Abstract

Simple SummaryThe evolving change in societal attitudes regarding animal care and use has led to two main streams of thought. On one hand, there is the concept of “animal rights”, emphasizing that animals should have the same rights as humans, and as such should never be used to benefit humans (e.g., for food, clothing, entertainment, education, research, and even pet ownership). Animals should be able to live a life free of human interference and exploitation. On the other hand, many people agree that humans are responsible for animals and for their care; animals can be used to benefit humans if properly cared for, and their needs are met; abuse and neglect are banned. This is the “animal welfare” (AW) point of view, based on humane treatment, ensuring the physical and mental fitness of animals, as required by current EU legislation. Now, the point is that to fulfill the basic requirements of animal welfare animals are ensured a life worth living, especially given that they can feel emotions. In view of ensuring not only compliance with minimum legislative requirements, but also optimal farming conditions (above minimum legislative requirements), growing attention is attributed to best farming practices. In this work, a list of best practices proposed by the Italian National Reference Centre for Animal Welfare (CReNBA) has been collected to ensure a good quality of life for dairy cows, heifers and calves kept in intensive rearing systems.The concept of animal welfare (AW) has many meanings. Traditionally, AW has been considered as freedom from disease and suffering. Nowadays, growing attention goes to the concept of “positive animal welfare” (PAW), which can be interpreted within the concept of quality of life (QoL), thinking about a “balance of positives over negatives” and a “life worth living”. In this vision, where the QoL represents a continuum between positives and negatives, the Italian National Reference Centre for Animal Welfare (CReNBA), within the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell’Emilia Romagna (IZSLER), has developed a welfare assessment protocol for dairy cows, heifers, and calves in loose housing systems, including both animal-based and non-animal-based indicators, in which not only hazards but also benefits are identified. This protocol is part of an integrated monitoring system called “ClassyFarm”, belonging to the Italian Ministry of Health and developed by IZSLER. The aim of this paper is to extrapolate from the mentioned protocol, a list of 38 best farming practices (on managerial and equipment factors) for ensuring a high level of welfare in dairy cattle. All stakeholders (veterinarians, farmers, competent authorities, consumers, etc.) can benefit of these best practices as a guide or toolbox to ensure a life worth living for these animals.

Highlights

  • The concept of animal welfare has been deeply changing, reaching the awareness that animals can feel emotions and, both positive and negative affective states.In the past, the vision of animal welfare was primarily focused on avoiding negative welfare consequences, such as pain, fear, distress, frustration, and diseases

  • This review has found that Positive Animal Welfare (PAW) literature can be articulated into four different topics: 1

  • We focus our attention on the last topic; the vision of PAW as Quality of Life (QoL)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The concept of animal welfare (among humans) has been deeply changing, reaching the awareness that animals can feel emotions and, both positive and negative affective states. Within the PAW, QoL can be seen as a balance between negative and positive welfare, situated at the higher end of the continuum based on either the animals’ overall emotional state [18] or the available opportunities for the animal to have a good life [22]. QoL can be totally defined by emotions and, in this continuum, variance from unpleasant to pleasant experiences, the pleasant experiences overcome the unpleasant ones in case of a good QoL This feature of PAW directly leads to a debate about how to add up different aspects of welfare to a total value [14], and this discussion has emerged in connection with efforts to define comprehensive measures for animal welfare assessment at the farm or flock level [26]. The Italian National Reference Centre for Animal Welfare (CReNBA), within the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell’ Emilia Romagna (IZSLER), developed several on-farm welfare assessment protocols (for different species and animal populations), where QoL is seen as a continuum between negatives and positives

The Assessment of Welfare and the ClassyFarm Protocol
Feeding places dimension and accessibility
Space availability at drinkers or water troughs
Housing of animals older than 6 months
The ClassyFarm IT Platform
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.