Attitudes of Canadian Pig Producers Toward Animal Welfare

Spooner, Jeffrey M.; Schuppli, Catherine A.; Fraser, David

doi:10.1007/s10806-013-9477-4

Cited by 51 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to citizens' views (Vanhonacker et al 2009;Fredriksen et al 2011), farmers (Te Velde et al 2002Tuyttens et al 2010;Spooner et al 2014) and industry specialists (Cantrell et al 2013) tend to associate animal welfare mainly from the perspective of the animal's health and biological functioning. For instance, farmers consider surgical castration in piglets without anesthesia an acceptable practice (Tuyttens et al 2012;Spooner et al 2012).…”

Section: Stakeholder Engagements and The Role Of Science In Policy Rementioning

confidence: 99%

The Ticking Clock: Addressing Farm Animal Welfare in Emerging Countries

Keyserlingk

Hötzel

2014

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last decade many emerging economies, and in particular Brazil, have established themselves as major players in global food animal production. Within these countries much of the increase in food animal production has been achieved by the adoption of intensive housing systems similar to those found in most industrialized countries. However, it is now well established that many of these systems are associated with numerous welfare problems, particularly with respect to restriction of movement. Previous work has shown that people living in industrialized' countries broadly support farm animal welfare reform, and that similar criticisms may be voiced from citizens living in developing countries as they become more aware of confinement housing and potentially contentious husbandry practices. Given the developments that have taken place in other countries, there are lessons that could be learned and applied by emerging economies that would undoubtedly ease or prevent the challenges observed in other countries. Thus, we briefly describe the vehicles used by different countries when addressing animal welfare that may provide insights into identifying possible challenges and potential solutions for Brazil and other emerging economies. Where available we review the associated science and identify gaps where more research is needed. We conclude by providing a possible roadmap on how farm animal welfare reform may be addressed in emerging countries. Solutions will need to be tailored, culturally relevant, and science must play a key role in supporting animal welfare reform in the emerging countries.

show abstract

Section: Stakeholder Engagements and The Role Of Science In Policy Rementioning

confidence: 99%

The Ticking Clock: Addressing Farm Animal Welfare in Emerging Countries

Keyserlingk

Hötzel

2014

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, in a study of Canadian pig producers, the producers did not really feel comfortable using the term animal welfare at all [21], while Finnish producers do not seem to find this a problem, even though their definition of animal welfare might differ from that commonly used by scientists [22]. The producers in the study by Kauppinen et al [22] most often mentioned animal welfare in the concept of providing the animals with a favourable living environment and good healthcare.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing undocked pigs – on-farm prevention of tail biting and attitudes towards tail biting and docking

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTail biting is a common and serious welfare problem in pig production, causing large economical losses. Tail docking is performed routinely in most EU countries to reduce the tail biting risk. However, tail docking is painful, and does not prevent tail biting totally. The risk factors behind tail docking are multifactorial and most analyses are based on studies using biological or epidemiological approaches. There is very little information available on how producers deal with tail biting on-farm. There are also no studies on the attitude of producers towards tail docking and tail biting in systems with long-tailed pigs. We aimed to study how farmers rate the efficiency of different measures for preventing and intervening with tail biting, when tail docking is not allowed. Furthermore, we investigated the attitudes of Finnish farmers to tail docking and tail biting.ResultsRespondents scored feeding-related issues to be most important for prevention of tail biting, identifying and removing the biting pig as most important intervention measures, and straw as the most important manipulable material when preventing tail biting. Tail biting was not perceived as a very serious problem by over 70 % of the respondents, even though docking is not allowed, and was reported to occur close to a level which was also considered acceptable by the respondents. Most respondents did not think it is probable they would raise tail docked pigs if it were possible, but about 21 % probably would.ConclusionsIn comparison with other authors’ findings, the ranking of importance of risk factors for tail biting differs between scientists and farmers, and between farmers in different cultures of pig production. In addition, the attitude towards tail biting and tail docking appears to be very different in producers with different experiences of tail docking. These results indicate that a scientist-farmer dialogue, as well as international communication is important when trying to reduce the risk of tail biting, and subsequently the need for tail docking.

