Evaluating results of the Welfare Quality multi-criteria evaluation model for classification of dairy cattle welfare at the herd level

Animal-based welfare indicators for dairy cows and their validity and practicality: a systematic review of the existing literature

Animal welfare is of increasing importance, with consumers preferring animal products made with ethical practices due to growing awareness. This shift highlights the need for reliable methods to evaluate welfare. This systematic review aims to assess the validity of current animal-based welfare indicators for dairy cows to aid farmers and agricultural professionals in evaluating and improving welfare amidst the lack of a clear legislative definition. The literature search spanned five databases: CAB Direct, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar and Livivo, covering publications in English and German from 2011 to 2021. Specific search terms were employed, and abstracts were screened for relevance. Publications were categorized based on exclusion criteria, with a final verification process conducted by three independent scientists. Research highlights correlations between welfare measures, farm characteristics and innovative indicators like hair cortisol concentration. Farming systems and housing methods significantly affect welfare, with pasture-based systems generally resulting in reduced lameness and improved behavior. Proper housing design and management practices are important, as they influence indicators like lameness and cleanliness. Heart rate variability and heart rate monitoring provide insights into dairy cow stress levels during milking and other stressors, making them valuable for welfare assessment. Biomarker research emphasizes the need to balance productivity and health in breeding strategies, as high milk production alone does not indicate good welfare. Behavioral studies and the human-animal relationship are key to understanding welfare. Precision Livestock Farming offers real-time assessment capabilities, although validation is needed. Stress physiology is complex, and while cortisol measurement methods are promising, further research is necessary. Assessment tools like the Animal Needs Index and routine herd data analysis are valuable for identifying welfare concerns. Key findings highlight the WQ® protocol's effectiveness and versatility, the challenge of its time demands, and the DCF protocol's promise for more practical and efficient welfare assessments. Commercial animal welfare audits should prioritize easily observable indicators and herd records due to logistical constraints in measuring biomarkers or heart rate variability. This focus on easily accessible indicators, such as body condition score, lameness, claw health, cleanliness, and somatic cell count allows effective welfare assessments, enabling prompt action to enhance wellbeing.

The first protocol for assessing the welfare of dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarius) kept under nomadic pastoralism

There is no protocol to measure the welfare level of dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarious) kept under pastoralism-the predominant husbandry system of this species. This study therefore aimed to develop and describe a protocol for measuring welfare levels in dromedary camels kept under nomadic pastoralist conditions-. The indicators for each welfare principle (i.e., Good Feeding, Good Housing, Good Health, and Appropriate Behavior) were tailored to the specific conditions of camel pastoralism, drawing from the currently available protocol for assessing welfare in dromedary camels kept in intensive and semi-intensive systems. This adaptation was achieved using a structured literature search and Expert Knowledge Elicitation (EKE). The developed protocol, covering animal-, resource-, and management-based indicators, comprises two assessment levels: 'Caretaker-Herd level' and 'Animal level'. The Caretaker-Herd level is a face-to-face interview of about 10 min including 16 questions, spit into the four welfare principles, and a visual observation of applied animal handling practices. The 'Animal level' encompasses a behavioral observation and a visual clinical inspection of randomly selected individual dromedary camels, about 5 min/camel. The 'Animal level' includes 27 welfare indicators displayed for each welfare principle. The present study also includes the score for each indicator, the model for aggregating indicators' scores into compound indices for each welfare principle (PAI), and how to classify the herds based on the PAIs or to produce an overall welfare index for each herd. Even if the proposed protocol needs to be applied, refined, and validated, it is a first step toward a standardized method to collect data related to dromedary camel welfare kept under pastoralism. This framework may ultimately guide herd managers, animal health practitioners, experienced advisers, and lawmakers in fostering optimal conditions and proposing welfare standards for dromedary camels in pastoralist settings.

Exploring uses for an algorithmically generated Animal Welfare Indicator for welfare assessment of dairy herds

On-farm welfare assessment is time-consuming and costly. Assessing welfare using routinely collected herd data has been proposed as a more economical alternative. The online Animal Welfare Indicator (AWI), developed by a Norwegian dairy cooperative, applies an algorithm to routinely collected health, production, and management data to "indicate" aspects of animal welfare at herd level. The overall AWI score is based on 10 AWI subindicator scores, representative of elements of animal welfare such as claw health, udder health, and mortality. Our cross-sectional study explored 2 ways in which the AWI may enable more efficient welfare assessment of Norwegian dairy herds. First, we investigated using the AWI to reduce the duration of on-farm assessments by replacing on-farm measures. Second, we examined reducing the number of on-farm welfare assessments by using the AWI to predict which herds have poorer welfare with respect to specific on-farm measures. Using Spearman rank analyses, we investigated if the AWI scores for 157 herds were associated with 24 on-farm welfare variables measured contemporaneously by Welfare Quality assessment. The mortality AWI subindicator score and the percentage mortality in the previous 12 mo were moderately correlated, as were the udder health AWI subindicator score and the percentage high somatic cell count (SCC) in the previous 3 recordings. Only negligible or weak correlations were found between the other AWI scores and the on-farm assessment variables. We built Generalized Linear Models using AWI scores as independent variables to predict herds with poorer welfare. Herds were classified as having poorer welfare based on their results in specific on-farm welfare measures. We evaluated the models' predictive ability and accuracy. Moderately accurate models were built for predicting poorer herds with respect to high SCC, mortality, and moderate or severe lameness. The other models were less accurate. The AWI scores were generally unsuitable as replacements of on-farm welfare measures. The AWI subindicators for udder health and mortality could replace the on-farm welfare measures related to those 2 topics, but there was some overlap in the data used to calculate them. Despite a lack of independence, the use of those 2 AWI subindicators may marginally reduce the duration of on-farm assessments. A prediction model based on AWI scores showed potential for identifying herds with poorer welfare in terms of moderate or severe lameness, facilitating more efficient use of resources for on-farm lameness assessment. As a consequence of the data used in the AWI, it was only reflective of health-related welfare outcomes.

Improvement of the Welfare Quality scoring model for dairy cows to fit experts' opinion

After several years of implementation, the original Welfare Quality scoring model for dairy cows appears to be highly sensitive to the number and cleanliness of drinkers and not enough to the prevalence of diseases, and as a consequence may not fit the opinion of some animal welfare experts. The present paper aims to improve the Welfare Quality calculations for the criteria 'Absence of prolonged thirst' and 'Absence of disease' in dairy cows, so that the results are more sensitive to input data and better fit experts' opinion. First, we modified the calculation of 'Absence of prolonged thirst' by linearising the calculation for drinkers' availability to avoid threshold effects. Second, we modified the calculation of 'Absence of disease' by applying a Choquet integral on the three lowest spline-based scores for each health disorder to limit compensation between health disorders. Third, we performed a global sensitivity analysis of the original and the alternative scoring models. Fourth, we compared the results obtained with the original and the alternative models with eight experts' opinions on two subsets composed of 44 and 60 farms, respectively, inspected using the Welfare Quality protocol and on which experts gave their opinion on the overall level of animal welfare. Results show that the alternative model significantly reduced the 'threshold effects' related to the number of drinkers and the compensation between health disorders. On the first subset, the alternative model fits the experts' opinion slightly better than the original model (P = 0.061). On the second subset, the models performed equally. In conclusion, the proposed refinements for calculating scores are validated since they significantly reduced 'threshold effects' and the influence of measures related to drinkers. It also reduced the compensation between health disorders by considering only the three lowest scores and thus increasing the influence of measures related to health disorders, and slightly improve at overall score level the accordance with experts' opinion.

