African Swine Fever in the Russian Federation: Risk Factors for Europe and Beyond
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
empres watch VOL 28 May 2013 [email protected] | www.fao.org/ag/empres.html African swine fever in the Russian Federation: risk factors for Europe and beyond Contributors: Sergei Khomenko a, Daniel Beltrán-Alcrudo a, Andriy Rozstalnyy a, Andrey Gogin b, Denis Kolbasov b, Julio Pinto a, Juan Lubroth a , Vincent Martin a a Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) b All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Veterinary Virology and Microbiology (Pokrov, Russian Federation) Ukraine (Dietze et al., 2012). Without the spreading to neighboring countries and the availability of effective vaccines or treatment, likelihood that it will then establish in these Contents outbreaks of ASF have been controlled in newly infected areas (Beltran-Alcrudo et al., some countries by stamping out and through 2008 and 2009; FAO, 2010; Dietze et al., Introduction 1 the implementation of strict movement bans 2012). Such developments could lead to the of swine and their products. However, these expansion of ASF into Eastern Europe and Overview on key production measures are difficult to implement unless the beyond. veterinary services are well-equipped, have The analysis of the situation in the Russian systems affected by ASF 2 reliable, trained personnel and sufficient and Federation and its production and marketing ASF main epidemiological timely access to funds (for operations and systems here presented, allows us to better adequate compensation). In addition, understand the epidemiology and spread features 3 extensive culling implies economic losses and patterns of the disease in the region, and to Challenges in ASF detection shortfalls in available food, particularly for the identify critical areas for improved disease poorest farmers and households. One of the management. FAO, in collaboration with the and control 7 most important challenge is to get the All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of outbreaks reported by the farmers. Veterinary Virology and Microbiology (National Risk assessment for Reference Laboratory on ASF) in Pokrov, has the region 9 GIVEN THE WORRISOME prepared a comprehensive overview on the DEVELOPMENTS IN THE RUSSIAN subject. This technical publication is based Risk management options FEDERATION, EUROPEAN COUNTRIES HAVE TO largely on those findings. The knowledge for at-risk countries 10 BE ALERT AND READY TO PREVENT AND TO provided here will better inform veterinary services, animal health professionals, pig REACT EFFECTIVELY TO ASF INTRODUCTIONS Conclusions 12 producers and decision-makers in Europe, INTO THEIR TERRITORIES FOR MANY YEARS TO and in other countries around the globe. References 13 COME. Countries immediately bordering the In the Russian Federation, ASF has Russian Federation, particularly Ukraine, persisted since 2008 and continues to Republic of Moldova, Kazakhstan and Latvia, Introduction spread. The disease is endemic in most of the are most vulnerable to ASF introduction and south and is on its way to becoming endemic endemic establishment, largely because the frican swine fever (ASF) is one of in Tverskaya Oblast, not far from Moscow, biosecurity of their pig sector is predominantly the most severe viral pig diseases. where some of the highest pig and wild boar low. The prevention of ASF spread into A Some genotypes can cause up to densities are found. Over 600 000 pigs have Ukraine is particularly critical for the whole 100 percent mortality in pigs and died or have been culled from 2007 to mid- pig production sector in Europe. Given the wild boar, such as the genotype II virus 2012 due to ASF. Overall losses, including worrisome developments in the Russian introduced into Georgia in 2007 (Chapman et indirect ones, were estimated at around 30 Federation, European countries have to be al., 2011), which spread throughout the billion roubles or US$ 1 billion (Anonymous, alert. They must be ready to prevent and to Caucasus (Beltran-Alcrudo et al., 2008) into 2012). react effectively to ASF introductions into the Islamic Republic of Iran (Rahimi et al., Since 2008, the Food and Agriculture their territories for many years to come. 2010), the Russian Federation (Beltran- Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Alcrudo et al., 2009) and, in July 2012, into has repeatedly warned of the high risk of ASF empres watch VOL 28 MAY 2013 | Figure 1. Yearly detections of ASFV in the Russian Federation shown separately for wild boar (left) and domestic pigs (right) from 14 November 2007 to 29 December 2012. Figures in parenthesis next to the year represent the number of outbreaks or virus detections in meat/carcasses. Crossed circle indicates the first known incursion of ASF into the Russian Federation. The only outbreak of ASF (31 July 2012) in Ukraine is