Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...

Examination of Hospital Pen Management for Stocker Cattle Operations
J. Robins, S. Krumpelman, and D. H. Hellwig 1
Story in Brief
Two experiments were conducted to examine the management of hospital pens in a stocker facility. Eighty-six
calves (bulls and steers, 443 to 618 lb) and126 calves (bulls, steers and heifers, 213 to 415 lb) were used in experiments
1 and 2, respectively. For each experiment, the calves were blocked by weight and randomly assigned to 1.1-acre grass
lots with 21 or 22 calves per lot. The calves were examined daily for signs of bovine respiratory disease (BRD), given
a clinical illness score (CIS) and treated according to protocol. When each calf was treated for BRD, it was assigned to
either group 1 or group 2 (alternately). Calves in group 1 were sent to a hospital pen after treatment, while calves in
group 2 were returned to their home pen to recover. In either experiment, there were no significant differences between
groups in percentage of treatment successes, treatment failures or relapses. In addition, there were no significant differences
between groups for ADG, medication costs, and cost per pound of gain in either experiment.
Introduction
The goals of a stocker cattle or feedlot health program
include reducing mortality due to disease, minimizing disease
outbreaks, economically enhancing cattle performance and
utilizing professional assistance with health and production
management (Lechtenberg et al., 1998; Smith et al., 1993;
USDA, 1999). Many operations will utilize a hospital facility
for the treatment and recovery of sick animals. These facilities
provide a place for animals to recover in a low-stress,
non-competitive environment. It is convenient for the hospital
manager to evaluate the animal’s response to treatment as
well as re-evaluating the therapy for treatment failures. There
are however, disadvantages to using a hospital area. These
include exposure of the animal to additional pathogens, the
development of “seeder” calves that can bring new pathogens
back to the home pen, the social adjustment of the calf in a
new environment, and poorly managed pens that don’t provide
a stress-free environment for the recovering calf. The
objective of these studies was to compare the use of a hospital
pen against home pen replacement following treatment for
bovine respiratory disease (BRD).
Experimental Procedures
Experiment 1. Eighty-six stocker calves (bulls and
steers) with weights ranging from 443 to 618 lb were purchased
from several salebarns in Central Arkansas and delivered
as a group to the University of Arkansas Beef Cattle
Research Facility in Savoy. All animals were initially
processed within 24 hours of arrival. This included a modified-live
viral vaccine (Frontier 4-Plus ® , Bayer Corp.,
Shawnee Mission, KS), a multivalent clostridial bacterin
(Vision-7 ® , Bayer Corp., Shawnee Mission, KS), and a
tetanus toxoid. (Vision-CDT ® , Bayer Corp., Shawnee
Mission, KS). A pour-on endectocide (Eprinex ® , Merial,
Athens, GA), was used for parasite control. All animals were
re-vaccinated with the same products 2 weeks after initial
processing. At this time the bulls were castrated using a banding
method and the horns were tipped.
All calves were weighed, blocked by weight (bulls
were stratified through treatment groups to nullify any affects
of castration 2 weeks after arrival) and randomly assigned to
one of four grass lots (1.1-acres) with 21 or 22 calves per lot.
The animals were initially offered a 16% pelleted protein supplement
at a rate of 2 lb per head per day. This was gradually
increased over one week to a maximum of 4 lb per head per
day. This amount was offered daily until the end of the study
(28 d). Grass hay was supplemented as necessary.
Calves with clinical signs of BRD (Table 1) were
removed from their home pens and evaluated for treatment.
Each calf was given a clinical illness score (CIS, Table 2),
treated for BRD (Table 3) and alternately assigned to one of
two groups. Calves from group 1 were sent to a hospital pen
to recover and calves from group 2 were, upon treatment, sent
back to the respective home pen for recovery. Treatment success
was characterized by a CIS of < 2 accompanied by a
reduction in body temperature by 20°F or < 104°F. No
improvement in CIS and no reduction in body temperature
were considered to be a treatment failure and the next successive
(Table 3) treatment was initiated. A BRD relapse was
defined as showing clinical signs of BRD within 21 days of
recovery. There were designated hospital pens for first, second
and third treatments.
1 All authors are associated with the Department of Animal Science, Fayetteville.
79