Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The Impact of Climate Change Mitigation Strategies on Animal Welfare by Shields and Orme-Evans
Introduction
Two issues attract substantial attention in the modern world climate change and animal welfare. Although they may seem entirely independent from each other, Sara Shields and Geoffrey Orme-Evans argue in their article The Impacts of Climate Change Mitigation Strategies on Animal Welfare that the two are intrinsically related. In reality, feed production is inherently related to greenhouse emissions. Similarly, animal welfare is directly impacted by human-induced climate change. Breaking this cycle of interdependence requires changes in the feed production industry. The subsequent thesis is that for animal welfare to improve, climate change mitigation strategies should encompass systematic changes in the industry.
Impact of Livestock on Climate
Before showing what changes can be implemented, the authors start by explaining how the livestock industry impacts climate change in the first place. Overall, there are two ways it contributes to climate change direct and indirect. Shields and Orme-Evans write that enteric fermentation and manure associated emissions are direct, while production and transport of feed and land use changes contribute indirectly (363). Specifically, chemical fertilizers are applied to soil, thus stimulating crop yield. Subsequently, animals that eat plant materials also receive more food. The better animals are fed, the more food is supplied for consumer consumption. However, chemical fertilizers in the soil generate nitrous oxide, which contributes to global warming.
At the same time, nitrous oxide produced by chemical fertilizers is a small part of total emissions. A more prevalent proportion of emissions is generated by methane. The authors explain that as much as 44% of emissions related to livestock are a result of enteric fermentation, but they do not explain what it means (Shields and Orme-Evans 363). Enteric fermentation is an entirely natural digestive process in some animals, such as cows. Methane is one of the by-products of the resulting digestion, which contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. Another major source of emissions is carbon dioxide produced due to extensive transportation, which is an indirect contribution of the livestock industry to climate change.
Negative Animal Welfare Effects
The next point the authors make concerns the existing mitigation strategies that harm the animals. It is explained that methane emissions are the main problem that requires solutions (Shields and Orme-Evans 364). The first solution is to make feed changes, which would reduce greenhouse gas. For instance, a common solution is to increase grain consumption by cattle at the expense of forage, which includes grass. It is effective because it reduces emissions, but it also negatively influences animal digestion. Subsequently, it is a negative influence on animal welfare.
The second solution pointed out by the authors is the use of feed additives. They are useful for reducing greenhouse gas emissions because methane production is inhibited (Shields and Orme-Evans 365). However, similar to increased grain feeding, feed additives can also lead to digestive disorders. Besides, Shields and Orme-Evans also note that this sphere lacks research, and other negative side effects may surface (365). Even if none are found, feed additives lead to poor digestion, which is detrimental to animal welfare.
The third solution is the genetic selection to breed animals, which would decrease the volume of emissions. First, the authors point to specifically bred cows that produce more milk with less feed (Shields and Orme-Evans 366). However, the offside is that the more milk a cow yields, the more its energy levels are off balance, which precipitates health issues. Second, swine genetic selection allows newly bred pigs to yield more pork while reducing the carbon footprint (Shields and Orme-Evans 367). However, genetic intervention has lowered the piglet survival rate. Third, genetic intervention allows the breeding of chickens with high feed conversion efficiency, which is also beneficial to the climate. However, the same chickens have metabolic issues due to extremely fast growth. Ultimately, the authors idea is that genetic breeding does help reduce greenhouse gas emissions it also inevitably causes negative side effects, which harm animal welfare.
Potential Solutions
The authors believe that it is possible to develop strategies that would reduce the influence of the livestock industry on climate change and improve animal welfare simultaneously. If health issues are the main cause of worsening animal welfare, then health should be the first target, according to the authors (Shields and Orme-Evans 375). First, newly hatched chickens can be vaccinated, which would improve their welfare. At the same time, the authors admit that this strategy has not been studied.
The second option is to extend the lifetime of cattle, specifically dairy cows. The authors note that cows can live up to fifteen years, yet their lifespan in production facilities is six years (Shields and Orme-Evans 375). The more cows are replaced with new ones, the more methane emissions are generated. It is suggested that extending the lifespan of cows would remove this necessity. Ironically, the proposed solution is the selection of cows with an affinity for greater production. The third option is the implementation of Precision Livestock farming, which would allow farmers to monitor each animal individually due to sensors. However, it is a hypothetical technology that is not yet implemented.
Another strategy is improving animal nutrition in such a way that animals are not harmed. Particularly, the authors highlight clover, alfalfa, crown vetch, and birdsfoot trefoil, which are presumed not to cause disorders in animals after feeding Shields and Orme-Evans 376). The drawback is that the research supporting this strategy is not sufficient. Therefore, the authors suggest one more strategy that targets land instead of animals. One particular way of reducing carbon imprint is using perennial crops. The authors believe that they disturb the soil less than traditional fertilizers (Shields and Orme-Evans 377). Once again, there is a lack of research supporting this as a solution.
The final strategy is to reduce the number of animals in total. The authors argue that meeting the growing demand for food produced by the livestock industry is highly inefficient and harmful (Shields and Orme-Evans 378). As such, the presented solution is to reduce consumption or change its structure. Instead of eating animal-based food, people can follow vegetarian diets, and eat seafood and other alternatives. Lesser demand means fewer numbers of cattle, which in turn would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, it should be noted that such a sudden change in food preferences is unlikely.
Conclusion
In their conclusion, the authors point to the changing practices in both treatment of animals and agriculture. The idea that animal farming is not sustainable is repeated, as is the necessity to stop climate change. The authors admit the lack of research and call for more studies into animal welfare and the environment. However, the authors do not state the main implication of their writing, which is the low probability of any real improvement in cattle welfare due to a lack of research and human consumption habits.
Work Cited
Shields, Sara, and Orme-Evans, Geoffrey. The Impacts of Climate Change Mitigation Strategies on Animal Welfare. Animals, vol. 5, no. 2, 2015, pp. 361-394.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.