show abstract

“…Physical health, fertility, and other aspects associated with production are barometers of livestock animal welfare for many industry members [12,13,17]. These different conceptions of what constitutes animal welfare can lead to certain farming practices and housing systems being favoured over others.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These different conceptions of what constitutes animal welfare can lead to certain farming practices and housing systems being favoured over others. Those who consider animal welfare in terms of biological functioning are more likely to prefer the provision of indoor housing, where the environment and animals can be regulated and closely monitored, and which are typically more cost-effective, over other housing conditions [17,18]. In contrast, those who value natural living are more likely to favour outdoor access and free-range environments [10,19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, some industry members argue that public opposition towards certain farming practices is the result of lack of knowledge [14]. Indeed, knowledge is an important antecedent of beliefs [29], and research indicates that the public has only a vague understanding of animal welfare issues, at least in Western societies [1,16,17]. Studies investigating stakeholder beliefs underpinning levels of support for or opposition to specific farming practices should therefore also measure levels of industry and farming practice knowledge held by the stakeholder groups.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Online Chats to Assess Stakeholder Perceptions of Meat Chicken Intensification and Welfare

Howell

Rohlf

Coleman

et al. 2016

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryMost people care about animal welfare. Nevertheless, divergent views remain on what constitutes animal welfare, despite a growing body of scientific evidence. We used online chats to trigger discussion among participants from various stakeholder groups: general public, animal advocacy group, meat chicken industry-affiliated, and researchers or veterinarians who were not industry-affiliated but had experience with chickens. The aim of this pilot study was to assess reasons for divergence in opinions or conversely agreement between participants, using the topic of the welfare implications of meat chicken farming intensification. Participants also completed a pre- and post-chat survey to evaluate their perceptions and knowledge of chicken farming. Reasons for supporting intensification included perceptions of better health for the chickens and the sustainability of the system. Reasons for opposition included perceptions of the large number of animals kept together, and limited ability to perform natural behaviours. Misunderstandings about current practices were clarified in chats which contained industry-affiliated participants. Participants agreed on the need for enforceable standards and industry transparency. On average, objective knowledge of intensification increased after participating in the chat, but support for intensification did not change over the course of the study, counter to assertions that lack of knowledge results in lack of support for some practices. Engaging stakeholders can provide valuable information to anyone interested in the relationship between perception and knowledge of specific farming practices.AbstractEvidence suggests that there is variation in support for specific chicken farming practices amongst stakeholder groups, and this should be explored in more detail to understand the nature of these differences and work towards convergence. Online focus groups were used to assess attitudes to animal welfare in meat chicken farming in this pilot study. Across six online chats, 25 participants (general public, n = 8; animal advocacy group, n = 11, meat chicken industry, n = 3; research or veterinary practice who had experience with poultry but no declared industry affiliation, n = 3) discussed meat chicken intensification and welfare. Of those, 21 participants completed pre- and post-chat surveys gauging perceptions and objective knowledge about meat chicken management. Main reasons for intensification support were perceptions of improved bird health, and perceptions that it is a cost-effective, sustainable farming system. Reasons for opposition included perceptions that a large number of birds kept are in close proximity and have limited ability to perform natural behaviours. Misunderstandings about current practices were clarified in chats which contained industry representation. Participants agreed on the need for enforceable standards and industry transparency. Industry-affiliated members rated welfare of meat chickens higher, and gave lower ratings for the importance of n...

show abstract

Attitudes of Canadian Pig Producers Toward Animal Welfare

Cited by 51 publications

References 33 publications

The Ticking Clock: Addressing Farm Animal Welfare in Emerging Countries

The Ticking Clock: Addressing Farm Animal Welfare in Emerging Countries

Managing undocked pigs – on-farm prevention of tail biting and attitudes towards tail biting and docking

Online Chats to Assess Stakeholder Perceptions of Meat Chicken Intensification and Welfare

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About