Influence of neck-rail placement on free-stall preference, use, and cleanliness

Three experiments examined how the presence of a neck rail at different heights and locations influenced dairy cattle behavior and stall cleanliness. Experiment 1 compared 4 levels of neck-rail height (102, 114, and 127 cm and no neck rail; presented at 160 or 180 cm from the curb) in a preference test. Cows (n = 10) showed no consistent preference based on neck-rail height, regardless of the horizontal position of the neck rail. When cows were restricted to each treatment in turn, however, time spent standing fully (with all 4 hooves) in the stall was least in the stall with the lowest neck rail (mean, 22 min/24 h) and was greatest in the stall with no neck rail (mean, 83 min/24 h). A second experiment examined the effect of a neck rail placed at 3 distances from the curb (140, 175, and 233 cm) when height was held constant (131 cm; n = 12). Time spent standing fully in the stall was least when the neck rail was close to the curb (140 cm; mean, 11 min/24 h) and was greatest when the neck rail was furthest from the curb (233 cm; mean, 86 min/24 h). When the neck rail was far from the curb, the cows were more likely to soil the stall by defecating while standing fully in the stall. Experiment 3 compared soiling of the stall by 14 cows with and without a neck rail at a height of 124.5 cm. When the neck rail was removed, cows were more than twice as likely to soil the stall by defecating while standing fully in the stall compared with when the neck rail was present (1.3 vs. 0.5 defecations/24 h). Thus, restrictive neck-rail placement prevents cows from standing in stall, but helps keep stalls clean. Access to more comfortable flooring surfaces outside the stall may help mitigate the negative effects of restrictive neck rails.     

Flooring in front of the feed bunk affects feeding behavior and use of freestalls by dairy cows

In 2 experiments we assessed how preferences, time budgets, and feeding behavior of dairy cows change in response to flooring surfaces in front of the feed bunk. In Experiment 1, 12 nonlactating dairy cattle were individually housed with access to 2 standing platforms filled with either concrete or sawdust. In Experiment 2, 24 nonlactating dairy cattle were given access to either concrete or Animat rubber flooring in front of the feed bunk. In Experiment 1, cows preferred the sawdust to the concrete flooring. In both experiments, cows provided with a softer floor in front of the feed bunk spent more time standing near the feed bunk without eating (Experiment 1: 67 vs. 40 min/d on sawdust vs. concrete, respectively, SEM = 5.6 min/d; Experiment 2: 176 vs. 115 min/d on Animat vs. concrete, respectively, SEM = 20.5 min/d) compared with when they were kept on concrete. The increased time spent at the feed bunk was due to a combination of more frequent eating and standing bouts, indicating that cows were more willing to move on nonconcrete flooring. Total time spent eating was significantly greater on the softer floor in Experiment 2, but not in Experiment 1 (Exp. 1: 289 vs. 275 min/d on sawdust and concrete, respectively, SEM = 7.3 min/d; Exp. 2: 330 vs. 289 min/d on Animat and concrete, respectively, SEM = 15.4), although feed intake was increased on the sawdust treatment in Experiment 1. Cows spent significantly more time lying in the feed alley when the flooring was rubber (219 vs. 53 min/d on Animat and concrete, SEM = 53.6 min/d), perhaps because the lying area in Experiment 2 was inadequate. In conclusion, cows prefer to stand on softer flooring in front of the feed bunk, and are more willing to move on and spend more time standing in front of the feed bunk when provided with softer flooring. These results indicate that cows find softer flooring surfaces more comfortable to stand on than concrete, and highlight the importance of evaluating the comfort of the entire facility.     

Refinement of international recommendations for cubicles,based on the identification of associations between cubicle characteristics and dairy cow welfare measures

Maladjusted cubicles for dairy cattle may cause increased skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. The International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering has produced several recommendations for cubicle design, but a previous study showed that not all of them seem efficient. Here, we aim to refine and complete these recommendations. We collected data on 76 dairy farms (2,404 cows). We modeled the association between combinations of cubicle properties (e.g., type of bedding litter) and dimensions (e.g., cubicle width) relative to cow size, and prevalence of cow skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. We used weighted multivariable logistic regression models to predict the presence of skin alteration on the carpus; the neck, shoulder, and back; the flank, side, and udder; and the tarsus or hindquarters. We also evaluated the presence of lameness as well as the dirtiness of the lower hind legs including hocks; the hindquarters, upper hind legs, and flank; the cow rear including tail; and the udder. The risk factors highlighted led us to recommend (1) position cubicles in a way that leaves more than 1 m of clearance from any obstacle in front of the cubicle; (2) if there is an obstacle on the lateral plane (i.e., where the cubicle partition is) in front ahead of the cow, put the obstacle in front of the fore knees; (3) if there is an obstacle in front of the cow on the median plane (e.g., neck or front rail), the position the obstacle between 1.25 and 1.5 of the cow length from the curb and between 1.0 and 1.25 of its height; (4) use curb height between 0.11 and 0.15 of cow height with no sharp edges on the curb; (5) use round or at least has no sharp edges brisket board; (6) use a stone-free soil instead of concrete or use a mattress thicker than 1 cm, with microrelief, and a soft fixing area at the curb, (7) litter with straw (rather than nothing or sawdust) and keep it dry. This risk factor analysis should be followed by experiments in controlled environments to further validate these conclusions and used to update the International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering recommendations.     

Introducing heifers to freestall housing

Little work to date has assessed how dairy cattle respond when first introduced to freestall housing. In this study we carried out 2 experiments. The aim of experiment 1 was to assess the behavioral responses of naïve heifers to pens fitted with freestalls. Holstein heifers (n = 7 groups, each containing 3 heifers, 3 mo of age), with no previous experience with freestalls, were initially housed on a sawdust bedded pack and fed through a fixed feed barrier for at least 6 wk and then moved to a freestall pen fitted with a head-locking feed barrier. When kept on the bedded pack, the heifers’ lying time averaged 14.2 h/d. On the day heifers were moved to the freestall pen, lying times declined by 2.9 h, but recovered on the following days. The time spent lying down on the barn floor (i.e., outside the lying area) increased by 2.5 h on the day heifers were introduced to freestalls and remained higher during subsequent days. Heifers spent 46 min/d less time feeding on the day they were switched to the head-locking barrier, but recovered on the following days. In experiment 2 we assessed the behavioral responses of naïve heifers introduced to pens fitted with freestalls with or without a neck rail. Holstein heifers (n = 12 groups, each containing 2 heifers, 3 mo of age), with no previous experience with freestalls, were initially housed on a sawdust bedded pack and then moved to a freestall pen with or without neck rails. Heifers spent 4.2 h/d less time lying down in the 24 h following introduction into the freestall pen; the neck rail treatment had no effect on lying time but heifers spent more time standing with just their front 2 hooves in the stall when a neck rail was in the stall. In summary, lying and feeding behavior of naïve heifers is altered following introduction to new housing.     

Dairy cow trade-off preference for 2 different lying qualities: Lying surface and lying space

Lying down is an important behavior for cows, contributing to their health and welfare. With dairy cows being housed for increasingly longer periods, if not year-round, it is important to ensure that dairy cow lying comfort is not compromised when they are housed. The aim of this study was to assess cow preference for 2 different qualities of lying area that appear to be important to cows—surface type and an open lying space—to better understand how to optimize lying comfort for cows when housed. Twenty-four Holstein dairy cows were used during the study, which took place in Scotland from July to November 2018. The study consisted of 6 experimental periods, each lasting a total of 21 d. Cows were tested 4 at a time and individually housed in their own test pen. Each pen had 3 lying surfaces: sand, mattress, and straw (2.4 m × 2.4 m each) with a freestall in the middle of each, which could be removed. Cows were given access to one surface at a time (training period) with a freestall for 2 d, and then given a choice of all 3 surfaces for 2 d. When given the choice with freestalls in position, cows spent, on average, the largest amount of their lying time on straw (46.6 ± 7.8%) followed by mattress (44.3 ± 12.4%). Freestalls were then removed and the training and choice phase was repeated on the following day, with cows, on average, spending the most time lying on straw (64.4 ± 7.2%). Finally, a freestall was refitted onto each cow's most preferred surface and the cows were given a choice between lying on their most preferred surface with a freestall (P1 + freestall) or on their second or third preferred surface without a freestall (P2 + open and P3 + open, respectively) for 3 d. During this final trade-off stage, of the 19 cows for which data were available, 14 cows chose to give up the opportunity to lie down on their most preferred surface to have more space on P2 + open and P3 + open, 3 cows chose to lie down on P1 + freestall, and 2 cows made no clear choice. Overall, cows spent the largest amount of their total lying time on their second most preferred surface as an open lying space (65.7 ± 6.9%) compared with their preferred surface with a freestall (20.5 ± 5.9%) and their third preferred surface as an open lying space (13.8 ± 3.7%). The results indicate that when lying down, these dairy cows value an open lying space more than the lying surface.     

