Welfare of dairy cows

This Scientific Opinion addresses a European Commission's mandate on the welfare of dairy cows as part of the Farm to Fork strategy. It includes three assessments carried out based on literature reviews and complemented by expert opinion. Assessment 1 describes the most prevalent housing systems for dairy cows in Europe: tie-stalls, cubicle housing, open-bedded systems and systems with access to an outdoor area. Per each system, the scientific opinion describes the distribution in the EU and assesses the main strengths, weaknesses and hazards potentially reducing the welfare of dairy cows. Assessment 2 addresses five welfare consequences as requested in the mandate: locomotory disorders (including lameness), mastitis, restriction of movement and resting problems, inability to perform comfort behaviour and metabolic disorders. Per each welfare consequence, a set of animal-based measures is suggested, a detailed analysis of the prevalence in different housing systems is provided, and subsequently, a comparison of the housing systems is given. Common and specific system-related hazards as well as management-related hazards and respective preventive measures are investigated. Assessment 3 includes an analysis of farm characteristics (e.g. milk yield, herd size) that could be used to classify the level of on-farm welfare. From the available scientific literature, it was not possible to derive relevant associations between available farm data and cow welfare. Therefore, an approach based on expert knowledge elicitation (EKE) was developed. The EKE resulted in the identification of five farm characteristics (more than one cow per cubicle at maximum stocking density, limited space for cows, inappropriate cubicle size, high on-farm mortality and farms with less than 2 months access to pasture). If one or more of these farm characteristics are present, it is recommended to conduct an assessment of cow welfare on the farm in question using animal-based measures for specified welfare consequences.

Strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers

•

Transitioning to freestalls can be challenging for heifers.

•

We evaluated the effects of social models and brushes on freestall use. No treatment effects were detected.

•

Lying behavior improved with days of exposure to freestalls.

•

Some abnormal behavior (lying in alley, lying backward in stall) persisted.

Dairy cattle can experience problems adjusting to freestalls when first introduced, resulting in a marked reduction in lying time and increased abnormal behaviors such as lying in the alley or lying backward in a stall. Our objective was to evaluate 2 strategies to ease the transition of heifers to freestalls: using an older, experienced heifer as a social model [experiment (Exp.) 1] or using brushes mounted in the stalls as an attractant (Exp. 2). In Exp. 1, 44 naïve heifers (129 ± 37 d of age, mean ± standard deviation) were assigned in pairs (n = 11 pairs/treatment) to either the control or social model (with an older heifer, 200 ± 24 d of age, as an experienced social companion) treatments. In Exp. 2, 52 naïve heifers (146 ± 9 d of age) were preassigned in pairs (n = 13 pairs/treatment) to either control or brush treatments. In both studies, heifers were initially housed in pens with a bedded pack (for 5 and 7 d in Exp. 1 and 2, respectively) before moving to pens in the same barn with sand-bedded freestalls. On d −2, 0, and 4 relative to the move to the freestalls, standing, perching (with the front hooves on the bedding and rear hooves in the alley), and lying (location: bedding vs. alley; direction in stall on d 0 and 4: forward or backward) were recorded at 5-min intervals. In addition, starting on d 0 relative to the move, latency to first lie down in a stall was recorded continuously. In both studies, time budgets did not differ between treatments. On the day heifers were moved, they spent less time lying relative to d −2 [Exp. 1: −1.8 h/d, standard error (SE): 0.4 h/d; Exp. 2: −3.0 h/d, SE: 0.3 h/d] and more time standing and perching. By d 4, lying and standing returned to d −2 baseline levels, although heifers continued to spend more time perching. When heifers moved to freestalls, no treatment differences were observed in the latency to lie down in a stall, but latencies differed between Exp. 1 (averaging approximately 3.8 h across treatments) and Exp. 2 (averaging 31.4 h across treatments). After moving to freestalls, the percentage of total lying time that heifers spent facing forward in a stall increased (Exp. 2: 53 vs. 77%, SE: 7%) or tended to (Exp. 1: 84 vs. 92%, SE: 3%) between d 0 and 4 of exposure, with no effect of treatment. Although lying behavior improved with days of exposure to freestalls, some heifers continued to lie down in the alley or backward in a stall, suggesting the need for additional work to ease the adjustment to freestall housing.

The effects of farming systems (organic vs. conventional) on dairy cow welfare, based on the Welfare Quality® protocol

Animal welfare in livestock production is of great interest to consumers. The organic farming approach strives to ensure animal welfare based on preventive measures, but there are very few scientific studies that compare the actual differences in animal welfare between organic and conventional farms. Those studies that have been carried out frequently focus on specific aspects of animal welfare, mostly health issues. The aim of the present study, therefore, was to investigate the effects of the farming system on the welfare of dairy cows in a more holistic way. Although this study was carried out in just two federal states of Germany, the results could serve as a suitable model for the whole country. We used the Welfare Quality assessment protocol to measure welfare for dairy cattle (Welfare Quality®, 2009) and the results showed significant differences (P < 0.05) between organic and conventional farms, but there was also considerable variance between individual farms of the same farming system. Organic farms scored higher in all four Welfare Quality® principles: "Good Feeding", "Good Housing", "Good Health" and "Appropriate Behavior" compared to conventional farms. In particular, organic farms obtained higher scores with respect to Welfare Quality® measures of resting comfort, which contributes to a lower percentage of lameness; organic farms also implemented less painful methods for disbudding, or indeed carried out no disbudding, and provided access to pasture and outdoor exercise. However, organic farms still have room for improvement, especially with respect to animal health. Therefore, outcome-based specifications should be included in the current (purely action-oriented) European regulation of organic production (EC, 2008; EU, 2018) to safeguard the health-related aspects of animal welfare.

The Freestall Reimagined: Effects on Stall Hygiene and Space Usage in Dairy Cattle

Modern freestall barns for dairy cattle have been constructed with considerations for dairy cow cleanliness; partitions and other stall features such as neck rails are designed to reduce manure contamination of bedding and decrease farm labor. However, cows prefer to lie in more open spaces, including on bedded packs and pasture. We created an "alternative" housing area by modifying a traditional freestall pen and including flexible partitions to create larger lying areas. We assessed cattle lying behaviour, including lying postures, in this alternative pen (ALT) compared to an open pack (OP) and freestalls (FS) with different stocking densities. We also assessed levels of manure contamination across systems. Cleanliness was highest in FS, but ALT provided substantial improvement compared to OP. Cattle spent more time lying down in OP and ALT compared to FS. There were few differences in postures (such as lying with limbs outstretched) between OP and ALT, but cows in both of these systems more often lay in extended positions compared to when they were housed in FS. Housing in OP and ALT was associated with reduced perching for cows with high body weight; perching has been linked to an increased prevalence of both hoof lesions and lameness. Thus, alternative lying areas can offer a solution for producers seeking to provide cattle with the advantages of a more open lying area, while improving hygiene relative to an open pack.

Making tiestalls more comfortable: III. Providing additional lateral space to improve the resting capacity and comfort of dairy cows

Dairy cows housed in tiestalls are restricted to one space; therefore, this space should be designed to accommodate all the activities cows need to perform. Lying is a very important behavior for dairy cows as well as a critical measure in the assessment of stall designs, to ensure that the cows' needs for resting space are met. The objective of this study was to determine if increasing tiestall width alters the lying behavior of lactating dairy cows. Two treatments were compared: the current recommendation (139 cm) and a double stall (284 cm). Sixteen cows were blocked by parity and lactation stage, then randomly allocated to a treatment and a stall within 1 of 2 rows in the research barn, for 6 wk. The average stall length was 188 cm. Leg-mounted accelerometers were used to record lying behaviors. Cows were video-recorded 24 h/wk using surveillance cameras positioned above the stalls. Video data from wk 1, 3, and 6 were extracted at a rate of 1 image/min and analyzed by a trained observer to assess the position and the location of the cow's body, head, and limbs during the lying hours. Lying behaviors and frequency of each position and location were analyzed in SAS (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) using a mixed model in which treatment, block, and week were included as fixed factors, and cow and row as random factors. Multiple comparisons were adjusted using the Scheffé method. Results indicate that cows in double stalls fully extended their hindlimbs more often than single stall cows (21.7 vs. 7.6% of lying time). Cows in double stalls also intruded in the neighboring stalls with their hindlimbs less often (1.3 vs. 14.7% of lying time), instead positioning them inside their own stall more often (92.7 vs. 84.6% of lying time). Use of the second stall in the double stall group totaled 11.6, 5.1, 33.8, and 18.0% of lying time, respectively, for the head, front legs, hind legs, and body. Total lying time was not statistically different between double (716 min/d) and single stall (671 min/d) groups. Contacts with stall hardware during lying-down movements were also less frequent in double stalls (43.1 vs. 77.1% of lying events) compared with single stalls. These results suggest that dairy cows housed in double stalls modified their resting habits and used the extra space made available to them. Increasing stall width beyond the current recommendation is likely to benefit the cows by improving their ability to rest.

Associations of freestall design and cleanliness with cow lying behavior, hygiene, lameness, and risk of high somatic cell count

The objective of this study was to investigate associations of freestall design and cleanliness with cow lying behavior, hygiene, lameness, and risk of new high somatic cell count (SCC). Cows from 18 commercial freestall dairy herds (22 ± 15 cows/farm; mean ± SD) in Ontario, Canada, were enrolled in a longitudinal study. Four hundred focal cows that were <120 d in milk, had no mastitis treatment in the last 3 mo, and had an SCC <100,000 cells/mL at their most recent milk test were selected for the study. Data on SCC were collected through Dairy Herd Improvement Association milk testing (at ~5-wk intervals). Each farm was visited 5 ± 3 d (mean ± SD) after each milk test until 3 tests were completed (~105 d), for a total of 3 observation periods per cow. Elevated SCC was used as an indicator of subclinical mastitis. An incident of new high SCC was defined as a cow having SCC >200,000 cells/mL at the end of an observation period, when SCC was <100,000 cells/mL at the beginning of that period. Lying behavior was recorded for 6 d after each milk sampling, using electronic data loggers. Cows were scored during each period for lameness (5-point scale, with scores ≥3 = lame), body condition score (BCS; 5-point scale; 1 = thin to 5 = fat), and hygiene (4-point scale). Stall cleanliness was assessed during each period with a 1.20 × 1.65-m metal grid, containing 88 squares. The grid was centered between stall partitions of every tenth stall on each farm, and the squares containing visible urine or fecal matter (or both) were counted. Cow lying time averaged 10.9 ± 1.9 h/d. On average, cows with low BCS (≤2.5) spent 37 ± 16.6 min/d less time lying down than high-BCS cows (≥4.0). On average, cows tended to spend 36 ± 18.3 min/d more time lying down in deep-bedded versus mattress-based stalls. Mean proportion of soiled squares per stall was 20.1 ± 0.50%. Across farms, cow lying time decreased as the proportion of soiled squares per stall increased. A difference in daily lying time of ~80 more min/d was modeled for cows housed in barns with the cleanest stalls compared with those with the dirtiest stalls. Higher neck rail height [for every 1 SD (10 cm) increase] increased the odds (odds ratio = 1.5) of cows having a dirty upper leg-flank and udder. The odds of a cow having a dirty upper leg-flank, udder, and lower legs were 1.5, 2.0, and 1.9 times greater, respectively, for cows housed with dirtier stalls. Also, cows housed on farms with dirtier stalls had 1.3 times greater odds of being lame at the time of observation. Over the study period, 50 new high-SCC cases were detected, resulting in an incidence rate of 0.45 cases of new high SCC per cow-year at risk. No measured factors were detected to be associated with risk of a new high SCC. Overall, our results confirm that cows lie down longer in cleaner and more comfortable environments. Further, these results highlight the need for improved stall cleanliness to optimize lying time and potentially reduce lameness.

Organic Dairy Cattle: Do European Union Regulations Promote Animal Welfare?

Animal welfare is an emerging concept in EU law; with the advent of specific regulations intending to protect animals. The approach taken by European lawmakers is to provide "minimum standards" for conventional farming; argued by some as failing to adequately protect animals. In contrast, the EU organic farming regulations aim to "establish a sustainable management system for agriculture" and promote "high animal welfare standards". The first aim of this review was to identify key areas where there are clear improvements in quality of life for dairy cattle housed under the EU organic regulations when compared to the conventional EU regulations. Using the available scientific evidence, our second aim was to identify areas where the organic regulations fail to provide clear guidance in their pursuit to promote high standards of dairy cattle welfare. The greater emphasis placed on natural living conditions, the ban of some (but unfortunately not all) physical mutilations combined with clearer recommendations regarding housing conditions potentially position the organic dairy industry to achieve high standards of welfare. However, improvements in some sections are needed given that the regulations are often conveyed using vague language, provide exceptions or remain silent on some aspects. This review provides a critical reflection of some of these key areas related to on-farm aspects. To a lesser extent, post farm gate aspects are also discussed.

Effects of cubicle characteristics on animal welfare indicators in dairy cattle

Cubicle characteristics such as cubicle dimensions or management factors such as cow-to-cubicle ratio could affect health and behaviour of dairy cows. The objective of this study was to estimate effects of cubicle characteristics on animal welfare indicators in dairy cattle. A total of 64 loose housing farms in Germany were assessed once during the winter housing period by one experienced assessor. Nearly 15% of the dairy cows had access to pasture during summer months for <6 h/day, whereas 85% were zero-grazing farms. Selected animal welfare indicators (duration of the lying down process, collisions of cows with cubicles, cows lying outside cubicles, cow cleanliness, integument alterations, lameness and subclinical mastitis incidence) of the Welfare Quality® protocol and cubicle characteristics such as cow-to-cubicle ratio and cubicle dimensions were recorded. Data were statistically analysed using a multiple linear regression approach. Pasture access and cubicle type were considered as potential influencing factors. Wider cubicles positively affected the proportion of dairy cows with dirty flanks (-18.5% per 10 cm increase) but increased the number of cows with severe integument alterations (+8.9% per 10 cm increase). Larger lying areas reduced the percentage of cows with dirty udders (-2.9% per 10 cm2 increase). Longer distances from neck rail to curb were associated with higher prevalence of cows with dirty flanks (+3.1% per 10 cm increase) and subclinical mastitis incidence (+1.2% per 10 cm increase). With increasing neck rail height, the duration of the lying down process (-0.1 s per 10% increase), the percentages of cows with dirty legs (-8.4% per 10 cm increase), dirty udders (-7.0% per 10 cm increase) and severe lameness (-3.0% per 10 cm increase) decreased. Compared with rubber mat-equipped cubicles, deep-bedded cubicles showed a reduction in the lying down duration (-0.8 s), percentages of cows with dirty legs (-34.2%), dirty udders (-30.5%) and lesions and swellings (-13.1%). Compared with farms that did not provide any summer grazing, pasture access was associated with an increase of cows with severe lameness (+5.6%). Contrastingly, the number of cows with subclinical mastitis incidence was lower when cows had access to pasture in summer (-5.4%). Findings of the present study indicate several associations between cubicle characteristics and animal welfare in dairy cattle. Bedding type was found as the most influencing factor in terms of health and behaviour. Results of this study are valuable for farmers to identify the optimal cubicle design and improve the animal welfare level.

