Attitudes of Dutch Citizens toward Sow Husbandry with Regard to Animals, Humans, and the Environment

Bergstra, T.J.; Hogeveen, H.; Kuiper, W.E.; Stassen, E.N.

doi:10.1080/08927936.2017.1310985

Cited by 6 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second and the third statement concerned issues related to the behavioural needs of hens. (Bergstra et al, 2017a;Vanhonacker et al, 2010;.…”

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the concept biological functioning, we selected the aspects hens lay many eggs, a treated beak and mortality (e.g. Bergstra et al, 2017a;Fraser, 2009;. The aspects pain, anxiety or stress and injuries were chosen to be studied for the concept affective states (e.g.…”

Section: Concepts Of Chicken Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aspects pain, anxiety or stress and injuries were chosen to be studied for the concept affective states (e.g. Bergstra et al, 2017a;Fraser, 2009;. For the concept leading natural lives, we included the aspects space to move around freely, environment meets natural needs, outdoor access, scratching and dust bathing opportunities, enrichment, and ad lib.…”

Section: Concepts Of Chicken Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Increased public attention to animal welfare, has stimulated farmers to keep chickens in husbandry systems that are potentially beneficial for chicken welfare, for example by offering chickens outdoor access. At the same time people have become increasingly concerned about public health and food safety risks related to livestock farming (Chapter 3, Bergstra et al, 2017a;. Keeping chickens in systems with outdoor access may, however, increase the risks of certain public health and food safety hazards, such as Campylobacter,…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Conflicts between chicken welfare and public health risks in poultry husbandry : stakeholders’ perceptions and moral convictions

Asselt¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different perceptions of issues, such as hen welfare and public health risks, may lead to conflicting perceptions of the best husbandry system for laying hens. Insight into these perceptions may help to address societal concerns about hen husbandry. To this end, perceptions of the best hen husbandry system and the importance of 10 issues of laying hen husbandry were studied in three stakeholder groups in the Netherlands: poultry farmers (n = 100), poultry veterinarians (n = 41) and citizens (n = 2259). Most citizens (73%) perceived an outdoor system as the best system, while most farmers (71%) and veterinarians (93%) perceived an indoor system as the best husbandry system. Citizens perceived the issues 'natural needs of hens' and 'environmentally friendly' as more important and the issues 'hen health', 'farmer income' and 'hens lay many eggs' as less important than did farmers and veterinarians. The issues 'food safety' and 'public health' were perceived important by the three groups. Citizens' preference for a more extensive system was associated with a higher importance of 'hen welfare', 'natural needs of hens' and 'environmentally friendly', and a lower importance of 'hens lay many eggs', 'farmer income' and 'hens lay many eggs'. Being female citizen and experience with animals was associated with the preference for an outdoor system. Moral values may underlie the different perceptions within and between stakeholder groups. Interactive multi-stakeholder design methods, which addresses stakeholders' perceptions and values, seem a suitable way to design husbandry systems which address societal concerns.

show abstract

“…The second and the third statement concerned issues related to the behavioural needs of hens. (Bergstra et al, 2017a;Vanhonacker et al, 2010;.…”

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Concepts Of Chicken Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Concepts Of Chicken Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Conflicts between chicken welfare and public health risks in poultry husbandry : stakeholders’ perceptions and moral convictions

Asselt¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the UK, the pig industry is leading the way in the adoption of WO measures as part of their FAS. Pig production is one of the most intensive livestock industries (Bock and Huik, 2007) and consequently has been the recipient of some negative attitudes, often influenced by how pig farms are portrayed in the media (Bergstra et al, 2017;Ngapo et al, 2004). FAS for UK pig producers are nominally voluntary; however, in reality joining a FAS is a necessity if farmers are to be able to sell their produce through major slaughterhouses and retailers (Carmen et al, 2007;Hubbard, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Would it sell more pork?’ Pig farmers’ perceptions of Real Welfare, the welfare outcome component of their farm assurance scheme

