Literature DB >> 12523714

Carcass disposal: lessons from Great Britain following the foot and mouth disease outbreaks of 2001.

J M Scudamore1, G M Trevelyan, M V Tas, E M Varley, G A W Hickman.   

Abstract

The foot and mouth disease (FMD) outbreak that occurred in the United Kingdom in 2001 was of an unprecedented scale and severity and presented a massive logistical challenge to Government. Over 6.5 million animals were slaughtered and disposed of, over 4 million as a direct result of disease and a further 2.5 million on welfare grounds. On-farm burial and on-farm burning were the principal routes for disposal at the commencement of the outbreak. On-farm burial was limited by legislation to protect groundwater supplies and pyre burning came increasingly under attack from local communities concerned about health risks from smoke and emissions. Burning also painted a vivid but distressing picture of the war against disease. Increasingly, rendering capacity made an important contribution to disposal. The peak of the outbreak could only be managed by the development of a new disposal route--mass burial in engineered sites and by using licensed landfill where available. During the course of the outbreak, a disposal hierarchy was developed to reflect environmental and public health concerns, namely: rendering and incineration ranked first, licensed landfill next, followed by burning with mass burial or on-farm burial as the least preferred options. However, the campaign against the disease could not have been won without the tactical use of mass burial in addition to all the other available disposal routes. The authors describe the development and deployment of the disposal routes used in the 2001 outbreak.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12523714     DOI: 10.20506/rst.21.3.1377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Sci Tech        ISSN: 0253-1933            Impact factor:   1.181


  10 in total

1.  Biosecurity procedures for the environmental management of carcasses burial sites in Korea.

Authors:  Geon-Ha Kim; Sudipta Pramanik
Journal:  Environ Geochem Health       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 4.609

2.  Degradation of foot-and-mouth disease virus during composting of infected pig carcasses.

Authors:  J Guan; M Chan; C Grenier; B W Brooks; J L Spencer; C Kranendonk; J Copps; A Clavijo
Journal:  Can J Vet Res       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.310

3.  Viability of Bacillus licheniformis and Bacillus thuringiensis spores as a model for predicting the fate of bacillus anthracis spores during composting of dead livestock.

Authors:  Tim Reuter; Trevor W Alexander; Tim A McAllister
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2010-12-30       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 4.  Why must we rush to bury our dead (pigs): The option of excarnation by exposure.

Authors:  Terry L Whiting
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 1.008

5.  Estimating the scale of adverse animal welfare consequences of movement restriction and mitigation strategies in a classical swine fever outbreak.

Authors:  Shankar Yadav; Hsin-Yi Weng
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 2.741

6.  Duration of Contagion of Foot-And-Mouth Disease Virus in Infected Live Pigs and Carcasses.

Authors:  Carolina Stenfeldt; Miranda R Bertram; George R Smoliga; Ethan J Hartwig; Amy H Delgado; Jonathan Arzt
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2020-06-11

7.  Decision Support for Mitigation of Livestock Disease: Rinderpest as a Case Study.

Authors:  Judith R Mourant; Paul W Fenimore; Carrie A Manore; Benjamin H McMahon
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2018-09-03

8.  BSE infectivity survives burial for five years with only limited spread.

Authors:  Robert A Somerville; Karen Fernie; Allister Smith; Keith Bishop; Ben C Maddison; Kevin C Gough; Nora Hunter
Journal:  Arch Virol       Date:  2019-02-24       Impact factor: 2.574

Review 9.  A review of the animal disease outbreaks and biosecure animal mortality composting systems.

Authors:  Tiago Costa; Neslihan Akdeniz
Journal:  Waste Manag       Date:  2019-04-28       Impact factor: 7.145

10.  Causes of delayed outbreak responses and their impacts on epidemic spread.

Authors:  Yun Tao; William J M Probert; Katriona Shea; Michael C Runge; Kevin Lafferty; Michael Tildesley; Matthew Ferrari
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2021-03-03       Impact factor: 4.118

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.