The Roles of Industry and Science, Including Genetic Selection,

in Improving Animal Welfare

Donald M.Broom

Centre for Animal Welfare and AnthrozoologyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine,University of Cambridge, Madingley Road,Cambridge CB3 0ES, U.K. dmb16@cam.ac.uk

Welfare refers to live animals, including humans,and is a characteristic of an individual animal.

Animal protection is something humans do.

In recent years, public concern about animal welfare has grown rapidly.

The welfare of an individual is its state as regards its attempts to cope with its environment.

Plan of talk. 1. Changing attitudes to animals - conclusions for industry.2. Some developments in assessing welfare - conclusions for scientists.3. Genetic selection as an example of an area where collaboration is needed.

Evidence for increased concern about animal welfare.-Letters from the public, media coverage.-References in parliamentary discussions and government

statements.-Requests for scientific evidence concerning animal welfare.-Activity of scientific and other advisory committees.-Funding of scientific research on animal welfare.-Increased teaching and conferences.-More legislation

These concerns and actions in Europe are echoed in many other countries.Animal welfare research, national committees and laws are developing around the world.The O.I.E. is now playing a part in this.Multinational food companies are also having important effects.

Members of the European Parliament receive more letters on animalwelfare than on any other subject.

Factors affecting the welfare of animals include:

the attitudes of the people who care for, or otherwise interact with them,

the conditions and procedures used to keep and manage them.

These are affected by:

laws,

codes of practice and

the knowledge and beliefs of the people, hence by education.

Attitudes to animals

Altered by: tradition,

knowledge about animals and their welfare, what other people say.

Organisations producing: recommendations, * = relevant laws, in Europe codes of practice.

Council of Europe *

European Union *

Member states of E.U. *

Food retail companies

Food producing companies

Animal protection societies, especially Freedom Foods*(RSPCA)

Council of Europe:

[1] Standing Committee of the European Convention on the Protection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes.

[2] Ad hoc committees on Conventions on slaughter, transport, laboratory animals, companion animals.

The Recommendations are influential within all European countries but are also used by other countries when considering legislation.

E.U. Scientific Veterinary Committee,Animal Welfare Section (1990-1997)

E.U. Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare (1997-2003)

European Food Safety Authority Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (2003-present)

E.U. laws are based on scientific information

Some E.U. Directives and Regulations for example those relevant to cattle welfare

98/58 (20/7/98) Concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes.

(1974) 74/577 Stunning before slaughter.

(1993) On the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing.

(1991-2007) Laying down minimum standards for the protection of calves.

(1990- 2007) Concerning the protection of animals during transport.

Example of events leading to an E.U. Directive:the welfare of calves

1960-present Public view that close confinement and inadequate diet lead to poor welfare e.g. Ruth Harrison 1964 Animal Machines.

1970s and 1980s Research results giving evidence for this from Andreae et al, Broom, Friend and Dellmeier, van Putten, Webster et al, Wierenga, and de Wilt.

1988Recommendation concerning cattle from the Council of Europe Committee.

1990s Further welfare research: effects of diet, confinement, space in groups, design of systems - Albright et al, Blum et al, Ketelaar de Lauwere, Le Neindre and Veissier, Müller and Schlichting, Trunkfield and Broom.

Example of events leading to an E.U. Directive: the welfare of calves

1990 Report to European Commission by group of scientists.

1991Directive 91/629/EEC laying down minimum standards for the protection of calves. (Brief but specified space allowanceand required report from E.U. Scientific Veterinary Committee which Ministers would act on).

1994-1995 Public pressure for action, scientific report requested.

Example of events leading to an E.U. Directive: the welfare of calves

1995 Report on the welfare of calves by E.U. Scientific Veterinary Committee, Animal Welfare Section.

1996 Proposal for legislation from European Commission staff and scientific report considered by Ministry staff from each member state. Revised proposal discussed by Ministers from each Member state.

