Dairy producer attitudes to pain in cattle in relation to disbudding calves

Pain is an important indicator of poor welfare of livestock. Despite this, pain has largely gone unrecognized in farm animals due to attitudes of producers and veterinarians, although they play a key role in monitoring and managing the perception of animal pain. Producer attitudes toward animal welfare influence livestock management and production. The aim was to quantify dairy producer attitudes to the painfulness of various cattle diseases and disbudding, a painful routine procedure performed on farm to ensure safer handling of cattle. A questionnaire on disbudding-related opinions and practices was sent to 1,000 Finnish dairy producers (response rate: 45%). Attitudes toward disbudding were gauged using a 5-point Likert scale and attitudes to cattle pain scored on an 11-point numerical rating scale. Principal components analysis was used to assess the loadings, which were further tested for differences between producer gender and housing systems with Mann-Whitney U-tests, and between herd milk yield, herd size, and age and work experience of producers with a Kruskal-Wallis test. Four main factors were identified: factor I (“taking disbudding pain seriously”), factor II (“sensitivity to pain caused by cattle diseases”), factor III (“ready to medicate calves myself”), and factor IV (“pro horns”). Female producers took disbudding pain more seriously, were more sensitive to pain caused to cattle by diseases, and were more ready to medicate disbudded calves than male producers. Producers with tie-stalls favored horns over producers with freestalls. Male producers with tie-stalls were sensitive to cattle pain and preferred horns over male producers with freestalls. Female producers with freestalls were more ready to medicate calves, but did not prefer horns more than female producers with tie-stalls. Taking disbudding seriously correlated with sensitivity to pain caused by cattle diseases. Producers with low-milk-yielding herds were less willing to medicate calves and more willing to keep cattle with horns than producers with higher-yielding herds. Older producers were more sensitive to cattle pain than middle-aged and younger producers. No effect was established for taking disbudding pain seriously: the pro-horn factor was associated with work experience, age, and herd size. Women rated pain higher and were more positive toward pain medication for animals than men. Maintaining horns are more important for producers with tie-stalls than for those with freestalls.     

Development and daily management of an explicit strategy of nonuse of antimicrobial drugs in twelve Danish organic dairy herds

Promotion of animal health and well-being at the individual animal and herd level is an important goal in organic farming. At the same time, chemical products affecting the natural balance among living organisms are prohibited in all areas of the organic farm. From an animal welfare point of view, however, no animal must suffer. Therefore, veterinary drugs are allowed under the European Union's regulations for organic farming, despite the fact that they are powerful cell toxins affecting both pathogenic and necessary bacteria, and as such in organic terminology, are regarded as “chemical” or “artificial” products. In this article, we present and discuss interviews with 12 Danish organic dairy producers who claim that minimized use or nonuse of antimicrobial drugs is an explicit goal. The dairy producers were at different levels with regard to reduced antimicrobial treatment. An explicit strategy of no antimicrobial treatments is based primarily on a long-term effort to improve herd health, and secondarily, on finding alternative treatments for diseased animals. Improved hygiene, outdoor access, use of nursing cows, and blinding of chronic mastitis quarters were the main techniques in developing a strategy of not using antimicrobial treatments in the herd by dairy producers. Producers’ perception of disease changed from something unavoidable to a disturbing break in the daily rhythm that often could have been avoided. Change toward a nonantimicrobial strategy was gradual and stepwise. All dairy producers in this study desired to preserve the possibility of using antimicrobial drugs in emergencies.     

Views on contentious practices in dairy farming: The case of early cow-calf separation

