FEEDLOT MEDICINE 0749-0720/98 $8.00 + .

00

HANDLING METHODS AND

FACILITIES TO REDUCE STRESS
ON CATTLE
Temple Grandin, PhD

Well-designed facilities combined with handlers trained to be care-

ful can reduce stress on cattle and help improve productivity. Research
clearly shows that handling and transport stresses lower both immune
and rumen functions. 3, 7, 20 Research in cattle has found that animals that
become highly excited and agitated in the squeeze chute have lower
weight gains, reduced tenderness, and more borderline dark cutters. 26,27
Furthermore, anecdotal reports from feedyard managers indicate that
quiet handling throughout the yard may reduce respiratory sickness.
Reducing or eliminating the use of electric prods in the processing area
enabled cattle to go back on feed more quickly. Managers also report
that careful handling in the processing area can reduce the incidence of
toe abscesses.
A reduction in psychologic stress probably explains why careful
quiet handling reduces physiologic stress. Psychologic stress is fear
stress. Reactions to handling and restraint are part of the "flight or
fight" response which is a major component of the stress response.
Neuroscientists have mapped the fear circuits in the brain and found
similar mechanisms in all mammals, including humans. 5, 22, 24
If cattle are unaccustomed to frequent handling by people, being
restrained in a squeeze chute is almost as stressful as branding. 21 Re-
straint is a very strong source of stress. For example, one of the highest
cortisol levels recorded in the literature on sheep was induced by
6 hours of restraint. 2 Restraint stress induced cortisol levels up to
110 ng/mL, and normal husbandry procedures such as shearing and

From the Department of Animal Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado

VETERINARY CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA: FOOD ANIMAL PRACTICE

VOLUME 14 • NUMBER 2 • JULY 1998 325

326 GRANDIN

handling in a commercial slaughter plant raised cortisol levels from 61

ng/mL to 73 ng/mL.18,23

EARLY EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING

At the ranch of origin, training cattle to accept handling procedures

and facilities can help to reduce stress. Australian research has shown
that training calves to handling procedures produces adult animals that
are easier to handle. 7 Cattle that have never seen a person on foot are
often difficult to handle at the feedlot. Handlers on a ranch should get
cattle accustomed to people both on horseback and on foot. Cattle
trained by the process of people walking among them on the ranch are
often less stressed at the feedlot. The powerful stress-reducing effects of
training animals to cooperate during veterinary procedures was demon-
strated in research conducted with antelope at the Denver Zoo (Denver,
CO). Trained antelope had almost baseline cortisol (stress hormone)
values during handling and restraint. 16, 17 Obviously, it would not be
practical to completely train cattle, but some simple procedures con-
ducted at the ranch of origin to train the animals and reduce their
flight zones would probably pay for themselves in improved feedlot
performance.

GENETICS, TEMPERAMENT, AND STRESS

Genetic factors have an influence on stress levels. There are geneti-

cally based individual differences in temperament both within and
across breeds of cattle or between different breeds. These genetic factors
influence the reactions of cattle to situations that cause stress. There are
breed-related differences in cortisol levels during handling and re-
straint. 28 Higher cortisol levels are found in animals showing visible
signs of excitement and agitation. Animals with a very excitable temper-
ament are more likely to panic when suddenly confronted with a novel
experience such as an auction or a feedlot processing chute. 9, 15
This is definitely a genetic effect. Genetically excitable cattle may be
calm and well mannered at their home ranch but may become stressed
and agitated in the novel surroundings of a feedlot. Some genetically
excitable cattle may refuse to eat when they are first placed in a feedlot
because they are afraid of the feed truck or they may not drink out of
an automatic water trough that makes noise. Genetically calmer cattle
can usually adapt more quickly to feedlots and begin eating and drink-
ing right away. An individual animal's behavior is affected by both
genetics and previous handling experience. Cattle that have been han-
dled quietly at the ranch of origin are easier to handle in the feedlot
compared with animals that have had previous experience with rough
handling. Cattle that have been subjected to rough handling at the
feedlot are more likely to become agitated at the slaughter plant.
 HANDLING METHODS AND FACILITIES TO REDUCE STRESS ON CATTLE 327

