scholarly journals Living the ‘Best Life’ or ‘One Size Fits All’—Stakeholder Perceptions of Racehorse Welfare

Animals ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Butler ◽  
Mathilde Valenchon ◽  
Rachel Annan ◽  
Helen Whay ◽  
Siobhan Mullan

The purpose of the study was to explore the perceptions held by British racing industry stakeholders of factors influencing racehorse welfare. Ten focus groups were held across the UK with a total of 42 stakeholders from a range of roles within racehorse care including trainers, stable staff and veterinarians. Participants took part in three exercises. Firstly, to describe the scenarios of a ‘best life’ and the minimum welfare standards a horse in training could be living under. Secondly, to identify the main challenges for racehorse welfare and thirdly, to recall any innovative or uncommon practices to improve welfare they had witnessed. Using thematic analysis, eight themes emerged from the first exercise. Two strands, factors that contribute to maintaining health and the horse-human relationship ran through all eight themes. Across all themes horses living the ‘best life’ were perceived as being treated as individuals rather than being part of a ‘one size fits all’ life when kept under minimum welfare standards. Health was both perceived as the main challenge to welfare as well as one open to innovative practices such as improved veterinary treatments. Data obtained, informed by the knowledge and expertise of experienced stakeholders, combined with practical animal welfare science will be used to develop the first British racehorse welfare assessment protocol.

2020 ◽  
Vol 98 (Supplement_4) ◽  
pp. 468-468
Author(s):  
Sharon Kuca ◽  
Lindsey McKinney ◽  
Cia Johnson

Abstract Established in 2001, the Animal Welfare Assessment Contest® (AWJAC®) aims to be an innovative educational tool for enhancing understanding and awareness of welfare issues affecting animals used for human purposes (e.g., research, agriculture, entertainment, companionship). The contest is open to participation by veterinary, undergraduate, and graduate students who may participate as individuals or as part of a team. A limited number of veterinarians are also eligible to compete as non-placing participants. Participation in the contest entails assessment of live and computer-based scenarios encompassing data, photographs, and videos of animals in comparable situations. Students then use the information obtained to rank the welfare of the animals in those situations on the basis of physiologic and behavioral indicators, with attention to facilities and management, and present their analyses orally to expert judges. The species featured change each year of the contest. At the completion of each contest, participants and coaches are asked to anonymously complete a written survey. The quantitative and qualitative results of this survey are used to determine if the contest has achieved its aims and incorporate suggestions for improvement of future contests. The majority of survey respondents from the five contests held between 2014–2018 report they either strongly agree or agree that the AWJAC increased their knowledge of animal welfare science (98%, n = 549) and was an overall valuable experience (99%, n = 547) that they would recommend to their peers (98%, n = 550). Respondents cited networking opportunities and diversity of species featured in the contest as key reasons the contest is valuable. Given these results, the AWJAC is successfully achieving its aims to increase animal welfare knowledge in an innovative way.


Animals ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Friedrich ◽  
Krieter ◽  
Kemper ◽  
Czycholl

The present study’s aim was to assess the test−retest reliability (TRR) of the ‘Welfare Quality® animal welfare assessment protocol for sows and piglets’ focusing on the welfare principle ‘appropriate behavior’. TRR was calculated using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (RS), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), smallest detectable change (SDC), and limits of agreement (LoA). Principal component analysis (PCA) was used for deeper analysis of the Qualitative Behavior Assessment (QBA). The study was conducted on thirteen farms in Northern Germany, which were visited five times by the same observer. Farm visits 1 (F1; day 0) were compared to farm visits 2 to 5 (F2–F5). The QBA indicated no TRR when applying the statistical parameters introduced above (e.g., ‘playful‘ (F1–F4) RS 0.08 ICC 0.00 SDC 0.50 LoA [−0.62, 0.38]). The PCA detected contradictory TRR. Acceptable TRR could be found for parts of the instantaneous scan sampling (e.g., negative social behavior (F1–F3) RS 0.45 ICC 0.37 SDC 0.02 LoA [−0.03, 0.02]). The human−animal relationship test solely achieved poor TRR, whereas scans for stereotypies showed sufficient TRR (e.g., floor licking (F1–F4) RS 0.63 ICC 0.52 SDC 0.05 LoA [−0.08, 0.04]). Concluding, the principle ‘appropriate behavior’ does not represent TRR and further investigation is needed before implementation on-farm.


Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 1597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Baby Kaurivi ◽  
Richard Laven ◽  
Rebecca Hickson ◽  
Tim Parkinson ◽  
Kevin Stafford

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.


Agriculture ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Kaurivi ◽  
Richard Laven ◽  
Rebecca Hickson ◽  
Kevin Stafford ◽  
Tim Parkinson

Farm animal welfare assessment protocols use different measures depending on production systems and the purpose of the assessment. There is no standardized validated animal welfare protocol for the assessment of beef cattle farms in New Zealand, despite the importance of beef exports to the country. The aim of this study was therefore to identify welfare measures that would be suitable for an animal welfare assessment protocol for use in extensive pasture-based cow–calf beef cattle systems in New Zealand. The proposed animal welfare assessment measures were selected from the Welfare Quality protocol and the rangeland-based UC Davis Cow–Calf Health and Handling assessment protocol. Measures that were deemed impractical and/or unsuitable were excluded from the protocol. After testing the applicability of selected measures at one farm, additional measures that were deemed to be practical to undertake in New Zealand were identified and incorporated into the protocol. The intention was to identify animal welfare indicators that were assessable in the yard during a single farm visit, a questionnaire guided interview, and a farm resource assessment visit that evaluated cattle health and management. Further testing of the 50 measures that were identified as being appropriate will be undertaken on commercial beef farms to develop a practicable welfare protocol for extensive pasture-based beef systems.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i38-i38
Author(s):  
N Azeez ◽  
C Roberts ◽  
H Bradbury

Abstract Introduction Pre-registration pharmacy training in the UK is a competency-based programme1. Workplace-based assessment (WBA) tools are valid and reliable tools in assessing competency in the workplace,2 however no recognised WBA tools are used within pre-registration pharmacy training. Historically WBA have been used within healthcare training, including postgraduate pharmacy. A WBA tool was designed by amalgamating three recognised tools from postgraduate pharmacy training (case-based discussion, mini clinical examination and direct observed patient consultation), then piloted within the 2018/19 pre-registration pharmacy training year in a large teaching hospital. Aim To gather the views of pre-registration pharmacist trainees and tutors of their experiences of using the WBA tool in practice. From the views, to determine if the purposes of the tool had been met: allowing tutors to work directly with their trainee in the workplace and meet the GPhC performance standards1 that are more easily met through observation. Methods This research was carried out in a large teaching hospital in the North of England. The WBA tool which included a six-point Likert scale and comments boxes for feedback, was introduced to the stakeholders at the start of the 2018/19 training year in a training session. Data was collected 6 months after using the tool in practice. A triangulation method was used; a semi-structured interview with the pre-registration pharmacist manager and two focus groups were conducted, one with trainees (n=7) and one with tutors (n=5). Participants were recruited through an invitation email sent via a gatekeeper. The focus groups moderator set ground rules to ensure a safe space for discussion to reduce conflict. They also reduced possible bias by ensuring they were not a current tutor. Responses from the interview were used to support the design of the topic guide for the focus groups. Data was transcribed and thematic analysis was undertaken. Results Following thematic analysis, three global themes emerged: clarity of purpose of the tool, feedback to trainees and the WBA tool as an assessment. Overall, trainees found the WBA tool was the most valuable part of their training owing to the benefit of instant feedback. Tutors agreed the tool was valuable when directly observing their trainee in practice, supporting the initial aim of the tool. There were conflicting views on why the tool was introduced, therefore highlighting the importance of a good implementation strategy when making changes. Interestingly, the WBA tool was not perceived as an assessment by the majority of trainees, and the inclusion of the Likert scale on the tool was questioned, leading to possible changes being made for future use. Conclusion This is the first study that gathers stakeholders’ experiences of using a WBA tool within pre-registration pharmacy training within the UK. Overall, the WBA tool received positive responses from both trainees and tutors. With upcoming changes in foundation pharmacy training proposed, this study supports the use of a WBA tool as it allows for focused feedback which trainees’ value. Limitations include a small sample size and the WBA tool being piloted in one hospital. References 1. GPhC. 2020. Pre-registration trainee. [Online]. Available from: https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/i-am-pre-registration-trainee 2. Norcini, J. and Burch, V. 2007. Workplace-based assessment as an educational tool: AMEE Guide No.31. Medical Teacher.29, pp. 855–871.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill R D MacKay

Animal welfare science features interdisciplinary and collaborative working across fields, spanning behavioural ecology, psychology, veterinary sciences, economics and fundamental biology. However, education research is not yet prevalent within the animal welfare literature. In a Web of Science search there were 188 papers which specifically discussed or explored how to teach animal welfare from 1978 to 2017. Of these, only 34% (n = 61) specifically focussed on instructional design or pedagogical research, and these were predominantly within veterinary education (57%). Despite this, the literature is in broad agreement that animal welfare education is an important topic that should be done well. Within the UK, there were a possible 586 animal-related courses within Universities College Admissions Service database for potential students to choose from, highlighting the significance of robust and considered educational practice. The current gaps identified in the literature were discussion of hidden curriculums outside of veterinary degrees, animal-centred education, the blueprinting of assessment and authentic assessment. Therefore, this review proposes that animal welfare scientists interested in education consider discipline based educational research (DBER) practices, and engage more fully with the educational research literature. A key component of DBER is the recognition that specialist knowledge needs to be taught by specialists, and so it is important that animal welfare scientists begin to access educational research too.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document