Effects of providing total mixed rations indoors and on pasture on the behavior of lactating dairy cattle and their preference to be indoors or on pasture

Pasture access and eye temperature in dairy cows

Pasture access can benefit dairy cows' behavior, health, and welfare, but herds are increasingly housed indoors full-time. Recent infrared thermal-imaging (thermography) studies suggest that higher eye temperatures may be a physiological indicator of chronic stress. We, therefore, hypothesized that, compared to cows with pasture access, cows housed indoors full-time would have higher eye temperatures. In a two-phase crossover experiment, 29 Holstein-Friesian dairy cows experienced 18 days of overnight pasture access and 18 days of full-time indoor housing. We measured each animal's eye temperature 16 times (eight/phase). During Phase One, cows with pasture access had higher eye temperatures than cows housed indoors full-time (contrary to our hypothesis). However, during Phase Two, cows with pasture access had lower eye temperatures than cows housed indoors full-time. It is, therefore, unclear whether eye temperature reflected disparities in dairy cow welfare between different housing treatments.

Outdoor access practices in the Canadian dairy industry

Dairy cows are highly motivated to access pasture and have a partial preference for alternative forms of outdoor access (e.g., deep-bedded outdoor sand or wood-chip packs). In addition, Canadians value the provision of outdoor access to dairy cows as they perceive it as important for good cow welfare. In contrast to Europe, Oceania, and the United States, little data exist on the use of outdoor access on Canadian dairy farms. Therefore, our objective was to assess current outdoor access practices for dairy cows in Canada. An online questionnaire was used to determine housing and outdoor access practices for lactating cows, dry cows, pregnant heifers, and weaned, nonpregnant heifers on Canadian dairy farms. The questionnaire was distributed by the 10 provincial milk boards between November 2020 and August 2021, resulting in an 8.9% response rate (n = 903 completed questionnaires). In total, 75% (n = 675) of respondents provided some form of outdoor access to at least 1 cattle class on their farm. Pasture was the most frequently used form of outdoor access for all cattle classes. Based on a weighted average, a total of 29% and 48% of Canadian dairy farms provided lactating and dry cows, respectively, access to pasture; for youngstock, these numbers were 48% and 27% for pregnant heifers and weaned, nonpregnant heifers, respectively. Herd size (for each cow class), indoor housing system, and region were all associated with the provision of pasture. Farms with larger lactating herds less often provided access to pasture; larger herd sizes in terms of weaned, nonpregnant heifers, pregnant heifers, and dry cows were also associated with a lower likelihood of access to pasture. Farms using indoor bedded pack housing for their lactating cows more often provided pasture to this cattle class than farms with freestall or tiestall housing; this likelihood did not differ between farms with tie or freestall housing for this cattle class. Dry cows or pregnant heifers housed in a tiestall were more often provided pasture than freestall-housed dry cows or pregnant heifers. Housing type for weaned, nonpregnant heifers was not associated with the likelihood of pasture provision. Farms in British Columbia or on Canada's East Coast (i.e., Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island) more often provided lactating cows pasture compared with farms in other regions. For the other 3 cattle classes, farms on the East Coast of Canada more often provided pasture than farms in other parts of Canada. These results will inform future decisions regarding outdoor access for Canadian dairy cattle and may also aid in identifying future areas of research. For example, our results may aid in designing housing systems that facilitate outdoor access in larger herds and in areas that are subject to more extreme weather conditions.

Comparison between the Behavior of Low-Yield Holstein-Friesian and Brown Swiss Cows under Barn and Pasture Feeding Conditions

Cow pasturing poses many logistical and nutritional problems. Animals have more difficulty accessing pasture feed and require more time to consume the equivalent amount of dry matter compared to total mixed ration (TMR) feed from a feed table. The study was conducted during August 2016-October 2017 on 64 Holstein-Friesian (HF) cows and 54 Brown Swiss (BS) cows. All animals were equipped with CowManager sensor devices, and the cows' behaviors were recorded: time spent on feed intake, rumination, physical activity, and rest. In winter, cows were mainly fed hay, while in summer, they took forage from the pasture or freshly cut forage provided in the barn. The study showed that the time of day had a significant (p < 0.001) effect on the cows' feeding behaviors. The study also showed behavioral differences between HF and BS breeds. HF cows, regardless of the location and type of feed provided, spent more time on feed intake and chewed less compared to the BS breed. These differences were observable in all studied lactation groups. Animals were most willing to take forage two hours before sunrise and two hours before sunset and showed an increased willingness to take feed immediately after leaving the milking parlor.

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.

Effects of nomadic grazing system and indoor concentrate feeding systems on performance, behavior, blood parameters, and meat quality of finishing lambs

The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of three production systems on growth performance, behavior, blood parameters, carcass characteristics, and meat quality. A total of 30 lambs (n = 10 lambs/treatment) were randomly assigned to three production systems that included rotational grazing (NG) and two different levels of concentrate (CON), one with medium (roughage/concentrate ratio 50:50% based on DM, MC) and one with high concentrate (roughage/concentrate ratio 30:70% based on DM, HC) during the 90-day fattening period. At the start of the experiment, all lambs averaged 90 ± 4 days of age (mean ± SD) and were slaughtered at an average of 180 ± 3 days (mean ± SD). CON-fed lambs had higher average daily gain and loin thickness than NG-fed lambs. The NG lambs spent more time eating, drinking, and standing, but less time resting and rumination than the CON-fed lambs. In addition, plasma lipid, β-hydroxybutyrate, and urea levels were higher, while phosphorus levels were lower in NG-fed lambs than in CON-fed lambs. CON-fed lambs had better carcass yield, but gastrointestinal tract and rumen weights were lower than NG lambs. CON-fed lambs had higher pH values 0 h post mortem than the NG lambs; however, there was no effect of treatment on pH 24 h post mortem. The post-mortem color of the LD muscle of NG lambs had a higher lightness and yellowness index and a lower redness index than that of the LD muscle of CON-fed lambs. The results of this study showed that lambs fed CON had better carcass yield than lambs fed NG, although feed intake, feed conversion ratio (FCR), growth performance, carcass yield, and meat quality of lambs fed MC and HC were similar.

Contrasting Fecal Methanogenic and Bacterial Profiles of Organic Dairy Cows Located in Northwest Washington Receiving Either a Mixed Diet of Pasture and TMR or Solely TMR

Currently, little is known regarding fecal microbial populations and their associations with methanogenic archaea in pasture-based dairy cattle. In this study, we assessed the fecal microbiome of organic dairy cows across different time points receiving a mixed diet of pasture and total mixed ration (TMR) or TMR only. We hypothesized that the fecal methanogenic community, as well as co-occurrence patterns with bacteria, change across diets. To test these hypotheses, we analyzed TMR and pasture samples, as well as the V3-V4 region of 16S rRNA of fecal samples collected over the course of a one-year study period from 209 cows located on an organic dairy in Northwest Washington. The inherent variability in pasture quality, quantity, availability, and animal preference can lead to diverse dietary intakes. Therefore, we conducted a k-means clustering analysis to identify samples from cows that were associated with either a pasture-based diet or a solely TMR diet. A total of 4 clusters were identified. Clusters 1 and 3 were mainly associated with samples primarily collected from cows with access to pasture of varying quality and TMR, cluster 2 was formed by samples from cows receiving only TMR, and cluster 4 was a mix of samples from cows receiving high-quality pasture and TMR or TMR only. Interestingly, we found little difference in the relative abundance of methanogens between the community clusters. There was evidence of differences in diversity between pasture associated bacterial communities and those associated with TMR. Cluster 4 had higher diversity and a less robust co-occurrence network based on Spearman correlations than communities representing TMR only or lower-quality pasture samples. These findings indicate that varied bacterial communities are correlated with the metabolic characteristics of different diets. The overall good pasture and TMR quality in this study, combined with the organic allowance for feeding high levels of TMR even during the grazing season, might have contributed to the lack of differences in the fecal archaeal community from samples associated with a mixed pasture and TMR diet, and a TMR only diet. Mitigation strategies to decrease methane emissions such as increasing concentrate to forage ratio, decreasing pasture maturity and adopting grazing systems targeting high quality pasture have been shown to be efficient for pasture-based systems. However, the allowance for organic dairy producers to provide up to an average of 70% of a ruminant's dry matter demand from dry matter fed (e.g., TMR), suggests that reducing enteric methane emissions may require the development of novel dietary strategies independent of pasture management.

A “Good Life” for Dairy Cattle: Developing and Piloting a Framework for Assessing Positive Welfare Opportunities Based on Scientific Evidence and Farmer Expertise

Simple Summary

There is increasing appetite to understand how we can provide quality of life to farm animals. A framework to evaluate positive welfare opportunities for dairy cattle was developed using a participatory approach where farmer’s recommendations were integrated into a scientific framework and piloted on farm by vets. When provided with the opportunity to collaborate, farmers and scientists broadly agree on what constitutes “a good life” for dairy cattle and worked together to develop an assessment framework. Farmers did not agree equally on the value of each positive welfare opportunity. However, farmers supported positive welfare assessment as a means of recognition and reward for higher animal welfare, within existing farm assurance schemes, and to justify national and global marketing claims of higher animal welfare.

Abstract

On-farm welfare assessment tends to focus on minimising negative welfare, but providing positive welfare is important in order to give animals a good life. This study developed a positive welfare framework for dairy cows based on the existing scientific literature which has focused on developing positive welfare indicators, and trialled a participatory approach with farmers; refining the framework based on their recommendations, followed by a vet pilot phase on farm. The results revealed that farmers and scientists agree on what constitutes “a good life” for dairy cattle. Farmers value positive welfare because they value their cows’ quality of life, and want to be proud of their work, improve their own wellbeing as well as receive business benefits. For each good life resource, the proportion of farmers going above and beyond legislation ranged from 27 to 84%. Furthermore, barriers to achieving positive welfare opportunities, including monetary and time costs, were not apparently insurmountable if implementation costs were remunerated (by the government). However, the intrinsic value in providing such opportunities also incentivises farmers. Overall, most farmers appeared to support positive welfare assessment, with the largest proportion (50%) supporting its use within existing farm assurance schemes, or to justify national and global marketing claims. Collaborating with farmers to co-create policy is crucial to showcase and quantify the UK’s high welfare standards, and to maximise engagement, relevance and uptake of animal welfare policy, to ensure continuous improvement and leadership in the quality of lives for farm animals.

Dairy cows value an open area for lying down

As dairy cows are being housed for longer periods, with all-year-round housing growing in popularity, it is important to ensure housed environments are meeting the needs of cows. Dairy cows are motivated to access open lying areas, although previous motivation studies on this topic have confounded surface type and location (i.e. pasture outdoors vs cubicles indoors). This study measured cow motivation for lying down on an indoor open mattress (MAT; 9 m x 5 m) compared to indoor mattress-bedded cubicles, thus removing the confounding factor of surface type and location. This was repeated for an identically sized indoor deep-bedded straw yard (ST), to investigate whether surface type affected motivation for an open lying area. Thirty Holstein-Friesian dairy cows were housed in groups of 5 (n = 5 x 6) in an indoor robotic milking unit with access to six mattress-bedded cubicles. To assess motivation, cows were required to walk increasing distances via a one-way indoor raceway to access the open lying areas: Short (34.5 m), followed by Medium (80.5 m) and Long (126.5 m). Cows could choose to walk the raceway, leading to the MAT or ST, to lie down or they could lie down on the cubicles for ‘free’. Overall, cows lay down for longer on the open lying areas at each distance compared to the cubicles, with cows lying down slightly longer on ST than MAT, although lying times on the open lying areas did decrease at the Long distance. However, cows were still lying for >60% of their lying time on the open lying areas at the Long distance. This study demonstrates that cows had a high motivation for an open lying area, the provision of which could better cater for the behavioural needs of housed dairy cows and improve housed dairy cow welfare.

Historical Evolution of Cattle Management and Herd Health of Dairy Farms in OECD Countries

This work aimed to review the important aspects of the dairy industry evolution at herd level, interrelating production with health management systems. Since the beginning of the industrialization of the dairy cattle sector (1950s), driven by the need to feed the rapidly growing urban areas, this industry has experienced several improvements, evolving in management and technology. These changes have been felt above all in the terms of milking, rearing, nutrition, reproductive management, and design of facilities. Shortage of labor, emphasis on increasing farm efficiency, and quality of life of the farmers were the driving factors for these changes. To achieve it, in many areas of the world, pasture production has been abandoned, moving to indoor production, which allows for greater nutritional and reproductive control of the animals. To keep pace with this paradigm in milk production, animal health management has also been improved. Prevention and biosecurity have become essential to control and prevent pathologies that cause great economic losses. As such, veterinary herd health management programs were created, allowing the management of health of the herd as a whole, through the common work of veterinarians and farmers. These programs address the farms holistically, from breeding to nutrition, from prevention to consultancy. In addition, farmers are now faced with a consumer more concerned on animal production, valuing certified products that respect animal health and welfare, as well as environmental sustainability.

Production performance, nutrient use efficiency, and predicted enteric methane emissions in dairy cows under confinement or grazing management system

There has been an intense debate regarding the economic, social, and environmental sustainability of confinement versus grazing dairy systems. Our goal was to conduct a meta-analysis to compare dry matter intake, milk yield and composition, nutrient use efficiency (i.e., feed efficiency, milk N efficiency), and predicted enteric CH₄ emissions using studies that simultaneously evaluated confinement and grazing. We were able to include in the meta-analysis 8 peer-reviewed articles that met the following selection criteria: (1) publication between 1991 and 2021 in English language, (2) report either SEM or SD, (3) inclusion of at least 1 confinement [total mixed ration or fresh cut herbage fed indoors (i.e., zero-grazing)] and 1 grazing treatment in the same study, and (4) use of markers (internal or external) to estimate herbage dry matter intake. Two unpublished experiments were added to the data set resulting in a total of 10 studies for comparing confinement and grazing. The magnitude of the effect (i.e., effect size) was evaluated using weighted raw mean differences between grazing and confinement systems for a random effect model. Enteric CH₄ production was predicted as follows: CH₄ (g/d) = 33.2 (13.54) + 13.6 (0.33) × dry matter intake + 2.43 (0.245) × neutral detergent fiber. Dry matter intake (–9.5%), milk yield (–9.3%), milk fat yield (–5.8%), milk protein yield (–10%), and energy-corrected milk (–12%) all decreased in grazing versus confined dairy cows. In contrast, concentration of milk fat and feed efficiency (energy-corrected milk/dry matter intake) were not affected by management system. Whereas milk protein concentration increased, milk nitrogen (N) efficiency (milk N/N intake) tended to decrease in grazing compared with confinement. Predicted enteric CH₄ production was 6.1% lower in grazing than confined dairy cows. However, CH₄ yield (g/kg of dry matter intake) and CH₄ intensity (g/kg of energy-corrected milk) did not change between confinement and grazing. In conclusion, while production performance decreased in grazing dairy cows, nutrient use efficiency and predicted enteric CH₄ emissions were relatively similar in both management systems. Results of our meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of studies that met our inclusion criteria leading to a limited number of treatment mean comparisons.

Preweaning dairy calves' preferences for outdoor access

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

Production and Health Management from Grazing to Confinement Systems of Largest Dairy Bovine Farms in Azores: A Farmers' Perspective

Simple Summary

This study aimed to evaluate differences and critical factors in production and health management between dairy cattle farms with fixed milk parlours (FMP), and mobile milk systems (MMS) from Azorean grasslands. According to the farmers’ perspective, calf diarrhea, calf pneumonia, infertility/poor reproductive management, and mastitis were the main problems that farms faced in 2020. FMP was associated with more advanced and mechanized production systems, with a higher adherence to preventive and biosecurity control programs, than traditional MMS farms. MMS farms also showed a greater vocation for dual-purpose farming (beef and milk), smaller herd sizes and more grazing time for cows. In conclusion, inherent and non-inherent differences in production and health management between FMP and MMS were quantified by authors. These results indicate that a greater adoption of preventive veterinary medicine and biosecurity measures should be taken, especially among MMS farms. The education of farmers should also be improved and stimulated.

Abstract

The intensification of bovine milk production in the Azores has led farmers to increase farm size and specialization in grasslands, implementing confined and semi-confined production systems. Fixed milking parlours (FMP) have progressively gained more popularity, at the expense of conventional mobile milking systems (MMS). The present study aimed to evaluate the associations between production and health management in dairy cattle farms, with FMP or MMS, in grasslands (São Miguel, Azores), according to the farmers’ perspective. A total of 102 questions about production and health management were surveyed in 105 farms with >30 dairy cows each. Farms with FMP were associated (p ≤ 0.05) with larger herd size, better facilities, and specialized management, however, the adoption of preventive and biosecurity measures should be improved by these farmers. MMS farms implemented a lower level of disease prevention or control programs, less frequent transhumance, and showed a wider vocation to dual-purpose (milk and cross beef) than FMP farms. In conclusion, MMS and FMP farms tried to optimize yield and economic viability in different ways using grasslands. Several biosecurity and health prevention constraints were identified for improvement.

Understanding Behavioural Development of Calves in Natural Settings to Inform Calf Management

Simple Summary

Animal welfare research is intended to address societal concerns regarding animal care, including natural living concerns. We reviewed the literature on calf behaviour when reared in more naturalistic outdoor systems with their mothers and herd. Understanding calf behaviour in more natural settings may help inform changes in calf management and housing that promote behaviours important to calf welfare.

Abstract

One important type of animal welfare concern is “natural living” (i.e., that animals are able to express natural behaviours that are important to them, and to engage with aspects of the natural world that they find important). The aims of this narrative review were to describe the behavioural development of calves (Bos taurus) in natural settings and use this to identify characteristics of natural systems that may be important to consider relative to this natural living conception of animal welfare. At birth, calves are licked by their mothers and soon stand to suckle for colostrum, and during the milk-feeding period, calves spend much of their time lying down. In natural systems, calves perform a variety of social behaviours with herd-mates, and slowly transition from their mother’s milk to eating solid food, by gradually increasing time spent grazing and ruminating. In contrast, on most commercial dairy systems, dairy calves are removed from their mothers at birth, housed individually, fed restricted amounts of milk and weaned abruptly at a young age. The results of this review suggest that accommodating key natural behaviours, for example through the use of teat feeding of milk, social housing, and gradual weaning, can help address welfare concerns.

Perspectives of Western Canadian dairy farmers on providing outdoor access for dairy cows

Dairy cows are highly motivated to access pasture, especially at night in summer. When pasture is not available, dairy cows show a partial preference for alternative types of outdoor access, spending half the night outside in summer on an outdoor sand or wood chip pack. However, many dairy farms do not provide cows outside access. To better understand reasons why dairy farmers choose to provide or not provide outdoor access, we studied the perspectives of dairy farmers located in the 4 Western Canadian provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Data were collected via (1) 11 focus group discussions with a total of 50 Western Canadian dairy farmers, and (2) semi-structured individual interviews with 6 dairy farmers of Hutterite colonies. Transcripts were analyzed using template analysis. Reasons to not provide outdoor access fell into 5 main themes: (1) adverse climate conditions, (2) negative implications of outdoor access for cow welfare including concerns about udder health, (3) concerns regarding decreases in profitability, (4) farm infrastructure not set up for outdoor access, and (5) higher ability to manage animals kept indoors. Reasons to provide outdoor access fell into the 5 main themes: (1) local climate conditions conducive for outdoor access, (2) beneficial effects of outdoor access on cow welfare including lower lameness prevalence, (3) increased profitability due to a premium milk price provided to farmers that allow pasture access to their cows, (4) farm infrastructure that is set up for outdoor access, and (5) easier management of animals outdoors. We conclude that the decision to provide outdoor access depends on how farmers weigh these factors given the constraints on their farm, as well as their personal beliefs and values.

Effect of low and high concentrate supplementation on health and welfare indicators in different breeds in small-scale mountain dairy farms

We investigated and compared the effects of low and high concentrate supplementation in terms of animal welfare, health and reproductive performance in two different dairy cow breeds on small-scale mountain farms. 64 South Tyrolean dairy farms were evaluated using an on-farm assessment for animal-based and resource-based welfare indicators, data from test day records, and a questionnaire for the farmer. Farms were divided into four groups: low input Tyrolean Grey (L-TG), low input Brown Swiss (L-BS), high input Tyrolean Grey (H-TG) and high input Brown Swiss (H-BS). Effects of intensity level, breed and their interaction were calculated and analyzed statistically. The predominant husbandry system across all groups was tie-stall. The average energy-corrected milk yield increased with increasing concentrate level, with L-TG showing the lowest and H-BS showing the highest milk yield. Age at first calving was lowest in H-BS when compared to all other systems, while numbers of lactations were higher in L-TG compared to H-BS. Feed efficiency (percentage of milk out of roughage) was significantly higher in L-TG and L-BS when compared to H-TG and H-BS. L-BS showed the poorest results for most of the welfare indicators such as lean cows, lesions and percentage of dirty animals. In conclusion, a higher concentrate level in diets does not lead automatically to lower animal welfare for dairy cows in alpine regions. Indeed, keeping high yielding breeds in extensive systems seems to be challenging. The dual-purpose breed TG showed some clear advantages in that calving interval was lower and the number of lactations greater.

The effects of heat stress on the behaviour of dairy cows – a review

Heat stress in livestock is a function of macro- and microclimatic factors, their duration and intensity, the environments where they occur and the biological characteristics of the animal. Due to intense metabolic processes, high-producing dairy cows are highly vulnerable to the effects of heat stress. Disturbances in their thermoregulatory capability are reflected by behavioural, physiological and production changes. Expression of thermoregulatory behaviour such as reduction of activity and feed intake, searching for a cooler places or disturbances in reproductive behaviours may be very important indicators of animal welfare. Especially maintain of standing or lying position in dairy cattle may be a valuable marker of the negative environmental impact. Highly mechanized farms with large numbers of animals have the informatic system can detect alterations automatically, while small family farms cannot afford these type of equipments. Therefore, observing and analysing behavioural changes to achieve a greater understanding of heat stress issue may be a key factor for developing the effective strategies to minimize the effects of heat stress in cattle. The aim of this review is to present the state of knowledge, over the last years, regarding behavioural changes in dairy cows (Bos Taurus) exposed to heat stress conditions and discuss some herd management strategies provided mitigation of the overheat consequences.

