scholarly journals Assessing Extensive Semi-Arid Rangeland Beef Cow-Calf Welfare in Namibia. Part 2: Categorisation and scoring of welfare assessment measures

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Baby Kaurivi ◽  
Richard Laven ◽  
Rebecca Hickson ◽  
Tim Parkinson ◽  
Kevin Stafford
Keyword(s):  
Production Systems ◽  
Cattle Breed ◽  
Contributing Factors ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Beef Cow ◽  
Commercial Farms ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
Continuous Measures ◽  
Farm Types

The study aimed to develop standards for a welfare assessment protocol, by validating potential categorisation thresholds for assessment of beef farms in various beef cow-calf production systems in Namibia. Forty measures combined from a New Zealand-based protocol plus Namibia-specific measures, were applied on 55 beef farms (17 commercial farms, 20 semi-commercial and 18 communal village farms) during pregnancy testing, and a questionnaire guided interview. The categorised measures on a 3-point welfare score of 0: good 1: marginal and 2: poor/unacceptable welfare were subsequently compared with derivation of thresholds based upon the poorest 15% and best 50% of herds for each measure. Overall combined thresholds of continuous measures across the 3 farm types, showed 10/22 measures that posed welfare compromise across Namibia, where commercial farms had 4/22 measures and semi-commercial and communal village farms had 12/22 and 11/22 respectively with high thresholds. Most measures-imposed thresholds were retained because of significant importance to welfare of animals and preventiveness of the traits, while leniency was given to adjust good feeding and mortality measures to signify periods of drought. Handling measures (fearful, falling/lying) and abrasions thresholds were adjusted to reflect the temporary stress caused by infrequent cattle handling, and faulty yard designs/design and possible cattle breed influence on handling. Hence, the country needs prioritised investigation of underlying contributing factors and remediation to reduce the high thresholds.

scholarly journals Assessing Extensive Semi-Arid Rangeland Beef Cow-Calf Welfare in Namibia. Part 2: Categorisation and Scoring of Welfare Assessment Measures

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 250
Author(s):  
Yolande Baby Kaurivi ◽  
Richard Laven ◽  
Rebecca Hickson ◽  
Tim Parkinson ◽  
Kevin Stafford
Keyword(s):  
Production Systems ◽  
Cattle Breed ◽  
Contributing Factors ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Beef Cow ◽  
Commercial Farms ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
Continuous Measures ◽  
Farm Types

This paper aims to develop standards for a welfare assessment protocol by validating potential categorisation thresholds for assessing beef farms in various beef cow-calf production systems in Namibia. Forty measures, combined from a New Zealand-based protocol plus Namibia-specific measures, are applied to 55 beef farms (17 commercial farms, 20 semi-commercial and 18 communal village farms) during pregnancy testing, and a questionnaire guided interview. The categorised measures on a 3-point welfare score (0: good, 1: marginal, and 2: poor/unacceptable welfare) are subsequently compared with the derivation of thresholds based upon the poorest 15% and best 50% of herds for each measure. The overall combined thresholds of continuous measures across the three farm types show 10/22 measures that posed welfare compromise across Namibia, whereas commercial farms have 4/22 measures, and semi-commercial and communal village farms have 12/22 and 11/22, respectively, with high thresholds. Most measures-imposed thresholds are retained because of significant importance to the welfare of animals and preventiveness of the traits, while leniency was given to adjust good feeding and mortality measures to signify periods of drought. Handling measures (fearful, falling/lying) and abrasions thresholds are adjusted to reflect the temporary stress caused by infrequent cattle handling, and faulty yard designs/design and possible cattle breed influence on handling. Hence, Namibia needs prioritised investigation of underlying contributing factors and remediation to reduce the high thresholds.

scholarly journals Developing an Animal Welfare Assessment Protocol for Cows in Extensive Beef Cow–Calf Systems in New Zealand. Part 1: Assessing the Feasibility of Identified Animal Welfare Assessment Measures

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 1597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Baby Kaurivi ◽  
Richard Laven ◽  
Rebecca Hickson ◽  
Tim Parkinson ◽  
Kevin Stafford
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Beef Cow ◽  
Cattle Management ◽  
Assessment Measures ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
On Farm

