scholarly journals The Priority of Suffering Over Life. How to Accommodate Animal Welfare and Religious Slaughter

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 162-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Zuolo
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Religious Pluralism ◽  
Animal Suffering ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Animal Life ◽  
Livestock Farming ◽  
Competing Interests ◽  
Good Compromise ◽  
Religious Slaughter

Most contemporary Western laws regarding the treatment of animals in livestock farming and animal slaughter are primarily concerned with the principle that animal suffering during slaughter should be minimized, but that animal life may be taken for legitimate human purposes. This principle seems to be widely shared, intuitively appealing and capable of striking a good compromise between competing interests. But is this principle consistent? And how can it be normatively grounded? In this paper I discuss critically this principle (the priority of the minimization of animal suffering over animals’ right to life). I argue that this principle can be justified on the ground of respect for the value commitment toward animal welfare, which is held by many people. The advantage of this perspective is its inclusiveness: it can justify without contradiction the principle at stake and allow for the admissibility of religious slaughter while promoting animals’ interest in not suffering. This justification also has the advantage of being compatible with the cultural and religious pluralism of contemporary societies.

scholarly journals Precision Technologies to Address Dairy Cattle Welfare: Focus on Lameness, Mastitis and Body Condition

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 2253
Author(s):  
Severiano R. Silva ◽  
José P. Araujo ◽  
Cristina Guedes ◽  
Flávio Silva ◽  
Mariana Almeida ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Body Condition ◽  
Farm Animals ◽  
Economic Sustainability ◽  
Farm Animal Welfare ◽  
Livestock Farming ◽  
Technological Support ◽  
Technological Tools ◽  
Cow Welfare ◽  
Time Assessment

Specific animal-based indicators that can be used to predict animal welfare have been the core of protocols for assessing the welfare of farm animals, such as those produced by the Welfare Quality project. At the same time, the contribution of technological tools for the accurate and real-time assessment of farm animal welfare is also evident. The solutions based on technological tools fit into the precision livestock farming (PLF) concept, which has improved productivity, economic sustainability, and animal welfare in dairy farms. PLF has been adopted recently; nevertheless, the need for technological support on farms is getting more and more attention and has translated into significant scientific contributions in various fields of the dairy industry, but with an emphasis on the health and welfare of the cows. This review aims to present the recent advances of PLF in dairy cow welfare, particularly in the assessment of lameness, mastitis, and body condition, which are among the most relevant animal-based indications for the welfare of cows. Finally, a discussion is presented on the possibility of integrating the information obtained by PLF into a welfare assessment framework.

Political conservatism and the exploitation of nonhuman animals: An application of system justification theory

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 858-878 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark R. Hoffarth ◽  
Flávio Azevedo ◽  
John T. Jost
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Economic System ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Animal Suffering ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
Political Conservatism ◽  
Welfare Attitudes

Many people in Western societies tolerate the mistreatment of nonhuman animals, despite obvious ethical concerns about the injustice of animal suffering and exploitation. In three studies, we applied system justification theory to examine the ideological basis of human–animal relations. In Studies 1a and 1b, we showed in both a large convenience sample ( N = 2,119) and a nationally representative sample in the US ( N = 1,500) that economic system justification uniquely explained the relationship between political conservatism and animal welfare attitudes even after adjusting for social dominance orientation. In Study 2, we replicated and extended these findings using more elaborate measures of animal welfare attitudes in the context of an MTurk sample of U.S. respondents ( N = 395). Specifically, we found that conservatism was associated with less support for animal welfare and greater endorsement of speciesism (the belief that humans are morally superior to nonhuman animals) and that individual differences in economic system justification mediated these associations. We discuss several ways in which system justification theory may inform interventions designed to promote support for animal welfare in society at large.

scholarly journals Grooming Device Effects on Behaviour and Welfare of Japanese Black Fattening Cattle

Animals ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shigeru Ninomiya
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Environmental Enrichment ◽  
Carcass Weight ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Time Budgets ◽  
Livestock Farming ◽  
Exact Probability ◽  
Z Value ◽  
Mean Time

In livestock farming, a stark or barren environment compromises animal welfare. Environmental enrichment has been used to address the issue. For this study, after fattening cattle were provided with a grooming device (a brush), its effect on animal self-grooming and welfare were investigated. For Research trial 1 and 2, respectively, 28 and 11 Japanese Black steers were observed. Three or four of the animals were group-housed in a pen. For Trial 1, half of the animals were provided with a brush. The animals’ behaviour, carcass weight, and Viscera disease were recorded. Enrichment animals (E) performed self-grooming and scratching of the animals’ body on the brush and pen structures more than control animals (C) did (mean time budgets, 3.34% (SD = 2.48) in E and 0.89% (SD = 0.81) in C, GLMM, z value = 8.28, p < 0.001). The number of animals in which viscera disease was detected after slaughter was lower in E than in C (E = 0, C = 4, a Fisher’s exact probability test, p = 0.03). In Trial 2, brush use behaviour was observed continuously for 72 h. The observation revealed that the animals scratched various body parts on the brush. Results show that providing a brush as environmental enrichment improves welfare by satisfying the motivation of fattening cattle to perform self-grooming.

scholarly journals Organic Livestock Production: A Bibliometric Review

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 618
Author(s):  
Carmen L. Manuelian ◽  
Mauro Penasa ◽  
Luciana da Costa ◽  
Sara Burbi ◽  
Federico Righi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Animal Health ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Livestock Production ◽  
Annual Growth Rate ◽  
Livestock Farming ◽  
Bibliometric Review ◽  
Main Production ◽  
Organic Livestock Production

Due to the increasing interest in organic farming, an overview of this research area is provided through a bibliometric analysis conducted between April and May 2019. A total of 320 documents were published up until 2018 on organic livestock farming, with an annual growth rate of 9.33% and a clear increase since 2005; 268 documents have been published in 111 journals. Germany is the country with the largest number of published papers (56 documents). Authors’ top keywords (excluding keywords used for running the search) included: animal welfare (29 times), animal health (22 times), cattle (15 times), grazing (10 times), and sheep (10 times). This could indicate that more research has been done on cattle because of the importance of this species in Germany. Moreover, the prevalence of the terms ‘animal welfare’ and ‘animal health’ may indicate that the research on organic livestock production has been focused on these two areas. The bibliometric analysis indicates that: (i) countries focused the organic livestock production research on their main production, and (ii) more research in species other than cattle and sheep is needed.

scholarly journals Towards Facial Expression Recognition for On-Farm Welfare Assessment in Pigs

Agriculture ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 847
Author(s):  
Mark F. Hansen ◽  
Emma M. Baxter ◽  
Kenneth M. D. Rutherford ◽  
Agnieszka Futro ◽  
Melvyn L. Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Husbandry ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Automated System ◽  
Expression Recognition ◽  
Livestock Farming ◽  
Precision Livestock Farming ◽  
Innovative Work ◽  
Leave One Out ◽  
On Farm

Animal welfare is not only an ethically important consideration in good animal husbandry but can also have a significant effect on an animal’s productivity. The aim of this paper was to show that a reduction in animal welfare, in the form of increased stress, can be identified in pigs from frontal images of the animals. We trained a convolutional neural network (CNN) using a leave-one-out design and showed that it is able to discriminate between stressed and unstressed pigs with an accuracy of >90% in unseen animals. Grad-CAM was used to identify the animal regions used, and these supported those used in manual assessments such as the Pig Grimace Scale. This innovative work paves the way for further work examining both positive and negative welfare states with the aim of developing an automated system that can be used in precision livestock farming to improve animal welfare.

scholarly journals A Systematic Review on Validated Precision Livestock Farming Technologies for Pig Production and Its Potential to Assess Animal Welfare

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaneth Gómez ◽  
Anna H. Stygar ◽  
Iris J. M. M. Boumans ◽  
Eddie A. M. Bokkers ◽  
Lene J. Pedersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Radio Frequency Identification ◽  
Livestock Farming ◽  
Pig Production ◽  
Precision Livestock Farming ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
System Building ◽  
Load Cells ◽  
Thermal Cameras

