Search

The prenatal period is of critical importance in defining how individuals respond to their environment throughout life. Stress experienced by pregnant females has been shown to have detrimental effects on offspring behaviour, health and productivity. The sheep has been used extensively as a model species to inform human studies. However, in the farmed environment, the consequences for the lamb of the imposition of prenatal stresses upon the ewe have received much less attention. The stressors that pregnant ewes are most frequently exposed to include sub-optimal nutrition and those related to housing, husbandry and environment which may be either acute or chronic. A systematic review of the literature was adopted to identify material which had production-relevant maternal stressors and lamb outcomes. The current review focussed upon the lamb up to weaning around the age of 100 days and the results clearly demonstrate that stressors imposed upon the ewe have implications for offspring welfare and performance. Maternal under-nutrition (UN) in the last third of pregnancy consistently impaired lamb birth-weight and subsequent vigour and performance, while earlier UN had a variable effect on performance. Feeding the ewe above requirements did not have positive effects on lamb performance and welfare. Social and husbandry stressors such as transport, shearing, mixing and physiological treatments designed to mimic acute stress which would be considered disadvantageous for the ewe had positive or neutral effects for the lamb, highlighting a potential conflict between the welfare of the ewe and her lamb. This review also identified considerable gaps in knowledge, particularly in respect of the impact of disease upon the ewe during pregnancy and interactions between different stressors and the responses of ewe and lamb. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A survey of UK based pig farmers and veterinarians was conducted, in order to investigate attitudes to pain and the use of pain relief in pigs. Survey respondents were asked to indicate which anti-inflammatory drugs they used or prescribed for pigs, how often these were administered, and the level of pain they associated with particular conditions. The survey found that veterinarians used a range of anti-inflammatory products to treat pigs with lameness. While both farmers and veterinarians gave similar pain scores overall, farmers rated gastrointestinal disease as more painful and conversely veterinarians scored lameness higher. Female and younger respondents gave higher pain scores than males and older respondents. Overall, farmers and veterinarians had a positive attitude towards pain relief in pigs with the majority agreeing that animals recovered more promptly w hen pain relief was administered. Most farmers agreed that the recognition and management of pain is an important part of pig husbandry, and many expressed an interest in finding out more about identifying pain in this species as well as the treatment options available. The study highlighted potential barriers to the increased application of pain relief in pigs in that almost one-third of veterinarians and two-thirds of farmers did not agree that they discussed pain management with each other, while other respondents indicated that they found it difficult to recognise pain in pigs, and did not know how to treat it appropriately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A key indicator of resource use within farming is technical efficiency, which measures the amount of physical output attainable from a given set of inputs. The social aspects, in particular the treatment of animals, have generally been ignored within these measurement schemas. In addition, animal welfare will affect the production technology under which farms operate, and some allowance for this is needed within the measurement approach. This is the first paper to apply animal welfare as a discriminating technology within a technical efficiency framework. Using results from an animal welfare monitoring study coupled with resource usage data, it presents an adjusted measure of technical efficiency applied to a sample of British dairy farms and compares differences in lameness management strategies for herds. We employ both a categorical and nondiscretionary variant of the data envelopment analysis approach to measure technical efficiencies and adjust for various degrees of lameness prevalence among these farms. This paper finds that farms with low rates of lameness (below 10% of the cattle herd) tend to have significantly higher technical efficiencies than those with lameness rates of above 10% of the herd. Farms that have levels of lameness of between 10 to 20% of the herd and higher levels of lameness (above 20% of the herd) did not differ significantly. Furthermore, low lameness farms are inefficient in terms of labor and stocking density, but this is outweighed by the gain in milk yield obtained on these farms. Consequently, we argue for a whole-farm, rather than a partial indicator, approach to assessing efficiency when noneconomic factors such as lameness are accounted for. From a policy perspective, we support programs that encourage active lameness management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The presence of hock injury was assessed in the milking herds of 80 dairy farms (40 organic, 40 nonorganic) across the United Kingdom. A wide range of information on farm management and husbandry was gathered via interview to assess the factors contributing to hock damage for all 80 farms, and a comprehensive building appraisal was conducted for 40 farms visited during the winter housing period. The prevalence of hock lesions was lower on organic compared with nonorganic farms (37.2 vs. 49.1%). Prevalence of hock damage was greater in the spring than fall (59.9 vs. 21.6%) and cows housed in free-stalls had a greater prevalence of hock lesions than those housed on straw (46.0 vs. 25.0%). Prevalence of hock damage increased with lactation number. In the analysis of fall/spring data, the age first mated, herd biosecurity, duration of summer grazing, and cow milk yield were significant factors relating to herd hock damage. Larger herds had a greater proportion of cows with hock swellings. Farms with a shorter calving interval had more cows with hock swellings. Factors relating to housing conditions that were positively associated with the prevalence of hock damage were low feed face space per cow, inferior passageway cleanliness, low total standing area per cow, and the type of bedding added to the free-stall. To assess whether free-stall versus straw-pen or organic versus nonorganic farms had different sets of risk factors, the data were reanalyzed for these types separately. For the straw-pen farms a high culling rate was associated with more hock damage. Within nonorganic farms, the length of summer grazing was significant, with longer periods meaning less hock injury. The prevalence of hock injuries on many UK farms, both organic and nonorganic, exceeded levels that are deemed acceptable for cow comfort. Efforts are needed to improve housing standards to reduce the prevalence of hock injury and consequently improve cow welfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The numbers of organic dairy farms are increasing in the United Kingdom and in other parts of the world. On organic farms, the use of veterinary medicines is restricted. Because of this, there is concern that cow health is poorer on these farms. As udder health is primarily maintained by the use of antimicrobials, the effect of organic status on mastitis and somatic cell counts (SCC) is important to investigate. The aim of this study was therefore to determine whether the organic status and other management factors affect SCC. A group of 80 dairy farms was used in the study: 40 organic farms and 40 nonorganic farms. The farms were recruited in pairs, and each organic:nonorganic pair was matched for herd size, housing type, genetic merit for milk production and geographical location. Somatic cell count data were extracted from national databases for a standard year (2004), and analyzed using stepwise logistic regression models. The organic status of the farm did not appear in the final model, indicating no major influence of organic status on SCC. There were, however, several effects of management on SCC. Somatic cell counts were lower on farms where the udders were not cleaned or cleaned only when dirty. Somatic cell counts were also lower on farms that kept cows in larger management groups and where the majority, but not all cases of mastitis are treated with antimicrobials. It can be concluded that the control measures used on the organic farms in this study are at least as effective as those used on nonorganic farms in controlling SCC. Other management factors are influential and attention to these factors will allow farmers to reduce SCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is common in many countries for sheep to be housed during winter from mid-gestation until lambing to protect ewes and lambs from adverse conditions and improve late gestation nutritional management. Keeping ewes indoors, however, has its own challenges as the animals may be mixed with unfamiliar conspecifics, have limited floor and feeding space, experience changes to their diet and increased handling by humans. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the effect of variation in housing management (space allowance and social stability) on the behaviour and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis responses of pregnant ewes from mid-to-late gestation (weeks 11-18 of pregnancy). Seventy-seven ewes (41 primiparous, 36 multiparous) were divided into two groups: 'Control' and 'Restricted space and mixed' (RS-Mix), where RS-Mix ewes were allocated half the amount of space (1.27 vs 2.5 m 2 for RS-Mix and Control, respectively) and feedface (concentrate feeder space) allowance (36 vs 71 cm per ewe) given to the Control group and were also subjected to two social mixing events. Aggressive behaviour at the feedface and time spent standing, lying, walking, feeding and ruminating were recorded and faecal samples were collected for assessment of faecal glucocorticoid metabolite (FGM) concentrations. Higher aggression was observed in RS-Mix ewes during the first week of observation (P = 0.044), which gradually declined to the same level as Control ewes by the end of the study (P = 0.045). RS-Mix ewes were significantly less likely to be able to freely join the feedface compared to Controls (P = 0.022). No other significant treatment effects on aggressive behaviour or FGM during gestation were found. RS-Mix ewes displayed significantly higher ruminating behaviour at week 18 of gestation compared to Control ewes (P < 0.001), but no other effects were seen on general pen behaviour. However, the effect of indoor housing had a significant impact on primiparous ewes, who had lower weight gain (P = 0.015) and higher FGM concentrations (P = 0.014) compared to multiparous ewes regardless of treatment group. The data suggest that, although no sustained effects on behaviour or HPA axis responses were seen with the differences in space and feeder allowance or social stability at the levels used in this study, inexperienced (primiparous) ewes may find indoor housing more stressful; and are less able to adapt compared to multiparous ewes. These effects may influence the behaviour of the ewe at lambing time, and her offspring., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

