Review of rabies virus risk in 
imported dogs, cats and 
canine semen from approved 
countries  
Final report  
January 2023 
 
Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
i © Commonwealth of Australia 2023 
Ownership of intellectual property rights 
Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights) in this publication is owned by the 
Commonwealth of Australia (referred to as the Commonwealth). 
Creative Commons licence 
All material in this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence  except 
content supplied by third parties, logos and the Commonwealth Coat of Arms. 
 
Cataloguing data 
This publication (and any material sourced from it) should be attributed as: Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and 
Forestry 2023, Review of rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries –final report, 
Canberra, October. CC BY 4.0. 
This publication is available at agriculture.gov.au/biosecurity-trade/policy/risk-analysis/animal/dogs_and_cats . 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
GPO Box 858 Canberra ACT 2601 
Telephone 1800 900 090 
Web agriculture.gov.au  
Disclaimer  
The Australian Government acting through the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has exercised due care 
and skill in preparing and compiling the information and data in this publication. Notwithstanding, the Department of 
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, its employees and advisers disclaim all liability, including liability for negligence and for 
any loss, damage, injury, expense or cost incurred by any person as a result of accessing, using or relying on any of the 
information or data in this publication to the maximum extent permitted by law.  
Acknowledgement of Country  
We acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of Australia and their continuing connection to land and sea, waters, 
environment and community. We pay our respects to the Traditional Custodians of the lands we live and work on, their 
culture, and their Elders past and present. 
  
Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
ii Contents 
Summary .............................................................................................................................. 1  
1 Background ................................................................................................................... 3  
1.1 Global distribution ...................................................................................................... 3  
2 Technical information.................................................................................................... 6  
2.1 Taxonomy .................................................................................................................... 6  
2.2 Agent properties ......................................................................................................... 7  
2.3 Epidemiology ............................................................................................................... 7  
2.4 Pathogenesis ............................................................................................................. 10  
2.5 Incubation period ...................................................................................................... 11  
2.6 Clinical signs .............................................................................................................. 11  
2.7 Pathology .................................................................................................................. 12  
2.8 Diagnosis ................................................................................................................... 13  
2.9 Immunology .............................................................................................................. 15  
2.10 Vaccination ................................................................................................................ 15  
2.11 Changes to trade in companion animals................................................................... 19  
2.12 Current biosecurity measures ................................................................................... 22  
3 Risk assessment .......................................................................................................... 25  
3.1 Entry assessment ...................................................................................................... 25  
3.2 Exposure assessment ................................................................................................ 27  
3.3 Estimation of the likelihood of entry and exposure ................................................. 29  
3.4 Consequence assessment ......................................................................................... 29  
3.5 Estimation of the likely consequences ...................................................................... 38  
3.6 Risk estimation .......................................................................................................... 39  
4 Risk management measures ........................................................................................ 40  
4.1 Pre-export risk management .................................................................................... 40  
4.2 Post-entry risk management ..................................................................................... 43  
4.3 Recommended pre-export measures ....................................................................... 46  
4.4 Recommended post-entry measures ........................................................................ 48  
5 Biosecurity measures for rabies virus ........................................................................... 48  
5.1 Importation of dogs or cats from group 1 approved countries ................................ 48  
5.2 Importation of dogs or cats from group 2 approved countries ................................ 49  
5.3 Importation of dogs or cats from group 3 approved countries ................................ 49  
Glossary ............................................................................................................................. 52  Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
iii References .......................................................................................................................... 55  
Tables 
Table 1 Classification of the species of the genus Lyssavirus, geographical distribution and their 
common reservoirs ................................................................................................................................. 6  
Table 2 Typical host reservoirs for RABV and their geographic location ................................................ 9  
Table 3 Frequently observed clinical signs of rabies in dogs and cats .................................................. 12  
Table 4 Guidelines for the vaccination of dogs and cats ...................................................................... 17  
Table 5 Dog and cat import permits issued and imports from 2014 to 2021 ....................................... 19  
Table 6 The approved countries groups under the current policy ....................................................... 22  
Table 7 Nomenclature for qualitative likelihoods ................................................................................ 25  
Table 8 Nomenclature for magnitude of effect .................................................................................... 32  
Table 9 Definition of geographic levels ................................................................................................. 33  
Table 10 Rules used for combining direct and indirect effects ............................................................ 38  
Table 11 Summary of risk assessment .................................................................................................. 39  
Table 12 Imports of companion animals incubating RABV since 2011 ................................................. 44  
Figures 
Figure 1 Matrix for combining likelihood of entry and exposure ......................................................... 29  
Figure 2 Assessment of direct or indirect effects on a national scale .................................................. 33  
Figure 3 Matrix for determining likely consequences: combining the likelihood and overall effect of 
establishment and / or spread .............................................................................................................. 39  
Figure 4 Risk estimation matrix ............................................................................................................ 39  
  Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
1 Summary 
The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry undertook this risk review to assess the rabies 
virus risk from the importation of dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries into 
Australia. 
This risk review takes into account new and relevant scientific information, and relevant changes in 
industry practices and operational practicalities. The department has carefully considered all 
comments received on the draft report released on 20 October 2022 and, where relevant, made 
changes prior to finalisation of this report. Out of scope for this risk review are illegal importation 
and smuggling, importation into external Australian territories, animal welfare, Australian 
immigration policy, and departmental fees and charges. 
Australia permits the importation of dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
(including approved territories and jurisdictions) into Australia. However, there has been significant 
changes to the volume of imports and increasing commercialisation of trade, which has increased 
the rabies biosecurity risk for the importation of dogs and cats. 
This risk review proposes revised rabies risk management measures that will reduce the risk 
associated with the importation of dogs and cats from approved countries into Australia to achieve 
Australia’s appropriate level of protection (ALOP).  The revised rabies risk management measures for 
the importation of dogs and cats from approved countries are outlined below. 
For imports from all approved countries: 
 Implantation with an ISO compatible microchip before commencing pre-export preparation.  
 Direct imports must be only from approved countries. 
 The animal has been examined within 5 days of export and showed no clinical signs of rabies. 
For imports from group 1 approved countries: 
 Residency within group 1 approved countries or Australia for 180 days (or since birth) before 
export to Australia. 
  Animals from group 1 approved countries do not require post-entry quarantine (PEQ). 
Imports from group 2 approved countries: 
 Residency within group 1 or 2 approved countries or Australia for 180 days (or since birth) 
before export to Australia. 
 A declaration by an official veterinarian, should accompany the import permit application, 
certifying that they have scanned the animal’s microchip, that the animal is microchipped with 
the stated microchip number and the location of the microchip. This must occur prior to 
commencing pre-export preparations. 
 Animals from group 2 approved countries continue to require a PEQ period of 10 days. 
Imports from group 3 approved countries: Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
2  Residency within approved countries or Australia for 180 days (or since birth) before export to 
Australia. 
 *A declaration by an official veterinarian, should accompany the import permit application, 
certifying that they have scanned the animal’s microchip, that the animal is microchipped with 
the stated microchip number and the location of the microchip. This must occur prior to 
commencing pre-export preparation. 
 * For Australian origin animals, evidence of the animals export from Australia (e.g. export 
permit) has been provided with the import permit application. 
 Vaccination with an inactivated rabies virus (RABV) vaccine approved by the competent 
authority in the country of export (produced in accordance with the methods prescribed in the 
World Organisation for Animal Health Manual of Diagnostics Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial 
Animals 2022 (WOAH Manual)), in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. 
Rabies vaccination must be current according to the manufacturer’s recommendations at all 
times from when blood was taken for RNATT and up to the time of export. 
 An RNATT of at least 0.5 IU/mL within 12 months (365 days) immediately before export. 
 An interval of at least 180 days and not more than 12 months (365 days) between the date of 
the blood sample for the RNATT arriving at the laboratory and the date of export to Australia. 
 Either 
- For returning animals of Australian origin or those that have had their identity confirmed by 
an official veterinarian, a PEQ period of at least 10 days is required if animals are prepared 
in compliance with the pre-export measures. 
OR  
- For all other animals prepared in compliance with the pre-export measures, a PEQ period of 
at least 30 days is required. 
 Where considered relevant by the department based on document assessment and/or analysis 
of trade patterns and intelligence data, additional post-entry verification activities to verify 
compliance with the pre-export measures. In such cases, animals may be held in PEQ until it can 
be determined that biosecurity risk has been satisfactorily managed. The longest this could be 
expected to take is 180 days but would typically be a much shorter period. 
* These conditions are optional and may not be applicable for all animals. However, meeting these 
conditions will allow dogs and cats to be eligible for a shorter PEQ period. 
There are no risk management measures proposed for the importation of canine semen for rabies 
from approved countries into Australia as the unrestricted biosecurity risk achieves ALOP. 
  Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
3 1 Background 
Rabies is a zoonotic, viral disease caused by neurotropic RNA viruses of the genus Lyssavirus in the 
family Rhabdoviridae (WHO 2021a; WOAH 2022c). Lyssaviruses are transmissible to all mammals 
and cause death with indistinguishable fatal encephalitis. Rare cases of natural infection have been 
reported in birds (Baby et al. 2015) but they are not considered important in the epidemiology of the 
disease. Historical records of rabies outbreaks date back at least 4,000 years in different continents 
(Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). 
Rabies virus (RABV) is the most important lyssavirus for public and animal health (WHO 2021a; 
WOAH 2022c). This virus can establish in new host species and geographical areas despite effective 
pre- and post-exposure vaccination regimens (Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). RABV causes 
approximately 59,000 human deaths each year globally, 95% of which occur in Africa and Asia (WHO 
2021a; WOAH 2022b). Domestic dogs are estimated to be responsible for transmission to humans in 
up to 99% of cases (WHO 2021a). 
Lyssaviruses are generally maintained in specific mammalian reservoir hosts, from which spill over 
into other mammals may occur. These spill over infections tend to lead to a dead end in the 
transmission chain. However, RABV is distributed more widely than other lyssaviruses and strains 
may have host shifts (ICTV 2021). Establishment and sustained circulation of RABV in new hosts have 
been documented (ICTV 2021). 
Infection with RABV and Australian bat lyssavirus (ABLV) are nationally notifiable animal diseases in 
Australia (DAFF 2022). Due to the serious public health implications, infection with RABV and ABLV 
are listed in Australia’s Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement (EADRA) as Category 1 
diseases. In the event of an outbreak, the Australian government will provide 100% of the funding 
necessary for the emergency response (AHA 2021b). 
Rabies is classified as a Neglected Tropical Disease (NTD) by the World Health Organization (WHO) 
(WHO 2021a). Infection with rabies virus is also a World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH)-
listed disease (WOAH 2022a). The WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Code (the WOAH Code), defines 
a rabies case as ‘any animal infected with rabies virus’ and ‘dog-mediated rabies is defined as any 
case caused by rabies virus maintained in the dog population ( Canis lupus familiaris ) independently 
of other animal reservoir species, as determined by epidemiological studies’ (WOAH 2022b). For the 
purposes of international trade, the WOAH Code recommends measures for RABV and not other 
lyssaviruses (WOAH 2022b). 
1.1 Global distribution 
RABV is found almost worldwide, exceptions include Antarctica, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, 
Japan and Hawaii (Singh et al. 2017; WHO 2021a). Other lyssaviruses appear to have more restricted 
geographical and host range (WOAH 2022c). The geographical distribution of RABV, based only on 
international reporting of human and domestic animal cases, is considered unreliable unless free-
ranging wildlife cases are also included (Rupprecht, Stohr & Meredith 2001). 
The WHO defines a dog-mediated RABV-free country as a country with no recorded indigenously 
acquired dog-mediated RABV cases in humans, dogs or any other animal species for at least 24 Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
4 months (WHO 2018b). The WOAH (2022b) defines a country or zone as free from infection with 
RABV when: 
 Infection with RABV is a notifiable disease in the entire country. 
 No case of rabies has been confirmed and there is ongoing surveillance for the past 24 months. 
 There is an appropriate recording and reporting system of animal diseases, and investigations 
are carried out for all susceptible animals showing clinical signs suggestive of rabies. 
1.1.1 Africa 
Africa has the highest per capita human death rate from RABV infection of any continent (Scott et al. 
2015). There are also substantial livestock losses as a result of RABV infection in Africa (Jibat, 
Hogeveen & Mourits 2015). Dogs are the reservoir and principal vectors for RABV (Cliquet & Picard-
Meyer 2004). However, several countries in Africa have self-declared freedom from dog-mediated 
RABV infections – including Cape Verde, Congo, Libya and Mauritius (Singh et al. 2017). In 2008 and 
2010, South Africa had two outbreaks of RABV infection. Several hundred dogs were suspected to 
have been infected and two human deaths were reported (Thys et al. 2021). Both outbreaks were 
brought under control through free mass vaccination of dogs (Thys et al. 2021). 
1.1.2 Asia 
Domestic dogs are the most significant reservoir of RABV throughout Asia, with wildlife believed to 
play a lesser role (Rupprecht, Stohr & Meredith 2001). The disease is generally not notifiable and 
largely uncontrolled in most Asian countries. Thousands of human cases are reported annually 
(Cliquet & Picard-Meyer 2004). The South Asian region has the highest numbers of RABV infections, 
with most outbreaks occurring in India and Bangladesh (Singh et al. 2018). Cambodia, China, Lao, 
Malaysia, Mongolia, the Philippines and Vietnam are considered high risk for rabies in the Western 
Pacific region (WHO 2021b). 
WHO declared Taiwan rabies free in 1961 (Shih et al. 2018). In mid-2013 Taiwan reported multiple 
confirmed RABV cases in wild Taiwanese ferret badgers based on testing of historical brain 
specimens collected during May 2010 to December 2012 (Huang et al. 2015; OIE 2013). Spill over 
cases of RABV into six masked palm civets, a house shrew and a dog were documented by December 
2017 (Huang et al. 2015; Shih et al. 2018). RABV is now considered endemic in wildlife in Taiwan 
(WOAH 2022h). 
Since 2013, Malaysia has responded to several outbreaks in both Peninsular Malaysia and Sarawak. 
In Peninsular Malaysia, RABV incursions have been associated with suspected illegal movements of 
dogs from neighbouring countries via land and fishing boats (OIE 2015). Vaccination and public 
education campaigns have been effective in resolving incursions of RABV in Peninsular Malaysia. 
However, there has been an outbreak of RABV in Sarawak since mid-2017 (OIE 2021a). Both human 
and domestic animal cases have been recorded in Sarawak since the start of this outbreak. This 
RABV incursion is thought to have originated from southern Kalimantan (Indonesia), where RABV has 
been endemic since 1906 (Sim et al. 2021). The local Sarawak government has declared the RABV 
infection is an evolving epidemic in Sarawak (Sim et al. 2021). To June 2021, 35 human cases have 
been recorded, with only two survivors with severe neurological complications (Outbreak News 
Today 2021). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
5 1.1.3 Australia 
Australia is free from RABV. The last reported suspected case of rabies in animals was in 1867 (AHA 
2021a, b). Two human cases of overseas-acquired rabies were reported in 1987 and 1990 (AHA 
2021b). Historically, Australia was considered free from lyssaviruses until the discovery of ABLV in 
1996 (Field 2018). ABLV is genetically distinct from RABV but similar antigenically (AHA 2021b). ABLV 
has been isolated from flying foxes and is widespread in Australian bat taxa (Field 2018). Infection 
with both RABV and ABLV are nationally notifiable animal diseases in Australia (DAFF 2022) and are 
classified as EADRA category 1 diseases, meaning the costs for any disease response would be 
covered by the Australian government (AHA 2021b). No other lyssaviruses have been identified in 
Australia (AHA 2021b). 
1.1.4 North America 
The United States and Canada are considered to be free from dog-mediated rabies. The last 
documented locally acquired cases of RABV in domestic dogs were in the mid-1970s and mid-1960s 
respectively (Fehlner-Gardiner 2018). RABV is still endemic in wildlife in North America. Control of 
rabies is difficult in North America as it is epizootic in raccoons, skunks, and several species of bats 
and foxes (Fehlner-Gardiner 2018; Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). 
There have been four imported cases of rabies in dogs in the United States since 2015 (OIE 2021b; 
Pieracci et al. 2021; ProMED 2020, 2021), and two cases in Canada, one in 2021 and another one in 
2022 (OIE 2021d, 2022). Five cases of rabies in domestic dogs were reported in the southern part of 
Mexico in 2015 (Fehlner-Gardiner 2018). 
1.1.5 Central and South America 
RABV is enzootic in wildlife throughout Central and South America, including the Caribbean islands 
(Cliquet & Picard-Meyer 2004; Meske et al. 2021; Seetahal et al. 2018). Dog-mediated rabies has 
been controlled in most countries in Central and South America in the last decade following intense 
public vaccination campaigns (Campos et al. 2020). Over the past 35 years, RABV cases in dogs and 
humans have declined by 95% in the region (PAHO 2018). Dog-mediated rabies is still endemic in 
Bolivia, Guatemala, Haiti and the Dominican Republic (WOAH 2022g, e, f, d) and they contribute to 
most rabies cases in Central and South America. The remaining cases are isolated reports from 
Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Peru and Venezuela (PAHO 2018). 
The common vampire bat ( Desmodus rotundus ) is now the major sylvatic RABV reservoir in South 
America (Meske et al. 2021). Meske et al. (2021) found that around 70% of human RABV cases were 
transmitted by bats in South America. Rabies control programs in wildlife are still not well 
established in Central and South America due to financial constraints (OIE 2021b). 
1.1.6 Europe 
Rabies is notifiable in most of Europe (Cliquet, Picard-Meyer & Robardet 2014). The red fox ( Vulpes 
vulpes ) is the most important reservoir host of RABV in Europe (Gossner et al. 2020). Western and 
central European countries have implemented effective oral rabies vaccination programs for foxes 
(Cliquet, Picard-Meyer & Robardet 2014; Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). 
Many European countries have declared freedom from dog-mediated rabies but RABV still persists in 
wildlife and farmed animals (Gossner et al. 2020; Vega et al. 2021). The number of animal RABV 
infections in the European Union has dropped from more than 800 cases in 2010 to only 4 cases in Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
6 2019 (Gossner et al. 2020). The majority of human RABV cases in Europe are travel-related with 
infection acquired in other parts of the world (Gossner et al. 2020). 
2 Technical information 
2.1 Taxonomy 
There are eighteen identified lyssaviruses. The International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses 
(ICTV) categorises lyssaviruses into two phylogroups with one unclassified virus and three additional 
species considered independent from these two phylogroups, based on genetic similarity and 
serological cross-reactivity (ICTV 2021). The taxonomy of lyssaviruses, their geographic range and 
reservoir hosts are summarised in Table 1  below. 
Recently lyssa-like viruses have been identified in amphibians and reptiles by screening of publicly 
available sequence data (Horie et al. 2021; Oberhuber et al. 2021). The significance of this finding is 
unclear and further work is required. 
Table 1 Classification of the species of the genus Lyssavirus, geographical distribution 
and their common reservoirs 
Phylogroup  Virus name Distribution /Countries of virus 
isolation  Most common reservoir 
based on virus detection  
I Aravan virus Central Asia / Kyrgyzstan Lesser mouse-eared bat 
Australian bat lyssavirus Australia / Australia  Frugivorous and 
insectivorous bats (Black 
flying fox, yellow-bellied 
sheath-tailed bat) 
Bokeloh bat lyssavirus Europe / France and Germany Natterer’s bat 
Duvenhage virus Southern Africa / Kenya and South 
Africa Insectivorous bats 
European bat lyssavirus 1 Europe/ Belgium, Denmark, France, 
Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, 
Russia, Slovakia, Spain and Ukraine Insectivorous bats (Serotine 
bat) 
European bat lyssavirus 2 Europe / Denmark, Finland, France, 
Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, 
Switzerland and the United Kingdom Insectivorous bats 
(Daubenton’s bat) 
Gannoruwa bat lyssavirus Asia / Sri Lanka Indian flying fox 
Irkut lyssavirus East Siberia / China and Russia Insectivorous bats (Greater 
tube-nosed bat) 
Khujand virus Central Asia / Tajikistan Insectivorous bats 
(Whiskered bat) 
Taiwan bat lyssavirus Asia /Taiwan Japanese house bat 
Rabies virus Worldwide (except several islands 
including Australia) Carnivores and bats   
 
II Lagos bat virus Africa / Central African Republic, 
Ethiopia, France#, Ghana, Nigeria, 
Senegal, South Africa and Zimbabwe Numerous frugivorous bats Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
7 Phylogroup  Virus name Distribution /Countries of virus 
isolation  Most common reservoir 
based on virus detection  
Mokola virus Sub-Saharan Africa / Cameroon, 
Central African Republic, Ethiopia, 
Nigeria, South Africa and Zimbabwe Shrews, rodents and 
domestic cats 
Shimoni bat virus East Africa / Kenya Commerson’s leaf-nosed 
bat 
Independent 
 Ikoma lyssavirus Africa / Tanzania African civet 
Lleida bat lyssavirus Europe / Spain Common bent-winged bat 
West Caucasian bat 
lyssavirus Caucasian region / Russia Insectivorous bats 
(Common bent-winged bat)  
Unclassified  Kotolahti bat lyssavirus Europe / Finland Brandt’s bat 
# It is unknown whether the infected animals arrived in France from Egypt or Togo. 
(Fooks et al. 2017; ICTV 2021; Lan et al. 2017; Vega et al. 2021; WHO 2018b). 
2.2 Agent properties 
RABV is an enveloped bullet-shaped negative-stranded RNA virus of the Rhabdoviridae family 
(Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018; WHO 2021a). RABV is small, with a compact genome of about 12 
kb encoding five proteins (Brunker & Mollentze 2018). 
RABV is rapidly inactivated outside a host. It is sensitive to both very low and very high pH (OIE 
2014). RABV can be inactivated by desiccation, sunlight, and a range of chemicals including sodium 
hypochlorite, 45-75% ethanol, quaternary ammonium disinfectants in 1:500 dilution, 5-7% iodine 
solution, formaldehyde, phenol, ether, trypsin, and hydrogen peroxide (OIE 2014; Willoughby 2015; 
Wu et al. 2017). 
2.3 Epidemiology 
2.3.1 Lyssaviruses and their hosts 
Most lyssaviruses have natural reservoir hosts as outlined above in Table 1 . These natural reservoir 
hosts are usually within the Carnivora and Chiroptera orders and have a global distribution (Fooks et 
al. 2017; WHO 2021a). Sixteen of the eighteen lyssaviruses have bats as reservoir hosts and have 
limited public and animal health implications (Vega et al. 2021; WOAH 2022c). While some of these 
lyssaviruses have reservoir hosts and geographical ranges that are well documented (for example 
EBLVs in Europe), others are poorly defined. 
Cross-species transmission (spill over) is the ability of a virus to infect a member of a new host 
species. For lyssaviruses, this normally results in ‘dead-end’ infections with no further spread to 
other hosts (Fooks et al. 2017). Reported spill over hosts of RABV include all mammals such as 
humans, cattle, horses, cats, and wildlife; for example, foxes, skunks, wolves, racoons and monkeys. 
Poultry, rodents and lagomorphs can also be spill over hosts of RABV but this rarely occurs (Baby et 
al. 2015; Fitzpatrick et al. 2014). 
Some species show more resistance to RABV infection than others, requiring a higher exposure dose 
to induce infection (Niezgoda, Hanlon & Rupprecht 2002). Species regarded as moderately 
susceptible include felids, mustelids (badgers, ferrets and minks), primates and ungulates (Niezgoda, 
Hanlon & Rupprecht 2002). Cats are effective vectors for transmission; however, there are no known Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
8 RABV strains adapted to felids (Rupprecht, Stohr & Meredith 2001). Lagomorphs, rodents, and 
insectivores are considered most resistant (Niezgoda, Hanlon & Rupprecht 2002). 
Potential wild or feral hosts (foxes, wild canids and feral cats) are widespread in Australia. In some 
places, foxes and wild canids are in sufficient densities to become maintenance hosts for RABV. It 
was estimated that foxes ( Vulpes vulpes ) and wild dogs inhabit about 76% and 83% of Australia, 
respectively (West 2008). There are large populations of free-roaming community dogs in 
communities in Northern Australia. Feral cats are also potential spill over hosts. 
The susceptibility of Australian native animals to infection with RABV is unknown (AHA 2021b). Rare 
cases of RABV have been documented in American marsupials (Virginia opossum) (Diana, Mitchell & 
Feldman 2015) and this may indicate that Australian marsupials are also susceptible. It is possible 
that if infected, Australian native mammals in the orders Chiroptera, Carnivora (dingoes) and 
Dasyuromorphia (antechinus, dunnart, quoll, Tasmanian devil) could contribute to the maintenance 
of a sylvatic cycle of RABV. 
2.3.2 RABV and its epidemiological cycles  
RABV is different from other lyssaviruses as it has multiple independent transmission cycles 
established in a broad range of reservoir hosts (WHO 2018b). RABV has adapted to each reservoir 
independently, leading to host-specific maintenance cycles. These are known as the urban and 
sylvatic cycles (Singh et al. 2017). Dogs are the main reservoir host in the urban RABV cycle which is 
dominant in Africa, Asia, and Central America (Singh et al. 2017; WHO 2021a). The sylvatic cycle is 
the predominant cycle in the North and South America, and Europe (Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018; 
Meske et al. 2021; WHO 2018b). Both cycles are present simultaneously in some parts of the world. 
RABV transmits sporadically from the primary reservoir hosts to domestic animals and humans. 
These spill over transmissions rarely lead to the establishment of new maintenance cycles (Brunker 
& Mollentze 2018; OIE 2014; WHO 2018b). Different independent maintenance cycles may occur 
simultaneously within one geographic region (WHO 2018b). Table 2  outlines the typical reservoirs 
host for RABV and their geographic location. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
9 Table 2 Typical host reservoirs for RABV and their geographic location 
Geographic location Typical carnivore reservoir hosts for RABV 
Africa domestic dog ( Canis lupus familiaris ) 
jackals ( Canis adustus  and C. mesomelas ) 
mongoose ( Herpestes  spp.) 
Middle East and Asia domestic dog ( Canis lupus familiaris ) 
red fox ( Vulpes vulpes ) 
ferret badger ( Melogale moschata ) 
golden jackals ( Canis aureus ) 
Europe red fox ( Vulpes vulpes ) 
raccoon dog ( Nyctereutes procyonoides ) 
North America raccoon ( Procyon lotor ) 
grey fox ( Urocyon cinereoargenteus ) 
striped skunk ( Mephitis mephitis ) 
coyote ( Canis latrans ) 
South America common vampire bat ( Desmodus rotundus ) 
domestic dog ( Canis lupus familiaris ) 
crab-eating fox ( Cerdocyon thous ) 
marmoset ( Callithrix jacchus ) 
Caribbean islands domestic dog ( Canis lupus familiaris ) 
small Indian mongoose ( Herpestes auropunctatus ) 
Eurasian and American arctic and 
subarctic regions arctic fox ( Alopex lagopus ) 
(Meske et al. 2021; WHO 2018b) 
2.3.3 Transmission 
Transmission of RABV usually occurs via bites from rabid animals, which shed the virus in their saliva. 
RABV then enters the body via these wounds (transdermal inoculation) or by direct contact on skin 
lesions or mucous membranes (WHO 2021a). RABV cannot penetrate intact skin (WHO 2021a) but 
may enter through scratches and abrasions (Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). Rarely, oral exposure, 
for example licks and consumption of carcasses of infected animals has resulted in clinical rabies or 
immunity, depending on the dose of virus (Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018; Niezgoda, Hanlon & 
Rupprecht 2002). 
Indirect transmission can occur but is rare as the virus inactivates rapidly in the environment 
(Rupprecht, Hanlon & Hemachudha 2002). RABV transmission by aerosols has also been reported 
but is limited to environments with high concentrations of virus (Bowen-Davies & Lowings 2000; 
Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). These include bat caves with large groups of bats or in laboratories 
(Bowen-Davies & Lowings 2000; Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). No hematogenous or congenital 
transmission of RABV has been reported. Blood, urine, and faeces of rabid animals have not been 
shown to transmit RABV (Willoughby 2015). 
Dogs 
Dogs are the main reservoir host in the urban RABV cycle (OIE 2014). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
10 Dog semen 
There is no evidence of transmission of lyssaviruses including RABV through dog semen (AHA 
2021b). 
Cats 
Cats may shed RABV in saliva (Trimarchi, Rudd & Abelseth 1986). Despite being able to transmit 
RABV effectively, cats (domestic or wild) are not usually maintenance hosts (Rupprecht, Hanlon & 
Hemachudha 2002). Rabid cats are spill over infections of the dominant geographic biotype from 
maintenance host species. However, vaccination programs for domestic cats are present in countries 
such as Sri Lanka, where cats are free to roam, to reduce the transmission of rabies from stray cats 
and dogs to humans (Jayasundara 2020). 
Humans 
In Africa and Asia, human RABV infections are mainly transmitted through bites from rabid dogs 
(Begeman et al. 2018). As dog-mediated RABV infection is well controlled by vaccination programs, 
bats have become important in transmission to humans in the past decade, especially in South 
America (Begeman et al. 2018; Meske et al. 2021). Human-to-human transplacental transmission of 
RABV and by tissue and organ transplants has been reported (Zhou et al. 2016). There are rare 
instances of human survival of clinical rabies without post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), which 
generally involved bat variants. This is most likely due to infection with less neurotropic and less 
uniformly lethal wild strains of RABVs rather than carnivore RABVs (Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). 
2.4 Pathogenesis 
Following a bite from a rabid animal, the virus enters and replicates within myocytes or 
macrophages in muscle, where it sequesters during the incubation period. RABV then crosses the 
neuromuscular junction and enters the exposed neuronal terminals of sensory and motor peripheral 
nerves (Begeman et al. 2018; Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018; Singh et al. 2017). Replication 
continues once the virus is within neuronal tissue (Singh et al. 2018). 
RABV ascends to the central nervous system (CNS) via retrograde transport within neuronal axons, 
utilising cellular transport mechanisms (Begeman et al. 2018; Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018; Singh 
et al. 2017). This centripetal movement often occurs via multiple motor and/or sensory nerves 
(Begeman et al. 2018; Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). Speed of RABV spread to the CNS is variable 
but can be fast, with up to 100mm/day reported (Singh et al. 2017). 
RABV may also be transmitted by the intranasal route. In these rare cases, the virus enters 
trigeminal nerves and ganglia en route to the CNS via branches of the cranial nerves (Greene 2013). 
Transmission via the oro-gastrointestinal route, is thought to require mucosal abrasions to allow 
viral passage into innervated muscle or neuronal tissue in the gastrointestinal tract (Fisher, Streicker 
& Schnell 2018). 
Within neuronal tissue, RABV spreads via synapses connecting the axons or dendrites (Begeman et 
al. 2018). From the spinal cord, RABV spread to the cerebral cortex, cerebellum, diencephalon, 
midbrain, pons, and medulla oblongata using synaptically connected neurons in sensory or motor 
tracts. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
11 Within the brain, RABV is disseminated preferentially to the limbic areas, thalamic nuclear, reticular 
formation, and trigeminal and vagal nuclei (Greene 2013). Disease is caused by neuronal dysfunction 
rather than damage in these areas (Greene 2013; Singh et al. 2018). Infection within the limbic area 
results in behavioural changes, including loss of fear of humans and aggression, which contributes to 
the ongoing transmission of RABV through bites (Singh et al. 2018). Death ultimately occurs due to 
the interference with cardiorespiratory control (Greene 2013). 
From the brain, RABV is then transported centrifugally via nerves to the peripheral tissue at a rate of 
100-400mm/day (Begeman et al. 2018; Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018; Greene 2013). The virus is 
most commonly found in neurons, although it can enter any other cell type (Begeman et al. 2018; 
Greene 2013). RABV may enter the acinar cells of the salivary glands, where it will replicate and be 
shed into the saliva, enabling transmission to the next host (Begeman et al. 2018; Dietzschold et al. 
2008; Greene 2013; Singh et al. 2017). Sometimes death may occur before peripheral spread to the 
salivary gland (Greene 2013). 
Pathogenesis may vary between RABV strains (Katz et al. 2016; Mesquita et al. 2017; Morimoto et al. 
1996). More pathogenic RABV strains appear to be more neuroinvasive and better able to sequester 
from the immune response (Scott & Nel 2016). Experimentally, highly attenuated RABV strains were 
associated with more robust immune responses and non-lethal outcomes compared to wild strains 
in dog models (Gnanadurai et al. 2015). 
2.5 Incubation period 
In natural RABV infections, the incubation period varies. Shorter incubation periods are associated 
with the transmission of a high viral load, at a site close to the CNS, and where there is a high degree 
of exposed peripheral neuronal terminals (for example skin and skeletal muscles) (Begeman et al. 
2018; Fekadu 1982; Greene 2013; Ward & Brookes 2021). 
The incubation period for RABV can range from 10 days to 6 months (Greene 2013; Sparkes et al. 
2015). The WOAH Code defines the incubation period of infection with RABV as six months (WOAH 
2022b). The majority of animals infected with RABV will develop clinical disease within this time 
period (WOAH 2022b). Cases in dogs and cats with incubation periods over six months are rare (AHA 
2021b). 
The Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan (AUSVETPLAN) for lyssaviruses states the incubation 
period of rabies to be from 10 days to 6 months (AHA 2021b). 
2.6 Clinical signs 
There are no pathognomonic clinical signs for rabies (Niezgoda, Hanlon & Rupprecht 2002; WOAH 
2022c) and atypical signs are common (Greene 2013). Clinical signs occur once the virus reaches the 
CNS (Sparkes et al. 2015). Once clinical signs appear, the disease is usually fatal (Singh et al. 2018; 
Sparkes et al. 2015). Death occurs within ten days of clinical signs appearing in dogs (Niezgoda, 
Hanlon & Rupprecht 2002; Tepsumethanon et al. 2004). 
Increased aggression and the tendency to bite are commonly seen in rabid dogs (Hampson et al. 
2009). The WOAH (2022b) defines a suspected case for the purpose of surveillance as ‘a susceptible 
animal that shows any change in behaviour followed by death within 10 days, or that shows any of Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
12 the following clinical signs: hypersalivation, paralysis, lethargy, abnormal aggression, abnormal 
vocalisation’. 
The frequently observed clinical signs are summarised in Table 3 . Not all cases progress through 
each phase or type. 
Table 3 Frequently observed clinical signs of rabies in dogs and cats 
Phase or type Dogs Cats 
Prodromal phase Length 2 to 3 days 
Variable fever 
Licking wound site 
Apprehensive, nervous, anxious  
Friendly animals become shy or irritable 
Fractious animals become docile and affectionate 
Pupillary dilation +/- sluggish palpebral or corneal 
reflexes Length 1 to 2 days 
Fever spike 
Unusual or erratic behaviour 
Furious/psychotic 
type Length 1 to 7 days 
Restless, irritable, photophobic, hyperaesthetic, 
vicious, cage aggression 
Roaming, hiding 
Pica 
Muscle incoordination, disorientation or grand mal 
seizures 
May be followed by a short paralytic phase  
Death during a seizure Length 2 to 5 days 
Most common form in cats 
Erratic and unusual behaviour 
Anxious, cage aggression 
Muscle tremors and weakness, 
incoordination, staggering 
Blank eyes 
Run until they die 
 
Paralytic type Length 2 to 4 days 
Lower motor neuron paralysis spreading from the 
wound site until the entire CNS is affected 
Change in bark 
Excessive salivation (paralysis of laryngeal muscles 
preventing swallowing) 
Dropped jaw (paralysis of the masticatory muscles) 
Deep laboured breathing 
Coma and death due to respiratory failure Length 2 to 10 days (death usually 
occurs after 3 to 4 days of paralytic 
signs) 
Sometimes no furious phase first 
Paralysis of bitten extremity then 
paraparesis 
Incoordination 
Ascending or generalised paralysis 
Increased vocalisation frequency and 
change in voice pitch 
Coma and death due to respiratory 
failure 
(Greene 2013). 
2.7 Pathology 
RABV infection does not cause gross pathological changes (Greene 2013; Singh et al. 2017). In the 
early centripetal stage of the disease, histopathological lesions are not present at the entry site or in 
the peripheral nerves (Begeman et al. 2018). 
Histopathological changes within the CNS can vary in severity and be completely absent in some 
areas of the CNS (Begeman et al. 2018). Changes tend to be more pronounced the longer the disease 
course (Greene 2013) but some histopathological changes are always found at the end stage of the 
disease (Begeman et al. 2018). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
13 Histopathological changes in the brain and spinal cord may include gliosis, neuron necrosis, 
perineural and perivascular infiltration of mononuclear cells (lymphocytes, plasma cells) and 
neutrophils, neuronophagia, and eosinophilic inclusions (Negri bodies) in the cytoplasm of neuronal 
cells (Begeman et al. 2018; Singh et al. 2017). Most of these histopathological changes are found 
within the hypothalamus (Plotkin 2000). Thrombosis may also be seen in the brain stem, 
hypothalamus and limbic system (Singh et al. 2017). In cats, spongiform lesions may appear as 
vacuolation in the neuropile of the thalamus and inner layers of the cerebral cortex (Greene 2013). 
Following centrifugal spread of RABV to the periphery, Wallerian degeneration and mononuclear cell 
infiltration can be found in peripheral nerves. Neuronal necrosis and mononuclear cell infiltration 
can be seen in dorsal root ganglia (Begeman et al. 2018). At the end stage of disease, degeneration 
of non-neuronal tissue can sometimes be seen in the salivary glands, lacrimal glands, pancreas and 
adrenal medullae (Jackson 2003; McKay & Wallis 2005). 
2.8 Diagnosis 
Due to the non-specific and variable clinical signs of rabies, a diagnosis based on clinical signs only is 
not possible. Common clinical signs may lead to a suspicion of rabies, which should then be 
confirmed by testing. Diagnostic tests that identify the virus or some of the virus’ specific 
components are required to make a definitive diagnosis (WOAH 2022b, c). Recommended samples 
for these tests in animals are brain tissue, however, other samples (such as salivary glands) have also 
been used with variable sensitivity and specificity (WOAH 2022c). Laboratory technicians should take 
suitable precautions when handling potentially infected brain tissue (Singh et al. 2018; Singh et al. 
2017). 
2.8.1 Identification of the agent 
A range of brain tissues should be tested for rabies to reduce the occurrence of false negative results 
(AHA 2021b; WOAH 2022c). The WOAH (2022c) recommends that these brain tissues should include 
brain stem, Ammon’s horn, thalamus, cerebral cortex, cerebellum and medulla oblongata. 
Immunochemical identification of rabies virus antigens 
The direct fluorescent antibody test (DFA test or dFAT) is recommended by the WHO and WOAH for 
confirmation of population freedom and clinical cases, and for surveillance and eradication programs 
(WOAH 2022c). Fluorescein-labelled antibody conjugate is used to detect virus nucleocapsid protein 
antigens. Due to the antigenic similarity of all lyssavirus nucleoproteins, this test does not 
differentiate between lyssaviruses (AHA 2021b). 
The DFA test is recommended to be run on a direct impression smear of fresh composite brain 
tissue, which includes the brain stem and cerebellum (WOAH 2022c). The DFA test has a 100% 
sensitivity, however, this will be reduced if the tissue samples are autolysed or are not composite 
samples (Singh et al. 2017). The specificity of the test is between 96-99% (WOAH 2022c). 
The DFA test is rapid and results can be provided in under two hours (Singh et al. 2018; Singh et al. 
2017; WOAH 2022c). The test reagents are low cost, however, the fluorescence microscope required 
to read the result is costly. 
A direct rapid immunohistochemical test (dRIT) is also available for the detection of rabies antigens 
(Madhusudana et al. 2012; Singh et al. 2018; WOAH 2022c). This test is often used in low- and Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
14 middle-income countries where diagnostic laboratories do not have access to a fluorescence 
microscope (Scott et al. 2015; WOAH 2022c). The sensitivity and specificity of the dRIT has been 
shown to be similar to the DFA test (Ali et al. 2014; Scott et al. 2015). Its efficacy for local RABV 
strains should be validated before application due to regional diversity of lyssaviruses (WOAH 
2022c). 
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) have also been developed for the detection of 
lyssavirus antigens. These are useful for large epidemiological surveys. The efficacy for the local 
circulating lyssaviruses should be assessed before application (WOAH 2022c). 
Virus isolation 
Isolation of RABV from brain tissue can be used as a confirmatory test when other tests are 
inconclusive. Virus isolation by cell culture is preferred over the mouse inoculation test (WOAH 
2022c). 
Polymerase chain reaction 
The WOAH (2022c) describes two polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for the detection of 
lyssavirus RNA. If composite brain tissue samples (which include the brain stem and cerebellum) are 
used, these have a similar sensitivity and specific to the DFA test or dRIT (WOAH 2022c). These 
assays may be used for confirmation of population freedom and clinical cases, and for surveillance 
and eradication programs (WOAH 2022c). 
A number of other PCR assays, which are highly specific for a particular strain of lyssavirus, have also 
been described. An inconclusive result on a strain-specific PCR assay should be confirmed by other 
diagnostic means. Sequencing can be used to determine specific viral types (AHA 2021b; WOAH 
2022c). 
2.8.2 Histological identification of characteristic cell lesions 
Examination of histopathological lesions is no longer recommended as a routine diagnostic tool for 
RABV (WOAH 2022c). The process is expensive, time consuming and has a low sensitivity as 
‘classical’ Negri bodies are not always detectable (Singh et al. 2017; WOAH 2022c). 
2.8.3 Serological tests 
Serological tests should not be used for the diagnosis of RABV (AHA 2021b; Greene 2013; Singh et al. 
2018; WOAH 2022c). Animals infected with RABV may not produce sufficient antibodies pre-mortem 
to be reliably detected in the serum (Greene 2013; Singh et al. 2018). 
Virus neutralisation serological tests are more commonly used to detect serologic responses to RABV 
vaccination (AHA 2021b; WOAH 2022c). The fluorescent antibody virus neutralisation test (FAVN) 
and the rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test (RFFIT) are recommended for measuring vaccination 
response before international animal movement or trade (WOAH 2022c). These tests are referred to 
collectively as rabies neutralising antibody titre tests (RNATT). The WOAH Code has set the standard 
for demonstration of an adequate serological response to RABV vaccination before international 
animal movement at 0.5 international units (IU)/mL (WOAH 2022b). 
There are ELISAs available which can detect RABV antibodies. However, none are validated for their 
application in international animal movement or trade (WOAH 2022c). These ELISAs have been used 
to detect serological response in post mass vaccination surveys; for example, oral vaccination Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
15 campaigns. ELISAs should be validated before being applied in each local setting due to significant 
variations in animal species being surveyed and the circulating RABV strains (WOAH 2022c). Until 
further information is available, ELISAs cannot be considered to replace RNATTs for validation of 
serological response to vaccination before international movement of an animal (WOAH 2022c). 
2.9 Immunology 
RABV is well adapted to avoiding and suppressing the host immune system. These mechanisms 
occur at the exposure site and include sequestration of innate immune responses, which negatively 
impact the later development of adaptive immune responses. This also allows the virus to replicate 
more efficiently in the muscle tissue, assisting neuroinvasion (Scott & Nel 2016). Clinically, there is a 
distinct absence of serological responses during this incubation phase (Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 
2018). Within nerve tissue, the virus causes minimal neuronal cell damage and apoptosis, which 
reduces the release of antigens; induces peripheral immunosuppression; and attracts non-RABV 
specific lymphocytes into the CNS, reducing lymphocytes in the periphery (Lafon 2002; Singh et al. 
2018; Wiktor, MacFarlan & Koprowski 1985). RABV may also be able to utilise immune cells to assist 
spread throughout the peripheral nervous system (Scott & Nel 2016). In contrast, attenuated RABV 
strains have been shown in experimental studies to induce stronger immune response, which is 
associated with protection from lethal outcomes (Gnanadurai et al. 2015). 
Fatal infections produce little or no virus neutralising antibody titre in serum (Gerber et al. 1985; 
Manickam, Basheer & Jayakumar 2008; Swanepoel 1994). Low level serological responses have been 
reported in some experimental infections in dogs (Fekadu & Baer 1980; Gnanadurai et al. 2015). 
Gnanadurai et al. (2015) reported serum virus neutralising antibodies were on average 0.12 IU/mL 
and 0.31 IU/mL at 7 and 21 days post intramuscular infection with a wild RABV strain in a dog model. 
All dogs showed clinical signs consistent with rabies at 19 to 30 days post infection and were 
euthanased when they developed hind limb paralysis at 21 to 31 days post infection (Gnanadurai et 
al. 2015). 
Reports of dogs surviving infection are rare. In addition to their rarity, reports of survival due to 
natural immunity are unclear as dogs are often euthanised before 180 days post challenge (Fekadu 
& Baer 1980; Manickam, Basheer & Jayakumar 2008). Variable fatality rates ranging from 32% to 
85% were reported in experimental infections in cats dependent upon the RABV strain and dose 
(Soulebot et al. 1981; Vaughn, Gerhardt & Paterson 1963). 
