Objective—To compare published recommendations regarding biosecurity practices for various production animal species and classes.
Population—Educational materials available on the World Wide Web that provided biosecurity recommendations for dairy cattle, beef cattle, small ruminant, swine, and poultry producers.
Procedures—Web sites for national producer organizations, university cooperative extension services, and state departments of agriculture were searched to identify educational materials with biosecurity recommendations.
Results—A single national organization was selected as representing each animal agriculture commodity group. A total of 53 university Web sites were visited, and 65 publications prepared by university cooperative extension services were identified and evaluated. Web sites for all 50 state departments of agriculture were searched, and 29 were found to have at least 1 publication related to biosecurity practices, for a total of 46 publications. Evaluation of the biosecurity recommendations revealed wide variations by source and within and among commodity groups.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that educational materials for producers contained wide variations in recommended biosecurity practices. It is possible that some producers choose not to implement biosecurity recommendations because of confusion as to the specific recommendations they should follow.
Animal carcass composting for both routine and emergency management of dead production animals is an alternative method of carcass disposal in those situations in which conventional methods are inadequate. Carcass composting differs from composting other materials such as manure and green waste and presents some unique challenges. Carcasses are typically composted whole and do not present uniformly chopped substrate for microbial action, and these compost piles are not turned frequently. Both of these factors contribute to a nonuniform compost composition at the end of the process. Although allowances for this nonuniformity need to be made, well-designed carcass compost systems (with
Objective—To identify reasons for engagement in
continuing veterinary medical education (CVME)
activities, obstacles to participation, ways to provide
more effective programs, and ideas to improve participation
Design—Focus group interviews.
Sample Population—Selected practicing veterinarians
from a state that did mandate continuing education
Procedure—12 focus group interviews were held
throughout the state of California between May and
September 1998. Practitioners were asked to
respond to questions about where they obtain information
to improve their practice, what value they see
in CVME, what motivates them to participate, what
obstacles to CVME participation exist, and ways
CVME providers and practitioners could overcome
Results—84 practitioners participated in the focus
group interviews. In addition to the educational value
of CVME, participation was used to rejuvenate practice
life and prevent feelings of isolation. Continuing
education activities ranged from problem-oriented
chats with colleagues to formal educational programs.
Timing of events, distance, money, solo practice,
stage of career, and family demands were identified
as barriers to participation. Designing and marketing
CVME with specific learning objectives and for
specific career stages and using new educational
delivery technologies were suggested to overcome
some of these barriers.
Conclusion and Clinical Relevance—If CVME is to
improve practice and patient care, it should be integrated
into a practice's strategic planning and considered
a legitimate business expense. Decisions about
CVME participation are made easier if program objectives
are clearly outlined. (J Am Vet Med Assoc