COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the welfare of intensively kept pigs in particularly taking into account the welfare of sows reared in varying degrees of confinement and in groups

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

The protection of pigs is a matter of Community competence.

Council Directive 91/630/EEC lays down minimum standards for the protection of pigs.

Based on Article 6 of this Directive the Commission is requested to submit a report to the Council by 1 October 1997, drawn up on the basis of an opinion from the Scientific Veterinary Committee, on the intensive pig-rearing system(s) which comply with the welfare requirements of pigs from the pathological, zootechnical, physiological and behavioural points of view and on the socio-economic implications of the different systems. The report shall particularly take into account the welfare of sows reared in varying degrees of confinement and in groups and shall be accompanied by appropriate proposals which take account of the conclusions of the report.

The Scientific Veterinary Committee on Animal Welfare (SCAHAW) of the Directorate General Health and Consumer Protection has adopted an opinion on the "Welfare of intensively kept pigs" the 30th September 1997.

The outcome of the above mentioned opinion highlight the necessity to take actions for the improvement of the welfare conditions of pigs and in particular to avoid in the future the use of individual stalls for pregnant sows.

Information is available to the Commission confirming that during the last years five Member States have adopted legislation for the protection of pigs providing additional requirements than Council Directive 91/630/EEC, in particular banning the individual stalls for pregnant sows and providing for improved flooring surfaces and separate areas for the performing of the different behaviours of the animals.

On the basis of the above mentioned elements the Commission has elaborated a report to be presented to the Council accompanied by appropriate proposals (see Article 6 of the Directive).

The aim of the Commission proposal is to amend current legislation in line with new scientific evidences and the experience acquired in this field by Member States.

The proposal for a Council Directive to amend Directive 91/630/EEC, based on the provision of Article 6, aims to:

* Ban the use the individual stalls for pregnant sows and gilts and the use of tethers;

* Increase the living space available for sows and gilts;

* Allow the sows and the gilts to have permanent access to materials for rooting;

* Introduce higher level of training and competence on welfare issues for the stockmen and the personnel in charge of the animals;

* Request new scientific advice in relation to certain issues of pig farming.

The present proposals will put in place an EU-wide framework of acceptable welfare standards for pigs. To allow the industry time to adjust to these higher standards, provision is made for the phased introduction of the measures. Once the measures are in place, the pigmeat industry can produce and market its product in a manner which is acceptable to the vast majority of the public, thus strengthening its image. Labelling requirements to highlight this and to provide consumer information can be considered in due course when the measures are fully in place.

Animal protection is a central issue in relation to the development of future farming policies in the EU to bring public image together with efficient farming systems. Adaptations in plant size, in labour inputs and in communication policy as well as a strong emphasis of a broad participation on benefits of production plans will be of help for that process.

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the welfare of intensively kept pigs in particularly taking into account the welfare of sows reared in varying degrees of confinement and in groups

1. Background

Council Directive 91/630/EEC [1] lays down minimum standards for the protection of pigs.

[1] OJ L 340, December 1991, p. 33.

Based on Article 6 of this Directive the Commission is requested to submit a report to the Council by 1 October 1997, drawn up on the basis of an opinion from the Scientific Veterinary Committee on the intensive pig-rearing system(s) which comply with the welfare requirements of pigs from the pathological, zootechnical, physiological and behavioural points of view and on the socio-economic implications of the different systems. The report shall particularly take into account the welfare of sows reared in varying degrees of confinement and in groups and shall be accompanied by appropriate proposals from the Commission.

The Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare of the Directorate General Health an Consumer Protection was asked to examine in detail the welfare of pigs kept in intensive farming systems, as well as the socio-economic implications of different systems of rearing.

The Committee established an expert-working group under the chairmanship of Professor P. Jensen (University of Agricultural Science - Department of Animal Environment and Health - Skara - Sweden).

The Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare adopted the opinion the "Welfare of pigs kept in intensive conditions" on 30 September 1997. The outcome of the opinion highlights the necessity for the Commission to undertake actions to obtain further improvement of the welfare of pigs.

Furthermore the Commission is aware that during the last few years the systems for the housing of pigs in the European Union are in the process of continuous change. In particular in several Member States farming systems are affected by national legislation on animal welfare going further that the requirements of Council Directive 91/630/EEC, demanding additional elements to improve the conditions of pigs kept in intensive conditions as the keeping of pregnant sows in groups. In several Member States environmental concerns are also demanding the modification of the farming systems for pigs with the reduction of the stocking densities of the animals.

On the bases of the conclusions presented by the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare and taking into account the recent legislative developments in this field in the EU, the Commission has decided to put forward appropriate proposals amending Council Directive 91/630/EEC.

In particular a proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 91/630/EEC and a proposal to be adopted by the Commission on the bases of the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee have been elaborated.

The Commission proposal accompanying this report aims to introduce improvements in the intensive farming of pigs that are affecting the welfare of the animals as the keeping of pregnant sows in individual stalls, the necessity to improve the quality of the environment where the animals are living and the quality of the flooring surfaces actual in use.

A second proposal, to be adopted by the Commission following the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee, will amend the Annexes of Directive 91/630/EEC improving the technical elements already included in the legislation. Mainly the proposal provides new elements in relation to the management of pigs in groups, a minimum age for weaning, additional details for flooring surfaces and the prohibition to perform routine mutilations.

2. Main production systems in the European Union - General overview

In Europe designs of housing system are affected by a number of factors including, climate, legislation, economics, farm structure and ownership, research and traditions.

Recently legislation related to animal protection and environmental concerns in addition to socio-economic issues have had a greater impact on pig housing systems in Member States.

The result of the influences of the above-mentioned factors is that at present time there are great differences in housing pigs between countries and regions of the European Union.

This paragraph aims to briefly review the nature of currently commercial pigs' production units in the Union with particular regard to the intensive farming systems.

2.1 Main categories of indoor systems of production

Indoor systems can be divided into 3 categories based on the manure handling system adopted: deep litter systems, scraped systems, slatted systems.

Deep litter systems

In these systems, the total area occupied by the animals has to be maintained in a clean, dry state by regular provision and removal of absorbent bedding material. In such systems the animals will often subdivide the pen area into separate lying and excretory areas, choosing to lie in the most thermally comfortable and undisturbed areas and excreting in areas of the pen which are cold, wet or draughty.

Whilst straw is the most commonly used material in such systems, there has recently been development of deep litter systems using sawdust beds, in some cases with anaerobic digestion of waste being promoted by regular application of an enzyme/microbe mixture.

Scraped systems

In these systems the lying and excretory areas are made structurally distinct and the manure is removed at frequent intervals from the excretory area, often daily. Such systems have the advantage of requiring little or no bedding and operating successfully at lower space allowances for the animal.

Slatted systems

Slatted housing systems are the most widely used throughout the EU.

In these systems hygiene is maintained, usually in the absence of any bedding, by installation of slatted floors through which the excreta can fall and be stored in a physically separate place from that occupied by the animals. Removal of the need for bedding makes such systems applicable for use in non-arable locations and minimises overall farm labour requirements.

Systems may be fully slatted over the entire pen area, or have a solid floored lying area combined with a slatted dunging area. More recently, slatted systems designed especially to reduce ammonia emissions have been developed.

2.2 Housing systems for different categories of pigs

a. Boars

Mature boars are normally housed individually to facilitate staff safety and service management. Boars maintained at artificial insemination studs are typically housed in individual pens.

Replacement breeding boars are typically purchased at 5-6 months of age from specialised breeders. They begin their working life at about 6-7 months of age and, on most farms, are sold after 2-3 years.

b. Dry sows and replacement gilts

Replacement gilts are typically reared in groups, in the same way as slaughter pigs, until transfer to the breeding herd. It is most common for these gilts to be housed separately from older sows until completion of their first lactation.

