The factory farming initiative wants to explicitly anchor the protection of the dignity of farm animals in the Federal Constitution. Animals should have the right not to live in factory farm conditions. In the future, they should be kept in manageable and species-appropriate group sizes and no longer be subjected to practices that violate their dignity, as is currently still widespread in livestock farming.

In its statement on the counter-proposal, the Federal Council correctly states that animal welfare legislation protects the welfare of the individual animal regardless of the number of animals kept on a farm and thus provides individual protection. From this, it draws its problematic conclusion that a restriction of animal numbers is superfluous and that such a restriction would not directly improve animal welfare. According to the Federal Council, a reduction in animal numbers would result in significant economic losses for livestock farmers. The Federal Council also argues that Swiss livestock numbers are already very small in international comparison due to the structure of farms and national legislation. These arguments are to be contradicted for the following reasons:

Switzerland allows poultry farms to house up to 18,000 birds, which clearly makes it impossible to provide adequate care for the individual animal. In these farming systems, individual animals drown in the masses. Many animals die a painful death among their conspecifics. In such farming systems, the individual is lost in the mass. Many animals die a painful death among their conspecifics. Despite the statutory protection of the individual, their death is considered an inevitable factor in this system, with a mortality rate of up to four percent, and is unlawfully tolerated by the authorities for reasons of practicability. The threat of economic losses alone cannot justify such disregard for the dignity and welfare of animals and could easily be mitigated by appropriate financial support from the public sector. The international comparison of the Swiss animal population is misleading: Switzerland has more animals per capita than the surrounding countries.

The exclusion of an entire livestock category from the announced animal welfare improvements - again based solely on economic considerations - is particularly disturbing. The Federal Council's intention to anchor the requirements of the (currently voluntary) RAUS program as a minimum standard in the future, which is positive in itself, will not apply to broiler chickens ( and also to rabbits), although it is particularly common for these animals to be kept on factory farms. As a reason for this, the Federal Council cites the fact that the breeds currently used for fattening are not suitable for the RAUS program or that this would require the use of other breeds with a longer life span. In doing so, the Federal Council ignores the fact that these animals currently suffer severe health impairments such as respiratory problems, foot pad burns and leg deformities during their lives, which only last around 35 days due to the one-sided breeding characteristics and the conditions under which they are kept. It is in broiler farming that the excesses of factory farming are particularly visible and already illegal under current legislation (see TIR news release of April 17, 2019).

A paradigm shift is needed, not only to drastically reduce the number of animals, but also to move away from chicken breeds that are unilaterally bred for maximum performance.

According to the Federal Council, broilers should have at least one outdoor climate area (a kind of winter garden) at their disposal. This corresponds to the current BTS standard (particularly animal-friendly housing), which already applies to more than 95 percent of Swiss broiler chickens. Unfortunately, upon closer inspection, this "animal welfare measure" proves to be a false solution that does little to improve the lives of the chickens concerned, since as a rule only a few animals on a farm benefit from the fresh air in the outdoor climate area.  Chickens are highly social animals with complex social networks. In unnaturally large flocks, such relationships cannot be established resulting in permanent stress - all the more so when individual animals have to make their way through thousands of conspecifics to the outdoor enclosure. Many animals therefore choose not to venture out into the fresh air. Another obstacle is the draft created by the openings, which varies in intensity depending on the barn design. In addition, livestock farmers are not required to open the outdoor climate area in all weather conditions. They are only obliged to do so if the outside temperature exceeds a certain level and only from the 22nd day after the animals are born (broilers are slaughtered at approximately 35 days old). However, at around this age, fast-growing broilers begin to lose their ability to walk due to increased physical discomfort associated with high weight gain.

Finally, the Federal Council warns against incorporating the private Bio-Suisse guidelines into the constitution because the requirements for this level of standardization are too detailed and the rules are too static or would already be outdated by the time they take effect after the transitional period. In contrast, the transitional provisions for the factory farming initiative explicitly state that the implementing legislation must specify requirements regarding the dignity of the animal that are at least equivalent to the requirements of the Bio-Suisse Guidelines of 2018. This means that the Bio-Suisse guidelines serve as a guide and that the new regulations to be adopted would have to be based on the latest scientific findings in any case. The inclusion of the Bio-Suisse guidelines primarily serves as a protection against a watering down of the factory farming initiative at the time of its implementation and is by no means to be understood as the primary objective of the popular initiative.

The wording of the direct counter-proposal merely corresponds to the principles of the Animal Welfare Act already in force today and in this respect is not a step forward. The intended increase of the minimum animal welfare standard based on the proposed draft is a welcome development which, however, would already be possible and necessary under the current legislation. The exemption of poultry from the RAUS obligation is unacceptable in TIR's view and consolidates a practice that is already illegal today. Overall, TIR considers the Federal Council's counter-draft to be inadequate and unsuitable as an alternative to the initiative's request in central points.