Fundamental Change

Last year in the UK, The Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022 gave legal recognition that non-human vertebrates (along with any cephalopod molluscs and any decapod crustaceans) are sentient. On 25th May this year the Animal Sentience Committee was launched. 

So, sheep are sentient. No ifs. No buts. Sheep are recognised to have feelings - joy, fear, pain, distress, and so on. This recognition represents a ‘game-changer’. No longer can any human argue that sheep don’t feel. The law says that they do. No longer can anyone act towards sheep as if they did not have feelings. For anyone who is involved with sheep to profess ignorance of sheep being sentient is not acceptable. No longer can treatment of sheep that causes suffering to them be justified. No longer can it be ignored when a sheep is being made to suffer directly by human action or through human choices and decisions.

A plethora of things in the sheep farming process come to mind which, with the formal recognition of sheep’s sentience, must now be re-evaluated, for seeing if they are suitable to be allowed and continued in the new situation of legal acceptance that sheep have feelings. 

In his book Animal Liberation Now ((2023), Peter Singer, the philosopher and animal rights campaigner, says this: ‘If a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration.’  

Much rides on the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act’s recognition of sheep’s sentience, and on how strongly that recognition is promulgated and enforced. Vital is instilling in the sheep farming community an awareness of the sentience of sheep, and of the consequences therefrom concerning how sheep farming procedures and actions should be. But it is wider than that. For all of us is the duty and obligation to demonstrate cognisance and acceptance that sheep are sentient.

Wild Camping and Sheep

It has been reported that the shadow environment minister, Alex Sobel, has said that ‘Labour would legislate so that people visiting national parks have the right to wild camp’ (Helena Horton, The Guardian, 4th August 2023). Labour is a political party in the UK. The National Parks concerned are those in England.

Largely, National Parks in England are marginal lands. Therefore, sheep are present in them in considerable number. So, it is worth thinking about what could be the situation and might be the effects and outcomes if wild camping was happening on land where sheep are present.  As context is that recently in the UK, ‘the court of appeal ruled that wild camping on Dartmoor [a National Park] was lawful without landowner permission, overturning a high court ruling in favour of a landowner who wanted to ban the practice.’ (Helena Horton, The Guardian, 4th August 2023) 

If wild camping with permission was to occur on National Park land, or any rural land, which is a habitat of sheep, humans would be occupying areas of sheep presence for extended hours and, moreover, would be engaging in new and additional kinds of activity. They would be in sheep’s territory, not just during daylight hours but during hours of darkness too. So, sheep would have no ‘downtime’ of peace and quiet.

For humans, wild camping will be a lovely idea and ideal. It represents having access to nature at night as well as day and with all the fresh experiences that night-time can bring and offer. It can be imagined that giving opportunities for wild camping can deliver circumstance to possibly engender activities such as: revelling; noisy partying; heavy consuming of alcohol; lighting fires for heat and food cooking and which could get out of hand; leaving litter and detritus dangerous to sheep, for example, broken glass and tin cans. Such human activity would, at the very least disturb and frighten sheep, and could deliver worse harm to them than that. Clearly, education and regulation will be needed to try to avoid harm being done to animals and environment. It can be hoped that humans will display wisdom and responsibility in wild camping, will adhere to ‘leave no trace’ principles, will do nothing to cause upset or harm to sheep, but will they all behave well and appropriately? Wild campers have cover of darkness. And how is wild camping to be monitored and managed? Worth remembering is that, while shepherds/sheep farmers regularly check the sheep in their care, nowadays sheep are on their own most of the time, whether in or outside a National Park.

Wild camping in a place where sheep are present is to put human want above sheep need and welfare. It is inconceivable that wild camping in National Parks would not deliver some adverse circumstances to the sheep residing in them. 

Time In The Countryside

Now is a time of the year when a lot of people in the Northern Hemisphere visit the countryside for purposes of relaxation and enjoyment. Many of them will be urban, or suburban, dwellers, and so they will not necessarily be arriving in the countryside with knowledge of rural ways and knowing about sheep.

