Knowledge and attitudes are important factors in farmers' choice of lamb tail docking length

Does tail docking prevent Cochliomyia hominivorax myiasis in sheep? A six-year retrospective cohort study

Tail docking is a husbandry practice widely incorporated in sheep farms around the world. It is an irreversible mutilation that impairs animal welfare, both immediately and in the longer term. The defence of tail docking as a practice is centred around the perception that doing so contributes to the promotion of local hygiene, allowing the use of the wool, facilitating reproductive management and reducing the chances of myiasis, a disease caused by the invasion of blowfly larvae in the tissues of warm-blooded animals. However, current understanding of farm animal welfare questions the need to maintain practices such as tail docking. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of tail docking on the incidence of Cochliomyia hominivorax myiasis in sheep in an experimental flock in Brazil during a six-year retrospective cohort study. Relative risk, odds ratio and incidence rate ratio were the association measures adopted. A total of 4,318 data-points were collected and supplied the analytical model. Tail docking did not decrease the risk and, on the contrary, was found to increase the chances of sheep being affected by myiasis. The results support the hypothesis that tail docking is not a protective factor against the occurrence of myiasis and further fuel calls for a rethink of tail docking being deployed as a blanket measure in the prevention of myiasis in sheep.

How Well Does Australian Animal Welfare Policy Reflect Scientific Evidence: A Case Study Approach Based on Lamb Marking

The development and substance of animal welfare policy is subject to a range of social, cultural, economic, and scientific influences that commonly vary within and between countries. Discrepancies in policy can create confusion and mistrust among stakeholders and consumers and limit the ability to create a uniform minimum level of requirements to safeguard animal welfare, as well as create a level 'playing field' for farmers when trading with other jurisdictions. The livestock sector is receiving growing scrutiny globally for real and perceived violations of animal welfare, for example, the practice of mulesing in Australia. This article explores animal welfare legislation within Australia and how it reflects the scientific evidence surrounding routine husbandry practices in sheep, including tail docking, castration, and mulesing. While there is some variation between state and territory legislation, the most notable concern is the lack of enforceable recommendations surrounding the evidence-based use of analgesia and anaesthesia for painful husbandry procedures. The age at which these procedures are recommended to be performed is relatively consistent across Australian jurisdictions, but there is a marked difference compared to international legislation. The global context of animal welfare legislation, public perception, and producer perception of these procedures are also discussed, highlighting the difficulty of creating robust animal welfare legislation that promotes a good standard of welfare that is respected worldwide whilst being practical in an Australian setting given our unique geography and climatic conditions.

Measuring Sheep Tails: A Preliminary Study Using Length (Mm), Vulva Cover Assessment, and Number of Tail Joints

Docking sheep tails is a long-standing practice that, when done at the recommended length, reduces the risk of flystrike. The recommended length is to cover the vulva of ewes and to a similar length in males. This length is often equated to three coccygeal joints left intact, and there are many other ways the recommended length is described by researchers, industry, and government. This study compared the observer consistency and retest consistency using three different tail length measurement methods: vulva cover assessment, length (mm), and joint palpation. The tails of 51 yearling and 48 weaner Merino ewes were assessed by two observers. Length and vulva cover assessment methods provided the most reliable results, and joint palpation was the least reliable method of tail measurement. In the sample, tails that covered the vulva of yearlings and weaners measured 57.6 mm (n = 14) and 63.7 mm (n = 30) on average, respectively, and contained two coccygeal joints (more than two coccygeal vertebrae). Tails that did not cover the vulva of yearlings and weaners measured 41.3 mm (n = 36) and 52.8 mm (n = 17) on average, respectively, and had less than two coccygeal joints. The two most reliable methods enable valid comparison to the best practice recommendations.