Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:48:22.132Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Current developments in pig welfare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

S.A. Edwards
S.A. Edwards*
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK
Get access

Extract

Public concern about the welfare of farm animals has resulted in an increasing body of legislation regulating livestock production systems. In 2003, the UK implemented two new EU Directives on Pig Welfare (Directives 2001/93/EC and 2001/99/EC), and issued revised Welfare Codes for Pigs. New Council of Europe Recommendations are also at the consultation stage. The welfare issues highlighted for current consideration within the pig sector include space allowance and floor type, environmental enrichment, tail docking, weaning age and the use of the farrowing crate. With present scientific and practical knowledge, not all of these issues have a simple resolution. From an industry perspective, the major welfare issue is the level of endemic disease and, in particular, the dramatic influence of PMWS. There are also concerns regarding potential conflicts between the different policy objectives of animal welfare, environmental protection, food safety, staff health and safety, and financial sustainability that will need to be resolved.

Type
Section 4: Dealing with the inevitable
Information
BSAP Occasional Publication , Volume 31: The Appliance of Pig Science , 2004 , pp. 101 - 115
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Production 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boon, C.R. 1981. The effect of departures from lower critical temperature on the group postural behaviour of pigs. Animal Production 33: 71–79.Google Scholar
Boon, C.R. 1982. The effect of air speed changes on the group postural behaviour of pigs. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 27: 71–79.Google Scholar
Breuer, K., Kay, R.M., Demmers, T.G.M. and Day, J.E.L. 2004. The effect of floor type on ammonia emissions, health, welfare and behaviour of growing pigs. In: The Appliance of Pig Science. Proceedings of an Occasional Meeting of the British Society of Animal Science, Nottingham, 9-10 September 2003. In press.Google Scholar
Breuer, K.B., Sutcliffe, M.E.M., Mercer, J.T., Rance, K.A., O’Connell, N.E., Sneddon, I.A. and Edwards, S.A. 2003. An estimate of heritability of clinical tail biting on a commercial pig breeding farm. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, Winter Meeting 2003. p 138.Google Scholar
Curtis, J. and Bourne, F.J. 1973. Half lives of immunoglobulins IgG, IgA and IgM in the serum of new–born pigs. Immunology 24: 147-155.Google Scholar
Day, J.E.L., Spoolder, H.A.M. and Edwards, S.A. 2001. Straw as environmental enrichment: which properties to growing pigs find behaviourally rewarding. In: Animal Welfare Considerations in Livestock Housing Systems, Proceedings of an International Symposium of the CIGR 2nd Technical Section, Szklarska Poreba, Poland. pp 157-166.Google Scholar
Day, J.E.L., Burfoot, A., Docking, C.M., Whittaker, X., Spoolder, H.A.M. and Edwards, S.A. 2002. The effects of prior experience of straw and depth of straw bedding on the behaviour of growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 76: 189-202.Google Scholar
de Passille, A.M.B., Pelletier, G., Menard, J. and Morisset, J. 1989. Relationships of weight gain and behaviour to digestive organ weight and enzyme activities in piglets. Journal of Animal Science 67: 2921–2929.Google Scholar
Docking, C., Van de Weerd, H.A., Day, J.E.L. and Edwards, S.A. 2003. Do pigs of different ages synchronise their behaviour in enriched pens? Proceedings of the 37th International Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology, 24-28 June, Abano Terme, Italy. p112.Google Scholar
Edwards, S A. 2002. Perinatal mortality in the pig: environmental or physiological solutions? Livestock Production Science 78: 3-12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, S.A., Armsby, A.W. and Spechter, H.H. 1988. Effects of floor area allowance on performance of young growing pigs kept on fully slatted floors. Animal Production 46: 453–459.Google Scholar
Edwards, S.A. and Fraser, D. 1997. Housing systems for farrowing and lactation. The Pig Journal 39: 77–89.Google Scholar
Edwards, S.A. and Rooke, J.A. 1999. Effects of management during the suckling period on post weaning performance of pigs. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the European Association of Animal Production, Zurich, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Ekkel, E.D., Spoolder, H.A.M, Hulsegge, I. and Hopster, H. 2003. Lying characteristics as determinants for space requirements in pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 80: 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAWC. 1992. Five Freedoms. Farm Animal Welfare Council, Tolworth.Google Scholar
Feddes, J.J.R., and Fraser, D. 1994. Non–nutritive chewing by pigs: implications for tail–biting and behavioural enrichment. Transaction of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 37: 947–950.Google Scholar
Fraser, D. 1987. Mineral–deficient diets and the pig's attraction to blood: implications for tail–biting. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 67: 909–918 Google Scholar
Fraser, D., Bernon, D.E. and Ball, R.O. 1991. Enhanced attraction to blood by pigs with adequate dietary protein supplementation. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 71: 61-619Google Scholar
Gonyou, H.W., Beltranena, E., Whittington, D.L. and Patience, J.F. 1998. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 78: 517–523.Google Scholar
Hemsworth, P.H., Barnett, J.L. and Coleman, G.J. 1993. The humananimal relationship in agriculture and its consequences for the animal. Animal Welfare 2: 33–51.Google Scholar
