The effect of dry cow winter management system on feed intake, performance and estimated energy demand

Provision of shelter during the prepartum period: Effects on behavior, blood analytes, and health status in dairy cows in winter

This study aimed to assess the effect of shelter provision during the prepartum period on lying, ruminating, and feeding behavior in outdoor-housed dairy cows exposed to winter weather conditions in a temperate climate. We also aimed to determine whether shelter provision during the prepartum period influenced blood analytes related to energy metabolism, body cleanliness, and health status. In this study, 2 cohorts of 12 multiparous Holstein prepartum cows were tested in winter. Twenty-five days before their expected calving date, the cows in each cohort were paired and randomly assigned to an open paddock without shelter or to one with access to an artificial shelter until calving. Shelter use, lying time, number of lying bouts, duration of lying bouts, rumination time, and feeding time were continuously recorded during the 3 wk before calving. Cows were assessed weekly for body cleanliness throughout the 3-wk prepartum period. A blood sample was taken from the coccygeal vein of each cow at wk -3, -2, -1, 1, 2, and 3 relative to calving date, and were assayed for nonesterified fatty acids (NEFA), β-hydroxybutyrate, and haptoglobin concentrations. Cases of clinical health disorders after calving were also recorded. The cows spent 60% of their daily time in the shelters, and for 75% of that time they were lying down. Cows with access to shelter during the prepartum period lay down around 3.2 h/d more than cows without shelter on wk -3 and -2 relative to calving. The cows with shelter access spent less time feeding during the morning (wk -3: 29.7 min; wk -2: 12.1 min; wk -1: 17.3 min) and afternoon (wk -3: 18.2 min; wk -2: 21.9 min) than cows without shelter access. As well, cows with shelter access showed a higher body cleanliness score (∼92 vs. ∼48%) and lower NEFA concentrations (wk -2: 0.27 vs. 0.44 mmol/L; wk -1: 0.46 vs. 0.64 mmol/L) in the precalving period, and lower haptoglobin concentrations in the first week postpartum (0.34 vs. 0.79 mg/mL) than cows without shelter access. We observed no treatment differences in daily rumination time, β-hydroxybutyrate concentrations, or postpartum health disorders. Despite the small number of dairy cows used in this study, these findings suggest that having access to a shelter during the prepartum period increases lying time, improves body cleanliness, and reduces adipose mobilization. Therefore, it is important to provide a protected area for the welfare of prepartum dairy cows exposed to winter climate conditions.

Effects of winter housing system on hygiene, udder health, frostbite, and rumination of dairy cows

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of 2 winter (December to April) housing systems on dairy cow hygiene scores, frostbite, teat condition, clinical mastitis, and activity and rumination across 3 winter seasons (2013, 2014, and 2015). Certified-organic cows (n = 268) were randomly assigned to 2 treatments (2 replicates per system): (1) outdoor straw pack (outdoor) or (2) 3-sided compost-bedded pack barn (indoor). Cows calved during 2 seasons (spring or fall) at the University of Minnesota West Central Research and Outreach Center, Morris, Minnesota, organic dairy. Organic wheat straw was used as bedding for the 2 outdoor straw packs, and bedding was maintained by farm management to keep cows dry and absorb manure throughout the winter. The compost-bedded pack barn (2 pens in the barn) was bedded with organic-approved sawdust, and the bedding material was stirred twice per day with a small chisel plow. Hygiene scores were recorded biweekly as cows exited the milking parlor. Incidence of clinical mastitis was recorded in a binary manner as treated (1) or not treated (0) at least once during a lactation. Frostbite incidence was collected monthly. Activity and rumination times (daily and 2-h periods) were monitored electronically using a neck collar sensor (HR-LD Tags, SCR Dairy, Netanya, Israel). Indoor cows had greater udder hygiene scores (1.75 vs. 1.46) and greater abdomen hygiene scores (1.79 vs. 1.43) compared with outdoor cows. Additionally, the indoor cows had greater upper and lower leg hygiene scores compared with outdoor cows. Incidence of clinical mastitis was greater for indoor cows compared with outdoor cows (27.1% vs. 15.1%, respectively). Frostbite incidence was not different between indoor (30.1%) and outdoor (17.5%) cows. Daily rumination was 509 min/d for indoor cows and 530 min/d for the outdoor cows. In summary, lactating cows housed outdoors on straw-bedded packs had cleaner udders and improved udder health compared with cows housed in a compost-bedded pack barn.