1997 Directive 97/2/EC amending 91/629/EEC: phase in - 2006.

2005 EU Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Animal Welfare asked to prepare a report: 2006 produced.

No Directives whose effect is to improve animal welfare have been rescinded and there are no plans to do so. (For example that banning battery cages for hens.) The public pressure is for there to be better welfare for animals.

Conclusion: countries, or groups of countries need a committee of independent animal welfare scientists.

What do we need from animal welfare law?Most people would say that the law should prevent people from causing poor welfare in animals:i.e. pain, fear, other suffering, severe disease, distress caused by environments which do not meet the animals’ needs, or distress caused by the genetic selection used in breeding.

Some might refer only to animals which humans keep.

In reality, the way that a law might do this is principally by acting as a deterrent. People who disobey the law are punished and this becomes known. However, explicit or implicit in a law there will be a principle which guides the actions of those aware of the law.

Laws should provide guidance, not just a mechanism to punish.

U.K.The Animal Welfare Law refers to animals kept by man for enjoyment, sport, companionship or farming purposes.

It refers directly to animal welfare.

It also refers to people having a duty of care to the animals covered.

The effectiveness of laws and codes depends on the attitudes of people to them and on the efficacy of enforcement.

Some laws are readily enforceable.

Slaughter….. Transport….. Housing of animals.

Number of enforcement officers.Diligence and honesty of enforcement officers.

Laws and codes are needed.

Codes of practice concerning animal welfare, demanded by consumers, are now used by many E.U. supermarket companies and by several fast food chains, including McDonalds, Burger King etc.

The greatest effects on the welfare of animals used for commercial reasons, like food production, come from retailers’ codes.

Farmers often sell their products to single purchasers who represent large retail chains or wholesale distribution companies. The increase in direct selling to supermarket and fast food chains has increased retailer power.

They can set conditions for animal production and enforce these by inspection.

The standards set by the chains are determined by what people will buy and by their reputation with the public. They are generally based on scientific evidence about animal welfare.

Public image Bad publicity Letters from consumers Enforcement of standards Welfare of animals on farms

In the long term, education has a great effect on human attitudes.

People with more knowledge of animal welfare science, and of the physiology, behaviour, and cognitive ability of animals are more likely to treat them in a way that ensures that their welfare is good.

20 years ago there were about six people teaching animal welfarein veterinary, agriculture, biology and psychology courses.

Now there are hundreds.

For example, 32 in Brazil.

People in many countries know from books and television programmes that farm and companion animals are clever.

The attitudes of consumers to agricultural products are altered by their ideasabout animal abilities and about the welfare of the animals.

The reactions of consumers to believing that something is wrong: some to stop eating meat, some to eat some animal products but not others, some to write to retail organisations to tell them what the consumer will not buy.

What would be the cost to the meat industry of a 5% increase in vegetarianism?

What would be the cost of 20% of consumers switching to another meat ?

The cost of improving the image of an industry so that it could be said that the welfare of our animals is good, would be small in comparison with either of these.

Use animal welfare science in order to be credible. Importance of national animal welfare committee:independent scientists.

For the industry: be proactive.

Those involved in animal industries should be aware of public attitudes to

the animals, changes in these and likely future changes in these.

To be prepared and to maintain or improve the image of the industry, there

should be staff and means of communication to facilitate keeping in touch

with (1) new scientific developments in and (2) public attitudes to animal

welfare and other factors affecting sustainability of industry practices.

There should be good liaison with animal protection societies and scientists.

In order to establish good laws and codes of practice, those in animal industry

should encourage formulation using good quality scientific information.

If an industry tries to block new laws, its image may be tarnished by doing so.

Industry should fund independent research in animal welfare science.

Scientists should:

be objective in their work, separating the science from the ethics;

use good methodology for welfare assessment;

attempt to develop new methodologies;

publish their work whatever the result;

and some scientists should ensure that new results become known in the relevant industries and government departments.

Both scientists and industry should aim to use genetic selection to reverse some recent trends and improve animal welfare .

This can’t be done by either alone and is one of the biggest problems for farm animal, companion animal and laboratory animal welfare.

Production levels and animal welfare

Improved plant production: one of the two greatest achievements of the last century.

Improved animal production: almost as great a success.

Examples of changes designed to improve Example of problem forgeneral economic efficiency animal

Easier feeding and management Individual housing

High stocking density More disease

Fewer animal care staff Problems missed

Less veterinary time per animal Disease etc. not treated

Fewer, larger, faster abattoirs Longer journeys, poorer care

Examples of changes designed to improve Example of problem forefficiency of production per animal animal

Improved nutrition for growth Growth too fast

Improved nutrition for energy partitioning Muscle : bone ratio wrong

Reduced energy expenditure by animals Confinement

Growth promoters Leg problems

Growth promoters from bioengineering More production-related disease

Embryo transfer Parturition problems

Conventional breeding Harmful characteristics

Transgenic animal use Biological system changes

Average energy corrected milk yield for Swedish dairy cows over time (from Oltenacu and Algers 2005).

Changes in dairy cows in Austria 1988 2007

Mean yield per lactation (kg) Holstein 5500 8200 Simmental 4500 6600

Mean number of parities in culled Holsteins 3.6 3.3 Simmental 3.95 3.9

Mean number of calves Holsteins 3.59 3.26 Simmental 3.98 3.87

(data from Knaus 2009)

Examples of extent of welfare problems in dairy cows

Leg and foot problems: 35 - 59 cases per 100 cows per annum

Mastitis: 40 cases per 100 cows per annum

Reason given for culling for 36.5% of cows culled was failure to conceive

Positive correlations between milk production level and indicators of poor welfare

Milk yield from 33,732 lactation records:

calving interval 0.50 ± 0.06days to first service 0.43 ± 0.08mastitis 0.21 ± 0.06foot problems 0.29 ± 0.11milk fever 0.19 ± 0.06

(from Pryce et al, 1997)

Average calving interval and proportion of cows alive at 48 mo of age over time for Holstein cows in the Northeastern United States (from Oltenacu and Algers 2005).

Effects of bovine somatotrophin (BST) usage on dairy cowWelfare

Increase in risk of clinical mastitis above risk in non-treated cows as demonstrated using meta-analyses or large data-sets: five studies 15-45%, 23%, 25%, 42%, 79%.

Foot disorders: large scale study with multiparous cows showed 2.2 times more cows affected and 2.1 times more days affected.

Pregnancy rate dropped from 82% to 73% in multiparous cows and from 90% to 63% in primiparous cows.

Multiple births substantially increased.

Injection site: severe reactions in at least 4% of cows. (Report of E.U. Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare, adopted 10th March 1999)

Conclusions

Industry has to rapidly change policies relating to animal welfare and

other aspects of sustainability.

Scientists need to be aware of new developments and communicate.

In many areas, for example in the impact of animal genetics on the

welfare of the animals, cooperation between industry and scientists is

essential.

Bennett, R.M., Broom, D.M., Henson, S.J., Blaney, R.J.P and Harper, G. 2004 . Assessment of the impact of government animal welfare policy on farm animal welfare in the UK. Anim.Welfare, 13, 1-11.

Broom D.M. 2001. (Ed.) Coping with Challenge: Welfare in Animals Including Man. Dahlem University Press.

Broom, D.M. and Fraser, A.F. 2007. Domestic Animal Behaviour and Welfare, 4th Edition. Wallingford: CABI.

Broom D.M. and Johnson K.G. 2000. Stress and Animal Welfare. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Broom, D.M. and Zanella, A.J. 2004. Brain measures which tell us about animal welfare. Anim. Welfare, 13, S41-S45.

Kirkden, R.D., Edwards, J.S.S. and Broom, D.M. 2003. A theoretical comparison of the consumer surplus and the elasticities of demand as measures of motivational strength. Anim. Behav., 65, 157-178.

Oltenacu, P.A. and Algers, B. (2005). Selection for increased production and the welfare of dairy cows; are new breeding goals needed? Ambio, 34: 308-312.