A method for estimating the economic value of changes in the risk of breech strike
Brian HortonA CRC for Sheep Industry Innovation, Homestead Building, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia.
B Present address: Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture, University of Tasmania, PO Box 46, Kings Meadows, Tas. 7249, Australia. Email: Brian.Horton@utas.edu.au
Animal Production Science 53(10) 1126-1133 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN12326
Submitted: 18 September 2012 Accepted: 17 January 2013 Published: 9 April 2013
Abstract
An economic model of the costs of sheep flystrike has been modified to examine the effect of a given change in the risk of breech strike as if it applied to the entire wool-producing industry, rather than to individual wool producers. Within each region (high rainfall, sheep/cereal and pastoral zones), the model sets the proportion of the sheep population in low, medium and high risk categories and calculates the estimated level of strike for untreated sheep in those groups. The costs related to breech strike can be calculated according to the original model. The risk of breech strike can then be adjusted to any required level, the proportion of sheep in each category adjusted and the costs recalculated according to the adjusted risk. The model estimated that a 50% reduction in the risk of breech strike would decrease the number of sheep requiring preventive treatment to about one-third of previous levels, but only provide a small reduction in costs related to struck sheep, due to the large increase in the number of sheep no longer receiving preventive treatment. There would be only small reductions in costs related to crutching and mulesing sheep unless much larger reductions in strike risk occurred. The overall benefit of a 50% reduction in the risk of strike would be $0.23–0.27 per sheep. If this reduction in strike risk occurred across all regions this could provide a benefit to the Australian sheep industry of $15 million. The model found that if mulesing was not used in any of the sheep then the use of preventive treatment would increase so that 93% rather than only 60% received chemical treatment, and reduction of the risk of breech strike by 50% provided benefits of $0.40 per sheep. Therefore, the estimated benefits would be greater than $0.27 per sheep in situations where the current level of risk is very high.
Additional keywords: breech cover, dags, flystrike, mulesing, wrinkle.
References
Campbell N, Horton B (2002) WoolRes: a model to assist producers to meet market requirements for low-residue wool. Wool Technology and Sheep Breeding 50, 632–637.Falconer DS (1981) ‘Introduction to quantitative genetics.’ 2nd edn. (Longman Scientific and Technical: Essex, England)
Greeff J, Karlsson J (2009a) Incorporating breech strike resistance into your ram selection program: how to use the data effectively, what genetic progress you can expect to make. In ‘Sheep updates 2009’. (Ed. S White) (Department of Agriculture and Food: Perth, WA)
Greeff JC, Karlsson LJE (2009b) Opportunities to breed for resistance to breech strike in merino sheep in a Mediterranean environment. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 18, 272–278.
Greeff J, Karlsson LJE, Schlink AC, Underwood N, Stanwyck N, Lindon G (2010) Identifying indicator traits that can be used to breed for breech strike resistance. In ‘National R&D Technical Update. Sydney’. June 2010. (Australian Wool Innovation). Available at http://www.wool.com/Grow_Animal-Health_Flystrike-prevention_Technical-RnD-update.htm [Verified 18 March 2013]
Horton JD, Champion S (2001a) Some current management strategies for low residue fly and lice control. In ‘FLICS conference. Launceston, Tasmania’. (Ed. S Champion) pp. 443–453. (Tasmanian Institute of Agricultural Research: Hobart)
Horton JD, Champion SC (2001b) Wool producer perceptions of their flystrike problem. In ‘FLICS conference. Launceston, Tasmania’. (Ed. S Champion) pp. 428–432. (Tasmanian Institute of Agricultural Research: Hobart)
Horton B, Hogan L (2010) FlyBoss: a web-based flystrike information and decision support system. Animal Production Science 50, 1069–1076.
| FlyBoss: a web-based flystrike information and decision support system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
James PJ (2006) Genetic alternatives to mulesing and tail docking in sheep: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46, 1–18.
| Genetic alternatives to mulesing and tail docking in sheep: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Joint Blowfly Committee (1940) ‘The sheep blowfly problem in Australia.’ (CSIR: Melbourne)
Larsen JWA, Anderson N (2000) The relationship between the rate of intake of trichostrongylid larvae and the occurrence of diarrhoea and breech soiling in adult Merino sheep. Australian Veterinary Journal 78, 112–116.
| The relationship between the rate of intake of trichostrongylid larvae and the occurrence of diarrhoea and breech soiling in adult Merino sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c3gtV2isw%3D%3D&md5=e6460ea0c40dcd7b5ed97e77481ea366CAS |
Lucas P, Horton B (2013) Comparative costs, chemical treatments and flystrike rates in mulesed and unmulesed sheep flock as predicted by a weather-driven model. Animal Production Science 53, 342–351.
| Comparative costs, chemical treatments and flystrike rates in mulesed and unmulesed sheep flock as predicted by a weather-driven model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Morley FHW, Johnstone IL (1983) Mules operation – a review of development and adoption. In ‘Sheep blowfly and flystrike in sheep. Proceedings of the Second National Symposium. University of New South Wales’. (Ed. HW Raadsma) pp. 3–24. (Department of Agriculture New South Wales)
Sackett D, Holmes P, Abbott K, Jephcott S, Barber M (2006) Assessing the economic cost of endemic disease on the profitability of Australian beef cattle and sheep producers. MLA Report AHW.087. Meat & Livestock Australia, Sydney.
Scobie DR, O’Connel D (2010) Breech bareness reduces flystrike in New Zealand crossbred sheep. Animal Production Science 50, 599–602.
| Breech bareness reduces flystrike in New Zealand crossbred sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Smith J (2010) Breeding for breech flystrike resistance – Project results update. In ‘National R&D Technical Update. Sydney’. (Australian Wool Innovation: Sydney)
Ward MP, Farrell R (2003) Sheep blowfly strike reduction using a synthetic lure system. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 59, 21–26.
| Sheep blowfly strike reduction using a synthetic lure system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12719014PubMed |
Wardhaugh KG, Vogt WG, Dallwitz R, Woodburn TL (1989) The incidence of flystrike in relation to sheep susceptibility and the abundance of the blowfly, Lucilia cuprina (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Calliphoridae). General and Applied Entomology 21, 11–16.
Wardhaugh KG, Morton R, Bedo D, Horton BJ (2007) Estimating the incidence of fly myiases in Australian sheep flocks: development of a weather-driven regression model. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 21, 153–167.
| Estimating the incidence of fly myiases in Australian sheep flocks: development of a weather-driven regression model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2szjvVamuw%3D%3D&md5=3d32d367c9b7ac2d58d9afec4fa39d44CAS | 17550435PubMed |
Watts JE, Dash KM, Lisle KA (1978) The effect of anthelmintic treatment and other management factors on the incidence of breech strike in Merino sheep. Australian Veterinary Journal 54, 352–355.
| The effect of anthelmintic treatment and other management factors on the incidence of breech strike in Merino sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaE1M%2FktFCksw%3D%3D&md5=8620c773e442a485c96532fcd4f9e8b4CAS | 708333PubMed |
