Welfare of Pigs During Transport and Slaughter

Marchant‐Forde, Jeremy N.; Marchant-Forde, R. M.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-8909-1_10

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 95 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is evidence that pigs highly involved in reciprocal fights have more skin lesions immediately after mixing, but likewise the strong propensity to receive non-reciprocal aggression is susceptible to increase body lesion severity (25). Once established, stable dominance hierarchy among group members can suppress unnecessary fights (52), which are among the most damaging social interactions, and future agonistic interactions are usually limited to single bites, knocks and threats due to the competition for resource access (e.g., feeding, resting area), hunger, discomfort, irritability or frustration (8,53,54). On days 27 and 29, Resident Subdominants gave numerically more non-reciprocal agonistic acts than their Resident counterparts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of long-term welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

Brajon

Ahloy‐Dallaire

Devillers

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mixing gestating sows implies hierarchy formation and has detrimental consequences on welfare. The effects of social stress on the most vulnerable individuals may be underestimated and it is therefore important to evaluate welfare between individuals within groups. This study aimed at investigating the impact of social status and previous experience in the group on well-being of sows housed in large semi-static groups (20 groups of 46-91 animals). We assessed aggression (d0 (mixing), d2, d27, d29), body lesions (d1, d26, d84) and feeding order. Social status was based on the proportion of fights won during a 6-hr observation period between d0 and d2. Dominants (29%) were those who won more fights than they lost, Subdominants (25%) won fewer fights than they lost, Losers (23%) never won any fight in which they were involved while Avoiders (23%) were never involved in fights. Resident sows (70%) were already present in the group in the previous gestation while New sows (30%) were newly introduced at mixing. Subdominants and Dominants were highly involved in fights around mixing but this was more detrimental for Subdominants than Dominants, Losers and Avoiders since they had the highest body lesion scores at mixing. Avoiders received less non-reciprocal agonistic acts than Losers on d2 (P=0.0001) and had the lowest body lesion scores after mixing. However, Avoiders and Losers were more at risk in the long-term since they had the highest body lesions scores at d26 and d84. They were followed by Subdominants and then Dominants. New sows fought more (P<0.0001), tended to be involved in longer fights (P=0.075) around mixing and had more body lesions throughout gestation than Resident sows. Feeding order from one-month post-mixing was influenced both by the previous experience in the group and social status (P<0.0001). New sows, especially with a low social status, are more vulnerable throughout gestation and could serve as indicators of non-optimal conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of long-term welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

Brajon

Ahloy‐Dallaire

Devillers

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the Biological Weapons Convention and Chemical Weapons Convention prohibits all state-parties from acquiring, developing, producing, stockpiling, or retaining biological or chemical weapons. 122 In contrast, Protocol IV on Blinding Laser Weapons prohibits the use of permanently blinding laser weapons, but not their research or development. 123 Multilateral conventions have been successful in regulating these weapons because their use is widely recognized as contrary to the principles of IHL.…”

Section: Multilateral Conventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autonomous Weapons Systems: Taking the Human Out of International Humanitarian Law

Foy¹

2013

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Once confined to science fiction, killer robots will soon be a reality. Both the USA and the UK are currently developing weapons systems that may be capable of autonomously targeting and killing enemy combatants within the next 25 years. According to Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Convention and customary international law, weapons systems must be capable of operating within the principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). This paper will demonstrate that without significant restrictions on the use of autonomous weapons systems (AWS) or the creation of a new legal framework, the use of AWS is problematic. First, there are legitimate concerns that AWS are, by their nature, incapable of adhering to IHL principles. Second, there is a more fundamental problem: the principles of IHL are actually insufficient to address the unique concerns regarding AWS. Finally, the solutions proposed by proponents of AWS do not sufficiently address these concerns. A legal solution beyond the general principles of IHL must be developed.

show abstract

“…International pig production is characterized by increasing herd sizes and changes in the slaughter industry toward fewer and larger units [as discussed by (1)] leading to increasing transportation distances from farm to slaughter. Pig transportation is a multifactorial stressor (2), but until now studies have focused almost exclusively on market weight pigs (3–5).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transportation of Cull Sows—Deterioration of Clinical Condition From Departure and Until Arrival at the Slaughter Plant

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cull sows may be more vulnerable to transportation compared to other swine categories, as they are typically culled after several production cycles, and hence may be injured or weak. Until now, transportation of sows has received very little scientific attention. We aimed to investigate whether the clinical condition of the sows changed during transportation from commercial Danish farms to slaughter plants, and to initiate identification of potential risk factors for such deterioration. This observational study included 522 sows in 47 batches from 12 farms, varying according to transportation time from farm to slaughter plant. Standardized clinical examinations were conducted on-farm and on the slaughter plant. In addition, data on transportation duration, number and duration of stops, temperature during driving, and during waiting before unloading were collected. The sows' median parity was five (range 1–11) and close to 40% were lactating at the day of transportation. The mean duration of transportation was 232 ± 113 min, and the mean temperature in the trucks was 14.1 ± 5.3°C. Half of the clinical variables recorded before and after transportation changed significantly. Among these were injuries (e.g., superficial skin lesions, totally, P < 0.000; front, P < 0.001; wounds, P < 0.001; gait score, P < 0.001), and measures possibly related to heat stress (e.g. skin elasticity, P < 0.001). Three sows arrived in a condition as legally unfit for transport. The deterioration of the sows' condition was mainly related to transportation factors, such as temperature and duration—often in interaction—as well as duration of stops during the journey and while waiting before unloading. The changes in clinical condition were less dependent on the pre-transportation clinical condition of the sows, such as parity, body condition score and gait score. The results show that the clinical condition of the cull sows deteriorated from farm to slaughter plant, thereby adding data to the debate on fitness for transport of cull sows. The main risk factors were not related to characteristics of the sows, but of the journeys. Future studies should focus on identifying and distinguishing between risk factors in order to develop procedures that allow transportation of cull sows to slaughter without jeopardizing their welfare.

show abstract

Welfare of Pigs During Transport and Slaughter

Cited by 11 publications

References 95 publications

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of long-term welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of long-term welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

Autonomous Weapons Systems: Taking the Human Out of International Humanitarian Law

Transportation of Cull Sows—Deterioration of Clinical Condition From Departure and Until Arrival at the Slaughter Plant

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About