A roadmap for improving animal welfare and community health.
We conducted this research on behalf of Animal Welfare League. More information about this organisation's work for animals is available here on their website.
Author: Animal Ask
Download PDF version
Executive Summary
The welfare of farmed animals is a critical component of agriculture. Improving animal welfare means that animals live happier, healthier lives - not only is this good for its own sake, but animal welfare also supports community development, public health, and environmental outcomes. For this reason, many farmers in Ghana already opt for more extensive farming systems or shun the use of battery cages in the production of products like eggs. Unfortunately in Ghana, existing legal requirements for animal welfare don’t match this. The criminal code outlaws ill defined ‘unnecessary suffering’ and includes exceptions for animals being slaughtered or prepared for slaughter for food. This leaves the vast majority of traditional extensive farmers' livelihoods at risk for competition from large industrial farms adopting practise banned in many other parts of the world. This progressively concentrates the industry in the hands of few and fewer wealthier individuals who lack concern for animals, public health and the environment. In this report, we identify the top opportunities for improving farmed animal welfare in Ghana, working with industry and government stakeholders to uphold animal welfare as a public good (1).
When the stakeholders seek to improve the lives of animals, it is important to focus efforts on the animal species and policies that will bring about the biggest improvements for a given investment of effort. Reforms should focus on reaching as many animals as possible. Fish (170 million individuals) and poultry (82 million individuals) are the most numerous farmed animals in Ghana by far, and intensively farmed fish and poultry typically experience poorer welfare conditions than other types of animals. Intensive poultry and live markets have come with high risks of zoonotic diseases through the spread of avian influenza (2,3). So, improving the lives of farmed fish and chickens is a priority.
With this in mind, we have identified several high-priority avenues for improving the welfare of these keystone species in Ghana agriculture.
Cage free work for hens. Making sure that laying hens are free from battery cages has been identified as a crucial reform by many animal welfare scientists, as well as the direction that the global market is inevitably heading toward. The National Cage-Free Farmers' Network are already standing for cage free production systems including over 130 farmers (4) rapidly growing from previous years.
Poultry disease prevention. A number of zoonotic diseases are present in Ghanaian poultry populations (5). Additionally, worm infestations, fowl pox, and coryza are non-zoonotic diseases that can cause significant morbidity and mortality on farms (6). These lead to the death and suffering of the chickens, existential human health concerns and financial losses for farmers.
Pre-slaughter stunning. Stunning animals before slaughter using affordable easy to maintain stunning systems, such as the Zephyr captive bolt stunner. While stunning is required before slaughter in Ghana (7), there is no indication that this is practised beyond these four slaughterhouses. Slaughterhouses cover a variety of different animals so the stunning device used must be multipurpose. As the bulk of animals slaughtered in Ghana are chickens, it is very important that any slaughter methods apply to them.
Improve water quality on tilapia farms. We recommend that the Environmental Protection Agency establish a program that monitors water quality on all tilapia farms producing over 100 tonnes of tilapia each year and works with farms to improve water quality where problems are identified. This will improve health, welfare and productivity outcomes for farmed fish and reduce risks of mass mortality events in Volta lake.
Strengthen biosecurity practices in aquaculture. As with water quality, weak biosecurity presents a large risk for fish and fish farmers. We recommend that the Veterinary Services Directorate and the Fisheries Commission continue their work in establishing a biosecurity plan for aquaculture in Ghana as well as a number practices that should be considered in said plan.
All of these efforts can be further supported by establishing umbrella animal welfare regulations. These would establish overarching requirements or powers for the control of cruel and dangerous practices that are adopted by intensive farmers. This could be modelled on the animal welfare act of Tanzania or the EU, and include the requirement for pre-slaughter stunning.
Table of contents
Cage free work
Poultry disease prevention
Pre-slaughter stunning
Strengthen biosecurity practices in aquaculture
Farmed Animals in Ghana
Improving farm animal welfare is good for animals, and it can also bring a range of benefits for humanity. For example, higher farm animal welfare can reduce the risk of zoonotic disease, reduce antimicrobial resistance, increase food safety, and reduce environmental problems (8). While animal welfare is a critical component of agriculture, it is also important to ensure that any improvements in animal welfare are feasible to implement. Therefore, given limited resources, it is important to focus efforts on the animal species and particular policies that will bring about the biggest improvements.
To accomplish this, reforms should focus on the highest priority issues, reaching as many animals as possible. Tilapia (170 million individuals slaughtered per year) and chickens (82 million individuals alive at any one time) are the most numerous farmed animals in Ghana by far. Intensively farmed fish and chickens typically experience poorer welfare conditions than other types of animals. So, improving the lives of farmed tilapia and chickens is the most promising way to achieve significant improvements in animal welfare through relatively modest policies.
Poultry
There are approximately 82.5 million poultry alive at any time in Ghana (9). Of these, 50.7% are exotic chickens; 36.9% are indigenous chicken; 3.9% are crossbreeds; 5.6% are guinea fowl; 1.3% are ducks; and the rest are a small number of other species (e.g. goose, pigeons, and so on) (10). According to personal communication from 2013/2014, of these chickens, approximately 23 million may be laying hens and the remaining 59.5 million may be broiler chickens (11) Note that smaller farms using indigenous breeds may use them for both eggs and meat (12). Additionally, according to the same source, 50% of laying hens may be housed in cage systems (11), but note again that this number is both unreliable and may have grown considerably in the intervening 10 years.
This production is supplemented with imported frozen poultry supplying around 75% of total consumption, mostly from the EU (~25%), Brazil (~25%), and the United States (~40%) (9). Imported poultry tends to be cheaper than domestically produced poultry, which has resulted in a precipitous decline in the local Ghanaian industry over time (12). For example, in 2000 domestic poultry production supplied 60% of domestic demand, but this fell to 20% in 2011 (13).
Poultry production systems in Ghana can be broken down into large-scale production (10,000+ birds), medium-scale (5000 – 10,000 birds), and small-scale (50 – 5000 birds). Large-scale systems occupy around 20% of total production in Ghana and primarily produce eggs. Medium- and small-scale producers practise much laxer biosecurity, and wild or free-range birds may be able to wander into these facilities and infect other birds (12). Although we have not found exact statistics on the number of chickens which are free range, medium and small-scale farmers tend to have free-range chickens or an open aviary design (14).
There are significant health issues associated with the consumption of frozen, intensively farmed chicken from these countries. In particular, a lack of adequate refrigeration in all parts of the supply chain and unsanitary handling often result in hazardous levels of E. coli and salmonella (15).
This presents an opportunity to support the local industry in providing a significantly safer and more nutritious product, as well as a product that better supports animal and environmental welfare. This can be done through a progressive series of reforms. This presents an opportunity for the local industry to differentiate itself from less healthy and wholesome imports.
There are two key ways in which the welfare of poultry—and therefore farm productivity, which drives farmers' profits and Ghana's overall food security—can be improved.
Cage free work: Using a combination of methods, especially corporate outreach, to encourage cage free farming of chickens in Ghana.
Poultry disease prevention
These two opportunities are discussed in detail in the next section of this report.
Tilapia
In Ghana, around 200 million individual tilapia are produced each year. Tilapia accounts for almost all of the farmed fish in Ghana—a couple of other fish species are farmed, though in very low numbers (9,16,18).
Scientific studies over the past 20 years have arrived at the conclusion that fish, like land animals, can feel pain (19–21). Improving the welfare of fish is not only good for the fish—it can also help improve the productivity of aquaculture and increase the quality of the fish for the person who eventually consumes them (22). Therefore, we have just as much reason to protect the welfare of aquaculture-raised fish as we do other farm animals.
Tilapia production in Ghana is dominated by a relatively small number of large-scale producers, who generally farm tilapia in cages using monoculture. Taken together, farmers with an annual production over 100 tonnes produce around 80 percent of Ghana's tilapia (10). While there were 1,386 tilapia holders in 2017, around 90 percent of production came from just 101 cage farmers (23,24). Likewise, around 95 percent of tilapia produced in Ghana are farmed in a monoculture, rather than a polyculture (10). (There may be many farmers using polyculture, but these farmers only produce a small amount of fish (17).) Most floating cage farms are situated on Lake Volta (25). A typical floating cage might measure five metres by five metres, and farms usually have many cages (26).
Aquaculture supplies around 10 percent of Ghana's fish production with the rest coming from wild-caught fish (23). On cage farms, tilapia are harvested using a net (17)—harvesting tilapia using electrical stunning rather than not stunning them would improve tilapia welfare (27,28), but electrical stunning machines may be too expensive for most fish farmers in Ghana to purchase and implement. In fact, even the use of tools like pumps and scales may be limited to wealthier farmers (17).
There are two key ways in which the welfare of tilapia—and therefore farm productivity, which drives farmers' profits and Ghana's overall food security—can be improved.
Water quality. Fish farmers in Ghana may find it challenging to provide their fish with an optimal water quality (29), and water quality is an important factor in tilapia welfare (27,30). Establishing a program to monitor and improve water quality on large fish farms in Ghana would improve both fish welfare and productivity.
Biosecurity. Disease outbreaks can kill tilapia, cause tilapia to experience pain and suffering, and cause significant financial losses to farmers (30,31). While Ghana has made significant progress in improving biosecurity in the past, it is important to identify further ways to reduce the chances that Ghana's fish farmers encounter preventable disease outbreaks.
These two opportunities are discussed in detail in the next section of this report.
Top opportunities for improving animal welfare
Overarching
Umbrella animal welfare regulations
The first opportunity for improving general animal welfare is umbrella animal welfare regulations, the most important start to which would be a general animal welfare act for the country of Ghana.
Ghanaian animal welfare legislation is largely limited to the Ghanaian Criminal Code, Section 303 (7). These provisions largely only regulate cruelty and the infliction of unnecessary suffering on animals, which leave things unclear as to which action should count as inflicting unnecessary suffering. Normally this would be specified in more detail in an animal welfare act, in addition to the act prohibiting many practices that can never be done humanely, including some farming practices.
An animal welfare act in Ghana would be a key first step to legislating animal welfare in the country in a serious way. The sentience of animals could also be recognized in the act to enshrine a commitment to the care of animals as feeling individuals, following the lead of a growing number of countries (32). Further animal welfare regulations could be later added directly to the act, instead of necessitating the revision of the criminal code. More detailed secondary legislation, such as codes of practice, could also be added relatively straightforwardly at a later date.
The most progressive piece of animal welfare legislation in Ghana is currently not in the animal welfare act of Ghana at all. It is a requirement for pre-slaughter stunning in the Code of Practice for Slaughterhouses/Slabs. The full requirement is: ".4.7. Stunning must be done in a humane way as this process affect the quality of the meat, with due consideration to minimizing contamination" (33). While this is encouraging, it has not been enforced and pre-slaughter stunning is only practised in a select few slaughterhouses following assistance from NGOs (34).
Ghana could lead Africa and animal welfare legislation by adopting a new progressive animal welfare act, perhaps modelled off the animal welfare act of Tanzania or the EU, including the requirement for pre-slaughter stunning.
Pre-slaughter stunning
The second general opportunity in Ghana is stunning animals before slaughter using affordable easy to maintain stunning systems, such as the Zephyr captive bolt stunner. This has previously been practised by Eyes on Animals, who introduced the stunning devices to four slaughterhouses in Ghana (34). While stunning is required before slaughter in Ghana (7), there is no indication that this is practised beyond these four slaughterhouses or enforced anywhere in the country.
Slaughterhouses in Ghana are multipurpose, slaughtering a variety of different animals farmed in Ghana (expert interviews). Any stunning device used must therefore be multipurpose, in order to stun this range of animals of various sizes. As the bulk of animals slaughtered in Ghana are chickens, it is very important that any slaughter methods apply to them.
