Monitoring the welfare of sheep in organic and conventional farms using an ANI 35 L derived method

The present study was undertaken to evaluate the inter-observer reliability of a welfare monitoring scheme to be applied to sheep, and compare the welfare state of the animals between 10 organic and 10 conventional sheep farms. Two trained observers performed recordings. A graded point protocol was used, that relies on five sheets mostly derived by the Animal Needs Index, which is mainly based on resource-based parameters. Therefore, in the fifth sheet animal-based parameters, deemed relevant to sheep welfare, were taken into account. In particular, the following animal-based variables were assessed: integument alterations, animal dirtiness, hoof overgrowth, lameness and lesions, which where scored on the basis of their prevalence (number of affected animals/numbers of observed animals), longevity (age in years), and mutilations, such as de-horning and caudotomy, evaluated in terms of presence/absence. No significant differences were observed between organic and conventional farms in terms of ANI scores, housing characteristics and animal-based parameters. This result was not surprising, as most of the farms, both conventional and organic, based their farming systems on an extensive use of the land by grazing animals. The monitoring protocol proved to be feasible (the mean time needed to perform the assessment of welfare was 85 min per farm) and reliable: a significant Spearman's correlation coefficient between observers was observed for total score and all sheets. As to animal-based parameters, body condition could not be assessed visually due to the presence of flee in winter; the correlation between observers was significant for integument alterations, animal dirtiness, hoof overgrowth and lameness, whereas inter-observer reliability was not significant for lesions. This result indicated that more training is needed for the assessment of lesions in order to increase the reliability of the measure. In addition, we suggest visiting farms in early summer, soon after shearing, in order to make easier the detection of lesions and the assessment of body condition.     

Review: Automated techniques for monitoring the behaviour and welfare of broilers and laying hens: towards the goal of precision livestock farming

There is increasing public concern about poultry welfare; the quality of animal welfare is closely related to the quality of livestock products and the health of consumers. Good animal welfare promotes the healthy growth of poultry, which can reduce the disease rate and improve the production quality and capacity. As behaviour responses are an important expression of welfare, the study of behaviour is a simple and non-invasive method to assess animal welfare. The use of modern technology offers the possibility to monitor the behaviour of broilers and laying hens in a continuous and automated way. This paper reviews the latest technologies used for monitoring the behaviour of broilers and laying hens under both experimental conditions and commercial applications and discusses the potential of developing a precision livestock farming (PLF) system. The techniques that are presented and discussed include sound analysis, which can be an online tool to automatically monitor poultry behaviour non-invasively at the group level; wireless, wearable sensors with radio-frequency identification devices, which can automatically identify individual chickens, track the location and movement of individuals in real time and quantify some behavioural traits accordingly and image processing technology, which can be considered a direct tool for measuring behaviours, especially activity behaviours and disease early warning. All of these technologies can monitor and analyse poultry behaviour, at the group level or individual level, on commercial farms. However, the popularity and adoption of these technologies has been hampered by the logistics of applying them to thousands and tens of thousands of birds on commercial farms. This review discusses the advantages and disadvantages of these techniques in commercial applications and presents evidence that they provide potential tools to automatically monitor the behaviours of broilers and laying hens on commercial farms. However, there still has a long way to go to develop a PLF system to detect and predict abnormal situations.     

Effects of three husbandry systems on health,welfare and productivity of organic pigs

