Farmers’ Attitude Towards Animal Welfare Aspects and Their Practice in Organic Dairy Calf Rearing: a Case Study in Selected Nordic Farms

Articles

Abstract

In organic philosophy, the concept of “naturalness” is of major importance. According to the organic interpretation of animal welfare, natural living is considered a precondition for accomplishing welfare and the principal aims of organic production include the provision of natural living conditions for animals. However, respective regulations are lacking in organic legislation. In practice, the life of a calf in organic rearing systems can deviate from being natural, since common practices in dairy farms include early weaning, dehorning, or cow-calf separation soon after birth. This case study explores how calf welfare is approached in six different organic dairy farms and how far the concept of naturalness is implemented. The farms included in this study were located in Norway and Sweden. A semi-structured questionnaire was used for data collection. The interviewed farmers approach the concept of welfare in various ways and state that “naturalness” is an aspect of animal welfare. However, in practice in the calf rearing systems under study, only a few “naturalness” aspects were implemented. Reasons for the observed discrepancy might lie in differing understandings of “naturalness,” in economic restrictions, and in other trade-offs resulting from production system inherent characteristics and in limited regulation concerning provision of natural living aspects.

Keywords

Animal welfare Calf rearing Dairy Natural living Organic 

References

  1. Algers, B. (1992). Natural behavior–a natural concept? Berliner und Munchener Tierarztliche Wochenschrift, 105(11), 372–374.Google Scholar
  2. Alroe, H. F., Vaarst, M., & Kristensen, E. S. (2001). Does organic farming face distinctive livestock welfare issues?-A conceptual analysis. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14, 275–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bracke, M. B. M., & Hopster, H. (2006). Assessing the importance of natural behavior for animal welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(1), 77–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Broom, D. M. (1986). Indicators of poor welfare. British Veterinary Journal, 142(6), 524–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broom, D. M. (1991). Animal welfare: concepts and measurement. Journal of Animal Science, 69(10), 4167–4175.Google Scholar
  6. Commission Regulation 889/2008. (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 L, 250.Google Scholar
  7. Dawkins, M. S. (1980). Animal suffering: The science of animal welfare. London: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Duncan, I. J. H. (1993). Welfare is to do with what animals feel. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 6(2), 8–14.Google Scholar
  9. Duncan, I. J. H. (1996). Animal welfare defined in terms of feelings. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica (Section A—Animal Science), 27(Suppl), 29–35.Google Scholar
  10. Duncan, I. J. H., & Fraser, D. (1997). Understanding animal welfare. In M. C. Appleby & B. O. Hughes (Eds.), Animal welfare (pp. 19–31). Wallingford, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
  11. Field, T. G., & Taylor, R. E. (2007). Scientific farm animal production: An introduction to animal science (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Fraser, A. F., & Broom, D. M. (1997). Farm animal behaviour and welfare (3rd ed.). Wallingford, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
  13. Grondahl, A. M., Skancke, E. M., Mejdell, C. M., & Jansen, J. H. (2000). Growth rate, health and welfare in a dairy herd with natural suckling until 6–8 weeks of age. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 49, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hall, S. J. G. (2002). Behaviour of cattle. In P. Jensen (Ed.), The ethology of domestic animals. An introductory text (pp. 131–143). Oxford: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haynes, R. P. (2008). Animal welfare: Competing Conceptions and Their Ethical Implications. Springer.Google Scholar
  16. IFOAM (2005). The IFOAM norms for organic production and processing. International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements.Google Scholar
  17. IFOAM (2007a). Principles of organic agriculture. International federation of organic agriculture movements http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/principles/index.htm. Accessed 7 Oct 2007.
  18. Jensen, M. B., & Kyhn, R. (2000). Play behaviour in group-housed dairy calves, the effect of space allowance. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 67, 35–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lund, V. (2006). Natural living–a precondition for animal welfare in organic farming. Livestock Science, 100(2–3), 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lund, V., & Röcklinsberg, H. (2001). Outlining a concept of animal welfare for organic farming systems. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14, 391–424.Google Scholar
  21. Reinhardt, V., & Reinhardt, A. (1981). Natural sucking performance and age of weaning in zebu cattle (Bos indicus). Journal of Agricultural Science., 96, 309–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Vaarst, M., Alban, L., Mogensen, L., Milan, S., Kristensen, E. S., & Kirstensen, T. (2001). Health and welfare in danish dairy cattle in the transition to organic production: Problems, priorities and perspectives. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14, 367–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Verhoog, H., Matze, M., Van Bueren, E. L., & Baars, T. (2003). The role of the concept of the natural (naturalness) in organic farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16, 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. von Keyserlingk, M. A. G., & Weary, D. M. (2007). Maternal behavior in cattle. Hormones and Behavior, 52(1), 106–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wagenaar, J. P. T. M., & Langhout, J. (2007). Suckling systems in calf rearing in organic dairy farming in the Netherlands. Paper presented at 3rd QLIF Congress: Improving sustainability in organic and low input food production systems, university of Hohenheim, Germany, March 20–23, 2007. Organic eprints. Online. Available: http://orgprints.org/9851/.
  26. Waiblinger, S., Baumgartner, J., Kiley-Worthington, M., & Niebuhr, K. (2004). Applied ethology: The basis for improved animal welfare in organic farming. In M. Vaarst, S. Roderick, V. Lund, & W. Lockeretz (Eds.), Animal health and welfare in organic agriculture (pp. 117–162). Oxford: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Webster, J. (1994). Animal welfare: A cool eye towards Eden (1st ed.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  28. Wemelsfelder, F., & Birke, L. (1997). Environmental challenge. In M. C. Appleby & B. O. Hughes (Eds.), Animal welfare (pp. 35–47). Wallingford, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Theofano Vetouli
    • 1
  • Vonne Lund
    • 2
  • Brigitte Kaufmann
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Animal Production in the Tropics and Subtropics, Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Faculty of Agricultural SciencesHohenheim UniversityStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.National Veterinary InstituteOsloNorway
  3. 3.DITSL GmbH at the University of KasselWitzenhausenGermany

Personalised recommendations