8_Group_Assessment 群體動物福利評估法

advertisement
Module 8
模組8
Group assessment and
management of welfare
動物福利的群體評估與管理
1
This module will enable you to
此模組將使你能夠
• Understand the principles of welfare
assessment at group level了解群體福利之評估原則
• Identify different methods for assessment確認不
同的評估方法
• Recognise applications for welfare assessment
at group level認識動物福利群體評估的應用
• Understand management of health and welfare
in group systems了解群體健康與福利系統的管理
2
Introduction介紹
Assessment of individual animal 動
物的個體評估使用下列參數:
For example, assessment of comb
colour, feather-score, beak 雞冠色
澤,羽毛評估,喙
How do you assess
thousands?你要如何評
估上千隻動物?
3
Principles of welfare assessment on group
level群體動物福利評估的原則
• Which groups of animals?什麼樣的動物
群體
– Farms農場動物
– Laboratory animals實驗動物
– Animals in shelters收容所的動物
– Wildlife野生動物
– Etc.及其他
4
Principles of welfare assessment on group
level群體動物福利評估的原則
• Requirements for welfare indicators動物福利指標的要
求
– Practicability實用性
• E.g. time constraints, expenses如時間限制、成本
– Reliability: Amount of random error, including可信度:統
計誤差,包括
• Agreement between observers不同評審之一致同意
• Agreement between different observations of the
same observer同一評審對不同測試項目之觀察結果
– Validity: Meaningfulness of the parameter有效性:有意
義的參數
5
Epidemiological approach流行病學
• Selecting a representative cross-section of
groups of animals (e.g. from all dairy units of an
area)從不同動物群體中橫切選擇有代表性的抽樣(如同一
地區之不同乳牛群)
• Random selection of animals of a group同一群體
中之動物做亂數抽樣
• Assessment評估
– Severity and duration of a problem問題的嚴重性和持
續性
– Numbers of animals affected – i.e. Prevalence and
Incidence受影響的動物數目-盛行率和發生率
6
Methods方法
• Input – assessment 間接評估
– Measurements of housing 房舍測量
– Provision of food and water食物飲水提供
– Qualification of stockperson工作人員能力
– Medicine records 醫療記錄
• Output – assessment 直接評估
– Assessment of live animal 活動物的評估
– Assessment of dead animal (abattoir, post mortems) 死動物評
估(屠宰場,死後屠體等評估)
7
Welfare Inputs & Outputs動物福利的間接與成果
STOCKMAN技師
ENVIRONMENT環境
ANIMAL動物
E.g. training訓練
E.g. housing, diet房舍
食物
WELFARE
INPUTS動物
福利的間接
E.g. breeding育種
ANIMAL-BASED MEASURES
以動物為基礎的評估
WELFARE
Disease/production疾病和生產 Behaviour行為
Physiology生理
OUTPUTS動
物福利的成
果
8
Example 1: Animal-centred assessment
例子1:以動物為中心的評估(Main et al 2003)
• Welfare outputs
• 動物福利的直接參數
• Dairy cows乳牛
– Farm records農場檢驗紀錄
– Farmer’s estimates
of disease incidence, body condition etc農民對
疾病發生率及身體狀況的評估
– Independent observations獨立的觀察
9
Example 2: Animal Needs Index 例子
2:動物需求指數(Bartussek et al 2000)
• Uses welfare inputs & outputs使用動物福利
的間接和直接參數
•
•
•
•
•
Space and movement空間和移動
Social interaction社交
Flooring地板材料
Light and air光線和空氣
Stockmanship飼養員關懷
– E.g. animal cleanliness動物的清潔
10
Can we describe ‘welfare’ with
one score?是否可以用一種標準測
量
• A variety of parameters are assessed各種
評估參數
– Can they be summarised to one score?是否可
以簡化到只用一種標準做指標
– Are some more important than others?是否某
些參數較重要
– What is a ‘normal’ level?何謂正常水準?
11
Applications應用
• Research研究
– Health and welfare monitoring衛生與福利監測
– Impact assessment of interventions干擾衝擊評估
• Voluntary Certification Schemes NGO主辦之
認證制度
– E.g., American Meat Institute如美國肉類協會
• Legislation立法
• Advisory - Preventive medicine勸導-預防醫學
12
Research examples研究範例
•
•
•
•
Monitoring 監測下列各項評估
Assess range in ‘normal’ groups正常群體評估項目
Assess husbandry systems 農場系統評估
Assess individual resources (risk factors) 個體資
源(風險因子)評估
• Assess certification schemes NGO認證系統評估
• Assess influence of new legislation新法規效力
• Assess impact of projects 策略衝擊評估
13
Assess range in normal farms
正常乳牛場生理值
14
Compare husbandry systems
比較農場系統
Individual housing of pregnant
sows (Leeb et al, 2001)個別懷孕
母豬舍
• 2.4% lame跛足
• 21.4% overgrown claws
趾過長
• 41.7% calluses長老繭
Group housing of pregnant
sows群體懷孕豬舍
• 5.3% lame跛足
• 8.3% overgrown claws
趾過長
• 18.2% calluses長老繭
15
Assess effect of interventions
評估干涉的效果
• Vaccination campaigns
疫苗注射活動
• Owner education
and training飼主之教育訓練