Organic pig husbandry systems in Europe are diverse – ranging from indoor systems with concrete outside run (IN) to outdoor systems all year round (OUT) and combinations of both on one farm (POUT). As this diversity has rarely been taken into account in research projects on organic pig production, the aim of this study was to assess and compare pig health, welfare and productivity in these three systems. Animal health and welfare were assessed using direct observation and records of 22 animal-based measures, comprising 17 health-, 3 productivity- and 2 behavioural measures. These were collected in pregnant sows, weaners and fattening pigs during direct observations and from records within a cross-sectional study on 74 farms (IN: n = 34, POUT: n = 28, OUT: n = 12) in eight countries. Overall, prevalence of several animal health and welfare issues was low (e.g. median 0% for pigs needing hospitalisation, shoulder lesions, ectoparasites; <5% for runts, tail lesions, conjunctivitis). Exceptions in particular systems were respiratory problems in weaners and fatteners (IN: 60.0%, 66.7%; POUT: 66.7%, 60.0%), weaning diarrhoea (IN: 25.0%), and short tails in fatteners (IN: 6.5%, POUT: 2.3%). Total suckling piglet losses (recorded over a period of 12 months per farm) were high in all three systems (IN: 21.3%; POUT: 21.6; OUT: 19.2%). OUT had lower prevalences of respiratory problems, diarrhoea and lameness of sows. POUT farms in most cases kept sows outdoors and weaners and fatteners similar to IN farms, which was reflected in the results regarding several health and welfare parameters. It can be concluded, that European organic pigs kept in all three types of husbandry system showed a low prevalence of health and welfare problems as assessed by our methodology, but respiratory health and diarrhoea should be improved in weaners and fatteners kept indoors and total piglet mortality in all systems. The results provide benchmarks for organic pig producers and organisations which can be used in strategies to promote health and welfare improvement. Furthermore, in future research, the identified health and welfare issues (e.g. suckling piglet mortality, weaning diarrhoea) should be addressed, specifically considering effects of husbandry systems.     

My pigs are ok,why change? – animal welfare accounts of pig farmers

Intensive pig production systems are a source of stress, which is linked to reduced animal welfare and increased antimicrobial use. As the gatekeepers of the welfare of the animals under their care, farmers are seen as the stakeholder responsible for improving animal welfare. The aim of this study was to explore the knowledge and attitudes of pig farmers towards pig welfare and the impact of such attitudes on farmers' selection of management strategies on the farm. We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 44 pig farmers in one of the main pig producing regions of Brazil. Interviews covered knowledge and attitudes towards pig sentience and behaviour and welfare-related issues commonly observed in intensive pig farms (belly-nosing, fights, tail-biting, diarrhoea and castration without pain control) and farmers' conception and attitudes towards pig welfare. We identified many management and animal-based indicators of poor welfare, such as the use of painful and stressful management practices and use of environments that limit the expression of natural behaviours. However, most farmers were satisfied with animal welfare standards at their farms. Farmers' perceptions are aligned with their understanding of animal welfare. Although they identified all the dimensions that impact the welfare of a pig on a farm (affect, biological functioning and naturalness), their social reality, industry demands and available advice pushed them to perceive their range of action limited to biological and environmental aspects of the animals that do not necessarily benefit affective state. This precluded farmers from making associations between good health and the animal's ability to express a full behavioural repertoire, as well as from viewing abnormal behaviours as problems. The negative consequences for the welfare of the animals were commonly alleviated by routines that relied on constant use of medication, including high dependence on antibiotics. Expressions of estrangement from the production chain were common voices among the participants. This suggests that farmers may not be sufficiently informed or engaged in responding to consumers' expectations and commitments made by companies, which can pose a severe economic risk for farmers. The findings of this study indicate that economic, technical and social factors restrict farmers' autonomy and their ability to perform their role as stewards of animal welfare. (Re)connecting different human, animal and environmental interests may be a step to changing this scenario.     