Reducing Noise

Cattle have very sensitive hearing, especially at high frequencies,

and are more sensitive to high-pitched noise than humans. 1 Handling
facilities and equipment should be designed to avoid clanging and
banging, and the hydraulic system on the squeeze chute should be
engineered to be quiet. It is especially important to avoid high-pitched
noise around 6000 to 8000 Hz, because a cow's hearing is the most
sensitive at these frequencies. 19 These sounds may actually hurt the
animal's ears. Loud yelling and constant whistling should be stopped,
and if pneumatic equipment is used, air exhausts should be muffled to
prevent hissing.

Solid Sides Keep Cattle Calmer

Cattle remain calmer in the squeeze chute and single-file chute if

there is a solid barrier which blocks vision between them and the
handler. The single-file chute, loading ramp, crowd pen, and squeeze
chutes should all have solid sides.lO, 13, 14 The crowd gate should also be
solid to prevent cattle from turning back.
Solid sides on handling facilities have been used for years, but until
recently, squeeze chutes have always had open barred sides to provide
access to the animal. Some squeeze chute manufacturers are now equip-
ping squeeze chutes with angled rubber louvres (Fig. 1). The side bars

Figure 1. Rubber louvres mounted on a squeeze chute at a 45 degree angle prevent

incoming cattle from seeing people. The side bars can still be dropped down for access to
the cattle.
328 GRANDIN

can still be dropped down for access to the animal, but an incoming
animal cannot see the handler standing next to the chute. Solid sides on
both the squeeze chute and the lead-up alley also help to prevent
lunging at the headgate. Cattle lunge at the headgate because they are
trying to escape from the handler standing next to the chute.
Covering the open barred sides of a squeeze chute keeps cattle
calmer. The back half of the side closest to the tailgate is the most
important part to cover. An IS-in (45-cm) wide opening can be left near
the headgate so that injections can be given in the cows' necks. Solid
sides on squeeze chutes have the greatest calming effects on wild cattle
with large flight zones.
Cattle also stay calmer if they cannot see other cattle through the
headgate. Figure 2 shows a cow's view of a squeeze chute with solid
sides and a solid sorting gate in the front of the headgate. This is an
ideal system. The animal sees a lighted hole as the way through, but it
is unable to see the operator standing next to the chute.

Figure 2. Cow's eye view of a squeeze chute which has rubber louvres to prevent the
cattle from seeing people beside the chute. This is an ideal set up because the incoming
animal sees a lighted hole for its head but a sorting gate in front of the headgate prevents
it from lunging at the headgate.
 HANDLING METHODS AND FACILITIES TO REDUCE STRESS ON CATTLE 329

Squeeze Chute Adjustment

To prevent excessive pressure from being exerted on the animal, the

pressure relief valve on the squeeze chute must be properly adjusted.
The animal should be able to breathe normally when the squeeze lever
is held down and the hydraulic pump bypasses. Excessive hydraulic
pressure can cause serious injuries such as internal rupture 12 or a bro-
ken pelvis.
Solid sides on the squeeze chute make it possible to hold the
animals with less pressure. There is an optimal pressure for holding an
animal. The animal must be held tightly enough to provide a feeling of
restraint, but excessive pressure causing pain should be avoided. When
cattle struggle in the squeeze chute, many people make the mistake of
squeezing tighter. Sometimes cattle struggle because they are being held
too tightly. Pressure should be released slowly until the animal stops
struggling.
It is also very important that the squeeze chute have a nonslip floor.
Cattle become excited if they slip or feel as if they are going to fall.
There must also be a nonslip floor in front of the squeeze chute. The
best squeeze chutes have two squeeze panels that fold in evenly on both
sides. This keeps the animal in a balanced position. All concrete areas
where cattle walk should be grooved to prevent slipping. A rough
broom finish is not sufficient. A good grooving pattern is 8-in (20-cm)
diamonds made with 1.5 X 1.5-in V grooves.
Squeeze chute adjustments recommended for feedlot use may not
be appropriate for a chute used for pregnancy checking or testing bulls
on a ranch. For these purposes, it is often best to widen the distance
between the squeeze sites at the floor level to allow the animal to stand
in a normal position. To ensure proper adjustment, the hydraulic chute
used in a feedlot should have a hydraulic adjustable bottom.
For feedlot procedures such as restraint for implanting or ultraso-
nography, it is recommended to narrow the space between the squeeze
chute sides at the floor level so that the V shape of the squeeze sides
supports the animal. This helps prevent it from lying down and choking
in a headgate designed to hold the head still for implanting. On ranches
where a wider bottom adjustment of the squeeze chute may be needed,
a straight bar stanchion headgate should be used. This prevents the
animal from choking if it lies down, because the head gate bars do not
press on the carotid arteries of the animal.

