No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Welfare Quality † was the largest ever European research project on animal welfare. Here, we briefly describe some major achievements of Welfare Quality † and identify future research priorities, potential strategies and organisational structures to build on the outcomes. Achievements include: definition of principles and criteria of good welfare; development of standardised, primarily animal-based measures for each welfare criterion and their integration in an overall assessment model. Since Welfare Quality † could not answer all the questions we recommend:(1) Continued development and refinement of the assessment systems and extension to new species.(2) The development of automatic measures of welfare to reduce the duration of the assessment while still retaining its holistic nature.(3) Exploration of potential implementation strategies across food chain actors. (4) Establishment of an independent body to manage and update the assessment and information systems, support their implementation and inform and engage stakeholders.

Conventions to protect domestic animals during transport, farming and slaughter were established by the Council of Europe and approved by many European states. Conventions are followed by recommendations that specify how the general principles of conventions apply for the different species. The European Union (EU) started discussions on animal welfare in the 1980s and adopted a series of Directives to protect farm animals. Both Recommendations and Directives define higher space allowance, more opportunity for social contacts, balanced diet, enriched environment, and limitation of harmful procedures. Animal welfare law varies across Europe with Northern states generally having the most stringent legislation.There is also an increasing variety of farm production schemes within European member states which contain animal welfare standards that go beyond the legal minimum. Some schemes are retailer-led; others are founded by producer organizations, sometimes in co-operation with non-governmental organisations. The differences between schemes reflect higher national legal requirements, higher quality industry schemes, organic production schemes and specific welfare-friendlier schemes. The communication of these higher welfare standards to consumers through the use of a quality assurance scheme logo on a product or packaging claims does not always happen. Farmers differ in their motivation for participating in animal welfare schemes. Some are mainly encouraged by premium prices; others give ethical reasons for changing towards animal friendly production methods.Although there is no official link between the Brambell report and European regulations to protect farm animals, the fact that the first European regulations to protect animals were adopted 10 years after the report and were in line with the conclusions of the report suggest that the report was influential, not only in the United Kingdom but also in the rest of Europe. #

No abstract

Animals are subjected to various events that cause physical exhaustion and psychological stress during transfer to slaughter. This can lead to defective meat quality. Some animals may be better able to withstand the stress of transfer, depending on their previous experience of transport and on their finishing conditions (mixing, farmers' attitudes). The objective of this study was to assess the impact of 1) the conditions of transfer to slaughter (including duration of the journey, waiting time at lairage, etc.); and 2) the bulls' previous history (including experience in transport, mixing during finishing, and the farmers' attitudes) on the reactions of bulls to transfer and on their meat quality. We conducted a survey in commercial conditions. The history of the bulls and the facilities on the farms were noted; farmers were questioned on their attitudes; the bulls' reactions to loading into and unloading from the truck were observed; journey-related data were collected; and cortisol concentration at slaughter and the pH of the LM and the rectus abdominis were measured. Our study confirmed that certain physical factors associated with transport can increase stress and limit the decline of meat pH. These factors include the absence of loading facilities on the farm, transport on a warm day, or a short waiting time at lairage. Social aspects also played a role; the presence of bulls from the same finishing group limited stress and improved the pH decline. Events and management before transfer were also of importance; the farmer awareness of the sensitivity of bulls to humans or to feeding schedules but the absence of a positive attitude toward close contacts with bulls were all likely to limit stress or its consequences on meat pH. Although these results need to be confirmed in controlled experiments, they suggest that good management of beef bulls before and during transfer is essential to meat quality.

No abstract