Backyard poultry: legislation, zoonoses and disease prevention

Survey of the husbandry and biosecurity practices of backyard chicken keepers in the UK

BACKGROUND

This survey investigated the housing, feeding, health and welfare of backyard chickens kept in the UK.

METHODS

Information was collected via an online questionnaire active from May to July 2021. The survey asked about flock demographics, housing, diet, enrichment provision, if the flock was registered with the Animal Plant and Health Agency (APHA) and the reason, preventative health care and biosecurity, and the incidence and methods of euthanasia.

RESULTS

The majority of flocks (48.8%) consisted of one to five birds, were located in rural areas (58%) and were kept as pets (77%) and/or for eggs (71.6%). Enrichment was provided by 78.4% of keepers. Most respondents (69%) were aware of the Animal Plant and Health Agency poultry registration scheme, with 32.8% being registered with the scheme. Kitchen scraps were fed by 29% of keepers. Veterinary services were used by 63.6% of keepers, although 4% said they struggled to find a veterinarian willing to treat backyard poultry. New additions to the flock were isolated by 70.2% of keepers.

LIMITATIONS

The survey was distributed through poultry-specific Facebook groups and via chicken rescue centres, so it is not a truly random sample of backyard chicken keepers. All survey-based studies have an inherent element of subjectivity.

CONCLUSIONS

The survey identified biosecurity, humane euthanasia training, veterinary training in backyard poultry medicine, and enrichment provision as areas where improvements can be made to improve poultry health and welfare and reduce the risks of infectious disease transmission.

Chlamydia gallinacea in Brazilian backyard chicken farms

Avian chlamydiosis is a bacterial infectious disease of birds, considered until recently caused only by Chlamydia psittaci, that now includes the newly described species C. buteonis, C. avium, and C. gallinacea, associated with several avian hosts. Since its recognition as a species in 2014 and having chickens as one of its main hosts, C. gallinacea has already been described in backyard poultry on all continents. The present study aimed to survey by molecular techniques the presence and species of Chlamydia spp. in backyard chickens from three states of the southern region of Brazil (Paraná-PR, Santa Catarina-SC, and Rio Grande do Sul-RS). DNA extracted from cloacal swab samples were tested by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for different species of Chlamydia, namely Chlamydiaceae (23 S rRNA gene), C. psittaci (ompA gene), C. avium (enoA gene) and C. gallinacea (gidA and enoA genes). The 16 S rRNA gene was used for sequencing and phylogenetic analysis. A total of 582 backyard chicken samples were collected and grouped in 238 pools, from 134 properties in 59 municipalities. Chlamydiaceae was detected in 25.2% (60/238) of the samples, in 38.8% (52/134) of the properties and in 66.1% (39/59) of the municipalities. None of the samples yielded positive PCR results for C. psittaci or C. avium. For C. gallinacea, the overall percentage was 16.3% (39/238) according to the results of gidA and enoA genes. Sequence analysis confirmed that the samples corresponded to C. gallinacea. This is the first report of C. gallinacea in Brazil.

Backyard poultry: exploring non-intensive production systems

The concept of backyard poultry historically encompassed "food-producing animals." Nevertheless, a recent shift in livestock production paradigms within developed countries is evident, as backyard poultry owners now raise their birds for purposes beyond self-consumption, raising animals in a familiar way, and fostering emotional bonds with them. Because backyard animals are frequently privately owned, and the resulting products are typically not marketed, very little information is available about the demographic profile of backyard owners and information on flocks' characteristics, husbandry, and welfare. Thus, this review aims to clarify the characteristics of backyard poultry, highlighting the prevalent infectious diseases and the zoonotic risk to which farmers are exposed. According to the FAO, there are different types of poultry production systems: intensive, sub-intensive, and extensive. The system conditions, requirements, and the resulting performance differ extensively due to the type of breed, feeding practices, prevalence of disease, prevention and control of diseases, flock management, and the interactions among all these factors. The presence and transmission of infectious diseases in avian species is a problem that affects both the animals themselves and public health. Bacterial (Escherichia coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter, and Mycoplasma), parasitic (helminths, louses, and mites), and viral (Avian influenza, Newcastle, Marek, Infectious Bronchitis, Gumboro, Infectious Laringotracheitis, and Fowlpox) are the most important pathogens involved in backyard poultry health. In addition, Avian influenza, Salmonella, Campylobacter, and E. coli, could be a risk for backyard farmers and/or backyard-derived products consumers. Thus, proper biosecurity implementation measures are mandatory to control them. While the principles and practices of on-farm biosecurity may be well-versed among commercial farmers, hobbyists, and backyard farmers might not be familiar with the necessary steps to protect their flocks from infectious diseases and curb their transmission. This sector represents the fourth category of poultry farming, characterized by the lowest biosecurity standards. Consequently, it is imperative to address the legal status of backyard poultry, educate owners about biosecurity measures, and promote proper veterinary care and disease control.

