An EeoDomlcEvaluatlonofllte Po.slble 'Serateale.for '.be COhtrol olSbeep Bod, Lite, In :New 'So.-thWare,

P JNomorU.I,·.ad RL Batterba.,..

UnivenltyofSydney

if I~! .fIt ~ :: ~i: i·~.~.· .. ~Ii n ~.oEsc4

iii -t Ii j!$l.

f.S£ifK

§ ,t--i ......... '9--; ......... :. I... i... !f ~ I ..... ~. ~ f5'1 .aI' i :

;. if Pi,. .. :: : :-1 ~i' ;

~ I~'i! flli ~ r: .: i lei

II i; I~I

tl~

t·.,,".'. ,.f_, f ..... ' .. t.· ••. 1, ..... 1 •..... 1.-. !g ...•... ~........ ..1, •...• ' .. ,I~ .. · .• ··.',*.· , •. l.~.~ •.... , ..... I.':ft, I ...•... ·.·, .......... i .•.•.•.• · .•.. ' .= I r II if' ft st.1! III 1. ~ leI ~ .... fa'i¢ .. ~!». f ;r ~ 1f1 dl'~ ... 'i 111!I!i'(til iillf i~ 'I ........ 8. ..• ' •.. -., •.•.... ' ... ,".' ....... 1.· ...•..... , •. ' ....•. , .. , .•. ,1: ........ 1

1, ... ' .:~ .... I .. ' ... ·., .. I .. :· .. · ..... ·.•.. . ..... ,1 ........... f .• ,·· .. ' .. · ...•. "1 ... ,, F ,.,1., .•.. '., .. ,.1 , .• , ........•..•... *'1 .• :, ........ , .•.. 1 .. ,.: ......•. ' .. , _i .• , •......• , .. ·. ,., ••• 1 .... ·,· .. ,., •. ', ",!illl·· ;.~ ..... 1.1 Sllf!1i

st.f~iftl .! fi; 1l.1t.>8 ~.I'

1 •. '.1',' ... ·., .,1,., .. ·, •.• ; ...•. , .i ....•. '.' ..... , .... I .... ,."., .. i .. ",:.' .••.• , ... § ....... _' ••• ' -., ..••. 1 ...•.. , .•.•• ~, ..• ,.I"....... " ... 1.,., .•.. , ...•... 1 .••.•••. ,,' .~.I •. , .•••.. , .••.. ,.. . ..••...•. ' ......••.. , .. , ",.1".> .•.•••• :.' .••• : '.',1,' ',., .•• I." •. b .... , .•.••. '.... . .• , .•.. ,.....' ,.,.-.. ~., .•. , •..• • ,:::1,.,., ... , •.•..... Jrl&t'~f"'lr~1 r4l i

11 .•.• 1' ~~ I ~l f f ~ ·tl·I· •. · •. tl.··. l' •... 1 ... ,· .. ,.. , ••...• ' .•• , .. ,.1 ....•..•.. , ..• , •. '. t.: .• ··I.,,·· •.. ··.,·.',: I ••.• ~ ..•• ·1.',." ...•• , .... 1,: .•• , I, •....•.•.••.•.• 1.· •. · ..•. I •....... · ..•• ,.', ...•. :." ..• , ...•.. ' .,.!1 .. _ ...•..•. ,.:.,......... :r;; .••... • •.•. I., .• ~, ..• , ••. If r I f ~8 < .. -.- ~I

A~~~~.:_·t.....L:tillih-l_,....;tt.--.".L...ii.~ioiiiIrIiol .. ····· .........• ~ ' .. \, ............. '''''I''~~'~~J~IIIIif''If~~J~~~'M~,~~~ ... ' .......•

liP~dift'~~Q!_Rw~or~~II(Jt .. m.ilf8tA,~ • ... .:~-1 . .... .. . .~ ........ - the·· .. '~ .• ~ ... b!eL ....a'a ..... " ...... . .... ' .. " ...... '. . ..... ··.t.i~."" • • ~.a~~~~~I' '" ... W~~~IolN,~ ......• ~J '~.","~WMWI1~.J

$i_Mt

1'bt:tneJ(t~.iilvestiptl;d·YA\$.·~.~tI~icltbJt~~.'Ik»~. pn,lpmtm:lnJ988tcyen·wbmlko· ... MYCt ... ~orttbo~l! .~g~

~ledin Table 2.

TabJe·2: n.1 number·of,rQptrll ••• rn.ll.foflftt : •• i_ .,,,. ...... lice bve ·.bem ... ".rdttede4 _tt.. ro

Therc·wua .• ianiratasll dlfferoACObc~ ·the· hi&ftt11nf,u _ t""~·_IOne.tOl<p. value < .OS).Howev~.thercwq no lianificant ~betwcenttcbiah:Qlnf""l .... _\ pastoral zones

TheptoductlonlOis datahA..". been tibulatcdin ~3.

Table 3: Tbe direct reduction .~·tb.tMeUr afttra. JieeinrMtltlon

cut? O.23k ()"3k ./had 2M Howmucb wu the wool dilc:ounted at lbe·woolules? 31.97ccn ; cenlllhead 261

,I':'"

Wblti.$ the ·tota1monewy value of ucUon losses? 91.22 centslheld ~ cents/be.ld 239

'lbene wlSa consideJabJe ~tofvariabWly in these fiJUIQI·Q bcvidcrn flOll' the above Table 3. A nolablcfeature of the faults wu Ibc numberofmpondenu who reponed that they sustained mro production Joucs·after Ike badbcen ~ on their property. It was this finding that wasmorc ~ponanl than tbeoventU prodL.-cdoolones figura_ A bfeakdown of each individuaiquesUoo revealed that there were 74/264mspondentl who felt dun a lice infestation rcsulled in a lower per held wool clip; 36/261 respondents who believed wool from their Uce infcstedwu discounted at the wool sales and 69/239 respondents who provided a

non'!~fiSUtC'(or·tolId.~·loPcJ.atWr, •• ·lko.:inf~tatiotl.N~~ltJ.~~ loweRdtcrd1ityinthelr_·l.O •• UQc·,hlre,~ .. Md·~~~~,,*,·~.'~r 4eCJi~inp:rfQJQnce'of,lh;Ir:~thll'~ .·~.·lWUlt of,·~lrie •• tkJn.~ ,~, hqUCJlt~t···WM··dW.~.:tff~_~.'~tkJn·.4n4·~.moro~1tJ;·fO·.tJl~

ltrikc'an4bnenudparas.i~~t~r41~~tbcinMmb'to.Ulk¢,.~._ M4'tbe,pos$ible,lCfQsalby.~ tQ,'~···lAinfe~~PJ