Breeding sows may be housed individually, in stable groups (formed at weaning or service and remaining unchanged until farrowing) or in large dynamic groups (where existing sows are removed to farrow and replaced by newly served sows on a regular basis). Individual housing may be in fully enclosed stalls or in partial stalls where the sow is tethered by a collar or girth belt (tethering will be banned in the EU after 2005 as provided by Council Directive 91/630/EEC).

B.1 Individual housing in stalls

Individual stalls typically allow the sow an area of 0.6-0.7 x 2.0-2.1 m, such that she cannot turn around and excreta are deposited at a fixed location. There are many different stall designs: with good designs the stall width is adapted to the body size of the sow, the partitions are barred or meshed to allow visual contact but prevent aggression and the height and fixing position of the bottom rail are appropriate to avoid injury. Flooring is most commonly partially slatted, although both fully slatted and bedded systems do occur. Sows commonly have a trough which is either individual or communal (4-6 sows) to allow the possibility of keeping sows of the same body size or condition in adjacent stalls. Feeding may be manual or automatic (1-3 times per day) and feed may be given dry or wet.

B.2 Group housing

The design of group housing systems is highly influenced by the constraints imposed by current sow feeding practice. Precise rationing of each individual animal without aggression can only be guaranteed by individual confining the animals at the time of feeding.

Dry sows are typically fed a relatively small amount of a concentrate diet in one or two daily meals.

The main feed delivery systems available for group housed animals are the following: individual feeding stalls, automated flat rate individual feeding stalls, automated individual identification and rationing (feeding stations), ad libitum feeding systems.

B.3 Farrowing and lactation

Sows are typically moved from dry sow to farrowing accommodation 3-7 days before the expected farrowing date (115 days after service).

In outdoor systems, farrowing and lactating sows are housed in either individual or group paddocks, with access to individual farrowing huts. In indoor systems, the use of farrowing crates for this period predominates. These crates, typically 2.0-2.4 x 0.6m in size, are designed to restrict the movement of the sow and placed centrally or offset in a pen which has specialised provision for the young piglets.

The tethering of the sow in partial crates is an alternative option, but will be precluded under the terms of Directive 91/630/EEC. In some member states, the use of farrowing crates is already restricted to a limited period around the time of farrowing.

However, in the EU as a whole, the use of farrowing crates throughout lactation is the predominant system.

Recently, some indoor group-farrowing systems have also been developed, where sows have individual farrowing nests and access to a communal area. These include systems with simple nest boxes, small square nest pens with heated creeps. At the present time, none of these are used to any significant extent in commercial practice.

Most sows remain in the farrowing crate or individual pen throughout lactation. However, in some cases sows and litters may be grouped in a 'multisuckling' system once the piglets are established. The age at which this occurs can vary from 2-3 days to 2 weeks.

C. Weaning and weaners

Weaning typically takes place abruptly at between 3 and 5 weeks of age, although some farms still wean as late as 8 weeks. At this time, the sow is returned to service accommodation, and the piglets either left in the farrowing pen for a period or moved immediately to the weaner accommodation.

A variety of housing systems for weaned piglets exists. Tiered cages house small groups of pigs on fully-slatted floors, typically in highly controlled environments with supplementary heating. Flat decks are again fully-slatted but open-topped for easier access.

If intensive housing is used, pigs will be moved from the first stage weaner accommodation to larger, second stage accommodation after 2-4 weeks. If more extensive housing is used, weaners may remain in the same pen until 30-40 kg or, in a few instances, until slaughter.

