Is the profitability of Canadian tiestall farms associated with their performance on an animal welfare assessment?

• Published in: Journal of dairy science 2018-03, Vol.101 (3), p.2359-2369
• Main Authors: Villettaz Robichaud, M., Rushen, J., de Passillé, A.M., Vasseur, E., Haley, D.B., Pellerin, D.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Animal Husbandry; Animal Welfare; Animals; Breeding; Canada - epidemiology; Cattle - physiology; Cell Count - veterinary; Costs and Cost Analysis; Dairying; Farms; Female; Gait; Lactation; Milk - metabolism; Milk Proteins - analysis; proAction Initiative; productivity; profitability; tiestall; welfare
• ISSN: 0022-0302; 1525-3198
• DOI: 10.3168/jds.2017-13316

In order for dairy producers to comply with animal welfare recommendations, financial investments may be required. In Canada, a new dairy animal care assessment program is currently being implemented under the proAction Initiative to determine the extent to which certain aspects of the Code of Practice are being followed and to assess the care and well-being of dairy cattle on farm. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the association between meeting the proAction animal-based and the electric trainer placement criteria and certain aspects of productivity and profitability on tiestall dairy farms. The results of a previous on-farm cow comfort assessment conducted on 100 Canadian tiestall farms were used to simulate the results of a part of the proAction Animal Care assessment on these farms. Each farm's productivity and profitability data were retrieved from the regional dairy herd improvement associations. Univariable and multivariable linear regressions were used to evaluate the associations between meeting these proAction criteria and the farms' average yearly: corrected milk production, somatic cell count (SCC), calving interval, number of breedings/cow, culling rate, prevalence of cows in third or higher lactation, and margins per cow and per kilogram of quota calculated over replacement costs. The association between milk production and the proAction lameness criterion was moderated through an interaction with the milk production genetic index which resulted in an increase in milk production per year with increasing genetic index that was steeper in farms that met the proAction lameness criterion compared with farms that did not. Meeting the proAction body condition score criterion was associated with reduced SCC and meeting the proAction electric trainer placement criterion was associated with SCC through an interaction with the farms' average SCC genetic index. The increase in SCC with increasing SCC genetic index was milder in farms that met this criterion compared with farms that did not. Farms that met the proAction electric trainer placement criterion had 4.6% more cows in their third or greater lactation. These results suggest that some associations exist between the productivity of Canadian tiestall farms and meeting several parameters of the proAction Animal Care assessment. Meeting these criteria is unlikely to impose any economic burden to the dairy industry as a whole.