FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2023; 13(9); 1465; doi: 10.3390/ani13091465

GLAD Scale for Ranking Welfare of Horses on Arrival after Transport to Slaughterhouses.

Abstract: To date, there is no official method for measuring horse welfare after transport. This study aimed to develop a scale to classify horses into four categories: good shape; light affected; affected; down (GLAD) based on their welfare impairment measured at unloading. To this end, 15 animal-based measures (ABMs), previously recorded from 1019 horses, were scored. Weight and severity scores provided by welfare experts, alongside the number of welfare principles highlighted by the ABM, were assigned to each ABM. The welfare impairment () of each horse was then calculated as the weighted sum of the severity scores of the 15 ABMs. Three thresholds were also set to define the four GLAD categories; the ABM "down" (i.e., horses unable to stand and walk on arrival, also considered by the law as the indicator of the worst welfare) was used as the higher threshold, , (category D); the intermediate threshold, , was defined by the ABM "injuries", assumed to represent highly impaired welfare (category A); the threshold, , was defined assuming that significant welfare impairment starts from 20% of (L category). Horses with an value below were considered physically and mentally fit (G category). Out of 1019, 43% of horses fell into category G, 48% into L, 9% into A, and 0.3% into D. Our scale could be useful for veterinarians to decide whether a horse can be slaughtered immediately (G), needs rest (L), needs attention (A), or euthanasia (D), but further validation is needed.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-04-25 PubMed ID: 37174502PubMed Central: PMC10177125DOI: 10.3390/ani13091465Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research outlines a new method for assessing the welfare of horses upon their arrival at slaughterhouses after transport. The study results in a scale termed ‘GLAD’, with horses categorized into ‘good shape’, ‘lightly affected’, ‘affected’, or ‘down’, based on the severity of their welfare condition.

Objective of the Research

The objective of this study was to establish a clear method for the evaluation of horse welfare upon their arrival at abattoirs after transportation. Up until this point, there has been no standardized or formal means of gaiving a welfare assessment under these conditions. Thus, the authors aimed to classify horses into four groups using a new model named the ‘GLAD’ scale.

Conducting the Study

  • The study used 15 animal-based measures (ABMs) to assess the condition of 1019 horses. These measurements were judged according to their weight and severity as provided by welfare experts.
  • A numerical value indicating welfare impairment was then calculated as the sum of the severity scores of all 15 ABMs multiplied by their weights.
  • Set thresholds were then designated to determine the four potential welfare categories. Significant conditions such as inability to stand or walk formed the upper threshold while sustained injuries were used as an indicator for highly impaired welfare.

Results of the Study

  • Of the total 1019 horses assessed for the study, 43% were categorized as being in good shape (G), 48% were lightly affected (L), 9% were marked as affected (A), and 0.3% were classified as down (D).
  • The categories provided a quick reference for determining whether a horse could be immediately slaughtered, required to rest, needed attention, or required euthanasia. However, the paper stresses that further validation of the model is necessary.

Potential Impact and Applications

  • The study’s system stands to greatly improve welfare evaluations through an objective and reliable method.
  • The system could potentially help both regulators and animal health professionals in determining the treatment or fate of animals with greater precision and swiftness.
  • The scale could also be an effective tool for comparing the conditions of horses transported under different circumstances, or to assess the impact of various practices in the industry.

Cite This Article

APA
Padalino B, Benedetti B, Felici M, Bicout DJ. (2023). GLAD Scale for Ranking Welfare of Horses on Arrival after Transport to Slaughterhouses. Animals (Basel), 13(9), 1465. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13091465

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 13
Issue: 9
PII: 1465

Researcher Affiliations

Padalino, Barbara
  • Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna, 40127 Bologna, Italy.
Benedetti, Beatrice
  • Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna, 40127 Bologna, Italy.
Felici, Martina
  • Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna, 40127 Bologna, Italy.
Bicout, Dominique Joseph
  • EPSP, Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, VetAgro Sup, TIMC, 38000 Grenoble, France.

