top of page

FARM ANIMAL DEPOPULATION
Frequently Asked Questions

What is depopulation? 

Depopulation describes the rapid destruction of a population of animals in response to urgent circumstances [1–2]. Today, depopulation is common in animal agriculture in response to certain disease outbreaks as well as market disruptions, corporate bankruptcies, and other economic considerations [3].

Is depopulation the same as euthanasia?

No. Euthanasia involves giving an animal a good death, that is, ending their life in the most rapid, painless, and distress-free manner possible when continuing to live is no longer in their best interest [4]. Disease outbreaks and natural disasters have long necessitated euthanizing herds or flocks of farm animals. As agricultural operations have come to confine tens of thousands or even millions of animals in one location, ending animals’ lives via traditional euthanasia methods has become unfeasible. In its depopulation guidelines, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) includes language indicating that during depopulation, the animals’ welfare needs receive only as much consideration “as practicable,” with other concerns taking priority [2]. Despite international standards requiring that depopulation methods result in immediate loss of consciousness or that animal suffering be minimized during loss of consciousness [5], methods that inherently cause severe and/or prolonged suffering have become the norm in the United States. VAFAW seeks a transition to modern depopulation methods that provide a painless, distress-free death, thus meeting the animal welfare standards required for euthanasia methods.

What is ventilation shutdown plus (VSD+)?

Ventilation shutdown plus, or VSD+, is a method of depopulation that involves sealing a barn, shutting off the ventilation system, and adding heat and/or steam to raise the temperature [6]. The animals die of heatstroke, or hyperthermia. Heatstroke directly causes damage throughout the body, and additional pathology develops from the body’s response to being overheated [7]. VSD+ is widely used for the depopulation of some farm animal species in the U.S. [6,8]. Since February 2022, when the current highly pathogenic avian influenza (H5N1 HPAI) outbreak began, approximately 190 million chickens, turkeys, ducks, and pheasants have been depopulated. Of these, 72% died on premises where the birds in some or all barns were subjected to VSD+ [9]. VSD+ was also used to kill approximately 250,000 pigs when COVID-19 infections among workers resulted in slaughterhouse bottlenecks [6].

What are the animal welfare concerns associated with heatstroke-based depopulation methods like VSD+?

Before animals lose consciousness, they likely experience overheating, pain, anxiety, frustration, helplessness, nausea, malaise, respiratory distress, and exhaustion. Under field conditions, poultry often require hours to lose consciousness and die [10]. According to the USDA, in most poultry barns where VSD+ is used, some birds survive, even after several hours of heat exposure. These debilitated birds are then destroyed by a secondary method, sometimes days later [8]. Under field conditions, pigs often require an hour or more to lose consciousness and die from VSD+ [6]. The higher temperatures and humidity levels involved when VSD+ is used to destroy pigs may result in steam burns, worsening the pain experienced by the animals [10].

What other depopulation methods are prevalent in the U.S.?

Carbon dioxide gassing is commonly used, especially in the egg industry. Birds are either caught and put into carts or containers with high levels of carbon dioxide, or the gas is pumped into the whole barn. Death is faster than with VSD+, but birds are likely to experience pain and distress before loss of consciousness [10–11]. Medium-expansion water-based foam is often used to destroy turkeys and broilers (chickens raised for meat). This wet foam blocks their airway. Death is faster than with VSD+, but birds are likely to experience fear and distress before they lose consciousness. [11] Methods that are applied to one animal at a time, such as cervical dislocation and blunt force trauma, are also used occasionally. While these methods may cause immediate or near-instantaneous loss of consciousness when performed properly, the risk of animal welfare compromise increases when they are used on large numbers of birds or performed by inadequately trained workers.[11]

How can we assess the animal welfare impact of different depopulation methods?

Assessing animal welfare at the time of killing involves considering the time to loss of consciousness and what the animal experiences until then [12]. An animal’s likely experience can be determined by examining behavior and considering what bodily changes occur. Research on humans and other animals demonstrates the effect that bodily changes have on the individual’s experience. For example, physical changes can result in pain, anxiety, or air hunger, which are often referred to as negative affective states [13].

What are higher-welfare methods of depopulation or mass euthanasia?

Higher-welfare methods generally rely on the use of inert gases, such as nitrogen or argon, which are not detected by the body. While both gases can be used in containerized systems, nitrogen is the gas typically used with other delivery systems [14]. Nitrogen-based methods include nitrogen whole house gassing and injection of nitrogen gas into a trailer. Nitrogen can also be delivered via a high-expansion foam matrix. Unlike water-based foam, high-expansion nitrogen foam does not obstruct the animal’s windpipe [11,15–16]. Inert gas-based methods work by creating a very low-oxygen (anoxic) environment around the animal. Without oxygen, the brain functioning required for consciousness rapidly ceases [11,17]. For certain species, such as chickens, turkeys, and pigs, nitrogen-based methods of killing are considered higher welfare because, when properly deployed, they cause no pain and little to no distress to the animal. For poultry and pigs, nitrogen anoxia is considered a method of humane euthanasia [18]. Nitrogen-based methods are used in other countries in response to H5N1 HPAI and other disease outbreaks; however, in the U.S., they have not yet been deployed in emergency situations. Nitrogen-based methods can also be used for routine end-of-lay culling of hens kept for egg production, offering animal welfare and worker safety benefits over the traditional carbon dioxide carts, particularly in aviary and other cage-free egg production facilities.

What are barriers to adoption of higher-welfare depopulation methods, and how can they be overcome?

Nitrogen-based depopulation methods were developed more recently than the methods currently used. In the U.S., commercial operations and governmental agencies often lack the requisite equipment and expertise. While no advanced preparation and very little forethought are required to use VSD+, commercial operations must prepare in advance if nitrogen-based depopulation methods are to be rapidly deployable. Preparedness measures include contracts with nitrogen suppliers, access to needed equipment, and development of SOPs [2,14,19]. Unfortunately, federal policy currently fails to incentivize the use of higher-welfare depopulation methods [9–10]. Farms receive taxpayer-funded indemnity and compensation payments when their birds are depopulated due to HPAI. USDA policy requires that other depopulation methods be considered before VSD+ is selected, but VSD+ is easily approved if operations can show that other methods were not rapidly accessible. Thus, operations that fail to prepare for the known threat of HPAI infection effectively create the very circumstances required for the USDA to approve use of VSD+. Public pressure, new laws, and changes to governmental and industry policy can motivate corporate producers, management companies, and animal health officials to plan and prepare for a successful transition to higher-welfare depopulation methods. Most farms—even very large ones—can complete preparations within a few months so they will be ready to deploy nitrogen-based depopulation methods within hours of an HPAI outbreak or other emergency.

Why should the veterinary profession care about depopulation?

Our professional oath requires that we, as veterinarians, use our scientific knowledge and skills to prevent and relieve animal suffering [20]. Society expects veterinarians to lead on animal welfare issues, especially when it comes to end of life. Veterinarians know that how an animal dies matters morally, and many have witnessed the suffering of animals experiencing heatstroke. However, the depopulation guidelines promulgated by the American Veterinary Medical Association include low-welfare methods requiring minimal planning or preparation [2]. These guidelines are often cited by industry and government representatives as justification for the use of VSD+. These veterinary guidelines entrench heatstroke-based depopulation methods and threaten to undermine society’s trust in the U.S. veterinary profession and its moral legitimacy. With depopulation now a routine part of animal agriculture, VAFAW believes the veterinary profession must, at a minimum, advance the transition to higher-welfare depopulation methods. It’s not only the animals who suffer. Veterinarians and other workers tasked with depopulation often experience significant negative psychological impacts, such as secondary trauma and moral distress/injury, especially when significant animal suffering is involved [21]. We can support our colleagues who do this difficult work by hastening the transition to higher-welfare methods and working together to reduce the risk of circumstances that result in depopulation.

How does VAFAW work to advance animal welfare in the context of depopulation?

VAFAW works to advance policies that (1) reduce animals’ vulnerability to dying by depopulation and (2) promote a transition to higher-welfare methods of depopulation. We lobby Congress to push for HPAI vaccination of poultry, which requires USDA authorization, as this would dramatically reduce the number of birds depopulated annually. In addition, our efforts have contributed to Congress directing the USDA to advance nitrogen-based depopulation methods. We work with veterinary colleagues to advance higher-welfare depopulation methods and provide education about them. VAFAW leaders collaborated with other members of the US Animal Health Association to pass a resolution advancing nitrogen-based methods. VAFAW led a collaborative effort that resulted in over 850 veterinarians and vet students petitioning the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) to revise its depopulation guidelines to better protect animal welfare. In addition, we submitted technical comments on the depopulation guidance of both the AVMA and the World Organization for Animal Health during their respective comment periods. Finally, VAFAW brings the discourse about depopulation and animal welfare to academia by challenging depopulation-related research that obfuscates or downplays the negative welfare impacts of depopulation methods.

Additional Resources:

View VAFAW's advocacy engagement on depopulation here.

Listen to VAFAW leaders, Dr. Gwendy Reyes-Illg and Jeff Hill, in this podcast, “When Emergency Becomes Policy: Rethinking Mass Depopulation in Animal Agriculture,” hosted by the Colorado State University Animal-Human Policy Center.

References:

  1. Purc-Stephenson, R. J., Hood, D. K., & Doctor, J. M. (2025). "With every big outbreak, we lose staff": The mental health impacts of depopulation on veterinarians. The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne, 66(2), 184–192.

  2. American Veterinary Medical Association. (2026). AVMA Guidelines for the Depopulation of Animals: 2026 Edition. Schaumburg, IL: AVMA. https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/2026-01/Depopulation_Guidelines_2026Complete.pdf

  3. Oatman, R. (2024). Former Pure Prairie Poultry chickens depopulated. MEAT+POULTRY. https://www.meatpoultry.com/articles/31000-former-pure-prairie-poultry-chickens-depopulated

  4. Antinoff, N. (2025). Euthanasia and Pet Loss. Merck Veterinary Manual. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/special-pet-topics/health-and-the-human-animal-bond/euthanasia-and-pet-loss

  5. World Organisation for Animal Health. (2019). Terrestrial Animal Health Code: Chapter 7.6 – Killing of animals for disease control purposes. https://www.woah.org/fileadmin/Home/eng/Health_standards/tahc/2018/en_chapitre_aw_killing.htm  

  6. Baysinger, A., Senn, M., Gebhardt, J., Rademacher, C., & Pairis-Garcia, M. (2021). A case study of ventilation shutdown with the addition of high temperature and humidity for depopulation of pigs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 259(4), 415–424. https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.259.4.415

  7. Bruchim, Y., Horowitz, M., & Aroch, I. (2017). Pathophysiology of heatstroke in dogs - revisited. Temperature (Austin, Tex.), 4(4), 356–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/23328940.2017.1367457

  8. USDA-APHIS. (2024). 2022-2023 Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Outbreak: Summary of Depopulation Methods and the Impact on Lateral Spread. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/hpai-2022-2023-summary-depop-analysis.pdf

  9. Animal Welfare Institute. (2026). Depopulation (Mass Killing) of Farmed Animals. https://awionline.org/content/depopulation-mass-killing-farmed-animals

  10. Reyes-Illg, G., Martin, J. E., Mani, I., Reynolds, J., & Kipperman, B. (2022). The Rise of Heatstroke as a Method of Depopulating Pigs and Poultry: Implications for the US Veterinary Profession. Animals: an open access journal from MDPI, 13(1), 140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13010140

  11. McKeegan, D. (2018). Mass depopulation. In Advances in poultry welfare (pp. 351-372). Woodhead Publishing.

  12. Martin, J. (2022, June). Challenges of animal welfare assessment for controlled atmosphere killing methods. In UFAW Advancing Animal Welfare Science 2022.

  13. Mellor, D. J., & Beausoleil, N. J. (2015). Extending the ‘Five Domains’ model for animal welfare assessment to incorporate positive welfare states. Animal Welfare, 24(3), 241-253. doi:10.7120/09627286.24.3.241  

  14. Hill, J. (2025). A Better Means to a Humane Ending? Nitrogen Anoxia for the Mass Depopulation of Livestock, 2025. Recording: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ats0zN_gY4 Presentation slides:https://www.vafaw.org/_files/ugd/231617_f76db69528b0489facb1a880a25fb4fb.pdf

  15. Raj, A. B., Smith, C., & Hickman, G. (2008). Novel method for killing poultry in houses with dry foam created using nitrogen. The Veterinary record. 162(22), 722–723. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.162.22.722

  16. United Kingdom Animal Welfare Committee. (2024). Opinion on the Use of High Expansion Nitrogen Foam Delivery Systems for depopulation of poultry flocks affected by notifiable disease in the UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/awc-opinion-on-high-expansion-nitrogen-foam-for-culling-poultry/awc-opinion-on-the-use-of-high-expansion-nitrogen-foam-for-culling-poultry

  17. Raj, A. B. M., & Gregory, N. G. (1996). Welfare implications of the gas stunning of pigs 2. Stress of induction of anaesthesia. Animal Welfare (South Mimms, England), 5(1), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600018352

  18. AVMA. (2020). AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals: 2020 Edition. Schaumburg, IL: AVMA. https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/2020-02/Guidelines-on-Euthanasia-2020.pdf

  19. Australian Eggs. (2025). Validation of Modified Atmospheric Nitrogen Euthanasia (MANE) in Australian layers.

  20. AVMA. (n.d.). Veterinarian’s Oath. https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/avma-policies/veterinarians-oath

  21. Galles, Beth, "A Literature Review of the Psychosocial Impacts on Livestock Producers and Veterinary Responders Involved with Depopulation During and After an Animal Health Emergency" (2023). Capstone Experience. 263. https://digitalcommons.unmc.edu/coph_slce/263

 info@vafaw.org

VAFAW is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. (EIN 93-1583316)

candid-seal-platinum-2026.png

VAFAW holds the Platinum Seal of Transparency from Candid (formerly GuideStar), a leading nonprofit accountability and information source.

bottom of page