Short communication: Effects of mesh leggings on fly pressure and fly avoidance behaviors of pastured dairy cows

The Defensive Behaviors and Milk Production of Pastured Dairy Cattle in Response to Stable Flies, Horn Flies, and Face Flies

Thirty-four crossbred dairy cows were observed on pasture six times per week from June to August 2014 at the University of Minnesota West Central Research and Outreach Center grazing dairy in Morris, MN, for defensive behaviors in response to three species of muscid flies. Counts of stable flies (Stomoxys calcitrans (L.)), horn flies (Haematobia irritans (L.)), and face flies (Musca autumnalis DeGeer) were recorded before and after pasture observation. Individual cows were monitored for 5 min intervals to observe the frequencies of five different defensive behaviors: front and back leg stomps, head tosses, skin twitches, and tail swishes. Fly numbers averaged 5 stable flies per leg, 37 horn flies per side, and 1 face fly per face during the study. The fly counts and behavior frequencies increased with ambient temperature. The results showed a very strong relationship between the numbers of flies and numbers of defensive behaviors, though correlations between specific flies and behaviors were low. Younger cows had fewer stable flies and horn flies than older cows. The thresholds of flies to lower production for pastured organic dairy cows may be greater than 5 for stable flies, 37 for horn flies, and 1 for face flies.

Review: Assessment of dairy cow welfare at pasture: measures available, gaps to address, and pathways to development of ad-hoc protocols

Pasture is generally perceived as positive for dairy cow welfare, but it nevertheless exposes cows to heat, parasites, and other challenges. This review is intended for people ready to design comprehensive protocols for assessing the welfare of dairy cows at pasture. We provide an overview of the benefits and risks of pasture for cows, and then go on to identify the available and feasible measures for assessing cow welfare at pasture and the gaps that need to be addressed to develop specific welfare measures. Some of the measures from on-farm welfare assessment protocols designed for indoor use (e.g. Welfare Quality®) are relevant for cows at pasture (e.g. lameness scoring). However, the timing, location and/or method for certain measures (e.g. observation of social behaviour) need to be adapted to the pasture context, as cows at pasture can roam over a large area. Measures to address specific pasture-related risks (e.g. heat stress, biosecurity) or benefits (e.g. expression of a wide range of behaviours) should be implemented in order to capture all dimensions of cow welfare at pasture. Furthermore, cow welfare is liable to vary over the grazing season due to changes in weather conditions, grass quality and pasture plots that induce variations in lying surface conditions, food availability, distance to walk to the milking parlour, and so on. It is therefore important to investigate the variability in different welfare measures across the pasture season to check whether they hold stable over time and, if not, to determine solutions that can give an overview across the grazing season. Sensors offer a promising complement to animal and environment observations, as they can capture long-term animal monitoring data, which is simply not possible for a one-day welfare-check visit. We conclude that some measures validated for indoor situations can already be used in pasture-based systems, while others need to be validated for their fitness for purpose and/or use in pasture conditions. Furthermore, thresholds should probably be determined for measures to fit with pasture contexts. If all measures can be made adaptable to all situations encountered on farms or variants of the measures can at least be proposed for each criterion, then it should be possible to produce a comprehensive welfare assessment protocol suitable for large-scale use in near future.

Alternative Practices in Organic Dairy Production and Effects on Animal Behavior, Health, and Welfare

The number of organic dairy farms has increased because of the increased growth of the organic market, higher organic milk price, and because some consumers prefer to purchase products from less intensive production systems. Best management practices are expected from organic dairy farms to ensure animal health and milk production. Organic dairy producers typically transition from conventional systems to avoid chemicals and pesticides, enhance economic viability, improve the environment, and increase soil fertility. Organic dairy producers respect and promote a natural environment for their animals, is also an important component of animal welfare. Organic producers have few options to mitigate pain in dairy calves. In the United States, therapies to mitigate pain for disbudded organic dairy calves are regulated by the US National Organic Program. Organic producers regularly use naturally derived alternatives for the treatment of health disorders of dairy calves, heifers, and cows. Alternative natural products may provide an option to mitigate pain in organic dairy calves. Despite the reluctance to implement pain alleviation methods, some organic farmers have expressed interest in or currently implement plant-based alternatives. Efficacy studies of alternative remedies for organic livestock are needed to verify that their use improves animal welfare. Non-effective practices represent a major challenge for organic dairy animal welfare. The relationship between humans and animals may be jeopardized during milking because first-lactation cows may exhibit adverse behaviors during the milking process, such as kicking and stomping. The periparturient period is particularly challenging for first-lactation cows. Adverse behaviors may jeopardize animal welfare and reduce safety for humans because stressed heifers may kick off the milking unit, kick at milkers, and display other unwanted behaviors in the milking parlor. This may reduce milking efficiency, overall production, and ultimately reduce the profitability of the dairy farm. Positive animal welfare is a challenging balancing act between the three overlapping ethic concerns. Identifying animal welfare deficits in organic livestock production is the first step in capitalizing on these opportunities to improve welfare.

