QUALITALY 141

August /September 2024 VII MAGAZINE It is the animal responses that are the most useful in indicating the level of welfare. However, since they are the most difficult to measure, it is preferred to evaluate indirect parameters, i.e. those that trigger animal responses. However, it must be considered that the level of welfare is the result of adaptation, or not, to environmental stresses. WHAT IS ASSESSED AT THE LEVEL OF LEGISLATION AND SELF-REGULATION? At the legislative level, indirect parameters are assessed to define what are the appropriate conditions for establishing and then managing a herd. The national health system monitors them continuously and has the authority to determine for each herd the suitability to operate. An assessment based on indirect parameters alone is not enough. That is why evaluation models have been developed that measure both indirect and direct indicators, weigh them according to optimal levels, the animal categories present and use an algorithm to establish a final level of welfare. There is no single model and there are no conversion coefficients between one model and another that allow the comparison of farming systems adopting different models. Comparison between farms may therefore not be straightforward and is only valid if the assessment is made by experienced assessors using the same model. CLASSYFARM EVALUATES ALL STATE-RECOGNISED FARMS NATIONWIDE. Classyfarm is an important step because it offers a nationwide standardisation of herd assessments. However, various systems exist within specific areas or product specifications, which are often self- referential and not scientifically validated. Ideally, there should be a single system per species or production category. The European Community wants this so as not to create fake trade barriers, but at the moment it does not exist. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT? Classyfarm is a very complex system. I do not want to confuse readers too much by saying that it is a Ministry of Health software that collects information on farms and characterises them into four main macro areas: • welfare, assessed with specific parameters in different species of farmed animals; • bio-security standards that enable farms to prevent and reduce the risk of transmissible diseases (e.g. quarantine areas, controls and procedures to avoid contagion, ..., etc.); • the protection of animals in facilities authorised for slaughter; • monitoring the use of antimicrobial drugs, both in purchase and treatment. The data is entered continuously by each farm and the Ministry can check them in real time. ARE THERE ANIMAL SPECIES AND FARMS WHERE THE LEVEL OF WELFARE IS HIGHER? For all species reared for food production there is a great deal of attention but it is inevitable that there are breeding systems that receive more attention due to the economic importance of breeding, the attention and special empathy aroused by a given species or category which turns the spotlight on livestock farming techniques that are considered, rightly or wrongly, more or less outdated. The attention - of the public and of regulations - is increasingly directed to particular categories of animals (e.g. dairy calves, white meat calves, sows, egg-laying hens) or to the so-called ‘naturalness’ of the breeding system (e.g. grazing, free-range animals). The balanced discussion that leads to a confrontation between the various stakeholders in the agri-food chain is important because it allows for a review of certain stages of a process that has developed in certain ways throughout human history, but which could be modified with new understanding with an increase in animal and human welfare. HOW DO YOU RATE THE CURRENT LEVEL OF ANIMAL WELFARE ON ITALIAN FARMS? Overall, the level of animal welfare is continuously increasing. There are various reasons for this: increased professionalism of breeders and technicians, improved facilities and equipment, improved food and environmental standards, better understanding of animal ethology. There’s no comparison with what was happening only 30 years ago, although the public’s sensibility has a different perception to the real situation. I believe that the dimension of ‘naturalness’ has been loaded with excessive ideal values that do not correspond to reality. The public’s sensibilities also seem to apply differently to each animal species. We tolerate the fact that pet animals are forced to live in our homes, which is not natural, but we consider farms to be inhospitable. Certainly, the future will still change breeding systems but let us remember that it is primarily in the interest of the breeder to ensure a high standard of welfare. WHAT’S THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE WELFARE OF FARMED ANIMALS AND THE QUALITY OF FOOD? WHAT ARE THE QUALITY BENEFITS FOR THE CONSUMER AND PUBLIC HEALTH? The system in use allows monitoring of all drug treatments that have a withdrawal time before meat, milk and eggs can be fed to humans. Classyfarm reports whether an animal has received treatment and all stakeholders (farmer, farm veterinarian, national health system) can check the status of a farm in real time. Since January 2023, this data collection system has been computerised through software and monitors all herds, limiting errors to practically zero. I would like to remind you that anyone who releases food contaminated with antibiotics or drugs with withdrawal periods for human consumption is committing a criminal offence under Italian law. Research in recent years has also shown how the quality of animal products is diminished when animals suffer or have inadequate welfare levels. With the advance of many dietary radicalisms, I fear that there will also be talk of ‘plant-based’ welfare. Is there a level playing field and ethical codes of respect for cultivated species? Let us not exaggerate. There are certainly manuals on good cultivation practices, but to date there is no law on plant welfare. This does not mean that we should not take care of plants. Stress (think of water stress) causes serious damage to plants that reduce production and their nutritional quality. BUT ISN’T THE ASSESSMENT OF ANIMAL WELFARE ORIGINALLY FLAWED AS BEING ANTHROPOCENTRIC? [smiles]. Could there be a credible alternative to the assessment made by a person? Various components must be