Relative importance of factors influencing the prevalence of lameness in Austrian cubicle loose-housed dairy cows

Invited review: Prevalence, risk factors, treatment, and barriers to best practice adoption for lameness and injuries in dairy cattle-A narrative review

Lameness and leg injuries are both painful and prevalent across the dairy industry, and are a major welfare concern. There has been a considerable amount of research focused on investigating the risk factors associated with lameness and injuries and how they might be prevented and treated. The objectives of this narrative review were to summarize herd-level prevalence estimates, risk factors, strategies for prevention, control, and treatment of these conditions, and the barriers to best practice adoption for lameness and injuries on dairy farms. There is a relatively high within-herd prevalence of lameness on dairy farms globally, with a recent systematic review estimating the mean prevalence at 22.8%. Similarly, there is a relatively high prevalence of hock injuries, with within-herd estimates ranging from 12% to 81% of cows affected. Knee and neck injuries have been reported to be less common, with 6% to 43% and 1% to 33%, respectively. Numerous risk factors have been associated with the incidence of lameness, notably housing (e.g., access to pasture, bedding depth, bedding type, flooring type, stall design), management (e.g., stall cleanliness, frequency of trimming, holding times, stocking density), and cow-level (e.g., body condition, parity, injured hocks) factors. Risk factors associated with hock injuries can be similarly classified into housing (e.g., bedding type and depth, outdoor access, parlor type, stall design), management (e.g., bedding depth, cleanliness), and cow (e.g., parity, days in milk, lameness) factors. Key preventative approaches for lameness include routine preventative and corrective hoof trimming, improving hoof cushioning and traction through access to pasture or adding rubber flooring, deep-bedded stalls, sand bedding, ensuring appropriate stocking densities, reduced holding times, and the frequent use of routine footbaths. Very little research has been conducted on hock, knee, and neck injury prevention and recovery. Numerous researchers have concluded that both extrinsic (e.g., time, money, space) and intrinsic (e.g., farmer attitude, perception, priorities, and mindset) barriers exist to addressing lameness and injuries on dairy farms. There are many diverse stakeholders in lameness and injury management including the farmer, farm staff, veterinarian, hoof trimmer, nutritionist, and other advisors. Addressing dairy cattle lameness and injuries must, therefore, consider the people involved, as it is these people who are influencing and implementing on-farm decisions related to lameness prevention, treatment, and control.

Global losses due to dairy cattle diseases: A comorbidity-adjusted economic analysis

An economic simulation was carried out over 183 milk-producing countries to estimate the global economic impacts of 12 dairy cattle diseases and health conditions: mastitis (subclinical and clinical), lameness, paratuberculosis (Johne's disease), displaced abomasum, dystocia, metritis, milk fever, ovarian cysts, retained placenta, and ketosis (subclinical and clinical). Estimates of disease impacts on milk yield, fertility, and culling were collected from the literature, standardized, meta-analyzed using a variety of methods ranging from simple averaging to random-effects models, and adjusted for comorbidities to prevent overestimation. These comorbidity-adjusted disease impacts were then combined with a set of country-level lactational incidence and/or prevalence estimates, herd characteristics, and price estimates within a series of Monte Carlo simulations that estimated and valued the economic losses due to these diseases. It was estimated that total annual global losses are USD 65 billion (B). Subclinical ketosis, clinical mastitis, and subclinical mastitis were the costliest diseases modeled, resulting in mean annual global losses of approximately USD 18B, USD 13B, and USD 9B, respectively. Estimated global annual losses due to clinical ketosis, displaced abomasum, dystocia, lameness, metritis, milk fever, ovarian cysts, paratuberculosis, and retained placenta were estimated to be USD 0.2B, 0.6B, 0.6B, 6B, 5B, 0.6B, 4B, 4B, and 3B, respectively. Without adjustment for comorbidities, when statistical associations between diseases were disregarded, mean aggregate global losses would have been overestimated by 45%. Although annual losses were greatest in India (USD 12B), the USA (USD 8B), and China (USD 5B), depending on the measure of losses used (losses as a percent of GDP, losses per capita, losses as a percent of gross milk revenue), the relative economic burden of these dairy cattle diseases across countries varied markedly.

