Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T07:06:58.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Breeding and animal welfare: practical and theoretical advantages of multi-trait selection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

AB Lawrence*
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
J Conington
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
G Simm
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: a.lawrence@ed.sac.ac.uk

Abstract

The traditional concerns about farm animal welfare have centred around the impact of intensive environments and management practices on the animal. This emphasis on the physical environment is changing, however, with greater consideration being given to animal factors and in particular to the selective breeding of farm animals. In this paper we use examples from our own research on dairy cattle and sheep breeding that have made positive and practical contributions towards reducing welfare problems by creating more balanced breeding programmes. In both examples, inclusion of health and fitness traits into breeding indexes can be shown to be more profitable than selecting on production traits alone. In addition, we propose that in principle animal breeding combined with economics research can make a more general contribution towards resolving animal welfare issues, by providing a framework for the quantitative evaluation of the costs and benefits of an animal production system. The advantage of the approaches currently used in multi-trait selection is that they transform all traits (production-based or welfare-based) to a common currency allowing direct comparisons of costs and benefits. Currently the weights applied to traits reflect their economic value to the producer. This approach is likely to underestimate non-economic welfare aspects such as the pain or discomfort associated with lameness, and new approaches are needed to more fully account for these non-economic welfare costs. We therefore propose that consideration is given to the use of approaches such as contingent valuation, which has been widely used in economics to derive values for non-economic activities. The question of who would pay for the addition of these welfare costs to a breeding index remains open, but it would seem most reasonable to treat these as a public good and pay for them as such through appropriate mechanisms.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2004 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

Arrow, K, Solow, R, Portney, P R, Learner, E E, Radner, R and Scuman, H 1993 Report for the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Panel on Contingent Valuation. Resources for the Future: Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Bennett, R, Anderson, J and Blaney, R J P 2002 Moral intensity and willingness to pay concerning farm animal welfare issues and the implications for agricultural policy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15: 187202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, R and Larson, D 1996 Contingent valuation of the perceived benefits of farm animal welfare legislation: an exploratory survey. Journal of Agricultural Economics 47: 224235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, R M 1996 People's willingness to pay for farm animal welfare. Animal Welfare 5: 311Google Scholar
Binns, S H, Cox, I J, Rizvi, S and Green, L E 2002 Risk factors for lamb mortality on UK sheep farms. Preventative Veterinary Medicine 52: 287303CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brotherstone, S, Veerkamp, R F and Hill, W G 1998 Predicting breeding values for herd life of Holstein-Friesian dairy cattle from lifespan and type. Animal Science 67: 405411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conington, J 2003 Breeding for sustainable hill sheep production. SAC Information Sheet. Scottish Agricultural College: Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
Conington, J, Bishop, S C, Grundy, B, Waterhouse, A and Simm, G 2001 Multi-trait selection indexes for sustainable UK hill sheep production. Animal Science 73: 413423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conington, J, Simm, G and Lawrence, A B 2003 Breeding to improve cow welfare. SAC Technical Note (T550). Scottish Agricultural College: Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
Danbury, T C, Weeks, C A, Chambers, J P, Waterman-Pearson, A E and Kestin, S C 2000 Self-selection of the analgesic drug carprofen by lame broiler chickens. Veterinary Record 146(11): 307CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, R 2003 Bull index boosts welfare. Farmer's Weekly 14 March 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, S A, Robertson, J and Kelly, M 1999 The influence of housing research on welfare legislation. In: Russel, A J F, Morgan, C A, Savory, C J, Appleby, M C and Lawrence, T L J (eds) Farm Animal Welfare — Who Writes the Rules? pp 6574. British Society of Animal Science Occasional Publication No. 23. British Society of Animal Science: Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
FAIP (Farm Animal Industrial Platform) 2002 Farm Animal Breeding. Farm Animal Industrial Platform: The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
FAWC (Farm Animal Welfare Council) 1997 Report on the Welfare of Dairy Cattle. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food: London, UK. Available at: http://agrifor.ac.uk/whatsnew/detail/3009974.htmlGoogle Scholar
Henderson, C R 1975 Best linear unbiased prediction under a selection model. Biometrics 31: 423447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, R B and Hocking, P M 1999 Genetic selection for poultry behaviour: big bad wolf or friend in need? Animal Welfare 8(4): 343359Google Scholar
Kadarmideen, H N and Pryce, J E 2001 Genetic and economic relationships between somatic cell count and clinical mastitis and their use in selection for mastitis resistance in dairy cattle. Animal Science 73: 1928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempster, A J, Cook, G L and Grantley-Smith, M 1986 National estimates of body composition of British cattle, sheep and pigs with special reference to trends in fatness: a review. Meat Science 17: 107138CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mclnerney, J 1991 A socio-economic perspective in animal welfare. Outlook in Agriculture 20: 5156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olesen, I, Gjerde, B and Groen, A F 2000 Definition of animal breeding goals for sustainable production systems. Journal of Animal Science 78: 570582CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Philipot, J M, Pluvinage, P, Cimarosti, I, Sulpice, P and Bugnard, F 1994 Risk-factors of dairy-cow lameness associated with housing conditions. Veterinary Research 25(2-3): 244248.Google Scholar
Pryce, J E, Simm, G, Amer, P, Coffey, M P and Stott, A 1999 Returns and genetic improvement on indexes that include production, longevity, mastitis and fertility in UK circumstances. Genetic Improvement of Functional Traits in Cattle (GIFT) Workshop, October 1999, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Pryce, J E, Veerkamp, R F, Thompson, R, Hill, W G and Simm, G 1997 Genetic aspects of common health disorders and measures of fertility in Holstein Friesian dairy cattle. Animal Science 65: 353360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rauw, W M, Kanis, E N, Noordhuizen-Stassen, E N and Grommers, F J 1998 Undesirable side effects of selection for high production efficiency in farm animals: a review. Livestock Production Science 56: 1533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandøe, P, Nielsen, B L, Christensen, L G and Sørensen, P 1999 Staying good while playing god — the ethics of breeding farm animals. Animal Welfare 8: 313328Google ScholarPubMed
Simm, G 1998 Genetic Improvement of Cattle and Sheep. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Simm, G and Dingwall, W S 1989 Selection indexes for lean meat production in sheep. Livestock Production Science 21: 223233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weeks, C A, Danbury, T D, Davies, H C, Hunt, P and Kestin, S C 2000 The behaviour of broiler chickens and its modification by lameness. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 67(1-2): 111125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weller, J I 1994 Economic Aspects of Animal Breeding. Chapman and Hall: London, UKGoogle Scholar