Abstract
"In the report on the status of Velogenie Vtserotropic Newcastle Disease (VVND) presented to the Committee on the Transmissible Diseases of Poultry of the United States Animal Health Association, it was recounted that there were thirty-seven confirmed cases of VVND diagnosed so far this year (1981) in exotic birds. A few thousand birds were destroyed.
''The implicated causes of this year's outbreaks of Exotic Newcastle Disease were smuggled birds. The cause each year, year after year, is usually always the same, the contraband bird. Each year hundreds to thousands of exotic birds exposed to these infected smuggled birds are destroyed as a result. The annual cost varies from many thousands to millions of dollars. Every year we fi'nd ourselves faced with the same dilemma all over again. The annual recurrences of Exotic Newcastle Disease introduced by smuggled birds are so regular that they can almost be forecast. One such yearly occurrence is so predictable that it has become known as "The Yellow Nape Season. '' Each year when yellow naped baby parrots are harvested from the nest south of the border, it is followed by young contraband Yellow Napes causing outbreaks ofVVND north of the border. The VVND control program and all of the combined efforts of the Departments of Agriculture and of Customs Services do little to affect this cycle of disease introduction.
''The proposed regulations by Vetennary Services to require leg banding and records of transactions for cage birds legally enten'ng the United States will distinguish the licit birds from the illicit, and facilitate tracebacks on the former group tn case of disease outbreaks. It m(l.y also he(p in the control of smuggled birds =t=« the market chain of the cage bird mdu!try, but it will not effectively affect illegal birds from being
brought into this country.
''Smuggled birds are clandestinely brought into the United States the year around, at all border points, and into all states. Many of these birds sicken and die and are never reported to authorities. They are buried. It would be self delusion for U.S.D.A. to presume that they are locating all of the illegal diseased birds that come through. Their ef forts are comparable to those of a menaced blind man jlatfing with his knife at his unseen foe who can be anywhere. The traffic in contraband sick birds that are never reported and are not discovered brings up some interesting questions:
Why haven't they caused outbreaks of Exotic Newcastle Disease? Has it just been good fortune that they haven't? Has U.S.D.A. 's efforts to date AU been successful stabs in the dark? When will its luck run out? When wzll we again face a major outbreak? A costly outbreak with no funds to cover it?
''Even the conscientious bird keeper is oft times hesitant to report his legitimate losses because he is afraid that the consequences of his action might be the destruction of his flock.
"He is just as fearful of Exotic Newcastle Disease and as much aware of the damage it can do as is the poultryman. He has the added dread that purchased sick birds may not only bring him VVND, but also other destructive infections such as psittacosis, pox, and the deadly Pacheco's disease-diseases which the Dept. of Agriculture does not protect him from even in legally quarantined imports.
''He must realize that he should report all suspected sick birds, but there is his lack of trust because present eradication policies afford him little consideration or protection. Wouldn't it be better to strive for more confidence on the part of the bird owner and have him report his losses rather than having him
fearful and distrustful and not report them? Perhaps, some needed changes in the VVND control methods would accomplish just this.
"Today there is a consensus that changes in the VVND control methods are long overdue; that modifications can be made which will prove beneficial to all interests concerned with the problem.
"The U.S.A.H.A. recognized this a yfar ago when this committee passed its resolution that: 'The Committee supports the establishment of the mechanism for a formal dialogue between poultry and pet bird industries and regulatory and research people on the problem of VVND eradication. '
''Thanks, perhaps, in part to this resolution; to written criticism ofVVND control methods by the Amen.can Veterinary Medical Association (A. V.M.A. Journal); and to a petition by the America» Federation of Aviculture calling for a national symposium to find better and more practical ways of protecting both the poultry and bird industn"es from VVND, a national conference is being planned for the spring of 1982.
"Tbis search for change can best be made by full consultation with all who are involved and who are affected, together with specialists in disease control and research. So far, the Amen.can Association of Avian Pathologists, The Association of Avian Veterinarians, the American Federation of Aviculture and the Pet Industry joint Advisory Council have responded by designating delegates to represent their organizations on the Steering Committee which is organizing the Symposium.
"Tbe United States Department of Agriculture, Veterinary Services, has consented to take part in the conference and has committed itself to provide consultants as necessary. "
The preceding paragraphs are from a report presented before the Committee on Transmissible Diseases of Poultry and Other Avian Species at the eighty-fifth annual meeting of the U.S.A.H.A.
As stated in the report, a national symposium on the problems ofVVND is projected to be held in the year 1982. The location for this meeting will most likely be in the Washington, D.C. area and attendance will be by invitation. (It is felt that unrestricted attendance would impede orderly consideration of the problems.)
Suggested topics for discussion at the symposium include: The Cost of Control Methods. Quarantine and Testing of Populations Within Populations in In-
fected Flocks. Recognition of Low Risk vs. High Risk Exotic Birds. A Policy for Outbreaks in Low Risk Areas (not close to poultry concentrations) as Apan from One for Those in High Risk Areas (close to large poultry concentrations). Differentiation of Eradication Procedures for Private Premises as Opposed to Infected and I or Exposed Commercial Premises (Private Owner or Breeder vs. Dealer). Quarantine Considerations for Infected and I or Exposed Pet Shops (to facilitate keeping them in business). Evaluation of Efficacy of Present Laboratory Testing Procedures (Representative Sampling. Interpretations.) Possible Modification of Individual Pet Bird Regulations. Criteria for Determining Date of Infection. Preventive Vaccination, and, The Smuggling Problem.
A recommendation was made that imporration policies be discussed considering all possibilities from a closed door (complete restriction) policy at one extreme to that of an open door (no restrictions, whatsoever) at the other.
Cost of Control Methods
Under the current Federal budgetary restraints, funds to carry out present VVND control methods in some possibly large outbreak in the future just may not be made available and the whole control program would have to be abandoned.
A viculturisrs want continued control of VVND, but not under these present methods.
In 1971-1974, VVND cost the Federal government $56,000,000.00. In 1974-1975, $3,195,001'.l.OO was spent. In 1975-1976, $2,842,000.00. 1977, $2,816,000.00. 1977-1978,$704,000.00. 1979, $2,738,000.00. 1980-1981, $3,500,000.00 and: 1981 (thru June) $360,000.00. This makes a total of $72, 155,000.00 spent on VVND in LESS than ten years! (From USDA Emergency Disease Outbreaks Memo., dated 9 I 15 I 81). Additional millions of dollars in administrative expenses (salaries, travel, etc.) must be added to this.
With the Office of Management and Budget wanting to take food off the plates of needy American school children and telling our elderly and our poor that they must do with less to balance the Federal budget by 1984, how can Veterinary Services hope for additional millions of dollars to pay for more killing of pet birds?
Atthe U.S.A.H.A. meeting, tight Federal budgeting was recognized as a reality and several programs imponant to the poultry industry had to be disregarded:
The consideration of even modest funding which would result in the complete final eradication of Infectious Larengo
Tracheitis had to be passed over. Reference to funding on the Fowl Typhoid resolution was deleted, and delegates were discouraged from hoping for funds to carry forward the Avian M ycoplasmosis program. All of these important economic programs are stalled while millions of dollars are still thrown out on destroying pet birds unnecessarily.
There are many who are convinced that the spending of all of this money for the indemnification of depopulated pet birds fosters abuse. It is common opinion that there are pet bird dealers who actually welcome the needless destruction of their birds in order to collect the indemnity.
Critical of the present Veterinary Services VVND control measures are many V.S. field employees, themselves, who are charged with the carrying out of these distasteful tasks. They consider present methods inhumane, needless, and wasteful.
Quarantine & Testing of Populations Within Populations. Low Risk vs. High Risk Birds.
Present VVND control and eradication policies dictate that if even one VVND infected bird is found in a flock, all of the birds in that flock must be destroyed and allows for no extenuating circumstances to alter this action. Such a policy which does not consider any factor that could moderate the course of complete eradication is wrong and must be changed.