The Welfare of Cows in Indian Shelters
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Interview with the Shelter Manager
2.2. Animal-Based Measures
2.3. Measures on Selected Cows
2.4. Resource-Based Measures
3. Data Handling and Statistical Analysis
4. Results
4.1. Interview with the Shelter Manager
4.2. Animal-Based Measures
4.3. Housing
4.4. Water Provision
4.5. Cleanliness
4.6. Feeding
- 1—Chopping only (14.81%)
- 2—Chopping + ground concentrate (44.44%)
- 3—Chopping + cakes (11.11%)
- 4—Chopping + ground concentrate + cakes (3.70%)
- 5—Chopping + TMR + Cooked concentrates (7.41%)
- 6—Chopping + TMR + Cooked concentrates + mineral mixture (5.56%)
5. Discussion
5.1. Assessment Time
5.2. Animal-Based Assessment
5.3. Assessment of Disease Status and Carcass Disposal Risks
5.4. Housing and Flooring
5.5. Access to Pastures and Yards
5.6. Noise and Luminosity Levels
5.7. Feeding and Watering Provisions
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Parameter | Description | Scales and Scores |
---|---|---|
General temperament [31] | Visual examination |
|
Cow Comfort Index (CCI) [32] | Proportion of cows in a stall or shed that were lying down | |
Avoidance Distance (AD) [33] | Cows that were standing at the feeding manger were approached at the front at a rate of one step per second, starting at 2 m from the manger. The distance between the assessor’s hand and the cow’s head was estimated at the moment the cow moved away and turned its head |
|
Lactation |
| |
Body Condition Score (BCS) [34,35] | A cow with a score of ≤ 1.25 was considered emaciated, 1.5–2 thin, 2.25–3.75 normal and 4 or more obese Visual examination | 1 to 5 with increments of 0.25. |
Lameness Score [36] | 1 to 5 scale Visual examination |
|
Claw overgrowth [37] | Visual examination |
|
Rising behavior [38,39] | All cows lying in the shelter were coaxed to get up with use of a minimum amount of force. If the presence of the assessor did not evoke rising they were given one or two gentle slaps on the back, followed by a break of 5 s, then more slaps with slightly more force if required, up to a maximum of 30 s |
|
Rising restrictions [40] | As a result of shelter facilities by visual inspection |
|
Hock joint swellings [41,42] | Visual examination |
|
Hock joint hair loss and ulceration [41,42] | Visual examination |
|
Carpal joint injuries [41] | Visual examination |
|
Dirtiness of the hind limbs, udder and flanks [43] | By visual inspection of the cows from both sides (left and right) and from behind |
|
Body Coat condition [44] | Visual examination |
|
Ectoparasitism [45] | Visual examination |
|
Lesions from shelter furniture [37] | Visual examination |
|
Skin lesions/Integument alterations [46] | Visual examination |
|
Teat and udder condition | Visual inspection |
|
Skin tenting time [47] | Visual examination by skin pinch of the cervical region of neck |
|
Oral lesions | Visual examination |
|
Neck lesions [48] | Visual examination |
|
Ocular lesions [48] | Visual examination |
|
Nasal discharge [48] | Visual examination |
|
Hampered respiration [48] | Visual examination |
|
Vulvar discharge [48] | Visual examination |
|
Rumen Fill Score [55] | Visually by standing behind the cow on the left side and observing the left para lumbar fossa between the last rib, the lumbar transverse processes and the hip bone |
|
Fecal consistency [55] | Visual inspection |
|
References
- 19th Livestock Census 2012 All India Report, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Government of India. 2014. Available online: http://dahd.nic.in/sites/default/filess/Livestock%20%205_0.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Athreya, V. Is Relocation a Viable Management Option for Unwanted Animals?—The Case of the Leopard in India. Conserv. Soc. 2006, 4, 419–423. [Google Scholar]
- Arnold, D. The Problem of Traffic: The street-life of modernity in late-colonial India. Mod. Asian Stud. 2012, 46, 119–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bentinck, J.V. Unruly Urbanisation on Delhi’s Fringe: Changing Patterns of Land Use and Livelihood. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands, 26 June 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Fitzharris, M.; Dandona, R.; Kumar, G.A.; Dandona, L. Crash characteristics and patterns of injury among hospitalized motorised two-wheeled vehicle users in urban India. BMC Public Health 2009, 9, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jegatheesan, B. Influence of Cultural and Religious—Factors on Attitudes toward Animals. In Handbook on Animal-Assisted Therapy, 4th ed.; Fine, A.H., Ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2015; pp. 37–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fox, M.W. India’s Sacred Cow: Her Plight and Future. Anim. Issues 1999, 3, 1–35. [Google Scholar]