Milk- and starter-feeding strategies to reduce cross sucking in pair-housed calves in outdoor hutches

Social housing of preweaned calves can benefit their welfare, but housing and cross sucking are potential barriers to adoption for farmers. For farms using outdoor hutches, an option is to pair adjacent hutches with a shared fence. Our objective was to investigate milk- or starter-feeding strategies to mitigate cross sucking in this system. Holstein heifers were housed in pairs (n = 32 pairs) and divided into 4 treatments (n = 8 pairs each) in a 2 × 2 factorial design: milk in an open bucket with starter in only a bucket (OB-SB), milk in an open bucket and starter in both a bucket and a specialized teat bottle (Braden bottle; OB-BB), milk in a slow-flow teat bucket with starter in only a bucket (TB-SB), or milk in a slow-flow teat bucket and starter in both a bucket and a specialized teat bottle (TB-BB). When starter was first offered (d 6 ± 1 of life, mean ± SD), calf latency to approach was recorded, averaged within pairs, and compared between starter treatments using a linear mixed model with fixed effect of treatment and random effect of pair within treatment. Calves were initially bottle fed; milk treatments began on d 14 ± 1 of life and ended when calves were completely weaned (d 53 ± 1). Calves were observed for behaviors such as drinking milk and cross sucking twice weekly for 30 min during the afternoon milk meal using continuous video, with values averaged within pairs. Linear mixed models were run separately before (wk 3–6) and after (wk 7–8) weaning, with fixed effects of milk- and starter-feeding treatments, week, and the 2- and 3-way interactions, with week as repeated measure and pair as subject. Pairs with Braden bottles and buckets approached starter sooner than those with only buckets (Braden bottles vs. no Braden bottles: 13.1 ± 6.1 vs. 33.2 ± 6.1 min, LSM ± SEM). Before weaning, pairs with open buckets for both milk and starter cross sucked for at least twice as long (OB-SB: 2.9 ± 0.3 min) as all other treatments (OB-BB: 1.5 ± 0.3 min; TB-SB: 0.4 ± 0.3 min; TB-BB: 0.5 ± 0.3 min). This pattern held during weaning, when cross sucking increased overall (OB-SB: 3.9 ± 0.4 min; OB-BB: 1.8 ± 0.4 min; TB-SB: 0.9 ± 0.4 min; TB-BB: 1.6 ± 0.4 min). Regardless of starter treatment, calves spent less time cross sucking when fed milk in teat buckets, which extended the milk meal relative to open buckets (teat bucket vs. open bucket: preweaning = 7.0 ± 0.2 vs. 1.6 ± 0.2 min; weaning = 3.0 ± 0.1 vs. 0.6 ± 0.1 min). When calves are fed milk in open buckets, a novel option for reducing cross sucking is to provide starter through a specialized bottle. Nonetheless, providing milk in slow-flow teat buckets had the greatest effect on reducing cross sucking by directing suckling to the teat instead of another calf or pen objects.     

The effect of rearing substrate and space allowance on the behavior and physiology of dairy calves

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of rearing substrate and space allowance on the behavior and physiology of dairy calves. At 1 wk of age, 72 calves were moved into 1 of 18 experimental pens (n = 4 calves/pen) where they remained until 6 wk of age. Half of the pens had floors covered with quarry stones (QS) and the other half were covered with sawdust (SW). For each substrate type, calves were reared at 1 of 3 space allowances: 1.0, 1.5, or 2.0 m²/calf. Behavior was video-recorded continuously for 24 h in the home pen at 2, 4, and 6 wk of age; the time calves spent lying, standing, walking, and running were estimated using 1-min instantaneous scan sampling. Body weight, cleanliness, fecal fluidity, and skin surface temperature were recorded at 1, 4, and 6 wk of age. Escherichia coli numbers were assessed on the skin surface of the shoulder and in feces of calves at 4 and 6 wk of age. Blood samples were taken at 1, 4, and 6 wk of age to measure cortisol, creatine kinase, immunoglobulin G, serum amyloid A, and total protein concentrations. Calves reared on QS spent less time lying and walking and more time standing at 4 and 6 wk of age compared with calves reared on SW. Furthermore, calves reared at a space allowance of 2.0 m²/calf spent less time lying and more time standing and walking compared with calves reared at a space allowance of 1.0 and 1.5 m²/calf. Calves reared on QS had lower skin surface temperatures compared with calves reared on SW. Fecal fluidity scores were lower in calves reared on QS than SW at 2 wk of age. Fewer E. coli were recovered from the shoulder of calves reared on QS than those of calves reared on SW, but fecal E. coli counts were similar between rearing substrates and space allowances. Serum amyloid A concentrations were lower in calves reared on QS than SW. We detected no effect of rearing substrate or space allowance on body weight, cleanliness, or concentrations of cortisol, creatine kinase, immunoglobulin G, and total protein. In conclusion, lower skin temperature in combination with reduced lying behavior may reflect reduced comfort of calves reared on QS. Furthermore, a space allowance of 2.0 m²/calf may provide calves with more opportunity to perform active behaviors.     

Health,physiology, and behavior of dairy calves reared on 4 different substrates

The objective of this study was to compare the health, physiology, and behavior of group-housed calves reared on wood shavings with those reared on alternative surfaces. At 1 wk of age, 80 calves were moved into 1 of 20 experimental pens (n = 4 calves/pen) where they remained until 6 wk of age. Pens had floors covered with pea gravel (PG), rubber chip (RC), sand (SA), or wood shavings (WS; n = 5 pens/substrate). Body weight, cleanliness, health, and skin surface and vaginal temperature were recorded at 1, 3, and 6 wk of age. Escherichia coli numbers were assessed on the skin surface of the shoulder and in the feces of calves at 3 and 6 wk of age. Blood samples were taken at 1, 3, and 6 wk of age to measure hematological values and cortisol, IgG, and lactate concentrations. Behaviors (lying, running, and self-grooming) were recorded in the home pen at 1, 3, and 6 wk of age using video recorders and accelerometer data loggers. At 6 wk of age, calves were tested individually in an arena test and behavior was recorded continuously for 20 min. Body weight did not differ among calves reared on PG, RC, SA, or WS, regardless of age. All calves were clean and no calves displayed any signs of lameness, leg lesions, or injuries at wk 1, 3, or 6, regardless of substrate. The number of E. coli recovered from a surface area of 100 cm² on the shoulder of each calf was affected by rearing substrate, with more E. coli recovered from calves reared on WS than PG, RC, or SA at 3 and 6 wk of age. Fecal E. coli counts were not affected by rearing substrate at 3 or 6 wk of age. Over the entire study period, calves reared on PG and SA had lower skin temperatures than calves reared on RC or WS, but skin temperature was similar between calves reared on PG and SA. However, vaginal temperature did not differ among calves reared on different substrates at 1, 3, or 6 wk of age. Hematology values and cortisol, IgG, and lactate concentrations of calves were similar among rearing substrates over the 6-wk study period. In the home pen, rearing substrate did not influence time spent lying; however, calves reared on WS performed more lying bouts than calves reared on PG or SA. In addition, rearing substrate did not influence the time calves spent running; however, calves reared on WS spent more time self-grooming than calves reared on PG, RC, and SA. During a 20-min arena test, running, bucks, jumps, and kicks performed by calves was not affected by rearing substrate. In conclusion, the physiology and behavior of calves reared on PG, RC, and SA was similar to WS, which is considered the preferred rearing substrate to use when rearing calves. Therefore, PG, RC, and SA may be acceptable substrate options when rearing group-housed dairy calves.     

Effects of pair versus single housing on performance and behavior of dairy calves before and after weaning from milk

This experiment tested the effects of pair versus single housing on the performance and behavior of dairy calves before and after weaning. Twenty-seven Holstein calves were separated from the dam within 6 h of birth, housed in individual pens for 4 d, and then assigned to either continued individual housing (n = 9 calves) or pair housing (n = 9 pairs). Calves had ad libitum access to starter, hay, and water via buckets. Pasteurized whole milk was fed via teat twice a day for 2 h at ad libitum volumes until d 36. During the milk-feeding period, paired calves showed higher intakes of starter than did the individually housed calves (averaging 93 vs. 59 ± 11 g/d per calf). Calves were weaned from milk from d 37 to 41 by progressive dilution of milk with water, and the teat was removed on d 49. Calves in both treatments vocalized in response to teat removal but this response was less in paired calves than in individually housed calves (84 vs. 194 ± 12 calls/2-h period per calf on d 49). On d 56, calves were moved to group pens, mixed with other calves, and observed for 15 d. Starter, water, and hay were available ad libitum via automatic feeders. Compared with calves previously housed in single pens, paired calves had a shorter latency to start feeding (9.1 ± 2.6 vs. 49.5 ± 4.1 h/calf), visited the starter feeder more frequently (41.6 ± 3.0 vs. 26.4 ± 3.3 visits/d per calf), spent more time at the feeder (87.8 ± 2.5 vs. 65.3 ± 2.9 min/d per calf), and consumed more starter (3.4 vs. 2.3 ± 0.2 kg/d per calf). Weight gains at mixing were higher for paired than for individually housed calves on d 2 and 3 after mixing (0.5 vs. −2.4 ± 0.3 kg/d per calf; and 0.8 vs. −0.9 ± 0.3 kg/d per calf, respectively). The results indicate that pair housing during the milk-feeding stage reduces calf responses to weaning and improves performance after weaning when calves are housed in groups.     

Short communication: Pair housing dairy calves in modified calf hutches

The objective of this study was to test if body weight (BW) and starter intake increased and reaction to novelty decreased for preweaning Holstein heifer calves pair housed in modified hutches (n = 8 pairs) versus individually housed in a single hutch (n = 14 calves). Calves were alternately assigned to housing treatment at d 5 of age. Cross sucking was recorded in 5-min scans for 30 min after milk feeding once per week over 14 wk. Calf health and BW were measured weekly from birth until approximately 88 d. When calves were 60 d old they underwent a food neophobia test where they were exposed to a novel feed for the first time. Cross sucking was observed only 5 times (in 4 different pairs) over the entire milk-feeding period. Pair-housed calves ate more starter than individually housed calves [0.89 (0.72–1.08) vs. 0.48 (0.42–0.56) kg/d; median and confidence interval], these calves also consumed 2.6 times more novel feed in the neophobia test (150 ± 27 vs. 58 ± 20 g/30 min). We observed no effect of treatment on BW. We concluded that social housing in modified hutches promotes solid feed intake and decreases fearfulness in dairy calves.     

A barrier can reduce competition over teats in pair-housed milk-fed calves

The objectives of this study were 1) to assess whether a barrier placed between 2 teat buckets would reduce displacements at the teat buckets during milk-feeding events, 2) to determine whether the length of the barrier would influence this effect, and 3) to determine whether the quantity of milk provided to the calves would further affect competitive behavior. In both experiments, male and female Holstein calves were housed in pairs and fed milk in adjacent teat buckets. Experiment 1 included 12 pairs of calves provided with either 8 or 5 L of milk/d and compared the effect of a short barrier placed between the 2 teat buckets (B) with the effect of no barrier (C) in a crossover design with 4 periods of 10 d each. Three pairs of calves on each of the 2 milk allowances were given the treatments in the order B, C, C, B, whereas the other 3 pairs were given the treatments in the order C, B, B, C. The short barrier reduced the frequency of switches between teat buckets but did not affect the latency to initiate switching behavior. Calves provided 5 L of milk/d ingested their ration faster and had a shorter latency to initiate switching behavior, but their frequency of switching per milk-feeding event was not higher than that of calves fed 8 L. Experiment 2 examined the effect of the length of barriers placed on both sides of the teat buckets. Forty-eight calves had either long (100 cm), short (46 cm), or no barriers throughout the milk-feeding period. Three barriers (all of the same size) were placed in each pen; one was placed between the 2 teat buckets, another was placed on the right-hand side of the right bucket, and another was placed on the left-hand side of the left bucket. The long barriers doubled the latency to initiate switching behavior and greatly reduced the frequency of switching. Moreover, no calves were able to displace a calf successfully while it was consuming milk from a teat bucket when the buckets were separated by the long barriers. In conclusion, barriers between teat buckets can reduce competition for milk among pair-housed calves, but the effects were strongest when using long barriers, which separated the teat buckets as well as the front half of the calf during a feeding event.     

Preweaning dairy calves' preferences for outdoor access

Adult dairy cattle show a preference for outdoor spaces during summer nights, but little is known about such preferences for dairy calves. Our aim was to determine the preferences of dairy calves for outdoor access during their first 11 wk of age in summer conditions. Calves were paired (n = 10) at 7 d of age and placed in one of 10 pens (7.32 × 2.44 m, deep bedded with bark mulch), each with equally sized outdoor and indoor areas. All feed was provided indoors; calves had ad libitum access to water, hay and concentrate. During the preweaning period, from 5 to 29 d of age, calves were offered 12 L/d of milk divided into 2 feedings. Calves were weaned stepwise, with milk gradually reduced by 1 L/d from d 30 to 35 of age. Calves were fed 6 L/d from 35 to 51 d of age, then milk was again reduced by 1 L/d so that calves were completely weaned by 56 d of age. Calves remained in the trial until, on average (± SD), 72 ± 2 d of age. Pens were continuously video recorded, and behaviors were scored 3 d/wk using 5-min scan samples. Four observers scored whether calves were inside, outside, lying, standing, in the sun or shade (interobserver reliability = 0.97). Sun and shade could not always be detected, so a proportion was calculated as the amount of time in the sun or shade divided by the total time sun or shade was visible. Calves spent approximately one-third of their time outside throughout the experiment, and time spent outside was affected by several factors. Pairs of calves spent less time outside as the amount of rain increased. During the first 6 wk of age, time spent outside increased, but time spent outside decreased between wk 6 and 7, and remained around 200 min/d from wk 7 to 11. Calves with the highest average daily gain and calves that were approximately 50% white appeared to spend more time outdoors. When outside, calves spent similar amounts of time in the sun and shade during the first 8 wk, but after weaning they appeared to spend more time in the shade. When calves were outside they appeared to spend a greater proportion of their time standing than when they were indoors during the first 4 wk. These results indicate that, when given the option in the summer, calves make use of an outdoor space, but this appears to vary with weather, calf age, average daily gain, and coat color.     

Factors affecting stall use for different freestall bases

The objective of this study was to compare stall use (stall occupancy and cow position) by barn side for factors affecting stall use. A closed circuit television system recorded stall use four times per day for a 9-mo period starting May 9, 2001. Six factors were analyzed: stall base, distance to water, stall location within stall base section, stall location within barn, inside barn temperature, and length of time cows were exposed to stall bases. Two barn sides with different stocking densities were analyzed: low (66%), with cows milked by robotic milker; and high (100%), with cows milked 2X in parlor. Six stall base types were tested: two mattresses, a waterbed, a rubber mat, concrete, and sand (high side only). The base types were grouped 3 to 7 stalls/section and randomly placed in each row. Cows spent more time in mattress-based stalls, but the highest percentage lying was in sand-based stalls. The following significant stall occupancy percentages were found: sand had the highest percentage of cows lying on the high stocking density side (69%), followed by mattress type 1 (65%) > mattress type 2 (57%) > waterbed (45%) > rubber mat (33%) > concrete (23%). Mattress type 1 had the highest percentage stalls occupied (88%), followed by mattress type 2 (84%) > sand (79%) > soft rubber mat (65%) > waterbed (62%) > concrete (39%). On the low stocking rate side, mattress type 1 had the highest percentage cows lying (45%) and occupied (59.6%), followed by mattress type 2 > waterbed > soft rubber mat > concrete. Cow lying and stalls occupied percentages were highest for stalls 1) not at the end of a section, and 2) on the outside row, and varied by base type for time cows exposed to stalls and inside barn temperature. Lying and occupied percentages were different for different mattress types. The percentage of stalls with cows standing was higher for mat and mattress-based stalls. Results show mattress type 1 and sand to be superior and rubber mats and concrete inferior stall bases.     

Relationship between herd size and measures of animal welfare on dairy cattle farms with freestall housing in Germany

The objective of this study was to examine the association of herd size with animal welfare in dairy cattle herds. Therefore, 80 conventional dairy cattle farms were classified by the number of cows into 4 herd size classes, C1 (<100 cows), C2 (100–299 cows), C3 (300–499 cows), and C4 (≥500 cows), and assessed using multiple animal-based measures of the Welfare Quality Assessment protocol for dairy cattle. Data were recorded from April 2014 to September 2016 by an experienced single assessor in northern Germany. Each farm was visited 2 times at an interval of 6 mo (summer period and winter period) to avoid seasonal effects on the outcome. The average herd size was 383 ± 356 Holstein-Friesian cows (range 45 to 1,629). Only farms with freestall (cubicle) housing and a maximum of 6 h access to pasture per day were included in the study. Data were statistically analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model. None of the farms reached the highest overall rating of “excellent.” The majority of the farms were classified as “enhanced” (30%) or “acceptable” (66%), and at 6 assessments the farms were rated as “not classified” (4%). Regarding single indicators, mean trough length per cow, percentage of cows with nasal discharge, and vulvar discharge increased with increasing herd size, whereas it was vice versa for displacements of cows. Percentage of lean cows, percentage of dirty lower legs, and duration of the process of lying down showed a curvilinear relationship with the number of cows per farm. Herd size was not associated with any other measures of the Welfare Quality protocol. In conclusion, herd size effects were small, and consequently herd size cannot be considered as a feasible indicator of the on-farm animal welfare level. Housing conditions and management practices seem to have a greater effect on animal welfare than the number of dairy cows per farm.     

Effects of three types of free-stall surfaces on preferences and stall usage by dairy cows

One important criterion in choosing appropriate housing systems for dairy cattle is that the freestall provides a comfortable surface for the cow. This paper describes two experiments testing the effects of commonly used lying surfaces on stall preference and stall usage by Holstein cows. In both experiments, 12 cows were housed individually in separate pens. Each pen contained three free stalls with a different surface: deep-bedded sawdust, deep-bedded sand, and a geotextile mattress covered with 2 to 3 cm of sawdust. The animals were restricted to each surface in turn, in a random order for either 2 (Experiment 1) or 3 d (Experiment 2). Both before and after this restriction phase, the animals were allowed access to all three surfaces, and preference was determined, based on lying times. Of the 12 cows used in Experiment 1, 10 preferred sawdust before and nine after the restriction phase. During the restriction phase, average lying times and number of lying events during the restriction phase were significantly lower for the sand-bedded stalls (P < or = 0.05), and standing times were higher on mattresses (P < or = 0.05), compared with sawdust. Although these cows had some experience with all three surfaces during the experiment, they had been housed in sawdust-bedded stalls during their previous lactation. Cows used in Experiment 2 had spent their previous lactation in sand bedded stalls. In this experiment, about half the cows preferred sand and half sawdust, after the restriction phase. During the restriction phase of experiment, lying times and number of lying events were lower, and standing times were higher when the animals were restricted to the mattresses compared to either sand or sawdust (P < or = 0.05). These results indicate that (1) free stall surface can affect both stall preferences and stall usage, and (2) mattresses are less preferred.     

Layouts for small freestall dairy barns: effect on milk yield for cows in different parities

Freestall housing for dairy cows has many different layouts and the space allocated for cows differs considerably. The objective of the present study was to investigate possible associations between barn layout and milk yield for different parities in small dairy freestall barns. Layouts of 204 Norwegian freestall barns constructed during the period from 1995 to 2005, and with a mean herd size of 42.7 ± 15.5 cows, were obtained and merged with milk yield data and calving interval, for each parity, from the Norwegian Milk Recording System (NDHRS). The milk yield data set contained 20,221 different lactations from these 204 herds. Both simple mixed models, including the different explanatory variables one by one together with parity, calving interval, and herd as random effect, and a final mixed model, including all significant explanatory variables, were created. According to variables tested in this study, the final mixed model estimates show that only primiparous cows benefit significantly from increased free space allocation. Milk yield was generally higher in automatic milking system barns compared with that in barns with milking parlors, but not for primiparous cows. Milk yield was higher for all parities for barns using separation pens in accordance with the recommendations. Barns with 2 or more dead-end alleys had lower milk yield compared with that from layouts without dead-end alleys. Primiparous cows benefited from water troughs located for easy access and responded with increased milk yield. In 10% of the barns, the water trough capacity was less than 47% of the recommendations, and all parities benefited from a water trough capacity higher than this level. Higher parities had increased milk yield when water trough capacity was more than 80%. Feed bunk space, number of freestall rows, and the location of freestalls had no significant effect on the milk yield. The present study showed that increased space and improved access to water is beneficial to primiparous cows, whereas layouts without dead-end alleys and improved water capacity is beneficial for all cows in freestall systems.     

Holstein calves' preference for potential physical enrichment items on different presentation schedules

Impoverished housing environments are thought to prevent motivated behaviors and may result in frustration. We first aimed to investigate an effective physical enrichment protocol to improve dairy calves' welfare and initially determine their use of various items. Thereafter, we aimed to determine dairy calves' preference for and ways of interacting with various items, and whether this was influenced by social housing. In experiment 1, at 21 ± 3 d of age, 27 individually housed calves were assigned alternately into 1 of 3 treatments: control (CON, no additional items), rotating enrichment (RE, one item each week on a rotating presentation schedule), and fixed enrichment (FE, 4 types of item at the same time). The items were stationary brushes, ropes, springs, nets filled with strawberry-scented hay, and dry teats. Calves' behaviors were observed from 4 to 7 wk of age using focal observations after feeding, followed by instantaneous scan sampling. Their behavioral responses to a novel object were assessed at 43 ± 1 d of age. In the instantaneous scans, calves in FE tended to interact with items more often than calves in RE. Calves in RE and FE expressed less non-nutritive oral behavior than those in CON. Latency to touch novel objects did not differ significantly between treatments. Calves in RE and FE interacted with nets filled with strawberry-scented hay more often than with other items in instantaneous scans. In experiment 2, 24 calves were assigned alternately into 8 individual pens and 8 pair pens at 2 d of age. All pens were provided with a stationary brush, plastic chain, net filled with strawberry-scented hay, and dry teat. Calves' behaviors were collected from 2 to 5 wk of age using instantaneous scan sampling. Calves interacted with nets filled with strawberry-scented hay more often than with other items. Pair housing reduced calves' interactions with items compared with individual housing. Individually and pair-housed calves' frequencies of overall interaction with items varied with time of day, with frequencies increasing to peaks at 0700, 1500, and 1900 h. Calves showed scratching, sniffing, sucking, butting, and hay intake toward nets filled with strawberry-scented hay and showed the first 3 behaviors toward stationary brushes, plastic chains, and dry teats. In conclusion, dairy calves are likely to prefer a fixed multi-item enrichment presentation schedule over a rotating schedule with a single enrichment item presented at one time. For the fixed multi-item enrichment presentation schedule, items were used more in individual pens than in pair pens, and a diurnal pattern was observed for use of the items. Nets filled with scented hay might be the most multifunctional and attractive item of the items tested.     

Associations between on-farm animal welfare indicators and productivity and profitability on Canadian dairies: I. On freestall farms

Motivating dairy producers to financially invest in the improvement of their animals' comfort and welfare can pose some challenges, especially when financial returns are uncertain. Economic advantages for dairy producers associated with increased animal welfare are likely to come from either a premium paid for the milk or increased productivity. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the associations between measures of herd productivity and farm profitability and animal-, management-, and resource-based indicators of cow welfare and comfort. The cow welfare measures were collected during a cow comfort assessment conducted on 130 Canadian freestall dairy farms, including 20 using an automatic milking system. Herd productivity and farm profitability measures were retrieved or calculated from data collected by the regional dairy herd improvement programs, and included milk production and quality, longevity, and economic margins over replacement costs. Univariable and multivariable linear regression models were used to assess the associations between welfare indicators and productivity and profitability measures. Increased yearly corrected milk production was associated with reduced prevalence of cows with knee lesions [β = 7.40; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.6, 12.2], dirty flanks (β = 26.9; 95% CI: 7.4, 46.5), and lameness (β = 11.7; 95% CI: 3.3, 20.1). The farms' economic margin per cow, calculated over replacement costs, was associated with the within farm average lying time standard deviation (β = ?7.2; 95% CI: ?12.7, ?1.7), percent of stalls with dry bedding (β = 6.4; 95% CI: 1.4, 11.4), and prevalence of cows with knee lesions (β = ?5.1; 95% CI: ?8.9, ?1.3). Some of the relationships found were complex, including several interactions between the animal-, management-, and resource-based measures. Overall, the results suggest that improved cow comfort and welfare on freestall farms is associated with increased herd productivity and profitability, when the latest is calculated by the margins over the replacement costs.     

Prevalence of and factors associated with hock,knee, and neck injuries on dairy cows in freestall housing in Canada

Injuries are a widespread problem in the dairy industry. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of and explore the animal-based and environmental factors associated with hock, knee, and neck injuries on dairy cows in freestall housing in Ontario and Alberta, Canada. Freestall dairy farms in the provinces of Ontario (n = 40) and Alberta (n = 50) were visited for cross-sectional data collection. A purposive sample of 40 lactating Holstein cows was selected for detailed observation on each farm. Cows were scored for hock, knee, and neck injuries on a 3- or 4-point scale, combining the attributes of hair loss, broken skin, and swelling and with a higher score indicating a more severe injury. The highest hock and highest knee score were used in the analysis. Animal-based and environmental measures were taken to explore which factors were associated with injury. Overall, the prevalence of cows with at least one hock, knee, and neck injury was 47, 24, and 9%, respectively. Lame cows had a greater odds of hock injury [odds ratio (OR) = 1.46] than nonlame cows, whereas cows with fewer days in milk (DIM) had reduced odds of hock injury compared with those >120 DIM (OR = 0.47, 0.64, and 0.81 for <50, 50–82, and 83–120 DIM, respectively). The odds of hock injury was lower on sand (OR = 0.07) and concrete (OR = 0.44) stall bases in comparison to mattresses. Conversely, the odds of knee injury was greater on concrete (OR = 3.19) stall bases compared with mattresses. Cows in parity 1 (OR = 0.45 and 0.27 for knee and neck injury, respectively) and 2 (OR = 0.49 and 0.40 for knee and neck injury, respectively) had lower odds of knee and neck injury compared with cows in parity 4+. Low feed rail heights increased the odds of neck injury (OR = 76.71 for rails between 128 and 140 cm and OR = 43.82 for rails ≤128 cm). The odds of knee injury was greater on farms where any cows were observed slipping or falling when moving into the holding area for milking (OR = 2.69) and lower on farms with rubber flooring in the alley along the feed bunk compared with bare concrete floors (OR = 0.19). These results demonstrate that individual animal characteristics, as well as barn design and animal management, are associated with hock, knee, and neck injuries. These data can help to guide investigations into causes and prevention of injuries.     

Effects of changing freestall area on lameness,lying time,and leg injuries on dairy farms in Alberta,Canada

Cow comfort is of increasing importance in the dairy industry, due to an increased focus on animal welfare. However, whether producer changes to the cows' environment affect cow comfort has not been well characterized. Our objectives were to: (1) quantify the effect of freestall area changes on the prevalence of lameness, leg injuries, and average lying time; and (2) compare cow comfort outcomes on farms that had never had an assessment of cow comfort to farms that had had a previous assessment of cow comfort. A sample of 60 Holstein-Friesian cows were selected on each of 15 farms that made changes to the freestall area after an assessment of cow comfort (change, CHG); 15 farms that did not make changes to the freestall area after an assessment of cow comfort (no change, NC); and 14 farms that had yet to be evaluated (new farms, NF). Cows in NC and NF were lame 1.50 and 1.71 times more often, respectively, than cows on CHG farms. Additionally, daily lying time was 0.33 and 0.62 h/d lower in NC and NF, respectively, than on CHG farms. The prevalence of hock and knee injuries was not different among the 3 groups of farms. No differences were detected in the parameters of interest when comparing NF with NC farms; therefore, we concluded that the NC group was not biased by a previous assessment of cow comfort. Farms in the CHG group had a lower prevalence of lame cows and greater lying time than the NC and NF groups.