Suchergebnisse

SIMPLE SUMMARY: On 23 March 2020, the UK Government introduced its first nationwide lockdown as part of efforts to reduce the impact of COVID-19. There have since been two more. "Lockdown" control measures meant both racehorse trainers and veterinary surgeons (vets) had to make changes to the way they worked. Beneficial practices which aided veterinary care have been reported anecdotally, as has an increase in the use of electronic communication and information technologies. The aim of this study was to investigate if these claims could be supported by exploring any changes to racehorse veterinary care that occurred due to the implementation of the first COVID-19 lockdown restrictions. Data collection involved carrying out ten semistructured interviews with racehorse trainers and ten equine vets from November 2020 to January 2021. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to try and make sense of how vets and trainers interacted with each other before and during a period of rapid change and how both groups found alternative ways to ensure beneficial veterinary care was not compromised. Data Analysis revealed four themes threading through the data. These were, firstly, the trainer–vet relationship is built upon a good working relationship, secondly, there had been little or no change in the vet–trainer relationship during the first "lockdown" period. Thirdly, when COVID-19 restrictions were in force, more remote consultations took place using images or videos as well as telephone consults, and the fourth and final theme identified the way connectivity and poor-quality images and videos limited their effectiveness. ABSTRACT: In March 2020, the World Health Organisation called for countries to take urgent and aggressive action against a global pandemic caused by COVID-19. Restrictions were introduced in many countries to reduce transmission of COVID-19 and ultimately deaths. Such restrictions have been colloquially referred to as "lockdown". Anecdotal evidence of the beneficial practices that facilitated safe veterinary ...

A range of welfare outcome measures relating to on-farm welfare are monitored in UK slaughterhouses to check compliance with the European Broiler Directive. A national dataset from 438,155 batches of chickens between 2010 and 2014 and from 228,795 batches between 2016 and 2018 was analysed. The data contained information about 3.1 billion chickens. The highest mean proportion for a single condition was for ascites/oedema in 2016–2018 at 0.384%, affecting 3.9 million chickens/year sent to slaughter during that time, followed by abnormal colour/fevered at 0.324%, affecting 3.4 million chickens/year. Identifying farms most likely to have poor welfare is an important strategy for improving animal welfare overall, and for maximising the capacity for checking regulatory compliance when resources are limited. We found a greater proportion of broiler farms overall remained consistently in the best quartile (16.4%) rather than the worst quartile (6.6%). Farms that exceeded a Government 'trigger' threshold for poor welfare were significantly more likely to subsequently improve than 'non-trigger' farms, although they usually remained in the worst performing quartile of farms.

Veterinary surgeons are often asked to provide reports to courts describing factual observations and their expertopinion on the presence or absence of unnecessary suffering in animals. This study reviewed 42 expert witness reports in order to describe the approach taken to the assessment of unnecessary suffering. Whilst most reports suitably described factual observations, there was significant variation in the opinions on suffering and the actions of the owner. Severity and duration of potential suffering was commented upon in 26 and 29 reports respectively. Experts used terms associated with negative mental states and physical states in 28 and 27 reports respectively. The necessity of suffering was commented upon in 27 reports, with minimal commentary on theactions of the owner. External references supporting the opinion of the expert was only provided in 13 reports. There was evidence of disputes between experts concerning the definition of suffering, the significance of clinical findings and the relevance of different assessment methods. It is suggested that expert witness reports should include a systematic consideration of the animal's mental and physical states, severity of harm, duration of harm and a commentary on the necessity of suffering as defined by legislation.

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Ensuring acceptable welfare of broilers at the slaughterhouse is paramount in meeting legislative and retailer specifications, and in producing high quality meat. Animal welfare training for staff working in red meat slaughterhouses has been shown to improve animal welfare measures and product quality, however there is little evidence of the effects of welfare training in poultry processing plants. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of introducing a welfare training program for staff on bird welfare and carcass quality in a commercial Costa Rican and British poultry slaughter plant. The results we obtained show that staff welfare training has a positive effect on several bird welfare outcomes. Some carcass quality measures also improved post training, although this result was not consistent. These data could help the development and targeting of future welfare training courses and encourage the uptake of welfare training in the poultry slaughter industry. ABSTRACT: The number of broilers slaughtered globally is increasing. Ensuring acceptable welfare conditions for birds at the time of slaughter is paramount in meeting legislative and retailer specifications, and in producing high quality meat. There is knowledge that welfare training programs for members of the farming and red meat slaughter industry can improve animal welfare measures and product quality, however there is little evidence of the effects of welfare training in poultry processing plants. In our study, a comprehensive welfare training program was introduced to a Costa Rican and a British commercial broiler primary processing plant, both of which slaughter birds by way of neck cut post electrical water bath stunning. The effects of this program on some welfare and product quality measures were investigated, both immediately and six months post training. The welfare measures that showed significant improvements post training included; flapping at shackling, pre-stun shocks, stun parameters and effective neck cut. ...