Welfare Assessment of Dairy Cows in Small Farms in Bangladesh

Protocols for assessing the welfare of dairy cows in large scale intensive dairy systems in the developed world have been used extensively. Little attention has been paid to the use of similar welfare assessment protocols for small dairy enterprises in developing countries. We modified part of the standard assessment protocol and used it to assess aspects of the welfare of dairy cows in a field survey of 70 small farms in the Sirajgonj district of Bangladesh. Welfare indicators selected were mainly those of health and economic importance, such as lameness, lesions on the body and limbs, cleanliness levels, milk yield, and body condition. The study included physical examination of 700 cows and use of a structured questionnaire to collect data on health and management practices and farmers' perspectives about animal welfare. Mean milk yield, averaged across farms, was 10.3 L/d (range 6.3-14.2) and body condition assessment indicated that cows were, on average, thin. Hygiene management was often poor, with soiling of body parts with faeces. The prevalence of lameness, at 4.3%, was less than has commonly been observed in larger, more intensive dairy farms, but body injuries were commonly detected at the carpal and hock joints (56 and 51% of cows, respectively). This suggests that floors and/or bedding to lie on were inadequate. Many farmers did not follow routine vaccination and deworming schedules (63% and 31%, respectively) and farmers were not generally aware of the concept of animal welfare. The study demonstrates some similar welfare issues to those that have been commonly identified in large, intensive units, but also some differences, in particular a failure to provide good floors, bedding, and basic health care.

Invited review: Compost-bedded pack barns for dairy cows

Compost-bedded pack barns (CBP) are receiving increasing attention as a housing system for dairy cows that has potential to improve animal welfare. This article reviews current scientific knowledge about CBP with the aim of providing a comprehensive tool for producers and researchers using this housing system. In CBP, cows are provided with an open bedded pack area rather than the individual stalls and concrete alleys found in freestall systems. The bedded pack, a mixture of organic bedding and cattle excreta, is cultivated frequently (1-3 times per day) to incorporate fresh manure and air into the pack, thus promoting an aerobic composting process. To function well, CBP generally require a large area per cow. Optimal animal densities over the bedded area range from 7.4 to more than 15 m²/cow depending on several factors, including climate, bedding, pack management, and cow characteristics. Studies have indicated that CBP, compared with conventional systems such as freestall barns, have the potential to improve the welfare of dairy cows. In particular, the main reported benefits include improved comfort during resting, better foot and leg health, and more natural animal behavior. Research has also indicated that adequate udder health can be achieved in CBP. However, because the bedded pack has been shown to contain high bacterial concentrations, proper management is essential to maintain adequate cow cleanliness and reduce the risk of mastitis. Controlling pack moisture is consistently indicated as the most important issue with CBP. Especially under cold and humid weather conditions, large amounts of bedding may be necessary to keep the pack adequately dry and comfortable for the cows. Nevertheless, the improvements in cow health may offset the higher costs of bedding.

Bacterial concentrations in bedding and their association with dairy cow hygiene and milk quality

