The farmers’ influence on calves’ behaviour, health and production of a veal unit

The ClassyFarm System in Tuscan Beef Cattle Farms and the Association between Animal Welfare Level and Productive Performance

In 2018, the Italian Ministry of Health introduced the ClassyFarm system in order to categorize the level of risk related to animal welfare. The ClassyFarm checklist for beef cattle is divided into four areas: Areas A "Farm management and personnel"; B "Structures and equipment"; C "Animal-based measures"; and "Emergency plan and alert system". Answers contribute to the final Animal Welfare Score (AWS) and to the score of each area. The aim of this work was to assess the animal welfare level on 10 Tuscan beef cattle farms through the ClassyFarm checklist and to examine the relationship between the level of animal welfare on final weight (FW), carcass weight (CW), weight gain (WG), and average daily gain (ADG). The AWS was divided into four classes, and the scores for each area were divided into three classes. The analysis of variance was applied, and AWS class, sex, and breeding techniques (open and closed cycle) were included in the model. The AWS class and sex had a highly significant influence on all parameters, while the breeding technique did not significantly influence any parameter. Farms classified as excellent presented a higher FW (677.9 kg) than those classified as good and insufficient, and the same trend was found for the ADG. The classes obtained in Areas A and C had a highly significant influence on all the parameters investigated. The classes obtained in Area B significantly influenced FW and WG. In conclusion, the productive response of the animals seemed to benefit from the welfare conditions.

Calf- and herd-level factors associated with dairy calf reactivity

A positive relationship between handlers and animals in farm systems is essential because the human-animal relationship has implications for welfare and productivity. For this reason, on-farm animal welfare assessment protocols often include the behavioral response of animals to humans to measure the quality of the human-animal relationship. The existing literature has described this relationship as being multifactorial in nature. In the current study, we aimed to investigate the potential influence of farm management and infrastructure characteristics, calf manager traits, and intrinsic features of dairy calves on the human-animal relationship. To this end, an escape test was conducted with 698 calves on 30 dairy farms in Chile. This test measured the calf's response to the active approach of an unfamiliar human (and was scored from 0 [fearful] to 4 [friendly]). The explanatory variables used to predict calves' response in the escape test were grouped according to the following categories: (1) farm management and infrastructure (e.g., calf-dam separation age, space allowance); (2) calf manager (e.g., attitudes, behavior, and background); and (3) calf (e.g., breed, sex, age). We concluded that calf managers with additional jobs on the farm, no training, low job satisfaction, a greater proportion of negative contacts, and more negative attitudes were predictive of fearfulness in the escape test. Holstein breed (compared with Holstein and Jersey crossbreeds) was associated with greater odds of fearful calves. Our study confirms the association between animals' fear and handlers' features, which can potentially be used to select employees on a farm. Understanding the factors that influence fear responses in calves may highlight ways to improve the relationship between animals and humans.

Avoidance Distance in Sheltered Cows and Its Association with Other Welfare Parameters

The human-animal relationship is an important welfare parameter in animal welfare assessment in cows, and the avoidance distance of cows to a stranger at the feed bunk is measured to assess this relationship. The assessment of the human-animal relationship in cow shelters in India, where old, unproductive, and abandoned cows are sheltered, is important to explore the welfare of cows in these shelters. The cows observed were of indigenous Indian breeds and breeds which were crosses between indigenous breeds and pure bred exotic cows. The human-animal contact in this context is of particular interest for welfare assessment as traditional Indian farming and sheltering systems involves regular close human-animal contact. In a cross-sectional study across 6 states, 54 cow shelters were visited and 30 cows in each shelter were randomly selected (1620 in total) for the assessment of avoidance distance and other cow-based (27 parameters) and resource-based (15 parameters) welfare parameters. Avoidance distance was assessed 1 h after morning feeding. Cows standing at the feeding manger were approached from the front at a rate of one step/s, starting 2 m away from the manger. The distance between the assessor's hand and the cow's head was estimated at the moment the cow moved away and turned its head, using a four-point scale (0, touched; 1, 0-50 cm; 2, 51-100 cm; and 3, >100 cm). The majority, 52%, of the cows allowed touch by the assessor and another 32% allowed approach within 50 cm, demonstrating tolerance, or even solicitation of close human-animal relationships by the cows. Avoidance distance increased with the proportion of cows with dirty hind limbs, tarsal joint swellings, and hair loss, and the extent of rumen fill. There was also evidence of reduced avoidance distances in cows with high levels of body condition score (BCS), dirty flanks, tarsal joint ulceration, carpal joint injuries, diarrhoea, hampered respiration, lesions on the body due to traumatic injuries, and body coat condition, probably as a result of moving difficulties. The avoidance distance was thus related to the health and welfare of the cows, providing a vital insight into the factors affecting human-animal contact in the shelters.

Keeper-Animal Interactions: Differences between the Behaviour of Zoo Animals Affect Stockmanship

Stockmanship is a term used to describe the management of animals with a good stockperson someone who does this in a in a safe, effective, and low-stress manner for both the stock-keeper and animals involved. Although impacts of unfamiliar zoo visitors on animal behaviour have been extensively studied, the impact of stockmanship i.e familiar zoo keepers is a new area of research; which could reveal significant ramifications for zoo animal behaviour and welfare. It is likely that different relationships are formed dependant on the unique keeper-animal dyad (human-animal interaction, HAI). The aims of this study were to (1) investigate if unique keeper-animal dyads were formed in zoos, (2) determine whether keepers differed in their interactions towards animals regarding their attitude, animal knowledge and experience and (3) explore what factors affect keeper-animal dyads and ultimately influence animal behaviour and welfare. Eight black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis), eleven Chapman's zebra (Equus burchellii), and twelve Sulawesi crested black macaques (Macaca nigra) were studied in 6 zoos across the UK and USA. Subtle cues and commands directed by keepers towards animals were identified. The animals latency to respond and the respective behavioural response (cue-response) was recorded per keeper-animal dyad (n = 93). A questionnaire was constructed following a five-point Likert Scale design to record keeper demographic information and assess the job satisfaction of keepers, their attitude towards the animals and their perceived relationship with them. There was a significant difference in the animals' latency to appropriately respond after cues and commands from different keepers, indicating unique keeper-animal dyads were formed. Stockmanship style was also different between keepers; two main components contributed equally towards this: "attitude towards the animals" and "knowledge and experience of the animals". In this novel study, data demonstrated unique dyads were formed between keepers and zoo animals, which influenced animal behaviour.

Prevalence and potential influencing factors of non-nutritive oral behaviors of veal calves on commercial farms

Veal calves raised under intensive conditions may express non-nutritive oral behaviors. When expressed in an abnormal way, these behaviors can be a sign of mental suffering and reduced welfare due to a mismatch between environmental or management features and the animal's needs. The aims of this study were to estimate the prevalence of non-nutritive oral behaviors in a large sample of veal farms in Europe and to determine the potential influencing factors present at farm level. Data were collected on 157 commercial veal farms in the 3 main veal-producing countries in Europe (the Netherlands, France, and Italy). Observations of 3 non-nutritive oral behaviors (manipulating substrates, tongue rolling, and manipulating a penmate) were performed when calves were aged 14 wk, and the prevalence of these behaviors was calculated. Information on management practices and characteristics of the building and equipment were collected on all farms to assess potential influencing factors for each of the 3 behaviors. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to evaluate the effect of each individual factor within a generalized linear model. The mean percentage of calves per farm performing manipulating substrates was 11.0 ± 0.46%, performing tongue rolling 2.8 ± 0 .18%, and manipulating a penmate 2.7 ± 0.09%, with a high range between farms. Allowing more space for calves than the legal minimum requirement of 1.8 m(2)/ calf and housing them in groups of >10 calves/pen reduced the incidences of manipulating substrates and tongue rolling. Incidence of manipulating substrates was lower for calves fed maize silage compared with calves fed cereal grain, pellets, or muesli. A higher risk of tongue rolling was found when baby-boxes (i.e., single housing during the first 5 to 8 wk) were not used. Risk of calves manipulating a penmate was higher for calves of milk- or meat-type breeds compared with dual-purpose breeds and for calves fed with 280 to 380 kg compared with those fed >380 kg of milk powder in total for the fattening period. The study allowed assessment of multiple factors across farms that showed variety in terms of conditions and level of non-nutritive oral behaviors. Identification of the factors influencing non-nutritive oral behavior is helpful to define potential actions that could be taken on farms to improve the welfare of calves and reduce the prevalence of these behaviors.

An on-farm investigation of beef suckler herds using an animal welfare index (AWI)

BACKGROUND

Beef suckler farms (194 farms throughout 13 counties) were assessed once with housed cattle and once with cattle at grass using an animal welfare index (AWI). Twenty-three of the 194 farms were revisited a year later and re-evaluated using the AWI and the Tier-Gerechtheits-Index 35L/2000 (TGI35L/2000). Thirty-three indicators were collected in five categories: locomotion (5 indicators); social interactions (between animals) (7), flooring (5), environment (7) and Stockpersonship (9). Three indicators relating to the size of the farm were also collected.Improving animal welfare is an increasingly important aspect of livestock production systems predominantly due to increased consumer concern about the source of animal products. The objectives were (i) to evaluate animal welfare of Irish beef suckler herds using an animal welfare index (AWI), (ii) to examine correlations between parameters, how they influence the AWI and investigate the applicability of the parameters used, (iii) to investigate the impact of the activity of the farmer (full-time or part-time), the interest of the farmer and the number of animals on the AWI.

RESULTS

The mean AWI was 65% and ranged from 54% to 83%. The grazing period represented 16.5% of the total points of the AWI. Seventy percent of the farms were rated as "Very Good" or "Excellent". There was no difference (P > 0.05) in AWI between full-time and part-time farmers. Part-time farmers had greater (P = 0.01) "social interactions": calving (P = 0.03) and weaning (P < 0.001) scores. Full-time farmers had cleaner animals (P = 0.03) and their animals had less lameness (P = 0.01). The number of animals on-farm and the interest of the Stockperson were negatively and positively correlated (P = 0.001), respectively, with the AWI. A hierarchical classification was performed to examine how the indicators influenced the AWI.

CONCLUSION

The AWI was easily applicable for an on-farm evaluation of welfare. The Stockpersonship was an important factor in determining the AWI (11% of the total variation) more specifically, the interest of the farmer. Part and full-time farming did not differ (P > 0.05) in AWI scores. This method could, with further development, be used in countries with both intensive and/or extensive production systems and would require substantially less resources than animal-based methods.

A comparative approach to the study of Keeper-Animal Relationships in the zoo

Research on intensively farmed animals over the past 25 years has shown that human-animal interactions, by affecting the animal's fear of humans, can markedly limit the productivity and welfare of farm animals. This article begins to explore some of the factors that need to be considered to investigate Keeper-Animal Relationships (KARs) in the zoo. In the mid-1990s, a large body of multi-institutional data on zookeepers and animals was collected from 46 Zoos. Using standardized questionnaires, 82 keepers rated how they behaved towards animals, their husbandry routine, how the animal responds to them and to other people, and provided information about themselves. These data include 219 individuals of four endangered species: black rhinoceros, cheetah, maned wolf, and great hornbill. At each zoo, keepers were also videotaped calling to their animals in order to directly observe animal responses to keeper behaviors. Principle Components Analysis reduced eight animal variables to three components and ten keeper variables to five components. Scores for animals and for keepers were calculated on these components and compared, according to five predictions based on models of human-animal interactions in the literature. Animal responses to keepers varied along three dimensions: Affinity to Keeper, Fear of People, and Sociable/Curious. Animal scores of Fear of People were significantly and positively correlated with independent measures of poor welfare from two later studies: fecal corticoid concentrations for 12 black rhinos and "tense-fearful" scores for 12 cheetahs. (1) Significant species differences were found for Affinity to Keeper and Fear of People, and the interaction of these two dimensions of animal response to keepers appears to be species-specific. (2) The quality of KAR is influenced by whether the zookeeper goes in the enclosure with the animal or not, the frequency and time of feeding, and keeper visibility to the animal. Among keepers who go in with their animals, a significant negative correlation between Frequency of Feeding/Early Feedtime and average Affinity to Keeper of their animals, and a positive correlation between Keeper Experience and their animals' Fear of People, indicates that certain zoo keeping styles or habits among experienced keepers might be aversive and increase fear among animals. (3) Keepers who locomote or make unexpected noises when calling their animals elicit increased aggression or apprehension from maned wolves and cheetahs. (4) Wild-born black rhino and parent-reared maned wolf have significantly less affinity to keepers than their captive-born or hand-reared counterparts, but neither differs in Fear of People. (5) Keeper-animal relationships are likely to be reciprocal as evidenced by a negative correlation of Job Satisfaction with animal Fear of People. Future research directions are discussed with respect to assessment of keeper attitudes and behaviors, animal fear, positive measures of welfare, and positive reinforcement training.

