Longevity as an Animal Welfare Issue Applied to the Case of Foot Disorders in Dairy Cattle

Bruijnis, M.R.N.; Meijboom, F.L.B.; Stassen, E.N.

doi:10.1007/s10806-012-9376-0

Cited by 38 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(29 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Others (e.g. Bruijnis et al, 2012;Yeates, 2011) have addressed these questions in detail and we refer the interested reader to these texts.To shed light on the four situations we consider the practical issues involved -such as the existence and feasibility of alternatives -in combination with the ethical issues at stake. We develop the discussion against the background of the major theoretical considerations…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare and quantity of life.

Franco

Magalhães-Sant’Ana²,

Olsson³

2014

Dilemmas in Animal Welfare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

*These authors have contributed equally to this paper ABSTRACTThe Animal welfare science is mostly focused on evaluating and improving the quality of life of animals that actually exist. This leaves out a range of ethically relevant issues regarding the quantity of life -in terms of number of animals living and the longevity of each animal. In many cases quantity and quality are related, and often there is a tension between the two. In this chapter, we develop a discussion around four practical cases presenting quality-quantity dilemmas: a) the issue of dairy cow longevity, b) the early slaughter of male dairy calves, INTRODUCTIONMost of the attention in animal welfare science, be it in practical research or in theoretical discussion, is given to These dilemmas involve issues having to do with the quality and duration of the lives of animals that will be born and live, and the discussion will focus on these issues. However, some issues of whether or not certain animals would be brought into existence will also be addressed.There are some more fundamental philosophical issues that are relevant for life and death decisions affecting animals but which go beyond the scope of this paper.These include the challenge of deciding whether the life of another individual of a different species is worth living, and questions having to do with whether animals have a will to live or a notion of the future and how having or lacking these concepts interacts with the harm caused by death. Others (e.g. Bruijnis et al., 2012;Yeates, 2011) have addressed these questions in detail and we refer the interested reader to these texts.To shed light on the four situations we consider the practical issues involved -such as the existence and feasibility of alternatives -in combination with the ethical issues at stake. We develop the discussion against the background of the major theoretical considerations

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare and quantity of life.

Franco

Magalhães-Sant’Ana²,

Olsson³

2014

Dilemmas in Animal Welfare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Longevity has been used as an indicator of welfare since it indicates whether health and biological functioning are compromised to such an extent that the life span is affected, although it does not necessarily translate that a long life is a one worth living. From this perspective, what is acceptable can be interpreted more broadly than merely preventing physical or mental discomfort and includes the possibility for animals to flourish and live a natural life (Bruijnis et al, 2013). In general, an extended life span will enhance production efficiency of breeding animals such as dairy cattle and, at the same time, will improve animal welfare.…”

Section: Contribution Of Livestock To Global Greenhouse Gas Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current available strategies to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in livestock systems: an animal welfare perspective

Llonch

Haskell

Dewhurst

et al. 2017

Animal

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Livestock production is a major contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, so will play a significant role in the mitigation effort. Recent literature highlights different strategies to mitigate GHG emissions in the livestock sector. Animal welfare is a criterion of sustainability and any strategy designed to reduce the carbon footprint of livestock production should consider animal welfare amongst other sustainability metrics. We discuss and tabulate the likely relationships and trade-offs between the GHG mitigation potential of mitigation strategies and their welfare consequences, focusing on ruminant species and on cattle in particular. The major livestock GHG mitigation strategies were classified according to their mitigation approach as reducing total emissions (inhibiting methane production in the rumen), or reducing emissions intensity (Ei; reducing CH 4 per output unit without directly targeting methanogenesis). Strategies classified as antimethanogenic included chemical inhibitors, electron acceptors (i.e. nitrates), ionophores (i.e. Monensin) and dietary lipids. Increasing diet digestibility, intensive housing, improving health and welfare, increasing reproductive efficiency and breeding for higher productivity were categorized as strategies that reduce Ei. Strategies that increase productivity are very promising ways to reduce the livestock carbon footprint, though in intensive systems this is likely to be achieved at the cost of welfare. Other strategies can effectively reduce GHG emissions whilst simultaneously improving animal welfare (e.g. feed supplementation or improving health). These win-win strategies should be strongly supported as they address both environmental and ethical sustainability. In order to identify the most cost-effective measures for improving environmental sustainability of livestock production, the consequences of current and future strategies for animal welfare must be scrutinized and contrasted against their effectiveness in mitigating climate change.Keywords: animal welfare, climate change, livestock, mitigation, sustainability ImplicationsLivestock is a major contributor to climate change. In the context of an expected increase in the consumption of animal products, livestock producers must reduce their impact on the environment. A number of strategies have been proposed to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from livestock, including ruminants. These strategies are based on changes in feeding, breeding and management practices. However, their implications for the animal's health and welfare still need to be explored. This paper tabulates and discusses the potential welfare hazards and benefits of implementing the most prominent strategies and identifies the most costeffective (GHG reduction v. welfare) strategies to mitigate climate change. Contribution of livestock to global greenhouse gas emissionsThe global livestock sector contributes significantly to anthropogenic GHG emissions. Direct emissions (through enteric fermentation and losses from manure) from livest...

show abstract

“…gassing with CO 2 ) is fairly quick, but there is no unanimous agreement that it does not raise welfare issues. Although, assuming the killing itself can be done in a way that is completely or almost completely welfare neutral, it is questionable whether the killing of such young animals is really not an animal welfare issue, because the animals are not able to complete a normal lifespan and their interests are at stake (Yeates 2009;Bruijnis et al 2013). The latter argument requires a view on animal welfare where it is accepted that animal welfare is a concept based on interacting biological and normative viewpoints.…”

Section: Status Of Day-old Chicksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The normative viewpoints determine what types of biological aspects are important and what is, or is not, acceptable (e.g. Schmidt 2011; Bruijnis et al 2013). In this interpretation of animal welfare, the aspect of naturalness is also considered important.…”

Section: Status Of Day-old Chicksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral “Lock-In” in Responsible Innovation: The Ethical and Social Aspects of Killing Day-Old Chicks and Its Alternatives

Bruijnis

Blok

Stassen

et al. 2015

J Agric Environ Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to provide a conceptual framework that will help in understanding and evaluating, along social and ethical lines, the issue of killing dayold male chicks and two alternative directions of responsible innovations to solve this issue. The following research questions are addressed: Why is the killing of day-old chicks morally problematic? Are the proposed alternatives morally sound? To what extent do the alternatives lead to responsible innovation? The conceptual framework demonstrates clearly that there is a moral ''lock-in'', and why the killing of day-old chicks is indeed an issue. Furthermore, it is shown that both alternative directions address some important objections with regard to the killing of day-old chicks, but that they also raise new dilemmas. It also becomes clear that the framework enables and secures anticipation, reflection, deliberation with and responsiveness to stakeholders, the four dimensions of responsible innovation, in a structured way.

show abstract

Longevity as an Animal Welfare Issue Applied to the Case of Foot Disorders in Dairy Cattle

Cited by 38 publications

References 32 publications

Welfare and quantity of life.

Welfare and quantity of life.

Current available strategies to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in livestock systems: an animal welfare perspective

Moral “Lock-In” in Responsible Innovation: The Ethical and Social Aspects of Killing Day-Old Chicks and Its Alternatives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About