The Eradication of Bovine Tuberculosis From Infected Wildlife Populations: A New Zealand Scenario

The Animal Health Board (AHB) is the agency responsible for controlling bovine tuberculosis (Tb) in New Zealand. In 2000, the AHB embarked on a strategy designed to reduce the annual period prevalence of Tb infected cattle and farmed deer herds from 1.67% to 0.2% by 2012/13. Under current rules of the Office International des Epizooties (OIE) this would allow New Zealand to claim freedom from Tb. The epidemiology of Tb in New Zealand is largely influenced by wildlife reservoirs of infection and control of Tb vector populations is central to the elimination of Tb from New Zealand’s cattle and deer herds. The AHB has classified New Zealand’s land area into Vector Risk Areas (VRAs) where Tb is established in wildlife (currently 39%) and Vector Free Areas (VFAs) where the disease is not established (61%). Within the VRAs the introduced Australian brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) is the primary wildlife maintenance host and the main source of infection for domestic cattle and deer herds. Southland is a region of New Zealand with a long history of wildlife associated Tb. Progress in reducing infected herd numbers has been impressive in recent years, primarily due to an intensive possum control program. As a result of this reduction, the focus is now shifting to that of providing increasing levels of confidence that Tb is absent from the remaining susceptible wildlife. High levels of confidence of Tb freedom in wildlife will allow the AHB to reduce the wildlife control programs and ultimately cease control altogether, with minimal risk of Tb reemerging. This paper examines the strategies being utilized to provide that confidence. The types of data, the format in which it is collected and the methods of analysis and review are outlined.

METHODS OF CONTROLLING COYOTES, BOBCATS, AND FOXES

In reviewing methods of predator control, it would first seem appropriate to define what is meant "by "methods" and what is meant by "control." Taking the last term first, control, as applied to the predatory coyotes, bobcats, and foxes, may be defined as regulating the numbers of these animals to the point where the economic losses for which they are responsible will be reduced to a practicable minimum. In some situations, area control, i.e., limiting the numbers of the offending predator over wide areas, may be necessary for satisfactory reduction of economic losses; in other situations, spot control or localized reduction of numbers of a certain predator may be called for; in still other situations, elimination of an individual animal may be all the control that is needed. In no sense is control, as applied to coyotes, bobcats, and foxes, intended to mean extermi¬nation of a species. The term "methods" is interpreted as meaning the procedures employed against coyotes, bobcats, and foxes, and not the broader systems of predator control such as the paid hunter system, the extension system, or the much-discredited bounty system. For an excellent review of the systems of predator control, see Latham (l).

METHODS OF CONTROLLING STARLINGS AND BLACKBIRDS

Most people have accepted the fact that all living things can be beneficial to mankind in some way or other. This is especially true of our wild birds, since they provide enjoyment and wholesome recreation for most of us, regardless of whether we live on farms or in the city. But despite the fact that wild birds are for the most part beneficial, at times individuals or populations of certain species can seriously affect man's interests. When such situations occur, some measures of relief are desirable and usually eagerly sought. This report is not intended to answer all the questions that may arise concerning problems with blackbirds and starlings; instead, it is merely a summary of measures used to protect agricultural crops from these birds.