Six recommendations for improving monitoring of diseases shared with wildlife: examples regarding mycobacterial infections in Spain

Monitoring is needed to identify changes in
disease occurrence and to measure the impact of intervention.
Using mycobacterial diseases as an example, we
discuss herein the pros and cons of the current Spanish
Wildlife Disease Surveillance Scheme providing suggestions
for monitoring relevant diseases shared with wildlife
in other regions facing similar challenges. Six points should
be considered. This includes: (1) making sure the disease is
properly monitored in the relevant domestic animals or
even in humans; (2) also making sure that background
information on wildlife population ecology is available to
maximize the benefits of the monitoring effort; (3) selecting
the appropriate wildlife hosts for monitoring, while being
flexible enough to incorporate new ones if research
suggests their participation; (4) selecting the appropriate
methods for diagnosis and for time and space trend
analysis; (5) deciding which parameters to target for
monitoring; and finally (6) establishing a reasonable
sampling effort and a suitable sampling stratification to
ensure detecting changes over time and changes in response
to management actions. Wildlife disease monitoring produces
knowledge that benefits at least three different
agencies, namely, animal health, public health and conservation,
and these should combine efforts and resources.
Setting up stable, comprehensive and accurate schemes at
different spatial scales should become a priority. Resources
are always a limiting factor, but experience shows that
combined, cross-collaborative efforts allow establishing
acceptable schemes with a low enough cost to be
sustainable over time. These six steps for monitoring
relevant shared diseases can be adapted to many other
geographical settings and different disease situations.