We are all schizophrenic – responsible citizens on one hand and consumers on the other. In theory, we would be willing to pay more for responsibly produced food, but when we are in the supermarket we tend to choose the lowest priced food items.
This is how Dr Mark Chimes, animal health and welfare manager at the Dairy Standard Agency (DSA), opened a recent webinar on the responsible rearing of dairy calves. Referring to the demands consumers make on food producers in general, and dairy producers in particular, he pointed out that it is important to consider this ‘schizophrenic’ trait in consumers when analysing survey results.
One should always ask whether respondents are merely answering questions according to what they think is the correct answer, or are they reflecting their true behaviour? This affects the way in which the dairy industry should respond to consumer demands.
Consumer research findings
“A European survey, for example, indicated that consumers are more likely to base buying decisions on animal welfare, taste and quality, than on sustainability. This has implications for producers when they must decide whether to spend money on making their operations more sustainable and carbon negative, as opposed to spending on animal welfare. According to this study, they would do better fulfilling consumer demands by spending on animal welfare rather than sustainability factors.”
According to surveys by Prof Nina von Keyserlingk of the University of British Columbia, Canada, conducted in North America, Europe, and Australia regarding perceptions on cow welfare on dairy farms before and after visits to dairy farms, the majority of respondents concluded that cows on dairy farms are not being treated badly but are not having the best life either.
“What became evident was that respondents who initially through that cows were being treated badly were surprised by the amount of care each individual animal received on the farm. On the other hand, the majority of respondents were displeased with the fact that calves were being separated from their mothers within a few days after birth, and with the fact that male calves were slaughtered at a young age. The majority were less opposed to slaughter in principle, than to slaughtering at an age younger than six months.”
What scientific research shows
In order to find solutions to these consumer perceptions, an investigation was launched into the conclusions of scientific papers on the actual effects on calf and cow health when calves were taken away from their mothers at a young age, as opposed to keeping them with their mothers for a longer period. In respect of scours, 12 articles were found of which six showed a positive outcome (calves had less scours when kept with the mothers), five showed no effect, while only one paper reflected a negative outcome.
Regarding the animal disease, cryptosporidiosis, two of the research projects showed an improvement when calves stayed with their mothers, two showed a deterioration, while five showed very little difference. Regarding pneumonia, one article showed an improvement while two were inconclusive.
In terms of mortality, six articles showed an improvement when calves were kept with their mothers, two showed no real improvement, and three showed a negative result.
Mastitis had the most telling result. In 11 of 18 research projects, keeping the calf with the mother had a positive effect, seven were inconclusive, while none showed a negative outcome.
Keeping cow and calf in contact
The survey also indicated that the respondents where not appeased by either removing calves from their mothers and putting them together in a group or putting them with a foster cow. The main objection was removing calves from their mothers at a young age.
Looking at dairy operations where cow-calf contact is being maintained, it turned out that there actually are numerous instances, especially in Europe, where this is a common practice. Admittedly, however, these herds are generally not large.
The issue of herd size, says Dr Chimes, is probably the determining factor in one’s approach to the issue of cow-calf separation. It is considerably more complicated to operate a 1 000-cow herd than an 80-cow herd. However, a different approach is possible by asking: Am I milking 1 000 cows, or am I milking ten herds of 100 cows, or even 20 herds of 50 cows? Perhaps rethinking the management system could provide answers to legitimate consumer concerns.
He quoted a Canadian dairy farmer who in 2022 said: “If we want people to still drink real milk in 20 or 30 years, we need to give them a reason to drink milk, not just shoot down their reasons not to drink milk”.
Finding reasons for consumers to keep on drinking real milk, he said, was therefore of the utmost importance. On the positive side, Prof Von Keyserlingk found that the public understood that changes will not take place overnight, but they wanted to see real efforts towards change.
For more information regarding the Dairy Standard Agency and its projects, visit www.dairystandard.co.za
