AWI forum ‘orchestrated’

06 Dec, 2012 03:00 AM
Comments
6
 
New England OJD Advisory Committee chairman David Moen who has backed the new natioanl OJD management plan.
New England OJD Advisory Committee chairman David Moen who has backed the new natioanl OJD management plan.

NEW England producers have backed the new national Ovine Johne’s Disease management plan and last week became the first area to submit a regional biosecurity plan to become a protected area.

Despite this, Sheepmeat Council of Australia and WoolProducers Australia this week bowed to public pressure to delay the introduction of the plan by six months, to July 1, 2013.

Much of this public dissension flowed from an Australian Wool Innovation-hosted forum in Sydney last month, which passed a number of motions including one to indefinitely delay the plan and another to revoke it entirely.

New England producer Katrina Blomfield, Karori Merinos, Walcha, has lambasted the forum as an “orchestrated meeting” organised to “push a point of view”.

Mrs Blomfield urged the sheep industry to back the proposed new national plan and stop the spread of the “insidious” OJD for as long as possible.

The new plan proposes to replace the previous scheme with just two areas; control and protected, with trade restricted between the two. To be eligible to be a protected area, producers would need prevalence of less than one per cent.

Mrs Blomfield queried the motives of AWI in hosting the forum.

“Who are they representing? I would like to think that (AWI) wouldn’t be behind a scheme which spreads an insidious disease across our industry,” she said.

“I think it was an orchestrated meeting to push a point of view. I don’t think it was a fair representation of all producers, I think it was a forum of the people that are making the most noise.”

AWI has previously justified holding the forum – held in Sydney and attended by about 100 people last month – with a spokesman saying it sought legal advice before going ahead.

Mrs Blomfield said the people calling for the proposed national OJD management plan to be scrapped needed to question whether – if they had a choice – they would want the disease on their property.

Motions were passed at the AWI forum to revoke the proposed national plan in one case, and indefinitely delay it in another.

“We’ve asked ourselves that question and we don’t want it. We don’t want to be in a prevalent area and we don’t want to have it,” she said.

“I know that producers that have OJD have been economically affected, and that’s really sad for them, but that is no reason to then say everyone should have it.

“I don’t think that is a valid thought process.”

In the New England, 67 per cent of producers who responded to a Livestock Health and Pest Authority (LHPA) survey last year voted in favour of maintaining their previous exclusion area status.

The Blomfields were one of the first studs to join the market assurance program in 1997, and Mrs Blomfield said all producers should try to limit the spread of OJD.

“We have to do a management plan, we have to test sheep every year but we think we should make an effort to not get OJD because we don’t want it,” she said.

“Why is it that we as farmers are not prepared to practice good scientific risk-based assessment and practice good animal health?”

Wollomombi producer and New England OJD Advisory Committee chairman David Moen, “Chandler”, said he believed the committee had a mandate on behalf of sheep producers in the New England LHPA to protect the area for as long as possible from OJD.

“At the moment we’ve got 1600 sheep flocks in the New England LHPA and there is no known infection, which is quite amazing,” said Dr Moen, a veterinarian.

“We’re still wondering how that can be, but all the work over the last 15 years... has shown this to be true.

“The philosophy of our little committee is to keep it out of the New England as long as we can.”

Dr Moen said “misinformation” had been spread in the debate about the proposed national OJD management plan. He said the calls for deregulation were unfounded, as the only regulation which would exist in NSW under the proposed scheme was the sheep health statement, regulated by the Fair Trade Act.

“It’s against the law to fill out the sheep health statement incorrectly,” he said.

Dr Moen made no bones about the fact the New England was proud of its status as being OJD-free, and said he wanted that maintained.

“Good biosecurity, in other words risk management, begins at the farm gate,” he said.

“People can bring sheep into the New England if they wish – it’s not illegal to bring in sheep with a high level of infection – but New Englanders aren’t because they’re practising good biosecurity.

“That’s the critical issue; people get risk management by farmers in the New England mixed up with regulation by the State government.

“It’s an awful piece of misinformation.”

Dr Moen said the proposed national management plan was a "good compromise” which had been undermined at the “eleventh hour”.

“There is only a month to go before the program (was due to start) and they’re trying to derail it,” he said.

“I find it a bit strange when they’ve had plenty of time to talk to the folk who have been putting it together.”

Dr Moen said in the past he had been verbally abused for his strong position on OJD however, while reports of bullying against producers in the New England have emerged, Glen Innes producer Archie Cameron, Kalanga Poll Dorsets, said he had not encountered this.

Mr Cameron attended the AWI forum in Sydney last month and spoke out against the motions against the proposed national plan.

“I was one of the few, you might say, dissenting voices to the voting there and I did stand up and state my piece,” he said.

“They didn’t necessarily agree with me... (but) I didn’t get any flak from that.”

Page:
1
Date: Newest first | Oldest first

READER COMMENTS

Dave66
6/12/2012 6:42:57 AM, on The Land

Why is that the OJD prevalant area sheep producers feel they have a responsibility to ensure all sheep producers are subject to this insideous wasting disease. It seems to me there are some significant self serving individual agendas at work. If it was foot and mouth or rabies there would be a different hymn sheet.
Glass Houses
6/12/2012 9:09:46 AM, on The Land

While we are on the regulation bandwagon, I would suggest that a policy on drench resistant worms and their transferance be implimented. We could have a control and protected area for this disease which is far more costly to treat than OJD. We would then see some tremors from the New England area.
Adrian Veitch
6/12/2012 3:08:47 PM, on The Land

I am a breeder and veterinarian. NO ONE WANTS OJD and breeders should do everything to prevent it. What I have a problem with is the stigma associated with OJD. In the new system, the protected areas will have to test regularly and as I have found, if you go looking for OJD hard enough, there is a likelihood you will find it and as a member of a protected area, you have to be prepared for the consequences. Get the facts about OJD as I have found even the "experts" do not fully understand the disease. My biosecurity was excellent with 15 years of testing but I still got a positive - Vaccinate
MN3 - V
6/12/2012 8:59:09 PM, on Stock & Land

Poor self-righteous Mrs Blomfield, if you don't want OJD vaccinate. Because OJD can't read lines on maps. One day you will realise it is your current point of view that is INSIDIOUS.
MN3 - V
6/12/2012 9:28:48 PM, on Stock & Land

Dave66, people from prevalant areas are just trying to rite the wrongs that they have lived thru in the past. OJD is easily managed, very bad policy is far worse & much more damaging than the actual disease itself But if you do get the proposed new national sham and when OJD is found closer and closer to your area make sure you keep on testing.
Observant
11/12/2012 9:56:50 AM, on The Land

There are no reasons for governments to regulate for OJD. The disease, to date, is not linked to human health. There is a vaccine to control it along with tests. Abattoir surveillance provides some level of knowledge of incidence. Market tools are available for producers to be informed. Industry is not united on the issue; governments should step back and make clear they will not consider regulations to support this plan. No one on the New England is being forced to buy sheep; let the buyer beware.

POST A COMMENT


Screen name *
Email address *
Remember me?
Comment *
 

COMMENTS

light grey arrow
They are two totally different issues, Ted, and if you read more than simply the sheep prices,
light grey arrow
I'm sick of the likes of Sen. Sterle and any other experts in spending other people's money. By
light grey arrow
Ok Nico so tell us in your own words exactly in deg C how much has it warmed in the last 18 years ?