Livestock Vol 16 July 2011 27© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

pens in a small shed or moved directly into the mainshed. An automatic feeder was in place, with calfgroups of up to 25 animals per pen fed 6L milkpowder daily, as well as ad lib straw and calf pencils.The calves remained in the shed until about sixmonths of age, kept in five pens of 25+ animals.

Clinical examination of the two sick calvesconfirmed pneumonia. One calf was moribund andwas euthanased. Post mortem examination (PME)showed severe damage to almost all lung tissue, withwidespread consolidation.

The farmer was contacted and the following planwas formulated:1. Send three severely affected animals to Langford

VLA for PME2. Weigh the calves to check growth rates3. Use farm records to quantify the scale of the

problem4. Identify pneumonia risk factors.

Calf pneumonia remains a significant cause of loss inmany beef and dairy herds despite improvements inunderstanding of the aetiology of the disease,development of vaccines and new antibiotictreatments. This is perhaps not surprising because itis a multifactorial disease and its associated riskfactors are common to many management systems.However, it is often frustrating for the clinician thatthe farmer seems unwilling or unable to implementany changes likely to reduce the risks and incidenceof disease, so it rumbles on as a costly and debilitatingproblem.

This paper describes how the financial lossesassociated with pneumonia in one large herd werecalculated and used to drive management changesaimed at pneumonia control.

BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION

This was a dairy herd of about 350 Holstein/Friesiancows that (at that time) were almost all bred toContinental beef bulls. The calves were reared onand sold fat. During a visit to an adult cow in January2009 I was asked to look at a couple of sick calves.The herdsman complained that pneumonia levelswere very high, with many animals requiringtreatment. There were too many deaths, both at theacute stage and in chronic ‘poor doers’ that neverrecovered from pneumonia. The herdsman wasconvinced that pneumonia was causing a reductionin calf growth rates.

Calves were housed on one side of a huge shed alsoused for adult dairy cows (Fig. 1). They were movedfrom the loose yard calving accommodation at 24 -48 hrs old, then housed for a few days in individual

Katrine Bazeley BVSc BSc CertWEL MRCVSSYNERGY FARM HEALTH LTD, WEST HILL BARNS, EVERSHOT, DORSET. DT2 0LD

Calculation of a herd’s pneumonia coststo promote management changes

ABSTRACT: This paper describes the calculation of financial losses associated with pneumonia using figuresfrom the diary, movement records, veterinary bills and one session weighing calves. The calves were home-bredContinental beef X in a 350-cow dairy herd. Pneumonia was a severe problem, with mortality of 9%, costingover £5,000 and growth rates average 0.44 kg/day to 160 d.o., costing about £17,000. Veterinary costs forpneumonia treatments were over £3,000 in 2008. Management changes made as a result of presenting thesefigures to the owner resulted in a marked improvement. Growth rate increased to 0.75 kg/day, mortality andveterinary costs fell. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-3870.2011.00042.x

Subs hotline: 01635 254911 email: subs@ukvet.co.uk

Fig. 1: The old shed. This building has been transformed from the dayswhen it was used to house calves; a ridge has been opened, a new floorand cubicles added.

COSTING

Costs January 1st 2008 to December 31st 20081. Mortality2. Reduced growth rate3. Veterinary drug costs.

There were 318 calves born.

1. Mortality costs

It is inevitable in any herd that some calves are borndead and some calves die. Accepted target mortalityis less than 5%, all before 28 days old.

If we can reduce losses to the target, this would save:

£8,853 - £3,648 = £5,205

2. Reduced growth rate

Average growth rate of the calves weighed was 0.44kg per day, with large individual variation (Graph 2).Target growth rate is 0.8 kg per day (this is not anambitious target for Charolais X calves). If all calvesincreased to reach target growth rate by 160 days ata kill weight of 650 kg, the days to finish are asshown in Table 3.

Assuming rearing costs of £1.00 per day, the extracost per animal fattened:

(836-763) x 1 = £73

For 250 cattle, the total loss is £18,250.

In fact losses would be higher because not all animalswould return to target growth rate immediately (or ever).

3. Veterinary costs

Veterinary costs for treating calves in 2008 wereapproximately £3,180.

PNEUMONIA RISK FACTORS IN THIS HERD� Inadequate colostrum protection

a. Although all calves in principle were fed 2Lcolostrum soon after birth, this did not alwayshappen

b. Cows calved in a large and crowded straw yardso many calves probably did not get enoughcolostrum by suckling

LIV

ESTO

CK

�C

ATT

LE

Livestock Vol 16 July 201128 © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

TABLE 1: Mortality costs on farm

Item Unit cost Number total cost

Calves that died* £220 28 (9%) £6,160

Rearing costs £1.00 per day** 2,693 £2,693

Total £8,853

TABLE 2: Target mortality costs

Item Unit cost Target

Calves that die £200 5% x 318 = 16 3,200

Rearing costs £1.00 per day 16 x 28 = 448 £448

Total £3,648

TABLE 3: Days to finish

Birth weight Growth rate to Weight @ 160d (kg) Growth rate from Days to finish

(kg) 160d (kg/d) 160d to finish (kg/day)

Farm 40 0.44 (0.44 x 160) + 40 0.8 (650-110.4) = 836

= 110.4 0.8

Target 40 0.8 (0.8 x 160) + 40 0.8 (650-168) = 763

= 168 0.8

* Not all deaths were due to pneumonia, but farm staff wereconfident that pneumonia was a direct or indirect cause of almostall mortality.

** Rearing costs have been estimated by calculating the age of calvesat death. Rearing costs are much higher than £1.00 per day for thefirst seven weeks up to weaning so this represents an underestimateof the true cost.

Graph. 1. Mortality - age of calves that died.

Graph. 2: Calf growth before management changes were made. Large variation inweight-for-age as calves get older. A few animals weigh little more at 40-60 daysthan at birth.

c. Charolais calves tend to be large and calvingsupervision was suboptimal, so the calvingprocess was often prolonged (number of calvesborn dead was also high). Exhausted calvesdon’t get up to feed and exhausted cows don’tmother their calves adequately

d.Colostrum quality is poor in many high-yielding cows, so calves may not be fullyprotected even if they are fed an adequatevolume of colostrum

Adequacy of colostrum protection was tested inthree calves using specific gravity of serum toestimate protein level. Results showed that onehad received borderline protection but the othertwo had not had enough.

� Exposure to pathogens

a. Mixing sick and healthy calves. There were noisolation pens for sick calves and calves thathad not grown (often as a result of disease)were left behind in pens to which youngercalves were added

b.Mixed age groups within pens. Ideally thereshould be no more than one week differencein age between the oldest and youngest in agroup of calves. The computerised feeder hadonly one station so all calves being fed on milkwere added to one pen with an age range ofup to 6 weeks

c. Shared air space with older calvesd. Shared air space with adult cowse. The shed was never empty so could not bethoroughly cleaned out and disinfected

f. Cows were not vaccinated against BVD and calveswere not vaccinated against pneumonia pathogens.

� Wet and dirty bed

This led to a humid environment in whichpneumonia pathogens could thrive, and a build upof ammonia, reducing the calves’ innate protectionagainst invasion by pneumonia pathogens

� Poor ventilation

The calves were housed in a large building notdesigned for livestock. There was no central ridgeto provide an air outlet, and although both endsof the building were open, it was likely that therewas poor and patchy air-flow in the middle ofthe building

� Inadequate observation and stockmanship

Various staff members (not the herdsman, who wasresponsible only for the adult cows) managed thecalves. Only one had significant experience withcattle, all had a multitude of other duties and nonehad formal training in livestock management.Several of the farm workers were EasternEuropeans whose English was poor.

Other risks commonly associated with pneumoniadid not appear to be a problem in this herd.

NEXT STEPS

Post mortem results indicated infection with bothRSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) and Histophilussomni. It is likely that other pathogens were alsoinvolved.

A meeting was set up with the farmer, whoimmediately recognised that the financial lossescaused by pneumonia were unacceptable and heneeded to make changes. A range of options werediscussed and he chose those that he felt were most practical.

MANAGEMENT CHANGES MADE

1. Increasing colostrum protection by feeding allcalves 3.5L first colostrum in the first six hoursafter birth, using a stomach tube if required.Colostrum quality was checked by testing its specific gravity using a Colostrometer.Colostrum feeding was continued for at least 24 hours. A proportion of the herd was in calf toAberdeen Angus rather than continental beefbulls, so calvings tended to be easier.

2. Reducing exposure to pathogens was difficult inthe short term, given the housing and milkfeeding system in place. All calves were started inthe smaller shed in individual pens before beingintroduced to the main calf house. Solid

Livestock Vol 16 July 2011 29© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Applications for 2012 now open!

Have you ever wanted to investigate your cases further, comparedifferent clinical techniques, examine the economic impact of disease,or simply see which diseases are most prevalent around you?Studying for a Certificate or Diploma and have a project you wantto undertake? Or simply want to know more about real farms andwhat affects them?

Practitioners interested in carrying out field study projects of academic orpractical interest can now apply for research funding courtesy of a successfulinitiative supported by UK Vet, now in its third year.

The company is making a number of study bursaries, up to maximumbudget of £12,000, available to vets in practice. Projects should be withina ruminant disease area of commercial interest to Intervet/Schering-PloughAnimal Health. Of particular interest would be proposals in the areas ofinfectious diseases (BVD, IBR or Leptospirosis) or mastitis in cattle.Practices are also encouraged to consider projects looking into the costs ofdisease and the positive impact from intervention and control.

If you wish to discuss any potential project ideas you might have, thencontact Paul Williams, Livestock Veterinary Advisor on 07917 000 587, or you can request an application pack by email at: paul.williams9@sp.intervet.com

Practices interested in accessing the funding have until 31st October 2011to submit a project proposal.

partitions were put up between pens to reducenose-to-nose contact between groups. Later,cows went out to grass, so no longer shared theair-space. A new calf house (always planned butnot a high priority) was built before thefollowing winter.

3. Making sure the beds were kept clean and dry bycleaning out more regularly and morethoroughly, with use of plenty of straw (Figs. 2aand 2b).

4. Ensuring that the stockpersons had enough timeto care for the calves.

LIV

ESTO

CK

�C

ATT

LE

Livestock Vol 16 July 201130 © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Measures included feeding colostrum to allnewborn calves, getting new calves started on the machine, cleaning out pens and earlierrecognition and treatment of sick calves,including nursing and rehydration as necessary(Fig 3).

5. Vaccination of the adult herd against BVD.

OUTCOME

Calves were weighed again in September 2009.Growth rate was much improved to 0.75 kg/day,with less variation (Graph 3). Mortality rate haddeclined and the cost of veterinary treatments forpneumonia fell in 2009 to £1,366.

DISCUSSION

This was not set up as a scientific study. Moreaccurate figures for loss of growth rate could havebeen calculated if cattle of all ages had beenweighed, more accurate estimates could have beenmade of losses due to mortality, and a more thoroughcomparison of ‘before’ and ‘after’ figures could havebeen achieved. No estimate of extra labour costs wasundertaken. But although the cost calculations wererough, they were effective: the farmer took one lookand decided to prioritise calf managementimprovements. Pneumonia cost calculations arereadily available and often alarming, but to knowthat the disease costs the UK industry £80 M, orthat it costs other farmers £22 (SAC, 2005) or £30(Andrews, 2000) or £43-84 (Potter, 2007) peranimal is not nearly as persuasive as showing thefarmer the losses in his own herd. All that wasrequired to make these calculations was the diary, themovement book, the veterinary bills and a session toweigh calves.

Rearing healthy calves requires time, skill andattention to detail. Quality of stockmanship isparamount, yet calves are often reared byinexperienced staff who lack motivation and whoseunderstanding is limited or non-existent. FAWChighlighted the importance of education andtraining, which needs to be formalised now thatmany livestock keepers have not learned their skillsfrom farming parents (FAWC, 2008). Lack of

Figs. 2a and 2b: The new calf house is well ventilatedand bedded with plenty of clean dry straw.

Figs. 2b.

Fig. 3: Straw is fed in racks so calves do not need toeat bedding.

Graph. 3: Calf growth after management changes were made. Average growth rateis considerably higher, and ther is less variation in weight-for age.

LIV

ESTO

CK

�C

ATT

LE

Livestock Vol 16 July 2011 31© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

motivation is difficult to tackle where pay rate is low,the work force is short term and the perceived worthof the job is poor, but it has been shown in othersectors of the livestock industry (e.g. pigs, dairycows) that raising motivation can lead to significantincreases in production and welfare (Hemsworth &Coleman, 1998). Communication with Europeanfarm workers is tackled on some farms by provisionof language training, which has greatly enhanced thevalue of the stockpersons.

REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING

ANDREWS, A. H. (2000) Calf Pneumonia Costs! Cattle Practice 8.

FAWC Report on Stockmanship and Farm Animal Welfare (2008).

HEMSWORTH, P. H. and COLEMAN, G. J. (1998) Human-Livestock

Interactions: The Stockperson and the productivity and welfare of

intensively farmed animals. CABI.

POTTER, T. (2007) Calf Pneumonia UK Vet 12 No 1 pp24-28

POTTER, T., ALDRIDGE, B. (2010) Systematic Approach to Calf

Pneumonia Parts 1 and 2 UK Vet 15 No. 6 pp31-34, No. 7 pp19-24

SAC Technical Notes 571 (2005) Pneumonia in Cattle.

C O N T I N U I N G P RO F E S S I O N A LD E V E L O P M E N T S P O N S O R E D B YN O R B RO O K P H A R M A C E U T I C A L SWO R L DW I D E

1. Which of the following agents is NOT generally

associated with calf pneumonia:

a. BRSVb. Mannheimia haemolyticac. Histophilus somnid. Serratia arcescense. Mycoplasma bovisa

2. How is BVDV linked with calf pneumonia:

a. Attack on the integrity of the nasal mucosab. Respiratory depression allowing respiratorypathogens to attach to respiratory tract tissue

c. Hypoglycaemia leading to calves spending moretime lying down

d. Immune suppression

3. Why is vaccination against calf pneumonia not

always effective:

a. Overwhelming pathogenic challengeb. Causative organisms are not included in the vaccineused

c. Immune suppression due to stress/poornutrition/intercurrent disease

d. Calves already incubating disease when they are vaccinated

e. All of the above

4. Which of the following are considered to be risk

factors for calf pneumonia:

a. Poor drainage causing build-up of ammonia leadingto reduced function of the mucociliary escalator

b. Inadequate ventilation which fails to extractrespiratory pathogens from the air

c. Stressors such as overcrowding and weaningd. Mixed age groups exposing younger calves tohigher pathogen load

e. All of the above

5. What is the biggest factor contributing to costs of

pneumonia in this outbreak:

a. Increased labourb. Veterinary costsc. Reduced growth ratesd. Mortality

6. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents are often

used as an adjunct to pneumonia treatment. Which

of the following is NOT a reason for their use:

a. Improved feed metabolism for weight loss isreduced

b. Reduced pyrexia so calves feel betterc. Improved penetration of antibiotic to lung tissued. Reduced damage to lung tissue

7. What is the estimated cost of calf pneumonia

to the UK cattle industry:

a. £150,000,000-£180,000,000b. £50,000,000-£80,000,000c. £10,000,000-20,000,000d. More than £200,000,000e. About £5,000,000

These multiple choice questions are based on the abovetext. Answers appear on page 43 of the print version, and as supporting information in the online version of this article.

NEWSREVIEWBLUETONGUE FREEDOM THANKS TO PARTNERSHIP

BETWEEN VETS, FARMERS AND GOVERNMENT

The British Veterinary Association (BVA) haswelcomed the announcement that Great Britainwas declared bluetongue (BTV8) free on 5th July.

Defra has announced that Bluetongue-free statuswill mean that animals exported from GB tobluetongue-free countries will not requirevaccination or have to meet any other bluetonguerequirements.

However, the current EU Bluetongue Directiveonly allows bluetongue vaccination within aprotection zone. From 5th July vaccination will nolonger be permitted in GB. The BVA is supportingDefra to lobby for these rules to be changed toallow vaccination in bluetongue areas.

Commenting, Harvey Locke, BVA President, said:“The move to bluetongue freedom is thanks tothe excellent partnership between government,farmers and vets across Great Britain. It is atremendous achievement to turn the situationaround from the outbreak in 2007 to freedom in2011.

“We are disappointed that changes to the EUDirective to allow vaccination to continue couldnot be made before the deadline and we willcontinue to work with Defra to try to secure this change as soon as possible to allow vets and farmers to make the right choice to protecttheir herds.

“The BVA would reiterate the message to farmersto source stock responsibly to help avoid a futureoutbreak.”