National Animal Identification System / NAIS is NOT DEAD

National Animal Identification System / NAIS is NOT DEAD: USDA Announces New Framework for Animal Disease Traceability


(Note: No one should be breathing a sigh of relief that the "National Animal Identification System," or "NAIS," is dead. It becomes immediately clear, when reading the "Factsheet" below the news release, that the language deception has simply been ramped up a couple of notches. The "840" "country code" -- which is an INTERNATIONAL identification code -- remains firmly in place. RFID tags are still the preferred way. The information already gathered will NOT be deleted or removed. There is no mention whatsoever of giving up on the original intent or its tentacles. Notice that there is no contact information for a USDA spokesperson. Whoever said "There's a sucker born every minute" is alive and working for the USDA.)


February 5, 2010


http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB/.cmd/ad/.ar/sa.retrievecontent/.c/6_2_1UH/.ce/7_2_5JM/.p/5_2_4TQ/.d/1/_th/J_2_9D/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?PC_7_2_5JM_contentid=2010%2F02%2F0053.xml&PC_7_2_5JM_parentnav=LATEST_RELEASES&PC_7_2_5JM_navid=NEWS_RELEASE#7_2_5JM


Release No. 0053.10


Washington, D.C., February 5, 2010 - Agriculture Secretary Vilsack announced today that USDA will develop a new, flexible framework for animal disease traceability in the United States, and undertake several other actions to further strengthen its disease prevention and response capabilities.

"After concluding our listening tour on the National Animal Identification System in 15 cities across the country, receiving thousands of comments from the public and input from States, Tribal Nations, industry groups, and representatives for small and organic farmers, it is apparent that a new strategy for animal disease traceability is needed," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "I've decided to revise the prior policy and offer a new approach to animal disease traceability with changes that respond directly to the feedback we heard."

The framework, announced today at the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) Mid-Year meeting, provides the basic tenets of an improved animal disease traceability capability in the United States. USDA's efforts will:


Only apply to animals moved in interstate commerce;

Be administered by the States and Tribal Nations to provide more flexibility;

Encourage the use of lower-cost technology; and

Be implemented transparently through federal regulations and the full rulemaking process.


"One of my main goals for this new approach is to build a collaborative process for shaping and implementing our framework for animal disease traceability," said Vilsack. "We are committed to working in partnership with States, Tribal Nations and industry in the coming months to address many of the details of this framework, and giving ample opportunity for farmers and ranchers and the public to provide us with continued input through this process."

One of USDA's first steps will be to convene a forum with animal health leaders for the States and Tribal Nations to initiate a dialogue about the possible ways of achieving the flexible, coordinated approach to animal disease traceability we envision. Additionally, USDA will be revamping the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health to address specific issues, such as confidentiality and liability.

Although USDA has a robust system in place to protect U.S. agriculture, with today's announcement, the Department will also be taking several additional actions to further strengthen protections against the entry and spread of disease. These steps will include accelerating actions to lessen the risk from diseases -- such as tuberculosis -- posed by imported animals, initiating and updating analyses on how animal diseases travel into the country, improving response capabilities, and focusing on greater collaboration and analyses with States and industry on potential disease risk overall.

More information on USDA's new direction on animal traceability and the steps to improve disease prevention and control is available at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability (Note: Pasted below this news release.)


http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB/.cmd/ad/.ar/sa.retrievecontent/.c/6_2_1UH/.ce/7_2_5JM/.p/5_2_4TQ/.d/1/_th/J_2_9D/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?PC_7_2_5JM_contentid=2010%2F02%2F0053.xml&PC_7_2_5JM_parentnav=LATEST_RELEASES&PC_7_2_5JM_navid=NEWS_RELEASE#7_2_5JM


~~~~~


Animal Disease Traceability


On February 5, 2010, USDA announced a new, flexible framework for animal disease traceability in the United States.

The framework will provide the basic tenets of an improved animal disease traceability capability in the United States. USDA’s efforts will:


Only apply to animals moved in interstate commerce;

Be administered by the States and Tribal Nations to provide more flexibility;

Encourage the use of lower-cost technology; and

Be implemented transparently through federal regulations and the full rulemaking process.


USDA is committed to working in partnership with States, Tribal Nations and industry in the coming months to address many of the details of this framework, and is establishing a Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health to address specific issues, such as confidentiality and liability.

For more information about the new framework, please read the following documents:

USDA Announces New Framework for Animal Disease Traceability(En Espa?ol)

Questions and Answers: New Animal Disease Traceability Framework


http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability/


~~~~~


Questions and Answers: New Animal Disease Traceability Framework


http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/faq_traceability.pdf (7 pages; 56.12 KB)


APHIS Veterinary Services Factsheet - February 2010 - Questions and Answers: New Animal Disease Traceability Framework

Excerpts: "Considering the significant investment of taxpayer money, it would be irresponsible to completely disregard all elements of NAIS. We must be fiscally responsible and use and adapt as much of the investment from NAIS as is practical. ... USDA will also re-establish a Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Animal Health with representatives from States, Tribal Nations, industry groups, local farms, organic farmers, and underserved communities to assist us in evaluating commodity-based animal disease traceability approaches, as well as State-by-State and Tribe-by-Tribe animal disease traceability efforts. ... The system will not be mandatory in the sense that all producers are required to participate or that all States and Tribal Nations must implement one approach. ... The new approach also places producers who do not move their animals in interstate commerce outside the scope of the Federal animal disease traceability system. ... USDA will still require the use of official identification and location identifiers from the national allocator for program diseases. The 840 radio frequency (electronic) tag will be considered as a first choice, due to ease of testing and recording/reporting information. ... USDA understands that the confidentiality of producer information is a foremost concern. USDA believes that producer information gathered through animal disease traceability efforts is exempt from provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. USDA also intends to continue to work with stakeholders and Congress to thoroughly consider this issue."

