SEARCH
Industry Partners
Prairie Swine Centre is an affiliate of the University of Saskatchewan
Prairie Swine Centre is grateful for the assistance of the George Morris Centre in developing the economics portion of Pork Insight.
Financial support for the Enterprise Model Project and Pork Insight has been provided by:
Changing concepts of farm animal welfare: Bridging the gap between applied and basic research
Posted in: Welfare by admin on January 1, 2003 | No Comments
On one hand, the advancement of animal welfare science seems to be a slow process; on the other hand, quick solutions to animal welfare issues tend to result when legislative bodies become involved. The ‘quick fix’ approach to animal welfare can be dangerous. It can result in research that is too narrow, where scientists do not consider the whole picture. The difficulty in defining animal welfare has led to many definitions and concepts being developed. Some definitions have removed important components that are difficult to measure, such as feelings, emotions and consciousness. These definitions tend to focus on animal health and biological functioning as measures of animal welfare. Animal welfare becomes easier for scientists to measure, but the results do not address the concerns of the general public, which tend to be focused on feelings and emotions. Currently, validation of welfare indicators is lacking. If the focus is on biological functioning, must show that this is related to suffering. There is also a lack of using health problems as indicators of welfare, which are easily validated. For example, lameness is obviously linked to pain, so welfare could be compared in different housing systems based on this measure. Different housing systems are difficult to assess because there are so many variables that could challenge animal welfare. Two approaches for assessment include: General welfare indicators, or an overall assessment, such as longevity in the system. Another approach is to document the incidence of all the problems in each system and then compare them. However, it is difficult to integrate all the measures of welfare. A new housing system may solve welfare problems, but create others in another area. Therefore, it is difficult to develop an overall welfare score, when measures point in different directions. This problem raises the question of possibly weighting the indicators. However, this must be done objectively either statistically or based on a theoretical model. The focus may turn towards using critical measures or solving the problems associated with each housing system, as opposed to attempting to assess overall welfare. There needs to be more focus on the variation that exists within a particular housing system (usually due to different management factors), not just between systems. There also needs to be a better understanding of the biological basis of behavioural, physiological and immunological responses that are used as indicators of welfare. A single definition or concept of welfare may never be achieved; but that should not deter the effort to improve it for animals. Perhaps, instead of a single concept, multiple concepts need to be considered.
Animal-based measures for the assessment of welfare state of dairy cattle, pigs and laying hens: Consensus of expert opinion
Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments
Animal welfare experts participated in the development of animal-based measures that could be used as indicators of welfare status. The objective was to use a Delphi technique to create a consensus among experts about welfare measures about the animal, as opposed to measures about the animal’s environment. The experts responded to two questionnaires. There was consensus among the experts that observations of health status, behaviour and examination of health records would provide ample information about welfare states. This information would indicate how well the animal is coping with the environment and management system in which it lives. The important welfare indicator identified for cattle and pigs was lameness and for laying hens was feather condition. The results of this study assisted in the development of protocols to assess the welfare of dairy cattle, pigs, and laying hens.
Alternative housing for sows and litters Part 4. Effects of sow-controlled housing combined with a communal piglet area on pre- and post-weaning behaviour and performance.
Posted in: Welfare by admin on January 1, 2002 | No Comments
Sows and their litters are typically housed in a farrowing crate/pen until weaning, with no provision for the sows to escape their piglets, nor for the piglets to interact with other litters. The experimental treatment in this study provided an escape area for the sows, in which they could interact with two other lactating females, from day 12 to weaning at day 27. Piglets had a creep area that allowed them to interact with two other litters from day 14 to weaning. The control treatment allowed the sow similar amounts of space, but they could not escape the piglets, and the piglet creep area was not shared by other litters. Sows made extensive use of the escape area, in excess of 14 hours/day prior to weaning, and nursed their litters less often than those that could not escape. Feed intake was reduced in these sows, but weight loss during lactation was similar in both treatments. Piglets of sows that could escape consumed more creep feed, but weighed less than the control litters at weaning. Consumption of feed post-weaning was greater in the ‘escape’ treatment piglets, such that by day 42 their weights did not differ from the control. Piglets allowed to interact with other litters prior to weaning were less prone to aggression after weaning. The get-away housing system allows sows more control over their lives, reduces their lactational stress, reduces aggression among piglets and has no net effect on production measures.
Protecting Farm Worker Health and Safety: Risks and Hazards Associated with Hog Production
Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments
As with any industry, there are specific hazards to hog production. Dust is hazardous to the lungs and comes from animal dander, dried saliva, feed components, bedding, and more. Dust masks can help to minimize the hazard. Hazardous gases in hog operations include H2S, ammonia, and carbon dioxide. H2S is particularly dangerous because it inhibits smell and can lead to death. Confined spaces can potentially be dangerous (such as a closed tank, pit, grain bin, etc.). Dangers here include oxygen deficiency/surplus, fire, gases, and liquids. Chemical hazards that may be present include fuels, solvents, drugs, cleaners and sanitizers. Any dangerous chemicals should be listed in the material safety data sheet (MSDS). Zoonotic diseases are always a threat (these diseases can be passed on from animal to man). Herd health and personal hygiene are fairly preventative measures. Earplugs should be worn to prevent hearing damage from loud noises. Of course, working with animals poses the risk of animal handling hazards. Proper handling must be practiced to maintain well-behaved animals.
Health conditions of two genotypes of growing-finishing pig in three different housing systems: implications for welfare.
Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments
Indoor or outdoor sows were mated to boars, and their progeny were raised in outdoor paddocks, straw yards, or fully-slatted pens. The trial ran from the period when the pigs were an average of 30 kg to 80 kg liveweight. Welfare was assessed using a combination of different health criteria. Criteria examined were bursitis of the hock, injuries to the body, prevalence of stomach ulcers, and prevalence of enzootic pneumonia. Piglets from outdoor sows had less body injuries and lung damage due to pneumonia than piglets from the indoor sows. When housed in outdoor paddocks or straw yards, piglets had significantly less bursitis of the hock, body injuries, stomach ulcers, lung damage, deaths, and morbidity (having to be removed from the trial due to health problems) compared to piglets raised in fully-slatted pens. There were no significant interactions between housing and type of sow the piglets were born of for any health parameters measured. The overall effect of season on pig welfare could not be adequately determined due to conflicting health criteria. In conclusion, pig welfare was improved when the pigs were raised in either outdoor paddocks or straw yards compared to fully-slatted pens.
Bioacoustic tools for enhancing animal management and productivity: effects of recorded calf vocalizations on milk production in dairy cows.
Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments
Vocal communication plays an important role in establishing and maintaining social relationships in many mammalian species. For bovines, vocal communication in particular plays an important role in mediating mother-infant relationships, specifically during contexts of separation. Several species produce calls that are exclusively used to induce nursing behaviour. We therefore predicted that calf calls would affect the behaviour and biology underlying lactation in dairy cows. Playback of vocalizations were conducted at two dairies under controlled conditions. Exposure to calf vocalizations significantly increased milk production in experimental cows by 1-2% in the milking session immediately following the milking session in which playbacks were conducted. The playback of calf vocalizations in the milking parlor therefore increased overall milk production (but not immediate milk release or letdown) in dairy cows. In conclusion, this study suggest that the use of calf vocalization playback as bioacoustic tool provides a non-chemical alternative for increasing milk production in dairy cows.
Influence of maternal experience on fear reactions in ewes.
Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments
Ewes with three levels of maternal experience were tested for fear reactions in three different tests. The ewes were either nulliparous (21 months, never giving birth to a lamb), primiparous (21 months, one lamb reared), or multiparous (ave. 4.5 yr; 1-4 litters reared). When isolated from other sheep, ewes from all parity groups were calm and non-fearful. When exposed to a large rubber ball dropping from the ceiling (surprise test), ewes that had given birth (primiparous and multiparous) were less fearful than the nulliparous ewes, indicating that the experience of giving birth and rearing a lamb reduced the response to startling stimuli. The final test involved being in the presence of humans. Only the multiparous animals displayed a non-fearful response to this situation, indicating that several birthing/rearing experiences (or age) were necessary to reduce the fear of humans. The experiences of giving birth and rearing lambs reduced the response of ewes to humans and startling stimuli.
Les pathogenes du bA
Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments
Tous les animaux, y compris les animaux de compagnie, le bA
Alternative housing for sows and litters Part 5. Individual differences in the maternal behaviour of sows.
Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments
A series of studies were conducted using farrowing pens that allowed the sow to escape from her piglets. This report summarizes the results of those studies in terms of the variation seen in the use of this escape area. Examining 96 litters, there was a great deal of variation among sows on the use of the escape area. Increased use of the escape area resulted in less weight loss by the sows, and reduced gains by the piglets. Sows were fairly consistent within a lactation in their use of the escape area. However, sows returning for a second farrowing showed no correlation with their behaviour in the first. Rather, use of the escape area tended to be associated with low sow weight at farrowing and large litter size. It would appear that use of the escape area had more to do with the cost of caring for the young rather than the personality of the sow. However, sows that used the escape area more were also very responsive to the distress calls of their piglets by the end of the lactation. It would appear that the key to effective sow-controlled housing lies with management of environmental conditions, rather than with selecting the most appropriate sows.
What Airborne Contaminants are Pig Barn Workers Exposed to a
Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments
Pig barn workers are exposed to dust, gases, and endotoxins. In a study, it was found that dust exposure varied little between different areas of the barn. However, there is a large difference between areas (farrowing, nursery, grow-finish) when dust particles are larger than 5.0 microns. Results were inconclusive for ammonia measurements. 10% of workers in different areas of the barn are exposed to the 20-ppm limit of H2S regularly. Endotoxins (by-products from bacteria) vary quite a bit between farrowing, nursery, and grow-finish (nursery and grow-finish being the most). This could be due to a higher relative humidity in the nursery/grow-finish area.