Working towards animal welfare
Following on from the last entry, I find the wording of this entry paragraph rather interesting:
Farmers Weekly, October 6 2008
If you fear that animal welfare would become the next global issue for farmers the Government has just proven you're not delusional.
Agriculture Minister Jim Anderton last week announced the Government's support for the notion of a Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare.
The previous global issue, presumably, being the requirement to reduce 'environmentally harmful' emissions, many of them traced back to grazing livestock and decomposing vegetation.
It's that word 'fear'. Why would farmers fear an increased interest in animal welfare?
You know, when I go to discussion groups and industry meetings it's not unusual to hear variations on: "I'm not a sandal-wearing hippie but..." before the speaker continues with the assertion that animal welfare is important and maybe we could be doing this or that to improve it.
Livestock farmers as a rule are very interested in animal welfare.
Livestock farmers as a rule are very interested in distancing themselves from any and all association with animal rights activists, vegetarians, 'sandal-wearing hippies'.
Why?
(Rhetorical question. I know the answer.)
Moving on... because there are a lot of things that could be discussed around this issue, I just wanted to put that 'why?' out there.
Given that farmers (as a rule) and concerned people in general (as a rule) and animal rights activists (??) all think that animal welfare is important and all steps should be taken to ensure farmed animals (leaving aside pets/feral/lab animals for the moment) have a high quality of life, it doesn't seem right that attempts by one group to progress in this area should be sabotaged by the other two. Yet this is the situation we are in.
Are the three groups aiming for the same goal?
No.
Because 'good welfare' is not defined the same way. Someone who works with livestock daily has a different knowledge of welfare than someone who isn't intimate with the animals but is concerned about their direct support of livestock farming, who has a different knowledge to someone who is keenly interested in animal survival/life quality but has no economic interest in livestock production.
I had a read of the UDAW, accessible through the entry below. It's a mere two pages, extremely basic but covers in simple form the codes/laws that farmers in NZ and Britain must comply with. I'll hunt down a few examples of these regulations on-line in a minute - there was a new proposal created sometime last year which will be industry-wide law (within New Zealand), and there are examples also of the tighter regulations required on organic farms.
One of the issues affecting Brtiain round about the time I left ten years ago was the proliferation of supermarket accreditation (sp?) schemes. From what I've heard since the industry has continued down that road into insanity - and it was insanity, because there was an extreme compliance cost for some requirements that did nothing directly to improve livestock welfare and may even have caused harm.
A few years ago in NZ it was suggested that the collection of young calves from dairy farms be off-road, so that the public couldn't see the calves waiting in the pen (nothing to do with animal welfare, purely a 'public image' consideration). At the time there was strong resistance from the trucking companies, who protested the extra time it would take to drive down farm tracks.
Now it's standard practice that trucks drive to the farm buildings and collect calves directly from their rearing sheds. And a great many farmers won't permit it. I won't - once my stock agent told me he'd take a couple of my calves to a prospective buyer and if they weren't wanted he'd bring them back and I was "no way - not to this shed you won't."
Who knows what infections the last calves in the stock agent's trailer might have been incubating? If you've seen rotavirus devastate a group of calves once, you'll never want to see it again.
I get a point against me at every dairy inspection because I have a roadside collection pen. Because I won't risk my calves by allowing men who have been in every calf shed up and down the road to set foot in mine.
This is fairly typical of the sort of 'animal welfare' regulation devised by individuals who don't work with livestock.
Obviously, taking the collection point out of public view does *nothing* to change the fact that young calves are sold from dairy farms. Does nothing to alter the welfare of those calves sold. And as I explained above, greatly risks the welfare of every other calf born and brought into those sheds.
edit
(Links to requirenments for organic certification of livestock farms from an old farm report - I haven't checked that these links are still valid)
The summary of Bio-Gro requirements for livestock farms is found here: http://www.bio-gro.co.nz/content/files/1010430_livestock.pdf
For Demeter, here http://www.biodynamic.org.nz/demeter.html
For Agriquality, here: http://www.agriquality.co.nz/resources/pdf/AQ_Organic_Standard_V2.pdf
Organic Farm New Zealand is government (MAF) run with the Soil and Health Association and apparently doesn’t have an on-line presence.
Draft Animal Welfare Code 2006 - this link may be obsolete - my browser seems to think so anyway.
http://http//www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/animal-welfare/codes/drafts/dairy-cattle-public-draft-06.pdf
Hmm - it should be in these archives, but I can't see it: http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/biosec/consult/archive
but absolutely want this page for my own reference - why aren't some of these coming through in my e-mails? http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/biosec/consult
Govenrment aren't updating their codes... this is the code for welfare of dairy cattle, but even a glance through tells me it's outdated. And this isn't the full code, I've seen much more detailed information: http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/animal-welfare/codes/dairy-cattle/index.htm
Regarding the draft code: http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/media/03-11-06/animal-welfare.htm
The code is intended to encourage all those responsible for the welfare of dairy cattle to exceed the minimum standards and adopt the best industry practices of husbandry, care and handling.
