Hostname: page-component-55f67697df-xlmdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-12T12:32:43.572Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selection of Parameters for On-Farm Welfare-Assessment Protocols in Cattle and Buffalo

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

C Winckler ,
J Capdeville ,
G Gebresenbet ,
B Hörning ,
U Roiha ,
M Tosi  and
S Waiblinger
C Winckler*
Affiliation:
Research Centre for Animal Production and Technology, University of Göttingen, Driverstrasse 22, D-49377 Vechta, Germany
J Capdeville
Affiliation:
Institut d'Elévage, Lyon, France
G Gebresenbet
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
B Hörning
Affiliation:
University of Kassel, Witzenhausen, Germany
U Roiha
Affiliation:
University of Helsinki, Mikkeli, Finland
M Tosi
Affiliation:
University of Milan, Italy
S Waiblinger
Affiliation:
Veterinary University, Vienna, Austria
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Department of Livestock Sciences, Gregor-Mendel-Strasse 33, A-1180 Vienna, Austria; [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

On-farm welfare-assessment protocols should be based on valid, reliable and feasible indicators which reflect the animal's state in the context of the housing and management system. This paper focuses on the selection of parameters for cattle and buffalo from welfare research, from assessment protocols used in different European countries and from the literature. Three groups of parameters are described: (1) parameters which can readily be included, such as lameness, injuries, body condition score, cleanliness, getting up/lying down behaviour, agonistic social behaviour, oral abnormal behaviours, human behaviour toward the animals and measures of the animal-human relationship; (2) parameters which require more information on reliability, such as indicators of good welfare and housing factors; and (3) parameters which are regarded as important but so far lack reliability in most countries, such as the incidence of clinical diseases and mortality.

Keywords

animal-based parametersanimal welfarebuffalocattleon-farm welfare assessment
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 12 , Issue 4: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level , November 2003 , pp. 619 - 624
Copyright
© 2003 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bartussek, H 1997 Praktische Erfahrungen in der Anwendung des Tiergerechtheitsindex ‘TGI 35-L’ in Österreich. In: Weber, R (ed) Proceedings 23 IGN-Tagung: Tiergerechte Haltungssysteme für landwirtschaftliche Nutztiere, 23-25 October 1997 pp 15–24. Eidgenössische Forschungsanstalt für Agrarwirtschaft und Landtechnik (FAT): Tänikon, Switzerland [Title translation: Practical experiences with the application of the animal needs index ‘TGI 35-L’ in Austria]: Practical experiences with the application of the animal needs index ‘TGI 35-L’ in Austria]Google Scholar
Breuer, K, Hemsworth, P H, Barnett, J L, Matthews, L R and Coleman, G J 2000 Behavioural response to humans and the productivity of commercial dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 66: 273–288CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, D M 1996 Animal welfare defined in terms of attempts to cope with the environment. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica (Section A — Animal Science) Suppl 27: 22–28Google Scholar
Capdeville, J and Veissier, I 2001 A method of assessing welfare in loose housed dairy cows at farm level, focusing on animal observations. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica (Section A — Animal Science) Suppl 30: 62–68Google Scholar
Chaplin, S and Munksgaard, L 2001 Evaluation of a simple method for assessment of rising behaviour in tethered dairy cows. Animal Science 72: 191–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Rosa, G, Tripaldi, C, Napolitano, F, Saltalamacchia, F, Grasso, F, Bisegna, V and Bordi, A 2003 Repeatability of some animal-related variables in dairy cows and buffaloes. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level. Animal Welfare 12: 625–629Google Scholar
Ekesbo, I 1984 Methoden der Beurteilung von Umwelteinflüssen auf Nutztiere unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Tiergesundheit und des Tierschutzes. Wiener Tierärztliche Monatsschrift 71: 186–190 [Title translation: Methods for evaluation of environmental influences on animal health]Google Scholar
Faye, B and Barnouin, J 1985 Objectivation de la propreté des vaches laitières et des stabulations — l'indice de propreté. Bull Techn C R Z V Theix, INRA 59: 61–67 [Title translation: Objective assessment of the cleanliness of dairy cows and housing systems — the cleanliness index]Google Scholar
Haidn, B, Kramer, A and Schön, H 1997 Eingestreute Milchviehställe — Strohbedarf und Verfahrensbewertung. Proceedings 3 Int Tagung ‘Bau, Technik und Umwelt in der landwirtschaftlichen Nutztierhaltung’ pp 44–52. 11-12 March 1997, Kiel, Germany. Institut für Landwirtschaftliche Verfahrenstechnik: Kiel, Germany [Title translation: Littered housing systems for dairy cattle — amounts of straw needed and assessment of the systems]: Littered housing systems for dairy cattle — amounts of straw needed and assessment of the systems]Google Scholar
Hemsworth, P H, Coleman, G J, Barnett, J L, Borg, S and Dowling, S 2000 The effects of cognitive behavioural intervention on the attitude and behaviour of stockpersons and the behaviour and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 80: 68–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hörning, B 2001 The assessment of housing conditions of dairy cows in littered loose housing systems using three scoring methods. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica (Section A — Animal Science) Suppl 30: 42–47Google Scholar
Lensink, B J, Veissier, I and Florand, L 2001 The farmer's influence on calves’ behaviour, health and production of a veal unit. Animal Science 72: 105–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manson, F J and Leaver, J D 1988 The influence of concentrate amount on locomotion and clinical lameness in dairy cattle. Animal Production 47: 185–190Google Scholar
Menke, C, Waiblinger, S, Fölsch, D W and Wiepkema, P R 1999 Social behaviour and injuries of horned cows in loose housing systems. Animal Welfare 8: 243–258Google Scholar
O'Callaghan, K A, Murray, R D and Cripps, P J 2002 Behavioural indicators of pain associated with lameness in dairy cattle. Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Lameness in Ruminants pp 309–312. 9-13 January 2002, Orlando, Florida, USA. University of Florida: Gainesville, USAGoogle Scholar
Sato, S, Sako, S and Meada, A 1991 Social licking patterns in cattle (Bos taurus): influence of environmental and social factors. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 32: 3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valde, J P, Hird, D W, Thurmond, M C and Osteras, O 1997 Comparison of ketosis, clinical mastitis, somatic cell count, and reproductive performance between free stall and tie stall barns in Norwegian dairy herds with automatic feeding. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 38: 181–192CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waiblinger, S, Menke, C and Coleman, G 2002 The relationship between attitudes, personal characteristics and behaviour of stockpeople and subsequent behaviour and production of dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79(3): 195–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, B, Schaub, J, Friedli, K and Hauser, R 2000 Behaviour and leg injuries in dairy cows kept in cubicle systems with straw bedding or soft lying mats. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 69: 189–197CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winckler, C and Willen, S 2001 The reliability and repeatability of a lameness scoring system for use as an indicator of welfare in dairy cattle. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica (Section A — Animal Science) Suppl 30: 103–107Google Scholar
Winckler, C, Bühnemann, A and Seidel, K 2002 Social behaviour of commercial dairy herds as a parameter for on-farm welfare assessment. In: Koene P (ed) Proceedings of the 36th International Congress of the ISAE p 86. International Society for Applied Ethology: Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar