scholarly journals Comparing welfare indicators in dairy cattle under different loose housing systems (deep litter vs cubicle barns) using recycled manure solids for bedding

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. e0501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Molina ◽  
Estrella I. Agüera ◽  
Carlos C. Pérez-Marín ◽  
Francisco Maroto-Molina

Aim of study: Dairy farmers in Southern Spain are continuously investing in the modernization of their facilities and frequently ask technicians about the type of housing they should choose for their farms. Although some studies have analysed the economic impact of different housing systems, there are no reports evaluating the impact of these systems on animal wellbeing. To remedy this deficit, a study was carried out to analyse animal welfare status in two types of loose housing conditions: deep litter (DL) and cubicle (CU) barns.Area of study: This study was conducted in Cordoba (Spain).Material and methods: A total of 1,597 cows from nineteen commercial dairy farms were involved in this study, of which twelve had CU barns and seven had DL barns. Welfare Quality assessment was used to evaluate animal wellbeing, inn order to compare both housing systems.Main results: The study found some weaknesses for feeding and health indicators of animal welfare in both types of housing systems. The overall welfare assessment based on feeding, housing and health indicators showed no differences between farms with DL or CU barns.Research highlights: A good welfare status could be reached under any type of housing system.

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 881
Author(s):  
Frank J. C. M. van Eerdenburg ◽  
Alice M. Di Giacinto ◽  
Jan Hulsen ◽  
Bert Snel ◽  
J. Arjan Stegeman

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


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marek Gaworski ◽  
Michał Boćkowski

The objective of the study was to propose a method to assess how well some housing conditions in barns meet national standards and recommendations. The key element of the method was to investigate the index of technical standards fulfilment (ITSF), which shows differences between current housing conditions created by barn facilities and some standards. The lower differences are expressed by higher ITSF value, whereas the index values range from 0 to 1. Data collected in 38 dairy farms (with tie-stall and freestall housing systems) were used for the ITSF index analyses. The ITSF index values for the two compared housing systems were calculated for measurements carried out in four zones in each barn: lying, social, feeding and milking areas. There were higher average ITSF index values for the freestall system than for the tie-stall housing system across all investigated zones included in the barns. Investigations can support farmers to improve some conditions of dairy production in the barns including consciousness of some standards on dairy facilities and cow comfort.


Author(s):  
M.B.M. Bracke ◽  
J.H.M. Metz ◽  
B.M. Spruijt

In the scientific literature several attempts have been made to systematically assess the overall welfare-status of animals in relation to housing and management. This paper reviews assessment tables and schemes that have been constructed to this end. These tables and schemes have a tabular format that allows an assessment of housing systems using a list of welfare-relevant attributes (properties of the housing system). Rather than identifying deficits, the focus of this review is on finding positive recommendations for the purpose of developing a method for overall welfare assessment (OWA) on a scientific basis. The main recommendation is to use the tabular format as representation formalism for OWA. The concept of linked tables provides the key to performing OWA on a scientific basis in an explicit and systematic 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 (4) ◽  
pp. 605 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukas Reese ◽  
Katrin Baumgartner ◽  
Lorenzo von Fersen ◽  
Roswitha Merle ◽  
Mechthild Ladwig-Wiegard ◽  
...  

Deflighting zoo birds is a practice that receives increasing criticism due to its presumed incompatibility with animal welfare. To our knowledge, this is the first approach to address this problem in a scientific way. To do this, we compared feather corticosterone (CORTf) from Greater Flamingos (Phoenicopterus roseus, n = 151) of different flight status (i.e., pinioned, feather clipped, airworthy) from twelve different zoological institutions. To complement the hormone measurements, behavioral observations (scan samplings) were conducted prior to feather sampling within the presumed time frame of feather growth. We hypothesized that CORTf of the deflighted flamingos would differ from CORTf of their airworthy conspecifics. No significant difference in CORTf was found between the three groups, and our hypothesis was rejected. However, the impact of the institution itself (i.e., the housing conditions) proved to be the most dominant variable (variance between the institutions = 53.82%). Due to high variability, the behavioral observations were evaluated descriptively but did not give rise to doubt the findings in CORTf. Therefore, we assume that the method of flight restraint of Greater Flamingos does not have a measurable effect on CORTf. We consider this model for evaluating animal welfare of zoo birds a useful tool and provide ideas for further adjustments for consecutive studies.


2011 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 975-984 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Ostojic-Andric ◽  
S. Hristov ◽  
Z. Novakovic ◽  
V. Pantelic ◽  
M.M. Petrovic ◽  
...  

The subject of this research was to determine the effect of the housing system on quality of welfare of dairy cattle in Serbia. Study was realized on six farms, capacity of 30 to 900 cows, with loose and tie housing system. Assessment of the welfare quality parameters was done by using the Welfare Quality? Assessment Protocol for Cattle, 2009. Results of the research show that the welfare quality of dairy animals is under the significant effect of housing system, and that loose system has the advantage when it comes to comfort around resting, easy of movements and health condition of cows. Share of not lame cows (81%) and cows with no lesion (86%) was significantly higher (p<0.01) in loose system. Indicator values: duration of lying down movements (6.53 sec), lying down movements with collisions (18.7%) and lying outside lying area (28.4%) in tie system were significantly higher (p<0.01) compared to loose system indicating the inadequacy of the housing and lack of comfort. Analysis of indicators associated with cow hygiene (dirty legs and udder) and diseases (dystocia) points to significant gaps in management in both housing systems which represent significant threat to cow welfare quality.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina Hollandt ◽  
Markus Baur ◽  
Caroline Wöhr

AbstractConsidering animal welfare, animals should be kept in animal-appropriate and stress-free housing conditions in all circumstances. To assure such conditions, not only basic needs must be met, but also possibilities must be provided that allow animals in captive care to express all species-typical behaviors. Rack housing systems for snakes have become increasingly popular and are widely used; however, from an animal welfare perspective, they are no alternative to furnished terrariums. In this study, we therefore evaluated two types of housing systems for ball pythons (Python regius) by considering the welfare aspect animal behavior. In Part 1 of the study, ball pythons (n = 35) were housed individually in a conventional rack system. The pythons were provided with a hiding place and a water bowl, temperature control was automatic, and the lighting in the room served as indirect illumination. In Part 2 of the study, the same ball pythons, after at least 8 weeks, were housed individually in furnished terrariums. The size of each terrarium was correlated with the body length of each python. The terrariums contained substrate, a hiding place, possibilities for climbing, a water basin for bathing, an elevated basking spot, and living plants. The temperature was controlled automatically, and illumination was provided by a fluorescent tube and a UV lamp. The shown behavior spectrum differed significantly between the two housing systems (p < 0.05). The four behaviors basking, climbing, burrowing, and bathing could only be expressed in the terrarium. Abnormal behaviors that could indicate stereotypies were almost exclusively seen in the rack system. The results show that the housing of ball pythons in a rack system leads to a considerable restriction in species-typical behaviors; thus, the rack system does not meet the requirements for animal-appropriate housing.


Author(s):  
V. V. Nedosekov ◽  
◽  
H. V. Petkun ◽  

Dairy animal welfare is of growing interest around the world, especially in developed countries, which have animal welfare programs and resources to establish optimal management systems for cows and understand that animal welfare is the foundation of innovative dairy farming. The article, based on the analysis, synthesis and generalization of world research and the results of own scientific expert assessment of animal welfare identifies the main problems of animal welfare on dairy farms, considers methods of assessing animal welfare in the world and substantiates the importance of implementing welfare programs and management protocols in dairy farming. Thus, in dairy farming, animal welfare is an important component based on world regulations. The analysis of regulations requires an understanding of the legislative aspects of different levels and examples of best practice: a) EU directives and practices, b) directives and practices of each European country c) national directives of non-EU countries, which must take into account all three legislative features. It has been shown that the EU has implemented a number of animal welfare acts, compromises between dairy producers and consumers on a number of instruments to harmonize law enforcement through audit, training, scientific expertise and consulting, and contributes to the stability of the EU food chain. In Ukraine, it is important to harmonize legislation with European Union norms and create a system for assessing the welfare of dairy animals, as well as information and educational activities and training on animal welfare on dairy farms for stakeholders and practical approaches to implementing animal welfare in production. We launched the European approach "Signals of cows" within the Ukrainian-Dutch project "Dairy farm", which allowed to work out the basic aspects of animal welfare in research farms NULES. In 2021, a new law on veterinary medicine was adopted, which implements 14 EU acts and includes a section on animal welfare, which is already a big step forward and opens new opportunities. However, in addition to the provisions on the welfare of calves (harmonization with Regulation 98/58 EC) do not consider regulations on the welfare of the dairy herd, which is not enough to develop the dairy industry in a global transformation. The article presents the basic indicators of welfare of cows, which are used in European countries and which we use in expert assessments. However, systemic data to assess the welfare of cows is not enough, because it is in the plane of consulting, which does not allow the analysis of the welfare of cows. In the context of globalization, the basic problem of animal welfare on dairy farms is the intensification, so the main welfare assessment programs (FARM, The Code of welfare, Welfare Quality and IDSW), which are widely used in milk production in accordance with current animal welfare standards. Intensification of animal husbandry, which provides greater economic efficiency, poses many threats to animal health and remains one of the biggest problems of animal welfare. The desire for profit reduces the ability to implement the principles of sustainable development. We consider it expedient to develop and implement programs for assessing the welfare of cows in Ukraine. So in the EU there is a voluntary WQ program that certifies producers and aims to meet the needs of society, develop a reliable monitoring system on farms and improve the welfare of cows in general. In New Zealand, the Code of welfare has been implemented, which forms awareness of farmers and care for animal welfare. Almost 98% of US farms are members of the FARM (USA) program, which is positioned as a voluntary program and a number of others. Thus, despite the fact that dairy farming is one of the strategic sectors of animal husbandry in Ukraine, the welfare of dairy farms is insufficiently studied and covered. In the perspective of research, it is important to analyze the experience of other countries in this area and the introduction of a system of welfare assessment, as well as the development and implementation of protocols on animal welfare in Ukraine based on the concept of "Five Freedoms". It is important to raise the awareness of stakeholders and officials to ensure proper compliance with EU animal welfare rules, taking into account national, regional and local networks, different support and understanding of the target audience (both farmers and producers, civil servants, scientists and educators, etc.). Also a priority is research on animal welfare, as well as the development of modern approaches to the legal provision of animal welfare, which will improve animal welfare. Thus, in order to ensure a high level of welfare of cows in relation to world standards of animal welfare, the priority is to assess the welfare of cows, improve the legal framework in Ukraine, further research in this area, implementation of effective programs to control the welfare of dairy animals.


2020 ◽  
Vol 87 (S1) ◽  
pp. 13-19
Author(s):  
Angela Krueger ◽  
Jenifer Cruickshank ◽  
Erminio Trevisi ◽  
Massimo Bionaz

AbstractAnimal welfare is an essential component of dairy production and several systems exist to evaluate the welfare of dairy cows. Here, we review and compare three well-known systems that operate at farm level from around the world (FARM, Welfare Quality®, and The Code of Welfare) and discuss their advantages and limitations. Despite having some commonalities, the programs evaluate different elements. We also briefly review an emerging system (Integrated Diagnostic Welfare System) that might address some of the shortcomings of the existing systems, especially the possibility of automating the evaluation of animal well-being and identifying any cause of poor welfare. None of the aforementioned systems has been fully validated for their ability to assess animal welfare using independent measurements. The future holds increased attention around the well-being of dairy cows and increased use of sensing technologies. There is an urgent need for dairy welfare evaluation systems that are scientifically validated, holistic, and that can take advantage of the use of sensing technologies to continuously monitor animal welfare.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document