From the Five Freedoms to a more holistic perspective on animal welfare in the Dutch Animals Act

Abstract

One of the aims of the Dutch Animals Act is to protect animal welfare. The assumption that animal welfare risks are managed and mitigated by the Act, however, has not been studied before. The aim of this paper is to evaluate whether or not animal welfare risks can be managed adequately under the current Dutch Animals Act and what modifications to the legislation could improve animal welfare in the Netherlands. For that purpose, welfare consequences identified in various supply chain risk assessments from the Office of Risk Assessment & Research (BuRO) were assessed in conjunction with the Dutch Animals Act and related legislation. A distinction was made between means- and goal-oriented legislation. The current Dutch Animals Act uses the “Five Freedoms” to define animal welfare. However, this seems outdated, given that current scientific insight also indicates that positive experiences should be included as an integral part of animal welfare. Currently, most welfare consequences in supply chains are linked to factors that are regulated by Dutch legislation as qualitative, goal-oriented, open standards. Furthermore, there is no species-specific legislation for some of the most common farm animals in the Netherlands, e.g., dairy cattle. By applying the latest scientific insights, both the current Dutch Animals Act and associated legislation can be improved to more appropriately manage animal welfare risks. As suggestions for improvement, we propose that the definition of animal welfare in the Dutch Animals Act is updated, that species-specific legislation for farm animals is developed where not already applicable, and that animal-based measures (ABMs) are integrated into legislation. As amendments to animal welfare legislation at the European level are currently being developed, our proposals to include the most recent scientific insights in animal welfare legislation also hold for European legislators.

The value of regulating stocking densities in aquaculture must not be dismissed: a reply to Saraiva et al. 2022

“…Whilst we agree that it is difficult to set “optimal” stocking density levels, when done correctly, stocking density limits are used to protect animal welfare, preventing issues before they develop. In fact, operational welfare input indicators, like stocking density, are often considered valuable preventative tools ( 11 – 13 ) and are typically the ideal practical input measure for legislation ( 14 – 16 ).…”

“…For example, the EU Directive 2007/43/EC outlines broiler stocking density limits and in the Netherlands, the Dutch Animals Act (2011) ( 40 ) requires farmers at higher stocking densities to monitor animal-based indicators, such as incidences of footpad dermatitis. Then, if scores are too high, farmers must create improvement plans, which often include lowering stocking density ( 13 ).…”

Rewilded horses in European nature conservation – a genetics, ethics and welfare perspective

“…From an anthropocentric perspective (Bradshaw and Casey, 2007), fertility control aligns better with welfare considerations (Swegen and Aitken, 2016). From an animal-centred perspective (i.e., being "mentally and physically capable and possessing the ability and opportunity to react in a natural behaviour", Voogt et al 2023), it induces poor welfare by compromising natural behaviours (Bracke and Hopster, 2006) and causing distress (e.g., related to castration, Dalla Costa et al 2014). Although culling could represent a suitable alternative (see section 5), it is very often rejected by conservation managers, due to anticipated public opposition (authors' experience), which is generally influenced by animal rights advocates (Beever et al 2018;Bechert et al 2022, Beeton andJohnson 2019) and based on "ethical non-compliance" (Lundmark et al, 2015).…”

The Implementation of Animal Welfare Standards on Pig Farms in the Highlands and Lowland Area in Gianyar Bali

“…Ternak akan dikatakan bebas dari rasa tidak nyaman ketika mampu menyiapkan kandang yang baik, Voogt et al, (2023), menyatakan bahwa kandang yang ideal adalah kandang yang berukuran tidak terlalu sempit dan sesuai kapasitas, mendapatkan pencahayaan yang baik, sirkulasi udara yang optimal, serta kebersihan kandang yang terjaga. Di dataran tinggi dan dataran rendah didapati kandang babi yang sesuai dengan pernyataan Voogt et al, (2023), dimana dari pengamatan babi tidak bersedak-desakan dalam satu kandang, mendapatkan pencahayaan yang baik, sirkulasi udara yang bagus, serta kebersihan kandang yang terjaga. Menurut Chidgey (2023), babi yang tidak berdesakan mereka memiliki ruang yang cukup untuk bergerak bebas sehingga mendukung kesejahteraan dan memberikan lingkungan yang lebih bersih.…”