2012ANIMAL HEALTH IN AUSTRALIA

© Animal Health Australia 2013

Preferred citationAnimal Health Australia (2013). Animal health in Australia 2012, Canberra, Australia.

AcknowledgmentsThe Animal health in Australia 2012 report draws together information provided primarily by the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, and state and territory government agencies. Animal Health Australia maintains responsibility for production of the report for the Australian Chief Veterinary Officer as part of the National Animal Health Information System (NAHIS).

Animal Health Australia would like to acknowledge the efforts of all contributors to this report, including the NAHIS Editorial Panel. Appreciation is also extended to the national and state coordinators for NAHIS, and the organisations and individuals who contributed photos for the report.

DisclaimerThis publication is published by Animal Health Australia for information purposes only. Information contained in it is drawn from a variety of sources external to Animal Health Australia. Although reasonable care was taken in its preparation, Animal Health Australia does not guarantee or warrant the accuracy, reliability, completeness or currency of the information, or its usefulness in achieving any purpose.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, Animal Health Australia will not be liable for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred in or arising by reason of any person relying on the information in this publication. Persons should accordingly make and rely on their own assessments and enquiries to verify the accuracy of the information provided.

Copyright and trademarks

Use of materials and informationThis publication is protected by copyright. Information or material from this publication may be reproduced in unaltered form for personal, noncommercial use. All other rights are reserved. Information or material from this publication may be used for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review permitted under the Copyright Act 1968.

Any reproduction permitted in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 must acknowledge Animal Health Australia as the source of any selected passage, extract, diagram or other information. Any reproduction must also include a copy of the original copyright and disclaimer notice as set out here.

Commercial and other useNo part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or commercialised in any form without prior written approval from Animal Health Australia. The contents of this publication may not be used to sell a product or service for commercial reasons such as advertising.

TrademarksAny trademarks or logos contained in this publication may not be used without the prior written permission of Animal Health Australia.

ISBN 978 1 921958 14 4

Technical editing by Biotext, Canberra Designed and typeset by Typeyard Design & Advertising Printed by Paragon Printers Australasia Produced by Animal Health Australia Cover photograph: Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

FeedbackComments and suggestions regarding the Animal health in Australia 2012 report are welcomed. Please forward all correspondence to the Manager, Corporate Communications, Animal Health Australia, via email at aha@animalhealthaustralia.com.au.

ForewordThis is the sixteenth annual report on the status of animal health in Australia. It is a comprehensive summary of Australia’s animal health system, providing insights into ongoing programs, nationally significant terrestrial and aquatic animal diseases, and new initiatives during 2012.

This year has been interesting on multiple fronts.

Reflecting the national interest in animal welfare and a sustainable live animal export industry, the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) changed in structure during the year. A Live Animal Exports Division was formed, and the Animal Welfare Branch was incorporated into the Biosecurity Animal Division.

The continuous improvement of animal welfare domestically and overseas is a national priority. Throughout 2012, DAFF improved controls over the live export of slaughter and feeder livestock. This culminated in the implementation of the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS) — the newly created regulatory framework for all slaughter and feeder livestock exports. Exporters must supply evidence of an acceptable ESCAS before they can be issued with an approval to export. All ESCAS submissions require evidence of compliance with internationally agreed welfare standards. They must demonstrate control and traceability through the supply chain, meet reporting and accountability requirements, and include independent auditing.

Australia continued to focus on preparedness for an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD). One of the many activities in this area was an innovative, on-the-ground approach to training in FMD detection. Tailored training was delivered by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in FMD-affected countries. Trainees included veterinarians, such as private practitioners, and people from a range of livestock sectors across Australia who work with large numbers of FMD-susceptible animals. The first five-day training course was run in Nepal in November. It involved identifying, ageing and sampling FMD lesions, and performing outbreak investigation activities on buffalo, goats and cattle. The overall aim of the overseas training is to improve Australia’s early detection and response capability. Approximately 80 Australians are expected to be trained through this program.

Significant work has also been conducted on our National General Surveillance Program, and will underpin the future planning on general surveillance. Three pillars of work have been completed to improve Australia’s ability to anticipate and respond to an emergency animal disease incursion:

• The Animal Health Committee (AHC) General Surveillance Epidemiology Working Group developed a general

surveillance assessment tool to measure our surveillance capability to detect FMD.

• The AHC FMD Resources Working Group determined the human resource requirements for a medium-sized FMD outbreak.

• Australia’s current capacity to provide a first-response capability was assessed.

I commend the many stakeholders who contributed to the revised Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan (AUSVETPLAN) Disease Strategy for FMD. Governments, industries and other interested stakeholders worked together cooperatively to achieve agreement on the revised national FMD contingency plan. The revised plan received high-level approval from the Standing Council on Primary Industries (composed of all Australian, state, territory and New Zealand ministers responsible for primary industries matters). This approval does not mean that Australia will become complacent; the AUSVETPLAN manuals are maintained on a continuous improvement cycle.

This year, a number of Australian jurisdictions dealt with emergency animal disease incidents. These included highly pathogenic avian influenza, Hendra virus, influenza A and bovine Johne’s disease. Such incidents highlight the continued importance of good on-farm and personal biosecurity practices.

A change in directorship of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory (CSIRO-AAHL) was heralded in late 2012. Dr Kurt Zuelke will take over CSIRO-AAHL, following the retirement of Professor Martyn Jeggo in January 2013. I wish Professor Jeggo every success for the future and welcome Dr Zuelke. Dr Zuelke has extensive research, management and policy experience gained throughout his career working in the fields of veterinary sciences, biotechnologies, and livestock and wildlife diseases.

At the 80th General Session of the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), Paris, four Australians, including myself, were included on key OIE groups. I joined the Council of the OIE, which manages the business of the OIE on behalf of its member countries between General Sessions; Ingo Ernst (DAFF) joined the Aquatic Animal Health Standards Commission; Peter Daniels (CSIRO-AAHL) joined the Biological Standards Commission; and Peter Thornber (DAFF) joined the OIE’s Animal Welfare Working Group. Australia is an active member of the OIE, and these positions give Australia an opportunity to have greater involvement in and contribution to the OIE processes.

Lastly, one significant global issue I wish to mention is antimicrobial resistance (AMR) — a theme that was selected for World Veterinary Day (28 April 2012). I am participating

iii

on the AMR Standing Committee (AMRSC), which reports to the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee of the Australian Health Ministers Advisory Council. AMRSC has been newly formed to develop and support an integrative, national approach to minimising AMR in Australia. A key outcome of AMRSC will be to recommend actions on national priorities for AMR. Australia’s animal health component is playing its part in combating AMR, through a responsible approach towards the use of antibiotics of importance to human medicine in production animals.

I commend this report to you.

Mark Schipp Australian Chief Veterinary Officer

iv Animal health in Australia 2012

Contents

Foreword iii

Overview 1

1 Organisation of the animal health system 7

1.1 Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

1.2 National biosecurity reforms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

1.3 Service delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

1.4 Livestock industry quality assurance programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

2 Terrestrial animal health 29

2.1 Nationally notifiable animal diseases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

2.2 International reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

2.3 National reporting system for animal diseases in Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

2.4 Endemic diseases of national significance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

2.4.1 American foulbrood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

2.4.2 Anthrax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

2.4.3 Caprine arthritis–encephalitis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

2.4.4 Cattle tick and tick fever . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

2.4.5 Equine herpesvirus 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

2.4.6 European foulbrood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

2.4.7 Infectious bovine rhinotracheitis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

2.4.8 Johne’s disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

2.4.9 Newcastle disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

2.4.10 Ovine brucellosis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

2.4.11 Ovine footrot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

2.4.12 Small hive beetle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

2.4.13 Swine brucellosis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

2.4.14 West Nile Virus (change in Australia’s status) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

3 Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 47

3.1 Towards a national general surveillance program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

3.2 Surveillance programs managed by Animal Health Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

3.3 Surveillance programs managed by state and territory governments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

3.4 Programs and activities managed by the Australian Wildlife Health Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

3.5 Programs and activities managed by other organisations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

3.6 Participation by private veterinarians in disease surveillance and management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

3.7 Surveillance programs in northern Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

3.8 Public health surveillance for zoonotic diseases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

4 Managing animal health emergencies 71

4.1 Response plans and coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

4.2 Preparedness initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

4.3 Increasing awareness and understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

4.4 Biosecurity planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

4.5 Preparedness against specific diseases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

4.6 Emergency animal disease responses in 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

v

5 Aquatic animal health 85

5.1 Status of aquatic animal health in Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

5.2 Aquatic animal disease emergency preparedness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

5.3 Disease events in 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

5.4 Research and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

5.5 Regional aquatic animal health initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

6 Imports and exports 95

6.1 Imports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

6.2 Exports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

6.3 International standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

7 Consumer protection 107

7.1 Regulations and standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

7.2 Protective measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

7.3 Inspection and monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

8 Animal welfare 113

8.1 Jurisdictional updates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

8.2 Animal Welfare Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

8.3 Standards and guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

8.4 Australian Animal Welfare Strategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

8.5 Livestock exports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

8.6 International animal welfare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

9 Regional animal health initiatives 129

9.1 Pre-border surveillance and capacity building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

9.2 Overseas aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

9.3 International animal health research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

10 Research and development 135

10.1 CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory and Biosecurity Flagship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

10.2 Biosecurity Animal Division of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry . . . . 136

10.3 Cooperative research centres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

10.4 University research programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

10.5 Research and development corporations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

Appendix 1 Livestock industries in Australia 147

Appendix 2 Animal health contacts in Australia 155

Appendix 3 Investigations of emergency animal diseases 159

Appendix 4 Research projects in livestock health 169

Appendix 5 Key Australian animal health websites 197

Acronyms and abbreviations 200

Glossary 202

Index 204

vi Animal health in Australia 2012

Table 1.1 Veterinarians and other animal health personnel in Australia, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Table 1.2 Members of Animal Health Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Table 2.1 Australia’s status for OIE-listed diseases of terrestrial animals, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30Table 2.2 Australia’s status for other diseases of terrestrial animals that are reported to the OIE each year, 2012 . . . . . . . . 33

Table 2.3 Ovine brucellosis accredited-free flocks, at 31 December 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Table 3.1 Summary of results from the National Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Surveillance Program, 2011–12 . .55

Table 3.2 Summary of adult screw-worm fly trapping in 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Table 3.3 Samples examined for parasites of bees and pest bee species by state or territory, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Table 3.4 Samples examined for parasites of bees and pest bee species by agent, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Table 3.5 Serological tests for Brucella abortus in Australia, abortion serology, 2006–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Table 3.6 Serological tests for Brucella abortus in Australia, other serology, 2006–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Table 3.7 Incidence of selected zoonotic diseases in humans, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Table 4.1 Hendra virus incidents in Queensland, 2012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

Table 5.1 Australia’s status for OIE-listed diseases of aquatic animals, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Table 5.2 Australia’s status for other significant diseases of aquatic animals, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

Table 8.1 Performance measures of the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy National Implementation Plan 2010–14 122

Table A1.1 Australian livestock numbers (millions), 2008–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

Table A1.2 Volume of Australian meat exports (kilotonnes of shipped weight), 2008–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

Table A1.3 Australian sheep industry, 2009–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

Table A1.4 Australian beef cattle production, 2009–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Table A1.5 Australian dairy production, 2009–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

Table A1.6 Australian dairy production and exports, 2009–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

Table A1.7 Australian pig production, 2009–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

Table A1.8 Australian poultry production, 2009–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

Table A1.9 Australian fisheries production by species, 2009–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

Table A1.10 Australian aquaculture production, 2010–11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

Table A1.11 Australian seafood production and exports (kilotonnes), 2008–11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

Table A3.1 Investigations of suspect emergency animal diseases listed on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

Table A4.1 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory and Biosecurity Flagship animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

Table A4.2 Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

Table A4.3 Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . 172Table A4.4 Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

Table A4.5 Poultry Cooperative Research Centre animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173Table A4.6 Charles Sturt University — School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences animal health research projects . . . . . . 174

Table A4.7 Murdoch University — School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences animal health research projects. . . . . . 176

Table A4.8 University of Adelaide — School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences animal health research projects . . . . . . 176Table A4.9 University of Melbourne — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Table A4.10 University of Queensland — School of Veterinary Science animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180

Table A4.11 University of Sydney — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

Table A4.12 Australian Egg Corporation Limited animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

Table A4.13 Australian Wool Innovation Limited animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187Table A4.14 Dairy Australia animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

Table A4.15 Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram) animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

Table A4.16 Meat & Livestock Australia animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192

Table A4.17 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation animal health research projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Tables

vii

Figures

Figure 1.1 Structure of animal health and welfare management committees and organisations in Australia . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 2.1 Sources of data in the National Animal Health Information System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Figure 3.1 Areas where six exotic diseases are mostly likely to occur should they enter Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Figure 3.2 Areas where outbreaks of two endemic diseases are most likely to occur. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Figure 3.3 Location of NAMP monitoring sites in Australia, 2011–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Figure 3.4 Distribution of bluetongue virus in Australia, 2009–10 to 2011–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Figure 3.5 Distribution of Akabane virus in Australia, 2009–10 to 2011–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Figure 3.6 Distribution of bovine ephemeral fever virus in Australia, 2009–10 to 2011–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Figure 3.7 Number of investigations reported by species and financial year under the National Significant Disease Investigation Program, July 2009 to June 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Figure 3.8 Number of investigations reported by syndrome and species under the National Significant Disease Investigation Program, July 2011 to June 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Figure 3.9 Location of Australian Veterinary Practitioner Surveillance Network practitioners by livestock production region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Figure 3.10 Reason for veterinarian visits across beef cattle, dairy cattle, and performance and pleasure horses . . . . . . . . 64

Figure 3.11 Reason for farm visits by region, 2011–12 financial year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Figure 4.1 Approximate locations of Hendra virus incidents, 2012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Figure 5.1 Distribution of OIE-listed aquatic animal diseases in Australia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Figure A1.1 Sheep distribution by state and territory, 30 June 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

Figure A1.2 Beef cattle distribution by state and territory, 30 June 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

viii Animal health in Australia 2012

OverviewAustralia’s animal health system — comprising all the organisations, government agencies, livestock industries, research institutions, laboratories and individuals that are involved in the livestock production chain — maintains the high standard of animal health in Australia.

This report describes Australia’s animal health system and current status of animal health. Significant events in 2012 are also described, and these are summarised below.

Organisation of the animal health systemChapter 1 describes the roles of government and nongovernment participants in the national animal health system, as well as the consultative mechanisms that link them. Animal Health Australia is a major coordinating body for national animal health programs in Australia, and the Australian Wildlife Health Network provides a link between livestock health and the health of wild and feral animals.

The Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) is implementing reforms to Australia’s biosecurity system so that it continues to be modern, responsive and targeted in a changing global trading environment. The reform program is substantial, and changes are achieved incrementally.

Livestock export is a key area for policy and regulatory reform for DAFF. Although new regulatory processes have been developed and rolled out, implementation and ongoing policy development are still in progress. A priority for DAFF is to give effect to the balance of the Farmer review1 recommendations. To facilitate this, DAFF established a new Live Animal Exports Division on 31 October 2012.

In February 2012, a new Animal Welfare Branch was established within the Biosecurity Animal Division. This branch works with government, industry and community stakeholders to lead, coordinate and implement Australian Government policies and programs on animal welfare for portfolio industries.

Terrestrial animal healthChapter 2 provides information about Australia’s reporting system for animal diseases, the National Animal Health Information System (NAHIS); Australia’s status for all nationally significant terrestrial animal diseases; the distribution and occurrence of endemic diseases of national significance in terrestrial animals in Australia during 2012; and the control programs that are in place for endemic diseases of national significance.

1 Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 2011, Independent review of Australia’s livestock export trade, (Farmer review), DAFF, Canberra. www.livestockexportreview.gov.au

From July 2012, a revised National Bovine Johne’s Disease Strategic Plan was implemented, building on the success of the previous plan. Under the revised eight-year plan, Australian governments and the livestock grazing industries reaffirmed their commitment to protect the north and west of the country — and the beef and alpaca sectors — from bovine Johne’s disease, while allowing dairy and goat producers greater control over how they manage the infection in their herds.

The Newcastle Disease Management Plan (2008–12) aims to minimise the risk of Newcastle disease outbreaks due to viruses of Australian origin by strategically applying vaccination together with surveillance and poultry industry biosecurity plans. A successor management plan has been drafted for the period 2013–16. The goal remains to have a vaccination program that mitigates the risk of an Australian-origin outbreak of Newcastle disease.

Notifications of significance in 2012:

• In New South Wales, from December 2011 to November 2012, 102 beekeepers had an officially recorded outbreak of American foulbrood, with 456 hives infected. Special apiary compliance operations were conducted.

• Four anthrax incidents occurred in New South Wales. These incidents were found in the anthrax endemic area, and were managed according to NSW Department of Primary Industries policy.

• Abortion due to equine herpesvirus 1 occurred on five thoroughbred studs in the Hunter Valley, New South Wales. Equine herpesvirus 1 abortions are generally sporadic, but outbreaks do occur.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Overview 1

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoringThis chapter describes government and nongovernment programs that contribute to disease surveillance and monitoring capability at a national level. The programs are managed by Animal Health Australia, the Australian Wildlife Health Network, and the Australian, state and territory governments.

The General Surveillance Epidemiology Working Group, established by the Animal Health Committee, has developed a general surveillance assessment tool (GSAT) and used it for foot-and-mouth-disease (FMD). For the first time, estimates have been made of the time that would elapse before jurisdictions could be confident that an outbreak of FMD would be reported, and the size of the outbreak at the time that it was reported. A workshop was held for industry and jurisdictional representatives to be trained in the use of the GSAT, in preparation for its use to assess the current surveillance effort within jurisdictional areas of interest.

In January 2012, the National Bee Pest Surveillance Program was transferred from Animal Health Australia, which managed the National Sentinel Hive Program, to Plant Health Australia. This followed the transfer of responsibility for bees from the Office of the Australian Chief Veterinary Officer to the Biosecurity Plant Division of DAFF Biosecurity. These transfers have not significantly changed the national implementation of the program, which is delivered through the expertise of state and territory apiary officers.

In 2012, 796 wildlife disease investigations were added to the national database of the Australian Wildlife Health Network. Around one-fifth of these were bats submitted for exclusion testing for Australian bat lyssavirus. Wild bird mortalities accounted for more than 50% of investigations and, where appropriate, diagnostic tests included exclusion of avian influenza, avian paramyxovirus and West Nile virus. No wild bird mortality events were attributed to avian influenza or West Nile virus.

Managing animal health emergenciesChapter 4 describes arrangements that are in place for Australia to prepare for and respond to emergency animal diseases, including planning, training and communication. The chapter also describes emergency animal disease responses during 2012.

Australia continued to focus on preparedness for an outbreak of FMD:

• A national FMD vaccination policy was endorsed by all state and territory ministers at the Standing Council on Primary Industries meeting in April 2012; vaccination can

now be considered as a potential control tool from the first day of an emergency response to FMD. This change in national policy is reflected in the updated Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan (AUSVETPLAN) Disease strategy: foot-and-mouth disease.2

• A risk analysis identified FMD risk regions in Australia, based on risk factors across the biosecurity continuum. Highly complex disease epidemiological modelling, Australian livestock population demographics, and data on trade and movement of livestock and livestock products were integrated into a risk analysis. The risk analysis is now being used as a key input towards FMD surveillance, awareness and preparedness activities in the FMD risk regions.

• Through collaboration with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), DAFF developed an initiative that provides real-time training in FMD-endemic countries for approximately 80 Australian veterinarians and livestock handlers. The training aims to improve awareness of the signs of FMD and increase the likelihood of early detection of an outbreak in Australia.

• Australia is now also better placed to anticipate potential FMD risks and to translate warning intelligence into action. An agreement between DAFF and the FAO will provide the Australian Chief Veterinary Officer with global intelligence reports that are tailored to Australia’s biosecurity intelligence priorities.

With the assistance of a working group comprising governments, industry and Plant Health Australia, Animal Health Australia completed the second five-year review of the Government and Livestock Industry Cost Sharing Deed in Respect of Emergency Animal Disease Responses (Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement — EADRA).3 The review showed that parties to the EADRA were highly satisfied with the agreement.

Stage 1 of a consultancy for an authoring system for AUSVETPLAN4 was completed in 2012. The new system will allow manuals to be revised more efficiently, and will also allow those involved in outbreaks to download or print documents that are tailored to their particular operational needs.

Trial work on a Hendra virus vaccine continued during 2012 at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Australian Animal Health Laboratory in Geelong, Victoria, in partnership with Pfizer Animal Health

2 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/FMD-19-FINAL29Oct12.pdf

3 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/emergency-animal-disease-preparedness/ead-response-agreement

4 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/emergency-animal-disease-preparedness/ausvetplan

2 Animal health in Australia 2012

Australia. In August 2012, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) issued a minor use (trial) permit to allow the sale and use of the Hendra virus vaccine under strict conditions. On 1 November 2012, the Equivac® HeV vaccine became commercially available for use in horses under the APVMA’s conditions.

In 2012, Exercise Phantom Fox, a functional exercise based on a simulated bluetongue outbreak in South Australia, tested the emergency readiness of the Rapid Response Team and jurisdictional staff.

Aquatic animal healthChapter 5 provides details of the status in Australia of aquatic animal diseases of national significance, and the system for responding to and preparing for aquatic animal disease events. There were a number of highlights in 2012:

• The Aquatic Animal Health Training Scheme is being reviewed and may be continued. In 2012, it funded participation in specialist university courses on aquatic animal health, and sponsored a visit by an expert in fish virology.

• An Aquatic Animal Biosecurity Emergency Response Arrangements workshop was held during the year. It built on the extensive work by industry and government towards developing standardised arrangements to prepare for, and respond to, significant disease or biosecurity emergencies in the aquatic environment. All five aquatic animal industry sectors participated: aquaculture, commercial fishing/wild fish populations, recreational fishing, Indigenous fishing and ornamental fish.

• Exercise Sea Fox 2012 was conducted by Primary Industries and Regions South Australia, and the South Australian Research and Development Institute. The exercise aimed to educate industry and government response staff on issues to consider and responsibilities during a response to an aquatic emergency animal disease outbreak in South Australia.

• The fourth edition of Aquatic animal diseases significant to Australia: identification field guide was published on the DAFF website.5

No significant disease events occurred in Australia in 2012 that required involvement of the Aquatic Consultative Committee on Emergency Animal Diseases. Ongoing management of two diseases previously reported (infection with abalone herpesvirus and Pacific oyster mortality syndrome) has led to their containment within the current known distribution and reduced their potential impact on industries.

5 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/aquatic-animal-diseases-significant-to-australia-identification-field-guide-4th-edition

Imports and exports DAFF helps maintain Australia’s animal health status by managing pest and disease threats from imports. The department also provides technical input for the export of live animals and agricultural produce. Chapter 6 describes these activities.

On 7 July 2011, DAFF implemented a new regulatory framework — the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS) — for exports of feeder and slaughter livestock to Indonesia. On 21 October 2011, the Australian Government announced that it would extend the framework to all its feeder and slaughter livestock markets by the end of 2012.

The framework was phased in gradually: 75% of trade was covered by 1 March 2012, 99% was covered by 1 September 2012, and all markets were covered by the end of 2012. From 1 January 2013, Australian exporters are required to have an ESCAS in place for feeder and slaughter livestock exports to all markets before they are granted approval to export.

The aim of the ESCAS framework is to minimise adverse animal welfare incidents for Australian livestock. When such incidents occur, the framework provides a process to investigate and take regulatory action against the Australian exporter, where appropriate, in a manner that minimises disruption to trade and improves animal welfare.

The livestock export reforms that have been implemented seek to protect the welfare of Australian exported livestock and to provide long-term stability for the industry, as well as for the jobs, families and communities that rely on the industry.

Other significant developments in 2012:

• On 4 July 2012, DAFF commenced consultation on draft biosecurity legislation to replace the century-old Quarantine Act 1908. A Bill to replace the Quarantine Act 1908 was introduced into the Australian Parliament in November 2012.

• In November 2012, the Animal Biosecurity Branch proposed changes to the management of disease risks associated with imported ornamental fish, placing greater emphasis on managing the biosecurity risks offshore, at the source.

• The Animal Biosecurity Branch released three draft policy reviews to stakeholders in 2012 on the importation of zoo perissodactyls (equine species, tapirs and rhinoceroses), the importation of queen honey bees, and the importation of dogs and cats and their semen. In addition, a policy review of epizootic rabbit enteropathy for the importation of commercial rabbits was finalised.

Overview 3

Consumer protection Activities to ensure that locally produced foods are safe for consumers are described in Chapter 7. Protective measures involve surveillance for communicable diseases and foodborne disease; monitoring for residues of agricultural and veterinary chemicals, and other contaminants; and inspection of meat. DAFF also inspects and certifies meat, dairy products, seafood and eggs for export.

Australia plays a strong leadership role in the development of international science-based food standards through the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) and its subsidiary bodies. In 2012, Codex continued developing draft Guidelines for control of specific zoonotic parasites in meat: Trichinella spiralis and Cysticercus bovis. Australia has actively participated in the development of these guidelines to ensure that a risk-based approach is applied to the risks posed to food safety by T  spiralis and C  bovis.

Country-of-origin labelling is currently required for all packaged food and unpackaged fresh or processed fruit, vegetables, seafood and pork sold in Australia. Following a decision at the December 2012 meeting of the Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation, mandatory country-of-origin labelling will also apply to all unpackaged beef, sheep and chicken meat from 18 July 2013.

In April 2012, the Australian Health Ministers Advisory Council endorsed the establishment of a new subcommittee — the Antimicrobial Resistance Standing Committee.6 The committee aims to support an integrative approach to the national strategy on minimising antimicrobial resistance in Australia.

Animal welfareThe Australian Animal Welfare Strategy (AAWS) — developed jointly by the Australian Government, state and territory governments, industry bodies and community organisations — provides a national framework to improve animal welfare outcomes. Chapter 8 reports on Australia’s animal welfare activities, including those under the AAWS.

In March 2012, the Primary Industries Standing Committee agreed to establish a new high-level Animal Welfare Committee (AWC).7 The committee focuses on animal welfare issues that support improved economic, social and environmental outcomes that are long term and sustainable. AWC membership comprises representatives from DAFF, each state and territory government, and the New Zealand Government. In addition, the Sub-Committee on Animal Welfare supports the AWC’s work.

6 www.safetyandquality.gov.au/our-work/healthcare-associated-infection/antimicrobial-resistance-subcommittee

7 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/animal/committees/ahc/awwg

During 2012, the AWC:

• finalised the revised Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines — land transport of livestock8

• established a taskforce that developed animal welfare standards for domestic abattoirs

• continued to progress the development of the cattle and sheep standards and guidelines for delivery to the Standing Council on Primary Industries by April 2013.

Regional animal health initiativesAustralia assists countries in the Asia–Pacific region and Africa to improve their livestock health through aid (delivered through AusAID — the Australian Agency for International Development) and research (delivered through ACIAR — the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research). Chapter 9 describes Australia’s three main areas of activity in terrestrial animal health in these regions:

• Pre-border surveillance and capacity building — Australia assists its near neighbours, including Papua New Guinea and Timor-Leste, with field surveillance and monitoring for significant animal diseases. These activities strengthen the limited surveillance capacity of these countries, provide training, identify new or re-emerging risks, and strengthen partnerships within the region.

• Overseas aid — Australian aid programs help people overcome poverty. This also serves Australia’s national interests, by promoting stability and prosperity both in the region and beyond. Helping neighbouring countries to detect and contain infectious disease threats at their source also protects Australia’s own national biosecurity. During 2012, Australia has been heavily involved in the Australia–Indonesia Partnership for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Animal Health, 2010–14 project, which focuses on strengthening the Indonesian animal health systems to meet the challenges presented by emerging infectious diseases.

• International animal health research — Australia funds international animal health research through several agencies, including ACIAR and AusAID. ACIAR’s Animal Health program supports research organisations in Australia and partner countries to use multidisciplinary approaches to solve problems in animal production and health. The program focuses on Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos and Papua New Guinea, but has increasing emphasis on Myanmar and Africa, as well as on regional cooperation in the South East Asia and China Foot and Mouth Disease campaign countries.

8 www.animalwelfarestandards.net.au/land-transport

4 Animal health in Australia 2012

Research and development Chapter 10 summarises Australian research in livestock health during 2012, and Appendix 4 lists some of the research projects. Research relating to livestock health is conducted by the CSIRO, cooperative research centres, university veterinary science faculties or schools, and industry-based research and development corporations.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Overview 5

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

6 Animal health in Australia 2012

1 Organisation of the animal health system

Effective national surveillance and control of animal diseases in Australia requires cooperative partnerships among the government agencies, industry, organisations, commercial companies and individuals who are involved in the animal industries.

This introductory chapter describes the organisation of Australia’s animal health system, including the roles of government and nongovernment organisations.

The Australian Government advises on and coordinates animal health policy at a national level. It is responsible for international animal health matters, including quarantine, export certification, trade, and disease reporting to the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). Under the Australian constitution, the individual state and territory governments are responsible for animal health matters within their boundaries. Such matters include disease surveillance and control, chemical residues in animal products, livestock identification and traceability, and animal welfare.

Australian governments have a close association with livestock industries. This allows consultation between government and industry to determine national animal health priorities. The livestock industries participate in policy development, support targeted animal health activities and contribute to emergency responses. Australia’s livestock industries are described in Appendix 1.

Australia’s animal health system includes all organisations, government agencies, commercial companies, universities and individuals who are involved in the livestock production chain. The Australian Wildlife Health Network complements livestock health activities by investigating, and managing reporting on, the health of wild native and feral animals.

Table 1.1 shows the numbers and categories of veterinarians and other animal health personnel in Australia.

Chapter

Organisation of the animal health system 7

Animal Health Australia (AHA) is a not-for-profit public company established in 1996 by the Australian Government, state and territory governments, and major national livestock industry organisations (current membership is shown in Table 1.2). AHA coordinates and manages more than 40 national projects to improve animal and human health, biosecurity, livestock welfare, productivity, market access, and food safety and quality.

1.1 Governance

1.1.1 Australian Government committeesConsultative committees ensure that all components of the animal health system (described below and in Figure 1.1) work together to serve the interests of Australia. AHA links these components by providing information, networks, programs and training to its members.

Primary industries committeesThe Standing Council on Primary Industries (SCoPI),9 previously called the Primary Industries Ministerial Council, is the peak forum to:

• pursue and monitor priority issues of national significance affecting Australia’s primary production sectors that require a sustained and collaborative effort across jurisdictions

• address key areas of shared responsibility between the Australian Government and state and territory governments, and funding for Australia’s primary production sectors.

SCoPI comprises the Australian national, state and territory, and New Zealand ministers who are responsible for primary industries matters. The council develops and implements policies and strategies for agreed national approaches to biosecurity, food security, and productivity and sustainability of primary industries (including the fisheries and forestry

9 www.mincos.gov.au

industries). It encourages greater collaboration and promotes continuous improvement in the investment of Australia’s research and development resources.

SCoPI is supported by a permanent committee, the Primary Industries Standing Committee (PISC). This committee comprises the heads of the Australian national, state and territory, and New Zealand agencies that are responsible for policy and technical issues that fall within the ambit of SCoPI.

Expert advisory committees develop and provide advice to PISC and SCoPI on a wide range of issues. The advisory committees that relate to animal health are:

• the National Biosecurity Committee (NBC),10 which advises and supports PISC on all animal, plant, marine and environmental biosecurity issues. The NBC provides strategic leadership, across jurisdictions and sectors, to develop national approaches and policies for emerging and ongoing biosecurity issues

• the Animal Welfare Committee (AWC), which advises and supports PISC on national animal welfare policy issues. The AWC focuses on issues that support improved long-term and sustainable economic, social and environmental outcomes, informed by community expectations. Examples include nationally consistent animal welfare standards and guidelines for sheep and cattle. The AWC has also established a taskforce to develop animal welfare standards for domestic abattoirs.

For more information about SCoPI, PISC and its advisory committees, visit the SCoPI website.11

10 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pihc

11 www.mincos.gov.au

Table 1 1 Veterinarians and other animal health personnel in Australia, 2012

Registered veterinarians Auxiliary personnel

Government 666 Stock inspectors, meat inspectors, etc. 1129

Laboratories, universities, etc. 781

Private practitioners 9 037

Other veterinarians 497

Total 10 981 Total 1129

8 Animal health in Australia 2012

Animal Health CommitteeThe Animal Health Committee (AHC)12 provides the Australian Government with scientific, strategic and nationally coordinated policy advice on animal biosecurity matters through the NBC, PISC and SCoPI. The AHC leads the development and implementation of government policy, programs, operational strategies and standards in the areas of national animal health, domestic quarantine and veterinary public health.

AHC membership comprises the national, state and territory chief veterinary officers and representatives from:

• the Australian Animal Health Laboratory of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO-AAHL)

• DAFF Biosecurity in the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF)

• AHA

12 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/animal/committees/ahc

• the Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

• the Ministry for Primary Industries, New Zealand.

The AHC is advised by three subcommittees:

• the Sub-Committee on Aquatic Animal Health (SCAAH)

• the Sub-Committee on Animal Health Laboratory Standards (SCAHLS)

• the Sub-Committee on Emergency Animal Diseases (SCEAD).

Specialist ad hoc working groups advise the AHC on technical or policy issues, as required.

The AHC consults with the animal industries through their membership of AHA and industry participation in AHC meetings. Aquatic animal industries consult through the National Aquatic Animal Health Industry Reference Group and the Australian Fisheries Managers Forum. Those with an interest in zoo, wild or feral animals are consulted through the Australian Wildlife Health Network.

Table 1 2 Members of Animal Health Australia

Government Organisation

The Australian Government Industry

Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Australian Alpaca Association Ltd

State and territory governments Australian Chicken Meat Federation Inc

Australian Capital Territory Australian Dairy Farmers Ltd

Northern Territory Australian Duck Meat Association Inc

State of New South Wales Australian Egg Corporation Ltd

State of Queensland Australian Honey Bee Industry Council Inc

State of South Australia Australian Horse Industry Council

State of Tasmania Australian Lot Feeders’ Association Inc

State of Victoria Australian Pork Ltd

State of Western Australia Australian Racing Board Ltd

Cattle Council of Australia Inc

Equestrian Australia Ltd

Goat Industry Council of Australia Inc

Harness Racing Australia Inc

Sheepmeat Council of Australia Inc

WoolProducers Australia Ltd

Service providers Associate members

Australian Veterinary Association Ltd Australian Livestock Export Corporation Ltd (LiveCorp)

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory

Council of Veterinary Deans of Australia and New Zealand

Dairy Australia Ltd

National Aquaculture Council Inc

Zoo and Aquarium Association Inc

Organisation of the animal health system 9

Sub-Committee on Aquatic Animal HealthSCAAH provides high-level scientific and technical advice to the AHC to support development of policy and programs on national aquatic animal health affecting the capture and recreational fishing industries, the aquaculture industries and the ornamental fish industry. SCAAH comprises representatives from the Australian, state and Northern Territory governments; the New Zealand Government; CSIRO-AAHL; and Australian universities. Other aquatic animal health experts from both government and nongovernment agencies — including specialists from academia, industry and the private sector — may also be invited to participate.

Sub-Committee on Animal Health Laboratory Standards SCAHLS is the national network for animal and public health laboratories in Australia and New Zealand that are managed by governments, the private sector, universities and industry. SCAHLS establishes, implements and monitors professional and technical standards by dealing with quality assurance, skills, and the development and validation of new tests in these laboratories. This includes providing laboratory policy support to the AHC, maintaining the Australian National

Standing Council on Primary Industries

Primary Industries Standing Committee

National Biosecurity Committee

Other animal health committees (e.g. Vertebrate Pest

Committee)

Animal Health Committee

Animal Welfare Committee SAFEMEAT

Animal Health Australia

Sub-Comittee on Animal Welfare

Ad hoc working groups as required

Sub-Committee on Aquatic Animal

Health

Sub-Committee on Emergency Animal

Diseases

Sub-Committee on Animal Health

Laboratory Standards

Laboratories for Emergency Animal

Disease Diagnosis and Response network

Ad hoc working groups as required

Ad hoc working groups as required

Ad hoc working groups as required

Government committee structure

Reporting Consulting

Government–industry animal organisations

Figure 1 1 Structure of animal health and welfare management committees and organisations in Australia

10 Animal health in Australia 2012

Quality Assurance Program,13 and producing Australian and New Zealand standard diagnostic procedures (ANZSDPs).14 The subcommittee also monitors and facilitates preparedness for exotic and other emergency diseases through the Laboratories for Emergency Animal Disease Diagnosis and Response (LEADDR) network, which ensures a nationally coordinated approach. Section 1.3.4 and Chapter 4 provide more information on the LEADDR network.

Sub-Committee on Emergency Animal DiseasesSCEAD maintains communications between agencies that manage responses to emergency animal diseases (EADs). The subcommittee is responsible for addressing operational aspects of EAD prevention and preparedness. SCEAD has representation from the Australian Government, the governments of each state and the Northern Territory, the LEADDR network and AHA (as an observer). The committee is chaired by a member of the AHC. Among other responsibilities, SCEAD develops nationally agreed standard operating procedures (NASOPs) for use by states and territories in the response to EAD incidents and emergencies (see Section 4.1.4).

1.1.2 Government–industry committees and organisations

Consultative Committee on Emergency Animal DiseasesThe Consultative Committee on Emergency Animal Diseases (CCEAD)15 is convened when an EAD outbreak occurs. The CCEAD comprises AHC members and technical representatives from relevant industries. Further information about the CCEAD’s membership and role is in Chapter 4.

Aquatic Consultative Committee on Emergency Animal DiseasesChapter 5 provides information on the Aquatic CCEAD.

Animal Health Australia — ‘Working together for animal health’AHA is the coordinating body for national animal health programs in Australia. With a national focus on animal health and welfare issues, the company facilitates sustainable partnerships between members. It also provides leadership in securing outcomes that support Australia’s position as a world leader in animal health and animal health services.

13 www.anqap.com

14 www.scahls.org.au/procedures

15 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/animal/committees/ccead

AHA’s 32 members comprise the Australian Government, the state and territory governments, livestock industry organisations and service providers; a number of other organisations are associate members. The current membership is shown in Table 1.2, and contact details for these organisations are provided in Appendix 2.

AHA has a strong track record in delivering significant outcomes for its members and is recognised as an important contributor to improving animal health in Australia. The company’s roles are to:

• improve Australia’s animal health policy and practice by building capacity for EAD preparedness

• ensure that Australia’s livestock health systems support productivity, competitive advantages and preferred market access

• ensure that animal health programs help to protect human health, the environment and recreational activities

• manage nationally agreed animal health programs.

One of AHA’s strengths is its comprehensive consultative approach, based on consensus, to identifying priorities and resolving issues. The company has established a number of formal and informal consultative mechanisms involving all members or groups of members, depending on the scope of the particular issues to be addressed. The Industry Forum provides a unique opportunity for AHA industry members to discuss industry-related concerns. An industry consensus can then be brought to the members’ forum for broader consideration by all members of the company.

Specific national projects and programs are also strongly based on a collaborative approach, leading to consensus and successful outcomes. Consultations can involve a specific company or be more broadly focused. Stakeholders other than members are also extensively involved in various projects. By working across a complex network of stakeholders, AHA delivers results that benefit the national animal health system as a whole.

For more information about AHA, visit the website.16

16 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au

Organisation of the animal health system 11

SAFEMEATSAFEMEAT17 is a partnership between the peak meat industry bodies,18 the Australian Government, and the state and territory governments. Reporting to PISC, SAFEMEAT oversees and promotes sound management systems to deliver safe and hygienic products to the marketplace. Initiatives developed by SAFEMEAT include:

• targeted residue-monitoring programs — the National Residue Survey conducts testing on behalf of the red meat industries

• the National Livestock Identification System (NLIS) — developed for cattle, sheep, goats and pigs, with a similar system under development for alpacas

• a system of National Vendor Declarations (NVDs) about the health of cattle, sheep, goats and pigs that are being traded

• strategies for animal disease issues affecting food safety, including the implications of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

Major activities during 2012 included:

• obtaining agreement from manufacturers of veterinary drugs on policy for placing export slaughter intervals on product labels

• developing management plans for metal shot in livestock

• further developing the rules applying to the mob-based system for the NLIS (Sheep and Goats); see below.

The NLIS is Australia’s system for livestock identification and traceability. When fully implemented for a type of livestock, such as sheep, it should be a permanent, whole-of-life system that allows animals to be identified — individually or by mob — and tracked from property of birth to slaughter, for the purposes of food safety, product integrity and market access. Australia’s state and territory governments are responsible for the legislation that governs animal movements, and therefore for NLIS implementation. All jurisdictions carry out compliance monitoring checks throughout the livestock supply chain to ensure that those consigning, receiving and slaughtering stock are complying with NLIS requirements.

Information on animal movements is recorded on movement documents and submitted to the NLIS database by producers, saleyard operators, livestock agents and processors. NLIS Limited administers the NLIS database

17 www.safemeat.com.au

18 Australian Livestock & Property Agents Association, Australian Livestock Exporters Council Ltd, Meat & Livestock Australia, Sheepmeat Council of Australia, WoolProducers Australia, Cattle Council of Australia, Australian Lot Feeders’ Association, Australian Meat Industry Council, Australian Dairy Farmers Ltd, Australian Pork Ltd, Livestock Saleyards Association of Australia, Saleyard Operators of Australia and Animal Health Australia

on behalf of industry and government stakeholders. This includes managing the development and operation of the database in accordance with stakeholder requirements.

In 2011, SAFEMEAT instigated a comprehensive review of various programs, including the NLIS, NVDs and Livestock Production Assurance (see Section 1.4.1). A working group was formed to consider recommendations aimed at achieving a fully auditable and responsive whole-of-chain risk-management biosecurity system that maintains market access, food safety and product integrity (including traceability and animal welfare). The final report of the working group was distributed to stakeholders in November 2012, with the intention of preparing recommendations for consideration by government and industry in early 2013.

NLIS for cattleNLIS (Cattle) is an electronic identification system in which each animal is tagged with an individual radio frequency identification device, and accompanied by movement documentation when moved from a property. Animal movements from properties are recorded electronically in the NLIS database. Legislation in all states and territories requires animals to be identified and their movement recorded. The system also enables the residue and disease status of animals to be identified.

NLIS for sheep and goatsNLIS (Sheep and Goats) is a mob-based system for tracing mobs of sheep and farmed goats. It uses visually readable ear tags labelled with Property Identification Codes. When mobs are transported, they are accompanied by a movement document, such as an NVD or a waybill.

SAFEMEAT participated in a review of NLIS (Sheep and Goats) by an independent consultant. The review was commissioned by PISC to identify ways in which the current mob-based system could be improved to enable compliance with the National Livestock Traceability Performance Standards. The NLIS (Sheep and Goats) Management Committee identified strategies for improving the current system or moving to an electronic system. The strategies were then forwarded to PISC.

NLIS for pigsThe pig industry is continuing to develop NLIS (Pork). Currently, NLIS (Pork) is a mob-based system based on tattoos and brands to identify the property of birth, along with movement documents. In November 2012, SAFEMEAT partners considered draft business rules for NLIS (Pork) to develop an implementation program for reporting pig movements to the PigPass and NLIS databases, and for meat

12 Animal health in Australia 2012

processors to notify these databases of slaughter details. These requirements are to be introduced progressively, from the first half of 2013.

NLIS for alpacasThe NLIS (Alpaca) tracing system is under development. The alpaca industry is advocating the use of radio frequency identification tags that incorporate both radio frequency and visual readability. The system is currently voluntary.

1.2 National biosecurity reformsDAFF is implementing reforms to Australia’s biosecurity system so that it continues to be modern, responsive and targeted in a changing global trading environment. The reform program is substantial, and changes are achieved incrementally. Funding is considered on an ongoing basis as part of the usual budget processes.

Australia’s biosecurity system has been reviewed several times. Recommendations for improvements to its operation started with the Nairn review in 1995. The 2008 Beale review

was an independent review of Australia’s quarantine and biosecurity arrangements, which produced the report One biosecurity: a working partnership. The Beale review found that Australia’s biosecurity system operated well, but could be improved. It proposed significant reforms to strengthen the system, by:

• revising legislation

• targeting resources to the areas of greatest return, from a risk-management perspective

• sharing responsibility between government, businesses and the community

• improving transparency, timeliness and operations across the biosecurity continuum — offshore, at the border and onshore.

Biosecurity risk is growing. Some reasons for this include changing global demands, growing passenger and trade volumes, increasing imports from a growing number of countries, population expansion and climate change. International trading partners are also increasingly demanding greater levels of assurance about Australia’s exports.

The current reforms position DAFF to meet this increasing demand and to ensure that the biosecurity system is effective and sustainable. The reform program is consistent with the themes outlined in the Beale review, and is informed by previous reviews and stakeholder needs. It is underpinned by five key principles:

• implementing a risk-based approach to biosecurity management

• managing biosecurity risk across the continuum

• strengthening partnerships with stakeholders

• being intelligence led and evidence based

• being supported by modern legislation, technology, funding and business systems.

The reformed biosecurity system will benefit industry, government, the environment and international trading partners, with positive flow-through effects to the economy more generally. This will occur through improved trade, streamlined business processes, improved productivity, and reduced regulatory burden in a seamless, lower cost business environment. The system emphasises risk-based decision making, the use of intelligence, a single point of regulatory contact and robust partnerships.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Organisation of the animal health system 13

1.3 Service delivery

1.3.1 Australian Government animal health services

Under the Australian constitution, the Australian Government is responsible for quarantine and international animal health matters, including disease reporting, export certification and trade negotiation. It also coordinates and provides advice on national policy on animal health and welfare. In some circumstances, it provides financial assistance for national animal disease-control programs. The Australian Government’s activities in animal health and welfare are delivered by DAFF.

The Australian Government is Australia’s largest single employer of veterinarians, providing an important reserve for the state and territory governments in the event of a major EAD outbreak.

DAFF’s quarantine and biosecurity functions, including animal health, work together in the Biosecurity Animal Division to deliver effective, risk-based services across the biosecurity continuum. As discussed in Section 1.2, this structure reflects a national approach to biosecurity and welfare, simplifies domestic and international communications, and improves responsiveness.

Livestock export is a key area for policy and regulatory reform for DAFF. Although new regulatory processes have been developed and rolled out, implementation and ongoing policy development are still in progress. A priority for DAFF is to give effect to the balance of the Farmer review19 recommendations. To facilitate this, DAFF established a new Live Animal Exports Division on 31 October 2012.

In 2012, DAFF Biosecurity had the following divisions and branches responsible for animal health and welfare:

• Office of the Australian Chief Veterinary Officer

– Foot-and-mouth Disease Taskforce

• Biosecurity Animal Division

– Animal Health Policy Branch

– Animal Welfare Branch

– Animal Biosecurity Branch

– Animal Import Operations Branch

– Biological Import Operations and Marine Pests Branch

19 Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 2011, The independent review of Australia’s livestock export trade, (Farmer review), DAFF, Canberra. www.liveexports.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/2030380/independent-review-of-australias-livestock-export-trade.pdf

• Live Animal Exports Division

– Animal Export Operations Branch

– Animal Export Reform Branch.

Office of the Australian Chief Veterinary OfficerThe Office of the Chief Veterinary Officer20 provides national leadership and direction on priority policy issues relating to animal health and welfare in Australia. As the international reference point on animal health, it coordinates animal health intelligence gathering, Australia’s commitments to the OIE, and communication with other international agencies involved with animal health and welfare.

Foot-and-mouth Disease TaskforceEstablished on 1 December 2011, the Foot-and-mouth Disease (FMD) Taskforce leads the delivery of DAFF’s responsibilities under the Australian Government’s response to the Matthews report.21

The taskforce works collaboratively with many agencies and industry groups to ensure a unified approach to common goals. Its roles are to:

• provide national leadership and DAFF contributions to whole-of-government and collaborative efforts

• meet the department’s responsibilities under the NBC National FMD Action Plan

• deliver a dedicated program consistent with DAFF’s core business responsibilities to safeguard Australia’s animal health status and protect Australia from the impact of exotic animal diseases. This includes activities aimed at raising awareness and increasing the likelihood of early detection, developing policy and preparatory logistical arrangements for the emergency deployment of an FMD vaccination campaign, and building Australia’s response resource capacity.

Biosecurity Animal Division

Animal Health Policy BranchThe Animal Health Policy Branch represents DAFF on national animal health policies and programs. The branch coordinates:

• national animal surveillance and laboratory strategies

• livestock disease prevention and preparedness activities

• EAD planning, training and awareness programs.

Through its ‘One Health’ Program, the Animal Health Policy Branch supports animal and human health, biodiversity and

20 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/animal

21 Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 2012, A review of Australia’s preparedness for the threat of foot-and-mouth disease. www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/animal/fmd/review-foot-and-mouth-disease

14 Animal health in Australia 2012

trade by collaborating with human health authorities and managing programs in wildlife health and veterinary public health. The Aquatic Animal Health Program also sits within this branch, and it’s responsibilities are described in Section 1.3.4.

The branch contributes to the ongoing development of national standards through the National Johne’s Disease Control Program. Key components of this program are the National Standard Definitions, Rules and Guidelines for zoning; interzone movement controls; and official disease-control programs in the respective states. The branch also contributed to the Standard definitions and rules for eradication of enzootic bovine leucosis in dairy cattle, and development of the document to declare freedom from enzootic bovine leucosis in the Australian dairy herd.

The Animal Health Policy Branch also has a role in international standards development. The branch provided comments to the OIE for the chapter on bluetongue and epizootic haemorrhagic disease in the OIE Manual of diagnostic tests and vaccines for terrestrial animals.22

The branch also provides technical, executive and administrative support to national animal health committees, and their working groups and programs.

Animal Welfare BranchIn February 2012, a new Animal Welfare Branch was established within the Biosecurity Animal Division. This branch works with government, industry and community stakeholders to lead, coordinate and implement Australian Government policies and programs on animal welfare for portfolio industries. Responsibilities include delivering administered funding programs, coordinating the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy, providing advocacy and leadership for international animal welfare policy, and supporting the implementation of the Regional Animal Welfare Strategy for Asia, the Far East and Oceania. In collaboration with states and territories, and industry and animal welfare groups, the Animal Welfare Branch participates in the development of nationally consistent animal welfare standards and guidelines. (See also Section 1.3.2.)

Animal Biosecurity BranchThe Animal Biosecurity Branch develops biosecurity policy. It also provides technical and scientific advice for the safe importation of animals and animal products (including aquatic animals and their products) using science-based risk analysis. The branch provides scientific and technical

22 World Organisation for Animal Health 2009, Terrestrial manual, Chapter 2.1.3, Bluetongue and epizootic haemorrhagic disease. www.oie.int/fileadmin/Home/eng/Health_standards/tahm/2.01.03_BLUETONGUE.pdf

support to gain, maintain and improve access for the export of Australian animals and their genetic material. Animal Biosecurity Branch also contributes to the development and maintenance of international animal health standards.

Animal Import Operations BranchThe Animal Import Operations Branch manages the importation of live animals and animal reproductive material to minimise the risk of exotic animal pests and diseases entering Australia. The branch provides import inspection and clearance for live animals and animal reproductive material, and manages the government-operated, post-entry animal quarantine stations. It is one of several DAFF branches that deliver biosecurity field services and manage biosecurity controls at Australia’s border.

Biological Import Operations and Marine Pests BranchThe Biological Import Operations and Marine Pests Branch helps to maintain Australia’s favourable status for animal diseases and marine pests by establishing and implementing import conditions for biological products, and overseeing national measures to prevent and manage marine pest incursions.

The branch is divided into two programs that reflect its major functions: the Biological Imports Program and the Invasive Marine Species Program.

The Biological Imports Program manages the biosecurity risks of imported biological products by assessing and granting import permits, advising clients and regulatory staff, and auditing and verifying systems and producers that import biological products into Australia. Imported products that may require a permit include skins and hides, veterinary and human therapeutic products, veterinary vaccines, laboratory materials, soil and water samples, pet foods, stockfeed supplements, and foods containing animal products (such as fish, seafood, egg, dairy and meat).

The Invasive Marine Species Program is currently developing Australia’s biofouling management requirements, as well as managing the Australian Government’s marine pest responsibilities. The program also coordinates national emergency responses to marine pest incursions detected in Australian waters.

Live Animal Exports DivisionThe Animal Export Operations Branch and the Animal Export Reform Branch have moved from the Biosecurity Animal Division to create the new Live Animal Exports Division. The Livestock Export Reform Program of the Animal Welfare Branch has also been included in the new division.

Organisation of the animal health system 15

Animal Export Operations BranchThe Animal Export Operations Branch manages the Australian Government’s legislative responsibilities to allow the export of live animals and animal genetic material from Australia. The branch provides export inspection and certification for live animals and animal reproductive material that meet importing country requirements.

The branch contributes to market access assurance for live animals and animal genetic material, and is also responsible for ongoing regulation of the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS).23

Animal Export Reform BranchThe Animal Export Reform Branch implements the Australian Government’s regulatory framework for the export of feeder and slaughter livestock under ESCAS. The branch develops operational policy and detailed business processes to put the regulatory framework into practice, assists with the development of legislative amendments, and liaises with licensed exporters and industry peak bodies to enable practical implementation of ESCAS. It also assesses initial ESCAS applications, oversees compliance management and reporting, and provides technical and operational advice. The Animal Export Reform Branch engages with a wide range of internal and external stakeholders.

1.3.2 Australian Government animal welfare programs

The Animal Welfare Branch of DAFF works to improve animal welfare outcomes nationally and internationally to meet, at a minimum, international standards: taking into consideration market and community expectations.

Through collaborative relationships with governments, industry and community stakeholders, the branch:

• develops animal welfare policy

• implements recommendations of the Farmer review associated with standards for livestock export, including livestock export inspection processes

• encourages nationally consistent approaches to animal welfare by assisting with the development of standards and guidelines

• supports adoption of OIE animal welfare guidelines

• seeks to improve understanding and communication of best-practice animal welfare through the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy.

23 www.daff.gov.au/aqis/export/live-animals/livestock/escas

The Animal Welfare Branch coordinates the implementation of the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy and management of the Australian Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, and administers $1 million of government funding to deliver sustainable improvements in the welfare of all Australian animals. The branch also provides leadership and support for the implementation of the Regional Animal Welfare Strategy for Asia, the Far East and Oceania. Other international activities include regular dialogue on animal welfare with international organisations (OIE, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), key trading partners (Canada, New Zealand, the United States and the European Union) and nongovernment organisations.

More information about animal welfare in Australia and the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy is in Chapter 8.

1.3.3 Other Australian Government services and programs

Animal health outcomes are supported by a number of other DAFF programs. Responsibility for food safety and product integrity fall within the Food Division, which has the following branches:

• Export Standards

• Food Exports

• Residues, Dairy, Fish and Eggs.

The Trade and Market Access Division of DAFF also provides policy and strategic support for DAFF’s international activities.

1.3.4 Other national animal health services and programs

Australian Wildlife Health NetworkThe Australian Wildlife Health Network (AWHN) is a not-for-profit organisation initiated by the Australian Government, with funding from DAFF. It is managed by DAFF’s ‘One Health’ Program. AWHN was established to promote and facilitate collaborative links in the investigation and management of wildlife health, to support human and animal health, biodiversity and trade. The network actively encourages collaboration between organisations.

The AWHN has a major focus on human and animal health issues associated with free-ranging populations of wild animals, but also works closely with environment agencies, zoos and wildlife parks. Its activities are underpinned by ‘One Health’ principles, through actively fostering interdisciplinary work on wild animal health issues.

The AWHN manages a network of more than 500 wildlife health professionals and carers around Australia.

16 Animal health in Australia 2012

These include individual subscribers and institutional representatives from national, state and territory departments of conservation, agriculture and human health; universities; zoos; hunting groups; wildlife and other industries; diagnostic pathology services; private practitioners; and wildlife carers. The Chair of the AWHN is Australia’s OIE Wildlife Focal Point.

The AWHN coordinates national wildlife health surveillance, wildlife health expertise and resources, and research needs and priorities. It collates national data on wild fauna mass mortalities, and manages specific datasets, such as those from avian influenza surveillance in wild birds and Australian bat lyssavirus monitoring. The network also monitors for new and emerging diseases in wildlife, particularly those that could affect humans and production animals.

Activities of the AWHN include:

• managing Australia’s national database of wildlife health information

• organising and providing national communication about wildlife disease and emerging incidents

• participating in the development of regional and national strategies for wildlife health emergency preparedness and response

• facilitating and monitoring field investigations of disease incidents

• advancing education and training in wildlife health

• publishing fact sheets about wildlife and its role in diseases of national importance

• providing information about wildlife health to the community.

Animal health laboratoriesAustralia’s animal health laboratories provide diagnostic and research services for endemic and exotic animal diseases, including transboundary animal diseases and emerging zoonoses (diseases of animals that can be transmitted to humans). The Australian Government, state and territory governments, CSIRO-AAHL, veterinary schools and the private laboratory sector maintain a network of world-class animal health laboratories.24 Laboratory services, policies and standards relevant to EADs are coordinated nationally through SCAHLS.25 SCAHLS also provides advice on issues relevant to the national animal health reference laboratories.

For professional development and scientific exchanges between laboratory staff, SCAHLS supports the activities of the Australian Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians. Development and adoption of new diagnostic tests for EADs is facilitated nationally through

24 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/animal/system/lab-network

25 www.scahls.org.au

evaluation by SCAHLS of new tests, and a comprehensive series of Australian and New Zealand standard diagnostic procedures (ANZSDPs). The ANZSDPs reflect the relevant international standards prescribed by the OIE.26 National laboratory preparedness for, and response to, EAD incursions is primarily led by the LEADDR network, which is overseen by SCAHLS (see Chapter 4).

CSIRO-AAHL27 is Australia’s national animal health laboratory and an OIE reference laboratory for a number of transboundary animal diseases. It develops and improves diagnostic technologies, and provides diagnostic services, exotic and emergency disease support, and independent scientific advice. The high-level biocontainment facility within CSIRO-AAHL is vital to maintaining Australia’s capability to quickly and securely diagnose EADs that may threaten Australia’s livestock, wildlife or people. CSIRO-AAHL also plays a key role in transferring testing capabilities for major EADs to the LEADDR network laboratories and, if appropriate, other laboratories under controlled quality assurance conditions.

The state and territory government laboratories specialise in services for endemic diseases and are the primary providers of testing in support of animal exports. Some states have outsourced laboratory testing to the private sector, and this has led to a number of companies offering veterinary diagnostic services that are important to Australia’s EAD surveillance. Veterinary schools at universities also offer diagnostic services and related research in specialty areas and for teaching purposes.

All government and most private animal health laboratories in Australia are accredited to the ISO/IEC 17025:2005 standard (General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories),28 which is administered by the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) — a member of the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation. NATA accreditation is obligatory for laboratories that participate in official EAD testing.

Under the SCAHLS umbrella, the Australian National Quality Assurance Program (ANQAP)29 provides proficiency testing (PT) programs to determine the performance of individual laboratories in Australia. A series of ANZSDPs ensure that national standard testing procedures are used for specific EADs. ANQAP is an international PT provider and supports a range of PT programs for veterinary serology, virology and bacteriology on a fee-for-service basis. Most PT programs are used by laboratories that perform veterinary tests

26 www.scahls.org.au/procedures/anzsdps

27 www.csiro.au/en/Organisation-Structure/National-Facilities/Australian-Animal-Health-Laboratory.aspx

28 www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=39883

29 www.anqap.com

Organisation of the animal health system 17

associated with quarantine, export health certification and disease-control programs. More than 30 animal health laboratories in Australia, New Zealand, Asia, Europe, Africa and North America currently participate in ANQAP. CSIRO-AAHL and AHA, through its Australian Animal Pathology Standards Program, also collaborate with other laboratories in Australia and overseas to develop and implement specific PT programs for quality assurance.

Aquatic Animal Health ProgramThe Aquatic Animal Health Program (AAHP) of DAFF leads and coordinates the national management of aquatic animal health (finfish, crustaceans and molluscs). The AAHP supports the implementation of AQUAPLAN — Australia’s National Strategic Plan for Aquatic Animal Health. It provides technical, executive and administrative support to aquatic animal health committees and their working groups and programs. It also contributes to other areas within the Australian Government relating to aquatic animal health.

The AAHP coordinates domestic surveillance and reporting of aquatic animal diseases to support a comprehensive, consistent and informed approach to preparedness and response activities. The program also coordinates the national response to aquatic animal disease emergencies, based on the Australian Aquatic Veterinary Emergency Plan (AQUAVETPLAN). It is involved in developing EAD response mechanisms to protect Australia’s aquatic animal industries, including improvements and changes to AQUAVETPLAN.

The program manages Australia’s international reporting commitments to the OIE and other international agencies, and coordinates Australian input on draft standards developed by the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Standards Commission. It also engages in the Asia–Pacific region in aquatic animal health preparedness, response and related activities: particularly capacity building.

1.3.5 State and territory animal health servicesUnder the Australian constitution, state and territory governments are responsible for animal health services within their respective borders (jurisdictions). State and territory animal health services aim to protect the interests of livestock producers and the community by providing world-class biosecurity systems that benefit the economy, the environment and public wellbeing. This is achieved through a combination of legislation and service delivery. Although the mechanisms differ among jurisdictions, the AHC ensures a harmonised outcome by coordinating the jurisdictions’ approaches to national animal health issues.

The state and territory governments develop and administer legislation governing the surveillance, control, investigation and reporting of diseases, chemical residues and contaminants, and animal welfare. The jurisdictions deliver their services through government-appointed or government-accredited animal health personnel — district veterinarians, regional veterinary officers and local biosecurity officers — who are responsible for administering the relevant state and territory legislation. The work of these personnel includes:

• surveying, controlling, investigating and reporting on livestock diseases of interest, including EADs

• contributing to the control of specified endemic livestock diseases, in partnership with relevant livestock industries

• monitoring and ensuring compliance with animal identification systems and the supply of vendor declarations

• maintaining appropriate controls on the movement of livestock to ensure a high level of biosecurity

• investigating reports of chemical contamination in livestock products and implementing response plans to protect consumers from chemical residues

• contributing to producer awareness of best practice in local livestock management systems

• ensuring compliance with national and local agreed standards for livestock welfare

• monitoring the health of feral animals and native wildlife to detect the emergence of new or exotic diseases

• educating livestock producers, industry organisations and service providers (transport and marketing) on their legislative obligations; relevant biosecurity, welfare and market assurance programs; and technological developments.

18 Animal health in Australia 2012

Notifiable diseases Under state and territory legislation, jurisdictions proclaim certain diseases as ‘notifiable’. Animal owners and veterinarians have a legal requirement to report notifiable diseases to the government animal health authorities when such diseases are suspected or diagnosed.

Notifiable diseases for each state and territory are listed on the National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals30 (i.e. exotic, emergency and endemic diseases of national significance, and additional diseases of regional significance in that jurisdiction). Government-appointed veterinarians and biosecurity officers monitor notifiable diseases and implement regulatory control programs, where necessary. They are authorised, in defined circumstances, to inspect, quarantine, test, treat and destroy affected livestock as part of regulated disease response or control.

Over the past 50 years, the coordinated efforts of state and territory animal health services — often assisted by nationally coordinated arrangements — have eradicated many notifiable diseases. These include contagious bovine pleuropneumonia, bovine tuberculosis, bovine brucellosis, classical swine fever, equine influenza, highly pathogenic avian influenza and virulent Newcastle disease.

Chemical residues and contaminantsChemical residue programs aim to keep animal products free from unacceptable levels of agricultural and veterinary chemicals and other contaminants. Without these programs, animal products could contain a wide range of chemicals, including:

• pesticides from soil, pasture or stockfeed

• lead from discarded batteries

• veterinary drugs, such as anthelmintics, antibiotics and acaricides.

Legislated chemical-avoidance or contaminant-avoidance protocols and monitoring programs minimise the risk, and severe penalties apply to livestock owners who fail to comply.

Livestock identification and tracingState and territory animal health services enforce livestock identification and tracing legislation. All cattle, sheep and goat producers must identify their stock and record movements of cattle on and off their properties on the NLIS database. This provides lifetime traceability of each animal and the ability to identify all other stock that each identified animal has had contact with during its lifetime. Pig and alpaca producers are currently developing NLIS systems with

30 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/animal/notifiable

database recording. In addition, requirements for a Property Identification Code are being extended to all properties that hold horses, deer or commercial poultry.

Surveillance and other collaborative activitiesAs well as administering legislation, state and territory animal health personnel conduct general surveillance and applied research projects. Authorities constantly watch for the emergence of new infectious diseases, because early detection of disease facilitates control and eradication. This work requires close links with livestock producers, industry organisations, private veterinarians, veterinary laboratories, livestock transport and marketing agents, and other stakeholders.

State and territory animal health personnel provide disease diagnostic services — particularly for cases that are not routinely managed by private veterinarians — such as detailed investigations for exotic and emerging diseases, and postmortem examination of livestock. The field staff are supported by government or government-contracted veterinary diagnostic laboratories, which provide reports to government. Most of the advances in Australia in understanding and managing livestock diseases during the past 50 years have come from the partnership between government laboratories and field workers.

Data gathered during these activities are recorded in disease information databases, to maintain disease profiles of districts and individual properties. Information that is collected and analysed by the state and territory animal health systems is collated through the National Animal Health Information System. This information is used to support the issuance of health certificates for domestic and international trade, and to produce reports on Australia’s animal disease status for the OIE.

Collaboration with industry strengthens government animal health services and contributes to high-quality policy decisions. It also leads to joint industry–government programs for awareness and improvement of biosecurity and welfare. Such programs have been applied for ovine brucellosis, ovine footrot, Johne’s disease, caprine arthritis–encephalitis, feedlot management and poultry production systems. To promote government–industry partnerships, the jurisdictions train livestock industry staff to work in EAD control centres.

Protecting human health from diseases and pests of animals and animal products is a key role of state and territory animal health personnel. They work closely with their government public health counterparts in a joint approach to zoonoses such as chlamydophilosis, avian influenza and Hendra virus infection.

Organisation of the animal health system 19

In 2012, DAFF collaborated with state and territory governments and the livestock industry to deliver the following animal health and welfare objectives:

• The first vaccine to protect horses against Hendra virus was developed and registered, as a result of collaboration between CSIRO-AAHL, Pfizer Animal Health Australia and United States medical organisations. The Hendra vaccine is a critical step towards breaking the transmission cycle of this disease and reducing its impact on Australia’s horses and their owners.

• The General Surveillance Epidemiology Working Group — comprising representatives of the Australian Government and state and territory governments — developed the general surveillance assessment tool, which estimates the number of days from introduction to detection of an outbreak of FMD. Using this information, a series of workshops was held around Australia in mid-2012 with key industry stakeholders to develop options for improving Australia’s general surveillance (see Chapter 3).

• The FMD Resources Working Group was a collaborative project that estimated the resource requirements to respond to a medium-to-large outbreak of FMD in Australia. This enables Australian, state and territory governments to effectively plan for an FMD outbreak in Australia with optimal resources and disease-control strategies.

• Jurisdictions self-evaluated their current EAD response preparedness. DAFF, the AHC and AHA benchmarked survey results against the first-response capability requirements (the capability of a jurisdiction to respond as per the Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan to a single-focus FMD incident for one week without extra-jurisdictional assistance). This enables DAFF and AHA to identify areas in which additional training would improve the first-response team (see Chapter 4) capability of each jurisdiction. A three-year EAD training program is now being developed by DAFF and AHA to meet identified needs, beginning with a national EAD planning workshop in February 2013.

• The CCEAD, jurisdictional animal health personnel and industry collaboratively responded to and controlled a number of EAD outbreaks around Australia in 2012 (see Chapter 4). The effective control and eradication of these outbreaks illustrates the strength of a collaborative national approach to EAD responses in maintaining Australia’s favourable animal health status.

1.3.6 Private veterinary services and veterinary education

Private veterinary practitioners play a vital role in rural communities, by providing livestock owners with animal health advice and by investigating and treating disease. They also play an integral role in programs for detecting and responding to disease incidents in Australia’s livestock industries.

Veterinary practitioners must be registered in the state or territory in which they practise. Competence in recognising and diagnosing livestock diseases is an important part of veterinary education in Australia, and a prerequisite for registration as a veterinarian. All veterinary practitioners must be able to recognise the possibility of an EAD and be familiar with the procedures to initiate an immediate response. To maintain this awareness, state and territory authorities conduct awareness programs on notifiable and exotic livestock diseases for private veterinarians: particularly those involved in livestock industries.

The national Accreditation Program for Australian Veterinarians31 is designed to integrate private veterinary practitioners into the national animal health system, thus supporting the international standing of Australia’s animal health capability. The program aims to accredit nongovernment veterinarians, who can use their skills and knowledge effectively to contribute to government and industry animal disease-control programs.

Other national programs that involve private veterinarians in the national animal health system are the Australian Veterinary Practitioner Surveillance Network (see Section 3.6.1), the Australian Veterinary Reserve (see Section 4.2.2) and the National Significant Disease Investigation Program (see Section 3.2.4).

Australia has seven veterinary schools. Six of these — at the University of Queensland, the University of Sydney, the University of Melbourne, Murdoch University, Charles Sturt University and James Cook University — are currently producing graduates. The University of Adelaide, which opened its School of Veterinary Science in 2008, will see

31 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/training-centre/accreditation-program-for-australian-veterinarians-apav

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

20 Animal health in Australia 2012

its first students graduate in 2013. All Australian veterinary courses include strong undergraduate programs in the health of horses, companion animals, farmed livestock and wildlife, as well as in biosecurity and public health. The veterinary schools also provide research, continuing education and postgraduate training relevant to Australia’s livestock industries.

Once every seven years, an accreditation committee conducts a site visit to each established Australian veterinary school and Massey University in New Zealand to audit against 12 standards, including curriculum, facilities, staffing and outcomes. Since 1999, this audit has been conducted by the Australasian Veterinary Boards Council (AVBC).32 AVBC accreditation is recognised in the United Kingdom, and most site visits include a representative from the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons on the team. In recent years, site teams from the United States accreditation system have joined AVBC visits to American Veterinary Medical Association–accredited schools at Massey, Murdoch and Sydney universities. In addition to visits, accredited schools must submit annual reports, which are assessed against the 12 standards for veterinary accreditation. The newly established veterinary schools have also welcomed AVBC teams to provide formative feedback during development of their courses.

As well as conducting accreditation, the AVBC advises on the standards for veterinary registration in Australia and New Zealand and on the registration of veterinary specialists. It also conducts skills assessment for veterinarians who wish to migrate to Australia and the National Veterinary Examination for overseas-qualified veterinarians.

1.3.7 Agricultural colleges and other registered training organisations

Agricultural colleges and other registered training organisations within the Australian vocational education and training sector provide training for veterinary nurses, animal technologists, farm managers and others involved in the care of animals. Students can participate in full-time training, mix part-time training with work, or begin their program while they are still at school. One of the hallmarks of the system is the active involvement of industry groups and employers in providing training opportunities and work experience. This training meets the requirements of national competency standards and vocational qualifications under the Australian Qualifications Framework. The standards are agreed by industry, professional organisations and each jurisdiction.

32 www.avbc.asn.au

In 2012, a suite of vocational qualifications in biosecurity emergency management at the levels of Certificate III, Certificate IV and diploma was nationally endorsed by the National Skills Standards Council. These will provide an alternative training and qualification pathway for people, including government employees and livestock producers, who engage in EAD preparedness and response activities.

1.4 Livestock industry quality assurance programs

The peak livestock industry associations contribute to national animal health policies and strategies, implement industry biosecurity plans, and promote sound animal health management practices to livestock producers. Quality assurance (QA) programs in the livestock industries are central to on-farm biosecurity and food-safety practices. Examples of livestock industry QA programs are detailed below.

1.4.1 Livestock Production Assurance for the red meat industry

The Australian red meat industry (cattle, sheep and goats) has developed and implemented integrity systems to verify and assure food safety and other quality attributes of livestock.

Livestock Production Assurance (LPA), which began on 1 March 2004, is an on-farm food-safety certification program for cattle, sheep and goats. It was developed by Meat & Livestock Australia, in conjunction with industry peak councils and stakeholders.

The LPA program (including LPA QA) is managed on behalf of the red meat industry by AUS-MEAT through the LPA Advisory Committee. This committee includes representatives from industry sectors, including cattle, sheep, goat and dairy producers, processors and livestock agents. The Australian Government participates through representation from DAFF Biosecurity.

A number of strategic initiatives were progressed in 2012, including introduction of a Commitment Declaration through which participants must reaffirm their understanding of LPA requirements each year. An improved and ongoing communications program was introduced at the same time.

The LPA on-farm food-safety guidelines underpin food-safety declarations on NVDs displaying the LPA logo. The LPA food-safety program (Level 1) standards follow hazard analysis and

Organisation of the animal health system 21

critical control points (HACCP)33 principles and comprise five elements:

• property risk assessment — ensures that livestock are not exposed to areas on a property that are contaminated with organochlorides or other persistent chemicals

• safe and responsible animal treatments — ensures that livestock intended for human consumption do not contain unacceptable chemical residues or physical hazards

• stock foods, fodder crops, grain and pasture treatments — ensures that livestock are not exposed to feeds containing unacceptable contamination, especially animal products or unacceptable chemical residues

• preparation for dispatch of livestock — ensures that livestock to be transported are fit for the journey and not unduly stressed, and that contamination is minimised during on-farm assembly and transport to the destination

• livestock transactions and movements — ensures that livestock movement can be traced, if necessary, and that the livestock are accompanied by information about any exposure to chemical residues.

Approximately 7000 on-farm audits were completed in the year ending 30 June 2012 as part of the random and targeted audit programs conducted on behalf of the National Residue Survey. To 31 October 2012, more than 29 000 audits were completed.

The LPA on-farm QA program (Level 2) incorporates the CATTLECARE and FLOCKCARE programs, and consists of three modules: Food Safety Management (LPA Level 1), Systems Management and Livestock Management. This industry-recognised QA program emphasises internal and external systems review.

Systems Management comprises:

• training

• internal auditing and document control

• quality records

• chemical inventory.

Livestock Management comprises:

• livestock husbandry and preparation

• livestock-handling facilities

• livestock transport

• animal welfare

• accredited livestock.

33 HACCP is a systematic preventive approach to food safety that addresses physical, chemical and biological hazards by prevention, rather than inspection of the finished product. HACCP is used in the food industry to identify potential food safety hazards, so that key actions, known as critical control points, can be taken to reduce or eliminate the risk of the hazards being realised.

1.4.2 National Feedlot Accreditation SchemeThe Australian feedlot industry was the first agriculturally based industry in Australia to embrace QA, and its National Feedlot Accreditation Scheme (NFAS) has been in place since 1995. This self-regulatory program, which has accredited approximately 600 feedlots, covers animal health and welfare, environmental conservation and product integrity. Third-party annual auditing of every accredited feedlot ensures that the scheme’s high standards are met.

The NFAS is managed by the Feedlot Industry Accreditation Committee, which comprises government and industry representatives from around Australia. The independence of the committee from the Australian Lot Feeders’ Association (ALFA) provides the scheme with important autonomy, while government representation on the committee ensures its integrity and credibility.

Relevant technical information on heat stress, biosecurity and disease issues is compiled by Meat & Livestock Australia, ALFA and AHA, and is used to develop and continually update standards and awareness materials, which are incorporated into the accreditation scheme. This ensures that feedlot managers operate in accordance with the requirements and expectations of consumers, markets, regulatory authorities and the wider community.

ALFA hosts an annual feedlot conference, which highlights research and best-management practices from Australia and around the world, and aims to improve knowledge, systems and awareness of animal health and welfare. ALFA also holds animal health and welfare workshops across Australia each year, with the participation of experienced feedlot veterinarians and animal nutritionists.

These well-attended workshops provide practical information for the day-to-day management of animal health and welfare on feedlots. Other promotional materials, including DVDs and fact sheets containing industry case studies, have been used to deliver information on heat stress, biosecurity and other matters.

In 2012, ALFA undertook a broad review of its animal welfare requirements, involving a thorough assessment of:

• animal welfare issues, practices and standards

• known knowledge and research gaps

• weaknesses and areas for improvement.

This process involved several workshops (involving lot feeders, veterinarians, university representatives and AHA representatives), as well as numerous ALFA committee meetings and teleconferences. As a result of the review, ALFA has developed amendments to the NFAS rules and standards, which take into account the recently finalised animal welfare

22 Animal health in Australia 2012

standards and guidelines for land transport of livestock (see Chapter 8). The National beef cattle feedlot environmental code of practice34 will also be incorporated.

Through such continual improvement, the NFAS is ensuring that the feedlot industry exceeds both legislative requirements and community expectations.

1.4.3 Dairy industry quality assurance programAustralia has comprehensive food standards, legislation and regulation that apply across the dairy production and processing chain, from farm to consumer, under the requirements of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (Standard 4.2.4: Primary production and processing standard for dairy products). The production and processing chain monitors compliance with food standards to ensure the integrity of the dairy supply chain.

The Australian dairy food-safety scheme has three elements:

• Dairy farms and dairy companies must have a food-safety program that is developed, validated and approved by the competent government authority to national and international standards.

• Individual programs must be verified under legislation from farm through to retail or export.

• Each business (farm or manufacturing company) is licensed, and compliance against the food-safety program is checked by audit.

Industry and government support programs underpin the scheme, and the partnership between industry and government is a critical factor in its success. The food-safety requirements of the dairy industry on-farm QA programs are complemented by recommended biosecurity elements to protect animal health and cover provisions of national disease-control programs, including for enzootic bovine leucosis and Johne’s disease.

The state dairy food-safety authorities license the operation of farm businesses. All on-farm dairy food-safety programs are HACCP based and cover the following core areas, which are relevant to both milk and meat production:

• physical, chemical and microbiological contaminants

• herd health programs (including safe and responsible animal treatments)

• dairy milking premises

• hygienic milking

• water supply and quality

• cleaning and sanitising

• identification of animals from birth

34 www.mla.com.au/News-and-resources/Publication-details?pubid=5940

• traceability systems for both farm inputs (including treatment of animal feeds and pasture) and farm outputs (milk, and animal or meat products)

• appropriate records to enable verification

• competence of personnel.

All dairy companies have product identification and traceability systems to follow raw materials and products from farm to consumer.

1.4.4 Australian Pork Industry Quality Assurance Program

The Australian Pork Industry Quality Assurance Program (APIQ✓®) is owned and administered by Australian Pork Limited on behalf of the Australian pork industry. As at 31 October 2012, APIQP✓® covered 87% of the Australian breeding herd and 586 pig farm enterprises.

APIQ✓® is an independently audited, on-farm QA system. It is based on managing farm risks by following good agricultural practices, using HACCP principles. To gain APIQ✓® certification, producers must meet standards in five key areas:

• management

• food safety

• animal welfare

• biosecurity

• traceability.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Organisation of the animal health system 23

All pig production systems, including free-range, outdoor-bred and indoor systems, are covered by APIQ✓®, which recognises two categories of producers: smallholders and large holders. The system provides producers in both categories with specific tools to assist them with record keeping, which is a requirement of the APIQP✓® standards. The smallholder category covers producers who own or manage 50 or fewer sows, or sell 1000 or fewer pigs annually. Traditionally, these producers have found it difficult to participate in QA.

All APIQ✓®-certified producers must have an annual on-site compliance audit conducted by a certified independent auditor and meet all the certification requirements. Auditors must be APIQ✓® registered and be accredited by the Registrar Accreditation Board and the Quality Society of Australasia (RABQSA). They must also have a minimum accreditation as a National Food Safety Auditor, Level 2, with APIQ✓® Scope (an examination to test knowledge of the pig industry), and have attended the APIQP✓® auditor training program. They must be a third party with no conflicting interests and must not audit the same piggery for more than three consecutive years. Each auditor’s skills and practices are assessed annually through an independent on-farm witness audit process. APIQ✓® auditors must renew their registration each year.

The APIQ✓®system and program are audited annually by an independent certifying body to ensure that their policies, processes and administration are robust, reliable and of a high standard.

The APIQ Panel, comprising independent experts, has been established to consider major or critical incidents involving producers and auditors, and determine courses of action, in accordance with APIQ✓® certification policies.

APIQ✓® also underpins the PigPass NVD, which includes sections relating to pig ownership and health status (withholding periods, export slaughter intervals and food safety). When the PigPass NVD is linked to a certified and audited on-farm QA program such as APIQ✓®, it meets the requirements of the state food authorities and DAFF Biosecurity under Australian standard Hygienic production and transportation of meat and meat products for human consumption (AS 4696:2007).

1.4.5 Egg Corp Assured, the national egg quality assurance program

On behalf of the egg industry, the Australian Egg Corporation Limited (AECL) maintains the EggCorp Assured (ECA) national QA program. The program is an integral part of the egg industry’s commitment as a signatory to the Government and Livestock Industry Cost Sharing Deed in Respect

of Emergency Animal Disease Responses (Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement) and to the industry’s corporate social responsibility. ECA provides standards for best practice in the egg industry relating to:

• animal health and welfare

• quarantine and biosecurity

• food safety

• egg labelling

• environmental management.

Launched in November 2004, the program is governed by certification rules, a registered trademark, a registration and licensing process, a suite of policies and procedures, and an independent, third-party auditing regime. Voluntary uptake of the program by industry has led to ECA registering 163 farms in 2012. The program covers more than 11.2 million laying hens: 67% of the national flock.

To ensure that ECA remains relevant and continues to improve, the program was reviewed in 2009. It has since been converted to a standard, drawing on the resources of a technical advisory committee of experts and industry representatives. The new egg standard will be launched to both the egg industry and customers in 2013; the current ECA program will be phased out at the same time.

AECL, the ECA trademark owner and program administrator, has licensed auditors who have RABQSA accreditation and have attended the ECA auditor training program. All auditor accreditations must be renewed each year. Prerequisites are that auditors complete at least four ECA audits and attend an egg-related auditor training workshop each year.

With the pending launch of the new egg standard in 2013, AECL has selected global auditing companies to manage the audit regime of the standard. Three such companies have been given exclusive auditing rights. AECL has appointed two senior auditors to review every audit and has implemented a program of spot audits of at least 20% of licensees each year. Other features of the ECA program are unique identification master logos for egg businesses with multiple farm sites, and an Egg Labelling Integrity Panel, which will approve label designs and critical market information to ensure market transparency.

A series of QA training workshops is held annually in all states and territories for egg producers, ECA-licensed farms and ECA-accredited auditors. The purpose of the workshops is to educate and inform attendees on how to incorporate any new components of the national QA program, from both a practical farm point of view and an auditor’s perspective. The program is continually being improved to maintain its relevance to a changing marketplace and improve its integrity.

24 Animal health in Australia 2012

1.4.6 Australian Chicken Meat Federation’s customer-driven quality systems

In 2010, the Australian Chicken Meat Federation produced and distributed a revised version of the National farm biosecurity manual for chicken growers.35 The revision was based on the original 2002 Biosecurity manual for contract growers and informed by the National farm biosecurity manual — poultry production, which was published in 2009 as a result of a joint effort between DAFF, AHA and the poultry industry. The revised manual has an auditable checklist.

All jurisdictions have agreed that implementation of the National farm biosecurity manual for chicken growers will satisfy the requirements for poultry farming in the new Primary Production and Processing Standard for Poultry Meat, issued by Food Standards Australia New Zealand. The new standard came into effect on 20 May 2012, and is expected to be incorporated into state and territory legislative frameworks during 2012–13.

An auditable industry animal welfare standard for all aspects of the chicken meat industry — including hatcheries, breeder farms and grow-out farms — was finalised in 2009. Processors are encouraged to integrate these industry standards into their in-house QA systems.

Implementation of these welfare standards and biosecurity measures relies heavily on the integrated nature of much of the chicken meat industry. Processors have contractual arrangements with growers, and are themselves bound by the requirements of customers: especially the quick-service restaurants and supermarket chains. The Chicken Meat Program of the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation is developing training tools, including DVDs, to help implement these measures.

1.4.7 Australian Duck Industry Quality Assurance Program

In May 2010, the Australian Duck Meat Association (ADMA) and AHA jointly produced the Farm biosecurity manual for the duck meat industry.36 This manual, which supersedes individual duck producers’ operation manuals, contains an auditable checklist, making it an important document for the Australian duck industry. The manual was produced to complement the requirements of the new Primary Production and Processing Standard for Poultry Meat (see Section 1.4.6).

35 www.farmbiosecurity.com.au/livestock/chickens/meat-chicken-production-biosecurity

36 www.farmbiosecurity.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Farm-Biosecurity-Manual-for-the-Duck-Meat-Industry.pdf

Previously, the duck industry’s on-farm biosecurity and QA measures were taken from the National farm biosecurity manual — poultry production. The new biosecurity manual is more suited to duck production and allows for better QA of duck meat and byproducts.

In 2009, the duck industry adopted the National water biosecurity manual — poultry production to ensure that water sanitation systems used on commercial duck farms meet national biosecurity standards.

The Model code of practice for the welfare of animals — domestic poultry (4th edition)37 outlines the welfare standards for the Australian poultry industry. The duck industry follows this code, and processors are encouraged to integrate these requirements into their in-house QA systems.

The ADMA has trained personnel to operate as industry liaison officers, and as members of the CCEAD and National Management Group, in the case of an EAD incident.

1.4.8 Q-AlpacaQ-Alpaca, designed and managed by the Australian Alpaca Association Ltd, is a QA program for voluntary use by Australian alpaca breeders and owners. Q-Alpaca is fully endorsed by all Australian Government and state and territory animal health authorities.

Q-Alpaca has a number of intentions:

• The program encourages development and adoption of easier, more affordable ways to diagnose, monitor and manage known diseases.

37 www.publish.csiro.au/Books/download.cfm?ID=3451

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Organisation of the animal health system 25

• The program reduces the risk of a defined EAD affecting a herd in the event of a disease outbreak.

• The health of participating alpaca herds is closely monitored. All deaths within the herd must be investigated by an approved veterinarian — this requirement relates to all dead alpacas 12 months of age and over, and all dead alpacas under 12 months of age that show signs of wasting and diarrhoea (resulting in Johne’s disease in the differential diagnosis). Necropsy is required to eliminate Johne’s disease, severe worm infestation, liver disease, gastric ulceration, liver fluke infestation and coccidiosis. The program allows other diseases to be investigated in the necropsy, if required.

• There is minimal chance of introducing certain preventable infections and infestations, or transferring them to another alpaca herd. Preventable conditions include Johne’s disease, severe worm infestation, liver disease, gastric ulceration, liver fluke infestation and coccidiosis.

• The program is fully auditable. Owners of participating alpaca herds are required to keep movement records, adopt sound biosecurity practices when new arrivals are added to the herd, and maintain appropriate and adequate fencing.

An agreement signed between the participant and the approved veterinarian forms the basis of a partnership for adhering to the requirements of Q-Alpaca and the adoption of best practice in biosecurity.

1.4.9 National honey bee industry B-Qual food-safety program

The B-Qual food-safety program is owned by the Australian Honey Bee Industry Council. The program is managed by the B-Qual Australia Pty Ltd Board and is administered by AUS-QUAL Pty Ltd. It is a voluntary program for beekeepers that ensures the honey bee industry’s standards meet best practice, and domestic and international market demands.

The honey industry recognises that quality and food-safety standards are required by customers, wholesalers and regulators. The industry must comply with the requirements of Food Standards Australia New Zealand — including the development of an HACCP-based food-safety program — to ensure that honey products meet international, national, and state and territory food-safety requirements.

The B-Qual standards encompass all facets of honey production and industry services, including honey production, queen bees, pollination and honey packing.

B-Qual is a cost-effective and easy-to-use program designed for apiarists and honey-processing businesses. Beekeepers

who wish to become certified first undergo training in HACCP principles and the B-Qual requirements. The nationally recognised training is provided by AUS-MEAT through its registered training organisation. Groups of beekeepers can attend face-to-face workshops, or complete a self-learning pack that is available for individuals.

Once a beekeeper has integrated the B-Qual requirements into their operation, the business is audited by an independent, RABQSA-registered, third-party auditor. Certification is provided by AUS-QUAL, which is a certification body accredited by the Joint Accreditation System of Australia and New Zealand. Beekeepers selling direct to the public undergo an annual audit. Those selling bulk honey to packers undergo an audit once every two years.

The B-Qual program provides comprehensive work instructions and record forms that must be maintained for each of the following areas:

• hive management (identification, location, movement and disease status)

• extraction (process, facilities and equipment)

• biosecurity

• hygiene (personal, machinery maintenance, sanitation, vermin control)

• purchases (inventory lists, stocktake activities)

• equipment calibration

• internal and external audit results

• staff training register

• occupational health and safety issues

• environmental management (soon to be released).

The B-Qual Board is committed to maintaining the integrity of the B-QUAL program and ensuring that it remains relevant and beneficial to the industry. During 2012, the board facilitated the development of an auditable Environmental Code of Practice, funded by the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection. This project is anticipated to enable the industry to demonstrate good environmental management practices and increase the professional standing of the beekeeping industry as a whole.

The final draft of the code of practice is being implemented by 10 Queensland beekeepers for a trial period of nine months. Feedback from the participating beekeepers will determine whether a further review of the code of practice is required before its final endorsement and release. The project is scheduled for completion at the end of May 2013.

26 Animal health in Australia 2012

1.4.10 Other quality assurance programs

FeedSafe® stockfeed industry quality assurance programThe Stock Feed Manufacturers’ Council of Australia (SFMCA) operates FeedSafe® as the QA accreditation program for the Australian stockfeed industry. FeedSafe® aims to increase the Australian stockfeed industry’s commitment to QA and risk mitigation in the manufacture and use of animal feeds. Through FeedSafe®, the SFMCA has recognised the need for a broader industry approach to feed and food safety and is providing greater security of supply to Australia’s livestock industries.

The central aspect of FeedSafe® is a Code of Good Manufacturing Practice. This document was developed in conjunction with the chief veterinary officers of each state and territory and has been endorsed by SCoPI. FeedSafe® requires feed manufacturers to meet minimum standards and undergo annual site audits by independent, third-party auditors. Feed manufacturers are required to implement HACCP as part of their FeedSafe® accreditation.

Australian Renderers Association rendering quality standards and accreditationAustralian standard Hygienic rendering of animal products (AS 5008) provides the framework for producing safe rendered products in Australia. First published in 2001 and revised in 2007, the standard is partly based on the Australian Renderers Association (ARA) Code of Practice for Hygienic Rendering of Animal Products. It prescribes minimum requirements for:

• implementing QA and HACCP principles

• hygienic construction of plants

• hygienic rendering operations, microbiological testing and validation of heat treatments

• product tracing

• labelling requirements consistent with state and territory legislation on labelling stockfeed with a restricted animal material statement.

Each state and territory requires rendering plants to abide by the standard. Compliance is verified by audits. These must be conducted by — or on behalf of — state and territory food authorities, or by independent auditors, who recommend accreditation of rendering plants according to an accreditation scheme managed by the ARA. The independent auditors report audit results to the ARA and DAFF. In some states and territories, the auditors also report results of audits, or compliance with product labelling requirements, to the relevant state or territory authorities.

PetFASTIn 2011, the Australian Veterinary Association and the Pet Food Industry Association of Australia developed a system for gathering and analysing information about suspected pet food–safety incidents, so that potential problems can be identified and action taken. The system — Pet Food Adverse Event System of Tracking (PetFAST)38 — became operational in early 2012.

Seafood Services Australia’s standards for the seafood industrySeafood Services Australia Ltd (SSA) is a not-for-profit company established in 2001 as a catalyst for the sustainable development of the Australian seafood industry.39 SSA’s founding members were the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation and the Australian Seafood Industry Council.

SSA has developed the core capacity, networks and alliances across industry and government to cost-effectively deliver outcomes crucial for the sustainability and viability of Australian seafood enterprises. SSA works closely with the seafood industry at the enterprise and organisational level to help it to continually improve industry practices and capitalise on opportunities that may not otherwise be realised.

SSA is accredited by the Accreditation Board for Standards Development Organisations to develop Australian standards for the seafood industry. In 2003, SSA revised the Australian seafood standard for the production of seafood that is safe and suitable for human consumption. The Australian seafood standard reflects the seafood industry’s commitment to providing seafood that is produced in accordance with internationally recognised standards, and meets the requirements of domestic and international customers and food-safety authorities.

Australian seafood is caught, farmed, processed and sold by a wide range of industry operations, which each consider public and consumer confidence in seafood safety to be of paramount importance. Many of the larger sectors have developed their own QA programs, based on HACCP principles, tailored to their own operations.

38 www.ava.com.au/petfast

39 www.seafood.net.au

Organisation of the animal health system 27

Joan Gates

28 Animal health in Australia 2012

2 Terrestrial animal health

Australia has a long history of freedom from the major epidemic diseases of livestock. The geographical isolation of the continent provides a natural quarantine barrier, which is supported by sound quarantine policies and a history of successful disease-eradication campaigns.

The spread of some endemic diseases in animals in Australia is limited by climate and the animal production enterprises present in a particular area. Tick fever, for example, occurs only in those parts of Australia where the climate is suitable for the tick vectors.

Control and eradication of animal diseases are managed by state and territory governments, often with the support of industry accreditation schemes. Chapter 1 describes the coordinating mechanisms that provide national consistency — for example, the Animal Health Committee. For some endemic diseases, such as Johne’s disease, government and industry have agreed that a nationally coordinated program is necessary to reduce the risk of disease spreading between regions and individual properties.

This chapter provides information about Australia’s reporting system for terrestrial animal diseases, Australia’s status for all nationally significant terrestrial animal diseases, and control programs for endemic diseases of national significance in terrestrial animals.

2.1 Nationally notifiable animal diseasesThe National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals facilitates disease reporting and control. It ensures that unusual incidents involving animal mortality or sickness, and diseases of public health significance, are investigated; it also requires reporting of diseases on the list. The list is regularly reviewed by the Animal Health Committee, and was last reviewed during 2010. It takes into account key diseases on the list of diseases that are notifiable to the World Organisation for Animal Health

Chapter

Terrestrial animal health 29

Table 2 1 Australia’s status for OIE-listed diseases of terrestrial animals, 2012 Disease Status Date of last occurrence and notesMultiple-species diseasesAnthrax Present Limited distribution

Aujeszky’s disease Free Never occurred

Bluetongue Viruses present Restricted to specific northern areas of Australia; sentinel herd and vector monitoring program

Brucellosis (Brucella abortus) Free Australia declared freedom in 1989

Brucellosis (B melitensis) Free

Brucellosis (B suis) Serological evidence Maintained in feral pigs in northern Australia; rare occurrence in domestic pigsa

Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever Free Never occurred

Echinococcosis/hydatidosis Present

Epizootic haemorrhagic disease Virus present Disease has not been reported

Equine encephalomyelitis (eastern) Free Never occurred

Foot-and-mouth disease Free 1872; officially recognised by the OIE as free without vaccination

Heartwater Free Never occurred

Japanese encephalitis Serological evidence Detected annually in Torres Strait, and on Cape York in 1998 and 2004

New World screw-worm fly (Cochliomyia hominivorax)

Free Never occurred

Old World screw-worm fly (Chrysomya bezziana)

Free Never occurred

Paratuberculosis Present National control/management programs

Q fever Present

Rabies Free 1867

Rift Valley fever Free Never occurred

Rinderpest Free 1923; with the global eradication of rinderpest finalised in 2011, all countries are free

Surra (Trypanosoma evansi) Free Never occurred

Trichinellosis Not reported Trichinella spiralis not present; T  pseudospiralis present in wildlife

Tularaemia Free Never occurred

Vesicular stomatitis Free Never occurred

West Nile fever Australian variants present

A previously unknown Australian strain of West Nile virus was identified following an outbreak of neurological disease in horses in 2011.b No cases were reported in 2012

Cattle diseasesBovine anaplasmosis Present

Bovine babesiosis Present

(OIE), and also includes endemic diseases of national significance.

The requirement to report a notifiable disease is contained in state and territory legislation. State and territory lists of notifiable diseases contain all the diseases on the national list, as well as others that are of particular interest to an individual state or territory.

2.2 International reportingAustralia provides the OIE with routine information about OIE-listed diseases through reports every six months. Information on other diseases of interest to the OIE is reported through annual questionnaires. Tables 2.1 and 2.2 show Australia’s status for both these categories in 2012.

30 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table 2 1 Australia’s status for OIE-listed diseases of terrestrial animals, 2012 Disease Status Date of last occurrence and notesBovine genital campylobacteriosis Present

Bovine spongiform encephalopathy Free Never occurred; National Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Freedom Assurance Program includes surveillance; official OIE ‘negligible risk’ status

Bovine tuberculosis Free Australia declared freedom in 1997; last case in any species (including free-living) reported in 2002

Bovine viral diarrhoea Present Bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) 1 — present; BVDV-2 — never occurred

Contagious bovine pleuropneumonia Free 1967; Australia declared freedom in 1973; officially recognised by the OIE as free

Enzootic bovine leucosis Present Licensed dairy cattle herds monitored free of disease; Australia declared provisional freedom of the Australian dairy herd in 2010

Haemorrhagic septicaemia Free Never occurred; strains of Pasteurella multocida present, but not the 6b or 6e strains that cause haemorrhagic septicaemia

Infectious bovine rhinotracheitis/infectious pustular vulvovaginitis

Present Bovine herpesvirus (BHV) 1.2b — present; BHV-1.1 and 1.2a — never occurred

Lumpy skin disease Free Never occurred

Theileriosis Free Theileria parva and T  annulata not present

Trichomonosis Present

Trypanosomosis (tsetse borne) Free Never occurred

Sheep and goat diseasesCaprine arthritis–encephalitis Present Voluntary accreditation schemes exist

Contagious agalactia Not reported Mycoplasma agalactiae has been isolated, but Australian strains do not produce agalactia in sheep

Contagious caprine pleuropneumonia Free Never occurred

Enzootic abortion of ewes (ovine chlamydiosis)

Not reported Never occurred

Maedi–visna Free Never occurred

Nairobi sheep disease Free Never occurred

Ovine epididymitis (Brucella ovis) Present Voluntary accreditation schemes in all states

Peste des petits ruminants Free Never occurred

Salmonellosis (Salmonella Abortusovis) Free Never occurred; surveillance has shown no evidence of infection in sheep

Scrapie Free 1952; National Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Freedom Assurance Program includes surveillance

Sheep pox and goat pox Free Never occurred

Equine diseasesAfrican horse sickness Free Never occurred

Contagious equine metritis Free 1980

Dourine Free Never occurred

Equine encephalomyelitis (western) Free Never occurred

Equine infectious anaemia Present Limited distribution/sporadic occurrence

Equine influenza Free Australia’s first outbreak of equine influenza occurred between 24 August and 25 December 2007. Australia declared freedom according to OIE standards on 25 December 2008

Terrestrial animal health 31

Table 2 1 Australia’s status for OIE-listed diseases of terrestrial animals, 2012 Disease Status Date of last occurrence and notesEquine piroplasmosis Free 1976

Equine rhinopneumonitis Present

Equine viral arteritis Serological evidence

Glanders Free 1891

Venezuelan equine encephalomyelitis Free Never occurred

Swine diseasesAfrican swine fever Free Never occurred

Classical swine fever Free 1962

Nipah virus encephalitis Free Never occurred

Porcine cysticercosis Free Never occurred

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome

Free Never occurred

Swine vesicular disease Free Never occurred

Transmissible gastroenteritis Free Never occurred

Avian diseasesAvian chlamydiosis Present

Avian infectious bronchitis Present

Avian infectious laryngotracheitis Present

Avian mycoplasmosis (Mycoplasma gallisepticum)

Present

Avian mycoplasmosis (M  synoviae) Present

Duck virus hepatitis Free Never occurred

Fowl typhoid Free 1952

Highly pathogenic avian influenza Free as of 20 March 2013 at time of publication

An outbreak was reported to the OIE on 15 November 2012. Destruction, decontamination and disinfection were completed on 20 December 2012

Infectious bursal disease (Gumboro disease) Present Infectious bursal disease occurs in a mild form; very virulent strains not present

Low pathogenicity notifiable avian influenza (poultry)

Occasional reports An outbreak was reported to the OIE on 27 January 2012, and was resolved on 5 June 2012

Newcastle disease in poultry Lentogenic viruses present

Virulent Newcastle disease last occurred in poultry 2002c

Pullorum disease Present Not in commercial chickens

Turkey rhinotracheitis Free Never occurred

Lagomorph diseasesMyxomatosis Present Used as a biological control agent for wild rabbits

Rabbit haemorrhagic disease Present Used as a biological control agent for wild rabbits

Bee diseasesAcarapisosis of honey bees Free Never occurred

American foulbrood of honey bees Present

European foulbrood of honey bees Present

Small hive beetle Present Restricted distribution

Tropilaelaps of honey bees Free Never occurred

Varroosis of honey bees Free Varroa destructor has never been reported in Australia

32 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table 2 1 Australia’s status for OIE-listed diseases of terrestrial animals, 2012 Disease Status Date of last occurrence and notesOther diseasesCamel pox Free Never occurred

Leishmaniasis Australian variant present

Rare. No Australian Leishmania has been isolated this year from macropods. A case occurred in an imported dog

OIE = World Organisation for Animal Health

a B suis has also, rarely, been isolated in dogs.

b Further details of this incident can be found in Section 2.4.14.

c In August 2011, a paramyxovirus not previously reported in Australia was detected in hobby pigeons in Victoria. Disease caused by this avian paramyxovirus has not spread to poultry. Further details of this incident can be found at www.dpi.vic.gov.au/agriculture/pests-diseases-and-weeds/animal-diseases/pigeon-paramyxovirus.

Table 2 2 Australia’s status for other diseases of terrestrial animals that are reported to the OIE each year, 2012

Disease Status Date of last occurrence and notesActinomycosis Present

Avian encephalomyelitis Present

Avian leucosis Present

Avian salmonellosis (excluding fowl typhoid and pullorum disease)

Present

Avian spirochaetosis Present

Blackleg Present

Botulism Present

Caseous lymphadenitis Present

Coccidiosis Present

Contagious ophthalmia Present

Contagious pustular dermatitis Present

Distomatosis (liver fluke) Present Restricted distribution

Enterotoxaemia Present

Equine coital exanthema Present

Filariosis Present

Footrot Present Restricted distribution

Infectious coryza Present

Intestinal Salmonella infections Present

Listeriosis Present

Melioidosis Present Restricted distribution

Nosemosis of bees Present

Salmonellosis (Salmonella Abortusequi) Free Never reported

Sheep mange Free 1896

Strangles Present

Swine erysipelas Present

Toxoplasmosis Present

Ulcerative lymphangitis Free Never reported

Vibrionic dysentery Present

Warble fly infestation Free Never reported

Other clostridial infections Present

Other pasteurelloses Present OIE = World Organisation for Animal Health

Terrestrial animal health 33

2.3 National reporting system for animal diseases in Australia

Australia’s National Animal Health Information System (NAHIS) was redeveloped and launched in January 2006. NAHIS collates data from a wide range of government and nongovernment surveillance and monitoring programs to provide an overview of animal health in Australia. The information in NAHIS is essential for supporting trade in animal commodities and meeting Australia’s international reporting obligations.

Figure 2.1 summarises the sources of data in NAHIS, including surveillance and monitoring programs, control programs, diagnostic laboratories and veterinary investigations.

In 2009, NAHIS was expanded to house data that are accessed by two other surveillance program applications: NAMPInfo (information system for the National Arbovirus Monitoring Program) and EDIS (Endemic Disease Information System). All applications managed by NAHIS use the same underlying Central Animal Health Database, but maintain separate and distinct web interfaces:

• NAHIS provides selected summaries of national animal health data and disease information sheets

• NAMPInfo provides the official interactive bluetongue virus zone map

• EDIS has a searchable register of herds and flocks in the Australian Johne’s disease Market Assurance Program.

NAHIS data are routinely reported, together with case reports of veterinary investigations, in the Animal Health Surveillance Quarterly newsletter. The data are also used by the Australian Government in reports to the OIE, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and the World Health Organization. Current disease surveillance reports and publications are available on the NAHIS page of the Animal Health Australia (AHA) website.40

2.4 Endemic diseases of national significance

This section describes the status of, and programs for, endemic animal diseases of national significance in 2012. Disease notifications for the Australian Capital Territory are included within New South Wales reporting.

2.4.1 American foulbroodAmerican foulbrood (AFB) is a brood disease of honey bees caused by the spore-forming bacterium Paenibacillus larvae subsp. larvae (formerly Bacillus larvae). The disease attacks bee larvae, eventually killing the affected hive. It is very difficult to

40 nahis.animalhealthaustralia.com.au

treat, because the bacteria form spores that are resistant to heat, drying and chemicals. The recommended treatment for AFB-infected hives is to depopulate the hives, burn or bury the dead bees, then burn, bury or irradiate the hive material.

AFB is nationally notifiable and subject to control programs in several states. It is endemic in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia (except for Kangaroo Island, which remains free), Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia. It has not been reported in the Northern Territory.

New South WalesIn New South Wales, from December 2011 to November 2012, 102 beekeepers had an officially recorded outbreak of AFB, with 456 hives infected. This is a 53% increase in the number of infected hives from the previous year. In areas where there has been a high incidence of AFB, the Compliance Unit of the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries (NSW DPI) has conducted special apiary compliance operations. These aim to raise awareness of the apiary industry’s responsibilities under the New South Wales Apiaries Act 1985, to detect breaches of the Act and to allow action to be taken, where necessary. During these operations, the industry has provided departmental apiary inspectors with information about the location of abandoned, neglected and/or diseased hives, and helped with the removal of such hives for destruction.

QueenslandAFB is widespread in Queensland, and its control is a routine part of apiary management. Apiary staff from the Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (QDAFF) conduct monthly information sessions for beekeepers in various locations, which cover sterilisation, control and management techniques.

South AustraliaAFB is present to varying degrees throughout South Australia, except for Kangaroo Island, which remains free from the disease. Detection of AFB is achieved predominantly through a combination of apiarist reporting, packer testing and active disease surveillance.

TasmaniaTasmania has no government control program for AFB, but the Tasmanian apiary industry has established the Apiary Industry Disease Control Program for voluntarily registered beekeepers. Registration fees fund the testing of honey samples for AFB. This assists with disease surveillance by encouraging broad participation by both commercial and recreational beekeepers.

34 Animal health in Australia 2012

Figure 2 1 Sources of data in the National Animal Health Information System

Central

Animal

Health

Database

Na�onal Arbovirus Monitoring Program

(interface)

Endemic diseaseinforma�on (interface)

Publicly available outputsAnimal Health Surveillance Quarterly newsle�erAnimal health in Australia — annual report NAHIS disease informaon sheetsProject-based surveillance reports (summary data)JD News (Johne’s disease)NAMP annual report

Na�onal Arbovirus Monitoring Program

Northern Australia Quaran�ne Strategy

Surveillance at sea ports (insect)

Na�onal Residue Survey (meat)

Government veterinary inves�ga�ons (suspect emergency or nofiable

diseases)

Na�onal Significant Disease Inves�ga�on

Program(private praconers)

Meat inspec�on for granulomas

(surveillance for bovine tuberculosis)

Laboratory tes�ng (for surveillance, export

tes�ng and endemic disease management)

Market assurance programs

(Johne’s disease)

Australian Wildlife Health Network

Freedom assurance programs

Na�onal Enteric Pathogen Surveillance

Scheme

Na�onal No�fiable Diseases Surveillance

System (zoonoses)

Summary data collated and reproduced in the database from an external animal health source

Primary animal health data managed in the Central Animal Health Database

Descrip�ve reports of wildlife morbidity and mortality events from an external source

NAHIS(interface)

Summary data collated and reproduced in the database from an external public health source

Accredita�on programs (enzoo�c bovine

leucosis and contagious ovine epididymi�s)

Australian Milk Residue Analysis Survey

(screw-worm fly and transmissible spongiform

encephalopathy)

Terrestrial animal health 35

The Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment offers free inspection of hives and an advisory service to apiarists when positive hives are identified from honey samples.

VictoriaVictorian beekeepers are encouraged to seek laboratory confirmation of AFB when it is suspected.

Western AustraliaBeekeepers in Western Australia are required to register their beehives and report occurrences of AFB in their apiaries. Eradication action is also required, and failure to take action can lead to the imposition of quarantine measures and a requirement to follow a management plan. The Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia provides a diagnostic service that allows beekeepers to monitor the AFB status of their apiaries and allows the department to monitor infected apiaries. These measures support a quality assurance program, B-Qual, which has been adopted by the industry (see Chapter 1). The percentage of infected apiaries in 2012 remains low (6–10%).

2.4.2 AnthraxAnthrax is on the list of nationally notifiable diseases. It is subject to compulsory government controls, including quarantine, disposal of carcasses, and vaccination and tracing of at-risk animals and their products. Areas at risk of anthrax occurrence, which are well defined, include the northern and north-eastern districts of Victoria and central New South Wales. In these areas, anthrax has a low prevalence and occurs only sporadically.

Anthrax has never been recorded in the Northern Territory. In Queensland, the most recent confirmed cases were in 2002 (six animals) and 1993 (one animal). South Australia’s last recorded anthrax outbreak was in 1914, and Tasmania’s was more than 80 years ago. The only case in Western Australia was an isolated case in 1994.

All suspected cases of anthrax are investigated and controlled according to an agreed jurisdictional program.

New South WalesFour anthrax incidents occurred in New South Wales during 2012. In January, a property in the Riverina district was reported to have 30 mortalities from a flock of 1000 sheep. The case was initially tested with the immunochromatographic test (ICT; see under ‘Victoria’, below, for a description), which gave a strong positive result. Follow-up laboratory testing confirmed anthrax.

In November, 70 ewes were reported to have died on a property in the Forbes district. The district veterinarian obtained a positive ICT test, and follow-up laboratory testing using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was positive. In December, there were two unrelated anthrax incidents in cattle. A property in the central west, near Molong, reported the death of one animal from a herd of 400; a property near Condobolin reported the death of a single animal from a herd of 160. Both these properties had a history of anthrax, and vaccination had not been undertaken in recent years.

All of these properties are in the known anthrax endemic area of New South Wales. The incidents were managed according to NSW DPI anthrax policy, with properties being placed in quarantine, all at-risk stock vaccinated and carcasses disposed of by burning. No movements of stock off at-risk properties had occurred.

There were 61 negative investigations for anthrax during 2012. Forty-two of these involved cattle, and 15 involved sheep. One investigation involved goats, two involved horses, and one involved a common eland in a zoo.

VictoriaThere were no reports of anthrax in Victoria during 2012. A total of 69 anthrax exclusion investigations were undertaken — 58 on cattle, 7 on sheep and 4 on horses. These investigations represent events involving 202 deaths and approximately 25 000 at-risk animals. The last recorded case of anthrax in Victoria was in September 2009.

An ‘animal-side’ ICT, developed by the Victorian Department of Primary Industries, has been used for the past several years in Victoria. This field test enables rapid screening for anthrax when government or private veterinarians are investigating sudden, unexplained deaths in ruminant livestock. Following approval of this test in 2010 by the Sub-Committee on Animal Health Laboratory Standards, the ICT kits have been manufactured by the department and are being supplied for use in other states.

2.4.3 Caprine arthritis–encephalitisCaprine retrovirus causes caprine arthritis–encephalitis (CAE): a multisystemic, inflammatory condition of goats. The disease is found in most countries, including Australia. It has been reported in all Australian states and territories, apart from the Northern Territory. CAE is not included on the list of nationally notifiable diseases in Australia. Although Australia has no regulatory control programs for CAE, there are some voluntary accreditation programs based on serological testing. Animals testing positive are removed from the herd.

36 Animal health in Australia 2012

New South WalesIn New South Wales, a voluntary control program is available to goat producers. It currently includes 12 CAE-accredited herds and a number in pre-accreditation stage. No clinical cases of CAE have been reported during 2012.

QueenslandQueensland has had a voluntary control program for dairy goats since 1987. In December 2012, the program had 46 CAE-accredited herds.

South AustraliaIn South Australia, where CAE is present, the Dairy Goat Society of South Australia has a voluntary market assurance scheme.

TasmaniaCAE is not a notifiable disease in Tasmania, but a voluntary herd accreditation scheme was introduced in late 2011. A register of accredited-free herds is maintained by the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment.

VictoriaCAE is a notifiable disease in Victoria. Two clinical cases were reported during 2012.

Western AustraliaCAE is not a notifiable disease in Western Australia.

2.4.4 Cattle tick and tick feverThe cattle tick, Rhipicephalus microplus (previously Boophilus microplus), was introduced to Australia in the late 19th century. It spread steadily from Darwin over northern Australia, stabilising to its current distribution in northern and north-eastern coastal regions by about 1918. The distribution of cattle tick is determined largely by climatic factors: the tick needs high humidity and ambient temperatures of at least 15–20 °C for egg laying and hatching.

Cattle ticks mainly infest cattle, but may occasionally affect horses, sheep, goats, camelids, deer and water buffalo. Tick infestations damage hides, reduce production, and cause anaemia and death. Cattle tick can also transmit tick fever (bovine babesiosis or anaplasmosis), caused by Babesia bigemina, B  bovis or Anaplasma marginale. Babesiosis and anaplasmosis are nationally notifiable diseases in tick-free areas.

Acaricide treatment (dipping, pour-on or spraying) has been widely used for tick control in endemic areas. Inspection and treatment are compulsory for cattle leaving defined tick areas in the Northern Territory, Queensland and Western Australia, and for cattle leaving known infested properties in New South Wales. The spread of ticks from endemic areas is restricted by state-managed zoning policies. Many producers in the tick endemic area have changed to Bos indicus–type cattle, because these breeds have greater resistance to tick infestation.

No incursions of cattle ticks or cases of tick fever were reported in South Australia, Tasmania or Victoria during 2012.

New South WalesCattle tick generally occurs only in the far north-eastern corner of New South Wales. NSW DPI maintains a surveillance program at all far North Coast saleyards, where all cattle presented for sale are inspected. Inspectors treat cattle returning to a property from a sale with acaricide (by dipping) before their dispatch. Regular surveillance is also undertaken at North Coast abattoirs. Infested and at-risk properties are quarantined, and eradication programs and movement controls are implemented. Surveillance cameras at seven sites along the New South Wales – Queensland border monitor livestock movements into New South Wales from the tick-infested areas of Queensland. Led and tractable livestock may be treated at the Kirra border crossing before they enter New South Wales from tick-infested areas of Queensland. Other stock originating from tick-infested areas are treated at official clearing facilities on the Queensland tick line before entering New South Wales.

Since 1997, the average number of new cattle tick infestations each year in New South Wales has been 74 (range 37–110). In the 2012 season, 47 new infestations were detected, mostly in the far North Coast region, except for one each at Quirindi in the North West Slopes and Texas on the Queensland border.

Tick fever is a sporadic disease in New South Wales, with an average of one occurrence every two years, usually on the far North Coast. In 2012, there were four outbreaks, all due to B  bovis. Three were on the far North Coast, and one was at

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Terrestrial animal health 37

Quirindi in the North West Slopes. The most recent case, in May 2012, was in the Tweed region at Crystal Creek, close to the Queensland border.

Northern TerritoryThree cattle tick areas are gazetted under Northern Territory legislation. Cattle tick occurs only in the northern tropical and subtropical regions; the southern half of the Northern Territory is a cattle tick–free zone. A buffer zone, known as the cattle tick control zone, separates the infested and free areas. Cattle tick was detected during 2009 on several properties in the control zone and two properties in the free zone that were previously free from ticks. The control zone was extended in 2010 to include these two properties. The cattle tick infestation has been confined to these areas with movement controls and property management plans. Active surveillance on properties in the control zone and northern free zone is continuing. No further spread of the cattle tick was detected during 2012.

Tick fever is not commonly diagnosed in the Northern Territory, although the organisms responsible for babesiosis and anaplasmosis are present. Tick fever is seen mainly in cattle that have had little or no previous exposure to ticks.

Parkhurst-strain ticks, which are resistant to the synthetic pyrethroids that are often used as acaricides, are present on 20 properties in the Darwin region. Movement controls and dipping with a different acaricide are used to minimise the risk of further spread of these ticks. An active surveillance program is in place to detect changes in their distribution.

QueenslandQueensland regulates the movement of stock to control cattle ticks through the declaration of three zones: infected, free and control. The control zone is used as a buffer between the free and infected zones in parts of Queensland to minimise the risk of incursions. Owners of stock are encouraged to take measures to eradicate or prevent the spread of cattle ticks. Stock moving from an infected zone — or from restricted properties in either of the other zones — are required to meet conditions that may include inspection or treatment (or both) before movement.

For movements from the infected zone, QDAFF has a system of approved third-party providers (TPPs) for inspecting and supervising treatment of stock at official clearing facilities. The TPPs currently operate at 28 clearing dips and two livestock inspection centres (spray stations), which undertake more than 95% of all stock clearances from the infected zone.

QDAFF inspectors provide regulatory and advisory services for cattle tick control, eradication and management. They also provide inspection and treatment services for the restricted

properties in the free and control zones, and at four clearing facilities that have not progressed to the approved TPP system. QDAFF provides laboratory services for the analysis of dip fluids, and for testing and identification of acaricide-resistant strains of cattle ticks.

At the end of June 2012, when the Queensland cattle tick season ended, 74 infected properties in the free zone and 135 infected properties in the control zone were under movement restrictions and treatment.

During 2012, 51 incidents of babesiosis and 9 incidents of anaplasmosis were confirmed through QDAFF veterinary laboratories.

Live vaccines produced by QDAFF’s Tick Fever Centre are used to control babesiosis and anaplasmosis. During 2012, the centre sold 685 335 doses of trivalent vaccine (96% chilled and 4% frozen).

Western AustraliaThe cattle tick–infested area in Western Australia includes the Kimberley in the north; the southern boundary is generally at latitude 20°S. Cattle moving from the tick-infested area to the tick-free area of the state are inspected and treated for ticks. There are no regulatory control measures for ticks within the tick-infested area, and there is almost no strategic treatment for ticks or vaccination for tick fever.

The last two detections of cattle tick in the tick-free area were in 1979 and 2001, and the cattle ticks were eradicated successfully. Acaricide-resistant ticks have not been detected in Western Australia.

2.4.5 Equine herpesvirus 1Equine herpesvirus 1 (EHV-1) is a respiratory pathogen of horses that occasionally causes abortion and, rarely, neurological disease. The abortigenic and neurological strains are on the list of nationally notifiable diseases. EHV-1 abortions are generally sporadic, but outbreaks do occur. EHV-1 neurological disease is an emerging disease of increasing prevalence overseas, and new cases have been diagnosed in recent years in Australia.

Herpesvirus infection can be tentatively diagnosed by detection of intranuclear inclusion bodies during examination of tissue samples under a microscope. However, definitive diagnosis of EHV-1 infection — in cases of either abortion or neurological disease — requires detection of the virus by PCR or virus isolation. Virus detection and categorisation are essential when EHV-1 is suspected, as there are nine EHV serotypes. There is also evidence that EHV-1 neurological disease could be associated with a nucleotide substitution in the EHV-1 polymerase gene. Virus isolation

38 Animal health in Australia 2012

and sequence analysis can provide information on the prevalence of this mutation in Australian isolates.

During 2012, no cases of EHV-1 abortion or neurological disease were reported in the Northern Territory, South Australia, Tasmania or Victoria.

New South WalesAbortion due to EHV-1 occurred on five thoroughbred studs in the Hunter Valley in 2012; EHV-1 was confirmed by positive PCR tests on foetal tissues. On three studs, only a single mare aborted; one stud had four mares abort, and another stud had five.

QueenslandThree cases of EHV-1 associated with abortion or weak foals occurred in Queensland in 2012. The virus was detected by PCR examination of tissues from aborted foetuses or moribund newborn foals.

Western AustraliaIn 2012, there was one case of equine abortion that may have been caused by EHV-1. The mare was found to have a very low antibody titre to EHV-1, and sampling was not repeated.

2.4.6 European foulbroodEuropean foulbrood (EFB) is a disease of bee larvae caused by the bacterium Melissococcus pluton. The disease is usually acquired only by larvae less than 48 hours old, which generally die at 4–5 days of age: particularly in early spring, when the colonies are growing rapidly. Colonies infected with EFB release a characteristic odour, and infected larvae die and turn brown during the coiled stage, giving a peppered appearance to the brood comb. Because of the young age at which larvae are affected, cells with diseased larvae are usually unsealed. The disease causes high levels of mortality of larvae, and reduces the longevity of queens.

EFB occurs in many regions around the world. It was first reported in Australia in 1977 and is now found in all states, except Western Australia. Western Australia maintains stringent control measures to minimise the risk of introduction of the disease. The Northern Territory has a small beekeeping industry that is thought to be free from EFB; disease freedom is supported by geographic isolation from affected states, well-informed beekeepers and health import regulations.

EFB is diagnosed intermittently in Tasmanian honey bees — the last case was detected in 2011. It is monitored by the Tasmanian apiary industry’s Apiary Industry Disease Control Program for voluntarily registered beekeepers. No incidents of EFB were detected in Tasmania during 2012.

2.4.7 Infectious bovine rhinotracheitisInfectious bovine rhinotracheitis is caused by bovine herpesvirus 1 (BHV-1), which also causes infectious pustular vulvovaginitis, infectious balanoposthitis and several other clinical syndromes. BHV-1 occurs in most cattle-raising countries.

Three subtypes of BHV-1 are recognised worldwide: BHV-1.1, BHV-1.2a and BHV-1.2b. Subtypes 1.1 and 1.2a are more virulent than subtype 1.2b, and subtype 1.2a can cause severe respiratory disease and several other syndromes, including abortion. These virulent subtypes are present in North America, Europe and many other parts of the world, but only the relatively benign BHV-1.2b is present in Australia. The absence of more virulent subtypes and a predominance of pasture-based grazing means that disease due to infectious bovine rhinotracheitis is rare in Australia.

2.4.8 Johne’s diseaseJohne’s disease (or paratuberculosis) is a chronic mycobacterial infection, primarily of the intestines, that causes ill-thrift, wasting and death in several species of grazing animals. In Australia, there are two main types of the causative organism, Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis; the sheep strain is largely restricted to sheep, while the cattle strain affects cattle, goats, alpaca and deer. The livestock industries, governments and the veterinary profession collaboratively manage the Australian National Johne’s Disease Control Program, which aims to reduce the impact of both the infection and the measures taken to control it. In partnership with governments, each affected industry has implemented strategies that suit its particular needs and disease situation. Key elements of the program are Australian Johne’s Disease Market Assurance Programs for cattle, sheep, goats and alpaca. These provide a high level of assurance that participating herds and flocks are not infected with Johne’s disease. Details of herds and flocks in the Market Assurance Programs are maintained in NAHIS (see Figure 2.1) and are available on the AHA website.

Regulatory programs for Johne’s disease operate in the north of Australia. In southern Australia, the emphasis is on control of the disease by producers: especially in the south-eastern dairy and sheep industries, where Johne’s disease is endemic.

In 2012, Western Australia retained its status as a bovine Johne’s disease (BJD)–Free Zone. Queensland, the Northern

Terrestrial animal health 39

Territory and northern South Australia’s Protected Zones maintained controls on introductions to manage the risk of entry of BJD. Johne’s disease is rare in the alpaca industry, and no cases were detected in 2012.

From July 2012, a revised National BJD Strategic Plan was implemented, building on the success of the previous plan. Under the revised eight-year plan, Australian governments and the livestock grazing industries reaffirmed their commitment to protect the north and west of the country — and the beef and alpaca sectors — from BJD, while allowing dairy and goat producers greater control over how they manage the infection in their herds. The main changes affect New South Wales and south-eastern South Australia, where the previous Control Zones and Protected Zone have been replaced by the Beef Protected Area (BPA). Within the BPA, there will be a separate ‘dairy compartment’ — that is, farms that supply milk to a dairy factory, including any land the dairy cattle have run on. Since many dairy herds in Victoria and Tasmania are infected with BJD, these states have been classified as Management Areas. Western Australia continues as a Free Zone, and the Northern Territory, pastoral South Australia and Queensland remain as Protected Zones.

Beef cattleJohne’s disease has rarely been detected in the northern and western beef industry. However, three clinical cases were detected in a Queensland beef herd in late 2012, following detection of a single case in another smaller herd during 2011. Control procedures and tracing are currently under way to determine the extent of spread from the index herd.

Johne’s disease is also uncommon in beef herds in south-eastern Australia. To help protect this situation, producers whose herds have had little or no contact with dairy cattle are encouraged to make a written declaration that the breeding cattle they are selling meet the criteria to be classified as low risk (‘Beef Only’).

Although the disease is uncommon, the impacts can be serious for individual infected herds. The National BJD Financial and Non-Financial Assistance Package helps owners of infected herds to eliminate Johne’s disease, thus contributing to the low prevalence of BJD in the beef industry. Since the scheme started in 2004, it has assisted 290 producers, of whom about 201 have had the infected or suspect statuses of their herds resolved. During 2012, the assistance levels available to producers were reviewed, and payments were capped at $11 000 per property (GST inclusive). This change was made to ensure that the program could continue to operate within its budget.

Dairy cattleIn south-eastern Australia, the dairy industry promotes hygienic calf rearing to help reduce the incidence of Johne’s disease in replacement heifers. Buyers seeking Johne’s disease assurance are also encouraged to ask the seller for a written declaration of the National Dairy BJD Assurance Score for the cattle. A score of 10 indicates a very high level of confidence that the cattle are not infected. New South Wales and South Australia require sellers to declare the dairy score when selling dairy cattle.

SheepFollowing a major review in 2012, a revised five-year control program for Johne’s disease in sheep (ovine Johne’s disease, OJD) is being developed. A transition period began from 1 July 2012, and the new program will begin from 1 July 2013. Final details of the new program will not be known until early 2013.

A key tool to help producers manage their own farm biosecurity is the National Sheep Health Statement. This enables buyers to assess the risk for OJD and other diseases.

Abattoir surveillance provides feedback to individual farmers and the wider sheep industry on the occurrence of OJD and other significant endemic disease conditions. In 2012, the sheep industry continued working with AHA and the meat-processing industry to support abattoir surveillance at several sites across southern Australia. In the 2011–12 financial year, approximately 6350 consignments, comprising 1 070 799 adult sheep, were inspected for evidence of OJD. The data from this project are used each year to assess the regional flock prevalence of OJD. In parts of south-eastern Australia, the estimated prevalence of OJD and its impact on infected flocks continued to rise.

GoatsThe goat industry has established a risk-based trading approach that uses a National Goat Health Statement with a nationally agreed risk ranking system. This owner declaration includes a risk rating for Johne’s disease and provides herd information on other conditions that can easily spread from herd to herd with movements of goats. A component of the strategy is a National Kid Rearing Plan to help protect young goats from infections such as Johne’s disease and CAE.

2.4.9 Newcastle diseaseNewcastle disease (ND) is a viral disease of domestic poultry and wild birds. It can cause gastrointestinal, respiratory and nervous signs. Australia has been free from outbreaks of virulent ND since 2002, when two incidents of ND of Australian origin occurred in Victoria and New South Wales.

40 Animal health in Australia 2012

These outbreaks were eradicated as prescribed by the Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan. Subsequently, the National ND Management Plan was developed to minimise the risk of Australian-origin virulent ND outbreaks in Australian commercial chicken flocks.

The plan is overseen by a steering committee, which includes representatives from the commercial chicken sector, the Australian Government, most state governments and the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory. Membership also includes experts in poultry vaccination and poultry disease management. AHA manages the plan and chairs the committee.

The goal of the ND Management Plan (2008–12) is to minimise the risk of Australian-origin ND outbreaks by strategically applying vaccination (using attenuated [‘live’] V4 and inactivated [‘killed’] vaccines), together with surveillance and poultry industry biosecurity plans.

The primary objective of the vaccination program is for the vaccine strain of the virus to outcompete potential precursor strains of ND virus: that is, strains with genome sequences similar to the virulent sequence that might result in the emergence of virulent ND virus. Based on the level of risk of an outbreak of Australian-origin virulent ND in each state or territory, chickens of different classes (meat chickens, laying hens and chickens used for breeding) are vaccinated and surveyed according to standard operating procedures.

Vaccination compliance is monitored through reconciliation of data on vaccine sales with commercial chicken numbers, and industry intelligence.

In 2012, the steering committee developed a successor ND Management Plan for the period 2013–16. The goal remains to have a vaccination program that mitigates the risk of an Australian-origin ND outbreak. The draft plan does not propose any changes to the vaccination requirements for long-lived birds. However, consistent with the relaxation of the rules for short-lived birds in Tasmania and Western Australia in the 2008–12 plan, the draft plan provides for relaxed rules in such birds in Queensland and South Australia. Once endorsed, the new plan will be implemented.

New South WalesThe ND Management Plan (2008–12) requires flocks to meet adequate antibody titres within four weeks of completion of the vaccination course. Monitoring of vaccinated pullet flocks in New South Wales has found that 90% of the flocks meet these requirements. A survey of broilers originating from hatcheries vaccinating one-day-old chickens against ND by coarse spray — or from companies vaccinating at 7–14 days in the field via drinking water — found that the required titres were mostly achieved, regardless of the maternal antibodies of the donor flocks. Overall, the technique was capable of delivering the haemagglutination inhibition titres required by the management plan.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Terrestrial animal health 41

Northern TerritoryThere are no commercial poultry flocks in the Northern Territory.

QueenslandIn Queensland, all commercial operators of farms with 500 or more birds are required by law to vaccinate their poultry against ND. Vaccination is in accordance with the ND Management Plan (2008–12) for a medium-risk state, as agreed by the national steering committee.

During 2012, no virulent ND or precursor ND viruses were detected. All detections of ND virus have been categorised as a vaccine-like strain.

South AustraliaIn South Australia, it is mandatory for all birds in commercial poultry flocks, including breeder and genetic stock, to be vaccinated against ND. The vaccine is a restricted product that requires approval from the chief veterinary officer for use, and producers apply for purchase through a permit system.

TasmaniaIn Tasmania, meat chickens are exempt from the requirement to vaccinate flocks with more than 1000 birds, provided they comply with surveillance requirements. Meat chicken breeders are not included in this exemption. Vaccine is obtained from the supplier under licence from the chief veterinary officer. It must be used according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

VictoriaOwners of commercial poultry flocks with more than 1000 birds are required by law in Victoria to vaccinate against ND. In 2012, permits were issued for the purchase and use of approximately 98.6 million doses of ND vaccine.

Western AustraliaIn Western Australia, owners of 1000 or more chickens are required to vaccinate long-lived birds, keep vaccination records, assist with inspections and undertake any testing required for auditing purposes. ND vaccination of meat chickens kept for less than 24 weeks is not required, and permits to purchase ND vaccine are no longer required. Targeted auditing of producer compliance is undertaken. Reporting of, and sample collection from, any flock meeting the ND case definition is compulsory. The nationally agreed biosecurity standards41 are strongly promoted to industry.

41 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/biosecurity/animal_biosecurity/bird-owners/poultry_biosecurity_manual

2.4.10 Ovine brucellosisOvine brucellosis, caused by Brucella ovis, is endemic in commercial sheep flocks in some states, but its prevalence is low. It is not on the list of nationally notifiable diseases. Accreditation schemes for stud flocks are well supported and are managed by state animal health authorities and breed societies. The numbers of accredited flocks at the end of 2012 are shown in Table 2.3.

Table 2 3 Ovine brucellosis accredited-free flocks, at 31 December 2012

State Accredited free

New South Wales 842

Queensland 65

South Australia 570

Tasmania 93

Victoria 487

Western Australia 184

Australia 2241

New South Wales

The New South Wales Ovine Brucellosis Accreditation Scheme has been operating since 1981, with some flocks maintaining continuous accreditation. The scheme requires the adoption of a biosecurity plan and a testing regime. Flocks are tested by accredited private veterinary practitioners either annually or every second or third year, depending on how long they have been in the scheme. The program is strongly supported by the New South Wales sheep industry and show societies, and accreditation is a requirement for entry to many major shows and sales. At the end of 2012, the scheme covered 842 flocks, which were predominantly stud flocks.

Northern TerritoryThere are no commercial sheep flocks in the Northern Territory.

QueenslandQueensland has a voluntary ovine brucellosis accreditation scheme for stud flocks, which is administered by QDAFF on behalf of the state’s sheep industry. In December 2012, there were 65 accredited flocks (16 Merino/Poll Merino flocks and 49 flocks of other breeds). The historically low incidence of ovine brucellosis reported in the state’s flocks did not change significantly during 2012.

42 Animal health in Australia 2012

South AustraliaA voluntary ovine brucellosis accreditation scheme operates in South Australia. There are currently 448 accredited producers and 570 accredited flocks. There was no change in 2012 in the low incidence of ovine brucellosis reported in South Australia’s flocks.

TasmaniaThe Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment — in conjunction with veterinary practitioners and industry — has developed a voluntary ovine brucellosis accreditation scheme to control the disease in Tasmanian flocks. Accredited private veterinary practitioners test the flocks, and the department maintains the records. Tasmania currently has 93 accredited ovine brucellosis–free flocks. Ovine brucellosis has not been confirmed in any sheep in Tasmania since 1988.

VictoriaOvine brucellosis is present at low levels in Victorian sheep flocks. During 2012, infection was detected in 13 flocks.

A voluntary ovine brucellosis accreditation scheme, which is administered by the Victorian Department of Primary Industries, provides assurance that rams are free from ovine brucellosis. This assurance is required for sales, interstate movement, overseas export and attendance at shows. The scheme is based on property risk assessment, regular testing, adherence to best-practice flock management and investigation of suspect cases. Both departmental staff and private veterinary practitioners are involved in implementing the program across Victoria. At December 2012, 487 flocks were accredited in Victoria as free from ovine brucellosis.

Western AustraliaA voluntary ovine brucellosis accreditation scheme is available to ram breeders in Western Australia. In December 2012, the scheme had 184 accredited flocks.

2.4.11 Ovine footrotOvine footrot, caused by Dichelobacter nodosus infection, was probably introduced in the early days of the Australian sheep industry. Virulent ovine footrot causes significant economic loss in southern Australia. Ovine footrot is not on the list of nationally notifiable diseases.

Several states have eradication or control programs. New South Wales has implemented the NSW Footrot Strategic Plan for the past 20 years, and the state was declared a Protected Area for footrot in August 2009. The prevalence of virulent footrot in New South Wales has remained at less than

0.1% of flocks in 2012. The major threat to the Protected Area status in New South Wales is the introduction of sheep from control areas in other states.

South Australia and Western Australia also operate control programs. In Western Australia, less than 1% of flocks are infected with virulent footrot. Tasmania and Victoria do not have official control programs for footrot, although legislation is available to quarantine properties, if required.

A trial is being undertaken to assess the ability of flock-specified footrot vaccines to eradicate footrot from large sheep flocks in Tasmania. These are custom-made vaccines containing footrot bacteria strains known from representative sampling to be present in a flock. The vaccines only contain a maximum of two strains to maximise efficacy. If more than two strains are identified in a flock, additional rounds of vaccination with the other strains are applied if economically feasible.

Footrot is not regarded as a significant problem in Queensland, and no clinical cases were reported in 2012. There are no commercial sheep flocks in the Northern Territory.

2.4.12 Small hive beetleThe small hive beetle (SHB), Aethina tumida, invades honey bee hives. It can cause serious economic concern to producers through loss of bee colonies and infestation of honey combs awaiting extraction: especially under the hot and humid conditions in which it thrives. SHB is on the list of nationally notifiable diseases. Eradication from Australia has not been attempted; the agreed management strategies aim to reduce the impact of SHB on productivity, slow its spread, and minimise damage in infested apiaries.

Government apiary officers provide advice and guidance to the honey bee industry. Researchers have designed, tested and commercialised a chemical in-hive beetle harbourage to minimise the impact of SHB. The chemical has been approved by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority.

New South WalesSHB was first detected in New South Wales in 2002. It is well established along the coast and is periodically moved inland by commercial beekeepers, although it does not appear to be persisting in inland areas. The beetle has a significant impact on hive management; it has caused significant losses of honey bee colonies and is a major pest in honey extraction sheds. No regulatory action is taken in New South Wales, although reported cases of SHB are recorded for the purposes of certifying interstate movement of beehives and export of live bees.

Terrestrial animal health 43

Northern TerritoryA survey of registered beekeepers in the Northern Territory in 2010 confirmed the absence of SHB. Import controls to restrict entry of the pest are in place.

QueenslandSHB is identified as a major pest species and is endemic in most coastal regions of Queensland. It is present in other, drier areas as a result of beekeepers moving their apiaries to access seasonal flora. The prevalence is increasing in the northern part of the state and increases after rain in warmer months of the year.

QDAFF provides beekeepers with information on the most efficient trapping methods. Scientific research is continuing on fungal control, yeast identification and the relationship of yeast to the SHB lifecycle.

South AustraliaExcept for one detection of SHB early in 2012 in a small apiary (consisting of six hives), there is no evidence of SHB in South Australia. The affected hives were treated, and no further evidence of infestation has been found.

To assist with keeping the state SHB free, hives, package bees, used hive equipment, beeswax, pollen, propolis, used appliances, queen cells, queens and escorts, and any other bee products are prohibited entry into South Australia — unless accompanied by both written permission from the South Australian Chief Inspector of Stock and a completed health certificate declaring freedom from all stages of SHB. Before countersigning any health certificate, state departments are encouraged to request evidence that beekeepers have undertaken significant inspections to confirm absence of SHB.

TasmaniaThere is no evidence of SHB in Tasmania. Apiarists are encouraged to inspect their hives regularly and to submit suspect insects to the state laboratory for identification. Entry of used beekeeping equipment, packaged bees and unmelted beeswax into Tasmania is prohibited. Queen bees, queen cells and escorts may be imported, but must be in SHB-proof containers and accompanied by a completed health certificate declaring freedom from SHB.

VictoriaSHB is endemic in Victoria, and its occurrence is monitored by the Victorian Department of Primary Industries.

Western AustraliaIn September 2007, SHB was detected in Western Australia in the Ord River Irrigation Area at Kununurra. Surveillance, monitoring and tracing have contained the beetle within the Ord River Irrigation Area. Zoning under legislation has identified an SHB-infested area and an SHB-free area within the state. Targeted surveillance continues to be carried out; no samples collected have confirmed the presence of SHB in the free area. Import controls to restrict entry of SHB are in place.

2.4.13 Swine brucellosisSwine brucellosis resulting from infection with Brucella suis causes sterility and abortion in sows and orchitis in boars. Other livestock species may be infected, but do not show clinical signs; however, orchitis has been seen in antibody-positive pig-hunting dogs. The disease is a zoonosis: humans can also be infected.

In 2012, no cases of B  suis infection in pigs were reported from the Northern Territory, Victoria, Western Australia, South Australia or Tasmania. The latter four states have specific import controls for breeding pigs from areas where B  suis is known to occur.

New South WalesDuring 2012, surveillance of feral pigs in the north of the state showed antibodies to Brucella sp. This is the first time that brucellosis has been confirmed in feral pigs in New South Wales. There have been no reports of brucellosis in commercial pigs.

Northern TerritoryA limited survey of feral pigs in the Katherine region during 2007 did not detect the presence of swine brucellosis. Ongoing opportunistic sampling of feral pigs from the northern floodplains has not detected any clinical signs or serological evidence of brucellosis.

QueenslandIn Queensland, B  suis is confined to some populations of feral pigs. The B  suis Accredited Herd Scheme is administered by QDAFF on behalf of the industry and currently has 11 member herds. The scheme aims to ensure piggery freedom from B  suis and to provide a secure source of disease-free breeding stock for pig producers.

44 Animal health in Australia 2012

South AustraliaTo protect the disease-free status of farmed pigs in South Australia, movement controls are maintained for domestic pigs originating from states where B  suis can occasionally be detected in feral populations. In 2012, no cases of B  suis infection were reported in South Australia.

2.4.14 West Nile Virus (change in Australia’s status)

In the summer and autumn of 2011, an unprecedented number of cases of neurological disease in horses occurred across south-east Australia. A variant West Nile virus (WNV) strain, WNV

NSW2011, was identified as the causative agent

for many cases. This virulent virus emerged in Australia. WNV

NSW2011 is related to Kunjin virus, the indigenous WNV

strain in Australia, but is substantially more neuroinvasive.

The clinical signs exhibited by horses infected with WNVNSW2011

were consistent with those described for West Nile fever (WNF). The OIE provides the following criteria to define the occurrence of WNF:42

42 www.oie.int/index.php?id=169&L=0&htmfile=chapitre_1.8.16.htm

i. WNV has been isolated from an animal that shows signs

consistent with WNF; or

ii. viral antigen or viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) specific to WNV

has been identified in samples from one or more animals

that show clinical signs consistent with WNF, or that is

epidemiologically linked to a confirmed or suspected

outbreak of WNF; or

iii. antibodies to WNV have been identified in an unvaccinated

animal that shows clinical signs consistent with WNF,

or that is epidemiologically linked to a confirmed or

suspected outbreak of WNF.

The experience of 2011, supported by recent research, leads to the conclusion that WNF as defined in the OIE Terrestrial animal health code is present in Australia. Based on this information, Australia can no longer claim country freedom from WNF. To date, there have been no reports of WNF in Australia in species other than horses. The occurrence of the disease in any species, including wild species, is notifiable to the OIE.

Clinical WNF is on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals. This means there is a legal requirement for anyone who diagnoses WNF to immediately notify their relevant state or territory animal health authority.

Animal Health Australia

Terrestrial animal health 45

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

46 Animal health in Australia 2012

3 Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring

Australia’s surveillance and monitoring capability is underpinned by a network of government field veterinary officers, government and private veterinary diagnostic laboratories, private veterinarians, researchers and livestock owners.

This network implements surveillance plans to identify and treat risks from notifiable, emerging and exotic diseases. It is supported by the National Livestock Identification System (see Chapter 1), which enables livestock to be identified and traced from property of birth to slaughter, and the National Animal Health Information System (NAHIS; see Chapter 2) for collating data.

This chapter describes government and nongovernment programs that contribute to disease surveillance and monitoring capability at a national level. These programs are listed in Box 3.1.

3.1 Towards a national general surveillance program

The General Surveillance Epidemiology Working Group (GSEWG), established by the Animal Health Committee (AHC), has identified the areas of Australia with the highest likelihood of an incursion of eight selected animal diseases (Figures 3.1 and 3.2). An assessment of the current general surveillance effort showed that it was being conducted in the areas of highest likelihood of incursions. The GSEWG has developed a general surveillance assessment tool (GSAT) and used it for foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) to estimate the:

• probability that a single farm would detect and report a disease event

• time delay between the beginning of the disease event and reporting (if infection on that single farm results in a report)

• number of farms that would need to be infected to be confident (at the 95% confidence level) that the jurisdictional chief veterinary officer would be notified of at least one infected premises.

Chapter

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 47

For the first time, estimates have been made of the time that would elapse before jurisdictions could be confident that an outbreak of FMD would be reported, and the size of the outbreak at the time that it was reported.

The GSAT was also used to conduct a sensitivity analysis. In this analysis, the values of input parameters were varied to identify the on-farm activities to which improvements would provide the largest improvements in the surveillance system. These activities were found to be the opportunity to observe stock, the recognition of clinical signs by the producer, and the likelihood of reporting to a veterinarian. Recognition of clinical signs by veterinarians and submission of appropriate samples to the laboratory were also identified as significant opportunities to influence the effectiveness of surveillance.

The GSEWG’s assessment of the national general surveillance system has identified a number of steps in the reporting process at which the probabilities of disease being recognised and reported are low. Existing programs are already addressing many of these weak points, including:

• Animal Health Australia’s (AHA’s) Farm Biosecurity Program

• the National Significant Disease Investigation Program (see Section 3.2.4)

• free laboratory testing for exclusion of emergency animal diseases (EADs)

• EAD awareness training for veterinarians

• a proposed EAD training course to be conducted by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory (CSIRO-AAHL).

Figure 3 1 Areas where six exotic diseases are mostly likely to occur should they enter Australia

Classical swine fever

Highly pathogenic

avian influenza

Rabies

Foot-and-mouth disease

Japanese encephalitis

Sheep pox

Relative likelihood <0.0001 0.0001–0.001 0.001–0.01 0.01–0.1 > 0.1

48 Animal health in Australia 2012

Anecdotal reports suggest that these programs are used by only a small proportion of vets, and that improved uptake may require engagement of the veterinary community and increased awareness of existing programs, rather than design and implementation of new programs.

The outcomes of the GSEWG have been presented to jurisdictions and industries at five regional meetings in Bunbury, Orange, Adelaide, Melbourne and Brisbane. Presentations have also been made to the Sheepmeat Council of Australia, the Wool Council of Australia, AHA, the AHA stakeholders’ forum, the FMD stakeholders’ workshop, and the Epidemiology Chapter of the Australian and New Zealand College of Veterinary Scientists.

A workshop was held in October 2012 for industry and jurisdictional representatives to be trained in the use of the GSAT, in preparation for its use to assess current surveillance effort within jurisdictional areas of interest. Testing of the GSAT within jurisdictions will continue, with the aim of obtaining a more local assessment of the effectiveness of general surveillance and suggestions for improving estimates of days to detection of an EAD outbreak.

AHA and the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) have begun drafting the outline of a business plan for a National General Surveillance Program. This will be progressed when jurisdictions have completed the GSAT regional verification process. Establishment of this program remains a goal of the AHC.

3.2 Surveillance programs managed by Animal Health Australia

AHA43 responds to members’ needs for general and targeted national surveillance programs, and supports the AHC in developing and implementing national surveillance policy.

Surveillance programs managed by AHA are listed in Box 3.1. NAHIS receives surveillance data from a number of sources, collates the information, and reports it to AHA members and the public. NAHIS is integral to validating reports on livestock disease status across jurisdictions and production sectors.

AHA has been working with the AHC to develop a national approach to general surveillance and its evaluation, and will continue to do so as the AHC refines its approach. General surveillance is an important risk mitigation strategy to provide early notification of an EAD outbreak. AHA continues to foster the National Significant Disease Investigation Program (see Section 3.2.4). This aims to strengthen the general surveillance network involving private veterinary practitioners and government officers, and thereby increase Australia’s capacity for the early detection of EADs.

3.2.1 National Arbovirus Monitoring Program The National Arbovirus Monitoring Program (NAMP) monitors the distribution of economically important arboviruses (insect-borne viruses) of livestock and their insect vectors in Australia. Important arboviruses include bluetongue, Akabane and bovine ephemeral fever (BEF) viruses. Clinical bluetongue disease has not been observed in commercial livestock flocks and herds in Australia.

Australia’s economy benefits from the export of ruminants (for both slaughter and breeding) and their semen and

43 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/biosecurity/tse-freedom-assurance-program/national-tse-surveillance-program

Figure 3 2 Areas where outbreaks of two endemic diseases are most likely to occur

Relative likelihood <0.0001 0.0001–0.001 0.001–0.01 0.01–0.1 > 0.1

Bluetongue Hendra virus infection

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 49

embryos. This trade depends on a shared confidence between Australia and its trading partners that any risks to the animal health status of the importing country can be accurately assessed and properly managed. NAMP was established to provide credible data on the nature and distribution of important arboviral infections in Australia, for use by regulatory agencies in Australia and overseas, and by livestock exporters. The program enables the Australian Government to certify to trading partners that ruminants are sourced from areas that are free from important arboviruses. In addition, NAMP data assist overseas countries to develop animal health requirements for the importation of Australian livestock and livestock semen and embryos.

NAMP is jointly funded by its primary beneficiaries: the cattle, sheep and goat industries; the livestock export industry; and the state, territory and Australian governments.

Objectives of NAMPNAMP has three specific objectives:

• trade support — to facilitate the export of live sheep, cattle and goats, and ruminant genetic material to countries with concerns about bluetongue, Akabane and BEF viruses by providing scientific information for developing animal health requirements and to meet export certification requirements

• bluetongue early warning — to detect incursions into Australia of exotic strains of bluetongue virus (BTV) and Culicoides midge species (the vectors of BTV in Australia) by surveillance of the northern BTV endemic area

• risk management — to detect changes in the seasonal distribution of endemic bluetongue, Akabane and BEF viruses and their vectors in Australia, in support of livestock exporters and producers.

Operation of NAMPNAMP data are gathered throughout Australia by serological monitoring of cattle in sentinel herds, strategic serological surveys of cattle herds and trapping of insect vectors. Blood samples from groups of young cattle that have not previously been exposed to arboviral infection are tested at regular intervals for evidence of new infection with bluetongue, Akabane and BEF viruses. The frequency of blood sampling relates to the probability of arbovirus transmission; that is, the greater the likelihood of virus transmission, the more frequent the sampling. Insect traps to detect Culicoides species are positioned near the monitored herds during the period of testing or near herds where conditions are favourable for Culicoides survival. This increases the likelihood of detection.

The number and locations of herds are selected to enable the distribution of important arboviruses to be determined.

Box 3 1 National surveillance and monitoring activities

Managed by Animal Health Australia• National Arbovirus Monitoring Program

• Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Freedom

Assurance Program

• Screw-worm Fly Freedom Assurance Program

• National Significant Disease Investigation Program

Managed by state and territory governments• Field and laboratory diagnosis of significant livestock

diseases

• Targeted surveillance for priority diseases

• Identification, research and reporting of emerging

diseases

• Collection, collation and analysis of data on, and

reporting of, notifiable diseases

• Investigation of the epidemiology, distribution and

prevalence of animal diseases

• Investigations of suspected emergency animal

diseases

Managed by the Australian Wildlife Health Network• Wildlife Health Information System and intelligence on

diseases emerging from wildlife

• Avian influenza surveillance in wild birds

• Surveillance of bats

Managed by other organisations• Bovine tuberculosis surveillance

• Surveillance at sea ports and elsewhere

– National Bee Pest Surveillance Program

– Asian Honey Bee Transition to Management

Program

– Biosecurity Manual for the Honey Bee Industry

– Trapping for Culicoides midges

• Bovine brucellosis surveillance

Participation by private veterinarians • Australian Veterinary Practitioner Surveillance Network

• Initial field investigations of suspect notifiable diseases

• Field surveillance of animal diseases

• Endemic disease management programs (if

contracted)

Surveillance programs in Northern Australia• Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy

– Japanese encephalitis surveillance

• Animal biosecurity in the north Queensland tropics

Public health surveillance for zoonotic diseases• National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System

• Communicable Diseases Intelligence• National Enteric Pathogen Surveillance Scheme

50 Animal health in Australia 2012

Hence, most sentinel sites are located either along the border between the zone where infection is expected and the zone where infection is not expected, or in areas where infection occurs sporadically. In addition, areas expected to be arbovirus free are monitored to verify their freedom, and known infected areas are sampled to assess the seasonal intensity of infection with each arbovirus. The location of monitoring sites in 2011–12 is shown in Figure 3.3.

To detect incursions of arboviruses from overseas, virus isolation is routinely undertaken on blood samples from one herd in the Northern Territory and four herds in northern Queensland. Virus isolation and molecular testing are also applied strategically in other herds in the Northern Territory, Queensland, Western Australia and New South Wales after seroconversions are detected. NAMP surveillance data relating to bluetongue early warning are supplemented by targeted surveillance activities conducted by the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy of DAFF in remote coastal regions of northern Australia, including Torres Strait.

Desert

Monitoring location

Western Australia

SouthAustralia

Northern Territory

New SouthWales

Queensland

Victoria

Tasmania

Figure 3 3 Location of NAMP monitoring sites in Australia, 2011–12

Monitoring data for 2011–12This report describes the limits of vector and virus distribution, and the areas free from bluetongue, Akabane and BEF viruses in the 2011–12 arbovirus transmission season.

Vector distribution and climateThe distribution of bluetongue, Akabane and BEF viruses across the Australian continent is determined by the distribution of their insect vectors. Complex interactions with geography, climate and vectors prevent the viruses from becoming established in the southern and inland areas of Australia. Consequently, these areas are continuously free from these arboviruses. In the north, and in some of

the eastern and western coastal areas, the distribution of arboviruses fluctuates from year to year, depending on the distribution of their insect vectors. The principal climatic factors influencing vector distribution are rainfall and temperature.

BTV is biologically transmitted by a limited number of species of Culicoides midges. The important vector species in Australia feed on cattle and originally all arrived in Australia on air currents from neighbouring countries. The biting midge C  brevitarsis is the main vector of BTV and Akabane virus in Australia. There is a close relationship between the southern limits of C  brevitarsis and the distribution of the two viruses, although the viruses are less widely distributed than their vectors. Other vectors of BTV in Australia, which are less widely distributed, include C  actoni, C  dumdumi, C  fulvus and C  wadai. The main vector of BEF virus is believed to be the mosquito Culex annulirostris. This mosquito is less susceptible to climatic extremes than Culicoides brevitarsis, and often has a wider distribution.

In Western Australia, during the 2011–12 arbovirus season, rainfall was average to above average for almost all of the state. Both maximum and minimum temperatures were higher than average in the south-west and lower than average in the Kimberley. Culicoides trapping occurred across the state. The first Australian detection of the potential vector Culicoides nudipalpis was a single specimen collected in March at Kalumburu, the most northerly community in Western Australia. C  nudipalpis is known to occur in Southeast Asia. Subsequent Kalumburu collections have contained no further specimens. The other vectors collected were C  actoni, C  brevitarsis, C  fulvus and C  wadai; these were only trapped in the north-east Kimberley, well within their usual distribution.

In the Northern Territory, rainfall in the wet season was slightly above average across the northern regions. The season was characterised by long dry periods, interspersed with short but very wet bursts. Central Australia experienced slightly above-average rainfall. In general, there were below-average maximum and minimum temperatures across all regions. C  brevitarsis was widespread in the north, being found at all sites and as far south as the Barkly Tableland. Its numbers were generally very low. C  actoni and C  fulvus were found only in low numbers, at all the most northerly sites. C  wadai was found at three of the most northerly sites, also in very low numbers. No exotic species of Culicoides were found.

In Queensland, above-average summer rainfall was received for the second successive year, resulting in flooding in some areas. The distribution of C  brevitarsis was again extensive, spreading well into western Queensland. C  actoni and C  wadai were restricted to the east coast and Cape York, as in previous years. C  dumdumi was not collected. C  fulvus was

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 51

collected again on Cape York, as in the previous year, but not elsewhere. Genetic analyses indicate that the population in Queensland came from New Guinea rather than from the Northern Territory. C  flavipunctatus (a single specimen of which was collected the previous year in Torres Strait) was not detected. C  oxystoma was again collected on Cape York, but not elsewhere. Genetic analyses indicate that this population probably originated in the Northern Territory.

New South Wales experienced higher than average rainfall and lower than average temperatures in January, which resulted in some localised flooding in the north and far west of the state. This weather pattern suppressed the vector populations, compared with the previous three seasons. The annual southerly migration of C  brevitarsis extended into the Hunter Valley and as far south as Cattai (near Windsor). In north-west New South Wales, C  brevitarsis (usually limited to the Inverell and Wallangra districts) was detected in Moree, with very low numbers trapped in February, March and April. The vector C  wadai was not detected in New South Wales in the 2011–12 season.

Victoria experienced a warmer than average start to the monitoring season, followed by a slightly warmer, wetter and more humid summer than usual, and a wet autumn in the eastern half of the state. South Australia experienced above-average rainfall for the second half of 2011. No vectors of BTV were detected in Victoria, South Australia or Tasmania.

Bluetongue virus distributionClinical bluetongue disease has not been observed in commercial flocks and herds of any susceptible species in Australia. The limits of BTV transmission in Australia are shown on the interactive BTV zone map,44 which defines areas in which no viral transmission45 has been detected for the past two years.

44 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/disease-surveillance/national-arbovirus-monitoring-program

45 Viral transmission is defined as detection or evidence of viral infection based on serological monitoring of sentinel cattle

Monitoring data showed that BTV continued to be endemic in far northern Australia, including the Kimberley region of Western Australia, where serotypes BTV-1, BTV-20 and BTV-21 were detected. BTV also occurred within its usual limits in the Northern Territory, Queensland and New South Wales (Figure 3.4).

In the Northern Territory, activity was detected in all northern sentinel sites except Garrithiya and Victoria River. There was a single BTV-1 conversion at Beatrice Hill in July 2011, a spillover from the previous season, and it did not persist. At Beatrice Hill, new conversions began in November 2011 and continued through to May 2012. Serotyping and virus isolation showed that BTV-1 was active from November to April, and BTV-20 in April and May. BTV-1 and BTV-20 were also detected at other northern sites, with most seroconversions in April and May. Serosurvey data showed BTV-1 activity in the Victoria River district and the Barkly Tableland, and a single focus of BTV-21 in the lower eastern Barkly.

Most of the Queensland sites showed evidence of BTV transmission in March through to June 2012. BTV-1, BTV-15 and BTV-21 were detected, by serology and virus isolation, in Queensland, with BTV-21 being more active. This is the first time that BTV-15 has been detected in Queensland. BTV-2 was not detected in Queensland from July 2011 to July 2012.

In New South Wales, BTV transmission was detected in herds in the North West Slopes region from April to June 2012. This resulted in the expansion of the zone of possible bluetongue transmission to the south and west in north-east New South Wales and into southern Queensland. Transmission of BTV-21 was confirmed by type-specific PCR (polymerase chain reaction) and VNT (viral neutralisation testing). BTV transmission was also detected on the far North Coast at Casino in June. BTV-1 was detected by VNT.

All regions in southern Australia and most pastoral regions in eastern Australia remain BTV free.

Figure 3 4 Distribution of bluetongue virus in Australia, 2009–10 to 2011–12

2009–10

Bluetongue virus–free areas

Bluetongue virus distribution

Desert

2010–11

Bluetongue virus–free areas

Bluetongue virus distribution

Desert

2011–12

Bluetongue virus–free areas

Bluetongue virus distribution

Desert

52 Animal health in Australia 2012

Akabane virus distributionMonitoring data continued to show Akabane virus transmission in the Kimberley region of Western Australia, throughout the north of the Northern Territory and throughout Queensland, where distribution of the virus was similar to that of BTV.

In New South Wales, Akabane virus was detected over a greater area than in 2010–11. Within the known endemic range, transmission was detected on the coastal plain south to Camden, on the eastern ranges at Armidale and extending west along the Hunter Valley to Singleton. There was also transmission across the North West Slopes region. Transmission was detected from December 2011, commencing on the far North Coast, through to June in the south.

Akabane virus was not detected in the southern states of South Australia, Victoria or Tasmania (Figure 3.5).

Bovine ephemeral fever virus distributionIn the Northern Territory, BEF virus activity was very widespread, with seroconversions beginning in October in the most northerly sites and continuing through to April–May. There was activity at Alice Springs from January to April. Serosurvey data showed extensive activity in the Victoria River district and Barkly Tableland, and confirmed the southern extension, with activity along the Northern Territory – Queensland border. BEF virus was widespread throughout Queensland (as in previous years) and was detected at one site in the Kimberley, Western Australia.

In New South Wales, BEF virus transmission was detected on the North West Slopes and west to Bourke from April to June. Cases of BEF were also confirmed in the region from early March. A single seroconversion was detected in the sentinel herd at Dubbo, although no clinical cases were reported. On the North Coast, activity was detected in the sentinel herds from Casino south to Paterson from March to June, with cases also reported in the Hunter Valley region during April.

BEF virus was not detected in the southern states of Tasmania, Victoria or South Australia (Figure 3.6).

3.2.2 Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Freedom Assurance Program

In 2012, Australia continued to be recognised as a country of negligible risk for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and free from classical scrapie. These diseases are types of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). The purpose of the TSE Freedom Assurance Program (TSEFAP) is to increase market confidence that Australian animals and animal products are free from TSEs. This is achieved through the structured and nationally integrated management of animal-related TSE activities.

Projects that operate under the TSEFAP are:

• the National TSE Surveillance Program (NTSESP)

• the Australian ruminant feed-ban scheme, including inspections and testing

• imported animal surveillance, including traceback schemes for certain imported cattle

• communications.

A review of projects such as the TSEFAP is routinely undertaken in the final year of the business plan cycle. A review of the TSEFAP is being undertaken, during 2012–13, with regard to the program’s objectives and future needs to ensure that Australia continues to be recognised as a country of negligible risk for BSE and free from classical scrapie.

National Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Surveillance ProgramThe NTSESP aims to demonstrate Australia’s continuing ability to meet the requirements for a BSE-negligible risk and classical scrapie-free country, and provide early detection of these diseases should they occur. It involves the collection of samples from ‘clinically consistent’ sheep and from ‘clinically

–free areas

Akabane virus distribution

Desert

–free areas

Akabane virus distribution

Desert

–free areas

Akabane virus distribution

Desert

Akabane virus–free areas

Akabane virus distribution

Desert

2009–10

Akabane virus–free areas

Akabane virus distribution

Desert

2010–11

Akabane virus–free areas

Akabane virus distribution

Desert

2011–12

Figure 3 5 Distribution of Akabane virus in Australia, 2009–10 to 2011–12

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 53

consistent’,46 ‘fallen’47 and ‘casualty slaughter’48 cattle. Details of the sampling program for sheep and cattle are provided in the NTSESP National guidelines for field operations.49

For sheep, the NTSESP is a targeted surveillance program that has an annual sampling intensity designed to be 99% confident of detecting scrapie if it is present in at least one in a million adult sheep. This is achieved by the annual laboratory examination of a minimum of 440 sheep brains, collected from animals showing clinical signs of a neurological disorder (as stated in the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) Terrestrial animal health code50).

For cattle, Australia is assessed by the OIE as BSE ‘negligible risk’. This means that Australia should implement OIE Type B surveillance, which is designed to allow the detection of at least one BSE case per 50 000 in the adult cattle population at a confidence level of 95%. Surveillance points are assigned to cattle samples according to the animal’s age and subpopulation category (i.e. the likelihood of detecting BSE). Australia’s target is to achieve a minimum of 150 000 surveillance points during a seven-year moving window. Australia also aims to meet OIE recommendations to investigate all ‘clinically consistent’ cattle, and ensure that cattle from the fallen and casualty slaughter subpopulations are tested.

46 A clinically consistent animal is defined by the AUSVETPLAN disease strategy for BSE as ‘an animal that is found with clinical signs considered consistent with BSE’. This is analogous with the term ‘clinical suspect’ used in the OIE Terrestrial animal health code, Chapter 11.5, on surveillance for BSE

47 Fallen cattle are defined by the OIE Terrestrial animal health code, Chapter 11.5, as ‘cattle over 30 months of age which are found dead or killed on farm, during transport or at an abattoir’

48 Casualty slaughter cattle are defined by the OIE as ‘cattle over 30 months of age that are non-ambulatory, recumbent, unable to rise or to walk without assistance; cattle over 30 months of age sent for emergency slaughter or condemned at ante-mortem inspection’

49 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/NTSESP-Field-Guidelines-2012-13.pdf

50 www.oie.int/en/international-standard-setting/terrestrial-code/access-online

AHA manages the NTSESP with funding from 10 industry stakeholders (livestock and associated industries), the Australian Government, and the state and territory governments. Table 3.1 shows the results from the NTSESP for the 2011–12 financial year. Data for other periods are available from the NAHIS database.51

Australian ruminant feed-ban schemeSince 1997, Australia has had a total ban on the feeding of ruminant meat and bone meal to ruminants. In 1999, this ban was extended to cover feeding of specified mammalian materials to all ruminants. Since 2002, feeding of ruminants with any meals derived from vertebrates (including fish and birds) has been banned. The ban is enforced under legislation in each state and territory, and by a uniform approach to the inspection of all parts of the ruminant production chain. It does not include tallow, gelatine, milk products, poultry or fish oils.

In the 2011–12 financial year, 567 operations were inspected, from renderers to end users. This revealed 35 instances of noncompliance, none of which required prosecution. During the same period, 12 037 audits were completed through

51 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/disease-surveillance/national-animal-health-information-system

Victoria

Tasmania

Bovine ephemeral fever virus–free areas

Bovine ephemeral fever virus distribution

Desert

2009–10

Bovine ephemeral fever virus–free areas

Bovine ephemeral fever virus distribution

Desert

2010–11

Bovine ephemeral fever virus–free areas

Bovine ephemeral fever virus distribution

Desert

2011–12

Figure 3 6 Distribution of bovine ephemeral fever virus in Australia, 2009–10 to 2011–12

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

54 Animal health in Australia 2012

industry quality assurance programs. Twenty-nine required referral to the relevant central agency.

Imported animal tracing All cattle imported between 1996 and 2002 from countries that have experienced a native-born case of BSE are placed under lifetime quarantine, electronically tagged as part of the National Livestock Identification System for cattle, and inspected by government authorities every six months. These animals may not enter the human or animal feed chains. They are slaughtered and tested as part of the NTSESP, then incinerated or buried. The Cattle Council of Australia funds the removal of these cattle from the Australian herd.

Program communicationsDuring 2011–12, TSEFAP communications included:

• a pamphlet aimed at producers, to encourage them to report animals with TSE-consistent clinical signs for sampling under the TSEFAP

• a series of pamphlets for stockfeed manufacturers and users, promoting awareness of their responsibilities under the ruminant feed-ban legislation

• a series of media releases on the ruminant feed ban and its importance in keeping the Australian ruminant industries free from TSEs.

3.2.3 Screw-worm Fly Freedom Assurance Program

Old World screw-worm fly (Chrysomya bezziana) (SWF) is a serious EAD threat facing Australia’s livestock industries. Old World SWF is an obligate parasite of warm-blooded animals in the tropics and is endemic throughout much of Africa, parts of the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent and

Southeast Asia, including countries to Australia’s north. In 1973, Australian authorities, recognising the threat posed by SWF, began a long-term research and development effort, initially in Papua New Guinea and then in Malaysia. The aim was to investigate the biology and ecology of SWF, develop large-scale mass rearing technology for SWF, and then adapt this technology for use in the sterile insect technique to eliminate from Australia any incursion of SWF.

Findings from this research were considered in 2001, and in 2002 responsibility for coordinating Australia’s future SWF preparedness was transferred to AHA. AHA currently manages an ongoing Screw-worm Fly Freedom Assurance Program, in consultation with industry and government stakeholders.

Screw-worm fly surveillanceSWF surveillance uses a multifaceted approach, including adult fly trapping in Torres Strait and at sea ports, sample collection from myiasis cases in livestock and wildlife, and animal surveys. This approach increases the capacity for the early detection of SWF incursions, which increases the probability of a successful eradication program. Nationally collated SWF surveillance data show that C  bezziana has not been detected in insect trapping and inspection of arriving international livestock vessels (data since 2003), insect trapping in Torres Strait (data since 2004), or myiasis investigations (data since 1997). The surveillance data (excluding vessel inspection data) are reported in NAHIS. Table 3.2 provides a summary of fly trapping data and Table A3.1 provides a summary of suspect SWF myiasis investigations.

Table 3 1 Summary of results from the National Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Surveillance Program, 2011–12

State or territoryCattle Sheep

Number examined Pointsa Number positive Number

examinedNumber positive

New South Wales 157 47 204.5 0 143 0

Northern Territoryb 18 9 870 0 0 0

Queensland 243 85 269.6 0 17 0

South Australia 34 5 888.8 0 74 0

Tasmania 15 5 371.3 0 7 0

Victoria 196 80 373.4 0 135 0

Western Australia 42 18 243.5 0 172 0

Total 705 252 221 1 0 548 0a Points are awarded according to the criteria in the OIE Terrestrial animal health code

b There are no commercial sheep farms in the Northern Territory

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 55

CommunicationsA widespread communications program focuses on producers in northern Australia, live export yards and abattoirs. In addition, the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy (NAQS) provides awareness material through its dealings with local villages and visitors to the Torres Strait region.

ReviewDuring late 2012, an external consultancy was initiated to review the risks of entry of SWF into Australia and surveillance requirements. The review includes an assessment of Australia’s entomology capability (including identification resources) for surveillance and response to an incursion.

3.2.4 National Significant Disease Investigation Program

Ongoing general surveillance (see Section 3.1) is important in maintaining Australia’s favourable animal health status and ensuring early detection of animal disease emergencies. Its value has been demonstrated by the early detection of outbreaks of EADs in Australia: Menangle virus in a New South Wales piggery in 1997, sporadic Hendra virus infection in Queensland horses since 1994, and sporadic anthrax in New South Wales and Victoria.

Veterinary practitioners play a key role in general surveillance in Australia, by providing expertise for evaluating, clinically investigating and reporting outbreaks of significant disease in animals. The National Significant Disease Investigation Program (NSDIP) was initiated to encourage veterinarians to conduct full investigations, which can otherwise be limited by competing priorities and commercial realities, such as the low economic value of individual animals relative to the cost of veterinary services.

Managed by AHA and funded from livestock industry and government subscriptions,52 the NSDIP began in June 2009. The program aims to boost Australia’s capacity for the early detection of emerging diseases and EADs by increasing the participation of veterinary practitioners in disease investigations. Registered, nongovernment veterinarians who are engaged in clinical veterinary medicine — including all veterinary practitioners in university clinics, zoos and wildlife parks — are eligible to participate in the program. Significant diseases are broadly defined as those that may impact trade or market access, farm productivity, public health or wildlife biodiversity conservation.

Subsidies are available for the initial clinical evaluation and a follow-up investigation, if required. In return, the practitioner must provide a case report of the investigation to their state or territory animal health authority. Where there is a genuine suspicion of a notifiable animal disease, the veterinary practitioner has a legal responsibility to notify their relevant animal health authority.53

During 2011–12, private veterinary practitioners reported 464 significant disease investigations under the NSDIP. The program funded approximately 150 investigations, and the remainder were independently funded by some jurisdictions as part of their investigations (see Section 3.6). Summary data of investigations by species and financial year are shown in Figure 3.7, and by syndrome and species in Figure 3.8. The high incidence of nervous signs in horses that was reported in Animal health in Australia 2011, in association with an outbreak of arbovirus diseases in horses, was not repeated in 2011–12.

During 2012–13, there is a budget for investigating approximately 350 cases across Australia.

Section 3.6 provides further information on the role of private veterinary practitioners in disease surveillance and management.

52 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/disease-surveillance/national-significant-disease-investigation-program

53 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/animal/notifiable

Table 3 2 Summary of adult screw-worm fly trapping in 2012

ProgramJan–Mar Apr–Jun Jul–Sep Oct–Dec

Traps examined Positive Traps

examined Positive Traps examined Positive Traps

examined Positive

Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy

27 0 36 0 6 0 27 0

Port surveillance

23 0 33 0 37 0 38 0

Note: Excludes traps with identification results pending

56 Animal health in Australia 2012

3.3 Surveillance programs managed by state and territory governments

State and territory governments provide and coordinate most of the infrastructure for general animal health surveillance and disease control. It is a legal requirement in all states and territories that animal owners, veterinarians and laboratories report any suspicion of ‘notifiable’ diseases — that is, diseases that might require government intervention and management — to animal health authorities. The identification of serious zoonotic diseases such as Australian bat lyssavirus (ABLV) and Hendra virus disease of horses is part of the surveillance role of the states and territories.

Networks of official state and territory field veterinarians and diagnostic veterinary laboratory pathologists gather intelligence about notifiable diseases. In some cases, private veterinary practitioners are contracted to the government for this work. Governments also contract and liaise with the private sector to ensure that surveillance for these diseases is effective. Through these networks, as well as through their research and extension facilities, governments obtain knowledge about the distribution and prevalence of a wide range of animal diseases, not just notifiable ones.

State and territory government surveillance plans have a common objective: to ensure that relevant information from general animal health surveillance is readily available for assessing and managing risks to trade in livestock and products, public health and animal production efficiency. Historically, this has led to:

• early detection of emergency and emerging diseases

• demonstration of freedom from diseases or disease agents

• determination of, and detection of changes in, the distribution, prevalence and incidence of diseases and disease agents

• detection of changes in factors or events that influence the risk of diseases.

Government veterinarians attend disease outbreaks in regions of the state or territory that a private practitioner cannot attend, or that involve a suspected endemic notifiable disease or exotic animal disease. Incursions or outbreaks of diseases such as avian influenza, anthrax, equine influenza and Newcastle disease have been detected in this way. This may involve confirmation of a notifiable endemic or exotic disease following the initial investigation by a private practitioner. When high levels of mortality are beyond the investigative and resource capacity of owners and private veterinarians, the disease investigation might require the

Cat

tle

Shee

p

Hor

se

Goa

t

Bird

s

Pig

Alp

aca

Rabb

it

Barn

ow

l

Bats

Buffa

lo

Dee

r

Gre

en tu

rtle

Kang

aroo

Koal

a

Mar

copo

ds

Pade

mel

on

Wal

laby

Jul 2009 – Jun 2010

Financial year

Jul 2010 – Jun 2011Jul 2011 – Jun 2012

Species

Num

ber o

f sub

mis

sion

s

500

400

300

200

100

0

Figure 3 7 Number of investigations reported by species and financial year under the National Significant Disease Investigation Program, July 2009 to June 2012

Incr

ease

d m

orta

ility

/sud

den

deat

h

Ner

vous

sig

ns

Dia

rrho

ea

Wea

knes

s/de

pres

sion

/ano

rexi

a/m

alai

se

Ill-t

hrift

/wei

ght l

oss

Abo

rtio

n/st

illbi

rth

Foun

d de

ad

Resp

irato

ry s

igns

Circ

ulat

ory/

anae

mia

/oed

ema

No

suita

ble

synd

rom

e

Skin

lesi

ons

Lam

enes

s

Jaun

dice

Acu

te fe

brile

dis

ease

Prod

uctio

n dr

op

Alim

enta

ry s

igns

oth

er th

an d

iarr

hoea

Infe

rtili

ty

Ora

l les

ions

or s

aliv

atio

n

Con

geni

tal d

efec

t

Gen

ital l

esio

ns

Mas

titis

Nas

al d

isch

arge

Cattle

80

60

40

20

0

Sheep Horse

Goat Birds

Syndrome

Num

ber o

f inv

estig

atio

ns

Other

Figure 3 8 Number of investigations reported by syndrome and species under the National Significant Disease Investigation Program, July 2011 to June 2012

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 57

services of a government veterinarian. Most investigations are not emergencies, but government veterinarians have ready access to equipment that minimises the risk that they will spread any diseases from farm to farm. Government veterinarians are also skilled in postmortem examination and diagnosis. Another role of government veterinarians is to provide private practitioners with training in disease investigation, biosecurity and the use of personal protective equipment.

Samples for laboratory confirmation or exclusion of disease are quickly taken and dispatched. Laboratory diagnosis is free of charge to the submitter for many categories of submission. Samples may be submitted to government laboratories with access to specialist diagnostic pathologists, or to contracted private laboratories that meet prescribed standards. In all cases of suspected exotic diseases and some emergency diseases, samples are also submitted to CSIRO-AAHL in Geelong, Victoria.

Laboratory quality assurance is maintained by compulsory accreditation of laboratories by the National Association of Testing Authorities, as well as compulsory participation in interlaboratory quality assurance programs (see Chapter 1 for further information).

The information collected by state and territory field and laboratory staff is recorded in information management systems. Property-of-origin health certificates and official reports of regional and national disease status to various authorities (including the OIE) can readily be extracted from these systems. The information is also fed back to the veterinary networks through surveillance reports that keep state and territory field and laboratory staff and private veterinary practitioners informed about disease patterns.

Targeted disease surveillance projects conducted by state and territory veterinarians help to develop and maintain the epidemiological skills of the veterinarians, and enable the use of the most recent surveillance tools for the analysis of existing and emerging diseases.

3.4 Programs and activities managed by the Australian Wildlife Health Network

Wildlife disease surveillance is coordinated nationally through the Australian Wildlife Health Network (AWHN), which has a wildlife coordinator in each state and territory. The network promotes and facilitates collaboration around Australia in the investigation and management of wildlife health, focusing on potential risks to human and animal health, trade and biodiversity. In addition to surveillance, the AWHN assists with disease investigations and research in wildlife and feral

animals, and facilitates education and training to ensure that Australia is well prepared for serious disease outbreaks in livestock, and wild and feral animal populations. Surveillance is focused on six disease categories: diseases listed by the OIE, bat viral diseases, mass or unusual mortality events, Salmonella cases, arbovirus infections, and diseases that wildlife coordinators consider unusual or interesting.

The AWHN is collaborating with the peak representative body for zoos in Australia, the Zoo and Aquarium Association, on the Zoo Based Wildlife Disease Surveillance Program. The program was initiated as a 12-month pilot project by the Zoo Animal Health Reference Group (ZAHRG), which includes representatives from Australia’s major zoos and provides advice to the Australian Chief Veterinary Officer. An independent review of the pilot project found that information captured through the project increased the coverage of surveillance for the wildlife population, and it recommended that the program be continued and expanded. The program has continued in 2012, with nine zoos now participating around Australia.

The AWHN administers a ‘first alert system’, which allows email alerts to be sent to more than 500 individuals and agencies around Australia with an interest in wildlife health issues. The network also produces weekly electronic digests of wildlife health information relevant to Australia. These digests are circulated nationally and to OIE member countries within the region.

In 2012, the focus of activities for AWHN was:

• assisting Australia’s states, territories and national agencies in general wildlife health surveillance and coordination for wildlife disease incidents

• supporting the work of NAHIS

• assisting AHA in its efforts to incorporate wildlife into the NSDIP

• assisting in EAD events by providing relevant information on wildlife disease and facilitating communication with wildlife stakeholders

• providing wildlife health information for national and international reports prepared by the Australian Government

• managing and coordinating the avian influenza surveillance program in wild birds

• ‘horizon scanning’ to identify issues with wildlife as part of the ecology that may impact on Australia’s trade, human health or biodiversity

• coordinating a network of wildlife health expertise and organising working groups with a particular focus. These included a group focusing on university researchers’ contributions to national wildlife health issues, a group

58 Animal health in Australia 2012

focusing on bat health issues in Australia, and the ZAHRG, focusing on the zoo industry and wildlife hospitals in zoos

• encouraging collaboration, communication and engagement among national, state and local government and nongovernment agencies

• assisting the AHC by providing information on wildlife health events to a working group examining the development of a national general animal disease surveillance program (see Section 3.1) that includes wildlife.

A total of 796 wildlife disease investigation events were added to the national database in 2012. Around one-fifth of these were bats submitted for exclusion testing for ABLV. Wild bird mortalities accounted for more than 50% of investigations; where appropriate, diagnostic tests included exclusion of avian influenza, avian paramyxovirus and West Nile virus. No wild bird mortality events were attributed to avian influenza or West Nile virus.

Early in 2012, avian paramyxovirus 1 (APMV-1) continued to be detected via PCR testing in wild domestic rock doves (Columbia livia) in Victoria. All of the rock doves confirmed with APMV-1 were found dead close to several known infected premises. The most likely source of infection in these wild pigeons was domestic pigeons. In January 2012, one juvenile collared sparrowhawk (Accipiter cirrocephalus), a raptor native to Australia, was the first native species with confirmed APMV-1 in Australia.

Findings in bird mortality events included aspergillosis, avian cholera, avian mycobacteriosis, avian chlamydophilosis, avian paramyxovirus, avian pox, botulism, clostridial enteritis, megabacteriosis, salmonellosis, spironucleosis, poisoning, psittacine beak and feather disease, trichomoniasis and trauma.

3.4.1 Avian influenza surveillance in wild birdsNational surveillance activities for avian influenza in wild birds include two sampling components. These were targeted surveillance, via sampling of apparently healthy, live and hunter-killed wild birds; and general surveillance, via investigation of significant, unexplained morbidity and mortality events in wild birds (including captive and wild birds within zoo grounds). Sources for targeted wild bird surveillance data include state and territory government laboratories, universities, and samples collected through the NAQS program. Samples from sick birds include submissions from members of the public, private practitioners, universities, zoos and wildlife sanctuaries.

In 2012, targeted wild bird surveillance occurred in New South Wales, the Northern Territory, Queensland, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia and Western Australia. A total of

8225 birds were sampled. The majority of samples were collected from waterbirds (ducks and waders). No highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses were identified. However, surveillance activities continue to find evidence of a wide range of subtypes of low pathogenicity avian influenza viruses; H1–H12 subtypes were detected in 2012.

The National Avian Influenza Wild Bird Surveillance Program continues to assist in informing policy for prevention and management of avian influenza outbreaks in Australian poultry flocks. This program plays an important role as a key source of samples that are positive for avian influenza viruses, which are required for maintaining and developing current and specific diagnostic primers and probes. These tools are essential for continued confidence that the tests being used in Australia will detect any strains of H5 or H7 subtypes in the event of an outbreak of H5 or H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza in chickens. The program also ensures that laboratory capacity for high-throughput molecular testing is available in Australia. The multi-agency and cross-jurisdictional approach of this project provides a forum for collaboration on technical aspects of influenza in humans, animals and wildlife (a ‘One Health’ approach).

3.4.2 Surveillance of batsSurveillance of bats in Australia has a particular focus on pathogens threatening livestock and public health. In other countries, diseases of bats can affect bat-facilitated pollination and insect control in ecosystems. Information about bat diseases in Australia similarly assists with safeguarding Australia’s biodiversity and provides a better understanding of the ecology of diseases of Australian bats.

State animal and public health laboratories and CSIRO-AAHL continue to screen Australian bats for ABLV. The AWHN collates and publishes national ABLV test results, in collaboration with NAHIS. It also coordinates a working group that focuses on improving national coordination of issues associated with bat health.

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 59

A total of 170 bats were tested for ABLV in 2012. Of these, three tested positive: two grey-headed flying foxes (Pteropus poliocephalus) and a black flying fox (Pteropus alecto). A grey-headed flying fox was the first ABLV-positive bat to be identified in South Australia, and followed the recent establishment of a grey-headed flying fox campsite in Adelaide.

Biosecurity Queensland’s Queensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases (QCEID) screens Australian flying foxes to increase understanding of the disease ecology and epidemiology of Hendra virus. The emphasis is on virus strain diversity; the bat–horse transmission pathway; horse owner knowledge, risk perception and actions; and spatial and temporal patterns of infection.54 The current QCEID research program is supported by additional funding from the Queensland, New South Wales and Australian governments under the National Hendra Virus Research Program.55 Research partners include CSIRO-AAHL, the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, the University of Queensland and the University of Western Sydney. Research outcomes are communicated to industry and the public via Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry fact sheets56 and to the broader scientific community in peer-reviewed publications.57An extensive compendium of Hendra virus information is available on the Biosecurity Queensland website.58

3.5 Programs and activities managed by other organisations

3.5.1 Bovine tuberculosis surveillanceAustralia was officially declared free from bovine tuberculosis (TB) caused by Mycobacterium bovis on 31 December 1997. Australia’s Brucellosis and Tuberculosis Eradication Campaign ran from 1970 to 1997, achieving freedom from bovine TB by OIE standards several years before the end of the campaign. The last cases of bovine TB were in December 2000 in cattle and in January 2002 in buffalo. Traceforward and traceback slaughter was completed in both instances according to the Tuberculosis Freedom Assurance Program.

In 2010, bovine TB surveillance data were evaluated quantitatively using a scenario-tree methodology.59 This showed a very high level of confidence (approaching 100%)

54 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4791_18617.htm

55 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4790_21026.htm

56 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4791_22025.htm

57 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4791_22076.htm

58 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4790_2900.htm

59 Martin P, Cameron A and Greiner M (2007). Demonstrating freedom from disease using multiple complex data sources 1: a new methodology based on scenario trees. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 79:71–97.

that Australia is free from bovine TB and that, if the disease were present, it would have been detected.

In the unlikely event of a bovine TB case, eradication activities will be guided by the current Bovine tuberculosis case response manual — managing an incident of bovine tuberculosis,60 which is endorsed by cattle industry representatives. This provides for an ‘approved property or herd’ eradication program agreed by the owner and the relevant state or territory government. Funding agreements, including reimbursement for destroyed livestock, are included in the Government and Livestock Industry Cost Sharing Deed in Respect of Emergency Animal Disease Responses.61

Since bovine TB is considered an EAD in Australia, results of suspicious granulomas submitted for testing to exclude M  bovis as a cause in 2012 are reported in Table A3.1.

3.5.2 Surveillance at sea ports and elsewhereSurveillance is conducted at sea ports for exotic bee mites and bees (under the National Bee Pest Surveillance Program) and Culicoides midges (the insect vector for bluetongue and Akabane viruses in Australia), because sea ports that service returning livestock vessels are high-risk locations for incursions of these pests and vectors.

National Bee Pest Surveillance Program The National Bee Pest Surveillance Program (NBPSP) follows on from the previous National Sentinel Hive Program, which was established in 2000 to improve post-border monitoring around Australia for exotic pests of honey bees. These include varroa mites (Varroa destructor and V  jacobsoni), Tropilaelaps mites (T  clareae and T  mercedesae) and tracheal mite (Acarapis woodi). Early detection of these exotic pests is critical to eradicating an incursion, and to limiting the size and cost of an eradication program.

In January 2012, the NBPSP was transferred from AHA, which managed the National Sentinel Hive Program, to Plant Health Australia. This followed the transfer of responsibility for bees from the Office of the Australian Chief Veterinary Officer to the Biosecurity Plant Division of DAFF Biosecurity. These transfers have not significantly changed the national implementation of the program, which is delivered through the expertise of state and territory apiary officers.

The change in name of the surveillance program reflects a transition to a more broadly based surveillance program for bee pests and pest bees. Surveillance techniques such

60 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/disease-surveillance/australian-bovine-tuberculosis-surveillance-project

61 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/emergency-animal-disease-preparedness/ead-response-agreement

60 Animal health in Australia 2012

as remote surveillance of hives, floral sweep netting, and a greater number of catch boxes at high-risk ports are currently being investigated for inclusion in the NBPSP. This will increase the ability for early detection of exotic strains of Asian honey bee (Apis cerana), and other honey bees that occur in Asia and Africa — such as the red dwarf honey bee (A  florea) and the giant honey bee (A  dorsata), and exotic strains of A  mellifera, including Africanised honey bees (A  mellifera scutellata) and Cape honey bees (A  mellifera capensis). Plant Health Australia is currently negotiating with the states and the Northern Territory to formally implement these changes, which will be formalised with each jurisdiction by 1 July 2013.

As part of this new program, each jurisdiction is also committed to increasing sentinel hive numbers to six. These will be tested every two months at the three highest risk, first ports of call within each state or territory. In 2012, 92 sentinel hives were established and maintained at Australian sea ports and airports that receive significant volumes of imported cargo, or regular berthing of vessels from international locations where exotic pests of honey bees are known to occur. This is an increase from 26 sentinel hives in 2011. In addition, coconut log traps for Asian honey bee were maintained at the ports of Darwin, Gove and Brisbane. Catch boxes (empty hives) are deployed at many southern ports as an additional surveillance measure for detecting swarms of exotic bees.

Tables 3.3 and 3.4 show sample data from sentinel hives located primarily at Australian ports in 2012.

As well as providing early detection of bee pests and pest bees, the NBPSP supplies data to support health certification for exports of queen bees and packaged bees.

Asian Honey Bee Transition to Management ProgramThe Australian Government is investing $2 million from July 2011 to June 2013 to move from eradication to management of Asian honey bee in Australia. This will be done in partnership with Biosecurity Queensland and the Australian Honey Bee Industry Council, which will also contribute significant funding and activities. The Asian Honey Bee Transition to Management Program (AHB T2M)62 is administered by Plant Health Australia.

An Asian Honey Bee Transition Management Group has been established to oversee the AHB T2M, monitor its delivery and ensure that its outcomes are achieved. An Asian Honey Bee Scientific Advisory Group has also been established to provide technical advice, feedback, and consideration of specific projects and activities under the AHB T2M. Appendix 4 provides details of associated research projects.

62 asianhoneybee.net.au

Table 3 3 Samples examined for parasites of bees and pest bee species by state or territory, 2012

State or territory State or territory

New South Wales 61

Northern Territory 28

Queenslanda 84

South Australia 44

Tasmania 2

Victoria 106

Western Australia 54

Australia 379a Queensland is currently undergoing a transition phase as part of its involvement in the National Bee Pest Surveillance Program, and because of its extensive

commitments to the Asian Honey Bee Transition to Management Program. Of the 277 nests and swarms detected in 2012 of Asian honey bee (Apis cerana Java genotype), 84 were examined for external mites (Varroa sp. and Tropilaelaps sp.), internal mites (Acarapis sp.) and microsporidian parasites (Nosema sp.) by Biosecurity Queensland.

Table 3 4 Samples examined for parasites of bees and pest bee species by agent, 2012

Agent Specimens examined

Apis ceranaa 84

Tracheal mite 111

Varroa/Tropilaelaps mites 184

Total 379a In 2012, 84 samples of Asian honey bee (Apis cerana Java genotype) were examined for external mites (Varroa sp. and Tropilaelaps sp.), internal mites (Acarapis

sp.) and microsporidian parasites (Nosema sp.) by Biosecurity Queensland in the Cairns region, as part of its commitment to the Asian Honey Bee Transition to Management Program.

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 61

Biosecurity manual for the honey bee industry

The Biosecurity manual for the honey bee industry63 is a biosecurity toolkit for commercial and hobby beekeepers. It explains how to keep honey bees healthy and how to spot pests and diseases that have devastated honey bee colonies overseas.

The manual is an initiative of government and industry partners, and has been sent to every registered beekeeper (about 12 000) in Australia. The aim is to protect Australia’s honey bees — and the crop industries that rely on pollination services — from the introduction and establishment of exotic pests such as the varroa mite. The manual contains fact sheets on 13 exotic and established pests and detailed information on how to check for these pests in an apiary, to allow early detection and possible eradication. It also gives simple guidelines on reporting suspect pests, honey bee hygiene and product management principles.

The manual was developed by Plant Health Australia, with support from the Pollination Program of Horticulture Australia Ltd, the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, the Australian Honey Bee Industry Council, the Federal Council of Australian Apiarists Association and the Wheen Bee Foundation.

Trapping for Culicoides midgesCulicoides surveillance supports the livestock export trade by confirming the continuous or seasonal absence of Culicoides vectors at ports from which livestock are loaded. The program also allows the early detection of incursions by exotic Culicoides species. DAFF Biosecurity manages this program. Results for the program are reported into the Central Animal Health Database via the NAMP interface for knowledge base purposes (see Figure 2.1).

3.5.3 Bovine brucellosis surveillanceAfter an eradication campaign that began in 1970, Australia achieved freedom from bovine brucellosis (caused by Brucella abortus) in July 1989, and remains free from this disease. Targeted serological surveillance — performed by serological testing of blood samples collected from adult female cattle at slaughter — continued until the end of 1993. Since then,

63 www.phau.com.au/go/phau/biosecurity

extensive general surveillance by investigation of abortions has demonstrated ongoing freedom from bovine brucellosis.

Table 3.5 shows the number of serological tests for B  abortus carried out at state and territory veterinary laboratories as part of abortion investigations. Table 3.6 shows the number of tests performed for other reasons, such as export requirements. Sampling is conducted on other species, as shown in the tables, on an ad hoc basis.

3.6 Participation by private veterinarians in disease surveillance and management

Private veterinary practitioners provide information about their on-farm investigations, which is collected through the Australian Veterinary Practitioner Surveillance Network (Section 3.6.1). They also participate in national surveillance programs, particularly the NTSESP (see Sections 3.2.2 and 3.6.2). Australia’s states and territories have legislation that requires all farmers, private veterinary practitioners and laboratories to report suspicion or confirmation of a notifiable disease (see Section 3.3).

3.6.1 Australian Veterinary Practitioner Surveillance Network

The Australian Veterinary Practitioner Surveillance Network (AVPSN) is a web-based program that collects information about on-farm investigations by nongovernment veterinarians. Veterinarians are recruited strategically across Australia’s animal production regions to ensure geographic coverage of the range of livestock industries and animal production systems in Australia (Figure 3.9). The program complements other surveillance activities undertaken by state and territory field services and nongovernment animal health surveillance programs.

The AVPSN supports Australia’s disease-free reputation by providing quantitative evidence of the amount of farm-level passive surveillance, and raises awareness of EADs among participating practitioners.

The AVPSN was initiated by the Australian Government and is managed by DAFF. The network reports annually to the AHC and in the Animal Health Surveillance Quarterly. Data about farm visits are organised geographically, by livestock type and by reasons and outcomes for farm visits.

One practitioner from each registered practice enters data into a dedicated website for the last seven days of each of the three months of the reporting period, in spring and autumn.

62 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table 3 5 Serological tests for Brucella abortus in Australia, abortion serology, 2006–12

SpeciesNumber of testsa

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Cattle 746 293 626 289 1313 939 1205

Dog 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Horse 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pig 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Sheep 18 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 765 293 626 289 1313 939 1208a All test results were negative for Brucella abortus

Note: Animal health in Australia 2008 was the first report to present data for cattle, horses and sheep; before this, aggregated totals were provided for brucellosis surveillance.

Table 3 6 Serological tests for Brucella abortus in Australia, other serology, 2006–12

SpeciesNumber of testsa

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Alpaca 8 0 0 8 0 0 0

Cattle 9 875 13 209 9 860 5 672 11 398 4 936 4 880

Deer 0 519 0 53 0 0 0

Dog 7 0 0 0 0 0 0

Goat 473 2 190 0 905 0 9 64

Horse 8 9 0 0 2 1 0

Pig 22 0 0 18b 0 0 11

Sheep 361 273 45 5 0 3 2

Total 10 754 16 200 9 905 6 661 11 400 4 949 4 957a All test results were negative for Brucella abortus.

b Previously reported as 33 tests (data updated by New South Wales)

Note: Animal health in Australia 2008 was the first report to present data for cattle, horses and sheep; before this, aggregated totals were provided for brucellosis surveillance.

Figure 3 9 Location of Australian Veterinary Practitioner Surveillance Network practitioners by livestock production region

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 63

Practitioners can report five general reasons for their visits:

• routine herd/flock health or production visit (split into routine advisory work, and routine reproductive work for breeding thoroughbreds and standardbreds)

• herd/flock disease investigation

• herd/flock accreditation (or examination and certification in horses)

• research activity

• clinical case.

During the 2011–12 financial year, practitioners entered data from 2250 farm visits. Clinical cases were the most common reason for visiting livestock, accounting for 67% of all farm visits. Herd health accounted for 25% of visits. In terms of livestock type, performance and pleasure horses and beef cattle were the most commonly visited (32% and 31% of all visits, respectively) (Figure 3.10).

Visits to inspect breeding thoroughbred and standardbred horses, sheep and goats accounted for 12% of visits.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Clinical cases Herd health Herd accreditation

Investigation

Perc

enta

ge

Beef cattle Dairy cattle

Performance and pleasure horses

Figure 3 10 Reason for veterinarian visits across beef cattle, dairy cattle, and performance and pleasure horses

By region, the reason for visits mostly followed the overall trend — clinical case visits were most common, followed by herd health visits (Figure 3.11).

3.6.2 Participation by private veterinarians in state and territory surveillance

New South WalesIn New South Wales, cases of suspect notifiable diseases are investigated after private practitioners submit diagnostic specimens to the State Veterinary Laboratory in the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries. State and

district government veterinary officers collate data from these investigations, and often assist in the investigation or manage cases referred by private practitioners. Private practitioners receive subsidised laboratory testing for cases in which notifiable diseases are suspected. They also receive training in sample submission, disease investigation methods for some notifiable diseases, and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE).

Northern TerritoryPrivate practitioners in the Northern Territory are asked to report significant animal disease events to veterinary officers in the Northern Territory Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries, who manage the investigations. Practitioners are encouraged to submit livestock samples for laboratory investigation, which is performed free of charge.

QueenslandPrivate veterinary practitioners involved in large animal and equine practice are regularly visited or contacted by veterinary or biosecurity officers from the Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to discuss disease incidents in their area. Private practitioners are reminded of the importance of reporting significant animal disease events, including notifiable diseases and suspect EADs. In response to outbreaks of Hendra virus, the department has been distributing a package of printed material on management of the disease, and conducting training sessions with private practitioners on disease investigation and exclusion of notifiable diseases. The recently introduced Queensland Government PPE rebate program, which assists private veterinary practices to offset the cost of PPE used in the testing of suspect Hendra virus cases, has been welcomed by the profession.

Departmental veterinary officers also work with private veterinary consultants in the intensive pig and poultry industries to manage serious disease issues. The department’s veterinary pathologists provide telephone advice and in-field support to private practitioners and field veterinary officers investigating complex disease cases, particularly when no clear cause for the problem has been identified.

State veterinary officers are involved in structured teaching activities at Queensland’s two veterinary schools. New graduates are entering the veterinary profession with a deeper appreciation of state veterinary medicine.

South AustraliaBiosecurity SA, a division of Primary Industries and Regions South Australia, maintains close communication with rural private veterinary practitioners. Biosecurity SA runs the

64 Animal health in Australia 2012

Enhanced Disease Surveillance Program to encourage investigations of disease incidents in South Australian livestock. The program funds laboratory submissions for suspect infectious diseases in livestock. When requested, it also reimburses contracted private veterinary practitioners for costs incurred investigating unusual disease events.

Biosecurity SA also offers training and refresher courses in necropsy techniques and disease investigations to practitioners, as well as providing ongoing technical support when required.

TasmaniaIn Tasmania, private veterinary practices provide general surveillance information via personal contacts with department animal health staff. They also participate in the NSDIP and various targeted disease surveillance programs, such as the NTSESP. During 2012, practitioner liaison included an EAD awareness workshop, promotion of overseas FMD training opportunities for private practitioners, and continuation of a quarterly newsletter. The newsletter provides practitioners with brief reports of surveillance information from disease investigations and Tasmania’s Animal Health Laboratory data, and promotes relevant surveillance programs. A dedicated web page for Tasmanian practitioners is expected to improve participation in surveillance programs in 2013.

VictoriaIn Victoria, private veterinary practitioners make an important contribution to surveillance by providing reports of notifiable

diseases and significant disease events. Since 2005, private veterinary practitioners in Victoria have investigated significant disease events as part of the Victorian Significant Disease Investigation Program. Participating practitioners receive a payment from the Victorian Department of Primary Industries for reporting the investigation and a subsidy towards laboratory investigation costs. In 2010, the department also introduced a subsidy for cattle, sheep, goat and pig owners who initiate an investigation of a significant disease event, to partially cover the cost of engaging a veterinary practitioner. During 2012, 316 significant disease events were investigated and reported by private veterinary practitioners in Victoria.

Private veterinary practitioners are also contracted by the Department of Primary Industries to undertake on-farm activities associated with endemic disease management programs — for example, bovine Johne’s disease.

In 2012, the department offered two short courses in livestock disease investigation methods for private veterinary practitioners. Both courses were well attended.

Western AustraliaWestern Australia promotes surveillance and reporting of significant livestock disease events by private practitioners through personal networking by departmental veterinary officers, regional training workshops in disease investigation, and the production of a monthly surveillance newsletter.

Laboratory diagnostic work on cases of suspect notifiable diseases, or cases that are considered to be of public benefit, is exempt from laboratory charges.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Research activity Disease investigation Accreditation Herd health Clinical cases

Tem

perate So

uth-eas

t Coas

t

Central Q

ld and N

orth-w

est NSW

Mediterra

nean

Tasm

ania

Tem

perate Sl

opes and Plai

ns

South-w

est Weste

rn Austr

alia

Tropica

l North

-east C

oast

New England

Arid Zone

Far N

orth

Lower N

orth

Barkley T

ablelan

d

Perc

enta

ge

Figure 3 11 Reason for farm visits by region, 2011–12 financial year

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 65

During 2012, submissions from private veterinarians resulted in the investigation of 556 cases of livestock disease. Of these, 155 included exotic disease exclusions. The Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia and the NSDIP sponsored 92 of the 556 investigations of significant disease in livestock. This included payment of private veterinarians’ travel costs, waiving of laboratory fees, and assistance with collecting and dispatching samples.

Practitioners, district veterinary officers and pathologists liaise closely under the NSDIP.

3.7 Surveillance programs in northern Australia

3.7.1 Northern Australia Quarantine StrategyNAQS is a program of DAFF that operates across coastal northern Australia, from Broome in Western Australia to Cairns in Queensland, including Torres Strait.

NAQS contributes to national biosecurity through:

• identifying and evaluating the unique quarantine risks facing northern Australia

• developing and implementing measures for the early detection of targeted pests, diseases and weeds

• contributing to national and international initiatives relating to domestic surveillance for targeted pests and diseases

• managing the quarantine aspects of border movements through Torres Strait.

NAQS surveillance objectives are delivered through a program of integrated activities, including:

• active surveillance for targeted pests and diseases through targeted surveys of domestic and feral animal populations, sentinel animal monitoring, insect and vector trapping, and fee-for-service programs delivered by Indigenous ranger groups

• a general surveillance strategy that educates residents and visitors to northern Australia about pests and diseases of concern, and encourages the reporting of unusual signs of pests and diseases through the program’s Quarantine TopWatch! campaign.

Strategy prioritiesKey priorities for NAQS in 2012 included:

• continuing to focus on risk-based delivery of domestic surveillance for the detection of NAQS target exotic animal pests and diseases, including highly pathogenic avian influenza, rabies, surra, SWF, FMD and classical swine fever

• collaborating with a range of internal and external stakeholders on surveillance initiatives, including contributing to capacity building and animal health surveillance in Papua New Guinea (coordinated by the ‘One Health’ Program in DAFF)

• implementing the recommendations of a 2011 expert review of risk areas across northern Australia, to ensure that the NAQS surveillance effort continues to target areas of higher risk for the introduction and establishment of exotic animal pests and diseases within the strategy’s area of responsibility

• strengthening existing surveillance strategies relating to domestic animal health, including developing and implementing a syndromic reporting project with Indigenous ranger groups to increase reporting of domestic animal health in Indigenous communities

• developing new approaches for effective capture of observational and negative animal health data (data arising from testing that gives negative results)

• implementing a new surveillance strategy for Japanese encephalitis virus.

The program continued to contribute to national surveillance programs, including NAMP, the Screw-worm Fly Freedom Assurance Program, and the National Avian Influenza Wild Bird Surveillance Program of the AWHN.

No targeted exotic pests or diseases were detected through NAQS activities in 2012.

Onshore surveillanceDuring 2012, NAQS conducted nine feral animal health surveys across northern Australia, one domestic animal health survey of Torres Strait and the Northern Peninsula area, and eight surveys of wild waterfowl populations for the detection of avian influenza viruses. Public awareness visits were conducted across more than 35 communities. These included education campaigns in schools and health clinics, and with Indigenous ranger groups and pastoralists.

Other monitoring activities included regular testing of sentinel cattle herds for diseases, including exotic strains of bluetongue virus; and trapping for adult SWF and insect vectors, including Culicoides biting midge species. In 2012, NAQS monitored four sentinel cattle herds located in Queensland, the Northern Territory and Western Australia. Insect traps were located on the islands of Saibai, Boigu, Dauan and Horn in Torres Strait and at each of the sentinel cattle sites.

66 Animal health in Australia 2012

Japanese encephalitisLimited surveillance for Japanese encephalitis virus in Torres Strait and mainland Australia was undertaken in the 2012 wet season. Japanese encephalitis virus is exotic to mainland Australia but is considered to be seasonally present in Torres Strait. Testing for Japanese encephalitis and related arboviruses was also conducted on monthly samples from the Northern Peninsula area sentinel herd. A novel vector trapping method, in combination with the sentinel herd sampling, allowed both genetic and serological surveillance. No evidence of Japanese encephalitis was found; historically, there has been no evidence of circulation of the virus on the mainland since early 2004.

3.7.2 Animal biosecurity in the north Queensland tropics

Biosecurity Queensland conducts surveillance and awareness activities for emergency pests and diseases across tropical north Queensland. These activities complement those of other programs, such as border security and quarantine barrier activities undertaken by DAFF Biosecurity and NAQS. They also contribute to national pest and disease surveillance programs, including:

• NAMP (Section 3.2.1)

• the NTSESP (Section 3.2.2)

• the NBPSP (Section 3.5.2)

• the national Screw-worm Fly Freedom Assurance Program (Section 3.2.3).

Activities are also conducted in aquatic animal health surveillance, EAD preparedness, and livestock identification and traceability.

Biosecurity Queensland personnel work to raise awareness about biosecurity. They provide guidance to the public and private sector on:

• managing risk of exposure to zoonotic disease

• managing emergency pest and disease incidents, including decontamination procedures and movement controls

• on-farm biosecurity planning

• investigating suspect animal pests or diseases

• animal disease prevention strategies, including swill-feeding regulations

• animal welfare and animal ethics.

A key activity for Biosecurity Queensland is to investigate reported outbreaks of disease and losses in livestock and domestic animals. During 2012, there were five confirmed EAD detections. All were cases of Hendra virus: two separate cases in Ingham in May and November, one in Mackay in July, and two separate cases in Cairns in August and September. The response to these incidents included placing affected properties under quarantine, and testing of in-contact horses and dogs until it was demonstrated that the animals were not infected.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 67

Asian honey bees were first detected in Cairns in 2007 and have gradually spread as far north as Port Douglas, south to South Johnstone and west to Atherton. Natural movement is expected to lead to slow spread of the bee. Biosecurity Queensland scientists are conducting research to learn more about the bee and its potential impacts on the apiary industry and the environment. The Asian Honey Bee Transition to Management Program (see Section 3.5.2) is focusing on minimising the bee’s spread, and providing a range of safe and effective tools to help the community to manage this pest.

Extension programs conducted in the northern tropics during 2012 included:

• visits by state veterinary officers to private veterinary clinics, discussing procedures for investigation of suspected Hendra virus cases

• promotions at agricultural shows and field days, focusing on biosecurity programs

• presentations at the Cape York Peninsula training workshops for environmental health workers and animal management workers, to promote the importance of biosecurity awareness, animal welfare and zoonotic diseases for Indigenous communities

• tutorial sessions and field trips with small groups of final-year veterinary science students from James Cook University, covering national surveillance programs, EAD preparedness and response, and on-farm biosecurity planning

• information sessions for apiarists on Asian honey bee and bee diseases.

3.8 Public health surveillance for zoonotic diseases

The Communicable Diseases Network Australia (see Section 7.2.1) provides national leadership and coordination for the surveillance, prevention and control of communicable human diseases that pose a threat to public health.

3.8.1 National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System

The National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) coordinates the national surveillance of more than 50 communicable diseases or disease groups that can affect people. Unit records of disease notifications made to state or territory health authorities, under the provisions of the public health legislation in each jurisdiction, are supplied daily to the Office of Health Protection, Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. The data are published weekly on the NNDSS website64 and quarterly in the Communicable Diseases Intelligence (CDI) journal65 (see Section 3.8.2). Data on five important zoonoses are replicated in Animal Health Surveillance Quarterly.

Table 3.7 reports the incidence of selected zoonotic diseases in 2012 and compares these data with those for 2011 and the five-year mean.

64 www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-surveil-nndss-nndssintro.htm

65 www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-pubs-cdi-cdiintro.htm

Table 3 7 Incidence of selected zoonotic diseases in humans, 2012

Zoonotic diseaseNumber of casesa

2011 2012 5-year mean

Anthrax 0 0 0.2

Barmah Forest virus infection 1863 1701 1717.2

Brucellosisb 39 25 32.4

Kunjin virus infection 2 0 1.2

Leptospirosis 215 111 141.8

Murray Valley encephalitis virus infection 16 1 4.6

Ornithosis 86 63 75.2

Q feverc 338 317 334.6

Ross River virus infection 5139 4649 5055.6a Data accessed on 17 January 2013 by diagnosis date

b Australia is free from zoonotic Brucella spp. except B suis, which is endemic in feral pigs in some areas.

c The Australian Q Fever Register stores information on the Q fever immune status of individuals. The website www.qfever.org has general information on Q fever and information on the register.

68 Animal health in Australia 2012

3.8.2 Communicable Diseases IntelligenceThe Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing publishes CDI. This online, quarterly, peer-reviewed journal disseminates information on the epidemiology of communicable diseases in Australia, including surveillance, prevention and control.

3.8.3 National Enteric Pathogen Surveillance Scheme

The National Enteric Pathogen Surveillance Scheme collects, analyses and disseminates data on enteric pathogens isolated from humans, animals, food, water, the environment and other sources. The scheme is operated and maintained by the Microbiological Diagnostic Unit at the University of

Melbourne. Data on pathogens — such as Salmonella spp., pathogenic Escherichia coli, Yersinia spp. and Campylobacter spp. — isolated from humans and nonhuman sources are submitted from participating laboratories around Australia. Data for human notifications are reported within the NNDSS.

NNDSS data show that, as in recent years, the most frequently reported foodborne infections in 2012 were campylobacteriosis66 (15 071 cases) and salmonellosis (11 194 cases).

66 This disease is not notifiable in New South Wales.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Terrestrial animal disease surveillance and monitoring 69

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

70 Animal health in Australia 2012

4 Managing animal health emergencies

Emergency animal disease responses in Australia are coordinated nationally. Governments, the private sector and other key players work together to ensure a successful outcome.

This chapter describes the arrangements and initiatives that are in place to prepare for, and respond to, emergency animal diseases (EADs). The chapter also provides information on disease incidents that occurred during 2012. Information on management of aquatic animal health emergencies and aquatic animal disease incidents during 2012 is provided in Chapter 5.

The Australian Government, state and territory governments, livestock industries, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), private veterinarians and laboratories, and other animal health workers all contribute to the management of EADs. Animal Health Australia (AHA) participates on behalf of its members.

4.1 Response plans and coordinationEAD responses in Australia are coordinated nationally: governments and industry work together to ensure a successful outcome. Responses are underpinned by the Government and Livestock Industry Cost Sharing Deed in Respect of Emergency Animal Disease Responses (Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement — EADRA).

The EADRA ensures that responses:

• accommodate the relevant state’s or territory’s legislative, industry, government and community structures

• are guided by a nationally agreed plan — the Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan (AUSVETPLAN).

Chapter

Managing animal health emergencies 71

4.1.1 Review of foot-and-mouth disease preparedness — response to the Matthews report

Following recommendations made by Mr Ken Matthews, AO, in A review of Australia’s preparedness for the threat of foot-and-mouth disease,67 Australia’s National Biosecurity Committee agreed to reinvigorate national action on improving preparedness through development of a National Foot-and-Mouth Disease (FMD) Action Plan. The plan identifies priorities for national action (to address policy and capacity gaps), action currently under way, and areas to be addressed through industry–government collaboration.

Through the collaborative efforts of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), states and territories, livestock industry groups and AHA, significant progress has been made in strengthening Australia’s defences against FMD.

A significant advance in 2012 was agreement on a national FMD vaccination policy. The policy provides for vaccination to be considered as a potential control tool from the first day of an emergency response to FMD. It was endorsed by all state and territory ministers at the Standing Council on Primary Industries meeting in April 2012. This change in national policy is reflected in the updated AUSVETPLAN Disease strategy: foot-and-mouth disease.68

In 2012, a risk analysis was completed to identify FMD risk regions in Australia, based on risk factors across the biosecurity continuum (pre-border, at the border, and post-border). The work integrates highly complex disease epidemiological modelling, Australian livestock population demographics, and data on trade and movement of livestock and livestock products into a risk analysis. The risk analysis is now being used as a key input to FMD surveillance, awareness and preparedness activities in these regions.

DAFF developed a new training initiative that started in 2012. Through collaboration with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), it provides real-time training in FMD-endemic countries for approximately 80 Australian veterinarians and livestock handlers. The training aims to improve awareness of the signs of FMD and increase the likelihood of early detection of an outbreak in Australia (see Section 4.3.3).

Australia is now also better placed to anticipate potential FMD risks and to translate warning intelligence into action. An agreement between DAFF and the FAO will provide the

67 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/animal/fmd/review-foot-and-mouth-disease

68 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/FMD-19-FINAL29Oct12.pdf

Australian Chief Veterinary Officer with global intelligence reports that are tailored to Australia’s biosecurity intelligence priorities. This will allow Australia to make use of the extensive global and regional intelligence networks (and analysis capacity) of the FAO.

4.1.2 Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement

The EADRA69 is a legally binding agreement between the Australian Government, state and territory governments, livestock industries (currently 14) and AHA. It supports a rapid and efficient response to an EAD outbreak.

The agreement, which is a world first, establishes basic operating principles and guidelines, and defines roles and responsibilities of the parties. It provides for formal consultation and dispute resolution between government and industry on resource allocation, funding, training, risk management and ongoing biosecurity arrangements.

The signatories to the EADRA are committed to:

• minimising the risk of EAD incursions by developing and implementing biosecurity plans for their jurisdictions or industries

• maintaining capacity to respond to an EAD by having adequate numbers of trained personnel available to fill roles specified in AUSVETPLAN

• participating in decision making relating to EAD responses, through representation on the Consultative Committee on Emergency Animal Diseases (CCEAD) and a National Management Group (NMG)

• sharing the eligible response costs of EAD incursions using pre-agreed formulas.

The EADRA is regularly reviewed so that it remains relevant, flexible and functional. In 2012, only minor updates were made. The latest version of the EADRA can be found on the AHA website.

Two EADRA guidance documents were endorsed by parties to the EADRA and published on the AHA website:70 Normal commitments for Parties to the Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement, and Livestock welfare management and compensation principles for Parties to the Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement.

With the assistance of a working group comprising governments, industry and Plant Health Australia, AHA completed the second five-year review (2012) of the EADRA.

69 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/emergency-animal-disease-preparedness/ead-response-agreement

70 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/emergency-animal-disease-preparedness/eadra-guidance-documents

72 Animal health in Australia 2012

The review showed that parties to the EADRA were highly satisfied with the agreement. Findings that require follow-up actions were added to the EADRA work plan.

Cost sharing under the EADRA was invoked for two EADs during 2012:

• a detection of a low pathogenicity avian influenza virus (H5N3) in a duck farm in Victoria (see Section 4.6.3)

• an outbreak of highly pathogenic H7N7 avian influenza in a layer farm in New South Wales (see Section 4.6.4).

4.1.3 Australian Veterinary Emergency PlanAUSVETPLAN is a comprehensive series of manuals that sets out the suggested starting policy and guidelines for agencies and organisations involved in a response to an EAD outbreak.

AHA manages the continued improvement of AUSVETPLAN71 on behalf of its government and industry members. AHA does not determine animal health policy; it facilitates the development of national policy through engagement with the relevant stakeholders. Governments are ultimately responsible for developing and implementing national disease response policies. AUSVETPLAN disease strategies

71 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/emergency-animal-disease-preparedness/ausvetplan/

are endorsed by state and territory ministers through the Standing Council on Primary Industries.

The availability of agreed AUSVETPLAN disease strategies or response policy briefs72 for all diseases listed in the EADRA ensures that informed decisions about the policies and procedures needed to manage an EAD response are immediately at hand; no time is lost in the event of an EAD outbreak. This requires that as many policy principles as possible are agreed to during non-outbreak times. EAD responses are planned and implemented at three levels — national, state or territory, and local — and involve animal health authorities, emergency management agencies and industry organisations.

The disease strategies and response policy briefs are supported by operational manuals, enterprise manuals, and other resource and guidance documents. The AUSVETPLAN Summary document73 describes the components of AUSVETPLAN and outlines its functional relationships.

72 Response policy briefs cover EADs that are subject to cost sharing between governments and livestock industries but are not currently covered by full disease strategies

73 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/AUSVETPLAN-Summary-Document.pdf

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Managing animal health emergencies 73

Updating prioritised AUSVETPLAN manualsIn 2012, AHA worked with the AUSVETPLAN Technical Review Group, industry and government experts, the Animal Health Committee (AHC) and scientific editors, to revise and publish updated prioritised AUSVETPLAN manuals.

The updated manuals were for:

• anthrax — a major revision that incorporates new scientific knowledge about this disease and its control. Updates included historical occurrences in Australian animals, modes of transmission and decontamination. Additions included a case definition and a definition for a sporadic incident, the immunochromatographic antigen detection assay, export eligibility of animals and their products, premises definitions relating to anthrax, matrices for recommended movement controls, and relevant permits for declared premises

• Aujeszky’s disease, classical swine fever, swine vesicular disease and transmissible gastroenteritis — major revisions that incorporate new scientific knowledge about these diseases and their control. Updates included laboratory procedures for analysis and identification, and general updating of information (e.g. on the manner and risk of introduction of the diseases into Australia, and zoning and compartmentalisation). Additions included case definitions, matrices for recommended quarantine and movement controls, and relevant permits for declared premises

• bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) — a major revision that incorporates new scientific knowledge about BSE and its control (e.g. information on the known strains of BSE — ‘classical’ BSE and ‘atypical’ BSE). Updates included general information (e.g. recent amendments to World Organisation for Animal Health [OIE] standards), and laboratory procedures for analysis and identification. Additions included case definitions that trigger the use of AUSVETPLAN, and a matrix for movement controls for premises (it is very unlikely that there will be a need to declare restricted areas or control areas during a BSE outbreak, but in exceptional circumstances, compartments may be created to address different levels of risk in different sectors of the cattle industry)

• FMD — a major revision, following a two-year process74 of public consultation and research to update policies that govern Australia’s response to an outbreak of FMD. The revised FMD disease strategy (version 3.3) was endorsed by all state and territory ministers at the Standing Council on Primary Industries meeting in October 2012, and

74 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/emergency-animal-disease-preparedness/ausvetplan/fmd-response-policy-review

has now been published on the AHA website.75 This is a significant achievement for Australia and marks an important milestone under the National FMD Action Plan, in response to the report by Mr Ken Matthews, AO, A review of Australia’s preparedness for the threat of foot-and-mouth disease76 (see Section 4.1.1). The updated policy reflects the latest thinking on vaccination and provides for vaccination to be considered for use in Australia from day one of an emergency response. The manual also contains updated guidance on tracing and surveillance, and recommended quarantine and movement controls for animals and animal products that are based on risk and provide a better balance between disease control and business continuity.

Revisions were also made in 2012 to the AUSVETPLAN manuals for:

• avian influenza

• bluetongue (including incorporating the outcomes of Exercise Phantom Fox;77 see also Section 4.2.2)

• Hendra virus

• Rift Valley fever

• scrapie

• screw-worm fly.

Further revisions were made to the management manual for laboratory preparedness, and to enterprise manuals for artificial breeding centres, the poultry industry, and saleyards and transport. These revisions are undergoing a formal development and approvals process before the revised manuals are published in 2013.

Improved useabilityStage 1 of a consultancy for an AUSVETPLAN authoring system was completed in 2012. Stage 2 of the consultancy to improve the useability and functionality of AUSVETPLAN will be completed in 2013. The new system will allow manuals to be revised more efficiently, and will also allow those involved in outbreaks to download or print documents that are tailored to their particular operational needs.

4.1.4 Nationally agreed standard operating procedures

Nationally agreed standard operating procedures (NASOPs) have been developed for use by states and territories during responses to EAD incidents and emergencies. They

75 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/emergency-animal-disease-preparedness/ausvetplan/disease-strategies

76 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/animal/fmd/review-foot-and-mouth-disease

77 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/news/2012/phantom-fox-wraps-up

74 Animal health in Australia 2012

support national consistency and provide guidance to response personnel undertaking operational tasks. Although not formally a part of AUSVETPLAN, NASOPs underpin elements of AUSVETPLAN and describe the actions typically undertaken during a response to an incident. They are provided to guide states and territories in developing local procedures and work instructions.

NASOPs are prepared by the AHC’s Sub-Committee on Emergency Animal Diseases and are reviewed, as necessary, to ensure that they remain up to date.

NASOPs currently published on the AHA website78 address EAD-specific topics such as personal decontamination, collecting samples, managing stock during a national livestock standstill and transport of carcasses.

The Biosecurity Emergency Preparedness Working Group of the National Biosecurity Committee has accepted responsibility for developing generic NASOPs that apply to all biosecurity responses, such as conducting briefings and debriefings.

4.1.5 What happens in an EAD response?Operational responsibility for the response to an EAD lies with the relevant state or territory, which develops an EAD response plan (EADRP). In most jurisdictions, the government department of agriculture or primary industries manages the response to an EAD outbreak and implements the EADRP. State and territory chief veterinary officers (CVOs) have leadership roles in the response, which also involves state emergency services, public safety services and other government departments, as needed. Pre-existing, whole-of-government arrangements allow agriculture or primary industries departments to draw upon resources and expertise from these agencies.

The CCEAD is responsible for technical coordination of an EAD response. The committee is chaired by the Australian CVO or delegate, and comprises the state and territory CVOs, the Director of the CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory (CSIRO-AAHL), members of DAFF Biosecurity and technical representatives from relevant industries. Industry representatives comprise of members of relevant, affected industry parties, and generally includes one member representing a non-affected industry. AHA attends CCEAD meetings as an observer.

To ensure a timely and effective response, the CCEAD oversees implementation of EADRPs, strategy development and planning, and the development of technical policy. The CCEAD provides advice to an NMG that is established for each incident. The Secretary of DAFF chairs the NMG,

78 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/emergency-animal-disease-preparedness/nasops

and members are chief executives of the state and territory agriculture or primary industries departments, and chief executives from each affected industry. Representatives of AHA attend NMG meetings as observers.

When the NMG receives technical advice from the CCEAD, it considers policy and financial issues associated with the EADRP. The NMG’s agreement to an EADRP is an undertaking to share eligible costs under the EADRA.

This structure ensures that the resources needed for agriculture and animal health authorities to deal with an EAD are available and coordinated for the most effective response.

Further information about the mechanism of an EAD response and how cost-sharing provisions are implemented can be found in the AUSVETPLAN Summary document.79

4.2 Preparedness initiatives

4.2.1 Emergency Animal Disease Preparedness Program

Development of Australia’s preparedness to manage and respond to EADs is coordinated through the EAD Preparedness and Response Program, which is managed by AHA. The main objective of the program is to ensure that Australia is well prepared for EAD incidents, through a range of activities, including public awareness, training, simulation exercises and surveillance. When outbreaks occur, preparedness ensures that Australia can mount a rapid and effective response with minimal disruption to livestock industries and food industries. The program is funded through a tripartite arrangement between the Australian Government, state and territory governments, and livestock industry organisations.

4.2.2 National Emergency Animal Disease Training Program

In the event of an EAD incident, government officers, livestock producers, private veterinary practitioners and emergency workers are called upon to help eradicate or control the disease. AUSVETPLAN defines how a response to an EAD incident is to be conducted and the roles that require specific training.

The National Emergency Animal Disease Training Program provides education and training in the various EAD response functions. Face-to-face EAD awareness training provides government officers, private practitioners and industry members with a basic understanding of Australia’s agreed

79 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/AUSVETPLAN-Summary-Document.pdf

Managing animal health emergencies 75

response strategies. Formal accredited training — covering the skills and knowledge needed to perform a function during an EAD response — is available for government officers through in-house jurisdictional programs, and for industry members through AHA.

The elements of the national EAD training program are delivered by different organisations and are described below.

First-response team training Each state and territory maintains a ‘first-response team’. The team is responsible for managing the initial response to an EAD, including staffing control centres and beginning field activities. First-response team members receive training in their EAD response roles from jurisdictional training programs.

Development and sharing of training materialsAHA facilitates the development of training resources that can be shared nationally and delivered by qualified and experienced trainers to government and industry response staff. Training resources include online modules, induction training modules, and face-to-face workshops. AHA’s EAD Foundation online module is a generic introduction to emergency response arrangements in Australia. It provides information on the basic principles of an EAD response, AUSVETPLAN, the responsibilities of people involved in a response, and the importance of communications and information management during a response.

CCEAD and NMG training AHA holds twice-yearly workshops to prepare industry executives, technical specialists and senior government officers for service on the two key decision-making bodies — the NMG and the CCEAD (see Section 4.1.5) — during an EAD response.

Rapid Response TeamThe national Rapid Response Team is an Australian Government initiative that was originally developed to help smaller jurisdictions establish emergency control centres for disease outbreaks. The Rapid Response Team is a group of 50 government response personnel with expertise in key control centre management positions. During their 3–5-year membership on the team, members take part in professional development activities to maintain and develop their response skills.

In 2012, the Rapid Response Team participated in Exercise Phantom Fox, a functional exercise based on a simulated bluetongue outbreak in South Australia. During the exercise, simulated state and local control centres were established

and staffed with personnel from the Department of Primary Industries and Regions South Australia (PIRSA), and from the Rapid Response Team. The exercise provided an opportunity for PIRSA staff to practise their response roles, and for the Rapid Response Team to practise integrating into a jurisdictional emergency response.

Private veterinary practitioner engagementThe Australian Veterinary Reserve (AVR), which was created in 2004, includes nearly 100 nongovernment and rural veterinary practitioners. AVR members are trained in two veterinary response roles: field surveillance officer and tracing officer. In the response to the 2007 equine influenza outbreak, nearly half of the AVR members were actively deployed to affected states, where they demonstrated their commitment, expertise and professionalism.

Between outbreaks, AHA maintains contact with AVR members through an electronic news bulletin. Each year at the annual conference of the Australian Veterinary Association, a dedicated session is held for AVR members, covering topics relating to EADs in Australia and overseas.

The states and territories hold regular EAD awareness workshops for private veterinary practitioners, to assist them with recognising EADs and to remind them of their reporting obligations (see Section 4.3.3). CSIRO-AAHL contributes to these training workshops.

Industry training In 2012, AHA conducted training workshops for industry liaison officers in the sheepmeat, wool, alpaca, horse, pork and feedlot industries. Industry liaison officers play an important part in local and state control centres during an emergency response, assisting with response planning and liaising between government and the affected industries and communities. Several industry liaison officers practised their roles in Exercise Phantom Fox.

In 2012, DAFF, AHA and state government personnel collaborated to deliver EAD awareness sessions to meetings of livestock transporters, livestock agents, and personnel from livestock saleyards and markets. The focus of these sessions was to increase awareness of FMD, including:

• the signs of FMD

• emergency response arrangements in Australia

• the need for, and possible impacts of, a national livestock standstill in the event of an FMD outbreak.

GovernanceOversight for the national EAD training program is provided by a governance group, with technical support from the

76 Animal health in Australia 2012

National Animal Health Training Steering Committee (NAHTSC). Members of the NAHTSC include the training coordinators from AHA; representatives from the Australian, state and territory governments; and representatives from peak livestock industry bodies, registered training organisations and the Australian Veterinary Association.

4.2.3 International collaboration on modelling for preparedness

To strengthen EAD preparedness, Australia is a key player in an international collaboration on epidemiology and disease modelling. The EpiTeam is a subgroup of the Emergency Management Working Group of the Quadrilateral Group of Countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States). The team was formed in May 2005, following a workshop on FMD modelling and policy.

The use of vaccination to control an outbreak of FMD in a previously FMD-free country is increasingly being recognised as important, particularly given changes to the OIE guidelines on regaining FMD-free status.80 In 2012, the EpiTeam — in conjunction with the United Kingdom and the Netherlands — continued a modelling study to evaluate different vaccination strategies and identify conditions under which vaccination could be beneficial in managing an FMD outbreak. The study uses five modelling platforms from each country to compare a range of vaccination strategies with a standard control (no vaccination) approach. Data from the 2010 FMD exercise in the United Kingdom, Exercise Silver Birch, is used as the basis for the study. Preliminary results suggest that vaccination is likely to be most effective in situations where disease is widespread, high rates of spread are expected, or there are resource shortages.

The study provides important knowledge on operational issues associated with using vaccines for FMD control. It also adds credibility to the use of simulation models in disease control decision making. The findings will be used to develop and support more robust and acceptable policies for FMD control.

4.2.4 Hendra virus researchTrial work on a Hendra virus vaccine continued during 2012 at CSIRO-AAHL in Geelong, Victoria, in partnership with Pfizer Animal Health Australia. In August 2012, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) issued a minor use (trial) permit to allow the sale and use of the Hendra virus vaccine under strict conditions. On

80 Under Article 8.5.9 of the OIE Terrestrial animal health code, it will take six months before a country can regain its FMD-free status when a stamping out policy, emergency vaccination and serological surveillance are applied

1 November 2012, the Equivac® HeV vaccine, manufactured by Pfizer Animal Health Australia, became commercially available for use in horses under the APVMA’s conditions. These include administration of the vaccine by accredited veterinarians only, and identification of vaccinated horses by a microchip, with horse details recorded in a database. Wider commercial release of the vaccine may be possible in 2013 or 2014, subject to further research, final registration and commercial considerations.

The Hendra virus vaccine is an important step towards breaking the cycle of this disease and reducing its impact on Australia’s horse-owning community. Biosecurity messages on dealing with sick horses have been reinforced with the introduction of the vaccine to avoid complacency, since no vaccine is 100% effective.

The Intergovernmental Hendra Virus Taskforce,81 established in July 2011, continued to operate in 2012. Its aim is to pursue a collaborative ‘One Health’82 approach to minimise adverse impacts of Hendra virus on human and equine health. Equipped with $12 million in funding, it oversees the National Hendra Virus Research Program.83

The five areas of research directly commissioned by the taskforce in 2011 have progressed in 2012. These are:

• Hendra virus infection in dogs

• assessing the risks posed by Hendra virus antibody-positive animals

• Hendra virus infection and transmission dynamics

• Hendra virus risk associated with flying fox dispersal

• Hendra virus horse vaccine.84

In May 2012, grants for six new research projects, totalling just over $2 million, were announced as part of an open funding

81 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4790_20725.htm

82 ‘One Health’ is a concept for expanding interdisciplinary collaborations and communications in all aspects of health care for humans, animals and the environment

83 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4790_21026.htm

84 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4791_21031.htm

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Managing animal health emergencies 77

program under the National Hendra Virus Research Program. The projects are being managed by the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All projects have commenced and are expected to be finalised within three years.

The funded projects are:

• Development of improved diagnostics and therapeutics for Hendra virus infections

• Longitudinal cohort study of horse owners

• Models that predict risk for Hendra virus transmission from flying foxes to horses

• Models to predict Hendra virus prevalence in flying fox populations

• Implementing a national flying fox monitoring program

• Early detection of Hendra virus infection by microRNA profiling.85

The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) is overseeing a parallel open funding program.86 In 2012, the NHMRC supported eight project grants, totalling $3 million. These projects87 are:

• Understanding pathogenicity and immunity in an encephalitic mouse model of Hendra virus infection

• Defining the role of microRNAs in human Hendra virus infections

• Structural studies of Hendra virus replication

• Can the bat immune response to Hendra inform drug and vaccine development in other species?

• Identification of viral–cellular interacting factors for an in-depth understanding of the Hendra virus life cycle and pathogenesis

• Hendra virus vaccine

• New Hendra virus treatments

• Safety assessment of an anti–Hendra virus antibody in humans.

Further information can be found on the DAFF website.88

4.2.5 Animal health diagnostic laboratoriesAustralia’s state and territory government animal health diagnostic laboratories, CSIRO-AAHL, university laboratories and private diagnostic laboratories all participate in, and contribute to, national EAD response programs and

85 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4791_21032.htm

86 www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants/apply-funding/urgent-call-research-hendra-virus

87 www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants/outcomes-funding-rounds/hendra-virus-urgent-call-research-outcomes

88 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/animal/hendra

initiatives. Collectively, Australia’s animal health laboratories play a crucial role in maintaining and developing Australia’s favourable animal health status and capacity to respond to a disease emergency.

AHA contributes to Australia’s network of animal health diagnostic laboratories by managing the National Animal Health Laboratory Coordination Program,89 the Australian Animal Pathology Standards Program90 and AUSVETPLAN. These programs focus on a national approach to meet future requirements for disease surveillance, in-depth case investigations, surges in demand for testing during emergency situations, quality assurance and training.

The AUSVETPLAN Management manual: laboratory preparedness assists veterinary laboratories to prepare a contingency plan for a disease emergency. A review of this manual commenced in 2011. The updated version will incorporate current laboratory standards and practices, and will recognise the role of the Laboratories for Emergency Animal Disease Diagnosis and Response (LEADDR) network (see below) in an EAD response.

The Sub-Committee on Animal Health Laboratory Standards (see Chapter 1)91 — a subcommittee of the AHC — establishes, implements and monitors professional and technical standards within Australia’s animal health laboratories. In 2012, the AHC approved an equine influenza real-time polymerase chain reaction as a new test.

Laboratories for Emergency Animal Disease Diagnosis and Response networkThe LEADDR network was formed in early 2009 with members from the Australian Government, CSIRO-AAHL, and state and territory government laboratories. The network reports to the Sub-Committee on Animal Health Laboratory Standards (under the AHC) and aims to standardise or harmonise testing services for targeted EADs in terrestrial and aquatic animals in all member laboratories. This ensures a nationally coordinated approach and maximises the availability of national resources to meet demands for large-scale testing during a major EAD outbreak.

Initially, the network focused on testing for animal influenza, Newcastle disease and bluetongue. It has since expanded to include testing for Hendra virus infection, and aquatic animal diseases caused by white spot syndrome virus and Ostreid herpesvirus 1 microvariant. The network is currently developing its capacity to screen for FMD — without

89 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/livestock-health/national-animal-health-laboratory-network

90 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/livestock-health/australian-animal-pathology-standards-program

91 www.scahls.org.au

78 Animal health in Australia 2012

involving live FMD virus or viral proliferation — as part of the national FMD-preparedness program. At times, the network also provides ad hoc services to the AHC and the CCEAD for other diseases (e.g. a test harmonisation project for equine flaviviral infection in 2011).

During an EAD outbreak, the Laboratory Sub-Committee-CCEAD, which consists of relevant experts from the LEADDR network, will be formed to support the CCEAD or Aquatic CCEAD. Although CSIRO-AAHL remains the diagnostic centre for exotic EADs, it also transfers AHC-agreed testing capabilities to the LEADDR network laboratories under controlled quality assurance conditions.

4.3 Increasing awareness and understanding

4.3.1 National communication arrangements for biosecurity incidents

Australia’s National Biosecurity Committee maintains the Biosecurity Incident National Communication Network. This network produces nationally consistent public information in response to pest and disease outbreaks and animal welfare incidents. It consists of communication officers from the Australian, state and territory government agencies responsible for biosecurity, and from agricultural health organisations.

The network’s activities for 2012 included:

• drafting a Biosecurity incident public information manual, which describes how public information will be delivered during biosecurity incidents that affect any biosecurity sector

• exploring the use of social media in the response and recovery phases of incidents

• supporting activities under the National FMD Action Plan — in particular, developing communication strategies to raise awareness of the disease in stock, and swill-feeding prohibitions.

The network has also worked with the National Engagement and Communication Working Group to deliver a National Engagement and Communication Framework. The framework is intended to guide national communication activities that cover the biosecurity phases of prevention, preparedness, response, recovery, management and surveillance.

4.3.2 Farm Biosecurity campaignThe Australian Government, state and territory governments, and livestock industries all have biosecurity and communications initiatives to increase awareness of the biosecurity practices needed to protect landholdings and Australia against EADs. One of these initiatives is Farm Biosecurity.

Farm Biosecurity is a national awareness and engagement program that provides information to livestock producers and related service providers about farm biosecurity and prevention of animal diseases and plant pests. The program is a joint initiative of AHA and Plant Health Australia. It encourages producers to identify risks to their livestock and plant products, and minimise these risks by using biosecurity measures as everyday practice in their enterprises.

The Farm Biosecurity program uses the media, educational materials and stakeholder engagement to deliver its messages. It promotes the Emergency Animal Disease Watch Hotline92 and the Exotic Plant Pest Hotline93 to report unusual signs of diseases or pests.

4.3.3 Practitioner awarenessThe Australian Government has supported a number of awareness initiatives for veterinary practitioners in 2012.

In his report A review of Australia’s preparedness for the threat of foot-and-mouth disease,94 Mr Ken Matthews, AO, noted that there was a strong possibility that an incursion of FMD may not be readily detected in Australia. This is partly because relatively few veterinarians or stock handlers have had first-hand experience dealing with FMD-infected animals and identifying the disease.

To help address this, DAFF commissioned the FAO to deliver training in FMD-infected countries for Australian veterinarians

92 Emergency Animal Disease Watch Hotline: 1800 675 888

93 Exotic Plant Pest Hotline: 1800 084 881

94 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/animal/fmd/review-foot-and-mouth-disease

Managing animal health emergencies 79

and stock handlers. Such training will better equip these Australians to recognise, report and investigate FMD, thereby strengthening Australia’s early warning and response capacity. The training courses provide practical experience in FMD lesion identification, ageing and sampling; active, real-time FMD outbreak investigation; and consideration of appropriate disease-control measures, such as vaccination.

Approximately 80 Australian veterinarians and stock handlers will participate in the training. The training will be held in Nepal where FMD is endemic. The first two courses with Australian trainees took place in November and December 2012, and another six courses will take place in 2013.

The Australian Government also provides funding to the states and territories for training veterinary practitioners in EAD recognition and response. These funds are used to conduct workshops that provide a technical update and specialist material relating to EADs, with some coverage of basic emergency structures and policy (e.g. AUSVETPLAN, hotline numbers, and state or territory response arrangements). Material covered in the workshop is based on key EADs that are topical or changing in their epidemiology. Workshops are part of continuous professional development for field veterinarians and may be used by individual jurisdictions to deliver some EAD competency training. During 2012, workshops were held in Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and Western Australia.

The Australian Government also provided funding for two issues of the Emergency Animal Disease Bulletin (on screw-worm fly and Edwardsiella ictaluri), to be published in the Australian Veterinary Journal, and for the publication of three EAD newsletters, providing updates on a wide range of EAD topics.95

4.4 Biosecurity planningEffective biosecurity at the enterprise and industry levels is extremely important in reducing the risk of introduction or spread of animal diseases. This is recognised by the Australian livestock industries and governments in the EADRA, which requires that all signatories develop, implement and maintain biosecurity plans at industry, regional and farm levels for their sector.

The farm-level biosecurity plans describe measures to mitigate the risks of disease entry or spread. The plan for each EADRA signatory is endorsed by the other EADRA signatories and is subject to ongoing review and maintenance.

95 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/animal/ead-bulletin

AHA continues to work with its members to ensure that the biosecurity plans are science based, relevant, cost-effective and contemporary. All plans can be found on the AHA and Farm Biosecurity websites.96

4.4.1 Grazing industries biosecurityAustralia’s National farm biosecurity reference manual — grazing livestock production,97 published in 2012, is a cooperative initiative of AHA and Australia’s cattle, dairy, sheepmeat, wool, goat and alpaca industries. The manual documents and raises awareness of best practice in biosecurity. Designed as an industry resource, the manual can be used by individual livestock producers to gauge their own biosecurity requirements and implement biosecurity practices suitable for their particular circumstances.

4.4.2 Pork industry biosecurityThe Australian Pork Industry Biosecurity Program98 was developed and published by Australian Pork Limited and AHA during 2012. It complements the Australian Pork Industry

96 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/biosecurity/biosecurity-planning

97 www.farmbiosecurity.com.au/toolkit/plans-manuals

98 www.farmbiosecurity.com.au/toolkit/plans-manuals

80 Animal health in Australia 2012

Quality Assurance Program (APIQ✓®) (see Chapter 1). The program outlines biosecurity risk-management measures for pork production and pig breeding sites. It also has sections on biosecurity requirements for pig transporters, saleyards, pig shows and abattoir lairages (animal holding areas). In conjunction with the industry’s crisis management plan, Porksafe, the program seeks to safeguard production of pork products for the domestic and international markets, as well helping to safeguard Australia’s public health with regard to zoonotic diseases in pigs.

4.4.3 Honey bee biosecurityThe Biosecurity manual for the honey bee industry,99 which was published in 2012, is a cooperative initiative of the Australian Honey Bee Industry Council, Horticulture Australia, the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, the Federal Council of Australian Apiarists Associations, the Wheen Bee Foundation and Plant Health Australia. The manual provides a set of measures designed to protect a beekeeper’s honey bees from the entry and spread of pests. The health of the honey bee industry also ensures the continued success of many plant industries that rely on honey bees for pollination.

4.5 Preparedness against specific diseases

In 2012, Australia’s EAD preparedness activities have targeted FMD. Other important diseases were also a focus, and work continued on ensuring that Australia is well prepared for an incursion of avian influenza (AI).

4.5.1 Avian influenzaThroughout 2012, reports continued of outbreaks of H5N1 highly pathogenic AI (HPAI) in wild birds, poultry and humans in Asia. Australia provides ongoing assistance with control of HPAI and other zoonotic and emerging diseases in neighbouring countries, by delivering capacity-building programs that help countries to prevent, detect and respond to disease in animals. Activities in 2012 included the following:

• DAFF maintained the Avian Influenza Toolkit website,100 which provides resources to help countries manage the threat of AI and other EADs

• DAFF continued an agreement with the FAO that includes funding to improve monitoring and response capacity for EAD outbreaks and threats in Asia.

99 www.phau.com.au/go/phau/biosecurity

100 www.aitoolkit.org

Although H5N1 HPAI has never been detected in wild birds or poultry in Australia, preparedness remains a high priority. DAFF works with the Australian poultry industries to continuously strengthen preparedness and response capacities for AI, and to maintain awareness of biosecurity among poultry owners. DAFF’s activities also focus on border security to detect illegally imported poultry and poultry products.

Through the Australian Wildlife Health Network (AWHN), DAFF coordinates a national surveillance program for AI in wild birds to provide information on the prevalence and subtypes of AI viruses in wild birds, and to act as an early warning system for the poultry industry. Samples were taken from 8225 wild birds during 2012, and a variety of low pathogenicity AI virus subtypes (including H5 and H7) were found (see Section 3.4.1).

In 2012, surveillance of poultry flocks for AI continued. One incident of H7N7 HPAI was detected (see Section 4.6.4). There were no other detections of HPAI during the remainder of the surveillance. Details of the detection of a low pathogenicity notifiable H5N3 AI on two duck farms in Victoria are provided in Section 4.6.3.

4.5.2 Diseases in wildlifeThe Wildlife and Exotic Disease Preparedness Program is a joint program of the Australian Government and state and territory governments. Established in 1984–85, it aims to develop practical field strategies for disease eradication, control and management in the event of an emergency, emerging or exotic disease that involves wild animals and could threaten Australia’s livestock industries. In recent years, the program has focused on improving wildlife disease surveillance.

The program is funding four projects in 2012–13:

• ‘A biogeographic and ecological approach to wildlife health surveillance in Sahul, Papua New Guinea (PNG)’, to improve understanding of, and capacity for, wildlife health in PNG

• ‘Social analysis of the AWHN Digest readership’, to explore the extent to which the AWHN Digest increases awareness and knowledge of wildlife health and disease among its readers (the digest is a weekly summary of wildlife health information relevant to Australia and the region)

• ‘Preparing for rabies: incursion pathways among free-ranging and domestic dogs’, to analyse the behaviour patterns and interactions of free-roaming and owned canines in identified areas of risk in Australia

• ‘Australian Wildlife Health Network’, to improve surveillance and surveillance tools for wild and feral animals, and to improve the management of wildlife health information.

Managing animal health emergencies 81

More information about the Wildlife and Exotic Disease Preparedness Program and results from previous projects are available on the DAFF website.101

Emergency and emerging diseases in wildlife in 2012The risk of diseases emerging from wildlife is receiving increasing attention from agricultural agencies worldwide. Australia recognises the importance of monitoring wildlife health to address the impacts of diseases and mass mortalities in wild fauna on livestock, human health, agriculture, biodiversity and trade. The Australian Government, state and territory governments and the AWHN are constantly on alert for emerging and emergency diseases in wildlife. The AWHN alerts relevant authorities of outbreaks of disease in wildlife, such as wild bird mortality events.

Investigations during 2012 included confirmation of Macrorhabdus ornithogaster in galahs and little corellas, and Mycobacterium pinnipedii in a wild, free-living Australian fur seal. White nose syndrome was excluded in microbats. Details of these incidents are as follows:

• M ornithogaster infection was diagnosed in galahs (Eolophus roseicapillus) and little corellas (Cacatua sanguine) from Queensland, New South Wales and Western Australia, from April to June 2012. It is not known whether M  ornithogaster infection alone causes clinical disease in wild birds, whether it is an opportunistic pathogen, or whether it contributes with other infectious conditions (such as spironucleosis, circovirus infection and aspergillosis) to a syndrome of weight loss and ill-thrift.

• The necropsy of a wild, free-living Australian fur seal (Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus) from South Australia revealed gross lesions of pyogranulomatous pneumonia, lymphadenitis and pericarditis. Lung tissue culture was

101 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/emergency/wedpp

positive for the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex, subsequently confirmed as M  pinnipedii.

• White nose syndrome, caused by the fungus Geomyces destructans, was excluded in three microbats: two in Victoria and one in Queensland. Because of its significant impacts in North America, white nose syndrome is investigated in relevant cases in Australian bats. To date, it has not been identified in Australia.

Wild bird surveillance for AI is discussed in Sections 3.4.1 and 4.5.1.

4.6 Emergency animal disease responses in 2012

Appendix 3 lists investigations of potential exotic and other emergency diseases in Australia during 2012. Responses to several diseases are discussed below.

4.6.1 Hendra virus incidents102

In 2012, there were eight separate incidents of Hendra virus in Queensland and none in New South Wales (see Figure 4.1 and Table 4.1). All incidents were in horses. One person was assessed to have been sufficiently exposed to receive monoclonal antibody post-exposure prophylaxis.

Throughout 2012, Queensland authorities have continued to implement well-established emergency procedures on each infected property, and have reinforced biosecurity messages to the public to reduce the risk of infection in horses and people. In no case did infection spread beyond the infected property, and no people were infected. Updated information on precautions against Hendra virus for people who work with horses is available on the website of Biosecurity Queensland.103

102 Numbers of incidents and affected animals are as at 12 November 2012

103 www.daff.qld.gov.au/4790_20718.htm

Table 4 1 Hendra virus incidents in Queensland, 2012

Location Month Equine cases Canine cases Human cases

Townsville January 1 0 0

Rockhampton May 1 0 0

Ingham May 1 0 0

Mackay June 1 0 0

Rockhampton July 3 0 0a

Cairns July 1 0 0

Port Douglas September 1 0 0

Ingham November 1 0 0

Total   10 0 0

a One person received monoclonal antibody post-exposure prophylaxis

82 Animal health in Australia 2012

4.6.2 Influenza A in pigsInfluenza A of human origin was detected in two commercial piggeries — one in Queensland and the other in Western Australia — in August 2012. Clinical signs in affected pigs included fever, coughing, swollen face, weakness and recumbency. Samples taken from both piggeries were positive for influenza A virus, which was subsequently typed as being of human origin, including genes from the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza virus. Samples from the affected pig herds were also positive for other respiratory system pathogens, including enterobacteria, Haemophilus parasuis, Mycoplasma spp. and Streptococcus suis; the pathology of many affected pigs was more indicative of bacterial infection than influenza virus infection.

The prevalence of respiratory disease decreased after an amended in-feed antibiotic treatment regime was implemented in both piggeries. Based on the laboratory investigations and response to treatment, it was concluded that the respiratory disease was principally due to bacterial pathogens. Both piggeries were quarantined to protect animal and human health while the incidents were investigated. During the investigations, pigs that were clinically normal were permitted to be slaughtered for human consumption.

To prevent spillover of influenza to pigs, it is recommended that people working in piggeries, and people having frequent contact with pigs, consider personal vaccination against current human influenza strains.

4.6.3 Influenza H5N3 in ducks in VictoriaIn late January 2012, a low pathogenicity notifiable AI (H5N3) was detected in two isolated, but related, free-range duck farms in Victoria. Standard emergency disease response arrangements were implemented, and the NMG agreed to invoke cost-sharing under the EADRA. Disease-control measures included quarantine and movement restrictions, tracing of movements of birds and risk materials, increased surveillance, and the destruction and disposal of all susceptible birds (a total of 24 500) on the properties. Both properties were subsequently disinfected and cleaned. Extensive surveillance on all traces found no evidence of spread beyond the affected farms. The response led to the virus being eradicated from the flock, and remaining quarantine measures were lifted by Victorian authorities in early June 2012.

Investigations indicated that wild birds were the source of the virus. Low pathogenicity strains of AI are detected in wild birds from time to time in Australia. This is the first time that an H5 subtype virus has been detected in domestic ducks in Victoria. The OIE and trading partners were notified of the outbreak.

4.6.4 Influenza H7N7 in a layer flock in New South Wales

H7N7 AI was confirmed in a flock of 50 000 free-range layer hens near Maitland in New South Wales in November 2012. Clinical signs in the flock included increased rates of mortality of layers and a significant drop in egg production. The virus was initially detected by the Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute in New South Wales and subsequently confirmed by CSIRO-AAHL. Standard emergency disease response arrangements were implemented, and no other farms were infected. Disease-control measures included quarantine and movement restrictions, tracing of movements of birds and risk materials (including eggs), increased surveillance, and the destruction and disposal of all susceptible birds on the property, followed by disinfection and cleaning. The OIE and trading partners were notified of the outbreak.

The source of infection was likely to have been wild birds. Australia has previously had a small number of outbreaks of H7 AI viruses, which have all been quickly and successfully eradicated.

NEW SOUTH WALES

N

W E

S

0 405.3

kilometres

Scale: 1:10 410 000

PORT DOUGLAS (September)

CAIRNS (July)

INGHAM (May and November)

TOWNSVILLE (January)

MACKAY (June)

ROCKHAMPTON (May and July)

Brisbane

QUEENSLAND

Figure 4 1 Approximate locations of Hendra virus incidents, 2012

Managing animal health emergencies 83

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

84 Animal health in Australia 2012

5 Aquatic animal health

The health management of finfish, crustaceans, and molluscs is an essential element of maintaining fisheries resources and biodiversity in Australia.

This chapter provides details on the status of aquatic animal health in Australia. It describes the Australian reporting system for aquatic animal diseases, national aquatic animal health policy, aquatic animal disease emergency preparedness, the Australian Aquatic Veterinary Emergency Plan (AQUAVETPLAN), surveillance, disease events in 2012, and regional initiatives on aquatic animal health.

5.1 Status of aquatic animal health in Australia

Australia has a reporting system for aquatic animal diseases of national significance. All the diseases currently reportable to the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and other aquatic animal diseases of national significance are included on Australia’s National List of Reportable Diseases of Aquatic Animals.104

In 2012, nine fish diseases, seven mollusc diseases, eight crustacean diseases and two amphibian diseases were reportable to the OIE. Australia is free from most of these diseases. Australia’s status for each OIE-listed aquatic animal disease in 2012 is shown in Table 5.1. The distribution of OIE-listed aquatic animal diseases that are present in Australia, based on reporting by states and territories, is shown in Figure 5.1.

The other aquatic animal diseases of national significance to Australia, and their status in 2012, are listed in Table 5.2.

104 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/aquatic/reporting/reportable-diseases

Chapter

� Aquatic�animal�health 85

Table 5 1 Australia’s status for OIE-listed diseases of aquatic animals, 2012

Disease or agent Status

Finfish diseases

Epizootic haematopoietic necrosis Locally present

Epizootic ulcerative syndrome (Aphanomyces invadans) Locally present

Infection with Gyrodactylus salaris Never reported

Infectious haematopoietic necrosis Never reported

Infectious salmon anaemia Never reported

Koi herpesvirus disease Never reported

Red sea bream iridoviral disease Never reported

Spring viraemia of carp Never reported

Viral haemorrhagic septicaemia Never reported

Mollusc diseases

Infection with abalone herpesvirusa Locally present

Infection with Bonamia exitiosa Never reported

Infection with Bonamia ostreae Never reported

Infection with Marteilia refringens Never reported

Infection with Perkinsus marinus Never reported

Infection with Perkinsus olseni Locally present

Infection with Xenohaliotis californiensis Never reported

Crustacean diseases

Crayfish plague (Aphanomyces astaci) Never reported

Infectious hypodermal and haematopoietic necrosis Locally present

Infectious myonecrosis Never reported

Necrotising hepatopancreatitis Never reported

Taura syndrome Never reported

White spot disease Never reported

White tail disease Locally present

Yellowhead disease Never reported

Amphibian diseases

Infection with Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis Locally present

Infection with ranavirus Locally presentOIE = World Organisation for Animal Health

Note: Aquatic animal diseases that were reportable to the OIE in 2012 are those listed in the OIE’s 2012 Aquatic animal health code

a New South Wales eradicated abalone herpesvirus (abalone viral ganglioneuritis), which was contained in aquaria, and is now free from this disease

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

86 Animal health in Australia 2012

ACT2011

1992

2009

2012

Epizootic haematopoietic necrosis

2008

2012

20122012

2012

2012

Epizootic ulcerative syndrome

2010

Infection with abalone herpesvirus

2011

2011a

2012

2005

2003

Infection with Perkinsus olseni

20032008

Infectious hypodermal and haematopoietic necrosis

2008

White tail disease

2008

2011

2012

Infection with Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis

2008

Infection with ranavirus

States and territories reporting the occurrence of the specific disease and the year the disease last occurred

States and territories reporting that the specific disease has never been reported within their jurisdictional boundaries

States and territories reporting that presence of the specific disease is suspected, but no information is available to indicate the year when it last occurred

States and territories reporting that no information is available

a New South Wales eradicated abalone herpesvirus (abalone viral ganglioneuritis), which was contained in aquaria, and is now free from this disease

Figure 5 1 Distribution of OIE-listed aquatic animal diseases in Australia

� Aquatic�animal�health 87

Table 5 2 Australia’s status for other significant diseases of aquatic animals, 2012

Disease or agent Status

Finfish diseases

Aeromonas salmonicida — atypical strains Locally present

Bacterial kidney disease (Renibacterium salmoninarum) Never reported

Channel catfish virus disease Never reported

Enteric redmouth disease (Yersinia ruckeri — Hagerman strain) Never reported

Enteric septicaemia of catfish (Edwardsiella ictaluri) Reported in 2011 from native fish in one aquarium facility also holding imported exotic fish. Never detected in wild fish

Epizootic haematopoietic necrosis — European catfish virus/European sheatfish virus

Never reported

Furunculosis (Aeromonas salmonicida subsp. salmonicida) Never reported

Grouper iridoviral disease Never reported

Infectious spleen and kidney necrosis virus (ISKNV)-like viruses Detected in imported aquarium fish, never detected in wild fish

Infectious pancreatic necrosis Never reported

Piscirickettsiosis (Piscirickettsia salmonis) Never reported

Viral encephalopathy and retinopathy Locally present

Whirling disease (Myxobolus cerebralis) Never reported

Mollusc diseases

Akoya oyster disease Never reported

Infection with Bonamia species Locally present

Infection with Marteilia sydneyi Locally present

Infection with Marteilioides chungmuensis Never reported

Infection with Mikrocytos mackini Never reported

Iridoviroses Never reported

Ostreid herpesvirus 1 µ variant (OsHV-1 µvar) Contained to two estuaries in New South Wales

Crustacean diseases

Gill-associated virus Locally present

Milky haemolymph disease of spiny lobster (Panulirus spp.) Never reported

Monodon slow growth syndrome Never reported

5.1.1 National aquatic animal health policy Australia’s Animal Health Committee (AHC) is responsible for public policy and government decision making on aquatic animal health. The Sub-Committee on Aquatic Animal Health (SCAAH) supports the AHC in its policy deliberations by providing robust scientific and technical advice on aquatic animal health issues. Subcommittee members represent the Australian Government; the state, Northern Territory and New Zealand governments; the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory (CSIRO-AAHL); and Australian universities (one representative). The AHC reports to the National Biosecurity Committee for high-level endorsement of decisions and policy. (See Figure 1.1 in Chapter 1 for the structure of animal health management organisations and committees.)

AQUAPLAN 2005–2010 was Australia’s second national strategic plan for aquatic animal health. The plan aimed to maximise Australia’s ability to control aquatic animal disease outbreaks, maintain market access, support quality assurance and improve the productivity and sustainability of aquatic animal production industries. AQUAPLAN 2005–2010 concluded in mid-2010 and has been reviewed; the review was overseen by SCAAH. The review reports on the plan’s development and implementation, and future approaches to aquatic animal health, including the possible need for a successor strategy. The review findings are now being considered by the Australian, state and territory governments. Information on AQUAPLAN 2005–2010 is available on the website of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF).105

105 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/aquatic/aquaplan

88 Animal health in Australia 2012

Some projects initiated under AQUAPLAN 2005–2010 are ongoing, including:

• implementation of a national Aquatic Animal Health Training Scheme

• proficiency testing for aquatic animal disease diagnostic laboratories

• an initiative to raise industry awareness about aquatic emergency animal disease (EAD) response arrangements.

The Aquatic Animal Health Training Scheme, which was established in 2010, is a national training scheme for practising aquatic animal health professionals. It aims to improve knowledge and skills in aquatic animal health management to support Australia’s fishing and aquaculture industries, including the aquarium sector. Funding is available on a competitive basis to support Australian aquatic animal health professionals to undertake short, focused training activities — either within Australia or overseas. In 2012, funded activities included participation in specialist university courses on aquatic animal health, and a sponsored visit by an expert in fish virology. This program is being reviewed and may be considered for continuation.

A national program of diagnostic proficiency testing for aquatic animal diseases was established in 2010 within the Australian National Quality Assurance Program. Previously, this program addressed diagnostic proficiency testing for terrestrial animal diseases only. The new program tests the proficiency of laboratories using molecular (polymerase chain reaction) methods to detect white spot syndrome virus, yellowhead virus and gill-associated virus of prawns; viral encephalopathy and retinopathy, and viral haemorrhagic septicaemia of fish; and abalone viral ganglioneuritis. Nonviable samples are used in proficiency testing procedures. The program has been accredited by the National Association of Testing Authorities. The testing program results confirm that Australia has strong diagnostic capabilities for these six diseases.

An initiative to raise awareness of current aquatic EAD response arrangements began in 2011. Funding was made available to:

• support individual aquaculture and fisheries sectors (including recreational fishing and ornamental fish) to increase industry understanding of established procedures and responsibilities for aquatic EAD responses

• identify any risks or weaknesses in current arrangements that may constitute a threat to industry, and plan actions to address these risks

• raise awareness of the potential benefits of formal joint industry–government arrangements for aquatic EAD responses.

Under this initiative, activities have been undertaken by the abalone fishery and aquaculture sectors, prawn farmers, and the Queensland Aquaculture Industries Federation.

An Aquatic Animal Biosecurity Emergency Response Arrangements workshop was held in 2012. The workshop built on the extensive work by industry and government towards developing joint arrangements to prepare for, and respond to, significant disease or biosecurity emergency events in the aquatic environment. Major aquatic animal industry sectors participated: aquaculture, commercial fishing/wild fish populations, recreational fishing, Indigenous fishing and ornamental fish.

The workshop’s participants agreed that response agreements between industry and government are desirable, but that the current Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement (see Chapter 4) for terrestrial animals is not entirely applicable to the aquatic animal sectors. However, some elements of the current agreements for terrestrial animals, plants, the environment and social amenity also apply to aquatic animal sectors; these elements should be used in developing an appropriate agreement. Participants agreed that a key component of aquatic EAD response arrangements is risk mitigation, particularly through development of biosecurity plans for industry sectors. Outcomes and future directions identified during the workshop are under consideration by the Australian, state and territory governments.

A comprehensive analysis of aquatic animal disease risks associated with translocation of domestic bait was completed in 2011. It outlines the risks and suggests some options for risk mitigation. A SCAAH working group considered the risk analysis, and decided that national policy guidelines for translocation of bait and berley within Australia are required. Guidelines would aim to inform and harmonise state and territory policy on bait translocation. Work began in 2012 to develop policy guidelines, considering the two high-risk and three moderate-risk diseases identified in the hazard analysis from more than 80 diseases of concern.

DAFF Biosecurity is planning a trial of a surveillance system for ornamental fish imports to test its operational feasibility. This is part of an assessment of proposed changes to Australia’s system for managing biosecurity risks associated with imported ornamental fish (see Chapter 6). The proposed changes aim to improve management of the biosecurity risks by shifting the emphasis of risk management offshore, removing the need for the current system of post-arrival quarantine detention of fish. The system to be trialled is an on-arrival, fish health surveillance program that would continuously monitor the effectiveness of overseas authorities in ensuring the health of ornamental fish exported to Australia.

� Aquatic�animal�health 89

5.2 Aquatic animal disease emergency preparedness

Australia’s national system for preparing for, and responding to, aquatic EADs encompasses all activities relating to disease surveillance, planning, monitoring and response. These activities are carried out by the Australian Government, state and territory governments, aquatic animal industries, universities, CSIRO, private veterinarians and laboratories.

The national response to aquatic animal disease emergencies is coordinated by the Aquatic Consultative Committee on Emergency Animal Diseases (Aquatic CCEAD), which helps to ensure that the most effective technical response is implemented.

The Aquatic CCEAD comprises:

• the Australian Chief Veterinary Officer

• representatives from DAFF Biosecurity

• the chief veterinary officer (or the director of the fisheries department) in each state and territory government

• the head of CSIRO-AAHL.

Technical representatives from industry may also be invited to participate.

There were no aquatic animal disease outbreaks in 2012 requiring coordination by the Aquatic CCEAD.

As with terrestrial animal disease emergencies, operational responsibility for the response to an aquatic EAD in an Australian state or territory primarily lies with the relevant jurisdiction. Each state and territory government will bring together a broad range of resources to help fisheries, aquaculture and aquatic animal health authorities address disease incidents. Experts from other jurisdictions may be called in to assist in the response, if required.

5.2.1 AQUAVETPLAN AQUAVETPLAN is a series of technical response plans that describe the proposed Australian approach to an aquatic EAD event. These manuals provide background information and guidance on how to respond to a disease outbreak in Australia. AQUAVETPLAN is based on the Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan for terrestrial animal diseases. Disease strategy manuals relating to specific EADs allow animal health professionals to respond appropriately to an outbreak of that EAD in Australia. Operational manuals address important procedural issues and complement the disease strategy manuals.

Manuals are considered for revision every five years, or in the event of significant new developments.

AQUAVETPLAN manuals can be downloaded from the DAFF website.106

5.2.2 SurveillanceEach jurisdiction in Australia is responsible for surveillance activities within its borders. Passive surveillance includes regular health monitoring, investigation of unusual fish mortality events, and reporting and investigation of diseases listed on Australia’s National List of Reportable Diseases of Aquatic Animals. Active surveillance is conducted for specific purposes — for example, export certification for particular industries, or specific diseases of importance to Australia. Active surveillance is conducted to OIE standards or using methods required to meet export market requirements.

Surveys of ornamental fish for pathogens of quarantine significance are under way to gather further evidence to confirm freedom from these diseases in Australia’s wild and farmed fish populations. The results of these surveys will provide a scientific basis for policy development for these pathogens.

5.2.3 Response exercisesExercise Sea Fox 2012 was conducted by Primary Industries and Regions South Australia, and the South Australian Research and Development Institute. The exercise aimed to educate industry and government response staff on issues to consider and responsibilities during a response to an aquatic EAD outbreak in South Australia. Participants included staff from South Australia, as well as aquatic animal health officers and industry representatives from other states (New South Wales, Tasmania and Western Australia) and New Zealand. The scenario was a hypothetical outbreak of Pacific oyster mortality syndrome (POMS) — the disease caused by Ostreid herpesvirus 1 microvariant (OsHV-1 µvar) — which is considered a high threat to South Australia’s oyster growing sector.

The exercise was conducted in three phases:

• improving understanding of the aquaculture environment in a disease context

• raising awareness of national and state emergency response arrangements

• assessing response options to the hypothetical disease scenario.

106 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/aquatic/aquavetplan

90 Animal health in Australia 2012

Lessons learnt included the need for cooperation between government and industry for both prevention and response (e.g. for use of vessels, other infrastructure and personnel). Observations were made on the:

• lack of mechanisms for owner reimbursement for stock loss

• issue of carrier stocks (any animal that can carry the disease or act as reservoirs, including native species) and feral stocks

• differences between the aquatic and terrestrial disease response environments.

Exercise Sea Fox 2012 will inform the development of a POMS-specific response plan for South Australia.

5.2.4 CommunicationThe Australian Biosecurity Intelligence Network (ABIN) was established to provide a common information technology platform for Australia’s biosecurity research, surveillance, diagnostic and response capabilities. ABIN aims to enable researchers, industry and governments to collaborate, share expertise and information, and undertake analysis using tools and technologies available through ABIN’s secure online workspace. One component of ABIN is the aquatic animal health community space (Neptune).

Key goals of Neptune are to create a comprehensive dataset of Australian aquatic animal disease information and store it in a secure, user-friendly database; and to provide access to additional reference material to supplement this disease information and facilitate teaching and learning. The latest version of the database, launched in July 2012, allows users to search for disease information using a variety of fields, including host species, disease, disease agent, event location and affected host organs. Neptune provides access to web-based communication and video conferencing technology, mapping tools, and many types of electronic resources that contain additional disease information.

A digital microscopy platform is currently being integrated into the database; this will allow users to view images of the symptoms and pathogens of key endemic and exotic diseases. The technology allows advanced visualisation of true-colour digital whole-slide images, where any region of interest can be magnified up to 400 times. This provides a unique platform for pathology analysis and training, and overcomes the limitations associated with the use of physical specimens. The initial collection includes 180 images contributed by Australia’s leading aquatic animal disease laboratories.

Neptune also hosted nine online presentations on aquatic animal diseases in 2012. These included presentations on nodavirus in barramundi, abalone viral ganglioneuritis (AVG) management and research, and koi herpesvirus research.

Development of Neptune is continuing within the ABIN framework.

5.2.5 Aquatic animal diseases significant to Australia

The fourth edition of Aquatic animal diseases significant to Australia: identification field guide was published on the DAFF website in 2012. The field guide provides information to raise awareness and assist diagnosis of aquatic animal diseases significant to Australia. The revised version includes new scientific information and maintains consistency with Australia’s National List of Reportable Diseases of Aquatic Animals (see Section 5.1). It covers 48 diseases of finfish, crustaceans, molluscs and amphibians that have the potential to damage Australia’s aquatic animal biodiversity, fisheries and aquaculture productivity, and international trade. The field guide is available on the DAFF website.107

5.3 Disease events in 2012 No significant disease events occurred in Australia in 2012 that required involvement of the Aquatic CCEAD. Ongoing management of two diseases previously reported has contained them to their current known distribution and reduced their potential impact on industries.

5.3.1 Infection with abalone herpesvirusAVG (listed by the OIE as infection with abalone herpesvirus) is a disease of Australian abalone that was first reported in Victoria in 2006. Since then, the virus has been detected in Tasmania, where it is considered likely to be endemic to wild populations although clinical disease has not been seen in the wild.

The last report of AVG from wild abalone in Victoria was in January 2010. This case was a continuation of the disease outbreak initially reported in 2006. No extension in the range of the disease in wild abalone populations — or outbreaks of clinical disease in farmed abalone — were reported in Victoria during 2012. Since March 2011, Victoria has implemented an order declaring a control area over the outflow from processing facilities considered at risk. Treatment of outflow water to an appropriate level is required, as determined by the Chief Veterinary Officer of Victoria.

107 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/aquatic-animal-diseases-significant-to-australia-identification-field-guide-4th-edition

� Aquatic�animal�health 91

Tasmania began implementing recommendations of the Tasmanian Abalone Biosecurity Program after successful emergency responses to AVG outbreaks from 2008 to 2011. The first component of the biosecurity program, which came into effect in November 2011, relates to discharge of water from abalone processors and live-holding premises. Such premises are now required to submit a discharge plan for approval by the Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment. In most cases, processors and live-holding premises are required to treat discharge water so that it complies with the department’s testing standards. Tasmania is expanding the biosecurity program to include wild fishing activities and abalone farms during 2012–13. No cases of AVG were reported in Tasmania in 2012.

