National OJD Management
Purpose of this Paper
Sheepmeat Council of Australia (SCA) and WoolProducers Australia (WPA) are committed to
developing the most effective national management plan for Ovine Johnes Disease (OJD).
This is a discussion paper developed by the two peak bodies which proposes new amendments to
the National OJD Management Plan and addresses the key areas of producer concern around
current and proposed arrangements.
The National OJD Management Plan is proposed to take effect from 1 July 2013. The proposal
outlined below has been revised from the plan circulated in 2012. The amendments are the result
of extensive consultation over the last six months with industry, state and national regulatory
authorities and state governments.
The proposed amendments include:

A simpler management system that relies on producers and industry (including agents)
taking a risk management approach to management of OJD.

Encouragement for producers to collectively develop their own Regional Biosecurity
Plans (RBPs).

No control or protected areas. These have now become untenable because of the lack of
any formal approval process for RBPs by government at the state level.

Continuation of Sheep Health Statements but the removal of the ABC point scheme.
SCA and WPA are inviting producers to consider the amendments and respond to the points
raised in this discussion paper.
Comments will be received up until close of business 1 March 2013.
A final policy paper will then be developed and communicated to the industry for
implementation from 1 July 2013.
1
Background
Ovine Johne’s disease (OJD) has become endemic in some sheep production areas of Australia
but in other areas the disease does not exist or exists at a very low level.
The OJD Management Plan (2007-12) – the current plan – was to cease in 2012. SCA and WPA
conducted a review and consultation process throughout 2011-12 to evaluate the plan and make a
decision on future national management arrangements.
The review identified that some regions of Australia have been effective in delaying the spread
of the disease between flocks and / or in reducing within flock prevalence. However, in other
regions, the plan had failed to meet the objective of minimising the risk to properties and areas
that appeared to be disease-free, as OJD has continued to spread into a number of previously low
prevalence areas. This meant that some change was necessary – it was not appropriate for the
current plan to continue.
Through an extensive process a revised plan was developed. A key part of this was working
with state governments to develop Australia-wide uniform entry requirements and resolve
various technical issues about the disease. Throughout the entire process SCA and WPA worked
hard to achieve a compromise in balancing the widely divergent and differing needs of producers
across the nation – from those where the disease was endemic to those areas where the disease
has yet to be observed.
Some issues were easy and received wide support. There was clear agreement that there should
be a national program and that research and development should continue to be funded. Other
activities were seen as important but had constraints in the way they were currently undertaken,
including abattoir monitoring and the use of the Sheep Health Statement and the ABC system. It
was proposed the ABC system be removed as producer feedback indicated it was confusing and
not well understood, and therefore ineffective.
In late 2012 it became clear that there continued to be confusion and conjecture about the
benefits of the revised national plan. In light of this it was decided to extend the transition phase
to 1 July 2013 so that this could be addressed.
SCA and WPA are now seeking comment on the things that might need to change in order to
unite industry.
2
Proposed Management Plan from 1 July 2013
SCA and WPA remain committed to delivering a national management plan and to provide
funding for a number of elements which will assist producers manage biosecurity and OJD.
The 2013-2017 national plan – the revised plan – will have the following objectives:
1. Minimise the risk of infection by Mycobacterium paratuberculosis (Mptb) OJD
spreading to properties and regions that currently appear disease free
2. Reduce the financial impact and adverse animal health and welfare effects of the
disease on individual flocks, and on the sheep industry as a whole.
Under the revised plan, funding will be provided for:
1. Extension/communication activities to provide producers with information about
biosecurity and management of OJD.
2. Developing and refining risk assessment tools, such as the national Sheep Health
Statement (SHS) to assist producers make informed decisions when trading sheep.
3. Developing an effective abattoir program as a tool for monitoring individual flock
OJD control programs and for use as an assurance tool in low-risk flocks. The
intention is that this be eventually moved into a generic animal health and production
feedback system.
4. Ongoing research and development to help producers minimise the impact of OJD on
their businesses.
5. Contributing to the cross-species National Johne’s Disease Control Plan, including
SheepMAP
The revised plan will continue to encourage vaccination and a regional approach to OJD.
Vaccination is the best tool we have for reducing the clinical expression of the disease and for
significantly reducing the level of shedding by infected sheep. In one long term trial involving
twelve flocks, shedding was not detected in two flocks at their last sampling.
A regional approach to biosecurity is more effective than an individual approach and hence
producers will be encouraged to address OJD, and all animal health issues, through a regional
biosecurity approach.
Vaccination and a regional approach will not be provided with financial support by the revised
plan. Both result in primarily private good outcomes, and socialised funding is not justified.
The ABC Scheme will no longer be a part of the national plan. Whilst it provided a simplified
measure of the level of risk through a numerical point score, it was not well understood by most
producers. Producers did not appreciate the need to supplement the Scheme with their own
assessment of risk, especially on the vaccination history of sheep.
3
The national approach will increase efforts to provide producers with information on the
different levels of risk associated with the vaccination history of the property from which sheep
originate.
Zoning
The plan SCA and WPA put forward late last year provided for the development of Regional
Biosecurity Plans (RBP). This was for groups of producers in areas where the prevalence of the
disease was low and who wanted to minimise the risk of entry or further spread of OJD.
Meeting certain criteria, as evidenced in the RBP, could have allowed the geographic area
covered by the plan to gain ‘protected’ area status. If an area was not covered by a RBP then it
would have, by default, been a ‘control’ area.
The review of the OJD Management Plan conducted in 2011-12 highlighted that inconsistent
entry requirements across Australia were detrimental to trade and played a role in noncompliance with state trading regulations. In developing the revised plan during 2012, SCA and
WPA had a fundamental desire to gain uniform entry requirements so that ‘protected’ areas
could have been able to trade between each other with minimum impediments.
The national OJD plan has been underpinned by state laws and regulations, including
enforcement of interstate (or inter-area) entry requirements. This is because the states have the
responsibility for domestic animal health issues. Government representatives have indicated that
they do not have a role in the approval process of RBPs. SCA and WPA do not consider that
they have a mandate to ‘approve’ plans. Therefore without a formal approval process and
without state regulation, compliance with protected area conditions cannot be enforced.
This means that zoning, that is ‘protected’ and ‘control’ areas, would no longer exist with legal
status.
However, the concept of RBPs remains sound in providing producers with a mechanism for joint
action to address OJD (and other animal health issues). Regions which have developed an RBP
may wish to claim a certain status, although this may not have any legal affect in states where
there is no regulatory support. Industry needs to further consider whether or not there should be
formal recognition for regions that implement an RBP, and who would be the appropriate body
to do this.
It is anticipated that producers in some regions will want to actively manage the disease and
continue to have a plan or program in their region or state. Regional Biosecurity Plans will
outline how groups of producers will be able to detect, control and manage the disease with the
aim of minimising the spread of OJD. Further, by actively managing disease risk, producers will
need to negotiate trading opportunities with those states and regions with biosecurity plans in
place.
4
Non-financial support will be provided for groups of producers who wish to implement regional
biosecurity plans to minimise the risk of introduction of OJD and other diseases. This could
include technical assistance through the OJD Management Committee (OJDMC).
Like previous plans producers will need to manage their own risk and tools will be provided for
this including SHS, RBP guidelines and business rules and advice. There is a potential of regions
having inconsistent entry requirements, which will require negotiations to ensure a national
sheep health statement is available.
Addressing industry concerns
Over recent months SCA and WPA have been talking with and listening to stakeholders and are
aware there are a range of issues producers are concerned about.
SCA and WPA have taken these concerns on board and believe the amended management plan
presents the most effective approach to minimise the spread of OJD.
The concerns and responses of SCA and WPA are summarised below.
Industry concerns
SCA and WPA response
Industry should maintain
the status quo
Some regions of Australia have been effective in delaying the
spread of the disease between flocks and / or in reducing within
flock prevalence. However, in other regions, the current system
failed to meet its objective of minimising the risk to properties and
regions that appeared to be disease-free, as OJD has continued to
spread into a number of previously low prevalence areas. This
means that some change is necessary.
Vaccination alone should
be sufficient to allow
trade of sheep anywhere
in Australia.
Scientific evidence suggests that vaccinated sheep may continue to
shed OJD bacteria; however vaccination is an important tool
against OJD and significantly reduces the impacts of clinical
disease. The movement of vaccinated sheep from regions where
OJD is present into regions of nil or low disease, presents a risk of
disease spread. The national approach will increase efforts to
provide producers with information on the different levels of risk
associated with the vaccination history of the property from which
sheep originate, and on ways to increase the assurance that sheep
are not infected, for example by testing. State governments and
individual landholders will then be able to determine acceptable
entry requirements.
Industry should get rid of From 1 July 2013 it is proposed that zones no longer exist. Some
5
zoning.
states and individual properties can continue to implement
movement restrictions based upon their assessments of acceptable
risk.
Biosecurity is an effective tool in managing the risk of animal
health diseases. The National plan will encourage individual
producers and groups of producers to implement biosecurity plans
to minimise the risk of diseases entering their region or property.
The National plan cannot remove the individual’s rights to make
business decisions.
Industry should remove
all controls for OJD and
allow complete
deregulation.
As a result of the majority of state governments deciding not to be
involved in the approval process for RBPs, the management of
OJD has effectively been deregulated. Individual producers and
RBP areas will be supported by industry in managing their own
risk and in making informed decisions when trading sheep.
Industry should retain
the ABC scheme.
The ABC Scheme was poorly understood, misused and an
ineffective tool. Whilst it provided a simplified measure of the
level of risk through a numerical point score, producers did not
appreciate the need to supplement the Scheme with their own
assessment of risk especially on the vaccination history of sheep.
As a result it has been decided to rely on Sheep Health Statements
to inform sound trading decisions. The emphasis on collective
producer action through regional biosecurity plans will also assist
in minimising the spread of OJD.
Accuracy of Pooled
Faecal Culture of 350
sheep (PFC350).
The estimated sensitivity (ability to detect infection) of PFC for a
single infected animal is about 50-55%. This is why PFC is used
as a flock test only and is not used to screen individual animals.
For a PFC of 350 sheep from a flock, there is a 98% confidence of
detecting infection if it is present in the flock at a prevalence of
2% or more. Used in this way, it is a highly effective test for flock
screening.
Accuracy of abattoir
monitoring.
Abattoir testing is excellent for monitoring individual flock OJD
control programs and for use as an assurance tool in low risk
flocks. The estimated sensitivity for abattoir monitoring increases
with the number of animal tested. This is why abattoir monitoring
is used as a flock test and to determine estimated prevalence of
OJD in regions. For example an abattoir test of 150 sheep (Ab150
test) with a sensitivity of 50% has a confidence level of 78% and is
6
a useful tool for providing assurance for low risk flocks. Ab350
provides >95% confidence level of detecting prevalence of 2%
within a flock. Ab500 provides equivalent sensitivity as a PFC350
(i.e. 98% confidence of detecting infection if the flock has a
prevalence of 2%).
Opportunity for Industry Comment
Over the next four weeks, SCA and WPA will be meeting with producer and industry groups to
further explain how the proposed amendments would operate.
Those organisations or producers wishing to make a formal submission for consideration by
SCA and WPA as part of the policy discussion are invited to do so in writing. Alternatively
please contact your State farming organisation, producer group or breed society.
These comments should be submitted by mail to PO Box 942 Broadway NSW 2007 or by email
to [email protected]
Copies of this discussion paper can be requested by calling 1800 332 312.
All comments should be received by COB 1 March 2013.
This discussion paper is available on the WPA website www.woolproducers.com.au as well as
www.ojd.com.au.
7