IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPARTMENTALIZATION POLICY OF OIE AND BIOSECURITY MEASURES THROUGH USE OF MODERN EPIDEMIOLOGICAL TOOLS
The implementation of compartmentalisation, including current biosecurity measures to guarantee the safety of sub-populations and their products, even when notifiable diseases are present in the country or zone. The specific criteria and conditions for compartmentalisation are described in the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code. Compartmentalisation requires a competent and credible Veterinary Service, as well as a strong partnership between the private (producer companies, including) and public sector. This approach is being applied particularly in industrialized poultry operations in Tamil Nadu. While it imposes a very higher demand on the quality Veterinary Service, the next possible thing which has to be based upon assurances to the ―export of well differentiated breeding and livestock; aquaculture production sub-sectors‖ and the above approach could assure continued operation, even when wildlife or carrier animals maybe infected or the population, is at risk from infection with notifiable diseases. While the concept of compartmentalisation has been clearly described through principles and guidelines, and adopted and published in the Terrestrial Animal Health Code, it has been difficult to date to fully implement compartments in the field and to achieve formal recognition of such a concept by trading partners.
Compartmentalisation: a new way forward through OIE standards
In addition to disease eradication efforts, the OIE seeks the most updated scientific information in order to develop commodity specific recommendations as part of the overall recommendations in the Code. Even, in cases where a disease may be present in a country or zone, the trade of animals and their products may pose no risk if the proper risk mitigating conditions are met. While the ultimate goal is the global eradication of diseases of importance, the OIE addresses the management of risk at all levels. The recommendation on safe trade must take several factors into account. The status of country is certainly of great importance; however, while total freedom may not always be attainable, the true health status of the country or zone is essential before other safety measures can be considered. Even if the true health status of a country or zone within that country, cannot be ascertained, and even in cases where it is known that total disease freedom does not exist, risk mitigating measures recommended by the OIE can be applied in order to guarantee that the disease does not occur in a certain animal sub- population and that the commodity to be traded can be rendered safe. Being able to determine and maintain the disease freedom in a sub-population becomes a valuable element in the formula for safe trading. Nevertheless this OIE approach, based on the safety of specific commodities being traded, as well as on the ability to define and maintain disease free sub-populations through the establishment of zones and compartments should not interfere with the obligations of OIE Members regarding disease notification and implementation of disease prevention and control measures in the entire territory. Depending on the epidemiology of a disease and in the hosts preference and modes of transmission of the pathogen, it is at times difficult to guarantee the absence of such pathogen from an entire territory. However, it is possible, through adequate biosecurity measures and intense surveillance, to demonstrate the disease freedom in a selected and well isolated sub-population. Traditionally, countries have separated segments of their animal populations on the basis of geography. Taking advantages of natural ecological borders, they have established zones containing animal sub- populations with a different health status. They have separated these from others by rivers, deserts, mountains, or in other cases, using political borders between provinces or states. The safety of these zones has been guaranteed by strict animal movement control, and intense disease surveillance. This zoning approach has proven successful in guaranteeing the separation of animal subpopulations with different health status for diseases like foot and mouth disease, bovine brucellosis, bovine tuberculosis, etc. Efficient and credible Veterinary Services with an adequate surveillance system remain the essential elements in the establishment and maintenance of these health conditions. However, there are diseases and certain situations where zoning alone is not sufficient to guarantee the freedom of disease in a certain animal sub-population. Particularly, in cases, where the disease is present in wildlife, or where the disease is carried by migratory birds, zoning does not always prove to be sufficient to guarantee the status of the subpopulation. In some situations, it is through strict biosecurity measures that we can manage to separate and preserve the disease freedom in a specific animal sub-population. Historically successful eradication programs for bovine brucellosis and bovine tuberculosis relied heavily on the use of biosecurity measures for the separation of herds. The OIE has further elaborated this biosecurity approach into what today is known as the concept of ‗compartmentalisation‘, which with its principles and guidelines has been incorporated into the Code. Compartmentalisation is the procedure by which animal sub-populations presenting different health statuses can be separated from each other through strict biosecurity measures. The Veterinary Services of a country wishing to establish compartments within its territory should be able to clearly define the animal sub-population intended to be compartmentalised, as well as provide proof of the required surveillance system and the identification and traceability of live animals, as described in the Code.
