Welfare assessment of Danish dairy herds

10 downloads 0 Views 3MB Size Report
Nov 14, 2016 - Matthew Denwood, Søren S. Nielsen, Anne M. Michelsen, Tine Rousing,. Jan T. Sørensen, Hans Houe. Welfare assessment of Danish dairy.
Welfare assessment of Danish dairy herds The Danish Animal Welfare Index Nina D. Otten, Marlene K. Kirchner, Björn Forkman, Matthew Denwood, Søren S. Nielsen, Anne M. Michelsen, Tine Rousing, Jan T. Sørensen, Hans Houe

14/11/2016

The Danish Animal Welfare Index (DAWIN) • Veterinærforlig II (2013-2016) • National indices for: • dairy cattle and dairy calves (aged 0-180 days) • Slaughter pigs, weaners, piglets and sows

• Cooperating partners: • University of Copenhagen • Aarhus University • Danish Veterinary and Food Administration

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

2

14/11/2016

Animal welfare definition – the hedonistic view

ANIMAL WELFARE PRINCIPLES GOOD FEEDING GOOD HOUSING GOOD HEALTH APPROPRIATE BEHAVIOUR

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

3

4

Materials and methods • Random sample of 90 dairy herds (≥80 cows) • Recruitment procedure (AU): • Invitation by letter • Follow-up and confirmation by phone call

• Final sample of 60 participating herds • Geographically dispersed throughout DK CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

14/11/2016

Materials and methods CONVENTIONAL N=51

ORGANIC N=9

Size

Breed

50-200

HOL

27

5

RDM/DRH

2

1

JER

4

2

HOL

8

200-300

>300

JER

2

HOL

5

JER

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

3

1

NTOTAL=60

NTOTAL=41

NTOTAL=11

NTOTAL=8

5

6

On-farm welfare assessment

COWS

• Animal-based measure: •

Avoidance distance at the feeding table

• Resources outside cow area: • •

Length of feeding table/neck rail/no. feeding slots Sick and calving pens (number/water provision/bedding/total floorage)

• Animal-based measures • •

Behaviour – lying down and collisions, lying outside, pain face, getting up Clinical observations – BCS, cleanliness, integument alterations, claws, lameness

• Resources inside cow area: •

Total floorage, no. cubicles, bedding, water points (no./cleanliness),brushes

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

Gleerup et al. 2015

14/11/2016

Animal-based measures

COWS BCS: Normal Lean Fat

Cleanliness (0/1): Low leg Hindquarter Udder

Integument : Hairless patches Lesions Swellings

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

7

Overgrown claws (0/1)

Lameness: Non lame Moderate Severe

14/11/2016

On-farm welfare assessment • Animal-based measures: • • • • •

BCS Cleanliness Respiratory disorders Diarrhea Integument alterations

• Resource-based measures: • Access to feed, water, other calves, brushes, sick pen • Total floorage, bedding

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

8

CALVES

14/11/2016

Welfare challenges

COWS

Good Feeding CleanWater

WaterSupply

85.2

Only 14 % of herds have sufficient water supply (compliance with given legislation)

50.7

FeedBunkSpace

BodyConditionScore

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

9

79.8

90.7

52 % of herds have sufficient feed bunk space per cow (compliance with given legislation)

14/11/2016

Welfare challenges

COWS

Mean of 46 % dirty udders Good Housing TotalFloorageSickCalving AccessCalvingPen AccessSickPen Cubicles TotalFloorage CleanlinessUdder CleanlinessLowerHind CleanlinessHindQuarters BeddingMaterial GettingUpBehaviour CollidingWithEquipment TimeNeededToLieDown LyingOutsideLyingArea Tethering

Only 22 % of herds have sufficient total area per cow (compliance with given legislation)

93.6 100 89.9 80.3 58.7 78.1 58.7 79 77.9 88 78.5 70.1 15.1 99.2 0

One herd with 100 % clean cows ☺ Mean of 43 % dirty lower legs

20

40

60

10

80

Mean of 44 % dirty hind quarters

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

100

120

As many as 70 % of herds have a high proportion of cows lying outside the lying area

14/11/2016

Welfare challenges

COWS

Good Health HealedFractures (Abattoir data)

98.8

LiverDisease (Abbatoir data)

97.9

Pyemia (Abattoir data)

99.7

ProperEuthasia

100

PainFace

Hock lesions : 8 herds with no lesions, mean=19 % (0-46%) Carpal lesions: 15 herds with no lesions, mean= 5 % (0-12%)

95.7

Stillborn

74.8

Mortality

11

58.1

BulkTankSCC

93.7

OvergrownClaws

97.4

IntegumentAlterations

53.4

Lameness

Non-lame: mean= 63.9 % (19.9-100%)

71.6 0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Moderate: mean=28% (1.5-78.6%) Severe: mean=10.6 % (1.5-35 %) CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

14/11/2016

Welfare challenges

COWS

Appropriate Behaviour AvoidanceDistance

42.2

CowBrush

55

0

10

20

30

40

50

12

60

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

Only 3 % of herds have sufficient numbers of working cow brushes (compliance with given legislation)

14/11/2016

Welfare challenges • Clinical observations (N=3090 calves) • Cleanliness: Mild = 22 % Very dirty (>25 % of body)= 6.6 %

• Integument alterations: hairless patches= 20 % Lesions/swellings= 1.1 %

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

13

CALVES

14/11/2016

Welfare challenges • Resources • Individual housed (N=3090 calves) • No access to other calves: 19 % • Insufficient water supply/no access: 26 % • Insufficient space: 26 %

• Group housed (638 pens) • Insufficient water supply/no access: 19 % • Insufficient space: 17 %

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

14

CALVES

14/11/2016

15

Conclusion • The DAWIN for dairy cows and calves is developed and ready for implementation…so stay tuned ☺ • Year 2018 is scheduled to be T0 • Added value for stakeholders in terms of campaign planning • Added value for farmers in terms of animal welfare issues on farm compared to the national population

CPH Cattle 2016 N.D.Otten Section for Animal Welfare & Disease Control

14/11/2016

Acknowledgements • All participating herds and farmers • AU ANIS (EMA) – Jan Tind Sørensen, Tine Rousing, Pia Haun Poulsen, Mari Reiten, Victor H. Silva de Oliveira • KU SUND (AWDC)- Björn Forkman, Marlene K. Kirchner, Anne Marie Michelsen, Franziska Hakansson, Vibe Pedersen Lund, Matthew Denwood, Søren S. Nielsen and Hans Houe • The Danish Veterinary and Food Administration

16