15 pages. Pages 1-15 of journal. No volume or issue listed., In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to describe differences between India and the United States in public perceptions of free-roaming dogs and cats, concerns related to free-roaming animals, and preferred strategies for veterinary medical interventions and population management. Between August 2021 and February 2022, 498 individuals completed an online survey including 210 Indian respondents and 288 American respondents. Free-roaming dogs and cats were largely perceived as community animals among Indian respondents, with significantly more respondents indicating they should be allowed to roam freely compared with American respondents. Respondents from both countries were concerned about animal welfare, although Americans were significantly more likely to list animal welfare, public health and wildlife risks as significant concerns related to free-roaming cats and dogs. American respondents were also more likely to support adoption for sociable animals and euthanasia for unsociable animals, whereas Indian respondents were more likely to support spay/neuter, vaccinate and release strategies for both dogs and cats. Our findings speak to the importance of implementing tailored strategies for free-roaming cat and dog management based on local cultures and community perceptions of free-roaming animals.
Wilms, Lisa (author), Komainda, Martin (author), Hamidi, Dina (author), Riesch, Friederike (author), Horn, Juliane (author), and Isselstein, Johannes (author)
Format:
Journal Article
Publication Date:
2024-04-15
Published:
USA: Oxford University Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 209 Document Number: D13552
11 pages, Virtual fencing (VF) is a modern fencing technology that requires the animal to wear a device (e.g., a collar) that emits acoustic signals to replace the visual cue of traditional physical fences (PF) and, if necessary, mild electric signals. The use of devices that provide electric signals leads to concerns regarding the welfare of virtually fenced animals. The objective of this review is to give an overview of the current state of VF research into the welfare and learning behavior of cattle. Therefore, a systematic literature search was conducted using two online databases and reference lists of relevant articles. Studies included were peer-reviewed and written in English, used beef or dairy cattle, and tested neck-mounted VF devices. Further inclusion criteria were a combination of audio and electrical signals and a setup as a pasture trial, which implied that animals grazed in groups on grassland for 4 h minimum while at least one fence side was virtually fenced. The eligible studies (n = 13) were assigned to one or two of the following categories: animal welfare (n studies = 8) or learning behavior (n studies = 9). As data availability for conducting a meta-analysis was not sufficient, a comparison of the means of welfare indicators (daily weight gain, daily lying time, steps per hour, daily number of lying bouts, and fecal cortisol metabolites [FCM]) for virtually and physically fenced animals was done instead. In an additional qualitative approach, the results from the welfare-related studies were assembled and discussed. For the learning behavior, the number of acoustic and electric signals and their ratio were used in a linear regression model with duration in days as a numeric predictor to assess the learning trends over time. There were no significant differences between VF and PF for most welfare indicators (except FCM with lower values for VF; P = 0.0165). The duration in days did not have a significant effect on the number of acoustic and electric signals. However, a significant effect of trial duration on the ratio of electric-to-acoustic signals (P = 0.0014) could be detected, resulting in a decreasing trend of the ratio over time, which suggests successful learning. Overall, we conclude that the VF research done so far is promising but is not yet sufficient to ensure that the technology could not have impacts on the welfare of certain cattle types. More research is necessary to investigate especially possible long-term effects of VF.
17 pages, o sustain the economic viability of a livestock farm in a global market, characterised by a price undercutting competition, farmers are forced to adapt to what the market demands. At the same time, they have to care for the functionality of the farm system as a whole and of the subsystems, such as the farm animals, so that they for their part they can contribute to an economic success. Now, that animal health and welfare (AHW) has become an increasingly important issue for citizens and consumers, not only the decision makers but also the disciplines of animal science are challenged to improve an unsatisfying AHW level that has been neglected for long. However, to reduce AHW problems requires a quite different approach than to increase productive efficiency. A common sense can be assumed concerning the need to strive for an optimal cost-to-benefit ratio while balancing positive and negative impacts of production processes on economic and AHW target figures. However, what is often not adequately considered is the fact that economic and biological demands have to be balanced within a living system, e.g. in the individual animal and farm system. These function as the relevant reference systems in all cases where measures to reduce AHW problems are considered. Furthermore, there is a large gap of scientific knowledge, however, not in the traditional sense. While the predominant approaches, scientists generate context-invariant, and thus generalisable disposal knowledge in diversified subdisciplines, problem solving requires contextualisation, orientation and action-guiding knowledge within transdisciplinary approaches. The reason is that AHW problems are highly context-sensitive as well as multifactorial. They develop within the farm specific interconnectedness of manifold and highly varying factors, emerging a complexity that does not allow predictive statements via inductive approaches but requires an iterative procedure to approach to a farm specific AHW level, which is balanced with the overarching goal of economic viability. Recommended action guiding knowledge has to be of high external and ecological validity, before farmers might consider it to be implemented in farm practice. From the reflection about the discrepancy between the knowledge needed to reduce AHW problems and what is offered by animal science, it is concluded that not only the farm systems but also the predominant approaches of animal science have to be transformed. Otherwise, there is not a big chance to considerably reduce AHW problems in farm animals.
