Many contemporary dairy cattle housing practices are at odds with societal perceptions of positive animal welfare. The public (i.e., those external to the dairy industry) typically emphasizes the importance of naturalness for dairy cattle, such as through provision of pasture, freedom of movement, and the ability to interact socially with conspecifics. Yet, in the United States, the majority of lactating dairy cattle are reportedly housed without any access to pasture, and almost 39% of dairy farms use tiestalls, which restrict movement and social interactions. In addition to being in conflict with public expectations, a lack of pasture access and restrictive housing systems are also in conflict with the animals' own motivations, which can adversely affect their welfare. For example, dairy cattle are highly motivated to access pasture and show a reduction in oral stereotypies when allowed on pasture after periods of tethering. Calves housed without social contact have cognitive deficits and exhibit increased fear responses to novelty. We argue that the long-term sustainability of the dairy industry will depend on the extent to which housing systems reflect public concerns and the animals' priorities. The adoption of technologies, such as automated feeders and remote monitoring systems, may represent a means to practically promote the animals' natural behavior while simultaneously improving individualized care. Although older generations of the public may consider technological solutions to be a further deviation from naturalness and a departure from dairy farming's agrarian roots, the definition of "naturalness" for younger generations may well have expanded to include technology. As the buying power shifts to these younger generations, the adoption of technologies that promote natural cattle behaviors may be one means toward reconciling the disconnect between public perceptions of animal welfare and contemporary dairy farming practices.

Housing preweaned dairy calves in individual outdoor hutches is common in North America. However, this type of housing lacks stimulation and minimizes calves' ability to express natural behavior. Providing a social companion has been shown to stimulate natural behavior and promote growth, but no research has assessed the effect of providing physical enrichment items to calves pre-weaning. The objective of this study was to determine calf use of physical items added to an individual hutch, and if providing these items affected growth, behavior (e.g., locomotor play and sucking on pen fixtures), and response to novelty after weaning. At birth, Jersey heifer calves were allocated to 1 of 2 types of hutches: furnished (n = 9 calves) or standard (n = 10 calves). Calves were housed in individual hutches on loose gravel and bedded with straw. The outdoor enclosure of furnished hutches contained 2 artificial teats, a stationary brush, a calf "lollie," and a rubber chain link for calves to manipulate. Calves were video-recorded continuously between 0800 and 2000 h twice weekly at 1, 3, 5, and 7 wk of age; behavioral data were collected using the Noldus Observer software program (Noldus Inc., Wageningen, the Netherlands). At 63 d of age (after weaning), calf response to social and environmental novelty was tested. Starter consumption was measured daily, and calves were weighed at birth and weekly thereafter. Pre-weaning behavioral data were not normally distributed, so raw data were square-root-transformed before analysis. Calves used all of the items depending on the time of day, but they spent the most time using the brush. Calves housed in furnished hutches spent almost 50% more time engaged in locomotor play, but they spent the same amount of time sucking pen fixtures as calves housed in standard hutches. We observed no effect of treatment on growth, starter intake, or behavioral response to social and environmental novelty after weaning. Results suggest that providing some physical complexity to a standard hutch has some benefits for young calves, but further research is encouraged to determine the long-term effects of physical and social complexity for young dairy heifer calves.

Providing optimal calf care remains a challenge on many dairy farms and has important implications for the future health, welfare, and productivity of male and female calves. Recent research suggests that male dairy calves receive a lower quality of care early in life than female calves, but further investigation is required to determine the factors that influence this disparity. The objectives of this study were to understand dairy producer perspectives on neonatal calf care practices and explore differences between male and female calf care. Overall, 23 dairy producers in Ontario, Canada, participated in 4 focus groups about calf care practices that were recorded and evaluated qualitatively using thematic analysis. Major barriers for good calf care included lack of knowledge about the best management practices for calf care and the prioritization of farm resources toward the milking herd. Some producers also noted that farm infrastructure (particularly during challenging weather) and employee training were important limitations. The economic cost of providing good neonatal calf care was important primarily for male calves and acted as a motivation or a barrier depending on the producer's beliefs about calf care and how they chose to market their calves. The primary source of knowledge producers used to develop calf care practices was their own experience, although many also relied on dairy-industry advisors, most often veterinarians. Producers were motivated by social norms, along with intrinsic pride and obligation to provide good calf care, and these motives were influenced by their emotional state. Producers expressed beliefs about which aspects of calf care are most important-notably colostrum management-and appreciated simple and economical solutions to calf-rearing challenges. Calf care practices were varied, and we identified a diversity of knowledge, motivations, and barriers to adopting best management practices, which sometimes differed between male and female calves. Some producers said that they did not know what happened to their male calves after they left the farm and tended to prioritize the care of female over male calves in subtle ways, such as less timely provision of colostrum. The infrastructure investment and other costs associated with caring for male calves often limited their care, but producers were still motivated to provide adequate care for male calves. These findings represent potential targets for additional research and intervention strategies to improve calf care practices on dairy farms.

Summary: The period from 3 wk before until 3 wk after calving is called the transition period. This is a challenging time for dairy cows due to the need to adapt, in a short period of time, to many physical and environmental changes, such as labor and delivery, the onset of lactation, pen changes, and new social groups. The primiparous cow experiences many of these changes for the very first time, and their responses to these changes differ from the older, more experienced cows. Primiparous cows show some behavioral differences from older cows only during the period before calving or after calving, while other differences span the entire length of transition. It is important to understanding the unique experiences of primiparous cows to improve the management of this vulnerable group of animals.

Signs of distress in dogs are often normalized during routine veterinary care, creating an animal welfare concern. We sought to test whether targeted interventions during veterinary visits affect physiological indicators of stress in dogs. Some 28 dogs were examined within four visits across 8 weeks. All dogs received the same care during the first visit and were then randomized into control and intervention groups for visits 2–4. In the intervention group, 14 dogs underwent procedures designed to reduce stress and to enlist their collaboration during examination. The 14 dogs in the control group received routine care. At each visit, heart rate (HR), serum cortisol (CORT), neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and creatine kinase (CK) were measured. A composite stress index based on the summed standardized scores for these markers was constructed. No differences in HR, NLR, and CK parameters between groups were found, and both groups had a decrease in CORT by visit four. However, the intervention group showed a greater overall decrease in CORT between the first and fourth visit than the control group (p < 0.04). The composite stress index differed between the first and fourth visits for the intervention group, but not for the control group (Intervention p = 0.03; Control p= 0.288). There was a tendency for the composite stress index to worsen at visit four vs. visit one for the control group. The findings suggest that dogs that participated in adaptive, collaborative exams and procedures designed to minimize fear had a greater reduction in stress over time compared to those receiving standard care.