**Training outcomes for animal based measures**

*Penny Lawlis*¹,² *and Tina Widowski*¹

¹University of Guelph/Campbell Centre for the Study of Animal Welfare, Canada, ²Professional Livestock Auditing Incorporated, Canada; pclawlis@gmail.com

Reliable measures are required for animal welfare audits to ensure consistent and valid results. There are 3 types of measures that can be used to measure any standard – resource-based, management-based or animal-based measures – although animal based measures (ABM's) are preferred since they are a direct measure of animal welfare. Over a six-year period, groups of 12-19 graduate students (n=98) were provided with similar in-class training in several dairy cattle ABM's including body condition scoring (BCS), lameness as well as hock, knee and neck lesion scoring. In each year, students and an expert independently assessed approximately 50 cows (n=303) at either an auction or at a dairy farm. Scoring systems varied across cohorts, with some years' students scoring using two categories (i.e. acceptable or unacceptable) while in other years students compared a five point BCS and lameness systems to the 3-point scoring systems included in the Welfare Quality© program. Overall, interobserver reliability (IOR) was typically 70% between students and the expert with IOR improving with fewer categories. In 2016, students were intentionally given limited training prior to the on-farm assessment to test the strength of protocols developed using five point BCS and lameness scoring systems and an injury scoring system with four categories. Results were better for hock injuries (72% agreement) and neck scores (97% agreement) but unacceptable for BCS (38%) and lameness (33%). This suggest that injuries may be easier to classify, compared to BCS or lameness, or it may be that gaps in the protocols contributed to unacceptable IOR. Assessors can be taught to reliably use ABM's for dairy cattle in agreement with an 'expert' provided that training on ABM's involves the use of clearly worded guidelines. This should be considered when selecting ABM's for an animal care assessment program.
**Qualitative and quantitative animal behaviour measures in on-farm welfare assessments for pig herds**

Tine Rousing, Peter T Thomsen and Jan Tind Sørensen

Dept. of Animal Science, Aarhus University, Denmark; tine.rousing@anis.au.dk

Qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA) is a qualitative animal welfare indicator included in the WQ® animal welfare assessment protocols for cattle, swine and poultry. The WQ® protocols includes also quantitative welfare indicators for social behaviour. This study explores the potential association between QBA and the quantitative measures for social behaviour in slaughter pigs. During 2015-2016, four observers scored QBA and quantitative social behaviour – both as described in the WQ® protocol – for a total of 3,669 group housed slaughter pigs from 25 Danish slaughter pig herds. Quantitative social behaviour measures were edited to mean herd prevalences. Based on this, two variables on quantitative measures for social behaviour were included in the analyses – one on the positive (QUANPOS) and one on the negative (QUANNEG) interactions. Multiple Spearman rank correlations were used to evaluate the potential association between: (1) QUANNEG and the negative loaded WQ*-QBA terms: Fearful, Agitated, Frustrated, Bored, Irritable, Calmless, Apathetic and Distressed; and (2) QUANPOS and the positive loaded WQ*-QBA terms: Relaxed, Calm, Content, Friendly, Playful, Positively Occupied, Lively, Inquisitive, Sociable and Happy. Statistical significance level was set to P<0.001. QUANNEG did – apart from one negative QBA-measure ‘Agitated’ (correlation coefficient -0.69, P=0.0001) – not correlate to the negative QBA-measures, and QUANPOS did not correlate to any of the positive QBA-measures. The results indicate that quantitative and qualitative measures do not replace each other but rather supplement each other in an on-farm multidimensional welfare assessment.
Recording behaviour directly vs from video during on-farm behaviour tests

Christina Veit, Marie Albers and Sabine Dippel

Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Institute of Animal Welfare and Animal Husbandry, Germany;

christina.veit@fli.de

Direct and video observation of animal behaviour differ regarding practicability and bias of observers. We compared the results of behaviour tests on a farm where behaviour was recorded directly and from video. A total of 18 groups (35-40 pigs each) were tested in their pens on 12 days during late rearing and early fattening (n=169). In each group, voluntary human approach test (VHAT), novel object test (NOT) and a modified novel object test where the object was thrown (mNOT) were performed and video recorded using a head camera. The performing person recorded seconds till APPROACH within half a pig length, seconds till first CONTACT and proportion of group within one pig length of person/object (INTEREST) at two time points (t) live as well as from video afterwards. APPROACH and CONTACT were collapsed into binary variables and positive and negative agreement calculated. For INTEREST we subtracted video from direct observation results. Influence of observation method (video vs direct) on results was analysed for each test in linear or logistic mixed models with random factor group. Positive and negative agreement [P_pos|P-negative] were weak to strong (APPROACH: NOT [0.61|0.95], mNOT [0.62|0.95] and VHAT [0.88|0.97]; CONTACT: NOT [0.94|0.81], mNOT [0.97|0.38] and VHAT [0.92|0.96]). Differences for INTEREST for VHAT [t₃₀; t₆₀] were higher [mean % ± std = -2.6±7.4; -1.7±5.4] than for NOT [1.3±9.2; 0.7±7.7] and mNOT [0.2±6.2; 0.2±7.0]. Significantly more pigs were INTERESTed during VHAT when assessed from video compared to direct observation (lsmeans INTEREST₃₀s = 32.9 vs 30.3%, respectively; SE=0.8, P<0.001; INTEREST₆₀s = 31.4 vs 29.7%, respectively; SE=0.8, P=0.014). No other significant differences were found. In conclusion, when animals can be seen clearly (as during VHAT) video observations yield more reliable scan sampling results than direct observations. If the view is less clear, variation of observations obscures differences between methods.
**Development and application of a pre-slaughter welfare monitoring protocol for broilers**

Leonie Jacobs¹, Evelyne Delezie¹, Klara Goethals², Bart Ampe¹, Luc Duchateau² and Frank Tuyttens¹,²

¹Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), Animal Sciences Unit, Belgium, ²Ghent University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Belgium; jacobs.leonie@gmail.com

To assess the impact of the pre-slaughter phase on broiler chicken welfare, a practical monitoring protocol is warranted. We developed such a user-friendly integrated welfare score (IWS) based on expert opinion. An initial list of 15 potential animal-based welfare measures to be assessed at the slaughter plant was based on literature. For each measure the impact of various stages within the pre-slaughter phase (baseline pre-catching, catching/loading, transportation, lairage) was tested for 81 commercially transported Belgian flocks. Measures were on birds individually (n=132±3 birds/flock), in-crate (n=88 crates/flock) or at the slaughter line (n=1,785±33 birds/flock). Six measures were removed, as they received low relative weights from poultry experts (n=9) during a workshop or because they were insufficiently affected by any of the pre-slaughter stages. Thus, the protocol consisted of 9 measures (fractures, bruising, panting/huddling, splay-legged birds, crowding, supine birds, stuck body parts, mortality, carcass rejections) which together take circa 1 h/flock to assess. Although inter-observer reliability could not be tested for mortality, carcass rejection data and for measures at the slaughter line, it was reasonably good for the remaining 5 measures (≥68% agreement). The IWS is based on the sum of all measure scores (0-100), multiplied by their relative weights (0-1), as based on a digital survey among 19 poultry researchers. The IWS is corrected with a customized compensation reduction strategy to give more weight to low measure scores. Indeed, when giving overall welfare scores to fictitious transports, experts allocated more weight to bad measure scores than good scores. Application of the integration on 63 transports showed a good spread on IWS and good sensitivity to important measures and to extremely low scores. The IWS can be used for auditing and quality assurance schemes, comparing slaughter plants and transportation companies. Individual measure scores can identify problematic pre-slaughter stages and opportunities for remedial actions.
Validation of lesions on the carcass as indicators of pig welfare on farm

Nienke Van Staaveren¹, Bernadette Doyle², Edgar G. Manzanilla², Julia A. Calderón Díaz²,³, Alison Hanlon⁴ and Laura A. Boyle²

¹ University of Guelph, Department of Animal Biosciences, Canada, ²Teagasc Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Pig Development Department, Ireland, ³Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Polish Academy of Sciences, Department of Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Poland, ⁴University College Dublin, School of Veterinary Medicine, Ireland; nvanstaa@uoguelph.ca

This study aimed to validate the recording of carcass skin (SL) and tail lesions (TL) at meat
inspection as indicators of pig health and welfare (HW) on farm. Thirty-one integrated
pig farms were assessed using an adapted version of the Welfare Quality® protocol to allow
inspection of six randomly selected pens of pigs in the first weaner (S1), second weaner (S2)
and finisher stage (S3). Hereafter, one batch of pigs was observed at slaughter for each farm
where SL due to agonistic interactions (0-3) and TL due to tail biting (0-4) were scored once
according to severity for each carcass. Linear regression models were developed to predict the
prevalence of each HW outcome in each stage based on the prevalence of the carcass lesion
outcomes. The HW outcomes that were best predicted by carcass SL and TL were poor body
condition (S1, R²=0.30), bursitis (S2, R²=0.28), huddling (S1, R²=0.30), severe tail lesions
(S3, R²=0.31) and coughing (S2, R²=0.45). Receiver operating curves (ROC) were plotted to
evaluate the potential of carcass lesions as monitoring tools to identify problem farms. Problem
farms were defined as those above the 75th percentile value for each HW outcome and the area
under the curve (AUC), sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) were calculated. The prevalence of
carcass lesions could moderately accurately predict problem farms with poor body condition
(AUC: 0.80, Se: 75%, Sp: 87%), bursitis (AUC: 0.82, Se: 100%, Sp: 75%) and severe tail lesions
(AUC: 0.81, Se: 88%, Sp: 74%) with high levels of Se and Sp at the optimal cut-off value of the
predictive carcass lesion. Hence, carcass lesions reflect certain pig HW problems on farm and
could play a role in the monitoring of pig welfare at meat inspection.
Should the contribution of one more lame cow depend on how many other cows on the farm are lame?

Peter Sandøe¹,², Thomas Bøker Lund², Björn Forkman¹ and Matt Denwood¹

¹University of Copenhagen, Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Denmark, ²University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics, Denmark; pes@sund.ku.dk

Welfare states apply to individual animals. Therefore, group welfare in our view should be aggregated as a linear function of the proportion of affected animals, so that for example doubling the number of lame cows on a farm leads to a doubling of the welfare effect of lameness. In contrast, the Welfare Quality protocol considers the total welfare score to be a highly non-linear function of the proportion of animals on the farm that are suffering. The weight that each additional affected animal has on the total welfare score depends heavily on the proportion of animals that are already affected, so that the impact of an additional affected cow is reduced as the number of animals with problems increases. This is a result of the application of expert weighting of different levels of welfare problems on a scale which as its anchor points include the terms ‘acceptable’ and ‘unacceptable’. We support our view by two arguments: (1) It is conceptually problematic to mix the size of welfare problems and the evaluation of acceptability thresholds within one measure – partly because acceptability may be viewed as a non-linear function of the size of the welfare problems found a farm level. (2) What experts view as an acceptable level of animal welfare is more a matter of individual ethical judgement than of expertise. We asked 166 animal welfare experts to score the welfare effects of various prevalences of four conditions in cattle on an 11-point Likert scale with ‘acceptable’ and ‘unacceptable’ as anchor points. Linear mixed effects models with respondent as a random effect showed that the standard deviation for respondent (between 1.5-1.8) was between 30 and 80% higher than the residual standard deviation (between 1.0-1.2) for each outcome. This indicates a disproportionately large effect of respondent on the score.
Validation of hock lesions as welfare indicator in dairy cows

Daniela Haager, Christine Leeb and Christoph Winckler

Livestock Sciences, Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Austria; daniela.haager@boku.ac.at

Hock lesions are a common welfare problem in dairy cows. However, empirical data linking hock lesions to e.g. inflammatory reactions or painfulness are limited. To address this, we examined signs of inflammation, especially hyperthermia and the presence of inflammatory cells, in different types of hock lesions and hypothesised that already mild hock lesions, indicated by hair loss, are relevant for the cow's welfare. 172 dairy cows were assessed visually at the lateral hock (H) and the lateral point of the hock (PH) and were categorised as no hair loss (control), hair 'curly' (mild), hair loss ≤2.5 cm (moderate), or hair loss >2.5 cm (severe). Ulcerations were additionally recorded as absent or present. Skin temperature (ST) was measured at both H and PH using an infrared camera (FLIR T440). Control animals were shaved before thermal imaging and animals with mild hair loss were excluded for this part of the study. In the second part, at an abattoir 25 H and 26 PH were assessed visually for hair loss, and skin samples taken post mortem histologically examined for tissue alterations and inflammatory processes. Maximum skin temperature at H and PH with moderate hair loss (H: 37.7 °C; PH: 37.3 °C) and with severe hair loss (H: 37.8 °C; PH: 37.4 °C) was significantly higher than in control animals (H: 36.5 °C; PH: 36.2 °C) (Kruskal-Wallis, P≤0.001 and P=0.004, respectively). Additionally, ST of H with severe hair loss and ulceration (38.1 °C) differed significantly from H without ulceration (37.7 °C; Wilcoxon, P=0.001). The degree of severity of hair loss was significantly associated with the degree of severity of tissue alteration, as well as infiltration of inflammatory cells at both H and PH (Fisher's exact test, P=0.002 and P=0.031, respectively). The consistent signs of inflammation support our hypothesis that already mild hock lesions are relevant for the cow's welfare.
**Implementation of animal-based measures within an animal-welfare labelling scheme for steers**

Sabine Hartmann¹, Verena Wesian¹, Christoph Winckler², Christine Berger², Marlene Berger², Edina Scherzer² and Christine Leeb²

¹VIER PFOTEN-Stiftung für Tierschutz, Science Unit, Austria, ²University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Austria; sabine.hartmann@four-paws.org

Animal-based measures (ABM) are used to indicate animal welfare (AW) and reflect the outcome of resources. ABM have been implemented in Austria for the first time within the AW label ‘Tierschutz-kontrolliert’ applied to ‘ALMO®’ steers kept in loose housing systems with pasture access. The goal of this on-farm study was to describe the implementation of ABM during auditing, to evaluate the prevalence of ABM and potential correlations with resource-based measures (RBM). Four inspectors trained to sufficient agreement in assessing 15 selected ABM, audited 190 farms regarding both RBM and ABM. For this study 120 audits (1,784 steers) were analysed. The median prevalence (%) of each ABM was 0.0. The most common parameters found were: ‘dirtiness’ (Q3: 15.0%; Max: 64.2%), ‘ocular discharge’ (Q3: 4.7%; Max: 35.7%) and ‘loose faeces’ (Q3: 2.8%; Max: 50.0%). Additionally, on several farms the following parameters had highest maximum values: ‘hairless spots on front leg’ (Q3: 0.0%; Max: 40.0%), ‘overgrown claws’ (Q3: 0.0%; Max: 33.3%) and ‘hairless spots on head, neck, shoulder or back’ (Q3: 0.0%; Max: 31.3%). ‘Hairless spots on front legs’ were significantly higher in cubicles with rubber mats (Q3: 2.63%; Max: 40%; n=24), than in straw systems, where they were never observed (deep litter: P=0.004; n=31; straw flow system: P=0.015; n=21). Space allowance correlated negatively with ‘dirtiness’ (-0.356; P=0.007) as well as ‘hairless spots on the hind leg’ (-0.349; P=0.008). The negative correlation found between certain RBM and ABM suggests the need to address and ultimately adjust those RBM (e.g. replacing rubber mat systems with straw systems). Furthermore, the fact that some ABM do not correlate with RBM but nevertheless vary between similar housing systems, reiterates the necessity to include ABM in any auditing for quality seals.
**Association between animal welfare standards and farm profitability on Canadian freestall dairies**

Marianne Villettaz Robichaud¹, Jeffrey Rushen², Anne Marie De Passillé², Elsa Vasseur³,
Derek Haley⁴, Karin Orsel⁵ and Doris Pellerin¹

¹Université Laval, Animal Sciences, Canada, ²University of British Columbia, Canada, ³McGill University, Canada, ⁴University of Guelph, Canada, ⁵University of Calgary, Canada; elsa.vasseur@mcgill.ca

Improving animal welfare on dairy farms is often thought as a cost more than a potential financial gain for the farmer. The aim of this study was to examine if improvements in farm profitability and productivity indicators were associated with meeting the new Canadian proAction animal welfare standards for freestall farms. A total of 130 freestall farms (mean ± SD: 148±90 cows) were evaluated on whether or not they passed the proAction animal welfare standards for prevalence of leg and neck lesions, lameness, dirtiness, body condition score (BCS), and stocking density. The farms' profitability indicators retrieved from the dairy herd improvement program were: average milk production, calving interval, % of culling, and % of cows in third or more lactations. Univariable and multivariable linear regressions were used to analyse the associations between reaching welfare criterion and the farms' profitability indicators. Attaining the criterion for lameness prevalence interacted with the average days in milk (DIM) at first breeding to affect milk production, which increased with increasing DIM at first breeding in farms that passed the criterion (β=41.49 kg/DIM; P=0.032). Reaching the criterion for BCS interacted with the number of milking cows on the farms to affect the farm's yearly % of culling. The % of culling increased with increasing number of cows for farms that passed the criterion (β=0.12%/cow; P=0.004). The criteria for hock lesions interacted with the criteria for knee lesions to affect the % of cows in their third lactation or more leading to the highest % of mature cows found on farms that passed the hock lesions criterion and failed the knee lesions one and the lowest % of mature cows on farms that passed both criterion (42 vs 35%; P=0.005). The relationship between reaching the proAction components and farm profitability indicators are complex but the results suggests that meeting the animal welfare criterion could be financially beneficial for dairy farms.
How to measure dairy cows’ responsiveness towards humans in breeding and welfare
assessment?

Asja Ebinghaus¹, Silvia Ivemeyer¹, Vanessa Lauks¹, Laura Santos², Kerstin Brügemann², Sven König³ and Ute Knierim¹

¹University of Kassel, Farm Animal Behaviour and Husbandry, Germany, ²University of Kassel, Animal Breeding, Germany, ³Justus Liebig University, Animal Breeding and Domestic Animal Genetics, Germany; ebinghaus@uni-kassel.de

In dairy cattle breeding and animal welfare science uncertainties exist regarding the quality of
measures of cows' responsiveness towards humans. This study investigated criterion validity of
four behavioural measures applied in the barn - avoidance distance (AD), tolerance to tactile
interaction (TTI), release behaviour (RB), and qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA) in a
handling situation: (1) in comparison with the existing behavioural breeding trait of milking
temperament (MT) at animal level; and (2) in comparison with cows' behaviour during milking
at herd level. On 33 farms we collected data on AD, TTI, RB, QBA, as well as MT that is
routinely scored by the farmer, and recorded the number of steps and kicks per cow during
milking. Inter-test associations on animal and herd level were investigated by Spearman rank
correlation analysis. While at animal level AD and TTI correlated weakly (r_s=0.28, P<0.01,
n=1,890), among the other behavioural measures moderate to strong correlations were found
(r_s=0.46-0.74, P<0.01, n=582-1,890). Between MT and any other measure no significant
correlation was found. At herd level, medians of AD and QBA, means of steps and kicks, and
percentages of cows scored nervous regarding TTI, RB, and MT were calculated. Significant
correlations were found between AD, TTI, RB, and QBA, in general higher than at animal level,
and between steps and kicks (r_s=0.80, P<0.01, n=24). But neither steps and kicks correlated with
AD, TTI, RB, QBA or MT nor MT with AD, TTI, RB or QBA. Associations of different strengths
between AD, TTI, RB, and QBA suggest that the measures partly reflect different aspects of
cows' responsiveness towards humans, e.g. depending on the location and setting of testing.
The absence of correlations with the behaviour during milking underline methodological
problems with MT, but also question the relation between behaviour in the milking parlour
and responsiveness in the barn.
**Private animal welfare standards – opportunities and risks**

Frida Lundmark, Charlotte Berg and Helena Röcklinsberg

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health,
Sweden; Frida.Lundmark@slu.se

In Europe various types of voluntary animal welfare standards are often regarded a key to improved farm animal welfare. Our project aimed at analysing the consequences of having both official EU and national legislation and various private animal welfare standards or programmes. Results from EconWelfare (www.econwelfare.eu) were used for an overview, followed by thorough systematic text analyses regarding the values, structure and content of in total 14 European regulations from Germany UK, Spain and Sweden. Seven focus areas were identified: intentions with the legislation/standard, the concept of animal welfare, the five freedoms animal welfare concept, unnecessary suffering, natural behaviour, stock-keeper's role and killing of animals. In a second study inspection protocols from on-farm inspections (2010-2013) of 328 Swedish farms were analysed. Above the official control farms were affiliated to either of the private standards Arla, KRAV (Sweden's organic standard) or Seal of Quality. Private standards are often perceived as more flexible and less restrictive than legislation. By linking to sanctions, including expulsion from a marketing label, they can also be efficient in achieving improved animal welfare, and may enable premium payment to the producers. However, many private standards are not really voluntary, as affiliation is a prerequisite for market access, and it can be difficult for the farmers – and the consumers – to understand the differences between different standards, not least due to lack of transparency as to what is actually required in terms of animal welfare provisions in some private standards. Our study revealed that depending on how compliance is measured, e.g. individual or flock level, the outcome will vary considerably even if the requirements in the regulations are similar. Animal welfare problems identified within a given regulation risk reflecting the focus of that particular regulation rather than insufficient welfare from a biological or ethological point of view.
Using data from electronic sow feeders for investigating the effect of lameness on feeding behaviour

