Application of a Protocol to Assess Camel Welfare: Scoring System of Collected Measures, Aggregated Assessment Indices, and Criteria to Classify a Pen

Abstract

This study aimed to apply a protocol for assessing camel welfare, to develop a scoring system for the welfare measures, to produce overall assessment indices, and to classify the animal units (i.e., pens) according to their welfare level. A total of 105 measures were collected at Herd level from 76 pens at a market in Qatar. The pens held 528 camels, 132 of which were evaluated at a deeper level (i.e., Animal level). Out of the 105 measures, 71 were selected, scored, and aggregated to reach a Total Welfare Index (TWI) for each pen. The TWI ranged from 46.2 to 69.8. The Good Feeding index, including measures related to prolonged thirst and prolonged hunger, was the most critical (p < 0.001), while the Good Health index, including measures related to the absence of injuries, disease and pain, was the less problematic (p < 0.001). However, most of the pens were classified as “unsatisfactory” (61.8%) and none as “excellent”. Body Condition Score (BCS), Thirst Index, disease and physical injuries, presence of a shelter, and cleanliness of bedding were the measures which influenced the pens’ classification the most (p < 0.05). The proposed model seems useful in the identification of camel welfare issues. Further applications, as well as the involvement of many scientists and stakeholders, are needed to refine and validate the protocol and its indices.

New Animal-Based Measures to Assess Welfare in Dromedary Camels

“…However, these thresholds were calculated based on our study population and require external validation (Menchetti et al, 2021).…”

“…Water management is a wellknown welfare issue for animals kept in several intensive and extensive contexts (Pritchard et al, 2005;Bergin and Nijman, 2019;Bekele et al, 2020;Rodrigues et al, 2020), but it may seem to be surprising for the camel due to its famous adaptability to resources scarcity. Thus, it is worthwhile noting that the odds of having a disease was 2 times higher in camels receiving rationed than ad libitum water suggesting that water supply is an aspect of camel welfare that cannot be overlooked (Menchetti et al, 2021;Padalino and Menchetti, 2021). It must also be taken into account that water needs in intensive systems are greater than in Bedouin ones (about 9 times higher to produce 1 litre of milk (Faye, 2013)).…”

“…However, for statistical purposes, some numerical variables (e.g. space allowance, water and feeding space) were categorized by statistical binning using the tertiles as the threshold (Altman, 2014;Menchetti et al, 2021).…”

“…This protocol includes a combination of animal-, resource-and management-based measures assessed at three levels of investigation: using a face-to-face interview with the caretaker (Caretaker level), checking the herd and the pen facilities (Herd level), and inspecting individual camel behaviour and health status (Animal level). These measures could be then scored and combined to produce overall assessment indices, and to classify the pens according to their camel welfare level (Menchetti et al, 2021). As far as we know, however, no speci c ABMs have been selected for camels and their relationship with factors that may effect their welfare has not been investigated yet.…”

Effects of two different management systems on hormonal, behavioral, and semen quality in male dromedary camels

“…In intensive farming, camels are often kept in individual boxes with limited opportunities for social contact and other natural behaviors (Fatnassi et al 2014b;Padalino et al 2014). However, this management system may lead to sufferance, affecting camel welfare (Padalino et al 2014;Menchetti et al 2021). Since welfare is linked with production and reproduction, correct management is crucial for male camels used for artificial insemination.…”