Case study: Treatment of oral and locomotory stereotypic behaviors in a mature sow

A 32-month-old female 225-kg nonpregnant cross-bred Newsham sow presented a 6-week history of stereotypic behaviors when housed in a laboratory research facility. A behavioral examination over 12 daylight hours revealed 3 main stereotypic motor patterns, namely (1) oral-nasal gate manipulation defined as placement of the snout between the bars of the pen gate with repetitive, forceful up and down movement; (2) head weaving defined as repetitive lateral head and snout movement toward the pen gates while rocking back and forth on her forequarters with hooves remaining on ground at all times; and (3) body weaving defined as repetitive shifting of body weight from one side to the other with front hooves lifting alternately off the ground. The sow performed the oral-nasal gate manipulation and head and body weaving 4.0%, 12.4%, and 6.8% of her total baseline time budget, respectively. The presumptive diagnosis was oral-nasal and locomotory stereotypies. Three treatments were used to mitigate the duration and frequency of these stereotypic behaviors. Treatment 1—Social treatment (change social stimuli by providing visual and nose-to-nose contact with different neighboring sows); Treatment 2—Forage treatment (change foraging substrates by providing peat moss as a rooting substrate); and Treatment 3—Space treatment (change pen configuration by increasing space). The sow performed the oral-nasal gate manipulation and head and body weaving 0%, 0.4%, and 0.1% of her total time budget, respectively; social treatment: the sow performed the oral-nasal gate manipulation and head and body weaving 0.9%, 15.3%, and 11.3% of her total time budget, respectively; and forage treatment: the sow performed the oral-nasal gate manipulation and head and body weaving 0.5%, 28.0%, and 15.5% of her total time budget, respectively. This study is one of the first reports to evaluate the treatment of established stereotypies in a mature sow. Results suggest the promise of environmental enrichment as an effective treatment strategy. Further research is needed to evaluate the persistence of these behavioral changes and relative importance of different environmental manipulations provided

Dairy Cattle Euthanasia—Focus Groups Exploring the Perspectives of Brazilians Working in the Dairy Cattle Industry

The objective of this study was to explore perspectives and attitudes about euthanasia specific to the Brazilian dairy cattle industry. Twenty-five Brazilian citizens (13 veterinarians, 4 animal scientists, 3 professors, 3 researchers, 1 dairy owner, and 1 caretaker) participated in one of three focus groups conducted and recorded online (10, 8, and 7 participants per group). Questions regarding euthanasia were posed by a moderator, and the focus group discussions were then transcribed verbatim for analysis. After the initial data analysis, themes were evaluated and collapsed into three major categories: Euthanasia Training and Farm and Human Components. A complex interconnection between the three main themes and multiple subthemes specific to dairy cattle euthanasia was also revealed. The lack of nationally recognized euthanasia guidelines for dairy cattle paired with ineffective and inaccessible euthanasia tools makes it difficult for dairy veterinarians to implement humane protocols for on-farm euthanasia. In addition, logistical factors, particularly, the financial cost of euthanasia and the human–animal bond, play a role in the failure to perform euthanasia when warranted. Future studies should focus on the development of science-based standards and producer training to improve the consistency of on-farm euthanasia in Brazilian dairy operations

