Stall Surface

Deep loose bedded sand stalls are the best for cow comfort!

Dairy producers worldwide must decide between two main types of resting surface: deep loose bedding or a mattress type surface. Thin rubber mats or concrete surfaces with little bedding have no place in adult cattle housing and should not be used.

Bedding material choices are secondary and usually consist of sand, manure solids, or other organic bedding materials (straw, sawdust, shavings, hulls, paper, peat, etc.).

Under the vast majority of circumstances, The Dairyland Initiative strongly favors deep loose bedding, specifically sand, over other man-made surfaces because of the greater cushion, traction, and support such a surface provides.

Deep loose bedded surfaces are preferred for all dairy cows because herds with deep loose bedding:

1. Have fewer lame cows
2. Have fewer cows with hock and knee injuries
3. Produce more milk

With improved well-being and higher production, the choice is a simple one. Where manure management challenges preclude the use of deep loose bedding, then the softest mattress products should be chosen and steps taken to reduce the negative impacts of these surfaces on the dairy cow.

The Benefits of Deep Loose Bedding

Why fewer lame cows?

We believe that the benefits of deep loose bedding, especially sand, relate to a difference in the way lame and non-lame cows rest in the stalls.

Resting behavior is modified on deep loose bedding with softer surfaces promoting fewer, longer lying bouts

Data from 205 cows in 16 different freestall facilities show that cows on sand bedding lie down for 20 minutes longer for each lying bout (1.3 hour/day vs. 1 hour/day), and take fewer bouts per day (10 vs. 14) than cows on mattresses.

Resting behavior of 205 cows on sand or rubber crumb filled mattress bedded freestalls

This difference in behavior is insignificant for young, fit non-lame cows, but it becomes a problem for older cows with sore feet.

Cows with sore feet have great difficulty rising and lying down on a firm, unyielding surface such as a mat or a poorly cushioned mattress. Lame cows typically lie down for longer bouts and the pain associated with the process of rising leads to increased time spent standing in the stall between lying bouts. When we compare the behavior of lame cows to non-lame cows, it is apparent that lame cows have a higher frequency of very short lying times AND very long lying times compared to non-lame cows. In simple terms, lame cows get stuck lying down and find it hard to rise in the stall (these cows don’t have time to eat!), and other lame cows get stuck standing in the stall waiting to lie down.

Observe how the cow’s foot is supported and how she rises with confidence in a deep sand bedded stall.

Now observe how the cow’s weight is entirely supported on the tip of her toe as she rises in a mattress stall.

One of the major benefits of sand is that it normalizes lame cow behavior by allowing time for rest and recuperation. In a Finnish study, two groups of lame cows were kept in freestalls bedded with either straw or sand. After 21 weeks, lameness had improved in the group housed on sand while the group on straw remained unchanged.

Across multiple studies, lameness in herds with deep loose bedding is 40% less than in herds with mattresses. In our recent Wisconsin survey of 66 high producing freestall housed dairy herds, lameness prevalence was 11% on deep loose bedding and 17% on mattresses. Other studies have repeatedly found a similar differential.

Why fewer hock and knee injuries?

Hock and knee injuries are pressure sores caused by the weight of the cow being transferred through a focal point on a firm resting surface. This pressure creates hair follicle damage, hair loss, skin damage, and ulceration, and in the worst cases, joint swelling and associated cellulitis. Lameness is associated with hock injury likely through altered resting behavior – with lame cows unlikely to shift and change position as frequently as non-lame cows – leading to greater pressure damage.

The frequency of hair loss on hocks and knees is very high in housed dairy cattle, averaging about 50% cows across different bedding systems. However, the frequency of ulcerated and swollen hocks and knees is remarkably different between deep loose bedded and mattress surfaces. In our recent survey of 66 high producing freestall dairy herds in Wisconsin, the prevalence of ulcerated and or swollen hocks in mattress herds was 29%, compared to 5% in deep loose bedded herds.

The effect of stall surface type (prevalence %) on measures of physical well-being in 66 Wisconsin herds

Deep loose bedding provides improved cushion around bony prominences and is associated with fewer lame cows, reducing the risk for severe hock and knee injury.

Poorly managed and designed deep bedded stalls are associated with an increased risk for medial hock injuries caused by the limb hanging over the raised rear curb when cows lie diagonally across the stall, and when sand fill is poor.

Why more milk?

The most likely explanation for deep loose bedded stall herds producing more milk than mat or mattress herds is the control of lameness. Fewer lame cows and improved longevity leads to an increase in the proportion of healthy older multiparous cows in the herd that produce a lot of extra milk.

There is some suggestion that longer resting times improve blood flow and the delivery of nutrients to the udder, increasing milk production. This may well be true, but it is likely secondary to the effect of lameness.

Longer resting times have been reported in deep loose bedded herds compared to other herds with different types of stall surfaces, with the aim of allowing cows to rest for 12 hours per day. Typically, deep loose bedded herds average 11.5 to 12 hours per day lying times compared to 10 to 10.5 hours per day for mat and mattress herds.

Average lying times (hours/day) of cows on various bedding surfaces (Solano et al., 2016)

Currently, 70% of freestall facilities in Wisconsin use deep loose bedding, of which 60 to 64% use sand, while the remainder use manure solids, or other organic materials. Only 30 to 32% of herds use a mattress or mat – most commonly a rubber crumb filled type mattress.

From a survey of 176 Wisconsin freestall herds in 2012, the sand bedded herds carried a benefit of 7 lbs (3.2 kg) of milk per cow per day, and a rolling herd average of 2,539 lbs (1,152 kg) of milk. Sand bedded herds have lower SCC, lower turnover rates, and improved fresh cow health.

In the most recent survey of Wisconsin herds shipping more than 25,000 lbs (11,340 kg) of milk per day, 60% of herds used inorganic bedding and produced 2,401 lbs (1,089 kg) more milk per cow per year than the 9% of herds bedding with manure solids, and 1,859 lbs (843 kg) more milk than the 19% of herds using another type of organic bedding. These inorganic bedding users also had lower somatic cell counts than the other two groups.

Similar milk differentials of about 2000 lbs (907 kg) of milk per cow per year have been reported in other surveys in countries such as Denmark. We have used these data to create partial budgets to develop a cost benefit analysis of converting to deep loose bedding.

Use the links below to download our partial budget tools to examine the cost benefit of mattress to sand conversions.

Mattress vs. Sand Partial Budget Calculator – Daily Milk Response

Save the file to your computer before use.

Mattress vs. Sand Partial Budget Calculator – Rolling Herd Average Milk Response

Save the file to your computer before use.

Sand Bedding Management

Sand is a granular material consisting of finely divided rock and mineral particles. Dry matter (DM) is usually 94 to 97% (drier is better), and organic matter (OM) content is usually <4%. Granular size varies. Very coarse sand drains moisture from the surface of the bed well, but may be very abrasive and lead to excessive hoof wear, while very fine sand will trap moisture and organic matter which may fuel bacterial growth and create associated risk for mastitis. In general, we select sand that is neither too coarse nor too fine for optimal comfort and udder health. For reclamation systems, a coarser sand is usually selected. Separation systems perform optimally with a mason or concrete type sand, which should have had a sieve analysis performed.

Sand Sieve Analysis (from Gooch and Inglis)

The ASTM standards for Mason (a.k.a. Number 8 sand) and Concrete Sand sieve analysis is as follows (Either one of these, or somewhere in between, are acceptable sand particle sizes for mechanical separation systems)

Sand DM, OM, and bacterial load may be monitored regularly by sampling uncontaminated sand from the rear of a random selection of stalls within a pen. We suggest using a gallon plastic bag or small bucket and walking through the pen sampling every 2 to 10 stalls (depending on the size of the pen), taking a small handful of uncontaminated sand from the rear of the bed where the cow’s udder sits. The gallon plastic bag may then be mixed and sub-sampled into a quart plastic bag for transport on ice to the lab. Bacterial cultures can be done as bedding cultures at a milk quality lab of your choosing. Note that for DM and OM tests, freezing is not required. DM is measured after 24 hours at 1000 ^oF (538 ^oC), and OM is measured after 12 hours at 6000 ^oF (3316 ^oC).

Suggested targets for ideal sand would be:

DM: >95%

OM: <2%

Fresh bedding total bacterial count: <5,000 CFU/mL

            Used bedding total bacterial count: <1 to 2 million CFM/mL (mostly streptococci)

            Coliform count in used bedding: <100,000 CFM/mL

Whatever type of sand is used, the compaction zone below the surface of the top layer of sand should be monitored to see if it is becoming as hard as concrete. If this gets to within 1 to 2 inches (2.5 to 5 cm) of the point of the rear curb, it is time to remove the rear third of the bed and replace it with fresh uncontaminated sand. Superior Attachments makes a bedding extractor auger for this purpose ( http://www.superiorattachments.com/beddingextractor.php ).

Adding fresh sand twice a week is usually sufficient to maintain reasonable fill, and grossly contaminated sand should be removed during each milking. Note: Only sand that is contaminated with organic matter needs to be removed. An easy stall-side test is to ball the sand in your hand and juggle it. If the ball stays in a ball, the sand needs to be removed. If it breaks up easily, it can stay in the stall.

Leveling and aerating the bed is essential for successful sand stall management. Level the bed by redistributing the sand from beneath the divider loops, and aerate the top 3 to 4 inches (8 to 10 cm) of the bed. This may be done by hand in smaller herds. The raker must be taught to drag sand diagonally from under the divider loops back to the rear of the stall flush with the rear curb after removing the wet contaminated sand. Note the excellent job of bed leveling in the stall picture below:

For larger herds, Superior Attachments make a rotating arm bedding leveler (the Sandman) that does an excellent job (www.superiorattachments.com). This now comes in a low-profile unit to allow the unit to fit under most freestall loops.

Video of groomer

Other groomers are handmade and basically level the bed with the curb. If the leveler has teeth, we recommend that they are no longer than 4 inches (10 cm).

The rear retaining curb for deep loose beds should be 6 to 8 inches (15 to 20 cm) wide and can either be poured with a flat top or with a slight slope of 1 to 2 inches (2.5 to 5 cm) on the bedding surface side (preferred). It is recommended that the height of the curb on the alley side be 8 to 9 inches (20 to 23 cm) and no higher. Do not make the curb too wide as this will take away standing space and lead to problems with neck rail placement.

Sand typically costs $7 to $15 USD per ton ($7.72 to $ 16.54 USD per metric ton), but prices vary widely between regions. Multiply cost per ton by 1.5 for cost per cubic yard (multiply cost per metric ton by 1.45 for cost per cubic meter).

The range of sand use rates is typically 20 to 80 lbs (9 to 36 kg) sand per stall per day with an average of ~50 lbs (23 kg). Therefore, bedding costs for fresh sand are typically ~$70 to $100 USD per stall per year.

Herds must decide whether or not they want to reclaim sand from the manure. This decision will depend on the cost of sand, herd size, land availability, soil type and nutrient management, and other economic factors. Sand settling lanes are in operation in herds as small as 120 cows, but in general, herds with more than 800 to 1000 cows tend to recycle sand.

Fresh Sand Use

For herds using fresh sand, a deep loose bed can be used or alternatively, a ‘Pack Mat’ system can be installed to reduce sand use.

Sand trap grids are not recommended because they reduce cushion and trap contaminated sand in the stall, however the ‘Pack Mat’ design, which consists of a rubber crumb filled mattress over limestone, installed 2 inches (5 cm) below the rear curb, allows an accumulation of 2 inches (5 cm) of sand on top with the rear curb acting as a bedding retainer. These designs aim to reduce bedding use by around 50% compared to deep loose bedded stalls (mean 25 lbs (11 kg) sand per stall per day), while making stall maintenance easier. However, it is still important to remove contaminated bedding from the rear of the stall frequently. Studies show that just 2 inches (5 cm) of sand over a mattress pad provides the benefits of improved rest for lame cows that deep sand beds provide. Cost of the installed Pack Mat is ~$150 USD per stall, and payback usually occurs within 3 years based on purchased bedding savings.

A ‘Pack Mat’ stall design with a rubber crumb filled mattress located below the rear curb and 2 inches (5 cm) of sand bedding on top. This design retains the benefits of a sand bed while reducing the amount of bedding used and increasing the ease of surface management.

The Pack Mat concept was developed by ProMat Ltd and utilizes the rubber crumb pasture mat mattress pad, laid over limestone with a permeable cover anchored over the top.

Do not use a foam overlay with the ‘Pack Mat’ as this will retain moisture. The idea is that milk and urine drain through the pad into the limestone and away from the cow.

For ‘Pack Mat’ users, we recommend the use of a Mason-type sand and the installation of manure handling equipment that can handle this type of sand. Do not use wet recycled sand with the ‘Pack Mat’ system – the moisture will not wick away from the surface, increasing the risk for udder health problems.

Recycled Sand Use

When sand is recycled correctly, cows are at no greater risk for udder health problems than they are when fresh sand is used. Sometimes, udder health actually improves compared to fresh sand use.

For recycled sand, deep beds are preferred with at least an 8-inch (20 cm) depth of sand to allow drainage of moisture from the surface. Recycling systems rely on a coarse grade sand with larger particles. These sands are variably referred to as Concrete or Mason sand with Torpedo sand being the coarsest sand of all. However, for purchasers of sand, it is better to consult a sieve analysis rather than rely on the name of the sand.

Manure Solid Management

Dried manure solids (DMS) provide an attractive alternative bedding for dairy cows because they are readily available, and they work well with manure management programs compared to the difficulties faced with sand.

There are three main types of DMS being used on dairy farms:

(i) From a screw press with composting in piles or windrows. Final product is ~30% DM.

(ii) From a ‘Bedding Recovery Unit’ (models available from Dairytech and FAN) with composting in a heated drum at ~160 °F (71 °C) for 24 to 30 hours. Final product is ~40% DM.

(iii) From an anaerobic digester with plug flow, modified plug flow, or complete mix digesters run at either mesophilic (95 °F or 35 °C) or thermophilic (131 to 149 °F or 55 to 65 °C) temperature regimes. Final product is ~ 40% DM.

There are currently about 120 digesters in Wisconsin, approximately 40 of which are on dairy farms. The expected growth is around 14% per year, so by 2020 we may see about 130 farms with digesters if the scale matches that of Germany who currently leads the world in use of this technology. While these farms will receive a lot of attention, use of DMS from digesters will impact relatively few cows. DMS from the other two strategies will therefore be more commonly seen.

A recent Cornell study on 6 New York farms showed that there were differences in the type of DMS product dependent on the method of production, but these differences were small compared to sand. DM ranged from 27 to 36% and OM was 86 to 93%. In contrast, sand had a DM of ~90% and an OM content of <3 to 4%. All DMS products had higher bacterial counts than fresh sand, but these counts were not predictive of the counts in used bedding. Counts of Klebsiella spp and total gram positive bacteria were higher on cows’ teats when bedded with DMS compared to sand.

These results are consistent with the struggles observed on farms in Wisconsin using DMS. Mastitis problems are common, particularly due to Klebsiella spp, as are injuries from cows slipping in alleys on wet DMS. While comfort is good, these udder health issues preclude us from recommending the use of DMS in hot humid climates like the Upper Midwest.

DMS may successfully be used in the hot dry climates of the Southwest US.

Mattresses – Choice and Management

The challenge for mattress products is to provide sufficient cushion for the cow when she is lying down, and sufficient traction and support for both lame and non-lame cows to rise and lie down. The majority of these products struggle to achieve both of these goals.

Newer mattress products utilize rubber crumbs, foam, water, or gel to provide improved cushion over the older mat and rubber crumb filled products. Preference studies performed by Roger Palmer at UW Arlington in 2003 showed that cows prefer to lie in sand stalls and on the more cushioned mattresses.

• Fulwider, W.K., and R.W. Palmer. 2004. Use of Impact Testing to Predict Softness, Cow Preference, and Hardening Over Time of Stall Bases. J Dairy Sci, 87:3080-3088.
• Wagner-Storch, A.M., R.W. Palmer, and D.W. Kammel. 2003. Factors Affecting Stall Use for Different Freestall Bases. J Dairy Sci, 86:2253-2266.

Some products provide cushion when the cow is lying down, but fail to provide traction and support when the cow rises and lies down. For example, products like the DCC Waterbed or the Kraiburg Wing-flex mats provide adequate cushion when the cow is lying down, when the weight of the cow is distributed more widely over the mat or the dual water chambers, but these products fail to provide cushion and traction as the cow rises and lies down as the weight of the cow is transferred to a single rear foot. These products may fair well for heifers and younger non-lame cows, but will not be adequate for mature and lame cows.

Video of a cow’s foot while lying down on a water bed

Mattress products that come the closest to mimicking the cushion and traction of sand are the composite foam products such as the Kraiburg KEW Plus and the Premium Pad Pasture Mat. Both of these products employ high memory foam that significantly improves cushion and traction. They cost in the region of $250 USD per stall.

All mattresses should be fixed to a concrete platform 7 inches (18 cm) high at the curb with a 2 inch (5 cm) rise to the front of the stall.

Mattress and Lameness Management

Because mattress surfaces reduce lying time and hinder recovery of lame cows, herds must improve their management of lame cows.

We suggest the following plan:

1. Early active surveillance – Walk the pens each week to identify cows with sore feet and acute digital dermatitis lesions so that they can be treated.
2. Move lame cows to a recovery pen – After trimming, a comfortable bedded pack is ideal for recovery because of less competition for a place to eat and rest.
3. Milk lame cows twice a day – Consider having a group of lame cows and milk them twice a day rather than more frequently. This gives them more time for rest and recuperation.
4. Provide an optimal hoof care program, which consists of trimming at least twice per lactation and regular footbathing.

Mattress to Sand Bedding Remodeling

There are three options to consider when converting mattress freestalls to sand:

1. Completely remove the platform and re-pour the curb
2. Cut the concrete out of the stall platform and leave a curb
3. Add a bedding retainer to the rear curb and put sand over concrete or a mat

1. Remove the platform and re-pour the curb

Advantages to this approach are that it is permanent and long-lasting. It will also optimize stall dimensions and maximize cow comfort benefits. Disadvantages are that it is costlier than some of the other options and very disruptive to the cows while building work is performed, unless there is a spare pen where the cows can be housed.

2. Cut the concrete out of the stall platform and leave a curb

Advantages to this approach are that it is permanent and long-lasting. It will also optimize stall dimensions and maximize cow comfort benefits. If performed with the right equipment, it can be less disruptive and quicker than re-pouring a new curb. Disadvantages include the cost, the hiring of cutting equipment, which may breakdown, and the disruption time to the cows.

When performing this option, it is essential to know where the concrete rebar is located. Usually there is rebar in the curb and the platform is poured separate from the curb. Some platforms may have a wire mesh in the concrete that needs to be avoided with any cutting equipment.

3. Add a bedding retainer to the rear curb and put sand over concrete or a mat

The bedding retainer approach has the advantage over the first two methods in terms of cost and causing the least disruption to the cows. Whole pens can be converted in a single day. The main goal is to have 2 to 3 inches (5 to 8 cm) of sand over a mattress, or 4 to 5 inches (10 to 13 cm) of sand over concrete.

However, there are some distinct disadvantages that need to be considered with this method. Retainers can be broken and require maintenance to fix. At the most, there is usually only 3 to 5 inches (8 to 13 cm) of sand over concrete or a mat rather than 8 inches (20 cm) of sand typical of a deep sand stall. In some stalls, elevating the bedded platform relative to the divider loops and neck rail will create stall dimension problems that may impact cow use of the stall negatively. Finally, elevating the curb above the alley tends to discourage stall use for some individuals, especially young heifers. As a rule of thumb, bedding retainers can be used as long as the total height of the rear curb above the alley does not exceed 14 inches (36 cm).

The four main types of bedding retainers that have commonly been used are:

1. Fiber glass pipe
2. Angle iron
3. Concrete curb
4. Treated landscape timber

Fiber Glass Pipe

Fiber glass pipe is available in 33/16-inch O.D. (5.2 cm), 3/16-inch (0.5 cm) thick pipes in 30 foot (9.1 m) lengths with beveled ends so that they slot together. The pipe should be bolted to the platform with 7- to 8.5-inch (18 to 22 cm) concrete lag bolts every 4 feet (1.2 m). No spacers are required between the pipe and the concrete as they tend to weaken the assembly.

Angle Iron

An angle iron or ‘shepherd’s crook’ can be bolted onto the stall platform as shown in the diagram below to retain the sand.

Concrete Curb

A pre-formed concrete curb can be purchased to fit onto the rear of a platform. This has the advantage that it may add to the length of a short stall platform, and the disadvantage that it may reduce the width of the alley. In general, maintain a minimum stall alley width of 9 feet (2.7 m) and a minimum feed alley width of 11 feet (3.4 m).

Treated Landscape Timber

Treated landscape timber is available in 4×4-inch (10×10 cm) or 6×4-inch (15×10 cm) options in 8 foot (2.4 m) lengths. The inside upper edge of the 6×4-inch (15×10 cm) can be beveled and shaped before being set. The timber can be attached to the curb using 8.5-inch (22 cm) stainless steel concrete lag bolts beneath each divider loop.