Whose responsibility is farm animal welfare?

Question

Is it the major multiple retailers (supermarkets and fast food giants) who sell most of the meat? The farmers who raise the livestock? The government, who shape welfare legislation and guidelines? Or is it down the consumer, to read the labels and make the choices they can afford? And, in the end, is “higher welfare” meat merely a luxury, or a moral imperative?

Need more food for thought? I have teamed up exclusively with Yahoo! to offer my book at a special discount. More information is here: http://www.rivercottage.net/yahoo

Answer 1

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

In Australia, there is various levels of responsibility for Farm Animal Welfare, and Regulatory over sight.

There are farmer/breeder/producer associations, societies, and then Regulation involving quarantine & disease control, chemical use and withholding periods, food standards, animal transport, animal feed, and various other welfare issues.

There is no 1 single oversight Authority.

Australian products generally attract higher export prices because of the “clean, green” image of the livestock industries. The high level of attraction and marketability of Australian livestock products relates closely to the country’s freedom from most of the world’s most serious animal diseases and the very low use of chemicals and potential contaminants in livestock production. These factors alone have beneficial welfare effects and advanced husbandry, endemic animal disease and biosecurity controls add significantly to livestock welfare.

Animal welfare legislation in Australia

Each state has its own animal welfare Act and accompanying regulations that affect people who own or work with animals including farmers, livestock transporters, livestock exporters, saleyard personnel and processors.

The regulations include the reference to codes of practice (codes) that define what is generally regarded as acceptable welfare practices for livestock husbandry and transport. Compliance with the codes can be used as a defence against a charge of cruelty.

The current rationalisation of the various Commonwealth, State and Territory codes of practice into a national set of standards for animal welfare as recommended by the Neumann report is working with the following principles:

1. A strong national framework for the development of `minimum standards' with species specific definitions of animal welfare that are underpinned by legislation. minimum standards shold be outcome-based and measurable.
2. An efficient, agreed process for developing and maintaining minimum standard and best practice guidelines.
3. Consistency across state and territory jurisdictions in the application (enforcement) of legislation.
4. An industry-government partnership to make decisions.
5. Broad consultation with all stakeholders, especially end users.
6. A process for evaluating Standards through a Regulatory impact Statement (RIS).
7. Standards must be auditable for credibility abd international acceptance.
8. An outcome focus responsive to verified drivers and needs.
9. Science based inputs to be a critical element in the development of standards.
10. Efective communication to all stakeholders.

Source(s):

http://www.animalsaustralia.org/
http://www.mla.com.au/TopicHierarchy/Inf…
http://www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf…
http://kb.rspca.org.au/17/
http://www.wspa.org.au/news.asp?newsID=3…

Answer 2

I think it's the responsibility of whoever has them in their possession at any given time. There are many groups and laws out there that monitor and set forth farm animal welfare albeit no one can be everywhere at once so there are gaps.

As a customer, labels give me no indication of how the animal was treated; yeah some labels say free range but that does not mean they were treated humanely. I would pay more if I had no doubts about the welfare of the animal but honestly I don't think the green labels they put on meat packages prove it so I will continue to buy the cheap stuff.

Honestly the only farm animal that I know of that has any trace of a spoiled life is the cows bred and raised for Kobe beef, even then it depends on who has possession of them.

Answer 3

The consumers are responsible, but they can only buy what is made available to them locally. I will now only buy free range eggs, British pork and chicken products that are RSPCA freedom food or free range.

In my local area I am surrounded by Tesco (I have 2 in my small town alone) and nothing else, they dominate so my choice is restricted.

Tesco are steadily reducing the amount of their Willow Farm chicken range on offer now since the press coverage and hype has died down, and there is regularly nothing left.

I drove to 2 tesco supermarkets in Surrey on a Sunday to buy chicken for a roast - all I was offered was cheap Tesco value or an organic free range one for £18! I bought British Pork instead.

Keep up the good work Hugh - there are people like me out there that do want to make a difference - but the supermarkets are making increasingly difficult.

Answer 4

I think the responsibility is ultimately on the shoulders of the consumer. The customer is king and we decide what is put on the shelves of our grocery stores.

I believe it is important to be informed on the food we consume.

Answer 5

Personally, I feel everyone.

