Radio-frequency identification tracking shows individual free-range laying hens vary in range use, with some never going outdoors. The range is typically more environmentally complex, requiring navigation to return to the indoor resources. Outdoor-preferring hens may have improved spatial abilities compared to indoor-preferring hens. Experiment 1 tested 32 adult ISA Brown hens in a T-maze learning task that showed exclusively-indoor birds were slowest to reach the learning success criterion (p < 0.05). Experiment 2 tested 117 pullets from enriched or non-enriched early rearing treatments (1 pen replicate per treatment) in the same maze at 15–16 or 17–18 weeks. Enriched birds reached learning success criterion faster at 15–16 weeks (p < 0.05) but not at 17–18 weeks (p > 0.05), the age that coincided with the onset of lay. Enriched birds that were faster to learn the maze task showed more range visits in the first 4 weeks of range access. Enriched and non-enriched birds showed no differences in telencephalon or hippocampal volume (p > 0.05). Fear may reduce spatial abilities but further testing with more pen replicates per early rearing treatments would improve our understanding of the relationship between spatial cognitive abilities and range use.

Enrichment during the indoor rearing of pullets destined for free-range systems may optimize pullet development including increasing motivated natural behaviors (termed ‘positive behaviors’) including foraging, dust bathing and chick play. Hy-Line Brown® chicks (n = 1700) were floor-reared indoors across 16 weeks with three enrichment treatments (n = 3 pens/treatment): (1) standard control, (2) weekly novel objects—‘novelty’, (3) perching/navigation structures—‘structural’. At 16 weeks, pullets (n = 1386) were transferred to nine identical pens within rearing treatments with outdoor range access from 25 to 65 weeks. Video cameras recorded the pullet pens, adult indoor pens, and outside range. During rearing, observations of play behavior (running, frolicking, wing-flapping, sparring) in chicks at 2, 4 and 6 weeks (total of 432 thirty-second scans: 16 observations × 3 days × 9 pens) showed no overall effect of rearing treatment (p = 0.16). At 11 and 14 weeks only the ‘novelty’ hens were observed to increase their foraging across age (p = 0.009; dust bathing: p = 0.40) (total of 612 thirty-second scans per behavior: 17 observations × 2 days × 2 age points × 9 pens). Observations of adult hens at 26, 31, 41, 50, 60 and 64 weeks showed that the structural hens exhibited overall more dust bathing and foraging than the control hens (both p < 0.04) but both novelty and/or structural hens showed small increases depending on the behavior and location (total of 4104 scans per behavior: 17 observations × 2 days × 6 age points × 9 pens × 2 locations = 3672 + an additional 432 observations following daylight saving). Across age, adult hens differed in the degree of dust bathing performed inside or outside (both p ≤ 0.001) and foraging outside (p < 0.001) but not inside (p = 0.15). For litter-reared pullets, additional enrichments may result in some long-term increases in positive behaviors.

In late 2008 a survey of beef cattle producers was undertaken to gain a clearer picture of how, why and when producers buy, sell, and move cattle, provide an insight into what influences on-farm decision making and to assist in the development of a simulation model for (modelling) cattle movements. The survey was targeted at beef producers in central and southern inland Queensland and north-western New South Wales. The survey was part of a project funded by the Federal Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. The project focussed on utilising animal movement data from the National Livestock Identification System for 2006 and 2007 in the development of a national-scale spatial simulation model that would be used by national and state animal health agencies as a decision-support tool to assess and manage emerging animal disease threats. Major highlights arising from the study were that over half of the respondents were beef-only enterprises, with the remainder mixed enterprises (sheep and or cropping), and were predominantly in the breeding and growing production sector. The number of cattle movements, for farms having greater than 50 head, was not related to herd size. The most common movements other than buying or selling cattle were to a property owned by the producer close by (32%) or between properties for agistment (20%). Most types of cattle (cows, bulls, steers, etc) were sold within a few hundred kilometres of the property. The two main factors influencing when to sell cattle were reaching a target weight or matching a buyer/processor’s specification. Pasture availability, current prices and availability of suitable stock were also important factors.