Abstract
Simple SummaryBranding cattle with hot irons is a painful procedure, inflicting severe burns that take weeks to heal. Although Sri Lanka prohibits hot-iron branding, the practice is still common in some areas of the country but has not been described. We observed branding practices on four smallholder farms and identified welfare concerns and challenges impeding adoption of alternative methods of identification, such as ear tags. Farmers used multiple irons to mark their initials and, in some cases, their address, with the largest brands extending across the ribs and hip. Farmers did not consider ear tags a viable alternative to hot-iron branding because of issues with security and tag retention. Hot-iron branding raises serious animal welfare concerns and efforts to introduce more welfare-friendly alternatives are needed.Hot-iron branding is illegal in Sri Lanka, but is still commonly used to identify dairy herds in extensive farming systems, which are primarily located in the country’s Dry Zone. Despite the negative welfare implications of this practice, there is no written documentation of branding in this region. We observed branding on four smallholder farms in Kantale, Eastern Province to understand the welfare implications associated with the procedure and challenges limiting the uptake of more welfare-friendly alternatives, such as ear tagging. Areas of welfare concern included the duration of restraint, the size and location of the brand, and the absence of pain relief. Animals were restrained with rope for an average duration of 12 min (range 8–17 min). Farmers used multiple running irons to mark their initials and, in some cases, their address, with the largest brands extending across the ribs and hip. Three farmers applied coconut or neem oil topically to the brand after performing the procedure. No analgesics were given before or after branding. Farmers reported that poor ear tag retention in extensive systems and theft were the main factors impeding the uptake of alternative forms of identification. Branding is also practiced as part of traditional medicine in some cases. Given the clear evidence that hot-iron branding impairs animal welfare and there is no evidence that this can be improved, alternative identification methods are needed, both in Sri Lanka, as well as in other countries engaging in this practice.
Highlights
In many countries, including Sri Lanka, cattle herds have traditionally been identified by hot-iron branding, a procedure that permanently marks the animal via thermal damage to the skin
In response to increasing animal welfare concerns over this practice, several countries have prohibited its use in cattle [8,9], and horses [10]
Sri Lanka has successfully transitioned to ear tagging in intensive and semi-intensive dairy practices, the majority of which are owned by smallholder farmers
Summary
In many countries, including Sri Lanka, cattle herds have traditionally been identified by hot-iron branding, a procedure that permanently marks the animal via thermal damage to the skin. In response to increasing animal welfare concerns over this practice, several countries have prohibited its use in cattle [8,9], and horses [10]. In 2017, the Sri Lankan government amended the Animals Act, No 29 of 1958, to declare hot-iron branding illegal. Hot-iron branding is still prevalent in the Eastern Province, which accounts for approximately 20% of the country’s one million cattle [11]. No written records exist on branding practices in the Eastern Province. We discuss the welfare implications of this procedure and the challenges impeding adoption of ear tags
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
