Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T03:45:20.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of a welfare indicator protocol for assessing animal welfare in AMS herds: researcher, production advisor and veterinary practitioner opinion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

T Rousing ,
IA Jakobsen ,
J Hindhede ,
IC Klaas ,
M Bonde  and
JT Sørensen
T Rousing*
Affiliation:
University of Aarhus, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Health and Welfare, PO Box 50, DK 8830 Tjele, Denmark
IA Jakobsen
Affiliation:
University of Aarhus, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Health and Welfare, PO Box 50, DK 8830 Tjele, Denmark
J Hindhede
Affiliation:
University of Aarhus, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Health and Welfare, PO Box 50, DK 8830 Tjele, Denmark
IC Klaas
Affiliation:
University of Aarhus, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Health and Welfare, PO Box 50, DK 8830 Tjele, Denmark
M Bonde
Affiliation:
University of Aarhus, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Health and Welfare, PO Box 50, DK 8830 Tjele, Denmark
JT Sørensen
Affiliation:
University of Aarhus, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Health and Welfare, PO Box 50, DK 8830 Tjele, Denmark
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [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.

A welfare indicator protocol integrating a total of 38 measures from 4 information sources: housing system, management, animal behaviour and clinical health has been developed for decision support in Automatic Milking System (AMS) herds. Two expert opinion studies focusing on the relevance of the welfare indicator protocol as basis for on-farm welfare assessment have been carried out; one study focused on the opinion of 21 AMS researchers; the other on that of 14 AMS production advisors and 15 veterinary practitioners. The researchers were asked to score the individual welfare relevance of the 38 measures. Furthermore, both the panels were asked to prioritise the 10 most important measures. The 21 researchers generally appreciated the listed protocol measures as highly relevant. The researcher and advisor panels agreed on prioritised measures from all 4 information sources among the 10 most important welfare indicators. In summary, researchers as well as production advisors and veterinarians supported the suggested measures for inclusion in a welfare assessment system. This has demonstrated that integration of different information is considered decisive for operational welfare assessment at herd level.

Keywords

advisory toolanimal welfareautomatic milking systemdairy cattleexpert opinionwelfare indicator protocol
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 16 , Issue 2: Special Issue: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level , May 2007 , pp. 213 - 216
Copyright
© 2007 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Bartussek, H 2001 An historical account of the development of the animal needs index ANI-35L as part of the attempt to promote and regulate farm animal welfare in Austria: An example of the interaction between animal welfare science and society. Acta Agricultura Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science Supplement 30: 34–41Google Scholar
Fregonesi, JA and Leaver, JD 2001 Behaviour, performance and health indicators of welfare for dairy cows housed in strawyard or cubicle systems. Livestock Production Science 68: 205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hindhede, J, Rousing, T, Fossing, C and Sørensen, JT 2002 A protocol for assessing animal welfare in an automatic milking system. In: Implication of the introduction of automatic milking on dairy farms (QLK5-2000-31006) http://www.automaticmilking.nlGoogle Scholar
Klaas, IC, Rousing, T, Fossing, C, Hindhede, J and Sørensen, JT 2003 Is lameness a welfare problem in dairy farms with automatic milking systems? Animal Welfare 12: 599–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Main, DCJ, Whay, HR, Green, LE and Webster, AJF 2002 Preliminary investigation into the use of expert opinion to compare the overall welfare of dairy cattle farms in different farm assurance schemes. Animal Welfare 12: 565–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rousing, T, Bonde, M and Sørensen, JT 2001 How to aggregate welfare indicators into an operational welfare assessment system: a bottom up approach. Acta Agricultura Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science Supplement 30: 53–57Google Scholar
Sørensen, JT, Hindhede, J, Rousing, T and Fossing, C 2002 Assessing animal welfare in a dairy cattle herd with an automatic milking system. In: Proceedings First North American Conference on Robotic Milking VI-54-VI-59. Toronto, CanadaGoogle Scholar
Thomsen, PT, Kjeldsen, AM, Sørensen, JT and Houe, H 2004 Mortality (including euthanasia) among Danish dairy cows (1990-2001). Preventive Veterinary Medicine 62: 19–33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed