Download Babesia gibsoni in dogs (Canis familiaris) and dog semen - Import risk analysis review of submissions (October 2003)

This document is a review of submissions on a MAF risk analysis on the blood parasite Babesia gibsoni in dogs, which was carried out by MAF in 2002.
Babesia gibsoni has been identified as a potential hazard in the generic cat and dog import risk analysis that is currently being undertaken by MAF, and since approximately 70% of dogs imported into New Zealand come from Australia, the recent occurrence of clinical cases of B. gibsoni in Australia lead to a need for a separate risk analysis to determine whether safeguards were required immediately.
The risk analysis recommended sanitary measures to minimise the likelihood that dogs would be carrying B. gibsoni when given a biosecurity clearance in New Zealand. Semen was also considered and was determined not to require safeguards.
The risk analysis was released for public consultation in March 2003, and MAF received 29 submissions.
As several early submissions raised uncertainty over the likelihood that the New Zealand cattle tick, Haemaphysalis longicornis, would be a competent vector for B. gibsoni, MAF commissioned a review of literature on this subject during the public consultation period. Thereview, which concludes that Haemaphysalis longicornis is indeed a competent vector for B. gibsoni, is attached as Appendix 1 of this document.
Concern was expressed in a number of submissions regarding the underlying assumption in the risk analysis that B. gibsoni was widespread in Australia. It is possible that the distribution of the parasite in Australia is limited, but in the absence of surveillance information MAF cannot make any conclusion about its regional distribution, which means that the whole country has to be treated as infected.
Although many submissions expressed concerns, for a variety of reasons, regarding the proposed quarantine and testing measures, this review of submissions concludes that, given the risk management objective stated in the risk analysis, the recommendations presented in the risk analysis are appropriate. Thus, the recommended safeguards could form the basis for the development of a new import health standard for dogs that aims to deliver the level of protection signalled in the risk analysis. However, if the risk management objective were to be changed to reflect a higher level of acceptable risk, then a different set of safeguards,
selected to deliver a lower level of protection, might be considered appropriate.