Animal Welfare in Beef Production Jim Rothwell Manager Sustainability R&D Meat & Livestock Australia
Outline Learnings from events/issues Community backlash - upcoming issues for the beef industry Market Research what consumers want/think Land transport example Welsman report What is on the horizon for welfare research in beef MLA welfare R&D plans, recent current Standards and Guidelines for cattle
Inevitable use of environmentalist tactics by the welfare lobby Harnessing the power of the consumer
Consumer market research focus groups Live export Live export concerns everyone & is strongly rejected by some (particularly vegetarians) At best, there is a sense of pride that Australia is investing in improving animal welfare Dehorning The act of dehorning sounds unpleasant and unnatural However, some elements of the scenario make it more palatable (stops cattle from injuring themselves, anaesthetic, selective breeding of polled cattle) Feedlots Feedlots are generally a known reality, so less shocking overall
Consumer market research focus groups Transport Scenario The transport guidelines for trucking cattle stipulates that maximum travel time without feed or water is 48 hours Maximum travel time has been extended following scientific studies that showed there was no long-term impact on the health of the animals as they were able to regain their weight within three days of arriving at their destination Transport is one of the most disturbing scenarios and evokes anger However, interestingly, consumers feel empowered, they can stop animals suffering by buying local (or slaughtered on farm)
Case study: Transport Duration - Cattle Treatments: 6, 12, 30 & 48 h transport x 2 replicates Animals: 480 Bos indicus x Bos taurus heifers Average liveweight = 384 kg 15 focal animals/truck
Results - Bodyweight 380 370 6 h 12 h 30 h 48 h Bodyweight (kg) 360 350 340 330 Weight Loss 6 h 5.4% 12 h 6.0% 30 h 6.8% 48 h 10.2% 95-98% pre-trans bodyweight Transport Recovery 320-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 Time (h)
Dehydration measures Serum total protein and osmolality Total protein (g/l) 85 80 75 70 Transport Recovery 6 h 12 h 30 h 48 h Osmolality (mosmol) 308 306 304 302 300 298 296 294 292 290 Transport Recovery 6 h 12 h 30 h 48 h 65-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 288-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 Time (h) Time (h) Some evidence of dehydration but levels on arrival still within normal clinical ranges for cattle
Results - Behaviour during initial 6h recovery (12 and 48 h treatments) Cattle transported 48 h spent significantly more time lying during initial 3 h of recovery
Conclusions Healthy mature cattle with no pre-transport feed or water curfew and transported in accordance with accepted good practice generally coped with transport durations up to 48 h. The current maximum limits under the new land transport Standards and Guidelines are acceptable on animal welfare grounds for this class of cattle. Accepted by welfare scientists, industry and partly by the welfare but not the rights lobby BUT Focus group results show that consumers don t like it and no amount of science will overcome this
Welsman report, Dr Walker s summary Aim for real solutions addressing industry needs i.e. problem solving. Seek REPLACEMENT as the preferred strategy e.g. polled condition gene markers in Bos indicus cattle. Focus R&D on essential procedures. Decide early which practices industry should defend (and therefore those NOT to defend e.g. pizzle dropping) Refinement maybe required in the short term e.g. practical pain relief. No bloody operations. Industry needs to avoid the gruesome, the unnatural and the inappropriate as judged by your average suburbanite. Assess what science to do through consumer/market eyes Strategically plan how to be reasonable men in advance e.g. leaving animals to die in the paddock is not a reasonable life
Rights Five freedoms: from hunger and thirst, from discomfort, from pain, injury and disease, from fear and distress, to express normal behaviours Life and survival Integrity To not be used instrumentally Dignity and respect Naturalness Above all The right to live a reasonable life until humanely killed and the community will decide what is humane, not the producer.
Industry progress Positive Objectively assessing and describing welfare in animals Understanding the industry s potential points of vulnerability MLA R&D, Exporter Supply Chain Assurance Scheme, Feedlot QA program Establishing harmonised, science-based standards and guidelines Negative Establishing the means to demonstrate high standards of animal welfare Achieving real, outcome-based improvements in animal welfare performance Achieving widespread adoption of best practices
MLA welfare vision Australian red meat industries will have solutions that allow them to meet high standards of animal welfare without reducing productivity levels. 1. Develop replacements for aversive procedures 2. Reduce mortality rates on farms 3. Increase uptake and demonstration of welfare best practices across the whole supply chain 4. Develop ways to minimise the pain of aversive procedures
Develop replacements for aversive procedures
Reduce mortality rates on farms
Increase uptake and demonstration of welfare best practices
Develop ways to minimise the pain of aversive procedures
Upcoming issues Standards and Guidelines Aversive husbandry practices Dehorning Castration Spaying Branding, ear notching Mortality Calves Cull cows Land transport Live export Halal/kosher slaughter
Standards and Guidelines Principles desirable for livestock welfare feasible for industry and government to implement important for the livestock-welfare regulatory framework achievable to meet the intended outcome for livestock welfare. Standards legally enforceable under the prevention of cruelty to animals acts must Guidelines recommended practices to achieve desirable livestock welfare outcomes should
Aim of Standards Development Under the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy and Animal Health Australia Re-format and combine each of the 22 existing MCOP in Standards and Guidelines Started with livestock being transported by land - in Nov 2006!! The new Land Transport Standards combines 7 Models Codes of Practice and provisions on livestock transport appearing in 13 other Codes. Endorsed by PISC in September 2012 Introduced by each state in 2013, 2014 as regulations under the cruelty act
So what is different - transport? Max time off water - hours S&G MCOP S&G Spell Cattle over 6 months old 48 36 /48 36 (18) Calves 30 days to 6 months old 24 24 12 Lactating cows with calves at foot Calves 5 30 days old travelling without mothers 24 24 12 18 10 - Cattle 6 8 months pregnant 24 12 Cows more than 8 months pregnant 4 8
So what is different - cattle? MCOP Castration should be at first muster, preferably < 6 months. Rings < 2 wks. Illegal in some states > 6 months Dehorned as young as possible, preferably < 6 months or first muster WDOT preferred by skilled operator. Other spay Should be done by a vet or trained operator Should use analgesia Euthanasia must be humane and immediate. Bullet or captive bolt. Temporal shot allowed Draft S&G Castration - must be < 6 months or < 12 months at first yarding unless use pain relief Dehorning - must be < 6 months or < 12 months at first yarding unless use pain relief Spaying must be a vet or accredited or under their direct supervision.. Must use pain relief for flank Euthanasia must give rapid unconsciousness. spaying Must confirm death. Club only < 24hrs Should use WDOT or passage Euthanasia Temporal must shot give not recommended rapid unconsciousness. Must confirm death. Club only < 24 hrs Temporal shot not recommended
Euthanasia
The future Vaccination or implants instead of castration and spaying Implantable RFID chips for ID. Phase out of branding and ear notching Improved individual/mob management to avoid nutritional crises, predator attacks and reduce deaths. Remote data capture, remote sensing etc sheep CRC wellbeing program Widespread availability of cheap and easy to use pain relief products Topical and injectable local anaesthetics, NSAIDs Link between good welfare, good eating quality and good welfare with branded products to supply consumer pullthrough needed
Welfare issue??