scholarly journals Equid Assessment, Research and Scoping (EARS): The Development and Implementation of a New Equid Welfare Assessment and Monitoring Tool

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoe Raw ◽  
Joao B. Rodrigues ◽  
Karen Rickards ◽  
Joe Ryding ◽  
Stuart L. Norris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Sharing ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Future Development ◽  
Monitoring Tool ◽  
Assessment Data ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
Assessment And Monitoring ◽  
The Many ◽  
Assessment Research

The assessment of animal welfare poses numerous challenges, yet an emerging approach is the consolidation of existing knowledge into new frameworks which can offer standardised approaches to welfare assessment across a variety of contexts. Multiple tools exist for measuring the welfare of equids, but such tools have typically been developed for specific contexts. There is no ‘one size fits all’ which means that resulting datasets are generally non-comparable, creating a barrier to knowledge-sharing and collaboration between the many organisations working to improve equid welfare around the globe. To address this, we developed the Equid Assessment, Research and Scoping (EARS) tool, which incorporates pre-existing validated welfare assessment methods alongside new welfare indicators to deliver a larger and more comprehensive series of welfare indicators than currently exists, creating a single resource that can be used to assess equid welfare in any context. We field-trialled three welfare assessment protocols within the EARS tool, and applied these to welfare assessment of equids in a variety of contexts across nineteen countries. The EARS tool proved a useful, versatile and rapid method for collecting welfare assessment data and we collected 7464 welfare assessments in a period of fifteen months. We evaluate the EARS tool and provide ideas for future development.

scholarly journals Animal Welfare Assessment of Fattening Pigs: A Case Study on Sample Validity

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mareike Pfeifer ◽  
Armin Otto Schmitt ◽  
Engel Friederike Hessel
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Random Sample ◽  
Mean Squared Error ◽  
Sampling Strategies ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
Squared Error ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
Fattening Pigs

A guide for animal welfare assessment of fattening pigs recommends recording some of the indicators for a sample of the animals from a herd. However, it is not certain whether the herd’s level of welfare can be correctly judged using a random sample. Therefore, both the true prevalences of welfare indicators in a full census and the estimated prevalences of the indicators based upon simulated samples taken according to five strategies (termed S1 to S5) were determined. Deviations from the true level of animal welfare in the herd due to the sampling were recorded and analyzed. Depending on the strategy, between 12% and 43% of the samples over- or underestimated the true prevalences by more than 50%. The validity of the sampling strategies was evaluated using the normalized root-mean-squared error (NRMSE) and the relative bias (RB). In terms of accuracy, the strategies differed only slightly (between NRMSE = 0.13 for S2 and NRMSE = 0.19 for S4). However, the strategies varied more obviously regarding the bias (between RB = −0.0002 for S1 and RB = −0.0370 for S5). The described results are the outcome of an initial case study on the sample validity of the indicators and have to be verified using the data of more herds.

Adaptation of the animal welfare assessment grid (AWAG) for monitoring animal welfare in zoological collections

2017 ◽  
Vol 181 (6) ◽  
pp. 143-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. S. M. Justice ◽  
M. F. O'Brien ◽  
O. Szyszka ◽  
J. Shotton ◽  
J. E. M. Gilmour ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Continuous Monitoring ◽  
Practical Method ◽  
Monitoring Tool ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Legal Requirement ◽  
Research Programmes ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
Taxonomic Groups

Animal welfare monitoring is an essential part of zoo management and a legal requirement in many countries. Historically, a variety of welfare audits have been proposed to assist zoo managers. Unfortunately, there are a number of issues with these assessments, including lack of species information, validated tests and the overall complexity of these audits which make them difficult to implement in practice. The animal welfare assessment grid (AWAG) has previously been proposed as an animal welfare monitoring tool for animals used in research programmes. This computer-based system was successfully adapted for use in a zoo setting with two taxonomic groups: primates and birds. This tool is simple to use and provides continuous monitoring based on cumulative lifetime assessment. It is suggested as an alternative, practical method for welfare monitoring in zoos.

