Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T17:01:52.027Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The development of on-farm welfare assessment protocols for foxes and mink: the WelFur project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

J Mononen ,
SH Møller ,
SW Hansen ,
AL Hovland ,
T Koistinen ,
L Lidfors ,
J Malmkvist ,
CM Vinke  and
L Ahola
J Mononen*
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Eastern Finland, PO Box 1627, FI-70211 Kuopio, Finland
SH Møller
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, PO Box 50, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
SW Hansen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, PO Box 50, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
AL Hovland
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 5003, NO-1432 Aas, Norway
T Koistinen
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Eastern Finland, PO Box 1627, FI-70211 Kuopio, Finland
L Lidfors
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden
J Malmkvist
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, PO Box 50, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
CM Vinke
Affiliation:
Department of Animals in Science and Society, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, PO Box 80166, 3508 TD Utrecht, The Netherlands
L Ahola
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Eastern Finland, PO Box 1627, FI-70211 Kuopio, Finland
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: jaakko.mononen@uef.fi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The WelFur project aims at the development of on-farm welfare assessment protocols for farmed foxes (the blue fox [Vulpes lagopus], the silver fox [Vulpes vulpes]) and mink (Neovison vison). The WelFur protocols are based on Welfare Quality® (WQ) principles and criteria. Here, we describe the WelFur protocols after two years of developmental work. Reviews for each of the 12 WQ welfare criteria were written for foxes and mink to identify the welfare measures that have been used in scientific studies. The reviews formed the basis for potential measures to be included in the WelFur protocols. All measures were evaluated for their validity, reliability and feasibility. At present, we have identified 15 fox and 9 mink animal-based (or outcome-based) welfare measures, and 11 and 13 input-based (resource-based or management-based) measures. For both foxes and mink, each of the four WQ principles is judged by at least one criterion, and seven out of the 12 criteria include animal-based measures. The protocols will be piloted in 2012. Using the WQ project and protocols as a model has been a fruitful approach in developing the WelFur protocols. The effects of the WelFur protocols will provide benchmarks from which the welfare of animals on European fur farms can be assessed.

Keywords

animal-based welfare measuresanimal welfareinput-based welfare measuresfoxfur farmingmink
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 21 , Issue 3: Selected papers from the 5th International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level , August 2012 , pp. 363 - 371
Copyright
© 2012 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahola, L, Harri, M, Kasanen, S, Mononen, J and Pyykönen, T 2000 Effect of family housing of farmed silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in outdoor enclosures on some behavioural and physiological parameters. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 80: 427–434. http://dx.doi.org/10.4141/A99-112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahola, L, Harri, M, Mononen, J, Pyykönen, T and Kasanen, S 2001 Welfare of farmed silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes) housed in sibling groups in large outdoor enclosures. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 81: 435–440. http://dx.doi.org/10.4141/A00-107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahola, L, Koistinen, T and Mononen, J 2011 Health and behavioural measures in farmed foxes: inter-observer reliability of farm averages. In: Widowski, T, Lawlis, P and Sheppard, K (eds) Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level p 51. 8-11 August 2011, Guelph, Canada. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Ahola, L, Mononen, J, Pyykönen, T and Mohaibes, M 2002 Effects of group size and space allocation on physiological, behavioural and production-related welfare parameters in farmed silver fox cubs. Agricultural and Food Science in Finland 11: 185–19710.23986/afsci.5724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akre, AK, Hovland, AL, Bakken, M and Braastad, BO 2008 Risk assessment concerning the welfare of animals kept for fur production. A Report to the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety pp 47. 9 May 2008. Norwegian University of Life Sciences: Aas, NorwayGoogle Scholar
Berg, P and Møller, SH 2010 Evidence for genetic variation in bite marks in group housed mink. NJF Seminar no 440: Fur Animal Research, Autumn Meeting pp 7. 29 September-1 October 2010, Oslo, NorwayGoogle Scholar
Clausen, TN and Dietz, HH 2000 Mastitis in the lactating mink female (Mustela vison S) and the development of ‘greasy kits’. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 41: 243–247CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dahlman, T 2003 Protein and amino acids in the nutrition of growing-furring blue foxes. PhD Thesis, University of Helsinki, FinlandGoogle Scholar
Damgaard, BM, Hansen, SW, Børsting, CF and Møller, SH 2004 Effects of different feeding strategies during the winter period on behaviour and performance in mink females (Mustela vison). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 89: 163–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2004.04.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dietz, HH, Andersen, TH and Chriél, M 2000 Health surveillance in Danish mink farms: a prospective study. Scientifur 24: 13–17Google Scholar
