Factors that Influence Farmers' Views on Farm Animal Welfare: A Semi-Systematic Review and Thematic Analysis

Barriers and drivers of farmers to provide outdoor access in pig farming systems: a qualitative study

Part of the farmers have chosen to raise pigs with outdoor access. However, providing outdoor access to pigs is not a simple matter, and many farmers are hesitating or feel powerless to engage in this transition. A better understanding of their needs and challenges could facilitate the development of innovations that generate commitment. This survey aimed to identify the French pig farmers' barriers to and drivers for providing outdoor access to pigs. A total of 36 farmers, aged 25-60, who worked in all types of pig farming systems (from full indoor to free-range) participated in a semi-structured interview that lasted 1.25-2.25 h. The topics covered included a historical overview, a description of the farm and practices, as well as opinions about the impact of outdoor access on farmers, animals, production and economic performance, environment, and society. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis. Most of the participants agreed that rearing pigs indoors is a different job from that of rearing pigs with outdoor access and that it is above all a matter of choice, farmer work conception, and work comfort. Farmers generally agreed that working outdoors is particularly arduous, but this could be compensated by the satisfaction of being in contact with nature and seeing animals in a more complex environment. A large majority of farmers managing a system with outdoor access raised the issue of lack of support, highlighting the need for refinement and diffusion of guides of practices as well as day-to-day support. The impact of outdoor access on the health and welfare of pigs was discussed, especially regarding climatic hazards and the risk of zoonoses, and several outdoor farmers explained how their relationship with the animals changes when pigs are raised outside. Given that zootechnical performance may significantly decrease in farms with outdoor access, various strategies can be employed to maintain profitability, such as feed production, circularity, direct sales, or work diversification. They could be either motivating or demotivating factors depending on the individuals. Concerns about social criticism were prominent among many indoor farmers while farmers providing outdoor access generally felt more serene and proud. Overall, this study can serve as a basis to identify levers that could remove barriers, foster the adherence of more farmers, and facilitate the transition towards more pig farming systems with outdoor access, provided that those systems are viable and beneficial for the welfare and health of the animals and farmers.

Dairy farmers' preferences for immediate versus late calf separation

The practice of separating calves from their dams right after birth is one of the main dairy cattle welfare concerns among the public. Farmer perceptions about the practice and the available alternative contact systems in the US are however, not well understood. Using data from a sample of Wisconsin dairy farmers, the study examines farmer preferences for different prolonged (relative to immediate separation) contact systems and the potential role of farm structural and individual-level specific factors. Four alternative hypothetical systems - free dam, half day, foster cow, and restricted suckling systems - differing on the basis of calf access to dam-were considered. The analysis controls for farm size, production system (conventional, organic, grazing), farmer socio-demographic characteristics in addition to farm animal welfare (FAW) perceptions. The findings indicate that amongst the set of alternative practices considered, foster cow system is most preferred alternative to the conventional early separation practised by most farmers. This is followed by restricted suckling systems. The least ranked alternative system is free calf-dam contact. The analyses further indicate that calf contact duration is negatively associated with herd size. Relative to conventional farms, calf-dam pairs on grazing, organic and mixed farms are less likely to be separated immediately after birth. Prolonged calf-dam contact is also prevalent amongst older farmers. Overall, the findings imply that farming system and structural considerations may be the key drivers of transition to prolonged contact systems in dairy production. Foster cow systems may offer the most feasible pathway for achieving this objective.

Welfare Assessment on Different-Sized Dairy Goat Farms in the Northern Serbian Province of Vojvodina

This research aimed for the first time to identify the essential welfare problems on 46 goat dairy farms in Vojvodina,based on the goat AWIN welfare protocol. The study showed that space allowance per goat was 1.55, 1.86 and 2.50 m2/goat (large, medium, small-sized farms, respectively). Most farms possessed the soil floor and straw as a flooring material. The small and medium farms more allowed access to the outdoor area. Contrary, large-sized farms mostly kept goats in fully housed systems with reduced opportunities for the goats to express their natural behavior. Management procedures were significantly different (p < 0.05) between the investigated farms. Differences were mainly in bedding, feeding and culling strategies. Low productivity was the main cause of culling in all farm types. Small-sized farms carried out more often disbudding (42.9%) in comparison with medium (21.4%) and large-sized ones (14.3%). Group level observation showed that the main areas of concern were associated with hair coat condition and kneeling at the feeding rack (p < 0.05). Inadequate BCS, udder asymmetry and claw overgrowth were frequently recorded. The prevalence of thin and fat goats was highest in large-sized farms All farm size categories and management systems showed certain welfare weaknesses. Thus, the findings highlighted the need for higher implementation of animal welfare principles and improvement of management techniques to meet the welfare requirements of dairy goats.

Cohort profile: The FarmMERGE project-Merging human and animal databases to investigate the relationship between farmer and livestock health and welfare. The HUNT Study

Stockmanship is an important determinant for good animal welfare and health. The goal of the FarmMERGE project is to investigate the associations between farmer health and work environment, and the health, productivity and welfare of their livestock. We merged several livestock industry databases with a major total population-based health study in Norway (The Trøndelag Health Study 2017-2019 (HUNT4)). This paper describes the project's collection and merging of data, and the cohort of farmers and farms that were identified as a result of our registry merge. There were 56,042 participants of HUNT4 (Nord-Trøndelag County participants only, participation rate: 54.0%). We merged a list of HUNT4 participants whose self-reported main occupation was "farmer" (n = 2,407) with agricultural databases containing production and health data from sheep, swine, dairy and beef cattle from 2017-2020. The Central Coordinating Register for Legal Entities was used as an intermediary step to achieve a link between the farmer and farming enterprise data. We identified 816 farmers (89.5% male, mean age 51.3 years) who had roles in 771 farming enterprises with documented animal production. The cohort included 675 unique farmer-farm combinations in cattle production, 139 in sheep, and 125 in swine. We linked at least one HUNT4 participant to approximately 63% of the dairy farms, 53% of the beef cattle farms, 30% of the sheep farms, and 38% of the swine farms in Nord-Trøndelag County in the 2017-2019 period. Using existing databases may be an efficient way of collecting large amounts of data for research, and using total population-based human health surveys may decrease response bias. However, the quality of the resulting research data will depend on the quality of the databases used, and thorough knowledge of the databases is required.