The public has become increasingly interested in the welfare of food animals, but the food animal industries possess few mechanisms for public engagement. Here we present results from a web-based forum designed to allow stakeholders to share views on controversial issues in dairying. In response to the question “Should dairy calves be separated from the cow within the first few hours after birth?” participants were able to indicate “yes,” “no,” or “neutral” and either write a reason in support of their view or select reasons provided by other participants. Four independent groups of participants were recruited (a total of 163 people); 31% said they had no involvement in the dairy industry; the remaining 69% (with some involvement in the industry) were students or teachers (33%), animal advocates (13%), producers (11%), veterinarians (9%) and other dairy industry professionals (3%). Overall, little consensus existed among participants across groups; 44% chose “yes,” 48% “no,” and 9% “neutral.” Responses varied with demographics, with opposition to early separation higher among females, animal advocates, and those with no involvement with the dairy industry. A fifth group was recruited at a dairy industry conference (an additional 28 participants); 46% chose “yes,” 32% “no,” and 21% “neutral.” Across all 5 groups, opponents and supporters often referenced similar issues in the reasons they provided. Opponents of early separation contended that it is emotionally stressful for the calf and cow, it compromises calf and cow health, it is unnatural, and the industry can and should accommodate cow-calf pairs. In contrast, supporters of early separation reasoned that emotional distress is minimized by separating before bonds develop, that it promotes calf and cow health, and that the industry is limited in its ability to accommodate cow-calf pairs. These results illustrate the potential of web-based forums to identify areas of agreement and conflict among stakeholders, providing a basis for the development of practices that address shared concerns.     

Consumer attitudes towards hypoallergenic apples that alleviate mild apple allergy

The development of genetically modified (GM) foods with benefits for consumers may be more acceptable than GM foods with benefits that accrue to industry or producers. The Santana apple is a novel hypoallergenic product suitable for many apple allergic consumers with mild symptomology. The Santana also needs fewer pesticides to be applied in production. A survey was conducted among consumers who bought the Santana in a large-scale “sales pilot”. The Santana was perceived to be beneficial by many apple allergic consumers. Non-allergic consumers were less positive about genetically modified hypoallergenic apples. Overall, traditional breeding was the preferred production strategy, although acceptance of genetic modification as a process did increase with increasing perceived personal benefit associated with products, in particular those which were “medically-related”, or perceived to reduce allergic reactions. Consumer preferences for reduced pesticide usage were also found, although this was more contingent on type of production processes applied.     

Animal Welfare Labelling and the Approach of the European Union: An Overview on the Current Situation

There is a growing appreciation of the insistence of consumers that animals used in food production should be well treated. High welfare standards could have both a direct and indirect impact on food safety and quality; regulatory and support systems in agriculture must adapt accordingly. Retailers and producers are increasingly recognising animal welfare as a fundamental aspect of product image and quality which create a need for reliable systems for on farm monitoring of animal welfare status and providing some warranty on appropriate production conditions. The article shows an overview of the European strategies for implementing the animal welfare labelling. Received: July 2, 2008; accepted: July 8, 2008     

An advisory tool to improve management practices affecting calf and heifer welfare on dairy farms

We developed an advisory tool addressing 10 critical areas of calf and heifer management, including calving management, care to newborn calves and painful procedures, colostrum management, cow-calf separation, calf feeding, weaning, calf housing, heifer feeding, heifer housing, and general monitoring. Targets and indicators for each critical area were validated by a panel of experts and maximum scores were assigned based on experts’ opinions and reviews of scientific literature. The tool was tested on 28 Quebec dairy farms for feasibility and repeatability between 2 observers. Farmers were asked to test colostrum quality, measure blood IgG concentrations, and record health events. The on-farm evaluation included an interview on management practices and an evaluation of conditions in the barn. Scorings and recommendations were discussed with producers. The usefulness of our on-farm welfare tool was evaluated by the producers themselves during a final debriefing. We reached the main goals of a successful advisory tool of calf and heifer management to improve welfare on dairy farms. We respected the targeted time limit of a 3-h visit covering all aspects of our tool including data collection on management and environment, scoring, practical demonstration with producers, and debriefing. We had no problems collecting management- and environment-based data and had high repeatability of qualitative environment-based measures (kappa value > 0.6). Our tool helped to detect problems and to discuss these problems with the producers; producers scored below 50% for some targets in calving management, care to newborn calves and painful procedures, colostrum management, and calf feeding. The targets were realistic so producers were not discouraged. All producers were convinced of the usefulness of our tool for identifying areas of calf and heifer management in need of improvement. They were also convinced of the usefulness of our tool as an advisory tool for technical advisors and veterinarians. Six months after the on-farm visit, recommended practices were implemented in many of these areas. Voluntary improvements in animal welfare can be facilitated by using appropriate tools to educate producers and help them change their attitudes toward calf management and animal welfare.     