Staying in holiday accommodation at, or nearby to, farms that have sheep can give visitor outsiders the great opportunity for discovering about sheep and their characteristics and needs; as similarly can camping out in those areas of countryside where sheep reside and graze. Signage and leaflets etc are around for explaining what is expected of visitors to the countryside and saying how they should behave for sheep to be safe and unharmed. Those who are day visitors may not during their visit be gaining all information needed.

Of those who dwell full-time in the countryside, most require to earn a livelihood in it, unless they are commuting to work in a town. Farmers often need to diversify to obtain an adequate income. In a tourism area, many other people, in whole or part, depend on visitors for their income. The challenge for all of these persons is to welcome visitors but to deter visitors from doing any harm or damage. For sheep farmers, dogs not managed and controlled properly by their owners is the great worry. Sheep are prey animals. Dogs’ instinct is to chase sheep. Sheep can suffer stress, injury or death due from being chased or attacked by dogs. It is vital that owners keep their dogs on leads when the dogs are near sheep.

Hot Weather

In various parts of the world sheep must be feeling the heat. The Met Office says that last month was the hottest June in the UK since records began. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO), depicting findings of the Copernicus Climate Change/European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, said on 6 July ‘The world just had the hottest June on record’ (News section). In Headline Statements of the AR6 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2023 (March 2023) of The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change it is said: ‘Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming, with global surface temperature reaching 1.1°C above 1850-1900 in 2011-2020.’  And adding another dimension, WMO announced in a 4 July press release ‘El Niño develops in tropical Pacific. It will likely fuel further global temperature increase.’  

All those who look after sheep need to have awareness of how sheep are, and are likely to be, affected directly and indirectly by hotter weather. For the sheep’s welfare and for sheep not to suffer, sheep’s carers need to take measures to ameliorate the situation as far as possible.

Heat is increasing, hot spells are extending. Hot weather is delivering wildfires. From greater and more heat is delivered: parching of sheep’s pasture; more and sooner drying out of sources of sheep’s drinking water. For their protection from heat, sheep will need enough shade to be present, or created. And if sheep’s grazing pasture is in full heat of sun, it may be too dried out for them to get good nutrition, and/or sheep may not be able endure that strong heat long enough to eat enough pasture to stay fully-nourished. So, they may need supplementary food. Drought caused by hot weather may bring result of drying up of drinking water resources. And in much heat, sheep will be extra thirsty and will need constant supplies of fresh, and clean, drinking water. That water needs to be in the shade. Nights may be quite warm and so sheep may not be able to cool down from the heat of the day. Careful consideration needs to be given to when shearing of sheep takes place. Sheep should be shorn in advance of an anticipated hot weather period. A one-inch-thick fleece provides some relief because it disperses the heat while giving protection against sunburn of the skin. If possible, sheep should not be put in any type of tight group in hot weather. Disturbance and handling of sheep at hottest times of day should be avoided. It is obviously undesirable to keep sheep outdoors in holding pens for a long time in hot weather. Transportation of sheep should only occur at cool times. Hotter weather will render sheep more prone to illness and disease caused by insects, prominently fly-strike. 

All people who are responsible for sheep and their wellbeing need to consider, and act accordingly in relation to, global warming’s impacts on sheep. 

Now, the heat is on.

‘Not Economic’

Disappointingly, on an Outer Hebridean island there seemed to be a dearth of Hebridean sheep. Apparently, they are ‘not economic’.

It can be understood that for all those who aim to earn a living from sheep farming - and its related activities - the endeavour must work economically. But are all, or too many, decisions made just on economic criteria? It seems that economics define, so much, the choices, activity and process in sheep farming. What about sheep welfare? Where does that sit in the hierarchy of priorities?

Among things economics are likely to influence or govern, as well as what sheep breed or cross-breed is decided to be bred and farmed, are how long is the life of a sheep to be, where is it to be located, what grazing or feed it has, to where and in what manner it be will be transported, the amount of quality - beyond specified levels - of the facilities of shows, sales, slaughterhouses. 

Discussing the animal producer industry in his book Why Veganism Matters: The Moral Value of Animals (2022) Gary L Francione opines ‘… the level of protection for animal interests is, with rare exceptions, set by the industry and is linked to what is required to exploit animals in an economically efficient way’ (p 32). He goes on to remark ‘If animals are property, welfare standards will always be low and will be shaped more or less by what level of protection is necessary to exploit animals in an economically efficient way’ (p 46).   

