RED DEER – Animal welfare laws rarely improve animal welfare, says a Manitoba agriculture official.
Terry Whiting told the Alberta Farm Animal Care conference in Red Deer April 4 that American legislators tend to respond to lobbyists, which results in laws with no clear benefit. The ban on horse slaughter is a case in point, Whiting said.
Europe, on the other hand, seems more strategic, and its legislation may improve welfare for animals.
In Canada, he said, federal animal cruelty legislation is contentious and has failed partly because of a lack of consensus and community understanding on what society’s duties are to animals.
Read Also
First-time pig mothers may need more lysine
Lysine feed recommendations may fall short for gilt pregnancies when it comes to making sure the mother pig can produce as much milk for her piglets as possible
John Webster of Britain’s Bristol University said it has taken 50 years to improve standards of farm animal care.
As an educator, Webster wants animal welfare studies embedded into the veterinarian curriculum. Too many universities pay only lip service to education about animal welfare, he added.
He said the free market has significant influence on animal welfare, with companies such as McDonald’s demanding higher standards of care.
In Europe, supermarkets and retailers took a leading role in developing food quality assurance schemes that include animal welfare.
“McDonald’s are doing very good things, but they are not bragging about it,” Webster said.
Ed Pajor of Purdue University sits on McDonald’s animal welfare committee and recently completed a sabbatical at the World Animal Health Organization in France, where he studied the European approach.
He has learned that animal welfare is part of the culture in Europe and is important to the public.
The trend is widespread. An international welfare quality project involving 44 institutions and 17 countries, including five in Latin America, is developing practical strategies to improve animal welfare. It combines consumer perceptions and attitudes with scientific information.
Push for change
Pajor said pressure will increase for North America to change and adopt similar policies.
In the U.S., most guidelines are voluntary so the private sector is taking the lead because public opinion is changing the way things are done from the farm to the processor.
A 2001 Gallup poll found 74 percent believe animals need protection and 25 percent said they deserve the same rights as people.
Those surveyed may have been thinking of pets but that could expand to include farm animals.
An American Farm Bureau survey in 2007 found that 95 percent agreed farm animals are well treated, but 68 percent wanted government to have a more active role in protecting them.
Pajor said these surveys tend to be small, but they show a shift in public opinion about how animals are treated on farms and in laboratories and hunting.
Animal legislation is also growing in the U.S., and 75 law schools now offer at least one course in animal law. In Canada, the University of Victoria started an animal law course last year.
“Most of the animal law tends to deal with pets, but it is not a big leap to discussions about the treatment of farm animals,” Pajor said.
The new social awareness could mean more guidelines and standards at all levels of production and more attempts to use legislation to improve animal welfare. While the public is having a big impact on welfare legislation and what animal agriculture is allowed to do, only two percent of the population has anything to do with animal agriculture.
“The disconnect about animal agriculture is real,” Pajor said.
Not only is the urban public uninformed about farm activities, he added, but commodity groups probably don’t communicate adequately with each other.
