This article was downloaded by: [Michigan State University] On: 03 April 2015, At: 07:32 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
New Zealand Veterinary Journal Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tnzv20
An historical review of animal movement, exotic disease and quarantine in New Zealand and Australia A.E. Pierce F.R.C.V.S. F.A.C.V.Sc. D.V.S.M. D.Sc. Ph.D. M.Sc.
a
a
CSIRO Canberra Published online: 23 Feb 2011.
To cite this article: A.E. Pierce F.R.C.V.S. F.A.C.V.Sc. D.V.S.M. D.Sc. Ph.D. M.Sc. (1975) An historical review of animal movement, exotic disease and quarantine in New Zealand and Australia, New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 23:7, 125-136, DOI: 10.1080/00480169.1975.34213 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00480169.1975.34213
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL VOLUME 23
JULY, 1975
NUMBER 7
AN HISTORICAL REVIEW OF ANIMAL MOVEMENT, EXOTIC DISEASE AND QUARANTINE IN NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA A. E.
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
INTRODUCTION
Most of the diseases that still afflict those animals of economic importance with which we are most concerned are as exotic as the animals themselves. Thel entry of both animals and their diseases into New Zealand and Australia were concomitant. Thus, in an historical review one might begin with the arrival in New Zealand of the exotic subspecies H omOi sapiens euyopaeus (Linnaeus, 1758) on December 19, 1642, when Abel Tasman arrived at Murderer's Bay (Tasman, 1642) norw named Golden Bay. Although four of his ship's company were killed by the Maoris, no landing was made and, therefore, we can also be fairly certain that no animals came ashore. Thus, the story more properly starts with the first voyage of discovery by Captain Cook bee. tween 1768 and 1771. His impressions of both New Zealand and Australia werej prophetic; on March 31, 1770, he writes of New Zealand: ". . . yet the very hills and mountains are many of them cover'd with wood, and the Soil of the planes and Vallies appear~ ed to be rich and fertile and such as we had opportunity to examine we found to be in a high degree and not very much 'encumbered with woods; it was the opinion of every body on board that all sorts of European grain fruit Plants &ca would thrive here. In short was this Country settled by an Industrus people they would very soon be supply'd not only with the necessarys but many of the luxurie:s of life." *A. E. Pierce, F.R.C.v.S., F.A.C.V.Sc., D.V.S.M., D.Sc., Ph.D., M.Sc., Member of Executive, CSIRO Canberra. Paper presented at the 50th Annual Conference of the New Zealand Veterinary Association in Nelson, February 1974.
PIERCE*
Five months later, as Cook sailed around northern Australia, he wrote on August 23: "We are to Consider that we see this Country in a pure state of Nature, the! Industry of Man has nothing to do with any part of it and ye.t we find that all such things as nature hath bestorw'd upon it in a flourishing state. In this Extensive Country it can never be doubt~ ed but what most sorts of Grain, Fruits, Roots &ca of every kind would flourish: here were they once brought hither, planted and cultivated by the hand of Industry, and here are Provender for more cattle at all seasons of the year than ever can be brought into this Country". Two hundred years and more have noW elapsed since that time and this interval may be divided into three periods. During the first there was no quarantine and .the movement of animals was restricted largely by problems posed by logistics, The second period was one of gradually increasing restrictions on the movement of animals as the result of quarantine inspired by research findings which had! clarified the aetiology of animal diseases. The third peTiod, which it is suggested, is noW beginning is one during which an in~ crease in international animal movement may be seen. This is and will be, to an in~ creasing extent, the reward of current research effort which is leading to the eradication of diseases and is developing reliable diagnostic tests so that individual animals, semen and perhaps one-day ova in an infected population can be. identified as disease-free. Thus, in more recent times, it has become possible to revise the restrictions imposed by quarantine so that, with appropriate testing and other precautions, the movement of animals becomes possible coincidentally
125
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
126
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
with adequate safeguards against the inadvertent introduction of an exotic disease. The account which follows outlines some aspects of activity during these three periods and concludes with a consideration of the facilities ne,eded to exploit fully the present and future opportunities to import exotic gene material into the area of Oceania. The availability of this material to the animal industry of both New Zealand and Australia may well be essential to maintain their competitive position in world trade. . The intimate link between New Zea~ land and Australia will be apparent from the historical review and must continue into the future. A consideration of the adequacy of the channels of communication in this regard is also discussed in the final section.
VOL. 23
pomona and L. mitis) and a rickettsia (R. humeti) which has its reservoir in the native bandicoot and is transmissible to domestic animals and man. Seddon (1947) suggests that soil bacterial infections such as tetanus, botu~ lism, black disease, braxy, enterotoxaemia and aspergillosis may also have been present. When the early importations of animals were made without restriction, the reasons why serious diseases were not introduced were certainly not due to any effective knowledge~ of the underlyng causes of disease. It was a time when even the techniquelS for any serious ad.. vance in bacteriology were unknown. These became available from about the middle of the 19th century as the result of the work of Pasteur who was born in 1822 and died in 1895. It was not until 1877-9 that Pasteur showed that the di1. THE PERIOD OF UNRESTRICTED ANIMAL sease anthrax could be transmitted by MOVEMENT INTO AND BETWEEN NEW an organism, B. anthracis. There could ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA be little impetus to the development of During the period at least three phases quarantine when the prevailing view durcan be recognized. The first coincides with ing this period was that diseases were: the dire needs of the early settlers to caused by the spontaneous generation of bring in domestic animals for work and microbes, particularly in decomposing food, quality of breed was not a prime organic matter. consideration. The second phase was It is necessary to look for other exmarked by moves to improve the quality: planations why serious diseases were not of the livestock and coincided with the introduced into Australia, and subincreasing affiuence and confidence of the' sequently New Zealand. The obvious early settlers flowing from their firmer ,reasons could have been the origin of establishment in their new and rather animal imports, from the temperate westhostile environment. The third phase co- ern world rather than the tropical and incided with the period of activity of the sub-tropical landmasses such as Africa naturalization societies. and India, together with the unavoidable It would seem that in none of these quarantine imposed by the long sea voyactivities was the disease status of the age- during which acute infections would imported animals given any serious con- cause epidemics resulting in death or sideration. Therefore, if this period coin- . ste:rile recovery, and in genera~l the acquicided with the origins of the animal sition of an immune status for thoseJ surindustry, why are New Zealand and Aus- viving the journey. Some support foI'! tralia so privileged regarding the absence such a theory can be gained by reference of serious exotic diseases from their live~ to the· diseases which were introduced stock? Those diseases truly indigenous, 'and did become established, chronic but i.e., those present before domestic not necessarily fatal, diseases such as animals were introduced - were ap- tuberculosis, brucellosis, mastitis and in.. parently very few. For exarnp,le, in Aus- ternal and external parasities, for intralia, there existed psittacosis which has stance sheep scab introduced into Aus.. its reservoir in native parrots and is tralia in 1788. Support for losses at sea transmissible to domestic birds and man, is provided by an acoount of 140 cattle also two forms of leptospirosis (L. bound for Australia in 10 ships between
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
1975
127
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
1788 and 1792 of which only 16 survived the voyage (Hindmarsh, 1967). Nevertheless, reference to the literature regarding the origin of animals imported during the; e;arly pioneering days shows that thesei animals imports were not, in fact, pri~ marily from the U.K. Cumpston's (1964) list of early Sydney shippings between 1788 and 1825 shows that the chief sources were India - Calcutta and Bombay - and to a less extent the Cape of Good Hope. In 1788, when the first fleet landed in Australia, Governor Philip listed the livestock in the; settlement on May 1 as: 1 stallion, 3 mares, 3 colts, 2 bulls, 5 cows, 29 sheep, 19 goats, 49 hogs, 15 pigs, 5 rabbits, 18 turkeys, 29 geese,. 35 ducks, 122 fowls, 57 chickens, These animals had been purchased en route at the Cape of Good Hope. No doubt they had at very least their comple,ment of internal parasites. It was not surprising that early imports to New Zealand were largely derived from Australia. One of the first to import animals into New Zealand from Australia: appears to have been the Reverend Marsden who made seven missionary journeys sailing from New South Wales to Ne;w Zealand. In 1814, he landed at the Bay of Islands 1 horse, 2 mares, a few sheep, cattle, cats and dogs, turkeys, geese and fowl; in 1820 he landed four merino sheep. Petre (1844) gives an account of the settlements of the New Zealand Company during a period of three years and records the importation from New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land into New Zealand of large; numbers of sheep and cattle. During this period, the importation of both man and animals from Australia into New Zealand was quite fre~ quent. Along with merino importations from Australia, came sheep scab and caseous lymphadenitis; the former was eradicated from New Zealand in 1885 (Jamieson, 1964) and from Australia in 1896. Later, while cattle importation from Australia into New Zealand came contagious bovine pleuropneumonia which had previously entered Australia in 1858 in cattle from the U. K. New Zealand eradicated the disease, very promptly, in about 1880. However, in Australia this disease
6-, v.~
o;eme~
Cull
FIG. 1: Map showing sites of early settlements in
northern Australia.
established itself and spread throughout the length and breadth of the land and was offlciallyeradicated only in 1973. Importations of domestic animals took place into the remote areas of northern Australia. It is rather surprising that serious exotic infections were not introduced! into this area because domestic animals were often derived from islands close to Australia which therefore involved relatively shorter sea voyages. Between the years 1838 and 1849, a military settlement, Victoria, at Port Essington on the Cobourg Peninsula (Fig. 1) was the only established community in the whole of the tropical northern Austraila, although Dutch seamen, Pieter Pieterson and Abel Tasman, had seen the area in 1636 and 1644, respectively (Hee-res, 1899; Sharp, 1968, Frith and Calahy, 1974) . Calaby ( 1974) records that, additionally, the area was visited annually during the wet season by Buginese tre-pang fishers from Macassar in Sulawesi (formerly the Celebes). It is thought that these visits started during the 18th century and that up to 1000 men came to Australia's northern shores annually until 1907 when the visits were prohibited by the Commonwealth Govern~ ment. However, as far as is known,. they introduced no livestock apart from poultry although it is interesting to note that their sites are still marked by the tamarind trees they introduced. There were also established two settle~ ments, at Fort Dundas on Melville Island in 1824 and Fort Wellington on Raffles Bay in 1827 (Fig. 1); neither prospered
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
128
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
VOL.
