Stakeholder views on treating pain due to dehorning dairy calves

Abstract

A common and painful management practice undertaken on most dairy farms is dehorning young calves (also called ‘disbudding’ when done on calves less than about two months of age). Despite much evidence the practice is painful, and effective means available to mitigate this pain, it is frequently performed without pain relief. The overall aim of this study was to describe different stakeholder views on the use of pain mitigation for disbudding and dehorning. Using an interactive, online platform, we asked participants whether or not they believed that calves should be disbudded and dehorned with pain relief and to provide reasons to support their choice. Participant composition was as follows: dairy producer or other farm worker (10%); veterinarian or other professional working with the dairy industry (7%); student, teacher or researcher (16%); animal advocate (9%); and no involvement with the dairy industry (57%). Of 354 participants, 90% thought pain relief should be provided when disbudding and dehorning. This support was consistent across all demographic categories suggesting the industry practice of disbudding and dehorning without pain control is not consistent with normative beliefs. The most common themes in participants’ comments were: pain intensity and duration, concerns about drug use, cost, ease and practicality and availability of alternatives. Some of the participants’ reasoning corresponded well with existing scientific evidence, but other reasons illustrated important misconceptions, indicating an urgent need for educational efforts targeted at dairy producers and dairy industry professionals advising these producers.

Public concerns about dairy-cow welfare: how should the industry respond?

“…For example, even though tail docking is still common on dairy farms in the USA, both producers and the public tend to agree that the practice is not acceptable (Weary et al 2011). Similarly, although many calves are still disbudded without any form of pain relief, producers and the public widely agree that pain relief should be provided (Robbins et al 2015). Finally, even though only a small minority of dairy farms in the USA provide routine access to pasture, producers and the public seem to agree that pasture access is desirable .…”

“…In this case, authors may still disagree (for example, some using a clinical scale and others quantifying the surface area with faecal contamination), but these disagreements tend to be technical as all agree that cleanliness is relevant. Pain is an affective state (or 'feeling'), and, thus, more difficult to study scientifically, but here too, there is wide agreement that pain (however it is measured) is the relevant consideration (Robbins et al 2015).…”

“…These producers would benefit from targeted extension efforts that show why docking is ineffective (and sometimes counterproductive), and that provide examples of more effective strategies for improving cow cleanliness and udder health (Weary et al 2011). Similarly, some producers stated that they believed that effective methods of pain mitigation for disbudding were either not available, or were prohibitively expensive (Robbins et al 2015). Here too, targeted producer extension events could help overcome these barriers by showing the efficacy of pain mitigation provided by various agents, and documenting the costs involved.…”

Online Chats to Assess Stakeholder Perceptions of Meat Chicken Intensification and Welfare

“…Conventional focus groups are face-to-face discussions, and while they are useful in providing a rich understanding of a particular topic, they do have a number of limitations, such as constraints on time and distance. For this reason, online discussions have recently been employed in Canada as a successful and low-cost means to explore animal welfare views [14,22,33]. An additional advantage of these virtual focus groups is that participants’ identity can be protected.…”

Why Pain Is Still a Welfare Issue for Farm Animals, and How Facial Expression Could Be the Answer

“…Allowing an animal to experience pain that could be alleviated, or performing painful practices intentionally on animals are amongst the highest concerns the public has about animal welfare [2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Farm animals are recognized as sentient beings that have the ability to experience both pleasurable and aversive states [9], and there is legislation around the world protecting animals from pain and suffering, albeit inconsistent in level of protection and enforcement; for example, the UK's Animal Welfare Act 2006 protects farm animal welfare by preventing unnecessary suffering caused by an act or failing to act when required, whereas France's Rural and Maritime Fishing Code and the Penal Code, although offers some protection from deliberate cruelty or neglect to captive animals, it does not cover wild animals and it provides exemption for traditions such as bull fighting, cock fighting and the force feeding of ducks and geese to produce foie gras.…”