Several precision livestock farming (PLF) technologies, conceived for optimizing farming processes, are developed to detect the physical and behavioral changes of animals continuously and in real-time. The aim of this review was to explore the capacity of existing PLF technologies to contribute to the assessment of pig welfare. In a web search for commercially available PLF for pigs, 83 technologies were identified. A literature search was conducted, following systematic review guidelines (PRISMA), to identify studies on the validation of sensor technologies for assessing animal-based welfare indicators. Two validation levels were defined: internal (evaluation during system building within the same population that were used for system building) and external (evaluation on a different population than during system building). From 2,463 articles found, 111 were selected, which validated some PLF that could be applied to the assessment of animal-based welfare indicators of pigs (7% classified as external, and 93% as internal validation). From our list of commercially available PLF technologies, only 5% had been externally validated. The more often validated technologies were vision-based solutions (n = 45), followed by load-cells (n = 28; feeders and drinkers, force plates and scales), accelerometers (n = 14) and microphones (n = 14), thermal cameras (n = 10), photoelectric sensors (n = 5), radio-frequency identification (RFID) for tracking (n = 2), infrared thermometers (n = 1), and pyrometer (n = 1). Externally validated technologies were photoelectric sensors (n = 2), thermal cameras (n = 2), microphone (n = 1), load-cells (n = 1), RFID (n = 1), and pyrometer (n = 1). Measured traits included activity and posture-related behavior, feeding and drinking, other behavior, physical condition, and health. In conclusion, existing PLF technologies are potential tools for on-farm animal welfare assessment in pig production. However, validation studies are lacking for an important percentage of market available tools, and in particular research and development need to focus on identifying the feature candidates of the measures (e.g., deviations from diurnal pattern, threshold levels) that are valid signals of either negative or positive animal welfare. An important gap identified are the lack of technologies to assess affective states (both positive and negative states).

scholarly journals Does Smart Farming Improve or Damage Animal Welfare? Technology and What Animals Want

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marian Stamp Dawkins
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Critical Factor ◽  
Farming Systems ◽  
Good Health ◽  
Computer Algorithms ◽  
Livestock Farming ◽  
Common View ◽  
The Public ◽  
Smart Farming

“Smart” or “precision” farming has revolutionized crop agriculture but its application to livestock farming has raised ethical concerns because of its possible adverse effects on animal welfare. With rising public concern for animal welfare across the world, some people see the efficiency gains offered by the new technology as a direct threat to the animals themselves, allowing producers to get “more for less” in the interests of profit. Others see major welfare advantages through life-long health monitoring, delivery of individual care and optimization of environmental conditions. The answer to the question of whether smart farming improves or damages animal welfare is likely to depend on three main factors. Firstly, much will depend on how welfare is defined and the extent to which politicians, scientists, farmers and members of the public can agree on what welfare means and so come to a common view on how to judge how it is impacted by technology. Defining welfare as a combination of good health and what the animals themselves want provides a unifying and animal-centered way forward. It can also be directly adapted for computer recognition of welfare. A second critical factor will be whether high welfare standards are made a priority within smart farming systems. To achieve this, it will be necessary both to develop computer algorithms that can recognize welfare to the satisfaction of both the public and farmers and also to build good welfare into the control and decision-making of smart systems. What will matter most in the end, however, is a third factor, which is whether smart farming can actually deliver its promised improvements in animal welfare when applied in the real world. An ethical evaluation will only be possible when the new technologies are more widely deployed on commercial farms and their full social, environmental, financial and welfare implications become apparent.

A Proper Death

2018 ◽  
pp. 159-174
Author(s):  
Nicole Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Animal Life ◽  
Modern Times ◽  
Animal Trials ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Natural Life

In The Death Penalty I, Derrida elucidates Kant’s support of the death penalty as that which “marks the access to what is proper to man and to the dignity of reason or of human logos and nomos.” “Man” is distinguished from animals/the beast, precisely because “man … is a subject of the law who raises himself above natural life.” This law is based on rationality, reason, ethics, right to life, and thus to forgiveness and the right to burial. In modern times the animal is not subject to the same law, and therefore the death penalty not only marks what is “proper to man,” but also frames human and animal life in particular ways. This essay examines the medieval practice of animal trials in order to push back against anthropocentric conceptions of the death penalty and to explore its implications for both human and animal lives.

Practical considerations for the use of precision livestock farming to improve animal welfare.

2021 ◽  
pp. 241-265
Author(s):  
Janice M. Siegford ◽  
Kaitlin Wurtz
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Livestock Farming ◽  
Precision Livestock Farming

Abstract This chapter provides general concepts and definitions important for an understanding of precision livestock farming (PLF) and how PLF can improve animal welfare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document