Proceedings of the open meeting - 8 July 2009

Welcome and opening remarks

1.         Professor Wathes, the Chairman of the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) welcomed everyone and explained that the purpose of the meeting was to offer an update on the ongoing work of the Council and to have a dialogue about issues in farm animal welfare.  The Annual Review 2008/2009, published in June, summarised the work of the last year.

2.         The next FAWC report on future welfare strategy, to be published in late summer 2009, would for the first time present the ethical position advocated by the Council.  The first question was whether man had any rights to use farm animals.  That man has the right to use farm animals was decided by Parliament in 1911 but the report would also cover what uses of farm animals were acceptable or unacceptable and what were the minimum standards for the treatment of farm animals.  FAWC’s precautionary principle was that animal welfare should be forefront, and that the animal should be given the benefit of the doubt.

3.         Communication and openness were important aspects of the Council’s remit.  The use of the Council’s website was growing steadily.  The site received 220 unique visitors a day and about 45,000 copies of reports and opinions were downloaded each year (nearly 10,000 copies of the red meat slaughter report were downloaded in 2008).  The most popular page was the Five Freedoms, accessed 89 times a day.

Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing – Part Two: White Meat Animals

4.         Professor Wathes thanked David Henderson for Chairing the Slaughter Working Group and all the members of that Group who had contributed to the production of the report.

5.         90 poultry a (working) second were slaughtered in Great Britain, equating to more than 800 million animals slaughtered a year.  The report had set out 6 principles of humane slaughter, which if followed would help to ensure that animal welfare was protected in the slaughterhouse.  The report made more than 50 recommendations to the Governments in England, Scotland and Wales and it was now for them to assess the advice and take it forward. 

6.         The training and experience of slaughterhouse staff was a common theme running through the report.  Council had recommended that a slaughterman should not be issued a licence for life, rather that this should be reviewed every five years.  The fitness to travel of some poultry, particularly end-of-lay hens was a particular concern expressed and FAWC called for the phasing out of inversion and live shackling within 20 years.  Electrical waterbath stunning systems should use constant current rather than constant voltage, to ensure that each bird received the correct current for an effective stun.  Council called for the use of gas mixtures used elsewhere in Europe, the effectiveness of which had been proven, to be allowed in Great Britain.  It also referred to the basic need to stun animals before slaughter.

7.         Phil Brooke – Compassion in World Farming (CIWF) – Welcomed the report generally and particularly the call for live shackling of birds to be phased out.  Noted some disagreement in the academic community about the welfare implications of different gas systems and hoped that the situation could be clarified.  FAWC response – The gas systems described in the report were anoxia (usually argon or nitrogen displacing oxygen), hypercapnic anoxia (inert gas supplemented with 30% carbon dioxide) and the two phase system currently used in Europe (anaesthetic phase with 40% carbon dioxide, nitrogen and 30% oxygen followed by a killing phase with 80% carbon dioxide in air).  All mixtures had some advantages and drawbacks but all avoided the need to invert and shackle live birds.

8.         Massood Khawaja – Halal Food Authority – The Halal Food Authority would accept a slight electrical stun but the main requirement was that the animal was alive at the point of slaughter.  FAWC response – The Report set out FAWC’s preferred option of a stun to kill, since welfare could not be compromised after this point.  It recognised that this would not satisfy the requirements of religious slaughter but there were other methods available that did afford a reversible stun.  During the study Council had been made aware that some European Halal certifying bodies had approved controlled atmosphere methods that had been shown to be reversible.

9.         Nizar Boga – UK Halal Corporation – Welcomed the report and raised the issue of lengthy live shackling periods in some slaughterhouses producing Halal meat.  He felt that the cut should be made as quickly as possible after shackling.  Slaughtermen were usually trained on the job in the slaughterhouse, but there seemed to be a lack of training available in the specifics of Muslim methods.  FAWC response – Accept that the time from shackle to cut should be as short as possible, but would prefer a stunning operation be included.  Inversion and handling caused distress and shackling was painful and these procedures should be phased out.  Controlled atmosphere systems not only improved animal welfare by avoiding live shackling but were also advantageous to staff welfare.  All slaughtermen should be demonstrably competent and this should include a five yearly review.  The Shochet involved in Shechita slaughter had seven years training and regular reviews.

10.       Marc Cooper – RSPCA – Questioned the effectiveness of gas for stunning and killing ducks if ducks naturally breath-hold, and the legislation currently did not allow it.  Jade Spence – Humane Slaughter Association (HSA) – Research on the use of controlled atmosphere systems to kill ducks found that a dwell time of 3 minutes would result in death, but practical experience in Europe suggested that 5 minutes dwell time was necessary.  Professor Geoffrey Alderman – Union of Shechita Boards (?) – noted that other research on the use of controlled atmosphere systems to kill ducks had left breath-holding ducks unaffected.

11.       Alan Long – VEGA Research – The lack of urgency in FAWC’s report was unsatisfactory.  ‘Should’ should be replaced with ‘must’ in many recommendations to make the advice more forceful.  Some of the terms used, such as humane slaughter were questionable.  Halal meat being served as a matter of course in schools and colleges needed to be challenged.  At least consumers should have the information to make informed choices and therefore have the ability to influence supply in terms of production and slaughter method.  FAWC response – FAWC is an advisory body and cannot tell Government what it must do.  The Chairman would reinforce with Ministers Council’s views when they next met.  The consumer must be able to make an informed choice on any criteria that concerned them, effectively a free choice for all on many aspects of food production.  Alan Long – VEGA – noted that the Secretary of State was vegetarian demonstrating a commitment to consumer choice.

12.       Rita Bloomberg – VEGA – Questioned whether maceration as a method of disposal of male chicks in the hatchery was immediate and how could this be proven?  Shouldn’t gas systems be used as in adult poultry?  FAWC response – Council was not aware of any studies in this area and neither would it recommend any.  The rate of travel through the macerator (less than one second) and the speed of revolution of the blades or rollers was such that death would effectively be instantaneous.  (Most hatcheries do now use gas to kill male chicks and macerators only for hatchery waste, e.g. unhatched eggs.)

13.       Dr Shuja Shafi – Muslim Council of Britain – If training was so good in the Shechita slaughter sector then lessons from this should be learned in all sectors and perhaps FAWC should suggest this.  FAWC response – Council would like to see comprehensive training of all slaughtermen.  The Meat Hygiene Service’s representative in the slaughterhouse, the Official Veterinarian, was on hand to ensure those operating in stunning and slaughter areas were competent.  Dr Shuja Shafi was not convinced that MHS checks were fully effective. 

14.       Michael Woodhouse – Saracen UK Ltd – While interested in the discussion of gas systems in the report, he called on FAWC to remember that shackling and electrical stunning were likely to continue for some time as the main or back up stunning method for slaughterhouses across the world and Council should not lose track of opportunities to improve welfare in these systems.  Jeremy Hall – Bernard Matthews – confirmed that Bernard Matthews’ plants used controlled atmosphere systems to kill turkeys and did not employ any electrical stunning as a back-up.  Maintenance was the key to the effective running of a controlled atmosphere system.

Dairy cow welfare.

15.       Mr Davies reported that the current review of dairy cow welfare was based on some of the main concerns expressed in FAWC’s 1997 Report on the Welfare of Dairy Cattle and aimed to identify trends in aspects of dairy cow health and welfare.  The number of dairy herds was reducing and at the same time the size of herds was increasing.  The study was looking at increasingly intensive dairy production. 

16.       Consultation and evidence gathering had identified a number of key welfare issues including:

• Labour and Stockmanship
• Lameness
• Mastitis
• Other diseases (e.g. bovine TB, Johne’s disease)
• Injuries
• Genetics and Breeding
• Surveillance of cow welfare
• Lifespan
• Infertility
• Failure of first lactation heifers

17.       The industry seemed to lack confidence in the face of financial uncertainty, e.g. in a climate when a major milk buyer can fail.  Economic pressure was leading to intensification, which in turn needed good management and stockmanship to ensure good animal welfare. 

18.       The opinion identified a lack of national data on prevalence and incidence of conditions such as lameness.  It stressed that good stockmanship was vital to good welfare.  Breeding into cows elements of robustness was considered a step forward and the positive impact of herd health planning and retailer action was welcomed.  The Opinion was planned for publication in September 2009. 

19.       Phil Brooke – CIWF – Called on the Ruminants Standing Committee to include the issue of body condition relative to hunger and reproduction.  The development of zero grazing systems should be avoided.

20.       Julie Roxburgh – Shellfish Network – Questioned the meaning of robustness as applied to dairy cows and called for large calves not to be allowed.  FAWC response – Previously the dairy cow had been bred to produce milk at the expense of body condition.  Breeding for robustness included selection for other factors such as leg health and resistance to disease.  FAWC had always been of the view that unnecessary caesarean sections needed to deliver larger calves should be avoided.

21.       Rita Bloomberg – VEGA – Cows that were lactating and pregnant at the same time were having unreasonable strains placed on their bodies.  Cows should not be put in the unnatural conditions of being confined in stalls without being able to graze at pasture.  FAWC response – It was part of the natural cycle of the dairy or beef cow to calve and become pregnant while still milking.  Zero grazed systems, and others, were dependent on the skills and experience of good stockmen and careful management.  Joanne Nash – Worcester Trading Standards – It could be argued that 4 out of the 5 Freedoms were not fulfilled in zero grazed systems.

Pigs, Poultry and Fish Standing Committee

22.       Professor Edwards reported that in November 2008 FAWC had published its Opinion on breeding and rearing of farmed gamebirds.  These essentially captive wild birds were increasingly being bred and reared in farm-type systems and intensification was also increasing.  Such challenges highlighted the need for very good standards of management and stockmanship.

23.       Key recommendations in the Opinion had included:

• Better surveillance and data collation for benchmarking and development of welfare standards.
• Barren cages should be phased out.
• Spectacles should not be used.
• Use of other management devices, e.g. bits for young birds, had some balancing welfare advantages at present but should be justified for each enterprise in a health and welfare plan.
• Further research is needed on defining and meeting physiological and behavioural needs.

24.       The Committee was currently engaged in a study of the mutilations employed on growing pigs and how environmental enrichment might mitigate against their use.  Castration was not used in British production but imported pigmeat from Europe was likely to have been partly derived from castrated males.  Tail docking and teeth clipping were widely used to reduce the subsequent risk of other welfare problems (injurious behaviours between animals) and other mutilations such as ear notching and tattooing were used for identification.

25.       The study would address how necessary these procedures were, how they might be avoided or, if they could not, then whether pain relief might be applied.

26.       Helen Galland – Spitalfields City Farm – Her vet had felt that anaesthetic to castrate male lambs was unnecessary.  Were there yet methods of applying pain relief to pigs or lambs?  FAWC response – FAWC’s report on castration and tail docking of lambs had called for producers to consider whether to castrate at all and if necessary to apply pain relief when delivery methods had further developed.  Male and female lambs could be successfully managed to avoid the need for castration.

27.       Julie Roxburgh – Shellfish Network – Why when kittens or puppies were routinely anaesthetised for castration were pigs and sheep not?  FAWC response – While Council recommends that pain relief be used, it needed to be recognised that there were differences in anatomy between domestic and farmed animals, in the locations where the procedures had to take place and in the scale of operations that would bring practical differences of approach.  Limitations were the lack of licensed medicines and a fully developed means of delivery in field conditions.

Ethics, Economics, Education and Regulation Standing Committee

28.       Professor Bennett explained that the wide remit of his Standing Committee meant that it had developed a number of responses to consultation on behalf of Council as well as focussing on its own Opinion studies. 

29.       In December 2008 FAWC had published a review of the policy instruments available to Government and others to protect and improve farm animal welfare.  There were often calls for Government to legislate for specific situations but there were a range of other instruments available to achieve similar ends.  These were not often used in isolation but in combinations believed to be most helpful to the task at hand.  There was a need for proper co-ordination of chosen instruments.  Legislation would always be required to ensure minimum standards.  Other measures, e.g. the market, would not achieve this on behalf of society.

30.       Recommendations in the Opinion had included those on: necessity of co-ordinated approach, legislation always necessary for minimum standards, welfare codes to communicate legislation and best practice, compliance enforcement and incentives, registration, govt procurement to set example, welfare information/labelling, welfare assessment, school/college education.

31.       The Committee had just begun work on a study of contingency planning for farm animal welfare.  There was potential for animal welfare to be compromised in a range of emergency scenarios.  The study would seek to identify the main animal welfare implications of emergencies (e.g. need for emergency transport, slaughter, housing, feeding, etc.), develop strategies to provide for these needs and consider how to include these in Governments’ and others’ contingency planning arrangements.

32.       The study would follow the usual process beginning with wide consultation and information gathering exercises.  The Committee would seek to draw on current best practice and examples such as co-ordinated incident management systems existing in other countries.  Publication was planned for late Autumn 2010.

33.       Phil Brooke – CIWF – CIWF was particularly concerned that FAWC should reconsider and come out against ventilation shutdown as a method of killing poultry in emergencies.

34.       Julie Roxburgh – Shellfish Network – Had any funding been allocated for implementing any of the recommendations likely to come out of an Opinion on contingency planning, which might prove expensive for already hard pressed farmers?  FAWC response – The study was in its very early stages so it was too early to say what funding would be required, but costs would be addressed during the study.