Grant Funding

  • PadalinoAA2020 / Animals Angels
  • PadalinoWHW2020 / World Horse Welfare

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 47 references
  1. Alonso ME, González-Montaña JR, Lomillos JM. Consumers' Concerns and Perceptions of Farm Animal Welfare.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Feb 27;10(3).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10030385pmc: PMC7143148pubmed: 32120935google scholar: lookup
  2. Berthe F, Vannier P, Have P, Serratosa J, Bastino E, Maurice Broom D, Hartung J, Michael Sharp J. The role of EFSA in assessing and promoting animal health and welfare.. EFSA J. 2012;10:s1002.
    doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.s1002google scholar: lookup
  3. Nielsen SS, Alvarez J, Bicout DJ, Calistri P, Canali E, Drewe JA, Garin-Bastuji B, Gonzales Rojas JL, Gortázar Schmidt C, Michel V, Miranda Chueca MÁ, Padalino B, Pasquali P, Roberts HC, Spoolder H, Stahl K, Velarde A, Viltrop A, Winckler C, Earley B, Edwards S, Faucitano L, Marti S, Miranda de La Lama GC, Costa LN, Thomsen PT, Ashe S, Mur L, Van der Stede Y, Herskin M. Welfare of equidae during transport.. EFSA J 2022 Sep;20(9):e07444.
    doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7444pmc: PMC9449990pubmed: 36092762google scholar: lookup
  4. Mellor DJ, Reid CSW. Concepts of animal well-being and predicting the impact of procedures on experimental animals.. .
  5. Blokhuis HJ, Veissier I, Miele M, Jones B. The Welfare Quality® project and beyond: Safeguarding farm animal well-being.. Acta Agric. Scand.—A Anim. Sci. 2010;60:129–140.
    doi: 10.1080/09064702.2010.523480google scholar: lookup
  6. . AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Horses.. Animal Welfare Indicator (AWIN) 2015.
  7. Main DCJ, Kent JP, Wemelsfelder F, Ofner E, Tuyttens FAM. Applications for methods of on-farm welfare assessment.. Anim. Welf. 2003;12:523–528.
    doi: 10.1017/S0962728600026129google scholar: lookup
  8. . Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol for Poultry (Broilers, Laying Hens). Welfare Quality® 2009.
  9. . Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol for Pigs (Sows and Piglets, Growing and Finishing Pigs). Welfare Quality® 2009.
  10. . Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol for Cattle.. Welfare Quality® 2009.
  11. . AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Donkeys.. Animal Welfare Indicator (AWIN) 2015.
  12. . AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Goats.. Animal Welfare Indicator (AWIN) 2015.
  13. . AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Turkeys.. Animal Welfare Indicator (AWIN) 2015.
  14. . AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep.. Animal Welfare Indicator (AWIN) 2015.
  15. Mellor DJ. Taming and training of pregnant sheep and goats and of newborn lambs, kids and calves before experimentation.. Altern Lab Anim 2004 Jun;32 Suppl 1A:143-6.
    doi: 10.1177/026119290403201s22pubmed: 23577448google scholar: lookup
  16. Littlewood KE, Mellor DJ. Changes in the Welfare of an Injured Working Farm Dog Assessed Using the Five Domains Model.. Animals (Basel) 2016 Sep 21;6(9).
    doi: 10.3390/ani6090058pmc: PMC5035953pubmed: 27657140google scholar: lookup
  17. McGreevy P, Berger J, de Brauwere N, Doherty O, Harrison A, Fiedler J, Jones C, McDonnell S, McLean A, Nakonechny L, Nicol C, Preshaw L, Thomson P, Tzioumis V, Webster J, Wolfensohn S, Yeates J, Jones B. Using the Five Domains Model to Assess the Adverse Impacts of Husbandry, Veterinary, and Equitation Interventions on Horse Welfare.. Animals (Basel) 2018 Mar 18;8(3).
    doi: 10.3390/ani8030041pmc: PMC5867529pubmed: 29562654google scholar: lookup
  18. Botreau R, Veissier I, Butterworth A, Bracke MBM, Keeling LJ. Definition of criteria for overall assessment of animal welfare.. Anim. Welf. 2007;16:225–228.
    doi: 10.1017/S0962728600031390google scholar: lookup
  19. Rushen J, Butterworth A, Swanson JC. Animal behavior and well-being symposium: Farm animal welfare assurance: science and application.. J Anim Sci 2011 Apr;89(4):1219-28.
    doi: 10.2527/jas.2010-3589pubmed: 21216980google scholar: lookup
  20. Dalla Costa E, Dai F, Lebelt D, Scholz P, Barbieri S, Canali E, Zanella AJ, Minero M. Welfare assessment of horses: The AWIN approach.. Anim. Welf. 2016;25:481–488.
    doi: 10.7120/09627286.25.4.481google scholar: lookup
  21. Webster J. Animal Welfare: A Cool Eye Towards Eden.. Blackwell Science; Oxford, UK: 1994. Assessment of animal welfare: The Five Freedoms; pp. 10–14.
  22. Mellor DJ, Beausoleil NJ, Littlewood KE, McLean AN, McGreevy PD, Jones B, Wilkins C. The 2020 Five Domains Model: Including Human-Animal Interactions in Assessments of Animal Welfare.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Oct 14;10(10).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10101870pmc: PMC7602120pubmed: 33066335google scholar: lookup
  23. Mellor DJ, Beausoleil NJ. Extending the ‘Five Domains’ model for animal welfare assessment to incorporate positive welfare states.. Anim. Welf. 2015;24:241–253.
    doi: 10.7120/09627286.24.3.241google scholar: lookup
  24. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW), Bøtner A, Broom D, Doherr MG, Domingo M, Hartung J, Keeling L, Koenen F, More S, Morton D. Statement on the use of animal-based measures to assess the welfare of animals.. EFSA J. 2012;10:2767.
    doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2767google scholar: lookup
  25. Lesimple C. Indicators of Horse Welfare: State-of-the-Art.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Feb 13;10(2).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10020294pmc: PMC7070675pubmed: 32069888google scholar: lookup
  26. Padalino B. Effects of the different transport phases on equine health status, behavior, and welfare: A review.. J. Vet. Behav. 2015;10:272–282.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2015.02.002google scholar: lookup
  27. Messori S, Visser E, Buonanno M, Ferrari P, Barnard S, Borciani M, Ferri N. A tool for the evaluation of slaughter horse welfare during unloading.. Anim. Welf. 2016;25:101–113.
    doi: 10.7120/09627286.25.1.101google scholar: lookup
  28. Felici M, Nanni Costa L, Zappaterra M, Bozzo G, Di Pinto P, Minero M, Padalino B. Journeys, Journey Conditions, and Welfare Assessment of Broken (Handled) Horses on Arrival at Italian Slaughterhouses.. Animals (Basel) 2022 Nov 12;12(22).
    doi: 10.3390/ani12223122pmc: PMC9686993pubmed: 36428350google scholar: lookup
  29. Zappaterra M, Nanni Costa L, Felici M, Minero M, Perniola F, Tullio D, Padalino B. Journeys, Journey Conditions, and Welfare Assessment of Unbroken (Unhandled) Horses on Arrival at a Slaughterhouse in Italy.. Animals (Basel) 2022 Aug 15;12(16).
    doi: 10.3390/ani12162083pmc: PMC9404719pubmed: 36009673google scholar: lookup
  30. Miranda-de la Lama GC, Gonzales-Castro CA, Gutierrez-Piña FJ, Villarroel M, Maria GA, Estévez-Moreno LX. Welfare of horses from Mexico and the United States of America transported for slaughter in Mexico: Fitness profiles for transport and pre-slaughter logistics.. Prev Vet Med 2020 Jul;180:105033.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2020.105033pubmed: 32464300google scholar: lookup
  31. Carroll CL, Huntington PJ. Body condition scoring and weight estimation of horses.. Equine Vet J 1988 Jan;20(1):41-5.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1988.tb01451.xpubmed: 3366105google scholar: lookup
  32. Whiting J. The exhausted horse.. In: Robinson NE, Sprayberry KA, editors. Current Therapy in Equine Medicine. 6th ed. Saunders Elsevier; Philadelphia, PA, USA: 2009. pp. 926–929.
  33. Waiblinger S, Menke C, Coleman G. The relationship between attitudes, personal characteristics and behaviour of stockpeople and subsequent behaviour and production of dairy cows.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2002;79:195–219.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00155-7google scholar: lookup
