Live Stock. 



132 



[August, 1911. 



A serious attempt to grapple with 

 the disease has been made in America, 

 particularly in the States of Minnesota, 

 Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Massa- 

 chusetts, but in all of these States the 

 work is badly hampered by want of 

 funds. For instance, Wisconsin is 

 estimated to have a cattle population of 

 over three millions, but only 41,000 were 

 tested, either officially or unofficially, 

 during the year 1907-1908, a rate of pro- 

 gress which will take about eighty years 

 to test once all the cattle in the State. 

 Similarly in the case of Pennsylvania 

 with its two millions of cattle and 60,000 

 tested it will take at that rate thirty- 

 three years to test all the cattle once. 

 It will therefore be granted that to take 

 steps tor eradicating the disease alto- 

 gether, enormous funds would be 

 wanted ; even to deal with the danger- 

 ously infective animals a considerable 

 cost would be involved, a cost which 

 owners of stock cannot stand, and con- 

 sequently must be borne by the State. 



Bang, however, has shown that suc- 

 cessful individual and voluntary effort 

 to rear a tubercle-free herd can be done 

 cheaply, and providing that great care 

 is taken by the individual stock-owners 

 concerned, great and lasting benefit 

 results. 



Two methods of controlling the disease 

 thus become apparent ; destruction of 

 dangerously infective animals— that is, 

 dangerous to other animals or human 

 beings — to be dealt with by, and at 

 the expense of, the State; voluntary 

 attempts by individual stock-owners 

 to rear up tubercle-free herds. The first 

 of these methods was practically em- 

 bodied by the Board of Agriculture in 

 the Tuberculosis Order ot 1909, now 

 unhappily withdrawn. All authorities 

 who have given careful consideration 

 to this question of controlling tuber- 

 culosis welcomed the Order, but it met 

 with considerable opposition from the 

 ratepayers, because the cost was to 

 come out of the local rates ; and strange 

 to say, city and country ratepayers 

 opposed it for opposite reasons. Country 

 ratepayers opposed because it would 

 apparently benefit the public health of 

 the towns at their expense, whilst city 

 ratepayers welcomed the protection it 

 gave to public health by safeguarding 

 meat and milk supplies, but objected 

 to pay rate-aid for the purpose, 

 because the order made no attempt to 

 assist owners and breeders of stock to 

 raise tubercle-free herds and thus make 

 a first attempt to reduce the number 

 of tuberculous animals in the country. 



Apparently both classes of ratepayers 

 liad good grounds for their objections, 



and whilst it is highly desirable tha^ 

 some efficient if only preliminary step 8 

 should be taken to deal with tuberculosis 

 among animals, it would seem that any 

 new Order made and put into force 

 should be supplied with State-aid for 

 both compensation and administration, 

 and ought to give material assistance to 

 pioneer owners of stocks who voluntarily 

 attempt to establish tubercle-free 

 herds of cattle and swine. Such action 

 would certainly tend to reduce the 

 amount of tuberculosis among food 

 animals by removing the dangerous 

 infective from all herds and would be 

 a beginning towards obtaining clean 

 herds in different parts of the country, 

 the latter probably becoming centres of 

 education for the benefit of neighbour- 

 ing farmers. Further, the removal and 

 destruction of the dangerous animals 

 under proper veterinary supervision 

 would in a large measure protect the 

 public from the danger of consuming 

 tuberculous meat and milk. 



It has been mentioned above that the 

 efforts of Bang and others in building 

 up tubercle-free herds have been more 

 or less successful. Failure has generally 

 arisen through the accidental introduc- 

 tion of tuberculous animals into other- 

 wise free herds ; but knowledge of such 

 a danger should cause greater efforts to 

 be taken to prevent such an occurrence. 

 In this country, no doubt, failures in 

 many instances will be recorded, but 

 persistent and steady effort by both the 

 State and the stock-owner combined 

 must prove advantageous in the end. 

 It must not, however, be looked upon as 

 more than a preliminary towards con- 

 trolling the disease. 



One step has been discussed, and in 

 two countries put into force, that is 

 "stamping out." In Belgium and Massa- 

 chusetts it has been tried and failed. 

 Taking into consideration the enormous 

 cost it would involve, and the dislocation 

 of the cattle breeding and milk and 

 meat producing industries that must 

 necessarily follow, I do not suppose 

 that such a course would be seriously 

 considered in this country for a moment, 

 and it can consequently be summarily 

 dismissed from further discussion. 



A second step is one which demands 

 much more serious consideration — I now 

 refer to anti-tuberculous vaccination, I 

 will not describe the technique or results 

 of this method of immunizing young 

 cattle against the attacks of tubercle 

 bacilli. Various veterinarians on the 

 Continent have, however, been working 

 at it since 1884, although it is only much 

 more recently that serious and to some 

 extent successful attempts have been 



