scholarly journals Introduction

Author(s):  
Claas Kirchhelle

AbstractThis chapter introduces readers to the animal welfare campaigner Ruth Harrison. It highlights her importance for the development of farm animal welfare and discusses the usefulness of a biographic approach to analyse the wider evolution of twentieth-century welfare activism, politics, and science. It also examines the reasons underlying the relative neglect of Harrison and her long-term campaigning career in existing scholarship.

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah J. J. Adcock

Farm animals routinely undergo painful husbandry procedures early in life, including disbudding and castration in calves and goat kids, tail docking and castration in piglets and lambs, and beak trimming in chicks. In rodents, inflammatory events soon after birth, when physiological systems are developing and sensitive to perturbation, can profoundly alter phenotypic outcomes later in life. This review summarizes the current state of research on long-term phenotypic consequences of neonatal painful procedures in rodents and farm animals, and discusses the implications for farm animal welfare. Rodents exposed to early life inflammation show a hypo-/hyper-responsive profile to pain-, fear-, and anxiety-inducing stimuli, manifesting as an initial attenuation in responses that transitions into hyperresponsivity with increasing age or cumulative stress. Neonatal inflammation also predisposes rodents to cognitive, social, and reproductive deficits, and there is some evidence that adverse effects may be passed to offspring. The outcomes of neonatal inflammation are modulated by injury etiology, age at the time of injury and time of testing, sex, pain management, and rearing environment. Equivalent research examining long-term phenotypic consequences of early life painful procedures in farm animals is greatly lacking, despite obvious implications for welfare and performance. Improved understanding of how these procedures shape phenotypes will inform efforts to mitigate negative outcomes through reduction, replacement, and refinement of current practices.


2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J. Austin ◽  
Ian J. Deary ◽  
Gareth Edwards-Jones ◽  
Dale Arey

2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 1081-1093 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Jones ◽  
Joop Lensink ◽  
Maria Cecilia Mancini ◽  
Richard Tranter

2001 ◽  
Vol 51 (sup030) ◽  
pp. 17-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc B. M. Bracke ◽  
Jos H. M. Metz ◽  
Berry M. Spruijt

Agriculture ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 104
Author(s):  
Jill N. Fernandes ◽  
Paul H. Hemsworth ◽  
Grahame J. Coleman ◽  
Alan J. Tilbrook

It costs money to improve the welfare of farm animals. For people with animals under their care, there are many factors to consider regarding changes in practice to improve welfare, and the optimal course of action is not always obvious. Decision support systems for animal welfare, such as economic cost–benefit analyses, are lacking. This review attempts to provide clarity around the costs and benefits of improving farm animal welfare, thereby enabling the people with animals under their care to make informed decisions. Many of the costs are obvious. For example, training of stockpeople, reconfiguration of pens, and administration of pain relief can improve welfare, and all incur costs. Other costs are less obvious. For instance, there may be substantial risks to market protection, consumer acceptance, and social licence to farm associated with not ensuring good animal welfare. The benefits of improving farm animal welfare are also difficult to evaluate from a purely economic perspective. Although it is widely recognised that animals with poor welfare are unlikely to produce at optimal levels, there may be benefits of improving animal welfare that extend beyond production gains. These include benefits to the animal, positive effects on the workforce, competitive advantage for businesses, mitigation of risk, and positive social consequences. We summarise these considerations into a decision tool that can assist people with farm animals under their care, and we highlight the need for further empirical evidence to improve decision-making in animal welfare.


2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 401-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
G Illmann ◽  
L Keeling ◽  
M Melišová ◽  
M Šimečková ◽  
V Ilieski ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document