23
and both were abandoned in 1829. Neve;r~ ai., 1929). A form of rinderpest is present theless, they were significant, as buffalo in Indonesia and was probably present were left on Melville Island and horses, during the early importations of domestic pigs, cattle and buffalo at Raffles Bay. animals into northern Australia as the These stock are considered by Calaby disease was first recognized in the East (1974) to be the progenitors of the Indies in 1838 (de Beaufort et aT., 1929). feral herds, with the exception of cattle, Rabies, so widespread, was not confirmed which still persist. in Africa until 1893, although it may have Thus, we return to the Port Essington occurred as early as 1772 (Bisseru, 1972). settlement, Victoria, founded shortly after Calaby and Keith (1974) were the first the arrival of HMS Alligator in October to provide spe.cific details of the origin 1838. Again feral livestock have descende.d and date of introduction of Bali cattle, to this day from animals such as pigs, a domesticated strain of Banteng which Timor ponies, Bali cattle and buffalo Were reoorded in Commander McArthur's originally imported into the settlement. dispatch of May 23, 1849,. in the last year Other introduced livestock such as sheep, of the Victoria settlement, when they regoats and poultry (Lcichhart, 1845; Earl, ceived 20 Balli Sapis [sic]; a peculiar 1846) failed to beoome established (Cala- breed of o'Xen, a few casks of light ale, by, 1974). By 1876, Harcus refers to large spirits, wine, etc. These cattle came from! numbers of buffalo in the Northern Ter- Balli Badong [sic] - now known as Denritory. In 1912, three species of deer were! pasar on· the southern side of the island released at Port Essington although only of Bali. one species, the sambar, has survived to The question arises as to whether foot and mouth disease, for example, existed this day. What are the origins of these animals at that time on Bali. The disease would and the diseases they might have intro- have been well known in Europe and, in duced? The three species of deer for ex~ fact, was described by Frascatorius in ample, would have been an unlikely 1546. Thus, it is probable that the Dutch source of serious disease as the fallow colonists would have recognized the deer were from a private herd in New disease which had been described in aniSouth Wales whilst the other deer (sam- mals in Germany in 1751 by Adami baI' and barasingha) came from the Mel- ( 1782). However, it is an importation of bourne zoo (Bentley, 1967). cattle from Holland which is blamed for The descendants of the Timor ponies the first outbreak of foot :and mouth introduced into both Fort Wellington disease in the then Dutch East Indies in (Wilson, 1855) and Victoria (Earl, 1846) the district of Malang, East Java, in 1887 from the island of Timor persist to this (Anon., 1974). Although animal mOiVement day. A great deal of detailed, and possibly was re.stricted, the disease spread so unrewarding, research would be needed rapidly throughout the eastern part of to determine the disease status of the in- East Java that the indigenous cattle dividual species at the site of origin and population must have been fully suscepat the time of the importation. In a short tible. Subsequently, outbreaks were rewide-ranging paper such as the present corded in areas of Jakarta (1906), Sula~ one, it has not been possible to assess wesi, Banten, Aceh (1892), Madura, Kaliaccurately the Iisks involved and it is mantan (1906), Medan (1907), Lombok questionable whether reliable data exist and Bali (1911) (Anon., 1974), and foot in the S.E. Asian area. From 1838 to 1852 and mouth disease still persists on some there were exclusively military veterinary Indonesian islands. Thus, it is probable surgeons in the Indies and by 1856 these that, at the time of the importation of numbered four. Were glanders and dou- ungulates, the Dutch East Indies wer~ rine present in Timor in the 19th century? free from foot and mouth disease during Glanders, one of the oldest recorded the first half of .the 19th century. diseases, is still present, in a sporadic Rinderpest was probably also present in form, on some Indonesian islands and the East Indies and would seem to have dourine was diagnosed between 1898 and posed a threat during the early cattle im1907 in the East Indies (de Beaufort et portations from Indonesia. However, in
L975
to Europe~, severe outbreaks are rare in Indonesia and fOJi periods of years the disease appears only sporadically and in mild form (Hutyra et aI., 1949). Additionally,. the disease is very acute and carrie:rs are not suspected. Buffalo were introduced from Kisar, a small island near the island of Timor tal Victoria, Port Essington, in 1838 and subsequently, further shipments arrived from the, Indonesian islands. The Timor ponies were introduced from the island of Timor to Fort Wellington and the Victoria settlement (Wilson, 1855; Earl, 1846). Earl (1846) also records the importation of pigs from European: (-= New South Wales) and S.E. Asian sources. However, the. danger from exotic diseasesoprerates in all directions and it is possible that hog cholera was introduced Into Indonesia from Australia around 1908 (de Beaufort, 1929). Pigs were also imported in considerable, numbers to Sydney from Tahiti (Maude, 1968). Camels were used by the early explorers, Horrocks in 1846, Burke and Wills in 1860 and Warburton between 1872 and 1873. Between 1893 and 1896, over 4500 came:ls were introduced from India for use in cormection with the gold fields in central and western Australia. The early importations in 1860 were from Karachi (McKnight, 1969). It is surprising that, along with these importations, surra was not also introduced into Australia as indeed it was at a later period. Cattle: tick and tick fever probably entered Australia at Darwin in 1872 when Brahman cattle - eight cows and four' bulls - were imported from Batavia (now Jakarta) on the island of Java. These animals were intended for slaughter but escane:d, and were eventually mustered and taken to Adelaide River where they bred. In Gilruth's report (1912) of a scientific expedition to the Northern Territory made from June: to AU$st, 1911, he comments ,that their descendents were still recognizable in this area. Again, during the time when troops were stationed in the north of Australia during World War 2, a considerable number of Zebu-cross cattle, probably descendants of these early Zebu introduc.. tions in 1843 and 1872 to Port Essington ~ontradistinction
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
NEVV ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
129
and the Darwin settlements, were found in a belt of country toward the Alligator River - see~ Fig. 1 (Kelley, 1959). The cattle tick, Boophilus microplus, and the two tick fevers caused by Babesia bigemina and B. argentina are still the! major cattle disease problem in tropical Australia. By about 1810, imports tailed off as the Australian colony, with its relatively small human population, be:came selfsufficient in breeding stock. The second component of this first period was about to start. Landholders in Australia by about 1824 had become wealtJhy and were seeking better-bred stock of British and E.uropean origin. In 1848 the South Australian Company bought superior merino rams and ewes in Saxony and also breeding stock in England. In 1844, there was a further purchase of 15 choice Mecklenburgh rams which were shipped from Bremen direct to Port Adelaide. In Western Australia, around 1848, good breeds of horses were imported from Sydney, Van Diern:en's Land, South America and some from England, with lighte:r horses from thd Cape of Good Hope and ponies from Timor. Since foot and mouth disease was first recorded in the U.K. in 1839, any clovenfooted import into Australia or New Zealand after this date would be suspect. Moreover, it is only in relative:ly recent years that the carrier state! has been recognized. Since the acute phase of the! disease: lasts only a short time, trans~ mission would be rapid in the cramped quarters and mortality not necessarily high and a carrier state could, therefore, be expected in some surviving animals on arrival at Australian ports. The outbreaks of foot and mouth disease: in Australia, reviewed bv Pullar (1965), in 18001, 1803-4 and 1871, all in N.S.W., and thd outbreak in the State of Victoria in 1872 were no doubt related to infected animals from the U.K. Foot and mouth disease has been re:corded from virtually every livestockraising country in the world with the noteworthy exception of New Zealand. The third component of the first period was -the activity of naturalization
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
130
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
societies, which were active in both New Zealand and Australia. Their aim was to introduce exotic species into Australia: and New Zealand. This Was a popular movement in the days of early settlement when man, too, was an exotic animal, anxious to ameliorate the unfamiliar 'landscape: or at least force it to resemble something that he understood and in .which he did not feel so alien. Thel societies seemed little concerned with the effects of their activities on the conserva,tion of the enviroment and particularly on the indigenous. sometimes unique, native animal nopulations, nor with the possible introduction of exotic diseases. These societies easily obtained nermission to'introduce a wide range of exotic .animals and birds. Fortunately, in Australia the life of the acclimatization societies was short. lasting from about 1860 to theearlv 1870s. Similar societies were started in Ne,w Zealand at about the same time but nersisted somewhat longer. until 1880. Their ·activitv Was only finally brought under control in 1895 when it became necessary to obtain. in writinQ'. the consent of the Minister-in-charge of the Department .of Agriculture to introduce "any animal or bird whatsoever". Very many different species from manv parts of the world were introduced into New Zealand and the. reader is referred to a very full review of the subject by Wodzicki (1949). The New Zealand societies introduced a very wide varie'tv of fishes, birds, and mammals. With reference to the mammals, New Zealand was fortunate: not to introduce serious exotic diseases as the result of the activity of enthusiasts in these societies. For example. the Axis deer was introduced. although unsuccessfully, in 1867 and the SambaI' deer in 1875 successfully. both species being imported from India. Waniti were introduced into New Zealand from Canada, at first unsuccessfully in 1870, but later successfully from the U.S.A. in 1905. Foot and mouth diseaSe! was first re:corded in the U.S.A. in 1870 'and was thought to have entered the continent via Canada throu!th infected cattle from Britian. New Zealand also introduced Japanese deer from Manchuria in
VOL.
