Effect of summer grazing on welfare of dairy cows reared in mountain tie-stall barns

Traditional mountain farms have an important economic, social and environmental role. The Alps management system for dairy cows consists of animals kept indoors from autumn to spring, mostly in tie-stalls, and moved to mountain pasture in summer. The aim of our study was to assess the effect of mountain summer grazing on the welfare of dairy cows housed in tie-stall barns. Twenty-four farms were considered. In twelve of them, animals were reared in tie-stalls and moved to mountain pasture for three months in summer; they were visited three times: (i) four weeks before grazing during the indoor period in the stall; (ii) about three weeks after the start of grazing; and (iii) in the stall, in autumn, at least three weeks after returning from grazing. The other twelve farms kept the animals in tie-stalls all year; they were visited once in autumn. Data were collected following a protocol that considers animal-based measures and structure information on the basis of Quality Welfare Consortium® indications. Data allowed the calculation of both the Animal Needs Index score (ANI 35L) and an overall assessment of the cows' welfare obtained from three general aspects: housing, animal's physical condition, and animal's behaviour. Summer grazing had a significant positive effect on injuries, lameness and animal's rising duration but a negative effect on faeces consistency. Moreover, a reduction of tongue playing was observed. The ANI 35L and the overall assessment did not show significant differences linked to summer grazing, which tended to have a positive but temporary effect on animal behaviour

Group Space Allowance Has Little Effect on Sow Health, Productivity, or Welfare in a Free-Access Stall System

Free-access stalls allow sows to choose the protection of a stall or use of a shared group space. This study investigated the effect of group space width, 0.91 (SS), 2.13 (IS), and 3.05 (LS) m, on the health, production, behavior, and welfare of gestating sows. Nine replications of 21 (N = 189) gestating sows were used. At gestational d 35.4 ± 2.3, the pregnant sows were distributed into 3 pens of 7 sows, where they remained until 104.6 ± 3.5 d. Each treatment pen had 7 free-access stalls and a group space that together provided 1.93 (SS), 2.68 (IS), or 3.24 (LS) m2/sow. Baseline measurements were obtained before mixing. Back fat depth, BW, BCS, and lameness were measured monthly, and skin lesions were scored weekly. Blood was collected monthly for hematological, immunological, and cortisol analyses. Sow behavior was video recorded continuously during the initial 4 d of treatment and 24 h every other week thereafter. Behavior was analyzed for location, posture, pen investigation, social contact, and aggression. Skin response to the mitogen concanavalin A (Con A) was tested at mean gestational d 106. Litter characteristics including size and weight were collected at birth and weaning. The data were analyzed using a mixed model. Multiple comparisons were adjusted with the Tukey-Kramer and Bejamini-Hochberg methods. Group space allowance had no effect on any measure of sow health, physiology, or production (P ≥ 0.10). Sows in the SS, IS, and LS pens spent 77.88% ± 3.88%, 66.02% ± 3.87%, and 63.64% ± 3.91%, respectively, of their time in the free-access stalls (P = 0.12). However, SS sows used the group space less than IS and LS sows (P = 0.01). Overall, pen investigatory behavior was not affected by group space allowance (P = 0.91). Sows in the LS pens spent more time in a social group than SS sows (P = 0.02), whereas sows in IS pens were intermediate to, but not different from, the other treatments (P ≥ 0.10). The size of the social groups was also affected by the group space allowance (P = 0.03), with SS sows forming smaller groups than LS sows; again, IS sows were intermediate to, but not different from, the other treatments. Although the group space allowance had no measurable impact on the health, physiology, or productivity of the sows, the lower group space use and social contact of the SS sows reduced the behavioral diversity benefits of group housing and may indicate an avoidance of social stressors or a lack of physical comfort in the smallest pens

Locomotion disorders and skin and claw lesions in gestating sows housed in dynamic versus static groups

Lameness and lesions to the skin and claws of sows in group housing are commonly occurring indicators of reduced welfare. Typically, these problems are more common in group housing than in individual housing systems. Group management type (dynamic versus static) and stage of gestation influence the behavior of the animals, which in turn influences the occurrence of these problems. The present study compared prevalence, incidence and mean scores of lameness and skin and claw lesions in static versus dynamic group housed sows at different stages of gestation during three consecutive reproductive cycles. A total of 10 Belgian sow herds were monitored; 5 in which dynamic groups and 5 in which static groups were utilized. All sows were visually assessed for lameness and skin lesions three times per cycle and the claws of the hind limbs were assessed once per cycle. Lameness and claw lesions were assessed using visual analogue scales. Static groups, in comparison with dynamic groups, demonstrated lower lameness scores (P<0.05) and decreased skin lesion prevalence (24.9 vs. 47.3%, P<0.05) at the end of gestation. There was no difference between treatment group regarding claw lesion prevalence with 75.5% of sows demonstrating claw lesions regardless of group management. Prevalences of lameness (22.4 vs. 8.9%, P<0.05) and skin lesions (46.6 vs. 4.4%, P<0.05) were highest during the group-housed phase compared to the individually housed phases. Although the prevalence of lameness and skin lesions did not differ three days after grouping versus at the end of the group-housing phase, their incidence peaked during the first three days after moving from the insemination stalls to the group. In conclusion, the first three days after grouping was the most risky period for lameness incidence, but there was no significant difference between static or dynamic group management