Page 18 - The Welfare of Cattle

IntroduCtIon to the WhIte PaPers xvii

Of that 29%, about 36% is used for agriculture, 30% are in forests, and 3% in urban use. The
remaining 31% is represents various landscapes including mountains, permanent snow, rivers,
lakes, and reservoirs that are not considered suitable for food production. Most of agriculture’s 36%
of land are already in productive use so increased production of food will require more intensive
production systems.
There is insufficient land to move the current meat, by-product, milk, and egg production
operations from intensive to extensive systems. Accepting the current published stocking density
standards: Wisconsin would require about 60% of all the land in the state to house their current
inventory of dairy cattle; Iowa would require 20 times all of the land in the state to house their swine
population; and Georgia would require 477 times all of the land in the state to house their boiler
chicken population.

Cattle Ectoparasites in Extensive and Intensive Cattle Systems

Alec C. Gerry, PhD
College of Natural and Agricultural Sciences
University of California, Riverside, CA

Professor Gerry is an entomologist and Cooperate Extension Specialist who focuses on arthro-
pods and disease vectors that impact the growth or productivity of animals. A portion of his work
is to understand the impacts on human populations working on farms or living adjacent to farming
areas. His focus is on integrated pest management approaches to control these pests.
As the world becomes more populated, there are more and more people living in proximity
to animal production operations and they are often concerned about insect pests that impact their
neighborhoods. Concern also exists about the role intensive production systems have on ectopara-
sites (flies, mites, ticks, grubs mosquitoes) as compared to extensive systems.
The seasonal timing of peak ectoparasite activity is predictable by temperature and rainfall
during the preceding months, but the abundance of ectoparasites and the severity of their impact
depend on the operational characteristics of the facility.
The differences between extensive and intensive systems are primarily: (a) presence or
absence of pasture; (b) sharing habitat with wildlife; (c) density of cattle in the pen or on the
pasture; (d) storage of cattle feed and supplemental rations on site; (f) collection and storage of
manure on site; and (g) ease of implementing ectoparasite control including applying insecticides
to animals.
Neither extensive nor intensive production systems are the “best” for managing all ectoparasites.
The presence of ectoparasites in herds without a control program is dependent on the availability of
immature development habitat, survival of ectoparasites when off the host, and the opportunity for
ectoparasites to acquire a new host whenever needed for feeding.
The diversity of cattle ectoparasites will be greater in extensive production systems compared
to intensive systems. This includes the presence of most but not all ticks, horn and face flies. Stable
and house flies are expected to be more frequently associated with intensive systems unless cattle
on pasture are being supplemented or bedded with hay or other organic material. Lice, mites, and
grubs could all be common in either extensive or intensive systems. Aquatic habitats are common
in and around pasture operations and may be found around intensive operations with water “leaks”
creating areas of standing water. Aquatic habitats support the growth of midges, mosquitoes, horse,
deer, and black flies.
Intensive systems enjoy a higher level of human contact, ready facilities for handling cattle, and
more opportunities for early recognition and treatment and therefore should result in lower abun-
dance levels and lower impacts.