In this research communication we describe the performance of dairy cow−calf pairs in two cow-driven CCC-systems differing in cows' access to the calves through computer-controlled access gates (smart gates, SG). We investigated cows' machine milk yield in the automatic milking system (AMS), calf growth, and intake of supplemental milk and concentrate. Two groups each with four cow-calf pairs were housed in a system with a cow area, a calf creep and a meeting area. SG's controlled cow traffic between the meeting area and the cow area where cows could obtain feed, cubicles and the AMS. Calves had ad libitum access to supplemental milk and concentrate. During the suckling phase of 31 d, cow access to the meeting area was free 24 h/d (group 1) or restricted (group 2) based on milking permission. Following the suckling phase, cow access was gradually decreased over 9 d (separation phase). During the suckling phase, cows' machine milk yield (mean ± sd) in the AMS was 11.4 ± 6.38 kg/d. In the separation phase, the yield increased to 25.0 ± 10.37 kg/d. Calf average daily gain (ADG) was high during the suckling phase: 1.2 ± 0.74 kg. During the separation phase, ADG decreased to 0.4 ± 0.72 kg which may be related to a low intake of supplemental milk. Calves' concentrate intake increased with age, and all calves consumed >1 kg/d after separation. We conclude that cows nurse the calf in a cow-directed CCC system well resulting in high ADG, and AMS milk yields were, at least, partially maintained during the suckling phase. Although the AMS yields increased in response to separation, calf ADG was decreased. A low sample size limits interpretation beyond description but provides a basis for hypotheses regarding future research into CCC-systems.

Research is needed on how technology can facilitate cow−calf contact (CCC). This research communication describes the behaviour of dairy cow−calf pairs in two cow-driven CCC-systems differing in cows' access to the calves through computer-controlled access gates (smart gates, SG). Specifically, cow traffic through SG when visiting their calves, allogrooming, suckling and cross-suckling, cows' eating and resting behaviour and finally vocal response to separation were assessed. After 3 d in an individual calving pen, pairs (n = 8) were moved to the CCC compartment with a cow area, a calf creep and a meeting area. During the next 31 d calves could suckle the cows whenever they visited the meeting area (suckling phase). Cows had free (group 1, n = 4 pairs) or restricted access to the calves based on previous activity in the automatic milking system (group 2, n = 4 pairs). SG's controlled cow traffic between the meeting area and the cow area, in which the cows could access resources such as feed, cubicles, and the automatic milking system. Following the suckling phase cow access into the meeting area was gradually decreased over 9 d (separation phase). During the suckling phase, cows paid frequent and short visits to their calves. Pairs spent in total approximately one h/d suckling and allogrooming. However, the duration and frequencies of these events varied among pairs and groups, as did the vocal response to separation. Restricted access − cows performed more (unrewarded) attempts to visit the calves who cross-suckled more. Collectively, free access to the calves may have been more intuitive and welfare friendly. Although a low sample size limits interpretation beyond description and enabling hypothesis formulation for future research, the results indicate that the cow is motivated to visit her calf, albeit through a SG, thus facilitating particular behaviours for which cow-calf pairs are highly motivated.

IntroductionKnowing the national status of animal welfare, one can identify welfare problems and set a benchmark against which improvements can be compared. Such a status is potentially invaluable for tangible, sustained animal welfare improvement. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to report the status of animal welfare in Norwegian loose-housed dairy herds as assessed using the Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol. Additionally, we investigated if the welfare status varied on a regional basis.MethodsIn total, 155 herds in eight of Norway's eleven counties were assessed by six trained Welfare Quality® assessors. This article presents the herd prevalences of common welfare issues in dairy production in Norway, as well as integrated welfare scores. To determine whether welfare status varied regionally in Norway, generalized linear modeling was used to estimate the mean welfare score for five regions in the four Welfare Quality® principles: A. Good feeding, B. Good housing, C. Good health, and D. Appropriate behavior. These estimated mean welfare scores and their 95% confidence intervals were subsequently assessed for significant variation.ResultsEncouraging findings included the low mean herd prevalence of ‘very lean' cows (3.0%) and the high proportion of cows (59.8%) which could be touched during avoidance distance testing, indicating a positive relationship between stockpeople and their cattle. Challenges affecting the welfare of Norwegian dairy cows were also identified. Of particular concern were issues related to the cows' environment such as prolonged times needed to complete lying down movements and integument alterations. No herd was completely free of changes to the integument and, on average, 77.9% of each herd were affected either mildly or severely. Animal welfare did not appear to vary much between the five regions assessed. Our investigation revealed significant regional variation between two regions (Trøndelag and Vestlandet North) in only the Welfare Quality® principle Good housing (p < 0.01).DiscussionThe almost complete absence of regional variation demonstrates that animal welfare status generally varies most at herd level. In conclusion, both welfare challenges and encouraging findings were identified in loose-housed Norwegian dairy herds. To improve animal welfare, herd-specific interventions are most likely to be effective in these herds.

Feeding big round-bales in round-bale feeders are known to reduce labor and costs. However, one disadvantage is the high feed wastage. The aim of these experiments was therefore to investigate the effect of feeder design, type of roughage and size of round-bales on feed wastage in sheep. Four round-bale feeders (Diagonal Rail Sheep Circular Feeder (RD), Knarrhult Flexible Round-Bale Feeder (KR), Telemark Round-Bale Feeder (TR) and Standard Sheep Circular Ring Feeder (RV)) were distributed into four identical experimental pens and used in both experiments. In Experiment 1, two types of roughages were used; Roughage 1: low-quality, grass silage harvested at late stage of maturity with dry matter (DM) content of 560 g/kg and Roughage 2: high-quality, hay harvested at an early stage of maturity with DM content of 738 g/kg. In Experiment 2, ewes were offered hay harvested at the late stage of maturity with DM content of 766 g/kg as half and whole round-bales. In both experiments, four groups of 10 ewes of the Norwegian White breed were rotated between the experimental pens and each treatment lasted for 4 days. Feed wastage (roughage on the ground surrounding the feeder) was collected daily. The amount of feed wastage was generally high. The type of roughage (Experiment 1) had a large effect on feed wastage (P < 0.001), where Roughage 1 had a mean feed wastage of 1.88 kg DM/day per ewe and Roughage 2 had 0.48 kg DM/day per ewe. When Roughage 1 was provided, it was evident that the ewes pulled out the long fibrous stems of the feeders and left them as wastage while selecting the leaves. This was not the case for Roughage 2. When feeding half round-bales (Experiment 2), the mean feed wastage was 1.50 kg DM/day per ewe compared to 2.88 kg DM/day per ewe when feeding whole round-bales (P < 0.001). This is probably due to the ewes spending more time eating with their heads inside the feeder when fed half round-bales (P < 0.001) and thus dropped more of the potential wastage inside the feeder. Less feed inside the feeder may also be the reason that feed wastage decreased gradually from Day 1 to Day 4 in both experiments (P < 0.001). Feeder design also had a significant impact on feed wastage (P < 0.001). We conclude that providing early harvested roughage and feeding half round-bales significantly reduced feed wastage.

No abstract