On-farm Welfare Assessment Protocols Research Articles

Development of a welfare assessment protocol and assessment of dairy cattle welfare in Haryana and Punjab states of Northern India

AbstractThe aim of this study was to develop an on-farm dairy cattle welfare assessment protocol at different-sized farms in two major commercial dairy farming states in India. For developing the protocol, the basic ‘Integrative Diagnostic System Welfare’ (IDSW) framework was modified to include three welfare components (animal housing and other facilities; feeds and feeding practices; and animal health, performance and behaviour) and 20 welfare indicators (ten resource- and ten animal-based). Each indicator was weighed on a value scale with an aggregate welfare score of 100. The protocol was tested for feasibility, validity and reliability using Cronbach's alpha and Guttman split-half coefficient. Using this protocol, welfare was assessed on 60 commercial farms in Punjab and 50 in Haryana, divided into three adult herd sizes: small (S < 20), medium (M = 21–50) and large (L > 50). Welfare scores in L (76.60 [± 1.70]) and M (68.40 [± 2.27]) sized herds in Punjab were higher than in S herds (60.80 [± 2.77]). In Haryana these were higher in L (68.1 [± 1.18]) than in S (60.50 [± 2.74]) and M (59.35 [± 2.17]) sized herds. The aggregate average welfare score was higher in Punjab (68.60 [± 1.49]) than in Haryana (62.65 [± 2.02]). Welfare at more than 75% of the farms in Punjab and more than 50% of those in Haryana was judged as ‘acceptable.’ Six welfare indicators in Punjab and eight in Haryana were most compromised. Four indicators (microclimate protection measures, availability of milking parlour, cow cleanliness and reproductive efficiency) were the most compromised indicators in both states. To improve dairy cattle welfare in these states we recommend an emphasis on improving housing and feeding conditions, especially at small and medium farms, along with heat stress amelioration measures and improving hygiene and reproductive efficiency at all farms.

The development of the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for donkeys

The donkey population has increased in the last 10 years, with an estimated 50 million donkeys currently worldwide. Donkey welfare, meanwhile, is an increasing global concern that receives close public scrutiny. However, multiple challenges are surrounding how donkey welfare is assessed and recorded. The Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) project is the first project, funded by the European Commission, intended to improve donkey welfare by developing a scientifically sound and practical on-farm welfare assessment protocol. The present study describes the procedure for the development of the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for donkeys: 1) selection of promising welfare indicators; 2) research to cover gaps in knowledge; 3) stakeholder consultation; 4) testing the prototype protocol on-farm. The proposed two-level strategy improved on-farm feasibility, while the AWIN donkey app enables the standardized collection of data with prompt results. Although limitations are linked with a relatively small reference population, the AWIN welfare assessment protocol represents the first scientific and standardized approach to evaluate donkey welfare on-farm.

Tilapia On-Farm Welfare Assessment Protocol for Semi-intensive Production Systems.

The aim of this study was to develop and test a tilapia on-farm welfare assessment protocol, based on Brazilian semi-intensive production systems. The study included two mains steps: the elaboration of tilapia welfare protocol and its on-field feasibility test. The protocol, including the potential indicators organized into health, environmental, nutritional, and behavioral categories, was tested on three farms. Skin, eyes, gills, jaws, fins, and vertebral spine were individually examined in 139 individual tilapias. Water physicochemical parameters and production system were considered. The overall nutritional status of individuals was assessed through body condition factor, feed conversion ratio, feed crude protein ratio, and feed ingestion behavior. During massive capture, signals of stress, level of crowding, and duration of air exposure were registered. Time required for loss of consciousness was evaluated by clinical reflexes and other behaviors during slaughter. Eye, jaw, and gill scores were different across farms (Kruskal-Wallis test, p = 0.011; 0.015; 0.043, respectively), showing good discrimination power. Critical welfare points were extremely low dissolved oxygen in water, fin and skin lesions, prolonged air exposure during pre-slaughter handling and non-humane slaughter techniques, as decapitation or asphyxia. The protocol presents practical viability and it is an initial step for the development of a tilapia welfare strategy, where the prioritization of critical welfare points, implementation of corrective actions and monitoring of the results is part of a permanent welfare management system.

On-farm testing of dairy calves’ avoidance response to human approach: Effects of sex, age and test order

AbstractHuman approach tests are generally accepted as valid measures of the human-animal relationship and hence are widely included in on-farm welfare assessment protocols. Most measures of avoidance response to human approach in production animals have been developed and tested under experimental conditions rather than on commercial farms, thereby making the results less relevant for operational on-farm animal welfare assessment. By contrast, the current study was conducted on calves in their home pens. On 110 Norwegian dairy farms, 548 group-housed calves (aged 22-288 days) were tested individually for their behavioural response to an unfamiliar human approach by a single test person. To conduct the test, the respective calf manager administered concentrates to the manger, followed by the test person who approached each animal in turn in a standardised manner. The avoidance response of the individual calf was categorised as 0 to 5 (maximal to no avoidance) in reaction to an attempted approach and head touch by the test person. The statistical analyses showed that heifer calves were more avoidant compared to bull calves, as were younger bulls compared to older bulls, and that overall avoidance increased in calves that were not tested first.

On-Farm Welfare Assessment Protocol for Suckling Piglets: A Pilot Study.

Simple SummaryThe welfare of piglets is a major concern for the pig industry. Despite a large body of knowledge regarding piglets welfare, only a few specific protocols to assess welfare have been proposed for suckling piglets. Consequently, there is limited implementation of monitoring of piglets welfare during the nursery phase. Therefore, the present study tested the ability of a new protocol regarding the identification of the main welfare issues in suckling piglets and their relationship to management conditions. This pilot study involved 134 litters from two farms, with a total of 1608 piglets assessed at the age of 7 and 20 days. In both farms, some litters were tail docked, while others were left undocked. The welfare parameters consisted of behavioural, lesion and health measures. The results showed that the main issues were represented by lesions in the front area of the body, probably the consequence of teat competition due to repeated cross-fostering, and lack of appropriate milk supplementation. Non-aggressive lesions and health conditions were mainly related to housing conditions such as light and pen and nest temperatures. Tail docking did not influence lesions or behaviour; however, tail-docked piglets showed high scores in the indicators of a negative emotional state.Piglets experience welfare issues during the nursery phase. This pilot study aimed to test a protocol for identifying the main welfare issues in suckling piglets and to investigate relationships among animal-based indicators and management conditions. Litters (n = 134), composed of undocked and tail-docked piglets, were assessed at two farms. After birth, observations were made at the age of 7 days and 20 days. At each observation, housing conditions (HCs) were measured, and 13 animal-based indicators, modified from Welfare Quality, Classyfarm, Assurewel and others introduced ex novo, were recorded. A generalized linear mixed model was used, considering animal-based indicators as dependent variables and farm, piglets’ age, tail docking and HCs as independent variables. The main welfare issues were lesions of the limb (32.6%) and the front area of the body (22.8%), a poor body condition score (BCS) (16.1%), ear lesions (15.5%), and tail lesions (9.7%). Negative social behaviour (e.g., fighting and biting) represented 7.0% of the active behaviour, with tail biting observed in 8.7% of the piglets. While lesions on the front areas of the body were mostly associated with the farm, tail lesions, low BCS, tear staining, and diarrhoea were associated with light and nest temperature (p < 0.05). In particular, tail biting increased with scarce light (p = 0.007). Tail docking did not influence any animal-based indicator except for tear staining which was higher in the tail-docked as compared to the undocked piglets (p = 0.05), increasing awareness on this practice as a source of negative emotion in piglets. The protocol tested may be a promising tool for assessing on-farm piglets’ welfare.

Animal-Based Measures for the On-Farm Welfare Assessment of Geese.

Simple SummaryThis paper aims to identify animal-based measures of geese welfare for birds raised in commercial meat production systems, and to assess the reliability of these measures. As with other livestock production systems, it is important that geese producers can demonstrate compliance with accepted welfare standards. Presently, there are no welfare measures that have been developed specifically for the geese meat industry. The results showed that plumage dirtiness, twisted wings, and broken/twisted wings are valid and reliable measures of goose welfare and can thus be included in on-farm welfare assessment protocols. Future studies should examine the reliability of other animal-based measures.Currently, no specific animal-based measures (ABMs) protocols are available for geese in commercial meat production systems. Following a critical review of the literature and consultation of experts, seven ABMs, potentially valid and feasible for the on-farm welfare assessment of geese, were identified and then tested in 12 farms in Poland to assess their inter-observer reliability. Two observers conducted the assessment, which was divided into two phases. First, a handling test assessed the human–animal relationship (HAR), and a 100% inter-observer reliability was achieved by the observers when evaluating the attitudes of stockpeople and the reactions of geese to humans. Next, an animal inspection was conducted, and the observers simultaneously and independently visually evaluated 100 randomly selected geese per farm and assessed whether the selected ABMs could be identified. In terms of inter-observer reliability, high correlation coefficients were found for plumage dirtiness (ρ = 0.745; p < 0.01), twisted wings (ρ = 0.890; p < 0.001), and broken/twisted wings (ρ = 0.858; p < 0.001). The results showed that plumage dirtiness, twisted wings, and broken/twisted wings are valid and reliable measures. Further research should address the reliability of ABMs of geese in other types of production systems.

Calf- and herd-level factors associated with dairy calf reactivity

A positive relationship between handlers and animals in farm systems is essential because the human-animal relationship has implications for welfare and productivity. For this reason, on-farm animal welfare assessment protocols often include the behavioral response of animals to humans to measure the quality of the human-animal relationship. The existing literature has described this relationship as being multifactorial in nature. In the current study, we aimed to investigate the potential influence of farm management and infrastructure characteristics, calf manager traits, and intrinsic features of dairy calves on the human-animal relationship. To this end, an escape test was conducted with 698 calves on 30 dairy farms in Chile. This test measured the calf's response to the active approach of an unfamiliar human (and was scored from 0 [fearful] to 4 [friendly]). The explanatory variables used to predict calves' response in the escape test were grouped according to the following categories: (1) farm management and infrastructure (e.g., calf-dam separation age, space allowance); (2) calf manager (e.g., attitudes, behavior, and background); and (3) calf (e.g., breed, sex, age). We concluded that calf managers with additional jobs on the farm, no training, low job satisfaction, a greater proportion of negative contacts, and more negative attitudes were predictive of fearfulness in the escape test. Holstein breed (compared with Holstein and Jersey crossbreeds) was associated with greater odds of fearful calves. Our study confirms the association between animals' fear and handlers' features, which can potentially be used to select employees on a farm. Understanding the factors that influence fear responses in calves may highlight ways to improve the relationship between animals and humans.

The effects of herd size on the welfare of dairy cows in a pasture-based system using animal- and resource-based indicators

