Animal welfare rules are coming

Help Support CattleToday:

Cattle Rack Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Messages
1,605
Reaction score
0
Location
Manitoba, Canada
From the Western Producer

Why farmers should care about animal welfare
this document web posted: Wednesday April 6, 2005 20050407p23

By Ernest Miciak

This is part of a series of articles written for the Western Producer by Ernest Miciak, doctor of veterinary medicine, on a conference he attended on animal sentience held in London, England, March 17-18.

Why should a western Canadian farmer care about animal sentience?

The answer is that world agricultural policy is changing rapidly through organizations such as the United Kingdom's Compassion in World Farming Trust, or CIWF. It is a powerful organization that lobbied successfully to change the way European lawmakers define animals.

Many of these issues are being debated and researched here in Canada and in the United States. With pressure from retail food giants such as McDonalds and Safeway adding their clout to organizations like the CIWF, similar changes are imminent here. CIWF now has an office in Montreal.

In Europe, animals used to be described as goods or products, but through persistent pressure on Britain's Labour party, the notion of animal sentience was ratified in the 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam.

That treaty says it will "ensure improved protection and respect for the welfare of animals as sentient beings," and that, "in formulating and implementing the (European) Community's policies on agriculture, transport, internal markets and research, the member states shall pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals by respecting the legislative or administrative conditions and customs of member states, relating particularly to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage."

The CIWF campaigns on this issue and is pressing for similar rules for the United Nations and the World Animal Health Organization.

A sentient being as recognized by the European Union means that an animal:

• Is capable of being aware of its surroundings.

• Is aware of emotions related to its sensations.

• Is aware of what is happening to it.

• Has the ability to learn from experience.

• Is aware of sensations in its own body, such as pain, hunger, heat or cold.

• Is aware of its relations with other animals including humans.

• Has the ability to distinguish and choose between different objects, animals and situations, which shows that it understands what is going on in its environment.

In short, animals are aware of how they feel, where they are, whom they are with and how they are treated.

The EU has adopted detailed directives on pigs, calves and laying hens. Gestation crates have been a hotly debated topic. The EU has banned new crates since 2003 and existing crates will be prohibited starting Jan. 1, 2013, although they are still allowed in the first four weeks of pregnancy. The latter point is to be contested when the directive comes up for review in 2008.

This prohibition of gestation crates came as a result of a report by the EU's Scientific Veterinary Committee that states: "no individual pen should be used which does not allow the sow to turn around easily."

The report noted that "since overall welfare appears to be better when sows are not confined throughout gestation, sows should preferably be kept in groups."

Under EU legislation, slatted floors in pig barns will be a thing of the past by 2013 and producers are compelled to provide a "sufficient quantity of bulky or high fibre food as well as high energy food."

Environmental enrichment through the use of straw, hay, wood, sawdust, compost or peat is required to "enable proper investigation and manipulation activities."

Routine tail docking has also been prohibited.

Veal crates were the target of the EU directive on calves. As of December 2006, calves can only be kept in pens large enough so they can turn around. After eight weeks of age they must be kept in groups unless a veterinarian certifies that individual animals must be isolated for health reasons.

"The welfare of calves is poor when they are kept in small individual pens with insufficient room for comfortable lying, no direct social contact and no bedding or other material to manipulate," the EU vet report said.

Further, the report criticized the all-milk diet fed to veal calves and EU law has prohibited this since 1998.

It concluded that calves fed a diet deficient in iron and roughage "can have serious health problems, can show serious abnormalities in behaviour and can have substantial abnormalities in gut development."

As of Jan. 1, 2012, battery cages will be prohibited for egg laying hens and until then, they must meet strict standards for dimensions, litter and environmental enrichment.

So-called enriched cages are allowed but critics say these offer no significant welfare benefits to hens and some states have recognized this.

Germany will prohibit enriched cages from 2012. The animal welfare movement prefers free range husbandry and this is being addressed in the EU directives.

Debeaking and forced molting have been prohibited or severely restricted in European law.

Under the General Farm Animal Directive, all animals including fish that are bred or kept for the production of food, wool, skin or fur or for other farming purposes have been included.