Olga Szczodry<sup>1,2</sup>, Bart Ampe<sup>1,2</sup>, Wouter Kraan<sup>3</sup>, Emilie-Julie Bos<sup>1,2</sup>, Annelies Van Nuffel<sup>2</sup> and Frank Tuyttens<sup>1,2</sup>

<sup>1</sup>Ghent University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Belgium, <sup>2</sup>Institute for Agricultural, Fisheries and Food Research (ILVO), Belgium, <sup>3</sup>HAS University of Applied Sciences Den Bosch, the Netherlands; olga.szczodry@ilvo.vlaanderen.be

Lameness is a major cause for economic losses in the pig sector and an animal welfare problem in breeding sows. Numerous farms use electronic sow feeders (ESF) which notify the farmer when a sow fails to eat. ESF collects also extra data that is currently not exploited although it may yield information on feeding behaviour. Since there is evidence that lameness status affects feeding behaviour, this study aimed to derive feeding-related variables from ESF-data and to investigate their association with lameness status. Eleven variables relating to feeding behaviour were derived from raw ESF-data and matched with the corresponding sows' gait score, which was assessed using a 150 mm tagged visual analogue scale. Data were analysed with generalized linear mixed models using R 3.3.0, 2016. Increased lameness was associated with less time spent in the ESF (57.56 vs 72.52 min for lame and non-lame respectively, P=0.026), particularly for the unrewarded (i.e. no food delivered) ESF-visits (29.50 vs 43.81 min, P=0.022). The minimum, median and maximum durations between ESF-visits were higher with increased lameness (P=0.003, 0.020 and 0.015, respectively). Finally, there was a tendency for the feeding rank to differ between lame (11.8±0.74 SEM) and non-lame (9.8±0.61) sows (P=0.072). These results indicate that lame sows shorten their visits to the ESF, which suggests that they are less willing or able to stand for prolonged periods. Additionally, lame sows seem to have longer intervals between visits, which may indicate a reluctance to walk, reside or compete for access to the ESF. This study demonstrates that lameness status influences several aspects of feeding behaviour that can be derived routinely from ESF data. Further research is ongoing to integrate ESF data in a lameness monitoring system.
**Abattoir data provide information on pig welfare at herd level in different production
systems**

Hanne Kongsted and Jan Tind Sørensen

Aarhus University, Department of Animal Science, Denmark; hanne.kongsted@anis.au.dk

Our aim was to evaluate whether lesions related to animal welfare (housing and behaviour) recorded at routine meat inspection were associated with production system (conventional indoor (CI), conventional free-range (CF) or organic free-range (OF)). We evaluated meat inspection data from 1,096,756 pigs (from 78 CI herds (533,765 pigs), 25 CF herds (269,933 pigs) and 37 OF herds (293,058 pigs) slaughtered at one Danish abattoir during 2013-2015. Generalized linear mixed model with production type, year and quarter of slaughter as fixed effects and herd as random effect were constructed. Pigs raised in CI systems exhibited minor variations in the prevalence of lesions through quarter 1-4 of each year. Across the study period, the within-herd prevalence of leg swellings, hoof abscesses, skin lesions and tail lesion was 3% [1%; 7%], 1% [1%; 2%], 1% [1%; 13%] and 1% [0.1%; 9%]. In CF and OF herds, we saw the same pattern of variation in the prevalence of skin and tail lesions through the quarters of each year. Skin lesions were most prevalent in quarter 3. The prevalence of tail lesions was highest in quarter 1 and 4. In CF and OF herds the within-herd prevalence of leg swellings, hoof abscesses, skin lesions and tail lesions was 1.5% [0.6%; 3%], 0.7% [0.1%; 2%], 3% [0.3%; 21%] and 2.5% [0%; 9%]. Odds for skin and tail lesions were approximately 3 times higher in CF and OF pigs compared to conventional pigs (P<0.001). Odds for leg swellings and hoof abscesses were approximately 1.5 times higher in CI pigs compared to CF and OF pigs (P<0.001). Large herd effects (ICC 21-24%) on the occurrence of skin and tail lesions suggested possibilities for herd-specific interventions. Data on lesions obtained by routine meat inspection can provide useful information for assessing welfare at herd level when retrieved from one abattoir.
Enforcement of ‘open standards’ for animal welfare – climate in pig houses

Herman Vermeer and Johan Van Riel

Wageningen Livestock Research, the Netherlands; herman.vermeer@wur.nl

According to the Dutch Animal Welfare Act the indoor climate in pig houses shouldn't be
harmful to the animals. This is a so called 'open standard' which enables pig farmers to reach
welfare goals with self-chosen measures. However inspection is difficult because strict limits
are not available. The aim of the project was to determine measures to assess climate in pig
houses. This creates the possibility to enforce open standards on pig farms. In total 32 farms
with finishing pigs and 64 farms with rearing piglets were assessed by the Dutch inspection
service. On these farms a set of climate related measures was collected in six pens according
to a newly developed protocol. The measures were animal and resource based measures and
air quality. A simple assessment of the reliability, variation and correlation between measures
reduced the dataset from 22 to 12 measures. With principal components analysis five of the
measures within this set appeared to be the major measures and could be regarded as warning
signals. Piglets and finishing pigs had CO2 and NH3 levels, eye and tail scores as warning signals
in common. Number five for piglets was ear score and for finishing pigs animal soiling. Based
on the Welfare Quality® Pig Protocol and other references limits were defined for all measures.
The number of times a measure exceeded these limits per farm was calculated. This total
number for the set of 12 and the set of 5 measures were highly correlated (r=0.81 and r=0.95
for piglets and finishers respectively). These five measures were sufficient to sorting farms on
the risk of climate problems. It can be concluded that shortcomings in indoor climate for pigs
can be assessed by a limited set of 12 measures and the first signs can be easily detected by
measuring only five measures.
Welfare benchmarking for commercially farmed pigs in the UK

Fanny Pandolfi¹, Ilias Kyriazakis¹, Katja Stoddart², Nina Wainwright² and Sandra E. Edwards¹

¹Newcastle University, School of Agriculture Food and Rural Development, United Kingdom,
²Agricultural and Horticultural Development Board PORK, United Kingdom; f.pandolfi@ncl.ac.uk

The ‘Real Welfare’ scheme has collected animal-based measures to assess on-farm pig welfare in the UK since April 2013. The assessment involved five main measures (percentage of pigs requiring hospitalization, percentage of lame pigs, percentage of pigs with severe tail lesions, percentage of pigs with severe body marks and enrichment use ratio) and data about housing and management. The objective is to report the prevalence of five main welfare outcomes for the mainstream finisher pig herd (excluding hospital pens) in the UK and changes over three calendar years. Fisher and χ² tests were conducted to assess associations between different environmental variables and production practices. Generalized linear models were used to assess changes over time in enrichment provision, tail docking and welfare outcomes. Correlations between welfare outcomes were also assessed. Substrates (in 69% of farms and for 62% of the pigs) were more common as enrichment than objects. The type of enrichment and tail docking practice were associated with measures related to the environment (P<0.05). Over time, there was a significant increase of pens with undocked-tail pigs (P<0.05) and pens with substrates (P<0.05) and a significant decrease of the proportion of lame pigs, pigs requiring hospitalization and pigs with severe body lesions (P<0.05). At farm level, an average of 0.07% pigs required hospitalization, 0.18% were lame, 0.14% had severe tail lesions and 0.26% had severe body marks. The percentage of pigs requiring hospitalization and lame pigs were correlated (P<0.05, R>0.3). The results from the first three years of the scheme demonstrate a reduction in the prevalence of most animal-based measures. Further research is needed to understand if this is attributable to better management of sick pigs or increased attention to animal welfare.
Does animal health and welfare of organic pigs differ between husbandry systems?

Gwendolyn Rudolph¹, Sabine Dippel², Davide Bochicchio³, Sandra Edwards⁴, Barbara Früh⁵,
Mirjam Holinger⁵, Diane Holmes⁴, Gudrun Illmann⁶, Denise Knop⁷, Armelle Prunier⁸,
Tine Rousing⁹, Christoph Winckler¹ and Christine Leeb¹

¹Univ. of Natural Resources & Life Sciences (BOKU), Vienna, Austria, ²Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Celle, Germany, ³CRA-SUI, Italy, ⁴Newcastle University, United Kingdom, ⁵FiBL, Switzerland, ⁶Inst. of Animal Science, Czech Republic, ⁷Beratung Artgerechte Tierhaltung e.V., Germany, ⁸INRA, France, ⁹Aarhus University, Denmark; christine.leeb@boku.ac.at

During the CoreOrganicII ProPIG, animal health & welfare (AHW) of organic pigs in 3
husbandry systems (8 countries) was compared: indoor with outside run (IN: n=34 farms),
outdoor on pasture (OUT: n=12) and partly outdoor with at least one age group on pasture
(POUT: n=28). The hypothesis was that all systems can deliver good welfare when well
managed. 7 trained observers assessed pregnant sows (SO), weaners (WE) and fatteners (FA)
using animal-based parameters. Non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests were used, if P<0.05
pairwise testing (Wilcoxon rank sum; Bonferroni corrected) was performed with P<0.05.
Across systems, the median prevalence of several AHW areas was 0% (shoulder lesions SO;
ectoparasites SO, FA; tail lesions, lameness WE; runts FA). No differences between husbandry
systems in the prevalence of vulva deformation in SO (10.7%, 3.0%, 8.7%); short tails in
WE (0%, 0.5%, 2.2%) or FA (1.8%, 2.3%, 6.5%) were found. OUT had lower prevalence of
respiratory problems in WE and FA (both 0% OUT, >60% POUT, IN). Signs of diarrhoea in
WE were less frequent in OUT (0%) than in IN (25.0%) and diarrhoea in FA was less frequent
in OUT than in POUT and IN (0%, 0%, 8.3%). OUT had fewer lame SO than POUT and IN
(0%, 3.4%, 7.1%). Across systems, prevalences of most AHW areas but respiratory problems in
IN and POUT and diarrhoea in IN were low. Beyond that, OUT appeared to be beneficial with
regard to several areas of AHW, which could be explained by the environmental conditions,
e.g. respiratory problems (air quality), diarrhoea (exposure to faeces) and lameness (flooring).
POUT farms in most cases kept SO outdoors and WE and FA similar to IN farms, and this
was reflected in the results. It can be concluded, that systems do differ regarding AHW and
development of organic husbandry systems across Europe should take this into account.
# The relation between impaired gait and automated monitoring of broiler flock activity levels

Tom Van Hertem¹, Tomas Norton², Daniel Berckmans² and Erik Vranken¹,²

¹Fancom BV, Innovation, Research, the Netherlands, ²KU Leuven, Animal and Human Health Engineering (A2H), Belgium; tvhertem@fancom.com

Leg deformities and lameness cause a major welfare concern in the European poultry industry. In this study, the aim was focused on the relation between bird activity, measured from camera images, and broiler gait score. Within the EUPLF-project, broiler gait was manually assessed on a discrete [0-5]-scale according to the Welfare Quality Protocol by trained local human experts in five commercial broiler farms spread over four European countries. Assessments (n=88) on 129±37 birds were done in week 3, 4 and 5 of the rearing period. Flock Gait Score (FGS) was calculated as the mean gait score value of the flock during the assessment. Bird activity was automatically monitored with a Precision Livestock Farming tool, four cameras of the eYeNamic™ system mounted at the ridge of the house in top-down perspective. Flock activity level was calculated from the difference between the two consecutive (697±120 millisec. interval) snapshot images of the floor space below. Flock activity level (ACT) was calculated as the mean value of all daily measured activity samples. Data analysis showed a significant Spearman correlation (r=-0.76; P<0.001) between FGS and ACT, and we may conclude that there is a significant negative correlation between activity level and gait score in broiler flocks. The significant linear regression equation FGS = 2.85 - 0.21×ACT was found (F(1,86)=104.59, P<0.001), with an R² of 0.55. Higher activity levels are associated with lower gait scores, i.e. better animal gait. The linear trend is clear in all farms (R²=[0.53-0.74]). Both the activity level and gait score are influenced by the age of the birds. The Bland-Altman plot showed that both measurements were unbiased with a mean difference of 0.00±0.42. The 95% lower limit of agreement is -0.83, and the higher limit of agreement is 0.83. This might indicate that the activity level of the flock is a rather weak single predictor for flock gait score. These results suggest that there is potential for the continuous automated assessment of gait scoring through the fully automated and continuous measurement of flock activity levels in the broiler house.
Assessment of plumage and integument condition in dual-purpose breeds and conventional layers

Mona Franziska Giersberg, Birgit Spindler and Nicole Kemper

University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Institute for Animal Hygiene, Animal Welfare and Farm Animal Behaviour, Germany; mona.franziska.giersberg@tiho-hannover.de

Feather pecking and cannibalism are major challenges in laying hen husbandry. The assessment of plumage and integument condition provides useful information about the occurrence of these behavioural disorders. The aim was to evaluate the behaviour of dual-purpose breeds (Lohmann Dual, LD) and conventional layer hybrids (Lohmann Brown plus, LB+), and to compare two scoring methods, i.e. a mere visual scoring (VSc) and a scoring with handling of individual animals (HSc). 1,800 untrimmed hens per genetic strain were housed conventionally in four compartments of an aviary system. During weekly (20th-71st week of life) VSc, the hens' plumage and integument condition were scored on five body parts (head/neck, back, tail, wing, breast/belly) using a five or four point scale. HSc was carried out on seven study days applying the same scoring scale as for VSc. In LB+ hens, minor plumage damage started at the age of 25 weeks and increased to the 71st week, resulting in 22.5% (wing) and 99.5% (back) of the LB+ hens showing feather losses. In contrast, only 2% of the LD hens showed minor feather losses (head/neck, breast/belly) remaining constant throughout the laying period. Integument damage occurred in 0.5% of the LB+ hens in week 46, with 6% affected hens in week 66, and 2.5% at the end of the study. No injuries were found in LD hens. Spearman's rho for the comparison of plumages scores given in VSc and HSc was >0.90 and significant (P<0.01) for all body regions, except for breast/belly (0.45-0.50). However, VSc and HSc were equally valid for detecting skin injuries of all body regions (r_s>0.86, P<0.01). In conclusion, feather pecking and cannibalism only occurred in the LB+ flocks, though both genetic strains were kept under the same conditions. The visual scoring method was suitable for detecting both plumage damages and skin injuries.
Effects of automated monitoring equipment on laying hen behaviour

Stephanie Buijs, Christine Nicol, Francesca Booth, Gemma Richards and John Tarlton
University of Bristol, School of veterinary sciences, United Kingdom; stephanie.buijs@bristol.ac.uk

Precision livestock farming often requires the attachment of sensors to animals. However, such equipment can alter behaviour, invalidating the data collected. For instance, laying hens often respond aggressively to flock members with minor alterations in appearance, causing equipped hens to flee, fight or hide. We evaluated how 50 g ‘backpacks’ affected hen behaviour using direct observation. These ‘backpacks’ contained three monitoring devices (a light sensor, an accelerometer and a location device). The equipment was wrapped in brown tape and fitted to the hen’s back using elastic loops around the wing base. We equipped 14 hens within a flock of 2,000 housed on a commercial free-range farm (British Blacktails, 45 weeks old). Behaviour of equipped and non-equipped hens was observed 2, 3 and 7 days after equipping (continuous focal observation, 5 min/hen/day, alternating between equipped and non-equipped) and compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. None of the equipped hens was ever observed to flee or fight. Although equipment tended to increase the frequency of pecks received on day 2 and 3 (P=0.08 and 0.05, respectively) compared to non-equipped birds, median values were 0 for both groups and differences in interquartile range were small (0-0 vs 0-0.3 and 0-0 vs 0-0.6 pecks/ minute, respectively). Equipped hens generally did not react to these pecks (which included all types except severe feather pecks). Equipped and non-equipped hens were not found to differ significantly in the % of time spent eating/drinking, foraging, perching, preening, sitting, standing, walking or in the nestbox, or in their frequency of bodyshaking and pecking others (all P-values >0.05 for each day). Although further evaluation is required as sample size was modest, numerical differences between the treatments were either very small (<3%) and/or inconsistent over days, suggesting that it is unlikely that such behaviours were not found to differ simply due to lack of power. The exception was foraging, which was numerically lower in equipped birds on day 2 (31%) and 3 (10%), though not on day 7. Overall, this system seems to have only a minor impact on behaviour, suggesting its suitability for collecting automated behavioural data.

http://www.wageningenacademic.com/doi/book/10.3920/978-90-8686-862-9 - Monday, September 18, 2017 7:42:39 AM - IP Address:147.99.219.84
**Development of an animal welfare assessment scheme for use in companion animal
veterinary clinics**

Lauren C. Dawson¹, Cate E. Dewey¹, Elizabeth A. Stone², Michele T. Guerin¹ and Lee Niel¹

¹University of Guelph, Population Medicine, Canada, ²University of Guelph, Clinical Studies, Canada; dawsonl@uoguelph.ca

Veterinary care is important for ensuring animal health, but can also negatively impact patient welfare. To encourage optimal canine and feline welfare related to veterinary care, we aimed to develop a welfare assessment scheme for the clinic environment, similar to those that exist for agricultural species. To identify factors to be included, a variety of stakeholders, including animal welfare researchers and veterinarians, were consulted in a multi-stage survey. Through thematic analysis, pain management, behavioural health, and veterinarian-client communication emerged as overarching themes, each encompassing several assessable factors (e.g. pre-emptive analgesia for surgery, use of low-stress handling techniques, provision of training advice). These factors formed the basis of a draft assessment tool, incorporating questionnaires, interviews, and video observation of veterinary appointments. Through assessments in 30 veterinary clinics, reliability, validity, and feasibility were evaluated. This process revealed unique challenges, such as conducting a point assessment with little control over the patient's home life or previous experiences, making animal-based measures more complicated than in on-farm assessments. Intra-observer reliability was high throughout (K<sub>w</sub>≥0.80), inter-observer reliability was highest for interviews (K<sub>w</sub>=0.83, 0.73 for pain; 0.82, 0.81 for behavioural health; 0.40, 0.44 for communication), and feasibility was high for interviews and questionnaires; however, responses given through interviews and questionnaires were often inconsistent with data from appointment observation, suggesting low validity. Overall, a mix of measurement types is required to achieve an optimal balance between reliability, feasibility, and validity. Further evaluation of alternative assessment techniques (e.g. veterinarian evaluation of staged encounters, real-time evaluation of analgesic protocols) is warranted to attempt improvements in validity.
**Positive human-bird interactions improve welfare and production performance in the ostrich**

Maud Bonato¹, Tonny Muhvali¹, Anel Engelbrecht², Irek Malecki³ and Schalk Cloete¹,²

¹University of Stellenbosch, South Africa, ²Institute for Animal Production: Elsenburg, South Africa, ³University of Western Australia, Australia; mbonato@sun.ac.za

Poorly defined husbandry practices and inappropriate stockmanship has been suggested to contribute to unsatisfactory production results, still constraining ostrich farming worldwide (i.e. low chick survival, suboptimal egg and chick production). We thus investigated the effect of two different husbandry practices on ostrich chicks from hatch to 12 weeks of age. 272 chicks were randomly assigned to two groups, namely: standard husbandry practices (S), and additional human presence (as compared to S), involving regular physical contact, audio and visual stimuli (I). Immune responses were evaluated by performing a Hemaglutination-Inhibition (HI) test following Newcastle disease vaccine injection at 5 months old, while stress responses were assessed by measuring the heterophil/lymphocyte ratio (H/L) before (T0) and 3 days after (T3) harvesting feathers at 8 months. Finally, egg production of these birds was recorded over a 7-month breeding season at 2-years-old. The HI test revealed that a lower dilution rate was needed to cause complete inhibition of antigens in I chicks as compared to S chicks (I: 18.78±3.0; S: 23.37±2.34; P<0.05), suggesting a stronger immune response in I chicks. While the H/L ratio did not differ before and after the harvesting of feathers in I chicks (T0: 7.41±0.66; T3: 7.21±0.89, P>0.05), S chicks showed a higher ratio after the harvesting of the feathers (T0: 7.03±0.71; T3: 12.06±2.09, P<0.05), indicating an improved ability of I chicks to handle potential stressful events. Furthermore, I birds produced significantly more eggs than S birds (I: 60.71±4.96; S: 35±8.17; P=0.02). Clearly, additional human presence and interaction seemed to have worthwhile beneficial effects not only on the welfare of the birds but also on their reproductive performance under farming conditions and should thus be studied further.
Effect of gaseous ammonia on eating and ruminating behaviour in sheep in simulated transport by sea

Yu Zhang¹, Laureline Guinnefollau² and Clive Phillips¹

¹Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, School of Veterinary Science, The University of Queensland, Australia, ²Universite Francois Rabelais, Tours France, France; yu.zhang2014@gmail.com

Ammonia accumulation in sheep accommodation during live export is a major welfare problem. Ammonia is an irritant to mucosal surfaces, including the buccal cavity, which may be linked to previously observed reductions in feed intake. We investigated the mechanisms for this by studying eating and ruminating rates in sheep under simulated live export conditions. Twelve 6 months old lambs (mean 24.5±2 kg) were randomly assigned to control or 30 ppm ammonia treatment (a validated maximum for livestock in live export) for three 14 day periods (a typical journey duration from Australia to the Middle East) in a change-over design. In each period, ruminating behaviour was recorded for ten periods of 60 seconds from 14:00 to 19:00 pm on day 7 and day 8. Rumination was recorded in chews/min and the time interval between swallowing and regurgitation. Sheep were fed 400 g TMR pellets and long-chopped lucerne hay *ad libitum* daily. Ammonia decreased hay intake (1.03 vs 1.10 kg/d, SEM=0.014, P=0.002). Ruminating chewing rate decreased with ammonia (85.68 vs 88.10 chewing bites/ min, SEM=0.60, P=0.014) and the time between swallowing and regurgitation increased (6.75 vs 5.83 seconds, SEM=0.18, P=0.002). Palatability of a hard lucerne pellet and soft sorghum chaff was measured during a short (6 min) eating test. Ammonia reduced the rate of masticating lucerne pellets (2.20 vs 2.28 chews per second, SEM=0.012, P<0.001) but not sorghum chaff (2.26 vs 2.28 chews per second, SEM=0.018, P=0.47). Thus ammonia reduced feed intake and slowed chewing and swallowing, maybe due to an irritated buccal cavity. If proven, this would indicate reduced welfare of the very large numbers of sheep that are transported from Australia to the Middle East.
## Evaluation of the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for horses regarding animal-based indicators

Irena Czycholl<fnref n="1" />, Kathrin Büttner<fnref n="1" />, Philipp Klingbeil<fnref n="1" />, Michela Minero<fnref n="2" />, Emanuela Dalla Costa<fnref n="2" />, Francesca Dai<fnref n="2" /> and Joachim Krieter<fnref n="1" />

Based on Welfare Quality®, the AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Horses was developed as welfare assessment tool in the equine sector. Thereby, mainly animal-based indicators are used which are collected in two assessment approaches: first and second level. Whereas the first level enables a fast overview with nearly no direct animal contact, the second level represents a comprehensive and thus time-consuming data collection. The aim of this study was to test the agreement of first and second level to prove whether the first level is sufficiently sensitive. Altogether, one trained observer will perform 140 protocol assessments on 14 stables in Germany, in this preliminary analysis, 23 assessments on 9 stables were included. Spearman Rank correlation coefficients (RS), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), smallest detectable changes (SDC) and limits of agreement (LoA) were calculated for each indicator. The results of the behavioural tests, the horse grimace scale and the stereotypes demonstrated insufficient agreement. Of the disease indicators eye discharges (RS: 0.58, ICC: 0.54, SDC: 0.06, LoA: -0.06-0.07) and coughing (RS: 0.66, ICC: 0.64, SDC: 0.07, LoA: -0.07-0.08) revealed good agreement, for the others, significant differences were detected. Also most integument alterations showed a poor match between first and second level with the exception of skin changes at the muzzle in general (RS: 0.58, ICC: 0.50, SDC: 0.07, LoA: -0.09-0.06) and at the back regarding skin lesions (RS: 0.84, ICC: 0.6, SDC: 0.06, LoA: -0.07-0.06) and swellings (RS: 0.80, ICC: 0.79, SDC: 0.02, LoA: -0.03-0.02). Body condition score of category 2 was scored in an agreeing manner (RS: 0.85, ICC: 0.79, SDC: 0.04, LoA: -0.03-0.05) whereas differences were revealed for category 3 and 4. In summary, only some indicators showed a good agreement. This is probably due to low prevalences and too detailed categorisation. Thus, an adaption of the protocol is needed.

