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.     

Restricting dairy cow access time to pasture in early lactation: the effects on milk production, grazing behaviour and dry matter intake

One of the main aims of pasture-based systems of dairy production is to increase the proportion of grazed grass in the diet. This is most easily achieved by increasing the number of grazing days. However, periods of inclement weather conditions can reduce the number of days at pasture. The two objectives of this experiment were: (i) to investigate the effect of restricting pasture access time on animal production, grazing behaviour and dry matter intake (DMI) of spring calving dairy cows in early lactation; and (ii) to establish whether silage supplementation is required when cows return indoors after short grazing periods. In all, 52 Holstein-Friesian spring calving dairy cows were assigned to a four-treatment study from 25 February to 26 March 2008. The four treatments were: full-time access to pasture (22H; control); 4.5-h- pasture access after both milkings (2 × 4.5H); 3-h pasture access after both milkings (2 × 3H); 3-h pasture access after both milkings with silage supplementation by night (2 × 3SH). All treatments were offered 14.4 kg DM/cow per day herbage from swards, with a mean pre-grazing yield of 1739 kg DM/ha above 4 cm, - and were supplemented with 3 kg DM/cow per day of concentrate. The 2 × 3SH treatment was offered an additional 4 kg DM/cow of grass silage by night. Restricting pasture access time (2 × 3H, 2 × 3SH and 2 × 4.5H) had no effect on milk (28.3 kg/cow per day) and solids-corrected milk (27.2 kg/cow per day) yield when compared with the treatment grazing full time. Supplementing animals with grass silage did not increase milk production when compared with all other treatments. Milk protein concentration tended to be lower (P = 0.08; 32.2 g/kg) for the 2 × 3SH animals when compared with the 22H animals (33.7 g/kg). The grass DMI of the 2 × 3SH treatment was significantly lower (-2.3 kg DM/cow per day) than all other treatments (11.9 kg DM/cow per day), yet the total DMI of these animals was highest (16.6 kg DM/cow per day). The 22H cows grazed for 481 min/cow per day, which is significantly longer than all other treatments. The 2 × 3H animals grazed for 98% of the time, whereas the 2 × 3SH grazed for 79% of their time at pasture. Restricting pasture access time did not affect end body weight or body condition score. The results of this study indicate that restricting pasture access time of dairy cows in early lactation does not affect milk production performance. Furthermore, supplementing cows with grass silage does not increase milk production but reduces grazing efficiency.     

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.     

Effect of time at pasture combined with restricted indoor feeding on production and behaviour in dairy cows

Extremely high nutrient loads have been reported in grazed grassland regimes compared with cutting regimes in some dairy systems that include the use of supplemental feeding. The aim of this study was, therefore, to investigate the effects on productivity and behaviour of high-yielding dairy cows with limited access to indoor feed and restriction in the time at pasture in a continuous stocking system. During a 6-week period from the start of the grazing season 2005, an experiment was conducted with the aim of investigating the effect of restrictive indoor feeding combined with limiting the time at pasture on the productivity and behaviour of high-yielding dairy cows (31.0 ± 5.4 kg energy-corrected milk) in a system based on continuous stocking. The herd was split into three groups allocated to three treatments consisting of 4, 6.5 and 9 h at pasture, respectively. Each group of cows grazed in separate paddocks with three replicates and was separately housed in a cubicle system with slatted floor during the rest of the day. All cows were fed the same amount of supplement, adjusted daily to meet the ad libitum indoor intake of the cows at pasture for nine hours. The herbage allowance was 1650 kg dry matter (DM) per ha, and the intake of supplemental feed was 9.1 kg DM per cow daily. The limitation of the time at pasture to 4 h in combination with restrictive indoor feeding reduced the daily milk, fat and protein yield and live weight compared with 9 h of access to pasture. The proportion of time during which the cows were grazing while at pasture increased from 0.64 to 0.86 and the estimated herbage intake per h at pasture decreased from 2547 g DM to1398 g DM, when time at pasture changed from 4 to 9 h. It can be concluded, that in systems with a high herbage allowance, the cow was able to compensate for 0.8 of the reduction in time at pasture by increasing the proportion of time spent grazing and presumably also both the bite rate and mass, although the latter two have not been directly confirmed in the present study.     

Impact of cow strain and concentrate supplementation on grazing behaviour,milk yield and metabolic state of dairy cows in an organic pasture-based feeding system

As ruminants are able to digest fibre efficiently and assuming that competition for feed v. food use would intensify in the future, cereals and other field crops should primarily be destined to cover the dietary needs of humans and monogastric animals such as poultry and pigs. Farming systems with a reduced or absent concentrate supplementation, as postulated by organic agriculture associations, require adapted dairy cows. The aim of this experiment was to examine the impact of concentrate supplementation on milk production, grazing and rumination behaviour, feed intake, physical activity and blood traits with two Holstein-Friesian cow strains and to conclude the consequences for sustainable and organic farming. The experiment was a cross-over study and took place on an organic farm in Switzerland. In all, 12 Swiss Holstein-Friesian (HCH) cows and 12 New Zealand Holstein-Friesian (HNZ) cows, which were paired according to lactation number, days in milk and age for primiparous cows, were used. All cows grazed full time and were supplemented either with 6 kg/day of a commercial, organic cereal-grain mix or received no supplement. After an adaptation period of 21 days, a measurement period of 7 days followed, where milk yield and composition, pasture dry matter intake estimated with the n-alkane double-indicator technique, physical activity based on pedometer measurements, grazing behaviour recorded by automatic jaw movement recorder and blood samples were investigated. Non-supplemented cows had a lower milk yield and supplemented HCH cows produced more milk than supplemented HNZ cows. Grazing time and physical activity were greater for non-supplemented cows. Supplementation had no effect on rumination behaviour, but HNZ cows spent longer ruminating compared with HCH cows. Pasture dry matter intake decreased with the concentrate supplementation. Results of blood analysis did not indicate a strong negative energy balance for either non-supplemented or supplemented cows. Minor differences between cow strains in this short-term study indicated that both cow strains are equally suited for an organic pasture-based production system with no concentrate supplementation. Many factors such as milk yield potential, animal welfare and health, efficiency, grazing behaviour and social aspects influence the decision to supplement grazing dairy cows with concentrates.     

Assessment of welfare indicators in dairy farms offering pasture at differing levels

In terms of animal welfare, farming systems of dairy cows are perceived positively by consumers when compared to pigs or poultry. A main reason is that the majority of consumers associate dairy farming with pasture, which in turn they relate with benefits for animal health and welfare. However, holistic scientific assessments of the effects of pasturing on animal welfare are rare. Hence, it was the aim to study the animal welfare level in 61 German loose housing dairy farms by using the measures of the Welfare Quality® protocol for dairy cattle (WQP). Data were collected twice per farm at the end of the pasture season (July to October) and approximately 6 months later at the end of the barn season (December to April). Farms were classified based on the duration cows had access to pasture per day during the pasture season: group 1 (G1)>10 h; group 2 (G2) 6 to 10 h; group 3 (G3)<6 h and group 4 (G4) without pasture access. The average herd size was 129 Holstein-Friesian or Red-Holstein cows (range 58 to 527). In addition to WQP data, performance data were gathered from routine herd data recordings. The indicators were aggregated to criteria applying the scoring system of the WQP. G4 received lower scores at the first than at the second visit for the criterion absence of hunger, while there were no differences between visits in the other groups (P=0.58 – group×farm visit effect). All pasturing groups were scored better at the end of the pasture season than G4 for the criterion comfort around resting (P<0.01). Compared with G1 for both farm visits and G2 for the end of the barn season, G4 reached inferior scores for the criterion absence of injuries, including indicators such as hairless patches, lesions, and swellings and lameness. At both assessments G2 was scored higher than the other groups for the criterion absence of diseases (P=0.04). In conclusion, pasture access had positive effects only on selected welfare indicators, however, these effects were not maintained throughout the barn season.     

Aligning health and welfare principles and practice in organic dairy systems: a review

This review provides an assessment of research findings into the current practices and standards and the principles and aspirations for organic dairy production, with respect to the health and welfare of the dairy cow. The relationships between the four main factors: management, environment, genetics and nutrition and their impact on the health and welfare status of organic dairy cows are considered. The concept that good animal health and welfare is more than merely the absence of disease, with behavioural aspects of health and welfare such as physiological and psychological needs, is also discussed. These factors are inter-related and important in all dairy systems, irrespective of whether the system is organic, low-input or intensive. Incidences of individual clinical and sub-clinical diseases that are recorded in conventional dairy systems also occur in organic dairy systems, with infertility, lameness and mastitis being the major problems. However, the magnitude of the incidence of many of these diseases may be either lower or higher in organic systems due to different management practices and the standards defined for organic milk production that, for example, prohibit the routine use of conventional medicines and require the feeding of high-forage diets. In relation to different systems, it is important to note that contrary to a common assumption, good welfare does not necessarily occur with more extensive systems. The type of organic system (self-sufficient, purchased-feed) also has the potential to have a major influence on the incidence of health problems and the reproductive status of organic dairy herds. Health status is also influenced by environmental and welfare factors, including the method of rearing replacement animals, type of housing and the geographical and climatic conditions of individual farms. Overall, this review identifies where conflicts arise between current practice and the organic principles and standards, and aims to provide suggestions to bring about further improvement in organic dairy health and welfare.     

Embryo survival in dairy cows managed under pastoral conditions

Efficient pasture-based milk production systems require a compact calving pattern aligned to the onset of the grazing season, a 365-day calving interval and low culling rates for infertility. Achievement of these targets requires high herd reproductive performance. While high genetic merit Holstein cows produce more milk in grass-based systems their fertility is compromised. Management of the modern high genetic merit Holstein dairy cow presents a major challenge in pasture-based systems of production. It appears that the extent of early embryo loss is greater (up to 20% points greater) in the modern high-producing dairy cow and that a much higher proportion of the embryos die before day 7 following insemination in contrast to heifers and lower yielding cows. About 7-8% of pregnancies are lost between days 30 and 90 of gestation with no evidence that loss rate is related to cow genetic merit, parity or level of production. Systemic concentrations of progesterone during both the cycle preceding and following insemination affect embryo survival rate with evidence that too low or indeed too high a concentration of progesterone been negatively associated with embryo survival rate. Peripheral concentrations of both progesterone and oestradiol are lowered by increased plane of feed intake due to increased metabolic clearance rate of the steroids, which is related to liver blood flow. It appears that high producing dairy cows have an increased risk of embryo death as a result of lowered peripheral concentrations of progesterone as a consequence of increased hepatic metabolism of progesterone. Uterine expression of mRNA for progesterone receptor, oestradiol receptor and retinol binding protein mRNA appears to be sensitive to changes in peripheral concentrations of progesterone during the first week after AI. It would appear that energy balance and dry matter intake during the 4 weeks, immediately after calving are critically important in determining conception rate when cows are inseminated at 70-100 days post-calving. Concentrate supplementation of cows at pasture during the breeding period has minimal affects on conception rates though sudden reduction in dietary intake should be avoided. For pasture-based systems of milk production more balanced breeding strategies, with greater emphasis on fertility and feed intake must be developed.     

Effect of grazing on the cow welfare of dairy herds evaluated by a multidimensional welfare index

Structural development in the prime sector has led to increasing herd sizes and new barn systems, followed by less summer grazing for dairy cows in Denmark. Effects of grazing on single welfare measures in dairy cows – for example, the presence of integument alterations or mortality – have been studied under different conditions. However, the effect of grazing on welfare, conceptualised as the multidimensional physical and mental state of the animal, has not yet been studied in contemporary cubicle loose-housing systems. The aim of our study was to investigate, based on a Welfare Quality® inspired multidimensional dairy cow welfare assessment protocol, the within-herd effect of summer grazing compared with winter barn housing in Danish dairy herds with cubicle free-stall systems for the lactating cows. Our hypothesis was that cow welfare in dairy herds was better during summer grazing than during full-time winter housing. Furthermore, we expected improved welfare with an increase in daily summer grazing hours. In total, 41 herds have been visited once in the winter and once in the summer of 2010 to assess their welfare status with 17 different animal- and resource-based welfare measures. A panel of 20 experts on cattle welfare and husbandry evaluated the relative weight of the 17 welfare measures in a multidimensional assessment scheme. They estimated exact weights for a priori constituted severe compared with moderate scores of welfare impairment concerning each measure, as well as relevance of the measures in relation to each other. A welfare index (WI; possible range 0 to 5400) was calculated for each herd and season with a higher index indicating poorer welfare. The within-herd comparison of summer grazing v. winter housing considered all the 17 measures. The mean WI in summer was significantly lower (better) than in winter (mean 2926 v. 3330; paired t-test P = 0.0001) based on a better state of the integument, claw conformation and better access to water and food. Body condition and faeces consistence were worse in summer. Many daily grazing hours (range average above 3 to 9 h) turned out to be more beneficial than few daily grazing hours (range average above 9 to 21 h) for the welfare of the dairy herds. In conclusion, this study reports a positive within-herd effect of summer grazing on dairy cow welfare, where many daily grazing hours were more beneficial than few daily grazing hours.     

Restricting dairy cow access time to pasture in autumn: The effects on milk production,grazing behaviour and DM intake of late lactation dairy cows

Extending the grazing season in pasture based systems of dairy production can increase farm profitability; poor weather and soil conditions can reduce the number of grazing days. The study objectives were to (i) examine the effect of restricted access to pasture in the autumn on the milk production, grazing behaviour and DM intake (DMI) of late lactation spring-calving dairy cows and (ii) establish the effect of alternating restricted and continuous access to pasture on dairy cow production, DMI and grazing behaviour. Cows were randomly assigned to one of four grazing treatments: (i) 22 h (full-time) access to pasture (22H; control); (ii) Two 5-h periods of access to pasture (2×5H); (iii) Two 3-h periods of access to pasture (2×3H); and (iv) alternating between full-time and 3-h access to pasture with no more than three continuous days on any one regime, e.g. Monday – full-time access, Tuesday − 2x3H access, Wednesday − 2x3H access; Thursday – full-time access, etc. (2×3HV). Restricted access to pasture was offered after a.m. and p.m. milking. Swards of similar quality and pregrazing herbage mass were offered. Treatment had no effect on milk yield (13.2 kg/day), milk fat (48.2 g/kg), protein (39.0 g/kg) or lactose content (42.6 g/kg) and milk solid yield (1.15 kg/day). Similarly, there was no effect of treatment on final BW (483 kg) or final BCS (2.66). There was no significant difference in DMI (15.1 kg DM/cow/day) between treatments. There was an effect on daily grazing time, 22H cows (565 min/cow/day) grazed for longest time, however, when the 2x3HV treatment had full-time access to pasture, they had a similar grazing time (543 min/cow/day) to the 22H cows and were similar to the 2x3H treatment on days with restricted access to pasture (357 min/cow/day). The 22H and 2x5H animals had similar grass DMI/min (29.2 g/min), the 2x3HV were higher (33.9 g/min) but were similar to the comparable treatment when offered 2x3H access time (41.6 g/min) and when offered 22H access time (27.7 g/min). The results from this study show how when offered a grass only diet of autumn pasture grazing behaviour can be modified by restricting pasture access time without reducing dairy cow production in late lactation at low production levels. There was also no effect of alternating access time between 22H and 2x3H on milk production and DMI in the 2x3HV treatment. Restricted access time to pasture in autumn may be a strategy which farmers can use to extend the grazing season.     

Animal behavior and pasture depletion in a pasture-based automatic milking system

In pasture-based automatic milking systems (AMS), feed is the main incentive that can be managed to encourage reliable and consistent voluntary and distributed cow traffic. Modifying timing, placement and size of feed allocations is expected to have an effect on cow behavior that could avoid the occurrence of extended milking intervals, which have a negative effect on milk yield. Therefore, behavioral studies provide information on how cows modify their actions under different management regimes and can help explain the impact of those regimes. Behavioral observations were conducted in spring 2011 at the FutureDairy AMS research farm, as part of a study where a herd of 175 cows was split into two groups that received supplementary feed either before (PRE), or immediately after (POST) milking. In addition, all cows were offered access to two daily pasture allocations. Observations were conducted in the pasture allocation on 15 focal cows from each treatment group during four periods of 24 h to detect presence and behavior (grazing, ruminating, idling and other) every 15 min. In addition, bite rate and pasture biomass were measured every hour. Overall, despite the finding that more POST cows than PRE cows entered the pasture allocation during the first 8 h of active access, there was no difference in the total proportion of cows that had gained access by the end of the active access period (average 68% for both treatments). Cows in the PRE treatment started exiting the pasture allocation just 6 h after entering, compared with 8 h for POST cows, although their behaviors in the pasture allocation did not differ. Behaviors and bite rate were more dependent on pasture biomass than on supplementary feeding management.     

Assessing the Welfare of Dairy Cattle

This article suggests that health problems represent some of the main threats to the welfare of dairy cattle. Although disagreement often arises about what constitutes the main welfare problems, there is broad agreement that welfare is reduced by health problems. In recent decades, a marked increase has occurred in the incidence of various production diseases in dairy cattle of which lameness is the most prevalent. This article summarizes the evidence showing that lameness is affected by the genetics of the animal and by housing. High levels of production do not necessarily lead to increased lameness, although genetic correlations between levels of production and the incidence of lameness suggest that continued high selection for milk production will likely exacerbate the problem. Denying access to pasture may increase the incidence of some forms of lameness. Both the design of the stall and the type of walking surface can have a large effect on the incidence of hoof problems for the nonhuman animal kept in free-stall housing. Finally, management and nutritional factors can have a large effect, often obscuring the influence of housing. The behavior of the cow, particularly time spent lying or standing, can influence the likelihood of lameness.     

Robot utilisation of pasture-based dairy cows with varying levels of milking frequency

Achieving a consistent level of robot utilisation throughout 24 h maximises automatic milking system (AMS) utilisation. However, levels of robot utilisation in the early morning hours are typically low, caused by the diurnal feeding behaviour of cows, limiting the inherent capacity and total production of pasture-based AMS. Our objective was to determine robot utilisation throughout 24 h by dairy cows, based on milking frequency (MF; milking events per animal per day) in a pasture-based AMS. Milking data were collected from January and February 2013 across 56 days, from a single herd of 186 animals (Bos taurus) utilising three Lely A3 robotic milking units, located in Tasmania, Australia. The dairy herd was categorised into three equal sized groups (n=62 per group) according to the cow’s mean daily MF over the duration of the study. Robot utilisation was characterised by an interaction (P< 0.001) between the three MF groups and time of day, with peak milking time for high MF cows within one h of a fresh pasture allocation becoming available, followed by the medium MF and low MF cows 2 and 4 h later, respectively. Cows in the high MF group also presented for milking between 2400 and 0600 h more frequently (77% of nights), compared to the medium MF group (57%) and low MF group (50%). This study has shown the formation of three distinct groups of cows within a herd, based on their MF levels. Further work is required to determine if this finding is replicated across other pasture-based AMS farms.     

A survey on management and housing of peri-parturient dairy cows and their calves

Housing and management around the time of calving impact dairy cow behaviour, health and welfare, but little is known about current practice. The aim was to provide an overview of current calving practice and the study describes the main calving housing and management based on replies to an online questionnaire by 42 dairy cattle experts in 28 countries, or regions, in Europe, Canada and USA. The survey suggests that in the majority of countries and regions included in this study, dairy cows typically calve in indoor calving facilities; either individual pens, group pens or a system where the cow is moved from a group pen into an adjacent individual pen before calving. Regarding individual calving pens, the survey suggests that in the majority of countries and regions included in this study, most pens have open sides and offer cows no opportunity to isolate, although research shows that a secluded corner of an individual pen creates a preferred calving site. Further, the survey suggests that when cows calve in individual calving pens or tie-stalls, they are often moved there with signs of imminent calving, although research shows that this practice increases the duration of calving and it is recommended to move cows before their expected calving time. Regarding group pens, none of the 42 respondents replied that group pens typically offer cows the opportunity to isolate at calving. Recent research suggests that when cows calve in a secluded area of a group calving pen, this reduces the risk of failure of passive transfer of immunity. Regarding calving facilities where group pens are combined with adjacent individual pens, this was reported to be the most typical in 10 of the 24 countries and regions with indoor calving sections covered by the survey. The same concerns regarding when the cow is moved from the group pen to an individual pen apply, as outlined above. Irrespective of pen type, the most frequently reported surface was deep bedded straw and the most frequent type of separation between pens was open sides. Cow-calf separation within 12 hours of birth, and thereafter individual housing of calves combined with milk feeding via a teat bucket or bar was indicated the most frequent management. The survey presents experts’ evaluations of current practice of housing and management of peri-parturient dairy cows and their calves, and suggests that there is a discrepancy between current calving management and housing and recommendations based on recent research.     

Peripheral and gastrointestinal immune systems of healthy cattle raised outdoors at pasture or indoors on a concentrate-based ration

Background  

Despite an increasing preference of consumers for beef produced from more extensive pasture-based production systems and potential human health benefits from the consumption of such beef, data regarding the health status of animals raised on pasture are limited. The objective of this study was to characterise specific aspects of the bovine peripheral and the gastrointestinal muscosal immune systems of cattle raised on an outdoor pasture system in comparison to animals raised on a conventional intensive indoor concentrate-based system.     

Measures to improve dairy cow foot health: consequences for farmer income and dairy cow welfare

Dairy farming in western countries with cubicle housing is an efficient way of dairy farming. Though, a disadvantage is the high prevalence and incidence of foot disorders (clinical and subclinical), which cause high economic losses and also seriously impair the welfare of dairy cattle. To point out the importance of reducing the amount and severity of foot disorders, advice to farmers should include information about the scale of the problem and the consequences in terms of economics and animal welfare. To provide support in making decisions on implementing intervention measures, insight into costs and benefits of different measures should be available. The objective of this study, therefore, is to provide more insight into the costs and benefits, for farmer and cow, of different intervention measures to improve dairy cow foot health. Intervention measures were modeled when they were applicable on a dairy farm with cubicle housing and when sufficient information was available in literature. Net costs were calculated as the difference between the costs of the measure and the economic benefits resulting from the measure. Welfare benefits were calculated as well. Cost-effective measures are: improving lying surface (mattress and bedding, €7 and €1/cow per year, respectively), reducing stocking density (break even) and performing additional foot trimming (€1/cow per year). Simultaneously, these measures have a relative high welfare benefit. Labor costs play an important role in the cost-effectiveness of labor-intensive measures. More insight into cost-effectiveness and welfare benefits of intervention measures can help to prioritize when choosing between intervention measures.     

Farm characteristics related to on-farm cow mortality in dairy herds: a questionnaire study

Dairy cow mortality is an important animal welfare issue that also causes financial losses. The objective of this study was to identify farm characteristics and herd management practices associated with high on-farm cow mortality in Swedish dairy herds. A postal questionnaire was sent to farmers that had either high or low mortality rates for 3 consecutive years. The questionnaire consisted of five sections: ‘About the farm’, ‘Milking and housing’, ‘Feeding’, ‘Routines’ and ‘Lame and sick cows’. A total of 145 questionnaires were returned (response rate=33%). Ten of the 77 characteristics investigated met the inclusion criteria for multivariable analysis. The final logistic regression model included: herd size, breed, use of natural service bull, bedding improvement frequency and pasture system. Herds with Swedish Holstein as the predominant breed (odds ratio (OR) 22.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.2 to 101.8) or with mixed breeds (OR 5.5, 95% CI 1.7 to 17.5) had a greater risk of being high mortality herds than herds that were predominantly Swedish Red (OR 1). Herds larger than 100 cows (OR 19.6, 95% CI 3.5 to 110.4) and herds with 50 to 99 cows (OR 13.8, 95% CI 3.2 to 60.6) had greater risk of mortality than herds numbering 35 to 50 cows (OR 1). Being a high mortality herd was also associated with having cows on exercise lots during the summer season (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.3 to 9.9) compared with on pasture. A missing answer on the question of bedding improvement frequency was associated with high mortality herds. Overall, this study suggests that characteristics that are related to intensification of the dairy industry are also associated with high on-farm mortality of dairy cows.     

The effect of dry cow winter management system on feed intake, performance and estimated energy demand

This research compared three wood-chip out-wintering pad (OWP; an unsheltered OWP; a sheltered OWP (both with a concrete feed apron); and an unsheltered OWP with silage provided directly on top of the wood-chip bedding (self-feed OWP)) designs and cubicle housing with regard to dairy cow performance during the pre-partum period, and for 8 weeks post partum. Data were compared during 2 years. In Year 1, the unsheltered (space allowance = 12 m2 per cow) and sheltered (6 m2 per cow) OWPs were compared with cubicle housing (n = 49 cows per treatment). In Year 2, all three OWP designs (12 m2 per cow) were compared with cubicle housing (n = 24 cows per treatment, split into two replicates). Animals were dried off and assigned to treatment in the autumn, and remained there until calving in spring. Subsequently, they were managed at pasture during lactation. Outcome measures for analysis during the pre-partum period were feed intake, live weight, body condition score (BCS), heat production and heat loss, and post-partum were live weight, BCS, milk yield and milk composition. In Year 1, all cows had a similar live weight, but both pre-partum and at calving cows on the unsheltered OWP had a lower BCS than cows in cubicles (P < 0.05). However, in Year 2, there were no differences in either live weight or BCS. In Year 1, cows in the unsheltered OWP produced less heat than in cubicles (P < 0.05), but in Year 2, there was no treatment effect. In both years, cows in unsheltered OWPs lost more heat than cows in the sheltered OWP (P < 0.001). Treatment had no effect on milk composition either year. However, in Year 2, cows in the self-feed OWP had higher milk yields than the other treatments (P < 0.05). The lower BCS and heat production values in unsheltered treatments during Year 1 were probably because of higher rainfall and wind-speed values of that year. However, in both years, live weight in all treatments increased pre partum, and BCS did not decrease, indicating that unsheltered cows did not need to mobilise body reserves. Thus, OWPs could be a suitable pre-partum alternative to cubicle housing for dry dairy cows with regard to some aspects of dairy cow productive performance. However, further research should be carried out to investigate longer-term effects.     

Behaviour and leg injuries in dairy cows kept in cubicle systems with straw bedding or soft lying mats

In order to reduce straw input, soft lying mats are used increasingly instead of straw bedding in cubicle systems for dairy cows. This study aimed at comparing different types of soft lying mats with straw bedding regarding cow behaviour and leg injuries. Data were collected on five farms with straw bedding and on 13 farms using four types of soft lying mats consisting of different materials. On each farm, lying behaviour of 10 cows was recorded automatically during 3 days by means of a pneumatically operated resting sensor fitted in a belt. In addition, standing up and lying down behaviour of cows was quantified by direct observations, and all cows on a given farm were checked once for leg injuries.There were no significant differences between cows kept in cubicle systems with soft lying mats and straw bedding regarding the total time spent lying per day and the number of lying bouts per day. Standing up and lying down behaviour also did not differ between cows with access to soft lying mats and straw bedding. Leg injuries were most frequent in the tarsal and carpal joints. Cows kept in cubicle systems with soft lying mats had a significantly higher incidence of both hairless patches more than 2 cm in diameter (P<0.001) and scabs or wounds less than 2 cm in diameter (P<0.001) located in the tarsal joints than cows in cubicle systems with straw bedding. With the carpal joints, on the other hand, the incidence of leg injuries did not differ significantly between these two housing conditions. In conclusion, the results of this study indicate that soft lying mats are equivalent to straw bedding in terms of cow behaviour but less favourable with respect to leg injuries located in the tarsal joints.     

The effect of out-wintering pad design on dirtiness score, somatic cell score and mastitis incidence in dairy cows

This study aimed to compare three woodchip out-wintering pad (OWP) designs, and indoor cubicle housing with regard to cow dirtiness scores during the winter housing period, and udder health during both the winter period and the following lactation, for spring-calving dairy cows. The treatments were: an uncovered (UP) and covered (CP) OWP with a concrete feed apron; an uncovered OWP with self-feed silage pit provided directly on the woodchips (SP); and indoor cubicle housing (IC). Data were compared during 2 years: year 1 was a case study while year 2 was an experimental study. In year 1, treatments were UP (space allowance = 12 m2/cow), CP (6 m2/cow) and IC. In year 2, all three OWP designs (12 m2/cow) were compared with IC. Animals were assigned to treatments at the end of lactation in the autumn, and remained there while dry until calving the following spring. Subsequently, all cows were at pasture during lactation. Outcome measures for analysis were cow dirtiness score, somatic cell score (SCS) and incidence of clinical mastitis during the dry period and during lactation. Quarter milk samples were also taken at drying off, calving and 3 weeks post partum both years, and at approximately 113 days in milk in year 2. Samples were analysed for presence of mastitis-causing agents and SCS was determined. Sub-clinical mastitis was diagnosed when cows had an SCS greater than 200 000, or California mastitis test greater than 1 in at least one quarter. In year 1, cows in CP were dirtier than cows in the other two treatments. These animals also had the highest SCS during lactation and tended to have more mastitis-causing agents isolated from quarter milk samples. In year 2, when all cows were stocked at the same density, cows in the sheltered OWP (i.e. CP) had similar dirtiness scores to cows in cubicles and significantly lower dirtiness scores than cows in the unsheltered OWP designs, i.e. UP and SP. However, there were no effects on SCS or quarter sample results. Cleaning of OWP's stocked at 12 m2/cow reduced cow dirtiness scores. However, cleaning of CP in year 1 when cows were stocked at 6 m2/cow had no effect on dirtiness scores. We conclude that dry cows stocked at 12 m2/cow on OWP's are unlikely to have udder health problems in the subsequent lactation. Furthermore, provision of shelter and cleaning of the woodchips are management factors that help to keep cows clean on OWP's.