1. Action to improve the productivity and welfare of pigs with the aim of reducing tail docking
4th to 6th October 2016, Grange Ireland
Matthias Chapman-Rose
Animal Welfare Division
German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture

2. Content Overview activities & initiatives in Germany Main problems
Approaches

3. Overview – Situation in Germany
Several activities / initiatives
Research level
Retailer, NGO, Industry, etc.
Government level
State („Länder“) level (CA)
Federal level

4. Retailer, NGO, Industry, etc.
For example:
brand meat programmes / Animal welfare labels
(Initiative Animal Welfare)
Annual Exchange Meeting since (ZDS)

5. Initiatives – State („Länder“) Level (CA)
For example:
Advisory schemes
Interpretation aid for enrichment material
Research programmes
„Curly tail bonus“ (€16.50/pig)
Handbook (manual)

6. Initiatives – Federal Level I
Standing State Secretary Committee AW (Federal & Länder): mandate Federal Research Institute (FLI) to
identify research needs and
organise and coordinate research with Länder research farms

7. Initiatives – Federal Level II
Voluntary Agreement with industry (not accomplished yet)
Research budget: since 2011 ca. €3m-€4m
In process of planning:
developing and building a „Model-“Farm

8. Initiatives – Federal Level III
Model and Demonstration AW Scheme (since 2013) (tail biting approx. €1.6m-€2m)
goal: Putting new scientific findings into practice
3 main approaches:
Advisory scheme,
Demonstration farms,
„Platform of knowledge“

9. I Model and Demonstration AW Scheme
2013 – 2016 Advisory scheme:
Project 1: Prevention of tail biting
Project 2: Intervention at acute tail biting
holistic approach, risk assessment (Schwip) -> recommendations for actions

10. II Model and Demonstration AW Scheme:
since 2015 „Demonstration“-farms
10 Farms (5x piglet production; 5x fattening pigs)
Implement higher standards and better management
3-4x/a exchange experiences
Pass information on to other farmers („show room“)
Accomplish partly long tail (but with high input)

11. III Model and Demonstration AW Scheme:
currently in process of planning:
„Platform of knowledge“
Implementing a facility which
collects, processes & provides information (scientific findings etc.) for farmers

12. Initiatives – Federal Level IV
Joint position paper - DK, NL, SE, DE (April 2015)
Request for revision of Directive 2008/120:
among others:
„The responsibility for keeping tail docked pigs throughout the whole production chain needs to be reviewed.“

13. Farm 1 Piglet Production
Main Problems
Tail biting
Tail docking ? !
Farm 2 Weaners
Farm 3 Fattening pigs ! ?
Farm 1 Piglet Production
Tail docking is performed either
without knowledge of and without provable essential need or
because weaning and/or rearing farmers demand piglets with docked tails

14. Farm 1 Piglet Production
Main Problems
Tail biting
Tail docking ?
Farm 2 Weaners
Farm 3 Fattening pigs ?
Farm 1 Piglet Production
Scenario a) „tails docked without knowledge of essential need“
CA was so far powerless, because
Piglet producers: „Piglets are sold to a livestock dealer – no knowledge where and how the pig will be kept.“
Weaner & fattening producers: „There are only piglets with docked tails available.“

15. Farm 1 Piglet Production
Main Problems
Tail biting
Tail docking !
Farm 2 Weaners
Farm 3 Fattening pigs !
Farm 1 Piglet Production
Scenario b) „tail docked piglets demanded“
CA was so far powerless, because
Weaner & fattening: „If tail is not docked, we will buy somewhere else.“
Piglet producer: „If I lose business, I will claim for compensation.“
Different enforcement

16. Farm 1 Piglet Production
Main Problems
Tail biting
Tail docking
Farm 2 Weaners
Farm 3 Fattening pigs
Farm 1 Piglet Production
Ideally:
Regulation which excludes the possibility of keeping pigs with docked tails, unless specific conditions are proven to exist, resulting in tail docking being unavoidable.
Directive 2008/120:
Currently provisions address circumstances under which tails may be docked.

17. CA approach - in process of planning
EU recommendation will be taken into account by CA
Willingness of all farmers to participate
1. risk assessment (third party)
2. adjustment of conditions
3. assessment animal based indicators and control group
4a. occurrence of tail biting
4b. no tail biting
Stop routine tail docking

18. Summary / Conclusions
Many different initiatives in Germany on different levels.
Current provisions (Directive 2008/120) make it very difficult for CA to enforce the phasing out of routine tail docking.
EU-recommendation can help and is a very good approach, however
for a successful implementation it is crucial that all farmers along the productin chain agree to participate.
Ideally declaration from EU-Farmers’ association and on national level would be provided.