Comparing wild boar behavior and ecology with farmed pig welfare needs reveals the extent to which even improved production systems fail to meet the full behavioral repertoire of an ecologically complex species.
The wild boar comparison is a welfare thought experiment that clarifies where even the best farmed pig systems succeed and where they fall short. Free-range systems with outdoor access, enrichment, and social groupings produce animals with substantially better welfare indicators than intensive systems. Against the wild standard, however, even good free-range systems confine animals to a small fraction of their natural range, limit foraging complexity, and constrain social dynamics. This does not mean free-range is no better than intensive — the welfare difference is real and significant — but it contextualizes welfare improvement as progress along a spectrum rather than achievement of fully adequate welfare for a species with complex ecological needs.