Louise van der Merwe is deeply honoured to have been awarded an Honorary Fellowship by the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics in recognition of her contribution to the cause of animal protection.
In announcing the award, Revd Professor Andrew Linzey said:
“This is the highest award that the Centre can bestow and is only given to individuals who have made an outstanding contribution to the Centre and/or the cause of animal protection. I am delighted to report that, after careful consideration, it is the unanimous decision of the Selection Committee to invite you to become our thirteenth Honorary Fellow.”
For more information, visit the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics
Botswana-based scientist points towards an entirely different future for Africa…
by Louise van der Merwe - Director: Humane Education
In the wake of the recent horror exposed on broiler chicken farms in Mpumalanga, South Africa – where the NSPCA was forced to cull more than 350 000 starving and crippled chickens amid a financial collapse at a state-owned poultry operation – a Botswana-based scientist is pointing towards an entirely different future for Africa... one rooted not in industrialised suffering, but in healthy ecosystems, healthy animals, healthy communities – and ultimately, healthy people.
Ironically, says Professor Richard Fynn of the Okavango Research Institute at the University of Botswana, the pathway out of poverty may lie in something as simple – and as revolutionary – as giving chickens back their natural lives.
Professor Fynn, a specialist in grassland science and rangeland management, believes Africa has an unprecedented opportunity to avoid repeating the mistakes of the industrialised West.
Here, he shares his insights with Humane Education...
Humane Education:
Professor Fynn, there is an old saying that “we are what we eat.” Is the chicken produced by modern industrial farming actually nourishing us?
Professor Fynn:
The short answer is: no.
In much of the Western world, virtually all meat products now come from animals raised in confinement systems that never experience natural rangeland. They are fed predominantly grain-based diets – mainly maize – designed for rapid growth and mass production.
Even many so-called “free-range” systems rely heavily on grain feeding.
The modern food system is focused almost entirely on producing large quantities of cheap meat. Very little attention is paid to the biological quality of that meat, or to the long-term consequences for human health.
And that comes at a tremendous cost – both to the animals themselves and to the people consuming them.
Humane Education:
Recently there has been growing public interest in “psychobiotics” and the connection between gut health, inflammation, anxiety and depression. Is there a link between this and the way animals are raised for food?
Professor Fynn:
Absolutely.
One of the greatest problems with industrial farming is the absence of phytochemical diversity in the animals’ diets.
On natural rangeland, herbivores and chickens are exposed to extraordinary plant diversity – grasses, shrubs, legumes and forbs – sometimes 60 to 100 plant species, each with its own unique chemical profile and medicinal properties.
Animals instinctively select what they need. That diversity strengthens immunity and profoundly influences the nutritional quality of the meat.
Research increasingly shows that animals raised in healthy natural systems contain far higher levels of beneficial anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant compounds. Those benefits are then transferred to us through the food we eat.
By contrast, meat from feedlots and intensive confinement systems is associated with inflammatory compounds that contribute over time to chronic illnesses such as heart disease, cancers and metabolic disorders.
You can often see the difference physically. Naturally raised chickens frequently have richer-coloured flesh and yellow fat because of the nutrients and phytochemicals present in their diets.
But far more important are the invisible differences – the biological and health properties within the meat itself.
Humane Education:
You have also spoken about animal suffering itself affecting meat quality.
Professor Fynn:
Yes. Stress and suffering matter enormously.
In industrial systems, animals experience chronic trauma. Calves are torn away from their mothers. Animals are crowded together in unfamiliar environments with little space, little shade, and constant stress. The same applies to chickens in intensive broiler systems.
When animals are subjected to fear and distress, powerful stress hormones and inflammatory responses are triggered throughout the body.
Professor Fynn:
We cannot separate the emotional and physical condition of an animal from the food ultimately placed on our plates.
In depriving animals of the natural grasses, shrubs and forbs that sustain their health, we are also depriving ourselves.
Humane Education:
Massive overcrowding in industrial farming often requires the routine use of antibiotics simply to keep animals alive until slaughter age. In South Africa, a University of the Western Cape study found tetracycline residues in broiler chickens purchased from major supermarkets. There is growing global concern about antibiotic resistance in humans.
Your thoughts?
Professor Fynn:
Antibiotics are routinely administered in both intensive chicken and cattle systems because the animals’ immune systems are compromised by the conditions under which they are kept.
Animals standing continuously in overcrowded, unhygienic conditions become highly vulnerable to disease.
And ultimately, this is the food system we are passing on to our children.
On natural rangeland systems, however, the situation can be entirely different.
Because our chickens are out in the veld all day they are not standing in their own muck like they would be in a chicken house, so they are much less susceptible to disease and we don’t need to use antibiotics on them.
That should tell us something important.
Rangeland farming is not backward farming. In many ways, it represents the future.
Humane Education:
Yet despite these concerns, industrialised poultry production continues to be promoted aggressively in Southern Africa. South Africa’s ‘Poultry Masterplan’ has even celebrated the expansion of intensive broiler and battery cage systems as a “Transformation Milestone.” How do we begin changing public understanding?
Professor Fynn:
Africa still has an extraordinary opportunity because many rural communities already raise cattle, goats and sheep on natural veld systems rich in phytochemical diversity.
What we should now be doing is integrating chickens into those systems.
For example, grazing animals disturb insects in the grasslands and chickens naturally follow behind feeding on them. The systems complement one another ecologically.
This is part of what we are exploring at the Research Institute.
If enough small-scale farmers each raised even two seasonal batches of 1 000 chickens under healthy rangeland conditions – and if retailers such as Woolworths or Food Lover’s Market supported and marketed these products – we could create a premium ethical food system that uplifts rural communities while dramatically improving animal welfare and human health.
Such a model has the potential to reduce poverty, disease, and the immense suffering inherent in intensive feedlot production.
Consumers deserve to know how
their food was produced.
Just as cigarette packets carry health warnings, perhaps meat from intensive confinement systems should carry similar warnings about the risks associated with industrial production methods.