Understanding Communication Barriers: Demographic Variables and Language Needs in the Interaction between English-Speaking Animal Professionals and Spanish-Speaking Animal Caretakers

This study focused on assessing the language needs of English-speaking animal professionals in their interactions with Hispanic/Spanish-speaking animal caretakers. A survey was administered to a target audience of non-Spanish speaking and bilingual animal professionals to identify communication gaps while interacting with Hispanic/Spanish-speaking animal caretakers. The data was analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistics, including ordinal regression analyses to examine the impact of demographic variables on respondents' answer choices. The results showed that English-speaking professionals struggled with written and oral communication, which differed compared to bilingual professionals (p < 0.05). Additionally, responses of female professionals varied regarding the aspects of Spanish necessary for interacting with Hispanic/Spanish-speaking animal caretakers, as well as the topics likely to be addressed when agriculture professionals communicate with animal caretakers (p < 0.05). Communication difficulties in the oral medium for both oral receptive skills (listening) and oral productive skills (speaking) were reported as the major barriers that animal professionals need to overcome in their attempt to communicate with the Hispanic/Spanish-speaking workforce in farm settings. This emphasizes the need to address oral communication barriers, and to a lesser degree, the development of reading and writing skills. The topics: typical clinical signs of illness, euthanasia, treatment-drugs, and identification of sick or injured animals were identified as the most likely to be addressed during on-farm interactions. These findings indicate that there are gaps in communication that need to be overcome to improve communication with on-farm Hispanic/Spanish-speaking animal caretakers and consequently contribute to enhancing animal health, welfare, and production.

How might the public contribute to the discussion on cattle welfare? Perspectives of veterinarians and animal scientists

Veterinarians and animal scientists can provide leadership on issues relevant to farm animal welfare, but perceptions of these stakeholders regarding societal expectations for welfare are underexplored. This study involved five focus groups of veterinarians and animal scientists (n = 50 in total), recruited at a European meeting focused on cattle welfare. Participants were invited to discuss topics related to cattle welfare and were prompted with questions to elicit their perspectives of public concerns and how the participants felt public input should be included when developing solutions. Discussions were moderated by trained facilitators, audio-recorded and transcribed, and transcripts analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Ultimately, four primary themes were developed: (1) The public as concerned; (2) The public as ignorant; (3) The public as needing education; and (4) The public as helper or hindrance. Groups identified specific farming practices viewed as concerning to the public, including lack of pasture access, behavioural restriction, and painful procedures. Discussions about these concerns and the role of the public were often framed around the assumption that the public was ignorant about farming, and that this ignorance needed to be rectified through education. Participants were generally ambivalent in their beliefs regarding public contributions to solutions for farm animal welfare but suggested that consumers should pay more for products to help shoulder any costs of welfare improvements.

Animal Welfare Science: Why and for Whom?

There are, in the literature, distinct ways to approach animal welfare. The objective of this work was to study the value attributed to farm animals in the scientific papers published in animal welfare and animal production journals at three different points in time, separated by a decade each. The first ten papers mentioning "animal welfare" or "animal well-being" in their objectives or hypotheses from each journal and each focus year were selected. The 180 papers were blindly scored by five assessors between 1 and 10, according to the degree of intrinsic value attributed to animals. The overall mean score and standard deviation were 5.60 ± 2.49, with 6.46 ± 2.29 and 4.74 ± 2.40 for AW and AP journals, respectively, and 5.37 ± 2.44, 5.68 ± 2.52 and 5.75 ± 2.41 for the focus years of 2000, 2010 and 2020, respectively. There was an interaction between focus year and publication area: papers from AW journals scored better over time, in contrast with papers from AP journals, for which scores remained similar over decades. The inter-assessor agreement is moderate, which may reflect the subject complexity, as the language used in the papers studied was ambiguous in relation to why and for whom it is performed. The low overall mean score evidenced that the animal welfare scientific publications are, on average, not prioritizing the interests of the animals. Thus, our results evidenced the presence of animal welfarism in animal welfare science, a problem that seems not to be intrinsic to animal welfare science itself, but rather to the way research is frequently conceived, conducted, interpreted, summarized and applied. Therefore, it seems urgent to further study the motivation for animal welfare research. The statement of the main justification for animal welfare papers, with an explicit declaration of the motivational priorities that constitute each scientific animal welfare study, may be an interesting recommendation for the improvement of animal welfare science.

Canadian dairy farmer views about animal welfare

Concerns regarding the welfare of farm animals continue to grow. Traditionally, research efforts have largely focused on refining existing management practices to improve welfare. However, the incorporation of views from those directly involved in animal care is equally, if not more, important. This study investigated the perspectives of Canadian dairy farmers on animal welfare. We conducted 16 interviews with a total of 22 participants from four provinces across Canada. Recorded audio files and field notes were transcribed, anonymised, and coded using deductive and inductive thematic analysis. The interview data revealed two major themes: (1) animal dimension of animal welfare, including views related to biological functioning, naturalness and affective states; and (2) dairy farmer identity, including, the voice of the 'city', what it means to be a good 'cow-man', and the nature of human-animal relationships. Dairy farmers emphasised biological functioning, but they made numerous references to the emotional and natural living aspects of their animals' lives. Our work also provides evidence that farmers believed it was their duty to care for their animals beyond simply milking cows and making a profit. In terms of the larger debate, this study identified potential shared values with members of the public: opportunities for natural living and agency, attentiveness to individual animals, and the value of life over death. Finally, the emotional relationship that farmers developed with their animals highlights the values dairy farmers have for their animals beyond simply utilitarian function. Overall, these shared values could contribute to constructive dialogue.

