Beneath the surface with David Law Forward Farming

I recently published a column in which I stated the strongest evidence yet that Mycoplasma bovis does not flourish on  farms with well-balanced soil had been confirmed at farms belonging to the Van Leeuwen Group, the first to test positive for the disease in 2017.

More than 100 soil tests were carried out on VLG farms and it was discovered the farms on which cattle had tested positive for M. bovis all had the same characteristic – a low-pH soil, typically imbalanced and minerally-depleted. In contrast, soil tests taken on the farms with no cases of M. bovis found the soil had a healthy pH of 6.3.

I shared my disappointment that  the Ministry for Primary Industries had chosen not to recognise the  findings, instead categorising M. bovis solely as a contagious disease and not a symptom of livestock immune system deficiency or collapse due in part to poor soil conditions.

In the interests of creating a healthy discussion around the topic, MPI reviewed the article – and is still failing to acknowledge our findings.

“It is disappointing that some farming experts are contributing to this situation with unfounded comments at a time of high anxiety and uncertainty,” an MPI spokesperson said.  

“The idea that soil conditions are important for M. bovis infection are not supported by international scientific literature. There is also no evidence to support his [David Law’s] assertion about the bacteria thriving in low-pH farms.”

I want to reiterate that I’m not saying the disease lives in the soil per se, but feed that is grown in low-pH soil is eaten by the cow and creates low-pH conditions in the cow’s rumen – which I believe affects the cow’s ability to fight disease.

Restock

The VLG farms were given the go-ahead to restock their affected farms after the compulsory stand-down period of 60 days after depopulation – but I warned them if the conditions in which the disease thrived were not rectified, it could reoccur.

MPI disagreed with my opinion that its repopulation guidelines alone could be ineffective unless the farm’s soil was examined and any deficiencies corrected to balance the whole farm system, so the cows’  immunity is restored.

“MPI is satisfied that a farmer can safely repopulate their farm, provided the cattle with M. bovis have  been culled, the property has been cleaned and disinfected to the high standard MPI requires,” said an  MPI statement.

“MPI is confident it is safe to bring animals back on to this property with little risk of M. bovis reinfection,” MPI stated.

This idea is not something I’ve plucked out of thin air; it’s the unanimous opinion of a large group of international farming specialists including veterinarians, soil scientists, farm consultants and agronomists – who endorse a science-based regenerative farming approach as a solution to prevent M. bovis  symptoms recurring.

In June, I presented a statement from this group to a parliamentary committee. It was reviewed by MPI who felt “the information provided in the proposal did not meet the level required to justify spending taxpayer and farmer levies to action”.

Research

“[The proposal] did not meet some fundamental requirements of scientific research...(and) none of the extensive literary research undertaken by MPI staff backs up the claims made in the proposal,” MPI said.

The proposal was endorsed by a group of world experts working with cutting-edge research; research that is surely more relevant than that which MPI is calling on to make decisions.  

“There was nothing in the proposal that would have avoided the depopulation of farms that MPI has been forced to carry out as part of the eradication plan,” MPI continued.

Maybe not – but we believe the eradication response is only solving the problem in the short-term. We belive new cases of M. bovis will continue to be found until these particular animals’ immunity is enhanced, which is the longer-term solution.

If we want to be world-leading and cut a new track as far as M. bovis is concerned, we have to lead the way with new research and new information. That’s how we are going to beat this devastating disease.  

MPI has dismissed our science-based approach, which we feel is part of the solution, because it is not familiar to them. All we are suggesting is that MPI looks at the new research that has backing from an increasing number of farmers and specialists alike, as part of the solution.

This column is the opinion of David Law, managing director of Forward Farming Biological Consultancy.