Age, timing of exposure, sex, temperature and genetics have been shown to affect the immune 
response to infection in mouse models (Bell & Moore 1974; Lodmell 1983). Higher ambient 
temperatures have been associated with longer incubation (Bell, Clark & Moore 1977). 
2.10 Vaccination 
2.10.1  Types of vaccines 
Attenuated live virus vaccines.  These vaccines use viruses that were processed to reduce their 
pathogenicity in target and non-target host species. Due to safety reasons such as self-inoculation of 
the vaccinator or vaccine induced rabies in the animal, live attenuated RABV vaccines are no longer 
recommended (Esh, Cunnigham & Wiktor 1982; WOAH 2022c; Yang et al. 2013). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
16 Inactivated cell culture vaccines.  Virtually all commercially available rabies vaccines contain 
inactivated viruses. Commercial inactivated RABV vaccines for use in animals are produced from a 
number of RABV biotypes (Bowen-Davies & Lowings 2000). The virus is inactivated by chemical or 
physical means so it cannot cause infection but can still induce immunity (WOAH 2022c). 
Recombinant vaccines.  Recombinant vaccines do not contain live RABV. They are manufactured by 
inserting RABV nucleic acid into a benign virus vector such as vaccinia or canary pox virus. The 
recombinant canary pox vaccine is registered for use in cats in the United States; however, its 
present formulation does not stimulate immunity in dogs (Day, Horzinek & Schultz 2010). 
Recombinant RABV vaccines have now been developed for use as oral rabies vaccine (ORV) baits for 
use in wildlife rabies control (Maki et al. 2017). 
Plasmid DNA vectors encoding the RABV glycoprotein G elicited strong, antigen-specific immune 
responses in dogs and cats (Lodmell et al. 2003; Osorio et al. 1999; Tesoro Cruz et al. 2006). 
Antibodies induced by plasmid DNA vaccines have been shown to be protective in dogs under 
experimental conditions (Bahloul et al. 2006). 
ORVs have been used as part of control programs on a wide range of wildlife in many countries; for 
example, red foxes and golden jackals in Israel, foxes in Europe, raccoon dogs in South Korea and 
coyotes, foxes, raccoons and skunks in the United States (Maki et al. 2017). ORV baits are 
thermostable and suitable for aerial distribution. Baits contain an edible bait-attractant and 
biomarkers to allow identification and monitoring of uptake. Eight ORVs are licenced for use in 
wildlife (WHO 2018a). There has been widespread use of ORVs in Western and Central Europe, 
which has allowed many countries to have well controlled rabies, including Austria, Belgium, the 
Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and 
Switzerland (Müller et al. 2015). 
2.10.2  Phylogroups covered 
The World Organisation for Animal Health Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial 
Animals 2022 (WOAH Manual) recommends that the RABV strain selected for vaccine production 
should protect against any RABV variant of phylogroup I (WOAH 2022c). Current rabies vaccines 
protect against all known strains as well as the ABLV. They provide variable protection against most 
other known lyssaviruses but are ineffective against phylogroup II (Lagos bat virus and Mokola virus) 
and the West Caucasian bat lyssavirus (Hanlon et al. 2005; Horton et al. 2010; WOAH 2022c). 
2.10.3  Manufacturing controls 
The WOAH Manual provides recommendations for development and manufacture of rabies vaccines 
for use in animals (WOAH 2022c). Vaccines should confer protective immunity for at least one year 
in target species. 
To provide protection, vaccines must be efficacious and stored and administered according to 
manufacturer’s instructions. The efficacy of commercial vaccines varies. Each country is responsible 
for registration of vaccines in its own jurisdiction. 
2.10.4  Vaccination guidelines 
A summary of vaccination guidelines is provided in Table 4 . Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
17 Table 4 Guidelines for the vaccination of dogs and cats 
Vaccine Primary course  
(< 16 weeks) Primary course (> 16 
weeks) Revaccination 
recommendation 
Dogs 
Rabies (killed parenteral) Administer one dose as 
early as 12 weeks of age. If 
vaccination performed 
earlier than 12 weeks, the 
puppy should be 
revaccinated at 12 weeks. 
In high-risk areas, a second 
dose may be given 2–4 
weeks after the first dose Administer a single dose Canine rabies vaccines with 
either a 1- or 3-year DOI are 
available. Timing of boosters 
is determined by this 
licensed DOI, but in some 
areas may be dictated by 
statute 
Cats 
Rabies  
(Canary pox virus-vectored 
recombinant, non-
adjuvanted, parenteral) Administer a single dose as 
early as 12 weeks of age, 
with revaccination 1 year 
later Administer as single dose Annual booster is required 
Rabies 
(1 and 3 year killed, 
adjuvanted products are 
available, parenteral) Administer a single dose as 
early as 12 weeks of age, 
with revaccination 1 year 
later Administer 2 doses, 
12 months apart Booster as for licensed DOI 
(1 or 3 years) or as required 
by local regulations 
DOI = duration of immunity (Day et al. 2016) 
2.10.5  Protection after vaccination 
Vaccination has been shown to induce an effective and relatively long-lasting humoral immune 
response in dogs and cats (Bahloul et al. 2006; Coyne et al. 2001; Fooks 2001; Lakshmanan et al. 
2006). RABV specific virus neutralising antibodies produced as a result of vaccination provide a 
reliable indicator that an animal can withstand challenge with virulent RABV (Moore & Hanlon 2010; 
Wilsmore et al. 2006). Consequently, the standard for demonstration of an adequate serological 
response to RABV vaccination before international animal movement is 0.5 IU/mL (WOAH 2022b). 
Cell mediated immunity is also an important component of the protection induced by vaccination, 
however, this is not readily quantified. 
The duration of immunity induced by vaccination of dogs and cats with some commercially available 
inactivated RABV vaccines is at least three years as measured by challenge and may be as long as 
seven years based on serological responses (Day, Horzinek & Schultz 2010; Sharpee, Nelson & 
Beckenhauer 1985; Soulebot et al. 1981). However, all current commercial vaccines for dogs and 
cats recommend boosters be given from 1 to 3 years after a primary course (Day et al. 2016). 
The occurrence of rabies in vaccinated dogs and cats has been documented, but investigations 
indicate this is rare (Clark et al. 1981; Clark & Wilson 1996; De Benedictis et al. 2009; Murray, 
Holmes & Hanlon 2009). This may be due to poor responses to the vaccination such as in very young 
animals. The presence of maternal antibodies in very young animals can interfere with the 
development of active immunity following vaccination. Rabies vaccines should therefore only be 
administered to animals at 12 weeks of age or older (Day et al. 2016). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
18 The effectiveness of rabies vaccination may also be affected by the vaccine type, breed, size, age, 
and health status of the animal. Small and mixed breeds dogs respond better serologically to primary 
rabies vaccination than large and purebred animals (Berndtsson et al. 2011; Tasioudi et al. 2018; 
Wallace et al. 2017). Lower body condition scores have been associated with poorer serologic 
responses to vaccination in dogs (Wera et al. 2021). Berndtsson et al. (2011) found a difference in 
serological response between two inactivated vaccines (Nobivac Rabies and Rabisin), with Rabisin 
associated with more dogs achieving an RNATT of at least 0.5IU/mL 6 to 12 months following 
vaccination. This response was seen for both single and multiple doses suggesting a difference in 
immunogenicity between the two vaccines. 
Immunologically naïve dogs also have higher rates of failure to produce prolonged adequate 
serological responses (that is RNATT less than 0.5IU/mL) than those given multiple doses of vaccine 
(Berndtsson et al. 2011; Cliquet & Picard-Meyer 2004; Kaila, Marjoniemi & Nokireki 2019; Pimburage 
et al. 2017; Tasioudi et al. 2018; Trujillo, Martínez-Gutierrez & Ruiz-Saenz 2018; Watanabe et al. 
2013; Wera et al. 2021). In particular, juvenile dogs (less than 1 year of age) have higher rates of 
vaccine failure compared to older animals vaccinated only once (Pimburage et al. 2017; Wera et al. 
2021). Immune responses in geriatric dogs (12 years or older) to RABV vaccination may also be 
reduced serologically compared to younger dogs (HogenEsch et al. 2004). 
2.10.6  Correlation between protection after vaccination and virus 
neutralising titre 
The immunological basis of protection against rabies following vaccination is not fully understood. 
Both humoral and cellular immune responses are induced by rabies vaccines and are important in 
providing protective immunity (Lafon 2002; Schultz 2006). Virus neutralising antibodies are useful 
for evaluating vaccine efficacy, but absence of these antibodies does not preclude protective 
immunity (Wilsmore et al. 2006). 
The WHO considers that a virus neutralising antibody titre of at least 0.5 IU/mL is a reliable indicator 
of protective immunity in animals and humans (WHO 2006, 2018a). This minimum titre has also 
been accepted by the WOAH as the international standard for safe movement of dogs and cats 
(WOAH 2022b). The current WOAH Code recommends that vaccinated dogs and cats undergo an 
RNATT with a result of at least 0.5 IU/mL no less than 3 months and no longer than 12 months 
before shipment (WOAH 2022b). 
RABV neutralising antibody titres generally peak at about four weeks following vaccination and then 
decline (Manickam, Basheer & Jayakumar 2008; Mansfield et al. 2004). A significant number of 
animals, young or naïve, may not achieve prolonged serological responses following a single rabies 
vaccination. A single dose in naïve dogs failed to produce RABV neutralising antibody titres greater 
than 0.5 IU/mL, which lasted for a year, in 23.1 to 57.1% of dogs (Pimburage et al. 2017; Watanabe 
et al. 2013). In comparison, most animals receiving two or more doses of rabies vaccine had titres of 
at least 0.5 IU/mL for at least one year post vaccination (Briggs et al. 1998; Watanabe et al. 2013). 
Animals infected before, or at the time of, vaccination can continue to incubate the virus despite 
developing an antibody titre (Blancou et al. 1989; De Benedictis et al. 2009). For dogs and cats from 
RABV endemic countries a waiting period of six months, following the development of post-vaccinal Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
19 immunity is required to allow expression of clinical signs if infection was acquired before vaccination 
(Fooks, McElhinney & Pollitt 2000). 
2.11 Changes to trade in companion animals 
Since the review in 2013, there have been significant changes to the trade in companion animals. 
2.11.1  Increased demand 
Following the review in 2013, the post entry quarantine (PEQ) period for dogs and cats from 
approved countries was reduced to 10 days which created increased capacity of the PEQ facilities at 
that time. Further in late 2015, all (PEQ for dogs and cats from approved countries (excluding group 
1 countries, which do not require PEQ) was consolidated in one facility in Melbourne, Victoria. This 
facility has larger capacity than the previous facilities combined. The 2013 Importation of dogs, cats 
and their semen from approved countries: final policy review (2013 review) reported an average of 
3,713 dogs and 1,949 cats imported each year in the years 2010 to 2012 (Department of Agriculture 
2013). However, demand has increased since then, especially for dog imports, as indicated in Table 
5. 
Table 5 Dog and cat import permits issued and imports from 2014 to 2021 
Year Dogs imported Cats imported Total imports Permits issued 
2014 5,935 2,423 8,358 6,078 
2015 5,744 2,367 8,111 5,620 
2016 5,516 2240 7,756 6,695 
2017 6,342 2,606 8,948 6,722 
2018 5,923 2,484 8,407 7,325 
2019 6,215 2,692 8,907 7,159 
2020 4,180 1,767 5,947 5,339 
2021 3,362 1,524 4,886 6,621 
2022 (to late 
November) 4,012 1,978 5,990 7,698 
Numbers of imported animals and import permits granted during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in 2020 
and 2021 remained relatively stable despite flight restrictions and decreased capacity in the PEQ 
facility due to public health measures affecting resourcing. This reflects an unforeseen surge in 
demand from people returning to Australia with their pets during this period. Many owners were 
unprepared for the robust biosecurity measures and complex logistics of relocating their pets to 
Australia. Despite this, the number of dogs imported in 2020 exceeded the numbers reported in the 
2013 review (4,180 dogs imported compared to an average of 3,713 in 2010 to 2012). In 2022, the 
number of permits issued to late November 2022 has exceeded pre-pandemic levels, while the 
number of actual imports has lagged behind permits issued due to difficulties with flight availability 
and capacity at the PEQ facility. 
In addition, demand for companion animals increased during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. A study in 
Israel found that dog adoption rates and potential dog adopters increased as social distancing and 
lockdown measures were implemented (Morgan et al. 2020). The same study also found an increase 
worldwide in internet searches regarding dog adoption on google during the pandemic (Morgan et Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
20 al. 2020). Similar increases in demand were reported in media in many countries including Australia 
(Kinsella 2020; Pieracci et al. 2021; Wynne 2021). 
2.11.2  Changing profile of exporting countries 
New Zealand is consistently the top exporting country for dogs and cats being imported into 
Australia. This has not changed since the 2013 review. However, dogs and cats being imported from 
New Zealand do not require an import permit and do not undergo PEQ on arrival. 
The profile of other exporting countries has changed since the time of the 2013 review. At the time 
of the 2013 review, 60% of the import permits granted were for dogs and cats for export from the 
United States and the United Kingdom, with another 15% from Canada, South Africa and Singapore 
(Department of Agriculture 2013). In comparison, import permits for the United States and the 
United Kingdom, made up only 40% of those issued in 2021. Permits from Canada, South Africa and 
Singapore made up 21% for the same period. 
In 2022 to late November, the top ten exporting countries were (in descending order based on 
import permits issued) the United Kingdom, the United States, , Hong Kong, South Africa, Singapore, 
Canada, United Arab Emirates, South Korea, Japan and Germany. These countries accounted for 79% 
of import permits issued during this period. 
2.11.3  Increasing commercialisation 
At the time of 2013 review, the majority of imported companion animals were considered to be pets 
accompanying owners relocating to Australia. However, there is increasing commercialisation of pet 
movements internationally. The United Kingdom, European Union, and Canada recognise a 
difference in risk profile (biosecurity and welfare) for these movements by having different import 
conditions for commercial consignments of dogs and cats. 
Within Australia, there have been changes in state and territory legislation to regulate the 
companion animal breeding industry and to improve animal welfare (Goncalves Costa et al. 2020). 
This may have led to a decrease in local supply which fuelled an increase in online purchasing of pets 
located overseas. This may have been further exacerbated by down-scaling of local breeding 
operations during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic within Australia (Kinsella 2020). 
Internationally, there has been significant growth within the companion animal breeding industry 
with large scale commercial breeding organisations, increasing international trade and use of the 
internet to facilitate sales (Maher & Wyatt 2021). In Europe, there is growing evidence that criminal 
networks are becoming involved in lucrative puppy imports (Maher & Wyatt 2019, 2021; Zucca et al. 
2020). This illegal puppy trade, and online puppy sales scams, were reported to have increased 
during the pandemic (Better Business Bureau 2020; British Broadcasting Corporation 2020). Norman, 
Stavisky and Westgarth (2020) conducted a survey of pet importers and found that people importing 
rescue dogs into the United Kingdom used social media to find suitable dogs and rescue groups to 
handle the importation. Most respondents seemed unaware of the import conditions, as 89% 
reported their dog had been imported under the European Union Pets Travel Scheme, which they 
were not eligible for (Norman, Stavisky & Westgarth 2020). 
Importation of very young puppies for resale is increasing in other countries. In 2017, the United 
States specifically targeted illegal puppy movements in Operation Dogcatcher (Houle 2017). Young Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
21 puppies which could not have met rabies vaccination requirements were being imported into many 
countries (Cocchi et al. 2021; Houle 2017; Pieracci et al. 2021; Zucca et al. 2020). During the SARS-
CoV-2 pandemic, increases in non-compliance with rabies biosecurity requirements were seen in 
2020 in the United States (falsified vaccination certificates) and Europe (inadequate serological 
responses) (Cocchi et al. 2021; Pieracci et al. 2021). However, similar trends were observed before 
the pandemic, suggesting that the pandemic was not solely responsible for this increase in 
noncompliance (Pieracci et al. 2021; Zucca et al. 2020). 
2.11.4  Increasing non-compliance and anomalies in certification 
Non-compliance and certification anomalies are frequently being reported internationally in 
association with movement of dogs and cats. Missing microchips, no proof of rabies vaccination, or 
very young dogs that would be unable to have met manufacturer’s recommendations or waiting 
periods if they received a rabies vaccination have been reported as common reasons to deny entry 
for companion animals being imported (Pieracci et al. 2021; Zucca et al. 2020). A number of studies 
have looked at RNATT levels in recently imported dogs with documented pre-export rabies 
vaccination. Klevar et al. (2015) found that 53% of non-commercially imported rescue dogs, which 
had been certified to have been vaccinated at least 21 days before export, had titres less than 0.5 
IU/ml. In Italy, higher rates of RNATT failure were found in dogs imported into Italy (13.15%) 
compared to dogs being prepared for export from Italy (5.89%) in a study of 21,001 dogs from 2006 
to 2012 (Rota Nodari et al. 2017). 
In companion animals denied entry due to non-compliance and certification anomalies, the rates of 
rabies vaccination failure were found to be very high. Zucca et al. (2020) reported a failure rate of 
75% in companion animals denied entry at the Italian – Austrian border from December 2017 to July 
2020. A similar study found a failure rate of 86% in three month old puppies seized at the Italian – 
Austrian border between January 2018 and December 2020 (Cocchi et al. 2021). Following diagnosis 
of rabies in a recently imported dog from Azerbaijan into the United States, the investigation of the 
consignment found only 7 of the 25 dogs had serological evidence of prior rabies vaccination despite 
vaccination certificates and RNATT results being provided with the consignment (ProMED 2020). 
Internationally, dogs that developed clinical signs of rabies shortly after importation, were 
subsequently euthanased and diagnosed. During 2002 to 2013, there were 21 rabies cases in animals 
in Western Europe that were imported from Morocco and Eastern Europe (Ribadeau-Dumas et al. 
2016). In France, 9 rabid dogs were imported from 2001 to 2011 (Mailles et al. 2011). Importation of 
dogs that were later found to be infected with exotic RABV variants has been reported in the United 
States four times since 2015 (OIE 2021b; Pieracci et al. 2021; ProMED 2020, 2021). Recently, two 
dogs incubating rabies were imported into Canada from Iran (OIE 2021d, 2022). These incidents have 
resulted in extensive public health investigations, PEP and quarantine of multiple animals. In 
addition, Spain and France lost (and later regained) their freedom from dog-mediated rabies 
following its introduction by a non-compliant imported pet (Allibert et al. 2008; Cliquet, Picard-
Meyer & Robardet 2014; Perez de Diego et al. 2015). In mid-2022, the United States and Canada 
have made significant changes to their import conditions for dogs and cats following the increase in 
rabies biosecurity risk. In October 2022, the United Kingdom implemented an approved importers 
scheme for commercial imports of dogs and cats from Ukraine, Belarus, Poland and Romania 
following an increase in rabies biosecurity risk and an almost 6 month suspension of trade. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
22 Intentional non-compliances and fraudulent documentation have been detected and suspected 
during the import permit application process or during PEQ in dogs and cats being imported into 
Australia. Evidence has emerged of the operation of networks in approved countries with the 
intention of circumventing Australia’s existing risk management measures for rabies virus. The 
methods detected or suspected include providing falsified or fraudulent laboratory reports and 
other pre-export preparation documentation (such as rabies vaccination certificates); collecting 
blood samples from animals not intended for export but known to be compliant with Australia’s 
import conditions; and replacing microchips to link animals to compliant documentation. The 
department has been managing these detected and suspected non-compliance and fraudulent 
documents on an ad hoc basis. This has included requesting additional information from permit 
applicants, revoking import permits, verification of documentation with exporting countries, 
quarantine and in some case, re-export. However, as this is a global issue and some of the fraudulent 
activities are very sophisticated, ad hoc management is not a feasible or sustainable long-term 
solution; changes to import conditions are required in order to ensure Australia’s ALOP continues to 
be met. 
2.12 Current biosecurity measures 
The department has categorised countries approved for importation of dogs and cats into Australia 
into three groups based on their health status. For each group, prescribed pre-export and post-
arrival biosecurity measures may apply. All dogs and cats being prepared for export to Australia 
must also be permanently identified by an ISO compatible microchip. The criteria for each group 
under the current policy is listed below in Table 6 . 
Table 6 The approved countries groups under the current policy 
Groups 1 2 3 
Description RABV-free, with dog and 
cat health status at least 
equivalent to Australia Other RABV-free countries  All other approved 
countries 
Countries/territories Cocos (Keeling) Islands*, 
New Zealand and Norfolk 
Island Bahrain, Barbados, 
Christmas Islands, Cook 
Islands, Falkland Island, Fiji, 
French Polynesia, Guam, 
Hawaiian Islands, Iceland, 
Japan, Kiribati, Mauritius, 
Federated States of 
Micronesia, Nauru, New 
Caledonia, Niue, Palau, 
Papua New Guinea, Samoa 
(American), Samoa 
(Western), Singapore, 
Solomon Islands, Tonga, 
Kingdom of Tuvalu, 
Vanuatu, Wallis and Futuna 
Islands. Antigua and Barbuda, 
Argentina, Austria, 
Bahamas, Belgium, 
Bermuda, Brunei 
Darussalam, Bulgaria, 
Canada, Cayman Islands, 
Chile, Croatia, Cyprus, 
Czechia (Czech Republic), 
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, 
France, Germany, Gibraltar, 
Greece, Greenland, 
Guernsey, Hong Kong, 
Hungary, Ireland, Isle of 
Man, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, 
Jersey, Korea (Republic of), 
Kuwait, Latvia, Lithuania, 
Luxembourg, Macao, Malta, 
Monaco, Montenegro, 
Netherlands, Northern 
Mariana Islands, Norway, 
Poland, Portugal, Puerto 
Rico, Qatar, South Africa, 
Reunion, Serbia, Seychelles, 
Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
23 Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint 
Lucia, Saint Vincent and the 
Grenadines, Sweden, 
Switzerland, Taiwan, 
Trinidad and Tobago, 
United Arab Emirates, the 
United Kingdom, the United 
States (excluding the State 
of Hawaii), Uruguay, Virgin 
Islands (British), Virgin 
Islands (USA). 
* Importation of dogs is not permitted from the Cocos (Keeling) Islands.  
2.12.1  Current import conditions for dogs and cats to Australia 
Group 1 countries  
Importation of dogs and cats is permitted from these countries, which the department recognises as 
being free from RABV and with a similar status to mainland Australia. Group 1 countries include New 
Zealand, Norfolk Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands. Dogs and cats must have been resident in 
group 1 countries: 
 since birth or import from Australia 
 or for at least 90 days in New Zealand since import from another country, as New Zealand’s 
import conditions require a minimum 90 day residency before export 
 or since import from New Zealand for Norfolk Island 
 or for 180 days before export to Australia for cats from Cocos (Keeling) Islands. 