On-farm animal welfare assessment in beef bulls: consistency over time of single measures and aggregated Welfare Quality® scores

Consistency over time of (on-farm) animal welfare assessment systems forms part of reliability, meaning that results of the assessment should be representative of the longer-term welfare state of the farm as long as the housing and management conditions have not changed considerably. This is especially important if assessments are to be used for certification purposes. It was the aim of the present study to investigate consistency over time of the Welfare Quality® (WQ®) assessment system for fattening cattle at single measure level, aggregated criterion and principle scores, and overall classification across short-term (1 month) and longer-term periods (6 months). We hypothesized that consistency over time of aggregated criterion and principle scores is higher than that of single measures. Consistency was also expected to be lower with longer intervals between assessments. Data were obtained using the WQ® protocol for fattening cattle during three visits (months 0, 1 and 7) on 63 beef farms in Austria, Germany and Italy. Only data from farms where no major changes in housing and management had taken place were considered for analysis. At the single measure level, Spearman rank correlations between visits were >0.7 and variance was lower within farms than between farms for six and two of 19 measures after 1 month and 6 months, respectively. After aggregation of single measures into criterion and principle scores, five and two of 10 criteria and three and one of four principles were found reliable after 1 and 6 months, respectively. At the WQ® principle level, this was the case for three and one of four principles. Seventy-nine per cent and 75% of the farms were allocated to the same overall welfare category after 1 month and 6 months. Possible reasons for a lack of consistency are seasonal effects or short-term fluctuations that occur under normal farm conditions, low prevalence of clinical measures and probably insufficient sample size, whereas poor inter-observer agreement leading to inflation of correlation can be ruled out. At the criterion and principle level, aggregation of information into scores appears to partly smoothen undirected variation at the single measure level without losing sensitivity in terms of welfare evaluation. Reliable on-farm animal welfare assessments should therefore be based on repeated assessments. Further long-term studies are recommended to better understand the factors influencing consistency over time.     

Selection method and early-life history affect behavioural development, feather pecking and cannibalism in laying hens: A review

The aim of this review is to discuss the effects of selection method and early-life history on the behavioural development of laying hens. Especially in larger groups, laying hens often develop damaging behaviours, such as feather pecking and cannibalism, leading to impaired animal welfare. We hypothesise that the propensity to develop feather pecking and cannibalism is affected by a bird's genetic background and by its early-life history. The genetic background can be influenced by genetic selection. Laying hens are traditionally selected on individual performance, which may lead to co-selection of feather pecking and cannibalism. For hens kept in small groups, it has recently been demonstrated that a novel group selection method, focusing on group performance, can help to reduce cannibalism. However, the biological background behind the success of group selection is unknown. It is also not known whether these results from small groups can be translated to larger groups of laying hens. Regarding early-life history, laying, brooding and rearing conditions have been shown to have major effects on behavioural development and on feather pecking and cannibalism. The presence of a hen during rearing has been shown to improve foraging- and social behaviour, to decrease feather pecking and to decrease fearfulness in chicks. Applying group selection and rearing laying hens in a more natural environment may be key factors in solving the problems caused by feather pecking and cannibalism, especially if the promising results of group selection from small groups in experimental settings can be translated to large-group housing systems.     

Welfare effects of a disease eradication programme for dairy goats

The Norwegian dairy goat industry has largely succeeded in controlling caprine arthritis encephalitis (CAE), caseous lymphadenitis (CLA) and paratuberculosis through a voluntary disease eradication programme called Healthier Goats (HG). The aim of this study was to apply an on-farm welfare assessment protocol to assess the effects of HG on goat welfare. A total of 30 dairy goat farms were visited, of which 15 had completed disease eradication and 15 had not yet started. Three trained observers assessed the welfare on 10 farms each. The welfare assessment protocol comprised both resource-based and animal-based welfare measures, including a preliminary version of qualitative behavioural assessments with five prefixed terms. A total of 20 goats in each herd were randomly selected for observations of human–animal interactions and physical health. The latter included registering abnormalities of eyes, nostrils, ears, skin, lymph nodes, joints, udder, claws and body condition score. For individual-level data, robust clustered logistic regression analyses with farm as cluster variable were conducted to assess the association with disease eradication. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for comparisons of herd-level data between the two groups. Goats with swollen joints (indicative of CAE) and enlarged lymph nodes (indicative of CLA) were registered on 53% and 93% of the non-HG farms, respectively, but on none of the HG farms. The only other health variables with significantly lower levels in HG herds were skin lesions (P=0.008) and damaged ears due to torn out ear tags (P<0.001). Goats on HG farms showed less fear of unknown humans (P=0.013), and the qualitative behavioural assessments indicated that the animals in these herds were calmer than in non-HG herds. Significantly more space and lower gas concentrations reflected the upgrading of buildings usually done on HG farms. In conclusion, HG has resulted in some welfare improvements beyond the elimination of infectious diseases. The protocol was considered a useful tool to evaluate the welfare consequences of a disease eradication programme. However, larger sample sizes would increase the reliability of prevalence estimates for less common conditions and increase the power to detect differences between the groups. Despite the obvious link between disease and suffering, this aspect is rarely taken into account in the evaluation of disease control programmes. We therefore propose that welfare assessment protocols should be applied to evaluate the merits of disease control or eradication programmes in terms of animal welfare.     

Relationship between welfare and individual ranging behaviour in commercial free-range laying hens

Laying hens housed in free-range systems have access to an outdoor range, and individual hens within a flock differ in their ranging behaviour. Whether there is a link between ranging and laying hen welfare remains unclear. We analysed the relationships between ranging by individual hens on a commercial free-range layer farm and behavioural, physiological and health measures of animal welfare. We hypothesised that hens that access the range more will be (1) less fearful in general and in response to novelty and humans, (2) have better health in terms of physical body condition and (3) have a reduced physiological stress response to behavioural tests of fear and health assessments than hens that use the range less. Using radio frequency identification tracking across two flocks, we recorded individual hens’ frequency, duration and consistency of ranging. We also assessed how far hens ventured into the range based on three zones: 0 to 2.4, 2.4 to 11.4 or >11.4 m from the shed. We assessed hen welfare using a variety of measures including: tonic immobility, open field, novel object, human approach, and human avoidance (HAV) behavioural tests; stress-induced plasma corticosterone response and faecal glucocorticoid metabolites; live weight, comb colour, and beak, plumage, footpad, and keel bone condition. Range use was positively correlated with plasma corticosterone response, faecal glucocorticoid metabolites, and greater flight distance during HAV. Hens that used the range more, moved towards rather than away from the novel object more often than hens that ranged less. Distance ranged from the shed was significantly associated with comb colour and beak condition, in that hens with darker combs and more intact beaks ranged further. Overall the findings suggest that there is no strong link between outdoor range usage and laying hen welfare. Alternatively, it may be that hens that differed in their ranging behaviour showed few differences in measures of welfare because free-range systems provide hens with adequate choice to cope with their environment. Further research into the relationship between individual range access and welfare is needed to test this possibility.     

Willingness to Pay: Australian Consumers and “On the Farm” Welfare

The success of welfare legislation for nonhuman animals rests upon primary producer compliance that, in turn, is affected by public willingness to pay (WTP) for such initiatives. Although the topic of the welfare of animals on farms (and relevant legislation) is becoming increasingly important to the Australian public, there remain relatively few recent assessments of the variables that may affect WTP and, therefore, support initiatives aimed at improving the welfare of animals living on farms. This study surveyed 1,224 community members in Queensland, Australia. The study assessed respondents' self-rated knowledge of, and concern regarding, farm animal welfare. In addition, the survey asked respondents how much more they would be prepared to pay for animal-based products to ensure that they came from a source where the Five Freedoms were met. Although self-rated knowledge and level of concern were found to affect WTP, the study found only concern for farm animal welfare actually predicted consumer behavior. Further analyses showed a potential confound between knowledge levels and locality. This article discusses the implications of this for future initiatives to increase WTP.     

