Economic assessments and modeling studies suggest that these programs yield cost savings and public health benefits.

Rabies is a fatal zoonotic disease of mammals; it exacerbates the uncertainty of conserving populations of some threatened mammals (TM). Modelling affords an inexpensive, a priori way of studying key parameters of wildlife rabies transmission, rabies management economics, and TM conservation. Numerous models of rabies transmission have been published. Linear density dependent models predicted that a threshold density (K T 6 1.0), possibly attained by culling or contraception, would eliminate an epizootic through reduced contacts among host animals. Density independent models predicted less advantage of culling and contraception in rabies control due to limited contacts among territorial host animals. Recent stochastic, mixed models offer novel predictions about the role of culling, fertility control, and oral rabies vaccination (ORV) in disease management. Use of a ''threshold successful contact'' rate (C T ) as a parameter in these models predicts that density reduction of host animals will enhance ORV campaigns in non-TM contexts via more efficient bait delivery and vaccination. Economic analyses of medical, public health, and veterinary costs have shown post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and increased pet vaccinations (PV) to be major rabies-caused expenses during and after epizootics in North America.No modelling efforts have examined either the benefits-costs of rabies management strategies to conserve TM or the use of ORV, per se, to conserve TM -an omission due in part to the lack of methodologies for properly valuing TM (potential savings) and the expense or lower priority of using ORV for TM protection. This paper: (1) describes key aspects of rabies-transmission models in wildlife, (2) posits the use of C T to predict disease persistence, (3) reviews selected ORV strategies, economic studies, and benefit-cost models associated with the use of ORV as a means of rabies control in non-TM situations, (4) discusses implications of these models to the conservation of TM, and (5) recommends five steps to improve modelling of rabies transmission (wildlife disease in general), rabies-control economics, and TM conservation.

The direct and indirect costs of suspected human rabies exposure were estimated for San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties, California, USA. Clinic, hospital, and county public health records (1998-2002) were examined to determine direct costs for postexposure prophylaxis (PEP), and 55 (41%) former patients were contacted to voluntarily provide estimates of their indirect costs associated with receiving PEP. Additional costs due to public health and animal control personnel responses to rabid animals were collected, including diagnostic testing and wages. The mean total cost of a suspected human rabies exposure was $3,688, the direct costs per case were $2,564, and the indirect costs were $1,124 of that total. About one third of the total cost for suspected human rabies exposure was attributed to indirect costs (e.g., lost wages, transportation, and day-care fees), most of which were not reimbursable to the patient.

In Texas, the use of ORV stopped the northward spread and led to the progressive elimination of the DDC variant of rabies in coyotes (Canis latrans). The decision to implement an ORV program was cost-efficient, although many unknowns were involved in the original decision, and key economic variables were identified for consideration in future planning of ORV programs.