2025-04-022024/25:MJU10 · p.12MJUEnvironment & agriculture
Grazing Law and Outdoor Grazing
Grazing legislation and outdoor access for livestock
What's at stake: The grazing requirement affects both cows' health and natural behaviour and the open landscape that supports biodiversity, while also affecting dairy farmers' rules and competitive conditions. Abolishing the requirement could ease things for some producers but concerns those who want to safeguard animal welfare.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question is how parliament should respond to proposals on livestock outdoor access and grazing requirements while a government inquiry, which proposes abolishing the current grazing requirement for dairy cows in loose housing, is still being processed.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee considers that the motions on grazing legislation and outdoor access can be left without action pending the ongoing government inquiry into livestock-husbandry requirements, which already addresses these issues. The reason is that parliament should await the outcome of the process under way before taking a position.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 16 (S)
The reservation (S) is strongly critical of the government inquiry's proposal to abolish the Swedish grazing requirement for dairy cows in loose housing, and wants to safeguard the right to graze as a guarantee of cows' right to graze. The reasoning is that the grazing requirement benefits animal welfare, biodiversity in an open landscape, and the competitiveness of Swedish dairy products, and that the rules can be modernised without this coming at the expense of animal welfare.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 16 by S.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
How the AI parties would have voted
For each party: what its own plan – election manifesto and party programme – argues for in this case, next to how the party actually voted. The AI can only answer Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| AI | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | No | Abstain 0/1/19/4 | differs | confidence: high | not addressed |
| S | No | No 0/93/0/13 | match | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| MP | No | No 1/14/1/2 | match | confidence: high | not addressed |
| C | No | Abstain 0/0/20/4 | differs | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| L | No | Yes 13/0/0/3 | differs | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| KD | No | Yes 17/0/0/2 | differs | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| M | Yes | Yes 60/0/0/8 | match | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| SD | No | Abstain 0/0/62/10 | differs | confidence: high | explicit |
Broke with the party line
| VHåkan Svenneling (V, Värmlands län) | No — party line: Abstain |
| MPJan Riise (MP, Hallands län) | Yes — party line: No |
| MPLinus Lakso (MP, Södermanlands län) | Abstain — party line: No |
MPs whose vote differs from their party's majority position in this division. Marked with a dark ring in the chamber view.
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions 2024/25:897 by Magnus Manhammar (S), 2024/25:978 by Camilla Mårtensen et al. (L), 2024/25:1397 by Martin Kinnunen et al. (SD) item 2, 2024/25:1770 by Rebecka Le Moine et al. (MP) item 3, 2024/25:2953 by Helena Lindahl et al. (C) item 20, 2024/25:3071 by Emma Nohrén et al. (MP) items 14 and 15, and 2024/25:3108 by Anna-Caren Sätherberg et al. (S) item 9.
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna 2024/25:897 av Magnus Manhammar (S), 2024/25:978 av Camilla Mårtensen m.fl. (L), 2024/25:1397 av Martin Kinnunen m.fl. (SD) yrkande 2, 2024/25:1770 av Rebecka Le Moine m.fl. (MP) yrkande 3, 2024/25:2953 av Helena Lindahl m.fl. (C) yrkande 20, 2024/25:3071 av Emma Nohrén m.fl. (MP) yrkandena 14 och 15 samt 2024/25:3108 av Anna-Caren Sätherberg m.fl. (S) yrkande 9.
Riksdag decision: Animal veterinary care shall have better conditions to conduct its operations. The Riksdag approved the government's proposal which involves changes for activities offering health and veterinary care for animals. The purpose is to ensure in the long term a well-functioning health and veterinary care for animals. Supervision of animal health and veterinary care shall be expanded; currently supervision only applies to the person performing animal treatment. The proposal means that supervision will now also apply to the person who operates an activity where animal health personnel work. Currently animal caretakers are not included in animal health personnel. Given that demand for animal veterinary care has increased substantially, animal caretakers will be able to become approved and thus be part of animal health personnel. Another change in the regulations concerns making it easier for foreign veterinarians to work in Sweden. The new regulations enter into force on 1 September 2025, with the exception of changes concerning qualifications for animal caretakers which instead enter into force on 1 September 2030. The Riksdag also decided to direct a formal statement (tillkännagivande) – an appeal – to the government to safeguard and develop Swedish grazing law.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants to impose clearer requirements on veterinary companies to provide price information for various treatments. (S) — Reservation 16
Plan vs actual vote
Every party, in chamber order: what its own plan pointed to, how it voted, and the reasoning behind both. Highlighted rows are where the two differ — but a vote that follows the plan is a result too, so the reasoning is there for every party.
