Preference of beef cattle for feedlot or pasture environments

Efficacy of Edible and Leisure Reinforcers with Domestic Dogs

Preference assessments are often used to identify stimuli that function as potential reinforcers for training or intervention purposes. Specifically, various preference assessment formats have been used to identify preferred stimuli for humans, cockroaches, cotton-top tamarins, tortoises, and wolves, to name a few. However, to date, no study has evaluated the differential efficacy between food and leisure stimuli within domestic dogs. The current study aimed to compare the reinforcing value and efficacy between food and leisure stimuli for domestic dogs by comparing rates of behavior when receiving access to either their top-preferred food or leisure items. Overall results suggest (1) domestic dogs prefer food over leisure items, and (2) food is more likely to function as a reinforcer than leisure items for domestic dog's behavior. These results suggest that dog owners and trainers should consider using food reinforcers over leisure items as reinforcers when attempting to train dogs.

An effective environmental enrichment framework for the continual improvement of production animal welfare

Substrates and objects are provided to farm animals on the assumption that they improve animal welfare by enriching the environment, but these often fail to consider the extent to which an environmental enrichment (EE) improves animal welfare, if at all. Furthermore, there are numerous definitions of EE, each with a unique expectation. If expectations of animal welfare improvement are set too high, industry uptake may be thwarted, but if thresholds are set too low it will not result in meaningful improvements to animal welfare. We propose an EE framework based on revised definitions of EE that reflect improvements to various components of animal welfare: (i) pseudo-enrichment; (ii) EE for meeting basic needs; (iii) EE for pleasure; and (iv) EE for positive welfare balance. This framework requires short- and long-term assessments to determine the impact of the EE, although many are lacking in the production animal literature. Redefining EE with a focus on specific animal welfare outcomes will assist producers in identifying the optimal EE for their enterprise. Subsequently, we encourage dialogue between farmers, researchers and industry stakeholders when designing environmental enrichment programmes. This framework is a science-based tool that can be used to inform the development of clear EE assessment protocols and requirements for animal welfare legislation, assurance programmes and industry. This evidence-based framework ensures that the focus is on the outcome of EE programmes rather than the intent. Importantly, this framework has the flexibility to adapt even as baseline environments evolve, ensuring the continual improvement to production animal welfare.

Beef Cattle Preference and Usage of Environmental Enrichments Provided Simultaneously in a Pasture-Based Environment

Environmental enrichment can improve livestock welfare through increasing environmental complexity to promote a greater range of natural behaviours. However, there is limited understanding of the need for and impacts of enrichments for extensively managed beef cattle that can sometimes be kept in grassed paddocks devoid of additional natural and artificial features, i.e., ‘barren pastures’. This trial assessed which enrichments beef cattle preferred and utilised in a barren paddock environment. Eight groups of seven Angus steers housed on pastured paddocks devoid of natural or artificial features were observed during daylight hours for two days a week over a period of three weeks, after being presented with four enrichments simultaneously: a cattle brush, a piece of hanging rope, a tree stump, and a woodchip pile. Although enrichment use generally decreased over time, the brush, stump, and woodchip maintained a higher level of use than the rope, based on the frequency of interactions and number of displacements around the enrichments (both p < 0.001). This suggests that the brush, stump, and woodchip pile were more valuable resources to the cattle, allowing for grooming and lying behaviours, although oral manipulations also occurred on the stump, woodchip, and rope. The inclusion of these enrichments can increase the complexity of barren pasture environments and allow for the increased expression of natural behaviours, potentially contributing to improved welfare.

Dairy vs beef production - expert views on welfare of cattle in common food production systems

Consumers' views and concerns about the welfare of farm animals may play an important role in their decision to consume dairy, meat and/or plants as their primary protein source. As animals are killed prematurely in both dairy and beef industries, it is important to quantify and compare welfare compromises in these two sectors before the point of death. Seventy world-leading bovine welfare experts based in 23 countries were asked to evaluate the likelihood of a bovine to experience 12 states of potential welfare concern, inspired by the Welfare Quality® protocol. The evaluation focused on the most common beef and dairy production systems in the experts' country and was carried out separately for dairy/beef calves raised for red meat, dairy/beef calves raised for veal, dairy/beef calves raised as a replacement, and for dairy/beef cows. The results show experts rated the overall likelihood of a negative welfare state (i.e. welfare risk) to be higher in animals from dairy herds than from beef herds, for all animal categories, regardless of whether they were used to produce milk, red meat or veal. These findings suggest that consuming food products derived from common dairy production systems (dairy or meat) may be more harmful to the welfare of animals than consuming products derived from common beef production systems (i.e. from animals solely raised for their meat). Raising awareness about the linkage between dairy and meat production, and the toll of milk production on the welfare state of animals in the dairy industry, may encourage a more sustainable and responsible food consumption.

Understanding Behavioural Development of Calves in Natural Settings to Inform Calf Management

Simple Summary

Animal welfare research is intended to address societal concerns regarding animal care, including natural living concerns. We reviewed the literature on calf behaviour when reared in more naturalistic outdoor systems with their mothers and herd. Understanding calf behaviour in more natural settings may help inform changes in calf management and housing that promote behaviours important to calf welfare.

Abstract

One important type of animal welfare concern is “natural living” (i.e., that animals are able to express natural behaviours that are important to them, and to engage with aspects of the natural world that they find important). The aims of this narrative review were to describe the behavioural development of calves (Bos taurus) in natural settings and use this to identify characteristics of natural systems that may be important to consider relative to this natural living conception of animal welfare. At birth, calves are licked by their mothers and soon stand to suckle for colostrum, and during the milk-feeding period, calves spend much of their time lying down. In natural systems, calves perform a variety of social behaviours with herd-mates, and slowly transition from their mother’s milk to eating solid food, by gradually increasing time spent grazing and ruminating. In contrast, on most commercial dairy systems, dairy calves are removed from their mothers at birth, housed individually, fed restricted amounts of milk and weaned abruptly at a young age. The results of this review suggest that accommodating key natural behaviours, for example through the use of teat feeding of milk, social housing, and gradual weaning, can help address welfare concerns.

A method for assessing sustainability, with beef production as an example

A comprehensive approach to decisions about the use of land and other world resources, taking full account of biological and other scientific information, is crucial for good decisions to be made now and in future. The sustainability of systems for producing food and other products is sometimes assessed using too narrow a range of component factors. A production system might be unsustainable because of adverse effects on a wide range of aspects of human welfare, animal welfare, or the environment. All factors should be included in sustainability evaluation, otherwise products or actions might be avoided without adequate consideration of key factors or of the diversity of production systems. A scoring method that is based on scientific information and potentially of general relevance is presented here, using beef production as a example with a review of each of its sustainability components. This includes an overall combined score and specific factors that make the system unacceptable for some consumers. The results show that, in this example, the sustainability of the best systems is very much better than that of the worst systems. By taking account of scores for a wide range of components of sustainability in comparing beef-production systems, better quality policies about beef use can be formulated than when statements referring only to one system are considered. The least sustainable beef-production systems are extensive grazing that causes land degradation and the use of feedlots or indoor housing with grain feeding. Semi-intensive silvopastoral systems are the most sustainable beef-production systems, and well-managed pasture-fed beef from areas where crop production is uneconomic is also sustainable. This simple, scientifically based scoring system could be modified to use positive as well as negative scores and is of value for policy makers, researchers, producers, organisations aiming to improve sustainability, and the general public.

Does the Effect of Replacing Cottonseed Meal with Dried Distiller's Grains on Nellore Bulls Finishing Phase Vary between Pasture and Feedlot?

Simple Summary

The use of less costly products that are not consumed by humans in animal feed has gained increasing attention in the context of sustainable production. Dried distiller’s grains (DDG), a co-product of the production of ethanol from corn, stands out for being efficient in the nutrition of ruminants, meeting both the energy and protein demands of the diets, when the cattle are kept in the pasture or feedlot. The study aimed to evaluate the effect of replacing cottonseed meal (CM) by DDG in two levels (50% (50DDG) and 100% (100DDG)), in terms of efficiency in the productive aspects of cattle finishing phase comparing pasture versus feedlot. The effect of replacing CM by DDG on dry matter, nutrients intake and nutrients digestibility depends on finishing system. While in the pasture system animal consumed more nutrients in the CM, a greater intake was observed in the 100DDG in feedlot. The nutrients digestibility was lower in the pasture. Animal performance and final body weight were higher in the feedlot. The use of DDG does not change the animal performance finished in pasture or feedlot, and it is a viable alternative to replace conventional supplements in finishing phase in both systems in tropical environment.

