Right: Australia's national capital. It has been pointed out that the banning of "factory" farming in the ACT is fairly inconsequential, as Canberra and its territory occupies a miniscule area of the country - and contains very little farming of any kind.
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments against banning the 'factory farming' of hens and pigs
1. The welfare of intensively farmed animals is a priority for farmers
It has been claimed that there is a natural correspondence between healthy farm animals and productive farms that supply the farmer and the consumer with a saleable product.
The National Farmers Federation has stated, 'For Australian farmers, their animals are their living, so looking after their welfare is not only the right thing to do, it also makes good business sense. Australian farmers are committed to ensuring their animals are healthy and well cared for.'
A 2012 review of pig farming practices employed in the European Union, that included comparisons with Australian practices, noted the extent to which good profits for the farmer depend on the maintenance of healthy animals. It has been claimed that intensive farming practices would not be persisted with if they resulted in animals whose products could not be sold for a good price.
The 2012 review states, 'During abattoir meat inspection pig carcasses are partially or fully condemned upon detection of disease that poses a risk to public health or welfare conditions that cause animal suffering e.g. fractures.'
The review went on to explain, 'This incurs direct financial losses to producers and processors. Other health and welfare-related conditions, such as bruising, may not result in condemnation but can necessitate "trimming" of the carcass, and result in financial losses to the processor. Since animal health is a component of animal welfare these represent a clear link between suboptimal pig welfare and financial losses to the pig industry.'
One of the review's conclusions is that there is an economic imperative for pig farmers to maintain their animals in the best possible health.
2. Regulations and audit procedures are already in place to ensure the welfare of intensively farmed animals
Defenders of intensive farming argue that regulations and monitoring guidelines ensure that animal welfare is not jeopardised.
For example, the conditions under which meat chickens are housed and the way in which they are managed during their growing, transportation and slaughter are set down in several government- and industry-endorsed Model Codes of Practice designed to safeguard their health and wellbeing.
The industry has developed a model animal welfare audit program, which covers hatchery, breeder rearing, breeder laying, growing, and the pick-up, transport and processing sectors. Several companies have incorporated elements of this welfare audit in their own quality plans. All companies incorporate elements of good practice for bird welfare in their grower manuals.
Similarly, regarding intensive pig-rearing practices, a report produced by the New South Wales Department of Primary Industry in June 2014 it has stated, 'Australian pig farms are required to adhere to high welfare standards that are based on animal care. These standards were developed through a process of consultation between government and industry representatives, veterinarians and animal welfare groups.
These standards are legislated in Australia. Indoor intensive farms continue to upgrade to meet changes in animal welfare regulations, marketplace requirements and community expectations.'
Australian Pork Limited (API) has stated, 'The Model Code of Practice for Welfare of Animals (Pigs) is a guide that has been developed in consultation with all levels of industry, regulators, RSCPA and scientists to detail the acceptable practice for the management of pigs. It outlines all responsibilities involved in caring for pigs - including their housing, food, water and special needs. Standards in the Model Code have been incorporated into the Australian Pork Quality Assurance Program and are independently audited each year to ensure producers comply.'
3. Some intensive farming practices are required to ensure the welfare of animals
Farmers claim that some of the farm practices which animal rights activists object to are actually necessary for the wellbeing of the animals.
Referring to pig farming, the National Farmers Federation has stated, 'People often ask why sows are kept in individual housing. It's because pigs can be aggressive animals and aggression between sows increases in the early stage of pregnancy. During this vulnerable time, individual housing is the best way to ensure sows are getting food and are totally protected from bullying, bites, injuries and the increased chance of miscarrying their babies.'
The Federation has further explained, 'Similarly, farrowing crates are used to protect piglets. The average sow weighs over 250 kilograms - equivalent to three standard fridges. During the short period new piglets are suckling, they are extremely vulnerable to being crushed to death by their mother, so the temporary use of farrowing crates play a crucial role in protecting piglets from being crushed.'