Potential measures suitable for assessing welfare in pasture-based beef cow–calf systems in New Zealand were identified from Welfare Quality and UC Davis Cow-Calf protocols. These were trialled on a single farm and a potential protocol of 50 measures created. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of the measures included in this protocol on multiple farms in order, to develop a credible animal welfare assessment protocol for pasture-based cow–calf farms systems in New Zealand. The assessment protocol was trialled on 25 farms over two visits and took a total of 2.5 h over both visits for a 100-cow herd. The first visit in autumn included an animal welfare assessment of 3366 cows during pregnancy scanning, while the second visit in winter included a questionnaire-guided interview to assess cattle management and health, and a farm resource evaluation. Through a process of eliminating unsuitable measures, adjustments of modifiable measures and retaining feasible measures, a protocol with 32 measures was created. The application of the protocol on the farms showed that not all measures are feasible for on-farm assessment, and categorisation of identified animal welfare measures into scores that indicate a threshold of acceptable and non-acceptable welfare standards is necessary.

scholarly journals Assessing Extensive Semi-Arid Rangeland Beef Cow-Calf Welfare in Namibia: Part 1: Comparison between farm production system’s effect on the welfare of beef cows

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Baby Kaurivi ◽  
Richard Laven ◽  
Tim Parkinson ◽  
Rebecca Hickson ◽  
Kevin Stafford
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Beef Cows ◽  
Export Market ◽  
Grazing Land ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Commercial Farms ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
Semi Arid ◽  
Arid Rangeland

A proposed animal welfare assessment protocol for semi-arid rangeland-based cow-calf systems in Namibia combined 40 measures from a protocol developed for beef cattle in New Zealand with additional Namibia-specific measures. Preliminary validation of the protocol had been undertaken with five herds in one semi-commercial village. The aim of the current study was to apply this protocol and compare animal welfare across three cow-calf production systems in Namibia. A total of 2529 beef cows were evaluated during pregnancy testing in the yards of 17 commercial, 20 semi-commercial and 18 communal (total: 55) herds followed by an assessment of farm resources and a questionnaire-guided interview. Non-parametric tests were used to evaluate the difference in the welfare scores between the production systems. The results indicated a discrepancy of animal welfare between the three farm types, with a marked separation of commercial farms from semi-commercial, and communal village farms in the least. The differences in these production systems was mainly driven by economic gains through access to better beef export market for commercial farms and semi-commercial villages, as well as by the differences in the available grazing land, facility designs/quality and traditional customs in the village systems. The results indicate an advantage of commercialisation over communalisation.

scholarly journals Developing an Animal Welfare Assessment Protocol for Cows in Extensive Beef Cow-Calf Systems in New Zealand. Part 2: Categorisation and Scoring of Welfare Assessment Measures

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 1592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Baby Kaurivi ◽  
Rebecca Hickson ◽  
Richard Laven ◽  
Tim Parkinson ◽  
Kevin Stafford
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Beef Cow ◽  
Two Measures ◽  
Welfare Implications ◽  
Welfare Measures ◽  
Assessment Measures ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
The University

The intention of this study was to develop standards for a welfare assessment protocol by validating potential categorisation thresholds for the assessment of beef farms in New Zealand. Thirty-two measures, based on the Welfare Quality and the University of California (UC) Davis Cow-Calf protocols, plus some indicators specific to New Zealand, that were assessed during routine yardings of 3366 cattle on 25 cow-calf beef farms in the Waikato region were categorised on a three-point welfare score, where 0 denotes good welfare, 1 marginal welfare, and 2 poor/unacceptable welfare. Initial categorisation of welfare thresholds was based upon the authors’ perception of acceptable welfare standards and the consensus of the literature, with subsequent derived thresholds being based upon the poorest 15% and best 50% of farms for each measure. Imposed thresholds for lameness, dystocia, and mortality rate were retained in view of the significance of these conditions for the welfare of affected cattle, while higher derived thresholds appeared more appropriate for dirtiness and faecal staining which were thought to have less significant welfare implications for cattle on pasture. Fearful/agitated and running behaviours were above expectations, probably due to the infrequent yarding of cows, and thus the derived thresholds were thought to be more appropriate. These thresholds provide indicators to farmers and farm advisors regarding the levels at which intervention and remediation is required for a range of welfare measures.

scholarly journals Assessing Extensive Semi-Arid Rangeland Beef Cow–Calf Welfare in Namibia: Part 1: Comparison between Farm Production System’s Effect on the Welfare of Beef Cows

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yolande Baby Kaurivi ◽  
Richard Laven ◽  
Tim Parkinson ◽  
Rebecca Hickson ◽  
Kevin Stafford
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Beef Cows ◽  
Export Market ◽  
Grazing Land ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Commercial Farms ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
Semi Arid ◽  
Arid Rangeland