Animal welfare assessments were conducted on 50 Australian pasture-based dairy farms of varying herd sizes: 16 small (<300 cows), 15 medium-sized (300-500 cows), 11 large (501-750 cows), and 10 very large (751+ cows). A protocol based on elements of Welfare Quality adapted for Australian conditions was developed to assess the broad categories of good feeding, housing, health, and appropriate behavior. Farm records, body condition scores, integument injuries, fecal plaques, avoidance distance of humans, and fecal pat scoring for acidosis assessment were undertaken. The mean maximum kilograms of grain fed per day significantly increased with herd size, from 5.2 ± 0.38 (small), 7.7 ± 0.29 (medium-sized), 8.8 ± 0.45 (large), to 10.1 ± 0.80 kg (very large). Acidosis was not related to herd size based on either farm records or fecal pat scoring. All cows had access to water for more than 12 h in a 24-h period. More larger farms had water points on the farm tracks or at the dairy. Very large farms (90%) were more likely than others (36-39%) to provide water suitable for human consumption. Integument lesions were not related to herd size and were uncommon; 56 and 84% of farms had no cows with lesions or hairless areas, respectively, and no farm had >6% integument lesions. Heat stress is an important welfare risk in Australia. All farms had some form of cooling strategy; shade in all paddocks was more common on smaller farms (>90%) than others (<75%). Sprinklers were more common on large or very large farms (>80%) than others (<65%). Mastitis and lameness were the most common health conditions, followed by dystocia, downer cows, and gastrointestinal diseases. Prevalence of lameness, mastitis, downer cows, dystocia, and gastrointestinal disease were not related to farm size. Larger farms were more likely to have electronic infrastructure to monitor or electronically draft cows for inspection. We found wide variation in the avoidance distance of humans, but this was not related to farm size. Larger farms had longer walking distances to pasture and longer time away from pasture, which could affect the time available for behaviors such as lying down. Animal welfare risks differ on Australian farms compared with housed cattle. As animal welfare is multidimensional, both animal- and resource-based indicators can be useful. Animal-based indicators have strengths in that, when measured accurately, they genuinely reflect the outcome being measured, but they also have weaknesses in that the point-estimate of a disease prevalence on a given day may not be representative of other times of year or differences in case definition may exist when farm records are used. Similarly, resource-based indicators have strengths in that they may be applicable to longer periods, but weaknesses because the fact a resource is present does not guarantee it is being used. Identifying the major risks to animal welfare on individual farms and ensuring a plan is in place to effectively manage them should be an important element of any on-farm animal welfare assessment protocol.

Associations between qualitative behaviour assessments and measures of leg health, fear and mortality in Norwegian broiler chicken flocks

Qualitative behavioural assessments (QBA) is an animal-based welfare measure that has been included in several on-farm welfare assessment protocols, including the Welfare Quality® (WQ) protocol for poultry. However, there is a scarcity of information about how it relates to other animal-based welfare indicators. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate the associations between QBA and selected animal-based welfare indicators commonly used for the assessment of broiler chicken welfare, i.e. lameness, foot pad dermatitis (FPD), fear of humans (touch test), and mortality.A total of 50 commercial broiler chicken farms were visited by one observer who conducted on-farm welfare assessments using the WQ protocol. Assessments were done close to the time of slaughter (between day 27 and 34). QBA was analysed using principal component analysis (PCA), revealing two main components, labelled arousal (PC1) and mood (PC2). The scores for the other welfare indicators were categorised into dichotomous (touch test) or ordinal scales (gait score, footpad dermatitis score and mortality) to deal with skewed distributions caused by homogenous data. To investigate the associations between QBA and the other welfare indicators, we ran logistic and ordinal logistic regression models with these welfare measures as outcomes, and the two components of QBA as the predictors.Significant negative associations were found between both components of QBA and the chickens’ fear of humans, as measured using the touch test. In other words, flocks with higher scores on both mood and arousal were less likely to have any chickens that were possible to touch by the assessor. A possible interpretation of these associations is that both QBA components may indicate greater liveliness in birds that did not accept to be touched by the observer. Flocks with a higher arousal score, as measured by the first component of QBA (PC1), were also less likely to be in a higher mortality category. For the other selected animal-based measures, there were no associations with QBA. We conclude that QBA needs thorough validation for the routine use in the assessment of broiler chicken welfare, but that the method may provide useful supplementary information in overall welfare assessments. This information may be particularly valuable in a production system, like the broiler industry, where management is highly standardised, sometimes resulting in little between-flock variation in other welfare measures.

A shorter on-farm dairy welfare assessment protocol that can provide useful feedback to producers

On-farm dairy welfare assessments are important tools for the dairy industry. There are several existing assessment protocols; however, these can be quite time-consuming to complete on-farm. The aim of our study was to modify an existing Canadian assessment protocol, the basis for the Dairy Farmers of Canada animal assessment program, to reduce the amount of time needed to complete an assessment on-farm. The original assessment required 2 separate visits to the farm, which took on average 8 to 9 hours and 4 hours to complete, respectively. The goal for the modified assessment protocol was to complete an assessment in a single 6 to 8 hour visit.

Inter-observer reliability of animal-based welfare indicators included in the Animal Welfare Indicators welfare assessment protocol for dairy goats

This study was conducted within the context of the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) project and the underlying scientific motivation for the development of the study was the scarcity of data regarding inter-observer reliability (IOR) of welfare indicators, particularly given the importance of reliability as a further step for developing on-farm welfare assessment protocols. The objective of this study is therefore to evaluate IOR of animal-based indicators (at group and individual-level) of the AWIN welfare assessment protocol (prototype) for dairy goats. In the design of the study, two pairs of observers, one in Portugal and another in Italy, visited 10 farms each and applied the AWIN prototype protocol. Farms in both countries were visited between January and March 2014, and all the observers received the same training before the farm visits were initiated. Data collected during farm visits, and analysed in this study, include group-level and individual-level observations. The results of our study allow us to conclude that most of the group-level indicators presented the highest IOR level (‘substantial’, 0.85 to 0.99) in both field studies, pointing to a usable set of animal-based welfare indicators that were therefore included in the first level of the final AWIN welfare assessment protocol for dairy goats. Inter-observer reliability of individual-level indicators was lower, but the majority of them still reached ‘fair to good’ (0.41 to 0.75) and ‘excellent’ (0.76 to 1) levels. In the paper we explore reasons for the differences found in IOR between the group and individual-level indicators, including how the number of individual-level indicators to be assessed on each animal and the restraining method may have affected the results. Furthermore, we discuss the differences found in the IOR of individual-level indicators in both countries: the Portuguese pair of observers reached a higher level of IOR, when compared with the Italian observers. We argue how the reasons behind these differences may stem from the restraining method applied, or the different background and experience of the observers. Finally, the discussion of the results emphasizes the importance of considering that reliability is not an absolute attribute of an indicator, but derives from an interaction between the indicators, the observers and the situation in which the assessment is taking place. This highlights the importance of further considering the indicators’ reliability while developing welfare assessment protocols.

Welfare assessment of horses: the AWIN approach

AbstractThe EU-funded Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) research project (2011-2015) aimed to improve animal welfare through the development of practical on-farm animal welfare assessment protocols. The present study describes the application of the AWIN approach to the development of a welfare assessment protocol for horses (Equus caballus). Its development required the following steps: (i) selection of potential welfare indicators; (ii) bridging gaps in knowledge; (iii) consulting stakeholders; and (iv) testing a prototype protocol on-farm. Compared to existing welfare assessment protocols for other species, the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for horses introduces a number of innovative aspects, such as implementation of a two-level strategy focused on improving on-farm feasibility and the use of electronic tools to achieve standardised data collection and so promote rapid outcomes. Further refinement to the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for horses is needed in order to firstly gather data from a larger reference population and, secondly, enhance the welfare assessment protocol with reference to different horse housing and husbandry conditions.

Validity and feasibility of Human-Animal Relationship tests for on-farm welfare assessment in dairy goats

