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

Dairy producers' awareness, perceptions, and barriers to early detection and treatment of lameness on dairy farms: A qualitative focus group study

Lameness is a common and painful condition, making it an important issue in the dairy industry. Whereas moderate and severe cases of lameness are likely to be noticed and dealt with by most dairy producers, mild cases are often overlooked. The barriers to implementing best management practices (BMP) to detect lameness are unknown. The objectives of this study were to understand awareness, perceptions, and barriers to implementation of established BMP for early detection and treatment of lameness of participant dairy farmers. In total, 35 dairy farmers from 2 regions of Ontario (southwestern [n = 3] and eastern [n = 3]) participated in 6 focus groups. Four themes were identified from the transcribed data: (1) perception and rationalization of lameness, (2) reconciling perceived effects and the ability to effect improvement, (3) assessment strategies, and (4) mild lameness detection challenges. Participants viewed the detection of lameness to be the responsibility of producers (i.e., themselves) and often disagreed with external assessors regarding the prevalence of lameness in their herds. They were unsure what the appropriate treatment was for mild lameness and questioned whether it had significant economic effects on their farms. Lameness assessments by producers occurred informally as participants performed other routine tasks. Some participants also reported using the interval between milkings in automatic milking systems as the primary lameness assessment method. Lack of training for employees and themselves, busy daily schedules, and continuously seeing the same cows were raised as important challenges to the detection of mild lameness. Our results suggest that participants viewed mild lameness detection and treatment a low priority with uncertain benefit. Greater recognition by dairy producers of the importance of early identification of lameness and improved access to effective treatment protocols will be needed to advance implementation of BMP for detection and treatment of nonsevere lameness.

Perceived barriers of dairy producers to the adoption of selective antimicrobial therapies for non-severe clinical mastitis and at dry-off in dairy cattle: A focus group study in Ontario, Canada

Prudent antimicrobial use (AMU) in the dairy industry is crucial as it affects animal health, welfare, and could help to slow the development of antimicrobial resistance. There is a need to adopt selective AMU. However, the barriers to adoption of selective antimicrobial use for the management of mastitis and dry-off are not adequately described. The objective of this study was to understand the barriers that dairy farmers in Ontario faced in the adoption of selective antimicrobial therapy for non-severe clinical mastitis and at dry-off in dairy cattle. Six focus groups were held in 2 regions of Ontario [southwestern (n = 3) and eastern (n = 3)] involving 35 dairy farmers. Three themes were identified from the transcribed discussions; 1) experiences with selective antimicrobial mastitis and dry-off therapies, 2) risk tolerance for selective antimicrobial mastitis and dry-off therapies, and 3) factors influencing the adoption of selective antimicrobial mastitis and dry-off therapies. Participants viewed the decision to adopt selective antimicrobial mastitis and dry-off therapies to be the responsibility of the dairy producer. They described the use of bacterial diagnostics for selective treatment of non-severe clinical mastitis as frustrating because results were not delivered in time to inform treatment. Some participants were not receptive to selective dry-off therapy because they perceived it placed their cows at high risk for mastitis during the next lactation. Participants who used selective dry-off therapy often mitigated these initial concerns by beginning this strategy with a small group of low production animals. Individual cow data from automatic milking systems and record keeping were viewed as instrumental to the success of selective AMU but human elements (e.g., visual assessment of animals) continued to be used in the decision-making process. Some participants described cognitive dissonance and a reluctance to change when selective AMU to manage mastitis appeared to be in conflict with previously recommended blanket treatment practices. Our results suggest that cognitive dissonance experienced by participants may be mitigated by information from trusted sources, such as veterinarians. Additionally, peer-to-peer learning opportunities (e.g., dairy producers learning from colleagues' experiences and reflecting on their own current practices) could be used to facilitate evaluation of whether adoption of selective AMU aligns with their management approach for clinical mastitis. Therefore, until rapidity of mastitis diagnostics and communication of results improves for selective lactation therapy, and the perceived mastitis risk related to selective dry-off therapy is addressed, challenges will continue for the adoption of best management practices for selective antimicrobial therapy for non-severe clinical mastitis and at dry-off in dairy cattle.

Perceived barriers to implementation of biosecurity best management practices for control of Salmonella Dublin on dairy farms: A focus group study

Salmonella Dublin is an emerging pathogen on Canadian dairy farms, making biosecurity practices crucial. However, the barriers to implementing biosecurity best management practices (BBMP) to control Salmonella Dublin (e.g., track herd health status, proactive response to disease risks, limit animal purchases, routine facility disinfection, control visitor access) are unknown. The objectives of this study were to understand dairy farmers' awareness, perceptions, and barriers to implementation of established BBMP for control of Salmonella Dublin. In total, 28 dairy farmers participated in 5 focus groups from 2 regions of Ontario (southwestern [n = 2] and eastern [n = 3]). Four themes were developed from the data: (1) informational preparedness, (2) structural factors that influence disease mitigation, (3) motivational drivers of disease mitigation, and (4) shifts in biosecurity engagement. Participants' perceived awareness and preparedness for an outbreak of Salmonella Dublin on their farm was variable. Although most participating farmers were aware of the pathogen, most were not concerned about their farm becoming infected and stated that their farm was not prepared to handle an outbreak. All focus groups discussed how structural factors including producer organizations and national or provincial governments could improve disease surveillance or how academia could create new farm-level best practices to mitigate Salmonella Dublin transmission. All focus groups also discussed intrinsic motivational drivers (e.g., that biosecurity does not register as a daily priority) and the belief that the risk of Salmonella Dublin infecting animals on their farms is low. Participants also discussed extrinsic barriers (e.g., money, labor, practicality) as challenges to change their biosecurity practices. Finally, participants who had experienced a Salmonella Dublin outbreak expressed a shift in their perspective toward biosecurity (proactive rather than complacent) and risk management (e.g., wanting to limit spread to other farms). Our results suggest that participants expected producer organizations, government, and academia to provide more support and develop strategies to mitigate the spread of Salmonella Dublin. Participants who had not experienced a Salmonella Dublin outbreak did not view the pathogen as a substantial risk to their farm. Therefore, until the perceived risk increases, the motivation to overcome extrinsic and intrinsic barriers to adopt BBMP to control this pathogen will likely remain low.

Building value for dairy farmers and advisors in the Farmers Assuring Responsible Management Environmental Stewardship Program

Major industry-led efforts aim at reducing the cradle-to-farmgate environmental impacts of milk production (e.g., U.S. Dairy Net Zero Initiative). Our qualitative, exploratory work sought to characterize farmer and advisor perceptions of an environmental sustainability assessment program [FARM ES Version 2] in the Upper Midwest. We aimed to 1) explore the ways participants valued environmental stewardship (ES) assessments, 2) describe feasible on-farm improvement strategies identified regionally, and 3) characterize how participants assigned responsibility for enacting selected improvement strategies. In Fall 2023, we held a series of 2 to 3 focus groups for each of 5 regions (n = 14 meetings total) including farmers (n = 24), advisors (n = 20), and processor representatives (n = 1). Facilitators guided participants through semi-structured prompts to generate qualitative data including meeting transcriptions, consensus lists, and consensus diagrams. First, we used a deductive-inductive process to analyze meeting transcriptions and identify themes related to the value of environmental stewardship assessments. Results suggested that participants valued simplicity, ease of data entry, availability of regional comparisons, and the ability to enumerate a baseline for environmental performance. Conversely, participants reported skepticism about accuracy and fairness and the usefulness of assessments as decision-support tools. Second, we examined consensus documents to generate a list of feasible strategies for on-farm improvement. Participants identified immediately feasible management strategies including cover cropping, genetic improvement, no-/minimum-tillage, precision nutrient management, herd/facility management technologies, monensin supplementation, and the conversion of fossil fuel to electric motors. Finally, we inspected collaborative actor-network diagrams generated with participants, which illustrated that participants envisioned implementation as complex and (in some instances) contingent on cooperation across supply chains and allied industries. Overall, our findings suggested that dairy farms need both accessible entry points into ES management and advanced technical and social support for implementing changes.

Milk feeding and calf housing practices on British Columbia dairy farms

Decades of research have helped inform practices on how to care for calves, but little is known about how well these practices are adopted on commercial dairy farms. The primary aim of this study was to describe rearing practices of dairy calves in British Columbia, Canada. Measures of calf growth are sometimes used to assess success in calf rearing, so a secondary aim was to describe methods used to assess calf growth on these farms. All 437 dairy farms in the province were invited to participate in a survey distributed via email from the British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture and Food from June to December 2023. A total of 63 completed responses were received (i.e., 14.4% of those invited). Milking herd size averaged (± SD) 167 ± 172 cows, and the primary breed was Holstein for 84.1% of respondents. Most (63.5%) farms housed calves individually before weaning; the remainder used either just social housing (groups of 2 or more; 25.4% of farms) or a combination of individual and social housing (11.1% of farms). Maximum milk allowance averaged 9.5 ± 2.7 L/d, with 86.4% of respondents offering >8 L/d. Teat feeding was used on 71.6% of farms, and 13.1% of farms used automated milk feeders. Two participants reported feeding calves via the dam or nurse cows. Weaning age averaged 75.8 ± 16.3 d, with calf age being the primary criterion for weaning. About half (52.4%) of farms reported monitoring calf growth, and 31.7% of farms reported having a target growth rate. Our results suggest that rearing practices are changing, in that calves are now often fed higher milk rations via a teat, and many farms use social housing. However, individual housing remains prevalent, suggesting research is needed to understand the barriers to adopting social housing on farms. Our findings also suggest the opportunity to improve methods for monitoring calf growth; improved measures may facilitate evidence-based evaluations of calf rearing and weaning protocols on farms.

Natural Savannah Systems Within the "One Welfare" Approach: Part 1-Good Farmers' Perspectives, Environmental Challenges and Opportunities

The Colombian Orinoquia is considered one of the eight most important ecosystems in the world. Savannah ecosystems play an essential role in providing ecosystem services. The objectives were (a) to explore and identify the perceptions of traditional farmers and institutional representatives regarding human well-being, animal welfare and the environment, and (b) to identify environmental challenges and opportunities for improvement based on the "One Welfare" concept. Three focal groups were developed: male and female farmers and institutional representatives (n = 24) from Vichada. A thematic analysis, coding with an inductive approach and the definition of themes and sub-themes were carried out. The concept of being "a good farmer" explains the behavior of the producers, where the perception of human well-being is associated with the value of the family and the sense of pride in their tradition as "llanero". Animal welfare was considered a symbol of profitability and prestige for cattle farmers, a concept that, for them, mixed traditional management, water supply, shade and feed, good health and the natural behavior of cattle. Regarding the environment, this concept is based on their awareness of the importance of conserving the natural savannah. Among the environmental challenges described are climate change, solid waste management and the use of controlled burns. Regarding opportunities for improvement, they proposed strengthening institutional dynamics, partnerships, environmental governance and education. Our results can provide information on the "One Welfare" approach and the motivation of farmers to care for animals and the environment, a fundamental aspect for developing effective intervention strategies.

A qualitative exploration of owner experiences following dog adoption

The adjustment period - wherein adopted animals transition to their new home - is a critical time for animal welfare and owner satisfaction, yet literature varies in estimates of how long this period lasts in dogs. This study sought to better characterise the adjustment period in relation to owner experience and canine welfare and clarify its duration as perceived by owners. We used a qualitative approach to examine owner perceptions of duration and their experience of the adjustment period. Twenty-seven interviews were conducted and analysed using thematic content analysis. Six themes were described: adjustment period duration; behavioural indicators during adjustment; behaviours indicative of adjustment; factors influencing adjustment; owner change in routine; and adjustment concerns. Over half of participants perceived the adjustment period to last longer than four months. Behaviours used by owners to assess dog adjustment included: moderation of behavioural extremes (e.g. lethargy and restlessness); play; tail wagging; greeting; and learning their routine. Owners reported that prior experiences and medical needs impacted the adjustment duration, that they adjusted aspects of their lifestyle, and raised concerns about being the right fit for their dog. Future research should incorporate a longer time-frame to better understand how and when dogs adjust to a home, and as there is variation in dog behaviour during adjustment, it must also account for individual differences. As we develop a better understanding of how to characterise this period, adopters can be better prepared for the initial months of dog ownership, and interventions can be individualised to improve owner experience and dog welfare.

Invited review: Qualitative social and human science research focusing on actors in and around dairy farming

Qualitative research related to humans, dairy cows, calves, and farming has been published by scientists from a variety of disciplines in many journals targeting dairy science audiences. We aimed to investigate how scientific communities other than those working in dairy science describe, analyze, and discuss dairy farming, because we found it important to bring this research to the attention of dairy scientists. In total, 117 articles were identified as involving one or more qualitative research methods in relation to dairy cattle. The review brought out a wealth of perspectives, new insights, and discussions related to dairy cattle, farmers, farming, and the sector, and in relation to societal issues and food and ecological landscapes. A broad range of qualitative research methods were used, and the literature targeted issues at the animal, farm, societal, food system, and landscape levels. Some raised critical questions about existing structures, highlighted unfairness in the industry, or pointed to new potential futures and contemporary agendas. We expect that it will be inspirational and stimulating for researchers to review new sources of literature and suggest a closer interdisciplinary collaboration among researchers from different disciplines for the future development of research involving dairy cattle. Further, it could be relevant and even necessary to engage in such interaction to avoid increasing polarization around future development of the sector-for example, related to climate change or how industrialization seems to push inequity or ignore the agency of animals themselves. Exploring perspectives of farming from different angles could enrich the outcomes of future dairy research.

Recording antimicrobial use on Irish dairy farms: Barriers and facilitators to using technology and sharing data

Antimicrobial use (AMU) data are essential to monitor the effect of AMU reduction strategies in animal health. The use of technology and herd recording software to record AMU will be vital to scale the collation of these data in the future. The aim of this study was to determine the barriers and facilitators to Irish dairy farmers recording their AMU using a herd recording software and sharing AMU data. Thirty-three Irish dairy farmers involved in a study on AMU monitoring were asked to record their AMU using a herd recording software over a 12-mo period. At the end of the 12-mo period, 10 of these farmers were selected to take part in semi-structured interviews exploring their opinions on recording AMU, the use of herd recording software, and sharing AMU data. Interviews were transcribed and qualitatively analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Several barriers and facilitators to farmers recording their AMU using a herd recording software and sharing AMU data were identified. Barriers included the age and generation of the farmer, farm infrastructure, a lack of training and education, a lack of knowledge around the benefits of digital data, a lack of incentive to digitize records, and a fear of repercussions. Facilitators identified by the farmers included the benefits of having instantly available data for making herd management decisions, reduced paperwork, increased organization for inspections, and a potential positive effect on the image of the dairy industry. To increase the uptake of new technology to record AMU at farm-level, farmers will need support in terms of education and training around the software available to them and reassurance around the perceived risks of repercussions with sharing data in a digital format.

Emerging Technologies for Improving Properties, Shelf Life, and Analysis of Dairy Products

Processing results in several kinds of dairy products with variable properties and shelf lives that preserve and often enhance the unique nutritional and biological value of milk [...].