Q. What kind of comments did you receive during the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) listening tour and submitted online?

A. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) received a wide variety of comments during the listening tour. Some people were in favor of NAIS, but the vast majority of participants were highly critical of the program. Some of the concerns and criticisms raised included confidentiality, liability, cost, privacy, and religion. There were also concerns about NAIS being the wrong priority for USDA, that the system benefits only large-scale producers, and that NAIS is unnecessary because existing animal identifi cation systems are sufficient.

During the feedback process, USDA also received input from Tribal Nations and industry groups, as well as representatives for small and organic farmers.

USDA seriously considered and reviewed all the comments and feedback we received before deciding how to address animal disease traceability.

Q. What has USDA decided to do about NAIS?

A. USDA announced on February 5, 2010, that it will revise the prior animal identification policy and offer a new approach to achieving animal disease traceability.

We need an adaptable system that will help us find disease, quickly address it, and minimize harm to producers. USDA will move forward using a flexible yet coordinated approach that embraces the strengths and expertise of States, Tribal Nations, and producers.

Q. Why did you make this decision?

A. Preventing and controlling animal disease is the cornerstone of protecting American animal agriculture.

The United States needs a fl exible system that will allow us to find disease, quickly address it and minimize harm to producers.

Under the previous Administration, USDA tried to implement NAIS. USDA spent more than $120 million, but only 36 percent of producers participated. It is no secret that there are concerns about and opposition to NAIS.

While USDA appreciates the more than 500,000 producers who took part in our animal disease traceability efforts, it’s time that we do more to make these efforts more workable, feasible and common sense for all of America’s producers -- especially small producers.

This new approach honors the very legitimate concerns of the American public and those in Rural America, as well as those who have supported our past animal disease traceability efforts. USDA is moving forward with an approach to animal disease traceability that is flexible and lets the States, Tribal Nations, and producers use their expertise to find and use the animal disease traceabilty approaches that work best for them.

Q. Do we really need animal disease traceability? Why?

A. Animal disease traceability, or knowing where diseased and at-risk animals are, where they’ve been, and when, is very important to make sure that there can be a rapid response when animal disease events take place.

Animal disease traceability does not prevent disease. But knowing where diseased and at-risk animals are is indispensable during an emergency response and for ongoing disease programs. It helps to reduce the number of animal deaths and preserve animal health when outbreaks occur in certain parts of the country. It can also limit the number of animal owners impacted by an outbreak and reduce the economic strain on owners and affected communities.

Animal Disease Traceability Framework

Q. What exactly is the new animal disease traceability framework ?

A. The benefit of Secretary Vilsack’s decision to move forward with a new approach to animal disease traceability is that USDA will not be creating the framework alone. USDA will partner with States and Tribal Nations to create the framework for the new approach. USDA also plans to re-establish a Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Animal Health with representatives from States, Tribal Nations, industry groups, local farms, organic farmers, and underserved communities to assist us in evaluating commodity-based animal disease traceability approaches, along with State-by-State and Tribe-by-Tribe animal disease traceability efforts. This Committee will also advise USDA on other issues that need addressing, such as confi dentiality and liability.

A few other aspects are clear. The intent of the new approach is to:

Achieve basic, effective animal disease traceability and response to animal disease outbreaks without overly burdening producers;

ONLY apply to animals moving in interstate commerce;

Be owned, led, and administered by the States and Tribal Nations with Federal support focused entirely on animal disease traceability;

Allow for maximum fl exibility for States, Tribal Nations, and producers to work together to find identification solutions that meet their local needs;

Encourage the use of lower-cost technology;

Ensure that animal disease traceability data is owned and maintained at the discretion of the States and Tribal Nations;

Be less Federally intrusive and support producers’ request to operate on principles of personal accountability; and

Help overcome some of the mistrust caused by NAIS.

Q. How is this different from the old system?

A. This new approach will be focused entirely on animal disease traceability. It will be led and administered by the States and Tribal Nations. USDA’s role will be to provide support to the States and Tribal Nations, and to work cooperatively with them to ensure animal disease traceability standards are defined, measurable, and well documented. Once the standards are defined, States, Tribal Nations, and producers will determine what methods will work best for them to achieve animal disease traceability.

The new framework focuses only on animals that move in interstate commerce. So, small producers who raise animals and move them within a State, Tribal Nation, or to local markets, as well as to feed themselves, their families, and their neighbors are not a part of the framework’s scope and focus.

