Government continues to assure the country the fight against foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is firmly on track. Yet, for many farmers across South Africa, particularly those in communal areas, that sense of progress remains distant and, at times, difficult to believe.
By Lebogang Mashala, editor at African Farming
Perhaps the scepticism is not rooted in cynicism, but in lived reality.
For many smallholder and emerging farmers, the vaccine has simply not arrived. And until it does, assurances of progress will continue to feel abstract, disconnected from the daily challenges on the ground.
The North West Department of Agriculture and Rural Development recently reported that 129 808 of the 150 000 allocated vaccine doses have been administered, representing an 86% uptake. At face value, this appears encouraging. It suggests efficiency, movement and a system that is beginning to function as intended.
Also read: FMD: ‘The virus does not care about factions or blame-shifting’
When Numbers Don’t Tell The Whole Story
But context matters.
The North West is home to approximately 1.8 million cattle, forming a significant portion of South Africa’s national herd of roughly 14 million. Against this backdrop, the reported figures begin to feel less substantial. They raise an uncomfortable but necessary question: Are we measuring progress in a way that truly reflects the scale of the challenge?
Numbers, after all, do not tell the full story.
Earlier this year, I shared my own experience of how FMD affected my livestock operation. Like many farmers, we were placed under quarantine as part of containment measures. Months later, we remain in that position, still waiting for clarity on when vaccines will reach us. Repeated engagements with our local veterinary office in Madibeng Municipality have yielded little more than uncertainty.
This is not an isolated case. It is a pattern.
Across farming communities, particularly in communal areas, there is a growing sense that the response to FMD is uneven. While official communication highlights increasing vaccine availability and improved coordination, farmers continue to report delays, inconsistencies and, in some cases, complete absence of support.
At the centre of this issue lies a widening disconnect between policy and implementation.
Government maintains that vaccine supply constraints are easing. Recent updates confirm the release of 20 000 locally produced monovalent doses by the Agricultural Research Council, supplemented by millions more secured through imports. The national target is clear: Vaccinate at least 80% of the livestock population by year-end. Officials further report that more than 1.7 million animals have already been vaccinated.
These are important milestones. They signal intent and effort.
Also read: FMD | Next batch of ARC’s locally produced vaccines signals rise in production
Where Implementation Falls Short
But for farmers, progress is not measured in shipments, procurement figures or strategic targets. It is measured by whether a veterinarian arrives at the farm. Whether animals are vaccinated. Whether the spread of disease is actually contained.
Two weeks ago, I attended a vaccination drive in the Zeerust area, led by the Minister of Agriculture, John Steenhuisen, and the North West MEC, Somadoda Sambatha. The visit was meant to demonstrate the government’s commitment to addressing the foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) outbreak and accelerating the vaccination rollout.
What emerged from that engagement, however, was a more complex picture.
Farmers used the opportunity to voice their frustrations, not only about vaccine shortages, but also about broader challenges such as stock theft, inadequate infrastructure and a perceived lack of consistent state support. These concerns are not new, but the FMD outbreak has brought them into sharper focus.
The vaccination exercise itself raised further concerns. Only about 600 cattle were vaccinated across more than six villages, where livestock farming is the primary economic activity. For communities that rely heavily on cattle for both income and cultural value, this level of coverage is not sufficient.
In another recent meeting, it was revealed that the department had struggled to procure ear tags, an essential tool for identifying and tracking vaccinated animals. Farmers have been encouraged to use permanent ear tags with unique identification numbers, but without adequate support and resources, even basic compliance becomes difficult.
These operational gaps matter. They slow down the response, weaken traceability and ultimately compromise the effectiveness of the vaccination programme.
Perhaps the most concerning development, however, is a gradual shift in perception among farmers.
As animals begin to recover from the visible symptoms of FMD, there is a growing sense that the worst has passed. Lesions heal, mobility returns and herds begin to stabilise. In the absence of continued engagement and visible intervention, it becomes easy for farmers to assume the threat has diminished.
This is a dangerous misconception.
Also read: Communal farmers have their say as FMD vaccination drive reaches SA-Botswana border
The Dangerous Assumption That FMD Has Passed
FMD does not simply disappear when symptoms fade. Without proper vaccination and monitoring, the virus can persist, spread silently and re-emerge under favourable conditions. If farmers stop reporting suspected cases or disengage from the vaccination process, containment efforts will be severely undermined.
Also watch: Weekly RMIS FMD update: Vaccine supply and strategic planning
This brings us to a critical point.
What happens to the national vaccination target if farmers lose confidence in the system? What becomes of South Africa’s long-term ambition to regain its FMD-free status?
The implications are far-reaching. Beyond the immediate impact on livestock health and farmer livelihoods, South Africa’s ability to access and compete in international markets is at stake. FMD-free status is not just a technical classification – it is a gateway to trade, investment and growth in the agricultural sector.
Losing ground on this front would be a significant setback.
What is needed now is not only increased vaccine supply, but improved coordination, communication and delivery at the local level. Farmers need clarity. They need timelines. They need to see and feel the response where it matters most: on their farms.
Equally important is rebuilding trust.
A lot of farmers have shown willingness to cooperate. Many have complied with quarantine measures, reported outbreaks and participated in vaccination campaigns where possible. But cooperation is a two-way street. It requires consistent engagement, reliable support and a system that responds with urgency.
At present, that balance feels uneven.
There is also a risk that the national conversation around FMD is losing momentum. As attention shifts elsewhere and the visible signs of the disease diminish, the sense of urgency may fade, both among farmers and within the broader system.
This would be a mistake.
FMD remains a serious threat, and the window for effective containment is not indefinite. Delays now will have consequences later.
The message is clear: Progress cannot remain confined to reports, statistics and official statements. It must translate into tangible outcomes, vaccinated animals, supported farmers and controlled outbreaks.
Until then, scepticism will remain; not as a rejection of government efforts, but as a reflection of a reality that has yet to change.
Also read:
From our editor: More than just meat – who will guard the knowledge?
From our editor: War, youth and the future of agriculture
From our editor: Rain, the Soweto Derby and a new dawn for Zebediela
