High Welfare Myth
Between February and May 2024, I accompanied animal rights investigators from Animal Rising as they conducted 60 undercover inspections of 45 farms approved under the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) Assured scheme, the UK’s highest animal welfare programme. The investigations documented 280 alleged legal breaches and 94 potential violations of Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) regulations, prompting widespread calls for the scheme to be dropped.
Following the investigations, a review commissioned by the RSPCA concluded that the scheme was “operating effectively,” but controversy persisted. Prominent figures, including TV presenter Chris Packham, former Green Party MP Caroline Lucas, and Queen guitarist Sir Brian May, have since resigned from their RSPCA roles, while Crown Court Judge Ayesha Smart condemned the scheme as “effectively fraud.”
The findings have reignited debates over whether animals can be farmed humanely given the current high demand for meat, which sees over one billion land animals farmed annually in the UK. This question is even more pressing when viewed alongside the devastating environmental impacts of large-scale, intensive farming operations. Agriculture remains the leading cause of river pollution and accounts for 35% of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.
The RSPCA acknowledges that reducing animal product consumption is crucial for improving conditions for farmed animals but maintains that welfare standards are still necessary while 94% of the population continues to eat meat.
Animal rights organisations challenge this stance, arguing that, as the world’s largest animal welfare charity, the RSPCA should take a bolder approach to protect farmed animals rather than normalising their suffering on an industrial scale. They allege that systemic change in our food system is needed to address the root causes of suffering and that “high welfare” animal farming cannot exist.