Sheep are living creatures, and, in all the decisions which humans make concerning them, the sheep’s welfare should be the paramount consideration. If to do something is in the sheep’s best welfare, and it is the right thing to do, it should be done. The thing should not be avoided being done on grounds that it is ‘not economic’ to do it. 

And, as the photograph indicates, eventually some Hebridean sheep were seen, exceptions to the generality of their absence on this visit to the Outer Hebrides.

Disturbing News

On 25th May 2023, the UK government (Conservative) dropped the Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill. The news was given in an oral statement to Parliament by Mark Spencer, the Minister for Farming and Rural Affairs.

The news is disturbing for everyone concerned for the welfare of animals. Included in the Bill were a range of items. The Bill addressed two issues key to sheep and their welfare. Legislation in the Bill was to ban exports from Great Britain of live animals for slaughter and fattening, and to get tougher on worrying and attacks by dogs on livestock. Sheep feature much as creatures of live exports. It is sheep, prey to dogs, who suffer worrying and attack from dogs.

Mark Spencer said ‘…we will be taking forward measures in the Kept Animals Bill individually during the remainder of the Parliament.’ (‘Oral statement to Parliament, Animal Welfare Statement: an update on the government’s progress on animal welfare’, Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, 25th May 2023). Compassion in World Farming, hugely regretting the abandonment of the Bill, commented warningly - under a sub-title ‘Uncertain Future’ - that ‘Consequently, all measures under the Kept Animals Bill, will now be individually separated instead, to become possible Private Members Bills in the next Parliamentary year. Whether such Bills will be forthcoming and whether they will carry through before the next election is completely uncertain.’ (‘Government’s Kept Animals Bill Abandoned’, 25th May 2023). 

So, when will there be, and will there be, progress and legislation on two items of such great relevance for sheep?

Troubling Matter

This year, a matter - long-troubling - has come to prominence. Though about a particular place and circumstance, it displays some fundamentals, relevant across the globe. 

On the island of St Kilda, a World Heritage Site off the west coast of Scotland, are Soay sheep. Sheep die there each year from starvation, illness and parasitism. The starvation comes about because the size of the flock increases to an extent that there are not enough food resources to keep sheep fed adequately. 

Responsibility for the sheep on St Kilda resides with the Scottish government and the National Trust for Scotland (NTS). Monitoring of the sheep by The St Kilda Soay Sheep Project has taken place since 1985. 

The BBC reports (Starving sheep on St Kilda need help, say Western Isles vets, 10th May) an NTS spokeswoman as saying:

‘The Soay sheep are an important part of the St Kilda archipelago’s heritage, and originate from the population on the island of Soay where they were treated as a wild population for hundreds of years, unmanaged save for periodic hunting by the archipelago’s inhabitants.

The sheep will continue to be treated as feral animals with a presumption against intervention, except in exceptional circumstances, such as a serious outbreak of disease that threatens the sheep populations.’

The BBC also reports the Scottish government as saying ‘the history of the sheep meant they were not considered to be a species that was commonly domesticated within the British islands.’ The BBC report continues that a spokesman said ‘This means that provisions contained within the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2006 would not apply. This has been the consistent position of the Scottish government for many years.’ The spokesman added, according to the BBC, ‘We recognise that within any wild population of animals in Scotland there will be different challenges from year to year which may impact population numbers.’

Two retired vets, David Buckland and Graham Charlesworth, have launched a petition to The Scottish Parliament ‘to urge the Scottish Government to clarify the definition of protected animals contained in the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, and associated guidance, to ensure the feral sheep on St Kilda are covered by this legislation, enabling interventions to reduce the risk of winter starvation and the consequential suffering of sheep.’ 

