Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems

Søren Saxmose Nielsen, Julio Alvarez, Dominique Joseph Bicout, Paolo Calistri, Klaus Depner, Julian Ashley Drewe, Bruno Garin‐bastuji, Jose Luis Gonzales Rojas, Christian Gortázar Schmidt, Virginie Michel, Miguel Ángel Miranda Chueca, Helen Clare Roberts, Liisa Helena Sihvonen, Hans Spoolder, Karl Stahl, Antonio Velarde Calvo, Arvo Viltrop, Stephanie Buijs, Sandra Edwards, Denise Candiani & 3 others Olaf Mosbach‐schulz, Yves Van Der Stede, Christoph Winckler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The AGRI committee of the European Parliament requested EFSA to assess the welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems, including organic production, and to update its 2005 scientific opinion about the health and welfare of rabbits kept for meat production. Considering reproducing does, kits and growing rabbits, this scientific opinion focusses on six different housing systems, namely conventional cages, structurally enriched cages, elevated pens, floor pens, outdoor/partially outdoor systems and organic systems. To compare the level of welfare in the different housing systems and rabbit categories, welfare impact scores for 20 welfare consequences identified from the literature were calculated, taking their occurrence, duration and severity into account. Based on the overall welfare impact score (sum of scores for the single welfare consequences), obtained via a 2-step expert knowledge elicitation process, the welfare of reproducing does is likely (certainty 66–90%) to be lower in conventional cages compared to the five other housing systems. In addition, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99%) that the welfare of kits is lower in outdoor systems compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Finally, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99%) that the welfare of growing rabbits is lower in conventional cages compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Ranking of the welfare consequences allowed an analysis of the main welfare consequences within each system and rabbit category. It was concluded that for reproducing does, as well as growing rabbits, welfare consequences related to behavioural restrictions were more prominent in conventional cages, elevated pens and enriched cages, whereas those related to health problems were more important in floor pens, outdoor and organic systems. Housing in organic rabbit farming is diverse, which can result in different welfare consequences, but the overall welfare impact scores suggest that welfare in organic systems is generally good.
Original languageEnglish
Article number5944
Number of pages96
JournalEFSA Journal
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 21 Nov 2019

Fingerprint

production technology
rabbits
cages
Rabbits
Health
rabbit meat
Organic Agriculture
expert opinion
meat production
organic production
committees
Meat
farming systems
duration

Cite this

Saxmose Nielsen, S., Alvarez, J., Bicout, D. J., Calistri, P., Depner, K., Drewe, J. A., ... Winckler, C. (2019). Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems. EFSA Journal, 18(1), [5944]. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5944
Saxmose Nielsen, Søren ; Alvarez, Julio ; Bicout, Dominique Joseph ; Calistri, Paolo ; Depner, Klaus ; Drewe, Julian Ashley ; Garin‐bastuji, Bruno ; Gonzales Rojas, Jose Luis ; Gortázar Schmidt, Christian ; Michel, Virginie ; Miranda Chueca, Miguel Ángel ; Roberts, Helen Clare ; Sihvonen, Liisa Helena ; Spoolder, Hans ; Stahl, Karl ; Velarde Calvo, Antonio ; Viltrop, Arvo ; Buijs, Stephanie ; Edwards, Sandra ; Candiani, Denise ; Mosbach‐schulz, Olaf ; Van Der Stede, Yves ; Winckler, Christoph. / Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems. In: EFSA Journal. 2019 ; Vol. 18, No. 1.
@article{557a7831c44243479081f89b159806ff,
title = "Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems",
abstract = "The AGRI committee of the European Parliament requested EFSA to assess the welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems, including organic production, and to update its 2005 scientific opinion about the health and welfare of rabbits kept for meat production. Considering reproducing does, kits and growing rabbits, this scientific opinion focusses on six different housing systems, namely conventional cages, structurally enriched cages, elevated pens, floor pens, outdoor/partially outdoor systems and organic systems. To compare the level of welfare in the different housing systems and rabbit categories, welfare impact scores for 20 welfare consequences identified from the literature were calculated, taking their occurrence, duration and severity into account. Based on the overall welfare impact score (sum of scores for the single welfare consequences), obtained via a 2-step expert knowledge elicitation process, the welfare of reproducing does is likely (certainty 66–90{\%}) to be lower in conventional cages compared to the five other housing systems. In addition, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99{\%}) that the welfare of kits is lower in outdoor systems compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Finally, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99{\%}) that the welfare of growing rabbits is lower in conventional cages compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Ranking of the welfare consequences allowed an analysis of the main welfare consequences within each system and rabbit category. It was concluded that for reproducing does, as well as growing rabbits, welfare consequences related to behavioural restrictions were more prominent in conventional cages, elevated pens and enriched cages, whereas those related to health problems were more important in floor pens, outdoor and organic systems. Housing in organic rabbit farming is diverse, which can result in different welfare consequences, but the overall welfare impact scores suggest that welfare in organic systems is generally good.",
author = "{Saxmose Nielsen}, S{\o}ren and Julio Alvarez and Bicout, {Dominique Joseph} and Paolo Calistri and Klaus Depner and Drewe, {Julian Ashley} and Bruno Garin‐bastuji and {Gonzales Rojas}, {Jose Luis} and {Gort{\'a}zar Schmidt}, Christian and Virginie Michel and {Miranda Chueca}, {Miguel {\'A}ngel} and Roberts, {Helen Clare} and Sihvonen, {Liisa Helena} and Hans Spoolder and Karl Stahl and {Velarde Calvo}, Antonio and Arvo Viltrop and Stephanie Buijs and Sandra Edwards and Denise Candiani and Olaf Mosbach‐schulz and {Van Der Stede}, Yves and Christoph Winckler",
year = "2019",
month = "11",
day = "21",
doi = "10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5944",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
journal = "EFSA Journal",
issn = "1831-4732",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd",
number = "1",

