The Welfare of Cattle kept for Beef Production

Content: 1) Introduction 2) State of the Industry 3) Hosing Systems 4) Behaviour of Cattle 5)Effect of Housing on the Welfare of the Animals 6) the effects of Management on Cattle Welfare 7)Futere Research Needed 8) Conclusions 9) Recommodations 10) References 11) Acknowledgement

Aquatic food security:insights into challenges and solutions from an analysis of interactions between fisheries, aquaculture, food safety, human health, fish and human welfare, economy and environment

Fisheries and aquaculture production, imports, exports and equitability of distribution determine the supply of aquatic food to people. Aquatic food security is achieved when a food supply is sufficient, safe, sustainable, shockproof and sound: sufficient, to meet needs and preferences of people; safe, to provide nutritional benefit while posing minimal health risks; sustainable, to provide food now and for future generations; shock-proof, to provide resilience to shocks in production systems and supply chains; and sound, to meet legal and ethical standards for welfare of animals, people and environment. Here, we present an integrated assessment of these elements of the aquatic food system in the United Kingdom, a system linked to dynamic global networks of producers, processors and markets. Our assessment addresses sufficiency of supply from aquaculture, fisheries and trade; safety of supply given biological, chemical and radiation hazards; social, economic and environmental sustainability of production systems and supply chains; system resilience to social, economic and environmental shocks; welfare of fish, people and environment; and the authenticity of food. Conventionally, these aspects of the food system are not assessed collectively, so information supporting our assessment is widely dispersed. Our assessment reveals trade-offs and challenges in the food system that are easily overlooked in sectoral analyses of fisheries, aquaculture, health, medicine, human and fish welfare, safety and environment. We highlight potential benefits of an integrated, systematic and ongoing process to assess security of the aquatic food system and to predict impacts of social, economic and environmental change on food supply and demand

Use of lumpfish for sea-lice control in salmon farming: challenges and opportunities

Efficient sea-lice control remains one of the most important challenges for the salmon farming industry. The use of wrasse (Labridae) as cleaner fish offers an alternative to medicines for sea-lice control, but wrasse tend to become inactive in winter. Lumpfish (Cyclopterus lumpus) continue to feed on sea-lice at low temperatures, and commercial production has escalated from thousands of fish in 2010 to well over 30 million juveniles deployed in 2016. However, production still relies on the capture of wild broodstock, which may not be sustainable. To meet global industry needs, lumpfish production needs to increase to reach c. 50 million fish annually and this can only come from aquaculture. We review current production methods and the use of lumpfish in sea cages and identify some of the main challenges and bottlenecks facing lumpfish intensification. Our gap analysis indicates that the areas in most need of research include better control of maturation for year-round production; formulation of appropriate diets; artificial selection of elite lines with desirable traits; and development of vaccines for certified, disease-free juvenile production. The welfare of farmed lumpfish also needs to be better quantified, and more information is needed on optimal densities and tank design. Finally, the risk of farmed lumpfish escaping from net pens needs to be critically assessed, and we argue that it might be beneficial to recover cleaner fish from salmon cages after the production cycle, perhaps using them as broodstock, for export to the Asian food markets or for the production of animal feeds

EFSA BIOHAZ Panel (EFSA Panel on Biologicial Hazards), 2013. Scientific Opinion on the public health hazards to be covered by inspection of meat (solipeds)

A risk ranking process identified Trichinella spp. as the most relevant biological hazard in the context of meat inspection of domestic solipeds. Without a full and reliable soliped traceability system, it is considered that either testing all slaughtered solipeds for Trichinella spp., or inactivation meat treatments (heat or irradiation) should be used to maintain the current level of safety. With regard to general aspects of current meat inspection practices, the use of manual techniques during current post-mortem soliped meat inspection may increase microbial cross-contamination, and is considered to have a detrimental effect on the microbiological status of soliped carcass meat. Therefore, the use of visual-only inspection is suggested for “non-suspect” solipeds. For chemical hazards, phenylbutazone and cadmium were ranked as being of high potential concern. Monitoring programmes for chemical hazards should be more flexible and based on the risk of occurrence, taking into account Food Chain Information (FCI), covering the specific on-farm environmental conditions and individual animal treatments, and the ranking of chemical substances, which should be regularly updated and include new hazards. Sampling, testing and intervention protocols for chemical hazards should be better integrated and should focus particularly on cadmium, phenylbutazone and priority “essential substances” approved for treatment of equine animals. Implementation and enforcement of a more robust and reliable identification system throughout the European Union is needed to improve traceability of domestic solipeds. Meat inspection is recognised as a valuable tool for surveillance and monitoring of animal health and welfare conditions. If visual only post-mortem inspection is implemented for routine slaughter, a reduction in the detection of strangles and mild cases of rhodococcosis would occur. However, this was considered unlikely to affect the overall surveillance of both diseases. Improvement of FCI and traceability were considered as not having a negative effect on animal health and welfare surveillance

Kangaroos

tag=1 data=Kangaroos tag=2 data=Australia. Parliament. Senate. Select Committee on Animal Welfare tag=6 data=^d ^m ^y1993 tag=8 data=ANIMALS tag=9 data=KANGAROOS tag=10 data=FILED IN PAMPHLET BOX "GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO REPORTS" Government response to the Senate Select Committee on Animal Welfare report of June 1988. tag=15 data=PAMFILED IN PAMPHLET BOX "GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO REPORTS" Government response to the Senate Select Committee on Animal Welfare report of June 1988