A method for assessing sustainability, with beef production as an example

A comprehensive approach to decisions about the use of land and other world resources, taking full account of biological and other scientific information, is crucial for good decisions to be made now and in future. The sustainability of systems for producing food and other products is sometimes assessed using too narrow a range of component factors. A production system might be unsustainable because of adverse effects on a wide range of aspects of human welfare, animal welfare, or the environment. All factors should be included in sustainability evaluation, otherwise products or actions might be avoided without adequate consideration of key factors or of the diversity of production systems. A scoring method that is based on scientific information and potentially of general relevance is presented here, using beef production as a example with a review of each of its sustainability components. This includes an overall combined score and specific factors that make the system unacceptable for some consumers. The results show that, in this example, the sustainability of the best systems is very much better than that of the worst systems. By taking account of scores for a wide range of components of sustainability in comparing beef-production systems, better quality policies about beef use can be formulated than when statements referring only to one system are considered. The least sustainable beef-production systems are extensive grazing that causes land degradation and the use of feedlots or indoor housing with grain feeding. Semi-intensive silvopastoral systems are the most sustainable beef-production systems, and well-managed pasture-fed beef from areas where crop production is uneconomic is also sustainable. This simple, scientifically based scoring system could be modified to use positive as well as negative scores and is of value for policy makers, researchers, producers, organisations aiming to improve sustainability, and the general public.

Optimism and pasture access in dairy cows

Allowing dairy cattle to access pasture can promote natural behaviour and improve their health. However, the psychological benefits are poorly understood. We compared a cognitive indicator of emotion in cattle either with or without pasture access. In a crossover experiment, 29 Holstein-Friesian dairy cows had 18 days of overnight pasture access and 18 days of full-time indoor housing. To assess emotional wellbeing, we tested cows on a spatial judgement bias task. Subjects learnt to approach a rewarded bucket location, but not approach another, unrewarded bucket location. We then presented cows with three "probe" buckets intermediate between the trained locations. Approaching the probes reflected an expectation of reward under ambiguity-an "optimistic" judgement bias, suggesting positive emotional states. We analysed the data using linear mixed-effects models. There were no treatment differences in latency to approach the probe buckets, but cows approached the known rewarded bucket slower when they had pasture access than when they were indoors full-time. Our results indicate that, compared to cattle housed indoors, cattle with pasture access display less anticipatory behaviour towards a known reward. This reduced reward anticipation suggests that pasture is a more rewarding environment, which may induce more positive emotional states than full-time housing.

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

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

The Influence of Different Types of Outdoor Access on Dairy Cattle Behavior

Pasture access for dairy cows is highly valued both by cows and the public at large. When pasture access is not feasible, farmers can provide cows with alternative forms of outdoor access, such as an outdoor bedded pack, that may be easier to implement on some farms. We reviewed the literature on how lying, standing, walking, feeding, social, and estrus behaviors are influenced by pasture and other types of outdoor areas. Pasture allows the expression of grazing and can facilitate the expression of lying, standing, walking, and estrus behaviors. In addition, pasture can decrease the number of negative social interactions between cows, likely because more space per cow is provided than what is normally available indoors. The provision of soft flooring and an open space in outdoor bedded packs appears to provide some benefits for lying, standing, and walking behavior and may also have positive effects on social behavior, especially with larger space allowances. The effects of an outdoor bedded pack on estrus behavior are less well-documented, but the provision of a standing surface that provides better footing than typically available indoors may promote estrus behavior. Alternative outdoor areas assessed to date appear to be less attractive for cows than pasture, perhaps because these areas do not provide the opportunity to graze. We encourage future research to investigate the importance of grazing for dairy cows. The motivation of dairy cows to access alternative outdoor areas should also be investigated. As cow preference for the outdoors depends on many factors, providing cows a choice may be of particular importance.

Assessing whether dairy cow welfare is "better" in pasture-based than in confinement-based management systems

Consumers perceive pasture-based systems of milk production as natural and therefore better for cow welfare than confinement systems. However both systems are heterogeneous and continually evolving, varying from total confinement to total pasture with many hybrid intermediaries. To compare the welfare of dairy cows in these various systems, we use the three spheres framework, comprising biological functioning, natural behaviour and affective states. Considering biological functioning, pasture-based cows are less at risk of subclinical and clinical mastitis, claw lesions, lameness, metritis, early embryonic mortality, culling and mortality, but at more risk of internal parasitism, malnutrition and delayed onset of oestrous activity postpartum than confined cows. Regarding natural behaviours, pasture-based cows exhibit less agonistic behaviour, better lying behaviour, more normal oestrous behaviours and better synchronicity of behaviours than confined cows. They also have the opportunity to graze, which is one of the main features of the behavioural repertoire of dairy cows, but, they may also experience long periods away from pasture in larger herds, and severe climatic stresses which will become increasingly important as the climate changes. Our current ability to assess the affective state of dairy cows is poor. For example, hunger is an important subjective state that cannot be measured directly. The growing focus on ensuring that animals have lives worth living, means that dairy cows should garner some positive emotions from their lives, and it seems clear that pasture access is essential for this. Clearly measurement of affective state is an important challenge for future dairy cow welfare research. At the extremes of management systems, there can be major differences in animal welfare but in hybrid systems, dairy cows experience elements of both confinement and pasture which may ameliorate the negative effects of each on cow welfare. Ultimately, the optimal system gives cows an element of choice between both environments. Moreover management of the system, whether it is confinement or pastured-based, may be as important as the system of management in ensuring good dairy cow welfare and addressing societal concerns.Abbreviations: BCS: Body condition score; TMR: Total mixed ration.

Effect of outdoor open pack space allowance on the behavior of freestall-housed dairy cows

Providing dairy cows access to pasture is desirable, given their strong motivation for pasture access, but this practice is hindered by several practical constraints, including lack of available pasture. An alternative to pasture is an outdoor area that is bedded with a soft material such as sand or wood chips that requires less space than pasture, given the absence of soil or grass that can otherwise be damaged by cow traffic. However, little is known about space requirements for alternative outdoor areas. This study investigated how space allowance affected cow preference to be outdoors as well as cow behavior on an outdoor pack. A total of 3 groups of 24 pregnant, lactating, healthy Holstein cows were used. Each group was given 3 d for social dynamics to stabilize; during this time cows were kept indoors in a freestall pen. A habituation phase of 5 d followed, where animals were given free access to the outdoor pack with a space allowance of 16 m²/cow. Cows were moved outside (if not already outdoors) at set times each day during the habituation phase (i.e., 5 times during the first 2 d and 2 times during the last 3 d). Cows were then given free access to the outdoor pack, but space allowance was changed every day. A total of 13 different space allowances were randomly applied, without replacement, ranging from 4 to 16 m²/cow in 1-m² increments. Using continuous video recordings, the location of the cows (i.e., in the freestall barn or on the outdoor pack) as well as displacements from a lying position on the outdoor pack were scored. Standing and lying behaviors were automatically measured using HOBO data loggers (Onset, Cape Cod, MA). Over the 24-h period, cows spent more time outside with increasing space allowance, but this result was driven almost entirely by the increased time spent outdoors during the nighttime hours. During the night, space allowance did not influence the number of displacements from lying on the outdoor pack or the proportion of time on the outdoor pack that cows spent lying down. Our results indicate that cows use an outdoor bedded pack mostly at night and that the time spent outside at night increases with increasing space allowance. Providing an outdoor bedded pack should be considered when designing dairy cattle housing systems.

Pasture Access Affects Behavioral Indicators of Wellbeing in Dairy Cows

Simple Summary

Dairy cows in Europe and the United States are increasingly housed indoors year-round. Even cows with pasture access are usually kept inside during the winter and around calving. However, animal welfare scientists and dairy consumers are concerned that full-time housing impacts cattle welfare. We investigated how pasture influences behavioral indicators of wellbeing. Using cow pedometers, we recorded 29 animals’ lying and walking activity during 18 days of pasture access and 18 days of indoor housing. Cattle at pasture had fewer lying bouts but longer lying times, indicating they were more comfortable and less restless. Lying behavior was also more synchronous outdoors, with most of the herd lying at the same time. These results indicate pasture provides a comfortable surface and reduces competition for lying space. Furthermore, cows at pasture walked farther, with potential benefits for their physical health and psychological wellbeing. Our findings contribute to the growing body of evidence that pasture access improves dairy cow welfare. As a society, we must decide whether full-time housing is a price worth paying for dairy products.

Abstract

Dairy cows are increasingly housed indoors, either year-round or for long stretches over the winter and around parturition. This may create health and welfare issues. In cattle, lying and walking are highly motivated, and herds synchronize lying behavior when they have comfortable surfaces and little competition for space. Lying and walking activity can, therefore, indicate good welfare. Using a repeated measures crossover design, we gave 29 Holstein–Friesian dairy cows 18 days of overnight pasture access (PAS treatment) and 18 days of indoor housing (PEN treatment). Accelerometers recorded their lying and locomotory behavior. We measured behavioral synchrony with Fleiss’ Kappa and analyzed the accelerometry data using linear mixed models. Compared to the PEN treatment, the PAS treatment had longer overnight lying durations (χ²₁ = 27.51, p < 0.001), fewer lying bouts (χ²₁ = 22.53, p < 0.001), longer lying bouts (χ²₁ = 25.53, p < 0.001), and fewer transitions up or down (χ²₁ = 16.83, p < 0.001). Herd lying behavior was also more synchronous at pasture (χ²₁ = 230.25, p < 0.001). In addition, nightly step counts were higher in the PAS treatment than the PEN treatment (χ²₁ = 2946.31, p < 0.001). These results suggest pasture access improves dairy cow welfare by increasing comfort, reducing competition and boredom, and facilitating motivated behavior.

A systematic review of non-productivity-related animal-based indicators of heat stress resilience in dairy cattle

INTRODUCTION

Projected temperature rise in the upcoming years due to climate change has increased interest in studying the effects of heat stress in dairy cows. Environmental indices are commonly used for detecting heat stress, but have been used mainly in studies focused on the productivity-related effects of heat stress. The welfare approach involves identifying physiological and behavioural measurements so as to start heat stress mitigation protocols before the appearance of impending severe health or production issues. Therefore, there is growing interest in studying the effects of heat stress on welfare. This systematic review seeks to summarise the animal-based responses to heat stress (physiological and behavioural, excluding productivity) that have been used in scientific literature.

METHODS

Using systematic review guidelines set by PRISMA, research articles were identified, screened and summarised based on inclusion criteria for physiology and behaviour, excluding productivity, for animal-based resilience indicators. 129 published articles were reviewed to determine which animal-based indicators for heat stress were most frequently used in dairy cows.

RESULTS

The articles considered report at least 212 different animal-based indicators that can be aggregated into body temperature, feeding, physiological response, resting, drinking, grazing and pasture-related behaviour, reactions to heat management and others. The most common physiological animal-based indicators are rectal temperature, respiration rate and dry matter intake, while the most common behavioural indicators are time spent lying, standing and feeding.

CONCLUSION

Although body temperature and respiration rate are the animal-based indicators most frequently used to assess heat stress in dairy cattle, when choosing an animal-based indicator for detecting heat stress using scientific literature to establish thresholds, characteristics that influence the scale of the response and the definition of heat stress must be taken into account, e.g. breed, lactation stage, milk yield, system type, climate region, bedding type, diet and cooling management strategies.

Survey of dry cow management on UK commercial dairy farms

Dry period management of the dairy cow focuses on maximising milk production during the subsequent lactation but may include procedures that negatively affect dry cow health and welfare. A survey of dairy farmers in the UK was conducted to investigate dry cow management procedures. The questionnaire was completed by 148 farmers. Most farms (84 per cent) kept dry cows in dynamic social groups. The median length of the dry period was 56 days, and 83 per cent of farms stopped milking abruptly, regardless of milk production level at dry-off. Twenty-seven per cent of cows from respondent farms produced more than 20 kg of milk per day at dry-off. The majority of farms (78 per cent) used antibiotic dry cow intramammary tubes at dry-off, in combination with internal or external teat sealants. Procedures that were commonly practised and potentially stressful for dry cows included abrupt cessation of milking of high yielding cows and frequent changes in diet and social environment.