Squeeze Chute Operation

Cattle can be seriously injured if they hit the headgate too hard. An
examination of beef cattle carcasses revealed old healed injuries in the
animals' backs and necks. 12 These data were collected in a chute with a
scissors stanchion headgate. Bruises directly attributable to the squeeze
chute ranged from 1.6% to 7.8% of the cattle examined. 4 If squeeze chute
330 GRANDIN

Figure 3. This new rotary style headgate provides a broader contact surface with the
shoulders to help reduce injuries. It consists of two half circle gates which rotate on pivots
located in front of the headgate.

operators learn to slow the animals down before they reach the headgate,
injuries to the neck and shoulders can be reduced. New head gate designs
with a broader contact surface against the animal's neck, which move in
the same direction as cattle movement, may also help reduce neck and
shoulder injuries (Fig. 3).
Neck extender bars on the headgate which hold the head still for
implanting often strike the jaw when the headgate closes. Neck extender
bars can be eliminated on a scissors stanchion head gate if the squeeze
chute operator takes a few extra seconds to back the animal up in the
chute so that its head can be held still for implanting. To obtain maxi-
mum weight gain from an implant, it is important to administer it
properly and to hold the animal's head still, but injuring the animal in
the process is counterproductive.
Sudden jerky motion of a restraint device causes cattle to become
excited, whereas slow steady movements are calming. When a restrainer
with solid sides completely blocking the animals' vision was used, cattle
walked in quietly, and pressure could be applied gradually. A fully
enclosed restrainer in a meat plant used three behavioral principles of
restraint: (1) blocking the animal's vision, (2) slow steady movement of
parts that press against the animal, and (3) optimal pressure. Compared
with the situation often observed in a feedlot processing chute with
open barred sides, the cattle remained very calm. If an animal has to be
repositioned in a squeeze chute, it remains calmer if the pressure is
gradually released. Suddenly releasing pressure is likely to cause agita-
tion.
 HANDLING METHODS AND FACILITIES TO REDUCE STRESS ON CATTLE 331

Electronic Monitoring of Squeeze Chutes

The technology is now available to electronically monitor how hard

cattle hit the headgate. Load cells and strain gauges can be used to
measure the force that the animal exerts on the headgate. They can also
measure struggling. Data from an instrumented squeeze could easily be
fed into the main computer system. The squeeze chute operator and the
other people working the cattle should keep improving their technique
to lower pressure on the headgate and struggling scores. Doing this may
result in better cattle performance, because the stiffness and soreness
caused by the squeeze chute would be reduced. Impact on the headgate
and struggling in the squeeze chute could be easily correlated with
weight gain and feed conversion in feedlots with electronic identifica-
tion. There is still too much emphasis on speed when working cattle.
Electronic monitoring of a squeeze chute would make it possible to put
a dollar value on rough handling in the processing area.

METHODS TO IMPROVE HANDLING

Excessive use of electric prods is a major cause of cattle running

into a squeeze chute and hitting the headgate too hard. Cattle should
walk quietly into the squeeze chute. To induce the animals to move
quietly, they must be kept calm from the time they leave the feedlot pen
until they reach the squeeze chute. Slow careful movement of cattle
from the yards to the processing area can reduce the amount of stress
experienced during restraint. If cattle become excited, it can take up to
30 minutes for their heart rates to return to norma1. 25 Below are some
handling tips that make it possible to process cattle at efficient speeds
and minimize the use of electric prods.
1. Bring cattle to the processing area quietly. Cattle should be moved at a
walk. A lead horse is recommended so that movements through the
alleys are controlled. Excited cattle are more difficult to handle.
2. Never overload the crowd pen. The crowd pen should never be filled
more than three quarters full, and half full is best. Animals' need room
to turn around (Fig. 4).
3. Use the following behavior. The crowd pen should not be filled until
there is space in the single-file chute. Filling the crowd pen when the
single-file chute is full results in cattle turning around. Filling it when the
single-file chute is half empty encourages the animal's natural following
behavior.
4. Use other driving aids. Replace electric prods with other driving aids
such as plastic paddle sticks or a stick with a flag or plastic streamers on
the end. Use these aids to turn and direct the cattle, but do not shake
them violently or make loud noise.
5. Use handler movement patterns. Figures 5 and 6 show handler move-
ment patterns that induce cattle to walk through the chute and enter the
squeeze. Cattle move forward when a handler moving in the opposite
direction passes the point of balance at each animal's shoulders. To move
332 GRANDIN

Figure 4. These handlers quietly move the cattle into the chute. The crowd pen is filled
only half full and the crowdgate is not pushed up against the cattle. A stick with a piece of
plastic on the end is the only driving aid used. Note that the man in the dark shirt is
standing back so that the incoming cattle do not see him.

one animal into the squeeze chute, the handler should stop after he or
she passes the point of balance of the first animal. Handlers also need to
learn the principles of the animal's flight zone. 8 Handlers should only
penetrate the flight zone when they want to make an animal move.
Otherwise, they should back away outside the animal's flight zone.
6. Do not push from behind. The crowd gate should not be pushed up tight

Point of
balance

Figure 5. Handler movement pattern to induce cattle to move forward in a chute. The
handler moves inside the flight zone in the opposite direction of desired movement and
outside the flight zone when moving in the same direction or desired cattle movement.
 HANDLING METHODS AND FACILITIES TO REDUCE STRESS ON CATTLE 333

Figure 6. Handler movement pattern for moving cattle through a curved chute.

against the cattle. For most bunches of cattle, it should be left on the first
notch, and the animals should have room to move. The crowd gate
should be used like the emergency brake on a car. Most cattle enter the
chute by directing them with the flag or paddle. The crowd gate should
only be used on stubborn cattle.
7. Be careful with a lone animal. An isolated animal in a crowd pen may
panic and injure either itself or the handlers. If it becomes agitated and
refuses to enter the chute, it should be let out of the crowd pen and
brought in again with another bunch of animals.

Electric Prod Reduction

The results of a recent survey conducted for the USDA showed that
in three meat plants that had both modern curved chutes and well-
trained employees, 90% to 95% of the cattle could be moved through
the entire system without using electric prods. These plants processed
over 250 animals per hour, and the employees could keep up with the
line. In two plants with poor facilities and rough handling, the percent-
age of animals shocked with an electric prod was reduced from an
average of 83% of the animals down to 17% after only 15 minutes of
instruction. The employees were instructed to stop overfilling the crowd
pen and that they should tap an animal on the rear end before using an
electric prod.
In a feedlot at which the employees worked hard to eliminate
electric prods, only 1% of the animals were prodded. Electric prods were
banned in the crowd pen and were only used if an animal refused to
334 GRANDIN

enter the squeeze chute. The use of the movement patterns shown in
Figures 5 and 6 helped to almost eliminate electric prods. Approximately
2 weeks were required for the feedlot employees to fully learn the new
handling methods. During the first week, handling was less efficient
while the employees were learning. Feedlot managers who are patient
during the learning period are rewarded with less injuries, less sickness,
and better performance.

