Producer estimates of prevalence and perceived importance of lameness in dairy herds with tiestalls, freestalls, and automated milking systems.

Lameness is one of the most important welfare and productivity concerns in the dairy industry. Our objectives were to obtain producers' estimates of its prevalence and their perceptions of lameness, and to investigate how producers monitor lameness in tiestall (TS), freestall with milking parlor (FS), and automated milking system (AMS) herds. Forty focal cows per farm in 237 Canadian dairy herds were scored for lameness by trained researchers. On the same day, the producers completed a questionnaire. Mean herd-level prevalence of lameness estimated by producers was 9.0% (±0.9%; ±SE), whereas the researchers observed a mean prevalence of 22.2% (±0.9%). Correlation between producer- and researcher-estimated lameness prevalence was low (r = 0.19) and mean researcher prevalence was 1.6, 1.8, and 4.1 times higher in AMS, FS, and TS farms, respectively. A total of 48% of producers thought lameness was a moderate or major problem in their herds (TS = 34%; AMS =53%; FS = 59%). One third of producers considered lameness the highest ranked health problem they were trying to control, whereas two-thirds of producers (TS = 43%; AMS = 63%; FS = 71%) stated that they had made management changes to deal with lameness in the past 2 yr. Almost all producers (98%) stated they routinely check cows to identify new cases of lameness; however, 40% of producers did not keep records of lameness (AMS = 24%; FS = 23%; TS = 60%). A majority (69%) of producers treated lame cows themselves immediately after detection, whereas 13% relied on hoof-trimmer or veterinarians to plan treatment. Producers are aware of lameness as an issue in dairy herds and almost all monitor lameness as part of their daily routine. However, producers underestimate lameness prevalence, which highlights that lameness detection continues to be difficult in in all housing systems, especially in TS herds. Training to improve detection, record keeping, identification of farm-specific risk factors, and treatment planning for lame cows is likely to help decrease lameness prevalence.

[1]  J. Rushen,et al.  Technical note: Assessing lameness in tie-stalls using live stall lameness scoring. , 2017, Journal of dairy science.

[2]  Theo J G M Lam,et al.  Invited review: Determinants of farmers' adoption of management-based strategies for infectious disease prevention and control. , 2017, Journal of dairy science.

[3]  J. Rushen,et al.  Effect of following recommendations for tiestall configuration on neck and leg lesions, lameness, cleanliness, and lying time in dairy cows. , 2017, Journal of dairy science.

[4]  E. Vasseur ANIMAL BEHAVIOR AND WELL-BEING SYMPOSIUM: Optimizing outcome measures of welfare in dairy cattle assessment. , 2017, Journal of animal science.

[5]  D. Kelton,et al.  Identifying management and disease priorities of Canadian dairy industry stakeholders. , 2016, Journal of dairy science.

[6]  J. Rushen,et al.  Cow- and farm-level risk factors for lameness on dairy farms with automated milking systems. , 2016, Journal of dairy science.

[7]  J. Rushen,et al.  Associations between lying behavior and lameness in Canadian Holstein-Friesian cows housed in freestall barns. , 2016, Journal of dairy science.

[8]  Jeffrey Rushen,et al.  Can automated measures of lying time help assess lameness and leg lesions on tie-stall dairy farms? , 2016 .

[9]  J. Rushen,et al.  Lying times of lactating cows on dairy farms with automatic milking systems and the relation to lameness, leg lesions, and body condition score. , 2016, Journal of dairy science.

[10]  M A G von Keyserlingk,et al.  Invited review: Changes in the dairy industry affecting dairy cattle health and welfare. , 2015, Journal of dairy science.

[11]  J. Rushen,et al.  Prevalence of lameness and associated risk factors in Canadian Holstein-Friesian cows housed in freestall barns. , 2015, Journal of dairy science.

[12]  J. Rushen,et al.  An assessment tool to help producers improve cow comfort on their farms. , 2015, Journal of dairy science.

[13]  J. Rushen,et al.  Technical note: a comparison of 2 methods of assessing lameness prevalence in tiestall herds. , 2014, Journal of dairy science.

[14]  Z. E. Barker,et al.  Investigating the value dairy farmers place on a reduction of lameness in their herds using a willingness to pay approach. , 2014, Veterinary journal.

[15]  Laura E. Green,et al.  Temporal associations between low body condition, lameness and milk yield in a UK dairy herd. , 2014, Preventive veterinary medicine.

[16]  D. Kelton,et al.  Randomized clinical trial of tetracycline hydrochloride bandage and paste treatments for resolution of lesions and pain associated with digital dermatitis in dairy cattle. , 2013, Journal of dairy science.

[17]  Henk Hogeveen,et al.  Dairy farmers' attitudes and intentions towards improving dairy cow foot health , 2013 .

[18]  E Vasseur,et al.  Development and implementation of a training program to ensure high repeatability of body condition scoring of dairy cows. , 2013, Journal of dairy science.

[19]  D. Weary,et al.  Benchmarking cow comfort on North American freestall dairies: lameness, leg injuries, lying time, facility design, and management for high-producing Holstein dairy cows. , 2012, Journal of dairy science.

[20]  J. Rushen,et al.  Sampling cows to assess lying time for on-farm animal welfare assessment. , 2012, Journal of dairy science.

[21]  J. Rushen,et al.  A training programme to ensure high repeatability of injury scoring of dairy cows , 2012 .

[22]  J. Rushen,et al.  Assessing the welfare of dairy calves: outcome-based measures of calf health versus input-based measures of the use of risky management practices , 2012 .

[23]  D C J Main,et al.  Working towards a reduction in cattle lameness: 1. Understanding barriers to lameness control on dairy farms. , 2010, Research in veterinary science.

[24]  Y T Gröhn,et al.  The cost of different types of lameness in dairy cows calculated by dynamic programming. , 2010, Preventive veterinary medicine.

[25]  D M Weary,et al.  Lying behavior as an indicator of lameness in dairy cows. , 2010, Journal of dairy science.

[26]  C. Brenninkmeyer,et al.  Risk factors for lameness in freestall-housed dairy cows across two breeds, farming systems, and countries. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[27]  T. Knowles,et al.  The development, implementation and testing of a lameness control programme based on HACCP principles and designed for heifers on dairy farms. , 2009, Veterinary journal.

[28]  S Dippel,et al.  Assessing lameness in cows kept in tie-stalls. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[29]  D. Kelton,et al.  Herd-level risk factors for seven different foot lesions in Ontario Holstein cattle housed in tie stalls or free stalls. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[30]  D. Kelton,et al.  Herd- and cow-level prevalence of foot lesions in Ontario dairy cattle. , 2008, Journal of dairy science.

[31]  N. Neerchal,et al.  Objective determination of claw pain and its relationship to limb locomotion score in dairy cattle. , 2007, Journal of dairy science.

[32]  J. Huxley,et al.  Current attitudes of cattle practitioners to pain and the use of analgesics in cattle , 2006, Veterinary Record.

[33]  E. Aizinbud,et al.  A field investigation of the use of the pedometer for the early detection of lameness in cattle. , 2006, The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne.

[34]  M. Endres,et al.  Prevalence of lameness in high-producing holstein cows housed in freestall barns in Minnesota. , 2006, Journal of dairy science.

[35]  Jehan Frans Ettema,et al.  Economic decision making on prevention and control of clinical lameness in Danish dairy herds , 2006 .

[36]  D. Kelton,et al.  Major advances in disease prevention in dairy cattle. , 2006, Journal of dairy science.

[37]  D. Weary,et al.  Effect of hoof pathologies on subjective assessments of dairy cow gait. , 2006, Journal of dairy science.

[38]  D. Kelton,et al.  Stall dimensions and the prevalence of lameness, injury, and cleanliness on 317 tie-stall dairy farms in Ontario. , 2005, The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne.

[39]  O. Østerås,et al.  Prevalence of claw lesions in Norwegian dairy cattle housed in tie stalls and free stalls. , 2005, Preventive veterinary medicine.

[40]  L. Green,et al.  Assessment of the welfare of dairy caftle using animal-based measurements: direct observations and investigation of farm records , 2003, Veterinary Record.

[41]  E N Noordhuizen-Stassen,et al.  Prevalence of claw disorders in Dutch dairy cows exposed to several floor systems. , 2003, Journal of dairy science.

[42]  J. Hernández,et al.  Comparison of topical application of oxytetracycline and four nonantibiotic solutions for treatment of papillomatous digital dermatitis in dairy cows. , 1999, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.

[43]  H. Whay,et al.  The influence of lesion type on the duration of hyperalgesia associated with hindlimb lameness in dairy cattle. , 1998, Veterinary journal.

[44]  T. Carpenter,et al.  Case-control study of papillomatous digital dermatitis in southern California dairy farms , 1996 .

[45]  R. Robinson,et al.  Prevalence and severity of lameness in lactating dairy cows in a sample of Minnesota and Wisconsin herds. , 1993, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.