The number of broilers slaughtered globally is increasing. Ensuring acceptable welfare conditions for birds at the time of slaughter is paramount in meeting legislative and retailer specifications, and in producing high quality meat. There is knowledge that welfare training programs for members of the farming and red meat slaughter industry can improve animal welfare measures and product quality, however there is little evidence of the effects of welfare training in poultry processing plants. In our study, a comprehensive welfare training program was introduced to a Costa Rican and a British commercial broiler primary processing plant, both of which slaughter birds by way of neck cut post electrical water bath stunning. The effects of this program on some welfare and product quality measures were investigated, both immediately and six months post training. The welfare measures that showed significant improvements post training included; flapping at shackling, pre-stun shocks, stun parameters and effective neck cut. Product quality measures including broken wings and red pygostyles also improved, however the positive effect of training was not seen in all quality measures. Welfare training does have the potential to improve broiler welfare and product quality at slaughter, and these data could help the development and targeting of future welfare training courses and encourage the uptake of welfare training in the poultry slaughter industry.

The number of broilers slaughtered globally is increasing. Ensuring acceptable welfare conditions for birds at the time of slaughter is paramount in meeting legislative and retailer specifications, and in producing high quality meat. There is knowledge that welfare training programs for members of the farming and red meat slaughter industry can improve animal welfare measures and product quality, however there is little evidence of the effects of welfare training in poultry processing plants. In our study, a comprehensive welfare training program was introduced to a Costa Rican and a British commercial broiler primary processing plant, both of which slaughter birds by way of neck cut post electrical water bath stunning. The effects of this program on some welfare and product quality measures were investigated, both immediately and six months post training. The welfare measures that showed significant improvements post training included; flapping at shackling, pre-stun shocks, stun parameters and effective neck cut. Product quality measures including broken wings and red pygostyles also improved, however the positive effect of training was not seen in all quality measures. Welfare training does have the potential to improve broiler welfare and product quality at slaughter, and these data could help the development and targeting of future welfare training courses and encourage the uptake of welfare training in the poultry slaughter industry.

Existing animal welfare standards for legislation and food certification programmes are primarily designed to avoid harms to the livestock, with minimal consideration given to their behavioural freedoms. Recent research has shown, however, that animal welfare should not only be evaluated by the absence of negative states but also by the presence of 'good life' or positive experiences enjoyed by animals. The objective of the present study is to investigate the scientific validity and on-farm cost implications of utilising potential input-based measures of positive welfare as part of evaluation criteria for farm assurance schemes. Building upon the Farm Animal Welfare Council's concept of good life opportunities, an assessment was undertaken on 49 non-caged laying hen farms across the UK by measuring on-farm resources to facilitate positive experiences alongside commonly measured metrics for welfare outcomes. The financial cost of providing these resources on each enterprise was also estimated using a farm-scale costing tool. The results suggested that 63% of resource needs that facilitate the behaviour opportunities of laying hens are already being provided by these producers, far above legal and commercial requirements. This practice attracts no reward mechanism or direct financial benefit under the current market structure. Additional provision of opportunities was positively associated with behavioural outcomes, but only limited impact was observed on health and productivity measures. Economic modelling indicated that significant room exists to further improve welfare scores on these farms, on average by 97%, without incurring additional costs. Together we argue that these results can be seen as evidence of market failure since producers are providing positive welfare value to society that is not being currently recognised. It is therefore contended that measuring and rewarding the supply of good life opportunities could be a novel policy instrument to create an effective marketplace that appropriately recognises high welfare production.

Existing animal welfare standards for legislation and food certification programmes are primarily designed to avoid harms to the livestock, with minimal consideration given to their behavioural freedoms. Recent research has shown, however, that animal welfare should not only be evaluated by the absence of negative states but also by the presence of "good life" or positive experiences enjoyed by animals. The objective of the present study is to investigate the scientific validity and on-farm cost implications of utilising potential input-based measures of positive welfare as part of evaluation criteria for farm assurance schemes. Building upon the Farm Animal Welfare Council's concept of good life opportunities, an assessment was undertaken on 49 noncaged laying hen farms across the UK by measuring on-farm resources to facilitate positive experiences alongside commonly measured metrics for welfare outcomes. The financial cost of providing these resources on each enterprise was also estimated using a farm-scale costing tool. The results suggested that 63% of resource needs that facilitate the behaviour opportunities of laying hens are already being provided by these producers, far above legal and commercial requirements. This practice attracts no reward mechanism or direct financial benefit under the current market structure. Additional provision of opportunities was positively associated with behavioural outcomes, but only limited impact was observed on health and productivity measures. Economic modelling indicated that significant room exists to further improve welfare scores on these farms, on average by 97%, without incurring additional costs. Together we argue that these results can be seen as evidence of market failure since producers are providing positive welfare value to society that is not being currently recognised. It is therefore contended that measuring and rewarding the supply of good life opportunities could be a novel policy instrument to create an effective marketplace that appropriately recognises high welfare production.

