Search

Public interest is stimulating farming industries to improve animal welfare in production systems. Indoor housing of ruminants has received scrutiny because of perceived intensiveness and lack of naturalness. Animal welfare has traditionally focused on health benefits (e.g. bedding management and reducing disease) and reducing negative experiences (e.g. painful husbandry practices). Recent attention to animals having "a life worth living" extends expectations to provide increased care and opportunities for positive experiences and natural behaviors. Although not all natural behaviors necessarily contribute to improved welfare, we present evidence for why many are important, and for how they can be promoted in commercial systems. Worldwide, commercial dairy goats (Capra hircus) are frequently housed in large open barns with space to move and soft bedding for lying; however, this is not sufficient to promote the range of natural behaviors of goats, which in turn suggests that commercial housing could be improved. The basis for this thinking is from the range of behaviors expressed by the Capra genus. Collectively, these species have evolved cognitive and behavioral strategies to cope with harsh and changing environments, as well as variable and limited vegetation. The rocky and often steep terrain that goats inhabit allows for predator avoidance and access to shelter, so it is not surprising that domesticated goats also seek out elevation and hiding spaces; indeed, their hoof structure is designed for the movement and grip in such rugged environments. The browsing techniques and flexibility in diet selection of wild, feral and extensively managed goats, appears to be equally important to housed goats, highlighting the need for more complexity in how and what goats are fed. Goats naturally live in small, dynamic groups, governed by complex social structures in which horns play a strong role. Commercial housing systems should consider the benefits of more natural-sized social groups and revisit the rationale behind horn removal. We suggest that cognitive stimulation is a potential welfare improvement for goats in commercial settings. Goat cognitive abilities, which enabled success in complex and variable social and physical environments, are unchallenged in uniform environments, potentially leading to negative affective states. We make suggestions for housing improvements that could be readily adopted into current systems without compromising production efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Goats are browsers and select vegetation at various heights when foraging. On commercial farms, dairy goats are typically fed from low-level feed bunks. The objective of this study was to determine how feed intake and feeding behavior vary when goats are offered feed at variable heights, with the potential of evaluating the benefits of offering an elevated feeder to dairy goats. Thirteen Saanen X dairy goats were housed in a home pen with a lying area of wood shavings, where they were pre-exposed for 24 d to 3 feeder heights designed to result in differences in head height while feeding: floor level (head lowered relative to body), head level (head level relative to body), and elevated level (head and neck angled upward). Nine groups of 3 goats each were randomly selected and housed for 24 h in a test pen identical to the home pen except that it contained 1 of each of the 3 feeder heights. Each feeder contained ad libitum chopped alfalfa silage and a top-dressed corn-based supplement, refreshed twice daily. Refusals from inside and under each feeder were weighed to calculate intake. Feed intake increased with increasing feeder height (mean ± SE; 0.18, 0.29, and 0.34 ± 0.04 kg of DM/goat for floor-level, head-level, and elevated-level feeders, respectively). Total feeding time did not vary with feeder height, but feeding rate tended to be faster at the elevated-level feeder (14.5 ± 2.1 g of DM/min) compared with head-level (9.2 ± 2.3 g of DM/min) and floor-level (8.9 ± 2.1 g of DM/min) feeders. Goats visited the floor-level feeder (36.4 ± 8.4 visits/goat) less than the head-level (79.4 ± 8.4 visits/goat) and elevated-level (74.8 ± 8.4 visits/goat) feeders. The number of displacements per minute of feeding time (physical removal of another goat from the feeding place) was greater at the elevated-level feeder (0.46 ± 0.06 displacements/min) compared with the floor-level feeder (0.23 ± 0.06 displacements/min) and tended to differ from the head-level feeder (0.27 ± 0.06 displacements/min). We conclude that goats eat more from an elevated feeder and compete more to access this feeder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Calf housing often only meets the basic needs of calves, but there is a growing interest in providing enrichments. This study described the behaviour of calves when they were given the opportunity to interact with two commonly available enrichment items. Female and male calves (approximately 11 days old) were pair-housed in 8 identical pens fitted with an automated brush and a hanging rope. Frequency and duration of behaviours were recorded on 3 separate days (from 12:00 until 08:00 the following day. Calves spent equal time using the brush and rope (27.1 min/day), but there was less variation in the use of the brush as opposed to the rope (coefficient of variation, CV: 23 vs. 78%, respectively). Calves had more frequent (94 bouts, CV: 24%) and shorter (17.8 s/bout, CV: 24%) brush use bouts compared to fewer (38 bouts, CV: 43%) and longer (38.3 s/bout, CV: 53%) rope use bouts. There was a diurnal pattern of use for both items. Frequency of play was similar to rope use, but total time playing was 8% of rope and brush use. Variability among calves suggested that individual preference existed; however, the social dynamics of the pair-housed environment were not measured and therefore could have influenced brush and rope use. Multiple enrichment items should be considered when designing improvements to calf housing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]