Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T02:52:34.318Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dairy goat welfare in semi-intensive production systems and drought conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

C Larrondo ,
J Leiva  and
L de la Cruz-Cruz
C Larrondo*
Affiliation:
Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Agronomía, Universidad de Las Américas, Chile
J Leiva
Affiliation:
Facultad de Ciencias Agropecuarias, Universidad Pedro de Valdivia, Chile
L de la Cruz-Cruz
Affiliation:
Escuela de Ciencias de la Salud Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Universidad del Valle de México, México Preservación del Bienestar Animal/Manejo de la Fauna Silvestre, Departamento de Producción Agrícola, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Calz del Hueso 1100, Coapa, Villa Quietud, Coyoacán, 04960, CDMX, México
*
* Contact for correspondence: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The region of Coquimbo has the highest percentage of goats (Capra hircus) in Chile and is severely affected by droughts. This can lead to environmental challenges such as limited water and forage availability when goats are kept in natural grasslands. The objective of this study was to assess the welfare of dairy goats in semi-intensive production systems under drought conditions. The study was carried out in La Serena city, region of Coquimbo, Chile and 22 semi-intensive dairy goat farms were assessed using the Animal Welfare Indicators protocol. In each evaluation, the following indicators and information were gathered: physical and behavioural indicators of animal welfare, farmers’ sociodemographic information, farm facilities, husbandry practices and management of the farm, and farmers’ perception of animal welfare. Of the goats evaluated (n = 446), the vast majority had a body condition score (BCS) considered normal (n = 349; 78.25%). The main welfare problems were poor hair condition, faecal soiling, overgrown claws and improper disbudding or dehorning. The majority of farmers (96%) considered it ‘rather important’ or ‘very important’ to handle their goats in a gentle manner, expressing concern about the welfare of their animals and considering pain as a negative experience for goats. A lower than expected percentage of very thin animals (low BCS) were seen, considering the drought conditions and the forage shortage that affects the region, and no animals were observed with signs of thermal stress. The semi-intensive production systems could be an alternative to pasture-based systems to overcome environmental challenges.

Keywords

animal welfareassessmentdairy goatsdroughtindicatorsperception
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , November 2021 , pp. 371 - 379
Copyright
© 2021 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Andrade, E 2015 Welfare assessment in Portuguese dairy goat farms: on-farm overall feasibility of an international prototype. Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária: Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, PortugalGoogle Scholar
Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) 2015 AWIN welfare assessment protocol for goats. Milan, Italy. https://doi.org/10.13130/AWIN_GOATS_2015Google Scholar
Anzuino, K, Bell, N, Bazeley, K and Nicol, C 2010 Assessment of welfare on 24 commercial UK dairy goat farms based on direct observations. Veterinary Record 167(20): 774–780. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.c5892Google ScholarPubMed
Aschwanden, JL, Gygax, L, Wechsler, B and Keil, NM 2008 Social distances of goats at the feeding rack: influence of the qual-ity of social bonds, rank differences, grouping age and presence of horns. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 114: 116–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.02.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battini, M, Peric, T, Ajuda, I, Vieira, A, Grosso, L, Barbieri, S, Stilwell, G, Prandi, A, Comin, A, Tubaro, F and Mattiello, S 2015 Hair coat condition: A valid and reliable indicator for on-farm wel-fare assessment in adult dairy goats. Small Ruminant Research 123: 197–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2014.12.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boisier, JP, Alvarez-Garretón, R, Cordero, RR, Damiani, A, Gallardo, L, Garreaud, RD, Lambert, F, Ramallo, C, Rojas, M and Rondanelli, R 2018 Anthropogenic drying in central-south-ern Chile evidenced by long-term observations and climate model simulations. Elementa Science of Anthropocene 6: 74. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.328Google Scholar
Boisier, JP, Rondanelli, R, Garreaud, R and Muñoz, F 2016 Anthropogenic and natural contributions to the Southeast Pacific precipitation decline and recent megadrought in central Chile. Geophysical Research Letters 43: 413–421. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL067265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Can, A, Vieira, M, Battini, M, Mattiello, S and Stilwell, G 2016 On-farm welfare assessment of dairy goat farms using animal-based indicators: the example of 30 commercial farms in Portugal. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 66(1): 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064702.2016.1208267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caroprese, M, Casamassima, D, Giacomo, S, Napolitano, F and Sevi, A 2009 Monitoring the on-farm welfare of sheep and goats. Italian Journal of Animal Science 8(1): 343–354. https://doi.org/10.4081/ijas.2009.s1.343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casoni, D, Mirra, A, Suter, MR, Gutzwiller, A and Spadavecchia, C 2019 Can disbudding of calves (one versus four weeks of age) induce chronic pain? Physiology & Behavior 199: 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2018.11.010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castro, I, Gygax, L, Wechsler, B and Hauser, R 2012 Effect of short and long periods of separation on agonistic behaviour, injuries and stress in Hérens cows kept in loose housing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 136: 96–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2011.12.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz, L 2006 Industrialización y aprovechamiento de productos y subproductos derivados de materias primas agropecuarias de la región de Coquimbo. Universidad de La Serena, La Serena, Chile. [Title translation: Industrialisation and exploitation of products and by-products derived from agricultural raw materials from the Coquimbo region]Google Scholar
Dwyer, CM 2009 Welfare of sheep: Providing for welfare in an extensive environment. Small Ruminant Research 86: 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2009.09.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallo, C 2010 Transporte y reposo pre-sacrificio en bovinos y su relación con la calidad de la carne. In: Mota-Rojas, D, Guerrero-Legarreta, I and Trujillo-Ortega, ME (eds) Bienestar Animal y Calidad de la Carne pp 15–36. BM Editores: México. [Title translation: Transport and pre-slaughter resting time and their relationship with meat quality in cattle]Google Scholar
Gallo, C and Huertas, SM 2016 Main animal welfare problems in ruminant livestock during preslaughter operations: A South American view. Animal 10: 342–348. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731115001597CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallo, C, Tarumán, J and Larrondo, C 2018 Main factors affecting animal welfare and meat quality in lambs for slaughter in Chile. Animals 8(10): 165. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8100165CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gobierno Regional de Coquimbo (GORECOQUIMBO) 2019 Gobierno declara emergencia agrícola para apoyar a pequeños productores de la región de Coquimbo. https://www.gorecoquimbo.cl/gobierno-declara-emergencia-agri-cola-para-apoyar-a-pequenos-productores/gorecoquimbo/2019-07-31/134132.html. [Title translation: Government declares agri-cultural emergency to support small-scale farmers in the Coquimbo region]Google Scholar
Hartnack, A, Jordan, M and Roussel, A 2018 Complications associated with surgical dehorning in goats: A retrospective study of 239 cases. Veterinary Surgery 47: 188–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.12743Google ScholarPubMed
Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA) 2001 Razas caprinas para zonas áridas y semiáridas de Chile. http://bib-lioteca.inia.cl/medios/biblioteca/ta/NR27088.pdf. [Title translation: Goat breeds for arid and semi-arid areas of Chile]Google Scholar
Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA) 2019 Red Agrometeorológica de INIA. https://agrometeorologia.cl/. [Title translation: INIA Agrometereological Network]Google Scholar
Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas (INE) 2011 Encuesta de ganadería caprina, 2010. https://www.ine.cl/docs/default-source/produccion-pecuaria/publicaciones-y-anuarios/ganaderia-caprina/encuesta-ganado-caprino.-a%C3%B1o-2010—-publi-caci%C3%B3n-trianual-convenio-conodepa.pdf?sfvrsn=c591c796_6. [Title translation: Goat farming survey]Google Scholar
Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas (INE) 2017 Encuestas intercensales agropecuarias 2017-2018. https://www.ine.cl/estadisti-cas/economicas/estad%C3%ADsticas-agropecuarias. [Title translation: Agricultural intercensal surveys 2017-2018]Google Scholar
Jackson, K and Hackett, D 2007 A note: The effects of human handling on heart girth, behaviour and milk quality in dairy goats. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 108: 332–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.01.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joy, A, Dunshea, F, Leury, B, Clarke, I, DiGiacomo, K and Chauhan, S 2020 Resilience of small ruminants to climate change and increased environmental temperature: a review. Animals 10: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10050867CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, M, Gibbons, P and Hartnack, A 2017 Surgery of the sheep and goat integumen-tary system. In: Fubini, S and Ducharme, N (eds) Farm Animal Surgery, Second Edition pp 551–560. Elsevier: USA. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-31665-1.00020-4Google Scholar
Knierim, U, lrrgang, N and Roth, BA 2015 To be or not to be horned-consequences in cattle. Livestock Science 179: 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2015.05.014Google Scholar
Larrondo, C, Bustamante, H and Gallo, C 2018 Sheep farm-ers’ perception of welfare and pain associated with routine hus-bandry practices in Chile. Animals 8: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8120225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laytte, MJ 2015 Caracterización del grado de innovación según géne-ro en sistemas de producción ovina en las comunas de Navidad y Litueche. In Memoria de Título: Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile. [Title translation: Characterisation of the degree of innovation according to gender in sheep production systems in the com-munes of Navidad and Litueche]Google Scholar