Development of a benchmarking tool to assess the welfare of dairy cattle on small-scale farms

Public concern about the welfare of farm animals and the livestock industry's awareness of the need to improve animal welfare have led to the implementation of new tools designed to meet this objective. Especially in the case of small-scale farms in marginalized areas, the lack of available data specifically for assessing welfare led to the present study. Its aim was to use animal- and resource-based indicators that are representative of small-scale farms, to establish an index and develop a benchmarking tool that can be used to dynamically evaluate the welfare of cattle on farms with different husbandry systems and provide farmers, veterinarians, extension officers, and stakeholders with reliable information that can be used as a decision support tool. For this reason, 1,891 cows from 204 herds housed in freestall (n = 111) and tiestall (n = 93) husbandry systems in South Tyrol (Northern Italy) were evaluated. The results showed that 17.6% of herds (36 farms) had an average score below 60 (out of 100), which means that immediate intervention should be adopted to improve welfare. South Tyrolean dairy farms performed well in terms of lameness, skin alterations, avoidance behavior, number and space of lying areas, and dystocia occurrence scores, whereas water supply, cow cleanliness status, claw conformation, and getting-up behavior offered significant potential for improvement. Significant differences were observed between housing systems scoring less than 60 out of 100 points in 9.9% (n = 11) and 26.9%, (n = 25), of the herds kept in freestalls and tiestalls, respectively. A slight difference was found when comparing the percentage of herds with high scores, which corresponded to 30.6% (n = 34) of herds housed in freestalls and 22.6% (n = 21) of herds housed in tiestall housing systems. In addition, it was shown that animals reared on farms with tiestalls more often had problems with body condition, cleanliness, and skin alterations. All individual welfare indicators in the top 25% of herds had scores above 80, indicating that this may be an attainable target for freestall and tiestall herds, respectively, to promote good dairy cow welfare. The overall aim must be to adopt measures to increase the scores on all farms closer to this level.

Acute Stress-Induced Changes in the Lipid Composition of Cow's Milk in Healthy and Pathological Animals

Producers of milk and dairy products have been faced with the challenge of responding to European society's demand for guaranteed animal welfare production. In recent years, measures have been taken to improve animal welfare conditions on farms and evaluation systems have been developed to certify them, such as the Welfare Quality^® protocol. Among the markers used for this purpose, acute phase proteins stand out, with haptoglobin being one of the most relevant. However, the diagnostic power of these tools is limited and more sensitive and specific technologies are required to monitor animal health status. Different factors such as diet, stress, and diseases modify the metabolism of the animals, altering the composition of the milk in terms of oligosaccharides, proteins, and lipids. Thus, in order to study oxidative-stress-associated lipids, a collection of well-characterized milk samples, both by veterinary diagnosis and by content of the acute stress biomarker haptoglobin, was analyzed by mass spectrometry and artificial intelligence. Two lipid species (sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine) were identified as potential biomarkers of health status in dairy cows. Both lipids allow for the discrimination of milk from sick animals and also milk from those with stress. Moreover, lipidomics revealed specific lipid profiles depending on the origin of the samples and the degree of freedom of the animals on the farm. These data provide evidence for specific lipid changes in stressed animals and open up the possibility that haptoglobin could also affect lipid metabolism in cow's milk.

Obtaining an animal welfare status in Norwegian dairy herds-A mountain to climb

Introduction

Knowing the national status of animal welfare, one can identify welfare problems and set a benchmark against which improvements can be compared. Such a status is potentially invaluable for tangible, sustained animal welfare improvement. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to report the status of animal welfare in Norwegian loose-housed dairy herds as assessed using the Welfare Quality^® Assessment Protocol. Additionally, we investigated if the welfare status varied on a regional basis.

Methods

In total, 155 herds in eight of Norway's eleven counties were assessed by six trained Welfare Quality^® assessors. This article presents the herd prevalences of common welfare issues in dairy production in Norway, as well as integrated welfare scores. To determine whether welfare status varied regionally in Norway, generalized linear modeling was used to estimate the mean welfare score for five regions in the four Welfare Quality^® principles: A. Good feeding, B. Good housing, C. Good health, and D. Appropriate behavior. These estimated mean welfare scores and their 95% confidence intervals were subsequently assessed for significant variation.

Results

Encouraging findings included the low mean herd prevalence of 'very lean' cows (3.0%) and the high proportion of cows (59.8%) which could be touched during avoidance distance testing, indicating a positive relationship between stockpeople and their cattle. Challenges affecting the welfare of Norwegian dairy cows were also identified. Of particular concern were issues related to the cows' environment such as prolonged times needed to complete lying down movements and integument alterations. No herd was completely free of changes to the integument and, on average, 77.9% of each herd were affected either mildly or severely. Animal welfare did not appear to vary much between the five regions assessed. Our investigation revealed significant regional variation between two regions (Trøndelag and Vestlandet North) in only the Welfare Quality^® principle Good housing (p < 0.01).

Discussion

The almost complete absence of regional variation demonstrates that animal welfare status generally varies most at herd level. In conclusion, both welfare challenges and encouraging findings were identified in loose-housed Norwegian dairy herds. To improve animal welfare, herd-specific interventions are most likely to be effective in these herds.

Exploring the effect of auditory stimuli on activity levels, milk yield and faecal glucocorticoid metabolite concentrations in Holstein cows

Health and welfare are inextricably linked within efficient and sustainable dairy production, and several potential risk factors may affect the well-being of dairy cows, including chronic stress. Although auditory stimuli could be used as a tool to decrease the potential stress that cows might experience, it is seldom applied to livestock production systems due to the perception that enrichment is an unnecessary expense. This study aimed to explore the effect of auditory stimuli as a form of enrichment in a Holstein herd by monitoring fecal glucocorticoid metabolite (fGCM) concentrations (a non-invasive, stress-associated biomarker). Cow activity level and milk yield were also measured. Nine cows in their second and third lactation were divided into 3 groups, using a Latin Square experimental design, exposing each cow group to each of the 3 treatments, namely constant exposure (CE), limited exposure (LE), and no exposure (NE) to classical music. FGCMs were quantified using a group-specific enzyme immunoassay detecting 11,17-dioxoandrostanes. Compared to LE and NE animals, cows exposed to constant music had significantly lower fGCM concentrations (P = 0.012), as well as higher milk yields (P < 0.0001) and lowered activity levels during the morning (P = 0.005) and the evening activity period (P = 0.048). These findings indicate that auditory stimuli in the form of classical music may have a positive effect on the welfare of cows as well as milk yield, which hold economic benefits for the producer and potentially reduces the number of cows needed for profitable production.

The relationship between common data-based indicators and the welfare of Swiss dairy herds

The assessment of dairy cow welfare has become increasingly important in recent years. Welfare assessments that use animal-based indicators, which are considered the most direct indicators, are time consuming and therefore not feasible for assessments on a large number of farms. One approach to reducing this effort is the use of data-based indicators (DBIs) calculated from routine herd data. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between common DBIs and the welfare of 35 dairy herds to evaluate the feasibility of a data-based welfare prediction method. For this purpose, the WelfareQuality® (WQ) protocol was used to assess the welfare of dairy cows on 35 Swiss farms, for each of which 10 commonly used DBIs were calculated from herd data. Spearman's rank correlations were used to investigate the relationship between DBIs and WQ criteria and measurements. The study found only a few statistically weak associations between DBIs and animal welfare, with no associations for measurements or criteria of resting comfort and appropriate behavior. Thus, the multidimensional welfare definition is insufficiently covered, and the present publication does not support the approach of a purely data-based prediction of dairy welfare status at the farm level. Instead, the regular calculation of DBIs that are indicative of isolated animal welfare problems or metrics of animal health could allow monitoring of these specific areas of animal welfare.

Practical Application of the Five Domains Animal Welfare Framework for Supply Food Animal Chain Managers

The author has worked as a consultant with global commercial supply managers for over 20 years. The focus of this commentary will be practical application of The Five Domains Model in commercial systems. Commercial buyers of meat need simple easy-to-use guidelines. They have to use auditors that can be trained in a workshop that lasts for only a few days. Auditing of slaughter plants by major buyers has resulted in great improvements. Supply chain managers need clear guidance on conditions that would result in a failed audit. Animal based outcome measures that can be easily assessed should be emphasized in commercial systems. Some examples of these key animal welfare indicators are: percentage of animals stunned effectively with a single application of the stunner, percentage of lame animals, foot pad lesions on poultry, and body condition scoring. A farm that supplies a buyer must also comply with housing specifications. The farm either has the specified housing or does not have it. It will be removed from the approved supplier list if housing does not comply. These types of easy to assess indicators can be easily evaluated within the four domains of nutrition, environment, health and behavioral interactions. The Five Domains Framework can also be used in a program for continuous improvement of animal welfare.