Enggaard Hansen, N, Creutsberg, A and Simonsen, HB 1991. Euthanasia of mink (Mustela vison) by means of carbon dioxide (CO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and nitrogen (N2). British Veterinary Journal 147: 140–146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0007-1935(91)90104-UCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
European Commission 2001 The Welfare of Animals Kept for Fur Production. Report of the Scientific Committee for Animal Health and Welfare, Adopted on 12-13 December 2001 pp 211. http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/international/out67_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
European Convention 1999 Standing Committee of the European Convention for the Protection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes (T-AP). Recommendation Concerning Fur Animals pp 27. 22 June 1999. http://www.efba.eu/download/1_recommendation_concerning_fur_animals.pdfGoogle Scholar
European Food Safety Authority 2008 Animal welfare aspects of husbandry systems for farmed trout, prepared by working group on trout welfare, issued on 11 September 2008. Annex I to The EFSA Journal 796: 1–97Google Scholar
Gaborit, M, Veissier, I and Botreau, R 2011 Applying Welfare Quality® strategy to interpret and aggregate welfare measures for farmed fur animals. In: Widowski, T, Lawlis, P and Sheppard, K (eds) Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level p 77. 8-11 August 2011, Guelph, Ontario, Canada. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Hansen, SW and Jeppesen, LL 2008 Bite marks as a welfare indicator in mink. Danish Fur Breeders’ Research Center, Annual Report 2007: 13–23Google Scholar
Hansen, SW, Hansen, BK and Berg, P 1994 The effect of cage environment and ad libitum feeding on the circadian rhythm, behaviour and feed intake of farm mink. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica 44: 120–127Google Scholar
Hansen, SW, Malmkvist, J, Palme, R and Damgaard, B 2007 Do double cages and access to occupational materials improve the welfare of farmed mink? Animal Welfare 16: 63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, BK, Møller, SH, Berg, P and Bækgaard, H 2009 Validation of a method for subjective body condition scoring. Danish Fur Breeders’ Research Center, Annual Report 2008: 129–135Google Scholar
Houbak, B and Jeppesen, LL 1988 Adfærd i forbindelse med fravænning hos mink. Faglig årsberetning 1987 pp134-142. Dansk Pelsdyravlerforeningen. [Title translation: Behaviour in relation to weaning in mink]Google Scholar
Hovland, AL and Bakken, M 2010 Group housing of adult silver fox (Vulpes vulpes) vixens during autumn and its consequences for body weight, injuries and later reproduction: a field study. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 127: 130–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2010.09.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hovland, AL, Akre, AK and Bakken, M 2010 Group housing of adult silver fox (Vulpes vulpes) vixens in autumn: agonistic behaviour during the first days subsequent to mixing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 126: 154–162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applan-im.2010.06.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeppesen, LL and Pedersen, V 1991 Effects of whole-year nest boxes on cortisol, circulating leucocytes, exploration and agonistic behaviour in silver foxes. Behavioural Processes 25: 171–177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(91)90019-VCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jeppesen, LL, Heller, KE and Dalsgaard, T 2000 Effects of early weaning and housing conditions on the development of stereotypies in farmed mink. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 68: 85–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00099-XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kangas, J 1982 Kettujen ja supikoirien sairaudet. Suomen Turkiseläinten Kasvattajain Liitto, Vantaa pp 99. [Title translation: Diseases of foxes and Finnraccoons]Google Scholar
Kasanen, S, Mononen, J and Harri, M 1999 Effects of resting platforms and concealment screens on behaviour, physiology and growth of silver foxes. Proceedings of the Nordic Association of Agricultural Scientists, XXI Congress 1999, Ås, Norway. Nordisk Jordbrugsforskning 81: 244Google Scholar
Kasanen, S, Mononen, J, Sepponen, J and Harri, M 2001 Effects of platforms and concealment screens on the behaviour of silver foxes. In: Manninen-Leivo, E (ed) Proceedings of the 13th Nordic Symposium of the International Society for Applied Ethology pp 13. 25-27 January 2001, Lammi, FinlandGoogle Scholar
Kempe, R, Koskinen, N, Peura, J, Koivula, M and Strandén, I 2009 Body condition scoring method for the blue fox (Alopex lagopus). Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A59: 85–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09064700903045341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempe, R, Koskinen, N, Mäntysaari, and E Strandén, I 2010 The genetics of body condition and leg weakness in the blue fox (Alopex lagopus). Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A60: 141–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkden, RD, Rochlitz, I, Broom, DM and Pearce, GP 2010 Assessment of on-farm methods to measure confidence in mink and foxes on Norwegian farms. Cambridge University Animal Welfare Information Centre, Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
Kivinen, T and Korhonen, H 2006 Varjotalon ja hallin vertailu siniketun kasvatusympäristönä. In: Hopponen, A (ed) Maataloustieteen Päivät 2006, Suomen Maataloustieteellisen Seura julkaisuja no 21 pp 6. 11-12 January 2006, Helsinki, Finland. [Title translation: A comparison of a shed house and barn as housing environment for blue foxes]Google Scholar
Korhonen, H and Niemelä, P 1996 Comparison between the use of open and walled platforms by juvenile blue foxes (Alopex lagopus). Agricultural and Food Science in Finland 5: 177–18410.23986/afsci.72733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korhonen, H and Orjala, H 2010 Effect of cage dimension on welfare and production of farmed blue fox. Annals of Animal Science 10: 311–324Google Scholar
