--------------------------------------------- 
    THE BridgeNews FORUM: On farming, farm policy 
    and related agricultural issues. 
    --------------------------------------------- 
  
* The Rise Of Business Techniques Like Outsourcing Mean Few Farms Stand  
  Alone, Which Adds An Additional Dimension To Containing Disease   
  Outbreaks 
  
  
    By David Walker, agricultural economist 
    BridgeNews 
    NORWICH, England--The increasingly hollow claims by Britain's Minister 
of Agriculture that the country's outbreak of foot-and mouth-disease was 
under control were displaced late last week with details of new measures 
to address the second wave of the outbreak. 
  
    Increasingly, the standard isolation-and-slaughter control measures 
are being questioned. 
  
    The reality is that the government has played a catch-up game from the 
start. The source case was two or three weeks old before it was discovered 
and the disease had spread to a neighboring farm and from there into 
marketing channels.  
  
    As soon as this was known, a nationwide ban on livestock movement was 
imposed. The hope was that the disease would be limited to wherever it had 
reached, livestock movement records would identify those locations, and 
after two weeks--the long end of the range for the development of the 
disease symptoms, all new cases would have been identified and the second 
wave would be nipped in the bud. 
  
    The restriction on movements has probably been successful in limiting 
foot-and-mouth's reach. Unfortunately, this included most major livestock 
producing areas in the country. 
  
    During the two-week head start, infected sheep moved across northern 
England, south to a farm owned by a livestock dealer in Devon and on to 
various locations in southern England, having passed through four 
livestock auction markets on the way. 
  
    This route of infection was promptly identified and the disease 
discovered at most locations along the route. 
  
    Surprisingly, however, the first case reported from the northwest, 
where the outbreak has taken firmest hold, came four days after those in 
the south. 
  
    As is probably the case with livestock auction markets everywhere, 
some deals are done behind rather than in the ring. As these deals were 
off the record, government veterinarians are dependent on those involved 
to volunteer information. 
  
    For whatever reason, it seems some people were unwilling to go onto 
the record and the vets were left to wait for reports. Once they came, the 
incidence exploded. 
  
    Although well over half of English counties have reported foot-and- 
mouth, about half of all cases are now being reported in the two counties 
adjacent to the implicated livestock market. With no truly complete record 
of livestock passing by, if not through, the market, there is no assurance 
all contacts have been identified. 
  
    A further challenge is the difficulty of identifying the disease in 
large flocks of sheep extensively grazed over this hill country. The 
danger here is that several generations of the infection could occur 
before the disease is identified with increased chance for further spread. 
  
    In Devon and some other counties in the west country with high 
livestock densities, the close proximity of one herd to the next means the 
disease has lots of opportunity to spread. 
  
    In contrast, much of the eastern half of England and Scotland are 
 still free of the disease, and where there have been outbreaks there has 
been much better success with control. 
  
    With this inevitably mixed situation, the British government is now  
attempting to match measures with circumstance. To address the most serious  
challenge in the northwest, a "fire break" policy is being adopted 
with all sheep flocks and pig herds within 3 kilometers of any confirmed 
outbreak being slaughtered. 
  
    In Devon there will be intensive patrols to all farms within 3 
kilometers of infected farms. More livestock would be involved in a 3- 
kilometer circle in this area and the livestock are easier to observe. In 
areas not affected by the disease the livestock movement ban has been 
eased. 
  
    Outside exclusion zones around confirmed cases, licensed movement is 
permitted for 0.5 kilometers on a single farm, for 10 kilometers, once 
only between farms and for unlimited distances for slaughter and animal 
welfare situations. 
  
    Finally, all flocks that have had any contact with sheep that moved 
through the four implicated livestock markets or by two dealers whose 
sheep were infected will be destroyed. This may make good sense in the 
context of control, but is not being accepted without question in the 
northwest, where the harshest measures are being advocated. 
  
    There is further growing unrest outside agriculture, with tourism 
claiming economic damage far exceeding that done to the livestock 
industry. 
  
    The unthinkable for the livestock sector--replacing the slaughter 
policy with immunization and thereby giving up foot-and-mouth disease-free 
status in the long term and forfeiting future export business, is also 
being raised. 
  
    The outbreak has so far resulted in a loss of less than 0.5 percent of 
the livestock population, but slaughter will certainly exceed that of the 
1967 outbreak. With 30 years of improvements in control measures, this 
merits questioning.  
  
    The head start afforded the outbreak was almost certainly an indirect 
consequence of declining government investment in long-term prevention 
measures. Larger flocks and herds mean the disease is more difficult to 
identify. The standard control measure, isolation, is also increasingly 
difficult to implement. 
  
    The self-contained family farm that could easily be identified and 
isolated is something of the past. The adoption of business techniques 
with such terms as outsourcing, just-in-time inventory management and 
downsizing means few farm businesses stand alone physically or 
financially. The constant traffic in livestock and person power adds an 
additional dimension to disease control. 
  
    It was always known that foot-and-mouth disease was difficult to get 
under control once it had been given a head start. The longer the outbreak 
lasts, the more difficult public relations will become and the more 
evident the need for early detection will be.  End 
  
    DAVID WALKER, an agricultural economist, lives on his family's farm  
outside Norwich, England. He recently served as senior economist in London  
for the Home-Grown Cereals Authority and previously was executive director 
of  the Alberta Grain Commission in Canada. He also maintains a Web site 
at http://www.openi.co.uk/. His views are not necessarily those of BridgeNews, 
whose  ventures include the Internet site http://www.bridge.com/. 
  
    OPINION ARTICLES and letters to the editor are welcome. Send 
submissions to Sally Heinemann, editorial director, BridgeNews, 3 World 
Financial Center, 200 Vesey St., 28th Floor, New York, N.Y. 10281-1009. 
You may also call (212) 372-7510, fax (212)  372-2707 or send e-mail to 
opinion@bridge.com. 
  
    EDITORS: A color photo of the author is available from KRT Photo 
Service.