Hockenhull

Main

Mullan

2019

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the UK, the pig industry is leading the way in the adoption of welfare outcome measures as part of their farm assurance scheme. The welfare outcome assessment (WOA), known as Real Welfare, is conducted by the farmers’ own veterinary surgeon. For the first time, this has allowed the pig industry to evaluate welfare by directly assessing the animal itself and to document the welfare of the UK pig industry as a whole. Farmer perspectives of the addition of a welfare outcome assessment to their farm assurance scheme have yet to be explored. Here, we investigate how the introduction of the Real Welfare protocol has been perceived by the farmers involved, what value it has (if any), whether any practical changes on farm have been a direct consequence of Real Welfare and ultimately whether they consider that the welfare of their pigs has been improved by the introduction of the Real Welfare protocol. Semi-structured interviews with 15 English pig farmers were conducted to explore their perceptions and experiences of the Real Welfare process. Our findings fall into three key areas: the lived experience of Real Welfare, on-farm changes resulting from Real Welfare and suggested improvements to the Real Welfare process as it currently stands. In all the three areas, the value farmers placed on the addition of WOA appeared to reflect their veterinary surgeon’s attitude towards the Real Welfare protocol. If the vet was engaged in the process and actively included the farmer, for example through discussion of their findings, the farmers interviewed had a greater appreciation of the benefits of Real Welfare themselves. It is recommended that future similar schemes should work with veterinary surgeons to ensure their understanding and engagement with the process, as well as identifying and promoting how the scheme will practically benefit individual farmers rather than assuming that they will be motivated to engage for the good of the industry alone. Retailers should be encouraged to use Real Welfare as a marketing tool for pig products to enhance the perceived commercial value of this protocol to farmers.

show abstract

Growth, blood, carcass and meat quality traits from local pig breeds and their crosses

Martins

Fialho

Albuquerque

et al. 2020

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contrary to intensive pig production, local pig breeds and their production systems are able to respond to the high criteria and expectations of modern society in regard to some environmental aspects, animal welfare, food quality and healthiness. This study proposes the recovery, study and use of a cross between two local breeds, contributing to animal biodiversity conservation and to the income of local pig producers. This work studied the growth performance and blood, carcass and meat quality traits of Alentejano (AL), Bísaro (BI) and Ribatejano (RI) (AL × BI, BI × AL) castrated male pigs. Raised outdoors, pigs were fed commercial diets ad libitum and killed at ~65 kg (trial 1, n = 10 from each genotype) and ~150 kg BW (trial 2, n = 9 from each genotype). In trial 1, AL and AL × BI attained slaughter weight later than BI and BI × AL pigs, with AL presenting lower average daily gains than the other genotypes (P < 0.001). Alentejano and RI pigs presented higher (P < 0.01) levels of plasma total protein than BI. Overall, carcass traits were affected by genotype, with length (P < 0.01), yield (P = 0.07) and lean cut proportions (P < 0.01) lower in AL than BI, and intermediate values for crossed pigs. Conversely, AL pigs presented higher fat cut proportion (P < 0.01), average backfat thickness (P < 0.001) and ‘zwei punkte’ fat depth (P < 0.01) than BI and RI pigs. Alentejano pigs also presented higher Longissimus lumborum (LL) intramuscular fat (P < 0.05), myoglobin content and ultimate pH (P < 0.01), but lower total collagen (P < 0.05), drip (P < 0.001) and cooking losses (P < 0.01), and shear force (P < 0.001) than all other genotypes. Finally, LL showed a more intense red colour in AL than in BI pigs. In trial 2, AL pigs confirmed to be a slow-growing obese breed with lower bone and lean cut proportions than BI, and higher LL intramuscular fat, richer colour, lower water loss and higher tenderness. In both trials, RI pigs grew faster, with higher lean and lower fat cut proportions and backfat thickness, and with overall LL characteristics comparable to those observed in AL pigs. This work demonstrates some clear differences between AL and BI breeds while showing that their crosses present intermediate characteristics in most studied traits. These data on RI pigs can be useful to breeders’ associations and farmers in order to consider the use of these crosses as an option or complement to pure line breeding.

show abstract

Attitudes of Dutch Citizens toward Sow Husbandry with Regard to Animals, Humans, and the Environment

Cited by 6 publications

References 43 publications

Conflicts between chicken welfare and public health risks in poultry husbandry : stakeholders’ perceptions and moral convictions

Conflicts between chicken welfare and public health risks in poultry husbandry : stakeholders’ perceptions and moral convictions

‘Would it sell more pork?’ Pig farmers’ perceptions of Real Welfare, the welfare outcome component of their farm assurance scheme

Growth, blood, carcass and meat quality traits from local pig breeds and their crosses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About