Welfare assessment and the Five Freedoms

1. Welfare assessment and the Five Freedoms Module 2

2. Learning objectives • To understand the concept and potential uses of the Five Freedoms • To understand the difference between factors affecting welfare (inputs) and actual welfare performance (outcome) • To use the Severity, Duration, Number affected (SDN) framework to quantify welfare • To appreciate that science can provide information on the severity of welfare problems (but not the acceptability)

3. Summary of content • Five Freedoms • Welfare factors • Quantifying welfare • Assessing significance

4. Assessing human welfare How are you feeling at the moment?

5. Welfare continuum Fantastic Pretty good Reasonable OK Not good Miserable Terrible Good Poor

6. Why ? Chair comfort Hungry Hot / cold Work Social life Overall Poor Good

7. Animal Welfare criteria ? ? ? ? ? ?

8. Animal quality of life = Five Freedoms Hunger / Thirst Pain / Injury / Disease Discomfort Fear / Distress Normal behaviour Overall Poor Good

9. Five Freedoms = Animal welfare “The council believes that the welfare of an animal ... should be considered with reference to ‘Five Freedoms’. Freedom from hunger and thirst Freedom from discomfort Freedom from pain, injury and disease Freedom to express normal behaviour Freedom from fear and distress (Farm Animal Welfare Council UK, 1993)

10. Are all Freedoms equally important? In your opinion how much importance should be placed on providing animals with the Five Freedoms? Producer attitude (344 farmers) – questionnaire distributed by Tesco plc

11. How important are the Five Freedoms?

12. Motivation towards the Five Freedoms In this survey more than 80% of UK farmers thought that all Freedoms were of great or extreme importance This proportion will be different for different groups of users and different countries Even in the surveyed population, with reportedly high motivation, there are significant welfare problems For example, in the UK 20% of dairy cattle are lame, and lamb mortality is more than 20%

13. Five Freedoms conflict Freedom from disease conflicts with: Fear from handling during treatment Freedom to express normal behaviour conflicts with: Distress during normal social interactions

14. All farming systems restrict normal behaviour

15. Restriction of ‘normal’ Obvious - farrowing crates Not so obvious - cubicle surface

16. Cubicle surface and laying time 100 80 60 % time spent laying 40 20 0 Rubber Concrete Soft mat mat

17. Significance of Freedoms Consensus amongst scientists and politicians in many countries – welfare should be considered in terms of the Five Freedoms The Freedoms give an initial indication of what should be assessed and what should be provided to animals It does not define the minimum standards as it is extremely difficult to always provide all the Freedoms

18. ENVIRONMENT ANIMAL STOCKMAN Inputs (indirect parameters) e.g. housing / diet e.g. breeding e.g. training Animal-based measures e.g.: Body lesions / condition Lameness Hock lesions Outputs (direct parameters) Inputs and Outputs

19. Five Freedoms & welfare inputs / factors Freedom from hunger & thirstby ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour Freedom from discomfortby providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area Freedom from pain, injury and diseaseby prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment Freedom to express normal behaviourby providing sufficient space, proper facilities and company of the animal’s own kind Freedom from fear and distressby ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering

20. Welfare inputs / factors Stockman Environment Animal

21. Examples of welfare factors • Stockman • Empathy, Knowledge, Observation skills • Environment • Housing, Bedding, Feed quality, Water provision • Animal • Suitable breed, Age and Sex for the system

22. Severity Duration Number affected Common framework for quantifying problem

23. Behaviour e.g. fearfulness Disease e.g. lameness, pneumonia Production performance e.g. growth rates Physiology e.g. heart rate, cortisol Quantifying severity

24. Severity example How severe is the social isolation of sheep?

25. Severity example (contd.) 4.5 3 Vocalisations a minute 1.5 0 Visual Spatial isolation isolation (Baldock & Sibly, 1990)

26. Severity example (contd.) 30 20 Heart rate increase (beats/min) 10 0 Visual isolation Spatial isolation (Baldock & Sibly, 1990)

27. Duration example For how long are sheep sensitive to pain after a lameness episode?

28. Sheep lameness (Ley et al.1995) 5 Threshold stimulus (N) 2.5 0 Lame Lame (After 3 months) Normal (Not lame)

29. Number affected Example: At any one time, how many animals are lame ? 15% * 22% * 26% * * UK figures

30. Example: Confinement in farrowing crates

31. 60 40 20 0 Severity: Nest building distress Pen (loose) Farrowing crate Cortisol (ng/ml) Baseline During farrowing

32. Duration: Avoidance of piglets Farrowing crate 6 4 2 0 Cortisol ( nmol/l ) 28 14 21 1 7 Days after farrowing

33. Farrowing crate Severity Restrict freedom to move around Restrict freedom to nest build Restrict freedom to avoid the piglets Duration 3-4 weeks Number affected Most indoor sows in intensive systems

34. Intrinsic issue Farrowing crates are a significant welfare issue for the sow but are used throughout the world Why? Currently considered intrinsic (unavoidable) in commercial indoor pig production i.e. Benefits for piglets and production > Costs to the sow

35. Severity: How thin are the cows (e.g. Body condition score)? Duration: How long have the cows been thin? Number affected: How many cattle are thin? SDN example: Cattle in poor condition

38. Conclusions / Summary • Welfare can be assessed systematically • Five Freedoms are a useful initial indication • Welfare factors / inputs can also be assessed • Severity, Duration and Number affected can quantify problems