Facts and Fallacies...

Publicity generated in the media revealing the suffering of hundreds of thousands of female pigs in factory farms has put extreme pressure on the pig industry representative body Australian Pork Limited (APL).

Animals Australia has been following APL’s media comments with interest. We have noted what APL has been saying, and what they are deliberately not saying, when defending cruel industry practices.

Following is a review of APL’s media comments. Animals Australia provides a response to each comment, as well as the independent opinions of researchers and scientists enabling members of the community to determine was is fact and what is fallacy – and a desperate industry trying to justify practices that have been proven to cause endemic suffering.

Australian Pork Ltd’s (APL) Chief Executive Andrew Spencer on ABC 29/10/06 on the motivation of farmers:

"The things that the animal extremists don't like about our industry are actually, in many cases, things that are put in place in the production systems to ensure that the animals are looked after well," he said.
"This is really the motivation of the pig farmer, he has to have productive animals.

What APL’s Andrew Spencer didn’t say:

The alliance funding the public awareness campaign - Animals Australia, Voiceless, The Berg Family Foundation and Hunter Hall International Ltd are not animal extremists. We represent ordinary Australians who care about the welfare of animals. Thankfully, compassion and kindness are yet to be considered ‘extreme’ sentiments to anyone but those involved in cruel animal industries!

Current pig ‘production’ systems fail to allow pigs to be pigs. This is in itself cruel. Severe confinement of the mother pigs and boars denies them all of their behavioural and physical needs. This production system is about maximizing profit – not animal welfare.

‘Productive’ animals? More than half of all commercial breeding sows die or are sent off to slaughter each year due to lameness, illness or failure to become pregnant. On average they will be only 2-3 years old – healthy robust pigs should live to around 10 years of age.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APL’s Chief Executive Andrew Spencer on ABC 29/10/06 on the welfare expertise of farmers:

"He [the farmer] is the expert on welfare, he has to deliver it every single day."

What Andrew Spencer didn’t say:

‘Experts’ on animal welfare recognise that exercise and freedom to perform natural behaviours are intrinsic to the welfare of animals – yet the current factory farming norm is to house breeding pigs in barren and severe indoor confinement.

Producers are motivated by ‘productivity’. The ‘factory farming’ of pigs occurs to reduce the space (and building costs) allotted to each pig, and the metal bars that confine the pigs negate the need for skilled staff – again reducing costs.

Independent position

The UK government (not extremists) has banned sow stalls based on scientific evidence of suffering. Similarly after an extensive review of the welfare implications of sow stalls by the highly respected and independent European Union Scientific Veterinary Committee, the EU is to phase out sow stalls on welfare grounds.

Mutilations carried out on piglets (tail docking, ear notching, teeth clipping, and sometimes castration of males) in the first few days of their lives cause severe pain. For example, teeth clipping of piglets, using clippers, is common and ‘…it is likely that tooth resection induces severe pain in piglets. … the pain probably lasts at least up until the fiftieth day of life, when they lose their lacteal teeth’ [Animal Welfare Journal (V 13, Issue 1) February 2004]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APL’s John Lamont defending sow stalls in The Age online

“Pigs become aggressive during pregnancy, with high levels of fighting and bullying resulting in severe injuries, more miscarriages, lower nutrition and in some cases animals being bullied to death.”

What Australian Pork Limited’s John Lamont didn’t say …

That these behavioural issues all result from keeping pregnant animals en masse in a factory environment to maximise profits. That sow stalls have been banned in the UK on welfare grounds and have been condemned by respected international scientists. That humans and animals if tightly confined together in an inappropriate space will fight and bully each other through frustration.

Expert Independent opinion

Professor Donald Broom, Professor of Animal Welfare at the University of Cambridge UK, Chairman of the EU Scientific Veterinary Committee:

“Stalls do not allow the sow to turn around or to lie safely in a comfortable position. Many of the needs of pigs are not provided for in stalls. The scientific evidence for poor welfare in all sows kept in stalls is explained at length in the report of the European Union Scientific Veterinary Committee (http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/oldcomm4/out17_en.html ). Many scientific papers present this evidence. Sow stalls are now illegal in the UK because they cause poor welfare in animals kept in them.”

Professor David Mellor, Director of the Animal Welfare Science and Behaviour Centre Massey University New Zealand:

“When confined in stalls, sows are only able to stand up and sit or lie down. The environment is barren (as is generally seen in the other parts of the production system) and this, plus an inability to exert any control over this environment, results in boredom and frustration and often abnormal behaviour. Dry sow stalls are an unrewarding environment for sows..”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APL’s John Lamont on ABC Radio 5/12/05 suggesting that it would be cruel to leave pigs to roam in paddocks..

"In a country like Australia with our climatic conditions, pigs like humans do get sunburnt and will suffer from skin cancer," he said.

And APL’s John Lamont in The Age, Online, 5/12/05

"Only three to five per cent of Australia's land mass is suitable for free range production," APL spokesman John Lamont said.

What Australian Pork Limited’s John Lamont didn’t say…

That pigs are currently successfully being free-range farmed in Australia and that these farmers avoid sunburn issues through breeding suitable pigs with pigmented skin as well as providing wallows and shelter.

That in Western Australia the Great Southern Piggery, has the largest outdoor herd in the world. The farm uses a combination of open range and straw-based shelters. The sows wean 20 piglets a year, have no lameness problems and fewer farrowing problems [ABC Landline March 1998].

That the industry putting forward a ‘welfare’ argument is a strategic (and ironic) ploy to avoid discussing the real welfare issues of factory-farmed pigs whose natural existence is to live outdoors, instead of intensively confined in tiny individual pens, unable to exercise, unable to perform natural behaviour, denied mental and emotional stimulation plus suffering lameness and sores through standing or lying on hard floors.

Independent research conclusions

Recent scientific studies recommend free range pig breeding units be in regions with a temperate climate (Barnett, Hemsworth, Cronin, Jongman, Hutson. ‘A review of the welfare issues for sows and piglets in relation to housing’, Aust. J. Agric. Res., 2001, 52, 1-28). Large areas of southern Australia have climates where temperatures rarely exceed 30 degrees C (ref. Bureau of Meterology Temperature map).

The use of shelters, mud wallows and fogger systems reduce core temperatures of the free-range pigs and enable them to ‘perform very well’ even in summer temperatures exceeding 35 degrees C (Glatz and Ru, ‘Developing Free-range Animal Production Systems’ December 2004 – Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation RIRDC Publication No 04/058).

In Tasmania the temperate climate is ideally suited to extensive pig farming [Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, Tasmania, industry profile], and ‘Experience in Tasmania with free-range pigs, compared with the intensive production system, suggests no additional health problems, particularly with regard to pneumonia. In fact, free range pigs have a reputation for robustness and ease of adaptation to new environments’ [from Glatz and Ru 2004].

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Lamont (APL) on ABC Radio 5/12/2005 on free-range piggeries:

“Piggery waste can leach through different soil types into the water table, equally it can run off into water courses”

What Australian Pork Limited’s John Lamont didn’t say ..

That intensive animal systems world-wide are a primary factor of concern of environmentalists through effluent, water usage and odour emissions.

Independent research

Rather than an environmental negative, moving to less intensive outdoor farming of pigs means that the lower volume per hectare of waste produced can contribute (harmlessly) to soil fertility and, managed correctly, free range pigs can assist weed control in cropping areas (see Glatz and Ru, RIRDC report Developing Free-range Animal Production Systems 2004). Conversely, the output of the large intensive piggeries involves massive amounts of water and energy in special treatment plants and ponding systems. For example, a piggery of 15,000 pigs puts out effluent the equivalent of a town of 50,000 people. (see Case Study Berrybank Piggery Victoria – Australian Centre of Cleaner Production, 1998)

Intensive agricultural developments such as major piggeries are emitting significant air pollutants that can affect the amenity and health of nearby communities. (see Predicting Community Response and Potential Health Issue in the Australian Context for Major Piggeries and other Similar Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations – Katestone Environmental 2002)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APL’s John Lamont in The Age online 5/12/05 on the launching by Voiceless of a comprehensive report on intensive pig farming ‘From Paddocks to Prison’

Australian Pork Ltd has slammed the report as the work of an "extremist group" that represents "a menace to society". "They seek to establish themselves as messiahs of public conscience, in circumstances where their lack of knowledge about their chosen cause means they should be regarded as nothing more than false prophets," APL spokesman, John Lamont, said. "The actions of extremist groups, like Voiceless, in peddling this information in schools under the banner of being educational is something parents and educators should be concerned with. Groups such as these prey upon the ignorance of city kids with no real connection to the land filling their heads with
nonsense. This is not education. It's a brainwashing exercise."

What APL and John Lamont didn’t say …

That it is a deliberate ploy every time they speak to the media, to call animal groups concerned about industry practices ‘extremists’ and ‘radicals’ to try and marginalise their views. That the ‘Paddocks to Prison’ report is completely referenced and compiled from scientific research and endorsed by the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA), the Humane Society International (HSI), Compassion in World Farming (CIWF) and Animals Australia who together represent millions of individuals who care about animal welfare world-wide.

That APL’s attempts to discredit Voiceless and other groups are based on concerns that industry practices such as sow stalls and farrowing crates are being revealed to consumers. That concern is exemplified by the fact that not a single photograph showing the confinement that breeding animals endure is on APL’s website.

That whilst they try to confuse the community through using terms such as animal ‘rights’, they are in fact trying to deflect attention from obvious ‘animal wrongs’.

Independent position

The UK government (not radical extremists) has banned sow stalls based on scientific evidence of suffering. Similarly after an extensive review of the welfare implications of sow stalls by the highly respected and independent European Union Scientific Veterinary Committee, the EU is to phase out sow stalls on welfare grounds.

Click here to read Voiceless' 'From Paddocks to Prisons' report (PDF)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Australian Pork Limited on ABC TV 5/12/05

Free range pigs may ingest worms that can be transmitted to humans.

What APL didn’t say …

That they are so concerned about their intensive farming practices being exposed that they are resorting to unfounded health ‘scare tactics’. That if consumers could see the conditions that pigs endure in factory farms - often forced to lie or stand in their own excrement – that consumers would have a whole new view on APL’s ‘Tender, juicy pork’ promotion.

Independent Position

Free range pigs have been shown in studies to be healthier than indoor pigs and have fewer respiratory problems (as cited in Barnett, Hemsworth, Cronin, Jongman, Hutson. ‘A review of the welfare issues for sows and piglets in relation to housing’, Aust. J. Agric. Res., 2001, 52, 1-28), and to be calmer and less likely to be suceptible to stress (as cited in Glatz and Ru, ‘Developing Free-range Animal Production Systems’ December 2004 - RIRDC Publication No 04/058).

Low stocking densities, rotation and spelling of pig grazing areas, particularly with alternating crops will control gastrointestinal parasites - similar to such control in sheep and cattle (Glatz and Ru RIRDC report 2004).

Heard enough? Take Action!