Page title

Animal Breeding and Animal Welfare

Mr Ben Bradshaw MP
Minister of State
Defra
9 Millbank
c/o 17 Smith Square
London
SW1P 3JR

25 January 2007

Dear Minister,

The recent story in the Daily Mail (10th January 2007) about the birth of a calf derived from a cow cloned in the US, has provoked considerable media interest about cloning, in vitro fertilisation and other technologies used in animal breeding. When the news broke, I declined invitations for interviews from BBC news, BBC Radio 4, ITV news and other broadcasters since I believe that FAWC’s remit to advise Government about farm animal welfare is best discharged through private discussions with you rather than public debate. There are, after all, plenty of pundits, often with vested interests, who are eager to promulgate their opinions.

This case centres on the offspring of a cow cloned in the USA. There are unlikely to be any specific welfare implications for an animal imported into the UK as an embryo. However cloning as breeding technology may present risks to animal welfare. For example, embryos, fetuses, placentae and offspring resulting from in vitro production (an essential part of cloning) of cattle can differ significantly in morphology and developmental competence compared with those from embryos produced normally in vivo. The consequences of ‘abnormal offspring syndrome’ include higher embryo mortality, development defects in the offspring and possible adverse effects on the dam due to fetal overgrowth. While it appears that cloning will not be taken up commercially in Britain mainly due to public distaste, the birth of the calf referred to above shows that the products of cloning can enter Britain and still arouse alarm. Overall, I am sceptical about the net benefits to farming and consumers of such technology.

The Government is consulting publicly on its response to the FAWC (2004) report on the welfare implications of animal breeding and breeding technologies in commercial agriculture. FAWC will respond formally in due course but I thought it helpful to indicate our likely view to help you at this time.

Current concerns about animal breeding

Animal breeding can have beneficial or adverse consequences for animal welfare, affecting the lives of hundreds of millions of farm animals reared in Britain and elsewhere. The detailed arguments have been presented in numerous reports, i.e.

• FAWC reports on broiler chickens (1992), sheep (1994), turkeys (1995), outdoor pigs (1996), laying hens (1997), dairy cattle (1997), broiler breeders (1998), and cloning (1999)
• the Banner Committee on the ethical implications of emerging technologies in the breeding of farm animals (1995)
• the Agriculture and Environment Commission report on animals and biotechnology (2002)

The major concerns are summarised in the 2004 FAWC report. Suffice it to say that on the basis of current scientific and veterinary knowledge, animal breeding through its various technologies raises considerable concern about welfare, particularly for poultry and, somewhat surprisingly, the dairy cow. Like many others, I am concerned about general trends in animal breeding, whether this is by novel or traditional methods, given the commercial pressures placed on breeders and farmers alike.

Not all the responsibility for any adverse effects can be laid at the feet of the breeding companies since the farmer’s management of his animals can play a strong part in making proper, or improper, use of the genetic potential provided by the breeders. Furthermore, the poor profitability of livestock farming also impacts greatly on standards of welfare: as you are aware, FAWC will start work this spring on a major review of the economics of farm animal welfare.

The science underpinning animal breeding and its associated technologies is advancing rapidly. More enlightened breeders are realigning their breeding goals to give greater prominence to traits such as health and welfare – as well as the environmental impact of livestock production - but the rate of change is too slow. Government can take a lead here by directly encouraging breeders and farmers in this new direction and, indirectly, by dialogue with retailers and others in the food chain, who effectively restrict improvements in welfare by their pricing policies.

Government’s response to specific recommendations in the 2004 FAWC report on animal breeding

1. Establishment of a standing committee. I agree that FAWC is ideally placed to tackle many of the concerns that it itself raised about animal breeding; the three main roles that are proposed for FAWC are sensible. The Council will need to recruit a specialist in animal breeding, and ensure proper interaction with CAWC, the new Standing Committee on Farm Animal Genetic Resources and European bodies. Preliminary discussions about these aspects have taken place already.
2. Legislation. The main thrust of your draft response has been that current legislation covers the direct and indirect consequences of animal breeding. I suggest that we should keep the situation under review, as part of the new arrangements. The European directive 98/58/EC, as implemented in the Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2000 (and similar legislation in Scotland and Wales) is quite clear:

   ‘Natural or artificial breeding procedures which cause, or are likely to cause, suffering or injury to any of the animals concerned shall not be practised.

   No animals shall be kept for farming purposes unless it can reasonably be expected, on the basis of their genotype or phenotype, that they can be kept without detrimental effect on their health and welfare.’

   Given current evidence, I would advise caution about claims for animal breeding until there is substantially more evidence in terms of livestock health and welfare.

3. Surveillance. The SVS already undertakes surveillance of farm animal welfare on a regular and substantial scale. Under the proposed new arrangements, there will be a need to ensure that information on breeding per se is collected by the SVS as part of its regular activities, especially in light of new demands on surveillance as part of cross-compliance. Dialogue with animal breeders will also be important.
4. Research and training. No comment.

In summary, FAWC is willing to take on the role proposed for it in your draft response to our 2004 report. This will enable the Council to continue to advise you on the consequences of animal breeding for the welfare of farm animals. In the meantime, I would advise you to take a cautious approach to animal breeding, particularly new technologies. Further improvements in animal breeding are needed to ensure an acceptable standard of welfare for many farmed animals.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Christopher Wathes
Chairman, FAWC