Distractions That Cause Balking

Quiet cattle handling with a minimum of electric prod use is impos-

sible if cattle are constantly balking. Both visual and auditory distrac-
tions make cattle balk and can ruin the performance of a well-designed
facility.ll By watching the animals when they are calm, it is easy to
detect reflections, shadows, and other distractions that cause balking.
The lead animal looks right at a distraction such as a juggling chain,
which attracts its attention. To reduce the number of distractions that
cause balking, handlers should get down in the chute and look for
distractions at a cow's eye level.

Chute Entrance Too Dark

Cattle often refuse to go into a dark place. For example, if the crowd
pen is in bright sunlight and the single-file chute is inside a building,
this may cause balking, because the chute entrance looks like a black
hole. The wall of a building should never be placed at the junction
between the single-file chute and the crowd pen. Cattle enter a building
more easily if a portion of the single-file chute is outside the building.
Animals tend to voluntarily move from a darker place to a lighter place
but move reluctantly or refuse to move at all into blinding sunlight. At
several feedlots, I have observed that cattle movement in the processing
area was improved by installing translucent skylights and opening up
doors to allow more daylight into the building (Fig. 7). Skylights are
especially important if the crowd pen is inside the building. The ideal
lighting resembles a bright cloudy day and the facility should be free of
harsh shadows.

Light-Dark Contrasts
Shadows and bright patches of sunlight cause cattle to balk. They
also balk at abrupt changes in flooring type or drain gates in the floor.
Facilities should be painted a uniform color, and lighting should be
diffuse to avoid harsh contrasts. Reflections off of shiny metal or puddles
also impede movement. ll These reflections may not be visible until a
person looks through the chute at the cow's eye level. Other contrasts
such as a coat or hat thrown over a fence also cause balking.
 HANDLING METHODS AND FACILITIES TO REDUCE STRESS ON CATTLE 335

Figure 7. The feedlot processing building should have skylights and fully washable walls.
The walls in this processing building are covered with plastic coated panels which are the
same type that are used in food processing plants. Facilities must be designed so that they
are easy to clean.

Moving Objects
A chain hanging down near the entrance of the single-file chute can
cause balking (Fig. 8). At several feedlots, removing a hanging chain

Figure 8. The little piece of chain hanging down in this chute may make cattle balk. The
dangling chain should be removed to facilitate cattle movement through the chute.
336 GRANDIN

improved cattle movement. Cattle also tend to balk at one-way flapper

gates located near the entrance of the single-file chute (see Fig. 8). These
gates should be located at least one body length away from the junction
of the single-file chute and the crowd pen. Cattle movement can be
improved by equipping a one-way gate with a remote control rope so
that it can be held open for incoming cattle. As handling procedures
improve, it may be possible to tie all the one-way gates open. Calm
cattle are less likely to back out of the single-file chute. Too many one-
way flapper gates in a chute can impede movement. Cattle often move
easily if some of the one-way gates are permanently tied open.

Seeing People Up Ahead

Feedlot personnel need to learn to stand in the correct locations so
that approaching cattle do not see them. People should move with slow
deliberate movements. Sudden jerky movements are more likely to cause
balking. Shields should also be installed so that cattle do not see people
up ahead. Moving people usually cause more balking than stationary
people.

PROCESSING FACILITY

Processing Facility Layout

Curved chutes and round crowd pens with solid sides are efficient
for moving cattle, because as the animal goes around the curve, it thinks
it is returning to where it came from. A curved single-file chute also
prevents animals that are standing in the crowd pen from seeing people
by the squeeze chute. Another advantage of a curved single-file chute is
that cattle back up less frequently.
Figure 9 illustrates several different layouts for a curved processing
area. The radius points for the curved single-file chute, round curved
pen, and wide curved lanes are all located along a layout line. The
radius on the round crowd pen should be 12 ft (3.5 m). Crowd pens are
inefficient if they are either too small or too large. Detailed information
on designs is available. 10, 13 Curved systems must be laid out correctly to
work efficiently. One rule of layout is that an animal standing in the
crowd pen must be able to see two to three body lengths up the single-
file chute. The single-file chute must not be bent too sharply where it
joins the crowd pen. If the single-file chute appears to be a dead end,

