Welfare Assessment of Farmed Rabbits Housed in Indoor and Outdoor Cages

Transcription

1 Welfare Assessment of Farmed Rabbits Housed in Indoor and Outdoor Cages Silvana Popescu, Eva Andrea Diugan, Cristin Borda, Cristina El Mahdy University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, , Cluj-Napoca, Manastur street, no 3-5, Romania Abstract This study aimed to assess the welfare of farmed rabbits in two facilities using different housing situations: indoor and outdoor cages. The welfare parameters assessed were extrapolated from the actual scientific knowledge and based on the five freedoms. The calculated prevalence of several welfare problems recorded by direct animal assessment was higher in the rabbits kept in indoor cages than outdoors, including very thin body condition (5.1% indoors, 0% outdoors), pododermatitis (15.4% indoors, 7.5% outdoors), coughing/sneezing (21.8% indoors, 5.7% outdoors) and fear or aggression during the human arm contact test (33.3% and 7.7% indoors vs. 28.3% and 3.8% outdoors, respectively). Yet, some of the problems may be related to poor resource management on the farms, such as the absence of bedding (16.7% indoors, 0% outdoors) or dirty cage floor (80% indoors, 17% outdoors). One of the welfare problems recorded in both of the farms was the individual housing of all adult rabbits, without possibility for social contact. According to our results, the welfare of the rabbits housed in outdoor cages during the winter was better, as the prevalence of the welfare problems was lower in these than in the rabbits housed in indoor cages in the same season. Keywords: extensive rearing, human-rabbit interaction, individual cage housing, rabbit welfare. 1. Introduction Despite the fact that rabbit farming has a long history in Romania, the scientific research data regarding this area is very limited. In fact, the main problems holding back development and improvements in rabbit health and welfare worldwide is the lack of research and of a cohesive structure in the industry by which improvement strategies can be implemented at farm level [1]. According to the estimate of FAO [2] there were about 1,700,000 domestic rabbits and hares in Romania at the end of As the same source states [2] for the same period, the European leaders in farmed rabbit production are Italy, Germany, the Czech Republic and Ukraine. * Silvana Popescu, Tel: , Fax: , popescusilvana@yahoo.com In these countries the rabbit farming is done at highly intensive level, from the 1970s, using hutches made from wire grids, complete diet in pellet form, specialized premises and an intense, continuous reproductive rhythm in the does [3]. However, in the case of rabbits, the intensification of husbandry necessitates strict observance of physiological, behavioural and health requirements, in view of the very special needs of the species and the sensitivity of rabbits to environmental conditions [3]. Even if a growing business branch, rabbit farming in Romania is usually of a smaller scale, based on semi-extensive and extensive procedures. In this more traditional rearing all the adult rabbits are housed in individual cages with plain walls, straw bedding and using hay and cereal mixes for feeding. This way some of the negative influences of intensive farming on the welfare of the rabbits can be avoided, provided that good management and hygiene practices are respected. 200

2 According to Verga [4] and Hoy [5], the main welfare indicators for rabbits would be the followings: mortality (no or low); morbidity, in terms of pathologies and injuries (should be low and unavoidable); physiology, regarding hormone levels, heart rate variation, immune reactions (the parameters should be in the species-specific standard); behavior, evaluated by ethograms, reaction to behavioural tests (rabbits should perform species-specific behavior) and performance (production), in terms of growth, feed conversion, fertility rate (all of these should be on a high level). However, hormone levels, heart rate variation and immune reactions can be used as indicator for the housing conditions but have to be discussed only in the relationship with other parameters such as behavior or morbidity [6]. Based on the fact that the assessment of animal welfare is the first compulsory step in problem identification, decision making and proper intervention in animal welfare improvement, this study aimed to assess the welfare of farmed rabbits in two facilities using different housing situations: indoor and outdoor cages. 2. Materials and methods Within this study the welfare of the adult rabbits was assessed in two small scale farms, during the winter period. Both of the farms used extensive breeding techniques (weaning the kits at the age of 6 to 7 weeks and mating the doe only after). All the adult rabbits (reproduction does and bucks) were housed in individual cages (80 cm long, 60 cm wide, 60 cm high) with complete walls and floors, with wire mash only covering the front door and a 20 cm wide strip of flooring in the back of the cages. Straw and hay was used as litter inside the majority of the cages. All the rabbits were fed with good quality hay and homemade cereal mixtures, with no additives, ad libitum. Plastic bottle drinkers were mounted on the wire mash of the cage doors; the water was changed several times per day or the bottles were replenished when emptied. The main majority of the rabbits were of New Zealand and Californian breed in both of the farms. None of the farms had unweaned kits in the moment of the assessment and only the adult rabbits were assessed (considered). Farm A had 78 adult rabbits, in cages placed inside of a barn with solid walls, on three levels (superimposed). The illumination was only artificial and the ventilation was unorganized, natural. Farm B housed 53 adult rabbits, in cages placed on three levels, outdoors, being protected by a building wall from the main air currents and winds. Artificial illumination was used only occasionally, for a quick checking of the rabbits during the night for example. The welfare assessment of the rabbits in the two farms was performed in two consecutive days. The evaluated parameters and the assessment methodology are described shortly in Table 1. The parameters in Table 1 are arranged in the same order as were assessed. The results for each parameter were recorded for each individual rabbit, than the prevalence of the conditions indicated by each parameter was calculated as percentage of the total number of animals assessed on each farm. 3. Results and discussion The prevalence of the welfare problems identified by assessing the rabbits (direct examination and observation of certain management conditions) in the two investigated farms is presented in Table 2. The first problem noted in both of the farms was the fact that all the adult rabbits were kept in individual cages. The need for social contact and possibility to perform social behavior is not taken in consideration usually in farmed rabbits. Due to the fact that adult male rabbits will fight when kept together and aggressions occur also in does housed in pairs, farmers use to isolate each adult animal. Yet, from the welfare point of view it is considered that lack of social contact is a serious deprivation for a rabbit, so the welfare of those kept in social isolation will be poor [9]. The severity of the rabbits social isolation in the investigated farms is not the worst because the animals can hear and smell each other through the cage walls but they do not have the possibility for physical contact. 201

3 Table 1. Parameters, description and scoring methodology used in the welfare assessment of farmed rabbits Parameter Description Scoring Social isolation Observation for possibility of social contact [6] 0 complete isolation; 1 auditory and olfactory contact; 2 visual, auditory and olfactory Space allowance Access to water Response toward humans Bedding quantity Cleanliness of bedding Body condition score (BCS) Skin lesions Pododermatitis (sore hocks) Measurement. The space should allow normal hopping, lying fully stretched and stand up with erect ears. Minimal: cm long, cm wide, 40 cm high [1]. Visual observation if there are drinkers for each rabbit and if these are functioning [3] Human arm contact test: opening the cage door, slowly putting an arm inside the cage (advancing horizontally, not from above), as far as possible from the rabbit inside, than observing the rabbit s response during 5 min (adapted from [7]) Visual observation, moving part of the bedding layer, distributing it evenly on the whole surface of the cage floor [8] Visual observation, moving part of the bedding layer [8] Palpation of the rabbit s ribs, pelvis, spine and rump (adapted from [9]) Palpation and visual assessment of the rabbit s body (adapted from [10]) Visual assessment and palpation of the palmar/plantar surface (adapted from [10]) contact; 3 group housing 0 cage too small; 1 minimal cage dimensions; 2 cage larger than minimal dimensions 0 lack of a drinker; 1 presence of an empty drinker; 2 presence of a functional drinker 0 aggressive (attacking the human arm); 1 fearful (standing tensed, vigilant, not approaching the human arm during 5 min); 2 timid (approaching the human arm in more than 2 min); 3 - friendly/curious (approaching the human arm in less than 2 min) 0 no bedding; 1 small quantity (less than 2-3 cm thick); 2 sufficient quantity (thicker than 3 cm) 0 very dirty (the whole bedding quantity is wet, soiled); 1 dirty (parts of the bedding are wet, soiled); 2 clean (the bedding is dry, only small quantity of feces) 1 emaciated (bones very easily palpated and very sharp, concave rump); 2 lean (bones easily palpated and sharp, flat rump); 3 ideal (bones can be palpated, rounded edges, flat rump); 4 fat (firm palpation required to feel the ribs, round rump); 5 obese (ribs can t be felt, very convex rump) 0 at least one wound involving the musculature and/or the full thickness of skin; 1 at least one superficial wound; 2 at least one area of alopecia, scaling, crusting; 3 no skin lesion 0 ulcerative pododermatitis involving deep tissue; 1 superficial pododermatitis involving only the skin; 2 alopecia/callosity of the palmar/plantar surface; 3 no sign of pododermatitis Coughing/sneezing Auditory/visual assessment (adapted 0 coughing or sneezing; 1 no coughing or from [10]) sneezing Dirty nose Visual assessment (adapted from [10]) 0 dirty hair on the nasal area, 1 clean hair on the nasal area Dirty/wet fur around eyes As above (adapted from [10]) 0 dirty/wet fur below the nasal angle of the eye/eyes; 1 clean fur in the same area Diarrhea As above (adapted from [10]) 0 presence of diarrhea, fur soiled with feces in the caudal area of the body; 1 absence of diarrhea, clean fur in the same area Crusts inside the ears Morbidity in adult rabbits As above (adapted from [10]) 0 crusts, scales, visible in the ear canal from the exterior; 1 crusts, scales, visible by inside exam of the ear canal; 2 no crusts, scales inside the ears Questionnaire of the owner Number of adult rabbits that died in the past 6 months 202

4 Access to fresh drinking water is very important for rabbits, in the same way as for other animals. In their code of recommendation for the welfare of rabbits, DEFRA [12] states that a plentiful supply of clean fresh water should be easily accessible to the rabbits at all times. For example a lactating doe with a large litter, close to weaning, may drink up to 4.5 liters of water a day. It is presumable that in the studied farms the rabbits had proper access to water but we found empty drinkers and we can not have any certainty of how long they have been emptied. The major problem during the winter in the small farms of this type, using plastic bottle drinkers (with nipples) is to minimize the risk of drinking water freezing. The response toward humans was assessed as the first direct, animal based parameter in order to avoid the effect of previous stressing or frightening of the rabbits. Aggressiveness was more frequent in the rabbits housed in indoor cages than in those in outdoor cages. Regarding human related behavior, rabbits can be aggressive towards people for several reasons, and there maybe more than one factor at work [13]. Territoriality, pain/health problems, learnt aggression, stress, defense instinct triggers, lack of socialization and unresolved aggression are some of the most frequent causes [13]. Both aggressiveness and fear (also a possible trigger for aggressiveness) were more frequent in the farm A than in farm B in our study. Conversely, shyness and timid behavior, extended latency in approaching the human hand arm was recorded in more of the half of the rabbits in farm B. Table 2. The prevalence of welfare problems in the assessed rabbit farms Welfare problem Prevalence (%) Severity Farm A Farm B (score) (indoor cages) (outdoor cages) Social isolation Access to water Response toward humans Bedding quantity Cleanliness of bedding Body condition score (BCS) Pododermatitis Coughing/sneezing Dirty nose Dirty/wet eyes Diarrhea Crusts inside the ears Mortality in adult rabbits According to Csatádi et al. [7], early human contact, related to nursing, with the kits reduces fear responses toward humans in the rabbits along of their later life. The quantity and quality of bedding used in rabbit cages can have effects on the health of the rabbits and also on their behavior. The barren cage floors, even if plain, compact surfaces (not wire mash) can favor the development of pododermatitis in adult rabbits, especially in heavy, aged individuals. Pressure on the plantar surfaces, trauma to the skin by stamping, irritation by urine and feces from dirty bedding are the recognized causes of pododermatitis [14]. As Table 2 shows, the complete lack of bedding and the presence of dirty bedding were more prevalent in farm A, and also, the prevalence of pododermatitis was double, comparing with farm B. Another health issue linked with the hygiene conditions inside the rabbit cages, including cleanliness of bedding and ventilation, is the risk of triggering clinical signs of pasteurellosis in carrier animals. It was shown that the number of cases of pneumonia caused by Pasteurella multocida is directly proportional to the level of ammonia in a rabbitry [15]. In the farm A, where 80% of the rabbits were found on 203

5 dirty bedding and also the cages were indoors (much lower ventilation rate than in the cages located outdoors) there were more signs of respiratory disease (coughing/sneezing, dirty noses, dirty/wet eyes) than in farm B. Regarding behavior, proper quantity and quality of clean bedding can act as environmental enrichment, with a benefic effect on the welfare of rabbits [5, 9]. Other alarming signals, showing obvious health problems in the farm A were the unacceptable high prevalence of mortality in adult rabbits during the past 6 months and the presence of emaciated rabbits (Table 2). In our opinion, the high prevalence of lean rabbits in both of the farms is also concerning. In this case the explanation for the low body condition score of some of the rabbits can not be related to the inadequate quantity and/or quality of the food administered. The general practice in these farms was the ad libitum feeding of good quality hay and a cereal mix for all the rabbits. Considering the fact that more than half of the rabbits (67.9% in farm A and 69.8% in farm B, respectively) had good body condition (BCS = 3) (Figure 1), the low BCS scores in other rabbits had, most probable, health-related reasons (malabsorbtion, maldigestion, concurrent diseases, internal parasitism and so on). The positive welfare aspects recorded in the two rabbit farms are presented in Figure 1. As the figure shows, the prevalence of positive welfare aspects recorded was higher for all the parameters in the farm B than in the farm A. Farm A Farm B Prevalence (%) Friendliness BCS 3 Sufficient bedding Clean bedding Figure 1. The prevalence of positive outcomes of the welfare assessment in two rabbit farms 4. Conclusions According to our results, the welfare of the rabbits housed in outdoor cages during the winter was better than of those kept in indoor cages. The reasons supporting this conclusion are the lower prevalence of the welfare problems and the higher frequency of positive welfare aspects found in the adult farmed rabbits kept outdoors than in those indoors, in the same season. References 1. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), The impact of the current housing and husbandry systems on the health and welfare of farmed domestic rabbits: Scientific opinion of the Panel on animal health and welfare, The EFSA Journal, 2005, 267, FAOSTAT, Home page address: 3. Morisse, J.P., Maurice, R., Welfare and intensive production of rabbits, Revue scientifique et technique (Office international of Epizootics, 1994, 13(1), Verga, M., Intensive rabbit breeding and welfare: development of research, trends and applications. Proc. 7 th World Rabbit Congress, Vol B, Valencia, Spain, 2000, pp Hoy, S., Housing requirements for breeding rabbits from the viewpoint of welfare, behaviour and hygiene, Proc. 4 th Inter. Conf. on Rabbit Prod. in Hot Climates, Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, 2005, pp Hoy, S., Ruis, M., Szendrö, Zs., Housing of rabbits: results of an European research network, Archiv Fur Geflugelkunde, 2006, 70(5), Csatádi, K., Kustos, K., Eiben, Cs., Bilkó, Á., Altbäcker, V., Even minimal human contact linked to nursing reduces fear responses toward humans in rabbits, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2005, 95,

6 8. Animal Research Review Panel (ARRP), Guideline 18: Guidelines for the housing of rabbits in scientific institutions, 2003, pp Reusch, B., Why do I need to body condition score my rabbit?, Rabbiting On, 2010, Spring, Jong, I.C., Reuvekamp, B.F.J., Rommers, J.M., A welfare assessment protocol for commercially housed rabbits, Report 532. Wageningen UR Livestock Research, Broom, D.M., and Fraser, A.F., The welfare of farmed and pet rabbits. In: Domestic Animal Behaviour and Welfare. CAB International, Cambridge University Press, 2007, pp Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), Animal welfare: Codes of recommendations for the welfare of livestock Rabbits, Home page address: Stone, T., Understanding your rabbit s habits, first ed., T-squared, Baltimore, 2011, pp The Merck Veterinary Manual, Rabbits: noninfectious diseases: ulcerative pododermatitis, ninth ed., Merck&Co. Inc., Philadelphia, 2005, pp The Merck Veterinary Manual, Rabbits: bacterial and mycotic diseases: pasteurrelosis, ninth ed., Merck&Co. Inc., Philadelphia, 2005, pp