Building defences to protect the health of future generations of companion animals is likely to be a slow and gradual process, according to a meeting organised jointly by the BVA and BSAVA at last month’s congress.
The meeting was intended to help create an alliance with the other EU member states which benefit from the derogation on the free movement of pet animals, and to devise a strategy for a new system when the current arrangements end in July next year.
Representatives from the Irish Republic, Sweden, Finland and Malta attended to give support for the maintenance of at least some elements of the current controls. Their emphasis varied according to their individual national interests, but there was sufficient common ground to suggest that they could work together in developing a new system acceptable to the other 22 member states.
Nigel Gibbens, chief veterinary officer at DEFRA, warned that maintaining the current arrangements would be unrealistic in view of pressures from the EU for a harmonised system and from pet owners disgruntled with the demands of complying with those rules. He argued that a process mainly designed to keep out rabies was no longer proportionate when the disease has been largely eradicated from western and central Europe.
He urged those five member states to press for an extension to the current derogation both to gain time to carry out further studies and draw up a new system based on an assessment of the risks associated with the country exporting that particular animal.
The Swedish and Finnish representatives were concerned about the need to persuade the EU of the need to maintain controls designed to prevent entry of the canid tapeworm Echinococcus multilocularis by proving that the five derogation states were disease-free.
The Maltese representative was more worried about the import of rabid animals but recognised that maintaining a system that might encourage illegal movements could be counterproductive.
Phil Craig, professor of biology at Salford University, argued that E. multilocularis was probably a greater threat to human health than rabies. If left untreated, there was a 95% risk of death within 10 years of infection by a parasite which causes extensive lesions in the liver.
Currently available treatments do not eliminate disease, cause significant adverse reactions and must be taken throughout the patient’s life. The human health implications were so great that the Japanese authorities were considering arrangements similar to the PETS scheme to prevent the parasite spreading down from the most northerly island of Hokkaido where it is newly established, he said.
Dilys Morgan from the UK government’s Health Protection Agency believed there was also a strong case for maintaining controls requiring treatment of imported pets against tick borne diseases. She insisted that if these conditions became established they would be expensive and difficult to control.
Sue Shaw, of the Bristol veterinary school, reminded the audience that animals infected with tick-borne conditions were presenting regularly at veterinary practices and there was a significant risk of the parasites becoming permanently established in the UK.
She appealed for tighter controls to prevent well-intentioned people from adopting disease-carrying stray animals from high-risk countries and for easier access to products without UK licences when diseased animals arrive on our doorstep.