Q. What roles will the States, Federal government, Tribal Nations, industry, and producers all play in the new framework?

A. Everyone will need to play an important role in developing the animal disease traceability framework. USDA will take the initial steps to create a basic framework and publish a new animal disease traceability section in the Code of Federal Regulations that includes clear criteria and performance measures.

However, the framework ultimately will be led and administered by the States and Tribal Nations, with Federal support. Each State and Tribal Nation will be able to determine the specific approaches and solutions it will use to meet basic animal disease traceability performance measures based on the needs of their local producers.

USDA will also re-establish a Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Animal Health with representatives from States, Tribal Nations, industry groups, local farms, organic farmers, and underserved communities to assist us in evaluating commodity-based animal disease traceability approaches, as well as State-by-State and Tribe-by-Tribe animal disease traceability efforts.

Q. Is the new framework mandatory for all owners of animals?

A. No. USDA will not mandate a one-size-fits-all approach to animal disease traceability. The system will not be mandatory in the sense that all producers are required to participate or that all States and Tribal Nations must implement one approach.

What is certain is that animal disease traceability will be required for animals moving in interstate commerce. However, each State and Tribal Nation will be able to determine the specific approaches and solutions it wants to use to achieve the minimum animal disease traceability performance measures. Animals not moved out of state, as well as small producers who raise animals to feed themselves, their families, and their neighbors, are not a part of the framework’s scope and focus.

Q. Will the new system be less burdensome for producers?

A. The new framework will allow States, Tribal nations and producers maximum flexibility -- and therefore reduce the burden on producers. They can work together to determine what identification methods meet their local needs, while still meeting the national standards and performance measures.

The new approach also places producers who do not move their animals in interstate commerce outside the scope of the Federal animal disease traceability system.

Q. Will the size of my herd have any relation to the standards I must meet?

A. Producers who raise animals and move them within a State, Tribal Nation, or to local markets, as well as to feed themselves, their families, and their neighbors are not part of USDA’s framework’s scope and focus.

Animals moving in interstate commerce into normal marketing channels are those that will fall under USDA’s new animal disease traceability approach.

Q. Are local producers required to participate?

A. No. Only producers whose animals move in interstate commerce will be covered by the Federal animal disease traceability framework. USDA purposefully chose a new direction for animal disease traceability that supports the concerns of America’s local farmers.

Official Identification

Q. Will animals participating in the new system need to be officially identified?

A. Under the new framework, it will be important for animals moving in interstate commerce to be part of the traceability system. The details of the new system will be developed in a transparent and collaborative process. USDA will maintain a list of official identification devices, which can be updated or expanded, based on the needs of the States and Tribal Nations.

There are many official identification options available, such as branding, metal tags, RFID, just to name a few.

Q. What forms of ID will be used in the new framework? Will this be decided at the Federal or State level? Who will have input on this decision?

A. Under the new framework, it will be important for animals moving in interstate commerce to be part of the traceability system. The details of the new system will be developed in a transparent and collaborative process. Each State and Tribal Nation will be able to determine the specific approaches and solutions it will use to achieve basic animal disease traceability performance measures based on the needs of their local producers. USDA will be flexible in supporting States and Tribal Nations as they use technologies that suit the needs of their producers. For example, in some States and Tribal Nations, branding might be a way to meet animal disease traceability goals.

The new framework will also work with existing USDA disease programs, incorporating the identification requirements for those programs. Additionally, USDA will review and revise if needed the current species-specific identification requirements.

Finally, several species groups already have animal disease traceability methods in place, and the specific animal disease traceability needs of each species will be considered by the Secretary’s Advisory Committee.

Q. How will this new animal disease traceability approach support lower-cost technology?

A. States and Tribal Nations will have the flexibility to adopt the specific methods that best enable them to meet animal disease traceability performance measures. They will also have flexibility to determine what technology they choose to use to support their efforts.

In some States or Tribal Nations, animal disease traceability goals could be achieved through branding; in other States or Tribal Nations, metal ear tags may be suitable. To ensure interstate compatibility and connectivity, APHIS will work with States and Tribal Nations in establishing standards and guidelines, where free or low-cost tags will be incorporated as options.

Q. Will there be additional burdens for states who choose to implement a more technology-based system (electronic ID as opposed to visual ID or brands)? How will cost differences be handled? Will there be subsidies available?

A. The goal of this new animal disease traceability approach is to impose the least burden on producers as possible, while still making sure that we have effective animal disease traceability in the United States.

USDA will work with States, Tribal Nations, and industry to provide free or low-cost visual tags as an option.

USDA will also make the information technology (IT) systems it developed through NAIS available to States and Tribal Nations, should they want to use them.

Once States and Tribal Nations decide on acceptable methods of identification, it will be up to the producer to choose the method they want to use, if multiple options are available.

Animals Moving in Interstate Commerce

Q. How will having different systems in different States and Tribal Nations affect interstate commerce?

A. Under the new framework, USDA will work with States and Tribal Nations to develop systems that achieve basic animal disease traceability performance measures based on the needs of their local producers.