Effects of winter housing systems on production, economics, body weight, body condition score, and bedding cultures for organic dairy cows

Certified-organic dairy cows (n = 268) were used to evaluate the effect of 2 winter (December to April) housing systems on milk production, somatic cell score (SCS), body weight, body condition score (BCS), and economics across 3 winter seasons (2013, 2014, and 2015). Bedding cultures from the housing systems were also evaluated. Cows were randomly assigned to 2 treatments (2 replicates per group): (1) outdoor (straw pack, n = 140) or (2) indoor (3-sided compost bedded pack barn, n = 128). Cows calved during 2 seasons (spring or fall) at the University of Minnesota West Central Research and Outreach Center, Morris, Minnesota, organic dairy. Milk, fat, and protein production and SCS were recorded from monthly milk recording. Body weight and BCS were recorded biweekly as cows exited the milking parlor. Bedding cultures from the housing systems were collected biweekly. Costs for key inputs and the price received for milk production were recorded for the study period and averaged for use in the profitability analysis. Energy-corrected milk and SCS were not different for the outdoor (15.1 kg/d, 2.64) and indoor (15.7 kg/d, 2.57) housing systems, respectively. In addition, cows in the outdoor and indoor housing systems were not different for body weight (528 vs. 534 kg) and BCS (3.22 vs. 3.23), respectively. Daily dry matter intake was 19.1 kg/d for the outdoor cows and 19.6 kg/d for indoor cows. The total bacteria count from bedding samples tended to be lower in the outdoor (13.0 log₁₀ cfu/mL) compared with the indoor (14.9 log₁₀ cfu/mL) system. Milk revenue and feed cost were not different for the 2 housing systems. Labor and bedding costs were lower and net return was higher for the outdoor housing system. The outdoor straw pack system had a $1.42/cow per day net return advantage over the indoor compost bedded pack barn. In summary, lactating cows housed outdoors on straw-bedded packs did not differ for production or SCS, or for body weight, BCS, or dry matter intake, but had greater profitability than cows housed in an indoor compost bedded pack barn.

The economic, environmental and welfare implications of alternative systems of accommodating dairy cows during the winter months

Pasture grazed in situ is one of the most competitive and sustainable feeding systems for dairy cows globally because of a low environmental footprint, the potential for excellent animal welfare and the relatively low cost in the production and utilisation of the feed. However, because of seasonal variation in grass production and inclement weather conditions, dairy cattle may have to be accommodated and/or fed off pasture. There are numerous infrastructural options for achieving this and the focus of the present paper was to review the research and discuss the merits of these alternate animal accommodation systems, focussing on the impact that they have on the environment, animal welfare and farm profitability relative to pasture-only systems. Research data showed that dairy cow welfare can be protected in a range of well managed alternative winter accommodation. In a temperate climate, such as that which pertains in Ireland, adequately fed adult cattle will not use extra feed energy to maintain body temperature when accommodated outdoors and exposed to the effects of wind, rain and low temperatures, as the heat produced from the digestion of feed is in excess of the requirement to maintain body temperature. The main welfare challenge of a wintering system in such conditions is to provide suitable lying facilities for cows to express normal lying behaviour and provide adequate feed. The primary economic focus of pasture-based systems should be to maximise the length of the grass-grazing season and, consequently, to minimise the period off paddock. Provided that body condition targets can be met, there will be minimal effect of wintering system on dairy cow productivity and the only economic differences will be in costs. The cost analysis should combine the capital costs of construction financed over its useful life and the annual operating costs, including labour.