Prevalence of lameness in dairy cows: A literature review

Lameness in dairy cows has major negative impacts on animal welfare and production economy. While previous studies have evaluated the prevalence of lameness in single countries, the present literature review is the first overview of the prevalence of lameness in dairy cows globally. This literature review identified 53 studies reporting prevalence of lameness among representative samples of dairy cows and fulfilling a number of specified inclusion criteria (e.g., at least 10 herds and 200 cows, and locomotion scoring by trained observers). A total of 414,950 cows from 3945 herds were included in these 53 studies, which spanned a 30-year period (1989-2020) and included herds from six continents, with the majority from Europe and North America. Across the studies, the mean prevalence of lameness (typically defined as score 3-5 on a 1-5 scale) was 22.8% with a median of 22.0% and a range between studies from 5.1% to 45%, and a within herd range from 0% to 88%. The mean prevalence of severely lame cows (typically defined as score 4-5 on a 1-5 scale) was 7.0% with a median of 6.5% and a range between studies from 1.8% to 21.2%, and a within herd range from 0% to 65%. Over time, it appears that the prevalence of lameness has changed very little. Several different locomotion scoring systems and definitions of (severe) lameness were used across the 53 studies, and this may have affected the reported lameness prevalence. Sampling of herds and cows, inclusion criteria and representativeness also differed between studies. This review offers recommendations for the future capture of information on lameness in dairy cows and identifies potential knowledge gaps.

The Combined Use of Automated Milking System and Sensor Data to Improve Detection of Mild Lameness in Dairy Cattle

This study aimed to develop a tool to detect mildly lame cows by combining already existing data from sensors, AMSs, and routinely recorded animal and farm data. For this purpose, ten dairy farms were visited every 30–42 days from January 2020 to May 2021. Locomotion scores (LCS, from one for nonlame to five for severely lame) and body condition scores (BCS) were assessed at each visit, resulting in a total of 594 recorded animals. A questionnaire about farm management and husbandry was completed for the inclusion of potential risk factors. A lameness incidence risk (LCS ≥ 2) was calculated and varied widely between farms with a range from 27.07 to 65.52%. Moreover, the impact of lameness on the derived sensor parameters was inspected and showed no significant impact of lameness on total rumination time. Behavioral patterns for eating, low activity, and medium activity differed significantly in lame cows compared to nonlame cows. Finally, random forest models for lameness detection were fit by including different combinations of influencing variables. The results of these models were compared according to accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. The best performing model achieved an accuracy of 0.75 with a sensitivity of 0.72 and specificity of 0.78. These approaches with routinely available data and sensor data can deliver promising results for early lameness detection in dairy cattle. While experimental automated lameness detection systems have achieved improved predictive results, the benefit of this presented approach is that it uses results from existing, routinely recorded, and therefore widely available data.

Effects of Housing and Management Factors on Selected Indicators of the Welfare Quality® Protocol in Loose-Housed Dairy Cows

The objective of this study was to examine the effects of housing and management factors on animal welfare indicators in dairy cows using a benchmarking approach. In total, 63 conventional dairy cattle farms with zero-grazing in Northern Germany were assessed using selected animal welfare indicators (body condition score, integument alterations, lameness, milk somatic cell count, and social behaviour) of the Welfare Quality® protocol. Additionally, housing characteristics such as designs of barns, cubicles, and floors were documented during farm visits and farmers were interviewed concerning their common management routines. Farms were categorized into a high welfare or low welfare group by calculating upper and lower tertiles for each of the animal welfare indicators separately. Both groups were compared regarding housing conditions and management practices using univariable and multivariable logistic regressions. Several associations between housing and management factors and animal welfare indicators were demonstrated in univariable analysis (p < 0.20). Significant effects within multivariable logistic regression analysis were determined for lameness (routine use of foot-baths), milk somatic cell count (milking frequency) and social behaviour (cow-to-stall ratio) (p < 0.05). Comparing farms with higher and lower animal welfare status can provide useful information about effective options to improve animal welfare.

Lameness prevalence and management practices on Irish pasture-based dairy farms

Background

Lameness is a painful disease, which negatively impacts dairy cow production and welfare. The aim of this observational study was to determine herd lameness prevalence, describe current lameness management practices and identify the presence of established risk factors for lameness on Irish pasture-based dairy farms. Farms were visited once during grazing (99 farms) and again during housing (85 farms). Lameness scoring was carried out at each visit (AHDB 0–3 scale); cows were classified as lame if they scored two or three. Farm management practices and infrastructure characteristics were evaluated via farmer questionnaires and direct measurements of farm infrastructure.