USDA will work cooperatively with the States, Tribal Nations, industry, and the public to set the minimum requirements for animal disease traceability that allow for the efficient movement of animals

Q. Who will decide what systems are acceptable for interstate commerce?

A. USDA will work cooperatively with the States, Tribal Nations, industry, and the public to set the minimum requirements for animal disease traceability that allow for the efficient movement of animals.

Q. If I buy animals from one State or Tribal Nation and then later need to sell them to another State or Tribal Nation with different ID requirements, will I need to re-ID them?

A. USDA will work with State and Tribal Nations to establish minimum standards for animal disease traceability, as well as when these officials work together to develop individual animal identifi cation requirements.

Our goal is to ensure that animals continue to move efficiently in interstate commerce.

Q. Who will hold the information needed to conduct traces? How will USDA gain access to this information when a disease event occurs?

A. Under the new framework, the States and Tribal Nations will hold animal disease traceability information. USDA will stand ready to assist States and Tribal Nations as requested.

USDA will have access to necessary animal disease traceability information when an animal health event arises. In developing the details of the new animal disease traceability approach, USDA will work with States, Tribal Nations, and industry to provide options and support for information systems.

Q. Will my animals’ information or my information be entered into any government database?

A. Under the new framework, animal disease traceability information will be held by the States and Tribal Nations, unless a State or Tribal Nation requests that USDA hold their information. USDA will have access to necessary animal disease traceability information only when an animal health event arises.

Costs of the New Approach to Animal Disease Traceability

Q. Who’s going to pay for this? How much is it going to cost? How will it be funded?

A. While the total cost of the new framework is not known at this time as the details still need to be decided, it is USDA’s intent to be a cooperative partner in terms of both technical and financial assistance with States and Tribal Nations.

U.S. taxpayers have already made a significant investment in USDA’s past animal disease traceability efforts, and it is vitally important that funding for this initiative not go to waste. USDA will be fiscally responsible and use some elements from NAIS in the new approach. Elements, such as IT infrastructure and tags, will be changed or updated to work with the new approach -- and made available to the States and Tribal Nations to use as they see fit for their producers.

Finally, the cost of the animal disease traceability framework will be less than the $228 million per year that the NAIS Benefit-Cost Analysis outlined for a full animal disease traceability system. It will cost less for two reasons:

The framework covers only animals moving in interstate commerce and offers flexibility in the identification devices and tracing methods used.

The Benefit-Cost Analysis was based, among other things, on identifying and tracing livestock animals, as well as using electronic identification devices for cattle (the largest segment of the livestock population).

Q. Will the new approach be an unfunded mandate on States and Tribal Nations or expensive for producers?

A. No. It is USDA’s intent to provide funding to the States and Tribal Nations to develop animal disease traceability approaches for their producers. USDA also intends to work with States, Tribal Nations, and producers to facilitate access to tags and to help offset other costs, just as USDA does for other animal disease programs.

Q. Will any of USDA funds received to implement NAIS be used for this new approach?

A. Yes. USDA funds previously allocated to NAIS will be used for the new animal disease traceability approach.

Investments in NAIS

Q. What will happen to the people who signed up for the original NAIS?

A. Producers who registered their locations as part of NAIS and currently use 840 numbers may continue to do so. Information collected as part of USDA’s animal disease programs will remain in place to be used as needed for tracebacks and trace forwards during disease situations.

The new animal disease traceability framework does not roll back any identification gains made in commodities such as sheep, swine, and poultry that often exceed the basic level of animal disease traceability.

Finally, USDA working with the States and Tribal Nations, will determine the components of NAIS that can or should be salvaged and overhauled and what can’t, and to leverage our investment to support the new approach. USDA will also replace NAIS guidance and other NAIS materials with information about this new direction on animal disease traceability.

Q. Is there going to be any sort of benefit/compensation to the original NAIS participants (voluntary)?

A. USDA values the more than 500,000 people who decided to participate in USDA animal disease traceability efforts to date. It’s also important to recognize that States, Tribal Nations, industry groups, and thousands of American producers have invested heavily in NAIS and have worked hard to make it succeed. It is their input and feedback that has led us to develop an approach that offers more flexibility, lower cost options, and is less burdensome.

In fact, the goal of Secretary Vilsack’s new animal disease traceability approach is to impose the least burden on producers as possible, while still ensuring effective animal disease traceability. USDA will be working with States, Tribal Nations, and industry to facilitate access to visual tags as an option as well as provide access to information technology systems that support animal disease traceability efforts.

Q. More than $120 million was spent on the old NAIS system. Are there elements that you are keeping?

A. The money invested in NAIS will not go to waste. Many elements of the NAIS system can be used in this new animal disease traceability framework, should States and Tribal Nations elect to use them. These elements include:

a strong IT infrastructure;

an allocator to provide unique location identifiers; and

840 tags.

Q. Why are you reusing NAIS components?

A. Considering the significant investment of taxpayer money, it would be irresponsible to completely disregard all elements of NAIS. We must be fiscally responsible and use and adapt as much of the investment from NAIS as is practical. This can be done with IT systems and tags. These elements will remain available; however, it will be up to the States and Tribal Nations to decide how they want to use them, if at all.