Abstract

The study aimed to evaluate the effect of replacing cottonseed meal by dried distiller’s grains (DDG) in terms of efficiency in the productive aspects of beef cattle finishing in pasture versus feedlot. The experiment was conducted in a completely randomized design in a 2 × 3 factorial arrangement, with two production systems (pasture versus feedlot) and three supplements: CM, conventional supplement with cottonseed meal (CM) as a protein source; 50DDG: supplement with 50% replacement of CM by DDG; and 100DDG: 100% replacement. The effect of replacing CM by DDG on dry matter and nutrients intake and nutrients digestibility depends on the finishing system (p < 0.05). While in the pasture system animal consumed more nutrients in the CM, a greater intake was observed in the 100DDG in feedlot. The nutrients digestibility was lower in the pasture (p < 0.05). Animal performance and final body weight were higher in the feedlot (p < 0.0001), with averages of 1.57 kg/d and 566 kg of final body weight (FBW) for feedlot, and 0.99 kg/d and 504 kg FBW for pasture. The use of DDG does not change the animal performance finished in pasture or feedlot, and it is a viable alternative to replace conventional supplements in finishing phase in both systems in tropical environment.

Animal Welfare Management in a Digital World

Although there now exists a wide range of policies, instruments and regulations, in Europe and increasingly beyond, to improve and safeguard the welfare of farmed animals, there remain persistent and significant welfare issues in virtually all types of animal production systems ranging from high prevalence of lameness to limited possibilities to express natural behaviours. Protocols and indicators, such as those provided by Welfare Quality, mean that animal welfare can nowadays be regularly measured and surveyed at the farm level. However, the digital revolution in agriculture opens possibilities to quantify animal welfare using multiple sensors and data analytics. This allows daily monitoring of animal welfare at the group and individual animal level, for example, by measuring changes in behaviour patterns or physiological parameters. The present paper explores the potential for developing innovations in digital technologies to improve the management of animal welfare at the farm, during transport or at slaughter. We conclude that the innovations in Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) offer significant opportunities for a more holistic, evidence-based approach to the monitoring and surveillance of farmed animal welfare. To date, the emphasis in much PLF technologies has been on animal health and productivity. This paper argues that this emphasis should not come to define welfare. What is now needed is a coming together of industry, scientists, food chain actors, policy-makers and NGOs to develop and use the promise of PLF for the creative and effective improvement of farmed animal welfare.

Welfare of beef cattle in Australian feedlots: a review of the risks and measures

The rising global demand for animal protein is leading to intensification of livestock production systems. At the same time, societal concerns about sustainability and animal welfare in intensive systems is increasing. This review examines the risks to welfare for beef cattle within commercial feedlots in Australia. Several aspects of the feedlot environment have the potential to compromise the physical and psychological welfare of cattle if not properly monitored and managed. These include, but are not limited to, animal factors such as the influence of genetics, temperament and prior health, as well as management factors such as diet, pen design, resource provision, pregnancy management, and stock-person attitudes and skills. While current industry and producer initiatives exist to address some of these issues, continuous improvements in welfare requires accurate, reliable and repeatable measures to allow quantification of current and future welfare states. Existing measures of welfare are explored as well as proxy indicators that may signal the presence of improved or reduced welfare. Finally, potential future measures of welfare that are currently under development are discussed and recommendations for future research are made.

An outlook on livestock welfare conditions in African communities - A review

A significant proportion of the African continent is conducive for animal agricultural production, due to its historical experience and available resources to accommodate and nurture various indigenous and exotic animal species and breeds. With food security being a global challenge, animal products can play an important role as nutrient dense food sources in human diets, particularly in Africa. However, this does not seem to reach its full potential in practice, due to numerous reasons that have not been adequately addressed. Animal welfare reservations can be highlighted as one of the major contributing factors to the curbed progress. The consequences have been scientifically proven to affect product quality and market access. However, in the African community, the concept of animal welfare has not been fully embraced. While there are international animal welfare standards in the developed world, there are inherent factors that hinder adoption of such initiatives in most developing regions, particularly among communal farmers. These include cultural norms and practices, social ranking, socio-economic status, available resources, information dissemination and monitoring tools. Therefore, there is need to harmonize what is internationally required and what is feasible to accommodate global variability. The protocols followed to ensure and evaluate farm animal welfare require regular investigation, innovation and a sustainable approach to enhance animal productivity, efficiency and product quality. Additionally, investing in animal wellbeing and health, as well as empowering communities with significant knowledge, has a potential to improve African livelihoods and contribute to food security. This review seeks to highlight the concept of animal welfare in relation to livestock and food production in African conditions.

