The objective of this study was to examine the association of herd size with animal welfare in dairy cattle herds. Therefore, 80 conventional dairy cattle farms were classified by the number of cows ...into 4 herd size classes, C1 (<100 cows), C2 (100–299 cows), C3 (300–499 cows), and C4 (≥500 cows), and assessed using multiple animal-based measures of the Welfare Quality Assessment protocol for dairy cattle. Data were recorded from April 2014 to September 2016 by an experienced single assessor in northern Germany. Each farm was visited 2 times at an interval of 6 mo (summer period and winter period) to avoid seasonal effects on the outcome. The average herd size was 383 ± 356 Holstein-Friesian cows (range 45 to 1,629). Only farms with freestall (cubicle) housing and a maximum of 6 h access to pasture per day were included in the study. Data were statistically analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model. None of the farms reached the highest overall rating of “excellent.” The majority of the farms were classified as “enhanced” (30%) or “acceptable” (66%), and at 6 assessments the farms were rated as “not classified” (4%). Regarding single indicators, mean trough length per cow, percentage of cows with nasal discharge, and vulvar discharge increased with increasing herd size, whereas it was vice versa for displacements of cows. Percentage of lean cows, percentage of dirty lower legs, and duration of the process of lying down showed a curvilinear relationship with the number of cows per farm. Herd size was not associated with any other measures of the Welfare Quality protocol. In conclusion, herd size effects were small, and consequently herd size cannot be considered as a feasible indicator of the on-farm animal welfare level. Housing conditions and management practices seem to have a greater effect on animal welfare than the number of dairy cows per farm.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
The effort to develop methods for assessing animal welfare at farm level has grown dramatically since the end of the 1990s, culminating in the protocols developed by the European-wide project Welfare ...Quality® (WQ). However, these protocols are time consuming and lack transparency in how scores are aggregated into welfare outcomes. The current study investigates the potential of Qualitative Behavior Assessment (QBA), a much less time-consuming approach, to be used as a stand-alone integrative screening tool for identifying farms with compromised welfare before applying the full WQ protocol. QBA is a ‘whole-animal’ approach asking human observers to summarize animals’ expressive demeanor and its context into descriptors such as relaxed, anxious, content or frustrated –terms which given their emotional connotation appear to have direct relevance to animal welfare. Two trained QBA-assessors, and one trained Welfare Quality® assessor visited 43 Danish dairy cattle farms at different times, the former focusing on QBA and the latter making a full WQ protocol assessment. The QBA scores were analyzed using Principal Component Analysis (correlation matrix, no rotation), and WQ protocol data were analyzed and integrated according to the WQ protocol. The resulting QBA and WQ protocol outcomes were correlated using non-parametric methods (Spearman Rank and Kendall W). Highly significant inter-observer agreement was found between the two QBA-assessors (P<0.0001). QBA scores showed some weak correlations to WQ measures but no meaningful pattern of relationship between these measures emerged. The present study does not support the application of QBA as a stand-alone welfare assessment tool capable of predicting the outcome of the larger WQ protocol.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Despite considerable research regarding the benefits of natural living conditions on several aspects of the health and well-being of dairy cows, the effects of pasture access on their overall welfare ...are less studied. In this comparative study, the Welfare Quality® protocol was applied in 22 zero-grazing and 17 grazing access farms with an ulterior statistical exploration of the differences found. Moreover, correlations were calculated between pasture access and animal-based welfare measures. Aside from the multiple benefits of pasturing identified within the welfare measures, criteria, and principles, in the overall classification, the farms with permanent confinement ranked lower than the grazing farms. Although both systems used free-stall barns, allowing the cows’ movement, the grazing animals showed improved overall welfare. Yet, the origin-related adaptation of the animals could play a role. The authors recommend research-based tailoring whenever these conditions are intended to be transposed in technology, especially in intensive systems.
Cubicle characteristics such as cubicle dimensions or management factors such as cow-to-cubicle ratio could affect health and behaviour of dairy cows. The objective of this study was to estimate ...effects of cubicle characteristics on animal welfare indicators in dairy cattle. A total of 64 loose housing farms in Germany were assessed once during the winter housing period by one experienced assessor. Nearly 15% of the dairy cows had access to pasture during summer months for <6 h/day, whereas 85% were zero-grazing farms. Selected animal welfare indicators (duration of the lying down process, collisions of cows with cubicles, cows lying outside cubicles, cow cleanliness, integument alterations, lameness and subclinical mastitis incidence) of the Welfare Quality® protocol and cubicle characteristics such as cow-to-cubicle ratio and cubicle dimensions were recorded. Data were statistically analysed using a multiple linear regression approach. Pasture access and cubicle type were considered as potential influencing factors. Wider cubicles positively affected the proportion of dairy cows with dirty flanks (−18.5% per 10 cm increase) but increased the number of cows with severe integument alterations (+8.9% per 10 cm increase). Larger lying areas reduced the percentage of cows with dirty udders (−2.9% per 10 cm2 increase). Longer distances from neck rail to curb were associated with higher prevalence of cows with dirty flanks (+3.1% per 10 cm increase) and subclinical mastitis incidence (+1.2% per 10 cm increase). With increasing neck rail height, the duration of the lying down process (−0.1 s per 10% increase), the percentages of cows with dirty legs (−8.4% per 10 cm increase), dirty udders (−7.0% per 10 cm increase) and severe lameness (−3.0% per 10 cm increase) decreased. Compared with rubber mat-equipped cubicles, deep-bedded cubicles showed a reduction in the lying down duration (−0.8 s), percentages of cows with dirty legs (−34.2%), dirty udders (−30.5%) and lesions and swellings (−13.1%). Compared with farms that did not provide any summer grazing, pasture access was associated with an increase of cows with severe lameness (+5.6%). Contrastingly, the number of cows with subclinical mastitis incidence was lower when cows had access to pasture in summer (−5.4%). Findings of the present study indicate several associations between cubicle characteristics and animal welfare in dairy cattle. Bedding type was found as the most influencing factor in terms of health and behaviour. Results of this study are valuable for farmers to identify the optimal cubicle design and improve the animal welfare level.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
The effect of milk production systems on the welfare of dairy cows has been studied worldwide, but studies that compare pasture-based, compost barn, and free stall systems, according to animal ...welfare, are more scarce. In this work, the welfare of 51 dairy herds, including 17 from each management system, was investigated through the application of the Welfare Quality® protocol. Descriptive statistics and the Kruskal–Wallis non-parametric method were used to analyze variables. In the present work, the welfare of the evaluated herds was significantly better in the pasture-based system than in the confinement systems. However, the pasture-based system presented weaknesses in providing water resources. The compost barn had fewer animal welfare critical points than the free stall system, as well as it was better than the free stall in measures related to comfort and health. The free stall did not present better scores than the other systems. It is concluded that the welfare of dairy cows is affected by the rearing system, with better scores, in most measures, in the pasture-based system, followed by the compost barn and, finally, the free stall.
Full text
Available for:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
The objective of this study was to examine the effects of housing and management factors on animal welfare indicators in dairy cows using a benchmarking approach. In total, 63 conventional dairy ...cattle farms with zero-grazing in Northern Germany were assessed using selected animal welfare indicators (body condition score, integument alterations, lameness, milk somatic cell count, and social behaviour) of the Welfare Quality® protocol. Additionally, housing characteristics such as designs of barns, cubicles, and floors were documented during farm visits and farmers were interviewed concerning their common management routines. Farms were categorized into a high welfare or low welfare group by calculating upper and lower tertiles for each of the animal welfare indicators separately. Both groups were compared regarding housing conditions and management practices using univariable and multivariable logistic regressions. Several associations between housing and management factors and animal welfare indicators were demonstrated in univariable analysis (p < 0.20). Significant effects within multivariable logistic regression analysis were determined for lameness (routine use of foot-baths), milk somatic cell count (milking frequency) and social behaviour (cow-to-stall ratio) (p < 0.05). Comparing farms with higher and lower animal welfare status can provide useful information about effective options to improve animal welfare.
Using a dataset from dairy farms in Germany that combines two types of welfare measures, namely welfare quality protocol (WQP) measures and production economic and herd-management data, this study ...aims to validate the use of production economic and herd-management data to proxy dairy cow welfare measures. The paper implements two multivariate estimation approaches of Seemingly Unrelated Estimation and Canonical Correlation Analysis. Data from on-farm animal welfare assessments based on WQP require time intensive collection and are typically unavailable for research based on large-scale panel datasets. On the other hand, survey data on production economic and herd management are available for such analysis, especially in European countries, but their informational value regarding animal welfare is debated. In this paper, we were able to establish relationships between the four WQP principles (feed, health, housing, behaviour) and variables from production economics and herd-management data. We find that concentrated feed, building costs, cell counts, milk fat content, calving intervals, and age at calving have strong links to the different principles of the WQP measures. In conclusion, our findings support the use of already existing and routinely collected production economic and herd-management data from dairy cows to enable an analysis of farm animal welfare on a larger scale using panel data.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Around the world, people who care for animals as stock keepers, stockmen, farmers, producers are placed in a position where they can greatly influence the quality of life of the animals they manage. ...This is particularly true in broiler chickens, where large numbers of animals can be cared for by comparatively small numbers of people. There is an international progression to start to assess poultry welfare on farm by looking at the animals themselves using (Animal Based Measures ABMs) rather than by looking exclusively at the resources provided (space, light heat, litter material - Resource Based Measures RBM's). In general, the areas being assessed are: Are the animals properly fed and supplied with water? Are the animals properly housed? Are the animals healthy? Can the animals express a range of behaviours and emotional states? Different types of organisations are starting to use ABM's - Government inspection bodies - for example state veterinary staff, Research institutes - wishing to use standardized assessment methods for research, Animal Welfare NGO's, Farm assurance companies and Legislators. The WelfareQualityNetwork® (WQN) http://www.welfarequality.net/everyone has described ABM's which address twelve health and welfare criteria and has tested them on a large number of farms across Europe. Some examples from this assessment scheme are described.
PDF
