No abstract

BackgroundApproximately 50% of sows are slaughtered each year, but management of cull sows is not well described.MethodsWe aimed to describe how cull sows are sent to slaughter using a questionnaire survey emailed to 885 Danish pig farmers, including questions about the use of pick-up facilities (either a designated pen used for reasons of biosecurity and practicality, in a special part of the barn, where pigs are kept in the last hours before being loaded onto a commercial truck, or a stationary vehicle kept outside the buildings and used for the same purpose) and evaluation of fitness for transport.ResultsA total of 360 farmers answered all questions, constituting a homogeneous group of middle-aged, experienced males. The management of the sows seemed rather variable, for example regarding choice of pick-up facility, its available resources, actions taken when sows were not fit for transport and sow conditions leading to doubt about fitness for transport. Special condition transport was only reported rarely, and rejection of sows due to lack of fitness for transport, by drivers or veterinarians at the slaughterhouse, was only rarely experienced.ConclusionThese findings may be used for formulation of hypotheses for future studies in this area characterised by welfare challenges, potentially leading to science-based recommendations relevant for animal welfare, productivity and biosecurity.

No abstract

No abstract

The ultimate aim of this paper is to study and discuss a central dilemma within inspection of animal welfare. On the one hand, it may be argued that controllers should check only whether farmers comply or not with animal welfare regulation. Here, the key value is the rule of law, and that all offenders should be treated equally. On the other hand, it may be argued that an important component of inspections is to enter into dialogue with farmers. This may be based on a more forward-looking view aimed at motivating farmers to look after the welfare of the animals in their care. In European countries, authorities try to enforce animal welfare legislation through inspections followed up by penalties in instances where a lack of compliance is found. However, the fairness and efficiency, and ultimately the public acceptance of the system, critically depend on the performance of the individual inspector. This paper presents the results of an interview-study into how Danish animal welfare inspectors view their own role and tasks. In the main results, a theme of disagreement presented itself and revealed different attitudes in terms of the possibility of engaging in a dialogue with the farmers. The first theme focused on the preventive aspect. The second had its focus on compliance and on the avoidance of engaging in dialogue with the farmer regarding the reasons for the regulations. Moreover, a theme of agreement showed interpretation as unavoidable. We discuss how the points of view or strategies of the inspectors may affect the outcome of animal welfare inspections, both on a short- and long-term basis. We argue that this study can initiate a necessary and more open discussion of the aforementioned dilemma.