Expanded Access for U.S. Cattle and Beef Products

[blackjack]

...any food products whether its beef,grain,fruits all have diseases...thats why it is just important if it comes from the good old USA or tim buc tu food produce has to be checked...maybe father_son knows the regulations on ana and bt between states lines...do the states not do blood tests on breeding stock for these diseases... what are the vaccinations given and what is the control...just some questions...

[pandiana]

Here is an excerpt from a Jan. 1999 report from Ben Thorlaksen, then president of CCA. It will be interesting to see how CCA policy changes in light of border issues. FYO: the North West Program now includes 38 states.

Cakadu, yes, blue tongue is a serious disease in sheep. Cattlemen, however, seem less than sympathetic. I have been convinced, though, that with the exception of the area in the Okanogan, the absence of the vector precludes transmission of this disease. Anaplasmosis is a difference story. Again, it is my understanding that positive herds can be quarantined (I am not sure if they are depopulated). I was told by a veterinary that it can be transmitted mechanically (using needles). Therefore, if you introduce it into your herd with one animal, annual vaccinations would potentially propigate it throughout.

It has been argued that because the US and Mexico are our major trading partners, even if we did lose our disease free status it would just put us on par with them. I am not really qualified to argue whether this is true as I don't know what other exports are significant.

R-calf insistence in keeping the border closed when it protects their higher prices is somewhat short sighted. It is of interest that the Montana cattlemen had no complaints when competition for their cattle was high when purchased for Canadian feeders.

The fact that the dollar impacts profitability on Canadian imports going both ways,I would think this will temper any mass movements of cattle.

Animal Health Requirements
Ben Thorlaksen CCA President Jan. 1999

The main issue here is the difference in our reportable disease list with specific concerns about testing requirements for bluetongue and anaplasmosis. The other element is the regulatory changes required to move ahead with regionalization/zoning for States using international standards for risk assessment.

We have spoken to our senior officials and the Minister Of Agriculture and Agri-Food about making the changes to our regulations to accommodate regionalization/zoning. The Canada/United States agricultural agreement in December included several key provisions to advance this process. The first is the extension of the North West Program to an additional 26 States (upon application by the States) and a commitment to make the regulatory changes for regionalization/zoning of our disease requirements with the U.S.. At a recent meeting of our national animal health consultative meetings, a faster process was reviewed to achieve the changes for regionalization. We are also examining changes to our reportable disease list. We should note the Canada/U.S. agreement did include a provision that the trade investigations would put the extension of the North West Program in jeopardy.

The consequences of removing Bluetongue from our reportable list is that we may lose our international disease free status resulting in lost sales for breeding cattle to parts of the world, and increased testing costs for semen and embryos. The disease risk to cattle is negligible with minor sickness in rare cases. We are recommending that we must modify our requirements.

Anaplasmosis does not carry the same trade implications although additional testing requirements would become necessary. There are direct disease risks associated with Anaplasmosis. A recent risk assessment projects the annual costs of disease would be about $2.8 million per year in Canada. We are recommending modification here as well that could allow year-round access without testing. Initial discussions on both of these diseases took place in December and went reasonably well. We will be meeting with the NCBA to ensure that our governments deal with these matters quickly.

This summer, we were able to get significant changes made to the North West Program. We had hoped that the program would have provided for improved access last winter. Unfortunately, the federal government established such onerous requirements in the fine detail that it proved too costly and cumbersome. Since October 1st, 1998 approximately 36,000 head of feeder cattle (31,000 from Montana) have been imported into Canada and the volume is growing. At last count 66 feedlots have become designated or have applied. We are told this had a positive impact on the market, particularly in Northern Montana.

[farmers_son]

Pandiana: The biting midge responsible for spreading Bluetongue, CULICOIDES SONORENSIS, is present in Alberta, most prevalent in the southern half of the province. What is not known is if the midge is a competent vector. The study being conducted will conclude September 2005. Until that study is done there is no science to determine the risk of spread of bluetongue.


The ability of the CULICOIDES SONORENSIS to be a competent vector depends upon environmental conditions. It is known that where the right combination of temperature and humidity are present that CULICOIDES SONORENSIS is a competent vector for bluetongue.

See: http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/projects/projects.htm?ACCN_NO=406582

I agree that anaplasmosis is the more serious disease that will cost Alberta cow calf producers millions of dollars. Both Anaplas and BT cause abortions in pregnant cows which is a major concern. Most of the death loss will be from Anaplasmosis, in the range of 20% in infected herds. The symptoms of BT mimic those of hoof and mouth and infected animals can become deathly ill, especially if there is a trigger such as a previous infection with BVD.

[farmers_son]

There is a news item in the Agri-ville News corner on contagious Foreign Animal Diseases at:

https://www.agriville.com/cgi-bin/newsroom/view.cgi?articleID=3006

I happen to know Clare Schlegel, and he speaks the truth. BSE is relatively easy to contain and stop spreading. We may not be so lucky next time. All our livelihoods depend on keeping our livestock disease free.

"Clare Schlegel, an Ontario pork producer, doesn't want to be a scaremonger, but says estimates show that even an isolated, short-lived outbreak could cost producers as much as $13 billion. Not a scenario to play around with, he adds. The worst-case estimates for a major outbreak pegs the hit to the Canadian economy at $45 billion..."

[cakadu]

What I don't get is why even set up the potential for these diseases to manifest themselves. Wasn't our disease free status worth something? At least pre-BSE, it was something that we had that other countries didn't.

I should also think that at this stage of the game we shouldn't think it won't happen to us or happen here.

I take it that Canadian feedlots want access to American feeders so that they can custom feed. Is custom feeding lucrative enough to warrant all the cross-border movement? I'm just trying to get a handle on how all of this works.

[WoolyBear]

I personally don't think that we should open the border to cattle from regions where there is anaplasmosis and or blue tongue. BSE is not a disease that could cause long term economical health problems in our sheep and cattle (and other ruminants). The costs of control and eradication of these disease from our otherwise healthy herds would make the cost to date of BSE look like chump change.

This isn't a wise concession to open the borders............ I say keep it close,and keep it out.

[cowman]

Well I don't think they ever said they were going to throw it wide open? I believe it is just from states they thought were basically pretty safe?
They had this restricted access thing in place already anyway and although it was supposed to be real tight, it actually wasn't once they got up here? I saw a pen of heifers sell at Innisfail that came in under the restricted program...bred angus heifers! Now I don't know if they were tested up here but they definitely still had the special eartags in! That would have been about three years ago.