Bovis outbreak taking its toll
AS the battle to contain the spread of cattle disease Mycoplasma bovis continues, the toll that it is taking — both financially and mentally — is reaching feverpitch.
Confirmation of the disease at a farming operation in the Waimate district in July last year subsequently triggered New Zealand’s largest and most expensive biosecurity response, and it is showing no signs of abating.
Last month, the Ministry for Primary Industries announced 22,300 animals would be culled — on top of about 5000 slaughtered last year — having decided it was the most appropriate action to take to contain the spread of the disease until a decision can be taken on how M. bovis will be managed in the future.
Already there are heartbreaking stories of farmers having to cull their highlyproductive, topperforming herds, built up through years of hard graft but now destined for the slaughter plant. Farmers are typically a stoic bunch and you can tell things are really tough when the stress they are under is palpably obvious.
Equally disturbing was the announcement from MPI that search warrants had been executed on several properties, as part of the M. bovis investigation.
Top marks should be given to MPI for potentially tracking it down to that point, but it is also horrendous to think biosecurity rules might have knowingly been breached, putting farmers, animals and livelihoods at risk, along with the New Zealand economy.
The media has reported about growing speculation the disease was introduced to New Zealand through cheap, illegally imported, livestock drugs. If that is the case, then the consequences for any perpetrators must be severe.
Compensation was always going to be a prickly issue and so it is proving to be. Affected farmers have been complaining about the compensation process, with one Otago recently farmer describing it as being ‘‘quite appalling’’.
The disease response also raised concerns about the effectiveness of the National Animal Identification and Tracing (Nait) programme, with a subsequent review released and various recommendations made to improve the programme. \
It was the first time the animal traceability system had been used for one of its primary purposes but its value was limited by the failure of some farmers to fulfil their responsibilities, making the tracing of animal movements far harder and less reliable than it should have been. That had complicated and slowed disease response efforts.
MPI rightly says it has to take every step necessary to fairly administrate the compensation scheme, when public money is at stake, and it is good to hear it is boosting its compensation team.
But surely, for those affected farmers that have played by the rules — who have adhered to their Nait obligations and put in appropriate realistic compensation claims and have been under horrendous stress through no fault of their own — their claims should be handled swiftly, allowing them to get back to normal as soon as possible.
If a farmer does not like the offer made to them, they can appeal and go to arbitration.
However, that is a process that takes time and involves more money the further it goes, amid a response that must already be costing into the very many millions of dollars.
It is also concerning to hear from farmers that a lack of communication from MPI is a recurring theme, along with indecision, and dealing with people with no practical understanding of farming.
Undoubtedly, the response has been a massive operation for MPI staff, but one of the organisation’s key roles is to protect New Zealand’s primary industries — that’s what it is there for.