Animal Welfare evaluation in Lidia Cattle farms in Spain and Mexico

• Juan Manuel Lomillos Universidad CEU Cardenal Herrera, Facultad de Veterinaria, Departamento de Producción y Sanidad Animal, Salud Pública Veterinaria y Ciencia y Tecnología de los Alimentos. Valencia, España
• Erika Georgina Hernández Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Departamento Medicina y Zootecnia de Rumiantes. México, México
• Urso Martín Dávila Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales. Juriquilla, Querétaro, México
• Marta Elena Alonso Universidad de León, Facultad de Veterinaria de León, Departamento de Producción Animal. León, España

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52973/rcfcv-e33252

Keywords: Animal welfare, bovine, lidia

Abstract

Animal welfare (AW) of extensively managed cattle has been studied very little and within bovine cattle, the lidia breed is very interesting in this regard due to its ethological peculiarities and aggressive behaviour. An optimized assessment protocol is developed based on the Welfare Quality® project, in order to integrate and assess AW in the facilities, in group behaviour, in physiological signs and in management. For this, 6 different farms have been evaluated, 3 of them located in the Extremadura region (Spain) and 3 in the Querétaro region (Mexico). Ten animals were chosen from each subgroup, formed based on the productive moment and the batches of each farm: mother cows, stallions and batches of animals of different ages. Each AW indicator included in the protocol was rated on a scale of 1 to 5. The data collection methodology developed worked adequately. In general, the 6 farms present an optimal rating in all parameters, although it is worth noting differences in terms of approach distance, being less in those farms where animals are handled more frequently, also reflected in curiosity displayed by animals. It is important to highlight that the study reflects an appropriate nutrition, both in the long and short term (body condition and rumen fill) in the 6 herds. Regarding health (breathing and mucous membranes, condition of hooves and lameness index), optimal AW values were obtained. There is a certain difference between the farms in Spain and Mexico in terms of the body condition of the animals, being significantly lower in Mexico, where winter is the dry season, with less grass available.

References

Purroy A. Comportamiento del toro de lidia: en el campo, en el ruedo. Pamplona, España: Universidad Pública de Navarra: 2003. 267 p.

Cruz–Sagredo J. El toro de lidia en la Biología, en la Zootecnia y en la Cultura. España: Junta de Castilla y León; 1991. 272 p.

Fernández–Sanz J. Tauromaquia y Bienestar Animal. [Internet] 2018 [Consultado 15 Mar 2023]; 188 p. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3pxlCtm

Domingo–Montes A. Valoración del bienestar animal en explotaciones de ganado de lidia. [Tesis Doctoral]. España: Universidad complutense de Madrid; 2017; 197 p.

Fraser D, Duncan IJ, Edwards SA, Grandin T, Gregory NG, Guyonnet V, Mench JA. General principles for the welfare of animals in production systems: the underlying science and its application. The Vet. J. 2013; 198(1): 19–27.

Edwards SA. Experimental welfare assessment and on–farm application. Anim. Welfare. 2007; 16(2): 111–115.

Botreau R, Veissier I, Capdeville J, Perny P. L’évaluation en ferme du bien–être des animaux: objectifs, outils disponibles, utilisations, exemple du projet Welfare Quality®, Rencontres pour la recherche sur les ruminants. 2007; 14: 277–284.

Alonso ME, Lomillos JM, Cadenas D, Molina A, Rodríguez J, Safir MQ y González JR. Happy Cow: metodología docente para el desarrollo de competencias y habilidades de valoración del bienestar en ganado vacuno, Rev. Docencia Universit. 2015; 13 (núm. extraordinario): 155–170.

Hulsen J. Cow signals (el lenguaje de las vacas) – Una guía práctica para el manejo de explotaciones de vacuno lechero. Ediciones Técnicas Reunidas, S.L. Madrid. 2007; p 37–52.

Edmondson AJ, Lean JI, Weaver CO, Farver T y Webster G. A body condition–scoring chart for Holstein dairy cows, J. Dairy Sci. 1989; 72: 68–78.

