Day 091 - 17 Feb 95 - Page 25
1 are likely to move around?
2 A. You could argue that, except that these birds have the
3 freedom of the sheds from a young age to move around as
4 much as they need to. As we said yesterday, the
5 restriction or the limitation to movement is only in the
6 last three or four days, but even then they still have
7 enough freedom for movement if they wish to do so.
8
9 Q. So do you disagree with the Farm Animal Welfare Council
10 Report on page 16 of that Report?
11 A. Which bit are you asking me whether I agree with?
12
13 Q. Paragraph 44.2?
14 A. The encouragement of activity helps to develop leg
15 strength. I do not disagree with that at all.
16
17 Q. You would agree with the raised lighting and the
18 intermittent lighting helping with that problem as well?
19 A. Yes, and I explained to you yesterday that we are
20 looking at that possibility in the hope that we can find a
21 better light programme that will stimulate and improve
22 activity and, therefore, should have a good effect on leg
23 strength.
24
25 Q. But that is not something that has been implemented yet?
26 A. No. There is a lot of work going on but we are just
27 trying to find the ideal programme.
28
29 Q. Would you agree with the other part of what is written
30 there: "Free range flocks and those kept in semi-intensive
31 indoor systems appear to have fewer leg problems than those
32 reared in conventional systems."
33 A. I have no personal experience of free range broilers
34 and, therefore, I am not really able to comment on that,
35 except to say that it would be logical that they would have
36 fewer leg problems.
37
38 Q. The system used at Sun Valley is what they call a
39 conventional system?
40 A. A conventional system.
41
42 Q. So it would have more incidence of leg weakness, leg
43 problems, than those kept in semi-intensive or free range
44 flocks?
45 A. You make that conclusion from that paragraph. I do not
46 necessarily agree with that but you could make that
47 conclusion.
48
49 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I thought you had, although you said you had
50 no personal experience, it would be logical?
51 A. It would be logical but how can I agree if I do not
52 have the figures? It is fine making bald statements but
53 I would like to make conclusions based on facts.
54
55 Q. That may be right, but we do not always have all the
56 necessary facts to do it. We may have to just come down to
57 probability.
58 A. OK.
59
60 Q. That is not a rebuke; it is a lawyer's comment. It would
