FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21456, 24 April 1935, Page 7

FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE

iro Tin EDiTon o» tub nisss. Sir,—The question of lifting the embargo is again cropping up. Several "expert" veterinarians have expressed their conviction that there is no danger of introducing the disease here. In view of the questions asked in the British House of Commons and the answers given thereto last November, it is difficult to see what they base their opinions on. Mr William Nicholson asked the Minister for Agriculture whether in any of the recent outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease the source of infection or cause had been ascertained, and whether any of the cattle first affected in the outbreaks had been imported into Britain. Mr Elliot replied: "During the last three months seven outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease have occurred which could not be attributed to previous cases in this country. In none of these outbreaks was the source of infection definitely established, and in no case was there reason to believe that the animals imported into this country were the first to be affected." Lord Apsley asked the Minister for Agriculture in the same month whether the original causes of infection which had caused the many outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in the Western and South Midland counties of England that month had as yet been traced; whether he was yet in a position to state to what causes these outbreaks could be attributed; and whether or not he considered them to be all spread from an original outbreak or to have'been caused by different agencies acting independently. Sir G. Bowyer replied: "Outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease have occurred during this month in six areas, the majority of the cases being in the Lindsey, Lincolnshire, area. Two outbreaks near Grimsby v/ere probably independent of the other cases in that area, in which, however, the means of spread of infection have not definitely been established. The initial cause of infection in any of these six areas has not yet been traced; in the case of one area, however, namely, that of Thornbury, Gloucestershire, it is thought that the outbreak may be a recurrence of a previous outbreak in September. No evidence has been obtained which would indicate that an outbreak in any one of the infected areas has been responsible for the occurrence of disease in any of the other areas concerned. The history of the animals involved and their management in the initial case in each of the affected areas vary widely, which suggests the likelihood of different agencies acting independently." Lord Apsley: "Has any general cause been discovered as the reason for these outbreaks at the present time?" Sir G. Bowyer: "No, sir."

Mr McQuisten: "Is there any reason to suspect that they are caused maliciously?" Sir G. Bov/yer: "I think not." In a recent statement by J. O. Powley, M.R.C.V.S., Superintending Inspector, Veterinary Department, Ministry of Agriculture, London, he said: "I afn satisfied that some of the initial cases in this country are missed owing to the fact that the originally infected animal contracted the disease in such a mild form as not to throw up what we regard as typical diagnostic vesicles, but probably suffered only from a slight transient malaise. Such an animal, however, has transmitted the infection to several of its companions, which later throw up typical vesicles." At a recent meeting in Africa the Rhodesian Minister for Agriculture, said: "Although, careful investigations

have been made, it has not been discovered from where the foot-and-mouth disease infection has come." He stated also, "The Government is very keen to have a veterinary conference with representatives from all countries in Africa to consider the question of foot-and-mouth disease," It would be presumptuous for a mere layman to comment on the above confessions of failure on the part of two governments. Both are baffled. Britain, with millions, able to command the service of the finest scientists of the world, backed by drastic quarantine regulations, has been, unable to clear the country of this dread disease after half a century of research ana experimenting. It is just now worse than it has been for several years.

According to the report of the Dairy Commission the number of dairy cows in the Dominion is approximately 250,000, and there are 30,000,000 sheep, producing more than 90 per cent, of our export revenue. To expose these to the risk of contamination would be a blunder worse than a crime; it would be a national calamity. Consideration for your space compels me to stop, but I hope I have drawn the attention of my fellow-far-mers to the danger of being apathetic over this question. The petition presented to Parliament was signed by seven breeders. There are about 80,000 in the Dominion; are they all represented by those seven? I was pleased to notice that the farmers of Motukarara and surrounding districts are dead against the embargo' being lifted; so are the branches I| have the honour to represent,—Yours, 1 etc.,

JOHN G. FIECKEN, Chairman, Tai Tapu and surrounding districts branch, N.Z. Farmers' Union. April 23, 1935. * . j tO TIDS EDITO* O* THE PRBSS. Sir, —Last Wednesday at the Adding-, ton saleyards, I was asked by people* interested, both as sheep breeders, stockmen, and others who make their living from New" Zealand's greatest and largest industry—the export of lamb, mutton, and other food products,' including butter —to protest against lifting the embargo on stock from countries in which foot-and-mouth disease exists. Dr. Reakes, the head of the New Zealand Department of Agriculture, mentions that the destruction of 2000 head of stock shows how stringent the regulations are in England. Consequentlyit is quite safe for us to import stock: from there. No. Lasft year there) were 84 outbreaks of the disease in| England. If the scourge is so rampant, and the experts there cannot control l it, what guarantee have we that it will not reach here through importing stud stock. If'the disease once became established in New Zealand our great meat and wool industry would be greatly retarded. Many people would be thrown out of employment and farmers a little more ruined than they are at present. Dr. Reakes goes on to say that this destruction of 2000 head of live stock gives a description of the thoroughness of the British authorities and that British livestock can be imported without risk of i'oot-and-mouth disease.

When England can definitely say the disease has been located and stamped out, we in New Zealand will be only too pleased to import stud animals. Until then I would most definitely say it is not worth taking the great risk for the small gain. Our Government is taking opinions from agricultural and pastoral societies, farmers' unions, and breed societies. It is to be hoped that their replies to the Minister for Agriculture will be definitely against lifting the embargo. Even in such bad times as these we are doing pretty well. Why paint the lily?— Yours, etc., C. H. ENSOR, Hanmer Springs, April 22, 1835.