News 
 National Rural News 
 Opinion 
 Comment 
 Animal welfare: perception or reality? 

Animal welfare: perception or reality?

12 Jun, 2009 11:46 AM
WITHOUT a doubt, the welfare of animals should be the first priority for everyone working with

animals.

As a veterinarian I am obliged to promote a standard of care to ensure animals’ needs are met. I am also obliged to use my knowledge and skills to alleviate suffering and for the enhancement of animal welfare.

I am the first to acknowledge that there is a continuing need for improvement in the management and farming of animals.

New Zealand is a world leader in animal welfare. With the exception of rare animal welfare cases, all farmers comply with the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) Animal Welfare Codes.

In the past couple of weeks, emotionally charged comments have been flying over the welfare of farmed pigs after footage of pigs recorded in a piggery near Levin was screened on the Sunday programme.

NAWAC has defended the Code and the New Zealand Pork Industry Board has said the story was “unbalanced, misleading and alarmist”.

Agriculture Minister David Carter has asked NAWAC to push pig welfare to the top of its priority list, while Green MP Sue Kedgley expressed concern at “NAWAC’s ability to make fair and impartial recommendations”.

As societies around the world become increasingly urbanised, a gap seems to have developed between the public’s perception of what animal welfare should be and the reality. Urban populations have become separated from the realities of farming and the impact of nature.

Urban dwellers’ attitudes to the welfare of animals and the choices they make when purchasing and using food and other animal products, are dictated by their own understanding and expectations of animal welfare. They don’t understand how animals are kept and, increasingly don’t understand how food is derived from animals.

By 2050 the world population will have increased by almost 50 per cent, yet there remains only finite resources of land, water and air to produce the food required for a growing number of people.

As such, the art of balancing the provision of animal welfare and ensuring security of food supply is set to become increasingly difficult.

It is estimated that less than 10 per cent of pigs farmed in New Zealand spend more than six weeks in sow stalls. There is evidence that says sow stalls can improve animal welfare by temporarily isolating aggressive sows during early pregnancy.

Pigs are farmed intensively to help ensure a food supply that is affordable to the majority of consumers. It takes a lot of space to farm pigs free range, yet move the pigs indoors and you can farm many more.

In contrast to intensively farmed pigs, those that live outdoors, especially feral pigs, have evolved thick coats. The high meat producing animals farmed indoors are protected from climate and diseases to ensure their welfare. Sows have been kept separate to protect them from aggression. Farrowing pigs in confinement has been used to keep the piglets warm and protect them from being crushed by their mother.

In developing or reviewing the Animal Welfare (Pigs) Code, NAWAC will take into account all the available evidence. Animal welfare standards must be based on science, the science of animal welfare. NAWAC will need to consider the feasibility, practicality and economic effects of improving current practices.

But, ultimately, the committee considers good practice, and the knowledge and technologies that are available at the time.

If new research advocates against the use of dry or sow stalls in any form then the Code should be reviewed.

For now, the best step concerned citizens can take, is to purchase locally grown pork. Around 40 per cent of the pork consumed in New Zealand is imported, and there is a chance that this pork may not have been produced in as welfare-friendly systems as those in use in New Zealand.

Buy New Zealand pork and help our pork industry to fund research into best practices and find the balance between animal welfare and food supply security.