Thcnc".t·~dQAqftho;q~tlW.·WN·~~ MI·tho~or.:~'ll\lf bad'prevlOt$lli~mr~tion hktory'.~cenain·" ~t,·.~·Tao.,tlmrof .... tQ

be e"amin<dwM··tbc. 4epe~. beI~n l*vi(JUJIi¢Omresgdoq:fti~QQ'1U'td~1M ~Yin~"*p(~~mm).Ji'Qql.~~p.;prod~.Vlitl •• :~1,~,,e CQntmB~y"bJeitwu r~ ,ft(ml .. ~ .tI·prtn1~in ·U1J$;Ql'V")'.:tMt.~.Qf._·

nceinrestJltionon.~U1Cltlm~1k:oor~~I;~pwemi~~()f~· other. :for:all ~ of tho.picQl~l1·~

Using.imflarrnethOdsthe ~of.·~.,~.ot·liooun.·.·~·.Md·tM_: ~etnCntpncticcof~,aUslteePOQ'tbo~nywlUUn,a.~~:~,~:~

for dependency. Itwu 'foundthat·fottbew~t~~p·II)d.:thc·Pf.S"~$'amt.bO~r~ wete~pendcntlr~t theJe MSa .• ~ ·be~ '!hem·in·.thchiJb ~rablf.u'rono:GOl <:,.. v.l~< .. OS).

AX2 2,,2 c:ontin."eav;y·~·~yainl~:hi~~OfUee_.~,·.M4 problems with sUJying sheep on~t~tyt wp,then~for.u~_ul~ ZOflCs.~_abighkvclof~ucy .. ~.·lbotet~

Table 4 ~nt$. breal«Iown oldie, 'klP»~. a ~Je$Q1t ofliro~tlnfQ,~lr components foreachagricI.11nq1$tratpQ1..

Table 4 : Tile ·1oQes·.'''OCCQr •• 4;,'tf!t,""ltoft_ ',pP&l~tI.,of a Ute trntmtmt

HI~:' Rainfall Wlteat~Sh"p ,Paltora' Number . .... ~ .• Number .~ .. ';Number 'CJ.J

Post dipping deaths 1 7 4 .. 1 9 5 .. 3 12 '9.4 Post dipping lameness 2 11 6.5 12 7.1 3 2.4 Increase4'inc:tdenco'of myOOticd.ertnatitis 3 .14 8.2 12 1.1 :10 7.9 . NoloSlCS " 126 74.1 125 74~O 92 72.4

; OthertOlSCSS S 1 0,,6 3 1.8 0 Combination of 1,2, S, &5 11 6.S 8 t 4.7 10 7.9 SampleUDl 170 169 :127

~I~llo·.i~tdi~~s'~~.~.~~'I~"~~sfor·M)'Qf··~ ·~·lOJ~J~Mim~t~~~h1.'~in'~;p~~~l~wQ.tJu\'~· l.~~sma)'·~ .. ,.'~tQf·.tbQ llSCci"dlo~~"tlto4 of~~'t'·~:IQI~I.~ ftom,tbes.heep~b¢jnl,f~m\l~~i~,aI~"vo~~npw·~fgt' tbeJl\Ckof cf&acy ·f)f·me··.~·~·:itcb-~~·The.~(lItQf'~jti~~.~hg ,c;hl~~@,~p~$ ~·.~QJpIl~"whkb·@1d~v.bl1~·:gtUl~1DbeJ.P~·

tM$C lQs$e$w_cAlcu~ HQ~v~,~WJeIQDly<,,~oftppro~J12()1527 ;p~~ <;~s~tbc.CQ~~n~'tp·be~ ,1..;~.~ .. p;r·~·fQf~,~~n~lhi~ fi~ WllS 4iscan.tedtrPm itho ~)'.,

The additiorutl~~fi .. ~from.~ .. ppJqtiQn QfJbee,U~~n.1SW~~~t. ~ dla~·.wp a,naly$Cd, 'f.hIe ·Spovi~·Jbe~ Jesuits.

Table 5; The .d4iti(}n.l_ntnt •• ~t .~ur ••• 41~t'_Qltot.lt' ~ppll~UQQ ofa lice treatment

Hleb :Rainfall Wbeat-Sheep,: Paatoral ,Number' $ Number " ." Number CJ,

"

AS$istan~ with blow~fly control 1 28 15.8 41 25 .. 1 33 2S~2'

'."

Assis~witb

itcb-mite control 2 14 7.9 13 8.0 10 7.6,

A$sisUUlCO withnlY~ dermatitis control 3 1 ,0.6 1 O~6 0

Noadditiunal·benefits 4 5S '1~1 28 17.2 27 '20.6 ,0; , .. "

"

Other additional benetits 5 4 2:.3 3 ' , 1.8 4 ,3.1 .'~' , .... I

Combination of 1&2 SO 28.2 42 25.8 32 24.4· : ....

Combination of 1 &, 3 4 2.3 S 3.:1 2 '1.5 .. ." "' .

Combination of 1,2 &, 3 13 7.3 23 14.1 11 8.4

Combination of 2 &, 3 4 2.3 3 1..8 3 2.3 Combination of 1 t 2 & 5 2 1.1 1 0.6 4 3 .. 1 Combination 1. ,2, 3 &, S 0 3 1.8 1 0.8

Combination 1. 3 & S 1 0.6 1 0.6 0

Combination 1 & S 0 0 3 2.3 Combination2&5 0 0 1 0.8 Combination 3 & 5 1 0.6 0 0 Sample Total 177 163 131

The~ te~\llt$ werc'nQtstatisticaUyanlllysed becau8C ()f~numetO\ls :~m~dQ!\Qf~Mtits tbatFQ4ucers felttbeYJeCelv~ frQIn; ~app~~tion Qf.~ lice ~ntJ{Qwever, ~t~· cxzuninati9n of these temiltsreveal~t1u~foUQWin8 seriollSnP$COn,ception by .$l'l~ l'tQd~ts. In the mghrainftJll, wheat .. sh~p an4~tom;~es~$~tivelYt l4183,Zl/8Stm4:1S/6Z re$pQndenta who cllPmed. tAAtu.~y ~eivtdp$i3~witbth~ CQllP'Ol <>f;itch"mito, 'wmu~r$ of bac~ prePllrauons. nis wen establis~dtat ~ 1m~~prepAmtiQQ$dQ;notD$sl$t m'me control of itch-tnite.

The.abilinr of th~ Aus~tWQ91 Te$tip4l.Au~1¥(A,WTA) to ~~U~iQ~ir·~ sampling pnlCequre an4 wh~ta'lerdUs.~~ti<»l ~dKJd·sb~ld. ~.usc;4·~ a JrnC~~~~UK>4 forsh~p licec()nU'Ql W3S ~Jduatcxl inT~ble ·6,

T,-ble6 ;PrC)d1.lC!er$·awar~ne~ of tl1"bUJ(y()f ,th~ ,A 'WTA'$ ~orepmpn~l: tec h • d t II d its t tl I t b k th d nique to . etec ce an pO en a .8S:8' race- Be ,me 0

,'", ',-' ,. "'.

.Bieb Rainfan Wbeatl!'Sheep ,Pastoral; /I " ,~v

Number' % Number % Number ;% ..... ,. "'~" " ,

I<nowled~ Qfme A WTAts ability to detect lice intbe core

!

sample 153 74.6 139 '19.0 109 ' '79~6; ,.; .. ,

Sample Total 20S 176 IS7 ......

Should~s @tection methQd be us~ as a trace-back procedure in liee control? 176 89.3 146 8S~4 108 Sample Total 197 171 131

, ... ..,.

Statistical analysis of Table 6 ~vea1ed that there was no. sipifip~t diff~~s betWr&n complementary figures in the~gri(:plt\ll1\lQ~ta.

....

'82~A, ' ...

Anan~ysisof the varlO:\lsmcth~ Qf:UCQ tn.m1Inent WM ~ n<'~t aspect ofUtc sptV~ywbich tnerlted a~ntion. 1b~ three ~jor Uce tllmtment~luliqu.es Umt were evA1~Wd W~ ~shQwet (spray) dip, tbep1unge 4iP .. ~ me CQnv~ntionm b~~~uncmUJ.Ea(!bll~cUltQml.~ was analy~ on theimsis of.tbese.~ ~~Qd,$Qf~~nt~1b~C()$ts .W1~for~lWhof tb~se methods. were ~tQtA1 c()St of ~cbcllliQ. use4in U~ tNa~ntannqNIy. ~ a.nnual r1aintenance cuul depreciation costs ontiUs capita1~qjpment? the toqUftU11l1abour epst (c){.cluQing ()u~ide labour cost$) as$OCiAte.d with the aCImiJlis!cring of the li~~atmentanmmUy, tltetQwfannlab~ .. ' cost (apin oxclumng ()q~i~ lll~C;()sls)ps$OCia«:4 withtlle mU$~dn! .of sb~p specifically for ~ treatment annually .. ~.tlle ~ farm labour cost (also ex;cllldJng OlltSide laboqrcQsts)associateawitb the @tu~· c1ellning of the clip tn'a year. The Q.ut$~ labour

~$~ I\$s~i~fe4,with, the,\I.noll$:~tb~Qt'Jl~tnmtm¢nt'~ m$.Oin9l~ T.blq1~Yl~ .sJJmm~ ,of Jhcso ~$ult!l.fwtl,lQ~;.~ultund..h~

T~bf~'7;;. CP$"'PJr.b~p 9t :ph,n,e'lbow'.r(lJ.,ph •• ,.Q'fl:~eldIQ' treatments in :NewSouth Wa~es

Zone

fllgb. Jta'nt@lI Plunge ""

Shower

Bacldine

W",at!tshf.'ep Plunge

Shower

'Backline

P41stor •• Plun~

Sbower Backline

Zone

Iii a .. R~dnr'dl Plunge

Shower

Bacldine

Wheat.she~p,

Plunge

Shower Backline

Pa$tQfal Plunge

Shower

Backline

18.71 "

17 .• 70·

29.97

19.12

20.17

26.91

16.72

16.21 27.61

MQ$teriQI' CQ't

.(cents)

13.46

12.43

1.40

11.24 13.62

1.1S

25.46

23.64

1.46

3.99 7.79 7.64' ", ".,

4.54 7.54 18~92 ".'

2.89 3.21 12.4~l

8.35 1.00 t.92 9.42, 16.91

,'"

1.19 3.45 10.,80

9 .. 34 9.54 ,8.65'

8.89 .9.'80 15.15 4.96 4.05 0.36

'Olpqle"I'IU11 '<ro1tU.PP·QI CQ.' '" ~=:: lQt'. (cents) cents)

1.76 2.21 SS.S6

2.'4 1.72 65.39 '"' ." .

0.06 0.33 SO~35

2.02 41~73*

2.07 1.S7 65.68 0.03 1.68 45.21

2.64 0.65 '3.00 2.34 9.31 85.34 0.05 0.54 39.03

The astenslc aIOllgsi~ the ~. wb~at~s~p plunge dipping costin the above Table7indic3teS that tbislUl,~U@le fi~ Th:numberpfrcsPQ!ldents lluUsingthis rnetb()(,\mthe wbeat~ sb~p wne was very low anQll$a c()nseqllcnce.relitlble figures were not attaillabl~.

-7-

Dhl~g.s.l(ut qrr~lttJlr.fd"lf....,m :the tI~~ ~~R.tmt :.u,voy

Th~tmljQl' findhlStbl\~stenl$-~dU& i~lisUlat,~l~ll"~rtlf$~p~~~Snd the ~llalroUti~ l~ ~tmcnt 3$ ,M~_,lm'v~d~c: ~~'dult'~',~ir_p tlccbft'om any Olijtsjde inv1lSlQl,l~Y$h~p ~~ A •. ~$Cbelief. -~' ~.~ •. ,~. I~se '$b~p ~rodUce($IUi~de to lice ,·;md,~UlNi)'it$~1lJ>\ wlU ~lQ~Qa',~Ull Chfit1,~h' til" futuro. With th~ ~t adv~nt Qfl~,wopl~nt.lt~infcs~tiM.~uJ4 ~ ~ W~Q they occur.ra~ dum "'l.'Otl~6lNl~lpff ... IIJ'S~~.

Whilst dle adv()Cation ofthi$~.pf cpnuive.p~n~y fl~tpbe,<»ntnu'Ym~\ pJeventivc ntedicine princip~l,it~s lQ be mlpbQ~tQ Jbe$beepman.~S .egmmooit)'. thlU routirleshf;epUco~atnlC:lntisOQt MeffeQth~1op1 tf.nQ,ptoptay~~gro~~nUy.

,-' " higbpropQrtitm ·Qf sh~pp~rulJtakcnl1~~~'llW ,~. ~~C)Qof.l~f1.1atm¢Dt ptnvi~$ prctecQon~g~t~fQt a lW~l.." moutha'peripd TtlbbelierhP~n fCl!l(~l;ty the ph~"tica1c~swbolM1lqf~~,JP4tli$t.ribu~~.~ ~n"t--mu ~tlvelY promo-ung, thl&amll~alUce'~~ntu~Qf.l~~trol~!'A4ditimanr~~' mis~M ~nef of~ua~ '~~VCU1UQn,f¢\$p1Ma .fq)ma..iggJc JU)nual~nt,bM .~ beenJCintQrcedb)' v~ous.$m~s'.gricultl1f1lde~l\thaviqgC()illput~~~pdipplnIQ a s~atutoryteq~nt It i$~.$il1'Yt() stato. priOt to, ~AdYC'lltpflon3!w(l()1m=P~(JQ.t th~w~s only alimitednUJUbe .. Qfme~()f~~gJi9c.fUI4~pQvi$km ot~ regulatory #qum,~ntofUcc~nt wp~,,"~of.few.~OMgpeA ~~tbo"'Jt> adtninism.t:i.vc bQ.dies.lthgtncv~1ess, (mJ;~ in·~s~ppxgd~. C9multmitYa view that ~ i$anee4'to'~ s~ fo.-li", ,.runll11y.

Whilst 1M 1'OUtin~ Uce~~lltmay ove~~ unapp~nJ(lipt)infes~s,itwoul4,be better ~ di$COve.-that aninfe$~dPl\ -was ,~n~ and'1Q ~~"'aQlnv~tistUiQllintQ ~~ of the inf~sUld()n. InvC$tig~tiPn()f ,d1e,PfOb~m w()\itd en@1e ,~sh~p ,pod~~,to wsct properly ~y are,uof rnana~ment th.t~)'N~ist in ~,prevendQn ()far¢-ieat<,stati~n! An example of ~ a:reathat could be improve(1,m tile, ~ of a pmblem with l~ytnB I" would be theinlrOducnon of eiectrification ~tIlc ~fencin,.

The reasons why. proportiQnrUly, th~ ~ si;nific~t1y leu ptQPCnies in dtehjgbrabUallf.OOO tteatins for li~than either the whe&t~sbeep or.pastond· zones. ~llld ,bc~peallat¢d 'to. ha~ theil' basi$ inthedlffe$g m~u\,emeIU ~JWes. Thc~i.np;nsivc.fanningp~C$ ~~ on the farms ()fth~mghrainfmt ~.~ thatsneep ~ ~ly to be ~ ~ OftCl1dlM in the other two ZQues, Sbeep prod~~rs in ~ lUSh rainfall zone wogl". of nece$sity. be .forcedto y~their sh~p for UWlt1scrnc;nt p:mcedUR:$ $uch ll$ anthelmintic dl;nchiu,an<itg A

c(msequen~t ~ 1>\blo.tQ detec~ l~ ,~~l\dily than their<;oun~ in'$e othet tWo zones.

The 'll\~of a $uimble<>\>~ti~~Q1ent of,~.Je~of·~,inf~~~'~uldbe lltilisedby ~sbeepp~cer, bash~·tbc·~tro.l QfU~lnJhc~tM4win~~y cQntinuQ to be a stunlblinS blwkin ·~f~~.l)iftpo$i$pf lif;Ci~$~nwollld~~At\)' u$isted by a trace .. 1)aclc~· SU<:hM ~,Licc~tectiQQT~t. '~.tbis:,~tm;t)'npt

identify light in(~$U\tiPnS. it w()f"lld be a valuableadJuncttQmeep pfOduce~ in'~ Agbt to combat li~ lnvasions~

Even tnoughit is difficult to~"t\ny v-Ud. ~nt$·Qn ~acmal v~~.s of tb~ PfOd~op losses reponed. in Tablo3. tbofiOOing that e, bigb;numberofrespoo4ents :SU$~~~IUgib~ Ipss~s afler a lice infestapon tneri~ funh~<XmS~!Someoftbe~nl$ ~~cted,·.tbe lice infcstadQns close tonf)i1lUl! 'shcllring;md bef~any ~'da.ma~lwA~nslJs.tain~ nus finding sppported dle W()rk ~cnductedin T~a by IWQU ~aJ~ (1986) \Vho,~so foun,dlhau sheep C()ll1d usually be detected Widt: lice ~f<m' aignifiClUlt .sewas dQ~'tq tlleitwO()l. ~ PQP1llation dynamic st.udies carried. out by Niven .mtdPritchard (198S)a.nd WiUdn.~"Nzl. (1982) alSQ are relcvllnt to Jhe ,ques~onQfpfQduction,l()ss.es. The~~~archeJ1 fwn4,m~~~ cri~eal factor for tb" pt'QtectiQA and ntpide.xpp,nsiQll Qf tile lQQsc.populadQAWQ the w()Q1SUll'tc length and not the envi!oru.nent3llPt1uc~s ofte~ ~mill as w~orismtM1y ~Uc~ '1be~ nndiQgs are ~tical for $~pp-oaucers who nomlAllyh~veth&;ir s!l~'p$hprninAQtmnn and may have previously been delp~intQ~lievblgtl'~ ... +!tc~ wowd npt 'bt;a lk,e buUd-up over the sununer lllOntbs prior to ~if nt)"t$he~g.