• Assess before & after
intervention干渉前後之差別
• Compare locations
with and without intervention有或沒有實施干涉
16
Example: Health monitoring
舉例:衛生監測
• Current policy 當前政策
– Normal treatment and prevention protocol 正常防
治計畫
• Records 記錄-疾病發生
– Disease incidence
• Review 檢視水準
– Target levels目標水準
– Intervention levels干涉水準
• Action plan 計劃做法
17
Health and welfare monitoring
衛生與福利監測
• Also applicable for wild animals同樣應用再野生動物
• Assessment of inputs e.g.
評估間接參數如
– Adequate grazing適當牧區
– Access to water牧區內之飲水
• Assessments of outputs 評估直接參數
– Body condition score體態評分
– Number of young幼畜數目
– Physiological parameters - e.g. cortisol in
faeces生理參數-如糞皮質醇
18
Voluntary/certification examples NGO
認證舉例
• Farm assurance schemes農場保險
– Usually market-led通常是市場導向
– Prime concern is food safety主要考慮食品安全
• UK - Red Tractor Mark scheme, Freedom
Foods英國認證標籤
• USA – Certified Humane Program美國認證標籤
• Austria - “Tierschutzgeprueft” use Animal
Needs Index for laying hens澳洲:使用動物需求索引在蛋
雞上
19
Voluntary/certification examples
NGO認證舉例
• EUREPGAP - international國際認證法律
• Organic certification systems有機認證系統
– Voluntary membership but some EU
legislative requirements (EU reg.
1804/1999)歐盟有機立法
• Subsidy requirements補貼需求
– Voluntary system, can choose to join or not
可自由選擇加入
20
Legislation examples立法舉例
• EU legislation 98/58/EC歐盟立法
– Primarily resource-based standards基本資源
標準
– However, some can be assessed by
observing the animal然而,有些情況是目測動
物
• Austria: Animal Needs Index in certain
provinces 澳洲:動物需求索引在某些地區
– Salzburg & Tyrol (澳洲若干省)
– Minimum ANI score使用最低的ANI評分
21
Legislation examples立法舉例
• Ireland: Individual cow health assessment
愛爾蘭:牛隻個體衛生評估
– Annual inspection of cow as part of TB test
結核病檢測列入年度母牛評鑑
• Switzerland: Assessment of system by
research centre瑞士:研究中心評估
– New husbandry systems assessed and
authorised新畜牧系統評估授權
22
How do legislation or certification
schemes work?立法或認證之程序
Standards...
.-(1) Where calves are housed in groups, they shall have sufficient unobstructed
floor space to be able to turn round and lie down without hindrance, and in any
event each calf of 150 kg or more live weight must have at least 1.5 square metres
unobstructed floor space.(2) Until 1st January 2004, the preceding sub-paragraph
shall not apply in relation to accommodation in use before 1st January 1994.(3)
Where tethers are used, they must not cause injury to the calves and must be
inspected regularly and adjusted as necessary to ensure a comfortable fit. Each
tether must be of sufficient length to allow the calves to stand up, lie down, rest
and groom itself without hindrance. The design must be such as to avoid, as far as
possible, any risk of strangulation or injury.2. Where a calf is housed in an
individual stall or pen-(a) the stall or pen shall have at least one perforated wall
which enables the calf to see other animals in neighbouring pens or stalls unless
isolated for veterinary reasons, except that -until 1st January 2004. this shall not
apply in relation to accommodation in use before 1st January 1994;(b) the width of
the stall or pen shall be no less than the height of the calf at the withers;(c) the calf
must be able to stand up, turn round, lie down, rest and groom itself without
hindrance.
Standards define the
resources that should
be provided標準(規範)
定義應提供之資源要求
23
Standards: Means-orientated
設備導向標準
• Resources are required • Example: “Animals not kept in
independent of their
buildings shall at all times
actual effect要求與它們
have access to a well-drained
的實際影響無相關性
lying area”無畜舍農場應全時間提
• Based on good
供動物乾燥躺臥處所
practice/ welfare
research應以好的操作
與福利研究為要求基礎
• Assessed by looking at
resources應以觀察設備
資源進行評估
24
Standards: Goal-orientated
目標導向標準(譯註:直接標準)
• Level of required
Example: ‘Animals shall be
resources is defined with
fed a wholesome diet in
reference to their effect
sufficient quantity to maintain
on the animals on each
them in good health, satisfy
farm必要提供的資源要求水準是
their nutritional needs and
根據其對該農場動物之影響
promote a positive state of
• Assessed by looking at
well-being.’例如:動物應該給予完全
the animal要親眼看到動物予以 食物,供應量需達到維持良好衛生之要求,
評估
滿足營養需求與提升正面福利狀況。
25
Advisory/Management examples
建議/管理舉例
• Problem analysis 問題分析
– Perceive–evaluate-act-revaluate 問題之察覺-評估-行動再評估
• Benchmarking system 參考評分系統
– Giving points of references for 給下列評分標準之分數
• Animal based parameters 以動物為基礎之參數
• Production performance 生產表現
• Management system 管理系統
– Health plan e.g. Farm Assurance requirement 衛生計畫,
如農場保險需求
– HACCP systems危害分析及關鍵管制點系統
26
Example: Goat farm
舉例:山羊農場
• Perceive problem察覺問題
– Death of 3 adult breeding females 3隻成年種
母羊死亡
• Clinical evaluation e.g
臨床評估如
– Body condition
score體態評分
– Teeth檢視牙齒
– Superficial lymph
nodes表層淋巴結
– Mucous membranes黏膜
27
Example: Goat farm (cont)
舉例:山羊農場(續)
100
90
prevalence of goats (%)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
BCS
1,5
BCS
2
BCS
2.5
BCS
3
BCS
3.5
28
Benchmarking systems
參考評分系統
• Welfare assessment of farm農場之福利評估
• Compare with welfare on farms in the
same area和同地域的農場比較動物福利
• Produce farm-specific priorities for action
建立農場特定的行動優先次序
• Identify farm strengths and weaknesses
確認農場之優缺點
29
Benchmarking
Example 1: Calluses in sows
參考評分 舉例1: 43個豬場之豬腿繭數目做檢測標準
Number of calluses per pig on 43 farms
9.00
8.00
calluses
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
(Leeb et al, 2001)
30
Benchmarking
Example 2: Health of dairy cows
參考評分舉例2:乳牛的衛生
31
Benefits of benchmarking
參考評分的益處
• Feedback to farmers motivates them對農民的
回饋可以激勵他們
• Encourage鼓勵
– Competition between farms over results各
農場結果(數據)之競爭
– Incentive system補貼系統
– Better price for animal products if criteria
are met畜產品若符合標準則設法降價
32
Benefits of benchmarking
參考評分的益處
• Educate推廣教育
– Raise awareness of own performance提高自己表現之認知
– Awareness of husbandry solutions to problems了解農場必
須解決問題
• Enforce加強執行力
– Define minimum welfare performance定義最低動物福利表
現
– Can be used to pass/fail e.g. animal-dependent legislation
可用在及格/不及格 如:以動物為基礎之立法
– Alternatively, farmer must produce and implement action
plan for certification scheme或者,農民必須建立行動計畫
並執行取得認證
33
Health plan衛生計畫
62. Each herd should have a written health and welfare
programme produced, where necessary, with expert advice.
This should set out health and husbandry activities covering
the whole of the yearly cycle of production. The programme
should be reviewed and updated annually by the farmer and
should be available for inspection by enforcement authorities.
各農場均要有書面之衛生與福利計畫,必要時得請專家建議。
計畫需包含衛生與畜產整年度之生產行動。內容須每年由農民
做檢討與修正且需隨時可供督導單位監察。
Farm Animal Welfare Council Report on dairy cattle (1997)
農場動物福利委員會乳牛報告(1997)
34
Who is responsible?誰的責任
• Responsibility for the success of a welfare
action plan lies with為衛生計畫的成功進度負
責的
– Animal owner動物飼主
– Their advisors e.g. vet, nutritionist他們的顧問,如
獸醫、營養師
– The external assessor of the welfare scheme外界
的福利評審員
• Owner飼主
– Overall responsibility負一切責任
– Formulate plan for procedures擬訂計畫步驟
– Maintain records保管紀錄
35
Who is responsible?誰的責任
• Advisor顧問
– Advice on plans and record system給予計畫與記
錄系統建議
– Review of performance審查農場表現
– Advice on corrective action給予修正建議
• Assurance assessor保險評估者
– Assess availability of health plans/records衛生計
畫/記錄評估
– Assess frequency of review檢討頻度評估
– Assess implementation of health plan衛生計畫執
行評估
– Assess effectiveness of health plana衛生計畫效
果評估
36
General comments通案性意見
• Legislation and certification standards are mostly
resource–based立法與認證標準是大部份資源之基礎
– They rely on welfare research有賴於動物福利研究
• Legislation is variably enforced in many countries不同國
家之立法推動程度不同
• Certification schemes have a role in enforcing and going
beyond legislation認證體制扮演推動執法與超越立法的重
要角色
• Management systems (e.g. health plans) are not
currently used much管理系統(如衛生計畫)目前使用率不
高
37
Conclusions/Summary結論和摘要
