Page 356 - The Welfare of Cattle
P. 356

CoW CoMfort daIrY housInG sYsteMs                                           333


               Many of the welfare challenges we have discussed involve facility design issues that cannot be
            easily addressed by later changes in management. Future efforts should encourage greater collabo-
            ration between those designing, constructing, and renovating dairy facilities, and animal scientists
            versed in the relevant scientific literature. Injecting science-based information about the needs of
            the cows early on in the planning process may help prevent animal welfare issues before they occur
            and in doing so help avoid the costs associated with expensive housing modifications.
               We believe science can and should continue to play a central role in providing valuable infor-
            mation about the impact different housing features have on animal welfare. However, the science
            of cow comfort should be accompanied by a much greater appreciation of farms as complex, inter-
            dependent systems. Failure to recognize this could result in science-based recommendations that
            improve one dimension of cow comfort (e.g., lameness) at the expense of another (e.g., mastitis).
            The challenges posed by considering these potential trade-offs are even more formidable when we
            recognize they extend far beyond animal welfare concerns. Farmers are in the unenviable posi-
            tion of having to constantly balance animal welfare concerns with other, equally urgent concerns
            revolving around milk quality and safety, environmental stewardship, worker well-being and profit-
            ability. More holistic research approaches that better reflect the interconnectedness of the farm as a
            dynamic system will be needed if we are to foster genuinely sustainable solutions to the challenges
            facing the dairy industry.



                                             reFereNCeS

            Anderson, S.D., B.J. Bradford, J.P. Harper, C.B. Tucker, C.Y. Choi, J.D. Allen, L.W. Hall, S. Rungruang,
                R.J.  Collier and  J.F.  Smith.  2013.  Effects of adjustable and stationary fans with misters on core
                body   temperature and lying behavior of lactating dairy cows in a semiarid climate.  J. Dairy Sci.
                96:4748–4750.
            Arnott, G., C.P. Ferris and N.E. O’Connell. 2017. Review: Welfare of dairy cows in continuously housed and
                pasture-based production systems. Animal. 11:261–273.
            Bach, A., N. Valls, A. Solans and T. Torrent. 2008. Associations between nondietary factors and dairy herd
                performance. J. Dairy Sci. 91:3259–3267.
            Bar, D., L.W. Tauer, G. Bennett, R.N. González, J.A. Hertl, Y.H. Schukkne, H.F. Schulte, F.L. Welcome and
                Y.T. Gröhn. 2008. The cost of generic clinical mastitis in dairy cows as estimated by using dynamic
                programming. J. Dairy Sci. 91:2205–2214.
            Barkema, H.W., Y.H. Schukken, T.J.G.M. Lam, M.L. Beiboer, G. Benedictus and A. Brand. 1999. Management
                practices associated with the incidence rate of clinical mastitis. J. Dairy Sci. 82:1643–1654.
            Barkema,  H.W.,  Y.H.  Schukken and  R.N.  Zadoks.  2006.  Invited review: The role of cow, pathogen, and
                treatment regimen in the therapeutic success of bovine Staphylococcus aureus mastitis. J. Dairy Sci.
                89:1877–1895.
            Barkema, H.W., M.A.G. von Keyserlingk, J.P. Kastelic, T.J.G.M. Lam, C. Luby, J.P. Roy, S.J. LeBlanc, G.P.
                Keefe and D.F. Kelton. 2015. Invited review: Changes in the dairy industry affecting dairy cattle health
                and welfare. J. Dairy Sci. 98:7426–7445.
            Bernardi,  F.,  J.  Fregonesi,  C.  Winckler,  D.M.  Veira,  M.A.  von  Keyserlingk  and  D.M.  Weary.  2009.  The
                stall-design paradox: Neck rails increase lameness but improve udder and stall hygiene. J. Dairy Sci.
                92:3074–3080.
            Barrientos, A.K., N. Chapinal, D.M. Weary, E. Galo and M.A.G von Keyserlingk. 2013. Herd-level risk fac-
                tors for hock injuries in freestall-housed dairy cows in the northeastern United States and California.
                J. Dairy Sci. 96:3758–3765.
            Bewley, J., R.W. Palmer and D.B Jackson-Smith. 2001. A comparison of free-stall barns used by modernized
                Wisconsin dairies. J. Dairy Sci. 84:528–541.
            Bouffard, V., A.M. de Passillé, J. Rushen, E. Vasseur, C.G.R. Nash, D.B. Haley, and D. Pellerin. 2017. Effect
                of following recommendations for tiestall configuration on neck and leg lesions, lameness, cleanliness,
                and lying time in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 100:2935–2943.
   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   359   360   361