Our knowledge of current conditions so far suggests that there is currently a great deal of suffering involved in slaughter in Ghana, as there is in many countries. An investigation in the JFamco slaughterhouse in Accra in December 2022 found “very brutal killing methods, which entailed having their throats cut first and then being thrown into a deep container while still conscious. Due to inadequate restraint during the cutting process, the cuts were often imprecise. Furthermore, the chickens were piled on top of each other as they bled to death. The consequences included poor bleeding, intense pain (due to wounds contacting other chickens), and a struggle for survival lasting several minutes”.
Under guidance from Eyes on Animals and WACPAW, so-called “slaughter cones” have been adapted for use at this slaughterhouse. These cones cause the heads of the chickens to descend to the bottom while keeping the rest of their body restricted in the cone above. This allows their throat to be cut more cleanly and with less struggling. We should note that this is still far from a humane death as this will not be either instantaneous or necessarily reliable on a first attempt. It plausibly improves these metrics, though this has not been studied scientifically yet.
This work should be done in communication with the Bureau of Halal Certification Ghana, to ensure that the substantial Muslim community in Ghana approves of the stunning process. Note that globally among Halal certified producers it is estimated that 84% of poultry, 75% of cattle, and 62% of sheep receive pre-slaughter stunning (35), so in practice this is a widely held position among the global Islamic community.
We think it is a high-impact opportunity because of the large number of animals slaughtered without prior stunning in Ghana and the small number of slaughterhouses that are responsible for proportionately large numbers of animals killed (expert interviews). While the prevalence of on farm or market slaughtering (36) limits the ceiling of the impact of this intervention (because it means that only a smaller proportion of the total number of animals slaughtered per year in Ghana could be reached by such programs), making sure that all existing slaughterhouses have access to this device is a quite tractable intervention with a clear positive impact. This campaign could therefore be an achievable and significant campaign for animal welfare in Ghana.
Poultry
Cage-free work
The first opportunity to improve poultry welfare is multifaceted work to prevent and to reduce the reliance on battery cages in Ghanaian chicken farming.
Making sure that laying hens are free from battery cages has been identified as a crucial reform, as well as the direction that the global market is inevitably heading towards:
Welfare Footprint (37) and others as one of the most substantial improvements to the well-being of the hens.
Cage-free farming has been called the new global norm, with 2600 companies making cage-free commitments across 74 countries and all inhabited continents (38).
It does not make sense for new farmers to buy the discarded cages of other countries to enter the dying industry of caged farming.
Environmental enrichment, such as that provided by cage-free systems, also contributes to improving many other welfare indicators among the birds including physical health, natural behaviour, and affective states (39). While research on the contribution of cage-free systems towards robustness against diseases has yet to be performed, this effect has been found in the case of pigs and it is possible in the case of chickens (39). This indicates some concrete improvements in bird health that come with the adoption of cage-free systems.
This work is all the more important in Ghana where cage production is less entrenched, and can reasonably be prevented from coming to dominate the industry. Compared to many other countries, the larger populations of laying hens in Ghana also make this particularly valuable.
In addition to the very significant animal welfare benefits (37), consumer willingness to pay for cage-free eggs is higher in many countries. While studies have yet to be done on willingness to pay for cage-free eggs in Ghana, one survey indicates that 47.6% of Ghanaians preferred eggs from hens that were not confined (40). As economic means in Ghana continue to improve, we would expect this preference to increase and be prioritised to a greater extent, providing an economic advantage to cage-free production.
Additionally, as the sector grows in Ghana, and the prospects of exporting significant quantities of eggs becomes a live option, cage production of eggs will increasingly become a liability, as export to the EU and the many countries beginning to follow their lead in banning battery cages becomes difficult or impossible (41). These poor long-term signs are particularly relevant since cage farming represents speculative investment that is hoped to pay off in the future.
Biosecurity on cage-free farms also appears to benefit from cage-free farming, with either caged farming itself or the higher densities associated with caged farming, being associated with high rates of salmonella contamination in the meat of chickens in one study (42).
We expect this work would best start as corporate work working with farmers and suppliers to transition towards cage-free or commit to maintaining cage-free egg production. This could later move towards legislative work on the subject once the country is ready for such legislation.
Cage-free work has already seen some substantial success in the country, with the National Cage-Free Farmers' Network in Ghana who collectively farm a total of 750,000 hens under a commitment to cage-free farming (4).
Animal Welfare League has begun to study this process, commissioning a study to compare the economics of cage-free versus caged egg production in Ghana, as well as transition costs between the two. When this is completed it will be an invaluable supplement to this analysis (43).
Battery cages are increasingly being used in the farming of hens in Ghana, driven by cheap imports in Europe following the phase out of battery cage farming in the EU. However, exact data on the prevalence of this is lacking and more research in this area would be very valuable (44).
Poultry disease prevention
The second opportunity to improve poultry welfare in Ghana is a portfolio of welfare improvements to reduce diseases among poultry and Ghana.
A number of zoonotic diseases are present in Ghanaian poultry populations including avian influenza (virus subtype H5N1), Newcastle disease, salmonellosis, and coccidiosis (5). Additionally, worm infestations, fowl pox, and coryza are non-zoonotic diseases that can cause significant morbidity and mortality on farms (6).
Of these diseases, Newcastle disease is one of the most significant, being responsible for the highest proportion of mortality and morbidity. The vaccine is currently made cheaply available, but many village chickens are not vaccinated and outbreaks can cause devastating mortality of up to 100%. More intensively farmed chickens are often vaccinated, but the disease can still cause significant morbidity and mortality (45).
Understanding and uptake of biosecurity practices on poultry farms is poor. In a sample of 76 farms in the Ashanti region, the vast majority of farmers wore no personal protective equipment while on farm, and only 53% of farmers had a footbath installed (46). On the other hand, all of the farms vaccinated their chickens against Newcastle disease (46).
Almost all the farms also sold their chickens live at the farm gate, which can present biosecurity challenges through visitors spreading diseases between chickens at different farms or catching diseases themselves. It also presents serious welfare challenges, as it means that birds will be subject to significant distress while transported alive, particularly if handling is done poorly. Finally, birds which are transported alive may spread diseases to other regions, as large numbers of them are dispersed across the country without biosecurity measures.
In 2021 the Ghanaian government gave GH₵20.1 million in compensation to farmers impacted by avian influenza (14). This is testament to the substantial monetary resources at stake in not getting biosecurity and general chicken health in order (as well as the consequences for chicken welfare for its own sake). If stronger biosecurity measures were implemented in the first place, it is possible that much of this money could have been saved.
There are additional strong risks associated with zoonotic diseases among chickens in Ghana.
Three outbreaks of the highly pathogenic form of avian influenza have occurred in Ghana between 2008 and 2020, and while no human affections were recorded during this time, the disease has a 53% mortality rate in humans, so this is a significant threat (46).
In addition to those listed, there are possibilities of new disease strains developing and passing on to humans. This can have disastrous consequences for human health, for the country’s poultry sector, and for the country’s reputation as a whole (47).
There are a number of potential interventions that the government of Ghana and farmers can move towards in order to reduce disease mortality and morbidity. :
Training programs for biosecurity and general chicken welfare for poultry farmers in Ghana
The use of more indigenous breeds
Increased vaccination: More vaccination could be done for Newcastle disease, and vaccination could be considered for avian influenza. Increasing access to Newcastle disease vaccination for village chickens could be especially valuable, as it is the main source of mortality among village chickens (48)
Cage-free farming methods
Tilapia
Improve water quality on tilapia farms
The first opportunity to improve tilapia welfare is by ensuring that water quality on tilapia farms is kept within recommended limits.
To accomplish this, we recommend that the Environmental Protection Agency establish a program that monitors water quality on all tilapia farms producing over 100 tonnes of tilapia each year and works with farms to improve water quality where problems are identified.
The most recent scientific review gives the following recommendations for the water quality parameters that best protect tilapia welfare (49):
Temperature: 24 to 34 °C
pH: 6.0 to 8.5
Transparency: 30 to 45 cm
Oxygen saturation: 60 percent or above (i.e., above roughly 4 mg/L of dissolved oxygen)
Non-ionized ammonia: 0.05 mg/L or below
Nitrite: 0.3 mg/L or below
Alkalinity: 30 to 100 mg/L of calcium carbonate
When parameters are outside of these recommended limits, this can harm tilapia welfare (27,49,50). Moreover, poor water quality can threaten farmers' economic outlook by reducing productivity (26). One study found that tilapia farms with optimal water quality produced 20 percent more tilapia per square metre compared to farms with poor water quality (51), and another study found that tilapia raised under good water quality tended to be in better condition at harvest (50). Therefore, providing farmers with assistance to keep water quality within, or close to, the recommended limits is an effective way to improve tilapia welfare and increase farmers' profits.
Most fish farmers in Ghana do not actively monitor water quality. Many farmers check the quality and smell of water, but only a minority of farmers in Ghana use instruments to measure the water quality parameters that are important for tilapia welfare (29). The fish farmers who have invested in equipment to monitor water quality have found this to be very valuable (29).
Fish farmers in Ghana have the opportunity to achieve an optimal water quality, but this may require some monitoring and adjustment to accomplish. The average conditions in Lake Volta, in parts of the water where fish are not farmed, are often within the recommended ranges for tilapia welfare. For example, temperature typically varies between 28 and 32 °C and oxygen is typically around 8 mg/L at the surface (52). Likewise, pH is generally neutral in the open water of the lake and river system (53). However, these are only averages. On farms, water quality can change drastically as fish consume oxygen and feed and expel waste, and the degradation of feed and dead fish can further hinder water quality. Furthermore, there is variation with depth (52), and different parts of the Volta lake and river system have different water parameters (54). Parts of the water close to human activity can be higher in pollutants, which can cause water quality parameters to move outside of the recommended ranges for tilapia welfare (55). To illustrate, one study found that pH can be as low as 4.4 or as high as 10 and that dissolved oxygen can be as low as 2 mg/L at some points in the Volta river system (54).
We recommend that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establish a program that monitors water quality on all large tilapia farms. Ensuring that water quality is sufficient for tilapia welfare in Ghana will depend on both farmers and the EPA. This program would:
Identify the tilapia farms producing over 100 tonnes of tilapia each year. As mentioned above, this handful of large farms accounts for over 80 percent of Ghana's tilapia production—this means that Ghana can achieve the biggest gains in animal welfare and economic profits by improving water quality on a relatively small number of farms.
Provide those farms with the tools necessary to monitor water quality. This would involve discussing the role that water quality plays in fish welfare and farm profits and, subsequently, encouraging farms to install water quality metres in the water.
Maintain records of water quality at each farm over time. This could involve having the farmers check the water quality metres regularly (e.g. several times per day) and report the results to the EPA periodically (e.g. every six months).
If farms are identified that tend to have water quality outside of the recommended limits for tilapia welfare, then the EPA and those farms can work together to solve this issue. The specific solution will be guided by the circumstances—for example, if the EPA's water quality monitoring finds that most farms have poor water quality, then this may warrant a large-scale water quality improvement program. On the other hand, if only a few farms struggle with water quality, then the EPA can focus on working with those few farms.
Depending on the context, water quality can be improved by aeration and farm management (26). There are many different types of aerators, each of which works in a different way (56,57). This means that farms and policymakers have a number of different options and can select the aerators best suited to their particular goals, local conditions, and financial constraints. Likewise, farmers have several options for improving water quality via farm management. In the short term, farmers can clean cages, remove any dead fish or debris from the water, and reduce feeding. In the longer term, farmers can ensure that stocking densities are not too high.
Strengthen biosecurity practices in aquaculture
The second opportunity to improve tilapia welfare is by establishing a plan for monitoring, preventing, and treating fish disease on large-scale tilapia farms.
To accomplish this, we recommend that the Veterinary Services Directorate and the Fisheries Commission continue their work in establishing a biosecurity plan for aquaculture in Ghana.
An ideal biosecurity plan would include disease surveillance, disease preparedness, and disease control. The plan would also encourage on-farm biosecurity practices (58). These broad characteristics are similar to the work already underway by the Ministry and have formed part of past initiatives (e.g. the Tilapia Seed Project, the recent training of fish paraprofessional officers, and the establishment of fish health laboratories) (59,60), and we encourage the government to continue and strengthen this work.
The plan should encourage farms and hatcheries to develop their own disease monitoring and control plans (59). Currently, many fish farmers treat diseases when they are detected, but only a minority of farmers use preventative practices such as vaccination, heat shock treatment, burying dead fish, and so on (61). Such plans should include the following on-farm and on-hatchery practices (31,59,62,63):
Regular cleaning and disinfection of nets, tanks, and other equipment
Allowing several days between harvest and stocking (fallow period)
Training all farm staff in early detection of common diseases
Screening and filtration of floating cages to prevent the entry of wild fish, which can carry disease
Vaccination of fingerlings before outbreaks occur
Quarantine system to keep different batches of fish separate, especially when they arrive from external sources (e.g. fish delivered from a hatchery to a grow-out farm)
The government should be congratulated on the tilapia biosecurity initiatives already underway (60). However, the Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development may require additional support to strengthen this work and to ensure the success of these initiatives. This support would enable the Ministry to (60–64):
Continue to raise awareness of the importance of disease monitoring, prevention and control, especially among large-scale cage farmers
Continue to invest in skilled personnel and researchers (e.g. expanding the current training of paraprofessional and continuing to develop fish health laboratories)
Continue the routine surveillance, monitoring, and collection of data relating to the on-farm disease rates and biosecurity practices, especially for large farms
Provide subsidies for farmers with strong biosecurity practices, as financial limitations can often hinder the adoption of biosecurity practices (62,64)
In tilapia aquaculture, biosecurity covers a range of activities at all stages of the value change (31). Here, we emphasise the prevention and control of disease, as disease is a major factor in both fish welfare and farm productivity.
Tilapia can become sick and die due to a range of bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites. This can happen across all life stages, including eggs, larvae, fry, fingerlings, and adults—the different diseases that can affect tilapia at each of these life stages are described in detail by MacKinnon et al (31).
The importance of strong biosecurity in improving both fish welfare and farm productivity cannot be overstated. Bacterial and viral disease is one of the most important factors that limits the productivity of tilapia aquaculture (31). Disease causes fish kills, stunted growth, lower market values, higher costs of production, and major losses of stocks (64). In Lake Volta's tilapia farms, there have been repeated outbreaks of major diseases in the past few years. For example, Infectious Spleen and Kidney Necrosis Virus (ISKNV) and bacterial infections caused mortalities of up to 90% on some farms in late 2018 to early 2019—beyond the suffering and death that this causes to fish, this also causes farms to experience huge financial losses (60,63,65). A separate survey found that half of fish farmers in Lake Volta reported experiencing major losses due to diseases (61).
However, farms that have strong disease monitoring systems and treat diseases quickly and effectively have significantly higher production levels (65). Prevention is typically a more effective solution than the prophylactic use of antibiotics (66), though antibiotics certainly have an important role in treating disease once it is detected in fish. To prevent disease, it also helps to improve water quality (as discussed above). Higher quality water reduces the background level of fish stress, which improves fish immune responses and reduces the chance that an infectious disease will spread (31).
Recommended resources
Appendix: Animal welfare and One Health
The One Health framework recognises the links between animal health and welfare, human health, and environmental health (67). Recognising how animal welfare can contribute to economic and community development allows governments and organisations to make smarter investments. According to the International Livestock Research Institute (68): "One dollar invested in One Health approaches can generate five dollars’ worth of benefits at the country level through increased GDP and the individual level." Animal welfare is not a luxury, but an essential component of public health and economic development (8).
The explicit objective of the Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development is to support the sustainable management and development of aquaculture for the national benefit (60). Likewise, the Ministry of Food and Agriculture aims to modernise agriculture to achieve food security, reduce poverty, and support the sustainable management of the environment.
The One Health framework shows that animal welfare can contribute to the national benefit—including food security, poverty reduction, and environmental sustainability—in a number of ways:
Reducing zoonotic diseases. Improving animal health and welfare makes animals less likely to develop and transmit zoonotic disease. This can prevent the emergence of zoonotic diseases and the associated threats to public health (8).
Reducing antimicrobial resistance. Animals with higher welfare can be raised with fewer antibiotics, thereby reducing the risk of antimicrobial resistance and improving community health (8,69).
Increasing food safety. When animals harbour harmful bacteria like Salmonella and Campylobacter, people who eat the animals' meat can become sick. Healthier, less stressed animals are less likely to harbour these bacteria. This improves food safety and people's health (8,67,70).
Reducing environmental problems. Better husbandry systems are more productive. This means that fewer resources like feed and water are wasted and that fewer environmental pollutants are released into the atmosphere and the water. This reduces environmental problems (8).
Animal welfare can also contribute to increasing farmer and community wealth, which is a critical component of a modernised, flourishing agricultural sector.
More efficient food production. Animals with higher welfare are healthier and less stressed, and therefore experience lower mortality and higher yields (67). This makes agricultural production more efficient, helping both households and businesses to produce more.
Supporting private sector economic development. Businesses that can produce food more efficiently will be in a strong economic position to develop, such as through capital investments.
Improving food security. Helping households to produce food more efficiently can improve household food security (8), and preventing the emergence of zoonotic diseases can improve food security country-wide (70).
Increasing income. More productive, efficient production of food means that both households and commercial farmers can receive more money (8).
The development of a modern, efficient sector will enable Ghana's agriculture to become competitive and well-integrated into global markets. Animal welfare is a core component of this goal.