<footnote n="1">¹Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Germany,</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²Università degli Studi di Milano, Dipartimento di Scienze Veterinarie e Sanità Pubblica, Italy;
iczycholl@tierzucht.uni-kiel.de</footnote>
Impact of following recommendations for tie stall configuration on outcome-based
measures of welfare

Véronique Bouffard¹, Anne Marie De Passille², Jeffrey Rushen², Elsa Vasseur³, Clem Nash⁴,
Haley Derek⁴ and Doris Pellerin¹

¹Laval University, Canada, ²University of British Columbia, Canada, ³MacDonald College, Canada, ⁴University of Guelph, Canada; amdepassille@gmail.com

To evaluate how well Canadian dairy farms with tie stalls complied with recommendations for stall dimensions, and the effect of compliance on cow welfare, we assessed lactating Holstein cows (n=3,485) on 100 tie stall dairy farms for neck and leg lesions, lameness, and cleanliness, and measured time spent lying down. Data on the width and length of the stall were recorded for each cow. The majority of cows were housed in stalls that are smaller than recommended. The prevalence of lesions and lameness was high (neck=33%; knee=44%; hock=58%, lameness=25%) and the prevalence of dirtiness was low (udder=4%; flank=11%; legs=4%). Mixed models (GLIMMIX) were used to examine how the risk of each outcome changed as the stall dimensions deviated from the recommendations. Meeting the recommendation for stall width reduced the risk of neck injuries (odds ratio OR=0.89; SE=0.05 P<0.01) and lameness (OR=0.85; SE=0.04; P<0.01) and increased the daily duration of lying time, (P<0.01) but increased the risk of a dirty flank (OR=1.21; SE=0.06; P<0.01) and dirty legs (OR=1.17; SE=0.08; P=0.04). Meeting the recommendation for stall length tended to reduce the risk of knee lesions (OR=0.90; SE=0.06; P=0.08) and increased lying bout frequency (P<0.01) but increased the risk of a dirty udder (OR=1.36; SE=0.13; P=0.02). Compliance with recommendations for stall dimensions, especially stall width, is associated with signs of better cow welfare. There is a trade-off between the prevalence of lesions and lameness and prevalence of cleanliness: stalls of recommended size reduce the risk of lesions and lameness but increase dirtiness, but the prevalence of dirty cows remains very low.
# Refinement of broiler chicken welfare outcomes using Delphi methodology

Ana Paula Oliveira Souza and Carla Forte Maiolino Molento

Federal University of Paraná, Animal Welfare Laboratory, Brazil; anapaulasouza@ufpr.br

Recent studies about broiler chicken welfare assessment suggest the need for refinement in some animal welfare indicators. This study aimed to refine three broiler chicken welfare indicators: bird cleanliness (BC), carcass scratches (CS), breast and abdomen contact dermatitis (CD). We built a questionnaire with pictures of birds with different levels of the target indicators to be classified as absent, low, moderate or severe. Following Delphi methodology, the questionnaire was sent to 146 experts invited for the first round (R1). In the second round (R2), 88 participants who answered R1 were asked about the relationship between feathering and BC; to quantify maximum accepted levels of CS according to age, depth and length of lesion; and, based on justification given in R1 for each level of CD, to select between two scales including erythema. Interquartile deviation was calculated to verify consensus among respondents. In R1, there was 56.8% (83/146) complete and relevant responses for BC, 56.1% (82/146) for CS and 55.5% (81/146) for CD. In R2, 73.5% (61/88) of specialists participated, 68.7% (57/88) completed the questionnaire. In R1, consensus was achieved for 8/10 pictures of BC, and in R2 results suggested the need to include feathering condition assessment during BC analysis. Considering CS, consensus was achieved for 5/8 pictures in R1. In R2, 98.2% (56/57) of respondents considered that old scratches must be assessed as animal welfare indicator. For CD, consensus was achieved in 2/10 pictures in R1, being them the extreme cases, absence and severe CD. Additionally, erythema was recognized as an unhealthy condition of the skin by 96.4% (80/83) of respondents in R1. In R2, 64.9% (37/57) of respondents chose a more detailed scale to assess CD. After R2, we built a visual and descriptive scale for the assessment of BC and CD on farm, and CS at the slaughterhouse.
**Broiler chicken meat inspection data in Southern Brazil: an animal welfare approach**

Ana Paula Oliveira Souza¹, Cesar Augusto Taconelli², Nicolle Fridlund Plugge³ and Carla Forte Maiolino Molento¹

¹Federal University of Paraná, Animal Welfare Laboratory, Brazil, ²Federal University of Paraná, Department of Statistics, Brazil, ³Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply, Brazil; anapaulasouza@ufpr.br

The Federal Inspection Service (SIF) of the Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (MAPA) undertakes meat inspection at slaughterhouses, but outcomes have not been used for animal welfare surveillance. We assessed condemnation data from broiler chicken slaughterhouses in Southern Brazil to evaluate their potential use as animal welfare indicators (AWI). Data from January 2010 to December 2015 in the states of Paraná (PR), Santa Catarina (SC) and Rio Grande do Sul (RS) were used. Correlation of AWI was tested using Spearman rank correlation test. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used to explore variance and covariance structures of AWI. Fractures and bruising were recorded together, and they represent the most prevalent welfare problem (PR, 22.1%; SC, 16.6%; RS, 23.7%), followed by skin lesion or inflammation (PR, 14.8%; SC, 9.1%; RS, 9.1%). Footpad dermatitis is not officially controlled since affected feet might be accepted as lower grade product. In PR, progressive increase on injury, arthritis, ineffective bleeding, and airsacculitis may reveal important welfare aspects. High correlation between AWI within PR was more commonly observed than in RS and SC, perhaps because of earlier implementation of local SIF standardization. PCA showed changes on condemnation data pattern in PR after standardization, pointing injury and *Escherichia coli* problems as main causes for condemnation related to animal welfare. They were strongly related to component 1, representing 39.4% of data variability. It seems crucial to update and standardize data collection to set a routine that allows risk analysis regarding both food safety and animal welfare. There is considerable potential to improve animal welfare assessment using SIF structure that is already in place for food safety purposes. In this regard, cooperative work between SIF and companies seems an interesting approach to promote transparency of production process, which would benefit society and animals.
**Behavioural traits of undocked heavy pigs receiving different enrichment tools**

*Eleonora Nannoni, Luca Sardi, Marika Vitali and Giovanna Martelli*

Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Department of Veterinary Medical Sciences, Italy;
eleonora.nannoni2@unibo.it

The aim of the present work was to investigate the effects of innovative enrichment devices on the behavioural traits of undocked Italian heavy pigs kept on slatted floor in the body weight range 25-160 kg. Two separate and independent trials (n=40 pigs each, 5 pigs/pen) were carried out. In Trial 1, 20 pigs received a hanging metal chain (C1, positive control) as environmental enrichment, and 20 received wood logs (WL) placed inside a metal rack allowing snout and biting manipulation. In Trial 2, 20 pigs received a metal chain (C2, positive control) whereas 20 received a specifically formulated vegetable edible block (EB) placed inside the same metal rack. The manipulable materials were always available to animals. Pigs were videotaped every 2 weeks and behaviour was analysed by the same trained observer (scan-sampling for general behaviour and all-occurrences sampling on three selected days for the number and the duration of the interactions with the devices). Data were submitted to one-way ANOVA (using the pig as the experimental unit and the environmental enrichment as the main effect). Kruskal-Wallis test was used for non-parametric data. General behaviour was only marginally affected by all enrichment tools, although EB pigs spent less time in (aimless) rooting/exploring the pen floor (13.39 vs 15.90% of the observed behaviours, P<0.01) than C2. In Trial 1, WL pigs interacted with the enrichment tool less than C1 pigs (0.64 vs 1.84%, P<0.01). In Trial 2, EB pigs interacted more with the enrichment (2.85 vs 1.12%, P<0.001) if compared to C2 group. These data were confirmed by in-continuous observations. In conclusion, our results show that edible blocks (EB) but not wood logs (WL) were more attractive for pigs than hanging metal chains (C1 and C2). The research was funded by Progetto AGER, grant no. 2011-0280.
**A model to induce cannibalism outbreak on pigs based on frustration of exploratory
behaviour**

Marie-Christine Meunier-Salaün¹, Diana Quent¹, Aurélie Thivat² and Valérie Courboulay²
¹PEGASE Agrocampus Ouest INRA, France, ²IFIP-Institut du Porc, France;
marie-christine.salaun@inra.fr

A model of cannibalism in pigs was built from the frustration of investigation, generated in
two trials by the withdrawal from the fifth day of fattening period (FP) of the pen enrichment
supplied during the post weaning period (PW). Three levels of enrichment were applied:
in Trial 1 (T1): slatted floors and progressive supply of chain-plastic pipe or cord (E-) vs no
object (A) (12 pens/treatment: A vs E-); Trial 2 (T2): straw bedding (E+) vs slatted floor with
progressive supply of objects (E-) (12 pens/treatment: E- vs E+). During the first four days of
the FP, piglets had cords and plastic pipes (P) vs no material (A) (6 pens per treatment: T1:
A/A, A/P, E/A, and E-/P; T2: E-/A, E-/P, E+/A, and E+/P). Behaviour was video recorded every
2 weeks during PW, then daily during the first four days and finally at Day 7 of the fattening
period. The social interactions, tail biting, pen and object investigation performed in pens
for two hours were submitted to variance analysis (Proc Mixed SAS). Tails and ears injuries
were scored three times in PW and daily for the two first weeks in FP (χ2 test). During PW,
enrichment promoted interest towards object (T1: 2% total scan for E- vs 0 for A; P<0.05),
and more straw investigation compared to objects ones (T2: 23.2 for E+ vs 3.5% total scan
for E-, P<0.05). No severe tail and ears lesions were observed in both trials. At Day 4 of FP,
the withdrawal of objects did not strongly affected the behaviour, except in T2 showing more
positive social interactions (33 for E-/A vs 23% total items for E-/P; P<0.05). Cannibalism
outbreak was only limited to three pens in T2 (E+/A, E-/A, E-/P), and any case at Day 7,
highlighting multifactorial causes of cannibalism.
# Developing a Japanese animal welfare certification system for dairy cows

Tetsuya Seo and Mika Kitamura

Obihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, Japan; seo@obihiro.ac.jp

In recent years, animal welfare concerns have been increasing among Japanese consumers. However, Japan has no third-party farm animal welfare certification system. We are striving to produce animal welfare assessment standards for certification in dairy cows, and have established the Japanese farm animal welfare association for certifying the farms. Based on a literature review, objective assessment standards were developed for each item simply by judging the results with a circle ('yes') and an X ('no') to denote whether the standards are met. The welfare standards are based on three categories: facilities, management, and animals as follows. In all, 52 items are assessed. The farm can be certified if it receives a score of 80% or more in each category. Facility-based assessment: Indicators are used to assess proper rearing facilities and to assess the barn and outdoor areas for defects that might adversely affect animals. Assessment items include the feed trough size, water trough size, temperature control, calving pens, and cow trainers. Management-based assessment: Indicators are used to assess proper performance of daily rearing management. Assessment items include feed and water trough cleanliness, and bed softness. Animal-based assessment: If animals are diseased, injured or undernourished, then animal welfare is regarded as poor. Assessment items include the hock condition, abnormal behaviour, and body condition. To acquire certification, the farm would be inspected twice per year during the first year. The inspectors visit a farm to assess whether the farm complies with certification requirements, and subsequently report the assessment results. After the association certifies a farm, the farmer can display the association label when selling dairy products. Such certified products will be sold in 2017.
**Salivary CgA as a new biomarker of stress in pigs**

D. Escribano¹, Md. Contreras², N. Casal¹,³, E. Fàbrega³, J.J.Cerón², X. Manteca¹ and F. Tecles²

¹School of Veterinary Science, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Department of Animal and Food Science, Spain, ²University of Murcia, Interdisciplinary Laboratory of Clinical Pathology, Interlab-UMU, Spain, ³IRTA (Research and Technology Food and Agriculture), Department of Agriculture (Government of Catalonia), Spain; *damian.escribano@uab.cat*

Saliva sampling has the advantage of being non-invasive as it causes minimal stress during collection, thus making it an ideal tool for evaluating stress in animals. Chromogranin A (CgA) is the major protein found at the core of catecholamine's storage vesicles of the adrenal medulla and sympathetic nerves chromaffin cells, from which it is co-released with epinephrine and norepinephrine. In human, salivary CgA (sCgA) is considered as a sensitive and reliable quantitative tool for monitoring the sympathoadrenal medullary (SAM) activity. However, it is still not widely used in pigs. The objective of this abstract would be to provide to evidence of the use of sCgA as a marker of stress in pigs and stress the advantages that this protein can have in comparison with other biomarkers used traditionally. For this purpose the following aspects have been addressed: (1) the development and validation of a sensitive assay for sCgA in pigs. (2) The behaviour of sCgA on different acute stress models such as: restriction with nose-snare, transport and accommodation in the slaughterhouse or isolation and regrouping in a farm. (3) The possibility of use sCgA to detect stress associated with factors of chronic exposure. (4) The advantages in comparison with other salivary biomarkers of stress such as the existence of no circadian pattern and the lack of variations due to gender and/or age. It is expected that this data can help to promote the use of this innovative salivary stress biomarker as a practical and non-invasive tool to stress response of pigs.
**Welfare risk assessment plans – identification and characterization of potential risks and benefits**

Saskia S. Arndt and Vivian C. Goerlich-Jansson

Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Department of Animals in Science and Society, Division Animal Welfare & Laboratory Animal Science, the Netherlands; s.s.arndt@uu.nl

From an ethical and legal point of view, ensuring animal welfare is imperative and a distinct scientific and societal goal. We are in need of science-based, objective frameworks to address animal welfare issues and to enable appropriate welfare management. 'Risk assessments' comprise the identification and characterization of potential risks and benefits for the welfare of animals. Risk assessment plans (RAPs) might be used as guidelines to address and improve circumstances, procedures and/or management strategies. Risks to welfare are identified based on the 'dynamic concept of animal welfare', which requires animals to be mentally and physiologically capable/able to react adequately to environmental challenges. Adequate reactions are seen as elements of an animal's natural behavioural repertoire. The capability/ ability to display normal behavioural patterns allows the animal to adapt to the demands of the prevailing environmental circumstances and enables it to reach a state that it appraises as positive (modified and extended from Ohl and Van der Staay). A RAP characterizes the exposure of a defined target population to the potential risk factors an possible consequences thereof for the welfare of the population, using literature research and on site data collection. The potential impact of the identified risk factors is weighted by classification into four categories, each comprising four sources: (1) generalization (which part of the target population is exposed to potential risks); (2) duration of exposure to potential risks; (3) intensity of exposure to potential risks (ranging from mild to terminal); (4) probability of exposure to potential risks. Here we present the implementation of animal welfare risk assessment, using the example of a dog population housed in a research kennel. Even though this kennel fulfils al legal requirements for a research facility (including welfare-related requirements), we were able to identify (potential) risks to the welfare of the kept dogs, related to e.g. housing and management. We will highlight the advantages and challenges of a RAP while aiming at objectively assessing risks to welfare.
A co-elaborative tool to assess growing pigs welfare

Valérie Courboulay¹, Marie-Christine Meunier-Salaün², Françoise Pol³ and Marie Stankowiak⁴
¹IFIP, breeding techniques, France, ²INRA, UMR Pegase, France, ³ANSES, Animal Health and Welfare, France, ⁴ISA Lille, Grecat, France; valerie.courboulay@ifip.asso.fr

Animal welfare assessment systems are mainly used by external auditors. Better commitment
could be achieved if farmers could assess the welfare of their pigs themselves and act to improve
it. A project was designed to build an animal welfare assessment tool with farmers from three
different French regions. An exhaustive list of criteria was established at three co-design
workshops involving farmers, their advisers and animal welfare experts. Farmers indicated how
they evaluated whether their animals were doing well, either spontaneously in a brainstorming
discussion, or by answering to questions from a naïve visitor. Then representatives of the
groups gathered, prioritized and selected the criteria according to four dimensions: housing
(cleanliness, moisture, resting posture), behaviour (fear of human, use of enrichment material),
health (diarrhoea, coughing, lameness, severe body/tail lesions, physical appearance) and
feeding (trough/drinker cleanliness, low body weight). They proposed rapid measurement
methods (observation at group level from the corridor and individually in the pen) and stages
to use them: two rooms in the post weaning period (PW) and two rooms in the growing-
finishing period (G). A prototype tool was built on these bases. Farmers and advisers scored
their animals twice, after the training session and six months later (spring 2017). The first series
of evaluation indicated that lameness frequency was lower in PW than in G (0.27 vs 0.41% of
pigs) and ranged from 0 to 1.7% (PW) and 3.6% (G). Exploratory behaviour was scored when
entering the room and 10 minutes later. The percentage of pens with enrichment investigation
was higher after 10 minutes presence, higher in PW period than in G period (34.5 vs 23.1%) and
ranged from 0 to 100% of pens. The feedback of both sessions will allow to assess the feasibility
of this tool in different type of farms, the difficulties encountered in the implementation by the
farmers and to finalize with them a list of relevant measures.
Barren environments increase ‘wakeful’ inactivity in veal calves

Laura Webb¹, Bas Engel², Kees Van Reenen¹ and Eddie Bokkers¹

¹Wageningen University, Animal Production Systems, the Netherlands, ²Wageningen University,
Biometris, the Netherlands; laura.webb@wur.nl

Inactivity is a vastly understudied behavioural category, which may reflect both positive and negative affective states, or a lack hereof, in domesticated, captive animals. Increased inactivity in barren-housed animals, in combination with an increased interest in stimuli, was previously suggested as an indicator of boredom in captive mink. The aim of this study was to further our understanding of inactive behaviours and associated affective states in intensively raised calves fed different diets. Holstein-Friesian veal calves (n=200) were housed in enriched or barren environments: (1) imposed/restricted diet vs free choice (experiment [EXP] 1); (2) no additional straw vs ad libitum straw (EXP2); (3) low vs high solid feed (EXP2); (4) bucket vs automated dispenser for milk replacer feeding (EXP2). Inactive behaviours (EXP1: lie, idle, sleep; EXP2: lie idle, stand idle, sleep) and stereotyped behaviours (tongue playing, object manipulation) were recorded at two ages (EXP1: 12 and 26 wk; EXP2: 15 and 24 wk) using instantaneous scan sampling. In EXP2, latency to touch a novel object was recorded at 15 and 24 wk. Calves in all enriched environments showed less stereotyped behaviours (P<0.05). No differences in inactivity were found between calves with a restricted or free choice diet (% total scans for idle: 34.8 vs 33.4), however, calves from the other barren environments, showed more lying idle at 24 wk of age (P<0.05) (% total scans; straw: 31.4 vs 23.1; solid feed: 33.0 vs 23.8; milk replacer method: 30.7 vs 23.2). No differences in latency to touch the novel object were found. Therefore, although barren environments were generally associated with more stereotyped behaviour and ‘wakeful’ inactivity (sleep was not different), suggesting worse welfare, we were unable to conclude that this inactivity was potentially an indicator of boredom, or any other affective state for that matter.
**Welfare and quality check – customized system for monitoring animal welfare**

