Development of a benchmarking tool to assess the welfare of dairy cattle on small-scale farms

• Published in: Journal of dairy science Vol. 106; no. 9; pp. 6464 - 6475
• Main Authors: Poulopoulou, I., Zanon, T., Alrhmoun, M., Katzenberger, K., Holighaus, L., Gauly, M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.09.2023; Elsevier
• Subjects: animal welfare; benchmarking tool; dairy cattle; small-scale farms; benchmarking tool; small-scale farms; dairy cattle; animal welfare
• ISSN: 0022-0302; 1525-3198
• DOI: 10.3168/jds.2022-22592

Public concern about the welfare of farm animals and the livestock industry's awareness of the need to improve animal welfare have led to the implementation of new tools designed to meet this objective. Especially in the case of small-scale farms in marginalized areas, the lack of available data specifically for assessing welfare led to the present study. Its aim was to use animal- and resource-based indicators that are representative of small-scale farms, to establish an index and develop a benchmarking tool that can be used to dynamically evaluate the welfare of cattle on farms with different husbandry systems and provide farmers, veterinarians, extension officers, and stakeholders with reliable information that can be used as a decision support tool. For this reason, 1,891 cows from 204 herds housed in freestall (n = 111) and tiestall (n = 93) husbandry systems in South Tyrol (Northern Italy) were evaluated. The results showed that 17.6% of herds (36 farms) had an average score below 60 (out of 100), which means that immediate intervention should be adopted to improve welfare. South Tyrolean dairy farms performed well in terms of lameness, skin alterations, avoidance behavior, number and space of lying areas, and dystocia occurrence scores, whereas water supply, cow cleanliness status, claw conformation, and getting-up behavior offered significant potential for improvement. Significant differences were observed between housing systems scoring less than 60 out of 100 points in 9.9% (n = 11) and 26.9%, (n = 25), of the herds kept in freestalls and tiestalls, respectively. A slight difference was found when comparing the percentage of herds with high scores, which corresponded to 30.6% (n = 34) of herds housed in freestalls and 22.6% (n = 21) of herds housed in tiestall housing systems. In addition, it was shown that animals reared on farms with tiestalls more often had problems with body condition, cleanliness, and skin alterations. All individual welfare indicators in the top 25% of herds had scores above 80, indicating that this may be an attainable target for freestall and tiestall herds, respectively, to promote good dairy cow welfare. The overall aim must be to adopt measures to increase the scores on all farms closer to this level.