“If you were a cow, what would you want?” Findings from participatory workshops with dairy farmers

When looking to improve animal welfare, it is essential to understand the viewpoints of stakeholders in the industry. Previous research has engaged stakeholders such as farmers, veterinarians, and the public to better understand future dairy industry directions. However, the use of perspective-taking as a tool to overcome farmer's focus on current barriers to the industry has not been explored. Therefore, the aims of this study were to have farmers take the perspective of the cow, to elicit: (1) farm elements that are essential to create a cow-centric dairy system, and (2) how this system can be achieved in the next 50 years. To do this, we employed participatory methods (photo elicitation, timelining) to generate discussion with 12 New Zealand dairy farmers. Pasture access is frequently cited as an integral component for promoting good welfare in dairy cows, thus, this cohort of farmers was considered a good case study as they all had experience managing cows in grazing systems. Participants were asked to create a cow-centric farm design, and a pathway to implementation. Following thematic analysis of the multiple data sources, the results are presented under the following three themes: (1) cow-centric farm designs (environmental considerations, cow handling and care), (2) timeline to achieve and sequence of implementation ("low hanging fruit" and long-term investments), and (3) assumptions and resources needed (including financial considerations, technology, farmer buy-in, regulations and enforcement and other stakeholder involvement). By better understanding how current industry practice aligns, and also differs, from what the cow would want, we can work towards future management systems that incorporate the requirements of all stakeholders, including the cow.

Meat the challenge: Segmentation and profiling of Japanese beef mince and its substitutes consumers

Shifts in protein production methods are an emerging challenge toward realizing a sustainable society. This paper aims to examine preferences among Japanese consumers regarding attributes of beef mince and its substitutes, to develop consumer segments based on these preferences, and to explore the segment with higher acceptance of replacement from conventional products. This paper also aims to explain intersegment differences from consumer heterogeneity in human values, scientific literacy, and sociodemographic viewpoints for a deeper understanding of consumer behavior in each segment. The results of an online choice experiment involving 4421 consumers in Japan, using food labels on mince showed that Japanese-origin organic beef was associated with the highest utility among the five production methods mentioned. Five consumer segments were identified with latent class analysis: novelty accepters, generous customers, attribute-economy balancers, price-conscious, and conservatives, which vary in preference in choice behavior, sociodemographic, human values, and scientific literacy.

A decade on: where is the UK poultry industry for emergency on-farm killing?

Millions of poultry are farmed intensively every year across the United Kingdom (UK) to produce both meat and eggs. There are inevitable situations that require birds to be emergency killed on farm to alleviate pain and suffering. In Europe and the UK, emergency methods are regulated by the European Council Regulation (EC) No. 1099/2009 and The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations (England 2015; Scotland 2012; Wales and Northern Ireland 2014). Cervical dislocation has been reported to be the most widely used method prior to these legislative changes which took place from 1 January 2013. Based on limited scientific evidence and concern for bird welfare, these legislative changes incorporated restrictions based on bird weight for both manual (≤3 kg) and mechanical (≤5 kg) cervical dislocation, and introduced an upper limit in the number of applications for manual cervical dislocation (up to 70 birds per person per day). Furthermore, it removed methods which showed evidence of crushing injury to the neck. However, since legal reform new scientific evidence surrounding the welfare consequences of cervical dislocation and the development of novel methods for killing poultry in small numbers on farm have become available. Whether the UK poultry industry have adopted these novel methods, and whether legislative reform resulted in a change in the use of cervical dislocation in the UK remains unknown. Responses from 215 respondents working across the UK poultry industry were obtained. Despite legal reform, manual cervical dislocation remains the most prevalent method used across the UK for killing poultry on farm (used by 100% of farms) and remains the preferred method amongst respondents (81.9%). The use of alternative methods such as Livetec Nex® and captive bolt guns were available to less than half of individuals and were not frequently employed for broilers and laying hens. Our data suggests there is a lack of a clear alternative to manual cervical dislocation for individuals working with larger species and a lack of gold standard methodology. This risks bird welfare at killing and contributes to inconsistency across the industry. We suggest providing stakeholders with practical alternatives prior to imposing legislative changes and effective knowledge transfer between the scientific community and stakeholders to promote positive change and protect bird welfare.

Farmers Views on the Implementation of On-Farm Emergency Slaughter for the Management of Acutely Injured Cattle in Ireland

Four management options for acutely injured cattle in Ireland exist: treatment, unless cattle are severely injured; on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES); casualty slaughter (CS) if the animal is certified fit for transport; or euthanasia. OFES is designed to prevent transport of welfare-compromised cattle. An online survey of farmers in Ireland was carried out between April and July 2021 and focused on events during 2020. A theoretical framework of capacity, willingness, and opportunity was used to explore farmers' perceptions. Responses from 94 farmers (49 dairy and 45 beef) were analysed; not all respondents answered all questions. Respondents indicated that the incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland is low. A majority reported not having an acutely injured animal for greater than 36 months. Most respondents had a positive attitude towards OFES for animal welfare reasons and were aware of relevant regulations and guidelines. Barriers to OFES included a lack of availability of OFES, and dairy farmers indicated that it had a similar financial impact as euthanasia. A parallel study with veterinarians indicated a higher incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland; the current results may be due to the demographic or the sensitivity of the topic. Nationwide electronic data capture on the cause of mortality could support improvements in the management of acutely injured cattle and enable surveillance of the proportion of these cattle undergoing OFES, euthanasia, or CS.

Psychological implications of humane endings on the veterinary profession

The veterinary profession has a unique responsibility to animals during the final stages of their lives. The veterinarian's obligations extend to humane endings, involving all species of animals in a range of circumstances including, but not limited to, euthanasia of individually owned animals, euthanasia of animals for research purposes, depopulation of animals during emergencies, and slaughter of animals raised for food. The veterinary profession continues to improve animal welfare through advances in end-of-life decision-making and humane killing techniques,1-3 but the psychological impacts on veterinarians have not received the same level of consideration. Building on the influential AVMA Humane Endings Guideline, the AVMA recognizes that support for the mental health of veterinarians engaged in such activities needs to be a priority. This article aims to provide the foundation and rationale for improved preparation and establishment of sustainable mental health resources and to offer recommendations on pragmatic solutions to support and prepare veterinary professionals as leaders impacted by participation in humane endings-related activities. While end-of-life decision-making and implementation may present mental health challenges to veterinarians, it is crucial to recognize that there are stressors specific to each situation and that every individual's experience is valid. Addressing the mental health issues surrounding the decision-making process and implementation of humane endings activities start with a comprehensive understanding of each activity's unique context and the veterinarian's leadership role. Therefore, this article highlights the psychological impact of depopulation and its similarities and exclusive challenges compared with euthanasia and humane slaughter.

Undocked Tails, Mycoplasma-like Lesions and Gastric Ulcers in Slaughtering Pigs: What Connection?

Tail biting is an economical and behavioral problem in the pork production system worldwide and systematic tail docking has been applied for decades to decrease the risk of its onset. However, legal and market-driven requirements are leading pig producers to rear undocked animals. The aim of this work was to monitor tail, pluck (lungs, pleurae, and liver), stomach, carcass, and thigh lesions in slaughtering pigs belonging to either docked or undocked batches. A total of 525 batches were evaluated at slaughter: 442 docked and 83 undocked batches. The presence of tail lesions was only recorded in undocked batches (44.0 ± 0.402 vs. 0.2 ± 0.2% compared to docked ones, p < 0.001), with a prevalence of severe chronic lesions of 27.3% ± 0.032, suggesting that more and alternative wide efforts to manage long-tailed animals are needed. On the contrary, docked animals showed more frequent ear lesions (9.6% ± 0.037 vs. 4.6% ± 0.019; p = 0.0001). Severe lung lesions were found more frequently in undocked animals (9.2% ± 0.043 vs. 6.6% ± 0.011, p = 0.006), as well as gastric ulcers (26.1% ± 0.021 vs. 20.3% ± 0.37, p = 0.006). These lesions might share the same predisposing factors of tail lesions; the latter might be investigated as an iceberg indicator for other pathological conditions in undocked pigs and eventual causal association among lesions in these organs should be explored.

Management of acutely injured cattle by on farm emergency slaughter: Survey of veterinarian views

Background

Fitness to transport is a key provision in animal welfare regulations in the European Union, and for the management of acutely injured cattle. Whilst treatment may be appropriate for some injuries, three common production outcomes for acutely injured cattle are; on farm emergency slaughter (OFES), casualty slaughter (CS) or euthanasia. The aims of this study were to evaluate the perceptions of veterinarians, working in Ireland, on the use of OFES for the management of acutely injured cattle and to evaluate the influence of capacity, willingness and opportunity on their ability to operate OFES.

Methodology

Two online surveys of veterinarians working in Ireland, Private Veterinary Practitioners (PVPs) and Official Veterinarians (OVs), were conducted through QualtricsXM over a 7-week period between April and June of 2021. Quantitative and qualitative questions were developed and analyzed using the tripartite framework of capacity, willingness, and opportunity to collect relevant data about the management of acutely injured cattle and the provision of OFES in Ireland by veterinarians.

Results

43 OVs and 85 PVPs participated in the survey. OVs regulated on average 4.2 abattoirs, of which 21.6% accepted OFES. Participants reported 343 and 377 OFES and CS, respectively, in 2020. 62.4% PVPs had not certified cattle for OFES, or CS. Limb fracture accounted for 79% OFES, 34.5% CS and 47.9% euthanized acutely injured cattle. 63.3% OVs and 44% PVPs were not aware of abattoirs providing OFES within 100 km of their workplace. Lack of availability of OFES negatively associated with PVP knowledge of the procedure. Regulations and guidelines were the most common source of information on OFES for PVPs.

Conclusion

Increasing the availability of OFES may help to improve the management of acutely injured cattle, especially those with limb fractures that are unfit for transport.

Discrepancies between farmers' perceptions and actual animal welfare conditions on commercial pig farms

Animal welfare is a multiparameteral concept that encompasses the physical and mental health of animals and includes various aspects such as physical wellbeing, absence of hunger and thirst, and ability to express motivated behavior, to which farmers usually attach different importance. The objectives of this study were to evaluate animal welfare on Slovenian commercial pig farms, to determine whether farmers' perceived importance of animal welfare differ from actual animal welfare on farms and to determine, if farmer's age, gender, their level of education and participation in vocational training have an influence. For that purpose, we created an Animal Welfare Protocol/Questionnaire for Pig Farms (AWQ/P-P) that assessed several parameters of animal welfare: (1) general status, (2) animal behavior, (3) health status, (4) living conditions, and (5) environmental conditions. Each parameter included at least five observation points and was scored on a 5-point scale. The same observation points were used to measure farmers' perceived importance of animal welfare and for observational assessment. Consequently, we were able to compare both statistically. Farmers from 14 (N = 14) large Slovenian pig farms participated in the study. Results show that farmers rate all parameters of animal welfare very highly. For them, animal health status is the most important, and environmental conditions are the least important factors for animal welfare. Observational inspections yielded significantly lower scores for animal welfare conditions than those obtained from farmer ratings. The highest correlations between farmers' perceptions and observational inspections were found for the parameters of animal behavior and environmental conditions. The results of this study also suggest that vocational training is a significant variable in increasing levels of pig welfare. Age, gender, and education level are not significant variables, however, farms led by older male farmers with lower level of education but involved in vocational training from different sources had slightly better welfare on the farm. This should be further investigated before making conclusions, due to our small sample size. The significance of the study is to identify deficiencies in pig welfare as perceived by farmers and consequently improve pig welfare.