Q. What about States that legislated that they would not participate in NAIS?

A. It’s important to remember that the new animal disease traceability framework the USDA is announcing is not NAIS. This framework will set forth criteria that States and Tribal Nations must meet for their animals to be able to move interstate. States and Tribal Nations will have the flexibility to decide what methods they will use.

Q. Are the PINs provided through NAIS being maintained or is all the information being deleted?

A. States and Tribal Nations will have the flexibility to determine the specific approaches and solutions they will use to achieve basic animal disease traceability performance measures. And, each State and Tribal Nation’s decisions will be based on the needs of their local producers.

However, producers who registered their locations as part of NAIS and use 840 numbers may continue to do so.

Other information will remain in place to be used as needed for tracebacks and trace forwards during disease situations.

Q. Some fairs and packers require PINs. If these requirements continue, how should producers obtain a PIN?

A. Until the new animal disease traceability framework is established and States and Tribal Nations decide the specific approaches and solutions they will use, producers may continue to use 840 numbers and PINs, if they already have them.

If a producer does not have a PIN and needs one, he/she can contact their State animal health officials to acquire one. If the State or Tribal Nation does not provide the location identifiers, a local USDA representative can provide the location identification number.

Q. Will my 840 tags still be valid? Will I need to retag my animals?

A. Producers that wish to use 840 tags may continue to do so. Retagging will not be necessary.

Confidentiality

Q. What will USDA do to keep my information confidential?

A. USDA understands that the confidentiality of producer information is a foremost concern. USDA believes that producer information gathered through animal disease traceability efforts is exempt from provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. USDA also intends to continue to work with stakeholders and Congress to thoroughly consider this issue.

Domestic Disease Programs

Q. How does this new framework work with existing USDA disease programs, for example TB and brucellosis?

A. In a new section of the Code of Federal Regulations, USDA intends to compile, in cooperation with States, Tribal Nations, and the Advisory Committee, species-specific identification requirements and revise them as necessary to be consistent with our new direction. The revisions will recognize the different animal disease traceability needs of various animal species and will build on the animal disease traceability successes in a number of commodity groups.

These revisions will also clarify how our new framework for animal disease animal disease traceability works with existing disease control programs. Successful species-specific identification programs will continue.

Q. What about 840 tags for disease programs?

A. USDA will still require the use of official identification and location identifiers from the national allocator for program diseases. The 840 radio frequency (electronic) tag will be considered as a first choice, due to ease of testing and recording/reporting information.

However, other options will be available.

Imported Animals

Q. One of the concerns raised during the listening sessions is the entry of foreign animals with diseases. How does the new framework help this situation? What steps is USDA taking to address it?

A. We know that the best defense against animal disease is to prevent it from reaching the United States.

While [the] USDA already has procedures and regulations in place to protect U.S. livestock from diseased animals entering the United States, we will take several steps to strengthen our first line of defense as part of the animal disease traceability announcement.

The steps include:

taking actions to lessen the risk from disease introduction, such as developing a highly pathogenic avian influenza rule to prevent the introduction of this disease into the United States;

initiating and updating analyses on how animal diseases travel into the country, including conducting a risk assessment on the introduction of new world screwworm into the United States, Mexico, and Central America from the Caribbean;

improving response capabilities, and

focusing on greater collaboration and analyses with States and industry on potential disease risk overall.

Q. Will international animals imported into the United States have to meet individual State or Tribal Nation requirements?

A. Since this new approach to animal disease traceability is only just underway, States and Tribal Nations have not yet outlined their animal identification requirements.

Food Safety

Q. How does animal disease traceability relate to the President’s food safety initiative?

A. USDA’s animal disease traceability announcement only focuses on animal health and aims to assist USDA in quickly finding out where diseased animals have been and what other animals they may have come in contact with. Animal disease traceability isn’t a food safety program.

Q. Will animal disease traceability allow USDA to trace down to a package of meat?

A. USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is the lead Federal agency for animal disease traceability. This type of traceability is focused on animal health and allows for the tracing of an animal’s movements during its lifespan. Currently, animal disease traceability ends when an animal is slaughtered.

USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is the lead agency dealing with food safety in meat and poultry. They have a wide range of programs designed to ensure food safety. One of their responsibilities is being able to trace packaged meat back to a processing facility or slaughter house.

While these are currently two separate systems, animal disease traceability can serve as an important animal health resource by tracing animals that arrive at slaughter facilities showing signs of disease to their original herd and other animals that may have been exposed to the same disease.

Q. Will animal disease traceability prevent people from getting food borne illnesses?

A. Animal disease traceability focuses on animal health and allows for the tracing of an animal’s movements during its lifespan. This allows animal health officials to determine what animals may have been exposed to a disease, and where they are located. These potentially exposed animals are quarantined, or kept from moving in commerce, until they can be tested for disease.

Only healthy animals are eligible for slaughter. Once slaughtered, FSIS has a variety of methods for ensuring that meat stays fresh and free from contamination throughout the processing, packaging and distribution process.

It is also important that consumers follow USDA cooking temperature recommendations to help prevent foodborne illness.

