TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM WITH UNHAPPY PIGS.
Today unhappy pigs are a fact all over the world. We have read in the paper about those poor pigs being chewed on by each other, living in small dung filled pig pens - sometimes with a dead congener lying beside them. Another problem is the long, stressful transport to the abattoir. If we do not solve this problem with unhappy pigs we will get a lot of antibiotic in our meat, more multi resistant bacteria and bored, stressed pigs causing each other damadges. An unhappy pig will also give us inferior quality of the meat. Why not legislate about loose housing, local abattoirs, small packs and stimulation? That would result in happy pigs with a curl on their tails.Pigs need to be outdoors. Pigs need to grub, graze and take a mud bath now and then. Therefore loose housing is an excellent way of breeding. Grubbing is a natural behaviour which pigs must get an outlet for. A mud bath is how pigs refreshes themself and rub their skin. When the pigs are able to grub for worms and insects, and graze twigs and grass they both get stimulation and a variety in their diet.
Secondly, pigs are happier in small packs. When the pigs are crowded they will injure each other and starts to chew on each other - mostly on the tails. In a small pack they will have enough space and it will result in less chewing, fewer parasites, less pneumonia and less resistant bacterias. A healthy pig is a happier pig.
Finally, long transports to the abattoir makes the pig stressed. A stressed pig is an unhappy pig, and we should not eat meat from a stressed and unhappy pig so local abattoir would be preferable. In a small, local abattoir it would be a more decent treatment of the pig and it will be happier without cattle prod treatment.
I am well aware of that some people might argue about the costs of those solutions, and that they are unnecessary because the pig is going to be slaughtered within eight months anyway. However, if I am going to eat a pig I would certainly want the pig to have a great life before I cook it for dinner! I do not want to eat an unhappy pig who suffered in a dirty pen, stuffed with chemicals, tortured by a cattle prod. I want to eat a healthy dinner from a happy pig. And I will pay for it! What do you want?
To get happy pigs demands a legislation of loose housing. A pig have natural behaviours it must be allowed to exercise for stimulation. Those behaviours are to grub, graze and take a mud bath. But that is not all there is if we want happy pigs. A pig also need to live in smaller packs to stay healthy and have enough space so they will not get stressed and start to chew on each other's tails. A pig also get stressed by long transports so we need small local abattoirs. If we fail to get happy pigs we will eat meat stuffed with chemicals and with inferior quality. And most of us will feel bad about the pig suffered with illness and injuries, living in a dung filled pen all life just to get tortured by a cattle prod in the end. Loose housing and local abattoirs are the solution for happy pigs.
Your introduction is a well-stated definition of the problem with unhappy pigs. You give the reader a vivid picture of pig’s situation and several causes to that: too small pig pens and long, stressful transports. As a result of these disproportions you mention increase of antibiotic in our meat. That surely is true but knowing nothing about pigs, I was a bit curious why? Do unhappy pigs get more antibiotic to make them happy?
SvaraRaderaThere is a little spelling-mistake in first paragraphs “…causing each other damages.”
Your solutions of the problem are in the end of the first paragraph. Maybe it should be better to present your proposal in introduction of second paragraph. Your first paragraph is clear and consist facts about the dreadful situation of pigs so it is better to make your proposal in second paragraph with the “change of tone” and more like expert talk. If you put together the end of first paragraph and beginning of the second, you get a clearly stated proposal to solve this problem. I think the second paragraph is very good! It really sounds like an expert telling us about what pigs needs are. Remember also, “them self” in second paragraph should be themselves.
Bacterias in third paragraph should be bacteria, I believe. You argument nicely in favour of your solutions and show an awareness of counter arguments like the costs in fifth paragraph.
Look up subject-verb in paragraph fours:” …long transports to the abattoir makes…”
Consider also 6: th paragraph:” A pig have...” (Has) “A pig also need…” (Needs) “A pig also get…” (Gets).
To some up I think you use a reasonable, sensitive tone in you proposal that really engage the readers. You sum up an evaluation of the benefits and give a careful analysis to the reader why your proposal holds. Your text is convincing and persuading and all your hints as to how to implement the solution gives the reader a clear picture of what and why we have to do to gain the pigs.
Even if you don’t know anything about pigs or loose housing this really makes you ready to take stand for all pigs and give back some of their natural living and liberty!