Interactions between profit and welfare on extensive sheep farms

This study quantified interactions between animal welfare and farm profitability in British extensive sheep farming systems. Qualitative welfare assessment methodology was used to assess welfare from the animal's perspective in 20 commercial extensive sheep farms and to estimate labour demand for welfare, based on the assessed welfare scores using data collected from farm inventories. The estimated labour demand was then used as a coefficient in a linear program based model to establish the gross margin maximising farm management strategy for given farm situations, subject to constraints that reflected current resource limitations including labour supply. Regression analysis showed a significant relationship between the qualitative welfare assessment scores and labour supply on the inventoried farms but there was no significant relationship between current gross margin and assessed welfare scores. However, to meet the labour demand of the best welfare score, a reduction in flock size and in the average maximum farm gross margin was often required. These findings supported the hypothesis that trade-offs between animal welfare and farm profitability are necessary in providing maximum animal welfare via on-farm labour and sustainable British extensive sheep farming systems.

Simple SummaryAnimal welfare is difficult to quantify, especially among farmers, in extensive rural sheep farms where there is a low level of animal interaction and a lack of technology. In this study, we searched for iceberg indicators of animal welfare using the Five Domains Model approach, and studied the relationship among sheep flight distance, sheep handling training and job satisfaction in extensive rural sheep systems. A structured survey was used to obtain socio-demographical, job satisfaction and sheep handling training data. A full animal welfare evaluation was performed on all farms; furthermore, a health status examination was also made in which blood and stool samples were taken. Four iceberg indicators were found with the potential to predict overall animal welfare scores on farms, and one to study state of mind in extensive rural sheep systems, as well as interactions among job satisfaction, training in sheep handling and sheep mind state.Animal welfare for sheep in extensive rural farms is difficult to quantify among rural farmers due to several factors, including the lack of technology and the low level of interaction they have with the animals. The purpose of this study was to search for animal-based iceberg indicators using the Five Domains Model approach and study the relationship between sheep reactive behavior (flight distance), sheep handling training and farmers job satisfaction. Thirteen extensive commercial dual-purpose sheep farms (n = 520 animals) were evaluated in Marulanda, Caldas (Colombia, South America). On-farm Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) were assessed using an adapted version of this protocol. Socio-demographic characteristics, sheep handling training and job satisfaction were evaluated using a structured interview. Blood and stool samples were taken to determine Fecal Egg Count and Packed Cell Volume. Bivariate regression models were used to find animal-based indicators that predicted Nutrition, Ambience, Health and Behavior welfare domains, and a Qualitative Behavior Analysis was used for mind state domain analysis. Body condition score (BCS) (p = 0.001), fleece cleanliness (p = 0.03), FAMACHA© Score (p = 0.05), and flight distance in meters (p = 0.19) were found to be indicators, and were useful for predicting overall welfare assessment (R2 = 0.85) on theses farms. Regarding mind welfare domain, Qualitative Behavioral Assessment found two principal components (PC) that explained 82% and 67% of the variance, and described emotional valence and energy levels of sheep, respectively. Sheep handling training (β = −8.75, p = 0.004) and job satisfaction (β = −7.5, p = 0.013) had a negative association with the average flock flight distance. Spearman’s rank correlations were significant (p < 0.001) between Fecal Egg Count, Packed Cell Volume, FAMACHA© Score (FS), Body Weight (BW) and, BCS. The strongest association was observed between Packed Cell Volume (PCV) and Fecal Egg Count (FEC) (r = −0.43), also FS was correlated with PCV (r = −0.28) and FEC (r = 0.21), and BCS was correlated with weight (r = 0.32). We suggest that these animal-based indicators could be useful as iceberg indicators for extensive sheep production systems and may set the ground for more research in small extensive sheep farms to develop strategies to find welfare problems and solutions.

Broom's (2014) book is a well-researched and thoroughly written exploration and evaluation of the journey from the origins of animal welfare science to what we can say we now know and need to consider in relation to animal sentience and welfare. This book will help to counter any skepticism among academics and policy makers.