Farmers for poor animal welfare.

Retailers drive down prices, which forces farmers to cut corners, and often that means animal welfare.

The consumer is also at fault for making retailers drive down prices to compete with each other. If more people were to buy free range foods, then the retailers would not then cause farmers (through financial pressure) to cut corners.

Me, I used to be a vegetarian. I stopped after a while, but I feel uneasy eating meat that is not free range. I can live with eating an animal so long as it has had a good life. I have watched enough nature documentaries to know that death in the wild for an animal is not nice. But then living your life in a cage is not nice either.

Besides, while there is no convincing evidence (to science that is) to prove my view, I honestly think that a free range animal is going to make healthier food.

Source(s):

http://www.farmersguardian.com/tesco-pri…

Answer 6

While we have a system that takes the responsibility of raising and slaughtering animals away from the individual who consumes meat, then the responsibility for animal welfare must lie in legislation. The farmer raises vast quantities of livestock for profit and when profit is the sole goal then cutting corners to decrease costs is a natural consequence of seeing the £££s increase.

The government represents the views of the people, and if enough people organise into a pressure/lobby group then legislation will be made. It is then encumbant upon those with knowledge to impart it to the rest of the population who are so removed from livestock that the processes involved bring tears to the eyes.

Perhaps it is right and correct that we have an emotional response to the taking of a life so that we feel gratitude for the sustenance to us it provides. But in times of necessity our survival instincts will kick in and compassion will go out the window. In an ideal world higher welfare meat must be a moral imperative, however it will not be compatible with low prices. And a capitalist society by its very nature produces low paid and umemployed workers, just like lower welfare meat.

Thus while maximising profit is the goal rather than simply making a profit, animal welfare suffers to enable those who are marginalised to afford to eat meat produced by someone else. The solution is to re-educate, fund and encourage us to go back to a little bit of subsistance farming where those with gardens can grow basic veg and maybe some chickens and create more allotment space for those without gardens.

The mechanisation of the last few decades have increasingly detached us from the ability to be independant, self-sufficient and connected to the land on a personal basis. Instead we utterly rely on and are exploited by the supermarket monopolies who in turn wield huge control over mass producers of food.
What do you think?

Answer 7

I think the farmer because all farmers have a passion for looking after there animals however they farm to get the best price they can for there animals or milk.
I do think that supermarkets buy far to much and waste a lot on the quiet!
The government seem to find more things for the farmer to worry about by bringing more guide lines in which cost money that they don't have.
The consumer in the end has the choice of which to buy and at the moment it seems to be the cheaper rather than the "luxury".

Answer 8

Well put it this way hugh collectively we are all responsible. Supermarkets know where the meat comes from and consumers choose to say how much their care about welfare standards when they buy meat and more often than not welfare standards are not the most important issue as has been shown in this recession.

Oh and my family are farmers chicken farmers (broiler) and I can honestly say i don't think theres anything slightly inhumane about how we keep them, compared to battery chickens they are very well catered for and compared to some pigs that are reared in the world they live a great life. Its worth noting how poorly some of the worlds pigs live in cramp conditions with no sunlight or bedding and its worth considering that the next time you pick up that cheaper pack of Danish bacon.

Britain has the highest animal welfare standards in the world so we don't need you keeping up unesscessary fuss by all means get rid of battery chickens and push for greater pig welfare standards but leave the broiler chickens alone, or go overseas and see how poorly the rest of the world rears animals.

add: our farm has pigs as well, which i think could be better kept, but seeing as i'm not the boss..

Answer 9

I really don't know. I try to do my best with balancing animal welfare, morality, healthy eating, carbon miles and my own budget. To the point where I'm lost now.

If I buy meat from a local farmer's market, I don't know that it was any better cared for than supermarket meat, thats an assumption. Equally I don't know it's any safer with infections, or even if the infections are a big risk. Is it greener to by locally (lots of small movements of food) or at a supermarkets (large movements of food, but less of them).

But perhaps I shouldn't eat meat at all, I sympathise with the vegetarian point of view. Is it better for the animals to be no use to us? Usually that sends them heading for extinction.

It's hard to know what the right way is.

Answer 10

its everyone's. we all eat the produce that comes from these farms .etc. if an animal that we are benefiting from is being treated badly then it should be on our conscience and we should do something about it as well, it's not for us to stand by and let someone else do it because that's not the right thing, we all benefit, we all do our part to help back, also, meat is meat, the best meal tastes good whether it comes from a charity for the poor or a high class resturant.

i love your show by the way, i live in Dorset in England which i think is where you film the show? i might be wrong but anyway, keep them coming, we love them!

Answer 11

I think it's mainly the responsibility of the person buying the meat.

Answer 12

Hello Hugh

Whose responsibility? Everyone in the chain - from the consumer right back to the producer. The consumer drives what is available in larger supermarkets and local farmer's markets; you only have to look at trends in food over recent years to see that.

If I had to choose one link in the chain, then it must be the consumer. Without the consumer, the producer and all the other links have no reason to do anything. It is therefore incumbent on us, as consumers, to insist on getting what we want.

Even at what might be termed the "lower" end of the market (sorry!) cheap meat doesn't have to be drug filled, poorly raised meat does it? Perhaps a societal change from our heavily meat based diet wouldn't be a bad thing either....changes like this take time, but do happen.

Is higher welfare meat a moral imperative or a luxury you ask. At the moment, both. Perhaps one day soon, most people will eat less meat, but the meat they buy will be top quality and correctly reared. At the moment it is a luxury for me, and one I try to indulge in when I eat meat. This does not happen 100% of the time for a number of reasons (laziness, cost, convenience) but I would like it too and am working towards it. I have the good fortune to be able to hunt deer, and to fish (sea and river) from time to time. I find the sacrifice of the animal (if you want to put it in those terms) is more reconcilable when one takes personal responsibility for it. Certainly one is a lot closer to it and appreciates it more than picking up a polystyrene tray wrapped in PVA cling film from a supermarket.

Unfortunately most of us live in an urban, or semi urban environment, so raising or killing one's own animals isn't really an option....thereforeI feel we must all strive to acknowledge where our food comes from, and strive to eat the very best we can manage. We are, after all, what we eat are we not?! (and e-numbers just do NOT taste good!! LOL!!)

Thanks
Halcon :-))

Answer 13

I strongly beleive that it is the responsibility of everyone to care for animals that give us food so that we can live!! These animals should be cared for in the best possinle way, asleast being able to free roam and graze outside in the fresh air. these are simple rights for humans to have freedom, fresh air and exercise. so why is it that chickens of skacked high up in little cages, pigs and cattle kept in indoors with no hope of streching its legs untill its led to slaughter!! We live in the 21st century surely we can provide safe and cruelty free treatment to animals!

On the other note when possible people should buy the free range products, I try to every week and we continue to do so!

Source(s):

my thoughts

Answer 14

The welfare of the animal would be even better if it wasn't killed for meat.

I am fed up with these hypocrites who, for example,only buy free range eggs as they think its cruel to keep chickens all couped up together but then have no qualms for the chicken to have its throat slit for their meal

Answer 15

I think thats it is the major retailers thought for farm animals kept poorly as they want to buy as cheaply as possible to makes big profits.
It is also the consumers thought as they want to pay as little as possible for there meat instead of checking the labels.

Answer 16

The first answer is right. It's point of source - ie, the farmer. By the way , where i live there are dozens of dead road kill grouse on the road. Delicious when marinated.

Answer 17

I work for one of our major retailers, and our record for animal welfare is pretty good. All our eggs are free range, and our chickens are free range. Our Fish is rated as the best by the Marine Conservation Society, and we have had this award for the last 2 years. All our meat is sourced from well managed sources, and we put back a lot of funding into fairtrade, and other welfare projects. I also agree that the consumer, producer and retailer are all responsible for making sure that meat is raised in ethical ways, and I am prepared to spend a little bit more money to ensure this.

Source(s):

Myself.

Answer 18

I believe it is the responsibility of all.

