Ethical stockmanship

Human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions in animals under human care: A summary of stakeholder and researcher perceptions and future directions

Animals under human care are exposed to a potentially large range of both familiar and unfamiliar humans. Human-animal interactions vary across settings, and individuals, with the nature of the interaction being affected by a suite of different intrinsic and extrinsic factors. These interactions can be described as positive, negative or neutral. Across some industries, there has been a move towards the development of technologies to support or replace human interactions with animals. Whilst this has many benefits, there can also be challenges associated with increased technology use. A day-long Animal Welfare Research Network workshop was hosted at Harper Adams University, UK, with the aim of bringing together stakeholders and researchers (n = 38) from the companion, farm and zoo animal fields, to discuss benefits, challenges and limitations of human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions for animals under human care and create a list of future research priorities. The workshop consisted of four talks from experts within these areas, followed by break-out room discussions. This work is the outcome of that workshop. The key recommendations are that approaches to advancing the scientific discipline of machine-animal interactions in animals under human care should focus on: (1) interdisciplinary collaboration; (2) development of validated methods; (3) incorporation of an animal-centred perspective; (4) a focus on promotion of positive animal welfare states (not just avoidance of negative states); and (5) an exploration of ways that machines can support a reduction in the exposure of animals to negative human-animal interactions to reduce negative, and increase positive, experiences for animals.

Heat Shock Protein Response to Stress in Poultry: A Review

Compared to other animal species, production has dramatically increased in the poultry sector. However, in intensive production systems, poultry are subjected to stress conditions that may compromise their well-being. Much like other living organisms, poultry respond to various stressors by synthesising a group of evolutionarily conserved polypeptides named heat shock proteins (HSPs) to maintain homeostasis. These proteins, as chaperones, play a pivotal role in protecting animals against stress by re-establishing normal protein conformation and, thus, cellular homeostasis. In the last few decades, many advances have been made in ascertaining the HSP response to thermal and non-thermal stressors in poultry. The present review focuses on what is currently known about the HSP response to thermal and non-thermal stressors in poultry and discusses the factors that modulate its induction and regulatory mechanisms. The development of practical strategies to alleviate the detrimental effects of environmental stresses on poultry will benefit from detailed studies that describe the mechanisms of stress resilience and enhance our understanding of the nature of heat shock signalling proteins and gene expression.

Transitioning from crates to free farrowing: A roadmap to navigate key decisions

There are animal welfare concerns about the continued use of permanent crating systems for farrowing and lactating sows, which is the most prevalent maternity system in global pig production. Greater societal attention in recent years has culminated in changes (or proposed changes) to regulations as well as market-driven initiatives to move away from crated systems. Transitioning from farrowing crates to systems that allow the sow greater freedom of movement and behavioral expression requires a number of key decisions, with various trade-offs apparent when trying to balance the needs of different stakeholders. This review discusses these decisions based on common questions asked by farmers, policy makers and other stakeholders when deciding on a new system to build/approve. Based on the latest scientific evidence and practical insight, decisions such as: whether to retrofit an existing barn or build a new one, what spatial dimensions are necessary per sow place, whether to adopt free farrowing or temporary crating, how to provide substrate/enrichment and be hygienic and environmentally friendly, and how to optimize the human inputs and transition between systems are considered. The aim of this paper is to provide a roadmap for those interested in uptake of higher welfare systems and practices, as well as to highlight areas requiring further optimization and research.

Space, time, and context drive anticipatory behavior: Considerations for understanding the behavior of animals in human care

Animal-based measures reflecting the welfare state of individuals are critical for ensuring the well-being of animals under human care. Anticipatory behavior is one potential animal-based measure that has gained traction in recent years, as it is theorized to relate to animals' reward sensitivity. It is of particular interest as an assessment for animals living under human care, as the predictability of the captive environment lends itself to the development of this class of behaviors. Animals are likely to exhibit anticipation in locations related to the anticipated event, often in temporally predictable time frames, and before specific contexts they experience in their day-to-day management. In this sense and under certain circumstances, anticipatory behaviors are likely to drive observed behavioral or space use patterns of animals under human care. Drawing conclusions from such data without identifying anticipation may result in misleading conclusions. Here we discuss how space, time, and context are related to patterns of anticipatory behaviors in animals under human care, how unidentified anticipation may alter conclusions regarding animal behavior or welfare under certain circumstances.