Causes of mortality in laying hens in different housing systems in 2001 to 2004

Background  

The husbandry systems for laying hens were changed in Sweden during the years 2001 – 2004, and an increase in the number of submissions for necropsy from laying hen farms was noted. Hence, this study was initiated to compare causes of mortality in different housing systems for commercial laying hens during this change.     

The welfare of growing pigs in five different production systems: assessment of feeding and housing

Ninety-one farms were visited over a 2-year period to assess the welfare of growing pigs in five different production systems found either in France or in Spain using the Welfare Quality® protocol. This study focused on animal-based measures as indicators of ‘good feeding’ and ‘good housing’. Multiple Generalized Linear Mixed Models were performed for each measure to evaluate the differences between production systems and to detect possible causal factors. Pigs in the conventional system presented the lowest prevalence of poor body condition, whereas extensive Mallorcan Black pigs and extensive Iberian pigs were associated with a decreased prevalence of bursitis and pig dirtiness. The straw-bedded system presented a lower prevalence of bursitis, but poorer hygiene and more susceptibility of poor body condition than the conventional system. The age of the animals had a significant effect on the appearance of bursitis in the three intensive systems studied. The type of floor was a significant causal factor of bursitis and pig dirtiness in the conventional system and among intensive Iberian pigs. The feeding system was another causal factor of pig dirtiness on more than 50% of the body in the conventional system, whereas pig dirtiness on less than 50% of the body was influenced by the age of the animals. The prevalence of huddling animals in the conventional system was associated with the highest stocking densities and the lowest environmental temperatures. The results indicate that there were important differences between production systems based on animal-based indicators of the good feeding and housing principles. The recording of the age of the animals, type of floor, feeding system, stocking density and environmental temperature can be useful to predict the appearance of a given welfare measure of ‘good housing’ on a farm.     

Animal welfare official inspections: farmers and inspectors shared concerns

Official inspections to check the compliance of farms with European legislation to protect farm animals are often perceived negatively by farmers. In addition, the inspections have a limited effect on improving farm compliance. We looked at the perceptions of both farmers and their inspectors about animal welfare and the inspections in a case study of dairy production in France. The identification of gaps and commonalities between both parties should help us to propose improvements in the inspection method by which inspections could more likely encourage compliance with animal welfare legislation. To achieve this aim, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 dairy farmers and their 19 inspectors. Both farmers and inspectors described animal welfare in terms of the state of the animal and of the living conditions and care provided to them. The majority of farmers found that the official checklist used by the inspectors is inappropriate to assess the welfare of their animals; inspectors themselves reported that they often use their own criteria and indicators (often based on the observation of animals) in addition to the official checklist. Both groups disagreed with some requirements of the legislation. These findings suggest that the content and background of the legislation to protect animals should be made clearer to both farmers and inspectors and that these two groups of actors should be involved in the definition of key points to be checked on farms, with special attention to animal-based indicators. All this could improve farmers' engagement with the results of the inspections and, hopefully, could lead to better compliance with legislation and improvements in animal welfare on farms.     

Register-based predictors of violations of animal welfare legislation in dairy herds

The assessment of animal welfare can include resource-based or animal-based measures. Official animal welfare inspections in Denmark primarily control compliance with animal welfare legislation based on resource measures (e.g. housing system) and usually do not regard animal response parameters (e.g. clinical and behavioural observations). Herds selected for welfare inspections are sampled by a risk-based strategy based on existing register data. The aim of the present study was to evaluate register data variables as predictors of dairy herds with violations of the animal welfare legislation (VoAWL) defined as occurrence of at least one of the two most frequently violated measures found at recent inspections in Denmark, namely (a) presence of injured animals not separated from the rest of the group and/or (b) animals in a condition warranting euthanasia still being present in the herd. A total of 25 variables were extracted from the Danish Cattle Database and assessed as predictors using a multivariable logistic analysis of a data set including 73 Danish dairy herds, which all had more than 100 cows and cubicle loose-housing systems. Univariable screening was used to identify variables associated with VoAWL at a P-value<0.2 for the inclusion in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Backward selection procedures identified the following variables for the final model predictive of VoAWL: increasing standard deviation of milk yield for first lactation cows, high bulk tank somatic cell count (⩾250 000 cells/ml) and suspiciously low number of recorded veterinary treatments (⩽25 treatments/100 cow years). The identified predictors may be explained by underlying management factors leading to impaired animal welfare in the herd, such as poor hygiene, feeding and management of dry or calving cows and sick animals. However, further investigations are required for causal inferences to be established.     