Figure 9. Curved chutes are more efficient than straight chutes but they must be laid out
correctly. This system is easy to layout along a layout line. The radius of the wide curved
line may vary from 35 ft. (10.66 m) which is shown here, to 15 ft. (4.5 m). The ideal radius
for the single file chute is 16 ft. (5 m) and the crowd pen should have a 12 ft. (3.5 m) radius.
 Feet
NOTE: o 10 20
ALL FENCING ON FORCING PEN, CURVED WIDE
'"-6" LANE AND SINGLE FILE CHUTES ARE SOLID.
[457.2) 1"11111111"111"111
IUNGATE ALL GATES IN FORCING PEN ARE SOLID o 3048 6096
[MillimeterB]
DRAWING SCALE
~
I CURVED, SINGLE
'Ow
0 I
~ ~
.qo
.qo RECOMMENDED: INSIDE RADIUS
0 - .35'-0" MAX. [10.67 M) ~
E:!. - 25'-0" MINIM. [7.62 M] t>..~
. (OV
1\:)'0
I ~
.-
r.-
eo ,/6
~":J
LAYOUT UNE 1 UNE- 1
-- ------

I 12'-0" [3867.80] I
• • ,47'-2" [14370.05] •
1I11III( """ 141'-8" [43179.88] •.-& -)I'" ~

UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECifIED;

I.. ..I ALL DimensionB are in FEET .. INCHES
iz'-o· [3658] with [MiUi7neters] in bra.ckets.
BASIC CA ITLE LA your -4
- WITH OPTIONAL SINGLE FILE CHUTE LAYOUTS IDRAWING: PLAN-04 I
YJ
YJ
....::J Figure 9. See legend on opposite page
338 GRANDIN

the cattle may balk and refuse to enter. The worst design mistake is an
absolute dead end. An animal standing in the crowd pen cannot see
up the chute even when it is turned and oriented towards the chute
entrance.
The wide curved lane with solid sides facilitates animal movement
into the round crowd pen. It works on the same principle as the round
crowd pen and the curved single-file chute. The cattle move easily into
the crowd pen because they think they are going back to where they
came from. The wide curved lane should be filled half full so that
animals can be turned and moved. It works best if the handler works
outside the fence along the inside radius. He or she can either work
from a catwalk or walk at ground level. If the catwalk is omitted, a
slightly lower solid fence can be installed on the inner radius, and the
handler can guide the animals by holding a flag over the solid portion
of the fence.

Sorting Facilities in the Processing Area

Sorting cattle and handling them as individuals is becoming more

and more common in the feedlot industry. Processing facilities should
be designed to have at least a three-way· sort in front of the squeeze
chute. Space should be left in the layout so that additional sorting pens
can be easily added. Figure 10 illustrates a layout that provides enough
space for additional equipment such as a second squeeze chute which
can be used for cattle undergoing ultrasound testing, or as a site for an
automatic grubacide dispenser or other devices that may be developed
in the future. If this layout is used with a single squeeze chute, it should
be moved so that the cattle do not walk through a long straight section
to reach the squeeze chute. The long straight section should be located
after the cattle exit the chute.

Cleaning of Processing Facilities

In large feedlots, the processing building should be designed so that

it is easy to clean. It is best to build a small, easy-to-clean building
around the squeeze chute instead of building a large open-air shed over
the entire chute and crowd pen. These sheds are difficult to keep clean
and they are often filled with birds and rodents.
The building over the squeeze chute should have completely imper-

Figure 10. Feedlot processing layout which has a three-way sort in front of the squeeze
chute. It can be easily converted to a four-way sort by dividing the middle sorting pen. The
curved single file chute, round forcing pen and wide curved lane should have solid sides
to block the animal's vision.
 10"'-3"
F ••'
o 10 20
1""III"I,,"I'1fI1 19';"" [5892.8~
iN
o 3048 6096 cD
cD
[MiUinwm-.] ~
DRAWING SCALE Tn
I
io
N
LA YOUT LINE ,
THIS STRAIGHT SECTION, 20-0" [6096.00),
TO 40-0" [12192.02] MAXIMUM, GO
~T:g~Ni~8~Rg~~i~' G~:ii~CKU'-;~~~~~G
--=-. -- ~ '"-I>"
[457.2)
EQUIPMENT. g I'WIaATE

THIS SECTION IS FOR EXTENDING :::.

THE LENGTH OF STRAIGHT SECTION " _ /
AND MAIN WIDE LANE AREAS. - / ' ' " ,
~-1 w
NOTE: N
.., •
~O;
ALL FENCING ON FORCING PEN, CURVED riDE
LANE AND SINGLE FILE CHUTE ARE SOUD.
,," . o- ..,
cD
~.~,,"--\ " IIJICK
GAle ~ cD'-'
ALL CATES IN FORCING PEN ARE SOLID en _
o 1
~ ..,
'J~7.1S']: N _I
IF A f"-(/" [3657.61] riDE ALLEY IS USED , . .... N
INSTALL f4'-(/" [4267."] CATES ON THE SORTING \. r
PENS .. INTERSECTIONS. ...
... ~
.. .. TnI -
io
....

~WAYGAlE.
rD
SORTING PEN SORTINC PEN SORTING PEN FOR DETAU - SEE ~
SHEET' .I..I&.J!t
PEN HOLDS PEN HOLDS PEN HOLDS 0' !
N ,.,
ONE TRUCKLOAD ONE TRUCKLOAD ONE TRUCKLOAD ...:
~ '8" [457.2)
~J
I
.!. IIANGo'TE •
"0
---
,
!

[12192.00) • I. "0'-0" [12192.00) - .............. . - - -

..... '" 173'-10" [52977.27] .. I

UNLESS OTIIERlrlSK "KaOn · I

CLASSIC FEEDLOT ALL ~ - - in FEET DRAJfINC:
I ~ !
CORRAL LAYOUT ~'=!u~th [JliUimeUn] i
VJ
VJ
'-0 Figure 10. See legend on opposite page
340 GRANDIN

vious washable walls similar to those of a food establishment (see Fig.

7). Corrugated siding installed on the inside does not work well because
wash water wets the building's insulation. Spray-on insulation should
be avoided, because insulation is impossible to clean. The building over
the squeeze should be able to be heated in the winter and cooled in the
summer. If employees are given a comfortable clean environment they
do a better job of administering implants, vaccines, and other products.
The chute outside the building and crowd pen should be equipped
with concrete curbs and gutters so that they can be easily cleaned. Well-
designed curbs keep wash water contained in the facility and divert it
towards a drain. This makes cleaning easier and prevents a muddy mess
from developing around the facility.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Partial funding for research on animal handling was from USDA Agricultural Re-
search Service Project Number 3602-32000-002-08G (Survey of Stunning and Handing in
Federally Inspected Beef Veal, Pork and Sheep Slaughter Plants).

References

1. Ames DR: Sound stress and meat animals. In Proceedings of the International Livestock
Environment Symposium of the American Society of Agricultural Engineering, SP-
0174, 1974, P 324
2. Apple JK, Dikeman ME, Minton JE, et al: Effects of restraint and isolation stress and
epidural blockage on endocrine and blood metabolites states, muscle glycogen deple-
tion and incidence of dark cutting logissimus muscle in sheep. J Anim Sci 71:71-77,
1993
3. Blecha FS, Boyles SL, Riley JG: Shipping suppresses lymphocyte blastogenic responses
in Angus and Brahman X Angus feeder calves. J Anim Sci 59:576-583, 1984
4. Brown H: The effect of restraining fat cattle prior to slaughter and the incidence and
severity of injuries resulting in carcass bruises. In Proceedings of the Western Section
of the American Society of Animal Science, 1981, pp 363-365
5. Davis M: The role of the amygdala in fear and anxiety. Ann Rev Neurosci 15:353-
375, 1992
6. Fordyce G: Weaner training. Queensland Agricultural Journal 113:323-324, 1987
7. Galyean ML, Lee RW, Hubbart MW: Influence of fasting and transit on rumen and
blood metabolites in beef steers. J Anim Sci 53:7-18, 1981
8. Grandin T: Animal handling. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 3:323-338, 1987
9. Grandin T: Assessment of stress during handling and transport. J Anim Sci 75:249-
257, 1997
10. Grandin T: The design and construction of facilities for handling cattle. Livestock
Production Science, 49:103-119, 1997
11. Grandin T: Factors that impede animal movement at slaughter plants. JAVMA 209:757-
759, 1996
12. Grandin T: Good restraining equipment is essential. Vet Med Small Anim Clin 75:1291-
1296, 1980b
13. Grandin T: Handling of facilities and restraint of range cattle. In Grandin T (ed):
Livestock Handling and Transport. Wallingford, England, CAB International, 1993,
pp 75-94
14. Grandin T: Observations of cattle behavior applied to the design of cattle handling
facilities. Applied Animal Ethology 6:19-31, 1980a
 HANDLING METHODS AND FACILITIES TO REDUCE STRESS ON CATTLE 341

15. Grandin T, Dessing MJ: Genetic effects on behaviour during handling In Grandin T
(ed): Genetics and the Behavior of Domestic Animals. San Diego, Academic Press, 1998
16. Grandin T, Irlbeck N, Phillips M: Training antelope to cooperate with veterinary
procedures. In Proceedings of the 30th International Congress of the International
Society of Applied Ethology, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 1996, p 49
17. Grandin T, Rooney MB, Phillips M, et al: Conditioning of nyala (Tragelaphus angasi) to
blood sampling in a crate with positive reinforcement. Zoo Biology 14:261-273, 1995
18. Hargreaves AL, Hutson GD: The stress response of sheep during routine handling
procedures. Appl Anim Behav Sci 26:83-90, 1990
19. Heffner RS, Heffner HE: Hearing in large mammals-horse (Equus caballus) and cattle
(Bos taurus). Behav Neurosci 97:299-309, 1983
20. Kelley KW, Osborn C, Evermann J, et al: Whole blood leukocytes vs. separated
mononuclear cell blastogenis in calves, time dependent changes after shipping. Can J
Comp Med 45:249-258, 1981
21. Lay DC, Friend TH, Randel RD, et al: Behavioral and physiological effects of freeze
and hot iron branding on crossbred cattle. J Anim Sci 70:330-336, 1992
22. LeDoux J: The Emotional Brain. New York, Simon and Schuster, 1996
23. Pearson AJ, Kilbour R, deLangen H, et al: Hormonal responses of lambs to trucking,
handling and electric stunning. New Zealand Society of Animal Production 37:243-
249, 1977
24. Rogan MT, LeDoux JE: Emotion: Systems, cells, synaptic plasticity. Cell 85:469-475,
1996
25. Stermer RA, Camp TH, Stevens DG: Feeder Cattle Stress During Handling and Trans-
portation. American Society of Agricultural Engineering, Technical Paper 81-6001, St
Joseph, MI, 1981
26. Voisinet BD, Grandin T, O'Connor SF, et al: Bos indices-cross feedlot cattle with
excitable temperaments have tough meat and higher incidence of borderline dark
cutters. Meat Sci, 46:367-377, 1997
27. Voisinet BD, Grandin T, Tatum JD, et al: Feedlot cattle with calm temperament have
higher average daily gains than cattle with excitable temperaments. J Anim Sci 75:892-
896, 1997
28. Zavy MT, Juniewicz PE, Phillips WA, et al: Effects of initial restraint, weaning and
transport stress on baseline and ACTH stimulated cortisol responses in beef calves of
different genotypes. Am J Vet Res 53:551-557, 1992

Address reprint requests to

Temple Grandin, PhD
Department of Animal Sciences
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1171