Making tiestalls more comfortable: IV. Increasing stall bed length and decreasing manger wall height to heal injuries and increase lying time in dairy cows housed in deep-bedded tiestalls

Prevalence and Risk Factors Associated with Rib Lesions in Dairy Cows

Unilateral or bilateral hard bony enlargement is sometimes palpated over dairy cows' ribs. Although usually not painful, these injuries may have welfare and economic implications and can be used as indicators of poor husbandry conditions. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of rib lesions in dairy cows kept in intensive systems and to identify the risk factors either associated with the housing or with the animal's clinical history. We examined the ribs of all 1319 lactating cows from 22 Portuguese dairy farms. In each farm, housing and animal potential risk factors were recorded. Additionally, clinical examination, including lameness scoring, was performed on all cows showing rib lesions. The global rib lesions' prevalence per farm was 2.3%, ranging from 0% (n = 12 farms) to 6.1% (n = 1 farm). Lesions were found in cows with an average of 3.7 lactations. The main farm risk factors were narrow stalls; insufficient feeding places; insufficient cubicles; and the presence of an exposed curb at the back end of the stalls. Rib lesions were associated with a history of lameness but not with lame cows at the moment of examination or a history of being a downer cow. In conclusion, rib lesions' prevalence can be high in some farms, being significantly associated with cubicle design and lameness. By being associated with chronic lameness and inadequate housing, rib lesions should be included in dairy cows' welfare assessment protocols.

Welfare of dairy cows

This Scientific Opinion addresses a European Commission's mandate on the welfare of dairy cows as part of the Farm to Fork strategy. It includes three assessments carried out based on literature reviews and complemented by expert opinion. Assessment 1 describes the most prevalent housing systems for dairy cows in Europe: tie-stalls, cubicle housing, open-bedded systems and systems with access to an outdoor area. Per each system, the scientific opinion describes the distribution in the EU and assesses the main strengths, weaknesses and hazards potentially reducing the welfare of dairy cows. Assessment 2 addresses five welfare consequences as requested in the mandate: locomotory disorders (including lameness), mastitis, restriction of movement and resting problems, inability to perform comfort behaviour and metabolic disorders. Per each welfare consequence, a set of animal-based measures is suggested, a detailed analysis of the prevalence in different housing systems is provided, and subsequently, a comparison of the housing systems is given. Common and specific system-related hazards as well as management-related hazards and respective preventive measures are investigated. Assessment 3 includes an analysis of farm characteristics (e.g. milk yield, herd size) that could be used to classify the level of on-farm welfare. From the available scientific literature, it was not possible to derive relevant associations between available farm data and cow welfare. Therefore, an approach based on expert knowledge elicitation (EKE) was developed. The EKE resulted in the identification of five farm characteristics (more than one cow per cubicle at maximum stocking density, limited space for cows, inappropriate cubicle size, high on-farm mortality and farms with less than 2 months access to pasture). If one or more of these farm characteristics are present, it is recommended to conduct an assessment of cow welfare on the farm in question using animal-based measures for specified welfare consequences.

Testing the ability of contact mats to identify problematic stall configurations

Comparing the frequency of cow contact with stall rails across multiple stall designs may help to determine which stall configurations best promote cow ease of movement and reduce injury risk. The objective of this study was to compare the frequency of cow contact with the dividers across different stall treatments using the contact mat (CM) system to identify problematic stall designs. A total of 6 stall treatments were each tested against for 6 consecutive weeks against control (CON) stall condition: 3 treatments that modified the placement of the tie-rail (TRFARM, TRNEW1, TRNEW2), and 3 separate treatments that increased chain length (LCL), doubled stall width (DSW), and shortened manger wall height (SMW). CM were affixed to the stall dividers to record the frequency of cow contact per second. Cows were ranked in descending order from highest frequency of divider contact to lowest frequency of divider contact for each week. TRNEW1 and TRNEW2 were the only stall treatments with a consistently lower frequency of divider contact than CON, while DSW was consistently higher than CON. The results suggest that the CM system can be used to identify problematic stall configurations to independently substantiate findings related to cow comfort.

Graduate Student Literature Review: The effect of housing systems on movement opportunity of dairy cows and the implications on cow health and comfort

Intensification within the dairy industry has led to an increase in use of more restrictive indoor housing systems (most commonly tiestalls and freestalls) and less use of the pasture-based housing systems used in past generations. These indoor housing systems are associated with not only a higher level of restriction to cow movement, but also with a higher prevalence of lameness and cow comfort issues on farm, which negatively affects cow welfare, public perceptions, and producer profitability. In looking for solutions to these issues, several studies have investigated different housing and management options that are less restrictive and increase cow movement opportunity. We hypothesized that movement opportunity, briefly summarized as the level of locomotor activity a cow is able to express in her given environment as well as the ease with which said movement can be expressed, can have a direct, substantial effect on cow comfort as well as cow leg and hoof health. Lying behaviors, which serve as common indicators of cow comfort, are affected not only by the ease of movement that comes with providing more movement opportunity within the lying environment, but also by the aforementioned improvements to leg health. This is particularly true regarding the ability to display different lying postures and to rise and lie down with ease. The complexity of the relationship between the different methods by which movement opportunity can be provided to dairy cows and the corresponding effects on outcome measures related to cow health and comfort is an area of research that warrants exploration. In this literature review, we sought to identify how level of movement opportunity, provided though different housing systems and management practices, affects cow hoof and leg, udder, and reproductive health, as well as the effects that it has on cow lying behaviors that are indicative of comfort.