6.1 Animal welfare

Animal welfare means the well-being of non-human animals. It refers to the quality of life experienced by an animal and encompasses how well the animal is coping with its current situation and surroundings. Human-animal relationships can affect animal welfare, and we are responsible for ensuring that all animals are treated humanely, responsibly, and respectfully.

The Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare, proposed by Irish scientist Francis Brambell in 1965 and established by the United Kingdom’s Farm Animal Welfare Council in 1979, indicate the very minimum living standards for animals in captivity:

1. Freedom from hunger, malnutrition, and thirst by having easy access to fresh water and eating a healthy diet to remain in good health.
2. Freedom from fear and distress by establishing conditions and care that prevent mental distress.
3. Freedom from heat stress or physical discomfort by providing a suitable setting that protects and provides a comfortable resting place.
4. Freedom from pain, injury, and disease by early diagnosis and treatment or prevention.
5. Freedom to express normal patterns of behaviour by providing the animal enough space, sufficient facilities, and a company of its species.

6.2 Importance of animal welfare

Low welfare practice on farms negatively affects an animal’s physical and mental health. For example,

• A lower space allowance negatively influences calves’ behavioural and physiological responses.
• In lactating animals, a lack of wallowing area during the hot season inhibited the expression of wallowing, a typical buffalo natural habit, and reduced fertility.
• Inappropriate feeding management of dry cows and female calves has increased the occurrence of vaginal and uterine prolapses.

Animal welfare and food safety are essential to an overall food quality concept. Animal welfare is a prerequisite for animal health, productivity, and economy. Practicing good welfare on the farm will result in good animal health, less disease prevalence and susceptibility, improved farm biosecurity, a more organized management system, and more comfortable space. FAO recently announced animal welfare as the core component of sustainable livestock production.

6.3 Indicators of buffalo welfare

• Body condition score: In the buffalo, as well as in cattle, Body Condition Scoring (BCS) is used to estimate the energy balance, body composition, and body stores in place of live weight change. This parameter should be used to assess undernutrition (BCS<2.5), with a high prevalence of thin buffaloes associated with reduced levels of animal welfare.
• Cleanliness: The examination of body cleanliness gives some idea about animal comfort and the attitude of the workers towards the herd. Soiling of skin and hair may hamper thermoregulation and anti-microbial properties of healthy skin in cattle. But this does not apply to the buffaloes. Wallowing in water or mud is a typical thermoregulatory behavior of this animal. Therefore, mud in the body coat is not a negative indicator of buffalo welfare. But a thick and compact layer of dung may be associated with higher stocking density.
• Lameness: Lameness is an excellent indicator of animal welfare status in a buffalo farm. It is a significant welfare concern associated with long-term pain and discomfort. Several factors may cause lameness, such as unbalanced nutrition, flooring, social behavior, and transportation. Sometimes abnormal claw conditions (claw overgrowth and corkscrew claw) may cause lameness. Bulls with claw abnormalities are excluded from reproduction as these traits may transmit genetically.
• Alteration of integument: Skin lesions are signs of animal welfare. Any alteration of integument can measure the impact of the surrounding environment on the animal body. High stock density, hard floors, and hit with feed rack and cubicle may cause alteration of normal skin. Body coat thinning and any hairless patch are suggested to be recorded as impaired animal welfare.
• Disease and mortality: Disease and mortality in a buffalo dairy farm is a problem both in terms of welfare and economic loss. Welfare can be assessed by the farmers using parameters that directly or indirectly reflect the animal’s health. Respiratory, enteric, and reproductive problems, including prolapses and mastitis, mortality, and culling rate due to disease and accidents, should be recorded to measure welfare on a farm.
• Abnormal behaviors: Buffalo calves often show cross-suckling behavior resulting in inflammation or injuries at the prepuce, teats, or navel. This behavior may also observe in lactating animals resulting in milk loss. This behavior can be prevented using a weaning ring (A device, like nose rings or flaps, used to prevent calves from suckling). Moreover, offering enough milk frequently in teat buckets may prevent this behavior.
• Wallowing and grazing: Animals, irrespective of species, should also be able to develop naturally and express species-specific behavior. In recent years, to improve milk hygiene and reduce udder disease and disease transmission, buffaloes are less allowed to wallow in potholes and pools, instead only providing water spray. It has been observed that giving natural wallowing facilities such as ponds or pools, or potholes may accelerate milk production and reproductive efficiency, indicative of higher animal welfare.
• Human-animal relationship: The relationship between humans and animals is essential to animal welfare. Positive stock-person interaction can significantly reduce the number of kicking during milking and the percentage of oxytocin use in animals.

References

1. World Animal Protection, “What is animal welfare and why is it important?” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.worldanimalprotection.org.nz/news/animal-welfare-and-why-important  [Accessed 12 November 2022].
2. World Organization for Animal Health, “Animal Welfare,” World Organization for Animal Health, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/animal-health-and-welfare/animal-welfare/ [Accessed 12 November 2022].
3. F. Napolitano, G. G. F. De Rosa and A. Bordi, “Influence of space restriction on welfare of weaned buffalo claves (Bubalus bubalis),” Livest. Prod. Sci., vol. 86, pp. 117-124, 2004.
4. L. Zicarelli, D. Midea, G. Piccolo, R. Di Palo, G. Neglia and G. Campanile, ” Influenza della presenza di una vasca con acqua e fertilità nella bufala,” in 1st National Congress on Buffalo management, Eboli, Italy, 2001.
5. L. Zicarelli, “Considerations about the prophylaxis of the uterine and vaginal prolapse in Italian Mediterranean buffalo cows,” Bubalus Bubalis, vol. 6, pp. 71-90, 2000.
6. FAO, “Shaping the future of livestock sustainably, responsibly, efficiently,” 2018. [Online]. Available: www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/I8384EN/
7. C. Winckler, J. Capdeville, G. Gebresenbet, B. Hörning, U. Roiha, M. Tosi and S. Waiblinger, “Selection of parameters of on-farm welfare-assessment protocols in cattle and buffalo,” Anim. Welfare, vol. 12, pp. 619-624, 2003.
8. G. De Rosa, F. Grasso, F. Masucci, A. Bragaglio, C. Pacelli and F. Napolitano, “Assessment of human-animal relationship in dairy buffaloes,” in Proc. 48th International Congress ISAE, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain, 2014.
9. X. Manteca, E. Mainau and D. Temple, “What is Animal Welfare?” The Farm Animal Welfare Fact Sheet, no. 1, 2012.