|
|
|
7Back |
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS |
Next8 |
||
|
||||
| TUESDAY, MAY 3, 2005 | |
|
DISEASE EPIDEMICS: A
LOOK AT THE IMPACT ON INTERNATIONAL MARKETS |
|
|
Terry WHITING, DVM, MSC Disease Control and Epidemiology Manitoba Agriculture and Food Veterinary Services Branch 545 University Crescent Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 5S6 Grew up on a mixed beef and hog farm near Sarnia in southwestern Ontario. Graduating from the Ontario Veterinary College in 1984 he was in mixed practice in Sarnia and returned to the University of Guelph to complete a Masters in clinical medicine in 1988, dealing with respiratory disease of performance horses. He returned to general mixed practice for two years in Ontario, and joined the Federal Civil Service in 1990 in Wynyard Saskatchewan. Working with the federal government department of agriculture from 1990 to 1998 he held the positions of district veterinarian, veterinary operations manager and disease control specialist. During this time he developed an interest in the safe and humane transportation of animals and in the evolution of farm assurance programs. Terry was on the development committee for the Canadian Agri-Food Research Council Horse Code of Practice (1998), the Transport Code of Practice (2001) and the Swine Segregated Early Weaning Amendment (2003). Terry has authorship on several peer-reviewed papers relating to animal welfare and disease control.
[ Back to Top ] |
Disease Epidemics: Their
Impact on Canadian Farm An
Terry WHITING,
dvm, msc
Based on lessons provided by other countries’ epizootic eradication experiences, introduction of FMD (Foot and Mouth Disease) or CSF (Hog Cholera) into Canada would result in 3 separate types of crisis situation, they are;
The current Canadian Federal Veterinary Infrastructure has the responsibility to deal with infected farms only. This activity is estimated to constitute 1/400th of the farms seriously affected in a Canadian FMD outbreak. There is currently no obvious leadership, legislative framework or pre-authorized funding to meet direct costs that would be required to assure an effective animal welfare component (surplus to market livestock) in a FAD (Foreign Animal Disease) response. Canadian foreign animal disease response in non-supply managed livestock (when it happens) will not be about disease control but about welfare slaughter. As current national FAD disease eradication strategies only deal with infected farms it is a gross error to misconstrue these disease eradication plans as effective and comprehensive agri-emergency management programs for CSF and FMD. There could also be a very substantial livestock crisis/disaster in Canada without ever having FAD identified here. Animal disease or other crisis in the USA could trigger international border closure in a time sensitive livestock production system. This situation would not constitute a mandated emergency in Canada and no immediate federal response would be triggered. A FAD limited to a single US State such as Iowa and a single species such as swine would have significant repercussions in live animal markets and farm animal welfare in Canada. Iowa draws feeder pigs from all over the Continental United States in addition to Canada. Individuals are often unable or unwilling to imagine the potential devastation that could be caused by low frequency catastrophic events and will not take measures to protect against the potential loss. In the insurance field this behaviour is referred to as “cognitive failure”. Our collective current level of preparedness to respond to the risk to animal welfare posed by the threat of a FAD incursion is similar in nature to “cognitive failure”. I would suggest the important lesson provided from the British and Dutch experiences is that modern livestock production systems are allowed to exist based on public goodwill. That goodwill is predicated on the belief held by the public that farmers are responsible and the national veterinary infrastructure is competent and prepared for a FAD emergency.
Selected Publication [ PDF of PowerPoint Presentation ] 1491 kb |
|
John F. WIEMERS, DVM, MS National Animal Identification Staff USDA, APHIS, Veterinary Services 2100 S. Lake Storey Road Galesburg, IL 61401 USA Tel: +1 309-344-1942 Fax: +1 309-244-1489 Cell: +1 240-508-9269 John F. Wiemers@aphis.usda.gov
After obtaining a DVM degree from Iowa State University in 1977, Dr. Wiemers practiced food animal medicine in Iowa for nine years. In 1986 he left private practice to work for USDA, FSIS as a supervisory veterinary medical officer. Two years later he began working for USDA, APHIS, Veterinary Services as Swine Epidemiologist in Illinois. In 1993, Dr. Wiemers completed a masters degree in Integrated Food Animal Management Systems at the University of Illinois at Champaign/Urbana. Since that time he has served on the USDA, APHIS, VS, Animal Health Programs Staff. He is now serving on the National Animal Identification Staff working with the State, Federal, and Industry representatives to develop a national livestock identification system that will meet the needs of all sectors. Dr. Wiemers is a member of the animal identification committees of the National Institute for Animal Agriculture and the United States Animal Health Association. He serves as chairman of the federal Interagency Coordinating Committee on Animal Identification.
[ Back to Top ] |
A Look At the Impact of
Disease Epidemics in the U.S.A. on International
Markets & Long Term Animal Welfare
John F. WIEMERS, DVM, MS National Animal Identification Staff USDA, APHIS, Veterinary Services The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is responsible for protecting and promoting U.S. agricultural health. APHIS protects the nation’s animal and plant resources from agricultural pests and diseases and threats to our food supply and economy. In recent years, the scope of APHIS' protection function has expanded beyond pest and disease management to direct involvement in international agriculture trade issues. APHIS responds to other countries' animal and plant health import requirements and negotiates science-based standards that ensure U.S. agricultural exports, worth over $50 billion annually, are protected from unjustified trade restrictions. Perception often plays a key role in shaping import and export policies. The United States’ ability to export is directly affected by other nations’ views of the potential threat of our products. Imports to the United States are affected by the need to safeguard our system from foreign diseases. Two diseases that have had sweeping impact on U.S. agricultural trade are avian influenza (AI), affecting poultry, and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), affecting bovine species. Outbreaks of AI in several States in early 2004 immediately prompted poultry trade bans from many important trading partners. The U.S. poultry industry suffered great losses. Government entities partnered with industry to swiftly eradicate the disease. As a result of APHIS’ quick and efficient response, the United States was considered free of high pathogenicity AI (HPAI) by the end of August 2004; however, many trade barriers persist, and APHIS continues negotiating to reopen markets. A single case of BSE in December 2003, in the State of Washington, coupled with other cases of BSE in Canada, prompted a wide array of bans on U.S. cattle products. From milk to beef, the U.S. cattle industry suffered world-wide. As a direct response, USDA’s APHIS and other agencies refocused testing and inspection procedures. APHIS also enhanced its BSE targeted surveillance program, which had been in place since May, 1990, with a one-time, 12-18 month effort to test all high-risk cattle for BSE. We have tested 300,000 samples in just over a year, with no positive test results; however, BSE-based trade restrictions on U.S. cattle products continue. APHIS is dedicated to support and promote trade based on science, not on politics and continues tireless efforts to develop, negotiate, and implement fair, science-based trade agreements with all U.S. trading partners. [ PDF of PowerPoint Presentation ] 53 kb
The above abstract was prepared by Dr. Andrea Morgan, Associate Deputy Administrator for Regional Operations, USDA, APHIS, Veterinary Services who was not able to attend. |
Alf-Eckbert Füssel, DVM Head of Sector DG SANCO/E2 Rue Froissart 101-3/64 B-1040 Brussels Tel: +32-2-2950870 Fax:+32-2-2953144 alf-eckbert.fuessel@cec.eu.int Education: 1973-1978 - Studies of veterinary medicine, Moscow Veterinary Academy. Graduation: 1978 - Diploma, Moscow Veterinary Academy; 1989 - Doctor veterinary medicine, Humboldt-University Berlin. Occupation: 1979-1991 - Institute for Applied Animal Hygiene, research in animal physiology and hygiene of animal husbandry. 1990-1991 - Trainee in EC Commission, veterinary inspection animal health. 1991-1998 - EC Commission, veterinary inspection animal health. 1998- EC Commission, veterinary legislation animal health. Currently with Unit E2 (Animal health and welfare, zootechnics), Directorate E (Food Safety: plant health, animal health and welfare, international questions), DG Health and Consumer Protection, EC Commission.
[ Back to Top ] |
The Socio-Economic Impact of
and the Lessons Learned from Epidemic Livestock Diseases in Parts of the
European Union Alf-Eckbert FÜSSEL, DVM Head of Sector European Commission - DG Health and Consumer Protection Directorate E / Unit E2 From a global prospective, the 25 Member States (MSs) of the European Union (EU) could be considered densely populated livestock areas. The total number of cattle, pigs, sheep and goats is about 350 million animals, not to count the riche cloven-hoofed wild fauna in many parts of Europe. In accordance with harmonised animal health conditions significant numbers of biungulates are imported into and traded between Member States. These transports are the most visible area to citizens in relation to the protection of animal health and welfare. Incriminated in the spread of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) in 2001 in 4 Member States, long distance transports may lead to spread of disease notably when combined with contacts at control points for animal welfare or assembly centres. To avoid possible spread of disease the animal health rules require the region, the registered holding and the herd of origin to be free of a whole range of notifiable diseases. The animals must be identified and their movement is recorded. Before being loaded to another MS they are resident for a minimum period of time on the holding, which is, in case of small ruminants, subject to a standstill. Pre-movement tests verify the status of the animals and the herd. At the time of loading the animals for trade are inspected by the certifying official veterinarian and an electronic message is forwarded through TRACES to the place of destination, including details about the transport route. The number of assembly operations and thereby of potentially hazardous contacts is limited and the trade flow is merely canalised in case of sheep and goats. The EU is free of the most important epidemic diseases without using prophylactic vaccination. Following notification of a disease suspicion, the affected holding is subject to official investigations and restrictions that are extended to neighbouring or contact holdings and larger areas, and may include a standstill in one or more MSs. Following disease confirmation, the measures, rehearsed in the framework of national contingency plans, are implemented as required by EU legislation. In general these measures include stamping out of infected herds, preventive killing of contaminated or suspect herds, establishment of protection and surveillance zones and, where needed, a larger regionalisation to allow trade in safe products to continue from unaffected areas. Potentially contaminated products of animal origin are restricted, treated or destroyed. Following the 2001 FMD epidemic, resorting to the use of emergency vaccines formulated from EU or national antigen or vaccine stocks has become a more viable option. The measures taken by MSs to control and eradicate certain listed diseases are co-financed by the Community in accordance with Council Decision 90/424/EEC. Payments are subject to Commission approval and have been scrutinised by the European Parliament and the Court of Auditors. Following major outbreaks of swine fever, foot-and-mouth and avian influenza in certain parts of the Community, the Commission announced in December 2004 a thorough evaluation of the Community animal health policy and its financial support structures. [ PDF of PowerPoint Presentation ] 453 kb |
|
7Back |
[ Back to Top ] |
Next8 |
ANIMAL
TRANSPORTATION
ASSOCIATION
imal
Welfare
