Physiology and behavior of food animals -- Reception and unloading of animals -- Lairage and handling -- Practical methods to improve animal handling and restraint -- Mechanical stunning and killing methods -- Electrical stunning and killing methods -- Gas stunning and killing methods -- Fish stunning and killing -- Slaughter without stuning -- Animal welfare at depopulation strategies during disease control actions -- European Council Regulation (EC) 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing -- Future trends to improve welfare at slaughter -- Effect of pre-slaughter handling and stunning on meat quality
Intensive animal production systems are compromising current animal welfare standards. European societies' growing concerns regarding how animals are raised have resulted in continuous European Union (EU) policy reforms that have banned certain intensive farming methods. We investigated whether EU respondents, differentiated by their roles as citizens and consumers, believe that the current regulations on animal welfare should be more restrictive. Data were collected using a survey approach implemented in eight European countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, Poland, Greece, Lithuania, Romania, Italy, and Sweden) with a sample of 3860 respondents with approximately 240 respondents organized by group and country. The results show that women citizens are more concerned with animal welfare and are prone to accept more restrictive regulations. Respondents from Northern European countries (Poland and Sweden) are willing to accept regulations that are more restrictive than the current minimum standards than respondents from southern countries (Spain and Italy). Our results suggest that increasing knowledge of animal welfare is related to effective information campaigns that use the Internet to endorse the current animal welfare legislation. ; Postprint (updated version)
Intensive animal production systems are compromising current animal welfare standards. European societies' growing concerns regarding how animals are raised have resulted in continuous European Union (EU) policy reforms that have banned certain intensive farming methods. We investigated whether EU respondents, differentiated by their roles as citizens and consumers, believe that the current regulations on animal welfare should be more restrictive. Data were collected using a survey approach implemented in eight European countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, Poland, Greece, Lithuania, Romania, Italy, and Sweden) with a sample of 3860 respondents. The results show that women citizens are more concerned with animal welfare and are prone to accept more restrictive regulations. Respondents from northern European countries (Poland and Sweden) are willing to accept regulations that are more restrictive than the current minimum standards than respondents from southern countries (Spain and Italy). Our results suggest that increasing knowledge of animal welfare is related to effective information campaigns that use the Internet to endorse the current animal welfare legislation. ; Postprint (published version)
SIMPLE SUMMARY: Intensive animal production systems are compromising current animal welfare standards. European societies' growing concerns regarding how animals are raised have resulted in continuous European Union (EU) policy reforms that have banned certain intensive farming methods. We investigated whether EU respondents, differentiated by their roles as citizens and consumers, believe that the current regulations on animal welfare should be more restrictive. Data were collected using a survey approach implemented in eight European countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, Poland, Greece, Lithuania, Romania, Italy, and Sweden) with a sample of 3860 respondents. The results show that women citizens are more concerned with animal welfare and are prone to accept more restrictive regulations. Respondents from northern European countries (Poland and Sweden) are willing to accept regulations that are more restrictive than the current minimum standards than respondents from southern countries (Spain and Italy). Our results suggest that increasing knowledge of animal welfare is related to effective information campaigns that use the Internet to endorse the current animal welfare legislation. ABSTRACT: Increasingly, intensive livestock production systems have increased societal concern regarding the current animal welfare standards. We investigated whether individuals in their roles as consumers and citizens believe that the current European regulations regarding animal welfare should be more restrictive. Factors affecting this decision were assessed by analyzing respondents' understanding of animal welfare-related issues, their subjective and objective knowledge levels, the credibility they assign to different information sources, their perceptions toward the current restrictiveness of animal welfare standards, and their socioeconomic characteristics. Data were collected using a semi-structured questionnaire distributed in eight European Union (EU) countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, Poland, Greece, Lithuania, ...