23
1885 unsucccessfullybut later successfully Virginia de,er from the U.S.A., were imported into New Zealand in 1910 and moose from Canada in 1900 and 1910. An unsuccessful attempt was made to' introduce South American deer into New Zealand in 1870. It is believed that foot and mouth disease: was intDoduced into South America from Europe between 1860 and 1870. Even zebra were introduced, unsuccessfully, from South Africa in 1870. Many different deer were also intro~ dJced, into Australia although half the species failed to establish themselves. The story of the eoUeetion of lamas and alpacas in South America and their intro~ duction into Australia in 1858 and 1863 is a fascinating account of endur'ance and fortitude bv one C. Ledger, and has been recorded by Rolls ( 1969) . Round about 1862 Angora goats were introduced from Asia Minor and Cashmere goats from Tibe:t; although the latter failed to survive. Angora goats were eventually established, their agilitv. howe~er, making them extremely difficult to handle. Donke,ys derived from the wild ass of Asia, were introduced 'and still exist in Australia as feral animals. I have asked the question why exotic diseases were kept Gut of Australia and New Zealand. Of course in early days they we,re not. There was almost certainly a small outbreak of rabies in Hobart, Tasmania, between 1866 and 1877. Fortupately, nromnt action eradicated the ,disease althow.rh one child bitten by a rabid dog died. It is possible that the acute devastating diseases with a high mortality such as rinderpest and haemm:rhagic septicaemia. with a high mortality and no evidence of the carrier state, were self-eliminating from susceptible spf':cies during the voyage to New Zealand or Australia. Some exnbnation is necessary be,cause rinderpest has been present in India since: time immemorial and was certainly present in the U.K. and Europe during the time of the early importations. Rinderpest was recognized in Europe as early 376-386 AD and persisted until about 1930 when most Euronean countries with the exception of Turkey were free from the
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
1975
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
disease. A catastrophic epidemic occurred in the U.K. in 1865. However, the disease did not penetrate to the Cape Colony until 1897 and was eradicated again by 1903 (Plowright, 1968). Anthrax is also an acute disease and it is perhaps a little surprising that it was introduced early into Australia, in about 1847, and New Zealand somewhat later. However, the explanation lies in the fact that it was not introduced by animals. As far as Australia is concerned, Seddon (1947) considered that infe,ction may have been imported with spom-infected hay. Firm evidence was obtained in New Zealand that anthrax spores contaminated unsteirilized hone meal imported from Calcutta and this is regarded as the New Zealand o-rigin. Although the disease persists in parts of Australia, in New Zealand the incidence is now so low, thel last recorded case in animals Was in 1954, that the: country could be regarded as anthrax-free (Jamieson, 1965). The consideration of anthrax provides a convenient link with the second major period during which animal imports were increasingly controlled by quarantine. This was due to a growing awareness of the causation of diseases and the economic significance of animal disease, together with the de,velopment of procedures for laboratory diagnosis. 2. THE PERIOD OF INCREASING RESTRICTION OF ANIMAL MOVEMENT INTO AND BETWEEN NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA
The beginning of quarantine in Australia, in relation to cattle, dat~s from 1871. The proclaimed diseases were cattle plague, foot and mouth disease, sheep pox and any other diseases whicH might be proclaimed. The Act was ame:nd~ ed in 1884 to include sheep, goats, swine, dogs and such other animals as might be declared. Thus, a proclamation under this Act in 1893 provided for protection against the following diseases: shee:p scab, catarrh, rabies, CBPP, tuberculosis, glanders, swine fever, warbles, actinomycosis, cancer, anthrax, influenza, mange in horses, tick and lice in sheep, and trichinosis in swine. Under the, Customs Act of 1879 a ban was placed on the import of cattle and
131
sheep from all countries except Great Britain and Ireland. This policy, as will be seen later, has persisted until very recent time/so Prior to Federation, colonies maintain~ ed their own external quarantine. How~ ever, there was, from the outset, a strong spirit of co~operation. For example, when in 1891 glande:rs was diagnosed in New South Wales, telegrams were despatched between the Chief Insnector of Stock and the Chief Inspector of the other colonies including New Ze,aland. A more recent example would be the prompt way New Zealand has informed Australia of a suspected, but happily not confirmed, outbreak of foot and mouth disease. Quarantine in Australia, a Federal responsibility since 1908, became; operative! in 1909. Quar'antine regulations were re>viewed in 1925 and 1933, and restrictions were slowly tightened so that during the war years, 1939-45, there were almost no importations of stock (Wardle., 1951). Despite constant vigilance, an outbreak of rindernest occurred in Western Australia in '1923. The origin was suspected to be pigs carried as ships stores. These pigs infected cattle picke:d up en route! in northern Western Australia which were landed at Freemantle. However, the disease was rapidly eradicated. Similarly, after the: Quarantine regulations were promulgated, hog cholera was inadver~ tently introduced into Australia in 19m, 1927-8, 1942-3 and a lowcvirulence strain in 1962. Outbreaks have also occurred from time to time in New Zealand. Newcastle disease has never been introduced into New Zealand; however, the: disease penetrated the Australian quarantine barrier in 1930-32 and a low-virulence strain in 1962. It was not until 1907 that surra was diagnosed in some camels imported from India. The disease was deitected while the animals were still in quarantine and the infected camels were destroyed; no other cases have e;ver been reported. In 1952, scrapie penetrated the Australian quarantine barrier and in 1950 also .the New Zealand quarantine, but was rapidly eradicated. Quarantine pore-cautions preve,nted the spread of glanders when this disease was diagnosed in aJ number of horses attached to a circus
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
·132
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
from the U.S.A.; they, together with all contacts, were destroyed. In recent years, quarantine has been further tightened, as the result of advancing knowledge' of animal diseases. For exampJe, relatively recently, it has been shown that dogs can incubate rabies for an even longer time than was originally considered possible and this necessitated changes in quarantine regulations. Similarly, it has only recently been demonstrated that cattle can be carriers of the virus of bluetongue, a disease normally affecting sheep, and that apparently healthy cattle can carry viable virus of foot and mouth disease in the cells of the pharynx over a prolonged period. All these findings have underlined the need for vigilance regarding quarantine and for the application of even tighter restrictions on the importation of animals. By 1953-4, very few sheep or cattle were imported into Australia. The few sheep that were imported were derived only from New Zealand and the cattle only from the U.K. and New Zealand. By 19589, all imports of cattle and sheep were completely suspended owing: to a fear that bluetongue infection might be introduced into Australia (Fig. 2). A few pigs were imported, mostly from New Zealand, and this importation also ceased in 19601 (Fig. 3). Thus, there was a 10 year in.7289
,'0-,
:0
. .
1500
100
Sheep •••••• Cattle _ _
..
'"
UK&NZ : only :
USA
1953/54
23
"1762'UK&NZ o
'0 ..
o
Horsel
_
o'
Pigs ...... _......_...__...._
1000
.. only
o
1500
o
o
Dogs ACata , •••••
o
o o
.
o
o o
500 • I,
0
0
0
0
o o
o
0
o
0 0 0
0 0 0
o o o
o o
0
UK&NZ only
0
000
o
o
o
• 0
.:
60/61
65/66
69/70
73/14
[] NZ only
• Rabies UK .. Including PING
FIG. 3: Importations of domestic animals into Aus-
tralia -
horses, pigs, dogs and cats.
terval from 1958-9 to 1967-8 during which the importation of cattle and sheep was prohibited and from 1960-1 to 1969-70 when no pigs were imported (Figs. 2 and 3). Only the importation of horses, dogs and cats was permitted, with strict quarantine, and these imnorts were confined to animals from the U.K. and New Zealand (Fig. 3). Thus, 1968-9 marks the! end of the second period when the world genetic pool in relation to domestic a:ni~ mals imported into Australia was totally banned, with the exception of horses, dogs andcats imported either from New Zealand or from the U.K. (Fig. 3).
.0
1000
500
VOL.
58/59 [] NZ only • All further imports of cattle and sheep prohibited (blue tongue risk)
0/ domestic animals into Australia - sheep and cattle.
FIG. 2: Importations
3. THE PERIOD OF INCREASING ANIMAL MOVEMENT INTO AND BETWEEN NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA
During the latter part of the second period and currently, reliable methods have been developed for the diagnosis of dangerous exotic diseases, particularly' tests whereby individual animals derived from a country known to have diseases exotic to New 'Zealand and Australia can be shown to be free from these speCific infections so that they may be imDorted: with safety. . ' For example, at Denver, Colorado, U.S.A., millions of dollars are: being spent on the study of bluetongue which in now endemic in that country. Much of the :research is being directed towards developing tests whereby cattle can be
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
1975
NE~
ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
shown to be free. from the virus of blue~ tongue. This is important, because they can act as carriers of this virus disease of sheep for many months. Reliable tests have been developed in Australia so that live cattle for export can be shown to be free from the virus of ephemeral fever. Tests have also been developed ~here;by cattle can be shown to be free from contagious pleuropneumonia infection. Thus, if they pass stringent tests, these animals can be imported with safety. Of course, testing for contagious bovine pleuropneumonia is less relevant now that the disease, at one time exotic, then endemic is noW once again exotic as the result of a successful eradication pl10gramme in Australia. Rigid tests on cattle, in relation to freedom from bluetongue virus, have enabled Australia to accept semen from the U.K. and New Zealand since the end of 1967 and Canada! since the end of 1972. Thus, we see the beginning, in this third period, of increase in the number of species and countries of origin from which genetic mateiI'ial can be imported into Australia. The entry of sheep and goats into Australia from New Zealand has also been allowed since the end of 1973. Where previously horses, dogs and cats from the U.K. were only allowed entry into Australia when transported by sea, these species may now be air-freighted in. This change in quarantine regulations has resulted in a considerable increase in the number of impopted horses. In the matter of exotic diseases, the very special relationship between Aus'tralia and New Zealand, and to a lesser extent the U.K., is amply evident from ai study of the data shown in Figs. 2 and 3 and the persistence and development of these trading ties is dependent on ade'" quate channels of communication being maintained and developed. This is particularly important when quarantine re;gulations are being revised - i.e., dur~ ing the period we are now entering. New Ze:aland has, in some regards, been used by Australia as a staging post to strengthen its quarantine precautions. The U.K. is being similarly used so that semen from EUI10pean breeds, such as Charolais, can be safely imported into Australia.
