Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T01:02:37.458Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Formal animal-based welfare assessment in UK certification schemes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

DCJ Main ,
HR Whay ,
C Leeb  and
AJF Webster
DCJ Main*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, Langford House, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
HR Whay
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, Langford House, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
C Leeb
Affiliation:
University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Teaching and Research Farm, Kremesberg 13, A 2563 Pottenstein, Austria
AJF Webster
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, Langford House, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Providing assurance of improvement in welfare outcomes is the desire of some UK certification schemes. However, this is only likely to be achieved if such schemes monitor welfare outcomes rather than rely on defining welfare resources that should be provided. The University of Bristol has developed protocols for the on-farm evaluation of animal-based welfare parameters for incorporation into certification schemes. The assessment system is designed to provide credible (repeatable, valid and feasible) evidence for assessment of compliance with welfare standards in organic and conventional farming systems. For issues identified as causing potential concern the assessor is encouraged to conduct further investigations of the relevant resource standards and, where appropriate, management requirements. Furthermore the assessment tool enables certification bodies and relevant third parties to monitor the ability of schemes to deliver good welfare outcomes. Finally, it provides a mechanism for farmers to review their own health and welfare performance. The practical application of these systems is now being pursued by some UK certification bodies.

Keywords

animal-based welfare measuresanimal welfarecertification schemes
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 16 , Issue 2: Special Issue: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level , May 2007 , pp. 233 - 236
Copyright
© 2007 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Farm Animal Welfare Council 2005 Report on the welfare implications of Farm Assurance Schemes. FAWC: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Johnsen, PF, Johannesson, T and Sandøe, P 2001 Assessment of Farm Animal Welfare at Herd Level: Many Goals, Many Methods. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica Section A, Animal Science Supplement 30: 26–33Google Scholar
Leeb, B, Leeb, C, Troxler, J and Schuh, M 2001 Skin lesions and callosities in group-housed pregnant sows: animal related welfare indicators. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica Section A, Animal Science Supplement 30: 82–87Google Scholar
Main, DCJ, Kent, J, Wemelsfelder, F, Ofner, E and Tuyttens, F 2003 Applications for methods of on-farm welfare assessment. Animal Welfare 12: 523–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, AJF, Main, DCJ and Whay, HR 2004 Welfare assessment: indices from clinical observation. Animal Welfare 13: S93–S98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whay, HR, Main, DCJ, Green, LE and Webster, AJF 2003a Animal-based measures for the assessment of welfare state of dairy cattle, pigs and laying hens: consensus of expert opinion. Animal Welfare 12: 205–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whay, HR, Main, DCJ, Green, LE and Webster, AJF 2003b Assessment of the welfare of dairy cattle using animal-based measurements: direct observations and investigation of farm records. Veterinary Record 153: 197–202CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
tmal related welfare indicators. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica Section A, Animal Science Supplement 30: 82–87Google Scholar