  34. . Council Regulation (EC) No. 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 on the Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing.. Council of the European Union 2009.
  35. Sommerville R, Brown AF, Upjohn M. A standardised equine-based welfare assessment tool used for six years in low and middle income countries.. PLoS One 2018;13(2):e0192354.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192354pmc: PMC5821349pubmed: 29466391google scholar: lookup
  36. Marlin D, Kettlewell P, Parkin T, Kennedy M, Broom D, Wood J. Welfare and health of horses transported for slaughter within the European Union Part 1: Methodology and descriptive data.. Equine Vet J 2011 Jan;43(1):78-87.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00124.xpubmed: 21143638google scholar: lookup
  37. Roy RC, Cockram MS, Dohoo IR, Ragnarsson S. Transport of horses for slaughter in Iceland.. Anim. Welf. 2015;24:485–495.
    doi: 10.7120/09627286.24.4.485google scholar: lookup
  38. . FVE.. Federation of Veterinarians of Europe .
  39. Messori S, Ouweltjes W, Visser K, Dalla Villa P, Spoolder HAM, Baltussen WHM. Improving horse welfare at transport: Definition of good practices through a Delphi procedure; Proceedings of the 67th Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science; Belfast, UK.. 29 August 2016.
  40. Dai F, Dalla Costa A, Bonfanti L, Caucci C, Di Martino G, Lucarelli R, Padalino B, Minero M. Positive Reinforcement-Based Training for Self-Loading of Meat Horses Reduces Loading Time and Stress-Related Behavior.. Front Vet Sci 2019;6:350.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00350pmc: PMC6802606pubmed: 31681807google scholar: lookup
  41. Dai F, Zappaterra M, Minero M, Bocchini F, Riley CB, Padalino B. Equine Transport-Related Problem Behaviors and Injuries: A Survey of Italian Horse Industry Members.. Animals (Basel) 2021 Jan 18;11(1).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11010223pmc: PMC7831101pubmed: 33477521google scholar: lookup
  42. Roy RC, Cockram MS, Dohoo IR. Welfare of horses transported to slaughter in Canada: Assessment of welfare and journey risk factors affecting welfare.. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 2015;95:509–522.
  43. Stull CL, Payne MA, Berry SL, Reynolds JP. A review of the causes, prevention, and welfare of nonambulatory cattle.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2007 Jul 15;231(2):227-34.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.231.2.227pubmed: 17630888google scholar: lookup
  44. McCutcheon LJ, Geor RJ. Thermoregulation and exercise-associated heat illnesses.. In: Hinchcliff KW, Kaneps AJ, Geor RJ, editors. Equine Sports Medicine and Surgery. 2nd ed. Saunders Elsevier; Philadelphia, PA, USA: 2014. pp. 901–918.
  45. . Council Regulation (EC) No. 1/2005 of 22 December 2004 on the Protection of Animals during Transport and Related Operations and Amending Directives 64/432/EEC and 93/119/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1255/97.. The Council of the European Union Volume 003; Brussels, Belgium: 2004.
  46. Broom DM. The effects of land transport on animal welfare.. Rev Sci Tech 2005 Aug;24(2):683-91.
    doi: 10.20506/rst.24.2.1605pubmed: 16358519google scholar: lookup
  47. . Removing the Blinkers: The Health and Welfare of European Equidae in 2015.. Eurogroup for Animals .

Citations

This article has been cited 1 times.
  1. Nielsen SS, Alvarez J, Boklund A, Dippel S, Dorea F, Figuerola J, Herskin M, Miranda Chueca MA, Nannoni E, Nonno R, Riber A, Stahl K, Stegeman JA, Thulke HH, Tuyttens F, Winckler C, Raj M, Velarde A, Candiani D, Van der Stede Y, Michel V. Welfare of horses at slaughter. EFSA J 2025 Jan;23(1):e9178.
    doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2025.9178pubmed: 39877304google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,780 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.