Pilanesburg Resolution
In July, 2001, at an international scientific
meeting held in Pilanesburg National Park in South Africa, the Wildlife Disease
Association and the Society for Tropical Veterinary Medicine jointly prepared
and released a resolution calling for the recognition of animal health sciences
as critical to the design and management of sustainable programs for both
livestock and wildlife. This resolution, which is targeted at the international
government or government-related donor community, encourages agencies to
consider potential wildlife health impacts when development projects (particularly
livestock development) are being planned or implemented. The two societies,
meeting together to address the issue of diseases transmitted between domestic
livestock and wild animals, wished to emphasize the interrelatedness of development
actions and the environment, the potential for adverse consequences in projects
that neglect to consider wildlife disease issues, and the importance of considering
the true and overall costs and benefits to natural as well as human-made
production systems when evaluating or defining sustainable projects.
The resulting “Pilanesburg resolution” reads as follows:
Resolution by the Wildlife Disease
Association and the Society for Tropical Veterinary Medicine calling for
international donor community recognition of animal health sciences as critical
for the design and management of sustainable wildlife and/or livestock-based
programs.
Whereas, contact and resource competition between wildlife and livestock
continuously expand as more and more land comes under some form of human
use;
whereas, wild and domestic animals have many diseases in common and
both groups can and do play different roles in disease epidemiology,
and recognizing that these interrelationships can have significant implications
for disease prevention or control schemes;
whereas, livestock-based and wildlife-based activities are undertaken
separately as well as jointly as primary modes of sustenance, economic betterment
and support of rural livelihoods, with the sustainability thereof inextricably
linked to ecologically appropriate land-use choices;
whereas, the sustainable management of livestock as well as the conservation
of wildlife require ground-level stewardship, including disease surveillance,
by those communities closest to and most dependent on these resources;
whereas, numerous governmental and non-governmental organizations
worldwide provide financial resources, incentives, leadership, and advice
targeted at boosting productivity and sustainability of the livestock and/or
natural resource management sectors without always recognizing concomitant
disease implications, which can be significant and complex;
whereas, limited funding streams for wildlife and/or livestock
initiatives require prudent use;
whereas, donor organizations seldom possess sufficient internal expertise
regarding the myriad disease issues implicit in ensuring the success of wildlife
and/or livestock-based programs; and
whereas, the Wildlife Disease Association and the Society for Tropical
Veterinary Medicine, along with other local, national, and international
organizations, represent professionals who possess unique skills, knowledge,
and experience with wild and domestic animal diseases and their underlying
causes, ecological relationships, and economic implications.
Now,
therefore, be it resolved that, the Wildlife Disease Association and the
Society for Tropical Veterinary Medicine urge those organizations contemplating
the funding and implementation of programs involving wildlife or livestock
resources to:
* encourage
projects that foster integrative approaches to livestock production, food
security, human health, economic growth, democracy and governance,
biodiversity conservation, and natural resource management in order
to build upon synergies among these sectors while precluding conflicting
policies and/or negative impacts on either livestock or wildlife health;
* formalize
steps in their project design, environmental impact assessment, and implementation
processes which address wildlife, livestock, and rangeland health issues
and their implications for sustainability and thus success, recognizing that
these projects may alter fundamental relationships between animal hosts and
potential pathogens and parasites;
* when
contemplating projects involving domestic and/or wild animals, establish
relationships with appropriate wildlife and domestic animal health-oriented
organizations and recognized local, national, regional, and international
experts, thereby identifying an appropriate pool of professionals who can
assist in ensuring the inclusion of timely, science-based advice in
planning, implementation, and monitoring processes; and
* put
a premium on local human capacity-building to address the long-term technical
needs of development activities that require expertise in domestic
animal health and wildlife health by building adequate support into
project design and implementation so as to engage local expertise and to
foster capacity-building at professional as well as community levels
as a first-tier priority within and beyond the life-spans of such programs.