Today’s Gauteng High Court ruling involving foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) vaccination has raised important questions about whether livestock farmers could play a greater role in protecting their animals. But what does this mean in practical terms for farmers on the ground?
By Maile Matsimela, digital editor at African Farming
South Africa’s livestock sector continues to battle foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), a disease that has disrupted animal movement, affected trade and created uncertainty for farmers. Against this backdrop, the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria heard an urgent application on 11 May, with judgment delivered on Monday 25 May. The case involved Sakeliga and agricultural organisations challenging government’s position on who may administer FMD vaccines.
Also read: FMD | Industry calls for private sector help to procure and distribute vaccines
What farmers should know now
For now, livestock farmers do not need to change anything in their current disease-control practices. The legal process is continuing, meaning existing FMD control measures remain in place. Farmers should continue complying with movement restrictions and continue reporting suspected FMD cases to veterinary authorities.
The proposed order also applies to all cloven-hoofed livestock; not only cattle. This includes sheep, goats and pigs. Importantly, farmers should also not assume that FMD vaccines will suddenly become freely available on the open market. Any vaccine would still need to be lawfully imported or manufactured and administered according to prescribed requirements.
Also read: RMIS: FMD vaccination scheme provides industry with pathway to restore trade
What was the court case about?
The issue before the court was not whether government can vaccinate livestock. Government currently continues vaccinating animals as part of its disease-control strategy. Instead, the dispute centred on whether livestock owners themselves should be allowed to lawfully obtain and administer FMD vaccines under regulated conditions.
The applicants argued that government had effectively prevented private participation in the process.
What could this mean for farmers?
The proposed order does not mean farmers would be allowed to vaccinate animals without controls.
Instead, farmers wanting to vaccinate would still need to follow strict procedures, including:
- Informing veterinary authorities at least five days before vaccination.
- Providing details of the location and animals involved.
- Explaining who will administer the vaccine.
- Showing how vaccine temperatures will be maintained.
- Keeping records and submitting proof after vaccination.
Government would also continue controlling vaccines it purchases and determining where those vaccines are distributed.
Also read: FMD | Another 2 million doses of vaccine arrive while ‘cows don’t carry passports’
Costs order against government respondents
The court also ordered the Minister of Agriculture, Director-General of Agriculture and Director of Animal Health to pay legal costs related to the application, including mediation costs and legal counsel costs.
The process is not yet over. The court order states that proceedings seeking final relief should be instituted within 20 days of the order.
For many farmers, the bigger question may ultimately be whether fighting FMD becomes a stronger partnership between government, veterinarians and producers themselves.
Also read:
FMD | Relief at last! KwaZulu-Natal’s disease management area is no more
FMD in Botswana: ‘Shoot, burn and bury’ policy as outbreaks confirmed in 24 locations
FMD will only be eradicated through mass vaccination in 6-8 week time period
(toll-free): 0860 246 640