Hunter, E.J., Jones, T.A., Guise, H.J., Penny, R.H.C. and Hoste, S. 1999. Tail biting in pigs 1: The prevalence at six UK abattoirs and the relationship of tail biting with docking, sex and other carcass damage. The Pig Journal 43: 18–32.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S., Calvert, S.K., Stevenson, J., van Leeuwen, N. and Lawrence, A.B. 2002. Pituitary–adrenal activation in pre–parturient pigs (Sus scrofa) is associated with behavioural restriction due to lack of space rather than nesting substrate. Animal Welfare 11: 371– 384.Google Scholar
P., Jensen 1995. The weaning process of free–ranging domestic pigs. Ethology 100: 14–25.Google Scholar
Lawrence, A.B., Petherick, J.C., McLean, K.A., Deans, L.A., Chirnside, J., Vaughan, A., Clutton, E. and Terlouw, E.M.C. 1994. The effect of environment on behaviour, plasma cortisol and prolactin in parturient sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 313– 330.Google Scholar
Leenhouwers, J.L., de Almeida, C.A., Knol, E.F. and van der Lende, T. 2001. Progress of farrowing and early postnatal pig behaviour in relation to genetic merit for pig survival. Journal of Animal Science 79: 1416–1422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGlone, J.J. and Newby, B.E. 1994. Space requirements for finishing pigs in confinement: behaviour and performance while group size and space vary. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 331–338.Google Scholar
McIntyre, J. and S.A., Edwards 2002a. Preference for blood and behavioural measurements of known tail biting pigs compared to control penmates. Proceedings of the 36th International Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology, p93.Google Scholar
McIntyre, J, and Edwards, S A. 2002b. An investigation into the effect of different protein and energy intakes on model tail chewing behaviour of growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 77: 93–104.Google Scholar
McIntyre, J, and Edwards, S A. 2002c. An investigation into the effect of tryptophan on tail chewing behaviour of growing pigs. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, p 34.Google Scholar
Moinard, C., Mendl, M., Nicol, C.J. and Green, L.J. 2003. A case control study of on–farm risk factors for tail biting in pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81: 333–335.Google Scholar
National Committee for Pig Production. 2002. Annual Report, Danske Slagterier, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
J.C., Petherick 1983. A biological basis for the design of space in livestock housing. In: Farm animal housing and welfare. Eds. S.H. Baxter, M.R. Baxter and J.A.C. MacCormack. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp 103–120.Google Scholar
Ruiterkamp, W. A. 1985. Het gedrag van mestvarkens in relatie tot huisvesting. [The behaviour of grower pigs in relation to housing systems]. PhD Thesis, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Schroder–Petersen, D.L. and Simonsen, H.B. 2001. Tail biting in pigs. The Veterinary Journal 162: 196–210.Google Scholar
Scott, K., Armstrong, D., Chennells, D.J., Eckersall, P.D., Gill, B.P., B., Hunt, Taylor, L. and Edwards, S.A. 2004. The welfare of finishing pigs under different housing and feeding systems: 1. liquid versus dry feeding in fully–slatted and straw–bedded housing. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, Winter Meeting 2004, in pressGoogle Scholar
Segales, J. and Domingo, M. 2002. Postweaning Multisystemic Wasting Syndrome (PMWS) in pigs. A review Veterinary Quarterly 24: 109–124.Google Scholar
Spoolder, H.A.M., Edwards, S.A. and Corning, S. 2000. Legislative methods for specifying stocking density and consequences for the welfare of finishing pigs. Livestock Production Science 64: 167–173.Google Scholar
Turner, S.P., Ewen, M., Rooke, J.A. and Edwards, S.A. 2000. The effect of space allowance on performance, aggression and immune competence of growing pigs housed on straw deeplitter at different group sizes. Livestock Production Science 66: 47–55.Google Scholar
Van Arendonk, J.A.M., van Rosmeulen, C., Janss, L.L.G. and Knol, E.F. 1996. Estimation of direct and maternal genetic (co)variances for survival within litters of piglets. Livestock Production Science 46: 163–171.Google Scholar
Van de Weerd, H.A., Docking, C.M., Day, J.E.L., Avery, P.J. and Edwards, S.A. 2003. A systematic approach towards developing environmental enrichment for pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 84: 101–118.Google Scholar
Van de Weerd, H.A., Docking, C., Day, J.E.L., Breuer, K. and Edwards, S.A. 2004. Longitudinal study of adverse behaviour of undocked pigs in two different housing systems. In: The Appliance of Pig Science. Proceedings of an Occasional Meeting of the British Society of Animal Science, Nottingham, 9-10 September 2003. In press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vega–López, M.A., Bailey, M., Telemo, E. and Stokes, C.R. 1995. Effect of early weaning on the development of immune cells in the pig small intestine. Veterinary Immunology and Pathology 44: 319–327.Google Scholar
White, K.R., Anderson, D.M. and Bate, L.A. 1996. Increasing piglet survival through an improved farrowing management protocol. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 76: 491–495.Google Scholar
Young, R.J., Carruthers, J. and Lawrence, A.B. 1994. The effect of a foraging device (The ‘Edinburgh Foodball’) on the behaviour of pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 237–247.Google Scholar
Zonderland, J.J., Vermeer, H.M., Ter Avest, A., Vereijken, P.F.G. and Spoolder, H.A.M. 2001. Measuring a pig's preference for suspended toys by using an automated recording technique. In: Animal Welfare Considerations in Livestock Housing Systems, Proceedings of an International Symposium of the CIGR 2nd Technical Section, Szklarska Poreba, Poland. pp 147-156.Google Scholar