The dependency between tbohlstorical p~n~ ot liee anti the PfQb1emswith#ltnlyirlgsh¢p()n that pt()perty is ~ynQsutpri~~ WUkmsoo'. epit1emiolog!aU and economlo smtly(1984) supportS this view. ~Howevet, ~~e rmding; dlatthe mtrQduction ofp~1uu~ $b"p .an4.'.~ historical presence oflieo Wl}$ in~lX'n~nt fQf a1l.~ ~~ultlmll~~si. \lnex~~ Previous studies by WilldU$On (1988) ha!J stl'OnilY implica~purcb~ sh~p.ll$ a $~ of new lice infestations. The im~e (If me PfOblem of strayioa s~p in ~ epidemiolQgyof lice infestations cannot be QVcrsuessed.

Table 7 provided a comp~son of ~ts ~lweenthe ~ metb0d3 ofli~ tteaUPentm the ~ agricvJtlU'al zones of New South WQles. 'I'he mQ$t significant cOll1ponentoft.hedillPlngcPSti in the zones was the actual mustQ'illg c~tfortbe lice ~U"Qent itself particularly in ~pastQrAl wne~ The high mt1na~e~lltco$ts offllusferirl~ in the pastoral7.OJle have, ~$ulte4 inth~ hiah adoptionrato of the backlinQtreatment metllPd in this WIle.

A ~uent COJDInent that~e from. ~ S\ltVcy WWJ tile ~rceived faUUJe of the U~ trca~nt This oceuned, in all strata. This fai1~ of a lice ~aunent proced.uro bas its derivAtion either from II managerial source 9ffrom tm acrual chemical failure. Inattenponto the provision pf tbQ

COtTeCt dose and method of adtninis~tion can be l'e$IUy construed as a chemical failure. On the

.Qtberh~, (be·fCal$lMCC ofliceto~: $yn~ac;p~tlu'Qid$(t~'~ttvQc:onstit"'nfj 9ftll~ ..... 0; "tv ... tbebacld· ......... ' . ts\,,,, ... ,,,k6.",in .. ,", 'Tb! tw··S~tatt-.d 'b' 0",''''---~~Qn"" Ol ., "" ,me:~",,~n. I!'~ ~n .. ~DSm,B,· ",I ...... ' n.~~~~, , .. a~. ~~~H~+' tbe'$yntbetit; pyrethrol~ a~nb~blckU~$lw'agP.r8~poo$pb~b~.cpmPQL\ml(i~ ,$,hQwer <>rl'lungQ dipplnB> ·to· cn~~tlu\tUcecQnm>l ~PDt

AnQ~l' imponamt:finding\ha\ ~ .. aeU.fmm·dlc,$urv~y w\\s 'd\~ $t(OnS .\iP~ for·",~.\1~of

the AVtfA'~ C<,\fe ~ple~I1Y$is ~s l\~"~~~~ This WM :MI1l1i8ht¢QinTibl~ 6~

Th~ u~·of dU$diaposuc Jool. whi~bl$ ,kn9WQ,~·,~,U,~P<:~on T~t(L1)l) m We~~ A.~tralia <WUldnsm M4 a"~ (1989», ~ly~"fm1bermve$ti~lJ.pn, It'i~ wonhwhi1~ noting th~t a ~~ num~r of p1'Od~f$ex.~se41heirtotal opl?Q$ilipn 1Q,th~ intrQducuon ofspch a ~"bac" Qtboclt 11l1l~lyobp;ttns on·the \)asisQft.he:~P'Qll;U CQ~t tUld th~ ~gulatOfY n"ture of the sc~~~

The losses that were sustained as a direct ~$ultpf d\~ 1i~ ~tl*nt ~.whb tb~ exception of shower dippifJIg in tb~ ~as~· ~e. were n;tiniml\l.nu1~p, frotn D.3l tQZ.21 cents per sheC'p. The hi8h~ IO$~ sU$~tn thcpa$tU@1~ ~ wit1l,sha~rfJppin~ ~ influenced by SPlllC big Ip$$es te~ byonc pmd~r (9.0.1 ~nf$ pcrsh~p)- "Ihnat \p$sca of this magnitude do OCCut' (usually tbroggb, bact~dal conwnmailttnthcdillPin~ SQlut;iQn) tlti~ figure is a true outliet in this data sct8.1ldl'robabl)" $bpuld ba,"~bec=n <ii~rde<t

An indirect loss that occu.rred as ~sult of me use of $ynthetic p~tImlid b~ldine prcpaxa.tiOO$ was the nec~ssity to tlPplyan additional treatment for itch-mite cQnllOl(~g tbe·admini~tnltlonpf an ivenuectin compound to the s~p)~ Pn)(iq~" who continpcd wi~ sllower ~ plunse dipping and used. a chcnncal nuch M rotenone would not hav~ dds additional ~Q~~

'The validity of clahns of additiO\lalbenefit$ gained. by a~ produ~rs thlm llslng lice treatments needtl to 1Jc challenged. Whilst Table S ~howea mat over balf of the 1;heep producm ~lievedthey sained blow-fly P1OtectiOll ftQrnlice uea~nt, it is hiahlY q~$tiQnable wb~mer a shorn sheep requites add1tionalp1'Q~tion1\~nst blow-fly larval invasion. AnoUaerlJOint that arose from this $eCtiDn ~d mentiooeQ betOt; in the last clulpter. WM thenum~rofPfOd\J~PJ

who attributed additional benefits tQ lice ~tments when, in fact, dte$e bcll¢uts did not occur. The e~antple previously cite4 Wa1.S .no $.ppposOO assisum~ with itch-mi~ ';Qfl~l dUll W~$ claIDled after the u~ of backlinctreaunent$.

Policy Optlons To CQntrol E~ternal COS,ta

BecaQso me extenuUlties arisiPS frQm a ~ in(estatlOil and ~trol of the$C lice cn,:ate a dlverscnce between priva~ lUldsocmt berwfits mltl CQats it may beneceS$ttty for $()V~~!lt in~rvention in em l\tteOlP\ to ~tify this discrepancy. The possibl~ gQvemment policies des.Sued ttl bnprove t.be aUPCativc efl!~iency ·~dismb"tiQntd equity of J;esources used fm- the control of sbeep lice include policy instrutnen~ such as: a SY$~nt of propeny tipts; insurance against

-10-

tPB$C~ CJlq$«lby Ucetth~ imRQ~lUon QfaPi~QUvlM~; ··.~u$Qof"i~;i"put·Qf··<mttill~ s'ubs,idies; al'egul~tory appro4,\ch; lUlddtm~8bF~eml pmduc~r ~~AttPP,

'Each oftile~ opriQ~' wete;M$~lndiviqUPJIY. Th~"~ly '.wgt; pf~~te.mal :b¢uefit$ 3.ccrnipgirom Uce cpnn.ol c~d .~. ~ptQpri~~: b)'es~bU~hlpSpmP;111"lh~.mli~·~ ani:(t~U$. UQw~ver, at th1$ $ta$~t shC)~~~~t$ do nQ.t 4Ut~renua~ad~~.u~t¢t)'b¢~W~" U~~ ~. Uceb'~fes,ted ,sbeep and ~h~'p nfooknQwQ Uce s,l+\tU$.lJntit~ff~fficient ~$.Ot diffe1l'ntiatin.g sheep j~totheir v.m~sUcel"~i cA~i0ri~~~me$AvaUabl~!ft 4JysteJll4>f plVpeny n3h~ will not providl; a sclQdpn·«l tlli$C~~rna.Ut)',

Insunm~ agiUnst pmdUCtiOlllQs$C$ frnm· U~t$JUrely .tQ. ~bl1pPSs'lble;tQill1pI~~nl~~u.$C P! ~e~atdUl1cqlties in ideJltiMng lUlQ qUMtif)'lnB los'~s' fi'omn~ itri~a.l f.Ul4 wool~~g", (this WaS eXemplified b3'thetUmcU1d~~pr04u~ l1@tryi,nts to C9~~~ 00$ tas~ fPtthi$ smvey). Hence it is u~ely Uu\t 'ml imnnucc sch;me would 'bebtit,iAt~b)' elth" aprivat~ insurer or a govcrntnt;:nt in~nta1ity t9 CQuQterncte~tcmaUUesMismg from U~ ~.d their control measures.

The imposition of a PiSQuviM tax 011 ~~~ who f~l to contrQl~ark:ulnmU. pests bf\S received a considerable amQ\lntof nttentionin tho p~t Johnston (1918 and,. 1983). JQooston and MCInnes (1983) andlolmstoll M4 R()~ (1987) ·detml mis type of~ ind\elr WQfkpf\ agricultural pest management in particPlar with tef~nce to stared pus in~t$.ThQ pj~O\lvla,t,l tax. could be applie4 to sheep producen wbQ continue to produce lice infcSle4$b"ll.The .t3X to be effectlveneeds to l>e flCt at a "atu~ which tmtCdy eqWlls th~ margitU\l cQSt of the Qmna80 imposed by the pmducer. Cuneo"y it ~ll~ dlat all P«KlPCel1 wbowleta.w any lice infesUltions on their NOpenies pose a ri~lc tQ others in direcf .-eJatioU$mp fQ tho p;rubatdlit)' of me!!' infested sb~eJl maldngCOQtact with other clean s,lleep. Matdnson (1986) $U"~~ Ulat a levy be imp<)sed. on the Dumber of sheep traded. ~twee" lll'Odu~. with l\ lowerrmeapplying to flocks provisionally ~ of lice. At this sUlse infom~tiol\ ia la.clting in two ·main~a$ which would prevent the intr'Od4lction of such 4\ t3Xi,n$system. The opti~level of U~ <:OAtrQl is unknown and as yet, th.cre ia neither an ol>~tivc ~dlod pf detection of s~p lice nQr a m-eans of a~sessing the risk posed by an individtlal prociuccrto otbers.

Inpllt subsidies could ~pply to a vanelYo! itcUl~ assocmted with U~C ,~nU'Ol. S"b~idics could be applied to insecticidal Uce ueatment cbemicals,lice tfeAtmenl fl\CiUtics and on ~QVe~nt extension facilities being utilised m Ute diagnosis pf lice infestaUoos. However. subsidi~atiQn sbould be in~nQed to give the appropriate lr # r;1 of supponto th()~at risk of lice infesmtion from outside. Thus, any subsidies should be JppUcable only to proQuccrs woo bPrve suffe~ lice infestations from either purchased Uce infested sbeep or from U~ infes~4 neighbou.ring flocks. At the present time this is, not a fetJSi.ble option because, as yet it is impossible to declare

...,11-

a:fl9Qk certUiecl ft~of li~~4eq\la1ly'~ difficult·lQ pmve th~t·.~· U~ ~stmiQQ aet\llll~y origim\ttXt from MQdl~f property,.

An Qutput$ubsidy WQuld IDwlvcPQliQ), in$~~ deImeadn~fl09lc$ into licc~:Md UCQ infestedprQpet1i~s. ,A PtePUU,m ~ou1d"be pmdpIl. prodpc~ ~ucn8$ W(.l(ll AAame~temMlatms from lice ~ pro~nie$tO:urently, and in the f~seeablCf"M'C, t~&~prob.l¢M as previQUsly di$;usstd with dleinp"' subsidies prcvails.tbati~, .'U1¢fQ is p\uwnUy no $!lQsfactoty way of detennmmg whether a flQClc is guaranded lice ~,.