The Welfare of Dairy Cows in Pasture, Free Stall, and Compost Barn Management Systems in a Brazilian Subtropical Region

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.

The ClassyFarm System in Tuscan Beef Cattle Farms and the Association between Animal Welfare Level and Productive Performance

Simple Summary

Interest in animal welfare has increased due to the growing ethical sensitivity of consumers and the awareness of its impact on food security and safety. In addition, respecting a high standard of animal welfare helps in the prevention of transmissible infectious diseases and the control of antimicrobial resistance. As a response to these needs, in 2018, the Italian Ministry of Health introduced the ClassyFarm system, which categorizes the level of risk arising from farm animal welfare and provides a specific checklist. This paper investigates the relationship between animal welfare and productive parameters on beef cattle farms. Animal welfare was assessed using the ClassyFarm system checklist for beef cattle. Our results demonstrated the influence of animal welfare on productive performance, suggesting that respecting high animal welfare levels helps to reach the full growth potential of beef cattle.

Abstract

In 2018, the Italian Ministry of Health introduced the ClassyFarm system in order to categorize the level of risk related to animal welfare. The ClassyFarm checklist for beef cattle is divided into four areas: Areas A “Farm management and personnel”; B “Structures and equipment”; C “Animal-based measures”; and “Emergency plan and alert system”. Answers contribute to the final Animal Welfare Score (AWS) and to the score of each area. The aim of this work was to assess the animal welfare level on 10 Tuscan beef cattle farms through the ClassyFarm checklist and to examine the relationship between the level of animal welfare on final weight (FW), carcass weight (CW), weight gain (WG), and average daily gain (ADG). The AWS was divided into four classes, and the scores for each area were divided into three classes. The analysis of variance was applied, and AWS class, sex, and breeding techniques (open and closed cycle) were included in the model. The AWS class and sex had a highly significant influence on all parameters, while the breeding technique did not significantly influence any parameter. Farms classified as excellent presented a higher FW (677.9 kg) than those classified as good and insufficient, and the same trend was found for the ADG. The classes obtained in Areas A and C had a highly significant influence on all the parameters investigated. The classes obtained in Area B significantly influenced FW and WG. In conclusion, the productive response of the animals seemed to benefit from the welfare conditions.

Effects of Housing and Management Factors on Selected Indicators of the Welfare Quality® Protocol in Loose-Housed Dairy Cows

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.

Dynamic sustainable productivity growth of Dutch dairy farming

The economic, environmental and social sustainability of Dutch dairy farms have attracted increasing societal concern in the past decades. In this paper, we propose a recently developed dynamic Luenberger indicator based on the by-production model to measure dynamic productivity growth in the economic, environmental and social dimensions of sustainability of Dutch dairy farms. Subsequently, we investigate the statistical associations between productivity growth and socio-economic factors using the OLS bootstrap regression model. We find that dairy farms have suffered a decline in dynamic sustainable productivity growth, especially in the environmental dimension where it is more pronounced than in the economic and social dimensions. Furthermore, we find that both technical and scale inefficiency change contribute to the decline of environmental productivity growth. Specialization and government support are associated with a higher economic and environmental sustainability productivity growth, and with, a decreased growth of social sustainable productivity. We found no significant association between the age of the oldest entrepreneur, financial structure, farm size or cost of advisory service and dynamic productivity growth in the three sustainability dimensions. The results provide insights into potential pathways towards improving the three pillars of sustainability.

A proposed structural approach to improve cow-claw health on Dutch dairy farms

Despite extensive research leading to an improved understanding of the risk factors and pathogenesis of infectious and non-infectious disorders, claw health has not structurally improved in recent decades. Several studies have shown that claw disorders harm milk production, fertility and longevity of the dairy cows and job satisfaction of the farmer. This is enough reason to structurally improve claw health on dairy farms. The focus should be on a rapid curative intervention when lameness occurs and above all the prevention of claw problems. Most claw disorder diagnoses are nowadays made during regular claw trimming by the professional trimmer or the dairy farmer. Registration of the detected disorders during claw trimming is not always done consistently, so the estimated prevalence (number of cows with a claw disorder) is in most cases an underestimation of the real prevalence. The quality of these records often makes it difficult for consultants to formulate appropriate claw health advice. To be able to give good advice on claw health, insight into the prevalence of the various hoof disorders on a farm is a key condition. However, good quality advice alone is not a guarantee for an improved claw health situation on a farm. Research has shown that in addition to high quality substantiated advice, the communication style between the consultant and the dairy farmer is essential for the interpretation and motivation of the dairy farmer to implement the advice. In this paper a 7-point plan is presented as a guidance for herd advisors who want to support dairy farmers to improve claw health.

Animal Welfare and Farmers' Satisfaction in Small-Scale Dairy Farms in the Eastern Alps: A "One Welfare" Approach

The multidimensional concept of animal welfare includes physical health, good emotional state, and appropriate behavior of the animals. The most recent methods for its assessment are inspired by the Welfare Quality, a project compiling animal-, resource-, and management-based measures. Recently, animal welfare assessment has also considered the human factor in a so-called “One Welfare” approach. The One Welfare framework highlights the interconnections between animal welfare, human well-being, and the environment. The concept seems to fit particularly well to mountain areas where the relationship between human, animals, and the environment is stronger. In such disadvantaged areas, farmers' well-being plays a key role in maintaining livestock farming profitably and sustainably. This study aims to investigate the relationship between farmers' satisfaction, animal welfare outcomes, and overall farm performance in 69 small-scale dairy farms in the Eastern Alps. Animal welfare assessment consisted of animal-based measures and was performed using the methodology proposed by the European Food Safety Authority for this type of farm. Moreover, the farmers were interviewed to retrieve data on farm characteristics and on their level of satisfaction toward workload, land organization, relationship with the agricultural/non-agricultural community, and the future of local agriculture. The results show that good animal welfare can be obtained in a mountain farming system. Clinical indicators show a low prevalence of diseases and of very lean cows as opposed to integument alterations. The workload is not perceived as a problem in traditional farms (i.e., tie-stall and with no participation in quality-certification schemes). Animal welfare is higher in those farms where farmers have a positive engagement with both the agricultural and non-agricultural community and where farmers are satisfied with their land organization. A One Welfare approach could be applied on a larger scale to fully understand the links between animal and human well-being in mountain areas.

Time-Consuming, but Necessary: A Wide Range of Measures Should Be Included in Welfare Assessments for Dairy Herds

Animal welfare assessments that measure welfare outcomes, including behavior and health, can be highly valid. However, the time and skill required are major barriers to their use. We explored whether feasibility of welfare outcome assessment for dairy herds may be improved by rationalizing the number of measures included. We compared two approaches: analyzing whether strong pairwise associations between measures existed, enabling the subsequent exclusion of associated measures; and identifying possible summary measures—“iceberg indicators”—of dairy herd welfare that could predict herd welfare status. A cross-sectional study of dairy herd welfare was undertaken by a single assessor on 51 English farms, in which 96 welfare outcome measures were assessed. All measures showed at least one pairwise association; percentage of lame cows showed the most (33 correlations). However, most correlations were weak–moderate, suggesting limited scope for excluding measures from protocols based on pairwise relationships. A composite measure of the largest portion of herd welfare status was then identified via Principal Component Analysis (Principal Component 1, accounting for 16.9% of variance), and linear regression revealed that 22 measures correlated with this. Of these 22, agreement statistics indicated that percentage of lame cows and qualitative descriptors of “calmness” and “happiness” best predicted Principal Component 1. However, even these correctly classified only ~50% of farms according to which quartile of the Principal Component 1 they occupied. Further research is recommended, but results suggest that welfare assessments incorporating many diverse measures remain necessary to provide sufficient detail about dairy herd welfare.

