Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Tiffany Scanlon x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search


Objective—To determine application rate and effectiveness of sodium bisulfate to decrease the fly population in a horse barn environment.

Sample Population—12 privately owned farms in southeastern Pennsylvania.

Procedure—Application rates of sodium bisulfate were approximately 2.3 kg/stall, 1.1 kg/stall, and 0.5 kg/stall. Two or 3 stalls were treated, and 1 or 2 stalls were not treated (control stalls) at each farm. Farm personnel applied sodium bisulfate in treated stalls daily for 7 days. Fly tapes were hung from the same site in treated and control stalls. After 24 hours, the fly tape was removed, flies adhering to the sticky surface were counted and recorded, and a new fly tape was hung. This procedure was repeated daily during each of the testing periods.

Results—Following the application of 2.3 kg of sodium bisulfate/stall, the numbers of flies collected on the fly tape were significantly decreased in treated stalls, compared with control stalls during the same time periods on 9 of the 12 farms evaluated. Following the application of 1.1 kg of sodium bisulfate/ stall, fly numbers were significantly decreased in treated stalls on 6 of the 9 farms evaluated. Following the application of 0.5 kg of sodium bisulfate/stall, fly numbers were significantly decreased in the treated stalls on 3 of the 4 farms evaluated.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Our findings suggest that sodium bisulfate would be effective for fly control in horse barns. (Am J Vet Res 2000; 61:910–913)

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research


Objective—To determine feeding, cropping, and manure-handling practices of swine operations of various sizes.

Design—Producer survey.

Sample Population—85 sow units and 132 finish floors.

Procedure—Swine producers were surveyed by mail and during farm visits for information regarding herd characteristics and management practices, with emphasis on the 3 components of the nutrient cycle: cropping, feeding and nutrition, and manure handling. Farms were categorized by operation type as sow units or finish floors and, subsequently, stratified by size as small sow units (< 600 head), large sow units (≥ 600 head), small finish floors (< 2,000 head), and large finish floors (≥ 2,000 head).

Results—Large sow units and large finish floors were approximately twice as likely to use environmentally sound nutrient management practices as small sow units or small finish floors. These large operations were more likely to use progressive feeding practices, to be aware of their nutrient flows, and to be capable of using these nutrients properly.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—There is a need for greater environmental awareness among all swine producers, especially among small producers. This provides a possible growth area for large-animal veterinary consultants. Economy of scale and increased governmental regulations allow large farms to use environmentally sound practices. Thus, large swine farms are not necessarily harmful to the environment. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:1526–1530)

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association