** The conclusions and opinions made in these papers are not necessarily those of the School of Veterinary Medicine or St. George’s University but those entirely of the author. We hope that you will enjoy and learn from what you will read.

     Veal Calf Production in the United States

Stacie Rae Gallenstein

SGU-SVM 6th Term

The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) has, within its animal welfare position statements, recognized veal calf production as a potentially humane use of male dairy calves and has encouraged management practices that promote proper veterinary care, housing, nutrition, and lighting for such animals.  The organization does not, however, provide concrete guidelines as to how to best meet these standards nor does it address specifically some of the most controversial aspects of the industry including, but not limited to, utilization of solitary stalls and tethering.  If one concedes that the dairy industry as a whole operates within ethical boundaries, then s/he must also recognize that one unfortunate bi-product of milk production for human consumption is the birth of unwanted male offspring.  Hence, the veal calf industry might represent an ethical use of animals that would otherwise be slaughtered immediately after parturition.  However, public concern over tethering practices, housing conditions, liquid diets and social deprivation of individually stalled animals has prompted legislative proposals meant to protect veal calves from inhumane treatment.  Such legislation has already been implemented in the European Union, but for the most part, these proposals have failed in the United States.  While the personal consumption of veal may therefore be more a question of personal choice and values than an issue to be addressed by a professional organization such as the AVMA, it is absolutely the responsibility of veterinarians to not only promote, but to actively demand the most humane treatment of veal calves while they are alive.   In order to do so, laws that regulate veal calf production must be reviewed and amended in the United States.  Members of the AVMA should move beyond mere encouragement of humane practices and become actively involved in legislative processes that can lead to changes in current law.  Specific management requirements that limit stalling and tethering and explicitly describe acceptable husbandry practices need to be mandated and enforced.

Veal calves in the United States are kept in restrictive individual stalls in part because the resulting lack of activity contributes to an increase in meat quality as described by industry standards.  Canadian and U.S. guidelines recommend stalls with a minimum width of 66 cm and length of 168 cm for calves weighing up to 181-kg.  Animals are tethered to the front of the stall with fiber or metal tethers 61-91 cm in length.  Opponents of veal production contend that individual stalling of animals does not allow for enough social interaction among the animals and that such confinement does not provide nearly enough room for calves to move about and groom naturally. On the other hand, American veal producers argue that current guidelines already dictate stall dimensions that allow room enough for calves to stand, stretch, groom themselves, and lay down in a natural position.  Legal changes would impose unnecessary economic hardship on producers due to facility renovations and reduced calf capacity of the facilities. They maintain that stalling allows for regulation of air temperature and humidity through heating and ventilation, facilitates individual health assessment and veterinary care, and helps to prevent rapid spread of infectious disease throughout the herd.  The stall's slotted floors also allow for efficient removal of waste products.  Veterinarians should strive to implement laws with specific space regulations that will ensure animals are afforded enough room to move freely (not in individual stalls) and to interact with others in their age group.  Vague descriptions of acceptable conditions will not suffice and will not lead to changes in legislation. 

         In the past, veal calves were housed in the dark to enhance meat quality.  It has been recommended by the AVMA that adequate levels of light be available for inspection while feeding or monitoring.  Through one study of ten commercial veal facilities researchers found that all barns were equipped with adequate supplemental lighting, that six of the ten facilities had natural light sources, and that none of the facilities incorporated darkness as a deliberate component of the production system.  Again, however, little to no specific federal legislation exists to regulate exactly how much and what kind of light is deemed to be adequate.

         Opponents of veal production have also raised concerns with regard to the health, nutritional status, and immunocompetance of veal calves.  Upon birth, calves have very low levels of circulating immunoglobulin (IgG).  The consumption of colostrum by the newborn within twenty-four hours after parturition provides passive immunity, without which the calf is predisposed to any number of infectious diseases.  Despite the importance of colostrum ingestion to the health of the individual calf and to the herd, the percent of calves receiving enough high-quality colostrum and thereby developing satisfactory passive immunity varies regionally in the States. The possibility of failure of passive transfer, along with the stress of transport, and the effects of mixing many calves from several different herds of origin, make it far more likely for veal calves to suffer from infections of enteropathogens such as E. coli.  Even though the health benefits of early colostrum ingestion are well recognized within the veterinary profession, specific mention of it is not addressed in the animal welfare position statements released by the organization.

