Similar to the situation in many countries, the dairy industry in Canada is challenged by the need to adapt to changing societal demands. An industry-led initiative (Dairy Farmers of Canada's proAction Initative, known as proAction) was developed to respond to this challenge, providing mandatory national standards for on-farm practices. Farmers are more likely to follow such standards if they are aligned with their values and beliefs. The aim of this study was to better understand farmers' perspectives on the future of the Canadian dairy industry, with a focus on the role of mandatory policies such as those related to proAction. Seven focus groups were conducted, with discussions based on the principles of appreciative inquiry. Participants were each asked to write down key words that represent the "must-haves" on dairy farms in 20 yr from now. Although participants were encouraged to focus on aspects directly related to animal care, all answers were accepted. Key words were then used to facilitate a discussion and elicit ideas on how to achieve these must-haves. Particular focus was on the direction that participants believed policy should take to meet these goals. Explorative qualitative analysis was used for the written key words, and transcripts of the audiorecorded focus group discussions were analyzed using thematic analysis. Examples of farm-specific considerations that were raised as future must-haves of animal care on dairy farms included cow comfort, employee management, responsible health management, and use of advanced thechnologies. Participants agreed that objectives can only be achieved through collaboration among farmers and between farmers and researchers, and they regarded citizen education as a promising approach to align differing expectations of the public and farmers. Citizen trust in the dairy industry was considered a must-have, and participants believed that one of the benefits of mandatory policies for animal care is their potential to increase trust. These results may help guide the development of new animal care policies and increase understanding of the perceived legitimacy of new policies by dairy farmers.
Tail docking and ear cropping are two surgical procedures commonly performed on many dog breeds. These procedures are classified as medically unnecessary surgeries whose purpose is primarily cosmetic. Available attitude research surrounding these controversial practices has been limited to surveys of veterinarians and dog breeders familiar with both practices. The aim of this project was to: 1) assess public awareness of tail docking and ear cropping, 2) determine whether physical alteration of a dog affects how the dog, and 3) owner are perceived. In Experiment 1 awareness was measured using a combination of both explicit and implicit measures. We found that 42% of participants (n = 810) were unable to correctly explain the reason why tail docked and ear cropped dogs had short ears and tails. Similarly, an implicit measure of awareness (‘nature vs nurture task’), found that the majority of participants believed short tails and erect ears were a consequence of genetics rather than something the owner or breeder had done. The results obtained in Experiment 2 (n = 392) provide evidence that ear cropped and tail docked dogs are perceived differently than an identical dog in its ‘natural’ state. Modified dogs were perceived as being more aggressive, more dominant, less playful and less attractive than natural dogs. Experiment 3 (n = 410) is the first evidence that owners of modified dogs are perceived as being more aggressive, more narcissistic, less playful, less talkative and less warm compared to owners of natural dogs. Taken together, these results suggest that although a significant proportion of subjects appear unaware of the practices of tail docking and ear cropping in dogs, these procedures have significant impacts on how modified dogs and their owners are perceived by others.
Many dairy cows become ill in the weeks after calving, a period when cows also experience numerous environmental and physiological changes. Most research on this transition period has focused on biological factors including nutrition, immunology, and physiology, but little work has examined sociological factors affecting how farmers care for their cows. The aim of the current study was to describe barriers preventing the adoption of more successful management practices. We used individual and group interviews, paired with photo elicitation, to understand the perspectives of farmers (n = 11) and veterinarians (n = 8) living and working in the lower Fraser Valley of British Columbia, Canada. Participants viewed transition period management as difficult. The lack of a single definition of the transition period emerged as one barrier to improvement; providing a clear and consistent definition for the transition period may be an important first step to improved practices on dairy farms. Participants also identified other barriers hindering improvement, including variation in both farmer attitude toward transition cow management and veterinarian involvement, stocking density of cows, and nutrition management. Barriers to improved practices varied by farm, suggesting that a tailored approach is required to make meaningful change.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.