The development of the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for donkeys

Costa, Emanuela Dalla; Dai, Francesca; Murray, Leigh Margaret Anne; Cannas, Simona; Zanella, Adroaldo José; Minero, Michela

doi:10.11606/issn.1678-4456.bjvras.2021.173333

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During the last years, protocols for the assessment of welfare in donkeys on farm have been developed (AWIN, 2015b), including a recent app to facilitate data collection on‐farm (Dalla Costa et al., 2021). However, there is still very little research available on welfare of donkeys during transport (Dai et al., 2020a).…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, during escape attempts, they may get injured. –PRE: The BUT test can be applied before loading animals to recognise whether a horse shows signs of being able to be tied or led by a halter without causing avoidable excitement, pain or suffering (called ‘broken’ in EC 1/2005) or not (Menchetti et al., 2021; Dalla Costa et al., 2021). Horses showing signs of not being able to do so, should be transported loose in a small group of familiar conspecifics. …”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Welfare of equidae during transport

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2022

EFS2

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the framework of its Farm to Fork Strategy, the Commission is undertaking a comprehensive evaluation of animal welfare legislation. This opinion deals with the protection of horses and donkeys during transport. While the opinion focuses primarily on road transport of horses, there are specific sections dealing with the transport of horses on roll-on-roll-off ferries, horses transported by air and the transport of donkeys. In addition, the opinion covers welfare concerns in relation to a specific scenario identified by the European Commission related to the transport of horses on long journeys to slaughterhouses. Current practices related to transport of horses during the different stages (preparation, loading and unloading, transit and the journey breaks) are described. Overall, 13 welfare consequences were identified as being highly relevant for the welfare of horses during transport based on severity, duration and frequency of occurrence: gastro-enteric disorders, handling stress, heat stress, injuries, isolation stress, motion stress, prolonged hunger, prolonged thirst, respiratory disorders, resting problems, restriction of movement, sensory overstimulation and separation stress. These welfare consequences and their animal-based measures are described. A variety of hazards were identified related to factors such as inexperienced/untrained handlers, lack of horse training, structural deficiencies of vehicles/facilities, poor driving skills/conditions, horse separation/regrouping, unfavourable microclimatic and environmental conditions and poor husbandry practices. The opinion contains general and specific conclusions in relation to the different stages of transport. Recommendations to prevent hazards and correct or mitigate welfare consequences have been developed. Recommendations were also developed to define quantitative thresholds for microclimatic conditions within the means of transport and for space allowance. The development of welfare consequences over time was assessed in relation to maximum journey time.

show abstract

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare of equidae during transport

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2022

EFS2

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An alternative approach is the use of fixed lists of descriptors and their corresponding definitions, which are pre-defined by the experimenters. Some studies use descriptors and definitions that are universally agreed upon by leading scientists or certifiedsuch as the European "Animal Welfare Project" (AWIN) for donkeys, goats, horses, and sheep [26,[49][50][51]. Other descriptor-definition pairs are even part of registered trademark protocol-such as the Welfare Quality ® protocols for cattle, poultry, and pigs [4].…”

Section: Fixed Listsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No doubt, clearly defined descriptors are a prerequisite for reliable assessment in QBA. Papers on the quality of the definitions and their interpretation do exist [19,26] and demonstrate the necessity of aligning the scoring styles of the observers, but it has not been investigated how well descriptors and definitions are understood and can be matched by the raters.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Power Is in the Word—Do Laypeople Interpret Descriptors of Dog Emotional States Correctly?

Heritier,

Riemer,

Gaschler

2023

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A basic understanding of dog behaviour and emotion is relevant not only for professionals, such as veterinary personnel or dog trainers, but also for dog owners and for people with little contact with dogs. Information about dog behaviour and emotions is mostly conveyed verbally. This study explores whether definitions of dog behaviour and emotion are understood in such a way that they can be allocated to a descriptor (i.e., a label such as “fearful”), even by people with low background knowledge. If people can match descriptors to definitions, this suggests that the definitions are distinct enough and elicit mental representations of behaviour that can fit the label. Good agreement on the definitions is a prerequisite for the validity of the descriptors used; however, no study to date has tested this. A sample of 236 adults was asked to match descriptors of Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) for veterinary and shelter situations to their correct definitions, e.g., the descriptor “fearful” to its definition “dog may try to flee, hide or freeze; ears back”. Matching was substantially above chance; nonetheless, the mean proportion of correct responses was only 50% (SD ± 16.6%) for the veterinary QBA set and 33% (SD ± 14.3%) for the shelter QBA set. Performance in the matching task was positively correlated with measures of experience with dogs. Taken together, the results suggest that descriptor–definition pairs used to describe dog behaviour need to be clearly defined to avoid misinterpretations when teaching laypeople how to interpret canine behaviour.

show abstract