Search

African swine fever (ASF) has massively spread in recent years and threatens the global pig industry. ASF has been present in Latvia since 2014. Hunters play a major role in the implementation of measures to control ASF and in passive disease surveillance. The probability to detect an ASF-positive wild boar is much higher in animals found dead than in hunted animals. Thus, the willingness and the motivation of hunters to support passive surveillance is of utmost importance. Using participatory methods, this study aimed to assess the acceptability of control measures for ASF in wild boar among hunters. In addition, new approaches to increase hunters' motivation to report wild boar found dead were investigated. A total of ten focus group discussions with hunters from different regions in Latvia were conducted. To assess the quantity and quality of contacts between hunters and stakeholders involved in the control of ASF, relation diagrams were used. Using ranking tools, the trust of the participants in stakeholders to implement control measures successfully was evaluated. Defined control measures were presented to the hunters and their acceptability investigated. An impact diagram and a list of defined motivation options for passive surveillance were offered to identify new ways to increase the willingness of hunters to support passive surveillance actively. A satisfactory and regular relationship was identified between the hunters, the Food and Veterinary Service (FVS) and the State Forest Service (SFS). The hunters' trust in these authorities was high. Although there is no vaccine against ASF, hunters were convinced of the potential of vaccination in controlling ASF. However, building fences was considered as useless and ineffective. To increase the willingness of hunters to support passive surveillance, reducing the infection pressure in the forests was regarded as most motivating. Furthermore, hunters would appreciate a decrease in their costs and workload. The study provides new insight into the concerns and experiences of hunters. Including their views and expectations in the further design and implementation of control and surveillance activities may help to improve current efforts to control ASF in wild boar populations. Although representing the perceptions of Latvian hunters, the main conclusions may be adaptable to adjust ASF control and surveillance in other countries.

African swine fever (ASF) was first identified in Estonia in 2014, initially detected in wild boar and spreading to affect almost the whole country from late 2016 onwards. Passive surveillance and the control measures applied in Estonia are the main actions in the attempt to control the wild boar population and therefore limit the spread of ASF. Implementation and success of both activities depend mainly on the involvement and commitment of the executing force: the Estonian hunters. Thus, their acceptance of the measures is of utmost importance and with the help of participatory methods, their acceptability can be assessed. Participatory epidemiology allows the involvement of key stakeholders in planning control measures and surveillance strategies and gathering information otherwise inaccessible. By conducting focus group discussions and utilizing participatory tools, this study aimed to assess the acceptance of ASF control measures by hunters in Estonia. Furthermore, the study aimed to detect means to improve the motivation of hunters to support passive surveillance. Among hunters, the results ranked the trust in lower authorities (e.g. local official veterinarians) towards implementing control measures as high (in contrast to higher officials e.g. 'Ministry of Rural Affairs'), while perceiving themselves as the most trustworthy group among those implementing ASF control measures. Hunting and every measure supporting increased hunting, for example selective hunting, bait feeding and incentives for hunting wild boar, were deemed favourable for hunters. These measures also received the highest trust for controlling ASF. All measures hindering hunting and the movement of wildlife, for example fencing or involvement of the army in ASF control, were described as unpleasant or even unethical and trust in these measures to control the disease successfully was lacking. When assessing the perceived consequences for hunters of finding a dead wild boar, arising financial costs, additional workload and time consumption were highlighted. In line with these results, the two tools with the strongest motivational effect for taking part in passive surveillance were: (1) higher monetary incentives as compensation for the hunters' work, and (2) the reduction of the negative consequences by limiting the hunters' duties to solely reporting found dead wild boar. In conclusion, participatory methods can be used as a highly suitable tool for the evaluation of acceptance of measures and surveillance systems. Potentially, the results can help to improve control and passive surveillance in Estonia, as well as functioning as an example for other countries battling or awaiting ASF.