Finally, the Federation has stated regarding pig rearing that even on free range farms there are occasions where sheds are necessary. The Federation has claimed, 'On some farms, sows have piglets in a free range environment, and once weaned, the piglets are moved into group housing, eco sheds or shelters. This is for a number of reasons: it helps protect the pigs from predators and from the elements of the weather (pigs suffer from sunburn, and are very susceptible to extreme temperatures), and ensures that the pigs receive the nutrition they need as their feed can be monitored.'
4. Free range products are too expensive for many consumers
It would appear that many Australian consumers are either unwilling or unable to pay the higher prices associated with 'free-range' food products.
The Lifehacker website has noted that among those buying home brand eggs in Australia's supermarkets, 80 percent purchase 'caged' rather than 'barn-raised' or 'free-range eggs'. That may not be a surprising figure as those purchasing home brand products are normally looking for a reduced price. However, a survey conducted by Choice magazine suggests that only 40 percent of eggs purchased in Australia are free-range. This suggests that for a comfortable majority of Australian egg consumers price is an important factor in their purchasing decisions. The two figures combined also imply that for those on limited incomes, free-range eggs may simply be too expensive. A comparison conducted in New South Wales in 2013 suggests that free-range-eggs are twice as expensive as caged eggs.
The same situation exists with regard to chickens reared for meat rather than egg production. John Hazeldene, the managing director of Hazeldene chicken meat producers, has stated, 'The consumer, to buy free range or to buy RSPCA [accredited chicken meat], they must pay a premium because it costs us a lot more money to rear... [the birds]. For instance, to build a shed would probably be 30 per cent more expensive if we were doing it all with RSPCA [accreditation] because we simply put less birds in the shed, so it's a cost thing.'
Mr Hazeldene has claimed that while there is more consumer interest in animal welfare, many people still do not want to pay too much for their chicken products.
Similar patterns have been discerned in other countries. Surveys by New Zealand Pork have shown that although consumers may oppose factory farming pigs, they are not necessarily willing to pay more for free-range pork.
New Zealand Pork chairman, Ian Carter, has said of pork consumers, 'They may answer surveys that they want free-range pork but they don't vote with their wallets.'
Referring to consumer behaviour, the executive director of the animal welfare group SAFE, Hans Kriek, has stated, '"It is a mixed bag. There is a small group of people who are very conscientious and would not be caught dead buying factory-farmed pork even if it meant paying more for free-range pork.'
However, Mr Kriek also acknowledged, 'Then the majority of people would say they are opposed to factory farming but have very busy lives and animals are not at the forefront of their minds when they are shopping and so this concern does not show in their consumer behaviour.'
5. Intensive farming measures are necessary to keep pace with domestic and overseas demand for chicken and pig products
It has been claimed that intensive farming methods are the only way to keep pace with a growing demand for chicken and pig products. An increase in Australia's population is expected to result in a significant growth in the market for these food sources.
For example, the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) estimated that in 2012-13 annual consumption of chicken meat would increase slightly to 44 kilograms per person, making it the most consumed meat in Australia. ABARES noted that while per capita poultry consumption is anticipated to increase, population growth is expected to be the key driver of total consumption growth in poultry. Industry projections show Australian consumption will be 45 kilograms per person by 2015.
Some commentators are concerned that Australian agricultural output is not keeping up with this demand. In 2014, research analyst Jack Di Nunzio stated, 'To satisfy export growth targets while maintaining domestic food security, Australia must...increase agricultural production and improve sustainability.' In a research paper published by Future Directions International, Di Nunzio stated, 'Since the early-2000s, however, total factor productivity (TFP) in Australian agriculture has been almost stagnant; running at less than one per cent.' There are those who claim that in this context Australia cannot afford to abandon intensive farming practices; the country must find ways of increasing farm production rather than employing lower density techniques which would increase costs and reduce productivity.