Factors affecting use of veterinarians by small-scale food animal operations

Declining engagement of veterinary services in Australian animal production systems: why has this occurred and what are the risks?

The provision of veterinary services is essential to deliver animal health and welfare outcomes, but over the last several decades demand for veterinary services in animal production systems has broadly declined in Australia. Reduced demand is closely related to a decline in the size of the production animal veterinary workforce, and there is evidence that the percentage of veterinarians participating in the delivery of veterinary services to animal production systems has lessened. Reduced demand for veterinary services in the production animal sector is likely to be attributed to several factors, including challenges around widespread adoption of preventive veterinary services, improved self-efficacy of producers through advancement of knowledge, and potential concern by producers over the role of veterinarians in production animal systems. Declining veterinary engagement results in increased risk at both the individual farm level (diminished expertise to deliver reactive and proactive veterinary services) and at a population level (increased biosecurity risk and risk to social licence to operate). The current environment and the community trust in the profession should be seen as an opportunity to develop and implement a strategy to halt and reverse the decline in demand for production animal veterinary services. Such a strategy will require significant and sustained collaboration between the veterinary profession, Industry and government.

Factors influencing the performance of voluntary farmer disease reporting in passive surveillance systems: A scoping review

The impacts of exotic disease incursions on livestock industries can be mitigated by having robust surveillance systems in place that decrease the time between disease introduction and detection. An important component of this is having farmers routinely observe their animals for indications of clinical disease, recognise the existence of problems, and then decide to notify their veterinarian or animal health authorities. However, as highlighted by this literature review, farmers are believed to be underreporting clinical events due to factors such as (1) uncertainty around the clinical signs and situations that warrant reporting, (2) fear over the social and economic consequences from both positive and false positive reports, (3) negative beliefs regarding the efficacy and outcomes of response measures, (4) mistrust and dissatisfaction with animal health authorities, (5) absence of sufficiently attractive financial and non-financial incentives for submitting reports, and (6) poor awareness of the procedures involved with the submission, processing, and response to reports. There have been few formal studies evaluating the efficacy of different approaches to increasing farmer engagement with disease reporting. However, there is a recognised need for any proposed solutions to account for farmer knowledge and experience with assessing their own farm situation as well as the different identities, motivations, and beliefs that farmers have about their role in animal health surveillance systems. Empowering farmers to take a more active role in developing these solutions is likely to become even more important as animal health authorities increasingly look to establish public-private partnerships for biosecurity governance.

Animal health care seeking behavior of pets or livestock owners and knowledge and awareness on zoonoses in a university community

Aim:

We investigated the attitude of pets or livestock owning households in a university community to animal health care services and assessed the knowledge and awareness level of the residents on zoonoses.

Materials and Methods:

Structured questionnaire was used to obtain information on demography, pet or livestock ownership, animal health care seeking behavior, awareness and knowledge of zoonoses from 246 households. We did descriptive statistics and bivariate analysis to determine the level of association in discrete variables between owners and non-owners of pets or livestock at a significant level of p<0.05.

Results:

Of the 246 respondents, 80 (32.5%) were either pet or livestock owners. The animal health care seeking behavior of the 80 pets or livestock owners in terms of treatment and vaccination was 70%. Of the 56 (70%) who provided health care services for their animals, about 48 (85.7%) engaged the services of a veterinarian. Dog owning households (42) had the highest frequency of treating their pets against endoparasites (97.6%); ectoparasites (81%) and vaccination against diseases (73.8%). Of the 246 respondents, only 47 (19.1%) have heard of the term zoonoses. Of the considered zoonoses; their awareness of rabies (79.3%) was the highest, followed by Lassa fever (66.3%), the least was pasteurellosis with 18.7%. Having pets or livestock was significantly associated (p=0.04) with rabies awareness. However, there is no significant difference in the level of awareness of zoonoses; knowledge of zoonoses, knowledge of prevention of zoonoses and knowledge of risk of zoonoses between owners and non-owners of pets or livestock.

Conclusion:

The animal health care seeking behavior of households with pets or livestock is good and should be encouraged. Public education should be created for other zoonoses aside from rabies, Lassa fever, and avian influenza.

Detection of quinolones in commercial eggs obtained from farms in the Espaíllat Province in the Dominican Republic

Previously, we reported the use of quinolones in broiler chickens resulted in residues in retail poultry meat obtained from nine districts in the Santiago Province of the Dominican Republic. Residues in poultry products are a concern due to consumer allergies and the potential to develop antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Given the use of quinolones in poultry production and our previous findings in poultry meat, the objective of this study was to evaluate the presence of quinolone residues in eggs. Samples were collected from 48 different farms located in three of the four municipalities (Moca, Cayetano Germosén, and Jamao) of the Espaíllat Province. Each farm was sampled three times between July and September for a total of 144 samples. Samples were evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively for quinolone residues using the Equinox test. Operation systems (cage or floor), seasonality, and location were considered along with egg-producer sizes that were defined as small scale, <30,000 eggs per day; medium scale, 30,000 to 60,000 eggs per day; or large scale, >60,000 eggs per day. From small-, medium-, and large-scale producers, 69, 50, and 40% of samples were positive for quinolone residues, respectively. A greater number of samples were positive (61%) in floor-laying hen producers compared with those using cages (40%). In the Jamao municipality, 67% of the samples were positive compared with Moca and Cayetano Germosén, where 56 and 25% of samples were positive, respectively. Sampling time had an effect on percent positives: samples collected in July, August, and September were 71, 19, and 63% positive, respectively. Overall, 51% of the samples obtained from eggs produced in the province of Espaíllat were positive for quinolone residues at levels higher than the maximum limits for edible tissue established by the regulatory agencies, including the European Union and U.S. Department of Agriculture. The results obtained from this research confirmed the presence of quinolone residue in eggs, which may present a health risk to some consumers.