Pig Code of Welfare – last day to send submissions

Written By: - Date published: 12:00 am, April 16th, 2010 - 16 comments
Categories: animal welfare, farming - Tags: ,

Today is the last day to send in your submission on NAWAC’s draft Code of Welfare for Pigs. New Zealand Open Rescue have put out a new video containing footage from many different farms around the country, to remind you why it is important to have your say.

The draft Code of Welfare as it currently stands proposes to limit the use of sow crates to 4 weeks per year by 2013 – leaving sows in crates for up to 20 weeks per year. It recommends that by 2018 sow crates be banned, leaving sows in farrowing crates for still up to 12 weeks per year.

What SAFE is asking for is pretty conservative. All they are asking is that sow crates and farrowing crates be banned. The rest of the conditions on a pig farm are pretty awful too – sow group housing and fattening pens are also concrete and barren – the only thing that makes them slightly better is that the pigs can turn around.

As always, it is best if you have time to write your own submission – however the most important thing is that you get it in on time. You can send a submission using SAFE’s template at www.lovepigs.org.nz.

16 comments on “Pig Code of Welfare – last day to send submissions”

  1. belladonna 1

    Yes I think it is important that compassion is extended to all living creatures. I hope those on the left are as willing to show their disgust at the way these pigs are treated as they do to the suffering of humans.

  2. Sarge 2

    I’m curious. How many of those who want to stop factory farming pigs also wear clothes from Chinese sweat shops?

    If you want to buy free range pork, go ahead. I’m not going to stop you (indeed, I have no reason to prevent you doing anything). However, a law change would force me to also buy free range pork. Why should I not have the choice?

    • Marty G 2.1

      – If you want to not beat your wife, go ahead. I’m not going to stop you (indeed, I have no reason to prevent you doing anything). However, a law change would force me to also not beat my wife. Why should I not have the choice? –

      We have laws against things because society thinks they’re too wrong to allow, even if some individuals don’t mind it.

    • Lew 2.2

      The proposed change has nothing to do with enforcing free-range production. Not even SAFE and Open Rescue are pushing for that, as Rocky’s article makes plain.

      L

  3. Sarge 3

    Marty G -Alright, fair point. Why just pigs then? I’m sure most people would find starving children acceptable (I myself donate to TearFund), but there’s no way I would suggest a compulsary donatation to help end poverty in Africa. Or what about those with terminal illnesses? Even though most people find these unacceptable, I certainly wouldn’t support a law change requiring all scientists to work on finding a cure. Let people choose which causes they wish to support, instead of a law change that requires everyone to pay more.

    Besides, if most people found this practice unacceptable, they wouldn’t buy from firms that used them. Those firms would quickly go out of business. As this doesn’t happen, I’d suggest that although most people may voice disgust at the current practice, they aren’t happy to pay the higher prices (Note: This was not aimed at anyone in particular).

    Lew – Sorry, you’re right. My apologies to all, and thanks for pointing that out.

    • Marty G 3.1

      there is a compulsory donation to help end poverty in the third world. It’s called your taxes paying for the aid budget.

    • lprent 3.2

      Apart from anything else both sow and farrowing crates violate our own animal welfare legislation as a parliamentary select committee found a few years ago (limited access today, so I’m not looking it up). They have been given ‘temporary’ exemptions for the last decade by regulation to be able to continue to violate the standards already laid down in legislation.

      So Sarge – do you advocate that pig farmers should be able to continue to violate our existing legislation by a bureaucratic override?

      captcha: misunderstands – weirdly appropriate

    • prism 3.3

      Sarge I haven’t enquired whether the pig farms whose bacon I buy have got good conditions. I think about it, but find that having to make ethical decisions on each item as I do my shopping means that I faint from hunger before finishing the job. Shoppers don’t want to go without bacon and buy either not caring, or in a limited time-frame. The decision about ethical treatment of animals shouldn’t be left to the market.

      But I may do better in future. My latest bacon purchase from the supermarket is from Freedom farms – NZ free farmed, no crates, no cages, no pens, no growth hormones, gluten fee and traditionally wood-smoked also GE free. It has a Free Farmed logo with map of NZ and pig beside. Can’t remember how much it cost.

      So we might be on the road to ending this resistance to good conditions for piggies. Freedom farms is making a stand so support their product and other food suppliers doing likewise.

      • Sarge 3.3.1

        Marty -And I disagree with that. Even though it’s a cause I support, I believe people should be able to choose who they donate money too.

        Iprent – if they’re breaking they law, take them to court. However, if they’re using a loop hole, they aren’t violating anything. What they’re doing is perfectly legal. (I agree people shouldn’t be able to get away with using a loop hole though. The law should be clairfied one way or the other).

        prism – I agree the market isn’t a perect mechnism. I accept that there will be a small number of people who will be unable to find a brand which matches their beliefs. But the alternative is forcing a larger group of people to start paying for a cause they don’t believe in. Which seems to be the most inequitable?

  4. prism 4

    Incidentally this so-called argument that people shouldn’t attempt to adopt better and more humane standards for one circumstance because there are a million other unsatisfactory circumstances in the world being ignored is a pathetic one.

    It is lazy and selfish people who criticise every attempt to improve things, only arousing themselves to give negative examples attempting to show that the person wanting change is foolhardy. Let’s all not bother about trying to do anything that is within our power to make anything better. It’s too much hard work and ultimately it may improve things for others and not ourselves, and that’s the important point.

  5. Sarge 5

    “Let’s all not bother about trying to do anything that is within our power to make anything better. It’s too much hard work and ultimately it may improve things for others and not ourselves, and that’s the important point.”

    Not at all. You can donate to any cause you want. You can volunteer for any group you want. I don’t care. Just don’t expect me to pay more for a cause I don’t believe in.

  6. Sarge 6

    “Let’s all not bother about trying to do anything that is within our power to make anything better. It’s too much hard work and ultimately it may improve things for others and not ourselves, and that’s the important point.”

    Not at all. You can donate to any cause you want. You can volunteer for any group you want. I don’t care. Just don’t expect me to pay more for a cause I don’t believe in.

  7. prism 7

    Yes I can see you have made my point Sarge, twice.

  8. jules 8

    sarge , is just like the majority of human beings ,he cares for only one thing and one thing only -himself!

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Compliance strengthened for property speculation
    Inland Revenue is to gain greater oversight of land transfer information to ensure those buying and selling properties are complying with tax rules on property speculation. Cabinet has agreed to implement recommendation 99 of the Tax Working Group’s (TWG) final ...
    1 week ago
  • Plan to expand protection for Maui and Hector’s dolphins
    The Government is taking action to expand and strengthen the protection for Māui and Hector’s dolphins with an updated plan to deal with threats to these native marine mammals. Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage and Minister of Fisheries Stuart Nash ...
    1 week ago
  • Cameras on vessels to ensure sustainable fisheries
    Commercial fishing vessels at greatest risk of encountering the rare Māui dolphin will be required to operate with on-board cameras from 1 November, as the next step to strengthen our fisheries management system. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Fisheries Minister ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Greatest number of new Police in a single year
    A new record for the number of Police officers deployed to the regions in a single year has been created with the graduation today of Recruit Wing 326. Police Minister Stuart Nash says the graduation of 78 new constables means ...
    3 weeks ago