The percentage of salmonella-infected flocks of hens in Poland is still too high. The infection rate acceptable by the EU regulations is 1 percent for breeding flocks and 2 percent for the flocks of laying hens. However in 2010, Poland occupied the shameful first place among the EU countries with the infection rate among the flocks of breeding hens of 2.6 percent. 4.5 percent rate of infected flocks of laying hens gave our country the fourth position. In 2011, the situation improved only slightly.
Poland is a huge manufacturer and exporter of poultry products. It takes the fourth position in the EU in meat production (10.6 percent of production) and the sixth place as regards production of consumer eggs (8.5 percent). One third of production goes for export - nearly 33 percent of meat and more than 33 percent of eggs.
Subsequent National Anti-Salmonella Programmes financed from the EU funds do not bring expected results. One of the reasons is that they come into force with delay. Instead of on 1 January they become effective in April or May. These delays usually result from long-lasting arrangements among ministries. Before the Council of Ministers ratifies executive orders there is no legal basis in Poland to issue a decision to liquidate infected flocks, even if the disease is detected. This situation lowers effectiveness of the whole process of fighting salmonella.
NIK acknowledges efforts taken by the Chief Veterinary Doctor who recommended taking samples for tests even during breaks between the National Programmes. But without the capacity to liquidate infected flocks such activities proved ineffective. According to NIK, orders concerning such a self-evident matter should be issued by the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development so that the National Anti-Salmonella Programmes start to be effective on 1 January each year.
The audit showed as well that not all flocks of hens were covered by the National Anti-Salmonella Programmes. On the area of 11 District Veterinary Inspectorates covered by the audit, more than 10 percent of breeders did not report their activity to the district veterinary doctors although they were obliged to do so. On the other hand, the doctors did not perform obligatory audits that would detect such activity. It means that 166 hen breeds were not covered by the veterinary supervision or protection against salmonella.
Other minor irregularities were also identified in the work of district veterinary doctors. Some vets failed to inform doctors from neighbouring districts of having detected salmonella infection in their area (4 in 11 audited veterinary doctors failed to do so). That practice was particularly dangerous in terms of its consequences.
NIK also points to the necessity of developing clear criteria based on which compensation amounts for breeders due to damaged breeds are estimated. At present there are too big differences in estimates (even up to 109 percent). Calculations vary depending on the district and the appraiser who makes them.
