Influence of Neck-Rail Placement on Free-Stall Preference, Use, and Cleanliness

Behavior of Cows in the Lying Area When the Exit Gates in the Pens Are Opened: How Many Cows Are Forced to Get Up to Go to the Milking Parlor?

Equipping a farm with a milking parlor requires moving groups of cows from their pens to the part of the barn where milking takes place. The task of moving cows, carried out two or three times each day, shows links to the lying area of the barn. When the cows are taken from the pen to the milking parlor, some of them may be lying down, and this lying down must be interrupted. The forced standing up of cows can be considered in terms of their welfare. The aim of the study was to examine the number of cows lying in the stalls at the time of opening the exit gates in the pens in order to take the cows to the milking parlor. The study covered four pens, each with 12 cows. The behavior of the cows in the pens before morning and afternoon milking was recorded over 26 days. In the analysis, the dependent variable was the number of lying cows, and the independent variables were the time of milking and the level of sand in the lying stalls. The results of the study showed the significance of differences in the number of lying cows for stalls with a low and high level of sand, both in the case of morning and afternoon milking. Differences in the number of lying cows were also found when comparing the time before morning and afternoon milking. To compare the tendency of individual cows to lie down before going to milking, an index of forced standing up was proposed. The research conducted showed differences in the behavior of cows before leaving the pen to the milking parlor. The stage to reduce the forced standing up of cows is to equip the farm with an automatic milking system (AMS) instead of using a milking parlor. In barns with AMS, cows have full freedom to get up and approach the milking stall. The results of the observations are thus an additional argument confirming the benefits of using an automatic milking system, considered in terms of the welfare of dairy cows, regarding their lying down and getting up.

Comparison of Cattle Housing Systems Based on the Criterion of Damage to Barn Equipment and Construction Errors

Simple Summary

As a result of many years of use, dairy cattle barns are subject to gradual wear and degradation. Damage to technical equipment can be identified in many areas in the barn. These areas are used by dairy cattle, so it is important to recognize the problem of damage and the associated health risks for animals. The problem of damage to internal equipment (e.g., damage to the floor, partitions between lying stalls, feed ladders, drinking bowls) applies to both tie-stall and freestall barns, which are the most common in dairy farms. Such premises became an inspiration to compare barns with a tie-stall system, a freestall system and their individual areas (lying, feeding, milking and social) in terms of the amount of damage but also construction errors. Most damage per one barn was found in the feeding area of objects with a tie-stall housing system. More cow health problems (e.g., laminitis, hoof problems) were identified in the barns with the freestall housing system. Equipment failures and construction errors may disrupt efficient and animal-safe dairy production in the barn. The results of the research study may be an incentive for farmers to check the barns in terms of their technical wear.

Abstract

Dairy cattle housing systems are the subject of numerous studies, in which a strong emphasis is placed on the comparison of animal welfare, animal behavior, production indicators and labor inputs. Dairy cattle housing systems are linked to specific livestock buildings, which is a prerequisite for undertaking studies comparing barns and their technical equipment. The aim of the study was to compare barns with two types of housing systems, i.e., tie-stall and freestall, including the identification of technical wear in various areas used by animals. This objective was linked to the assessment of animal health problems in livestock facilities. The research covered 38 dairy farms, 19 of which kept cows in the tie-stall system and 19 in the freestall system. The barns in these farms were examined for technical damage and construction errors, assessed in four areas: lying, feeding, milking and social. The research results confirmed significant differences in the degree of damage to technical equipment in individual areas of barns and between barns with tie-stall and freestall housing systems. The conclusions indicate the need to link the degradation of barns and their technical equipment, as well as design errors with the evaluation of dairy cattle welfare in future studies.

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.