The plan's commitment is that all animal husbandry should be based on animals being sentient beings who should live good lives, which speaks for that the right to outdoor access is cherished rather than removed for dairy cows in loose housing.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan's commitment is that all animal husbandry should be based on animals being sentient beings who should live good lives, which speaks for that the right to outdoor access is cherished rather than removed for dairy cows in loose housing. The plan also requires ambitious goals that are followed up with strict legislation and investments in sustainable food production and rich ecosystems in an open landscape.
Original (Swedish)
Planens åtagande är att all djurhållning ska utgå från att djur är kännande varelser som ska leva goda liv, vilket talar för att rätten till utomhusvistelse värnas snarare än slopas för mjölkkor i lösdrift. Planen kräver dessutom ambitiösa mål som följs upp med skarp lagstiftning och satsningar på hållbar livsmedelsproduktion och rika ekosystem i ett öppet landskap.
- animals are sentient beingsdecisive»All djurhållning ska utgå från att djur är kännande varelser som ska leva goda liv.« (party programme ↗)“All animal husbandry should be based on animals being sentient beings who should live good lives.”
- strict legislation»Vi vill se ambitiösa miljömål som följs upp med skarp lagstiftning och praktiskt arbete.« (party programme ↗)“We want to see ambitious environmental goals that are followed up with strict legislation and practical work.”
- sustainable food production»En annan viktig del i den gröna omställningen är satsningar på hållbar livsmedelsproduktion.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Another important part of the green transition is investments in sustainable food production.”
- rich ecosystems»Sverige behöver också ett medvetet och heltäckande arbete med att skapa goda villkor för rika ekosystem« (party programme ↗)“Sweden also needs a conscious and comprehensive effort to create good conditions for rich ecosystems”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The party programme makes ethical animal husbandry a fundamental principle and requires agriculture that meets requirements for ecological sustainability.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The party programme makes ethical animal husbandry a fundamental principle and requires agriculture that meets requirements for ecological sustainability. To safeguard the right to outdoor grazing for dairy cows in loose housing, rather than abolishing the requirement, follows from that principle and from the commitment to protect biological diversity in an open landscape. The documents do not address the grazing legislation itself.
Original (Swedish)
Partiprogrammet gör etisk djurhållning till en grundprincip och kräver ett jordbruk som lever upp till kraven på ekologisk uthållighet. Att värna rätten till utomhusvistelse för mjölkkor i lösdrift, i stället för att slopa kravet, följer av den principen och av åtagandet att skydda den biologiska mångfalden i ett öppet landskap. Dokumenten behandlar inte beteslagstiftningen i sig.
- ethical animal husbandry as fundamental principledecisive»och etisk djurhållning är grundprinciper.« (party programme ↗)“and ethical animal husbandry are fundamental principles.”
- sustainable agriculture»kraven på ekologisk uthålligt åkerbruk och säkra livsmedel.« (party programme ↗)“requirements for ecologically sustainable crop production and safe food.”
- open landscape and diversity»biologiska mångfalden måste skyddas« (party programme ↗)“biological diversity must be protected”
The plan establishes that animals should have the right and opportunity for natural behaviour and that animal husbandry should be adapted to that, not the other way around.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan establishes that animals should have the right and opportunity for natural behaviour and that animal husbandry should be adapted to that, not the other way around. The counter-proposal's objection to abolishing the requirement for outdoor access for dairy cows protects exactly this, and the plan's support for pastures and an open landscape points the same way. Therefore, the plan supports the demand.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att djuren ska ha rätt och möjlighet till ett naturligt beteende och att djurhållningen ska anpassas till det, inte tvärtom. Motförslagets invändning mot att slopa kravet på utomhusvistelse för mjölkkor värnar exakt detta, och planens stöd till naturbetesmarker och ett öppet landskap pekar samma väg. Därför stöder planen kravet.
- right to natural behaviourdecisive»Djuren ska ha rätt och möjlighet« (party programme ↗)“Animals should have the right and opportunity”
- animal husbandry must be adapted»till ett naturligt beteende och då måste« (party programme ↗)“for natural behaviour and then must”
- support for pastures»ge mer stöd till lantbruket för omställning till ekologisk odling, återskapande av naturbetesmarker och andra miljöinsatser.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“provide more support to agriculture for transition to organic farming, restoration of pastures and other environmental measures.”
- pastures and diversity»Betade ängs- och hagmarker är viktiga« (party programme ↗)“Grazed meadows and pastures are important”
The plan wants a living, sustainable agriculture that contributes to biological diversity and emphasizes that Swedish animal husbandry provides the open landscape.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wants a living, sustainable agriculture that contributes to biological diversity and emphasizes that Swedish animal husbandry provides the open landscape. The counter-proposal defends the right to outdoor access for dairy cows against a proposal to abolish the requirement, which is in line with the plan's commitment to safe food in accordance with animal welfare directives and the special responsibility for animals. The plan therefore supports the demand.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill ett levande, hållbart jordbruk som bidrar till den biologiska mångfalden och framhåller att svensk djurhållning ger det öppna landskapet. Motförslaget värnar rätten till utomhusvistelse för mjölkkor mot ett förslag om att slopa kravet, vilket ligger i linje med planens åtagande om trygga livsmedel i enlighet med djurskyddsdirektiven och det särskilda ansvaret för djuren. Planen stöder därför kravet.
- sustainable agriculture with diversitydecisive»Vi ska arbeta för mer närodlad och klimatsmart mat och ett levande, hållbart jordbruk som bidrar till den biologiska mångfalden.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We shall work for more locally grown and climate-smart food and a living, sustainable agriculture that contributes to biological diversity.”
- grazing animals create open landscape»Svensk djuruppfödning bidrar också till ett öppet landskap och möjliggör produktion av biogas.« (party programme ↗)“Swedish animal husbandry also contributes to an open landscape and enables biogas production.”
- safe food with animal welfare»har som mål att skapa tillgång till trygga livsmedel – närproducerade och i enlighet med djurskyddsdirektiven« (party programme ↗)“aims to create access to safe food — locally produced and in accordance with animal welfare directives”
- responsibility for animal welfare»Människan har ett särskilt ansvar att agera så att andra levande varelser också kan fortleva.« (party programme ↗)“Humans have a special responsibility to act so that other living beings can also continue to exist.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The party programme establishes that all animal husbandry must guarantee animals a dignified life, and that how we treat our animals is a measure of our civilisation.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The party programme establishes that all animal husbandry must guarantee animals a dignified life, and that how we treat our animals is a measure of our civilisation. Valuing dairy cows' right to pasture access follows directly from that commitment. The plan gives no support for abolishing the pasture requirement, and the commitment to preserving biological diversity in the landscape strengthens the conclusion.
Original (Swedish)
Partiprogrammet slår fast att all djurhållning måste garantera djuren ett värdigt liv, och att hur vi hanterar våra djur är ett mått på vår civilisation. Att värna mjölkkors rätt till utevistelse följer direkt av det åtagandet. Planen ger inget stöd för att slopa beteskravet, och åtagandet om bevarad biologisk mångfald i landskapet stärker slutsatsen.
- dignified animal husbandrydecisive»All djurhållning måste garantera djuren ett värdigt liv och en anständig död.« (party programme ↗)“All animal husbandry must guarantee animals a dignified life and a decent death.”