Lene Meinert, Leif Lykke, Helle Daugaard Larsen, Lars Ole Blaabjerg, Margit Dall Aaslyng, Lars Kristensen and Susanne Støier

Danish Meat Research Institute, Meat Technology, Denmark; lme@dti.dk

Documentation of animal welfare in the entire production chain is an increasing demand from many customers of fresh meat. A systemized registration system makes it possible to turn these demands into advantages. Welfare and Quality Check (WQC) is a system for monitoring animal welfare of pigs at the slaughterhouse. Animal welfare can be monitored and documented by different animal-based measurements but also more indirectly by resource-based measurements as recently reviewed by Brandt and Aaslyng. WQC is a science-based tool founded in the ethical audits. The WQC protocol contains a well-defined setup of questions and observation points that combines management related issues with practical arrangements (e.g. reflections, shadows or disturbing light; hit by box gate), animal-based measures (e.g. positioning of sticking knife, noise level) and meat quality. WQC includes observations and graduation of 6 to 13 indicators within each of the four important areas: (1) the unloading area, (2) the lairage area, (3) the stunning/sticking process and (4) the meat quality performed on the cut floor. The check provides the slaughterhouse with an overview of the status at hand. The concurrent training of slaughterhouse employees ensures implementation of the WQC system and ongoing focus on animal welfare. Furthermore, the design allows for inclusion of specific customer demands related to animal welfare, providing the slaughterhouse with a customized protocol. Good animal welfare is also good business. Quality defects seen in the meat cuts as e.g. haemorrhages can lead to loss of income. However, by monitoring the occurrence of haemorrhages, followed by identification of the problem area and implementation of the necessary adjustments, the problem can be reduced. In this way, WQC is an effective tool when identifying and registering potential problems related to the handling of animals on the day of slaughter. Monitoring animal welfare parameters provides the possibility of changing these inappropriate procedures and operations.
## Nesting behaviour of broiler breeders

Anne Van Den Oever¹,²,³, Bas Rodenburg¹,², Liesbeth Bolhuis², Lotte Van De Ven³ and Bas Kemp²

¹Wageningen University, Behavioural Ecology Group, the Netherlands, ²Wageningen University, Adaptation Physiology Group, the Netherlands, ³Vencomatic Group, the Netherlands;
anna.vandenoever@wur.nl

Broilers have been selected for growth related characteristics, which are negatively correlated to reproductive traits. This genetic background creates challenges in broiler breeders, as the hens do not make optimal use of the nests provided. This project aims to investigate what factors determine where a broiler breeder hen prefers to lay her egg, in which nesting behaviour probably plays a crucial role. Factors such as genetic background, social interactions, physical characteristics of the nest and climate might interfere with the natural nesting behaviour of the hen. Also fundamental trade-offs between different motivations, such as hunger, comfort and safety, might influence nesting behaviour. Behaviour and use of space will be measured in experimental set-ups in order to gain insight in the importance of different system components. This knowledge will be used to optimise housing conditions and develop strategies that stimulate the hen to lay her egg in the nest. The performance of this improved system will be tested in field experiments to investigate the transferability of results from experimental to field conditions.
assessing animal welfare in costa rican dairy herds based on the Welfare Quality® protocols

Alice Mercedes Di Giacinto¹, Frank Eerdenburg², Sandra Estrada-König³, Mariano Rojas-González⁴, Jaime Murillo-Herrera³ and Juan José Romero-Zúñiga³

¹Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands, ²Utrecht University, Farm Animal Health, the Netherlands, ³Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica, Costa Rica, ⁴GEA Farm Technologies, Costa Rica; alicedivi@gmail.com

Animal welfare is an important issue in farming, and welfare assessment is vital to improve the welfare of farm animals. Since the welfare status of dairy farms in Costa Rica was not known, the Welfare Quality® protocol (2009) was applied in 60 dairy herds around the country. The aim of this study was to evaluate the applicability of this protocol in Costa Rica. The farms were all from the biggest dairy producers' cooperative in the country. The protocol assesses the welfare in four areas: feeding, housing, health and behaviour. Most of the farms were scored as 'enhanced' (55%) or 'acceptable' (37%), the rest were 'not acceptable'. The protocol was applied in a wide variety of farms: extensive, semi-intensive and intensive farming systems, equatorial to tropical savanna climate, etc. Since in this protocol most of the measurements are taken directly on the animals and not on the infrastructure, the protocol was easily applied on the farms of Costa Rica. Nevertheless, some adjustments are necessary for a more accurate use of the protocol in the country, mainly regarding housing-dependent measurements like the evaluation of the drinkers and the avoidance distance. In 92% of the farms cows were kept on the pasture at least half of the day, in these cases, the drinkers on the pasture were different from those in the stable, which made the scoring of the drinkers difficult. Also, around 20% of them had feeding troughs that limited the vision of the cow, making the avoidance distance test inaccurate. Moreover, is important to create a method to evaluate heat stress, a key parameter in tropical countries, since for example in Costa Rica the average temperature is 24 °C and the average humidity is of 81%, which gives an average temperature-humidity index of 73, which has been categorized as mild heat stress for cattle. It was concluded that since the protocol mainly consists of animal based measures, it can be easily adapted to the different management methods and environmental conditions in Costa Rica.
Is the reticular temperature a useful indicator of heat stress in dairy cattle?

Stefanie Ammer¹, Christian Lambertz² and Matthias Gauly²

¹Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Department of Livestock Science, Switzerland, ²Free University of Bolzano, Faculty of Science and Technology, Italy; stefanie.ammer@fibl.org

The predicted climate change may intensify heat stress (HS) effects for dairy cattle which impair performance, health and welfare. The use of automatic systems for continuously monitoring body temperature might be a useful method to detect HS. The objectives were to investigate the reticular temperature (RT) as HS indicator taking performance and water intake (WI) into consideration. Therefore RT of 28 Holstein-Friesian dairy cows was recorded continuously and milk yield daily (classified as <30 kg, 30-35 kg, 35-40 kg, and ≥40 kg) between March and December. Barn climate records (air temperature, relative humidity) were used to calculate the daily temperature-humidity-index (THI; classified as <60, 60-65, 65-70, and ≥70.). Additionally, the individual WI of 10 cows during 100 days was recorded. A mixed model and Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated with SAS 9.3 to estimate the effects on daily median RT. Up to a THI of 65, RT remained at 39.2 °C. Above this threshold, RT increased to 39.3 °C and further to 39.4 °C when THI ≥70 (P<0.001). The correlation between THI ≥70 and RT was 0.22, while there was no relation when THI<70 (P<0.001). The RT was greater, when dairy cows yielded ≥30 kg/d and THI ≥70 (39.5 °C) compared with <30 kg and THI<70 (39.3 °C) (P<0.001). WI caused a mean decrease in RT of 3.2 °C (±1.5). It was influenced by the amount of WI (r=0.60; P<0.001). After WI, it took up to 2 h until RT reached the level before drinking. In conclusion, RT increased markedly when THI ≥70 so that it could be used as an indicator for HS. Nevertheless, the effects of WI and performance have to be considered carefully when RT is used to detect hyperthermia in dairy cattle.
**Training observers in the use of an equine welfare assessment tool: benefits of hands-on experience**

Cordelie Dubois¹,², Derek Haley¹,³, Trevor Devries¹,², Penny Lawlis¹,² and Katrina Merkies¹,²

¹University of Guelph, Campbell Centre for the Study of Animal Welfare, Canada, ²University of Guelph, Animal Biosciences, Canada, ³University of Guelph, Population Medicine, Canada; cdubois@uoguelph.ca

Previous research has documented the success of a variety of methods to teach observers how to repeatably and reliably score a single animal-based measure. Whether these same training methods can be applied to multiple animal-based measures in a single training program is less documented, but equally important, given the rise in comprehensive welfare assessment tools. The objective, of this research was to determine the levels of inter-observer reliability when trainee assessors were taught a combination of animal-based welfare measures to assess horses in a range of conditions in Ontario. As part of a larger project examining the use of an equine on-farm welfare assessment in Canada, three assessors were trained by a 'gold standard' assessor in the use of six animal-based measures (ocular and nasal discharge, injury, hoof status, body condition, and lameness scores) incorporated into an on-farm welfare assessment tool. Training took place over three days and involved in-class (two days) and hands-on (one day) experience. Trainee assessors achieved over 70% agreement with the trainer for all measures and improved agreement when provided with hands-on experience for all measures except injury scoring. Subsequently, the trainer was accompanied by one trainee to horse farms ($n_{TraineeA}=9, n_{TraineeB}=16$) where horses ($n_{total}=308$) were scored using the six measures. Injury scoring achieved the lowest percentage agreement (78%), lameness scoring the highest (97%). Kappa scores differed substantially between the two trainees attending on-farm assessments. Overall percentage agreement and $\kappa$ scores were comparable or higher than those seen in existing literature, likely due to the simplification of the scoring systems and the relative scarcity of welfare-threatening conditions (e.g. severe lameness). Results suggest that trainees are capable of learning how to reliably score multiple animal-based measures and benefit from the addition of hands-on training when applying the scoring systems to a diverse population of horses.
**Selection of meat inspection data for animal welfare index**

Søren Saxmose Nielsen, Matthew James Denwood and Hans Houe

University of Copenhagen, Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Denmark;

houe@sund.ku.dk

National welfare indices of cattle and pig production are being established in Denmark, and register data from abattoirs may contribute to such indices. The objective of this study was to select potentially welfare-relevant abattoir recordings and to assess the sources of variation within these recordings with a view towards inclusion in a national welfare index. Slaughter codes from the largest sow (n=3), slaughter pig (n=9) and cattle (n=8) abattoirs covering 92% of slaughtered animals in Denmark during 2012 were pre-selected based on expert judgment of having animal welfare relevance. This resulted in 22 individual codes and 8 code combinations for pigs, and 20 individual codes and 9 code combinations for cattle. Random effects logistic regression was used for each code/combination to determine the magnitude of variation derived at the level of the farm or abattoir, of which farm variation might be associated with welfare, whereas abattoir variation is most likely caused by differences in recording practices. Codes/combinations were excluded for use in the national welfare index based on poor model fit, or a relatively large abattoir effect. Ultimately, there was a large abattoir effect for most of the codes modelled. Among the pre-selected codes, the following number of codes or combinations were found to be potentially useful for a welfare index: 8 for slaughter pigs, 15 for sows, 5 for cattle <18 months of age, and 6 for older cattle. The majority of codes were considered to be not appropriate to be carried forward to the welfare index. It should also be noted that the accuracy of each code/combination was not assessed, only the observed variation between farms and abattoirs. In order to improve the possibility of using meat inspection data in animal welfare assessment, it is highly needed to identify the reasons for the large variation between abattoirs.
**Assessment of injuries of laying hens at slaughter and its informative value concerning cannibalism**

Helen Louton¹, Angela Schwarzer¹, Laura Herr¹, Elke Rauch¹, Shana Bergmann¹, Sven Reese² and Michael Erhard¹

¹Chair of Animal Welfare, Ethology, Animal Hygiene and Animal Husbandry, Department of Veterinary Sciences, LMU Munich, Germany, ²Chair of Anatomy, Histology and Embryology, Department of Veterinary Sciences, LMU Munich, Germany; h.louton@lmu.de

Detection of cannibalism is essential for the improvement of hens' welfare in subsequent laying periods. The validity of the assessment of skin injuries at slaughter compared to on farm was evaluated in hens, being non-beak trimmed (20 flocks), beak trimmed (10 flocks) or 'mixed' (1 flock). 438 hens each from 31 flocks (flock size 1,500-5,900) of 11 farms (farm size 6,000-58,000 hens) were examined at the evisceration line after a previous on farm examination by the same observer (30 hens/flock). Time intervals between 'on farm' and 'at slaughter' assessments varied from 1 to 22 weeks. On average 6.5% of the laying hens had skin injuries, non-beak trimmed hens more (8.0%) than beak trimmed hens (4.2%, P<0.001, χ²-test). The time interval of assessment did not seem to affect the prevalence of injuries. Setting a limit for the definition of cannibalism at 10% of injured hens, 6 flocks were affected by cannibalism. A correlation between the assessment results of skin injuries at slaughter with on farm results was found (Kendall's-Tau, 0.609; P<0.001). The difference of assessed skin injuries between the two assessment methods was 25.0% (31.6% of hens affected on farm, 6.5% at slaughter). A large variation of frequency of injuries is demonstrated by the coefficient of variation for repeated measurements of 131.3%. After transforming the data into a binary form of either 'cannibalism' or 'no cannibalism', a ROC-Curve analysis determined the accuracy of estimating the prevalence of cannibalism on farm via examinations at slaughter. Using a threshold of 1.4% of hens with injuries at slaughter, presence of cannibalism as defined above was detected with a sensitivity of 92.3% and a specificity of 72.4%. In conclusion, the detection of preceding cannibalism is possible, whereby the detection limit to diagnose cannibalism from injuries on farm is much lower than at slaughter.
Comparing welfare assessment results from Welfare Quality and a Finnish healthcare
scheme for cattle

Mikaela Mughal<fnref n="1" />, Lilli Frondelius<fnref n="2" />, Matti Pastell<fnref n="2" />, Heli Lindeberg<fnref n="2" />, Erja Tuunainen³ and
Jaakko Mononen<fnref n="2" />

We studied whether Naseva, a national healthcare scheme for cattle in Finland, could be used
as a reliable on-farm welfare assessment tool. Naseva's welfare section (NWS) includes 23
measures (12 animal based (ABM) and 11 other) based on the principles and criteria of Welfare
Quality (WQ). Each measure can score 1 (good), 2 (acceptable) or 3 (needs improvement). We
compared NWS and WQ-assessment on both criteria and measure level to examine whether the
evaluation of the welfare status was overlapping. Forty-three free-stall dairy farms from Eastern
Finland were Naseva-evaluated by their contract veterinarian. One of three trained assessors
conducted the full WQ assessment within two weeks from this. A linear mixed model with the
veterinarian as a confounding factor was formulated to predict the WQ-criteria score with the
NWS measures that best correspond to the measures within each WQ-criteria. Spearman rank
correlation was used to study connection between individual NWS and WQ measurements.
There was an association between NWS and WQ only in the criteria 'Absence of prolonged
hunger' (P=0.04) and 'Expression of other behaviour' (P<0.001). Most correlations between
WQ and NWS measurements were weak (|r<sub>s</sub>|<0.4). Moderate to strong correlations (|r<sub>s</sub>|>0.4)
were found between lesions (NWS) and mild and severe integument alterations (WQ) (r<sub>s</sub>=-0.52
and 0.53, respectively), outdoor access (NWS) and days in outdoor loafing area (OLA) per year
and hours in OLA/day (WQ) (r<sub>s</sub>=-0.51 for both), and grazing (NWS) and days on pasture/year
and hours on pasture/day (WQ) (r<sub>s</sub> = -0.75 and -0.70). In general NWS was not in agreement
with WQ. Naseva and WQ had different assessors, which might explain part of the differences
in the results. Also, NWS does not have a fixed sample size for the ABMs. According to our
results, Naseva needs further development if it is to be used as a welfare assessment tool.

<footnote n="1">¹University of Eastern Finland, Department of Environmental and Biological Sciences, Finland,</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Green Technology, Finland, ³Animal Health ETT, Finland; mikaela.mughal@uef.fi</footnote>
**Risk factors associated with skin and vulva lesions in Danish loose-housed gestating sows and gilts**

Vibe Pedersen Lund, Anne Marie Michelsen, Franziska Hakansson, Marlene K. Kirchner, Nina D. Otten, Matthew J. Denwood and Björn Forkman

University of Copenhagen, Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Section for Animal Welfare and Disease Control, Denmark; vl@sund.ku.dk

This cross-sectional study investigated risk factors associated with the pen-level prevalence of skin and vulva lesions in loose-housed gestating sows and gilts in Denmark. Twenty-one conventional herds with more than 200 sows were visited from April to December 2015. Herds were chosen by convenience sampling and pens and animals were selected according to the Welfare Quality protocol. Associations between the proportion of animals in a pen with skin or vulva lesions and selected pen characteristics were analysed using univariable generalised linear mixed models with a negative binomial response and herd and pen as random effects. A multivariable model was not used due to moderately high confounding between pen characteristics. Of the 657 sampled animals from 121 pens, 210 (32%) had skin lesions, whereas 63 (10%) had vulva lesions. Skin and vulva lesions occurred with a corresponding frequency in the same animal (n=20, 3%), as expected if occurring independently. The risk of skin lesions was higher in pens with: electronic feeding compared to individual feeding stalls with rear gates (OR=3.0, 95% CI: 1.5-6.2), groups of >60 animals compared to groups of 8-20 animals (OR=2.7, 95% CI: 1.3-6.2), and recently mixed stable groups compared to stable groups (OR=2.2, 95% CI: 1.1-4.1). The risk was lower in pens with gilts compared to mixed groups (OR=0.2, 95% CI: 0.0-0.7) and tended to be lower in pens with maximally two handfuls of straw compared to no rooting material (OR=0.4, 95% CI: 0.1-1.0). The risk of vulva lesions was higher in pens with >60 animals compared to 8-20 animals (OR=4.4, 95% CI: 1.2-19.0). The results suggest that occurrence of skin and vulva lesions may have different aetiologies. Further research is needed to uncover the effects of pen design, feeding system, rooting material, group dynamics and size on skin and vulva lesions.
**BOVIWELL: an easy-to-use tool to evaluate on-farm welfare of cattle**

*Nicolas Nocture and Mathieu Pissot*

*Moy Park Beef Orléans, France; mathieu.pissot@moypark.com*

On-farm animal welfare monitoring has made an important move forward since the publication of the Welfare Quality system in 2009. Articulated around the Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare, BoviWell is a cattle welfare evaluation tool inspired of Welfare Quality protocol and methodology (sample, aggregation, scoring) and aimed to be carried out within a maximum of 2 h on farm. The tool was built thanks to several working sessions with scientific experts, technical experts, institutions, NGOs, and tests in farms. Target was to identify the most relevant and feasible indicators to allow a scoring repeatable and comparable to the one obtained with Welfare Quality full assessment. BoviWell starts with a questionnaire on farm profile, farming practices (dehorning, castration, time spent in pasture, etc.) and technical indicators (animal health, calving conditions, etc.). Then, size of sample to be observed (in barn only) is calculated for each cattle category. Measures are mainly animal-based (body scoring, cleanliness, appropriate lying down, injures, approach test, etc.) and completed by housing conditions observations (watering and area per animal). Results are converted into scores through compliance to references or decision tree methods, with higher weight given to weaker performances (correlated to Choquet integrals). Finally, scores are classified within the Five Freedoms and aggregated into cattle category. To date, 100 diagnosis have been performed and show that 11% are in ‘Excellent’ grade; 77% ‘Superior’, 12% ‘Acceptable’ and none ‘not-classified’. Each diagnosis helps enrich the database and refine references and grading scale. In conclusion, BoviWell gives an accurate evaluation of animal welfare, comparable to Welfare Quality full evaluation, within only few hours. Identification of best practices and/or potential ways of improvement linked to technical indicators facilitates discussion and involvement of farmers. BoviWell is currently spread out in 1,600 farms in France.
**Use of routinely collected herd data to classify dairy herds for claw health associated welfare**

Henriëtte Brouwer¹, Thomas Dijkstra¹, Heleen Worm¹, Yvonne Van Der Vorst² and
Gerdien Van Schaik¹

¹GD Animal Health, the Netherlands, ²Friesland Campina, the Netherlands;
h.brouwer@gdanimalhealth.com

Claw health is an important indicator for dairy cattle welfare. The claw health status of a herd can be assessed by clinical observation of individual cows, which is time consuming and a challenge to obtain uniformity between observers. The objective of the study was to develop an empirical model on routinely collected herd data that could classify herds with a below or above average claw health. Two hundred dairy herds were visited to determine the proportion of lame cows, cows with visible hock or knee lesions and an overall grade for claw health. Routinely collected herd data were converted into cattle health parameters. Principal component analysis was used to combine claw health parameters into an observed claw health score. The dataset was randomly divided in a test group of 150 herds to develop a predictive model and a group of 50 herds for validation. Multivariable linear regression with a backward elimination procedure was carried out on routine herd data of the test group to find the best predictive model for the observed claw health score. With the final predictive model, the claw health status of the 50 validation herds was estimated. Herds were classified as below or above average for claw health. Agreement between the predicted relative to observed claw health score was obtained and sensitivity and specificity of the model were determined using the veterinary observations during the herd visits as golden standard. The final model explained 27% of the variance in the observed claw health score. The model correctly classified claw health for 72% of the validation herds with a sensitivity of 77% (95% CI 46-95%) and specificity of 76% (95% CI 57-90%). The study showed that routinely collected data can be used to classify herds for claw health, but was not sensitive enough to achieve multilevel classification.
**Use of indicators of dairy cow welfare in the EU**

