Laven R A, Fabian J
a Institute of Veterinary, Animal and Biomedical Sciences , Massey University , Private Bag 11222, Palmerston North 4442 , New Zealand.
N Z Vet J. 2016 Jul;64(4):212-7. doi: 10.1080/00480169.2016.1149523. Epub 2016 Mar 3.
To assess the feasibility of applying animal-based welfare assessments developed for use in Europe on New Zealand dairy farms; in particular, to identify measures which could be evaluated during a single visit at milking time alongside whole herd locomotion scoring.
A protocol for animal welfare assessment, developed in the United Kingdom (UK), was evaluated. Measures that were suitable for use on pasture-based dairy farms in New Zealand were then assessed for practicability on 59 farms across New Zealand, during and immediately after milking, alongside whole herd locomotion scoring. Where data were collected the results were compared to those from a UK study of 53 dairy farms.
Thirteen observations of the physical condition of cows were considered suitable for measurement, excluding observations related to hock lesions as they are rarely observed on pasture-based farms. Five of these measures were not assessed as there was not time to do so during milking alongside whole herd locomotion scoring. Thus, the prevalence of dirty flanks, hind limbs and udders, dull coat, thick hairy coat, significant hair loss, very fat cows (body condition score (BCS) ≥7 on 1-10 scale) and very thin cows (BCS≤3), were recorded. Three measures of behaviour were considered suitable for measurement on-farm, but only locomotion score was practicable and was measured. Farmer-estimates for the incidence of mastitis, lameness, sudden death, milk fever and other diseases were also obtained.Overall, dirty flanks, dirty udders and estimated milk fever incidence were more prevalent in this study than in the UK. The prevalence of thin and fat cows, lame cows and estimated mastitis incidence were much lower in the present study than on UK farms.
Animal-based assessments can be used on dairy farms in New Zealand, but need to be modified from those developed for housed cows.Welfare on these farms was generally good compared to those in the UK, but these results need to be confirmed on more farms using a wider range of assessments than proved practicable in this study.
评估将欧洲开发的基于动物的福利评估方法应用于新西兰奶牛场的可行性;特别是确定在挤奶时单次访问期间与全群运动评分一起可评估的指标。
对英国制定的动物福利评估方案进行了评估。然后,对适用于新西兰以牧场为基础的奶牛场的指标,在新西兰的59个农场挤奶期间及挤奶后立即进行全群运动评分时,评估其可行性。收集到数据的地方,将结果与英国一项对53个奶牛场的研究结果进行了比较。
奶牛身体状况的13项观察指标被认为适合测量,但与跗关节损伤相关的观察指标除外,因为在以牧场为基础的农场很少观察到。其中5项指标未进行评估,因为在挤奶时与全群运动评分一起没有时间进行。因此,记录了胁腹、后肢和乳房脏污、被毛暗淡、被毛浓密、大量脱毛、极胖奶牛(体况评分(BCS)在1 - 10分制中≥7分)和极瘦奶牛(BCS≤3分)的发生率。三项行为指标被认为适合在农场测量,但只有运动评分可行并进行了测量。还获得了农民对乳腺炎、跛足、猝死、产乳热和其他疾病发生率的估计。总体而言,本研究中胁腹脏污、乳房脏污和估计的产乳热发生率比英国更普遍。本研究中瘦牛和肥牛、跛足奶牛的发生率以及估计的乳腺炎发生率比英国农场低得多。
基于动物的评估可用于新西兰的奶牛场,但需要对为圈养奶牛开发的评估方法进行修改。与英国的奶牛场相比,这些农场的福利总体良好,但这些结果需要在更多农场使用比本研究中证明可行的更广泛的评估方法来加以证实。