To lock out foot-and-mouth disease, Australia must help our neighbour countries bolster their biosecurity

Australia’s varroa mite outbreak has so far been contained to the east coast. Shutterstock

Unfortunately, since 2013, such agricultural programs have ended or been greatly reduced in scope in line with decreased spending in the sector^[11]. The cuts came as part of broader reductions^[12] to Australia’s overseas aid budget – including a cut of more than 40%^[13] in aid to Southeast Asia in 2020.

Indeed, in 2021 Australia contributed just 0.22%^[14] of its gross national income towards overseas development assistance, compared to the OECD average of 0.33%^[15] for that year.

Prevention is good for the bottom line

The cost of supporting effective agricultural biosecurity services in neighbouring countries would be but a small fraction of the cost of a major disease outbreak.

Looking forward, cost-efficient biosecurity programs will require^[16] integrated risk identification and management across human, animal, plant and environmental health. Such a joined-up approach is essential to address major and interrelated sociological and environmental biosecurity challenges.

Read more: What is foot and mouth disease? Why farmers fear 'apocalyptic bonfires of burning carcasses'^[17]

A priority in the new national biosecurity strategy^[18] is to create “stronger partnerships” at the local, regional, national and international levels. One of the initial steps identified is to help shape global biosecurity standards, rules and conditions. It will also:

“deepen international partnerships and capacity building, including in the Indo-Pacific, to increase engagement, harmonisation, skills exchanges and information sharing on national priority pests, weeds and diseases.”

This is a great foundation for further strengthening global agricultural biosecurity systems. But to fully and effectively meet the biosecurity challenges of the 21st Century, it’s crucial to ensure agricultural biosecurity systems fully integrate with humans and our natural environment.

Coordinating the activities of different sectors – such as human health, agriculture and the natural environment – would result in more effective use of limited resources, especially those required to support frontline activities. This will ultimately be far better for the national budget.

Broader focus on livestock health

Effective agriculture aid programs require a broad focus on livestock health, rather than just tackling diseases that might threaten Australia.

For example, many small-scale farmers would prefer to vaccinate cows against diseases such as haemorrhagic septicaemia and anthrax that kill cattle, rather than only vaccinating them against foot-and-mouth disease which causes cows to produce less milk, but won’t usually^[19] kill the animal.

Controlling diseases with a high death rate would build trust from small-scale farmers in animal health services. This could, in turn, make rural communities more receptive to vaccinate their animals against other diseases such as foot-and-mouth disease.

Federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries, Forestry and Emergency Management Senator Murray Watt. AAP Image/Mick Tsikas

It takes considerable effort to establish effective and efficient vaccination campaigns and other biosecurity measures. But once they’re in place, maintaining them is less costly. If funding for recurrent maintenance isn’t in place and disease outbreaks occur, this trust will be lost.

This lesson was learnt in Southeast Asian countries such as Indonesia and Laos during the avian influenza pandemic which started in 2003^[20]. During that period, poultry producers were forced by government disease control agencies to cull affected flocks without receiving compensation.

The intervention still casts a shadow over relationships between producers and animal health services, complicating^[21] efforts to control and monitor disease.

Read more: Yes, wash your shoes at the airport – but we can do more to stop foot-and-mouth disease ravaging Australia^[22]

Beyond livestock related biosecurity risks, adequate investment is also needed in the countries of origin to improve biosecurity practices for imported plant products.

This includes cut flowers^[23] imported from developing countries where a 2021 investigation detected pests in 12% of consignments^[24].

Members of Veterinary Team for Handling Foot and Mouth Diseases during a vaccination drive for cows in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, July 2022. EPA/HOTLI SIMANJUNTAK

Taking a long-term view

Much work is needed to reduce the risk of further pests and diseases entering into Australia. This includes ongoing support to help our regional neighbours strengthen their biosecurity and associated food security systems.

Of course, this is not the only step. Australia must also ensure effective biosecurity surveillance at the border and actively engage the Australian community to report any incursions that may occur.

And most importantly, Australia’s biosecurity strategies must take a long-term, integrated view. These strategies must consider both benefits and costs and, crucially, have guaranteed bipartisan support at the state and federal levels.

Read more https://theconversation.com/to-lock-out-foot-and-mouth-disease-australia-must-help-our-neighbour-countries-bolster-their-biosecurity-188010