No abstract

No abstract

A study was conducted to assess the awareness of cattle abortions due to brucellosis, Rift Valley fever (RVF) and leptospirosis, and to compare frequencies of reported abortions in communities living at the periphery of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area in southeastern Zimbabwe. Three study sites were selected based on the type of livestock-wildlife interface: porous livestock-wildlife interface (unrestricted); non-porous livestock-wildlife interface (restricted by fencing); and livestock-wildlife non-interface (totally absent or control). Respondents randomly selected from a list of potential cattle farmers (N = 379) distributed at porous (40·1%), non-interface (35·5%) and non-porous (26·4%), were interviewed using a combined close- and open-ended questionnaire. Focus group discussions were conducted with 10-12 members of each community. More abortions in the last 5 years were reported from the porous interface (52%) and a significantly higher per cent of respondents from the porous interface (P < 0·05) perceived wildlife as playing a role in livestock abortions compared with the other interface types. The odds of reporting abortions in cattle were higher in large herd sizes (odds ratio (OR) = 2·6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·5-4·3), porous (OR = 1·9; 95% CI 1·0-3·5) and non-porous interface (OR = 2·2; 95% CI 1·1-4·3) compared with livestock-wildlife non-interface areas. About 21·6% of the respondents knew brucellosis as a cause of abortion, compared with RVF (9·8%) and leptospirosis (3·7%). These results explain to some extent, the existence of human/wildlife conflict in the studied livestock-wildlife interface areas of Zimbabwe, which militates against biodiversity conservation efforts. The low awareness of zoonoses means the public is at risk of contracting some of these infections. Thus, further studies should focus on livestock-wildlife interface areas to assess if the increased rates of abortions reported in cattle may be due to exposure to wildlife or other factors. The government of Zimbabwe needs to launch educational programmes on public health awareness in these remote areas at the periphery of transfrontier conservation areas where livestock-wildlife interface exists to help mitigate the morbidity and mortality of people from some of the known zoonotic diseases.

BackgroundIn the great Limpopo transfrontier conservation area (GLTFCA), there is an increased interface between wildlife and domestic animals, because rural households move their cattle into the game park in search of grazing and watering resources. This creates opportunities for inter-species transmission of infectious diseases, including zoonoses like brucellosis and tuberculosis, which may also pose a health risk to the local rural communities. This study investigated the awareness, perceptions and practices on zoonoses amongst rural cattle owners, commodity chain- and health-workers in three different localities around Gonarezhou National Park (GNP), Zimbabwe, where the interface between wild and domestic animals varies.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in Malipati, Chikombedzi and Chiredzi that are considered to be high-, medium- and low-domestic animal-wildlife interface areas, respectively. Data was collected from cattle owners, commodity chain and health-workers using a semi-structured questionnaire. To determine the public health risk of food-borne zoonoses, their practices with regard to meat and milk consumptions, and measures they take to prevent exposure to infections were assessed. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and principal component analysis.ResultsMost respondents (52.8 %, 102/193) were cattle owners, followed by health (30.1 %, 58/193) and lastly commodity chain workers (17.1 %, 33/193). Overall 67.4 % (130/193) of the respondents were aware of zoonoses with respective 48, 81.8, and 93.1 % of cattle owners, commodity chain, and health workers, being aware. Significantly more cattle owners (P < 0.05) from medium and low interface areas were aware of zoonoses compared to those from high interface areas. All categories of respondents cited anthrax (69.2 %), rabies (57.7 %), tuberculosis (41.5 %) and brucellosis (23.9 %) as important zoonoses. About half (46.1 %; 89/193) of the respondents perceive wildlife as important reservoirs of zoonoses. High proportions 98.4 % (190/193) and 96.4 % (186/193) of the respondents indicated that they consume meat and milk, respectively. Access to game meat and milk from informal markets was closely associated with consumption of raw meat and milk.ConclusionsFewer cattle owners from a high interface area of Malipati are aware of zoonoses compared to other areas due to combined effects of limited education and other factors disadvantaging these marginalised areas. This may increase their risk of exposure to zoonoses, considering that consumption of raw meat and milk is common. Thus, awareness campaigns may reduce the public health impact of zoonoses at the interface.

Diseases transmitted between wildlife and livestock may have significant impacts on local farmers" health, livestock health and productivity, overall national economies, and conservation initiatives, such as Transfrontier Conservation Areas in Southern Africa. However, little is known on local farmers" awareness of the potential risks, and how they perceive the role played by wildlife in the epidemiology of these diseases.We investigated the knowledge base regarding livestock diseases of local cattle owners living at the periphery of conservation areas within the Great Limpopo TFCA and the Kavango-Zambezi TFCA in Zimbabwe, using free-listing and semi-structured questionnaires during dipping sessions. The results suggest that information related to cattle diseases circulates widely between cattle farmers, including 1 between different socio-cultural groups, using English and vernacular languages. Most respondents had an accurate perception of the epidemiology of diseases affecting their livestock, and their perception of the potential role played by wildlife species was usually in agreement with current state of veterinary knowledge. However, we found significant variations in the ranking of livestock diseases between sites, and owners" perceptions were not directly related with the local abundance of wildlife.In contrast, awareness of zoonotic risks and of the potential increase in TADs with the establishment of TFCAs, seemed low. We recommend the establishment of a One health program, including information and awareness on zoonotic diseases, with increased participation of communities at a local level in the prioritization of disease control and surveillance.