A proposed animal welfare assessment protocol for semi-arid rangeland-based cow–calf systems in Namibia combined 40 measures from a protocol developed for beef cattle in New Zealand with additional Namibia-specific measures. Preliminary validation of the protocol had been undertaken with five herds in one semi-commercial village. The aim of the current study was to apply this protocol and compare animal welfare across three cow–calf production systems in Namibia. A total of 2529 beef cows were evaluated during pregnancy testing in the yards of 17 commercial, 20 semi-commercial, and 18 communal (total: 55) herds followed by an assessment of farm resources and a questionnaire-guided interview. Non-parametric tests were used to evaluate the difference in the welfare scores between the production systems. The results indicated a discrepancy of animal welfare between the three farm types, with a marked separation of commercial farms from semi-commercial, and communal village farms in the least. The differences in these production systems were mainly driven by economic gains through access to better beef export market for commercial farms and semi-commercial villages, as well as by the differences in the available grazing land, facility designs/quality, and traditional customs in the village systems. The results indicate an advantage of commercialization over communalization.

scholarly journals Revisiting Cattle Temperament in Beef Cow-Calf Systems: Insights from Farmers’ Perceptions about an Autochthonous Breed

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 82
Author(s):  
Laura X. Estévez-Moreno ◽  
Genaro C. Miranda-de la Lama ◽  
Morris Villarroel ◽  
Laura García ◽  
José Alfonso Abecia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Selection ◽  
Cattle Breed ◽  
Focus Group Discussions ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
Group Discussions ◽  
Beef Cow ◽  
Human Safety ◽  
Speed Of Response ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
Sensory Acuity

Understanding temperament is an important part of cattle production since undesirable temperament may cause serious problems associated with aggression, maternal care, and human safety. However, little is known about how farmers define or assess temperament, especially in autochthonous cattle breeds. The aim of this study was to explore perceptions of farmers about the temperament of the Pyrenean cattle breed with special attention to beef cow-calf systems in Spain. The methodology used to obtain the information was focus group discussions (FGD). Farmers defined temperament as a behavioural response to challenging situations imposed by human handling. Specific terms used were related to active or passive reactions to fear (e.g., “strong”, “aggressive”, “nervous”, “fearful”). The speed of response to stimuli was also important. Female temperament was thought to become more docile with age while bull temperament was more variable. Maternal aggressiveness was highlighted as a potential human safety problem, but also desirable in an extensively bred animal who may need to defend calves against predators. Anatomical characteristics were seen as unreliable predictors of temperament, while behavioural indicators were more widely used, such as “alertness”, which was a general trait of the breed, and “gaze”, which, when associated with an alert expression, suggests a potential threat. Sensory acuity, such as sight and smell, were thought to be related with temperament in some FGDs but there was no overall agreement as to whether different behavioural responses were due to differences in sensory acuity. The results from the study could be useful during training programs or in the development of new genetic selection schemes and evaluation protocols involving cattle temperament.

scholarly journals Tilapia On-Farm Welfare Assessment Protocol for Semi-intensive Production Systems

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Silvia Pedrazzani ◽  
Murilo Henrique Quintiliano ◽  
Franciele Bolfe ◽  
Elaine Cristina de Oliveira Sans ◽  
Carla Forte Maiolino Molento
Keyword(s):  
Production Systems ◽  
Skin Lesions ◽  
Feed Conversion ◽  
Discrimination Power ◽  
Protein Ratio ◽  
Air Exposure ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Intensive Production ◽  
On Farm

The aim of this study was to develop and test a tilapia on-farm welfare assessment protocol, based on Brazilian semi-intensive production systems. The study included two mains steps: the elaboration of tilapia welfare protocol and its on-field feasibility test. The protocol, including the potential indicators organized into health, environmental, nutritional, and behavioral categories, was tested on three farms. Skin, eyes, gills, jaws, fins, and vertebral spine were individually examined in 139 individual tilapias. Water physicochemical parameters and production system were considered. The overall nutritional status of individuals was assessed through body condition factor, feed conversion ratio, feed crude protein ratio, and feed ingestion behavior. During massive capture, signals of stress, level of crowding, and duration of air exposure were registered. Time required for loss of consciousness was evaluated by clinical reflexes and other behaviors during slaughter. Eye, jaw, and gill scores were different across farms (Kruskal-Wallis test, p = 0.011; 0.015; 0.043, respectively), showing good discrimination power. Critical welfare points were extremely low dissolved oxygen in water, fin and skin lesions, prolonged air exposure during pre-slaughter handling and non-humane slaughter techniques, as decapitation or asphyxia. The protocol presents practical viability and it is an initial step for the development of a tilapia welfare strategy, where the prioritization of critical welfare points, implementation of corrective actions and monitoring of the results is part of a permanent welfare management system.