Individual and environmental factors associated with defecation while lying down in dairy cows

Cows typically defecate while standing. Freestalls are designed to position standing cows such that their feces fall into the alley. Cows sometimes defecate while lying down, increasing the risk that feces contaminate the stall surface. We conducted 2 studies investigating cow-level and environmental factors associated with defecating while recumbent. In experiment 1, we hypothesized that conditions making it more difficult for cows to stand up (including greater age, high body weight, pregnancy, and lameness) would increase the risk of this behavior. We followed 92 cows for 12 d, scanning stalls 5 times/d using live observation. Almost half (48%) of all cows defecated while recumbent at least once; cows that spent more time lying down and that were earlier in gestation were at highest risk. Weight, parity, age, and lameness were not associated with this behavior. In experiment 2, we tested how overstocking influenced the occurrence of defecating while recumbent. We predicted overstocking would increase the occurrence of this behavior, especially when cows were in stalls at more preferred locations. We recorded stall occupancy, displacement attempts, and defecating while recumbent in 4 groups of 36 cows tested at both 100% and 150% lying stall stocking densities for 2 nights each using a crossover design. Overstocking resulted in higher stall use and more displacements, but less lying and fewer perching events. We did not detect any relationship between use of specific stalls or competition and defecating while recumbent. Most recorded displacements were associated with perching. Increased time perching increased the likelihood of defecating while recumbent, perhaps because perching cows were less dominant or more reluctant to stand up once lying down in the stall. Overstocking did not increase defecating while recumbent, likely because cows spent less time lying down. Together, these results indicate that defecating while recumbent can be common, and points to some of the cow-level factors associated with this behavior.

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

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

Welfare assessment in intensive and semi-intensive dairy cattle management system in Sicily

The present study aimed to compare the welfare of dairy cows kept in two traditional husbandry systems (semi-intensive and intensive farming) in south-eastern Sicily. A total of 18 dairy farms (nine semi-intensive and nine intensive) were evaluated with a multicriteria system adapted for Sicilian conditions and obtained simplifying the model of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Values of welfare measures, collected by inspections of the farms (general well-being indicators, ventilation system, resting areas [cubicles or bedding], flooring, milking parlours and waiting area, manger and watering equipment), and those of health categories (cases of abortions, hypocalcemia, displacement of abomasum, acidosis/ketosis, enteritis, hoof problems, and mastitis) obtained through the farm records, were compared using Mann-Whitney and Chi-squared tests, respectively. Data showed significant differences (p ≤ .05) about the variables related to welfare categories such as housing ventilation system, resting area, manger, and water equipment that were better in the semi-intensive system than the intensive system. No significant differences were observed about the variables related to health indicators. The results demonstrated that in Sicily the semi-intensive farm is better than the intensive to satisfy the conditions of animal welfare.

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

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

Refinement of international recommendations for cubicles, based on the identification of associations between cubicle characteristics and dairy cow welfare measures

Maladjusted cubicles for dairy cattle may cause increased skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. The International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering has produced several recommendations for cubicle design, but a previous study showed that not all of them seem efficient. Here, we aim to refine and complete these recommendations. We collected data on 76 dairy farms (2,404 cows). We modeled the association between combinations of cubicle properties (e.g., type of bedding litter) and dimensions (e.g., cubicle width) relative to cow size, and prevalence of cow skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. We used weighted multivariable logistic regression models to predict the presence of skin alteration on the carpus; the neck, shoulder, and back; the flank, side, and udder; and the tarsus or hindquarters. We also evaluated the presence of lameness as well as the dirtiness of the lower hind legs including hocks; the hindquarters, upper hind legs, and flank; the cow rear including tail; and the udder. The risk factors highlighted led us to recommend (1) position cubicles in a way that leaves more than 1 m of clearance from any obstacle in front of the cubicle; (2) if there is an obstacle on the lateral plane (i.e., where the cubicle partition is) in front ahead of the cow, put the obstacle in front of the fore knees; (3) if there is an obstacle in front of the cow on the median plane (e.g., neck or front rail), the position the obstacle between 1.25 and 1.5 of the cow length from the curb and between 1.0 and 1.25 of its height; (4) use curb height between 0.11 and 0.15 of cow height with no sharp edges on the curb; (5) use round or at least has no sharp edges brisket board; (6) use a stone-free soil instead of concrete or use a mattress thicker than 1 cm, with microrelief, and a soft fixing area at the curb, (7) litter with straw (rather than nothing or sawdust) and keep it dry. This risk factor analysis should be followed by experiments in controlled environments to further validate these conclusions and used to update the International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering recommendations.

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.