Comparison of bacterial counts (BCs) among common bedding types used for dairy cows, including straw, is needed. There is concern that the microbial content of organic bedding is elevated and presents risks for dairy cow udder health and milk quality. The objectives of this study were to investigate: (1) % DM and BCs (Streptococcus spp., all gram-negatives and specifically Klebsiella spp.) in different types of bedding sampled, and to investigate housing and farm management factors associated with % DM and BCs; (2) if bedding type was associated with hygiene of cow body parts (lower-legs, udder, upper-legs and flank) and housing and management factors associated with hygiene and (3) bedding types associated with higher BCs in cow milk at the farm level and bulk tank milk and management factors that were associated with highest BCs. Seventy farms (44 free-stall and 26 tie-stall) in Ontario, Canada were visited 3 times, 7 days apart from October 2014 to February 2015. At each visit, composite samples of unused and used bedding were collected for % DM determination and bacterial culture. Used bedding samples were collected from the back third of selected stalls. Data were analyzed using multivariable linear mixed models. Bedding classification for each farm were: new sand (n = 12), straw and other dry forage (n = 33), wood products (shavings, sawdust; n = 17) and recycled manure solids (RMSs)-compost, digestate (n = 8). In used bedding, across all bedding samples, sand was driest, compared to straw and wood, and RMS; higher % DM was associated with lower Streptococcus spp. count. Streptococcus spp. and all Gram-negative bacteria counts increased with increasing days since additional bedding was added. Gram-negative bacteria counts in used bedding varied with type: RMS = 16.3 ln colony-forming units (cfu)/mL, straw = 13.8 ln cfu/mL, new sand = 13.5 ln cfu/mL, and wood = 10.3 ln cfu/mL. Klebsiella spp. counts in used bedding were lower for wood products (5.9 ln cfu/mL) compared to all other bedding types. Mean cow SCC tended to be higher on farms with narrower stalls. Farms with mattress-based stalls had a higher prevalence of cows with dirty udders compared to those using a deep bedding system (often inorganic sand). Wider stalls were associated with lower bulk milk bacteria count. Lower % DM of used bedding was associated with higher bulk milk bacteria count. In conclusion, bedding management may have a profound impact on milk quality, bacterial concentrations in the bedding substrates, and cow hygiene.

Assessment of farmers' compliance in implementing recommended cow comfort changes and their effects on lying time, stall and cow cleanliness within smallholder dairy farms in Kenya

Our study aimed to evaluate farmers' compliance in implementing recommendations of farm-specific cow comfort changes, and the effects of these changes on lying time, stall cleanliness and cow cleanliness using a randomized controlled trial carried out on 100 smallholder dairy farms in Kenya, with 62 and 11 farms remaining in the intervention and control groups, respectively. On the first farm visit, data loggers were attached on lactating cows to determine lying time and questionnaires utilized to collect baseline data. Three days later, stall design and management recommendations were given to the intervention group of farmers orally and in written form. After an average of 39 ± 7 days, data loggers were re-attached, compliance was assessed, and a post-intervention questionnaire was administered to the intervention group on the third visit. Three days subsequent to the first and third visits, data loggers were removed from all cows. Data were analysed in Stata 14.2® using proportion tests and Kruskal-Wallis rank tests to compare cleanliness scores and lying time, respectively. Interaction effects between treatment groups and visits were assessed using multivariable mixed linear and logistic regression models. While 46 of the 62 intervention farmers (74%) made at least one recommended change to cow comfort, 63% of the 324 overall recommendations were implemented. The odds of a recommendation being implemented were significantly higher when:1) major recommendations were given relative to minor recommendations (OR = 6.28); 2) recommendations were related to floor characteristics (floor softness and flatness) in comparison to recommendations related to stall design (OR = 3.14). The odds of compliance were lower on: 1) farms where the farm-hands received the recommendations compared to farms that had the female principal farmer receive the recommendations (OR = 0.01); 2) farms that had recommended changes related to roof, alley and sharps fixes relative to stall design fixes (OR = 0.13). Post-intervention, stall, udder and upper hind-leg cleanliness scores improved significantly (p < 0.0001, p = 0.021 and p = 0.017, respectively) in the intervention farms but not in the control farms. There was no significant difference in lying times between intervention and control farms, with 0.6 and 0.2 h/day increases being recorded in the intervention and control groups, from the 10.9 and 10.4 h/day at baseline, respectively. Giving farm-specific cow comfort recommendations to smallholder dairy farmers in Kenya, and providing them with a participatory role in the formulation and implementation of improvement recommendations ensured good acceptance and a high degree of implementation, and led to a subsequent improvement in cow comfort and cleanliness.

Free-Stall Use and Preferences in Dairy Cows: A Case Study on Neck Rails Covered by Foam

Simple Summary

Neck rails are used in many free-stall barns; they are intended to keep cows standing at the rear of the stall such that faeces and urine are more likely to fall in the alley rather than on the stall surface. However, cows can come into contact with the neck rail when entering the stall or when standing up. This study tested the effect of covering neck rails with a protective foam surface, by allocating stalls to control and foam conditions using a crossover design. There was no effect of the foam treatment on the time that stalls were occupied for lying. Considering the time of individual stall occupation and the distribution of the stalls in the pen, it was found that cows preferred one of the two lying stall rows. Analysis of variance showed a significant difference between the time of stall occupation for two different rows in the pen, including the time for lying as well as the time of standing with two and four hooves in the stall. Results from this study can be used to support the design process for free-stall barns.