There is no requirement for pre-export rabies vaccination or serological confirmation of response by 
RNATT. In addition, dogs and cats must be examined within 5 days before export and found to have 
no signs of infectious or contagious disease. 
Group 2 countries 
Importation of dogs and cats is permitted from these countries, which the department recognises as 
being free from RABV. Group 2 countries include Singapore, Japan, Hawaii and several Pacific Island 
countries. The dog or cat must have been continuously resident in a group 1 or 2 country since birth 
or direct import from Australia, or for a minimum period of 180 days immediately before export to 
Australia. 
There is no requirement for pre-export rabies vaccination or serological confirmation of response by 
RNATT. In addition, dogs and cats must be examined within 5 days before export and found to have 
no signs of infectious or contagious disease. 
Group 3 countries  
Importation of dogs and cats is permitted from these countries, which the department recognises as 
having well controlled RABV. Group 3 countries include the United States (excluding Hawaii), the 
United Kingdom, Hong Kong, South Africa and many European countries. 
The dog or cat must have been vaccinated with an inactivated RABV vaccine when at least 90 days of 
age, and this vaccination must be current, in accordance with manufacturer’s directions, at the date 
of export to Australia. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
24 Following rabies vaccination, a blood sample must be collected from the dog or cat and tested with a 
positive RNATT result of at least 0.5 IU/mL using either a FAVN test or an RFFIT. The sample must 
arrive and be tested at the laboratory at least 180 days before export to Australia. Not more than 
730 days (24 months) must elapse between the date of blood sample collection and the date of 
export to Australia. 
In addition, dogs and cats must be examined within 5 days before export and found to have no signs 
of infectious or contagious disease. 
Non-approved countries  
There is a process for the importation of dogs or cats originally resident in a non-approved country. 
This process requires that the animal first be exported to any approved country and then on to 
Australia. PEQ measures remain the same as for other companion animal imports. However, 
additional RABV pre-export testing and vaccination is required. Dogs and cats must also comply with 
the import conditions for the approved country. 
Stage 1 (in the country of origin) 
The dog or cat must be vaccinated with an inactivated RABV vaccine when at least 90 days of age, 
and this vaccine must be current, in accordance with manufacturer’s directions, at the date of 
export. 
Following rabies vaccination, an initial blood sample must be collected from the dog or cat and 
tested with a positive RNATT result of at least 0.5 IU/mL using either a FAVN test or an RFFIT. 
This blood sample must be tested at either the Australian Centre for Disease Preparedness (ACDP); 
or a WOAH reference laboratory for rabies which are in China, France, Mexico, South Korea or the 
United Kingdom. 
The blood sample must arrive and be tested at the laboratory at least 180 days before export to 
Australia. Not more than 730 days (24 months) must elapse between the date of blood sample 
collection and the date of export to Australia. 
Stage 2 (in an approved country) 
The dog or cat must then be imported into an approved country. 
Another blood sample must be collected from the dog or cat in this approved country and tested 
with a positive RNATT result of at least 0.5 IU/mL using either a FAVN test or RFFIT. This test must be 
conducted at a laboratory within or recognised by this approved country. 
If the second RNATT result is at least 0.5 IU/mL, the dog or cat will be eligible for export to Australia 
at least 180 days after the date the initial sample collected in the country of origin arrived at the 
laboratory. 
The dog or cat must also be revaccinated with an approved inactivated RABV vaccine in this 
approved country before export to Australia. 
The dogs and cats must be examined within 5 days before export and found to have no signs of 
infectious or contagious disease. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
25 3 Risk assessment 
This section reviews the risk of RABV introduction associated with importing dogs and cats under 
Australia’s current import conditions and considers whether those risks have changed significantly 
since the introduction of the existing conditions in 2013. However, due to the detected operations of 
fraud networks, export only from an approved country may no longer provide the level of risk 
management intended in the 2013 review. Accordingly, this risk assessment has considered the 
likelihood of entry in a dog or cat being imported into Australia from any country. 
There has been no further information supporting a role for dog or cat semen in RABV transmission 
since 2013. Risk management measures for RABV continue not to be warranted for dog or cat 
semen. Import conditions for dog and cat semen will not be considered further in this risk 
assessment. 
Risk assessment is defined in the WOAH Code as ‘… the evaluation of the likelihood and the 
biological and economic consequences of entry, establishment and spread of a hazard’. 
Chapter 2.1 of the WOAH Code provides recommendations for conducting import risk analyses, 
describing the risk assessment steps in Article 2.1.4 as entry, exposure and consequence 
assessments and their integration into a risk estimation, producing overall outcome of the risks 
associated with the hazards identified at the outset. In this review the hazard identified is RABV. 
This assessment was conducted using a qualitative approach. The likelihood that an event will occur 
was evaluated and reported qualitatively, using qualitative likelihood descriptors for the release and 
exposure assessment, and the outbreak scenario in Table 7 . 
Table 7 Nomenclature for qualitative likelihoods 
Likelihood Descriptive definition 
High The event would be very likely to occur 
Moderate The event is equally likely to occur or not occur 
Low The event would be unlikely to occur 
Very low The event would be very unlikely to occur 
Extremely low The event would be extremely unlikely to occur 
Negligible The event would almost certainly not occur 
3.1 Entry assessment 
The entry assessment estimates the likelihood that RABV would be present in a dog or cat being 
imported into Australia in the absence of any risk management measures, other than standard 
practices such as pre-export inspection of animals. 
The following factors were considered relevant to the estimate of the likelihood of RABV being 
present in imported dogs and cats imported: 
RABV is found almost worldwide (WHO 2021a). (Notable exceptions include Australia, New Zealand, 
Singapore, Japan and Hawaii). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
26  RABV is endemic in wildlife maintenance hosts in Canada, United States, Europe, and most 
Central and South American countries. 
 From a species perspective, dogs and cats are commonly infected with RABV. 
 Dogs are the main reservoir host in the urban RABV cycle (Singh et al. 2017; WHO 2018b). 
 Most cases of human RABV infection are transmitted by dogs (Cliquet & Picard-Meyer 2004). 
 Cats are effective vectors for transmission, although they are not usually maintenance hosts 
(Rupprecht, Hanlon & Hemachudha 2002). 
Rabies can have a long incubation period and there is no reliable way to diagnose infection in a live 
animal so there is potentially a long time period during which an infected animal could appear 
clinically normal and the infection not be identified by regular veterinary examination. 
 Rabies incubation period is from 10 days to six months (Greene 2013; Hampson et al. 2009; 
Sparkes et al. 2015). 
 Serological tests cannot be used for the diagnosis of rabies (AHA 2021b; Greene 2013; Singh et 
al. 2018; WOAH 2022c). 
 The definitive diagnosis of rabies is from the isolation and identification of the RABV or its 
components usually in brain tissue (WOAH 2022c, b). 
 RABV infections produce little or no virus neutralising antibody titre in serum (Gerber et al. 
1985; Manickam, Basheer & Jayakumar 2008; Swanepoel 1994; WHO 2006). 
 Serological tests are generally used for measuring vaccination response such as before 
international animal movement or trade (WOAH 2022c). 
While vaccination is effective and widely practiced in much of the world, there are several situations 
that can lead to vaccine failure. On its own, a history of vaccination does not guarantee an animal 
will not develop rabies. 
 In countries, including approved countries, where RABV is endemic, rabies vaccination is 
recommended as part of the routine vaccinations for dogs and cats (Day et al. 2016). 
 Vaccination has been shown to induce an effective and relatively long-lasting (1 - 4 years) 
humoral immune response in dogs and cats (Bahloul et al. 2006; Coyne et al. 2001; Fooks 2001; 
Lakshmanan et al. 2006). 
 RABV neutralising antibodies generally peak around four weeks following vaccination and then 
decline (Manickam, Basheer & Jayakumar 2008; Mansfield et al. 2004). 
 Rabies vaccines should only be administered to animals 12 weeks of age or older (Day et al. 
2016; Lakshmanan et al. 2006), otherwise maternal antibodies may render them ineffective. 
 Young animals (less than one year of age) require two doses of vaccine to generate an 
appropriate serological response (Pimburage et al. 2017; Wera et al. 2021). 
 Serological response to vaccine may be reduced in large breed dogs, purebred dogs (Berndtsson 
et al. 2011; Tasioudi et al. 2018; Wallace et al. 2017), and those with low body condition (Wera 
et al. 2021). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
27  The occurrence of rabies in vaccinated dogs and cats is rare (Clark et al. 1981; Clark & Wilson 
1996; De Benedictis et al. 2009; Murray, Holmes & Hanlon 2009). However, animals infected 
before or at the time of vaccination can continue to incubate the disease despite developing an 
antibody titre (Blancou et al. 1989; De Benedictis et al. 2009). 
In recent years, there have been changes to the international trade environment for companion 
animals. 
 There has been a marked increase in the yearly number of dog and cat imports into Australia 
since the 2013 review. 
 Internationally, there has been significant growth within the companion animals breeding 
industry, with large-scale commercial breeding organisations, increasing international trade and 
online sales (Maher & Wyatt 2021). 
Concurrently with these changes to the international trade environment, there appears to have 
been an increase in the level of non-compliance around rabies vaccination and RNATT results. This 
may, in part, be the cause of an apparent spate of RABV-infected dogs being moved internationally 
in recent years. 
 Non-compliance and certification anomalies for companion animals (regarding rabies 
vaccination status and RNATT results) are now frequently being reported internationally (Cocchi 
et al. 2021; Klevar et al. 2015; Pieracci et al. 2021; Rota Nodari et al. 2017; Zucca et al. 2020). 
 Increases in falsified, incomplete or inaccurate certification for rabies requirements has been 
found for dogs and cats being imported into the United States and the European Union (Pieracci 
et al. 2021; Zucca et al. 2020). 
 In Europe, there is growing evidence that criminal networks are becoming involved in lucrative 
puppy imports (Maher & Wyatt 2019, 2021; Zucca et al. 2020). 
 There are attempts to import young puppies, which could not have met rabies vaccination 
requirements, reported by many countries (Cocchi et al. 2021; Houle 2017; Pieracci et al. 2021; 
Zucca et al. 2020). 
 Similar intentional non-compliances and fraudulent documentation have been detected or 
suspected during the import permit application process or during PEQ in dogs and cats being 
imported into Australia. 
 Since 2001, there have been multiple cases of RABV-infected dogs imported into Western 
Europe and North America, notably France and Spain, the United States and Canada (Allibert et 
al. 2008; Cliquet, Picard-Meyer & Robardet 2014; Mailles et al. 2011; OIE 2021d; Perez de Diego 
et al. 2015; Pieracci et al. 2021; Ribadeau-Dumas et al. 2016). 
Based on this information the likelihood that RABV would be present in a dog or cat imported into 
Australia was estimated to be high . 
3.2 Exposure assessment 
The exposure assessment estimates the likelihood that susceptible animals in Australia will be 
exposed to RABV via an imported dog or cat. It considers the exposure groups most likely to be 
affected as well as the possible pathways by which exposure of these groups could occur. For RABV, Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
28 the exposure group is all mammals (including humans, wildlife and feral mammals). The most likely 
exposure pathway is via direct contact. This is based on the experience in other countries with 
incursions associated with the importation of dogs and cats. In these cases, animals in direct contact 
with the index case were exposed to, and in some cases infected with RABV. 
The following factors were considered relevant to the estimate of the likelihood that susceptible 
animals would be exposed to RABV via an infected dog or cat: 
There is a very large, diverse and widespread group of susceptible animals in Australia and 
transmission is readily achieved through regular behavioural interaction (for example grooming or 
fighting) with an infected dog or cat. While the specific degree of susceptibility to RABV of some 
Australian species has not been quantified, it is reasonable to assume they will not have any 
particular resistance. Humans and any other in-contact mammals are at risk of exposure. 
 Transmission of RABV usually occurs via bites (but can also occur through grooming behaviour) 
of rabid animals. RABV in saliva then enters the body via skin lesions or mucous membranes 
(WHO 2021a). 
 RABV transmission by aerosols has also been reported but is limited to environments with high 
concentrations of virus such as bat caves with large groups of bats or in laboratories (Bowen-
Davies & Lowings 2000; Fisher, Streicker & Schnell 2018). 
 The susceptibility of Australian native animals to rabies is unknown (AHA 2021b). 
 Rare cases of RABV have been documented in American marsupials (Virginia opossum) (Diana, 
Mitchell & Feldman 2015). This supports the view that Australian marsupials (of which there are 
several species) may be susceptible to infection. 
There is a moderate to long time-period during which an imported dog or cat infected with RABV 
could become infectious. This provides opportunity for interaction with susceptible animals, 
including humans, in Australia and the potential for virus transmission. 
 The incubation period for rabies can range from 10 days to 6 months, with most cases apparent 
after 2 to24 weeks (Greene 2013; Hampson et al. 2009; Sparkes et al. 2015). 
 The majority of animals infected with RABV will develop clinical disease within six months (the 
incubation period for rabies defined by the WOAH) (WOAH 2022b). 
 Cases of rabies in dogs and cats with incubation periods over six months are rare (AHA 2021b). 
 Dogs, cats and ferrets can excrete RABV up to ten days before the onset of any clinical signs. 
 Infected animals may appear healthy but still transmit RABV to other animals (WOAH 2022b). 
Dog and cat ownership in Australia is relatively high by world standards. Imported dogs and cats are 
very likely to encounter other susceptible species in Australia. 
 A national survey estimated that there were approximately 5.1 million pet dogs and 3.8 million 
pet cats in Australia in 2019 (Animal Medicines Australia 2019). 
 It has been estimated that almost 48% of the Australian population own a least one dog, and 
37% own at least one cat (Wilkins et al. 2020). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
29 While dog and cat populations in Australia are generally concentrated in urban areas and well 
managed, there are some notable exceptions that mean the level of domestic animal management 
cannot be relied on as a risk mitigation measure. 
 Only 11.6% of dog owners and 8.5% of cat owners live outside urban areas (Wilkins et al. 2020). 
 Local governments (councils) in urban Australia generally have effective animal control 
programs to minimise the stray dog population. This would reduce uncontrolled contacts that a 
RABV-infected animal may have with stray animals. 
 There are less effective controls on community dogs in some rural areas which may increase 
RABV transmission to other susceptible species. 
 There are large populations of free-roaming community dogs in communities in central and 
northern Australia. 
 There are an estimated 2.8 million feral cats, of which only 0.7 million are located in urban 
landscapes (House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy 
2020). 
Based on this information the likelihood of susceptible species in exposure groups being exposed to 
RABV associated with imported dogs and cats was estimated to be high . 
3.3 Estimation of the likelihood of entry and exposure 
Using the matrix in Figure 1 , the overall likelihood of entry and exposure is estimated by combining 
the likelihood of entry and the corresponding likelihood of exposure. 
Figure 1 Matrix for combining likelihood of entry and exposure 
 
With the likelihood of entry estimated to be high and combined with the likelihood of exposure 
estimated to be high, the likelihood of entry and exposure for RABV in imported dogs or cats was 
estimated to be high . 
3.4 Consequence assessment 
The consequence assessment describes the potential consequences associated with RABV entry and 
exposure and estimates the likelihood of these consequences occurring. This involves estimating the 
likelihood of establishment and/or spread of RABV for the most likely outbreak scenario, and 
determining the direct and indirect effects (health, environmental and socioeconomic) should this 
Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
30 outbreak scenario occur. Combining the likelihood of establishment and/or spread for this outbreak 
scenario with the corresponding overall effect of establishment and/or spread gives an estimation of 
likely consequences. 
3.4.1 Likelihood of establishment and/or spread associated with the 
outbreak scenario 
Once exposure of susceptible animals has occurred, a number of possible outbreak scenarios could 
follow, ranging from no spread to widespread establishment of the virus and, consequently, disease. 
In determining the most likely outbreak scenario, consideration was given to the experience with 
RABV incursions associated with the importation of dogs and cats in other countries. Based on this 
experience, the likely extent of establishment and / or spread at detection is assumed to be limited 
to direct contacts of infected animals. 
The most likely outbreak scenario following exposure to RABV was considered to be a regional 
outbreak where RABV establishes in directly exposed susceptible animals, and spreads through 
direct contact to other populations of susceptible animals within a region or state/territory. Because 
of the movement patterns of susceptible species and the almost inevitable fatal outcome, an 
incursion is likely to be detected before wider inter-state or national spread occurs. 
The following factors were considered relevant to the estimate of the likelihood of establishment 
and/or spread associated with the outbreak scenario: 
There is a very large, diverse and widespread group of susceptible animals in Australia and 
transmission is readily achieved through regular behavioural interaction (for example grooming or 
fighting) with an infected dog or cat. While the specific degree of susceptibility to RABV of some 
Australian species has not been quantified, it is reasonable to assume they will not have any 
particular resistance. 
 RABV is transmissible to all mammals. 
 Cats are effective for transmission; however, there are no known RABV strains adapted to felids 
(Rupprecht, Hanlon & Slate 2006). 
 Spill over into non-native canid and felid species (foxes, wild canids and feral cats) may lead to 
the establishment and spread of RABV infection in feral and wild animal populations. 
 The degree of susceptibility of RABV in Australian native animals is unknown (AHA 2021b). 
 Rare cases of RABV have been documented in American marsupials (Virginia opossum) (Diana, 
Mitchell & Feldman 2015). This supports the view that Australian marsupials (of which there are 
several species) would be susceptible to infection. 
 Australian native mammals in the orders Chiroptera (bats), Carnivora (dingoes) and 
Dasyuromorphia (antechinuses, dunnarts, quolls, Tasmanian devils) could contribute to the 
maintenance of a wildlife cycle of RABV (AHA 2021b). 
Transmission of RABV usually occurs via bites (but can also occur through grooming behaviour) of 
rabid animals. RABV in saliva then enters the body via skin lesions or mucous membranes (WHO 
2021a). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
31  Some species of native animals regularly engage in fighting and might contribute to the 
maintenance of a wildlife cycle. 
 Native wildlife on which canid species occasionally prey (possums, wombats, wallabies, 
kangaroos) may also be infected but are unlikely to maintain a wildlife RABV cycle. 
Susceptible animals are widely distributed across Australia, thus favouring the spread of RABV if it 
were to establish. 
 A national survey estimated that there were approximately 5.1 million pet dogs and 3.8 million 
pet cats in Australia in 2019 (Animal Medicines Australia 2019). 
 It has been estimated that almost 48% of the Australian population own a least one dog, and 
37% own at least one cat (Wilkins et al. 2020). 
 The companion animal population is concentrated in urban areas in Australia. Only 11.6% of 
dog owners and 8.5% of cat owners live outside urban areas (Wilkins et al. 2020). 
Local governments (councils) in urban Australia generally have animal control programs to control 
and minimise the stray dog population. This reduces uncontrolled contacts that a RABV-infected 
animal may have with stray animals. 
 There are large populations of free-roaming community dogs in communities in Northern 
Australia. 
 There are an estimated 2.8 million feral cats, of which only 0.7 million are located in urban 
landscapes (House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy 
2020). 
 There are less effective controls on community dogs in some rural areas which may have 
implications for ongoing RABV transmission to both other dogs and humans. 
There is a moderate to long time-period during which a dog or cat infected with RABV could become 
infectious. This provides opportunity for interaction with susceptible animals and the potential for 
transmission. 
 The incubation period for RABV can range from 10 days to 6 months, with most cases apparent 
after 2 to 24 weeks (Greene 2013; Hampson et al. 2009; Sparkes et al. 2015). 
 While the RABV incubation period is defined by the WOAH as six months, the majority of 
animals infected with RABV will develop clinical disease within this time period (WOAH 2022b). 
 Dogs, cats and ferrets can excrete RABV up to ten days before the onset of any clinical signs.  
 Infected animals may appear healthy but still transmit RABV to other animals (WOAH 2022b). 
 Pending confirmation of a diagnosis of RABV infection, the control and eradication policy 
outlined in the lyssaviruses response strategy would be implemented to reduce the risk of 
establishment or spread (AHA 2021b). 
Australia’s susceptible mammalian population is largely immunologically naïve due to restrictions on 
the use of rabies vaccines domestically. This means there are unlikely to be any immunological 
barriers to establishment and spread in the event that RABV were to be introduced. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
32  Due to Australia’s rabies free status, there is no requirement for dogs and cats born and 
resident here to be vaccinated against rabies. Therefore, aside from some imported animals 
vaccinated overseas, the great majority of the population is immunologically naïve to RABV. 
 A rabies vaccine is available in Australia on a limited use permit which allows it to be used only 
in special circumstances. For example, the vaccine can be used to prepare companion animals 
for export to countries that require pre-export rabies vaccination or as part of an emergency 
disease response to a rabies incursion. 
 The high proportion of immunologically naïve and susceptible animals should not delay 
detection of primary cases in this population. 
Based on this information the likelihood of establishment and / or spread of RABV in Australian 
domestic and wildlife mammalian populations was estimated to be moderate . 
3.4.2 Effects of establishment and/or spread 
Determination of the effects resulting from the outbreak scenario 
Following estimation of the likelihood of establishment and / or spread of RABV is the determination 
of the effects (health, environmental and socioeconomic) resulting from the outbreak scenario. 
Adverse effects are evaluated in terms of seven (two direct and five indirect) criteria. Further details 
on the method for determining the effects resulting from the outbreak scenario can be found in the 
department’s previous import risk assessments (Biosecurity Australia 2010). 
The following descriptors were applied to estimate the effects of the establishment and/or spread of 
RABV for each criterion. The magnitude of effects and geographic levels are described in Table 8  and 
Table 9  respectively. A national effect score was then determined for each effect criterion according 
to the corresponding level and magnitude outlined in Figure 2 . 
Table 8 Nomenclature for magnitude of effect 
Effect Descriptive definition 
Highly significant The effect is extremely serious and irreversible and likely to disturb either economic 
viability or the intrinsic value of the criterion. 
Significant The effect is serious and substantive but reversible and unlikely to disturb either 
economic viability or the intrinsic value of the criterion. 
Minor significance The effect is recognisable but minor and reversible. 
Unlikely to be discernible The effect is not unusually distinguishable from normal day to day variation in the 
criterion. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
33 Table 9 Definition of geographic levels 
Geographic levels Description 
Local an aggregate of households or enterprises (a rural community, a town or a local 
government area). 
District or region a geographically or geopolitically associated collection of aggregates (generally a 
recognised section of a state or territory, such as ‘Far North Queensland’). 
