Dr. Ruth Newberry
Lecture 2
|
 |
This lecture addresses animal welfare legislation in North America compared to Europe. In the United States, public pressure has lead to strong legislation and control over the use of animals in research. The same thing could happen for animals used in agriculture as has already happened in Europe.
Currently in the United States, there is very little legislation governing the use of animals in agriculture. There are two federal laws that pertain specifically to animals in agriculture. One is the
Twenty-Eight Hour Law , an old law that was passed at a time when animals were primarily transported by train. The law states that animals cannot be shipped by rail for more than 28 hours without being fed or watered. Obviously this is an outdated law now that animals are primarily transported by truck.
The second law is the Humane Slaughter Act that governs the humane slaughter of livestock. It doesn't include poultry. This law states that you must render an animal unconscious before you cut its throat and exsanguinate it. The approved methods for rendering an animal unconscious are captive bolt, CO2 (in pigs), electric shock, and gunshot under certain circumstances. This law does not apply to ritual slaughter in the Jewish and Muslim religious traditions. In this case, the law permits cutting the throat of a conscious animal. The Humane Slaughter Act also prohibits the dragging of downed animals at the slaughter plant (e.g., by wrapping a chain around a leg and dragging the animal along the ground). The term "downer" refers to animals that are unable to stand up. Most downers are dairy cattle.
There are also state laws for the prevention of cruelty to animals, including animals used in agriculture. These laws vary from state to state.
In Canada, the animal welfare laws are similar. In addition, they have national voluntary codes of practice for the care and handling of animals. There is a code for each major animal commodity. There is no legal requirement to abide by these codes but the industry commodities encourage the use of these codes among their members. The codes include guidelines on space allotment, food and water needs, and other good management practices.
In the USA, some commodity groups have basic management guidelines. However, consumer pressure has prompted companies such as
McDonalds and Burger King to develop more stringent animal welfare specifications for their suppliers. They already have guidelines for humane slaughter of livestock and are now developing specifications for housing and management on the farm. Because companies like MacDonalds are major customers for animal products, some animal commodity groups are now developing or expanding their own animal welfare guidelines. For example, I am a member of the United Egg Producers Scientific Advisory Committee on Animal Welfare. We have developed science-based recommendations for improving the welfare of laying hens. We have also made recommendations for research
on aspects where knowledge is lacking.
European laws differ from those in the United States and Canada. Astrid Lindgren is an author of children’s books in Sweden; you may know her as the author of Pippi Longstockings. She almost single handedly caused the Swedish government to pass a very extensive animal protection law in 1988. She wrote letters to national newspapers and raised interest about animal welfare and caused a countrywide debate. In the end, public pressure forced a change. The resulting law states that animals bred and kept for the production of wool, fur, milk or food shall be housed and treated in such a way that their health is furthered and natural behavior is possible. The Prime Minister of Sweden awarded this law to Astrid Lindgren as an 80th birthday present. Note the law's phrase "natural behavior". What defines natural behavior for a domesticated animal? People did not want to see animals kept with the degree of confinement that has become typical in animal agriculture. This law requires, for example, that cows be allowed outside to graze in the summer.
In the USA, veal calves used for the production of white veal are usually kept in narrow stalls that don't allow them to turn around. This makes it easier to keep the stall clean because the urine and feces are mainly at the back of the stall. When veal calves don't get colostrum and are fed a milk replacer that is low in iron to make the meat pale (white veal), the calves are susceptible to infections, especially gastrointestinal infections.
In Sweden and some other European countries including Britain, it is not allowed to keep veal calves for the production of white veal. The law requires that they be kept in pens in which they have sufficient space to turn around. Often, they are housed in groups. The calves are also fed solid food and their iron intake is not restricted.
In the USA, the standard way to keep a sow and her piglets is in farrowing crates.
A farrowing crate is used to reduce the risk of the sow crushing the piglets. However, the sow is kept at a significant level of confinement; she can’t turn around in these stalls. In Sweden and Britain, the use of these crates is not allowed after the first few days after farrowing. In Britain, it is now common to see outdoor pig production systems where piglets are born in little huts and the sows can go outside to graze. This is a more expensive way of producing pigs. There are concerns about parasites and predation in this kind of production establishment. Also, when you have these regulations, as a producer you face the problem that cheaper pork products will be imported from countries that don’t have this kind of legislation. People tend to buy the cheaper product even though at the emotional level they like to see the pigs outside.
In the USA, sows are housed in gestation stalls during their pregnancy in order to facilitate individual feeding of the sows. Meat producing animals are selected to have huge appetites. If you let pregnant animals eat as much as they want, they become obese and have poor reproductive output. Consequently, there is a need to control their level of feed intake. When sows are kept in gestation stalls and feed restricted, they tend to develop oral stereotypies like repetitive bar biting and sham chewing. This is because they are stimulated to look for food but lack foraging opportunities. You have probably heard of stereotyped behavior in zoo animals. Development of stereotypies is a concern because members of the public perceive stereotypies as a sign of poor welfare and an inadequate environment. People don’t like to see stereotypies, such as tigers and polar bears at the zoo pacing back and forth, and elephants rocking from side to side. In farm animals, oral stereotypies are usually associated with feed restriction and lack of foraging opportunities.
In Europe, there is a movement away from the keeping of sows in gestation crates. Instead, the sows may be kept in straw bedded pens, have transponders around their necks, and go to an electronic feeder. This is an expensive system and they are having some problems with it because of the swine dominance hierarchy. If you have a dominant sow blocking the way, no other pigs can get in to feed. Some places have sows go into individual stalls for feeding instead of using the electronic feeding system.
With laying hens there is also the concern about confinement.
By 2012, in the whole of the European Community, confinement cages will be banned. Alternative housing systems for hens are called aviaries or percheries. The basic concept is that the birds are free to move around the whole poultry house. There are several different levels with food and water lines at each level, and rows of nest boxes. There is litter on the ground.
In these systems, it is not so easy for the caretaker to work in with the birds flying around. The main problem with these systems is egg collection. With cages you get almost every egg laid. The eggs roll out immediately after being laid and are conveyed away to the egg room. They are clean, and the hens don’t have access to them to eat them. In aviary systems, the nest boxes have a roll away system so the eggs are also clean and easily conveyed away from the birds. The problem arises when some hens don’t lay in the nest boxes. When the eggs are laid on the floor, they get dirty and are more likely to get cracked or eaten by the hens. They also have to be collected manually. Because of losses due to floor eggs, egg production in aviary systems is more expensive than in cage systems.
European legislation that bans the confinement cage does not ban a modified or enriched cage. That means the cages must be larger than traditional cages, and must contain a nest box, a dust bath, and a perch. These requirements make for an expensive cage. As long as people are willing to pay extra for eggs from these systems, they are viable alternatives.
Minor surgical procedures
There is a contrast in legislation between the US and Europe regarding minor surgical procedures. The United States has no legislation on this issue and the procedures are generally performed without any form of pain control. In Europe, some countries have legislation controlling whether, how and when they may be performed.
In Britain, for example, hot iron branding is prohibited. When castration is performed by placing a rubber ring around the scrotum, the ring can be applied in the first week of life but after that is not allowed.
When castration is performed using a knife, pigs can be castrated up to one month of age, cattle and goats to 2 months of age, and sheep up to 3 months of age, without anesthesia. After that, the procedures must be performed under anesthesia. Dehorning cannot be done with a hot iron without anesthetic.
You can use a caustic dehorning paste only in the first week of age. These rules are based on minimizing pain to the animals.
Pigs have their tails docked to prevent tail biting. Tail biting results in infections in the tail. Additionally the animals can be condemned at slaughter due to internal infections that started from tail biting.
In most countries, tail biting in pigs is controlled by tail docking. In Sweden it is not allowed to tail dock at all because this is considered a mutilation. In Britain you are allowed to do it in the first week of life only.
Tail docking of cattle is not allowed in the UK, Norway, Sweden, or the Netherlands. It is strongly controlled in Germany as well. Dairy cows are sometimes tail docked in the United States, especially when using a milking system that milks from behind such that the tail is in the way.
There have been some suggestions that tail docking might improve cleanliness and reduce the somatic cell count. In New Zealand where tail docking of cattle used to be very prevalent, there was a study done that showed there was no significant difference in somatic cell count, milk yield, body weight, or in udder health due to tail docking. It seems that this procedure cannot be justified strictly on a health basis.
Another area where there is animal welfare legislation is transportation. In Europe there has been a huge outcry about the transporting of livestock over long distances. In laying hens, for example, as time in transit to the processing plant increases from less than twelve hours to more than 24 hours, there are significant increases in birds "dead on arrival" and in condemnation of carcasses. Similar findings have been found with the transport of pigs. In Europe, the limit in transport time for poultry is 12 hours. Transport is limited to 8 hours for livestock unless you follow some strict regulations. An important animal welfare consideration during transportation is that, when animals are crowded on a truck, they can very quickly overheat, especially if the truck is stationary for any period of time. In Europe they have a requirement that if animals are going to be transported for more than 8 hours, the truck must have forced air ventilation.
In the northern European countries such as the Scandinavian countries, Germany, The Netherlands and Britain, there is public concern for animal well-being resulting in pain control and reduced confinement of animals. This is not the same in the Mediterranean countries and France. In those countries, the emphasis in animal production tends to be more on the taste and quality of the food than on the welfare of the animal. One of the products produced in France that is controlled by legislation is free-range chicken meat.
People will pay a lot of extra money for it. Free-range chicken commands about 30% of the market. They use special slow growing breeds of chicken that they are legally required to use. They slaughter the birds at double or more of the typical age of a regular chicken and they feed them a diet containing no animal products. At the supermarket, the consumer can see the difference between them and regular chickens and these products also have special labeling. Government control and a visible difference in the product help to limit cheating, unlike the situation for free-range eggs which look the same as cage eggs. There have been cases where producers took cheaper cage eggs and sold them as free range eggs for more money.
In Europe, the animal welfare legislation is backed up with farm inspections. In the USA, public pressure has led to controls and inspection of research facilities using animals. The question is whether the American consumer is willing to pay more for products considered more "animal welfare friendly". If controlled by legislation, is the American taxpayer willing to pay for the cost of enforcing the legislation? These are some considerations to take into account when you discuss different production systems and the raising of animals with animal welfare in mind.
lat edit March 03, 2000