ZETU.htm

NR ZETU

AU Croney,C.C.; Wilson,L.L.; Curtis,S.E.; Cash,E.H.

TI Effects of handling aids on calf behavior

QU Applied Animal Behaviour Science 2000 Aug; 69(1): 1-13

PT Article

AB Effects of three different handling aids on calf behavior were determined. Group 1 calves were intensively-reared intact Holstein males (mean 180 days old); Group 2, extensively-reared beef-breed females (mean 230 days); Group 3, extensively-reared castrated beef-breed males (mean 253 days). Calves in each group were assigned to one of three handling aid treatments (n = 5 per treatment subgroup; total n = 45): electric prod (Prod), oar with rattles (Oar), manual urging (Manual). Treatments were applied only as needed to encourage forward movement of calves through the length of a solid-sided semicircular chute system. Number of treatment applications, length of time required to move through the entire chute system, and behavior during movement through the chute were recorded. An approach test was conducted 1 day before and 1 day and 1 week after chute tests to evaluate changes in behavior due to handling aid application. During chute tests, Group 1 Prod calves required the fewest treatment applications (4.9) vs. 23.5 (Oar) or 13.5 (Manual), ran most often (1.40 times) vs. 0.20 times (Manual) or 0.33 times (Oar), and made contact with chute sides most often (1.8 times vs. 0.2 times (Manual) or 0.7 times (Oar), respectively tall P < 0.05). Similar trends were observed for calves in Groups 2 and 3. There were no significant differences between behaviors observed during the approach tests conducted before and after handling aid treatments had been imposed. Regardless of treatment, intensively-reared Group 1 calves appeared markedly less fearful of handlers during approach tests compared to extensively-reared calves in Groups 2 and 3, which demonstrated overt attempts to escape from the test facilities. One week after chute tests, 13 of 15 Prod calves from all three groups walked, rushed, or backed > 1 m away from the handler when the prod was buzzed but not applied, suggesting that the buzzing sound alone may have sufficed to encourage movement by calves that had previously experienced both the sensation and sound associated with electric prodding. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

AD C.C.Croney, Penn State Univ, Dept Dairy & Anim Sci, 324 William L Henning Bldg, University Pk, PA 16802 USA.

SP englisch

PO Niederlande

Autorenindex - authors index
Startseite Betäubung - home page Stunning