A description of biosecurity practices among selected dairy farmers across Australia
J. W. Aleri
A B and M. Laurence A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A School of Veterinary Medicine, College of Science, Health, Engineering and Education, Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: J.Aleri@murdoch.edu.au
Animal Production Science 60(14) 1711-1720 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN19340
Submitted: 21 June 2019 Accepted: 6 March 2020 Published: 26 May 2020
Abstract
Aims: The study investigated critical biosecurity control points and dairy farmers’ motivations towards biosecurity practices among selected dairy farmers across Australia.
Methods: A questionnaire template was administered via an online survey. A three-stage process was used to develop the questionnaire by pooling of potential questions, selection and reduction of the questions to fit an 8–10 min survey.
Key results: A total of 55 responses were obtained. Mixed species rearing was practiced on 69% of the farms, with a majority keeping either sheep or beef cattle within the same property as dairy cattle. Approximately half of the farms (49%) did not provide formal training to new staff on aspects of animal health, as well as not conducting bull breeding soundness. Most of the farms (98%) required staff to use personal protective equipment, such as overalls and gumboots, but only a few of the farms (34%) had designated areas to clean footwear and a system for recording visitors (17%). Record keeping pertaining to animal health, maintenance of good fences and use of vendor declaration forms was practiced in a majority of the farms. The practice of quarantining new stock before mixing with other stock was practiced in only 45% of the farms. Monthly herd health visits by a veterinarian were utilised by 55% of the farms. Multivariable analysis showed positive significant associations between mixed species rearing with the practice of regular pest control (P = 0.004) and use of footbaths (P = 0.024) and no biosecurity plan (P = 0.025). Furthermore, a positive significant association was also recorded on the presence of a biosecurity plan and the presence of a designated area to clean footwear (P = 0.002) and no regular deworming (P = 0.024). Animal and human health reasons were the main motivators for implementing and maintaining ‘best practice’ biosecurity practices, whereas government regulation was the lowest motivator.
Conclusions: It is concluded that the biosecurity practices were variable, and animal and human health reasons were the primary motivators for instituting biosecurity practices.
Implications: There is a need to continue educating farmers on the importance of biosecurity practices.
Additional keywords: Australia, dairy biosecurity, epidemiology.
References
Acord BR, Walton TE (2004) Animal health organizations: roles to mitigate the impact of ecologic change on animal health in the tropics. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1026, 32–40.| Animal health organizations: roles to mitigate the impact of ecologic change on animal health in the tropics.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15604467PubMed |
AHA (2019) Farm biosecurity plan. https://www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/what-we-do/endemic-disease/farm-biosecurity-plan/ [Verified 15 November 2019]
Banyard AC, Simpson J, Monaghan P, Barrett T (2017) Terrestrial animal health code: OIE.
Barrington GM, Gay JM, Evermann JF (2002) Biosecurity for neonatal gastrointestinal diseases. Veterinary Clinical North American Food Animal Practice 8, 7–34.
Björkman C, Uggla A (1999) Serological diagnosis of Neospora caninum infection. International Journal for Parasitology 29, 1497–1507.
| Serological diagnosis of Neospora caninum infection.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 10608435PubMed |
Brennan ML, Christley RM (2012) Biosecurity on cattle farms: a study in north-west England. PLoS One 7, e28139
| Biosecurity on cattle farms: a study in north-west England.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22235244PubMed |
Caldow G (2004) Biosecurity, does it have a place in the management of beef herds in the United Kingdom? (Reprinted). Cattle Practice 12, 149–153.
Chesterton RN, Pfeiffer DU, Morris RS, Tanner CM (1989) Environmental and behavioural factors affecting the prevalence of foot lameness in New Zealand dairy herds: a case-control study. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 37, 135–142.
| Environmental and behavioural factors affecting the prevalence of foot lameness in New Zealand dairy herds: a case-control study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16031547PubMed |
Conraths FJ, Schwabenbauer K, Vallat B, Meslin F-X, Füssel A-E, Slingenbergh J, Mettenleiter TC (2011) Animal health in the 21st century: a global challenge. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 102, 93–97.
| Animal health in the 21st century: a global challenge.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21570729PubMed |
Cook AJC (2013) Implementing biosecurity on dairy farms: rewriting the ‘cultural script’. Veterinary Journal 197, 118–119.
| Implementing biosecurity on dairy farms: rewriting the ‘cultural script’.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cufos N (2012) Mutation scanning-based analysis of Theileria orientalis populations in cattle following an outbreak nucleic acids. Electrophoresis 33, 2036–2040.
| Mutation scanning-based analysis of Theileria orientalis populations in cattle following an outbreak nucleic acids.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22806470PubMed |
Dubey JP (1999) Neosporosis: the first decade of research. International Journal for Parasitology 29, 1485–1488.
| Neosporosis: the first decade of research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 10608433PubMed |
Dubey JP, Lindsay DS (1996) A review of Neospora caninum and neosporosis. Veterinary Parasitology 67, 1–59.
| A review of Neospora caninum and neosporosis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 9011014PubMed |
Enticott G, Donaldson A, Lowe P, Power M, Proctor A, Wilkinson K (2011) The changing role of veterinary expertise in the food chain. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 366, 1955–1965.
| The changing role of veterinary expertise in the food chain.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21624916PubMed |
Heikkilä J (2011) Economics of biosecurity across levels of decision-making: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 31, 119–138.
| Economics of biosecurity across levels of decision-making: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hernández-Jover M, Schemann K, Toribio JALML (2013) A cross-sectional study on biosecurity practices and communication networks of poultry exhibition in Australia. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 110, 497–509.
| A cross-sectional study on biosecurity practices and communication networks of poultry exhibition in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23347640PubMed |
Hernández-Jover M, Hayes L, Toribio JALML (2014) ‘Smallholder production in Australia. Report prepared for Australian Government Department of Agriculture and Water Resources, Charles Sturt University.’ (Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Agriculture and Water Resources: NSW, Australia)
Islam MK, Jabbar A, Campbell BE, Cantacessi C, Gasser RB (2011) Bovine theileriosis: an emerging problem in south-eastern Australia? Infection, Genetics and Evolution 11, 2095–2097.
| Bovine theileriosis: an emerging problem in south-eastern Australia?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21906697PubMed |
Knight-Jones TJD, Rushton J (2013) The economic impacts of foot and mouth disease: what are they, how big are they and where do they occur? Preventive Veterinary Medicine 112, 161–173.
| The economic impacts of foot and mouth disease: what are they, how big are they and where do they occur?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kristensen E, Jakobsen EB (2011) Danish dairy farmers’ perception of biosecurity. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 99, 122–129.
| Danish dairy farmers’ perception of biosecurity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21345504PubMed |
LeBlanc SJ, Lissemore KD, Kelton DF, Duffield TF, Leslie KE (2006) Major advances in disease prevention in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 1267–1279.
| Major advances in disease prevention in dairy cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16537959PubMed |
Leonard, N, Egan, J, Griffin, J, Hanlon, A, Poole, D (2001) ‘A survey of some factors relevant to animal welfare on 249 dairy farms in the Republic of Ireland Part 2: Data on incidence of disease, culling and biosecurity measures.’ Available at https://www.cattle-lameness.org.uk/ddoc-research-papers/a-survey-of-some-factors-relevant-to-animal-welfare-on-249-dairy-farms-in-the-republic-of-ireland-part-2-data-on-incidence-of-disease-culling-and-biosecurity-measures/ [Verified 9 May 2020]
Levings RL (2012) Emerging and exotic zoonotic disease preparedness and response in the United States: coordination of the animal health component: emerging and exotic zoonotic disease preparedness and response in the United States. Zoonoses and Public Health 59, 80–94.
| Emerging and exotic zoonotic disease preparedness and response in the United States: coordination of the animal health component: emerging and exotic zoonotic disease preparedness and response in the United States.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22958252PubMed |
Mee JF, Geraghty T, O’Neill R, More SJ (2012) Bioexclusion of diseases from dairy and beef farms: risks of introducing infectious agents and risk reduction strategies. Veterinary Journal 194, 143–150.
| Bioexclusion of diseases from dairy and beef farms: risks of introducing infectious agents and risk reduction strategies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Moore DA, Merryman ML, Hartman ML, Klingborg DJ (2008) Comparison of published recommendations regarding biosecurity practices for various production animal species and classes. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 233, 249–256.
| Comparison of published recommendations regarding biosecurity practices for various production animal species and classes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18627227PubMed |
Nielsen SS (2011) Dairy farmers’ reasons for participation in the Danish control programme on bovine paratuberculosis. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 98, 279–283.
| Dairy farmers’ reasons for participation in the Danish control programme on bovine paratuberculosis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21232808PubMed |
Noremark M, Sternberg-Lewerin S, Sveriges I (2014) On-farm biosecurity as perceived by professionals visiting Swedish farms. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 56, 28
| On-farm biosecurity as perceived by professionals visiting Swedish farms.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24886408PubMed |
Palmer S (2009) Factors affecting livestock disease reporting and biosecurity practices: a study of West Australian sheep and cattle producers. PhD thesis, Faculty of Arts and Education, Murdoch University, Perth.
Ribbens S, Dewulf J, Koenen F, Mintiens K, De Sadeleer L, de Kruif A, Maes D (2008) A survey on biosecurity and management practices in Belgian pig herds. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 83, 228–241.
| A survey on biosecurity and management practices in Belgian pig herds.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17850906PubMed |
Ritter C, Jansen J, Roche S, Kelton DF, Adams CL, Orsel K, Erskine RJ, Benedictus G, Lam TJGM, Barkema HW (2017) Invited review: Determinants of farmers’ adoption of management-based strategies for infectious disease prevention and control. Journal of Dairy Science 100, 3329–3347.
| Invited review: Determinants of farmers’ adoption of management-based strategies for infectious disease prevention and control.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28237585PubMed |
Sanderson MW, Dargatz DA, Garry FB (2000) Biosecurity practices of beef cow-calf producers. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 217, 185–189.
| Biosecurity practices of beef cow-calf producers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 10909456PubMed |
Sayers RG, Good M, Sayers GP (2014) A survey of biosecurity-related practices, opinions and communications across dairy farm veterinarians and advisors. Veterinary Journal 200, 261–269.
| A survey of biosecurity-related practices, opinions and communications across dairy farm veterinarians and advisors.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schembri N, Hernandez-Jover M, Toribio JA, Holyoake PK (2015) On-farm characteristics and biosecurity protocols for small-scale swine producers in Eastern Australia. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 118, 104–116.
| On-farm characteristics and biosecurity protocols for small-scale swine producers in Eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25433716PubMed |
Sergeant ESG (2018) Epitools Epidemiological Calculators. Ausvet. Available at: http://epitools.ausvet.com.au [Verified 9 May 2020]
Sibley R (2010) Biosecurity in the dairy herd. In Practice 32, 274–280.
| Biosecurity in the dairy herd.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Turner AJ (2011) Endemic disease control and regulation in Australia 1901–2010. Australian Veterinary Journal 89, 413–421.
| Endemic disease control and regulation in Australia 1901–2010.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21933170PubMed |
Vanclay F, Enticott G (2011) The role and functioning of cultural scripts in farming and agriculture. Sociologia Ruralis 51, 256–271.
| The role and functioning of cultural scripts in farming and agriculture.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
