Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrzębiec, Poland
Animal Welfare
Improving welfare status of animals in different phases of
production chain
Impact of handling, attitude to animals and personal traits of the
stockman on animal welfare and human safety
Definition of handling
According to Webster`s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English
Language (1989) the term “handling” may be defined as “the manner of treating or
dealing with something”.
In farm animal husbandry this term is relevant when close relation between domestic
animal and the stockman takes place. Generally, there are direct and indirect
relations between humans and farm animals. The narrower meaning of “handling”
(direct relations) refers to the physical contact initiated by the stockman when
manipulating, touching, stroking, or during veterinary interventions etc. Handling is
indispensable in all phases of animal production chain. Humans not only have impact
on animals due to physical contact, but also through designing of animal facilities and
planning husbandry systems. Each type of housing system is related to specific
handling. The direct human involvement in animal handling is not always necessary.
In modern husbandry systems, mechanical, automatic or electronic devices are being
developed to replace more and more the stockman at the laborious or time
consuming husbandry activities (mechanical manure removal, automatic feeding and
watering, milking robots, etc.). Some kinds of handling (e.g. health care, animal
marking) need tools or devices of special design.
Tendency in modern animal husbandry
In modern animal husbandry stockpeople/farmers have more animals to care of and
less time to spend taking care of individual animals due to increased working load
and other activities. On the other hand, farm animals are less dependent of and
accustomed to direct contact with humans and become less familiar to the human
presence and handling. Main husbandry procedures in which handling problems may
occur involve: milking, restraining an animal to the veterinary intervention, loading
and unloading animals for transportation, pre-slaughter handling, moving large
groups of domestic herbivores to the pasture, training of horses etc.
Fear of humans
The handling is very important for animal welfare, because the presence of human in
close proximity to animal and human’s behaviour directed to animal can be aversive
1
Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrzębiec, Poland
or positive to animal. Through the domestication process the fear of humans was
generally attenuated in domesticated animal (Belaev, 1969) but this opinion is only
partially true. In fact, humans may easily evoke fear in domestic animals particularly
when animals are raised in groups with the little or no contact with man. This fear of
humans occurs with various intensity (from restlessness to panic escape).
Experiments have shown that direct human contact of the stockman with animals can
be very important for the development of young animals. Even a brief but systematic
contact of the stockman with pre-weaned or weaned young animals, including
stroking, talking to and gentle handling of animals, often results in better growth rate,
better cognitive abilities (e.g. learning capacity) and more balanced reaction to
subsequent stressors (Hemsworth, 2004).
On the base of the kind, intensity and frequency of previous contacts with human, an
animal can differently perceive humans i.e.:
as danger or predator eliciting flight/fight reaction)
as food- and water-giving environmental object
as social partner to whom an animal is trying to establish social dominance or
becomes submissive.
• as indifferent environmental object which is ignored by animal (Estep, Hetts,
1992)
•
•
•
The idea of the stockperson acting as a social partner for farm animals is based on
two concepts.
(1) The concept of social dominance
According to most practitioners, the animal handler should behave and act as
the dominant member of the animal herd or the leader of the herd.
According to a more anthropomorphic approach, the handler should be
perceived by animals rather as the “friend” than dominant herd-mate.
(2) The concept of imprinting or socialization
Imprinting can be considered as an attachment phenomenon that will be
created during sensitive period in animal’s early life. This attachment is
expressed later on, as filial or sexual preferences. Originally, the concept of
imprinting was developed by K. Lorenz (1935) and concerned birds. The
imprinting process was viewed as irreversible.
For mammals a concept of socialization was proposed instead of imprinting.
Socialization creates reversible social relationship (including the human partner) and
is mainly based on the process of attachment and adjustments to the other member
of the social group, especially in particular sensitive periods of the animal’s life.
Socialization will occur mostly in orphan young animals which are fed by stockman
from bottle. The phenomenon of socialization may have both positive effect (no fear
of human, ease of handling) and negative effect (too much bond to humans, ignoring
2
Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrzębiec, Poland
herdmates of animal’s own species, and no respect of human, dangerous behaviours
towards humans).
The fear of humans may be differentiated among animal species and is especially
expressed in poultry, pigs and sheep (Fraser, Broom, 1997.)
The fear reaction is often aggravated by other environmental stimuli interpreted by
animal as fear-provoking. Not only painful experiences but all the housing conditions
and husbandry procedures which are perceived as aversive and stressful by the
livestock, often evoke the serious troubles during handling. Animals often
demonstrate fear of novelty.
Measuring fear in animals
Some tests have been developed for measuring the fear reaction of animals towards
human (Boivin et al, 2003):
(1)
(2)
(3)
Recording reactions of animal to the man staying motionless (approach or
no approach, and latency to approach are noted.
Recording of animal’s reaction when it is restraint and the man is
approaching the animal (estimating stress hormones and heart rate).
Estimation of the “flight distance” as the radius of space around an animal
which intrusion provokes flight reaction (Fraser, Broom, 1997).
Environmental and genetic factors of fear reactions
The results of test measuring fear of man in animals are influenced by genetic and
environmental factors. Reaction to humans may be enhanced by novelty of situation
or by stress evoked by social isolation. The flight distance in beef cattle is longer than
in dairy cattle which is probably caused by genetic factors, and, dairy cattle kept
under traditional system seemed to be less fearful towards man than animals kept on
pasture which can be attributed to environmental factors (Murphy et al., 1981, Boivin
et al., 1991).
The inter-breed differences and genetic variability as well as a possibility of selecting
animals that are better adapted to being handled, should be taken into consideration
for improving handling and welfare of animals during handling. However, the
estimated heritability coefficients for traits related to “docility” were rather moderate
(h2 = 0.2 - 0.3).
Despite of thousands years of domestication and elimination of the most reactive
animals, a substantial variability still exists in traits related to reaction of animals to
humans. The interaction between rearing environment (individual experience) and
genetic make up is probably responsible for the great variability of behavioural traits
related to reactivity of animals to humans.
3
Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrzębiec, Poland
Effects of handling
There are many experimental data showing negative effects of harsh or brutal
treatment of animals on their productivity. Aversively handled pigs have a lower
pregnancy rate and lower weight gains. On the other hand, the corticosteroids level
was higher when animals were handled in a harsh way (Hemsworth and Barnett,
1987). The way animals are handled, can have not only impact on animal
performance or fear of people. Inconsistent of brutal treatment of animals (especially
males) can trigger aggressivity towards stockpeople.
Vaarst (1997) found that the incidences of kicking where stockpeople were harmed
by cows, varied between 3 and 29% in 10 dairy herds in Denmark. The differences in
the quality of human behaviour towards animal were probably very important factor in
this case.
Personality traits of a good stockman
Positive influence of stockperson on the milk yield in dairy cows was reported as
early as in the beginning of seventies (Seabrook, 1972). The same author evaluated
the optimal personality traits of the stockperson, which may positively influence
animal productivity (Seabrook, 2000). A good stockman should act consistently,
rewarding wanted behaviour of an animal and providing pleasant physical contact
with it. As a whole, the action of the stockperson directed to cattle should have a form
of positive active interaction „involving use of the voice in a calm manner, patting,
stroking and touching of the animal, particularly the head area and around the ears”.
This behaviour has the positive effect on the milk production.
The stockman should be: emotional stable, confident, independent, satisfied with
his/her job, motivated, having high self-esteem, relaxed, rather introvert and shrewd.
Calm and self confident stockperson scarcely faces defensive reaction from animals.
An unsure, inexperienced or nervous person may have difficulties when handling
animals. If a stockperson is excitable, unbalanced or has a tendency to be violent,
he/she has a greater chance of inducing dangerous reactions from animals.
The importance of the “body language” of animals
The prominent researcher of animal handling problems T. Grandin (2004a), on the
basis of own investigations and experiences, prepared guidelines for
better
handling of the domestic livestock in various situations. She stressed the fact, that
animal’s experience in new surroundings should be positive one. The stockperson
should not appear suddenly to the animal, avoiding startle reaction.
For effective and safe handling of animals, a stockperson should know the so called
“body language” of animals (postures and gestures signalling animal’s intentions
towards man or animal’s mood).
4
Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrzębiec, Poland
Animals can precisely signal if their attitude to the approaching person is:
•
•
•
•
•
aggressive,
submissive,
friendly,
curious,
being afraid.
Each animal species has its own repertoire of body language signals.
Forms of animal learning playing a role at handling
As results of a systematic handling throughout longer period of time, behaviour of
animals changes gradually due to the process of learning. There are two main types
of learning that take place during handling: habituation and operant conditioning.
Habituation takes place when animals are exposed many times to a stimulus
that appears in neutral context. The frightful reaction to this stimulus will
gradually extinguish, if this stimuli is neither aversive nor positive to the
animal. As a result e.g. human who is evoking frightful reaction may become
to an animal simply a part of its environment and the fear reaction may extinct.
(2) Operant conditioning takes place when a desirable reaction or behaviour of an
animal is reinforced by rewarding the animal (e.g. giving a titbit or by pleasant
contact with man) or undesirable reaction or behaviour is punished.
(1)
Usually, habituation and operant conditioning are appearing not in their pure forms
but are mixed.
Some advices for proper handling
To control animal’s movement on the pasture, the stockman should know the flight
distance of the livestock. He should put himself on the edge of animal flight distance
zone. Then, he would adjust his position–approach animals or withdraw to move or
stop them. When moving animals, direction of the handler path should be opposite to
the desired direction of the animals (Grandin 2004a).
There are also recommendations concerning grouping animals before some handling
procedures (Grandin, 2004b). For example, crowd pen linked with the chute should
be filled only up to three quarters enabling animals to perform turning movements.
Characteristics such as vision and flight distance must be also taken into account in
this case. Hoof stock is very sensitive to moving objects that appear in the visual
field, avoids shadows and the strong light. These environmental stimuli evoke the
balking and backing reactions. Thus, special design of facility is needed with the
curved corridor and its solid sides reducing visual field in animal and sufficiently
separating from the human handler who works on the catwalk. Similar principles
should be taken into account when designing squeezing chutes, loading ramps and
corrals.
Safety at animal handling
5
Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrzębiec, Poland
Farm animals can be dangerous to stockpeople due to their body mass, strength,
inconsistency in behavioural reactions and unpredictability. Females can be as
dangerous as males when their young are threaten. On the base of case reports on
accidents classified as dangerous to stockpeople, the following reactions of animals
can be expected:
Cattle: especially adult bulls: can hit the stockman with horns, push or press against
the wall. Because of their weight, strength and inconsistent temperament bulls
require extra caution. Even a bull’s playful activity can easily injure or kill a person.
Bulls require special facilities that allow them to feed, drink, exercise and breed
without direct contact with handlers. Cows can kick the stoclman/milker, mostly with
hind legs.
Horses of both sexes can strongly kick both with front and hind legs and bite
severely. Stallions are very excitable when in proximity of a mare in heat.
Pigs: adult boars and sows defending piglets can bite severely.
Goats and sheep: adult males can hit with horns or even kill a man when they are
provoked by stockman’s unusual behaviour (accidental falling down or squatting).
Each animal has its own personality; however certain animal behaviours are
predictable:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Most animals respond positively to calm, gentle and consistent handling,
Livestock become uneasy or skittish when their ordinary routines or familiar
surroundings change. Do not alter the daily routine
Animals have defined social order. Dominant animals have first choice of
feed, location and direction of travel. Crowding a subordinate animal against a
dominant one during handling may disrupt their social structure and cause an
unpredictable and dangerous response,
Domestic livestock especially cattle, sheep and horses are herd animals.
They may become agitated or stressed when isolated and will try to return to
the group,
Livestock detect people by their movement which is much more important to
animals than what is moving or the location, colour, or identity of the moving
object. A handler’s excited or aggressive movements may cause animals to
stop and watch the activity rather respond to handling. It is important to move
calmly and steadily when handling animals,
Always leave an escape route when working closely to animals,
Avoid startling an animal especially a horse. Make it aware of your approach
before getting too close to it,
Yards, sheds should be suitable in size and strength for the animal,
Avoid blind covers and sharp turns in the design of the yard,
Keep the walkways dry and non-slip,
Make sure your gates, footholds and access ways are well positioned,
Keep all equipment in good repair.
6
Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrzębiec, Poland
Literature
1.
Belaev D.K. (1969): Domestication of animals. Science Journal 1, 47-52.
2.
Boivin X., Le Neindre P., Boissy A., Lensink J., Trillat G., Veissier J. (2003):
Eleveur et grands herbivores: une relation a entretenir. INRA Productions
Animales, 16, 101-115.
3.
Duncan J.J., Slee G.S., Kenlewell P., Berry P., Carlisle A.J. (1986): Comparison
of the stressfulness of harvesting broiler chickens by machine and by hand.
British Poultry Science 27, 109-114.
4.
Estep D.Q., Hetta S. (1992): Interaction, relationship and bonds: the conceptual
basis for scientist-animal relations. [In:] The Inevitable Bond: Examining
Scientist-Animal Interactions. H. Davis and D. Balfour (Eds). Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 6-26.
5.
Fraser A.F., Broom D.M. (1997): Farm Animal Behaviour and Welfare. CABI
Publishing, Wallingford, New York.
6.
Grandin T. (2004a): Principles for Handling Grazing Animals. [In:] The Well-Being
of Farm Animals. G.J. Benson & B.E. Rollin (Edsl), Blackwell Publ., Ames, 119144.
7.
Grandin T. (2004b): Principles for the Design of Handling Facilities and Transport
Systems. [In:]The Well-Being of Farm Animals. G.J. Benson & B.E. Rollin (Eds),
Blackwell Publ., Ames, 145-166.
8.
Gray J.A. (1987): The psychology of fear and stress. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
9.
Hemsworth P.H. (2004): Human –Livestock Interaction. [In:]The Well-Being of
Farm Animals. G.J. Benson & B.E. Rollin (Eds), Blackwell Publ., Ames, 21-38.
10.
Hemsworth P.H., Barnett J.L. (1987): Human-Animal Interactions. [In:] The
Veterinary Clinics of North America, 3, 2, Farm Animal Behaviour 339-356,
Philadelphia, Saunders.
11.
Murphy R.M., Moura-Duarte F.A., Torres-Penedo M.C. (1981): Response of cattle
to humans in open spaces: breed comparison and approach-avoidance
relationship. Behavioural Genetics 11, 37-48
12.
Seabrook M.F. (1972: A study to determine the influence of the herdsmen
personality on milk yield. Journal of the Agricultural Labour Science 1, 45-59.
7
Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrzębiec, Poland
13.
Seabrook M.F. (2000): The effect of the operational environment and operating
protocols on the attitudes and behaviour of employed stockperson. The 4th
NAHWOA Workshop, Clermont-Ferrand
14.
Vaarst M. (1997): Introduction to milking and udder health in 1st lactation cows
after calving-management routines in organic herds [In:] Organic milk production
with focus on management, animal health and welfare. Internal Report no 97,
Danish Institute for Agricultural Sciences43/49, 63-67.
8