Reliability of an avoidance distance test for the assessment of animals’ responsiveness to humans and a preliminary investigation of its association with farmers’ attitudes on bull fattening farms

Windschnurer, Ines; Boivin, Xavier; Waiblinger, Susanne

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2008.12.013

Cited by 59 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Absmanner et al (2009) found a slightly higher lying down duration on straw bedding (5.3 s). In addition, the proportion of animals that could be touched or with an avoidance distance at the feeding rack of <0.5 m, as measures of human-animal relationship, were similar to data from Austrian beef farms (Windschnurer et al, 2009). However, in the current study, variation was large, especially regarding the proportion of animals with a high avoidance distance (>100 cm).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

“…In a more recent review on the effects of floor quality and space allowance on the welfare of finishing beef cattle, Wechsler (2011) concluded that the SCAHAW recommendations from 2001 such as 'Fully slatted concrete or wooden floors should not be used' are still valid. Recent studies regarding welfare aspects in beef bulls focused on problems arising from feeding facilities (Gottardo et al, 2004), cleanliness Tessitore et al, 2009), skin lesions (Platz et al, 2007), agonistic and socio-positive behaviours, (Platz et al, 2007) or human-animal relationship (Windschnurer et al, 2009). To the best of our knowledge, besides studies in Italy (Gottardo et al, 2009;Tessitore et al, 2009), no largerscale on-farm welfare assessments have been carried out in intensive beef farms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Application of the Welfare Quality® assessment system on European beef bull farms

Kirchner

Westerath

Knierim

et al. 2014

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Welfare concerns for intensive beef production have often been raised, but on-farm welfare assessment studies are rare. The aim of this study was to apply the Welfare Quality® (WQ) welfare assessment system for fattening cattle on beef bull farms to evaluate the state of welfare at the level of WQ measures and of aggregated scores, as well as overall classification. In addition, the purpose was to evaluate two ways of providing feedback information to the farmers with regard to possible welfare improvements on the farms. The study was conducted in Austria, Germany and Italy on a total of 63 beef bull farms with deep litter or cubicle-housing systems. Assessments were carried out 3 times (1 month and 7 months apart from the initial visit). In every country, farmers were assigned to two treatment groups (feedback from initial visit as written report, F, written feedback plus oral advice, FA) and a control group (C), which did not receive any feedback. At the criterion level, the highest average welfare scores were obtained from ‘Absence of prolonged hunger’ (94/100 points) followed by ‘Absence of pain induced by management procedures’ (88/100) and ‘Comfort around resting’ (77/100). Most welfare concerns related to the criteria ‘Absence of disease’ (40/100), ‘Expression of social behaviour’ (44/100) and ‘Positive emotional state’ (48/100), thus indicating room for improvements. Two-thirds of the farms achieved the ‘Enhanced’ level, about one-third was judged ‘Acceptable’ and only one farm ‘Excellent’. After 6 months of monitoring period, there was no significant welfare improvement in both the treatment groups as compared with the control group. Reasons for the lack of effect may mainly be seen in the short monitoring period and a lack of external incentives. In conclusion, the WQ assessment system revealed areas for improvement, but longer term studies and investigations on alternative ways of transferring outcomes from on-farm welfare assessments to farmers should be carried out in future.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of the Welfare Quality® assessment system on European beef bull farms

Kirchner

Westerath

Knierim

et al. 2014

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Buffalo avoidance distance measured at the manger (mean 5 37 cm; De Rosa et al, 2009b) is lower than in sheep (mean 5 68 cm; Napolitano et al, 2011) but higher than that measured in fattening bulls (mean 5 12 to 15 cm; Windschnurer et al, 2009). The percentage of buffaloes that accepted being touched at the manger (median 5 20%; De Rosa et al, 2009b) is similar to that observed in cattle in the barn (median 5 19%;Waiblinger et al, 2002), and in sheep at the manger (mean 5 14%; Napolitano et al, 2011).…”

Section: Maternal Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

The behaviour and welfare of buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) in modern dairy enterprises

Napolitano

Pacelli

Grasso

et al. 2013

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review deals with the behaviour of river buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis), in confinement and in extensive conditions, also focusing on the effects of different housing and rearing conditions on their welfare. The behavioural repertoire expressed by buffaloes in extensive and intensive conditions is similar to those displayed by other domestic ruminants. However, through natural selection, buffaloes have also acquired several morphological, physiological and behavioural (i.e. wallowing) adaptations to hot climatic conditions. Buffaloes kept in intensive conditions and having no access to pasture and water for wallowing extend their periods of idling and are less often involved in investigative activities. Confinement is also associated with a reduction of space; however, no specific studies have been carried out to determine the specific requirements of this species. Space restriction can adversely affect various aspects of buffalo welfare, such as health (increased levels of lesions and injuries), social behaviour (increased number of agonistic interactions) and heat dissipation. The buffaloes, originating from tropical areas, are well adapted to large variations in food availability and quality, and to dietetic unbalances. As to human animal relationship, it has been observed that the incidence of stepping and kicking behaviour of buffaloes in the milking parlour is positively correlated with the frequency of oxytocin injections, whereas the frequency of positive stockperson interactions with the animals such as talking quietly, petting and gentle touching are negatively correlated with the number of kicks during milking. Data from farms where both dairy cattle and buffaloes are present show that avoidance distance measured in the pen is lower in buffaloes than in cattle. This may be attributed to the fact that buffaloes are generally recognised to be curious animals. Finally, the effects of different farming practices on animal-related indicators are described. However, these measures should be integrated into a monitoring protocol, such as the Welfare Quality R scheme, to reliably assess buffalo welfare in the current intensive farming conditions.

show abstract

“…Waiblinger et al (2003) found a strong relationship between animals' reactions to humans, particularly avoidance distance inside the stable, and the continuity, quality and quantity of daily contact and handling, and with the frequency of friendly interactions with the farmer (human-animal interactions). Other authors also revealed negative associations between avoidance distances and positive behavior of farmer in dairy farms Windschnurer et al, 2009). Accordingly, there are several evidences that positive interactions ease handling and milking (increase productivity) and can reduce mastitis by promoting adequate milk flow, which has, additionally to improved welfare, an economic impact (EFSA, 2009).…”

Section: Avoidance Distancementioning

confidence: 99%

Dairy Cattle Welfare Status Measured by Animal-Linked Parameters Under Tunisian Rearing Conditions

M’Hamdi¹,

Frouja²,

Bouallegue³

et al. 2012

Milk Production - An Up-to-Date Overview of Animal Nutrition, Management and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reliability of an avoidance distance test for the assessment of animals’ responsiveness to humans and a preliminary investigation of its association with farmers’ attitudes on bull fattening farms

Cited by 59 publications

References 44 publications

Application of the Welfare Quality® assessment system on European beef bull farms

Application of the Welfare Quality® assessment system on European beef bull farms

The behaviour and welfare of buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) in modern dairy enterprises

Dairy Cattle Welfare Status Measured by Animal-Linked Parameters Under Tunisian Rearing Conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About