A comparison of indoor and outdoor calf housing systems using automated and manual feeding methods and their effect on calf health, behavior, growth, and labor

Housing and feeding are integral to calf rearing, and must meet calf needs while remaining functional for the farmer. This study compared health, behavior, growth, and labor requirements of calves housed in groups indoors and fed via an automatic or manual milk feeding system compared to calves manually fed in individual or group hutches outdoors. Seventy-six (49 Holstein Friesian [HF] and 27 HF × Jersey) dairy heifer calves were balanced for birth weight (35.2 ± 4.95 kg), birth date (1 February ± 7.2 d) and breed. The experiment was a randomized block design with four treatments; 1) indoor group housing with automated feeding (IN_AUTO; 12 calves per pen), 2) indoor group housing with manual feeding (IN_MAN; 12 calves per pen), 3) outdoor group hutch with manual feeding (OUT_G_MAN; 8 calves per pen), and 4) outdoor individual hutch with manual feeding (OUT_I_MAN; 6 calves: 1 per pen). Calves in OUT_treatments moved outdoors at 18 d (± 5.9 d). Each treatment was replicated once. Milk allowance increased gradually from 6 to 8 L/day (15% reconstitution rate) with ad libitum fresh water, concentrates, and hay offered from 3 d old. Gradual weaning occurred at 8 wk old. Measurements were divided into period 1; before movement outdoors, and period 2; after movement outdoors. Health was similar among treatments, regardless of period, with the most frequent score being zero (i.e., healthy). Summarized, standing and lying were observed 24.3% and 29.8%, respectively, in OUT_I_MAN calves, compared to 8.0% and 49.1%, for the other systems, which were similar. No difference in bodyweight (BW) existed between treatments, except at weaning where BW was lower for OUT_I_MAN (67.4 ± 2.84 kg) compared to IN_MAN (74.2 ± 2.01 kg), and day 102 where OUT_I_MAN (94.1 ± 2.85 kg) were lighter than IN_AUTO (101.1 ± 2.10 kg) (P= 0.047). Total labor input was greatest for OUT_I_MAN (00:02:02 per calf per day; hh:mm:ss) and least for IN_AUTO (00:00:21 per calf per day) (P< 0.001). The labor for feeding (00:00:29 per calf per day), feeding inspection (00:00:10 per calf per day), and cleaning equipment (00:00:30 per calf per day) was greatest for OUT_I_MAN. All calves showed good health and growth patterns. Differences in behavior expressed by calves in the OUT_I_MAN, compared to other treatments may indicate compromised welfare. Thus, although outdoor group hutches do not negatively impact calves, indoor housing, particularly using automated feeders, can improve labor efficiency.In seasonal calving dairy systems, cows calve in a period of approximately 12 wk. Demand for calf accommodation and labor is high during this time. Outdoor housing structures, such as robust plastic calf hutches, may offer an alternative to permanent indoor facilities. In this study, we compared indoor housing systems using automated and manual feeding methods and outdoor calf housing systems using manual feeding methods, to examine their effect on calf health, behavior, growth, and labor. Moving calves to their respective outdoor system commenced at approximately 18 d. This reflected a housing system with limited indoor availability, where older calves would be moved outdoors (allowing young calves to remain indoors). The most labor-efficient method of rearing was group housing calves indoors feeding via automatic feeder, followed by group housing indoors feeding via manual feeders, outdoor in group hutches, and outdoor in individual hutches with manual feeding. Calves in all systems showed health and growth patterns consistent with positive development. Calf behavior in the individual hutches outdoor may indicate compromised well-being, compared to all other systems. Thus, although outdoor group hutches do not negatively impact the calf, indoor housing, particularly when using automatic feeders, can provide improved labor efficiency.Indoor group housing using automatic feeders was the most labor-efficient system investigated. All calves displayed positive health and growth indicators; however, behavioral patterns of calves housed individually outdoors may suggest compromised well-being.