- animal welfare as a measure of civilisation»Hur vi hanterar våra djur är ett mått på vår civilisation och en förutsättning för en god folkhälsa.« (party programme ↗)“How we treat our animals is a measure of our civilisation and a prerequisite for good public health.”
- compensation for collective benefits»ersättas för kollektiva nyttigheter som naturvård samt bevarande av den biologiska mångfalden« (party programme ↗)“compensated for collective benefits such as nature conservation and preservation of biological diversity”
- strengthened animal welfare controls»nationella lagar och EU-regler efterlevs måste skärpas« (party programme ↗)“national laws and EU regulations are followed must be strengthened”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan requires that animals under human care be able to live as natural a life as possible and that their physiological and behavioral needs be taken into account; removing the requirement for outdoor pasture for dairy cows goes against this.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires that animals under human care be able to live as natural a life as possible and that their physiological and behavioral needs be taken into account; removing the requirement for outdoor pasture for dairy cows goes against this. The plan also requires great consideration for nature in the agricultural landscape and wants to utilize Sweden's preconditions for safe and environmentally friendly production, which is the counter-proposal's other reasons.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver att djur i människans vård får leva ett så naturligt liv som möjligt och att hänsyn tas till deras fysiologiska och beteendemässiga behov; att slopa kravet på utomhusvistelse för mjölkkor går emot detta. Planen kräver också stor naturhänsyn i jordbrukslandskapet och vill ta tillvara Sveriges förutsättningar för säker och miljövänlig produktion, vilket är motförslagets övriga skäl.
- animals shall live naturallydecisive»dessa djur får leva ett så naturligt liv som möjligt.« (party programme ↗)“these animals are allowed to live as natural a life as possible.”
- animals' behavioral needs»djurens hälsa främjas och hänsyn tas till djurens fysiologiska och beteendemässiga behov« (party programme ↗)“animal health is promoted and consideration is taken to animals' physiological and behavioral needs”
- consideration for nature in agricultural landscape»stor naturhänsyn i skogs- och jordbrukslandskapet« (party programme ↗)“great consideration for nature in forest and agricultural landscape”
- high-quality Swedish production»Sverige bör ta till vara sina mycket goda förutsättningar för miljövänlig och säker produktion« (party programme ↗)“Sweden should utilize its very good preconditions for environmentally friendly and safe production”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The counter-proposal demands that the requirement for outdoor time for dairy cows in loose housing be retained as a binding guarantee.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The counter-proposal demands that the requirement for outdoor time for dairy cows in loose housing be retained as a binding guarantee. The plan's guiding line for agriculture is to support, not control: the number of rules for agriculture should decrease, administration costs go down and use rights be strengthened, because profitability in agriculture is under pressure. Locking in a detailed requirement in the regulations does not follow from the plan, which therefore rejects the demand.
Original (Swedish)
Motförslaget kräver att kravet på utomhusvistelse för mjölkkor i lösdrift behålls som en bindande garanti. Planens bärande linje för lantbruket är att stötta, inte styra: antalet regler för jordbruket ska minska, kostnaderna för administration gå ner och brukanderätten stärkas, eftersom lönsamheten i lantbruket är pressad. Att låsa kvar ett detaljkrav i regelverket följer inte av planen, som därför avvisar kravet.
- support not control agriculturedecisive»Vi ska stötta, inte styra, jord- och skogsbruket« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We should support, not control, agriculture and forestry”
- fewer agriculture rules»Minska antalet regler för jordbruket och korta handläggningstider för miljötillstånd« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Reduce the number of rules for agriculture and shorten processing times for environmental permits”
- use rights for farmers»Stärka ägande- och brukanderätten för jordbrukare« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Strengthen ownership and use rights for farmers”
- strained profitability in agriculture»Samtidigt vittnar bönder om att det inte lönar sig att så inför sommarsäsongen. Det är ohållbart.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“At the same time, farmers report that it does not pay to sow before summer. It is unsustainable.”
The plan explicitly wants to facilitate livestock farmers in having their animals outdoors and give dairy farmers special compensation for the additional cost when dairy cows graze outdoors in summer.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan explicitly wants to facilitate livestock farmers in having their animals outdoors and give dairy farmers special compensation for the additional cost when dairy cows graze outdoors in summer. An eliminated requirement for outdoor time for dairy cows in loose housing directly contradicts that commitment. The plan moreover wants to increase the possibility for cattle to be outdoors and that agricultural land is used so that overgrowth is prevented, which is the counter-proposal's reason about open landscape.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill uttryckligen underlätta för djurhållare att ha djuren utomhus och ge mjölkbönder särskild ersättning för merkostnaden när mjölkkor betar utomhus om somrarna. Ett slopat krav på utomhusvistelse för mjölkkor i lösdrift går rakt emot det åtagandet. Planen vill dessutom öka möjligheten för tamboskap att gå ute och att jordbruksmarken brukas så att igenväxning motverkas, vilket är motförslagets skäl om öppet landskap.
- grazing compensation to dairy farmersdecisive»Det är även angeläget att underlätta för djurhållare att kunna ha sina djur utomhus. Sverigedemokraterna vill ge svenska mjölkbönder en särskild ersättning för den merkostnad det innebär att låta mjölkkor beta utomhus om somrarna.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“It is also important to facilitate livestock farmers in being able to have their animals outdoors. Sweden Democrats want to give Swedish dairy farmers special compensation for the additional cost of letting dairy cows graze outdoors in summer.”
- preserved outdoor time»Öka möjligheten för tamboskap att gå ute« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Increase the opportunity for cattle to be outdoors”
- strengthened animal protection»Sverigedemokraterna vill ha ett stärkt djurskydd där större hänsyn tas till djurens naturliga beteende.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Sweden Democrats want stronger animal protection where greater consideration is given to animals' natural behaviour.”
- open landscape»Att jordbruksmarken brukas och att igenväxning motverkas« (2022 manifesto ↗)“That agricultural land is used and that overgrowth is prevented”
The stance rests on the quoted commitment in the party's own documents; the actual vote deviated. Click the quote to verify it in the document.
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2024/25:MJU10)
- Committee report full text (HC01MJU10)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2024/25:1020 — Ny djurskötarutbildning av Kerstin Lundgren (C)
- Motion 2024/25:1024 — Små slakterier av Anders W Jonsson (C)
- Motion 2024/25:1308 — Myndighet och minister för djurskydd av Rebecka Le Moine m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2024/25:1373 — Livsmedel av Martin Kinnunen m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:1395 — Jordbruk - ökad konkurrenskraft utan förlust av biologisk mångfald av Martin Kinnunen m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:1397 — Djurskydd av Martin Kinnunen m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:1533 — Fler veterinärer i Sverige av Alexandra Anstrell m.fl. (M)
- Motion 2024/25:1750 — Utfasning av turbokycklingar av Rebecka Le Moine m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2024/25:1751 — Förbud mot avlivning av hankycklingar av Rebecka Le Moine m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2024/25:1752 — Förbud mot burhållning av hönor av Rebecka Le Moine m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2024/25:1770 — Betesrätten av Rebecka Le Moine m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2024/25:195 — Konsumenträtt av Andreas Lennkvist Manriquez m.fl. (V)
- Motion 2024/25:1983 — Trygga köp av hundburar av Ann-Sofie Alm (M)
- Motion 2024/25:2129 — Grisars rätt till ett värdigt liv av Sanna Backeskog m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2024/25:215 — Omhändertagande av djur som far illa av Lina Nordquist (L)
- Motion 2024/25:2291 — Förbud mot särskilt farliga hundraser av Fredrik Kärrholm (M)
- Motion 2024/25:234 — Förbud mot halal- och koscherslakt av Richard Jomshof (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:2484 — Virtuella stängsel av Stina Larsson och Helena Vilhelmsson (båda C)
- Motion 2024/25:2536 — Djurtillsyn av Jan Ericson (M)
- Motion 2024/25:2599 — Tillträde till bostäder i djurskyddsärenden av Jan Ericson (M)
Source: The Swedish Parliament