Day 090 - 16 Feb 95 - Page 24


     
     1        controlled by Regulation as soon as possible".  You were
     2        involved in the preparation of this document?
     3        A.  Yes, I was.
     4
     5   Q.   Were you pushing for more lax stocking densities?
     6        A.  No, I definitely was not.
     7
     8   Q.   So were you happy with this 34 kilograms per metre squared?
     9        A.  The Committee produces a report which is a consensus
    10        view of all the people sitting on that Committee.  It does
    11        not mean to say that everybody on the Committee agrees with
    12        every statement made in a report.  What in the end of the
    13        day the report does, it reflects the views of the Committee
    14        overall and there will be particular areas, perhaps, which
    15        individuals would not always agree with each other on.
    16
    17   Q.   So you disagreed on this issue?
    18        A.  As I say, I think 34 kilos is a good aim across the
    19        country based on average housing facilities and I do not
    20        see any harm in that recommendation.
    21
    22   Q.   If it became law you would be breaking the law at Sun
    23        Valley Poultry, would you not?
    24        A.  If it became law, then we would be prepared to look at
    25        it and make adjustments as required.
    26
    27   Q.   But while there are no sanctions you are quite happy for
    28        the birds to be more crowded than what is recommended here?
    29        A.  The amount by which we are over that is fairly small.
    30        It would not require a great deal of adjustment.  There
    31        would be many houses anyway which will be stocked at that
    32        level and the figure I gave you yesterday was simply an
    33        average for the more modern facilities.
    34
    35   Q.   So why not have less birds per shed then?  Why not adhere
    36        to this recommendation?
    37        A.  Well, I think the practice that we use, as I say,
    38        I feel comfortable that the welfare, the requirements of
    39        birds are being met.  We have done many trials at much
    40        lower stocking densities than that to see if there is any
    41        difference in the performance or the behaviour of the birds
    42        or the mortality, and we have not been able to demonstrate
    43        to ourselves any great benefits from reducing that, that
    44        level.  This is why we have stayed with the status quo at
    45        the moment.
    46
    47   Q.   On the same page at (b) it says that:  "Any bird wishing to
    48        move from a crowded area to a more open space should be
    49        able to do so"?
    50        A.  Yes. 
    51 
    52   Q.   Now towards the end they are not able to do that, are they? 
    53        A.  The last three or four days, may be not.
    54
    55   Q.   Right.  So why not reduce the stocking density and allow
    56        them to be able to have that bit more space?
    57        A.  As I have just said, the reasons that we have not done
    58        that are -- there are many reasons, including behaviour,
    59        mortality, economics, they all come into the factor.
    60

Prev Next Index