The integration of human-animal relations into animal welfare monitoring schemes

There are increasing local and international pressures for farm animal welfare monitoring schemes. Housing of farm animals is a contentious issue for many, although the impact of the housing system may be overestimated by some. In contrast, the topic of stockmanship has received relatively little attention, even though research has shown that animal carers or stockpeople have a major impact on the welfare of their livestock. While welfare monitoring schemes are likely to improve animal welfare, the impact of such schemes will only be realised by recognising the limitations of stockpeople, monitoring ‘stockmanship’ and providing specific stockperson training to target key aspects of stockmanship. Appropriate strategies to recruit and train stock-people in the livestock industries are integral to safeguarding the welfare of livestock. Monitoring the key job-related characteristics of the stockperson, attitudes to animals and to working with these animals, empathy, work motivation and technical knowledge and skills, provides the opportunity to detect deficits in stockmanship and the necessity for further targeted training. Due to the strong relationships between stockperson attitudes and behaviours and animal fear responses, as well as the relationships between attitudes and other job-related characteristics, we believe attitudes, together with empathy, work motivation and technical knowledge and skills, should be the principal focus of measuring stockmanship in on-farm welfare monitoring schemes.

Modelling farmer decision-making: concepts, progress and challenges

Decisions made by farmers may have large influences beyond the farm boundary, and for this reason they are often of interest to Government and the public. The process of adoption of new technologies and policies has received considerable academic attention over many years, and this has highlighted the rôle of social influences in decision-making. In addition a range of purely economic-based models of farmer decision-making have been developed in order to predict potential changes in agriculture and land use under future policy and market scenarios. Since the 1990s these traditional approaches to understanding decision-making have been supplemented by an increasing input from psychology. As a result of this work it is clear that farmers' decisions are influenced by a range of factors which may be grouped under six headings: socio-demographics of the farmer, psychological make up of the farmer, the characteristics of the farm household, structure of the farm business, the wider social milieu and the characteristics of the innovation to be adopted. This paper presents a short review of the quantitative methods that seek to integrate insights from economics and social science within theoretical frameworks derived from psychology. Suggestions for further work include more empirical study in farmer decision-making related to animal health and welfare, the rôle of the farmers' own health status in decision-making and the formal integration of economic and psychological variables in simulation models.

Links between specialization in the finishing of bulls, mixing, farmers' attitudes towards animals and the production of finishing bulls: a survey on French farms

In France, beef bulls are finished by breeder-finishers who produce calves and then fatten them, or by specialized finishers who fatten bulls that they buy. According to previous results on both dairy cows and pigs, breeding on the farm promotes positive attitudes of farmers towards animals, which can lead to improved animal health and growth. The mixing of bulls on their arrival at a specialized unit could stress them and thus impair health and growth. We hypothesized that breeder-finishers have more positive attitudes towards bulls and their work with bulls than specialized finishers, and that positive attitudes lead to better production, whereas mixing may be counterproductive. We observed 1038 bulls (67 groups) finished by breeder-finishers or specialized finishers in mixed and unmixed groups. Using a questionnaire, we assessed farmers' beliefs about the sensitivities of bulls, their attitude towards contacts with bulls, their beliefs about successful factors in finishing, and job satisfaction. We recorded the number of clinical signs and weight gain of the bulls. Specialized finishers tended to have more negative contacts with bulls than breeder-finishers (P=0·06). Poor health of bulls was associated with (i) a positive attitude towards gentle contacts with bulls (P<0·01), (ii) job satisfaction (P=0·01), and (iii) was negatively correlated to beliefs in bulls being difficult animals (P=0·09). Fast growth of bulls was associated with job satisfaction (P<0·01). Unmixed bulls grew faster than mixed bulls (P=0·05). We conclude that in finishing bulls, it is production results that have an impact on attitudes, rather than the opposite: the need for close contacts with bulls resulting from health problems engenders more positive attitudes of farmers towards their animals, and good production results increase job satisfaction. Variations in production results between breeder-finishers and specialized finishers seem to lie more in the fact that the latter always use animals mixed at the beginning of the finishing period - with mixing impairing growth - than in the attitudes of farmers towards animals and their work.