Behavioral characteristics of Hanwoo (Bos taurus coreanae) steers at different growth stages and seasons

OBJECTIVE

This research analyzed behavioral characteristics of Hanwoo (Bos taurus coreanae) steers during each season and growth stage to enable measurement of the animals' welfare level for precision livestock farming.

METHODS

A hundred-eight beef steers were divided into three equal groups at a Hanwoo farm according to their growth stage: growing stage (GS), 8 months; early-fattening stage (EFS), 19 months; and late-fattening stage (LFS), 30 months. Twelve behavioral categories were continuously recorded for 13 day-time hours in each four seasons with three replications.

RESULTS

Time spent standing was found to be significantly longer in summer at all growth stages (p<0.05). Hanwoos at the GS spent significantly longer standing time in spring and summer than those at the EFS and LFS (p<0.05). Lying time in summer was the shortest for all growth stages (p<0.05). Steers at the LFS spent significantly longer lying time than that at the GS (p<0.05) in summer. For GS and EFS, time spent eating in spring and autumn were longer than in summer and winter (p<0.05). Eating time was the longest for the GS in spring, autumn, and winter, excluding for the LFS in winter (p<0.05). Regarding ruminating, steers at the LFS spent significantly shorter time than those at other stages in all seasons (p<0.05). GS and EFS steers showed the longest walking time in summer compared with other seasons (p<0.05). At GS and LFS, drinking time in summer was the longest of all seasons (p<0.05). Sleeping time was significantly shorter in summer compared with the other seasons (p<0.05). Self-grooming time was the longest in winter for all growth stages (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Steers were found to have more variable behavioral patterns during summer and the GS and less active behaviors during the LFS, thus extra care seems necessary during the GS, LFS, and summer period.

Farm to abattoir conditions, animal factors and their subsequent effects on cattle behavioural responses and beef quality - A review

The current review seeks to highlight the concerns that have been raised on pre-slaughter stress, contributing factors and its consequent effects on cattle behavioural responses and the quality of beef; inter-linking the activities involved from birth to slaughter. Such information is crucial in light of the consumer concerns on overall animal welfare, quality of meat and food security. Slaughter animals are exposed to different conditions during production and transportation to abattoirs on a daily basis. However; the majority of studies that have been done previously singled out different environments in the meat production chain, while conclusions have been made that the welfare of slaughter animals and the quality of meat harvested from them is dependent on the whole chain. Behaviour is a critical component used to evaluate the animals' wellbeing and it has been reported to have an effect on product quality. Apart from the influence of on-farm, transportation and abattoir conditions, the genetic background of the animal also affects how it perceives and responds to certain encounters. Stress activates the animals' hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal activity, triggering release of various stress hormones such as catecholamines and cortisol, thus glycogen depletion prior slaughter, elevated ultimate pH and poor muscle-meat conversion. Pre-slaughter stress sometimes results to cattle attaining bruises, resulting to the affected parts of the carcass being trimmed and condemned for human consumption, downgrading of the carcass and thus profit losses.

Beef cattle welfare in the USA: identification of priorities for future research

This review identifies priorities for beef cattle welfare research in the USA. Based on our professional expertise and synthesis of existing literature, we identify two themes in intensive aspects of beef production: areas where policy-based actions are needed and those where additional research is required. For some topics, considerable research informs best practice, yet gaps remain between scientific knowledge and implementation. For example, many of the risk factors and management strategies to prevent respiratory disease are understood, but only used by a relatively small portion of the industry. This is an animal health issue that will require leadership and discussion to gain widespread adoption of practices that benefit cattle welfare. There is evidence of success when such actions are taken, as illustrated by the recent improvements in handling at US slaughter facilities. Our highest priorities for additional empirical evidence are: the effect of technologies used to either promote growth or manage cattle in feedlots, identification of management risk factors for disease in feedlots, and management decisions about transport (rest stops, feed/water deprivation, climatic conditions, stocking density). Additional research is needed to inform science-based recommendations about environmental features such as dry lying areas (mounds), shade, water and feed, as well as trailer design.