Mutilations of Sheep
Sheep are adapted to the farm environment, instead of vice versa
Farmed sheep are subjected to several painful interventions. These interventions are mostly carried out without anaesthesia and pain relief. Why? For more economic efficiency and thus cheaper animal-derived products.
Tail Docking
Live Lamb Cutting (Mulesing)
Castration Without Anaesthesia
Laparoscopic Artificial Insemination
Ear Tagging, Ear Notching, Tattooing
1
2
3
4
5
Live lamb cutting (mulesing)
- Purpose: To prevent Myiasis (flystrike). Flystrike is the infestation of a live sheep's body by flies, which lay their eggs in the skin folds of the hind parts of the sheep, which later turn to larvae and causes infections. Flies are especially drawn to that part of sheep because it is soaked with moisture and faeces. The highly wrinkled Merino sheep that are bred in Australia are especially prone to flystrike because their wrinkles capture moisture for a longer duration than plain bodied sheep. Live lamb cutting does not adequately protect sheep against flystrike, as flies can attack other parts of a sheep's body, too.2,3
- Procedure: With the help of shears and most commonly without any appropriate anaesthesia or pain relief, the farmers restrain the few weeks old lamb and cut off the skin around the buttocks, causing the animals immense pain.1
- Information: Millions of lambs endure this cruel ordeal in Australia every year and the consequences of live lamb cutting also increase lamb mortality. There are many alternatives to this (intradermal substances, shearing of the breech area, insecticides) but we believe the best option is to breed sheep for fly strike resistance and to improve hygiene with better management strategies. Therefore, live lamb cutting should not be done. Read more about our campaign against live lamb cutting of sheep and demand 'Wool with a butt'.
- FOUR PAWS demands: A ban on live lamb cutting (mulesing) of sheep. We call on brands and industry stakeholders to phase out the practice – there are many more effective alternatives to this cruel practice. Learn more about our work to phase out mulesing here.
Tail docking
- Purpose: To maintain hygiene and prevent myasis (flystrike infestation).
- Procedure: The tail or a part of the tail is removed by using a rubber ring (cutting off the blood circulation, causing the tail to fall off after 4-6 weeks), a hot docking iron, or a knife. Even though many studies have shown that all tail docking methods cause significant pain, the lambs involved are generally not provided with adequate pain relief or anaesthesia during the procedure nor afterwards.4 Furthermore, tail docking could have long-term consequences like chronic pain and primary hyperalgesia.5 It can also enhance various severe risks such as rectal and vaginal prolapses6,7, cancer in the perineal region due to the exposure to solar radiation8, bacterial arthritis.9
- Information: Although it is important to prevent myasis as it could affect the sheep’s health and welfare very negatively, there are different and less invasive prevention methods than tail docking: breeding of sheep with shorter tails and improving management. Better management strategies could prevent diarrhoea and soiling, and shearing of the breech region would help with the danger of myasis.10 Additionally, there have been many studies done disproving this – the defence against flies is hampered, and there can be even more infestations on docked sheep.11 Therefore, tail docking should only be done in medically justified individual cases with anaesthesia and multi-modal pain relief by a veterinarian. Instead of tail docking, maintenance of hygiene and prevention of diseases should be ensured by using selection of tail length in breeding and improving management measures.
- FOUR PAWS demands: A general ban on tail docking in all countries. Hygiene must be guaranteed by appropriate feeding (to prevent diarrhoea) and care (shearing of tail and hind parts). Appropriate farming methods do not require the amputation of body parts.
Ear tagging, ear notching, tattooing
- Purpose: Identification
- Procedure: Ear tagging: the ears are pierced to fix ear tags.
- Ear notching: pliers are used to remove a small piece of the sheep’s ears.
- Tattooing: penetrating the sheep’s skin with a sharp needled tool to insert ink under the skin.
- All methods are causing pain12 and are mostly done without anaesthesia and pain relief.
- FOUR PAWS demands: A ban of painful and mutilating identification methods.
Castration without anaesthesia and pain relief (common practice in males)
- Purpose: To curb the fertility of male animals (to avoid unwanted breeding) and to make them less aggressive and therefore, easier to manage.
- Procedure: There are several ways castration can be performed:
- The most common way in sheep is with the use of a rubber ring, which obstructs blood supply, causing atrophy within 4 to 6 weeks. This method is accompanied with possible chronic inflammation, sepsis, and more pain.