Using Community Conversations to explore animal welfare perceptions and practices of rural households in Ethiopia

There is a scarcity of data on animal welfare and its impact on livelihoods to inform animal welfare initiatives in Ethiopia. Perceptions and practices of rural households toward animal welfare are influenced by socio-cultural, demographic, and agroecological factors. We conducted Community Conversations in two geographically and culturally diverse regions of Ethiopia to explore the attitudes and practices of rural households regarding animal welfare and its impact on livelihoods. Community Conversations are facilitated dialogues among rural households to explore their perceptions, practices, constraints, and needs and identify and co-create solutions to improve the welfare of their animals. We used single- and mixed-sex discussion groups to understand community members' gendered perceptions of animal welfare and influence their attitudes and practices toward gender-equitable roles in animal welfare management. In the Community Conversations, community members readily described the biological needs of their animals but there was also a good acknowledgment of the behavioral and affective state needs of animals. Identified constraints for animal welfare included feed and water shortage, limited veterinary support, and poor animal handling practices. Community members described the welfare of their animals as being intertwined with their own livelihoods and identified productive, public health, and non-economic benefits of good animal welfare. Raising awareness of animal welfare within rural communities through Community Conversations is a useful way to both identify livestock production needs as well as engage community members in making practical improvements in animal welfare. The understanding of perceptions, practices, and needs of rural households in animal welfare helps engage communities in starting behavioral change and provides insights into developing context-specific welfare improvement interventions. Community Conversations are also an effective way to feedback community voices into planning to build a bottom-up implementation of animal welfare programs.

Danish Cattle Farmers' Experience With Fitness for Transport – A Questionnaire Survey

Worldwide, cattle are transported in great numbers for breeding, fattening and slaughter. Within the European Union, the Council Regulation 1/2005 states that all animals must be fit for transport. Yet, the line between fit and unfit is blurred as the regulation allows for animals that are slightly ill or injured to be transported. However, “slightly ill or injured” lack a clear definition leaving room for individual interpretation of fitness for transport with potential negative implications in terms of both animal welfare and legal certainty. The aim of the present study was to gain an understanding of cattle farmers' experience with and doubt about assessment of fitness for transport-a topic that has received limited scientific attention, despite the important role of farmers in maintaining acceptable animal welfare during transport. The results of the study are based on 119 Danish cattle farmers' answers to a questionnaire survey. The majority of respondents felt they possessed the knowledge and skills required for assessment of fitness for transport. However, a considerable large part of the respondents, one third approximately, reported to be in doubt at least sometimes and likewise one third felt a lack of knowledge at least sometimes. In addition, more than half of the respondents reported that they at least sometimes found it difficult to understand the rules to address the disconnect between on-farm and slaughterhouse decisions and fitness for on-farm slaughter. These results indicate that learning materials, assessment tools and training programs could be helpful for a large group of cattle farmers in order to secure animal welfare during transport. The results also underline the need for further research to clarify what constitutes a “fit” vs. “unfit” animal.

A qualitative systematic review of governance principles for mangrove conservation

Management of mangrove ecosystems is complex, given that mangroves are both terrestrial and marine, often cross regional or national boundaries, and are valued by local stakeholders in different ways than they are valued on national and international scales. Thus, mangrove governance has had varying levels of success, analyzed through concepts such as principles of good governance and procedural justice in decision-making. Although there is substantial research on case studies of mangrove management, global comparisons of mangrove governance are lacking. This research aims to fill this gap by comparing relationships among qualities of governance across mangrove social-ecological systems worldwide. Through a systematic literature search and screening process, we identified 65 articles that discussed mangrove governance and conservation. Case studies in these articles, drawn from 39 countries, were categorized as top-down, bottom-up, or comanaged and thematically coded to assess the influence of eight principles of good governance in mangrove conservation success. Across all three governance systems, the principles of legitimacy, fairness, and integration were most important in determining conservation success or failure. These principles are closely related to the concept of procedural justice, highlighting the importance of stakeholder inclusion throughout all stages of mangrove management. Thus, we recommend clearly defined roles for all governance actors, transparent communication of policy development to stakeholders, fairness in both process and outcome, and careful consideration of sustainable access to conservation resources.

On Farm Emergency Slaughter and Emergency Killing of Acutely Injured Cattle: Analysis of Guidelines From Five Jurisdictions

Background

In July 2009, the Farm Animal Welfare Advisory Council (FAWAC) in the Republic of Ireland published Animal Welfare Guidelines for the Management of Acutely Injured Animals on Farm in support of a new Irish regulation designed to permit on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES) of cattle. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the FAWAC guidelines, to determine if they remain fit for purpose by comparing them with five guidelines on the management of acutely injured cattle from four jurisdictions purposively selected because of their relevance to OFES, and to represent geographical and organisational diversity; The United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and British Columbia/Canada.

Methodology

Content and Thematic Analysis were used to compare the incidence and frequency of themes in the six guidelines using NVIVO 12.

Results

Humane killing and slaughter of animals and the prevention of unnecessary suffering at time of killing were emphasised in all guidelines. Thematic Analysis identified seven primary themes (“parent nodes”): animal welfare; decision tree; certification; legislation; stakeholders; transport and; veterinary ethics. Parent nodes encompassed 26 secondary themes (“child nodes”) including casualty slaughter, on-farm emergency slaughter, euthanasia, unnecessary suffering, animal owner, private veterinary practitioner, official veterinarian and fitness for transport. Guidelines outlined stakeholders' roles in relation to all aspects of managing acutely injured cattle. Results showed similarities between FAWAC, the British Cattle Veterinary Association and the British Columbian/Canadian guidelines in relation to OFES as a method to address acutely injured cattle. OFES is not allowed in Australia or New Zealand as a method of managing acutely injured cattle.

Conclusions

Animal welfare guidelines play a pivotal role in informing all stakeholders involved in the management of acutely injured cattle. Guidelines vary from prescriptive standard operating procedures on actions that should be undertaken for food safety reasons, to descriptive guidance upholding practicalities in relation to equipment and methods to be used in managing acutely injured cattle not meant for human consumption. The FAWAC guidelines remain substantially relevant today and consistent with other welfare guidelines published in the jurisdictions that formed part of the study. However, they need to be reviewed to align with current regulations.

Current Consumer Perceptions of Animal Welfare across Different Farming Sectors on the Island of Ireland

Simple Summary

The well-being and welfare of animals on farms is a topic of interest to many people. On the island of Ireland, this issue has received increased attention because of political and governance changes, including Brexit and COVID-19. Policy-makers and industry are considering labelling schemes to inform the food consumer about welfare standards on farms. Focus groups and an online survey were carried out with members of the public on the island of Ireland to explore their awareness, perceptions, and attitudes toward farm animal welfare standards on farms in Ireland and Northern Ireland. Most consumers believed farm animal welfare standards were high, although different farming sectors were rated differently: beef and dairy farms were viewed more positively, and pig and poultry farms were viewed less positively. The living conditions of the animal, size and intensity of the farm, national standards and schemes, and visibility all influenced perceptions of welfare standards. The public also expressed a lack of knowledge and information on the topic. In developing new policies and labelling schemes, it is important to be apprised of the current awareness, attitudes, and perceptions that the public has regarding farm animal welfare standards, as identified in the current paper.

Abstract

There has been increased public interest and concerns in issues such as farm animal welfare (FAW) on the island of Ireland, stoked in part by political and governance changes, such as Brexit and COVID-19. Front-of-pack food labelling represents a primary information channel for many people. In advance of considering formalised food labelling schemes, specifically relating to FAW, it is important to ensure an up-to-date understanding of current consumer perceptions of FAW. With this aim, the current study utilised a mixed methodology. Nine focus group discussions (n = 41) and an online survey (n = 972) with food consumers in Ireland and Northern Ireland explored perceptions of FAW. Results suggest that overall perceptions of FAW are high, and consumers perceive FAW to have improved in the last decade. Quantitative (ANOVA) and qualitative results show variations in perception of FAW between sectors. Results from the focus group discussions identified factors underlying consumers’ perception of FAW: the living conditions of the animal, size and intensity of the farm, national standards and schemes, and visibility. Information insufficiencies and knowledge gaps were identified. The findings are discussed in relation to policy implications for the role of public engagement, front-of-pack welfare labelling, and quality assurance schemes.

Towards a Positive Welfare Protocol for Cattle: A Critical Review of Indicators and Suggestion of How We Might Proceed

Current animal welfare protocols focus on demonstrating the absence (or at least low levels) of indicators of poor welfare, potentially creating a mismatch between what is expected by society (an assurance of good animal welfare) and what is actually being delivered (an assurance of the absence of welfare problems). This paper explores how far we have come, and what work still needs to be done, if we are to develop a protocol for use on commercial dairy farms where the aim is to demonstrate the presence of positive welfare. Following conceptual considerations around a perceived “ideal” protocol, we propose that a future protocol should be constructed (i) of animal-based measures, (ii) of indicators of affective state, and (iii) be structured according to indicators of short-term emotion, medium-term moods and long-term cumulative assessment of negative and positive experiences of an animal's life until now (in contrast to the current focus on indicators that represent different domains/criteria of welfare). These three conditions imposed the overall structure within which we selected our indicators. The paper includes a critical review of the literature on potential indicators of positive affective states in cattle. Based on evidence about the validity and reliability of the different indicators, we select ear position, play, allogrooming, brush use and QBA as candidate indicators that we suggest could form a prototype positive welfare protocol. We emphasise that this prototype protocol has not been tested in practice and so it is perhaps not the protocol itself that is the main outcome of this paper, but the process of trying to develop it. In a final section of this paper, we reflect on some of the lessons learnt from this exercise and speculate on future perspectives. For example, while we consider we have moved towards a prototype positive welfare protocol for short-term affective states, future research energy should be directed towards valid indicators for the medium and long-term.

Positive Welfare in Science and Society: Differences, Similarities and Synergies

Societal and scientific perspectives of animal welfare have an interconnected history. However, they have also, somewhat, evolved separately with scientific perspectives often focusing on specific aspects or indicators of animal welfare and societal perspectives typically taking a broader and more ethically oriented view of welfare. In this conceptual paper, we examine the similarities and differences between scientific and societal perspectives of positive welfare and examine what they may mean for future discussions of animal welfare considered as a whole. Reviewing published studies in the field we find that (UK and Republic of Ireland) farmers and (UK) members of the public (i.e., society) typically consider both negatives (i.e., minimising harms) and positives (i.e., promoting positive experiences) within the envelope of positive welfare and prioritise welfare needs according to the specific context or situation an animal is in. However, little consideration of a whole life perspective (e.g., the balance of positive and negative experiences across an animal's lifetime) is evident in these societal perspectives. We highlight how addressing these disparities, by simultaneously considering scientific and societal perspectives of positive welfare, provides an opportunity to more fully incorporate positive welfare within a comprehensive understanding of animal welfare. We suggest that a consideration of both scientific and societal perspectives points to an approach to welfare which accounts for both positive and negative experiences, prioritises them (e.g., by seeing positive experiences as dependent on basic animal needs being fulfilled), and considers the balance of positives and negatives over the lifetime of the animals. We expand on this view and conclude with its potential implications for future development of how to understand and assess animal welfare.

Conventional versus Ritual Slaughter–Ethical Aspects and Meat Quality

Social pressure on increased protection and welfare of animals results mainly from the initiative of people living in the urbanized parts of the world. The respect for the right to freedom of religion, which is indisputably one of the fundamental liberal rights, must be taken into account. The right to freedom to religion also includes the right to follow a religion’s dietary recommendations. The aim of the literature analysis was to systematize the knowledge on the ethical aspects and quality of meat obtained from carcasses of animals subjected to conventional and ritual slaughter. Consistent with the importance of ritual slaughter for humans of two major faiths (Islam and Judaism), it is important that scientists be objective when evaluating these practices from an animal welfare and meat quality point of view. To evaluate the welfare of the slaughtered animal, it is necessary to openly discuss ritual slaughter and the improvement of its methods. The quality of meat and the degree of bleeding of animals do not always correlate with the ritual slaughter method used.

Knowledge and Perspectives on the Welfare of Italian Heavy Pigs on Farms

Simple Summary

Italian heavy pigs are characterized by much higher body weights and age at slaughter (approximately 160–170 kg, and over 9 months of age) than the majority of pigs reared in Europe. This results in peculiar behavioral and rearing-related needs compared to smaller pigs. However, there is a limited body of research dealing with the welfare of this productive category. The aim of this review is to collect the most significant available information on welfare issues of heavy pigs on farms and to highlight recent findings and areas needing additional research. It is hoped that these findings will, in the future, serve as a basis for the development of specific policies aimed at enhancing the ethical attributes of this renowned production.

Abstract

This review aims to give an overview of the most significant available information on welfare issues of Italian heavy pigs on farms. These animals, whose meat is used to produce typical products, are characterized by much higher body weights and age at slaughter (approximately 160–170 kg, and 9 months of age) than most pigs reared in Europe, resulting in peculiar behavioral and rearing-related needs. To highlight the main findings and the areas in which additional research is needed, the paper was organized by allocating the studies on the basis of the Welfare Quality four principles framework, i.e., good feeding, good housing, good health, and appropriate behavior. The results indicate the possibility of improvement with regard to the management of feeding, watering, and some environmental parameters (light, thermal comfort, enrichments) and a lack of knowledge on the actual space requirements (and a corresponding regulatory gap). Moreover, deficiencies concerning the prevalence of injuries and disease and the relationship between lesions observed post-mortem and rearing conditions needs to be addressed. Lastly, the absence of research concerning the evaluation of the emotional state of animals has been highlighted. It is hoped that these findings will, in the future, serve as a basis for the development of specific policies for these animals in order to increase the ethical value of the entire production chain, in accordance with consumers’ demand and expectation for high animal welfare standards.

Australian Livestock Export Industry Workers' Attitudes toward Animal Welfare

Understanding live export industry workers' attitudes and beliefs toward animal welfare can provide insight into their decision-making processes and likely behavior. Industry workers (n = 265) with various roles within the supply chain were surveyed from different global regions. Participants were divided into ten categories according to their industry roles and compared using ordinal regression. Respondents were highly likely to have a positive attitude toward animal welfare; the majority of workers enjoyed working with livestock (95.8%) and agreed that livestock should be treated with respect (97.7%). Workers demonstrated a strong understanding of animal welfare concepts, 168 respondents (63.4%) provided examples of ways they had improved animal welfare in their workplace, and 164 workers (61.9%) suggested ways that animal welfare could be improved further. Most workers (95.8%) agreed that animal welfare was satisfactory in their workplace. Five out of the 24 multiple-choice responses differed significantly by the participant's industry role, but no particular group displayed consistently divergent beliefs or attitudes. Given the community concern regarding animals in the livestock export supply chain, it is imperative to understand the attitudes of industry personnel who are responsible for the daily management of the animals. This knowledge assists in the development of animal welfare policy and can inform strategies to manage public perception.

Exploring the Opinions of Irish Dairy Farmers Regarding Male Dairy Calves

Background: There has been very little previous research in Ireland on the farmers' opinions regarding calf welfare issues. Calf welfare, particularly for male dairy calves, has assumed greater importance in Ireland in recent years due, in part, to an increase in the number of dairy cattle over the past decade. The objective of this study was to explore dairy farmers' views on a broad range of issues related to the expansion in the dairy herd.

Methods: A survey was developed to capture the views of farmers regarding male dairy calves. The majority of questions were quantitative, and a final open-ended question collected qualitative data. The survey was distributed to ~2,900 dairy farmers via text message and 881 responses were received.

Results: The sample was composed almost entirely of dairy farmers, although ~20% also had a beef enterprise on their farm. Fifty eight percent of the farmers were concerned with the increase in the number of male dairy calves in recent years. The EU's abolition of milk quotas, the profitability of dairy farming compared to other farm types, and guidance from farm advisors were the three highest ranked drivers behind the increase in the number of male dairy calves. The three highest ranked options for managing the number of male dairy calves were to increase exports, encourage greater use of sexed semen, and improve the beef merit of these calves. Eighty five percent of respondents stated that individual farmers had responsibility for making changes to the number of male dairy calves. The main themes arising from analysis of the responses to the open-ended question, seeking any additional comments, were breed, beef price, live exports, and sexed semen.

Conclusions: Dairy farmers recognized the responsibility they have for making changes in respect of male dairy calves, and many demonstrated a willingness to make changes in this regard. The important role of other stakeholders, particularly suckler (system where reared from calf to beef) farmers, in rearing male dairy calves for beef production was also recognized. However, the issues of who bears the risks and costs associated with greater integration will have to be carefully considered.

Welfare Health and Productivity in Commercial Pig Herds

In recent years, there have been very dynamic changes in both pork production and pig breeding technology around the world. The general trend of increasing the efficiency of pig production, with reduced employment, requires optimisation and a comprehensive approach to herd management. One of the most important elements on the way to achieving this goal is to maintain animal welfare and health. The health of the pigs on the farm is also a key aspect in production economics. The need to maintain a high health status of pig herds by eliminating the frequency of different disease units and reducing the need for antimicrobial substances is part of a broadly understood high potential herd management strategy. Thanks to the use of sensors (cameras, microphones, accelerometers, or radio-frequency identification transponders), the images, sounds, movements, and vital signs of animals are combined through algorithms and analysed for non-invasive monitoring of animals, which allows for early detection of diseases, improves their welfare, and increases the productivity of breeding. Automated, innovative early warning systems based on continuous monitoring of specific physiological (e.g., body temperature) and behavioural parameters can provide an alternative to direct diagnosis and visual assessment by the veterinarian or the herd keeper.

Desire for information and alternative therapies of pet owners is associated with empathy and partnership-building of veterinarians

OBJECTIVES

The relationship between the pet owners' desire for information and preference of alternative therapies and the veterinarians' ability to build partnership and communicate empathically was investigated using quantitative multifactorial analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In an online survey, 1270 German pet owners were asked about their experience of veterinary appointments regarding communication and relationship building. Additional questions included the type and number of pets, years of animal husbandry, age, gender and education level. The factors associated with the pet owners' desire for further information and alternative therapies were analysed in two multivariable linear models. A recently published structural equation model consolidated the following as latent factors: veterinarian's empathic communication, veterinarian's partnership building, pet owners' desire for further information and pet owners' desire for alternative therapies (e.g. non-veterinary practitioners).

RESULTS

The two veterinarian-related factors of empathic communication and partnership building were positively associated with each other, but negatively associated with the pet owners' desires. Dog owners and participants who owned animals for more than 2 years expressed less desire for further information. The desire for further information decreased with increasing age. The desire for alternative therapies was more among animal owners of more than 2 years and those visiting the same veterinary practice for over 2 years.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Veterinarians' empathic communication and partnership building are key factors that satisfy clients' desires for information and alternative therapies. This comprises communicational skills regarding information sharing, as well as emotional aspects.

A Perspective on the Use of Sexed Semen to Reduce the Number of Surplus Male Dairy Calves in Ireland: A Pilot Study

The production of surplus male offspring illustrates a socioethical concern in the dairy industry. In this article, we highlight the animal health and welfare implications of production outputs for surplus dairy calves, namely veal production, dairy calf to beef production, and euthanasia. Moreover, we present a pilot study focus on exploring the perception of key industry actors within the dairy industry in Ireland regarding the use of sexed semen as a mitigation strategy to reduce the production of surplus male dairy calves. A pilot survey was completed by farmers (n = 6), veterinarians (n = 17), and dairy farm advisors (n = 11). All the veterinarians, 80% of the farmers, and 62% of the advisors believed that the use of sexed semen had a positive influence on herd welfare. All participants identified the same barriers to the implementation of sexed semen: lower conception rate, lower availability, and higher cost. The reviewed literature highlights the importance of tailored communication to support knowledge exchange between stakeholders and key industry actors such as dairy farmers, their veterinarians, and advisors. Research to understand stakeholders' perception is pivotal to address socioethical concerns such as the surplus male dairy calves.

Producer and Veterinarian Perspectives towards Pain Management Practices in the US Cattle Industry

Simple Summary

A key aspect to improve animal welfare is to reduce pain experienced by the animal. However, pain management practices have not been widely adopted in the United States (US) cattle industry. Furthermore, for a veterinarian or producer to relieve pain in cattle, analgesics must be provided in an extra-label drug manner. Currently, research describing pain mitigation strategies used by cattle producers and the study of barriers to implement those strategies from a producer or veterinarian perspective is limited. Understanding challenges faced by these stakeholders is key in improving on-farm pain management strategies. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to explore producer and veterinarian perspectives on pain. Albeit analgesia use increased in the past ten years for some producers and the majority of veterinarians, administering analgesics for pain management on US cattle farms remains a challenge. From a producer perspective, drug cost, availability and logistics for administration. From a veterinarian perspective, lack of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) products hinders the support of on-farm protocols requiring extra-label drug use. Future steps to improve analgesic use on-farm include identifying and approving drugs that demonstrate efficacy for managing pain and disseminating educational resources to support stakeholders in both the implementation and drug withdrawal process.

Abstract

Producers and veterinarians are considered responsible for improving animal welfare, as they are responsible for implementing practices that directly impact the animal’s well-being. Most husbandry procedures performed in cattle do not include pain mitigation, and understanding challenges faced by these stakeholders to use analgesics is key in improving on-farm pain management strategies. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to explore producer and veterinarian perspectives on pain management practices by (1) exploring inquires received by Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank (FARAD) regarding analgesic use in cattle and (2) using a survey instrument to identify factors that impact pain management implementation in the US cattle industry. Albeit analgesia use increased in the past ten years for some producers and the majority of veterinarians, administering analgesics for pain management on US cattle farms remains a challenge. From a producer perspective, drug cost, availability and logistics for administration. From a veterinarian perspective, lack of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) products hinders the support of on-farm protocols requiring extra-label drug use. Future steps to improve analgesic use on-farm include identifying and approving drugs that demonstrate efficacy for managing pain in cattle and disseminating educational resources to support stakeholders in both the implementation and drug withdrawal process.

Legal Complexities of Animal Welfare in Australia: Do On-Animal Sensors Offer a Future Option?

Simple Summary

‘Good animal welfare’ has evolved in recent decades to recognise behavioural, physiological and health factors, acknowledging that an animal may have good clinical health and be productive, though their welfare may be poor. The five freedoms and domains of animal welfare provide internationally recognised frameworks against which to evaluate practices to shape evidence-based standards which recognise both the physical and mental health needs of animals to provide a balanced view of an animal’s ability to cope in its environment. Whilst there are many techniques to measure animal welfare, the challenge lies with how best to align these with future changes in definitions and expectations, advances in science, legislative requirements and technology improvements. Substantial literature discusses the use of technology for improving animal monitoring, management and productivity on and off farm, though little has been published in relation to using such technologies to support legislative compliance and drive overall improvements in animal welfare. This article discusses the current legislation around animal welfare (with a focus on the Australian red meat sector); the impact of public expectation of welfare standards and production practices; and the current and future opportunity for on-animal sensors to support animal welfare, monitoring, management and compliance.

Abstract

The five freedoms and, more recently, the five domains of animal welfare provide internationally recognised frameworks to evaluate animal welfare practices which recognise both the physical and mental wellbeing needs of animals, providing a balanced view of their ability to cope in their environment. Whilst there are many techniques to measure animal welfare, the challenge lies with how best to align these with future changes in definitions and expectations, advances in science, legislative requirements, and technology improvements. Furthermore, enforcement of current animal welfare legislation in relation to livestock in Australia and the reliance on self-audits for accreditation schemes, challenges our ability to objectively measure animal welfare. On-animal sensors have enormous potential to address animal welfare concerns and assist with legislative compliance, through continuous measurement and monitoring of an animal’s behavioural state and location being reflective of their wellbeing. As reliable animal welfare measures evolve and the cost of on-animal sensors reduce, technology adoption will increase as the benefits across the supply chain are realised. Future adoption of on-animal sensors by producers will primarily depend on a value proposition for their business being clear; algorithm development to ensure measures are valid and reliable; increases in producer knowledge, willingness, and trust in data governance; and improvements in data transmission and connectivity.