Interrelationships between cows, calves, and humans in cow-calf contact systems-An interview study among Norwegian dairy farmers

Invited review: Future directions for cow-calf contact research and sustainable on-farm applications

Prolonged cow-calf contact (CCC) is of growing importance to the dairy sector due to increasing societal interest, implementation of CCC on farms, and research efforts. Incorporating CCC into dairy systems may be a polarizing change for academics and farmers. However, by considering the challenges with curiosity, including those mutual to CCC and non-CCC systems, there may be an opportunity to collectively improve the management of dairy animals. The aim of this review was to describe current issues and constraints in CCC, propose opportunities to advance knowledge of CCC, and inspire forward-thinking questions for dairy systems. There are known challenges for CCC implementation, such as research reproducibility (e.g., suitable controls, validity types) and on-farm application (e.g., farmer perspectives, policies, and corporate standards). To facilitate practical solutions for farmers wanting to adopt CCC we need research describing the effects of CCC systems on animal health and behavior. Already researchers have begun to explore cow and calf performance and health, methods for decreasing stress at weaning and separation (e.g., duration of contact, gradual weaning), foster cows, and opportunities for positive animal welfare in CCC systems (e.g., affiliative and play behavior). However, because dairying takes place in a complex system, changes may affect different facets of the system's sustainability. We suggest that the development of CCC systems should happen in dialog with stakeholders. Cow-calf contact is an uncommon practice in dairy systems and exists in different contexts; thus, there are many questions to address before advice can be given to interested dairy stakeholders. Perhaps, these CCC-related questions are an invitation to contemplate how we want dairy systems to look like in 30 years.

Dam-calf contact rearing in Switzerland: Aspects of management and milking

Cow-calf contact (CCC) rearing is becoming an increasingly popular alternative to the common practice of early separation of cow and calf in dairy management. Milkability can be impaired in nursing cows, which contributes to the loss of machine milk yield caused by calf intake, especially in pure dam-calf contact (DCC) systems. The aims of this study were (1) to describe the current status quo of DCC rearing regarding management and milking and (2) to evaluate the effects of DCC (suckling and milking vs. milking alone) and the effects of different types of DCC on milkability parameters, teat condition, and behavior during milking on Swiss DCC farms. By means of 17 telephone interviews with DCC farmers, we collected data on DCC management, housing, separation and weaning processes, milking procedures and techniques, and perceived milkability problems. Subsequently, we collected data on 10 of the interviewed DCC farms (183 cows): 4 DCC farms with a whole-day contact (WDC) system, 3 farms with DCC before milking (CBM), and 3 farms with DCC after milking (CAM). Five farms on which calves had no contact with dams were chosen as reference farms (178 cows). Using a milk flow meter, the occurrence of ejection disorders, bimodality of the milk flow curve, machine milk yield, duration of the decline phase, and duration of prestimulation were measured. The average mouthpiece chamber vacuum during the main milking phase and hind leg activity during milking were measured using a pressure sensor and an accelerometer, respectively. After cluster removal, the teat condition was evaluated, and a stripping milk sample was taken for fat content analysis. The interview results revealed that 8 of the 17 farms surveyed had a WDC system, and 2 farms operated a daytime DCC system. Contact before milking was applied by 3 farms, and 3 farms allowed CAM. On one farm, calves had access to dams 3 times a day. A great diversity in cow-calf management was found. In the on-farm data collection, 20 milkings of a total of 701 milkings examined met the criteria for a clear ejection disorder, with 17 of these observations occurring on WDC farms and none on reference farms. The stripping milk fat content was lower in nursing cows, indicating a lower degree of udder emptying. Machine milk yield was higher in nursing CAM cows than in nursing WDC and CBM cows. Farm types did not differ regarding teat condition, hind leg activity, or the occurrence of bimodal milk flow curves. In conclusion, the large variation in individual management approaches to DCC rearing even within DCC types, such as calf housing or cow breeds, implies caution when interpreting results. Contact after milking may be the system most beneficial for some productivity parameters, but adequate calf supply must be ensured. Higher amounts of milk remaining in the udder after cluster removal indicate that nursing can affect milkability, but future research should consider the effects of udder filling before milking to better interpret the fat content of stripping milk.

Cow-calf contact: a single-herd observational study of AMS yield during the first 100 days in milk

An increasing number of dairy farmers plan to implement cow-calf contact (CCC) in their herd which necessitates descriptions of the cows` performance in different systems. The aim of the study was to describe (1) Automatic milking system (AMS) milk yield of cows in a CCC system during the first 100 days in milk (DIM) and (2) AMS milk yield before and after cow-calf separation. In a prospective study at a commercial Norwegian dairy farm, we included all calvings from Norwegian Red cows between January 2019 to April 2020. After calving, cow-calf pairs stayed in an individual calving pen during the first 5-6 d before they were moved to the loose housing unit with the remaining herd. Calves had whole-day (24 h/d) and full physical contact to the cows. Cows were milked in an AMS. From 14 individual cows of which one cow calved twice during the study period, we collected daily AMS yields from 15 different lactations, with parities ranging from 1 (n = 6), 2 (n = 5) and 3 (n = 4). Due to the sample size and structure of the data set, we only calculated descriptive statistics from DIM 7-100. All data is shown separately for primiparous and multiparous cows. Mean (± SD) calf age at (fence-line) separation was 52 d ± 14.8 beyond which suckling was prevented. Our data indicates great individual variation in the AMS milk yield. Prior to separation, primiparous cows` AMS yields ranged from 11.0 to 25.9 kg/d while that of multiparous cows ranged from 4.8 to 28.8 kg/d. Once calves were no longer allowed to suckle, the yield increased gradually. During the week after separation, AMS yields ranged from 17.3 to 30.4 kg/d for primiparous cows and 8.7 to 41.8 kg/d for multiparous cows and these yields increased in DIM 93-100 (26.5 to 34.3 and 20.6 to 38.3 kg/d respectively). This study is limited by a low sample size from a single-herd but may provide useful descriptions of AMS milk yield in a whole-day, full contact CCC system during the first 100 days of lactation.

Perceived role of the veterinarian in promoting dairy cattle welfare

Improving the lives of animals in agricultural systems has primarily focused on minimizing negative experiences. Research is needed on the promotion of positive experiences (pleasure, enjoyment, play, choice, happiness) for animals and the role of veterinarians in their promotion. Our aims were to describe how Canadian bovine veterinarians and veterinary students perceive the role of a veterinarian in positive vs. negative experiences for dairy cows and to analyze the rationale provided to explain their answers. Canadian veterinary practitioners (n = 78) and veterinary students (n = 148) responded to an online cross-sectional survey and were asked, on a 7-point scale, how important the role of a veterinarian is to promote practices that influence the experience of dairy cows. We used qualitative description to analyse participants' open-ended text responses. Practices to minimize negative experiences were most important (mean ± SE; 6.8 ± 0.03), a balance of positive and negative experiences was less important (6.4 ± 0.05), and encouragement of positive experiences scored lowest (6.0 ± 0.06), although all scored highly. Four themes were identified to explain participants' reasoning regarding their perceived role of a veterinarian in the promotion of dairy cattle welfare, centered on: the animal, the producer, the veterinarian, and society. Participants indicated that promoting positive experiences was less important than decreasing negative experiences (5.9 ± 0.09). There were four themes identified to explain participants' reasoning regarding the relative importance of promotion of positive experiences versus decreasing negative experiences which centered on: frameworks to compare positive and negative experiences, impacts on the animal, the participant's view of their role, and the practicality of implementation. These results indicate modest differences in valuing avoidance of negative vs. promotion of positive welfare. There were no differences in the quantitative analyses between veterinarians and veterinary students. We conclude that veterinarians are favorably disposed to positive aspects of welfare for dairy cows but may be more focussed on avoidance of negative aspects of welfare.

Three years of situated social learning and development of diverse cow-calf contact systems in Danish organic dairy farms

This study had 2 aims: first, to describe the intent of a learning process among farmers about cow-calf contact (CCC) systems using a so-called Stable School approach, where farmers advise farmers. The second aim was to identify the main themes that arose from the conversations held throughout the 21 meetings that focused on the topic of CCC. The meetings were hosted by 10 host farmers. In total, 32 farmers, farm managers, employees, and calf caregivers who collectively represented 16 farms participated. Characteristics of participating farms varied widely, including herd sizes, which ranged from 7 to 600 cows. At each of the 21 meetings, a written summary was recorded and uploaded to a common data storage site. Using an inductive approach, words, phrases, topics, and suggestions were coded into themes relevant to CCC systems and processes of learning and change. The longitudinal nature of this study allowed for the capturing of how farmers changed their views on how to care for the animals and the concept of keeping cows and calves together. A central theme was how they identified particular challenges associated with a CCC system, such as space requirements or pasture access, and then collectively identified potential solutions for implementing cow-calf contact on their farms, increasingly using experience from their own farms. In addition to raising questions regarding the practical aspects of implementing a CCC system, many participants also raised ethical questions, and many acknowledged their pleasure and joy in seeing the system work and the animals thriving (e.g., when calves were playing or seemed to learn very quickly from the cows). Steps that led to an increased understanding among farmers on this topic included developing a shared language, for instance, referring to the "sharing of milk with the calf" rather than the "loss of milk." Despite the diversity of farms represented by the participants, there was an overall acceptance that they were colleagues and thus were highly supportive of each other. Many participants viewed foster cow systems as a more feasible option for providing CCC than dam-rearing systems, but some also viewed the foster cow system as a stepping stone to their long-term goal of implementing a dam-rearing system. This study provided evidence that socially situated learning and communities of practice can facilitate learning by farmers interested in developing, implementing, and improving CCC systems in different dairy farming contexts.