Citizens' views on the practices of zero-grazing and cow-calf separation in the dairy industry: Does providing information increase acceptability?

Abstract

The primary aim of this study was to assess the influence of provision of information on lay citizens' opinions regarding 2 common management practices, zero-grazing and cow-calf separation. To aid in the interpretation of the findings, our secondary aim was to explore the awareness and opinions of Brazilian citizens about these practices. We surveyed a convenience sample of Brazilian citizens (192 men and 208 women), recruited in a public place, with the majority stating that they were largely unfamiliar with animal production and lived in urban environments. Participants were presented short scenarios with information on the primary production factors and welfare concerns for and against zero-grazing (n = 200) or cow-calf separation (n = 200). Participants were then asked to state their position (reject, indifferent, or support), and to provide the reason(s) justifying their position. Immediately following, participants were provided a short statement describing either zero-grazing or cow-calf separation, depending on what question they responded to in the first part. Two closed questions (Q) followed each of these statements: (Q1) "Are you aware of this practice?" with choices yes, somewhat, or no, and (Q2) "What is your position regarding this practice?" with choices reject, indifferent, or support. Only 31 and 33% of the respondents were aware of zero-grazing and cow-calf separation, respectively. Previous awareness of existence of practice did not influence levels of support. Provision of information resulted in more people rejecting the practices of zero-grazing and cow-calf separation. Participants' main justifications to reject zero-grazing and cow-calf separation focused on perceived negative effects of practices on farm animal welfare and product quality, and loss of naturalness. Survey participants, Brazilians living in urban environments, with little or no association with dairy production, were generally unaware that many cows do not have access to pasture and that cows are separated from their calf at birth. Independent of provision of additional information, most participants did not support these practices. Provision of brief explanatory information played a minor role in influencing people's views, but failed to result in general acceptance.

Smallholder family farmers’ perceptions, attitudes and choices regarding husbandry practices that influence performance and welfare of lactating dairy calves

“…Farmers and other industry stakeholders should be made aware of the potential repercussions to the dairy industry of consumers' growing concerns towards animal welfare (VON KEYSERLINGK & HÖTZEL, 2015). Recent research has shown that Brazilians (HÖTZEL et al, 2017), like citizens from other countries (ELLIS et al, 2009;CARDOSO et al, 2016a) are concerned with dairy cattle welfare and reject some of the practices reported to be prevalent in this study.…”

Dairy cow preference for access to an outdoor pack in summer and winter

“…A growing body of evidence has shown that the public considers pasture access for dairy cows important (Schuppli et al, 2014;Hötzel et al, 2017) and that cows value access to pasture, especially at night (e.g., Legrand et al, 2009;Charlton et al, 2013;von Keyserlingk et al, 2017). Cows may use indoor housing as protection from rainfall (Legrand et al, 2009;Charlton et al, 2011aCharlton et al, , 2013 and solar radiation (Schütz et al, 2009).…”

The complex relationship between welfare and reproduction in cattle

“…For example, given that production and fertility are important to farm profitability, those involved with animal production have traditionally taken a pragmatic approach to welfare and often emphasize factors that improve biological functioning (e.g., health, fertility, production; Te Velde, Aarts, & Van Woerkum, ; Verbeke, ). Conversely, lay citizens often place more emphasis on natural living (see, e.g., Cardoso, Hötzel, Weary, Robbins, & von Keyserlingk, ; Hötzel, Cardoso, Roslindo, & von Keyserlingk, ).…”

“…For example, given that production and fertility are important to farm profitability, those involved with animal production have traditionally taken a pragmatic approach to welfare and often emphasize factors that improve biological functioning (e.g., health, fertility, production; Te Velde, Aarts, & Van Woerkum, 2002;Verbeke, 2009). Conversely, lay citizens often place more emphasis on natural living (see, e.g., Cardoso, Hötzel, Weary, Robbins, & von Keyserlingk, 2016;Hötzel, Cardoso, Roslindo, & von Keyserlingk, 2017). Fraser et al (2013) suggest that animal science diverges from animal welfare science insofar as the former has traditionally emphasized efficiency or productivity at the farm level, while the latter focuses on the individual animal, with herd-level functioning as an associated outcome.…”