Abstract

This study tested the effect of neck rails equipped with and without foam on stall usage and preference by dairy cows. The hypothesis of the experiment, that cows prefer lying stalls with foam in comparison to stalls without foam, was rejected. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) in lying time and time spent standing with two and four hooves in the lying stalls between the two treatment groups. Considering the time of individual stall occupation and the distribution of stalls in the pen, cows showed a preference for one of two lying stall rows. Analysis of variance showed a significant difference (p < 0.001) between the time of stall occupation for the two different rows in the pen, including the time spent lying and the time spent standing with two and four hooves in the stall. Lying time per stall in the preferred row (near the feeding alley) in comparison with the alternative row was 580 ± 101 min·d⁻¹·stall⁻¹ versus 50 ± 28 min·d⁻¹·stall⁻¹, respectively. These results can support a design process for new barns with a free-stall housing system for dairy cattle.

Risk factors associated with cows' lying time, stall and cows' own cleanliness in smallholder dairy farms in Kenya

Background and Aim:

The welfare of animals kept in livestock production systems has raised concerns around the world. Adult dairy cattle require adequate rest and spend approximately 12 h/day lying down. This cross-sectional study aimed to determine the stall factors and management practices affecting cows’ lying time, stall cleanliness, and cows’ cleanliness (udder and upper leg), in smallholder dairy cows in Meru County of Kenya.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 106 milking cows from 73 farms were assessed for daily lying time and cleanliness. Data loggers were used to record the lying time of cows for 3 days. Stall, udder, and upper leg cleanliness were assessed using a 5-score system: 1 (very clean) to 5 (very dirty). Management information was acquired using a questionnaire that was administered face-to-face to the farmers in their native Kimeru language. Univariable and multivariable linear and logistic regression models were fit to determine factors associated with cows’ lying time and dichotomized stall and cows’ own cleanliness, respectively.

Results:

The mean daily lying time was 10.9±2.2 h, and the mean stall cleanliness score was 2.4±1.0. The mean average cleanliness scores of the udder and upper legs were 1.9±0.7 and 2.5±1.1, respectively. Overall, 35% of the stalls were categorized as dirty (>2.5), whereas 13% and 47% of the cows had udder and leg cleanliness scores >2.5, respectively. From the final multivariable models (p<0.05), daily lying time increased by 1.0 h for cows older than 5.25 years versus younger cows. Conversely, lying time decreased by 1.0 h with stall cleanliness scores >2.5 and by 1.6 h with poorly positioned neck rails. In an interaction term, addition of new bedding at least once a day without removing stall manure at least once a day decreased the daily lying time of the cows by 1.5 h, whereas failure to add new bedding at least once a day but removing stall manure at least once a day decreased the lying time of the cows by 1.2 h. Farm-level risk factors for stall dirtiness (>2.5) included delayed cleaning of the alley (odds ratio [OR]=6.6, p=0.032), lack of bedding (OR=4.9, p=0.008), and standing idle and/or backward in the stall (OR=10.5, p=0.002). Stalls categorized as dirty (OR=2.9, p=0.041) and lack of bedding (OR=2.7, p=0.065) were cow- and farm-level risk factors for dirtiness of the udder (>2.5), respectively, whereas the stall being dirty (OR=2.3, p=0.043) was the only risk factor (cow level) for dirtiness of the upper legs (>2.5).

Conclusion:

It was recommended that farmers should pay attention to the specific factors identified regarding the stall design (e.g., neck rail position) and bedding/manure management that impact the cleanliness of cows and their lying time.

Dairy cow preference for different types of outdoor access

Dairy cows display a partial preference for being outside, but little is known about what aspects of the outdoor environment are important to cows. The primary aim of this study was to test the preference of lactating dairy cattle for pasture versus an outdoor sand pack during the night. A secondary aim was to determine whether feeding and perching behavior changed when cows were provided outdoor access. A third objective was to investigate how the lying behavior of cows changed when given access to different outdoor areas. Ninety-six lactating pregnant cows were assigned to 8 groups of 12 animals each. After a baseline phase of 2 d in which cows were kept inside the freestall barn, cows were habituated to the outdoor areas by providing them access to each of the 2 options for 24 h. Cows were then given access, in random order by group, to either the pasture (pasture phase) or the sand pack (sand phase). As we tested the 2 outdoor options using space allowances consistent with what would be practical on commercial dairy farms, the space provided on pasture was larger (21,000 m²) than that provided on the sand pack (144 m²). Cows were tested at night (for 2 nights in each condition), from 2000 h until morning milking at approximately 0800 h, as preference to be outdoors is strongest at this time. During the next 3 nights cows were given access to both outside options simultaneously (choice phase). Feeding and perching behaviors were recorded when cows were indoors during the day and night periods. Lying behavior was automatically recorded by HOBO data loggers (Onset, Bourne, MA). Cows spent more time outside in the pasture phase (90.0 ± 5.9%) compared with the sand phase (44.4 ± 6.3%). When provided simultaneous access to both options, cows spent more time on pasture than on the sand pack (90.5 ± 2.6% vs. 0.8 ± 0.5%, respectively). Time spent feeding indoors during the day did not change regardless of what type of outdoor access was provided, but there was a decline in perching during the day when cows were provided access to either outdoor option at night. Lying time in the pasture phase was lower than in the baseline or sand phase. During the nighttime, lying time outside was not different between the sand (55.4 ± 7.9%) and pasture (52.0 ± 7.4%) phases. In summary, cows spent a considerable amount of time outside during the night when given the opportunity and showed a preference for a large pasture versus a small sand pack as an outdoor area.