16 pages, Mounting concern over the negative externalities of industrialized animal agriculture, coupled with falling cost curves of novel food technologies have birthed the field of cellular agriculture: a new category of food technology seeking to reproduce the sensory experiences of animal protein, and promising a cleaner, more ethical way of enjoying animal proteins. This research examines consumer acceptance of precision fermentation (PF) made egg products in Germany, Singapore, and the USA. Using an online survey of 3,006 participants, the study examines demographic and dietary traits that predict willingness to try such products and identifies the reasons why consumers are most attracted to them. The findings suggest that PF made egg products are likely to find a willing market, with a substantial proportion (51–61%) of participants willing to try the product, with vegetarians and vegans displaying the highest enthusiasm. Egg consumption habits and, to a lesser extent, income also predict acceptance. Major reasons for adopting the product were animal welfare in Germany, and health aspects in Singapore and the USA, as well as curiosity in all three countries. Observed differences between the acceptance of PF egg and PF dairy are discussed, as well as comparisons to existing alternative protein (AP) product adoption.
Cooke, Andrew (author), Mullan, Siobhan (author), Morten, Charlie (author), Hockenhull, Joanna (author), Le-Grice, Phil (author), Le Cocq, Kate (author), Lee, Michael R. F. (author), Cardenas, Laura M. (author), and Rivero, M. Jordana (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2023-06-29
Published:
United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 206 Document Number: D12951
14 pages, Animal welfare encompasses all aspects of an animal’s life and the interactions between animals. Consequently, welfare must be measured across a variety of factors that consider aspects
such as health, behaviour and mental state. Decisions regarding housing and grazing are central to farm management. In this study, two beef cattle systems and their herds were compared
from weaning to slaughter across numerous indicators. One herd (‘HH’) were continuously
housed, the other (‘HG’) were housed only during winter. Inspections of animals were conducted to assess body condition, cleanliness, diarrhoea, hairlessness, nasal discharge and ocular discharge. Hair and nasal mucus samples were taken for quantification of cortisol and
serotonin. Qualitative behaviour assessments (QBA) were also conducted and performance
monitored. Physical health indicators were similar between herds with the exception of
nasal discharge which was more prevalent in HH (P < 0.001). During winter, QBA yielded differences between herds over PC1 (arousal) (P = 0.032), but not PC2 (mood) (P = 0.139).
Through summer, there was a strong difference across both PC1 (P < 0.001) and PC2 (P =
0.002), with HG exhibiting more positive behaviour. A difference was found in hair cortisol
levels, with the greatest concentrations observed in HG (P = 0.011), however such a pattern
was not seen for nasal mucus cortisol or for serotonin. Overall, providing summer grazing
(HG) appeared to afford welfare benefits to the cattle as shown with more positive QBA
assessments, but also slightly better health indicators, notwithstanding the higher levels of cortisol in that group.
11 pages, Individual background and demographics affect student perceptions of animal production. Understanding how science-based education alters these opinions is a critical aspect of improving university instruction as well as increasing consumer engagement in the poultry industry. The study objectives were to quantify the effects of student background, career interests, and science-based instruction on opinions regarding current issues in the poultry industry. Undergraduate students enrolled in a one semester poultry science course at Iowa State University between 2018 and 2021 were anonymously surveyed at the start and end of the semester as part of a 4-yr study. Students who opted to take the survey answered three demographic questions indicating their 1) livestock experience, 2) sex, and 3) career goals. The body of the survey consisted of 16 “poultry issue statements” where students were directed to mark a vertical dash on a 130 mm horizontal line indicating their level of agreement with each statement. Post-survey collection, the line was separated into 5 sections for discussion: responses within 0%–20% indicated strongly disagree, 21%–40% disagree, 41%–60% neutral, 61%–80% agree, and 81%–100% indicated strongly agree. Responses were analyzed using Proc Mixed in SAS Version 9.4 with a Tukey–Kramer adjustment for all pairwise comparisons using main effects including demographic categories, education (pre- or post-instruction), and year the survey was taken. Responses to various issue statements were affected by students’ livestock experience (P < 0.05; 6 out of 16 statements affected), sex (P < 0.05; 5 out of 16 statements), and ultimate career goals (P < 0.05; 4 out of 16 statements). Pre- vs. post-education responses differed significantly in 6 out of 16 statements (P < 0.05), and in 2 out of 16 poultry issue statements, the year of instruction affected student response (P < 0.05). These data indicate that individual student background, sex, and differing career interests impact opinions of current topics in the broiler and layer industries. Further, science-based education as well as the year the course was taken over consecutive semesters significantly altered student opinions.
26 pages, In the United States, there is a growing disconnect between consumers and their food source, leading to a lack of knowledge and trust in the agricultural food system. Urbanization has moved people away from farms, ranches, and food production; and the information consumers seek about their food is filtered through mass and social media. Portrayals of information about food production, specifically beef, from outside the agriculture industry often present polarizing and conflicting information about beef production and its implications for the health and well-being of humans, livestock, and the environment. This adds to consumer confusion and influences purchasing behaviors. Using a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest 2x2 factorial design, we sought to explore consumer (n = 60) perceptions, consumption, and purchasing behaviors of grass-fed beef and determine the effects of four information treatments on overall perception. Descriptive results showed consumers do not have a shared definition pertaining to grass- and grain-fed beef, citing the internet as their most referenced source for information about food and grass-fed beef. Results from a t-test indicated that exposing consumers to an information treatment had a significant effect on environmental impacts, cost, quality/nutrition, and overall perception of grass-fed beef. A between-subjects factorial ANOVA revealed there was no significant difference in perception based on treatment type. Efforts to raise awareness about beef production, on-farm practices, and links between food and grower could be warranted to help enhance the trust and credibility of the industry and bridge the gap between producers and consumers.
9pgs, Divergence in opinion over how farm animals should be cared for is creating a disconnect between livestock farming and the public that risks a loss of “social license” to farm. One proposed solution for the dairy farming community is to engage more constructively with the public to develop a shared vision of the industry's future; however, farmers and veterinarians remain reluctant to validate public opinions on farm animal care, in particular, often viewing them as naïve or impractical. Understanding the interpretive frames through which people make sense of dairy farming could help the dairy farming community engage more constructively with public opinion, thereby reducing conflict and providing opportunities to change communication or practice. Hence, frame analysis was conducted on transcripts of 60 face-to-face interviews with members of the UK public, first defining frames using reflexive thematic analysis, then considering the effect of these frames on those holding them. The results showed that dairy farming was mainly characterized by two entities: the cow and the farmer. Three frames were developed for the cow: she was perceived as i) enduring, which induced a sense of moral responsibility for her well-being among participants; ii) a fellow or companion, which led to feelings of a shared or parallel life with her; and iii) a force of nature, where the cow's connection with the natural world and “otherness” was appreciated, or even longed for. These connections were unexpectedly widespread within the sample, with many participants simultaneously holding two or even three frames. The farmer was seen through two frames: i) traditional; or ii) modernizing, but both frames had positive and negative narratives depending on the perceived care of the cow, causing confusion or even conflict about the care the farmer actually delivered. These findings provide new insights into the interpretive lenses through which the public makes sense of the dairy cow and her care, not least the bond the public themselves feel with the animal. They offer fresh opportunities for the dairy industry to improve engagement through more reflexive communication or modification of farming practices to better fit societal expectations about dairy cow welfare.
