1. 18/05/2014
1
Improvement of Animal Welfare
During Long Distance Transport
SANCO/2011/G3/CRPA/SI2.610274
CP2 FINAL CONFERENCE
Kurhaus, Scheveningen The Hague
7° May 2014
Animal based measures for a ‘Welfare-plus’
certification scheme for long distance transport
Hans Spoolder1, Wijbrand Ouweltjes1, Patrick Chevilllon2, Paolo
Ferrarri3, Michael Marahrens4, Stefano Messori5, Beatrice Mounaix6,
Cecilia Pedernera7, Evangelia Sossidou8 and Kathalijne Visser1
1WUR Livestock Research - NL, 2 IFIP - FR, 3CRPA - IT, 4FLI - DE, 5IZS
- IT, 6Institut de l’Elevage - FR, 7IRTA - ES, 8HAO DEMETER - GR
WP2 of the project aimed:
To provide a scientific basis
... for an assessment scheme which identifies
... long distance transports with a
... high level of animal welfare
How to measure welfare?
1
How to measure welfare?
1
1
2
3
4
Available pen area
Shiny coat / clean feathers
Presence of toys
Good locomotion (cattle / broilers)
Access to outside area
Species specific behaviour
Partly unslatted flooring
Little or no aggression
How to measure welfare?
Available pen area
Shiny coat / clean feathers
Presence of toys
Good locomotion (cattle / broilers)
Access to outside area
Species specific behaviour
Partly unslatted flooring
Little or no aggression
Animal Based vs Environment Based

2. 18/05/2014
2
WP2 starting position and focus:
• Environment and management based parameters are
essential and remain the basis of the scheme
• The welfare ‘plus’ is achieved through high
performance on animal based parameters
Animal Based vs Environment Based
In addition we investigated:
• Fitness to travel
• Electronic data collection
Animal Based Measures
• To provide a scientific basis for animal based
assessment, we:
• identified suitable ABMs
• identified thresholds for certification at measure
level
• identified minimum number of certifiable
measures for a certifiable overall score
• Welfare Quality® approach
• In combination with risk assessment
Which Animal Based Measures to
include?
• Welfare Quality® approach
• In combination with risk assessment
WQ Welfare
principles
WQ Welfare criteria
Adverse effects
Good feeding 1 Absence of prolonged hunger Hunger
2 Absence of prolonged thirst Dehydration
Good housing 3 Comfort around resting Exhaustion
4 Thermal comfort Heat stress, Cold stress
5 Ease of movement Pain & injury
Good health 6 Absence of injuries Pain & injury
7 Absence of disease Disease
8 Absence of pain induced by management procedures Pain & injury
Appropriate
behaviour
9 Expression of social behaviours Fear, Aggression
10 Expression of other behaviours Pain & injury
11 Good human-animal relationship Fear
12 Positive emotional state Fear
Adapted from WQ® and EFSA Journal 2011; 9(1):Table 4, p 58
Which Animal Based Measures to
include?
Adverse effect Measures
Direct observation Other
Hunger Quantity of eating; manure; explorative behaviour, skin
lesions, body weight loss, body condition
State of stomach; plasma
corticosteroids; fatty acids; ketone
Dehydration Extreme thirst, collapse, mortality; Skin-pinch test Haematocrit, Blood pCO2, pH
Urine colour, specific gravity
Exhaustion Apathy, reluctance to move
Prostration, collapse, mortality
Dark, firm dry carcasses
Blood enzymes (CK, CPK)
Heat stress Thermal panting, drooling, sweating (horses, cattle),
gasping; extreme thirst, collapse, mortality
Body temperature
Cold stress Shivering, huddling, skin colour (pig); collapse,
mortality
Body temperature
Pain & injury Lameness, swollen joints/feet, slipping, falling,
Abnormal body posture; skin lesions
Fractures; hypersensitivity to touch
Disease Collapse, mortality; nasal, ocular discharge; abnormal
respiration, diarrhoea, blood in faeces; vomiting
Body temperature; Abnormal
respiratory sounds; pathogens
Aggression Vocalisation, aggression, escape behaviour, QBA,
change in normal behaviour, HAR, skin lesions
Bleeding, Haematoma, plasma
corticosteroids, blood enzymes
Fear Vocalisation, escape behaviour; urination and/or
defecation, reluctance to move
Plasma corticosteroids
Which Animal Based Measures to
include?
Adverse effect Measures
Other
Hunger Quantity of eating; manure; explorative behaviour, skin
lesions, body weight loss, body condition
State of stomach; plasma
corticosteroids; fatty acids; ketone
Dehydration Extreme thirst, collapse, mortality; Skin-pinch test Haematocrit, Blood pCO2, pH
Urine colour, specific gravity
Exhaustion Apathy, reluctance to move
Prostration, collapse, mortality
Dark, firm dry carcasses
Blood enzymes (CK, CPK)
Heat stress Thermal panting, drooling, sweating (horses, cattle),
gasping; extreme thirst, collapse, mortality
Body temperature
Cold stress Shivering, huddling, skin colour (pig); collapse,
mortality
Body temperature
Pain & injury Lameness, swollen joints/feet slipping, falling
Abnormal body posture; skin lesions
Fractures; hypersensitivity to touch
Disease Collapse, mortality; nasal, ocular discharge; abnormal
respiration, diarrhoea, blood in faeces; vomiting
Body temperature; Abnormal
respiratory sounds; pathogens
Aggression Vocalisation, aggression, escape behaviour, QBA,
change in normal behaviour, HAR, skin lesions
Bleeding, Haematoma, plasma
corticosteroids, blood enzymes
Fear Vocalisation, escape behaviour; urination and/or
defecation, reluctance to move
Plasma corticosteroids
Which Animal Based Measures to
include?

3. 18/05/2014
3
Assessment Protocols
Assessments
At arrival General characteristics of the transport / electronic data
Truck characteristics
Unloading Conditions during unloading
ABMs
Animal handling
Resting pens ABMs
Additional information Drivers checklist Fitness to travel
Training materials
Horses
• 25 arrivals in Italy, by CRPA
• 26 arrivals in Italy, by ICT
Sheep
• 25 arrivals in Italy, by ICT
• 23 arrivals in Greece, by Demeter
200 assessments
Pigs
• 26 arrivals in France, by IFIP
• 25 arrivals in Germany, by FLI
Cattle
• 9 arrivals in Spain, by IRTA
• 41 arrivals in France, by IDELE
Outcomes Fitness to travel
• Loading fit animals is crucial
• How to include this aspect into a scheme?
• The study design only allowed loading data to be
collected retrospectively (from the driver)
Outcomes Fitness to travel
• Information from the driver after the journey
generated few useable results.
• Assessments carried out after long journeys revealed
that the vast majority of animals were fit after travel.
• It can be assumed they were fit at loading.
Outcomes Fitness to travel
For discussion:
• Obvious shortcomings of our assessment were the
retrospective assessments, not randomly selected
• For the purpose of a certification system: is it
sufficient to check fitness on arrival?
• Is average fitness to travel for long journeys better
than for short?

4. 18/05/2014
4
Outcomes Electronic data
• Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 require
electronic data to verify the transport organisation
and the physical environment of animals during long
transports.
• The route of the vehicle
• Open/close status of the loading door
• Temperature on board
• Can we link this to our welfare assessments?
• Data was collected on arrival
Outcomes Electronic data
Outcomes:
• The aim was to match the electronic data of long
transports with the animal based measures
• Drivers were reluctant to share information, and
seemed generally unable to provide them in an
interpretable format.
• This is related to the fact that providers of data
collection systems use their own data formats.
• At the Advisory Board meeting in Bologna (February
2013) it was agreed a different approach was needed.
Outcomes Electronic data
Next steps & discussion issues:
Two meetings with the main European system providers
were held. They agreed:
• Data format: all legally based data in XML format
• Time intervals: No real time data transmission. Data
collection every 15 minutes in addition to some
asynchronous events (loading doors, temp alarms)
• Data flow: Data submission procedures and need for
on board internet connection.
Outcomes ABMs
• The data collected give an indication of the range of
values that can be observed
• Information regarding the feasibility of parameters
-> improved protocol
Outcomes ABMs
• Eight animal categories:
weaner pigs, finishing pigs, calves, heifers, other
cattle, horses, lambs and adult sheep
• Each 10-14 measures
• Unloading and resting pen
Outcomes ABMs
Measure description min median max
Dead on arrival Animal that has stopped breathing and has no pulse
(cardiac arrest) on arrival.
0 0 1.1
Severe lameness An animal is considered severely lame when it shows
inability to bear weight on one or more limbs while not
lying.
0 0 0
Slipping Animal showing a loss of balance during unloading
without a non-limbic part of the body touching the
ground.
0 4.2 17.2
Falling Animal showing a loss of balance during unloading
causing other part(s) of the body (beside legs) to touch
the floor
0 2.1 11.2
Pig measures at unloading

5. 18/05/2014
5
ABMs: acceptability level
• Following selection of the measures, we:
• identified thresholds for certification at measure
level
• identified minimum number of certifiable
measures for a certifiable overall score
Delphi approach
• Iterative process, aiming for consensus:
• ask for opinions
• return them to all participants and ask to reconsider opinion
• repeat....
• Two questions:
• Q1: what are acceptability thresholds for each measure?
• Q2: how to determine an overall score based on number of
‘acceptable’ ABM outcomes
• Three rounds for Q1 and Two rounds for Q2
Excellent response:
• Three rounds for Q1: 185, 105 and 91 sets returned
• Two rounds for Q2: 127 and 101 answers
Q1 Threshold levels
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3
TH2 Integument (weaners)
Q3
Median
Q1
Q1 Threshold levels - outcomes
(EXAMPLE)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1 2 3
TH2 Slipping (horses)
Q3
Median
Q1
Q1 Threshold levels - outcomes
(EXAMPLE)

6. 18/05/2014
6
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1 2 3
TH2 Falling (sheep)
Q3
Median
Q1
Q1 Threshold levels - outcomes
(EXAMPLE)
Q1 Threshold levels - weaners
Q1 Threshold levels - finishers Q1 Threshold levels - horses
Q1 Threshold levels - calves Q1 Threshold levels – heifers & cows

7. 18/05/2014
7
Q1 Threshold levels – other cattle Q1 Threshold levels - lambs
Q1 Threshold levels - sheep Q2 Overall score
Q2 Overall score
• Each animal category has 10-14 measures
• Given the possible outcomes:
• Unacceptable
• Acceptable
• Certifiable
• How many ‘Acceptables’ are allowed for a transport
to still be certifiable?
Q2 Overall scores - outcomes
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
First Round
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Second Round

8. 18/05/2014
8
Summary advice re. ‘Welfare Plus’
• Resource and management based measures provide
legal Welfare minimum
• Animal Based Measures can provide the ‘Plus’
• Feasible protocols and training material are available
to assess animal based measures
• Thresholds for certifiability and acceptability are
proposed
• Max 3-4 ‘acceptable’ measures allowed
for a ‘Welfare Plus’. The rest should be
at ‘certifiable’ level.
We gratefully acknowledge the financial support from DG SANCO
and from the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs