Dairy farmers' considerations for antimicrobial treatment of clinical mastitis in British Columbia and Alberta, Canada.

Introduction: Clinical mastitis (CM) treatment decision-making is a multifaceted process that remains relatively understudied, despite CM being one of the most prevalent diseases on dairy farms worldwide, contributing greatly to the use of antimicrobials in the dairy industry. This study aimed to gain insights into decision-making mechanisms employed by dairy farmers in British Columbia and Alberta, Canada, when dealing with CM. Methods: Interviews were held with 15 dairy farmers in the Canadian provinces of British Columbia and Alberta and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to develop both the decision-pathway and overarching themes influencing the CM decisions by farmers in this region. Results and discussion: The analysis generated a decision-making process that begins with identification and classification of CM, guided by visual characteristics of milk and the udder, available milk production and quality data, presence of systemic signs, and additional diagnostics. Subsequently, CM cases are assessed based on the likelihood of cure, value of the cow, and herd goals to decide whether antimicrobial treatment is desired. Next, a treatment choice is made by evaluating severity and urgency of the case, availability of drugs and timing of the case. Finally, definition of treatment success and progression over time following the treatment decision guides the termination of treatment. Three overarching themes were generated that shape the decision-making process: 'Personal attributes', including personal approach and experiential knowledge; 'Inter-actor dynamics', such as shared decision-making and dynamics among producers, veterinarians, and milkers; and 'Moving beyond protocols', which highlights the dynamic nature of mastitis decision-making. These insights have the potential to inform the development of effective interventions to improve CM antimicrobial use that align with the reality of farming operations within Western Canada, and potentially beyond.

Access to an outdoor open pack promotes estrus activity in dairy cows.

Dairy cows have a partial preference to access an outdoor deep-bedded pack, but the effects of continuous access to an outdoor area on estrous behaviors has not been studied. Our objective was to investigate if access to an outdoor open deep-bedded pack improves the expression of estrus behaviors. We enrolled 60 lactating Holstein cows directly after calving and followed them each for 12 weeks. Cows were housed in a single freestall pen holding 36 cows at a time, with a dynamic group composition. Half of the cows were randomly assigned to the OUTDOOR treatment; these cows had access to an outdoor open pack via an automated selection gate. INDOOR cows were housed together with OUTDOOR cows but were not allowed outdoor access. All cows were fitted with an automated activity monitor (AAM) 21 ± 3 d before expected calving date. Estrous behaviors (i.e., standing to be mounted and mounting behaviors) were continuously monitored using video, and the intensity of mounting (i.e., the number of standing to be mounted and other mounting behaviors per hour) was calculated per estrus event per cow. Temperature and humidity were monitored by data loggers indoors, and these data were used to calculate the Temperature Humidity Index (THI). Following an alert from the AAM, cows were checked to detect the presence of a dominant preovulatory follicle and an absence of a mature corpus luteum (CL) by rectal ultrasonography following milking, as well as 7 d thereafter to confirm ovulation by the presence of a new CL. A total of 94 estrus events were used in the final analysis. INDOOR cows tended to have a lower mounting intensity with increasing indoor THI, but no such effect was noted for OUTDOOR cows. The total number of cows in estrus positively influenced mounting intensity. OUTDOOR cows had a longer duration of estrus, as measured by the automated monitors, compared with INDOOR cows (12.4 ± 0.7 h versus 9.9 ± 0.8 h). Estrus event number and the total number of cows in estrus were both positively associated with estrus duration. These results indicate that access to an outdoor pack tended to increase mounting behavior for freestall housed dairy cows, especially during periods of elevated THI. We conclude that providing dairy cows access to an outdoor area can help with estrus detection and may thus help improve the reproductive programs on dairy farms.

Perceptions of antimicrobial stewardship: identifying drivers and barriers across various professions in Canada utilizing a one health approach.

Introduction: As antimicrobial resistance (AMR) represents a substantial threat to the efficacy of available antimicrobial options, it is important to understand how to implement effective and practical mitigation efforts, including antimicrobial stewardship (AMS), across human, animal, and environmental sectors. Methods: A mixed-methods questionnaire was distributed virtually to attendees of the virtual One Health Antimicrobial Stewardship Conference (March 10-12, 2021) and their professional networks. Respondents (n = 81) were largely from the veterinary (75%) or human (19%) health sectors. Qualitative data were analyzed in NVivo using template analysis whereas quantitative data were analyzed in STATA using Kruskall-Wallis tests. The questionnaire asked respondents about their perceptions of AMS, as well as the perceived barriers and drivers of AMS efforts. Results: Perceptions of what AMS meant to the respondents personally and their profession as a whole were grouped into 3 main themes: 1) AMS strategies or considerations in antimicrobial prescribing and use; 2) responsibility to maintain health and preserve antimicrobial effectiveness; and 3) reducing antimicrobial use (AMU) as a goal of AMS efforts. Identified AMS barriers had 3 main themes: 1) lack of various prescribing and AMU support mechanisms; 2) shift in prescriber attitudes to drive change; and 3) stronger economic considerations to support shifting prescribing practices. Drivers of AMS had the following themes: 1) leadership to guide change; 2) education to support optimizing AMU; and 3) research to identify best practices and opportunities for action. Across all questions, 2 cross-cutting themes emerged: 1) a One Health understanding of AMS; and 2) blame placed on others for a lack of AMS success. Conclusion: Overall, sector-specific, but particularly cross-sectoral AMS drivers and barriers were identified, highlighting the importance of a One Health approach in AMR research and mitigation.

Outdoor access practices in the Canadian dairy industry.

Dairy cows are highly motivated to access pasture and have a partial preference for alternative forms of outdoor access (e.g., deep-bedded outdoor sand or wood-chip packs). In addition, Canadians value the provision of outdoor access to dairy cows as they perceive it as important for good cow welfare. In contrast to Europe, Oceania, and the United States, little data exist on the use of outdoor access on Canadian dairy farms. Therefore, our objective was to assess current outdoor access practices for dairy cows in Canada. An online questionnaire was used to determine housing and outdoor access practices for lactating cows, dry cows, pregnant heifers, and weaned, nonpregnant heifers on Canadian dairy farms. The questionnaire was distributed by the 10 provincial milk boards between November 2020 and August 2021, resulting in an 8.9% response rate (n = 903 completed questionnaires). In total, 75% (n = 675) of respondents provided some form of outdoor access to at least 1 cattle class on their farm. Pasture was the most frequently used form of outdoor access for all cattle classes. Based on a weighted average, a total of 29% and 48% of Canadian dairy farms provided lactating and dry cows, respectively, access to pasture; for youngstock, these numbers were 48% and 27% for pregnant heifers and weaned, nonpregnant heifers, respectively. Herd size (for each cow class), indoor housing system, and region were all associated with the provision of pasture. Farms with larger lactating herds less often provided access to pasture; larger herd sizes in terms of weaned, nonpregnant heifers, pregnant heifers, and dry cows were also associated with a lower likelihood of access to pasture. Farms using indoor bedded pack housing for their lactating cows more often provided pasture to this cattle class than farms with freestall or tiestall housing; this likelihood did not differ between farms with tie or freestall housing for this cattle class. Dry cows or pregnant heifers housed in a tiestall were more often provided pasture than freestall-housed dry cows or pregnant heifers. Housing type for weaned, nonpregnant heifers was not associated with the likelihood of pasture provision. Farms in British Columbia or on Canada's East Coast (i.e., Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island) more often provided lactating cows pasture compared with farms in other regions. For the other 3 cattle classes, farms on the East Coast of Canada more often provided pasture than farms in other parts of Canada. These results will inform future decisions regarding outdoor access for Canadian dairy cattle and may also aid in identifying future areas of research. For example, our results may aid in designing housing systems that facilitate outdoor access in larger herds and in areas that are subject to more extreme weather conditions.

Western Canadian dairy farmers' perspectives on the provision of outdoor access for dairy cows and on the perceptions of other stakeholders.

The provision of pasture and outdoor access for dairy cattle differs around the globe. For example, in Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia, dairy farms are largely pasture based, whereas dairy farms in the United States and Canada are largely confinement based. There is a high level of public support for pasture and outdoor access for dairy cows, and the available evidence shows that dairy cattle are highly motivated to access pasture, especially at night. The decision as to whether to provide outdoor access is typically made by farmers, but little is known about dairy farmers' perspectives on this topic. We investigated perspectives of Western Canadian dairy farmers on outdoor access, as well as how they believe different stakeholders (i.e., the dairy industry, the dairy cows, and the general public) regard outdoor access for dairy cows. Data were collected via (1) 11 focus group discussions with a total of 50 Western Canadian dairy farmers, and (2) semi-structured individual interviews with an additional 6 dairy farmers of Hutterite colonies. Data were analyzed using template analysis. Although most participants in this study did not provide outdoor access on their farms, or only provided outdoor access to certain cow groups, participants generally mentioned that they enjoyed seeing cows on pasture or outdoors. However, participants shared that the Canadian supply management system (including processors) required a consistent flow of production, which was thought to be easier and more economically realized with indoor housing of lactating cows. Participants believed that pasture or outdoor access for dairy cows was desired by the public. Some participants believed that dairy cows prefer to spend time outside under favorable weather conditions, but others felt that cows preferred to stay indoors in modern, ventilated freestall barns. The results of this study describe the perspectives of dairy farmers regarding the views of dairy industry stakeholders as they relate to outdoor access, helping to inform conversations around the provision of outdoor access for dairy cattle.

Perspectives of Western Canadian dairy farmers on providing outdoor access for dairy cows.

Dairy cows are highly motivated to access pasture, especially at night in summer. When pasture is not available, dairy cows show a partial preference for alternative types of outdoor access, spending half the night outside in summer on an outdoor sand or wood chip pack. However, many dairy farms do not provide cows outside access. To better understand reasons why dairy farmers choose to provide or not provide outdoor access, we studied the perspectives of dairy farmers located in the 4 Western Canadian provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Data were collected via (1) 11 focus group discussions with a total of 50 Western Canadian dairy farmers, and (2) semi-structured individual interviews with 6 dairy farmers of Hutterite colonies. Transcripts were analyzed using template analysis. Reasons to not provide outdoor access fell into 5 main themes: (1) adverse climate conditions, (2) negative implications of outdoor access for cow welfare including concerns about udder health, (3) concerns regarding decreases in profitability, (4) farm infrastructure not set up for outdoor access, and (5) higher ability to manage animals kept indoors. Reasons to provide outdoor access fell into the 5 main themes: (1) local climate conditions conducive for outdoor access, (2) beneficial effects of outdoor access on cow welfare including lower lameness prevalence, (3) increased profitability due to a premium milk price provided to farmers that allow pasture access to their cows, (4) farm infrastructure that is set up for outdoor access, and (5) easier management of animals outdoors. We conclude that the decision to provide outdoor access depends on how farmers weigh these factors given the constraints on their farm, as well as their personal beliefs and values.

Short communication: Motivation to walk affects gait attributes.

Lameness is a major welfare problem in the dairy industry. Environmental factors, such as flooring surface, as well as cow-level factors, such as udder fill, can influence gait. The aim of the current study was to test whether motivation to walk affects gait attributes and whether this effect differs between lame and sound cows. We trained cows to walk down an alley for a food reward and assessed walking speed, stride length, head bob, and back arch of cows previously identified as either lame (n = 7) or sound (n = 10). Cows were assessed when they walked toward a food reward and toward no reward. Cows walked faster and had longer stride length and less variation in head bob when approaching the reward; these effects were similar in both sound and lame cows. We concluded that motivation to walk affects several gait attributes of dairy cows.

The Influence of Different Types of Outdoor Access on Dairy Cattle Behavior.

Pasture access for dairy cows is highly valued both by cows and the public at large. When pasture access is not feasible, farmers can provide cows with alternative forms of outdoor access, such as an outdoor bedded pack, that may be easier to implement on some farms. We reviewed the literature on how lying, standing, walking, feeding, social, and estrus behaviors are influenced by pasture and other types of outdoor areas. Pasture allows the expression of grazing and can facilitate the expression of lying, standing, walking, and estrus behaviors. In addition, pasture can decrease the number of negative social interactions between cows, likely because more space per cow is provided than what is normally available indoors. The provision of soft flooring and an open space in outdoor bedded packs appears to provide some benefits for lying, standing, and walking behavior and may also have positive effects on social behavior, especially with larger space allowances. The effects of an outdoor bedded pack on estrus behavior are less well-documented, but the provision of a standing surface that provides better footing than typically available indoors may promote estrus behavior. Alternative outdoor areas assessed to date appear to be less attractive for cows than pasture, perhaps because these areas do not provide the opportunity to graze. We encourage future research to investigate the importance of grazing for dairy cows. The motivation of dairy cows to access alternative outdoor areas should also be investigated. As cow preference for the outdoors depends on many factors, providing cows a choice may be of particular importance.

Short communication: The effects of regrouping in relation to fresh feed delivery in lactating Holstein cows.

This study tested whether separating regrouping from the time of fresh feed delivery mitigated the effects of regrouping on cow behavior and milk production. Cows (n = 26) were individually introduced into a stable group of 11 animals/pen fed twice daily. Animals were randomly assigned to early regrouping (at 0300 h, approximately 10.5 h after fresh feed delivery and 3.5 h before the next fresh feed delivery) and late regrouping (between 0630 and 0730 h, coinciding with access to fresh feed). For 3 d, starting immediately after regrouping, video recordings continuously monitored feeding and perching (i.e., standing with the 2 front feet in the lying stall) behavior and displacements at the feed bunk. Data loggers were used to quantify lying time and the number of standing bouts; milk production was automatically recorded at each milking. Daily feeding and lying times and the number of standing bouts per day did not differ between treatments or experimental days. Daily perching time and the number of displacements at the feed bunk did not differ between treatments but decreased with experimental day. Average milk production on d 2 and 3 after regrouping (30.6 ± 1.5 kg/d) was lower than during the 3 d before regrouping (32.3 ± 1.5 kg/d), but we observed no effect of treatment on this decline. We conclude that regrouping at a time not associated with fresh feed delivery does not mitigate the negative effects of regrouping.

Cows are highly motivated to access a grooming substrate.

In natural environments, cattle use trees and other abrasive surfaces to scratch and groom themselves. Modern indoor dairy cattle housing systems often lack appropriate grooming substrates, restricting the animals' ability to groom. We assessed the motivation of dairy cows to access an automated mechanical brush, a grooming resource that can be implemented in indoor cattle housing systems. Cows were trained to push a weighted gate to access either fresh feed (positive control), a mechanical brush or the same space without a brush (negative control). Weight on the gate was gradually increased until all cows failed to open it. The weight each cow was willing to push to access each resource was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Despite differences in methodology used to obtain data on motivation to access feed and the brush, the outcomes were very similar; cows worked as hard for access to fresh feed and the brush (p = 0.94) and less hard for access to the empty space (compared with fresh feed: p < 0.01; brush: p < 0.02). These results indicate that cows are highly motivated to access a mechanical brush and that it is an important resource for cows.

Dairy cow preference for different types of outdoor access.

Dairy cows display a partial preference for being outside, but little is known about what aspects of the outdoor environment are important to cows. The primary aim of this study was to test the preference of lactating dairy cattle for pasture versus an outdoor sand pack during the night. A secondary aim was to determine whether feeding and perching behavior changed when cows were provided outdoor access. A third objective was to investigate how the lying behavior of cows changed when given access to different outdoor areas. Ninety-six lactating pregnant cows were assigned to 8 groups of 12 animals each. After a baseline phase of 2 d in which cows were kept inside the freestall barn, cows were habituated to the outdoor areas by providing them access to each of the 2 options for 24 h. Cows were then given access, in random order by group, to either the pasture (pasture phase) or the sand pack (sand phase). As we tested the 2 outdoor options using space allowances consistent with what would be practical on commercial dairy farms, the space provided on pasture was larger (21,000 m2) than that provided on the sand pack (144 m2). Cows were tested at night (for 2 nights in each condition), from 2000 h until morning milking at approximately 0800 h, as preference to be outdoors is strongest at this time. During the next 3 nights cows were given access to both outside options simultaneously (choice phase). Feeding and perching behaviors were recorded when cows were indoors during the day and night periods. Lying behavior was automatically recorded by HOBO data loggers (Onset, Bourne, MA). Cows spent more time outside in the pasture phase (90.0 ± 5.9%) compared with the sand phase (44.4 ± 6.3%). When provided simultaneous access to both options, cows spent more time on pasture than on the sand pack (90.5 ± 2.6% vs. 0.8 ± 0.5%, respectively). Time spent feeding indoors during the day did not change regardless of what type of outdoor access was provided, but there was a decline in perching during the day when cows were provided access to either outdoor option at night. Lying time in the pasture phase was lower than in the baseline or sand phase. During the nighttime, lying time outside was not different between the sand (55.4 ± 7.9%) and pasture (52.0 ± 7.4%) phases. In summary, cows spent a considerable amount of time outside during the night when given the opportunity and showed a preference for a large pasture versus a small sand pack as an outdoor area.