Terence Cassidy and Patrick Caruana

European Commission, Directorate-General for Health & Food Safety (Unit F2 Animals), Ireland;

patrick.caruana@ec.europa.eu

Dairy farming is widespread in the EU with milk the number one single product sector; in value 15% of agricultural output. EU animal welfare legislation provides general requirements for dairy cows and Member State implement this by checking the resources provided to dairy cows and whether these are sufficient to prevent animal suffering. Although not defined in legislation animal based indicators are now frequently used in farm assessments. At national level there is little data on how farms perform based on indicators and there is no overview of dairy cow welfare. Somatic cell count is the only indicator widely used as it is a mandatory requirement. Its use has brought about huge improvements in milk quality in the last decades and dairy cow welfare has also benefited from low levels of mastitis. Other milk parameters used by farmers to improve cow welfare include those for acidosis and ketosis, but have not been used as part of wider schemes. Lameness and body condition score are used during farm assessments but systems have not been set up to monitor farms on the basis of these indicators. Although several Member States have set intervention levels for official investigation, e.g. 20% lameness, they do not have an overview of lameness in dairy cows. Breeders' associations use ease of calving to improve cow survivability, reduce injury at calving and improve reproductive performance. Several Member States have promoted certain cow types for certain farm conditions. Data is not available on the uptake of either of these initiatives by farmers. Animal indicators are effective for identifying problems on farm; however they have not been utilised to establish benchmarks for farms. By using existing data more systematically, farmers can be clear on the standards they achieve and Government and industry can provide assurances that animal welfare is respected. In order to achieve this, indicators need to be further standardised, with data defined for collection and analysis and intervention levels established.
Pre-weaning environment affects adult pigs' emotional state

Oceane Schmitt¹,², Keelin O'Driscoll², Laura Boyle² and Emma M. Baxter¹

¹SRUC, Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Animal and Veterinary Science Research Group, United Kingdom, ²Teagasc, Pig Development Department, Ireland; oceane.schmitt@teagasc.ie

Artificial rearing (i.e. rearing piglets away from the sow) is used when large litters (>14 piglets) are prevalent. Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) was used by observers of different backgrounds to assess the effect of pre-weaning environment on adult pigs' emotional state. Pigs were sow-reared (SR) or artificially-reared (AR) with milk replacer from 7 days-old until weaning. At the finisher stage of production (134±5.9 days-old) one group of SR pigs (n=13) and one group of AR pigs (n=16) (mixed sex, from different litters) were videoed in the home pen for 20 min. Five 1-min clips were randomly selected from each video (n=10) and watched by observers blinded to treatment (n=22). They were experienced or inexperienced with pigs (EP; EP+: n=14, EP-: n=8) and with behavioural observations (EO, EO+: n=14, EO-: n=8). Clips were scored by placing a vertical mark on a 125-mm visual analogue scale for 20 QBA descriptors. QBA score was calculated using all descriptors' scores. Wilcoxon-rank test analysed differences due to treatment, pig and behaviour experiences. Kendall's coefficient of concordance (W) assessed inter-observers reliability. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) processed descriptors scores. SR QBA was higher than AR (39.13±3.04 vs 30.36±2.90, X²=4.08, P<0.05). Pigs were perceived along two axes: feelings (PC1, 42% variance explained) and physical activity (PC2, 18% variance explained). SR pigs experienced more positive feelings (e.g. happy, content, relaxed) and less negative feelings (e.g. tense, frustrated, aimless), but were less physically active (e.g. playful, agitated, active) than AR pigs. The inter-observer reliability was significant but weak (W=0.09, P<0.05). QBA score was similar between observers with different experience with behavioural observations (EO+: 36.28±2.61, EO-: 32.06±3.61, X²=0.65, P>0.05) or with pigs (EP+: 35.81±2.70, EP-: 32.88±3.40, X²=0.21, P>0.05). Pre-weaning environment affected the emotional state of adult pigs: SR pigs were perceived as being in a better emotional state than AR pigs.
**Impact of grazing on dairy cow welfare – first results of the Welfare Quality® protocol**

Kathrin Wagner, Jan Brinkmann, Solveig March, Peter Hinterstoißer, Sylvia Warnecke, Maximilian Schüler and Hans Marten Paulsen

Thuenen-Institute of Organic Farming, Germany; kathrin.wagner@thuenen.de

Studies targeting the impact of grazing on the animal welfare status overall are scarce in Germany. Previous studies aimed mostly at impacts on health parameters or selected diseases. The aim of the present study was to examine the effects of grazing on welfare of dairy cows in organic and conventional farms based on the Welfare Quality® protocol for dairy cattle. Therefore, we applied the Welfare Quality® protocol on 32 (14 zero grazing, ZG; 18 summer grazing, SG) dairy farms twice to assess the status of animal welfare during the winter and summer period. For the summer assessment we recorded some indicators of the protocol on pasture for the SG farms (e.g. lying comfort). For statistical analyses we used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The first results indicate a higher score in most welfare principles (mean ± SEM; good housing ZG: 53±4, SG: 70±3, P=0.001; good health ZG: 44±3, SG: 52±3, P=0.048; appropriate behaviour ZG: 32±2, SG: 67±3, P<0.001) during the summer months for dairy cows with summer grazing, except for the welfare principle 'good feeding' (ZG: 44±8, SG: 23±4, P=0.029). This worse rating for SG farms was predominantly related to insufficient supply of drinking water on pasture (usually too few drinking places) compared to ZG farms. Better scoring of SG farms in the other welfare principles might be explained by improvements of lying surfaces on pasture, thereby reducing injuries (integument alterations, lameness), and in space allowance which might be helpful to prevent agonistic behaviours. In contrast, the welfare situation between ZG farms and SG farms did not differ during winter (all principles, P>0.05). In conclusion, grazing offers a great potential to enhance welfare of dairy cows during the summer period, while the beneficial effects of grazing are not guaranteed when management does not satisfy the animals' needs.
An app assessing animal welfare through animal-based measures

Léa Michel¹, Cécile Guillon-Kroon¹, Tristan Doublet¹, Laure Bignon², Valérie Courboulay³, Nathalie Bareille⁴, Raphaël Guatteo⁴, Marie-Christine Salaün⁵ and Amélie Legrand⁶

¹Terrena Innovation, AEI, France, ²ITAVI, UMT BIRD, France, ³IFIP-Institut du porc, France, ⁴BIOEPAR / INRA / ONIRIS, France, ⁵INRA, UMR1348 PEGASE, France, ⁶CIWF, AgroCIWF, France; lmichel@terrena.fr

TIBENA (Terrena animal-based welfare measures for a New Agriculture) is an innovative tool supporting farmers in their animal welfare improvement process. This diagnostic tool, based on the 5 Freedoms, helps identify good practices and possible improvements, through 37 to 80 animal-based welfare indicators (depending on the species). The results are used to discuss many aspects of flock (or herd) management and welfare with the farmer: water and nutrition, comfort, health, stress level and animal behaviour. Construction of the tool began with an exhaustive consultation process: literature review (mainly Welfare Quality) and interviews with scientists and professionals. Then, the trial app was assessed in the field including 20 to 30 commercial farms per species and with an expert committee, until the tool was considered reliable and robust enough to be used on a large commercial scale. Reproducibility inter-observers was tested: the results' similarity correlation is 92.74% (3 observers and 2 farms) in pigs, and 98.1% (4 observers and 3 farms) in broilers. Reproducibility inter-farms is ensured: for each species, farms selected for testing were as different as possible regarding infrastructures and production methods. Technical feasibility was tested by different operators, and scientific validity was monitored until the end with bibliography and experts. By spending about one to three hours observing the animals, TIBENA gives an objective picture of the welfare state at the herd or flock level. Thanks to the clear and illustrated instructions, and the convenience of a smartphone app, anyone can use the tool and obtain a valid result. The app contains recommendations for welfare improvement. The app currently exists for pigs, broilers, rabbits and cattle, and is being developed for other farm species. During the period October 2015-December 2016, the TIBENA app was used on 54 Terrena farms to assess welfare and provide recommendations for improvement. The longer-term goal is to make the app available to the whole industry.
# Evaluation of an automated monitoring system to assess laying hens' use of the outdoor range

Stephanie Buijs, Christine Nicol, Francesca Booth, Gemma Richards and John Tarlton
University of Bristol, School of veterinary sciences, United Kingdom; stephanie.buijs@bristol.ac.uk

Automated monitoring allows collection of continuous sets of behavioural data on multiple animals simultaneously, which is nearly impossible by direct observation. We assessed the accuracy of a novel light-based monitoring system that records range use in laying hens. We compared the system's output to direct continuous focal observation of hen location. Fourteen hens from a commercial free-range flock (British Blacktails, 45 weeks old, total flock size 2,000) were equipped with a device that recorded light levels each minute. Aiming to equip hens that would differ in how much they used the range, 7 hens were caught outside and 7 inside the house. Data were collected 2-7 days after equipping. Hen location ('in' or 'out') was determined by comparing the hen's sensor to four ambient light sensors placed in the brightest areas of the shed (where sunlight came in through the popholes or ventilation slits). When the reading of a hen-mounted sensor exceeded that of all inside ambient sensors, the hen was considered to be outside at that moment. To avoid collecting data when inside and outside levels were too similar, two additional ambient light sensors were placed outside, and data were discarded when min(out) < 1.1×max(in). This resulted in daily data collection starting between 07.11 and 07.45 and ending between 16.20 and 16.35, corresponding with sunrise and sunset for that time of year (November). Additionally, 0-30 minutes/day when the sun shone directly through the popholes (around 08:00 or 14:30) had to be discarded. The system's accuracy was evaluated by direct observation of the equipped hens (206 minutes in total). Monitoring and observations were in agreement 92% of the time, i.e. the hen's position ('in' or 'out') as determined by the system was confirmed by our observations. The monitoring system indicated that hens originally caught outside spent a much greater percentage of the monitored time on the range (median (Q1-Q3): 42% (40-51)) than those caught inside (6% (3-17), P<0.001, Wilcoxon rank-sum test). We conclude that the system shows great promise as a tool to monitor range use.
Date of assessment affects the WelFur-assessment of mink in the winter- and growth
period

*Anna Feldberg Marsbøll*¹, *Britt Ingeborg Foseide Henriksen*¹, *Bente Krogh Hansen*² and *Steen Henrik Møller*¹

¹Aarhus University, Department of Animal Science, Denmark, ²Kopenhagen Fur, Kopenhagen
Counselling, Denmark; anna.marsboll@anis.au.dk

In the on-farm welfare assessment system WelFur-Mink, a range of animal- and resource-based
measurements are taken on a sample of mink in each production season and aggregated into
an overall assessment at farm level. Mink follow a strictly synchronised annual cycle. In order
to limit the variation in welfare with stage of life, each assessment period lasts only six to eight
weeks. However, the prevalence of welfare problems may still vary with date of assessment, as
previously shown in the nursing period. The aim of this study is to explore if there is a change
in the prevalence of welfare problems in the winter- and growth periods. Eight private Danish
mink farms were included. Each farm was assessed four times during the growth period in
2014 and three times during the winter period in 2015 according to the WelFur-Mink protocol.
The same set of cages was assessed repeatedly on each farm within each period. They consisted
of 120 cages with one mink per cage in the winter period and 90 cages with one to four mink
per cage in the growth period. Initial analysis using logistic binomial mixed models showed a
change with assessment date. In the winter period, the prevalence of ‘too thin mink’ (χ²=134,
df=1, P<0.001) decreased and the prevalence of ‘mink with fur chewing’ (χ²=24, df=1, P<0.001)
increased. In the growth period, the prevalence of ‘mink with injuries’ (χ²=8, df=1, P=0.004),
‘cages with diarrhoea’ (χ²=9, df=1, P=0.003), and ‘exploratory mink’ (χ²=15, df=1, P<0.001)
increased. Some changes with date of assessment are negative in regards to animal welfare,
e.g. the prevalence of ‘mink with fur chewing’, ‘mink with injuries’, and ‘cages with diarrhoea’
increased, while others are positive, e.g. the prevalence of ‘too thin mink’ decreased and the
prevalence of ‘exploratory mink’ increased. If these changes affect the aggregated welfare
assessment, this must be controlled in order to ensure that the WelFur assessment of mink is
independent of assessment date.
**US pork producer perceptions of issues affecting the management, performance, and well-being of pigs**

Sarah H. Ison, Ronald O. Bates, Juan P. Steibel, Catherine W. Ernst and Janice M. Siegford
Michigan State University, Animal Science, USA; shison@msu.edu

An online survey of US pork producers investigated their perception and use of behaviour in managing pigs. Questions included: 'when you conduct health checks, what signs are you looking for that tell you everything is well or not well' (wellness); 'what do you consider the top three most important issues affecting the management, performance, and well-being of breeding pigs' (sow issues); and 'market hogs' (hog issues). A qualitative analysis of text identified themes. All listed wellness terms and all three sow and hog issue were placed in a general then specific category. Chi-square tests of homogeneity compared frequencies between groups. In total, 277 respondents listed 949 wellness terms. Of these, 69% were clinical signs, most mentioned were coughing (27%), looking at the manure (23%), and lameness (17%). Behavioural signs were mentioned by 66%, including movement (21%), and the ability to get up (18%). Other general categories included looking at parts of the pig (21%), posture (11%), demeanor (17%), and surrounding environment (10%). Additionally, 18% mentioned affective states, including lethargic/listless (10%), comfortable (3%), playful (1.4%), and happy (1.4%). Respondents mentioning affective states tended to be female (P=0.06). Hog and sow issues were categorized as 'human-based', 'pig-based', or 'environment-based', and frequencies differed between sows and hogs (P<0.001). Pig-based issues were mentioned more for sows (57%) than hogs (45%), environment-based for hogs (29%) than sows (15%), and human-based were similar (sows: 28%, hogs: 26%). The highest specific issues for both were health (hogs: 17%, sows: 12%) and nutrition (hogs: 16%, sows: 15%). Environment-based air quality (6% hogs vs 1.5% of all mentions for sows) and space (hogs: 6%, sows: 0.7%) were mentioned more for hogs, and pig-based performance more for sows (hogs: 3%, sows: 11%). This information can be used to drive future outreach education, and research.
# NSAIDs do not mitigate piglet castration pain based on behavioural and activity monitoring

Abbie V. Viscardi, Brianne Mercer, Julia Whatley, Hailey Hoffman and Patricia V. Turner
University of Guelph, Pathobiology, Canada; aviscard@uoguelph.ca

Each year, millions of boar piglets in North America and the EU are surgically castrated to minimize boar taint and aggression. While this procedure is known to be painful, and legislation mandates that piglets be provided with appropriate analgesia to control post-procedural pain, many piglets are not given pain relief. This has a potentially significant impact on piglet welfare. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of meloxicam (0.4 and 1.0 mg/kg) and ketoprofen (6.0 mg/kg) in reducing pain in castrated piglets, using validated behavioural scoring techniques and a novel Piglet Grimace Scale (PGS). Fifteen litters of 5 day old piglets (n=80) were used and boar piglets within a litter were randomly assigned to one of eight possible treatments: 0.4 mg/kg meloxicam-castrated, 0.4 mg/kg meloxicam-uncastrated, 1.0 mg/kg meloxicam-castrated, 1.0 mg/kg meloxicam-uncastrated, 6.0 mg/kg ketoprofen-castrated, 6.0 mg/kg ketoprofen-uncastrated, saline-castrated, or sham-castrated (n=10 piglets/treatment group). Injections were given intramuscularly 20 mins prior to surgical castration. Piglets were video recorded for 1 h pre-procedure, immediately post-castration for 8 h and for another 1 h, 24 h post-procedure (10 h total). Twenty-one behaviours and postures were scored continuously for the first 15 mins of every hour by four observers blinded as to experimental time and piglet treatment using Observer software. Data was analysed using a mixed model ANOVA with repeated measures and a post-hoc Tukey test. Castrated piglets were significantly less active 3 and 4 h post-castration (P=0.0007 and P<0.0001, respectively) while uncastrated piglets had unvarying levels of activity throughout the observation period. Castrated piglets also displayed significantly more tail wagging and pain-related behaviours (e.g. spasms, rump rubbing, trembling, stiffness) than uncastrated piglets (P<0.0001). The use of meloxicam or ketoprofen was not associated with a reduction in pain behaviours or postures. Our findings indicate that the use of NSAIDs at recommended doses does not sufficiently alleviate castration-associated pain in neonatal pigs.
Benchmarking in a Swedish welfare assessment system for dairy cattle

Louise Winblad Von Walter¹, Karin Alvåsen² and Marie Mörk¹

¹Växa Sverige, Department of Animal health, Sweden, ²Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Clinical Sciences, Division of Veterinary Epidemiology, Sweden; louise.winbladvonwalter@vxa.se

'Ask the Cow' is an advisory animal welfare service performed by trained assessors. The service includes objective assessments of animal-based welfare measures. In a benchmarking system, the results from the assessments are compared with a reference group of randomly selected Swedish dairy herds. An action plan, in combination with the benchmarking system, guides the owner towards measures to improve animal welfare. The aim of the study was to estimate body condition, cleanliness and prevalence of lesions, lameness, long or asymmetric claws and abnormal rising behaviour. Ask the Cow assessments were performed on 1,750 cows, 1,676 heifers and 1,623 calves at fifty randomly selected Swedish farms. The prevalences of remarks were estimated at individual and herd level per animal category. Herd level estimates will be used to update the benchmarking system. The highest prevalence was found for lesions in cows followed by cows standing in cubicles, cows with asymmetric claws, lameness in cows, dirty cows and dirty heifers. In comparison to the current limits in the benchmarking system, statistically significantly differences were found. Prevalence of dirty and lean animals and animals with lesions have decreased in all age groups. Dirty cows have decreased from 24 to 10%, heifers from 28.8 to 9.7% and calves from 15.5 to 4.7%. Lean cows have decreased from 6.2 to 1.6%, heifers from 4.1 to 0.7% and calves from 7.1 to 3.8%. Lesions in cows have almost halved, from 30.5 to 17.3% and decreased in heifers from 3 to 1.6% and calves from 4.1 to 0.9%. Animals with high body condition scores have become more common, from 3.1 to 6.3% in cows and from 2 to 7.6% in heifers. In cows, lameness have increased from 8.9 to 12.9%. The development towards larger herds and loose-housed systems probably have an impact on the changes.
Does giving access to grass silage improve health of growing-fattening pigs in organic farms?