On-farm quality assurance programs: a survey of producer and industry leader opinions.

To assess interest in implementing a California dairy quality assurance program, practices and opinions of dairy producers and industry leaders were surveyed by a mailed questionnaire and by focus groups. The majority of the 55 participants in the focus group were dairy producers; processor marketing executives, extension dairy advisors, packinghouse executives, and dairy veterinarians were represented. The consensus among the focus groups was that a quality assurance program should be voluntary, be managed by creameries, and confer an economic advantage to participants. Focus group members listed chemical and microbial food safety (in both meat and milk), environmental health, and animal welfare as issues that should be addressed. Of the 1440 questionnaires mailed with producers' milk checks, 413 were returned. Information was collected regarding opinions and practices pertaining to administration of drugs to animals, medical records and animal identification, culling practices, manure management, cow welfare, and feeding of animal protein. An overwhelming 99% of producers believed they were responsible for the safety of meat and milk leaving the farm. Sixty percent of producers said that they would consider joining a California-specific quality assurance program, whereas 9% indicated that they would not. Producers would be more likely to join if their processor believed it would impart a market advantage and if the program standards were controlled by producers.     

浅谈食品添加剂——亚硝酸钠

对亚硝酸钠在食品中的使用进行了简单的介绍,提出了亚硝酸钠在生产使用过程中生产者及监管部门应当注意和遵循的规范,并对消费者食用含有亚硝酸钠食品作出了指导。     

Structure,sensory and nutritional aspects of soluble-fibre inclusion in processed food products

The food industry relies increasingly on soluble fibre to formulate products with superior structural properties, mouthfeel and potential health benefits. In this paper, we have compiled experimental data from a wide range of high-solid foodstuffs in order to demonstrate the utility of fibre inclusion in such preparations. Recent studies have mapped out the structural properties of soluble-fibre polysaccharides (e.g., κ-carrageenan, agarose and deacylated gellan) in the presence of increasing levels of co-solute with application to the confectionery and ice cream industries. One of the incentives to understand the behaviour of such systems is the prospect of providing an alternative to gelatin since the protein is increasingly falling “out of fashion” with consumers and producers alike. This rather underresearched area has other applications, for example, flavor encapsulation and preservation of bioactive molecules in glassy polysaccharide matrices.     

Sub- and supercritical fluid extraction of functional ingredients from different natural sources: Plants,food-by-products,algae and microalgae: A review

The increasing interest of consumers in functional foods has brought about a rise in demand for functional ingredients obtained using “natural” processes. In this review, new environmentally clean technologies for producing natural food ingredients are discussed. This work provides an updated overview on the principal applications of two clean processes, supercritical fluid extraction and subcritical water extraction, used to isolate natural products from different raw materials, such as plants, food by-products, algae and microalgae. Although the extraction of some compounds with antibacterial, antiviral or antifungical activity is discussed, special attention is paid to the extraction of antioxidant compounds, due to their important role in food preservation and health promotion.     

How consumers choose olive oil: The importance of origin cues

This study investigates quality cues to explore the importance of origin attributes in the choice of olive oil by consumers in two countries: Tunisia and France (n = 245). We used best–worst scaling and latent class analysis to obtain consumer clusters. The results emphasize the importance of origin cues in consumer choice and identify three latent segments in both countries: “official cues”, “sensory cues”, and “origin cues”. French consumers tend to choose olive oil based on official signals, while Tunisian consumers mainly use origin and sensory cues.     

Making things clear: Science-based reasons that chickens are not fed growth hormones

BackgroundGlobal public concerns about “industrial agriculture” have widely disseminated amongst consumers the myth that chickens are fed growth hormones to produce meat more efficiently. This misleading information regarding the use of hormones in chickens is now a growing health concern among consumer groups.Scope and ApproachWorldwide, the poultry industry relies on science and technology to define new strategies to improve the health, welfare and performance of animals in production. In this report, we performed a detailed analysis of the poultry science literature and provide the scientific bases explaining why chickens are not feed hormones.Key Findings and ConclusionsThe use of growth hormones in poultry meat production does not occur because: i) they are too expensive to be used in chickens, ii) they do not promote growth in poultry and iii) their use is illegal in many countries. Therefore, health providers, policy makers, food professionals, consumer advocates, food producers and veterinarians can use this information to educate consumers and eliminate negative concerns related to hormone use in the poultry industry.     

