International Journal of One Health

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Aboveground Burial for Managing Catastrophic Losses of Livestock


Affiliations
1 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 3000, 4411 Early Road, Harrisonburg, VA 22801, United States
2 Virginia Cooperative Extension, 600 North Main Street, Suite 100, Woodstock, Virginia 22664-1855, United States
3 National Center of Zoosanitary Vigilance, Tunis, Tunisia
4 Department of Health and Environmental Control, Columbia, SC, United States
5 Regional Department for Agricultural Development, Sfax, Tunisia
 

Background and Aim: Environmental impacts from carcass management are a significant concern globally. Despite a history of costly, ineffective, and environmentally damaging carcass disposal efforts, large animal carcass disposal methods have advanced little in the past decade. An outbreak today will likely be managed with the same carcass disposal techniques used in the previous decades and will likely result in the same economic, health, and environmental impacts. This article overviews the results of one field test that was completed in Virginia (United States) using the aboveground burial (AGB) technique and the disposal of 111 foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) infected sheep in Tunisia using a similar methodology.

Materials and Methods: Researchers in the United States conducted a field test to assess the environmental impact and effectiveness of AGB in decomposing livestock carcasses. The system design included a shallow trench excavated into native soil and a carbonaceous base placed on the bottom of the trenches followed by a single layer of animal carcasses. Excavated soils were subsequently placed on top of the animals, and a vegetative layer was established. A similar methodology was used in Tunisia to manage sheep infected with FMDs, Peste des Petits Ruminants virus, and Bluetongue Virus.

Results: The results of the field test in the United States demonstrated a significant carcass degradation during the 1-year period of the project, and the migration of nutrients below the carcasses appears to be limited thereby minimizing the threat of groundwater contamination. The methodology proved practical for the disposal of infected sheep carcasses in Tunisia.

Conclusions: Based on the analysis conducted to date, AGB appears to offer many benefits over traditional burial for catastrophic mortality management. Ongoing research will help to identify limitations of the method and determine where its application during large disease outbreaks or natural disasters is appropriate.


Keywords

Aboveground Burial, Carcass Disposal, Foot-And-Mouth Disease, Foreign Animal Diseases, Mesophilic Static Pile Composting.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • World Bank. People, Pathogens and Our Plant. Towards a Once Health Approach for Controlling. Vol. 1. Zoonotic Diseases Report, 50833-GLB; 2010.

  • Miller LP, Flory GA, Bonhotal J. HPAI Outbreak 2014-2015: Mortality Composting Protocol for Avian Influenza Infected Flocks. United States Department of Agriculture Guidance, 24 September; 2015.

  • Flory GA. U.S. Response to outbreaks of avian influenza. Domest Prep J 2016;12:38-41.

  • Bendfeldt ES, Peer RW, Flory GA. Lessons learned from avian influenza outbreaks in Virginia 1984-2005. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Composting Mortalities and Slaughterhouse Residuals. Portland, Maine, 24-25, May; 2005.

  • Flory GA, Peer RW. Composting solution to avian flu mortality management. Biocycle 2016;57:37-40.

  • Environment Agency. The environmental impact of the foot and mouth disease outbreak: An interim assessment. In: Environment Agency-434 Foot and Mouth Task Force. Bristol, United Kingdom: Environment Agency; 2002.

  • Hseu ZY, Chen ZS. Experiences of mass pig carcass disposal related to groundwater quality monitoring in Taiwan. Sustainability 2016;9:46.

  • https://doi.org/10.3390/su9010046

  • Hayama Y, Muroga N, Nishida T, Kobayashi S, Tsutsui T. Risk factors for local spread of foot-and-mouth disease, 2010 epidemic in Japan. Res Vet Sci 2012;93:631-5.

  • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2011.09.001

  • PMid:21945801

  • Kim HS, Kim K. Microbial and chemical contamination of groundwater around livestock mortality burial sites in Korea-a 456 review. Geosci J 2012;16:479-89.

  • https://doi.org/10.1007/s12303-012-0036-1

  • Muroga N, Hayama Y, Yamamoto T, Kurogi A, Tsuda T, Tsutsui T. The 2010 foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in Japan. J Vet Med Sci 2012;74:399-404.

  • https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.11-0271

  • PMid:22075710

  • Kim MH, Ko CR, Kim G. Cost of analysis of carcass burial site construction: Focused on the foot and mouth disease 2011, South Korea. Environ Eng Res 2015;20:356-62.

  • https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2015.034

  • Carpenter TA, O'brien JM, Hagerman AD, McCarl BA. Epidemic and economic impacts of a delayed detection of foot-and mouth disease: A case study of a simulated out-break in California. J Vet Diagn Invest 2011;23:26-33.

  • https://doi.org/10.1177/104063871102300104

  • PMid:21217024

  • Department of Health. A Rapid Qualitative Assessment of Possible Risks to Public Health from Current Foot and Mouth Disposal Options. Main Report, June. London: Department of Health; 2001.

  • Chen SJ, Hung MC, Huang KL, Hwang WI. Emission of heavy metals from animal carcass incinerators in Taiwan. Chemosphere 2004;55:1197-205.

  • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2003.12.020

  • PMid:15081760

  • Flory GA, Peer RW. Mesophillic static pile composting of animal carcasses. Biocycle 2017;58:65-8.


Abstract Views: 255

PDF Views: 91




  • Aboveground Burial for Managing Catastrophic Losses of Livestock

Abstract Views: 255  |  PDF Views: 91

Authors

Gary Alan Flory
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 3000, 4411 Early Road, Harrisonburg, VA 22801, United States
Robert W. Peer
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 3000, 4411 Early Road, Harrisonburg, VA 22801, United States
Robert A. Clark
Virginia Cooperative Extension, 600 North Main Street, Suite 100, Woodstock, Virginia 22664-1855, United States
Mohamed Naceur Baccar
National Center of Zoosanitary Vigilance, Tunis, Tunisia
Thanh-Thao Le
Department of Health and Environmental Control, Columbia, SC, United States
Aziz Ben Mbarek
Regional Department for Agricultural Development, Sfax, Tunisia
Sami Farsi
Regional Department for Agricultural Development, Sfax, Tunisia

Abstract


Background and Aim: Environmental impacts from carcass management are a significant concern globally. Despite a history of costly, ineffective, and environmentally damaging carcass disposal efforts, large animal carcass disposal methods have advanced little in the past decade. An outbreak today will likely be managed with the same carcass disposal techniques used in the previous decades and will likely result in the same economic, health, and environmental impacts. This article overviews the results of one field test that was completed in Virginia (United States) using the aboveground burial (AGB) technique and the disposal of 111 foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) infected sheep in Tunisia using a similar methodology.

Materials and Methods: Researchers in the United States conducted a field test to assess the environmental impact and effectiveness of AGB in decomposing livestock carcasses. The system design included a shallow trench excavated into native soil and a carbonaceous base placed on the bottom of the trenches followed by a single layer of animal carcasses. Excavated soils were subsequently placed on top of the animals, and a vegetative layer was established. A similar methodology was used in Tunisia to manage sheep infected with FMDs, Peste des Petits Ruminants virus, and Bluetongue Virus.

Results: The results of the field test in the United States demonstrated a significant carcass degradation during the 1-year period of the project, and the migration of nutrients below the carcasses appears to be limited thereby minimizing the threat of groundwater contamination. The methodology proved practical for the disposal of infected sheep carcasses in Tunisia.

Conclusions: Based on the analysis conducted to date, AGB appears to offer many benefits over traditional burial for catastrophic mortality management. Ongoing research will help to identify limitations of the method and determine where its application during large disease outbreaks or natural disasters is appropriate.


Keywords


Aboveground Burial, Carcass Disposal, Foot-And-Mouth Disease, Foreign Animal Diseases, Mesophilic Static Pile Composting.

References