Abstract: Among equestrians the “natural” training methods of horses are gaining widespread popularity due to their spectacular efficiency. Underlying philosophy of trainers – founders of different “natural horsemanship training” (NHT) schools, along with other not well documented statements includes argumentation of solely welfare- and human-friendly effects of NHT in the horse. The aim of this review was to screen scientific papers related to NHT to answer the question whether „natural“ training methods may actually exert only positive effects upon equine mental state and human-horse relationship. It appears that NHT trainers may reduce stress and emotional tension and improve learning processes as they appropriately apply learning stimuli. Basing on revised literature it can be concluded that training is successful provided that [i] the strength of the aversive stimulus meets sensitivity of an individual horse, [ii] the aversive stimulus is terminated at a right moment to avoid the impression of punishment, and [iii] the animal is given enough time to assess its situation and make an independent decision in the form of adequate behavioural reaction. Neglecting any of these conditions may lead to substantial emotional problems, hyperactivity, or excessive fear in the horse-human relationship, regardless of the training method. However, we admit that the most successful NHT trainers reduce aversive stimulation to the minimum and that horses learn quicker with fear or stress reactions, apparently decreasing along with training process. Anyway, NHT should be acknowledged for absolutely positive role in pointing out the importance of proper stimulation in the schooling and welfare of horses.

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: The relationship between social behaviour and skin injuries (caused by horns) of loose housed horned cows was investigated on 35 dairy farms. While the frequencies of two agonistic behaviour elements (push and chase away) were positively correlated with the occurrence of skin injuries, the frequencies of butting and homing were not. Butting appears to have an ambivalent motivation, in that its occurrence is correlated positively both with agonistic behaviour and with social licking. Horning showed a positive correlation with social licking only. Four groups of husbandry conditions that may be associated with the occurrence of social behaviour and of injuries were distinguished: i) herd management, with variables including problem solving management by the farmer, integration of new cows, and dealing with periparturient and oestrus cows; ii) human-animal relationship, with variables including ability to identify individual cows, frequency of brushing the cows, number of milkers, and frequency of personnel changes; iii) animal characteristics, with the variable of herd size; and iv) stable characteristics, with the variable of space per cow (m2). The relevance of the husbandry variables investigated here had been confirmed in a previous stepwise regression analysis (Menke 1996). The variables for herd management and human-animal relationship conditions correlated in a consistent way with the occurrence of agonistic behaviour and/or of injuries, while most of them also correlated in the opposite direction with the occurrence of social licking. Herd size correlated positively with agonistic behaviour, but negatively with social licking. Space per cow correlated negatively with agonistic behaviour and injuries. In more than 70 per cent of the herds investigated, the levels of agonistic behaviour and of skin injuries were low, implying that horned dairy cows can be kept with less risk than is often assumed. We argue that such risks strongly depend on management factors that can be improved.

Abstract: The human-animal relationship is an important factor when considering animal welfare at herd level. In the present study, two behavioural tests for the on-farm assessment of the human-animal relationship at herd level of dairy cows housed in loose housing cubicle systems were evaluated with respect to inter-observer reliability, test-retest reliability, effect of familiarity of test person as well as inter-correlation of the two tests. In a voluntary animal approach (VAA) test, the number of cows and the latencies to approach and touch a stationary test person was measured. In an avoidance (AV) test, the cows' avoidance reactions to an approaching test person were categorised. A first study was carried out in 12 commercial Danish and Austrian dairy farms. On each farm, both behaviour tests were carried out on the same day and repeated within 4-5 days. For each test, cows were tested by both an unfamiliar and a familiar test person (the stock-person) and two observers simultaneously registered the animals' test responses. The inter-observer reliability of both behavioural tests was found to be high (VAA: 2.5-m approach r=0.98 (P<0.001) and touch r=0.97 (P<0.001); AV: Kappa coefficientweighted=0.886 (prevalence index for flight distance>=2 m is 0.636)). The cows at herd level showed shortest latency for touching an unfamiliar test person on the first test day (P=0.006). Further, the AV test had a high test-retest reliability (Kappa coefficientweighted=0.503 (prevalence index for flight distance>=2 m is -0.660)) and results indicated no effect of familiarity of test person (Kappa coefficientweighted=0.463 (prevalence index for flight distance>=2 m is -0.677)). In a second study, the correlation between the two behavioural tests (similar measures) was evaluated. On each of 10 commercial Danish dairy farms with loose housing cubicle systems at four repeated sessions, both behaviour tests were carried out on the same day. For each test cows were tested by the stock-person. The VAA and AV tests at herd level were highly correlated (rs=-0.84; P=0.002). The results suggest that the AV test is valid and applicable for on-farm assessment of the human-animal relationship at herd level. This accounts only partly for the VAA test, which seem to be more unclear regarding motivation for the animals' approach behaviour.

Abstract: From observations of intra-specific social grooming in cattle and studies on human stroking in other species, we hypothesised that cows' reactions to human stroking differ depending on the body regions being stroked. Moreover, we tested, whether cows `reactions to stroking change with the animals' experience of stroking. Sixty dairy cows were stroked in three different body regions, i.e. the withers, W, neck ventral, NV (both licked often in social grooming) and the lateral chest, LC (licked rarely), in a balanced order during 10-min sessions. Behavioural reactions and heart rate during stroking as well as reactions to the human just after stroking were recorded. Two test sessions were carried out with 3 weeks of treatment in-between. During this period, the cows were randomly allocated to four treatment groups: three groups received 5 min of daily stroking in either W, NV or LC and the last one (control group) was exposed to simple human presence. During stroking W and NV, cows showed longer neck stretching and ear hanging than during stroking LC (P < 0.001). Moreover, ear hanging was shown longer when W was stroked as compared to NV (P < 0.001), but neck stretching was observed longer during stroking NV as compared to W only after the treatment period (P < 0.01). In the first test session, more animals showed head shaking and head throwing during stroking W and NV than LC (P < 0.01), whereas in the second test session these behaviours were observed only in few animals. In the first test session heart rate was higher during stroking W than the other body regions (P <= 0.01). In the second test session, the lowest heart rate was found during stroking NV (P < 0.05). Finally, contact with the experimenter following stroking differed for the three body regions stroked in both test sessions (first: P = 0.06, second: P < 0.01); contact was shortest for LC. When comparing both test sessions, stretching the neck and ear hanging increased (P < 0.001), while head shaking and head throwing decreased (P < 0.05); there was no difference for heart rate and contact with the experimenter. The four treatments had no influence on reactions to stroking. To conclude, stroking of body regions often licked during social grooming led to more responses than stroking the one licked rarely. Some reactions, such as stretching the neck, are also observed during social licking. This suggests that cows may in part perceive human stroking of body regions often licked similarly to social licking. This knowledge could be of interest for an improvement in quality of human-cattle interactions.