Fluralaner systemic treatment of chickens results in mortality in Triatoma gerstaeckeri, vector of the agent of Chagas disease

BACKGROUND

Chagas disease remains a persistent vector-borne neglected tropical disease throughout the Americas and threatens both human and animal health. Diverse control methods have been used to target triatomine vector populations, with household insecticides being the most common. As an alternative to environmental sprays, host-targeted systemic insecticides (or endectocides) allow for application of chemicals to vertebrate hosts, resulting in toxic blood meals for arthropods (xenointoxication). In this study, we evaluated three systemic insecticide products for their ability to kill triatomines.

METHODS

Chickens were fed the insecticides orally, following which triatomines were allowed to feed on the treated chickens. The insecticide products tested included: Safe-Guard® Aquasol (fenbendazole), Ivomec® Pour-On (ivermectin) and Bravecto® (fluralaner). Triatoma gerstaeckeri nymphs were allowed to feed on insecticide-live birds at 0, 3, 7, 14, 28 and 56 days post-treatment. The survival and feeding status of the T. gerstaeckeri insects were recorded and analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Feeding on fluralaner-treated chickens resulted 50-100% mortality in T. gerstaeckeri over the first 14 days post-treatment but not later; in contrast, all insects that fed on fenbendazole- and ivermectin-treated chickens survived. Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-QQQ) analysis, used to detect the concentration of fluralaner and fenbendazole in chicken plasma, revealed the presence of fluralaner in plasma at 3, 7, and 14 days post-treatment but not later, with the highest concentrations found at 3 and 7 days post-treatment. However, fenbendazole concentration was below the limit of detection at all time points.

CONCLUSIONS

Xenointoxication using fluralaner in poultry is a potential new tool for integrated vector control to reduce risk of Chagas disease.

Systemic veterinary drugs for control of the common bed bug, Cimex lectularius, in poultry farms

BACKGROUND

The common bed bug, Cimex lectularius L., is a hematophagous ectoparasite that was a common pest in poultry farms through the 1960s. Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and organophosphates eradicated most infestations, but concurrent with their global resurgence as human ectoparasites, infestations of bed bugs have been reappearing in poultry farms. Although the impact of bed bugs on chicken health has not been quantified, frequent biting and blood-feeding are expected to cause stress, infections and even anemia in birds. Bed bug control options are limited due to the sensitive nature of the poultry environment, limited products labeled for bed bug control and resistance of bed bug populations to a broad spectrum of active ingredients. Veterinary drugs are commonly used to control endo- and ectoparasites in animals. In this study, we evaluated the effects of two common veterinary drugs on bed bugs by treating the host with systemic antiparasitic drugs.

METHODS

We conducted dose-response studies of ivermectin and fluralaner against several bed bug strains using a membrane feeding system. Also, different doses of these drugs were given to chickens and two delivery methods (topical treatment and ingestion) were used to evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin and fluralaner on bed bug mortality.

RESULTS

Using an artificial feeding system, both ivermectin and fluralaner caused high mortality in insecticide-susceptible bed bugs, and fluralaner was found to be effective on pyrethroid- and fipronil-resistant bed bugs. Ivermectin was ineffective in chickens either by the topical treatment or ingestion, whereas bed bugs that fed on chickens which had ingested fluralaner suffered high mortality when feeding on these chickens for up to 28 days post treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that systemic ectoparasitic drugs have great potential for practical use to control bed bug infestations in poultry farms. These findings also demonstrate the efficacy of fluralaner (and potentially other isoxazolines) as a potent new active ingredient for bed bug control.