         Veal calves are usually separated from their mothers within three days after birth.  About fifteen percent of veal calves are marketed at a weight of 150 pounds, or at around three weeks, and are called Bob calves.  However, most calves in the United States are “special-fed” and consume milk or soy based diets with no roughage.  The amount of iron in their diet is carefully controlled as to produce a pale-colored product desired by consumers.  Growers ordinarily limit iron during the last stages of production in order to decrease the myoglobin content of the muscle without inducing circulatory anemia.  Many veal opponents claim that calves are maintained intentionally at a low level of nutrition to support the production of pale meat.  While it has been determined by some researchers that the standard dietary limitation of iron does not markedly affect the calves clinically, it does reduce blood levels of the element to some extent, and the potential exists for clinical consequences if blood iron levels fall too low.  Therefore, regular monitoring of blood values should be mandated and enforced, and, again, veterinarians should take a strong position to this end.

         Bull et al. (1994) concluded that the current liquid diets of veal calves produced heavier animals and higher-quality, more desirable carcasses than diets including grain or pasture.  Further, no available data suggest enhanced calf health due to the inclusion of forage or grain in the veal calf.   However, it has been proposed that feed with iron-chelating agents could be offered along with grain in order to maintain desirable muscle color in veal while providing non-milk sources of nutrition. Even if milk diets are not supplemented with grain, farms should at least be required to provide a minimum amount of water in between twice-daily feedings of milk replacer.  Given the ethical issues many people have with feeding an animal on a wholly liquid diet for its entire life, these alternatives should be seriously considered by both veal producers and veterinary professionals. 

         Many public concerns regarding the humaneness of veal production have been addressed through research.  While results generally support modern, commercial veal production as practiced in North America, it is important to consider all alternatives and the well being of individual animals in assessing the appropriateness of industry regulations as they stand today.  Research examining integrated alternatives to special-fed veal production systems has addressed the addition of solid feed to the milk-based diet, group rearing, and use of pasture.  For instance, the practice of feeding a combination of milk replacer, grain, and forage to dairy-type bull calves has not been widely accepted in the United States but is increasing in Canada.  Although the carcasses produced under this system have more muscle pigmentation than in special-fed veal carcasses and hence are similar to the USDA non-special-fed veal classification, there is no ethical reason the United States should not also embrace these changes.

         The European Union has already implemented laws with specific requirements that must be met by veal calf producers.  For example, the legislation forbids calves to be kept permanently in darkness.  Healthy veal calves raised in member nations may not be confined in individual pens after the age of eight weeks.  Calves may only be tethered for up to one hour and only to allow for feeding in a group-housing situation. Their lying area must be comfortable, clean, and adequately drained and must not adversely affect the calves.   For all calves less than two weeks old, appropriate bedding must be provided.  The law dictates that each calf must receive bovine colostrum as soon as possible after it is born and in any case within the first six hours of life.  Specific requirements for feed and water are dictated, allowing very little room for interpretative differences.

         If the veterinary profession in the United States is to continue to condone the use of calves in veal production, it must also accept as its responsibility the welfare of the animals raised within the industry.  Economic considerations and the wishes of a relatively small minority of veal producers and consumers should not trump the inherent needs of animals that have already been subjected to premature separation from their mother, the stress of transport, and the increased risk of morbidity and early mortality.  The profession must at the very least ensure that these animals are treated humanely while they are alive.  Veterinarians should not accept extended individual stalling and tethering, administration of inadequate amounts of colostrum and feeding of diets lacking in iron and/or roughage, or low-light housing as acceptable industry standards.  The only way to ensure changes in veal calf production occur is to condemn inhumane practices and to lobby for legislation that supports this position.

References

http://www.factoryfarming.com/veal_laws_euro.htm

http://www.peta.org/factsheet/files/FactsheetDisplay.asp?ID=102

http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/vetext/INF-AN/INF-AN_VEAL95FRANCE.HTML

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Fact_Sheets/Veal_from_Farm_to_Table/index.asp