Mirjam Holinger¹, Barbara Früh², Peter Stoll³, Michael Kreuzer⁴ and Edna Hillmann¹

¹ETH Zurich, Institute of agricultural sciences, Ethology and Animal Welfare Unit, Zurich, Switzerland, ²Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL, Frick, Switzerland, ³Agroscope, Posieux, Switzerland, ⁴ETH Zurich, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Animal Nutrition, Zurich, Switzerland; mirjam.holinger@usys.ethz.ch

Despite the enriched environment and straw availability prescribed in organic pig fattening, health problems like tail and skin lesions as well as gastric ulcers may occur that are related to a lack of palatable roughages. We therefore investigated the effect of grass silage availability in addition to straw and concentrate feed on six commercial organic farms. On each farm, there were two groups offered grass silage (GS) and two control groups without silage (C). Tail and skin lesions, and tear staining, as a potential indicator of chronic stress, were scored individually four times during the fattening period. At slaughter, the status of the gastric mucosa of the *pars oesophacea* was assessed. We used generalized linear mixed effect models with pig in group in farm as nested random effect and likelihood-ratio tests for data analysis. From 1,394 observations on 368 animals we diagnosed tail lesions in 26 cases (on 25 animals), of which 11 originated from the first observation after regrouping and were thus not yet related to the treatment. From the remaining 15 cases of tail lesions, only one was found in a GS group and the other 14 in six C groups. Skin lesions did not differ between treatments (χ²(1)=1.58; P=0.21) but changed during the fattening period (χ²(1)=102.31; P<0.001) with the highest scores for scratches at the beginning. There was no treatment effect on tear staining (χ²(1)=0.09; P=0.77), but tear staining considerably increased during the fattening period (χ²(1)=110.20; P<0.001). Severe changes in the gastric mucosa and gastric ulcers were found in stomachs of pigs from three out of the six farms. On these farms C pigs had more severe changes than GS pigs (8.5 vs 2.7%; χ²(1)=4.0; P=0.04). Grass silage thus seems to potentially reduce tail lesions and gastric ulcers especially on farms with high incidence of such ulcers.
Validation of a scoring system for footpad dermatitis in broiler chickens

Sophia Heitmann¹, Jenny Stracke¹, Henning Petersen², Birgit Spindler¹ and Nicole Kemper¹

¹Institute for Animal Hygiene, Animal Welfare and Farm Animal Behaviour, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation, Germany, ²Clinic for Poultry, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation, Germany; sophia.heitmann@tiho-hannover.de

Measuring the severity of footpad dermatitis, as an important indicator of animal welfare in poultry industry, is an accepted tool monitoring the quality of animal husbandry. Different scoring schemes are used, most of them based on a visual evaluation. A standardization of the existing systems could be beneficial, not only to compare different studies, but to provide an objective tool in poultry welfare surveillance. In this study we present a validation of a visual scoring system, widely used in German production systems, adding information of histological parameters. Therefore, feet of broiler chicken (ROSS 308) were scored at the abattoir (4-point scale: 0; 1; 2a; 2b). Ten feet per score class (n=40) were sampled and analysed macroscopically and microscopically, measuring size and depth of the lesions and thickness of the different cutaneous layers. For a classification of these histological parameters, a cluster analysis was performed. Using the glimmix procedure in SAS, visual and histological classification were found to differ significantly (F=5.49; P<0.05). Furthermore, using the Kendall tau correlation coefficient, a positive correlation of the size of a lesion with the depth of the ulcer was found. In conclusion, in this study we showed that the size of the lesion might be a good indicator of the depth. Whereas histological findings coincided well with the less severe visual scores (0; 1), the differentiation between the severe scores (2a; 2b) seemed to be less valid. We therefore recommend keeping visual scoring systems as simple as possible, referring to the size of the lesions as indirect parameter for the depth.
Welfare assessment in beef cattle: a multidisciplinary approach

Martina Tarantola¹, Ilaria Biasato¹, Elena Biasibetti¹, Davide Biagini², Pierluigi Capra³,
Franco Guarda¹, Marta Leporati⁴, Barbara Miniscalco¹, Silvia Mioletti¹, Andrea Salaroglio¹,
Marco Vincenti⁴ and Maria Teresa Capucchio¹

¹University of Turin, Dip. Scienze Veterinarie, Italy, ²University of Turin, Dip. Scienze Agrarie, Forestali e Alimentari, Italy, ³I.Z.S. Piemonte, Liguria e Valle d'Aosta, Italy, ⁴Centro Reg. Antidoping e Tossicologia 'A. Bertinaria', Italy; martina.tarantola@unito.it

The purposes of this study were to evaluate beef cattle welfare with a multidisciplinary approach as housing conditions and management practice change and to investigate the correlations between the parameters used and their applicability. A total of 15 Piemontese bulls reared in a tied stall housing system (farm A), 15 Piemontese and 15 Blonde d'Aquitaine reared in pen for groups (farm B and C, respectively) and 15 Irish cross-breed reared in paddock (for the first 40 days) and pen for groups (for the next 6 months) were considered. The 'RIBECA' scoring system (a welfare protocol formulated by CRPA; Centro Ricerche Produzioni Animali) was used for the assessment of animal- (e.g. BCS, ocular/nasal discharge, avoidance distance) and resource-based (e.g. pen features, animal crowding) measures. Hair 20β-diidrocortisol, complete blood and serum profile and dROMs (Reactive Oxygen metabolites) were also analysed. Observations and blood samples were performed 2 times: 3 weeks after the arrival of the animals on the farm (T0) and after 5 months (T1). Data were analysed by One-way ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis test, Student's t and Wilcoxon tests. Animal-based score was not significantly different between the farms, while total welfare score (animal- and resource-based measures) was 'poor' for farm A, 'fair' for farms B and D and 'very good' for farm C. Farm D animals were the most fearful; blood findings suggest that this group showed the worst adaptation: WBC, neutrophils, N/L, albumin, CK, glucose, creatinine and LDH increased at T1; P<0.01. Farm C animals were well adapted: WBC, monocytes, eosinophils and basophils decreased at T1; P<0.01, 20β-diidrocortisol and dROMs were lower in this group; P<0.01. Farm A and B animals did not show significant differences. These results suggest that the parallel use of total welfare scores and laboratory stress indicators allows a better assessment of animal welfare.
**Brief sensorial restriction lamb-ewe and behaviour in young**

Patricia Mora-Medina<fnref n="1" />, Agustín Orihuela Trujillo<fnref n="2" />, Daniel Mota-Rojas³, Emilio Arch-Tirado⁴,
Patricia Roldan-Santiago⁵, Carlos Vázquez-Cruz<fnref n="1" />, Angélica M. Terrazas-García<fnref n="1" /> and
Marcelino Rosas-García<fnref n="1" />

In sheep it is common that brief periods of separation ewe-lamb are performed in farms,
reducing the sensorial exchange between ewe and lamb. Aim of this study was to determine
the behaviour of lambs of different ages during short periods of additive sensory isolation of
their ewes. Sixty ewe-lamb were randomly assigned to one of five treatments: lambs remained
with their mothers (C), sensory restriction from second to fourth treatment: auditory (A),
auditory and visual (A + V), auditory, visual and tactile (A+V+T), and auditory, visual, tactile
and olfactory restriction (A+V+T+O). In A and V treatments, devices were put over ears and
eyes of lambs, respectively in order to reduce the sensorial interaction. Only in A+V+T and
A+V+T+O lamb and ewes were physically separated by wall. Treatments were repeated in
the same animals at three different ages: at 3 (G3), 10 (G10) and 20 (G20) days of age, during
15 minutes. Behaviours were recorded (vocalizations, micturitions, defecations, sniffing of
objects, sniffing of conspecific, escape attempts, walking and lying down). No animal suffered
any injury or temporary or permanent damage due to research. Data were analysed using a
covariance analysis to determine differences for repeated measurements. It was found that
in A+V+T and A+V+T+O restrictions, lambs showed an increase in the average of number
of vocalizations (P<0.0001), exploration of conspecific (P<0.001), walking (P<0.0001) and
lying down (P≤0.02). In G3, offspring showed differences (P=0.006) in the mean of urination;
however G10 (P=0.05) and G20 lambs (P<0.0001) showed an increase in the average of escape
attempts. It is concluded that: (1) the behavioural signs evaluated increased, particularly when
limiting the physical contact and olfactory sense from the mother; and (2) the older lambs
showed more reactivity in the ‘fight or flight’ behaviours to the sensorial restriction.

<footnote n="1">¹Facultad de Estudios Superiores Cuautitlán, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico,</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos, Mexico, ³Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-</footnote>

<footnote>Xochimilco, Mexico, ⁴Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación, Mexico, ⁵Universidad del Valle de México, Mexico; mormed2001@yahoo.com.mx</footnote>
Simulating pigs to understand their feeding behaviour and to improve their welfare

Iris J.M.M. Boumans¹, Imke J.M. De Boer¹, Gert Jan Hofstede² and Eddie A.M. Bokkers¹

¹Wageningen University, Animal Production Systems group, the Netherlands, ²Wageningen University, Information Technology group, the Netherlands; iris.boumans@wur.nl

The causation of feeding behaviour is known to be a complex interaction among many internal (e.g. metabolism, pig characteristics) and external factors (e.g. feeding system, social interactions). This interaction, however, is not well understood. The aim of this study was to gain deeper understanding of mechanisms and essential factors underlying feeding behaviour of growing pigs under intensive housing conditions. We developed an agent-based model in which feeding and interaction behaviour of individually and group-housed pigs with a single feeder emerged over the day (per minute) and during the growth period (120 days). We tested the effect of internal factors (e.g. metabolism, circadian rhythms, behavioural strategies) and external factors (e.g. social dynamics and diet characteristics) on emerging feeding and interaction patterns, such as feed intake, meal frequency, feeding rate and displacement attempts. These patterns were validated by comparing them to those observed in empirical studies with conventionally housed growing pigs in various group sizes. Model results show that hormonal circadian rhythms of melatonin and cortisol interact with metabolism and explain feeding patterns of individually housed pigs over the day. An interaction between pig (e.g. maximum feeding rate) and diet characteristics (e.g. energy level) and group size affects competition between pigs and conflicts around the feeder. Competition level at a certain threshold caused a turning point in behavioural patterns, after which behavioural strategies of pigs (e.g. avoid and approach decisions) explained the direction of change, especially in meal-based (e.g. meal frequency and size) and interaction patterns (e.g. avoidance and displacements). Social facilitation had a limited effect on patterns in the model. The model helps to better understand mechanisms underlying feeding behaviour in growing pigs and can be used as a tool in further research to understand how housing and management practices, pig characteristics and group dynamics can affect pig behaviour and welfare over time.
# Effects of holding time before milking on behaviour of dairy cows and milk hygiene quality

Fredy García, Diana Flórez, Aldemar Zúñiga and Jaime Cubides

Corpoica, Cundinamarca, Colombia; fgarciac@corpoica.org.co

Cows that wait longer to be milked have fewer opportunities to express their natural behaviour and could experience more stress; these factors might be associated with increased somatic cell counts (SCC) and bacteria counts (BC) in milk. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of holding time (HT) on the behaviour of cows during milking, SCC, and BC in milk. One hundred cows were enrolled from 10 pasture-based dairy farms in the plains of Bogota, Colombia, balanced by milking type (5 farms fixed-parlour, n=50 cows; 5 farms mobile-parlour, n=50 cows). Farms were visited 3 times (1 morning- and 2 afternoon-milking) between April and September 2014. Cows were recorded during milking process to determine HT and frequency of restless behaviours (i.e. step, lift, kick). Videos were analysed using the software Cowlog 2.0. Individual milk samples were taken to determine SCC, mesophilic, *Escherichia coli*, and total coliform counts. HT was dichotomized: HT1 (≤35 min) and HT2 (>35 min). Data were analysed using factorial ANCOVA in SPSS 20. HT (mean ± SD) was significantly (P<0.05) shorter for cows milked in fixed-parlour (28±25.4 min) compared to mobile (42±28 min); and HT was significantly longer during afternoon-milking (44±33 min) compared to morning-milking (30±23 min). SCC and *E. coli* counts were significantly lower in the HT1 group (SCC: 552.028±88.985 cells/ml; *E. coli*: 4.9±38.5 cfu/ml) compared to HT2 group (SCC: 625.447±105.443 cells/ml; *E. coli*: 11.2±82.8 cfu/ml) in mobile-parlour. The frequency of stepping was in the HT1 group (0.4±0.5 steps/min) compared to cows in the HT2 group (0.3±0.4 steps/min) (P>0.05). This study suggests that having short holding times (≤35 min) when mobile-parlour is using could help improve milk quality.
A shared and practical method for welfare assessment in poultry and rabbit: EBENE

Laure Bignon¹, Amandine Mika¹, Claire Mindus¹, Joanna Litt¹, Christophe Souchet¹, Virginie Bonnaud¹, Chloé Picchiottino¹, Laura Warin¹, Gaelle Dennery¹,², Coline Brame³, Vanessa Guesdon⁴ and Isabelle Bouvarel¹

¹ITAVI, 37380 Nouzilly, France, ²Chambre régionale des Pays de la Loire, 49105 Angers, France, ³Chambre d'agriculture de Bretagne, 22195 Plerin, France, ⁴ISA Lille, 59046 Lille, France; warin@itavi.asso.fr

Farmers are concerned by the welfare of their animals. Recent regulatory and international welfare texts have increasingly focused on outcomes and stakeholder empowerment (animal welfare training, good practice guidelines, etc.). To help the poultry and rabbit sectors achieve this, the EBENE (Evaluation du BiEN-Etre animal) project is developing a practical and shared method for assessing welfare. The first step was to agree on a methodological framework with a group of professionals. The second involved proposing indicators and measurement methods specific to each sector within five working groups: meat sector (chickens, turkeys, ducks, guinea fowl, and quails), laying hens, ducks for foie gras, breeder flock and rabbits. A third stage aimed at taking into account the views of other stakeholders. From the beginning of the process, NGOs (CIWF, Welfarm) and relevant scientists (INRA, ANSES, ISA Lille, Oniris) were consulted to develop welfare assessment methods for chickens / turkeys and laying hens in cages. Meetings between representatives from the poultry and rabbit industries and other civil society stakeholders (NGOs, scientists, competent authorities, distribution) led to consensus on the method to be used. This method integrates all the components of welfare and is based on the principles and criterion grid established in the Welfare Quality® project. It represents a tool for improvement that farmers, technicians and / or veterinarians can use. Currently, indicators and associated measures are available for broilers, turkeys, rabbits and laying hens, but there is still need to validate or simplify some of them. Subsequently, the method will be adapted to free-range systems and to other species. Throughout 2017, it will be improved through scientific validation, and feedback from users and the various stakeholders. Work will then continue to compile the results, and to develop a smartphone application to facilitate use.
**Development and pilot study of a welfare assessment protocol for dairy calves**

John Barry¹, Emer Kennedy¹, Riona Sayers¹, Imke De Boer² and Eddie Bokkers²

¹Teagasc Moorepark, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Ireland, ²Wageningen University, Animal Production Systems Group, the Netherlands; John.Barry@teagasc.ie

As agricultural systems continue to develop and become more refined, so too must protocols used to assess the welfare of animals experiencing them. The aim of this research was to develop a welfare assessment protocol for pre-weaned dairy calves (<12 weeks old), and investigate, and improve, its reliability and feasibility through an on-farm pilot study. Using existing protocols, literature and expert consultation, animal based indicators were selected to assess welfare of dairy calves. Measurements include behavioural observations from 60 minute video recordings, health scoring, heart girths, and blood and faecal sample analyses. To successfully estimate welfare at farm level a representative sample of calves must be taken (i.e. male and female, from different age groups). To be able to identify risk factors and improvement options for calf welfare, management practises (e.g. colostrum management, post-colostrum feeding, weaning, hygiene, and health), are assessed by interviewing the farmer, and husbandry conditions are assessed using measurements such as temperature, wind-speed, space allowance, bedding quality, availability of fresh drinking water, concentrates, and forage, air ammonia concentration, and feeding equipment hygiene. Subsequent to protocol development, a pilot study was carried out on five commercial Irish dairy farms to evaluate its reliability and feasibility. Strengths and weaknesses of the protocol were identified during the pilot and modifications made accordingly. Further questions were included and a number of existing questions restructured to enhance clarity. Additional measurements, such as bedding depth and total air capacity, were included to provide more environmental information. Through the combined use of animal, management and environmental information, we are confident in having developed and piloted a reliable and feasible on-farm dairy calf welfare protocol. This protocol can be used for large scale on-farm dairy calf welfare assessments.
# Health and welfare status of pregnant dairy goats according to the farming system in France

Jenna Coton¹, Elodie Dubois², Christophe Aubert³, Christophe Mallet², Eric Delval², Alain Boissy², Jaquemine Vialard³ and Virginie Michel³

¹ANSES, Laboratoire de Ploufragan-Plouzané, France, ²INRA, Centre Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, France, ³ANSES, Laboratoire de Niort, France; jenna.coton@anses.fr

Chronic stress in farm animals during pregnancy alters health and welfare both in females and their offspring but few data exist from field studies. An epidemiological survey has been performed in dairy goat farms to investigate the effects of the farming systems on the welfare and health of adult females and their offspring. We here report data collected during the dry (non-milking) period of goats in 62 French farms selected to embrace the diversity of existing production systems: 26 big farms (>400 goats) without grazing area (system 1); 18 smaller farms (<400 goats) without grazing area (system 2); and 18 farms with grazing areas (<400 goats, system 3). For each farm, welfare and health have been assessed, applying the AWIN* protocol on a representative sample of animals. Regarding welfare, the human/animal relationship indicator (latency for first contact during the avoidance distance test) did not show difference between farming systems, what may be due to the high variability of the results between farms (min = 0 vs >180 s). Regarding health indicators: (1) for body condition, there were less thin goats in system 1 (4%) than in systems 2 (10%) and 3 (16%) (P=0.0001) and more fat goats in system 2 (21%) than in system 3 (7%) (P=0.008), (2) pregnant goats reared in system 2 had more claws in poor condition (62%) than the ones reared in system 3 (36%) (P=0.0578) and (3) there were less abscesses in system 3 (10%) than in systems 1 (21%) and 2 (21%) (P=0.0188). The first analysis of available data shows that health seems to be less optimal in the smaller (<400 goats) farms without grazing area, whereas no significant difference could be found for the welfare indicators up to now. These preliminary results will be completed in the poster by further analyses allowing to have a more comprehensive picture of the goats and kids health and welfare in dairy farms, and to assess the influence of housing and management characteristics on those.
A method to develop an effective animal welfare protocol: laboratory mice

Ivone Campos-Luna¹, Amy Miller¹, Andrew Beard¹, Francoise Wemelsfelder² and Matthew Leach¹

¹Newcastle University, School of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Development, United Kingdom,
²Scotland's Rural College, Animal and Veterinary Sciences Group, United Kingdom;
i.campos-luna@newcastle.ac.uk

In animal welfare, effective protocols are designed to assess all components of welfare including physical and psychological states as well as the environment that houses the animal. The aim of this study was to create a laboratory mouse welfare protocol that includes all aspects of welfare. The construction of this protocol comprised 3 phases: (1) input of experts through a Delphi consultation, (2) validation of Qualitative Behavioural Assessment (QBA) for assessing the behavioural expressions (emotional states). This validation forms part of a project exploring the utility of the QBA in laboratory animals for the first time. It used free choice profiling, fixed expression validation approach and cross-validation with other welfare measures. Finally, in phase (3) the indicators derived from the Delphi consultation and QBA were aggregated into a single protocol and its reliability and practicability were assessed in different laboratory facilities. A total of 98 participants completed the final round in the Delphi study with a consensus of 72% being reached. Hunch posture, coat condition, exhibition of normal and abnormal behaviour and usage of nesting material were chosen, irrespective of the nature of the assessment being carried out (daily assessment or welfare audit). The Free Choice Profiling data for the QBA was analysed with General Procrustes Analysis (GPA). The results show a significant agreement between participants in their assessment (P<0.001). The GPA found two main dimensions that accounted for 78% of the variation observed. Dimension 1 was characterised as ‘inquisitive’/‘alert’ vs ‘in pain’/‘lethargic’ and dimension 2 as ‘calm’/‘content’ vs ‘agitated’/‘stressed’. The 3-phase process used to construct the final protocol better guarantees the validity of the indicators it contains, as it encompasses all aspects of mouse laboratory welfare including a novel method of assessing psychological welfare (QBA).
**On-farm self-monitoring of animal welfare in poultry flocks**

Sarina Fetscher¹, Robby Andersson², Christiane Keppler¹, Sabine Petermann³, Elke Rauch⁴, Birgit Spindler⁵, Rita Zapf⁶ and Ute Knierim¹

¹University of Kassel, Germany, ²University of Applied Sciences Osnabrueck, Germany, ³Lower Saxony State Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety, Germany, ⁴Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Germany, ⁵University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation, Germany, ⁶Association for Technology and Structures in Agriculture (KTBL), Germany; fetscher@uni-kassel.de

German animal welfare legislation requires since 2014 all livestock owners to perform on-farm self-assessments of animal welfare, mainly with animal based indicators. While this novel approach may contribute to improved welfare, both extent and methods of the welfare assessment are under debate, as training and available time of farmers are limited. Based on group discussions with 14 experts (scientists, farm advisors, farmers, and representatives from administration and organisations), a proposal on the selection of relevant welfare indicators and easily applicable methods for laying hens and pullets, broilers and turkeys is presented. Indicator choice was based on the most important animal welfare concerns, depending on species and production type: feather pecking, cannibalism, injuries, dermatitis at feet, hocks or breast, lameness, high morbidity, keel bone damage, insufficient water availability, poor body condition, high mortality, mutilations as well as pain or injury due to catching and transport. Taking into account literature information on validity, reliability and feasibility of corresponding indicators and practical experience, assessment methods were chosen, described and illustrated in a farmers' booklet. Three categories of measures were included: (1) summary assessments of routinely and regularly recorded data such as animal losses, water consumption, use of pharmaceuticals, laying performance and egg quality; (2) slaughter records regarding dead birds on arrival, condemnation causes, foot pad, breast or skin dermatitis; and (3) measures for which a sample of birds needs to be scored at certain intervals, e.g. on lameness, extent of beak trimming, weight uniformity, plumage condition, skin wounds, dermatitis or keel bone damage. The assessment protocols are the basis for ongoing work on the feasibility and efficiency of animal welfare self-assessments on-farm.
Dairy cattle welfare assessment in Israel

Gilad Faktor

Hachaklait Veterinary services Israel, Israel; faktor@hachaklait.co.il

The objective of this presentation is to introduce a new audit for assessing dairy cattle welfare in Israel. The audit was created on the basis of the European Welfare Quality assessment protocol for cattle, the Bristol Welfare Assurance Programme (BWAP) and the American Dairy welfare evaluation guide. As these protocols are not totally suitable for Israeli Dairy farms, we created an Israeli tailored audit. Promoting animal welfare is one of echief duties of veterinarians. ‘Hachaklait’, a group practice of 46 bovine practitioners in Israel attends approximately 90% of dairy farms in Israel (some 100,000 milking cows). Therefore we developed an advisory welfare audit for our clients. The special conditions in our dairy farms and our hot and humid climate require unique welfare issues to be examined. For example, lameness is a minor issue in Israel (around 6% annual occurrence) as our farms are comprised of open pens with soft matter and cows spend little time on concrete floors (compared to high rates of lameness in stall systems due to excessive walking and standing on concrete floors). On the other hand, cooling the cows on farm (water sprinklers and ventilation) is a big welfare issue. Our audit is based on our heard health department data (resource based) and on animal based data from farm visit. As most of our farms are highly computerized we have a large data base on many topics (morbidity, mortality, fertility milk yield, body condition score, lameness and more). On the basis of this data we are able to pinpoint potential welfare issues prior to farm visit. The audit is comprised of five topics: husbandry and living conditions, animal health, painful procedures, human-animal relationship (including animal behaviour) and summary. Each topic is evaluated numerically, for example, when evaluating ventilation we will give the following scores: no ventilation=2, partial ventilation=1, full ventilation=0. When summarising, a total score is presented for both resource and animal based data. As we have only started using this audit, we only have preliminary results. After auditing a large number of farms we will create welfare benchmarks. These benchmarks will be presented to our clients as welfare issues that don’t meet the standard and require improvement.
**Validation of the EBENE method's measures for laying hens housed in cages**

Claire Mindus¹, Laure Bignon¹, Amandine Mika¹, Virginie Bonnaud¹, Cécile Levrault², Vanessa Guesdon² and Isabelle Bouvarel¹

¹ITAVI, 37380 NOUZILLY, France, ²ISA Lille, 59046 LILLE, France; vanessa.guesdon@yncrea.fr

The objective of the welfare project EBENE (Evaluation du BiEN-Etre animal) is to provide the French poultry and rabbit industries with a shared and practical method to assess animal welfare. This study aimed to validate the practicability (simple and fast – less than 1 h) and the scientific reliability of the indicators and their measures for the cage laying hen production system. The study involved nine laying hen cage farms. Two assessors first carried out the measures on the same population sample together and then repeated the assessment less than 3 days later. After collecting general information about the flock, observations were conducted on 12 cages per flock. First, behavioural measures at a cage scale were collected (e.g. proportion of foraging or dustbathing hens). Then, sanitary measures at an individual scale (five to eight animals per cage) were conducted (e.g. the proportion of hens with a featherless area). The total duration of the assessment was calculated and correlation tests were run to evaluate the repeatability of the measured indicators in order to validate the reliability of the method. The practicability of the method was not entirely validated because the time required was too long (54±10 min for behavioural data and 26±8 min for sanitary data). Inter- and intra-assessor repeatability were validated for 14 and 15 of the 19 indicators respectively. Correlations between indicators (e.g. aggression and severe feather pecking) or modifying observation technics could enable the measures to be simplified and shortened. Work will continue to compile results. Following validation, a smartphone application will be developed to facilitate use of the methods.
**Validation of the EBENE method's measures for standard broiler**

Amandine Mika¹, Laure Bignon¹, Virginie Bonnaud¹, Claire Mindus¹, Chloé Picchiottino¹, Christophe Souchet¹, Laura Warin¹, Vanessa Guesdon² and Isabelle Bouvarel¹

¹ITAVI, 37380 Nouzilly, France, ²ISA Lille, 59046 Lille, France; warin@itavi.asso.fr

The objective of the welfare project EBENE (Evaluation du BiEN-Etre animal) is to provide the French poultry and rabbit industries with a shared and practical method to assess animal welfare. This study aimed to validate the practicability (simple and fast – under 1 h) and the scientific reliability of the indicators and their measures for the indoor broiler production system. Two assessors carried out the measures on seven broiler farms, initially together on the same population sample and then a second time the following day. After collecting general information about the flock, behavioural measures (e.g. proportion of walking or foraging birds) were conducted on two areas of the building (4 m²/area). Then sanitary measures (e.g. proportion of lame or small birds) were assessed on three transects, allowing observation of 3/5 of the birds as birds are assumed to be homogeneously distributed in the building along five predefined transects. The total duration of the assessment was calculated and correlation tests were run to evaluate the repeatability of the measured indicators in order to validate the reliability of the method. A lower total duration than required in the objectives (26±5 min for the collection of behavioural data and 24±5 min for the collection of sanitary data) confirmed the practicability of the method. Intra assessor repeatability was validated except for the ‘head injuries’ indicator, rarely observed in our sample. Inter assessor repeatability was validated except for ‘head injuries’ and ‘stretching’ indicators. Calculated correlations between the indicators observed in farms and data collected at slaughterhouse is a first step to confirm the accuracy of our indicators. Work will continue to compile results. Following validation, a smartphone application will be developed to facilitate use of the methods.
Housing lame dairy cows in hospital pens – do they benefit from the stay?

