4.7 Article

Best Farming Practices for the Welfare of Dairy Cows, Heifers and Calves

Journal

ANIMALS
Volume 11, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ani11092645

Keywords

best farming practices; positive animal welfare; quality of life; positives and negatives; dairy cows; heifers; calves; management; facilities

Funding

  1. Italian Ministry of Health [PRC2017001STRATEGICA]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The evolving societal attitudes towards animal care and use have led to two main streams of thought: animal rights, which emphasize that animals should have the same rights as humans, and animal welfare, which focuses on responsible care and humane treatment. The concept of animal welfare has shifted towards positive animal welfare, aiming for a balance of positives over negatives and a life worth living. The Italian National Reference Centre for Animal Welfare has developed a protocol for dairy cattle welfare assessment, including both hazards and benefits, as part of an integrated monitoring system called ClassyFarm. This paper extracts 38 best farming practices from the protocol to ensure a high level of welfare for dairy cattle.
Simple Summary: The evolving change in societal attitudes regarding animal care and use has led to two main streams of thought. On one hand, there is the concept of animal rights, emphasizing that animals should have the same rights as humans, and as such should never be used to benefit humans (e.g., for food, clothing, entertainment, education, research, and even pet ownership). Animals should be able to live a life free of human interference and exploitation. On the other hand, many people agree that humans are responsible for animals and for their care; animals can be used to benefit humans if properly cared for, and their needs are met; abuse and neglect are banned. This is the animal welfare (AW) point of view, based on humane treatment, ensuring the physical and mental fitness of animals, as required by current EU legislation. Now, the point is that to fulfill the basic requirements of animal welfare animals are ensured a life worth living, especially given that they can feel emotions. In view of ensuring not only compliance with minimum legislative requirements, but also optimal farming conditions (above minimum legislative requirements), growing attention is attributed to best farming practices. In this work, a list of best practices proposed by the Italian National Reference Centre for Animal Welfare (CReNBA) has been collected to ensure a good quality of life for dairy cows, heifers and calves kept in intensive rearing systems. Abstract: The concept of animal welfare (AW) has many meanings. Traditionally, AW has been considered as freedom from disease and suffering. Nowadays, growing attention goes to the concept of positive animal welfare (PAW), which can be interpreted within the concept of quality of life (QoL), thinking about a balance of positives over negatives and a life worth living. In this vision, where the QoL represents a continuum between positives and negatives, the Italian National Reference Centre for Animal Welfare (CReNBA), within the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna (IZSLER), has developed a welfare assessment protocol for dairy cows, heifers, and calves in loose housing systems, including both animal-based and non-animal-based indicators, in which not only hazards but also benefits are identified. This protocol is part of an integrated monitoring system called ClassyFarm, belonging to the Italian Ministry of Health and developed by IZSLER. The aim of this paper is to extrapolate from the mentioned protocol, a list of 38 best farming practices (on managerial and equipment factors) for ensuring a high level of welfare in dairy cattle. All stakeholders (veterinarians, farmers, competent authorities, consumers, etc.) can benefit of these best practices as a guide or toolbox to ensure a life worth living for these animals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available