The draft code includes all calves born from dairy cows until weaning, all dairy replacement stock and dairy cattle kept as “house cows”. It does not include weaned dairy cattle raised for beef production.
Proposed minimum standards cover all aspects of dairy cattle husbandry including the need for food, water, shade, shelter and housing. The management of downer cows, requirements around the use of stand-off areas and feed pads and the feeding of bobby calves prior to transport are also addressed.
A draft code was developed by a dairy industry writing group including representatives from dairy farmer, animal welfare, university and veterinary groups. Dairy cattle producers and other industry interest groups were consulted during the development process.
The draft code was submitted to NAWAC, which is seeking public feedback on the recommendations before finalising the code.
“No decisions have been made yet. We want to know whether the minimum standards and recommendations being made go too far or not far enough,” says Dr O’Connor, MAF animal welfare programmer manager. “We welcome submissions from anyone interested in dairy cattle welfare”.
The draft code will be issued for public consultation on 4 November 2006 and is available at www.biosecurity.govt.nz/regs/animal-welfare. The closing date for submissions is 19 December 2006.
Any person may make submissions on the draft code
I learned about this because fedfarmers e-mailed the link and a brief call for input. At around the same time one of the farming papers published a brief article indicating the existence of the draft code, location and request for consultation. I read it throug, picked up on two areas of concern (exceissive compliance for little real benefit) but decided it wasn't important anough to raise the issue with govt, but around the same time I attended a meeting on animal welfare where one of the speakers held up the paper version - anyone heard of this? There was general denial from the farmers attending.
You have to be very alert to know when these things are in consultation, and I doubt anyone in the general public would have had any notice at all.
http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/acvm/publications/agvetlink/issue-4v/page-09.htm
This supercedes the code on the biosecurity site (and is how I knew that one was hopelessly outdated).
This one is for pigs: http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/animal-welfare/codes/pigs/index.htm
From the uk: Herd-keepers are reminded that it is an offence for anyone to keep cattle unless they have access to the Welfare Code and are familiar with its provisions. Herd-keepers are asked to familiarise themselves with the Code and to ensure that any employees receive instruction and guidance on its contents.
http://archive.nics.gov.uk/ard/060220d-ard.htm
http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/farmed/on-farm.htm
For cattle: http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/farmed/cattle/booklets/cattcode.pdf
Farmers Weekly, October 6 2008
If you fear that animal welfare would become the next global issue for farmers the Government has just proven you're not delusional.
Agriculture Minister Jim Anderton last week announced the Government's support for the notion of a Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare.
The previous global issue, presumably, being the requirement to reduce 'environmentally harmful' emissions, many of them traced back to grazing livestock and decomposing vegetation.
It's that word 'fear'. Why would farmers fear an increased interest in animal welfare?
You know, when I go to discussion groups and industry meetings it's not unusual to hear variations on: "I'm not a sandal-wearing hippie but..." before the speaker continues with the assertion that animal welfare is important and maybe we could be doing this or that to improve it.
Livestock farmers as a rule are very interested in animal welfare.
Livestock farmers as a rule are very interested in distancing themselves from any and all association with animal rights activists, vegetarians, 'sandal-wearing hippies'.
Why?
(Rhetorical question. I know the answer.)
Moving on... because there are a lot of things that could be discussed around this issue, I just wanted to put that 'why?' out there.
Given that farmers (as a rule) and concerned people in general (as a rule) and animal rights activists (??) all think that animal welfare is important and all steps should be taken to ensure farmed animals (leaving aside pets/feral/lab animals for the moment) have a high quality of life, it doesn't seem right that attempts by one group to progress in this area should be sabotaged by the other two. Yet this is the situation we are in.
Are the three groups aiming for the same goal?
No.
Because 'good welfare' is not defined the same way. Someone who works with livestock daily has a different knowledge of welfare than someone who isn't intimate with the animals but is concerned about their direct support of livestock farming, who has a different knowledge to someone who is keenly interested in animal survival/life quality but has no economic interest in livestock production.
I had a read of the UDAW, accessible through the entry below. It's a mere two pages, extremely basic but covers in simple form the codes/laws that farmers in NZ and Britain must comply with. I'll hunt down a few examples of these regulations on-line in a minute - there was a new proposal created sometime last year which will be industry-wide law (within New Zealand), and there are examples also of the tighter regulations required on organic farms.
One of the issues affecting Brtiain round about the time I left ten years ago was the proliferation of supermarket accreditation (sp?) schemes. From what I've heard since the industry has continued down that road into insanity - and it was insanity, because there was an extreme compliance cost for some requirements that did nothing directly to improve livestock welfare and may even have caused harm.
A few years ago in NZ it was suggested that the collection of young calves from dairy farms be off-road, so that the public couldn't see the calves waiting in the pen (nothing to do with animal welfare, purely a 'public image' consideration). At the time there was strong resistance from the trucking companies, who protested the extra time it would take to drive down farm tracks.
