Management practices associated with stress in cattle on western Canadian cow-calf operations: A mixed methods study.

Handling, weaning, and euthanasia are some of the most stressful practices performed on cow-calf operations. Although strategies to minimize stress exist, their use on western Canadian cow-calf operations is unknown. The objectives were to describe current stress-associated practices on western Canadian cow-calf operations, describe producer and operation demographics associated with the use of nonabrupt weaning methods, and explore producer perceptions toward these practices. A questionnaire focusing on stressful management practices was delivered to 109 cow-calf producers in western Canada. Fifteen respondents were purposively selected for individual interviews. The majority of producers reported calves less than 1 wk of age were handled by manual restraint (87%) and those older than 1 wk of age were handled using a cattle squeeze or table. Most producers performed abrupt weaning (70%). Interviewees often mentioned that cost and logistics were major factors in deciding on a weaning strategy. Pasture availability and facilities were viewed as constraints toward the adoption of a nonabrupt weaning method. Animal stress was considered, as producers expressed concern that nonabrupt weaning methods may cause increased stress because of the additional handling required. Producers conveyed that animal age was a major factor that impacted weaning stress and that improved animal performance might motivate them to adopt a nonabrupt weaning strategy. Producers also expressed reluctance to change previously successful traditional approaches. Of respondents, 13% did not euthanize cattle on farm and 8% did not confirm death. Producers interviewed reported that the decision to euthanize cattle on farm was difficult and that veterinary advice was often considered. Factors that influenced their decision to euthanize included the animal's likelihood of recovery and degree of pain and distress. Finally, producers explained that they considered whether the animal was salvageable and able to be transported. Identification of common methods of handling provides focus for future research to determine optimal handling strategies. Identified barriers to nonabrupt weaning may be addressed through research, extension, or policy to encourage the adoption of weaning methods that could improve animal welfare. Confirmation of death after euthanasia was identified as an area that needs to be addressed by producer education to minimize animal stress during on-farm euthanasia.

Management practices associated with pain in cattle on western Canadian cow-calf operations: A mixed methods study.

The implementation of on-farm pain mitigation strategies is dependent on feasibility and importance to producers. Currently, there is a lack of information regarding adoption of management practices associated with pain in cattle within the Canadian beef industry. The objective of this mixed methods study was to describe pain-associated practices implemented on farm and producer perceptions toward pain mitigation strategies. A questionnaire about calving management and calf processing was delivered to 109 cow-calf producers in western Canada. In addition, 15 respondents were purposively selected based on questionnaire responses to participate in individual semistructured, on-farm interviews. The prevalence of pain mitigation strategies used for dystocia and cesarean section by respondents were 46 and 100%, respectively. The majority of operations reported castrating and dehorning calves before 3 mo of age (95 and 89%, respectively). The majority of operations did not use pain mitigation strategies for castration and dehorning (90 and 85%, respectively). Branding was practiced by 57% of respondents, 4% of which used pain mitigation. Thematic content analysis revealed that producers' perception of pain were influenced by what they referred to as "common sense," relatability to cattle, visual evidence of pain, and age of the animal. Factors that influenced participant rationale for the implementation of pain mitigation practices included access to information and resources, age of the animal, benefit to the operation, cost and logistics, market demands, and personal conscience. Overall, management practices were generally in compliance with published Canadian guidelines. Results of this study may provide direction for future policy making, research, and extension efforts to encourage the adoption of pain mitigation strategies.

Short communication: limit feeding affects behavior patterns and feeding motivation of dairy heifers.

The study objective was to assess the effects of limit feeding dairy heifers on behavior patterns and feeding motivation. Ten Holstein heifers (291.6±39.2d of age, weighing 324.2±61.2kg; mean ± SD) were exposed to each of 2 dietary treatments, in a random order, over 2 successive 26-d treatment periods (14-d adaptation period and a 12-d data collection period) using a crossover design: (1) a high-forage total mixed ration (TMR), provided ad libitum (CON) and (2) a low-forage TMR, limit-fed at 2.05% body weight (LF). Heifers were fed daily at 1100h and motivation to access a low-nutritive feedstuff (straw) was assessed using a push-door apparatus at 2 time points: 3h after feed delivery (1400h) and 21h after feed delivery (0800h). The amount of weight pushed, weight pushed as percentage of body weight, and latency to access the push door were recorded on 3 different days for each heifer at each time point on each treatment. When fed CON, heifers had greater dry matter intake (12.9 vs. 7.2kg/d), greater feeding time (209.3 vs. 82.4min/d), greater ruminating time (452.2 vs. 318.3min/d), and slower rates of intake (0.06 vs. 0.09kg of dry matter/min) than when fed LF. Heifers fed LF pushed more weight as a percentage of body weight at 3h (4.5 vs. 1.9%) and 21h (9.3 vs. 2.8%) after feed delivery. At both 3 and 21h after feed delivery, latency to access the door was shorter for the LF heifers compared with the CON heifers (65 vs. 145 s). These results indicate that, in addition to decreasing feeding time, limit feeding increases motivation of heifers to access a low-nutritive feedstuff, possibly due to lack of satiety resulting from lack of physical fill or insufficient time spent foraging.

Growing dairy heifers prefer supplementary long straw when fed a nutrient-dense ration in a limited amount.

The objective of this study was to determine whether limit-fed heifers will choose to consume long particles, rather than short, of a low-nutritive feedstuff to ameliorate rumen function and meet foraging needs. Ten Holstein heifers 261.6 ± 39.2 (mean ± SD) d of age were exposed to each of 2 dietary treatments, in a random order, over 2 successive 7-d treatment periods (4-d adaptation period and a 3-d data collection period) using a crossover design. The treatments were (1) a provision of long particle oat straw (85% of particles>8mm; LS) and (2) provision of short particle oat straw (45% of particles >8mm; SS). Both treatments were offered following consumption of a limit-fed, nutrient-dense total mixed ration fed at 2.05% of body weight. Following each 7-d period, heifers were given access to both types of straw during an additional 2-d preference period; individual intakes were recorded daily. Feeding and lying behavior were recorded during the last 3d of each treatment period. Ruminal temperature was recorded during the last 3d of each treatment period using a telemetric acquisition system and rumen boluses. Dry matter intake of both the total mixed ration (6.3 kg/d) and straw (0.36 kg/d) was similar between treatments. Heifers fed LS spent more time feeding (197.7 vs. 175.2 min/d) throughout the day than heifers fed SS due to the increase in time required to consume long particles in the LS (59.8 vs. 34.2 min/d). Daily lying time (974.7 min/d) and time spent standing without eating (278.9 min/d) was similar between treatments. The preference period showed a strong preference ratio for LS rather than SS (preference ratio=0.83), with heifers consuming 0.43 ± 0.2 kg/d of LS and 0.07 ± 0.1 kg/d of SS (mean ± SD). Heifers maintained similar mean (38.3°C), minimum (35.1°C), and maximum (38.9°C) rumen temperature across treatments. The amount of time that rumen temperature was elevated over 38.6°C, 39.0°C, and 39.4°C was similar between treatments. In conclusion, heifers will consume similar amounts of supplementary long or short straw if provided to them alongside of a limit-fed TMR. Limit-fed heifers do, however, show a clear preference for LS when offered the choice, suggesting that they find LS to be more satisfactory for achieving rumen fill or meeting their behavioral foraging needs.

Short communication: effects of frequency of feed delivery and bunk space on the feeding behavior of limit-fed dairy heifers.

The objective of this experiment was to determine the interaction between feed bunk space and frequency of feed provision on the feeding behavior patterns and growth of growing dairy heifers fed a limited amount. Sixteen Holstein dairy heifers (183.4 ± 9.1 d of age, mean ± standard deviation) were divided into 4 groups of 4. The groups were exposed to each of 4 treatments, using a 4 × 4 Latin square design with a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments, over 21-d periods (14-d adaptation period, 7-d data collection periods). The treatments were arranged in 2 feed delivery frequencies (once per day at 1200 h: 1 ×/d, and twice per day at 1200 and 1400 h: 2 ×/d) and 2 levels of feed bunk space (adequate feed bunk space: 0.40 m/heifer, and reduced feed bunk space: 0.29 m/heifer). Pen dry matter intake (DMI) was recorded daily, average daily gain (ADG) was recorded weekly, and variability in ADG was calculated from the standard deviation of ADG. Feeding, unrewarded behavior (time at feed bunk without feed present), and competitive behavior were recorded using time-lapse video. Feeding and unrewarded behavior were measured for the last 7 d of each period, whereas competitive behavior was recorded on d 16, 18, and 20 of each period. Lying time was recorded for the last 7 d of each period. A tendency for interaction between feed bunk space and frequency of feed delivery on the feed efficiency of limit-fed dairy heifers was noted. Heifers provided restricted bunk space were reported as being less efficient when fed 2 ×/d; however, no other interactions were found. Although DMI and variability in ADG were similar between treatments, ADG was higher (1.0 vs. 0.9 kg/d) when heifers were provided with 0.40 m of feed bunk space and tended to be higher when fed 1 ×/d compared with that of heifers given restricted bunk space or fed 2 ×/d. Heifers fed 1 ×/d spent more time feeding throughout the day (70.5 vs. 58.9 min/d) than heifers fed 2 ×/d. Heifers fed at a restricted bunk space or fed 1 ×/d were approximately 25% more variable in feeding time than heifers fed 2 ×/d or with adequate bunk space. Heifers spent a similar amount of time in unrewarded visits to the feed bunk (28.9 min/d). Although feed bunk space did not affect competition (3.6 displacements/d), heifers fed 1 ×/d were displaced twice as frequently than heifers fed 2 ×/d. Regardless of treatment, heifers spent a similar amount of time lying down and standing without eating. Overall, providing sufficient feed bunk space to allow all limit-fed heifers to feed simultaneously improves feed efficiency and ADG and reduces variability in feeding time. Additionally, although delivering feed 1 ×/d resulted in increased competition, it also enabled heifers to gain adequate weight and spend more time feeding each day.

Short communication: Limit feeding dairy heifers: effect of feed bunk space and provision of a low-nutritive feedstuff.

The objectives of this study were to examine the behavioral effects of providing limit-fed dairy heifers an increased amount of feed bunk space compared with recommended feed bunk allowance, and to determine if the effects of provision of extra bunk space would be comparable to those seen when limit-fed heifers are provided a low-nutritive feedstuff. Twelve Holstein dairy heifers (381.1 ± 44.8 d of age, 417.3 ± 47.9 kg), divided into groups of 4, were exposed to each of 3 treatments using a 3 × 3 Latin square design with 7-d periods. The treatments were (1) 0.68 m of feed bunk space/heifer (TMR-0.68), (2) 0.34 m of feed bunk space/heifer (TMR-0.34), and (3) 0.34 m of feed bunk space/heifer with an additional 0.34 m of feed bunk space available for free-choice straw (TMR-S). The total mixed ration was fed once daily at a restricted level (1.83% of body weight) and contained (dry matter basis) 19.9% alfalfa/grass haylage, 20.1% corn silage, 49.6% high-moisture corn, and 10.4% protein supplement. Group dry matter intake (DMI) was recorded daily. Behavior at the feed bunk was recorded for the last 4 d of each treatment period. Due to the provision of straw, DMI was highest on the TMR-S treatment compared with the other treatments (9.4 vs. 7.8 kg/d). Heifers spent the most time feeding when on the TMR-S treatment (147.7 min/d), with no difference in feeding time between the limit-fed TMR treatments (64.5 min/d). Within the TMR-S treatment, feeding time on the straw was 76.9 min/d; thus, the rate of consumption of only the TMR was similar across all treatments. Unrewarded time at the feed bunk (when no feed was present) did not differ between treatments. Heifers did not differ in competitive behavior when on the limit-fed TMR treatments (13.1 displacements/heifer per day). However, while on the TMR-S treatment, heifers displaced each other more frequently (23.8 displacements/heifer per day) than while on the other 2 treatments. Overall, results suggest that neither increased feed bunk space nor provision of straw will reduce competition for, or slow consumption rates of, a limit-fed TMR. The provision of straw alongside a limit-fed TMR did increase DMI, which would contribute to further rumen fill, and allowed heifers to increase their time spent feeding throughout the day.

Feed delivery method affects the learning of feeding and competitive behavior in dairy heifers.

The objective of this study was to determine how different feeding methods may affect the learning of feeding, sorting, and competitive behavior of growing dairy heifers. We hypothesized that heifers previously fed a total mixed ration (TMR) would distribute their feeding time more evenly throughout the day, sort the new ration less, compete less for feed, maintain a more solid fecal consistency, and continue to grow rapidly compared with heifers previously fed a top-dressed ration (TDR). Thirty-two Holstein heifers (237.2+/-21.9 d of age) were divided into 8 groups of 4 and exposed to 1 of 2 treatments for 13 wk: 1) TMR or 2) TDR, with each containing 65% grass/alfalfa haylage and 35% textured concentrate on a dry matter (DM) basis. Following this feeding period, all heifers were switched to an unfamiliar TMR containing 56.1% grass/alfalfa haylage, 21.0% corn silage, 21.0% high-moisture corn, and 1.9% mineral supplement (DM basis) for 7 wk. Group DM intakes were recorded daily throughout the experiment. Feeding behavior, recorded using time-lapse video, and sorting behavior were measured for 7 d during wk 1, 4, and 7 after the dietary change. Feeding competition was measured on d 2, 4, and 6 of each recording week. Sorting activity was determined through particle size analysis of the fresh feed and orts. The particle size separator separated feed into 4 fractions (long, medium, short, and fine). Sorting of each fraction was calculated as actual intake expressed as a percentage of predicted intake. Animals were scored for fecal consistency twice weekly, using a scale from 1 (liquid) to 4 (solid). Heifers were weighed every 2 wk. Neither DM intake (9.0 kg/d) nor average daily gain (1.2 kg/d) differed between treatments. Sorting also did not differ between treatments. Heifers tended to spend more time feeding if they had previously been fed a TDR (198.8 vs. 186.8 min/d). As they had done before the dietary change, heifers previously fed the TDR spent more time at the bunk in the 2h following feed delivery (40.6 vs. 25.9 min/d). Heifers previously fed the TDR were displaced from the feed bunk more frequently than heifers previously fed the TMR (23.0 vs. 13.1 times/d), particularly during the 2-h period following feed delivery. Fecal scores were lower (more fluid in consistency) for heifers originally fed the TDR (3.2 vs. 3.7). The continued difference in feed bunk competition suggests that heifers previously fed the TDR had learned these patterns in the past, retaining them even when switched to an unfamiliar ration. Furthermore, lower fecal scores for heifers previously fed the TDR suggest altered rumen fermentation, possibly because of altered diurnal consumption patterns. These results show that feeding a TMR to replacement dairy heifers from a young age promotes a more even diurnal feeding pattern, minimizes feed bunk competition, and promotes a more solid fecal consistency.

Effect of feed delivery method on the behavior and growth of dairy heifers.

The objective of this study was to determine the effects of feed delivery method on growth, feeding competition, feeding, and sorting behavior of dairy heifers. Thirty-two Holstein heifers (146.2+/-21.9 d of age) were divided into 8 groups of 4 and exposed to 1 of 2 feed delivery treatments for 13 wk. The treatment rations contained 65% grass/alfalfa haylage and 35% textured concentrate (on a dry matter basis) fed as a 1) total mixed ration (TMR) or 2) top-dressed ration (TDR). Group dry matter intakes were recorded daily throughout the experiment. Feeding behavior, recorded using time-lapse video, and sorting behavior were measured for 7 d during each of wk 1, 5, 9, and 13. Sorting activity was determined through particle size analysis of the fresh feed and orts. The particle size separator separated feed into 4 fractions (long, medium, short, and fine). Sorting of each fraction was calculated as actual intake expressed as a percentage of predicted intake. Heifers were fecal scored for consistency of stool twice weekly using a scale from 1 (liquid) to 4 (solid); heifers were weighed every 2 wk. Neither dry matter intake (7.3 kg/d) nor average daily gain (1.3 kg/d) differed between treatments. Heifers fed the TDR tended to consume less neutral detergent fiber than heifers fed the TMR (4.77 vs. 4.91 kg/d). Heifers fed the TDR sorted against long particles (98.9 vs. 96.0%) and consumed short particles (100.3 vs. 101.1%) to a greater extent than did heifers fed the TMR. Daily feeding time did not differ between treatments (201.0 min/d), but heifers on the TDR did spend more time at the bunk in the 2h following feed delivery (50.1 vs. 32.0 min/d). Heifers fed the TDR were displaced from the feed bunk more frequently than heifers fed the TMR (17.6 vs. 8.6 times/d), particularly during the 2-h period following feed delivery. Fecal scores were lower for heifers on the TDR (2.7 vs. 3.4). These results suggest that feeding a TMR to replacement dairy heifers may promote a more even diurnal feeding pattern, minimize feed sorting and feed bunk competition, and promote more solid fecal consistency.

Nutrient intake and feeding behavior of growing dairy heifers: effects of dietary dilution.

The objective of this study was to determine how the addition of straw to a total mixed ration offered to growing dairy heifers affects their nutrient intake and feeding behavior. Six prepubescent Holstein heifers (226.2 +/- 6.3 d old and weighing 250.1 +/- 17.7 kg), fed once per day for 1.0 kg/d of growth, were subjected to each of 3 treatment diets using a replicated 3 x 3 Latin square design. The treatment diets were 1) control (17.0% corn silage, 52.1% grass silage, 30.9% concentrate), 2) control diet with 10% straw, and 3) control diet with 20% straw. Dry matter intake and feeding behavior were monitored for 7 d for each animal on each treatment. Fresh feed and orts were sampled on the last 3 d of each treatment period for each heifer and were then subjected to particle size analysis. The particle size separator contained 3 screens (19, 8, and 1.18 mm) and a bottom pan, resulting in 4 fractions (long, medium, short, and fine). Sorting activity for each fraction was calculated as actual intake expressed as a percentage of the predicted intake. Heifers sorted against long particles and for short particles on all 3 diets. On the 10 or 20% straw diets the heifers sorted for medium particles. Heifers also sorted for fine particles on the 20% straw diet. There was a linear increase in sorting for medium, short, and fine particles with increased straw in the diet. Dry matter intake linearly decreased with increased straw in the diet. Feeding time and meal duration increased linearly with the addition of straw to the diet, whereas feeding rate, meal size, and meal frequency decreased with the addition of straw. Requirements for maintenance and growth of 1.0 kg/d were sufficiently met when the animals consumed the control and 10% straw diet. On the 20% straw diet the animals consumed sufficient nutrients to achieve a 0.9 kg/d growth rate. These results indicate that the addition of straw to the diet of prepubescent heifers strongly influences their sorting behavior. Despite this sorting, the results suggest that a low-quality feedstuff may be included in the diet to target nutrient intake and reduce feed costs without negatively affecting feeding behavior or growth potential.