D. Fattening pigs

Accommodation for fattening pigs may again be fully slatted, partly slatted, minimally bedded with scraped dunging area or deep bedded with straw or sawdust. Although there are national differences, housing with fully or partly slatted flooring predominates within the EU. Feed may be provided either wet or dry. Dry feed is often given ad libitum from one or more hoppers, although feed may be restricted in the later stages to prevent excessive fatness in pigs of unimproved genotypes or very heavy slaughter weights. In controlled environment housing, it is normal to use two or three housing stages, each with larger pens, in the growing/finishing period to make most efficient use of space.

3. Main socio economics aspects of pigs' production in the EU

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

In the EU the pig population has remained relatively stable during the 1990s. However, in 1998 pig population increased by more than 5% from previous year reaching 125 million heads (EUROSTAT). In 1999 and 2000 EU pig population has slightly decreased.

The total population of breeding sows in the EU is around 12.6 Mio sows [2] (see graphic).

[2] EUROSTAT 1997.

Concerning the distribution of sows per country (see table below) the data available indicate that in 1999 five countries have the 72% of the total population of the Community.

Table 1: Number of sows in EU Member States (in '000 animals and as percentage of total (EUROSTAT 1999)

>TABLE POSITION>

It should be noted that sow herd size is relatively larger in Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands and the UK as compared to other countries, which have fewer farms with more than 200 sows. In the Netherlands almost 90% of the farms have more than 100 sows. Herd size is relatively small in Germany where more than 40% of the sow farms have less than 10 sows. In Italy the 80% of the farms are having less than 10 sows while the 2% of the farms hold 60% of the sow population [3].

[3] H.J.M. Hendriks, B.K. Pedersen, H.M. Vermeer and M. Wittman: "Pig housing systems in Europe: current trends" 49th Annual Meeting of the European Association for animal production (Warsaw - Poland. August 1998)

In Germany the sow stock decreased during the 90s but nevertheless it remains the biggest in Europe with 21.68% (EU-12) of all sows. However for total number of pigs, the gap narrowed between Germany and Spain, the second biggest producer in the EU.

In the EU almost 65% of all the pregnant sows are housed individually and of these more than 60% do not have access to straw. In countries including Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and UK group housing systems are increasing due to legislation prohibiting confinement systems such as stalls and tethers, which are restricting the sows ability to turn around.

EU production of pig meat is around 18 million tonnes per annum (1999). The EU is self-sufficient in pig-meat production and is the world's largest exporter.

In the EU per capita consumption of pig meat has been increasing steadily and is predicted to continue along this trend.

Pig production has become a very specialised industry, often not associated with a land area, and, geared to purchase, fattening and sale of standardised animals meeting precise specifications and strict delivery deadlines.

It should also be noted that the structure of the sector has been influenced by the fact that the corresponding EU pig market organisation is market oriented without direct support measures, for instance direct aids.

At present the production in the European Union is highly concentrated: 72% of the pig population is in five Member States, 21% in Germany alone.

Within these Member States regional concentration results in huge numbers of pigs being kept in close proximity. In Spain, for example, one third of the total pig population is in Catalonia, 95% of Belgium pig population is in Vlaams Gewest, 90% of the pigs of the Netherlands are in the east and south of the country and 65% of the pig population of Germany is located in the three Länder of Bavaria, Lower Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia. The information available to the Commission shows that for all these areas, with the exception of Catalonia, livestock density exceeds the level that is generally accepted as ecologically sustainable (1,4 livestock units per hectare) [4].

[4] Source: CONCENTRATION OF LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION (Martin BOSCHMA, Alain JOARIS, Claude VIDAL - Eurostat) The complete version of the report is available on the Web site of DG Agriculture at the following address: http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg06/envir/report/en/live_en/report.htm

The fact that pigs farming is only profitable on an increasingly larger scale as margins are squeezed as a result of competition at home and abroad has resulted in significant increases in the average number of pigs per holding and the proportion of large holdings. For example during the period 1990 to 1995 the average number of pigs per holding in Belgium increased by 68%, in Spain by 59% and in the Netherlands by 36%. The increase in Germany during the same period was less marked (19%) due to the restructuring that took place after unification.

Specialisation in Member States such as the Netherlands results in the movement of piglets from farm to farm, whereas closed systems, such as the one dominant in Denmark, minimise the number of movements and thereby the risk of spreading disease.

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4. SUMMARY OF THE MAIN LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS ON THE PROTECTION OF PIGS KEPT IN INTENSIVE CONDITIONS ACTUALLY IN FORCE IN MEMBER STATES.

The current legislative situation of the member states of the Union is presented in the following table based on the information given by the competent authorities duringthe first six month of year 2000.

The information available demonstrate that the influence of animal welfare and environment protection concerns have affected the way pigs are reared in a certain number of member states. Farmers are forced to meet higher demands in terms of animal housing and management in different regions of the Community.

In several member states legislation is at present providing for the keeping of pregnant sows in groups and in two of them (UK and Sweden) the provisions are already entered into force. In the UK 85% of sows are actually group housed and the proportion is still increasing.

Mainly in Northern Europe the legislation for the keeping of pigs address new requirements for their protection that are reflected in the opinion of the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare as for example technical requirements for the flooring surfaces, minimum dimensions for the individual pens enabling all the animals to turn around easily, materials for environmental enrichment, detailed requirements to carry on mutilation on the pigs or banning certain mutilations.

At present everywhere in the EU environmental concerns and corresponding legislation have affected the way pigs are kept. EU legislation is now providing specific requirements for the reduction of stocking densities, constructive details for flooring surfaces and the removal of waste with the aim to reduce ammonia emission.

The main Community legislation adopted aiming to reduce the environmental impacts of intensive livestock production is the Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources [5]. This Directive has yet to be applied fully in most Member States despite deadlines for the undertaking of most measures having passed [6].

[5] OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

[6] See for details: COM(1997)473 and COM(1998)16 final.

During these days the pressure of environmental concerns associated with the adoption of new animal welfare standards is already requiring to pig farmers to change their systems of production in line with a new conceptualisation of the housing systems.

Consumers' demands and new marketing standards developed by the important retail chains mainly drive these changes.

>TABLE POSITION>

(*) More restrictive measures on animal welfare have to be applied when a farmer subscribe to a "contrats territoriaux d'exploitation".

(**) Actually into force.

(ñ) Member that did not provide information to the Commission.

5. Socio-economics aspects in relation to the improving of certain welfare requirements for pigs as provided in the Commission proposal

Clearly, improved animal welfare conditions carry a price and the measures outlined in this proposal are no exception. In an industry as competitive as the pigmeat industry, where profit margins are extremely tight, even small price differentials can have important competitive implications. There are also implications for consumers who, ultimately, bear the cost of improved welfare standards.

Pig production in the EU will be increasingly affected by global trade and by the changing of consumer values. Producers will have to take into account more and more than before consumers' concerns and their preferences.

In particular in most member states animal welfare is an issue of increasing importance and the level of legislation in this field is extending. Today the requirements for welfare are strongly related to the image of production. There is an increasing awareness among consumers and producers about the effects that breeding and farming techniques may have on animals, on their health and welfare and, not least, the environment.

In its report the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare presented under chapter 6.3 an economic evaluation of welfare improving measures. In several model calculations, based on farm price conditions in the Netherlands, measures improving animal welfare are compared with a basic situation as it is provided by Council Directive 91/630/EEC. The exercise include:

- Comparison of individual housing to group housing for dry sows

- Economic impact of changing the housing of lactating sows,

- Economic impact of changing weaning age,

- Possible effects of increasing space for fattening pigs and the use of straw,

- Estimation of how higher production costs due to welfare improving measures may effect the consumption of pigmeat and some reflections on consumer attitude and behaviour.

The main results of the evaluation are concluded in the following 5 points:

1. Some new techniques and housing systems whose aim is to improve animal welfare, increase the cost price of pig meat and hence reduce farmers' income, whilst other measures have no cost or are even increase income. However, as the operating margin is thin, even small changes in cost can change the balance.

2. The cheapest form of group housing for pregnant sows is cheaper from a per-sow investment point of view than any individual housing system. However, this benefit could be reduced or totally offset by poorer productivity of the sows. (decrease in number of liveborn piglets per litter and increase in the annual culling rate of the sows).

3. Most consumers are presumed not to be willing to pay more for pigmeat that is produced under conditions which they perceive to be better with respect to animal welfare. Therefore, there will be a serious threat to income and employment in the EU pig industry, due to a decline in competitiveness with respect to export on the world market on the one hand and the possible import of pigmeat from third countries where animal welfare standards are lower on the other.

4. If consumers are not willing to pay for better animal welfare when imports from third countries where animal welfare standards are lower cannot be restricted, then the pig industry has no choice but to try to counterbalance the increase in costs, for example by increasing the herd size and improving economic efficiency.

5. The possibility that consumers will cease to buy pig meat if the welfare of pigs is perceived to be unacceptably poor should be considered although data concerning this point are not available at present.

It should be born in mind that if existing housing systems for sows were converted to comply with the present proposal the cost would be very difficult to estimate as the existing situation vary a lot from Member States to Member States. Naturally the extra cost would be highest in recently build confinements as the depreciation would not have yet decreased the value of earlier investment.

It is also pointed out in the report of the Scientific Committee that if changes to the housing systems are done at the end of a reasonable lifetime period of a confinement the cost calculation will be quite different. While difficult to quantify, the additional costs arising from the abolition of individual sow stalls are estimated to increase the cost of about EUR 0.006 per kilo/pig carcase (building costs + labour costs in new building with slats). All the data received by the Commission confirmed that the costs are higher if the conversion of the systems has to be carried out with a delay shorter then 10 years, increasing the amount to EUR 0.02 per kilo/pig carcase.

In the group housing systems, data shows that costs for the building are actually lower than in individual stall system: the SVC report (Section 6.3.3) states "The main reason for the decrease [in investment costs] is that the expensive crates are not needed any more." Concerning the running costs they are affected mainly by two elements: the use of straw (the cost of it is not easily quantifiable) and the system of feeding the animals (see table 3).

Table 3 compares the costs and the financial return between a farm in the Netherlands complying with the provisions of Council Directive 91/630/EEC keeping sows in individual stalls without any straw with the different ways of keeping sows in groups. The table confirms that, in relation to new installations with Electronic feeding systems, the production costs of keeping sows in groups is lower than the ones related to individual stalls. The production costs are rising since straw is provided (due in particular to the high costs of straw in the Netherlands) and when the surface available is increased consistently (over what is included in the Commission proposal).

Table 3 is summarising the data presented in the tables included in section 6.3 of the report of the Scientific Veterinary Committee where it is possible to refer for more detailed information.

Table 3: Changes in costs and financial return of group housing with ESF compared to sow stalls for typical(**) Netherlands sow farm (165 sows)

(SVC report)

>TABLE POSITION>

(*) ESF: Electronic sow feeder

(**) Typical: complying with Council Directive 91/630/EEC

It must be underlined that this table is based on a scenario of two types of new installations, one based on group housing and the other on individual sow stalls as exist today. It does not address the question of the additional costs involved for actual producers who without the proposed amendment of the Directive would not have to invest into new installations.

Regarding the question of financial aid to farmers for investment in buildings and technical installations for the improvement of the welfare of pigs, it should be noted that Council Regulation (EC) 1257/1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) provides for support for investments in agricultural holdings with the objective to preserve and improve animal welfare standards. The support measures have to be included in rural development plans prepared by the Member States and approved by the Commission. They will be co-financed by the EAGGF and the Member State concerned.

Concerning the international dimension of animal welfare and the relation with WTO it is evident that the issue is a complex one, which is at the crossroads of economic, ethical, animal health, public health, food production and legal issues. For this reason the present report will not deal directly with this issue but will recall the different initiatives that the EC has undertaken to address animal welfare in the context of WTO negotiations to ensure that trade will not undermined the Community's efforts in the improving the protection of farm animals.

In this context the Community has submitted in June 2000 during a WTO meeting a specific paper on "Animal welfare and trade in agriculture". The paper was starting with the presentation of the objectives of the EC in negotiating animal welfare in the context of WTO and in particular ensuring that trade does not undermine the efforts of the Community in improving the protection of the welfare of the animals. The EC propose a combination of a number of actions to address this legitimate concern: (1) the development of multilateral agreements, (2) appropriate labelling rules, (3) to exempt compensation of additional costs to meet animal welfare standards from reduction commitments.

Table 4: Market prices for pig-meat (1)

>TABLE POSITION>

Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture.

(1) Representative markets. (2) Slaughter weight - Class U. After 1 July 1995, Class E.

(3) Calculated on the basis of prices in national currencies. (4) Weighted Ø EURO/100 kg

6. Main areas where action is required to improve the welfare of pigs kept in intensive conditions

Pigs have needs which must be fulfilled in order to safeguard their welfare.

Such needs include the performing certain species-specific behaviours, taking sufficient exercise and adopting adequate movements and postures to avoid bad development of muscles, bones and joints, avoiding injuries, disease and parasitism, and living in adequate social surroundings.

Behaviour, health and productivity of pigs are greatly influenced by the specific design of housing equipment, climatic factors and stockmanship.

A number of conclusions and subsequent recommendations are given by the experts of the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare to improve welfare conditions for the different categories of pigs kept in intensive systems.

Based on these conclusions and in the light if the current developments in European pigs' farming techniques the Commission has elaborated a Proposal for a Council Directive amending present EU legislation in relation to the following issues.

6.1 The keeping of pigs in social isolation and in particular the use of the individual stall-systems for sows are causing serious welfare problems to the animals

Apart from adult boars and sows around parturition, pigs are social animals.

Neither boars nor gilts should be reared in social isolation. It is acceptable to house boars individually, but they should not be permanently housed in visual and olfactory isolation from other pigs.

The Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare is concluding that some serious welfare problems for sows persist even in the best stall-housing system. The advantages for welfare of group-housing sows rather than confining them in stalls are in particular the establishing of normal social interactions and better potential for the provision of opportunities to root or manipulate materials. The major problems evident in good examples of tether housing are also evident in stall-housing. As a consequence, group-housed sows show less abnormality of bone and muscle development, much less abnormal behaviour, less likelihood of extreme physiological responses, less of the urinary tract infections associated with inactivity, and better cardiovascular fitness.

No individual pen should be used which does not allow the sow to turn around easily.

The Commission proposal address the ban on the use of individual pen for sows during a period starting from 4 weeks after the service to 7 days before the expected time of farrowing. The use of tethers for sows and gilts will be definitively forbidden. A minimum size for the sow pen that will allow the sow to turn around is provided.

6.2 The keeping of pigs on artificial flooring and in particular the use of fully slatted flooring surfaces affects the welfare of the animals

The needs of pigs which are affected especially by artificial flooring are: to have comfort when lying and avoidance of injury, to minimise the risk of disease, to thermoregulate adequately in any high or low temperatures which might be encountered. Where floors are perforated or slatted, rather than solid, hygiene may be improved by reducing the contact between the pig and the faeces/urine. The risk for claw injuries is less on solid flooring than on perforated flooring. Some perforations or slats in floors may trap claws and the solid section between perforations or slats may be too narrow to support the foot evenly.