- Euthanasia Advisory AWBI. Criteria and Standards of Euthanasia of Animals; Animal Welfare Board of India: Chennai, India, 2013; p. 9. [Google Scholar]
- Ghatak, S.; Singh, B. Veterinary public health in India: Current status and future needs. Rev. Sci. Tech. 2015, 34, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chhangani, A.K. Status of vulture population in Rajasthan, India. Indian For. 2009, 135, 239–251. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, B.; Ghatak, S.; Banga, H.; Gill, J.; Singh, B. Veterinary urban hygiene: A challenge for India. Rev. Sci. Tech. 2013, 32, 645–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Solanki, D. Unnecessary and cruel use of animals for medical undergraduate training in India. J. Pharmacol. Pharmacother. 2010, 1, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yadav, D.K.; Vij, P.K. Inventorization of Gaushala resources and their use in breed improvement and conservation programmes. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 2010, 80, 343–345. [Google Scholar]
- Alavijeh, A.Z. Representations of Cow in Different Social, Cultural, Religious and Literary Contexts in Persia and the World. Asian J. Soc. Sci. Hum. 2014, 3, 215–218. [Google Scholar]
- Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI); (Chennai, Tamilnadu, India). Registered Gaushalas in India. Personal communication, 2016.
- Kaur, P.; Filia, G.; Singh, S.V.; Patil, P.K.; Ravi Kumar, G.V.; Sandhu, K.S. Molecular epidemiology of Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis: IS900 PCR identification and IS1311 polymorphism analysis from ruminants in the Punjab region of India. Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2011, 34, 163–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, S.V.; Singh, P.K.; Kumar, N.; Gupta, S.; Chaubey, K.K. Evaluation of goat based ‘Indigenous vaccine’against Bovine Johne’s Disease in endemically infected native cattle herds. Indian J. Exp. Biol. 2015, 53, 16–24. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Johnsen, P.F.; Johannesson, T.; Sandoe, P. Assessment of farm animal welfare at herd level: Many goals, many methods. Acta Agric. Scand. A 2001, 51, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kelly, P.C.; More, S.J.; Blake, M.; Hanlon, A.J. Identification of key performance indicators for on-farm animal welfare incidents: Possible tools for early warning and prevention. Ir. Vet. J. 2011, 64, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Main, D.; Mullan, S.; Atkinson, C.; Cooper, M.; Wrathall, J.; Blokhuis, H. Best practice framework for animal welfare certification schemes. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 37, 127–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nair, J. Many Faces of Drought. Econ. Political Wkly. 1986, 21, 767–769. [Google Scholar]
- Canali, E.; Keeling, L. Welfare Quality® project: From scientific research to on farm assessment of animal welfare. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2009, 8, 900–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Napolitano, F.; Knierim, U.; Grasso, F.; De Rosa, G. Positive indicators of cattle welfare and their applicability to on-farm protocols. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2009, 8, 355–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rouha-Mulleder, C.; Palme, R.; Waiblinger, S. Assessment of animal welfare in 80 dairy cow herds in cubicle housing—Animal health and other animal-related parameters. Wiener Tierärztliche Monatsschrift 2010, 97, 231–241. [Google Scholar]
- De Vries, M.; Bokkers, E.; Van Schaik, G.; Botreau, R.; Engel, B.; Dijkstra, T.; De Boer, I. Evaluating results of the Welfare Quality multi-criteria evaluation model for classification of dairy cattle welfare at the herd level. J. Dairy Sci. 2013, 96, 6264–6273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Vries, M.; Engel, B.; den Uijl, I.; van Schaik, G.; Dijkstra, T.; de Boer, I.J.M.; Bokkers, E.A.M. Assessment time of the Welfare Quality (R) protocol for dairy cattle. Anim. Welf. 2013, 22, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Creative Research Systems. Available online: www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm (accessed on 23 June 2016).
- Anon. Setting up of Gau Sadans. Available online: https://epaper.tribuneindia.com/t/687 (accessed on 24 August 2016).
- Cook, N.B. The influence of barn design on dairy cow hygiene, lameness and udder health. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Convention of American Association of Bovine Practitioners, Madison, WI, USA, 26–28 September 2002; pp. 97–103. [Google Scholar]
- Otten, N.D.; Rousing, T.; Houe, H.; Thomsen, P.T.; Sørensen, J.T. Comparison of animal welfare indices in dairy herds based on different sources of data. Anim. Welf. 2016, 25, 207–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cafe, L.M.; Robinson, D.L.; Ferguson, D.M.; McIntyre, B.L.; Geesink, G.H.; Greenwood, P.L. Cattle temperament: Persistence of assessments and associations with productivity, efficiency, carcass and meat quality traits. J. Anim. Sci. 2011, 89, 1452–1465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Krawczel, P.D.; Hill, C.T.; Dann, H.M.; Grant, R.J. Short. Effect of Stocking Density on Indices of Cow Comfort. J. Dairy Sci. 2008, 91, 1903–1907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Vries, M.; Bokkers, E.A.M.; van Schaik, G.; Engel, B.; Dijkstra, T.; de Boer, I.J.M. Exploring the value of routinely collected herd data for estimating dairy cattle welfare. J. Dairy Sci. 2014, 97, 715–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Edmonson, A.; Lean, I.; Weaver, L.; Farver, T.; Webster, G. A body condition scoring chart for Holstein dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 1989, 72, 68–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomsen, P.T.; Baadsgaard, N.P. Intra-and inter-observer agreement of a protocol for clinical examination of dairy cows. Prev. Vet. Med. 2006, 75, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Flower, F.C.; Weary, D.M. Effect of Hoof Pathologies on Subjective Assessments of Dairy Cow Gait. J. Dairy Sci. 2006, 89, 139–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huxley, J.; Whay, H.R. Cow based assessments Part 3: Locomotion scoring, claw overgrowth and injuries associated with farm furniture. Livestock 2006, 11, 51–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaplin, S.; Munksgaard, L. Evaluation of a simple method for assessment of rising behaviour in tethered dairy cows. Anim. Sci. 2016, 72, 191–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rousing, T.; Bonde, M.; Badsberg, J.H.; Sørensen, J.T. Stepping and kicking behaviour during milking in relation to response in human–animal interaction test and clinical health in loose housed dairy cows. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2004, 88, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huxley, J.; Whay, H.R. Welfare: Cow based assessments Part 2: Rising restrictions and injuries associated with the lying surface. Livestock 2006, 11, 33–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wechsler, B.; Schaub, J.; Friedli, K.; Hauser, R. Behaviour and leg injuries in dairy cows kept in cubicle systems with straw bedding or soft lying mats. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2000, 69, 189–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whay, H.; Main, D.; Green, L.; Webster, A. Animal-based measures for the assessment of welfare state of dairy cattle, pigs and laying hens: Consensus of expert opinion. Anim. Welf. 2003, 12, 205–217. [Google Scholar]
- Whay, H.R.; Main, D.C.; Green, L.E.; Webster, A.J. Assessment of the welfare of dairy cattle using animal-based measurements: Direct observations and investigation of farm records. Vet. Rec. 2003, 153, 197–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huxley, J.; Whay, H.R. Welfare: Cow based assessments Part 1: Nutrition, cleanliness and coat condition. Livestock 2006, 11, 18–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popescu, S.; Borda, C.; Sandru, C.D.; Stefan, R.; Lazar, E. The welfare assessment of tied dairy cows in 52 small farms in North Eastern Transylvania using animal-based measurements. Slov. Vet. Res. 2010, 47, 77–82. [Google Scholar]
- Leeb, C.; Main, D.; Whay, H.; Webster, A. Bristol Welfare Assurance Programme–Cattle Assessment; University of Bristol: Bristol, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Roussel, A.J. Fluid therapy in mature cattle. Vet. Clin. Food Anim. Pract. 2014, 30, 429–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kielland, C.; Boe, K.E.; Zanella, A.J.; Osteras, O. Risk factors for skin lesions on the necks of Norwegian dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2010, 93, 3979–3989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coignard, M.; Guatteo, R.; Veissier, I.; des Roches, A.d.B.; Mounier, L.; Lehébel, A.; Bareille, N. Description and factors of variation of the overall health score in French dairy cattle herds using the Welfare Quality® assessment protocol. Prev. Vet. Med. 2013, 112, 296–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aalseth, E. Fresh cow management: What is important, what does it cost, and what does it return. In Proceedings of the Western Dairy Management Conference, Reno, NV, USA, 9–11 March 2005; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Hulsen, J. Cow Signals: A Practical Guide for Dairy Farm Management; Roodbont Publishers: Zutphen, The Netherlands, 2005; ISBN 978-9075280654. [Google Scholar]
- Hartnell, G.F.; Satter, L.D. Determination of rumen fill, retention time and ruminal turnover rates of ingesta at different stages of lactation in dairy cows. J. Anim. Sci. 1979, 48, 381–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aitchison, E.; Gill, M.; Dhanoa, M.; Osbourn, D. The effect of digestibility and forage species on the removal of digesta from the rumen and the voluntary intake of hay by sheep. Br. J. Nutr. 1986, 56, 463–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Llamas-Lamas, G.; Combs, D. Effect of forage to concentrate ratio and intake level on utilization of early vegetative alfalfa silage by dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 1991, 74, 526–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaaijer, D.; Noordhuizen, J. A novel scoring system for monitoring the relationship between nutritional efficiency and fertility in dairy cows. Ir. Vet. J. 2003, 56, 145–152. [Google Scholar]
- Von Keyserlingk, M.A.G.; Barrientos, A.; Ito, K.; Galo, E.; Weary, D.M. Benchmarking cow comfort on North American freestall dairies: Lameness, leg injuries, lying time, facility design, and management for high-producing Holstein dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2012, 95, 7399–7408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bartussek, H.; Leeb, C.; Held, S. Animal Needs Index for Cattle (Ani 35 L/2000-Cattle); Federal Research Institute for Agriculture in Alpine Regions BAL Gumpenstein: Irdning, Austria, 2000.
- Decibel X Android Phone Application. Available online: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.skypaw.decibel&hl+en AU (accessed on 23 August 2016).
- Phillips, C.; Morris, I. The locomotion of dairy cows on floor surfaces with different frictional properties. J. Dairy Sci. 2001, 84, 623–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phillips, C.J. Principles of Cattle Production, 2nd ed.; CABI: Oxfordshire, UK, 2010; ISBN 987-1-84593-397-5. [Google Scholar]
- Costa, J.; Hötzel, M.; Longo, C.; Balcão, L. A survey of management practices that influence production and welfare of dairy cattle on family farms in southern Brazil. J. Dairy Sci. 2013, 96, 307–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Regula, G.; Danuser, J.; Spycher, B.; Wechsler, B. Health and welfare of dairy cows in different husbandry systems in Switzerland. Prev. Vet. Med. 2004, 66, 247–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greub, L.J.; Cosgrove, D.R. Judging crop quality, part II: Score sheets for evaluating haylage and corn silage. NACTA J. 2006, 50, 46–51. [Google Scholar]
- Evans, D.L. The distribution of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Cramer-von Mises, and Anderson-Darling test statistics for exponential populations with estimated parameters. In Computational Probability Applications; Drew, J.H., Leemis, L.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 165–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Viksten, S.; Visser, E.; Nyman, S.; Blokhuis, H. Developing a horse welfare assessment protocol. Anim. Welf. 2017, 26, 59–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Main, D.C.J.; Whay, H.R.; Lee, C.; Webster, A.J.F. Formal animal-based welfare assessment in UK certification schemes. Anim. Welf. 2007, 16, 233–236. [Google Scholar]
- Farm Animal Welfare Council 2009 Five Freedoms. Available online: www.fawc.org.uk/freedoms.htm (accessed on 12 March 2018).
- Winckler, C.; Capdeville, J.; Gebresenbet, G.; Hörning, B.; Roiha, U.; Tosi, M.; Waiblinger, S. Selection of parameters for on-farm welfare-assessment protocols in cattle and buffalo. Anim. Welf. 2003, 12, 619–624. [Google Scholar]
- Sandgren, C.H.; Lindberg, A.; Keeling, L.J. Using a national dairy database to identify herds with poor welfare. Anim. Welf. 2009, 18, 523–532. [Google Scholar]
- De Vries, M.; Bokkers, E.A.M.; Dijkstra, T.; van Schaik, G.; de Boer, I.J.M. Invited review: Associations between variables of routine herd data and dairy cattle welfare indicators. J. Dairy Sci. 2011, 94, 3213–3228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Thomsen, P.T.; Kjeldsen, A.M.; Sørensen, J.T.; Houe, H. Mortality (including euthanasia) among Danish dairy cows (1990–2001). Prev. Vet. Med. 2004, 62, 19–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, R.; Kuhn, M.; Norman, H.; Wright, J. Death losses for lactating cows in herds enrolled in dairy herd improvement test plans. J. Dairy Sci. 2008, 91, 3710–3715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dairy, U.S.D.A. Part II: Changes in the US Dairy Cattle Industry, 1991–2007; Fort Collins: USDA-APHIS-VS, CEAH; U.S.D.A.: Fort Collins, CO, USA, 2008; pp. 57–61.
- Henderson, A.; Perkins, N.; Steve, B. Determining Property-Level Rates of Breeder Mortality in Northern Australia: Literature Review; Meat & Livestock Australia Limited: Sydney, Australia, 2013; pp. 1–33. ISBN 9781925045529. Available online: https://www.mla.com.au/download/finalreports?itemId=405 (accessed on 27 March 2019).
- Amble, V.; Jain, J.P. Comparative performance of different grades of crossbred cows on military farms in India. J. Dairy Sci. 1967, 50, 1695–1702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alvåsen, K.; Jansson Mörk, M.; Hallén Sandgren, C.; Thomsen, P.T.; Emanuelson, U. Herd-level risk factors associated with cow mortality in Swedish dairy herds. J. Dairy Sci. 2012, 95, 4352–4362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shahid, M.Q.; Reneau, J.K.; Chester-Jones, H.; Chebel, R.C.; Endres, M.I. Cow- and herd-level risk factors for on-farm mortality in Midwest US dairy herds. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98, 4401–4413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joshi, S.; Gokhale, S. Status of mastitis as an emerging disease in improved and periurban dairy farms in India. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2006, 1081, 74–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banerjee, G.C. A Textbook of Animal Husbandry, 7th ed.; Oxford & IBH Publishing Company: New Delhi, India, 1991; ISBN 978-8120400665. [Google Scholar]
- Sarkar, A.; Dhara, K.; Ray, N.; Goswami, A.; Ghosh, S. Physical characteristics, productive and reproductive performances of comparatively high yielding Deshi Cattle of West Bengal, India. Livest. Res. Rural Dev. 2007, 19. Available online: http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd19/9/sark19122.htm (accessed on 12 September 2018).
- Mülleder, C.; Troxler, J.; Waiblinger, S. Methodological aspects for the assessment of social behaviour and avoidance distance on dairy farms. Anim. Welf. 2003, 12, 579–584. [Google Scholar]
- Overton, M.; Moore, D.; Sischo, W. Comparison of commonly used indices to evaluate dairy cattle lying behavior. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Dairy Housing Conference, Fort Worth, TX, USA, 29–31 January 2003; pp. 125–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cook, N.B.; Bennett, T.B.; Nordlund, K.V. Monitoring Indices of Cow Comfort in Free-Stall-Housed Dairy Herds. J. Dairy Sci. 2005, 88, 3876–3885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, R.; Watts, P.; Stafford, R. Covered Housing Systems. In Feedlot Design and Construction; Watts, P.J., Davis, R.J., Keane, O.B., Luttrell, M.M., Tucker, R.W., Stafford, R., Janke, S., Eds.; Meat & Livestock Australia: Sydney, Australia, 2016; ISBN 9781741919165. [Google Scholar]
- Manoharan, T. Expert System for Cattle and Buffalo. Available online: http://www.agritech.tnau.ac.in/expert_system/cattlebuffalo/aboutus.html (accessed on 5 September 2018).
- Huzzey, J.M.; DeVries, T.J.; Valois, P.; von Keyserlingk, M.A. Stocking density and feed barrier design affect the feeding and social behavior of dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 2006, 89, 126–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lievaart, J.J.; Noordhuizen, J.P.T.M. Ranking experts’ preferences regarding measures and methods of assessment of welfare in dairy herds using Adaptive Conjoint Analysis. J. Dairy Sci. 2011, 94, 3420–3427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, S.; Prabhakar, S.; Singh, S.; Ghuman, S. Incidence of lameness in dairy cows and buffaloes in Punjab State. Indian Vet. J. 1998, 75, 63–65. [Google Scholar]
