Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-15T10:48:20.842Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can stroking during milking decrease avoidance distances of cows towards humans?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

I Windschnurer ,
K Barth  and
S Waiblinger
I Windschnurer*
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Husbandry and Welfare, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria
K Barth
Affiliation:
Institute of Organic Farming, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries, Trenthorst, Germany
S Waiblinger
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Husbandry and Welfare, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: Ines.Windschnurer@vetmeduni.ac.at
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigated whether short-time stroking of loose-housed dairy cows in the daily farm routine could improve the cow-human relationship and consequently decrease avoidance distances, and whether this effect was persistent. Thirty-one cows (from two different breeds: Holstein Friesian and German Red Pied) received either a treatment (STROKING; n = 15) or no treatment (CONTROL; n = 16). In the STROKING group, each animal was stroked during morning and evening milking by an unfamiliar individual (experimenter) for 3 min over a 5-day period (Treatment 1) and again, 4 weeks later, over a 3.5-day period (Treatment 2). CONTROL animals could observe the experimenter during milking. Before and after treatment, the experimenter recorded the avoidance distances of cows (distance of first withdrawal when approached from the front) at the feeding place (AVOIDfeed) and in the barn (AVOIDbarn). Prior to Treatment 1, CONTROL and STROKING animals did not differ in AVOIDfeed or in AVOIDbarn. After Treatment 1, AVOIDfeed was significantly lower in STROKING animals compared to CONTROL animals. With regard to AVOIDbarn, no significant difference was found between STROKING animals and CONTROL animals after Treatment 1. After 4 weeks, before Treatment 2, CONTROL and STROKING animals did not differ significantly anymore in AVOIDfeed. After Treatment 2, AVOIDfeed was again significantly lower in STROKING animals than in CONTROL animals. Also, in the barn, (AVOIDbarn), STROKING animals avoided the experimenter less than CONTROL animals after Treatment 2. In terms of within-group evolution of avoidance distances, AVOIDfeed of CONTROL animals did not decrease in the course of the two treatments. Only after Treatment 2 were avoidance distances at the feeding place of STROKING animals significantly lower than initial avoidance distances. AVOIDbarn of CONTROL animals decreased after Treatment 1 but did not decrease significantly after Treatment 2. AVOIDbarn of STROKING animals decreased significantly after Treatment 1 and again after Treatment 2. It is suggested that short-time stroking during milking can affect the responses of cows to humans positively, although our results question the amount of contact necessary: even more contact might be required for lasting effects.

Keywords

animal welfareavoidance testscattlehuman-animal relationshipstrokingtactile contact
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 18 , Issue 4: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level , November 2009 , pp. 507 - 513
Copyright
© 2009 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bertenshaw, CE and Rowlinson, P 2008 Exploring heifers’ perception of ‘positive’ treatment through their motivation to pursue a retreated human. Animal Welfare 17: 313–319Google Scholar
Boissy, A and Bouissou, MF 1988 Effects of early handling on heifers’ subsequent reactivity to unfamiliar situations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 20: 259–273Google Scholar
Boissy, A, Manteuffel, G, Jensen, MB, Moe, RO, Spruijt, B, Keeling, LJ, Winckler, C, Forkman, B, Dimitrov, I, Langbein, J, Bakken, M, Veissier, I and Aubert, A 2007 Assessment of positive emotions in animals to improve their welfare. Physiology & Behavior 92: 375–397CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boivin, X, Garel, JP, Durier, C and Le Neindre, P 1998 Is gentling by people rewarding for beef calves? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 61: 1–12Google Scholar
Boivin, X, Lensink, BJ, Tallet, C and Veissier, I 2003 Stockmanship and farm animal welfare. Animal Welfare 12: 479–492Google Scholar
Hanna, D, Sneddon, IA, Beattie, VE and Breuer, K 2006 Effects of the stockperson on dairy cow behaviour and milk yield. Animal Science 82: 791–797Google Scholar
Hemsworth, PH 2003 Human-animal interactions in livestock production. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81: 185–198Google Scholar
Hemsworth, PH and Coleman, GJ 1998 Human-Livestock Interactions: The Stockperson and the Productivity of Intensively Farmed Animals. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Jago, JG, Krohn, CC and Matthews, LR 1999 The influence of feeding and handling on the development of the human-animal interactions in young cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 62: 137–151Google Scholar
Krohn, CC, Jago, JG and Boivin, X 2001 The effect of early handling on the socialisation of young calves to humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 74: 121–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lensink, BJ, Boivin, X, Pradel, P, Le Neindre, P and Veissier, I 2000 Reducing veal calves’ reactivity to people providing additional human contact. Journal of Animal Science 78: 1213–1218Google ScholarPubMed
Lensink, BJ, Raussi, S, Boivin, X, Pyykönen, M and Veissier, I 2001 Reactions of calves to handling depend on housing condition and previous experience with humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 70: 187–199CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munksgaard, L, de Passillé, AM, Rushen, J, Herskin, MS and Kristensen, AM 2001 Dairy cows’ fear of people: social learning, milk yield and behaviour at milking. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 73: 15–26CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Price, EO 1984 Behavioral aspects of animal domestication. The Quarterly Review of Biology 59: 1–32Google Scholar
Raussi, S, Lensink, BJ, Boissy, A, Pyykkonen, M and Veissier, I 2003 The effect of contact with conspecifics and humans on calves’ behaviour and stress responses. Animal Welfare 12: 191–203Google Scholar
Rushen, J, Munksgaard, L, de Passillé, AM, Jensen, MB and Thodberg, K 1998 Location of handling and dairy cows’ responses to people. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 55: 259–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushen, J, Taylor, AA, and de Passillé, AM 1999 Domestic animals’ fear of humans and its effect on their welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 65: 285–303Google Scholar
Schmied, C, Boivin, X and Waiblinger, S 2008a Stroking different body regions of dairy cows: Effects on avoidance and approach behaviour towards humans. Journal of Dairy Science 91: 596–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmied, C, Waiblinger, S, Scharl, T, Leisch, F and Boivin, X 2008b Stroking of different body regions by a human: Effects on behaviour and heart rate of dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 109: 25–38Google Scholar
Veissier, I and Boissy, A 2007 Stress and welfare: Two complementary concepts that are intrinsically related to the animal's point of view. Physiology & Behavior 92: 429–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Menke, C and Coleman, G 2002 The relationship between attitudes, personal characteristics and behaviour of stockpeople and subsequent behaviour and production of dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79: 195–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Menke, C and Fölsch, DW 2003 Influences on the avoidance and approach behaviour of dairy cows towards humans on 35 farms. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 84: 23–39Google Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Menke, C, Korff, J and Bucher, A 2004 Previous handling and gentle interactions affect behaviour and heart rate of dairy cows during a veterinary procedure. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 85: 31–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Boivin, X, Pedersen, V, Tosi, M, Janczak, AM, Visser, EK and Jones, RB 2006 Assessing the human-animal relationship in farmed species: A critical review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 101: 185–242Google Scholar
Windschnurer, I, Schmied, C, Boivin, X and Waiblinger, S 2008 Reliability and inter-test relationship of tests for on-farm assessment of dairy cows’ relationship to humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 114: 37–53Google Scholar