Following recent concern about avian influenza the Soil Association has produced this position statement. Risk assessment: The risk of avian influenza occurring in the UK is currently low. The Soil Association support Defra's conclusion that the key areas that must be addressed now are risk assessment – including surveillance – and biosecurity measures. Risk assessment should include an appraisal of the type, country of origin and number of migratory birds that are likely to arrive on farm. The Soil Association is working to provide support for producers in identifying migratory flyways but recommends that all farms stay vigilante. The Soil Association also recommends that all farms with poultry carry out a contingency plan for production if farmers are forced to isolate their flocks. This plan should cover housing, feed supplies and welfare issues (see further advice to producers) The Soil Association suggests that farms that are judged to be 'at risk' - due to the presence or potential presence of large numbers of migratory birds coming from infected areas - should consider using netting to cover at least part of the range area. This would aim to keep domestic and potentially infected wild birds from mixing. Defra are now asking poultry keepers to feed and water birds indoors, wherever possible, to avoid attracting wild birds onto poultry farms. If this is not possible the Soil Association recommends that food and water are provided under a shelter which prevents contact by wild birds with the feed or water intended for poultry. Vaccination: The Soil Association is pleased that, following Soil Association representation at the meeting on 12 September, Defra will now examine the potential that vaccination could have in the control of avian influenza should the disease arrive in the UK. It is very important that wild birds are monitored to track any spread of the disease through the European Union. In the event of any incidence of avian influenza in the UK, the Soil Association accept that infected flocks should be culled. However, we would then like to see vaccination used as a tool to 'ring fence' the infected farm or area where a cull has taken place. We fully support the recent decision of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) that the main method of controlling the highly pathogenic strain of bird flu (H5N1) in poultry should be through the vaccination of animals (see reference below). Poultry vaccines already exist for the virus and are being widely used in Russia, China and Indonesia. The FAO and OIE experts agreed that the mass culling of infected and at-risk livestock is no longer acceptable as the main method of control "for ethical, ecological and economic reasons". In addition, the FAO and OIE recognise that this approach is not effective in the case of bird flu, since a reservoir of the virus persists in the wild bird population and the virus cannot be eradicated by slaughtering domestic birds. About 150 million chickens have already been slaughtered in South-East Asia in an attempt to control the disease. The minutes of the Defra meeting of 23 August 2005 appear to dismiss vaccination as an option, due to the fact that the avian influenza vaccine is an inactivated vaccine and must therefore be administered by injection to each individual bird. However, the Soil Association does not believe that this is an insurmountable problem. Training would need to be provided to ensure that vaccination could be carried out quickly and effectively, and supplies of vaccine would need to be in place to ensure a rapid reaction to changing situations. It may take time for birds to develop immunity after vaccination so the assessment of the incoming risk would be crucial to the timing of – and area covered by – any vaccination programme. Avian influenza is not like foot and mouth disease, as the progress of the disease can be monitored. It should be remembered that this is not a new disease; it is just this mutation that is new. Precedence for the use of vaccination: There is also precedence for the use of vaccination as a control of avian influenza when used as a ring fence. This appears to have been successful in Hong Kong (Ellis et al 2004) and it is possible that the same strategy could be adopted in the UK. Ellis et al evaluated vaccination of chickens with a commercially available vaccine as an additional tool to enhanced biosecurity measures and intensive surveillance for control of highly pathogenic avian influenza subtype H5N1 disease in Hong Kong in 2002. In December 2002 to January 2003, there were outbreaks of H5N1 disease in waterfowl in parks, wild water birds, several poultry markets and five chicken farms. In addition to quarantine, depopulation of the affected sheds and increased biosecurity, vaccination of the unaffected sheds and surrounding unvaccinated farms was undertaken on three farms. On at least two farms, infection spread to the recently vaccinated sheds with low rates of mortality when the chickens were between 9 and 18 days post-vaccination. However, after 18 days post-vaccination no more deaths from H5N1 avian influenza occurred and intensive monitoring showed no evidence of asymptomatic shedding of the virus. This provides evidence that H5 vaccine can interrupt virus transmission in a field setting. Enclosure of free-range birds: Stress is one of the biggest immunosuppressants in livestock. The Soil Association questions the validity of enclosing birds, as has been carried out in the Netherlands. The disease is likely to have mutated in an intensive situation where many birds are in one small area and likely to be under stress. Any enclosure of birds will probably need to be supported by the use of in-feed antibiotics, as enclosing birds provides the ideal conditions for the spread of any disease - not just avian influenza. This creates further problems for decisions about whether a bird enclosed for any length of time is still producing an organic product. The approach to enclose birds would have much more impact in the UK because of the sheer numbers of birds involved. The UK is in the excellent position of now having 37% of laying chickens in free-range systems, as well as 2-3% of table birds, which includes all organic flocks. This development has brought enormous animal welfare gains, which would be lost if birds had to be enclosed. Enclosure would also have a huge impact on consumers and producers of free-range chickens and eggs. Any decision to require enclosure would completely disrupt the organic and 'free-range' poultry sectors, as it could mean an end to free-range poultry systems for as long as the virus continues to circulate among wild birds. The Netherlands stated that the eggs from organic birds housed for up to five months could still be sold as organic, although the EU decision was that they could only be housed for six weeks. This is partly why Dutch officials have now agreed to change their ruling and birds can now be let outside. The Dutch authorities have decided that avian influenza precautions will now be taken on a farm by farm basis and those units in particular danger from wild bird populations may have to erect temporary cover over part of the range. If birds were enclosed, their eggs or meat could not be sold as 'organic' under current Soil Association standards. However, the Soil Association will work to develop strategies to isolate birds from the threat of disease whilst still meeting organic standards. Organic animals and birds: The health and natural immunity of organic animals and birds kept outdoors in free-range, natural conditions is boosted through exposure to normal environmental micro-organisms. Nevertheless, this preventative approach – which the Soil Association believes has considerable potential – has not yet been developed or implemented on a scale where it can be in any way relied on to avoid the destructive effects of epidemics. In addition, the risks are particularly great in cases such as this where a new strain of avian influenza has evolved and crossed over from other species so that livestock and human immune systems have not previously encountered the strain and are 'naive'. Therefore, in view of the highly destructive potential of this disease - and the overriding human health risk - the Soil Association accepts that other measures such as vaccination will be necessary in the control of this virus. The Soil Association will continue to work with its producers and Defra to ensure that appropriate monitoring and risk assessment are carried out. We believe that the risk of this disease reaching the UK is currently low. By working together now, we should help keep this risk low. References: Trevor M. Ellis, Connie Y. H. C. Leung, Mary K. W. Chow, Lucy A. Bissett, William Wong, Yi Guan, J. S. Malik Peiris (2004) Avian Pathology, volume 33 number 4, p405-412 OIE and FAO recommendations from International Scientific Conference on Avian Influenza – Paris, 7-8 April 2005 http://www.oie.int/eng/AVIAN_INFLUENZA/OIE_FAO_Recom_05.pdf For further information please call the Soil Association food and farming department on 0117 914 2400 Published: 27/10/2005 » Back to advice for organic poultry farmers