Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T17:42:32.224Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Electric shock control of farmed animals: Welfare review and ethical critique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

D Grumett  and
A Butterworth
D Grumett*
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, New College, Mound Place, Edinburgh EH1 2LX, UK
A Butterworth
Affiliation:
WelfareMax and Animal Welfare Training Ltd, 14 Stonewell Lane, Congresbury, Bristol BS49 5DL, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The available methods of electric shock control or containment of farmed animals are increasing and potentially include: (i) fixed and movable electric fencing; (ii) cattle trainers; (iii) prods or goads; (iv) wires in poultry barns; (v) dairy collecting yard backing gates; (vi) automated milking systems (milking robots); and (vii) collars linked to virtual fencing and containment systems. Since any electric shock is likely to cause a farmed animal pain, any such control or containment must, to be ethically justifiable, bring clear welfare benefits that cannot be practicably delivered in other ways. Associated areas of welfare concern with ethical implications include the displacement of stockpersons by technology, poor facility design, stray voltage, coercive behavioural change and indirect impacts on human society and values.

Keywords

animal welfareautomated milking systemcollarelectric fencingelectric shockethics
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , August 2022 , pp. 373 - 385
Copyright
© 2022 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Acosta, N, Barreto, N, Caitano, P, Marichal, R, Pedemonte, M and Oreggioni, J 2020 Research platform for cattle virtual fences. Proceedings 2020 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology pp 797–802. IEEE: Piscataway NJ, USA. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIT45562.2020.9067313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albright, JL, Cennamo, AR and Wisniewski, EW 1992 Voluntary entrance into the milking parlour. In: Ipema, AH, Lippus, AC, Metz, JHM and Rossing, W (eds) Prospects for Automatic Milking pp 459–465. Pudoc Scientific Publishers: Wageningen, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-6226(93)90080-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, DM 2007 Virtual fencing-past, present and future. The Rangeland Journal 29: 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1071/RJ06036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, DM, Hale, CS, Libeau, R and Nolen, B 2003 Managing stocking density in real-time. In: Allsopp, N, Palmer, AR, Milton, SJ, Kirkman, KP, Kerley, GIH, Hurt, CR and Brown, CJ (eds) Proceedings of the VIIth International Rangelands Congress pp 840–843. 26th July - 1st August 2003, Durban, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
Animal Welfare Act (UK) 2006 Animal Welfare Act 2006. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45Google Scholar
Appleby, MC 1984 Factors affecting floor laying by domestic hens: a review. World's Poultry Science Journal 40: 241–249. https://doi.org/10.1079/WPS19840019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleman, RD and Gustafson, RJ 1985 Source of stray voltage and effect on cow health and performance. Journal of Dairy Science 68: 1554–1567. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(85)80994-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Appleton, V 1911 T om Swift and His Electric Rifle; or, Daring Adventures in Elephant Land. Grosset: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Ashokkumar, M and Ajayan, PM 2021 Materials science per-spective of multifunctional materials derived from collagen. International Materials Reviews 66/3: 160-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09506608.2020.1750807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bear, C and Holloway, L 2019 Beyond resistance: geographies of divergent more-than-human conduct in robotic milking. Geoforum 104: 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.04.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunberg, EI, Bergslid, IK, Bøe, KE and Sørheim, KM 2017 The ability of ewes with lambs to learn a virtual fencing system. Animal 11: 2045–2050. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731117000891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunberg, EI, Bøe, KE and Sørheim, KM 2015 Testing a new virtual fencing system on sheep. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A - Animal Science 65: 168–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064702.2015.1128478Google Scholar
Campbell, DLM, Lea, JM, Farrer, WJ, Haynes, SJ and Lee, C 2017 Tech-savvy beef cattle? how heifers respond to moving virtu-al fence lines. Animals 7(9): 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani7090072CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, DLM, Lea, JM, Haynes, SJ, Farrer, WJ, Leigh-Lancaster, CJ and Lee, C 2018 Virtual fencing of cattle using an automated collar in a feed attractant trial. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 200: 71–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2017.12.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, DLM, Lea, JM, Keshavarzi, H and Lee, C 2019 Virtual fencing is comparable to electric tape fencing for cattle behavior and welfare. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 6: 445. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00445CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, LE, Mowry, GR and Hartstock, JG 1956 Factors affecting efficiency of electric fence operation. Agricultural Research Service 42. United States Department of Agriculture, USAGoogle Scholar
Cholewiń ska, P, Iwaszkiewicz, M, Ł uczycka, D, Wysoczań ski, T, Nowakowski, P, Czyż, K, Wyrostek, A and Bodkowski, R 2019 Electrical characteristics based on resistance and impedance of Polish Olkuska sheep lambs wool. Journal of Natural Fibers 17: 1366–1377. https://doi.org/10.1080/15440478.2019.1568347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Correll, N, Schwager, M and Rus, D 2008 Social control of herd animals by integration of artificially controlled congeners. In: Asada, M, Hallam, JCY, Meyer, J-A and Tani, J (eds) International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior: From Animals to Animals pp 437–446. Springer: Berlin, Germany. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69134-1_43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dirksen, N, Gygax, L, Traulsen, I, Wechsler, B and Burla, J-B 2020 Body size in relation to cubicle dimensions affects lying behavior and joint lesions in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 103: 9407–9417. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2019-16464CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Driessen, C and Heutinck, LFM 2015 Cows desiring to be milked? milking robots and the co-evolution of ethics and technol-ogy on Dutch dairy farms. Agriculture and Human Values 32: 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-014-9515-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Souza, DN, Warner, RD, Leury, BJ and Dunshea, FR 1998 The effect of dietary magnesium aspartate supplementation on pork quality. Journal of Animal Science 76: 104–109. https://doi.org/10.2527/1998.761104xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eastwood, CR and Renwick, A 2020 Innovation uncertainty impacts the adoption of smarter farming approaches. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 4: 24. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erdreich, LS, Alexander, DD, Wagner, ME and Reinemann, D 2009 Meta-analysis of stray voltage on dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 92: 5951–5963. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1979CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fay, PK, McElligott, VT and Havstad, KM 1989 Containment of free-ranging goats using pulsed-radio-wave-activated shock col-lars. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 23: 165–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(89)90016-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gengler, E 1934 Stock enclosure and system of electrically charging the same. US Patent no 1976721A. https://patents.google.com/patent/US1976721A/enGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, P 2013 Legend: From Electric Fences to Global Success: The Sir William Gallagher Story. Random House: Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
Grandin, T 1997 The design and construction of facilities for han-dling cattle. Livestock Production Science 49: 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(97)00008-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grumett, D 2018 Ethics, religion and farm animal welfare. In: Amos, N and Sullivan, R (eds) The Business of Farm Animal Welfare pp 32–44. Routledge: UK. https://doi.org/10.9774/gleaf.9781351270045_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halvorson, DA, Noll, SL, Bergeland, ME, Cloud, HA and Pursley, R 1989 The effects of stray voltage on turkey poults. Avian Diseases 33: 582–585. https://doi.org/10.2307/1591125CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hart, SP 2001 Recent perspectives in using goats for vegetation management in the USA. Journal of Dairy Science 84(S): E170–E176. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)70212-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartung, J, Briese, A and Springorum, AC 2009 Laying hens in aviaries: development, legal and hygienic aspects. In: Aland, A and Madec, F (eds) Sustainable Animal Production: The Challenges and Potential Developments for Professional Farming pp 315–328. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Hillman, H 2003 Electrical devices used by prison officers, police and security forces. Medicine, Conflict and Survival 19: 197–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/13623690308409691CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holloway, L, Bear, C and Wilkinson, K 2014 Re-capturing bovine life: robot-cow relationships, freedom and control in dairy farming. Journal of Rural Studies 33: 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.01.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hultgren, J 1991 A preliminary study of behavioural methods for assessing the influence of electric cow-trainers on animal health. Veterinary Research Communications 15: 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00430034CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keshavarzi, H, Lee, C, Lea, JM and Campbell, DLM 2020 Virtual fence responses are socially facilitated in beef cattle. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 7: 711. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.543158CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kubik, R 2014 Farm Fences and Gates: Build and Repair Fences to Keep Livestock In and Pests Out. Voyageur: Minneapolis MN, USAGoogle Scholar
Lalman, D, Gill, D, Highfill, G, Wallace, J, Barnes, K, Strasia, C and LeValley, B 2010 Nutrition and management considerations for preconditioning home raised beef calves. Oklahoma State University Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, USAGoogle Scholar
