Cargando…

The Stockman’s Scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship

An animal’s action, or inaction, is the direct result of a stockman’s action or inaction. The Stockman’s Scorecard is a novel observation instrument that has been proven to be a valid and reliable tool to measure the quality of beef cattle stockmanship. Specific handler actions have been weighted ba...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yost, John K, Yates, Jarred W, Davis, Matt P, Wilson, Matthew E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7759733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33409461
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tas/txaa175
_version_ 1783627169117765632
author Yost, John K
Yates, Jarred W
Davis, Matt P
Wilson, Matthew E
author_facet Yost, John K
Yates, Jarred W
Davis, Matt P
Wilson, Matthew E
author_sort Yost, John K
collection PubMed
description An animal’s action, or inaction, is the direct result of a stockman’s action or inaction. The Stockman’s Scorecard is a novel observation instrument that has been proven to be a valid and reliable tool to measure the quality of beef cattle stockmanship. Specific handler actions have been weighted based on their perceived negative relationship to cattle stress from handling. The purpose of this article is to 1) document the initial use of the scorecard in a beef cattle feedlot setting and 2) provide further support to its validity by establishing an association with other quantitative and qualitative means of evaluating stockmanship. The Scorecard was used at 39 beef feedlots in Texas between March 2018 and April 2019. Eighty-four stockman were observed, and the average score received was 84.5 (SD = 14.73, range = 20 to 100). The most frequent mistakes observed were as follows: fills crowd pen/tub over half full (n = 39), slow to remove pressure (n = 29), uses unnecessary noise (n = 25), stands in front and taps rear (n = 24), and fails to regulate animal flow through a pinch point (n = 22). A strong negative association (ρ = −0.51) was found between the points deducted from the Noise and Physical Contact theme of the Scorecard and the number of animals touched with an electric prod from the BQA Feedyard Assessment. Moderate negative associations were found between the Scorecard final score and the number of animals that vocalize in the chute prior to procedures (ρ = −0.31). Those stockmen that scored above average on the Scorecard were qualitatively observed to be calm and quiet while working with the cattle (Kappa = 0.44). The qualitative disposition of cattle had little effect on the final score of stockmen using the Scorecard (Kappa = 0.17). The use of the Scorecard in a feedlot setting has demonstrated that as stockman scores decrease, there is an increase in the number of negative actions toward cattle and a negative behavioral response of the cattle themselves. Establishment of an association between a stockman’s score using the Stockman’s Scorecard and the animal-based observations from the BQA Feedyard Assessment further strengthens the validity of the Stockman’s Scorecard as a tool to measure the quality of beef cattle stockmanship. The Scorecard has application as a tool to identify specific stockmanship deficiencies in order to target stockmanship training.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7759733
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77597332021-01-05 The Stockman’s Scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship Yost, John K Yates, Jarred W Davis, Matt P Wilson, Matthew E Transl Anim Sci Animal Behavior and Cognition An animal’s action, or inaction, is the direct result of a stockman’s action or inaction. The Stockman’s Scorecard is a novel observation instrument that has been proven to be a valid and reliable tool to measure the quality of beef cattle stockmanship. Specific handler actions have been weighted based on their perceived negative relationship to cattle stress from handling. The purpose of this article is to 1) document the initial use of the scorecard in a beef cattle feedlot setting and 2) provide further support to its validity by establishing an association with other quantitative and qualitative means of evaluating stockmanship. The Scorecard was used at 39 beef feedlots in Texas between March 2018 and April 2019. Eighty-four stockman were observed, and the average score received was 84.5 (SD = 14.73, range = 20 to 100). The most frequent mistakes observed were as follows: fills crowd pen/tub over half full (n = 39), slow to remove pressure (n = 29), uses unnecessary noise (n = 25), stands in front and taps rear (n = 24), and fails to regulate animal flow through a pinch point (n = 22). A strong negative association (ρ = −0.51) was found between the points deducted from the Noise and Physical Contact theme of the Scorecard and the number of animals touched with an electric prod from the BQA Feedyard Assessment. Moderate negative associations were found between the Scorecard final score and the number of animals that vocalize in the chute prior to procedures (ρ = −0.31). Those stockmen that scored above average on the Scorecard were qualitatively observed to be calm and quiet while working with the cattle (Kappa = 0.44). The qualitative disposition of cattle had little effect on the final score of stockmen using the Scorecard (Kappa = 0.17). The use of the Scorecard in a feedlot setting has demonstrated that as stockman scores decrease, there is an increase in the number of negative actions toward cattle and a negative behavioral response of the cattle themselves. Establishment of an association between a stockman’s score using the Stockman’s Scorecard and the animal-based observations from the BQA Feedyard Assessment further strengthens the validity of the Stockman’s Scorecard as a tool to measure the quality of beef cattle stockmanship. The Scorecard has application as a tool to identify specific stockmanship deficiencies in order to target stockmanship training. Oxford University Press 2020-09-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7759733/ /pubmed/33409461 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tas/txaa175 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Animal Behavior and Cognition
Yost, John K
Yates, Jarred W
Davis, Matt P
Wilson, Matthew E
The Stockman’s Scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship
title The Stockman’s Scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship
title_full The Stockman’s Scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship
title_fullStr The Stockman’s Scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship
title_full_unstemmed The Stockman’s Scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship
title_short The Stockman’s Scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship
title_sort stockman’s scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship
topic Animal Behavior and Cognition
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7759733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33409461
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tas/txaa175
work_keys_str_mv AT yostjohnk thestockmansscorecardquantitativeevaluationofbeefcattlestockmanship
AT yatesjarredw thestockmansscorecardquantitativeevaluationofbeefcattlestockmanship
AT davismattp thestockmansscorecardquantitativeevaluationofbeefcattlestockmanship
AT wilsonmatthewe thestockmansscorecardquantitativeevaluationofbeefcattlestockmanship
AT yostjohnk stockmansscorecardquantitativeevaluationofbeefcattlestockmanship
AT yatesjarredw stockmansscorecardquantitativeevaluationofbeefcattlestockmanship
AT davismattp stockmansscorecardquantitativeevaluationofbeefcattlestockmanship
AT wilsonmatthewe stockmansscorecardquantitativeevaluationofbeefcattlestockmanship