Head partitions at the feed barrier affect behaviour of goats

Welfare of calves

This Scientific Opinion addresses a European Commission request on the welfare of calves as part of the Farm to Fork strategy. EFSA was asked to provide a description of common husbandry systems and related welfare consequences, as well as measures to prevent or mitigate the hazards leading to them. In addition, recommendations on three specific issues were requested: welfare of calves reared for white veal (space, group housing, requirements of iron and fibre); risk of limited cow–calf contact; and animal‐based measures (ABMs) to monitor on‐farm welfare in slaughterhouses. The methodology developed by EFSA to address similar requests was followed. Fifteen highly relevant welfare consequences were identified, with respiratory disorders, inability to perform exploratory or foraging behaviour, gastroenteric disorders and group stress being the most frequent across husbandry systems. Recommendations to improve the welfare of calves include increasing space allowance, keeping calves in stable groups from an early age, ensuring good colostrum management and increasing the amounts of milk fed to dairy calves. In addition, calves should be provided with deformable lying surfaces, water via an open surface and long‐cut roughage in racks. Regarding specific recommendations for veal systems, calves should be kept in small groups (2–7 animals) within the first week of life, provided with ~ 20 m²/calf and fed on average 1 kg neutral detergent fibre (NDF) per day, preferably using long‐cut hay. Recommendations on cow–calf contact include keeping the calf with the dam for a minimum of 1 day post‐partum. Longer contact should progressively be implemented, but research is needed to guide this implementation in practice. The ABMs body condition, carcass condemnations, abomasal lesions, lung lesions, carcass colour and bursa swelling may be collected in slaughterhouses to monitor on‐farm welfare but should be complemented with behavioural ABMs collected on farm.

Browse or browsing: Investigating goat preferences for feeding posture, feeding height and feed type

Goats naturally browse different forages in various postures; this differs from typical farm practice, thus there are opportunities to improve goat welfare by understanding what and how they like to eat. We investigated if feeding preference was related to posture, feeder height relative to the ground, and type of feed. Sixteen adult, Saanen cross females participated in two experiments comparing a floor-level feeder (grazing posture; farm standard), with an elevated feeder (browsing posture; Exp1) and a platform-level feeder (raised, grazing posture; Exp2), when two forages (leaves, grass) were offered. Measurements included feed intake (g of DM/feeder), feeder switching frequency, first feeder visited, latency to visit first feeder and exploration and non-feeding activity time. Effects of posture (Exp1), height (Exp2) and feed type were analyzed. Type of feed affected preference for feeding posture and height. All goats consumed leaves over grass (Exp1: POP: 188 ± 6.52 g, GRA: 20.3 ± 7.19 g; Exp2: POP: 191 ± 6.15 g, GRA: 0.231 ± 6.91 g; P < 0.001), and the feeder containing leaves was often visited first (Exp 1: GRA/POP: 94% of visits, P < 0.001, POP/GRA: 53%, P = 0.724; Exp 2: GRA/POP: 91%, P < 0.001; POP/GRA: 69%, P = 0.041). When goats received only leaves, they consumed more from the floor-level (162 ± 22.2 g) vs. elevated level (102 ± 21.9 g) feeder (P = 0.039). When goats received only grass, there was no posture or height preference; however, they changed feeders more frequently (at least 4x (Exp1) and 2x (Exp2) more than other combinations; P > 0.01). Feed intake was negatively affected by exploring time (Exp1 only: r = −0.541; P < 0.001) and performing non-feeding activities (Exp1: r = −0.698; P < 0.001; Exp2: r = −0.673; P < 0.001). We did not identify a preference for elevated feeding posture; however, we suggest that our short test (compared to previous work) encouraged goats to make choices based on line-of-sight and also that the elevated feeder design (replicated from previous work) made leaf access harder. Nonetheless, we highlight that some goats actively used the elevated feeder; this coupled with the clear preference for leaves over grass, suggests that offering feed type and presentation diversity would allow individuals to express their natural feeding behavior more fully.