- Less commonly performed is surgical castration (knife/scalpel), and castration with clamp castrators (Burdizzo) that crushes the spermatic cords and causes swelling and inflammation, as well as immense pain13.
- All these methods are very painful and yet mostly done without anaesthesia and (sufficient) pain relief.
- Information: Nowadays these options are available that make the suffering of lambs during castration unnecessary and are acceptable from an animal welfare point of view: vaccination (immunocastration, which is a vaccination that prevents the release of male hormones) or surgical (scalpel) castration by a vet with anaesthesia and multi-modal pain relief.
- FOUR PAWS demands: The castration of (male) sheep must be carried out by a vet, with anaesthesia and multi-modal pain relief. No rubber ring! Alternatives to castration should preferably be used like vaccination (immunocastration).
Laparoscopic artificial insemination
- Purpose: To improve breeding success rates, ewes are artificially inseminated.
- Procedure: Ewes are restrained in a special cradle. Two incisions are made directly onto the sheep´s abdomen, the belly is inflated with air and inspected with the laparoscope, and then inseminated through another channel. There is no pain alleviation available for the animal during and after the procedure. There is only mild sedation during surgery, which is not obligatory but used only for easier handling of the animal (and does not alleviate pain).
- Information: There is evidence that intrauterine AI with laparotomy actually results in quite high rates of embryo mortality14 and it can also be associated with several complications because of inexperienced workers that are performing the procedure.15
- FOUR PAWS demands: A ban on laparoscopic artificial insemination.
FOUR PAWS demands regarding mutilations of sheep
- A ban on live lamb cutting (mulesing) of sheep. We call on brands and industry stakeholders to phase out the practice – there are many more effective alternatives to this cruel practice. Learn more about our work to phase out mulesing here.
- A general ban on tail docking in all countries. Hygiene must be guaranteed by appropriate feeding (to prevent diarrhoea) and care (shearing of tail and hind parts). Appropriate farming methods do not require the amputation of body parts.
- A ban of painful and mutilating identification methods.
- The castration of (male) sheep must be carried out by a vet, with anaesthesia and multi-modal pain relief. No rubber ring! Alternatives to castration should preferably be used like vaccination (immunocastration).
- A ban on laparoscopic artificial insemination.
Source
1. Fisher AD. Addressing pain caused by mulesing in sheep. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2011;135(3):232–240.
2. Hemsworth PH, Barnett JL, Karlen GM, Fisher AD, Butler KL, Arnold NA. Effects of mulesing and alternative procedures to mulesing on the behaviour and physiology of lambs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2009;117(1):20–27. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2008.12.007
3. Colvin AF, Reeve I, Kahn LP, Thompson LJ, Horton BJ, Walkden-Brown SW. Australian surveys on incidence and control of blowfly strike in sheep between 2003 and 2019 reveal increased use of breeding for resistance, treatment with preventative chemicals and pain relief around mulesing. Veterinary Parasitology: Regional Studies and Reports. 2022;31:100725. doi:10.1016/j.vprsr.2022.100725
4. Gascoigne E, Mouland C, Lovatt F. Considering the 3Rs for castration and tail docking in sheep. In Practice. 2021;43(3):152–162. doi:10.1002/inpr.29
5. Larrondo C, Bustamante H, Paredes E, Gallo C. Long-term hyperalgesia and traumatic neuroma formation in tail-docked lambs. Animal Welfare. 2019;28(4):443–454. doi:10.7120/09627286.28.4.443
6. Thomas DL, Waldron DF, Lowe GD, Morrical DG, Meyer HH, High RA, Berger YM, Clevenger DD, Fogle GE, Gottfredson RG, et al. Length of docked tail and the incidence of rectal prolapse in lambs. Journal of Animal Science. 2003;81(11):2725–2732. doi:10.2527/2003.81112725x
7. Fisher MW, Gregory NG, Kent JE, Scobie DR, Mellor DJ, Pollard JC. Justifying the appropriate length for docking lambs’ tails - a review of the literature. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production. 2004;64.
8. Swan RA, Chapman HM, Hawkins CD, Howell JMcC, Spalding VT. The epidemiology of squamous cell carcinoma of the perineal region of sheep: Abattoir and flock studies. Australian Veterinary Journal. 1984;61(5):146–151. doi:10.1111/j.1751-0813.1984.tb07218.x
9. Lloyd J, Kessell A, Barchia I, Schröder J, Rutley D. Docked tail length is a risk factor for bacterial arthritis in lambs. Small Ruminant Research. 2016;144:17–22. doi:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2016.07.018
10. James PJ. Genetic alternatives to mulesing and tail docking in sheep: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 2006;46(1):1–18.
