Housing System, Milk Production, and Zero-Grazing Effects on Lameness and Leg Injury in Dairy Cows

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of grazing (G) vs. zero-grazing (ZG), level of milk production, and quality and type of housing system [free stalls (FS) and straw yards (SY)] on the prevalence of lameness and leg injuries in dairy cows. Observations were made on 37 commercial dairy farms across Great Britain. A single visit of 5 d duration was made to each farm. During this visit, lameness scores and the incidence of swellings, rubs, and injuries to hocks and knees were recorded on all the peak- or mid-lactation cows. Aspects of the quality of housing and management that were likely to affect foot and leg health were recorded. There were more lame cows on ZG farms (39 +/- 0.02%) than on grazing (G) farms (15 +/- 0.01%), and lameness scores were higher on FS farms compared with SY farms (0.25 +/- 0.01 vs. 0.05 +/- 0.01). Cows on SY farms had fewer hock and knee injuries compared with FS farms. The frequency of knee swellings was higher on ZG farms (0.31 +/- 0.02) than on G farms (0.15 +/- 0.01). Aspects of the free-stall design affected foot and leg health. The number of hock swellings increased with increasing stall gradient (0.16 +/- 0.01 with no slope vs. 0.39 +/- 0.02 at a 0 to 1.5% slope). There was an interaction between the length of the free-stall lunging space and the hip width of the cow, indicating that the incidence of lameness is generally highest on farms with small free stalls and heavy cows. High levels of milk production did not affect lameness or leg injury. The results indicate that housing cows throughout the year potentially has a detrimental effect on foot and leg health. However, good free-stall design may reduce lameness and leg lesions.

The Effect of the Housing System on the Welfare Quality of Dairy Cows

“…In Romania data are available only for the lameness prevalence in tie-stall housing and it is similar with that obtained in this study (Popescu et al, 2010b). The increase in lameness prevalence is associated with solid concrete flooring, slippery walking alleys (Cook and Nordlund, 2009), uncomfortable and dirty barns (Cook, 2002(Cook, , 2003Espejo et al, 2006;Chapinal et al, 2013), increased degree of dirtiness in cows' hind legs (Cook, 2002;Zurbrigg et al, 2005) and zero-grazing (Haskell et al, 2006). Because in our study the mean prevalence of lameness exceeds 15%, we can state, referring to Nordlund et al (2004) that the implementation of specific measures is urgently needed to decrease lameness in 67% of the evaluated farms.…”

“…For this criterion high scores were awarded, in both housing systems, only to the farms where the cows have access to pasture (6 farms with LHS and 13 with THS). The access of dairy cows to pasture and generally to outside exercise prevents and reduces the incidence of lameness (Haskell et al, 2006), increases the resistance of their immune system, stimulates the reproductive function and improves the behavioural parameters in the sense of displaying natural behaviours (Krohn, 1994). The obviously positive mental state expressed through body language observed frequently in healthy cows on a qualitatively and quantitatively sufficient pasture can rarely be seen in stabled conditions, regardless of how adequate the housing conditions and the equipments are (Phillips, 1993).…”

Profile and genetic parameters of dairy cattle locomotion score and lameness across lactation

“…Together with reproductive failure and mastitis, lameness is one of the most common causes of cow culling (United States Department of Agriculture, 2007). Reported incidence and prevalence range from 23.7% to 54.6% and 15.0% to 62.0%, respectively (Whitaker et al, 2000;Haskell et al, 2006;Archer et al, 2010). In the Netherlands, the cost per case has been estimated to range from €48 to 886, including treatment associated expenses, milk yield loss and discarded milk, increased calving intervals and culling (Noordhuizen, 2012).…”

“…These are generally considered credible descriptors of lameness severity; when one such system was tested, it was found to be well correlated with foot lesions (Bicalho et al, 2007a). Locomotion scoring is a widespread management practice, providing useful epidemiological data, both for monitoring and confronting the problem (Haskell et al, 2006). However, a pattern of lameness dynamics before first calving and during a complete lactation is lacking as published research has mainly focused on the first stage of lactation, trying: (a) to identify correlations with milk production and reproductive performance or (b) to ascertain the influence of putative risk factors.…”

Register-based predictors of violations of animal welfare legislation in dairy herds

“…Results might have been different, if the outcome definition had been based upon animal-based measures instead. Previous risk factor studies have only investigated single components of animal welfare like animal-based measures, for example, lameness prevalence (Alban et al, 1996;Green et al, 2002;Haskell et al, 2006;Dippel et al, 2009), hock lesions (Rutherford et al, 2008;Kielland et al, 2009) or mortality (Thomsen et al, 2004;Alvåsen et al, 2012). Although other studies have evaluated register data performance in predicting herd animal welfare, there have been major differences in the case definition of animal welfare.…”