The Code of Practice & Free Range Pigs
How does the new Code of Practice effect the farming of free range pigs? The code now describes three systems of production;
- Indoor (including single and group housing on solid or slatted floors)
- Deep Litter (groups on deep litter in shelters or sheds)
- Outdoor (free range in paddocks with shelter such as arks or huts)
4.6 Pigs Kept Outdoors, requires that;
- 4.6.1 Access to shelters in cold weather and shade in hot weather must be provided to al outdoor pigs.
- 4.6.2 Feed and watering points must be provided so that all pigs can gain access and obtain their daily physiological requirements.
- 4.6.3 Pigs must not be raised on land that is contaminated with toxins, chemical residues, toxic plants or disease-causing organisms at levels that are known to cause harm.
4.6.4 Recommends that space allowances for shelters and grazing should be provided in accordance with Appendix 3. Appendix 3 neglects to mention free range grower pigs.
The Code is full of contradictions and it could be said that it
actually discriminates against the free range producer. Could this
possibly be an indication of just how much input the pork industry had
in the revision of this code? The standards in the code for outdoor
pigs seem to reflect the industry's intentions to define pigs raised in
eco shelters as free range. While the requirements for space are spelt
out for free range sows and piglets, outdoor grower pigs have been completely
ignored. Why is that? Lack of available science? Industry's lack of vision
for the future of free range?
We will touch on the question of
science shortly, but lets now look at the imbalance between the
requirements within the code for confined pigs and those kept outdoors.
The
specifications for new sow stalls effectively allow a floor space of
1.32 square metres, barely enough room to take a step forward or back.
When sows are kept in indoor group housing the required floor space is
still only 1.4 square metres, therefore we still have a situation where
sows can be crammed in so tightly that they have great difficulty even
turning around. In effect, this space allowance has only removed the
bars of the stalls and has made no real allowance for more space for these sows.
Now,
if we take that same group of sows and put them outdoors, it is now recommended that they have 300 - 400 square metres of space. Do we disagree with
the recommendations for outdoor sows? Certainly not, but the inequity of
the Code is glaringly obvious.
Another indication that the
industry has no vision for free range pig farming in the future, is the
requirement in section 5.5 of the code under Moving Pigs. While the
code does not define what moving pigs means, the Standard states:
5.1.1 Dogs, electric prodders and hitting with solid objects must not be used to move pigs.
This requirement refers to
the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals: Land Transport of Pigs. This code
makes no reference to the use of dogs
only the use of electric prodders. Unfortunately the requirements of
5.1.1 have been put under the heading of Moving Pigs in our Code and as
it presently stands, a free range producer could be prosecuted for
using working dogs to muster their herd from the paddock.
So what is the definition for Moving Pigs? Was the intention to only cover pigs
being moved within sheds and associated laneways? Was any
consideration given to management of outdoor pig herds? It appears that
section 5.1.1 is void once the pigs are loaded for transport as they
then come under a different code of practice that
does allow the use of dogs and the restricted use of electric goads.
Industry
commonly quotes 'science' as justification for its actions, a good
example is the reasoning for the continued use of sow stalls. There
was no 'science' involved in the implementation of sow stalls, it was
purely a commercial decision. Sow stalls promised improved production,
easier handling that would require less staff with even less
qualifications, and the ability to house the maximum number of sows on
a minimal area of land. Industry now spends millions of dollars each
year on research on how to maximize performance of these pigs and to keep
these animals alive under these confined conditions while continuing to
justify practices that consumers find objectionable. Assessment of
animal welfare should not rely solely on science, especially sponsored
science. Animal welfare should also encompass moral and ethical
considerations. It is accepted that pigs are a sentient beings and as
such capable of suffering. They deserve more than to be treated as
mere possessions.
Research for Free Range pig production is non
existent. For those of us paying the pig slaughter levy, our money
effectively goes to support the intensive, indoor production system.
The
Code of Practice is so rife with contradictions and inconsistencies
that if, in its current form, the Standards become law, it could be open
to all sorts of legal challenges.
You can read more about the code of practice
here....