Adding value to farm assurance
R-and- D » R-and- D » Farm_assurance »
Research partners: University of Bristol, University of Newcastle
Industrial partners: BPEX, Farm Assurance Schemes, pig producers
Duration: 2006–2009
On-farm evaluation of health and welfare outcomes
The aim of this project was to examine the feasibility and benefits to the industry of including some on-farm observations of welfare outcomes within farm assurance scheme assessments. To date these schemes have largely focused on resource-based assessment of, for example, facilities, space, water and feed. However, formal outcome-based observations of behaviour and physical condition of the pigs may provide a more direct evaluation of pig welfare.
During the course of the project (2006-2009) a stakeholder steering group consisting of producers, veterinary surgeons, policy-makers and farm assurance representatives defined the work programme needed to encourage maximum benefits to the industry. The project aimed to have direct benefits for:
- Producers: useful management information
- Industry: maintain and promote the UK competitive position
- Consumers: improved welfare assurance
Five ‘core’ measures of welfare were identified by the project steering group for particular evaluation during the project:
- Tail lesions
- Body lesions
- Oral behaviour
- Lameness
- Pigs requiring hospitalisation
Following a review of the scientific literature, training of farm assurance assessors, identification of the number of pens required for observation on each farm and on-farm testing and data collection by researchers and veterinary surgeons the steering group produced recommendations for including welfare outcome measures within farm assurance schemes.
In summary, the steering group recommended that each of the core measures be included within UK pig farm assurance schemes. They recommended that these measures be assessed by veterinary surgeons during the quarterly veterinary visit and by farm assurance assessors at the annual audit. Benchmarking of welfare outcome data should be provided to producers and where outcome measures appear to show poor levels of welfare producers should implement changes following discussions with their veterinary surgeon. Importantly, the steering group recommended that 'punishments', such as non-compliances, should not form part of the welfare outcome assurance process, but that positive rewards for farmers who had good levels of welfare outcome measures on their farms could be explored.
Page last updated 08 June 2010