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.

The effects of preferred natural stimuli on humans' affective states, physiological stress and mental health, and the potential implications for well-being in captive animals

Exposure to certain natural stimuli improves people's moods, reduces stress, enhances stress resilience, and promotes mental and physical health. Laboratory studies and real estate prices also reveal that humans prefer environments containing a broad range of natural stimuli. Potential mediators of these outcomes include: 1) therapeutic effects of specific natural products; 2) positive affective responses to stimuli that signalled safety and resources to our evolutionary ancestors; 3) attraction to environments that satisfy innate needs to explore and understand; and 4) ease of sensory processing, due to the stimuli's "evolutionary familiarity" and/or their fractal, self-repeating properties. These processes, and the benefits humans gain from natural stimuli, seem to be largely innate. They thus have strong implications for other species (including laboratory, farm and zoo animals living in environments devoid of natural stimuli), suggesting that they too may have nature-related "sensory needs". By promoting positive affect and stress resilience, preferred natural stimuli (including views, sounds and odours) could therefore potentially provide effective and efficient ways to improve captive animal well-being.

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.

Perspectives on pasture versus indoor feeding of dairy cows

The dairy industry in many regions of the world has moved towards a high-input/high-output system maximising annual milk production per cow, primarily through increasing concentrate-based total mixed rations fed indoors year round, as opposed to allowing cows to feed on pasture. Pasture-based dairy systems in regions like New Zealand and Ireland are oriented towards maximum milk yield per unit of pasture, which has led to Holstein strains that are 50 to 100 kg lighter, exhibit a higher body condition score, and produce roughly half the annual amount of milk as compared to their Holstein counterparts kept in confinement in North America and Europe. Freedom from hunger might not be guaranteed when high-yielding dairy cows are kept on pasture without any supplemental feed, but at the same time no access to pasture can be considered an animal welfare concern, because pasturing is generally beneficial to the animals' health. On pasture, lighter-weight dairy cows with a medium milk production potential have proven to be superior with regard to feed efficiency and fertility. The year-round indoor feeding of high-yielding dairy cows with total mixed rations containing substantial amounts of human-edible crops from arable land puts global food security at risk and fails to utilise the evolutionary advantages of ruminants.

Preference and behavior of lactating dairy cows given free access to pasture at two herbage masses and two distances

A number of factors influence dairy cow preference to be indoors or at pasture. The study reported here investigated whether herbage mass and distance affects preference and if continuously housed cows exhibited behavioral and production differences compared to cows that had free access to pasture. Dairy cows (n = 16) were offered a free choice of being in cubicle housing (1.5 cubicles/cow) or at pasture with a high (3,000 ± 200 kg DM/ha) vs. low (1,800 ± 200 kg DM/ha) herbage mass. A control group (n = 16) was confined to cubicle housing for the duration of the study. Each herbage mass was offered at either a near (38 m) or far (254 m) distance in a 2 × 2 factorial crossover design to determine motivation to access pasture. Overall, dairy cows expressed a partial preference to be at pasture, spending 68.7% of their time at pasture. This was not affected (P > 0.05) by herbage mass. Both grass intake (P = 0.001) and grazing time (P = 0.039) was greater when cows were offered the high herbage mass. Neither total mixed ration intake (P > 0.05) nor milk yield (P > 0.05) was affected by herbage mass or distance. Additionally, no interaction existed between herbage mass and distance (P > 0.05). Distance affected preference: overall time on pasture was greater at the near distance (P = 0.002); however, nighttime use was not affected by distance (P = 0.184). Housed cows produced less milk than free-choice cows and this was potentially due to a combination of decreased lying time in housed cows (P < 0.001) and grass intake (1.22 kg/d) in free-choice cows. This study shows that herbage mass is not a major factor driving dairy cow preference for pasture, but distance does affect preference for pasture during the day. Additionally, there are clear production and welfare benefits for providing cows with a choice to be at pasture or cubicle housing over being continuously housed. Further research is necessary to quantify the effect of lying time on milk yields.

Effects of Three Feeding Systems on Production Performance, Rumen Fermentation and Rumen Digesta Particle Structure of Beef Cattle

The effects of three different feeding systems on beef cattle production performance, rumen fermentation, and rumen digesta particle structure were investigated by using 18 Limousin (steers) with a similar body weight (575±10 kg) in a 80-d experiment. The animals were equally and randomly divided into three treatment groups, namely, total mixed ration group (cattle fed TMR), SI1 group (cattle fed concentrate firstly then roughage), and SI2 group (cattle fed roughage firstly then concentrate). The results showed that the average daily gain was significantly higher in cattle receiving TMR than in those receiving SI1 and SI2 (p<0.05). Consumption per kg weight gain of concentrate, silage, and combined net energy (NEmf) were significantly decreased when cattle received TMR, unlike when they received SI1 and SI2 (p<0.05), indicating that the feed efficiency of TMR was the highest. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) was significantly decreased when cattle received TMR compared with that in cattle receiving SI1 (p<0.05), whereas there was no difference compared with that in cattle receiving SI2. Ammonia nitrogen concentration was significantly lower in cattle receiving TMR than in those receiving SI1 and SI2 (p<0.05). The rumen area of cattle that received TMR was significantly larger than that of cattle receiving SI1 (p<0.05), but there was no difference compared with that of cattle receiving SI2. Although there was no significant difference among the three feeding systems in rumen digesta particle distribution, the TMR group trended to have fewer large- and medium-sized particles and more small-sized particles than those in the SI1 and SI2 groups. In conclusion, cattle with dietary TMR showed increased weight gain and ruminal development and decreased BUN. This indicated that TMR feeding was more conducive toward improving the production performance and rumen fermentation of beef cattle.

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).

Influence of grazing management on claw disorders in Swedish freestall dairies with mandatory grazing

Our hypothesis was that grazing time, the number of days (duration) and number of hours per day, affected claw health. From Swedish freestall herds that fulfilled our criteria of claw-trimming routines, 201 herds were randomly selected for a telephone interview regarding grazing management. Herd data were retrieved from the Swedish Official Milk Recording Scheme. Claw disorders to be analyzed were recorded at maintenance claw trimming before and after the grazing period and included mild and severe dermatitis, severe heel-horn erosion, and sole ulcer (including severe sole hemorrhage). Any remark included one or more of these recorded disorders. The odds for having a recorded claw disorder at the autumn trimming in relation to grazing management, as well as to herd- and cow-related parameters, was tested using multilevel logistic regression models. The final statistical analysis included 17,600 cows in 174 herds, which were distributed from the south to the north of Sweden with decreasing length of mandatory grazing period because of climate. Grazing duration was statistically associated with the risk of sole ulcer, but it was not linear. However, grazing duration was not statistically associated with the odds for any remark, dermatitis, or heel-horn erosion. The odds for dermatitis were lower with access to pasture for 24 h compared with either day or night access. Otherwise, the number of hours that the animals had access to grazing per day was not significantly associated with any of the other analyzed claw disorders. Higher pasture stocking density (number of cow hours per day per hectare) was associated with a higher odds for dermatitis and sole ulcer. For all recorded claw disorders, the highest odds for having a disorder after the grazing period were consistently when the cow had the same claw disorder before the release to pasture. The positive effects of grazing on claw health were less than expected, and the previous known effects of breed, days in milk, parity, production system, housing environment, and management were verified for most claw disorders. If cows in today's loose housing systems have a more restrictive grazing than cows in tie-stall herds previously experienced, one cannot expect as strong an effect even if grazing is mandatory in all Swedish dairy cattle. Despite some positive effects of grazing, good stall environment and management during the housing period seem to be more important to obtain good claw health.

Invited review: Genetic considerations for various pasture-based dairy systems

Pasture-based dairy systems use grazing to supply significant percentages of the dry matter intake of cows and heifers. Such systems vary from those for which pasture is used only as a supplemental feed for cows primarily fed a total mixed ration to those for which pasture is the primary source of dry matter for the herd. Cows that are optimal in a pasture system share many general characteristics with cows that are appropriate for a nonpasture system, including feed efficiency, maintenance of body condition, reproductive fitness, udder health, longevity, and the ability to adapt to various management systems. However, in such divergent feeding systems, the relative importance of various traits can differ. In pasture systems where cow nutrient demand intentionally coincides with seasonal forage availability, the focus of selection has emphasized fertility and other fitness traits, as well as yields of milk or milk components. Breeds or strains with higher yields of protein and fat typically have advantages in grazing systems that supply milk to solids-based or cheese markets. Holstein cows with high percentages of North American ancestry can work well in grazing systems that include supplemental concentrates or partial mixed rations, particularly if calving intervals are less restrictive. Crossbred cows can be selected for use in specific grazing systems as well as for specific milk markets, with the added advantage of heterosis. Breeds and crosses with high fertility are important for seasonal breeding and calving. The ability of cattle to both milk and maintain sufficient body condition for reproduction is important for any dairy production system but is critical in a seasonal system. Dairy farms that depend on pasture for most of dry matter for cows typically have lower production per cow than nongrazing dairies but have the potential to be economically competitive because of lower operating and overhead costs. Although the principles of selection are similar across a variety of pasture-based and nonpasture systems, we document from studies and observations covered herein that optimal breeds, breed strains, and selection strategies can differ based on varying management constraints and objectives.

The motivation of dairy cows for access to pasture

Several factors influence whether dairy cattle prefer to be indoors or at pasture, including weather conditions and milk yield, but it is unclear how motivated cows are for access to pasture. One way to measure motivation is to require the animal to work (e.g., walk different distances) for access to a resource. This study investigated whether pasture access located 60, 140, or 260m from the indoor housing would affect the proportion of time dairy cows spent at pasture. Thirty-two Holstein-Friesian dairy cows were used during the study, which took place in the United Kingdom from May to July 2010. The experiment consisted of four 18-d experimental periods, with 8 cows in each period, which were further divided into 2 groups of 4 cows. Following a training period, the cows were randomly allocated to distances of 60, 140, or 260m to pasture over three 4-d measurement periods. A video camera was used to record time spent indoors and outdoors 24h/d, and manual behavior observations (0700 to 2200h) took place 6 times during each period to record how the cows spent their time in each location. The video data showed that cows spent, on average, 57.8% (±3.44) of their time outside (either at pasture or on the track). One-sample t-tests revealed that this value was different from 0% (t=16.80), 50% (t=2.26), and 100% (t=-12.28). Analysis of the percentage time spent outside revealed that distance did not influence nighttime pasture use (2100 to 0430h; F2,8=0.16; 81.0% vs. 81.0% vs. 76.7%, for 60m vs. 140m vs. 260m, respectively). In contrast, during the day (0700 to 2100h; from behavior observations), time spent at pasture declined as distance increased; that is, cows spent more time at pasture when they had to walk 60m (F2,80=10.09) than when they had to walk 140 or 260m (45.3% vs. 27.4% vs. 21.2%, respectively). Time spent at pasture decreased on rainy days (y=-1.0672x + 59.646, R(2)=0.09, n=48d), but the indoor temperature-humidity index (THI), the outdoor THI, and body condition score did not influence time spent outside. Under the climatic conditions of the current study in the United Kingdom, cows had a partial preference for pasture, which was influenced by distance to pasture during daytime but not at night. This shows that dairy cows were more motivated to access pasture at night compared with during the day.