31 It’s Farming. And It’s Better. Better Farming | January 2025 BETTER CALF RECORDS Record-keeping is an important practice for anyone raising livestock, but farmers may find it challenging to keep entries up to date and in a format that is usable. Kristen Edwards, a dairy veterinarian with Tavistock Veterinarians and PhD candidate at the University of Guelph, recently studied the barriers to maintaining complete and accurate calf data records on dairy farms. “I am a practising veterinarian,” says Edwards about her motivation to study the topic. “I’ve been a dairy vet for over 10 years and have recognized that calf records are often incomplete on dairy farms.” She explains that previous research has found that only 15 per cent of Ontario dairy farms that were enrolled in Lactanet services had accessible calf health records. Fewer than 50 per cent of dairy farms across the country had complete calf records. “Having good records for calves or any age group is important. If you are not monitoring data, it is difficult to objectively quantify whether there is an issue or if a management or protocol intervention needs to occur,” says Edwards. Her research explores why many farmers struggle with record-keeping and what changes could be made to receive usable information from the data collected. The barriers Edwards’s research occurred in two stages. First, an electronic survey was sent to veterinarians to share with their clients. The survey included questions about farm health practices, treatment protocols and recording, data utilization, and other relevant practices. The second stage of the research investigated barriers to utilization of calf health data from the veterinarian perspective. After responses were collected, the first stage of the study had 88 eligible surveys which were reviewed. “We basically looked at the likelihood of farmers making management changes based on health outcomes, and we looked at if all illnesses and treatments were recorded, and how records were kept,” explains Edwards. “We found that only 19 per cent of producers recorded all calf illnesses, 43 per cent recorded all treatments with antimicrobials, 38 per cent recorded all treatments with anti-inflammatories, and only 13 per cent of farmers recorded supportive therapies.” She also said that 49 per cent of producers reported that they seldom or never received actionable recommendations from their veterinarian based on calf records. This discouraged some producers from keeping complete records, as it was difficult to see the benefits. The initial study also looked at how different management factors affected the likelihood of farms maintaining complete health and treatment records. Some of these factors included the location and method of record collection. “We did find that the probability of farmers keeping complete records for antimicrobial treatments was higher for producers using computer software compared to other recording methods. There were about 3.5 times greater odds of the records being complete,” says Edwards. “For anti-inflammatory treatments, producers who kept their records in the calf barn or near the calves had a three times greater probability of recording all anti-inflammatory treatments.” The location and method of recording also influenced the reasoning farmers provided for incomplete records. “How the information was being recorded was important. Over 50 per cent of farmers used paper booklets to record calf health and treatments. Farmers who used booklets were also more likely to report that their treatments were not recorded because they were not analyzed,” explains Edwards. “Farmers that kept records in the
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc0MDI3