UK: Egg producers to budget for pre-housing salmonella test results

Section 6: E3 of the Lion Code now states that a full hygiene monitoring programme is to be completed before replacement birds are taken onto the farm. Photo: Canva

Egg producers in the UK should ensure they receive the results of their house swab tests before placing their pullets.

Although the UK’s Lion Code has required farmers to carry out pre-housing, this was amended and expanded last year, which has led to longer turnaround times and therefore additional costs for producers.

Section 6: E3 of the Lion Code now says: “The environment of the poultry house must be sampled for Salmonella Enteritidis, or Salmonella Typhimurium or monophasic Typhimurium contamination. Therefore, a full hygiene monitoring programme is to be completed before replacement birds are taken onto the farm. The results of the samples submitted for Salmonella testing must be available and be negative for a regulated Salmonella serovar before restocking.”

A tight turnaround time

Tom Davies of Country Fresh Pullets said producers needed to budget for a longer turnaround and therefore need at least 2 weeks to make sure they have a negative result back.

“Every day that a house is empty it is losing money and so naturally producers want as tight a turnaround as possible. Some multi-tier sites are turning around in as little as 7 days, but it takes between 4-7 days to turn around a salmonella test,” said Davies.

Mark Williams, former chief executive of the British Egg Industry Council (BEIC), said late last year that the process would potentially add 5 days to a turnaround to ensure the results are received in time.

“Veterinary advice is that it is simply too risky to place ‘clean’ pullets into a house without knowing its salmonella status. It would certainly be very risky from a financial point of view, and added to this, there could be some awkward questions asked by an insurance provider if birds were housed before the house had tested negative and the flock subsequently went positive.

“The majority of vets would also agree that by allowing the house to rest for a few extra days can help to reduce the general disease challenge to the replacement flock and production could benefit,” he noted.

“The amendment protects producers”

The amendment to the Lion Code helps to protect producers since the option of confirmatory testing was withdrawn. He wrote: “APHA have withdrawn the right of a producer to request one of the 3 so-called ‘confirmatory sampling methods’ (7 bootswabs/handswabs, 4,000 eggs or 300 carcasses). This means that if the operator or official sample is found to be positive for a regulated Salmonella serovar, it is in effect ‘one strike and out’. If birds were to be placed in a house before a negative result was received, which subsequently came back positive, the potential of the flock becoming infected is significantly increased, especially as it ages.”

He added: “BEIC has long argued that the current government policy is totally unacceptable and we continue to lobby government for confirmatory testing to be reinstated. Afterall, consumers eat eggs. There have been a number of examples where we do not believe a positive sample (especially in the case of ST) reflected the health status of the flock. In summary, the amendment protects producers as well as the Lion scheme in general.”

With regards to when the swab tests should be taken, Williams said: “The Lion Code states ‘post cleaning’, therefore, this could be carried out after washing with a detergent and prior to disinfection. Whilst the best approach would be to conduct swabbing after full disinfection, taking swabs part-way through the cleaning and disinfection programme could help ensure results are available without having to extend turnaround times.”