Dairy calves must be fed appropriately to meet their nutritional needs, supporting optimal growth and development to achieve the recommended target age at first calving (AFC) of 24 months. Traditional restricted milk feeding practices suppress growth, contribute to negative welfare states and may result in malnutrition and immunosuppression. Despite more recent recommendations to increase milk allowances for pre-weaned calves, restricted feeding remains a common practice. This study explored the rationales behind the calf feeding protocols used by dairy farmers in England. Forty qualitative interviews (26 farmers, 14 advisors) were conducted between May 2016 and June 2017, transcribed in full, then coded into themes. Results indicate that a variety of calf feeding regimes are used on farms, largely determined by farmers’ attitudes regarding ease of management and the wellbeing of calves. Advisors were concerned about widespread underfeeding of calves, which may be partially due to insufficiently clear recommendations for calf milk replacer (CMR) feeding rates. There was also evidence of uncertainty regarding best practices for weaning calves. Collaboration between academic research and industry is essential to establish a consensus on calf feeding standards which support physiological function, facilitate weaning, support growth targets and ensure calf health and welfare is protected.

Replacement heifers are key to the future milking herd and farm economic efficiency but are not always prioritised on dairy farms. Dairy enterprises are comprised of components which compete for limited resources; scarce information about calf performance and the associated losses and (potential) gains on farms can mean calves are prioritised less in management and investment decisions. The research reported in this paper explored the personal and contextual factors that influence calf management decisions on dairy farms. Forty in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with dairy farmers (26 interviews) and farm advisors (14 interviews) who were recruited using purposive and “snowball” sampling. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed. Six major themes were constructed from the interview data relating to: the perceived importance of youngstock management, the role and influence of calf rearers, calf performance monitoring, farmer engagement with information and advice, the quality of communication and advice, and veterinary involvement in calf rearing. Results indicated that although the wider dairy industry has promoted the importance of youngstock, calves often have not been fully integrated into the whole dairy farm system, nor culturally accepted as an integral part of the productive herd. Calves tended to be marginalised on farms, largely due to limited resources, lack of data monitoring, and their unrecognised potential, as well as social norms and scarcity of support structures impacting upon farm investment and management decisions. Many calf rearers were disappointed by the repetition and impractical nature of information in print media. Most farmers did not routinely consult their veterinarian about their calves, rather following a reactive treatment model even when a preventive herd health strategy was applied to the adult herd. Advisory structures often require a driven individual with calf-centric interest to prevent calves from being overlooked. Furthermore, advisory efforts often failed to motivate farmers to act on advice. These findings indicate the need for greater focus on how to achieve rearing targets by provision of technical and support structures to foster action toward improved calf wellbeing, and for the status of calves to be raised in line with their vital importance for the future dairy herd.

Calf morbidity and mortality rates are often high in dairy herds, raising animal welfare concerns and negatively affecting farm economic efficiency and future performance. Disease prevention is critical to maintain calves in good health, but interventions are dependent upon the persons conducting them. This paper explores the perceptions of farmers, farm workers, veterinarians, and other advisors on the management of calfhood disease on dairy farms in England. Participants were recruited using purposive and “snowball” sampling, resulting in 40 in-depth, semi-structured interviews—26 with dairy farmers and 14 with advisors. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically coded. Three major themes were derived on the basis of interview data: disease occurrence and treatments, management of calf environment, and the role of stockmanship and perceived control. Respiratory and gastrointestinal diseases in calves were those reported to be most problematic on dairy farms. Limited time and financial resources caused some farmers and advisors to experience a perceived inability to control calf health without antimicrobial treatments. Overall, the findings emphasise the importance of human influences on calf health and disease in the context of influencing the interactions among the host, pathogens, and the environment. Further research should investigate what “attention to detail” means within different farm contexts and practices, as this was believed to be important in the promotion of better husbandry standards and health. We recommend the use of supportive knowledge exchange processes, including facilitation, to empower farmers to promote continuous improvement in calf health.

1. The concept of ‘Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems’ (AKIS) is most commonly used to describe the mix of different actors and institutions, which includes agricultural extensionists/ad...

Precision livestock technologies enable continuous animal monitoring or earlier health and welfare interventions. However, if data cannot be easily interpreted and acted upon by humans (e.g., farmers), benefits may not occur in practice. This case study explores the potential for Large Language Models (LLMs) to overcome the data-action gap by analyzing big data and communicating clear extension instructions. We worked with a company which has developed an AI model that predicts water intake deviations on poultry farms and identifies the possible cause, using an LLM to communicate farm data insights. Through qualitative interviews with developers and poultry farmers, we critically evaluate the potential role for LLMs in agricultural extension, exploring user preferences, design possibilities, and social/ethical opportunities and risks. Interviews uncovered an interesting extension journey, from initial manual data entry and reporting, towards the development of an LLM to automate the process. LLM insights informed work prioritization, but application varied across the chain of command in the poultry farming business as senior executives oversee multiple farm sites, each with a farm manager, some with a farm worker. Risks of using LLMs in extension were generally downplayed. The potential for LLMs to be used in ways that perpetuate inequality and tradeoffs, such as human surveillance for transparent animal welfare, is explored. Our work makes a theoretical contribution to emergent social science literature that has started to explore the application of LLMs in on-farm agricultural extension (e.g., Tzachor et al., 2023; de Clercq et al., 2024; Marinoudi et al., 2024), critically evaluating the potential role of LLMs in agricultural extension. We will shed light on the opportunities and risks of LLMs, as well as explore the potential role for user-centred design. Practically, we identify tangible factors that can optimize the use of LLMs for on-farm agricultural extension.