饲养密度和鸡笼局部遮光对肉种鸡产蛋期行为与福利的影响

用行为录像记录分析仪(TheObserverVideo-Pro,Noldus)观察和测定肉种鸡在产蛋期行为的变化。对两种不同饲养密度(或者空间供给单鸡笼组,1600cm2/只;双鸡笼组,800cm2/只)及鸡笼后部局部遮光与对照组进行比较实验结果表明,单鸡笼组肉种鸡的转身、挠头等行为均显著多于双鸡笼组,而展翅行为显著少于双鸡笼组;遮光组的肉种鸡采食行为显著多于未遮光组;遮光单鸡笼组肉种鸡,其产蛋行为趋向选择暗光区域。研究提示,虽然密度对蛋鸡行为的效应大于遮光的效应,但是局部遮光能够在一定程度上增加盒式笼养鸡的环境丰富度,降低密度增大引起的拥挤效应,可能缓解其较差的福利状态。     

Inter-observer reliability of animal-based welfare indicators included in the Animal Welfare Indicators welfare assessment protocol for dairy goats

This study was conducted within the context of the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) project and the underlying scientific motivation for the development of the study was the scarcity of data regarding inter-observer reliability (IOR) of welfare indicators, particularly given the importance of reliability as a further step for developing on-farm welfare assessment protocols. The objective of this study is therefore to evaluate IOR of animal-based indicators (at group and individual-level) of the AWIN welfare assessment protocol (prototype) for dairy goats. In the design of the study, two pairs of observers, one in Portugal and another in Italy, visited 10 farms each and applied the AWIN prototype protocol. Farms in both countries were visited between January and March 2014, and all the observers received the same training before the farm visits were initiated. Data collected during farm visits, and analysed in this study, include group-level and individual-level observations. The results of our study allow us to conclude that most of the group-level indicators presented the highest IOR level (‘substantial’, 0.85 to 0.99) in both field studies, pointing to a usable set of animal-based welfare indicators that were therefore included in the first level of the final AWIN welfare assessment protocol for dairy goats. Inter-observer reliability of individual-level indicators was lower, but the majority of them still reached ‘fair to good’ (0.41 to 0.75) and ‘excellent’ (0.76 to 1) levels. In the paper we explore reasons for the differences found in IOR between the group and individual-level indicators, including how the number of individual-level indicators to be assessed on each animal and the restraining method may have affected the results. Furthermore, we discuss the differences found in the IOR of individual-level indicators in both countries: the Portuguese pair of observers reached a higher level of IOR, when compared with the Italian observers. We argue how the reasons behind these differences may stem from the restraining method applied, or the different background and experience of the observers. Finally, the discussion of the results emphasizes the importance of considering that reliability is not an absolute attribute of an indicator, but derives from an interaction between the indicators, the observers and the situation in which the assessment is taking place. This highlights the importance of further considering the indicators’ reliability while developing welfare assessment protocols.     

Citizens’ understanding of welfare of animals on the farm: An empirical study

Many people believe that welfare standards for nonhuman animals on farms need to be improved. However, the definition of farm animal welfare (FAW) remains unclear, as different disciplines have developed competing understandings of FAW. Some studies have investigated citizens’ understanding of FAW through quantitative surveys. This study combined both closed-ended and open-ended questions and compared the findings from the different types of questions. For the open-ended question, respondents mostly named criteria in the categories of “housing system” and “management practice”; however, for the closed-ended question, the category “animal health” was most important. These findings suggest that not only whom you ask determines what comprises animal welfare, but how you ask. These findings should be considered when developing new animal welfare programs to increase the likelihood that the new programs will be accepted by the broader public and meet its expectations. In particular, improvements concerning animal health need to be publicized and clearly communicated to citizens, as health-related aspects are important to many people even though those aspects may not be the first thing they mentioned when asked.     

The ‘Real Welfare’ scheme: benchmarking welfare outcomes for commercially farmed pigs

Animal welfare standards have been incorporated in EU legislation and in farm assurance schemes, based on scientific information and aiming to safeguard the welfare of the species concerned. Recently, emphasis has shifted from resource-based measures of welfare to animal-based measures, which are considered to assess more accurately the welfare status. The data used in this analysis were collected from April 2013 to May 2016 through the ‘Real Welfare’ scheme in order to assess on-farm pig welfare, as required for those finishing pigs under the UK Red Tractor Assurance scheme. The assessment involved five main measures (percentage of pigs requiring hospitalization, percentage of lame pigs, percentage of pigs with severe tail lesions, percentage of pigs with severe body marks and enrichment use ratio) and optional secondary measures (percentage of pigs with mild tail lesions, percentage of pigs with dirty tails, percentage of pigs with mild body marks, percentage of pigs with dirty bodies), with associated information about the environment and the enrichment in the farms. For the complete database, a sample of pens was assessed from 1928 farm units. Repeated measures were taken in the same farm unit over time, giving 112 240 records at pen level. These concerned a total of 13 480 289 pigs present on the farm during the assessments, with 5 463 348 pigs directly assessed using the ‘Real Welfare’ protocol. The three most common enrichment types were straw, chain and plastic objects. The main substrate was straw which was present in 67.9% of the farms. Compared with 2013, a significant increase of pens with undocked-tail pigs, substrates and objects was observed over time (P<0.05). The upper quartile prevalence was <0.2% for all of the four main physical outcomes, and 15% for mild body marks. The percentage of pigs that would benefit from being in a hospital pen was positively correlated to the percentage of lame pigs, and the absence of tail lesions was positively correlated with the absence of body marks (P<0.05, R>0.3). The results from the first 3 years of the scheme demonstrate a reduction of the prevalence of animal-based measures of welfare problems and highlight the value of this initiative.     

A note on the effect of gestation housing environment on approach test measures in gilts

Systems’ welfare evaluation, including behavioural testing, is becoming increasingly popular in farm animal assurance schemes. The aims of this study were to investigate whether fairly short-term exposure to gestation housing systems, which varied in physical, environmental and human-input factors, influenced behavioural and physiological measures during a human approach test—often used to identify problems in human–animal interactions. Twenty-four Large White×Landrace gilts were initially subjected to identical human contact and daily husbandry. Forty-two days after service, the gilts were randomly assigned to either an indoor housing system (n=16) or an outdoor housing system (n=8), which differed physically and in the amount of human contact and daily husbandry. The indoor system used an electronic sow feeder (ESF), was more space-limited and thermally-controlled and had human contact centered on cleaning out. The outdoor system was more extensive, had much greater space accessible, was not thermally-controlled and had human contact that centered around feeding. The human approach test was carried out on all gilts 30–44 days after entry to the gestation system. At testing, each individual was fitted with heart rate monitor and then moved into a test arena. After 2 min an unfamiliar human entered the pen and stood motionless for 3 min against one wall and then approached the gilt and touched her snout. Throughout the experimental period, behaviour and sound within the test arena were recorded continuously. During the 2 min familiarisation period, outdoor gilts had lower heart rates (108.2 bpm versus 123.7 bpm, P<0.05) and tended to perform fewer short vocalisations (0.5 calls per min versus 3.4 calls per min, P<0.1). Outdoor-housed gilts also carried out less locomotor behaviour (2.2 sections crossed versus 4.0 sections crossed, P<0.05) and tended to perform fewer short (1.4 calls per min versus 5.0 calls per min, P<0.1) and long vocalisations (0.2 calls per min versus 1.8 calls per min, P<0.1) over the 3 min test period. Outdoor gilts tended to be slower to approach within 0.5 m of the human (69.9 s versus 19.3 s, P<0.1) but they then took less extra time to make physical contact (3.3 s versus 52.7 s, P<0.1). Mean heart rate was significantly lower in outdoor sows over the whole 3 min period (99.5 bpm versus 115.5 bpm, P<0.05). The results demonstrate that short-term exposure to different housing systems did influence behavioural and physiological measures during a standard human approach test and thus, systems differences should be taken into account before making judgements about the human–animal relationship on any commercial farm, based on results of behavioural tests of this type.     