SIMPLE SUMMARY: An input-based framework to evaluate positive welfare opportunities for farm animals presents a case for incorporating quality of life measures into farm assurance schemes, thereby encouraging more producers to deliver higher welfare. Using an original dataset of UK laying hen farms that uniquely connects input-based measures of positive welfare to outcome-based measures of both positive and negative welfare, this study investigates the feasibility of evaluating positive welfare within certification schemes from both scientific and financial viewpoints. ABSTRACT: Existing animal welfare standards for legislation and food certification programmes are primarily designed to avoid harms to the livestock, with minimal consideration given to their behavioural freedoms. Recent research has shown, however, that animal welfare should not only be evaluated by the absence of negative states but also by the presence of "good life" or positive experiences enjoyed by animals. The objective of the present study is to investigate the scientific validity and on-farm cost implications of utilising potential input-based measures of positive welfare as part of evaluation criteria for farm assurance schemes. Building upon the Farm Animal Welfare Council's concept of good life opportunities, an assessment was undertaken on 49 noncaged laying hen farms across the UK by measuring on-farm resources to facilitate positive experiences alongside commonly measured metrics for welfare outcomes. The financial cost of providing these resources on each enterprise was also estimated using a farm-scale costing tool. The results suggested that 63% of resource needs that facilitate the behaviour opportunities of laying hens are already being provided by these producers, far above legal and commercial requirements. This practice attracts no reward mechanism or direct financial benefit under the current market structure. Additional provision of opportunities was positively associated with behavioural outcomes, but only limited impact ...

Investigating how those responsible for the day to day care of animals understand the concept of animal welfare is an important step in the process of animal welfare improvement. For example, exploring how equine stakeholders talk about equine welfare may offer insight into how they interpret and utilise communications about welfare and how this may have an impact on the actual welfare of horses. In-depth interviews with 31 equine stakeholders in England and Wales were used to explore their perceptions and understanding of welfare. It was found that they understood the concept of welfare in four distinct ways. Firstly, welfare was understood in terms of the provision of resources, for example food and water. Secondly, a "horse-centred" understanding of welfare was articulated which included the horses' mental state and linked to natural behaviour. Thirdly, the word welfare had negative connotations and for some good welfare was achieved through the avoidance of negative states. There was a tendency for interviewees to distance themselves from examples of "poor" welfare. Finally, interviewees discussed incidents that occurred in their own familiar contexts but suggested that these were not welfare problems or sought to justify or downplay them. There was little acknowledgement or reference to definitions of welfare as used by welfare scientists and incorporated into welfare legislation and codes of practice. There was evidence that the ways in which equine stakeholders understood the concept of welfare may have been acting as a barrier to the alleviation of some commonly occurring equine welfare problems. Consequently, there is a need for strategies aimed at improving equine welfare to consider stakeholder constructs of welfare and the ways in which these are generated and acted upon.

This paper describes a case example where initiatives from private assurance schemes, scientists, charities, government and egg companies have improved the welfare of UK cage-free laying hens. The RSPCA and Soil Association farm assurance schemes introduced formal welfare outcome assessment into their annual audits of laying hen farms in 2011. Feather loss was assessed on 50 birds from each flock on a 3-point scale for two body regions: Head and Neck (HN) and Back and Vent (BV). In support of the observations assessors were trained in feedback techniques designed to encourage change in farmer behaviour to improve welfare. In addition, during Year 2 farmers were asked about changes they had made, and intended to make on their farms. During 2011-2013 there were also wider industry initiatives to improve feather cover. Data were analysed from 830 and 743 farms in Year 1 and Year 2 respectively. From Year 1 to Year 2 there was a significant reduction in the prevalence of feather loss from 31.8% (9.6% severe) to 20.8% (6% severe) for the HN region, and from 33.1% (12.6% severe) to 22.7% (8.3% severe) for BV. Fifty-nine percent of 662 farmers reported they had made changes on their farms during Year 1 to improve bird welfare. For such a substantial industry change, attributing causation to specific initiatives is difficult; however this is the first study to demonstrate the value to animal welfare of certification schemes monitoring the effectiveness of their own and other industry-led interventions to guide future policy.

An online training package providing a concise synthesis of the scientific data underpinning EU legislation on enrichment and tail docking of pigs was produced in seven languages, with the aim of improving consistency of professional judgements regarding legislation compliance on farms. In total 158 participants who were official inspectors, certification scheme assessors and advisors from 16 EU countries completed an initial test and an online training package. Control group participants completed a second identical test before, and Training group participants after, viewing the training. In Section 1 of the test participants rated the importance of modifying environmental enrichment defined in nine scenarios from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important). Training significantly increased participants' overall perception of the need for change. Participants then rated nine risk factors for tail biting from 1 (no risk) to 10 (high risk). After training scores were better correlated with risk rankings already described by scientists. Scenarios relating to tail docking and management were then described. Training significantly increased the proportion of respondents correctly identifying that a farm without tail lesions should stop tail docking. Finally, participants rated the importance of modifying enrichment in three further scenarios. Training increased ratings in all three. The pattern of results indicated that participants' roles influenced scores but overall the training improved 1) recognition of enrichments that, by virtue of their type or use by pigs, may be insufficient to achieve legislation compliance, 2) knowledge on risk factors for tail biting and 3) recognition of when routine tail docking was occurring.