Societal Threats and Challenges 07.31.2008 Sherwood Hill, Logan Canyon, Utah Peter Sandbøl Research Manager Danish Fur Breeders Research Center – Kopenhagen

SocietalThreats and Challenges

07.31.2008Sherwood Hill, Logan Canyon, Utah

Peter SandbølResearch Manager

Danish Fur Breeders Research Center – Kopenhagen Fur

FCUSA Annual Meeting 2008

Presentation Plan

Introduction to the Speaker:Who, Where and What

Societal Threaths and Challenges:Ethics:

Animal Behaviour and Animal WelfareStereotypies - Domesticaiton

Environment:Nutrient LossesSmell EmmissionFlies

What is ..

Kopenhagen Fur is a cooperative association owned by 1,900 Danish fur breeders in Dansk Pelsdyravlerforening

Veterinary service

Auction house

Magazines

Feed control

Research

Consultancy service

Breeding programs

WhoWho

Father

Grand Father

Great Grand FatherAlias Honorary Chief Eastern Starof the Winnebagos / Ho-Chunks

AliasResearch ManagerDanish Fur Breeders Research Center

SonPeter Sandbøl

Where - DenmarkWhere - Denmark

Mink farms: 1700Mink farms: 1700Farm size: 1500 femalesFarm size: 1500 femalesBreeding females: 2,6 millBreeding females: 2,6 millFox farms: 35Fox farms: 35Breeding females: 3.000Breeding females: 3.000Chinchilla: Breeding females: 12.000

Danish Fur Breeders Research CenterDanish Fur Breeders Research Center



2370 Females:1770 Brown/Glow

600 Black

About 12,500 – 13,000 pelts/year

2 stables for balance trials:1 with 48 balance cages1 with 36 modified farm cages

A total of 11-12 Employes


ResearchManager

StudentsResearch

LeaderStables

ResearchLeaderFarm

FarmManager

Secretary

ResearchAssistant

RessearchTechnician

FarmAssistant

FeedKitchenManager

ResearchWorker

ResearchWorker










WhereWhere

External Partners

PF

C

Faculty of Agricultural Sciences

Technical University of Denmark

WhatWhat

External Focus AreasBehaviour, Welfare & HealthBreeding, Genetics & Reproduction(Nutrition & Physiology)

GenomicsNutrition & PhysiologyHealth (Viral Research)

Behaviour

Health

Health (Astro virus)

Testing and Investigations on Farm Level

Faculty of Agricultural Sciences

Technical University of Denmark

Nutrient Requirements and Balances

Nutritional Related Diseases and

Testing of Feed Ingredients

WhatWhat

Own Focus AreasProtein/Amino Acids

Fat / Fatty Acids

CarbohydratesStarch

VitaminsBiotin

MineralsSalt

WhatWhat

Management

Health&

Disease

Nutrition&

Physiology

Breeding&

Genetics

Behaviour&

Welfare

WhatWhat

Management

Health&

Disease

Nutrition&

Physiology

Breeding&

Genetics

Behaviour&

WelfareEthicsEnvironment

FeedIngredientsProduction

Systems

Presentation Plan



Animal Behaviour and Animal WelfareStereotypies - Domestication

Environment:Nutrient LossesSmell EmmissionFlies

EthicsEthics

Management

Health&

Disease

Nutrition&

Physiology

Breeding&

Genetics

Behaviour&

Welfare

Ethics

ProductionSystems

FeedIngredients

New LegislationNew Legislation

First Danish order on fur animals in effect last year.

Based on EU recommendations.

Contains regulations regarding:1. Biological characteristics

2. Behavioural needs

3. Cage designs

4. Management procedures

SubjectsSubjects

Biological characteristics of the farmed mink

Behavioural needs

Occupational materials

Empty cages between breeding females

Social housing

Winter feeding

Selection against fearful mink

Status of the welfare of the farmed mink

Conclusion

The biological characteristicsThe biological characteristics

Reduced fearImproved production capacity

1957:Females 950 gMales 1600 g

1969:Barren females: 18 %Kits / mated female: 3,5

2007:Barren females: 8 - 9 %Kits / mated female: 5,0 – 5,5Females: 1600 gMales: 3000 g

Brain WeightWild 9.11 gramsRanch 8.38 gramsReduction -10.6 %

The behavioural needs (1993)The behavioural needs (1993)

”The five freedoms”

Freedom from thirst, hunger and malnutrition

Appropriate comfort and shelter

Prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment of injury and disease

