SAY NO TO IMPRISONED PIGS.
SIGN TO HELP STOP UK LARGEST PIG FARM.

"Confining such huge numbers of animals in this way deprives them of the ability to perform many of their natural behaviours, which can cause terrible suffering, especially in animals as intelligent as pigs." - Polly F., Care2 petition author


Say NO today! http://www.care2.com/go/z/PigFactory
Petition: Stop the biggest ever UK pig factory being built
Say NO to 30,000 pigs behind bars. Sign now!


Appeared on my FB page today, I was happy to sign .

Piggies get my vote every time.

One very good reason why I no longer eat pork.

Got my vote xx

Actually, the whole purpose of this new farm is to IMPROVE the welfare of the pigs. The existing facility is old and outdated, after building the new farm they are going to reduce the number of pigs at the existing facility by 85% and upgrade the facility using it for sow's housing.

The project is being driven by Sainsbury's who have upped their standards for welfare. Hall's supply Dunbia who supply Sainsbury's. Dunbia is the only supplier in Northern Ireland who has achieved ‘Freedom Food’ Farm Assurance accreditation for pork.

Sainsbury's pay over the going rate to their suppliers to enable them to have improved welfare for pigs.

SUMMARY: This new facility is to improve the welfare of pigs and yet its being shot down?

Leave 'em alone, they're delicious.

Thanks for giving us the facts, DD.

Hi DD . Sadly Im away and without internet access from early tomorrow for a week, so wouldnt read it straight away but Im interested in exactly what improvements you have read are being made for pig welfare .(my guess is most of the claimed upgrading etc is going to be in efficiency , environmental concerns and maximizing production of meat ) .

I wouldnt be too impressed by factory farms claiming to have reached the 'ultimate' red tractor farm assured standards etc . 'A marketing tool' according to the Independant today http://www.independent.co.uk/money/...-tractor-logo-on-meat-means-2034111.html - they are not impressed at all ,by the look of it.

Sadly the meat industry is skilled at putting out soothing words to allay the fears of the public , who want to believe them because few people really like the idea of animals being farmed by factory methods.

These improvements are often non events in real terms (in my opinion) for instance like when they bragged about improving welfare for caged hens ages ago ,by increasing their living space . The actual increase was minute, and almost insignificant in terms of whether the hens could achieve any of their normal behaviour - but it aided the conscience a bit if you ate chicken.

I cannot see that 30,000 pigs , all hugely intelligent can live in factory type conditions which can give them all scope to have any sort of life which allows them normal behaviours .

I do understand where you're coming from -improved welfare can be made to sound attractive, but I think allowing bigger and bigger factory farms ,with higher and higher tech, is not conducive to moving to a situation which will sustainably improve animal welfare , protect rural jobs , protect the environment etc . I would like to see less meat eating , so animals could then be given the space and resource to ensure a MUCH more natural life before slaughter.Healthier for people too .

Pigs are more intelligent than dogs. Could you imagine and condone a factory situation where 30,000 dogs were all sectioned off, in relatively tiny space, robotically fed and watered, activity severely restricted to keep fat on them etc. Could you really be happy knowing they were imprisoned there, day after day after day with little to do? ( and I can consider the comparison in so much as if I did want to eat meat, consciencewise ,I would eat dog as easily as pig.

Reading back, I don't think I've managed to express very well what Im getting at , but best I can do for now as dashing off.

PS -- In my haste I see Ive mentioned Red tractor , not Freedom Foods , but a similar problem exists with that . Some of the things still allowed within that 'label' , are still not high welfare. The RSPCA and Compassion in World Farming , do not approve of factory farming, but credit Freedom Foods as a step in the right direction .It is a very low minimum standard that the RSPCA achieved , to bring FF's into being.

I don't see the sense of attacking the producers that aren't the worst, you risk driving them out of business and handing their trade over to the worse companies which is 100% opposite to the objective.

Even worse is the risk that the pork will be procured from outside the country which gives even less control over the welfare of the animals.

All of Sainsbury's pork is British, at least they have taken steps, set standards above legal minimum and have future targets, in a competitive industry there is very little they can do without the support of the majority of their customers (which will never happen).

The legal minimum standard is what needs addressing, that is what governments are there for - to sort out the mess that competitive businesses make.

"Red Tractor" is a joke in comparison to "Freedom Food", it is merely a marketing and risk management tool, it sets no standards for animal welfare whatsoever.

What progress Sainsbury's have made is being thrown in their face - you could hardly blame them if they turned round and said "we give up, minimum legal standard for us from now on".

Sainsbury's sell over half of the "freedom Food" pork sold in this country, hopefully they plan to up their game and meet the new "RSPCA Assured" standards, but they need reward for their efforts not campaigns running against them.

BTW I'm not a fan of Sainsbury's I do not shop there nor have any association with them. It just annoys me that campaigns like this are poorly thought out and are counter-productive to animal welfare.

If we all want to avoid bowel cancer, don't eat pork, pork by products, or red meat. Simple, down to education.