Osseous Migration of a Perforating Gastrointestinal Foreign Body in an Indian Runner Duck (Anas platyrhynchos domesticus)

An Indian runner duck (Anas platyrhynchos domesticus) was presented for a second opinion after a linear, metallic foreign body was identified on radiographic images. The primary veterinarian performed diagnostic imaging while investigating the presenting complaint of the duck's left pelvic limb lameness. The images obtained from a computed tomography scan performed during the second-opinion visit revealed a linear, metallic foreign body with an associated migration tract originating from the ventriculus and terminating in the proximal left femur. Significant osteomyelitis was noted at the proximal left femur associated with the presence of the linear, metallic object. The foreign body and the adhesions associated with its migration were removed in 2, staged, surgical procedures. Although penetrating ventricular foreign bodies have been previously reported, migration through the cortex of a long bone is an unusual presentation. This case demonstrates that perforating, migrating, gastrointestinal foreign bodies can result in lameness refractory to analgesia and ancillary supportive care.

Backyard poultry flocks in France: A diversity of owners and biosecurity practices

Over the past few years, the number of backyard poultry flocks has been increasing in France. A mandatory step to improve backyard poultry management is to assess health risks by characterizing the flocks and understanding the owners' motivations for keeping poultry and their husbandry practices. A survey of backyard poultry owners was conducted in France to gather information about their motivations for owning poultry, flock characteristics, and breeding and biosecurity practices. The survey was completed by 1,160 owners. The major motivations for owning poultry flocks were egg consumption (93.3 %), recycling (72.4 %) and having pet animals (53.2 %). Most owners had already heard about avian influenza (96.7 %), but were less aware about other diseases such as Newcastle Disease (41.6 %), salmonellosis (79.1 %), or campylobacteriosis (18.6 %). Owners mainly kept only egg-layers (78.4 %), and the median size flock was five egg-layers. Owners gave eggs to their relatives, occasionally or regularly, in 86.6 % of the cases. Contacts with other family poultry owners were frequent (68.9 %) and biosecurity practices were poorly implemented: 50 % of owners did not wash their hands systematically after visiting the flock and more than 60 % of owners did not wear specific shoes. Drawing from the survey data, five profiles of family poultry flocks were identified with multiple correspondence analysis and hierarchical cluster analysis. The profiles, based on flock characteristics and owners' practices and motivations, illustrate the heterogeneity of the backyard poultry sector: 1) urban poultry, 2) traditional poultry, 3) student poultry, 4) pet poultry and 5) hobby poultry. Urban poultry consisted of recently constituted (< 2 years old), small (< 3 birds) flocks of layers, and traditional poultry of older, medium-sized flocks belonging to retired and older people. These two profiles were characterized by limited contacts (direct or indirect) with other flocks and owners. Student poultry consisted of younger owners (<30 years old) with flocks over 5 years old. Pet poultry consisted of recently established, medium-size flocks of layers located in both rural or urban environments. Hobby poultry consisted of dedicated owners who breed and sell poultry and participate in exhibitions and poultry shows. Pet and hobby poultry profiles were characterized by greater knowledge of diseases and biosecurity practices, more bird movements, and reported more frequent clinical signs. The observation of different profiles can help target veterinary and public health education messages to prevent disease transmission in backyard poultry flocks in France.

Prevalence of Select Intestinal Parasites in Alabama Backyard Poultry Flocks

Simple Summary

As biosecurity is generally low in backyard chicken flocks, infections with various pathogens are common. This puts other poultry nearby, including commercial flocks, at risk. Some chicken pathogens can also infect humans and cause disease. In this study, backyard poultry flocks were tested for parasites. Eighty-four fecal samples, 82 from chickens and two from turkeys, from 64 backyard flocks throughout the state of Alabama were collected in the summers of 2017 and 2018. The most frequently observed parasites were coccidia, unicellular parasites capable of causing diarrhea. Eggs of various roundworms were observed in 20.3–26.6% of the flocks. These parasites were usually present in low numbers only. Other detected parasites were the flagellates Histomonas meleagridis and Tetratrichomonas gallinarum in 4.7% and 18.8% of flocks. Both can cause severe disease in poultry. Detected parasites that can cause disease in humans were Cryptosporidium spp. in 18.8% of the flocks and Blastocystis spp. in 87.5% of the flocks. The results will help to provide information that can be used to design outreach programs to improve the health and wellbeing of birds in backyard flocks.

Abstract

Keeping chickens as backyard pets has become increasingly popular in the United States in recent years. However, biosecurity is generally low in backyard flocks. As a consequence, they can serve as reservoirs for various pathogens that pose a risk for commercial poultry or human health. Eighty-four fecal samples, 82 from chickens and two from turkeys, from 64 backyard flocks throughout the state of Alabama were collected in the summers of 2017 and 2018. Coccidia oocysts were seen in 64.1% of flocks with oocyst counts in most samples below 10,000 oocysts per gram. Eggs of Ascaridia spp. or Heterakis gallinarum were observed in 20.3% of the flocks, and eggs of Capillaria spp. in 26.6% of the flocks. Egg counts were low, rarely exceeding 1000 eggs per gram. DNA extracted directly from fecal samples was investigated by PCR for other relevant parasites. The results showed that 4.7% of flocks were positive for Histomonas meleagridis, 18.8% of flocks for Tetratrichomonas gallinarum, 18.8% of flocks for Cryptosporidium spp. and 87.5% of flocks for Blastocystis spp. The results will help to provide information that can be used to design outreach programs to improve health and wellbeing of birds in backyard flocks.

Backyard poultry cases in UK small animal practices: Demographics, health conditions and pharmaceutical prescriptions

BACKGROUND

Backyard poultry ownership is of keen interest in the United Kingdom. However, despite this, little is known about veterinary care engagement and outcomes of visits in this group of species.

METHODS

This study described and characterised veterinary practice-visiting backyard poultry, utilising electronic health record data supplied by veterinary practices voluntarily participating in the Small Animal Veterinary Surveillance Network between 1st April 2014 and 31st March 2019.

RESULTS

In total, 4424 recorded poultry consultations originating from 197 veterinary practices (352 sites) were summarised. Chicken consultation (n = 3740) peak incidence was in early summer (April-June), relative to all recorded species. More chickens resided in rural (incident rate ratio = 2.5, confidence interval [CI] 2.3-2.6, p <0.001) or less deprived areas. Non-specific clinical signs were commonly recorded (17.6% of chicken consultations, CI 15.9-19.2), as were those indicative of advanced disease. This latter finding was reflected in prescribed management strategies, with euthanasia comprising 29.8% (CI 27.0-32.6) of consultations. Antimicrobials were commonly prescribed (33.0% of consultations, CI 29.8-36.2), 43.8% of which included antimicrobials considered 'highest priority critically important' by the World Health Organisation.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate a need to tailor antimicrobial prescription guidance to the backyard poultry setting. In addition, late presentation of disease, vague clinical descriptions in clinical narratives and high euthanasia rates show that disease identification, management and knowledge of poultry health and welfare among owners and veterinary surgeons can be improved.

The Structural Characteristics, Management, and Challenges of Backyard Poultry Farming in Residential Areas of Turkey