Twelve Threats of Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) for Animal Welfare

Research and development of Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) is booming, partly due to hopes and claims regarding the benefits of PLF for animal welfare. These claims remain largely unproven, however, as only few PLF technologies focusing on animal welfare have been commercialized and adopted in practice. The prevailing enthusiasm and optimism about PLF innovations may be clouding the perception of possible threats that PLF may pose to farm animal welfare. Without claiming to be exhaustive, this paper lists 12 potential threats grouped into four categories: direct harm, indirect harm via the end-user, via changes to housing and management, and via ethical stagnation or degradation. PLF can directly harm the animals because of (1) technical failures, (2) harmful effects of exposure, adaptation or wearing of hardware components, (3) inaccurate predictions and decisions due to poor external validation, and (4) lack of uptake of the most meaningful indicators for animal welfare. PLF may create indirect effects on animal welfare if the farmer or stockperson (5) becomes under- or over-reliant on PLF technology, (6) spends less (quality) time with the animals, and (7) loses animal-oriented husbandry skills. PLF may also compromise the interests of the animals by creating transformations in animal farming so that the housing and management are (8) adapted to optimize PLF performance or (9) become more industrialized. Finally, PLF may affect the moral status of farm animals in society by leading to (10) increased speciesism, (11) further animal instrumentalization, and (12) increased animal consumption and harm. For the direct threats, possibilities for prevention and remedies are suggested. As the direction and magnitude of the more indirect threats are harder to predict or prevent, they are more difficult to address. In order to maximize the potential of PLF for improving animal welfare, the potential threats as well as the opportunities should be acknowledged, monitored and addressed.

The Animal-Human Interface in Farm Animal Production: Animal Fear, Stress, Reproduction and Welfare

Simple Summary

For at least the last four decades, the focus of animal welfare research, quality assurance, and policy initiatives has been on measuring behavioural and physiological stress responses in animals. In the last decade, however, this focus of animal welfare research has shifted to the consequences of these behavioural and physiological stress responses rather than only the responses per se. Modern-day farming, even with the intensification and automation requires regular monitoring and interactions by stockpeople. Research conducted in both experimental and commercial settings has shown widespread effects of the human-animal interactions on behaviour, physiology, and reproductive performance in farm animals. In this paper, we review the implications of human-animal interactions on reproduction in farm animals.

Abstract

A negative human-animal relationship (HAR) from the perspective of the animal is a limiting factor affecting farm animal welfare, as well as farm animal productivity. Research in farm animals has elucidated sequential relationships between stockperson attitudes, stockperson behaviour, farm animal fear behaviour, farm animal stress physiology, and farm animal productivity. In situations where stockperson attitudes to and interactions with farm animals are sub-optimal, through animal fear and stress, both animal welfare and productivity, including reproductive performance, can be compromised. There is a growing body of evidence that farm animals often seek and enjoy interacting with humans, but our understanding of the effects of a positive HAR on stress resilience and productivity in farm animals is limited. In this review, we explore the pathways by which stress induced by human-animal interactions can negatively affect farm animal reproduction, in particular, via inhibitory effects on the secretion of gonadotrophins. We also review the current knowledge of the stockperson characteristics and the nature of stockperson interactions that affect fear and physiological stress in farm animals. The contents of this review provide an insight into the importance of the HAR on farm animal welfare and reproduction while highlighting the gap in knowledge regarding the effects of a positive HAR on farm animals.

Why do Irish pig farmers use medications? Barriers for effective reduction of antimicrobials in Irish pig production

Background

In addressing the threat of antimicrobial resistance, it is critical to understand the barriers to the uptake of strategies for the reduction of antimicrobial use (AMU) in the pig industry. In several EU countries, factors such as education level, habits and social pressures are recognised as affecting farmers’ decision-making process in relation to AMU. However, there is a lack of information on the Irish scenario. The aim of this study was to investigate pig farmers’ perspectives and their behaviour towards AMU to identify potential barriers to effectively reduce AMU in Irish pig production. We conducted face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 30 pig farmers, 5 pig veterinarians and 4 focus groups of pig farm personnel. We employed qualitative analyses to explore the objective of the study.

Results

Qualitative analysis revealed six convergent themes as potential barriers: perceptions about the need for AMU on farm, concept of animal welfare and associated management practices, legislation, culture, economics and standards of communication/type of advice-network. Overall, pig farmers believed that there is poor communication between stakeholders (i.e. farmers, vets and advisors) and a lack of reliable people to approach for advice. They considered themselves as operating responsibly in terms of AMU compared to their national and international colleagues and expressed the importance of a so-called ‘Irish solution’ to the problem of AMU because it was associated with what ‘has always been done’ and was therefore considered reliable and safe.

Conclusions

Barriers and challenges were in line with those identified in other EU countries highlighting similarities in behavioural and attitudinal patterns among pig farmers. Overall, farmers appeared to be more likely to rely on previous experiences or to wait for an imposed change (e.g. legislation) instead of taking personal action. Thus, considerable behavioural and attitudinal changes are needed to adopt a more responsible AMU in Irish pig production and to develop effective intervention strategies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13620-021-00193-3.

Educating dog owners: how owner–dog interactions can benefit from addressing the human caregiving system and dog-directed parenting styles

Dogs need to adapt to a human environment to enhance their welfare and to avoid risks of undesired dog behaviour and relinquishment. Crucial to this adaptation may be how an owner interacts with the dog. Owner–dog interactions may be influenced by the human caregiving system with regard to how care, protection and resources are provided. This narrative review discusses how a consideration of the human caregiving system can benefit owner–dog interactions. Literature suggests that the human caregiving system and parenting styles could influence owner–dog interactions. Owner–dog education may improve these interactions. However, studies on owner–dog education present mixed outcomes for the dog. Also, only a few studies address owner outcomes, indicating a gap that needs filling. It is concluded that, when intervening in owner–dog interactions, more attention should be directed to aspects of human psychology. Dog-directed parenting styles can form one strategy as to improve owner–dog interactions and dog welfare.

Researching Human-Cattle Interaction on Rangelands: Challenges and Potential Solutions

Simple Summary

Research investigating the influence of human-animal interactions on beef cattle production and welfare often occurs during stress-inducing contexts, such as restraint and transport. Given that beef cattle which graze on expansive rangelands do not frequently interact with humans, assessment of animal response to humans may be inaccurate if they are only recorded during such stressful context. Future research aimed at identifying the causes and impacts of individual human–cattle relationships may consider conducting experiments while the cattle are in a low stress context, such as while ruminating, resting, or, grazing. By adapting methods used to research wildlife response to humans, researchers may be able to better understand how animal personality and previous experience can influence cattle production and welfare.

Abstract

Human-animal interaction (HAI) research spans across many scientific fields and animal taxa. For livestock species, HAI research tends to focus on animals that are managed in close proximity with humans such as poultry, dairy cattle, and swine. Given the nature of rangeland cattle production, HAI research with beef cattle often occurs in and around the processing environment. This high arousal context may skew behavioral and physiological responses by the animals due to the potentially negative interaction. The aim of this review is to describe cattle production on rangelands, examine the considerations and limitations of current HAI research used to evaluate interaction quality or traits of rangeland cattle, identify contexts in which rangeland cattle interact with humans, and provide recommendations for improving future HAI research with rangeland cattle. Current research delineating individual differences in response to humans by beef cattle occur during routine husbandry and management on rangelands (pragmatic) and in a research context (experimental). Human-cattle interactions can be distinguished based on the quality and goal of the interaction into four broad categories: human presence, human approach, human contact, and restraint. Limitations of HAI research with rangeland cattle are identified and reconciled by recommendations for HAI research that can take place outside of the processing environment (i.e., while cattle are ruminating, resting or grazing on rangelands).