Langworthy, AD, Verdon, M, Freeman, MJ, Corkrey, R, Hills, JL and Rawnsley, RP 2021 Virtual fencing technology to inten-sively graze lactating dairy cattle. I: Technology efficacy and pasture utilization. Journal of Dairy Science 104: 7071–7083. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2020-19796CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, C, Henshall, JM, Wark, TJ, Crossman, CC, Reed, MT, Brewer, HG, O’Grady, J and Fisher, AD 2009 Associative learning by cattle to enable effective and ethical virtual fences. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 119: 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applan-im.2009.03.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, C, Prayaga, K, Reed, M and Henshall, J 2007 Methods of training cattle to avoid a location using electrical cues. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 108: 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.12.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, C, Prayaga, KC, Fisher, AD and Henshall, JM 2008 Behavioral aspects of electronic bull separation and mate allocation in multiple-sire mating paddocks. Journal of Animal Science 86: 1690–1696. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0647CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lefcourt, AM, Akers, RM, Miller, RH and Weinland, B 1985 Effects of intermittent electrical shock on responses related to milk ejection. Journal of Dairy Science 68: 391–401. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(85)80837-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lefcourt, AM, Kahl, S and Akers, RM 1986 Correlation of indices of stress with intensity of electrical shock for cows. Journal of Dairy Science 69: 833–842. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(86)80473-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lentfer, TL, Gebhardt-Henrich, SG, Fröhlich, EKF and von Borell, E 2013 Nest use is influenced by the positions of nests and drinkers in aviaries. Poultry Science 92: 1433–1442. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02718CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lomax, S, Colusso, P and Clark, CEF 2019 Does virtual fencing work for grazing dairy cattle? Animals 9: 429. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9070429CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ludtke, CB, Silveira, ETF, Bertoloni, W, de Andrade, JC, Buzelli, ML, Bessa, LR and Soares, GJD 2010 Bem-estar e qual-idade de carne de suínos submetidos a diferentes técnicas de manejo pré-abate. Revista Brasileira de Saude e Producao Animal 11: 231–241. [Title translation: Welfare and meat quality of pigs sub-mitted to different pre-slaughter handling techniques]Google Scholar
McAtee, WL 1939 The electric fence in wildlife management. The Journal of Wildlife Management 3(1): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.2307/3796387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, CL, Beilharz, RG and McCutchan, J 1981 How cattle respond to electric fences. Journal of the Department of Agriculture, Western Australia, Series 4(22): 99–101Google Scholar
McKillop, IG, Pepper, HW, Butt, R and Poole, DW 2003 Electric Fence Reference Manual, Research and Development Surveillance Report 607. DEFRA: London, UKGoogle Scholar
McKillop, IG and Sibly, RM 1988 Animal behaviour at electric fences and the implications for management. Mammal Review 18: 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2907.1988.tb00078.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McSweeney, D, O’Brien, B, Coughlan, NE, Férard, A, Ivanov, S, Haltone, P and Umstatter, C 2020 Virtual fencing without visual cues: design, difficulties of implementation, and associated dairy cow behaviour. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 176: 105613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marini, D, Kearton, T, Ouzman, J, Llewellyn, R, Belson, S and Lee, C 2020 Social influence on the effectiveness of virtual fencing in sheep. PeerJ 8. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, SB, Bailey, DW and Jensen, D 2014 Comparison of electric fence and a simulated fenceless control system on cattle movements. Livestock Science 170: 203–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2014.10.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metz-Stefanowska, J, Huijsmans, PJM, Hogewerf, PH, Ipema, AH and Keen, A 1992 Behaviour of cows before, during and after milking with an automatic milking system. In: Ipema, AH, Lippus, AC, Metz, JHM and Rossing, W (eds) Prospects for Automatic Milking pp 289–295. Pudoc Scientific Publishers: Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Midwest Rural Energy Council (USA) 2005 Installation and Operation of Electric Fences, Cow Trainers and Crowd Gates. https://mrec.org/publications_2/Google Scholar
Miles, AD 1951 Electric fence for distribution of cattle on a range grazed by sheep and cattle. Rangeland Ecology & Management/Journal of Range Management Archives 4: 228–232. https://doi.org/10.2307/3894331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, N 2016 The role of portable electric fencing in biodiver-sity-friendly pasture management. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 31: 2–8. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170515000058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan-Davies, J and Waterhouse, T 2015 Cattle responses to a type of virtual fence. Rangeland Ecology & Management 68: 100–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2014.12.004Google Scholar
NoFence Grazing Technology undated a V irtual fencing for cat-tle. https://www.nofence.no/en/product/cattleGoogle Scholar
NoFence Grazing Technology undated b Virtual fence for goat and sheep. https://www.nofence.no/en/product/goat-and-sheepGoogle Scholar
Oltenacu, PA, Hultgren, J and Algers, B 1998 Associations between use of electric cow-trainers and clinical diseases, repro-ductive performance and culling in Swedish dairy cattle. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 37: 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-5877(98)00109-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paranhos da Costa, MJR and Broom, DM 2001 Consistency of side choice in the milking parlour by Holstein-Friesian cows and its relationship with their reactivity and milk yield. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 70: 177–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00158-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearsall, J 1998 The New Oxford Dictionary of English. Clarendon Press: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Polikarpus, A, Kaart, T, Mootse, H, De Rosa, G and Arney, D 2015 Influences of various factors on cows’ entrance order into the milking parlour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 166: 20–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2015.02.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinemann, DJ, Stetson, LE, Reilly, JP and Laughlin, NK 1999 Dairy cow sensitivity to short duration electrical currents. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 42: 215–222. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.13198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riber, AB 2010 Development with age of nest box use and gre-garious nesting in laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 123: 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2009.12.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rigalma, K, Duvaux-Ponter, C, Barrier, A, Charles, C, Ponter, AA, Deschamps, F and Roussel, S 2010 Medium-term effects of repeated exposure to stray voltage on activity, stress physiolo-gy, and milk production and composition in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93: 35–52. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2903CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, MN, Brooks, CG and Renshaw, GD 1990 Electric shock devices and their effects on the human body. Medicine, Science and the Law 30: 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/106002809003000403CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rutland Electric Fencing (UK) undated Fencing Tips. https://www.kerbl.co.uk/productsGoogle Scholar
Schewe, RL and Stuart, D 2015 Diversity in agricultural tech-nology adoption: how are automatic milking systems used and to what end? Agriculture and Human Values 32: 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-014-9542-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scotton, G 2019 Taming technologies: crowd control, animal con-trol and the interspecies politics of mobility. Parallax 25: 358–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/13534645.2020.1731004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stádník, L, Louda, F, Bezdíč ek, J, Ježková, A and Rákos, M 2010 Changes in teat parameters caused by milking and their recovery to their initial size. Archiv für Tierzucht 53: 650–662. https://doi.org/10.5194/aab-53-650-2010Google Scholar
Stuart, D, Schewe, RL and Gunderson, R 2013 Extending social theory to farm animals: addressing alienation in the dairy sector. Sociologia Ruralis 53: 201–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannenbaum, J 1999 Ethics and pain research in animals. ILAR Journal 40/3: 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.40.3.97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tesfaye, T, Sithole, B, Ramjugernath, D and Mokhothu, T 2018 Valorisation of chicken feathers: characterisation of thermal, mechanical and electrical properties. Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy 9: 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scp.2018.05.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Umstatter, C 2011 The evolution of virtual fences: a review. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 75: 10–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2010.10.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdon, M, Horton, B and Rawnsley, R 2021a A case study on the use of virtual fencing to intensively graze Angus heifers using moving front and back-fences. Frontiers in Animal Science 2: 663963. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2021.663963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdon, M, Langworthy, A and Rawnsley, R 2021b Virtual fencing technology to intensively graze lactating dairy cattle. II: Effects on cow welfare and behavior. Journal of Dairy Science 104: 7084–7094. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2020-19797CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vidali, G, Silversides, FG, Boily, R, Villeneuve, P and Joncas, R 1996 Effects of chopped sinusoidal voltages on the behavior and per-formance of laying hens. Canadian Agricultural Engineering 38: 99–106Google Scholar
Vroegindeweij, BA, Kortlever, JW, Wais, E and van Henten, EJ 2014 Development and test of an egg collecting device for floor eggs in loose housing systems for laying hens. Proceedings International Conference of Agricultural Engineering AgEng, C0366. EurAgEng. 6-10 July 2014, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Warner, RD, Ferguson, DM, Cottrell, JJ and Knee, BW 2007 Acute stress induced by the preslaughter use of electric prodders causes tougher beef meat. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47(7): 782–788. https://doi.org/10.1071/EA05155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenzel, C, Schönreiter-Fischer, S and Unshelm, J 2003 Studies on step-kick behavior and stress of cows during milking in an automatic milking system. Livestock Production Science 83: 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(03)00109-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiting, TL 2016 Pain in human and non-human animals caused by electricity. The Canadian Veterinary Journal 57: 883–886Google ScholarPubMed
Winter, A and Hillerton, JE 1995 Behaviour associated with feeding and milking of early lactation cows housed in an experi-mental automatic milking system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 46: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(95)00628-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worley, JW and Wilson, JL 2000 Effects of stray voltage on laying habits of broiler breeders. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 16: 723–729. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.5369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Grumett and Butterworth supplementary material
Download undefined(File)
File 273.6 KB