Cattle Producers' Perceptions of Biosecurity

Overview

Journal BMC Vet Res

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Veterinary Medicine

Date 2013 Apr 12

PMID 23574789

Citations 35

Authors

Marnie L Brennan

Robert M Christley

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The limited use of biosecurity practices by many in the farming community is likely to be due to a range of factors; further understanding of this issue is required. In this study, attitudes and behaviours of producers relating to selected biosecurity practices and the farming industry were studied by interviewing cattle farmers within a 100 km2 study area in north-west England using an interview-based questionnaire.

Results: Most producers appeared to be familiar with the broad concept of the term biosecurity, although risks due to indirect contacts, rather than direct (animal) contacts, were more frequently highlighted. Most producers felt the nominated biosecurity practices were in some way useful, however there was not always agreement between the usefulness of a practice and it being undertaken, and vice versa. In agreement with other studies conducted in the UK, farmers most preferred to obtain information and advice on biosecurity from private veterinarians, but also highlighted DEFRA as a source.

Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of understanding the motivators and barriers behind the uptake of biosecurity practices on farms, as perceptions are variable. Further understanding of these issues is needed in order to more effectively communicate information in regards to herd health and disease prevention. By identifying differences in producers' attitudes, programs can be tailored specifically to individuals' needs.

Citing Articles

Exploring industry perspectives and preferences about calf handling and restraint methods used during spring processing of calves in western Canada.

Arkangel L, Windeyer C, Goldhawk C, Adams C, Pajor E Transl Anim Sci. 2025; 9:txaf014.

PMID: 39991202 PMC: 11842966. DOI: 10.1093/tas/txaf014.

Assessing the Impact of On-Farm Biosecurity Coaching on Farmer Perception and Farm Biosecurity Status in Belgian Poultry Production.

Amalraj A, Van Meirhaeghe H, Chantziaras I, Dewulf J Animals (Basel). 2024; 14(17).

PMID: 39272283 PMC: 11394560. DOI: 10.3390/ani14172498.

Clustering broiler farmers based on their behavioural differences towards biosecurity to prevent highly pathogenic avian influenza.

Pao H, Jackson E, Yang T, Tsai J, Hwang Y, Sung W One Health. 2024; 19:100852.

PMID: 39129789 PMC: 11315216. DOI: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2024.100852.

A latent class analysis of biosecurity attitudes and decision-making strategies of swine producers in the United States.

Baye R, Zia A, Merrill S, Clark E, Smith J, Koliba C Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):17427.

PMID: 39103377 PMC: 11300889. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-67385-z.

Biosecurity perceptions among Ontario horse owners during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Germann J, OSullivan T, Greer A, Spence K Equine Vet J. 2024; 57(2):459-470.

PMID: 38934765 PMC: 11807931. DOI: 10.1111/evj.14115.

References

Van Schaik C, Dijkhuizen A, Benedictus G, Barkema H, Koole J . Exploratory study on the economic value of a closed farming system on Dutch dairy farms. Vet Rec. 1998; 142(10):240-2. DOI: 10.1136/vr.142.10.240. View

Leibler J, Carone M, Silbergeld E . Contribution of company affiliation and social contacts to risk estimates of between-farm transmission of avian influenza. PLoS One. 2010; 5(3):e9888. PMC: 2845626. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009888. View

BROWN P, Christensen O, Clough H, Diggle P, Hart C, Hazel S . Frequency and spatial distribution of environmental Campylobacter spp. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004; 70(11):6501-11. PMC: 525266. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.70.11.6501-6511.2004. View

Julio Pinto C, Santiago Urcelay V . Biosecurity practices on intensive pig production systems in Chile. Prev Vet Med. 2003; 59(3):139-45. DOI: 10.1016/s0167-5877(03)00074-6. View

Ellis-Iversen J, Cook A, Watson E, Nielen M, Larkin L, Wooldridge M . Perceptions, circumstances and motivators that influence implementation of zoonotic control programs on cattle farms. Prev Vet Med. 2009; 93(4):276-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2009.11.005. View

Casal J, De Manuel A, Mateu E, Martin M . Biosecurity measures on swine farms in Spain: perceptions by farmers and their relationship to current on-farm measures. Prev Vet Med. 2007; 82(1-2):138-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.05.012. View

Hernandez-Jover M, Gilmour J, Schembri N, Sysak T, Holyoake P, Beilin R . Use of stakeholder analysis to inform risk communication and extension strategies for improved biosecurity amongst small-scale pig producers. Prev Vet Med. 2012; 104(3-4):258-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2011.12.006. View

Schemann K, Firestone S, Taylor M, Toribio J, Ward M, Dhand N . Horse owners'/managers' perceptions about effectiveness of biosecurity measures based on their experiences during the 2007 equine influenza outbreak in Australia. Prev Vet Med. 2012; 106(2):97-107. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.01.013. View

Jansen J, van den Borne B, Renes R, van Schaik G, Lam T, Leeuwis C . Explaining mastitis incidence in Dutch dairy farming: the influence of farmers' attitudes and behaviour. Prev Vet Med. 2009; 92(3):210-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2009.08.015. View

10.

Denney I . Biosecurity, livestock health and the livestock producer. Aust Vet J. 2007; 85(11):N4. View

11.

. Biosecurity: challenges of disease control at every level. Vet Rec. 2005; 157(16):461-4. DOI: 10.1136/vr.157.16.461. View

12.

Kristensen E, Jakobsen E . Challenging the myth of the irrational dairy farmer; understanding decision-making related to herd health. N Z Vet J. 2011; 59(1):1-7. DOI: 10.1080/00480169.2011.547162. View

13.

Racicot M, Venne D, Durivage A, Vaillancourt J . Evaluation of the relationship between personality traits, experience, education and biosecurity compliance on poultry farms in Québec, Canada. Prev Vet Med. 2011; 103(2-3):201-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2011.08.011. View

14.

Boklund A, Alban L, Mortensen S, Houe H . Biosecurity in 116 Danish fattening swineherds: descriptive results and factor analysis. Prev Vet Med. 2004; 66(1-4):49-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2004.08.004. View

15.

Valeeva N, van Asseldonk M, Backus G . Perceived risk and strategy efficacy as motivators of risk management strategy adoption to prevent animal diseases in pig farming. Prev Vet Med. 2011; 102(4):284-95. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2011.08.005. View

16.

Tarabla H, Dodd K . Associations between farmers' personal characteristics, management practices and farm performance. Br Vet J. 1990; 146(2):157-64. DOI: 10.1016/0007-1935(90)90008-Q. View

17.

Brennan M, Kemp R, Christley R . Direct and indirect contacts between cattle farms in north-west England. Prev Vet Med. 2008; 84(3-4):242-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.12.009. View

18.

Dargatz D, Garry F, Traub-Dargatz J . An introduction to biosecurity of cattle operations. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2002; 18(1):1-5, v. DOI: 10.1016/s0749-0720(02)00002-6. View

19.

Lensink B, Fernandez X, Cozzi G, Florand L, Veissier I . The influence of farmers' behavior on calves' reactions to transport and quality of veal meat. J Anim Sci. 2001; 79(3):642-52. DOI: 10.2527/2001.793642x. View

20.

Gunn G, Stott A, Humphry R . Modelling and costing BVD outbreaks in beef herds. Vet J. 2004; 167(2):143-9. DOI: 10.1016/S1090-0233(03)00112-6. View