AT: “Impractical to Change Animal Agricultural Practices”

AT: “Impractical to Change Animal Agricultural Practices”

Gaverick Matheny & Cheryl Leahy, Professor Agricultural Economics U. Maryland & General Counsel, Compassion over Killing, 2007, Law and Contemporary Problems, Winter, 70 Law & Contemp. Prob. 325, p. 343-4

Substantive changes need to be made to conventional farming practices; European practices demonstrate that these changes are realistic. Modifications to birds' environment, diet, and breeding can slow growth and significantly improve welfare. ⁿ¹²⁷ Growth rates can be reduced by shortening eating periods and by modifying poultry feed to provide a lower protein-to-energy ratio. ⁿ¹²⁸ Genetically, slower growing breeds - including traditional breeds used before World War II - can be selected by primary breeding companies. In France, breeds with a lower growth rate have been used to produce "Label Rouge" chickens for more than twenty years and now comprise around one-third of broilers raised in that country. ⁿ¹²⁹ In the United States, several slow-growing breeds are available, but their market share is limited. ⁿ¹³⁰

Alternatives to veal crates are group-housing systems in which calves are kept together in large pens, allowing social interaction and freedom of movement. Some facilities keep calves on wooden-slatted flooring, while others provide deep straw bedding materials. Virtually all of Europe's calves are now housed in groups. ⁿ¹³⁶

Robyn Mallon, Attorney, 2005, Journal of Medicine and Law, Summer, 9 Mich. St. J. Med. & Law 389, p. 414-5

There are ways to make farming safe for consumers and more conscious of animal suffering. The United States would be best off following the practices of its European allies in regards to agriculture. The European Union (EU) recognizes animal welfare as a goal that is important to them and as such they have statutes that provide for better husbandry standards than those in the U.S. ⁿ¹⁹⁸ These statutes provide for sick animals to be treated quickly, no subtherapeutic antibiotics, free movement, attention to psychological needs specific to the species, and no perpetual darkness. ⁿ¹⁹⁹ The EU also protects chickens against battery cages by requiring much larger cage sizes so that there is room to move and the chickens are not forced into hostility, therefore needing their beaks removed. ⁿ²⁰⁰ The United Kingdom requires even larger cages than the EU for chickens and larger stalls for pigs. ⁿ²⁰¹ In the United Kingdom, the farmer must take into account psychological needs of the animal and they have restrictions on the amount of animals allowed into one stall. ⁿ²⁰²

AT: “Impractical to Change Animal Agricultural Practices”

Joyce D’Silva, Chief Executive of Compassion in World Farming, 2008, The Future of Animal Farming: renewing the ancient contract, eds. M. Dawkins & R. Bonney, p. 34

Is there an alternative way? I believe so. Farm animals could be bred back to more traditional, hardier breeds. They could be kept in farms which provide both comfortable shelter and the chance to range freely, as weather permits. They could be given feed appropriate to their species and left to seek some of their own food outside as their ancestors did. They could be kept in such good environments that they don’t feel frustrated and competitive with their peers, so that they will be allowed to keep their bodies whole and intact. When the time comes for slaughter they could be taken quietly to a nearby slaughterhouse. I’m tempted to all this kind of farming Holistic Farming, but in case that’s too alternative a description for you, let’s call it Fair Farming. It encompasses the true husbandry that Bernie Rollin described in Chapter 2.
NEED FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES IN FARM ANIMAL WELFARE PRACTICES

Ruth Layton, Director Food Animal Initiative, 2008, The Future of Animal Farming: renewing the ancient contract, eds. M. Dawkins & R. Bonney, p. 88

Important though developing new breeds is for the future of animal welfare, there are some systems of agriculture that are not at all valid for farmers or consumers who care about animal welfare. In order to meet our side of the “ancient contract” we must rethink the many systems that involve regular painful procedures, such as castration and tail docking or involve putting animals for long periods in situations where they are bored or continually bullied by their peers without a route or escape.

At FAI we recognize that fundamental change requires considerable investment, may take some time before the system is perfected, and even longer before it can be considered demonstrably “robust.” Robust when applied to an agricultural system means that it must operate without serious problems through all weather types, staff changes, holiday periods, and any other potential periods of disruption until the developers of the system have complete confidence and can convey this to others. In our experience this takes at least 2 years. Over the past 5 years we have developed a system for keeping pigs that addresses the two major animal welfare issues of pig production, namely the current need to dock tails and the use of the farrowing crate for sows.

Bernard E. Rollin, Professor of Philosophy, Colorado State University, 1995, Farm Animal Welfare: social, bioethical, and research issues, p. 25

There is a good deal of truth in these remarks. But the public, if aroused, will demand immediate action, which may cause harm to producers without benefiting animals. In this regard, it is worth recalling what occurred in the area of biomedicine. While the biomedical community continued to resist even the enforced self-regulation we had drafted, the public became increasingly convinced of the need for regulation of biomedical research, and the passage of legislation became more likely. In comparison to the Research Modernization Act, our legislation became more attractive to the research community. Thus, by the time I was called on to testify before the House Subcommittee on Health and Environment on behalf of the Walgren version of our bill in 1982, I carried the endorsement of the American Physiological Society, the traditional opponent of any intrusion into the research process.