Appendix 5 PROGRESS REPORT FOR TRANSCAUCASUS SINCE 37 TH SESSION (APRIL 2007) “Strengthening Foot-and-mouth disease prevention and emergency response capacity in the Trans-Caucasian countries (MTF/INT/003/EEC)” Dr C. Potzsch 1. Report relates to country or countries: Armenia –Azerbaijan –Georgia. [Report period: April 2007 – present] 2. Summarize FMD situation in the past two years (the reporting period). What were the major events, such as incursions of new virus types or involvement of previously free regions? What is the trend in 2009 compared to previous two years? Tables of outbreaks by serotype, maps of outbreak distribution are requested as annexes. Outbreaks: Spring 2007: serotype O PanAsia II in Nagorny Karabakh, sample submission to FGI-ARRIAH in 5/2007. No other outbreaks have been reported from 4/07 to 4/09. Last notifications to OIE: 2001 (Azerbaijan), 2002 (Armenia, Georgia). Media reports/suspicions: Armenia: a cattle disease was reported: • In Siunik District, FMD was excluded by the national vet. services (VS), no diagnostic results provided (News agency Regnum, ProMED 29./30.5.07); • In Lori Province; diagnosis was blackleg, FMD was excluded by the VS (Hetq Online, ProMED 10./12.7.07). Georgia: a cattle disease was reported in Akhaltsikhe District; it was diagnosed as necrobacillosis, FMD was excluded by the VS (Interpressnews, 2-8.12.07). All media reports were followed-up by project staff; FMD was excluded in all cases by the CVOs/National VS. In 2008 and 2009 no (media) reports about FMD were received except some rumours of clinical signs consistent with FMD from Georgia and Armenia in 2008. NSP baseline survey in the Trans Caucasus (see Annex II) A serological survey was conducted in the cattle population of the three countries. More than 12,000 sera were collected from young animals (aim: ≤18 months) in the vaccination buffer zone and from the rest of the countries. The objective of the national surveys was to estimate the level and describe the geographical distribution of NSP antibodies, to assess the success of the vaccination campaigns in reducing virus exposure, and to identify and quantify risk factors for NSP positive outcomes. Until reporting date approx. 4000 sera from were not yet tested. The mean NSP prevalences were highest in Armenia (31%), Azerbaijan (23%) and Nagorny Karabakh (16%); in the surveys carried out in mid 2008 (see map a) & table b)). In later surveys, Georgia (Nov.-Dec. 08) and Nakhichevan (Mar 09) prevalences were lower; 6 and 1% respectively (table b)). Also the follow-up investigations show this trend of decreasing exposure in the previous two to three years. In Azerbaijan where predominantly animals up to one year were included, the NSP prevalence was lower (3% in cattle, 9% in sheep) than in Armenia were older animals were sampled (11% in cattle, 20% in sheep) (see table c). 38 th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 50
Transcript
Appendix 5
PROGRESS REPORT FOR TRANSCAUCASUS SINCE 37TH SESSION (APRIL 2007)
“Strengthening Foot-and-mouth disease prevention and emergency response
capacity in the Trans-Caucasian countries (MTF/INT/003/EEC)”
Dr C. Potzsch
1. Report relates to country or countries: Armenia –Azerbaijan –Georgia. [Report period: April 2007 – present] 2. Summarize FMD situation in the past two years (the reporting period). What were
the major events, such as incursions of new virus types or involvement of previously free regions? What is the trend in 2009 compared to previous two years? Tables of outbreaks by serotype, maps of outbreak distribution are requested as annexes.
Outbreaks:
Spring 2007: serotype O PanAsia II in Nagorny Karabakh, sample submission to FGI-ARRIAH in 5/2007. No other outbreaks have been reported from 4/07 to 4/09. Last notifications to OIE: 2001 (Azerbaijan), 2002 (Armenia, Georgia). Media reports/suspicions:
Armenia: a cattle disease was reported:
• In Siunik District, FMD was excluded by the national vet. services (VS), no diagnostic results provided (News agency Regnum, ProMED 29./30.5.07);
• In Lori Province; diagnosis was blackleg, FMD was excluded by the VS (Hetq Online, ProMED 10./12.7.07).
Georgia: a cattle disease was reported in Akhaltsikhe District; it was diagnosed as necrobacillosis, FMD was excluded by the VS (Interpressnews, 2-8.12.07). All media reports were followed-up by project staff; FMD was excluded in all cases by the CVOs/National VS. In 2008 and 2009 no (media) reports about FMD were received except some rumours of clinical signs consistent with FMD from Georgia and Armenia in 2008. NSP baseline survey in the Trans Caucasus (see Annex II)
A serological survey was conducted in the cattle population of the three countries. More than 12,000 sera were collected from young animals (aim: ≤18 months) in the vaccination buffer zone and from the rest of the countries. The objective of the national surveys was to estimate the level and describe the geographical distribution of NSP antibodies, to assess the success of the vaccination campaigns in reducing virus exposure, and to identify and quantify risk factors for NSP positive outcomes. Until reporting date approx. 4000 sera from were not yet tested. The mean NSP prevalences were highest in Armenia (31%), Azerbaijan (23%) and Nagorny Karabakh (16%); in the surveys carried out in mid 2008 (see map a) & table b)). In later surveys, Georgia (Nov.-Dec. 08) and Nakhichevan (Mar 09) prevalences were lower; 6 and 1% respectively (table b)). Also the follow-up investigations show this trend of decreasing exposure in the previous two to three years. In Azerbaijan where predominantly animals up to one year were included, the NSP prevalence was lower (3% in cattle, 9% in sheep) than in Armenia were older animals were sampled (11% in cattle, 20% in sheep) (see table c).
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 50
The NSP results from the Trans Caucasus are similar to results from a NSP survey carried out in Turkey (see map d)). Although the survey designs differ, mean province/district NSP prevalences and ranges on village level are similar. During the surveys and follow-up investigations in the Trans Caucasus no FMD or clinical signs of FMD were reported. These first results indicate continued exposure to FMD virus in the region. The time of highest virus exposure could have occurred 1-2 years prior to the survey (see Annex II, tables b) & c): age of animals). The results could therefore mirror the two major epidemic waves which had hit Iran and Turkey in the two years prior to the surveys. 3. Summarise the main objectives of the current control policy, and any change in
control policy over the past 2 years. The main objective is to control the incursion and the spread of FMD by mass vaccination I FMD vaccination policy:
FMD vaccination is usually more intense in spring than in autumn. In spring movement to pastures starts and herds mix, which poses a high risk of spread of FMD. For vaccination overages in spring and autumn 2008 see Annex I. 1. Spring vaccination:
a) The EuFMD project support in the FMD vaccination buffer zone*
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan: vaccination of the whole cattle population > 4 months; Armenia and Azerbaijan: revaccination of calves in the buffer zone; Georgia: vaccination of small ruminants.
*The EuFMD project buffer zone comprises all border districts of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan with Turkey and Iran.
b) National vaccination campaigns, other than supported by the EuFMD project
Armenia: vaccination of all small ruminants in the buffer zone; vaccination outside the buffer zone: all cattle and small ruminants only according to availability of funds and the risk situation; Azerbaijan: vaccination of all cattle and small ruminants in- and outside the buffer zone only according to availability of funds and the risk situation; Georgia: vaccination of cattle and small ruminants outside the buffer zone if funds are available and according to the risk situation.
2. Autumn vaccination (only scenarios differing from spring vaccination stated)
a) FMD vaccination buffer zone: Georgia: vaccination of small ruminants in the buffer zone according to availability of resources and the risk situation.
b) National vaccination campaigns: Armenia: vaccination of most small ruminants in the buffer zone according to availability of funds; Azerbaijan: vaccination of most cattle outside the buffer zone according to availability of funds and the risk situation.
II Change in control policy
• No use of lapinized vaccine since 2008 in Armenia and Georgia, also as a result of project consultations to national decision makers.
4. Summarise any changes in capacity to implement the control policy for FMD in the past
2 years. These include additional staff, diagnostic facilities, change in vaccine use, etc
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 51
Legislation
National FMD contingency plans have been updated or are under development in Armenia and Azerbaijan; new diagnostic capacities are included, Azerbaijan: compensation policy and national budget established. Vaccination
• Increase of vaccine quantity and the buffer zone area by the EuFMD project due to the request from the countries and after reassessing the risk situation (s. 5.);
• More widespread and regular revaccination of calves every 3 months in Armenia (whole country) and Azerbaijan (buffer zone);
• Improvement of the cool chain for vaccine storage on central level in Georgia where a cold room was built, and in Armenia and Azerbaijan on district and village level by providing fridges and thermoboxes.
National budgets do not allow purchase of sufficient quantities of quality FMD vaccine for populations most at risk (e.g. buffer zone, • Young animals and traded animals). Without the EuFMD project large parts of these
animals would remain unvaccinated. Strengthening of diagnostic capacity in national labs
• Capacity to carry out NSP testing and to handle large amounts of sera (all countries);
Armenia and Azerbaijan:
• Participation in the next WRL proficiency test; • Refurbishment and increase of diagnostic capacities of national labs; • PCR capacity established (not for FMD currently); • In-country training on NSP testing by international consultant; • Training on NSP testing and general lab procedures of one Azeri expert in Ankara; • On the job training and evaluation during the national NSP survey by international
consultant.
