Çalışanların Hayvan Refahına Yönelik Tutumları: Afyonkarahisar'daki Tavukçuluk İşletmelerinde Bir Betimleme

Year 2017, Volume: 10 Issue: 4, 308 - 316, 01.12.2017

Zehra Bozkurt , Serdar Koçak İbrahim Kılıç Koray Çelikeloğlu Özlem Hacan Ömer Faruk Lenger Mustafa Tekerli

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı Afyonkarahisar ili ve ilçelerinde faaliyet gösteren yumurtacı tavuk işletmeleri çalışanlarının hayvan refahına ilişkin tutumlarının analiz edilmesidir. Araştırma, 53 ticari yumurtacı işletmede çalışanlar ile yüz yüze görüşme yoluyla yürütülmüş, çalışanların bireysel özellikleri ile bilişsel, duyuşsal ve davranışsal boyutta hayvan refahı tutum ölçeğini içeren toplam 118 anket değerlendirilmeye alınmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklem grubu tavukçuluk işletmelerinin sahipleri veya yöneticileri ile bu işletmelerde hayvan bakım ve idaresinde görevli veteriner hekim, ziraat mühendisi ve yumurtacı tavuk bakım ve idaresinden sorumlu diğer çalışanlardan oluşmaktadır. Yumurtacı tavuk çiftliklerinde katılımcıların büyük bölümünün erkek (%87,29) ve 40 yaşından küçük (%64,4) olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Çalışanların %72,88’ inin orta eğitim ve yüksek okul mezunu ve %63,56’sının iş deneyiminin 17 yıl veya daha az olduğu belirlenmiştir. Katılımcıların hayvan refahına ilişkin tutumlarının bilişsel boyutuna ilişkin bulgular katılımcıların hayvan refahı konusunda yeterli bilgisiye sahip olmadığını göstermiştir. Tutumun duyuşsal ve davranışsal boyutlarına ilişkin sonuçlar, çalışanların hayvan refahına yönelik tutumunun kültürel, ahlaki ve toplumsal öğeler ile inançlar tarafından etkilendiğini ve daha yararcı bir içerik taşıdığını göstermiştir.

Keywords

Hayvan Refahı, Tutum, Çalışanlar, Yumurtacı Çiftlik

Attitudes of Staff Regarding Animal Welfare: A Description on Poultry Farms in Afyonkarahisar

Abstract

The objective of this study was to analyze the attitudes of staff at layer hen farms operating in Afyonkarahisar province and its districts. The study was carried out with face to face interviews of staff working at 53 commercial layer hen farms to measure the cognitive, affective and behavioral dimensions of attitudes regarding animal welfare with a total of 118 survey forms which were evaluated. The sample group of the study consisted of the owners or administrators of poultry farms as well as veterinarians, agricultural engineers and other staff responsible for the care and administration of laying hens at these farms. It has been determined that a major proportion of the participants from the layer hen farms were male (87,29%) and under the age of 40 years old (64,4%). It was determined that 72,88% of the staff were graduates of secondary school and college and 63,56% of them had 17 years or less of work experience. Information on the cognitive dimension of attitudes of participants towards animal welfare has shown that knowledge in terms of animal welfare is inadequate. The results for the affective and behavioral dimensions indicate that the attitudes of staff regarding animal welfare are influenced by cultural, moral and social cults as well as beliefs and sustains a more utilitarian content.

