Blog

Posted Wednesday, 22 February 2012  /  Written by The Twig

The Sunday Times recently reported that a Norfolk pig farm had been guilty of long term neglect of it's animals. It was a shocking and tragic case with pigs apparently suffering widespread mistreatment and cruelty on a farm certified by the Red Tractor Scheme. But, the otherwise accurate article was marred by an important misrepresentation. The story was published under the headline “Pigs are beaten to death on ‘ethical’ farm”

So what's the mistake? Well, the Red Tractor Scheme (RTS) is not an "ethical" scheme as most consumers would understand it. It is a "quality assurance" scheme but that does not ensure higher than average welfare conditions for animals.

Now, before we go any further, this is not an attack on the RTS. The organisation does a great deal to ensure minimum standards in UK farming and has issued a clear and unambiguous statement condemning what was found on the farm in question. But that does not take away from the critical issue that there is still widespread confusion and uncertainty around food labels and welfare schemes in the country. How can we, as consumers, be expected to make informed choices, and use our purchasing power for the good of animal welfare, if we don't know what we are buying?

Two widely used schemes in the country are the Red Tractor Scheme and Lion Eggs. According to Compassion in World Farming, these labels simply mean:

- These food labels mostly ensure compliance with minimum legislative requirements for both standard and free-range production (in terms of animal welfare provision)
- Most, but not all, British meat, eggs and milk are certified to these standards
- The standards do little to prevent the serious welfare issues of confinement in cages, high stocking densities, fast-growing breeds and many mutilations
- Some of the standards do not enforce minimum legislative requirements adequately (e.g. prohibition of routine tail docking in pigs and the provision of appropriate manipulable material for pigs)
- Some of the standards are higher than minimum legislative requirements (e.g. castration of pigs is not allowed and sows have not been kept in stalls since 1999; maximum permissible stocking densities for broiler chickens are lower than both EU and national legislation.)

So, in many ways, buying into these assurance schemes does not guarantee you much more than you can already expect from any British producer. There is certainly no guarantee of significantly higher ethical or welfare standards than those required by law.

To make matters worse, in addition to the quality assurance schemes, producers are still able to use a range of potentially misleading words. Amongst our "favourites" are Fresh, Natural, Farm fresh, Barn fresh, Traditional and Heritage. Each of these has certain connotations but, apart from general consumer laws (which dictate that the public cannot be mislead) there are no restrictions on their use. So "100% traditional farm-fresh eggs" say nothing about the welfare conditions of the hens. Even if they came with the Lion Mark, you would be none the wiser; there is no reason why those eggs should not be your average intensively farmed variety (and they very probably are).

Remember, it costs more to produce Organic and Free Range produce and use of the terms is regulated by law. Shoppers pay a premium for them and so retailers and producers tend to shout about it. If it doesn't explicitly say it on the box, it almost certainly isn't. Become an educated consumer. Click here to read CIWF's detailed guide on food welfare labelling.

Back to blog posts