To limit tail biting incidence, most pig producers in Europe tail dock their piglets. This is despite EU Council Directive 2008/120/EC banning routine tail docking and allowing it only as a last resort. The paper aims to understand what it takes to fulfil the intentions of the Directive by examining economic results of four management and housing scenarios, and by discussing their consequences for animal welfare in the light of legal and ethical considerations. The four scenarios compared are: 'Standard Docked', a conventional housing scenario with tail docking meeting the recommendations for Danish production (0.7 m2/pig); 'Standard Undocked', which is the same as 'Standard Docked' but with no tail docking, 'Efficient Undocked' and 'Enhanced Undocked', which have increased solid floor area (0.9 and 1.0 m2/pig, respectively) provision of loose manipulable materials (100 and 200 g/straw per pig per day) and no tail docking. A decision tree model based on data from Danish and Finnish pig production suggests that Standard Docked provides the highest economic gross margin with the least tail biting. Given our assumptions, Enhanced Undocked is the least economic, although Efficient Undocked is better economically and both result in a lower incidence of tail biting than Standard Undocked but higher than Standard Docked. For a pig, being bitten is worse for welfare (repeated pain, risk of infections) than being docked, but to compare welfare consequences at a farm level means considering the number of affected pigs. Because of the high levels of biting in Standard Undocked, it has on average inferior welfare to Standard Docked, whereas the comparison of Standard Docked and Enhanced (or Efficient) Undocked is more difficult. In Enhanced (or Efficient) Undocked, more pigs than in Standard Docked suffer from being tail bitten, whereas all the pigs avoid the acute pain of docking endured by the pigs in Standard Docked. We illustrate and discuss this ethical balance using numbers derived from the above-mentioned data. We discuss our results in the light of the EU Directive and its adoption and enforcement by Member States. Widespread use of tail docking seems to be accepted, mainly because the alternative steps that producers are required to take before resorting to it are not specified in detail. By tail docking, producers are acting in their own best interests. We suggest that for the practice of tail docking to be terminated in a way that benefits animal welfare, changes in the way pigs are housed and managed may first be required.

The behavior of groups of housed, lactating dairy cattle was observed over 2 winter housing periods on 20 organic farms and 20 conventional farms in the United Kingdom. Three methods were used: (1) 6 video-clips of 10 min duration were captured of cows feeding at sections of the feed-bunk face during the peak feeding period (0 to 90 min) and continuously observed for aggressive interactions among cows; (2) the proportion of cows at the feed-bunk face was scanned every 15 min for 4.5h to include the peak feeding period (0 to 255 min); and (3) all nonfeeding behaviors were scanned every 15 min for 2.5h after the peak feeding period (120 to 255 min). The latter scans were analyzed post hoc for measures of cow comfort (freestall farms only). Management and health data were collected on each farm. On farms with open-fronted feed-bunk faces, a greater number of aggressive interactions occurred at the feed-bunk face at peak feeding time on organic farms than on conventional farms (organic = 36.3 ± 4.4; conventional = 29.1 ± 3.0). Higher proportions of cows were at the feed-bunk face at peak feeding on organic farms than on conventional farms (organic=0.58 ± 0.04; conventional=0.48 ± 0.03). Housing type (freestall versus straw pen) explained most differences in postfeeding behavior (proportion of ruminating cow in alleyways: freestalls=0.16±0.06 vs. straw-pen=0.08 ± 0.03), with few differences between organic and conventional herds. On freestall farms, the proportions of cows on organic farms lying down postfeeding was smaller than in conventional herds (organic=0.38 ± 0.09 vs. conventional=0.43 ± 0.07). Differences in behavior around peak feeding time could be associated with the reduction in food "quality" on organic farms compared with the energy requirement of the cows, with cows on organic farms being highly motivated to feed. A correlation was observed between farms that had high amounts of lying and farms that had high lameness prevalence (R(2)=55.3), suggesting a complex relationship between comfort and pain. Overall, the behavior of dairy cows on organic farms was not different from that of conventionally reared cows, and the results suggest that most behavioral welfare problems relating to housing could be alleviated by management practices., (Copyright © 2011 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)