• Practicability, reliability and validity are important可行性、
可信性與有效性都很重要
• Depending on the aim, a combination of different
parameters is favourable (inputs and outputs)決定於目
標,由多項參數共同決定是最好的(直接參數與間接參數)
• Research, voluntary certification schemes, legislation
and advisory tools are applications of welfare
assessment at group level科學研究、自發認證計劃、立
法與諮詢手段皆為群體動物福利評估之應用範疇
• The aim of all assessments should be the improvement
of animal welfare所有評估應以改善動物福利為宗旨
38
Resources:
Animal welfare judging, online
資源:動物福利線上評估
• Michigan State University, Animal Behavior
and Welfare Group
密西根州大學動物行為與福利團體
– http://www.msu.edu/~zanella/awjc.html
39
Resources: websites資源:網站
• EurepGAP
– A private sector body that sets voluntary standards for the
certification of agricultural products around the globe
– www.eurep.org
• COST Action: a forum for methods of measuring and monitoring
farm animal welfare and to stimulate welfare research
– www.cost846.unina.it
• UK Department of Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs
– http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/
• Welfare standards in organic farming
– http://www.veeru.reading.ac.uk/organic/proc/proceedings.htm
– http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/ahws/fhp/pdf/actionplan.pdf
– Welfare Quality Project, EU. www.welfarequality.net
40
Resources: welfare assessment and
monitoring資源:動物福利評估與監測
• Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm or Group Level Proceedings of an international workshop organised by the
Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences and the Royal
Veterinary and Agricultural University, 27-28 Aug. 1999,
Denmark. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. A Animal Sci., 2001 Suppl.
30, 3-4
• Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm or Group levelAbstracts of presentations and posters, University of Bristol (4-6
Sept. 2002, UK). Animal Welfare Volume 2003; Volume 12,
Issue 4
• Ekesbo I. 1992: Monitoring systems using clinical, subclinical
and behavioural records for improving health and welfare. In:
Moss, R. (ed) Livestock Health and Welfare, Bath press, Avon,
UK pp 20-50
41
Further Reading進階閱讀
• Bartussek H. 1999 A review of the animal needs index (ANI) for
the assessment of animals’ well-being in the housing systems for
Austrian proprietary products and legislation. Livestock Production
Science, 61: 179 – 192.
• Bartussek H, Leeb Ch & Held S 2000. Animal Needs Index for
Cattle. Federal Research Institute for Agriculture in Alpine
Regions.
• Farm Animal Welfare Council 1997 Report on the Welfare of Dairy
Cattle. Report 3426. www.fawc.org.uk/reports.htm
• Grandin T. Interpretation of the American Meat Institute Animal
Handling Guidelines for auditing the welfare of cattle, pigs, and
sheep at slaughter plants.
http://www.grandin.com/interpreting.ami.guidelines.html
42
Further Reading進階閱讀
• Johnsen PF, Johannesson T & Sandøe P. 2001. Assessment of
farm animal welfare at herd level: many goals, many methods.
Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A - Animal Science 51
(Supplement 30) 2001 26 – 33
• Leeb B,Leeb Ch, Troxler J, Schuh M. 2001 Skin Lesions and
Callosities in Group-Housed Pregnant Sows: Animal-Related
Welfare Indicators. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A Animal Science 51 (Supplement 30):82 - 87
• Main DC, Whay HR ,Green LE & Webster AJ. 2003. Effect of
the RSPCA Freedom Food Scheme on the welfare of dairy
cattle. Veterinary Record 153: 227-231
• Whay HR, Main DCJ, Green LE & Webster AJF. 2003
Assessment of dairy cattle welfare using animal–based
measurements:direct observations and investigation of farm
records. Veterinary Record 153: 197-202
43
Download
Related flashcards

Management

42 cards

Corporate governance

23 cards

Canadian Hockey League

15 cards

Civil defense

33 cards

Create Flashcards