Freedom to display most normal patterns of behaviour

Freedom from fear

Characteristics of behavioural needsCharacteristics of behavioural needs

All individuals perform the behaviour

Denying the animal to perform the behaviour induces a state of chronic

stress

The behaviour is primarily internally motivated and performed even in

the absence of the required stimuli (vacuum activity)

The behaviour is performed at an abnormally high rate when the

animal is eventually allowed to perform the behaviour after a period

of deprivation (rebound effect)

The display has in itself rewarding properties (endorphins)

Swimming water: not a behavioural need

Not all mink use swimming water

Mink don’t increase use after deprivation

Access has no effect on:1. stereotypic behaviour,2. fur chewing,3. anticipatory behaviour,4. does not unambiguously decrease the level of cortisol

Behavioural priorities

Mink are willing to work for access to swimming water as well as access to a running wheel

Use of water seems related to foraging/explorative behaviour, but does not seem to be an ”innate” or biological need.


Straw•Manipulate•Nest-building•Insulation


Shelf or tube attached to ceiling• Rest or look-out• Refuge from the male and the kits


Tubes and chewing materials (ropes)• Reduce stereotypies, fur chewing and cortisol Level

Cage areaCage area

Doubling of the standard cage area has:No effect on

stereotypies,

fur chewing or

the cortisol level

Empty cage between breeding females

Improves reproduction

No effect on reproduction, but the females are less out in the cage

Less stereotypies and less interaction between females

Catching is stressful to the females (Overgaard, 1999)

Group housing/family housingGroup housing/family housing

Increased aggression

No increase in play behaviour

Increases the number of mink with bite-marks

Reduced possibility of inspection of the individual mink

Restricted feeding prohibitedExcept 8 days prior to mating

Flushing: 14 days of restricted feeding followed by ad lib increases number of

ovulated and implanted eggs.

Slimming: effect on reproduction

increases anticipatory activity prior to feeding andthe development of stereotypies

can be done without increasing stereotypiesby use of low energy feed

Effects of individual feeding and low energy feed on stereotypies continue to be studied

Restricted feeding prohibitedExcept 8 days prior to mating

Slimming: Effect on reproduction

20. - 25. of February

3,5

4

4,5

5

5,5

6

6,5

1 2 3 4 5

Body score

Kits alive pr. female

20. March - 1. April

4.8

5

5.2

5.4

5.6

5.8

6

6.2

1 2 3 4 5

body score

Kits alive pr. female

Selection against fearful minkSelection against fearful mink

Fear is a natural behaviour

The threshold value for showing fear is changed by selection

Commercial breeding programmes for behavioural selection are available: Fearful, Control, Confident.

Generations

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

%

0

20

40

60

80

100

Status of the welfare of the farmed minkStatus of the welfare of the farmed mink

The farmed mink is domesticated

Farmed mink live accordance with their natural behaviour1. Mate naturally

2. Give birth only once a year

3. Weaning at 8 weeks of age

4. Litter is split up gradually

5. Young mink are kept in pairs (male + female)

6. Adult mink are kept individually


Cage size ensures performance of specific behavioural elements1. Move freely

2. Groom themselves

3. Lie down, curl up to sleep, stretch their limbs

4. Withdraw to their nestbox to rest or use shelf or tube

5. Permanent access to straw and shelf or tube


Abnormal behaviour1. Stereotypic behaviour is rare in young mink2. Stereotypies are primarily seen during winter and are

primarily related to feeding time3. Fur chewing is hereditary and the occurrence has

been reduced4. Fur chewing can be further reduced by use of

occupational materials for chewing and pulling


Empty cage between females 1. Peace and quietness during the sensitive period

2. However, in practice it means catching the females once more

Killing 1. At the cages

2. Quick and painless

3. Transport is not necessary


Health 1. Generally the health of the mink is good

2. The extent and intensity of welfare problems are low

3. The standard cage system makes it possible to monitor the animals

Group housing1. Reduces the possibilities of monitoring the individual

mink

2. No positive effect on mink welfare

3. Increases aggression and the occurrence of bite-marks

Conclusion on EthicsConclusion on Ethics

The welfare of mink kept in standard cages is good

The new order has improved the welfare of the mink further in relation to:

1. Occupational materials

2. Selection for confident temperament

3. Limited restrictive feeding

4. Increased peace and quietness during the nursing period.

Conclusion on EthicsConclusion on Ethics

However, not all the regulations are unambiguously positive for the welfare of the mink.