Stable fly activity is associated with dairy management practices and seasonal weather conditions

Stable flies (Stomoxys calcitrans) are blood-sucking insects commonly associated with cattle production systems worldwide and are known to cause severe irritation to cattle due to painful bites. Cattle react to biting stable flies with an aggregating behavior known as bunching. Bunching behavior reduces grazing or feed consumption and thus reduces cattle productivity and welfare. Cattle’s fly-repelling behaviors include foot stomping, head tossing, tail switching and skin twitching. A longitudinal study was conducted in 2017 on 20 California dairies (average lactating herd size = 2,466 (SE±28.392)) during the stable fly season from April to July. The study objectives were to estimate the association between environmental factors and dairy characteristics including facility design, feed and manure management, total mixed ration (TMR) components fed to cattle, and operational pest management procedures and the outcome stable fly activity on California dairies. Stable fly activity was measured by counting stable flies on cow forelimbs (leg count) and on Alsynite traps (trap count) over the 13-week study period. Weekly leg counts were performed for cattle in lactating cow pens (31 pens from 10 study dairies) with counts made during the morning (AM) and again during the afternoon (PM). Trap counts were performed on all 20 study dairies. Data were analyzed using linear mixed models which revealed temporal variation in the average leg and trap counts with stable fly activity increasing from May to June and then decreasing to the lowest activity in July. Leg counts were higher during the afternoon compared to morning. Ambient temperatures ≤30⁰C and relative humidity (RH) measurements <50% were associated with higher leg and trap counts. Traps located at the periphery of study dairies had higher stable fly counts compared to traps located in the interior of the dairy. Cow pens with trees on the periphery had higher leg counts in comparison to pens away from trees. Specific TMR components were associated with both leg and trap counts. Dairies feeding by-products including almond hulls, wet distillers’ grain, fruits, and vegetables had higher trap counts compared to dairies that did not feed these ingredients. At the pen level, pens with rations that contained straw had lower average leg counts compared to pens fed with rations that did not contain straw. A similar association was observed for pens with rations that contained wheat silage when ambient temperatures were ≤30⁰C. In contrast, pens with water added to the TMR while the RH was ≥50% had higher average leg counts compared to pens without water added to the TMR. Dairies that applied insecticides for fly control to their entire facility had lower trap counts compared to dairies that did not apply insecticides. Stable fly activity measured on California dairies using leg and trap counts varied according to the month, environmental factors, pen surroundings, trap location, TMR components, and insecticide use.

Effects of Pre-Parturient Iodine Teat Dip Applications on Modulating Aversive Behaviors and Mastitis in Primiparous Cows

Heifers and their human handlers are at risk for decreased welfare during the early lactation period. This experiment investigated pre-parturient teat dipping and parlor acclimation to reduce mastitis and aversive behaviors in early lactation heifers. Three weeks prior to calving, heifers were randomly assigned to receive either: (1) a weekly 1.0% iodine-based teat dip in the parlor (trained; n = 37) or (2) no treatment (control; n = 30). For the first 3 days of lactation, heifers were milked twice daily, and treatment-blinded handlers assessed behaviors and clinical mastitis. Aseptic quarter milk samples were collected within 36 h of calving and analyzed for pathogens. Control heifers had (OR ± SE) 2.2 ± 0.6 times greater (p < 0.01) odds of kicking during milking. Trained heifers had (OR ± SE) 1.7 ± 0.4 times greater (p = 0.02) odds of being very calm during milking, while control heifers had 2.2 ± 0.8 and 3.8 ± 2.1 times greater (p < 0.04) odds of being restless and very restless or hostile during milking, respectively. Quarters of control heifers had (OR ± SE) 5.4 ± 3.4 greater (p < 0.01) odds of intramammary Staphylococcus aureus infection, yet clinical mastitis was similar among treatments. The results indicate that teat dipping in the parlor weekly for 3 weeks before calving may alleviate some aversive milking behaviors and protect against early lactation S. aureus intramammary infections.