Simple Summary

Relatively little is known about backyard poultry flocks in urban areas in Turkey, their size and how they are managed. To address this knowledge gap, a semi-structured survey was conducted of backyard poultry owners in Turkey with regard to flock characteristics, management, biosecurity practices and the challenges of backyard poultry flocks. Data derived from 1094 respondents across Turkey showed that the majority of respondents owned small flocks with fewer than 50 birds. Most participants reported keeping poultry as food for family use and free-range coops were the most preferred type of housing. Keeping different poultry species together, which poses a significant biosecurity risk, was reported by 64% of owners. Internal-external parasites, Escherichia coli infections and chronic respiratory diseases were the most common health problems in backyard flocks. Although there is a significant amount of backyard poultry farming activity in residential districts of Turkey, lack of regional regulations and animal theft were the most cited challenges. The results highlighted the need for biosecurity measures and for a regulatory framework that takes into account the risks to commercial poultry flocks and public health. A thorough understanding of the complexities of backyard poultry practices and the needs of backyard breeders will help authorities to design effective policies for the backyard poultry sector in Turkey.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to collect, for the first time, comprehensive information about the backyard poultry sector in Turkey. This included a profile of the poultry owners, flock characteristics, husbandry, housing conditions, the owners’ biosecurity measures and the challenges of backyard poultry farming in residential areas of Turkey. An online semi-structured survey was fully completed by 1094 respondents. The majority of respondents (91%) owned fewer than 50 birds and reported raising other poultry species besides chickens (64%). Most of the participants indicated that they kept poultry as food for family use (83%) and had been involved in chicken-raising activities for less than 10 years (86%). Free-range coops were the type of housing most preferred by the respondents (86%). However, there was a lack of awareness about poultry diseases and poultry health care conditions. Respondents that confirmed wild bird and rodent access to their feeders and drinkers reported high rates of internal-external parasites, Escherichia coli infections and chronic respiratory diseases (p < 0.001). Lack of regional regulations (84%), animal theft (80%), lack of information on poultry management (79%), minimizing predation (75%), and the need for vaccination and veterinary services (73%) were the most cited challenges. The results highlighted the need for improved biosecurity measures and for a regulatory framework that takes into account the risks to commercial poultry flocks and public health.

A Review of Pathogen Transmission at the Backyard Chicken-Wild Bird Interface

Habitat conversion and the expansion of domesticated, invasive species into native habitats are increasingly recognized as drivers of pathogen emergence at the agricultural-wildlife interface. Poultry agriculture is one of the largest subsets of this interface, and pathogen spillover events between backyard chickens and wild birds are becoming more commonly reported. Native wild bird species are under numerous anthropogenic pressures, but the risks of pathogen spillover from domestic chickens have been historically underappreciated as a threat to wild birds. Now that the backyard chicken industry is one of the fastest growing industries in the world, it is imperative that the principles of biosecurity, specifically bioexclusion and biocontainment, are legislated and implemented. We reviewed the literature on spillover events of pathogens historically associated with poultry into wild birds. We also reviewed the reasons for biosecurity failures in backyard flocks that lead to those spillover events and provide recommendations for current and future backyard flock owners.

“What a Waste”—Can We Improve Sustainability of Food Animal Production Systems by Recycling Food Waste Streams into Animal Feed in an Era of Health, Climate, and Economic Crises?

Food waste has been a major barrier to achieving global food security and environmental sustainability for many decades. Unfortunately, food waste has become an even bigger problem in many countries because of supply chain disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic and African Swine Fever epidemic. Although Japan and South Korea have been leaders in recycling food waste into animal feed, countries that produce much greater amounts of food waste, such as the United States and the European Union, have lagged far behind. Concerns about the risk of transmission of bacteria, prions, parasites, and viruses have been the main obstacles limiting the recycling of food waste streams containing animal-derived tissues into animal feed and have led to government regulations restricting this practice in the U.S. and EU. However, adequate thermal processing is effective for inactivating all biological agents of concern, perhaps except for prions from infected ruminant tissues. The tremendous opportunity for nitrogen and phosphorus resource recovery along with several other environmental benefits from recycling food waste streams and rendered animal by-products into animal feed have not been fully appreciated for their substantial contribution toward solving our climate crisis. It is time to revisit our global approach to improving economic and environmental sustainability by more efficiently utilizing the abundant supply of food waste and animal tissues to a greater extent in animal feed while protecting human and animal health in food animal production systems.

Infectious Diseases and Meat Production

Most infectious diseases in humans originate from animals. In this paper, we explore the role of animal farming and meat consumption in the emergence and amplification of infectious diseases. First, we discuss how meat production increases epidemic risks, either directly through increased contact with wild and farmed animals or indirectly through its impact on the environment (e.g., biodiversity loss, water use, climate change). Traditional food systems such as bushmeat and backyard farming increase the risks of disease transmission from wild animals, while intensive farming amplifies the impact of the disease due to the high density, genetic proximity, increased immunodeficiency, and live transport of farmed animals. Second, we describe the various direct and indirect costs of animal-based infectious diseases, and in particular, how these diseases can negatively impact the economy and the environment. Last, we discuss policies to reduce the social costs of infectious diseases. While existing regulatory frameworks such as the "One Health" approach focus on increasing farms' biosecurity and emergency preparedness, we emphasize the need to better align stakeholders' incentives and to reduce meat consumption. We discuss in particular the implementation of a "zoonotic" Pigouvian tax, and innovations such as insect-based food or cultured meat.