The effects of farming systems (organic vs. conventional) on dairy cow welfare, based on the Welfare Quality® protocol

Animal welfare in livestock production is of great interest to consumers. The organic farming approach strives to ensure animal welfare based on preventive measures, but there are very few scientific studies that compare the actual differences in animal welfare between organic and conventional farms. Those studies that have been carried out frequently focus on specific aspects of animal welfare, mostly health issues. The aim of the present study, therefore, was to investigate the effects of the farming system on the welfare of dairy cows in a more holistic way. Although this study was carried out in just two federal states of Germany, the results could serve as a suitable model for the whole country. We used the Welfare Quality assessment protocol to measure welfare for dairy cattle (Welfare Quality®, 2009) and the results showed significant differences (P < 0.05) between organic and conventional farms, but there was also considerable variance between individual farms of the same farming system. Organic farms scored higher in all four Welfare Quality® principles: "Good Feeding", "Good Housing", "Good Health" and "Appropriate Behavior" compared to conventional farms. In particular, organic farms obtained higher scores with respect to Welfare Quality® measures of resting comfort, which contributes to a lower percentage of lameness; organic farms also implemented less painful methods for disbudding, or indeed carried out no disbudding, and provided access to pasture and outdoor exercise. However, organic farms still have room for improvement, especially with respect to animal health. Therefore, outcome-based specifications should be included in the current (purely action-oriented) European regulation of organic production (EC, 2008; EU, 2018) to safeguard the health-related aspects of animal welfare.

Using Expert Elicitation to Abridge the Welfare Quality® Protocol for Monitoring the Most Adverse Dairy Cattle Welfare Impairments

The Welfare Quality® consortium has developed and proposed standard protocols for monitoring farm animal welfare. The uptake of the dairy cattle protocol has been below expectation, however, and it has been criticized for the variable quality of the welfare measures and for a limited number of measures having a disproportionally large effect on the integrated welfare categorization. Aiming for a wide uptake by the milk industry, we revised and simplified the Welfare Quality® protocol into a user-friendly tool for cost- and time-efficient on-farm monitoring of dairy cattle welfare with a minimal number of key animal-based measures that are aggregated into a continuous (and thus discriminative) welfare index (WI). The inevitable subjective decisions were based upon expert opinion, as considerable expertise about cattle welfare issues and about the interpretation, importance, and validity of the welfare measures was deemed essential. The WI is calculated as the sum of the severity score (i.e., how severely a welfare problem affects cow welfare) multiplied with the herd prevalence for each measure. The selection of measures (lameness, leanness, mortality, hairless patches, lesions/swellings, somatic cell count) and their severity scores were based on expert surveys (14–17 trained users of the Welfare Quality® cattle protocol). The prevalence of these welfare measures was assessed in 491 European herds. Experts allocated a welfare score (from 0 to 100) to 12 focus herds for which the prevalence of each welfare measure was benchmarked against all 491 herds. Quadratic models indicated a high correspondence between these subjective scores and the WI (R² = 0.91). The WI allows both numerical (0–100) as a qualitative (“not classified” to “excellent”) evaluation of welfare. Although it is sensitive to those welfare issues that most adversely affect cattle welfare (as identified by EFSA), the WI should be accompanied with a disclaimer that lists adverse or favorable effects that cannot be detected adequately by the current selection of measures.

A Results-Oriented Approach for the Animal Welfare Measure of the European Union's Rural Development Programme

Farm animal welfare is a major concern to the European Union's citizens, addressed in the Rural Development Programmes by a specific animal welfare support measure. Previous evaluation results reveal that the implemented action-oriented measures fail when it comes to improving animal health, an important dimension of animal welfare. Results-oriented measures could compensate for this deficiency, but little is known about their design. In order to improve the effectiveness of current animal welfare measures for dairy cows, we analysed the elements of such a measure in an interdisciplinary, application-oriented research project involving agricultural economists and livestock scientists. We have used a mixed methods approach including a written Delphi survey, group-discussions and on-farm data-collection to select suitable indicators, develop an approach for the identification of threshold values and to design a support measure. Results suggest that, in animal welfare support measures, action- as well as results-oriented elements are necessary to address all dimensions of animal welfare.

Assessing dairy cow welfare during the grazing and housing periods on spring-calving, pasture-based dairy farms

The different periods characterizing spring-calving, pasture-based dairy systems common in Ireland have seldom been the focus of large-scale dairy cow welfare research. Thus, the aim of this study was to devise and conduct an animal-based welfare assessment during both the grazing and housing periods on spring-calving, pasture-based dairy farms, to identify areas for improvement and establish benchmarks for indicators of good welfare. Assessment of seven animal-based welfare indicators was conducted during two visits (one each at grazing and housing) to 82 commercial dairy farms in southern Ireland. Herd-level descriptive statistics were performed for all welfare indicators at each visit, and differences between visits were analyzed using paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. A mean of 9% and 10% clinically lame cows (mobility scores 2 and 3) were observed at housing and grazing, respectively. Recommended body condition scores (BCS) were not met for a mean of 13% of cows at grazing and 23% at housing, with more over-conditioned cows present at housing than grazing (P < 0.001). Ocular discharge was uncommon in both periods. Prevalence of moderate and severe nasal discharge combined was lower during housing (5%) than grazing (7%). In both periods, similar mean levels of tail injury were observed: 2% to 3% of cows with tail lacerations, 9% with broken tails, and 8% (measured at housing only) with docked tails. Integument alterations involved primarily hair loss and were most prevalent on the hindquarters (26%) during grazing and on the head–neck–back (66%) and the hindquarter (32%) regions during housing. Cows displayed an avoidance distance of >1 m (indicative of a fearful response) from an approaching human in an average of 82% of grazing cows and 42% to 75% of housed cows, dependent on test location. Opportunities to improve welfare in this system were identified in the areas of tail injury prevention, nasal health, and the management of indoor housing and feeding. The performance of the top 20% of farms for each welfare indicator was used to establish benchmarks of: 0% to 5% clinical lameness, 0% to 12% of cows outside recommended BCS, 0% to 27% ocular discharge, 2% to 16% nasal discharge, 0% tail lacerations and docked tails, 0% to 3% tail breaks, 0% to 14% integument alterations, and 4% to 74% for avoidance distance of >1 m. These represent attainable targets for spring-calving pasture-based farms to promote good dairy cow welfare.

Sustainability Assessment of Pasture-Based Dairy Sheep Systems: A Multidisciplinary and Multiscale Approach

This article describes a novel methodological approach for the integrated sustainability assessment of pasture-based dairy sheep systems. Most studies on livestock system sustainability focus on animal production, farm profitability, and mitigation strategies of greenhouse gas emissions. However, recent research indicates that pasture-based livestock farming also contributes positively to rural areas, and the associated increase in plant diversity promotes ecosystem functioning and services in natural and managed grasslands. Likewise, little attention has focused on how pasture-based livestock systems affect soil carbon changes, biodiversity, and ecotoxicity. Furthermore, the quality and safety of food products, particularly sheep milk and cheese, and socioeconomic issues such as cultural heritage and consumer behavior are often neglected in livestock system sustainability assessments. To improve the analysis of sustainability and adaptation strategies of livestock systems, we suggest a holistic approach that integrates indicators from diverse disciplines with complementary methods and models capable of capturing the complexity of these systems at multiple scales. A multidisciplinary perspective generates new indicators to identify critical trade-offs and synergies related to the resilience of dairy sheep livestock systems. A multiscale approach provides insights on the effects of socioeconomic and environmental changes associated with current dairy sheep grazing systems across multiple scales. The combined approach will facilitate the development and progressive implementation of novel management strategies needed to adapt pasture-based dairy sheep farms to changing conditions under future socioeconomic and environmental scenarios.

Cattle Cleanliness from the View of Swedish Farmers and Official Animal Welfare Inspectors

Dirty cattle have been commonly recorded in official animal welfare inspections in Sweden for years. The relevant authorities have initiated work to better understand the causes of dirty cattle, in order to improve compliance and standardize the grounds for categorizing a farm as non-compliant with welfare legislation when dirty animals are present. This study investigated the occurrence of dirty cattle in official animal welfare controls, on Swedish cattle farms, and examined farmers' views on the reasons for non-compliance and on key factors in keeping animals clean. The data used were collected by animal welfare inspectors at the county level during the regular official inspections of 371 dairy and beef cattle farms over two weeks in winter 2020. In addition to completing the usual inspection protocol, the inspectors asked farmers a set of questions relating to why their animals were clean or dirty. Dirty cattle were found on 49% of the farms inspected, but only 33% of the farms were categorized as being non-compliant with Swedish welfare legislation. According to inspectors and farmers, dirtiness in cattle depends mainly on management routines, which is a promising result since routines can be improved. The results also revealed a need for better guidance for inspectors and farmers on when dirtiness should be categorized as non-compliance with animal welfare legislation.

A New, Practical Animal Welfare Assessment for Dairy Farmers

Simple Summary

To determine the level of welfare on a dairy farm is a complex task. There is no protocol available that can serve as a ‘gold standard’. The Welfare Quality protocol is the most extensive one, but it takes about a full day to perform. We, therefore, examined if it would be possible to replace the time-consuming parts, like lengthy behavioural observations, with simple measurements in the environment. This resulted in a new Welfare Monitor that can be executed in 1.5 h on a farm with 100 cows. Welfare assessment was appreciated by the farmers, and they responded to advice for improvements on their farm. Besides promoting better welfare, this approach also led to a better financial result for the farms.

Abstract

The Welfare Quality^® assessment protocol (WQ) is the most extensive way to measure animal welfare. This study was set up to determine if resource-based welfare indicators, that are easier and faster to measure, could replace the more time consuming, animal-based measurements of the WQ. The WQ was applied on 60 dairy farms in the Netherlands, with good, moderate and poor welfare. The WQ protocol classified most farms (87%) as ‘acceptable’. Several of the animal-based measures of WQ correlated well with measures in the environment. Using these correlations, an alternative welfare assessment protocol (new Welfare Monitor) was designed, which takes approximately 1.5 h for a farm with 100 dairy cows. Because the opinion of farmers about welfare assessment is important if one wants to improve conditions for the cows at a farm, another objective of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of the new Welfare Monitor for the farmer. Over two years, the farms were visited, and advice was given to improve the conditions at the farm. After the first welfare assessment and advice, farmers improved the conditions for their cows substantially. Farms where the category score had increased made more improvements on average than those that did not upgrade.

The Relation between Hair-Cortisol Concentration and Various Welfare Assessments of Dutch Dairy Farms

Many protocols have been developed to assess farm animal welfare. However, the validity of these protocols is still subject to debate. The present study aimed to compare nine welfare assessment protocols, namely: (1) Welfare Quality^© (WQ), (2) a modified version of Welfare Quality (WQ Mod), which has a better discriminative power, (3) WelzijnsWijzer (Welfare Indicator; WW), (4) a new Welfare Monitor (WM), (5) Continue Welzijns Monitor (Continuous Welfare Monitor; CWM), (6) KoeKompas (Cow Compass; KK), (7) Cow Comfort Scoring System (CCSS), (8) Stall Standing Index (SSI) and (9) a Welfare Index (WI Tuyttens). In addition, a simple welfare estimation by veterinarians (Estimate vets, EV) was added. Rank correlation coefficients were calculated between each of the welfare assessment protocol scores and mean hair cortisol concentrations from 10 cows at 58 dairy farms spread over the Netherlands. Because it has been suggested that the hair cortisol level is related to stress, experienced over a long period of time, we expected a negative correlation between cortisol and the result of the welfare protocol scores. Only the simple welfare estimation by veterinarians (EV) (ρ = -0.28) had a poor, but significant, negative correlation with hair cortisol. This correlations, however, failed to reach significance after correction of p-values for multiple correlations. Most of the results of the different welfare assessment protocols had a poor, fair or strong positive correlation with each other, supporting the notion that they measure something similar. Additional analyses revealed that the modified Welfare Quality protocol parameters housing (ρ = -0.30), the new Welfare Monitor (WM) parameter health (ρ = -0.33), and milk yield (ρ = -0.33) showed negative correlations with cortisol. We conclude that because only five out of all the parameter scores from the welfare assessment protocols showed a negative, albeit weak, correlation with cortisol, hair cortisol levels may not provide a long term indicator for stress in dairy cattle, or alternatively, that the protocols might not yield valid indices for cow welfare.

Application of a Protocol to Assess Camel Welfare: Scoring System of Collected Measures, Aggregated Assessment Indices, and Criteria to Classify a Pen

Simple Summary

During the last few decades, several protocols have been developed for assessing the on-farm welfare of several animal species. However, a protocol for camels has only recently been proposed. This study, for the first time, applied this assessment protocol and developed a model to compound overall welfare indices and classify pens according to their welfare level. The welfare measures were collected in 76 pens of a camel market in Qatar, scored, and then aggregated to obtain overall welfare indices. Thirst Index, Body Condition Score (BCS), disease and physical injuries, feeding and watering management, presence of a shelter, and cleanliness of bedding were the measures that strongly affected the classification of the pens. The model seemed to be able to identify the major welfare concerns of camels kept at the market and to suggest corrective actions. Further studies are needed to implement the proposed model, but it may be the first step towards the definition of welfare standards for camels.

Abstract

This study aimed to apply a protocol for assessing camel welfare, to develop a scoring system for the welfare measures, to produce overall assessment indices, and to classify the animal units (i.e., pens) according to their welfare level. A total of 105 measures were collected at Herd level from 76 pens at a market in Qatar. The pens held 528 camels, 132 of which were evaluated at a deeper level (i.e., Animal level). Out of the 105 measures, 71 were selected, scored, and aggregated to reach a Total Welfare Index (TWI) for each pen. The TWI ranged from 46.2 to 69.8. The Good Feeding index, including measures related to prolonged thirst and prolonged hunger, was the most critical (p < 0.001), while the Good Health index, including measures related to the absence of injuries, disease and pain, was the less problematic (p < 0.001). However, most of the pens were classified as “unsatisfactory” (61.8%) and none as “excellent”. Body Condition Score (BCS), Thirst Index, disease and physical injuries, presence of a shelter, and cleanliness of bedding were the measures which influenced the pens’ classification the most (p < 0.05). The proposed model seems useful in the identification of camel welfare issues. Further applications, as well as the involvement of many scientists and stakeholders, are needed to refine and validate the protocol and its indices.

Primiparous and multiparous Friesland, Jersey, and crossbred cows' behavior around parturition time at the pasture-based system in South Africa

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to assess the behavioral attributes of primiparous and multiparous Friesland, Jersey, and Crossbred cows around calving time in a pasture-based dairy system.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 120 pregnant cows were used in the study, comprising of 40 cows per genotype in different parities [A-primiparous (n = 10), B-2 to 4 (n = 10), C-5 and 6 (n = 10), and D-7 and 8 (n = 10)] and kept in a maternity paddock. Five observers monitored cows from the onset of parturition until the calves were fully expelled, recording the frequency and duration of lying, standing, and walking bouts, calf licking, and suckling.

RESULTS

There were differences (p < 0.05) observed in the behavioral patterns around the time of calving. Jersey multiparous cows spent (p < 0.05) significantly most of their time (20.50 ± 3.10) in lying position as compared to the other genotypes. The Jersey cows also spent most (p < 0.05) of their time (48.00 ± 0.34) in a standing position during the calving period. Friesland cows spent (p < 0.05) most of their time (12.00 ± 1.19) exhibiting either stepping or walking attributes as compared to Jersey and Crossbred cows. The Jersey genotype spent significantly (p < 0.05) more time (123.00 ± 10.43) in expelling their calves compared to the other genotypes. There was a significant (p < 0.05) interaction between genotypes and parity on time spent by cows on licking their calves. There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) observed between the genotypes of the primiparous cow.

CONCLUSION

The primiparous cows spent most of their time in standing and the least amount of time in other activities throughout the trial due to the lack of maternal experience. The current study revealed that behavioral activities differ according to genotype and parity.

Environmental and Management Factors Affecting the Time Budgets of Free-Ranging Iberian Pigs Reared in Spain

Simple Summary

Understanding the natural behaviour of pigs in free-range conditions facilitates the interpretation of their behaviour in intensive conditions. The present study aims to study behavioural indicators of activity in the domestic pig, reared free-range and under two feeding regimes, with some help from humans with concentrates and without help, just eating natural resources. Results confirmed that exploratory behaviour was an important behaviour for pigs, but the same animals that dedicated 50% of their time to this activity when they were not fed by humans reduced this activity to 17.8% when they were fed with concentrates. In addition, few social contacts between animals were seen in extensive conditions, with a higher incidence of negative rather than positive social behaviour. It was concluded that: (1) the need for exploring the surroundings in natural environments is of less importance for pigs when they are fed by humans, and (2) bathing areas in outdoor conditions are important for pigs in the event of warm conditions. Overall, it is concluded that natural behaviour of pigs in free-range conditions, such as a reduced foraging behaviour when pigs are fed with concentrates, should be considered when interpreting behavioural needs in intensive conditions.

Abstract

Understanding the natural behaviour of pigs in free-range conditions facilitates interpretation of their behaviour in intensive conditions. Studying six different farms over two years at different seasons, with climatic and management variations, allowed for a general description of Iberian pig behaviour and which factors have an influence on it. The main activity found was resting (56.5% of the time observed), followed by exploratory behaviour. However, this exploratory behaviour was higher when animals were fed only with natural resources than when fed with concentrates (50% versus 17.8%, respectively). In addition, pigs used bathing areas in summer that were not visited in winter. Negative social behaviour was seen more frequently than positive social behaviour, accounting, in total, for 1% of the total activity of animals. Pigs situated at the centre of the groups tended to remain more relaxed, while the peripheral animals remained more alert and vigilant. Our results indicate that foraging behaviour accounts for a significant proportion of pigs’ active time, but this proportion is much more reduced when pigs are fed concentrates. Therefore, behavioural needs in pigs reared in intensive conditions should consider that exploratory behaviour is reduced when pigs are fed with concentrates.

Effects of cubicle characteristics on animal welfare indicators in dairy cattle

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.

The Welfare Aggregation and Guidance (WAG) Tool: A New Method to Summarize Global Welfare Assessment Data for Equids

Animal welfare can be represented by an array of indicators. There is, however, increasing demand for concise welfare assessments that can be easily communicated and compared. Previous methods to aggregate welfare assessments have focused on livestock systems and produced a single welfare score, which may not represent all aspects of welfare. We propose an aggregation method for the recently developed Equid Assessment Research and Scoping (EARS) welfare assessment tool that results in grades for five welfare categories: housing conditions, working conditions, health, nutrition, and behavior. We overcome the problems associated with existing approaches by using a single aggregation method (decision trees) that incorporates the most important welfare indicators in a single step. The process aims to identify equids with the poorest welfare and aid decision-making when allocating resources. We demonstrate its application using a case study of over 6000 equids across Europe and Asia, where equids in India and Pakistan had the poorest welfare status in terms of health (respiratory disease and open wounds) and behavior (signs of fear and distress, and limb tethering practices). We recommend identification of the specific causes of these issues, using either existing detailed welfare data or through issue-specific assessments by an appropriate professional, to guide the development of appropriate interventions and, ultimately, improve equid welfare.

Evaluation of the performance of register data as indicators for dairy herds with high lameness prevalence

BACKGROUND

The modern dairy industry routinely generates data on production and disease. Therefore, the use of these cheap and at times even "free" data to predict a given state of welfare in a cost-effective manner is evaluated in the present study. Such register data could potentially be used in the identification of herds at risk of having animal welfare problems. The present study evaluated the diagnostic performance of four routinely registered indicators for identifying herds with high lameness prevalence among 40 Danish dairy herds. Indicators were extracted as within-herd annual means for a one-year period for cow mortality, bulk milk somatic cell count, proportion of lean cows at slaughter and the standard deviation (SD) of age at first calving. The target condition "high lameness prevalence" was defined as a within-herd prevalence of lame cows of  ≥ 16% (third quartile). Diagnostic performance was evaluated by constructing and analysing Receiver Operating Characteristic curves and their area under the curve (AUC) for single indicators and indicator combinations. Sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of the indicators were assessed at the optimal cut-off based on data and compared to a set of predefined cut-off levels (national annual means or 90-percentile).

RESULTS

Cow mortality had the highest AUC (0.76), while adding the three other indicators to the model did not yield significant increase in AUC. Cow mortality and SD of age at first calving had highest Se (100%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 72-100%), while highest Sp was found for the proportion of lean cows at slaughter (83%, 95% CI: 66-93%). The highest differential positive rate (DPR = 0.53) optimizing both Se and Sp was found for cow mortality. Optimal cut-off points were lower than the presently used pre-defined cut-offs.

CONCLUSIONS

The selected register-based indicators proved to be able to identify herds with high lameness prevalences. Optimized cut-offs improved the predictive ability and should therefore be preferred in official control schemes.

The Welfare of Cows in Indian Shelters

Simple Summary

The welfare of cows in traditional cow shelters (gaushalas), was assessed on the basis of the measurement of animal- and resource-based welfare parameters and description of the herd characteristics by the manager. A description of the condition of the cows and the resources provided to them is provided in this cross-sectional study. Small space allowance per cow, non-uniform flooring, little freedom of movement, and lack of access to pastures were the key welfare issues observed in the study. Very few cows were recorded as lame, but about half had carpal joint lesions and slightly less had lesions from interacting with shelter furniture. This study will inform the stakeholders about the concept of welfare auditing of the cow shelters, for better welfare and management of the cows in the shelters.

Abstract

Cow shelters (gaushalas) are unique traditional institutions in India, where aged, infertile, diseased, rescued, and abandoned cows are sheltered for the rest of their life, until they die of natural causes. These institutions owe their existence to the reverence for the cow as a holy mother goddess for Hindus, the majority religion in India. There is a religious and legal prohibition on cow slaughter in most Indian states. A cross-sectional study was conducted to assess the welfare of cows in these shelters, which included the development of a welfare assessment protocol, based on direct animal-based measurements, indirect resource-based assessments, and description of the herd characteristics by the manager. A total of 54 cow shelters in 6 states of India were studied and 1620 animals were clinically examined, based on 37 health, welfare, and behavior parameters. Thirty resources provided to the animals, including housing, flooring, feeding, watering, ease of movement, cleanliness of facilities, lighting, temperature, humidity, and noise levels in the sheds were measured. The study showed that the shelters contained mostly non-lactating cows, with a mean age of 11 years. The primary welfare problems appeared to be different to those in Western countries, as the major issues found in the shelters were facility-related—the low space allowance per cow, poor quality of the floors, little freedom of movement, and a lack of pasture grazing. Very few cows were recorded as lame, but about one half had carpal joint hair loss and swelling, and slightly less had lesions from interacting with shelter furniture. Some shelters also had compromised biosecurity and risks of zoonosis. These issues need to be addressed to aid in ensuring the acceptability of these institutions to the public. This welfare assessment protocol aims to address the welfare issues and problems in the shelters, by providing feedback for improvement to the stakeholders.

