When two worlds collide – human and animal welfare

Author: Bryony Ravate (IG: @brynsteinscience)

SCG ID: 1701202012

Blog: Brynstein Science

The boundaries between animal and human welfare are often blurred. We share our word with animals, so it makes sense that the two intertwine. Women from a domestic violence setting often report their pets being another victim. Those which hoard animals often have anxiety or depression; some have even classified animal hoarding as a mental health condition itself. However, not all examples of the human-animal relationship occur at home.

Agriculture is an industry which heavily relies on animals and the staff within the food and supply chain. With the growing desire for animal products, there is an increased strain within the industry. Slaughterhouses have been known to exploit workers – offering them little job security and avoiding basic human rights. Farmworkers are often overworked and underpaid, struggling to meet the demand for meat and dairy.

Farm work is physical with little job security. Customer demand is vulnerable to intense fluctuations – with health scares in the media contributing to mass hysteria and therefore sudden drops in sales. Farmers often report feeling burnt out and stressed, and animal agriculture is renowned for high turnover rates.

Is it just the farmers who suffer? Two researchers, Bjørn Gunnar Hansen and Olav Østerås sought to discover the link between the occupational welfare of farmers and that of their animals. By interviewing farmers about their job satisfaction and using previously published animal welfare details about the farm, they were able to draw some parallels between the two separate entities.

Farmers with lower stress levels and higher occupational wellbeing had higher levels of animal welfare on their farm.

This may seem strange to some. How does the farmer's psychological wellbeing correlate to how the animals are being treated? Animal welfare always has been and always will be a complex and interdisciplinary subject. There are no black and white answers, and multiple viewpoints must be considered to reach the most cohesive conclusions. Many animal activists may cease to consider the feelings of a farmer, but this study shows how interlinked the two are.

People of all occupations suffer from financial stress. When a farmer is struggling to scrape by, his animals may suffer. With money comes a variety of benefits for the animals, including better veterinary treatment (both prevention and cure), better feed and better technologies. Financial stress can be caused by the veterinary fees, slaughter fees and the low prices that customers want to pay. As a result of plummeting prices, farmers must work harder. Due to time and economical constraints, animals may be handled with less care. Animals may have a smaller environment per animal- making it easier for farmers to engage in health checks and seeing individual animals – whilst decreasing animal welfare in the process.

A lack of social cohesion between farmers prevents knowledge transfer and networking. Farmers may not be alerted to new technologies and methods which improve animal welfare and product yield if they lack a social support system or network. This can lead to a heightened workload, increased stress and decreased profit; therefore, increasing farmer stress even further. Loneliness increases feelings of depression, which may also alter the farmer's optimism and motivation to work.

Low occupational wellbeing and high stress can lead to pessimism. Pessimism can alter people’s perceptions of the world. A lonely stressed and therefore pessimistic farmer may play down the effect on animal welfare that their behaviours may have, leading to less proactive behaviours. A heavy workload can also reduce the opportunity to engage in proactive behaviours – they may only have time to complete tasks which have an obvious and quick result. Record keeping and administering of probiotics and healthy feed schedules are examples of these tasks, often with long term rather than short term results.

Contrarily, a happy farmer may engage in gentler handling techniques when dealing with his animals. He will have more money and time to spare, leading to better veterinary care and less workload, meaning he can spend longer dealing with each animal. He will have a keen support group in which he can discuss new methodologies and regimes, which will further improve the welfare of his animals and therefore increase yield and profit. The increase in welfare ultimately leads to a further increase in occupational wellbeing and vice versa.

So, what does this mean for farmers? The researchers suggest using animal welfare as an early intervention tool for mental health professionals. A farm with low animal welfare may be indicative of a farmer suffering from low occupational welfare, high stress and loneliness.

Instead of demonising farmers, perhaps we could learn to be a little kinder to them. They are essentially a business, and animals are the stock. Their actions are often a response to the demand that we, the consumers, place upon them. Instead of outrage at inflated supermarket prices, we should respect the process and effort that it takes for our food to go from farm to fridge. As consumers, our actions affect the industries which provide the products we demand. Our disconnect from the land may have made us forget this. Buying ethically can help not only the animals but the farmers which raise them too.

ORIGINAL SOURCE: Hansen, B.G., Østerås, O. 2019. Farmer welfare and animal welfare- Exploring the relationship between farmer’s occupational well-being and stress, farm expansion and animal welfare. Preventative Veterinary Medicine, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2019.104741