This study aims at establishing suitable tests to measure the quality of the Human-Animal Relationship (HAR) in dairy goats for on-farm welfare assessment protocols by evaluating the predictive validity of different categories of HAR tests and their feasibility in on-farm condition. Twelve commercial dairy farms in Northern Italy were selected and classified as “good” (n=6) and “poor” (n=6) HAR on the basis of reports from a technical advisor. Some variables were tested to measure the HAR: sneezing – the number of alert sounds; voluntary approach (VA) test – in a stationary situation, the latency to the first contact by goat and the% of goats that entered in contact with the test person and within a 1.5m radius around her were recorded, both continuously and at scan sample intervals; avoidance distance (AD) test – the avoidance distance from a moving and approaching person and the% of tested goats, of contacts with the test person followed by withdrawal or of acceptances of gentle stroke were recorded. The feasibility of each test was evaluated based on costs, time consumption, safety and training requirement. Sneezes were rarely and random expressed, so they do not seem suitable to be included in a protocol. Both Principal Component Analysis and One-way ANOVA confirmed the predictive validity of most of the variables, which were able to discriminate between “good” and “poor” HAR farms. Latency to first contact resulted valid (P=0.01) and a high feasibility was reported. The indicator was easy to be recorded and the VA test could be stopped immediately after the first contact, saving time. Variables from the AD test resulted valid (% tested goats: P=0.006; AD mean: P=0.016; % contacts: P=0.006; % acceptance: P=0.003), although they were more time consuming or required a more specific training compared to latency to first contact. The correlation among variables seemed to support also a convergent validity of the tests used. The investigation pinpointed promising behavioural tests to be included into on-farm welfare assessment protocols in dairy goats. Taking into account species, test results and feasibility considerations, we suggest the inclusion of latency to the first contact with the test person into on-farm welfare assessment protocols. However, these results should be further tested in a larger number of farms of different dimensions, to overcome the limitations of this study due to the small sample size and to check the effect of farm size.

Results of testing the prototype of the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for dairy goats in 30 intensive farms in Northern Italy

The AWIN project aimed at developing an on-farm welfare assessment protocol for adult dairy goats. A prototype protocol was tested in 30 intensive dairy goat farms to evaluate its feasibility in farms of different size. Time for applying the prototype was recorded and any other constraint was taken into account. Moreover, data collected during the prototype testing provided information on the prevalence of welfare issues in intensive dairy goat farms in Northern Italy. The prototype included 25 animal-based indicators (14 group- and 11 individual-level indicators). The prototype showed a good on-farm feasibility and it was highly accepted among stakeholders, as its application did not interfere with the daily routine. Approximately 2 h were required for the application of the prototype. When feeding racks were available, using them for locking the animals during the individual assessment resulted advantageous to speed the data collection and to reduce handling stress to the goats and disturbance to the farmers. Farm size and different management systems influenced the prevalence of some indicators, with small farms in general better welfare conditions compared to larger farms. The results of the present study represent an important starting point to set up an epidemiological database that may lead to improve the welfare status of goats.

Welfare effects of a disease eradication programme for dairy goats

The Norwegian dairy goat industry has largely succeeded in controlling caprine arthritis encephalitis (CAE), caseous lymphadenitis (CLA) and paratuberculosis through a voluntary disease eradication programme called Healthier Goats (HG). The aim of this study was to apply an on-farm welfare assessment protocol to assess the effects of HG on goat welfare. A total of 30 dairy goat farms were visited, of which 15 had completed disease eradication and 15 had not yet started. Three trained observers assessed the welfare on 10 farms each. The welfare assessment protocol comprised both resource-based and animal-based welfare measures, including a preliminary version of qualitative behavioural assessments with five prefixed terms. A total of 20 goats in each herd were randomly selected for observations of human–animal interactions and physical health. The latter included registering abnormalities of eyes, nostrils, ears, skin, lymph nodes, joints, udder, claws and body condition score. For individual-level data, robust clustered logistic regression analyses with farm as cluster variable were conducted to assess the association with disease eradication. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for comparisons of herd-level data between the two groups. Goats with swollen joints (indicative of CAE) and enlarged lymph nodes (indicative of CLA) were registered on 53% and 93% of the non-HG farms, respectively, but on none of the HG farms. The only other health variables with significantly lower levels in HG herds were skin lesions (P=0.008) and damaged ears due to torn out ear tags (P<0.001). Goats on HG farms showed less fear of unknown humans (P=0.013), and the qualitative behavioural assessments indicated that the animals in these herds were calmer than in non-HG herds. Significantly more space and lower gas concentrations reflected the upgrading of buildings usually done on HG farms. In conclusion, HG has resulted in some welfare improvements beyond the elimination of infectious diseases. The protocol was considered a useful tool to evaluate the welfare consequences of a disease eradication programme. However, larger sample sizes would increase the reliability of prevalence estimates for less common conditions and increase the power to detect differences between the groups. Despite the obvious link between disease and suffering, this aspect is rarely taken into account in the evaluation of disease control programmes. We therefore propose that welfare assessment protocols should be applied to evaluate the merits of disease control or eradication programmes in terms of animal welfare.

On-FarmWelfare Assessment Protocol for Adult Dairy Goats in Intensive Production Systems.

Simple SummaryThe Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) project developed a practical welfare assessment protocol for lactating dairy goats in intensive husbandry systems, using animal-based indicators that cover the whole multidimensional concept of animal welfare. The strict collaboration between scientists and stakeholders resulted in an easy-to-use protocol that provides farmers or veterinarians with comprehensive but clear feedback on the welfare status of the herd in less than three hours. The protocol, which highlights key points and motivates farmers to achieve improvements, has received much attention from interested parties.Within the European AWIN project, a protocol for assessing dairy goats’ welfare on the farm was developed. Starting from a literature review, a prototype including animal-based indicators covering four welfare principles and 12 welfare criteria was set up. The prototype was tested in 60 farms for validity, reliability, and feasibility. After testing the prototype, a two-level assessment protocol was proposed in order to increase acceptability among stakeholders. The first level offers a more general overview of the welfare status, based on group assessment of a few indicators (e.g., hair coat condition, latency to the first contact test, severe lameness, Qualitative Behavior Assessment), with no or minimal handling of goats and short assessment time required. The second level starts if welfare problems are encountered in the first level and adds a comprehensive and detailed individual evaluation (e.g., Body Condition Score, udder asymmetry, overgrown claws), supported by an effective sampling strategy. The assessment can be carried out using the AWIN Goat app. The app results in a clear visual output, which provides positive feedback on welfare conditions in comparison with a benchmark of a reference population. The protocol may be a valuable tool for both veterinarians and technicians and a self-assessment instrument for farmers.

Development and validation of a visual body condition scoring system for dairy goats with picture-based training

Body condition scoring (BCS) is the most widely used method to assess changes in body fat reserves, which reflects its high potential to be included in on-farm welfare assessment protocols. Currently used scoring systems in dairy goats require animal restraint for body palpation. In this study, the Animal Welfare Indicators project (AWIN) proposes to overcome this constraint by developing a scoring system based only on visual assessment. The AWIN visual body condition scoring system highlights representative animals from 3 categories: very thin, normal, and very fat, and was built from data sets with photographs of animals scored by a commonly used 6-point scoring system that requires palpation in 2 anatomical regions. Development of the AWIN scoring system required 3 steps: (1) identification and validation of a body region of interest; (2) sketching the region from photographs; and (3) creation of training material. The scoring system’s reliability was statistically confirmed. An initial study identified features in the rump region from which we could compute a set of body measurements (i.e., measures based on anatomical references of the rump region) that showed a strong correlation with the assigned BCS. To validate the result, we collected a final data set from 171 goats. To account for variability in animal size and camera position, we mapped a subset of features to a standard template and aligned all the rump images before computing the body measurements. Scientific illustrations were created from the aligned images of animals identified as representative of each category to increase clarity and reproducibility. For training material, we created sketches representing the threshold between consecutive categories. Finally, we conducted 2 field reliability studies. In the first test, no training was given to 4 observers, whereas in the second, training using the threshold images was delivered to the same observers. In the first experiment, interobserver results was substantial, showing that the visual scoring system is clear and unambiguous. Moreover, results improved after training, reaching almost perfect agreement for the very fat category. The visual body condition scoring system is not only a practical tool for BCS in dairy goats but also shows potential to be fully automated, which would enhance its use in welfare assessment schemes and farm management.

Feasibility and validity of animal-based indicators for on-farm welfare assessment of thermal stress in dairy goats.

This investigation tested the feasibility and validity of indicators of cold and heat stress in dairy goats for on-farm welfare assessment protocols. The study was performed on two intensive dairy farms in Italy. Two different 3-point scale (0-2) scoring systems were applied to assess cold and heat stress. Cold and heat stress scores were visually assessed from outside the pen in the morning, afternoon and evening in January-February, April-May and July 2013 for a total of nine sessions of observations/farm. Temperature (°C), relative humidity (%) and wind speed (km/h) were recorded and Thermal Heat Index (THI) was calculated. The sessions were allocated to three climatic seasons, depending on THI ranges: cold (<50), neutral (50-65) and hot (>65). Score 2 was rarely assessed; therefore, scores 1 and 2 were aggregated for statistical analysis. The amount of goats suffering from cold stress was significantly higher in the cold season than in neutral (P < 0.01) and hot (P < 0.001) seasons. Signs of heat stress were recorded only in the hot season (P < 0.001). The visual assessment from outside the pen confirms the on-farm feasibility of both indicators: No constraint was found and time required was less than 10 min. Our results show that cold and heat stress scores are valid indicators to detect thermal stress in intensively managed dairy goats. The use of a binary scoring system (presence/absence), merging scores 1 and 2, may be a further refinement to improve the feasibility. This study also allows the prediction of optimal ranges of THI for dairy goat breeds in intensive husbandry systems, setting a comfort zone included into 55 and 70.

Application of the Welfare Quality® animal welfare assessment system in Finnish pig production, part I: Identification of principal components

AbstractThe Welfare Quality® (WQ) on-farm welfare assessment protocols for fattening pigs (n = 95 farms) and sows, as well as suckling piglets (n = 103 farms), were applied on Finnish farms. In order to identify distinct types of welfare problems (WPTs) Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was applied to the pooled animal-based items within both categories of animals. Measures describing suckling piglets did not contribute to the WPTs. The main WPTs (seemingly) reflected fighting in fattening pigs and lack of bedding in both fattening pigs and sows. The results imply that WQ includes biologically plausible shortlists of animal-based measures with decent to good internal consistency describing distinct types of welfare problems in growing pigs and in sows. The 20 descriptors of Qualitative Behavioural Assessment were analysed similarly to identify distinct mood types, which were named active positive, passive positive and passive positive behaviours. The different mood types had close to identical build-up in both fattening pigs and in sows and suckling piglets.

Hair coat condition: A valid and reliable indicator for on-farm welfare assessment in adult dairy goats

The aim of this study is to gather information about the possibility of including the hair coat condition as an animal-based indicator in an on-farm welfare assessment protocol for adult dairy goats. Validity was tested in two repetitions performed in Portugal and Italy, in order to increase the sample size. Two homogeneous groups of 24 adult dairy goats with rough hair coat (RH: matted, rough or scurfy hair) and 24 goats with normal hair coat (NH: shiny and sheen hair, homogeneous and well adherent to the body) were subjected to general clinical examination, evaluation of body condition, collection of hair, faecal samples and skin scraping. RH goats showed a significantly poorer body condition compared to NH goats, with a higher percentage of very thin goats by sternum area palpation (P<0.01) and by lumbar area palpation (P<0.001). Moreover, RH goats also showed mineral deficiencies or surplus that may lead to a consistent loss of weight (Mg, Fe: P<0.001; K, Ca, Al, Ti, Na: P<0.01). RH goats showed a higher prevalence of abnormal lung sounds compared to NH goats (P<0.001). Inter-observer reliability was tested in 10 farms in Portugal and 10 farms in Italy by two assessors per country demonstrating that hair coat assessment is highly reliable (ρ=0.901; P<0.001). Results show that hair coat condition is a valid and reliable indicator of goat welfare to be included in on-farm welfare assessment protocols.