Pigtail docking: Farmers must keep ahead of regulatory curve

This article appeared in the January 2019 edition of Northern Farmer

Regulation in the pig industry is not insignificant. The industry is, however, rightly proud of its welfare standards which lead the world with more than 90 per cent being parties to the Red Tractor Assurance Scheme. Nevertheless, regulation keeps coming with farmers and vets regularly altering procedures to ensure compliance.

In November 2017 Environment, rural affairs and food secretary, Michael Gove, said: “This government is committed to very high standards of animal welfare. We will make the UK a world leader in the care and protection of animals. This government will continue to promote and enhance animal welfare, both now and after we have left the EU.”

This was immediately followed in January 2018 with a consultation paper on the “Codes of Practice for Welfare in Pigs”. The proposals largely mirror parts of the Red Tractor regulations. In short central government is getting in on the act!

I recently spoke about the issue of tail docking and tail biting with an exasperated farmer at his pig unit shortly after his latest quarterly vet visit. More paperwork, more vets visits to fund and seemingly an approach that sought to question the very well managed procedures adopted within his unit for many years.

It was hard not to sympathise. Curious about this specific issue, I downloaded documents on the subject. I quickly accumulated four inches of paperwork comprising legislation, statutory instruments, learned articles, scheme regulations and recommendations.

My client rightly accepted that welfare regulation is necessary however, with up to 50 per cent of all pork consumed in the UK having been imported, the poor standards of welfare, particularly in southern Europe, are seemingly ignored by government and supermarket shoppers alike. “I don’t see anyone looking at how that pork has been raised,” he said. He has a point.

Tail docking, which had been the subject of the day, prevents tail biting, which in turn can lead to serious infection. Tail biting is a well-known problem that must be carefully managed.

So what is the actual regulatory position?

The European regulatory frameworks impose minimum welfare standards within all livestock farming. Interpretation and enforcement of the same differs radically throughout the EU.

The Animal Welfare Act 2006, makes it unlawful for any “prohibited procedure” to be carried out on livestock.

But what is a “prohibited procedure”? Step forward The Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2007 and the Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) (England) Regulations 2007! They identify “permitted procedures.”

Schedule 3, paragraph 5 of the Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) (England) Regulations 2007 specifically deals with tail docking. It says: “The procedure may be carried out only where measures to improve environmental conditions or management systems have been taken to prevent tail biting, but there is still evidence that injury to pig’s tails by biting has occurred.”

So where managed steps to prevent tail biting have failed, then docking, in accordance with regulation, may be carried out. The nature and extent of the measures of improvement in environmental conditions or management systems is not detailed.

Academics and farmers agree that tail biting is a “multi-factorial problem” with no single cause or solution. There is also general agreement about ways to combat it, including the use of enrichment materials, thermal comfort, air and light quality, health and fitness, competition among animals for space, diet, pen structures and cleanliness.      

In large units, identifying and removing a “biter” as is recommend is easier said than done. Efforts to manage and enrich the environment in good units are routine to a good stockman and indeed their vets.

Good farmers are not callous or blind to animal welfare and it is often not appreciated that, at all times, the farmers and their veterinary advisers strive to comply with very strict regulation. That said, indoor pig units are not all the same in design or operation. What’s relevant to one may not be to another. Common sense and realism are therefore very necessary in each and every instance.

So what of my exasperated client’s views on tail docking? The latest regulation requires a fully documented management process identifying all steps taken to enrich environments. This must be signed off by a vet who would ultimately sanction the decision to tail dock. The decision and reasoning must all be recorded.

So record keeping will change and be enhanced. Costs will unfortunately rise with further veterinary visits and input may change. However, in well run units these now regulated requirements have always been considered.

Where tail docking is deemed as necessary and sensible to prevent tail biting, the process will be sanctioned by the vet. In less well-run units, the vet will have a more significant role in setting welfare standards. The need for tail docking will however under the new regulations be constantly reviewed.

In its January briefing, The National Pig Association, quoted data showing that 70 per cent of a sample of three million pigs had their tails docked, an apparent fall from 82 per cent in 1999.

So change is happening, almost all of which in my view is as a result of the practical and judicious industry regulation and application of our pig farmers, rather than the government and EU mandarins who headline their own efforts./ more...

Whether it is a government requirement, or an industry standard, farmers can, in my view, rightly be proud of the standards they adhere to. They will continue to interpret and innovate within regulatory framework. Our regulation of the industry should receive significant praise. We do lead the world. Only pigs produced in this country have such standard so if welfare is an issue to consumers then looking for the Red Tractor should give comfort.