Livestock-related deaths in Great Britain (2010-2023)

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to describe the incidence, demographics, and context of livestock-related deaths 2010–2023. Study design A descriptive analysis of the Health and Safety Executive’s ‘Fatal injuries in agriculture, forestry and fishing in Great Britain’ annual reports. Methods Annual incidence of death was calculated. Demographic and contextual information were extracted, and data stratified by whether the victim was a farmer or member of the public. Statistical comparisons were made using Chi 2 tests, Fisher’s exact test, and Mann Witney U Tests, where appropriate. Results Out of 78 livestock-related fatalities, 97% were caused by domestic cattle and 74.3% were farmers. Median age of all fatalities was 67 (range:29-87), and 63.4% were alone at the point of injury. Farmers were predominantly male and tended to be working with individual animals, often in a contained space. All members of the public were killed in fields and 84.2% had a dog present with them. They were 250 times more likely to have a dog present than farmers (OR=250, p<0.001). A calf or per-parturient cow was more likely to be present when a member of the public was killed (OR=4.3, p<0.01). Conclusions Cattle-related incidents are a concern and further research is required to enable the development and implementation of effective safety interventions. We recommend that a database of livestock-related injuries is created, measures are introduced so farmers can easily temporarily divert public rights of way, and educational programmes for farmers and the public are developed.
Full text 2,988 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 4 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to describe the incidence, demographics, and context of livestock-related deaths 2010–2023. Study design A descriptive analysis of the Health and Safety Executive’s ‘Fatal injuries in agriculture, forestry and fishing in Great Britain’ annual reports.

Methods

Annual incidence of death was calculated. Demographic and contextual information were extracted, and data stratified by whether the victim was a farmer or member of the public. Statistical comparisons were made using Chi2 tests, Fisher’s exact test, and Mann Witney U Tests, where appropriate.

Results

Out of 78 livestock-related fatalities, 97% were caused by domestic cattle and 74.3% were farmers. Median age of all fatalities was 67 (range:29-87), and 63.4% were alone at the point of injury. Farmers were predominantly male and tended to be working with individual animals, often in a contained space. All members of the public were killed in fields and 84.2% had a dog present with them. They were 250 times more likely to have a dog present than farmers (OR=250, p<0.001). A calf or per-parturient cow was more likely to be present when a member of the public was killed (OR=4.3, p<0.01).

Conclusions

Cattle-related incidents are a concern and further research is required to enable the development and implementation of effective safety interventions. We recommend that a database of livestock-related injuries is created, measures are introduced so farmers can easily temporarily divert public rights of way, and educational programmes for farmers and the public are developed. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Funding Statement This study did not receive any funding Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Data Availability All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-26T02:00:01.498150+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0