Identifying management and disease priorities of Canadian dairy industry stakeholders

Bauman, C.A.; Barkema, Herman W.; Dubuc, J.; Keefe, Greg; Kelton, D.F.

doi:10.3168/jds.2016-11057

Cited by 36 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study consisted of 2 phases, the first of which was a questionnaire offered to all Canadian dairy producers between March 1 and April 30, 2015. The focus of the questionnaire was derived from a priority assessment of Canadian dairy industry stakeholders conducted in 2014 (Bauman et al, 2016). Before implementation, the questionnaire was given to an advisory group specific to the project, consisting of dairy producers, industry representatives, and veterinarians, which included representation from all provinces (Bauman et al, 2018).…”

Section: Survey Design and Administrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first Canadian National Dairy Study was designed based on identified management and disease priorities of Canadian dairy industry stakeholders (Bauman et al, 2016), and collected data from farms in all provinces regardless of enrollment in milk recording (Belage et al, 2017). This information has facilitated benchmarking of management practices, similar to the National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS) in the United States (USDA-APHIS, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Canadian National Dairy Study: Heifer calf management

Winder

Bauman

Duffield

et al. 2018

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past decade, substantial changes have occurred in the way dairy heifer calves are managed. The objectives of this study, part of phase I of the 2015 Canadian National Dairy Study, were to examine heifer calf health and adoption of rearing practices, and to explore factors associated with different rearing strategies on Canadian dairy farms. The questionnaire was open to all licensed dairy producers in Canada and had a 12% response rate (n = 1,373). Fifty-one percent of respondents reported never allowing heifer calves to nurse their dam, and 17% always removed calves within 30 min of birth. Sixty-seven percent reported always feeding heifer calves 4 L of colostrum within 12 h of birth; 17% always fed colostrum between 2100 and 0400 h; 5% pasteurized all colostrum fed on farm. Seventy-seven percent of respondents reported calving and stillbirth information for 2014; the mean reported stillbirth rate was 4.9% (SD = 3.3). Forty percent housed calves in individual pens, 34% in group pens, 21% in individual hutches, 2% reported tethering calves, and 1% used group hutches. Of those who housed calves in groups, 59% reported a maximum group size of 3 to 10 calves, 31% reported a pair (2) of calves per pen or hutch, and 10% reported a group >10 calves. The maximum amount of milk offered to calves per day during the preweaned period was a mean of 8 L (SD = 3). Fifty percent of respondents reported mortality data for 2014; mean preweaning mortality was 6.4% (SD = 8.3), and postweaning mortality was 2.4% (SD = 4.4). Over 95% of producers reported disbudding practices; 86% used cautery, 11% used surgical amputation, and 9% used caustic paste. Twenty-eight percent reported disbudding at less than 3 wk of age, 60% at 3 to 8 wk, and 22% at 8 to 16 wk; 5% of respondents reported dehorning at more than 16 wk of age. Sixty-six percent of cautery users reported use of local anesthetic, 33% used sedation, and 25% used a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). Multivariable regression models showed that the use of local anesthetic when disbudding calves was associated with social media activity (odds ratio = 2.3) and high-speed internet access (odds ratio = 2.0), whereas sedation was associated with geographic region, and NSAID use was associated with disbudding at more than 3 wk of age. Exploring heifer rearing management practices, including adoption of best practices, may help focus future education and extension efforts. Poor reporting of mortality data may reflect a lack of recordkeeping on farm.

show abstract

Section: Survey Design and Administrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Canadian National Dairy Study: Heifer calf management

Winder

Bauman

Duffield

et al. 2018

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data were obtained through a cross-sectional survey of the Canadian dairy cattle industry in the form of a comprehensive questionnaire (Bauman et al, 2016). The questionnaire was accessible from March 1 to April 30, 2015, and all licensed dairy producers received a mailed letter of invitation to participate.…”

Section: Questionnaire Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The questionnaire was designed in response to a needs assessment conducted in 2014 involving Canadian dairy industry stakeholders (Bauman et al, 2016). Collaborators from the University of Guelph (Guelph, Ontario, Canada), University of Saskatchewan (Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada), University of Calgary (Calgary, Alberta, Canada), Université de Montréal (St. Hyacinthe, Quebec, Canada), and University of Prince Edward Island (Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Canada) formulated questions focused on the 5 main management and disease priorities.…”

Section: Questionnaire Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the United States, the National Animal Health Monitoring System regularly conducts national studies and provides data on the health and management of livestock industries (USDA-APHIS, 2017). Comparable to the National Animal Health Monitoring System Dairy Study in 2014, the Canadian National Dairy Study (NDS) 2015 was designed to target all licensed Canadian producers and gather information on the health and management of dairy cattle (Bauman et al, 2016). Based on a large survey offered to all producers and follow-up visits to a subset of respondent herds, the NDS generated data on herd demographics, biosecurity, animal care and welfare, calf health (Renaud et al, 2017), reproductive management, and milk quality (Belage et al, 2017;Bauman et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reproductive management practices on dairy farms: The Canadian National Dairy Study 2015

Schyndel

Bauman

Pascottini

et al. 2019

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objectives of this cross-sectional study were to characterize reproductive management practices on Canadian dairy farms and describe differences based on regional and demographic factors. A questionnaire was offered to all licensed Canadian dairy producers and included 189 questions regarding producer and farm background information, herd dynamics, biosecurity, disease prevalence, calf health, animal welfare, milking practices, reproduction, and internet use. Twenty-four questions were related to estrus detection, hormonal protocols for reproduction, insemination, and pregnancy diagnosis. A total of 1,373 producers responded to the survey, representing a response rate of 12.5%. Estrus detection practices in lactating cows were associated with herd size, barn type, region, organic production, breeding method, and age of respondent. The most commonly used estrus-detection method in cows was visual (51.0% of farms for first insemination; 45.5% for subsequent inseminations). Estrus detection for nulliparous heifers was associated with herd size, barn type, region, and breeding method, with visual detection also the most common method for heifers (71.3% of farms). Eighty percent of farms used strictly artificial insemination, 2.8% used natural service only, and 16.8% used a combination of artificial insemination and natural service. Breeding method was associated with herd size, barn type, region, and education level of the respondent. Pregnancy diagnosis method was associated with herd size, barn type, region, and organic production. Ultrasound was the most commonly used method of pregnancy diagnosis (used by 52.2% of farms). Sixty-nine percent of farms rechecked cows for pregnancy, and rectal palpation was the most com-monly used method (employed by 48.7%). Reproductive management practices vary considerably among Canadian dairy farms and decisions are associated with farm-level factors, including region, herd size, and barn type, as well as producer-level factors, such as age, managerial role, and education level.

show abstract

Association between a genetic index for lameness resistance and the incidence of claw horn lesions in Holstein cows

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study aimed to determine the association between the lameness advantage genetic index and four outcomes: sole haemorrhage (SH), sole ulcers (SU), white line lesions (WL), and lameness during mobility scoring. Methods We enrolled 2352 Holstein cows from four predominantly housed dairy herds in the UK. Cows were mobility scored and foot lesions recorded at four time points from before calving to late lactation. Cows were genotyped and genetic indexes were assigned to each cow following national genetic evaluations. Lameness records and genetic indexes were matched for 2107 cows. Four separate multivariable logistic regression models, which included farm and parity as covariables, were used to quantify the association between the lameness advantage index and whether animals were affected by SH, SU, WL, or lameness. Results The odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for one‐point increases in the lameness advantage index were 0.79 (0.72–0.86), 0.68 (0.59–0.78), 0.94 (0.84–1.04), and 0.82 (0.74–0.91) for SH, SU, WL, and lameness, respectively. The same trends were present when the sire's lameness advantage index was evaluated in place of the animal's own, although the strength of this association was generally weaker. Conclusion The lameness advantage index is associated with SH, SU, and lameness, therefore selection on the lameness advantage index could be considered in herds aiming to reduce lameness. Where genomic testing of heifers is not conducted, sire lameness advantage index may still be effective to reduce SH and SU incidence.

show abstract

Identifying management and disease priorities of Canadian dairy industry stakeholders

Cited by 36 publications

References 7 publications

Canadian National Dairy Study: Heifer calf management

Canadian National Dairy Study: Heifer calf management

Reproductive management practices on dairy farms: The Canadian National Dairy Study 2015

Association between a genetic index for lameness resistance and the incidence of claw horn lesions in Holstein cows

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About