In natural environments, cattle use trees and other abrasive surfaces to scratch and groom themselves. Modern indoor dairy cattle housing systems often lack appropriate grooming substrates, restricting the animals' ability to groom. We assessed the motivation of dairy cows to access an automated mechanical brush, a grooming resource that can be implemented in indoor cattle housing systems. Cows were trained to push a weighted gate to access either fresh feed (positive control), a mechanical brush or the same space without a brush (negative control). Weight on the gate was gradually increased until all cows failed to open it. The weight each cow was willing to push to access each resource was assessed using the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. Despite differences in methodology used to obtain data on motivation to access feed and the brush, the outcomes were very similar; cows worked as hard for access to fresh feed and the brush (p = 0.94) and less hard for access to the empty space (compared with fresh feed: p < 0.01; brush: p < 0.02). These results indicate that cows are highly motivated to access a mechanical brush and that it is an important resource for cows.

Pasture access for dairy cows is highly valued both by cows and the public at large. When pasture access is not feasible, farmers can provide cows with alternative forms of outdoor access, such as an outdoor bedded pack, that may be easier to implement on some farms. We reviewed the literature on how lying, standing, walking, feeding, social, and estrus behaviors are influenced by pasture and other types of outdoor areas. Pasture allows the expression of grazing and can facilitate the expression of lying, standing, walking, and estrus behaviors. In addition, pasture can decrease the number of negative social interactions between cows, likely because more space per cow is provided than what is normally available indoors. The provision of soft flooring and an open space in outdoor bedded packs appears to provide some benefits for lying, standing, and walking behavior and may also have positive effects on social behavior, especially with larger space allowances. The effects of an outdoor bedded pack on estrus behavior are less well-documented, but the provision of a standing surface that provides better footing than typically available indoors may promote estrus behavior. Alternative outdoor areas assessed to date appear to be less attractive for cows than pasture, perhaps because these areas do not provide the opportunity to graze. We encourage future research to investigate the importance of grazing for dairy cows. The motivation of dairy cows to access alternative outdoor areas should also be investigated. As cow preference for the outdoors depends on many factors, providing cows a choice may be of particular importance.

Dairy cows display a partial preference for being outside, but little is known about what aspects of the outdoor environment are important to cows. The primary aim of this study was to test the preference of lactating dairy cattle for pasture versus an outdoor sand pack during the night. A secondary aim was to determine whether feeding and perching behavior changed when cows were provided outdoor access. A third objective was to investigate how the lying behavior of cows changed when given access to different outdoor areas. Ninety-six lactating pregnant cows were assigned to 8 groups of 12 animals each. After a baseline phase of 2 d in which cows were kept inside the freestall barn, cows were habituated to the outdoor areas by providing them access to each of the 2 options for 24 h. Cows were then given access, in random order by group, to either the pasture (pasture phase) or the sand pack (sand phase). As we tested the 2 outdoor options using space allowances consistent with what would be practical on commercial dairy farms, the space provided on pasture was larger (21,000 m) than that provided on the sand pack (144 m). Cows were tested at night (for 2 nights in each condition), from 2000 h until morning milking at approximately 0800 h, as preference to be outdoors is strongest at this time. During the next 3 nights cows were given access to both outside options simultaneously (choice phase). Feeding and perching behaviors were recorded when cows were indoors during the day and night periods. Lying behavior was automatically recorded by HOBO data loggers (Onset, Bourne, MA). Cows spent more time outside in the pasture phase (90.0 ± 5.9%) compared with the sand phase (44.4 ± 6.3%). When provided simultaneous access to both options, cows spent more time on pasture than on the sand pack (90.5 ± 2.6% vs. 0.8 ± 0.5%, respectively). Time spent feeding indoors during the day did not change regardless of what type of outdoor access was provided, but there was a decline in perching during the day when cows were provided access to either outdoor option at night. Lying time in the pasture phase was lower than in the baseline or sand phase. During the nighttime, lying time outside was not different between the sand (55.4 ± 7.9%) and pasture (52.0 ± 7.4%) phases. In summary, cows spent a considerable amount of time outside during the night when given the opportunity and showed a preference for a large pasture versus a small sand pack as an outdoor area.

The aim of our study was to test the preference of freestall-housed dairy cows to access an outdoor deepbedded open pack (versus remaining inside the freestall barn) in the summer and winter. A secondary aim was to investigate how preference for outdoor access influenced feeding, lying, and stall perching behavior. Eight groups of pregnant, lactating cows were tested in the summer and 9 groups in the winter. During both experiments, groups were allowed to stabilize for 5 d, followed by 2 d of baseline observations (baseline phase). Habituation to the outdoor pack took place for the next 2 d. Cows were then provided free access to the outdoor pack continuously for 5 d (choice phase). During the choice phase, in addition to feeding and perching behavior (recorded while cows were inside the barn), cow location (i.e., in the freestall pen or on the outdoor pack) was also noted. We used HOBO data loggers (Onset Computer Corp., Bourne, MA) to automatically record lying behavior during baseline and choice phases. Cows spent (mean ± standard error; minimum to maximum in parentheses) 25.3 ± 4.3% (8.0 to 44.5%) of their time outside in the summer and 1.8 ± 0.6% (0.1 to 4.1%) in the winter. In the summer, cows spent more time on the outdoor pack during night (50.0 ± 8.4% between 2000 and 0600 h) than during the day (3.3 ± 1.3% between 0600 and 2000 h). In the winter, we found no effect of time of day on time spent outside (day = 1.7 ± 0.7%; night = 2.1 ± 1.0%). Precipitation decreased the time cows spent outside during summer nights. During winter days, precipitation and increasing wind speeds decreased the time cows spent outside. In the summer, time spent feeding was higher during the baseline phase (18.7 ± 0.3%) than during the choice phase (17.4 ± 0.3%). During the winter, no difference in feeding time was found between the 2 phases (baseline = 18.7 ± 0.3%; choice = 18.4 ± 0.3%). During the summer, cows spent more time perching during the baseline phase (6.5 ± 0.5%) than during the choice phase (3.6 ± 0.5%) and this tended to be true during the winter (baseline = 5.5 ± 0.7%; choice = 4.5 ± 0.7%). Daily lying time did not differ between the baseline and choice phases in either the summer (baseline = 59.6 ± 0.9%; choice = 57.7 ± 0.9%) or winter (baseline = 63.0 ± 1.2%; choice = 62.6 ± 1.2%). When on the outdoor pack, cows spent 53.7% (±5.6) of the time lying during the summer and 4.7% (±2.5) during the winter. In conclusion, during the summer, cows displayed a partial preference to be outside on a deep-bedded open pack when given the opportunity, especially during the night, but in the winter, cows spent little time on the outdoor pack.

Dairy cows are highly motivated to access pasture, especially at night in summer. When pasture is not available, dairy cows show a partial preference for alternative types of outdoor access, spending half the night outside in summer on an outdoor sand or wood chip pack. However, many dairy farms do not provide cows outside access. To better understand reasons why dairy farmers choose to provide or not provide outdoor access, we studied the perspectives of dairy farmers located in the 4 Western Canadian provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Data were collected via (1) 11 focus group discussions with a total of 50 Western Canadian dairy farmers, and (2) semi-structured individual interviews with 6 dairy farmers of Hutterite colonies. Transcripts were analyzed using template analysis. Reasons to not provide outdoor access fell into 5 main themes: (1) adverse climate conditions, (2) negative implications of outdoor access for cow welfare including concerns about udder health, (3) concerns regarding decreases in profitability, (4) farm infrastructure not set up for outdoor access, and (5) higher ability to manage animals kept indoors. Reasons to provide outdoor access fell into the 5 main themes: (1) local climate conditions conducive for outdoor access, (2) beneficial effects of outdoor access on cow welfare including lower lameness prevalence, (3) increased profitability due to a premium milk price provided to farmers that allow pasture access to their cows, (4) farm infrastructure that is set up for outdoor access, and (5) easier management of animals outdoors. We conclude that the decision to provide outdoor access depends on how farmers weigh these factors given the constraints on their farm, as well as their personal beliefs and values.