How Can We Assess Positive Welfare in Ruminants?

Abstract

Simple SummaryThe concern for better farm animal welfare has been greatly increasing among scientists, veterinarians, farmers, consumers, and the general public over many years. As a consequence, several indicators have been developed to assess animal welfare, and several specific protocols have been proposed for welfare evaluation. Most of the indicators developed so far focus on the negative aspects of animal welfare (e.g., lameness, lesions, diseases, presence of abnormal behaviours, high levels of stress hormones, and many more). However, the lack of negative welfare conditions does not necessarily mean that animals are in good welfare and have a good quality of life. To guarantee high welfare standards, animals should experience positive conditions that allow them to live a life that is really worth living. We reviewed the existing indicators of positive welfare for farmed ruminants and identified some gaps that still require work, especially in the domains of Nutrition and Health, and the need for further refinement of some of the existing indicators.AbstractUntil now, most research has focused on the development of indicators of negative welfare, and relatively few studies provide information on valid, reliable, and feasible indicators addressing positive aspects of animal welfare. However, a lack of suffering does not guarantee that animals are experiencing a positive welfare state. The aim of the present review is to identify promising valid and reliable animal-based indicators for the assessment of positive welfare that might be included in welfare assessment protocols for ruminants, and to discuss them in the light of the five domains model, highlighting possible gaps to be filled by future research. Based on the existing literature in the main databases, each indicator was evaluated in terms of its validity, reliability, and on-farm feasibility. Some valid indicators were identified, but a lot of the validity evidence is based on their absence when a negative situation is present; furthermore, only a few indicators are available in the domains of Nutrition and Health. Reliability has been seldom addressed. On-farm feasibility could be increased by developing specific sampling strategies and/or relying on the use of video- or automatic-recording devices. In conclusion, several indicators are potentially available (e.g., synchronisation of lying and feeding, coat or fleece condition, qualitative behaviour assessment), but further research is required.

Welfare Assessment on Pasture: A Review on Animal-Based Measures for Ruminants

“…Therefore, the validity of behaviors such as walking, grazing or searching for food as indicators of animal welfare has not been discussed in these studies. Within the behavior principle, the results of [83] on the assessment of circadian rhythms of general activity using the Degree of Functional Coupling (DFC, which expresses the percentage of the measured behavior that is harmonically synchronized with environmental rhythms, over a 24-h period) provide reliable information on sheep welfare: high DFCs indicate high synchronization, which is considered a positive indicator of animal welfare [89].…”

Impact of Nutrients on the Hoof Health in Cattle

“…Dairy cows are exposed to a variety of environmental influences and related stressors during their productive lives [ 1 , 35 , 63 ], and healthy hooves are essential in cattle breeding due to their significant impact on functional viability and subsequent efficiency [ 1 ]. Most of the factors that lead to the culling of dairy cows are related to health (mastitis, lameness, and reduced fertility) and low production [ 66 , 69 ]. Risk factors that considerably impact limb disease include management [ 1 , 9 , 14 , 38 , 41 , 62 , 70 , 71 ], which plays a significant role in the prevention of lameness, especially nutrition management, and the environment [ 1 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 14 , 22 , 25 , 27 , 30 , 35 , 36 , 41 , 58 , 61 , 62 , 71 ], genetics [ 4 , 8 , 14 , 62 , 71 ], and various breeding conditions and technologies [ 7 , 22 , 62 ].…”

From Land to Water: Taking Fish Welfare Seriously

“…Most recently, animal welfare scientists expanded on these foundations by recognizing the need to aim beyond a mere reduction of suffering and have instead begun to explore what might constitute a "good life" for individuals of a particular species [7,8]. Interest in this good-life/positive-welfare approach has surged in recent years, with numerous reviews on the topic published in the last year alone [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19].…”