The Tripartite FMD Test Exercise
- An Industry Perspective

Ken Olson, Ph.D.
Dairy & Animal Health Specialist

Previous presentations have provided an overview of the Tripartite FMD Test Exercise. It should be noted that the overall exercise was more that just the functional portion in November, but really covered most of the year. I was one of the industry representative who participated in the Table Top portion that was held in Guadalajara, MX in June, 2000 and the functional portion that was held in Riverdale, MD in November, 2000.

There were many positive aspects to the total exercise. It was based on actual animal movement, so was quite realistic as it evolved. Industry was actively involved in all aspects of the exercise and their input was actively sought in most areas of decision making. Hopefully this will be continued in the event of an actual outbreak. This should be something that is built into future updates of action plans. The interaction with counterparts in Canada and Mexico by both governmental and industry representative was useful. This interaction in all phases of the exercise helps to build good working relationships for dealing with future issues. The use of the temporary Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in Riverdale during the exercise gave a taste of what it can do. It is important that renewed efforts be made to secure the needed funds to assure that it become fully operational as quickly as possible. In general, the teamwork that developed among all partners makes us much better prepared to deal with a potential outbreak. These efforts need to continue to be built upon.

While there were many positive aspects to the exercise, several needs were also identified. These include:

• A review/update of the Red Book for foot and mouth disease
• Species specific issues need to be addressed as many of our industries have changed significantly in the way they operate since the last update. Industry needs to play an active role in this review and update.
• Operating procedures need to be reviewed in light of concerns identified in the test exercise and experience in Great Britain. These include, but are not limited to, vaccination protocols, movement controls and carcass disposal.
• Compensation issues need to be clarified for operational downtime and animal care while awaiting slaughter in addition to just the animal loss.
• Upgrades on information included in databases are important if they are to be useful in assessing the likely spread of the disease and in making vaccination decisions.
• Wider access to databases and Geographic Information Systems for both the EOC and the field is important for management of the outbreak.
• Adequate facilities at the EOC for industry need to be provided. Space with adequate power and phone lines for computers is important if industry is to play the role that they should. They also need a dedicated FAX machine and are likely to need space for a support person so that they do not interfere with APHIS operations.
• One problem with the exercise, as conducted in the US, was the lack of coordination between the EOC activities and the field portion conducted in Texas. The two portions ended up running on different time frames. This made it impossible to really test information input from the field and its use in managing and controlling the outbreak. This needs to be tested in the future to assure that adequate and appropriate communication mechanisms exist and that they work.

Communications is an important need in the case of an outbreak. During the test exercise it was recognized that industry and APHIS communications staff did not know each other. An initial conference call was held to introduce people and begin to bridge this gap. There was a basic agreement to expand this contact. This needs to be done as part of an on-going effort.

A good start was made on US-Canada Industry communication during the Guadalajara portion of the exercise. This continued with Conference calls during functional potion of the exercise. Canada had industry people involved both in the field and headquarters parts of the exercise who participated in the call. A follow-up call after the exercise was conducted as a wrap-up for it and for development of industry reports. Concerns identified by industry in both countries were similar. There was general agreement on the need for regular calls between industry representative in the case of an actual emergency.

One concerns that does exist is the limited staff that industry has devoted to the issue. Producer organizations indicate support and have worked to increase funding for APHIS, but few staff or producers are actually involved and have working knowledge of the emergency management system. In most cases if one individual leaves, most of the organizational knowledge of the issue leaves with that person. Industry needs to be strongly encouraged to increase their commitment in this area.

In general the Tripartite FMD Test Exercise was a success. The US and North America are much better prepared to deal with an FMD outbreak if one were to occur than we were a year ago.