Why in news?
The Union government released updated progress figures for the National Animal Disease Control Programme. By March 2026, states had administered 132.49 crore foot-and-mouth disease vaccine doses. Since the programme began, 3.17 crore eligible female bovine calves received brucellosis vaccination. The programme protects livestock productivity, farm income and public health. These national totals show scale, but they do not alone prove disease elimination. Coverage quality, repeat vaccination and surveillance remain equally important.
Purpose and design of the programme
The programme began on 11 September 2019 in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh. It receives full Central funding for its main vaccination work. The original goal was to control foot-and-mouth disease and brucellosis by 2025. It also seeks eradication of foot-and-mouth disease by 2030. The programme now operates within the wider livestock health framework.
Foot-and-mouth vaccination covers cattle, buffaloes, sheep, goats and pigs. Repeated rounds are necessary because protection reduces over time. Brucellosis vaccination follows a different design. It targets female bovine calves aged four to eight months. A single dose during that age window supports longer protection and avoids complications in pregnant animals.
Foot-and-mouth disease explained
Foot-and-mouth disease is a highly contagious viral infection of cloven-hoofed animals. Fever and painful blisters can affect the mouth, feet and teats. Adult mortality is usually limited, but milk production and growth may fall sharply. Young animals can suffer severe illness. Outbreaks also restrict animal movement and trade.
The disease is not generally considered a public-health threat. Its main burden falls on farmers and livestock systems. Infected animals may spread virus before signs become obvious. Transport, markets and shared grazing can accelerate transmission. High vaccination coverage must therefore cover adjoining districts together. Isolated protection leaves gaps along movement routes.
Why brucellosis requires a different approach
Brucellosis is a bacterial disease and an important zoonosis. In cattle and buffaloes, it can cause abortions, infertility and weak calves. Humans can become infected through unpasteurised dairy products or occupational exposure. Fever and long-lasting weakness may follow. Veterinary workers, dairy handlers and livestock owners need protective practices.
Vaccination reduces infection within animal populations. It must be supported by testing, safe handling and proper disposal after abortions. Milk pasteurisation protects consumers. Farmers also need compensation and advice when infected animals require management. Otherwise, economic fear can discourage reporting. Disease control works best when public-health and veterinary systems share information.
Digital identification and monitoring
Vaccination records are increasingly linked with Bharat Pashudhan, the national livestock database. Each registered animal can receive a Pashu Aadhaar identity. By 6 August 2026, the system contained over 38.53 crore animal identities. It also registered 9.84 crore livestock owners. The platform recorded 168.67 crore vaccinations across programmes.
Digital records can reduce duplication and identify animals missing later rounds. They can also show coverage by village, species and age. Data quality still depends on accurate field entry. Weak connectivity can delay updates in remote areas. Owners need simple correction channels when tags or records are wrong. Privacy and access rules should remain clear.
Implementation across India
Livestock movement crosses village, district and state borders. Seasonal migration is especially important for pastoral communities. A weak vaccination pocket can threaten neighbouring areas. States must coordinate calendars, cold chains and market surveillance. Border districts need timely alerts. Laboratories should rapidly identify circulating strains and distinguish infection from expected vaccine responses.
India’s varied geography changes delivery conditions. Himalayan settlements, desert routes, islands and flood-prone plains need different logistics. Mobile teams may be essential where owners cannot reach veterinary centres. Vaccines must remain within approved temperatures during transport. Training should cover safe restraint, dose recording and adverse-event reporting.
How progress should be judged
Dose totals are useful, but coverage denominators matter. Authorities should show how many eligible animals received every required round. Serological surveys can measure the resulting immune response. Outbreak frequency and spread provide another test. Transparent district data can direct extra support towards persistent gaps. Independent evaluation can improve confidence in national claims.
Eradication is harder than control. It requires sustained vaccination, sensitive surveillance and fast outbreak containment. Vaccine supply must match the circulating virus types. Farmers need reasons to report disease early. Veterinary staffing and laboratory turnaround are therefore central investments. A temporary fall in cases should not lead to reduced vigilance.
Large numbers need local verification
The reported coverage represents a major veterinary operation. Yet eradication depends on complete schedules, strong immunity and rapid detection. District-level surveillance must confirm whether vaccination is interrupting transmission. National totals cannot replace that evidence.
Conclusion
The programme connects animal health with rural income, nutrition and safer food systems. Its updated figures show wider reach across a very large livestock population. The next phase must convert doses into durable disease control. Reliable data, laboratory surveillance and coordinated state action are essential. Farmers should experience fewer outbreaks, lower losses and faster veterinary support. Those outcomes will provide the strongest measure of success.