Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Avian Influenza in theAvian Influenza in the
NetherlandsNetherlands
Evaluation of
culling methods used
during the
outbreak...
Avian Influenza in theAvian Influenza in the
NetherlandsNetherlands
 Students: Judith Dietvorst
Marjan Kamphorst
 Superv...
Colloqium Avian InfluenzaColloqium Avian Influenza
 Introduction
 Problem definition and research questions
 Material a...
IntroductionIntroduction
 Outbreak AI started March 2003
 Culling AI-sensitive animals
 HKI Wageningen B.V. offered equ...
Problem definitionProblem definition
 Many animals have to be culled
 Not much knowledge about culling methods
used duri...
Research questionsResearch questions
 What is the:
- capacity
- animal welfare
- feather spreading
- working condition
of...
Research questionsResearch questions
 What are the advantages and disadvantages
of the culling methods used during the
ou...
Material and methodsMaterial and methods
 Culling methods used during outbreak
- Electrocution: small mobile slaughter li...
Material and methodsMaterial and methods
- RF2: small garbage containers are filled with 60 %
CO2.
Material and methodsMaterial and methods
- CAS: Controlled Atmosphere stunning. Tunnel with
conveyor belt which goes troug...
Material and methodsMaterial and methods
- House gassing: 4 different companies worked with
CO2. Gas is distributed out of...
Material and methodsMaterial and methods
 Farms
 Located in Gelderse Vallei and Nederweert
 22 observations on 11 farms...
Material and methodsMaterial and methods
 Four aspects of culling methods were
measured:
1 Capacity: number of animals pe...
Material and methodsMaterial and methods
Observing periods Electrocution RF2 House gassing
Catch X X
Shackle X
Put into co...
Material and methodsMaterial and methods
Back laying: Counted dead poultry that were laying on their
back. Could mean that...
Material and methodsMaterial and methods
4. Working conditions:
- Catching birds out of house
- Walking with birds
- Shack...
ResultsResults
Culling
method
Cage
systems
Floor
systems1
Average
RF2 9.5b, y
3.2x
6.3b
Electrocution 2.5a
3.0 2.8a
House ...
ResultsResults
 Feather spreading
Culling method Score
RF2 1.9b
Electrocution 2.7c
House gassing 0.9a
Different superscri...
ResultsResults
Culling
method
Catching Importing Culling
RF2 4.9 5.1b
5.4b
Electrocution 3.9 3.4a
3.9a
House gassing - 4.8...
ResultsResults
Culling method Live animals % Incidence
RF2 (n = 6) 0 0
Electrocution (n = 4) 2.3 3
House gassing (n= 11) 4...
ResultsResults
Observations RF2 Electrocution House
gassing
Catching live birds out of
cages, floor or aviary system
+++ +...
DiscussionDiscussion
 Capacity
- Farming system
- Number of RF2 containers used
DiscussionDiscussion
 Animal welfare
- Subjective results
- Back laying: could be a measurement , but back
laying is a re...
DiscussionDiscussion
 Feather spreading
- Assumption made feathers could spread virus. Not
found in literature.
 Working...
ConclusionsConclusions
 Capacity
Capacity Advantage Disadvantage
RF2 - the more containers
available the quicker
the cull...
ConclusionsConclusions
 Animal welfare
Animal
welfare
Advantage Disadvantage
RF2 - quick death
- no live animals
- sultri...
ConclusionsConclusions
 Feather spreading
Feather
spreading
Advantage Disadvantage
RF2 - closed container - walking with ...
ConclusionsConclusions
 Working conditions
Working
conditions
Advantage Disadvantage
RF2 - cage system: not
running after...
Thank you for your attention.Thank you for your attention.
Questions?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Avian Influenza in the Netherlands 2003: comparing culling methods

791 views

Published on

During the outbreak of H7N7 in Holland, 29,500.000 birds were killed at the farm. This presentation compares different culling techniques, such as stable gas, container gassing and electrocution.

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Avian Influenza in the Netherlands 2003: comparing culling methods

  1. 1. Avian Influenza in theAvian Influenza in the NetherlandsNetherlands Evaluation of culling methods used during the outbreak in 2003
  2. 2. Avian Influenza in theAvian Influenza in the NetherlandsNetherlands  Students: Judith Dietvorst Marjan Kamphorst  Supervisors: Dr. Simon Oosting (WUR) Harm Kiezebrink (HKI)
  3. 3. Colloqium Avian InfluenzaColloqium Avian Influenza  Introduction  Problem definition and research questions  Material and methods  Results  Discussion  Conclusions
  4. 4. IntroductionIntroduction  Outbreak AI started March 2003  Culling AI-sensitive animals  HKI Wageningen B.V. offered equipment to cull poultry
  5. 5. Problem definitionProblem definition  Many animals have to be culled  Not much knowledge about culling methods used during AI outbreak in Netherlands
  6. 6. Research questionsResearch questions  What is the: - capacity - animal welfare - feather spreading - working condition of each method used during the AI outbreak in the Netherlands in 2003, defined per farming system?
  7. 7. Research questionsResearch questions  What are the advantages and disadvantages of the culling methods used during the outbreak in the Netherlands?
  8. 8. Material and methodsMaterial and methods  Culling methods used during outbreak - Electrocution: small mobile slaughter lines with a water box
  9. 9. Material and methodsMaterial and methods - RF2: small garbage containers are filled with 60 % CO2.
  10. 10. Material and methodsMaterial and methods - CAS: Controlled Atmosphere stunning. Tunnel with conveyor belt which goes trough stunning system. Combination of CO2, O2 and N2.
  11. 11. Material and methodsMaterial and methods - House gassing: 4 different companies worked with CO2. Gas is distributed out of the gas tank into the house through tubes.
  12. 12. Material and methodsMaterial and methods  Farms  Located in Gelderse Vallei and Nederweert  22 observations on 11 farms and one slaughterhouse  Different farming systems
  13. 13. Material and methodsMaterial and methods  Four aspects of culling methods were measured: 1 Capacity: number of animals per hour that can be culled 2 Feather spreading: amount of feather spreading during culling was observed. Scores were given from zero till four ( no spreading till extreme spreading)
  14. 14. Material and methodsMaterial and methods Observing periods Electrocution RF2 House gassing Catch X X Shackle X Put into container X Tubes brought into house X Culling process X X X 3. Animal welfare: divided in stress, back laying and live animals Stress: observed animals on behavior like wing flapping, struggling, vocalization, head shaking and gasping. Scores were given from one to ten. One is enormously stressfull and ten absence of stress
  15. 15. Material and methodsMaterial and methods Back laying: Counted dead poultry that were laying on their back. Could mean that poultry had to struggle before they died. Live animals: Counted surviving animals after the culling process.
  16. 16. Material and methodsMaterial and methods 4. Working conditions: - Catching birds out of house - Walking with birds - Shackling birds - Use of CO2
  17. 17. ResultsResults Culling method Cage systems Floor systems1 Average RF2 9.5b, y 3.2x 6.3b Electrocution 2.5a 3.0 2.8a House gassing 13.3c,y 4.6x 9.0b CAS n.a. n.a. - Average 8.4y 3.6x 1 Hobby animals excluded n.a. : not available  Capacity: x 1000 animals per hour
  18. 18. ResultsResults  Feather spreading Culling method Score RF2 1.9b Electrocution 2.7c House gassing 0.9a Different superscripts within column indicate significant differences (P < 0.05)
  19. 19. ResultsResults Culling method Catching Importing Culling RF2 4.9 5.1b 5.4b Electrocution 3.9 3.4a 3.9a House gassing - 4.8a 3.9a Different superscripts within column indicate significant differences (P < 0.05)  Animal welfare - Stress observations: scored as affected by catching, importing animals into culling operation and the culling as such
  20. 20. ResultsResults Culling method Live animals % Incidence RF2 (n = 6) 0 0 Electrocution (n = 4) 2.3 3 House gassing (n= 11) 4.5 1 CAS (n = 1) 0 0  Animal welfare - Back laying: assessed for the four house gassing systems. Average of 3.7% was found back laying after culling -Live animals:
  21. 21. ResultsResults Observations RF2 Electrocution House gassing Catching live birds out of cages, floor or aviary system +++ +++ Walking with live birds out of house +++ +++ Use of CO2 ++ ++ Shackling birds ++ Putting birds into container ++ + = light work ++ = average work +++ = heavy work  Working conditions
  22. 22. DiscussionDiscussion  Capacity - Farming system - Number of RF2 containers used
  23. 23. DiscussionDiscussion  Animal welfare - Subjective results - Back laying: could be a measurement , but back laying is a result of convulsions. - RF2 no live animals, but maybe not only by CO2.
  24. 24. DiscussionDiscussion  Feather spreading - Assumption made feathers could spread virus. Not found in literature.  Working conditions - Cage system and house gassing: clearly heavier than the other farming system. Rigor mortis takes place very soon after gassing.
  25. 25. ConclusionsConclusions  Capacity Capacity Advantage Disadvantage RF2 - the more containers available the quicker the culling goes - time needed to walk from house to RF2 - time needed to fill the container with gas Electrocution - many animals could be shackled - time needed to walk out of the house to electrocution system House gassing - a lot of animals in one time - waiting after gassing before evacuators can do their work CAS - not many animals could be culled per hour
  26. 26. ConclusionsConclusions  Animal welfare Animal welfare Advantage Disadvantage RF2 - quick death - no live animals - sultriness while animals are consciousness Electrocution - when system properly used quick death - live animals - pre stun shock House gassing - normally a mild culling process - slow death CAS - quick death - not enough animals, birds could be consciousness in phase two.
  27. 27. ConclusionsConclusions  Feather spreading Feather spreading Advantage Disadvantage RF2 - closed container - walking with birds out of the house Electrocution - walking with birds and shackling House gassing - closed house - ventilation on and doors open after gassing CAS - closed system
  28. 28. ConclusionsConclusions  Working conditions Working conditions Advantage Disadvantage RF2 - cage system: not running after birds - catching live birds: aviary, free range and floor systems Electrocution - cage system: not running after birds - catching live birds: aviary, free range and floor systems House gassing - dead birds: no running - rigor mortis CAS - cage system: not running after birds - catching live bids: aviary, free range and floor systems
  29. 29. Thank you for your attention.Thank you for your attention. Questions?

×