Hostname: page-component-669899f699-swprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T22:45:53.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment of welfare and productive performance in dairy cows organically reared in plains or hilly areas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

G Martelli ,
H Valla ,
D Bucci ,
G Zaghini ,
G Vignola  and
L Sardi
G Martelli*
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Morphophysiology and Animal Production (DIMORFIPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Via Tolara di Sopra 50, 40064 Ozzano Emilia (BO), Italy
H Valla
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Morphophysiology and Animal Production (DIMORFIPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Via Tolara di Sopra 50, 40064 Ozzano Emilia (BO), Italy
D Bucci
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Morphophysiology and Animal Production (DIMORFIPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Via Tolara di Sopra 50, 40064 Ozzano Emilia (BO), Italy
G Zaghini
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Morphophysiology and Animal Production (DIMORFIPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Via Tolara di Sopra 50, 40064 Ozzano Emilia (BO), Italy
G Vignola
Affiliation:
Department of Food Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Teramo, Viale Crispi 212, 64100 Teramo, Italy
L Sardi
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Morphophysiology and Animal Production (DIMORFIPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Via Tolara di Sopra 50, 40064 Ozzano Emilia (BO), Italy
*
* Contact for correspondence and request for reprints: giovanna.martelli@unibo.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate several production parameters and the level of welfare of organic dairy cows kept in two different geographical and social contexts. The study group included 1,751 cows from 19 organic dairy farms, 11 of which were situated in hilly areas and 8 in plains areas. After an examination had been made of the general characteristics of each farm, the following data were collected: milk production; milk protein and lipid content; somatic cell count (SCC) and microbial count; lameness score (LS); body condition score (BCS) and udder cleanliness score (UHS). Welfare level was assessed using Bartussek's ANI-35-L system and the van Roessel ‘prototype for clinical welfare scoring’. Our data indicate that remarkable organisational and management differences exist between the two types of farms: farms in plains areas have a larger number of cattle and are corporate in structure rather than family run. The levels of welfare, health and production were shown to be high in both types of farms, though in some cases higher welfare scores were observed in farms situated in plains areas. The two types of ‘welfare scores’ we used were positively correlated. Our data indicate that organic farming of dairy cows successfully combines, in the large majority of cases, good levels of productivity, animal health and animal welfare; this latter aspect may be a valuable marketing point for organic milk, considering the propensity displayed by a significant portion of European consumers to buy food produced using systems that assure a high degree of animal welfare.

