Search

The list of standard abbreviations for JDS is available at adsa.org/jds-abbreviations-24. Nonstandard abbreviations are available in the Notes. For successful development and adoption of technology on dairy farms, farmers need to be included in the innovation process. However, the design of agricultural technologies usually takes a top-down approach with little involvement of end-users at the early stages. Living Labs offer a methodology that involve end-users throughout the development process and emphasize the importance of understanding users' needs. Currently, exploration of dairy farmers' technology needs has been limited to specific types of technology (e.g., smartphone apps) and adult cattle. The aim of this study was to use a Living Lab approach to identify dairy farmers' data and technology needs to improve herd health and inform innovation development. We conducted 18 focus groups with a total of 80 dairy farmers from Belgium, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Data were analyzed using Template Analysis, and 6 themes were generated representing the fundamental needs of autonomy, comfort, competence, community and relatedness, purpose, and security. Farmers favored technologies that provided them with convenience, facilitated their knowledge and understanding of problems on farm, and allowed them to be self-reliant. Issues with data sharing and accessibility and usability of software were barriers to technology use. Furthermore, farmers were facing problems around recruitment and management of labor and needed ways to reduce stress. Controlling aspects of the barn environment, such as air quality, hygiene, and stocking density, were particular concerns in relation to youngstock management. Overall, the findings suggest that developers of farm technologies may want to include farmers in the design process to ensure a positive user experience and improve accessibility. The needs identified in this study can be used as a framework when designing farm technologies to strengthen need satisfaction and reduce any potential harm toward needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT: 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.

Dairy farms have become more reliant on technology. The overall aim of this study was to better understand how dairy farmers view technology and its effects on animal care, including their views on the prospect of integrating gene-editing technology in the future. Virtual-semistructured interviews were conducted with dairy farmers (n = 11) from British Columbia and Alberta. To facilitate discussion, the participants were asked to develop and discuss a timeline describing when and why various technologies were adopted on their farm. Although farmers defined technology broadly and affecting multiple aspects of farm management, this paper focuses on their views regarding how technology can affect animal care. Following thematic analysis of the data, the following 3 themes emerged: (1) the changing role of the farmer (including intergenerational considerations and learning new technology), (2) the effect of technology on the cow and her relationship with the farmer and, (3) technology as the future of the farm. The discussions also highlight the concerns that some farmers have regarding challenges associated with reduced human-animal interactions and effective use of the large amounts of data that are collected through technology. We also specifically asked the participants their views about gene editing as a potential future technology. Most of the participants did not specifically address their views on gene editing, but they spoke about the effect on genetic technologies more generally, often making references to genomic testing. However, some questioned how this technology may affect farmers more generally and spoke about how it could affect human-animal relationships. These results illustrate differences among farmers in the way they view technology and how this can affect the dairy cattle they care for. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As clinical mastitis (CM) treatments are responsible for a large portion of antimicrobial use on dairy farms, many selective CM treatment protocols have been developed and evaluated against a blanket treatment approach of CM cases. Selective treatment protocols use outcomes of diagnostic tests to exclude CM cases from antimicrobial treatment when they are unlikely to benefit. To tailor interventions to increase uptake of selective treatment strategies, a comprehension of current on-farm treatment practices and factors affecting treatment decisions is vital. Two questionnaires were conducted among 142 farms across 5 provinces participating in the Canadian Dairy Network for Antimicrobial Stewardship and Resistance in this cross-sectional study. Self-reported adoption of selective CM treatments by dairy farmers was 64%, with median of 82% of cows treated in those herds using selective treatment. Using logistic regression models, the odds to implement a selective CM treatment protocol increased with a decreasing average cow somatic cell count. No other associations were identified between use of a selective CM treatment protocol and farm characteristics (herd size, CM incidence, province, milking system, and housing system). Three subsets of farmers making cow-level CM treatment decisions were identified using a cluster analysis approach: those who based decisions almost exclusively on severity of clinical signs, those who used various udder health indicators, and farmers who also incorporated more general cow information such as production, age, and genetics. When somatic cell count was considered, the median threshold used for treating was >300,000 cells/mL at the last Dairy Herd Improvement test. Various thresholds were present among those considering CM case history. Veterinary laboratories were most frequently used for bacteriological testing. Test results were used to start, change, and stop treatments. Regardless of protocol, reasons for antimicrobial treatment withheld included cow being on a cull list, having a chronic intramammary infection, or being at end of lactation (i.e., close to dry off). If clinical signs persisted after treatment, farmers indicated that they would ask veterinarians for advice, stop treatment, or continue with the same or different antibiotics. Results of this study can be used to design interventions targeting judicious mastitis-related antimicrobial use, and aid discussions between veterinarians and dairy producers regarding CM-related antimicrobial use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of the study was to determine the role played by farmers' sociodemographic factors in the characteristics of dairy farmers' breeding goals and how they are clustered in Slovenia. Understanding how farmers formulate their breeding objectives is crucial because their perspectives may diverge from those of the stakeholders engaged in selection and breeding. Involving farmers in the process of setting breeding goals can improve the use of selection tools and confidence in the selection process. For a more complete picture of how farmers view breeding work, their expectations, and the changes they would prefer to see in the future in terms of new traits and a total merit index, a mixed methods approach was used. Initially, 3 focus groups with 30 participants were conducted on the following main topics: farmers' needs and attitudes regarding genomic selection, the main barriers and advantages to adopting genomic selection, the design of a total merit index, and preferences for breeding goals. To generalize the results to the whole population, an additional online questionnaire was sent to dairy farmers affiliated with Slovenian breeding associations, with 212 farmers responding. Based on how the farmers distributed weights across the trait categories in the total merit index, a cluster analysis identifies 3 distinct groups of farmers. Milk production proved to be an important common factor for all farmers, especially production-focused ones. Functionality-focused farmers expressed the strongest preference for fertility (22%), longevity (18%), and animal health (18%), whereas resilience-focused farmers concentrated on fertility (13%), health (13%), longevity (11%), and workability (11%). Yet, the results also showed that dairy farmers hold quite similar preferences for breeding goal traits, with animal health and welfare, reproductive traits, dominating across the sample and environmental and meat traits being the least important. The quantitative analysis of the preference for new environmental traits showed that farmers express less importance to them due to pressure and negative public opinion about the environmental impact of dairy farming. The focus group participants, although acknowledging that adaptation to climate change and heat stress will be essential, were even more negative about traits related to greenhouse gas emissions, which can be attributed to negative public opinion and constraints on agricultural activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study used realistic evaluation to determine how, and in which circumstances, providing dairy farmers with benchmarked data on their calves can motivate improved colostrum management practices. Dairy farmers from British Columbia, Canada, were recruited through 2 veterinary clinics that offered benchmarking of calf data as part of their services. For approximately 8 wk, blood samples were collected from newborn calves to evaluate serum total protein concentrations as an indicator of the effectiveness of the farmer's colostrum management. These data were analyzed separately for heifer calves ("replacement calves") and non-replacement calves, including males and beef crossbred females ("surplus calves"). The results of these analyses were benchmarked against other participating herds and presented to dairy farmers (n = 27) by their herd veterinarian (n = 7). Follow-up interviews were conducted separately with the farmers and veterinarians after each meeting to determine their perspectives on the utility of this benchmarking strategy. Therefore, a total of 42 interviews were coded, and realistic evaluation was used to determine common contexts and mechanisms that contributed to the success or failure of the benchmark meeting, with success characterized by farmers' expressed intention to improve their colostrum management practices. Four important contexts were identified that influenced the outcome of the benchmark meetings: (1) farm resources (e.g., facility limitations), (2) the farmer's perception of their calf performance, (3) management strategies, and (4) the farmer's personal values. Depending on these contexts, some farmers intended to improve their calf care practices based on resources the benchmark meeting provided, which included illustrative data and veterinary advice. These resources motivated change through influencing farmer decision-making, which depended on the value they saw in the data as a decision-making tool. The economic or moral interest farmers expressed in their surplus calves also influenced whether farmers intended to implement management changes. Recommendations for future implementation of benchmarking include targeting producers who are motivated to improve and who value the future performance of their calves, those who have engaged calf care personnel, and those who prefer data-driven decision-making. This study supports the important role veterinarians can play in motivating improved calf care practices through providing benchmarking services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dairy farmers face challenges attracting and retaining staff, partly due to the difficulty meeting the desires of the modern workforce. These include flexible work hours and regular time off. The task of milking fundamentally affects the ability of dairy farmers to meet these desires. Milking contributes to a large proportion of the hours spent working on dairy farms. The number of milkings (milking frequency) and their timing (milking interval) within a day influence the number of hours spent milking and what time in the day they occur. Milking 3 times in 2 d (3-in-2) reduces the amount of time spent milking compared with milking twice a day (TAD), without reducing milk yield as much as milking once a day (OAD). However, long intervals between 3-in-2 milkings can still lead to a long workday if farmers are expected to work between milkings. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of milking interval within a 3-in-2 milking frequency on milk yield and composition at 2 stages of lactation and compare these with OAD and TAD milking. Cows (n = 200) were milked in 5 groups of 40 at 3 intervals of 3-in-2: 8–20–20 h, 10–19–19 h, and 12–18–18 h, along with 24 h (OAD), and 10 and 14 h (TAD), for 6 wk at early lactation (mean 24 d in milk ± 7 d, SD) and again at mid lactation (mean 136 d in milk ± 18 d). Milk yields were recorded at each milking and milk samples collected weekly to determine composition. At both early and mid lactation there were no significant differences in milk, fat, protein, or lactose yields between the three 3-in-2 intervals. Cows milked 3-in-2 produced 8% less milk than cows milked TAD and 14% more than cows milked OAD, with smaller differences observed at mid lactation between TAD and 3-in-2. For a 3-in-2 milking frequency, a shorter milking interval can be implemented on the days when cows are milked twice. This may allow farmers to shorten the working day when using 3-in-2, without compromising milk or component yields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In most low- and middle-income countries, milk is produced by smallholders, thereby contributing to the livelihood of their households. With the increasing importance of milk production in these countries, it is essential that milk quality is of a high level to ensure a safe product for consumers. It is, however, unclear whether smallholder dairy farmers are aware of the quality of their milk. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to gain insight on Indonesian smallholder dairy farmer awareness of milk quality parameters and to identify factors associated with the total plate count (TPC) and somatic cell count (SCC). A stratified sampling method was used to select smallholder farms in 4 districts in West Java, Indonesia, that were interviewed between August and September 2017. Factors putatively associated with awareness of TPC were investigated with multinomial regression models, whereas a Firth-type logistic regression was applied to identify factors associated with SCC awareness. Of the total 600 farmers surveyed, 264 (44%), 109 (18%), 170 (28%), 111 (19%), and 23 (4%) farmers were aware of TPC, total solid, fat content, milk density, and SCC, respectively, but did not know its value. Those that were conceptually aware of these quality parameters were generally unaware of their value. Furthermore, this study revealed that the following variables were significantly associated with dairy farmers' awareness of TPC: cooperative to which the farmer belonged, distance to neighboring dairy farmer, technology adoption index, TPC as the most important quality factor for the buyer, milk production information from cooperatives, and cow health information from veterinarians. Similarly, cooperative, dairy business experience, and milk quality test adoption were significantly associated with dairy farmers' awareness of SCC. Cooperative was the only variable that was significant in both final statistical models. This indicates that cooperatives play an important role in increasing farmer awareness of milk quality parameters in these smallholder dairies. This may be valid for other regions in the world also where milk production is dominated by smallholder dairy farmers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The benefits of feeding calves more milk are increasingly being recognized by dairy farmers. However, most producers have still not implemented higher feeding plans. The aim of the present study was to gain a deeper understanding of farmer and farm staff attitudes, and the perceptions and factors considered in their decision-making regarding daily milk allowances. We collected data through focus group interviews with dairy farmers, farm managers, and calf-care workers who were selected using purposive and snowball sampling. In total, 40 persons (24 women and 16 men) joined a focus group interview (6 in all, each with 5–8 participants). Interviews were recorded, and recordings were transcribed and analyzed thematically. Participants had contrasting opinions about the minimum, maximum, and recommended daily milk allowances to their calves. Their suggested lowest daily milk allowance to sustain animal welfare ranged from 4 to 8–10 L and the maximum allowance from 6 to 15 L. We found that farmers' and farm staff's choices and recommendations of milk-feeding protocols were influenced by a large number of factors that could be grouped into 4 themes: (1) Life beyond work , (2) Farm facilities and equipment , (3) Care of the calves , and (4) Profitability and production. Participants' considerations were similar and aimed to maximize daily milk allowance based on farm conditions. However, the allowances they described as optimal for their calves often differed from what they considered practically feasible. We found that the care of the calves and the well-being of the owners and the staff was central in the participants' decision-making, but that this care perspective was challenged by the social and economic sustainability of the farm. Most participants fed their calves twice daily and did not think that increasing that number would be practically feasible. Our results indicate that the participants' viewpoints regarding calves were important for their decision-making about milk allowances. We suggest that a more holistic perspective should be used when advising farmers about milk allowances, putting particular emphasis on the caring and social sustainability aspects of the individual farm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT: In dairy farming, mastitis treatment is the most common reason for antimicrobial use. The overuse or misuse of antibiotics in agriculture has been associated with the development and spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Traditionally, blanket dry cow therapy (BDCT), in which all cows receive antibiotic treatment, was used prophylactically to prevent and manage disease spread. In recent years, there has been a move toward selective dry cow therapy (SDCT), in which only clinically infected cows are treated with antibiotics. This study aimed to explore farmer attitudes toward antibiotic use (ABU), using the COM-B (Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behavior) model as a framework, to identify predictors of changing behavior toward SDCT and suggest interventions to encourage its uptake. Participant farmers (n = 240) were surveyed online between March and July 2021. Five items were found to be significant predictors of farmers having stopped BDCT: (1) having lower knowledge of AMR, (2) greater awareness of AMR and ABU (Capability), (3) feeling social pressure to reduce ABU (Opportunity), and (4) having greater professional identity, and (5) having positive emotions associated with stopping BDCT (Motivation). Direct logistic regression found that these 5 factors explained between 22 and 34.1% of the variance in making changes to BDCT practices. Additionally, objective knowledge was not correlated with current positive antibiotic practices, and farmers often perceived their antibiotic practices as more responsible than they actually were. A multifaceted approach, encompassing each of the predictors highlighted, should be taken to encourage farmer behavior change in relation to stopping BDCT. Additionally, as farmers' perceptions of their own behaviors may not align with their actual practices, awareness raising of what constitutes “responsible” behavior should be targeted at dairy farmers to motivate them to take action and adopt more responsible antibiotic practices.

In recent years, the common dairy farming practice of early separation of dam and calf has received increased attention. Our aim was to explore how Norwegian dairy farmers with cow-calf contact (CCC) systems apply these systems in practice, and how they experience and perceive the interrelationships between cows and calves and humans within these systems. We conducted in-depth interviews with 17 farmers from 12 dairy farms and analyzed responses inductively, inspired by the grounded theory approach. The farmers in our study practiced their CCC systems differently from each other and had varying as well as common perceptions about these systems. Calves' intake of colostrum was not seen as a challenge, regardless of practice. The farmers generally perceived that any aggression shown by cows toward humans was merely an exhibition of cows' natural protective instinct. However, when the farmers had good relationships with their cows and the cows felt safe around them, the farmers could handle the calves and build good relationships with them as well. The farmers experienced the calves learning a lot from their dams. Most of the farmers' dairy housing systems were not adapted for CCC, and CCC systems could require modification in terms of placing greater emphasis on observing the animals and making adjustments in the barn and around milking. Some thought having CCC on pasture was the best and most natural, while others were reluctant to have CCC on pasture. The farmers encountered some challenges with stressed animals after later separation, but several had found methods to minimize stress. Generally, they had different opinions about workload, but agreed they spent less time on calf feeding. We found that these farmers were thriving with their CCC systems; they all described positive emotions around seeing cows and their calves together. Animal welfare and natural behavior were important to the farmers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been largely attributed to antimicrobial use (AMU). To achieve judicious AMU, much research and many policies focus on knowledge translation and behavioral change mechanisms. To address knowledge gaps in contextual drivers of decisions made by dairy farmers concerning AMU, we conducted ethnographic fieldwork to investigate one community's understanding of AMU, AMR, and associated regulations in the dairy industry in Alberta, Canada. This included participation in on-farm activities and observations of relevant interactions on dairy farms in central Alberta for 4 mo. Interviews were conducted with 25 dairy farmers. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis and yielded several key findings. Many dairy farmers in this sample: (1) value their autonomy and hope to maintain agency regarding AMU; (2) have shared cultural and immigrant identities which may inform their perspectives of future AMU regulation as it relates to their farming autonomy; (3) feel that certain AMU policies implemented in other contexts would be impractical in Alberta and would constrain their freedom to make what they perceive to be the best animal welfare decisions; (4) believe that their knowledge and experience are undervalued by consumers and policy makers; (5) are concerned that the public does not have a complex understanding of dairy farming and, consequently, worry that AMU policy will be based on misguided consumer concerns; and (6) are variably skeptical of a link between AMU in dairy cattle and AMR in humans due to their strict adherence to milk safety protocols that is driven by their genuine care for the integrity of the product. A better understanding of the sociocultural and political-economic infrastructure that supports such perceptions is warranted and should inform efforts to improve AMU stewardship and future policies regarding AMU.

In dairy farming, mastitis treatment is the most common reason for antimicrobial use. The overuse or misuse of antibiotics in agriculture has been associated with the development and spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Traditionally, blanket dry cow therapy (BDCT), in which all cows receive antibiotic treatment, was used prophylactically to prevent and manage disease spread. In recent years, there has been a move toward selective dry cow therapy (SDCT), in which only clinically infected cows are treated with antibiotics. This study aimed to explore farmer attitudes toward antibiotic use (ABU), using the COM-B (Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behavior) model as a framework, to identify predictors of changing behavior toward SDCT and suggest interventions to encourage its uptake. Participant farmers (n = 240) were surveyed online between March and July 2021. Five items were found to be significant predictors of farmers having stopped BDCT: (1) having lower knowledge of AMR, (2) greater awareness of AMR and ABU (Capability), (3) feeling social pressure to reduce ABU (Opportunity), and (4) having greater professional identity, and (5) having positive emotions associated with stopping BDCT (Motivation). Direct logistic regression found that these 5 factors explained between 22 and 34.1% of the variance in making changes to BDCT practices. Additionally, objective knowledge was not correlated with current positive antibiotic practices, and farmers often perceived their antibiotic practices as more responsible than they actually were. A multifaceted approach, encompassing each of the predictors highlighted, should be taken to encourage farmer behavior change in relation to stopping BDCT. Additionally, as farmers' perceptions of their own behaviors may not align with their actual practices, awareness raising of what constitutes "responsible" behavior should be targeted at dairy farmers to motivate them to take action and adopt more responsible antibiotic practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For the control of Johne's disease (JD), management practices to minimize disease transmission must be implemented and maintained. Once infected, animals will enter a latent phase and will typically only manifest clinical symptoms years later. As young calves are the main susceptible group on farm, the observed effects of management practices geared toward minimizing their exposure to infective material may not be realized until years later. This delayed feedback limits the sustained implementation of JD control practices. Although quantitative research methods have demonstrated changes to management practices as well as their association with changes to JD prevalence, dairy farmers can offer insights into the current challenges relating to JD implementation and control. Thus, this study aims to use qualitative methods and in-depth interviews (n = 20) with Ontario dairy farmers who had previously been engaged in a Johne's control program to explore their motivations and barriers to the implementation of JD control practices and general herd biosecurity. A thematic analysis using inductive coding was completed generated the following 4 overarching themes: (1) the hows and whys of Johne's control, (2) barriers to general herd biosecurity, (3) barriers to Johne's control, and (4) overcoming barriers. Farmers no longer believed JD was an issue on their farm. Johne's was low on their list of concerns due to little public discourse, absence of animals displaying clinical signs, and no financial support for diagnostic testing. Producers who were still actively engaged in JD control cited animal and human health as their primary motivations. Financial support, targeted education, and promoting engagement through discourse may help encourage producers to reconsider their participation in JD control. Government and industry collaboration with producers may help to develop more effective biosecurity and disease control programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On-farm euthanasia is complicated in that farmers have to make the decision to end the life of an animal they are caring for. Studies have shown that some culling decisions are made too late, which results in animal welfare issues. However, information about on-farm euthanasia methods and the decision process leading to the euthanasia of an animal is limited. Additionally, emotions and feelings are involved in the decision and the act of euthanasia. The objectives of this study were to describe current practices related to on-farm euthanasia performed by Canadian dairy farmers and to assess the emotions and complex feelings surrounding the act. A cross-sectional study design was used to gather this information through an online questionnaire completed exclusively by Canadian dairy farmers. Data were analyzed descriptively using frequencies, and associations between the participants' characteristics and their practices and emotions regarding on-farm euthanasia were assessed using logistic regression models. A total of 479 dairy farmers from 5 provinces answered the survey. The most commonly used primary method of on-farm euthanasia was a firearm (>70%). Unacceptable euthanasia methods, such as standard 0.22-caliber long rifle for adult cows or no adjunct method following the use of captive bolt, were used by 25%, 18%, and 58% of the participants for calves, replacement animals, and dairy cows, respectively. Ninety-four percent of the participants reported that the farm owner was the person who always or often made the euthanasia decisions. In addition, 32% of the participants reported that the veterinarian always examined the animal before performing euthanasia, 51% reported at least one person received training to perform euthanasia, and 16% reported having a decision tree for euthanasia. Some participants (17%) were troubled with the responsibility for ending the life of their animals, and 19% perceived other people on the farm to be uncomfortable with performing euthanasia. Half of the participants reported that people performing euthanasia on the farm felt at least one related painful emotion or complex feeling, and half reported they had at least one reason to feel anxiety or unease concerning euthanasia. The results of this study showed gaps such as the limited use of acceptable euthanasia methods and decision trees by Canadian dairy farmers, low availability of on-farm training for euthanasia, and variable involvement of veterinarians. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been largely attributed to antimicrobial use (AMU). To achieve judicious AMU, much research and many policies focus on knowledge translation and behavioral change mechanisms. To address knowledge gaps in contextual drivers of decisions made by dairy farmers concerning AMU, we conducted ethnographic fieldwork to investigate one community's understanding of AMU, AMR, and associated regulations in the dairy industry in Alberta, Canada. This included participation in on-farm activities and observations of relevant interactions on dairy farms in central Alberta for 4 mo. Interviews were conducted with 25 dairy farmers. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis and yielded several key findings. Many dairy farmers in this sample: (1) value their autonomy and hope to maintain agency regarding AMU; (2) have shared cultural and immigrant identities which may inform their perspectives of future AMU regulation as it relates to their farming autonomy; (3) feel that certain AMU policies implemented in other contexts would be impractical in Alberta and would constrain their freedom to make what they perceive to be the best animal welfare decisions; (4) believe that their knowledge and experience are undervalued by consumers and policy makers; (5) are concerned that the public does not have a complex understanding of dairy farming and, consequently, worry that AMU policy will be based on misguided consumer concerns; and (6) are variably skeptical of a link between AMU in dairy cattle and AMR in humans due to their strict adherence to milk safety protocols that is driven by their genuine care for the integrity of the product. A better understanding of the sociocultural and political-economic infrastructure that supports such perceptions is warranted and should inform efforts to improve AMU stewardship and future policies regarding AMU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies have shown that farmer-veterinarian relationships influence antimicrobial use (AMU) in livestock, though how they do so is unclear. On the one hand, research shows that well-established veterinarian-farmer relationships are positive for implementation of antibiotic stewardship and restrictive AMU. On the other hand, studies also show that farmer demands can increase antimicrobial prescribing and that prescribing antimicrobials can strengthen the veterinarian's relationship with farmer clients. In the present study, we focus on veterinarians' perspectives on the relationships between dairy cattle farmers and veterinarians in Sweden and explore what characterizes these relationships when restrictive AMU is described as unproblematic and when AMU becomes a matter of tension or conflict. The study draws on semistructured interviews with 21 veterinarians working with livestock in Sweden. Interviews were analyzed thematically. The study shows that from the perspectives of veterinarians, well-established veterinarian-farmer relationships generally facilitate restrictive AMU in 3 slightly different but related ways: (1) they create trust in the veterinarian and their prescribing decisions; (2) they create shared understanding concerning when antimicrobials are needed and not needed; and (3) they facilitate constructive discussions between veterinarians and farmers on AMU. To make the farmer feel listened to and to come to an agreement on AMU was described as central for the veterinarians. However, the veterinarians described agreements on restrictive AMU as sometimes requiring strategic work, such as discussions to motivate the farmer and leave the door open for antimicrobials later if needed. Such work takes time and energy and is easier within well-established relationships according to the veterinarians. We also identified examples where veterinarians explained that they occasionally make compromises with farmers concerning antimicrobials—compromises that, according to the veterinarians, facilitate the relationship with the farmer, which in turn facilities restrictive AMU in the longer term. The examples in our interviews where antimicrobials became a matter of tension and even conflict between veterinarians and farmers could, with a few exceptions, be traced to absence of well-established relationships. However, some veterinarians also described AMU as a matter of tension within well-established relationships, especially with older farmers who do not trust new treatment strategies. We also found a small number of examples where disagreements on antimicrobials made a relationship with specific farmers impossible. Thus, even though the interviewed veterinarians generally meant that their restrictive antimicrobial prescribing did not threaten the relationship with the farmer, our study also, to some extent, confirms research showing that restrictive AMU can harm the relationship with some clients who simply choose another, less restrictive, veterinarian. In summary, our study supports that decisions on AMU cannot be reduced to the individual prescriber's behavior, nor to a strict medical judgment. Antimicrobial use for dairy cattle needs to be understood as taking form in relationships in which both veterinarians and farmers are active parts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Culled dairy cows represent a considerable source of meat production, but their carcasses may vary greatly in quality because of the wide variation in the age, stage of lactation, breed, body condition, and other characteristics of the cows at slaughter. However, the effect of crossbreeding on the value of culled cows has so far received little investigation. The aim of this observational study was to compare a range of carcass attributes of cull cows from 3-breed rotational crossbreeding using Viking Red, Montbéliarde (MO), and Holstein (HO) bulls with those of HO purebred cows. Data on 1,814 dairy cows were collected. Cows were reared together in one herd and slaughtered in 4 slaughterhouses. The carcass weight, fleshiness, and fatness scores, the total value, and the price (€/kg) of each cow carcass were recorded. The culling of a few cows in the sample (n = 86) was classified by the farm manager as "urgent" following a diagnosis of injury or sickness, and this information was recorded. Carcass traits were analyzed with a mixed model which included the fixed effects of parity, days in milk, genetic group (purebred HO, 787 cows, and crossbred cows, classified according to the breed of sire within crossbreds, with 309, 428, and 290 cows sired by Viking Red, MO, and HO bulls, respectively), and interactions, and the random effects of month × year of the date of slaughter, and slaughterhouse. Logistic regression was used to investigate the association of parity, days in milk and purebred or crossbred origin with unplanned, "urgent" culling compared with regular culling. Average carcass weight across genetic groups was 297 ± 65 kg, average price €2.03 ± 0.53/kg, and average value €631 ± 269. Compared with HO, crossbred carcasses were 7 to 12% heavier depending on the breed of sire, were graded + 0.12 to + 0.28 units higher for fleshiness and + 0.26 to + 0.30 units higher for fatness, and fetched an 8 to 11% higher price. As a consequence, compared with purebred HO, carcasses from crossbreds had 15 to 24% higher value (€84 to €133 more per cow), with crossbred cows sired by MO showing the greatest values. Moreover, compared with the HO cows, the crossbred cows had a 37% lower risk of being urgently removed from the herd, which raises welfare concerns and may reduce the salvage value of cull cows. Because cull cows represent a supplemental source of income for dairy farmers, the greater overall value of crossbred cull cows should be taken into account in evaluating the economic effectiveness of crossbreeding schemes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drying-off practices to reduce milk production before dry-off are gaining attention because high milk yields at dry-off are becoming more common and increase the risk to cow health and welfare during the dry period. Incomplete milking for the last days before dry-off is one approach for reducing milk production. We conducted an online survey to determine the currently used drying-off practices on Swiss dairy farms and to identify the adoption potential of integrating incomplete milking before dry-off. In March 2021, the online survey was sent to a representative sample of 1,974 Swiss dairy farmers. A total of 518 completed questionnaires were analyzed. The mean number of dairy cows per farm was 39 (range: 11–140 cows). Thirty-five percent of cows produced considerable quantities of milk (>15 kg/d) at dry-off, and milk yield at dry-off increased with increasing annual milk yield. Abrupt dry-off was applied on 45% of the farms. The participants reported observing behavioral changes of cows such as increased vocalizations and decreased lying time associated with dry-off. Selective dry cow therapy was applied on 74% of the farms, and 44% of the participants indicated the use of antibiotics at dry-off as being "rather often," "often," or "always." Correlation analysis revealed that with increasing annual milk yields, the frequency of observed behavioral changes and antibiotic use at dry-off increased as well. Therefore, drying-off approaches that reduce milk production while supporting cow welfare are needed. We found that farmers showed an interest in testing the presented drying-off approach of incomplete milking. In addition, the farmers indicated that they would be more willing to test incomplete milking before dry-off if it became available for automated use in milking parlors or robots. Uncertainties regarding udder health appeared to be the main barrier for the adoption potential of this approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT: To facilitate sustainable dairy farming, it is essential to assess and support the mental health of dairy farm workers, which is affected more than that of workers in other industries, as indicated by the relatively few studies to date. In addition, the limited investigations on mental health in dairy workers minimize the opportunities to suggest practical approaches of improvement of their mental health. Therefore, further data acquisition and analysis is required. In the present study, we undertook quantitative surveys on 17 management factors and administered a mental health questionnaire to 81 dairy farm managers (80 male, 1 female) in Hokkaido, northern Japan. The management factors were categorized into 3 groups: production input, production output, and facility indicator; mental health was evaluated based on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Principal component analysis assigned the factors into 2 groups: intensiveness factors of dairy production systems (PC1: livestock care cost, fat- and protein-corrected milk, stocking density, medical consultation fee per unit time per animal unit, nonfamily wages, fertilizer and pesticide expenses, and net agricultural income ratio) and basic dairy management factors (PC2: net agricultural income ratio, quantity of concentrate feed, and milk quality variable). The depression symptoms of dairy farm managers were not significantly associated with PC1 and milking methods; however, they were significantly negatively associated with PC2, which integrated 3 management factors, including factors related to finances, feeding, and milk quality. According to the findings of the present study, the efforts needed for stable economic farm management, adequate feed supply, and milk quality maintenance may increase the depression levels of dairy farm managers and negatively affect their mental health. These findings could be the basis for future studies on the relationship between the mental health of farm managers and sustainable dairy farm management and production.

Adjusting end-of-milking criteria, in particular applying a maximum milking time determined by expected milk yield at an individual milking session, is one strategy to optimize parlor efficiency. However, this strategy can be difficult to apply practically on farm due to large differences in session milk yield, driven by milking interval, which affects milking routines and can be limited by in-parlor technology. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that a single fixed milking time (duration) could be applied at all milking sessions without compromising milk production or udder health for a range of milking intervals. To test the hypothesis, 4 experimental herds were established: (1) herd milked twice a day (TAD) using a 10- and 14-h interval, (2) herd milked TAD using an 8- and 16-h interval, (3) herd milked 3 times in 2 d using a 10–19–19-h interval, and (4) herd milked once a day (OAD). Herds consisted of 40 cows each, and were established for two 6-wk experimental periods, one in peak lactation and the other in mid-late lactation. Within each herd, half the cows had an end-of-milking criterion of 0.35 kg/min (Flow), and the other half had milking ended after a fixed period of time (FixedT) based on the average milking session yield, the daily milk yield divided by average number of milkings per day, irrespective of milking interval. We found no differences in daily milk yield between end-of-milking criteria due to residual milk from one milking likely increasing the proportion of milk in the udder cistern at the next milking session for the FixedT treatment. However, fat yield was compromised when the percentage of the herd with a truncated milking exceeded an estimated 33% at a milking session, which occurred in the TAD 8–16 herd due to the divergence from the average milking interval (in the case of TAD, 12–12 h). Applying a fixed milking time had no detrimental effects on udder health, except in the OAD herd in mid-late lactation, which had both a higher cell count and new intramammary infection rate. This warrants further investigation, although the majority of cultured bacteria were coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS). Consequently, we conclude that, in general, with appropriate monitoring (e.g., weekly inspection) to ensure the proportion of the herd with truncated milkings does not exceed 33%, farmers in pasture-based dairy systems can use a fixed milking time to improve parlor efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both male and female calves that are not required in the dairy herd sometimes receive inadequate care on dairy farms. Veterinarians work with farmers to improve animal care, and farmers often view veterinarians as trusted advisors; however, little is known about the attitudes of veterinarians on surplus calves. This study investigated the perspectives of Canadian cattle veterinarians on the care and management of surplus calves, as well as how they view their role in improving care. We conducted 10 focus groups with a total of 45 veterinarians from 8 provinces across Canada. Recorded audio files were transcribed, anonymized, and coded using thematic analysis. We found that veterinarians approached surplus calf management issues from a wide lens, with 2 major themes emerging: (1) problematic aspects of surplus calf management, including colostrum management, transportation, and euthanasia, and suggested management and structural solutions, including ways to improve the economic value of these calves, and (2) the veterinarian's role in advising dairy farmers on the care of surplus calves, including on technical issues, and more broadly working with farmers to better address public concerns. We conclude that veterinarians are concerned about the care of surplus calves on dairy farms and believe that they have an important role in developing solutions together with their farmer clientele. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pasture-based dairy systems aim to maximize the proportion of grazed pasture in the cow's diet by having a compact calving season that coincides with the onset of the grass growing season. In Ireland, where pasture-based systems are dominant, a key performance indicator that reflects the degree of compact calving is referred to as 6-wk calving rate (6-wk CR). Although the industry target is 90%, the national average 6-wk CR in Ireland is currently 67%. The aim of this study was to use qualitative research to understand in depth farmers' experiences in implementing a high 6-wk CR. Ten case-study dairy farmers were interviewed using the biographical narrative interpretive method. We identified 5 broad and often interrelated themes evoked by farmers regarding 6-wk CR: the "good" farmer; support networks; free time and family time; simplicity of a structured system; and profitability and monetary gain. The findings of this study identify complexities and challenges at farm level when it comes to increasing 6-wk CR, such as increased workload and challenges associated with large numbers of male calves born during a condensed calving season. Benefits experienced by farmers as a result of increasing 6-wk CR included increased days in milk and consequently improved cash flow as well as increased grass utilization. Our findings are of interest to researchers and extension agents involved in programs concerned with reproductive management in pasture-based dairy systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 2013, selective dry cow treatment (SDCT) has been the standard approach in the Netherlands where farmers select cows for the use of antimicrobials at drying-off. Shortly after its introduction, antimicrobial usage decreased significantly, and no significant association was found between the level of SDCT and clinical mastitis (CM). Obviously, at that time long-term associations could not be evaluated. This study aimed to provide insight into the methods and level of implementation of SDCT on Dutch dairy farms with a conventional milking system (CMS) or an automatic milking system (AMS) in 2016 and 2017, several years after the implementation of SDCT. Udder health and antimicrobial use were also assessed. For this study, 262 farmers recorded dry cow treatments as well as all CM cases in the period from May 1, 2016, until April 30, 2017. Additionally, somatic cell count (SCC) data on cow and herd level, treatment data on herd level and questionnaire results on udder health management were collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics with differences between milking systems being evaluated using nonparametric univariable statistics. In the study period, SDCT was applied on almost all (98.8%) of the participating dairy farms. The main reason for applying antimicrobials at drying-off was either the SCC history during the complete previous lactation or the SCC at the last milk recording before drying-off. The median percentage of cows treated with antimicrobials was 48.5%. The average incidence rate of CM was 27.3 cases per 100 cows per year. From all CM cases that were registered per herd, on average 32.8% were scored as mild, 42.2% as moderate, and 25.0% as severe CM. The mean bulk tank SCC of the herds was 168,989 cells/mL. A cow was considered to have subclinical mastitis (SCM) if individual SCC was ≥150,000 cells/mL for primiparous and ≥250,000 cells/mL for multiparous cows. Passing these threshold values after 2 earlier low SCC values was considered a new case of SCM. The mean incidence rate of SCM in these herds was 62.5 cases per 100 cows per year. Bulk tank SCC and the incidence rate of SCM on farms with a CMS were statistically lower than on farms with an AMS, whereas the incidence rate of CM did not significantly differ between both groups of farms. The AMS farms had more cows per herd treated with antimicrobials at drying-off and a larger proportion of severe CM cases than did CMS farms. It is unknown whether the differences are due to the milking system or to other differences between both types of farms. This study showed the level of adoption of SDCT, udder health, and antimicrobial usage parameters several years after the ban on the preventive use of antimicrobials in animal husbandry. It found that udder health parameters did not differ from those found in Dutch studies before and around the time of implementing SDCT, whereas SDCT was widely applied on Dutch dairy farms during the study period. Therefore, it was concluded that Dutch dairy farmers were able to handle the changed policy of antimicrobial use at drying-off while maintaining indicators of a good udder health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on modeling studies, a 1-yr calving interval for dairy cows is generally considered optimal from an economic point of view. Recently some dairy farmers are deliberately extending the voluntary waiting period for insemination (VWP) to extend the calving interval. Reasons to extend the VWP are to reduce the frequency of transitions such as dry-off and calving to improve health, to reduce labor associated with these transitions, and to reduce the number of surplus calves. This study aimed to evaluate yearly revenues, yearly costs, and yearly net partial cash flow (NPCF) for individual cows with a VWP of 50, 125, or 200 d based on data from a randomized control trial. The NPCF included revenues and costs for milk yield, calves born, inseminations, concentrate supply, partial mixed ration (PMR) supply, veterinary treatments, discarded milk due to veterinary treatments, culling, and labor (for milking, calving cows, inseminations, and veterinary treatments). Holstein-Friesian dairy cows (n = 153) within one herd were blocked for parity, calving season, and expected (primiparous cows) or previous (multiparous cows) 305-d milk yield. Cows were randomly assigned within the blocks to 1 of 3 VWP (VWP50, VWP125, or VWP200) in wk 6 after calving, and monitored from wk 6 after calving until wk 6 after the next calving or until culling. Revenues and costs were calculated per individual cow and expressed per cow per year. Revenues from milk and costs for PMR and concentrate contributed most to the yearly NPCF. Total yearly revenues were greater in VWP50 compared with VWP200 (€3,169 vs. €2,832), mainly because of €334 greater milk revenues. Total yearly costs were also greater in VWP50 compared with VWP200 (€1,964 vs. €1,729), mainly because of €102 greater concentrate costs. The VWP was not significantly associated with the NPCF per cow per year. A change in milk, feed, or calf price, or a change in labor costs for calving cows or for inseminations had a greater effect on the yearly NPCF of cows in VWP50 compared with cows in VWP200. To investigate variation in NPCF, cows were grouped for yearly NPCF and categorized into 3 economic classes (EC): EC1 (<€1,100/yr), EC2 (€1,100–€1,400/yr), and EC3 (>€1,400/yr). Cows in EC3 had greatest lactation production per day in the experiment (i.e., kg of milk, protein, fat, lactose), and lowest number of veterinary treatments during the experiment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Milking 3 times in 2 d (3-in-2) could enhance the attractiveness of the dairy workplace relative to twice-a-day milking (TAD) by reducing labor requirements for milking and increasing workforce flexibility. The objective of this study was to quantify the farm system interactions associated with milking 3-in-2 at 3 stages of lactation, with the aim of providing guidance to pasture-based dairy farmers and advisors on the likely consequences of adopting 3-in-2 milking on farm productivity and business performance. Seventy-nine multiparous and 37 primiparous cows were randomly allocated to 4 experimental farms stocked at 3.5 cows/ha. One herd was milked TAD for the whole lactation (August 2019 to May 2020), with the remaining 3 milked 3-in-2 for either the whole lactation, after December 1 when cows were an average of 101 d in milk, or after March 1 when days in milk averaged 189 d. Milking intervals over 48 h were 10-14-10-14 h for TAD and 12-18-18 h for 3-in-2. Animal, pasture, and farm system data were analyzed by linear regression, with the dependent variable being the annualized value of the performance metric of interest, and the number of days in the lactation milked 3-in-2 as the independent variable. For the proportion of the season milked 3-in-2, there was a significant effect on milk (−11%), protein (−8%), and lactose (−12%) yield per cow per year, but no effect of fat. Additionally, there was a positive effect (+6%) on body condition score before dry-off and the energy required for liveweight change (+26%), and a negative effect on the energy required for walking (−30%). There were no differences in estimated feed eaten, or pasture herbage accumulation, composition, or quality. Therefore, pasture management and feed allocation under 3-in-2 should be similar to TAD. On commercial farms, the degree to which reduced milk income can be offset by lower costs will be highly farm-specific, but opportunities for savings were identified in the results. The short walking distances on the research farm and potential to improve farm management using the time saved from fewer milkings suggests better production may be achieved with 3-in-2 milking on a commercial farm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The provision of pasture and outdoor access for dairy cattle differs around the globe. For example, in Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia, dairy farms are largely pasture based, whereas dairy farms in the United States and Canada are largely confinement based. There is a high level of public support for pasture and outdoor access for dairy cows, and the available evidence shows that dairy cattle are highly motivated to access pasture, especially at night. The decision as to whether to provide outdoor access is typically made by farmers, but little is known about dairy farmers' perspectives on this topic. We investigated perspectives of Western Canadian dairy farmers on outdoor access, as well as how they believe different stakeholders (i.e., the dairy industry, the dairy cows, and the general public) regard outdoor access for dairy cows. Data were collected via (1) 11 focus group discussions with a total of 50 Western Canadian dairy farmers, and (2) semi-structured individual interviews with an additional 6 dairy farmers of Hutterite colonies. Data were analyzed using template analysis. Although most participants in this study did not provide outdoor access on their farms, or only provided outdoor access to certain cow groups, participants generally mentioned that they enjoyed seeing cows on pasture or outdoors. However, participants shared that the Canadian supply management system (including processors) required a consistent flow of production, which was thought to be easier and more economically realized with indoor housing of lactating cows. Participants believed that pasture or outdoor access for dairy cows was desired by the public. Some participants believed that dairy cows prefer to spend time outside under favorable weather conditions, but others felt that cows preferred to stay indoors in modern, ventilated freestall barns. The results of this study describe the perspectives of dairy farmers regarding the views of dairy industry stakeholders as they relate to outdoor access, helping to inform conversations around the provision of outdoor access for dairy cattle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Milk concentrates are used in the manufacturing of dairy products such as yogurt and cheese or are processed into milk powder. Processes for the nonthermal separation of water and valuable milk ingredients are becoming increasingly widespread at farm level. The technical barriers to using farm-manufactured milk concentrate in dairies are minimal, hence the suspicion that the practice of on-farm raw milk concentration is still fairly uncommon for economic reasons. This study, therefore, set out to investigate farmers' potential willingness to adopt a raw milk concentration plant. The empirical analysis was based on discrete choice experiments with 75 German dairy farmers to identify preferences and the possible adoption of on-farm raw milk concentration. The results showed that, in particular, farmers who deemed the current milk price to be insufficient viewed on-farm concentration using membrane technology as an option for diversifying their milk sales. We found no indication that adoption would be impeded by a lack of trustworthy information on milk processing technologies or capital. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bovine viral diarrhea (BVD) is endemic in the United Kingdom and causes major economic losses. Control is largely voluntary for individual farmers and is likely to be influenced by psychosocial factors, such as altruism, trust, and psychological proximity (feeling close) to relevant "others," such as farmers, veterinarians, the government, and their cows. These psychosocial factors (factors with both psychological and social aspects) are important determinants of how people make decisions related to their own health, many of which have not been studied in the context of infectious disease control by farmers. Farmer psychosocial profiles were investigated using multiple validated measures in an observational survey of 475 UK cattle farmers using the capability, opportunity, motivation-behavior (COM-B) framework. Farmers were clustered by their BVD control practices using latent class analysis. Farmers were split into 5 BVD control behavior classes, which were tested for associations with the psychosocial and COM-B factors using multinomial logistic regression, with doing nothing as the baseline class. Farmers who were controlling disease both for themselves and others were more likely to do something to control BVD (e.g., test, vaccinate). Farmers who did not trust other farmers, had high psychological capability (knowledge and understanding of how to control disease), and had high physical opportunity (time and money to control disease) were more likely to have a closed, separate herd and test. Farmers who did not trust other farmers were also more likely to undertake many prevention strategies with an open herd. Farmers with high automatic motivation (habits and emotions) and reflective motivation (decisions and goals) were more likely to vaccinate and test, alone or in combination with other controls. Farmers with high psychological proximity (feeling of closeness) to their veterinarian were more likely to undertake many prevention strategies in an open herd. Farmers with high psychological proximity to dairy farmers and low psychological proximity to beef farmers were more likely to keep their herd closed and separate and test or vaccinate and test. Farmers who had a lot of trust in other farmers and invested in them, rather than keeping everything for themselves, were more likely to be careful introducing new stock and test. In conclusion, farmer psychosocial factors were associated with strategies for BVD control in UK cattle farmers. Psychological proximity to veterinarians was a novel factor associated with proactive BVD control and was more important than the more extensively investigated trust. These findings highlight the importance of a close veterinarian-farmer relationship and are important for promoting effective BVD control by farmers, which has implications for successful nationwide BVD control and eradication schemes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In lower- and middle-income countries, uncontrolled use of antibiotics is causing antimicrobial resistance, affecting both animal welfare and public health. Meanwhile, studies on antibiotic use in these countries are limited. A crucial step to limit the spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is to examine the use of these drugs and identify its determinants. The aim of our study, the first of its kind in Lebanon, was to assess dairy farmers' knowledge and awareness of antimicrobial use (AMU) and AMR. For this, 18 farmers from different regions, educational backgrounds, experience levels, and herd sizes were interviewed. Results showed that owners of larger farms were more aware of AMU and AMR, and trying to implement preventive actions, whereas nonsystematic antimicrobial use was prevalent among the smaller farms. Mastitis and laminitis were the most treated diseases, and antibiotics used were oxytetracycline, penicillin, streptomycin, and florfenicol. Overall, antibiotic use was found as a preventive measure and a treatment of nonbacterial diseases. Irregular uses were linked to easy access of farmers to antibiotics, interrupted relations with veterinary authorities, and lack of self-assessment and inspection. Lebanese dairy farmers and owners reported feeling disadvantaged in their local trade field, facing illegal competition and unauthorized farms and industries, and lacking support from the government. Training and awareness programs must be implemented, and policies and regulations must be set, to reduce antibiotic use and hinder the spread of AMR in Lebanon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To facilitate sustainable dairy farming, it is essential to assess and support the mental health of dairy farm workers, which is affected more than that of workers in other industries, as indicated by the relatively few studies to date. In addition, the limited investigations on mental health in dairy workers minimize the opportunities to suggest practical approaches of improvement of their mental health. Therefore, further data acquisition and analysis is required. In the present study, we undertook quantitative surveys on 17 management factors and administered a mental health questionnaire to 81 dairy farm managers (80 male, 1 female) in Hokkaido, northern Japan. The management factors were categorized into 3 groups: production input, production output, and facility indicator; mental health was evaluated based on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Principal component analysis assigned the factors into 2 groups: intensiveness factors of dairy production systems (PC1: livestock care cost, fat- and protein-corrected milk, stocking density, medical consultation fee per unit time per animal unit, nonfamily wages, fertilizer and pesticide expenses, and net agricultural income ratio) and basic dairy management factors (PC2: net agricultural income ratio, quantity of concentrate feed, and milk quality variable). The depression symptoms of dairy farm managers were not significantly associated with PC1 and milking methods; however, they were significantly negatively associated with PC2, which integrated 3 management factors, including factors related to finances, feeding, and milk quality. According to the findings of the present study, the efforts needed for stable economic farm management, adequate feed supply, and milk quality maintenance may increase the depression levels of dairy farm managers and negatively affect their mental health. These findings could be the basis for future studies on the relationship between the mental health of farm managers and sustainable dairy farm management and production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMO), which use multiple component pricing schemas, farmers are paid for delivered quantity of butterfat, protein, and other solids, plus a producer price differential (PPD). The PPD captures the difference between the total handler obligations to the pool and the total component value of milk. In 2020, record negative PPD caused widespread frustration among dairy farmers. The primary objective of this research was to provide a comprehensive analysis of factors that affect PPD and to quantify their relative importance. We examined FMMO data from the past 10 yr including prices, utilizations, and tests. By decomposing the PPD, we were able to isolate the drivers of negative values. We found that long-term trends in usage, most importantly declining beverage milk and rising component tests, including both butterfat and protein, have substantially reduced PPD over the past decade. Class I milk pricing reform of 2018 exacerbated negative PPD in 2020, but we found that the PPD would have been negative even without that reform. The greatest contributor to recent negative PPD was the spread between cheese and milk powder prices, caused by shifts in demand due to the COVID-19 pandemic and USDA intervention cheese purchases. A range of policy modifications proposed to address negative PPD was evaluated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Separation of the cow and calf shortly after birth is a common practice on commercial dairy farms around the world, but there are emerging concerns about this practice among citizens and other stakeholders. Continuous improvement of on-farm management practices in collaboration with dairy sector stakeholders increases the likelihood that farming systems evolve in a way that is consistent with societal expectations. Few commercial dairy farms provide extended cow-calf contact, and there is little understanding of how dairy farmers view this practice. This study examined the views of New Zealand dairy farmers toward providing cow-calf contact, particularly the barriers to adopting such a system in a seasonal-calving pasture-based dairy system. Standard farm practice in New Zealand is to remove the calf from the cow around 24 h (but could be up to 48 h) after birth. These conventional farmers (n = 63) were randomly selected from the database of all dairy farmers in New Zealand and telephone-interviewed using a semistructured interview format. Their responses to questions about providing cow-calf contact (defined as contact beyond the standard practice of 48 h) were analyzed using thematic analysis. Three major themes of concern were identified by these farmers about providing cow-calf contact as follows: (1) poor animal welfare, especially the risk of mastitis in the dam, inadequate colostrum for the calf, increased stress from delayed separation, and lack of shelter for calves while outdoors with the cow; (2) increased labor and stress on staff; and (3) system-level changes required, including infrastructure and herd management. Many of these concerns stemmed from challenges related to the nature of large-scale seasonal-calving pasture-based dairy systems, where a large number of calves are born in a short period of time and may be exposed to inclement weather in late winter in some areas. Several small-scale farmers (n = 4) providing cow-calf contact for longer than standard practice of 48 h were also interviewed; all permitted contact for at least 4 wk. These farmers also felt that animal welfare and health were important, and that this was promoted in their cow-calf contact systems. Concerns about colostrum and mastitis, for example, were not raised by these farmers, but they did agree that additional infrastructure and shelter were important considerations for cow-calf contact systems. Some conventional farmers expressed cognitive dissonance in that they theoretically preferred cow-calf contact but could not see it being realistic or practical to implement. Farmers currently providing longer cow-calf contact may be a useful resource for better understanding of how practical and economical cow-calf contact systems could be adopted on commercial pastoral dairy farms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Grazing has become a less common dairy farming practice in most European countries. Ireland is an exception with its predominantly grass-based system. After the removal of European milk quotas, farmers were encouraged to expand within a grass-based paradigm rather than pursuing yield increases through feeding more concentrate. This research assessed Irish dairy farmer attitudes toward grass-based, higher-feed-input, and indoor paradigms. A paradigm of agriculture is a shared understanding about how agriculture should be carried out. Grass-based, higher-feed-input, and indoor paradigms propose different solutions to economic, environmental, and animal-welfare challenges facing dairy farming. An online survey was distributed to Irish dairy farmers in August 2018, which received 396 responses. There was support among respondents for the grass-based paradigm of maximizing milk from forage and minimizing concentrate use, with 73% of respondents strongly agreeing or agreeing this was the best option for Irish dairy farmers. The results suggest there were not significant ideological disagreements among respondents about the economic, environmental, and animal-welfare merits of different paradigms. Rather, the results showed respondents supported grass-based or higher-feed-input paradigms for different reasons as follows: profitability and lifestyle for the former, and the ability to expand production without access to additional land and less dependence on weather for the latter. These findings could be of interest in countries where grazing is less widely practiced, but where there is a desire to increase the uptake of grazing practices. Messaging about the profitability and simplicity of the grass-based system clearly resonated with respondents, and could be replicated in other countries. There is a desire within the Irish government, industry, and advisory bodies to keep dairy expansion within a grass-based paradigm. The results suggested individuals may diverge from this paradigm not because they disagree with messaging about its benefits, but rather if difficulties with land access or managing weather variability lead them to expand through feeding more concentrate. To maintain production within the grass-based paradigm, more opportunities could be created for farmers who are restricted from further expansion, such as alternative supply chains or payments for environmental services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A survey was conducted to investigate potential differences in biosecurity and health management practices on Irish dairy farms that sent their heifers for contract-rearing (source dairy farms, SDF; n = 62) and those rearing their own heifers (control farms, CF; n = 50). Participating farmers were surveyed by postal questionnaire between September and November 2018. The overall response rate was 93%. Results show that structurally, SDF were larger, less fragmented, and more specialized than CF. Outsourcing of labor-intensive activities to external contractors was more common among SDF than CF, exposing them to potentially increased biosecurity risks associated with animal movements, use of shared equipment, and increased frequency of farm visitors. The majority of SDF sent heifers to a single-origin rearing facility (70%), with heifers most commonly arriving at the rearing unit between 2 and 4 mo (53%) and returning to the dairy farm between 18 and 21 mo of age (56%). Despite the increased biosecurity risk associated with contract-rearing, implementation of disease prevention measures was not superior on SDF compared with CF. For both farm types, there was scope for improvement to visitor biosecurity protocols, quarantine procedures, colostrum feeding practices, and hygiene of calving areas. This research provides an overview of the demographics and farm management practices implemented by dairy farmers engaged in contract-rearing of replacement heifers, and will serve to inform farmers, veterinary advisors, and policy makers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lameness is a leading animal welfare concern in the dairy industry. Multiple stakeholders are involved in lameness management on a dairy farm, including farmers, hoof trimmers, and veterinarians. This study sought to explore perceptions of lameness, perceptions of roles in lameness management, and barriers to improved lameness management in these groups. Fourteen homogeneous focus groups were held in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and New York from April 2017 to March 2020; 5 with farmers (n = 31), 4 with hoof trimmers (n = 32), and 5 with veterinarians (n = 25). The 1-h facilitated discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and common themes identified through thematic analysis. Lameness was perceived by participants as a complex health problem and one in which the connections between pathogenesis, facilities, and management were not always well understood or easy to change. The complexity of the problem encompassed the lack of agreement on a definition of lameness, normalization to its signs, and the interconnectedness of lameness with other health and management issues. These issues appeared to contribute to resignation by participants that lameness was inevitable. Despite shared concerns about lameness among these groups, respondents reported a lack of communication, especially between hoof trimmers and veterinarians. Participants also voiced a desire to work together more productively, with hoof trimmers and veterinarians valuing the ability to deliver a consistent message to farmers. These findings suggest a need for increased efforts to facilitate collaboration between farmers, hoof trimmers, and veterinarians to improve lameness management on dairy farms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many dairy farmers in North America disbud or dehorn their cattle to improve human and animal safety. The Farmers Assuring Responsible Management (FARM v. 4.0) program requires that disbudding be performed before 8 wk of age with pain-control medication. The objective of this observational cross-sectional study was to quantify disbudding and dehorning practices of Wisconsin dairy producers to target future extension programming. Responses from 217 Wisconsin dairy producers and calf raisers were collected via digital surveys distributed at extension events and through industry contacts. Of the 217 respondents, 188 performed on-farm disbudding themselves. Most respondents (61%) used caustic paste as their primary method, which was most commonly applied on the day the calf was born (53%). Hot iron was used by 32% of respondents, and surgical methods (gouge, scoop, or wire saw) were used by 6% of respondents. Hot-iron disbudding was most commonly performed at 4 to 8 wk of age (41%) and 1 to 4 wk of age (33%), whereas surgical methods were most commonly performed at 8 wk or older (73%). Pain-control medication was used by 43% of respondents. Specifically, 35% used an anti-inflammatory, and 21% used a local nerve block. Veterinary involvement in creating the disbudding protocol was associated with increased odds of using pain control. Respondents with a target weaning age of ≥10 wk had greater odds of complying with FARM disbudding requirements and were also more likely to use polled genetics. Respondents aged 18 to 34 and respondents with >60 calves were more likely to have made changes to their disbudding or dehorning protocol in the last decade. Although use of pain control was higher than in previous US studies, full adoption of pain management requires further extension efforts. Veterinarians appeared influential on adoption of pain control, and their involvement may encourage adoption of pain management. Further research should investigate how the implementation of new FARM v. 4.0 standards will change the disbudding and dehorning practices of American dairy producers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Limiting antimicrobial use (AMU) in dairy farming is an important step toward reducing antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Therefore, it is relevant to understand dairy farmers' choices and the potential for change in relation to AMU, even in countries with low usage. Furthermore, there is an increasing recognition of the need to focus on both the individual farmer's behavior as well as the context surrounding and influencing the farmer's decisions in relation to AMU if the goal is further reduction. To date, no studies have taken into account both the individual farmer and their context in both conventional and organic dairy farms under Danish conditions. For this study, 15 Danish dairy farmers were interviewed using qualitative semi-structured research interviews, and the notion of landscape was used to describe the context of their AMU. We found that AMR was considered a distant element of the farmers' antimicrobial landscape. Daily challenges such as acutely diseased animals and poor housing conditions seemed more urgent and overruled the threat of AMR. We also found that interviewed farmers had differing opinions on farm management, partly shaped by changes in legislation and ways of farming over time. At one end of the scale, some organic farmers had rethought the current way of farming; keeping robust animals in a natural setting was expected to prevent disease. They were positive about legislation, and the numerous restrictions on AMU over time were thought to contribute to ensuring quality for consumers. At the other end of the scale, some conventional farmers perceived disease as something that should be controlled through treatment, and the currently eased legislation and intensification of farming have legitimatized AMU for this purpose, leading to an expectation among these farmers of certain rights to handle medicines themselves. These contrasting views might lead to inspiration and competition in terms of reducing AMU, as the farmers appeared to value the opinions of other farmers, and they were found to continuously assess each other. Through such ongoing assessment, pioneers of AMU reduction—whether organic or conventional—might motivate their colleagues to change their AMU. Future research should address the potential of experience- and attitude-sharing among farmers as motivation to reduce AMU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dairy cows are highly motivated to access pasture, especially at night in summer. When pasture is not available, dairy cows show a partial preference for alternative types of outdoor access, spending half the night outside in summer on an outdoor sand or wood chip pack. However, many dairy farms do not provide cows outside access. To better understand reasons why dairy farmers choose to provide or not provide outdoor access, we studied the perspectives of dairy farmers located in the 4 Western Canadian provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Data were collected via (1) 11 focus group discussions with a total of 50 Western Canadian dairy farmers, and (2) semi-structured individual interviews with 6 dairy farmers of Hutterite colonies. Transcripts were analyzed using template analysis. Reasons to not provide outdoor access fell into 5 main themes: (1) adverse climate conditions, (2) negative implications of outdoor access for cow welfare including concerns about udder health, (3) concerns regarding decreases in profitability, (4) farm infrastructure not set up for outdoor access, and (5) higher ability to manage animals kept indoors. Reasons to provide outdoor access fell into the 5 main themes: (1) local climate conditions conducive for outdoor access, (2) beneficial effects of outdoor access on cow welfare including lower lameness prevalence, (3) increased profitability due to a premium milk price provided to farmers that allow pasture access to their cows, (4) farm infrastructure that is set up for outdoor access, and (5) easier management of animals outdoors. We conclude that the decision to provide outdoor access depends on how farmers weigh these factors given the constraints on their farm, as well as their personal beliefs and values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A novel technology combining in vitro production and genomic embryo selection is currently under development in dairy cattle breeding. Adoption of this technology will probably accelerate genetic progress toward the main breeding goals of economic interest, as well as allow selection for traits of societal concern such as decreased methane emissions and improved animal welfare. However, dairy farmers, and especially organic farmers, could find the technology morally questionable and reject its use. This cross-sectional study surveyed Danish dairy farmers' general acceptance of the combined technology and their reported likelihood of using semen produced with it. Drawing on diffusion theory, a questionnaire was developed to examine the way farmers discover and communicate about new technological breeding options, and to measure the factors which predict acceptance and likelihood of adopting the technology. The questionnaire was sent to a randomly selected sample of organic and conventional dairy farmers in Denmark, and 85 organic and 71 conventional farmers (41% response rate) completed it. Seventy-six percent of farmers reported that they would be likely to use semen from bulls derived from the technology. A majority (61%) also found the technology acceptable, but many (33%) were unsure or undecided. Most farmers saw the technology as beneficial, but ethical reservations were aired by around a fifth of the farmers. There were no differences between organic and conventional farmers in likelihood of using, perceived utility, and ethical reservations about the technology. Self-reported idealistic organic farmers showed lower acceptance of the technology, but reported similar likelihood of using semen produced by it. Young farmers (20–39 yr) exhibited higher acceptance of the technology. Larger producers (in terms of number of cows) were more likely to report that they will use and accept the technology. We conclude that it is likely that semen from the technology combining in vitro production and genomic selection would be widely used by both organic and conventional farmers provided that costs can be kept low, and that there are advantages in terms of achieving breeding goals. Structural developments, growth in size of dairy farms, acceptance by young farmers, and the fact that economic incentives (and even ethical arguments) seem to favor the technology all point to this conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Zero-grazing (ZG; the mechanical harvesting and feeding of fresh grass) is increasingly used in grass-based milk production systems alongside conventional grazing. It allows farmers to supply fresh grass from land parcels that are outside of the main grazing block during seasonal shortages and periods when climatic conditions limit animal grazing opportunities. The objective of this study was to establish an understanding of current ZG practices on Irish dairy farms, to capture farmer perceptions on the implementation of this management practice, and to identify farmer knowledge requirements on ZG. An online survey was distributed and completed by 130 dairy farmers who use or have used ZG. Zero-grazing was used alongside conventional grazing by 92% of respondents. These farms were particularly fragmented, with between 1 and 14 separate land blocks. Respondents felt ZG helped them overcome fragmentation, increase grass use, and extend grass feeding in spring and autumn. However, extra cost and time input associated with ZG were recognized as key challenges. The majority of respondents rated current technical information available on ZG in the Republic of Ireland as "poor" or "very poor," and knowledge deficits were identified in the areas of cost analysis, grass management and productivity, cow productivity, cow health and nutrition, and soil fertility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To tackle antimicrobial resistance, it is vital that farmers' and veterinarians' antimicrobial use behaviors and attitudes toward resistance are understood so that we can identify how beliefs and motives influence practices. Current literature details qualitative and quantitative research that explores the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of dairy farmers and veterinarians with respect to antimicrobial resistance and antimicrobial practices, and the reported findings are varied and conflicting. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review to assess the evidence and knowledge gaps in the published literature. We identified articles via database searches of Embase, Medline, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science; we limited findings to published articles available in English with no publication year restrictions. Article screening was conducted at 3 levels: title, abstract, and full text. Of the 349 articles identified, 35 were retained for systematic review. Transparency of reporting was assessed for each study using the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) framework. Quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative checklist. Findings relating to dairy farmers' and veterinarians' knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions on antimicrobial resistance and practices were thematically analyzed. The comprehensiveness of reporting was variable: studies reported 5 to 26 of the 32 COREQ checklist items. Five key themes emerged from the data: knowledge and awareness of antimicrobial resistance; factors influencing farmer and veterinarian decision-making; perceived barriers and facilitators to reduced antimicrobial use; perceived responsibility for antimicrobial resistance; and the role of the farmer and veterinarian relationship in reducing antimicrobial use. Awareness of prudent antimicrobial use was not uniform between studies. Many factors influence farmers' and veterinarians' decisions to use antimicrobials, including animal welfare and available resources. The farmer–veterinarian relationship is a potential barrier or facilitator of reduced antimicrobial use, depending on the perceived relationship dynamic. Encouraging collaboration between farmers and veterinarians could lead to shared responsibility for reducing antimicrobial use. This review provided a coherent picture of what is currently known and identified gaps in the current knowledge to inform future behavioral intervention research. Increased knowledge, skill development, resources, engagement, and further research to address the gaps we identified are the main recommendations to effectively overcome barriers, elicit appropriate behavior change, and achieve reduced antimicrobial use in dairy cattle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dairy cows are negatively affected by the introduction of bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV), and consequently, produce less milk. Existing literature on potential milk production losses is based on relatively outdated data and hardly evaluates milk production loss in relation to a new BVDV infection in a surveillance system. This study determined the annual and quarterly loss in milk production of BVDV introduction in 3,126 dairy herds participating in the Dutch BVDV-free program between 2007 and 2017. Among these herds, 640 were "breakdown-herds" that obtained and subsequently lost their BVDV-free status during the study period, and 2,486 herds obtained and retained their BVDV-free status during the study period. Milk yields before and after BVDV introduction were compared through annual and quarterly linear mixed models. The fixed variables for both models included herd type (breakdown-herd or free-herd), bovine viral diarrhea status (on an annual and quarterly basis), year, season, and a random herd effect. The dependent variable was the average daily milk yield on the test day. To define the possible BVDV-introduction dates, 4 scenarios were developed. In the default scenario, the date of breakdown (i.e., loss of the BVDV-free status) was assumed as the BVDV-introduction date. For the other 3 scenarios, the BVDV-introduction dates were set at 4, 6, and 9 mo before the date of breakdown, based on the estimated birth date of a persistently infected calf. In the default scenario, the loss in milk yield due to BVDV introduction occurred mainly in the first year after breakdown, with a reduction in yield of 0.08 kg/cow per day compared with the last year before breakdown. For the other 3 scenarios, the greatest yield reduction occurred in the second year after BVDV introduction, with a loss of 0.09, 0.09, and 0.1 kg/cow per day, respectively. For the first 4 quarters after BVDV introduction in the default scenario, milk yield loss was 0.14, 0.09, 0.02, and 0.08 kg/cow per day, respectively. These quarterly results indicated that milk yield loss was greatest in the first quarter after BVDV introduction. Overall, BVDV introduction had a negative, but on average a relatively small, effect on milk yield for herds participating in the BVDV-free program. This study will enable dairy farmers and policymakers to have a clearer understanding of the quantitative milk production effect of BVDV on dairy farms in a control program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Standard operating procedures (SOP) are increasingly required on farms participating in animal welfare assurance programs, such as the Dairy Farmers of Canada's proAction initiative and the National Dairy FARM Program in the United States. However, little is known about the use of SOP on farms and who is involved in their development. Literature from other industries shows the importance of including advisors when developing SOP. Despite veterinarians being viewed by many farmers as trusted sources of information, little is known about their involvement in SOP development. The aim of this study was to better understand: (1) what advice from researchers and veterinarians is considered when developing an SOP and (2) what factors affect advice adherence. Participants in this study were farmers (n = 9) from 6 dairy farms in the Fraser Valley region of British Columbia, Canada and their herd veterinarians (n = 5). Structured and semi-structured interviews and participant observation were undertaken from April to December 2018, and the resulting data were analyzed using thematic analysis. In relation to the first aim, we identified 3 main themes: (1) the purpose of the SOP, (2) developing an SOP, and (3) accountability and tracking of procedures. For the second aim, 5 themes emerged: (1) feasibility of the advice, (2) resources required, (3) priority of the advice, (4) other actors involved, and (5) the importance of data. Collectively, these findings suggest that a farm-specific SOP that actively tracks procedures is most beneficial, and that advice adherence is context dependent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to apply the theory of planned behavior to determine the effects of attitude, perceived behavioral control, and subjective norms on the intention of dairy farmers toward high-grain feeding. Quantitative data were collected through interviews with 150 dairy farmers in Paraná, Brazil. Partial least squares structural equation modeling was used to analyze the data. We observed that farmers with a positive perception of grain feeding (attitude) and a positive perception of their ability to increase the use of grains (perceived behavioral control) had higher intention to increase grain feeding. Social pressure (subjective norm) had no effect on the intention to grain feed. These results can contribute to the development of public strategies and policies that encourage the use of high-grain diets in dairy farms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Similar to the situation in many countries, the dairy industry in Canada is challenged by the need to adapt to changing societal demands. An industry-led initiative (Dairy Farmers of Canada's proAction Initative, known as proAction) was developed to respond to this challenge, providing mandatory national standards for on-farm practices. Farmers are more likely to follow such standards if they are aligned with their values and beliefs. The aim of this study was to better understand farmers' perspectives on the future of the Canadian dairy industry, with a focus on the role of mandatory policies such as those related to proAction. Seven focus groups were conducted, with discussions based on the principles of appreciative inquiry. Participants were each asked to write down key words that represent the "must-haves" on dairy farms in 20 yr from now. Although participants were encouraged to focus on aspects directly related to animal care, all answers were accepted. Key words were then used to facilitate a discussion and elicit ideas on how to achieve these must-haves. Particular focus was on the direction that participants believed policy should take to meet these goals. Explorative qualitative analysis was used for the written key words, and transcripts of the audio-recorded focus group discussions were analyzed using thematic analysis. Examples of farm-specific considerations that were raised as future must-haves of animal care on dairy farms included cow comfort, employee management, responsible health management, and use of advanced thechnologies. Participants agreed that objectives can only be achieved through collaboration among farmers and between farmers and researchers, and they regarded citizen education as a promising approach to align differing expectations of the public and farmers. Citizen trust in the dairy industry was considered a must-have, and participants believed that one of the benefits of mandatory policies for animal care is their potential to increase trust. These results may help guide the development of new animal care policies and increase understanding of the perceived legitimacy of new policies by dairy farmers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lameness, injuries, and cleanliness are considered important indicators of dairy cow welfare, milk production, and milk quality. Previous research has identified that farmers globally underestimate the prevalence of these cow-based measurements, but no information on the perceptions of veterinarians is available. Because veterinarians are often perceived as the main providers of health advice on farms, the objective of the present study was to evaluate the relationship between the true prevalence of lameness, injury (hock, knee, neck), and cleanliness (udder, legs, flanks), and the estimated prevalence of these issues by farmers and their herd veterinarians. A cross-sectional study was conducted between February 2016 and July 2017. First, the farm owner and the herd veterinarian were asked to estimate the prevalence of lameness, of neck, knee and hock injuries, and of udder, leg, and flank cleanliness on the farm. The research team then visited the farm and scored all lactating cows in the herd for each measurement. Linear regression models were used to assess the relationship between the prevalence estimated by the veterinarians and the farmers, of each cow-based measurement, and the true prevalence on the farm. The 93 herds enrolled had a median of 55 milking cows and were housed in tiestall (90%) and freestall (10%) barns. Ten herd veterinarians participated and were involved with 2 to 22 enrolled farms each. A wide variation was detected in the true prevalence of the different cow-based measurements among herds (lameness: range = 19–72%, median = 36%; neck injuries: range = 0–65%, median = 14%; knee injuries: range = 0–44%, median = 12%; hock injuries: range = 0–57%, median = 25%; dirty udder: range = 0–55%, median 13%; dirty legs: range = 0–91%, median = 18%; and dirty flanks: range = 0–82%, median = 20%). For both veterinarians and farmers, the perception of each cow-based measurement prevalence increased incrementally as the herd's true prevalence increased. Overall, farmers and veterinarians underestimated cow-based measurements. Farmers and veterinarians more accurately estimated lameness prevalence in herds with higher prevalence than in herds with low prevalence, suggesting a better awareness of the issue on farms with lameness problems. Injuries were less accurately estimated in herds with higher injury prevalence compared with herds with lower prevalence, suggesting an opportunity for better knowledge transfer in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sensor systems (SS) were developed over the last few decades to help dairy farmers manage their herds. Such systems can provide both data and alerts to several productive, behavioral, and physiological indicators on individual cows. Currently, there is still a lack of knowledge on both the proportion of dairy farms that invested in SS and type of SS installed. Additionally, it is still unclear whether the performances of herds equipped with SS differ from those of similar herds managed without any technological aid. Therefore, the aims of this study were (1) to provide an insight into SS spread among Italian dairy farms and (2) to analyze the performances of similar herds equipped or not equipped with SS. To reach the former goal, a large survey was carried out on 964 dairy farms in the northeast of Italy. Farmers were interviewed by the technicians of the regional breeders association to collect information on the type of SS installed on farms and the main parameters recorded. Overall, 42% of the surveyed farms had at least 1 SS, and most of them (72%) reared more than 50 cows. Sensors for measuring individual cow milk yield were the most prevalent type installed (39% of the surveyed farms), whereas only 15% of farms had SS for estrus detection. More sophisticated parameters, such as rumination, were automatically monitored in less than 5% of the farms. To reach the latter goal of the study, a subset of 100 Holstein dairy farms with similar characteristics was selected: half of them were equipped with SS for monitoring at least individual milk yield and estrus, and the other half were managed without any SS. Average herd productive and reproductive data from official test days over 3 yr were analyzed. The outcomes of the comparison showed that farms with SS had higher mature-equivalent milk production. Further clustering analysis of the same 100 farms partitioned them into 3 clusters based on herd productive and reproductive data. Results of the Chi-squared test showed that the proportion of farms equipped with SS was greater in the cluster with the best performance (e.g., higher milk yield and shorter calving interval). However, the presence of a few farms equipped with SS in the least productive cluster for the same parameters pointed out that although the installation of SS may support farmers in time- and labor-saving or in data recording, it is not a guarantee of better herd performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A high-quality animal health surveillance service is required to inform policy and decision-making in food-animal disease control, to substantiate claims regarding national animal health status and for the early detection of exotic or emerging diseases. In Ireland, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine provides partially subsidized testing of farm animal samples and postmortem examinations to the Irish agriculture sector (farmers) at 6 regional veterinary laboratories (RVL) throughout the country. Diagnoses and data from these submissions are recorded and reported monthly and annually to enable animal health monitoring and disease surveillance. In a passive surveillance model, both the veterinary practitioner and the farmer play a vital role in sample submission by determining which cases are sent to the laboratory for postmortem or diagnostic testing. This paper identified factors influencing Irish dairy farmers' decisions to submit carcasses to RVL. Behavioral determinants of the submission of samples where veterinary professionals are concerned has been studied previously; however, limited work has studied determinants among farmers. This study conducted qualitative analyses of decisions of Irish dairy farmers relevant to diagnostic sample submission to an RVL and to examine the herd-level characteristics of farmers that submitted cases to an RVL. The biographical narrative interpretive method was used to interview 5 case-study farmers who were classified nonsubmitters, medium, or high submitters to the postmortem service based on the proportion of on-farm mortalities submitted to the laboratory service in 2016. The data obtained from these interviews were supplemented and triangulated through dairy farmer focus groups. The data were thematically analyzed and described qualitatively. In addition, quantitative analysis was undertaken. Data for herds within the catchment area of a central RVL were extracted, and a multivariable logistic regression model was constructed to examine the relationship between herds from which carcasses were submitted to the laboratory and those from which none were submitted. Results from the analysis show that the farmer's veterinary practitioner was the primary influence on submission of carcasses to the laboratory. Similarly, the type of incident, logistical issues with transporting carcasses to the laboratory, influence of peers, presence of alternative private laboratories, and a fear of government involvement were key factors emerging from the case-study interview and focus group data. Herd size was identified in both the qualitative and quantitative analysis as a factor determining submission. In the logistic regression model, herd size and increased levels of expansion were positively correlated with the odds of submission, whereas distance from the laboratory was negatively associated with odds of submission. These results identify the main factors influencing the use of diagnostic services for surveillance of animal health, signaling how services may be made more attractive by policy makers to a potentially wider cohort of users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]