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

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

Effects of cubicle characteristics on animal welfare indicators in dairy cattle

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

Invited review: Compost-bedded pack barns for dairy cows

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

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

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

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

Simple Summary

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

Abstract

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

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

Background and Aim:

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

Materials and Methods:

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

Results:

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

Conclusion:

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

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

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

Prepartum Lying Behavior of Holstein Dairy Cows Housed on Pasture through Parturition

Simple Summary

Dairy cows experience meaningful biological changes during gestation that impact cow comfort and alter behavior, particularly during late gestation and leading up to calving. The housing environment can also have a positive or negative effect on cow comfort. Pasture access allows cows the freedom of movement and an ability to express natural grazing and resting behaviors. After observing cows housed on pasture during the late gestation and calving periods, this study found that lying behaviors only differed on the day of calving and the day prior to calving. Additionally, the proportion of time spent lying per hour decreased in the hour prior to calving compared to 6 h prior to parturition. The altered lying behaviors and activity observed in the hours before calving may indicate a decrease in cow comfort experienced by the cow during parturition. However, discomfort is typical of parturition. These data suggest that cows were able to express natural behaviors associated with calving and pasture when provided an adequate environment for cows during the prepartum period.

Abstract

Utilizing pasture-based systems may increase cow comfort during late gestation and calving as it lacks the constraints of confinement housing. The objective of this study was to quantify lying behavior and activity of Holstein dairy cows housed on pasture during the 6 d before calving. Sixteen Holstein dairy cows were moved to pasture 3 weeks before their projected calving date. Data loggers were attached 14 d prior to projected calving date. Behavior was evaluated 6 d before calving for all cows (n = 16) and 6 h prior to calving for a subset of cows (n = 6) with known calving times. Data loggers recorded at 1-min intervals to determine lying time (h/d and %/h), lying bouts (n/d and n/h), lying bout duration (min/bout), and steps (n/d and n/h). A repeated measures analysis of variance with contrasts was performed to determine if lying behaviors and activity differed between baseline and day or hour of interest. Lying time was greater 6 d prior to calving compared to the day of and before calving. Cows had longer lying bouts 6 d prior to calving compared to day of calving. Cows spent less time lying in the hour before calving compared to 6 h prior to parturition. The lack of change in behavior and activity during the 7 d prior to calving may indicate that pasture provided an adequate environment for cows during the prepartum period but did not impact cow welfare in the hours leading up to calving.

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).

Stall cleanliness and stall temperature of two different freestall bases

The objective of this study was to describe the differences in freestall cleanliness and stall temperature between a barn with Dual Chamber Cow Waterbeds (DCCW; Advanced Comfort Technology, Reedsburg, WI) and a barn with rubber-filled mattresses at the University of Kentucky Coldstream Dairy Research Farm from January 18, 2012, to May 3, 2013. Stall cleanliness was measured twice weekly (n=134) by the same 2 observers using a 0.91 m×0.91 m wire grid containing 128 equally sized rectangles (10.16 cm×5.08 cm). This grid was centered at the rear portion of the stall; a rectangle that was visibly wet or had any amount of feces present was defined as a dirty rectangle. Weekly stall temperature (n=66) was measured by the same observer during a.m. milkings in the same predetermined stalls. Feces and wet sawdust were removed from the stalls before stall temperatures were acquired. Temperatures were obtained using a handheld thermometer at 30.48 cm above the stall base as determined via dual laser measurements. Stall temperature was measured on the front, middle, and back of the stall first with clean sawdust and then with the sawdust removed from the stall and wiped clean with a towel. Daily temperature-humidity index (THI) was calculated using Kentucky climate data calculated through the University of Kentucky College of Agriculture via a data logger, located 5.63 km from the Coldstream Dairy Farm. Stall cleanliness was not different between the DCCW barn (26.09±0.89 rectangles) and the rubber-filled mattress barn (23.70±0.89 rectangles). Mean THI throughout the study was 64.39±0.82. Stall temperature was different among THI categories. Temperature-humidity index categories 1 (coldest), 2, 3, and 4 (warmest) had THI ranges of 22.94 to 50.77, 50.77 to 64.88, 64.88 to 78.75, and 78.75 to 101.59, respectively. Stall temperatures (°C; least squares means±SE) were 2.26±0.30, 8.86±0.30, 15.52±0.30, and 20.95±0.30 for THI categories 1 to 4, respectively. Stalls with rubber-filled mattresses had a lower temperature (°C) than DCCW with least squares means±SE of 10.52±0.21°C and 13.29±0.21°C, respectively. The DCCW were probably significantly warmer because water holds heat well. The DCCW may have more of a heat-insulating effect compared with rubber-filled mattresses.

Hock lesion epidemiology in cubicle housed dairy cows across two breeds, farming systems and countries

This cross-sectional study examined various aspects of cubicle design and management in terms of their potential as risk factors for hock lesions, using an epidemiological approach. Cubicle dairy farms in Germany and Austria with Holstein Friesian or Simmental cows were visited during the winter housing season. 105 farms and 3691 cows were included in the analysis which consisted of three steps: bifactorial regression, regression trees and multiple linear regression. The mean farm prevalence of hock lesions, i.e. scabs, wounds, and swellings was 50%, with a range from 0 to 100%. The final model contained eight factors which were largely related to lying comfort and explained 75% of the variance. The presence of a curb turned out to be the most influential beneficial factor. Additionally, there were fewer hock lesions when cows were housed with deep bedded cubicles compared to cubicles without deep bedding. Other factors in the regression model were softness and length of the lying surface and height of free space under cubicle partitions, the proportion of overconditioned cows and a variable encoding three different combinations of region, husbandry system (organic and conventional) and breed. Independently from the risk factor model hock lesions were positively correlated with lameness at herd level as well as at animal level. This probably results from related risk factors for both conditions. It can be concluded that lying comfort of dairy cows should be improved in order to prevent hock lesions. In addition, preventive measures for hock lesions at the same time have a potential of reducing lameness and thus to improve cow welfare in several aspects.

Identifying risk factors for poor hind limb cleanliness in Danish loose-housed dairy cows

The objective of this study was to identify possible risk factors for poor cow hind limb cleanliness in Danish loose-housed, lactating dairy cows. The study was conducted as a cross-sectional study of 1315 cows in 42 commercial Danish dairy herds with primarily Danish Holstein cows. The effect of four cow-level factors (parity, days in milk, daily lying time and lameness) and eight herd-level factors (herd size, milk production, milking system, floor type, access to pasture grazing, floor scraping frequency, hoof bathing frequency and hoof washing frequency) on the risk of having dirtier hind limbs were analysed using ordinal logistic regression fitting a proportional odds model. Cow hind limb cleanliness was scored using an ordinal score from 1 to 4: 1 being clean and 4 being covered in dirt. The odds ratios (ORs) estimated from the proportional odds model depict the effect of a risk factor on the odds of having a higher rather than a lower cleanliness score. First parity cows had an increased risk of being dirtier compared with third parity or older cows (OR=1.70). Compared with late lactation, early and mid lactation were associated with an increased risk of being dirtier (OR=2.07 and 1.33, respectively). Decreasing the daily time lying by 30 min was associated with an increased risk of being dirtier (OR=1.05). Furthermore, an increased risk of being dirtier was found in herds with no pasture access (OR=3.75).

Flexible and fixed partitions in freestalls--effects on lying behavior and cow preference

The objective was to investigate the effect of stall partition design on total lying time, lying position, and stall cleanliness, and to evaluate the preferences of cows regarding stalls with traditional fixed stall dividers or flexible stall dividers. Using a crossover design, 16 nonlactating dairy cows were housed singly for 9 d in pens with 2 freestalls, 1 with fixed cantilever dividers and 1 with flexible dividers. The cows were first given access to one stall type, and then to the other type of stall, and finally to both in a preference test. Type of stall divider did not influence lying behavior (13.5h for fixed versus 14.0 h for flexible, ± 0.4h), lying positions, or stall cleanliness; however, the cows showed a preference for lying in the flexible stalls (65.2 for flexible vs. 34.8 for fixed ± 8.2%). This indicated that cows are able to distinguish between type of stall divider and that it is important to them; however, it is not clear if the reason for this is the shape or the properties of the dividers. We concluded that cattle chose a flexible stall divider over a fixed one, but the long-term consequences of this preference are not clear, because no obvious changes in stall usage were observed when cows were only given access to one type of divider.

Risk factors for dirty dairy cows in Norwegian freestall systems

Cow cleanliness is important for ensuring hygienic milk production and the well-being of dairy cows. The aim of this cross-sectional field study was to describe cow cleanliness in freestall-housed dairy herds and to examine risk factors related to thigh cleanliness. Cow cleanliness (n=2,335), management-related variables (e.g., ventilation and use of sawdust-bedded stalls), and housing-related variables (e.g., freestall design and number of cows per stall) were recorded in 232 Norwegian freestall-housed dairy herds. Cleanliness was scored on a 4-point scale ranging from clean (1) to very dirty (4). The cows were relatively clean on the udder and belly, dirtier on thigh and the rear part of the body, and dirtiest on the legs, with cleanliness scores (mean ± SD) of 1.64±0.62, 1.62±0.65, 2.02±0.75, 1.77±0.58, and 2.30±0.59, respectively. With dirty thighs as the response variable, several variables were tested in a logistic regression mixed model and with repeated measurements within herd and cow. A high number of cows per freestall [odds ratio (OR)=3.45], no use of sawdust as bedding (OR=3.24) versus use of sawdust, and a low-positioned (<0.85 m above stall floor) upper head rail "enclosing" the front of the stall (OR=1.42 to 2.13) versus a position >0.85 m were all risk factors for dirty thighs on the cows. Furthermore, liquid manure (score 2) versus more consistent manure (score 1; OR=1.66) and less tame cows (score 2) versus tame cows (score 1) were associated with an increased risk of dirty thighs (OR=1.24). The cleanest cows were associated with indoor temperatures in the range from 10 to 15°C. For each 10-percentage-unit increase in relative air humidity, the risk of dirty thighs increased (OR=1.32). Freestalls with a construction hindering normal lying, rising, and standing movements should be avoided. Furthermore, focus is needed on indoor climate and manure consistency to obtain cows with clean thighs.

Lying behavior as an indicator of lameness in dairy cows

Lameness is widely recognized as one of the most serious welfare and production concerns in the dairy industry. Our objectives were to evaluate the associations between lying behavior and lameness, and to determine whether lying behavior can be used as a diagnostic tool for lameness. Electronic data loggers recorded lying behavior of 1,319 cows from 28 farms at 1-min intervals for 5 d. These cows were gait scored according to a 5-point Numerical Rating System (NRS), and categorized as NRS <or=2, NRS=3, or NRS=4; no cow was scored as NRS=5. Lameness was dichotomized twice: LAME (NRS >or=3) and SEVLAME (NRS=4). Data were divided into 2 groups: 11 farms using deep-bedded stalls (DB) and 17 farms using mattress stalls (MAT). Differences in the daily lying time (h/d), frequency of lying bouts (n/d), duration of lying bouts (min/bout), and the standard deviation of bout duration (min/bout) between LAME or SEVLAME cows and those that were not were tested using mixed models. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to identify behavioral thresholds to distinguish SEVLAME cows from the rest. Odds ratios for SEVLAME were estimated using logistic regression. Overall, 28.5% of cows were LAME including 7.3% that were SEVLAME. The prevalence of SEVLAME was higher on MAT farms than on DB farms (9.3+/-1.3 vs. 4.4+/-1.2%, respectively). SEVLAME cows on DB farms spent 12.8 [confidence interval (CI): 12.0 to 13.7] h/d lying down compared with 11.2 (CI: 10.7 to 11.8) h/d for cows that were not SEVLAME. These cows had longer duration of lying bouts [95.3 (CI: 84.6 to 107.3) vs. 80.3 (CI: 74.9 to 86.1) min/bout] and greater SD of bout duration [44.4 (CI: 41.1 to 48.0) vs. 50.7 (CI: 44.1 to 58.3) min/bout]. There were no behavioral differences among lameness categories on MAT farms. Within DB farms, cows with lying times >14.5 h/d had 16.2 (5.8 to 45.2) times higher odds of being SEVLAME. Cows with average lying bouts >90 min/bout were at 3.0 (1.2 to 7.4) times higher odds of being SEVLAME, and cows with average SD of bout duration >55 min/bout were at 4.1 (1.7 to 9.9) times higher odds of being SEVLAME. These results show that high lying times, long lying bouts, and variability in the duration of lying bouts were associated with lameness, and that stall surface influenced the behavioral responses of lame cows.

Effects of sawdust bedding dry matter on lying behavior of dairy cows: a dose-dependent response

The objective was to determine the effect of sawdust bedding dry matter on the lying behavior of Holstein cows. Dry matter (DM) was varied systematically over 5 treatment levels to test how cows respond to damp bedding. This experiment was repeated during summer and winter to test if the effects of damp bedding varied with season. The 5 bedding treatments averaged (+/-SD) 89.8+/-3.7, 74.2+/-6.4, 62.2+/-6.3, 43.9+/-4.0, and 34.7+/-3.8% DM. Over the course of the trial, minimum and maximum temperatures in the barn were 2.6+/-2.0 and 6.8+/-2.2 degrees C in the winter and 13.3+/-2.5 and 22.6+/-4.1 degrees C in the summer. In both seasons, 5 groups of 3 nonlactating cows were housed in free stalls bedded with sawdust. Following a 5-d acclimation period on dry bedding, groups were exposed to the 5 bedding treatments in a 5 x 5 Latin square. Each treatment lasted 4 d, followed by 1 d when the cows were provided with dry bedding. Stall usage was assessed by 24-h video scanned at 5-min intervals. Responses were analyzed within group (n=5) as the observational unit. Bedding DM affected lying time, averaging 10.4+/-0.4 h/d on the wettest treatment and increasing to 11.5+/-0.4 h/d on the driest bedding. Lying time varied with season, averaging 12.1+/-0.4 h/d across treatments during the winter and 9.9+/-0.6 h/d during the summer, but season and bedding DM did not interact. These results indicate that access to dry bedding is important for dairy cows.

Neck-rail position in the free stall affects standing behavior and udder and stall cleanliness

This study tested the effect of neck-rail position on stall usage and udder and stall cleanliness. Thirty Holstein lactating cows were tested in groups of 6. Each group was tested with each of 5 neck-rail positions (130, 145, 160, 175, and 190 cm from the rear curb, at a constant height of 125 cm above the bedded surface) for 1 wk, with the order of testing allocated in a 5 x 5 Latin square. When the neck rail was positioned further from the rear curb, cows spent less time standing with their front 2 hooves in the stall (2.2 +/- 0.26 h/d at 130 cm vs. 1.7 +/- 0.27 h/d at 190 cm, mean +/- SE) and more time standing with all 4 hooves in the stall (0.0 +/- 0.02 h/d at 130 cm vs. 0.6 +/- 0.07 h/d at 190 cm). These effects of neck-rail position tended to be more marked for smaller cows, perhaps because the standing behavior of larger cows was restricted even in the 190-cm treatment. Cows were more likely to defecate and urinate in the stalls when the neck rail was positioned further from the rear curb. Cows using these stalls tended to have dirtier udders and these stalls required more cleaning time (0.4 +/- 0.16 min/d at the 130-cm position vs. 1.6 +/- 0.35 min/d at the 190-cm position). In summary, positioning the neck rail further from the curb increased the time that cows spent standing fully in the stall. This change in standing behavior is likely beneficial for hoof health, but reduced udder and stall cleanliness.

Comfort zone-design free stalls: do they influence the stall use behavior of lame cows?

The behavior of 59 cows in 4 herds, each with Comfort Zone-design free stalls with dimensions suitable for 700-kg, mature Holstein dairy cows, was filmed for a 48-h period. Comparison was made between nonlame, slightly lame, and moderately lame cows on either rubber-crumb-filled mattress stall surfaces bedded with a small amount of sawdust (2 herds) or a Pack Mat design, which consisted of a rubber-crumb-filled mattress pad installed 5 cm below a raised rear curb, bedded with 5 to 8 cm of sand bedding (2 herds). All other stall design components were similar. Despite adequate resting space and freedom to perform normal rising and lying movements, lame cows on mattresses stood in the stall for >2 h longer than nonlame cows. Although a significant increase in stall standing behavior was observed in lame cows on Pack Mat stalls, the mean (95% confidence interval) standing time in the stall was only 0.7 (0 to 3.0) h/d for nonlame cows and 1.6 (0 to 4.2) h/d for moderately lame cows, which was less than the 2.1 (0 to 4.4), 4.3 (1.6 to 6.9), and 4.9 (2.5 to 7.3) h/d spent standing in the stall for nonlame, slightly lame, and moderately lame cows on mattresses, respectively. This observation supports the hypothesis that it is the nature of the stall surface that dictates changes in stall standing behavior observed in lame cows, rather than other components of stall design. The finding that only 5 to 8 cm of sand over a mattress pad provides most of the benefits of deep sand-bedded stalls, along with other advantages related to stall maintenance and manure handling, gives farmers another useful housing alternative with which to improve cow comfort and well-being.