Extensive sheep farming systems provide numerous ecosystem services, most of which consumers are not aware of. Consumers’ subjective quality perception relates to intrinsic and extrinsic quality attributes. Extrinsic quality attributes, like animal welfare, conservation of biodiversity, and regional and sustainable lamb meat production, meet the expectations of meat consumers. Communication of quality attributes can support consumers’ willingness to buy and pay a premium price, as well as producers’ economic viability. Previous studies focused on consumers’ perception of intrinsic quality attributes, while it is our objective to analyse the target group-specific communication of extrinsic quality attributes of extensive sheep farming. An online survey with 387 valid respondents included lamb meat consumers in Berlin-Brandenburg and revealed their consumption patterns. The sample is representative of Berlin-Brandenburg in net household income, population division and gender, while academics and respondents over 50 years were overrepresented. The survey addressed demographics, meat consumption and purchasing behaviour, preferences for different lamb meat products, purchasing motives and barriers, perception of communication messages and personal initiative for the purchase of regional lamb. Via Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Cluster Analysis, we identified two key target groups for regionally produced lamb meat: “Foodies” and “Cooking enthusiasts”. Guided by Alphabet theory with its specific focus on Knowledge, Information seeking behaviour and purchasing Habit, we derive recommendations for target-group-specific communication of regionally produced lamb meat. “Foodies” showed a high potential for direct marketing and personal storytelling of sheep farmers. “Cooking enthusiasts” are best addressed through print and online marketing with a focus on cooking and personal health.

Review: Precision livestock farming, automats and new technologies: possible applications in extensive dairy sheep farming

A bibliometric analysis was undertaken to chart the development of animal welfare (AW) science as a whole, and of the individuals, organisations and countries that have had most academic impact to date. Publication data were collected from the Web of Science for the year range 1968-2017 and by-hand pre-processing of the data was undertaken to identify reviews and original research articles on AW. VOSviewer was used to create bibliometric networks. There has been a 13.3% annual growth in AW publications in the last 50 years with Animal Welfare and Applied Animal Behaviour Science the most frequent publishers of AW publications. Farm animals continue to dominate the subject of AW research and comparison of network visualisations for five key species suggested possible gaps in the research, such as relatively little emphasis on emotion research for some farm animals and little research on inherited disorders in dogs. However, keyword analysis indicated a recent broadening of AW findings to include other international contexts, such as conservation and sustainability. Highly cited review articles were grouped into five clusters with affective state (ie emotions, moods) and fish welfare the most recent topics. Almost all core authors of original research articles study farm animals, though in the last ten years other topics, such as consumer attitudes and wildlife, have emerged as highly cited areas of original research articles. Network analysis of organisations revealed the University of Bristol, UK as the main publisher of original research articles. Citation analysis indicated that many low-cited articles were originating from Germany and were published in German journals, suggesting that many worthwhile results and opinions on AW may be being missed by other researchers due to a language barrier. Several limitations of bibliometric analysis to generate an overview of AW science were identified, including the challenge of how to search and extract all the relevant publications in this discipline. In conclusion, animal welfare science is still in an exponential phase of growth which will bring opportunities, such as for the publication of new journals, but also challenges. The insights generated by this study suggest bibliometric analysis to be a useful addition to other approaches investigating the trends and concepts of animal welfare.

Sheep welfare is an emerging topic in research and food marketing, and recent studies suggest that farm labour is a key factor for both animal welfare and productivity in extensive sheep farming systems, although little research has been done into labour utilisation in these systems. This paper reports field data collection on two commercial farms and the use of a linear programming (LP) model to link labour economics and animal welfare analysis. The model maximises the number of ewes to clooked after over the lambing period, when constrained by labour availability for various key tasks and by a pre-determined level of sheep welfare. The results show a trade-off between welfare level and labour input per sheep. Dropping tasks with less significant welfare and productivity consequences is an effective way of increasing carrying capacity (from 977 ewes/shepherd to 1428), as is working longer hours (1174 ewes/shepherd) or only doing the legal minimum of welfare checking (labour reduced from 0.68 min/ewe to 0.44 min/ewe) . The field data suggest that farmers currently provide high welfare, and that, despite much time spent away from the flock (e.g. driving), they spend a large amount of time (39% of total) with their sheep.

The extensive livestock production industries are vital to the national economy of Australia. Continuing improvements to extensively-raised livestock welfare is desirable, necessary and in some situations mandatory, if the social license for animal sourced food and fiber production is to continue sustainably. However, meeting increasingly high welfare standards is challenging. The changing climate in this millennium, has seen the occurrence of two of the most severe drought periods on record in Australia, resulting in complex welfare issues arising from unforeseen disease, trade and environmental catastrophes. The onset of the first drought coincided with an uncontrolled epidemic of ovine paratuberculosis. It ended just prior to a temporary ban on live export of tropical cattle to Indonesia that induced a major market failure and led to severe morbidity and mortality on some beef properties. The second drought period progressed in severity and culminated in the most extreme bushfires recorded, causing unprecedented levels of mortality, morbidity and suffering in farmed animals and wildlife. Temperature extremes have also caused periodic heat-associated or cold-induced hyopthermia losses, requiring increased vigilance and careful management to reduce both temperature-induced stress during transport and the high ovine peri-parturient losses traditionally observed in extensive sheep farming. Several issues remain controversial, including surgical mulesing of wool sheep to manage flystrike, and the continuing live export trade of sheep and cattle. However, in reviewing the increasingly complex welfare challenges for the extensive livestock population industries that are export trade dependent and remain vulnerable to welfare activism, it appears progress has been made. These include development of prescribed livestock welfare Standards and Guidelines and the introduction of the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS) to address export concerns. Further, the sheep mulesing crisis led to improved producer welfare attitudes and practices, including pain management during aversive husbandry procedures that is now occurring globally. Finally, innovations in animal welfare surveillance and assessment, are additional encouraging signs that suggest improving change management of extensive farm animal welfare is occurring that provides lessons well-beyond Australian shores.

Animal welfare science is a relatively new scientific discipline, evolving mostly from within veterinary medicine over the latter half of the twentieth century into an independent specialty in its own right. Originally, the field of study was heavily focused on animal behavior (ethology), but it has emerged into a truly multi- and inter-disciplinary science, encompassing such sciences as behavior, physiology, pathology, health, immunology, endocrinology, and neuroscience, and influenced by personal and societal ethics. The first academic organization devoted to the scientific study of animal welfare was established in 1966 as the society for veterinary ethology (SVE), demonstrating its veterinary roots by being then affiliated with the British Veterinary Association. The world’s first Professor of Animal Welfare was appointed 20 years later at the University of Cambridge’s Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, and in 1991, the SVE became the International Society for Applied Ethology, in recognition of its geographical spread and its evolution from veterinary medicine. Over the last quarter of a century, there has been further expansion of the field and now animal welfare science is represented in many universities’ veterinary medicine and animal science departments across the world. Animal welfare science has become part of the core curriculum for many veterinary degrees, is a recognized specialty qualification within the veterinary professions of Europe, USA, and Australia and courses in animal welfare science as a stand-alone discipline are offered worldwide at Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Doctorate degree levels. Within research, there have been similar patterns of expansion and a spread from a heavy focus on farm animal welfare to the welfare of zoo, laboratory, and companion animals and the impacts of humans on wildlife. There continue to be studies that compare the welfare of populations within systems, but there is also more attention given to gaining in-depth knowledge of the welfare of individual animals, knowing that populations are not homogenous and that individuals within the same system may be experiencing quite different welfare states. We not only continue to use “traditional” welfare indicators but also work to develop novel indicators for use in experimental settings or in the field. As our fundamental knowledge base increases, we look for increasing application and we respond to challenges that arise from our own research questions and findings and from societal needs. In this paper, I will focus on a number of the areas that I see represent Grand Challenges within our discipline.

Simple SummaryThis article emphasizes the importance of educating veterinarians and veterinary students in animal welfare science and veterinary ethics, so that they can ably advance pertinent scientific knowledge and promote ethical thinking as trusted animal advocates in the 2020s. In light of this public expectation, a number of challenges are raised for veterinarians and the veterinary profession. These challenges involve: (1) re-envisioning the nature of disease treatment that goes beyond traditional conceptions of health or clinical matters, and which include animal welfare; (2) re-imagining disease prevention at the intersection of animal-human-ecosystem health; (3) developing core competencies in animal welfare science and ethics in order to provide professional leadership in animal welfare; and (4) taking a more active role in the development of novel networked devices, monitoring technologies and automated animal welfare solutions, and understanding their effects on the welfare of animals, human-animal relationships, and the veterinary profession in general.What should leading discourses and innovation regarding animal welfare look like for the veterinary profession in the 2020s? This essay considers four main challenges into which veterinarians are increasingly being drawn, as they respond to increasing public expectation for them to be scientific and moral authorities in animal welfare in addition to their traditional role as trusted health experts. They include: (1) to go beyond traditional conceptions of health by adopting a holistic view that also considers animal welfare, not only disease treatment; (2) to reimagine their professional duties when it comes to disease prevention at the intersection of animal-human-ecosystem health; (3) to develop core competencies/proficiency in animal welfare science and ethics in order to navigate discourses concerning competing priorities and socio-political ideologies and to provide professional leadership in animal welfare; (4) to provide feedback on novel networked devices, monitoring technologies and automated animal welfare solutions and their impact on animals’ welfare. To competently navigate the intricacies of the socio-political and connected world as trusted authorities and conduits for innovation in and through animal welfare, veterinarians and veterinary students are encouraged to: (a) develop core competencies in veterinary ethics, animal welfare science and deliberative capacities that are well-informed by current multidisciplinary frameworks, such as One Health; (b) engage interested parties in more effective collaboration and ethical decision-making in order to address animal welfare related concerns within their immediate sphere of influence (e.g., in a given community); and (c) participate in the process of engineering and technological design that incorporates animals’ welfare data (such as their preferences) for real-time animal monitoring through adding animal scientific and values-aware evidence in information technology systems. In order to tackle these challenges, four pillars are suggested to help guide veterinarians and the veterinary profession. They are: Collaboration, Critical Engagement, Centeredness on Research, and Continuous Self-Critique.

Farm animal welfare has now been studied, within a scientific framework, for several decades. The framework does not include ethical issues, but unless measurements of animal welfare at farm level are embedded in an ethical context, there is a danger that these measurements will not be properly utilised. This paper considers the relationship between ethical questions and animal welfare assessment. In it, the following four key ethical questions are identified. What is the baseline standard for morally acceptable animal welfare? What is a good animal life? What farming purposes are legitimate? What kinds of compromise are acceptable in a less-than-perfect world? The authors suggest that animal welfare scientists need to reflect carefully on these questions if welfare assessments are to be properly interpreted and put to practical use. Such reflection will lead to a more transparent appreciation of the values underlying welfare assessment. In this way, it will both offer welfare scientists a greater awareness of their own value-assumptions and enable the same scientists to communicate effectively with the wider audience — farmers, consumers, pressure groups, policy-makers and so on — for which the results of animal welfare assessments are of concern.

The conclusion reflects on Harrison’s achievements as a campaigner and analyses the wider changes of animal welfare politics, science, and activism that occurred during her life. Between 1920 and 2000, synthesist Edwardian campaigning gave rise to professionalised activism and new concepts of animal cognition, affective states, and welfare. The “backstage” of British corporatist welfare politics was similarly transformed by polarising “frontstage” public protest and animal rights thinking. Aided by the rise of a new “mandated” animal welfare science and European integration, the turbulent 1970s eventually resulted in a new world of British welfare politics characterised by transnational decision-making and market-driven assurance schemes, which relied on consumer citizens rather than citizen campaigners to drive change. Determined to bear witness to animal welfare, Harrison shaped and witnessed most of these changes even though the economic drivers of welfare were becoming divorced from the universalist moral framework she believed in.

Simple SummaryThe monitoring and assessment of animals is important for their health and welfare. The appropriate selection of multiple, validated, and feasible welfare assessment indicators is required to effectively identify compromises or improvements in animal welfare. Animal welfare indicators available can be animal based or resource based and collated together to form various assessment tools. The literature contains a wide variety of indicators; however, there is yet to be an ideal constellation of indicators for animal-based welfare assessment in small mammals. A systematic review was performed to identify and outline common animal-based indicators for animal welfare assessment in small mammals, specifically guinea pigs (Cavia Porcellus), mice (Mus musculus), rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), and rats (Rattus norvegicus). This review aims to provide the basis for further research into animal welfare indicators for these species and their application to improve animal welfare assessment, management, and strategies.The monitoring and assessment of animals is important for their health and welfare. The appropriate selection of multiple, validated, and feasible welfare assessment indicators is required to effectively identify compromises or improvements to animal welfare. Animal welfare indicators can be animal or resource based. Indicators can be collated to form assessment tools (e.g., grimace scales) or animal welfare assessment models (e.g., 5 Domains) and frameworks (e.g., 5 Freedoms). The literature contains a wide variety of indicators, with both types needed for effective animal welfare assessment; however, there is yet to be an ideal constellation of indicators for animal-based welfare assessment in small mammals such as guinea pigs (Cavia Porcellus), mice (Mus musculus), rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), and rats (Rattus norvegicus). A systematic review of grey and peer-reviewed literature was performed to determine the types of animal-based welfare indicators available to identify and assess animal health and welfare in these small mammals maintained across a wide variety of conditions. The available indicators were categorised and scored against a selection of criteria, including potential ease of use and costs. This review and analysis aim to provide the basis for further research into animal welfare indicators for these species. Future applications of this work may include improvements to animal welfare assessments or schemes, guiding better management, and implementing future strategies to enable better animal welfare.

