Veterinærers syn på kalvehelse og -velferd i økologisk melkeproduksjon i Norge

En Internett-basert spørreundersøkelse (QuestBack™) ble sendt ut til 400 norske stordyrpraktikere i januar 2008. Totalt svarte 207 (52 %) veterinærer; 114 (55 %) av disse oppfylte inklusjonskriteriene. I undersøkelsen ble deltakerne spurt om kjennskap til Debios regelverk og ulike parametere relatert til kalvehelse og -velferd i økologiske besetninger. De ble også spurt om hva de betraktet som det største velferdsfortrinnet og det største kritiske punktet relatert til kalvevelferd i økologiske besetninger. Respondentene ble delt i to grupper basert på erfaring fra få (F, n = 70) og mange (M, n = 44) økologiske bruk. Til tross for at M-gruppen hadde signifikant bedre kjennskap til Debio-reglene enn F-gruppen, vurderte de sitt kunnskapsnivå som middelmådig. For å øke kvaliteten på rådgivningsarbeidet veterinærene utfører, bør dette forbedres. De fleste veterinærene anså kalvehelse og -velferd som jevngod i økologiske og konvensjonelle besetninger. Kalvens tillit til mennesker, samt plassforhold, ble imidlertid vurdert som signifikant bedre i økologisk drift, mens fôrkvalitet ble ansett som signifikant dårligere. Når det gjaldt vurdering av helseparametere, kom lav kalvedødelighet og nødvendig behandling ved sykdom og skade ut som de to beste faktorene, mens hold og tilvekst samt bruk av helsekort fikk lavest skår. Mulighet for naturlig atferd står sentralt i økologisk dyrehold, og ifølge respondentene har en stor andel av kalvene mulighet for dette. De viktigste velferdsfortrinnene i økologisk drift ble ansett å være de sosiale forholdene, både mellom ku og kalv og kalvene imellom. En røkter som steller godt med dyra, ble også betraktet som et viktig velferdsfortrinn, spesielt av F-gruppen. Blant de kritiske punktene var det større forskjell mellom gruppene. Mens F-gruppen fokuserte på mangelfull behandling ved sykdom og bruk av ”alternative” behandlere uten veterinærutdanning, var M-gruppen mer opptatt av dårlig fôrkvalitet

Velferdsplanlegging i økologisk kalvehold

For å bedre kalvens velferd i økologiske melkebesetninger er det utarbeidet et system for velferdsplanlegging på besetningsnivå retta mot kalv. Dette prøves nå ut på økologiske melkeproduksjonsbruk. Opplegget innebærer en vurdering av status for kalvevelferd i besetningen, en tiltaksplan for de viktigste forbedringer, og oppfølging med evaluering

Farmer groups for animal health and welfare planning in European organic dairy herds

A set of common principles for active animal health and welfare planning in organic dairy farming has been developed in the ANIPLAN project group of seven European countries. Health and welfare planning is a farmer‐owned process of continuous development and improvement and may be practised in many different ways. It should incorporate health promotion and disease handling, based on a strategy where assessment of current status and risks forms the basis for evaluation, action and review. Besides this, it should be 1) farm-specific, 2) involve external person(s) and 3) external knowledge, 4) be based on organic principles, 5) be written, and 6) acknowledge good aspects in addition to targeting the problem areas in order to stimulate the learning process. Establishing farmer groups seems to be a beneficial way of stimulating a dynamic development on the farms towards continuous improvement, as in this case with focus on animal health and welfare planning. Various factors influence the process in different contexts, e.g. geographical, cultural, traditional factors, and a proper analysis of the situation as well as the purpose of the group is necessary, and can relevantly be negotiated and co‐developed with farmers as well as facilitators before being implemented. Farmer groups based on farmer‐to‐farmer advice and co‐development need a facilitator who takes on the role of facilitating the process and ‘decodes’ him‐ or herself from being ‘expert’

The process of minimising medicine use through dialogue based animal health and welfare planning, Workshop report FIBL. In: CORE Organic project no. 1903 - ANIPLAN

The process of minimising medicine use through dialogue based animal health and welfare planning. Livestock are important in many organic farming systems, and it is an explicit goal to ensure high levels of animal health and welfare (AHW) through good management. In two previous EU network projects, NAHWOA & SAFO, it was concluded that this is not guaranteed merely by following organic standards. Both networks recommended implementation of individual animal health plans to stimulate organic farmers to improve AHW. These plans should include a systematic evaluation of AHW and be implemented through dialogue with each farmer in order to identify goals and plan improvements. 11 research institutions in 7 European countries have been involved in the ANIPLAN project with the main objective to minimise medicine use in organic dairy herds through active and well planned AHW promotion and disease prevention. The project consisted of 5 work packages, 4 of which comprised research activities building on current research projects, new applications across borders, exchange of knowledge, results and conclusions between participating countries, and adopting them to widely different contexts. International and national workshops have facilitated this exchange. In the project, animal health and welfare planning principles for organic dairy farms under diverse conditions were developed. Animal health and welfare assessments, based on the WelfareQuality parameters, were conducted in different types of organic dairy herds across Europe. Finally, guidelines for communication about animal health and welfare promotion in different settings were also developed relevant to both existing animal health advisory services or farmer groups such as the Danish Stable School system and the Dutch network program. These proceedings contain the presentations at the final workshop, which also included invited external guests. The proceedings also contain three reports which are deliverables of the project. They are focused on the process of planning for better animal health and welfare, and how farmers and facilitators manage this situation. The focus areas are animal health planning, AHW assessment using animal based parameters and development of advisory systems and farmer groups

Risk assessment on welfare in turkeys. Opinion of the Panel of Animal Health and Welfare of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety

publishedVersio

Reliability of an injury scoring system for horses

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The risk of injuries is of major concern when keeping horses in groups and there is a need for a system to record external injuries in a standardised and simple way. The objective of this study, therefore, was to develop and validate a system for injury recording in horses and to test its reliability and feasibility under field conditions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Injuries were classified into five categories according to severity. The scoring system was tested for intra- and inter-observer agreement as well as agreement with a 'golden standard' (diagnosis established by a veterinarian). The scoring was done by 43 agricultural students who classified 40 photographs presented to them twice in a random order, 10 days apart. Attribute agreement analysis was performed using Kendall's coefficient of concordance (Kendall's <it>W</it>), Kendall's correlation coefficient (Kendall's τ) and Fleiss' kappa. The system was also tested on a sample of 100 horses kept in groups where injury location was recorded as well.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Intra-observer agreement showed Kendall's <it>W </it>ranging from 0.94 to 0.99 and 86% of observers had kappa values above 0.66 (substantial agreement). Inter-observer agreement had an overall Kendall's <it>W </it>of 0.91 and the mean kappa value was 0.59 (moderate). Agreement for all observers versus the 'golden standard' had Kendall's τ of 0.88 and the mean kappa value was 0.66 (substantial). The system was easy to use for trained persons under field conditions. Injuries of the more serious categories were not found in the field trial.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The proposed injury scoring system is easy to learn and use also for people without a veterinary education, it shows high reliability, and it is clinically useful. The injury scoring system could be a valuable tool in future clinical and epidemiological studies.</p

Methodology for studying human attitudes and behaviour to cow-calf contact systems

This position paper describes a common stand on methodology of human attitudes and behaviour that is suitable to use in studies regarding cow-calf contact (CCC) in dairy production, in order to create a common knowledge base and foundation for future recommendations of CCC systems. We describe how different quantitative and qualitative methods can be used to study human attitudes to CCC as well as farmer or consumer behaviour. We aim to contribute to a better understanding of the available methods, and hope that this paper can be used as a guideline for future studies in this area

Using qualitative behaviour assessment to explore the link between stockperson behaviour and dairy calf behaviour

AbstractDairy farming usually implies close and frequent contact between the stockperson and the animals. A good human–animal relationship (HAR) is therefore essential for good animal welfare. To fully understand the quality of the HAR both the stockperson behaviour and the animals’ reaction to the handler needs to be assessed, as they mutually affect each other. Qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA) has during the last decade become a method to assess animal welfare through scrutiny of animal body language. The application of this method to characterize stockperson behaviour, on the other hand, is novel. This study aimed to, through the use of QBA, to characterize stockperson behaviour and to portray the body language dairy calves of the animals in his/her care. Further, the study tested the relationships between stockperson behaviour and calf behaviour using structural equation modelling (SEM). The assessments were performed in 2006–2008 on 110 Norwegian dairy farms. The stockperson sample consisted of 79.6% males and 20.4% females, with a mean age of 46 years. The dairy calves (including young stock) were mostly Norwegian Red and were 3 to 298 days old at the day of observation. Ten items of the stockperson QBA were analysed through Principal component analysis. The handling styles that emerged were termed calm/patient, dominating/aggressive, positive interactions and insecure/nervous. The 31 items of the calf QBA were also analysed using principal component analysis and revealed two dimensions of calf behaviour labelled pos/neg mood and high/low arousal. Based on the expected relationships between stockperson behaviour and calf behaviour a structural model was developed and tested using SEM. The analysis revealed that stockpersons who handle their calves patiently and pet and calmly talk to them during handling have animals with higher levels of positive mood, as characterized by high scores on QBA items like friendly and content. Stockpersons with a nervous handling style, or who were dominating and aggressive, on the other hand, had calves with more negative mood. These findings are important as they show the direct link between human behaviour and calf behaviour and once again confirm the significance of good stockmanship. The results also highlight the importance of proper training and self-awareness for those working with livestock

Expanding the moral circle: farmed fish as objects of moral concern

Until recently fish welfare attracted little attention, but international and national legislation and standards of fish welfare are now emerging and an overview of these developments is presented in this study. Whereas animal welfare legislation is based on public morality, animal ethics does not automatically accept public morality as normative and elaborates arguments regarding the way humans should treat animals (referred to as moral standards). In this study we present the most common animal ethics theories. For most of these, sentience is considered a demarcation line for moral concern: if an animal is sentient, then it should be included in the moral circle, i.e. receive moral consideration in its own right and some basic welfare should be ensured. As for fish, research has revealed that the sensory system of teleosts can detect noxious stimuli, and that some kind of phenomenal consciousness, allowing the fish to feel pain, seems to be present. This raises the ethical question as to how much evidence we need in order to act on such indications of fish sentience. A simple risk analysis shows that the probability that fishes can feel pain is not negligible and that if they do indeed experience pain the consequences in terms of the number of suffering individuals are great. We conclude that farmed fish should be given the benefit of the doubt and we should make efforts that their welfare needs are met as well as possible. Finally, the way forward is briefly discussed: efforts must be made to understand what fish welfare means in practical fish farming. This will involve the development of research and education, greater accountability and transparency, compliance with and control of policies, and quality assurance schemes