UK Parliament / Open data

Schmallenberg Virus

Written question asked by Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour) on Monday, 1 July 2013, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Monday, 3 June 2013. It was answered by David Heath (Liberal Democrat) on Monday, 1 July 2013 on behalf of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Question

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment he has made of the extent of the Schmallenberg virus in (a) sheep and (b) cattle; what assessment he has made of whether the virus should be made notifiable; and if he will make a statement.

[157323]

Answer

DEFRA funded surveillance over the summer of 2012 identified that the virus had spread across all rural counties in England and Wales. While many animals and farms in GB may have been infected, clinical signs in adult sheep and beef cattle to date have been non-existent. The signs in dairy cattle of a raised temperature, reduced milk yield and in some cases diarrhoea are mild/moderate, short-lived and similar to other endemic diseases due to their non-specific nature. In an individual dairy cow, these mild clinical signs may last up to five days and across the herd as a whole for several weeks. The main impact is in pregnancy on the developing foetus. The virus attacks the developing neurological system and limbs of foetal lambs or calves resulting in malformations such as domed heads, fixed bent limbs and jaw deformities. The affected newborns are often born dead or die shortly after birth. Birthing may be difficult due to the foetal limb presentation and care needs to be taken in assisting the mother, seeking veterinary assistance as appropriate. Post partum aftercare should be provided as with any other difficult birth.

In considering if a disease should be made notifiable, there needs to be a clear value benefiting disease control in the placing of additional burden on farmers and Government. In terms of control measures, preventing vector spread is very difficult and therefore not a realistic control measure. A vaccine has very recently received provisional marketing authorisation and will be available for use by farmers this summer in advance of the next sheep breeding period. The onus would lie with the farmer to report suspicion of disease and then for Government to intervene. The impact of Schmallenberg virus has to date been shown to be low at a national level, with farms infected showing 2% to 5% of malformed lambs or calves affected and as such, there is no rationale for intervening. Some early lambing flocks where mating periods are synchronised have seen greater impacts. These will now be able to be protected by vaccination. This is a disease with few defined clinical signs in adult animals, making detection difficult. By the time clinical signs are seen in offspring, it is too late to control. It is also possible that notifiying presence of disease on a farm may complicate trade, both with the UK, the EU and for third country partners.

We therefore consider that making Schmallenberg virus notifiable would be over burdensome and not proportionate to the disease impact. The decision was taken in full consultation with industry and the European Commission.

Type
Written question
Reference
157323; 565 c454W
Session
2013-14
Back to top