Search

Simple Summary: Rearing facilities directly affect the viability and suitability of calf rearing systems on-farm; however, it is unknown whether facilities in the Republic of Ireland are fit for purpose, or sufficiently consider calf and farmer welfare. Current housing facilities and management practices on Irish farms were reviewed to determine if calves are reared in appropriate facilities with management decisions that safeguard calf and farmer welfare. Fifty-one farms in the Munster region of the Republic of Ireland were visited twice: (1) Pre-calving (December–January; farmer interview and housing structural evaluation); (2) During peak calving (January–March; short farmer interview and housing environmental evaluation). The results showed farmers planned sufficiently for spring, providing appropriate housing and space allowances for calves, facilitating group housing post-birth, influencing calf welfare positively. On-farm housing that was not purposely built for rearing calves (e.g., straw storage) is frequently converted to be used to rear calves, meaning sheds must be modified to appropriately cater for calf needs (e.g., drainage and slopes to facilitate cleaning out). Management components of rearing systems appear in line with current recommendations (e.g., advice against feeding waste milk), however some areas require attention (e.g., colostrum testing and extended working hours), to safeguard calf welfare and reduce associated workloads. In conclusion, housing provisions are sufficient for calf numbers born in Ireland, however housing and management should be continually reviewed to consider calf and farmer welfare. It is unknown whether calf rearing facilities in the Republic of Ireland are fit for purpose, or if facilities sufficiently consider calf and farmer welfare. The aim of this study was to review current calf housing facilities and management practices on Irish farms to determine if calves are reared in structurally appropriate facilities with management decisions that safeguard calf and farmer welfare. Fifty-one farms located in the Munster region in the Republic of Ireland were visited twice: (1) Pre-calving (December–January) and (2) During peak calving (January–March). During visit one, herd owners completed a questionnaire regarding calf housing and management practices on-farm and each facility used to rear calves was measured (measurement of cubic air capacity, ventilation, pen area, drainage etc.) without calves being present. Visit two consisted of a short interview with the principal calf manager to validate previously asked questions and environmental based measurements of each calf house that had been recorded, with any deviation from the first visit noted (measurements of temperature, wind speed, light intensity, facility provisions in-house and in-pen; calves present). Average herd size was 254, operating a spring calving system with a median calving season length of 11.6 weeks. While most farms expanded (88%; N = 51), this did not appear to have negatively affected calf space allowances (9.9% houses overcrowded at a space allowance of 1.5 m2/calf; N = 121). Calves were most commonly housed in group sizes of <12 (71.6% of all groupings; N = 394), with farmers moving away from individual housing for a period immediately post-birth, to grouping them immediately instead (58.8%; N = 51). The number of farmers testing colostrum was 31.4% (N = 51). Although the calving season was compact, most farmers were unconcerned about the upcoming spring workload (58.8%; N = 51). Farms appeared sufficiently prepared for spring, with most using the same number or less sheds during visit two than declared in visit one (76.5%; N = 51). To conclude, farmers made sufficient provision for calf housing and space allowances for calves that facilitated group housing post-birth. While structural and management components of rearing systems appear in line with sectoral recommendations, certain areas require attention on many farms (e.g., colostrum testing) to safeguard calf welfare and reduce the workload associated with calf rearing for farmers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Cow-calf contact increased pre-weaning calf growth and reduced labour at calving. • Full-time pasture-based cow-calf contact challenged calf health and daily labour. • Part-time cow-calf contact affected calf behaviour and post-weaning growth negatively. Preventing cow-calf contact in rearing systems has been scrutinised. This descriptive study investigated the effects of full-time contact outdoors on pasture (FT-O), part-time contact indoors (PT-I), or no contact indoors (NC-I) on calf health, behaviour, growth and labour in a pasture-based dairy system. Cows (n = 55) were balanced pre-calving on parity (16 primiparous and 39 multiparous), milk production (35 weeks) of previous lactation (4497 ± 193.8 kg), breed and predicted calving date. Contact pairs bonded for 48 h, whereas NC-I calves were separated from cows immediately, and remained in individual pens for three days before grouping. The FT-O pairs moved outdoors at 5 ± 3.3 days, only separated from cows for milking twice daily. Part-time cows were milked once-a-day (8:00) and grazed outdoors post-milking, returning indoors to calves from 15:00–8:00 the following morning. The NC-I calves were assigned to a feeding plan offering up to 9.5 L/day of milk replacer via automatic feeder. All calves had Ad libitum access to water, concentrates and forage. For NC-I calves, weaning started at 48 days, taking 12 days, for contact calves it started at 58 days, taking seven days. From birth to three weeks post-weaning, animal health and labour were evaluated twice-weekly, weight and linear body measurements were recorded weekly and behaviour was recorded weekly (daily during weaning). Following this, weighing was carried out fortnightly. Faecal related issues were seen most often in contact calves than NC-I calves. The PT-I calves also experienced eye issues more often than NC-I and FT-O calves. Illness resulted in 26 % of FT-O calves being removed from experiment (none removed from NC-I and PT-I). The PT-I calves expressed the most abnormal behaviours throughout weaning. Contact calves vocalised more at weaning than NC-I (7.8 % vs 1.5 % of time). The NC-I calves weighed less at 28 (49.0 vs 55.5 kg), 56 (69.0 vs 82.1 kg), 70 (79.0 vs 87.1 kg) and 77 (81.8 vs 90.8 kg) days than FT-O and PT-I calves. Labour associated with calving was greater for the NC-I system (00:15:56 ± 00:00:35) than contact systems (00:01:39 ± 00:00:35). Weekly labour was greater for the FT-O system (00:01:29 ± 00:00:05) than NC-I and PT-I systems (00:00:44 ± 00:00:05), which were similar. Weaning labour was negligible for NC-I calves (computerised feeder), but 00:02:08 ± 00:00:09 for contact systems, which were similar. To conclude, pre-weaning calf growth and reduced labour at calving as a result of cow-calf contact is challenged by calf health and human welfare (related to daily labour) in the FT-O system and by calf behaviour and stunted post-weaning growth in the PT-I system. Thus, cow-calf contact in pasture-based dairy systems require further research to safeguard calf and human welfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]