Results

Median herd-level lameness prevalence was 7.9% (interquartile range = 5.6 – 13.0) during grazing and 9.1% (interquartile range = 4.9 – 12.0) during housing; 10.9% of cows were lame at a single visit and 3.5% were lame at both visits (chronically lame or had a repeat episode of lameness). Fifty-seven percent of farmers were not familiar with lameness scoring and only one farm carried out lameness scoring. Only 22% of farmers kept records of lame cows detected, and 15% had a lameness herd health plan. Twenty-eight percent of farmers waited more than 48 h to treat a lame cow, and 21% waited for more than one cow to be identified as lame before treating. Six percent of farmers carried out routine trimming and 31% regularly footbathed (> 12 times per year). Twelve percent put severely lame cows in a closer paddock and 8% stated that they used pain relief to treat severely lame cows. Over 50% of farms had at least one cow track measurement that was classified as rough or very rough, and cow tracks were commonly narrow for the herd size. On 6% of farms, all cubicle beds were bare concrete (no matting or bedding) and on a further 6% of farms, there was a combination of cubicles with and without matting or bedding. On 56% of farms, all pens contained less than 1.1 cubicles per cow and on 28% of farms, a proportion of pens contained less than 1.1 cubicles per cow.

Conclusions

Overall, this study identified infrastructure and management practices which could be improved upon. The comparatively low lameness prevalence demonstrated, compared to fully housed systems, also highlights the benefits of a pasture-based system for animal welfare; however, there remains scope for improvement.

Benchmarking Based on Regularly Recorded Claw Health Data of Austrian Dairy Cattle for Implementation in the Cattle Data Network (RDV)

While benchmarking is already used for the assessment of performance gaps in cattle herd management and welfare concerns, its application to quantifying claw health performance is relatively new. The goal here was to establish a benchmarking system for claw health in Austrian dairy cattle. We used electronically registered claw health data of cows from 512 dairy herds documented by professional hoof trimmers, culling data from the same herds, and locomotion scores taken at regular milk performance testings in 99 dairy herds during 2020. Mean, median and the 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles of the incidences of risk of lameness, 13 common claw lesions, and the annual culling risk directly related to claw and limb disorders were used as key performance indicators. Only validated data sets were used and participating trimmers and locomotion scorers had to pass interobserver reliability tests with weighted Cohen's kappa values ≥ 0.61 indicating substantial interobserver agreement. This claw health benchmarking system is intended to be used henceforth in the transnational cattle data network (RDV) by all participating farmers and is also available for veterinarians and consultants, with the agreement of respective farmers.

Cow- and herd-level risk factors for lameness in partly housed pasture-based dairy cows

Lameness in dairy cows is a major animal welfare concern and has substantial economic impact through reduced production and fertility. Previous risk factor analyses have focused on housed systems, rather than those where cows were grazed for the majority of the year and housed only for the winter period. Therefore, the aim of this observational study was to identify a robust set of cow-level and herd-level risk factors for lameness in a pasture-based system, based on predictors from the housing and grazing periods. Ninety-nine farms were visited during the grazing period (April 2019-September 2019), and 85 farms were revisited during the housing period (October 2019-February 2020). At each visit, all lactating cows were scored for lameness (0 = good mobility, 1 = imperfect mobility, 2 = impaired mobility, 3 = severely impaired mobility), and potential herd-level risk factors were recorded through questionnaires and infrastructure measurements. Routine cow-level management data were also collected. Important risk factors for lameness were derived though triangulation of results from elastic net regression, and from logistic regression model selection using modified Bayesian information criterion. Both selection methods were implemented using bootstrapping. This novel approach has not previously been used in a cow-level or herd-level risk factor analysis in dairy cows, to the authors' knowledge. The binary outcome variable was lameness status, whereby cows with a lameness score of 0 or 1 were classed as non-lame and cows with a score of 2 or 3 were classed as lame. Cow-level risk factors for increased lameness prevalence were age and genetic predicted transmitting ability for lameness. Herd-level risk factors included farm and herd size, stones in paddock gateways, slats on cow tracks near the collecting yard, a sharper turn at the parlor exit, presence of digital dermatitis on the farm, and the farmers' perception of whether lameness was a problem on the farm. This large-scale study identified the most important associations between risk factors and lameness, based on the entire year (grazing and housing periods), providing a focus for future randomized clinical trials.

A systematic approach to analyse the impact of farm-profiles on bovine health

In this study we present systematic framework to analyse the impact of farm profiles as combinations of environmental conditions and management practices on common diseases in dairy cattle. The data used for this secondary data analysis includes observational data from 166 farms with a total of 5828 dairy cows. Each farm is characterised by features from five categories: husbandry, feeding, environmental conditions, housing, and milking systems. We combine dimension reduction with clustering techniques to identify groups of similar farm attributes, which we refer to as farm profiles. A statistical analysis of the farm profiles and their related disease risks is carried out to study the associations between disease risk, farm membership to a specific cluster as well as variables that characterise a given cluster by means of a multivariate regression model. The disease risks of five different farm profiles arise as the result of complex interactions between environmental conditions and farm management practices. We confirm previously documented relationships between diseases, feeding and husbandry. Furthermore, novel associations between housing and milking systems and specific disorders like lameness and ketosis have been discovered. Our approach contributes to paving a way towards a more holistic and data-driven understanding of bovine health and its risk factors.

Including milk production, conformation, and functional traits in multivariate models for genetic evaluation of lameness

Lameness is a serious health and welfare issue that can negatively affect the economic performance of cows, especially on pasture-based dairy farms. However, most genetic predictions (GP) of lameness have low accuracy because lameness data are often incomplete as data are collected voluntarily by farmers in countries such as Australia. The objective of this study was to find routinely measured traits that are correlated with lameness and use them in multivariate evaluation models to improve the accuracy of GP for lameness. We used health events and treatments associated with lameness recorded by Australian farmers from 2002 to early 2019. The lameness incidence rates in Holstein and Jersey cows were 3.3% and 4.6%, respectively. We analyzed the records of 36 other traits (milk production, conformation, fertility, and survival traits) to estimate genetic correlations with lameness. The estimated heritability ± standard error (and repeatability ± standard error) for lameness in both Holstein and Jersey breeds were very low: 0.007 ± 0.002 (and 0.029 ± 0.002) and 0.005 ± 0.003 (and 0.027 ± 0.006), respectively, in univariate sire models. For the GP models, we tested including measurements of overall type to prediction models for Holsteins, stature and body length for Jersey, and milk yield and fertility traits for both breeds. The average accuracy of GP, calculated from prediction error variances, were 0.38 and 0.24 for Holstein and Jersey sires, respectively, when estimated using univariate sire models and both increased to 0.43 using multivariate sire models. In conclusion, we found that the accuracy of GP for lameness could be improved by including genetically correlated traits in a multivariate model. However, to further improve the accuracy of predictions of lameness, precise identification and recording incidences of hoof or leg disorder, or large-scale recording of locomotion and claw scores by trained personnel should be considered.

The Use of the General Animal-Based Measures Codified Terms in the Scientific Literature on Farm Animal Welfare

Background: The approach to farm animal welfare evaluation has changed and animal-based measures (ABM), defined as the responses of an animal or effects on an animal, were introduced to assess animal welfare. Animal-based measures can be taken directly on the animal or indirectly and include the use of animal records. They can result from a specific event or be the cumulative outcome of many days, weeks, or months. The objective of the current study was to analyze the use of general ABM codified terms in the scientific literature, the presence of their definitions, and the gap mapping of their use across animal species, categories, years of publication, and geographical areas of the corresponding author's institution. The ultimate aim was to propose a common standard terminology to improve communication among stakeholders. In this study, data models were populated by collecting information coming from scientific papers extracted through a transparent and reproducible protocol using Web of Science^TM and filtering for the general ABM codified terms (or synonyms/equivalents). A total of 199 papers were retained, and their full texts were assessed. The frequency of general codified ABM terms was analyzed according to the classification factors listed in the objectives. These papers were prevalently European (159 documents), and the most represented species was cattle. Fifty percent of the papers did not provide a definition of the general ABM terms, and 54% cited other sources as reference for their definition. The results of the study showed a very low penetration of the general codified ABM term in the literature on farm animal welfare, with only 1.5% of the papers including the term ABM. This does not mean that specific ABM are not studied, but rather that these specific ABM are not defined as such under a common umbrella, and there is no consensus on the use of terminology, not even among scientists. Thus, we cannot expect the stakeholders to use a common language and a standardized terminology. The recognition and the inclusion of ABM in the lists of commonly accepted abbreviations of scientific journals could be a first step to harmonize the terminology in the scientific literature.

Invited review: Lying time and the welfare of dairy cows

Adequate time lying down is often considered an important aspect of dairy cow welfare. We examine what is known about cows' motivation to lie down and the consequences for health and other indicators of biological function when this behavior is thwarted. We review the environmental and animal-based factors that affect lying time in the context of animal welfare. Our objective is to review the research into the time that dairy cows spend lying down and to critically examine the evidence for the link with animal welfare. Cows can be highly motivated to lie down. They show rebound lying behavior after periods of forced standing and will sacrifice other activities, such as feeding, to lie down for an adequate amount of time. They will work, by pushing levers or weighted gates, to lie down and show possible indicators of frustration when lying behavior is thwarted. Some evidence suggests that risk of lameness is increased in environments that provide unfavorable conditions for cows to lie down and where cows are forced to stand. Lameness itself can result in longer lying times, whereas mastitis reduces it. Cow-based factors such as reproductive status, age, and milk production influence lying time, but the welfare implications of these differences are unknown. Lower lying times are reported in pasture-based systems, dry lots, and bedded packs (9 h/d) compared with tiestalls and freestalls (10 to 12 h/d) in cross-farm research. Unfavorable conditions, including too few lying stalls for the number of cows, hard or wet lying surfaces, inadequate bedding, stalls that are too small or poorly designed, heat, and rain all reduce lying time. Time constraints, such as feeding or milking, can influence lying time. However, more information is needed about the implications of mediating factors such as the effect of the standing surface (concrete, pasture, or other surfaces) and cow behavior while standing (e.g., being restrained, walking, grazing) to understand the effect of low lying times on animal welfare. Many factors contribute to the difficulty of finding a valid threshold for daily lying time to use in the assessment of animal welfare. Although higher lying times often correspond with cow comfort, and lower lying times are seen in unfavorable conditions, exceptions occur, namely when cows lie down for longer because of disease or when they spend more time standing because of estrus or parturition, or to engage in other behaviors. In conclusion, lying behavior is important to dairy cattle, but caution and a full understanding of the context and the character of the animals in question is needed before drawing firm conclusions about animal welfare from measures of lying time.

Farmers' perceptions and approaches to detection, treatment and prevention of lameness in pasture-based dairy herds in New South Wales, Australia

AIMS

The objective of this study was to investigate farmers' perception of lameness in comparison to the estimated prevalence of lameness in NSW pasture-based dairies to evaluate farmers' perceptions and approaches to detection, treatment and prevention of lameness.

METHODS

Across-sectional study was conducted on 62 pasture-based dairy farms across NSW, Australia. The prevalence of lameness in these farms was estimated using locomotion scoring (1-4 scale). A survey was also conducted, using a questionnaire and face-to-face interview, to explore farmers' perceived prevalence of lameness and approaches to treatment and prevention.

RESULTS

The prevalence of lameness estimated by farmers was 3.7 times less (mean: 5%; range 0% to 26%) than that determined by locomotion scoring (mean: 19.1%; range 5.0%-44.5%). Approaches to treatment included antimicrobial therapy, hoof inspection with or without application of wooden blocks. In 28% of the farms, the lame cows were managed by farmers or farm staff with no official training in treatment of lame cows. The mean interval from detection of lameness to examination of the affected hoof was almost 55 hours (range 2-720 hours). A very low percentage of farms kept lameness records or implemented lameness preventive strategies such as footbaths and prophylactic foot trimming.

CONCLUSIONS

Farmers and farm managers were found to underestimate the prevalence of lameness which could be due to the low level of awareness and can contribute to subsequent lack of implementation of prophylactic procedures and preventive management strategies for lameness. These findings accentuate the need to improve farmers' ability to detect lame cows and to emphasise the importance of recording in order to facilitate the management of lameness in dairy herds.

Lameness in Sheltered Cows and Its Association with Cow and Shelter Attributes

Simple Summary

The sheltering of cows in shelters is a traditional practice in India. Old, abandoned and unproductive dairy cows are housed in shelters as cow slaughter is not legally permitted in most states. The welfare assessment of these old, abandoned, infertile, unproductive and rescued cows was carried out based on the measurement of cow-based and resource-based welfare parameters. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore the prevalence of lameness in these sheltered cows and the risk factors associated with it. Fifty-four shelters in six states of India were visited and 1620 cows were clinically examined for lameness and measurements of other animal and resource-based welfare parameters. The prevalence of lameness in these shelters was less than that recorded in dairy cows in conventional Indian farming systems. Lameness was associated with several cow factors: inadequate body conformation, lesions on the hock and carpal joints, dirty udders, overgrown claws and diarrhea. There was evidence of an association with an absence of bedding and a steep gradient of the floor. Improvement in the feeding practices, attention towards cleanliness, and improvements in shelter flooring may reduce the prevalence of lameness and improve cow welfare in the shelters.

Abstract

The sheltering of old, unproductive and abandoned cows in traditional cow shelters, known as gaushalas, has been practiced in India since ancient times. Cows are kept in these shelters until they die of natural causes. The welfare of the cows in these shelters was assessed through a cross-sectional study of 54 cow shelters in six states of India. A total of 1620 cows were examined to assess the prevalence of lameness in these cows, and the associated risk factors for lameness were identified through the measurement of animal-based and resource-based welfare indicators. The overall lameness prevalence was 4.2%. The majority (86%) had mild to moderate hock joint swellings but no or only mild carpal joint injuries. Approximately one-half had mild to moderate hock joint hair loss and most were free of hock joint ulcerations. Claw overgrowth was present in almost one half of the cows. Lameness prevalence was positively correlated with coat dirtiness, hock and carpal joint lesions, diarrhea and claw overgrowth scores. In a multivariate analysis, lameness prevalence increased as the Body Condition Score (BCS) decreased and was associated with increased udder dirtiness, the ulceration of the hock joint, carpal joint injuries and claw overgrowth. Resource-based indicators measured at the shelter level suggested that an absence of bedding in the sheds and an increase in the gradient of the shed flooring increased lameness. Addressing the principle risk factors identified for lameness in the sheltered cows (low body condition, dirty udders, lesions on the hock and carpal joints, overgrown claws, and a steep floor gradient) may help to reduce this serious animal welfare problem.

Invited review: Examining farmers' personalities and attitudes as possible risk factors for dairy cattle health, welfare, productivity, and farm management: A systematic scoping review

We aimed to determine how research regarding farmers' personalities and attitudes as risk factors is reported (methodological approaches to assessing, extracting, and processing data and analyzing risk factors) and to explore evidence for the effect of farmers' attitudes and personalities on dairy cattle health, welfare, productivity, and management. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of studies on personality and attitude as risk factors for dairy cattle health, welfare, productivity, and farm management. Database searches captured 1,144 records, and 38 were finally included in the review. Thirty-three manuscripts assessed farmers' attitudes, 1 assessed their personalities, and 4 assessed both as risk factors. These potential risk factors were checked for relationships with more than 50 different outcome variables regarding farm management (17 manuscripts), animal health (13 manuscripts), animal productivity (11 manuscripts), and animal welfare (4 manuscripts). The approaches to assessing risk factors and processing and interpreting data varied greatly; thus, drawing conclusions regarding the effects of attitude and personality as risk factors is impeded because manuscripts are difficult to compare. Our findings highlight the need for harmonization of attitudes and personality assessments in future research. Furthermore, researchers should carefully consider which depth of detail to apply when planning and evaluating related research. Nevertheless, results highlight the importance of the effect of personality and attitude on outcomes. Farmers' personality and attitudes are associated with dairy cattle health, welfare, productivity, and management. In general, attitudes indicating higher degrees of technical knowledge, affection with problems, perceived responsibility, perception of control of a situation, a better human-animal relationship, or a positive evaluation of the benefits of management decisions tended to affect outcomes in a beneficial way. "Agreeableness" and "conscientiousness" were shown to promote better farm performance, whereas "neuroticism" had a negative effect. Therefore, further research on attitude and personality and their consideration by professionals and decision-makers within the dairy sector and politics is strongly recommended. This might provide the chance to better understand the needs of dairy farmers and therefore develop tailored advice and support strategies to improve both satisfactory and constructive cooperation.

Zoo Animal Welfare: The Human Dimension

Standards and policies intended to safeguard nonhuman animal welfare, whether in zoos, farms, or laboratories, have tended to emphasize features of the physical environment. However, research has now made it clear that very different welfare outcomes are commonly seen in facilities using similar environments or conforming to the same animal welfare requirements. This wide variation is almost certainly due, at least in part, to the important effects of the actions of animal care staff on animal welfare. Drawing mostly on the farm animal literature, we propose that this "human dimension" of animal welfare involves seven components: (1) positive human-animal interaction, (2) consistency and familiarity of keepers, (3) treating animals as individuals and taking account of their personalities, (4) the attitudes and personalities of keepers, (5) the keepers' knowledge and experience, (6) the keepers' own well-being, and (7) the influence of facility design on how keepers and others interact with the animals. We suggest that attention to these human factors provides major scope for improving the welfare of animals in zoos.

Indoor Confined Feedlots

Indoor confined feedlots offer advantages that make them desirable in northern climates where high rainfall and snowfall occur. These facilities increase the risk of certain health risks, including lameness and tail injuries. Closed confinement can also facilitate the rapid spread of infectious disease. Veterinarians can help to manage these health risks by implementing management practices to reduce their occurrence.

Housing and management factors associated with indicators of dairy cattle welfare

Knowledge of potential synergies and trade-offs between housing and management factors for different aspects of animal welfare is essential for farmers who aim to improve the level of welfare in their herds. The aim of this research was to identify and compare housing and management factors associated with prevalence of lameness, prevalence of lesions or swellings, prevalence of dirty hindquarters, and frequency of displacements (social behavior) in dairy herds in free-stall housing. Seven observers collected data regarding housing and management characteristics of 179 Dutch dairy herds (herd size: 22-211 cows) in free-stall housing during winter. Lame cows, cows with lesions or swellings, and cows with dirty hindquarters were counted and occurrence of displacements was recorded during 120 min of observation. For each of the four welfare indicators, housing and management factors associated with the welfare indicator were selected in a succession of logistic or log-linear regression analyses. Prevalence of lameness was associated with surface of the lying area, summer pasturing, herd biosecurity status, and far-off and close-up dry cow groups (P<0.05). Prevalence of lesions or swellings was associated with surface of the lying area, summer pasturing, light intensity in the barn, and days in milk when the maximum amount of concentrates was fed (P<0.05). Prevalence of dirty hindquarters was associated with surface of the lying area, proportion of stalls with fecal contamination, head lunge impediments in stalls, and number of roughage types (P<0.05). Average frequency of displacements was associated with the time of introducing heifers in the lactating group, the use of cow brushes, continuous availability of roughage, floor scraping frequency, herd size, and the proportion cows to stalls (P<0.05). Prevalences of lameness and of lesions or swellings were lower in herds with soft mats or mattresses (odd ratio (OR)=0.66 and 0.58, confidence interval (CI)=0.48-0.91 and 0.39-0.85) or deep bedding (OR=0.48 and 0.48, CI=0.32-0.71 and 0.30-0.77) in stalls, compared with concrete, and in herds with summer pasturing (OR=0.68 and 0.41, CI=0.51-0.90 and 0.27-0.61), compared with zero-grazing. Deep bedding in stalls was negatively associated with prevalence of dirty hindquarters (OR=0.50, CI=0.29-0.86), compared with hard mats. It was concluded that some aspects of housing and management are common protective factors for prevalence of lameness, lesions or swellings, and dirty hindquarters, but not for frequency of displacements.

Variation in equine management factors between riding schools with high vs. low insurance claims for orthopaedic injury: a field study

Lameness is the most commonly diagnosed condition in equine veterinary practice. To examine whether variations in management and husbandry strategies in riding schools could influence wastage due to orthopaedic injury schools with high (HUIO) or low (LUIO) insurance claims for orthopaedic injuries (as an indirect measure of wastage) were compared epidemiologically using an extensive questionnaire and field study visits. Schools differed in management strategies and these influence injury rate and longevity. For horses in the LUIO schools a significantly longer time period had elapsed since acquisition and they had higher (but not statistically significant) mean ages. The employment of experienced managers and highly qualified chief instructors had a protective effect against orthopaedic injury in both LUIO and HUIO types of school. LUIO schools were significantly more likely to have at least 11 weeks of introductory work for new horses and were more likely to be under private management.