Dairy workers' attitudes toward dairy cattle euthanasia

ABSTRACT: Implementing timely and humane euthanasia in dairy farms remains a critical concern. One of the possible barriers for the implementation of timely euthanasia on-farm is dairy workers' attitudes toward the act. The objectives of this study were to investigate dairy workers' attitudes toward dairy cattle euthanasia and their association to individuals' demographic characteristics. A total of 81 workers from 30 dairy farms (ranging in size from less than 500 to more than 3,000 cows) participated in the survey and most participants were caretakers (n = 45; 55.6%) or farm managers (n = 16; 19.8%), with an average work experience of 14.8 years. Dairy workers' attitudes toward dairy cattle (empathy affect, empathy attribution, and negative attitudes about cattle), working environment (relying on others, perceived time constraints) and euthanasia decision-making (feeling comfortable with euthanasia, feeling confident, seeking knowledge, using different sources to obtain advice, having negative attitudes about euthanasia, having insufficient knowledge, having trouble deciding when to euthanize and avoiding if possible) were identified and used for cluster analyses. Cluster analyses identified 3 distinct clusters: (1) confident but uncomfortable with euthanasia (n = 40); (2) confident and comfortable with euthanasia (n = 32); and (3) unconfident, lacking knowledge and detached from cattle (n = 9). Dairy workers' demographic characteristics (age, sex, race and ethnicity, dairy experience, role on-farm, farm size, and previous euthanasia experience) were used as predictors for the risk factor analyses. The risk analysis demonstrated that there were no predictors for cluster 1, but White workers (P = 0.04) and caretakers that had previous euthanasia experience tended to be more likely to be members of cluster 2 (P = 0.07) whereas respondents that worked in farms with 501–1,000 cows were more likely to be grouped in cluster 3. This study provides vital information about variability in dairy workers' attitudes toward dairy euthanasia as well as its association with race and ethnicity, farm size, and previous euthanasia experience. This information can be used to implement appropriate training and euthanasia protocols to increase both human and dairy cattle welfare on-farm

Determination of Dairy Cattle Euthanasia Criteria and Analysis of Barriers to Humane Euthanasia in the United States: The Veterinarian Perspective

When dairy cattle become ill or injured to the extent that recovery is unlikely or impossible, on-farm euthanasia should be used as a tool to eliminate pain and suffering. Our study aimed to identify decision-making criteria and the most common factors considered by veterinarians when making and carrying out euthanasia decisions. Dairy cattle veterinarians were recruited to participate in an online survey (Part I, 61 surveys collected) or in one of three focus groups (Part II, 4–10 veterinarians/group, n = 22). Part I (survey): Surveyed veterinarians varied regarding health condition management and demonstrated a strong proclivity to treat compromised cattle, mirroring trends amongst dairy producers identified in previous research. Sixty percent of respondents indicated that most facilities for which they serve as the primary veterinarian have a written euthanasia protocol in place. Part II (focus groups): Three main themes about euthanasia decision-making (logistical, animal, and human) were identified from focus group discussions. Discussions focused primarily on logistical factors such as financial considerations and client/public perceptions. Development of specific standards for euthanasia, alongside interactive training programs for dairy veterinarians and producers are vital next steps to improving cattle welfare and consistency in euthanasia decision-making across the United States dairy industry

Precision livestock farming: a qualitative exploration of swine industry stakeholders

Introduction: Precision livestock farming (PLF) technology development has proliferated recently, but on-farm adoption has lagged. Understanding PLF stakeholders’ views, practical applications, limitations, and concerns are necessary to understand the factors influencing the adoption of PLF technology. Methods: Using semi-structured online interviews, 12 influential stakeholders’ PLF views and lived experiences were investigated. A phenomenological paradigm was used to generate qualitative data that was analyzed using template analysis. Results: We identified two unique groups of stakeholders, namely the PLF enthusiast and PLF cautious groups. The majority of the participants were well aware and had firsthand experience with the PLF technologies that are currently being used in the swine industry. Discussion: We found that PLF technology was perceived to improve specificity in decision-making, better care for pigs, improve animal health and welfare, increase labor efficiency, and improve resource-use efficiency. Poor internet connectivity and the inability to use PLF data for decision-making due to needing to first complete daily on-farm tasks were considered key obstacles to its implementation. To integrate PLF technology into the existing barn environment, it is necessary to modify farm buildings and infrastructure and management protocols. Stakeholders’ main concerns with PLF technology included data privacy issues and the influence of PLF technology on human-animal relationships and farmers’ duty of care to the animals. In conclusion, stakeholders perceived camera systems for monitoring pig health and welfare and ensuring individual pig identification as a high priority in PLF development going forward.This article is published as Akinyemi BE, Vigors B, Turner SP, Akaichi F, Benjamin M, Johnson AK, Pairis-Garcia MD, Rozeboom DW, Steibel JP, Thompson DP, Zangaro C and Siegford JM (2023) Precision livestock farming: a qualitative exploration of swine industry stakeholders. Front. Anim. Sci. 4:1150528. doi: 10.3389/fanim.2023.1150528. © 2023 Akinyemi, Vigors, Turner, Akaichi, Benjamin, Johnson, Pairis-Garcia, Rozeboom, Steibel, Thompson, Zangaro and Siegford. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms