One way to frame sustainability, whether we are talking about it from an economic, environmental, or social perspective, is to discuss efficiency. If we can make more with the same amount or fewer resources, there is a better chance our businesses and community will be able to continue to thrive.

A fundamental tenet of efficiency for dairy farmers is having healthy animals. We know that repeatedly sick calves and heifers grow into less productive cows, and when milking cows deal with an illness, they are not producing milk to the best of their ability. It is helpful, then, to think about how something dairy farmers aim to do every day — keep their animals healthy — contributes to the sustainability of our businesses, industry, and the world.

“Where would we be without healthy cows?” asked Kaitlyn Briggs, D.V.M., the dairy welfare lead at fairlife, during the recent Dairy Cattle Reproduction Council annual meeting. It is well-reported that the U.S. dairy industry reduced its greenhouse gas (GHG) production by 19%, its water use by 30%, and its land use by 20% between 2007 and 2017. Those per-unit improvements are possible because our cows produced more milk with the same or only slightly more resources. That does not happen if cows are not cared for well and can’t produce to their genetic potential.

The dairy industry’s lifecycle assessment in 2008 found that 71% of milk’s environmental footprint comes from the farm level. Briggs said that means farmers have a real opportunity to make an impact with what they do on the farm, and that doesn’t just mean making investments in technology or cropping practices. It also covers the everyday efforts farmers take to care for their herds.

On a global scale, Briggs stated that 20% of livestock production is lost every year due to disease. This costs farmers an estimated $300 billion per year.

For these reasons, cattle disease can raise GHG emissions by 24% per unit, she continued. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization has said that every two cattle that are vaccinated can save one person from hunger.

While that statistic mostly applies to underdeveloped countries where vaccination is not already widespread, Briggs said that even research in the European Union found that improved animal health can lower GHG emissions by around 10%. Emissions per animal may climb modestly because they are expending more energy with greater production, but because there will be a need for fewer animals in the overall farm and food supply chain, total emissions will be down, she explained.

To narrow in on the conventional dairy production picture, Briggs shared data from a model run in the Netherlands. That research showed that cows with any case of clinical mastitis in a lactation had 6.2% higher emissions per gallon of milk produced. A case of white line disease, the most impactful lameness problem, raised emissions 4.5% per pound of milk. There were also significant emission impacts for ketosis, particularly when other conditions arose as well.

The main drivers of these greater emissions were reduced milk production and removal from the herd, Briggs said. Does that sound familiar to what dairy farmers care about for their own economic sustainability?

There are many things the dairy industry can do to work toward reaching its sustainability goals. Improving animal health won’t get us all the way there, but it is a big part of the solution, Briggs said. While we explore other options that reduce the environmental impact of our farms, we have to be sure those efforts don’t negatively impact animal health.