- Sood, P. Effect of Lameness on Reproduction in Dairy Cows. Ph.D. Thesis, PAU Ludhiana, Ludhiana, India, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Platz, S.; Ahrens, F.; Bahrs, E.; Nüske, S.; Erhard, M.H. Association between floor type and behaviour, skin lesions, and claw dimensions in group-housed fattening bulls. Prev. Vet. Med. 2007, 80, 209–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Telezhenko, E.; Bergsten, C.; Magnusson, M.; Ventorp, M.; Nilsson, C. Effect of different flooring systems on weight and pressure distribution on claws of dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2008, 91, 1874–1884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Busato, A.; Trachsel, P.; Blum, J. Frequency of traumatic cow injuries in relation to housing systems in Swiss organic dairy herds. J. Vet. Med. A 2000, 47, 221–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Webb, N.; Nilsson, C. Flooring and injury—An overview. In Farm Animal Housing and Welfare; Baxter, S.H., Baxter, M.R., MacCormack, J.A.D., Eds.; Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1983; pp. 226–259. ISBN 0-89838-597-0. [Google Scholar]
- Blom, J. Traumatic injuries and foot diseases as related to housing systems. In Farm Animal Housing and Welfare; Baxter, S.H., Baxter, M.R., MacCormack, J.A.D., Eds.; Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1983; pp. 216–223. ISBN 0-89838-597-0. [Google Scholar]
- Potterton, S.; Green, M.; Harris, J.; Millar, K.; Whay, H.; Huxley, J. Risk factors associated with hair loss, ulceration, and swelling at the hock in freestall-housed UK dairy herds. J. Dairy Sci. 2011, 94, 2952–2963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maton, A.; Daelemans, J.; Lambrecht, J. Housing of cattle. In Housing of Animals: Construction and Equipment of Animal Houses, 1st ed.; Maton, A., Daelemans, J., Lambrecht, J., Eds.; Elsevier Science: New York, NY, USA, 2012; Volume 6, pp. 87–142. ISBN 0444419403. [Google Scholar]
- Irps, H. Results of research projects into flooring preferences of cattle. In Farm Animal Housing and Welfare; Baxter, S.H., Baxter, M.R., MacCormack, J.A.D., Eds.; Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1983; pp. 200–215. ISBN 0-89838-597-0. [Google Scholar]
- Hughes, J. A system for assessing cow cleanliness. Practice 2001, 23, 517–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chavhan, P.; Maske, D.; Jagtap, H. Prevalence of Arthropod Parasites in Bovines (Cattle and Buffalo) in Eastern Zone of Vidarbha Region. Adv. Life Sci. 2013, 2, 60–61. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, H.; Sharma, D.; Singh, J.; Sandhu, K. A study on the epidemiology of brucellosis in Punjab (India) using Survey Toolbox. Rev. Sci. Tech. 2005, 24, 879–885. [Google Scholar]
- Bharadwaj, R.; Bal, A.M.; Joshi, S.A.; Kagal, A.; Pol, S.S.; Garad, G.; Arjunwadkar, V.; Katti, R. An urban outbreak of leptospirosis in Mumbai, India. Jpn. J. Infect. Dis. 2002, 55, 194–196. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, B.; Gumber, S.; Randhawa, S.; Dhand, N. Prevalence of bovine tuberculosis and paratuberculosis in Punjab. Indian Vet. J. 2004, 81, 1195–1196. [Google Scholar]
- Kamboj, M.L.; Prasad, S.; Oberoi, P.S.; Manimaran, A.; Lathwal, S.S.; Gupta, K. National Code of Practices for Management of Dairy Animals in India; National Dairy Research Institute: Karnal, India, 2014; p. 80. [Google Scholar]
- Panda, A.; Kumar, A. Environmental pollution caused by stray animals in Palampur City, Himachal Pradesh. In Proceedings of the Compendium of the 5th Annual Conference of the Indian Association of Veterinary Public Health Specialists (IAVPHS), Palampur, India, 12–14 October 2006; pp. 28–29. [Google Scholar]
- Park, K. Parks Textbook of Preventive and Social Medicine, 23rd ed.; Banarsidas Bhanot Publishers: Jabalpur, India, 2011; p. 868. ISBN 9789382219057. [Google Scholar]
- Chantalakhana, C.; Korpraditsakul, R.; Skunmun, P.; Poondusit, T. Environmental conditions and resource management in smallholder dairy farms in Thailand. II. Effects of dairy wastes on water and soil. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 1999, 12, 215–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farm Animal Welfare Council. Second Report on Priorities for Research and Development in Farm Animal Welfare; FAWC, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food: London, UK, 1993.
- Moran, J. Managing High Grade Dairy Cows in the Tropics; CSIRO Publishing: Collingwood, Australia, 2012; pp. 1–265. [Google Scholar]
- Rushen, J.; De Passillé, A. Effects of roughness and compressibility of flooring on cow locomotion. J. Dairy Sci. 2006, 89, 2965–2972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rushen, J.; De Passille, A.M. Flooring options to minimize lameness and optimize welfare. In Proceedings of the 27th Western Canadian Dairy Seminar Advances in Dairy Technology, Red Deer, AB, Canada, 10 March 2009; pp. 293–301. [Google Scholar]
- Palmer, M.A.; Olmos, G.; Boyle, L.A.; Mee, J.F. A comparison of the estrous behavior of Holstein-Friesian cows when cubicle-housed and at pasture. Theriogenology 2012, 77, 382–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Telezhenko, E.; Magnusson, M.; Bergsten, C. Gait of dairy cows on floors with different slipperiness. J. Dairy Sci. 2017, 100, 6494–6503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tucker, C.B.; Weary, D.M. Bedding on Geotextile Mattresses: How Much is Needed to Improve Cow Comfort? J. Dairy Sci. 2004, 87, 2889–2895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heffner, R.S.; Heffner, H.E. Hearing in large mammals: Sound-localization acuity in cattle (Bos taurus) and goats (Capra hircus). J. Comp. Psychol. 1992, 106, 107–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patbandha, T.; Swain, D.; Pathak, R.; Mohapatra, S.; Sahoo, S. Photoperiodic manipulation for augmentation of dairy animal performance. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 5, 4594–4601. [Google Scholar]
- Buyserie, A.C.; Dahl, G.E.; Gamroth, M.J. Managing Light in Dairy Barns for Increased Milk Production. Oregon State University Extension Service, 2001. Available online: https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/administrative_report_or_publications/xd07gt178 (accessed on 23 September 2018).
- Furnaris, F.; Ghimpeteanu, O.M.; Predoi, G. Dairy Cows’ Welfare Assessment in a Farm from South-Eastern Romania. Agric. Agric. Sci. Procedia 2016, 10, 403–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ranjhan, S.K. Nutrient Requirement of Livestock and Poultry, 2nd ed.; Indian Council of Agricultural Research: New Delhi, India, 1997; p. 72. [Google Scholar]
- Birthal, P. India’s Livestock Feed Demand: Estimates and Projections. Agric. Econ. Res. Rev. 2010, 23, 15–28. [Google Scholar]
- Ireland-Perry, R.L.; Stallings, C.C. Fecal Consistency as Related to Dietary Composition in Lactating Holstein Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 1993, 76, 1074–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Upadhyay, R.C.; Hooda, O.K.; Anjali Aggarwal, A.; Singh, S.V.; Ritu Chakravarty, R.; Sirohi, S. Indian Livestock Production has Resilience for Climate Change. In Proceedings of the Climate Resilient Livestock & Production System, National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, India, 18 November–1 December 2013; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
Parameter | Mean/Median * | Standard Deviation | First Quartile Q1 | Third Quartile Q3 | Interquartile Range IQR * | p-Value of Distribution (for Normal Distributed Data) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total no. cattle in the shelter | 232 * | - | 126 | 587 | 460 | |
Cows as % of cattle | 63.42 * | 52.65 | 73.48 | 20.84 | ||
No. cows | 137 * | 77 | 349 | 272 | ||
Cow age (years) | 11.0 | 2.02 | 0. 36 | |||
Annual Mortality (%) ** | 1.14 (13.80) | 0.399 | 0.57 | |||
Proportion of cows with identification | 0.41 * | 0.0 | 0.82 | 0.82 | ||
Proportion of horned cows | 0.93 * | 0.7 | 1.000 | 0.3 | ||
Proportion of lactating cows | 0.03 * | 0.000 | 0.2 | 0.2 | ||
Temperament score** | 0.41 (2.61) | 0.068 | 0.24 | |||
Cow comfort Index (CCI), (no. cows lying/total no. cows) | 0.27 | 0.13 | 0.34 | 0.20 | ||
Avoidance Distance (AD) Score (scale 1–4) | 1.53 * | 1.2 | 2.13 | 0.93 | ||
Body Condition Score (BCS) Score (scale 1–5) | 2.69 | 0.366 | 0.27 | |||
Lameness score (scale 1–5) | 1.13 * | 1.05 | 1.27 | 0.22 | ||
Claw overgrowth score (scale 0–3) | 0.61 * | 0.23 | 0.90 | 0.67 | ||
Hock joint swelling score (scale 0–3) | 1.64 * | 0.233 | 2.233 | 0.44 | ||
Hock joint hair loss score (scale 0–3) | 1.05 | 0.298 | 0.22 | |||
Hock joint ulceration score (scale 0–3) | 0.59 | 0.386 | 0.16 | |||
Carpal joint injuries score (scale 0–3) | 0.78 | 0.455 | 0.17 | |||
Dirty hind limbs score ** (scale 0–3) | 0.21 ** (1.59) | 0.110 | 0.63 | |||
Dirty udder score (scale 0–3) | 1.27 | 0.560 | 0.90 | |||
Dirty flanks score (scale 0–3) | 1.24 | 0.570 | 0.95 | |||
Body hair loss score (scale 0–3) | 0.76 * | 0.066 | 2.033 | 1.04 | ||
Coat condition score (scale 1–3) | 1.54 | 0.298 | 0.07 | |||
Ectoparasitism score (scale 0–3) | 1.51 * | 0.966 | 3.267 | |||
Skin tenting score (scale 0–4) | 0.03 * | 0.000 | 0.833 | |||
Lesions from shelter furniture score (scale 0–3) | 0.75 * | 0.066 | 1.600 | 0.67 | ||
Teat condition score (scale 0–5) | 1.0 * | 0.92 | 1.00 | 0.075 | ||
Neck lesions score (scale 1–5) | 1.03 * | 1.000 | 1.10 | 0.1 | ||
Ocular lesions score (scale 0–1) | 0.06 * | 0.033 | 0.133 | 0.1 | ||
Nasal discharge score (scale 0–1) | 0.05 * | 0.000 | 0.141 | 0.141 | ||
Rumen Fill Score (scale 1–5) | 3.7 * | 3.19 | 3.90 | 0.708 | ||
Faecal consistency score (scale 0–5) | 3.70 * | 3.19 | 3.93 | 0.741 | ||
Diarrhoea score (scale 0–1) | 0.000 * | 0.000 | 0.033 | 0.033 |
Variable | Median/Mean * | SD | First Quartile Q1 | Third Quartile Q3 | Inter Quartile Range IQR | p-Value (Normal Distribution) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total number of sheds | 2.0 | 2 | 4 | 2 | ||
Number of animals/shed | 70.0 | 48.8 | 137.3 | 88.5 | ||
Area of the shed (m2) | 173 | 99 | 313 | 214 | ||
Area of the yard (m2) | 756 | 178 | 1800 | 1622 | ||
Shed Area/cow (m2/cow) | 2.73 | 1.56 | 3.63 | 2.07 | ||
Yard Area/cow (m2/cow) | 5.9 | 3.6 | 21.5 | 17.9 | ||
Area of movement of tethered cows (m2) | 4.50 * | 2.752 | 0.044 | |||
Height of eaves in sheds (m) | 3.80 | 2.99 | 5.34 | 2.35 | ||
Luminosity in sheds (Lux) | 582 | 89 | 1036 | 946 | ||
Noise levels in sheds (Decibels) | 27.67 | 21.33 | 37.17 | 15.83 | ||
Noise levels in the yards (Decibels) | 25.33 | 20.33 | 33.00 | 12.67 | ||
Dry bulb reading in sheds (◦C) | 29.50 | 27.2 | 32.8 | 5.6 | ||
Humidity in sheds (%) | 34.00 | 24.7 | 45.2 | 20.5 | ||
Coefficient of friction in shed passage floors | 0.43 | 0.27 | 0.65 | 0.37 | ||
Coefficient of friction in yard passage floors | 0.64 | 0.34 | 0.68 | 0.34 | ||
Mean gradient of shed lying areas | 1.46 | 0.96 | 2.2 | 1.23 | ||
Mean gradient of shed passages | 2.36 | 1.27 | 3.52 | 2.24 | ||
Mean gradient of the yard floors | 1.51 | 1.13 | 2.43 | 1.30 | ||
Percent dung in lying areas of sheds | 15.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 35.00 | ||
Percent dung in the passages of sheds | 10.00 | 5.00 | 42.50 | 37.50 | ||
Percent dung in yards | 20.00 | 10.00 | 40.00 | 30.00 | ||
Quantity of roughages provided to the cows (kg) ** | 1.25 ** (17.66) | 0.168 | 0.061 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Sharma, A.; Kennedy, U.; Schuetze, C.; Phillips, C.J.C. The Welfare of Cows in Indian Shelters. Animals 2019, 9, 172. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9040172
Sharma A, Kennedy U, Schuetze C, Phillips CJC. The Welfare of Cows in Indian Shelters. Animals. 2019; 9(4):172. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9040172
Chicago/Turabian StyleSharma, Arvind, Uttara Kennedy, Catherine Schuetze, and Clive J. C. Phillips. 2019. "The Welfare of Cows in Indian Shelters" Animals 9, no. 4: 172. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9040172
APA StyleSharma, A., Kennedy, U., Schuetze, C., & Phillips, C. J. C. (2019). The Welfare of Cows in Indian Shelters. Animals, 9(4), 172. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9040172