RESUMO
The Welfare Quality consortium has proposed a science-based protocol for assessing broiler chicken welfare on farms. Innovative features make the protocols particularly suited for comparative studies, such as the focus on animal-based welfare measures and an integration procedure for calculating an overall welfare status. These protocols reflect the scientific status up to 2009 but are meant to be updated on the basis of inter alia implementation studies. Because only few such studies have been done, we applied the Welfare Quality protocol to compare the welfare of broiler flocks in Belgium (representing a typical European Union (EU) country which implies stringent animal welfare legislation) versus Brazil (the major broiler meat exporter to the EU and with minimal animal welfare legislation). Two trained observers performed broiler Welfare Quality assessments on a total of 22 farms in Belgium and south Brazil. All of the farms produced for the EU market. Although the overall welfare was categorized as 'acceptable' on all farms, many country differences were observed at the level of the welfare principles, criteria, and measures. Brazilian farms obtained higher scores for 3 of the 4 welfare principles: 'good feeding' (P = 0.007), 'good housing' (P < 0.001), and 'good health' (P = 0.005). Four of the 10 welfare criteria scores were, or tended to be, higher on Brazilian than Belgian farms: 'absence of prolonged thirst' (P < 0.001), 'ease of movement' (P < 0.001), 'absence of injuries' (P = 0.002), and 'positive emotional state' (P = 0.055). The only criteria with a higher score for the Belgian farms than their Brazilian counterparts were 'absence of prolonged hunger' (P = 0.048) and 'good human-animal relationship' (P = 0.002). Application of the Welfare Quality protocol has raised several concerns about the validity, reliability, and discriminatory potential of the protocol. The results also call for more research into the effect of animal welfare legislation as broiler welfare on the south Brazilian farms appeared to be superior to that on the Belgian farms. Animal-based welfare assessments on a larger sample of farms are needed to evaluate to what extent these findings may be generalized.
Assuntos
Bem-Estar do Animal/normas , Galinhas , Animais , Bélgica , Brasil , Abrigo para AnimaisRESUMO
Scientific information on the welfare of broilers reared in alternative systems is scarce. The objective of this study was to assess the welfare of free-range broilers using the Welfare Quality® protocol. Free-range broilers reared in ten farms were observed, and measures were made in broilers of five of these farms. The collected data were transformed into scores (0-100), with higher scores indicating better welfare, except for emotional states. Prevalence percentages were calculated for the remaining data. Median (min-max) scores were 81 (63-98) for lameness, 93 (83-99) for hock burn on the farm, 100 (95-100) for plumage cleanliness, 35 (8-70) for podermatitis on the farm, 56 (26-88) for density, 53 (20-53) for dust, 34 (14-67) for litter quality, 93 (41-100) for drinkers, and 100 (100-100) for birds panting or huddling on the farm. The following average (min-max) prevalence percentages were obtained: total mortality 2.0% (1.4-7.2%), culling 0.0% (0.0-2.2%), feed withdrawal time 875 min (715-945 min), water withdrawal time 220 min (170-275 min), dead on arrival at the processing plant 0.00% (0.00-0.01%), broken wings 0%, (0-0%), inefficient stunning 3.9% (1.3-6.7%), pre-stun shock 49.3% (26.7-56.8%), hepatitis 4.5% (1.8-11.0%), bruising 9.3% (6.7-16.7%), and ascites 0% (0-0%). The negative broiler welfare points detected were pododermatitis, litter quality, density, dust, culling, feed withdrawal time, inefficient stunning, pre-stun shock, and hepatitis. The positive points identified were the absence of birds panting or huddling on the farm; low prevalence of lameness, hock lesions, dead on arrival, broken wings, and ascites; good plumage cleanliness scores, and short water withdrawal time.(AU)
Assuntos
Animais , Aves Domésticas/anatomia & histologia , Aves Domésticas/crescimento & desenvolvimento , Bem-Estar do Animal/normas , Bem-Estar do Animal/tendências , Guias como AssuntoRESUMO
Animal-based measures of thirst are currently absent from animal welfare monitoring schemes due to the lack of a well-validated indicator applicable for on-farm use. In the present study, an on-farm test based on voluntary water consumption from an unfamiliar open drinker was validated in a (semi-)commercial setting. To investigate the effect of thirst on water consumption, we subjected 4 flocks of 1,500 broilers to either 0 or 12 h of water deprivation and subsequently measured the amount of water that small subgroups consumed after the deprivation period (first experiment). Broilers that were water deprived before the test drank more than control broilers (P < 0.001). In a second experiment, a similar test was performed using 20 commercial broiler flocks in Belgium and Brazil. After a pretreatment water consumption test, the birds were subjected to 0 or 6 h of water deprivation, and a posttreatment water consumption test was conducted. Only in Brazil, deprived birds drank significantly more than controls in the posttreatment water consumption test (P < 0.001). A tendency for a difference was found in Belgium (P = 0.083). Pre- and posttreatment water consumption was higher in Brazil than in Belgium (P < 0.001). Stocking density and temperature influenced, respectively, the pretreatment and the control's posttreatment water consumption in Brazil, but not in Belgium. These results indicate that the water consumption test is sufficiently sensitive to discriminate between control and 12 h deprived flocks, and in Brazil even between control and 6 h deprived birds. The location of the test within the house did not affect the amount of water consumed in either experiment, suggesting that this variable does not have to be standardized. However, the amount of water consumed by broilers able to drink freely for a long period depended on indoor climatic variables (in Brazil only) and possibly genotype. This suggests that these variables need to be considered when interpreting the test outcome in terms of the thirst level experienced by the broilers.