@article{gates_evans_weston_2021, 
  title={Practices and opinions of New Zealand veterinarians regarding control of bovine viral diarrhoea}, 
  DOI={10.6084/m9.figshare.14458917.v2}, 
  abstractNote={To explore recommendations that New Zealand veterinarians make for diagnosing and managing bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD) in cattle herds under different clinical scenarios and their opinions towards potential barriers and opportunities for implementing BVD control programmes in New Zealand. A cross-sectional survey of registered veterinarians in New Zealand was conducted in 2019. Respondents were asked about the approaches they would use to manage BVD under different clinical scenarios as well as their opinions on national BVD control. A subset of veterinarians completed a more in-depth survey providing additional free-text responses on a range of different BVD topics. Descriptive statistics were provided for all quantitative study variables and the free-text responses were also analysed to generate further insights into veterinarians' perceptions towards BVD management. The cross-sectional survey was completed by 101 of an estimated 870 (11.6%) cattle veterinarians. Thirty-five veterinarians completed the in-depth survey. There was wide variation in the BVD diagnostic testing and vaccination protocols that respondents recommended under different clinical scenarios. Annual bulk milk BVD testing was perceived as a valuable tool for initiating BVD discussions with dairy farmers. Respondents indicated that beef farmers were more difficult to engage in BVD control largely due to the logistical challenges of yarding cattle at the appropriate times to implement interventions, with many farmers only contacting veterinarians after experiencing a BVD outbreak Most respondents (91/101; 90%) believed it was possible to eradicate BVD from New Zealand, but cited lack of farmer awareness and poor compliance with management recommendations as significant barriers. The measure with the most support for inclusion in a compulsory national eradication programme was requiring farmers to declare the status of their animals prior to sale while the least supported measure was requiring farmers to double fence boundaries to prevent nose- [...]}, 
  publisher={Taylor & Francis}, 
  author={Gates and Evans and Weston}, 
  year={2021}, 
  month={May}
  }