References
1. Nurse A. Beyond the property debate: animal welfare as a public good. Contemporary Justice Review. 2016 Apr 2;19(2):174–87.
2. WOAH - World Organisation for Animal Health [Internet]. World Organisation for Animal Health; 2021 [cited 2024 Jul 22]. Avian Influenza. Available from: https://www.woah.org/en/disease/avian-influenza/
3. AnimalHealth [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jul 22]. Global AIV with zoonotic potential. Available from: https://www.fao.org/animal-health/situation-updates/global-aiv-with-zoonotic-potential/en
4. Nyamekye E. Animal Welfare League. 2024 [cited 2024 Jun 21]. Over 750,000 hens committed to cage-free housing in Ghana through farmer commitments. Available from: https://www.animalwelfareleague.org/blog/over-750000-hens-committed-to-cage-free-housing-in-ghana-through-farmer-commitments
5. Amissah-Reynolds PK. Zoonotic risks from domestic animals in Ghana. academia.edu. 2020 Jun 20;17–31.
6. Ouma EA, Kankya C, Dione M, Kelly T, Enahoro D, Chiwanga G, et al. Poultry health constraints in smallholder village poultry systems in Northern Ghana and Central Tanzania. Front Vet Sci. 2023 Jul 3;10:1159331.
7. GAL. Global Animal Law. [cited 2024 Jun 28]. Animal laws at national level - Ghana. Available from: https://www.globalanimallaw.org/database/national/ghana/
8. ILRI. Keeping livestock healthy and well cared for improves animal, human, environment and economic health [Internet]. International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi; 2021. Report No.: Livestock pathways to 2030: One Health Brief 5. Available from: https://hdl.handle.net/10568/113059
9. Ministry of Food and Agriculture. Facts & Figures: Agriculture in Ghana, 2021 [Internet]. Statistics Research and Information Directorate; 2022. Available from: https://mofa.gov.gh/site/images/pdf/AGRICULTURE%20IN%20GHANA%20(Facts%20&%20Figures)%202021.pdf
10. Ghana Statistical Service. 2017/18 Ghana Census of Agriculture: National Report [Internet]. 2020. Available from: https://statsghana.gov.gh/gssmain/fileUpload/pressrelease/Final%20Report%2011%2011%202020%20printed%20version.pdf
11. Windhorst HW. Zootecnica International. 2017 [cited 2024 Jun 19]. Housing systems in laying hen husbandry. A status report. Available from: https://zootecnicainternational.com/poultry-facts/housing-systems-laying-hen-husbandry-second-part/
12. Kusi LY, Agbeblewu S, Anim IK, Nyarku K. The challenges and prospects of the commercial poultry industry in Ghana: A synthesis of literature. 2015; Available from: https://www.academia.edu/download/37938626/The_Challenges_and_Prospects_of_the_Commercial_Poultry_Industry_in_Ghana_A_Synthesis_of_Literature.pdf
13. ACDI/VOCA [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2024 Jun 24]. USDA Ghana Poultry Project (GPP). Available from: https://www.acdivoca.org/projects/ghana-poultry-project-gpp/
14. Frimpong R. Overview of Ghana’s struggling poultry sector [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jun 19]. Available from: https://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/overview-of-ghanas-struggling-poultry-sector
15. Kunadu AP. The microbiological quality of imported frozen chicken drumsticks from retail meat shops in Accra, Ghana. 2018 [cited 2024 Jun 24]; Available from: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5dc6f631fef6e9f90e530697800c7db885d9fb6b
16. Fishcount. Fishcount. 2017. Estimated numbers of individuals in aquaculture production (FAO) of fish species (2017). Available from: http://fishcount.org.uk/studydatascreens2/2017/numbers-of-farmed-fish-B0-2017.php
17. Nunoo FKE, Asamoah EK, Osei-Asare YB. Economics of aquaculture production: a case study of pond and pen culture in southern Ghana. Aquac Res. 2014;45(4):675–88.
18. Twumasi MA, Asante D, Asante IO, Addai B, Jiang YS. Assessing fish farm economic performance and access to financial services nexus: Empirical evidence from Ghana. Aquacult Econ Manage. 2023;27(2):249–66.
19. Sneddon LU. Can Fish Experience Pain? In: Kristiansen TS, Fernö A, Pavlidis MA, van de Vis H, editors. The Welfare of Fish. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2020. p. 229–49.
20. Brown C. Fish intelligence, sentience and ethics. Anim Cogn. 2015 Jan;18(1):1–17.
21. Elwood RW. Potential Pain in Fish and Decapods: Similar Experimental Approaches and Similar Results. Front Vet Sci. 2021 Apr 20;8:631151.
22. Hardy-Smith P, Roadknight N. Fish Welfare and One Welfare--A Veterinarian’s Perspective. In: One Welfare in Practice. CRC Press; 2021. p. 255–77.
23. Asiedu B, Nunoo FKE, Iddrisu S. Prospects and sustainability of aquaculture development in Ghana, West Africa. COGENT FOOD & AGRICULTURE [Internet]. 2017;3(1). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2017.1349531
24. Crentsil C, Gschwandtner A, Wahhaj Z. The effects of risk and ambiguity aversion on technology adoption: Evidence from aquaculture in Ghana. J Econ Behav Organ. 2020 Nov 1;179:46–68.
25. Lambongang M. THE NEXUS BETWEEN GOOD AQUACULTURE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, SURVIVAL RATE OF FINGERLINGS, AND THE EFFICIENCY OF FISH FARMERS IN GHANA [MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY IN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS]. University for Development Studies; 2021.