In 2023, there were 114 registered zoos in Korea, more than half of which are small indoor zoos. The welfare conditions of these indoor zoos have become a social issue. The amendment to the Zoo and Aquarium Act in 2023 introduced a licensing system based on the UK’s zoo licensing framework, requiring zoos to meet specific criteria in order to obtain an operating license. This study conducts welfare assessments of zoo animals, allowing for the evaluation of the welfare status of each species and the welfare levels associated with the zoo environment. This study assessed animal welfare and microenvironmental conditions in South Korean zoos using a pilot inspector system integrating the Modified Animal Welfare Assessment Grid (M-AWAG) with environmental evaluations. Sixteen zoos were selected from 109 registered facilities, categorized into four groups based on accreditation status and size. Eleven commonly housed species were evaluated to maximize species diversity. Three trained inspectors—a wildlife veterinarian, a zookeeper, and an animal welfare researcher—conducted welfare assessments across four categories: physical, psychological, environmental, and procedural. Environmental variables measured included temperature, humidity, sound levels, illuminance, and odor concentration. The inter-rater reliability among inspectors was 0.942 with high objectivity. Results showed environmental (scores ranging from 4.58 to 6.95), psychological (3.38–4.42), and procedural (3.54–4.78) welfare scores were consistently poorer than physical scores (1.63–2.51) across all species, indicating significant areas for improvement. Analysis of environmental variables showed that illuminance, temperature, and humidity varied significantly among zoo groups Higher sound levels were associated with higher food and drink intake scores (r = 0.28, p < 0.001). High illuminance was negatively correlated with food and drink intake scores (r = −0.24, p = 0.007). Relative humidity was negatively correlated with food and drink intake (r = −0.17, p = 0.046) and activity level (r = −0.18, p = 0.042). The results of this study, conducted as the first pilot project of its kind in Korea, demonstrate that microenvironmental factors can influence animal welfare and highlight the importance of individualized welfare assessments tailored to the ecological and behavioral needs of each species. The standardized welfare assessment protocol developed in this study can provide an empirical basis for evaluating and improving the welfare of animals of various species in domestic zoos, and easily measurable environmental-based assessments—such as temperature, humidity, light, and sound—provide essential data for improving actual animal welfare.

In organic farming animal welfare is one important aspect included in the internationally agreed organic principles of health, ecology, fairness and care (IFOAM 2006), reflecting expectation of consumers and farmers. The definition of organic animal welfare includes-besides traditional terms of animal welfare-'regeneration' and 'naturalness'. Organic animal welfare assessment needs to reflect this and use complex parameters, include natural behaviour and a systemic view. Furthermore, various parties with seemingly conflicting interests are involved, causing ethical dilemmas, such as the use of nose rings for outdoor sows (impaired animal welfare vs. destruction of humus). Solutions can only be found when foundational concepts are translated and applied to practical situations. On-farm animal welfare assessment and implementation of improvement strategies are increasingly relevant scientific areas. They combine on-farm welfare assessment, identification of key problem areas and connected risk factors. Constant communication between all parties is crucial for success. Animal health and welfare planning is one application of this approach, which was carried out on Austrian organic pig farms as well as organic dairy farms in seven European countries. The projects included welfare assessment, feedback and benchmarking as a tool for communication between farmers, advisors and scientists. Finally goals were set by the farmer and improvement strategies applicable to organic farming were implemented. This included prevention of disease by management strategies instead of routine treatment with pharmaceutical products. It appeared that next to problem structuring, multidisciplinary problem solving demands good communications skills to relate animal welfare science to value reflections.