Here, we take a look at answers to some key questions around foot and mouth disease that producers are asking. Answers have come mostly via the Department of Agriculture but also industry organisations and beef analysts.
Q: If meat and milk from infected livestock is safe to consume, why will we lose market access?
A: Countries free of FMD, which includes most of our most valuable beef export markets, would not buy Australian meat or milk if we became infected in order to prevent any risk of importing the disease and having it infect their own livestock industries.
Q: What does Australia's chief veterinary officer say about banning holidays to Bali?
A: Mark Schipp said he does not support shutting borders to Indonesia. On social media he posted: "We deal with the risk every day at our airports and seaports, and these measures have been enhanced since Indonesia contracted FMD. In addition, Indonesia is focusing their vaccination and airport biosecurity efforts on Bali. I believe that we can manage the risk without closing borders and losing export markets."
Q: What are the signs to look out for?
A: Cattle may show fever, be drooling and will be reluctant to move. They can suffer blisters on the mouth, tongue, lips or feet. Blisters may be intact or ruptured, exposing raw tissue which is very painful.
Q: Will farmers be required to eradicate their own infected animals?
A: State and territory governments will manage the slaughter of animals and it is likely they will appoint government officers and contractors.
Q: Will it only be animals confirmed to have the disease or the entire herd, and will it be neighbouring herds, that must be destroyed?
A: Due to the highly infectious nature of the disease, it is likely that most or all of the herd will have been exposed to the virus and be either showing signs of disease or in the early stages of infection, therefore it is likely that the whole herd will be need to be slaughtered. The neighbouring herds will be tested and assessed for signs of disease.
Q: How will carcases be disposed of?
A: The carcases and any contaminated products would be buried or burnt. Trials are currently being undertaken to investigate the possibility of composting carcases and contaminated products.
Q: How long can the virus survive on clothing and footwear?
A: An exact window can not be determined. Survival of the virus depends on many factors including ambient temperature, humidity, whether the virus is encased in mud or faeces and whether the surface is porous or not.
Q: FMD is most likely to be introduced to Australia in contaminated, illegal imported animal products. What is the process for that?
A: Swill feeding, where waste is fed to pigs, or infected rubbish from ships and planes can transmit FMD. Swill feeding is illegal in Australia and waste streams are subject to effective controls such as biosecure disposal of waste from ships and planes. Increased surveillance at airports includes checking for meat and animal products in passengers' baggage.
Q: What does the Australian Alliance for Animals say about destroying infected cattle and sheep?
A: "The most important thing is to stop FMD from getting to Australia and we support all efforts to that end. If it gets here, we would support the best evidence-based strategy to reduce the level of animal suffering. Animals should only be killed to control the spread of the disease when the evidence supports it and this must be done humanely. We note FMD outbreaks in other parts of the world have led to profound animal suffering through the mass on-farm killing of millions of animals. That is what we must avoid."
Q: The Lessons to be Learned Inquiry, ordered by the House of Commons in the aftermath of the United Kingdom foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 - one of the largest in history- identified a number of shortcomings. What were the key ones?
A: The first responses to the early cases were not fast enough or effectively co-ordinated. The paramount importance of speed, and especially the rapid slaughter of infected animals, was not given overriding priority early on. Initially the outbreak was treated as an agricultural issue. The impact of the disease, especially on tourism and the rural economy, was not recognised early on. Although supported by many at the time, with the benefit of hindsight the widespread closure of footpaths, with no straightforward mechanism for reopening them, was a mistake.
ALSO READ:
