National Animal Health Safeguarding Review -

What We Found; What We Plan to Do
 

Commissioner Gus Douglass
NASDA Animal Health Safeguarding Review Panel Chairman

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen. I also want to thank the National Institute for Animal Agriculture for providing me this opportunity to review ongoing animal health concerns from the Animal Health Safeguarding Review as well as the ongoing stimulus from USDA Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Foreign Animal & Poultry Diseases. My comments are as an Agriculture Commissioner from an animal industry state and as Chair of the Review and Advisory Committee.

A great personal concern of mine is that the animal and veterinary medical profession has not had the attention or status human health and the medical doctors enjoy. It is not until a national emergency emerges that suddenly the realities of life reveal that the diseases of the animal industry also pose threats to human health.

>It is only through the tenacity  of some career individuals in USDA and in the Congress of the United States that we have the staff, laboratory and analytical support, however antiquated, to provide some security to the agriculture industry and the human population in this country.

Timeliness is extremely important, and fortunately USDA, APHIS, and Veterinary Services have the information and support to secure the necessary appropriations to upgrade and replace the old analytical capabilities and adopt new technology that will carry us into the immediate future.

I feel much of the stimulus to fund the Animal Health Safeguarding Review emerged from the USDA Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Foreign Animal and Poultry Diseases.  I have served 6 years on this committee. Biosecurity and bioterrorism were discussed and evaluated long before they became common topics in the media today.  The recommendations made by this committee were timely indeed given the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in England.

The foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in the United Kingdom and the anthrax contamination through the postal system in this country demonstrate the great need for a Central Emergency Operations Center and a coordinated surveillance system in USDA.  I am amazed that we have survived without it.

Credit for part of this must go to the poor public relations or the image of USDA in the overall spectrum of national security and food safety. Most if not all of these deficiencies are highlighted in the Animal Health Safeguarding Review. There is an Executive Summary of the committee’s thoughts and a more detailed outline in the original document.

I had the honor of chairing this committee of some of the most talented and resourceful individuals from all walks of life, academia, research, and commodity groups. We also had the services of Bruce Andrews of Andrews & Doyle Associates to assist in compiling this information through the NASDA Research Foundation staff.

The review panel was divided into 4 subcommittees with their efforts directed primarily to Domestic Detection and Surveillance, Exclusion Activities, International Information, and Response. The opening comment is “U.S. biosecurity is a national military and food security issue and concern is rightfully growing over the country’s thin line of defense.”

At the core of this concern is the fact that animal diseases affect commercial animals, pets, companion animals, and wild animal populations. Some of these diseases can infect and kill humans. The Surveillance Committee states that “A comprehensive, coordinated, integrated surveillance system is the foundation for animal health, public health, food safety, and environmental health.”

The National Security Surveillance System cannot be implemented by APHIS and Veterinary Services alone. Partnerships with states, animal industries, veterinary practitioners, universities, OEI Reference Centers, and diagnostic laboratories are essential.

The Exclusion Committee concludes that “In order to achieve effective exclusion, the U.S. must adopt a unified approach that balances plant and animal issues and restores confidence to the fractured system now in place.”  The exclusion efforts encourage and reward innovation and must be decentralized so that every level has appropriate authority and responsibility for its work.

The International Information Committee emphasizes enhanced and upgraded electronic monitoring and security systems.  The ability to route animal health queries to a national surveillance system is vital in establishing centralized groups, preferably within the emergency center. 

The Response Committee states that, “Any national response system must be a coordinated cooperative effort of federal and state regulatory agencies, animal industries and related groups.”  “A dynamic response plan is necessary to control domestic and foreign animal diseases and issues. It should include enhanced training and education, mobilization of adequate supplies, resources and trained personnel, clarification of roles and responsibilities, and coordination of the myriad of response providers.” Wildlife and exotic species management is a critical component of a thorough animal disease response plan.

Question is raised as to USDA’s ability to react to major emergencies or threats to plant and animal food supplies.  Present staffing may handle one, but multiple emergencies would spread staff very thin and may necessitate the recall and reemployment of former professionals and retirees.

I will not attempt to go into more details of the summary, but I do consider it very visionary. Certainly a path for the future that this nation must consider is that USDA be on equal terms in the federal system with homeland safety, the State Department, health, medical, military and others.

The foot and mouth disease threat brought to the forefront the many deficiencies within coordinating staff in USDA, as well as Customs, DEA and their drug surveillance procedures. Cross-training should be required of the Plant, Veterinary, Customs, and Drug personnel, enabling them to provide support to each other.

There is an antiquated system of dealing with the thousands of containers and aircraft that are delivering goods here.  Computerization of commerce must be a high priority, enabling an inspector to check the manifest and determine the number of containers on a ship and their contents in the least amount of time possible.

USDA must look to a new policy of providing inspections at point of origin rather than point of entry to minimize threats to our animal and plant industries. Greater coordination with the military in screening and decontaminating returning personnel and equipment is vital.

An animal identification system must be put in place, ensuring that both domestic and imported animals can be traced in commerce in the event of a contagious disease outbreak. Other countries are far ahead of us in this respect.  This country is relatively disease-free thanks to the farmers, animal managers, veterinary professionals, and certainly an industry that is on guard, which is a great economic benefit as well as a bonus to the consuming public.

There are diseases such as Johne’s, scrapie, and chronic wasting disease in wildlife that also need attention with a goal of eradication. It is extremely important that the laboratory facilities be upgraded, and that the Agricultural Research Service and USDA laboratories work together to further evaluate technology, especially in the arena of genetics, cloning, and tracking the mutations associated with the many viruses. 

It is interesting that bovine spongiform encephalopathy or commonly known as mad cow disease is being traced to a possible mineral imbalance. The relationship of copper and manganese in the development of the prion diseases is gaining credibility. It does seem that the more we know, the more confusing it does become.

The bottom line really is surveillance, and knowing where to direct the information so that it may be properly evaluated for prompt and professional corrective action. I commend APHIS for maintaining the monthly nationwide conference calls with Departments of Agriculture and industry.  As for me, it’s been most interesting serving as the traffic director, and working to enhance the visibility of USDA-APHIS.   Thanks go to the members of the Animal Health Safeguarding Review and USDA Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Foreign Animal & Poultry Diseases for their tireless efforts on behalf of our agriculture community. I would be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge the tremendous support Secretary Ann Veneman is providing the animal industry. My thanks go to you for permitting me a few moments of your time.