Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-23T01:20:57.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A comparison of management practices, farmer-perceived disease incidence and winter housing on organic and non-organic dairy farms in the UK

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2008

Fritha M Langford*
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, SAC, West Mains Rd, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
Kenneth MD Rutherford
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, SAC, West Mains Rd, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
Mhairi C Jack
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, SAC, West Mains Rd, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
Lorna Sherwood
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, SAC, West Mains Rd, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
Alistair B Lawrence
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, SAC, West Mains Rd, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
Marie J Haskell
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, SAC, West Mains Rd, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
*For correspondence; e-mail;


There have been increases in the number of organic dairy farms in the UK in recent years. However, there is little information on the impact of organic regulations on cow welfare. As part of a larger study, we aimed to investigate differences between organic and non-organic farms in management practices and winter housing quality. Forty organic and 40 non-organic farms throughout the UK were visited. Organic and non-organic farms were paired for housing type, and as far as possible for herd size, genetic merit and location. A detailed questionnaire covering key aspects of dairy management was carried out with each farmer. On a subset of twenty pairs, an assessment of the quality of the winter housing for both lactating and dry cows was undertaken, covering the parlour, bedding, loafing and feeding areas. Management practices and building conditions varied greatly within farm types and there was considerable overlap between organic and non-organic farms. Milk yield, level and composition of concentrate feed, management of heifers and calving, and use of ‘alternative treatments’ to prevent and treat mastitis differed between organic and non-organic farms. In all other respects there were no differences between farm types. Building dimensions per cow did not differ, even though organic recommendations advise greater space per cow than recommended for non-organic farms. The similarity between organic and non-organic farms in most respects indicates that cow housing and health, based on both the described management regimes and the farmers' perceptions of disease incidence, on organic dairy farms is neither compromised by the regulations, nor considerably better than on non-organic farms.

Research Article
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Biggs, A 1999 Mastitis therapy. Cattle Practice 7 1518Google Scholar
CEC [Commission of the European Communities] 2004 Consolidated text (01/05/04) of Council Regulation No 2092/91 on organic production. Official Journal of the European Communities L198 115Google Scholar
DEFRA [Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] 2003 Code of Recommendations for the Welfare of Livestock: Cattle p. 19Google Scholar
Green, MJ, Bradley, AJ, Medley, GF & Browne, WJ 2007 Cow, farm, and management factors during the dry period that determine the rate of clinical mastitis after calving. Journal of Dairy Science 90 37643776CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Livestock Production Standards 2006 Organic Inspection and Certification Control Manual, Section 8, pp. 159. Shrewsbury, UK: Organic Farmers & Growers Ltd.Google Scholar
Hardeng, F & Edge, VL 2001 Mastitis, ketosis and milk fever in 31 organic and 93 conventional Norwegian dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 84 26732679Google Scholar
Haskell, MJ, Rennie, LJ, Bowell, VA, Bell, MJ & Lawrence, AB 2006 Housing system, milk production, and zero-grazing effects on lameness and leg injury in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 89 42594266CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hektoen, L, Larsen, S, Ødegaard, SA & Løken, T 2004 Comparison of homeopathy, placebo and antibiotic treatment of clinical mastitis in dairy cows – methodological issues and results from a randomized-clinical trial. Journal of the Veterinary Medicine Series A 51 439446CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hovi, M & Roderick, S 2000 Mastitis and mastitis control strategies in organic milk production. Cattle Practice 8 259264Google Scholar
Hovi, M, Sundrum, A & Thamsborg, SM 2003 Animal health and welfare in organic livestock production in Europe: current state and future challenges. Livestock Production Science 80 4153Google Scholar
Huang, CL 1996 Consumer preferences and attitudes towards organically grown produce. European Review of Agricultural Economics 23 331342Google Scholar
Kondo, S, Sekine, J, Okubo, M & Asahida, Y 1989 The effect of group size and space allowance on the agonistic and spacing behaviour of cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 24 127135Google Scholar
Løken, T 2001 Alternative therapy of animals – homeopathy and other alternative methods of therapy. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica Supplement 95 4750Google Scholar
Lund, V 2006 Natural living – a precondition for animal welfare in organic farming. Livestock Science 100 7183Google Scholar
Nederhof, AJ 1985 Methods of coping with social desirability bias: A review. European Journal of Social Psychology 15 263280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Mahony, MC, Healy, AM, O'Farrell, KJ & Doherty, ML 2006 Animal health and disease therapy on organic dairy farms in the Republic of Ireland. Veterinary Record 159 680682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roche, JF 2006 The effect of nutritional management of the dairy cow on reproductive efficiency. Animal Reproduction Science 96 282296CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rozzi, P, Miglior, F & Hand, KJ 2007 A total merit selection index for Ontario organic dairy farmers. Journal of Dairy Science 90 15841593CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rutherford, KMD, Langford, FM, Jack, MJ, Sherwood, L, Lawrence, AB & Haskell, MJ 2008 Lameness prevalence and risk factors in organic and non-organic dairy herds in the United Kingdom. Veterinary Journal doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2008.03.015Google Scholar
Sato, K, Bartlett, PC, Erskine, RJ & Kaneene, JB 2005 A comparison of production and management between Wisconsin organic and conventional herds. Livestock Production Science 93 105115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sehested, J, Kristensen, T & Søegaard, K 2003 Effect of concentrate supplementation level on production, health and efficiency in an organic dairy herd. Livestock Production Science 80 153165Google Scholar
Sundrum, A 2001 Organic livestock farming, a critical review. Livestock Production Science 67 207215Google Scholar
Swali, A & Wathes, DC 2006 Influence of the dam and sire on size at birth and subsequent growth, milk production and fertility in dairy heifers. Theriogenology 66 11731184CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vaast, M, Thamsborg, SM, Bennedsgaard, TW, Houe, H, Enevoldsen, C, Aarestrup, FM & de Snoo, A 2003 Organic dairy farmers' decision making in the first 2 years after conversion in relation to mastitis treatments. Livestock Production Science 80 109120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaast, M, Bennedsgaard, TW, Klaas, I, Nissen, TB, Thamsborg, SM & Østergaard, S 2006 Development and daily management of an explicit strategy of nonuse of antimicrobial drugs in twelve Danish organic dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 89 18421853Google Scholar
Von Borell, E & Sørensen, JT 2004 Organic livestock production in Europe: aims, rules and trends with special emphasis on animal health and welfare. Livestock Production Science 90 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar