Commercially reared broiler chickens are commonly supplied with drinking water through lines of nipple drinkers that are positioned above the birds' heads to avoid water leaking and spoiling the litter underfoot. This means that the birds have to peck upwards to obtain water, an action that is very different from the ‘scoop’ action of natural drinking seen when birds drink from troughs or puddles. In this study we investigate the welfare implications of this unnatural drinking behaviour imposed by nipple drinkers. We show 1) that chickens have no apparent aversion to the taste of tap water, 2) that they prefer bell drinkers and troughs over nipple drinkers, 3) that the stereotyped ‘scoop’ action is seen even when birds are drinking from bowls of different heights, 4) that chickens have a strong preference for drinking from nipples that are lower rather than higher and, 5) that when offered a choice between bowls and nipples of the same height, the chickens are indifferent to the method of water presentation. We conclude that the height at which water is presented to chickens is more important to them than whether they can drink with the natural ‘scoop’ action. While this might suggest that chicken welfare could be improved by lowering the drinker lines, wet litter causes welfare issues of its own through its effect on hock burn and pododermatitis. We suggest that drinker systems should be designed so that both aspects of welfare (birds able to drink in their preferred way and clean litter) are possible.

Much attention has been focused, quite rightly, on the welfare of laboratory rodents and farm animals but certain other groups have been less well represented in welfare research. Small birds, for example, are often kept as pets and used in a wide variety of behavioural and physiological experiments where ‘best’ housing conditions are based on advice from experienced keepers as opposed to being tested experimentally. We investigated the effects of two husbandry conditions on the welfare of captive zebra finches: a) optional cover and b) rewarded handling versus random rewards. As a correlate of welfare in the four conditions (cover + reward, cover, reward, nothing), we recorded the time to settle and perform normal behaviours after an experimenter entered the room throughout the study (ie habituation to disturbance). In addition, we measured female preference for males in the four conditions to see whether welfare situation affected attractiveness as a mate. Birds in the two conditions where a reward was provided settled most quickly; and their settling time decreased across the study. Birds provided with cover alone became more disturbed by the entry of the experimenter as the study progressed. However, the birds taking longest on average to settle were those in cages with no cover and no reward. Females preferred males in the reward conditions as mates, either due to the fact that these males settled more quickly or because less-stressed males are more attractive in some other way. Thus, rewarding birds after disturbance is an effective and simple way to improve habituation to handling and human presence. In addition, these birds are more attractive to females, implying that males more habituated to captivity may be preferred as mates. Provision of cover may help under certain circumstances, but appears paradoxically to lead to increased fearfulness over time under the conditions studied here.

There is a need to assess the welfare of dairy cows that live outdoors under cold and wet conditions. This study combined a number of techniques to measure stress and make an assessment of welfare in this situation. Two groups of ten non-pregnant, non-lactating Holstein Friesian cows were exposed to a week of wind and rain (WR) or housed indoors (I) with pre- and post-treatment weeks indoors in a cross-over design. Wind and rain consisted of continual air movement (7.1 kph) using fans, water sprinkling for 15 min (3.0 mm) per hour, a mean temperature of 3.4°C and wind chill of –0.3°C. Internal body temperature was recorded every ten min and behaviour for 16 h per day. Blood, faeces and infrared temperatures were sampled at 0800h each morning during treatment weeks, and three times per week during pre- and post-treatment weeks. All cows were challenged with 2 ml Leptoshield Vaccine (CSL Animal Health, Australia) subcutaneously after 3 days of cold exposure to test immune responses. During WR, cows spent a greater proportion of time standing and less time lying down and eating than during I. Infrared temperatures were lower during WR than I in both dorsal and orbital (eye) regions. There was a distinct diurnal pattern of internal body temperature which had a greater amplitude during WR than I resulting from both a lower minimum and a higher maximum. The time of the minimum was 40 min later for WR than I. The overall mean body temperature was 0.07°C higher in WR than I. There were greater increases in plasma and faecal cortisol during WR than I, respectively. Total T4 was higher during WR than I. Non-esterified fatty acid concentration was higher in the week following WR than I. Total white blood cell numbers were lower during WR than I. No treatment differences were found for creatine kinase or for tumour necrosis factor, heat shock protein 90, interleukin 6 or interferon gamma expression in response to vaccination. In conclusion, this study applied a suite of stress measures to dairy cows exposed to extreme cold and wet conditions. Together, these measures indicated activation of the stress axis, physiological and behavioural adaptations to cold and a reduction in welfare. A number of these measures could be used to assess welfare under cold conditions on farms.