EU member states are required to "make provision to ensure that the owners or keepers take all reasonable steps to ensure the welfare of animals under their care and to ensure that those animals are not caused any unnecessary pain, suffering or injury."
 
Rulings like these show us we need to be behind hunters, trappers, and fisherman too. Trappers and hunters are easy prey for animal "welfare" groups. However will activists be happy to stop by ending there. I highly doubt it. Farmers and ranchers will be they next target. Maybe I am just paranoid, but I would say the best medicine is prevention. Lets not deal with the problem when we are the next target. We should stop it now. Back other enthusiats so we don't see unneeded laws hampering our profitability.
 
So my last post was not taken the wrong way let me clarify. I have no problem with good common sense laws to protect animals from abuse. I do have a problem with laws made by folks who lack a real world prospective of how farms and ranches are operated.
 
according to drovers, a bill just went to the house & senate to stop all antibiotics in animal feed. if it passes, in 2 years no meds will be allowed in feed
 
jerry27150":1a3ph8cz said:
according to drovers, a bill just went to the house & senate to stop all antibiotics in animal feed. if it passes, in 2 years no meds will be allowed in feed

If that bill does pass it will be a red letter day for brahmans and brahman crosses.
 
franseen":i39i3czd said:
Rulings like these show us we need to be behind hunters, trappers, and fisherman too. Trappers and hunters are easy prey for animal "welfare" groups. However will activists be happy to stop by ending there. I highly doubt it. Farmers and ranchers will be they next target. Maybe I am just paranoid, but I would say the best medicine is prevention. Lets not deal with the problem when we are the next target. We should stop it now. Back other enthusiats so we don't see unneeded laws hampering our profitability.
No, those activist types will not stop no matter what concessions you give them. Just like those gun control types. They wanted to stop citizens owning full automatics, then so called Sat. night specials, then high capacity magazines, then...

Nations the same way. Ever time we give in, what do we get back? :mad: :mad:
 
I was trying to say we should give them no concessions. We need to stop it right now. Hunters, trappers and fishermen are being targeted now. We need to provide support to them. This way we won't have to fight the battles they fight right now. Preventive medicine. Stop the sickness before it can take hold. There are many ways anyone can help. Right letters to representatives. Pay attention when referendums are up for a vote that may hamper rights for hunting, trapping, and fishing. You should always vote for what you beleive in, but remember it may be you having your rights taken to the woodshed next. Animal "welfare" activists are a passionate group they can beleive in what they wish. That is what makes our country great. However are rights and beleives are equally important. The squeaky wheel gets fixed first. Stand up for others. So you may keep your rights and privileges.
 
jerry27150":8eqs7g9j said:
according to drovers, a bill just went to the house & senate to stop all antibiotics in animal feed. if it passes, in 2 years no meds will be allowed in feed

I'm always opposed to any new legislation, but I have a question for you.

"No meds in feed". Is that a bad thing? I don't feed any meds in my feed now, I don't purchase any feed with meds in them. Don't have any problems with that. Why are the meds needed?
 
cherokeeruby":26bkepvo said:
If that bill does pass it will be a red letter day for brahmans and brahman crosses.

I assume that a "red letter day" is bad. Why would these be specifically bad for brahmans and braman crosses?
 
franseen":2lqzm59k said:
Rulings like these show us we need to be behind hunters, trappers, and fisherman too. Trappers and hunters are easy prey for animal "welfare" groups. However will activists be happy to stop by ending there. I highly doubt it. Farmers and ranchers will be they next target. Maybe I am just paranoid, but I would say the best medicine is prevention. Lets not deal with the problem when we are the next target. We should stop it now. Back other enthusiats so we don't see unneeded laws hampering our profitability.

Well said. Couldn't agree more.
 
SF":2l5z64jj said:
cherokeeruby":2l5z64jj said:
If that bill does pass it will be a red letter day for brahmans and brahman crosses.

I assume that a "red letter day" is bad. Why would these be specifically bad for brahmans and braman crosses?

I think she means a special or good day because of the natural disease resistance of Brahmans.
 
s f, it is about the only way to stop cattle from getting anaplasmosis (chloratetracycline in minerals) also helps stop pneumonia, other respiratory infections & helps control pinkeye
 
SF":1objlv9u said:
cherokeeruby":1objlv9u said:
If that bill does pass it will be a red letter day for brahmans and brahman crosses.

I assume that a "red letter day" is bad. Why would these be specifically bad for brahmans and braman crosses?


"Red-letter means simply 'memorable or important, esp. in a happy or favorable way'.

The expression comes from the long-established practice of using red ink to indicate holy days in ecclesiastical calendars. A red-letter day--literally a day written in red letters--was a holy day, or church festival, and thus came to mean 'any memorable or happy day'.

Red letter meaning 'a red letter that indicates a holy day on a calendar' dates at least to the fifteenth century; the expression red-letter day is first found in the early 1700s."
 
franseen":2eqzksam said:
Rulings like these show us we need to be behind hunters, trappers, and fisherman too. Trappers and hunters are easy prey for animal "welfare" groups. However will activists be happy to stop by ending there. I highly doubt it. Farmers and ranchers will be they next target. Maybe I am just paranoid, but I would say the best medicine is prevention. Lets not deal with the problem when we are the next target. We should stop it now. Back other enthusiats so we don't see unneeded laws hampering our profitability.

so what Can we do franseen?

bif
 
I am not a real expert as probably none of us are on anything. We are farmers and ranchers - The Jack of all Trades. However to help stop a problem such as this we need to be heard. Farmers seemed to be a easy group to forget before this last election. To myself it seemed to be qutie prevelant why our veiws should be valued. The election seemed to be won on states with smaller populations - more rural states. Many not all of us live in a more rural area. Its hard to be a farmer and not be in the country. Therefore politicians should very willing to listen to a once silent majority. Let your representatives know why they are in office. I know it takes time and seems pointless, but it may prove worth it in the future. Also if you get the newspaper and see an outdoor enthusiat's activity being put down in an unfair manner stick up for them. Right your own letter to the editor. State that you believe in stopping a problem before it starts. Just think what a mess we would have it we didn't have hunters and trappers. Wildlife populations would skyrocket. With no control wildlife would decimate their own habitat and quickly try to move even farther in on our farmland. I see what deer and turkeys do each year to our crops and I am glad I can buy a license and harvest what the law allows me. Imagine what coyote populations would do if we had no predator hunters. Our calf crop would feel the toll. You need to get out and vote also. Kudos to you that already do. Others that don't regularily get out there. I am guilty too, but voting is much more powerful than most realize. Support outdoorsmen. They will support us. In our area about 95% of the land they use is privately owned. Most owned by farmers. I guess I am trying to say, BE HEARD. It does nothing to sit by and think about what you should do. We all know that. We couldn't farm or ranch if we didn't take action. Take action to ensure we can farm and ranch for our children's children's grandchildren.
 
Franseen,
Sometimes I wonder, if the drug companies have played a game on the cattle industry with all the antibiotics...and how much of the stuff is really needed in daily animal feed.
We have known for many years that antibiotics builds resistance up to them and then they are ineffective. I read an article in NEJM recently...that the new antibotics can't keep up with the level of resistance. A lot of which is caused, I understand, by the amount being fed to cattle,chickens,et al, and being passed on to humans.
Even knowing it is wrong..for sales...profits the drug industry would do that...no doubt in my mind. History books are full of analogies.
 
I know what you mean preston. We try to use as little antibiotics as possible. We have been told by our vet that anitbiotics will become ineffective with over use. The same with our family practice doctor. Then when you go to use an antibiotic you have to use one that is so strong it really "knocks down" you animal. I guess you could say I am pretty paranoid and I beleive there is some truth is your post. Their business is to make money. We are an easy target because in the past. If a cow was sick give her some penicillin or another anitbiotic. Well once those didn't work we looked to the drug companies to create something stronger. I beleive in nature survival of the fittest reaches all the way down to even they lowly bacteria. To survive the must become resistant to drugs we use against them. We could start a whole new thread on why or why not to use antibiotics. The one reason I try not to use them is that it cuts my profits and definitely profits someone else.
 

Latest posts

Top