Now it's standard practice that trucks drive to the farm buildings and collect calves directly from their rearing sheds. And a great many farmers won't permit it. I won't - once my stock agent told me he'd take a couple of my calves to a prospective buyer and if they weren't wanted he'd bring them back and I was "no way - not to this shed you won't."
Who knows what infections the last calves in the stock agent's trailer might have been incubating? If you've seen rotavirus devastate a group of calves once, you'll never want to see it again.
I get a point against me at every dairy inspection because I have a roadside collection pen. Because I won't risk my calves by allowing men who have been in every calf shed up and down the road to set foot in mine.
This is fairly typical of the sort of 'animal welfare' regulation devised by individuals who don't work with livestock.
Obviously, taking the collection point out of public view does *nothing* to change the fact that young calves are sold from dairy farms. Does nothing to alter the welfare of those calves sold. And as I explained above, greatly risks the welfare of every other calf born and brought into those sheds.
edit
(Links to requirenments for organic certification of livestock farms from an old farm report - I haven't checked that these links are still valid)
The summary of Bio-Gro requirements for livestock farms is found here: http://www.bio-gro.co.nz/content/files/1010430_livestock.pdf
For Demeter, here http://www.biodynamic.org.nz/demeter.html
For Agriquality, here: http://www.agriquality.co.nz/resources/pdf/AQ_Organic_Standard_V2.pdf
Organic Farm New Zealand is government (MAF) run with the Soil and Health Association and apparently doesn’t have an on-line presence.
Draft Animal Welfare Code 2006 - this link may be obsolete - my browser seems to think so anyway.
http://http//www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/animal-welfare/codes/drafts/dairy-cattle-public-draft-06.pdf
Hmm - it should be in these archives, but I can't see it: http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/biosec/consult/archive
but absolutely want this page for my own reference - why aren't some of these coming through in my e-mails? http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/biosec/consult
Govenrment aren't updating their codes... this is the code for welfare of dairy cattle, but even a glance through tells me it's outdated. And this isn't the full code, I've seen much more detailed information: http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/animal-welfare/codes/dairy-cattle/index.htm
Regarding the draft code: http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/media/03-11-06/animal-welfare.htm
The code is intended to encourage all those responsible for the welfare of dairy cattle to exceed the minimum standards and adopt the best industry practices of husbandry, care and handling.
The draft code includes all calves born from dairy cows until weaning, all dairy replacement stock and dairy cattle kept as “house cows”. It does not include weaned dairy cattle raised for beef production.
Proposed minimum standards cover all aspects of dairy cattle husbandry including the need for food, water, shade, shelter and housing. The management of downer cows, requirements around the use of stand-off areas and feed pads and the feeding of bobby calves prior to transport are also addressed.
A draft code was developed by a dairy industry writing group including representatives from dairy farmer, animal welfare, university and veterinary groups. Dairy cattle producers and other industry interest groups were consulted during the development process.
The draft code was submitted to NAWAC, which is seeking public feedback on the recommendations before finalising the code.
“No decisions have been made yet. We want to know whether the minimum standards and recommendations being made go too far or not far enough,” says Dr O’Connor, MAF animal welfare programmer manager. “We welcome submissions from anyone interested in dairy cattle welfare”.
The draft code will be issued for public consultation on 4 November 2006 and is available at www.biosecurity.govt.nz/regs/animal-welfare. The closing date for submissions is 19 December 2006.
Any person may make submissions on the draft code
I learned about this because fedfarmers e-mailed the link and a brief call for input. At around the same time one of the farming papers published a brief article indicating the existence of the draft code, location and request for consultation. I read it throug, picked up on two areas of concern (exceissive compliance for little real benefit) but decided it wasn't important anough to raise the issue with govt, but around the same time I attended a meeting on animal welfare where one of the speakers held up the paper version - anyone heard of this? There was general denial from the farmers attending.
You have to be very alert to know when these things are in consultation, and I doubt anyone in the general public would have had any notice at all.
http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/acvm/publications/agvetlink/issue-4v/page-09.htm
This supercedes the code on the biosecurity site (and is how I knew that one was hopelessly outdated).
This one is for pigs: http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/animal-welfare/codes/pigs/index.htm
From the uk: Herd-keepers are reminded that it is an offence for anyone to keep cattle unless they have access to the Welfare Code and are familiar with its provisions. Herd-keepers are asked to familiarise themselves with the Code and to ensure that any employees receive instruction and guidance on its contents.
http://archive.nics.gov.uk/ard/060220d-ard.htm
http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/farmed/on-farm.htm
For cattle: http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/farmed/cattle/booklets/cattcode.pdf
posted by sophie | 10:48 PM
1 Comments:
Thank you very much for writing this, Sophie. It was such an informative post.
I love reading your blog. It gives me more insight on what's going on in farming and agriculture. :) especially considering that I don't live near farm animals like you do.
I guess most farmers' definition of 'animal welfare' is clearly not the same as the one which those of us who truly care about animals would state...
How are your dairy cows doing, btw?
I heard organic farms have better standards when it comes to the ethical treatment of dairy cows and laying hens, that definitely right?
Post a Comment
<< Home