Short communication: Stall occupancy behavior of Nili Ravi buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) when first introduced to freestall housing

The aim of the present study was to assess stall occupancy of Nili Ravi buffaloes when first introduced to freestall housing. Thirty Nili Ravi buffaloes of different parity, weight, and pregnancy status were enrolled from the dairy farm of the University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan. All of the enrolled animals had no previous experience with freestalls. The selected buffaloes were introduced to the freestall shed. During an adaptation period of 7 d, all buffaloes had 24 h of free access to lie down in 1 of 3 areas: (1) freestalls, (2) alleys, and (3) an outside open area. After the adaptation period, all buffaloes were housed indoors during nighttime (restricted period) to ensure that only freestalls or alleys were available as lying areas. An observer monitored animals at 0100 h and recorded the number of animals lying in freestalls, in alleys, and in the outside open area. The results indicated that during the adaptation period, herd-level freestall occupancy in buffaloes remained below 10%. During the restricted period, herd-level stall occupancy was 0, 13, 50, and 90% on d 1, 2, 5, and 17, respectively. Buffaloes with parity ≥3 took fewer days (6.6 ± 1.0; mean ± standard error of the mean) to occupy stalls than buffaloes with parity 2, 1, and heifers (13.2 ± 1.5, 16.7 ± 2.1, and 13.5 ± 2.1 d, respectively). Body weight and pregnancy status of buffaloes did not have any effect on stall occupancy. Buffaloes showed adjacent stall occupancy, filling opposite stalls first. The results indicated that older buffaloes occupied freestalls earlier than younger buffaloes. Our findings would help better manage buffaloes in freestall housing.

Benchmarking welfare indicators in 73 free-stall dairy farms in north-western Spain

The aim of this study was to describe the status of body condition score (BCS), hock injuries prevalence, locomotion and body hygiene score as animal welfare measures in 73 free-stall dairy cattle farms in Lugo (Spain). A benchmarking process was established across farms: (1) the animal-based indicators were ordered from low to high values; (2) The farms were classified into three categories based on the number of indicators within less than the 25th percentile, 25th to 75th percentile and above the 75th percentile. The median prevalence of unsuitable BCS, hock injuries and clinical lameness was (median (range)) 51.7 per cent (13.3 to 89.5 per cent), 40.0 per cent (7.0per cent to 100 per cent) and 9.0 per cent (0per cent to 60.0 per cent) respectively. The dirtiness of the cow's coat had a high prevalence (73.0 per cent (37.5per cent to 100 per cent)). Most farms did not display consistently good or poor animal-based indicators and each farm had its own set of strong and weak points. Moreover, facilities design and management practices were described to understand source of the observations made of the cows. The incidence of overstocking was 31.5 per cent for stalls and 26.0 per cent for headlocks. The front lunge space was reduced (<90 cm) on most dairies (90.4 per cent). Signs of poor natural ventilation (cobwebs or humidity on the roof) and ammonia odour were observed on 32.8 per cent and 85.0 per cent of the barns totally closed or with a side openingless than 50 per cent of the wall height. The milking parlour was designed with two or more turns more than 90° (9.3 per cent), and failed to allow cows to see the parlour before entering (45.2 per cent). On 52.0 per cent of dairies, more than 15 per cent of the cows had to be forcefully moved into the milking parlour. In conclusion, there was a big variation in the animal welfare levels within and across farms and they could benefit from others by changing management practices related to facilities and herds.

Review: welfare of dairy cows in continuously housed and pasture-based production systems

There is increasing interest in the use of continuous housing systems for dairy cows, with various reasons put forward to advocate such systems. However, the welfare of dairy cows is typically perceived to be better within pasture-based systems, although such judgements are often not scientifically based. The aim of this review was to interrogate the existing scientific literature to compare the welfare, including health, of dairy cows in continuously housed and pasture-based systems. Although summarising existing work, knowledge gaps and directions for future research are also identified. The scope of the review is broad, examining relevant topics under three main headings; health, behaviour and physiology. Regarding health, cows on pasture-based systems had lower levels of lameness, hoof pathologies, hock lesions, mastitis, uterine disease and mortality compared with cows on continuously housed systems. Pasture access also had benefits for dairy cow behaviour, in terms of grazing, improved lying/resting times and lower levels of aggression. Moreover, when given the choice between pasture and indoor housing, cows showed an overall preference for pasture, particularly at night. However, the review highlighted the need for a deeper understanding of cow preference and behaviour. Potential areas for concern within pasture-based systems included physiological indicators of more severe negative energy balance, and in some situations, the potential for compromised welfare with exposure to unpredictable weather conditions. In summary, the results from this review highlight that there remain considerable animal welfare benefits from incorporating pasture access into dairy production systems.

