Community Engagement to Mitigate Transmission of Infectious Diseases and Antibiotic Resistance from Backyard Poultry

Purpose

Backyard poultry production is growing globally with 85 million backyard chickens estimated in the U.S. (Mace & Knight, 2024). Whether kept as pets or to provide a local and sustainable food source, flocks can harbor pathogens and antibiotic-resistant bacteria that can be transmitted to humans via the environment, pests, food products, and direct contact. Poultry waste can contaminate soil and water sources, posing risks to nearby humans and other animals. Flocks can attract pests that may carry diseases and disrupt local ecosystems. This project, which will launch in the summer of 2025, aims to improve understanding among backyard poultry farmers of potential health, environmental, community, and food safety risks associated with their systems and motivate the adoption and promotion of behaviors critical to public health and sustainability of local food systems using a peer-to-peer outreach approach.

This project will evaluate an approach to motivating behavioral changes among a cohort of backyard poultry farmers that is predicated on evaluating current flock management practices among participants, improving understanding of health risks associated with current practices, and motivating implementation of recommended practices to mitigate health risks. Beneficiaries of project outcomes include members of households in which chickens are maintained, local community members, consumers of local poultry products, and the broader population that shares environmental resources with these sites and are impacted by human health threats. Our project will uniquely address multiple facets of backyard poultry production that contribute to human health, environmental sustainability, food safety, and community well-being through engagement with existing poultry owners to improve knowledge, promote the adoption of best practices, and facilitate communication networks. Assessments of current production practices among participating local backyard poultry farmers will inform educational needs related to managing these systems for environmental and public health benefits. Facilitated engagement among participants during educational events will promote shared goals, motivate practice adoption, and build confidence among participants in their role as citizen scientists capable of promoting a broader community understanding of the topics addressed.

What Did We Do?

The overall goal of this project is to mitigate potential disease transmission risks to humans from small poultry flocks by delivering data-informed educational programming and assessing subsequent behavioral changes among audience members. After a thorough investigation using previous studies conducted on the impact of community engagement in health education, we have designed our research to identify, deliver, and assess an effective methodology to achieve the following objectives.

Objective 1: Evaluate the knowledge, perceptions, and practices among backyard poultry farmers that may contribute to their risks for acquiring AMR genes/infections from their birds using a Reasoned Action Approach.

Figure 1: Graphical representation of the Reasoned Action Approach, a psychological model to explain and predict behavior
Figure 1: Graphical representation of the Reasoned Action Approach, a psychological model to explain and predict behavior

Objective 2: Quantify the contribution of backyard poultry manure and bird management practices to the presence and concentration of pathogenic organisms and resistance genes in the environment via sampling and analysis of manure, soils, runoff, and flying insects.

Objective 3: Develop, deliver, and assess impacts of educational programming designed to motivate the adoption of new integrated antimicrobial management approaches in backyard poultry farming to reduce the potential spread of AMR.

Thirty backyard poultry farmers from up to three counties in Nebraska will be recruited through community groups, personal connections, and university extension contacts. Participants will be surveyed and observed to understand their current knowledge, perceptions, and management practices, and identify knowledge gaps related to bird health, biosecurity, and disease transmission risks. The Reasoned Action Approach, a social cognitive model for behavioral analysis will be used to categorize the data, predicting and explaining their behavior towards healthy farming practices. The mixed-methods study will use standard statistical methods and qualitative data for a richer interpretation.

Sampling of environmental matrices and potential insect transmission vectors will be conducted and used to complete a risk factor assessment to understand disease demography.

Through face-to-face and digital sessions, engagement and education sessions will be designed to address knowledge gaps in poultry handling, waste management, personal hygiene, water quality, food safety, and human health risks. It will promote best practices and encourage participation through rewards, project-based learning, on-farm demonstrations, and regular reflection on personal impact. The recruited farmers will be appointed as trainers for other farmers in their locality to continue to promote the learning outcomes from the training. The training sessions will be assessed through a post-training survey using a knowledge-based questionnaire, and all discussions with farmers will be recorded for future evaluation. This data will help determine improvements for future outreach events on infectious disease control in backyard poultry farms, enhancing the training’s impact.