Keywords

Animal Welfare, Attitude, Staff, Layer farm

References

• Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1991; 50:179-211.
• Borgen SO, Skarstad GA. Norwegian pig farmers’ motivations for improving animal welfare. British Food Journal.2007; 109:891-905.
• Bozkurt Z, Kılıç İ, Hacan Ö, Lenger Ö. The effects of human - animal interactions on animal welfare. Kocatepe Vet J. 2013; 6(1):41-50.
• Breuer K, Hemsworth PH, Barnett JL, Matthews LR, Coleman GJ. Behavioural response to humans and the productivity of commercial dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2000; 66:273-288.
• Breuer K, Hemsworth PH, Coleman CJ. The effect of positive or negative handling on the behavioural and physiological responses of nonlactating heifers. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2003; 84:3-22.
• Coleman GJ, Hemsworth PH, Hay M. Predicting stockperson behaviour towards pigs from attitudinal and job related variables and empathy. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 1998; 58: 63-78.
• Coleman GJ, Hemsworth PH, Hay M, Cox M. Modifying stockperson attitudes and behaviour towards pigs at a large commercial farm. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2000; 66:11-20.
• Coleman GJ, McGregor M, Hemsworth PH, Boyce J, Dowling S. The relationship between beliefs, attitudes and observed behaviours of abattoir personnel in the pig industry. Applied Animal Behaviour. Science. 2003; 82:189-200.
• Çelik B, Bozkurt Z. The attitudes and perceptions towards animal welfare of staff employed in the care and handling of animals during animal transport in Muş province. Kocatepe Vet J. 2016; 9(4):294-303.
• Dawkins MS. Using behaviour to assess animal welfare. Animal Welfare. 2004; 13:3-7.
• European Commission. Feasibility study on animal welfare labelling and establishing a community reference centre for animal protection and welfare Part 1: Animal Welfare Labelling. DG SANCO Evaluation Framework. Contract Lot 3, (Food Chain). 2009; No 2004/S243- 208899.
• Furnham A, Pinder A. Young people’s attitudes to experimentation on animals. The Psychologist. 1990; 10:444-448.
• Furnham A, McManus C, Scott D. Personality, empathy and attitudes to animal welfare. Anthrozoös. 2003; 16(2):135-146.
• Gocsik AG, Oude Lansink JM, Saatkamp HW. Mid-term financial impact of animal welfare improvements in Dutch broiler production. Poultry Science. 2013; 92(129):3314–3329.
• Hacan Ö, Bozkurt Z, Tekerli M, Kılıç İ, Koçak S, Eser M, Çelikeloğlu K. Atçılık işletmelerinde refah standartlarının belirlenmesi ve çalışanların hayvan refahına ilişkin algılarının ölçülmesi. Kesin sonuç raporu. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversites, BAPK, 2015; Proje No:13.VF.10, Afyonkarahisar.
• Havinga T. Private food safety standards in the EU. Nijmegen Sociology of Law Working Papers Series. 2017; no:2017/01.
• Heleski CR, Mertig AG, Zanella AJ. Assessing attitudes toward farm animal welfare: A national survey of animal science faculty members. Journal of Animal Science. 2004; 82:2806-2814.
• Hemsworth PH, Coleman GJ. Human–livestock interactions: The stockperson and the productivity and welfare of intensively farmed animals. CAB International. 1998; Wallingford.
• Hemsworth PH, Coleman GJ. Managing poultry: human–bird interactions and their implications. Animal Welfare. 2010; 9:219- 235.
• Hemsworth PH, Coleman GJ, Barnett JL, Borg S, Dowling S. The effects of cognitive behavioral intervention on the attitude and behavior of stockpersons and the behaviour and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science. 2002; 80:68-78.
• Herzog HA, Betchart NS, Pittman RB. Gender, sex role orientation, and attitudes toward animals. Anthrozoös. 1991; 4:184-191.
• Kauppinen T, Mikko Vesala K, Valros A. Farmer attitude toward improvement of animal welfare is correlated with piglet production parameters. Livestock Science. 2012;143:142–150.
• Kellert SR. Human-animal interactions: A review of American attitudes toward wild and domestic Animals in the twentieth century. In: A.N. Rowan (Ed.), Animals and people sharing the World. 1988; pp.137-175. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
• Kılıç İ, Bozkurt Z. The relationship between farmers' perceptions and animal welfare standards in sheep farms. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2013; 26(9):1329-1338.
• Kılıç İ, Bozkurt Z. Bilişsel, duyuşsal ve davranışsal boyutta hayvan refahı tutum ölçeği ile hayvan refahını etkileyen faktörlere ilişkin algı ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi ve hayvan haklarına yönelik katılımcı görüşlerinin belirlenmesi. Kesin sonuç raporu. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi, 2014; BAPK, Proje No:12.VF.02, Afyonkarahisar.
• Kılıç İ, Bozkurt Z, Tekerli M, Koçak S, Çelikeloğlu: Afyonkarahisar koyunculuk işletmeleri çalışanlarının hayvan refahını etkileyen faktörlerle ilgili algıları. Lalahan Hayvancılık Arastırma Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2013; 53(1):29-38.
• Kielland C, Skjerve E, Østeras O, Zanella AJ. Dairy farmer attitudes and empathy toward animals are associated with animal welfare indicators. Journal of Dairy Science. 2010; 93:2998-3006.
• Köhler F, Wildner S. Consumer concerns about animal welfare and the ımpact on food choice ‐ the German literature review report. EU‐Projekt EU FAIR‐CT 98 – 3678. 1998; Germany – 1st Report.
• Main DCJ, Mullan S, Atkinson C, Cooper M, Wrathall JHM, Blokhuis HJ. Best practice framework for animal welfare certification schemes. Trends in Food Science & Technology. 2014; 37:127-136. Maria GA. Public perception of farm animal welfare in Spain. Livestock Science. 2006; (103):250-256.
• Mench J. Farm animal welfare in the USA: Farming practices, research, education, regulation, and assurance programs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2008; 113:298-312.
• More SJ, Hanlon A, Marchewka J, Boyle L. Private animal health and welfare standards in quality assurance programmes: a review and proposed framework for critical evaluation. Veterinary Record. 2017; 180(25):612.
• Serpell JP. Factors affecting human attitudes to animals and their welfare. Animal Welfare. 2004; 13:145–51.
• Sinclair M, Zito S, Phillips CJC. The impact of stakeholders’ roles within the livestock industry on their attitudes to livestockwelfare in Southeast and East Asia. Animals (Basel). 2017; 7(2):6.
• Waiblinger S, Boivin X, Pedersen V, Tosi MV, Janczak AM, Visser EK, Jones RB. Assesing the human-animal relatrionship in farmed species: A critical review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2006; 101:185- 242.