Loretz, C, Wechsler, B, Hauser, R and Rüsch, P 2004 A com-parison of space requirements of horned and hornless goats at the feed barrier and in the lying area. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 87: 275–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2004.01.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattiello, S, Battini, M, Barbieri, S, Vieira, A, Stilwell, G, Canali, E and Zanella, A 2015 Un protocollo per la valutazione del benessere nella capra: I risultati del progetto AWIN. Large Animal Review 1(4): 90–93. [Title translation: A protocol for the assessment of welfare for goats: The results of the AWIN project]Google Scholar
Meneses, R 2017 Manual de producción caprina. Instituto de Desarrollo Agropecuario (INDAP) e Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA), Santiago, Chile. [Title translation: Goat pro-duction manual]Google Scholar
Menke, C, Waiblinger, S, Fölsch, DW and Wiepkema, PR 1999 Social behaviour and injuries of horned cows in loose housing systems. Animal Welfare 8: 243–258Google Scholar
Ministerio de Agricultura (MINAGRI) 2019 Sistema nacional de gestión de riesgos agroclimáticos. Coyuntura Agroclimática 8(11): 1–12. [Title translation: National agroclimatic risk management system]Google Scholar
Miranda-de La Lama, GC 2019 Goat handling and transport. In: Grandin T (ed) Livestock Handling and Transport, 5th Edition pp 271–289. CAB International: Wallingford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781786399151.0271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miranda-de la Lama, GC and Mattielo, S 2010 The importance of social behaviour for goat welfare in livestock farming. Small Ruminant Research 90: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.small-rumres.2010.01.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munoz, CA, Campbell, AJD, Hemsworth, PH and Doyle, RE 2019 Evaluating the welfare of extensively managed sheep. PLoS One 14(6): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218603CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muri, K, Stubsjøen, S and Valle, P 2013 Development and testing of an on-farm welfare assessment protocol for dairy goats. Animal Welfare 22(3): 385–400. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.22.3.385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahal, A, Ahmad, A, Prakash, A, Mandil, R and Kumar, A 2014 Environmental attributes to respiratory diseases of small rumi-nants. Veterinary Medicine International 2014: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/853627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sevi, A, Casamassima, D, Pulina, G and Pazzona, A 2009 Factors of welfare reduction in dairy sheep and goats. Italian Journal of Animal Science 8(1): 81. https://doi.org/10.4081/ijas.2009.s1.81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, M and Sherman, D 2009 Goat Medicine, Second Edition, pp 3–21. Wiley-Blackwell: Iowa, USA. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780813818825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spigarelli, C, Zuliani, A, Battini, M, Mattiello, S and Bovolenta, S 2020 Welfare assessment on pasture: A review on animal-based measures for ruminants. Animals 10(4): 609. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10040609CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stafford, KJ and Mellor, DJ 2005 Dehorning and disbudding dis-tress and its alleviation in calves. The Veterinary Journal 169(3): 337–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2004.02.005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stafford, KJ and Mellor, DJ 2011 Addressing the pain associated with disbudding and dehorning in cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 135: 226–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2011.10.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stilwell, G 2016 Small ruminants’ welfare assessment - Dairy goat as an example. Small Ruminant Research 142: 51–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2016.02.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strappini, AC, Metz, JHM, Gallo, C and Kemp, B 2009 Origin and assessment of bruises in beef cattle at slaughter. Animal 3: 728–736. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731109004091CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tadich, N, Gallo, C, Brito, M and Broom, D 2009 Effect of weaning and 48 h transport by road and ferry on some blood indi-cators of welfare in lambs. Livestock Science 121: 132–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2008.06.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarumán, JA and Gallo, C 2008 Bruising in lamb carcasses and its relationship with transport. Archivos de Medicina Veterinaria 40: 275–279. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0301-732X2008000300008Google Scholar
Toussaint, G 1997 The housing of milk goats. Livestock Production Science 49(2): 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(97)00011-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Knierim, U and Winckler, C 2001 The develop-ment of an epidemiologically based on-farm welfare assessment system for use with dairy cows. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A - Animal Science 51: 73–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/090647001316923108Google Scholar
Zobel, G, Neave, H and Webster, J 2019 Understanding natural behavior to improve dairy goat (Capra hircus) management sys-tems. Translational Animal Science 3: 212–224. https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txy145CrossRefGoogle Scholar