133
The increase in animal movement is not related in any way to a decrease in the danger from the inadvertant introduction of an exotic disease. Areas infected with rabies are, in fact, increasing in Europe. The period of transition from colonial status to national independence of a large number of countries, for example in Africa, has been associated with periods of political unrest or reorr~ ganization of veterinary services so that reliable data relating to their indigenous diseases have been difficult to obtain and! where efficient quarantine has been diffi.,. cult to administer. In affluent countries, such as New Zea~ land and Australia, the demand for imported goods, which include products of animal origin, has greatly expanded. Movement of people: is also rapidly increasing while, at the same time,. aircraft become larger, there are more of them, and they make longer and more rapid! journeys between landfalls. All these developments have a potential to increaSe! the risk of introducing exotic diseases and their insect vecto~S'. New and im~ proved techniques for the diagnosis ofl exotic diseases can be expected from the research effort being made in maximum security laboratories which are being built throughout the world. Additional quarantine stations are also being constructed where animals can be safely held in isolation while being adequatelyt tested for a range of exotic diseases. Thus, these developments will also open up the opportunities to move animals i_nternationally without the attendant fear of introducing exotic diseases. Maximum security labomtories have been built at Pirbright in the U.K. with special reference to foot and mouth disease and bluetongue. The Plum Island Animal Disease: Laboratory in the U.S.A., the Institut de Recherche Therapeutique at Tixensaart in Belgium, the Centraal Dier:geneeskundig Instituit, Lelystad, Holland, the Federal Researoh Institute for Animal Virus Diseases at Tubingen, Germany, and the Instituto Zooprofillatico Sperimentale at Brescia in Italy are aU con~ tributing .to the better understanding, diagnosis, control and hopefully the eventual eradication of the more serious exotic diseases. All will help to make the inter-
134
NE¥l ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
national movement of animals or their gene material safer. In recent years, New Zealand has built an animal quarantine station on Somes Island and we, in Australia, hope shortly to start building our quarantine station also on an off-shore island. The U.S.A. is building additional animal quarantine facilities at Florida Key, while Canada: has already established two quarantine 'Stations. The U.K. and other European countries have also established quarantine facilities. The developments anticipated du'ring this third period will not represent any relaxation in vigilance; they represent the growing confidence in re~ search findings which enable modification of quarantine' regulations with the consequent resumption of animal move~ ment with safety, always pmvided extremely strict and often costly testing is carried out and adequate animal and laboratory facilities are available. CONCLUDING REMARKS
A quarantine station cannot be fully functional, in the sense of allowing the importation of stock from high risk countries, without the backing of a maximum security laboratory. We expect to construct such a laboratory on the mainland of Australia, the site has been selected, and some staff have already been appointed. The laboratory will be responsible for carrying out laboratory tests on animals maintained in an off-shore quarantine station before their release on to the Australian mainland and Tasmania. Much of the Australian cattle export industry, which still has great potential for expansion, is associated with the tropical and sub-tropical pastures of northern Australia. Tropical breeds from overseas may make an important contribution to animal production in these areas. However, some of the breeds which may be best suited are native to high ,disease risk countries such as India and Africa. It is perhaps not widely known that the Australian founda,tion Afrikander stock consisted of only 10 animals imp~rted in 1954 from U.S.A. As far as Brahmans are concerned, the gene pool is
VOL. 23
somewhat greater, However, the numbers imported were relatively small - 20 in 1933,20 more between 1950 and 1953, and 6 more in 1954, all from the U.S.A. Additionally, in 1953, 228 Santa Gertrudis were imported from the U.S.A. Only 8 red Sindis and 8 Sahiwals have e.ver been imported - in 1953 from Pakistan. Australia, .as New Zealand, at present depends on a number of different overseas laboratories for the confirmation of diagnosis of most of its serious exotic diseases. While some. of these laboratories have a serious and well established commitment to this responsibility - such as the U.K. laboratory at Pirbright others carry out this service as a courtesy and the Australian veterinary authorities fee.! that a service so vital to our animal industry cannot be satisfactorily fulfilled in this way. The arrangement does not offer a satisfactory answer to problems of the initial diagnosis of an exotic disease, when speed and dependability may we;!l determine the final outcome of the epidemic. In an exporting country, such as New Zealand or Australia, proved freedom from an exotic disease following any outbreak must provide the"basis for a resumption of any suspended export industry. Such evidence could well depend on the results of tests carried out on .a large number of animals, possibly over lextensive and remote areas of country and over considerable periods. Subsidiary outbreaks can be anticipated, though these may well be false alanns, but each suspected outbreak will need further laboratory tests. Extensive testing of this sort may need to be carried out in microbiological iso~ lation and large numbers of tests may not be acceptable to or practical for overseas laboratories. The results of extensive testing could be expected to reduce the time required, after .an outbreak, for a confident declaration of total eradi:cation. Such considerations could have enO'rmous economic importance in relation to the multi-million export trade in animal products from Australia and New Zealand. The maximum security laboratory which we expe,ct to construot at Geelong, in the State of Victoria, will have many functions in addition to the diagnosis of
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
1975
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
exotic diseases. Until the laboratory has undergone very exhaustive tests, foot and mouth disease virus will not be handle:d in advance of an outbreak. However, such a laboratory would include a facility for the manufacture of F & M vaccine and, equally important, for the safe te~t ing of such vaccine for safety and potency should it ever be required. There are many reasons why, in the event of a serious and widespread outbreak of foot and mouth diseases whioh could not be: controlled by a slaughter policy, it is necessary to have a capacity to manufacture: and test one's own F & M disease vaccine, but this is not the place to go into these details. The Australian laboratory will be capable of the rapid and reliable diagnosis of a wide range of exotic diseases and have the: ability, through a thorough knowledge gained from research into indigenous virus diseases, another responsibility for the laboratory, to differentiate these from any suspected exotic disease. Equally important would be the ability to monitor the spread of any exotic disease by htboratory tests, thus providing reliable epidemiological data. This would enable the rate: and limit of spread to be continuously monitored and would provide reliable data both for decis~ons regarding control and eradication programmes, and also for reliable bulletins on the current status of an outbreak. The results of laboratory tests would provide dependable data to support a declaration of the eradication of the disease. .Such a laboratory will provide training for personnel in exotic disease recognition. Finally, it will provide the neceS$ary laboratory back-up which would enable a quarantine station to import, with safety, animals from high risk countries. A maximum security laboratory is extremely expensive to build, to maintain and to operate. It may be: of service, in one field or another of its responsibilities, to countries other than Australia. Since both New Zealand and Australia are geographically isolated, this laboratory could contribute: to the control of disease in the Oceania area and facilitate the movement of animal genes and therefore help improve the productivity of our livestock.
135
There exists already a joint committee of Australian and New Zealand departmental officers known as the AustraliaNew Zealand Technical Committee on animal and plant quarantine which was established in 1958 to consider and report on animal and plant quarantine restrictions as they affeot trade between the two countries. This committee is still operational and may well be one that could examine co-operative activity in relation to the new Australian maximum security laboratory once it is e:stablished. If nece~ sary, the machinery may need some overhaul to make sure that there is an efficient flow of information between Australia and New Zealand so that any untoward repercussions resulting from the revision of quarantine regulations can be avoided. Also it may be mutually advantageous to include: some representation from South-east Asian countries on this or some other committee with wide terms of reference in relation to problems connected with exotic diseases of the OCemlia area and the use of the facilities which are now being developed in New Zealand and Australia. New Zealand and Australia face: very difficult problems in the event of an outbreak of an exotic disease compared with many countries and, therefore, it is not surprising that both countries areextre" mely cautious in the: revision of any quarantine regulations. Yet, on a global basis, the movement of animals of economic importance or of their gene material is increasing. There may beeconomic advantages accruing from the acquisitiQIl of a wider gene pool. In an increasingly competitive world, we may not be able to stand apart and maintain a very restrictive attitude to the importation of gene material. Therefore, it is essential, first, to maintain an highly efficient veterinary service, seoondly, to develop the necessary facilities between the two countries so that the importation of desirable genes can be developed with safety, and, thirdly, to ensure adequate dialogue and co-operation in relation to quarantine by maintaining and if necessary, improving the mechanism for the exchange of information between our two countries.
136
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I thank the Council of the New Zealand Vete;rinary Association for their kind invitation to give an address, on which this paper is based, on the occasion of their Golden Jubilee meeting held at Nelson in February, 1974. I hope that the paper will serve as a reminder of the identity of purpose between, and of some of the successes of, the veterinary profession over the years in both New Zea" land and Australia and of the professional conoord which has always existed between the two nations. I would also like to thank John Calaby for drawipg my attention to many of the early reJerences, for checking them, and for criticizing the manuscript. REFERENCES
Adami, P. (1782): Untersuchungen und Geschichte der ViClhseuchen in den Kaiserl. Konig!. Erblandern, Vienna. Anon. (1974): Foot and Mouth Disease Eradication Programme in Indonesia. Directorate of Animal Health. Directorate General of Animal Husbandry. Dept of Agric., Indonesia. Bentley, A. (1967): An Introduction to the Deer of Australia with Special Reference to Victoria. Hawthorn Press, Melbourne. Bisseru, B. (1972): Rabies. Heinemann, London. Calaby, J. H. (1975): Introduction of Bali cattle to Northern Australia. Aust. vet. J. 51: 108. Calaby, J. H.; Keith, K. (1974): Fauna survey of the Port Essington District, Cobourg Peninsula, Northern Territory of Australia. CSIRO Div. Wildlife Res., Tech. Paper 28: 179-208. Cumpston, J. S. (1964): Shipping Arrivals and Departures Sydney, 1788'1825. Parts I, II and III. Pub!. by the author, Canberra. De Beaufort, L. F., et al. (1929): Science in the Netherlands East Indies. (Ed. L. M. R. Rutten). Earl, G. W. (1846): Enterprise in Tropical Australia. Madden & Malcolm, London. Frascatmius, H. (1546): De sympathia et antipathia rerum liber unus. De contagione et contagiosis morbis et eorum curatione. Book 1, ch. 12, Heirs of L. A. Junta, Venice. Frith, H. J.; Calaby, J. H. (1974): Fauna survey of the Port Essington district, Cobourg Peninsula, Northern Territory of Australia. CSIRO Div. Wildlife Res., Tech. Paper 28: 1-207. Gilruth, J. A. (1912): Report of preliminary scientific expedition to the Northern Territory. 2. Report on domesticated animals in the Northern Territory. Bull. Northern Territory, 1. Dept of External Affairs, Melbourne.
VOL. 23
Harcus, W. (1876):. South Australia: Its History, Resources and Production. Sampson, Low, Marston, Searle & Rh'1ington, London. Heeres, J. E. (1899): The Part Borne by the Dutch in the Discovery of Australia, 1606-1765. Luzac, London. Hindmarsh, W. L. (1967): Historical records of the veterinary profession in AustraIia. III, Animal health and associated legislation in N.S.W. from the foundation of the colon¥ until 1863. Aust. vet. f., 43: 102-7. Hutyra, F.; Marek, J.; Manninger, R. (1949): Special Pathology and Therapeutics of the Diseases of Domestic Animals. Bailliere, Tindall & Cox, London. Jamieson, S. (1964): Animal disease and quarantine procedures in New Zealand. Bull. Off. into Epiz., 62: 413-23. (1965): Regional examination of the zoosanitary regulations now in force in New Zea. land. Bull. Off. into Epiz., 63: 197-207. Kelly, R. B. (1959): Native and Adapted Cattle. Angus & Robertson, Sydney. Leichardt, L. (1845): Journal. MS in Mitchell Library, Sydney, N.S.W. Maude, H. E. (1968): Of Islands and Men. Studies in Pacific History. Oxford Univ. Press, Melbourne. McKnight, T. L. (1969): The Came~ in Australia. Mel,bourne Univ. Press, Melbourne. Petre, H. W. (1844): An Account of the Settlements of the New· Zealand Company, from Personal Observations during a Residence of ~hree years there. Smith, Elder, London. Plowright. W. (1968): Rinderpest Virus. SpringerVerlag, New York. Pullar, M. (1965): Viet Vet. Proc. 1964-65: 12. Rolls, E. C. (1969): They All Ran Wild. Angus & Robertson, Sydney. Seddon, H. R. (1947): Influence and movement of animals on the spread of disease in Australia. Aust. vet. J., 23: 200-9. Seddon, H. R. (1952): Diseases of Domestic Animals in Australia. Part 4. Department of Health, Canberra. Sharp, A. (1968): Voyages of Abel Janszoon Tasman. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Tasman, A. J. (1642): The Journal of Abel Jansz Tasman 1,642. (Ed. G. H. Kenihan.) Australian Heritage Press, Adelaide, 1968. Wardle, R. N. (1951): The development of Commonwealth animal quarantine. Aust. vet. J., 27: 219-25. Wilson, T. B. (1855): Narrative of a Voyage round the World. Sherwood, Gilbert & Piper, London. Wodiick'i, K. A. (1949): IIitroduced mammals of New Zealand. DSIR Bull., 98: 1-255.
(Received for publication March 31, 1975)
New Zealand Veterinary Journal Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tnzv20
An historical review of animal movement, exotic disease and quarantine in New Zealand and Australia A.E. Pierce F.R.C.V.S. F.A.C.V.Sc. D.V.S.M. D.Sc. Ph.D. M.Sc.
a
a
CSIRO Canberra Published online: 23 Feb 2011.
To cite this article: A.E. Pierce F.R.C.V.S. F.A.C.V.Sc. D.V.S.M. D.Sc. Ph.D. M.Sc. (1975) An historical review of animal movement, exotic disease and quarantine in New Zealand and Australia, New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 23:7, 125-136, DOI: 10.1080/00480169.1975.34213 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00480169.1975.34213
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL VOLUME 23
JULY, 1975
NUMBER 7
AN HISTORICAL REVIEW OF ANIMAL MOVEMENT, EXOTIC DISEASE AND QUARANTINE IN NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA A. E.
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
INTRODUCTION
Most of the diseases that still afflict those animals of economic importance with which we are most concerned are as exotic as the animals themselves. Thel entry of both animals and their diseases into New Zealand and Australia were concomitant. Thus, in an historical review one might begin with the arrival in New Zealand of the exotic subspecies H omOi sapiens euyopaeus (Linnaeus, 1758) on December 19, 1642, when Abel Tasman arrived at Murderer's Bay (Tasman, 1642) norw named Golden Bay. Although four of his ship's company were killed by the Maoris, no landing was made and, therefore, we can also be fairly certain that no animals came ashore. Thus, the story more properly starts with the first voyage of discovery by Captain Cook bee. tween 1768 and 1771. His impressions of both New Zealand and Australia werej prophetic; on March 31, 1770, he writes of New Zealand: ". . . yet the very hills and mountains are many of them cover'd with wood, and the Soil of the planes and Vallies appear~ ed to be rich and fertile and such as we had opportunity to examine we found to be in a high degree and not very much 'encumbered with woods; it was the opinion of every body on board that all sorts of European grain fruit Plants &ca would thrive here. In short was this Country settled by an Industrus people they would very soon be supply'd not only with the necessarys but many of the luxurie:s of life." *A. E. Pierce, F.R.C.v.S., F.A.C.V.Sc., D.V.S.M., D.Sc., Ph.D., M.Sc., Member of Executive, CSIRO Canberra. Paper presented at the 50th Annual Conference of the New Zealand Veterinary Association in Nelson, February 1974.
PIERCE*
Five months later, as Cook sailed around northern Australia, he wrote on August 23: "We are to Consider that we see this Country in a pure state of Nature, the! Industry of Man has nothing to do with any part of it and ye.t we find that all such things as nature hath bestorw'd upon it in a flourishing state. In this Extensive Country it can never be doubt~ ed but what most sorts of Grain, Fruits, Roots &ca of every kind would flourish: here were they once brought hither, planted and cultivated by the hand of Industry, and here are Provender for more cattle at all seasons of the year than ever can be brought into this Country". Two hundred years and more have noW elapsed since that time and this interval may be divided into three periods. During the first there was no quarantine and .the movement of animals was restricted largely by problems posed by logistics, The second period was one of gradually increasing restrictions on the movement of animals as the result of quarantine inspired by research findings which had! clarified the aetiology of animal diseases. The third peTiod, which it is suggested, is noW beginning is one during which an in~ crease in international animal movement may be seen. This is and will be, to an in~ creasing extent, the reward of current research effort which is leading to the eradication of diseases and is developing reliable diagnostic tests so that individual animals, semen and perhaps one-day ova in an infected population can be. identified as disease-free. Thus, in more recent times, it has become possible to revise the restrictions imposed by quarantine so that, with appropriate testing and other precautions, the movement of animals becomes possible coincidentally
125
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
126
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
with adequate safeguards against the inadvertent introduction of an exotic disease. The account which follows outlines some aspects of activity during these three periods and concludes with a consideration of the facilities ne,eded to exploit fully the present and future opportunities to import exotic gene material into the area of Oceania. The availability of this material to the animal industry of both New Zealand and Australia may well be essential to maintain their competitive position in world trade. . The intimate link between New Zea~ land and Australia will be apparent from the historical review and must continue into the future. A consideration of the adequacy of the channels of communication in this regard is also discussed in the final section.
VOL. 23
pomona and L. mitis) and a rickettsia (R. humeti) which has its reservoir in the native bandicoot and is transmissible to domestic animals and man. Seddon (1947) suggests that soil bacterial infections such as tetanus, botu~ lism, black disease, braxy, enterotoxaemia and aspergillosis may also have been present. When the early importations of animals were made without restriction, the reasons why serious diseases were not introduced were certainly not due to any effective knowledge~ of the underlyng causes of disease. It was a time when even the techniquelS for any serious ad.. vance in bacteriology were unknown. These became available from about the middle of the 19th century as the result of the work of Pasteur who was born in 1822 and died in 1895. It was not until 1877-9 that Pasteur showed that the di1. THE PERIOD OF UNRESTRICTED ANIMAL sease anthrax could be transmitted by MOVEMENT INTO AND BETWEEN NEW an organism, B. anthracis. There could ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA be little impetus to the development of During the period at least three phases quarantine when the prevailing view durcan be recognized. The first coincides with ing this period was that diseases were: the dire needs of the early settlers to caused by the spontaneous generation of bring in domestic animals for work and microbes, particularly in decomposing food, quality of breed was not a prime organic matter. consideration. The second phase was It is necessary to look for other exmarked by moves to improve the quality: planations why serious diseases were not of the livestock and coincided with the introduced into Australia, and subincreasing affiuence and confidence of the' sequently New Zealand. The obvious early settlers flowing from their firmer ,reasons could have been the origin of establishment in their new and rather animal imports, from the temperate westhostile environment. The third phase co- ern world rather than the tropical and incided with the period of activity of the sub-tropical landmasses such as Africa naturalization societies. and India, together with the unavoidable It would seem that in none of these quarantine imposed by the long sea voyactivities was the disease status of the age- during which acute infections would imported animals given any serious con- cause epidemics resulting in death or sideration. Therefore, if this period coin- . ste:rile recovery, and in genera~l the acquicided with the origins of the animal sition of an immune status for thoseJ surindustry, why are New Zealand and Aus- viving the journey. Some support foI'! tralia so privileged regarding the absence such a theory can be gained by reference of serious exotic diseases from their live~ to the· diseases which were introduced stock? Those diseases truly indigenous, 'and did become established, chronic but i.e., those present before domestic not necessarily fatal, diseases such as animals were introduced - were ap- tuberculosis, brucellosis, mastitis and in.. parently very few. For exarnp,le, in Aus- ternal and external parasities, for intralia, there existed psittacosis which has stance sheep scab introduced into Aus.. its reservoir in native parrots and is tralia in 1788. Support for losses at sea transmissible to domestic birds and man, is provided by an acoount of 140 cattle also two forms of leptospirosis (L. bound for Australia in 10 ships between
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
1975
127
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
1788 and 1792 of which only 16 survived the voyage (Hindmarsh, 1967). Nevertheless, reference to the literature regarding the origin of animals imported during the; e;arly pioneering days shows that thesei animals imports were not, in fact, pri~ marily from the U.K. Cumpston's (1964) list of early Sydney shippings between 1788 and 1825 shows that the chief sources were India - Calcutta and Bombay - and to a less extent the Cape of Good Hope. In 1788, when the first fleet landed in Australia, Governor Philip listed the livestock in the; settlement on May 1 as: 1 stallion, 3 mares, 3 colts, 2 bulls, 5 cows, 29 sheep, 19 goats, 49 hogs, 15 pigs, 5 rabbits, 18 turkeys, 29 geese,. 35 ducks, 122 fowls, 57 chickens, These animals had been purchased en route at the Cape of Good Hope. No doubt they had at very least their comple,ment of internal parasites. It was not surprising that early imports to New Zealand were largely derived from Australia. One of the first to import animals into New Zealand from Australia: appears to have been the Reverend Marsden who made seven missionary journeys sailing from New South Wales to Ne;w Zealand. In 1814, he landed at the Bay of Islands 1 horse, 2 mares, a few sheep, cattle, cats and dogs, turkeys, geese and fowl; in 1820 he landed four merino sheep. Petre (1844) gives an account of the settlements of the New Zealand Company during a period of three years and records the importation from New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land into New Zealand of large; numbers of sheep and cattle. During this period, the importation of both man and animals from Australia into New Zealand was quite fre~ quent. Along with merino importations from Australia, came sheep scab and caseous lymphadenitis; the former was eradicated from New Zealand in 1885 (Jamieson, 1964) and from Australia in 1896. Later, while cattle importation from Australia into New Zealand came contagious bovine pleuropneumonia which had previously entered Australia in 1858 in cattle from the U. K. New Zealand eradicated the disease, very promptly, in about 1880. However, in Australia this disease
6-, v.~
o;eme~
Cull
FIG. 1: Map showing sites of early settlements in
northern Australia.
established itself and spread throughout the length and breadth of the land and was offlciallyeradicated only in 1973. Importations of domestic animals took place into the remote areas of northern Australia. It is rather surprising that serious exotic infections were not introduced! into this area because domestic animals were often derived from islands close to Australia which therefore involved relatively shorter sea voyages. Between the years 1838 and 1849, a military settlement, Victoria, at Port Essington on the Cobourg Peninsula (Fig. 1) was the only established community in the whole of the tropical northern Austraila, although Dutch seamen, Pieter Pieterson and Abel Tasman, had seen the area in 1636 and 1644, respectively (Hee-res, 1899; Sharp, 1968, Frith and Calahy, 1974) . Calaby ( 1974) records that, additionally, the area was visited annually during the wet season by Buginese tre-pang fishers from Macassar in Sulawesi (formerly the Celebes). It is thought that these visits started during the 18th century and that up to 1000 men came to Australia's northern shores annually until 1907 when the visits were prohibited by the Commonwealth Govern~ ment. However, as far as is known,. they introduced no livestock apart from poultry although it is interesting to note that their sites are still marked by the tamarind trees they introduced. There were also established two settle~ ments, at Fort Dundas on Melville Island in 1824 and Fort Wellington on Raffles Bay in 1827 (Fig. 1); neither prospered
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
128
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
VOL.
23
and both were abandoned in 1829. Neve;r~ ai., 1929). A form of rinderpest is present theless, they were significant, as buffalo in Indonesia and was probably present were left on Melville Island and horses, during the early importations of domestic pigs, cattle and buffalo at Raffles Bay. animals into northern Australia as the These stock are considered by Calaby disease was first recognized in the East (1974) to be the progenitors of the Indies in 1838 (de Beaufort et aT., 1929). feral herds, with the exception of cattle, Rabies, so widespread, was not confirmed which still persist. in Africa until 1893, although it may have Thus, we return to the Port Essington occurred as early as 1772 (Bisseru, 1972). settlement, Victoria, founded shortly after Calaby and Keith (1974) were the first the arrival of HMS Alligator in October to provide spe.cific details of the origin 1838. Again feral livestock have descende.d and date of introduction of Bali cattle, to this day from animals such as pigs, a domesticated strain of Banteng which Timor ponies, Bali cattle and buffalo Were reoorded in Commander McArthur's originally imported into the settlement. dispatch of May 23, 1849,. in the last year Other introduced livestock such as sheep, of the Victoria settlement, when they regoats and poultry (Lcichhart, 1845; Earl, ceived 20 Balli Sapis [sic]; a peculiar 1846) failed to beoome established (Cala- breed of o'Xen, a few casks of light ale, by, 1974). By 1876, Harcus refers to large spirits, wine, etc. These cattle came from! numbers of buffalo in the Northern Ter- Balli Badong [sic] - now known as Denritory. In 1912, three species of deer were! pasar on· the southern side of the island released at Port Essington although only of Bali. one species, the sambar, has survived to The question arises as to whether foot and mouth disease, for example, existed this day. What are the origins of these animals at that time on Bali. The disease would and the diseases they might have intro- have been well known in Europe and, in duced? The three species of deer for ex~ fact, was described by Frascatorius in ample, would have been an unlikely 1546. Thus, it is probable that the Dutch source of serious disease as the fallow colonists would have recognized the deer were from a private herd in New disease which had been described in aniSouth Wales whilst the other deer (sam- mals in Germany in 1751 by Adami baI' and barasingha) came from the Mel- ( 1782). However, it is an importation of bourne zoo (Bentley, 1967). cattle from Holland which is blamed for The descendants of the Timor ponies the first outbreak of foot :and mouth introduced into both Fort Wellington disease in the then Dutch East Indies in (Wilson, 1855) and Victoria (Earl, 1846) the district of Malang, East Java, in 1887 from the island of Timor persist to this (Anon., 1974). Although animal mOiVement day. A great deal of detailed, and possibly was re.stricted, the disease spread so unrewarding, research would be needed rapidly throughout the eastern part of to determine the disease status of the in- East Java that the indigenous cattle dividual species at the site of origin and population must have been fully suscepat the time of the importation. In a short tible. Subsequently, outbreaks were rewide-ranging paper such as the present corded in areas of Jakarta (1906), Sula~ one, it has not been possible to assess wesi, Banten, Aceh (1892), Madura, Kaliaccurately the Iisks involved and it is mantan (1906), Medan (1907), Lombok questionable whether reliable data exist and Bali (1911) (Anon., 1974), and foot in the S.E. Asian area. From 1838 to 1852 and mouth disease still persists on some there were exclusively military veterinary Indonesian islands. Thus, it is probable surgeons in the Indies and by 1856 these that, at the time of the importation of numbered four. Were glanders and dou- ungulates, the Dutch East Indies wer~ rine present in Timor in the 19th century? free from foot and mouth disease during Glanders, one of the oldest recorded the first half of .the 19th century. diseases, is still present, in a sporadic Rinderpest was probably also present in form, on some Indonesian islands and the East Indies and would seem to have dourine was diagnosed between 1898 and posed a threat during the early cattle im1907 in the East Indies (de Beaufort et portations from Indonesia. However, in
L975
to Europe~, severe outbreaks are rare in Indonesia and fOJi periods of years the disease appears only sporadically and in mild form (Hutyra et aI., 1949). Additionally,. the disease is very acute and carrie:rs are not suspected. Buffalo were introduced from Kisar, a small island near the island of Timor tal Victoria, Port Essington, in 1838 and subsequently, further shipments arrived from the, Indonesian islands. The Timor ponies were introduced from the island of Timor to Fort Wellington and the Victoria settlement (Wilson, 1855; Earl, 1846). Earl (1846) also records the importation of pigs from European: (-= New South Wales) and S.E. Asian sources. However, the. danger from exotic diseasesoprerates in all directions and it is possible that hog cholera was introduced Into Indonesia from Australia around 1908 (de Beaufort, 1929). Pigs were also imported in considerable, numbers to Sydney from Tahiti (Maude, 1968). Camels were used by the early explorers, Horrocks in 1846, Burke and Wills in 1860 and Warburton between 1872 and 1873. Between 1893 and 1896, over 4500 came:ls were introduced from India for use in cormection with the gold fields in central and western Australia. The early importations in 1860 were from Karachi (McKnight, 1969). It is surprising that, along with these importations, surra was not also introduced into Australia as indeed it was at a later period. Cattle: tick and tick fever probably entered Australia at Darwin in 1872 when Brahman cattle - eight cows and four' bulls - were imported from Batavia (now Jakarta) on the island of Java. These animals were intended for slaughter but escane:d, and were eventually mustered and taken to Adelaide River where they bred. In Gilruth's report (1912) of a scientific expedition to the Northern Territory made from June: to AU$st, 1911, he comments ,that their descendents were still recognizable in this area. Again, during the time when troops were stationed in the north of Australia during World War 2, a considerable number of Zebu-cross cattle, probably descendants of these early Zebu introduc.. tions in 1843 and 1872 to Port Essington ~ontradistinction
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
NEVV ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
129
and the Darwin settlements, were found in a belt of country toward the Alligator River - see~ Fig. 1 (Kelley, 1959). The cattle tick, Boophilus microplus, and the two tick fevers caused by Babesia bigemina and B. argentina are still the! major cattle disease problem in tropical Australia. By about 1810, imports tailed off as the Australian colony, with its relatively small human population, be:came selfsufficient in breeding stock. The second component of this first period was about to start. Landholders in Australia by about 1824 had become wealtJhy and were seeking better-bred stock of British and E.uropean origin. In 1848 the South Australian Company bought superior merino rams and ewes in Saxony and also breeding stock in England. In 1844, there was a further purchase of 15 choice Mecklenburgh rams which were shipped from Bremen direct to Port Adelaide. In Western Australia, around 1848, good breeds of horses were imported from Sydney, Van Diern:en's Land, South America and some from England, with lighte:r horses from thd Cape of Good Hope and ponies from Timor. Since foot and mouth disease was first recorded in the U.K. in 1839, any clovenfooted import into Australia or New Zealand after this date would be suspect. Moreover, it is only in relative:ly recent years that the carrier state! has been recognized. Since the acute phase of the! disease: lasts only a short time, trans~ mission would be rapid in the cramped quarters and mortality not necessarily high and a carrier state could, therefore, be expected in some surviving animals on arrival at Australian ports. The outbreaks of foot and mouth disease: in Australia, reviewed bv Pullar (1965), in 18001, 1803-4 and 1871, all in N.S.W., and thd outbreak in the State of Victoria in 1872 were no doubt related to infected animals from the U.K. Foot and mouth disease has been re:corded from virtually every livestockraising country in the world with the noteworthy exception of New Zealand. The third component of the first period was -the activity of naturalization
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
130
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
societies, which were active in both New Zealand and Australia. Their aim was to introduce exotic species into Australia: and New Zealand. This Was a popular movement in the days of early settlement when man, too, was an exotic animal, anxious to ameliorate the unfamiliar 'landscape: or at least force it to resemble something that he understood and in .which he did not feel so alien. Thel societies seemed little concerned with the effects of their activities on the conserva,tion of the enviroment and particularly on the indigenous. sometimes unique, native animal nopulations, nor with the possible introduction of exotic diseases. These societies easily obtained nermission to'introduce a wide range of exotic .animals and birds. Fortunately, in Australia the life of the acclimatization societies was short. lasting from about 1860 to theearlv 1870s. Similar societies were started in Ne,w Zealand at about the same time but nersisted somewhat longer. until 1880. Their ·activitv Was only finally brought under control in 1895 when it became necessary to obtain. in writinQ'. the consent of the Minister-in-charge of the Department .of Agriculture to introduce "any animal or bird whatsoever". Very many different species from manv parts of the world were introduced into New Zealand and the. reader is referred to a very full review of the subject by Wodzicki (1949). The New Zealand societies introduced a very wide varie'tv of fishes, birds, and mammals. With reference to the mammals, New Zealand was fortunate: not to introduce serious exotic diseases as the result of the activity of enthusiasts in these societies. For example. the Axis deer was introduced. although unsuccessfully, in 1867 and the SambaI' deer in 1875 successfully. both species being imported from India. Waniti were introduced into New Zealand from Canada, at first unsuccessfully in 1870, but later successfully from the U.S.A. in 1905. Foot and mouth diseaSe! was first re:corded in the U.S.A. in 1870 'and was thought to have entered the continent via Canada throu!th infected cattle from Britian. New Zealand also introduced Japanese deer from Manchuria in
VOL.
23
1885 unsucccessfullybut later successfully Virginia de,er from the U.S.A., were imported into New Zealand in 1910 and moose from Canada in 1900 and 1910. An unsuccessful attempt was made to' introduce South American deer into New Zealand in 1870. It is believed that foot and mouth disease: was intDoduced into South America from Europe between 1860 and 1870. Even zebra were introduced, unsuccessfully, from South Africa in 1870. Many different deer were also intro~ dJced, into Australia although half the species failed to establish themselves. The story of the eoUeetion of lamas and alpacas in South America and their intro~ duction into Australia in 1858 and 1863 is a fascinating account of endur'ance and fortitude bv one C. Ledger, and has been recorded by Rolls ( 1969) . Round about 1862 Angora goats were introduced from Asia Minor and Cashmere goats from Tibe:t; although the latter failed to survive. Angora goats were eventually established, their agilitv. howe~er, making them extremely difficult to handle. Donke,ys derived from the wild ass of Asia, were introduced 'and still exist in Australia as feral animals. I have asked the question why exotic diseases were kept Gut of Australia and New Zealand. Of course in early days they we,re not. There was almost certainly a small outbreak of rabies in Hobart, Tasmania, between 1866 and 1877. Fortupately, nromnt action eradicated the ,disease althow.rh one child bitten by a rabid dog died. It is possible that the acute devastating diseases with a high mortality such as rinderpest and haemm:rhagic septicaemia. with a high mortality and no evidence of the carrier state, were self-eliminating from susceptible spf':cies during the voyage to New Zealand or Australia. Some exnbnation is necessary be,cause rinderpest has been present in India since: time immemorial and was certainly present in the U.K. and Europe during the time of the early importations. Rinderpest was recognized in Europe as early 376-386 AD and persisted until about 1930 when most Euronean countries with the exception of Turkey were free from the
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
1975
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
disease. A catastrophic epidemic occurred in the U.K. in 1865. However, the disease did not penetrate to the Cape Colony until 1897 and was eradicated again by 1903 (Plowright, 1968). Anthrax is also an acute disease and it is perhaps a little surprising that it was introduced early into Australia, in about 1847, and New Zealand somewhat later. However, the explanation lies in the fact that it was not introduced by animals. As far as Australia is concerned, Seddon (1947) considered that infe,ction may have been imported with spom-infected hay. Firm evidence was obtained in New Zealand that anthrax spores contaminated unsteirilized hone meal imported from Calcutta and this is regarded as the New Zealand o-rigin. Although the disease persists in parts of Australia, in New Zealand the incidence is now so low, thel last recorded case in animals Was in 1954, that the: country could be regarded as anthrax-free (Jamieson, 1965). The consideration of anthrax provides a convenient link with the second major period during which animal imports were increasingly controlled by quarantine. This was due to a growing awareness of the causation of diseases and the economic significance of animal disease, together with the de,velopment of procedures for laboratory diagnosis. 2. THE PERIOD OF INCREASING RESTRICTION OF ANIMAL MOVEMENT INTO AND BETWEEN NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA
The beginning of quarantine in Australia, in relation to cattle, dat~s from 1871. The proclaimed diseases were cattle plague, foot and mouth disease, sheep pox and any other diseases whicH might be proclaimed. The Act was ame:nd~ ed in 1884 to include sheep, goats, swine, dogs and such other animals as might be declared. Thus, a proclamation under this Act in 1893 provided for protection against the following diseases: shee:p scab, catarrh, rabies, CBPP, tuberculosis, glanders, swine fever, warbles, actinomycosis, cancer, anthrax, influenza, mange in horses, tick and lice in sheep, and trichinosis in swine. Under the, Customs Act of 1879 a ban was placed on the import of cattle and
131
sheep from all countries except Great Britain and Ireland. This policy, as will be seen later, has persisted until very recent time/so Prior to Federation, colonies maintain~ ed their own external quarantine. How~ ever, there was, from the outset, a strong spirit of co~operation. For example, when in 1891 glande:rs was diagnosed in New South Wales, telegrams were despatched between the Chief Insnector of Stock and the Chief Inspector of the other colonies including New Ze,aland. A more recent example would be the prompt way New Zealand has informed Australia of a suspected, but happily not confirmed, outbreak of foot and mouth disease. Quarantine in Australia, a Federal responsibility since 1908, became; operative! in 1909. Quar'antine regulations were re>viewed in 1925 and 1933, and restrictions were slowly tightened so that during the war years, 1939-45, there were almost no importations of stock (Wardle., 1951). Despite constant vigilance, an outbreak of rindernest occurred in Western Australia in '1923. The origin was suspected to be pigs carried as ships stores. These pigs infected cattle picke:d up en route! in northern Western Australia which were landed at Freemantle. However, the disease was rapidly eradicated. Similarly, after the: Quarantine regulations were promulgated, hog cholera was inadver~ tently introduced into Australia in 19m, 1927-8, 1942-3 and a lowcvirulence strain in 1962. Outbreaks have also occurred from time to time in New Zealand. Newcastle disease has never been introduced into New Zealand; however, the: disease penetrated the Australian quarantine barrier in 1930-32 and a low-virulence strain in 1962. It was not until 1907 that surra was diagnosed in some camels imported from India. The disease was deitected while the animals were still in quarantine and the infected camels were destroyed; no other cases have e;ver been reported. In 1952, scrapie penetrated the Australian quarantine barrier and in 1950 also .the New Zealand quarantine, but was rapidly eradicated. Quarantine pore-cautions preve,nted the spread of glanders when this disease was diagnosed in aJ number of horses attached to a circus
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
·132
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
from the U.S.A.; they, together with all contacts, were destroyed. In recent years, quarantine has been further tightened, as the result of advancing knowledge' of animal diseases. For exampJe, relatively recently, it has been shown that dogs can incubate rabies for an even longer time than was originally considered possible and this necessitated changes in quarantine regulations. Similarly, it has only recently been demonstrated that cattle can be carriers of the virus of bluetongue, a disease normally affecting sheep, and that apparently healthy cattle can carry viable virus of foot and mouth disease in the cells of the pharynx over a prolonged period. All these findings have underlined the need for vigilance regarding quarantine and for the application of even tighter restrictions on the importation of animals. By 1953-4, very few sheep or cattle were imported into Australia. The few sheep that were imported were derived only from New Zealand and the cattle only from the U.K. and New Zealand. By 19589, all imports of cattle and sheep were completely suspended owing: to a fear that bluetongue infection might be introduced into Australia (Fig. 2). A few pigs were imported, mostly from New Zealand, and this importation also ceased in 19601 (Fig. 3). Thus, there was a 10 year in.7289
,'0-,
:0
. .
1500
100
Sheep •••••• Cattle _ _
..
'"
UK&NZ : only :
USA
1953/54
23
"1762'UK&NZ o
'0 ..
o
Horsel
_
o'
Pigs ...... _......_...__...._
1000
.. only
o
1500
o
o
Dogs ACata , •••••
o
o o
.
o
o o
500 • I,
0
0
0
0
o o
o
0
o
0 0 0
0 0 0
o o o
o o
0
UK&NZ only
0
000
o
o
o
• 0
.:
60/61
65/66
69/70
73/14
[] NZ only
• Rabies UK .. Including PING
FIG. 3: Importations of domestic animals into Aus-
tralia -
horses, pigs, dogs and cats.
terval from 1958-9 to 1967-8 during which the importation of cattle and sheep was prohibited and from 1960-1 to 1969-70 when no pigs were imported (Figs. 2 and 3). Only the importation of horses, dogs and cats was permitted, with strict quarantine, and these imnorts were confined to animals from the U.K. and New Zealand (Fig. 3). Thus, 1968-9 marks the! end of the second period when the world genetic pool in relation to domestic a:ni~ mals imported into Australia was totally banned, with the exception of horses, dogs andcats imported either from New Zealand or from the U.K. (Fig. 3).
.0
1000
500
VOL.
58/59 [] NZ only • All further imports of cattle and sheep prohibited (blue tongue risk)
0/ domestic animals into Australia - sheep and cattle.
FIG. 2: Importations
3. THE PERIOD OF INCREASING ANIMAL MOVEMENT INTO AND BETWEEN NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA
During the latter part of the second period and currently, reliable methods have been developed for the diagnosis of dangerous exotic diseases, particularly' tests whereby individual animals derived from a country known to have diseases exotic to New 'Zealand and Australia can be shown to be free from these speCific infections so that they may be imDorted: with safety. . ' For example, at Denver, Colorado, U.S.A., millions of dollars are: being spent on the study of bluetongue which in now endemic in that country. Much of the :research is being directed towards developing tests whereby cattle can be
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
1975
NE~
ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
shown to be free. from the virus of blue~ tongue. This is important, because they can act as carriers of this virus disease of sheep for many months. Reliable tests have been developed in Australia so that live cattle for export can be shown to be free from the virus of ephemeral fever. Tests have also been developed ~here;by cattle can be shown to be free from contagious pleuropneumonia infection. Thus, if they pass stringent tests, these animals can be imported with safety. Of course, testing for contagious bovine pleuropneumonia is less relevant now that the disease, at one time exotic, then endemic is noW once again exotic as the result of a successful eradication pl10gramme in Australia. Rigid tests on cattle, in relation to freedom from bluetongue virus, have enabled Australia to accept semen from the U.K. and New Zealand since the end of 1967 and Canada! since the end of 1972. Thus, we see the beginning, in this third period, of increase in the number of species and countries of origin from which genetic mateiI'ial can be imported into Australia. The entry of sheep and goats into Australia from New Zealand has also been allowed since the end of 1973. Where previously horses, dogs and cats from the U.K. were only allowed entry into Australia when transported by sea, these species may now be air-freighted in. This change in quarantine regulations has resulted in a considerable increase in the number of impopted horses. In the matter of exotic diseases, the very special relationship between Aus'tralia and New Zealand, and to a lesser extent the U.K., is amply evident from ai study of the data shown in Figs. 2 and 3 and the persistence and development of these trading ties is dependent on ade'" quate channels of communication being maintained and developed. This is particularly important when quarantine re;gulations are being revised - i.e., dur~ ing the period we are now entering. New Ze:aland has, in some regards, been used by Australia as a staging post to strengthen its quarantine precautions. The U.K. is being similarly used so that semen from EUI10pean breeds, such as Charolais, can be safely imported into Australia.