Q. How will animal disease traceability protect consumers?

A. Should there be an animal disease event, animal disease traceability would allow for efficient traceback of infected animals and the rapid quarantine of potentially exposed animals. This ensures that healthy animals can continue to move freely to slaughter facilities, which protects producer’s livelihoods and keeps costs down at the grocery store. At that point, FSIS’ methods for traceability take over and continue to make sure that the food supply is safe.

Q. Can certain aspects of animal disease traceability be used to ensure safe food and prevent foodborne illnesses?

A. Animal disease traceability is focused on animal health. However, there are some aspects of disease traceability that can help promote a safe, healthy food supply:

1. When animals arrive at slaughter facilities, before they are slaughtered, FSIS conducts a wholesomeness evaluation. At this time, if FSIS sees any potential signs of disease, the animal is removed from the food chain and evaluated. If the animal is diseased, the animal disease traceability system would make the traceback of that animal much more effective and timely than if the animal did not have identification.

2. If animal disease is found, either at a pre-slaughter inspection or on the farm, animal disease traceability allows animal health officials to better determine what animals may have been exposed to the disease, as well as where they are located. This allows animal health officials to test potentially exposed animals for a disease, while leaving unexposed animals free to move in commerce.

3. Animal disease traceability will also ensure that the United States can manage zoonotic diseases, or those diseases that can be transmitted from animals to humans.

Next Steps

Q. What are the next steps?

A. USDA wants to be fully open and transparent in any actions taken in support of animal disease traceability and wants to engage and collaborate with those impacted by this new system as much as possible.

The fi rst step is to reach out to the States, Tribal Nations, and industry, and other stakeholders to begin the process of working together to develop the animal disease traceability framework, minimum standards, and regulations. In March 2010, USDA will convene a meeting with States and Tribal Nations, who will work together with their producers to provide us with guidance and input on what they feel should be a part of the animal disease traceability framework and eventual regulations.

USDA will also issue a call for nominations for a re-established Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Animal Health that will provide feedback on the animal disease traceability regulations, as well as other issues like confidentially and liability. It is the goal for this subgroup to meet and begin work in summer of 2010.

Finally, USDA will convene a regulatory working group of Federal, State, and Tribal Nations animal health officials to assess options for the animal disease traceability framework, provide input to the agency, and review the feedback received from the public and other partners.

Q. When will a proposed rule be published?

A . It is our goal that by the fall of this year, USDA, supported by the regulatory working group, will have reviewed the feedback from the public, along with input from States, Tribal Nations, and the animal disease traceability subgroup in order to develop a proposed rule.

By next winter, we hope to publish the proposed rule for animal disease traceability’s minimum standards and system performance in straightforward, understandable language. We will offer a comment period of 90 days to allow ample time for comments and feedback from all interested parties.

Q. When will the animal disease traceability framework be finalized?

A: Rulemaking can be a complicated process, so it is difficult to predict when a final rule may be issued. However, USDA is committed to transparency and openly working with States, Tribal Nations, and producers throughout the rulemaking process and providing them with ample time to comply with the final performance standards.

How can you participate?

Q. If I have concerns about the new animal disease traceability system, how can I raise them? Who do I need to talk to/write?

A. Because establishing the new animal disease traceability framework will be a joint State/TribalNation/USDA effort, your input and feedback are welcome and very important. You can either contact your USDA area veterinarian in charge (AVIC), your State veterinarian, or Tribal animal health officials with comments. To fi nd contact information for your State veterinarian, please visit USDA’s animal disease traceability web site at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability In the “Quick Links” menu, click on “State Veterinarian Directory.”

During the rulemaking process, a public comment period will also offer an opportunity for sharing your views.


http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/faq_traceability.pdf (7 pages; 56.12 KB)


Additional related news articles:


USDA Scraps Plans for National Animal ID System
Ozarks First - ?1 hour ago?
The USDA will be scrapping its national animal identification system for livestock. It was planned during the first mad-cow scare in 2003, but its price tag ...
USDA to ask states, tribes to run animal ID system Capital Press (subscription)
USDA Ends National Animal ID Program AgWeb
USDA announces plans for new program to trace animals, to be administered by ... Los Angeles Times
Feedstuffs - Agriculture Online
all 196 news articles »


New York Times
National Animal Identification System scrapped
Homeland Stupidity - ?17 hours ago?
The National Animal Identification System began as a voluntary program in which each animal on a farm would be tracked with a unique identification number ...
USA - Questions about cattle identification Meattradenewsdaily (blog)
USDA Plans to Drop Program to Trace Livestock New York Times
all 3 news articles »



2nd decade providing skillfully researched information. propertyrights@earthlink.net Websites: http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com & http://tips2ussavethem.blogspot.com Also: http://ourcommunitynewspaper.com

most emerging human diseases are “zoonotic” ... diseases can spread from people to animals, vice-versa

New Ouchless Plague Vaccine, Shipwrecks Wrecking Coral Reefs, White-Nose Syndrome in Bats, and More at the Wildlife Disease Association Conference


"... increased realization that most emerging human diseases are “zoonotic,” that is, diseases that can spread from people to other animals or vice-versa. ... until very recently, wildlife disease was not an important focus for the wildlife conservation community....Now, though, a new wave of social environmentalism and public concerns about emerging zoonotic diseases are placing increased pressure on wildlife agencies to address disease ‘crises’ involving wildlife."


