» Articles » PMID: 30282909

"I Feel Sorry for Them": Australian Meat Consumers' Perceptions About Sheep and Beef Cattle Transportation

Overview
Journal Animals (Basel)
Date 2018 Oct 5
PMID 30282909
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Concern for livestock welfare is significantly increasing in many parts of the world. One area of concern is the transportation of livestock. Using qualitative research methods, this research explores the concerns of Australian meat consumers related to livestock transportation practices, both on land by truck and on sea by ship. Participants were predominantly concerned about animals being "crammed" into trucks and ships, and the long distances over which livestock were transported. Likely contributors to these reactions are the high visibility of truck transport in urban areas, and recent media and political attention to the live-export issue in Australia. We argue that participants' concerns about transport are arising for a variety of reasons, including anthropomorphic tendencies, genuine concern for the welfare of farm animals, and emotional responses related to the discomfort experienced by meat consumers when they are reminded of the meat-animal connection. Given the importance of transport to the red-meat production industry, these results suggest that the sector may need to reconsider some of their practices and increase transparency and communication about the practices, which they utilise to ensure good animal welfare.

Citing Articles

Behavioral activity patterns but not hair cortisol concentrations explain steers' transition-related stress in the first 6 wk in the feedlot.

Mijar S, van der Meer F, Hodder A, Pajor E, Orsel K J Anim Sci. 2024; 102.

PMID: 39212666 PMC: 11401993. DOI: 10.1093/jas/skae236.


Are regulations addressing farm animal welfare issues during live transportation fit for purpose? A multi-country jurisdictional check.

Duval E, Lecorps B, von Keyserlingk M R Soc Open Sci. 2024; 11(1):231072.

PMID: 38269076 PMC: 10805601. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.231072.


Values of Australian Meat Consumers Related to Sheep and Beef Cattle Welfare: What Makes a Good Life and a Good Death?.

Buddle E, Bray H, Ankeny R Food Ethics. 2022; 8(1):5.

PMID: 36536767 PMC: 9753876. DOI: 10.1007/s41055-022-00114-2.


Field Trial of Factors Associated With the Presence of Dead and Non-ambulatory Pigs During Transport Across Three Colombian Slaughterhouses.

Romero M, Sanchez J, Hernandez R Front Vet Sci. 2022; 9:790570.

PMID: 35141312 PMC: 8820205. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.790570.


Public Views of Dairy Calf Welfare and Dairy Consumption Habits of American Youth and Adults.

Perttu R, Ventura B, Rendahl A, Endres M Front Vet Sci. 2021; 8:693173.

PMID: 34458352 PMC: 8385635. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.693173.


References
1.
Leroy F, Praet I . Meat traditions. The co-evolution of humans and meat. Appetite. 2015; 90:200-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2015.03.014. View

2.
Sinclair M, Derkley T, Fryer C, Phillips C . Australian Public Opinions Regarding the Live Export Trade before and after an Animal Welfare Media Exposé. Animals (Basel). 2018; 8(7). PMC: 6070947. DOI: 10.3390/ani8070106. View

3.
Coleman G . Public animal welfare discussions and outlooks in Australia. Anim Front. 2020; 8(1):14-19. PMC: 6952000. DOI: 10.1093/af/vfx004. View

4.
Taylor N, Signal T . Willingness to pay: Australian consumers and "on the farm" welfare. J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2010; 12(4):345-59. DOI: 10.1080/10888700903163658. View

5.
Salerno J, Peter-Hagene L . The interactive effect of anger and disgust on moral outrage and judgments. Psychol Sci. 2013; 24(10):2069-78. DOI: 10.1177/0956797613486988. View