Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Seven Measures to Reduce Tail Biting Lesions in Fattening Pigs

Abstract

Tail biting is an important animal welfare issue in the pig sector. Studies have identified various risk factors which can lead to biting incidents and proposed mitigation measures. This study focused on the following seven key measures which have been identified to affect the risk of tail biting lesions: improvements in straw provision, housing ventilation, genetics, stocking density, herd health, provision of point-source enrichment objects, and adoption of early warning systems. The aim of this study was to examine whether these selected measures to reduce the risk of tail biting lesions in pig fattening are cost-effective. The problem was analyzed by first summarizing the most prospective interventions, their costs and expected impacts on the prevalence of tail biting lesions, second, by using a stochastic bio-economic model to simulate the financial return per pig space unit and per pig at different levels of prevalence of tail biting lesions, and third by looking at how large a reduction in tail biting lesions would be needed at different levels of initial prevalence of lesions to cover the costs of interventions. Tail biting lesions of a severity which would require an action (medication, hospitalization of the pig or other care, or taking preventive measures) by the pig producer were considered in the model. The results provide guidance on the expected benefits and costs of the studied interventions. According to the results, if the average prevalence of tail biting lesions is at a level of 10%, the costs of this damaging behavior can be as high as €2.3 per slaughtered pig (~1.6% of carcass value). Measures which were considered the least expensive to apply, such as provision of point-source enrichment objects, or provided wider production benefits, such as improvements in ventilation and herd health, became profitable at a lower level of efficacy than measures which were considered the most expensive to apply (e.g., straw provision, increased space allowance, automated early warning systems). Measures which were considered most efficient in reducing the risk of tail biting lesions, such as straw provision, can be cost-effective in preventing tail biting, especially when the risk of tail biting is high. At lower risk levels, the provision of point-source objects and other less costly but relatively effective measures can play an important role. However, selection of measures appropriate to the individual farm problem is essential. For instance, if poor health or barren pens are causing the elevated risk of tail biting lesions, then improving health management or enriching the pens may resolve the tail biting problem cost-effectively.

Economic feasibility of interventions targeted at decreasing piglet perinatal and pre-weaning mortality across European countries

“…Regarding the profitability requirements, our results are in agreement with the recent study concerning the cost-effectiveness analysis of measures to reduce tail biting in fattening pigs [ 43 ]. According to Niemi et al [ 43 ] interventions which were considered the least expensive to apply (e.g. such as provision of point-source enrichment objects) or provided wider production benefits (e.g.…”

“…Regarding management interventions, our results indicated that the provision of point-source objects is financially viable for reducing perinatal mortality. Similar results were obtained in a previous study on cost-effective measures to reduce tail-biting in fattening pigs [ 43 ], mostly due to the relatively low prices of intervention. Even though, in our study, enrichment consisted of both high-fiber diet and provision of wood attached to a chain, the measure was quite inexpensive to be adopted across different production conditions.…”

“…On the one hand, one may consider that the associations derived from an observational study cannot be readily extrapolated in casual relationships and should be confirmed with experimental research. On the other hand, as seen on the example of cost–benefit analyses of tail-biting lesions [ 43 ], parametrizing a bio-economic model using information from previously published experimental studies may be challenging. The challenge in parameterization is related with between-experiment variation in the efficacy of preventive measures.…”

“…Therefore, specific interventions might not be equally effective between farms. Furthermore, as noticed by Niemi et al [ 43 ] appropriate targeting of the measures is essential for their profitability because an intervention is not automatically always effective, and the selection of an intervention must be solution-oriented. For this reason, analyzing herd productivity and management as well as conducting small management experiments, involving part of the herd, might be advisable before adjusting whole management procedures.…”

Interactive Rooting Towers and Behavioural Observations as Strategies to Reduce Tail Biting on Conventional Pig Fattening Farms

“…On a farm with 10% prevalence of tail injuries, costs were estimated to be EUR 2.30 and on a farm with 50% prevalence more than EUR 12. For most of the expensive measures (as straw provision), therefore, a large effect (reduction in prevalence of injuries) is required to be profitable [ 82 ].…”