thorough understanding of both, and would require them to provide clear guidance and direction to both, as required. Since the 39th Session the STC had held two teleconferences & a first face-to-face meeting on 17th October. On specific issues, the STC had considered 1) Proposals for wild boar studies (two) and on FMD diagnostic test development; 2) the improvement and application of the process of antigen bank prioritization; 3) actions needed in relation to bringing decision support tools for free and endemic regions into greater use; 4) Future science meetings and the research group. A follow-up STC meeting was proposed for January 2012 in Pirbright. 2) Proposals for studies relating to the risk of FMD transmission by wildlife (Appendix 15); A. Wild boar surveillance project, Anatolia This project, which as the aim of sampling wild boar in four distinct habitats in northern Black Sea coast regions of Turkey, is aimed at addressing gaps in knowledge on the prevalence of FMD in wild boar in different parts of an FMD endemic region, and should assist understanding on the exposure and possible circulation of infection in wild boar. The STC had considered the relevance to other regions of Europe, and considered the study would contribute to the current (EFSA) risk assessment studies. Other important questions also arise relating to wild boar, which should not be forgotten; including the question of optimizing surveillance procedures for wild boar, given the difficulty of sampling, and the issue of risk management; the options available and the impact of FMD in wildlife upon status of domestic animals in these regions. B. Concept Note on the “Tracking of wild boar for evaluation of its role for possible spread of FMDV in and between South-East of Bulgaria and Turkish Thrace” This had been developed by the FAO EMPRES wildlife unit, together with the EuFMD Secretariat and the Bulgarian Food Safety Authority (BFSA). The aim is to evaluate systems for “real-time”monitoring of movements of wild boar in the areas under surveillance in the Strandzha ecosystem – the forests close to the Bulgarian /Turkish border. The CN addresses the issue that movement of wild animals cannot be controlled by normal means and veterinary services may wish to monitor and control the potential dispersion of infected wild animals, and receive early warning of movements that may endanger domestic livestock. Such tracking methods have not been evaluated for use by veterinary services with wild boar, and in the context of Bulgaria, might reveal patterns of movement of importance across the common border. If further evidence of FMD is found, these movements could assist targeting of surveillance efforts and design of restriction zones. Recommendation: Support. The STC noted that a final project proposal should be presented after the selection and cost of the tracking devices had been identified. C. Process for antigen bank prioritization (Appendix 14). The need for a more systematic and transparent process for identifying priorities for antigens for vaccine banks had long been recognized and David Paton summarized the progress of the Research group with the EuFMD epidemiology consultant (Melissa McLaws) ; the two step approach identified at the Slovenia 2009 Research group had been used, with a global ”risk to Europe” assessment (by EuFMD) followed by an systematic analysis of the vaccine suitability for strains isolated in the high risk virus 82nd Executive Committee of the EuFMD, Madrid, Spain, 17-18 October 2011
16