Katrine K. Fogsgaard¹, Peter T. Thomsen¹, Margit B. Jensen¹, Peter Raundal² and Mette S. Herskin¹

¹Aarhus University, Department of Animal Science, Denmark, ²Seges Cattle, Denmark;
katrine.kopfogsgaard@anis.au.dk

For animal welfare reasons, Danish legislation states that dairy farmers must, if necessary, house lame cows in hospital pens with a soft and dry flooring and increased surveillance. Lameness can lead to behavioural changes, indicative of altered motivations and potentially other needs than in healthy herd mates. However, there is a lack of scientific knowledge on the gain from housing lame cows in hospital pens: does such a stay benefit the animal welfare, the productivity or other? In this ongoing project, we seek to examine whether lame cows benefit from a stay in a hospital pen in terms of: (1) speed of recovery and risk of relapse; (2) medicine use and veterinary treatments in the time period following lameness; (3) milk production and reproduction; and (4) behavioural measures of animal welfare. Data are recorded in commercial Danish dairy herds during a 1½-year period, and are currently ongoing. During this period, lactating cows are lameness scored and included in the study on a weekly basis. Based on a paired study design, half of the obviously lame cows (lameness score of 4, on a 1 (non-lame) – 5 (severe) point scale) are housed in hospital pens complying Danish legislation (lower competition, deep bedding) for a maximum of 4 weeks (or until lameness score 2). The other half of the lame cows are kept with the healthy herd mates in the group of lactating cows. An ethical permit was obtained to allow housing of lame cows together with the healthy herd mates. All cows, irrespective of experimental treatment, receive hoof treatment according to farm practices. For all cows in the study, weekly lameness scoring is performed for 4 weeks after study inclusion. Behavioural measures of activity, including lying time and lying bouts are obtained by use of data loggers during the first week after inclusion of each cow into the study. For the remaining part of the current lactation, information about milk yield, reproduction, veterinary treatment and culling is gathered.
Examining the reliability of a horse hoof condition score

Sarah Catherine Kuyken and Lauren Margaret Hemsworth
The University of Melbourne, Animal Welfare Science Centre, Australia;
skuyken@student.unimelb.edu.au

Whilst it is widely recognised that inadequate hoof condition is a major welfare concern in domestic horses, no universal hoof assessment scale exists. The Horse Welfare Assessment Tool (HWAT) was developed to enable horse owners to measure and benchmark their horses' welfare over time, in order to improve their horse management knowledge and awareness of their horses' welfare state. The HWAT consists of a range of animal-based measures including a Hoof Condition Score (HCS) developed during this study. The HCS measures a range of hoof factors including hoof balance, wall length and the presence of cracks or distortions. In order to ensure that the HCS is a valid measure of hoof condition when applied by owners, the inter- and intra-observer reliability of the indice was examined in the field using a test-retest assessment. Participants were recruited via Riding Clubs and data was collected during two on-site visits with horse owners and their horses. The HCS assessments were performed by both the horse owner and the researcher at each visit in a blind manner. Data were analysed using Spearmans' rho (ρ) and Kappa statistics (κ). The results suggest that HCS did not have acceptable levels of inter- and intra-observer reliability (ρ<0.50 and κ<0.60) for most elements. Poor inter- and intra-observer reliability were found in elements that were novel to owners such as medio-lateral heel balance (e.g. visit 1 inter-observer ρ=-0.043 and κ=0.234 on near fore). More acceptable levels of reliability were found in elements already familiar to owners, such as varus or valgus limb confirmation (e.g. visit 1 inter-observer ρ=0.443 κ=0.426 on near fore). These results suggest horse owners have difficulty evaluating the condition of their horses' feet using the HCS, however the effectiveness of the HCS may improve with increased exposure or improved instructions.
# Heart rate measures in goats affected by small ruminant lentivirus (SRLV): a pilot study

Alekandra Górecka-Bruzda¹, Katarzyna Barłowska¹, Michał Czopowicz², Danuta Słoniewska¹ and Emilia Bagnicka¹

¹Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding PAS, Poland, ²Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Poland; a.gorecka@ighz.pl

Small ruminants lentivirus (SRLV) provokes caprine arthritis-encephalitis (CAE) which manifests with joint and udder soreness and, at final stages, emaciation and death. However, the illness can develop sub-clinically for several years, provoking no obvious symptoms. It is not known if affected goats without clinical symptoms of CAE do not experience pain when milked. Twenty dairy goats (10 infection-free, 10 SRLV-positive), without clinical symptoms of CAE, were subjected to daily milking. Heart rate (HR) was measured with HR monitor (Polar 810i, Finland) 10 minutes before (Phase 1), during (Phase 2) and after (Phase 3) morning and evening milking. HR files were corrected with moderate error correction filter in Polar Pro-trainer software. Only files containing less than 10% of errors were retained for the analysis, due to higher than recommended number of artefacts, HRV analysis was omitted. Mean HR and HRmax were submitted to multi-factorial ANOVA with random animal effect. The models included goat's health status (healthy vs infected), time of day (morning vs evening), phase (Phases 1 – 3) and their interactions as fixed effects. HR measures did not differ between healthy and infected goats (P>0.05 for both HR and HRmax). Milking increased the HR (Phase 1, LSM=114.2±2.88 bpm vs Phase 2, LSM=124.3±2.88 bpm; P=0.01 and Phase 2 vs Phase 3, LSM=117.7±2.88 bpm; P<0.01) and HRmax (Phase 1, LSM=134.5±3.85 bpm vs Phase 2, LSM=153.8±3.85 bpm; P<0.01 and Phase 2 vs Phase 3, LSM=139.2±3.85 bpm; P<0.01). Also, during evening milking both cardiac measures were higher than during morning milking (HR, morning, LSM=111.7±2.69 vs evening, LSM=125.8±3.04, P<0.01; HRmax, morning, LSM=138.6±3.48 vs evening, LSM=146.4±4.08, P=0.04) which can be explained by greater relaxation of goats in morning hours. Although health status was not detectable, other effects (e.g. husbandry procedures), resulting in emotional or locomotor responses could be monitored by HR measurement for welfare assessment in goats. All procedures were accepted by the Commission for Ethics in Animal Experimentation.
## Evaluating ‘Animal Welfare Payments’ of the EUs Common Agricultural Policy

Angela Bergschmidt¹, Jan Brinkmann², Christine Renziehausen¹ and Solveig March²

¹Thünen-Institute of Farm Economics, Germany, ²Thünen-Institute of Organic Farming, Germany;
*angela.bergschmidt@thuenen.de*

In the EUs Common Agricultural Policy, one measure is specifically targeted at supporting farm animal welfare: the ‘Animal Welfare Payments’. Farms participating in this voluntary measure commit themselves to requirements such as access to pasture or the provision of straw bedding. We evaluated if the measure achieves its goal of supporting farms with a ‘good’ animal welfare status. To this aim we implemented the Welfare Quality® protocols, a resource-oriented assessment tool and a set of 10 health indicators. The data collection was carried out in 2013/2014 on a sample of 112 dairy farms participating in the support measure in Germany. The data were primarily analysed using descriptive statistics. To identify relationships between particular indicators and indicator systems, correlation coefficients (Spearman) were calculated. Differences between farming systems and sub-measures were analysed by means of non-parametric tests. The Welfare Quality® assessment showed a good situation with respect to the principles of ‘good housing’ (Ø 66.7 | 37.0-100) and ‘appropriate behaviour’ (Ø 57.7 | 17.0-90.8) and neutral values for ‘good feeding’ (Ø 49.0 | 4.2-100) and ‘good health’ (Ø 49.3 | 30.0-78.8). The resource-oriented assessment confirms problems with access to water and points out other critical aspects such as poor conditions for calving and resting. The health indicator analysis showed relevant prevalence of lameness (Ø 15% | 0-69) and mastitis (Ø 15% | 3-31 >400 SCC). While the methods used for evaluation might not be able to detect subtle but significant improvements, results indicate that there are still significant animal welfare problems on the subsidised farms. To improve the effectiveness of the policy measure, modifications should be introduced: The resource-oriented requirements can be adapted to provide for a better access to water, adequate cubicles and calving pens. Additionally, result oriented elements need to be implemented to address issues of animal health.
**Mountain summer pasturing improves behavioural measures of welfare of dairy cows**

Maruša Kraševec¹, Anna Zuliani², Marta Brščić³, Matthias Mair⁴, Christine Leeb⁴, Christoph Winckler⁴ and Manja Zupan¹

¹University of Ljubljana, Department of Animal Science, Slovenia, ²University of Udine, Department of Food, Agricultural, Environmental and Animal Sciences, Italy, ³ University of Padova, Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health, Italy, ⁴University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Austria; manja.zupan@bf.uni-lj.si

With the aim to assess the effect of mountain summer pasture (MSP) on dairy cows' welfare we compared a set of behavioural measures in the valley farms 2-4 weeks before and 2-6 weeks after MSP. For this purpose, a modified assessment protocol developed by EFSA for use in small-scale dairy farms including mainly animal-based measures of cow welfare was applied on 67 family farms. The inclusion criteria were location in the alpine region of Slovenia, Italy or Austria, dual purpose breeds and a minimum period of two months spent on MSP. Measures assessed were avoidance distance towards an approaching unknown person, cows lying outside the lying area, a rising movement score (the lower the score the easier the rising movement) and qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA). In the statistical analysis, assessment (before and after MSP) was used as fixed effect while farm within country was included as random effect when applicable. The avoidance distance and the percentage of cows lying outside the lying area were similar across the assessments (P=0.06), while cows had lower rising scores after MSP compared to before (1.84 vs 2.07; χ²=16.26, P=0.001). Dimension scores obtained from QBA showed that cows were assessed in a more positive valence after MSP (-0.21 vs 0.10; F-value=9.23; P=0.003) and a lower level of arousal was observed (-0.22 vs 0.04; F-value=4.87; P=0.029). Our results in small dairy farms imply that access to mountain summer pasturing can promote easier rising movements and that cows were assessed to be in a more positive emotional state, while – contrary to previous studies – it does not increase the level of fearfulness of the animals.
**Assessment of aggressive behaviour when mixing rabbit does after parturition –
preliminary results**

Laura Simarro, Amparo Martínez-Talaván, Mariam Pascual and Arantxa Villagrá
Centro de Tecnología Animal CITA-IVIA, Spain; villagra_ara@gva.es

Individual housing in wire cages, the predominant system for rabbit does, allows indirect
interactions but it prevents direct social contact between the does. A way of improving these
aspects is group or semi-group housing, but these systems may lead to aggressive behaviour,
mainly during the first days after grouping familiar or unfamiliar conspecifics in these systems.
Thus, the objective of this work was to study the aggressive behaviour of breeding does when first
contacting familiar or unfamiliar conspecifics in semi-group housing (consisting in 4 adjacent
individual cages connected, consequently mixing the does), at 14 days post-partum, in order
to take measures to diminish the problems caused by aggressiveness. A total of 24 nulliparous
does of fertile age were used in this experiment. Does were housed individually until day 14
after giving birth. Then, a collective cage was formed by removing one wall of four adjacent
cages, and the rabbits' aggressive behaviour was recorded for 30 minutes for later assessment.
Statistical analysis were performed throughout Statgraphics Centurion®. The preliminary
results showed that all the studied events had some kind of confrontational behaviour, being
the most frequent floor kicking (24.01%), attacking (22.05%), chasing (12.99%), and fighting
(11.22%). The average duration of a fight was of 8.04±7.75 s, with a latency to the first fight
of 191.63±166.45 s. In most cases, there were one (37.5% of encounters) or two dominant
does (62.5% of encounters) that initiated aggressive behaviour towards the others to establish
dominance (χ²=0.0032) and started between 35 and 94% of all the aggressive events observed.
Conclusively, the moment of remixing rabbit does has to be accurately studied and solutions
may have to be sought in order to avoid aggressiveness problems.
**Productive parameters in rabbit does housed individually and in semi-group systems: first results**

Laura Simarro, Amparo Martínez-Talaván, Mar Martínez and Arantxa Villagrà

Centro de Tecnología Animal CITA-IVIA, Spain; villagra_ara@gva.es

In order to assess and compare different commercial rearing conditions for rabbit does, it is essential to perform an objective evaluation of welfare conditions. Behavioural, physiological, pathological and productive indicators may be used to measure welfare conditions in rabbits. The main objective of this work was the search for a housing system in which rabbits' welfare is enhanced without an unacceptable economic impairment, in terms of production. To do this, two types of enriched cages (with a tunnel or with a hay dispenser), and a semi-group housing prototype were tested from a multifactorial point of view by using productivity measurements. The existing cage system served as a control. Seventy nulliparous does of fertile age were used for this experiment. Milk production was studied in first and second births through controlled nursing, and productive parameters (feed intake, body weight, and weight of the litter at birth and at weaning) were studied in first to fourth births. Feed consumption was significantly higher in collective cages in weeks 1 and 2, whereas there were no significant differences in weeks 3 and 4. This did not correlate with milk production, which was significantly lower in collective housing than control and tunnel housing, while no significant differences were found with the hay dispenser cages. On the other hand, doe weight and litter weight had no significant differences in all four groups, although litter weight was slightly higher in individual cages, regardless they were enriched or not. Thus, as feed intake was lower, litter weight remained the same, and although there were no significant differences in the Conversion Index (P=0.0889), it was lower in enriched individual cages than in semi-group cages (3.57 and 3.65 vs 3.98), it can be concluded that productive results in individual cages seem to be better than in semi-group.
## Seasonal effects on animal welfare assessment in dairy cattle

Daniel Gieseke¹, Lisa Dierkes¹, Susanna Montag¹, Christian Lambertz² and Matthias Gauly²

¹Georg-August-University of Göttingen, Department of Animal Science, Germany, ²Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Faculty of Science and Technology, Italy; dgiesek1@gwdg.de

In Europe, dairy cows are commonly kept in loose-housing systems under outdoor climatic conditions. Seasonal variations of the climate thus directly affect performance, behaviour, health and consequently welfare of the animals. Still, it is unknown whether results of welfare assessments are influenced by the time of the year they are conducted. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess 20 dairy cattle farms in four different seasons using the Welfare Quality protocol (WQP). Additionally, barns climate was recorded continuously by data loggers. The daily average temperature-humidity-index was calculated following the formula of National Research Council [winter: 50±5; spring: 51±7; summer: 70±5; autumn: 55±4]. A linear mixed model and pairwise Pearson chi-squared tests were performed to estimate differences between the four seasons. In terms of animal-based indicators, the prevalence of mild lameness was higher in spring (32%) and summer (35%) compared with winter (25%) [P<0.05], whereas diarrhoea was determined more often in winter (21%), summer (22%) and autumn (19%) than in spring (12%) [P<0.05]. Mild integument alterations were rated lower in winter (39%) and spring (36%) than in autumn (47%) [P<0.05]. Mastitis was found less often in winter (21%) and spring (26%) than in autumn (47%) [P<0.05]. The emotional state – evaluated with the qualitative behaviour assessment approach – was scored (range 0 to 100 pts) lower in summer (65 pts) compared with winter (79 pts) and spring (74 pts) [P<0.05]. In contrast, the percentage of lean cows was higher in winter (7%) than in summer (5%) and autumn (3%) [P<0.05]. For the remaining welfare indicators (e.g. nasal discharge, coughing, agonistic behaviour) no seasonal effects were observed [P>0.05]. The WQP overall classification ('enhanced' 44%; 'acceptable' 56%) also did not differ between seasons [P>0.05]. In conclusion, the results demonstrate the independence of the WQP overall classification results from seasonal effects, while single indicators are related. Consequently, the time of year welfare is assessed should be considered whenever studies are compared for single indicators.
**Ad libitum feeding of lactating mink or access to additional water for kits did not improve welfare**

Britt I.F. Henriksen and Steen H. Møller

Aarhus University, Department of Animal Science, Denmark; britt.henriksen@anis.au.dk

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of (1) *ad libitum* feeding of female mink from the first day of lactation and (2) additional water nipples for mink kits at the nest box opening, on two animal based welfare indicators and potential changes in the WelFur score at farm level. The indicators were measured according to the WelFur-Mink protocol. We hypothesized that (1) *ad libitum* feeding from the first day of lactation will reduce the prevalence of very thin females by the end of lactation, and that (2) an additional water nipple for mink kits positioned at the nest box opening will decrease the prevalence of kits with injuries by the end of the nursing period. Tree private farms with 1,387 dams with kits were included in the study. Of these 917 (316, 307, 294: farm 1, 2 and 3) dams were fed *ad libitum*, and 698 cages with 4,175 kits (1,437, 1,344, 1,394: farm 1, 2 and 3) had access to additional water. ‘Injuries’ and ‘Lean animals’ were measured around seven weeks of lactation. The prevalence of cages with injuries and lean animals were analysed with logistic binomial models, taking farm, kits at seven weeks and dams’ age into account. No significant effects of *ad libitum* feeding of lactating females on the prevalence of lean animals, or on additional water nipples for mink kits on the prevalence of injuries were found when looking at all the farms. Cages without *ad libitum* feeding had significantly lower prevalence of injuries (P<0.05). One farm had significantly lower prevalence of lean animals in cages with *ad libitum* feeding (P<0.001). Individual feed allowances per litter per day have been collected in order to analyse the effects in more detail, including simulated WelFur scores at farm level.
**On-line benchmarking of welfare assessments on dairy farms to help producers to improve welfare**

Megan Jewell<fnref n="1" />, Marguerite Cameron<fnref n="1" />, Javier Sanchez<fnref n="1" />, Michael Cockram<fnref n="1" />, Greg Keefe<fnref n="1" />, Shawn McKenna<fnref n="1" /> and Jonathan Spears<fnref n="2" />

Hock lesions and lameness were assessed on 4,652 Holstein cows from 80 farms, within the Maritime Provinces of Canada. These farms consisted of 34 tie-stall and 46 free-stall facilities. All assessors in this study were trained and reached a target agreement (κ≥0.6) prior to conducting assessments on-farm. Lameness was determined using gait scores or tie-stall lameness scores, which assessed foot placement and weight distribution. Hock lesions were scored on a 4 point scale (0-3) based on amount of hair loss, swelling and presence of broken skin. These outcomes, along with facility and management factors required or recommended in the Canadian Welfare Code of Practice for Dairy Cattle, were used to determine scores for 12 critical areas of cow welfare, for example hoof health and stall management. Scores were calculated using equal weighting of specific targets within each critical area, based on a welfare assessment developed by Vasseur *et al*. The within herd prevalence of hock lesions ranged from 0-83% and the within herd prevalence of lameness ranged from 0-52%. These results indicate that a low prevalence of lameness and hock lesions on dairy herds is achievable. The critical area scores, along with the prevalence of hock lesions and lameness within the herd, were reported to the producers through an online benchmarking system (www.benchmarkcowcomfort.com). This website is being used to track which producers access the website and the amount of time the participants spend online. Benchmarking welfare assessments can motivate producers to make improvements to reduce injuries and lameness in their herds. To assess the effect of benchmarking, after a 6-month interval, the animal-based outcomes will be re-evaluated on the participating farms during spring 2017. It is hypothesized that the within herd prevalence of injuries and lameness will be reduced in comparison to the initial assessments.

