Transitioning From a Tie Stall to a Freestall

When considering building a new barn, dairy farmers must consider how they will manage their cows: as a group or individually. While some may see tie stalls as a way of the past, 39% of dairies in the United States still house their cows in a tie stall; most of these farms are in the Northeast (USDA, 2016). When these barns wear out, and it is time to build a new one, farmers have a variety of barns they can choose from, whether it be a tie stall, freestall, bedded back, or another system. If transitioning to a freestall barn after a tie stall wears out, farmers must switch their mindset and start managing cows as a group.

Pros and Cons of Managing Cows as a Group

As animal welfare standards have changed, more farmers have switched from housing cows in tie stalls to a loose housing system. Many European countries have outlawed the building of new tie stalls, tying cows altogether, or some have implemented mandatory pasture time (Beaver et al., 2021). Cows housed in tie stalls are more likely to have diseases and injuries associated with lameness, and they are less able to express some natural behaviors (Beaver et al., 2021).

Managing cows as a group when they have been managed individually in the past can be a significant change for the cows and the people. Cows who have never had to compete for food, water, or a resting spot may experience stress while figuring out their new pecking order. Farmers who are used to monitoring dry matter intake for individual cows will no longer be able to. Paying attention to cow behavior is essential for farmers who do not use technology such as activity monitors or milk weights to help them detect disease. After a farmer drops feed at the bunk, they should look around and ask themselves, who didn’t get up to eat? They should also pay attention when cows return from the parlor; who went to lie down immediately instead of eating? Paying particular attention to fresh cows is always a good idea; this is the period of lactation during which cows are most likely to get sick. Farmers should also strip cows in the parlor to check for clinical mastitis.

What are different grouping strategies?

One of the most common grouping strategies is to group cows by diet. This allows producers to cut down on feed costs and increase milk production by allowing cows to get closer to the nutrients they need instead of one common diet (Cabrera and Kalantari, 2015). When grouping by diet, diets are often formulated for the level of milk production, usually high production and low production (Barrientos-Blanco et al., 2021). Grouping cows by diets allows for feed cost savings. When there are two diets, Cabrera et al. (2012) showed a savings of $39 per cow per year and a savings of $46 per cow per year with three diets. A more recent study showed a savings of $40 per cow per year with two diets and $59 per cow per year with three diets (Wu et al., 2019).  

Another way to group cows is by age; first lactation heifers are often managed as their own group. This is an excellent idea for freshening, as this is stressful for any animal, especially for heifers. This is the first time they are giving birth and milking. Adding additional stress to social situations with older, dominant cows should be avoided if possible. When heifers are managed as a separate group from older cows, their DMI increases by about 5 pounds per day, leading to an increase in milk production of about 450 pounds in the first 130 days in milk (Grant and Albright, 2001).

It is also common to group cows by stage of lactation. For example, some farms have a far-off dry cow group, close-up dry cow group, fresh group, peak lactation group, and tail-ender group. This strategy often pairs with the other two, grouping by diet and age.

How big should groups be?

In true extension fashion, the answer to this question is that it depends. Grant and Albright (2001) stated that group size should depend on the competition for resources like feed, water, number of freestalls, social interactions, size of the milking parlor holding area, animal size and age, body condition score, days in milk and the adequacy of the ventilation system. A lot of these factors boil down to stocking density. In a freestall barn, stocking density can be measured based on the number of cows compared to the number of stalls or the number of cows compared to the number of headlocks. If a farm has a post-and-rail at the feed bunk instead of headlocks, stocking density can be measured as the amount of feed space per cow. When stocking density is over 100%, competition increases, negatively impacting animal health and production. When stocked appropriately, headlocks reduce competition compared to a post-and-rail (Huzzey et al., 2006). Decreasing stocking density during regrouping can help minimize competition (Talebi et al., 2014).

Some studies have shown that multiparous cows later in lactation may not have a decrease in milk production or DMI when overcrowded (Krawczel et al.  2012). This is most likely because these cows are making up for a limited time at the feed bunk by slug feeding. This means they are eating considerable meals in short amounts of time. Slug feeding can lead to sub-acute ruminal acidosis, also known as SARA, and other adverse health effects.

Ideally, all cows would be able to eat and lie down at one time, meaning one cow per stall, one cow per headlock, or 24 inches (61 cm) of post-rail space per cow (DeVries, 2017).

How often should cows enter and leave a group?

After moving to a new group, it takes cows 3 to 7 days to establish a new social hierarchy (Grant and Albright, 2001). DMI decreases after cows are moved to a new pen, as many are displacing each other at the feed bunk to establish dominance (Schirmann et al., 2011).  Moving familiar cows together can help prevent competition (von Keyserlingk et al., 2008). It is common practice on larger farms to move cows from pen to pen weekly, but minimizing pen moves as much as possible can help maintain DMI and production.

A farmer's perspective must change when switching from a tie stall to loose housing. They must consider the above best management practices when managing cows as a group instead of individually. 

References

Barrientos-Blanco, J. A., H. White, R. D. Shaver, and V. E. Cabrera. 2021. Graduate Student Literature Review: Considerations for nutritional grouping in dairy farms. J. Dairy Sci. 105:2708-2717.

Beaver, A., D. M. Weary, M. A. G. von Keyserlingk. 2021. Invited review: The welfare of dairy cattle housed in tiestalls compared to less-restrictive housing types: A systemic review

Cabrera, V.E., and A. S. Kalantari. 2015. Economics of production efficiency: Nutritional grouping of the lactating cow. J. Dairy Sci: 99:825-841.

DeVries, T. J. 2017. Ensuring access to feed to optimize health and production of dairy cows. Large Dairy Herd Management, 3^rd ed. American Dairy Science Association.

Grant, R. J., and J. L. Albright. 2001. Effect of animal grouping on feeding behavior and intake of dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 84:156-163.

Huzzey, J. M., T. J. DeVries, P. Valois, and M.A.G. von Keyserlingk. 2006. Stocking density and feed barrier design affect the feeding and social behavior of dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 89:126-133.

Krawzcel, P. D., L. B. Klaiber, R. E. Butzler, L. M. Klabier, H. M. Dann, C. S. Money, and R. J. Grant. 2012. Short-term increases in stocking density affect the lying and social behavior, but not the productivity, of lactating Holstein dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 95:4298-4308.

Proudfoot, K. L., and J. M. Huzzey. 2022. JDS Communications. A first time for everything: The influence of parity on the behavior of transition dairy cows. 3:467-471.

Schirmann, K., N. Chapinal, D. M. Weary, W. Heuwieser, and M. A. G. von Keyserlingk. 2011. Short-term effects of regrouping on the behavior of prepartum dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2011. 94:2312-2319.

Talebi, A., M. A. G. von Keyserlingk. E. Telezhenko, and D. M. Weary. 2014. Reduced stocking density mitigates the negative effects of regrouping in dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 97:1358-1363.

United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. 2016. Dairy 2014: Dairy Cattle Management Practices in the United States, 2014.

Von Keyserlingk, M. A. G., D. Olenick, and D. M. Weary. 2008. Acute behavioral effects of regrouping dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 91:1011-1016.

Wu, Y., D. Liang, R. D. Shaver, and V. E. Cabrera. 2019. An income over feed cost nutritional grouping strategy. J. Dairy Sci. 2019. 102:4682-4693.