Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on July 9, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Short Communication
Short Communication Risk factors for lameness on 10 dairy farms in Ireland N. Doherty, S. J. More, J. Somers Lameness is an important welfare issue for dairy cows (O’Callaghan and others 2003) and has significant economic implications (Hoffman and others 2012). The aetiology of lameness is multifactorial and the result of interactions between the environment, farm management, nutrition and genetics (Leonard and others 1998). Detailed research on risk factors for lameness have been conducted in several countries, particularly New Zealand, the UK and the USA, and are known to vary with different management systems (Chesterton and others 1989). To date, lameness is best understood in cattle-managed in-housing, with limited knowledge available for other management systems. In Ireland, the prevalence of lameness in cows at grass and indoors is 17 per cent and 42 per cent, respectively (Boyle and Olmos 2008). This is similar to results from the UK, with relatively comparable management systems and climate, with 15 per cent for grazing herds and 39 per cent for zerograzing herds (Haskell and others 2006). With the impending abolition of quotas within the European Union, many farmers will be seeking to increase their herd size, and it is therefore imperative that relevant risk factors are identified and corrected. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate risk factors for lameness on 10 dairy farms in Ireland. This investigation was conducted as part of a larger study on lameness and fertility, conducted on 10 dairy farms in Co. Kildare, Ireland. These 10 farms were all participants in an on-going herd health programme, conducted by veterinarians at University College Dublin. A review of relevant literature was conducted to identify known risk factors for lameness in dairy cattle. Based on this review, 11 risk factors were identified as relevant to this study. A prompt-sheet was developed (see online supplementary material), to form the basis of data collection during a single farm visit, including a semistructured interview with each farmer. The prompt-sheet consisted of the relevant risk factors grouped in four separate sections: housing (subsections: type of flooring, cubicles, layout of shed), cow movement (subsections: parlour yard, gathering of animals for milking, roadways), current lameness management strategy (subsections: hoof-paring, foot bathing, locomotion scoring), and heifer management strategy (subsections: quality of grazing land and introduction to the milking herd). Visits to each study farm were conducted by the senior author during a two-week period in June 2013. During a single visit of approximately three hours to each farm, the prompt-sheet was used to guide data collection, conducted through observation and measurement, at all relevant farm facilities. Each visit was concluded by interviewing the farmer during which time any additional information or insights were gathered. At the time of these visits, the author had no knowledge of the prevalence of lameness on any of the participating farms. These latter data were collected Veterinary Record (2014) N. Doherty, S. J. More, MVB, PhD, DipPM, MANZCVS, FANZCVS, DipECBHM, DipECVPH J. Somers, MVM, UCD School of Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland;
doi: 10.1136/vr.102312 E-mail for correspondence: [email protected] Provenance: not commissioned; externally peer reviewed Accepted April 15, 2014
independently by the third author on at least four separate visits to each farm during March–August 2013. At each visit, a visual lameness assessment was conducted on the entire milking herd using the Sprecher Scale (Sprecher and others 1997). All data were transcribed to Excel, where descriptive methods were used during data analysis. General information about the 10 study farms is presented in Table 1. On these 10 farms, an average of between 5 per cent and 17 per cent of adult cows was considered lame across all lameness assessment visits during March–August 2013 (Table 2). A summary of the risk factors identified on the participating farms is presented in Table 3. There was an overall lameness prevalence of 11 per cent on the study farms, albeit with some between-farm variation, which compares favourably with international studies. On most farms, a range of recognised risk factors was present, despite relatively low levels of lameness, highlighting the complex multifactorial nature of this condition. On all farms, regular/routine locomotion scoring had only recently been introduced, as part of the larger lameness study, followed with prompt treatment of any lame cows by a skilled hoof/foot parer, lowering the number of chronically lame animals. Without this intervention, lameness would likely have been more problematic, due to existing risk factors, that is, ‘get lame-stay lame’ (Cook 2006). One risk