Department of Veterinary Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2023 Oct 20;18(10):e0290400. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290400. eCollection 2023.
The U.S. pork supply chain is vulnerable to various internal and external threats and in need of prompt, comprehensive response plans. Under urgent circumstances, for example in the case of foreign disease incursions, swine farms will have to perform on-farm animal depopulation to prevent disease spread. Several animal depopulation methods including water-based foam (WBF) have been proposed and are under evaluation for feasibility in the field. However, the psychological/emotional impacts of applying depopulation methods for personnel managing and carrying on the tasks are not currently well understood. Thus, this study aimed to investigate WBF as an alternative for depopulation compared to existing methods approved by the American Veterinary Medical Association. Swine industry stakeholders were invited to voluntarily observe a WBF depopulation trial and to provide their self-reported perspectives before and after the observation. A survey was designed to explore key areas on expected and perceived method effectiveness, efficiency, and animal welfare considerations, as well as to evaluate short-term post-observation psychological impacts. Among 42 recruited stakeholders, 31.0% (13/42) were educators/researchers followed by animal health officials (26.2%, 11/42) and veterinarians (23.8%, 10/42), with an average of 11.7 ± 12.6 (n = 39) years of work experience. After the trial, respondents' positive perception of WBF depopulation increased specifically regarding the animal loading process being less stressful than restrained in-barn depopulation options (P = 0.003) and by the observation of fewer swine escape attempts and vocalizations than expected (P < 0.001). Respondents' positive perception of WBF also increased regarding to the time required to fill the trailer with foam, to stop hearing animal vocalization, and stop hearing animal movement, as the observed trial times were faster than their pre-observation estimates (P < 0.001). Additionally, 79.5% (31/39) of respondents agreed that the rapid destruction of animal populations had priority over animal welfare under urgent scenarios. Minor post-traumatic stress disorder-like (PTSD-like) symptoms from the observed trials were reported (26.7%, 4/15 respondents) one month after the observation. This study showed that the WBF depopulation process was perceived positively by swine stakeholders and may have limited short-term psychological impacts on personnel involved in animal depopulation.
美国猪肉供应链容易受到各种内外威胁的影响，需要制定及时、全面的应对计划。例如，在发生外来疾病入侵的紧急情况下，养猪场将不得不进行场内动物扑杀，以防止疾病传播。已经提出了几种扑杀方法，包括水基泡沫（WBF），并且正在现场评估其可行性。然而，目前对于管理人员实施扑杀方法的心理/情绪影响还没有很好的了解。因此，本研究旨在调查 WBF 作为一种替代现有方法的可行性，这些方法已获得美国兽医协会的批准。邀请猪肉行业利益相关者自愿观察 WBF 扑杀试验，并在观察前后提供他们的自我报告观点。设计了一项调查，以探讨预期和感知的方法有效性、效率和动物福利考虑因素，以及评估短期观察后的心理影响。在 42 名招募的利益相关者中，31.0%（13/42）是教育者/研究人员，其次是动物健康官员（26.2%，11/42）和兽医（23.8%，10/42），平均工作经验为 11.7±12.6 年（n=39）。试验后，受访者对 WBF 扑杀的积极看法增加了，特别是因为动物装载过程的压力小于在畜舍中使用约束性扑杀方法（P=0.003），并且观察到的猪逃跑尝试和叫声比预期的要少（P<0.001）。受访者对 WBF 的积极看法也增加了，因为填充泡沫的时间、停止听到动物叫声和停止听到动物移动的时间都比他们的预观察估计要快（P<0.001）。此外，79.5%（31/39）的受访者认为，在紧急情况下，快速消灭动物种群比动物福利更重要。观察试验一个月后，有 26.7%（4/15 名受访者）报告了类似创伤后应激障碍（PTSD 样）的轻微创伤后应激障碍样症状。本研究表明，WBF 扑杀过程受到猪肉行业利益相关者的积极评价，并且可能对参与动物扑杀的人员产生有限的短期心理影响。