Clinical picture of active bovine viral diarrhoea infection in commercial bovine productive systems

2017 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 334
Author(s):  
Susana Astiz ◽  
Laura Cogollos ◽  
Juan Manuel Loste ◽  
Gorka Aduriz ◽  
Javier Heras ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Picture ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Clinical Signs ◽  
Dairy Farms ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Bovine Viral Diarrhoea ◽  
Calf Health ◽  
Beef Cow ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
Positive Animal

Bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD), one of the most important infectious diseases affecting bovine production systems, is thought to show a subclinical course in most cases, especially in regions that have suffered high BVD prevalence for a long time. However, few studies have assessed this rigorously under non-epidemic conditions. Here we assessed how often active BVD infection in a herd, defined as at least one antigen-positive animal, is associated with clinical signs. Surveying and sampling methods were used to detect BVD infection based on clinical picture. Analysis of 1203 samples of individual animals from 167 herds clinically suspected of BVD infection showed that 33.7% of dairy farms, 30.6% of beef cow-calf farms and 40% of feedlots contained at least one animal positive for BVD viral antigen. Prevalence of BVD infection was 7.7% at the animal level, much higher than the prevalence of 1–3% reported in the literature. This suggests that clinical picture can be useful for detecting active BVD infection, and that infections show a variable clinical course. On dairy farms, the presence of at least one antigen-positive animal was associated with a tendency towards lower fertility and higher rates of stillbirths and calf health problems (P < 0.1). On feedlots, such presence was associated with a tendency to a higher of calf health problems. In beef cow-calf systems, however, the presence of an antigen-positive animal was not associated with any particular sign. These results suggest a higher association of active BVD infections spreading in a herd and clinical pictures at the herd level, particularly in dairy herds.

scholarly journals 75 Historical view of stocker health and performance of Southeast origin cattle

2019 ◽  
Vol 97 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 24-24
Author(s):  
Jeffery A Carroll ◽  
Paul R Broadway ◽  
Nicole Burdick-Sanchez ◽  
Wade Nichols
Keyword(s):  
Management Practices ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Genetic Selection ◽  
Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Contributing Factors ◽  
Beta Agonists ◽  
Genetic Potential ◽  
Selection For ◽  
Cow Calf

Abstract Anecdotal evidence suggests that weaning/stocker weights, ADG, and carcass weights have increased for Southeast cattle over the last 30 years. Simultaneously, morbidity and mortality have not improved, and according to some reports, have significantly increased. Albeit, over the last 30 years, there have been several new vaccines and antibiotics introduced into the beef cattle market. Ceteris paribus, there appears to be a discrepancy related to prevailing theories that placing heavier cattle into stocker and feedlot operations reduces the incidence of morbidity and mortality. But, has there truly been an increase in weaning weights or placement weights of stocker/feedlot calves over the last 30 years? Perhaps, even with greater genetic selection by cow/calf producers for improved weaning weights and pre-weaning ADG, the genetic potential of these animals is not being realized until the stocker/feedlot sector. Indeed, Engler et al. (2014) reported that hot carcass weight (HCW) increased 4.9 lbs per year from 2001 to 2013 while others have reported no actual increase in weaning weights during this period. Undoubtedly HCW have increased, but the contributing factors are multifaceted including genetic selection for increased lean deposition, better nutritional programs, and the expanded variety of growth promoting implants, ionophores, and beta agonists. Likewise, morbidity and mortality are multifaceted manifestations affected by a variety of inputs including genetics, nutrition, environmental stressors, immunocompetence, and the prevalence and genetic diversity of pathogens. Therefore, while genetic selection for increased pre-weaning performance may be more prevalent, cow/calf producers may not be reaping the full potential of their calves due to management practices that do not capitalize on the genetic potential of the pre-weaned calf. Placing more emphasis on genetic selection for pre-weaning growth may have inadvertently resulted in calves that are less resistant to the stresses and strains associated with post-weaning production systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document