also shown. Overview on key subsistence production (34 percent). The populations are distributed continuously production systems last two categories have typically low to across space. However, wild boar population affected by ASF non-existent biosecurity and will be hereafter density is relatively low and only seldom referred to as the low biosecurity (LB) exceeds 0.43 heads/km2 even in the forested Pig production systems sector. These LB sectors are generally more areas, where numbers are highest (Fig. 4). susceptible to incursions of ASF and other According to official data (Volodina, 2011), Pig production in the Russian Federation pathogens. In terms of population size, in 2010, wild boar numbers in the Russian meets only 63.8 percent of the domestic particularly with regard to backyard pigs, the Federation reached their highest levels in pork demand (as of 2010). In 2009, 85.4 LB sector is comparable to the HB sector in 30 years (404 400 heads). However, in percent of the 17.2 million pigs in the country many parts of the Russian Federation, and is most areas, the rapid growth of wild boar were concentrated in four federal districts: larger than the HB sector in some areas (Figs. populations observed in the last eight the Central (28.8 percent), the Volga (25.4 2 and 3). The geographical distribution of the years (inserted graph in Fig. 4) appears to percent), the Siberian (17.2 percent) and the LB sector (b + c) is depicted in Figure 2. be leveling off. One third of the wild boar Southern (14.0 percent), with pig densities In the Russian Federation, the LB population (129 400) is concentrated in the higher than 4 animals/km2. The remaining production systems do not receive or have Central Federal District, followed by Volga (85 four federal districts (the Urals, the North access to much institutional support to deal 400) and Siberian (53 500) federal districts. Western, the North Caucasian and the Far with animal diseases. Moreover, disease These three districts account for 66.3 percent Eastern) accounted for only 14.6 percent prevention and control is most challenging of the national wild boar population. of the national herd with just a few regions in these settings due to a number of factors, where pig density exceeds 4 animals/km2 including: lower levels of awareness and THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DISEASE (Figs. 2 and 3). Some free-range production biosecurity, poor compliance to livestock CONTROL MEASURES IN WILD BOAR is practised seasonally in North Ossetia – related regulations (reporting, movement IS COMPLICATED BY THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST BETWEEN DIFFERENT Alania and parts of the North Caucasian and control, certifications and inspection, STAKEHOLDERS, GAPS IN LEGISLATION AND Southern federal districts. vaccination, etc.) and lack of animal LOGISTICAL CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING According to biosecurity standards, pig identification and traceability. SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL. production systems of the Russian Federation can be divided into three main categories: a) Wild boar distribution and Over most of their range in the Russian specialized (industrial) production units with numbers Federation, wild boar are sedentary and highly generally high biosecurity (HB) (61 percent In the European part of the Russian territorial. However, some populations show of the total population); b) small commercial Federation, where outbreaks of ASF have certain degrees of mobility, such as seasonal farms (5 percent); and c) backyard been reported from 2007 to 2012, wild boar vertical migrations into the mountains 2 empres watch | VOL 28 MAY 2013 (Caucasus, Altai), or seasonal movements in through movements of infected wild boar semi-arid areas (southern Russian Federation, from Georgia to the Chechen Republic. Kazakhstan) and at the extreme north of The following year, ASF spread rapidly its distribution range in the northwest of into six new administrative areas of the the Russian Federation (Sludskiy, 1956; Russian Federation. Initially, infection Danilkin, 2002). Critical weather events, was limited to wild boar (Chechen and natural disasters (floods, fires) as well as Ingush Republics, Figs. 1 and 2) and the direct encroachment and hunting by man, free-range pig production systems (North can stimulate unprecedented movements of Ossetia), but after 2008, it expanded to animals, too, and in an unpredictable manner. all pig production sectors, particularly the © FAO The issues of wild boar health status backyard sector. During 2009 and 2010, control and population management ASF progressively established itself in the boar, annually. Epidemiological trends do become increasingly relevant with the recent south of the Russian Federation with a few not indicate improvement, and the disease expansion of ASF into temperate forests occasional