Increasingly, intensive livestock production systems have increased societal concern regarding the current animal welfare standards. We investigated whether individuals in their roles as consumers and citizens believe that the current European regulations regarding animal welfare should be more restrictive. Factors a ecting this decision were assessed by analyzing respondents' understanding of animal welfare-related issues, their subjective and objective knowledge levels, the credibility they assign to di erent information sources, their perceptions toward the current restrictiveness of animal welfare standards, and their socioeconomic characteristics. Data were collected using a semi-structured questionnaire distributed in eight European Union (EU) countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, Poland, Greece, Lithuania, Romania, Italy, and Sweden) with 3860 total responses. The results showed that consumers are more reluctant to adopt more restrictive regulations than respondents in the role of citizens. Respondents from northern European countries (Poland and Sweden) are more likely to support regulations that are more restrictive than the current minimum requirements than respondents from southern countries (Spain and Italy). Women were found to be more concerned with the welfare of pigs and laying hens—lending credibility to the Internet as an information source—and were more likely to support more restrictive animal welfare legislation. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
European Union (EU) legislation states that the routine tail docking of pigs should not be carried out and that manipulable materials should be made available to all pigs to prevent tail biting and allow them to behave naturally. However, between 90 and 95% of pigs within the EU still have their tails docked to avoid the risk of tail biting. Farmers say they require information tailored to their particular production systems before they abandon this practice. In this study, four types of enrichment materials used in Spanish pig fattening production systems are compared. Most of these systems have fully slatted floors and high external temperatures for considerable periods of the year. The effects of chains (the control group), wood, paper or straw in a rack on the behaviour, health/physiology, performance and meat and carcass quality are evaluated. Straw in a rack was found to be the best material to meet the behavioural needs of pigs, whereas paper met the criteria of being manipulable, but only for a short period. To avoid the risk of blockages in the slurry system, there are some practical issues to consider and improvements to be made to the design of the rack for providing straw used in this study. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
SIMPLE SUMMARY: European Union (EU) legislation states that the routine tail docking of pigs should not be carried out and that manipulable materials should be made available to all pigs to prevent tail biting and allow them to behave naturally. However, between 90 and 95% of pigs within the EU still have their tails docked to avoid the risk of tail biting. Farmers say they require information tailored to their particular production systems before they abandon this practice. In this study, four types of enrichment materials used in Spanish pig fattening production systems are compared. Most of these systems have fully slatted floors and high external temperatures for considerable periods of the year. The effects of chains (the control group), wood, paper or straw in a rack on the behaviour, health/physiology, performance and meat and carcass quality are evaluated. Straw in a rack was found to be the best material to meet the behavioural needs of pigs, whereas paper met the criteria of being manipulable, but only for a short period. To avoid the risk of blockages in the slurry system, there are some practical issues to consider and improvements to be made to the design of the rack for providing straw used in this study. ABSTRACT: Some positive effects regarding the use of enrichment material on the stimulation of pig exploration and a reduction in redirected behaviour was reported. This study aims to evaluate the effects of four enrichment materials on the behaviour, physiology/health, performance and carcass and meat quality in pigs kept in Spanish production conditions. Ninety-six male pigs (six pigs/pen) ranging from 70 to 170 days old were used. Chains were used for the control group (CH), and wooden logs (W), straw in a rack (S) or paper (P) were also used. The pigs were subjected to two pre-slaughter treatments: 0 or 12 h of fasting. Their behaviour was observed for 12 weeks using scan and focal sampling. Samples of the Neutrophil: Lymphocyte (N:L) ratio and lactate were obtained from the pigs at 66 and 170 ...
