What Do Lithuanian Hunters Think of African Swine Fever and Its Control—Perceptions
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Design of Questionnaire
- General information: Gender, age group, county the respondents live in, hunting frequency (per month) and hunting experience (in years).
- Knowledge about ASF: The perceived knowledge of the respondents regarding ASF was assessed.
- Control of ASF: Hunters had to evaluate the individual control measures against ASF by assessing their feasibility and perceived effectiveness.
- Enhanced passive surveillance: Respondents stated their perceptions of the effectiveness of passive surveillance within ASF control and their willingness to support carcass search.
2.2. Distribution of Questionnaire
2.3. Questionnaire Analysis
3. Results
3.1. General Information
3.2. Knowledge about ASF
3.2.1. Assessment of Hunters’ Perceived Knowledge about ASF
3.2.2. Listed Information Sources about ASF
3.3. Assessment of ASF Control
3.3.1. Hunters’ Participation in Actions to Control ASF
3.3.2. Perceptions of ASF Control and the Feasibility of Elimination in Lithuania
3.3.3. Assessment of the Effectiveness of Control Measures to Eliminate ASF
3.3.4. Assessment of the Least Feasible ASF Control Options in the Field
3.3.5. Hindering Reasons to Support ASF Control and Elimination
3.4. Attitudes towards Passive Surveillance
3.4.1. Assessment of the Effectiveness of Passive Surveillance and Hunters’ Willingness to Support It
3.4.2. Hindering Reasons to Support Passive Surveillance Measures
3.4.3. Evaluation of Motivational Options to Support Passive Surveillance
3.5. Univariate Analysis Between Groups
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Variable | Number | % of Respondents (95% CI) |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Female | 15 | 2.47% (1–4%) |
Male | 606 | 97.58% (96–99%) |
Age-group | ||
18–40 years | 236 | 38% (34–42%) |
41–60 years | 301 | 48.47% (45–52%) |
> 60 years | 84 | 13.53% (11–16%) |
County | ||
Alytaus | 49 | 7.89% (6–10%) |
Kauno | 103 | 16.59% (14–20%) |
Klaipėdos | 45 | 7.25% (5–10%) |
Marijampolės | 40 | 6.44% (5–9%) |
Panevėžio | 48 | 7.73% (6–10%) |
Šiaulių | 76 | 12.24% (10–15%) |
Tauragės | 39 | 6.28% (5–8%) |
Telšių | 31 | 4.99% (4–7%) |
Utenos | 53 | 8.53% (7–11%) |
Vilniaus | 137 | 22.06% (19–25%) |
Hunting frequency (per month) | ||
less than once | 54 | 8.7% (7–11%) |
1–5 times | 292 | 47.02% (43–51%) |
6–10 times | 206 | 33.17% (30–37%) |
more than 10 times | 69 | 11.11% (9–14%) |
Appendix B
Compared Variables | Statistical Significance, p-Value | Direction of Association | |
---|---|---|---|
Age | Knowledge about ASF | 0.036 * | Older age groups were less likely to admit that they had less knowledge about ASF |
Hunting experience | <0.001 * | Older age groups were more likely to state that they had more hunting experience than younger age groups | |
Hunting frequency | 0.454 | ||
Knowledge about ASF | Hunting experience | 0.581 | |
Hunting frequency | 0.321 | ||
Respondents opinion whether it is possible to control and eliminate ASF | Hunting frequency | 0.784 | |
Wild boar female hunting | Age | 0.063 | |
County | 0.487 | ||
Hunting experience | 0.036 * | More experienced hunters were more likely to participate in hunting female wild boar |
References
- Guinat, C.; Wall, B.; Dixon, L.; Pfeiffer, D.U. English Pig Farmers’ Knowledge and Behaviour towards African Swine Fever Suspicion and Reporting. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0161431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nurmoja, I.; Mõtus, K.; Kristian, M.; Niine, T.; Schulz, K.; Depner, K.; Viltrop, A. Epidemiological analysis of the 2015–2017 African swine fever outbreaks in Estonia. Prev. Vet. Med. 2020, 181, 104556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guinat, C.; Reis, A.L.; Netherton, C.L.; Goatley, L.; Pfeiffer, D.U.; Dixon, L. Dynamics of African swine fever virus shedding and excretion in domestic pigs infected by intramuscular inoculation and contact transmission. Vet. Res. 2014, 45, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Blome, S.; Gabriel, C.; Beer, M. Pathogenesis of African swine fever in domestic pigs and European wild boar. Virus Res. 2013, 173, 122–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Vizcaíno, J.M.; Mur, L.; Martínez-López, B. African swine fever (ASF): Five years around Europe. Vet. Microbiol. 2013, 165, 45–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oļševskis, E.; Guberti, V.; Seržants, M.; Westergaard, J.; Gallardo, C.; Rodze, I.; Depner, K. African swine fever virus introduction into the EU in 2014: Experience of Latvia. Res. Vet. Sci. 2016, 105, 28–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) Scientific Opinion on African Swine Fever. EFSA J. 2010, 8, 45–57. [CrossRef]
- Costard, S.; Mur, L.; Lubroth, J.; Sanchez-Vizcaino, J.; Pfeiffer, D. Epidemiology of African swine fever virus. Virus Res. 2013, 173, 191–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, R.A.; Podgorski, T.; Simons, R.R.L.; Ip, S.; Gale, P.; Kelly, L.A.; Snary, E.L. Predicting spread and effective control measures for African swine fever-Should we blame the boars? Transbound. Emerg. Dis. 2020, 65 (Suppl. 1), 235–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Khomenko, S.; Beltrán-Alcrudo, D.; Rozstalnyy, A.; Pinto, J.; Lubroth, J.; Martin, V.; Gogin, A.; Kolbasov, D. African swine fever in the Russian Federation: Risk factors for Europe and beyond. Empres Watch 2013, 28, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Evaluation of possible mitigation measures to prevent introduction and spread of African swine fever virus through wild boar. EFSA J. 2014, 12. [CrossRef]
- Miteva, A.; Papanikolaou, A.; Gogin, A.; Boklund, A.; Bøtner, A.; Linden, A.; Viltrop, A.; Schmidt, C.G.; Ivanciu, C.; Desmecht, D.; et al. Epidemiological analyses of African swine fever in the European Union (November 2018 to October 2019). EFSA J. 2020, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gavier-Widén, D.; Ståhl, K.; Neimanis, A.S.; Segerstad, C.H.A.; Gortázar, C.; Rossi, S.; Kuiken, T. African swine fever in wild boar in Europe: A notable challenge. Vet. Rec. 2015, 176, 199–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gogin, A.; Gerasimov, V.; Malogolovkin, A.; Kolbasov, D. African swine fever in the North Caucasus region and the Russian Federation in years 2007–2012. Virus Res. 2013, 173, 198–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nurmoja, I.; Schulz, K.; Staubach, C.; Sauter-Louis, C.; Depner, K.; Conraths, F.J.; Viltrop, A. Development of African swine fever epidemic among wild boar in Estonia - two different areas in the epidemiological focus. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 12562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Boklund, A.; Dhollander, S.; Vasile, T.C.; Abrahantes, J.C.; Bøtner, A.; Gogin, A.; Villeta, L.C.G.; Gortázar, C.; More, S.J.; Papanikolaou, A.; et al. Risk factors for African swine fever incursion in Romanian domestic farms during 2019. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW); More, S.; Miranda, M.A.; Bicout, D.; Bøtner, A.; Butterworth, A.; Calistri, P.; Edwards, S.; Garin-Bastuji, B.; Good, M.; et al. African swine fever in wild boar. EFSA J. 2018, 16, e05344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Schulz, K.; Oļševskis, E.; Staubach, C.; Lamberga, K.; Seržants, M.; Cvetkova, S.; Conraths, F.J.; Sauter-Louis, C. Epidemiological evaluation of Latvian control measures for African swine fever in wild boar on the basis of surveillance data. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 4189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Danzetta, M.L.; Marenzoni, M.L.; Iannetti, S.; Tizzani, P.; Calistri, P.; Feliziani, F. African Swine Fever: Lessons to Learn From Past Eradication Experiences. A Systematic Review. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020, 7, 296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boklund, A.; Cay, B.; Depner, K.; Földi, Z.; Guberti, V.; Masiulis, M.; Miteva, A.; More, S.; Olsevskis, E.; Šatrán, P.; et al. Epidemiological analyses of African swine fever in the European Union (November 2017 until November 2018). EFSA J. 2018, 16, e05494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calba, C.; Antoine-Moussiaux, N.; Charrier, F.; Hendrikx, P.; Saegerman, C.; Peyre, M.; Goutard, F.L. Applying participatory approaches in the evaluation of surveillance systems: A pilot study on African swine fever surveillance in Corsica. Prev. Vet. Med. 2015, 122, 389–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Joshi, A.; Kale, S.; Chandel, S.; Pal, D.K. Likert Scale: Explored and Explained. Br. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2015, 7, 396–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agresti, A.; Coull, B.A. Approximate is Better than “Exact” for Interval Estimation of Binomial Proportions. Am. Stat. 1998, 52, 119–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allepuz, A.; De Balogh, K.; Aguanno, R.; Heilmann, M.; Beltran-Alcrudo, D. Review of Participatory Epidemiology Practices in Animal Health (1980–2015) and Future Practice Directions. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0169198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schulz, K.; Calba, C.; Peyre, M.; Staubach, C.; Conraths, F.J. Hunters’ acceptability of the surveillance system and alternative surveillance strategies for classical swine fever in wild boar—A participatory approach. BMC Vet. Res. 2016, 12, 187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Urner, N.; Mõtus, K.; Nurmoja, I.; Schulz, J.; Sauter-Louis, C.; Staubach, C.; Conraths, F.J.; Schulz, K. Hunters’ Acceptance of Measures against African Swine Fever in Wild Boar in Estonia. Prev. Vet. Med. 2020, 182, 105121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Urner, N.; Seržants, M.; Užule, M.; Sauter-Louis, C.; Staubach, C.; Lamberga, K.; Oļševskis, E.; Conraths, F.J.; Schulz, K. Hunters’ view on the control of African swine fever in wild boar. A participatory study in Latvia. Prev. Vet. Med. 2021, 186, 105229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vaclavek, P. ASF in the Czech. Republic: Management Experience and Lessons Learnt. In Proceedings of the FAO: Regional ASF Wild Boar Management Workshop, Belgrade, Serbia, 21–23 May 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Czech’s Republic State Veterinary Administration. Available online: https://www.inspection.gc.ca/DAM/DAM-animals-animaux/STAGING/text-texte/dis_africswine_event_asf_final_report_presentation_2-1_1567794333916_eng.pdf (accessed on 12 September 2020).
- Calba, C.; Goutard, F.L.; Hoinville, L.; Hendrikx, P.; Lindberg, A.; Saegerman, C.; Peyre, M. Surveillance systems evaluation: A systematic review of the existing approaches. BMC Public Heal. 2015, 15, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jori, F.; Chenais, E.; Boinas, F.; Busauskas, P.; Dholllander, S.; Fleischmann, L.; Olsevskis, E.; Rijks, J.; Schulz, K.; Thulke, H.; et al. Application of the World Café method to discuss the efficiency of African swine fever control strategies in European wild boar (Sus scrofa) populations. Prev. Vet. Med. 2020, 185, 105178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vergne, T.; Guinat, C.; Petkova, P.; Gogin, A.; Kolbasov, D.; Blome, S.; Molia, S.; Ferreira, J.P.; Wieland, B.; Nathues, H.; et al. Attitudes and Beliefs of Pig Farmers and Wild Boar Hunters Towards Reporting of African Swine Fever in Bulgaria, Germany and the Western Part of the Russian Federation. Transbound. Emerg. Dis. 2014, 63, 194–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Which Response Best Describes the Extent to Which You Agree or Disagree with the Statement: My Knowledge about ASF Is Good. | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Strongly Agree n (%) | To a High Extent n (%) | Neither Agree nor Disagree n (%) | To a Low Extent n (%) | Strongly Disagree n (%) |
258 (41.55%) (CI: 38–45%) | 256 (41.22%) (CI: 37–45%) | 87 (14.01%) (CI: 12–17%) | 16 (2.58%) (CI: 2–4%) | 4 (0.64%) (CI: 0.2–1.6%) |
Action | Number | % of Respondents (95% CI) |
---|---|---|
Sampling of wild boar | 496 | 79.87% (77–83%) |
Intensified hunting | 421 | 67.79% (64–71%) |
Performing increased biosecurity measures | 411 | 66.18% (62–70%) |
Voluntary active carcass search | 213 | 34.30% (31–38%) |
Disposal of carcass | 199 | 32.05% (28–36%) |
Compulsory active carcass search | 185 | 29.79% (26–34%) |
Selective hunting of female wild boar | 103 | 16.59% (14–20%) |
None | 19 | 3.06% (2–5%) |
Other | 5 | 0.81% (0.3–2%) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Stončiūtė, E.; Schulz, K.; Malakauskas, A.; Conraths, F.J.; Masiulis, M.; Sauter-Louis, C. What Do Lithuanian Hunters Think of African Swine Fever and Its Control—Perceptions. Animals 2021, 11, 525. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020525
Stončiūtė E, Schulz K, Malakauskas A, Conraths FJ, Masiulis M, Sauter-Louis C. What Do Lithuanian Hunters Think of African Swine Fever and Its Control—Perceptions. Animals. 2021; 11(2):525. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020525
Chicago/Turabian StyleStončiūtė, Evelina, Katja Schulz, Alvydas Malakauskas, Franz J. Conraths, Marius Masiulis, and Carola Sauter-Louis. 2021. "What Do Lithuanian Hunters Think of African Swine Fever and Its Control—Perceptions" Animals 11, no. 2: 525. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020525
APA StyleStončiūtė, E., Schulz, K., Malakauskas, A., Conraths, F. J., Masiulis, M., & Sauter-Louis, C. (2021). What Do Lithuanian Hunters Think of African Swine Fever and Its Control—Perceptions. Animals, 11(2), 525. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020525