Abstract: A previously described (Windschnurer et al., 2009) avoidance distance test was used to assess animals’ fear of humans in order to quantify the human–animal relationship (HAR). This study investigated the influence of the dominant and flightiest animals within a group on the responsiveness of animals during the avoidance distance test. Eighty-eight pregnant heifers comprised of four different genotypes were used (22 animals per genotype): Limousin × Holstein-Friesian, Limousin × Simmental, Charolais × Limousin, and Charolais × Simmental. Sixty of the 88 heifers were group housed (n = 5) into 12 pens with 3 pens per breed, while 28 heifers were singly housed (seven heifers per breed). A reactivity test was performed on days 10, 18, 25 and 30 post-housing on the singly housed heifers, and then on the group housed heifers, on the same days, to calculate a reactivity score. On days 33 and 37 flight and dominance tests, respectively, were performed to identify the flightiest and the dominant animal within each group. On day 41, an avoidance test, measuring both the avoidance distance towards a familiar and an unfamiliar human, was performed on all heifers. No difference (P > 0.05) in reactivity scores was found between the genotypes, between pens for the group housed heifers or between singly housed and group housed heifers (P = 0.28). The avoidance distance (AD) of singly (S) housed heifers towards a familiar (F) (ADSF) human was shorter (P < 0.001) than the avoidance distance of group (G) housed heifers towards an unfamiliar human (ADSU). The ADSF and ADGF were correlated with the ADSU and ADGU (R = 0.87 for singly housed heifers; R = 0.61 for group housed heifers, P < 0.001). For the singly housed heifers, no correlation was observed between reactivity score and ADSF (R = 0.36, P = 0.18), whereas the reactivity score and ADSU were correlated (R = 0.68, P = 0.004). For the group housed heifers no significant correlation was detected between the reactivity score and ADGF (R = 0.18, P = 0.22) or ADGU (R = &#8722;0.11, P = 0.39). No influence of the most dominant animal and the flightiest animals was found on the behaviour of the group in term of avoidance distance and reactivity (P > 0.05). It is concluded that the assessment of the fear of the animals towards humans using the avoidance test at the feed bunk may be useful for singly and group housed heifers and that the leaders of a group such as the flightiest animal or the dominant animal did not influence the avoidance distance test.

Abstract: In 2004, Natalie Lloyd and Jane Mulcock initiated the Australian Animals & Society Study Group, a network of social science, humanities and arts scholars that quickly grew to include more than 100 participants. In July 2005, about 50 participants attended the group“s 4-day inaugural conference at the University of Western Australia, Perth. Papers in this issue emerged from the conference. They exemplify the Australian academy”s work in the fields of History, Population Health, Sociology, Geography, and English and address strong themes: human-equine relationships; management of native and introduced animals; and relationships with other domestic, nonhuman animals-from cats and dogs to cattle. Human-Animal Studies is an expanding field in Australia. However, many scholars, due to funding and teaching concerns, focus their primary research in different domains. All authors in this issue-excepting one-are new scholars in their respective fields. The papers represent the diversity and innovation of recent Australian research on human-animal interactions. The authors look at both past and present, then anticipate future challenges in building an effective network to expand this field of study in Australia.

Abstract: Behaviour is an important factor to be taken into account in the various uses of horses. Today horses are mainly used for sport and leisure activities. They should therefore be easy to manage, calm and not fearful. Early handling is known to improve manageability and learning ability and to reduce fearfulness in various species. It has become fashionable in the horse industry to use an early training procedure, referred to as “imprint training”, which is said to produce durable if not permanent effects. However, no studies concerning the long-term effects of such neonatal handling have been carried out in horses. The present study examines the short- and long-term effects of neonatal handling on manageability, general reactivity and learning ability of foals. Twenty-six Welsh foals were studied: 13 were handled daily for 14 days from birth and 13 were non-handled controls. The handling procedure consisted of fitting a halter, gently patting all parts of each foal's body, picking up feet and leading over 40 m. Two days, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after the end of the handling period, foals underwent behavioural tests to measure their manageability and various aspects of their reactivity. The results showed that neonatal handling has only short-term effects on manageability: 2 days after the handling period, handled animals were significantly easier to handle than controls for the four parameters measured during this test (time to fit a halter, time to pick up feet, walk ratio that is time during which foal walks under constraint/total time measured during leading and number of defensive reactions). Two parameters (time to fit a halter and walk ratio) were still lower in handled foals than in non-handled foals 3 months later and only one 6 months later (walk ratio). One year later there was no difference between groups. In addition, there was no effect of handling on reactivity at any time of testing or in any of the tests (reaction to isolation from conspecifics, presence of a human, presence of a novel object and to a surprise effect). Finally, neonatal handling did not improve the spatial or discriminative learning abilities measured at 14 months of age. To conclude, the effects of neonatal handling are only temporary.