National bovine Johne’s disease (BJD) review:
implementation options for the WA cattle industry
23 March 2016
Animal Health Australia is in the process of undertaking a review of the current
National Bovine Johne’s Disease (BJD) Strategic Plan at the request of the national
BJD Steering Committee. To date, the review process has included a public forum in
February 2015, followed by facilitated workshops in Sydney, Brisbane and
Melbourne.
The final workshop will take place in Perth on August 11 and is the ideal opportunity
for Western Australian producers and producer groups to have their say in the future
of BJD management in Australia.
Review findings to date largely recommend that the management of BJD in Australia
moves to a market-based producer assurance program. The national industry plan
will be adopted once finalised and agreed nationally.
WA currently claims the lowest disease prevalence of BJD in Australia. If it is
nationally agreed that Australia moves to an assurance program, this may result in
significant changes to the way BJD is dealt with in WA. These changes will likely
include the removal of:
•
current zoning (WA being a BJD Free zone)
•
mandated movement controls into and within the state, and
•
regulated controls for producers and properties that have the disease.
Details on how aspects such as market assurance programs and health certification
may work are not yet available. It may be that the current zoning system is replaced
by a market-driven producer program where differing climatic regions of risk are
recognised. These details will, of course, impact how the new approach will work in
WA.
The Department of Agriculture and Food (DAFWA) urges the WA cattle industries to
engage in the review process to ensure their needs are met in the finalised strategy.
Based on the assumption that a market-driven producer assurance program is likely
to be adopted, three options for implementation are outlined below along with some
of the potential benefits and risks of each that should be considered.
Supporting your success
Option 1: Adopt a property-centric market-driven approach
WA cattle producers could adopt the new national plan as it is agreed upon.
Individual producers would be responsible for determining the requirements for
bringing stock onto their property, and how they then manage disease risk on their
property. Properties that are found to have imported risk animals, or that have the
disease, would not be placed under regulated conditions such as quarantine and
movement controls.
The benefit of this approach is that individual producers can make decisions based
solely on their own business risks and needs. For example, those running a seed
stock or export business can maintain whatever purchasing conditions they require
to minimise the risk of bringing BJD onto their property. A commercial enterprise with
domestic markets, on the other hand, may choose to accept cattle with lower levels
of assurance given the lower relative risk to their business.
Under this approach it is likely that BJD will enter and establish in WA where there
are favourable environmental conditions. Producers wanting to minimise the risk of
BJD entering their property would need to maintain appropriate biosecurity standards
on an individual level. Tools such as assurance programs and health statements
would be critical to this.
Option 2: Adopt a regionally-centric market-driven
approach
Some producers may wish to adopt a coordinated approach to control and manage
BJD where all individuals in a specified geographical area adopt the same
biosecurity arrangements. This could be achieved by applying to the Minister to
establish a Recognised Biosecurity Group (RBG) under the Biosecurity and
Agriculture Management Act 2007 (BAM Act). RBGs enable recognition of groups
that undertake activities to control declared pests, such as BJD, at a landscape scale
across a designated area.
An RBG could specify entry conditions for bringing in stock from elsewhere in the
country or state into the area, as well as how BJD would be managed in the area if it
were to enter.
This approach could be beneficial where there is a shared and equal need for
producers to adopt a certain level of controls to stop BJD entering their herds, for
example the dairy industry in South-West WA. Producers not in the RBG would be
responsible for determining their own biosecurity arrangements.
All producers in the designated area would need to agree to the same biosecurity
conditions regarding BJD. The group would be funded and managed by these
producers, with the potential for a dollar-for-dollar matching contribution from state
government if public benefit could be shown. An RBG has no direct statutory powers
– any use of statutory powers has to be agreed with and implemented by DAFWA.
Page 2 of 3
More than one separate RBG could be set up across the state to take into account
the differing risks and needs of areas or industries – for example the risks to dairy
versus extensive beef production.
Option 3: Adopt a state-wide market-driven approach
All cattle producers in the state could adopt the same biosecurity arrangements for
controlling BJD in WA. This could be achieved in two ways:
In theory, the entire state could apply to the Minister to form an RBG. All cattle
entering the RBG, in this case the state, could be required to meet specified
conditions, and management of incursions could be harmonised across the state.
This would require agreement from all WA cattle producers, which would be difficult
to achieve.
Alternatively, if BJD was determined to impact on the viability of agriculture at an
industry scale, it could be dealt with through the Industry Funding Scheme (IFS) for
cattle under the BAM Act. Any program under the IFS would be fully industry funded,
and managed by the Industry Management Committee (Cattle). The agreed program
could again include import conditions and controlling incursions within the state.
This would still require agreement to have state-wide controls for BJD at an industry
level and would need agreement from the Minister.
While this sort of arrangement would seem to offer the highest levels of protection
from BJD incursion and control on a state level, it removes the opportunity for the
individual producer to make decisions that best suit their business. Current
experiences with managing BJD have shown it may be very difficult to get
consensus on management options in an industry where the relative risks and
consequences of BJD incursion differ significantly.
More information
For more information on the above topics go to:
•
AHA website – national BJD review 2015
•
DAFWA website – Recognised Biosecurity Groups
•
DAFWA website – Industry Funding Schemes
•
DAFWA website – BJD
To make a submission to the BJD review, contact your industry representative or
make a direct submission via the AHA website.
Important disclaimer
The Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Agriculture and Food and the State of
Western Australia accept no liability whatsoever by reason of negligence or otherwise arising
from the use or release of this information or any part of it.
Copyright © Western Australian Agriculture Authority, 2015
Page 3 of 3