- Jan 14, 2008
- 5,644
- 497
- 303
I don't believe that NYREDS is against quarantine and biosecurity, necessarily. He is just advising us to use great care in where we get our livestock and if we get them from those that we know have healthy flocks then the issue with diseases becomes almost, if not completely non-existant. If you have had experience with having your flock get sick from fowl that you brought in then I can understand why you would be a strong supporter of quarantine and biosecurity.
I support disease control and biosecurity. It is possible to have disease free and disease hardy fowl. I and one of my friends trade fowl back and forth on a regular basis, we both breed for hardiness and vigor. While I am not against vaccinating, I strongly believe we do ourselves a great disfavor by medicating for every little disease and illness that our fowl get.
I have a closed flock except for trading back and forth with my friend. I cull all my fowl that get sick as I will not intentionally breed from one that has been sick. Experience has taught me that the offspring of formerly sick parent stock have a 95% higher possibility of getting sick themselves, and the ones from the parent stock that have never been sick have only a 5% possibility (in my flock as I have experienced it) of getting sick. This is my experience. It costs a lot more at start-up to take the route I just described, but in the long run it's actually cheaper because of hardy, vigorous livestock.
I'm not completely against quarantine either as I believe it has it's place.
In a society that is largely disrespectful of older people, I believe we do well to strongly consider the experiences of the same, if we personally know the older person and know firsthand they they tend to have unhealthy livestock then I believe we need to be very careful. I don't see myself bringing sick or formerly sick livestock to my place, to me that would be unwise. I also understand the principle for the importation laws.
I grew up on a dairy farm and understand the value of having healthy livestock. On the farm we always bred for hardiness and vigor. Anyone that has ever tried raising calves for profit knows the diseases and sicknesses that will accompany that endeavor. We had very little sickness on our farm and we did very little vaccinating. We vaccinated as the laws required. There were neighboring farmers that vaccinated and medicated for every little thing and it seemed they were always struggling to have hardy, healthy and vigorous livestock. We would not have even considered bringing in and breeding from any of their livestock, knowing that it would only weaken what we had.
I am not against research and I appreciate the efforts of those that have extended themselves in it, but I can't force myself to believe everything that "research" says is right. I do know that what I have experienced is true and know that it works for me. I also believe that we need to keep the living quarters of our animals clean and fresh. It only makes sense that animals that are in crowded, stressful situations will get sick quicker and easier, besides it is poor animal husbandry and cruelty to let them live in such situations. We are responsible as keepers of animals no matter what they are, to give them a good life. Again, experience has taught me that a largely stress free animal will do 100% better than one in a crowded situation. i.e. (pen to small for it). Perhaps if we were not allowed to house animals in crowded/over crowded conditions we would have for less problems with diseases, as the diseases/sicknesses seem to thrive well in poopy/wet conditions. A clean, well ventilated area is only one of many keys to have happy healthy livestock.
Actually, I do think bio-security is a bit ridiculous if you let your birds outside or,wild birds can get into your barn or coops. Wild birds are a much more likely vector of disease than visiting people.