• Dr Jim Edwards was president of both the World Veterinary Association and the Federation of Asian Veterinary Associations. He was president of the New Zealand Veterinary Association for two terms from 1992 to 1994.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
What a patronising and self serving anti-urban tirade. Of course city dwellers don't understand the way animals are reared in the worst examples of factory farming. The factory farmers don't want them to. Because they know they would lose business if people really knew what went on in factory farms. As for stalls, crates and cages being necessary for welfare purposes, give us a break!! Have you pondered over the strange coincidence that the very systems required by factory farmers to maximise their profits, just happen to be those that are best for the animal. Oh I see. We are not doing this for selfish reasons. We are doing this because we know these animals love rolling in their own excrement in a space so small they can't turn around. When Mike King hears them squealing from over a hundred metres away they are just "expressing their joy" at being alive. It amazes me that veterinarians can spout such unscientific nonsense. I can only conclude they must be totally blinded by emotion; in this case the emotion of greed or abject sniveling fear. There is no scientific basis at all for the assertion that sow stalls are necessary for animal welfare. Like all social species (including our own) sows can be agressive at times. But studies by scientists whose minds are not clouded by emotion (in this case the emotion of greed), know what every good pig farmer has always known; that pigs rub along well together if they are given tolerable living conditions, space to move and something to occupy their mind. Scientific studies have also shown that keeping sows in farrowing crates has no effect on piglet mortality. The Scientific Veterinary Committee in 1997 concluded that pigs require plenty of space for both farrowing and gestation. Again this is something good pig farmers already know. It is true that there is a shortage of land to feed people, but the best way to prevent shortages is to eat lower on the food chain. Passing perfectly good food through animals before eating it is inherently wasteful. Apart from the welfare implications, intensively farmed piggeries are an environmental disaster. A piggery can contain over 10,000 pigs. They all have rectums and together these produce as much sewage as a town of 16,000 people. Unlike municipal sewage this is not treated and simply ends up in waterways. A Wairarapa piggery is being prosecuted by the Regional Council for spewing essentially raw sewage into waterways. A piggery in the Manuwatu has had repeated violations of its resource consent conditions regarding discharge, according to the regional council. Jim Edwards' piece represents nothing but a thinly disguised and emotional piece of advertising for the pork industry. I would urge anyone concerned with animal welfare or the environment to boycott pork, both New Zealand and imported.
Posted by michael Morris, 13/06/2009 10:50:14 PM
Michael Morris' comments are eloquent & persuasive & I couldn't agree more. I have one question for Jim Edwards. Vet or public relations consultant for the pork industry? How does he prioritise his work ? And where are all the other vets in NZ? I'd like to hear their views on the "welfare" standards of pig farms in this country. They seem to keep very quiet when these questions are raised.
Posted by Marie Brittain, 15/06/2009 7:08:25 PM
Michael you rock!! What a wonderful comment containing the whole truth of the matter!
Posted by persian, 15/06/2009 9:18:12 PM
I think Dr Jim King could step back from being a scientist and reaffirm himself with being a caring person. Part of the moral decline of the human family is the way we turn a blind eye to animal cruelty in order for there to be, easy, cheap food... and justifying it as necessary. Meat is becoming morally and environmentally unsound. I would like to suggest that farmers start to invest in nuts as an alternative as they are good for the environment, they come already packaged and they do not require refrigeration or cooking, they are of a equivalent protein and fat content and are more healthy and nuts do not involve cruelty but instead would offer more employment of a healthy, clean nature. Imagine all them advantages over meat, and there are more... At least think about the advantages of nuts over meat.... and better still get planting some of the nut trees now... The future has to be more sustainable and morally sound... for our future... Colin. Auckland.
Posted by colin sky, 16/06/2009 9:29:18 AM
Jim says... "Animal welfare standards must be based on science, the science of animal welfare" Yes Jim, they should be. But I think you'll find that unfavourable science will be ignored to suits economics. NAWAC & Pork Producers only play the "science" card when it suits them. The welfare of these animals should be our number one prority, regardless if it is economical or not. As a "vet" you should be ashamed of your callous attitude towards animals, you reflect very badly on your industry. The Pork Industry has been getting away with this cruelty by using confusion tactics, saying NZ has good welfare standards, hiding the truth, and muddying the waters between free range and intensive farms to cover up the bad pig farmers (many of whom sit on the Pork Industry Board, which is why they dont want free range labelling). It's quite simple - pigs suffer every day on factory farms, and we are letting it happen, it has to stop. I do not care if pig farmers go out of business, if they refuse to change with the times then they deserve what they get. People should not be supporting this disgusting industy; if you buy pork, you are PAYING farmers to imprison pigs in disgusting concrete cells. People can no longer sit on the fence and claim ignorance. If you buy, you condone this abuse.
Posted by Debra, 16/06/2009 10:09:47 AM
Jim Edwards should be ashamed of spouting the tired excuses that we've been hearing from the pork industry in recent months. Does he think that the readers of this column are stupid?

No intelligent person could believe that pigs are better off in sow stalls and farrowing crates, than in free range conditions.

Yes, intensive farming is the way to maximise profits, but don't confuse this with animal welfare.

I would suggest that Edwards try being locked in a wardrobe for a few days and see if that is good for his wellbeing.

If our pig farmers are truly concerned about the welfare of their animals and about staying in business, they will make sure they farm purely using free range methods and that their products are clearly labelled as such.

Then they WILL be able to compete with pork imports, since the majority of consumers are appalled at intensive pig farming practises and such farmers will probably find strong allies in welfare groups such as the SPCA.

Posted by Marianne Macdonald MSc, 16/06/2009 12:32:01 PM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Dr Jim Edwards
Dr Jim Edwards

Most popular articles



 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...