State or territory a geographically or geopolitically associated collection of districts in a geographic area 
(generally a state or territory, although there may be exceptions with larger states such 
as Western Australia). 
National Australia wide (Australian mainland states and territories and Tasmania). 
Figure 2 Assessment of direct or indirect effects on a national scale 
 
Direct effects 
The effect on the life or health (including production effects) of susceptible animals. 
 Rabies is a significant zoonosis with a long incubation period that may affect all mammals. Once 
clinical signs develop it is almost inevitably fatal (Singh et al. 2018; Sparkes et al. 2015). 
 The incubation period for rabies can range from 10 days to 6 months (Greene 2013; Hampson 
et al. 2009; Sparkes et al. 2015). 
 Death occurs within ten days of clinical signs appearing in dogs (Niezgoda, Hanlon & Rupprecht 
2002; Tepsumethanon et al. 2004). 
 There are rare instances of human and animal survival of clinical rabies, usually with severe 
neurological complications. 
 Animals within the Carnivora and Chiroptera orders can act as natural reservoir hosts for RABV. 
Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
34 Based on these considerations, the effect of the establishment and/or spread of RABV for this 
criterion was estimated to be highly significant at the state level. The effect on the national economy 
or the Australian community as a whole and not just on directly affected parties, corresponds to 
significant at the national level (national effect score of F in Figure 2 ). 
The effect on the living environment, including life and health of wildlife, and any effects on the non-
living environment 
 The susceptibility of Australian native animals to RABV infection is unknown (AHA 2021b).  
 Australian native mammals in the orders Chiroptera, Carnivora (dingoes) and Dasyuromorphia 
(antechinus, dunnart, quoll, Tasmanian devil) could contribute to the maintenance of a wildlife 
cycle of RABV. 
 Rare cases of RABV have been documented in American marsupials (Virginia opossum) (Diana, 
Mitchell & Feldman 2015). 
For this criterion, the effect of the establishment and / or spread of RABV in Australia was estimated 
to be significant at the state level. The effect on the national economy or the Australian community 
as a whole and not just on directly affected parties, corresponds to minor at the national level 
(national effect score of E in Figure 2 ). 
Indirect effects 
The effect on new or modified eradication, control, monitoring or surveillance and compensation 
strategies or programs 
Australia would enact robust emergency animal disease measures in response to a RABV incursion, 
which are outlined in the lyssavirus AUSVETPLAN (AHA 2021b). 
 Due to the serious public health implications, infection with RABV is listed in Australia’s EADRA 
as a Category 1 disease. The government would provide 100% of the funding necessary for an 
emergency response to an outbreak (AHA 2021b). 
 Australia’s control and eradication programs for lyssaviruses include quarantine and movement 
controls, surveillance, euthanasia and testing of animals with clinical signs consistent with 
RABV, vaccination and public awareness campaigns (AHA 2021b). 
 Emergency responses would need to be tailored to suit the location of the detection, for 
example urban compared to rural settings. 
 The control area for an emergency disease response would be limited as transmission is 
predominantly to direct contacts. 
 Compensation may be paid following an emergency animal disease response based on the 
relevant legislation in each state and territory. 
 There may be limited suitable facilities for quarantine and monitoring of suspect or exposed 
animals (AHA 2021b). 
 Community norms about pet management, such as with community dogs, may affect control 
measures such as movement restrictions. 
Australia’s emergency response would initially aim to eradicate RABV. However re-establishment of 
Australia’s freedom from RABV would require an extensive surveillance program. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
35  The WOAH Code recommends an ongoing surveillance for the 24 months; and an appropriate 
recording and reporting system for animal diseases, and investigations carried out for all 
susceptible animals showing clinical signs suggestive of rabies (WOAH 2022b). 
RABV vaccination in companion animals may be effectively used as part of an emergency response 
or long-term management. The efficacy of RABV vaccination is likely to limit an incursion to the 
affected state or territory and mitigate potential negative consequences to the life and health of 
susceptible species. 
 RABV vaccination may be recommended for exposed domestic dog and cat populations as a 
preventative animal health measure or as part of long term control strategies. 
 Currently only one rabies vaccine for companion animals is available in Australia and is 
restricted to limited uses such as for pre-export preparation or emergency disease responses. 
 No oral rabies vaccines are currently available in Australia. 
 Should eradication not be feasible, resource intensive ongoing management and control 
programs would be necessary to manage the threats to public and animal health, associated 
with endemic RABV infection in feral and wild animals. 
 Oral vaccination campaigns are not always feasible or effective, such as with bats (AHA 2021b). 
 Trap, vaccinate and release programs for wildlife are time consuming and expensive (WHA 
2018). 
 The efficacy and safety of rabies vaccines in Australian native animals is unknown. 
 Indiscriminate culling of maintenance hosts is generally ineffective in controlling RABV 
infections (AHA 2021b). 
Based on these considerations, the effect of the establishment and / or spread of rabies in Australia 
for this criterion was estimated to be significant at the state level. The effect on the national 
economy or the Australian community as a whole and not just on directly affected parties, 
corresponds to minor at the national level (national effect score of E in Figure 2 ). 
The effect on domestic trade or industry, including changes in consumer demand and effects on other 
industries suppling inputs to, or using outputs from, directly affected industries 
Depending on the location, the emergency response may impact local industries, especially those 
associated with animals and animal products. 
 During the emergency response, quarantine and movement restrictions may be imposed on 
infected or potentially infected animals (AHA 2021b). 
 Movement controls may also be applied for carcasses and animal products and by products 
from susceptible species showing clinical signs, waste products, effluent, vehicles and 
equipment (AHA 2021b). 
 Restrictions may also be applied to sales and shows for dogs and cats, and other susceptible 
species during any emergency response (AHA 2021b). 
 Following detection or RABV within one state / territory of Australia, the other states / 
territories may impose movement restrictions until the extent of the outbreak is known. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
36  The impacts on domestic industries of an emergency response to a RABV incursion would differ 
in urban and rural areas. 
Rabies vaccination may be required as part of the emergency response or long term management. 
 Currently only one rabies vaccine for companion animals is available in Australia and is 
restricted to limited uses such as for pre-export preparation or emergency disease responses. 
 No oral rabies vaccines are currently available in Australia. 
Based on these considerations, the effect of the establishment and / or spread of rabies in Australia 
for this criterion was estimated to be significant at the state level. The effect on the national 
economy or the Australian community as a whole and not just on directly affected parties, 
corresponds to minor at the national level (national effect score of E in Figure 2 ). 
The effect on international trade, including loss of and restriction of markets, meeting new technical 
requirements to enter or maintain markets, and changes in international consumer demand 
Australia’s freedom from RABV is recognised by most trading partners. A change in Australia’s status 
would result in disruption to these markets. However, there are well established international 
protocols for managing the biosecurity risk which could be readily adopted. 
 In the event of a detection, pre-export or post-arrival quarantine may be required for 
companion animals being exported to RABV free markets. 
 There would be significant costs for owners associated with any additional measures such as 
vaccination, RNATT and quarantine. 
 In the event of a detection, there may be significant disruption to movement of dogs and cats to 
New Zealand and other RABV free countries. 
 If RABV was to establish, renegotiation of some export protocols would be required. 
Some export markets currently require rabies risk management measures for companion animals 
before export from Australia. No effect would be expected for these markets should RABV be 
detected in Australia. 
 Rabies vaccination and subsequent RNATT is already required for the export of companion 
animals to some markets. 
Based on these considerations, the effect of the establishment and / or spread of rabies in Australia 
for this criterion was estimated to be significant at the regional level. The effect on the national 
economy or the Australian community as a whole and not just on directly affected parties, 
corresponds to minor  at the state level (national effect score of D in Figure 2 ). 
The effect on the environment, including biodiversity, endangered species and the integrity of 
ecosystems 
Several potential wildlife reservoirs for RABV in Australia are vulnerable or endangered. This status 
would be further impacted by control programs should RABV establish in Australia. 
 The grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) is listed as a vulnerable species under the 
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
37  Several species of Australian carnivorous marsupials (order Dasyuromorphia) are also listed as 
endangered or vulnerable under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 
1999. 
 Control programs including culling or vaccination of potential wildlife reservoirs hosts may have 
significant impacts on biodiversity. 
Based on these considerations, the effect of the establishment and / or spread of rabies in Australia 
for this criterion was estimated to be significant at the state level. The effect on the national 
economy or the Australian community as a whole and not just on directly affected parties, 
corresponds to minor at the national level (national effect score of E in Figure 2 ). 
The effect on communities, including reduced rural and regional economic viability and loss of social 
amenity, and any ‘side effects’ of control measures 
Depending on the location, the emergency response may impact local economies and their ongoing 
viability. 
 Emergency responses to a detection, including animal and animal product movement 
restrictions and culling programs, may have significant impacts on regional economies. 
 Restrictions may also be applied to sales and shows for dogs, cats and other susceptible species 
during any emergency response (AHA 2021b). 
 Following detection or RABV within one state / territory of Australia, the other states / 
territories may impose movement restrictions until the extent of the outbreak is known. 
 Should disease establish within an area, the costs of vaccination of companion animals and 
serological tests to confirm vaccination would be borne by pet owners.  
Local communities would be expected to have concerns regarding the emergency animal disease 
response. In particular, quarantine and euthanasia of pets, livestock and wildlife may not be well 
supported. 
 Culling programs may raise public concerns for wildlife and feral animals, and negatively impact 
community support for disease control programs (AHA 2021b). 
 There would likely be community concern regarding orders to quarantine and or euthanase 
animals during an emergency response. 
Public health responses to a detection of RABV within a region would cause significant social impacts 
to the community and may be costly based on estimates from other countries. 
 There would be significant social impacts should there be human deaths and the need for PEP 
for members of the public that had contact with suspected infected animals. 
 Preventative immunisation would likely be recommended for those in certain high-risk 
occupations such as laboratory workers, and people who may have direct contact with 
susceptible mammals especially bats and carnivores (WHO 2018a). 
 Preventative immunisation may also be recommended for people travelling to RABV-affected 
remote areas (WHO 2018a). Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
38  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that post-exposure treatments 
for rabies in the United States typically exceeds USD $3,000 per patient (CDC 2019). 
 In the United States, the cost per human life saved ranges from USD $10,000 to $100 million 
depending on the nature of the exposure and the probability of RABV in a region (CDC 2019). 
 The CDC estimates that the United States public health costs relating to rabies range from USD 
$245 million to $510 million annually (CDC 2019). This does not include healthcare costs, animal 
control measures and time lost from work. 
Based on these considerations, the effect of the establishment and / or spread of rabies in Australia 
for this criterion was estimated to be significant at the state level. The effect on the national 
economy or the Australian community as a whole and not just on directly affected parties, 
corresponds to minor  at the national level (national effect score of E in Figure 2 ). 
3.5 Estimation of the likely consequences 
The effect scores (A-G) obtained for each direct and indirect criterion were combined to give the 
overall effect by applying the rules outlined in Table 10  in numerical order until one applies. 
Table 10 Rules used for combining direct and indirect effects 
Rule Effect scores for each direct and indirect criterion Overall effect 
1 Any criterion has an impact of ‘G’; or 
more than one criterion has an impact of ‘F’; or 
a single criterion has an impact of ‘F’ and each remaining criterion an 
‘E’. Extreme 
2 A single criterion has an impact of ‘F’; or 
all criteria have an impact of ‘E’. High 
3 One or more criteria have an impact of ‘E’; or 
all criteria have an impact of ‘D’. Moderate 
4 One or more criteria have an impact of ‘D’; or 
all criteria have an impact of ‘C’. Low 
5 One or more criteria have an impact of ‘C’; or 
all criteria have an impact of ‘B’. Very Low 
6 One or more but not all criteria have an impact of ‘B’; or all criteria have 
an effect of ‘A’. Negligible 
By using these rules, the overall effect of establishment and / or spread associated with the outbreak 
scenario was estimated to be high . The estimate of the overall effect associated with the outbreak 
scenario was combined with the likelihood of establishment and / or spread for the scenario using 
Figure 3  to obtain an estimation of likely consequences. 
The likelihood of establishment and/or spread ( moderate ) was combined with the estimate of the 
overall effect of establishment and/or spread ( high ), to result in a rating of high likely consequences. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
39 Figure 3 Matrix for determining likely consequences: combining the likelihood and 
overall effect of establishment and / or spread 
 
3.6 Risk estimation 
Risk estimation is the integration of the likelihood of entry and exposure and the likely consequences 
of establishment and/or spread to derive the risk associated with the entry, exposure, establishment 
and/or spread of rabies introduced by the importation of dogs and cats into Australia. Using Figure 
4, the likelihood of entry and exposure ( high ) is combined with the likely consequences of 
establishment and/or spread ( high ), resulting in a risk estimation of high . 
Figure 4 Risk estimation matrix 
 
The unrestricted risk associated with rabies is determined to be high.  The unrestricted risk 
exceeds Australia’s ALOP and therefore risk management is deemed necessary. 
Table 11 Summary of risk assessment 
Commodity Likelihood 
of entry Likelihood 
of 
exposure Likelihood 
of entry 
and 
exposure Likelihood of 
establishment 
and/or 
spread Overall effect 
of 
establishment 
and/or 
spread Likely 
consequences Unrestricted 
risk 
Dogs and 
cats High High High Moderate High High High 
Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
40 4 Risk management measures 
4.1 Pre-export risk management  
After consideration of the available technical information presented in Section 2, the following pre-
export conditions are recommended to manage the risk of RABV presented by imported dogs and 
cats. 
4.1.1  Pre-export risk management considerations  
Identification 
Identification of an individual cat or dog for import into Australia is critical to link the animal to its 
pre-export preparation. Non-compliance and certification anomalies for rabies vaccination status 
and RNATT results requires a stringent means of ensuring these correspond to the animal that 
arrives in Australia. 
Microchip implants are internationally recognised as an acceptable form of individual identification 
in animals. Microchips use passive radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology. International 
standards promote compatibility between chips and scanners. 
Dogs or cats for import into Australia must be implanted with an International Organization for 
Standardization (ISO) compliant microchip. This review recommends that the microchip must be 
implanted before commencing pre-export preparation. 
To ensure the microchip relates to the animal being exported, before pre-export preparation 
commences (and before blood is collected for an RNATT), a declaration by an official veterinarian, 
should accompany the import permit application. This should certify that the official has scanned the 
animal’s microchip, that the animal is microchipped with the stated microchip number and the 
location of the microchip. This identity certification should apply to imports from group 2 as well as 
group 3 approved countries. While rabies risk management is not a primary consideration for 
imports from group 2 countries, it is a factor if animals are moved through a group 2 country to 
Australia utilising fraudulent activities that shorten the residency period in the group 2 country. 
The risk management measures proposed in the 2013 review can no longer be considered effective 
due to the level of detected and suspected non-compliance and fraudulent documentation relating 
to the animal’s identification. This proposed identification check by a official veterinarian will 
provide additional assurance that the individual cat or dog for import into Australia has been 
correctly linked to accurate pre-export preparation. 
The review also considered alternative options for animal identification ranging from simple 
documentation or photographs to DNA profiling, but all such options have significant limitations that 
make them currently unsuitable for international movement or trade purposes. No other form of 
animal identification was identified that is as easily verifiable, and internationally standardised and 
recognised to be appropriate for accurately identifying an individual animal for the purpose of 
import into Australia. Identification measures must be able to be applied to both dogs and cats. DNA 
profiling, while promising, is not sufficiently developed or standardised in companion animals to 
allow use for routine identity confirmation in international trade. In addition, the identification Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
41 measure must be able to be easily verified by veterinarians and official veterinarians preparing 
animals for export to Australia and during biosecurity checks post entry. 
Approved and non-approved countries  
Dogs and cats can only be imported directly into Australia from approved countries. Dogs and cats 
must have resided in approved countries or Australia for 180 days immediately before export to 
Australia. Any changes to the current list of approved countries in Table 6  is outside the scope of this 
review. 
However, given the increasing rate of detected and suspected non-compliance and certification 
anomalies, the list of approved countries should be reviewed as needed. Changes in trade volume, 
post border compliance verification reports, and changes in animal health status, competent 
authority or official veterinary services, should be considered when determining the need to review 
a country’s approval status. 
Australia’s current process of approving countries is based on an assessment of the animal health 
status and the official controls, which underpin this status, to determine if imports from that country 
can reliably meet Australia’s import conditions. Historically, countries were approved mainly on their 
RABV status but this has changed as other diseases were added to the list of hazards to be 
considered. Other diseases of concern for the importation of dogs and cats are listed in the 2013 
review (Department of Agriculture 2013). 
Approved countries, through their competent authorities, provide confidence to Australia that all 
companion animals intended for export are prepared and compliant with current import conditions 
before export to Australia. Veterinary health certificates are used by approved countries as 
documentary evidence for pre-export preparation. 
Non-approved countries have not been determined to reliably meet Australia’s import conditions. 
Direct importation of companion animals from these countries is not permitted. However, dogs and 
cats from non-approved countries are currently permitted entry via an approved country (the non-
approved country pathway). This pathway includes some pre-export preparation in the non-
approved country. In many instances it has not been possible to reliably verify these preparations. 
This review recommends that the non-approved country pathway no longer be available. Dog and 
cats from non-approved countries must reside in an approved country for at least 180 days 
immediately before export to Australia. After this residency period, the dog and cat can be exported 
to Australia provided it meets all import conditions required for the approved country. 
Transit or transhipments en route to Australia via non-approved countries is not considered to be 
part of an animal’s residency as long as the animal does not leave the international side of the 
airport or is held in an approved equivalent quarantine arrangement. 
Country or zone freedom  
The department assesses whether a country or zone is free from RABV. As part of this assessment, 
consideration of whether a country or zone is free from RABV in all species and not just RABV in 
domestic dogs. It should be noted that the country or zone freedom is for RABV only and does not 
include other lyssaviruses. Australia will also consider any WOAH self-declarations of RABV freedom Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
42 as part of the assessment. The competent authority’s import conditions, border controls, laboratory 
and surveillance systems for RABV would also be considered. 
Dogs and cats currently imported directly into Australia from approved countries, which Australia 
considers free from RABV, do not require additional risk management measures for rabies. Dogs and 
cats imported from group 1 and group 2 approved countries, must have resided solely in group 1 or 
2 countries or Australia for 180 days immediately or since birth before export to Australia. For 
group  1 approved countries, the department has considered the equivalency provided by 
harmonisation of import conditions with Australia in the past. However, should this not continue to 
be the case, or where there is evidence of networks operating to fraudulently circumvent risk 
management measures, the recognition of equivalency may not be possible. 
For Australian origin animals where the microchip was implanted in Australia before export, and 
which were exported less than 180 days before return to Australia, residency within Australia can be 
considered as part of the 180 days residency requirement. 
This review recommends that certification of this residency period in a rabies-free country or zone 
be required on the veterinary health certificate to reduce the risk associated with potential 
fraudulent residency records. 
Vaccination 
Vaccination against rabies is an essential risk management measure for dogs and cats being 
exported from countries where RABV is present in the domestic and/or wildlife mammal population. 
Vaccination has been shown to induce an effective and relatively long-lasting (from 1 to 3 years) 
humoral immune response in dogs and cats. 
This review does not recommend any changes to the current import condition for rabies vaccination 
for dogs and cats from approved countries where RABV is present. All dogs and cats imported from 
group 3 approved countries must be vaccinated against rabies, according to manufacturer’s 
recommendations, before export to Australia with an inactivated RABV vaccine. 
Rabies vaccines should only be administered to animals at least 12 weeks of age due to maternal 
antibody interference in the development of active immunity. Further boosters are required to 
maintain immunity and should follow manufacturer’s instructions. 
Vaccination should be with an inactivated RABV vaccine approved for use by the competent 
authority of the country of export and their development and manufacturing meeting WOAH 
Manual recommendations. 
An official government veterinarian must certify when a rabies vaccination is administered for the 
purpose of export to Australia. Certification must also include the recommended booster date based 
on manufacturer’s instructions. Vaccination must not have lapsed and be current at the date of 
export to Australia and at all times during the preceding 180 days. 
Pre-export confirmatory testing 
The presence of RABV specific virus-neutralising antibodies, as detected by an RNATT, is considered 
a reliable indicator of effective vaccination. The WOAH Code has set the standard for demonstration Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
43 of an adequate serological response to rabies vaccination before international animal movement at 
0.5 IU/mL (WOAH 2022b). 
The competent authority’s systems for oversight of approved veterinarians collecting samples for 
pre-export testing are essential for ensuring Australia has confidence in the integrity of samples and 
the chain of custody. Certification anomalies have been detected where samples are not directly 
transferred to the laboratory by the veterinarian but by the owners, pet agents or commercial 
couriers. There have also been considerable delays between sample collection and arrival at the 
laboratory. 
This review found that the validity period of the RNATT should be aligned with the current WOAH 
manual of testing guidelines. Therefore, it should be reduced from 24 months (in the current 
conditions) to 12 months. This review also found that the date samples arrive at the laboratory must 
continue to be at least 180 days before export to Australia to prevent suspected fraudulent sample 
batch testing. 
All dogs and cats being imported from approved countries where RABV is present (group 3) must 
return a post-vaccination RNATT of at least 0.5 IU/mL at least 180 days before export to Australia. 
This blood sample must arrive at the laboratory for testing at least 180 days and not more than 12 
months before the date of the export to Australia. 
If animals have not been exported within 12 months of the date of arrival of the sample at the 
laboratory, a second RNATT (of at least 0.5 IU/mL) can demonstrate ongoing serological protection. 
In this case the sample should arrive at the laboratory within 12 months of the date of the original 
sample. 
Preventive treatment 
No treatment is currently available for animals after the exposure to RABV. There are few studies on 
PEP in animals, and the efficacy is unclear. 
Pre-export inspection 
The current import conditions for dogs and cats requires that the animal be inspected within 5 days 
of export and must be found to be free from ticks, fleas and clinical signs of infectious or contagious 
disease. This requirement is similar to the WOAH Code, which recommends animals should show no 
clinical signs of rabies on the day before or on the day of export (WOAH 2022b). No changes are 
proposed to this requirement for pre-export inspection. 
4.2 Post-entry risk management 
After reviewing the available technical literature on RABV in section 2, the following post-entry 
conditions are recommended to manage the risk of RABV presented by imported dogs and cats. 
4.2.1 Post-entry risk management considerations 
Since the 2013 review, there have been significant changes to the trade in companion animals. More 
companion animals are now being purchased online from overseas or imported into Australia for 
commercial purposes. This is also the experience in other countries, where an increased RABV 
biosecurity risk has been associated with these imports. The importation of rescue dogs for Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
44 rehoming resulted in importation of rabid animals into the United States four times since 2015 (OIE 
2021b; Pieracci et al. 2021; ProMED 2020, 2021). 
The incidence of falsified or incomplete documentation related to rabies vaccination and serological 
testing accompanying imports into the United States from high RABV risk countries increased from 
2018 to2020 (Pieracci et al. 2021). Similar issues with missing or fraudulent documentation for 
rabies vaccination have been found in the European Union (Ribadeau-Dumas et al. 2016; Zucca et al. 
2020). These increasing anomalies mean that no single pre-export RABV risk management measure, 
other than 180 days residency in a RABV free country, adequately manage the biosecurity risk. 
Additional post-entry risk management measures are required for approved countries where RABV is 
well controlled to achieve Australia’s ALOP. 
Differential post-entry import conditions must be applied for companion animals depending on if 
they are imported from group 1 and 2 (RABV free) or group 3 (RABV well controlled) countries/ 
jurisdictions into Australia. These risk management options are outlined below. 
Post-entry quarantine (PEQ) 
Since the 2013 review when the PEQ period was reduced to at least 10 days, there have been no 
cases of rabies in PEQ or following released from PEQ. However, there have been imports of 
companion animals incubating RABV in other countries where PEQ is not required ( Table 12 ). From 
2002 to 2013, there were 21 rabies cases in animals in western Europe after importation from 
Morocco and eastern Europe (Perez de Diego et al. 2015; Ribadeau-Dumas et al. 2016). Nine rabid 
dogs were imported into France between 2001 and2011 (Mailles et al. 2011), four into the United 
States between 2015 and 2021 (OIE 2021b; Pieracci et al. 2021; ProMED 2020, 2021; Raybern et al. 
2020) and two into Canada in 2021-2022 (OIE 2021d, 2022). No PEQ period is applied to imports in 
these countries and these cases were associated with illegal movements, smuggling or commercial 
imports. 
Table 12 Imports of companion animals incubating RABV since 2011 
Year Country Details Time to clinical signs / 
death after import Reference 
2011 France Illegal importation of dog from Morocco 
via Spain to France 1 day Mailles et al. (2011) 
2013 Spain Illegal movement of dog from Morocco 50 days Perez de Diego et al. 
(2015) 
2016 Western 
Europe Study of imported cases in western 
Europe between 2001 and 2013. The 
majority of these were non-compliant 
with import conditions. 14 days (average 
infectious period). Ribadeau-Dumas et 
al. (2016) 
2019 The United 
States Import of dogs from Egypt via Canada 23 days Raybern et al. 
(2020) 
2021 Germany Illegal import of 8-week-old puppy from 
Turkey via Bulgaria to Germany 7 days OIE (2021c) 
2021 Canada Import from Iran 10 days OIE (2021d) Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
45 Year Country Details Time to clinical signs / 
death after import Reference 
2021 The United 
States Rescue import from Azerbaijan 3 days OIE (2021b) 
2022 Canada Import from Iran 197 days OIE (2022) 
Based on the experience in other countries, most cases associated with fraudulent documentation 
or illegal importation showed clinical signs of rabies within 30 days of entry. This is consistent with 
Australia’s pre-2013 policy for the importation of dogs and cats, where a minimum 30-day PEQ 
period was required for animals from countries where RABV was present (Department of Agriculture 
2013). Smith et al. (2021) suggested a 30-day pre-export waiting period after the certified serological 
testing would have reduced the likelihood of entry of rabid animals into the European Union and the 
United States in most recent cases associated with fraudulent certification as the animals would 
have displayed clinical signs during a 30-day waiting period prior to export. In experimental RABV 
infection studies, dogs displayed clinical signs and/or died from 11 to 28 days post infection (Cho & 
Lawson 1989; Fekadu et al. 1992; Manickam, Basheer & Jayakumar 2008). The recent incident in 
Canada, which did not develop signs for 197 days post importation (OIE 2022), is extremely rare. 
These incidents in these countries where rabies is present but well controlled, resulted in extensive 
public health investigations and loss of animal health status in some cases. 
For dog and cat imports from group 1 and 2 approved countries, the biosecurity risk of RABV is 
managed entirely offshore and no change is recommended to current requirements. That is that no 
PEQ period is required for dogs and cats from group 1 approved countries. For dog and cats imports 
from group 2 approved countries, a minimum 10 day PEQ period is required. 
Returning Australian dogs and cats from group 3 approved countries, where evidence of previous 
export from Australia (e.g. an export permit) can be provided as part of the import permit 
application, should undertake a PEQ period of at least 10 days if they have been prepared in 
compliance with the pre-export measures. Dog and cat imports from group 3 approved countries, if 
the identification check has been completed by an official veterinarian and submitted as part of the 
import permit application, should undertake a PEQ period of at least 10 days if they have been 
prepared in compliance with the pre-export measures. All other dog and cat imports from group 3 
approved countries should undertake a PEQ period of at least 30 days if they have been prepared in 
compliance with the pre-export measures. In some cases, animals may need to he held longer to 
verify compliance with the pre-export measures, in which case the period should not exceed 180 
days. This increase in PEQ period is required due to the significant risks because of 
commercialisation of the companion animals trade, and the increase in detected and suspected 
fraudulent activities associated with pre-export measures. These risks are mitigated without the 
need for an extended PEQ period in returning Australian dogs and cats, and those where 
identification and residency can be confirmed by the official veterinarian. 
PEQ must be undertaken in a PEQ facility operated by the Australian government. Home quarantine 
or isolation does not manage the biosecurity risk and potentially exposes humans to a fatal zoonotic 
disease. In addition, imported cases of RABV detected within a quarantine facility do not affect a Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
46 country’s animal health status, but any cases of infection with RABV detected in home quarantine 
would likely impact Australia’s animal health status. 
Post-entry verification 
Due to the increases in detected and suspected non-compliance and fraudulent certification, 
additional verification may be required for imports from approved countries to ensure the RABV 
biosecurity risks were managed in line with Australia’s import conditions. In instances where it is 
required, this verification at a minimum should ensure that the animal’s veterinary health certificate 
and associated documentation is true and correct, and compliant with the import conditions. 
Imported dogs and cats must be held in PEQ pending this verification for no longer than 180 days. 
Verification could include the following: 
 Confirming authenticity of paperwork and microchip details with the competent authority of 
the exporting country. 
 Confirming the validity and accuracy of test results and associated information with the testing 
laboratory. 
 Confirming the vaccine lot numbers and expiry dates used in that geographical area. 
 Veterinary examination findings, testing or imaging; for example, confirming age by dentition. 
Additional tests, such as RNATT, have limited use for post-entry verification for individual animals, as 
they do not exclude or diagnose RABV infection. However, they could provide further evidence for 
compliance patterns for frequent importers, entities or countries. The use of rabies vaccination post-
entry has limited usefulness as post-exposure prophylaxis. 
Measures to verify compliance with Australia’s import conditions will be implemented as required 
based on routine documentation checks, intelligence or changes in the usual pattern of trade. 
4.3 Recommended pre-export measures 
Based on the preceding, it was concluded that, for importation of dogs and cats from approved 
countries the following combination of pre-export measures is recommended to achieve Australia’s 
ALOP. 
For imports from all approved countries: 
 The animal must be implantation with an ISO compatible microchip before commencing pre-
export preparation. 
 The animal has been examined within 5 days of export and showed no clinical signs of rabies. 
For imports from group 1 approved countries: 
 The animal must have resided in group 1 approved countries or Australia for 180 days (or since 
birth) before export to Australia. 
For imports from group 2 approved countries: 
 The animal must have resided in group 1 or 2 approved countries or Australia for 180 days (or 
since birth) before export to Australia. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
47  The animal’s microchip must have been scanned by an official veterinarian of the exporting 
approved country at least 180 days prior to export to Australia, or before commencing pre-
export preparation for animals less than 6 months. The official veterinarian must provide a 
declaration which includes that the animal is microchipped with the stated microchip number 
and the location of the microchip as part of the import permit application. 
Imports from group 3 approved countries: 
 The animal must have resided in approved countries or Australia for 180 days before export to 
Australia. 
 The animal was vaccinated with an inactivated RABV vaccine approved by the competent 
authority in the country of export (produced in accordance with the methods prescribed in the 
WOAH Manual), in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. Rabies vaccination 
must be current according to the manufacturer’s recommendations at all times between when 
blood was taken for RNATT and up to the time of export. 
 The blood sample collected from the animal for an RNATT must arrive at the laboratory at least 
180 days and not more than 12 months (365 days) before the date of export to Australia. 
 The blood sample collected from the animal returned an RNATT result of at least 0.5 IU/mL 
within 12 months (365 days) immediately before export. 
 Either 
 The animal has previously been exported from Australia and evidence of this export (such 
as the export permit) has been provided as part of the import permit application.  
OR 
 The animal’s microchip must have been scanned by an official veterinarian of the exporting 
approved country at least 180 days prior to export to Australia and prior to collecting the 
blood sample for the RNATT. The official veterinarian must provide a declaration which 
includes that the animal is microchipped with the stated microchip number and the 
location of the microchip as part of the import permit application. 
OR 
 The animal is neither a returning Australian origin animal nor has had its identity confirmed 
by an official veterinarian.  
Note: If animals are not exported within 12 months of the date of arrival of the sample at the 
laboratory, a second RNATT (of at least 0.5 IU/mL) can demonstrate an ongoing serological 
protection. In this case, the sample must arrive at the laboratory within 12 months of the original 
sample. In addition, the blood sample must be collected within 12 months of the original blood 
sample date. 
Note: Dogs and cats from non-approved countries must be legally moved to, and reside in, an 
approved country for at least 180 days immediately before export to Australia. After which, the dog 
and cat can be imported into Australia provided it meets all relevant import conditions for that 
approved country. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
48 Note: although an identity check is not required as part of the import permit application process, as 
per the existing import conditions, every animal must have its microchip scanned by the attending 
veterinarian to positively confirm its identity at every veterinary visit that forms part of pre-export 
preparations. This identity check requirement remains unchanged in the new import conditions. 
4.4 Recommended post-entry measures 
Based on the preceding considerations it is concluded that, as the specified combination of pre-
export measures achieves Australia’s ALOP for animals from group 1 and group 2 approved 
countries, specific post-entry measures for RABV are not required. Animals from group 1 approved 
countries do not require PEQ. In addition, no change is recommended to the current PEQ period for 
animals from group 2 approved countries and they will continue to require a PEQ period of 10 days. 
For imports from group 3 countries: 
 Either: 
 For returning animals of Australian origin or those that have had their identity confirmed 
by an official veterinarian, a PEQ period of at least 10 days is required if animals are 
prepared in compliance with the pre-export measures. 
OR  
 For all other animals prepared in compliance with the pre-export measures, a PEQ of at 
least 30 days is required. 
 Where considered relevant by the department based on document assessment and/or analysis 
of trade patterns and intelligence data, additional post-entry verification activities to verify 
compliance with the pre-export measures may be required. In such cases, animals may be held 
in PEQ until it can be determined that biosecurity risk has been satisfactorily managed. The 
longest this could be expected to take is 180 days but would typically be a much shorter period. 
5 Biosecurity measures for rabies 
virus 
Dogs and cats can only be imported into Australia directly from an approved country. 
5.1 Importation of dogs or cats from group 1 approved 
countries  
To achieve Australia’s ALOP it is recommended that the following biosecurity measures should apply 
to dogs and cats imported from group 1 approved countries: 
1) The dog or cat must have been implanted with an ISO compatible microchip before 
commencing pre-export preparation. 
AND Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
49 2) The dog or cat must be continuously resident for at least 180 days immediately before export, 
or since birth, in group 1 approved countries or Australia. 
AND 
3) The dog or cat must be examined and found free from clinical signs of rabies within 5 days of 
export to Australia. 
5.2 Importation of dogs or cats from group 2 approved 
countries 
To achieve Australia’s ALOP it is recommended that the following biosecurity measures should apply 
to dogs and cats imported from group 2 approved countries: 
1) The dog or cat must have been implanted with an ISO compatible microchip before 
commencing pre-export preparation. 
AND 
2) The dog or cat must be continuously resident for at least 180 days immediately before export, 
or since birth, in group 1 or 2 approved countries or Australia. 
AND 
3) At least 180 days before export to Australia, the dog or cat’s microchip must be scanned by an 
official veterinarian, and the stated microchip number, the location of the microchip and date of 
scanning must be included in a declaration as part of the import permit application. For animals 
less than six months of age, this scan must be completed prior to commencing pre-export 
preparation. 
AND 
4) The dog or cat must be examined and found free from clinical signs of rabies within 5 days of 
export to Australia. 
AND 
5) The dog or cat must undertake a PEQ period of at least 10 days (if prepared in compliance with 
the pre-export measures) at a government quarantine facility. 
5.3 Importation of dogs or cats from group 3 approved 
countries  
To achieve Australia’s ALOP it is recommended that the following biosecurity measures should apply 
to dogs and cats imported from a group 3 approved country: 
1) The dog or cat must have been implanted with an ISO compatible microchip before 
commencing pre-export preparation. 
AND 
2) The dog or cat must be continuously resident for at least 180 days immediately before export, 
or since birth, in approved countries or Australia. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
50 AND 
3) At least 180 days before export to Australia, the dog or cat must have been vaccinated with an 
approved inactivated rabies vaccine (produced in accordance with the methods prescribed in 
the WOAH Manual), in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations and which is 
current up to the time of export to Australia. 
AND 
4) A blood sample must be collected from the animal at least 180 days before export to Australia 
and tested using a rabies neutralising antibody titre test (RNATT) – either fluorescent antibody 
virus neutralisation (FAVN) test or rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test (RFFIT) – with a 
positive result of at least 0.5 IU/ml. 
AND 
5) The date the sample collected for the RNATT arrives at the laboratory must be between 180 
days and 12 months (365 days) before the date of export to Australia. 
AND 
6) The dog or cat must be examined and found free from clinical signs of rabies within 5 days of 
export to Australia. 
AND EITHER 
7) Post-entry quarantine period: 
Returning Australian animal: 
a) The dog or cat has previously been exported from Australia and evidence of this export 
(such as the export permit) has been provided as part of the import permit application. 
AND 
b) The dog or cat must undertake a PEQ period of at least 10 days (if prepared in compliance 
with the pre-export measures) at a government quarantine facility. 
OR 
Animals undergoing pre-import permit application identity check: 
c) At least 180 days before export to Australia and before sample collection for the RNATT, 
the dog or cat’s microchip must be scanned by an official veterinarian, and the stated 
microchip number, the location of the microchip and date of scanning must be included in 
a declaration as part of the import permit application. 
                AND 
d) The dog or cat must undertake a PEQ period of at least 10 days (if prepared in compliance 
with the pre-export measures) at a government quarantine facility. 
OR 
Animals without a pre-import permit application identity check: Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
51 e) The dog or cat must undertake a PEQ period of at least 30 days (if prepared in compliance 
with the pre-export measures) at a government quarantine facility. 
Note: with this option, although an identity check is not required as part of the import permit 
application process, as per the existing import conditions, every animal must have its microchip 
scanned by the attending veterinarian to positively confirm its identity at every veterinary visit that 
forms part of pre-export preparations. This identity check requirement remains unchanged in the 
new import conditions. 
 Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
52 Glossary 
Term Definition 
2013 review 2013 Importation of dogs, cats and their semen from approved countries: final 
policy review 
ACDP Australian Centre for Disease Preparedness  
ABLV Australian bat lyssavirus 
ALOP Appropriate level of protection 
appropriate level of protection 
(ALOP) for Australia The Biosecurity Act 2015  defines the appropriate level of protection (or ALOP) for 
Australia as a high level of sanitary and phytosanitary protection aimed at reducing 
biosecurity risks to very low, but not to zero. 
approved countries Countries, including jurisdictions and territories that are approved to directly 
export dogs and cats to Australia  
AUSVETPLAN Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan 
Australian territory Australian territory as referenced in the Biosecurity Act 2015  refers to Australia, 
Christmas Island and Cocos (Keeling) Islands. 
BA Biosecurity advice 
BICON Australia’s Biosecurity Import Condition System 
biosecurity The prevention of the entry, establishment or spread of unwanted pests and 
infectious disease agents to protect human, animal or plant health or life, and the 
environment 
biosecurity measures The Biosecurity Act 2015  defines biosecurity measures as measures to manage any 
of the following: biosecurity risk, the risk of contagion of a listed human disease, 
the risk of listed human diseases entering, emerging, establishing themselves or 
spreading in Australian territory, and biosecurity emergencies and human 
biosecurity emergencies. 
biosecurity risk The Biosecurity Act 2015  refers to biosecurity risk as the likelihood of a disease or 
pest entering, establishing or spreading in Australian territory, and the potential 
for the disease or pest causing harm to human, animal or plant health, the 
environment, economic or community activities. 
Carnivora Order of placental mammals that have specialised in primarily eating flesh, 
including canids and felids 
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
Chiroptera Mammalian order for bats 
CNS Central nervous system 
Dasyuromorphia Mammalian order which includes Australian carnivorous marsupials such as 
antechinus, dunnart, quoll, and Tasmanian devil 
DAFF The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
DFA test / dFAT Direct fluorescent antibody test 
DOI Duration of immunity  
dRIT Direct rapid immunohistochemical test 
EADRA Emergency animal disease response agreement 
EBLV European bat lyssavirus Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
53 Term Definition 
ELISA Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay 
Endemic/ enzootic Belonging to, native to, or prevalent in a particular geography, area or 
environment 
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 
FAVN test Fluorescent antibody virus neutralisation test 
host An organism that harbours a parasite, mutual partner, or commensal partner, 
typically providing nourishment and shelter 
ICTV International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses 
import permit Official document authorising a person to bring or import particular goods into 
Australian territory in accordance with specified import conditions 
IRA Import risk analysis 
ISO International Organization for Standardization  
IU International units 
Lyssavirus  A group of RNA viruses that includes rabies virus and bat lyssavirus 
non-approved countries  countries that have not been approved to directly export dogs and cats to Australia  
non-regulated risk analysis Refers to the process for conducting a risk analysis that is not regulated under 
legislation ( Biosecurity import risk analysis guidelines 2016 ) 
Official veterinarian A veterinarian employed and authorised by the veterinary authority of the 
exporting country to perform certain designated official tasks associated with 
animal health or public health, and inspections of commodities and where 
appropriate to certify. 
ORV Oral rabies vaccines 
PAHO Pan American Health Organization  
pathogen Biological agent that can cause disease to its host 
pathognomonic Disease specific, distinctive characteristic of a disease  
PCR Polymerase chain reaction 
PEP Post-exposure prophylaxis  
PEQ Post-entry quarantine 
quarantine Official confinement of regulated articles for observation and research or for 
further inspection, testing or treatment 
RABV Rabies virus 
reservoir host Animal that serves as a source of infection  
RFFIT Rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test 
RFID Radio-frequency identification  
risk analysis Refers to the technical or scientific process for assessing the level of biosecurity 
risk associated with the goods, or the class of goods, and if necessary, the 
identification of conditions that must be met to manage the level of biosecurity 
risk associated with the goods, or class of goods to a level that achieves the ALOP 
for Australia 
RNATT Rabies neutralising antibody titre test 
spill over infection The ability of a virus to infect a member of a new host species Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
54 Term Definition 
SPS Agreement WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
stakeholders Government agencies, individuals, community or industry groups or organisations, 
in Australia or overseas, including the proponent/applicant for a specific proposal, 
that have an interest in the policy issues 
surveillance An official process that collects and analyses information related to animal health. 
sylvatic cycle The transmission of RABV in wildlife and it is the predominant cycle in the North 
and South America and Europe   
unrestricted risk Unrestricted risk estimates apply in the absence of risk mitigation measures. 
urban cycle The transmission of RABV in urban area with dogs as the main reservoir host   
vector An organism that does not cause disease itself, but which causes infection by 
conveying pathogens from one host to another 
WHA Wildlife Health Australia 
WHO World Health Organization  
WOAH World Organisation for Animal Health, previously abbreviated to the OIE 
WOAH Code WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Code 2022 
WOAH Manual WOAH Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals 2022 
WTO World Trade Organization 
zoonotic disease Disease that is transmittable between animals to human  
  Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
55 References 
AHA 2021a, Animal Health in Australia Annual Report 2019-2020 , Animal Health Australia, Canberra, 
accessed 9 September 2021. 
-- -- 2021b, Response strategy: lyssaviruses , 5.0, Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan 
(AUSVETPLAN), Canberra ACT, accessed 23 December 2021. 
Ali, A, Sifer, D, Getahun, G & Aklilu, M 2014, ‘ Comparison of direct, rapid immunohistochemical test 
performance with direct fluorescent antibody test for rabies diagnosis in Ethiopia ’, Open Journal of 
Biochemistry , vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 49-55, DOI: 10.15764/BIOC.2014.01006, accessed 27 September 
2021. 
Allibert, G, Barret, P, M., B, Birba, P, Bouteiller, L, Bourhy, H, Capdepon, P, J., C, Dacheux, L, Debaere, 
O, Delattre, C, De Valk, H, Dubois, V, Fayaz, R, Famose, C, Goudal, M, Lesage, M, Luent, C, Lucas, N, 
Mailles, A, Marti, E, Paty, M, Portejoie, G, Posière, S, Saura, C, Stein, L, Vaillant, V, Verdon, R, 
Zaslavsky, M & Zeller, P 2008, ‘ Identification of a rabid dog in France illegally introduced from 
Morocco ’, EuroSurveillance , vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 1-2, DOI: 10.2807/ese.13.11.08066-en, accessed 3 
September 2021. 
Animal Medicines Australia 2019, Pets in Australia: a national survey of pets and people , Animal 
Medicines Australia, Animal Medicines Australia, Canberra, Australia, accessed 18 January 2022. 
Baby, J, Mani, RS, Abraham, SS, Thankappan, AT, Pillai, PM, Anand, AM, Madhusudana, SN, 
Ramachandran, J & Sreekumar, S 2015, ‘ Natural rabies infection in a domestic fowl ( Gallus 
domesticus ): a report from India ’, PLoS neglected tropical diseases , vol. 9, no. 7, pp. e0003942-e, 
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003942, accessed 28 January 2022. 
Bahloul, C, Taieb, D, Diouani, MF, Ahmed, SBH, Chtourou, Y, B'Chir, BI, Kharmachi, H & Dellagi, K 
2006, ‘ Field trials of a very potent rabies DNA vaccine which induced long lasting virus neutralizing 
antibodies and protection in dogs in experimental conditions ’, Vaccine , vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 1063-72, 
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2005.09.016, accessed 18 May 2022. 