Current European Union regulation explicitly states that farmed fish should be spared any avoidable pain, distress or suffering at the time of slaughter. It has been shown that fish suffer when they are killed in an ice slurry, the most common method of killing farmed fish in the Mediterranean. Thus, it is necessary to find a method of slaughtering Mediterranean fish that is, (1) efficient in inducing unconsciousness with minimal pain and distress, (2) practical to be applied to a large group of animals at the same time, and (3) feasible to be used at sea. The present study assesses the welfare of Gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata) stunned by two different gas mixtures authorised for stunning other farmed species. To achieve this objective, commercial sized seabream were stunned and /or sacrificed under different protocols: a) killed directly in ice slurry, b) exposed to a mixture of 30% CO2 + 70% N2, and then moved to ice slurry and c) exposed to a mixture of 40% CO2 + 30% N2 + 30% O2 and then moved to ice slurry. Electroencephalograms (EEG) were recorded to evaluate the state of consciousness of seabream during stunning, while blood and brains were sampled to obtain acute stress indicators and relative gene expression, respectively. Additionally, dead fish were kept for in situ meat quality evaluation. When exposed to the gas mixtures, fish lost balance at 1min 23s ± 31s with CO2 + N2 and 1min 12s ± 32s, with CO2 + N2 + O2, respectively. Cortisol, lactate and glucose levels were significantly lower in all fish exposed to gas prior to ice slurry than in fish slaughtered directly in ice slurry (p < 0.05). Electroencephalogram records indicated that fish started to lose consciousness when they 40 lost balance and sank to the bottom of the tank. No differences were found in the meat quality (pH and rigor mortis) among the three treatments. Altogether, the study concludes that the use of carbon dioxide together with nitrogen prior to immersion in ice slurry is more humane than ice slurry alone.
Animal Welfare educational programs aim to promote positive attitudes of future generations towards animal production systems. This study investigated whether secondary and university students in the majors that are not related to AW teaching believe that this concept should be included also in their educational programs. The determinant factors affecting students' attitudes towards such a decision were analysed. This research has focused on eight European countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, Poland, Greece, Lithuania, Romania, Italy, and Sweden) targeting 3,881 respondents composed of 1,952 secondary and 1,929 university students. Results showed that female university students with a level of subjective and objective knowledge on AW and who required more restrictive AW regulations, gave support to include the concept in their educational programs. However, Students who support medical experiments that use animals to improve human health were less likely to accept AW education. Students in Italy compared to those in Sweden were prone to support AW educational programs. Results highlight the importance of teaching the AW concept as a comprehensive teaching tool at universities and schools' programs as it may constitute a starting point for a more sustainable society toward improving animal living conditions, mainly in the Mediterranean countries in secondary schools.
International audience ; A survey was carried out to describe the extent and current practice of cattle disbudding/dehorning in the EU Member States. Disbudding was defined as removal of horns in calves of up to 2 months of age, whereas dehorning was defined as removal of horns in older animals. Specific questionnaires were created regarding dairy, beef, and suckler production systems and they were submitted to local experts of each country belonging to relevant institutions like universities, national farmers' associations, cattle breeders associations, farm veterinarians and practitioners. Figures on disbudding/dehorning practices were produced for each production system for both the whole European Union and the North, Centre, East and South EU macro-regions. A total of 652 questionnaires were collected and 64%, 24% and 12% of them related to dairy cattle, beef cattle and suckler cows, respectively. Data from the survey showed that in Europe, 81% of the dairy, 47% of the beef and 68% of the suckler currently keep disbudded/dehorned animals, while the prevalence of polled cattle is rather low, especially in the dairy cattle sector (5% of all cattle farms; <1% of dairy farms). Regardless of production system, prevalence of dehorned animals is the highest in the North macro-region. Polled cattle farms are almost exclusively located in the North where polled beef breeds are raised for fattening. Dehorning is performed primarily on loose housed cattle to reduce the risk of injuries for herdmates and the stockman. Dehorning is less frequently performed in organic farms. As method of horns removal, disbudding is generally preferred over surgical removal of the horns in older cattle. Hot-iron is the most used disbudding method especially in the North and Centre. Use of caustic paste is reported more frequently in the South and the East. In the large majority of EU farms, the stockman is the person in charge for disbudding and some kind of medication for pain relief is administered to the animals only in a small ...