Answer 19

i was never taught about animal welfare as a child , but learnrd later in life the suffering of animals for me to eat , it is a disgrace, the way animals are treated. and then they, die, i would gladly eat only vegetables and grains to save the animal, butlife does not make it that easy, does it nor does shops i blame the lot of us , and the consumer , who does not even try to make a start, people still buy eggs from caged hens even when they have a choice, of free range, from the big shops tesco to us the buyers we are all responsible. farmers thet are only interested in big bucks, REMEMBER IT IS THEIR WORLD TOO. TO ME LIFE IS LIFE, BE IT ANIMAL OR HUMAN, THEIR LIFE TO THEM. is as much value to them as ours is to us , i would gladly starve or as i said cut meat out my diet to save a animal suffering. remember we wont die of starvation if we dont eat meat, as we have vegetables, and grains. and water , i cant stand animals suffering at the hands of man, for our own greeds,also on the other hand , i blame life , i dont think it is very godliness , for a start every animal has got to kill and eat a n other animal to survive , then if i dont eat red meat i may get a vitamin b deficancy. so where is the humanity in that , or the godliness , as i said i would rather starve as i love animals but not to eat . to look at with wonder at them as they are amazing, and we could learn a lot from them . i have a saying and it is this ; WHO IS THE ANIMAL,;, I DONT THINK IT IS THE ANIMAL, they have more feeling; people forget about the farm animals , they are treated the worst,and yet they supply the mosr, farm animals go ignored, with no voice to speak for them, i myself help a charity when i can , it is called ; COMPASSION FOR world farming;; and it fights for farm animals rights in parliment; and often goes undercover to report abuse of those amazing animals, who are meant to be adored not eaten, by us who are meant to be civilized, as i said who is the animal, in my book it is not the animal, why dont you google my charitie ; compassion in world farming' the farmer is responsible for their welfare, it is them that abuse the animals, as they are in their care, then it is the goverments fault for not being interested, and not laying heavy rules and fines, they are both only iterseted in profit. the farmer and the goverment, those animals are born in to hell death must be a reliefe, to them. i just cannot stand the abuse and i worry even more about animals outside the uk as some of those countries are worse than uk, why cant people give animals a life too. oh and hugh. is not putting this on here for money, to sel his book, what a horrible thought, he is trying to educate people what is happening in the farm world, he is trying to help animals, as i for one found out through it that sainsburys, works towards the animals , helping them etc, i am glad to put it here as i cant watch it on tv, as i cant seeing the ill treatment of animals, join charities like i do which help them, one is called, PAL. which stands for [political animal lobby ; they go to parliment and help to get laws for animals passed the other one is called COMPASSION. IN WORLD FARMING.google them to see if you can donate or help

Answer 20

The farmer is responsible, given the fact that they own the animals.

Answer 21

i think its partly everyones responsibility really. the foundations start with the farmer in how they feed the livestock, treat and raise them. then the major retailers should ensure that the livestock are fed and slaughtered properly and ethically so to speak before purchasing from farmers, and the goverment needs to ensure that laws are implemented and regulated periodically to see that farmers and retailers are trading within these ethical guidelines. the consumer too has a moral responsibility i think in what they buy. i think higher welfare meat is a bit of both. a luxury and a moral imperative. i am carefull about what i buy meat wise but to be honest i donot eat a great deal of it anyway. i think its more of a case of seeing how animals are treated such as in a documentary of poultry birds i think abroad, and they were being force fed food to fatten them up so the farmer could get more money for them. its disgraceful and inhuman! i hear your an advocate for the treatment of welfare conditions for chickens which is right, good on you!

my elderly mums a big fan of your show, river cottage.

Answer 22

I firmly believe that if the consumer chooses higher welfare meats then that it what the supermarkets will supply. The supermarkets are in business to make money - if they sell more high welfare meats then that is what they will source and supply.

I only ever buy organic chickens and eggs, outdoor bred pork, Welsh free range lamb and organic beef. It's a lot more expensive and it *is* difficult to make ends meet sometimes, but we get by through eating less meat but of a higher quality.

It was your chicken farm what done it, Hugh! I cried like a baby all the way through that series and from that day to this not a scrap of intensively farmed meat has passed my doorstep.

I find that I now buy much less meat but what we *do* eat is of a much higher quality. I re-use leftovers and we eat a lot more offal such as chicken livers, kidneys and hearts. It actually makes cooking more of an adventure, trying to come up with new and interesting ways to re-use leftovers (and southern spiced chicken livers are to die for! Gourmet food indeed)

I'm currently trying to source some pig trotters and knuckles to make the sweet and sour trotter recipe but unfortunately I can't find any anywhere - I'll keep looking though.