Begeman, L, GeurtsvanKessel, C, Finke, S, Freuling, CM, Koopmans, M, Müller, T, Ruigrok, TJH & 
Kuiken, T 2018, ‘ Comparative pathogenesis of rabies in bats and carnivores, and implications for 
spillover to humans ’, The Lancet Infectious Diseases , vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 147-59, DOI: 10.1016/s1473-
3099(17)30574-1, accessed 23 August 2021. 
Bell, JF, Clark, HF & Moore, GJ 1977, ‘ Differences in efficiency of protective effect caused by high 
ambient temperature in mice infected with diverse substrains of rabies virus ’, Journal of General 
Virology , vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 307-15, DOI: 10.1099/0022-1317-36-2-307, accessed 15 October 2021. 
Bell, JF & Moore, GJ 1974, ‘ Effects of high ambient temperature on various stages of rabies virus 
infection in mice ’ (in eng), Infection and Immunity , vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 510-5, DOI: 
10.1128/iai.10.3.510-515.1974, accessed 15 October 2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
56 Berndtsson, LT, Nyman, AK, Rivera, E & Klingeborn, B 2011, ‘ Factors associated with the success of 
rabies vaccination of dogs in Sweden ’, Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica , vol. 53, no. 1, p. 22, DOI:  
10.1186/1751-0147-53-22, accessed 23 August 2021. 
Better Business Bureau 2020, ‘ Online puppy scams rising sharply in 2020, BBB warns ’, Better 
Business Bureau , Better Business Bureau, US, accessed 9 September 2021. 
Biosecurity Australia 2010, Import risk analysis report for horses from approved countries: final 
report , Biosecurity Australia, Canberra, accessed 18 May 2022. 
Blancou, J, Soria Baltazar, R, Artois, M, Toma, B & Rollin, P 1989, ‘Rabies despite pre- or post-
exposure vaccination’, paper presented at Progress in rabies control: proceedings of the second 
international IMVI ESSEN/WHO symposium on 'New developments in rabies control', Essen, 5-8 July 
1988, Wells Medical, Kent, pp. 441-7, accessed 18 May 2022. 
Bowen-Davies, J & Lowings, P 2000, ‘ Current perspectives on rabies 1: the biology of rabies and 
rabies-related viruses ’, In Practice , vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 118-24; DOI:10.1136/inpract.22.3.118, accessed 
18 May 2022. 
Briggs, DJ, Smith, JS, Mueller, FL, Schwenke, J, Davis, RD, Gordon, CR, Schweitzer, K, Orciari, LA, 
Yager, PA & Rupprecht, CE 1998, ‘ A comparison of two serological methods for detecting the 
immune response after rabies vaccination in dogs and cats being exported to rabies-free areas ’, 
Biologicals , vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 347-55; DOI: 10.1006/biol.1998.0162; accessed 18 November 2021. 
British Broadcasting Corporation 2020, ‘ Illegal puppy trade warning as sales boom during the Covid 
pandemic ’, British Broadcasting Corporation News , 18 November, accessed 9 September 2021. 
Brunker, K & Mollentze, N 2018, ‘ Rabies virus ’, Trends in Microbiology , vol. 26, no. 10, pp. 886-7, 
DOI: 10.1016/j.tim.2018.07.001, accessed 25 November 2021. 
Campos, AAS, Dos Santos, RN, Benavides, JA, de Carvalho Ruthner Batista, HB, Finoketti, F, Wagner, 
PGC, Zafalon-Silva, B, Alievi, M, da Silva, FB, Witt, A, Tartarotti, A, de Cassia Rodrigues da Silva, A, 
Ferreira, KCS, Frazzon, APG, Roehe, PM & Franco, AC 2020, ‘ Rabies surveillance in wild mammals in 
south of Brazil ’, Transboundary and Emerging Diseases , vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 906-13, DOI: 
10.1111/tbed.13415, accessed 18 November 2021. 
CDC 2019, ‘ Cost of rabies prevention ’, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention, USA, accessed 10 December 2021. 
Cho, HC & Lawson, KF 1989, ‘ Protection of dogs against death from experimental rabies by 
postexposure administration of rabies vaccine and hyperimmune globulin (human) ’, Canadian 
Journal of Veterinary Research , vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 434-7, accessed 28 April 20222. 
Clark, KA, Kelly, VP, Newman, EC, Bilderback, WR, Nettles, WD & Rhodes, TS 1981, ‘Rabies 
vaccination: field observations during epizootics in dogs’, Modern Veterinary Practice , vol. 62, no. 12, 
pp. 907-11, accessed 18 November 2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
57 Clark, KA & Wilson, PJ 1996, ‘ Postexposure rabies prophylaxis and preexposure rabies vaccination 
failure in domestic animals ’, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association , vol. 208, no. 11, 
pp. 1827-30; DOI: 10.2460/javma.2001.218.522; accessed 9 November 2021. 
Cliquet, F & Picard-Meyer, E 2004, ‘ Rabies and rabies-related viruses: a modern perspective on an 
ancient disease ’, Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Epizooties , vol. 23, no. 
2, pp. 625-42, DOI: 10.20506/rst.23.2.1514, accessed 1 September 2021. 
Cliquet, F, Picard-Meyer, E & Robardet, E 2014, ‘ Rabies in Europe: what are the risks? ’, Expert 
Reviews of Anti-Infective Therapy , vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 905-8, DOI: 10.1586/14787210.2014.921570, 
accessed 1 September 2021. 
Cocchi, M, Danesi, P, De Zan, G, Leati, M, Gagliazzo, L, Ruggeri, M, Palei, M, Bremini, A, Rossmann, 
MC, Lippert-Petscharnig, M, Mansfeld, MD, Deotto, S, Leardini, S, Gobbo, F, Zucca, P & De 
Benedictis, P 2021, ‘ A three-year biocrime sanitary surveillance on illegally imported companion 
animals ’, Pathogens , vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 1-12, DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10081047, accessed 17 
September 2021. 
Coyne, MJ, Burr, JH, Yule, TD, Harding, MJ, Tresnan, DB & McGavin, D 2001, ‘ Duration of immunity in 
dogs after vaccination or naturally acquired infection ’, The Veterinary Record , vol. 149, no. 17, pp. 
509-15; DOI: 10.1136/vr.149.17.509; accessed 18 September 2021. 
DAFF 2022, ‘ National notifiable disease list of terrestrial animals as of April 2019 ’, Department of 
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra, accessed 9 September 2022. 
Day, MJ, Horzinek, MC & Schultz, RD 2010, ‘ WSAVA guidelines for the vaccination of dogs and cats ’, 
Journal of Small Animal Practice , vol. 51, no. 6, pp. e1-e32, DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5827.2010.00959a.x, 
accessed 26 November 2021. 
Day, MJ, Horzinek, MC, Schultz, RD & Squires, RA 2016, ‘ WSAVA Guidelines for the vaccination of 
dogs and cats ’, The Journal of Small Animal Practice , vol. 57, no. 1, pp. E1-E45, DOI: 
10.1111/jsap.2_12431, accessed 26 November 2021. 
De Benedictis, P, Mutinelli, F, Veggiato, C, Capua, I, Squecco, G, Coassin, R & Ferri, G 2009, ‘ Rabies in 
a vaccinated dog in Italy ’, The Veterinary Record , vol. 165, no. 7, pp. 216-, DOI: 
10.1136/vr.165.7.216; accessed 28 January 2022. 
Department of Agriculture 2013, ‘ Importation of dogs and cats and their semen from approved 
countries: final policy review ’, Canberra, accessed 28 January 2022. 
Diana, NK, Mitchell, KC & Feldman, KA 2015, ‘ Shedding light on rabies in opossums ’, Journal of the 
American Veterinary Medical Association , vol. 247, no. 11, p. 1229, DOI: 
10.2460/javma.247.11.1227, accessed 12 January 2022. 
Dietzschold, B, Li, J, Faber, M & Schnell, M 2008, ‘ Concepts in the pathogenesis of rabies ’, Future 
Virology , vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 481-90, DOI: 10.2217/17460794.3.5.481, accessed 29 September 2021. 
Esh, JB, Cunnigham, JG & Wiktor, TJ 1982, ‘Vaccine-induced rabies in four cats’, Journal of the 
American Veterinary Medical Association , vol. 180, no. 11, pp. 1336-9, accessed 18 September 2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
58 Fehlner-Gardiner, C 2018, ‘ Rabies control in North America - past, present and future ’, Revue 
Scientifique et Technique , vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 421-37, DOI: 10.20506/rst.37.2.2812, accessed 20 
September 2021. 
Fekadu, M 1982, ‘ Rabies in Ethiopia ’, American Journal of Epidemiology , vol. 115, no. 2, pp. 266-73, 
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113298, accessed 18 September 2021. 
Fekadu, M & Baer, GM 1980, ‘Recovery from clinical rabies of 2 dogs inoculated with a rabies virus 
strain from Ethiopia’, American Journal of Veterinary Research , vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 1632-4, accessed 
20 September 2021. 
Fekadu, M, Sumner, JW, Shaddock, JH, Sanderlin, DW & Baer, GM 1992, ‘ Sickness and recovery of 
dogs challenged with a street rabies virus after vaccination with a vaccinia virus recombinant 
expressing rabies virus N protein ’, Journal of Virology , vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 2601-4, DOI: 
10.1128/jvi.66.5.2601-2604.1992, accessed 24 November 2021. 
Field, HE 2018, ‘ Evidence of Australian bat lyssavirus infection in diverse Australian bat taxa ’, 
Zoonoses and Public Health , vol. 65, no. 6, pp. 742-8, DOI: 10.1111/zph.12480, accessed 3 
September 2021. 
Fisher, CR, Streicker, DG & Schnell, MJ 2018, ‘ The spread and evolution of rabies virus: conquering 
new frontiers ’, Nature Reviews Microbiology , vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 241-55, DOI: 
10.1038/nrmicro.2018.11, accessed 15 September 2021. 
Fitzpatrick, JL, Dyer, JL, Blanton, JD, Kuzmin, IV & Rupprecht, CE 2014, ‘ Rabies in rodents and 
lagomorphs in the United States, 1995–2010  ’, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical 
Association , vol. 245, no. 3, pp. 333-7, DOI: 10.2460/javma.245.3.333, accessed 30 November 2021. 
Fooks, AR 2001, ‘ Keeping rabies out by surveillance strategies, vaccination and serology ’, paper 
presented at Proceedings of the Southern and Eastern African rabies group / World Health 
Organization Meeting, 18-22 June 2001, Lilongwe, Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi, World Health 
Organization, Geneva, pp. 131-5, accessed 15 September 2021 . 
Fooks, AR, Cliquet, F, Finke, S, Freuling, C, Hemachudha, T, Mani, RS, Müller, T, Nadin-Davis, S, 
Picard-Meyer, E, Wilde, H & Banyard, AC 2017, ‘ Rabies ’, Nature Reviews Disease Primers , vol. 3, no. 
17091, pp. 1-19, DOI: 10.1038/nrdp.2017.91, accessed 23 November 2021. 
Fooks, AR, McElhinney, L & Pollitt, WJ 2000, ‘Rabies antibody and the pet travel scheme’, The 
Veterinary Record , vol. 147, no. 15, pp. 427, accessed 15 September 2021. 
Gerber, JD, Sharpee, RL, Swieczkowski, TC & Beckenhauer, WH 1985, ‘ Cell-mediated immune 
response to rabies virus in dogs following vaccination and challenge ’, Veterinary Immunology and 
Immunopathology , vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 13-22, DOI: 10.1016/0165-2427(85)90126-6, accessed 20 April 
2022. 
Gnanadurai, CW, Yang, Y, Huang, Y, Li, Z, Leyson, CM, Cooper, TL, Platt, SR, Harvey, SB, Hooper, DC, 
Faber, M & Fu, ZF 2015, ‘ Differential host immune responses after Infection with wild-type or lab-
attenuated rabies viruses in dogs ’, PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases , vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1-15, DOI: 
10.1371/journal.pntd.0004023, accessed 28 October 2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
59 Goncalves Costa, A, Nielsen, T, Dal Grande, E, Tuke, J & Hazel, S 2020, ‘ Regulatory compliance in 
online dog advertisements in Australia ’, Animals vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1-20, DOI: 10.3390/ani10030425, 
accessed 17 September 2021. 
Gossner, CM, Mailles, A, Aznar, I, Dimina, E, Echevarría, JE, Feruglio, SL, Lange, H, Maraglino, FP, 
Parodi, P, Perevoscikovs, J, Van der Stede, Y & Bakonyi, T 2020, ‘ Prevention of human rabies: a 
challenge for the European Union and the European Economic Area ’, EuroSurveillance , vol. 25, no. 
38, pp. 1-8, DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.Es.2020.25.38.2000158, accessed 20 December 2021. 
Greene, C 2013, ‘Rabies and other lyssaviral infections’, in J Sykes & C Greene (eds), Infectious 
Diseases of the Dog and Cat , 4th edn, Saunders St Louis, Missouri, US, p. 1376, accessed 6 
September 2021.  
Hampson, K, Dushoff, J, Cleaveland, S, Haydon, DT, Kaare, M, Packer, C & Dobson, M 2009, 
‘Transmission dynamics and prospects for the elimination of canine rabies ’, PLoS Biology , vol. 7, no. 
3, pp. 0462; DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000053, accessed 25 August 2021. 
Hanlon, CA, Kuzmin, IV, Blanton, JD, Weldon, WC, Manangan, JS & Rupprecht, CE 2005, ‘ Efficacy of 
rabies biologics against new lyssaviruses from Eurasia ’, Virus Research , vol. 111, no. 1, pp. 44-54, 
DOI: 10.1016/j.virusres.2005.03.009, accessed 15 September 2021. 
HogenEsch, H, Thompson, S, Dunham, A, Ceddia, M & Hayek, M 2004, ‘ Effect of age on immune 
parameters and the immune response of dogs to vaccines: a cross-sectional study ’, Veterinary 
Immunology and Immunopathology , vol. 97, pp. 77-85, DOI: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2003.08.010, 
accessed 15 December 2021. 
Horie, M, Akashi, H, Kawata, M & Tomonaga, K 2021, ‘ Identification of a reptile lyssavirus in Anolis 
allogus  provided novel insights into lyssavirus evolution ’, Virus Genes , vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 40-9, DOI: 
10.1007/s11262-020-01803-y, accessed 28 January 2022. 
Horton, DL, McElhinney, LM, Marston, DA, Wood, JLN, Russell, CA, Lewis, N, Kuzmin, IV, Fouchier, 
RAM, Osterhaus, ADME, Fooks, AR & Smith, DJ 2010, ‘ Quantifying antigenic relationships among the 
lyssaviruses ’, The Journal of Virology , vol. 84, no. 22, pp. 11841-8, DOI: 10.1128/JVI.01153-10, 
accessed 8 April 2022. 
Houle, MK 2017, ‘ Perspective from the field: illegal puppy imports uncovered at JFK airport  ’, Centers 
for Disease Control and Prevention Centers for Disease Control and Prevention US, accessed 28 July 
2021. 
House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy 2020, Tackling the 
feral cat pandemic: a plan to save Australian wildlife , Parliament of Australia, Commonweath of 
Australia, Canberra, Australia.  
Huang, AS-E, Chen, W-C, Huang, W-T, Huang, S-T, Lo, Y-C, Wei, S-H, Kuo, H-W, Chan, P-C, Hung, M-N, 
Liu, Y-L, Mu, J-J, Yang, J-Y, Liu, D-P, Chou, J-H, Chuang, J-H & Chang, F-Y 2015, ‘ Public health 
responses to reemergence of animal rabies, Taiwan, July 16-December 28, 2013 ’, PLOS One , vol. 10, 
no. 7, pp. 1-14, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132160, accessed 9 August 2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
60 ICTV 2021, ‘ Genus: Lyssavirus ’, International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses, US, accessed 8 
April 2022. 
Jackson, AC 2003, ‘ Rabies virus infection: an update ’, Journal of Neurovirology , vol. 9, pp. 253-8; DOI: 
10.1080/13550280390193975; accessed 15 September 2021. 
Jayasundara, VK 2020, ‘Public awareness on vaccination of cats against rabies and risk of human 
rabies due to cats in Sri Lanka ’, International Journal of Infectious Diseases , vol. 101, no. S1, p. 249, 
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.11.086, accessed 30 November 2021. 
Jibat, T, Hogeveen, H & Mourits, MC 2015, ‘ Review on dog rabies vaccination coverage in Africa: a 
question of dog accessibility or cost recovery ?’, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases , vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 1-
13, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003447, accessed 1 September 2021. 
Kaila, M, Marjoniemi, J & Nokireki, T 2019, ‘ Comparative study of rabies antibody titers of dogs 
vaccinated in Finland and imported street dogs vaccinated abroad ’, Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica , 
vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 1-4, DOI: 10.1186/s13028-019-0450-8, accessed 16 December 2021. 
Katz, IS, Fuoco, NL, Chaves, LB, Rodrigues, AC, Ribeiro, OG, Scheffer, KC & Asano, KM 2016, ‘ Delayed 
progression of rabies transmitted by a vampire bat ’, Archives of Virology , vol. 161, no. 9, pp. 2561-6, 
DOI: 10.1007/s00705-016-2927-3, accessed 20 September 2021. 
Kinsella, E 2020, ‘ Pandemic puppies selling for exorbitant prices as demand soars in lockdown-hit 
Victoria ’, Australian Broadcasting Corporation News , 16 September, accessed 03 September 2021. 
Klevar, S, Høgåsen, HR, Davidson, RK, Hamnes, IS, Treiberg Berndtsson, L & Lund, A 2015, ‘ Cross-
border transport of rescue dogs may spread rabies in Europe ’, The Veterinary Record , vol. 176, no. 
26, p. 672, DOI: 10.1136/vr.102909, accessed 12 July 2021. 
Lafon, M 2002, ‘Immunology’, in AC Jackson & WH Wunner (eds), Rabies , Academic Press, 
Amsterdam, pp. 351-69, accessed 15 September 2021. 
Lakshmanan, N, Gore, TC, Duncan, KL, Coyne, MJ, Lum, MA & Sterner, FJ 2006, ‘Three-year rabies 
duration of immunity in dogs following vaccination with a core combination vaccine against canine 
distemper virus, canine adenovirus type-1, canine parvovirus, and rabies virus’, Veterinary 
Therapeutics , vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 223-31, accessed 18 September 2021. 
Lan, YC, Wen, TH, Chang, CC, Liu, HF, Lee, PF, Huang, CY, Chomel, BB & Chen, YA 2017, ‘ Indigenous 
wildlife rabies in Taiwan: ferret badgers, a long term terrestrial reservoir ’, BioMed Research 
International , vol. 2017, pp. 1-6, pp. 5491640, DOI: 10.1155/2017/5491640, accessed 9 August 2021. 
Lodmell, DL 1983, ‘ Genetic control of resistance to street rabies virus in mice ’, Journal of 
Experimental Medicine , vol. 157, no. 2, pp. 451-60, DOI: 10.1084/jem.157.2.451, accessed 15 
October 2021. 
Lodmell, DL, Parnell, MJ, Weyhrich, JT & Ewalt, LC 2003, ‘ Canine rabies DNA vaccination: a single-
dose intradermal injection into ear pinnae elicits elevated and persistent levels of neutralizing 
antibody ’, Vaccine , vol. 21, no. 25-26, pp. 3998-4002, DOI: 10.1016/S0264-410X(03)00297-4, 
accessed 1 September 2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
61 Madhusudana, SN, Subha, S, Thankappan, U & Ashwin, YB 2012, ‘ Evaluation of a direct rapid 
immunohistochemical test (dRIT) for rapid diagnosis of rabies in animals and humans ’, Virologica 
Sinica , vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 299-302, DOI: 10.1007/s12250-012-3265-6, accessed 23 November 2021. 
Maher, J & Wyatt, T 2019, ‘ Rural-urban dynamics in the UK illegal puppy trade: trafficking and trade 
in ‘man’s best friend ’, International Journal of Rural Law and Policy , vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 1-20, DOI: 
10.5130/ijrlp.2.2019.6266, accessed 10 September 2021. 
-- -- 2021, ‘ European illegal puppy trade and organised crime ’, Trends in Organized Crime , vol. 24, no. 
4, pp. 506-25, DOI: 10.1007/s12117-021-09429-8, accessed 10 September 2021. 
Mailles, A, Boisseleau, D, Dacheux, L, Michalewiscz, C, Gloaguen, C, Ponçon, N, Bourhy, H, Callon, H, 
Vaillant, V, Dabosville, I & Morineau-Le Houssine, P 2011, ‘ Rabid dog illegally imported to France 
from Morocco, August 2011 ’, EuroSurveillance , vol. 16, no. 33, pp. 1-3, DOI: 
10.2807/ese.16.33.19946-en, accessed 17 September 2021. 
Maki, J, Guiot, A-L, Aubert, M, Brochier, B, Cliquet, F, Hanlon, CA, King, R, Oertli, EH, Rupprecht, CE, 
Schumacher, C, Slate, D, Yakobson, B, Wohlers, A & Lankau, EW 2017, ‘ Oral vaccination of wildlife 
using a vaccinia-rabies-glycoprotein recombinant virus vaccine (RABORAL V-RG®): a global review ’, 
Veterinary Research , vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 1-26, DOI: 10.1186/s13567-017-0459-9, accessed 28 January 
2022. 
Manickam, R, Basheer, MD & Jayakumar, R 2008, ‘ Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) of rabies-infected 
Indian street dogs ’, Vaccine , vol. 26, no. 51, pp. 6564-8, DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.09.053, 
accessed 24 November 2021. 
Mansfield, KL, Burr, PD, Snodgrass, DR, Sayers, R & Fooks, AR 2004, ‘ Factors affecting the serological 
response of dogs and cats to rabies vaccination ’, The Veterinary Record , vol. 154, no. 14, pp. 423-6, 
DOI: 10.1136/vr.154.14.423, accessed 15 September 2021. 
McKay, N & Wallis, L 2005, ‘ Rabies: a review of UK management ’, Emergency Medicine Journal , vol. 
22, no. 5, pp. 316-21, DOI: 10.1136/emj.2003.013805, accessed 14 April 2022. 
Meske, M, Fanelli, A, Rocha, F, Awada, L, Soto, PC, Mapitse, N & Tizzani, P 2021, ‘ Evolution of rabies 
in South America and inter-species dynamics (2009-2018) ’, Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease , 
vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1-18, DOI: 10.3390/tropicalmed6020098, accessed 20 September 2021. 