Assessment of welfare indicators in dairy farms offering pasture at differing levels

In terms of animal welfare, farming systems of dairy cows are perceived positively by consumers when compared to pigs or poultry. A main reason is that the majority of consumers associate dairy farming with pasture, which in turn they relate with benefits for animal health and welfare. However, holistic scientific assessments of the effects of pasturing on animal welfare are rare. Hence, it was the aim to study the animal welfare level in 61 German loose housing dairy farms by using the measures of the Welfare Quality® protocol for dairy cattle (WQP). Data were collected twice per farm at the end of the pasture season (July to October) and approximately 6 months later at the end of the barn season (December to April). Farms were classified based on the duration cows had access to pasture per day during the pasture season: group 1 (G1)>10 h; group 2 (G2) 6 to 10 h; group 3 (G3)<6 h and group 4 (G4) without pasture access. The average herd size was 129 Holstein-Friesian or Red-Holstein cows (range 58 to 527). In addition to WQP data, performance data were gathered from routine herd data recordings. The indicators were aggregated to criteria applying the scoring system of the WQP. G4 received lower scores at the first than at the second visit for the criterion absence of hunger, while there were no differences between visits in the other groups (P=0.58 - group×farm visit effect). All pasturing groups were scored better at the end of the pasture season than G4 for the criterion comfort around resting (P<0.01). Compared with G1 for both farm visits and G2 for the end of the barn season, G4 reached inferior scores for the criterion absence of injuries, including indicators such as hairless patches, lesions, and swellings and lameness. At both assessments G2 was scored higher than the other groups for the criterion absence of diseases (P=0.04). In conclusion, pasture access had positive effects only on selected welfare indicators, however, these effects were not maintained throughout the barn season.

Should the Contribution of One Additional Lame Cow Depend on How Many Other Cows on the Farm Are Lame?

Simple Summary

To give a complete picture of animal welfare on a farm, different welfare measures must be combined. The aim of this paper is to assess the method by which this is achieved within the EU-funded project Welfare Quality^® (WQ). According to the protocols of WQ, individual animals with welfare problems contribute disproportionately more to a lower animal welfare score when they are associated with farms with an otherwise low prevalence of welfare problems compared to farms with a higher prevalence. As a consequence, the addition of a single lame cow on a farm with relatively few lame cows will have a greater consequence for the welfare score than on a farm with more lame cows. The stated aim of this aspect of the protocols is to prevent welfare problems being masked as a result of attaining better scores in other areas. By combining a case study of 44 Danish dairy farms and a questionnaire study of over 150 animal welfare experts, we test whether the system successfully prevents masking of problems that experts find to be unacceptable. Our findings indicate that this is not the case, and we conclude that better methods of summarizing farm-level animal welfare measures are required.

Abstract

Welfare Quality^® proposes a system for aggregation according to which the total welfare score for a group of animals is a non-linear effect of the prevalence of welfare scores across the individuals within the group. Three assumptions serve to justify this: (1) experts do not follow a linear reasoning when they assess a welfare problem; (2) it serves to prevent compensation (severe welfare problems hidden by scoring well on other aspects of welfare); (3) experts agree on the weight of different welfare measures. We use two sources of data to examine these assumptions: animal welfare data from 44 Danish dairy farms with Danish Holstein Friesian cows, and data from a questionnaire study with a convenience sample of 307 experts in animal welfare, of which we received responses from over 50%. Our main results were: (1) the total group-level welfare score as assigned by experts is a non-linear function of the individual animal welfare states within the group; (2) the WQ system does not prevent what experts perceive as unacceptable compensation; (3) the level of agreement among experts appears to vary across measures. Our findings give rise to concerns about the proposed aggregation system offered by WQ.

A survey of selected animal-based measures of dairy cattle welfare in the Eastern Alps: Toward context-based thresholds

In the Alps, traditional dairy farms are small-scale operations where vertical transhumance from valley indoor housing systems to highland pasture-based systems is still practiced in summer. Vertical transhumance implies a substantial change of environment, available resources, and management practices from one season to another. In such systems, animal-based welfare measures need to be monitored throughout the year to capture the variation of welfare outcomes, based on which targeted welfare management plans can be implemented. Because the Welfare Quality assessment approach has been tailored to indoor housing and intensive farming systems, the European Food Safety Authority recently developed a welfare assessment protocol for small-scale dairy cattle farms adapted after the Welfare Quality framework. The aim of this study was to assess nonbehavioral animal-based measures as defined by this protocol at different time points for transhumant systems in the Alps. In total, 18 animal-based measures were assessed before, during, and after the mountain pasture period in a sample of 67 small-scale dairy cattle farms practicing vertical transhumance in neighboring provinces of Austria, Italy, and Slovenia. Significant differences between assessments were identified for dirtiness of legs and teats, hairless patches, lesions and swellings, claw condition, ocular discharge, and diarrhea whereas BCS, lameness/severe lameness, vulvar discharge, nasal discharge, and hampered respiration were unchanged between seasons. In addition, a benchmarking exercise was carried out to identify relative boundaries (worst quartile thresholds) for each animal-based measure and to contribute to the discussion about achievable welfare outcomes for the 2 husbandry conditions that characterize a transhumant system. Worst quartile thresholds indicated a high prevalence of dirtiness (>80%) when cows were kept indoors, high prevalence of hairless patches (65%) before pasture turnout, and high prevalence of very lean cows (>13%) throughout the assessments. On the other hand, the best quartile thresholds for most clinical conditions suggested that high welfare standards (zero prevalence) are widely achievable in mountain farms practicing vertical transhumance during all assessments. The thresholds identified through benchmarking should serve as the basis for an effective context-based welfare management strategy promoting continuous welfare improvement on-farm.

Validation of carcass lesions as indicators for on-farm health and welfare of pigs

Incorporating indicators for pig health and welfare at meat inspection could reduce the need for on-farm assessments. Skin and tail lesions are important welfare indicators in pigs with good potential to record during meat inspection and could possibly function as iceberg indicators of on farm welfare. The aim of this study was to validate the use of these carcass lesions at meat inspection for the assessment of pig health and welfare on farm. Thirty-one farrow-to-finish pig farms (∼12% of Irish herds) were assessed using an adapted version of the Welfare Quality protocol by inspecting 6 randomly selected pens of pigs in the first weaner (4 to 8 wk), second weaner (8 to 13 wk) and finisher stage (13 to 23 wk). The average prevalence of welfare outcomes for each stage was calculated. One batch of pigs was observed at slaughter and skin and tail lesions were scored according to severity for each carcass. The average prevalence of carcass lesion outcomes was calculated for each farm. Linear regression models were developed to predict the prevalence of each welfare outcome in each stage based on the prevalence of the different carcass lesions. The welfare outcomes of different welfare aspects that were best predicted by abattoir information (highest ) were poor body condition (first weaner stage), bursitis (second weaner stage), huddling (first weaner stage), severe tail lesions (finisher stage) and coughing (second weaner stage). Regression trees and receiver-operating curves (ROC) were used to evaluate the usefulness of carcass lesions as monitoring tools. Receiver-operating curves were created using the 75th percentile to classify farms as a problem farm for these welfare outcomes. Cut-off values of predictive carcass lesion prevalence were similar using both techniques. Models for predicting problem farms with poor body condition, bursitis and severe tail lesions were moderately accurate. Sensitivity and specificity ranged from 75 to 100% and 70 to 87%, respectively at the optimal cut-off value of the predictive carcass lesion prevalence. Results show potential for using carcass skin and tail lesions as iceberg indicators of pig health and welfare on farm. Future work is needed to evaluate the cost of including carcass lesion recording at meat inspection, the cost of failing to identify problem farms and the cost of incorrectly visiting or penalizing problem farms before carcass lesions can be used as welfare indicators in a commercial setting.

Zoo agent's measure in applying the five freedoms principles for animal welfare

BACKGROUND

Animal welfare should be prioritized not only for the animal's life sustainability but also for supporting the sustainability of living organism's life on the earth. However, Indonesian people have not understood it yet, thereby still treating animals arbitrarily and not appreciating either domesticated or wild animals.

