Pain Management in Livestock: Understanding the Views of Producers and Veterinarians

Treatment of pain is an important part of livestock management. In the UK various pain management options are available. Yet despite this, and a historical emphasis on animal well being, use of pain relief for livestock is perceived to be limited. This presentation will: i) assess the evidence regarding how much livestock producers actually use pain relief, and ii) discuss the contributory factors which dictate whether pain relief is used or not. In recent survey studies of swine, cattle and sheep farmers we have gathered data on attitudes towards pain and its treatment, as well as on how often pain relief is used in practice. The overall message from these studies is that provision of pain relief is often better than is appreciated. Producers may choose to use pain relief either because they feel it is the right thing to do (has ethical benefits) or because they feel it is the rational thing to do (has direct or indirect practical benefits). For instance, the statement that animals ‘recover better when given pain relief’ was agreed with by 72%, 82% and 86% of pig, sheep and cattle farmers respectively. However, whilst attitudes are improving, routine pain relief is still not widespread. In relation to dystocia (rated as highly painful by all farmer groups), pain relief was always used by only 27% of cattle farmers, and 19% of sheep and pig farmers. Efforts have been made to understand the factors that underlie such decisions. Cost is a commonly cited barrier to wider pain relief in livestock. However, analgesics were judged too expensive by only 14% of sheep, 10% of cattle and 19% of pig producers. Alternatively practical barriers, such as gathering or handling animals, are often mentioned. Farmers in all three groups showed a recognition / knowledge gap: more farmers reported an adequate ability to recognise pain than reported an adequate knowledge of how to mitigate it. Communication between farmers and vets is therefore critical. However, the survey data suggests that vets think they are discussing pain relief with farmers more often than farmers think they are discussing it with vets. Finally, it is encouraging that the surveys also showed that better pain management often associates with other progressive management practices such as body condition and locomotion scoring, pregnancy diagnosis, and vaccination. Farmers who are proactive in their use of these practices are also more likely to treat livestock for pain.