The relationships between characteristics of milking sheds and the attitudes to dairy cows, working conditions, and quality of life of dairy farmers
C. J. Maller A , P. H. Hemsworth A B , K. T. Ng C , E. J. Jongman B , G. J. Coleman C and N. A. Arnold AA Animal Welfare Science Centre, University of Melbourne, 600 Sneydes Rd, Werribee, Vic. 3030, Australia.
B Animal Welfare Science Centre, Department of Primary Industries, 600 Sneydes Rd, Werribee, Vic. 3030, Australia.
C Animal Welfare Science Centre, Department of Psychology, Monash University, Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australia.
Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 56(4) 363-372 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR04148
Submitted: 22 June 2004 Accepted: 27 January 2005 Published: 26 April 2005
Abstract
This study consisted of a survey of dairy farmers and their milking sheds at 198 Victorian dairy farms to examine the relationships between physical features in the milking shed and a number of job-related characteristics of the farmer, such as attitudes to handling cows and job satisfaction. Furthermore, farmers’ opinions of the effects of specific design features of the milking shed on cow behaviour were sought. A further objective of this survey was to use the relationships between shed characteristics and job-related characteristics of the farmer to identify, for future research, possible features of the milking shed that may affect cow behaviour.
There was substantial variation in both the behavioural beliefs of farmers about cow behaviour in the milking shed and reports by farmers on comfort and working conditions in the dairy, indicating that considerable opportunities exist to improve these key job-related characteristics. A principal component analysis (PCA) of the responses to the questions on job-related characteristics of the farmer identified 6 factors: 2 of the factors identified were related to behavioural beliefs by farmers about cow behaviour (labelled ‘Cow Movement’ and ‘Cow Behaviour’); one of the factors related to comfort of the farmer in the shed (labelled ‘Operator Comfort’); and 3 of the factors related to aspects of the quality of life of the farmer (labelled ‘Workload’, ‘Farmer Mood’, and ‘Job Characteristics’). Positive beliefs about both cow movement (factor called Cow Movement) and cow behaviour (factor called Cow Behaviour) were correlated with farmers being more positive about working in the dairy (factor called Operator Comfort; P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively) and the characteristics of the job (factor called Job Characteristics; P < 0.01). These relationships suggest that improvements in cow behaviour may lead to improvements in both job satisfaction and the quality of life of the farmer. Furthermore, regression analysis revealed that a number of the shed features, such as height of the breast rail, presence of stall gates, length and width of the platform and solid side on first milking bail, were significant predictors of one or more of these 6 PCA factors. Although these results may not reflect causal relationships, these relationships between shed characteristics and a number of job-related characteristics of the farmer highlight the potential importance of shed design to both the cow and the farmer and provide a valuable guide in identifying features of milking sheds that require future examination as to their effects on cow behaviour.
Additional keywords: facility design, behaviour, job-related characteristics.
Acknowledgments
We thank the collaborating farmers and acknowledge the technical support of B. Schirmer and S. Borg. The research was supported by a grant from the Australian Dairy Research and Development Corporation.
Armstrong DV, Smith JF, Gamroth MJ
(1994) Mixing parlor performance in the United States. ‘Dairy Systems for the 21st Century—Proceedings of the 3rd International Dairy Housing Conference’. Orlando, FL. (Ed. R Bucklin )
pp. 59–69. (American Society of Agricultural Engineers: Michigan)
Barnett JB,
Coleman GJ,
Hemsworth PH,
Newman EA,
Fewings-Hall S, Ziini C
(1999) Tail docking and beliefs about the practice in the Victorian Dairy Industry. Australian Veterinary Journal 77, 742–747.
| PubMed |
Beveridge LM
(1996) Studies on the influence of human characteristics and training on stockperson work performance and farm animal behaviour. PhD thesis, University of Aberdeen.
Breuer K,
Hemsworth PH,
Barnett JL,
Matthews LR, Coleman GJ
(2000) Behavioural response to humans and the productivity of commercial dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 66, 273–288.
| Crossref |
PubMed |
GMAC Consulting Pty Ltd
(1999) Milk harvesting information needs analysis. Report to the Australian Milk Harvesting Program (AMHP), pp.59.
Grandin T
(1980) Observations of cattle behavior applied to the design of cattle-handling facilities. Applied Animal Ethology 6, 19–31.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Grandin T
(2000) Handling facilities and restraint of range cattle. ‘Livestock handling and transport’. (Ed. T Grandin)
pp. 103–125. (CABI Publishing: New York)
Gray, JA (1987).
Hemsworth, PH ,
and
Coleman, GJ (1998).
Hemsworth PH,
Coleman GJ,
Barnett JL,
Borg S, Dowling S
(2002) The effects of cognitive behavioral intervention on the attitude and behavior of stockpersons and the behavior and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 80, 68–78.
| PubMed |
Hinde, RA (1970).
Levens, M ,
and
Singer, G (1987).
Rushen J,
Munksgaard L,
Marnet PG, DePassille AM
(2001) Human contact and the effects of acute stress on cows at milking. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 73, 1–14.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
Rushen J,
de Passille AMB, Munksgaard L
(1999) Fear of people by cows and effects on milk yield, behaviour and heart rate at milking. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 720–727.
| PubMed |