Whether the sheep are regarded as feral or wild seems to be a critical thing in this whole matter. David Buckland ‘stresses that “feral” does not mean “wild” ’ and he says ‘An animal can’t be both’ (Eve McLachlan, ‘Feral on an uninhabited island, some dying from starvation: Uist Campaigners bring St Kilda sheep concerns to Parliament’, Press & Journal newsletter, Highlands & Islands, 6th May 2023). In a piece ‘St Kilda’s sheep in grave danger, vets warn’ (welovestornoway.com, 13th February 2023), is the comment ‘It appears that the official line is to regard the Soay sheep as wild animals and treat them the same way as wild deer despite being at odds with animal welfare health guidance that specifically includes the protection of feral sheep, goats and ponies.’

Earlier in the piece, were the remarks

‘… David Buckland and Graham Charlesworth are reportedly saying that no one appears to be taking responsibility for the management of the feral sheep, a situation that is being exacerbated by Scotland’s chief vet failing to include St Kilda’s sheep in animal health and welfare legislation aimed at preventing unnecessary harm and cruelty.

The veterinarians are alarmed that the feral sheep are being left to endure illness, parasites and hunger. As a result, it is believed that some 12,000 adult sheep and more than 4,000 lambs have died in the last two decades.’   

So, because of their perceived heritage, the sheep on St Kilda now are not intervened with. Some starve as an outcome. The sheep are not managed. The flock is not kept to a size commensurate with the available grazing on St Kilda. No supplementary feed is given. This is going too far beyond letting sheep do what is natural to them. Sheep still need to call upon humans for some help and care, and some decisions about where to be put to have appropriate and adequate basic resources of food, water, shelter. 

The ‘sheep on St Kilda circumstance’ surely tells us that we should never see an idea - and whether its correct or incorrect - as being of more importance than living creatures. So, seeing that living sheep have good health and welfare and ensuring that they do not suffer should take precedence over any espousal of, and adherence to concept - no matter what the effects. 

The fundamental message in all this is the generality, arising in all sorts of situations, that living creatures must have precedence over concept.

Unsettling Incident

Last week, three lambs were taken from a farm field by activists from the campaign group Animal Rising (AR). Their aim was to rescue them. Their belief was that the lambs were destined to be sent to slaughter. The lambs were transported away in a vehicle. AR ‘said the animals were safe and with animal experts’ (Katy Lewis, BBC News, 25th May). AR’s action has attracted considerable attention from the media and others.

Clearly AR believed they had demonstrated care about the lambs, and care about lambs in general. What they also demonstrated was that they did not have much sheep knowledge.

In the ‘rescue’, while the lambs were removed from danger of likely slaughter, also they were being removed from their mother(s). AR says it did try to rescue a mother sheep but that ‘it wasn’t possible’.

The action would have caused stress to the lambs and mothers in separating them. 

It is not known whether the lambs were weaned or not - in pictures the lambs look quite large - so they may have been.

Sheep are prey animals. They feel safer in a group and, also, are social animals. Any other sheep in the field would have been stressed, not only the taken lambs and their mother(s).

The lambs were removed from familiar field and people.

There was disease spread potential through the action.

Reported are these reactions to the snatch:

‘Nicola Noble, of the National Sheep Association said

“The mothers have likely spent the last 24 hours scouring the field for their lambs, bleating endlessly with no hope of finding them.

These animals would no doubt have been terrified as they were chased and manhandled by complete strangers.

Being bundled into the back of a dark van would have been highly distressing for the sheep involved - not to mention the risk of potential disease contamination. The lambs, I imagine, would be endlessly bleating, hopelessly calling out for their mothers.” ’

‘Gareth Wyn Jones … a sheep farmer with over five decades of experience, said that the protesters were likely to have terrified the lambs. He added “These people are absolutely bonkers. Its distressing for these animals to be handled wrongly by amateur strangers. They must have chased the sheep around in order to catch them - stressing them out. And taking lambs away from their mothers is incredibly cruel.” ’

Sabrina Miller, Daily Mail, 26th May 2023.

And on the 28th May, the important movement dimension was spoken of by Fiona Parker and Sabrina Miller in The Mail on Sunday 

‘Movement of sheep across the country is strictly regulated to prevent the spread of diseases such as foot-and-mouth.’

Parker and Miller give this quote from Theresa Villiers, a former Environment Secretary

‘For good reason there are extensive rules in place to safeguard the welfare of livestock, especially when animals are transported.’

