Euthanasia is a critical component in swine production and veterinarians play an important role in euthanasia protocol development and training. This study aimed to understand veterinarian involvement in and perspectives on euthanasia on pig farms. An online survey was disseminated both at a pig welfare conference and online via a veterinarian e-newsletter. Twenty-five veterinarians participated in the survey. The majority of respondents indicated that caretakers are the individuals making euthanasia decisions and performing the task (n = 17, 68% and 22, 88%, respectively). The majority (22, 88%) of respondents indicated that most of the facilities with which they work have a written euthanasia protocol, and 72% (18) indicated that they assisted in protocol development. Only half of respondents (13, 52%) agreed that “all employees performing euthanasia have been trained adequately”, and 80% (20) identified an interest in delivering more training. Less than half the respondents indicated that strategies for coping with “personal stress” and “emotional wellness” (12, 48%) were included in euthanasia training. While the moral stress of performing euthanasia is recognized, there is opportunity for addressing mental well-being in euthanasia resources. Although preliminary, this study supports the need for further euthanasia training on-farm, involving veterinarians in the process.

The assessment of animal handling is commonly included in cattle care programs. The guidelines set in the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association Beef Checkoff funded Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) program are often used for assessing handling on feedlot, stocker, and cow-calf operations. There is limited information about animal handling on cow-calf operations. Thus, the objectives of this study were to: 1) quantify handling outcomes on cow-calf operations and compare to national BQA program thresholds, and 2) investigate factors associated with handling outcomes. Researchers visited 76 operations across the United States to observe the following outcomes, adapted from the BQA program, during processing of cows or yearling heifers: Prod Use, Miscatch, Vocalization, Jump, Slip/Stumble, Fall and Run. One hundred cows or less (depending on herd size) were observed moving through a restraint system at each operation. Other information specific to animal type, facilities, and management were also gathered to be explored as potential predictors of handling outcomes. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics on an operation basis and analyzed with multi-predictor ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis tests to assess the relationship between outcomes and possible explanatory factors. Predictors included in final analyses were: BQA certification (BQA), animal temperament (TEMP), region (REGION), chute style (CHUTE), and visual contact with humans (VISUAL). The 76 operations were sampled in 24 states (Central, n = 17; East, 30; West, 29), with herd sizes ranging from 10 animals to more than 5,000 animals. A total of 4,804 animals were observed. There were a substantial number of operations exceeding BQA thresholds for Prod Use (34.0%, 26), Miscatch (46.0%, 35), and Fall (31.6%, 24); the averages of these outcomes also exceeded the BQA thresholds (< 10%, 0%, and 2%, respectively). There was an association between Prod Use and several explanatory factors, including SIZE (P = 0.072), TEMP (P = 0.001), VISUAL (P = 0.027) and BQA (P = 0.104). Miscatch, Vocalization, and Fall all had single associated factors (REGION, P = 0.019; REGION, P = 0.002; VISUAL, P = 0.002, respectively). The VISUAL and TEMP factors had an association with the majority of outcomes. The findings suggest an opportunity for improving handling outcomes, which could be achieved through educational and training support regarding the importance of animal handling on-farm. Future work should consider additional aspects of facilities and management that could impact cattle handling outcomes.

Euthanasia is a critical component of swine production. Veterinarians should play a key role in development of euthanasia protocols and training to ensure humane euthanasia. This study aimed to understand veterinarian involvement and perspectives on euthanasia training on swine farms. An online survey was disseminated through the American Association of Swine Veterinarians newsletter in February 2020. The survey consisted of 56 questions. Twenty-six veterinarians responded to the survey. The majority (88%, n = 23) of respondents indicated that most of the facilities with which they work have a written euthanasia protocol, and 69% of respondents indicated that they participated in the protocol design. The majority of respondents (88%; n = 23) indicated that caretakers are responsible for performing euthanasia of the pigs. When presented with the statement: “All employees performing euthanasia have been trained adequately,” 52% of respondents agreed while 42% disagreed. Additionally, 81% (n = 21) of the respondents indicated a desire to facilitate additional euthanasia training. All respondents (100%; n = 26) “believe that euthanasia is a humane way to end animal suffering” and that “the euthanasia process on-farm is necessary.” Over half of respondents (62%; n = 16) reported feeling emotionally upset after euthanizing an animal. Approximately half (54%; n = 14) of respondents believe their workplace values the mental health of employees, yet 50% (n = 13) indicated there were no programs to promote worker mental health and 96% (n = 25) indicated there were no mental health evaluations. Fifty four percent of respondents (n = 14) reported there were no employee check-ins with supervisors. Preliminary data supports the need for further euthanasia training on-farm developed with veterinarians and suggests veterinarians want to deliver more training. Although some facilities are considering employee mental well-being, further development of euthanasia training and wellness programs could benefit caretakers.

Employees on swine operations have the critical role of ensuring animal health and well-being, which sometimes involves performing euthanasia. This study aimed to understand caretaker and manager involvement and perspectives on performing euthanasia on swine farms. Individuals were recruited through online (newsletters and emails to companies) and in-person (e.g. Pig Welfare Symposium, MN) methods in the fall of 2019. The survey consisted of 61 questions on topics related to training, methods of euthanasia, perspectives about euthanasia and knowledge of available mental health resources. Thirty-nine individuals participated in the survey (18 caretakers, 21 managers). Half of respondents (50%, n = 20) indicated that they were involved with making euthanasia decisions. The vast majority of respondents “believe that euthanasia is a humane way to end animal suffering” (95%; n = 36) and that “the euthanasia process on-farm is necessary” (97%; n = 34). A quarter of individuals (25%, n = 9) “feel emotionally upset after euthanizing a pig” and 84% (n = 26) indicated it is “easier to euthanize a pig the more they do it.” Additionally, 92% (n = 35) of respondents agreed that they have “enough experience and knowledge to know when to euthanize a pig.” Most of survey respondents (n = 34) agreed that they “feel as though I can communicate with my supervisors if I feel uncomfortable performing euthanasia” and that their “supervisors aim to promote a safe and encouraging work environment” (n = 38). Despite this, a small number of respondents (n = 6) did not feel “as though my supervisors acknowledge concerns that they may have” and did not feel that their supervisors take “an interest in my professional development and/or job performance.” Overall, data suggest that caretakers and managers understand the importance of euthanasia regarding animal well-being and generally feel they can communicate their concerns.