Catching/moving the females once more Can the often fat breeding animals be brought into a

proper condition in 8 days ? Group housing reduces the welfare of the mink

Further studies Occupation of the mink Reduced aggression in groups of mink Individual feeding Low-energy feed without the mink feeling hungry

Presentation Plan



Animal Behaviour and Animal WelfareStereotypies - Domestication

Environment:Nutrient LossesSmell EmissionFlies

EnvironmentEnvironment

The Environmental Agenda isOutlined by Society!

1.Nutrient Losses2.Smell Emission3.Flies


Management

Nutrition&

Physiology

Breeding&

Genetics

Environment

FeedIngredients

Productionsystems

1. Norms2. Balance

a. – Nitrogen leachingb. – Ammonia evaporation

3.Adjustment possibilities

Loss of Nutrients

Norm for N, ab dyr. 1999 2003 2005

g delivered with the feed 4923 5420 5749

g in feed spillage 394 434 460

g eaten 4529 4986 5289

g deposited in body, skin and hair 332 351 386

g excreted in faeces and og urine 4197 4635 4903

g in faeces 679 748 899

g in urine 3518 3887 4004

Norm: g ab animal pr dam 4591 5069 5363

Norm: g ab animal pr pelt 857 959 983

NormsNorms

Model for N and P Emmission

Manure

25 % N

26 % N 48 % P

26 % N48 % P

40 % N38 % P

Feed Spillage8 % N8 % P

28 % N48 % P

65 % N52 % P

7 % N

20 % N



Liquid Manure

2 % N

54 % N 71 % P

40 % N23 % P

13 % N15 % P


25 % N65 % P

65 % N52 % P

10 % N

19 % N


19 % N



With Gutter and Weekly Emptying With Gutter and Daily Emptying

54 % N 71 % P

40 % N23 % P

13 % N15 % P


19 % N


62 % N 71 % P

32 % N23 % P

13 % N15 % P


11 % N


Ammonia EvaporationAmmonia Evaporation

32 41 50 59 68 77Temperature, F

Emptying every 3-4 days

32 41 50 59 68 77Temperature, F

Emptying every 5, 6 or 7 days

32 41 50 59 68 77Temperature, F

Emptying daily

32 41 50 59 68 77Temperature, F

Emptying every other day

PossibilitiesPossibilities

Actions to reduce environmental load:

Breeding – Selection for:1. Better feed conversion2. Larger litter size at pelting3. Shorter production period

a. Later birthb. Earlier pelting

Nutrition:1. Optimised feed composition

Management:1. Reduce feed spillage2. Utilise compensatory growth ?3. Optimise the winter feeding


1. Better Feed Conversion

Male + Female

3 kg LWG

Feed Consumption

kg

Feed Efficiency

kg LWG / kg Feed

Highest 25 % 64 0.047

Lowest 25 % 46 0.065

Difference 18 0.022

Heritability for Feed Efficiency: 0.30

2.Larger Litter Size at Pelting - Mortality:Birth to Pelting: 20-30 %Birth to 4 days: 10-25 %

Dead born kits weighing 4.8-9.3 grams

3.Later Birth – Earlier PeltingTime of birth is hereditaryTime of pelting varies.

Week







Protein Requirement

Is an extreme simplification

The requirement is for Amino Acids

AA’s with a certain balance an Amino Acid Profile

N in Feed

N in faecesN in Urine

N for Production:

Digestibility Coefficient: DC = (N in Feed - N in Faeces) / N in Feed

”Biological Value”: BV = (Digested N – N in Urine) / Digested N*100

GrowthFurFoetusMilk

Principle for Nitrogen MetaboslismPrinciple for Nitrogen Metaboslism(Protein /Amino Acid)(Protein /Amino Acid)

N for Maintenance

% Digested 81 83 85 87 89

g in feed 5166 5042 4923 4810 4702

g in spillage 413 403 394 385 376

g eaten 4753 4638 4529 4425 4326

g deposited 332 332 332 332 332

g excreted 4421 4306 4197 4093 3994

g in faeces 903 789 679 575 476

g in urine 3518 3518 3518 3518 3518

g ex animal 4834 4710 4591 4478 4370

Loss in g 1088 1060 1033 1008 983

Ex stable, g 3746 3650 3558 3470 3387

Storage loss g 75 73 71 69 68

Spread, g 3672 3577 3487 3401 3319

Effect of DigestibilityEffect of Digestibility

Feed Composition – ”BV”Feed Composition – ”BV”

Urine N in % of Digested N

55,060,065,070,075,080,085,0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7Feed

%

Skrede, (1978)

Protein in Danish Mink FeedProtein in Danish Mink Feed

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Jan-Feb

Apr Maj

Start juniMid JuneLate JuneEarly JulyMid Juli

Aug

Mid Sept

Oct Nov

Mid Dec

FC

Recommended

MEP

Norm = Requirement + Safety Margin

Basis for norm = Best Available Knowledge

A norm is dynamic

Norms

N-reduction, % 0 4 8 10 12 16 20

g in feed 5000 4800 4600 4500 4400 4200 4000

g in feed spillage 400 384 368 360 352 336 320

g eaten 4600 4416 4232 4140 4048 3864 3680

g deposited 332 332 332 332 332 332 332

g excreted 4268 4084 3900 3808 3716 3532 3348

g in faeces 690 662 635 621 607 580 552

g in urine 3578 3422 3265 3187 3109 2952 2796

g ex animal 4668 4468 4268 4168 4068 3868 3668

Loss in g 1050 1005 960 938 915 870 825

Ex stable g 3618 3463 3308 3230 3153 2998 2843

Storage Loss g 72 69 66 65 63 60 57

Spread g 3545 3393 3242 3166 3090 2938 2786

Effect of Nitrogen ReductionEffect of Nitrogen Reduction

Nutrient Loss - Growers

Urine N at Different Protein Content in the Feed

1.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.05.5

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55

% ME from Protein

g/animal/day

Skrede, (1978)


Urine N

00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

24 29 34% ME from Protein

gram N

Hejlesen, (2001)


0102030405060708090

%

8.-14. July 25.-31. Aug. 9.-15. Nov.

N in faeces and urine in the growing period

% Faeces N

% Urine N

Einarsson & Enggaard, (2000)

Nutrient Loss - Lactation

0123456789

10

Feed UrineFaeces

Feed UrineFaeces

Feed UrineFaeces

58:34:08 47:38:15 39:35:26

g N

Lactation

0

50

100

150

200

250

Mælk Proteinox.

Mælk Proteinox.

Mælk Proteinox.

58:34:08 47:38:15 39:35:26

g Milk

05101520253035404550

% of Heat production

Weaning

649

510

717

542

0100200300400500600700800

gram

59 40

% ME from Protein

Kit Weight at 8 Weeks

Males

Females

Protein LevelProtein Level

Energy Distribution in the Tested Feeds

Percent ME from:

Protein

Fat

Carbohydrates

14.9

54.0

31.1

19.0

53.8

27.2

26.7

52.0

21.3

DM, % 38.9 38.0 38.9

ME, Kcal/100 g 201.6 193.9 188.0

Urine N i response to digested Nat three levels of ME from protein

1

2

3

4

1 2 3 4

Digested N, g/day

Urine N, g/day

14.9% Protein 19.0% Protein 26.7% Protein

Protein LevelProtein Level







Feed SpillageFeed Spillage

0

10

20

30

% Feed spillage

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

Year

Feed spillage in July Feed spilllage, %

0

10

20

30

33 35 38 41 43

Week

%

Compensatory Growth?Compensatory Growth?

Average Weight

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27

Age in Weeks

Weight in grams

Late Born Males

Early Born Males

Late Born Females

Early Born Females

Relevant measures to reduce nutrient lossmust be based ona total economic evaluationincluding a.o.:

1. Alternative feed ingredients2. Price for land3. Alternativ deposition / utilisation

ConclusionConclusion




Smell EmissionSmell Emission

Reduce the amount ofSulphur containing Ingredientsin the feed: (Feathers – Sulphuric Acid)

Add relevant ”smell reducers”To the feed and / or the manure

Smell EmmisionSmell Emmision

Waste Management: It's About Thyme

Thymol is the acktive compound in thyme oil, whichcan be extracted from herbs like thyme and oregano.

Thymol is used in i.e. tooth paste, mouth wash products a.o.

In cattle manure thymol reduces the concentrationen ofFoul smelling fatty acids and coliform bacteria




FliesFlies

Optimize the present management strategy

Develop new and better management strategies

Use alternatives to traditional insecticides

FliesFlies

Alternative Insecticides?Glucosinolates

Produced in brassica species, i.e. rape seed.

When the plant is destroyed, they are hydrolysedto, i.e. isothiocyanates, thiocyanates and nitrils.

These are poisonous against a range of pathogenes,like nematodes, bacteria, fungus, and insects.

Thank You for Your Attention

My


I

turn


now?

Documents

Societal Threats and Challenges 07.31.2008 Sherwood Hill, Logan Canyon, Utah Peter Sandbøl Research Manager Danish Fur Breeders Research Center – Kopenhagen