There is growing interest among the public in farm animal welfare and a need for methods to assess animal welfare on farm. A survey on calf rearing practices that might affect dairy calf welfare was performed via a 1-h interview on 115 dairy farms (mean +/- SD: herd size=52.5+/-20.9 cows; milk production=8,697+/-1,153L) distributed throughout the province of Quebec. Despite frequent recommendations, many dairy producers continue to use management practices that increase the health risks of milk-fed calves. Major risk factors for poor calf welfare identified were 1) no use of calving pen in 51.3% of herds and low level of surveillance of calvings, especially at nighttime (once every 12h), 2) no disinfection of newborn's navel in 36.8% of herds, and delayed identification and, hence, calf monitoring (3 d), 3) 15.6% of farms relied on the dam to provide colostrum and none checked colostrum quality or passive transfer of immunity, 4) dehorning and removal of extra teats proceeded at late ages (6.4 wk and 6.7 mo, respectively) and without adequate pain control, 5) use of traditional restrictive milk feeding and waste milk distributed to unweaned calves without precaution in 48.2% of herds, 6) abrupt weaning performed in 16.5% of herds, and 7) calves housed individually in 87.9% of herds, and most inappropriate housing systems (crate=27.0%, tie-stall=13.9%, attached against a wall=5.7%) remained. This risk factor assessment was the first step in an intervention strategy to improve calf welfare on dairy farms.

Concerns about the welfare of animals typically include 3 questions: is the animal functioning well (e.g., good health, productivity, etc.), is the animal feeling well (e.g., absence of pain, etc.), and is the animal able to live according to its nature (e.g., perform natural behaviors that are thought to be important to it, such as grazing)? We review examples, primarily from our own research, showing how all 3 questions can be addressed using science. For example, we review work showing 1) how common diseases such as lameness can be better identified and prevented through improvements in the ways cows are housed and managed, 2) how pain caused by dehorning of dairy calves can be reduced, and 3) how environmental conditions affect cow preferences for indoor housing versus pasture. Disagreements about animal welfare can occur when different measures are used. For example, management systems that favor production may restrict natural behavior or can even lead to higher rates of disease. The best approaches are those that address all 3 types of concerns, for example, feeding systems for calves that allow expression of key behaviors (i.e., sucking on a teat), that avoid negative affect (i.e., hunger), and that allow for improved functioning (i.e., higher rates of body weight gain, and ultimately higher milk production).

Lameness is a severe welfare problem and a production-limiting disease in dairy farming. The objectives of this study were to determine prevalence of lameness and investigate cow- and herd-level factors associated with lameness in dairy cows housed in freestall barns in 3 Canadian provinces. A purposive sample of 40 Holstein-Friesian cows was selected from each of 141 dairy farms in Québec, Ontario, and Alberta. In total, 5,637 cows were scored once for lameness (presence of limping when walking). Data collected included information on individual cows (hock lesions, claw length, body condition score, parity, days in milk, and milk production), management practices (floor and stall cleaning routine, bedding routine, and footbath practices), and facility design (stall dimensions, stall base and bedding type, width of feed alley, flooring type, and slipperiness) hypothesized to be risk factors for lameness. Multilevel mixed logistic regression models were constructed (including farm as a random effect and province as a fixed effect). Herd-level lameness prevalence ranged from 0 to 69% (mean = 21%). Lameness prevalence increased with increasing parity; compared with first parity, cows in parity 2, 3, and ≥ 4 had 1.6, 3.3, and 4 times, respectively, higher odds of being lame. Furthermore, the odds of lameness were 1.6 times greater in cows with low body condition score (≤ 2.5) than in cows with a higher body condition score. In addition, injured hocks and overgrown claws were associated with 1.4- and 1.7-fold increased odds of being lame, respectively, whereas every 1 kg increase in daily milk production was associated with a 3% decrease in the odds of being lame. Lameness prevalence was higher in herds with ≤ 100 cows, but lower in barns with a sand or dirt stall base, or with bedding ≥ 2 cm deep. Cows exposed to very slippery floors had 2 times the odds of being lame compared with cows exposed to nonslippery floors. We attributed the wide range of lameness prevalence to the great variability in facilities and management practices among farms. Finally, we inferred that the prevalence of lameness could be decreased by improving management of multiparous, thin, or injured cows and by adopting management practices intended to improve cow comfort, namely the floor's slip resistance and the stall's lying surface.

The objective was to determine whether changes in the different components of gait, walking speed, and lying behavior were associated with hoof pathologies in lactating Holstein cows. In experiment 1, 53 cows had their gait scored, their walking speed estimated, and their lying behavior monitored before clinical assessment of the hooves. Multiparous cows with ulcers scored higher than cows without ulcers for overall gait score [numerical rating score (NRS); 3.3 +/- 0.2 vs. 2.8 +/- 0.2], back arch, joint flexion, asymmetric steps, and reluctance to bear weight. Although cows with ulcers did not walk more slowly than cows without ulcers (1.4 m/s), they spent more time lying down (827.8 +/- 29.1 vs. 738.2 +/- 15.5 min/d) because of longer lying bouts (93.3 +/- 5.9 vs. 79.7 +/- 3.4 min). In experiment 2, 47 cows were monitored for hoof health and changes in gait score from 4 wk before to 24 wk after calving. Differences were found after calving between cows that developed an ulcer and cows that did not for NRS (3.1 +/- 0.1 vs. 2.35 +/- 0.1), back arch, joint flexion, asymmetric steps, and reluctance to bear weight. Numerical rating score, back arch, and asymmetric steps were able to discriminate cows with ulcers at least 4 wk before the diagnosis. Cows that developed a sole ulcer had a faster decline in lying time during the periparturient period and a faster increase beginning in wk 2 after calving. The NRS was a more consistent predictor of sole ulcers than lying behavior or speed. The NRS was able to discriminate cows with ulcers across studies at a high intraobserver accuracy and reasonable specificity and was able to predict the presence of ulcers at least 4 wk before diagnosis. Abduction/adduction of the rear legs, head bob, and tracking-up did not consistently discriminate cows with ulcers, and we suggest that these measures are less useful for on farm gait assessment. Compared with the other gait attributes, back arch, joint flexion, asymmetric steps, and reluctance to bear weight best predicted the presence of sole ulcers.

When calves are weaned abruptly off large amounts of milk, weight gain is reduced as a result of low intake of starter. We compared gradual and abrupt weaning of 40 calves allowed to drink up to 12kg of milk/d by automated feeders, housed in groups of 4, and weaned at 41 d abruptly or over 3 gradual weaning periods (4, 10, or 22 d), with one calf within each group randomly allocated to each treatment, balancing for sex and birth weight. During the milk-feeding period, the calves weaned over 22 d drank the least milk and ate the most starter, but these calves had the lowest total digestible energy intake and weight gains. The abruptly weaned calves had the highest digestible energy intakes and weight gains during the period before weaning. During the 9 d following weaning, the calves weaned over 22 and 10 d ate more starter and had better weight gains than abruptly weaned calves and those weaned over 4 d. Abruptly weaned calves lost weight during this period. In summary, gradual weaning improved starter intake, but because of reduced milk availability, this resulted in reduced total digestible energy intake before weaning. Weaning over 10 d resulted in the best overall weight gains over the study.