Anyway, back to the point. I think it's down to the consumer to buy the highest welfare meat they can afford - just eat less of it. It's certainly worth it, and not just for the taste. It's worth it to sleep easily at night knowing I'm not contributing to animals suffering unnecessarily.

Source(s):

Own experience

Answer 23

hugh. that is almost an unanswerable question. most people (not me) will buy the cheapest option. so supermarkets hammer the price down ever lower (wrongly) to keep the consumer happy. but if they didnt do that, people would have to pay the fair price. if meat was humanely reared it would be more expensive. thats good because cheap meat is the main cause of the massive obesity problem. ban factory farming. bring back caring on our farms. ive stopped eating meat because i cant be sure it was treated well before it arrived shrink wrapped on the shelves of the supermarket. i dont think consumers should take the blame. its supermarkets and government greed for money thats the cause of this inhumanity to animals.

Answer 24

It is initially the responsibility of the farmer to ensure that their livestock are fed correctly, given space to roam and are not mistreated.

Supermarkets & other retailers however should be prepared to pay a fairer price for meat products, with part of this cost being passed on to the consumer.

As consumers, we should demand the highest quality meat we can, and if paying a bit extra helps ensure better treatment for livestock, then so be it. We do have to be careful though that the extra premium is not simply extra profit for those in the supply chain.

An independent, publicly elected body should be set up to monitor and spot check all UK livestock farms. This could work with animal welfare groups and the food standards agency.

Answer 25

I do care how my meat is treated when it is livestock but I earn min wage and it's hard enough to buy anything without paying for organic or freedom ranges...

I do try to buy welfare meat but cost is a major factor.. If I told the companies I have bills with that I can't pay them this month as I went free range that wouldn't be a good excuse...

Maybe it if was the law to have higher standards then I would have to be a veggie if I couldn't afford to buy meat. I do think standards should be better but In credit crunch times can we afford to if we are working class...sadly it's a toss up between my standard of life and the livestocks because there's always something I need to pay for!!!

Answer 26

Ok, so you are asking a question and selling a book.

I'll just take the question thanks. As a consumer I take a certain responsibility for animal welfare. I only free range eggs and I follow an almost vegetarian diet. I eat fish because they are wild and free and their death is fairly quick. Especially if you catch your own.

Farmers should aspire for better minimum standards for animal living conditions and this should be enforced by governments and their regulators. This may increase the prices making meat a luxury item as you suggest, but maybe thats the price we have to pay. Besides our modern lifestyles mean most of us don't really need meat to sustain our bodies.

Good night

Answer 27

Farmers.

Answer 28

A dead meat is a dead meat! never question where it is coming from
beside if you care more about animals welfare then why eat them in the first place?

Source(s):

Duh

Answer 29

Its all above that where mentioned!!
we are accepting european meat to come across to UK so are farmers are lossing money as european is cheaper!!
we should only sell UK meat stuff in supermarkets
but..im veggie so dont really agree with this at all
x

Answer 30

As a buyer of merchandise, I do strive to buy from ethical sources and therefore if the supermarkets namely the buyers only demanded the best, there would be no supply of animals raised within poor welfare.

But obviously there are always the cost constraints in the chain thus it is also up to the customers/consumers to ensure that they do not go for the cheapest thing possible as we all know cheap means factors such as low overheads and therefore poor conditions for animals.
It is the same with human conditions in factories.

It should be in people's conscience at all links of the chain to feel that they are doing the right thing by respecting animals and giving them the best life possible.

It is just obvious to me that the government should set the right guidelines for farm animal welfare and I can not understand that it is still a debate. Some conditions in which animals are raised and treated are unacceptable.

But unfortunately money rules the world - Economies of scale versus ethics

Answer 31

You're an amazing man and I admire very much what you are trying to do. But, (and yes there is a 'but') I think your question is like throwing a 'spanner in the works' because the only answer to it is, Everyone!
If we all make even a small effort, it really does make a big difference.
I have only a few small seed beds in my back garden, but when I produce a reasonable crop, I can live off it for weeks without going to the shops. That's a great feeling! Thanks to you, I wouldn't be as experienced as I am now.
Best wishes for the future!

PS: Organic chickens are the best, until they end up on my plate. Then their even better!