What Have We Learned?

The number of households engaging in “backyard poultry production” is growing regionally, nationally, and globally. Evidence also suggests that chickens are not strictly confined to the outdoors but are becoming indoor “pets,” creating complex human-chicken relationships responsible for zoonotic disease outbreaks and antibiotic resistance risks (Singh et al., 2018; Tobin et al., 2015). According to a 2010 study, the USDA confirmed almost 50% of the population related to backyard poultry production lacks knowledge about human health risks associated with contact with live birds (USDA, 2011). Studies reflect a critical need for decision-making support to ensure healthy birds, applying biosecurity practices that mitigate animal-to-human disease transmission risks and development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, promoting environmental sustainability, and providing healthy local food sources to communities. While these systems represent only a small part of the U.S. poultry industry, their positive impact on local food systems is widely recognized, as are their potential contributions to zoonotic disease transmission, antibiotic resistance, and local ecosystem disruptions. Public awareness about poultry-associated health risks and adopting best practices for biosecurity and disease prevention is critical to balancing healthy local food production with community well-being.

Future Plans

This project aims to improve the health, prosperity, and sustainability of backyard poultry farmers by focusing on zoonotic disease transmission, pest management, and natural resource protection. It will provide training, technical assistance, and peer support to improve knowledge and adoption of best practices for producing healthy local food sources. This will reduce health risks, decrease healthcare costs, and support market access and profitability among urban farmers. The community-based approach will foster mutually beneficial relationships among producers, communities, and experts, promoting sustainable production practices that prioritize health, community needs, and the environment.

Authors

Presenting author

Nafisa Lubna, Graduate Student, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Corresponding author

Amy Schmidt, Professor, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, aschmidt@unl.edu

Additional author

Mark E. Burbach, Environmental Social Scientist, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Additional Information

Mace, J. L., & Knight, A. (2024). From the backyard to our beds: The spectrum of care, attitudes, relationship types, and welfare in non-commercial chicken care. Animals, 14(2), 288.

Peters, G. J., & Crutzen, R. (2021). The core of behavior change: introducing the Acyclic Behavior Change Diagram to report and analyze interventions.

Singh, S., Chakraborty, D., Altaf, S., Taggar, R. K., Kumar, N., & Kumar, D. (2018). Backyard poultry system: A boon to rural livelihood. International Journal of Fauna and Biological Studies, 5(1), 231-236.

Tobin, M. R., Goldshear, J. L., Price, L. B., Graham, J. P., & Leibler, J. H. (2015). A framework to reduce infectious disease risk from urban poultry in the United States. Public Health Reports, 130(4), 380-391.

USDA. (2011). Reference of the health and management of chicken flocks in urban settings in four U.S. cities, 2010. Fort Collins, CO: USDA.

 

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2025. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth. Boise, ID. April 711, 2025. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date. 

An NE-1441 Project: Proposed Methodologies for Administering a Multi-State Environmental Best Management Practices Survey of Equine Properties


*Purpose 

Several states have reported that equine are the fastest growing segment of the livestock industry. Nationwide, equine has increased by 77% since 1997; and it is reported there are approximately 9.5 million horses in the United States (AHC, 2005). Proper management of equine operations requires the adoption of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to balance nutrient production and prevent erosion. Government agencies are concerned about non-point sources of water pollution and have focused on agriculture, including equine operations, as a major contributor to water quality issues. Many states’ laws have regulated equine farms, requiring farm managers to incorporate BMPs. The objectives of this proposed national (multi-state) survey are to quantify and assess the use of the equine industry’s BMPs in pasture management, erosion control and to examine potential environmental impacts. Few state studies have investigated horse BMPs in the U.S, and more research is needed to assess the effect of horse farm management on U.S. water quality. Knowledge of the current scope and nature of equine industry management practices are important when developing regulations, laws, and educational programs to enhance the stewardship and govern land management on equine operations.

What did we do? 

The methodology to assess horse property manager/owner practices consists of gathering a minimum of 150-2,000 names and email addresses of horse owners/farm managers from the 15 states involved in the NE-1441 project. Some of the N. E. states have fewer equine operations. An email containing survey information and a link to the 40 question online survey will be sent to horse farm managers in 2016. Three follow-up reminders will be sent to non-responding addresses. It is hoped to have a 40% response rate. Data will analyzed using SPSS 16.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) for descriptive statistics, determining response frequencies and percentages.

The Questionnaire Instrument will include the following areas:

Part I General: Involved in the horse industry? Are you the owner or manager of a horse operation? If No, then you are finished taking the survey. Business or Hobby?

Part II Demographics: Location, State, County, Survey participants gender, age, Size of farm total acreage, Confinement areas, Pasture areas, primary and 2nd use of operation, Highest average number of horses on property? On average, how many hours per day do your horses spend grazing pastures by seasons?

Part III Horse Pasture Management Rotational Grazing, unlimited access,Pasture Management Plan, Agricultural Erosion and Sedimentation Plan weed control and type, mowing, resting pastures,Sacrifice lots, pasture topography, surface water, Sheds and barns,divert runoff, roof gutters.

Part IV: Horse Pasture Applications and/or Evaluation: Line, Fertilizer, Herbicide use, Seeding practices, Lime, Soil testing.

Part V: Horse Manure Management: Nutrient Management Plan, primary manure management, collection, storage, uses, removal.

Part VI: Conclusion: What are your limitations in altering the management of your horse operation? What information resources do you use for your equine farm operations?

What have we learned? 

The questions for an equine related APHIS/USDA animal agriculture survey need to be more specific to the activities and needs of the horse industry. Whereas most animal agriculture operations do not deal directly with the general public as a necessary component of their business plan, the horse industry depends on active and engaged clientele. If we are able to gather national data through a single effort survey, the resulting information could be compared and sorted in a consistent and statistically reliable manner, allowing educational materials and opportunities to be tailored to area or regional needs.

Future Plans 

A survey will be conducted by the NE-1441 (a northeast regional Hatch research group focusing on environmental impacts of equine operations) participating states to determine the use of the following best management practices: managed storage area, composted manure storage, stream crossings, buffers and vegetative filter strips, heavy use pads and sacrifice areas, soil testing, and fertility management on fields receiving manure. Develop means of determining the impact of equine outreach programs, more specifically determination of BMP adoption rate.This will allow us to chart progress among producers who use extension services and/or implement BMPs with the assistance of extension or other service providers such as NRCS, state departments of agriculture, and etc. We will work with social scientists to determine adoption rates, what the reasons for resistance to adoption are, and how to develop programs to overcome this resistance.

Corresponding author, title, and affiliation 

Betsy Greene, Professor/Equine Extension Specialist, University of Vermont

Corresponding author email 

betsy.greene@uvm.edu

Other authors

Ann Swinker, Extension, Pennsylvania State University Amy Burk, Extension, University of Maryland Rebecca Bott, Extension, South Dakota State University Carey Williams, Extension, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey

Additional information 

Westendorf, M. L., T. Joshua, S. J. Komar, C. Williams, and R. Govindasamy. 2010. Manure Management Practices on New Jersey Equine Farms. Prof. Anim. Sci. 26:123-129.

Swinker, A., S. Worobey, H. McKernan, R. Meinen, D. Kniffen, D. Foulk, M. Hall, J. Weld, F. Schneider, A. Burk, M. Brubaker, 2013, Profile of the Equine Industry’s Environmental, Best Management Practices and Variations in Pennsylvania, J. of NACAA. 6:1, 2158-9429.

Fiorellino, N.M., K.M. Wilson, and A.O. Burk. 2013. Characterizing the use of environmentally friendly pasture management practices by horse farm operators in Maryland. J. Soil Water Conserv. 68:34-40.

Acknowledgements

The State University Extension Equine Specialists that make up the NE-1441: Environmental Impacts of Equine Operations, Multi-State Program. USDA.

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.