Development of management systems that promote the health of the food producing animal species represents a joint collaborative effort among four USDA agencies, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) and the Food and Drug Administration Center for Veterinary Medicine (FDA-CVM). The focus is on a safe, healthful, abundant, economical and high quality food supply that will benefit the American consumer and enhance the ability to export a larger portion of our production output. Administrators of all of these agencies approved the establishment of a committee of five persons to work on this project.

In addition to food quality and improved economic viability for the animal agriculture sector, this project can have a very significant impact on improving the ability of our agricultural sector to compete in the world market for export of animal products. Among the major issues which need to be resolved are: 1) presence of human pathogens in animal production systems; 2) antibacterial drug residues; 3) cost of disease outbreaks; 4) management systems and animal welfare. The USDA has, as one of its major priorities, improving the global competitiveness of our agricultural industries.

The history of disease control provides evidence of a succession of highly effective strategies (isolation with or without treatment, slaughter and burial or incineration, use of antibacterial drugs, vaccines plus or minus eradication efforts). Some pathogens have become resistant to antibacterial drugs and the public also has become more concerned about the possible carryover of residues from such drug usage into food products intended for human consumption. Given the added public concerns about animal production practices, environmental impact and animal welfare, a new approach to disease control is imperative. While disease-causing agents may be present, animals need to be sufficiently resistant that overt disease or reduced productivity does not occur.

Both public and producer interests have converged to present a very persuasive argument for a change in the conceptualization of animal disease and its impact on agricultural enterprises and the health of the consuming public. These factors argue for a program aimed at prevention or reduction in disease incidence thereby decreasing the need for drug usage for treatment of animals and leading to the production of a more wholesome, higher quality and more marketable product for human consumption.

Thus an appropriate, integrated approach to management of an animal production unit should provide the following outcomes:

• reduced costs of production

• lower incidence of clinical disease in food animals

• reduced use of drugs/chemicals for treatment of animal diseases

• higher quality food supply from healthier animals produced on a more cost effective basis

• safer food supply with less risk of foodborne disease agents

• improved environmental quality resulting from reduced use of chemicals

• worldwide acceptance of animal products for export marketing

• optimize production, health status, economics and food safety

A related programmatic effort in CSREES is a National Initiative, Managing Change in Agriculture. This new program has been put forward by agricultural economists with the intent of assisting the private sector to meet the challenges of competition and new opportunities. It is intended to help people, firms and communities make important strategic decisions that will enable them to manage their enterprise successfully in the face of continual change. The focus of the program will be on strategic decision making that will affect the basic direction of businesses, families and communities. We believe there is an opportunity to link this new program on Managing Change with this program on Integrated Management Systems to create a complete effort to assist the livestock producer meet these new challenges.

The need for maintaining global competitiveness and avoiding the impact of non-tariff trade barriers will become more important as our livestock industries increase their export efforts. A key issue in this export effort could be the need to have a documented program for production unit management that can be used to ensure that our export products are being produced in units that meet expected "good management practices". We believe that this Integrated Animal Health Management System program is an important step in meeting this type of requirement.

This does not mean that current fundamental research on animal diseases, with a strong focus on pathogenesis, host-agent interaction, and immune system function, should be eliminated or severely reduced. Rather, we need to have a somewhat longer and/or holistic focus on where such research is leading us and how it fits into a more comprehensive view of health management in the context of modern production agriculture. While continuing to learn more basic information about host-agent interactions for specific disease agents is an important and critical need, we also need to give attention to mission or problem-oriented research as well. The lack of credit for adaptive or applied research and the concurrent lack of funding support for such work has resulted in inadequate attention to the need to bring forward solutions for problems with which the producer must contend on a daily basis. Whether the proposed funding under the new Fund for Rural America will help meet this need remains to be seen.

Also, we must continue to keep our other "primary customer", the American consumer, very much in our mind. Unless we begin to focus more of our existing resources on solving the problems which they, and the politicians who control our budgets, feel are important to their health and well-being, we risk losing more of the financial support which we now have for research.

Therefore, we propose a coalition of those groups which serve animal agriculture, to develop more effective models for integrated management of animal production units which will also foster improved health of the animals in production units and improved confidence in the safety of food products of animal origin. To accomplish this goal, the federal agencies involved in research, extension and regulatory activities must develop a common agenda. Involvement of the land grant university system and the customers of the system is also an important ingredient. Failure to reach agreement could result in other agendas being imposed by individuals with less knowledge of the production systems and the topics being resolved.

Integrated methods or strategies for production management and the control of animal pathogens would strengthen the ability of veterinarians to respond to critical issues. Federal and state agencies involved in research, extension and regulatory medicine need to develop a common agenda in concert with other key players such as colleges of veterinary medicine and agriculture, veterinary science departments and other centers of research and education for animal health, food safety, and production systems. New and broader coalitions will be needed. We need to develop working coalitions with our animal scientist colleagues and become more united in our efforts.

The general approach will be to develop generalized integrated management system protocols that can be utilized by veterinary practitioners and producers to improve the level of management and control of the production cycle. The initial effort will be within the pork industry and will start with an initial introduction of such programs for a few producers.

In moving to a program of integrated management for animal health, many factors will be involved including environment (both environmental effects on animals and effects of animal production on the environment), nutrition, stress, genetics (both disease resistance and production potential), variability in type of problem between large and medium to small units, effect of water quality on the animals, and economics of production.

A Working Group will be appointed to perform the tasks of writing management protocols and defining the implementation plans. The individuals comprising this Working Group would represent the National Pork Producers Council (2), American Association of Swine Practitioners (2), Land-grant Universities (2), and USDA Agencies (2). Additional expertise will undoubtedly be added to assist with some portions of the program, especially in the disciplines of epidemiology and agricultural economics. Dr. LeRoy Biehl has agreed to serve as the Chair of this Working Group.

The Working Group will develop written protocols for specific types of production units. An initial task will be to define the types of production units for which programs will be prepared. After preparation of these initial plans we propose to select a limited number of pork producers to "pilot test" these programs.

An important component will be to monitor the health status of the pilot herds. We propose that the pilot herds should be monitored using a program such as the PigMON program as defined by Dr. Paul Yeske, Swine Veterinary Center, St. Peter, MN at the 1995 LCI meeting (Proc. 1995 Annual Meeting of Livestock Conservation Institute, p. 222).

The program is also intended to have a major focus on the "costs of production" which would include the disease costs but may be easier to obtain than costs of individual disease problems. Also, the "costs of production" represent the potential or probable cost to the consumer for the product and, therefore, would have a broad application and impact.

Definition: epidemiology - analysis of complex swine "production" diseases examine morbidity and mortality from these diseases losses due to subclinical diseases design health monitoring programs

Fundamental studies on genetic determinants of disease; genetically mediated immunoenhancement; disease resistance; new immune system modulators, more effective vaccine products.

Comprehensive studies on the complete system of animal health for swine from conception to consumption in a preventive medicine mode. Examine new vs current systems.

Also a need to support pilot projects demonstrating practical outcomes using an integrated management perspective. In part this can be done by bringing together current research efforts to demonstrate the synergy created in a total integrated system of management.

Information systems - develop computer-based information processing and analysis systems to support decision making by production units.

On-farm quality control programs - for high quality feed and water, waste management, breeding, environmental contamination

• Need to inform pork producers, veterinarians, animal scientists, extension specialists.

• Develop strategy to change educational outcomes for veterinary graduates.

• Should include HACCP concepts, risk analysis, epidemiology.