Regubnoljl control bas not over me ~~ had ~y itn,pactOIl'~ reducuon of the'UtcldenceQf sh~p lice in New SQQm wates. The~ has ~n a noriceable cbooge in sttm~by tnt; New South Wales Depanment Qf Agrtcul~ and Fishcrles Qyerrecent yC8f$ withre_ Wtberegulation ofUce. The condition has been largely ~~~lUe4 witbq~tinesnQIQnger app1i~ aut()matic~ly for thedetecnon of a Uce infesU\tion on a propeny" .However, tbe pwvistQQ of quarnntine is still available~d;lU1, be appn~ to produce.-s wh.o arc n(m~omp,tiant with directions to treat ~..eir sbeep for lice. In ~llmm.lU'Y, it is bighly un1i~ely dtlltpolicy cbanges aimed at future lice control strategies, would ~ ~ retlllll to the ~ys w~~ lice was a bighly regulated condition.

Producer education and tmining covers the field of provision ofinfonnation on identificaticm of lice infestations, the benefits and costs of different methods of lice control and the reasons fQr failed responses to lice tteaunents. Whilst educational pro~s fOf produccJ:'S would increase the private allocation of resources to lice control so as to equate private marginal benefits and costs, it would not encourage producers to include externalities in their bcnefit·cost calculations. This survey has clearly demonstraterl that there is a need for funber educational infonnation concerning lice.

The previous discussion has demonstrated the imponance of developing a means of being able to differentiate between lice free and lice infested flocks. It is impossible to inlplement policy measures such as taxes and subsidies unless this type of differentiation can be made. The development of the Lice Detection System (LDS) may, in the future, make this a reality. The advantages of the LOS can be enumerated as follows. The LDS is a highly sensitive test, because in the design of the current operating system, lice are not likely to be missed if present in a woo! sar~lple. TIle LDS, for this same reason. is a highly specific test (unlike a large number of serolugical tests which have cross-reactions). It is convenient. efficient. and repn. ~nts an extension of an existing testing system. The LDS is non-d!sIuptive to sheep producing fann activities. unlike nonna! visual inspection techniques. Furthermore, because of the laboratory based nature of the test. it has an additional advamage over the visual inspection method in that the diagnostician is not subject~ to any coercion during the course of a

~~,·Ono.cf·t1boM.'\t"'cf'I"·Il)S'iJ·"''''~~IWI_lt.'''.M: 'ctnoQyt'llQU11 woot:~r,

~\ .. ~ .'n~of:diQdVl1't"pJtO t._;Ql·tM·;~."'1DI1I'QOt:~\ .... · fJ1di~lba:prWJlkWonMd'~(Jm)~,_\_~.,'oe.'~

DctedionTCM.(.tbeWOJ1emA~~·"'~.:~)fOr,~' wOO1:Joqwuin'~~cl30S~ nus.··tNI .. · __ .. ;*r~.l~.lot __ ;11U~_ tbat,In'indlvfdUl1;liCf:,.inre_,~~N.,,,"~'_\"';k_:~to ... , • ..u.·.t1otks~u.the·wooI.od ... ti.:trcm.~·'.~'ilip~'''~~ $nWll~,With ·1bc·eUflUl.'WQOl i4mtiBc~i·~.dtll:W«*l ~.i... .~ identitY' .ndeven'irlice\Vel'CdlseoY~tn*,~itw.Jd."', 'to~i_ JOU1'CCofthlsl=conbtm1n~.~YO:~ot":kfP_J.~:~:iOa_.kU

wouJdbe~sw:ytoOVCR:ome tbbdi ....

11le dclaybenvcentbe$bQrin,. th.e·ICiWiI·~ otlbby_:U'>$II~;to'''1 digdv&nllgeucompared with viJUal in~l~vtrlif·~~.i.~ IMQllllccttcatment, ubu·b:en,rd~dUdtll·d\t~ottM.,~·**._

does not disadvantage the licef«o~.JntlClf dlcldopdoooflid:_ft~OJI,~ 1J)Smayhclp ·wean· someproduca'Jrromthe.UlditiortiloJd.~.:~,~·the dcl.yiD~vinl tbercsulu oftheLDSmlybe'.IdVltlQ.u..tber~

Itwuthl."concl~ thatthe:dcve~Jl of tbcLDSuI, tntee·blck ~'''1~. iDlportant.t\l1ein contn)U1nI·~·~temaJ*tJ,

(;, _acl •• lo ••

TbcmajofmtoYAllCndatlondllt .. crw 'ItbklUl"VQiltMt dIe~' of:ltudM:~ application or dcetreatmcnno lheep.lfterl~kl,~ ce.uo.~lpo.1tI'" ~.ot, Dee inr~~hubet:nn1ltde. Thil dlJpod,teoWd tab tt'::fonncfei~l_vevi" identi'-cltion oftbcliccon tbosheep Cf.podtiw'~*krromdlo WSjl)'~lpod1W

dia',ROIis ofUccil·madcon a~; tbtlheep'lhocldl~bc~ wilbM ~ .. tnt ~ictdal chem.iclJ., A~, .inthilconteX" ...... thatJfldlapod.fs"'*"ilt .... til ne,aconventionllli~~.ln· ~,t*tA.Ot~_n.iIn'l'CMbc:·.8'Pl~ U. .wcver. iftbe~·ls.mtdo.Ialcr,·than 4weeksorr ...... ~.~"ol't.ho,:'~Ib~i cc *'&Y. this woWdbe', tbetinlCthateew.f~·wouJd'IOftl1ID,·~·~·dlo .p~atc~cflicc.I~WOt.\l4.be.I.~blc1dmo'~totdtit_

ilis·futtba',~.tblr·thtIc:lkcinfej~\$b:ep .. sbofdd.:rw:d\40.MOtbet_~ aftcr·tfio next.JbeJrin, withacorlYcnrioudO$shetrI Ileo ~t nc~of*b~ istbatlkc~ntllrClPP&d only If •• poUlivediaposi$*

•• l'~ I If I - :." 11 ~., ~ ~ )I" ~ ;Ii ~ •• " •. If ~;. ~

lJ,f'~'~~llhM,~)t~.,." .. ., .. ,~'t,,.~._ ~ "", '" ,. tL*iaCor';bl.l.)S :~'-iiiL~/ ·I'kID6I;Af •• ~OI'i;: ...... ~""'!H-.lp.IO: ••. ' .... ,M~,., ".,.""~~""""' •• """"" """,~,~; lti'*"OOt"_.;·'~~rcJ~~·"~~.~.·~M,:~, ",,~,_ot...,,1J)S~ '*~-.'. ~~ ..... ··'·"L;;~""'1lc,*i"r6kA~~~.t~J .'.' ··,7ILi.o..,~' M~~~t.~~h' ... ' ,. , .. ,'"". ',' .• ...... ~~~~~i " • .,~~",",

.~

1bi.'~,~hoflt.· __ .,.~.~_ ... ,,~, _'~',~>tob'No,~ "~Mt~:1owl ,ofUee'~.1be~wl·"IQ~:""d"1b).OIlt~,wl"'WllId mdn~inlmkiQce'"(ree~ 1bb.' ..... _~ .... t#lbo~.bi ~tiOn,~.,tGCh.,f~.'~·.,~

'I'hc1tlM)'hi&blill.tftclackot,~~.~~t_,kcf'~·Qf.~;

tontrol$lAlCIY.,Fotln~~'b."dI6W_:~*.wbM~~.~, Jevclorlb~,nilatso'~,fO.~'60rbt*''''~_~~ IOcacbother.Bef'*theldVaUofd1oUl$,",~'~~"~Uco inleuatiQrls wu'hiPiylUbj~cth'C _#,l~on "'~.~ (I'''~;UtqQeitkm.

OvaIlJ.tb1Jltudy.~··_Ikc) ___ •• Ncw~W •• ~,_cmftlledto llocktinwbiCb •• poaidvo~lofthe;~o('lb hM: __ ~~:m.eaMot. pod1ive.diqOOllltbo"pm'Cmd.methodot~)l.,ttmup". ~.·~'no

e~ to this prd'eRntei$Ibc~y:_ot~·t.J!lftwNchwouW'~. tbeuso'gf·anal-.tivcc:bt:mkaL 1bc,~_'~c~ottM:IJ)Sf c:oncomillAtwithM·~,~~M"CW'mtlt~of~.Ytik

Ibjb~n'.adait'lNe~to."':pblbQpl.,atlice_OQ.YCQ··~

R,t,nAilo

BoraY. J .. CtLevOf. G .. W., Plans" 1.W.t JiulbcJ. ,.a, .and: Jobn$OO .• P~W*(988),·bsi ... ce ofthe·Sbeep BodyLol_DamalinlaovIlIOSyt'lthcdc~' tAu.ttmllanA~1S III· V~_lnaryScltnctJ 1988, 1»136.

De Chancct,O.C", Wi1kinSM.F~C. and Robcns. D., (1989), fRai.ranceof' Sheep mody Lb, it) Symhetic PyreUuokk in WC$tanAusntfat

l' Jlwm'alldftAdwlncu' lit Vel~StlM;ce 1989. 17()..172.

Blliott, J .• Jone~ A.L. and Pauley. J.R. (1986), 'The Erreet of Body Lkc on Wool Pmductiont,Austrailan Advanc«s In Vtttrlrla1ySclen.ce 1986. 125 .. 126.

-15~

Joiwon. :P~W.t Do:ay,;J.C. iPl!lOt,J.W, . .u4n.W$OQ"n. (1~~)t·ltc$b~Af:tho.'S_ :Bod)'·~.~tiIa(JV&fOS)~~~'tA~'-~·I,*'V'~ Scl,##1989. 1~16$"

Jobn~on.JlL(l97a), '~PubUc:'Pri~CQqQo1a~~fgr·~I;P~t.I'wJ. ~~.~st$~··andPi __ T~·a.n4Su~\:~:~ ... tt.1tb COQf~of,a;~ $ydMy,AuJ\tsl,.1918,

lOhnslOn,J~8. (l98l). '.PubtiC;PQIiw,~.M .. mept.~.,$~O_I~'. Un:PQbli$bedPh~ :J).n.'is.Ma;Q~·Uni~i'1' 5.,. JOIm$ton •. l.H.JUld.McJnnct..K.(198').·~.don,~inl Jl\ PQb1k:,PtJt~tml·., ~pce~lCdto"":21chAlUlUtlCoPrcmttOofthe·A'~A~:~ Bodety. Ouibeml, Februafy. 1913.

JohnitOn, J.1:L and'R~ BJ, (1987). ·11toCoil$QtPannl~doarot A;ricWtln1:Pat ManaI~ntwilb.P~ .. ltd'~tb.~·(kaiQ.~t.""'~ .• ()~:'I$( Annual·Cont~~ofthoA~A_~:~~,.,A"~F.6,~.'lg87*.

M4utinIOl1,B. (1986). 'UcoBradicatkm from tbe·~~ ofW~A.~~A:(!Qft. ·BenefitoftllcPrQpolII\Ul!pUbli*4',.,.ftltthc·.~_ .. ,~8~b, Wmem.AlWtNiQDcpan;mentof,A~,JWdJ.

Niven. :P~R. and Pricchanl.:D.A. (198S). ·SffOtl$ofConwl·of~S_p :Body Locl. (Dtl1rKl1ln1a (Nu)on Woot.~ i.nd Qu.dity·.A~_/~qf_dn1e_ AgricfUlUTe.25.21 .. 31.

WiUdnlOO.P.C. (1984), ·SbcepJ..b~.J;!p~alAM:~S_"(t_Sbb 1980 1983' .WorkbJg ~84~1, '~panm.entofA&riCuJnuc,.Pmh,

Wilkinson, F .. C. (1988), ·Licc,an41tCh~mlto· .~.s 110 ¢f1W~C<MWfor VelerifW'ians.P(mGradQ.teCommiueeinVe~ Sdenee.Um~.rl·S".

Wilkinson. P.c •• ·~·Ch~I,O.C. andB~,a.R,,(1982),'Growth.Qf<~I.don.()t U~,llflm4llnJa()V1s. onSbeep . .wl1ldrEffec;qon ~don··am4·:PIoto"nIPm~ of Wool'. Ve.rln(J1Y Partl$ilOlogy,9.243 .. 252 ..

WUJdnIOfl.F.C. nndBucknl.an.P.O. (l989). 'StatQShc!epUceConwol-Thc,tJce l)ctecdon Test (JJ)T)'.Plper~nted_mc. AllnQal Conf~ ot,thc Au~Ve~ AJ*iJltion,:Pertht'May.1989.