As part of a coordinated approach to improving diagnosis and management of AVG, the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) has funded a suite of research projects. Projects on abalone health include:

• Disease risk assessment for abalone stock enhancement

• Development of molecular diagnostic procedures for the detection and identification of herpesvirus of abalone, including characterisation of abalone herpesvirus infections

• Investigations into the genetic basis of resistance to infection of abalone by the abalone herpesvirus

• Determining the susceptibility of remnant populations of abalone previously exposed to AVG.

Details of these projects and links to publications are available on the FRDC website.108

5.3.2 Pacific oyster mortality syndromeA syndrome of increased mortality in farmed triploid Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas) was reported from the Georges River, New South Wales, in late 2010. The syndrome was also detected in Port Jackson (Parramatta River) in early 2011 in wild Pacific oysters. OsHV-1 µvar was found in association with the mortalities. Testing has confirmed continued presence of the virus in the Georges River estuary in 2012.

New South Wales continues to manage the disease, through movement controls on farmed Georges River oysters and oyster farming infrastructure and equipment. There is also a total ban on recreational fishers taking oysters from the Georges River, Botany Bay and Port Jackson.

POMS has been contained to the two currently affected estuaries, and OsHV-1 µvar has not been detected elsewhere in Australia in 2012.

As part of the strategic approach to management and containment of POMS, a suite of projects to inform response and management of the disease in affected areas have begun. These include:

• Understanding biotic and abiotic environmental and husbandry effects to reduce economic losses from POMS

• Understanding and planning for the potential impacts of OsHV-1 μvar on the Australian Pacific oyster industry

• Risk mitigation, epidemiology and biology of OsHV-1

• Industry study tours to examine the effect and response to OsHV-1 µvar in Europe.

Information on these projects is available on the FRDC website,109 together with a link to a blog on the biotic and abiotic effects project.

Reports on these events were provided to the OIE and the Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia–Pacific (NACA) through the Asia–Pacific Regional Quarterly Aquatic Animal Disease Reporting Program.

108 www.frdc.com.au/research/aquatic_animal_health/Pages/default.aspx

109 www.frdc.com.au/research/aquatic_animal_health/Pages/default.aspx

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

92 Animal health in Australia 2012

5.4 Research and developmentAustralia is conducting research to inform and guide diagnostics and management of endemic and emerging diseases. The Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram of the FRDC provides strategic direction of research to increase Australia’s capability to be prepared for, and respond to, aquatic animal disease emergencies.

Development of accurate molecular tools for disease management and diagnostics has been one focus of the subprogram. Projects that have recently been completed, or are active, include risk assessment and policy development for sustainable management of aquatic animal health, new and emerging diseases, and disease management in existing aquaculture industries. The FRDC website has further information on the subprogram and its activities, as well as progress and final reports on projects.

5.5 Regional aquatic animal health initiatives

Australia collaborates with many countries — particularly its neighbours in the Asia–Pacific region — to help improve their aquatic animal health. Cooperation occurs through Australia’s membership of NACA, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Secretariat of the Pacific Community, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and the Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation forum. Participation in these forums ensures that Australia is actively engaged in projects that address aquatic animal disease threats to the region.

The Asia Regional Advisory Group (AG) on aquatic animal health was established under the auspices of NACA to provide advice to member countries on aquatic animal health management. Members of the AG include aquatic animal disease experts, the OIE, the FAO and collaborating regional organisations. An Australian Government officer is serving as chair of the AG and chaired the group’s 11th meeting in Bangkok, Thailand, in November 2012. At this meeting, the group reviewed the disease situation in Asia, considered the recent changes to OIE global standards, revised the list of diseases in the regional Quarterly Aquatic Animal Disease reporting system, assessed progress made against the elements of the Asia regional technical guidelines on responsible movement of live aquatic animals, updated the list of regional disease resource centres, and developed recommendations and action points for consideration by the NACA secretariat and member governments. Further information is available on the NACA website.110

110 www.enaca.org (under ‘Publications’, ‘Health’)

DAFF is funding an aquatic animal health laboratory proficiency testing program, which is being implemented through DAFF, NACA, the Australian National Quality Assurance Program and CSIRO-AAHL. The program aims to strengthen Asia’s regional capability to diagnose important aquatic animal diseases that affect trade, industry sustainability and/or productivity. A series of steering committee meetings in early 2012 determined the operational aspects of the project. An initial workshop to decide upon the diseases to be included in the program, and to explain its mode of operation, was held in July 2012. Representatives from 43 laboratories in 13 countries in the region decided on a panel of 10 pathogens of significance for inclusion in the program. Four rounds of testing are to be run over 2013–14; the first round will begin in May 2013.

DAFF funded an emergency regional consultation on acute hepatopancreatic necrosis syndrome (AHPNS, also called early mortality syndrome). AHPNS is an emerging prawn disease affecting prawn production in China, Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia. Its aetiology is still not fully understood. The consultation, which was organised by NACA and DAFF, was held in Bangkok in August 2012. It brought together more than 80 participants, including international prawn health experts, regional governments and industry. Participants shared information on the disease — including its occurrence, pathology and diagnosis — and agreed to develop a coordinated regional response to the issue. The consultation also discussed arrangements to improve responses to future disease emergencies.

Elections to the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Standards Commission were held in May 2012. For the first time, two members from the Asia–Pacific region were elected to the six-person commission. Huang Jie (Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences) was elected as a vice president, and Ingo Ernst (DAFF, Australia) was elected as a member.

DAFF participated in a workshop for OIE National Focal Points for Aquatic Animals in Bangkok on 9–12 October 2012. The workshop focused on OIE reporting obligations, contributing to the development of OIE aquatic animal health standards, approaches to disease surveillance and maintaining networks with the competent authority for aquatic animal health in individual countries.

� Aquatic�animal�health 93

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

94 Animal health in Australia 2012

6 Imports and exports

Australia is progressively applying a risk-based approach to imports and exports across the biosecurity continuum (pre-border, at the border, and post-border). This approach draws on rigorous science, evidence and intelligence, and allows resources to be managed according to the level of risk.

Four divisions of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) manage pest and disease risks associated with imports: Biosecurity Policy, Biosecurity Animal, Biosecurity Plant, and Border Compliance. The divisions work together, using policies and procedures that meet international obligations under the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement).

The Biosecurity Animal and Biosecurity Plant divisions facilitate technical market access for exporters of agricultural products, including live animals and plants, and reproductive material. The Trade and Market Access Division of DAFF provides a coordinating role, by pursuing market access in multilateral forums and bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations with Australia’s principal trading partners.

This chapter outlines DAFF’s import and export-related activities in 2012.

Chapter

Imports and exports 95

6.1 Imports The importation of animals and animal products into Australia is regulated by DAFF, under the Quarantine Act 1908 and its subordinate legislation; and by the Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and its subordinate legislation.

On 4 July 2012, DAFF commenced consultation on draft biosecurity legislation to replace the century-old Quarantine Act 1908. The draft legislation will meet five high-level objectives that support the biosecurity reform principle of ‘modern legislation, technology, funding and business systems’. These are:

• managing biosecurity risk

• improving productivity

• strengthening partnerships

• ensuring sound administration

• increasing transparency.

Key provisions of the Biosecurity Bill 2012 include:

• giving the Australian Government the authority to set import conditions

• implementing the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments

• establishing national powers to manage biosecurity risks onshore and in Australia’s maritime environment

• creating the statutory position of Inspector-General of Biosecurity

• instigating flexible co-regulatory mechanisms to efficiently share responsibility with industry

• legislating Australia’s Appropriate Level of Protection (the level of biosecurity protection deemed necessary to protect a country’s human, animal and plant health)

• implementing modern compliance and enforcement tools to enable appropriate responses to a broad range of conduct and noncompliance.

The Bill was introduced into the Australian Parliament in November 2012.

6.1.1 Import risk analysesMany of Australia’s quarantine requirements are based on standards, guidelines and recommendations established by international organisations, such as the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). However, additional measures are sometimes needed to reduce risk to an acceptable level. Import conditions are only applied to the extent necessary to protect human, animal and plant health.

A regulated import risk analysis (IRA) process came into effect in 2007. The timeframes for the completion of IRAs are prescribed through regulations. They provide for either a standard or an expanded IRA process, depending on the complexity of the science and the nature of the biosecurity risks. A standard IRA will be completed within 24 months, and an expanded IRA within 30 months. IRAs can also be conducted using a nonregulated pathway — for example, for review of an existing policy.

The methods used to conduct IRAs are in line with Australian Government policy, the Quarantine Act 1908 and its subordinate legislation, the requirements of the SPS Agreement, and relevant international animal health standards. The IRA report assesses the quarantine risks and, where appropriate, recommends risk-management measures. The IRA process provides for public consultations, including consultation on the draft report.

The ‘stop-the-clock’ mechanism of the regulated IRA process remained in place throughout 2012 for IRAs of beef and beef products from Canada, Japan and the United States, to allow technical information to be provided. The clock can be restarted when the relevant information becomes available for analysis. Continuation of the ‘stop-the-clock’ mechanism applied to the three beef IRAs allowed staff to work on high-priority policy reviews.

DAFF continued to focus on management of the biosecurity risks associated with ornamental fish imports, following completion of the IRA in 2011. In November 2012, the Animal Biosecurity Branch announced proposed changes to the management of disease risks associated with imported ornamental fish. The proposed changes place greater emphasis on managing the biosecurity risks offshore, at the source, and include the introduction of an on-arrival fish health surveillance program. This would allow DAFF to monitor the performance of overseas authorities and export establishments, and ensure that health requirements for ornamental fish exported to Australia are met. These arrangements should also enable the department to be more responsive to emerging disease issues and to work closely with exporting countries to manage biosecurity risks effectively.

DAFF is planning a trial of the on-arrival fish health surveillance program during 2013 to test its operational feasibility. The first trial will involve only those bags of fish that would otherwise be destroyed because of noncompliance with Australian import requirements. DAFF has sought the cooperation of volunteers who hold ornamental fish import permits for a subsequent, more comprehensive trial.

96 Animal health in Australia 2012

6.1.2 Policy reviews and competent authority evaluations

The Animal Biosecurity Branch released four reviews of biosecurity policy to stakeholders in 2012:

• A draft policy review of the importation of zoo perissodactyls (equine species, tapirs and rhinoceroses) from approved countries was released on 15 February 2012. After consultation with stakeholders, a final biosecurity policy for importing these animals was released on 30 May 2012.

• A draft policy review of queen honey bees from approved countries was released on 29 February 2012. After consultation with stakeholders, a final biosecurity policy for importing queen honey bees was released on 31 August 2012.

• A draft policy review of the importation of dogs and cats and their semen from approved countries was released to stakeholders on 26 July 2012. The report reviews the major diseases of biosecurity concern of dogs and cats, including rabies and piroplasmosis. It is anticipated that, when the new policy is in operation, the time that dogs and cats spend in post-entry quarantine will be reduced in most instances.

• A policy review of epizootic rabbit enteropathy (ERE) for the importation of commercial rabbits from the European Union was completed on 3 September 2012. The available scientific information indicated that biosecurity measures for ERE are no longer required.

The Animal Biosecurity Branch also amended health certification requirements for cattle, sheep and goat semen and embryos from the European Union; and cattle semen and embryos from Norway and Switzerland. Monitoring of the European outbreak of Schmallenberg virus, which has caused abortions and birth deformities in cattle, sheep and goats, indicated that ruminant semen and embryos imported from Europe may be at risk of infection with this virus. Consequently, Australian livestock may also be at risk of infection. To manage these biosecurity risks, a requirement that ruminant semen and embryo donors be tested for Schmallenberg virus was added to the relevant import conditions, effective from 14 May 2012.

A review of the IRA of horses from approved countries continued. This was foreshadowed in the Australian Government’s response to a recommendation of the equine influenza inquiry that the IRA should be reviewed every two years. The review is taking into account relevant developments in scientific knowledge, including information

Debra Charlton

Imports and exports 97

about testing methods, vaccines, vaccination procedures and biosecurity controls for horses imported into Australia. A draft report of the policy review is expected to be circulated to stakeholders for consultation in the first half of 2013.

DAFF undertakes evaluations of overseas veterinary authorities, as well as the disease status of countries with which Australia trades, or for which market access has been sought. The evaluations assess the management of pre-border biosecurity risk. This includes application, verification and certification of Australian import requirements by the competent authority for the commodities of concern. The evaluations are typically comprehensive desk assessments, followed by on-site (in-country) verification visits.

In 2010, DAFF suspended the importation of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) risk materials from Japan, following the reporting of FMD outbreaks. The OIE reinstated Japan’s status as an FMD-free country without vaccination in February 2011. After this, and in line with existing policies on FMD and competent authority evaluations, DAFF conducted an evaluation of Japan’s FMD status. The evaluation was finalised in 2012, and the DAFF FMD Approved Country List was amended to include Japan as an approved country for the export of products to Australia (for which freedom from FMD is required).

The Animal Biosecurity Branch also continued its programs of assessments of competent authorities in relation to pre-export testing of prawns for export to Australia, and for ornamental fish exported to Australia.

6.1.3 Biological productsBiological products include a wide range of goods derived from animals (including humans), plants and microorganisms. They include animal feeds, foods for human consumption (e.g. prawns and dairy products), fertilisers, diagnostic kits, biological samples, bioremediation agents, human and veterinary therapeutics, and veterinary vaccines.

Importation of biological products into Australia is regulated by the Quarantine Act 1908. Under the Act, importation of many biological products is prohibited unless an import permit is granted by the Director of Quarantine. Permits are issued for specific products following an assessment of the associated risk. This assessment takes into account:

• the biological components of the product

• the relevant animal or plant health status of the country of origin

• manufacturing processes that might mitigate the risk

• the proposed end use of the product.

The Biological Imports Program (BIP) makes an important contribution to maintaining Australia’s animal health status by managing disease threats from imported biological products. BIP works across the biosecurity continuum (pre-border, at the border, and post-border) to manage biosecurity risks by:

• seeking policy advice from within the department and from other agencies

• auditing overseas facilities to verify the integrity of manufacturers’ systems for sourcing raw materials, processing, preventing contamination and tracing products

• liaising with international veterinary authorities

• granting, or refusing to grant, import permits

• applying conditions on each permit granted.

Import permits may be suspended, revoked or amended if there are changes to the biosecurity risk — for example, an outbreak of an exotic disease in a country from which biological components are sourced.

BIP has 31 officers, including veterinarians, scientists and program administrators. As well as assessing import applications, officers develop import systems. Examples include improving ICON (the database of import conditions) and website information, and contributing to the development of BICON: the new import information technology (IT) system.

In 2012, BIP officers received approximately 7500 import permit applications, provided advice in response to approximately 12 000 email enquiries and responded to about 18 000 phone calls through the public helpline.

Stakeholder engagement through formal and informal consultations was a key focus for BIP in 2012. The aim of consultation is to help importers and users of imported products comply with biosecurity requirements. Stakeholders include government agencies, importers, industries, community interest groups, producers, processors, consumers and users of imported products, research and development organisations, and travellers. Stakeholders are represented on the Biological Consultative Group, which met in March and September 2012. The group’s role is to ensure that all components of the biological importing system work together to serve the interests of Australia.

The year ahead is promising to be significant for BIP. The program will:

• pursue further improvements in Australia’s biosecurity systems across the continuum to manage the risks of imported biological products, including developing strategies to improve management of high-risk commodities

98 Animal health in Australia 2012

• work with industry to develop business assurance activities and appropriate risk-management measures for different categories of imported biological products

• develop training packages for program officers and entry management staff that focus on recognising and managing quarantine risks associated with biological imports

• in consultation with stakeholders, prepare for the introduction of the new biosecurity legislation

• work with industry stakeholders to finalise the development and implementation of BICON.

In an environment with increasingly complex products and complicated supply chains, BIP will continue to contribute to maintaining Australia’s animal health status.

6.1.4 Animal Import Operations BranchThe Animal Import Operations Branch (AIOB) implements the import policies for live animals and reproductive material. It also oversees the post-arrival quarantine of imported animals through DAFF-operated quarantine stations, and approved, privately operated quarantine premises.

Before importation, the branch provides advice to prospective importers on processes and requirements for importation of live animals and reproductive material, assesses applications to import animals, and issues import permits with appropriate conditions. For some commodities, the branch inspects and approves overseas pre-export quarantine facilities.

On arrival of an import, AIOB staff audit health certification for compliance with import conditions, and examine imported animals and genetic material. AIOB also liaises with overseas certifying authorities to verify that certification is consistent with import conditions and international standards for the live animal trade.

Most imported live animals undergo a period of post-arrival quarantine. AIOB assists with formulating standards for privately operated quarantine premises that have been approved by DAFF, and inspecting, monitoring and auditing these premises.

DAFF leases and operates four animal quarantine stations with the capacity to manage imported animals — dogs, cats, horses, ruminants, hatching eggs, live pigeons and bees — that are subject to a period of quarantine. The branch ensures that the facilities and care of animals being quarantined meet acceptable standards for biosecurity and for animal health and welfare.

The current quarantine stations are situated at Eastern Creek (New South Wales), Spotswood (Victoria), Torrens Island

(South Australia) and Byford (Western Australia). Each station is approximately one hour’s drive from the respective state’s international airport, allowing animals to be transferred for examination and quarantine soon after their arrival. The leases for these sites will expire over the next 3–6 years, and a new single quarantine station that will accommodate all animal species held by the current stations is being developed. The Department of Finance and Deregulation (DoFD) has procured a large site north of Melbourne, close to the international airport. DAFF is working with DoFD and architecture consultants to design a new quarantine station, which will begin operating during 2015.

6.2 Exports The Australian Government continues its endeavours to improve trade opportunities and access arrangements for Australian agricultural products through the Doha Round of WTO negotiations. In addition to this participation at the multilateral level, Australian producers benefit from free-trade agreements with members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Chile, New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand and the United States.

Australia’s Minister for Trade and Competitiveness, and Malaysia’s Minister for Trade and Industry, signed the Malaysia–Australia Free Trade Agreement (MAFTA) in Malaysia on 22 May 2012. Australia and Malaysia will each complete the relevant domestic ratification processes prior to it entering into force. For Australia, this includes consideration by the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties. The MAFTA entered into force on 1 January 2013.

Under the MAFTA, Malaysia and Australia will cut tariffs earlier and on a wider range of goods. The agreement will also address other barriers to trade and simplify administration for traders. Malaysia will eliminate tariffs on 97.6% of goods imported from Australia from day one, rising to 99% in 2017. Australia will eliminate all tariffs on goods from Malaysia from day one. Australian industries to benefit include:

• milk, through a liberalised licensing arrangement for liquid milk exporters, allowing access for higher value retail products

• processed foods, through immediate elimination of virtually all tariffs.

Free-trade agreement negotiations are continuing with China, the Gulf Cooperation Council, Japan, Indonesia and the Republic of Korea. Australia is also participating in the negotiation of the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus with Pacific island nations, and a Trans Pacific Partnership agreement with Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam.

Imports and exports 99

DAFF works with industry to take advantage of market access opportunities. Major activities include:

• consulting with industry on export priorities and strategies

• identifying impediments in importing country requirements and international standards, and developing arguments to resolve the impediments

• developing relationships with key trading partners and, where appropriate, implementing bilateral formal agreements or memorandums

• maintaining access to foreign markets during disease or pest emergencies by contributing to technical negotiations with overseas authorities

• contributing to the development of international standards.

6.2.1 Export inspection and certification reforms

The export certification reform project officially concluded at the end of June 2011. The reforms have reduced regulatory costs for export industries by around $30 million per year. They also provide flexibility for exporters to further reduce their costs through a range of initiatives agreed through ministerial taskforces for specific export industries. These

initiatives are now being implemented, and export industries are transitioning to the new arrangements.

The new arrangements include the following:

• Export meat plants have the option of engaging authorised officers to undertake meat inspection.

• Seafood exporters will benefit from one audit that will cover both domestic and export requirements.

• Dairy export establishments will benefit from greater recognition of state and territory systems for regulating dairy establishments, thus minimising regulatory duplication.

• Horticulture and grains exporters have the advantage of new plant legislation — the Export Control (Plants and Plant Products) Orders 2011. This enables innovation and provides flexibility in their export operations, as well as providing the option of engaging authorised officers to inspect export consignments, where supported by importing country requirements.

The project also included the development of three new IT systems:

• The Audit Management System streamlines the capture and analysis of audit data and enables a more performance-based and risk-based approach to regulatory oversight.

Animal Health Australia

100 Animal health in Australia 2012

• The Manual of importing country requirements replaces a range of paper-based and electronic databases that stored importing country requirements for export industries with a web-based IT system, supported by a robust search function.

• The Tracking Animal Certification for Export (TRACE) system, which was developed jointly by the Australian Government and the live animal export industry, enables electronic exchange of information regarding export consignments. This replaces a resource-intensive exchange of paper documents.

6.2.2 Legislation The Export Control Act 1982 controls the export of all goods regulated by DAFF. Subordinate legislation to the Act provides specific commodity-based regulation. It includes:

• Export Control (Animals) Order 2004

• Export Control (Eggs and Egg Products) Orders 2005

• Export Control (Fees) Orders 2001

• Export Control (Fish and Fish Products) Orders 2005

• Export Control (Meat and Meat Products) Orders 2005

• Export Control (Milk and Milk Products) Orders 2005

• Export Control (Organic Produce Certification) Orders 2005

• Export Control (Plants and Plant Products) Orders 2011

• Export Control (Poultry Meat and Poultry Meat Products) Orders 2010

• Export Control (Prescribed Goods — General) Orders 2005

• Export Control (Rabbit and Ratite) Orders 1985

• Export Control (Wild Game Meat and Wild Game Meat Products) Orders 2010.

Penalties for offences against export legislation are prescribed in the Export Control (Orders) Regulations 1982. More detail can be found in Chapter 7.

All exporters of red meat and livestock (cattle, sheep, goats, buffalo, deer and camelids) require an export licence under the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 and subordinate legislation, including:

• Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Conditions on Live-stock Export Licences) Order 2012

• Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Regulations 1998

• Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Export Licensing) Regulations 1998

• Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Standards) Order 2005

• Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Live Cattle Exports to Republic of Korea) Order 2002

• Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Export of Live-stock to Saudi Arabia) Order 2005

• Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Export of Live-stock to Egypt) Order 2008

• Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Conditions on Live-stock Export Licences) Order 2012.

Commonwealth legislation underpinning export inspection arrangements, and fees and charges, includes:

• Export Inspection and Meat Charges Collection Act 1985

– Export Inspection and Meat Charges Collection Regulations 1985

• Export Inspection (Establishment Registration Charges) Act 1985

– Export Inspection (Establishment Registration Charges) Regulations 1985

• Export Inspection (Quantity Charge) Act 1985

– Export Inspection (Quantity Charge) Regulations 1985

• Export Inspection (Service Charge) Act 1985

– Export Inspection (Service Charge) Regulations

• Meat Export Charge Act 1984

– Meat Export Charge Regulations

• Meat Export Charge Collection Act 1984

– Meat Export Charge Collection Regulations

• Meat Inspection Act 1983

– Meat Inspection (Modification) Regulations

– Meat Inspection (Orders) Regulations 1984

• Meat Inspection Arrangements Act 1964.

6.2.3 Technical input for market accessIn 2012, the Animal Biosecurity Branch assisted with approximately 64 issues involving more than 45 countries. These included technical matters in the export of:

• breeder sheep and goats to a range of markets, including Argentina, China and Uzbekistan

• cattle and sheep to Middle East destinations

• cattle semen and embryos to the United States

• day-old chicks to the European Union

• feeder cattle to the Solomon Islands

• live aquatic animals to Malaysia for breeding purposes

• live barramundi to a range of markets

• meat, dairy, fish, hides, live animals, and genetic material to the Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia

• ruminant genetic materials to Argentina, Chile, the European Union and Mexico

• salmon eggs to Canada and Chile.

Achieving acceptance by trading partners of Australia’s bluetongue–free zone, and Australia’s bovine tuberculosis–free status, continues to be a high priority for DAFF and exporters of ruminants.

Imports and exports 101

6.2.4 Export certification arrangements The Export Standards Branch of DAFF provides technical input and negotiates access to new markets for Australian meat, processed food, dairy, fish and other animal products. It also maintains existing markets for these products. The branch responds to the challenges associated with changes in importing country requirements, such as variations in food-safety requirements, animal or public health legislation, and other specialised inspection procedures (such as halal slaughter).

In 2012, the Export Standards Branch:

• continued to contribute to the development of the Manual of importing country requirements. This involved revising and updating market access requirements for more than 100 trading partners, and entering them into a comprehensive electronic database for use by registered exporters

• facilitated country-to-country reviews and audits, which are integral to the maintenance of many export markets; these were

– a review of Australia’s production systems for rendered product for animal feeds by China

– a follow-up audit of Australia’s production systems for dairy products by the European Union

– a review of Australia’s halal program by Malaysia

– an audit of horsemeat, sheepmeat and pigmeat establishments by the European Union

– an audit of meat and dairy establishments by the Russian Federation

– a systems audit of high-risk meat establishments by the Republic of Korea

• negotiated new or improved market access, and developed certification for a range of commodities and markets, including

– providing advice to poultry, pet food and egg exporters to minimise trade disruption during outbreaks of avian influenza in Victoria and New South Wales

– through negotiations with international trading partners, maintaining market access for the majority of Australian avian products sourced from areas outside those affected by avian influenza

– negotiating new access and certificates for exports of sheep, lamp, pork and poultry to India

– negotiating improved access conditions to the United States, through changes to the Australian Export Meat Inspection System, which will decrease regulatory costs in the export meat industry

– developing new certificates for the European Union for exports of composite foods. Composite foods contain a mixture of processed animal or plant foods, and include sausages, prepared or preserved meat products, extracts and soups, pastas, ice cream and protein concentrates

– negotiating new certificates for dairy, eggs, beeswax, honey, pet food, emu oil, pet meat, bovine pericardium, animal protein meal, seafood, bivalves and gallstones to various export destinations

• developed and implemented an EXport DOCumentation (EXDOC) certificate to replace the less secure manual certificate, and a new halal mark — which includes the establishment number — to increase product integrity for export meat and meat products to Muslim countries through the Australian Government Authorised Halal Program

• assisted Australian exporters when problems arose in clearing consignments in importing countries.

DAFF’s role in certifying and inspecting meat and other food products for export is covered in detail in Chapter 7.

Export certification and inspection services for live animals DAFF confirms the fitness of Australian live animals and animal reproductive material for export, and verifies that the requirements of the importing countries have been met. These activities involve:

• assisting with negotiating technical market access for live animals and animal reproductive material

• inspecting live animals and animal reproductive material for export, and assessing documentation

• issuing export permits and health certificates to Australian exporters of live animals and animal reproductive material

• licensing exporters of livestock

• registering premises for the assembly, isolation and quarantine of livestock intended for export

• accrediting veterinarians for the preparation and inspection of livestock for export

• auditing the procedures undertaken by licensed exporters, operators of registered premises and accredited veterinarians.

102 Animal health in Australia 2012

Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System for Australian livestock exports On 21 October 2011, the Australian Government announced that it would adapt and implement the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS) in all livestock export markets by the end of 2012. The implementation of ESCAS across all markets was recommended by the Independent Review of Australia’s Livestock Export Trade, conducted by Bill Farmer, AO, and two industry–government working group reports. This made Australia the first country in the world to introduce comprehensive mandatory animal welfare conditions for livestock exports.

To date, over 2.4 million animals have been exported under ESCAS, setting the highest standards for exported livestock anywhere in the world. Australia remains the only country among over 100 livestock exporting nations that regulates the welfare of livestock destined for export from paddock to the point of processing.

The aim of the ESCAS framework is to minimise adverse animal welfare incidents for Australian livestock. When such incidents occur, the framework provides a process to investigate and take regulatory action against the Australian exporter, where appropriate, in a manner that minimises disruption to trade and improves animal welfare outcomes.

Under the ESCAS framework, exporters must provide DAFF with evidence that they:

• handle and process animals through specified supply chains to the point of slaughter in accordance with the internationally accepted requirements for animal welfare established by the OIE

• have control of the movement of animals within their supply chain

• can track or account for animals throughout the supply chain

• organise independent audits of the supply chain to assess compliance with ESCAS requirements.

A fundamental element of the ESCAS is that responsibility for establishing and maintaining a compliant supply chain lies with Australian livestock exporters. Exporters work in conjunction with their commercial partners in importing countries to ensure that their supply chains meet the new regulatory requirements.

The livestock export reforms have been implemented to protect the welfare of Australian exported livestock and to provide long-term stability for the industry, as well as for the jobs, families and communities that rely on it.

6.3 International standardsDAFF contributes to the development of international standards through its involvement in multilateral organisations and groups. These include the WTO and its committees, the Food Safety and Animal Health Quadrilateral Forums (comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States), the OIE, and the Codex Alimentarius Commission of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

DAFF’s leadership — and the active participation of Australia’s delegations in these groups — helps to develop international rules and standards that reflect Australia’s interests and situation. In 2012, several Australians participated in OIE expert groups. This included the continued participation of a DAFF officer in the development of veterinary legislation standards through the OIE ad hoc Group on Veterinary Legislation.

At the OIE elections in May 2012, Australia gained a number of key positions on OIE bodies. Australia’s OIE Delegate and Chief Veterinary Officer, Dr Mark Schipp, was elected to the OIE Council, which manages OIE business on behalf of member countries. Other Australian appointments were to the Permanent Animal Welfare Working Group (Dr Peter Thornber, DAFF), the Aquatic Animal Health Standards Commission (Dr Ingo Ernst, DAFF; see Chapter 5), and the Biological Standards Commission (Dr Peter Daniels, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory). These positions will facilitate Australia’s ability to influence OIE standards and policies as they are developed.

Within DAFF, the Office of the Chief Veterinary Officer contributed to the maintenance of market access and exports by providing definitive advice on Australia’s animal health status to inform market access negotiations.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Imports and exports 103

Australia advises member states of revised import policies for animal, plant and food products through a process set up by the WTO. Notifications made during 2012 are listed below.

6.3.1 Animal health notifications• Importation of zoo perissodactyls from approved countries:

draft policy review (G/SPS/N/AUS/286)

• Policy review of the importation of live zoo perissodactyls including zebras, rhinoceroses and tapirs from approved countries (G/SPS/N/AUS/286/Add.1)

• Draft review of the importation of queen honey bees (G/SPS/N/AUS/288)

• Policy review of the importation of queen honey bees

• (G/SPS/N/AUS/288/Add.1)

• Emergency measures: Biosecurity Advice 2012/10: Amended health certification requirements for cattle, sheep and goat semen and embryos from the European Union, and cattle semen and embryos from Norway and Switzerland (G/SPS/N/AUS/295)

• The Biosecurity Bill and the Inspector-General of Biosecurity Bill (G/SPS/N/AUS/298)

• Release of additional parts of the draft Biosecurity Bill and the Inspector-General of Biosecurity Bill (G/SPS/N/AUS/298/Add.1)

• Release of additional parts of the draft Biosecurity Bill and the Inspector-General of Biosecurity Bill (G/SPS/N/AUS/298/Add.2)

• Final release of additional parts of the draft Biosecurity Bill and the Inspector-General of Biosecurity Bill (G/SPS/N/AUS/298/Add.3)

• Importation of commercial rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) from certain Member States of the European Union: policy review of epizootic rabbit enteropathy; and Biosecurity requirements for the importation of commercial rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) from certain Member States of the European Union (G/SPS/N/AUS/304)

• Guidelines for managing the risk of transmitting transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) via veterinary vaccines and other in vivo veterinary products (G/SPS/N/AUS/306).

6.3.2 Food-safety notifications• Emergency measures: Updated testing requirements for

some Japanese food imports for radionuclides (G/SPS/N/AUS/261/Add.1)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (17 January 2012 — Proposal 7O) (G/SPS/N/AUS/285)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (14 February 2012 — Proposal 8O) (G/SPS/N/AUS/287)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (13 March 2012 — Proposal 9O) (G/SPS/N/AUS/291)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (10 April 2012 — Proposal 10O) (G/SPS/N/AUS/292)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (8 April 2012 — Proposal 11O) (G/SPS/N/AUS/296)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (5 June 2012 — Proposal 12O) (G/SPS/N/AUS/297)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (3 July 2012 — Proposal 1P) (G/SPS/N/AUS/299)

• Call for submissions for Proposal M1008 Maximum Residue Limits (2012) (G/SPS/N/AUS/300)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (14 August 2012 — Proposal 2P) (G/SPS/N/AUS/303)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (11 September 2012 — Proposal 3P) (G/SPS/N/AUS/305)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (9 October 2012 — Proposal 4P) (G/SPS/N/AUS/307)

• Proposal to amend Standard 1.4.2 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (6 September 2012 — Proposal 5P) (G/SPS/N/AUS/308).

104 Animal health in Australia 2012

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Imports and exports 105

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

106 Animal health in Australia 2012

7 Consumer protection

Consumers in Australia and overseas expect that the food they purchase will be safe. The Australian Government, state authorities and industries work together to protect the public and ensure the safety of foods consumed in Australia or exported from Australia.

Programs for consumer protection are administered by the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF),111 Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ),112 the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA),113 state and territory government authorities, and Animal Health Australia.114

Activities in the many networks and partnerships that help to protect consumers include:

• establishment of international food standards

• identification of outbreaks of foodborne illness

• surveillance, prevention and control of communicable diseases

• monitoring of chemical residues, pathogens and environmental contaminants in products

• development of traceability systems for livestock used in food production

• promotion of sound management systems to deliver safe and hygienic food products to the marketplace.

111 www.daff.gov.au

112 www.foodstandards.gov.au

113 www.health.gov.au

114 www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au

Chapter

Consumer protection 107

7.1 Regulations and standardsThe following two sections outline the international and national regulations and standards that apply to Australian consumers.

7.1.1 International arrangements — Codex Alimentarius Commission

Australia plays a strong leadership role in the development of international science-based food standards through the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) and its subsidiary bodies. Australia contributes to the work of Codex committees dealing with export inspection and certification, food additives and contaminants, animal feed, residues of veterinary drugs and pesticides, food hygiene, food labelling, nutrition and food for special dietary uses. Australia also contributes to the work of the various commodity committees — fish and fishery products, fruits and vegetables, and fats and oils.

In 2012, Australia’s participation continued to ensure that Codex outcomes are consistent with, and support improved outcomes for, domestic food-safety and public health policies. Australia also focused on areas of benefit to the domestic agricultural and food industries, to maintain Australia’s position as an internationally competitive food exporter.

During 2012, Australia continued to chair the Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems. The committee completed the draft Principles and guidelines for national food control systems. This document provides guidance to governments as they develop systems that protect the health of their populations and meet international obligations. Codex is expected to adopt the principles and guidelines at its next meeting in July 2013. New work is also being discussed in relation to monitoring regulatory performance and the need for additional international guidance on managing food-safety emergency situations.

In 2012, Codex continued developing draft Guidelines for control of specific zoonotic parasites in meat: Trichinella spiralis and Cysticercus bovis. Australia has actively participated in the development of these guidelines to ensure that a risk-based approach is applied to addressing the risks posed to food safety by T  spiralis and C  bovis. The Codex Committee on Food Hygiene also agreed to begin discussing the occurrence and control of parasites in food, and whether guidance on the control of parasites should be issued in a general code of practice or within existing codes.

In addition to its leadership role in Codex, Australia has been a significant contributor to the expert bodies that provide

scientific advice to Codex. Australia provides funding to support the Joint Expert Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR), which provides independent scientific advice to the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues. The funding allowed the JMPR to meet the increasing demand for evaluation of chemical compounds.

In 2012, Codex adopted maximum residue limits for ractopamine in cattle and in pig muscle, tissue and fat. This is expected to contribute to fair practices in the international food trade.

7.1.2 National arrangementsThe Australian domestic food regulatory system covers three distinct areas: developing policy, setting food standards, and implementing and enforcing food standards. An intergovernmental agreement ensures an effective and cooperative national approach to food safety and regulation in Australia. A treaty between Australia and New Zealand allows for many common food standards in the two countries.

Policy agreed by the Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation, under the Council of Australian Governments, is taken into account by FSANZ (a statutory authority) when it develops food standards for the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. The forum is chaired by the Australian Government Minister for Health and Ageing (or delegate) and consists of representatives from the Australian, state and territory, and New Zealand governments.

Food-safety policy focuses on a preventive approach, to ensure that risks to public health are managed at the most effective point in the food supply chain. This builds consumer confidence, safeguards international trade in food and improves levels of food safety for the consumer.

Food standardsPrimary production and processing standards for Australia have been developed for seafood, ready-to-eat meat, dairy products, poultry meat, and eggs and egg products. These are being implemented by all states and territories. A primary production and processing standard for seed sprouts has been completed and is scheduled to commence from July 2013. FSANZ is developing primary production and processing standards for raw meat (including game meat), and for raw milk and raw milk products. New standards generally have a two-year phase-in period from the date of approval.

Country-of-origin labelling is currently required for all packaged food and unpackaged fresh or processed fruit, vegetables, seafood and pork sold in Australia. Following a

108 Animal health in Australia 2012

decision at the December 2012 meeting of the Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation, mandatory country-of-origin labelling will also apply to all unpackaged beef, sheep and chicken meat from 18 July 2013.

7.2 Protective measuresAustralia has two protective measures in place to ensure consumer safety: communicable disease surveillance by the Communicable Diseases Network Australia (CDNA) and OzFoodNet, and residue monitoring.

7.2.1 Communicable disease surveillance

Communicable Diseases Network AustraliaCDNA115 provides national leadership and coordination for the surveillance, prevention and control of communicable human diseases that pose a threat to public health. Its members include the Australian Government, state and territory governments, and key nongovernment organisations concerned with communicable diseases. CDNA offers advice to governments and other bodies on public health strategies to minimise the effect of communicable diseases in Australia and the region. The network oversees the development and implementation of the National Communicable Diseases Surveillance Strategy, which provides effective national surveillance, preparedness and responses for communicable disease risks. CDNA reports to the Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council through the National Public Health Partnership.

OzFoodNetIn 2002, DoHA — in collaboration with state and territory health agencies — established OzFoodNet to improve surveillance for foodborne disease. This collaborative network of epidemiologists, microbiologists and food-safety specialists conducts applied research into foodborne disease and methods for improving surveillance. Reports from OzFoodNet are provided fortnightly to CDNA and are published in Communicable Diseases Intelligence, a quarterly publication of DoHA.116

OzFoodNet identifies outbreaks and provides early warning of foodborne illnesses in Australia. It ensures a consistent national response to such outbreaks (which may include recall of a food product) and reduces the number of incidents and spread of foodborne illness by prompt preventive action.

115 www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/content/cda-cdna-cdna.htm

116 www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-pubs-cdi-cdiintro.htm

7.2.2 Residue monitoringAustralian industries participate in residue-monitoring programs that assess whether existing controls on the use of pesticides and veterinary medicines are appropriate, and determine the levels of these chemicals and environmental contaminants in commodities. The programs are risk based and are designed to identify and monitor chemical inputs into Australian agricultural production systems. Residue and contaminant monitoring results are assessed against relevant Australian standards. If a noncompliance is detected, the relevant state or territory authority conducts a traceback investigation to identify and resolve the source of the noncompliance. The results of monitoring programs provide confidence for Australian consumers and overseas markets that Australian agricultural products meet relevant standards.

The National Residue Survey (NRS), within DAFF, conducts national residue-monitoring programs for the cattle, sheep, goat and pig industries, and for camels, deer, horses, kangaroos, poultry, ratites (ostriches and emus), wild boar, honey, eggs and some aquatic animal species. Results of NRS monitoring programs are available on the DAFF website.117

The Australian Milk Residue Analysis survey provides a national, independent monitoring program for residues of agricultural and veterinary chemicals and environmental contaminants in raw cows’ milk. Dairy Food Safety Victoria coordinates the survey on behalf of the Australian dairy industry.

The NRS and Dairy Food Safety Victoria consult with the relevant industry sectors and DAFF to ensure that residue-monitoring programs address any specific export market requirements, as well as domestic requirements.

The South Australian Research and Development Institute implements national residue-monitoring plans for aquaculture salmonids and yellowtail kingfish.

117 www.daff.gov.au/agriculture-food/nrs/nrs-results-publications

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Consumer protection 109

Laboratories involved in residue monitoring are accredited by the National Association of Testing Authorities. For programs managed by the NRS, laboratories undergo proficiency testing before being contracted and throughout the contractual period.

7.2.3 Antimicrobial Resistance Standing Committee

In April 2012, the Australian Health Ministers Advisory Council endorsed the establishment of a new subcommittee — the Antimicrobial Resistance Standing Committee (AMRSC).118 The committee aims to support an integrative approach to the national strategy on antimicrobial resistance in Australia. It is chaired by the Healthcare Associated Infection Program Manager from the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. Membership of the AMRSC brings together agencies that are currently driving national antimicrobial resistance activities, including animal health-related nominations from DAFF and the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority.

7.3 Inspection and monitoringThe Australian Government and state and territory food-safety authorities provide consumer protection through inspection and monitoring. Good hygienic practices and hazard analysis and critical control points (HACCP) systems are used to ensure that meat, dairy, seafood, eggs and the products made from these commodities are safe for human consumption.

Premises used for processing and storing meat, dairy, seafood and eggs, and their products, for export as food must be registered with DAFF. They must also comply with the structural and operational requirements of the Export Control Act 1982 and its subordinate legislation, the Export Control Orders (see Chapter 6). These establishments must have an ‘approved arrangement’ (AA) — a fully documented arrangement that includes practices and procedures that demonstrate compliance with legislative requirements. DAFF inspects and verifies establishments to ensure compliance with the AA, thus supporting export certification. Noncompliance with legislation may result in the suspension of the AA or the establishment registration, and the product from the establishment will no longer be eligible for export.

DAFF also facilitates and manages audits of Australian export systems by major trading partners (see Chapter 6). Australia has recently hosted a number of countries to demonstrate improvements to Australia’s export systems. A new suite of reforms, developed in partnership with Australian industry,

118 www.safetyandquality.gov.au/our-work/healthcare-associated-infection/antimicrobial-resistance-subcommittee

will deliver more efficient export certification and inspection services. The reforms will ensure that Australian export industries continue to meet importing country requirements, while facilitating market access to expand Australia’s $32 billion agricultural export industry.

7.3.1 Exports of meatThe Australian Government, through DAFF, has primary responsibility for verifying the systems at export meat establishments. State and territory governments are responsible for verifying systems at domestic establishments and at some export-registered establishments operating under state and territory oversight. DAFF works closely with state and territory governments and industry to implement control measures for animal health, food safety and chemical residues. Together, these bodies review and update regulations, rules and industry practices in response to national and international developments in food safety.

Since 1985, the Australian export meat industry has progressively adopted quality assurance systems and implemented a culture of continuous improvement. Quality assurance systems are closely aligned with international standards developed by Codex and the International Organization for Standardization. They are designed to ensure that industry assumes responsibility for the quality and safety of its products and the accuracy of its documentation. This is achieved through the development of product and process controls — based on meat hygiene assessment and HACCP — which focus on minimising pathogens on carcases and in processed meat.

Australian domestic red meat processors are required to follow HACCP-based procedures under the Australian standard Hygienic production and transportation of meat and meat products for human consumption (AS 4696:2007). Other Australian standards exist for game, rabbit, ratite and poultry meat. The standards describe the requirements that must be met by all Australian slaughter and meat-processing establishments during inspection (antemortem and postmortem), slaughter, processing and transport of meat.

The Export Control Act 1982 and subordinate regulations require export-registered meat industry establishments to implement approved arrangements that describe all procedures underpinning food safety and supply chain integrity. These arrangements are subject to audit by DAFF. The approved arrangements:

• cover each stage of production, from sourcing to consignment, of all meat and meat products in the establishment

• provide for the implementation of good hygienic practices and HACCP plans

110 Animal health in Australia 2012

• contain controls that ensure that meat and meat products are safe, wholesome, and accurately identified to ensure traceability and supply chain integrity

• contain controls for animal handling and animal welfare at the establishment

• contain controls that ensure that meat and meat products unfit for human consumption are removed from the food chain and segregated from safe, wholesome food

• identify surveillance, monitoring and testing programs required by DAFF, including residue and microbiological testing

• identify the applicable importing country requirements for which export certification is required

• require establishments to verify compliance with these and other programs on an ongoing basis.

Establishments that process red meat and game for export have DAFF-employed veterinarians on site — supported

by a regulatory team — to verify that Australian and export certification requirements are met. Senior DAFF veterinarians and food-safety auditors conduct regular audits of the export meat system.

7.3.2 Exports of dairy, seafood and eggsDAFF provides export inspection, audit and certification services to industry in line with the Export Control Act 1982 and its subordinate regulations and orders. State and territory regulatory authorities currently perform dairy export audits on behalf of DAFF, with DAFF maintaining a verification role.

In 2011–12, DAFF certified the export of Australian dairy products worth approximately $2.3 billion to more than 100 countries, as well as exports of eggs and egg products of a lower value. Exports of Australian edible and inedible fisheries products in 2011–12 were worth $1.2 billion and were exported to approximately 115 countries.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Consumer protection 111

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

112 Animal health in Australia 2012

8 Animal welfare

Primary responsibility for animal welfare legislation and enforcement in Australia rests with individual states and territories. There is no national animal welfare legislation. National standards and guidelines are being developed to improve the consistency of animal welfare laws across Australia.

Each jurisdiction has officers responsible for administering, enforcing and reviewing animal welfare legislation. The responsible agency is within the agriculture portfolio (in five jurisdictions), the environment portfolio (in two jurisdictions) or the local government portfolio (in one jurisdiction).

The only control that the Australian Government exercises over animal welfare is through conditions imposed on the holders of licences to export animals or meat and meat products. Licence holders must meet the Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock119 and comply with importing country requirements, including for animal welfare. However, any breach of animal welfare laws is dealt with by the relevant state or territory authority.

Animal welfare legislation in Australia focuses on the ‘duty of care’ held by people responsible for delivering acceptable animal welfare outcomes. In the livestock and nonproduction sectors, standards, guidelines and model codes of practice assist people to understand their responsibilities for, and society’s expectations about, animal welfare. The standards, guidelines and model codes may be adopted under legislation. They also inform the development of contemporary, evidence-based, quality assurance programs.

119 www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/1904365/australian-standards-v2.3.pdf

Chapter

Animal welfare 113

Australia’s key policy document for national approaches to improve animal welfare outcomes is the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy (AAWS). In accordance with the AAWS, the states and territories — through the Standing Council on Primary Industries (SCoPI) — have harmonised the key features of their legislation and are improving the consistency of laws, policies and arrangements that apply across Australia.

Key stakeholders contributing to the development of Australian animal welfare policies and standards include governments, animal industries, animal welfare bodies, the veterinary profession and the research community. Stakeholders are engaged through animal ethics committees within individual institutions, state and territory animal welfare advisory committees and, at the national level, the Australian Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AusAWAC). The development of standards and guidelines includes comprehensive public consultation.

Australia works closely with New Zealand on animal welfare matters. New Zealand is a full member of the Animal Welfare Committee of the Primary Industries Standing Committee (PISC).

Further information on Australia’s animal welfare arrangements is available on the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry website.120

8.1 Jurisdictional updates

8.1.1 Australian GovernmentThe Australian Government has no constitutional responsibility for animal welfare, but provides leadership, coordination and funding for various programs. The Australian Government represents Australia from a national perspective in international animal welfare forums. A key contribution has been the Australian Government’s initiative in developing the AAWS, an important national blueprint to improve animal welfare in Australia (see Section 8.4).

8.1.2 Australian Capital Territory

Codes of practice — Animal Welfare Advisory Committee During 2011–12, the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) — through its Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC) — continued to review codes of practice that were outdated or where new issues have arisen. Due to recent legislative changes allowing for mandatory enforceable standards within codes of practice, most of the ACT’s codes will need to be reviewed and updated.

120 www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/welfare

AWAC is currently reviewing or gaining stakeholder input on the following codes:

• Code of practice for the humane destruction of kangaroos in the ACT

• Code of practice for the welfare of native wildlife — rescue, rehabilitation and release

• Code of practice for the care and welfare of dogs in the ACT 2013

• Code of practice for the welfare of reptiles held in captivity

• Code of practice for the welfare of animals at pounds and shelters

Policy, regulation and changes to the Animal Welfare Act 1992In the ACT’s Legislative Assembly, proposed changes to the Animal Welfare Act 1992 were tabled. The assembly did not support the two proposed bills regarding factory farming of animals and the breeding and sale of dogs, and these bills were therefore not adopted into law.

Other issuesACT residents continue to be concerned about the inappropriate breeding of dogs at ‘puppy farms’. Worries about the selling of animals at pet shops and markets have resulted in a high number of letters to ministers on this issue. However, neither ACT Government officers nor the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) have found any evidence of inappropriate breeding of dogs (i.e. puppy farms) in the ACT.

Residents also remain concerned about feral birds. The Canberra Indian Myna Action Group, which has been running since 2006, recently celebrated the capture and removal of the thirty-thousandth bird from Canberra environs.

Feral peacocks have established colonies in Canberra suburbs. These large birds have been known to damage cars, create road obstructions, destroy gardens and ‘screech’ through the night. Because the birds are located in the suburbs, shooting is not a control option. The ACT Government is currently investigating a trapping and removal program, with some birds to be relocated to Taronga Zoo.

Eastern grey kangaroo management continues to be a divisive issue. The majority of residents support culling as an option, but a minority of residents is totally opposed to any form of intervention. Management of kangaroos is often needed in areas where kangaroos are confined (fenced in), and thereby present a danger to the environment and endangered species through overgrazing.

114 Animal health in Australia 2012

8.1.3 New South WalesIn New South Wales, work continued on a number of standards and policies. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Land Transport of Livestock) Standards were completed in 2012 and are expected to be legislated by April 2013. The standards will be implemented as part of a project to mandate the national standards for land transport of livestock via regulation early in 2013. The New South Wales rodeo code was reviewed and is being redrafted following consultation. Further work was also undertaken on a review of the code for pounds and shelters.

Competency-based training in sheep and cattle handling, and assessment of animals in poor condition, was provided to officers of enforcement agencies under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979.

A key initiative in 2011–12 was the introduction of mandatory animal welfare training and the requirement for a designated animal welfare officer in red meat domestic abattoirs. This came about as a result of a review in early 2012. The initiative is an Australian first, and was introduced following support from, and consultation with, the industry.

Licensing systems for the Exhibited Animals Protection Act 1986 were improved following revision of application forms and changes to the licensing database. Almost all licensees can now be advised via email notifications.

8.1.4 Northern TerritoryThe Northern Territory Department of Local Government operates the Animal Welfare Branch, which is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2011 and its regulations.

The Animal Welfare Amendment Bill (No.2) 2012 was tabled in the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly in its October 2012 sittings. The proposed amendments lead to a considerable strengthening of the Animal Welfare Act 2011 and the Animal Welfare Authority’s ability to take action against breaches and meet its objectives, which are to ensure that animals are treated humanely and to prevent cruelty to animals.

A full review of the Animal Welfare Act 2011 and its regulations is under way and expected to be completed by December 2013.

During the 2011–12 financial year, the Animal Welfare Branch received 572 telephone complaints and conducted 324 investigations. In the same period, the branch successfully prosecuted 10 matters concerning breaches of the Animal Welfare Act 2011.

The Animal Welfare Branch continues to promote animal welfare across the Northern Territory by community

engagement, education and consultation with industry, to support the regulatory framework of the Animal Welfare Act 2011.

Animal Welfare Fund grants continue to be available to all Northern Territory not-for-profit organisations. The annual grant amount is $200 000 per year, and organisations can apply for a grant of up to $50 000 each.

The recipients of the 2012–13 grants were:

• Marthakal Homelands Health Services (Animal Health and Welfare Program) — $29 769

• Anindilyakwa Land Council (Animal Health and Welfare Program) — $33 784

• Wildcare NT (emergency packs for wildlife for tours and remote communities) — $9351

• Animal Management in Remote and Indigenous Areas (living with camp dogs — staying safe) — $37 700

• Animal Management in Remote and Indigenous Areas (education strategy for dog health and welfare) — $44 898

• Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association (educational DVD to care for animals, particularly wildlife) — $44 498.

8.1.5 QueenslandQueensland is introducing an increase in penalties for breaches of animal cruelty under the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001. Proposed amendments will result in an increase to a maximum of 2000 penalty units or three years’ imprisonment for cruelty offences. A new offence under the Criminal Code Act 1899 for serious animal cruelty, which will significantly increase penalties for serious offences, will be progressed in 2013.

The Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 has been amended to remove the exemption for cruelty offences associated with traditional hunting. Traditional and customary hunting rights, including native title rights, have not been removed by the amendments. The amendments regulate how hunting rights are exercised; in particular, a new offence exemption has been inserted that requires animals to be killed in a way that causes as little pain as is reasonable.

The process of adopting the Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines — land transport of livestock into the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 has continued, and implementation is planned for 2013.

Queensland has continued as an active contributor to the review of the Australian code of practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes (7th edition). Registration and monitoring of users of animals for scientific purposes has continued.

Animal welfare 115

Queensland has actively contributed to the development of the standard and guidelines for cattle and sheep, and attended the Reference Group meetings in November 2012. Final comments on the documents have been provided, as well as feedback on the regulatory impact statements before the Office of Best Practice Regulation endorsement and public consultation process.

The Poultry Welfare Monitoring Program commenced in 2011. This program monitors compliance with the poultry standards under the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001. The standards were derived from the national Model code of practice for the welfare of animals — domestic poultry (4th edition). Authorised officers, appointed under the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001, implement the monitoring program. It promotes the responsible care and use of poultry, and provides transparency to assure the community, industry and markets that requirements under the poultry code are being met.

Queensland continues to contribute nationally to animal welfare in live exports and abattoirs. A process of appointing Safe Food Production Queensland officers is under way. These officers will have limited powers under the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 to manage animal welfare issues in abattoirs.

Queensland standards and guidelines for animal welfare for breeding dogs have continued. A public consultation has been undertaken, together with proposed policy options for regulating intensive breeding of puppies for commercial purposes (i.e. puppy farms). Following the public consultation, a decision has been made to only progress the dog breeder standards and guidelines. A revised, post-public consultation draft has been submitted to a key stakeholder group for final consideration.

The draft ‘Queensland rodeo standards and guidelines’ have been deferred while consideration is given to developing national standards under the AAWS. Queensland has helped prepare a draft project proposal for submission for funding by the working group on animals used for work, recreation, entertainment and display. The funding for the national standards was approved by the Australian Government Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry in December 2012, and the project will be led by the Australian Professional Rodeo Association.

The Smiling Animals in the Dreamtime animal welfare education project for Indigenous students, funded through the AAWS, has been successfully delivered on time. The project has been well received, and feedback has been positive. Queensland has gained additional funding from the AAWS for two follow-up animal welfare projects for delivery by 2014. A key focus of these new projects will be the cultural

significance and welfare of dogs within communities. The production of a dog storybook, incorporating Indigenous student illustrations, will deliver positive welfare messages to more than 20 rural and remote communities.

Queensland attended the DAFF/World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) Animals in Disaster workshop on ‘Towards national collaboration for animals and communities in emergencies’. This workshop highlighted the need for animals to be integrated into disaster planning. It identified critical issues that need to be addressed to improve future emergency management arrangements for companion animals, wildlife and livestock.

8.1.6 South AustraliaThe South Australian Animal Welfare Act 1985, which includes most of the agreed legislative provisions required for national consistency, has regulated the majority of the standards from the Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines — land transport of livestock. The South Australian AWAC has provided comments to the writing groups developing the animal welfare standards and guidelines for both sheep and cattle.

State issues being addressed include:

• revising the South Australian Code of practice for the welfare of animals in the pet trade

• streamlining administrative processes for use of animals in research and teaching

• reviewing training options for authorised inspectors.

The Livestock Act 1997 has been amended to require registration of all properties holding livestock — including horses, but excluding poultry — to allow effective management of animal disease outbreaks or other animal emergencies. The Impounding Act 1920 is currently being reviewed to ensure that it is contemporary, practical and, as much as possible, consistent with similar legislation in other jurisdictions.

8.1.7 TasmaniaThe Tasmanian Government is preparing subordinate legislation under the Animal Welfare Act 1993 that will regulate most of the standards in the Model code of practice for the welfare of animals — pigs However, further regulations are being developed to prohibit the use of dry sow stalls from mid-2013, except for a period of up to 5 days following final mating of sows (and not exceeding 10 days in total) in each oestrous cycle.

Work is at an advanced stage to implement regulation of the standards in the Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines — land transport of livestock in early 2013.

116 Animal health in Australia 2012

The Tasmanian Government has announced that the number of caged layer hens in the state will be capped at 2012 levels, and is developing regulations to implement this.

A program of random inspections of intensive piggery and poultry premises has been implemented, in conjunction with the RSPCA, to ensure that producers are complying with animal welfare standards. This program will be extended to other livestock industries as animal welfare standards are developed and resources allow.

8.1.8 VictoriaThe Victorian Livestock Management Act 2010 has been used to regulate the Welfare of pigs: Victorian standards and guidelines (based on the national Model code of practice for the welfare of animals — pigs). In early 2013, the Act will also be used to regulate the Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines — land transport of livestock.

Victoria is also developing saleyard animal welfare standards and guidelines, which may be adopted nationally. A revised Code of practice for the welfare of horses has been released, and a major revision of the mandatory Code of practice for the operation of breeding and rearing establishments (i.e. puppy farms) is under way.

The Victorian Emergency Management Plan has been developed and adopted by emergency organisations. This plan outlines the roles and operational responsibilities of agencies, organisations, owners and carers for providing welfare support during emergencies for livestock and companion animals. Amendments to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986 included a provision to appoint any person as an inspector during any emergency declared by the head of department — in particular, to facilitate use of interstate animal welfare inspectors.

8.1.9 Western AustraliaOn 1 July 2011, responsibility for administration of the Animal Welfare Act 2002 was transferred from the Department of Local Government to the Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia (DAFWA).

As part of its commitment to animal welfare, the Western Australian Government increased annual funding of animal welfare activities to $1.6 million. This included the appointment of six additional full-time inspectors in DAFWA, and doubled the Western Australian RSPCA’s annual funding to $500 000.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Animal welfare 117

DAFWA has made significant contributions to the development of national animal welfare standards and guidelines. It has also worked closely with industry to promote awareness of, and implement, agreed standards.

There is a clear separation between DAFWA’s animal welfare compliance arm and its education, research and production arms. This separation ensures that enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 2002 and continued development of the livestock industries are not in conflict. DAFWA works closely with the RSPCA (Western Australia) in enforcing the Act in Western Australia. Other agencies with a role in enforcing the Act include police officers (all officers are authorised inspectors), some local government authorities, and some officers in the Department of Environment and Conservation (wildlife).

8.2 Animal Welfare CommitteeIn March 2012, PISC agreed to establish a new high-level Animal Welfare Committee (AWC). The role of the new committee includes advising and supporting PISC and SCoPI on national animal welfare policy issues. The AWC focuses on animal welfare issues that support improved economic, social and environmental outcomes that are long term and sustainable. AWC membership comprises representatives from DAFF, each state and territory government, and the New Zealand Government. In addition, the Sub-Committee on Animal Welfare, comprised of senior animal welfare officers, supports the AWC’s work.

The AWC has the following terms of reference:

• Engages in activities that add value to the PISC process and prioritise animal welfare issues according to the level of risk and value of potential outcomes.

• Consults with other agencies, the AusAWAC, industry organisations, interest groups and the community which have responsibilities and interests in national animal welfare policy and operational areas.

• Provides strategic leadership to its subordinate body (Sub-Committee on Animal Welfare) and directs, monitors and reviews its work to achieve national consensus on priority issues.

• Ensures that all issues and papers brought forward for information, consideration and deliberation by PISC/SCoPI are clear, concise and focused with respect to the outcomes sought, background, options, financial details and recommendations.

During 2012, the AWC:

• finalised the revised Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines — land transport of livestock, edition one, version 1.1, 2012

• established a taskforce that developed animal welfare standards for domestic abattoirs in 2012

• continued to progress the development of the cattle and sheep standards and guidelines for delivery to SCoPI by April 2013.

8.3 Standards and guidelines The current model codes of practice for the welfare of animals are adopted through various mechanisms in state and territory animal welfare legislation. SCoPI (previously the Primary Industries Ministerial Council — PIMC), industry and animal welfare groups identified this inconsistency as a priority issue. Animal Health Australia is managing the development of clear, contemporary animal welfare standards and guidelines for livestock industries across all jurisdictions. Standards and guidelines are based on the current model codes of practice, available scientific evidence, current industry practices and community expectations.

8.3.1 Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines — land transport of livestock

Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines for the land transport of livestock were the first to be reviewed and converted into animal welfare standards and guidelines, under an agreed national process. These standards and guidelines apply to land transport of the major commercial livestock species in Australia: cattle, sheep, goats, horses, pigs, alpacas, emus, ostriches, buffalo, deer, camels and poultry (meat chickens, layer hens, turkeys, ducks, geese, pheasants, guinea fowls, partridges, quails and pigeons).

PIMC endorsed the livestock transport standards in May 2009, but asked that more work be done on standards for maximum allowable time off feed for bobby calves, use of electric prodders on pigs and transport time for breeder hens that are to be culled.

For maximum allowable time off feed for bobby calves, the Fisher report121 concluded that the ‘best practice management of transported calves would involve time off feed not longer than around 24 hrs’, although it supported 30 hours as a defensible outer legal limit, provided that good practice is followed in other areas of calf management. The draft standard for the time-off-feed limit and a regulatory impact statement on the draft standard were provided for public consultation in 2011. SCoPI considered the final regulatory impact statement, including a summary of input to the public consultation, and the draft standard at its meeting on 28 October 2011, but was unable to reach agreement on a time-off-feed limit.

121 www.animalwelfarestandards.net.au/land-transport/bobby-calf-post-public-consultation-process

118 Animal health in Australia 2012

Industry partners of the bobby calf supply chain — Australian Dairy Farmers Limited, Australian Meat Industry Council, Australian Livestock and Rural Transporters Association, Australian Livestock and Property Agents, and Australian Livestock Markets Association — subsequently agreed to implement an industry standard of a maximum of 30 hours off feed for bobby calves. The standard will be underpinned by an electronic calf-tracking mechanism managed by industry. The calf-tracking mechanism will monitor welfare measures, including time off feed and condition of the calves on their arrival at abattoirs. Data from the system will be used to identify and manage risks along the supply chain. Once the data are collected and verified as robust by governments, they could help inform a new legislated time-off-feed standard.

The standard for restricted use of electric prodders on pigs during loading and unloading was endorsed by SCoPI in November 2010. Electric prodders must not be used during the loading, transport and unloading of pigs, except where all of the following apply:

• other reasonable actions to cause movement have failed

• individual pigs weigh 60 kg (live weight) or more

• there is a reasonable safety risk to the driver or the pig(s).

PISC’s AWC recently agreed that the maximum transport time for spent hens to slaughter should remain at 24 hours, as agreed in May 2009. Any proposed changes to the current standard should be informed by research.

8.3.2 Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines for cattle and sheep

During 2012, work on the development of sheep and cattle standards and guidelines has continued. Writing and reference groups have met regularly to finalise draft standards and the consultation regulatory impact assessments in preparation for public consultation. The consultation regulatory impact statements and draft standards are expected to be released for public consultation in early 2013, with SCoPI endorsement in mid-2013. Progress will be reported online.122

8.3.3 Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines for exhibited animals (zoos)

Animal welfare standards and guidelines for the zoo industry are the first to be developed for a nonproduction animal sector. The project started in mid-2008 and is jointly funded by industry, the states and territories, and the Australian Government. It is being led by a writing group involving the Zoo and Aquarium Association; Trade & Investment NSW;

122 www.animalwelfarestandards.net.au

the Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; and DAFF.

Drafted in 2010, the standards and guidelines have been organised into two parts: a general set of standards that applies to all facilities keeping animals for display purposes, and a series of taxon-specific standards for the welfare requirements of particular species. A regulatory impact analysis and public consultation will be undertaken in 2013 before the standards are sent to SCoPI for national endorsement. Reference to the standards and guidelines in state and territory legislation is anticipated for 2013.

The first of the taxon standards under development covers koalas, wombats, crocodilians, macropods (kangaroos and wallabies) and ratites (ostriches, emus, cassowaries and rheas).

Taxon standards have also been drafted for anurans (frogs and toads). However, these are on hold pending further work on complex issues such as spatial requirements. Priorities for further taxon standards include primates, carnivores and ungulates (hoofed mammals).

8.4 Australian Animal Welfare StrategyUnder current constitutional arrangements, primary responsibility for animal welfare within Australia rests with the states and territories.

Although there is no national animal welfare legislation, the AAWS is Australia’s key policy document for improving animal welfare outcomes. In accordance with the AAWS, the jurisdictions are working to harmonise the key features of their legislation to ensure that consistent laws, policies and arrangements apply across Australia. The strategy has relevance for the entire community; it unites animal industries, welfare groups, community organisations, and state and territory governments to work together on one agreed program on behalf of the broader community. The Australian Government provided funding of $1.012 million to the AAWS in 2012–13.

The AAWS reflects the strong feelings and concerns that Australians have for animal welfare, and our need to constantly improve the way we treat animals in our care at all levels of society. It focuses attention on key animal welfare issues and coordinated investments to deliver sustainable improvements in animal welfare.

Although the AAWS aims to be comprehensive and inclusive, it is only one body of work and one stream of investment. Many other organisations and individuals are also involved in improving animal welfare in Australia. Some of these are closely linked with the AAWS, but others are separate. As a national umbrella for animal welfare actions, the AAWS is not

Animal welfare 119

looking to assume control of all these activities in Australia. Rather, it aims to help build relationships and partnerships among groups, which will improve coordination across the spectrum of activities, reduce duplication of effort, and create a more effective, consistent approach to improving animal welfare. This means that there is now general agreement on priority animal welfare issues and a process that supports

projects in the areas of research, policy development, standards of care, education and training, and general public communication.

The AAWS relies on the commitment of time, resources and funding from all levels of government and from stakeholders — including community and industry groups associated with animals. As a result of the AAWS, animals will experience better levels of care and management, and a balanced debate of animal welfare issues can take place within the community.

The strategy was endorsed by SCoPI in 2004, and was externally reviewed in 2008–09 to evaluate its implementation and identify opportunities for improvement. In 2010, the Advisory Committee for the AAWS led a process to update the strategy in response to the recommendations from the review and to prepare an implementation plan for 2010–14 (phase 2 of the strategy — ‘Delivering together’).

The revised Australian Animal Welfare Strategy and National Implementation Plan 2010–11 was endorsed by SCoPI ministers in April 2011. The document outlines four areas of effort in stated goals and objectives:

• animals — the welfare needs of animals are understood and met

• national systems — national systems deliver consistent animal welfare outcomes and give priority to ongoing improvements

• people — people make ethical decisions regarding animal welfare, supported by knowledge and skills

• international — Australia is actively engaged in international partnerships and developments to improve animal welfare.

