Dairy farmer, hoof trimmer, and veterinarian perceptions of barriers and roles in lameness management

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

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

Attitudes and professional values of veterinarians and veterinary students towards positive welfare states for dairy cattle

Research that involves agricultural animal welfare has typically aimed to improve welfare by decreasing disease, distress, and pain. Positive welfare does not necessarily occur with the absence of suffering but in combination with opportunities for behaviors or affective states desired by animals. Our objectives were to describe Canadian bovine veterinarians' and veterinary students' attitudes, professional normative values, and perceived ability to promote positive welfare for dairy cows, and to explore participants' provided rationale. With an online cross-sectional survey, Canadian veterinary practitioners (n = 78) and veterinary students (n = 148) were asked, on a 7-point Likert scale, about their attitudes, perceived professional normative values, and perceived ability of veterinarians to promote positive welfare for dairy cows. We used an applied thematic analysis approach within the qualitative description methodology to analyze participants' open-ended text responses. Quantitatively, participants had very favorable attitudes (mean ± SE; 6.3 ± 0.04) and perceived favorable values (5.7 ± 0.06) in the veterinary community toward positive welfare opportunities for dairy cows. Three themes were identified to explain the professional normative values: influences from within the veterinary profession, influences from outside the veterinary profession, and personal views of participants. Participants were confident that veterinarians could suggest positive welfare opportunities for dairy cows (6.1 ± 0.06) but were uncertain that the decision to suggest these opportunities to producers was within a veterinarian's control (4.3 ± 0.11) and were not confident that implementation of positive welfare opportunities was under a veterinarian's control (2.1 ± 0.07). Three themes were identified to explain the barriers to veterinarians promoting positive welfare opportunities for dairy cows: not practical to implement, resistance to change, and concern for the animal. Participants stated that many positive welfare opportunities were impractical or expensive to implement. We conclude that positive attitudes and positive professional values exist in the veterinary community toward positive welfare for dairy cows but that much uncertainty exists regarding a veterinarian's ability to influence change to current practices.

How do different members of the on-farm mobility team perceive lameness, and what factors influence their NSAID use?

BACKGROUND

Lameness affects approximately one-third of the national dairy herd, impacting welfare and production. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the main analgesic available, but use is variable. The aims of this study were to describe how members of the mobility team perceive pain and use NSAIDs for conditions causing lameness in dairy cows.

METHODS

A questionnaire was distributed online to UK farmers, veterinarians, veterinary technicians (VTs) and foot trimmers (FTs). Respondents were asked to describe factors affecting their NSAID use and to score pain associated with 16 scenarios, including diagnoses, conditions and procedures associated with lameness in cows.

RESULTS

Of 210 respondents, 81 (38.6%) were farmers, 80 (38.1%) were veterinarians, 34 (16.2%) were FTs and 15 (7.1%) were VTs. For most conditions, farmers scored pain lower than veterinarians and VTs and were less likely to use or recommend NSAIDs than veterinarians, VTs and FTs. Farmers rated cow comfort as more important (p < 0.001) and the cost of drugs as less important (p < 0.001) in using NSAIDs than veterinarians predicted.

LIMITATIONS

There were fewer VTs and FTs than farmers and veterinarians, limiting generalisation. Response and social acceptability biases may have affected the findings.

CONCLUSION

All members of the mobility team have different perceptions and areas of expertise around lameness. Increasing collaboration and harnessing of skills and knowledge within the team could improve detection and treatment of lameness, with consequent benefits to cow welfare and production.

Exploring farmer and advisor lameness management behaviors using the COM-B model of behavior change

Introduction

This paper applies the COM-B framework to farmer and farm advisor understandings and responses to lameness in sheep, beef, and dairy systems. It reflects on how farmers' and advisors' capability, opportunity, and motivation (COM-B) influence lameness management practices in these farming systems, and considers the interaction between these three factors, and stakeholders' behavior.

Methods

Interviews with 29 farmers and 21 farm advisors in the north of England were conducted. Thematic analysis was undertaken with results categorized in relation to the COM-B framework focusing on barriers and enablers of lameness management. Use of the COM-B model provides a useful means of understanding the underlying behavioral mechanisms that contribute toward the persistence of lameness. This includes the complexities and interactions which hamper implementation of lameness management best practice.

Results and discussion

The findings highlight three key areas to address with interventions to improve lameness management on farm: (1) removing physical and social barriers for lameness management; (2) improving psychological capability and motivation for lameness management; and (3) facilitating relationships and developing communication between farmers and advisors. In particular, the value of exploring both farmer and advisor perspectives on behavior in the animal health context is demonstrated. Future interventions should look to target these three areas to overcome barriers and focus on factors that enable positive lameness practices to occur.

How might the public contribute to the discussion on cattle welfare? Perspectives of veterinarians and animal scientists

Veterinarians and animal scientists can provide leadership on issues relevant to farm animal welfare, but perceptions of these stakeholders regarding societal expectations for welfare are underexplored. This study involved five focus groups of veterinarians and animal scientists (n = 50 in total), recruited at a European meeting focused on cattle welfare. Participants were invited to discuss topics related to cattle welfare and were prompted with questions to elicit their perspectives of public concerns and how the participants felt public input should be included when developing solutions. Discussions were moderated by trained facilitators, audio-recorded and transcribed, and transcripts analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Ultimately, four primary themes were developed: (1) The public as concerned; (2) The public as ignorant; (3) The public as needing education; and (4) The public as helper or hindrance. Groups identified specific farming practices viewed as concerning to the public, including lack of pasture access, behavioural restriction, and painful procedures. Discussions about these concerns and the role of the public were often framed around the assumption that the public was ignorant about farming, and that this ignorance needed to be rectified through education. Participants were generally ambivalent in their beliefs regarding public contributions to solutions for farm animal welfare but suggested that consumers should pay more for products to help shoulder any costs of welfare improvements.

Invited review: Qualitative research in dairy science-A narrative review

The use of qualitative research in dairy science has increased considerably in recent years, providing the opportunity to inform research and practice. This review aims to enhance the accessibility of qualitative research among a range of audiences and specifically: (1) provide an overview of what qualitative research is and the value it can bring to scientific inquiries in the dairy context, (2) illustrate the emergence of qualitative dairy science research in the past 15 to 20 years, (3) outline the role of the researcher and key philosophical assumptions underlying qualitative research, (4) describe qualitative research approaches and methods used in dairy science research, and (5) highlight key aspects of qualitative inquiry used to ensure research trustworthiness. Qualitative approaches in dairy science enable researchers to understand myriad topics including stakeholder relationships, decision-making, and behaviors regarding dairy cattle management, animal welfare, and disease prevention and control measures. Approaches that were used often for qualitative data collection were individual interviews and focus groups, and variations of thematic analysis were common analytical frameworks. To assess public values, attitudes, and perceptions, mixed methods questionnaires that combined quantitative data with qualitative data from open-ended questions were used regularly. Although still used infrequently, action research and participatory approaches have the potential to bridge the research-implementation gap by facilitating group-based learning and on-farm changes. Some publications described the philosophical assumptions inherent to qualitative research, and many authors included reflexivity and positionality statements. Although a comprehensive description of strategies to meet trustworthiness criteria for qualitative research was uncommon, many publications mentioned certain aspects of trustworthiness, such as member checking, researcher triangulation, and the recording of reflexive notes. Qualitative research has been used to deepen our understanding of phenomena relevant to the dairy sector and has opened the door for a broad array of new opportunities. In addition to having merit on its own, qualitative research can guide, inform, and expand on quantitative research, and an understanding of the core pillars of qualitative research can foster interdisciplinary collaborations.

The Effect of Lameness on Milk Production of Dairy Goats

Lameness on dairy goat farms is a welfare concern and could negatively affect milk production. This study's objective was to evaluate the effects of clinical lameness on the daily milk production of dairy goats. Between July 2019 and June 2020, 11,847 test-day records were collected from 3145 goats on three farms in New Zealand. Locomotion scoring of goats used a five-point scoring system (0 to 4). The dataset was split into two groups by lactation type, where goats were classified as being in seasonal lactation (≤305 days in milk) or extended lactation (>305 days in milk). A linear mixed model was used to analyze datasets using milk characteristics as the dependent variables. Severely lame goats (score 4) in seasonal and extended lactation produced 7.05% and 8.67% less milk than goats not lame, respectively. When the prevalence of severe lameness is between 5 and 20% of the herd, the estimated average daily milk income lost was between NZD 19.5 and 104 per day. This study established the negative impact of lameness on milk production and annual income in dairy goats on three farms.

Canadian dairy farmer views about animal welfare

Concerns regarding the welfare of farm animals continue to grow. Traditionally, research efforts have largely focused on refining existing management practices to improve welfare. However, the incorporation of views from those directly involved in animal care is equally, if not more, important. This study investigated the perspectives of Canadian dairy farmers on animal welfare. We conducted 16 interviews with a total of 22 participants from four provinces across Canada. Recorded audio files and field notes were transcribed, anonymised, and coded using deductive and inductive thematic analysis. The interview data revealed two major themes: (1) animal dimension of animal welfare, including views related to biological functioning, naturalness and affective states; and (2) dairy farmer identity, including, the voice of the 'city', what it means to be a good 'cow-man', and the nature of human-animal relationships. Dairy farmers emphasised biological functioning, but they made numerous references to the emotional and natural living aspects of their animals' lives. Our work also provides evidence that farmers believed it was their duty to care for their animals beyond simply milking cows and making a profit. In terms of the larger debate, this study identified potential shared values with members of the public: opportunities for natural living and agency, attentiveness to individual animals, and the value of life over death. Finally, the emotional relationship that farmers developed with their animals highlights the values dairy farmers have for their animals beyond simply utilitarian function. Overall, these shared values could contribute to constructive dialogue.

“If you were a cow, what would you want?” Findings from participatory workshops with dairy farmers

When looking to improve animal welfare, it is essential to understand the viewpoints of stakeholders in the industry. Previous research has engaged stakeholders such as farmers, veterinarians, and the public to better understand future dairy industry directions. However, the use of perspective-taking as a tool to overcome farmer's focus on current barriers to the industry has not been explored. Therefore, the aims of this study were to have farmers take the perspective of the cow, to elicit: (1) farm elements that are essential to create a cow-centric dairy system, and (2) how this system can be achieved in the next 50 years. To do this, we employed participatory methods (photo elicitation, timelining) to generate discussion with 12 New Zealand dairy farmers. Pasture access is frequently cited as an integral component for promoting good welfare in dairy cows, thus, this cohort of farmers was considered a good case study as they all had experience managing cows in grazing systems. Participants were asked to create a cow-centric farm design, and a pathway to implementation. Following thematic analysis of the multiple data sources, the results are presented under the following three themes: (1) cow-centric farm designs (environmental considerations, cow handling and care), (2) timeline to achieve and sequence of implementation ("low hanging fruit" and long-term investments), and (3) assumptions and resources needed (including financial considerations, technology, farmer buy-in, regulations and enforcement and other stakeholder involvement). By better understanding how current industry practice aligns, and also differs, from what the cow would want, we can work towards future management systems that incorporate the requirements of all stakeholders, including the cow.

Changing interventions in farm animal health and welfare: A governmentality approach to the case of lameness

Lameness is a significant health and welfare issue in farmed animals. This paper uses a governmentality approach, which focuses on how a problem is made governable, to examine an emerging 'ecology of devices' introduced to intervene in, and attempt to reduce, on-farm incidence of lameness. These devices are associated with advisers who work with farmers on-farm; they enact lameness as a governable entity, are tools to assess the existence of lameness against established norms, and prescribe actions to be taken in response to evidence of lameness. In doing this they subjectify farmers and advisers into seeing and responding to lameness in particular ways. Using concepts of governmentality alongside other perspectives on the power relations and the simplifications and complexities involved in interventions in animal health and farm practice, the paper draws on in-depth research with advisers including vets and other paraprofessionals who work with farmers, and their cows and sheep. It explores how this set of devices introduces particular techniques and practices in lameness management, and produces farmer and adviser subjectivities. It then explores some of the problematics of this mode of governing lameness, including analysis of the limitations and unintended consequences of attempts to simplify lameness management. The paper concludes by arguing that its approach is valuable in analysing ongoing intensification of interventions in farming practices and in understanding the limits of such interventions and the unanticipated divergences from expected conduct.

Dairy producer perceptions toward male dairy calves in the Midwestern United States

Male dairy calves are often sold from the farm of birth within the first few days of life. Research describing the care of male calves is limited, with an emphasis on parsing differences between the care of male and female calves. The aims of this study were to describe dairy producers’ self-reported care practices for male relative to female calves, as well as their perceptions toward male calf care and welfare. Overall, 24 dairy producers in Ohio and Indiana participated in 1 in-person focus group (n = 10) or were individually interviewed (n = 14) using a semi-structured questionnaire with closed and open-ended questions about neonatal calf care and welfare. Discussions were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data from closed-ended questions are described quantitatively, and thematic analysis was used to identify common themes discussed by producers for open-ended questions. A majority of producers described using different care protocols for male and female dairy calves (64%; 9/14 interview participants). Low input care practices were more commonly consistent between male and female calves, such as colostrum protocols (71%; 10/14 interview participants) and navel care (100%; 14/14 interview participants) than more costly treatments. Of the producers that provided disease prevention products to female calves (79%; 11/14 interview participants), only a few also administered them to male calves (27%; 3/11 interview participants). Three major themes were constructed from the open-ended questions, including factors affecting male dairy calf care, attitude toward male calf welfare, and opportunities to improve male dairy calf welfare. Producers described multiple factors that influenced male calf care on the dairy, such as time and money required to care for them. There was divergence in concern among producers about male calf welfare, with some producers expressing concern, particularly for calves slaughtered soon after birth; yet others described feelings of indifference about the topic. Potential ways to improve male calf welfare, including greater sale prices and the involvement in specialized marketing schemes, were suggested by some producers. These findings highlight potential concerns for male calf welfare and ways to improve future care on dairy farms.

Applied Animal Ethics in Industrial Food Animal Production: Exploring the Role of the Veterinarian

Industrial food animal production practices are efficient for producing large quantities of milk, meat, and eggs for a growing global population, but often result in the need to alter animals to fit a more restricted environment, as well as creating new animal welfare and health problems related to animal confinement in high densities. These practices and methods have become normalized, to the extent that veterinarians and others embedded in these industries rarely question the ethical challenges associated with raising animals in this fashion. Moral ‘lock-in’ is common with those working in food animal industries, as is the feeling that it is impossible to effect meaningful change. Animal welfare issues associated with the industrialization of food animal production are ‘wicked problems’ that require a multi- and transdisciplinary approach. We argue that veterinarians, as expert animal health and welfare advocates, should be critical stakeholders and leaders in discussions with producers and the food animal sector, to look for innovative solutions and technology that will address current and future global sustainability and food security needs. Solutions will necessarily be different in different countries and regions, but ethical issues associated with industrial food animal production practices are universal.