Farmers' perception of stable schools as a tool to improve management for the benefit of mink welfare

Henriksen, Britt I. F.; Anneberg, Inger; Sørensen, Jan Tind; Møller, Steen Henrik

doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2015.09.019

Cited by 7 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 Significant difference (p < 0.001) between the number of proposed measures for each source between 2012 and 2016/2017. 4 Significant difference (p < 0.001) between the number of chosen measures proposed by the fellow farmers, the expert and proposed by the fellow farmers and later approved by the expert between 2012 and 2016/2017 (p < 0.001).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As external persons often see things differently than someone who works in the same environment every day [6,15], their participation can be beneficial to identify problem areas as well as to provide solutions or inspiration by exchanging observations and sharing reflections on the on-farm situations [12]. Meeting and discussing with external persons was the main motivation to join 'Stable Schools' for some farmers [4,14] as 'discussing with the farmers is what gives the most' [4]. New input and discussing farming methods help farmers realise why they work the way they do and provide a great opportunity for them to learn from more experienced farmers [4].…”

Section: Learning In Farmer-groups and The Role Of External Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Meeting and discussing with external persons was the main motivation to join 'Stable Schools' for some farmers [4,14] as 'discussing with the farmers is what gives the most' [4]. New input and discussing farming methods help farmers realise why they work the way they do and provide a great opportunity for them to learn from more experienced farmers [4].…”

Section: Learning In Farmer-groups and The Role Of External Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With regard to the great impact of farm managers' behaviour and attitudes on animal health and welfare [2], implementing animal health plans was recommended in order to motivate organic farmers to continuously and actively improve animal health and welfare on their farms [3]. Herd health plans should be based on the assessment and evaluation of current farm data and real farm circumstances combined with feedback, planning the implementation of farm-specific interventions in a continuous process of development and improvement of animal health and welfare [1,4]. Furthermore, herd health planning should involve external advisers and knowledge, be written down, highlight good aspects and success stories as well as address problem areas on the farms in order to promote the learning process [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The attitudes of farmers participating in 'Stable Schools' or other herd health plan projects were mainly very positive [4,6,15] and the compliance of dairy farmers to implement measures was high [3,15]. Reasons given for high implementation of interventions included ease of implementation, integrability in the farm routine and daily working routine, and the requirement of only little capital [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Modified ‘Stable Schools’ as a Consulting Tool for Organic Dairy Herds

Hansmann¹,

Volling²,

Krömker

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to examine the opinions of farmers on a consulting project, which was established for organic dairy farms in Northern Germany involving different animal health experts who participated in the meetings. Furthermore, the properties of measures that are of decisive importance for implementation on the farms were identified to improve consultancy services for dairy farming. Once a year, the farmers met on a host-farm in one of three groups consisting of five to nine farms, a facilitator and an expert. At each meeting, a host-farm was visited and the analysed data of all participating farms of the previous year were presented to the group members. Each farmer had the possibility to report on success stories and issues concerning his herd. During discussions, the farmers first proposed mutual farm-specific measures for improving herd health and animal welfare. Afterwards, the expert named possible interventions and commented on the given measures of the farmers. All measures were noted by the facilitator. At the end of each meeting, each farmer could choose which of the given measures he wanted to implement. Open group-interviews as well as anonymous questionnaires for the farmers were used at the meetings in winter 2016/2017 to evaluate their perception of this consulting project and to determine which properties of measures were important for implementation on the farms. Based on the results of this study, the participating farmers were very positive towards this kind of consulting project. They favoured the participation of an expert during the meetings and the analysis of farm-specific data. Farmers mostly chose measures for implementation proposed by farmers and approved by the expert, followed by those proposed by the expert only. Measures were chosen when they were practical in the implementation, effective, efficient and took a low additional workload for implementation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Learning In Farmer-groups and The Role Of External Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Learning In Farmer-groups and The Role Of External Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Modified ‘Stable Schools’ as a Consulting Tool for Organic Dairy Herds

Hansmann¹,

Volling²,

Krömker

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A comparison of the efficacy of three intervention trial types: postal, group, and one-to-one facilitation, prior management and the impact of message framing and repeat messages on the flock prevalence of lameness in sheep

Grant

Kaler

Ferguson

et al. 2018

Preventive Veterinary Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of three knowledge-transfer intervention trial types (postal, group, one-to-one) to promote best practice to treat sheep with footrot. Further aims were to investigate whether farmer behaviour (i.e. management of lameness) before the trial was associated with uptake of best practice and whether the benefits of best practice framed positively or negatively influenced change in behaviour. The intervention was a message developed from evidence and expert opinion. It was entitled "Six steps to sound sheep" and promoted (1) catch sheep within three days of becoming lame, (2) inspect feet without foot trimming, (3) correctly diagnose the cause, (4) treat sheep lame with footrot or interdigital dermatitis with antibiotic injection and spray without foot trimming, (5) record the identity of treated sheep, (6) cull repeatedly lame sheep. In 2013, 4000 randomly-selected English sheep farmers were sent a questionnaire, those who responded were recruited to the postal (1081 farmers) or one-to-one intervention (32 farmers) trials. A random sample of 400 farmers were invited to join the group trial; 78 farmers participated. A follow-up questionnaire was sent to all participants in summer 2014. There were 72%, 65% and 91% useable responses for the postal, group and one-to-one trials respectively. In both 2013 and 2014, the prevalence of lameness was lower in flocks managed by LC1 farmers than LC2 and LC3 farmers. Between 2013 and 2014, the reduction in geometric mean (95% CI) period prevalence of lameness, proportional between flock reduction in lameness and within flock reduction in lameness was greatest in the one-to-one (7.6% (7.1-8.2%) to 4.3% (3.6-5.0%), 35%, 72%) followed by the group (4.5% (3.9-5.0%) to 3.1% (2.4-3.7%), 27%, 55%) and then the postal trial (from 3.5% (3.3-3.7%) to 3.2% (3.1-3.4%), 21%, 43%). There was a marginally greater reduction in lameness in farmers using most of Six steps but slow to treat lame sheep pre-trial than those not using Six steps at all. There was no significant effect of message framing. The greatest behavioural change was a reduction in therapeutic and routine foot trimming and the greatest attitude change was an increase in negative attitudes towards foot trimming. We conclude that all three intervention trial approaches were effective to promote best practice to treat sheep with footrot with one-to-one facilitation more effective than group and postal intervention trials. Results suggest that farmers' behaviour change was greater among those practising aspects of the intervention message before the trial began than those not practising any aspect.

show abstract