Dairy calves must be fed appropriately to meet their nutritional needs, supporting optimal growth and development to achieve the recommended target age at first calving (AFC) of 24 months. Traditional restricted milk feeding practices suppress growth, contribute to negative welfare states and may result in malnutrition and immunosuppression. Despite more recent recommendations to increase milk allowances for pre-weaned calves, restricted feeding remains a common practice. This study explored the rationales behind the calf feeding protocols used by dairy farmers in England. Forty qualitative interviews (26 farmers, 14 advisors) were conducted between May 2016 and June 2017, transcribed in full, then coded into themes. Results indicate that a variety of calf feeding regimes are used on farms, largely determined by farmers’ attitudes regarding ease of management and the wellbeing of calves. Advisors were concerned about widespread underfeeding of calves, which may be partially due to insufficiently clear recommendations for calf milk replacer (CMR) feeding rates. There was also evidence of uncertainty regarding best practices for weaning calves. Collaboration between academic research and industry is essential to establish a consensus on calf feeding standards which support physiological function, facilitate weaning, support growth targets and ensure calf health and welfare is protected.

Good colostrum management can confer protective immunity to newborn calves, making calves less susceptible to infectious disease, and fundamentally improving both their short- and long-term health, welfare and productivity. Industry recommendations commonly refer to 'The Three 'Q's' of colostrum management: the need for calves to receive sufficient 'Quantity' of high 'Quality' colostrum 'Quickly' after birth; some also include 'sQueaky clean' and 'Quantification of passive transfer'. However, research to date suggests that the failure of passive transfer of colostral antibodies is common on commercial dairy farms, contributing to sub-optimal calf health and mortality. This paper explores why this may be the case by investigating stakeholder perceptions of colostrum management and how these perceptions might affect the practice of ensuring adequate colostrum administration to newborn calves. Calf rearing and youngstock management practices on English dairy farms were investigated using 40 in-depth semi-structured interviews: 26 with dairy farmers and 14 with advisors (including veterinarians, feed and pharmaceutical company representatives). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and thematically coded for analysis. 'The Three 'Q's' were found to act as useful reminders about the goals of colostrum management, and a case can be made for further publicising the inclusion of 'sQueaky clean' and 'Quantification of passive transfer' as there remains a lack of focus on colostrum hygiene and measurement of successful antibody transfer. Knowledge of the 'Q's' did not guarantee implementation, and time and labour constraints alongside farmer misconceptions must be addressed when offering professional advice on improving calf health. Further research to encourage on-farm collection and analysis of monitoring data including rates of passive transfer is particularly needed. Advisors must not overlook the importance of colostrum management when assessing farm practices and ensure that they promote evidence-based recommendations if dairy calf morbidity and mortality is to be reduced.

21Farmers' recognition of health and welfare problems, and their responses to related intervention programmes 22 such as those to reduce injurious pecking (IP) in hens, directly influence the welfare of animals in their care. 23Changing those responses can be achieved through a re-positioning of social drivers as well as from individual 24 behaviour. This study begins by considering how certain levels of plumage damage become normalised while 25 others might be considered unacceptable. Drawing upon in-depth farmer interviews, the study investigates 26 how management practices for addressing the issue of IP are developed and enacted, looking at the relative 27 2 influence of intrinsic and extrinsic individual behavioural factors. Twelve farmers with varied uptake of 28 evidence-based management strategies designed to reduce levels of IP were interviewed. Although farmers 29 ranked images of flocks with various levels of plumage damage in a similar order to scientists, their 30 perception of levels of IP in their own flocks varied, and was not consistently associated with the actual levels 31 measured. Most farmers recognised both financial and welfare implications of IP and expressed pride in 32 having a good-looking flock. The popular management strategies were those designed to redirect pecking to 33 other objects, whereas a substantial barrier to uptake was the perception of creating other problems: for 34 example mislaid eggs if early access to litter and range were adopted. To achieve uptake of knowledge that 35 improves animal welfare on farm it may be necessary both to shift the norms perceived as acceptable, and to 36 overcome barriers to change that include lack of time and understanding, by providing impartial advice and 37 facilitation of ownership of the issues. 38 39

Replacement heifers are key to the future milking herd and farm economic efficiency but are not always prioritised on dairy farms. Dairy enterprises are comprised of components which compete for limited resources; scarce information about calf performance and the associated losses and (potential) gains on farms can mean calves are prioritised less in management and investment decisions. The research reported in this paper explored the personal and contextual factors that influence calf management decisions on dairy farms. Forty in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with dairy farmers (26 interviews) and farm advisors (14 interviews) who were recruited using purposive and “snowball” sampling. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed. Six major themes were constructed from the interview data relating to: the perceived importance of youngstock management, the role and influence of calf rearers, calf performance monitoring, farmer engagement with information and advice, the quality of communication and advice, and veterinary involvement in calf rearing. Results indicated that although the wider dairy industry has promoted the importance of youngstock, calves often have not been fully integrated into the whole dairy farm system, nor culturally accepted as an integral part of the productive herd. Calves tended to be marginalised on farms, largely due to limited resources, lack of data monitoring, and their unrecognised potential, as well as social norms and scarcity of support structures impacting upon farm investment and management decisions. Many calf rearers were disappointed by the repetition and impractical nature of information in print media. Most farmers did not routinely consult their veterinarian about their calves, rather following a reactive treatment model even when a preventive herd health strategy was applied to the adult herd. Advisory structures often require a driven individual with calf-centric interest to prevent calves from being overlooked. Furthermore, advisory efforts often failed to motivate farmers to act on advice. These findings indicate the need for greater focus on how to achieve rearing targets by provision of technical and support structures to foster action toward improved calf wellbeing, and for the status of calves to be raised in line with their vital importance for the future dairy herd.

Calf morbidity and mortality rates are often high in dairy herds, raising animal welfare concerns and negatively affecting farm economic efficiency and future performance. Disease prevention is critical to maintain calves in good health, but interventions are dependent upon the persons conducting them. This paper explores the perceptions of farmers, farm workers, veterinarians, and other advisors on the management of calfhood disease on dairy farms in England. Participants were recruited using purposive and “snowball” sampling, resulting in 40 in-depth, semi-structured interviews—26 with dairy farmers and 14 with advisors. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically coded. Three major themes were derived on the basis of interview data: disease occurrence and treatments, management of calf environment, and the role of stockmanship and perceived control. Respiratory and gastrointestinal diseases in calves were those reported to be most problematic on dairy farms. Limited time and financial resources caused some farmers and advisors to experience a perceived inability to control calf health without antimicrobial treatments. Overall, the findings emphasise the importance of human influences on calf health and disease in the context of influencing the interactions among the host, pathogens, and the environment. Further research should investigate what “attention to detail” means within different farm contexts and practices, as this was believed to be important in the promotion of better husbandry standards and health. We recommend the use of supportive knowledge exchange processes, including facilitation, to empower farmers to promote continuous improvement in calf health.