Lying Behaviour in Dairy Goats: Effects of a New Automated Feeding System Assessed by Accelerometer Technology

Simple Summary

Goat farming is becoming more important in Germany and as dehorning is forbidden, it is necessary to facilitate animal welfare among horned and mixed-horned herds. In this study an optimized automatic concentrated feeding system was installed in a mixed-horned herd and lying behaviour was detected by accelerometer technology. Results show a seasonal progression of lying behaviour in dairy goats and an adjustment of behavioural differences between horned and hornless goats with the new feeding system.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate lying behaviour in dairy goats before and after installation of an optimized automatic concentrated feeding system (AFS). A mixed-horned herd of Bunte Deutsche Edelziege was used. As many agonistic interactions between goats happen at the feeding place, a new automated feeding system was installed to better fulfil the needs of horned goats. Lying behaviour is an indicator to ascertain animal welfare of ruminants. In order to measure lying behaviour accelerometer technology was used and verified by video analyses. The results show an agreement of 99.62–99.93% per lying time by comparing accelerometers to video data. Over all goats, a mean ± SD lying time (LT) of 11.78 ± 1.47 h/d, a mean ± SD lying bout duration (LBD) of 0.51 ± 0.10 h/bout and a mean ± SD frequency of lying bouts (FLB) of 24.35 ± 5.57 were found. Lying behaviour follows a seasonal progression with significant lowest LBD and highest FLB in summer. With the old AFS significant differences in LBD and FLB were detected between horned and hornless goats, but with the new AFS results were adjusted. Findings suggest that changes in feeding management do not affect the general seasonal progression of lying behaviour but can affect the behavioural differences between horned and hornless dairy goats.

Recent advances in the feeding and nutrition of dairy goats

There have been recent advances concerning research of the feeding and nutrition of dairy goats in a wide array of areas. Ruminally emitted methane and supplementary feedstuffs to a lesser extent make appreciable contributions to the carbon footprint of dairy goats, with the former affected by type of production system and associated dietary characteristics. Unique behavior of goats necessitates careful consideration of the nature of confinement facilities to achieve optimal production by animals differing in social hierarchy. Physiological conditions such as nutritional needs and perhaps health status may influence diet selection by goats in both grazing and confinement settings. Some research suggests that low concentrations of protein and fat in milk of high-yielding dairy goat breeds could involve the type and nature of dietary ingredients as influencing end products of ruminal fermentation. With the relationship between milk urea nitrogen concentration and efficiency of dietary protein utilization, through future research the measure may be a useful tool for diet formulation as in dairy cattle. Effects of dietary inclusion of sources of fats and oils vary considerably depending on their nature, as is also true for byproduct feedstuffs and conventional ones being substituted for. Supplementation of dairy goats with sources of polyunsaturated fatty acids can affect oxidative stress and various feedstuffs influence antioxidant status; however, research addressing the significance of such changes under practical production settings would be beneficial.

Understanding natural behavior to improve dairy goat (Capra hircus) management systems

Public interest is stimulating farming industries to improve animal welfare in production systems. Indoor housing of ruminants has received scrutiny because of perceived intensiveness and lack of naturalness. Animal welfare has traditionally focused on health benefits (e.g., bedding management and reducing disease) and reducing negative experiences (e.g., painful husbandry practices). Recent attention to animals having “a life worth living” extends expectations to provide increased care and opportunities for positive experiences and natural behaviors. Although not all natural behaviors necessarily contribute to improved welfare, we present evidence for why many are important, and for how they can be promoted in commercial systems. Worldwide, commercial dairy goats (Capra hircus) are frequently housed in large open barns with space to move and soft bedding for lying; however, this is not sufficient to promote the range of natural behaviors of goats, which in turn suggests that commercial housing could be improved. The basis for this thinking is from the range of behaviors expressed by the Capra genus. Collectively, these species have evolved cognitive and behavioral strategies to cope with harsh and changing environments, as well as variable and limited vegetation. The rocky and often steep terrain that goats inhabit allows for predator avoidance and access to shelter, so it is not surprising that domesticated goats also seek out elevation and hiding spaces; indeed, their hoof structure is designed for the movement and grip in such rugged environments. The browsing techniques and flexibility in diet selection of wild, feral and extensively managed goats, appears to be equally important to housed goats, highlighting the need for more complexity in how and what goats are fed. Goats naturally live in small, dynamic groups, governed by complex social structures in which horns play a strong role. Commercial housing systems should consider the benefits of more natural-sized social groups and revisit the rationale behind horn removal. We suggest that cognitive stimulation is a potential welfare improvement for goats in commercial settings. Goat cognitive abilities, which enabled success in complex and variable social and physical environments, are unchallenged in uniform environments, potentially leading to negative affective states. We make suggestions for housing improvements that could be readily adopted into current systems without compromising production efficiency.