Using Expert Elicitation for ranking hazards, promoters and animal-based measures for on-farm welfare assessment of indoor reared beef cattle: an Italian experience

A new approach and insights on modelling the impact of production diseases on dairy cow welfare

Animal welfare is becoming an important consideration in animal health-related decision-making. Integrating considerations of animal welfare into the decision-making process of farmers involves recognising the significance of health disorder impacts in relation to animal welfare. Yet little research quantifies the impact, making it difficult to include animal welfare in the animal health decision-making process. Quantifying the impact of health disorders on animal welfare is incredibly challenging due to empirical animal-based data collection constraints. An approach to circumvent these constraints is to rely on expert knowledge whereby perceived welfare impairment weights are indicative of the negative welfare effect. In this research, we propose an expertise-based method to quantify the perceived impact of sub-optimal mobility (SOM) on the welfare of dairy cows, because of its welfare importance. We first quantified perceived welfare impairment weights of SOM by eliciting expert knowledge using adaptive conjoint analysis (ACA). Second, using the perceived welfare impairment weights, we derived the perceived welfare disutility (i.e., perceived negative welfare effect) of mobility scores 1-5 (1 = optimal mobility, 5 = severely impaired mobility). Third, using the perceived welfare disutility per mobility score, we quantified the perceived welfare impact at case- and herd-level of SOM for different SOM severity. Results showed that perceived welfare disutility increased with each increase in mobility score. However, the perceived welfare impact of SOM cases with lower mobility scores was higher compared to SOM cases with higher mobility scores. This was because of the longer-lasting duration of the SOM cases with lower mobility scores. Moreover, the perceived herd-level welfare impact was largely due to SOM cases with lower mobility scores because of the longer duration and more frequent incidence compared to the SOM cases with higher mobility scores. These results entail that better welfare of dairy cows with respect to SOM can be achieved if lower mobility scores are detected and treated sooner. Our research demonstrates a novel approach that quantifies the perceived impact of health disorders on animal welfare when empirical evidence is limited.

Paratuberculosis, Animal Welfare and Biosecurity: A Survey in 33 Northern Italy Dairy Goat Farms

Paratuberculosis is a notable infectious disease of ruminants. Goats appear to be particularly susceptible. The survey aimed to investigate the spread of paratuberculosis in Italian goat farming and evaluate whether the presence of the disease could be influenced by welfare and biosecurity deficiencies. A serological survey for paratuberculosis in 33 dairy farms in northern Italy was conducted. Contextually, animal welfare and biosecurity were assessed, using a standardized protocol of 36 welfare indicators and 15 biosecurity indicators which assigns to each farm a welfare and biosecurity score from 0 (any application) to 100% (full application). An overall result of less than 60% was considered insufficient. Nineteen farms (58%) tested positive for paratuberculosis, with a mean intra-herd seroprevalence of 7.4%. Total welfare ranged from 39.56 to 90.7% (mean 68.64%). Biosecurity scores ranged from 10.04 to 90.01% (mean 57.57%). Eight farms (24%) showed poor welfare conditions (welfare score < 60%) and 19 (58%) an unsatisfactory biosecurity condition (biosecurity score < 60%). With respect to the explorative character of the study, an indicative association between seven welfare and biosecurity indicators and paratuberculosis seropositivity was identified. The presence of paratuberculosis in northern Italy dairy goat farms was confirmed. The welfare and biosecurity assessment protocol proved to be an accurate tool, capable of identifying critical points for managing health, welfare and productivity.

Practical Application of the Five Domains Animal Welfare Framework for Supply Food Animal Chain Managers

The author has worked as a consultant with global commercial supply managers for over 20 years. The focus of this commentary will be practical application of The Five Domains Model in commercial systems. Commercial buyers of meat need simple easy-to-use guidelines. They have to use auditors that can be trained in a workshop that lasts for only a few days. Auditing of slaughter plants by major buyers has resulted in great improvements. Supply chain managers need clear guidance on conditions that would result in a failed audit. Animal based outcome measures that can be easily assessed should be emphasized in commercial systems. Some examples of these key animal welfare indicators are: percentage of animals stunned effectively with a single application of the stunner, percentage of lame animals, foot pad lesions on poultry, and body condition scoring. A farm that supplies a buyer must also comply with housing specifications. The farm either has the specified housing or does not have it. It will be removed from the approved supplier list if housing does not comply. These types of easy to assess indicators can be easily evaluated within the four domains of nutrition, environment, health and behavioral interactions. The Five Domains Framework can also be used in a program for continuous improvement of animal welfare.