Compartmentalisation: a matter for true partnership
In the specific case of compartmentalisation, for it to be effective and credible, several essential factors need to be taken into account. This concept, above all, requires a strong partnership between the private and public sector, even more so than was is required in the case of zoning. In compartmentalisation, it is the industry‘s responsibilities to manage the application and monitoring the efficacy of biosecurity measures, quality assurance schemes, conducting animal identification and traceability, documenting audits and corrective actions, conducting surveillance within and outside the compartment(s), demonstrate rapid reporting and maintenance of records in a readily accessible form, and in accordance with a strict protocol established jointly with the Veterinary Services. While the surveillance and testing is conducted primarily by the private sector, the Veterinary Service must audit the certification of movement, conduct periodic inspections of facilities, and verify implementation of biosecurity measures, records and surveillance procedures. The Veterinary Service must also conduct or audit surveillance, reporting and laboratory diagnostic examinations. The final authority for all official certification still rests solely in the hands of the Veterinary Authority. A series of principles should be applied when establishing a compartment. The factors defining a compartment should be approved by the Veterinary Authority on the basis of relevant criteria identified in the Biosecurity Plan, and should be made public through official channels. The Biosecurity Plan should describe the details of the partnership between the relevant industry and the Veterinary Authority, including their respective responsibilities. The plan, taking into consideration the epidemiology of the diseases of concern and all related risk factors, it should describe the routine operating procedures to provide clear evidence that the surveillance conducted, the live animal identification and traceability system, and the management practices are adequate to meet the criteria for the compartment. The animals within a compartment must be identified in such a way that their history can be audited. Depending on the system of production, this identification may be done at a herd, flock, or individual level. Animal movement in and out of the compartment must be well controlled and documented. The establishment of compartments and the accompanying biosecurity plans should be shared by the Veterinary Authority of the exporting country with interested trading partners to seek their approval prior to agreeing on the certification requirements for that trade. Ideally, these agreements on the soundness of the compartments should be established at a time when there are no disease outbreaks, and should then be respected by the importing country in the event of disease outbreaks outside the compartments. Meeting the obligation of rapid and transparent reporting of any changes in the disease situation in the exporting country should ensure the continuation of trade from the free compartments. The OIE has developed a set of guidelines for the application of compartmentalisation. These guidelines outline the requirements needed to be identified by the Veterinary Authority in order to demonstrate the separation of a compartment from potential sources of infection. The guidelines also identify specific surveillance requirements to be conducted inside and outside the compartments. Other important factors include the demonstration of the necessary diagnostic capabilities, the ability for emergency response and rapid notification, and the strict supervision and control of all compartments. The Veterinary Authority must be able to demonstrate that these factors have all been addressed, while also identifying whose responsibility it is to conduct each of the activities. As a practical too, the OIE has developed a ‗check list‘ to be used by the Veterinary Service and the industry when first establishing a compartment and developing the biosecurity plan.
Practical applications: a new challenge and opportunity for OIE Members
While the concept of compartmentalisation has been clearly described through principles and guidelines, and adopted and published in the Code, it has been difficult to date to fully implement compartments in the field and to achieve formal recognition of such a concept by trading partners.
The difficulty in the official acceptance of compartments relates to several factors. One of them, and possibly the most critical, is the need for a robust and credible partnership between the relevant private sector and the Veterinary Authorities. Never before has the credibility of this partnership been so important, as most of the implementation of biosecurity measures and surveillance and testing are to be conducted by the industry rather than the Veterinary Service. The role of the Veterinary Service has shifted from actual implementers to auditors and certifiers. The need for trusting relationships is not limited to the public/private partnership at a national level, but is also critical between the Veterinary Authorities of trading partners. The credibility of a competent Veterinary Service is most important, when needing to demonstrate that the Veterinary Service is fully aware and confident of the information provided by the industry, when signing the relevant veterinary certificates. Therefore, the demonstration of reliable and credible veterinary governance is essential. Currently, several countries are considering the practical implementation of compartments, and some are even establishing compartments among their poultry and/or swine industries. At the moment, there are several efforts underway to establish compartments within the poultry sector. Some countries are limiting their initial approach to the poultry genetics sector. While it is important to consider the establishment of compartments in all sectors of the industry, this particular sector that has historically been completely isolated and already operating under extreme biosecurity conditions. More ambitious initiatives are being undertaken by countries with a strong poultry industry and with a robust export market. As a result of the recent avian influenza crisis, these countries, whether been affected, or considering the potential effect of an avian influenza incursion, are implementing a compartment framework for the more industrialised sectors of the poultry industry and with a special attention to avian influenza and Newcastle disease. The OIE has offered to provide technical assistance to countries in their efforts to implement compartmentalisation. More specifically, the OIE has obtained a grant from the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) to provide technical advice to Thailand and Brazil in the preparation of a grant proposal that would help fund a major pilot project between these governments and their poultry industry. The OIE envisions that the broad implementation of compartmentalisation beginning with the industrial poultry and pig sectors as well as the acceptance by trading partners, will be the best insurance to the industry, as well as serving as an animal and public health guarantee in case of animal diseases incursions. With the sound application of these modern procedures, safe trade should be expanded and the production further protected, while significant diseases are being controlled while not always totally eradicated.
PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF OIE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES ON COMPARTMENTALISATION
Compiled & Shared by- Team, LITD (Livestock Institute of Training & Development)
Image-Courtesy-Google
Reference-On Request.