Pigs have a preference for insulated or bedded flooring providing physical and thermal comfort. In hot conditions, possibilities for being cooled by the floor may be more important to the pigs than physical comfort or insulation provided by a bedded area. Hence deep litter or compost systems may create thermoregulatory problems in pigs kept under high ambient temperatures.

Bedded flooring not only influences comfort, it also provides for investigatory and manipulatory activities and, in the case of straw, may provide dietary fibre and allow pigs to express feeding behaviour. This aspects cannot be analysed independently each other.

Housing systems for growing and finishing pigs should facilitate separation of functional areas (feeding, resting and dunging area), or prevent direct contact with faeces in the resting area.

Earth floors suitable for rooting and objects or materials for manipulation and exploration provide environmental enrichment in barren housing. Deformable materials, such as wood with bark on it or thick rope, are especially attractive to pigs. When artificial objects are provided, however, the interest in manipulating these objects decreases as a function of decreased novelty. All pigs should have permanent access to soil for rooting or manipulable material.

The Commission proposal address specific requirements for concrete slatted floors. The provision is aimed to avoid the trapping of pigs' claws and to avoid discomfort whilst the animals are standing or walking. Pigs will be provided with different appropriate functional conditions and will have permanent access to materials for investigation and manipulation. The Commission proposal is requiring the permanent availability of fibre food for the animals.

6.3 Lack of feeding space is a potential source of aggression and poor feed conversion; the keeping of hungry animals increase the agonistic behaviour

Some welfare problems of dry sows can occur in several different kinds of rearing conditions. The food provided for dry sows is usually much less than that which sows would choose to consume, so the animals are hungry throughout much of their lives.

All sows should be given sufficient food for maintenance, growth and piglet production. All sows should be given some bulky or high fibre food as well as high-energy food in order to reduce hunger as well as to provide for the need to chew.

Sows kept in groups should be fed using a system which ensures that each individual can obtain sufficient food without being attacked, even when competitors for the food are present.

The Commission proposal address the use of feeding systems which ensures that each individual can obtain sufficient food without been attacked.

6.4 A stockman without competence in farming techniques and on welfare requirements causes problems in an otherwise good system

The quality of stockmanship has large effects on the welfare of pigs in any housing system. A skilful stockman can compensate for many bad effects of certain housing systems.

The Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare is recommending that every person who is in charge of the pigs should be licensed for this occupation. Such licensing should follow proper training and certification.

It should be noted that in particular the keeping of sows in groups will require particular knowledge of the appropriate management practices and awareness of the importance of the adoption of specific handling procedures.

The Commission proposal addresses the necessity that any person attending to pigs must be aware of the provisions related to the welfare of pigs and must be thought to apply welfare provisions in the appropriate manner.

7. Main areas where future research is needed for further improvements of pigs' protection

The Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare is concluding that more knowledge is needed in some areas where the consequence of farming practices on the welfare of the pigs are not yet investigated.

The Commission proposal is actually addressing these concerns for the future.

Certain requirements of the Directive would have probably to be revised in the future in line with the developments of scientific knowledge and new farming techniques for pigs.

In particular the Commission is aiming to address in its proposal the needs for more knowledge in the field of: the assessment of the consequences of growth promoters on welfare, the use of antibiotics in feed and antibiotic resistance, the effects of some farming practices in relation to space allowances, stall designing and flooring for fattening pigs, consequences on sows being confined during the lactation period and the developing of the loose-housing systems for that period without compromising piglet survival, feeding practices and their relation with the availability of materials for the pigs to root and manipulate.

The opinion from the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare shows that, since infectious diseases are an important welfare problem, particular attention should be paid to the developing of studies for the risk factors for the most prevalent endemic health diseases. Particular attention shall also be given to genetic changes produced by genetic engineering. Actually works on the welfare of transgenic pigs or pigs treated with substances produced with recombinant DNA technology are not abundant in the scientific literature. This area of development related to breeding technologies is foreseen as the one that will probably demand more actions from the future community legislation.