Human-animal relationship influences husbandry practices, animal welfare and productivity in pig farming

The nature of the relationship between humans and farm animals has multiple repercussions on the animals and the farmers and varies with farmers attitudes towards their animals. In particular, this relationship influences animal welfare and human working conditions. The present study, part of a larger research project investigating human-animal relationship (HAR) in pig farming and ways to improve it, had two objectives: 1) to investigate the HAR in a diversity of pig farming situations and to evaluate the possible correlation between farmer attitudes, pigs' reactions to humans, husbandry practices, animal health, welfare and productivity and 2) to find a way to rapidly assign a farmer to a profile, in order to better adapt course content during training sessions on HAR. The study focused on 52 farrow-to-finish farms and consisted of a semi-structured interview with the farmer, observations of the farmer in contact with his/her livestock, two human approach tests conducted on sows and growers and productivity data. Finally, a questionnaire was left at the farm to be filled out by all stockpersons on the farm. Interviews, analyzed using a thematic analysis followed by multiple correspondence analysis and ascendant hierarchical clustering, showed that some farmers develop husbandry practices to improve their HARs and identified three farmer profiles that have been named in relation to the place of the HAR in their profession: Profile 1 farmers for whom HAR is secondary in their work with their pigs, Profile 2 for whom the HAR is useful in their work with their pigs and Profile 3 for whom HAR is central in their work with their pigs. Logistic regression models of the relationships between behavioral tests and productivity data showed that confident sows produce and wean more piglets than fearful sows and that sows of Profile 3 farmers trust more humans than those of Profile 1 or 2 farmers. Farmers' responses to the questionnaire did not predict their profile assignment. Our results confirm the main role of the farmer's attitude towards animals on their farming practices, animal welfare and productivity. The farmers who have more confident pigs and better productivity are those for whom the farm animal is central to their profession, express the most pleasure in working with them and convey empathy for them.

The provision of toys to pigs can improve the human-animal relationship

It is now widely recognised that a positive human-animal relationship is beneficial not only for farm animals' welfare but also for productivity and the quality of products. A better understanding of animal emotions is an important goal in disciplines ranging from neuroscience to animal welfare science, but few reliable tools exist for measuring these emotions. In this study, whether the provision of toys to solicit play behaviour in pigs is associated with a change in the human-animal relationship and the emotional state of pigs was investigated. We involved a group of sixteen mini-pigs housed in an experimental setting and the use of a preliminary test called the 'strange person' test. After a Control and a Play session (with medium-sized dog toys, balls with ropes), the strange person test was performed. During the test, a person wearing a colourful overall, a hood, a mask, gloves and boots (unknown person with an odd appearance) entered the pen, where 2 mini-pigs were housed, for a 2-min video recording. The strange person test results after the Play and Control sessions were compared. The results showed that the latency to approach the person (duration in seconds) and the duration for which the pig was distant from the strange person (duration in seconds) were significantly lower after the Play session than after the Control session (Degrees of Freedom =30; Statistic of the F test =39.1; p < 0.0001 and Degrees of Freedom =15; Statistic of the F test =54.3; p < 0.0001, respectively). The duration of direct contact (duration in seconds) (Degrees of Freedom =15; Statistic of the F test =14.8; p = 0.002), the need to separate the pig from the strange person (frequency) (Degrees of Freedom =30; Statistic of the F test =9.3; p = 0.005) and the duration of tail movement (duration in seconds) (Degrees of Freedom =15; Statistic of the F test =12.6; p = 0.003) were all significantly higher after the Play sessions than after the Control sessions. Overall, the results suggest a change in the human-animal relationship after the Play sessions: the pigs seemed to be less fearful and more inclined to interact with the strange person, showing a more positive emotional state. This preliminary study suggests that the provision of toys, and more precisely, the opportunity to perform object play behaviour, and sometimes, spontaneously, social play behaviour, can improve the human-animal relationship. Additional research to explore this topic thoroughly may yield interesting results because a positive emotional state of the animals and a good human-animal relationship are essential to ensure good quality of life of farm animals.

Assessing and Enhancing the Welfare of Animals with Equivocal and Reliable Cues

Simple Summary

Actions of human caretakers influence the experience of animals under their care, in zoos and elsewhere. These animals often learn to associate stimuli—sights, smells, sounds—with desirable outcomes such as feedings, training sessions, or other positive experiences. Here, we propose that a conscientious approach to providing reliable cues about daily events and observing animal behavior in response to both reliable and uncertain cues can help caretakers support and assess animal welfare.

Abstract

The actions of human caretakers strongly influence animals living under human care. Here, we consider how intentional and unintentional signals provided by caretakers can inform our assessment of animals’ well-being as well as help to support it. Our aim is to assist in further developing techniques to learn animals’ affective state from their behavior and to provide simple suggestions for how animal caretakers’ behavior can support animal welfare. We suggest that anticipatory behavior towards expected rewards is related to decision-making behavior as viewed through the cognitive bias lens. By considering the predictions of the theories associated with anticipatory behavior and cognitive bias, we propose to use specific cues to probe the cumulative affective state of animals. Additionally, our commentary draws on the logic of reward sensitivity and judgement bias theories to develop a framework that suggests how reliable and equivocal signals may influence animals’ affective states. Application of this framework may be useful in supporting the welfare of animals in human care.

Welfare Quality of Breeding Horses Under Different Housing Conditions

Simple Summary

Depending on their use, horses are exposed to specific welfare risks. The aim of this study was to gain an insight into the welfare of breeding mares and stallions, in different types of housing, a topic which little has been written on. The assessed breeding horses were included in one of four welfare categories on the basis of a numerical welfare score calculated by the assessment of 30 management and animal-related indicators (health and behavior). The study also evidences the deficiencies and negative effects on horses’ welfare from the tie-stalls system, which is still used in some countries. This housing type is linked to increased risks of respiratory and locomotive problems, which have a significantly higher prevalence in the tie-stalled stallions than in mostly freely kept mares. The overall welfare categories recorded showed better welfare in the mares (“enhanced” and “excellent”) than in the stallions (“acceptable” and “enhanced”). Accordingly, it can be concluded that positive changes in housing management, such as free housing with the use of boxes, could improve the welfare quality of breeding stallions.

Abstract

This paper investigates the effect of different housing conditions on the welfare quality of breeding horses. Using a welfare protocol that included health and behavioral parameters, 330 stallions (kept in tie-stall housing) and 365 broodmares (kept in extensive, mostly free housing) were assessed. The horses were categorized into four welfare categories (“not classified”, “acceptable”, “enhanced” and “excellent”), according to an individual welfare score calculated for each horse. The prevalence of stallions with dyspnea, tendon and joint swellings, abnormal gait and abnormal hoof horn quality was significantly (p < 0.05) higher than that of the broodmares. No significant difference (p > 0.05) was found in the human-related behavioral response of the two categories of breeding horses. The median individual welfare scores were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in the broodmares than in the breeding stallions. The mares had “enhanced” and “excellent” welfare, while the stallions had “acceptable” and “enhanced” welfare. The results revealed differences in the horses’ welfare quality for the different housing conditions. Accordingly, it can be concluded that positive changes in housing management, such as free housing with the use of boxes, could improve the welfare quality of breeding stallions.

The relationship between the welfare quality and stress index in working and breeding horses

The aim of this observational study was to investigate if a relationship exists between the calculated overall individual welfare score (as an indicator of the welfare quality) and the neutrophil:lymphocyte (N:L) ratio (as a stress indicator) in working (draught) and reproduction horses (breeding stallions and broodmares), in two different seasons. The welfare of the horses was assessed by a protocol which included health and behavioural parameters. An individual welfare score was computed, the total and differential WBC count was established and the N:L ratio was calculated for each of the 1482 assessed horses. Using all these parameters, comparisons were made between the horse categories (working horses, breeding stallions, broodmares) in two assessment seasons. Finally, the relationship between the individual welfare score and the N:L ratio was studied in light of the significant correlations found. The highest frequency of health problems was recorded in working horses. The human-animal relationship did not present significant differences between the horse categories. The individual welfare scores were significantly lower (P<0.05) in the working than in the breeding animals, in both assessment seasons. The N:L ratio was significantly higher (P<0.05) in the working horses than in those kept for reproduction. The season had no significant influence (P>0.05) on the investigated parameters. All the significant correlations found between the N:L ratio and the individual welfare score were negative. The results obtained indicate poor welfare in the working horses, comparing with the breeding animals. The findings of our study confirmed that the N:L ratio increases in horses with a poor welfare state. The multiple correlations of the N:L ratio with the individual welfare scores of the assessed horses emphasised the efficiency of this parameter in identifying the acute and chronic stress conditions in the living environment of the animals.

Mutilating Procedures, Management Practices, and Housing Conditions That May Affect the Welfare of Farm Animals: Implications for Welfare Research

A number of mutilating procedures, such as dehorning in cattle and goats and beak trimming in laying hens, are common in farm animal husbandry systems in an attempt to prevent or solve problems, such as injuries from horns or feather pecking. These procedures and other practices, such as early maternal separation, overcrowding, and barren housing conditions, raise concerns about animal welfare. Efforts to ensure or improve animal welfare involve adapting the animal to its environment, i.e., by selective breeding (e.g., by selecting "robust" animals) adapting the environment to the animal (e.g., by developing social housing systems in which aggressive encounters are reduced to a minimum), or both. We propose adapting the environment to the animals by improving management practices and housing conditions, and by abandoning mutilating procedures. This approach requires the active involvement of all stakeholders: veterinarians and animal scientists, the industrial farming sector, the food processing and supply chain, and consumers of animal-derived products. Although scientific evidence about the welfare effects of current practices in farming such as mutilating procedures, management practices, and housing conditions is steadily growing, the gain in knowledge needs a boost through more scientific research. Considering the huge number of animals whose welfare is affected, all possible effort must be made to improve their welfare as quickly as possible in order to ban welfare-compromising procedures and practices as soon as possible.

Is There a Need for a More Expansive Use of Ethics and Values in Reflecting on the Use of Animals in Scientific Research?

Simple Summary

Debates about animal research are often polarized. On one side, increased knowledge, medical treatments or enhanced animal production are seen to justify harms. On the other, animals have rights constraining their use. Both sides fail to provide adequate support for this contentious use of animals. Reflecting the richness of ethics, it is suggested that empathy and respect for the animal, and greater acknowledgement of the value of experiences and care could also be considered. Along with a more informed understanding of the benefits of research and of the aims of animal rights, a more sophisticated ethic may reflect the common ground between the poles of the debate.

Abstract

Although reflecting a long tradition of moral reflection that the use of animals is acceptable as long as it is humane, the tension between causing harm to animals in research and the benefits to humans can nevertheless be troubling. Utilitarian arguments that appeal to the value of those practices in sustaining and enhancing human lives, and rights-based arguments which seek to constrain them, can be inadequate. Reflecting a more engaging, inclusive and sophisticated understanding of human activity, justification for animal use could be expanded to reflect the fullness and richness of ethical thinking. This might see more explicit inclusion of perspectives borne of virtues, caring, experiences, and respect for the essence of the animal, and different ways of understanding and knowing animals, values drawn from the middle ground of commonly acceptable human-animal relationships. Such values, already clearly evident in research, could be more widely integrated into arguments justifying animal use. A more expansive approach would not only reflect reality and acknowledge that costs and benefits are shared more widely, but it might result in more equitable, effective and humane science. It might also serve to reduce some of the tension long evident in the relationship between humans and animals.

The Relationship between Farmers' Perceptions and Animal Welfare Standards in Sheep Farms

In this study, we investigated the relationship between welfare standards in sheep farms and farmers’ perceptions of factors affecting animal welfare. We developed a scale of 34 items to measure farmers’ perceptions of animal welfare. We examined the relationships among variables in farmers’ characteristics, our observations, and farmers’ expressed perceptions through a t test, variance analysis and correlation analysis. Results of the research suggested that higher welfare standards for sheep exist on farms run by farmers who have a higher perception level of animal welfare. These farmers believed that personnel and shelter conditions were more effective than veterinary inspection, feeding and other factors in terms of animal welfare. In addition, we detected a significant relationship between the farmers’ perceptions and their gender, educational level, whether they enjoyed their work, or whether they applied the custom of religious sacrifice. Our results showed that emotional and cognitive factors related to farmers’ perceptions may offer opportunities for progress in the domain of animal welfare.

Farmers' self-reported perceptions and behavioural impacts of a welfare scheme for suckler beef cattle in Ireland

Background

To date, there have been a limited number of studies on the impact of government-incentivised farm animal welfare programmes or ‘schemes’, and on farmers’ attitudes regarding such schemes. In this study, focus groups were used to gain insight into Irish farmers’ perceptions of such a scheme for suckler cattle and its behavioural impacts on farmers.

Results

The findings were categorised into 46 codes and ultimately yielded two Global themes: 1) Beliefs and Evidence and 2) Logic and Logistics. The former theme covered farmers’ attitudes and observations regarding the Scheme. The latter dealt with factors such as workload and costs. The Global themes allowed for comprehensive reporting of the strongest messages from focus groups. There was consensus that Scheme measures for the minimum calving age and for weaning had a positive impact on welfare. Two aspects criticized by participants were firstly disbudding, due to the logistics for anaesthetic application, and secondly the administrative workload associated with data capture and utilisation. The majority anticipated that data being collected via the Scheme would help to inform farm management decisions in future.

Conclusions

Farm animal welfare schemes, which incentivise participants to implement certain practices, aspire to long-term behavioural change after scheme conclusion. Our research showed that this Scheme increased farmer awareness of the benefits of certain practices. It also demonstrated the importance of stakeholder participation in the design stages of welfare initiatives to ensure scheme measures are practical and relevant, to address any perceived controversial measures, and to plan for training and adding value to schemes.

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.

Infrared thermography as a non-invasive method for detecting fear-related responses of cattle to handling procedures

Two experiments were conducted to determine whether maximum eye temperature, measured using infrared thermography (IRT), could be a non-invasive technique for detecting responses of cattle to handling procedures. Experiment one used six crossbred heifers randomly assigned to two groups in a crossover design and subjected to i) being hit with a plastic tube on the rump and ii) being startled by the sudden waving of a plastic bag. Experiment two used 32 crossbred bulls randomly assigned to three treatments: i) control, restraint only; ii) electric prod, two brief applications of an electric prod or, iii) startled, as in experiment one, accompanied by shouting. Exit speed (m s−1) was recorded on release from the restraint. Maximum eye temperature was recorded continuously pre- and post-treatment. In experiment one, eye temperature dropped rapidly between 20 and 40 s following both treatments and returned to baseline between 60 and 80 s following hitting and between 100 and 120 s following startling. In experiment two, eye temperature dropped between 0 and 20 s, following both treatments, and returned to baseline by 180 s, following startling plus shouting, but did not return to baseline for five minutes following electric prod. Exit speed tended to be faster following the electric prod. In conclusion, IRT detected responses that were due possibly to fear and/or pain associated with the procedures and may therefore be a useful, non-invasive method for assessing aversiveness of handling practices to cattle.