Animal welfare research | Producer views in line with public on stresses that affect livestock
SASKATOON — Cattle producers view animal welfare in much the same way as the public, a study has found, and that bodes well for their ability to maintain public trust.
David Fraser, an animal welfare researcher at the University of British Columbia, and his colleagues, did in-depth interviews with about 100 cattle producers in Western Canada, with results reported earlier this year.
They were asked about what Fraser considers the three broad areas of concern people expressed about animal welfare: affective states such as pain, fear and contentment; basic health and functioning; and the ability of animals to live in a way that suits their natural behaviour.
Read Also
Calf hormone implants can give environmental, financial wins
Hormone implants can lead to bigger calves — reducing greenhouse gas intensity, land use intensity and giving the beef farmer more profit, Manitoba-based model suggests.
“I would say that beef cattle producers have a balance in their view of animal welfare that’s much more like that of the general public than we’d see in some other production sectors,” said Fraser in an interview after speaking at the International Symposium on Beef Cattle Welfare in Saskatoon June 6.
He said pork producers, for example, often focus on disease prevention and performance issues, but cattle producers tend to consider a larger array of stresses that affect their livestock.
Among those is “unavoidable stress” induced by branding, castration, dehorning, vaccination and weaning.
Fraser said these stresses are also key animal welfare issues for people outside the industry. However, producers said there are no viable alternatives.
They put more emphasis on “avoidable stress,” caused by over-stocking, use of electric prods, inadequate shelter or nutrition, lack of fresh water, rough handling and off-loading during long transport.
Fraser and his team also identified disagreements among producers about various practices such as winter calving, length of time on heavy grain rations, whether auctions are a good way to sell cattle, and other issues.
“There were some areas of disagreement. When should dehorning and castration be done? Early? Or is it all right to leave it to later?”
Fraser said collective action is needed to decide on best practices to resolve controversies within the industry so they can be explained and defended to the general public.
“The codes of practice process is a step in that direction. We’ll see if it goes far enough,” he added, in reference to a new cattle code now being developed.
In the survey, cattle producers also identified “wrecks” as a concern — situations where producers fail to care for cattle because of finances, family or mental health issues.
When these situations become public, animal welfare gets a black eye.
“Cow-calf ranchers are very independent people. We appreciate this and admire this,” said Fraser.
“We felt that there was scope for a kind of collective action partly to preserve the good name of the industry and partly of course to help producers in distress.”
Fraser said animal stressors identified by ranchers as unavoidable could be addressed through research into branding alternatives, genetics to allow greater use of polled breeds to eliminate dehorning and effective, simple pain medications for cattle.