A spokesman for AR is reported by Parker and Miller as saying about the lambs on 27th May 

‘We have received confirmation from a qualified vet that all their vaccinations have either been delivered over the last couple of days or are scheduled as soon as reasonable. 

Until their full course of vaccinations is completed, they are being kept apart from other animals to remove any risk of disease transmission.’ 

So, the lambs may indeed have been saved from one likely bad outcome, but through the well-intentioned but not well-informed action of their ‘saviours’ the lambs and their family and fellows have been put to suffer.

Movement

There are occasions when sheep need to be moved - whether for their own benefit, or for humans’ purpose. The level of stress and discomfort to sheep from being moved varies according to type and circumstance of the movement.

Sheep will need to be taken from one pasture to another nearby, be rounded up for reasons, and be gathered. The activity will be done by person or persons, on foot, on quad bike or in other vehicle, and likely with assistance from sheepdog(s). Such movements are routine and familiar to sheep. If they are done by persons and sheepdogs known to them (and albeit that the latter, as dogs, represent predators), and if the move is effected with calmness and without the sheep being moved more quickly than their natural speed, stress to them will be small. 

If it is necessary for sheep to be moved on foot along roads, for the safety of all concerned, the activity requires to be done with as much speed as feasible; but the concomitant will be heightening of stress and discomfort for the sheep. 

Movement to places more than walking and droving distance away - to not-in-the-vicinity grazing, to a show, to a sale, to a slaughterhouse - requires sheep to be transported in a vehicle. There is a consequent increase in potential for sheep to suffer. Sheep being transported from their home base - and whether or not in their owner’s trailer - will most likely have comfort and familiarity of being with fellows from their flock. And if returning whence they came, they will have the same consolation on their return journey. 

Going onwards from elsewhere to somewhere new and unknown is fundamentally different, giving increased stress to the sheep. There is unfamiliarity and unknowingness. Their human handlers are unlikely to be known to the sheep; most probably sheep who are usual companions will be travelling with more and other sheep and who they do not know, or by contrast one sheep might be journeying on its own which would be very fear-inducing; the transport vehicle will be probably be unfamiliar, and may also be of an unfamiliar type. Further stress will occur if they are thrust, with a great lot of others, largely or wholly strangers, into a vehicle which is not only unknown but which is very large - a livestock transporter. The sheep’s journey may be much longer than they are used to. It may be indeed be so far as to be to another country, and perhaps involving not just being moved on a lorry but also being carried on a ship.

Discussing ‘Key live transport welfare issues’ in relation to farm animals, the RSPCA states: 

‘Long-distance live transport can cause farm animals a number of welfare problems, including:

Mental distress
- due to the unusual and potentially frightening sights, movements, noises, smells, unfamiliar animals and people they’ll encounter.

Injuries
- if they’re not handled appropriately and carefully during loading and unloading, and transported in well-designed, comfortable vehicles.

Hunger and dehydration
- if they’re not provided with appropriate food, water and plenty of rest breaks.

Heat stress
- if they’re transported for long periods in hot weather.

The risk of these problems happening increases with journey time.’

There is a rising scale of risk to sheep to suffer due to being moved: from probability of only suffering slightly from being moved on foot ‘around the farm’ and its hinterland; through likelihood to suffer to a degree from any transportation by any vehicle; and reaching to, almost inevitable, dreadful suffering when being transported long distance.

Yet, still, the Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill, which contains the proposal to prohibit export from Great Britain of livestock for slaughter etc, has not yet been passed to become law.

Gentleness

Gentleness is a fundamental characteristic of sheep. Sheep are prey animals, without the ability to be aggressive to predators. The most sheep can do in a situation of being chased or attacked is to run away, or else stand ground together. If an individual sheep wants to ‘put someone off’, to protect itself or its offspring, the best it can do is stamp a foot. Sheep do sometimes have one-to-one arguments using means of head-butting. And rams will attack, with their heads. Gentleness is, however, sheep’s general stance and nature.

What a mis-match there can be with how sheep are treated by others: humans with responsibility for care and attendance upon sheep; humans having charge of dogs - main sheep predators; other predators in the animal kingdom. Very sadly, gentleness is not the characteristic always on display by a farmer in their treatment of their sheep. Seemingly stemming from a way of thinking that their sheep are their lesser and their property to do with as they wish, can be ungentle handling as outcome. If dog-owners attached proper value to sheep, they would ensure that their dogs were under control near sheep, and they would ensure that their dogs did not have any opportunity to treat sheep ungently and to render the sheep great harm. The non-pet animal kingdom predators do not have constraint by humans for stopping them from showing ungentleness towards sheep.

How wonderful it would be if commensurate gentleness to that of sheep was displayed by others to them.

Sheep Worrying By Dogs

The context for sheep worrying by dogs is: sheep are prey animals; dogs’ natural instinct is to go after sheep. The arena for potential sheep worrying by dogs is: dogs out of control; sheep placed where dogs can see, and reach, them. Unless a dog is wild, or a stray, it is given care by a human and its actions and behaviour are in the governance of a human. A domesticated and farmed sheep is in human care, and its location is chosen by a human. So, responsibility for sheep worrying by dogs rests with humans.

Two surveys, one (released 7th February 2023) from NFU Mutual ‘of over 1,100 dog owners’ (the survey was commissioned by NFU Mutual, PetBuzz did the interviews) and another (2023) by the National Sheep Association (NSA) through which the NSA ‘has collected the experiences of farmers affected by sheep worrying’, portray the seriousness of the situation. The heading words of the NFU Mutual press release of 7th February which announced the findings of the NFU Mutual survey convey the essential issue, ‘Out-of-control dogs placing sheep at risk’. The press release says that ‘Almost half of dog owners believe their pet won’t harm livestock despite nearly two thirds saying their dog chases other animals’. It continues ‘Nearly four in ten dog owners admit their pet doesn’t always come back when called’. The NSA, saying the results of its 2023 survey, gives the finding that ‘In line with previous survey results, 70% of respondents had at least one sheep worrying incident in the last 12 months’. Among other findings were that ‘Despite farmers making steps to prevent sheep worrying, through signs, moving sheep and use of social media, it’s not having an impact’; and that ‘82% of survey respondents strongly agreed additional powers are necessary to act as a deterrent to irresponsible dog ownership’.

Sad, but important-to-be-read, are 17 case studies that the NSA provides; in these ‘farmers tell of their experiences of sheep worrying’ (https://www.nationalsheep.org.uk/for-the-public/culture/sheep-worrying/case-studies/).

In the matter of sheep worrying by dogs, humans taking responsibility seems to be the vital thing. Dogs belong to humans, and those humans need not to be in denial about what their dogs can and may or will do. The dogs need to be trained and kept under control. Sheep belong to humans, and those humans need to provide their sheep with the maximum protected environment.

Lambs and Lamb

The general public loves lambs.
Sheep farmers put every effort into seeing that lambs are born safely and that they then grow and flourish.
Yet much of the public eats lamb.
Yet sheep farmers sell a quantity of their lambs to be killed and eaten.
There seems to be dissonance here. 

It would appear that there are ‘two minds’. One mindset of valuing lambs and seeing them as precious living creatures.  Another mindset of not minding lambs being killed, early in life, for reason of human wants: sheep farmers’ want to obtain income from selling lambs to be food; a sector of the population’s wish to eat flesh and organs of lamb. 

Of course, a proportion of lambs are not sold by sheep farmers to be eaten. Those lambs left to grow up are being kept for breeding: to make next generations of sheep. These are the lucky ones. 

Lambs for breeding reach adulthood. Those lambs to be eaten have a life so foreshortened that they never get beyond infanthood to have the rest of experience of life - that of being adult. 

What forms the definition of a lamb is a sheep which has an age from day of birth to about a year. Slaughter of a lamb to be food can occur from 10 weeks to 12 months - or even stretching to 14 months, and with around 6 months being the most common time of slaughter.   

Let us ponder our ‘two mindedness’ about lambs. Let us consider about lambs and lamb, and what occurs in relation. And we might do so especially at this season of the year that is characterised by: young lambs abounding in fields: lamb being, for some humans, the chosen thing to eat at Eastertide.