Expansion of the meat inspection process to incorporate animal-based welfare measurements could contribute towards significant improvements in pig (Sus scrofa domesticus) welfare and farm profitability. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of different welfare-related lesions on the carcase and their relationship with carcase condemnations (CC) and carcase weight (CW). The financial implications of losses associated with CC and CW reductions related to the welfare lesions were also estimated. Data on tail lesions, loin bruising and bursitis, CW and condemnation/trimming outcome (and associated weights) were collected for 3,537 slaughter pigs (mean [± SEM] carcase weight: 79.2 [± 8.82] kg). Overall, 72.5% of pigs had detectable tail lesions, whilst 16.0 and 44.0% were affected by severe loin bruising and hind limb bursitis, respectively. There were 2.5% of study carcases condemned and a further 3.3% were trimmed. The primary cause of CC was abscessation. While tail lesion severity did not increase the risk of abscessation, it was significantly associated with CC. Male pigs had a higher risk of tail lesions and of CC. The financial loss to producers associated with CC and trimmings was estimated at €1.10 per study pig. CW was reduced by up to 12 kg in cases of severe tail lesions. However, even mild lesions were associated with a significant reduction in CW of 1.2 kg. The value of the loss in potential CW associated with tail lesions was €0.59 per study pig. Combined with losses attributable to CC and trimmings this represented a loss of 43% of the profit margin per pig, at the time of the study, attributable to tail biting. These findings illustrate the magnitude of the impact of tail biting on pig welfare and on profitability of the pig industry. They also emphasise the potential contribution that the inclusion of welfare parameters at meat inspection could make to pig producers in informing herd health and welfare management plans.

No abstract

Aggression between unfamiliar pigs at mixing is a major animal welfare problem in commercial farming. It has been studied since the 1970s and remains an important topic in animal welfare research. Methods to reduce pig aggression at mixing have been reviewed previously, but there has been little translation of the advocated techniques and building designs into practice. As a result, the problem persists on many commercial units. A similar situation exists for many other animal welfare issues. This article takes a new approach in not only reviewing the recent scientific literature, but also reviewing the evidence of uptake in industry. Firstly, the current state of aggression mitigation research is reviewed; including the most successful recent developments in breeding against aggression, early life socialisation, the use of pheromones and nutrition. Secondly, information is extracted from both peer reviewed and industry literature to establish the extent to which these strategies have been transferred from research to practice. Finally, we discuss why in spite of the amount of research on reducing aggression at mixing the problem has not reduced in intensive farming systems. The limited uptake in practice appears to be due to low prioritisation of the problem, the practicalities of implementation, lack of information on cost-effectiveness and ineffective communication of research to the farming community. To bridge this gap, industry must be involved in the design of practical solutions and the cost-effectiveness of these must be quantified. This approach should also be considered for other animal welfare issues under investigation. We recommend a better alignment between research questions and industry interests to increase the success of research efforts to improve animal welfare in practice.

Despite extensive utilisation in epidemiological investigations of animal health, to date there has been little consideration of the value of abattoir meat inspection as a pig welfare surveillance tool. This study measured the prevalence of tail-docking, tail biting, carcase condemnations and associated financial losses of the latter (Northern Ireland only) in 36,963 pigs slaughtered in six abattoirs from the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland in July and August 2010. Over 99 per cent of inspected pigs had been tail-docked, while 58.1 per cent and 1.03 per cent had detectable and severe tail lesions, respectively. Producer losses resulting from carcase condemnation were estimated to be €0.37 per pig slaughtered. Enhanced capture and utilisation of meat inspection data for use in animal welfare surveillance schemes has the potential to drive improvements in production efficiency and animal welfare. However, significant differences were detected in the prevalence of carcase condemnation conditions between abattoirs and judiciaries (Republic and Northern Ireland). This reflects variation in the criteria and methods of data capture used in meat inspection in different abattoirs. Thus, the meat inspection process needs to be standardised and reformed before it can be reliably utilised in large-scale pig welfare surveillance schemes.

During abattoir meat inspection pig carcasses are partially or fully condemned upon detection of disease that poses a risk to public health or welfare conditions that cause animal suffering e.g. fractures. This incurs direct financial losses to producers and processors. Other health and welfare-related conditions may not result in condemnation but can necessitate ‘trimming’ of the carcass e.g. bruising, and result in financial losses to the processor. Since animal health is a component of animal welfare these represent a clear link between suboptimal pig welfare and financial losses to the pig industry.Meat inspection data can be used to inform herd health programmes, thereby reducing the risk of injury and disease and improving production efficiency. Furthermore, meat inspection has the potential to contribute to surveillance of animal welfare. Such data could contribute to reduced losses to producers and processors through lower rates of carcass condemnations, trimming and downgrading in conjunction with higher pig welfare standards on farm. Currently meat inspection data are under-utilised in the EU, even as a means of informing herd health programmes. This includes the island of Ireland but particularly the Republic.This review describes the current situation with regard to meat inspection regulation, method, data capture and utilisation across the EU, with special reference to the island of Ireland. It also describes the financial losses arising from poor animal welfare (and health) on farms. This review seeks to contribute to efforts to evaluate the role of meat inspection as a surveillance tool for animal welfare on-farm, using pigs as a case example.