Explore the vast range of titles available.

Prolonged cow-calf contact (CCC) could potentially improve dairy calf welfare. However, it is currently unknown how different types of CCC affect animals' biological functions. We evaluated health and performance parameters of dairy calves and their dams, where calves: (i) had no contact with their dam (NC), in which the calf was removed from the dam directly after birth ( n = 10); (ii) were allowed to have partial contact (PC) with their dam, in which the calf was housed in a calf pen adjacent to the cow area allowing physical contact on the initiative of the dam but no suckling ( n = 18); (iii) were allowed to have full contact (FC) with their dam, including suckling, in which calves were housed together with their dams in a free-stall barn ( n = 20). Throughout the first 7 weeks postpartum, data were collected on the health status, fecal microbiota, hematological profile, immune and hormonal parameters, and growth rates of calves, and on the health status, metabolic responses, and performance of dams. Overall, FC calves had more health issues ( P = 0.02) and a tendency for higher antibiotic usage ( P = 0.0 7) than NC calves. Additionally, FC calves showed elevated levels of erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, and leukocytes on day 49 compared to NC calves ( P < 0.001). Calf fecal microbiota changed over time, and we found preliminary evidence that fecal microbiota is affected by the type of CCC, as reflected by differences in relative abundances of taxa including Lactobacillus in FC calves compared to NC and PC calves except on days 7 and 66. The FC calves had a greater average daily gain in body weight than NC and PC calves ( P = 0.002). Cow health was not affected by the type of CCC, although in the first 7 weeks of lactation FC cows had a lower machine-gained milk yield accompanied by a lower fat percentage than NC and PC cows ( P < 0.001). These results indicate that full contact posed a challenge for calf health, presumably because the housing conditions of FC calves in this experimental context were suboptimal. Secondly, ad libitum suckling leads to higher weight gains and negatively affected milk fat content besides machine-gained yields. More research into strategies to improve cow-calf housing and management in CCC systems is warranted.

Due to increasing public concern regarding separation of the dairy cow and calf within the first days after birth, alternative systems, where cows and calves stay in contact for an extended period, are receiving increasing interest from a broad array of researchers and other stakeholders. With more research in the area, there is a risk of inconsistencies emerging in the use of terminology. To create a better consensus in further discussions, the aim of this Research Reflection is to provide definitions and propose a common terminology for cow-calf contact in dairy production. We also suggest definitions for various systems allowing cow-calf contact and describe the distinct phases of cow-calf contact systems.

Early cow-calf separation prevents much of cows’ natural maternal behaviour. Early separation is thought to prevent the development of a cow-calf bond. To assess this bond, we measured motivation of dairy cows to reunite with their calf. To vary the degree of bonding, some cows were allowed continued contact with their calf and others were separated from their calf soon after birth, following standard practice on most farms. Among cows allowed continued contact, some were able to suckle their calf and others were prevented from suckling (by covering the cow’s udder with an udder net). Cows were habituated to the weighted-gate apparatus before calving by daily training with the (un-weighted) gate. After calving, cow willingness to use the gate was assessed by determining if she would push open the gate to access to her own calf. Testing occurred once daily, with weight on the gate gradually increased. After passing through the gate, the dam’s calf-directed behaviour was recorded. Suckled cows pushed a greater maximum weight (45.8 ± 7.8 kg) than separated cows (21.6 ± 6.7 kg) and non-suckled cows (24.3 ± 4.5 kg), with no differences between separated and non-suckled cows. Once reunited, latency to make nose contact and duration of licking did not differ between treatments. We conclude that motivation for calf contact is greater for cows that are suckled.

An important obstacle toward sustainably produced animal-source food is the existence of so-called ‘surplus animals’, which are by-products of the production of dairy products and eggs, and ‘unwanted’ due to their perceived low value. Although this depends on the country, in Europe many surplus dairy calves are transported to veal farms to be raised for 6 months until slaughter. The aim of this article is to present ideas for alternative future systems for the dairy-veal chain, including an overview of current challenges and improvement strategies for calf welfare. This dairy-veal chain presents a number of potential concerns for calf welfare, including transportation of young animals, high risk of disease and barren housing. Many incremental changes have been suggested in past literature to lift the welfare of veal calves, including reducing transportation, transporting calves at an older age, better health screening, and pens with enrichment and bedding. The Netherlands is at the centre of the veal sector import-export flow in Europe and is one of the main veal producers in the world. The Dutch government has recently presented a report with three alternative ‘scenarios’ for the raising of these surplus dairy calves, which are expected to lead to improvements in animals welfare. The first scenario is a restriction on transport of <100km, leading to more local production of dairy-veal. The second scenario is a delay on the transportation of surplus calves from 2 weeks to 3 months of age, handing dairy farmers a much larger role in the raising of these calves. This delay would ensure that calves are more robust and less vulnerable to disease at the time that they are transported to the veal farm. The third scenario proposes an alternative system, where the veal sector is eradicated and surplus dairy calves are raised at the dairy farm of origin until slaughter. We, like others before us, question the impact of small incremental changes on calf welfare, arguing that improvements at one end could potentially lead to worsening of welfare at the other end, and prefer to focus on system changes, such as the use of dual-purpose cattle breeds. We do not however believe that system changes can be created and implemented with the sole input of animal welfare scientists. This work is hence just one piece of the puzzle towards the sustainable production of milk and meat, and more specifically the sustainable rearing of surplus calves.