(Note: This conference began on August 2nd and runs through August 7th, but was not sent to listserve members until the evening of August 3rd.)


August 3, 2009


From: cpuckett@usgs.gov

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2268&from=rss_home

USGS News Release August 3, 2009

Catherine Puckett (call during WDA conference) cpuckett@usgs.gov or 352-264-3532

Note to reporters and editors: The 58th annual meeting of the Wildlife Disease Association (WDA) http://www.wildlifedisease.org will be August 2-7, 2009, in Blaine, Washington.

The theme is "Wildlife Health from Land to Sea: Impacts of a Changing World."

This release is based on USGS research being presented at the conference.

Also see a full press release on emerging diseases in fish at http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/

Get Your Shots! Eating Ouchless Vaccines Protects Prairie Dogs in the Lab Against Plague:

A new oral vaccine against sylvatic plague is showing significant promise in the laboratory as a way to protect prairie dogs and may eventually protect endangered black-footed ferrets who now get the disease by eating infected prairie dogs, according to results by a USGS researcher at the USGS National Wildlife Health Center.

Sylvatic plague is an infectious bacterial disease usually transmitted from animal to animal by fleas. This exotic disease is usually deadly for black-footed ferrets and their primary prey, prairie dogs, resulting in local extinctions or regional population reductions. Along with other wild rodents, prairie dogs are also considered a significant reservoir of plague for other wildlife, domestic animals, and people in the western U.S. Prevention of plague in wild rodents by immunization could reduce outbreaks of the disease in animals, thereby reducing the risk for human exposure to the disease.

USGS scientists offered plague vaccine in food for voluntary consumption by 16 black-tailed prairie dogs. They also injected a plague vaccine into 12 other prairie dogs and then studied how much protection against plague the two kinds of vaccines offered. USGS researcher Dr. Tonie Rocke, the lead researcher of the project, found that the prairie dogs that “ate” their vaccine were better protected from the disease than the ones who were injected with a vaccine. These results, said Rocke, demonstrate that oral immunization of prairie dogs against plague provides significant protection from the disease, at least in the laboratory.

Black-footed ferrets, of course, are one of the rarest mammals in North America.

An oral vaccine, said Rocke, could be put into bait and delivered into the field without having to handle any animals, a process that is time-consuming, costly, and sometimes stressful for the animals. The same bacterium that affects ferrets, prairie dogs, and other rodents, is also responsible for human cases of plague. For more information, contact Dr. Tonie Rocke at trocke@usgs.gov or 608-270-2451

Shipwrecks Wrecking Coral Reefs? A Case Study at Palmyra Atoll National Wildlife Refuge:
For the first time, researchers have definitively shown that shipwrecks and other man-made structures increase the potential for large invasions of unwanted species into coral reefs, even comparatively pristine ones. These unwanted species can completely overtake a reef and eliminate native corals, dramatically decreasing the diversity of marine organisms on the reef. Coral reefs can undergo fast changes in their dominant life forms, a phenomenon referred to as phase shift. Scientists have speculated on many possible causes of phase shift, but this study is the first one to clearly show that a rapid change in the dominant life forms on a coral reef is associated with man-made structures.

In September 2007, USGS researcher Dr. Thierry Work, Dr. Greta Aeby from the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, and Dr. James Maragos from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service studied a 100-foot vessel that wrecked in 1991 on isolated Palmyra Atoll in the central Pacific Ocean. They found extremely high numbers of an invasive species related to anemones and corals, Rhodactis howesii, on and around the shipwreck site. The density of this species progressively decreased with distance from the ship, and it was rare or absent in other parts of the atoll. Likewise, the researchers confirmed high densities of R. howesii around several buoys installed on the atoll in 2001.

Even though phase shifts can have long-term negative effects for coral reefs, eliminating organisms responsible for phase shifts can be difficult, particularly if they cover a large area. The extensive R. howesii invasion and subsequent loss of coral reef habitat at Palmyra highlights the importance of rapid removal of shipwrecks on corals reefs to help prevent reefs from being overgrown by invasive species.

"Why this phenomenon is occurring remains a mystery," said Work, a scientist at the USGS National Wildlife Health Center's Honolulu Field Station. One possibility, he said, is that iron leaching from the ship and mooring buoy chains, accompanied with other environmental factors particular to Palmyra Atoll, are somehow promoting the growth of Rhodactis. For more information, contact Dr. Thierry Work at 808-72-9250 or thierry_work@usgs.gov

Society, Wildlife Disease and Wildlife Conservation: Oxymoron or Evolutionary Siblings?

Over the past 50 years, the field of wildlife disease as an issue for concern has exploded in significance, mostly because of the increased realization that most emerging human diseases are “zoonotic,” that is, diseases that can spread from people to other animals or vice-versa. USGS emeritus scientist Dr. Milt Friend, in an invited talk at the Wildlife Disease Association conference, will explore how and why the field of wildlife disease research has changed over the last 50 years.

