Hertl*, Y. Schukken, D. Bar, G. Bennett, R. González, B. Rauch, F. Welcome, L. Tauer, Y. Gröhn

The objective of this study was to estimate the effects of recurrent episodes of different types of clinical mastitis (CM) caused by gram-positive (Streptococcus spp., Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus spp.) and gram-negative (Escherichia coli, Klebsiella, Citrobacter, Enterobacter, Pseudomonas) bacteria, and other organisms (Arcanobacterium pyogenes, Mycoplasma, Corynebacterium bovis, yeast, miscellaneous) on the probability of mortality and culling in Holstein dairy cows. Data from 30,233 lactations in cows of 7 dairy farms in New York State were analyzed. Cows were followed for the first 10 mo in lactation, or until death or culling occurred, or until the end of our study period. Generalized linear mixed models with a AABP Newsletter 9 October 2011



Poisson error distribution were used to study the effects of recurrent cases of the different types of CM and several other factors (herd, parity, month of lactation, current year and season, profitability, net replacement cost, other diseases) on cows’ probability of death (model 1) or being culled (model 2). Primiparous and multiparous cows were modeled separately because they had different risks of mortality and culling and potentially different CM effects on mortality and culling. Approximately 30% of multiparous cows had at least one case of CM in lactation compared with 16.6% of primiparous cows. Multipara also had higher lactational incidence risks of second (10.7%) and third (4.4%) cases than primipara (3.7% and 1.1%, respectively). For primipara, CM increased the probability of death, with each successive case occurring in a month being increasingly lethal. In multipara, gram-negative CM increased the probability of death, especially when the gram-negative case was the first or second CM case in lactation. Primiparous cows with CM were more likely to be culled after CM than if they did not have CM, particularly after a second or third case. In multipara, any type of CM increased the probability of being culled. Gram-negative CM cases were associated with the numerically highest risk of culling.

*Section of Epidemiology, Department of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY

Appl Anim Behaviour Sci October 2011

Vol. 134, No. 1-2, pp. 16-22

Effects of Behaviour on the Development of Claw Lesions in Early Lactation Dairy Cows

S. Dippel*, C. Tucker, C. Winckler, D. Weary

Claw lesions such as haemorrhages (HAEM) or white line separation (WLS) are caused by a variety of factors. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between behaviour and the development of claw lesions. Holstein cows (n = 33) were housed in four pens with sand-bedded cubicles and solid concrete flooring, and stocked at two different densities in order to increase variation in cubicle use. Lying, feeding and standing behaviour were recorded for 48 consecutive hours per week during the first 3 weeks after calving using 10 min scan sampling from video. Claw health was scored at approximately 11, 40, 69, and 95 days after calving. For each time point and cow, we calculated four hoof health scores by summing the respective lesion severity scores for all four feet: total HAEM (HAEM-T), HAEM sole only (HAEM-S), HAEM white line only (HAEM-W), and total WLS (WLS-T). Analysis consisted of linear mixed models with repeated observations and HAEM-T, HAEM-S, HAEM-W and WLS-T, respectively, as dependent variables. The lesion scores at first claw scoring were included as covariates in each model. Cows that spent more time standing with their front feet in the cubicle had significantly higher haemorrhage scores in all feet (HAEM-T). Lying time was not associated with any of the lesion scores, perhaps because cubicle design and management encouraged reasonable lying times (11.0 h/d on average). In conclusion, standing partially in the cubicle increased the risk of claw haemorrhages in dairy cows after calving. Barns should be designed and managed to minimize this behaviour.

* BOKU – University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Division of Livestock Sciences, Gregor-Mendel-Strasse 33, 1180 Vienna, Austria

MY THOUGHTS ON THE CONKLIN DAIRY SALES VIDEO

By Donald E. Sanders, D.V.M., Dip. ACT, PAS

You’ve probably seen the video that’s been storming the networks and the Internet—the one of an individual beating up and torturing cows and calves at Conklin Dairy Sales in Plain City. I found it so repugnant that I turned the video off. I was angry and ready to string up the individual who was shown committing these atrocities. Several of my dairy clients reported similar emotions.
Our team at the OSU Large Animal Field Service has provided veterinary services for Conklin Dairy Sales for many years. We attend to animals there several times a week. In all of this time, no one in our group has ever seen signs of abuse on any animal at this operation.
Mercy for Animals
The video was shot by a Mercy for Animals undercover agent over a period of seven weeks. As repugnant as the abuse itself is the fact that the videographer taped this sociopath, on several occasions, without ever calling the authorities or the owner to end the senseless violence. He kept the camera running. And Mercy for Animals chose to wait to release the video until the timing was right to advance their political agenda.
At the time, Ohio’s legislature was voting on key animal welfare issues, and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) needed extra steam to drive its collection of signatures to put a referendum on the November ballot. The ballot issue would restrict farmers’ production practices and dictate that the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board (OLCSB) adopts specific livestock care standards. With this issue the HSUS is ignoring the voice of Ohio voters who last November overwhelmingly granted the OLCSB the authority to define the standards.
Mercy for Animals was founded by Nathan Runkle of Champaign County, Ohio. His father, Dr. Mark Runkle, is a veterinarian. Nathan and his father were clients of Dr. Judy and me, dating back 15 to 20 years. On occasion we vaccinated their horses and dogs and examined Jersey cows they purchased from the stockyards. Nathan’s father has achieved great financial success in the computer industry, enabling Nathan to pursue his passion for extreme animal activism. Professional ethics prevent me from describing some of these extremes, which have caused great turmoil in animal food agriculture. Mercy for Animals has in this case and others indicted an entire industry for the unfortunate, isolated acts of a few individuals.
Speaking for my clients
I find this organization’s tactics repugnant as dairy farmers have consistently earned my deep respect in my many years of getting to know them personally and professionally. I know that cow comfort is a high priority to my clients. Every dairy farmer knows that to be their most productive cows require pampering, comfortable housing and a highly nutritious diet.
For many of my clients’ cows, life is like a day at the beach, as they lie in sand beds provided for them, contentedly chewing their cud, their eyes half closed. All the while the dairy farmer works like the dickens.
Nearly all of my dairy clients schedule weekly or bi-weekly routine health care visits. In addition we vets serve as the equivalent of an urgent care program, 24/7, between the regular visits when cows have special needs such as calving. Plus, each cow receives vaccinations two or three times a year to ensure she doesn’t catch something contagious. Cows also get once or twice annual pedicures and special attention when they develop a sore foot between appointments. The special treatment begins at birth. Calves receive their mama’s first milk, called colostrum, within six hours of coming into the world. Dairymen know very well that a calf gets its best start in life from that first milk, which is chock full of antibodies, protective proteins, minerals and vitamins.
Dairymen committed to consumers
This special care results in a superior product for consumers. Dairy farmers are very concerned about providing the public, healthful, nutritious food. They withhold from the market the milk of cows that require medication, antibiotics or other treatment—until the milk tests free of residual medication. Milk is sampled at the farm before it’s loaded for shipment and then again at the processing plant to double check against residues. All of these precautions are taken because America’s dairy farmers are diligent, take pride in their product and have a deep passion for the animals in their care.
Guilt by association?
An entire dairy operation, whether involved in marketing dairy replacement animals or producing milk, can overnight go down the drain when a rogue employee chooses to act out his aggressions. And our entire nation and world are in a furor, unjustly linking the entire American dairy industry to the actions of one individual. If only our nation and the press reacted so strongly against a pedophile abusing dozens of children. Where are you, Nathan Runkle, when we really need you?

CULLING MANAGEMENT

Codes of culling

Are your culls ready to ship?

Principles & Guidelines for Dairy Animal Well-Being

Culling considerations