A survey was carried out to examine the attitudes of Turkish veterinarians towards animal welfare issues. The email questionnaire consisted of three sections of statements with a five-point Likert scale for choices of answer. The first section included statements examining the attitudes of Turkish veterinarians to animal welfare issues relating to European Union (EU) Legislation (93/119/EC, 95/29/EC, 2002/4EC and Council Regulation 1/2005). In the second, statements were designed to ascertain veterinarian attitudes towards the recently-passed Animal Protection Law, TR-5199. The statements in the last section were designed to assess the respondents' personal beliefs on a variety of welfare topics. The survey was sent to 615 veterinarians and the response rate was 40.2%. Turkish veterinarians expressed considerable support for the implications of animal welfare with the exception of statements regarding ‘stunning of ruminants pre-slaughter’, ‘phasing out of battery cages for poultry’ and ‘not operating on animals for aesthetic purposes’. In addition, they did not agree with the statements related to ‘ethological needs of farm animals’ and ‘effectiveness of EU laws and legislation in Turkey’. Females had higher mean values than males. The results of the survey indicated that significant concern for animal welfare issues is seen in the Turkish veterinarian population. Although the process of becoming a fully-integrated member of the EU will not occur rapidly, the influence of veterinarians could potentially enhance animal welfare in Turkey.

The variability of animal-based parameters was studied within a population of 41 farrow-to-finish farms. Data were collected during three visits, each corresponding to a different season within a two-year period. The largest between-farm variability was observed for stereotypic behaviour by pregnant sows, and for skin, ear and tail lesions, dirtiness and respiratory problems in growing pigs. Relationships with housing and management parameters were established to formulate advice on how to improve pigs' welfare. Group-housed sows performed less oral stereotypic behaviour than individual housed sows (18.7 versus 44.1%), but a higher proportion of skin lesions was observed in group-housed sows (15.4 versus 2.0%). Prevalence of tail-biting behaviour varied between 0 and 21%. The risk for tail biting was higher in cases of reduced levels of floor space per pig, and ear-biting behaviour occurred more often when tails were docked short. Coughing was not correlated directly with the occurrence of lung lesions, but the risk was higher in instances of reduced space availability per pig. Farms could be ranked according to these welfare parameters, ie either according to the score of each individual parameter or based on the summation of all scores. Hence, welfare status was defined in relation to farm-specific information, allowing formulation of advice on housing and management to ultimately improve pig welfare through the matching of a predefined benchmark.

Animal welfare presents particular policy challenges. Good welfare provides private productivity benefits to producers and some level of positive external benefit to people who care about animal welfare status. But markets for welfare fail, meaning that private producers are unlikely to provide the correct level of external benefit and social welfare will not be maximised. Accordingly, there is a rationale for government to be involved in the provision of animal welfare. The public good nature of animal welfare supply presents policy challenges for government regulators. Specifically, in setting regulatory targets, Defra, as the regulator, aims to maximise social welfare by designing regulation that delivers benefits that are at least equal to regulatory costs at the margin. This means that regulatory targets must be informed by some assessment of benefits of welfare policies. This paper considers this problem in the context of the proposed EU Directive on broiler welfare. The paper describes the application of the contingent valuation method to measure the economic benefits of broiler welfare, and considers how the results inform welfare target setting.

The effects of a (30 cm high) elevated platform as an enrichment structure on the behaviour and performance of fattening rabbits kept in groups were investigated. Three housing systems for fattening rabbits were compared using a stocking density of 15 rabbits m–2. The rabbits were housed either in large pens (3.67 m2 plus a platform of 0.39 m2; with 60 rabbits per pen) or in small pens (0.503 m2 plus a platform of 0.159 m2; with10 rabbits per pen), or in conventional standard cages (0.39 m2, with 6 rabbits and without any enrichment) from 31 to 72 days of age. The conventional cages without a platform were used as a control and reference model. Rabbits housed in each small pen or in each cage belonged to the same litter, and the 60 rabbits sharing the same large pen were from six or seven litters. At the end of fattening, rabbits reached the weight of 2,508 g in cages, 2,397 g in small pens, and 2,340 g in large pens; the only significant difference was daily weight gain which was better in cages than in both pens. There was no difference in growth parameters between the two types of pens. The mortality rate was less than 1% for all treatments. No sanitation problems or severe lesions were seen with rabbits even those reared in large pens and large groups. Neither housing systems, nor elevated platform affected activities such as dietary intake or resting. The use of the platform appears to depend upon the amount of space available; in a large pen, an elevated platform can be utilised as an exercise structure while in a small pen it was used more as simply extra space to occupy.

