Abstract: Animal welfare, or well-being, is a social issue with ethical, scientific, political, and aesthetic properties. Answering questions about the welfare of animals requires scientific definition, assessment, solutions, and public acceptance. With respect to the actual well-being of the animal, most issues are centered on how the animal “feels” when managed within a specific level of confinement, during special agricultural practices (e.g., tail docking, beak trimming, etc.) and handling. Questions of this nature may require exploration of animal cognition, motivation, perception, and emotional states in addition to more commonly recognized indicators of well-being. Several general approaches have emerged for solving problems concerning animal well-being in intensive production systems: environmental, genetic, and therapeutic. Environmental approaches involve modifying existing systems to accommodate specific welfare concerns or development of alternative systems. Genetic approaches involve changing the behavioral and (or) physiological nature of the animal to reduce or eliminate behaviors that are undesirable within intensive system. Therapeutic approaches of a physical (tail docking, beak trimming) and physiological (drug and nutritional therapy) nature bring both concern and promise with regard to the reduction of confinement stress. Finally, the recent focus on commodity quality assurance programs may indirectly provide benefits for animal well-being. Although research in the area of animal well-being will provide important information for better animal management, handling, care, and the physical design of intensive production systems there is still some uncertainty regarding public acceptance. The aesthetics of modern intensive production systems may have as much to do with public acceptance as with science.

Abstract: The major causes of accidents with cattle, horses, and other grazing animals are: panic due to fear, male dominance aggression, or the maternal aggression of a mother protecting her newborn. Danger is inherent when handling large animals. Understanding their behavior patterns improves safety, but working with animals will never be completely safe. Calm, quiet handling and non-slip flooring are beneficial. Rough handling and excessive use of electric prods increase chances of injury to both people and animals, because fearful animals may jump, kick, or rear. Training animals to voluntarily cooperate with veterinary procedures reduces stress and improves safety. Grazing animals have a herd instinct, and a lone, isolated animal can become agitated. Providing a companion animal helps keep an animal calm.

Abstract: We examined whether very young dairy calves are able to discriminate between two people, and whether they use the colour of clothing or other indices to do so. During the familiarisation phase, one person (the familiar rewarder), who always wore the same colour clothes, gave milk, spoke gently and patted the calves in their individual pen for 6 days each week. During the test phase, the calf had to make a choice in an Y-maze placed in front of the gate of its stall. When the calves chose the familiar rewarder, they received 200 ml of milk as reinforcement. When they made the incorrect choice, they received nothing and were returned to their stall. On each test day, the calves made eight choices. The criterion of success was that the calf made at least six correct choices in eight trials on each of two consecutive test days (P<0.021 by the binomial law). The first experiment was carried out with fourteen 1-week-old male and female Holstein calves to see if calves could approach a person, who changed position in the maze, in order to obtain a feed reward. The familiar rewarder wore the same clothes as during the period of familiarisation and was in one arm of the Y-maze. The other arm was empty and the position of the familiar rewarder in the maze was randomised. Eleven of the 14 calves reached the criterion for success, after only three tests. The second experiment, carried out with five 2-week-old calves, examined whether the calves can differentiate the familiar rewarder (wearing the same clothing as during the period of familiarisation) from another person (the non-rewarder) wearing clothes of a different colour. The criterion of success was reached by all five calves. The third experiment was carried out with seven 2-week-old calves. It examined whether the calves can differentiate the familiar rewarder and the non-rewarder, when the two people are wearing clothes of the same colour (i.e. the same colour worn by the familiar rewarder during the phase of familiarisation). None of the calves were able to reach the criterion of success within a limited number of four test days. Often, calves would always choose the same arm of the maze. The fourth experiment was carried out on six 1-month-old calves. It was similar to experiment 3 with the difference that the familiar rewarder and the non-rewarder both wore the same colour clothes, but which were not the same colour as worn during the phase of familiarisation. Only one calf achieved the criterion of success within two test days. Results demonstrated that colour cues help very young calves to discriminate between two people, when these people wear different colour clothing. Some calves may be able to use other indicators than the colour of clothing. The Y-maze method is an promising way of examining calves' abilities to recognise people.