133
The increase in animal movement is not related in any way to a decrease in the danger from the inadvertant introduction of an exotic disease. Areas infected with rabies are, in fact, increasing in Europe. The period of transition from colonial status to national independence of a large number of countries, for example in Africa, has been associated with periods of political unrest or reorr~ ganization of veterinary services so that reliable data relating to their indigenous diseases have been difficult to obtain and! where efficient quarantine has been diffi.,. cult to administer. In affluent countries, such as New Zea~ land and Australia, the demand for imported goods, which include products of animal origin, has greatly expanded. Movement of people: is also rapidly increasing while, at the same time,. aircraft become larger, there are more of them, and they make longer and more rapid! journeys between landfalls. All these developments have a potential to increaSe! the risk of introducing exotic diseases and their insect vecto~S'. New and im~ proved techniques for the diagnosis ofl exotic diseases can be expected from the research effort being made in maximum security laboratories which are being built throughout the world. Additional quarantine stations are also being constructed where animals can be safely held in isolation while being adequatelyt tested for a range of exotic diseases. Thus, these developments will also open up the opportunities to move animals i_nternationally without the attendant fear of introducing exotic diseases. Maximum security labomtories have been built at Pirbright in the U.K. with special reference to foot and mouth disease and bluetongue. The Plum Island Animal Disease: Laboratory in the U.S.A., the Institut de Recherche Therapeutique at Tixensaart in Belgium, the Centraal Dier:geneeskundig Instituit, Lelystad, Holland, the Federal Researoh Institute for Animal Virus Diseases at Tubingen, Germany, and the Instituto Zooprofillatico Sperimentale at Brescia in Italy are aU con~ tributing .to the better understanding, diagnosis, control and hopefully the eventual eradication of the more serious exotic diseases. All will help to make the inter-
134
NE¥l ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
national movement of animals or their gene material safer. In recent years, New Zealand has built an animal quarantine station on Somes Island and we, in Australia, hope shortly to start building our quarantine station also on an off-shore island. The U.S.A. is building additional animal quarantine facilities at Florida Key, while Canada: has already established two quarantine 'Stations. The U.K. and other European countries have also established quarantine facilities. The developments anticipated du'ring this third period will not represent any relaxation in vigilance; they represent the growing confidence in re~ search findings which enable modification of quarantine' regulations with the consequent resumption of animal move~ ment with safety, always pmvided extremely strict and often costly testing is carried out and adequate animal and laboratory facilities are available. CONCLUDING REMARKS
A quarantine station cannot be fully functional, in the sense of allowing the importation of stock from high risk countries, without the backing of a maximum security laboratory. We expect to construct such a laboratory on the mainland of Australia, the site has been selected, and some staff have already been appointed. The laboratory will be responsible for carrying out laboratory tests on animals maintained in an off-shore quarantine station before their release on to the Australian mainland and Tasmania. Much of the Australian cattle export industry, which still has great potential for expansion, is associated with the tropical and sub-tropical pastures of northern Australia. Tropical breeds from overseas may make an important contribution to animal production in these areas. However, some of the breeds which may be best suited are native to high ,disease risk countries such as India and Africa. It is perhaps not widely known that the Australian founda,tion Afrikander stock consisted of only 10 animals imp~rted in 1954 from U.S.A. As far as Brahmans are concerned, the gene pool is
VOL. 23
somewhat greater, However, the numbers imported were relatively small - 20 in 1933,20 more between 1950 and 1953, and 6 more in 1954, all from the U.S.A. Additionally, in 1953, 228 Santa Gertrudis were imported from the U.S.A. Only 8 red Sindis and 8 Sahiwals have e.ver been imported - in 1953 from Pakistan. Australia, .as New Zealand, at present depends on a number of different overseas laboratories for the confirmation of diagnosis of most of its serious exotic diseases. While some. of these laboratories have a serious and well established commitment to this responsibility - such as the U.K. laboratory at Pirbright others carry out this service as a courtesy and the Australian veterinary authorities fee.! that a service so vital to our animal industry cannot be satisfactorily fulfilled in this way. The arrangement does not offer a satisfactory answer to problems of the initial diagnosis of an exotic disease, when speed and dependability may we;!l determine the final outcome of the epidemic. In an exporting country, such as New Zealand or Australia, proved freedom from an exotic disease following any outbreak must provide the"basis for a resumption of any suspended export industry. Such evidence could well depend on the results of tests carried out on .a large number of animals, possibly over lextensive and remote areas of country and over considerable periods. Subsidiary outbreaks can be anticipated, though these may well be false alanns, but each suspected outbreak will need further laboratory tests. Extensive testing of this sort may need to be carried out in microbiological iso~ lation and large numbers of tests may not be acceptable to or practical for overseas laboratories. The results of extensive testing could be expected to reduce the time required, after .an outbreak, for a confident declaration of total eradi:cation. Such considerations could have enO'rmous economic importance in relation to the multi-million export trade in animal products from Australia and New Zealand. The maximum security laboratory which we expe,ct to construot at Geelong, in the State of Victoria, will have many functions in addition to the diagnosis of
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
1975
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
exotic diseases. Until the laboratory has undergone very exhaustive tests, foot and mouth disease virus will not be handle:d in advance of an outbreak. However, such a laboratory would include a facility for the manufacture of F & M vaccine and, equally important, for the safe te~t ing of such vaccine for safety and potency should it ever be required. There are many reasons why, in the event of a serious and widespread outbreak of foot and mouth diseases whioh could not be: controlled by a slaughter policy, it is necessary to have a capacity to manufacture: and test one's own F & M disease vaccine, but this is not the place to go into these details. The Australian laboratory will be capable of the rapid and reliable diagnosis of a wide range of exotic diseases and have the: ability, through a thorough knowledge gained from research into indigenous virus diseases, another responsibility for the laboratory, to differentiate these from any suspected exotic disease. Equally important would be the ability to monitor the spread of any exotic disease by htboratory tests, thus providing reliable epidemiological data. This would enable the rate: and limit of spread to be continuously monitored and would provide reliable data both for decis~ons regarding control and eradication programmes, and also for reliable bulletins on the current status of an outbreak. The results of laboratory tests would provide dependable data to support a declaration of the eradication of the disease. .Such a laboratory will provide training for personnel in exotic disease recognition. Finally, it will provide the neceS$ary laboratory back-up which would enable a quarantine station to import, with safety, animals from high risk countries. A maximum security laboratory is extremely expensive to build, to maintain and to operate. It may be: of service, in one field or another of its responsibilities, to countries other than Australia. Since both New Zealand and Australia are geographically isolated, this laboratory could contribute: to the control of disease in the Oceania area and facilitate the movement of animal genes and therefore help improve the productivity of our livestock.
135
There exists already a joint committee of Australian and New Zealand departmental officers known as the AustraliaNew Zealand Technical Committee on animal and plant quarantine which was established in 1958 to consider and report on animal and plant quarantine restrictions as they affeot trade between the two countries. This committee is still operational and may well be one that could examine co-operative activity in relation to the new Australian maximum security laboratory once it is e:stablished. If nece~ sary, the machinery may need some overhaul to make sure that there is an efficient flow of information between Australia and New Zealand so that any untoward repercussions resulting from the revision of quarantine regulations can be avoided. Also it may be mutually advantageous to include: some representation from South-east Asian countries on this or some other committee with wide terms of reference in relation to problems connected with exotic diseases of the OCemlia area and the use of the facilities which are now being developed in New Zealand and Australia. New Zealand and Australia face: very difficult problems in the event of an outbreak of an exotic disease compared with many countries and, therefore, it is not surprising that both countries areextre" mely cautious in the: revision of any quarantine regulations. Yet, on a global basis, the movement of animals of economic importance or of their gene material is increasing. There may beeconomic advantages accruing from the acquisitiQIl of a wider gene pool. In an increasingly competitive world, we may not be able to stand apart and maintain a very restrictive attitude to the importation of gene material. Therefore, it is essential, first, to maintain an highly efficient veterinary service, seoondly, to develop the necessary facilities between the two countries so that the importation of desirable genes can be developed with safety, and, thirdly, to ensure adequate dialogue and co-operation in relation to quarantine by maintaining and if necessary, improving the mechanism for the exchange of information between our two countries.
136
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
Downloaded by [Michigan State University] at 07:32 03 April 2015
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I thank the Council of the New Zealand Vete;rinary Association for their kind invitation to give an address, on which this paper is based, on the occasion of their Golden Jubilee meeting held at Nelson in February, 1974. I hope that the paper will serve as a reminder of the identity of purpose between, and of some of the successes of, the veterinary profession over the years in both New Zea" land and Australia and of the professional conoord which has always existed between the two nations. I would also like to thank John Calaby for drawipg my attention to many of the early reJerences, for checking them, and for criticizing the manuscript. REFERENCES
Adami, P. (1782): Untersuchungen und Geschichte der ViClhseuchen in den Kaiserl. Konig!. Erblandern, Vienna. Anon. (1974): Foot and Mouth Disease Eradication Programme in Indonesia. Directorate of Animal Health. Directorate General of Animal Husbandry. Dept of Agric., Indonesia. Bentley, A. (1967): An Introduction to the Deer of Australia with Special Reference to Victoria. Hawthorn Press, Melbourne. Bisseru, B. (1972): Rabies. Heinemann, London. Calaby, J. H. (1975): Introduction of Bali cattle to Northern Australia. Aust. vet. J. 51: 108. Calaby, J. H.; Keith, K. (1974): Fauna survey of the Port Essington District, Cobourg Peninsula, Northern Territory of Australia. CSIRO Div. Wildlife Res., Tech. Paper 28: 179-208. Cumpston, J. S. (1964): Shipping Arrivals and Departures Sydney, 1788'1825. Parts I, II and III. Pub!. by the author, Canberra. De Beaufort, L. F., et al. (1929): Science in the Netherlands East Indies. (Ed. L. M. R. Rutten). Earl, G. W. (1846): Enterprise in Tropical Australia. Madden & Malcolm, London. Frascatmius, H. (1546): De sympathia et antipathia rerum liber unus. De contagione et contagiosis morbis et eorum curatione. Book 1, ch. 12, Heirs of L. A. Junta, Venice. Frith, H. J.; Calaby, J. H. (1974): Fauna survey of the Port Essington district, Cobourg Peninsula, Northern Territory of Australia. CSIRO Div. Wildlife Res., Tech. Paper 28: 1-207. Gilruth, J. A. (1912): Report of preliminary scientific expedition to the Northern Territory. 2. Report on domesticated animals in the Northern Territory. Bull. Northern Territory, 1. Dept of External Affairs, Melbourne.
VOL. 23
Harcus, W. (1876):. South Australia: Its History, Resources and Production. Sampson, Low, Marston, Searle & Rh'1ington, London. Heeres, J. E. (1899): The Part Borne by the Dutch in the Discovery of Australia, 1606-1765. Luzac, London. Hindmarsh, W. L. (1967): Historical records of the veterinary profession in AustraIia. III, Animal health and associated legislation in N.S.W. from the foundation of the colon¥ until 1863. Aust. vet. f., 43: 102-7. Hutyra, F.; Marek, J.; Manninger, R. (1949): Special Pathology and Therapeutics of the Diseases of Domestic Animals. Bailliere, Tindall & Cox, London. Jamieson, S. (1964): Animal disease and quarantine procedures in New Zealand. Bull. Off. into Epiz., 62: 413-23. (1965): Regional examination of the zoosanitary regulations now in force in New Zea. land. Bull. Off. into Epiz., 63: 197-207. Kelly, R. B. (1959): Native and Adapted Cattle. Angus & Robertson, Sydney. Leichardt, L. (1845): Journal. MS in Mitchell Library, Sydney, N.S.W. Maude, H. E. (1968): Of Islands and Men. Studies in Pacific History. Oxford Univ. Press, Melbourne. McKnight, T. L. (1969): The Came~ in Australia. Mel,bourne Univ. Press, Melbourne. Petre, H. W. (1844): An Account of the Settlements of the New· Zealand Company, from Personal Observations during a Residence of ~hree years there. Smith, Elder, London. Plowright. W. (1968): Rinderpest Virus. SpringerVerlag, New York. Pullar, M. (1965): Viet Vet. Proc. 1964-65: 12. Rolls, E. C. (1969): They All Ran Wild. Angus & Robertson, Sydney. Seddon, H. R. (1947): Influence and movement of animals on the spread of disease in Australia. Aust. vet. J., 23: 200-9. Seddon, H. R. (1952): Diseases of Domestic Animals in Australia. Part 4. Department of Health, Canberra. Sharp, A. (1968): Voyages of Abel Janszoon Tasman. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Tasman, A. J. (1642): The Journal of Abel Jansz Tasman 1,642. (Ed. G. H. Kenihan.) Australian Heritage Press, Adelaide, 1968. Wardle, R. N. (1951): The development of Commonwealth animal quarantine. Aust. vet. J., 27: 219-25. Wilson, T. B. (1855): Narrative of a Voyage round the World. Sherwood, Gilbert & Piper, London. Wodiick'i, K. A. (1949): IIitroduced mammals of New Zealand. DSIR Bull., 98: 1-255.
(Received for publication March 31, 1975)
