How to start up a national wildlife health surveillance programme
Lawson, Becki (Zoological Society of London. Institute of Zoology)
Neimanis, Aleksija (National Veterinary Institute. Department of Pathology and Wildlife Diseases.)
Lavazza, Antonio (Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna)
López Olvera, Jorge R. (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Departament de Sanitat i d'Anatomia Animals)
Tavernier, Paul (WILDPAD)
Billinis, Charalambos (Faculty of Veterinary Science. Department of Microbiology and Parasitology)
Duff, Paul (Animal and Plant Health Agency. Diseases of Wildlife Scheme)
Mladenov, Daniel (National Diagnostic Research Veterinary Medical Institute "Prof. Dr. Georgi Pavlov")
Rijks, Jolianne (Utrecht University. Dutch Wildlife Health Centre)
Savić, Sara (Scientific Veterinary Institute "Novi Sad")
Wibbelt, Gudrun (Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research)
Ryser-Degiorgis, Marie Pierre (World Organisation for Animal Health. Working Group on Wildlife)
Kuiken, Thijs (Erasmus Medical Center. Department of Viroscience)

Fecha:	2021
Resumen:	Whilst multiple countries in Europe have wildlife health surveillance (WHS) programmes, they vary in scope. In many countries, coordinated general surveillance at a national scale is not conducted and the knowledge of wildlife health status in Europe remains limited. Learning lessons from countries with established systems may help others to effectively implement WHS schemes. In order to facilitate information exchange, the WHS Network of the European Wildlife Disease Association organised a workshop to both collate knowledge and experience from countries that had started or expanded WHS programmes and to translate this information into practical recommendations. Presentations were given by invited representatives of European countries with different WHS levels. Events that led to the start-up and fostered growth spurts of WHS were highlighted, including action plan creation, partnership formation, organisation restructuring and appraisal by external audit. Challenges to programme development, such as a lack of funding, data sharing, infrastructural provision and method harmonisation, were explored. Recommendations to help overcome key challenges were summarised as: understanding and awareness; cross-sectoral scope; national-scale collaboration; harmonisation of methods; government support; academic support; other funding support; staff expertise and capacity; leadership, feedback and engagement; and threat mitigation and wildlife disease management. This resource may enable the development of WHS programmes in Europe and beyond.
Nota:	The intensity of surveillance and funding sources varied greatly per country, with the number of animals examined post-mortem ranging from 30 to 5000 per year for general surveillance programmes, and from tens to tens of thousands per year for targeted surveillance programmes. By far the most important funding for WHS was provided by national governments, with additional funding from hunter organisations, universities, research projects, non-governmental organisations, the agricultural industry and environmental organisations.
Derechos:	Aquest document està subjecte a una llicència d'ús Creative Commons. Es permet la reproducció total o parcial, la distribució, la comunicació pública de l'obra i la creació d'obres derivades, fins i tot amb finalitats comercials, sempre i quan es reconegui l'autoria de l'obra original.
Lengua:	Anglès
Documento:	Article ; recerca ; Versió publicada
Materia:	Disease ; General ; Scanning ; Surveillance ; Targeted ; Partnership ; Network ; Wildlife ; Health
Publicado en:	Animals, Vol. 11 Núm. 9 (september 2021) , p. 2543, ISSN 2076-2615

DOI: 10.3390/ani11092543
PMID: 34573509

12 p, 287.6 KB

El registro aparece en las colecciones:
Artículos > Artículos de investigación
Artículos > Artículos publicados