Georgia:
• Use of the national lab for project FMD diagnostic work (NSP testing) in spring 2009 for the first time since project start.
Data work and epidemiological capacity
Regular reporting of national project consultants; Close cooperation of NCs with epidemiological units of the national VS; Excel training for national project consultant (NC) and laboratory staff (Azerbaijan). Other issues
Armenia and Azerbaijan: • Staff payments and availability of resources have improved on central, district and village
level, salaries are still very low and there is especially a lack of transport fuel and basic veterinary equipment on district and village level.
Georgia: • Since mid 2006, border vet. inspectors belong to the Ministry of Finances and are no
longer part to the vet. department; communication between the vet. dept. and vet. border inspection has worsened since then. Also as a result of this there is no effective system of border control to prevent introduction of livestock diseases, this situation has not changed since the ASF outbreaks;
• The EuFMD project has increased awareness about FMD on the level of MoA and the VS. No FMD vaccination was carried out in spring and autumn 2007. As a result of constant risk communication by the project at least in the buffer zone ruminants were vaccinated by central VS and district staff in autumn 2008, in spring 2009 private vets will be hired for vaccination.
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 52
• There is a lack of state vets and resources on central and district level; and no functioning system of private large animal vets on village level. This results in very limited resources for disease control and surveillance (vets from the central VS have collected the sera).
5. Summarise how the support provided by EuFMD or EU (EC) has assisted the national
control policy in this period. • Provision of trivalent vaccine (A Iran 05, O, Asia1) for use in the buffer zone, numbers of
doses increased according to national demands and reassessment of the risk situation; Table1: Delivery of vaccine under the project to the countries (spring 2007-spring 2009).
Vaccination campaign
Azerbaijan
Armenia *
Georgia
Spring 2007 430,000 240,000 320,000 Autumn 2007 866,000 287,000 - Spring 2008 867,000 282,000 240,000 Autumn 2008 867,000 282,000 40,000 Spring 2009 866,799 282,232 275,000
* Armenia has delivered about 60,000 doses per campaign to Nagorny Karabakh. • Improvement of FMD control by revaccination (Armenia and Azerbaijan) and FMD public
awareness campaigns (TV broadcasting; Georgia and Armenia); • Strengthening of diagnostic and epidemiological capacities; • Training of NCs and national staff in diagnostics, computer use and epidemiology; • Establishing a system of regular FMD sero surveillance to identify risk populations; • Regular risk assessments established to guide national and regional decision making; • National project consultants are part of national FMD control decision making, e.g.
contingency plans, communication between EuFMD and national VS. Workshops, meetings, trainings
• National FMD Workshops in Armenia (Nov. 07), Azerbaijan (Dec. 07) and Georgia (Feb. 08);
• Annual project meetings (Oct. 07, Nov. 08, Apr. 09); • Training in NSP serology (Armenia and Azerbaijan, Dec. 07); • Training in CEDI testing and lab procedures for one Azeri lab expert at the SAP Institute
• Freezers each for Armenia & Georgia; • Serum collection equipment (vacutainers, needles etc.) for 10,000 sera/country; • Lab consumables for serology; • NSP antibody detection kits (CEDI) for 10,000 sera/country; • Pen side tests for virus detection (Svanodip), 40 tests/ country; • Fuel (5000 USD/country) for field surveillance; • GIS data layers of Azerbaijan and Georgia; • Laptop for NC Azerbaijan.
6. Outlook for next 2 years: how is the FMD control situation expected to change over next
2 years? Summarise national policy and provide brief details on ongoing or expected investments that will affect FMD control to 2011.
• National FMD contingency plans are updated and approved if required; • Compliance with the progressive stages in FMD control/West Eurasia Roadmap;
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 53
• FMD surveillance and control/vaccination for risk populations like animals moving to seasonal pastures and traded animals; adaptation of legislation and implementation;
• Georgia: o Increase of staff and resources on VS central level planned for early 2009 was
postponed; o Currently an international organizations (World Bank, USDA) advises on animal
health strategies and structure of the VS. West Eurasia Roadmap (Shiraz meeting report) : please summarise the expected progression in next period (2-5 years). [Note The Shiraz report gives the national expected progression based on expert opinion at the meeting, November 2008]. • Armenia and Azerbaijan: currently stage 2 (self assessment), progression to stage 3 in
2010, priorities: Training in epid. and lab, vaccination continued, provision of kits, Animal ID;
• Georgia: stage 1 (90%) (self assessment), progression to stage 2 in 2009 and stage 3 in 2012, priorities: Continue vaccine supply, training in epidemiology;
• All countries have stated their support and commitment to the West Eurasia Roadmap in letters to FAO.