}

Saxmose Nielsen, S, Alvarez, J, Bicout, DJ, Calistri, P, Depner, K, Drewe, JA, Garin‐bastuji, B, Gonzales Rojas, JL, Gortázar Schmidt, C, Michel, V, Miranda Chueca, MÁ, Roberts, HC, Sihvonen, LH, Spoolder, H, Stahl, K, Velarde Calvo, A, Viltrop, A, Buijs, S, Edwards, S, Candiani, D, Mosbach‐schulz, O, Van Der Stede, Y & Winckler, C 2019, 'Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems', EFSA Journal, vol. 18, no. 1, 5944. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5944

Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems. / Saxmose Nielsen, Søren; Alvarez, Julio; Bicout, Dominique Joseph; Calistri, Paolo; Depner, Klaus; Drewe, Julian Ashley; Garin‐bastuji, Bruno; Gonzales Rojas, Jose Luis; Gortázar Schmidt, Christian; Michel, Virginie; Miranda Chueca, Miguel Ángel; Roberts, Helen Clare; Sihvonen, Liisa Helena; Spoolder, Hans; Stahl, Karl; Velarde Calvo, Antonio; Viltrop, Arvo; Buijs, Stephanie; Edwards, Sandra; Candiani, Denise; Mosbach‐schulz, Olaf; Van Der Stede, Yves; Winckler, Christoph.

In: EFSA Journal, Vol. 18, No. 1, 5944, 21.11.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems

AU - Saxmose Nielsen, Søren

AU - Alvarez, Julio

AU - Bicout, Dominique Joseph

AU - Calistri, Paolo

AU - Depner, Klaus

AU - Drewe, Julian Ashley

AU - Garin‐bastuji, Bruno

AU - Gonzales Rojas, Jose Luis

AU - Gortázar Schmidt, Christian

AU - Michel, Virginie

AU - Miranda Chueca, Miguel Ángel

AU - Roberts, Helen Clare

AU - Sihvonen, Liisa Helena

AU - Spoolder, Hans

AU - Stahl, Karl

AU - Velarde Calvo, Antonio

AU - Viltrop, Arvo

AU - Buijs, Stephanie

AU - Edwards, Sandra

AU - Candiani, Denise

AU - Mosbach‐schulz, Olaf

AU - Van Der Stede, Yves

AU - Winckler, Christoph

PY - 2019/11/21

Y1 - 2019/11/21

N2 - The AGRI committee of the European Parliament requested EFSA to assess the welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems, including organic production, and to update its 2005 scientific opinion about the health and welfare of rabbits kept for meat production. Considering reproducing does, kits and growing rabbits, this scientific opinion focusses on six different housing systems, namely conventional cages, structurally enriched cages, elevated pens, floor pens, outdoor/partially outdoor systems and organic systems. To compare the level of welfare in the different housing systems and rabbit categories, welfare impact scores for 20 welfare consequences identified from the literature were calculated, taking their occurrence, duration and severity into account. Based on the overall welfare impact score (sum of scores for the single welfare consequences), obtained via a 2-step expert knowledge elicitation process, the welfare of reproducing does is likely (certainty 66–90%) to be lower in conventional cages compared to the five other housing systems. In addition, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99%) that the welfare of kits is lower in outdoor systems compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Finally, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99%) that the welfare of growing rabbits is lower in conventional cages compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Ranking of the welfare consequences allowed an analysis of the main welfare consequences within each system and rabbit category. It was concluded that for reproducing does, as well as growing rabbits, welfare consequences related to behavioural restrictions were more prominent in conventional cages, elevated pens and enriched cages, whereas those related to health problems were more important in floor pens, outdoor and organic systems. Housing in organic rabbit farming is diverse, which can result in different welfare consequences, but the overall welfare impact scores suggest that welfare in organic systems is generally good.

AB - The AGRI committee of the European Parliament requested EFSA to assess the welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems, including organic production, and to update its 2005 scientific opinion about the health and welfare of rabbits kept for meat production. Considering reproducing does, kits and growing rabbits, this scientific opinion focusses on six different housing systems, namely conventional cages, structurally enriched cages, elevated pens, floor pens, outdoor/partially outdoor systems and organic systems. To compare the level of welfare in the different housing systems and rabbit categories, welfare impact scores for 20 welfare consequences identified from the literature were calculated, taking their occurrence, duration and severity into account. Based on the overall welfare impact score (sum of scores for the single welfare consequences), obtained via a 2-step expert knowledge elicitation process, the welfare of reproducing does is likely (certainty 66–90%) to be lower in conventional cages compared to the five other housing systems. In addition, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99%) that the welfare of kits is lower in outdoor systems compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Finally, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99%) that the welfare of growing rabbits is lower in conventional cages compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Ranking of the welfare consequences allowed an analysis of the main welfare consequences within each system and rabbit category. It was concluded that for reproducing does, as well as growing rabbits, welfare consequences related to behavioural restrictions were more prominent in conventional cages, elevated pens and enriched cages, whereas those related to health problems were more important in floor pens, outdoor and organic systems. Housing in organic rabbit farming is diverse, which can result in different welfare consequences, but the overall welfare impact scores suggest that welfare in organic systems is generally good.

U2 - 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5944

DO - 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5944

M3 - Article

VL - 18

JO - EFSA Journal

JF - EFSA Journal

SN - 1831-4732

IS - 1

M1 - 5944

ER -

Saxmose Nielsen S, Alvarez J, Bicout DJ, Calistri P, Depner K, Drewe JA et al. Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems. EFSA Journal. 2019 Nov 21;18(1). 5944. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5944