Disease and farm animal welfare

35.       Mrs Ward gave a brief preview of a new major study that would start later in July.  The possibly negative use of the word disease in the title was not intended to be pessimistic but might differentiate the study from existing animal health and welfare strategies.  The study had great potential to make positive observations and recommendations about the health, and consequently welfare, of many farmed animals.  The timing of the report would dovetail well with EU and GB animal health and welfare strategies.  It would also complement recent and current FAWC reports.

36.       The scope of the study was under discussion but to reign in the potential for a very large report the Working Group would focus on the welfare aspects of disease.  This would include:

• Direct and indirect welfare significance of the major physical and mental diseases of farm animals – incidence, severity and emerging trends.  
• Current surveillance systems, adequacy and availability of diagnostic techniques, preventative and curative treatments.
• Improved welfare through genetic improvements to disease resistance.
• Potential of improved welfare through supply chain and on-farm disease management solutions.
• The importance of the stockman/animal interactions in promoting good health and welfare.
• Notifiable diseases and the consequences for animal welfare.

37.       A written consultation would be issued over the summer and all attendees were encouraged to take part and to make sure FAWC was aware of all the relevant organisations to consult.

38.       The study might exclude fish and focus on land-based farm animals.  The Pigs, Poultry and Fish Standing Committee might take up fish disease as a future topic for an Opinion, although this would need to compete with other topics in a priority setting exercise running alongside the development of the next FAWC Strategic Plan for 2011-2016. 

General Q&A

39.       Alan Long – VEGA – Questioned the term humane killing for poultry.  The scale of the killing of poultry was of such enormity that the term slaughter was better.  Humane slaughter was an oxymoron.  Ritual slaughter was also a correct term.  Concern was expressed for the welfare of slaughtermen, employed in what used to be called an offensive trade.  It was degrading work with the risk of zoonoses and should be subject to veterinary and medical review. 

40.       Catherine McLaughlin – National Farmers Union (NFU) – Called for an update on publication of the Council’s welfare strategy report.  FAWC response – The report to be titled Farm Animal Welfare in Great Britain:  Past, Present and Future was planned for publication in September 2009.  A draft was undergoing final editing.  The report would introduce the concept of a life worth living rather than preventing animals being subject to unnecessary suffering.

41.       Nizar Boga – UK Halal Corporation – Raised the role of the Poultry Welfare Officer in the slaughterhouse and the lack of training among those employed by Halal certifying bodies.  FAWC response – The role of the Poultry Welfare Officer, and Animal Welfare Officer in red meat slaughterhouses, was to be a person employed by the operator with responsibility for animal welfare at operating level and having the influence to make changes as necessary.  All persons involved in or influencing the slaughter of animals should have the necessary competency to ensure animal welfare is protected.

42.       Phil Brooke – CIWF – CIWF still had concerns about advice from FAWC on the acceptability of enriched cages.  A cage was still a cage with lack of behavioural opportunity.  Beak trimming of laying hens was also a concern in the lead up to the ban in 2010.  FAWC response – Ministers had asked FAWC for further advice on beak trimming of laying hens, in the light of recent research at the University of Glasgow and other evidence received since November 2007, and FAWC would provide this in the next few months.  On the current evidence FAWC saw no need to amend its previous advice on enriched cages.

43.       Sian Davies – NFU Dairy Advisor – Welcomed FAWC’s review of dairy cow issues and looked forward to the Opinion.  Economics of dairy farming were highly relevant to cow welfare.  If retailers and consumers paid more, then levels of management, stockman resource and therefore welfare would improve.  Less than 5% of the UK dairy herd was zero grazed and more than 95% of the dairy herd was subject to farm assurance, ensuring standards were attained.  The media could damage the good work done by many in improving welfare standards. 

44.       Anon – Was the pursuit of robustness and disease resistance through genetics a blind alley in terms of emerging diseases or an attempt to breed animals to fit systems?  FAWC response – Dr Conington had been appointed to FAWC in 2008 in order to boost the Council’s expertise in breeding and genetics and in order to produce advice on breeding issues that might arise.

45.       Professor Wathes said that FAWC was currently undergoing a light-touch review on behalf of its sponsor department, Defra.  Anyone wishing to contribute could contact the reviewer through details on the FAWC website.  FAWC’s cost was equivalent to a half pence per year for every person in Great Britain.  Council would be planning for the future soon in the form of a new Strategic Plan for 2011-2016.  A consultation on this would be sent out later in the year.

46.       Professor Wathes thanked everyone for attending and for their commitment to farm animal welfare.  He thanked the Secretariat for all their efforts in arranging and running the Open Meeting.

FAWC Secretariat
July 2009

FARM ANIMAL WELFARE COUNCIL OPEN MEETING
WEDNESDAY 8 JULY 2009 – ATTENDEES