BOKU - Universität für Bodenkultur Wien - Forschungsinformationssystem

Logo BOKU-Forschungsportal

Gewählte Publikation:

Hartmann, S; Wesian, V; Winckler, C; Berger, M; Berger, C; Scherzer, E; Leeb, C.
(2017): Implementation of animal based measures within an animal-welfare label on ALMO (R) steer farms
WIEN TIERARZTL MONAT. 2017; 104(11-12): 341-352.

Introduction Animal-based measures are used to assess animal welfare and they reflect how the animal copes with the resources provided. They have been implemented in Austria for the first time for the animal-welfare label "Tierschutz-kontrolliert", which is applied to "ALMO" steers (ALMO (R) is the brand of an association of over 500 farmers in Austria who fatten steers under improved conditions in loose-house stables with access to pasture). This on-farm study aimed to describe the process and the prevalence of animal-based measures and to investigate potential associations with the use of particular resources. Results The median prevalence (%) of all animal-based measures was 0.0 (n=120). The most prevalent findings were: "dirtiness" (Q75: 15.0 %; Max: 64.2 %), "ocular discharge" (Q75: 4.7 %; Max: 35.7 %) and "loose faeces" (Q75: 2.8 %; Max: 50.0 %), while positive results for the following parameters were also found on some farms: "hairless spots on front leg" (Q75: 0.0 %; Max: 40.0 %), "overgrown claws" (Q75: 0.0 %; Max: 33.3 %) and "hairless spots on head, neck, shoulder, back" (075: 0.0 %; Max: 31.3 %). The prevalence of "hairless spots on front legs" was significantly higher in steers housed in cubicles with rubber mats (Q75: 2.63 %; Max: 40 %; n=24), than in those housed 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 was negatively associated with "dirtiness" of steers (rs=-0.356; p=0.007) and with "hairless spots on hind leg" (rs=-0.349; p=0.008; n=56). "Loose faeces" occurred only during the autumn-winter period (Q3: 6.25 %; Max: 50.0 %;), while "hairless spots on whole body" were more prevalent in spring (Q3: 7.14 %; Max: 40 %) than in autumn-winter (Q3: 0 %; Max: 30 % n=75). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of animal-based measures between farms that complied with all resource-based requirements and those that did not satisfy at least one requirement. Conclusions Compliance with resource-based measures is not reflected in a lower prevalence of animal-based measures, so the evaluation of resource-based measures alone during auditing is insufficient. Only in combination with an assessment of animal-based measures does it provide an accurate measurement of animal welfare.
Autor*innen der BOKU Wien:
Leeb Christine
Winckler Christoph

Find related publications in this database (Keywords)
Inspector training
animal based measures
animal welfare label
animal welfare

© BOKU Wien Impressum