Survey of Dairy Management Practices on One Hundred Thirteen North Central and Northeastern United States Dairies

作者: W.K. Fulwider , T. Grandin , B.E. Rollin , T.E. Engle , N.L. Dalsted

DOI: 10.3168/JDS.2007-0631

关键词:

摘要: The objective was to conduct a broad survey of dairy management practices that have an effect on animal well-being. Dairies were visited during the fall and winter 2005 2006 in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Indiana, Iowa, New York. Data collected 113 dairies colostrum feeding, dehorning, tail-docking, euthanasia methods, producer statements about welfare, use specialized calf-raising farms (custom), level satisfaction with by producers, cow behavior. Calves raised owner 50.4% dairies; 30.1% custom milk-feeding period, 18.6% after weaning, 1% sold calves option buy them back as first-lactation heifers. A total 51.8% producers very satisfied their current methods. Three feedings fed 23.9% dairies, 2 39.8% farms, 1 feeding 31.0% replacement products 5.3% farms. Many (61.9%) provided 3.8 L at first feeding. dehorned different ages various By 8 wk, 34.5% dehorned. 12 78.8% majority hot iron (67.3%). remainder gouging (8.8%), paste (9.7%), saw (3.5%), or unknown calf (10.6%). Anesthetic reported 12.4% owners analgesia 1.8%. Tail-docking observed 82.3% dairies. most common docking time pre- postcalving (35.2%). second commonly d (15.4%). Rubber band method (92.5%), followed amputation (7.5%). amputated precalving, mo 3 2. Cow hygiene reason given dock (73.5%), parlor worker comfort (17.4%) udder health (1.0%). Producers 2.0% cows obviously lame. Gun preferred (85.7%), i.v. (8.0%), live pick-up (1.8%), nondisclosure (3.5%). Most (77.9%) stated improved environment compared 20 yr ago, whereas 8.0% conditions worse, 14.2% undecided. higher percentages either approached touched observer had lower somatic cell counts. results showed important for welfare.

参考文章(27)
C.L. Stull, Tail Docking in Dairy Cattle ,(2004)
B. E. Rollin, Annual meeting keynote address: Animal agriculture and emerging social ethics for animals. Journal of Animal Science. ,vol. 82, pp. 955- 964 ,(2004) , 10.2527/2004.823955X
F.G.H. Hoe, P.L. Ruegg, Opinions and Practices of Wisconsin Dairy Producers About Biosecurity and Animal Well-Being Journal of Dairy Science. ,vol. 89, pp. 2297- 2308 ,(2006) , 10.3168/JDS.S0022-0302(06)72301-3
S.D. Eicher, J.W. Dailey, Indicators of acute pain and fly avoidance behaviors in Holstein calves following tail-docking. Journal of Dairy Science. ,vol. 85, pp. 2850- 2858 ,(2002) , 10.3168/JDS.S0022-0302(02)74372-5
K.J. Stafford, D.J. Mellor, Dehorning and disbudding distress and its alleviation in calves. Veterinary Journal. ,vol. 169, pp. 337- 349 ,(2005) , 10.1016/J.TVJL.2004.02.005
N.B. Cook, T.B. Bennett, K.V. Nordlund, Effect of free stall surface on daily activity patterns in dairy cows with relevance to lameness prevalence. Journal of Dairy Science. ,vol. 87, pp. 2912- 2922 ,(2004) , 10.3168/JDS.S0022-0302(04)73422-0
D.W. Kellogg, J.A. Pennington, Z.B. Johnson, R. Panivivat, Survey of Management Practices Used for the Highest Producing DHI Herds in the United States Journal of Dairy Science. ,vol. 84, ,(2001) , 10.3168/JDS.S0022-0302(01)70206-8
Preben Willeberg, Bovine somatotropin and clinical mastitis: epidemiological assessment of the welfare risk Livestock Production Science. ,vol. 36, pp. 55- 66 ,(1993) , 10.1016/0301-6226(93)90137-7
S.D. Eicher, J.L. Morrow-Tesch, J.L. Albright, R.E. Williams, Tail-docking alters fly numbers, fly-avoidance behaviors, and cleanliness, but not physiological measures. Journal of Dairy Science. ,vol. 84, pp. 1822- 1828 ,(2001) , 10.3168/JDS.S0022-0302(01)74621-8