Evaluation of consistency over time of the use of the Animal Welfare Indicators protocol for horses

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-90
Author(s):  
I Czycholl ◽  
K Büttner ◽  
P Klingbeil ◽  
J Krieter
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Rank Correlation ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Intra Class Correlation ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
Spearman’S Rank Correlation ◽  
Smallest Detectable Change ◽  
Behavioural Tests ◽  
Over Time

Consistency over time is a basic requirement for welfare assessment schemes since consistency must not depend, for example, on the day it is carried out. This study analysed the consistency of the indicators of the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) protocol for horses (Equus caballus) over time. Given the multi-dimensionality of animal welfare, the AWIN protocol includes a variety of indicators evaluating, eg the health status or the behaviour of the animals. Fourteen establishments keeping horses in Germany were visited four times each (day 0, day 3, day 42, day 90). For the evaluation of reliability and agreement between the different visits, ie across time, the reference visit on day 0 was compared to the other visits via calculation of Spearman's rank correlation (RS), intra-class correlation (ICC), smallest detectable change (SDC) and limits of agreement (LoA). The indicator, Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) was analysed by Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Most of the indicators demonstrated sufficient consistency over time. Indicators that were inconsistent included parts of the Horse Grimace Scale, outcomes of behavioural tests, the presence of swollen joints as well as the indicators hoof neglect, alopecia on the legs and water cleanliness. The QBA was consistent for the period of 42 days, but not for 90 days. Overall, those indicators with insufficient consistency over time require to be revised or replaced in future welfare assessment schemes.

scholarly journals Identification of Animal-Based Welfare Indicators in Captive Reptiles: A Delphi Consultation Survey

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 2010
Author(s):  
Alexandra L. Whittaker ◽  
Brianna Golder-Dewar ◽  
Jordyn L. Triggs ◽  
Sally L. Sherwen ◽  
David J. McLelland
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Affective State ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Care Staff ◽  
Nasal Discharge ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Regulatory Oversight ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Welfare Indicators

There is an increasing focus on evidence-based welfare assessment by animal care staff in zoos, along with a strong interest in animal welfare by the zoo-visiting public, to the extent that this can influence their choice of institutions to visit. Regulatory oversight of animal welfare standards continues to strengthen across many jurisdictions. Zoos are increasingly formalizing their practices with the development and refinement of evidence-based welfare assessment tools. There has been a drive for welfare assessment tools to comprise both resource-based and animal-based measures. However, animal-based indicators are not always well characterized, in terms of their nature and whether they infer a positive or negative affective state. This is especially so for reptiles, which are often considered behaviorally inexpressive and are under-researched. In this study, a Delphi consultation approach was used to gather expert opinion on the suitability of potential animal-based indicators of welfare for inclusion in a welfare assessment tool across four families of reptiles: Agamidae, Chelidae, Pythonidae, and Testudinidae. Two rounds of online surveys were conducted eliciting responses from a global group of professionals who work with reptiles. In the first survey, respondents were provided with an author-derived list of potential animal-based indicators for consideration of their validity and practicality as welfare indicators. The indicators were refined for the second survey including only those indicators that were considered valid or practical on the first survey (≥4 on a 5-point Likert scale), and that achieved ≥70% consensus amongst experts. In the second survey, respondents were asked to re-evaluate the reliability and practicality of the indicators and to rank them on these facets. Eight to ten assessment indicators for each family of reptiles were identified from Survey 2. These indicators were often health related, for example, presence of oculo-nasal discharge or wounds. However, some true behavioral indicators were identified, such as showing species-specific interest and alertness. These indicators should now be incorporated into taxon-tailored welfare assessment tools for trial and validation in captive reptile populations. This study provides a next step towards developing reptile-specific animal welfare assessment tools for these often-overlooked animals.

scholarly journals Farm Animals Are Long Away from Natural Behavior: Open Questions and Operative Consequences on Animal Welfare

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 724
Author(s):  
Alberto Cesarani ◽  
Giuseppe Pulina
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Farm Animal ◽  
Farm Animals ◽  
Natural State ◽  
Natural Behavior ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Naive Approach

The concept of welfare applied to farm animals has undergone a remarkable evolution. The growing awareness of citizens pushes farmers to guarantee the highest possible level of welfare to their animals. New perspectives could be opened for animal welfare reasoning around the concept of domestic, especially farm, animals as partial human artifacts. Therefore, it is important to understand how much a particular behavior of a farm animal is far from the natural one of its ancestors. This paper is a contribution to better understand the role of genetics of the farm animals on their behavior. This means that the naïve approach to animal welfare regarding returning animals to their natural state should be challenged and that welfare assessment should be considered.

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

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin E Crossley ◽  
Eddie A M Bokkers ◽  
Natasha Browne ◽  
Katie Sugrue ◽  
Emer Kennedy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dairy Cow ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Dairy Farms ◽  
Nasal Discharge ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
Signed Rank ◽  
Cow Welfare ◽  
Head Neck ◽  
Ocular Discharge

Abstract 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 score 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 were 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 region (66%), and the hindquarters (32%) 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, and 0 to 3% tail breaks; 0 to 14% IA; 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document