Keywords

animal welfareassessment systemdairy cowenvironmentorganic methodproduction parameters
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , February 2010 , pp. 17 - 23
Copyright
© 2010 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Amory, JR, Barker, ZE, Wright, JL, Mason, SA, Blowey, RW and Green, LE 2008 Associations between sole ulcer, white line disease and digital dermatitis and the milk yield of 1824 dairy cows on 30 dairy cow farms in England and Wales from February 2003-November 2004. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 83: 381–391Google ScholarPubMed
Amstel van, SR, Shearer, JK and Palin, FL 2004 Moisture content, thickness, and lesions of sole horn associated with thin soles in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 87: 757–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Associazione Italiana Allevatori (AIA) 2008 Bollettino dei controlli della produttività del latte. www.aia.it. [Title translation: Bulletin of controls on milk quality]Google Scholar
Bartussek, H 1999 A review of animal needs index (ANI) for the assessment of animal's well being in the housing systems for Austrian proprietary products and legislation. Livestock Production Science 61: 179–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartussek, H, Leeb, CH and Held, S 2000 Animal Need Index for cattle ANI 35 L/2000, cattle. Federal Research Institute for Agriculture in Alpine Regions BAL pp 1–20. Gumpenstein 8952: Irdning, AustriaGoogle Scholar
Breuer, K, Hemsworth, PH, Barnett, JL, Matthews, LR and Coleman, GJ 2000 Behavioural response to humans and the productivity of commercial dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 66: 273–288CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Capion, N, Thamsborg, SM and Enevoldsen, C 2008 Conformation of hind legs and lameness in Danish Holstein heifers. Journal of Dairy Science 91: 2089–2097Google ScholarPubMed
Cochran, WG 1977 Sampling Techniques, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons Inc: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Dantzer, R and Morméde, P 1983 Stress in farm animals: a need for re-evaluation. Journal of Animal Science 57: 6–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EC 2004 Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin Official Journal of the European Union Series L 226. Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
EC 2005 Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals. Special Eurobarometer 229/Wave 63.2 - TNS Opinion & Social pp 1–138. http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/euro_barometer25_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
EC 2007a Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91. Official Journal of the European Union Series L 189. Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
EC 2007b Attitudes of EU citizens towards Animal Welfare. Special Eurobarometer 270/Wave 66.1 - TNS Opinion & Social pp 1–82. http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/survey/sp_barometer_aw_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
EC 2008 Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products with regard to organic production, labelling and control. Official Journal of the European Union Series L 250 pp 1–84. Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Edmonson, AJ, Lean, IJ, Weaver, LD, Farver, T and Webster, GA 1989 A body condition scoring chart for Holstein dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 72(1): 68–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, KA, Innocent, GT, Mihm, M, Cripps, P, McLean, WG, Howard, CV and Grove-White, D 2007 Dairy cows cleanliness and milk quality on organic and conventional farms in the UK. Journal of Dairy Research 74: 302–310CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galindo, F and Broom, DM 2002 The effects of lameness on social and individual behaviour of cows. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 5(3): 193–291CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamilton, C, Hansson, I, Ekman, T, Emanuelson, U and Forslund, K 2002 Health of cows, calves and young stock on 26 organic dairy herds in Sweden. The Veterinary Record 150: 503–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemsworth, PH, Bamett, JL, Beveridge, L and Matthews, LR 1995 The welfare of extensively managed dairy cattle. A review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 42(3): 161–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) 2008 The Principles of Organic Agriculture. http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/principles/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Martelli, G, Rudatis, A, Conedera, I and Sardi, L 2005 Considerazioni sull'allevamento della bovina da latte con metodo biologico in zona dolomitica. Obiettivi e Documenti Veterinari 26(3): 11–15. [Title translation: Survey on organic farming of dairy cows in a Dolomites Mountains district]Google Scholar
Napolitano, F, De Rosa, G, Caporale, G, Carlucci, A, Grasso, F and Monteleone, E 2007 Bridging consumer perception and on-farm assessment of animal welfare. Animal Welfare 16: 249–253Google Scholar
Noordhuizen, JPTM and Metz, JHM 2005 Quality control on dairy farms with emphasis on public health, food safety, animal health and welfare. Livestock Production Science 94: 51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ofner, E, Amon, T, Lins, M and Amon, B 2003 Correlations between the results of animal welfare assessment by the TGI 35 L Austrian Animal Needs Index and health and behavioural parameters of cattle. Animal Welfare 12: 571–578Google Scholar
Regione Emilia Romagna 2006 Rapporto sull'agricoltura biologica in Emilia Romagna anno 2005 http://www.ermesagricoltura.it/wcm/ermesagricoltura/info_consumatori/sapori_valori/sezione_sapori_valori/s_biologico/s_att_controllo/rapporto_agri_bio_RER_2005. [Title translation: Report on organic farming in Emilia Romagna 2005]Google Scholar
Roesch, M, Doherr, MG and Blum, JW 2005 Performance of dairy cows on Swiss farms with organic and integrated production. Journal of Dairy Science 88: 2462–2475CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roessel van, S, Noordhuizen, JPTM, Nieuwenhuijzen, D and Bos van den, R 2002 Clinical welfare scoring on dairy farms: prototyping (unpublished data cited by Noordhuizen and Metz 2005)Google Scholar
SAS 1999 SAS/STAT User's Guide (Version 8). SAS Institute Inc: Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar
Sato, K, Bartlett, PC, Erskine, RJ and Kaneene, JB 2005 A comparison of production and management between Wisconsin organic and conventional dairy herds. Livestock Production Science 93: 105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreiner, DA and Ruegg, PL 2002 Effect of tail docking on milk quality and cow cleanliness. Journal of Dairy Science 85: 2503–2511CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trevisi, E, Bionaz, M, Piccioli-Cappelli, F and Bertoni, G 2006 The management of intensive dairy farms can be improved for better welfare and milk yield. Livestock Production Science 103: 231–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) 2008 Terrestrial Animal Health Code 2008. Section 7, Chapter 7.1 Introduction to the recommendations for animal welfare. www.http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/Mcode/en_chapitre_1.7.1.htmGoogle Scholar