native herds grazing, outwintered.

“What if the root cause of calves getting pneumonia is not that the ventilation in the sheds isn’t good enough, but that should they ever have been put into sheds at all,” she asked.

“What if the root cause of eye infections or gut worm problems is not because there are more nuisance flies or worms, but because the very products that we use to treat them, the chemical antiparasitics, kill our natural antiparasitics.

“The unintended consequence of using these products is that we then need to use more of these products. And the only winner on the chemical control treadmill is the pharmaceutical industry and we are lining their pockets.”

Some farmers, it seems, share this sentiment when it comes to methane, and believe the answer is already in nature.