One of the biggest differences, says Friend, is that until very recently, wildlife disease was not an important focus for the wildlife conservation community.

“Now, though, a new wave of social environmentalism and public concerns about emerging zoonotic diseases are placing increased pressure on wildlife agencies to address disease ‘crises’ involving wildlife,” Friend says.

He emphasizes, however, that emerging zoonotic diseases often result in double jeopardy for wildlife: not only do wildlife often suffer direct negative effects from a disease, they also endure indirect effects associated with actions taken to reduce human risks by suppressing wildlife populations.

In addition, says Friend, wildlife can also be jeopardized by actions taken if they happen to share diseases with domestic animals, even if those diseases do not pose a significant public health threat.

“Conversely, within the wildlife conservation community, the role of disease as a factor for species extinctions is receiving increased worldwide attention,” Friend noted. For more information, contact Dr. Milton Friend at 608-270-2488 or mfriend@usgs.gov

Disease Risks When Moving Wildlife to New Areas: Endangered Laysan Duck Cautionary Tale:
Laysan ducks, one of the world's most endangered waterfowl, are native to only the Hawaiian archipelago. For 150 years, Laysan ducks were restricted to an estimated 4 square kilometers of land on Laysan Island in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands. In 2004 and 2005, in an effort to rebuild thepopulation, biologists released 42 Laysan ducks on Midway Atoll, located one day's boat ride from Laysan. By 2007, a breeding population was well established on Midway, reaching 200 ducks. However, in August 2008, more than half of the Midway duck population (181 ducks) was lost to a disease epidemic lasting 30 days. Necropsies (the animal equivalent of autopsies) on dead birds revealed botulism type C as a cause of the die-off.

Disturbingly, said Work, 3 ducks were also infected with a worm suspected to be Echinuria uncinata; this worm has been responsible for mass die-offs of Laysan ducks on Laysan Island. Work notes that this worm was either moved to Midway during translocations of ducks from Laysan, despite preventive treatment of all founding birds, or it arrived with migratory waterfowl. Either way, says Work, this epizootic highlights the disease risk to birds restricted to small island populations and the challenges associated with managing newly translocated endangered species. Frequent population monitoring for early disease detection and comprehensive wetland monitoring and management will be needed to offset the potential effects of avian botulism and parasitism on endangered Laysan ducks, Work said. The bigger picture, though, is that disease risks need to be closely examined for translocations of all kinds, especially in light of translocations being proposed for dealing with habitat range changes that affect endangered species due to climate change. For more information, contact Dr. Thierry Work at 808-72-9250 or thierry_work@usgs.gov

Bat white-nose syndrome: An emerging fungal pathogen?

New research provides even more evidence that a previously undescribed, cold-loving fungus is associated with white-nose syndrome, a condition linked to the deaths of up to 1,000,000 cave-hibernating bats in the northeastern and mid-Atlantic states. Since the winter of 2006-2007, bat populations plummeted from 80 to 97 percent at surveyed bat-hibernation caves, called hibernacula. USGS microbiologist Dr. David Blehert and his colleagues identified the fungus last year, and have followed up by trying to determine if the fungus may be responsible for the deaths or if it is simply a side effect of another underlying disease. The researchers found that 90 percent of all bats they examined from suspected WNS sites had a severe fungal skin infection that did not just occur on the skin, but below it as well. The growth temperature requirements of the fungus are consistent with the core temperatures of cave-hibernating bat species throughout temperate regions of the world. Given the hundreds of thousands of hibernating bats found throughout the WNS-affected region, as well as the potential for the spread of this disease to other parts of the United States and Canada, white-nose syndrome represents an unprecedented threat to bats of the northeastern United States and potentially beyond. For more information, contact Dr. David Blehert at 608-270-2466 or dblehert@usgs.gov

Sick Fish May Get Sicker: Climate Change and Other Stresses Expected to Affect Entire Populations of Fish

See full press release on this subject http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2267
Entire populations of North American fish already are being affected by several emerging diseases, a problem that threatens to increase in the future with climate change and other stresses on aquatic ecosystems, according to a noted U.S. Geological Survey researcher giving an invited talk on this subject today at the Wildlife Disease Association conference in Blaine, Wash.

“A generation ago, we couldn’t have imaged the explosive growth in disease issues facing many of our wild fish populations,” said Dr. Jim Winton, a fish disease specialist at the USGS Western Fisheries Research Center.

“Most fish health research at that time was directed toward diseases of farmed fish.”

In contrast, said Winton, recent studies in natural aquatic systems have revealed that, in addition to being a cause of natural death, infectious and parasitic fish diseases can produce significantly greater mortality in altered habitats leading to population fluctuations, extinction of endangered fish, reduced overall health and increased susceptibility to predation. For more information, contact Dr. Jim Winton at jwinton@usgs.gov or 206-526-6282 Ext. 328

Catherine Puckett, USGS Office of Communications cpuckett@usgs.gov or 352-264-3532; cell: 352-275-2639; Fax: 352-374-8080

2201 NW 40th Terrace

Gainesville, FL 32605-3574

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2268&from=rss_home