7. Risk situation: what are the main risks to the national FMD control policy? for example:
risks of new virus incursions, risks to vet service activities as a result of national budget cuts or changes, lack of community support/civil disturbances etc.
• Inadequate funding and resource of the VS, worsened by the global financial crisis; • Early detection of newly introduced FMDV due to insufficient virus detection and shipment
capacities; • Fading FMD awareness on all levels since last official notifications were in 2001/2002; • Inadequate recognition of the work of the VS and FMD control by governments in
particular because of:
o No major disease outbreaks reported, o FMD poses no public health risk, o Low national importance of the livestock industry, mainly subsistence level of large
animal husbandry. • No incentives or even penalisation for reporting of FMD or suspicions on all levels; • Poor transparency about the FMD situation; • Georgia:
o National budget cuts for VS; o No clear FMD control policy; o Poor vaccination coverage and no re-vaccination of young stock.
8. Summarise the major issues that EuFMD or other international bodies (FAO/OIE/..) are
requested to assist with to achieve progression in FMD control in next 2 year period:
EuFMD
• Continuation with the project, especially provision of vaccine; • Increase epidemiological and diagnostic support, especially training in epidemiology and
support with diagnostic methods, especially virus confirmation and SP serology;
Other international bodies • All countries request support in animal identification and registration.
9. For ongoing EuFMD/EC projects please:
a. indicate expected end of project: June 2009 (MTF/INT/003/EEC); b. summarise Workplan and expected outputs for next 6 month period (see attached
workplan);
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 54
• project end in June 2009; • regional simulation exercise (4-8. May 2009) and evaluation of outcomes; • continue lab support and training (training in virus confirmation by SAP Institute); • collation of diagnostic and field SOPs in a project manual; • Funding agency and overall agreed financial support: EC, 2.74 million USD.
c. International and national professional staff assigned:
Georgia Zurab Rukhadze International consultants: lab diagnostics (12/2007)
Anne Mayer-Scholl
Simulation exercise (5/2009)
Johannes Fiedler
10. What to recommend
To be considered for inclusion in the General Session Recommendations. • Continue project activities in all three Trans Caucasus countries, reducing vaccine
provision would suddenly increase the risk of outbreaks in the Trans Caucasus:
o Georgia depends most on the continuation of project activities; the EuFMD project is the only reliable component in national FMD control;
o Armenia has the highest exposure to FMDV according to the NSP survey in 2007; o In Azerbaijan, the richest country in the region, the VS receive insufficient funds
for successful national FMD control and surveillance, and Azerbaijan has the highest population of susceptible animals (11.1 mill.), especially small ruminants (8.3 mill.).
• Main components of a next FMD control and surveillance project should be:
o Vaccination, incl. identification and vaccination of risk; populations, keeping a regional emergency vaccine bank;
o Applied epidemiology training, incl. clinical training in Turkey and support for quality reports;
o Lab support: testing for structural protein antibodies and virus confirmation; o Regular serological surveillance, including background sero surveillance and
surveillance of risk populations; o Regular participation of the three national labs in international FMD proficiency
tests; o Support in increasing FMD public awareness; o Policy advise and implementation support on FMD control and risk reduction; o Improve understanding of animal movements, incl. economics; o Information sharing through the regional FMD database.
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 55
ANNEX I Vaccination coverage (in %) reported by the national VS in 2008; average and range (in brackets) on district level a) Spring 2008.
*Revaccinations (booster vaccinations of young cattle) are included for Armenia.
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 56
ANNEX II NSP serological surveys in the Trans Caucasus 2008/2009 a) Geographical distribution of NSP antibody prevalences in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorny Karabakh (schaded: vaccination buffer zone). b) Baseline sero survey results. Nb. of
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 57
d) Geographical distribution of NSP antibody prevalences in border regions of Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan (Nakhichevan AR); red: mean NSP prevalence on province or district level, in brackets: range on village level, after semicolon: no of villages with at least one NSP positive animal/no. of all villages samples in the province or district
Time of NSP surveys:
in Turkey: Sep.-Nov. 08; in Georgia: Nov.-Dec. 08; in Armenia: May-Jun. 08; in Nakhichevan AR: Mar. 09.
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 58
ANNEX III Project Workplan 2007-2009 (Annex I, Implementing Agreement /Project Document)
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 59
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 60
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 61
38th General Session of the EuFMD – 28-30 April 2009. FAO, Rome 62
