Poultry International - June 2017 - 17
become more commonplace. Abandoning the practice may require producers to offer birds greater stimulation and alter feeding methods, and there are ongoing studies into how helping producers manage untrimmed birds. But rejection of trimming is unlikely to become universal. According to Dr. Claire Weeks, senior research fellow in animal welfare at Bristol University's School of Veterinary Sciences, certain markets demand it, but it will remain niche in the short term. And it may be the case that, as pressure on the practice increases, the need to beak trim diminishes. Changes at the genetic level may be the answer, as genetics companies look to develop birds less able to inflict harm. A British Veterinary Poultry Association (BVPA) spokesperson explains: "Selective breeding has generated significant physical alterations, many of which would be regarded as welfare positive and void the need for mutilations." No longer an interest group preserve The drivers of welfare are changing. Large corporations are taking a growing role not only in response to consumers, but picking up public sector responsibilities in countries favoring smaller government. Where one major company leads, others follow. McDonald's 2015 announcement that all its eggs in the U.S. and Canada would come from cage-free birds was followed by others committing to do the same. This ripple effect continues. Ignacio Blanco-Traba, senior global sustainable sourcing with McDonald's Corp., has said that McDonald's customers want to know more than ever how animals are reared and, being global, McDonald's applies its welfare policies worldwide. Retailers will also put more demands on producers. It is Europe's retailers - not legislators - that are bringing an end to enriched cages. Companies increasingly deem welfare a "key business issue," says Compassion in World Farming (CIWF). More are signing up to its Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare (BBFAW) - established with World Animal Protection and Coller June 2017 ❙ www.WATTAgNet.com Jason Smalley PoultryInternational ❙ 17 Enriched cages, seen as addressing certain welfare concerns, were the choice of many European egg producers at the start of the decade. Consumer and supermarket pressures, however, mean that this option is already being rejected. Capital - designed to drive higher welfare in food business. The latest BBFAW includes 99 companies. It will not only be the poultry industry's clients that drive welfare, but its suppliers too. As the industry becomes increasingly standardized, genetics companies will have little interest in supplying birds that perform poorly in changed production system. Science or no science The role of large corporations may be a mixed blessing. On one hand, they want suppliers to succeed, offering rules, sharing best practice and support. Private assurance schemes can be highly effective, but will only lead to genuine welfare improvements if properly designed. Ultimately, consumer-facing food businesses will align with customers' perceptions. Despite good intentions, these perceptions may be neither good for bird welfare nor producers and, as the world becomes more interconnected, views are quickly shared across communities and geographies. Dr. Weeks notes how social media has changed sourcing in the U.S. and how this is spreading: "Millennials are the ones on social media, and their ideas spread very quickly. But the people driving the agenda are ill-informed. The reality is wildly different to what consumers think." Yet alongside the consumer welfare interpretation,
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.