Korhonen, H, Harri, M and Asikainen, J 1983 Thermoregulation of polecat and raccoon dog: a comparative study with stoat, mink and blue fox. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology A74: 225–230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0300-9629(83)90592-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korhonen, H, Jauhiainen, L, Niemelä, P, Harri, M and Sauna-Aho, R 2001a Physiological and behavioural responses in blue foxes (Alopex lagopus): comparison between space quantity and floor material. Animal Science 72: 375–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korhonen, HT, Niemelä, P and Jauhiainen, L 2001b Effects of space and floor material on the behaviour of farmed blue foxes. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 81: 189–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korhonen, HT, Jauhiainen, L and Rekilä, T 2006 Effects of year-round nest box availability and temperament on welfare and production performance in blue foxes (Alopex lagopus). Annals of Animal Science 6: 149–167Google Scholar
Korhonen, HT, Cizinauskas, S and Viitmaa, R 2009 Evaluation of the traditional way of euthanasia of farmed foxes from an animal welfare point of view. Annals of Animal Science 9: 73–87Google Scholar
Malmkvist, J and Hansen, SW 2001 The welfare of farmed mink (Mustela vison) in relation to behavioural selection: a review. Animal Welfare 10: 41–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmkvist, J and Hansen, SW 2002 Generalization of fear in farm mink, Mustela vison, genetically selected for behaviour towards humans. Animal Behaviour 64: 467–501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2002.3058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, G and Latham, NR 2004 Can't stop, won't stop: is stereotypy a reliable animal welfare indicator? Animal Welfare 13: 57–6910.1017/S096272860001438XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moe, RO, Dille, LL and Bakken, M 2000 Water requirements of farmed foxes. Scientifur 24: 54–56Google Scholar
Møller, SH 1990 The need for nest boxes and drop-in bottoms in the whelping period of female mink. Scientifur 14: 95–100Google Scholar
Møller, SH 1991 Drinking behaviour of mink in relation to watering system and water temperature. NJF Seminar No 192. Drinking Water for Farm Animals p 12. 6-7 March 1991, Uppsala, SwedenGoogle Scholar
Møller, SH 1992 Production systems and management in the Danish mink production. Norwegian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Supplement 9: 562–568Google Scholar
Møller, SH 2000 Indicators of health and welfare observed at pelting of mink. Scientifur 24: 44–48Google Scholar
Møller, SH and Hansen, SW 2011 Challenges using Welfare Quality® principles for the development of an on-farm welfare assessment system for mink. In: Widowski, T, Lawlis, P and Sheppard, K (eds) Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level p 62. 8-11 August 2011, Guelph, Ontario, Canada. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Møller, SH, Hansen, SW and Sørensen, JT 2003 Assessing animal welfare in a strictly synchronous production system: the mink case. Animal Welfare 12: 699–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mononen, J 1996 Resting platforms and nest boxes for farmed blue foxes (Alopex lagopus) and silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes). PhD thesis, University of Kuopio, Kuopio, FinlandGoogle Scholar
Mononen, J, Harri, M, Sepponen, J and Ahola, L 1998 A note to the effects of an obstructed view on cage choice in farmed foxes. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 61: 79–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00180-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mononen, J, Kasanen, S, Harri, M, Sepponen, J and Rekilä, T 2001 The effects of elevated platforms and concealment screens on the welfare of blue foxes. Animal Welfare 10: 373–38510.1017/S0962728600032644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, V and Jeppesen, LL 2001 Effects of family housing on behaviour, plasma cortisol and performance in adult female mink (Mustela vison). Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A51: 77–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, V, Jeppesen, LL and Jeppesen, N 2004 Effects of group housing on behaviour and production performance in farmed juvenile mink (Mustela vison). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 88: 89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rattenborg, E, Dietz, HH, Andersen, TH and Møller, SH 1999 Mortality in farmed mink: systematic collection versus arbitrary submissions for diagnostic investigation. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 40: 307–314CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rekilä, T 1999 Behavioural tests in welfare research of foxes. PhD Thesis. Kuopio University, Kuopio, FinlandGoogle Scholar
Sanson, G 2011 Helsesituasjonen for pelsdyr i Norge. Norsk Veterinærtidskrift 123: 82–84. [Title translation: The health situation of fur animals in Norway]Google Scholar
Veissier, I, Botreau, R and Perny, P 2009 Scoring animal welfare: difficulties and Welfare Quality® solutions. In: Keeling, L (ed) An Overview of the Development of the Welfare Quality® Project Assessment System pp 15–32. Welfare Quality® Consortium: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Welfare Quality® 2009a Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol for Cattle. Welfare Quality® Consortium: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Welfare Quality® 2009b Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol for Pigs. Welfare Quality® Consortium: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Welfare Quality® 2009c Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol for Poultry. Welfare Quality® Consortium: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar