| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
National Poultry Extension Workshop |
Animal Science Department, University of California, Davis, 95616
Correspondence: 1 Corresponding author: mlpalmer{at}ucdavis.edu
 |
SUMMARY |
|---|
 TOP SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEMMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
Key Words: biosecurity • game fowl • exhibition poultry • fair • exposition
|
DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYDESCRIPTION OF PROBLEMMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
Game Fowl
Of the 3 index chicken cases in the END outbreak, 1 involved a backyard flock of laying hens and 2 were game fowl flocks. The owners of the 2 game fowl flocks utilized the services of the California Animal Health and Food Safety (CAHFS) laboratory and a private poultry practitioner. As CDFA and USDA staff moved into neighborhoods in Los Angeles and Riverside counties, it became clear that birds had been dying for some time. Their owners, often recent immigrants, had not utilized any of the CDFA and UCCE resources available to them. Although animal control agencies had been picking up the carcasses, they had not notified anyone of the unusual mortality.
The organized game fowl breeders in the state were increasingly concerned about the spread of the disease and the expanding size of the quarantine area. Officers of the Association for the Preservation of Gamefowl (APG), an organization representing California game fowl breeders, wanted a program that would document the disease-prevention measures many of them were already taking, would teach them additional biosecurity procedures, and would be available for other game fowl breeders who lacked biosecurity training.
Fairs and Expositions
As the END outbreak spread, a statewide ban was placed on poultry shows. Even before the outbreak, it had become evident to the extension poultry veterinarian and others that no structured plan existed at fairs and expositions to deal with a reportable disease at a poultry show. In anticipation of the resumption of fair poultry shows in 2004, discussions began about the development of a poultry health inspection program.
Exhibition Poultry Clubs
Before the imposition of a statewide ban on poultry shows during the END outbreak, rumors spread rapidly. There was an abundance of misinformation surrounding the disease, the response of the government, and the future of exhibition poultry shows. It was clear that increased outreach efforts were needed for those club members who do not regularly communicate with UCCE poultry staff.
Poultry Youth
As a clientele group, 4-H poultry youth undoubtedly had the most frequent and continuing contact with UCCE poultry staff before the END outbreak. Due to the well-established contacts and the 4-H club network system, this group was identified as one that would not only be receptive to biosecurity information, but would also share it with a wider audience.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYDESCRIPTION OF PROBLEMMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
All written materials for the program are available in English and Spanish. Educational sessions are always delivered by a team made up of UCCE poultry scientists and a poultry veterinarian either from CDFA or the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of California, Davis. Whenever requested, the oral portion of the program is delivered by a bilingual veterinarian.
Game fowl breeders must attend 3 educational sessions during the first year. In session I, the program is introduced, along with the principles of biosecurity and instructions for sampling birds. To initiate the certification progress, the breeder enrolls and provides the total number of birds owned. The CAHFS laboratory sends the breeder a culture kit. The number of pharyngeal and cloacal swabs to be taken is based on flock size. Initially, the CDFA veterinary staff recommended that the samples be tested only for Newcastle disease. The APG officers, however, requested that their game fowl also be tested for avian influenza. This discussion took place in 2003, and it was the game fowl breeders who told the veterinarians that they believed avian influenza was going to become more of a problem than exotic Newcastle disease!
In educational session II, the concept of surveillance is covered, along with the mechanics of submitting birds to a CAHFS laboratory. It is a program requirement that breeders submit routine mortality or cull birds to a laboratory a minimum of twice per year.
Session III covers vaccination programs, good vaccination practices, and the differences between vaccination and immunization. The breeder, who may consult with CDFA, UCCE, or private veterinarians, selects a vaccination program. Following vaccination, the breeder reports the program selected to the program coordinator.
In both sessions I and III, participants are given pre- and posttests. At the completion of all program steps, a 1-yr certificate is issued. The surveillance and monitoring requirements specified in the program are considered minimum standards. Breeders are encouraged to make submissions as often as possible and to become familiar with the staff at their nearest CAHFS laboratory. After the first year of participation, breeders keep their certification by again sampling their flock, making the minimum of 2 annual bird submissions to a CAHFS laboratory, and attending 1 continuing education session [1].
Fairs and Expositions
Poultry health inspectors (PHI) were needed to inspect poultry entering the 73 poultry shows at California fairs under the jurisdiction of the state veterinarian. Potential PHI were solicited from the ranks of veteran poultry fanciers, youth program leaders, poultry judges, and University of California, Davis, veterinary students. The PHI would need to identify situations that potentially involved catastrophic diseases and put a quarantine in motion. At a site remote from the poultry building, they would need to screen out birds that would not be healthy and suitable specimens for exhibit. It would also be important for the PHI to have educational materials that they could provide to the exhibitors.
In the fall of 2003, curriculum was developed that would train PHI to conduct visual poultry health checks. In the training materials, problematic poultry show entries were divided into 3 categories. The first and most important category was birds showing symptoms of exotic diseases. The other 2 categories were birds that should not be on display and birds that would need attention after the show. In the event of a category 1 entry, the PHI were instructed to quarantine the area, shut down check-in, and call the direct number of the CDFA field veterinarian. Birds showing signs of nonexotic diseases, ectoparasites, and conditions associated with poor management fall into category 2 entries. The PHI were trained to send such entries home and to provide the owner of the birds with educational materials (e.g., locations of the CAHFS laboratories and fliers on ectoparasite control). Among the conditions included in category 3 are slightly overgrown spurs and razor keels. The PHI were instructed to allow these birds into the show, but to also discuss the conditions with the bird owners and make them aware the conditions would need to be addressed after the show. Appropriate educational materials would also be available for the owners of birds with category 3 problems.
Training sessions included information on the mission of the program to keep unhealthy birds out of fairs and exposition poultry shows, to educate fanciers about poultry health maintenance and disease prevention, and to promote the fancy by displaying only healthy birds in good condition. There were also reminders that the program was mandatory if a fair was to be in compliance with the directive of the state veterinarian. A hands-on wet laboratory was designed for each training session. A cooperator in the area would purchase questionable birds from a flea market or auction. Before the session, the birds would be arranged in a variety of transport containers. The PHI trainees would be assembled into groups and role play, with some being PHI and others being exhibitors. Likely fair time scenarios were acted out during each session.
A pre- and posttest was designed for the PHI program. Packets containing a laminated poultry health check guide poster (color photographs and descriptions of all problem categories) and master copies of all educational handouts were prepared for each trainee [2].
Exhibition Poultry Clubs
Personalized mailings and phone calls were made to the leadership of all the poultry clubs and shows of the state. The PHI program was explained, and, although it is voluntary for non-fair and exposition poultry shows, clubs were encouraged to make use of the program. Clubs were approached and offered the opportunity to have UCCE-staffed educational booths at their shows. Club leadership was also made aware that UCCE would provide speakers on biosecurity and disease-related topics for their upcoming meetings.
Poultry Youth
Avian Science Notes, a quarterly newsletter, was used to increase understanding of biosecurity and emerging disease concerns. The newsletter is mailed to all California 4-H poultry leaders and any 4-H poultry families requesting to be put on the mailing list. Letters were sent to the same mailing list with specific action items that addressed small-flock biosecurity. Incentives, such as wrist bands and judging sticks with biosecurity messages, were used. Biosecurity contests were conducted with advertising done through Avian Science Notes and awards presented at the annual statewide Avian Science Day at the University of California, Davis.
|
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYDESCRIPTION OF PROBLEMMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
Fairs and Expositions
A total of 7 PHI training sessions were held and 148 PHI certified. Now in its third year, the program has sufficient numbers of PHI to inspect all of the poultry entered at the 73 fairs and expositions poultry shows in California. The PHI were surveyed in 2004 and asked to comment on the operation of the program. Most concerns dealt with small problems at specific fairs, for example, management failing to duplicate the educational handouts or not posting the appropriate signs. These concerns were addressed through followup communications with the problem fairs. Overall, PHI made positive comments, with many indicating that the quality of birds arriving for inspection had improved since the institution of the PHI program [3]. A Web site was developed to facilitate interaction between the program coordinators and PHI [4]. Program updates, fair schedules, copies of program materials, and a series of links to pertinent Web pages are available on the Web site [5].
Exhibition Poultry Clubs
The University of California Cooperative Extension has staffed biosecurity booths at the major poultry shows in California. Exhibitors have been eager to discuss their concerns about emerging poultry diseases and to receive science-based information. Shows sponsored by both game fowl and 4-H groups have voluntarily used PHI. Even with multiple outreach efforts to other exhibition poultry clubs, their leadership has been less willing to embrace such an inspection process. Although some have adopted their own form of inspection procedures, these often are conducted once the birds are cooped in and lack the benefits of inspections conducted at sites remote from the actual exhibit hall.
Poultry Youth
As is often the case, youth have been one of the most responsive audiences in terms of learning and embracing biosecurity procedures. Through the biosecurity contests, 4-H members across the state have come up with innovative ideas to spread what they have learned about biosecurity. Poultry youth have been the most valuable in amplifying biosecurity messages.
|
CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYDESCRIPTION OF PROBLEMMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
|
REFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYDESCRIPTION OF PROBLEMMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
