Indemnity payments in foreign animal disease eradication campaigns in the United States

2010 ◽  
Vol 236 (7) ◽  
pp. 742-750
Author(s):  
Jamie K. Umber ◽  
Gay Y. Miller ◽  
William D. Hueston
2019 ◽  
Vol 97 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. 61-62
Author(s):  
John Butler

Abstract Animal disease traceability—or knowing where diseased and at-risk animals are, where they’ve been, and when—is important to ensuring a rapid response when animal disease events take place. Although animal disease traceability does not prevent disease, an efficient and accurate traceability system reduces the number of animals and response time involved in a disease investigation; which, in turn, reduces the economic impact on owners and affected communities. The current approach to traceability in the United States is the result of significant discussion and compromise. Federal policy regarding traceability has been amended several times over the past decade based on stakeholder feedback, particularly from the cattle industry. In early 2010, USDA announced a new approach for responding to and controlling animal diseases, referred to as the ADT framework. USDA published a proposed rule, “Traceability for Livestock Moving Interstate,” on August 11, 2011, and the final rule on January 9, 2013. Under the final rule, unless specifically exempted, livestock moved interstate must be officially identified and accompanied by an interstate certificate of veterinary inspection (ICVI) or other documentation. However, these requirements do not apply to all cattle. Beef cattle under 18 months of age, unless they are moved interstate for shows, exhibitions, rodeos, or recreational events, are exempt from the official identification requirement in this rule. We can do better. Our industry must recognize how vulnerable we really are, should we be subject to a disease such as foot and mouth. We must also understand what a competitive disadvantage the United States faces in the global marketplace without a recognized, industry-wide traceability system.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 640-646
Author(s):  
Eric J. Linskens ◽  
Abby E. Neu ◽  
Emily J. Walz ◽  
Kaitlyn M. St. Charles ◽  
Marie R. Culhane ◽  
...  

AbstractIntroductionForeign animal disease (FAD) outbreaks can have devastating impacts, but they occur infrequently in any specific sector anywhere in the United States (US). Training to proactively discuss implementation of control and prevention strategies are beneficial in that they provide stakeholders with the practical information and educational experience they will need to respond effectively to an FAD. Such proactive approaches are the mission of the Secure Food System (SFS; University of Minnesota; St. Paul, Minnesota USA).MethodsThe SFS exercises were designed as educational activities based on avian influenza (AI) outbreaks in commercial poultry scenarios. These scenarios were created by subject matter experts and were based on epidemiology reports, risk pathway analyses, local industry practices, and site-specific circumstances. Target audiences of an exercise were the groups involved in FAD control: animal agriculture industry members; animal health regulators; and diagnosticians. Groups of industry participants seated together at tables represented fictional poultry premises and were guided by a moderator to respond to an on-farm situation within a simulated outbreak. The impact of SFS exercises was evaluated through interviews with randomized industry participants and selected table moderators. Descriptive statistics and qualitative analyses were performed on interview feedback.ResultsEleven SFS exercises occurred from December 2016 through October 2017 in multiple regions of the US. Exercises were conducted as company-wide, state-wide, or regional trainings. Nine were based on highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) outbreaks and two focused on outbreaks of co-circulating HPAI and low pathogenicity avian influenza (LPAI). Poultry industry participants interviewed generally found attending an SFS exercise to be useful. The most commonly identified benefits of participation were its value to people without prior outbreak experience and knowledge gained about Continuity of Business (COB)-permitted movement. After completing an exercise, most participants evaluated their preparedness to respond to an outbreak as somewhat to very ready, and more than one-half reported their respective company or farms had discussions or changed actions due to participation.Conclusion:Evaluation feedback suggests the SFS exercises were an effective training method to supplement preparedness efforts for an AI outbreak. The concept of using multi-faceted scenarios and multiple education strategies during a tabletop exercise may be translatable to other emergency preparedness needs.LinskensEJ, NeuAE, WalzEJ, St. CharlesKM, CulhaneMR, SsematimbaA, GoldsmithTJ, HalvorsonDA, CardonaCJ. Preparing for a foreign animal disease outbreak using a novel tabletop exercise. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(6):640–646.


1935 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 524-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. H. Worthley ◽  
O. N. Liming

1973 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 486 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. W. Walker ◽  
B. R. Heron ◽  
M. A. Mixson

2005 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 16-21
Author(s):  
Thomas G. Burrage

Plum Island Animal Disease Center, located on a small island off the coast of Long Island's North Fork, has been clouded in mystery and misinformation for years. Often the topic of conspiracy theorists, this secret place has generated many myths—from aliens to anthrax and pink eels to secret submarines. But the truth of the center's mission is far less colorful yet far more crucial to the state of the nation's agriculture.In June 2003, operational responsibility for the Plum Island Animal Disease Center (PIADC) transferred from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and PIADC became the core of the DHS effort to protect US livestock from foreign animal disease agents.


2018 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 1951-1958
Author(s):  
Jada M. Thompson ◽  
Glynn T. Tonsor ◽  
Dustin L. Pendell ◽  
Warren Preston

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S1) ◽  
pp. s91-s91 ◽  
Author(s):  
L.M. Myers ◽  
L. Fromberg

BackgroundPreparing for and responding to foreign animal diseases are critical missions to safeguard any nation's animal health and food supply. A specific challenge of foreign animal disease preparedness and response is the ability to rapidly incorporate and scale-up veterinary functions and countermeasures into emergency management operations during a disease outbreak. The United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services has established a Foreign Animal Disease Preparedness and Response Plan (FAD PReP) which provides a framework for FAD preparedness and response. The FAD PReP goal is to integrate, synchronize, and de-conflict preparedness and response capabilities, as much as possible, before an outbreak by providing goals, guidelines, strategies, and procedures that are clear, comprehensive, easily readable, easily updated, and that comply with the National Incident Management System (NIMS). An overview of FAD PReP will be presented.BodyThe APHIS FAD PReP incorporates and synchronizes the principles of the National Response Framework (NRF), the National Incident Management System (NIMS), and the National Animal Health Emergency Management System (NAHEMS). The FAD PReP contains general plans and disease specific plans that include incident goals, guidelines, strategies, procedures and timelines for local, State, Tribal and Federal responders. The FAD PReP helps raise awareness of the required veterinary functions and countermeasures, helps identify gaps or shortcomings in current response preparedness and planning, and helps to provide a framework to the States, Tribes, and Industry sectors in developing their individual response plans for specific diseases such as HPAI and FMD. The FAD PReP will also identify resources and personnel for potential zoonotic disease outbreaks and large-scale outbreaks, define stakeholder expectations for successful and timely outcomes, identify and resolve issues that may become competing interests during an outbreak and provide a systems approach to preparedness issues that need additional time, attention and collaboration.


1951 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-113
Author(s):  
S. F. Scheidy

A number of important diseases of dairy cattle can be prevented by the use of vaccines. Such vaccines are produced and distributed under the supervision of the United States Bureau of Animal Industry. In this article pertinent information is given with respect to vaccines for use against anthrax, blackleg, malignant edema, bacillary hemoglobinuria, brucellosis, hemorrhagic septicemia, and several other less important diseases of dairy cattle.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document