Bioactive Compounds in Food Waste: A Review on the Transformation of Food Waste to Animal Feed

Bioactive compounds are substances which are present in foods in small amounts and have the ability to provide health benefits. Bioactive compounds include but are not limited to long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, vitamins, carotenoids, peptides, and polyphenols. The aim of the present study is to review literature for potential bioactive compounds present in food waste material and discuss the transformation of food waste to animal feed under the perspective that usage of food waste, rather than disposal, may tackle food insecurity and provide health benefits. Finally, applications in poultry and swine nutrition, with emphasis on the presence of fatty acids on food waste material, are discussed.

A two-year prospective study of small poultry flocks in Ontario, Canada, part 2: causes of morbidity and mortality

Non-commercial poultry flocks (referred to as "small flocks") have become increasingly popular in Canada. Despite this popularity, little is known about the main causes of morbidity and mortality (health status) in these flocks. We assessed the baseline prevalence of infectious and non-infectious diseases among Ontario's small poultry flocks by conducting a prospective surveillance study over a 2-y period. With the owner's consent, for each bird ( n = 245) submitted to the Animal Health Laboratory, we performed a postmortem examination, including ancillary tests to reach a diagnosis. Infectious diseases were the most common primary cause of clinical signs or death (62%), with multifactorial respiratory diseases (21%) and Marek's disease (11%) being most frequent. Multifactorial respiratory diseases were commonly caused by coinfection with bacteria (e.g., Mycoplasma gallisepticum and M. synoviae, Escherichia coli, Avibacterium spp.) and viruses, such as infectious bronchitis and infectious laryngotracheitis viruses. No federally reportable diseases were diagnosed. The health status of small flocks in Ontario has not been reported previously, to our knowledge, and the data presented herein will produce helpful baseline information for the development of technology transfer material directed to owners and veterinarians, which will ultimately aid in the control of diseases among these flocks.

Small Poultry Flocks in Alberta: Demographics and Practices

The distribution, composition, and management characteristics of small "backyard" poultry flocks may have important implications in the spread of both avian diseases and zoonoses of public health concern. Although the prevalence of small poultry flocks has increased in Alberta, Canada, in recent years, there is minimal demographic information available for these populations. To gain initial epidemiologic insight into this growing population and potential areas of risk, a survey was conducted to characterize the sector. Information on flock demographics and bird health, as well as production and biosecurity practices, were gathered and analyzed from 206 surveys, representing respondents from 43 counties. These results revealed great diversity of both owners and flocks, characterized by wide variations in flock sizes and composition. Laying hens were the most commonly reported type of bird (93.4%), followed by ducks and geese (35.3%), turkeys, (33.8%), and broiler chickens (33.1%). Notably, 58.1% of owners reported having more than one type of bird in their flock, with many owners never, or only sometimes, separating flocks based on species or purpose. Personal consumption (81.8%) and sale of eggs (48.2%) were the most frequently cited purposes for owning a flock. Our findings suggest that owners in Alberta are predominantly new to production; most (73.1%) have kept birds for less than 5 yr and 25.6% for less than 1 yr. Flock health parameters revealed inconsistent use of medical interventions, such as vaccinations, treatments, and veterinary consultation. Data on the sourcing, housing, and movement of birds, as well as movement of people and visitors, reveal substantial potential for contact to occur directly and indirectly between flocks and humans. Additionally, basic husbandry and biosecurity practices were found to be inconsistent and often inadequate, highlighting important gaps and opportunities to improve the health of Alberta's small poultry flocks and mitigate risks to public health. These quantitative and qualitative results provide a baseline characterization of the sector and identify risks and challenges that may serve to inform the development and delivery of future study and interventions.

Disease surveillance in England and Wales, March 2017

▪ Current and emerging issues: spotty liver disease in free-range laying hens▪ Highlights from the scanning surveillance network▪ Update on international disease threats▪ Focus on the risks for cattle at turnoutThese are among matters discussed in the Animal and Plant Health Agency's (APHA's) disease surveillance report for March 2017.