Search

The New Zealand dairy industry needs to meet public expectations regarding animal welfare in order to retain the freedom to operate and achieve market success. Three key orientations towards animal welfare assessment have been identified, namely biological functioning, affective state and natural living, the last two of which are more recent foci for societal concern. Biological functioning was the first and most-studied aspect of animal welfare and continues to be important, but now the contribution of affective state to animal well-being is emphasised much more. Natural living, or naturalness, has received relatively less attention from animal welfare science. It is proposed that increasing the use of naturalness as a contextual reference point for considering species-specific behavioural expressions of affective state will enhance its inclusion in animal welfare assessment. Nevertheless, all three orientations need to be considered in order to evaluate the significance of welfare research findings. On this basis, five key aspects of the New Zealand dairy industry that have been the subject of recent research, due to the risk of them not meeting public expectations, are highlighted and discussed. The aspects are provision of shade and shelter, meeting targets for body condition, provision of comfortable surfaces for rearing calves, and for adult cows while off pasture, and pain relief for disbudding of calves. Research evidence indicates that the industry guidelines on body condition score, if met, would satisfy public expectations across the three orientations to animal welfare, whereas further work is needed on the other aspects. It is concluded that considering these three orientations to animal welfare when planning research and then evaluating the outcomes will help to promote the market success of the dairy industry in New Zealand.

Dairy cattle managed in some pasture-based systems such as in New Zealand are predominantly kept outdoors all year around, but are often taken off pasture for periods of time in wet weather to avoid soil damage. It is common to keep cattle on concrete surfaces during such "stand-off" practices and we investigated whether the addition of rubber matting onto concrete areas improves the welfare of dairy cattle. Sixteen groups of 5 cows (4 groups/treatment, 5 cows/group) were allocated to 1 of 4 treatments (concrete, 12-mm-thick rubber mat, 24-mm-thick rubber mat, or deep-bedded wood chips) and kept on these surfaces for 18 h/24h for 4 consecutive days (6h on pasture/24h). Each 4-d stand-off period was repeated 4 times (with 7 d of recovery between periods) to study the accumulated effects of repeated stand-off. Lying behavior was recorded continuously during the experiment. Gait score, stride length, hygiene score, live weight, and blood samples for cortisol analysis were recorded immediately before and after each stand-off period. Cows on wood chips spent the most time lying, and cows on concrete spent the least time lying compared with those on other surfaces [wood chips: 10.8h, 24-mm rubber mat: 7.3h, 12-mm rubber mat: 6.0 h, and concrete: 2.8h/18 h, standard error of the difference (SED): 0.71 h]. Cows on concrete spent more time lying during the 6h on pasture, likely compensating for the reduced lying during the stand-off period. Similarly, cows on concrete spent more time lying on pasture between stand-off periods (concrete: 12.1h, 12-mm rubber mat: 11.1h, 24-mm rubber mat: 11.2h, and wood chips: 10.7h/24h, SED: 0.28 h). Cows on concrete had higher gait score and shorter stride length after the 4-d stand-off period compared with cows on the other surface types, suggesting a change in gait pattern caused by discomfort. Cows on rubber mats were almost 3 times dirtier than cows on concrete or wood chips. Cortisol and live weight decreased for all treatment groups during the stand-off period. We observed no major effect of the repeated stand-off exposure. In summary, adding rubber matting onto concrete surfaces for stand-off purposes is beneficial for animal welfare. A well-managed wood chip surface offered the best welfare for dairy cows removed from pasture, and the findings of this study confirm that a concrete surface decreases the welfare of cows removed from pasture., (Copyright © 2014 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Body condition score (BCS) around calving, and the typical BCS loss for up to 100 d after parturition, is associated with both production and reproductive performance of dairy cattle. In addition, there is public concern that thin cows may have impaired welfare, particularly in early lactation where feed demand exceeds pasture growth, and a lag exists between peak milk energy requirements and intake. The aim of this experiment was to determine how BCS at calving influences behavioral and physiological responses to a short-term feed restriction at 47 DIM. Body condition score (on a 10-point scale) at calving was manipulated by modifying the diets in the previous lactation of healthy dairy cattle to generate 3 treatment groups: low BCS (3.4; n = 17), medium BCS (4.6; n = 18), or high BCS (5.4; n = 20). Cows were tested in 4 groups for 8 consecutive days; testing consisted of different levels of feed allocation (d 1 and 2: 100%; d 3 and 4: 75%; d 5: 50%; d 6 to 8: 125%), where 100% was 15 kg of DM/cow per day. All BCS groups had similar and marked behavioral and physiological responses to feed restriction. For example, they increased vocalization, time spent eating silage and grazing, aggressive behavior, and fat metabolism (as measured by concentrations of β--hydroxybutyrate and nonesterified fatty acids), and reduced milk production. Body condition affected some of these responses. Fewer cows with low BCS engaged in aggressive interactions in a feed competition test (trough filled with silage that could be consumed in 15 min) on the first day of feed restriction (low: 32%; medium: 74%; high: 64%; standard error of difference = 15.4%). High BCS cows had greater concentrations of β--hydroxybutyrate and nonesterified fatty acids throughout the experimental period, which suggests more fat mobilization; however, plasma leptin and fecal glucocorticosteroid metabolite concentrations were unaffected by BCS. Whereas cows demonstrated marked responses to feed restriction, the results suggest that a BCS of 3.4, 4.6, or 5.4 in healthy cows at calving does not overwhelmingly influence this response at 47 DIM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The nature of human–animal interactions is an important factor contributing to animal welfare and productivity. Reducing stress during routine husbandry procedures is likely to improve animal welfare. We examined how the type of early handling of calves affected responses to two common husbandry procedures, ear-tagging and disbudding. Forty Holstein–Friesian calves (n = 20/treatment) were exposed to one of two handling treatments daily from 1 to 5 weeks of age: (1) positive (n = 20), involving gentle handling (soft voices, slow movements, patting), and (2) negative (n = 20), involving rough handling (rough voices, rapid movements, pushing). Heart rate (HR), respiration rate (RR) and behaviour (activity, tail flicking) were measured before and after ear-tagging and disbudding (2 days apart). Cortisol was measured at −20 (baseline), 20 and 40 min relative to disbudding time. There were no significant treatment differences in HR, RR or behaviour in response to either procedure. However, the following changes occurred across both treatment groups. HR increased after disbudding (by 14.7 ± 4.0 and 18.6 ± 3.8 bpm, positive and negative, respectively; mean ± s.e.m.) and ear-tagging (by 8.7 ± 3.1 and 10.3 ± 3.0 bpm, positive and negative, respectively). After disbudding, there was an increase in RR (by 8.2 ± 3.4 and 9.3 ± 3.4 breaths/min, positive and negative, respectively), overall activity (by 9.4 ± 1.2 and 9.9 ± 1.3 frequency/min, positive and negative, respectively) and tail flicking (by 13.2 ± 2.8 and 11.2 ± 3.0 frequency/min, positive and negative, respectively), and cortisol increased from baseline at 20 min post procedure (by 10.3 ± 1.1 and 12.3 ± 1.1 nmol/l positive and negative, respectively). Although we recorded significant changes in calf responses during ear-tagging and disbudding, the type of prior handling had no effect on responses. The effects of handling may have been overridden by the degree of pain and/or stress associated with the procedures. Further research is warranted to understand the welfare impact and interaction between previous handling and responses to husbandry procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]