South Africa’s agricultural sector, a vital component of its economy, faces persistent challenges in controlling Foot-and-Mouth Disease (FMD) and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (bird flu).
These outbreaks threaten livestock and poultry industries, disrupt trade, and strain food security. Despite efforts to enhance biosecurity, the country struggles with complex ecological, logistical, and institutional factors. Understanding why these diseases are so difficult to control—and who bears responsibility—requires examining the interplay of natural reservoirs, human activity, and systemic weaknesses.
Why Controlling Foot-and-Mouth Disease is Difficult
FMD, a highly contagious viral disease affecting cloven-hoofed animals like cattle, sheep, and pigs, is notoriously hard to manage in South Africa due to its unique epidemiology. The African buffalo (Syncerus caffer), abundant in the Kruger National Park (KNP) and surrounding reserves, serves as a natural reservoir for the Southern African Territories (SAT) strains of FMD (SAT 1, SAT 2, SAT 3). Unlike in other regions, where FMD is primarily a livestock issue, South Africa’s wildlife-livestock interface complicates control. Buffalo carry the virus sub-clinically, shedding it through saliva and feces, and can transmit it to cattle during direct contact or via environmental contamination.
Historically, veterinary cordon fences and regular cattle vaccination near the KNP kept outbreaks rare—less than one per decade until 2000. However, since then, incidents have surged to over one annually. Floods and human negligence have damaged fences, allowing buffalo to escape and mingle with cattle. For instance, the 2000 SAT 1 outbreak in Mpumalanga traced back to buffalo breaching a flood-damaged KNP fence, while illegal animal movements from controlled zones in Limpopo sparked 56 outbreaks across five provinces in 2022. These events highlight how environmental factors and human actions undermine physical barriers.
Vaccination, while effective in reducing viral load, isn’t foolproof. It requires 75% herd coverage to limit transmission significantly, but vaccinated animals can still harbor and spread the virus asymptomatically, masking outbreaks. Logistical hurdles—such as producing sufficient, strain-specific vaccines at facilities like Onderstepoort Biological Products (OBP)—and rising production costs further hamper efforts. Moreover, porous borders with neighboring countries, where FMD is endemic, and the movement of stolen or untracked livestock exacerbate risks. South Africa’s beef exports dropped 12% in 2022 due to market closures following FMD outbreaks, underscoring the economic stakes.]
South Africa’s livestock industry and biosecurity challenges
Why Controlling Bird Flu is Difficult
Bird flu, particularly strains like H5N1 and H7N6, poses a different but equally daunting challenge. South Africa has faced recurring outbreaks since 2017, with 2023 seeing over 13.8 million poultry affected—25% of its breeding chickens—across 145 commercial sites. Wild migratory birds, especially waterfowl, are the primary vectors, carrying Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) viruses like H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b across continents. These birds contaminate farms via droppings, feathers, or direct contact, making exclusion difficult, especially in open or semi-open poultry systems.
Traditional biosecurity measures—restricting human and vehicle movement, disinfecting equipment, and excluding wild birds from sheds—have faltered. The H7N6 strain, new to South Africa in 2023, proved more contagious among chickens than H5N1, spreading rapidly between nearby farms. Weaknesses in implementation compound the problem: state veterinary services lack resources to enforce quarantine or manage culls effectively, and unlike the EU or US, South Africa no longer compensates farmers for culled birds. This discourages reporting and compliance, as seen when infected birds were sold off farms in 2023, amplifying outbreaks. Egg shortages and rising prices followed, hitting consumers hard.
Vaccination, though approved for H5 strains, faces hurdles. Guidelines are costly and complex, requiring extensive monitoring that overstretched veterinary staff can’t support. No H7 vaccines are yet authorized, and mismatched vaccines risk inefficacy. Surveillance lags too—wild bird monitoring is inconsistent, and summer breaks in sampling (e.g., January 2023) leave gaps in early detection.
Who is Responsible for the Outbreaks?
Responsibility for these outbreaks is shared across multiple stakeholders, reflecting a collective challenge rather than a single culprit.
Wildlife and Natural Systems: African buffalo and migratory wild birds are the root sources, maintaining FMD and bird flu in the environment. Their role is unavoidable, but human management of the wildlife-livestock interface dictates outbreak frequency. For example, buffalo escapes from KNP are natural risks, but fence maintenance falls to human oversight.
Farmers and Industry: Farmers bear a legal duty under the Animal Diseases Act (1984) to prevent disease spread through biosecurity—quarantining new animals for 28 days, limiting movements, and reporting symptoms. Yet, some flout rules, moving infected livestock illegally or neglecting protocols. In 2023, poultry farmers’ sales of infected birds worsened bird flu spread, while feedlots in 2022 showed lax biosecurity during FMD outbreaks.
Government and Veterinary Services: The Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD) sets policy, enforces movement controls, and oversees vaccine production. However, underfunding and capacity shortages cripple its response. State vets struggle to monitor vast areas, and delays in promulgating the Animal Safety Act leave provincial coordination patchy. The absence of compensation, unlike pre-2000s practice, disincentivizes farmer cooperation.
Private Sector and Consumers: Industry bodies like the South African Poultry Association (SAPA) and Red Meat Industry Services (RMIS) collaborate with DALRRD, but their influence is limited without government backing. Consumers indirectly pressure the system by demanding low-cost products, which can discourage investment in biosecurity.
External Factors: Neighboring countries with weaker controls and global trade dynamics (e.g., China’s 2022 wool ban) amplify risks. Illegal imports or cross-border livestock theft introduce pathogens South Africa can’t fully guard against.
Conclusion
Controlling FMD and bird flu in South Africa is a Sisyphean task due to wildlife reservoirs, human errors, and systemic frailties. Buffalo and wild birds seed the diseases, but outbreaks escalate through fence breaches, illegal movements, and inadequate biosecurity enforcement. Responsibility is diffuse—wildlife sets the stage, farmers and industry must act, and government must lead with resources and policy. Solutions lie in stronger fences, better-funded veterinary services, affordable vaccines, and farmer incentives like compensation. Without a unified push, South Africa’s biosecurity will remain a weak link, jeopardizing its agricultural future.
DISCLAIMER
The views and opinions expressed in this program are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of any entities they represent. The information contained in this website is for general information purposes only. The information is provided by CRA and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.