Cubicle housing systems for cattle: Comfort of dairy cows depends on cubicle adjustment

Housing is important for the welfare of cows. Although recommendations have been proposed, abnormal movements and injury problems are still observed in cubicle houses. We conducted a survey on 70 French dairy farms that used cubicles. We examined the design of the cubicles, and the behavior, injuries, and cleanliness of the cows. Most of the cubicles did not comply with the recommendations, often being too narrow and/or too short. Difficulties in lying behavior and injuries were more common when the neck rail was high. No improvement was noted when cubicles of a recent design were used ("U.S." cubicles), apparently because these cubicles were most often cantilevered on a double head rail rather than fixed on freestanding posts. An experiment was conducted, making similar measurements, on 84 cows to compare two configurations for U.S. cubicles (cantilevered on a double head rail as observed in the survey with a high and rear neck rail vs. fixed on freestanding posts as recommended) and another recent cubicle type (Euroconfort, cantilevered on head rails, but with a large space between the rails and fixed as recommended), with and without a brisket board. In U.S. cubicles on rails, cows spent more time lying and less time fully standing inside the cubicles than in the other cubicles (percentage of time: lying, 53.9 vs. 51.5; fully standing, 7.3 vs. 8.5); in Euroconfort cubicles, they hit bars more often when getting up than in U.S. Cubicles (percentage of observations: 42.4 vs. 26.4. Without a brisket board, cows lay down more often in a fore position in U.S. cubicles than in Euroconfort ones. Somatic cell counts increased with time in U.S. cubicles on rails and decreased in the other cubicles. It is suggested that the position of the neck rail in U.S. cubicles cantilevered on rails did not leave enough space for the cow to stand inside the cubicle, thereby encouraging the cow to lie down. This could in turn favor udder contamination and/or inflammation. It is concluded that the positioning of the neck rail is of prime importance, that U.S. cubicles should be used with a brisket board and with correct positioning of the neck rail (even when a head rail is used), and that leaving a large space between head rails does not offer an adequate remedial solution for keeping a free head space in front of the cubicle.

Attitudes to Farm Animal Welfare

Abstract. Although the there is considerable public interest in farm animal welfare, relatively little work has been done on the welfare attitudes of farmers. We describe the development of a welfare attitude scale, the EFAWS. The factor structure and correlates of this scale were examined in Scottish pig and sheep farmers, and in agriculture students. The EFAWS was found to have a hierarchical structure, with two superordinate dimensions corresponding to welfare and business orientations being present in both groups. Five narrower facets were extracted for farmers and six for students, with the two factor structures being similar. Factor scores were found to be correlated significantly with personality traits, knowledge about welfare, and farm welfare scores in interpretable ways.

Selection of Parameters for On-Farm Welfare-Assessment Protocols in Cattle and Buffalo

On-farm welfare-assessment protocols should be based on valid, reliable and feasible indicators which reflect the animal's state in the context of the housing and management system. This paper focuses on the selection of parameters for cattle and buffalo from welfare research, from assessment protocols used in different European countries and from the literature. Three groups of parameters are described: (1) parameters which can readily be included, such as lameness, injuries, body condition score, cleanliness, getting up/lying down behaviour, agonistic social behaviour, oral abnormal behaviours, human behaviour toward the animals and measures of the animal-human relationship; (2) parameters which require more information on reliability, such as indicators of good welfare and housing factors; and (3) parameters which are regarded as important but so far lack reliability in most countries, such as the incidence of clinical diseases and mortality.

Stockmanship and Farm Animal Welfare

Human factors (attitudes, personality traits, self-esteem, job satisfaction) strongly determine our behaviour towards animals, animal production and animal welfare. Recent studies have emphasised positive human contacts as indicators of a stockperson's positive attitude towards animals and towards animal welfare in general. Stockmanship can be improved by careful selection of people and/or by training. However, little is known of the biological basis of the effect of stock handling procedures on the welfare of animals. The animal's perception of the stockperson (based both on emotional responses and cognitive aspects such as anticipation, recognition and categorisation), and the existence of sensitive periods in an animal's life, need to be explored in more depth, especially under farm conditions. We need to consider the complexity of human behaviour (eg husbandry practices, balance between positive and negative interactions, predictability, controllability) and its effect on animal welfare from the animal's point of view throughout its whole life. This paper identifies the importance of positive human contacts for both animals and stockpeople, and highlights the challenge to maintain such positive contacts despite the trend in modern agriculture to increase the number of animals per stockperson. This requires better knowledge of animal genetics, socialisation to humans during sensitive periods, and management of the social group. We emphasise the ethical importance of the human-animal relationship in the context of farm animal welfare and productivity.