The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry appointed a new AusAWAC in October 2011 to help DAFF implement the new AAWS goals and objectives.123 The expert members of this committee will also be the chairs of the nine AAWS working groups (see Section 8.4.1), which will report to the committee.

8.4.1 AAWS activitiesThe revised AAWS has been developed using a combination of an outputs–outcomes–benefits framework and a program logic model. This will clearly identify how the investments and activities will deliver results; the assumptions made about the connections between investments, activities and outcomes; and the resources needed to achieve the identified aims.

123 Details of membership of the committee are at www.australiananimalwelfare.com.au/content/about-aaws

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

120 Animal health in Australia 2012

Implementation of the strategy is a shared responsibility. In particular, the state and territory governments need to ensure that their current and proposed activities are consistent with the strategy, and can support its goals and objectives. The Australian Government has committed approximately $4 million to the strategy for phase 2 (July 2010–June 2014). This funding will be used for specific joint initiatives to address priority issues at industry, sectoral and national levels. Co-contributions to activities under the strategy will be sought from governments and other stakeholders.

A key milestone in 2011 was the launch of a dedicated AAWS website,124 which will be an online reference point for Australia’s actions on animal welfare. The website was further developed in 2012 and is expected to be launched early in 2013. Each of the nine working groups (described below) will have its own minisite, an events calendar for each sector and a feedback mechanism on the usefulness of information. Each working group will maintain the currency of its information. AAWS also has a Twitter account and YouTube channel.125

The success of this work requires close cooperation and linkages between the AusAWAC and the AWC. The states and territories have prime responsibility to work together to develop consistent regulations and compliance arrangements for agreed national standards that are endorsed by SCoPI. The states and territories also make substantial contributions to the development, implementation and promotion of codes and best-practice guidelines.

Preparation of the AAWS has involved an impressive array of stakeholders across Australia. More than 140 diverse experts and representatives are providing a high level of in-kind contribution to the program. Members were appointed by the AusAWAC working group chairs according to defined criteria.126 Each working group has representation from government, industry and sector specialist organisations, as well as animal welfare organisations.

Six sectoral working groups connect the strategy and stakeholder networks through discussion forums, development of action plans, and provision of technical advice on the opportunities, impediments and drivers for each sector. Three further areas, which cross the boundaries of the animal sectors and require specific attention and investment, also have working groups.

124 www.australiananimalwelfare.com.au

125 youtube.com/user/AusAnimalWelfare

126 www.australiananimalwelfare.com.au/content/working-groups

The six sectoral working groups are:

• livestock and production animals

• companion animals

• aquatic animals

• animals used in research and teaching

• animals used for work, recreation, entertainment and display

• native and introduced wildlife.

The three cross-sectoral working groups (see Sections 8.4.2–8.4.4) are:

• communications

• education and training

• research and development.

Twenty partner projects were approved through the AAWS in 2012. These initiatives include further work on national animal welfare standards, teaching and education resources, and communications research and development. Details are available on the AAWS website.127

8.4.2 National animal welfare standardsAAWS financially supported the development of the Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines — land transport of livestock, which were derived from seven model codes of practice and other documents.128 These were endorsed nationally in 2009. States and territories have been working cooperatively to implement the standards and guidelines and to develop consistent regulations for enforcement. The AAWS website is an excellent source of information to support education, training and awareness about selection of livestock for transportation, and the roles and responsibilities of those involved in the transport process.

The following national standards and guidelines are currently at an advanced stage:

• exhibited animals (zoo and other exhibited animals)

• cattle

• sheep.

In addition, the following work is being progressed under the AAWS:

• Australian welfare guidelines for the private keeping of dogs and cats

• aquatic animal welfare codes of practice for the capture fisheries sector.

127 www.australiananimalwelfare.com.au

128 www.livestockwelfarestandards.net.au

Animal welfare 121

8.4.3 Program monitoring and evaluationThe Australian Animal Welfare Strategy National Implementation Plan 2010–14 includes performance measures agreed to by all key stakeholders, including SCoPI. The goals and performance measures, shown in Table 8.1, are being delivered through program activities.

AusAWAC has agreed to develop a monitoring and evaluation framework for the AAWS as a priority in 2012–13. The framework will provide tangible evidence of the impact of the program and its contribution to improved national animal welfare outcomes. This work is being progressed with the assistance of a consultant. The AAWS Research and Development Working Group will provide advice and input to this process.

8.4.4 Identification of impediments to progress and institutional options for animal welfare delivery

AusAWAC has appointed a working group to consider options for securing medium to long-term improvements in knowledge and implementation of animal welfare in Australia.

The AAWS seeks to improve animal welfare for all species, regardless of how they are used by people. Production sectors have a levy basis to contribute to long-term knowledge and improvements in the welfare of animals in their care. In the first phase of the AAWS, the lack of a funding mechanism in the nonproduction sector was seen as a major impediment to progress.

A discussion paper from the previous AAWS Advisory Committee outlined a suite of principle requirements for ongoing animal welfare arrangements, including:

• providing a forum so that all jurisdictions, animal sectors and animal welfare agencies can identify and discuss matters of common or specific concern

• prioritising research, education and communication needs, and commissioning the necessary work

• providing a mechanism for government ministers to seek advice on, or be given independent advice on, animal welfare matters

• gathering and reviewing new information emerging from commissioned work, animal welfare science and general experience, and communicating this to governments and animal users to inform improved policy and practice

• establishing national benchmarks for animal welfare, and commissioning the production of codes of practice incorporating standards and guidelines

• participating in and influencing policy formulation in the international arena

• enhancing Australia’s international credibility in animal welfare, and assisting in the maintenance of market access and trade

• maintaining cooperative and productive working relationships across the entire animal welfare spectrum.

These principles are being considered further by the working group in consultation with stakeholders, and a report is expected to be finalised for AusAWAC consideration by December 2013.

8.4.5 Sixth AAWS national workshopThe annual national workshop is an essential part of the AAWS Communication Strategy. It provides the main opportunity for cross-sectoral discussion and decision

Table 8 1 Performance measures of the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy National Implementation Plan 2010–14

Goal 1: Animals Goal 2: National systems Goal 3: People Goal 4: International

• Appropriate animal welfare measures are developed and used

• Deficiencies are recognised, discussed with stakeholders and addressed

• Annual AAWS report on Australia’s welfare system is prepared and regularly updated, and trends are analysed

• Efficiency in animal welfare activities is achieved through cooperation

• National consistency in animal welfare outcomes is achieved

• Animal welfare information is continually developed and delivered

• Attitudes, perceptions and behaviours are informed

• Participation in animal welfare education and training programs increases

• Sharing of resources between stakeholder groups increases

• Australia is rated as equivalent to, or better than, international benchmarks, such as the European Union, following formal international evaluations

• World Organisation for Animal Health and other international organisations continue to seek Australian expertise

AAWS = Australian Animal Welfare Strategy

122 Animal health in Australia 2012

making. Approximately 120 working group members attended the workshop, which was opened by the Secretary of DAFF, Dr Conall O’Connell, on 10–11 September 2012. The annual face-to-face meeting of the AAWS working groups was held on 13 September.

The development of a ‘State of the nation’ report into animal welfare in Australia emerged as one of the key priorities for 2012–13. This report was seen as a benchmark for improving efforts in animal welfare across Australia, by identifying areas to address as a priority and reinforcing the coordinated approach already being taken.

8.4.6 Plans for animals in natural disastersThe analysis of a number of recent, high-profile natural disasters in Australia — including Cyclone Larry (2006), the Canberra (2003) and Victorian (2009) bushfires, and the Queensland floods (2010–11) — highlighted the serious gap in planning to deal with animals in natural disasters. Pets and companion animals are part of the family, and people will not leave for evacuation centres without their animals.

AAWS and WSPA convened the first national workshop on animals in natural disasters in May 2011. The workshop was chaired by the Victorian Department of Primary Industries (DPI Victoria).

WSPA and AAWS co-sponsored the second national workshop on ‘building resilience’ in planning for animals in natural disasters on 11–12 October 2012. Good progress was made by some jurisdictions since the first workshop; for example, DPI Victoria completed the Victorian Emergency Animal Welfare Plan.129

At the 2012 workshop, it was agreed that a national framework for dealing with animals in natural disasters should be developed and implemented by a national coordinating group, with the following members:

• Australian Government (through AAWS or AusAWAC, plus the Attorney-General’s emergency planning policy area)

• states and territories

• local government

• livestock industry

• animal welfare organisations (RSPCA, WSPA)

• human service organisations (Red Cross)

• Australian Veterinary Association

• animal welfare research and training organisations.

The national framework will reflect the Council of Australian Governments’ National Strategy for Disaster Resilience, and link strongly with the emergency services policies and plans.

129 www.dpi.vic.gov.au/agriculture/about-agriculture/animal-health-and-welfare/animal-welfare-in-emergencies

It was suggested that the national group, once formed, should develop a work plan to direct the effort of the committee each year (or over multiple years). The work plan would contain the operational-level detail for the development and implementation of the national framework.

8.4.7 International activitiesAusAWAC has acknowledged that the AAWS has strong international recognition and has greatly increased Australia’s reputation as a global leader in animal welfare. Other countries have animal welfare strategies, but these are largely restricted to farming animals.

The AAWS model has been taken offshore, with Australia providing leadership and some funding to support the development of regional animal welfare strategies in Asia/Oceania. This has been done in collaboration with the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), WSPA, the European Union, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Australia strongly supports the OIE, and is currently in a position of influence, with the Australian Chief Veterinary Officer, Dr Mark Schipp, being a member of the OIE Council (Board). Dr Peter Thornber, the director of the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy, has been appointed as the expert representative for Asia, the Far East and Oceania to the OIE Animal Welfare Working Group, which develops international animal welfare standards and guidelines.

Currently, the OIE has a focus on implementing its animal welfare standards globally. Australia is assisting by funding a dedicated trainer for four years for the OIE Improved Animal Welfare Program. Training resources are being developed and training courses conducted to improve animal handling and slaughter. Australia is leading the development of a Guideline for implementing the OIE animal welfare standards that will eventually be agreed by the OIE’s 178 member countries.

Australia had a strong presence at the OIE’s 3rd Global Conference on animal welfare held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on 6–8 November 2012. Australian registrants were from government, the livestock industries, nongovernment organisations and the private sector. The theme of the conference was on implementing the OIE animal welfare standards. Three DAFF officers were invited speakers, and an Australian industry poultry scientist represented the International Poultry Council.

DAFF will lead a small international working group comprising Lesotho, Egypt, Canada and the International Egg Commission to develop an international OIE guideline document on pathways for implementing OIE animal welfare standards.

Animal welfare 123

The Australian Government requires exporters to have arrangements in place along the export chain in Australia — and in destination countries — so that Australian exported livestock are managed according to the OIE animal welfare standards. This is the basis of the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (see Chapter 6).130

The OIE has recognised the New Zealand/Australian Animal Welfare Science and Bioethical Analysis centre as an OIE Collaborating Centre. These are centres of expertise in specific areas of animal health that have committed to sharing their expertise internationally. The OIE’s recognition of this bi-national centre shows the high quality of its research and development efforts. The Collaborating Centre is finalising a cooperation project with University Putra in Malaysia to increase animal welfare science capacity in the region. This development program is being jointly funded by the AAWS, the New Zealand and Malaysian governments, University Putra, the European Union and WSPA. It will involve surveys and training workshops across four countries: Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam and the People’s Republic of China.

The AAWS funded the development of the OIE Regional Animal Welfare Strategy for Asia, the Far East and Oceania (RAWS), involving 29 countries, and is continuing to support its implementation. Australia chairs the RAWS coordinating committee, and DAFF provides secretariat support to the committee. The RAWS has been revised for the period 2013–15.

Some highlights of animal welfare progress under the RAWS are:

• In Thailand, more than 450 people have been trained, mainly in poultry handling and slaughter, and a draft animal welfare strategy has been written.

• Malaysia has launched a National Animal Welfare Strategic Plan, 2012–2020, and an animal welfare law has been drafted.

• The People’s Republic of China has translated RAWS into standard written Chinese and will publish it in 2013, and has drafted three farm animal welfare standards for stakeholder comment.

• Bhutan has declared that layer hens must not be raised in battery cages, and has launched the second phase of the National Dog Population Management and Rabies Control Program.

• Indonesia has progressed OIE-managed training for cattle handlers under the OIE Improved Animal Welfare Program being funded by the Australian Government. The Philippines will begin this training in 2013.

130 Available at www.daff.gov.au/biosecurity/export/live-animals/livestock/escas

8.5 Livestock exports

8.5.1 Australian Government response to the Independent review of Australia’s livestock export trade (Farmer review)

On 21 October 2011, the Australian Government announced its response to the Farmer review, and to reports from the Cattle and Sheep Industry – Government Working Groups. The reforms described in the government’s response are being implemented to supply chains on both a domestic and international level. This will ensure that Australian livestock exported for slaughter are treated according to internationally accepted animal welfare standards.

The implementation of recommendations that affect the domestic parts of the supply chain has required action by state and territory governments and industry, as well as by the Australian Government. Full implementation will result in standards that are clearer and more effective. There will be transparent lines of responsibility between the Australian, state and territory governments for regulating the supply chain and through-chain industry quality assurance system that complements government regulation.

Recommendations that affect the overseas parts of the supply chain have resulted in a significant change to the regulatory framework around the export of livestock to overseas markets. This work has resulted in a substantial improvement in assurance about the treatment of Australian animals. The implementation of these recommendations has involved comprehensive discussions with importing countries to address specific market issues and sensitivities with the new regulatory framework. Industry has undertaken considerable activity to meet the requirements of the new regulatory framework.

The Australian Government is on track to complete all of its responsibilities arising from the Farmer review recommendations by the end of June 2014.

The report of the Farmer review — and the responses of government and industry–government working groups to this report — are available on the Australian Government’s live exports website.131 This site also has further information about government action on live exports, including details of assistance available for people affected by the suspension of trade to Indonesia.

In response to the Farmer review, DAFF has undertaken several other projects during 2012.

131 www.liveexports.gov.au

124 Animal health in Australia 2012

Australian Standards for the Export of LivestockA steering committee has been convened to undertake a comprehensive review of the Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock. The committee has representatives from industry, animal welfare groups, state and territory governments, and the Australian Government. To date, the committee has evaluated more than 30 submissions from a range of key stakeholders. A report will be provided to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry by March 2013. An outcome of this work will be a revised set of livestock export standards.

Inspection regime at Fremantle PortA steering committee has been convened to review the current inspection regime at Fremantle Port. The committee has undertaken site visits and conducted a desktop review. The report on this review was provided to the DAFF Livestock Export Reform Project Implementation Board in December 2012.

Export of breeder cattleA review of the need for additional conditions for the export of breeder cattle has been conducted, based on a range of specific consultations with key stakeholders. The review report will be provided to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry in early 2013.

Development of standards of welfareThrough its role in the AWC and other relevant forums, DAFF has actively worked with the state and territory governments to develop and implement enforceable standards of welfare to replace codes of practice. Key progress to date includes development of:

• national land transport standards, which have been approved by PISC

• national cattle and sheep standards, which will be finalised by May 2013

• national standards for saleyards and abattoirs, which will be finalised by December 2013.

Accredited veterinarians for livestock exportsDAFF is improving the way in which it engages with Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service Accredited Veterinarians (AAVs). Key progress to date includes:

• AAVs now directly provide voyage reports to DAFF

• DAFF has set up better lines of communication with AAVs and is improving the DAFF training and induction of AAVs

• development of a Regulatory Performance and Compliance policy that will improve auditing processes.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Animal welfare 125

Exporter Supply Chain Assurance SystemThe implementation of the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS, see Chapter 6), which was phased in to Australia’s livestock export markets over the course of 2012, has fundamentally reformed the livestock export trade.

8.6 International animal welfare

8.6.1 World Organisation for Animal HealthAustralia supports the OIE’s development of scientifically based, international animal welfare guidelines. These guidelines are not intended to strengthen nontariff barriers to international trade through prescriptive animal welfare requirements. The Australian Government therefore consults closely with the livestock industries when developing Australian positions on issues being discussed in the OIE forum.

In 2012, Australian experts participated in OIE ad hoc working groups that are developing animal welfare guidelines for broilers and beef cattle. The final guidelines for broilers are expected to be released in early 2013. Also in 2013, OIE ad hoc working groups will start to develop guidelines for dairy cattle. Australia also provides comment to the OIE on draft standards.

In October 2012, an official from DAFF’s Animal Welfare Branch spent one month in Paris working with OIE on technical animal welfare issues. The two parties have agreed to further discussions about the technical aspects of slaughter.

8.6.2 Regional Animal Welfare Strategy for Asia, the Far East and Oceania

The RAWS Coordination Group’s third meeting was held on 3–4 April 2012 in Bangkok. At this meeting, the group reviewed the draft RAWS Implementation Framework and prepared a report of outcomes for the Regional Commission and the OIE. The fourth meeting was held following the OIE third Global Conference on Animal Welfare on 9 November 2012 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The Coordination Group agreed on the draft revised RAWS (edition 2). Part of this meeting was a joint discussion between the RAWS Coordination Group and selected members of the OIE Focal Points.

In 2013, a revised RAWS (edition 2) will be made available. It will summarise the progress that has been made, build on the strategy’s successes and identify further opportunities for improvements to animal welfare. The core function of the revised strategy will remain unchanged, providing an overarching framework and guidance for countries in the

Asia, Far East and Oceania region. The revised strategy will continue to require ongoing support from governments, the community, welfare organisations, practitioners, industry and scientists.

8.6.3 Other welfare activities with trading partners

The Australian Government has provided $5 million under the Approved Supply Chain Improvements Program for the financial years 2011–12 and 2012–13 to help Australian exporters improve their supply chains. The program will include infrastructure upgrades, the installation of stunning equipment, and training for feedlot and abattoir staff in overseas markets.

The Australian Government has also allocated $10 million of aid funding for the next four financial years (2011–12 to 2014–15) through the Improved Animal Welfare Program. This program provides support for improved animal welfare outcomes in countries eligible for Official Development Assistance that import live animals from Australia.

8.6.4 Australia/New Zealand Animal Welfare Liaison Agreement

In March 2010, the New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries (formerly the Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry) and DAFF agreed to terms of reference for the Australia/New Zealand Animal Welfare Liaison Agreement meetings. The aim of these meetings is to provide a regular forum for information exchange, and cooperation on animal welfare issues of operational and strategic importance to both participants.

A full-day, face-to-face meeting was held on 31 October 2012 in Canberra. DAFF officers met with delegates from the New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries to exchange information and discuss animal welfare issues, such as the New Zealand Animal Welfare Strategy, the AAWS and current animal welfare initiatives in each country.

8.6.5 Quadrilateral Animal Welfare NetworkThe Animal Health Quadrilateral Group met in Canada in April 2012 and decided to continue working on animal welfare as a network, rather than a working group. Members of the new Quadrilateral Animal Welfare Network held informal discussions during the course of the OIE global animal welfare conference in Kuala Lumpur in November 2012. A teleconference of the network was held in late November 2012. The network agreed to hold regular teleconferences to exchange information and agree on animal welfare issues of operational and strategic importance to members.

126 Animal health in Australia 2012

8.6.6 European Commission – Australia Animal Welfare Cooperation Forum

In September 2008, the European Commission and DAFF agreed to terms of reference establishing the Animal Welfare Cooperation Forum of the European Commission and the Australian Government. The forum aims to promote dialogue on current animal welfare systems, activities and priorities. In addition, the forum helps to further develop a science-based approach to animal welfare, and strengthen the bilateral relationship on animal welfare issues, including advancing OIE work in this area.

Since 2008, the forum has provided regular opportunities through videoconferences and face-to-face meetings to exchange information and foster cooperation on animal welfare issues of operational and strategic importance to both participants. The most recent forum, in February 2012, discussed current and emerging global issues, including OIE slaughter standards and the European Union’s Strategy for Protection and Welfare of Animals (2012–15). An additional teleconference was held between Australia and the European Commission in December 2012 to discuss implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1099/2009 on the Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing.

Animal Health Australia

Animal welfare 127

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

128 Animal health in Australia 2012

9 Regional animal health initiatives

Australia collaborates with many developing countries in the Asia–Pacific region to improve the health of their livestock, thereby improving livelihoods. Concerns expressed by international public health agencies about the potential impact of zoonotic diseases have increased the level of public and official attention paid to animal disease control.

Australia is involved in regional animal health initiatives through collaborative pre-border surveillance and capacity building in neighbouring countries, as well as aid and research activities. Australian Government agencies liaise with their overseas counterparts to conduct pre-border surveillance, and with government agencies, veterinary associations and private organisations in collaborating countries to conduct capacity-building activities. Aid activities are primarily resourced through the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID),132 and research activities are primarily resourced through the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR).133

Australia also provides technical and financial assistance at global and regional levels. It supports the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank, the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) — including FAO’s Animal Health and Production Commission for Asia and the Pacific — and the Secretariat of the Pacific Community. Australia’s support of international collaborators ensures that regional projects address animal health issues and requirements that are important for Australia, as well as for the collaborating countries.

132 www.ausaid.gov.au

133 www.aciar.gov.au

Chapter

Regional animal health initiatives 129

This chapter summarises Australia’s main areas of international engagement in terrestrial animal health in the Asia–Pacific and African regions through the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), AusAID and ACIAR. Information on regional aquatic animal health initiatives is provided in Chapter 5.

9.1 Pre-border surveillance and capacity building

Australia assists its near neighbours, including Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Timor-Leste, with field surveillance and monitoring for significant animal diseases. These activities are conducted under memoranda of understanding and are managed by DAFF. They strengthen the surveillance capacity of these countries, provide training, identify new or re-emerging risks, and strengthen partnerships within the region.

DAFF veterinarians conduct animal health surveillance activities in these countries, in collaboration with veterinarians and animal health officers from the PNG National Agriculture Quarantine and Inspection Authority (NAQIA) and the Timor-Leste Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF). These activities aim to gather information about the presence and distribution of animal diseases, and risk factors for spread of diseases important to Australia and Australia’s near neighbours. Participants develop their skills in surveillance and public awareness raising, thereby improving animal health management in the region. This increases the capacity of PNG NAQIA and the Timor-Leste MAF to respond to animal disease emergencies and helps to reduce exotic disease threats to Australia.

9.2 Overseas aid The fundamental purpose of the Australian aid program is to help people overcome poverty. This also serves Australia’s national interests, by promoting stability and prosperity both in our region and beyond. One of the five key goals of Australia’s aid program is to save lives. It does this through supporting large-scale disease prevention and control, and helping partner governments prepare for, and respond to, pandemics and other international public health threats. Helping neighbouring countries to detect and contain infectious disease threats at their source also protects Australia’s own national biosecurity.

Australia’s international development assistance for pandemics and emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) is guided by the Pandemics and Emerging Infectious Diseases Framework 2010–2015. Under this framework, Australia assists partner countries in Asia and the Pacific to translate gains in preventing, detecting and controlling diseases

(e.g. H5N1 avian influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome) into stronger systems for responding to EIDs. The framework supports a long-term, systemic approach that strengthens the capacity of partner governments to deal with EIDs more broadly, rather than dealing with a single disease in isolation.

The framework has four objectives:

• promoting adherence to international standards of animal and human health

• strengthening systems for preventing, detecting and controlling EIDs, particularly at the community level

• responding to outbreaks of EIDs when they occur

• building an evidence base for the response to EIDs.

AusAID supports partner governments to build surveillance systems and improve their ability to respond to emerging disease threats. This includes improving coordination between the human and animal health sectors. Animal health initiatives are highly relevant in the EID context, because many devastating human diseases originate in animals. Animal disease control and capacity building — including strengthening veterinary services — can have major benefits for health security, as well as for productivity at the farm level.

9.2.1 Previous contributions to pandemics and emerging infectious diseases

Since 2003, Australia has played a leading role in the response to pandemics and EIDs in the region. It has provided more than $200 million to assist countries to strengthen prevention, detection and response capabilities. This includes the Pandemics and Emerging Infectious Diseases Framework (2006–10), under which Australia contributed $100 million to partner governments, nongovernment organisations, and regional and multilateral institutions to strengthen EID capacity and response. Assistance provided under this framework significantly improved the capacity of countries to respond to pandemics and EIDs. Outcomes included the development of national pandemic preparedness plans; strengthening of systems for early detection, surveillance, prevention and control of avian and human influenza; and stockpiling of antiviral medication and personal protective equipment.

Activities that Australia has contributed to include:

• the World Bank Multi-Donor Avian and Human Influenza Trust Fund, to assist the east Asia, Pacific and Africa regions

• an OIE project to strengthen veterinary services to combat avian influenza and other priority diseases in Southeast Asia, including regional veterinary laboratory networking

130 Animal health in Australia 2012

• a program to strengthen community capacities in prevention, surveillance and response to highly pathogenic avian influenza in Cambodia, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Laos), Myanmar and Vietnam

• the Secretariat of the Pacific Community Regional Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Project, to help build the capacity of Pacific island countries and territories to prepare for, and respond to, pandemics

• a biosecurity strengthening project in Timor-Leste, implemented by the Timor-Leste MAF and the FAO, to improve avian influenza preparedness, prevention and response

• research on EIDs — Australia is partnering with Canada’s International Development Research Centre to increase local capacity for research on EIDs in Southeast Asia using an ecohealth approach, which encourages positive environmental action to improve both health and welfare at the community level.

9.2.2 Current commitments to pandemics and emerging infectious diseases

In October 2010, the Prime Minister announced that Australia would provide $32 million to help combat pandemics and EIDs in the Asia–Pacific region. This commitment, which is guided by the Pandemics and Emerging Infectious Diseases Framework 2010–2015, includes:

• $12 million to the WHO to assist countries in the Asia–Pacific region to build better laboratories, develop national pandemic preparedness plans and implement innovative surveillance systems, under the WHO Asia Pacific Strategy for Emerging Diseases (2010)

• $12.7 million to the OIE to strengthen veterinary services and to better manage animal-borne diseases in the region, under the Stop Transboundary Animal Diseases and Zoonoses (STANDZ) initiative

• $6 million to support the PREVENT project of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which conducts community-based research and behavioural change communications activities to reduce the risk of pandemic threats emerging from vulnerable populations in the Mekong region.

Current AusAID projects that include animal health activities are described below.

Stop Transboundary Animal Diseases and ZoonosesThe AusAID-funded STANDZ initiative in Southeast Asia (2011–16) was launched in September 2011 and is being implemented by the OIE. Its overarching goal is to reduce the impact of EIDs on food security, public health and livelihoods in Southeast Asia. The initiative is strengthening the capacity

of animal health sectors in Southeast Asian countries to prevent, control and eradicate priority transboundary animal diseases and zoonoses.

The four objectives of STANDZ are to:

• support regional and international coordination on animal health in Southeast Asia

• strengthen the capacity of national veterinary services, consistent with OIE tools and standards

• develop, better resource and implement priority animal disease management strategies; this includes providing more intensive in-country support to the South East Asia and China Foot and Mouth Disease program (SEACFMD), consistent with the revised 2020 roadmap for the program

• strengthen the capacity of the OIE Sub-Regional Representation for South-East Asia in priority areas of embedding gender and social issues in project design and delivery, monitoring and evaluation, operations research and communications.

DAFF will continue to provide technical and governance support to AusAID for the STANDZ initiative.

PREVENT Community-based Emerging Infectious Disease Risk Reduction Project in the MekongStrengthening the capacity of communities to prevent, detect and control EIDs in the Mekong is a key objective of the Pandemics and Emerging Infectious Diseases Framework 2010–2015. The framework underscores prevention at the community level, since this is where EIDs are most likely to emerge. It is also where timely recognition and response to threats can be most effective in preventing the spread of disease. However, knowledge, systems and capacities are often weak at the community level.

In June 2012, AusAID confirmed a memorandum of collaboration with USAID on EID prevention. This partnership is realised through the PREVENT Community-based Emerging Infectious Disease Risk Reduction Project in the Mekong

Department of Primary Industries, Victoria

Regional animal health initiatives 131

(2012–15). AusAID support is earmarked to high-risk, poor communities in priority countries, including Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam.

PREVENT is one of five projects under USAID’s global Emerging Pandemic Threats Program. PREVENT’s operational research focuses on generating new knowledge on EID transmission from wildlife. It also examines the context-specific factors (e.g. socioeconomic, political, cultural) motivating the behaviours of people and organisations that expose them to higher risk of EID infection. PREVENT will conduct social and behavioural change communication activities to promote more effective and locally sustainable preventive practices that pre-empt the spread of EIDs.

Australia–Indonesia Partnership for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Animal Health, 2010–14In December 2010, AusAID committed $22 million for the Australia–Indonesia Partnership for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Animal Health, 2010–14. This program builds on previous work relating to avian influenza, and focuses on strengthening the Indonesian animal health systems to meet the challenges presented by EIDs. In this context, EIDs are new diseases originating in animals, which have the potential to infect and spread between humans — with serious consequences for human populations. Avian influenza is one example.

Program activities concentrate on strengthening capacity in disease planning and management, subnational field activities (South Sulawesi and West Sulawesi), quarantine, information management and animal health laboratories. Activities to date include:

• a review of Indonesia’s animal health information needs and capabilities

• support for a foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) emergency response exercise

• support for development of animal health strategic plans

• training in the laboratory diagnosis of rabies and brucellosis

• training to improve understanding of how the OIE gap analysis process and outcomes relate to Indonesia

• training in advocacy and budgeting for animal health (South Sulawesi and West Sulawesi — all districts)

• development of disease investigation modules for field staff, and initiation of a train-the-trainer program for their implementation (South Sulawesi and West Sulawesi).

Improving the management of animal health in Indonesia will benefit both Indonesia and Australia. It will protect animal and human health, increase agricultural production, support economic development and international trade, help alleviate poverty and promote regional stability.

The program is being delivered by Australian technical advisers from DAFF who are based in Jakarta and Makassar (South Sulawesi), in partnership with their animal health counterparts in the Indonesian Government.

Public Sector Linkages ProgramIn 2012, DAFF managed several projects in the Asia–Pacific region that were supported by the AusAID Public Sector Linkages Program. The program provides funds to Australian Government agencies to work with their counterpart public sector agencies in partner countries. Program activities include training, work placements and twinning arrangements. These activities aim to transfer capacity-building skills and expertise, and strengthen linkages that focus on sustainable development.

Projects included:

• strengthening PNG’s capacity to respond to significant animal disease events through development of emergency response plans, including technical guidelines for FMD, classical swine fever, Newcastle disease and highly pathogenic avian influenza (completed in 2012)

• strengthening the animal health surveillance and reporting network throughout provincial PNG through a series of training workshops and systematic reporting using mobile phone (SMS) technology (ongoing)

• building Timor-Leste’s animal health laboratory capacity, following on from training provided by the FAO under the biosecurity strengthening project (see Section 9.2.1). A well-functioning and sustainable animal health laboratory is a key component of Timor-Leste’s progress towards a functional animal health system.

Department of Primary Industries, Victoria

132 Animal health in Australia 2012

9.3 International animal health research

Australia funds international animal health research through several agencies, including ACIAR and AusAID. Since 1982, ACIAR has supported research on animal health and production livestock, and created partnerships in many countries in Asia, the Pacific region and Africa. Research projects of between three and five years are funded to meet the priorities of partner countries and Australia, and to have the widest possible impact. ACIAR’s animal health projects are linked with other research programs, including those of other Australian organisations (e.g. AusAID and DAFF), and international organisations such as the FAO, the OIE and the International Livestock Research Institute.

9.3.1 ACIAR’s Animal Health programACIAR’s Animal Health program supports research organisations in Australia and partner countries to use multidisciplinary approaches to solve problems in animal production and health. The program focuses on Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos and PNG, but has increasing emphasis on Myanmar and Africa, as well as on regional cooperation in the SEACFMD countries. Progress and final reports of projects are published on the ACIAR website134 and via other media. The projects under the program are described below.

Improving animal disease management in IndonesiaImportant animal diseases in Indonesia include anthrax, avian influenza, brucellosis, classical swine fever and rabies. Research is being undertaken to support strategies to manage these diseases, including:

• improving decentralised delivery of veterinary services

• understanding livestock movement in relation to disease control in eastern Indonesia

• improving, and increasing the sustainability of, sweet potato–pig production systems in highland Papua and West Papua.

Improving health and production of village pigs and cattle in Laos and CambodiaDiseases of livestock can severely reduce household income in Laos, and trade in cattle is becoming increasingly important in Cambodia. Projects include research on:

• best-practice health and husbandry of cattle and buffalo

• improving livelihoods by developing pig-based enterprises in upland Laos

134 www.aciar.gov.au

• improving resource management and marketing systems for cattle in southern Laos

• developing domestic and international markets for high-value cattle and beef in southeast Cambodia.

Strengthening smallholder livestock systems in MyanmarA new project in Myanmar aims to improve the livelihood of smallholder livestock producers in the Central Dry Zone. The program will try to improve the management, nutrition and health of small ruminants, indigenous cattle and village poultry. It will explore the technical constraints and opportunities for smallholder livestock development in the Central Dry Zone, and develop and adapt improved animal health and production practices.

Livestock movement and transboundary disease control in SEACFMD countriesA new project, implemented through the OIE, is examining livestock movement and the control of transboundary animal diseases in SEACFMD countries. The project will describe cattle market value chains and disease risks for transboundary animal diseases (FMD and haemorrhagic septicaemia). This builds on earlier ACIAR research on understanding livestock movement and the risk of spread of transboundary animal diseases in Laos and Cambodia.

Strengthening systems to monitor and respond to livestock diseases in PNGBuilding on a project on syndromic surveillance in PNG, a new project will use a ‘One Health’ approach to explore the effect of animal health services on the health, nutrition and income of smallholder livestock producers and their communities.

Strengthening smallholder livestock systems in eastern and southern AfricaIn Botswana, a new project being implemented through the International Livestock Research Institute aims to increase the competitiveness of smallholder livestock producers. It will examine the factors constraining smallholder livestock producers, and ways to improve livestock-related marketing systems.

In Tanzania and Zambia, a new project aims to demonstrate that through the control of Newcastle disease, poultry health and production can be improved by closer integration of village poultry and crop production systems.

Regional animal health initiatives 133

Chapter

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

134 Animal health in Australia 2012

10 Research and development

The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), the cooperative research centres (CRCs), Australia’s veterinary schools, and industry-based research and development (R&D) corporations participate in an active research program in livestock health.

This chapter summarises Australian research in livestock health during 2012. Individual research projects are listed in Appendix 4.

10.1 CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory and Biosecurity Flagship

Research at the CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory (CSIRO-AAHL) and through the CSIRO Biosecurity Flagship includes terrestrial and aquatic animal health, and diseases that affect both people and animals.

The research is undertaken on behalf of Australia to manage the risks of exotic, emerging and new diseases. It underpins Australia’s diagnostic activities and informs decision makers on the most effective ways to manage the biosecurity risks facing Australia, including both preventive activities and responses to incursions. Lessons learnt from CSIRO-AAHL’s research activities are provided through published scientific papers and participation in numerous biosecurity technical committees.

Projects are directed mainly towards:

• evaluating new diagnostic technologies, including developing and validating new diagnostic tests

• studying the pathogenesis of new and emerging diseases that affect animals and humans

• identifying novel markers of infection and critical control points for reducing disease transmission

• developing novel strategies for disease control, including animals with innate resistance to infectious diseases

Chapter

Research and development 135

• developing a predictive framework for infectious disease threats

• studying vector-borne disease, including characterisation of arboviruses (arthropod-borne viruses) and their vectors, insect innate immunity, vaccines and episystems (the biological and environmental factors affecting the disease at a particular time and place).

Research activity is supported by funding from CSIRO, the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, and external funding bodies. A small selection of projects undertaken during 2012 is presented in Table A4.1.

Contact: Kurt Zuelke Director Email: Kurt Zuelke@csiro au

10.2 Biosecurity Animal Division of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

The Biosecurity Animal Division of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry provides sound scientific advice to inform animal health policy. This role is becoming more challenging as the complexity of issues and the rate of change increase. Strategic foresight is useful when managing uncertainty, both now and in the future. The Biosecurity Animal Division therefore uses strategic foresight to consider emerging current and future trends in animal health in Australia.

Methods of strategic foresight enable robust and resilient analysis, leading to better planning and policy advice. Emerging issues and trends are scanned, identified, analysed and interpreted from a range of perspectives. From this, a range of options is developed, and preferred responses are determined. This scanning assists the Biosecurity Animal Division to identify, understand and respond to significant emerging issues before they establish or become critical.

Some of the Biosecurity Animal Division’s strategic foresight activities for 2012 were:

• environmental scanning in areas such as biotechnology, emerging diseases, science and society, climate change and food safety

• production of the Animal health scanning report, which has the aim of early identification of emerging trends relevant to the management of animal health in the medium term in Australia. Emerging trends that have been identified include nanotechnology (e.g. for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes), antimicrobial resistance and the growing use of social media

• consideration of key emerging issues using foresight techniques, such as causal layered analysis, to assist with future planning

• cooperative work with Quadrilateral Group partners (Canada, New Zealand and the United States) on future approaches to emergency animal disease management

• participation in the Australasian Joint Agencies Scanning Network, which consists of representatives from the Ministry for the Environment (New Zealand); Environment Waikato (New Zealand); CSIRO; the Australian National University; the University of New South Wales (Canberra) School of Physical, Environmental, and Mathematical Sciences; Ergon Energy (Queensland); and the Cotton Research and Development Corporation. The group is facilitated by a professional futurist, Kate Delaney.

Contact: Dr Peter Black Email: peter black@daff gov au

10.3 Cooperative research centres

10.3.1 Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies

The CRC for Beef Genetic Technologies (Beef CRC) was Australia’s largest integrated beef research initiative, which operated from July 2005 to June 2012. It was a third-term CRC between industry and research partners from Australia, New Zealand, the United States, Canada, the Republic of Korea and Brazil. The Beef CRC’s research focused on beef quality, feed efficiency, adaptation, cattle welfare and reproductive performance. It used world-class genetics and genomics research to improve the profitability, productivity, animal welfare and responsible resource use of Australian beef businesses.

The Beef CRC’s animal health research included:

• studies of resistance of cattle to ectoparasites and endoparasites (ticks, buffalo flies and worms)

• developing a vaccine to control cattle ticks

• objective measurement of cattle welfare

• improving female reproductive rates

• developing technologies to reduce methane emissions and improve feed use in cattle.

In 2012, the Beef CRC’s gene discovery research provided the Australian beef industry with the world’s first across-breed, DNA-based tests that predict the breeding values of cattle for economically important traits that are very difficult or expensive to measure.

The tests use a process known as genomic selection, which uses a genome-wide panel of closely spaced DNA markers

136 Animal health in Australia 2012

called single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Beef CRC researchers used Illumina’s new high-density SNP panel to test their prediction equations in independent cattle populations before incorporating them into Australia’s beef genetic evaluation scheme, BREEDPLAN. The prediction equations were also offered to Pfizer and Neogen, with the proviso that both genomics companies must offer a service to the Australian beef industry.

The cost of genotyping animals continues to fall rapidly. Within five years, it might become cost-effective for most beef producers to routinely genotype all their calves at branding or earlier. They will be able to link the genotype information to the animals’ National Livestock Identification System tag, and use the information to optimise the profitability and productivity of their herds.

Good progress was also made during 2012 in identifying candidate antigens that could be included in a new cattle tick vaccine for the beef and dairy cattle industries. Animal trials of the Beef CRC’s tick vaccine candidates identified vaccine constructs that provide strong protection against cattle tick challenge. Animal trials are ongoing to test each of the candidate vaccines. However, years of research and registration trials are still required to achieve a commercial tick vaccine product. With the closure of the Beef CRC in June 2012, this ongoing research is being led by the Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, with funding from Meat & Livestock Australia (MLA).

Current Beef CRC projects are listed in Table A4.2.

Contact: Dr Heather Burrow Chief Executive Officer Email: Heather Burrow@une edu au

10.3.2 Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

The overall objective of the health program of the CRC for an Internationally Competitive Pork Industry was to reduce the impact of disease on the efficiency of pork production. It aimed to improve pig survival and growth performance through strategies other than reliance on antibiotics, and to reduce medication and veterinary costs.

The CRC for an Internationally Competitive Pork Industry finished operation in July 2011 and has been replaced by the CRC for High Integrity Australian Pork (Pork CRC). The new Pork CRC also has a program directed at improving animal health and reducing antibiotic use in the industry.

The Pork CRC has three subprograms within Program 2 (Animal health management):

• SP-1 — Diagnostic and health monitoring systems to control disease. This will concentrate on real-time

diagnostics, and monitoring pathogen challenge loads in the environment and the pig.

• SP-2 — New pig genotypes and genetic technologies to provide immune competence traits for disease resilience. This will be based on existing and unique overseas lines, genomic and phenotypic relationships for robustness traits (based on Australian and overseas genetics), and statistical methodology for incorporating environmental pathogen challenge data in current breeding programs.

• SP-3 — Integrated alternative health strategies and technologies to reduce the reliance on antibiotics.

Pork CRC research projects funded in 2011–12 are listed in Table A4.3. Details are available on the Pork CRC website.135

Contact: CRC for High Integrity Australian Pork Email: roger campbell@porkcrc com au

10.3.3 Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation

The major focus of the parasite project of the CRC for Sheep Industry Innovation (Sheep CRC) is the development and communication of efficient and sustainable management recommendations for internal and external sheep parasites.

Recent activities have focused on upgrading the Boss parasite management websites to increase accessibility and provide additional information. The redeveloped WormBoss site was launched in November 2012.136 It includes a series of regional worm-control plans and a comprehensive anthelmintic information guide. A similar redevelopment is in progress for LiceBoss,137 with a review of the technical content and site layout. The more recent FlyBoss website138 will also be updated when required.

A series of technical workshops based on the Boss websites has been run in all states over the past two years. The workshops help sheep producers develop control plans against blowfly strike (Managing Flystrike) and sheep worms (WormBoss Regional Plans).

A significant initiative in progress is the development of ParaBoss: a national parasite management coordination program. ParaBoss will ensure the maintenance and updating of the Boss websites, facilitate communication activities, and provide a technical forum for the debate of parasite control issues. Current activities centre on identifying a host organisation for the ParaBoss program after the Sheep CRC terminates.

135 www.porkcrc.com.au

136 www.wormboss.com.au

137 www.wool.com/Grow_LiceBoss.htm

138 www.flyboss.org.au

Research and development 137

No further experimental activities are in progress. However, the outcome of investigations into strategies to minimise the development of anthelmintic resistance will be modified as appropriate for different environments and incorporated into general recommendations. The strategies include targeted treatment for individual sheep within flocks, to reduce anthelmintic exposure. Also in progress is analysis of data from the Information Nucleus flocks. This will provide genetic parameters for genetic resistance of sheep to worms, and correlations with production and other traits. Two postgraduate students will complete these studies within the next 2–3 years.

Current Sheep CRC projects are listed in Table A4.4.

Contact: CRC for Sheep Industry Innovation Email: sheepcrc@sheepcrc org au

10.3.4 Dairy Futures Cooperative Research Centre

The Dairy Futures CRC is a large-scale partnership between dairy farmers, pasture and cattle breeding companies, government and researchers that aims to deliver breakthrough bioscience applications to benefit the dairy

industry. Two programs — Designer Forages and Animal Improvement — are developing new on-farm innovations, with the following aims:

• Program 1: Designer Forages

– Deliver a range of plant breeding technology — both genetic manipulation and nongenetic manipulation — for ryegrass, to provide benefits in persistence and yield.

– Deliver DNA-based tools for plant selection and quality assurance of endophytes on a commercial scale.

– Identify novel endophytes that can form superior associations with ryegrass.

– Extend ryegrass technology into warm-season grasses.

– Identify the capacity for genetic manipulation of white clover to increase persistence and yield, and extend research into lucerne.

• Program 2: Animal Improvement

– Deliver technology that substantially expands Australia’s national DNA reference set, thus increasing the reliability of genomic products, for both elite sires and commercial cows.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

138 Animal health in Australia 2012

– Complete the commercialisation process for the use of genomic selection in Holstein and Jersey breeds.

– Complete an international collaboration to map the entire DNA sequence of 1000 key ancestor bulls.

– Use genomic selection to drive progress with difficult traits such as fertility, and to assess new traits such as feed-conversion efficiency.

– Expand the value of animal breeding through the production of sex-selected semen using two approaches: induced true cattle stem cells, and antibodies to sex-specific proteins on the surface of sperm.

Contact: Dairy Futures Cooperative Research Centre Email: enquiries@dairyfuturescrc com au

10.3.5 Poultry Cooperative Research Centre The key challenge for the Poultry CRC is to achieve sustainable, ethical poultry production using fewer resources with reduced environmental impacts. In late 2009, the Poultry CRC secured an extension of funding from the Australian Government, including a $27 million cash grant, giving it resources totalling nearly $87 million to mid-2017.

The Poultry CRC, a joint venture between seven essential participants, has its headquarters at the University of New England in Armidale, New South Wales. The CRC has an extensive collaborative network of researchers, educators and support staff from 36 participating organisations.

Three programs, with integrated research, development and education components, address the major challenge of meeting increasing demand for ‘clean and green’ poultry products, while maintaining food security in the face of climate change and a growing population:

• Program 1 — Health & Welfare — uses frontier science to deliver poultry health products and evidence-based welfare methodology to industry.

• Program 2 — Nutrition & Environment — will undertake research to link the fundamental aspects of feeding to environmental outcomes.

• Program 3 — Safe & Quality Food Production — aims to control foodborne illness associated with poultry products.

The Poultry CRC has now begun research activities on all 28 outputs stipulated in the Commonwealth Agreement. Although there have been delays in achieving some of the agreed milestones, 13 new subprojects have been

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Research and development 139

commissioned to ensure that all milestones are met by the conclusion of CRC activities. Most research projects have two or more collaborators, including many industry participants, with a clear focus on delivering frontier science that has practical applications.

The Poultry CRC’s education program is progressing well ahead of schedule. Each year, CRC postgraduate students and postdoctoral researchers attend a workshop, followed by industry visits to partners such as feed companies, pharmaceutical producers or hatchery/breeder farms. These events are vital to forming strong links between current and future researchers and industry, to keep research relevant and end-user focused.

Strong demand for the Poultry CRC’s teaching materials for schools has continued, and new information is now accessible from the CRC’s Poultry Hub website to help schools with keeping poultry. Recently developed vocational education and training materials are helping industry personnel develop their skills via in-house training and through institutions such as Technical and Further Education (TAFE) organisations. In addition, the CRC’s internship program has been very successful, with the majority of interns retained in the poultry industry.

Information about the CRC’s progress is available from the websites,139 and by subscribing to the ‘eChook’ newsletter. Current projects are listed in Table A4.5.

Contact: Poultry CRC Email: info@poultrycrc com au

10.4 University research programs

10.4.1 Charles Sturt UniversityCharles Sturt University has an ongoing commitment to rural Australia and its livestock industries, as well as an international focus. The School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences has Australian partners and collaborators, through research centres such as the E H Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation; and international partners in countries including Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and China. These linkages allow the school to offer a breadth of exciting postgraduate training opportunities to Australian and international students.

Charles Sturt University has recently developed the National Life Sciences Hub on its Wagga Wagga campus. The hub provides world-class research laboratory facilities, and a site for interaction and collaboration between researchers from the various schools on the campus and outside research organisations.

139 www.poultrycrc.com.au; www.poultryhub.org

Academic staff in the School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences have research interests in animal health across a range of species and disciplines. The school offers research training that focuses on production animal research, with an emphasis on sustainable livestock production systems, as well as equine medicine and surgery, and wildlife medicine. The school has developed novel approaches to curriculum delivery to ensure that graduates benefit from leading-edge pedagogy, and uses research to inform further development of its educational programs.

The major research groupings are:

• animal physiology, reproduction and genetics

• parasitology, infectious diseases and animal health

• public health

• animal welfare

• nutrition and production

• clinical sciences

• research in teaching.

Table A4.6 lists the animal health research projects at Charles Sturt University.

Contact: Professor Nick Sangster School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences Email: nsangster@csu edu au

10.4.2 Murdoch UniversityResearch has a high priority within the School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences at Murdoch University. The research complements the school’s programs in veterinary, biomedical and animal sciences, and covers the full spectrum of animal health, animal production and public health. The school has more than 160 postgraduate and honours students.

Research areas of particular strength include:

• animal production and animal health

• animal biosecurity and public health

• biomolecular control of disease

• aquatic animal health

• wildlife and conservation medicine

• companion animal health.

Researchers are active in projects to improve production, health and welfare in the sheep, cattle, pig, poultry and equine industries. Areas of research include meat quality, efficiency of production, biomolecular approaches to the control of disease, practical approaches to developing indicators for animal welfare, and the live export industry. Of particular interest are the growing areas of animal biosecurity, public health, ‘One Health’ and animal welfare.

140 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4.7 lists the animal health research projects at Murdoch University. More information can be found on the website of the School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences.140

Contact: Professor David Hampson Email: d hampson@murdoch edu au

10.4.3 University of AdelaideThe School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences at the University of Adelaide began taking veterinary students in early 2008 and will graduate its first veterinary cohort in 2013. The school provides an outstanding environment for research, with high-quality infrastructure and access to industry and research facilities. Staff members are internationally recognised for their contributions to scientific and veterinary research.

The school is involved in several CRCs and has well-established links with partner organisations that add considerably to the available research opportunities. Partner organisations include the South Australian Research and Development Institute, the Department of Primary Industries and Resources South Australia, the Pig and Poultry Production Institute, and Martindale Holdings. In addition, the school is building partnerships with Zoos South Australia, TAFE South Australia, and the Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science.

The research interests of the school include:

• animal production and genetics

• nutrition

• wildlife ecology

• laboratory animal science

• animal welfare

• musculoskeletal biology

• epidemiology

• physiology and anatomy.

The research profile has expanded over the past two years, with key appointments in veterinary microbiology, virology, parasitology, toxicology, immunology and pharmacology, as well as the clinical disciplines.

Table A4.8 lists the current research projects of the School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences.

Contact: Professor Michael Reichel Email: michael reichel@adelaide edu au

140 www.murdoch.edu.au/School-of-Veterinary-and-Biomedical-Sciences

10.4.4 University of MelbourneThe Faculty of Veterinary Science141 at the University of Melbourne has research strengths in the diagnosis, prevention and control of infectious disease; morphology and cell biology; animal biotechnology; animal production systems and reproduction; and clinical studies. The faculty has a particular interest in:

• developing new vaccines, approaches to control and diagnostic methods for infectious diseases

• understanding the genomics and genetics of viruses, prokaryotes, protists and parasitic worms

• understanding the roles of the extracellular matrix in bone and joint pathology, and the role of protease-activated receptors in musculoskeletal development and inflammatory disease

• developing new approaches to vaccination and assessing novel adjuvants

• developing animal models of asthma

• improving sheep farm profitability and reducing production risk

• assessing and improving production animal welfare

• understanding the epidemiology of mastitis in sheep and cattle

• understanding the pharmacology of vasoactive agents and the pathophysiology of laminitis

• wildlife disease surveillance.

Table A4.9 lists the University of Melbourne’s research projects relating to animal health.

Contact: Professor Glenn F Browning Associate Dean for Research and Research Training Email: glenfb@unimelb edu au

10.4.5 University of QueenslandThe completion in 2010 of new veterinary science facilities at the Gatton campus was a key component of the university’s strategy to develop world-class animal and veterinary science facilities on the campus. Since then, the university has further strengthened its animal health capability through the formation, with the Queensland Government, of a new research institute — the Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation (QAAFI).

Several staff in the Schools of Veterinary Science and Agriculture & Food Science hold affiliate appointments in QAAFI. In the beef cattle area, QAAFI has also seen the formation of the Northern Beef Research Alliance: a collaboration between the university, the Queensland

141 www.vet.unimelb.edu.au

Research and development 141

Government and CSIRO. The alliance seeks to facilitate sharing of existing research infrastructure, establish new shared infrastructure, and sustain an appropriate number of beef researchers through staff and student exchanges, joint appointments and co-locations.

The School of Veterinary Science’s research strengths are in the following areas:

• infectious disease and pathology

• companion animal health

• genetics and reproduction

• production animal health, with a focus on beef cattle

• animal welfare science and ethics.

The school is also fostering an emerging strength in the area of wildlife health and biology.

Table A4.10 lists the University of Queensland’s research projects relating to animal health.

Contact: Professor Michael Holland Email: mike holland@uq edu au

10.4.6 University of SydneyThe Faculty of Veterinary Science,142 University of Sydney, has an international research profile. It continues to have outstanding success in attracting competitive research grants, with strong links to veterinary and animal health professional bodies, public health authorities, prestigious national CRCs and industry-based research and development corporations.

The faculty’s research143 strengths are concentrated in the following areas:

• animal production systems

• infectious diseases

• veterinary public health and epidemiology

• veterinary pathology

• comparative genomics

• reproduction and genetics

• companion animal health and behaviour

• animal welfare science

• wildlife health and conservation biology

• equine medicine and performance sciences.

Table A4.11 lists the University of Sydney’s animal health research projects that were active in 2012.

Contact: Associate Professor Peter Williamson Associate Dean Research Email: p williamson@sydney edu au

142 www.sydney.edu.au/vetscience

143 www.sydney.edu.au/vetscience/research

10.5 Research and development corporations

The rural R&D corporations listed below invest in research by various service providers (CSIRO, universities, commercial research organisations, government departments, CRCs), but do not do research themselves.

10.5.1 Australian Egg Corporation Limited The Australian Egg Corporation Limited (AECL) is a public, nonlisted company limited by guarantee and established under the Egg Industry Service Provision Act 2002. The company provides on-farm, through-chain and market services for its stakeholders, including egg producers. AECL is mainly funded through statutory promotional and R&D levies received from all egg producers, which are collected under the Act, and through Australian Government funds for R&D activities in agreed program areas, including animal health.

The egg industry has experienced incursions of exotic or emergency animal diseases, with devastating consequences for egg producers through a loss in egg production and a decline in consumer confidence. Minimising disease outbreaks and managing adverse public opinion are both essential to the ongoing sustainability of Australia’s egg industry. This includes ensuring effective levels of on-farm biosecurity, developing industry’s understanding of disease characteristics, and developing vaccines that are readily available.

AECL invests directly with research institutions, including as a major contributor and core participant in the Poultry CRC (see Section 10.3.5), in projects and activities that directly affect the health of the laying flock, including:

• ensuring effective on-farm levels of quarantine and biosecurity

• preventing and mitigating outbreaks of diseases such as Newcastle disease, infectious bursal disease, egg drop syndrome and avian influenza

• ensuring the availability of effective vaccines and medicines

• managing rapid diagnosis of hen health problems

• ensuring that disease research, which acts as an industry ‘insurance policy’, is conducted.

Current AECL projects are listed in Table A4.12.

Contact: James Kellaway Managing Director Email: James@aecl org

142 Animal health in Australia 2012

10.5.2 Australian Honey Bee Industry Council

Asian Honey Bee Transition to Management Program The Australian Government is investing $2 million from July 2011 to June 2013 to move from eradication to management of Asian honey bee in Australia. This will be done in partnership with Biosecurity Queensland and the Australian Honey Bee Industry Council, which will also contribute significant funding and activities. The Asian Honey Bee Transition to Management Program (AHB T2M) is being administered by Plant Health Australia.

To oversee the AHB T2M, monitor its delivery and ensure that the program outcomes are achieved, an Asian Honey Bee Transition Management Group has been established. An Asian Honey Bee Scientific Advisory Group has also been established to provide technical advice, feedback and consideration of specific projects and activities within the AHB T2M program.

Information on the AHB T2M can be found on the program’s website.144

10.5.3 Australian Wool Innovation Limited The mission of Australian Wool Innovation Limited145 is to invest in research, development, marketing and promotion to improve the profitability, international competitiveness and sustainability of the Australian wool industry; and to increase demand and market access for Australian wool.

Australian Wool Innovation Limited’s vision is to be a significant contributor to a vibrant, stable and profitable wool industry, providing the world with the best natural fibre.

The 2012 calendar year was covered by two operational plans (2011–12 and 2012–13), which focus on:

• fostering sustainable, profitable and ethical animal care and wool production through

– reduced impacts of illness, infestation and predation on productivity and welfare

– productivity gains through improved sheep resilience, reproduction and fleece production

– provenance and welfare credentials to protect market access and increase demand for wool

– improved industry reputation for ethical, sustainable and responsible animal care

– labour and production efficiencies in clip harvesting and preparation

– reduced incidence and impacts of clip contamination

– improved industry reputation for wool clip quality

144 asianhoneybee.net.au

145 www.wool.com/default.htm

• fostering sustainable, profitable and ethical land and resource management through

– productivity gains through optimal land and resource management

– increased resilience and adaptability to climate change

– productivity gains through advances in carbon sequestration and global greenhouse gas mitigation

– provenance and ecological credentials to protect market access, support participation in carbon trading markets and increase demand for wool

– improved industry reputation for ethical, responsible and sustainable land and resource management

• fostering industry resilience, confidence and growth through

– increased participation, use, adoption and retention rates

– increased wool grower resilience, pride and confidence

– integrated communication strategy with stakeholders and the marketplace

– improved industry reputation for productivity, profitability, and responsible land and animal custodianship.

Table A4.13 lists Australian Wool Innovation Limited’s current research projects.

Contact: Dr Jane Littlejohn Head On Farm RDE Email: jane littlejohn@wool com

10.5.4 Dairy AustraliaDairy Australia is the dairy industry’s service company and is committed to supporting the current high levels of animal health and welfare on Australian dairy farms. Australia is fortunate that there are few diseases of importance affecting Australian dairy herds; most diseases that do occur are relatively well understood.

Animal health and welfare is essential for the efficient and productive operations of dairy farms, and good outcomes help to maintain the excellent reputation of the industry and dairy products. The industry investment in research, development and extension has focused on projects for prevention and control of cattle diseases, genetic improvement, enhanced nutrition, and improved animal handling and husbandry practices. Priorities for the dairy industry are the integration of biosecurity measures into whole-farm management, and improved calf management.

Research and development 143

Research projects provide information for dairy farmers and their advisers to prevent the occurrences of disease, achieve good animal welfare outcomes, and establish appropriate animal management systems and practices. The industry conducts several national projects addressing animal health topics, and there are also a large number of small regionally based projects. Countdown Downunder is Australia’s national extension program for prevention, diagnosis and treatment of mastitis; the InCalf project focuses on improving reproductive performance; and BJD Aware promotes strategies to manage and control bovine Johne’s disease. CowTime, which has a focus on milk harvesting, delivers extension on ways to reduce stress for cows at milking, including principles of stock handling, dairy design and cow behaviour.

Building on the successful control of enzootic bovine leucosis (EBL) in dairy cattle, the Australian Dairy Industry Council and animal health authorities implemented a national program to eradicate EBL from the Australian dairy herd. Provisional freedom was achieved in December 2009, and testing has continued, with negative results.

To improve the skills of dairy farmers and their employees, Dairy Australia has established the National Centre of Dairy Education Australia to develop and deliver vocational education and training for the dairy industry. The animal health and welfare content is regularly revised and updated. The Dairy Futures CRC was established in January 2010 through a government and industry partnership to deliver major improvements to plant and animal breeding.

Dairy industry research projects are listed in Table A4.14.

Contact: Dr Robin Condron Email: RCondron@dairyaustralia com au

10.5.5 Fisheries Research and Development Corporation — Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) invests in areas of R&D that aim to benefit all sectors of Australian fisheries: the commercial sector (wild catch, aquaculture and post-harvest), the recreational sector and the Indigenous sector.

The FRDC’s Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram was established specifically to develop, support and manage a portfolio of aquatic animal health research projects, in consultation with the fisheries and aquaculture industry. The focus of the subprogram is infectious (viral, bacterial, fungal and parasitic) diseases of finfish, crustaceans and molluscs.

Australian aquaculture continues to grow and currently contributes close to 40% ($870 million) of Australian fisheries’ gross value of production ($2.18 billion). Although aquaculture is an important industry sector, R&D for aquatic animal health is required for all aquatic animal sectors, including the wild-catch, recreational and ornamental sectors, as well as noncommercial finfish, mollusc and crustacean (wildlife) stocks. The requirement for expert health services and advice, and therefore R&D activities, continues to increase. These are essential for the profitability, productivity and sustainability of Australia’s aquatic animal industries, and to protect Australia’s natural resources.

The Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram R&D Plan underwent a major review in 2011. Six key research areas remain:

• nature of disease and host–pathogen interaction

• aquatic animal health management

• diagnostics for endemic and exotic aquatic animal disease

• surveillance and monitoring

• aquatic animal disease therapy and prophylaxis

• training and capacity building.

More information can be found on the subprogram website,146 and the revised Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram R&D Plan can be obtained by contacting the subprogram leader. Table A4.15 lists current research projects.

Contact: Dr Mark Crane Subprogram Leader Email: mark crane@csiro au

10.5.6 Meat & Livestock AustraliaMLA invests in animal health research — including endemic, emerging and exotic diseases — to improve the profitability and sustainability of the beef cattle, sheep and goat industries in Australia. MLA invests in research into:

• Johne’s disease (ovine and bovine) — diagnostics, prevention, epidemiology, economics

• respiratory disease in feedlot cattle

• bovine ephemeral fever

• toxic plants

• nutritional/trace mineral deficiencies

• internal and external parasites in cattle, goats and sheep — management, diagnosis and epidemiology

• emerging diseases such as Theileria orientalis — diagnosis and treatment

• control of scouring in sheep and young calves.

146 frdc.com.au/research/aquatic_animal_health/Pages/default.aspx

144 Animal health in Australia 2012

MLA also invests in research that will improve disease surveillance, to demonstrate freedom from disease and improve biosecurity. This includes better tools for screw-worm fly diagnosis and incursion control, bluetongue diagnosis and vector distribution, response to foot-and-mouth disease, and capripox diagnosis.

Table A4.16 lists MLA’s livestock health research projects. More information can be found on the MLA website.147

Contact: Scott Hansen, Managing Director Email: shansen@mla com au

10.5.7 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

The Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC) works with industry and government to increase knowledge that fosters sustainable, productive and profitable new and existing rural industries, and furthers understanding of national rural issues.

Most projects relating to animal health fall within the RIRDC’s Chicken Meat, Honeybee, Horse, and New Animal Products programs.

147 www.mla.com.au

In 2012, a substantial number of reports from completed projects relating to animal health were published. These can be accessed on the RIRDC website,148 together with detailed reports of projects in progress.

RIRDC animal health–related projects in 2012 are listed in Table A4.17.

Contact: Anwen Lovett Executive Manager Email: Anwen Lovett@rirdc gov au

148 www.rirdc.gov.au

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Research and development 145

1Appendix

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

146 Animal health in Australia 2012

Livestock industries in Australia149

Australia is a major producer and exporter of livestock, livestock products and genetic material. Animal production in Australia is based largely on extensive grazing and is dominated by the beef, dairy, wool and sheepmeat industries. Australia also has smaller intensive pig and poultry industries. Changes in livestock numbers are shown in Table A1.1. Some historical values may differ from previous publications as the Australian Bureau of Statistics sometimes revises these estimates.

Table  A1 1 Australian livestock numbers (millions), 2008–12

Livestock species 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

Sheep 72.7 68.1 73.1 76.0

Cattle

Beef 25.3 24.0 25.9 26.4

Dairy 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.7

Totala 27 9 26 6 28 5 29 1

Pigs 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.2

Poultryb 95.4 83.0 90.7 nana = not available

a Figures may not add to totals due to rounding

b Meat chickens and laying hens only

Sources: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Agricultural commodities: December quarter 2012, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_commodities

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012). Agricultural commodities, Australia, 2010–11, cat. no. 7121.0, ABS, Canberra. www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/7121.0 (for poultry data only)

Livestock industries are located across most agricultural and pastoral areas of Australia.

In 2011–12, the gross value of Australian livestock and livestock products was estimated to be $21.2 billion. Exports of livestock and livestock products were estimated to be worth $14.7 billion.

149 All figures provided in the tables in this appendix are based on Australian financial years, which run from 1 July to 30 June.

Meat and other productsAustralia has a highly developed meat industry and is a major producer of meat and meat products. In 2011–12, the gross value of Australian livestock slaughtering was estimated to be $12.6 billion.

Australia is the world’s second largest exporter of beef, veal and sheepmeat. In 2011–12, Australian meat exports (not including live animals) were estimated to be worth $6.0 billion. Selected export statistics are shown in Table A1.2.

Australia also produces and exports smaller quantities of meat from goats, kangaroos, emus, ostriches, deer, wild boars, possums, crocodiles and camels. It exports substantial quantities of animal products, such as wool, hides, skins, rendered meals and animal food.

Sheepmeat and woolSheep are used to produce meat and wool over a wide range of environments in Australia, from the arid and semi-arid inland to the higher rainfall areas of south-eastern Australia (Figure A1.1). Most Australian sheep are produced as part of mixed-farming enterprises, frequently along with cropping and beef production.

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Livestock industries in Australia 147

ACT 0% NT 0%

NSW 37%

Qld5%SA 15%Tas

3%

Vic 21%

WA 19%

ACT = Australian Capital Territory; NSW = New South Wales; NT = Northern Territory; Qld = Queensland; SA = South Australia; Tas = Tasmania; Vic = Victoria; WA = Western Australia

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012). Agricultural commodities, Australia, 2010–11, cat. no. 7121.0, ABS, Canberra. www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/7121.0

Figure A1 1 Sheep distribution by state and territory, 30 June 2011

In 2011–12, sheep numbers were estimated to have increased by 4% to 76 million. This was the second consecutive year that sheep numbers have increased after declining for several years. Favourable seasonal conditions, combined with positive returns for wool production and relatively strong lamb prices, resulted in strong restocking activity.

Over the past decade, the emphasis on wool production has decreased. A long-term decline in the demand for raw wool — coupled with growing demand for Australian lamb exports by the United States, Europe and Asia — has led to a greater emphasis on prime lamb production. Flock numbers steadily declined as significant numbers of wethers (nonbreeding adult sheep), previously used in wool production, were turned off. Farming of specialty meat breeds, such as Dorper and Damara (which do not produce any harvestable wool) is a small but growing sector.

Total wool production declined by 1% in 2011–12 to 424 300 tonnes. Wool cut per head is estimated to have eased slightly in 2011–12 from a recent high of 4.34 kilograms per sheep in 2010–11. Total wool exports declined by 9% to 405 200 tonnes in greasy equivalents. However, the value of wool exports increased by 2.5% to $3.1 billion. Selected production and export figures for the wool and sheepmeat industries are shown in Table A1.3.

Table A1 2 Volume of Australian meat exports (kilotonnes of shipped weight), 2008–12

Type of meat 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

Beef and veal 968 899 937 948

Mutton 146 111 86 89

Lamb 156 157 157 174

Pork 32 30 31 29

Poultry 37 28 31 38Source: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Agricultural commodities: December quarter 2012, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_commodities

Table A1 3 Australian sheep industry, 2009–12

Sheep production 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

Sheep numbers (millions) 68.1 73.1 76.0

Sheep slaughterings (millions) 7.3 5.3 5.2

Lamb slaughterings (millions) 19.5 17.9 18.9

Total wool production (kilotonnes) 422.5 429.1 424.3

Mutton production (kilotonnes carcase weight) 161.8 123.2 119.7

Lamb production (kilotonnes carcase weight) 412.5 391.3 419.3

Sheep meat exports (kilotonnes shipped weight) 267.9 242.7 262.9

Value of sheep meat exports ($ million) 1348.4 1429.5 1422.7

Live sheep exports (millions) 3.1 2.9 2.6

Value of wool exports ($ million) 2306.0 3048.0 3123.0Source: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Agricultural commodities: December quarter 2012, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_commodities

148 Animal health in Australia 2012

Beef cattleCattle are raised over much of Australia (see Figure A1.2). Across northern Australia, cattle are produced on large holdings, where they graze native pastures at low stocking rates. Bos indicus breeds dominate, because they are better adapted to the tropical conditions in the north. The main outputs are beef, animals for lot feeding and live cattle exports.

In southern Australia, cattle are produced on smaller holdings than those in the north, and graze largely on improved pastures. Breeds derived from Bos taurus dominate, and smaller, younger animals are produced than in the north, principally for the domestic market.

ACT0%

Tas2%

WA8%

SA4%

Qld48%

Vic9%

NSW21%

NT8%

ACT = Australian Capital Territory; NSW = New South Wales; NT = Northern Territory; Qld = Queensland; SA = South Australia; Tas = Tasmania; Vic = Victoria; WA = Western Australia

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012). Agricultural commodities, Australia, 2010–11, cat. no. 7121.0, ABS, Canberra. www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/7121.0

Figure A1 2 Beef cattle distribution by state and territory, 30 June 2011

Improved seasonal conditions in south-eastern and northern Australia since 2010 have encouraged restocking and reduced cattle turnoff. The improved conditions contributed to an increase in the national herd of approximately 2 million animals in 2010–11, and a further increase of approximately 0.5 million in 2011–12, to reach a total of 26.4 million animals.

The volume of Australian beef exports increased by 1% in 2011–12 to 948 300 tonnes. The value of these exports increased by 3% to approximately $4.5 billion. The number of live cattle exported for slaughter decreased by 21% in 2011–12 to 578 583 animals (Table A1.4).

Dairy cattleThe dairy industry is the third largest rural industry in Australia by value of production. Victoria has 64% of the national dairy herd, followed by New South Wales (12%) and Tasmania (9%). Most dairy farms are family owned and operated.

The Australian dairy herd has declined by approximately one-quarter since 2000, reaching 1.63 million animals in 2011–12 (Table A1.5). Although dairy cow numbers have decreased in all states, the largest fall has occurred in Victoria, mainly due to the effects of long droughts in the irrigation-dependent dairying areas of northern Victoria.

Australian milk production increased from approximately 9.1 billion litres in 2010–11 to approximately 9.5 billion litres in 2011–12. The increase in milk production more than offset a decline in farm-gate prices for milk, resulting in the gross value of milk production rising slightly, to almost $4 billion in 2011–12.

In 2011–12, Australia exported dairy products worth $2.29 billion to about 100 countries (Table A1.6).

Table A1 4 Australian beef cattle production, 2009–12

Beef cattle production 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

Total beef cattle (millions) 24.0 25.9 26.4

Slaughterings (millions) 8.4 8.1 7.9

Beef and veal production (kilotonnes carcase weight) 2108.8 2133.4 2114.8

Live cattle exports (thousands) 870.6 728.2 578.6

Value of live cattle exports ($ million) 549.5 499.1 411.7

Beef exports (kilotonnes shipped weight) 899.0 937.3 948.3

Value of beef exports ($ million) 3953.2 4327.7 4466.2Source: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Agricultural commodities: December quarter 2012, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_commodities

Livestock industries in Australia 149

PigsThe number of pigs slaughtered increased by approximately 2% per cent in 2011–12 to 4.7 million. Pigmeat production increased by 2% to 351 500 tonnes, while export volumes of Australian pigmeat declined by 5%, to 29 000 tonnes (shipped weight). In 2011–12, exports (in carcase weight equivalent) accounted for approximately 14% of the total volume of Australian pigmeat production (Table A1.7).

In recent years, the number of farms with pigs has declined steadily, while the number of pigs has been stable. The Australian Bureau of Statistics indicates that, at 30 June 2011, Australia had 1659 pig farms, holding a total of 261 000 sows.150 In 2010–11, Queensland had the largest number of pigs, followed by Victoria and New South Wales.

Poultry meat and eggsPoultry farming in Australia is an intensive industry, producing birds for meat and egg production. The poultry industry has grown over recent years, resulting in lower retail poultry prices. Meat chickens comprise approximately 86% of the flock, and layer hens 14%. The chicken meat industry is dominated by two large companies and several medium-sized operators. Most operations are located within 50 kilometres of capital cities.

In 2010–11, approximately 2100 businesses produced more than 285 million dozen eggs for human consumption. Approximately 95% of eggs are produced under intensive

150 Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012). Agricultural commodities, Australia, 2010–11, cat. no. 7121.0, ABS, Canberra. www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/7121.0

production systems, with the balance from free-range and other systems.

The value of egg production increased by 1% in 2011–12 to $577.8 million (Table A1.8).

GoatsAustralia is the world’s largest exporter of goat meat, despite the small size of the Australian goat meat industry. The industry is steadily growing, based on exports of live goats and goat meat. In 2011–12, 1.78 million goats were slaughtered, supporting meat exports of 26 729 tonnes, valued at $113.6 million. The two largest markets were the United States and Taiwan, accounting for 48% and 14%, respectively, of total Australian goat meat exports in 2011–12. Additionally, 71 900 live goats, with an estimated value of $9.7 million, were exported to markets in Malaysia (88% of total exports), Singapore (11%) and Brunei (0.8%).

The domestic market for goat meat is small.

Australia also produces small quantities of goat milk, cashmere and mohair. The total value of these industries was estimated to be approximately $9 million in 2011–12, which came mainly from goat milk production.

Game and other livestock industriesAustralia produces high-quality game meats from animals grazed on the country’s extensive native grasslands. Game products include venison, kangaroo and buffalo.

Table A1 5 Australian dairy production, 2009–12

Dairy production 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

Dairy cow numbers (millions) 1.60 1.59 1.63

Total milk production (million litres) 9023 9101 9480

Milk yield per cow (litres) 5653 5727 5816

Gross value of milk production ($ million) 3371 3932 3986Source: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Agricultural commodities: December quarter 2012, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_commodities

Table A1 6 Australian dairy production and exports, 2009–12

Total production Exports

Dairy product 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

Cheese (kilotonnes) 349 339 340 168 163 161

Butter and butter fat (kilotonnes)

128 122 120 74 56 49

Milk powder (kilotonnes)a 324 379 376 226 268 248a Includes whole milk powder, skim milk powder and casein

Source: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Agricultural commodities: December quarter 2012, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_commodities

150 Animal health in Australia 2012

Venison In 2010–11, Australia had 1436 deer farms, carrying a total of 45 073 animals. Deer farms are located throughout Australia, but production is concentrated in Queensland, Victoria, New South Wales and Tasmania. The estimated gross value of production of the industry, including meat and antler velvet, was $1.84 million in 2011–12. The number of deer processed in 2010–11 was 5784, down from almost 47 000 in 2002–03. The price paid to farmers for venison in 2011–12 averaged approximately $2.95 per kilogram (hot carcase weight). Venison prices have been declining in recent years in response to weak demand.

Kangaroo The gross value of production of the kangaroo industry in 2011–12 was $18.3 million, down from a peak of $55 million in 2005–06. The decline is due to an extended period of drought and recent market access problems with the Russian Federation. In 2011–12, approximately 1.46 million kangaroos were harvested for meat, yielding more than 17 700 tonnes of meat for human consumption and pet food.

The value of kangaroo meat exports for human consumption in 2011–12 was $20.4 million, down from a peak of around $47 million in 2006–07. In the past, more than 70% of kangaroo meat exports were shipped to the Russian Federation, but market access issues reduced this share to zero in 2011–12. The major export destinations for kangaroo meat in 2011–12 were South Africa (28% of total exports), Germany (19%), the Netherlands (17%), Papua New Guinea (14%) and Belgium (11%).

BuffaloThe gross value of production of the buffalo industry in 2011–12 was just under $841 000, mainly from the export of live animals from the Northern Territory. Live exports decreased to 1003 animals in 2011–12, down from 2166 in 2010–11 and a peak of 6564 in 2006–07. The price received by farmers was $727 per animal, compared with an average of $783 per animal over the previous four years. The main markets in the past five years have been Indonesia and Malaysia.

Table A1 7 Australian pig production, 2009–12

Pig production 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

Total pigs (millions) 2.3 2.3 2.2

Breeding sows including gilts (thousands) 267.8 295.0 302.0

Slaughterings (millions) 4.6 4.6 4.7

Pigmeat production (kilotonnes carcase weight) 331.3 342.1 350.5

Pigmeat exports (kilotonnes shipped weight) 30.0 31.0 29.4

Value of pigmeat exports ($ million) 109.0 106.3 100.1

Gross value of production ($ million) 964.8 919.1 982.2Sources: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Agricultural commodities: December quarter 2012, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_commodities

Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Agricultural commodity statistics 2012, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_commodity_statistics (for breeding sow data only)

Table A1 8 Australian poultry production, 2009–12

Poultry production 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

Meat chickens (millions)a 71.3 77.6 na

Layer hens and pullets for egg production (millions) 11.7 13.1 na

Poultry slaughterings (millions)a 465.7 549.9 551.3

Poultry meat production (kilotonnes carcase weight)b 873.5 1056.0 1077.7

Exports of poultry meat (kilotonnes shipped weight) 27.8 30.7 37.9

Value of poultry meat exports ($ million) 36.2 38.4 45.4

Value of egg production ($ million) 427.5 572.2 577.8

Value of meat production ($ million) 1784.7 2077.2 2078.1na = not available

a Chickens only

b Includes all poultry

Sources: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Agricultural commodities: December quarter 2012, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_commodities (for layer hen and pullet data only)

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012). Agricultural commodities, Australia, 2010–11, cat. no. 7121.0, ABS, Canberra. www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/7121.0

Livestock industries in Australia 151

In 2011–12, 171 buffalo were slaughtered, compared with the peak of 1994 in 1999–2000. Exports of buffalo meat are close to zero, as the Northern Territory now has no export abattoirs.

Australia has three commercial dairy buffalo herds and produces small quantities of buffalo cheeses.

Fisheries and aquacultureAustralia has diverse wild-catch and aquaculture fisheries that produce both native and introduced species. In 2010–11, the estimated gross value of fisheries production was approximately $2.2 billion. The value and volume of fisheries production for 2009–10 and 2010–11 are shown in Table A1.9.

Farmed Australia-wide aquaculture production includes many major species, such as tuna, salmon, barramundi, abalone and oysters. It is an important component of Australian fisheries production. Between 1996–97 and 2010–11, aquaculture’s share of the total value of Australian fisheries production grew from 21% to almost 43%. The volume of aquaculture production in Australia rose by 1.8% in 2010–11, to approximately 75 200 tonnes. Despite the relatively small increase in the volume of production, the value of production increased by 8% to approximately $948 million.

Selected figures for the volume of production and gross value of aquaculture harvests in 2010–11 are shown in Table A1.10.

Exports of Australian edible fisheries products, shown in Table A1.11, totalled 41 542 tonnes in 2010–11, and were worth $991 million.

BeesIn 2011–12, honey production was estimated at 21 657 tonnes. The gross value of the whole industry was $78.6 million, of which $69.6 million was honey production. The remainder was made up of beeswax, pollination services, package bees and queens. Before 2011, the export of package bees to the United States for the pollination industry was a small but growing sector of the industry. This export trade was valued at approximately $2.5 million in 2009–10. However, the United States banned imports of packaged bees from Australia in December 2010, because of the perceived risk of disease incursions into the United States following the entrance of the Asian honey bee into Australia.

The Australian honey bee industry comprises approximately 10 500 registered beekeepers operating about 542 900 hives of European honey bees. Most honey bee operators are small, family owned and operated businesses. Many of these, particularly businesses with fewer than 250 hives, derive most of their income from other enterprises, investments or government sources. Larger operations (those with more than 500 hives) tend to specialise in honey production, and depend on their honey bee businesses as the sole source of income.

Most honey is produced by a relatively small number of businesses. According to industry estimates, around three-quarters of total honey production is produced by businesses operating more than 500 hives. Less than 15% of Australian honey production is produced by businesses with fewer than 250 hives.

Table A1 9 Australian fisheries production by species, 2009–11

FisheryVolume of production (kilotonnes) Value of production ($ million)

2009–10 2010–11 2009–10 2010-11

Abalone 5.0 5.2 173.4 178.3

Oysters 14.9 14.0 100.9 98.7

Prawns 27.3 26.9 324.5 304.8

Rock lobster 10.1 9.9 381.3 389.8

Salmonids 32.0 35.4 369.5 408.8

Scallops 7.6 6.2 23.4 22.0

Tuna 11.0 9.1 125.3 149.7

Other fish 120.7 110.8 464.5 424.3

Other crustaceans and molluscsa 14.7 16.8 228.1 254.2

Totalb 243 2 234 2 2190 9 2230 7a Volume excludes pearl oysters

b Figures may not add to totals due to rounding. Includes aquaculture production but excludes hatchery production.

Source: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Australian fisheries statistics 2011, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_fisheries_statistics

152 Animal health in Australia 2012

Further informationFurther information on each of the industries may be found at the relevant industry websites (see Appendix 5).

Other Australian agricultural statistics and forecasts are available from the website of the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences.151

151 www.daff.gov.au/abares

Table A1 10 Australian aquaculture production, 2010–11

Aquaculture production Volume of production (kilotonnes) Gross value of production ($’000)

Fish

Barramundi 4.4 35 730

Salmonids 35.4 408 839

Silver perch 0.4 4 485

Tuna 5.8 125 164

Othera 4.1 33 470

Totalb 50 0 607 687

Crustaceans

Marron 0.09 2 451

Prawns 4.0 57 332

Redclaw 0.05 908

Yabbies 0.04 637

Total 4 2 61 328

Molluscs

Abalone 0.5 16 389

Mussels 3.1 9 841

Oysters — edible 14.0 98 731

Oysters — pearl na 120 077

Total 17 5 245 038

Production not included elsewhere 3 5 34 095

Totalb,c (all categories) 75 2 948 148na = not available

a Includes eels, other native fish and aquarium fish

b Figures may not add to totals due to rounding

c Total volume excludes pearl oysters

Source: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Australian fisheries statistics 2011, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_fisheries_statistics

Table A1 11 Australian seafood production and exports (kilotonnes), 2008–11

Total production Exportsa

Type of food 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11

Fish and other seafood 238 243 234 47 40 42a Includes exports of tuna landed in Australia but excludes live tonnages

Source: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (2012). Australian fisheries statistics 2011, ABARES, Canberra. www.daff.gov.au/abares/publications_remote_content/publication_series/australian_fisheries_statistics

Livestock industries in Australia 153

Jon Condon

Jon Condon

2Appendix

Margaretta Fahey

154 Animal health in Australia 2012

Animal health contacts in AustraliaAustralian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Ms Rona Mellor Deputy Secretary GPO Box 858 Canberra ACT 2601 Ph: 61 2 6272 5455 Email: rona.mellor@daff.gov.au

Dr Mark Schipp Australian Chief Veterinary Officer GPO Box 858 Canberra ACT 2601 Ph: 61 2 6272 4644 Email: mark.schipp@daff.gov.au

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory Dr Kurt Zuelke Director Private Bag 24 Geelong VIC 3220 Ph: 61 3 5227 5511 Email: kurt.zuelke@csiro.au

Australian Capital Territory Dr Will Andrew ACT Government Veterinarian ACT Veterinary Services GPO Box 158 Canberra ACT 2601 Ph: 61 2 6207 2357 Email: will.andrew@act.gov.au

New South Wales Dr Ian Roth Chief Veterinary Officer Department of Primary Industries Locked Bag 21 Orange NSW 2800 Ph: 61 2 6391 3577 Email: ian.roth@dpi.nsw.gov.au

Northern Territory Dr Malcom Anderson Chief Veterinary Officer Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries GPO Box 3000 Darwin NT 0801 Ph: 61 8 8999 2130 Email: malcom.anderson@nt.gov.au

Queensland Dr Rick Symons Chief Veterinary Officer Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry GPO Box 46 Brisbane QLD 4001 Ph: 61 7 3087 8014 Email: rick.symons@daff.qld.gov.au

South Australia Dr Rob Rahaley Director Animal Health and Chief Veterinary Officer Department of Primary Industries and Resources SA GPO Box 1671 Adelaide SA 5001 Ph: 61 8 8207 7970 Email: rob.rahaley@sa.gov.au

Tasmania Dr Rod Andrewartha Chief Veterinary Officer Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment 13 St Johns Avenue New Town TAS 7008 Ph: 61 3 6233 6836 Email: rod.andrewartha@dpipwe.tas.gov.au

Victoria Dr Andrew Cameron Chief Veterinary Officer Department of Primary Industries 475 Mickleham Road Attwood VIC 3049 Ph: 61 3 9217 4237 Email: cvo.victoria@dpi.vic.gov.au

� Animal�health�contacts�in�Australia 155

Western Australia Dr Tony Higgs Chief Veterinary Officer Department of Agriculture and Food WA 444 Albany Hwy Albany WA 6330 Ph: 61 8 9892 8479 Email: tony.higgs@agric.wa.gov.au

Animal Health Australia Dr Mike Bond Chief Executive Officer Suite 15, 26–28 Napier Close Deakin ACT 2600 Ph: 61 2 6203 3999 Email: mbond@animalhealthaustralia.com.au

Council of Veterinary Deans of Australia and New Zealand Professor Kenneth Hinchcliffe Chair University of Melbourne Faulty of Veterinary Science 250 Princes Highway, Werribee VIC 3030 Ph: 61 3 9731 2261 Email: hkw@unimelb.edu.au

Australian Wildlife Health Network Dr Rupert Woods Manager PO Box 20 Mossman NSW 2088 Ph: 61 2 9978 4579 Email: rwoods@zoo.nsw.gov.au

Australian Alpaca Association Limited Mrs Michelle Malt President PO Box 1076 Mitcham North VIC 3132 Ph: 61 2 6665 3324 Email: alpaca@alpaca.asn.au

Australian Chicken Meat Federation Inc Dr Andreas Dubs Executive Director PO Box 579 North Sydney NSW 2059 Ph: 61 2 9929 4077 Email: andreas.dubs@chicken.org.au

Australian Dairy Farmers Limited Ms Natalie Collard Chief Executive Officer Level 2, 22 William Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Ph: 61 3 8621 4200 Email: ncollard@australiandairyfarmers.com.au

Australian Duck Meat Association Inc Mr John Millington President c/- Luv-a-Duck, PO Box 205 Nhill VIC 3418 Ph: 61 3 5365 1002 Email: john@luvaduck.com

Australian Egg Corporation Limited Mr James Kellaway Managing Director Suite 4.02, Level 4, 107 Mount Street North Sydney NSW 2060 Ph: 61 2 9409 6999 Email: james@aecl.org

Australian Honey Bee Industry Council Inc Mr Trevor Weatherhead Executive Director PO Box 4253 Raceview QLD 4305 Ph: 61 7 5467 2265 Email: ahbic@honeybee.org.au

Australian Horse Industry Council Mr Greg Bailey President PO Box 802 Geelong VIC 3220 Ph: 61 3 5222 6650 Email: secretary@horsecouncil.org.au

Australian Livestock Export Council (LiveCorp) Mr Sam Brown Chief Executive Officer PO Box 1174 North Sydney NSW 2059 Ph: 61 2 9929 6755 Email: sbrown@livecorp.com.au

Australian Lot Feeders’ Association Inc Mr Dougal Gordon Chief Executive Officer GPO Box 149 Sydney NSW 2001 Ph: 61 2 9290 3700 Email: dougal.gordon@feedlots.com.au

156 Animal health in Australia 2012

Australian Pork Limited Mr Andrew Spencer Chief Executive Officer PO Box 4746 Kingston ACT 2604 Ph: 61 2 6285 2200 Email: andrew.spencer@australianpork.com.au

Australian Racing Board Limited Mr Peter McGauran Chief Executive Level 7, 51 Druitt Street Sydney NSW 2000 Ph: 61 2 9551 7700 Email: pmcgauran@australianracingboard.com.au

Australian Veterinary Association Ltd Mr Graham Catt Chief Executive Officer Unit 40, 6 Herbert Street St Leonards NSW 2065 Ph: 61 2 6782 1313 Email: ceo@ava.com.au

Cattle Council of Australia Inc Mr Jed Matz Executive Director PO Box E10 Kingston ACT 2604 Ph: 61 2 6269 5600 Email: jmatz@cattlecouncil.com.au

Dairy Australia Limited Ms Helen Dornom Technical Issues Manager Locked Bag 104 Flinders Lane VIC 8009 Ph: 61 3 9694 3897 Email: hdornom@dairyaustralia.com.au

Equestrian Australia Ltd Mr Grant Baldock Chief Executive Officer PO Box 673 Sydney Markets NSW 2129 Ph: 61 2 8762 7777 Email: grant.baldock@equestrian.org.au

Goat Industry Council of Australia Inc Mr Glenn Telford President Telco MS 960 Roma QLD 4455 Ph: 61 7 4623 3791 Email: telco.farm@bigpond.com

Harness Racing Australia Inc Mr Andrew Kelly Chief Executive Officer Level 1, 400 Epsom Road Flemington VIC 3031 Ph: 61 3 9227 3000 Email: akelly@hra.harness.org.au

Meat & Livestock Australia Mr Scott Hansen Managing Director Locked Bag 991 North Sydney NSW 2059 Ph: 61 2 9463 9232 Email: managingdirector@mla.com.au

National Aquaculture Council Inc Mr Pheroze Jungalwalla PO Box 878 Sandy Bay TAS 7006 Ph: 61 3 6214 0550 Email: pherozej@gmail.com

Seafood Services Australia Mr Ted Loveday Managing Director PO Box 2188 Ascot QLD 4007 Ph: 61 1 1300 130 321 Email: tedloveday@seafoodservices.com.au

Sheepmeat Council of Australia Inc Mr Ron Cullen Chief Executive Officer PO Box E10 Kingston ACT 2604 Ph: 61 2 6269 5610 Email: roncullen@sheepmeatcouncil.com.au

WoolProducers Australia Limited Ms Jane Brownbill Chief Executive Officer PO Box E10 Kingston ACT 2604 Ph: 61 2 4836 7369 Email: jbrownbill@nff.org.au

Zoo and Aquarium Association Inc Mr Martin Phillips Executive Director PO Box 20 Mosman NSW 2088 Ph: 61 2 9978 4773 Email: martin@zooaquarium.org.au

� Animal�health�contacts�in�Australia 157

3Appendix

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

158 Animal health in Australia 2012

Investigations of emergency animal diseasesTable A3.1 reports investigations during 2012 of suspect emergency animal diseases that are on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals. This table excludes disease investigations recorded elsewhere in individual programs, such as equine infectious anaemia.

Table A3 1 Investigations of suspect emergency animal diseases listed on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals, 2012

Disease Species State Month Response codea Finding

African horse sickness Horse NT Mar 3 Negative

Horse NT Dec 3 Negative

American foulbrood (Paenibacillus larvae)

Bees NSW Oct 2 Negative

Bees NSW Nov 2 Negative

European honey bee NSW Jun 2 Positive

European honey bee Qld Jan 2 Negative

European honey bee Qld Jan 2 Positive (7 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Feb 2 Negative

European honey bee Qld Feb 2 Positive (9 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Mar 2 Positive (2 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Apr 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Apr 2 Positive (2 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld May 2 Negative

European honey bee Qld May 2 Positive (5 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Jun 2 Positive

European honey bee Qld Jul 2 Positive (2 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Aug 2 Negative (4 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Aug 2 Positive (9 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Sep 2 Negative

Investigations of emergency animal diseases 159

Table A3 1 Investigations of suspect emergency animal diseases listed on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals, 2012

Disease Species State Month Response codea Finding

American foulbrood (Paenibacillus larvae) (continued)

European honey bee Qld Sep 2 Positive (9 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Oct 2 Negative (4 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Oct 2 Positive (5 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Nov 2 Positive (6 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Dec 2 Negative

European honey bee Qld Dec 2 Positive (3 unrelated investigations)

Australian bat lyssavirus Dog NSW Sep 3 Negative

Dog NT Nov 3 Negative

Dog Qld Aug 2 Negative

Pig SA Jul 3 Negative

Babesiosis in tick-free areas Cattle NSW May 2 Positive

Cattle NSW Jun 2 Positive

Cattle NSW Jul 2 Negative

Cattle NSW Sep 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Bluetongue — clinical diseaseb

Cattle NSW Feb 2 Negative

Cattle NSW May 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Cattle SA Jul 3 Negative

Sheep NSW Feb 2 Negative

Sheep NSW May 2 Negative

Sheep NSW Aug 2 Negative

Brucellosis (B  abortus, B  suis, B  canis and B  melitensis)

Dog ACT Jul 2 Negative

Dog NSW Jul 2 Negative

Dog NSW Jul 2 Negative (2 related investigations)

Dog NSW Jul 2 Positivec

Dog Qld Aug 2 Negative

Dog Qld Aug 2 Positivec

Goat SA Oct 2 Negative

Horse Qld Dec 2 Negative

Horse SA Feb 2 Negative

Pig NSW Jul 2 Negative

Pig Qld Oct 2 Positived

Pig Qld Nov 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Pig Qld Dec 2 Negative (3 unrelated investigations)

Classical swine fever Pig Vic Oct 3 Negative

Contagious agalactia Goat Qld Jul 2 Negative

160 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A3 1 Investigations of suspect emergency animal diseases listed on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals, 2012

Disease Species State Month Response codea Finding

Contagious bovine pleuropneumonia

Cattle NT Aug 3 Negative

Contagious equine metritis Horse NSW Jan 2 Negative

Enzootic bovine leucosis Cattle Tas Oct 2 Negative

Equine influenza Horse NSW Jan 2 Negative

Horse NSW Mar 2 Negative

Horse NSW Apr 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Horse NSW May 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Horse NSW Jun 2 Negative

Horse NSW Aug 2 Negative

Horse NT Jan 3 Negative

Horse Qld Jul 2 Negative

Horse Qld Nov 2 Negative (2 related investigations)

Horse SA Nov 3 Negative

Horse SA Dec 3 Negative

Horse Vic Feb 2 Negative (3 unrelated investigations)

Equine piroplasmosis (Babesia equi, B  caballi and Theileria equi)

Horse NT Dec 2 Negative

European foulbrood (Melissococcus pluton)

European honey bee Qld Jan 2 Negative

European honey bee Qld Jan 2 Positive (2 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Mar 2 Positive (2 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Apr 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld May 2 Positive

European honey bee Qld May 2 Negative

European honey bee Qld Aug 2 Negative (4 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Aug 2 Positive (2 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Sep 2 Positive (4 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Sep 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Oct 2 Negative (4 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Oct 2 Positive (3 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Qld Nov 2 Negative

European honey bee Qld Nov 2 Positive

European honey bee Qld Dec 2 Negative (3 unrelated investigations)

Investigations of emergency animal diseases 161

Table A3 1 Investigations of suspect emergency animal diseases listed on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals, 2012

Disease Species State Month Response codea Finding

Foot-and-mouth disease Cattle NSW Feb 3 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Cattle SA Jul 3 Negative

Cattle WA Jun 3 Negative

Cattle WA Dec 3 Negative

Haemorrhagic septicaemia Cattle Tas Dec 2 Negative

Hendra virus infection Alpaca WA Apr 3 Negative

Cat Qld Jan 5 Negative (2 related investigations)

Cat Qld Jun 5 Negative (2 related investigations)

Cat Qld May 5 Negative

Dog NSW Nov 2 Negative

Dog NT Nov 2 Negative

Dog Qld Jan 5 Negative (6 investigations)

Dog Qld May 5 Negative (2 related investigations)

Dog Qld Jun 5 Negative (4 related investigations)

Dog Qld Jul 5 Negative (5 related investigations)

Dog Qld Aug 5 Negative (5 related investigations)

Dog Qld Sep 5 Negative (3 related investigations)

Dog Qld Nov 5 Negative (3 related investigations)

Donkey Qld Aug 2 Negative

Donkey Qld Oct 2 Negative

Horse ACT Jul 2 Negative

Horse NSW Jan 2 Negative

Horse NSW Apr 2 Negative

Horse NSW May 2 Negative

Horse NSW Jun 2 Negative (3 unrelated investigations)

Horse NSW Jul 2 Negative (21 investigations)

Horse NSW Aug 2 Negative (23 investigations)

Horse NSW Sep 2 Negative (10 investigations)

Horse NSW Nov 2 Negative

Horse NSW Dec 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Horse NT Jan 3 Negative

Horse NT Mar 3 Negative

Horse NT Apr 2 Negative (3 related investigations)

Horse NT Jun 3 Negative

Horse NT Jul 3 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Horse NT Oct 2 Negative (2 related investigations)

Horse NT Nov 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Horse NT Dec 3 Negative

Horse Qld Jan 2 Negative (32 investigations)

162 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A3 1 Investigations of suspect emergency animal diseases listed on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals, 2012

Disease Species State Month Response codea Finding

Hendra virus infection (continued)

Horse Qld Jan 5 Negative (4 related investigations)

Horse Qld Jan 5 Positive

Horse Qld Feb 2 Negative (25 investigations)

Horse Qld Feb 5 Negative (4 related investigations)

Horse Qld Mar 2 Negative (25 investigations)

Horse Qld Apr 2 Negative (25 investigations)

Horse Qld May 2 Negative (27 investigations)

Horse Qld May 3 Negative (8 investigations)

Horse Qld May 5 Negative

Horse Qld May 5 Positive (2 related investigations)

Horse Qld Jun 2 Negative (57 investigations)

Horse Qld Jun 5 Negative (8 related investigations)

Horse Qld Jun 5 Positive (3 related investigations)

Horse Qld Jul 2 Negative (47 investigations)

Horse Qld Jul 5 Negative (13 related investigations)

Horse Qld Jul 5 Positive

Horse Qld Jul 5 Positive (2 related investigations)

Horse Qld Aug 2 Negative (51 investigations)

Horse Qld Aug 5 Negative (5 related investigations)

Horse Qld Sep 2 Negative (37 investigations)

Horse Qld Sep 5 Negative (3 related investigations)

Horse Qld Sep 5 Positive

Horse Qld Oct 2 Negative (30 investigations)

Horse Qld Oct 5 Negative

Horse Qld Nov 2 Negative (2 related investigations)

Horse Qld Nov 2 Negative (46 investigations)

Horse Qld Nov 5 Negative (2 related investigations)

Horse Qld Nov 5 Positive

Horse Qld Dec 2 Negative (18 investigations)

Horse Qld Dec 5 Negative

Horse SA Feb 3 Negative

Horse SA Mar 3 Negative

Horse SA May 3 Negative

Horse SA Jun 3 Negative (3 unrelated investigations)

Horse SA Oct 3 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Horse SA Nov 3 Negative

Horse Vic Feb 3 Negative (5 unrelated investigations)

Horse Vic Mar 3 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Horse Vic Jun 3 Negative

Investigations of emergency animal diseases 163

Table A3 1 Investigations of suspect emergency animal diseases listed on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals, 2012

Disease Species State Month Response codea Finding

Hendra virus infection (continued)

Horse Vic Sep 3 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Horse Vic Oct 3 Negative

Horse Vic Nov 3 Negative

Horse WA Jan 3 Negative (3 unrelated investigations)

Horse WA Feb 3 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Horse WA Mar 3 Negative

Horse WA Apr 3 Negative (3 unrelated investigations)

Horse WA May 3 Negative

Horse WA Jul 3 Negative

Horse WA Aug 3 Negative

Pig SA Jul 3 Negative

Leishmaniasis of any species

Dog Qld Dec 3 Positivee

Dog WA Apr 3 Negative

Lumpy skin disease Cattle NT Oct 3 Negative

Porcine enterovirus encephalomyelitis (Teschen)

Pig Tas Nov 2 Negative

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome

Pig WA Apr 3 Negative

Post-weaning multisystemic wasting syndrome

Pig SA Apr 2 Negative

Pullorum disease (Salmonella pullorum)

Chicken SA Apr 2 Negative

Chicken SA May 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Rabies Cat WA Apr 3 Negative

Cat WA Aug 3 Negative

Dog Qld May 3 Negative

Salmonella enteritidis infection in poultry

Turkey Qld Sep 2 Negative

Screw-worm fly — Old World (Chrysomya bezziana)

Cattle NT Sep 2 Negative

Surra (Trypanosoma evansi) Goat NT Dec 3 Negative

Horse NT Dec 3 Negative

Swine influenzaf Pig Qld Aug 5 Negative (4 related investigations)

Pig Qld Sep 2 Negative

Pig Qld Sep 5 Negative

Pig Tas Aug 3 Negative

Pig WA Jul 2 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Pig WA Jul 3 Negative

Pig WA Aug 3 Negative

164 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A3 1 Investigations of suspect emergency animal diseases listed on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals, 2012

Disease Species State Month Response codea Finding

Swine influenzaf

(continued)Pig WA Sep 3 Negative

Pig WA Oct 2 Negative

Trichinellosis Cat Qld Jul 2 Negative

Dog Qld Jul 2 Negative

Pig NT Oct 2 Negative

Tuberculosis (Mycobacterium bovis)g

Cattle NSW Jan 2 Negative (4 granulomas examined)

Cattle NSW Apr 2 Negative (4 granulomas examined)

Cattle NSW Jul 2 Negative (3 granulomas examined)

Cattle NSW Oct 2 Negative (1 granuloma examined)

Cattle NT Apr 2 Negative (1 granuloma examined)

Cattle Qld Jan 2 Negative (10 granulomas examined)

Cattle Qld Apr 2 Negative (7 granulomas examined)

Cattle Qld Jul 2 Negative (7 granulomas examined)

Cattle Qld Sep 2 Negative

Cattle Qld Oct 2 Negative (13 granulomas examined)

Cattle SA Jan 2 Negative (5 granulomas examined)

Cattle SA Apr 2 Negative (2 granulomas examined)

Cattle Tas Apr 2 Negative (1 granuloma examined)

Cattle Vic Jan 2 Negative (18 granulomas examined)

Cattle Vic Apr 2 Negative (9 granulomas examined)

Cattle Vic Jul 2 Negative (9 granulomas examined)

Cattle WA Jun 3 Negative

Cattle WA Oct 2 Negative (1 granuloma examined)

Varroosis (Varroa destructor) Bees Vic Jul 2 Negative

Bees Vic Sep 2 Negative

Bees Vic Oct 2 Negative

Bees Vic Nov 2 Negative

Bees Vic Dec 2 Negative (3 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Vic Jan 2 Negative (6 unrelated investigations)

European honey bee Vic Feb 2 Negative

Vesicular stomatitis Cattle NSW Feb 3 Negative (2 unrelated investigations)

Cattle SA Jul 3 Negative

Investigations of emergency animal diseases 165

Table A3 1 Investigations of suspect emergency animal diseases listed on Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial Animals, 2012

Disease Species State Month Response codea Finding

West Nile virus infection — clinical

Birds SA Jan 3 Negative

Birds SA Aug 3 Negative

Chicken SA Aug 3 Negative

Ducks SA May 3 Negative

Horse NT Dec 3 Negative

Horse SA Aug 3 Negative

Horse SA Oct 3 NegativeNSW = New South Wales; NT = Northern Territory; Qld = Queensland; SA = South Australia; Tas = Tasmania; Vic = Victoria; WA = Western Australia

a Key to highest level of response:

1 Field investigation by government officer

2 Investigation by state or territory government veterinary laboratory

3 Specimens sent to the CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory (or CSIRO Entomology)

4 Specimens sent to reference laboratories overseas

5 Regulatory action taken (quarantine or police)

6 Alert or standby

7 Eradication

b For additional negative monitoring data, see the National Arbovirus Monitoring Program: www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/disease-surveillance/national-arbovirus-monitoring-program

c Suspected B  suis in pig-hunting dogs

d Sample taken from a feral pig and tested positive to B  suis using a rose bengal plate test and serum agglutination. B  suis is considered endemic in feral pigs in north-eastern Australia

e Imported dog

f For more information on combination of human-origin viruses, including genes from the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus, see Section 4.6.2

g Data includes suspect disease investigations and numbers of suspect granulomas examined

Note: Anthrax investigations are reported in a separate project (see Section 2.4.2), as are investigations for avian influenza (Section 4.5.1) and Newcastle disease (Section 2.4.9). Wild bird surveillance is discussed in Section 3.4.

166 Animal health in Australia 2012

Animal Health Australia

Investigations of emergency animal diseases 167

4Appendix

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

168 Animal health in Australia 2012

Research projects in livestock healthTables A4.1–A4.17 list some of the research projects in livestock health undertaken during 2012 by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (through the Australian Animal Health Laboratory and Biosecurity Flagship), cooperative research centres, Australia’s veterinary schools, and industry-based research and development corporations. Further information on research and development activities by these organisations is provided in Chapter 10.

Table A4 1 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory and Biosecurity Flagship animal health research projects

Project Granting body/collaborator

Development of necrotic enteritis vaccines Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Development of peptides to control Campylobacter jejuni Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Campylobacter vaccine Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Gut microbes in poultry Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Diagnostics for Campylobacter Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Development of interferon lambda as an in ovo vaccine adjuvant

Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Recombinant viruses Deakin University

Infectious bursal disease virus vaccines and surveillance Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Development of a vaccine for bovine ephemeral fever Pfizer

Development of a vaccine for Hendra virus Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Emerging infectious diseases: development of novel antiviral treatments for henipavirus infections

National Institutes of Health (United States)

Emerging infectious diseases: optimisation of novel henipavirus vaccines

National Institutes of Health (United States)

Control of sex determination in poultry Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Development of avian influenza-resistant poultry Malta Advanced Technologies (Germany)

Development and production of immunological reagents and tests for emerging infectious diseases using recombinant antibody technology

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Australian Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre for Emerging Infectious Disease

Research projects in livestock health 169

Table A4 1 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory and Biosecurity Flagship animal health research projects

Project Granting body/collaborator

Improving diagnostic capability for henipavirus infections Australian Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre for Emerging Infectious Disease; National Institutes of Health (United States); Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Development of molecular diagnostic tests for rapid identification and differentiation of important poultry viruses (infectious bursal disease virus, Newcastle disease virus, avian influenza)

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Evaluation of rapid molecular detection and characterisation systems for risk evaluation of unknown viruses isolated in Australia

Defence Science and Technology Organisation, Australian Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre for Emerging Infectious Disease

Pathogenicity of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) in pigs

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Australian influenza viruses Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; Australian Agency for International Development; National Health and Medical Research Council

Emerging bat viruses Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Research Council

Highly pathogenic avian influenza in ducks in Indonesia and Vietnam

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Koi herpesvirus as a potential biological control agent Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre

Pathogenesis of highly pathogenic avian influenza National Institutes of Health (United States)

Mycobacterium paratuberculosis as potential zoonotic pathogen with food-safety concerns

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (Office of Chief Executive), Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Development of quality-assured bioreagents for molecular diagnosis of viral and bacterial pathogens, and for research purposes

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation; Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Novel, based on protein-array, diagnostic test for capripox Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Meat & Livestock Australia

Hendra virus micro-ribonucleic acid (miRNA) detection for early diagnosis of infection

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, National Health and Medical Research Council

Development of modified eggs and cell lines for enhanced production of influenza vaccines

National Institutes of Health (United States), University of Georgia (United States)

Assessment of the bluetongue virus vector potential of selected Culicoides species in southern Australia

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Meat & Livestock Australia

Improving the management of Hendra virus infection in humans by optimisation of post-exposure therapy strategies

National Health and Medical Research Council

Understanding pathogenicity and immunity in an encephalitic mouse model of Hendra virus infection

National Health and Medical Research Council, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Deakin University

Vaccine efficacy against Hendra virus infection of horses Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Pfizer, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (United States), Intergovernmental Hendra Virus Taskforce

Transmission and risk of Hendra virus infection of dogs Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Intergovernmental Hendra Virus Taskforce

170 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 1 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Australian Animal Health Laboratory and Biosecurity Flagship animal health research projects

Project Granting body/collaborator

Novel vaccination strategies against influenza virus infections including prepandemic preparedness

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, University of Queensland, Commonwealth Serum Laboratories Limited

Novel post-exposure therapeutics against influenza virus infections

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, University of Melbourne, Immuron

Table A4 2 Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Genetic improvement of parasite resistance and thermoregulation

Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies (through Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation), Animal Genetics and Breeding Unit (a joint venture between the University of New England and New South Wales Department of Primary Industries), Victorian Department of Primary Industries, United States Department of Agriculture — Agricultural Research Services

Novel solutions to improve tick resistance of cattle (development of a vaccine to control cattle ticks)

Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies (through Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry), Murdoch University, University of Queensland, United States Department of Agriculture — Agricultural Research Services, Embrapa — the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation

Objective measures of cattle welfare Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies (through Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation); Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; Victorian Department of Primary Industries; Meat & Livestock Australia

Gene discovery for postpartum reconception and age at puberty

Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies through Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation; Animal Genetics and Breeding Unit (a joint venture between the University of New England and New South Wales Department of Primary Industries); Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; Victorian Department of Primary Industries; United States Department of Agriculture — Agricultural Research Services; New Mexico State University (United States); Meat & Livestock Australia

Male indicator traits to improve female reproductive performance

Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies (through Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Animal Genetics and Breeding Unit (a joint venture between the University of New England and New South Wales Department of Primary Industries), University of Queensland, Meat & Livestock Australia, New Mexico State University (United States)

Feeding and management strategies to increase dietary energy captured and reduce methane emissions from cattle

Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies (through Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation); Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; New South Wales Department of Primary Industries; Ohio State University (United States); Beef + Lamb New Zealand (through its Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Consortium); Meat & Livestock Australia

Research projects in livestock health 171

Table A4 3 Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork animal health research projects

Project Lead organisation

Validation of a data collection protocol on Australian pig farms Australian Pork Limited

Real-time detection of airborne pathogens in the piggery Melbourne University

Quantifying variation in environments within and across herds

Australian Genetics and Breeding Unit

Development of economic methodology to incorporate robustness in pig breeding programs

Australian Genetics and Breeding Unit

Strategies to quantitatively measure and reduce the load of Lawsonia in commercial herds

New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

Evaluating the efficacy of a live Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (APP) vaccine with and without bacterin vaccines

Chris Richards and Associates

Assessment of the efficacy and safety of a live, attenuated, oral Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae vaccine that can be administered to pigs via the drinking water and evaluation of the impact of erysipelas on morbidity, mortality, growth rates and feed-conversion efficiency through a large-scale field study comparing the outcomes in vaccinated and non-vaccinated pigs

Pfizer

Use of plant-derived compounds to condition piglet intake at weaning and reduce post-weaning use of therapeutics

University of Queensland

Bacteriophage-displayed peptides for the control of pathogens in swine

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Comparing the mucosal and systemic immune response after APP-alive vaccination with natural challenge

New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

Investigation of oral rennin (chymosin) supplementation as a farm-level protocol to improve the passive transfer of immunity in neonatal piglets

University of Adelaide

Evaluation of diagnostic tests to detect Clostridium difficile in piglets

University of Western Australia

Estimation of genetic parameters for immune competence and other physiological-priority traits for use in selection of disease resilience

Australian Genetics and Breeding Unit

Passive immunisation for oedema disease Chris Richards and Associates

Reducing the risk of Escherichia coli by establishing a fibre recommendation after weaning

Murdoch University

A comprehensive risk factor analysis of E  coli disease in the piggery environment

University of Sydney

Reducing sucker mortality through use of a novel feed supplement

Rivalea Australia

Antibiotic sensitivity of Haemophilus parasuis plus Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae and other respiratory pathogens

University of Queensland

Dietary manipulation of inflammatory cascade to minimise the impact of inflammation on production and health traits in weaner pigs experimentally infected with an enterotoxigenic strain of E  coli

Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia

Evaluation of oral fluid samples for herd health monitoring of pathogens and the immune response in pigs

New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

Development and validation of assays to measure gut health in order to identify risk factors for E  coli disease in weaner pigs

New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

Use of bacteriophage to prevent and treat enterotoxigenic E  coli (ETEC) infections in pigs

University of South Australia

172 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 4 Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation animal health research projects

Project Research institute

ParaBoss parasite communication coordination program Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia; University of New England; New South Wales Department of Primary Industries; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

WormBoss website Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia; New South Wales Department of Primary Industries; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; University of New England; South Australian Research and Development Institute; University of Tasmania

FlyBoss website New South Wales Department of Primary Industries; University of Tasmania; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia

Commercialisation of the worm-control program and supporting products for the summer rainfall region of eastern Australia

University of New England; New South Wales Department of Primary Industries; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

‘Managing Flystrike’ workshops for sheep producers New South Wales Department of Primary Industries; Victorian Department of Primary Industries; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; University of Tasmania; Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia

Parasite genetics — Information Nucleus Flocks Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, South Australian Research and Development Institute, University of New England, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Table A4 5 Poultry Cooperative Research Centre animal health research projects

Project Lead research institute

Towards commercialisation of a next-generation infectious laryngotracheitis virus vaccine and differential enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

University of Melbourne

Vaccine against Clostridium perfringens to protect birds from necrotic enteritis

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Monash University

Vaccine strategies and interactions of attenuated coccidial vaccines

Bioproperties Pty Ltd

Rapid multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay for differentiating Pasteurella multocida serovars

Monash University

Characterising population structure and diversity of Australian Eimeria

Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Sex determination in poultry Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Application of herpes viral vectors for in ovo delivery Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

New approaches to assess welfare in free-range layers University of New England

Influence of betaine on embryo survival, hatchability and progeny performance

Feedworks

In ovo therapeutics to improve gut efficiency and health in the broiler chicken

University of Adelaide

Post-hatch feed restriction effects on broiler muscle growth Ohio State University (United States)

Research projects in livestock health 173

Table A4 5 Poultry Cooperative Research Centre animal health research projects

Project Lead research institute

Identification of microbial and gut-related factors driving bird performance

South Australian Research and Development Institute, University of New England, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Ohio State University (United States)

Net energy system for the Australian chicken meat industry University of New England

Maximising spent litter fertiliser returns through nutrient and carbon management

Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Identification of odorous compounds and waste stream mitigation

University of New South Wales

Methods to quantify and inactivate viruses in poultry litter University of New England

Small molecule inhibitors as anti-Campylobacter jejuni agents Ohio State University (United States)

Vaccine to reduce Campylobacter colonisation in meat chickens

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Improving the efficacy and safety of egg washing South Australian Research and Development Institute

Eggshell quality and risks of foodborne pathogens University of New England

Testing a novel adjuvant to improve immune responses to Salmonella vaccination

University of Melbourne

Long-term protection against Salmonella Typhimurium Bioproperties Pty Ltd

Development of a temperature-sensitive Mycoplasma gallisepticum vaccine for use in turkeys

Bioproperties Pty Ltd

Riemerella anatipestifer diagnostics University of Queensland

Development of interferon lambda as an adjuvant and immune enhancer for in ovo use

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Development and extension of industry best practice for on-farm euthanasia of spent layer hens

Australian Egg Corporation Ltd

A new test for the measure of poultry welfare Deakin University

Improving the performance of free-range poultry production University of Sydney

Replacing supplemental oil with full-fat canola seed in broiler diets

University of New England

Use of novel protein sources and improved starter feed formulation for broiler chicks

University of New England

Odour measurement and impact from spent hen composting

FSA Consulting

Adding value by sustainable waste processing Active Research Pty Ltd

Epidemiology of Salmonella on layer farms University of Adelaide

Table A4 6 Charles Sturt University — School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Pathogenesis of avian circovirus Australian Research Council Discovery Grants

Pathogens in migrating pigeons Wildlife Exotic Disease Preparedness Program (Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry)

Improving dairy production in Pakistan through improved extension services

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Strengthening dairy value chains in Pakistan through improved farm management

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Development of an electrode assembly for the stimulation of a transplanted innervated smooth muscle sphincter

Australian Research Council

The development of a remote calf-alert device for use in northern Australia

Meat & Livestock Australia

174 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 6 Charles Sturt University — School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Assessment and alleviation of aversive stimuli in pigs Australian Pork Limited

Exposure assessment of MAP Meat & Livestock Australia

Financial impact of ovine Johne’s disease (OJD) on the processing sector

Meat & Livestock Australia

Molecular identification of Taenia — barcoding tapeworms of foxes

EH Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation

Intestinal parasites of rural and peri-rural dogs in eastern Australia

Private funding

Sheep measles in New South Wales, Western Australia and Tasmania

Meat & Livestock Australia

Lifting the limits — effects of internal parasites on prime lamb production

Meat & Livestock Australia

Detection and differentiation of Salmonella species using polymerase chain reaction high-resolution melting (PCR-HRM)

Charles Sturt University

Assessing emotions in sheep Australian Animal Welfare Strategy

Live export training programs Meat & Livestock Australia

Perennial rye grass toxicosis — prevention and treatment Meat & Livestock Australia

Calf scours survey in beef herds Private funding

E coli colonisation and shedding in cattle Meat & Livestock Australia

EverGraze — value of perennials for livestock systems in the high-rainfall zone

Cooperative Research Centre for Future Farm Industries

Efficient integration and utilisation of crops in sheep grazing systems

Meat & Livestock Australia

Role of omega fatty acids in the reproduction of sheep Meat & Livestock Australia

Toxic feedbase — identification, treatment and interventions to improve production and animal health and welfare in Australia

Meat & Livestock Australia

Effect of feeding frequency on glucose and insulin dynamics in the horse

Private funding

Effects of chronic sodium bicarbonate supplementation and diet composition on total plasma carbon dioxide concentrations in the horse

Private funding

Efficacy of phenylbutazone or meloxicam on artificially induced synovitis in the horse

Private funding

Effects of a selection of preparations on androgen production in thoroughbred geldings

Australian Racing Board

Determining forces generated using a padded whip and impacts on the horse

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Characterisation of smallholder livestock production in Australia

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Q fever: how common is it and how can we best prevent it? Research to inform vaccine policy for Australia and internationally

National Health and Medical Research Council

Neoplasia in cattle Meat & Livestock Australia

Liver fluke: improving disease control through understanding of parasite diversity, drug resistance and better diagnosis

Australian Research Council Linkage (partner Virbac Australia)

Research projects in livestock health 175

Table A4 7 Murdoch University — School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Developing qualitative behavioural assessment as an objective measure of pig welfare

Australian Pork Limited

Pink-eye in feedlot sheep Meat & Livestock Australia

Beef Cooperative Research Centre programs 1–6 Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies

Determining the impact of protozoan pathogens and strongyle worms on prime lamb production

Australian Research Council

Development of high-throughput diagnostic and genotyping techniques for understanding the impact of enteric bacterial infections on scouring in sheep

Australian Research Council

Enhancing the iron content of pork to promote human health benefits

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Working towards a more accurate diagnosis of inflammatory airway disease in the horse

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Goat nutrient composition Meat & Livestock Australia

Harmonising protocols for molecular and epidemiological surveillance of influenza viruses

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Improving the biological efficiency and cost effectiveness of ractopamine

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Interaction of Cryptosporidium lifecycle stages with aquatic biofilm communities

Australian Research Council

Management of pig-associated zoonoses in Lao People’s Democratic Republic

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Mortality in live cattle exports Meat & Livestock Australia

New technology for avian influenza surveillance Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Quantifying feral pig abundance and efficacy of control strategies in south-west Western Australia

Water Corporation — Western Australia

Selection of feed wheat and/or barley varieties for the Australian pig industry

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Strategies to reduce inanition in sheep: backgrounding and feedlotting strategies to address inanition in sheep

Meat & Livestock Australia

Subprograms: Next-generation meat quality, Improvement of lean meat yield technical project, and Completion of meat science program

Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation

Understanding factors affecting the iron content of pork Australian Pork Limited

Immunonutrition: a novel concept to overcome gastrointestinal tract mucosal damage after weaning in pigs

Australian Research Council Linkage

Development of novel vaccines and diagnostic tests for swine dysentery

Spirogene Pty Ltd

Table A4 8 University of Adelaide — School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences animal health research projects

Project Funding body

Characterisation of a new class of antimicrobial agent for multidrug-resistant infections

Australian Research Council

Feeding strategies to reduce ‘frustration’ and aggression amongst the group housed gilts and sows

Australian Pork Limited

People development program: Aquatic animal health training scheme

Fisheries Research and Development Corporation

176 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 8 University of Adelaide — School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences animal health research projects

Project Funding body

Surveillance tools and strategies for improved control, monitoring and eradication of avian influenza in Indonesia

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Besnoitiosis in Australian wildlife and significance to cattle Meat & Livestock Australia

Measures of behavioural reactivity and their relationships with production traits in sheep

Meat & Livestock Australia

A slow-release capsule for reducing winter scours in sheep — Stage 1: Proof of concept

Meat & Livestock Australia

Public health significance of layer farm or egg-associated Salmonella isolates

Australian Egg Corporation

Confinement-free lactation housing for sows: towards maximising expression of natural behaviours and maintaining reproduction

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Convenia minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) study — Porphyromonas and Prevotella isolates from cases of periodontal disease in dogs and cats

Pfizer Australia

Antimicrobial activity of new pharmacological agents against Staphylococci

Pharmagold

Provision of veterinary services Royal Agricultural & Horticultural Society of South Australia

Characterisation of a new class of antimicrobial agent for multidrug-resistant infections

Neoculi Pty Ltd

Functional and evolutionary physiology of paracellular absorption in flying and nonflying eutherian mammals

National Science Foundation (United States)

Mammary cancer and activation of transportable elements United States Army

Biomedical infrared technologies, solutions and services for assessment of immunity and immunoglobulin-based therapeutic products

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

Investigation of nerve growth factor (NGF) antibody for the treatment of canine arthritis

NexVet Biopharma Pty Ltd

Investigating the causes of a newly emerging disease syndrome (alopecia, weight loss and mortality) in southern hairy-nosed wombats

Nature Foundation SA

Mark 2 — Characterisation and control of emerging, multidrug-resistance zoonotic pathogens in animals: A multi-centre study

Pfizer Australia

Thyroid gland structure and function in South Australian koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus)

Nature Foundation SA

Improving sow reproductive performance through dietary manipulation in late lactation

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Reducing stillbirth and pre-weaning mortality rates through better gestation feeding

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Determining the effects of season on timing of ovulation and luteal function

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Pre-farrowing prediction of litter size: towards improving sow metabolic status during the peripartum period

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Managing the sow to stimulate lactational ovulation Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Dietary ractopamine supplementation to improve the productivity of early parity sows

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Research projects in livestock health 177

Table A4 8 University of Adelaide — School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences animal health research projects

Project Funding body

Impact of temperature on sow productivity Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Novel strategies to enhance creep attractiveness and reduce piglet mortality

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Investigation of oral rennin (chymosin) supplementation as a farm-level protocol to improve the passive transfer of immunity in neonatal piglets

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Egg shell quality and risks of foodborne pathogens Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Epidemiology of Salmonella on layer farms Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Periweaning polyamine supplementation: Effects on intestinal function, growth of weaned piglets and feed conversion to slaughter

Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian Pork

Table A4 9 University of Melbourne — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Welfare of lambs in intensive finishing systems

Surveillance tools and strategies for improved control, monitoring and eradication of avian influenza in Indonesia

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Faecal and cytokine profile in dogs with inflammatory bowel disease before and after successful treatment

American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation

Epidemiology and pathology of chronic fluoride exposure in native Australian wildlife surrounding fluoride-emitting industry in Victoria

ANZ Charitable Trusts

Fatigue properties of equine metacarpal subchondral bone ANZ Trustees

Alphaherpesvirus recombination — safety implications for attenuated herpesvirus vaccines

Australian Research Council

Avoiding the immune response — lessons from ‘simple’ bacteria

Australian Research Council

Catchment sources of microorganisms: developing an integrated strategy for the sustained prevention of waterborne disease outbreaks in humans in Melbourne

Australian Research Council

Development of an attenuated vaccine to control the emerging bovine respiratory pathogen Mycoplasma bovis

Australian Research Council

Development of an electrode assembly for the stimulation of a transplanted innervated smooth muscle sphincter

Australian Research Council

Elucidating a key developmental switch in Haemonchus contortus using a massively parallel picolitre reactor sequencing-coupled genomic and bioinformatic platform

Australian Research Council

Elucidating structure and function of activation-associated secreted proteins (ASPs) in blood-feeding hookworms — toward new methods of control

Australian Research Council

Evaluating host–parasite interplay in individual tissues Australian Research Council

Harnessing the ‘omics’ revolution to investigate drug response and resistance mechanisms in Giardia duodenalis

Australian Research Council

Harnessing the genomics revolution — toward radically new approaches to control neglected parasites of paramount global importance

Australian Research Council

Investigation of the resilience of immune memory to manipulation by pathogens

Australian Research Council

178 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 9 University of Melbourne — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Mitogenomics using a massively parallel reactor platform — from barcoding to diagnostic tools for pathogens of major socioeconomic importance

Australian Research Council

Relationships between insulin resistance, diet and obesity in ponies and horses

Australian Research Council

Structural and functional investigations into a novel chemokine-binding protein encoded by evolutionarily diverse alphaherpesviruses

Australian Research Council

Understanding heat shock protein complex vaccines Australian Research Council

Understanding immune mechanisms induced by pulmonary vaccination

Australian Research Council

Real-time detection of airborne pathogens in the piggery Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Pork

Evaluating the drug carprofen for short and long-term pain management in adult and juvenile sheep

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Identification of an infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) quasispecies in the commercial IBV vaccine VicS — its effect on laying hens

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Review of disbudding and dehorning Dairy Australia

The performance and survival of cows in Australian dairy herds

Dairy Australia

A rural training scheme — upscaling veterinary capability through dairy practice-based research, knowledge transfer, and graduate training

Dairy Australia, Geoffrey Gardiner Foundation

Investigation into the presence and prevalence of Chlamydiaceae spp. in northern and southern populations of koalas (Phascolarctus cinereus) and identification of risk factors associated with infection

Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management

Development and validation of a qRT-PCR assay for the detection of feline calicivirus (FCV) in clinical samples

Feline Health Research Fund

Adding value to cattle hides through improved control strategies that reduce damage from Demodex (follicular mange mite) infestations

Hermon Slade Foundation

Feed choices: cattle preference for feedlot or pasture environments

Meat & Livestock Australia

Impact of bacteria and coccidia on scouring and productivity in sheep

Meat & Livestock Australia

Lifting the limits imposed by worms on sheep meat production

Meat & Livestock Australia

South Gippsland autumn setback syndrome — SGASS Meat & Livestock Australia

Catchment sources of waterborne pathogens: ensuring safe drinking water

National Health and Medical Research Council

Cellular contributions to PAR-2’s essential role in periodontal disease

National Health and Medical Research Council

Development of a new method to prevent hydatid disease being transmitted by animals

National Health and Medical Research Council

Development of practical vaccines to break the life-cycles of the parasites causing cysticercosis and hydatid disease

National Health and Medical Research Council

Discovering the function and structure of RIO kinases — toward new nematocides

National Health and Medical Research Council

Genomic insights into the biology of the carcinogenic blood fluke, Schistosoma haematobium: a first response to the wake-up call

National Health and Medical Research Council

Research projects in livestock health 179

Table A4 9 University of Melbourne — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Immunological prevention of cysticercosis and hydatid disease

National Health and Medical Research Council

Insertional mutations to identify intervention targets National Health and Medical Research Council

Investigating a new factor which protects against bacterial disease in the gastrointestinal tract

National Health and Medical Research Council

Preventing transmission of the parasites causing neurocysticercosis and hydatid disease

National Health and Medical Research Council

Targeting bcl-2 pathways in parasites National Health and Medical Research Council

Targeting small airways to overcome resistance to therapy in asthma

National Health and Medical Research Council

The relationship between blood vessel remodelling and inflammatory cells in chronic asthma

National Health and Medical Research Council

The role of a protease-activated receptor system in prostate cancer bone metastasis

National Health and Medical Research Council

Australian Poultry Biologicals Commercialisation Centre Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Towards commercialisation of a next-generation infectious laryngotracheitis virus (ILTV) vaccine and differential ELISA

Poultry Cooperative Research Centre

Characterisation of avian nephritis virus (ANV) in commercial poultry

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Efficacy of intravenous and aerosolised recombinant equine tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha for treating exercise-induced pulmonary haemorrhage (EIPH)

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Improving control of infectious laryngotracheitis virus in Australian broiler flocks

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Measurement of racetrack surface using instrumented horseshoes

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Parallel development of novel vaccine vectors (pilot study) Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Targeting blood cell activation and clotting dysfunction in equine endotoxaemia

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

What role does rotavirus play in equine diarrhoea in Australian horses?

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

New and emerging herpesviruses in Australian marsupials The Ian Potter Foundation

Predisposition to pasture-associated laminitis: Is exercise the answer?

The Laminitis Trust

Gene expression patterns correlated with infection in the canine uterus

University Of Melbourne

Multiplexed tandem polymerase chain reaction (MT-PCR) — a rapid, reliable and effective tool for assessing toxic ‘algal’ blooms in Victorian water supplies: aiding protection and preservation

Water Quality Research Australia Ltd

Table A4 10 University of Queensland — School of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Naturally occurring bacteriocins: a novel therapy for the treatment of multidrug-resistant E  coli urinary tract infections in dogs

Canine Research Foundation

Transformational genetic and breeding strategies to create a sustained and globally competitive Queensland tropical beef herd

Queensland Government Smart Futures Research Partnerships Program

Determining the normal profile of energy metabolism in equine lamellar tissue

Morris Animal Foundation

180 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 10 University of Queensland — School of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Cysticercus bovis — enhanced classification of suspect lesions identified at meat inspection

Meat & Livestock Australia

Lamellar energy failure in supporting limb laminitis Grayson-Jockey Club Research Foundation, Inc

The effect of atenolol on cardiac variability in cats with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Peter & Mary Ellen Stone Memorial Fund

Digital hypothermia in laminitis: timing and signalling Ohio State University (United States)

Further development of a urinary probiotic to outcompete emerging, highly virulent multi-drug resistant E  coli strains with zoonotic potential

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Equipping veterinary students to address pet overpopulation The Waltham Foundation

The development of a rapid throughput diagnostic test for tick-borne disease in Australian dogs

John and Mary Kibble Trust

A molecular diagnostic approach for rat lungworm disease in dogs and other animals in Australia

Peter & Mary Ellen Stone Memorial Fund

Canine-induced pluripotent stem cells as a resource for treating canine osteoarthritis

John and Mary Kibble Trust, Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Linking bone metabolic status to energy metabolism in cattle — transition cow study

Dairy Australia

Laminitis treatment by regional drug delivery to the horse’s foot

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Factors predicting relapse from diabetic remission in cats and establishing reference values for glucose tolerance tests in cats 8 years of age or older

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Vocalisations of chickens as measures of animal welfare Voiceless: the fund for animals

Developing a reliable deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) resource bank for identifying genetic factors associated with susceptibility of cats to diabetes

Feline Health Research Fund

Laminitis treatment by intraosseous delivery of drugs to the horse’s foot

The Laminitis Trust

Migratory movements and genetic effective population size of leopard sharks Steogstoma fasciatum on the Australian east coast

Sea World Research and Rescue Foundation Inc

Metabolomic profiling of cats at high risk of diabetes Nestle Purina PetCare Global Resources, Inc.

Exploring the role of canines as potential reservoir hosts for Rickettsia felis

Bayer HealthCare AG

Review of AH/2004/040: the epidemiology, pathogenesis and control of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in ducks in Indonesia and Vietnam

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Development of the first veterinary vaccine to provide broad cross-protective immunity against strategically important Australian flaviviruses

University of Queensland Collaboration and Industry Engagement Fund

Strategies to increase adoption of artificial insemination in northern Australian tropical beef genotype herds

Meat & Livestock Australia

Canine lymphosarcoma in Australia: a survey of characteristics, investigation of aetiology and establishment of a cell culture bank

John and Mary Kibble Trust

K88 E coli resistance genotyping UniQuest Pty Ltd

Viral gene expression profile in tissues of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV)-infected cats

John and Mary Kibble Trust

In vitro-derived mesenchymal cells as a therapeutic resource for treating osteoarthritis — a clinical trial

University of Queensland Collaboration and Industry Engagement Fund

Research projects in livestock health 181

Table A4 10 University of Queensland — School of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Development of a rabbit model for in utero infection with newly emerging Kunjin virus strain and studies of foetal pathology

University of Queensland Postdoctoral Research Fellowship

Adoption study: control of Newcastle disease and identification of major constraints in village chicken production systems in Myanmar

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Macrocyclic lactone resistance in Australian horses Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Increasing skeletal growth to enhance wet season compensatory liveweight gain

Meat & Livestock Australia

Utilising metabolomics to improve diagnosis and prognosis for diabetic feline patients

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Gene expression profiling in peripheral monocytes in cats with diabetes mellitus

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Using metabolomics to understand the metabolomic derangements associated with obesity in dogs

John and Mary Kibble Trust

Evaluation of 99m technetium-labelled immunoglobulin G (IgG) for scintigraphic imaging of infection in horses

Morris Animal Foundation

Building Vietnam’s food security capacity through advanced veterinary science programs

Australian Leadership Award Fellowships

VetTrain: a training program for animal health professionals, supporting animal birth control and anti-rabies (ABC-AR) programs

AusAID Public Sector Linkage Program

Efficacy of two prototype cattle tick vaccines against artificial infestations of Rhipicephalus microplus

Pfizer Animal Health

Go-Hens: a survey of cage egg producer intentions to freeing hens from cages

Humane Society International

Population studies of brumbies Forestry Plantations Queensland Pty Ltd

A pilot survey of vector-borne diseases in India Bayer Animal Health

Flea susceptibility monitoring program Bayer Animal Health

Dugong necropsy training Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority

Behavioural response study with Australian humpback whales and seismic airguns

E&P Sound and Marine Life

Northern Australian beef fertility project Cash Cow Meat & Livestock Australia; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Sex ratio and sterility for commercial animal production Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Establish an alternative option for the humane euthanasing of green turtles

Torres Strait Regional Authority

Sea turtle stranding and necropsy workshops Western Australian Department of Environment and Conservation

A quantitative test for feeding by the cat flea, Ctenocephalides felis

Bayer Animal Health

Retroviral invasion of the koala genome: prevalence, transmission and role in immunosuppressive disease

Australian Research Council Linkage, Australia Zoo

E coli cattle vaccine Smart Futures National and International Research Alliances Program

An integrated genomics approach to improve our understanding of the biology of genital campylobacteriosis in beef cattle

Australian Research Council; Pfizer Australia; Gribbles Pathology; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; Murdoch University

182 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 10 University of Queensland — School of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Improvement and sustainability of sweet potato–pig production systems to support livelihoods in highland Papua and West Papua, Indonesia

South Australian Research and Development Institute

Identification of regions of the canine genome which predispose to increased risk of haemangiosarcoma development

John and Mary Kibble Trust

Comparison of surgical and medical management of facial nerve paralysis associated with tick (Ixodes holocyclus) paralysis in dogs and cats

John and Mary Kibble Trust

Table A4 11 University of Sydney — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Veterinary public health and food safety at the University of Sydney

Meat & Livestock Australia

Advancing artificial insemination in camelids, particularly the alpaca

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

An immunological and immunogenetic approach to understand and to protect Tasmanian devils against devil facial tumour disease

Australian Research Council

Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of bacterial isolates from horses

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Surveys of ornamental fish for pathogens of quarantine significance

Fisheries Research and Development Corporation

Tools for investigation of the nodavirus (NNV) carrier state in marine, euryhaline and freshwater fish and control of NNV through integrated management

Fisheries Research and Development Corporation

Arc Centre for Structural and Functional Microbial Genomics — the role of Dichelobacter nodosus genes in pathogenesis of footrot in sheep

Australian Research Council

Assessment of the risks to animal biosecurity associated with small landholders

Australian Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre

Best-practice health and husbandry of cattle and buffalo in Lao People’s Democratic Republic

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Best-practice health and husbandry of cattle, Cambodia Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Bovine Johne’s disease — basic and applied research for improved diagnosis and prevention

Meat & Livestock Australia

Campylobacter jejuni through the food chain: from range through processing

United States Department of Agriculture

Can short interfering ribonucleic acids (siRNAs) be a new treatment for controlling feline coronavirus infections such as feline infectious peritonitis?

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Canine atopic dermatitis — genomic studies in Australian dogs

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Canine superficial pyoderma: should we be concerned about multidrug-resistant Staphylococcus species?

Canine Research Foundation

Characterisation of canine adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells for treatment of diseases and disorders in dogs

Canine Research Foundation

Collagenous matrix remodelling and strength of fatigued canine bone

AO Foundation

Research projects in livestock health 183

Table A4 11 University of Sydney — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Completing the sheep genome project: Australia’s contribution to a global collaboration

Australian Government Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education

A study to confirm the lactation performance and animal safety of dairy cows treated with a lactation enhancer

Eli Lilly Australia Pty Ltd

Control of nodaviral disease in tropical marine finfish hatcheries: enhanced biosecurity through the application of contemporary biotechnology, epidemiology and pathobiology

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Determinants for white spot disease outbreaks in Indonesian smallholder shrimp ponds — a pilot study of locality factors, white spot syndrome virus genotype distributions and pond factors

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Determining genetic correlates of feline infectious peritonitis susceptibility

Winn Feline Foundation (United States)

Development of genomic tools to predict the occurrence of osteochondrosis

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Development of Mycoplasma bovis molecular diagnostic tests and investigation of the incidence of Mycoplasma in eastern Australian dairy herds

Geoffrey Gardiner Dairy Foundation

Development of Salmonella inanition treatment strategies for the livestock export industry

Meat & Livestock Australia

Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) adenine methylase mutants of Salmonella Typhimurium as modified live vaccines in calves

United States Department of Agriculture

Epidemiological investigations into the 2007 equine influenza outbreak

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Epizootiology of a myxozoan parasite in the endangered green and golden bell frog

Australian Academy of Science

Establishment of a Moraxella bovis and Moraxella bovoculi DNA diagnostic test to monitor species and strain prevalence in response to vaccination

Schering-Plough Pty Ltd

Evaluation of a new diagnostic test and therapeutic monitoring tool for invasive aspergillosis in cats — serum galactomannan detection

Feline Health Research Fund

Evaluation of the effectiveness of Gudair™ vaccination for the control of ovine Johne’s disease in flocks vaccinating for at least five years

Meat & Livestock Australia

Evolution, disease and extinction — using ancient and modern DNA to investigate molecular evolution in the Tasmanian devil

Australian Research Council

Extended examination of changes in within-flock prevalence of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis shedding following vaccination with GudairTM for ovine Johne’s disease in flocks with high, medium and low initial prevalence

Meat & Livestock Australia

Fertility management of koalas, kangaroos and wallabies Australian Research Council

Genomic studies into canine mast cell tumours Morris Animal Foundation (United States)

Healthy dogs, healthy communities: evaluating the impact of new interdisciplinary interventions to enhance dog health and welfare in remote Indigenous communities

Australian Research Council

Host–parasite–environment interaction for cryptococcosis caused by Cryptococcus gatti in Australia

Hermon Slade Foundation

Identification of the gene for the IL-2 cytokine in the brushtail possum

Landcare Research New Zealand Limited

184 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 11 University of Sydney — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Improving the production efficiency, welfare and processing of commercial ducks

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Investigation into gastrointestinal absorption of xenobiotics by the koala

Hermon Slade Foundation

Investigation of the development of the immune system of brushtail possum pouch young

Winifred Scott Foundation

Investigations into the role of feline herpesvirus in the development of eosinophilic granuloma complex (EGC) in cats

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Investigations into the immunological memory of dogs vaccinated with commercial vaccines against canine parvovirus and canine distemper in Australia

Canine Research Foundation

Linking habitat fragmentation and disease: the major histocompatibility complex class II and its role in disease of the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus)

Hermon Slade Foundation

Livestock movement and managing disease in eastern Indonesia and eastern Australia

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

Magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of stifle pathology in naturally occurring cruciate ligament disease in dogs

Canine Research Foundation

Major histocompatibility complex (MHC) disease associations in the cat: the next leap forward

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Molecular methods for detection of calf scour pathogens Meat & Livestock Australia

Noninvasive assessment of stress in commercial housing systems

Australian Egg Corporation Ltd

Oncotic and haemostatic effects of a modified fluid gelatin in normal horses

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Ovine Johne’s disease — applications of basic research on enhanced diagnosis and prevention

Meat & Livestock Australia

Oxidative stress, ageing and cognitive dysfunction in dogs as an ecological animal model in Alzheimer disease research

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

Parasitology network Australian Research Council

Physiological and nutritional approaches to alleviate heat stress in broiler chickens

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Prevalence and impact of hookworm infection on Australian sea lion populations

Australian Marine Mammal Centre

Progression of changes in renal function in dogs recovering from acquired Fanconi-like syndrome

Provet NSW Pty Ltd

Protection against photoimmune suppression and skin cancer via oestrogen receptor signalling

Cancer Council New South Wales

Reducing antibiotic usage in pig herds: controlling Lawsonia intracellularis by vaccination, housing and hygiene

New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

Respiratory disease and biomarkers in the foal Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Retroviral invasion of the koala genome: prevalence, transmission and role in immunosuppressive disease

Australian Research Council

Revisiting the mulesing operation on sheep Australian Wool Innovation Limited

Risk assessment: animal diseases as they relate to food safety Meat & Livestock Australia

Salmonella control in commercial layer flocks Australian Egg Corporation Ltd

Research projects in livestock health 185

Table A4 11 University of Sydney — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Should Australian cats be vaccinated against feline leukaemia virus (FeLV)? A pilot study of FeLV prevalence using a new methodology

Feline Health Research Fund

Strategies for low-cost molecular screening of contagious mastitis pathogens

Geoffrey Gardiner Dairy Foundation

Studies of the epidemiology and risk factors involved in the pathogenesis of acorn calf disease in Australia

Meat & Livestock Australia

Susceptibility of previously untested Basin fish species to epizootic haematopoietic necrosis (EHN) virus, and the epidemiology of EHN virus in the wild

Australian Government

The Canine Biobank Project: an integrated genomics resource for the health and wellbeing of dogs in Australia

Canine Research Foundation

The genetics of resistance to devil facial tumour disease Australian Research Council

The role of MHC in immune evasion: insights from a contagious cancer

National Health and Medical Research Council

The role of pulpitis in the development of type II feline odontoclastic resorptive lesions

Morris Animal Foundation (United States)

The welfare of laying hens in cages Australian Egg Corporation Ltd

Topical and cryoanaethesia for livestock husbandry Australian Research Council

Understanding and mitigation of domestic pig and pest animal interactions

Australian Pork Ltd

Viral and endogenous retroviral detection and characterisation in crocodiles

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Vitamin D in Australian lean red meat Meat & Livestock Australia

What causes upper respiratory aspergillosis in cats? Identification of Neosartorya species implicated in an emerging clinical syndrome

Australian Companion Animal Health Foundation

What role does wildlife play in emergency disease? The case of the feral pig

Australian Research Council

Strengthening food security through family poultry and crop integration in eastern and southern Africa

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research/Research and Development Programs

Effects of rearing on inappropriate conflict behaviours that predispose cannibalism

Australian Egg Corporation Ltd

The role of the dietary omega 6:omega 3 ratio on the performance of grower/finisher pigs

Australian Pork Limited

Future Dairy 3 Dairy Australia

Investigation of the role of bovine mammary stem cells in the lactation cycle of dairy cows

Dairy Australia

Coxiella burnetii (Q fever): is this an important agent of disease in Australian dogs and reservoir for human infection?

Canine Research Foundation

Generation of ‘clinic ready’ canine-induced pluripotent stem cells for regenerative medicine

Canine Research Foundation

Primary immunodeficiency in Australian German shepherds Canine Research Foundation

Evaluation of the milk bioactive proteins Dairy Australia

Ovine Johne’s disease/bovine Johne’s disease (OJD/BJD): diagnostic, predictive and preventative tools for Johne’s disease in sheep and cattle

Meat and Livestock Australia Ltd

Egg incubation and broiler chicken leg weakness Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Valuable behavioural phenotypes in Australian farm dogs Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

186 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 11 University of Sydney — Faculty of Veterinary Science animal health research projects

Project Granting body

Evaluation of sodium bisulphite in sorghum-based broiler diets

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Dislocated calcium alimentation for broilers Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

The science of horse training: Implications for rider safety and horse welfare

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Steam-pelleting temperatures of sorghum-based broiler diets Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of bacterial isolates from horses

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Molecular characterisation of novel loci for orofacial clefting using canine models

University of California — Davis (United States)

Bioinformatics in support of the ovine genome sequence and assembly

Utah State University (United States)

Fighting disease on farms: how do vaccinations drive evolution of new pathogen strains?

University of Queensland

Disease spread between domestic cattle and feral pigs: improving emergency preparedness

Meat and Livestock Australia Ltd

E  coli O157 colonisation and shedding in cattle Meat and Livestock Australia Ltd

Table A4 12 Australian Egg Corporation Limited animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Dietary available phosphorus requirements of laying hens University of Queensland

Salmonella control in commercial layer flocks University of Sydney

Determine the cause and methods of control for spotty liver syndrome

Scolexia Pty Ltd

Noninvasive assessment of stress in commercial housing systems

University of Sydney

Field application of Rispens-specific quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test

University of New England

Effects of rearing on inappropriate conflict behaviours that predispose cannibalism

University of Sydney, University of Melbourne

Understanding the physiology of shell pigmentation and colour deterioration in laying hens

University of New England

Public health significance of layer farm or egg-associated Salmonella isolates

University of Adelaide

Nutrient-specific appetite as a driver for feather pecking in hens

University of Queensland

Optimising calcium formulation in modern laying hens University of Sydney

Free-range hen welfare: characterisation of ‘indoor’ and ‘outdoor’ hens and physical features in the range

University of Melbourne

On-farm euthanasia of spent hens Scolexia Pty Ltd

Table A4 13 Australian Wool Innovation Limited animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Aerial baiting for wild dogs New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

Breech flystrike genomics project Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Breeding for breech strike resistance Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Research projects in livestock health 187

Table A4 13 Australian Wool Innovation Limited animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Skin traction Phase 3 Cobbett Pty Ltd

Skin traction Phase 4 Cobbett Pty Ltd

Comparison of programs for the control of blowfly strike in Merino sheep in south-eastern Australia

University of Melbourne

Evergraze 2012–2014 (Future Farm Industries CRC) Future Farm Industries Cooperative Research Centre

Facilitating the strategic management of wild dogs in Australia

Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre

Grazing management for efficient and sustainable production

New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Charles Sturt University

Development and augmentation of poison baits Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre

Impact of bacteria and protozoa on scouring and productivity in sheep

Meat & Livestock Australia, Murdoch University

Mulesing alternative Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation — Livestock Industries

Lifetime ewe management and high-performance weaner training

Rural Industries Skill Training

New breech flystrike prevention technique Commercial partner

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) for sheep — analgesia for painful husbandry procedures

Commercial partner, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Pilot study alternative to surgical mulesing Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Queensland/Victoria/South Australia wild dog coordinators Department of Primary Industries and Regions South Australia, Victorian Department of Primary Industries, Agforce Queensland

Review visual scores guides BCS Agribusiness Solutions

Genetics and production farm systems Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation

Reproduction efficiency Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation

Improved parasite management Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation

Wool biology Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation

Information nucleus — design Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation

Information nucleus — operations Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation

Information nucleus — information Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation

Sheep genetics Meat & Livestock Australia

Strategic approach to integrated wild canid management for agricultural benefit

Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre

Think Tank — Breeding for flystrike resistance Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Towards the commercialisation of new environmentally friendly insecticides targeting sheep body louse and blowfly ecdysone receptors

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Weanersafe: liveweight targets, worms and rotational grazing in southern Queensland — Part 2

Meat & Livestock Australia; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

188 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 13 Australian Wool Innovation Limited animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Wild dog on-ground activities Mountain Maid Wild Dog Control Association Inc, Tambo Wild Dog Control Group, Blackall–Tambo Regional Council Wild Dog Control Group, Barcaldine Wild Dog Syndicate, Carnarvon Rangelands Biosecurity Association, Paroo Shire Wild Dog Advisory Committee, Winton Shire Council Wild Dog Management Committee, Meekatharra Rangelands Biosecurity Association Inc., Barnard River Wild Dog Control Association, South West NRM Ltd, Waroo Balonne Regional Landcare Inc., South Australian Arid Lands Natural Resources Management Board, Traprock Wool Association Inc., Maranoa Regional Council Wild Dog Management Advisory Group, Western Downs Regional Council, Ledknapper Wild Dog Action Group Inc., Murweh Wild Dog Advisory Group, Quilpie Shire, Barcoo Shire Council, Condamine Alliance, Baldy Nob Dingo Destruction Syndicate, Tenterfield Wild Dog Control Association, New England Livestock Health and Pest Authority, MudgeeMerriwa Wild Dog Steering Committee, Brindabella–Wee Jasper Wild Dog Working Group and Burrinjuck Wild Dog Working Group, Oberon Pest Animal Management Committee, Australian Capital Territory Wild Dog Action Group, Ravensthorpe Declared Species Group, Taralga Wild Dog Association, East Gilmore Cooperative Wild Dog Management Plan, Goobragandra Cooperative Wild Dog Management Plan, Hume Wild Dog Working Group plan, Upper Murray Dog Group plan and Working Plan for Control of Wild Dogs in the Tumbarumba area, Chilcotts Creek, Barnard River and Niangala Wild Dog Association, Talwood Feral Dog Control Group, Swifts Creek and Ensay Landcare Group, Hunter Valley Combined Wild Dog Association, Wise Creek and Talgarno Landcare Group, Acheron Creek Wild Dog Association, Hargraves/Hill End Wild Dog Action Group, Mid Coast Livestock Health and Pest Authority, Eastern Wheatbelt Biosecurity Group, Central Wheatbelt Declared Species Group, Benambra/Omeo Landcare Group, Dargo Landcare Group, Upper Gwydir Landcare Association, Gundamulda Pest Animal Association, Glenaladale Landcare Group, Deddick River Landcare Group

Wild dog skills training — Western Division New South Wales New South Wales Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services

Wild dog state extension planning activities Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, Granite Borders Landcare Committee Incorporated, South Australian Arid Lands Natural Resources Management Board

Wild dog trapper training Queensland growers Agforce Queensland

Woolgrower publication on tail length Joan Lloyd Consulting Pty Ltd

Table A4 14 Dairy Australia animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Animal diseases

InCalf, a national extension program for herd reproductive performance

Dairy Australia

Countdown Downunder: ‘Making it happen on farm’, extension program managing mastitis

Dairy Australia

BJD Aware, a Johne’s disease communications program Dairy Australia

Application of herd tests for Johne’s disease Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Research projects in livestock health 189

Table A4 14 Dairy Australia animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Assessment of calf-rearing strategies for Johne’s disease control

Dairy Australia, Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Calf health and diseases University of Melbourne

National program to confirm enzootic bovine leucosis free Australian dairy herd

Australian Dairy Industry Council; dairy processors; Australian Dairy Farmers; Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; state animal health authorities; Dairy Australia

Response to emergency animal diseases Dairy Australia, NE Tweddle

Biosecurity management on dairy farms Dairy Australia, JA Craven

Animal health, lameness and calf-rearing extension days Regional dairy programs (several)

Downer cow management University of Melbourne

Facial eczema monitoring Dairy Australia, J Malmo, S Little

Bovine viral diarrhoea management strategies Dairy Australia, R Shephard

Managing mycoplasma infections University of Sydney

Genetic improvement

Australian Dairy Herd Improvement Scheme Australian Dairy Herd Improvement Scheme

Farmer decision making for the selection of genetics in Australian dairy herds

University of Melbourne

Dairy Futures Cooperative Research Centre Dairy Futures Cooperative Research Centre, Victorian Department of Primary Industries, LaTrobe University, University of Sydney, Monash University, University of Melbourne, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Australian Dairy Herd Improvement Scheme

Dairy nutrition

Future Forages Dairy Australia

30:30 Feedbase Project University of Melbourne

20:12 Feedbase Project Tasmanian Institute of Agricultural Research

Forage Plu$ Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Greener Pastures Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia

South East Forage Innovation Dairy South Australia (regional dairy program)

Future Dairy, addressing future resource limitations through innovation in forages and automation

University of Sydney

Flexible Intensive Feeding Systems Dairy Australia

The Cool Cows Project Dairy Australia

Feed budgeting and grain-buying workshops Western Dairy (regional dairy program)

Animal handling and husbandry practices

Dairy Welfare We Care, an animal welfare communications program

Dairy Australia

Caring for bobby calves before and during transport — land transport standard

Dairy Australia

Cool Cows, managing heat stress Dairy Australia

Flood response coordination Dairy Australia, regional dairy programs

Disbudding extension Dairy Australia

Lameness, training and prevention Dairy Australia

Dairy calf supply chain trial Dairy Australia

Calf management on farm Dairy Australia

190 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 14 Dairy Australia animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Competencies for calf husbandry J McNeil

Humane euthanasia training Dairy Australia

National Centre of Dairy Education Australia National Centre of Dairy Education Australia

Management of downer cows University of Melbourne

Victorian Dairy Extension Centre Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Dairy Pathways — NSW Extension Service New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

Table A4 15 Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram) animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Development of a deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) microarray to identify markers of disease in pearl oysters (Pinctada maxima) and to assess overall oyster health

Department of Fisheries, Western Australia; Macquarie University

Investigation of Chlamydiales-like organisms in pearl oysters, Pinctada maxima

Department of Fisheries, Western Australia

Strategic planning, project management and adoption Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Tools for investigation of the nodavirus (NNV) carrier state in marine, euryhaline and freshwater fish and control of NNV through integrated management

University of Sydney

Characterisation of abalone herpes-like virus infections in abalone

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Victorian Department of Primary Industries, South Australian Research and Development Institute

Surveys of ornamental fish for pathogens of quarantine significance

University of Sydney

Investigation of an emerging bacterial disease in wild Queensland gropers, marine fish and stingrays with production of diagnostic and epidemiological tools to reduce the spread of disease to other states in Australia

Queensland Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation

Improved fish health management for integrated inland aquaculture through better management practices (BMPs)

Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Investigations into the genetic basis of resistance to infection of abalone by the abalone herpes-like virus

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Development of improved molecular diagnostic tests for Perkinsus olseni in Australian molluscs

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation; Department of Fisheries, Western Australia

Investigation of inclusions in Australian prawns Department of Fisheries, Western Australia

Understanding and planning for the potential impacts of OsHV-1 on the Australian Pacific oyster industry

RDS Partners Pty Ltd, Hobart, Tasmania

Disease risk assessment for abalone stock enhancement Western Australian Fishing Industry Council

Determining the susceptibility of Australian species of prawns to infectious myonecrosis

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Pacific oyster mortality syndrome (POMS) — understanding biotic and abiotic environmental and husbandry effects to reduce economic losses

University of Sydney

Aquatic Animal Health Technical Forum Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Pacific oyster mortality syndrome (POMS) — risk mitigation, epidemiology and OsHV-1 biology

University of Sydney

Koi herpesvirus (Cyprinid herpesvirus 3, CyHV-3): its potential as a biological control agent for carp in Australia

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Research projects in livestock health 191

Table A4 16 Meat & Livestock Australia animal health research projects

Project Research institute

In vitro larval assays for anthelmintic resistance in cattle nematodes

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Refinement and validation of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test to replace worm egg count and faecal culture larval differentiation

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Perennial ryegrass toxicity: increased understanding, awareness and potential mitigation strategies; identification of metabolites associated with severe cases of perennial ryegrass toxicosis

University of Melbourne, Reed Pasture Science

Efficacy of Gudair™ vaccination for control of ovine Johne’s disease in flocks

University of Sydney, Animal Health Australia

Bovine and ovine Johne’s disease — basic and applied research for improved diagnosis and prevention

University of Sydney, Animal Health Australia

Systematic literature review: Association between soil and clinical expression of Johne’s disease

AusVet Animal Health Service

Improvement of Australia’s foot-and-mouth disease preparedness and response capability

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Animal Health Australia

Anthrax: enhanced diagnostics, molecular epidemiology and disease ecology

Victoria Department of Primary Industries

Importance and epidemiology of mastitis in the Australian sheep flock

University of Melbourne

Selection of novel tick vaccine candidates using vaccination-challenge studies in cattle

Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

In vitro culture of buffalo fly and infections with Wolbachia University of Queensland; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Molecular methods for detection of calf scour pathogens University of Sydney

Impact of bacteria and coccidia on scouring and productivity in sheep

Murdoch University, South Australian Research and Development Institute, University of Melbourne

Bovine anaemia caused by Theileria orientalis: buparvaquone tissue residue depletion

New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Agrisearch Analytical

Sheep measles (Taenia ovis cysts) prevalence and predisposing factors

Charles Sturt University

Development of a commercial vaccine for Barber’s pole worm

Moredun Research Institute, Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Veterinary Health Research

Integrated parasite management for the control of sheep helminths

University of New England; Charles Sturt University; Melbourne University; Tablelands Livestock Health & Pest Authority; Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia; Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Indospicine — elucidating the risk of residues in meat University of Queensland

Besnoitiosis in Australian wildlife and significance to cattle University of Adelaide

Improved protection of cattle against anaplasmosis in tick-infested areas of Australia

Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Slow-release capsule for reducing winter scours in sheep University of Adelaide

Detection of cows carrying a persistently pestivirus (bovine viral diarrhoea virus, BVDV) infected foetus

University of Adelaide

Investigating Metarhizium anisopliae for control of the biting midge CuIicoides brevitarsis

New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

192 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 17 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Chicken meat

Rapid typing of Pasteurella multocida University of Queensland

Evaluating foodborne pathogen transmission associated with partial and full litter re-use

Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Avian influenza: improved diagnostics for detecting antibodies to H5N1

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Evaluation of new high-yielding triticale lines for broilers University of Sydney

Surveillance and pathotyping of circulating infectious bursal disease virus (IBDV) strains

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Evaluation of near-infrared reflectance (NIR)-based diet formulations for broiler chickens

South Australian Research and Development Institute

Characterisation of avian nephritis virus (ANV) in commercial poultry

University of Melbourne

Dislocated calcium alimentation for broilers University of Sydney

Omega-3s and broiler heart health University of Adelaide

Parallel development of novel vaccine vectors (pilot study) University of Melbourne

Available phosphorus requirement of broilers University of Queensland

Egg incubation and broiler chicken leg weakness University of Sydney

Vitamin K and broiler bone development University of Queensland

An integrated typing service for the surveillance of Salmonella in chickens

Institute of Medical & Veterinary Science

Phage-displayed peptides for the real-time detection of Campylobacter jejuni

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Development of a vaccine to control Campylobacter in chickens

University of South Australia

Campylobacter genotypes in chickens — national and regional influences

Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Biosecurity/food-safety training DVDs for the poultry meat industry

Bannister Technical Pty Ltd

Campylobacter dynamics in free-range and conventional farming systems

Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Honey bee and pollination

Preparing for Varroa: How susceptible are Australian honey bee stocks?

University of Sydney

BeeForce: Improving high-risk surveillance Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Benefit–cost analysis for the honeybee program Agtrans Research

Genetic variation of Varroa jacobsoni and pathology of microbial pathogens

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Use of sniffer dog in detection of American foulbrood in beehives

Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Inter-specific matings between A  cerana and A  mellifera? University of Sydney

A test of Africanisation in imported semen University of Sydney

A strategy to address concerns of countries that import Australian honeybees

AgEconPlus Pty Ltd

Establishing the disease status of A  cerana Java strain in the Cairns region

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Horse (including the National Hendra Virus Research Program)

Maternal metabolic status and the occurrence of osteochondrosis dissecans in thoroughbred foals

University of Queensland

Research projects in livestock health 193

Table A4 17 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation animal health research projects

Project Research institute

Diagnosis and control of small strongyle parasites of horses Charles Sturt University

Investigation into the aetiology of Australian stringhalt University of Melbourne

Virus and horse-specific risk factors for equine herpesvirus 1 (EHV1) neurological disease

University of Melbourne

Oncotic and haemostatic effects of a modified fluid gelatin in normal horses

University of Sydney

Respiratory disease and biomarkers in the foal University of Sydney

Epidemiological investigations into the 2007 equine influenza outbreak

University of Sydney

Treatment of placentitis in thoroughbred mares: efficacy of altrenogest

Scone Equine Hospital

Determining reliable excretion rates for therapeutic drugs in horses

Queensland University of Technology

Intra-articular medication as a risk factor for musculoskeletal injury

University of Melbourne

Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of bacterial isolates from horses

University of Sydney

An adenoviral vector vaccine against Rhodococcus equi University of South Australia

Efficacy of intravenous and aerosolised recombinant equine tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) for treating exercise-induced pulmonary haemorrhage (EIPH)

University of Melbourne

Working towards a more accurate diagnosis of inflammatory airway disease

Murdoch University

What role does rotavirus play in equine diarrhoea in Australian horses?

University of Melbourne

Gene expression in horses with recurrent laryngeal neuropathy (RLN)

University of Melbourne

Finite element analysis modelling of third metacarpal bone in vivo stresses

University of Melbourne

Bone repair in thoroughbred racehorses: effects of training and rest

University of Melbourne

Developing training programs to prevent injury in young racehorses

University of Queensland

Laminitis treatment by regional drug delivery to the horse’s foot

University of Queensland

Short-term and future athletic performance of critically ill equine neonate

Axon Veterinary Services

Use of the guinea pig as a laboratory model for equine amnionitis and foetal loss (EAFL)

University of Queensland

Models that predict risk for Hendra virus transmission from bats to horses

James Cook University

Models to predict Hendra virus prevalence in fruit bat populations

Griffith University

Implementing a national flying fox monitoring program Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Longitudinal cohort study of horse owners University of Western Sydney

Development of improved diagnostics and therapeutics for Hendra virus infections

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Early detection of Hendra virus infection in humans by micro-ribonucleic acid (miRNA) profiling

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

194 Animal health in Australia 2012

Table A4 17 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation animal health research projects

Project Research institute

New animal products

Viral and endogenous retroviral detection and characterisation in crocodiles

Northern Territory of Australia represented by the Department of Resources

Alpaca immunoglobulins Bairnsdale Animal Hospital

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Research projects in livestock health 195

5Appendix

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

196 Animal health in Australia 2012

Key Australian animal health websitesAccreditation Program for Australian Veterinarians www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/training-centre/

accreditation-program-for-australian-veterinarians-apav

Animal Health Australia www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au

Animal Health Surveillance Quarterly www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/elibrary

AQUAPLAN www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/aquatic/aquaplan

AQUAVETPLAN www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/aquatic/aquavetplan

AUS-MEAT Limited www.ausmeat.com.au

Australasian Veterinary Boards Council www.avbc.asn.au

Australia’s Animal Health Laboratory Network www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/animal/system/lab-network

Australian Alpaca Association www.alpaca.asn.au

Australian Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre for Emerging Infectious Disease

www.abcrc.org.au

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research www.aciar.gov.au

Australian Chicken Meat Federation www.chicken.org.au

Australian Dairy Farmers www.australiandairyfarmers.com.au

Australian Egg Corporation Limited www.aecl.org

Australian Food and Grocery Council www.afgc.org.au

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

www.daff.gov.au

Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing www.health.gov.au

Australian Harness Racing www.harness.org.au

Australian Honey Bee Industry Council www.honeybee.org.au

Australian Horse Industry Council www.horsecouncil.org.au

Australian Livestock Export Corp (LiveCorp) www.livecorp.com.au

Australian Lot Feeders’ Association www.feedlots.com.au

Australian National Quality Assurance Program www.anqap.com

Australian Overseas Aid Program, AusAID www.ausaid.gov.au

Australian Poultry Cooperative Research Centre www.poultrycrc.com.au

Australian Q Fever Register www.qfever.org

Australian Racing Board www.australianracingboard.com.au

Australian Veterinary Association www.ava.com.au

Australian Wildlife Health Network www.wildlifehealth.org.au

Australian Wool Innovation www.wool.com

Biosecurity Risk Analysis www.daff.gov.au/ba

Cattle Council of Australia www.cattlecouncil.com.au

Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies www.beefcrc.com

Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation www.sheepcrc.org.au

Key Australian animal health websites 197

CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory www.csiro.au/aahl

DAFF Biosecurity www.daff.gov.au/aqis

Dairy Australia www.dairyaustralia.com.au

Deer Industry Association of Australia www.deerfarming.com.au

Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Queensland

www.daff.qld.gov.au

Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia www.agric.wa.gov.au

Department of Fisheries, Western Australia www.fish.wa.gov.au

Department of Primary Industries, New South Wales www.dpi.nsw.gov.au

Department of Primary Industries, Victoria www.dpi.vic.gov.au

Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, Northern Territory

www.nt.gov.au/d/Primary_Industry

Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Tasmania

www.dpiw.tas.gov.au

Department of Primary Industries and Regions South Australia

www.pir.sa.gov.au

Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Melbourne www.vet.unimelb.edu.au

Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney www.sydney.edu.au/vetscience

Farm Biosecurity www.farmbiosecurity.com.au

Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, Aquatic Animal Health

frdc.com.au/research/aquatic_animal_health/Pages/default.aspx

Food Standards Australia New Zealand www.foodstandards.gov.au

Meat & Livestock Australia www.mla.com.au

National Animal Health Information System nahis.animalhealthaustralia.com.au

National Animal Health Performance Standards www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/livestock-health/national-animal-health-performance-standards

National Farmers’ Federation www.nff.org.au

National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-surveil-nndss-nndssintro.htm

National Pests & Disease Outbreaks www.outbreak.gov.au

National Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Surveillance Program

www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/programs/biosecurity/tse-freedom-assurance-program/national-tse-surveillance-program

Office of the Chief Veterinary Officer www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/animal/the_office_of_the_chief_veterinary_officer

Pork Cooperative Research Centre www.porkcrc.com.au

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation www.rirdc.gov.au

SAFEMEAT www.safemeat.com.au

School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University

www.csu.edu.au/vet

School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide

www.adelaide.edu.au/vetsci

School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, James Cook University

www.jcu.edu.au/vbms

School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University

www.vetbiomed.murdoch.edu.au

School of Veterinary Science, University of Queensland www.uq.edu.au/vetschool

Seafood Services Australia www.seafoodservices.com.au

Standing Council on Primary Industries www.mincos.gov.au

Key Australian animal health websites (continued)

198 Animal health in Australia 2012

Karen White

Key Australian animal health websites 199

AAWS Australian Animal Welfare Strategy

ABLV Australian bat lyssavirus

ACIAR Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

AHA Animal Health Australia

AHC Animal Health Committee

AI avian influenza

AQUAVETPLAN Australian Aquatic Veterinary Emergency Plan

AusAID Australian Agency for International Development

AusAWAC Australian Animal Welfare Advisory Committee

AUSVETPLAN Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan

AWAC Animal Welfare Advisory Committee

AWHN Australian Wildlife Health Network

BEF bovine ephemeral fever

BTV bluetongue virus

CCEAD Consultative Committee on Emergency Animal Disease

AAcronyms and abbreviations

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

200 Animal health in Australia 2012

Codex Codex Alimentarius Commission

CRC cooperative research centre

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

CSIRO-AAHL CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory

DAFF Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

DoHA Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing

EAD emergency animal disease

EADRA Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement

EID emerging infectious disease

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FMD foot-and-mouth disease

FRDC Fisheries Research and Development Corporation

FSANZ Food Standards Australia New Zealand

HACCP hazard analysis and critical control points

IT information technology

LEADDR Laboratories for Emergency Animal Disease Diagnosis and Response

NAHIS National Animal Health Information System

NAMP National Arbovirus Monitoring Program

NAQS Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy

NBC National Biosecurity Committee

NBPSP National Bee Pest Surveillance Program

NLIS National Livestock Identification System

NMG National Management Group

NSDIP National Significant Disease Investigation Program

NSW DPI New South Wales Department of Primary Industries

NTSESP National Transmissable Spongiform Encephalopathies Surveillance Program

NVD National Vendor Declaration

OIE World Organisation for Animal Health

PCR polymerase chain reaction

PISC Primary Industries Standing Committee

PNG Papua New Guinea

POMS Pacific oyster mortality syndrome

QA quality assurance

QDAFF Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

RABQSA Registrar Accreditation Board and the Quality Society of Australasia

R&D research and development

RSPCA Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

SCAHLS Sub-Committee on Animal Health Laboratory Standards

SCoPI Standing Council on Primary Industries

SEACFMD South East Asia and China Foot and Mouth Disease campaign

SOP standard operating procedure

SWF screw-worm fly

TSE transmissible spongiform encephalopathy

TSEFAP Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Freedom Assurance Program

WHO World Health Organization

WSPA World Society for the Protection of Animals

WTO World Trade Organization

Acronyms and abbreviations 201

GGlossary

acaricide Pesticides used to control acarids such as mites and ticks.

antimicrobial Antibacterial agents (including ionophores) but not including antiprotozoals, antifungals, antiseptics, disinfectants, antineoplastic agents, antivirals, immunologicals, direct-fed microbials or enzyme substances.

biosecurity The exclusion, eradication or effective management of risks posed by pests and diseases to human and animal health, horticultural industries, ecological systems and the economy.

camelids Members of the biological family Camelidae, including camels, alpacas, llamas and dromedaries.

Culicoides A genus containing at least 123 species of biting midge — very small insects, visible to the naked eye, with a wing length of about 0.9 mm. Particular Culicoides species carry and spread bluetongue and Akabane viruses by taking blood meals from hosts such as cattle and sheep. The distribution and population of Culicoides are affected by factors such as climate (rainfall, wind), light and proximity of livestock.

emergency animal disease A disease that, when it occurs, requires an emergency response, because it would have a national impact if it was not controlled.

emerging (disease) A new infectious disease resulting from a change in an existing pathogenic agent, a known disease occurring in a new area or population, or a previously unrecognised pathogen or disease.

Glynn Maynard

202 Animal health in Australia 2012

endemic (disease) A disease that is known to occur over a long period of time within a population or a geographic range.

enteric Intestinal; to do with the intestines (gut).

epidemic An unexpected and substantial increase in the incidence of a disease.

epidemiological Relating to the study of disease and its causes in a population.

epidemiologist A scientist who studies the transmission and control of epidemic diseases.

epidemiology Science of the distribution of disease in populations, with investigations into the source and causes of infection.

exotic (disease or pest) A disease that does not normally occur in a particular area or country (as opposed to an endemic disease).

granulomas Lesions with a yellowish appearance that have a caseous (cheesy), caseo-calcerous (cheesy and chalky) or calcified (bony) consistency. Occasionally, they may contain pus. The caseous centre is usually dry, firm and covered with a capsule of varying thickness that is made from the surrounding tissue. Granulomas can vary in size from small (and therefore easily missed) to very large, involving the greater part of the organ.

invasive (animals) Any animal having, or with the potential to have, an adverse economic, environmental or social/cultural impact.

livestock Includes terrestrial and aquatic production animals, whether farmed or wild-captured. In this report, the term also includes horses and bees, unless otherwise indicated.

morbidity Illness or disease.

nucleotide substitution A form of mutation of the nucleotide sequence of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), where one base is replaced by another.

pandemic disease An epidemic disease that occurs over a widespread area (multiple countries or continents) and usually affects a substantial proportion of the population.

pathogen A biological agent that causes disease or illness in its host.

pathogenic Capable of causing disease.

phytosanitary Relating to the health of plants; especially the freedom from pests and diseases requiring quarantine.

polymerase chain reaction (PCR)

A highly sensitive test that can detect DNA fragments of viruses or other organisms in blood or tissue. It works by repeatedly copying genetic material using heat cycling and enzymes.

precursor A substance, or virus, from which another substance can form.

ratite A large, flightless bird, such as an emu or an ostrich.

real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)

A laboratory technique that is used to amplify and simultaneously quantify a targeted DNA molecule.

sentinel A previously uninfected animal or hive of animals, kept at a specific location to detect the presence of disease-causing organisms, such as viruses or parasites. Samples (e.g. blood, bees) are collected from the sentinels at intervals to check whether infection or infestation has occurred.

serology Immunological reactions and properties of serum, often used to diagnose disease.

stamping out The strategy of eliminating infection from premises through the destruction of animals in accordance with the particular AUSVETPLAN manual, and in a manner that permits appropriate disposal of carcasses and decontamination of the site.

synthetic pyrethroids Synthetic chemical insecticides that act in a similar manner to naturally derived pyrethrins.

taxon A taxonomic category or group, such as phylum, order, family, genus or species.

transboundary animal diseases

Epidemic animal diseases that are highly infectious, with potential for very rapid spread, irrespective of national borders, and able to seriously impact the economy or human health (or both).

vector A living organism (e.g. an insect) that transmits an infectious agent from one host to another.

virology The study of viruses and viral diseases.

virulent A term referring to the relative ability of an infectious agent to cause disease.

zoonosis (zoonotic disease) A disease that can be transmitted from animals to people or, more specifically, a disease that normally exists in animals but that can infect humans. Plural: zoonoses.

Glossary 203

IIndex

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

204 Animal health in Australia 2012

IndexAn ‘f’ following a page number refers to a figure; ‘t’ refers to a table

A review of Australia’s preparedness for the threat of foot-and-mouth disease, 14, 72, 79–80

abalone herpesvirus, 3abalone viral ganglioneuritis, 91–92abattoirs: animal welfare, 115, 116abbreviations, 200–201Acarapis woodi (tracheal mite), 60–61Accreditation Program for Australian Veterinarians, 20ACIAR (Australian Centre for International Agricultural

Research), 4, 129, 133acronyms, 200–201acute hepatopancreatic necrosis syndrome, 93Africa: animal health programs, 4, 133African horse sickness, 159tagricultural colleges, 21Akabane virus, 49–53alpaca industry

National Livestock Identification System, 13Q-Alpaca, 25–26

American foulbrood, 1, 34, 36, 159–160tamphibian diseases, 86tanaplasmosis, 37, 38Animal Biosecurity Branch, 15Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 (Qld), 115Animal Export Operations Branch, 16Animal Export Reform Branch, 16Animal Health Australia

membership, 9troles, 8, 11

Animal Health Committee, 9aquatic animal health, 88

animal health contacts, 155–157, 197–198animal health laboratories, 17–18animal health notifications, 104Animal Health Policy Branch, 14–15Animal health scanning report, 136animal health system

biosecurity reforms, 13governance, 8–12membership, 8torganisation of, 1, 7–8personnel, 8tquality assurance programs, 21–27service delivery, 14–21

animal health websites, 197–198Animal Import Operations Branch, 15, 99animal welfare

Australian Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, 16, 114, 120–123

Australian Animal Welfare Strategy, 4, 16, 114, 119–124Australian Lot Feeders’ Association, 22–23Improved Animal Welfare Program, 123, 126international collaboration, 126–127legislation, 113–114

livestock exports, 124–126regional initiatives, 4, 123standards and guidelines, 118–119, 125states and territories codes of practice, 114–118see also Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System; land

transport of livestockAnimal Welfare Act 2002 (WA), 117–118Animal Welfare Act 2011 (NT), 115Animal Welfare Branch, 1, 15, 16Animal Welfare Committee, 4, 8, 118Animal Welfare Cooperation Forum, 127anthrax, 1, 30t, 36, 68t

AUSVETPLAN manual, 74Antimicrobial Resistance Standing Committee, iii–iv, 4, 110apiary industry, see bee diseases and pests; honey bee

industryApiary Industry Disease Control Program (Tasmania), 34Apis spp. (bees), 61, 68, 143Approved Supply Chain Improvements Program, 126aquaculture, 144, 152, 153tAQUAPLAN 2005–2010, 18, 88–89Aquatic animal diseases significant to Australia: identification

field guide, 3, 91aquatic animal health, 3, 9, 85

Australia’s status for OIE-listed diseases, 86tAustralia’s status for significant diseases, 88tbiosecurity, 3, 89disease events in 2012, 91–92disease surveillance and monitoring, 90distribution of OIE-listed diseases in Australia, 87femergency animal diseases preparedness, 89, 90–91national policy, 88–89regional animal health initiatives, 93research and development, 93Sub-Committee on Aquatic Animal Health, 10, 88

aquatic animal health community space (Neptune), 91Aquatic Animal Health Program, 18Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram, 144, 191tAquatic Animal Health Training Scheme, 3, 89Aquatic Consultative Committee on Emergency Animal

Diseases, 90AQUAVETPLAN, 18, 90arboviruses, 49–53, 67Asia–Pacific region: animal health initiatives, 4, 93, 131–132Asia Regional Advisory Group, 93Asian honey bee (Apis cerana), 61, 68, 143Asian Honey Bee Transition to Management Program, 61, 68,

143Aujeszky’s disease, 30t

AUSVETPLAN manual, 74AusAID (Australian Agency for International Development), 4,

129, 130Australasian Joint Agencies Scanning Network, 136Australasian Veterinary Boards Council, 21Australia–Indonesia Partnership for Emerging Infectious

Diseases, Animal Health, 2010–14, 4, 132Australia/New Zealand Animal Welfare Liaison Agreement,

126Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code, 108Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID), 4,

129, 130Australian Alpaca Association Ltd, 25–26

Index 205

Australian and New Zealand standard diagnostic procedures, 11, 17

Australian Animal Health Laboratory research projects, 135–136, 169–171t

Australian Animal Pathology Standards Program, 18, 78Australian Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, 16, 114,

120–123Australian animal welfare standards and guidelines — land

transport of livestock, 4, 115–119, 121Australian Animal Welfare Strategy, 4, 16, 114, 119–124Australian Animal Welfare Strategy National Implementation

Plan 2010–14, 122Australian Association of Veterinary Laboratory

Diagnosticians, 17Australian bat lyssavirus, 59–60, 160tAustralian Biosecurity Intelligence Network, 91Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

(ACIAR), 4, 129, 133Australian Chicken Meat Federation, 25Australian code of practice for the care and use of animals for

scientific purposes, 115Australian Duck Meat Association, 25Australian Egg Corporation Limited, 24, 142, 187tAustralian Export Meat Inspection System, 102Australian Fisheries Managers Forum, 9Australian fur seal (Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus), 82Australian Government animal health responsibilities, 7, 14Australian Honey Bee Industry Council, 26, 143Australian Johne’s Disease Market Assurance Programs, 39Australian Lot Feeders’ Association, 22–23Australian Milk Residue Analysis, 109Australian National Quality Assurance Program, 10–11, 17, 89Australian Pork Industry Quality Assurance Program, 23–24Australian Renderers Association, 27Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock, 125Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan, see AUSVETPLAN

(Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan)Australian Veterinary Practitioner Surveillance Network, 62–64Australian Veterinary Reserve, 76Australian Wildlife Health Network, 2, 9, 16–17, 58–60, 81–82Australian Wool Innovation Limited, 143, 187–189tAustralia’s National List of Reportable Diseases of Aquatic

Animals, 85Australia’s National Notifiable Diseases List of Terrestrial

Animals, 19, 29–30, 159–166tAUSVETPLAN (Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan), 73–74

authoring system, 2Disease strategy: foot-and-mouth disease, iii, 2Management manual: laboratory preparedness, 78

avian diseases, 32tavian influenza, 59, 83avian paramyxovirus type 1, 59highly pathogenic avian influenza, 19, 48f, 81Newcastle disease, 1, 19, 40–42pullorum disease, 164tSalmonella enteritidis infection, 164t

B-Qual food-safety program, 26Barmah Forest virus infection, 68tbat diseases, 59–60, 160t

see also Hendra virusBeale review, 13

bee diseases and pests, 32t, 60–62, 143American foulbrood, 1, 34, 36, 159–160tAsian honey bee (Apis cerana), 61, 68, 143European foulbrood, 39, 161tmites, 60–61National Bee Pest Surveillance Program, 2, 60–61small hive beetle, 43–44varroosis, 165tsee also honey bee industry

beef cattle, see cattle diseases; cattle industrybiofouling, 15Biological Consultative Group, 98Biological Import Operations and Marine Pests Branch, 15Biological Imports Program, 15, 98–99biosecurity

aquatic animal health, 3, 89awareness and planning, 79–81import risk analyses, 96National Biosecurity Committee, 8, 79nationally agreed standard operating procedures, 75Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy, 66–67policy reviews, 97–98reforms, 1, 13

Biosecurity Animal Division, 14–15, 136Biosecurity Bill 2012, 96Biosecurity Incident National Communication Network, 79Biosecurity manual for the honey bee industry, 62, 81Biosecurity Queensland, 67–68bluetongue virus, 3, 30t, 49–53, 160tbobby calves, time off feed, 118–119bovine babesiosis, 37, 38, 160tbovine brucellosis, 19, 62, 63tbovine ephemeral fever, 49–53, 54fbovine spongiform encephalopathy, 53–55

AUSVETPLAN manual, 74bovine tuberculosis, 19, 60, 165tbrucellosis, 30t, 68t, 160tbuffalo production, 151–152

Cambodia, animal health programs, 4, 133camel pox, 33tcaprine arthritis–encephalitis, 36–37cats, 3, 97cattle diseases, 30–31t, 37–38

bovine babesiosis, 37, 38, 160tbovine brucellosis, 19, 62, 63tbovine ephemeral fever, 49–53, 54fbovine Johne’s disease, 1, 40bovine spongiform encephalopathy, 53–55, 74bovine tuberculosis, 19, 60, 165tcontagious bovine pleuropneumonia, 19, 161tenzootic bovine leucosis, 15, 161tinfectious bovine rhinotracheitis, 39lumpy skin disease, 164t

cattle industryanimal welfare, 116, 119beef cattle production, 149beef imports, 96bobby calves, time off feed, 118–119breeder cattle exports, 125Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic

Technologies, 136–137, 171t

206 Animal health in Australia 2012

imported animal tracing, 55Livestock Production Assurance, 21–22National Livestock Identification System, 12Northern Beef Research Alliance, 141–142ruminant feed-ban scheme, 54–55see also dairy industry

cattle tick, 37–38CATTLECARE program, 22Charles Sturt University, 140, 174–175tchemical residues, 19chicken meat industry, see poultry industryChrysomya bezziana (Old World screw-worm fly), 30t, 55–56,

164tclassical scrapie, 53–55classical swine fever, 19, 48f, 160t

AUSVETPLAN manual, 74Cochliomyia hominivorax (New World screw-worm fly), 30tCodex Alimentarius Commission, 4, 108Communicable Diseases Intelligence, 69Communicable Diseases Network Australia, 68, 109Consultative Committee on Emergency Animal Diseases, 11,

72, 75consumer protection, 4, 107

Antimicrobial Resistance Standing Committee, iii–iv, 4, 110Codex Alimentarius Commission, 4, 108Communicable Diseases Network Australia, 68, 109food standards, 108–109inspection and monitoring, 110–111meat exports, 110–111OzFoodNet, 109residue monitoring, 109–110

contagious agalactia, 160tcontagious bovine pleuropneumonia, 19, 161tcooperative research centres (CRCs)

CRC for Beef Genetic Technologies, 136–137, 171tCRC for High Integrity Australian Pork, 137, 172tCRC for Sheep Industry Innovation, 137–138, 173tDairy Futures CRC, 138–139Poultry CRC, 139–140, 173–174t

Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever, 30tcrustacean diseases, 86t, 88tCSIRO-AAHL, 17

research projects, 135–136, 169–171tCSIRO Biosecurity Flagship, 135–136, 169–171tCulex annulirostris (mosquito), 51Culicoides midges, 50–52, 60, 62

dairy industry, 15Australian Milk Residue Analysis, 109Dairy Australia, 143–144, 189–191tDairy Futures Cooperative Research Centre, 138–139exports, 111production values and volumes, 149–150quality assurance programs, 23see also cattle diseases; cattle industry

diagnostic servicesanimal health laboratories, 17–18proficiency testing for aquatic animal diseases, 89, 93state and territory roles, 19

disease surveillance and monitoring, 2, 47, 50baquatic animal diseases, 90

Australian Veterinary Practitioner Surveillance Network, 62–64

avian influenza, 59, 81bats, 59–60bee pests and pest bees, 60–62Biosecurity Queensland, 67–68bovine brucellosis, 62, 63tbovine tuberculosis, 60communicable diseases, 109foot-and-mouth disease, iii, 2, 20, 47–49, 79–80General Surveillance Epidemiology Working Group, 2, 20,

47–49by government veterinarians, 57–58Japanese encephalitis, 67National Arbovirus Monitoring Program, 49–53National Significant Disease Investigation Program, 49, 56,

57fnorth Queensland tropics, 67–68Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy, 66–67by private veterinarians, 62–66regional animal health initiatives, 130Screw-worm Fly Freedom Assurance Program, 55–56sea ports, 60–62by state and territory governments, 19–20, 57–58Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Freedom

Assurance Program, 53–55wildlife diseases, 2, 58–60, 81–82zoonotic diseases, 68–69

dogs, 3, 97dog breeding (puppy farms), 114, 116, 117

duck industry, 83quality assurance programs, 25

EADRA (Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement), 2, 71, 72–73

echinococcosis/hydatidosis, 30teducation and training

for animal health practitioners, 20–21animal welfare, 115Aquatic Animal Health Training Scheme, 3, 89foot-and-mouth disease preparedness, iii, 72, 79–80National Emergency Animal Disease Training Program,

75–77schools of veterinary science, 140–142

EggCorp Assured, 24eggs and egg products, 24, 111, 142, 187t

see also poultry industryelectric prodder use, 119emergencies: animal welfare provision, 116, 117, 123Emergency Animal Disease Preparedness and Response

Program, 75Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement (EADRA), 2,

71, 72–73Emergency Animal Disease Watch Hotline, 79emergency animal diseases (EADs), 2–3, 71

aquatic EAD response arrangements, 89, 90AUSVETPLAN, 73–74avian influenza preparedness, 81biosecurity awareness and planning, 79–81foot-and-mouth disease preparedness, 72international collaboration, 77laboratory services, 78–79

Index 207

National Emergency Animal Disease Training Program, 75–77

nationally agreed standard operating procedures, 74–75notifiable diseases, 19, 29–30, 159–166toperational responsibility, 75preparedness initiatives, 75–79responses in 2012, 82–83state and territory preparedness, 20Sub-Committee on Emergency Animal Diseases, 11wildlife diseases, 81–82see also specific diseases, e g anthrax

Emergency Management Working Group of the Quadrilateral Group of Countries, 77

emerging infectious diseases, 130–132Endemic Disease Information System, 34endemic diseases, 34–45enteric pathogens, 69enzootic bovine leucosis, 15, 161tEpiTeam, 77epizootic haemorrhagic disease, 30tequine diseases, 31–32t

contagious equine metritis, 161tequine encephalomyelitis (eastern), 30tequine herpesvirus 1, 1, 38–39equine influenza, 19, 161tequine piroplasmosis, 161tsee also Hendra virus

equine industry: horse imports, 97–98European Commission – Australia Animal Welfare

Cooperation Forum, 127European foulbrood, 39, 161tExercise Phantom Fox, 3, 76Exercise Sea Fox 2012, 3, 90–91exhibited animals welfare, 115, 119Exotic Plant Pest Hotline, 79Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System, iii, 3, 16, 103, 123,

126exports, 95

animal health notifications, 104Approved Supply Chain Improvements Program, 126certification, 102, 110food-safety notifications, 104free-trade agreements, 99–100inspection and certification reforms, 100–101international standards, 103–104legislation, 101Live Animal Exports Division, 15–16livestock exports, iii, 1, 3, 14, 124–126market access, 100, 101–102meat and meat products, 110–111production values and volumes, 147–153

Farm Biosecurity campaign, 79Farmer review, 1, 14, 103, 124–126feedlot industry, 22–23Feedlot Industry Accreditation Committee, 22Feedsafe®, 27feral animals, 114

see also Australian Wildlife Health Networkfinfish diseases, 86t, 88tfish, ornamental, 3, 89, 90, 96Fisher report, 118

fisheries products, 111, 152, 153tFisheries Research and Development Corporation, 144, 191tFLOCKCARE program, 22Food Division, DAFF, 16food labelling, 4, 108–109food safety, 4, 16

see also consumer protection; quality assurance programsfood-safety notifications, 104foot-and-mouth disease, 30t, 162t

AUSVETPLAN manual, 74import risk from Japan, 98preparedness review, 72surveillance and preparedness, iii, 2, 20, 47–49, 79–80vaccination, 2, 72, 77

Foot-and-mouth Disease Taskforce, 14free-trade agreements, 99–100Fremantle Port, 125

galah (Eolophus roseicapillus), 82game meats, 150–152general surveillance assessment tool, iii, 2, 20, 47–49General Surveillance Epidemiology Working Group, 2, 20,

47–49genotyping, 136–137glossary, 202–203goat diseases, 31t

caprine arthritis–encephalitis, 36–37contagious agalactia, 160tJohne’s disease, 40

goat industryLivestock Production Assurance, 21–22meat production, 150National Livestock Identification System, 12ruminant feed-ban scheme, 54–55

governance of animal health system, 8–12Government and Livestock Industry Cost Sharing Deed in

Respect of Emergency Animal Disease Responses, 2, 71, 72–73

Guidelines for control of specific zoonotic parasites in meat: Trichinella spiralis and Cysticercus bovis, 4, 108

haemorrhagic septicaemia, 162thazard analysis and critical control points, 21–22heartwater, 30tHendra virus, 2–3, 20, 60, 67, 77–78, 82–83, 162–164thighly pathogenic avian influenza, 19, 48f, 81honey bee industry

Australian Honey Bee Industry Council, 26, 143B-Qual food-safety program, 26Biosecurity manual for the honey bee industry, 62, 81disease surveillance and monitoring, 60–62honey production, 152importation of queens, 3, 97see also bee diseases and pests

human health, 68–69see also consumer protection

imported animal tracing, 55imports, 3, 95

Animal Import Operations Branch, 15, 99Biological Imports Program, 15, 98–99import permits, 98

208 Animal health in Australia 2012

policy reviews, 97–98risk analyses, 96

Improved Animal Welfare Program, 123, 126Indonesia: animal health programs, 4, 132, 133infectious bovine rhinotracheitis, 39influenza A, 83information technology systems

aquatic animal health, 91exports, 100–101imports, 98see also National Animal Health Information System

insect vector monitoring, 50–52, 60–62Intergovernmental Hendra Virus Taskforce, 77Invasive Marine Species Program, 15

Japan, imports from, 98Japanese encephalitis, 30t, 48f, 67Johne’s disease, 1, 15, 39–40Joint Expert Meeting on Pesticide Residues, 108

kangaroo production, 151kangaroos, 114Kunjin virus infection, 68t

Laboratories for Emergency Animal Disease Diagnosis and Response network, 11, 78–79

laboratory services, 17–18disease surveillance and monitoring, 58

lagomorph diseases, 32tland transport of livestock, 4, 115–119, 121Laos: animal health programs, 4, 133leishmaniasis, 33t, 164tleptospirosis, 68tLive Animal Exports Division, iii, 1, 14, 15–16Livestock Export Reform Program, 15livestock identification and tracing, 12, 19livestock industries

production values and volumes, 147–153roles in animal health, 7see also industry type, e g cattle industry

Livestock Production Assurance, 21–22lumpy skin disease, 164t

Macrorhabdus ornithogaster infection, 82Malaysia–Australia Free Trade Agreement, 99marine pests, 15Matthews report, 14, 72, 79–80Meat & Livestock Australia, 21, 144–145, 192tmeat and meat products

exports, 110–111production values and volumes, 147–153

midges (Culicoides spp.), 50–52, 60, 62mites, 60–61Model code of practice for the welfare of animals — pigs, 116–

117mollusc diseases, 86t, 88tmosquito vectors, 51Murdoch University, 140–141, 176tMurray Valley encephalitis virus infection, 68tMyanmar: animal health programs, 4, 133Mycobacterium pinnipedii, 82

National Animal Health Information System, 1, 19, 34, 35f, 47National Animal Health Laboratory Coordination Program, 78National Animal Health Training Steering Committee, 77National Aquatic Animal Health Industry Reference Group, 9National Arbovirus Monitoring Program, 34, 49–53National Association of Testing Authorities, 17National Avian Influenza Wild Bird Surveillance Program, 59National Bee Pest Surveillance Program, 2, 60–61National Biosecurity Committee, 8, 79National Bovine Johne’s Disease Financial and Non-Financial

Assistance Package, 40National Bovine Johne’s Disease Strategic Plan, 1National Centre of Dairy Education Australia, 144National Communicable Diseases Surveillance Strategy, 109National Emergency Animal Disease Training Program, 75–77National Engagement and Communication Framework, 79National Enteric Pathogen Surveillance Scheme, 69National farm biosecurity reference manual — grazing livestock

production, 80National Feedlot Accreditation Scheme, 22–23National Foot-and-Mouth Disease Action Plan, 72National General Surveillance Program, iii, 49National Goat Health Statement, 40National Health and Medical Research Council, 78National Hendra Virus Research Program, 60, 77–78National Johne’s Disease Control Program, 15, 39National Kid Rearing Plan, 40National Livestock Identification System, 12–13, 19, 47National Management Group, 72, 75National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System, 68National Residue Survey, 12, 109–110National Sentinel Hive Program, 2, 60National Sheep Health Statement, 40National Significant Disease Investigation Program, 49, 56, 57fNational Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies

Surveillance Program, 53–54, 55tNational Vendor Declarations, 12nationally agreed standard operating procedures, 74–75natural disasters: animal welfare provision, 116, 117, 123Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia–Pacific, 93New South Wales Footrot Strategic Plan, 43New South Wales Ovine Brucellosis Accreditation Scheme, 42New World screw-worm fly (Cochliomyia hominivorax), 30tNew Zealand — Australia Animal Welfare Science and

Bioethical Analysis collaborating centre, 124Newcastle disease, 19, 40–42Newcastle Disease Management Plan, 1, 41north Queensland tropics, 67–68Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy, 56, 66–67Northern Beef Research Alliance, 141–142notifiable diseases, 19, 29–30, 159–166t

Office of the Chief Veterinary Officer, 14OIE Animal Welfare Working Group, 123OIE Aquatic Animal Health Standards Commission, 93OIE-listed diseases, status in Australia

aquatic animal health, 86t, 87fterrestrial animal diseases, 30–33t

Old World screw-worm fly (Chrysomya bezziana), 30t, 55–56, 164t

ornamental fish, 3, 89, 90, 96ornithosis, 68t

Index 209

Ostreid herpesvirus-1 microvariant, 92overseas aid, 4, 130–132ovine brucellosis, 42–43ovine footrot, 43ovine Johne’s disease, 40oyster diseases, 3, 90–91, 92OzFoodNet, 109

Pacific oyster mortality syndrome, 3, 90–91, 92Pandemics and Emerging Infectious Diseases Framework

2010–2015, 130–131Papua New Guinea: animal health programs, 4, 66, 130, 132,

133paratuberculosis, 30t

see also Johne’s diseasepesticide residues, 108Pet Food Adverse Event System of Tracking, 27Pet Food Industry Association of Australia, 27pig diseases, 32t

Aujeszky’s disease, 30t, 74classical swine fever, 19, 48f, 74, 160tinfluenza A, 83porcine enterovirus encephalomyelitis, 164tporcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome, 164tpost-weaning multisystemic wasting syndrome, 164tswine brucellosis, 44–45swine influenza, 164–165tswine vesicular disease, 74transmissible gastroenteritis, 74

pig industryanimal welfare, 116–117Australian Pork Industry Biosecurity Program, 80–81Australian Pork Industry Quality Assurance Program, 23–24Cooperative Research Centre for High Integrity Australian

Pork, 137, 172telectric prodder use, 119National Livestock Identification System, 12–13pigmeat production, 150, 151t

Plant Health Australia: National Bee Pest Surveillance Program, 2, 60–61

porcine enterovirus encephalomyelitis, 164tporcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome, 164tpork industry, see pig diseases; pig industrypost-weaning multisystemic wasting syndrome, 164tpoultry diseases

avian influenza H5N3, 83avian influenza H7N7, 83highly pathogenic avian influenza, 19, 48f, 81Newcastle disease, 1, 19, 40–42see also avian diseases

poultry industryanimal welfare, 116, 117meat and egg production, 150, 151tPoultry Cooperative Research Centre, 139–140, 173–174tquality assurance programs, 25spent hens, 119see also eggs and egg products

prawn diseases, 93PREVENT Community-based Emerging Infectious Disease Risk

Reduction Project in the Mekong, 131–132Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Land Transport of Livestock)

Standards (NSW), 115

Primary Industries Ministerial Council, 8Primary Industries Standing Committee, 8Principles and guidelines for national food control systems, 108Public Sector Linkages Program, 132pullorum disease, 164tpuppy farms, 114, 116, 117

Q-Alpaca, 25–26Q fever, 30t, 68tQuadrilateral Animal Welfare Network, 126quality assurance programs, 21–27

meat and meat products, 110–111quarantine

live animal imports, 99Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy, 66–67

Quarantine Act 1908, 3, 96queen honey bees, 3, 97Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, 141Queensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, 60

rabbits, 3, 32t, 97rabies, 30t, 48f, 164tractopamine, 108Rapid Response Team, 76red meat industry

Livestock Production Assurance, 21–22production values and volumes, 147–152SAFEMEAT, 12

regional animal health initiatives, 4, 129–130animal welfare, 123aquatic animal health, 93emerging infectious diseases, 130–132international research, 133surveillance and capacity building, 130

Regional Animal Welfare Strategy for Asia, the Far East and Oceania, 15, 16, 124, 126

rendered products, 27research and development, 5, 135

aquatic animal health, 93Biosecurity Animal Division, 136cooperative research centres, 136–140, 171–174tCSIRO-AAHL, 135–136, 169–171tHendra virus, 77–78international animal health, 4, 133research and development corporations, 142–145, 187–

195tuniversity research programs, 140–142, 174–187t

residue monitoring, 109–110Rift Valley fever, 30trinderpest, 30trock dove (Columbia livia), 59rodeos: animal welfare, 115, 116Ross River virus infection, 68truminant feed-ban scheme, 54–55Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, 145,

193–195t

SAFEMEAT, 12saleyards: animal welfare, 117Salmonella enteritidis infection, 164tSchmallenberg virus, 97schools of veterinary science, 140–142

210 Animal health in Australia 2012

screw-worm fly, 30t, 55–56, 164tScrew-worm Fly Freedom Assurance Program, 55–56sea ports, 60–62seafood products, 111, 152, 153Seafood Services Australia Ltd, 27sentinel herds, 66sentinel hives, 60–61sheep diseases, 31t

classical scrapie, 53–55ovine brucellosis, 42–43ovine footrot, 43ovine Johne’s disease, 40sheep pox, 48f

sheep industryanimal welfare, 116, 119Australian Wool Innovation Limited, 143, 187–189tCooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry

Innovation, 137–138, 173tLivestock Production Assurance, 21–22meat and wool production, 147–148National Livestock Identification System, 12ruminant feed-ban scheme, 54–55

sheep pox, 48fsmall hive beetle, 43–44Smiling Animals in the Dreamtime, 116South East Asia and China Foot and Mouth Disease

campaign, 131, 133Standing Council on Primary Industries, 8state and territory animal health services, 18–20Stock Feed Manufacturers’ Council of Australia, 27stockfeed industry, 27Stop Transboundary Animal Diseases and Zoonoses, 131Sub-Committee on Animal Health Laboratory Standards,

10–11, 78Sub-Committee on Animal Welfare, 118Sub-Committee on Aquatic Animal Health, 10, 88Sub-Committee on Emergency Animal Diseases, 11, 75surra (Trypanosoma evansi), 30t, 164tsurveillance, see disease surveillance and monitoringswine brucellosis, 44–45swine influenza, 164–165tswine vesicular disease: AUSVETPLAN manual, 74

terrestrial animal health, 1, 29diseases of national significance, 34–45National Animal Health Information System, 1, 19, 34, 35f, 47notifiable diseases, 19, 29–30, 159–166tOIE-listed diseases, status in Australia, 30–33tsee also disease surveillance and monitoring

tick fever, 29, 37–38Timor-Leste: animal health programs, 4, 130, 132tracheal mite (Acarapis woodi), 60–61training, see education and trainingtransmissible gastroenteritis: AUSVETPLAN manual, 74transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, 53–55Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Freedom

Assurance Program, 53–55trichinellosis, 30t, 165tTropilaelaps spp. (mites), 60–61Trypanosoma evansi (surra), 30t, 164tTuberculosis Freedom Assurance Program, 60tularaemia, 30t

University of Adelaide, 141, 176–178tUniversity of Melbourne, 141, 178–180tUniversity of Queensland, 141–142, 180–183tUniversity of Sydney, 142, 183–187tuniversity research programs, 140–142, 174–187t

vaccinationsfoot-and-mouth disease, 2, 72, 77Hendra virus, 2–3, 20, 77–78Newcastle disease, 1, 41–42ovine footrot, 43

Varroa spp. (mites), 60–61varroosis, 165tvenison production, 151vesicular stomatitis, 30t, 165tveterinarians

Australian Veterinary Reserve, 76awareness and training for, 79–80disease surveillance role, 56, 62–66livestock exports, 125service delivery, 18

veterinary services and education, 20–21university research programs, 140–142, 174–187t

west Nile fever, 30t, 45west Nile virus infection — clinical, 45, 166twhite nose syndrome, 82wild bird mortalities, 59Wildlife and Exotic Disease Preparedness Program, 81–82wildlife disease surveillance, 2, 16–17, 58–60wildlife health, see Australian Wildlife Health Networkwool production, 147–148World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)

animal welfare, 126–127Australian involvement, iii, 103, 123

Zoo Based Wildlife Disease Surveillance Program, 58zoo perissodactyls, 3, 97zoonotic diseases, 19, 68–69zoos: exhibited animals welfare, 119

Index 211