Ferguson JD, Galligan DT, Thomsen N. Principal descriptors of body condition score in Holstein cows. J. Dairy Sci. 1994; 77: 2695–2703.

Moran J, Doyle R. Quantifying cow signals. In: Moran J, Doyle R. (eds.). Cow talk. Australia: CSIRO Publishing; 2015. 117 p.

Gord D, Martin A, Pulgadas C. Role of legislation in support of animal welfare. The Canadian Vet. J. 2009; 50(3): 233–234.

Sánchez JM, Alonso ME. Instalaciones y alojamiento en ganado de lidia. En: Buxadé, C. (ed.). Producciones equinas y de ganado de lidia. Madrid: Mundiprensa; 1996. p 295–308.

Fernández–Novo A, Lomillos–Pérez JM, García–García J. Prevalencia de Fasciola hepática en ganado bovino de Lidia. Abanico Vet. 2020; 10(1):1–10. https://doi.org/khh2

Farm Animal Welfare Council. FAWC updates the five freedoms. Vet. Rec. 1992; 17:357.

Farm Animal Welfare Council. Second Report on Priorities for Research and Development in Farm Animal Welfare. Londres: DEFRA; 1993. p 87–105.

Friedric NO. Bienestar animal. Sitio Argentino Prod. Anim. [Internet] 2012 [Consultado 15 Mar 2023]; 6 p. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/447lFuR.

Trillo Y, Vigo M, Barrio M, Becerra JJ, Herradón PG, Quintela LA. Evaluación del bienestar animal en vacas de leche alojadas en sistemas intensivos. Prod. Anim. 2015; 290:61–74.

Boivin X, Garel JJP, Mante A, Neindre P. Beef calves react differently to different handlers according to the test situation and their previous interactions with 37 their caretakers. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1998; 55:245–257.

Breuer K, Sutcliffe MEM, Mercer JT, Rance KA, Beattie VE, Sneddon IA, Edwards SA. The effect of breed on the development of adverse social behaviours in pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2003; 84:59–74.

Turner SP, Dwyer CM. Welfare assessment of extensive animals: challenges and opportunities. Anim. Welfare. 2007; 16:189–192.

Bach A, Juaristi JL, Rodríguez P. Cow confort. Cuadernos de Campo Ivomec. Zaragoza: Servet diseño y comunicación S.L.; 2012. 203 p.

Rodríguez JM, Lomillos, JM, Bartolomé C, Alonso ME. Evaluación del bienestar animal en ganado bovino en sistema extensivo. Libro de ponencias, comunicaciones y póster, ANEMBE; 6–8 de mayo de 2018; Vigo; 2018. 326 p.

Rodríguez V. Bienestar animal. [Internet] 2017 [Consultado 15 Mar 2023]; 89 p. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3rhhmio.

Webster J. The assessment and implementation of animal welfare: theory into practice. Rev. Scientif. Tech. Office Intern. Epizoot. 2005; 24(2):273–274.

Arias RA, Mader TL, Escoba PC. Factores climáticos que afectan el desempeño productivo del ganado bovino de carne y leche. Arch. Med. Vet. 2008; 40:7–22.

Cañón J, Cortés O, García D, García–Atance MA, Tupac–Yupanqui I, Dunner S. Distribución de la variabilidad genética en la raza de lidia. Arch. Zoot. 2007; 56:391–396.

Bavera GA, Peñafort CH. Lectura de la bosta del bovino y su relación con la alimentación. Sitio Argentino Prod. Anim. [Internet] 2006 [Consultado 15 Mar 2023]; 319 p. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/434kJpW.

Morrison SR, Givens RL, Lofgreen GP. Sprinkling cattle for relief from heat stress. J. Anim. Sci. 1973; 36(3): 428–431.

Degen AA, Young BA. Rate of metabolic heat production and rectal temperature of steers exposed to simulated mud and rain conditions. Canadian J. Anim. Sci. 1993; 73(1): 207–210.