26. Agyakwah SK, Asmah R, Mensah ETD, Ragasa C, Amewu S, Tran N, et al. Farmers’ manual on small-scale tilapia cage farming in Ghana [Internet]. Tilapia Seed Project; 2020. Available from: https://ebrary.ifpri.org/utils/getfile/collection/p15738coll5/id/7169/filename/7172.pdf
27. Volstorf J, Maia CM. Fair Fish Database. 2023. Nile tilapia (Version: B | 1.2). Available from: https://fair-fish-database.net/db/species/oreochromis-niloticus/farm/advice/
28. Compassion in World Farming. Improving the welfare of Nile tilapia – slaughter [Internet]. Available from: https://www.compassioninfoodbusiness.com/media/7456575/tilapia05-improving-welfare-at-slaughter.pdf
29. Ragasa C, Agyakwah SK, Asmah R, Mensah ETD, Amewu S, Oyih M. Accelerating pond aquaculture development and resilience beyond COVID: Ensuring food and jobs in Ghana. Aquaculture [Internet]. 2022;547. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.737476
30. Compassion in World Farming. Improving the welfare of farmed Nile tilapia at rearing [Internet]. Available from: https://www.compassioninfoodbusiness.com/media/7456572/tilapia03-improving-welfare-at-rearing.pdf
31. MacKinnon B, Debnath PP, Bondad-Reantaso MG, Fridman S, Bin H, Nekouei O. Improving tilapia biosecurity through a value chain approach. Rev Aquac. 2023 Feb;15(S1):57–91.
32. World Animal Protection. World Animal Protection. 2023 [cited 2024 Jul 15]. Encouraging Animal Sentience laws around the world. Available from: https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/latest/blogs/encouraging-animal-sentience-laws-around-world/
33. Food and Drug Authority. Code of Practice for Slaughterhouses/Slabs [Internet]. Food and Drug Authority; 2013. Available from: https://fdaghana.gov.gh/images/stories/pdfs/downloads/food%20guidelines/CODE%20OF%20PRACTICE%20FOR%20SLAUGHTER%20HOUSES.pdf
34. Sanja. Eyes on Animals. 2018 [cited 2024 Jun 19]. Four slaughterhouses in Ghana now use captive bolt stunners. Available from: https://www.eyesonanimals.com/more-stunners-arrive-in-ghana/
35. Riaz MN, Irshad F, Riaz NM, Regenstein JM. Pros and cons of different stunning methods from a Halal perspective: a review. Transl Anim Sci. 2021 Oct;5(4):txab154.
36. Annan-Prah A, Mensah A, Arkorli SY, Asare PT, Kumi-Dei D. Slaughterhouses, animal slaughter and slaughter hygiene in Ghana -. Journal of Veterinary Advances. 2012;2:189–98.
37. Transition to cage-free systems – Welfare Footprint Project [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jun 19]. Available from: https://welfarefootprint.org/research-projects/laying-hens/
38. OWA. OWA Cage-Free Egg Fulfillment Report. Open Wing Alliance; 2024.
39. Jacobs L, Blatchford RA, de Jong IC, Erasmus MA, Levengood M, Newberry RC, et al. Enhancing their quality of life: environmental enrichment for poultry. Poult Sci. 2023 Jan;102(1):102233.
40. Animal Welfare League [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jul 15]. Cage Free —. Available from: https://www.animalwelfareleague.org/cage-free
41. Linden J. Battery Cages, the EU and Beyond [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jul 15]. Available from: https://www.thepoultrysite.com/news/2011/11/battery-cages-the-eu-and-beyond
42. Management Board members, Director E, Operational Management. European Food Safety Authority. 2007 [cited 2024 Jul 15]. Report of the Task Force on Zoonoses Data Collection on the Analysis of the baseline study on the prevalence of Salmonella in holdings of laying hen flocks of Gallus gallus. Available from: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/rn-97
43. Animal Welfare League, Abiliba D, Ayang J, Piiru ED. Animal Welfare League 2023 Review. [cited 2024 Jun 21]; Available from: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/wC5tHG6Lvi3GzJQmP/animal-welfare-league-2023-review
44. Ayang J, Adhiambo A. The Epidemic of Second-Hand Battery Cages Being Imported into Africa: What does this mean for the cage-free movement in Africa? [cited 2024 Jun 19]; Available from: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/YfJs3ANnmFKpKhquS/the-epidemic-of-second-hand-battery-cages-being-imported
45. Walugembe M, Naazie A, Mushi JR, Akwoviah GA, Mollel E, Mang’enya JA, et al. Genetic Analyses of Response of Local Ghanaian Tanzanian Chicken Ecotypes to a Natural Challenge with Velogenic Newcastle Disease Virus. Animals (Basel) [Internet]. 2022 Oct 13;12(20). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani12202755
46. Ayim-Akonor M, Krumkamp R, May J, Mertens E. Understanding attitude, practices and knowledge of zoonotic infectious disease risks among poultry farmers in Ghana. Vet Med Sci. 2020 Aug;6(3):631–8.
47. Vidal J. Factory farms of disease: how industrial chicken production is breeding the next pandemic. The Guardian [Internet]. 2021 Oct 18 [cited 2024 Jul 2]; Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/18/factory-farms-of-disease-how-industrial-chicken-production-is-breeding-the-next-pandemic
48. Awuni JA. Strategies for the Improvement of Rural Chicken Reduction in Ghana. Characteristics and parameters of family poultry production in Africa [Internet]. 2002 [cited 2024 Jun 24]; Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joseph-Awuni-2/publication/237658715_STRATEGIES_FOR_THE_IMPROVEMENT_OF_RURAL_CHICKEN_PRODUCTION_IN_GHANA/links/5602ca8108aeaf867fb7d152/STRATEGIES-FOR-THE-IMPROVEMENT-OF-RURAL-CHICKEN-PRODUCTION-IN-GHANA.pdf
49. Pedrazzani AS, Cozer N, Quintiliano MH, Tavares CPDS, Biernaski V, Ostrensky A. From egg to slaughter: monitoring the welfare of Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus, throughout their entire life cycle in aquaculture. Front Vet Sci. 2023 Sep 21;10:1268396.
50. Pedrazzani AS, Quintiliano MH, Bolfe F, Sans EC de O, Molento CFM. Tilapia On-Farm Welfare Assessment Protocol for Semi-intensive Production Systems. Front Vet Sci. 2020 Nov 25;7:606388.
51. Begum A, Mondal S, Ferdous Z, Zafar MA, Ali MM. Impact of water quality parameters on monosex tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) production under pond condition. Int J Anim Fish Sci. 2014;2(1):14–21.
52. Darko D, Trolle D, Asmah R, Bolding K, Adjei KA, Odai SN. Modeling the impacts of climate change on the thermal and oxygen dynamics of Lake Volta. J Great Lakes Res. 2019 Feb 1;45(1):73–86.
53. Marloes Mul EO, Appoh R, Yeboah KK, Bekoe-Obeng E, Amisigo B, Logah FY, et al. Water Resources Assessment of the Volta River Basin. International Water Management Institute (IWMI); 2015. 78 p.
54. Onwona Kwakye M, Peng FJ, Hogarh JN, Van den Brink PJ. Linking Macroinvertebrates and Physicochemical Parameters for Water Quality Assessment in the Lower Basin of the Volta River in Ghana. Environ Manage. 2021 Dec;68(6):928–36.
55. Egbi CD, Anornu GK, Ganyaglo SY, Appiah-Adjei EK, Li SL, Dampare SB. Nitrate contamination of groundwater in the Lower Volta River Basin of Ghana: Sources and related human health risks. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2020 Mar 15;191:110227.
56. Roy SM, P, Jayraj, Machavaram R, Pareek CM, Mal BC. Diversified aeration facilities for effective aquaculture systems—a comprehensive review. Aquac Int. 2021 Jun 1;29(3):1181–217.
57. Roy SM, Tanveer M, Machavaram R. Applications of gravity aeration system in aquaculture—a systematic review. Aquac Int. 2022 Jun 1;30(3):1593–621.
58. Yeboah B. Modern Ghana. 2027 Aquaculture Production Target Already Missed? Available from: https://www.modernghana.com/news/1202819/2027-aquaculture-production-target-already-missed.html
59. Ragasa C, Amewu S, Agyakwah SK, Mensah ETD, Asmah R. Impact of aquaculture training on farmers’ income: Cluster randomized controlled trial evidence in Ghana. Agric Econ. 2022 Nov;53(S1):5–20.
60. Asafu-Adjei K. Report of the Parliamentary select Committee on Food, Agriculture and Cocoa Affairs on the programme based budget estimates of the Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development. 2019 Dec 1; Available from: https://repository.parliament.gh/bitstream/handle/123456789/1580/2020_01_21_09_22_58.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
61. Abarike ED, Atuna RA, Dandi SO, Agyekum S. Preliminary Survey on Perceived Fish Health Management Practices among Small-Scale Cage Tilapia Farmers on Lake Volta. J Aquacult Trop [Internet]. 2023; Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Samuel-Dandi/publication/375693145_preliminary-survey-on-perceived-fish-health-management-practices-among-small-scale-cage-tilapia-farmers-on-lake-volta/links/655684613fa26f66f4074384/preliminary-survey-on-perceived-fish-health-management-practices-among-small-scale-cage-tilapia-farmers-on-lake-volta.pdf
62. Opiyo M, Mziri V, Musa S, Kyule D, Hinzano S, Wainaina M, et al. Fish disease management and biosecurity systems. State of Aquaculture in Kenya. 2020;97–126.
63. Zornu J, Tavornpanich S, Brun E, van Zwieten PAM, van de Leemput I, Appenteng P, et al. Understanding tilapia mortalities and fish health management in Lake Volta : a systematic approach. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2024 Jun 18];7. Available from: https://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/wurpubs/620872
64. Omitoyin S, Osakuade KD. Awareness and constraints of aquaculture biosecurity among fish farmers in Ekiti State, Nigeria. Aquac Stud [Internet]. 2021 Feb 8; Available from: https://www.aquast.org/abstract.php?lang=en&id=514
65. Ayiku ANA, Adelani AA, Appenteng P, Nkansa M, Ngoi JM, Morang’a CM, et al. Molecular epidemiology and current management of Infectious Spleen and Kidney Necrosis Virus (ISKNV) infection in Ghanaian cultured tilapia. Aquaculture. 2024 Feb 25;581:740330.
66. Zornu J, Oyih M, Binde M, Viglo J, Agbekpornu H, Nkansa M, et al. Stakeholder perspectives on the 2023 Ghana National Aquaculture Development Plan: An integration within the ecosystem approach framework. Aquaculture Fish & Fisheries [Internet]. 2023 Oct 29; Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aff2.135
67. Pinillos RG, Appleby MC, Manteca X, Scott-Park F, Smith C, Velarde A. One Welfare - a platform for improving human and animal welfare. Vet Rec. 2016 Oct 22;179(16):412–3.
68. ILRI. Joined up investments reduce health risks and burdens to people, livestock and ecosystems [Internet]. International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi; 2021. Report No.: Livestock pathways to 2030: One Health Brief 1. Available from: https://hdl.handle.net/10568/113055
69. Diana A, Lorenzi V, Penasa M, Magni E, Alborali GL, Bertocchi L, et al. Effect of welfare standards and biosecurity practices on antimicrobial use in beef cattle. Sci Rep. 2020 Dec 1;10(1):20939.
70. Ministry of Health. Uganda One Health Strategic Plan 2018 - 2022 [Internet]. Ministry of Health; 2018. Available from: http://library.health.go.ug/publications/policy-documents/uganda-one-health-strategic-plan-2018-2022
1 This is an estimate calculated by Animal Ask. According to FAO data, around 53,000 tonnes of tilapia were produced in Ghana in 2017 (16). This number may have increased somewhat over time—the government of Ghana estimated that around 90,000 tonnes of fish were produced in aquaculture in 2021, though this includes catfish, African bonytongue, and other fish (9). At an estimated mean weight of 275 grams per tilapia at harvest in Ghana (17), the 53,000-tonne figure is equivalent to 200 million tilapia.
2 Notably, however, the farming of catfish is increasing.