Page 239 - The Welfare of Cattle

216 the WeLfare of CattLe

Unfortunately even though the health and welfare benefits of preconditioning/conditioning have
been shown, its use by North American cow–calf producers has been inconsistent due to the associ-
ated cost benefits for the cow–calf and feedlot producer (CanFax, 2015). This is because premiums
are not typically paid for preconditioned calves marketed through an auction as buyers for feedlots
cannot confirm if they have been conditioned/preconditioned or not (Endres and Schwartzkopf-
Genswein, 2018). This ultimately has negative welfare consequences for non-preconditioned calves
purchased through an auction who have considerably greater morbidity and mortality rates (Wilson
et al., 2017). As the consumer demand for welfare-friendly practices increase, it is likely that pre-
conditioning will be a required practice.

Welfare Issues related to Marketing

Auction vs Ranch Calves

Two main purchasing strategies for feedlots exist (1) acquire poor quality, non-preconditioned
calves at a discounted price or (2) acquire high-quality, preconditioned calves at a premium price.
The first strategy usually means that the buyer is willing to gamble on higher morbidity and mor-
tality rates in the feedlot in place of paying a lower price per calf. The second strategy means that
the buyer is willing to pay more for conditioned calves which typically have better welfare out-
comes. Calves in the first scenario are usually purchased from an auction while calves in the second
scenario are usually purchased directly from a ranch and are commonly referred to as “ranch direct”
calves. It should be noted that both ranch direct and auction calves may or may not be precondi-
tioned. The main welfare benefit for ranch direct calves is that they are not transported to an auction
market or mixed with other unfamiliar calves where the stressors of additional handling (loading
and unloading) and exposure to respiratory pathogens from other stressed calves is removed. The
effect of preconditioning alone compared to being ranch direct is not known and more research in
this area is needed. An alternative to live animal auctions is the use of video or online cattle sales
which has increased in recent years as a strategy to improve welfare in the feedlot. This market-
ing strategy has the benefit of selling cattle through a central location while removing the negative
welfare outcomes associated with increased loading and unloading, transporting, and comingling
stressed calves.

Transportation

The marketing of calves, yearlings, backgrounding, and finishing cattle ultimately means they
must be transported off the ranch or feedlot. Several recent reviews and studies on the relationship
between transportation and stress in cattle have been published (Schwartzkopf-Genswein et al., 2012b;
Tucker et al., 2015; Schwartzkopf-Genswein et al., 2016). The reviews indicate that numerous fac-
tors (alone or in combination) can influence cattle welfare outcomes during and after transportation.
The combined effects of the management practices conducted prior to transport (described in the
previous sections) in addition to those occurring during transport are believed to reduce an animal’s
ability to cope with their environment. Similar to routine management procedures, the greater the
number of transport-related stressors occurring in a single journey, the greater the likelihood that
welfare could be compromised. For example, González et al. (2012a) reported that cattle trans-
ported for longer durations at greater temperatures experienced shrinkage at more than 10% of body
weight and had the greatest mortality rates at the time of off-loading.
Transport factors that can impact cattle welfare outcomes include: loading density, trans-
port duration, trailer design and ventilation, driving and handling quality, road and environ-
mental conditions, and fitness of the animals (Schwartzkopf-Genswein et al., 2012b; Goldhawk
et al., 2015; Tucker et al., 2015). Negative welfare outcomes have been associated with several