Assessing animal welfare in sow herds using data on meat inspection,medication and mortality

This paper aims to contribute to the development of a cost-effective alternative to expensive on-farm animal-based welfare assessment systems. The objective of the study was to design an animal welfare index based on central database information (DBWI), and to validate it against an animal welfare index based on-farm animal-based measurements (AWI). Data on 63 Danish sow herds with herd-sizes of 80 to 2500 sows and an average herd size of 501 were collected from three central databases containing: Meat inspection data collected at animal level in the abattoir, mortality data at herd level from the rendering plants of DAKA, and medicine records at both herd and animal group level (sow with piglets, weaners or finishers) from the central database Vetstat. Selected measurements taken from these central databases were used to construct the DBWI. The relative welfare impacts of both individual database measurements and the databases overall were assigned in consultation with a panel consisting of 12 experts. The experts were drawn from production advisory activities, animal science and in one case an animal welfare organization. The expert panel weighted each measurement on a scale from 1 (not-important) to 5 (very important). The experts also gave opinions on the relative weightings of measurements for each of the three databases by stating a relative weight of each database in the DBWI. On the basis of this, the aggregated DBWI was normalized. The aggregation of AWI was based on weighted summary of herd prevalence’s of 20 clinical and behavioural measurements originating from a 1 day data collection. AWI did not show linear dependency of DBWI. This suggests that DBWI is not suited to replace an animal welfare index using on-farm animal-based measurements.     

Possible risk factors for keel bone damage in organic laying hens

Keel bone damage (KBD) in laying hens is an important welfare problem in both conventional and organic egg production systems. We aimed to identify possible risk factors for KBD in organic hens by analysing cross-sectional data of 107 flocks assessed in eight European countries. Due to partly missing data, the final multiple regression model was based on data from 50 flocks. Keel bone damage included fractures and/or deviations, and was recorded, alongside with other animal based measures, by palpation and visual inspection of at least 50 randomly collected hens per flock between 52 and 73 weeks of age. Management and housing data were obtained by interviews, inspection and by feed analysis. Keel bone damage flock prevalences ranged from 3% to 88%. Compiled on the basis of literature and practical experience, 26 potential associative factors of KBD went into an univariable selection by Spearman correlation analysis or Mann–Whitney U test (with P<0.1 level). The resulting nine factors were presented to stepwise forward linear regression modelling. Aviary v. floor systems, absence of natural daylight in the hen house, a higher proportion of underweight birds, as well as a higher laying performance were found to be significantly associated with a higher percentage of hens with KBD. The final model explained 32% of the variation in KBD between farms. The moderate explanatory value of the model underlines the multifactorial nature of KBD. Based on the results increased attention should be paid to an adequate housing design and lighting that allows the birds easy orientation and safe manoeuvring in the system. Furthermore, feeding management should aim at sufficient bird live weights that fulfil breeder weight standards. In order to achieve a better understanding of the relationships between laying performance, feed management and KBD further investigations are needed.