Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Conference Proceeding (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Keywords
- Agrarpolitik (1)
- Animal welfare (1)
- Expert interviews (1)
- German dairy farming (1)
- Kommunikation (1)
- Lobbyismus (1)
- Milchviehhaltung (1)
- Natural living strategies (1)
- Stroh (1)
- Tierwohl (1)
Institute
- Fakultät AuL (4) (remove)
Dairy farming has been the subject of public debate on animal welfare for a number of years now. Animal welfare discussions on dairy farming often include the demand for more nature connectedness in this area. This study focuses on the divergent perspectives of consumers and scientists on the importance of more nature connectedness for animal welfare strategies in German dairy farming. Within Europe, Germany is the main producer of cow’s milk and an important industry in many rural areas in Germany is dairy farming. The insights presented are based on qualitative interviews with dairy farming and livestock researchers from Germany and Austria. A key finding of this study is that we need to look more closely at the actual content of nature claims in animal welfare debates. The scientists interviewed tend to see idealized conditions in animal welfare discussions with images of nature which in fact seldom lead to improved conditions in dairy farming and, even then, only to a limited extent. The scientists interviewed rate calls for more nature connectedness in dairy farming from the nonagricultural public as anti-modern, complexity-reducing, and normative. Nevertheless, some of the scientists interviewed did have valuable insights into the nonagricultural public’s criticism of dairy farming practices. These scientists argued, however, that animal welfare needs to differentiate between nature connectedness and the innate needs of cattle when it comes to animal welfare strategies. An important conclusion of the study is that more discussion formats are needed to promote the exchange of ideas between different social groups attempting to understand animal welfare in dairy farming.
Um die Milchviehhaltung gibt es seit einigen Jahren auch eine öffentliche Tierwohldiskussion. Zwei Aspekte sind dabei immer wieder Gegenstand der Debatte: Die Anbindehaltung und der Weidegang. Auf Basis von qualitativen Interviews mit zivilgesellschaftlichen Verbänden und landwirtschaftlichen Verbänden zum Thema Tierwohl in der Milchviehwirtschaft wurden die Einstellungen und die Argumentationsmuster beider Verbandsgruppen zu den Haltungsformen Weidegang und Anbindehaltung ergründet. Von Interesse ist dieser Vergleich, da im Rahmen öffentlich-medialer Kommunikation die Diskussionsfronten zwischen beiden Verbandsgruppen als verhärtet dargestellt werden. Die Analyse der Aussagen der qualitativen Interviewreihe dieser Studie erlaubt die begründete Annahme, dass beide Verbandsgruppen mit den Themenkomplexen Anbindehaltung und Weidehaltung in einem wissenschaftlich orientierten Kommunikationskontext differenziert umgehen. Eine klare Polarisierung der Einstellungen zwischen beiden Verbandsgruppen war im Rahmen dieser Gesprächsformen nicht wahrnehmbar.
Animal husbandry methods also play an important role in public discussion, as animal welfare is often valued in society by visual perceptions. In this context, there is often an idealized idea of livestock husbandry and nutrition, which is staged by ideal-typical images. In the minds of many citizens, nature-loving images trigger a positive imagination that results from the longings of urban living conditions. Media and stakeholder analyses indicate that the use of straw in livestock husbandry and nutrition also has a positive impact on the welfare of livestock. According to this, straw is preferred by the public for more animal welfare.
But what is not considered is the fact that the straw must be of impeccable hygienic quality. Fungal infestation and the formation of mycotoxins in straw can cause diseases in livestock with consequences for animal welfare.
The first evaluation of a perfect straw quality also takes place in science through sensory tests, i.e. through smell, grip, colour and impurities. Only in the case of abnormalities in the sensory tests are further examinations indicated, such as microbiological examination procedures.
The hygienic properties of straw were examined on the basis of these assessment criteria. In addition to the microbiological-hygienic tests, the sensors of the straw were also tested.
The results show that there are no abnormalities in the sensory examination of the hygiene status. This was to observe an impeccable hygiene status.
However, the microbiological-hygienic investigations showed that the straw had microbiological as well as mycotoxin loads above the orientation values. This can have negative health effects, such as diseases for farm animals.
The scientific results led to the conclusion: The public discussion about animal welfare, which is often conducted primarily on the basis of visual impressions, could gain in scientific resilience if it includes objective results such as microbiological analyses in addition to images in order to evaluate animal welfare in livestock farming
Animal husbandry methods also play an important role in public discussion, as animal welfare is often valued in society by visual perceptions. In this context, there is often an idealized idea of livestock husbandry and nutrition, which is staged by ideal-typical images. In the minds of many citizens, nature-loving images trigger a positive imagination that results from the longings of urban living conditions. Media and stakeholder analyses indicate that the use of straw in livestock husbandry and nutrition also has a positive impact on the welfare of livestock. According to this, straw is preferred by the public for more animal welfare. But what is not considered is the fact that the straw must be of impeccable hygienic quality