Foot and Mouth Disease: 25 Years On – A Dutch Farmer’s Story

Monday, March 23, 2026 (19:14) – Friesch Dagblad

Twenty-five years ago, the Netherlands faced a devastating foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) outbreak, and the northeastern Friesland region was particularly hard hit. Veterinarian Peter Egberink, then chair of the Friesland department of the Royal Netherlands Veterinary Association (KNMvD), found himself at the center of the crisis. His early recognition of clinical signs on April 10, 2001, at a farm on Humaldawei – subsequently confirmed as the first case in Friesland involving farmer Piet Meindertsma – triggered a rapid escalation of events. Within days, dozens of farms were slated for culling.

Egberink recalls spending nearly two weeks immersed in the affected area, working alongside farmers and culling teams. The initial phase was swift; within ten days, the visibly infected area appeared largely cleared. Between sixty and seventy farms in Friesland were culled, representing a significant number of cattle, but with sheep disproportionately affected. The economic and social impact was stark: silent farms, stalled milking machines, and the loss of generations of breeding history and genetic lines for many farmers.

The Highly Contagious Nature of FMD

FMD proved exceptionally contagious. Egberink explained that infected animals can spread the virus even before developing antibodies, and recovered animals can remain carriers. At the time, a marker vaccine – a vaccine that allows vaccinated animals to be distinguished from infected ones – was unavailable. This lack significantly influenced policy, as export concerns took precedence. Countries were unwilling to import products from regions potentially harboring FMD, demanding guarantees of a virus-free status. These trade considerations heavily shaped the European non-vaccination policy and contributed to the culling of even seemingly healthy, vaccinated, or potentially exposed animals. The speed of transmission was alarming, with an estimated R0 value of around 14 – meaning one infected animal could infect many others in a short period – necessitating ring culling and immediate isolation measures.

The origin of the virus remained elusive. Theories circulated regarding the Rendac rendering plant in Sumar and wild geese, but prevailing wind directions and investigative reports rendered these explanations unlikely. The Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality (LNV) and the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA) were caught off guard by the outbreak in Friesland, which followed earlier cases in England and other parts of the Netherlands.

Resilience in the Face of Loss

Beyond the logistical and economic challenges, the outbreak took a significant social and emotional toll. Egberink expressed his admiration for the resilience demonstrated by many Friesland farmers. Most were able to rebuild their farms and look toward the future, though some were forced to abandon their livelihoods. The emotional aftermath also affected those involved in the response; Egberink remembers a lingering sensitivity to the sound of cranes, reminiscent of loading livestock for culling. Unlike some other regions, such as the Veluwe, Friesland generally exhibited a pragmatic and focused approach to controlling the disease, with less public resistance to the culling measures.

Egberink had publicly advocated in March 2001 for culling animals from at-risk areas as a justifiable measure, while also proposing large-scale vaccination and local meat consumption to circumvent export restrictions. These proposals weren’t feasible at the time, but a marker vaccine is now available, allowing vaccinated animals to potentially avoid culling and enabling meat exports. However, market reactions remain uncertain; if buyers refuse products from vaccinated animals, the sector faces difficult choices. Improvements in animal traceability and transfer registration since the 2001 outbreak represent a key “lesson learned,” aiming to reduce the risk of recurrence. You can find more information about the KNMvD, the Royal Netherlands Veterinary Association, at their official website.

The Role of Veterinary Expertise During the Crisis

Peter Egberink, a veterinarian at Dierenartsen Dokkum, graduated from Utrecht University in 1995. After working in a mixed practice in Brabant for two and a half years, he began working in Dokkum and surrounding areas in December 1997. His work focuses on supporting dairy farms, and he emphasizes the importance of monitoring and preventing gastrointestinal and lungworm in grazing cattle. His experience during the FMD crisis underscores the critical role veterinarians play in disease surveillance, control, and supporting the agricultural community. You can find more information about Peter Egberink on his LinkedIn profile.

The Friesch Dagblad’s series, of which this article is a part, reflects on the FMD crisis of twenty years ago, examining the technical, emotional, and administrative dimensions of a pivotal period for Friesland and the Dutch agricultural sector. The outbreak highlighted the interconnectedness of animal health, trade, and public policy, and the importance of preparedness and rapid response in the face of infectious disease threats.

Looking Ahead: Enhanced Surveillance and Preparedness

The lessons learned from the 2001 FMD outbreak have led to significant improvements in disease surveillance and traceability systems in the Netherlands. Ongoing monitoring programs, coupled with the availability of marker vaccines, provide a stronger foundation for preventing and controlling future outbreaks. However, maintaining vigilance and adapting to evolving threats remains crucial. Continued investment in research, diagnostic capabilities, and international collaboration will be essential to safeguarding animal health and protecting the Dutch agricultural sector.