Acta Vet. Brno 2024, 93: 45-57
https://doi.org/10.2754/avb202493010045
Analysis of the major deficiencies detected during welfare inspections of farm animals in the Czech Republic
References
1. Act No. 246/1992 Coll., on the protection of animals against cruelty. In: ASPI [legal information system]. Wolters Kluwer CR [vid. 15/03/2023]
2. R, Olmos G, Hötzel MJ 2021: My pigs are ok, why change? – animal welfare accounts of pig farmers. Animal 15: 100154
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2020.100154>
3. BB, Van Huik MM, Prutzer M, Kling Eveillard F, Dockes A 2007: Farmers’ relationship with different animals: The importance of getting close to the animals. Case studies of French, Swedish and Dutch cattle, pig and poultry farmers. Int J Sociol Agric Food 15: 108-125
4. EA, Bray HJ, Ankeny RA 2021: “Of course we care!ˮ: A qualitative exploration of Australian livestock producers’ understandings of farm animal welfare issues. J Rural Stud 83: 50-59
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.02.024>
5. JAM, Potter M, Harding E 2006: The welfare implications of animal breeding and breeding technologies in commercial agriculture. Livest Sci 103: 270-281
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.05.015>
6. Council Directive 1999/74/EC of 19 July 1999 laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens. Official Journal of the European Union, L 203, August 3,1999, pp 53-57
7. Council Directive 2007/43/EC of 28 June 2007 laying down minimum rules for the protection of chickens kept for meat production (Text with EEA relevance). Official Journal of the European Union, L 182, July 12, 2007, pp 19-28
8. Council Directive 2008/119/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of calves (Codified version). Official Journal of the European Union, L 10, January 15, 2009, pp 7-13
9. Council Directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs (Codified version). Official Journal of the European Union, L 47, February 18, 2009, pp 5-13
10. Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes. Official Journal of the European Union, L 221, August 8, 1998, pp 23-27
11. G, Brscic M, Gottardo F 2009: Main critical factors affecting the welfare of beef cattle and veal calves raised under intensive rearing systems in Italy: a review. It J Anim Sci 8: 67-80
<https://doi.org/10.4081/ijas.2009.s1.67>
12. Czech Statistical Office 2023: Livestock conditions. Available at: https://vdb.czso.cz/vdbvo2/faces/index.jsf?page=vystup-objekt&pvo=ZEM06A&z=T&f=TABULKA&skupId=2746&katalog=30840&pvo=ZEM06A&evo=v937_!_ZEM06A-19892018_1. Accessed March 8, 2023
13. Decree No. 208/2004 Coll., on the minimum standards for the protection of farm animals. In: ASPI [legal information system]. Wolters Kluwer CR [vid. 15/03/2023]
14. Escobar MP, Buller H 2014: Projecting social science into Defra’s animal welfare evidence base: A review of current research and evidence gaps on the issue of farmer behaviour with respect to animal welfare. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, United Kingdom, London, 94 p.
15. MP, Demeritt D 2017: Paperwork and the decoupling of audit and animal welfare: The challenges of materiality for better regulation. Environ Plan C Politics Space 35: 169-190
<https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X16646771>
16. Farm Animal Welfare Council 2018: Terrestrial animal health code. Available at: https://www.woah.org/fileadmin/Home/eng/Health_standards/tahc/2018/en_chapitre_aw_introduction.htm. Accessed February 15, 2023
17. É, Oude Lansink AGJM, Voermans G, Saatkamp HW 2015: Economic feasibility of animal welfare improvements in Dutch intensive livestock production: A comparison between broiler, laying hen, and fattening pig sectors. Livest Sci 182: 38-53
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2015.10.015>
18. S, Segerkvist KA, Wallgren T, Hansson H, Sonesson U 2020: A systematic mapping of research on sustainability dimensions at farm-level in pig production. Sustainability 12: 4352
<https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114352>
19. FL, Hultgren J, Röcklinsberg H, Wahlberg B, Berg Ch 2018: Non-compliance and follow-up in Swedish official and private animal welfare control of dairy cows. Animal 8: 72
20. PL, Hultgren J, Frösling J, Emanuelson U, Keeling LJ 2017: An epidemiological analysis of equine welfare data from regulatory inspections by the official competent authorities. Animal 11: 1237-1248
<https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731116002512>
21. A, McCulloch SP 2023: The political salience of animal protection in the Netherlands (2012–2021) and Belgium (2010–2019): What do Dutch and Belgian political parties pledge on animal welfare and wildlife conservation? J Agr Environ Ethic 36: 4
<https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-023-09899-6>
22. VM, Reinders MJ, van Tulder RJM, van Trijp JCM 2013: The livestock sector and its stakeholders in the search to meet the animal welfare requirements of society. J Chain Netw Sci 13: 151-160
<https://doi.org/10.3920/JCNS2013.1005>
23. KL, Andersen HR 1993: Space allowance and type of housing for growing cattle. Acta Agric Scand 43: 65-80
24. Jagielski J 2007: Rola administracji publicznej (in Polish, The role of public administration). Wydawnictwo LexisNexis, Warszawa, 12 p.
25. T, Vesala KM, Valros A 2012: Farmer attitude toward improvement of animal welfare is correlated with piglet production parameters. Livest Sci 143: 142-150
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2011.09.011>
26. P, Ahmed MA, Abubakar AA, Hayat MN, Kaka U, Ajat M, Goh YM, Sazili AQ 2023: Improving animal welfare status and meat quality through assessment of stress biomarkers: A critical review. Meat Sci 197: 109048
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.109048>
27. M, Soltyszewski I, Szarek J, Wąsowicz K, Felsmann MZ, Poplawski K 2018: Effectiveness of control measures taken by the Veterinary Inspection in Poland. Polish J Nat Sci 33: 183-194
28. G, Carnovale F, Arney D, De Rosa G, Napolitano F 2022: A simple method for on-farm evaluation of sheep welfare using animal-based indicators. Small Rumin Res 208: 106636
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2022.106636>
29. NT, Marliani G, Cavallini D, Accorsi PA, Di Pietro M, Beltrame A, Gentile A, Jacinto JGP 2023: Health and welfare assessment of beef cattle during the adaptation period in a specialized commercial fattening unit. Res Vet Sci 158: 50-55
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2023.03.008>
30. Ministry of Agriculture 2022: Animal protection system in the Czech Republic. Available at: https://eagri.cz/public/web/mze/ochrana-zvirat/system-ochrany-zvirat-v-cr/. Accessed March 12, 2023
31. SJ, Marchewka J, Hanlon A, Balzani A, Boyle L 2021: An evaluation of four private animal health and welfare standards and associated quality assurance programmes for dairy cow production. Food Policy 105: 102169
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102169>
32. E, Stevenson P 2019: Addressing lameness in farmed animals: An urgent need to achieve compliance with EU animal welfare law. Animals 9: 576
<https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9080576>
33. M, Popelková T, Chloupek P 2022: Sampling methods for determination of cortisol in pig saliva and their use in the assessment of pig welfare. Acta Vet Brno 91: 261-266
<https://doi.org/10.2754/avb202291030261>
34. T, Němečková M, Tšponová Z, Pištěková V 2022: Factors influencing the welfare of dairy goats. Acta Vet Brno 91: 333-337
<https://doi.org/10.2754/avb202291040333>
35. AC, Paranhos da Costa MJ 2011: The relationship between dairy cow hygiene and somatic cell count in milk. J Dairy Sci 94: 3835-3844
<https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3951>
36. JT, Fraser D 2010: On-farm welfare assessment for regulatory purposes: Issues and possible solutions. Livest Sci 131: 1-7
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2010.02.025>
37. State Veterinary Administration (Státní veterinární správa) 2020: Annual report of the State Veterinary Administration for the year 2019. State Veterinary Administration, Prague, 43 p.
38. State Veterinary Administration (Státní veterinární správa) 2021: Information on the animal protection program - situation in 2020. State Veterinary Administration, Prague, 29 p.
39. H, Aarts N, Van Woerkum C 2002: Dealing with ambivalence: Farmers’ and consumers’ perceptions of animal welfare in livestock breeding. J Agric Environ Ethics 15: 203-219
<https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015012403331>
40. F, Verbeke W 2014: Public and consumer policies for higher welfare food products: challenges and opportunities. J Agric Environ Ethics 27: 153-171
<https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-013-9479-2>
41. I, Miele M, Mounier L 2021: Animal welfare official inspections: farmers and inspectors shared concerns. Animal 15: 100038
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2020.100038>
