Assessing Extensive Semi-Arid Rangeland Beef Cow-Calf Welfare in Namibia. Part 2: Categorisation and Scoring of Welfare Assessment Measures

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Basing welfare assessment standards on protocols developed for industrialised beef exporting countries could enhance the beef production and export standards in Namibia. This paper compares imposed thresholds of welfare measures of categorisation and derived thresholds to see—which was the most appropriate to the range of observations and welfare implication in three cow-calf production systems in Namibia. Using the same thresholds as the New Zealand protocol, regardless of the farm system, commercial herds achieved most welfare measures thresholds, but semi-commercial and communal herds attained acceptable welfare thresholds only in a few measures. For measures with significant welfare implications, the stricter threshold was retained, while derived thresholds appeared more appropriate for commonly occurring traits (but of less welfare importance), and some measures threshold were temporarily adjusted to reflect drought conditions. The welfare assessment identified the strengths and weaknesses in thresholds in measures across the farm types, which is envisioned to draw attention for remedial intervention to improve welfare standards of the beef industry. ABSTRACT: This paper aims to develop standards for a welfare assessment protocol by validating potential categorisation thresholds for assessing beef farms in various beef cow-calf production systems in Namibia. Forty measures, combined from a New Zealand-based protocol plus Namibia-specific measures, are applied to 55 beef farms (17 commercial farms, 20 semi-commercial and 18 communal village farms) during pregnancy testing, and a questionnaire guided interview. The categorised measures on a 3-point welfare score (0: good, 1: marginal, and 2: poor/unacceptable welfare) are subsequently compared with the derivation of thresholds based upon the poorest 15% and best 50% of herds for each measure. The overall combined thresholds of continuous measures across the three farm types show 10/22 measures that posed welfare compromise across Namibia, whereas commercial farms have 4/22 measures, and semi-commercial and communal village farms have 12/22 and 11/22, respectively, with high thresholds. Most measures-imposed thresholds are retained because of significant importance to the welfare of animals and preventiveness of the traits, while leniency was given to adjust good feeding and mortality measures to signify periods of drought. Handling measures (fearful, falling/lying) and abrasions thresholds are adjusted to reflect the temporary stress caused by infrequent cattle handling, and faulty yard designs/design and possible cattle breed influence on handling. Hence, Namibia needs prioritised investigation of underlying contributing factors and remediation to reduce the high thresholds.