Animal Health and Welfare, Human Well-being, Food Security and Sustainability 55
Case Study 14 – Emaciated cattle and severe domestic squalor (by Prairie
Mountain Inter-Agency Hoarding Coalition, Canada)
An elderly farmer with cognitive issues and a lifelong penchant for buying cattle at
auction violated an order prohibiting him from acquiring new livestock due to a
recent history of neglect. Animal welfare officials intervened and noted that the
conditions of the home were squalid and hazardous. Police assisted and trans-
ported the individual for mental health assessment. This process resulted in fire and
health officials being notified of adverse conditions in the home.
Using relationships established through the animal welfare intervention, per-
mission was obtained from the owner to enter and assess the home. Conditions
were such that the home was deemed unfit for occupancy and ordered to be
closed under fire and health legislation as there were signs of severe flooding;
squalor; imminent fire and health hazards; trip and fall hazards; pest and wildlife
infestations; and a multitude of disrepair issues.
Fortunately, the family played a pivotal role in finding safe housing at an assisted-
living facility and the individual was able to stabilize and manage his affairs without
succumbing in a house fire. This case served as the impetus for establishing an
interagency coalition, and a common protocol and resource guide with shared
values, goals and objectives. This case study is available online.^1
(^1) http://www.prairiemountainhealth.ca/images/PublicHealth/PMIHC_Guide1.pdf
impact on farm profits, development and investment in animal welfare and man-
agement. Higher welfare labelling schemes have also been mentioned by some as
potential drivers for improved farmer income and animal welfare (FAWC, 2011);
however, others report that for this to be successful there is a need for positive
drivers as well as low consumption barriers (Heerwagen et al., 2013).
Examples of economic factors that are paired with animal welfare include
a reduction in labour effort by using welfare-friendly equipment, or improve-
ments in meat quality and productivity margins as a result of good animal wel-
fare and handling (Grandin, 2013). Better animal welfare has direct financial
benefits as a result of reduced mortality, improved health, improved longevity
for dairy cows, improved product quality, improved resistance to disease, re-
duced medication, lower risk of zoonoses and animal-borne infections, farmer
and producer satisfaction, and higher prices from customers (Dawkins, 2017).
The handling of livestock can be a source of work-related injury and
death (FAWC, 2016). Good animal welfare-handling practices can also help
reduce these risks by ensuring animals are calmer and more easily handled.
These include both the infrastructure for livestock handling and the training,
skills and competency of staff handling the animals. Infrastructure not only
needs to be adapted to animal behaviour but also to human behaviour, taking
into account that working in a non-ergonomic or tiring position with animals
that refuse to walk may be quite frustrating (Wiberg, 2012).
While investing in infrastructure for improved handling might be a
costly investment, the potential and non-quantified, future benefits of such
investment can be as high as a human life. This can be applied to all stages
of animal handling, from farm to slaughter.