A survey was carried out to describe the extent and current practice of cattle disbudding/dehorning in the EU Member States. Disbudding was defined as removal of horns in calves of up to 2 months of age, whereas dehorning was defined as removal of horns in older animals. Specific questionnaires were created regarding dairy, beef, and suckler production systems and they were submitted to local experts of each country belonging to relevant institutions like universities, national farmers' associations, cattle breeders associations, farm veterinarians and practitioners. Figures on disbudding/dehorning practices were produced for each production system for both the whole European Union and the North, Centre, East and South EU macro-regions. A total of 652 questionnaires were collected and 64%, 24% and 12% of them related to dairy cattle, beef cattle and suckler cows, respectively. Data from the survey showed that in Europe, 81% of the dairy, 47% of the beef and 68% of the suckler currently keep disbudded/dehorned animals, while the prevalence of polled cattle is rather low, especially in the dairy cattle sector (5% of all cattle farms; <1% of dairy farms). Regardless of production system, prevalence of dehorned animals is the highest in the North macro-region. Polled cattle farms are almost exclusively located in the North where polled beef breeds are raised for fattening. Dehorning is performed primarily on loose housed cattle to reduce the risk of injuries for herdmates and the stockman. Dehorning is less frequently performed in organic farms. As method of horns removal, disbudding is generally preferred over surgical removal of the horns in older cattle. Hot-iron is the most used disbudding method especially in the North and Centre. Use of caustic paste is reported more frequently in the South and the East. In the large majority of EU farms, the stockman is the person in charge for disbudding and some kind of medication for pain relief is administered to the animals only in a small percentage of farms (<30%). Surgical dehorning of more aged cattle is mainly performed with the wire/saw method. Compared to disbudding, it is more often carried out by a veterinarian and pre- and post operative medications (44% farms) is also more common.
EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases ('Animal Health Law'). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia (CBPP). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts review the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period, (iii) the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones, and (iv) the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. Different clinical and laboratory sampling procedures are proposed depending on the scenarios considered. The monitoring period of 45 days was assessed as not effective and at least 90 days (3 months) is recommended in affected areas where high awareness is expected; when the index case occurs in an area where the awareness is low the monitoring period should be at least 180 days (6 months). Since transmission kernels do not exist and data to estimate transmission kernels are not available, the effectiveness of surveillance and protection zones for CBPP was based on expert knowledge. A surveillance zone of 3 km was considered effective, while a protection zone including establishments adjacent to affected ones is recommended. Recommendations, provided for each of the scenarios assessed, aim to support the European Commission in the drafting of further pieces of legislation, as well as for plausible ad hoc requests in relation to CBPP.
EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases ('Animal Health Law'). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for Contagious Caprine Pleuropneumonia (CCPP). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts review the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period, (iii) the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones and iv) the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. Different clinical and laboratory sampling procedures are proposed depending on the scenarios considered. The monitoring period of 45 days was assessed as effective in affected areas where high awareness is expected, and when the index case occurs in an area where the awareness is low the monitoring period should be at least 180 days (6 months). Since transmission kernels do not exist and data to estimate transmission kernels are not available, a surveillance zone of 3 km was considered effective based on expert knowledge, while a protection zone should also be developed to include establishments adjacent to affected ones. Recommendations, provided for each of the scenarios assessed, aim to support the European Commission in the drafting of further pieces of legislation, as well as for plausible ad hoc requests in relation to CCPP.
EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases ('Animal Health Law'). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for peste des petits ruminants (PPR). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts review the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period and (iii) the minimum radii of the protection and surveillance zones, and the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere; nonetheless, the transmission kernels used for the assessment of the minimum radii of the protection and surveillance zones are shown. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. The monitoring period of 21 days was assessed as effective, except for the first affected establishments detected, where 33 days is recommended. It was concluded that beyond the protection (3 km) and the surveillance zones (10 km) only 9.6% (95% CI: 3.1–25.8%) and 2.3% (95% CI: 1–5.5%) of the infections from an affected establishment may occur, respectively. This may be considered sufficient to contain the disease spread (95% probability of containing transmission corresponds to 5.3 km). Recommendations provided for each of the scenarios assessed aim to support the European Commission in the drafting of further pieces of legislation, as well as for plausible ad-hoc requests in relation to PPR.
