Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T20:15:29.517Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

COWEL: a decision support system to assess welfare of husbandry systems for dairy cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

WW Ursinus ,
F Schepers ,
RM de Mol ,
MBM Bracke ,
JHM Metz  and
PWG Groot Koerkamp
WW Ursinus*
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB, Lelystad, The Netherlands Farm Technology Group, Agrotechnology and Food Sciences Group of Wageningen University and Research Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands
F Schepers
Affiliation:
Farm Technology Group, Agrotechnology and Food Sciences Group of Wageningen University and Research Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands
RM de Mol
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB, Lelystad, The Netherlands
MBM Bracke
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB, Lelystad, The Netherlands
JHM Metz
Affiliation:
Farm Technology Group, Agrotechnology and Food Sciences Group of Wageningen University and Research Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands
PWG Groot Koerkamp
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB, Lelystad, The Netherlands Farm Technology Group, Agrotechnology and Food Sciences Group of Wageningen University and Research Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: nanda.ursinus@wur.nl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Animals have various behavioural and physiological needs that are important for welfare. Fulfilment of these needs depends on the quality of housing, management and animal characteristics. The objective of this study was to develop a model to assign welfare scores to husbandry systems for dairy cattle, based on scientific results, and thereby supporting the design of new, welfare-friendly systems. COWEL is a computer-based decision support system that contains attributes regarding housing and management conditions. These attributes are technical specifications that contain various technical units called levels. These levels are ranked from best-to-worst regarding welfare, based on scientific information about animal-based parameters. This information, inserted in the model as statements, was weighted depending on the impact it has on welfare by using weighting categories. Thereafter, a weighting factor was calculated for each attribute which determines how important an attribute is for welfare. The COWEL model contains 2,343 statements on dairy cattle welfare from 476 sources found during a literature survey. The model was applied to four husbandry systems, namely a tie-stall, cubicle housing, a straw yard and a pasture-based system. The welfare scores, calculated by COWEL for these husbandry systems, correspond with the general opinion about these systems. A tie-stall receives a low and a pasture-based system a high welfare score: 211 and 271, respectively. A husbandry system can receive a maximum of 313 on the welfare scale of COWEL. We conclude that COWEL can be used to rank husbandry systems on a welfare scale, and may be a useful tool to develop new, sustainable and welfare-friendly systems for dairy cattle.

Keywords

animal welfaredairy cattledecision support systemhusbandry systemsmanagementsemantic modelling
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 18 , Issue 4: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level , November 2009 , pp. 545 - 552
Copyright
© 2009 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anonymous 2001 Scientists’ assessment of the impact of housing and management on animal welfare. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 4(1): 3–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, NA, Ng, KT, Jongman, EC and Hemsworth, PH 2007 The behavioural and physiological responses of dairy heifers to tape-recorded milking facility noise with and without a pre-treatment adaptation phase. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 106: 13–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartussek, H, Leeb, CH and Held, S 2000 Animal Needs Index for Cattle. ANI 35 L/2000, Cattle pp 6. Publicatie Bundesanstalt für Alpenländische Landwirtschaft: Gumpenstein Irdning, AustriaGoogle Scholar
Berry, SL 2001 Milking the golden cow-her comfort. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 219(10): 1382–1387Google ScholarPubMed
Bracke, MBM 2008 RICHPIG: a semantic model to assess enrichment materials for pigs. Animal Welfare 17: 289–304Google Scholar
Bracke, MBM, Spruijt, BM, Metz, JHM and Schouten, WGP 2002 Decision support system for overall welfare assessment in pregnant sows A: model structure and weighting procedures. Journal of Animal Science 80: 1819–1834Google Scholar
Breuer, K, Hemsworth, PH and Coleman, GJ 2003 The effect of positive or negative handling on the behavioural and physiological responses of nonlactating heifers. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 84(1): 3–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Mol, RM, Schouten, WGP, Evers, E, Drost, WC, Houwers, HWJ and Smits, AC 2006 A computer model for welfare assessment of husbandry systems for laying hens. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 54: 157–168Google Scholar
Faye, B and Lescourret, F 1989 Environmental factors associated with lameness in dairy cattle. In: Phillips, C (ed) Cattle Behaviour and Welfare, Second Edition pp 13. Blackwell Science: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Haskell, MJ, Brotherstone, S, Lawrence, AB and White, IMS 2007 Characterization of the dairy farm environment in Great Britain and the effect of the farm environment on cow life span. Journal of Dairy Science 90: 5316–5323CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ketelaar-De Lauwere, CC, Ipema, AH, Lokhorst, C, Metz, JHM, Noordhuizen, JPTM, Schouten, WGP and Smits, AC 2000 Effect of sward height and distance between pasture and barn on cows’ visits to an automatic milking system and other behaviour. Livestock Production Science 65: 131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kondo, S, Sekine, J, Okubo, M and Asahida, Y 1989 The effect of group size and space allowance on the agonistic and spacing behaviour of cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 24: 127–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shimmura, T, Hirahara, S, Eguchi, Y, Uetake, K and Tanaka, T 2008 A proposal of overall welfare assessment for laying hens, comparisons of our science-based with environment-based and animal-based assessment. WAFL 2008 Scientific Committee, Book of abstracts of the 4th International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level pp 121 (Abstract). Ghent, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Somers, JGCJ, Frankena, K, Noordhuizen-Stassen, EN and Metz, JHM 2003 Prevalence of claw disorders in Dutch dairy cows exposed to several floor systems. Journal of Dairy Science 86(6): 2082–2093CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vokey, FJ, Guard, CL, Erb, HN and Galton, DM 2001 Effects of alley and stall surfaces on indices of claw and leg health in dairy cattle housed in a free-stall barn. Journal of Dairy Science 84(12): 2686–2699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willeberg, P 1991 Animal welfare studies: Epidemiological considerations. Proceedings of a Meeting, Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine pp 76–82. 17-19th April 1991, London, UKGoogle Scholar