Free-Stall Use and Preferences in Dairy Cows: A Case Study on Neck Rails Covered by Foam

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Neck rails are used in many free-stall barns; they are intended to keep cows standing at the rear of the stall such that faeces and urine are more likely to fall in the alley rather than on the stall surface. However, cows can come into contact with the neck rail when entering the stall or when standing up. This study tested the effect of covering neck rails with a protective foam surface, by allocating stalls to control and foam conditions using a crossover design. There was no effect of the foam treatment on the time that stalls were occupied for lying. Considering the time of individual stall occupation and the distribution of the stalls in the pen, it was found that cows preferred one of the two lying stall rows. Analysis of variance showed a significant difference between the time of stall occupation for two different rows in the pen, including the time for lying as well as the time of standing with two and four hooves in the stall. Results from this study can be used to support the design process for free-stall barns. ABSTRACT: This study tested the effect of neck rails equipped with and without foam on stall usage and preference by dairy cows. The hypothesis of the experiment, that cows prefer lying stalls with foam in comparison to stalls without foam, was rejected. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) in lying time and time spent standing with two and four hooves in the lying stalls between the two treatment groups. Considering the time of individual stall occupation and the distribution of stalls in the pen, cows showed a preference for one of two lying stall rows. Analysis of variance showed a significant difference (p < 0.001) between the time of stall occupation for the two different rows in the pen, including the time spent lying and the time spent standing with two and four hooves in the stall. Lying time per stall in the preferred row (near the feeding alley) in comparison with the alternative row was 580 ± 101 min·d(−1)·stall(−1) versus 50 ± 28 min·d(−1)·stall(−1), respectively. These results can support a design process for new barns with a free-stall housing system for dairy cattle.