<footnote n="1">¹University of Prince Edward Island, Atlantic Veterinary College, Health Management, Canada,</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²University of Prince Edward Island, Atlantic Veterinary College, Biomedical Sciences, Canada;
mtrobertson@upei.ca</footnote>
Do my pigs have welfare problems: a proposal for an on-farm self- monitoring

Lars Schrader¹, Irena Czycholl², Joachim Krieter², Christine Leeb³, Martin Ziron⁴ and Rita Zapf⁵

¹Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Germany, ²Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Germany, ³University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Austria, ⁴South Westphalia University of Applied Sciences, Germany, ⁵Association for Technology and Structures in Agriculture (KTBL), Germany; iczycholl@tierzucht.uni-kiel.de

To comply with the German animal welfare legislation all livestock owners have to assess the welfare of their animals using animal based indicators (ABI). In order to specify this requirement a total of 17 scientists, farm advisors, farmers and representatives from administration and NGOs were invited to develop an on-farm self-monitoring scheme. In a first step of this transdisciplinary process, important welfare concerns in sows, piglets, weaners and fattening pigs were identified. These include health status, lesions, productive life span, mortality, tail length, heat stress, lying comfort, water supply, agonistic interactions, and possibilities to perform particular behaviours. In a second step, based on existing schemes indicators were selected covering these welfare concerns. In addition, the validity, reliability and feasibility of indicators were taken into account. In a third step, a smaller group of six experts developed a booklet for farmers. In this booklet for each indicator the relevance, methods for recordings and definitions (including illustrations) are described. Indicators are selected for relevance for each production phase and (1) are already available on farms (e.g. use of antibiotics, daily weight gain, mortality, and fertility data); (2) had to be assessed on-farm (e.g. stereotypies, cleanliness, body lesions, tail length, body condition, lameness, swellings of legs, claw condition, ectoparasites, water supply, nesting material); and (3) can be obtained from slaughter records (e.g. lung scores). As a result, a comprehensive ABI scheme is developed in a multi-stakeholder approach which can be used by farmers to perform a systematic monitoring of ABI as a basis for improvements. Within an ongoing project protocols will be tested, teaching material for their application will be developed, different training methods will be tested, and a framework to evaluate the welfare outcomes (e.g. thresholds) will be developed.
**Development of a customer-specific broiler welfare assessment programme**

Ingrid De Jong¹, Gerben Hofstra² and Jan Jaap Hamming³

¹Wageningen Livestock Research, Animal Welfare, the Netherlands, ²HAS University of Applied Sciences, the Netherlands, ³Heijs Food Products, the Netherlands; ingrid.dejong@wur.nl

In order to guarantee production according to a defined welfare standard, and to increase the transparency to customers, Heijs Food Products BV is currently developing a broiler welfare assessment programme specific for its own production chain. Previously developed welfare assessment protocols are available, e.g. from Welfare Quality, but these are relatively time consuming and therefore difficult to implement in practice. On broiler farms and at the slaughter plant many data are routinely collected and can possibly be integrated in a modified welfare assessment programme. The aim therefore was to develop a specific welfare assessment programme that can be incorporated into the routine procedures of the producer, and that consists of valid, reliable and feasible measures of broiler welfare. The framework was based on Welfare Quality and animal-based measures were preferred over resource-based measures. Four stages in the development process could be identified: (1) define a list of potential measures using the five principles of Welfare Quality; (2) selection of indicators, based on validity, reliability and feasibility; (3) define a classification and an impact score to calculate a measure score; (4) graphical representation of the scores per flock. In stage (1) and (2) eleven measures of on-farm welfare were selected. These included similar measures as in Welfare Quality, such as foot pad dermatitis, but also new measures that are collected routinely, such as the daily dose of antibiotic treatments. For each of these measures either a scoring was developed or an existing scoring was used, and the measure score was calculated by calculating score×impact. The scores for the individual measures are presented in a spider web. The prototype is currently tested using existing farm data and the model will be extended with measures indicative of the welfare during the end-of-life process.
**Indicators for on-farm self-monitoring of animal welfare – a proposal for implementation in cattle**

Jan Brinkmann¹, Silvia Ivemeyer², Andreas Pelzer³, Christoph Winckler⁴ and Rita Zapf⁵

¹Thuenen-Institute of Organic Farming, Germany, ²University of Kassel, Germany, ³Chamber of Agriculture North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, ⁴University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Austria, ⁵Association for Technology and Structures in Agriculture, Germany; jan.brinkmann@thuenen.de

Since 2014 the German Animal Welfare Act requires livestock keepers to monitor appropriate animal-based indicators in order to safeguard that the animals are kept and cared according to their needs. However, no detailed provisions regarding content, scope and implementation of the self-monitoring have been given. For self-monitoring of cattle welfare, in a first step 16 experts selected robust and feasible indicators which address the most important animal welfare problems in cattle. In a second step, detailed protocols for the implementation of self-monitoring in cattle farms were elaborated by a smaller expert group. Indicators consider already existing data (e.g. milk recording, cattle database) or should be assessed on-farm in defined intervals. The following sets of indicators have been recommended. Dairy cattle: productive life span, somatic cell count (alternatively: mastitis treatment incidence), milk fat-protein ratio, body condition, lameness, integument alterations, cleanliness, claw condition, animal losses, dystocia incidence, adequate use of lying places, rising behaviour, avoidance distance, water availability. Beef cattle: integument alterations (including tail tip alterations), lameness, body condition, cleanliness, claw condition, nasal discharge, animal losses, tongue rolling, space allowance, water availability. Calves: body condition, cleanliness, animal losses, treatment incidences of enteric and respiratory diseases, complications after dehorning, intersucking, nesting score. For each of these measures clear definitions, suggestions for sample sizes and, if applicable, illustrations are given and a recording schedule is proposed. In a recently started project, the self-monitoring of welfare will be implemented and subsequently evaluated. This will also address the type and extent of farmer training regarding reliable application of the monitoring protocols as well as an assessment framework regarding the welfare outcomes (target & threshold values, benchmarking).
**Indicators for a result-oriented approach for animal welfare policies and organic farming**

Solveig March¹, Jan Brinkmann¹, Christine Renziehausen² and Angela Bergschmidt²

¹Thuenen-Institute of Organic Farming, Germany, ²Thuenen-Institute of Farm Economics, Germany; jan.brinkmann@thuenen.de

The objective of the project was to integrate result-oriented approaches into agricultural policy support measures and organic farming. This was done exemplarily for dairy cows. To this aim, problem-oriented indicators were selected by scientists and practitioners and tested in an on farm survey on 115 dairy farms. The results were compared with the Welfare Quality® assessment and a resource based system. A normative and a status quo oriented approach were tested to define benchmarks and targets for the indicators as a basis for a remuneration scheme. The following recommendations were formulated: Suitable indicators for the result oriented approach are (1) lameness, (2) carpus/ tarsus alterations, (3) body condition, (4) integument alterations, (5) broken tails, (6) cleanliness, (7) somatic cell-count >400.000/ml, (8) fat-protein quotient ≥1.5, (9) fat-protein quotient <1.0 and (10) mortality. As these indicators only address the health dimension of animal welfare, resource and management provisions such as specifications for pasture, access to water, cow/cubicle relation, animal-feeding place ratio and the use of anaesthesia and analgesics for dehorning are necessary to address all aspects of animal welfare. A status quo based benchmarking should be applied, where a farm receives a premium for an indicator if achieving the value of the 25% best farms, will not receive a premium but remains in the support measure, if its value is that of the 50% medium farms, is excluded from the measure when more than one indicator value is among the 25% worst farms. The indicators are equally applicable for the use in organic farming. The benchmarking system would have to be applied with sanctions here: a farm with problematic indicator values could be obliged to follow a consultation or be excluded from using the label of the organic association for its dairy products.
Assessing the behavioural response of dogs to humans in a household environment

Megan Hayes and Lauren Hemsworth

Animal Welfare Science Centre, University of Melbourne, Australia;

lauren.hemsworth@unimelb.edu.au

The effects of the human-animal relationship (HAR) on livestock demonstrate the potential influence of the HAR on the welfare of companion dogs. The present study is part of a project to develop a behavioural test to assess fear of humans in dogs in household settings. The validity of an approach-avoidance test of dogs in an arena to a stationary human ('AAT') was examined by comparing it to a previously-published human avoidance test ('HAT') in which a human approached kennelled dogs from outside the kennel. Twenty-seven dogs were tested in the AAT and HAT (test order randomly imposed on individual dogs). Principal component (PCA) analysis was conducted to identify a set of components for each test that represents underlying relationships between the test's behavioural variables (transcribed from video footage). For the AAT, two components were identified that provided an appropriate summary of the data (51.9 and 27.1 variance accounted, respectively), and for the HAT three components were identified (42.3, 19.8 and 16.3 variance accounted, respectively). Spearman rank correlations examined the relationships between the ATT and HAT components and a moderate significant correlation was found between the AAT<sub>Component1</sub> and HAT<sub>Component2</sub> scores (ρ=0.418, P=0.034); the reduced proximity of the dog to a stationary experimenter in the AAT was correlated with a greater avoidance of the experimenter at the front of the kennel by the dog in the HAT. Intra- and inter-observer reliability for the AAT were high with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) above 0.990 (P<0.001). While the relationship between the tests was moderate, the HAT has not been validated and thus further research examining the validity of the AAT is required. For example, evidence of behavioural and physiological correlates in a test as well as handling treatments designed to differentially affect an animal's fear of humans, producing the expected variations in the behaviour.
# Determining cattle learning and behavioural response to a virtual fence

Sabrina Lomax and Cameron Clark

The University of Sydney, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Australia; sabrina.lomax@sydney.edu.au

Virtual fencing (VF) has the potential to revolutionise control of livestock movement. Cattle can associate an audio cue with a mild electrical shock. This study investigates individual animal learning with VF collars, and if training time can be reduced using a visual cue (VC). The experiment utilised dog training collars fitted in Moo Monitors. 8 non-lactating dairy cows were subjected to one of 2 treatments: (1) Virtual Fence (VF) only; (2) visual cue with VF (VC). Habituation to the laneway, pellets and manual collars occurred 2x per day for 4 days prior to testing. Testing was performed in a laneway twice daily. A VF line was set halfway down the laneway with a feed trough containing pellets at the end of the laneway. Cows received an audio cue for 2 sec at the VF line. If they kept moving forward they received a mildly aversive electric shock. After 3 days the VC was removed and test repeated for 3 days. Animal behaviour, and number of cues received was recorded. The visual cue reduced the number of times cows tested the fence line, with VC cows receiving less cues (mean 2.13) than VF cows (mean 4) overall (P=0.007). The number of cues reduced with each test (P<0.001), however the cows were less likely to test the VF once they had received a shock. Cues increased with removal of the VC, with cows receiving the most cues when the VC was removed (P<0.001). Results indicate that there is variation in learning VF cues, and a visual cue does not improve learning in the laneway test. Positive reinforcement using a reward in the laneway is necessary between tests for future studies.
**Qualitative behavioural assessment of *Bos indicus* bulls following castration**

Teresa Collins¹, Catherine Stockman¹, Anne Barnes¹, Timothy Hyndman¹, Michael Laurence¹, Gabrielle Musk¹, Heidi Lehmann¹, Craig Johnson², Karina Gleerup³ and Patricia Fleming¹

¹School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch WA, Australia, ²Institute of Veterinary, Animal and Biomedical Sciences, Massey University, New Zealand, ³Department of Large Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark; t.collins@murdoch.edu.au

Australian rangeland cattle are commonly castrated at first muster without analgesia. This study tested whether observers could distinguish between the behaviour of 42 six-eight month old *Bos indicus* cattle subject to four treatments: surgical castration (C, n=12), C with pre-operative sub-cutaneous meloxicam (CM, n=12), C with pre-operative sub-cutaneous and intratesticular lignocaine (CL, n=12), or uncastrated animals (NC, n=6). Bulls were anaesthetised for the procedure using halothane and their behaviour recorded in a recovery yard (day 0) and home paddock (days -1 to 13). Using fixed lists of 20 descriptive terms and a Qualitative Behavioural Assessment (QBA) protocol, 19 observers scored the video clips against visual analogue scales and their scores analysed by Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Observer scores showed a significant treatment effect for QBA dimension 1 (31.8% of variation) at 2 h post handling in the recovery yard (one way ANOVA F<sub>3,20</sub>=21.72 P<0.001). Pairwise comparisons for these data showed CM bulls were described as more relaxed, content and calm (low end of axis) than NC (F<sub>1,27</sub>=54 P<0.001), C (F<sub>1,48</sub>=66 P<0.001) and CL (F<sub>1,27</sub>=54 P<0.001) treatment groups, which were described as more irritated, agitated and uncomfortable (high end of axis). Bull behaviour using a quantitative ethogram was analysed by PCA and compared with the QBA scores. Ethogram scores for restless behaviour, such as self-grooming, tail swishing, and head shaking were correlated at the high end of QBA dimension 1 (P<0.05). Thus, QBA reflected the ethogram data in cattle, and results suggest meloxicam, but not lignocaine, benefitted cattle post-surgery.
Margin of error of the WelFur fox good health score in the current semi-random
sampling method

Tarja Koistinen¹, Juhani Sepponen¹, Hannu T Korhonen¹, Eeva Ojala² and Jaakko Mononen¹
¹Natural Resources Institute Finland, Finland, ²Research farm Luova Ltd, Finland;
tarja.koistinen@luke.fi

The welfare principle Good health in the WelFur on-farm welfare assessment protocol for
foxes includes ten measures within the three welfare criteria: (1) absence of injuries: moving
difficulties and skin lesions; (2) absence of diseases: bent feet, ocular inflammation, impaired
mouth and teeth health, diarrhoea, urinary tract infection, obviously sick fox and mortality;
and (3) absence of pain induced by management procedures; killing method. The margins of
error (MOE) can be easily calculated for the individual measures for estimating an adequate
sample size. The combined effect of these MOEs on the MOE of the Good health principle
score is more obscure, because it is aggregated from the measures via several steps and using
varying non-linear methods (warning and alarm thresholds, decision tree, l-spline functions
and/or Choquet integrals). Our aim is to demonstrate the MOE for the principle score in 22
samples of 120 foxes (the sample size in the current protocol) from a data collected from all
3,697 foxes of one farm. The semi-random sampling method of the protocol was used to take
20 samples. In addition, extreme samples were formed out of the 120 best and worst foxes of
the farm. The principle score based on the full farm data was 52, indicating acceptable category
 score 20-55), whereas the scores for the 20 semi-random samples ranged from 46 to 73 (mean
 54), with six samples in category good (55-80). The score for the best possible scenario, i.e. 100,
 belonged to the best category (80-100) and the worst scenario, i.e. 28, was above unacceptable
 level (20). Our demonstration shows that the current semi-random sampling method may
 lead to a misclassification of a farm in principle Good health. The MOE could probably be
 narrowed by further developing the sampling method, increasing the sample size or modifying
 the WelFur score calculation.
Seeking alone time: do cows seek isolation at and after calving?

Gosia Zobel¹, Frances Huddart¹, Jim Webster¹ and Kathryn Proudfoot²

¹AgResearch Ltd., Animal Welfare Team, New Zealand, ²The Ohio State University, USA;

gosia.zobel@agresearch.co.nz

Cows are social animals, but may naturally distance themselves from the herd at calving. The strength of this behaviour is unknown in modern New Zealand dairy cow genetics and in pasture-based systems using 'standoff' pads overnight. Our study aimed to determine if Kiwi cross dairy cows seek isolation around calving. Two standoff pads (17×70 m; typically utilized for pasture management during wet periods) were each equipped with 19 l-shaped 'hides' (2 heavy-duty gates covered with plywood and rubber matting). To randomize the chance cows had access to hides, and to minimize side bias, hides were accessible on each pad on alternating days with cows manually allocated to a pad in alternating order. Cows were kept on the pads overnight (16:00-08:00) at a stocking density of 50 cows/pad, and spent the daytime as a group of 100 on pasture. New cows were introduced into the group to replace those that calved. Weight and previous pad exposure were covariates in binomial tests of difference of observed proportions from 50%. Of 186 calvings, 42% (78 cows) occurred on pasture and 58% (108 cows) occurred on the pads. About half of the latter calved while hides were accessible, and 18% of these cows moved into a hide at calving (9/49 cows, 3 unknown, CI:7-29%). Of the cows that did not calve in the hides, 73% moved into a hide with their calf 2.5±1.7 h after calving (29/40 cows, CI:59-87%); previous pad experience tended to shorten this latency (P=0.1). Weight had no effect. Only a small proportion of cows sought isolation during calving, however, the majority eventually went in a hide with their calves. It is possible that cows familiar with large, pasture-based grouping either do not have a strong drive for isolation, or that it is actually the calf that seeks out a hiding place.
**Assessment of animal welfare during the collection process of depopulation for end of lay hens**

*Christopher Gerpe, Ariane Stratmann and Michael Jeffrey Toscano*

Division of Animal Welfare, Veterinary Public Health Institute, Bern, Switzerland;

*christopher.gerpe@vetsuisse.unibe.ch*

Depopulations of Swiss commercial laying hens from aviaries were investigated hypothesizing that injury rates and stress levels are higher in depopulated hens compared to baseline values collected prior to depopulation. We collected two subgroups for each farm (n=14) and assessed either cloacal and comb temperature as well as hematocrit (n=153; 6-15 hens) or breathing rate and tonic immobility (TI; # inductions required (max=3), latency to first head movement (LAT1) and standing upright (LATSU)) (n=166; 10-17 hens). Hens were haphazardly selected from entire crates which were collected in a stratified manner (packing station and time). As a control we assessed measures in the same fashion as described using 3-11 hens per subgroup (n=256) collected 2 h prior to depopulation from different barn locations. Variation in number of examined individuals arose due to differences in depopulation schedules and durations. Linear mixed models with a nested design (individuals within farms) were used to test for differences between control and depopulated hens. The number of inductions (TI) was analysed using a multinomial logistic regression. During depopulation, cloacal temperature was 0.5 °C (P<0.05) higher whereas the comb was 3 °C lower (P<0.05), and chest movements decreased by 5 per minute (P<0.05) compared to the control. TI in the control hens was more likely to require three inductions (P=0.03, z=2.12) or fail (P=0.02, z=2.3). We found no differences between control and depopulation for hematocrit (P=0.22, mean ± SE=31.6±0.2%), or LAT1 (P=0.46, mean ± SE=74.5±5.4 s) and LATSU (P=0.5, mean ± SE=117.1±8.4 s) of hens were TI induction was successful. On average, depopulations took 101 min (±6.6 min) with a speed of 2.9 hens/min (±0.26). Increased respiration rate and temperature changes indicate that hens were challenged by depopulation. Whether these responses reflect severe stress will be investigated further including assessment of injuries in future work.
**Correlation between criterion scores of WelFur fox assessment and Qualitative Behaviour Assessment**

Jaakko Mononen¹, Eeva Ojala² and Tarja Koistinen¹

¹Natural Resources Institute Finland, Green Technology, Finland, ²Kannus Research Farm Luova Ltd., Finland; jaakko.mononen@luke.fi

In the WelFur on-farm welfare assessment protocol assessment of foxes' 'Positive emotional state' is based on a temperament test performed to individual animals and management information of transportation of foxes. However, Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) for foxes is under development. We studied the correlation between the 12 welfare criterion scores and QBA results. WelFur assessments were carried out in winter, summer and autumn on 77 Finnish farms by 12 assessors. At the end of each assessment visit, the assessor evaluated the general appearance of the animals on the farm with a visual analogue scale for 24 QBA attributes. The attributes were combined season-wise to three Principal Components (PC). The interpretation of the PCs for the winter and autumn was: PC1 = 'Positiveness' (high loadings from e.g. 'happy'), PC2 = 'Fearfulness' (e.g. 'fearful') and PC3 = 'Apathy' (e.g. 'bored'). PC analysis extracted 'Positiveness' (PC1) and 'Fearfulness' (PC3) also for the summer, whereas PC2 was more contradictory (e.g. positive loadings from 'sad' and 'happy'). Correlation between the PCs and welfare criteria was weak: r ranged from -0.34 to +0.34, and only ten out of the 108 correlations were significant (P<0.05, n=74-77). The weak correlation could be interpreted to indicate that QBA adds to the protocol something that the other measurements do not cover, putatively a measure of positive emotional state. On the other hand, nine of the significant correlations were quite logical: for example, 'Positiveness' correlated positively with the 'Expression of other behaviour', 'Absence of injuries' and 'Absence of disease' scores. This may reflect overlap of QBA with the measurements in the current protocol. Also variance arising from the subjective nature of the QBA and the variation between the assessors might partially explain the low correlation. Thus, QBA was not probably independent of the measurements in the current protocol.