11. Graham MJ, Kent JE, Molony V. Effects of four analgesic treatments on the behaviouraland cortisol responses of 3-week-old lambs to tail docking. The Veterinary Journal. 1997;153(1):87–97. doi:10.1016/S1090-0233(97)80013-5
12. Steagall PV, Bustamante H, Johnson CB, Turner PV. Pain management in farm animals: focus on cattle, sheep and pigs. Animals : an Open Access Journal from MDPI. 2021;11(6):1483. doi:10.3390/ani11061483
13. Masłowska K, Mizzoni F, Dwyer CM, Wemelsfelder F. Qualitative behavioural assessment of pain in castrated lambs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2020;233:105143. doi:10/ghvkbq
14. Evans G. Current Topics in Artificial Insemination of Sheep. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences. 1988;41(1):103–116. doi:10.1071/bi9880103
15. Sathe SR. Laparoscopic Artificial Insemination Technique in Small Ruminants—A Procedure Review. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2018 [accessed 2023 Jan 10];5. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2018.00266
2. Hemsworth PH, Barnett JL, Karlen GM, Fisher AD, Butler KL, Arnold NA. Effects of mulesing and alternative procedures to mulesing on the behaviour and physiology of lambs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2009;117(1):20–27. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2008.12.007
3. Colvin AF, Reeve I, Kahn LP, Thompson LJ, Horton BJ, Walkden-Brown SW. Australian surveys on incidence and control of blowfly strike in sheep between 2003 and 2019 reveal increased use of breeding for resistance, treatment with preventative chemicals and pain relief around mulesing. Veterinary Parasitology: Regional Studies and Reports. 2022;31:100725. doi:10.1016/j.vprsr.2022.100725
4. Gascoigne E, Mouland C, Lovatt F. Considering the 3Rs for castration and tail docking in sheep. In Practice. 2021;43(3):152–162. doi:10.1002/inpr.29
5. Larrondo C, Bustamante H, Paredes E, Gallo C. Long-term hyperalgesia and traumatic neuroma formation in tail-docked lambs. Animal Welfare. 2019;28(4):443–454. doi:10.7120/09627286.28.4.443
6. Thomas DL, Waldron DF, Lowe GD, Morrical DG, Meyer HH, High RA, Berger YM, Clevenger DD, Fogle GE, Gottfredson RG, et al. Length of docked tail and the incidence of rectal prolapse in lambs. Journal of Animal Science. 2003;81(11):2725–2732. doi:10.2527/2003.81112725x
7. Fisher MW, Gregory NG, Kent JE, Scobie DR, Mellor DJ, Pollard JC. Justifying the appropriate length for docking lambs’ tails - a review of the literature. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production. 2004;64.
8. Swan RA, Chapman HM, Hawkins CD, Howell JMcC, Spalding VT. The epidemiology of squamous cell carcinoma of the perineal region of sheep: Abattoir and flock studies. Australian Veterinary Journal. 1984;61(5):146–151. doi:10.1111/j.1751-0813.1984.tb07218.x
9. Lloyd J, Kessell A, Barchia I, Schröder J, Rutley D. Docked tail length is a risk factor for bacterial arthritis in lambs. Small Ruminant Research. 2016;144:17–22. doi:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2016.07.018
10. James PJ. Genetic alternatives to mulesing and tail docking in sheep: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 2006;46(1):1–18.
11. Graham MJ, Kent JE, Molony V. Effects of four analgesic treatments on the behaviouraland cortisol responses of 3-week-old lambs to tail docking. The Veterinary Journal. 1997;153(1):87–97. doi:10.1016/S1090-0233(97)80013-5
12. Steagall PV, Bustamante H, Johnson CB, Turner PV. Pain management in farm animals: focus on cattle, sheep and pigs. Animals : an Open Access Journal from MDPI. 2021;11(6):1483. doi:10.3390/ani11061483
13. Masłowska K, Mizzoni F, Dwyer CM, Wemelsfelder F. Qualitative behavioural assessment of pain in castrated lambs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2020;233:105143. doi:10/ghvkbq
14. Evans G. Current Topics in Artificial Insemination of Sheep. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences. 1988;41(1):103–116. doi:10.1071/bi9880103
15. Sathe SR. Laparoscopic Artificial Insemination Technique in Small Ruminants—A Procedure Review. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2018 [accessed 2023 Jan 10];5. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2018.00266