Mesquita, LP, Gamon, THM, Cuevas, SEC, Asano, KM, Fahl, WO, Iamamoto, K, Scheffer, KC, Achkar, 
SM, Zanatto, DA, Mori, CMC, Maiorka, PC & Mori, E 2017, ‘ A rabies virus vampire bat variant shows 
increased neuroinvasiveness in mice when compared to a carnivore variant ’, Archives of Virology , 
vol. 162, no. 12, pp. 3671-9, DOI: 10.1007/s00705-017-3530-y, accessed 21 September 2021. 
Moore, SM & Hanlon, CA 2010, ‘ Rabies-specific antibodies: measuring surrogates of protection 
against a fatal disease ’, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases , vol. 4, no. 3, pp. e595, DOI: 
10.1371%2Fjournal.pntd.0000595, accessed 15 September 2021 
Morgan, L, Protopopova, A, Birkler, RID, Itin-Shwatz, B, Sutton, G, Gamliel, A, Yakobson, B & Raz, T 
2020, ‘ Human–dog relationships during the COVID-19 pandemic: booming dog adoption during Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
62 social isolation ’, Humanities and Social Sciences Communications , vol. 7, no. 150, pp. 1-11, DOI: 
10.1057/s41599-020-00649-x, accessed 7 September 2021. 
Morimoto, K, Patel, M, Corisdeo, S, Hooper, DC, Fu, ZF, Rupprecht, CE, Koprowski, H & Dietzschold, B 
1996, ‘ Characterization of a unique variant of bat rabies virus responsible for newly emerging human 
cases in North America ’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of 
America , vol. 93, no. 11, pp. 5653-8, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.93.11.5653, accessed 21 September 2021. 
Müller, T, Freuling, CM, Wysocki, P, Roumiantzeff, M, Freney, J, Mettenleiter, TC & Vos, A 2015, 
‘Terrestrial rabies control in the European Union: historical achievements and challenges ahead ’, 
Veterinary Journal , vol. 203, no. 1, pp. 10-7, DOI: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2014.10.026, accessed 26 November 
2021. 
Murray, KO, Holmes, KC & Hanlon, CA 2009, ‘ Rabies in vaccinated dogs and cats in the United States, 
1997-2001 ’, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association , vol. 235, no. 6, pp. 691-5, DOI: 
10.2460/javma.235.6.691, accessed 24 November 2021. 
Niezgoda, M, Hanlon, CA & Rupprecht, CE 2002, ‘Animal rabies’, in AC Jackson & WH Wunner (eds), 
Rabies , Academic Press, Amsterdam, pp. 163-218. 
Norman, C, Stavisky, J & Westgarth, C 2020, ‘ Importing rescue dogs into the UK: reasons, methods 
and welfare considerations ’, The Veterinary Record , vol. 186, no. 8, pp. 248-, DOI: 
10.1136/vr.105380, accessed 17 Septmeber 2021. 
Oberhuber, M, Schopf, A, Hennrich, AA, Santos-Mandujano, R, Huhn, AG, Seitz, S, Riedel, C & 
Conzelmann, KK 2021, ‘ Glycoproteins of predicted amphibian and reptile lyssaviruses can mediate 
infection of mammalian and reptile cells ’, Viruses , vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 1-13, DOI: 10.3390/v13091726, 
accessed 28 January 2022. 
OIE 2013, ‘ Immediate notification 17/07/2013 Chinese Taipei ’, WAHIS: World Animal Health 
Information System , World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 7 April 2022. 
-- -- 2014, ‘ Rabies ’, OIE, OIE, Paris, France, accessed 30 November 2021. 
-- -- 2015, ‘ Follow-up report 1 (final report) 23/10/2015 Malaysia ’, WAHIS: World Animal Health 
Information System , World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 8 April 2021. 
-- -- 2021a, ‘ Follow-up report 95 23/12/2021 Malaysia ’, WAHIS: World Animal Health Information 
System , World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 8 April 2021. 
-- -- 2021b, ‘ Immediate notification 19/07/2021 United States of America ’, WAHIS: World Animal 
Health Information System , World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 1 
September 2021. 
-- -- 2021c, ‘ Immediate notification 21/09/2021 Germany ’, WAHIS: World Animal Health Information 
System , World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 22 September 2021. 
-- -- 2021d, ‘ Immediate notification (final report) 18/08/2021 Canada  ’, WAHIS: World Animal Health 
Information System , OIE, Paris, France, accessed 1 September 2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
63 -- -- 2022, ‘ Immediate notification 07/02/2022 Canada ’, WAHIS: World Animal Health Information 
System , OIE, Paris, France, accessed 11 February 2022. 
Osorio, JE, Tomlinson, CC, Frank, RS, Haanes, EJ, Rushlow, K, Haynes, JR & Stinchcomb, DT 1999, 
‘Immunization of dogs and cats with a DNA vaccine against rabies virus’,  Vaccine , vol. 17, no. 9-10, 
pp. 1109-16, DOI: 10.1016/S0264-410X(98)00328-4, accessed 17 December 2021. 
Outbreak News Today 2021, ‘ Malaysia: 4th human rabies case reported in Sarawak in 2021 ’, 
Outbreak News Today June 2021, p. 1, accessed 20 December 2021. 
PAHO 2018, ‘ Rabies persists in in only four countries of Latin America and the Caribbean ’, Pan 
American Health Organization , Pan American Health Organization, Washington, US, accessed 20 
Decemeber 2021. 
Perez de Diego, AC, Vigo, M, Monsalve, J & Escudero, A 2015, ‘ The one health approach for the 
management of an imported case of rabies in mainland Spain in 2013 ’, Eurosurveillance , vol. 20, no. 
6, pp. 1-5, DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.es2015.20.6.21033, accessed 2 September 2021. 
Pieracci, EG, Williams, CE, Wallace, RM, Kalapura, CR & Brown, CM 2021, ‘ U.S. dog importations 
during the COVID-19 pandemic: do we have an erupting problem? ’, PLOS ONE , vol. 16, no. 9, pp. 1-
11, pp. e0254287, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254287, accessed 9 September 2021. 
Pimburage, RMS, Gunatilake, M, Wimalaratne, O, Balasuriya, A & Perera, KADN 2017, ‘ Sero-
prevalence of virus neutralizing antibodies for rabies in different groups of dogs following 
vaccination ’, BioMed Central Veterinary Research , vol. 13, no. 133, pp. 1-10, DOI: 10.1186/s12917-
017-1038-z, accessed 14 December 2021. 
Plotkin, SA 2000, ‘ Rabies ’, Clinical Infectious Diseases , vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 4-12, DOI: 10.1086/313632 
accessed 17 September 2021. 
ProMED 2020, ‘ Rabies (30): Americas (USA) coyote, bat, imported dog ex Egypt, human exposure ’, 
ProMed International society for infectious diseases , ProMed International society for infectious 
diseases, Brookline MA, USA, accessed 28 July 2021. 
-- -- 2021, ‘ Rabies (20): Americas (USA) imported dog ’, ProMed International society for infectious 
diseases , ProMed International society for infectious diseases, Brookline MA, USA, accessed 28 July 
2021. 
Raybern, C, Zaldivar, A, Tubach, S, Ahmed, FS, Moore, S, Kintner, C, Wallace, RM, Mandra, AM, 
Stauffer, K, Condori, RE & Garrison, I 2020, ‘ Rabies in a dog imported from Egypt - Kansas, 2019 ’, 
Morbidity and mortality weekly report , vol. 69, no. 38, pp. 1374-7, DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6938a5, 
accessed 27 April 2022. 
Ribadeau-Dumas, F, Cliquet, F, Gautret, P, Robardet, E, Le Pen, C & Bourhy, H 2016, ‘ Travel-
associated rabies in pets and residual rabies risk, Western Europe ’, Emerging Infectious Diseases , vol. 
22, no. 7, pp. 1268-71, DOI: 10.3201/eid2207.151733, accessed 15 September 2021. 
Rota Nodari, E, Alonso, S, Mancin, M, De Nardi, M, Hudson-Cooke, S, Veggiato, C, Cattoli, G & De 
Benedictis, P 2017, ‘ Rabies vaccination: higher failure rates in imported dogs than in those Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
64 vaccinated in Italy ’, Zoonoses and Public Health , vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 146-55, DOI: 10.1111/zph.12268, 
accessed 7 April 2022. 
Rupprecht, CE, Hanlon, CA & Hemachudha, T 2002, ‘ Rabies re-examined ’, The Lancet , vol. 2, no. 6, 
pp. 327-43, DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(02)00287-6, accessed 15 September 2021. 
Rupprecht, CE, Hanlon, CA & Slate, D 2006, ‘Control and prevention of rabies in animals: paradigm 
shifts’, Developments in Biologicals , vol. 125, pp. 103-11, accessed 17 September 2021. 
Rupprecht, CE, Stohr, K & Meredith, C 2001, ‘Part I: viral and prion diseases: rabies’, in ES Williams & 
IK Barker (eds), Infectious diseases of wild mammals , 3rd edn, Manson Publishing, London, pp. 3-36, 
accessed 22 September 2021. 
Schultz, RD 2006, ‘ Duration of immunity for canine and feline vaccines: a review ’, Veterinary 
Microbiology , vol. 117, pp. 75-9, DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2006.04.013, accessed 15 September 2021. 
Scott, TP, Coetzer, A, de Balogh, K, Wright, N & Nel, LH 2015, ‘ The Pan-African Rabies Control 
Network (PARACON): a unified approach to eliminating canine rabies in Africa ’, Antiviral Research , 
vol. 124, pp. 93-100, DOI: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2015.10.002, accessed 2 September 2021. 
Scott, TP & Nel, LH 2016, ‘ Subversion of the immune response by rabies virus ’, Viruses , vol. 8, no. 8, 
pp. 1-26, DOI: 10.3390/v8080231, accessed 7 September 2021. 
Seetahal, JFR, Vokaty, A, Vigilato, MAN, Carrington, CVF, Pradel, Louison, B, Sauers, AV, Roopnarine, 
R, Arrebato, JCG, Millien, MF, James, C & Rupprecht, CE 2018, ‘ Rabies in the Caribbean: a situational 
analysis and historic review ’, Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease , vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1-21, DOI: 
10.3390/tropicalmed3030089, accessed 10 January 2022. 
Sharpee, RL, Nelson, LD & Beckenhauer, WH 1985, ‘ Inactivated tissue culture rabies vaccine with 
three years immunogenicity in dogs and cats ’, Rabies in the tropics: proceedings of an international 
conference on rabies control in the tropics, Tunis, October 3-6 1983, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 
262-9, accessed 2 September 2021. 
Shih, T-H, Chiang, J-T, Wu, H-Y, Inoue, S, Tsai, C-T, Kuo, S-C, Yang, C-Y & Fei, C-Y 2018, ‘ Human 
exposure to ferret badger rabies in Taiwan ’, International Journal of Environmental Research and 
Public Health , vol. 15, no. 1347, pp. 1-7, DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15071347, accessed 9 August 2021. 
Sim, BNH, Liang, BNW, Ning, WS & Viswanathan, S 2021, ‘ A retrospective analysis of emerging 
rabies: a neglected tropical disease in Sarawak, Malaysia ’, The Journal of the Royal College of 
Physicians of Edinburgh , vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 133-9, DOI: 10.4997/JRCPE.2021.207, accessed 10 
September 2021. 
Singh, R, Singh, K, Saminathan, M, Sobharani, V, Manjunathareddy, G, Maity, M, Cherian, S & 
Dhama, K 2018, ‘ Rabies, a vaccine preventable disease: current status, epidemiology, pathogenesis, 
prevention and control with special reference to India’ , Journal of Experimental Biology and 
Agricultural Sciences , vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 62-86, DOI: 10.18006/2018.6(1).62.86, accessed 23 August 
2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
65 Singh, R, Singh, KP, Cherian, S, Saminathan, M, Kapoor, S, Manjunatha Reddy, GB, Panda, S & 
Dhama, K 2017, ‘ Rabies - epidemiology, pathogenesis, public health concerns and advances in 
diagnosis and control: a comprehensive review ’, The Veterinary Quarterly , vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 212-51, 
DOI: 10.1080/01652176.2017.1343516, accessed 16 November 2021. 
Smith, TG, Fooks, AR, Moore, SM, Freuling, CM, Müller, T, Torres, G & Wallace, RM 2021, ‘ Negligible 
risk of rabies importation in dogs thirty days after demonstration of adequate serum antibody titer ’, 
Vaccine , vol. 39, no. 18, pp. 2496-9, DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.03.064, accessed 24 November 
2021. 
Soulebot, JP, Brun, A, Chappuis, G, Guillemin, F, Petermann, HG, Precausta, P & Terre, J 1981, 
‘Experimental rabies in cats: immune response and persistence of immunity ’, The Cornell 
Veterinarian , vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 311-25, accessed 9 August 2021. 
Sparkes, J, Fleming, PJ, Ballard, G, Scott-Orr, H, Durr, S & Ward, MP 2015, ‘ Canine rabies in Australia: 
a review of preparedness and research needs ’, Zoonoses and Public Health , vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 237-
53, DOI: 10.1111/zph.12142, accessed 24 August 2021. 
Swanepoel, R 1994, ‘Rabies’, in JAW Coetzer, GR Thomson & RC Tustin (eds), Infectious diseases of 
livestock with special reference to southern Africa , 1st edn, Oxford University Press, Cape Town, pp. 
493-552, accessed 14 April 2022. 
Tasioudi, KE, Papatheodorou, D, Iliadou, P, Kostoulas, P, Gianniou, M, Chondrokouki, E, Mangana-
Vougiouka, O & Mylonakis, ME 2018, ‘ Factors influencing the outcome of primary immunization 
against rabies in young dogs ’, Veterinary Microbiology , vol. 213, pp. 1-4, DOI: 
10.1016/j.vetmic.2017.11.006, accessed 16 December 2021. 
Tepsumethanon, V, Lumlertdacha, B, Mitmoonpitak, C, Sitprija, V, Meslin, FX & Wilde, H 2004, 
‘Survival of naturally infected rabid dogs and cats ’, Clinical Infectious Diseases , vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 278-
80; DOI: 10.1086/421556, accessed 28 October 2021. 
Tesoro Cruz, E, Hernández González, R, Alonso Morales, R & Aquilar-Setién, A 2006, ‘Rabies DNA 
vaccination by the intranasal route in dogs’, Developments in Biologicals , vol. 125, pp. 221-31, 
accessed 16 December 2021. 
Thys, S, Knobel, DL, Simpson, G, Van Rooyen, J, Marcotty, T, Gabriël, S, Dorny, P & Boelaert, M 2021, 
‘Perceptions and practices of dog ownership and rabies control at a human–wildlife–domestic 
animal interface in South Africa ’, Anthrozoös , vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 281-302, DOI: 
10.1080/08927936.2021.1885146, accessed 3 September 2021. 
Trimarchi, CV, Rudd, RJ & Abelseth, MK 1986, ‘Experimentally induced rabies in four cats inoculated 
with a rabies virus isolated from a bat’, American Journal of Veterinary Research , vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 
777-80, accessed 9 August 2021. 
Trujillo, L, Martínez-Gutierrez, M & Ruiz-Saenz, J 2018, ‘ Low level of the immune response against 
rabies virus in dogs and cats, a cross-sectional study in sheltered animals, Santander, Colombia ’, 
Brazilian Journal of Veterinary Research , vol. 38, pp. 2109-16, DOI: 10.1590/1678-5150-pvb-5997, 
accessed 16 December 2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
66 Vaughn, JB, Gerhardt, P & Paterson, JC 1963, ‘ Excretion of street rabies virus in saliva of cats ’, JAMA: 
The Journal of the American Medical Association , vol. 184, pp. 705-8, DOI: 
10.1001/jama.73700220001013, accessed 17 September 2021. 
Vega, S, Lorenzo-Rebenaque, L, Marin, C, Domingo, R & Fariñas, F 2021, ‘ Tackling the threat of rabies 
reintroduction in Europe ’, Frontiers in Veterinary Science , vol. 7, pp. 1-9, pp. 613712, DOI: 
10.3389/fvets.2020.613712, accessed 1 September 2021. 
Wallace, RM, Pees, A, Blanton, JB & Moore, SM 2017, ‘ Risk factors for inadequate antibody response 
to primary rabies vaccination in dogs under one year of age ’, PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases , vol. 
11, no. 7, pp. 1-14, pp. e0005761, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005761, accessed 24 November 2021. 
Ward, MP & Brookes, VJ 2021, ‘ Rabies in our neighbourhood: preparedness for an emerging 
infectious disease ’, Pathogens , vol. 10, no. 375, pp. 1-18, DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10030375, 
accessed 25 August 2021. 
Watanabe, I, Yamada, K, Aso, A, Suda, O, Matsumoto, T, Yahiro, T, Ahmed, K & Nishizono, A 2013, 
‘Relationship between virus-neutralizing antibody levels and the number of rabies vaccinations: a 
prospective study of dogs in Japan ’, Japanese Journal of Infectious Diseases , vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 17-21, 
DOI: 10.7883/yoken.66.17, accessed 16 December 2021. 
Wera, E, Warembourg, C, Bulu, PM, Siko, MM & Dürr, S 2021, ‘ Loss of binding antibodies against 
rabies in a vaccinated dog population in Flores Island, Indonesia ’, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases , 
vol. 15, no. 9, pp. 1-15, pp. e0009688, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009688, accessed 15 December 
2021. 
West, P 2008, Assessing invasive animals in Australia 2008 , PN 20628, National Land & Water 
Resources Audit, Canberra. 
WHA 2018, ‘ WHA fact sheet: rabies in wildlife ’, Wildlife Health Australia, Canberra, Australia, 
accessed 12 January 2022. 
WHO 2006, About rabies: diagnosis of rabies in animals , Rabies Bulletin Europe, World Health 
Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland. 
-- -- 2018a, ‘ Rabies vaccines: WHO position paper, April 2018 - recommendations ’, Vaccine , vol. 36, 
no. 37, pp. 5500-3, DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.06.061, accessed 22 December 2021. 
-- -- 2018b, ‘ WHO expert consultation on rabies ’, World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland, 
accessed 6 July 2022. 
 
-- -- 2021a, ‘ Rabies ’, World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland, accessed 16 December 2021. 
-- -- 2021b, ‘ Rabies in the Western Pacific ’, World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland, 
accessed 17 December 2021. 
Wiktor, TJ, MacFarlan, RO & Koprowski, H 1985, ‘Rabies virus pathogenicity’, in E Kuwert, C Mérieux, 
H Koprowski & K Bögel (eds), Rabies in the tropics , Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 21-9. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
67 Wilkins, R, Botha, F, Vera-Toscano, E & Wooden, M 2020, The household, income and labour 
dynamics in Australia survey: selected findings from waves 1 to 18 (pdf 14.9MB) , Melbourne 
Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, Melbourne University, Melbourne, accessed 27 
January 2022. 
Willoughby, RE, Jr 2015, ‘ Rabies: rare human infection - common questions ’, Infectious Disease 
Clinics of North America , vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 637-50, DOI: 10.1016/j.idc.2015.07.006, accessed 25 
November 2021. 
Wilsmore, T, Hamblin, C, Taylor, N, Taylor, W & Watson, B 2006, Qualitative veterinary risk 
assessment of the introduction of rabies into the United Kingdom: a report prepared for DEFRA , 
Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics Research Unit, United Kingdom. 
WOAH 2022a, 'Diseases, infections and infestations listed by the OIE ' (version adopted in 2022), in 
Terrestrial Animal Health Code , World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 8 
September 2022. 
-- -- 2022b, ‘ Infection with rabies virus ' (version adopted in 2019), in Terrestrial Animal Health Code , 
World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 8 September 2022. 
-- -- 2022c, ‘ Rabies (infection with rabies virus and other Lyssaviruses) ' (version adopted in 2018) 
(pdf 907kb), in Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals, World Organisation 
for Animal Health, Paris, accessed 8 September 2022. 
-- --  2022d, ‘ Terrestrial - first semester 2019 report Dominican Republic ’, WAHIS: World Animal 
Health Information System, World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 17 July 
2022. 
-- -- 2022e, ‘ Terrestrial - first semester 2019 report Guatemala ’, WAHIS: World Animal Health 
Information System, World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 17 July 2022. 
-- -- 2022f, ‘ Terrestrial - second semester 2019 report Hait i’, WAHIS: World Animal Health 
Information System, World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 17 July 2022. 
-- -- 2022g, ‘ Terrestrial - second semester 2020 report Bolivia ’, WAHIS: World Animal Health 
Information System, World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 17 July 2022. 
-- -- 2022h, ‘ Terrestrial - second semester 2021 - Chinese Taipei  ’, WAHIS: World Animal Health 
Information System , World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, accessed 9 September 
2022. 
Wu, G, Selden, D, Fooks, AR & Banyard, A 2017, ‘ Inactivation of rabies virus’ , Journal of Virological 
Methods , vol. 243, pp. 109-12, DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2017.02.002, accessed 22 November 2021. 
Wynne, E 2021, ‘ Dog lovers find prices rise steeply amid COVID-fuelled demand ’, Australian 
Broadcasting Corporation News , 20 May, accessed 3 September 2021. Review of the rabies virus risk in imported dogs, cats and canine semen from approved countries 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 
68 Yang, DK, Kim, HH, Lee, KW & Song, JY 2013, ‘ The present and future of rabies vaccine in animals ’, 
Clinical and Experimental Vaccine Research , vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 19-25, DOI: 10.7774/cevr.2013.2.1.19, 
accessed 20 April 2022. 
Zhou, H, Zhu, W, Zeng, J, He, J, Liu, K, Li, Y, Zhou, S, Mu, D, Zhang, K & Yu, P 2016, ‘ Probable rabies 
virus transmission through organ transplantation, China, 2015 ’, Journal of Emerging infectious 
diseases , vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 1348-52, DOI: 10.3201/eid2208.151993, accessed 23 December 2021. 
Zucca, P, Rossmann, M-C, Osorio, JE, Karem, K, De Benedictis, P, Haißl, J, De Franceschi, P, Calligaris, 
E, Kohlweiß, M, Meddi, G, Gabrutsch, W, Mairitsch, H, Greco, O, Furlani, R, Maggio, M, Tolomei, M, 
Bremini, A, Fischinger, I, Zambotto, P, Wagner, P, Millard, Y, Palei, M & Zamaro, G 2020, ‘ The "bio-
crime model” of cross-border cooperation among veterinary public health, justice, law 
enforcements, and customs to tackle the illegal animal trade/bio-terrorism and to prevent the 
spread of zoonotic diseases among human population ’, Frontiers in Veterinary Science , vol. 7, pp. 1-
13, pp. 593683, DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.593683, accessed 10 September 2021.