factor common to all 10 farms was the quality of the surface on roadways leading to and from the milking parlour. Bad weather, poor herding skills (Clarkson and Ward 1991) and long walking distances are each recognised to exacerbate roadway-related lameness. Although the cows were at pasture, the effects of the housing environment may have affected the lameness scores during assessment visits in early 2013. Work by (Olmos and others 2009) found that cows require a period of at least 85 days at pasture to recover from the winter housing and postpartum period. Due to time constraints it was not feasible to investigate all risk factors for lameness cited in the literature. This study provides a basis for detailed future work on lameness in dairy cattle in Ireland. Using semiquantitative methods, this study investigated a comprehensive, but TABLE 1: General information about the 10 study farms Farm
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Number of adult milking cows
79
120
115
80
150
157
146
185
72
100
Number of units in milking parlour
10
14
10
12
20
10
20
24
6
12
7735 305-day milk yield (kg)
7027
6986
6880
6329 6439 6323
6283
5875 8157
TABLE 2: Average lameness assessment across all farm visits during March–August 2013 at each of the 10 study farms Average lameness assessment across all farm visits Farm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Overall
Sound (%)
Mild (%)
Lame (%)
58 71 66 70 57 56 67 53 54 55 61
29 24 25 24 30 32 24 30 34 32 29
13 5 9 6 13 12 9 17 12 13 11
An animal was considered sound with a lameness score of 1 on the Sprecher scale, mild if score 2, and lame if score 3, 4 or 5
June 14, 2014 | Veterinary Record
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on July 9, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Short Communication TABLE 3: Risk factors for lameness on the 10 study farms Farm Risk factor (A) Housing Type of flooring Automatic scrapers Worn concrete Plain concrete Cubicles Length Length Width Width Slope Kerb height Bedding Mats Stocking density Layout of shed Blind alleys Narrow passageways Water trough space per cow (B) Cow movements Parlour yard Surface Daily standing time Build-up of manure Exit Gathering of animals for milking Goads
Average distance to parlour Roadways Bottle necks/sharp bends Stony/uneven Grassy margins Cross-fall Width (C) Lameness management strategy Foot paring frequency Foot bathing
Foot bathing frequency Locomotion scoring (D) Heifer management strategy Quality of grazing land Introduction to the milking herd
Head to head
Short Communication
Short Communication Risk factors for lameness on 10 dairy farms in Ireland N. Doherty, S. J. More, J. Somers Lameness is an important welfare issue for dairy cows (O’Callaghan and others 2003) and has significant economic implications (Hoffman and others 2012). The aetiology of lameness is multifactorial and the result of interactions between the environment, farm management, nutrition and genetics (Leonard and others 1998). Detailed research on risk factors for lameness have been conducted in several countries, particularly New Zealand, the UK and the USA, and are known to vary with different management systems (Chesterton and others 1989). To date, lameness is best understood in cattle-managed in-housing, with limited knowledge available for other management systems. In Ireland, the prevalence of lameness in cows at grass and indoors is 17 per cent and 42 per cent, respectively (Boyle and Olmos 2008). This is similar to results from the UK, with relatively comparable management systems and climate, with 15 per cent for grazing herds and 39 per cent for zerograzing herds (Haskell and others 2006). With the impending abolition of quotas within the European Union, many farmers will be seeking to increase their herd size, and it is therefore imperative that relevant risk factors are identified and corrected. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate risk factors for lameness on 10 dairy farms in Ireland. This investigation was conducted as part of a larger study on lameness and fertility, conducted on 10 dairy farms in Co. Kildare, Ireland. These 10 farms were all participants in an on-going herd health programme, conducted by veterinarians at University College Dublin. A review of relevant literature was conducted to identify known risk factors for lameness in dairy cattle. Based on this review, 11 risk factors were identified as relevant to this study. A prompt-sheet was developed (see online supplementary material), to form the basis of data collection during a single farm visit, including a semistructured interview with each farmer. The prompt-sheet consisted of the relevant risk factors grouped in four separate sections: housing (subsections: type of flooring, cubicles, layout of shed), cow movement (subsections: parlour yard, gathering of animals for milking, roadways), current lameness management strategy (subsections: hoof-paring, foot bathing, locomotion scoring), and heifer management strategy (subsections: quality of grazing land and introduction to the milking herd). Visits to each study farm were conducted by the senior author during a two-week period in June 2013. During a single visit of approximately three hours to each farm, the prompt-sheet was used to guide data collection, conducted through observation and measurement, at all relevant farm facilities. Each visit was concluded by interviewing the farmer during which time any additional information or insights were gathered. At the time of these visits, the author had no knowledge of the prevalence of lameness on any of the participating farms. These latter data were collected Veterinary Record (2014) N. Doherty, S. J. More, MVB, PhD, DipPM, MANZCVS, FANZCVS, DipECBHM, DipECVPH J. Somers, MVM, UCD School of Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland;
doi: 10.1136/vr.102312 E-mail for correspondence: [email protected] Provenance: not commissioned; externally peer reviewed Accepted April 15, 2014
independently by the third author on at least four separate visits to each farm during March–August 2013. At each visit, a visual lameness assessment was conducted on the entire milking herd using the Sprecher Scale (Sprecher and others 1997). All data were transcribed to Excel, where descriptive methods were used during data analysis. General information about the 10 study farms is presented in Table 1. On these 10 farms, an average of between 5 per cent and 17 per cent of adult cows was considered lame across all lameness assessment visits during March–August 2013 (Table 2). A summary of the risk factors identified on the participating farms is presented in Table 3. There was an overall lameness prevalence of 11 per cent on the study farms, albeit with some between-farm variation, which compares favourably with international studies. On most farms, a range of recognised risk factors was present, despite relatively low levels of lameness, highlighting the complex multifactorial nature of this condition. On all farms, regular/routine locomotion scoring had only recently been introduced, as part of the larger lameness study, followed with prompt treatment of any lame cows by a skilled hoof/foot parer, lowering the number of chronically lame animals. Without this intervention, lameness would likely have been more problematic, due to existing risk factors, that is, ‘get lame-stay lame’ (Cook 2006). One risk factor common to all 10 farms was the quality of the surface on roadways leading to and from the milking parlour. Bad weather, poor herding skills (Clarkson and Ward 1991) and long walking distances are each recognised to exacerbate roadway-related lameness. Although the cows were at pasture, the effects of the housing environment may have affected the lameness scores during assessment visits in early 2013. Work by (Olmos and others 2009) found that cows require a period of at least 85 days at pasture to recover from the winter housing and postpartum period. Due to time constraints it was not feasible to investigate all risk factors for lameness cited in the literature. This study provides a basis for detailed future work on lameness in dairy cattle in Ireland. Using semiquantitative methods, this study investigated a comprehensive, but TABLE 1: General information about the 10 study farms Farm
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Number of adult milking cows
79
120
115
80
150
157
146
185
72
100
Number of units in milking parlour
10
14
10
12
20
10
20
24
6
12
7735 305-day milk yield (kg)
7027
6986
6880
6329 6439 6323
6283
5875 8157
TABLE 2: Average lameness assessment across all farm visits during March–August 2013 at each of the 10 study farms Average lameness assessment across all farm visits Farm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Overall
Sound (%)
Mild (%)
Lame (%)
58 71 66 70 57 56 67 53 54 55 61
29 24 25 24 30 32 24 30 34 32 29
13 5 9 6 13 12 9 17 12 13 11
An animal was considered sound with a lameness score of 1 on the Sprecher scale, mild if score 2, and lame if score 3, 4 or 5
June 14, 2014 | Veterinary Record
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on July 9, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Short Communication TABLE 3: Risk factors for lameness on the 10 study farms Farm Risk factor (A) Housing Type of flooring Automatic scrapers Worn concrete Plain concrete Cubicles Length Length Width Width Slope Kerb height Bedding Mats Stocking density Layout of shed Blind alleys Narrow passageways Water trough space per cow (B) Cow movements Parlour yard Surface Daily standing time Build-up of manure Exit Gathering of animals for milking Goads
Average distance to parlour Roadways Bottle necks/sharp bends Stony/uneven Grassy margins Cross-fall Width (C) Lameness management strategy Foot paring frequency Foot bathing
Foot bathing frequency Locomotion scoring (D) Heifer management strategy Quality of grazing land Introduction to the milking herd
Head to head