You've got to die of something, and you will. Best to enjoy what you do. Don't worry about what others do or the scaremongers put about, there's enough doom as it is. I used to be a pig farmer myself, well an assistant. Used the swill from the big messes to feed them, along with supplementary stuff, they all had a good life before going off to market and the boar was a top friendly animal. The sows were protective of their little 'uns and it was interesting to watch them all interacting. All in all it was a good ten months. They're still delicious, whether they're Wessex Saddleback, Large White, Landrace, Gloucester Spot, Tamworth et al get it down yer.

Blimey Bandy......what a rebel. Alcohol AND pork ! No hope for you.

Hi DD thanks for the reply.
I have to say , I do see clearly where you're coming from--all your points are very valid and logical and I admit that that on occasions I do struggle and sway towards that way of seeing things . However , for me , the whole business of the way we expect animals to live their one life so unaturally and stressfully , before slaughter, is so disgusting to me , that the only way I can begin to explain my stance, is to liken it to something akin to the way for instance Anti -abortionists feel - that abortion is either acceptable or its not , and welcoming a new 'improved' law of only allowing the baby to be killed at say 16 weeks instead of 20, would probably give them little hope, as that amendment to an inbetween postition, may in fact harm/delay, the hope of a complete revision to take the massive moral step to ban it.

ps (I am not commenting on the rights and wrongs of abortion here , I am half in half over it , and the weeks Ive quoted , are made up purely for my example. )

As for the pigs, I will still wait to see what emerges about the actual improvements for their day to day living experience.

Well beyond redemption and probably would refuse it if offered. Roll on!

Yes Venice, I'm generally a black or white person (yes or no) but unfortunately the powers that be aren't, so to make any progress you have to play them at their own game and make what steps you can - also everything is governed by money and a step-change in price just isn't going to happen.

I haven't found the freedom food standards other than it must be greater than legal minimum otherwise more farms would have succeeded in achieving it.

On abortion, there are two (or more) lives directly involved and the quality of life of both should be considered which is of course, to a degree, the same as the animal welfare issue as finance has a major impact on quality of life.

Links to standards for all the farmed animals covered by the scheme are at http://www.freedomfood.co.uk/Industry/rspca-welfare-standards

The standards are higher than the legal minimum, though there seems to be some debate about just how much higher. However Compassion in World Farming, who have probably done more to change farming practice than anyone, do recommend buying products with the FF mark. Red Tractor simply indicates that the food was produced in the UK on a farm that met minimum legal standards on the day of inspection.

I do agree that things will only get better little by little, and we can help the change to happen by supporting those who are doing their best to improve things. Unfortunately though, improved welfare does come at a cost, and for many struggling to make ends meet it's just not an option to pay extra when there's a cheaper option available.

Noticed on the Freedom Food home page it states that the FF mark is going to be rebranded as “RSPCA Assured“. Can't help thinking this is a mistake, given the awful reputation the RSPCA has with so many people...

The RSPCA has a bad reputation for two reasons:-

Firstly - the media find it an easy defenceless organisation to pick on and produce cheap news.

Secondly - People assume that the RSPCA has an obligation to do everything and that they have unlimited funds.

If you want the RSPCA to do more then they need more donations not a continual battering for what they were unable to do.

Not saying the reputation is necessarily deserved, I've no personal experience so couldn't say. But the reputation exists without a doubt, and I'm sure the RSPCA must know that. I have a number of friends in various different parts of the country who would call on any of the other animal welfare charities before the RSPCA, based on their past dealings. So (rightly or wrongly) the fact the scheme bears the RSPCA name will make it less trustworthy in their eyes. Which is a shame, because at the moment it's the best we've got

One of the reasons I feel you just cant sit back and allow these massive animal factories to happen without protest , is that they undeniably encourage more people to eat more meat . That is basically all the producers care about . They obviously are keen to get the FF stamp, because it gives them compassion cred, , and attract extra sales. More meat animals = more cruelty.

WHATEVER the standards are SUPPOSED to be, over and over and over again , when the limelight is not on them , the reality, is that FF outfit or not, only lip service is paid to the rules, shortcuts are human nature, and cruelty goes on , and because such high numbers of animals are involved in a superfarm ,the amount of cruelty can be massive .

I dont think you can have an animal factory situation , and expect the workers after a while, to even see their product as 'sentient'. Their emphasis is going to be to keep the mechanical production line going no matter what. An animal with a limp from a sore hoof, one with severe tooth rot, internal pain, is not going to be even noticed as it might be on a small farm .
Even on smallish FF farms , we are hoodwinked into thinking all must be hunkydory because the RSPCA are 'overseeing it' Yeah right! Cobby is right , people are waking up to the shortcomings of the RSPCA. I personally have a lot of time for the bottom sharp end layer of the RSPCA, but the top layer need sorting out if they want to improve their image.

Read as an example what these people are saying.

https://www.facebook.com/altrinchamrspca/posts/649110351798497

The majority of the animal rearers and abattoirs do not advertise or actively promote their meat products, its the middle men that do like unions, federations, assurance schemes and retailers.

The only exception that springs to mind is Bernard Matthews, no doubt there are a few more but it only represents a minor proportion of the trade.

We need to eat meat, the average person wouldn't be able to ensure they have adequate nutrients if they were put on a vegetarian diet. Vitamin B12, taurine, fatty acid DHA, and protein are all essential nutrients that are difficult to maintain as a human herbivore.

We are omnivores and should have a mixture of meat and plants.