Tail and ear biting lesions have a negative effect both on the animal welfare status of pigs (Sus scrofus) and the economical revenue of the pig farm. Tail biting behaviour is an unpredictable, abnormal behaviour that is thought to have a multifactorial origin. On-farm factors influencing tail biting have been described, but the real triggers are poorly understood. Much of the research into tail biting has been done on a small scale within a well-controlled environment and small sample sizes. This well-controlled environment is not always representative of the contemporary commercial conditions. Therefore, an observational epidemiological approach at farm level was adopted to gain a better insight into the factors influencing the occurrence of tail and ear biting lesions. Tail and ear biting lesions were observed at pen level three times a year on sixty farms across Belgium. A questionnaire was conducted to build a multifactorial model indicating different risk factors concerning the lesions scored. The temperature and the number of feeding places per animal in the nursery, the percentage of floor space covered with slats in the farrowing unit, the feed type in the growing unit and the overall hygiene policy were the most important indicators for the appearance of tail and ear biting lesions during fattening. The leave-one-out cross validation of the model demonstrated an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.55 between the predicted model outcomes and the observed data. This epidemiological study provides important potential risk factors in relation to the incidence of tail and ear biting lesions. However, experimental and/or longitudinal studies have to confirm that the correlations found in this work are causal factors.

Survival and mortality of extensive hill ewes are important commercial factors and valuable indicators of welfare, but difficult to study. Body condition scoring is a tried-and-tested management and monitoring tool which has been defined as a good predictor of fitness in ewes and is easily measured under hill farm conditions. This paper presents the results of a study on ewe survival rates in hill conditions in Scotland. Ewe performance and survival rates were measured in two contrasting hill flocks over a five-year period. Statistical analysis showed that mid-pregnancy body condition score was the most reliable indicator of subsequent ewe survival, followed closely by age of the ewe and environmental and management conditions. This study confirms that there are considerable welfare issues related to hill flocks and that improved winter nutritional management is a key component to good welfare and productivity. It also reinforces the view that body condition score is a good quantitative predictor of animal welfare and that poor mid-winter score indicates high risk of mortality, both at the flock and individual ewe level.

High concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2), used for killing laboratory rodents, are known to be more strongly aversive to rats than sweet food items are attractive. This study investigated whether the maintenance of a high oxygen (O2) concentration, using a gas mixture of 70% CO2 and 30% O2, would reduce aversion to CO2 during a gradual-fill procedure. Eight male Wistar rats, aged 10 months, were housed individually in an apparatus consisting of two cages, one higher than the other and joined by a tube. In a series of trials, subjects entered the lower cage for a reward of 20 sweet food items. The gas was turned on at the moment the rat started eating the reward items and flowed into the lower cage at a fixed rate. There were four treatments: 1) 100% CO2 at 14.5% cage volume min–1; 2) gas mixture at 14.5% min–1; 3) gas mixture at 21.0% min–1, which delivered CO2 at approximately 14.5% min–1 and 4) air, with each subject tested with each treatment four times. Measures of willingness to stay and eat in the lower cage (latency to stop eating, latency to leave and the number of reward items eaten) were much lower in all three gas treatments than in air, indicating that the CO2 and the CO2 + O2 mixture were both more strongly aversive than sweet food items were attractive. Comparing the gas mixture with 100% CO2, the latency to leave and the number of reward items eaten were slightly higher in the CO2 + O2 mixture at 21% min–1 than in CO2 at 14.5% min–1, indicating that the addition of O2 slightly reduced the aversiveness of CO2 in the gradual-fill procedure. This reduction is not enough to warrant recommending the use of CO2 + O2 mixtures for killing rats.