HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Interpretive Summary Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Glaze, J. B. Articles by Chahine, M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Glaze, J. B., Jr. Articles by Chahine, M.

Assessment of management and basic beef quality assurance practices on Idaho dairies

Department of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Idaho, Twin Falls Research and Extension Center, Twin Falls 83303

¹ Corresponding author: bglaze{at}uidaho.edu

In 2004 a mail-in survey was conducted to establish a baseline level of awareness and knowledge related to dairy beef quality assurance (BQA) issues in Idaho. A 30-question survey was mailed to every (n = 736) registered Idaho dairy. Two-hundred seventy-three (37%) dairies participated and were categorized as small (n <201 cows; 53.5%), medium-sized (n = 201 to 1,000 cows; 27.1%) or large (n >1,000 cows; 19.4%). The majority of respondents were dairy owners (83%). Eighty-nine percent of respondents indicated they followed BQA recommendations for animal care. The neck region in cows was used by 68% of respondents for i.m. injections and by 80% for s.c. injections. In calves, the values were 61 and 78%, respectively. Seventy-four percent of respondents indicated they had been trained for injections. Training methods cited included veterinarians (19.8%), dairy owners (16.8%), experience (9.9%), and BQA events or schools (4.5%). The importance of BQA in the dairy industry was rated 2.6 on a 5-point scale (0 = low; 4 = high). Participants rated the effect of dairy animals on the beef industry at 2.5. Plastic ear tags were the preferred method of animal identification, with 100% of large dairies, 97.3% of medium-sized dairies, and 84% of small dairies citing their use. Less than 10% used electronic identification for their animals. Almost half (48%) of large and medium-sized (49%) dairies and 32% of small dairies supported a national animal identification program. A mandatory identification program was supported by 41, 69, and 59% for small, medium-sized, and large dairies, respectively. The percentage of dairies keeping records was similar between small (93%), medium-sized (99%), and large (100%) dairies. Most small dairies (58%) used some form of paper records, whereas most medium-sized (85%) and large (100%) dairies used computers for record keeping. The preferred method to market cull cows by Idaho dairies was the auction market (64%), followed by order buyers (17%), direct to the packer (17%), private treaty sales (16%), and forward contracts (1%). To market calves, dairies used private treaty sales (52%), auction markets (42%), order buyers (14%), and forward contracts (1%). The results of this study will be used by University of Idaho Extension faculty in the design, development, and delivery of dairy BQA program information and materials.

Key Words: beef quality assurance • dairy cow • survey