Evaluation of solar photovoltaic systems to shade cows in a pasture-based dairy herd

The combined use of solar photovoltaics and agriculture may provide farmers with an alternative source of income and reduce heat stress in dairy cows. The objective of this study was to determine the effects on grazing cattle under shade from a solar photovoltaic system. The study was conducted at the University of Minnesota West Central Research and Outreach Center in Morris, Minnesota on a grazing dairy. Twenty-four crossbred cows were randomly assigned to 2 treatment groups (shade or no shade) from June to September in 2019. The replicated (n = 4) treatment groups of 6 cows each were provided shade from a 30-kW photovoltaic system. Two groups of cows had access to shade in paddocks, and 2 groups of cows had no shade in paddocks. All cows were located in the same pasture during summer. Behavior observations and milk production were evaluated for cows during 4 periods of summer. Boluses and an eartag sensor monitored internal body temperature, activity, and rumination on all cows, respectively. Independent variables were the fixed effects of breed, treatment group, coat color, period, and parity, and random effects were replicate group, date, and cow. No differences in fly prevalence, milk production, fat and protein production, or drinking bouts were observed between the treatment groups. Shade cows had more ear flicks (11.4 ear flicks/30 s) than no-shade cows (8.6 ear flicks/30 s) and had dirtier bellies and lower legs (2.2 and 3.2, respectively) than no-shade cows (1.9 and 2.9, respectively). During afternoon hours, shade cows had lower respiration rates (66.4 breaths/min) than no-shade cows (78.3 breaths/min). From 1200 to 1800 h and 1800 to 0000 h, shade cows had lower body temperature (39.0 and 39.2°C, respectively) than no-shade cows (39.3 and 39.4°C, respectively). Furthermore, between milking times (0800 and 1600 h), the shade cows had lower body temperature (38.9°C) than no-shade cows (39.1°C). Agrivoltaics incorporated into pasture dairy systems may reduce the intensity of heats stress in dairy cows and increase well-being of cows and the efficiency of land use.

Efficacy of Broilers as a Method of Face Fly (Musca autumnalis De Geer) Larva Control for Organic Dairy Production

The objective of this study was to evaluate Freedom-Ranger broiler chickens as a method to control face fly (Musca autumnalis De Geer) larvae in cow dung pats on pasture. Ninety-nine pats in three replicates were inoculated with first-instar larvae and exposed to one of four treatment conditions for 3 to 4 days: (1) an environment-controlled greenhouse (GH); (2) pasture without broilers (NEG); (3) pasture with 25 broilers stocked at a low density of 2.5 m2 of outdoor area per broiler (LOW); and (4) pasture with 25 broilers stocked at a high density of 0.5 m2 of outdoor area per broiler (HIGH). Broiler behaviors and weather conditions were recorded twice daily. Survival rates of larvae (mean, 95% CI) were similar for pats in the NEG (4.4%, 2-9%), LOW (5.6%, 3-11%), and HIGH (3.2%, 2-7%) groups, and was greatest for larvae reared in the GH (54.4%, 36-72%) group compared to all other groups. The proportion of broilers observed pasture ranging was 14.0% (6-28%) but was negatively related to solar radiation. Broilers were never observed foraging in pats. Results indicate that use of broilers may not be an effective method for controlling larvae of dung pat breeding flies.

A Historical Review of Management Options Used against the Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae)

The stable fly, Stomoxys calcitrans (L.) (Diptera: Muscidae), remains a significant economic pest globally in situations where intensive animal production or horticultural production provide a suitable developmental medium. Stable flies have been recorded as pests of livestock and humans since the late 1800s to early 1900s. Over 100 years of research has seen numerous methodologies used to control this fly, in particular to protect cattle from flies to minimise production losses. Reduced milk production in dairy cows and decreased weight gain in beef cattle account for losses in the US alone of > $2000 million annually. Rural lifestyles and recreation are also seriously affected. Progress has been made on many control strategies against stable fly over a range of chemical, biological, physical and cultural options. This paper reviews management options from both a historical and a technical perspective for controlling this pest. These include the use of different classes of insecticides applied to affected animals as toxicants or repellents (livestock and humans), as well as to substrates where stable fly larvae develop. Arthropod predators of stable flies are listed, from which potential biological control agents (e.g., wasps, mites, and beetles) are identified. Biopesticides (e.g., fungi, bacteria and plant-derived products) are also discussed along with Integrated Pest Management (IPM) against stable flies for several animal industries. A review of cultural and physical management options including trapping, trap types and methodologies, farm hygiene, scheduled sanitation, physical barriers to fly emergence, livestock protection and amendments added to animal manures and bedding are covered. This paper presents a comprehensive review of all management options used against stable flies from both a historical and a technical perspective for use by any entomologist, livestock producer or horticulturalist with an interest in reducing the negative impact of this pest fly.