Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
be used now or in the future. In this chapter, we
explain what we mean by animal welfare and
how both the social and natural sciences play
key roles in understanding this complex field.
Using egg production as an example, we will
then illustrate how animal welfare concerns
have played a driving role in policy and regula-
tory decisions regarding production practices,
and arguably have played the key role in shap-
ing the future of egg production. Given that
the elements of sustainability overlap, we pro-
vide examples where synergy exists between
improved animal welfare and the economic and
environmental aspects of sustainability. In this
section, we also discuss the challenges and com-
plexities associated with the integration of ani-
mal welfare in sustainable animal agriculture.
production by 10% (Vansickle, 2002). The inten-
sification of animal production and subsequent
public concern about animal care in these sys-
tems has resulted in broader concerns about ani-
mals in agriculture. It has become clear that
animal welfare includes more than health alone,
and other considerations, such as the extent to
which animals are able to move and perform their
normal behaviours, now play an important role
in evaluation of the quality of animals' lives.
Modern-day concerns about animal wel-
fare can be divided into three categories: (i) phys-
ical functioning, meaning that animals should
be healthy and thriving, such that one function
should not be enhanced to the detriment of
another and behavioural and physiological sys-
tems should not be pushed to a point where
health may break down; (ii) naturalness, mean-
ing that animals have the ability to engage in
behaviours that they are strongly motivated to
perform; and (iii) subjective states, in that ani-
mals can enjoy life; that is to say, they experience
positive states and that negative states (e.g. pain)
are minimized (Fraser, 2008b). This can also be
summarized as saying that concerns centre on
care of their bodies, their natures and their
minds (Appleby, 1999).
Intensification of animal agriculture has
affected animal welfare in all three categories.
In some cases, animal health has been nega-
tively affected by intensification; selection for
milk production in dairy cows and growth in
broilers has resulted in a number of deleterious
effects on health, including increased mastitis,
lameness and reduced fertility for dairy cows
and more musculoskeletal problems for chick-
ens (Rauw et al ., 1998). In contrast, more inten-
sive systems improve physical function by
providing protection from extreme weather
and better health management (e.g. vaccina-
tion programmes etc.). However, many inten-
sive systems may prevent behaviours that
animals are highly motivated to perform, such
as nesting by laying hens (Cooper and Appleby,
2003) and sows (Tuyttens, 2005). Finally,
many concerns about intensive animal systems
centre on the subjective experience of the ani-
mals, for example, when they experience pain
and suffering associated with standard proce-
dures, such as castration or dehorning, because
pain relief is not provided (Rault et al ., 2011;
Stafford and Mellor, 2011).
What is Animal Welfare?
Concern about the care of farm animals is noth-
ing new - farmers and veterinarians have always
been concerned about the condition of animals in
their care and have tried to ensure that they are
healthy and well nourished. In this older tradition
of animal care, good animal husbandry is seen
largely as the provision of food, water, shelter
and the absence of pain, illness or injury, and the
focus is upon protecting the welfare of individual
animals, ensuring that sick animals receive timely
and effective care. However, beginning in the
1960s, the issue of whether farm animals were
receiving humane care began to be questioned
(Harrison, 1964). The timing of this increased
scrutiny coincided with two primary changes in
food animal production systems. The first was the
growth of confinement systems, which resulted
from technological advancements that were pri-
marily justified from the perspective of economic
efficiencies (e.g. reduced labour, refrigeration,
land costs) and in some cases, such as egg-laying
production, concerns about food safety. This in
turn likely facilitated the second dramatic change,
namely, significant increases in animal numbers
on individual farms that ultimately resulted in
reduced farm numbers (Fraser, 2008a). For
example, over the span of three decades the swine
industry in the USA, which during this period
transitioned to nearly 100% confinement housing,
lost over 88% of its producers but increased
Search WWH ::




Custom Search