Animal welfare: An animal science approach

Increasing world population and demand for animal-derived protein puts pressure on animal production to meet this demand. For this purpose animal breeding efforts were conducted to obtain the maximum yield that the genetic makeup of the animals permits. Under the influence of economics which is the driving force behind animal production, animal farming became more concentrated and controlled which resulted in rearing animals under confinement. Since more attention was given on economics and yield per animal, animal welfare and behavior were neglected. Animal welfare which can be defined as providing environmental conditions in which animals can display all their natural behaviors in nature started gaining importance in recent years. This does not necessarily mean that animals provided with good management practices would have better welfare conditions as some animals may be distressed even though they are in good environmental conditions. Consumers are willing to pay more for welfare-friendly products (e.g.: free range vs caged egg) and this will change the animal production practices in the future. Thus animal scientists will have to adapt themselves for the changing animal welfare rules and regulations that differ for farm animal species and countries. In this review paper, animal welfare is discussed from an animal science standpoint.     

Status of animal welfare awareness of producers and direction of animal welfare research in the future

Most producers are as humane in their thinking and care of animals as are those people involved in the many activist organizations springing up around the United States. That there are no major problems of animal welfare with the dairy cow posed by changes of systems has been suggested. However, veal producers have been criticized for their production practices. The major areas to be resolved between animal welfare advocates and commercial veal producers is the matter of individual pens versus group systems that permit general freedom of movement. Recent developments of dairy cattle management that have improved the comfort and well-being of dairy cattle include raising of calves in individual pens or hutches; exercise prior to calving; change of flooring (grooving of concrete, use of dirt exercise lots, elimination of slats); use of free stalls rather than loose housing; use of materials to keep cows dry, clean, out of the mud, cool, and free from flies and pests; and elimination of stray voltage. Design of a system for animal welfare is only part of the solution. The most important factor in determining stress in the herd is the behavior, attitude, and consistency of the caretaker.     

Opinions and practices of wisconsin dairy producers about biosecurity and animal well-being

The objective of this study was to characterize opinions and practices of Wisconsin dairy producers about biosecurity and animal wellbeing. Wisconsin dairy producers were surveyed using a mailed questionnaire and responder herds were categorized based on the number of lactating cows: very small herds (≤50 lactating cows; n = 279); small herds (51 to 100 lactating cows; n = 202); medium herds (101 to 200 lactating cows; n = 42); and large herds (>200 lactating cows; n = 37). Producers from large herds adopted more biosecurity practices than those from small herds, but biosecurity risks were common. Almost half of the responders indicated that they purchased cattle, but few (49.4%) performed diagnostic testing of those cattle. The frequency of diagnostic testing and examination of purchased cattle increased with herd size. Producers generally (80%) believed that they used the “right amount” of antibiotics, but the use of written treatment protocols increased with herd size. Producers from large and medium herds reported much higher usage of computerized (65.7 and 17.5%, respectively) and paper records (42.9 and 22.5%, respectively) compared with producers from smaller herds. Almost all (92.6%) believed that Johne's disease was an important issue for the dairy industry, but only 9% had enrolled in the official Wisconsin control program. Most producers (88.6%) believed that dehorning caused at least a small amount of pain, but the majority (81%) did not use local anesthetics. Producers minimized risks with which they were most familiar. Drinking raw milk was not considered a human health risk by almost half the responders, whereas bovine spongiform encephalopathy was considered “no risk” to only 37%. Raw milk was consumed by more than 60%, but regular consumption of raw milk decreased from 47.7% (very small herds) to 24.3% (large herds); perception of the risk of raw milk increased from 46.2% (very small herds) to 56.8% (large herds) with herd size. Larger farms had more knowledge of personal health risks related to zoonotic pathogens. Overall, most management practices were associated with herd size, but many beliefs regarding important dairy farm issues were consistent.     

