Farm membership of voluntary welfare schemes results in better compliance with animal welfare legislation in Great Britain

AbstractThe Action Plan of the European Commission 2006-2010 proposed a move towards more private and less state regulation of animal welfare and Great British (GB) Governments made a commitment to reduce the burden of inspection of farms by targeting high-risk enterprises. In previous research in GB, farmers in private, voluntary regulated schemes were more compliant with GB legislation and code at statutory welfare inspections made by the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) than farmers not in such schemes. The current study investigated whether membership of other private voluntary regulators and national data sources were associated with greater compliance with welfare at APHA inspections and whether the previous association between greater compliance and membership of private schemes persisted. Compliance at APHA inspections remained higher on farms in the private schemes previously investigated. It was also higher in the one retailer and seven herd health schemes investigated. There was no association between non-welfare EU cross-compliance inspections and compliance at APHA inspections. Approximately 90% of farmers in a scheme passed animal welfare inspections compared with 80% of non-scheme members. We conclude that farms in private schemes are more likely to pass APHA inspections and so this criterion can be used in selection of farms for risk-based inspection. We hypothesise that private regulation with regular inspection of all farms could raise compliance with animal welfare legislation to at least the minimum legal standards, however, it could result in animals with low welfare being concealed; consequently, this hypothesis requires testing.</jats:p

The effect of mixing entire male pigs prior to transport to slaughter on behaviour, welfare and carcass lesions

peer-reviewedData set for article is also provided.Research is needed to validate lesions recorded at meat inspection as indicators of pig welfare on farm. The aims were to determine the influence of mixing pigs on carcass lesions and to establish whether such lesions correlate with pig behaviour and lesions scored on farm. Aggressive and mounting behaviour of pigs in three single sex pens was recorded on Day −5, −2, and −1 relative to slaughter (Day 0). On Day 0 pigs were randomly allocated to 3 treatments (n = 20/group) over 5 replicates: males mixed with females (MF), males mixed with males (MM), and males unmixed (MUM). Aggressive and mounting behaviours were recorded on Day 0 at holding on farm and lairage. Skin/tail lesions were scored according to severity at the farm (Day −1), lairage, and on the carcass (Day 0). Effect of treatment and time on behaviour and lesions were analysed by mixed models. Spearman rank correlations between behaviour and lesion scores and between scores recorded at different stages were determined. In general, MM performed more aggressive behaviour (50.4 ± 10.72) than MUM (20.3 ± 9.55, P < 0.05) and more mounting (30.9 ± 9.99) than MF (11.4 ± 3.76) and MUM (9.8 ± 3.74, P < 0.05). Skin lesion scores increased between farm (Day −1) and lairage (P < 0.001), but this tended to be significant only for MF and MM (P = 0.08). There was no effect of treatment on carcass lesions and no associations were found with fighting/mounting. Mixing entire males prior to slaughter stimulated mounting and aggressive behaviour but did not influence carcass lesion scores. Carcass skin/tail lesions scores were correlated with scores recorded on farm (rskin = 0.21 and rtail = 0.18, P < 0.01) suggesting that information recorded at meat inspection could be used as indicators of pig welfare on farm.This study was part of the PIGWELFIND project funded by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM), Ireland

Winner-loser effects overrule aggressiveness during the early stages of contests between pigs

Contest behaviour, and in particular the propensity to attack an unfamiliar conspecific, is influenced by an individual’s aggressiveness, as well as by experience of winning and losing (so called ‘winner-loser effects’). Individuals vary in aggressiveness and susceptibility to winner-loser effects but the relationship between these drivers of contest behaviour has been poorly investigated. Here we hypothesise that the winner-loser effect on initiation of agonistic behaviour (display, non-damaging aggression, biting and mutual fighting) is influenced by aggressiveness. Pigs (n=255) were assayed for aggressiveness (tendency to attack in resident-intruder tests) and then experienced two dyadic contests (age 10 and 13 weeks). Agonistic behaviour, up to reciprocal fighting, in contest 2 was compared between individuals of different aggressiveness in the RI test and experiences of victory or defeat in contest 1. Winner-loser effects were more influential than aggressiveness in determining initiation of agonistic behaviour. After accruing more skin lesions in contest 1, individuals were less likely to engage in escalated aggression in contest 2. The interaction between aggressiveness and winner-loser experience did not influence contest behaviour. The results suggest that aggressiveness does not compromise learning from recent contest experience and that reducing aggressiveness is unlikely to affect how animals experience winning and losing. <br/