Societal views and animal welfare science: understanding why the modified cage may fail and other stories

The innovations developed by scientists working on animal welfare are often not adopted in practice. In this paper, we argue that one important reason for this failure is that the solutions proposed do not adequately address the societal concerns that motivated the original research. Some solutions also fail because they do not adequately address perceived constraints within the industry. Using examples from our own recent work, we show how research methods from the social sciences can address both of these limitations. For example, those who persist in tail-docking cattle (despite an abundance of evidence showing that the practice has no benefits) often justify their position by citing concern for cow cleanliness. This result informs the nature of new extension efforts directed at farmers that continue to tail dock, suggesting that these efforts will be more effective if they focus on providing producers with methods (of proven efficacy) for keeping cows clean. Work on pain mitigation for dehorning shows that some participants reluctant to provide pain relief believe that the pain from this procedure is short lasting and has little impact on the calf. This result informs the direction of new biological research efforts to understand both the magnitude and duration of any suffering that result from this type of procedure. These, and other examples, illustrate how social science methodologies can document the shared and divergent values of different stakeholders (to ensure that proposed solutions align with mainstream values), beliefs regarding the available evidence (to help target new scientific research that meets the perceived gaps), and barriers in implementing changes (to ease adoption of ideas by addressing these barriers).

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.

Herd-level risk factors for lameness in freestall farms in the northeastern United States and California

The objective was to investigate the association between herd-level management and facility design factors and the prevalence of lameness in high-producing dairy cows in freestall herds in the northeastern United States (NE; Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania) and California (CA). Housing and management measures such as pen space, stall design, bedding type, and milking routine were collected for the high-producing pen in 40 farms in NE and 39 farms in CA. All cows in the pen were gait scored using a 1-to-5 scale and classified as clinically lame (score ≥3) or severely lame (score ≥4). Measures associated with the (logit-transformed) proportion of clinically or severely lame cows at the univariable level were submitted to multivariable general linear models. In NE, lameness increased on farms that used sawdust bedding [odds ratio (OR)=1.71; 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.06-2.76] and decreased with herd size (OR=0.94; CI=0.90-0.97, for a 100-cow increase), use of deep bedding (OR=0.48; CI=0.29-0.79), and access to pasture (OR=0.52; CI=0.32-0.85). The multivariable model included herd size, access to pasture, and provision of deep bedding, and explained 50% of the variation in clinical lameness. Severe lameness increased with the percentage of stalls with fecal contamination (OR=1.15; CI=1.06-1.25, for a 10% increase) and with use of sawdust bedding (OR=2.13; CI=1.31-3.47), and decreased with use of deep bedding (OR=0.31; CI=0.19-0.50), sand bedding (OR=0.32; CI=0.19-0.53), herd size (OR=0.93; CI=-0.89-0.97, for a 100-cow increase), and rearing replacement heifers on site (OR=0.57; CI=0.32-0.99). The multivariable model included deep bedding and herd size, and explained 59% of the variation of severe lameness. In CA, clinical lameness increased with the percentage of stalls containing fecal contamination (OR=1.15; CI=1.05-1.26, for a 10% increase), and decreased with herd size (OR=0.96; CI=0.94-0.99, for a 100-cow increase), presence of rubber in the alley to the milking parlor (OR=0.46; CI=0.28-0.76), distance of the neck rail from the rear curb (OR=0.97; CI=0.95-0.99, for a 1-cm increase), water space per cow (OR=0.92; CI=0.85-0.99, for a 1-cm increase), and increased frequency of footbaths per week (OR=0.90; CI=081-0.99, for a 1-unit increase). The multivariable model included herd size, percentage of stalls containing fecal contamination, and presence of rubber in the alley to the milking parlor, and explained 44% of the variation of clinical lameness. Severe lameness increased with the percentage of stalls containing fecal contamination (OR=1.23; CI=1.06-1.42, for a 10% increase) and decreased with frequency of manure removal in the pen per day (OR=0.72; CI=0.53-0.97, for a 1-unit increase). The final model included both variables and explained 28% of the variation in severe lameness. In conclusion, changes in housing and management may help decrease the prevalence of lameness on dairy farms, but key risk factors vary across regions.