Invited review: Animal-based indicators for on-farm welfare assessment for dairy goats

This paper reviews animal-based welfare indicators to develop a valid, reliable, and feasible on-farm welfare assessment protocol for dairy goats. The indicators were considered in the light of the 4 accepted principles (good feeding, good housing, good health, appropriate behavior) subdivided into 12 criteria developed by the European Welfare Quality program. We will only examine the practical indicators to be used on-farm, excluding those requiring the use of specific instruments or laboratory analysis and those that are recorded at the slaughterhouse. Body condition score, hair coat condition, and queuing at the feed barrier or at the drinker seem the most promising indicators for the assessment of the “good feeding” principle. As to “good housing,” some indicators were considered promising for assessing “comfort around resting” (e.g., resting in contact with a wall) or “thermal comfort” (e.g., panting score for the detection of heat stress and shivering score for the detection of cold stress). Several indicators related to “good health,” such as lameness, claw overgrowth, presence of external abscesses, and hair coat condition, were identified. As to the “appropriate behavior” principle, different criteria have been identified: agonistic behavior is largely used as the “expression of social behavior” criterion, but it is often not feasible for on-farm assessment. Latency to first contact and the avoidance distance test can be used as criteria for assessing the quality of the human–animal relationship. Qualitative behavior assessment seems to be a promising indicator for addressing the “positive emotional state” criterion. Promising indicators were identified for most of the considered criteria; however, no valid indicator has been identified for “expression of other behaviors.” Interobserver reliability has rarely been assessed and warrants further attention; in contrast, short-term intraobserver reliability is frequently assessed and some studies consider mid- and long-term reliability. The feasibility of most of the reviewed indicators in commercial farms still needs to be carefully evaluated, as several studies were performed under experimental conditions. Our review highlights some aspects of goat welfare that have been widely studied, but some indicators need to be investigated further and drafted before being included in a valid, reliable, and feasible welfare assessment protocol. The indicators selected and examined may be an invaluable starting point for the development of an on-farm welfare assessment protocol for dairy goats.     

A survey of practices and attitudes around cull cow management by bovine veterinarians in Ontario,Canada

The removal (culling) of dairy cows from the farm is a regular and required management practice. The main objectives of this study were to describe the involvement of bovine veterinarians in Ontario, Canada, in dairy cull cow management decisions, their expectations of current producer practices, and their perspectives on welfare issues and best management practices for cull dairy cows. Between February and May 2021, a province-wide survey was conducted among all members of the Ontario Association of Bovine Practitioners (OABP), with questions addressing veterinarians' background and demographics, veterinary clinic characteristics, cull cow management, down cow management, and learning preferences. The response rate for the survey was 25.1%, with 45 responses meeting all eligibility criteria. Dairy veterinarians would like to have greater involvement in cull cow management; when asked for desired involvement in culling decisions, 57.5% of veterinarians would like to be involved in culling decisions most of the time or always. Most (70.0%) veterinarians believed that cull cow welfare has improved over the last decade. However, most respondents also identified at least one area of management (farm of origin, transportation, auction, slaughter) as currently being a high risk to cull cow welfare. Given the frequency of their visits, trust by dairy producers, and knowledge, herd veterinarians are among those in the best position to improve the care of cull dairy cows. Information generated from this survey can be used to inform the development of improved decision-making tools for culling cows, and this, along with increased veterinarians' involvement in cull cow management, could improve the economic and welfare outcomes of culling decisions for dairy producers.     

The meat industry: Do we think and behave globally or locally?

For generations, those that produce livestock and meat generally felt that their country or geographical region (i.e., provenance) reflected a basis for product differentiation. This occurs to the extent that geography of production often is considered a “brand.” For example, there exists “U.S. Grain-Fed Beef” or “Kobe Black Wagyu” or “Uruguayan Grass-Fed Lamb” or “Danish Pork.” However, for most meat trade, industry has evolved beyond this. With the exception perhaps of farms onto which livestock are born, meat company's profits are not generally tied to geographical considerations. Most major companies (e.g., JBS, Marfrig, Tyson, Cargill, Danish Crown, Nippon Meat Packers, etc.) operate in multiple countries and represent to consumers the production of a number of locations. However, there also now exist entrepreneurial options for meat production and “local” sales, albeit at lesser volumes. This discussion explores “global” and “local” meat marketing options.