Is Humane Slaughter Possible?

Animal welfare at German abattoirs: insights into the occurrence of violations against laws and regulations from official veterinarians and judicial decisions

Introduction

This study investigated the occurrence of various animal welfare violations at German abattoirs by analyzing the results of an anonymous online survey and relevant German court decisions.

Methods

The survey targeted official veterinarians (OVs) and other individuals responsible for enforcing animal welfare laws and regulations at German abattoirs. Participants were asked to report the five most common animal welfare violations in their workplaces during the past 3 years (2019-2021), and whether 22 specific given violations had occurred or not (in the same timeframe). The court decisions were examined to determine how many abattoirs were penalized for a specific animal welfare violation and the details about the number and species of affected animals.

Results

Overall, the violations examined throughout this study fell into one of the following categories: (1) use of prohibited driving aids (e.g., illicit use of electric prods, or hitting/beating animals); (2) inadequate husbandry in lairage; (3) inappropriate handling of animals with special care needs; (4) improper restraint, stunning, and bleeding of animals; and (5) unqualified task execution/inadequate administrative work (e.g., documentation of a violation). The violations analyzed in the scope of this study most frequently fell into categories 1, 2, and 4. Regarding the five violations that survey participants reported to be the most common in the years 2019-2021, 42.6% of responses (N = 277 reported violations) fell into category 4, followed closely by category 1 with 37.9%. Of the 22 violations surveyed in the second part of the survey, those reported by 50.0% or more participants were concentrated in categories 1, 2, and 4. Regarding the 16 relevant court rulings spanning from 2015 to 2022, the most frequently documented instances of misconduct primarily fell into category 1.

Discussion

The collected data suggest that there may be need for improvements regarding compliance with animal welfare legislation, especially concerning categories 1, 2, and 4. The authors suggest OVs to consider these findings when conducting monitoring activities at abattoirs and in the training and education of abattoir personnel.

Flesh Without Blood: The Public Health Benefits of Lab-Grown Meat

Synthetic meat made from animal cells will transform how we eat. It will reduce suffering by eliminating the need to raise and slaughter animals. But it will also have big public health benefits if it becomes widely consumed. In this paper, we discuss how "clean meat" can reduce the risks associated with intensive animal farming, including antibiotic resistance, environmental pollution, and zoonotic viral diseases like influenza and coronavirus. Since the most common objection to clean meat is that some people find it "disgusting" or "unnatural," we explore the psychology of disgust to find possible counter-measures. We argue that the public health benefits of clean meat give us strong moral reasons to promote its development and consumption in a way that the public is likely to support. We end by depicting the change from farmed animals to clean meat as a collective action problem and suggest that social norms rather than coercive laws should be employed to solve the problem.

Effects of journey duration and temperature during pre-slaughter transport on behaviour of cull sows in lairage

This observational field study investigated the effects of journey duration, temperature, and waiting duration before unloading on the behaviour of 562 cull sows during lairage from 23 commercial loads. Each load consisted of sows originating from more than one herd, thus experiencing variable pre-slaughter transport and management. In lairage, sows were mixed in groups of 25, involving animals from all journey durations (min-max: 0.8-8.4 h) and video monitored for 60 min. At first most sows were in upright position (approximately 80-90%), decreasing to 30-40% after 30 min. After 60 min, 42% of the sows had initiated aggression (min-max: 0-43 events/sow), 28% had been subjected to aggressive behaviour (min-max: 0-14 events/sow), and 36% s were observed drinking (min-max: 0-16 events/sow). Several significant interactions were found between journey duration, the average temperature in the vehicle and lairage pen (averages: 4.3-26.2 °C) and waiting duration before unloading (min-max: 3-25 min). For example, after short journeys, sows exposed to higher temperature carried out more aggressive behaviour, while a higher temperature after long journeys was associated with more lying and less drinking. This suggests that the sows prioritised lying behaviour over drinking and establishing a dominance hierarchy. We discuss how the results may be interpreted as behavioural signs of fatigue, but further studies, for example involving quantification of physiological and motivational indicators, are needed to clarify this. Irrespectively, the present findings suggest that a stay in a lairage pen, as part of the pre-slaughter logistic chain, involves challenges for the welfare of the cull sows.

The perspectives of UK personnel towards current killing practices for laboratory rodents

Rodents are the predominant species used for scientific research and must be humanely killed upon completion of the work. In the UK this is regulated by Schedule 1 of the Animals Scientific Procedures Act 1986, which lists permitted methodologies considered capable of humane killing, including overdose of an anaesthetic, exposure to carbon dioxide (CO₂) gas, dislocation of the neck and concussion of the brain by striking the cranium. Although all are permitted, operator motivations behind method selection and individual operator preference remain unknown. The views of 219 laboratory animal personnel on institutional availability and use of Schedule 1 killing methods for laboratory rodents were obtained. Only 10% of participants reported that all four methods were available at their institution with 57.5% of respondents preferring cervical dislocation. For CO₂, only 18.6% of participants reported using the recommended flow rate, while 45.5% did not know the flow rate employed. We highlight the urgent requirement for the development of quality-controlled training programmes, to improve knowledge and confidence in the selection and application of killing methods. We advocate for continuous review of killing practices to ensure best practice is reflected in legislation and achieve optimal protection of the welfare of laboratory rodents during killing.

Legislative hurdles to using traditional domestic livestock in rewilding programmes in Europe

Rewilding is a restoration strategy that aims to return anthropogenic ecosystems to a "self-organized" state, by reinstating trophic complexity through disturbance (e.g. predation, herbivory), dispersal and connectivity. In depopulated areas of Europe, lite versions of rewilding, that maintain but minimize the management of rewilding species (e.g. predators, large herbivores) is gaining support. Livestock rewilding (LR) is a form of rewilding-lite, that uses livestock landraces as keystone species in the restoration of herbivory (the functional integrity of ecosystems) offering ecosystem services, such as ecotourism and the sale of livestock population surpluses, that can mitigate the economic and social effects of rural depopulation. Many challenges remain to implementing LR, including (i) more empirical evidence is required of the feasibility of LR across a variety of habitats and conditions, and (ii) understanding the hurdles that legislation poses for LR, the latter being the aim of this study. To accomplish this, we reviewed the EU legislation on environmental protection, animal health and welfare, identification and traceability, and ownership and civil responsibility, to assess how this might apply to LR. Although there is no specific EU legislation prohibiting LR, the review indicates that it is not clear what legislation applies to LR, as LR's status lies between that of livestock and wild species. As such the existing legislation can be a serious impediment to the development of LR programmes. We highlight the needs for a legal definition, and status of LR species and their ownership. We propose ways to adapt this legislation to support the application of LR programmes in abandoned areas of EU, for example, by using legal exceptions intended for livestock under extensive animal farming systems.

Ideological resistance to veg*n advocacy: An identity-based motivational account

Animal-based diets in Western countries are increasingly regarded as unsustainable because of their impact on human health, environmental and animal welfare. Promoting shifts toward more plant-based diets seems an effective way to avoid these harms in practice. Nevertheless, claims against the consumption of animal products contradict the ideology of the omnivorous majority known as carnism. Carnism supports animal-product consumption as a cherished social habit that is harmless and unavoidable and invalidates minorities with plant-based diets: vegetarians and vegans (veg*ns). In this theoretical review, we integrate socio-psychological and empirical literature to provide an identity-based motivational account of ideological resistance to veg*n advocacy. Advocates who argue against the consumption of animal products often make claims that it is harmful, and avoidable by making dietary changes toward veg*n diets. In response, omnivores are likely to experience a simultaneous threat to their moral identity and their identity as consumer of animal products, which may arouse motivations to rationalize animal-product consumption and to obscure harms. If omnivores engage in such motivated reasoning and motivated ignorance, this may also inform negative stereotyping and stigmatization of veg*n advocates. These "pro-carnist" and "counter-veg*n" defenses can be linked with various personal and social motivations to eat animal products (e.g., meat attachment, gender, speciesism) and reinforce commitment to and ambivalence about eating animal products. This does not mean, however, that veg*n advocates cannot exert any influence. An apparent resistance may mask indirect and private acceptance of advocates' claims, priming commitment to change behavior toward veg*n diets often at a later point in time. Based on our theoretical account, we provide directions for future research.

Does birth matter?

This paper is a response to a recent paper by Bobier and Omelianchuk in which they argue that the critics of Giubilini and Minerva's defence of infanticide fail to adequately justify a moral difference at birth. They argue that such arguments would lead to an intuitively less plausible position: that late-term abortions are permissible, thus creating a dilemma for those who seek to argue that birth matters. I argue that the only way to resolve this dilemma, is to bite the naturalist bullet and accept that the intuitively plausible idea that birth constitutes a morally relevant event is simply mistaken and biologically misinformed.

How Epigenetics Can Enhance Pig Welfare?

Epigenetics works as an interface between the individual and its environment to provide phenotypic plasticity to increase individual adaptation capabilities. Recently, a wide variety of epi-genetic findings have indicated evidence for its application in the development of putative epi-biomarkers of stress in farm animals. The purpose of this study was to evaluate previously reported stress epi-biomarkers in swine and encourage researchers to investigate potential paths for the development of a robust molecular tool for animal welfare certification. In this literature review, we report on the scientific concerns in the swine production chain, the management carried out on the farms, and the potential implications of these practices for the animals' welfare and their epigenome. To assess reported epi-biomarkers, we identified, from previous studies, potentially stress-related genes surrounding epi-biomarkers. With those genes, we carried out a functional enrichment analysis of differentially methylated regions (DMRs) of the DNA of swine subjected to different stress-related conditions (e.g., heat stress, intrauterine insult, and sanitary challenges). We identified potential epi-biomarkers for target analysis, which could be added to the current guidelines and certification schemes to guarantee and certify animal welfare on farms. We believe that this technology may have the power to increase consumers' trust in animal welfare.

Critical Perspective of Animal Production Specialists on Cell-Based Meat in Brazil: From Bottleneck to Best Scenarios

Simple Summary

The opinion of professionals involved in animal production is very important to the development of the emerging cell-based meat chain. This paper aims to analyse the perspective of Brazilian veterinarians and animal scientists regarding cell-based meat—women, veterinarians, vegetarians and vegans were more supportive of cell-based meat. The resistance expressed by the professionals seems related to a lack of knowledge and the association of cultivated meat with artificiality, which has a negative connotation. Therefore, higher education and motivation of veterinarians and animal scientists may mitigate the resistance and help these professionals to engage in this new chain for the benefit of the professionals themselves, society, the animals involved and the environment.

Abstract

Recently, many studies regarding consumer perception of cell-based meat have been published. However, the opinion of the professionals involved in animal production also seems relevant. In particular, veterinarians and animal scientists may be important players in the new cell-based meat production, acting as proponents or barriers to this major improvement for farm animal welfare. Therefore, our aim is to analyse the knowledge and perspective of Brazilian veterinarians and animal scientists regarding cell-based meat. Veterinarians (76.8%; 209/272) and animal scientists (23.2%; 63/272) responded to an online survey. Logistic regression, latent class and logit models were used to evaluate objective answers, and the Discourse of the Collective Subject method was used to interpret open-ended answers. Specialists who were women (62.5%; 170/272), veterinarians (76.8%; 209/272), vegetarians (7.0%; 19/272) and vegans (1.1%; 3/272) were more supportive of cell-based meat. Lack of knowledge and the connection with artificiality, the most frequent spontaneous word associated with cell-based meat by all respondents, were the main negative points highlighted. Thus, it seems fundamental to offer higher education to veterinarians and animal scientists regarding cell-based meat, since engaging them with this novel technology may mitigate both the resistance and its negative consequences for the professionals, society, the animals involved and the environment.