AIM

This research aimed to analyze the zoo agent's action in applying the five freedoms principle for animal welfare in Taman Satwa Taru Jurug (thereafter called TSTJ) or Surakarta Zoo and Gembira Loka Zoo (GLZ) of Yogyakarta Indonesia using Giddens structuration theory.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The informants in this comparative study with explorative were organizers, visitors, and stakeholders of zoos selected using purposive sampling technique. The informants consisted of 19 persons: 8 from TSTJ (Code T) and 10 from GLZ (Code G) and representatives from Natural Resource Conservation Center of Central Java (Code B). Data were collected through observation, in-depth interview, and Focus Group Discussion and Documentation. Data were analyzed using an interactive model of analysis consisting of three components: Data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. Data validation was carried out using method and data source triangulations.

RESULTS

Food, nutrition, and nutrition level have been given consistent with the animals' habit and natural behavior. Animal keepers always maintain their self-cleanliness. GLZ has provided cages according to the technical instruction of constructing ideal cages, but the cages in TSTJ are worrying as they are not consistent with standard, rusty, and damaged, and animals have no partner. Some animals in GLZ are often sick, whereas some animals in TSTJ are dead due to poor maintenance. The iron pillars of cages restrict animal behavior in TSTJ so that they have not had freedom to behave normally yet, whereas, in GLZ, they can move freely in original habitat. The animals in the two zoos have not been free from disruption, stress, and pressure due to the passing over vehicles.

CONCLUSION

There should be strategic communication, information, and education, community development, and law enforcement for the animal welfare.

Trained-user opinion about Welfare Quality measures and integrated scoring of dairy cattle welfare

The Welfare Quality (WQ) protocol for on-farm dairy cattle welfare assessment describes 27 measures and a stepwise method for integrating values for these measures into 11 criteria scores, grouped further into 4 principle scores and finally into an overall welfare categorization with 4 levels. We conducted an online survey to examine whether trained users' opinions of the WQ protocol for dairy cattle correspond with the integrated scores (criteria, principles, and overall categorization) calculated according to the WQ protocol. First, the trained users' scores (n = 8-15) for reliability and validity and their ranking of the importance of all measures for herd welfare were compared with the degree of actual effect of these measures on the WQ integrated scores. Logistic regression was applied to identify the measures that affected the WQ overall welfare categorization into the "not classified" or "enhanced" categories for a database of 491 European herds. The smallest multivariate model maintaining the highest percentage of both sensitivity and specificity for the "enhanced" category contained 6 measures, whereas the model for "not classified" contained 4 measures. Some of the measures that were ranked as least important by trained users (e.g., measures relating to drinkers) had the highest influence on the WQ overall welfare categorization. Conversely, measures rated as most important by the trained users (e.g., lameness and mortality) had a lower effect on the WQ overall category. In addition, trained users were asked to allocate criterion and overall welfare scores to 7 focal herds selected from the database (n = 491 herds). Data on all WQ measures for these focal herds relative to all other herds in the database were provided. The degree to which expert scores corresponded to each other, the systematic difference, and the correspondence between median trained-user opinion and the WQ criterion scores were then tested. The level of correspondence between expert scoring and WQ scoring for 6 of the 12 criteria and for the overall welfare score was low. The WQ scores of the protocol for dairy cattle thus lacked correspondence with trained users on the importance of several welfare measures.

Assessment of the multi-criteria evaluation system of the Welfare Quality® protocol for growing pigs

Animal welfare has become an important subject of public and political debate, leading to the necessity of an objective evaluation system for on-farm use. As welfare is a multi-dimensional concept, it makes sense to use a multi-criteria aggregation system to obtain an overall welfare score. Such an aggregation system is provided by the Welfare Quality® Network. The present paper focusses on the assessment of the multi-criteria evaluation model included in the Welfare Quality® protocol for growing pigs in order to aggregate the animal-based indicators first to criteria, then to principles and finally to an overall welfare score. Specifically, the importance of the indicators on the overall assessment of growing pig farms is analysed in a given population which consisted of a total of 198 protocol assessments carried out on a sample of 24 farms in Germany. By means of partial least squares modelling, the influence of measures in the calculation procedure is estimated by calculation and interpretation of Variable Importance for Projection (VIP) scores. Variable Importance for Projection scores revealed some meaningful, unexpected influences as the multi-criteria evaluation model of Welfare Quality® aimed at avoiding interferences and double-counting. Some of these influences led to the assumption that some measures might have potential as iceberg indicators, whereas others showed lesser importance. Thus, feasibility can be gained by the deletion and special weighting of indicators according to their importance. Altogether, the study is an essential contribution to the further development of the Welfare Quality® protocols as well as the application of multi-criteria decision systems in the field of animal welfare science in general.

Sensitivity of the Welfare Quality® broiler chicken protocol to differences between intensively reared indoor flocks: which factors explain overall classification?

There is a large demand for holistic welfare assessment systems that result in a singular balanced summary of welfare. The Welfare Quality® (WQ) broiler protocol summarizes 18 welfare measures into four principles ('good feeding', 'good housing', 'good health' and 'appropriate behaviour'), which are then integrated into one overall category ('excellent', 'enhanced', 'acceptable' or 'not classified'). But the protocol is time consuming which hampers implementation. Furthermore, WQ's aim to assess animal welfare in a wide range of husbandry systems may decrease its ability to discriminate between flocks from the same system. We applied the protocol in the context of intensive indoor rearing to assess whether it discriminated sufficiently between flocks, could be shortened without losing essential information, and provided a balanced summary of welfare. The vast majority of the flocks (88%) received the same overall classification (acceptable) whilst all other flocks received an adjacent classification (enhanced), suggesting poor discriminative capacity. For 95% of the flocks overall classification was explained by two measures only ('drinker space' and 'stocking density'). A system based on these two measures would reduce assessment time from 3.5 h to a few minutes. However, both measures' validity can be questioned as they are risk factors for poor welfare rather than animal-based outcome measures and they suffer from methodological weaknesses. Furthermore, the possibility for such an extreme simplification raises doubts on whether the overall classification reflects a balanced summary of different welfare aspects. In line with this, overall classification was not affected by replacing single measures within the 'good health' and 'appropriate behaviour' principles with realistically attainable minima or maxima for intensively reared flocks. Even replacing either of these two principles entirely with their realistically obtainable minimum or maximum did not affect classification. Such insensitivity to change may discourage attempts to improve the welfare of intensively reared flocks when assessments are made based on the overall classification. This calls for an adjustment of the classification system, which is currently being developed by the Welfare Quality Network.

Engineering to support wellbeing of dairy animals

Current trends in the global milk market and the recent abolition of milk quotas have accelerated the trend of the European dairy industry towards larger farm sizes and higher-yielding animals. Dairy cows remain in focus, but there is a growing interest in other dairy species, whose milk is often directed to traditional and protected designation of origin and gourmet dairy products. The challenge for dairy farms in general is to achieve the best possible standards of animal health and welfare, together with high lactational performance and minimal environmental impact. For larger farms, this may need to be done with a much lower ratio of husbandry staff to animals. Recent engineering advances and the decreasing cost of electronic technologies has allowed the development of ‘sensing solutions’ that automatically collect data, such as physiological parameters, production measures and behavioural traits. Such data can potentially help the decision making process, enabling early detection of health or wellbeing problems in individual animals and hence the application of appropriate corrective husbandry practices. This review focuses on new knowledge and emerging developments in welfare biomarkers (e.g. stress and metabolic diseases), activity-based welfare assessment (e.g. oestrus and lameness detection) and sensors of temperature and pH (e.g. calving alert and rumen function) and their combination and integration into ‘smart’ husbandry support systems that will ensure optimum wellbeing for dairy animals and thereby maximise farm profitability. Use of novel sensors combined with new technologies for information handling and communication are expected to produce dramatic changes in traditional dairy farming systems.