1. Introduction
Recent developments in European husbandry systems for domestic ungulates increas- ingly lead the farmers to rear their animals in free-stables or outdoors. These changes are
associated with an increase in the number of animals per caretaker. The resulting lack of familiarity of animals towards humans can lead to difficulties in handling, which, in
large animals, can present a safety risk both for the stockperson and the animal Ž
. Grandin, 1993 . Moreover, the welfare and performances of animals can be adversely
Ž .
affected O’Connor et al., 1985; Fordyce et al., 1988; Hemsworth and Barnett, 1991 . In order to improve cattle handling, several methods have been set up to evaluate
Ž .
their reactions to handling, also called docility for review, Burrow, 1997 . Some of Ž
. these methods are based on a restraint of the animal in a crush Grandin, 1993 . In other
methods, the animal is unconstrained; one of these methods, the docility test, has been Ž
. developed by Boivin et al. 1992b . The application of the docility test has provided
Ž information on the influence of the previous experience of the animal Boivin et al.,
. Ž
. 1992a,b; 1994 and genetic background Le Neindre et al., 1995 on the reactivity of
cattle to humans. Cattle responses to handling are probably not only a reaction to human, but also
Ž depend on other elements of the situation such as social context, physical environment,
. and the novelty of the situation . In particular, the social context may be important for
cattle, which, in common with other species of domestic ungulates, are very gregarious. Several studies have demonstrated how the social environment can influence the
Ž .
responses of farm animals to their environment for review, Nicol, 1995 . The mere presence of peers reduces stress responses of cattle to potentially fear-eliciting situa-
tions; the distress behaviour of Aubrac heifers in response to a novel object is less when Ž
. peers are in sight Boissy and Le Neindre, 1990 . Aubrac heifers exposed to a novel
Ž environment in groups of four show less escape attempts than do isolated ones Veissier
. and Le Neindre, 1992 . Since handling commonly induces fear reactions in farm animals
Ž .
Hemsworth and Barnett, 1987 , it can be supposed that the presence or absence of the social group has an effect on the ease with which animals can be handled. Nevertheless,
no work has been done with cattle to determine whether the presence of peers during handling can modify the animal responses to the human.
The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the presence or absence of familiar peers influences cattle reactions during the docility test. The experiment was
conducted with beef calves, which were subjected to docility tests with or without visual contact with familiar peers.
2. Animals, materials and methods
Kategori