by Chris Clayton, DTN Ag Policy Editor
OMAHA (DTN) — Animal-health experts at USDA don't know how they are going to implement a plan to require pork producers to report cases of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus or track movements of animals in herds with the infection.
Two weeks ago, the department announced new plans to tighten biosecurity and reduce the spread of PED that was first reported in the country nearly a year ago. Since that time, the pork industry has raised a lot of questions about just how USDA intends to implement such a plan. USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service doesn't yet have a strategy to track the movement of hogs from infected herds without putting an undue burden on pork producers nationally.
Porcine epidemic diarrhea virus is an animal disease that does not affect the food supply. It is highly contagious and can quickly sweep through a sow barn. Sows will get sick for a few days before building immunity to the virus. For piglets, however, PED has a near 100{0a3336b3da8cf935de4f3eb78fe29508c4b8b5ebd27d01af2d815614325d533e} mortality rate.
PED is not considered an internationally-recognized foreign animal disease by the World Organization for Animal Health, known by its French acronym OIE. Porcine epidemic diarrhea is not considered on the same level of animal health risk as diseases such as classic swine fever or foot and mouth disease. Still, the disease was foreign to the U.S. when it arrived last spring.
INDUSTRY CAUTIOUS ABOUT MONITORING MOVEMENTS
Howard Hill, president of the National Pork Producers Council, testified Wednesday before a House Agriculture Subcommittee that USDA projects PED has killed roughly 2 million pigs. Private economists have put the number closer to 7 million head lost, based on estimates that roughly 2.6 million sows have been infected and each sow may have lost an average of nearly three pigs.
The losses effectively translate into lower overall hog production. Fewer pigs mean lower slaughter numbers later on. The industry could increase market weights, but that won't make up the difference, Hill said in his testimony. Consumer prices for pork could rise 10{0a3336b3da8cf935de4f3eb78fe29508c4b8b5ebd27d01af2d815614325d533e} to 12{0a3336b3da8cf935de4f3eb78fe29508c4b8b5ebd27d01af2d815614325d533e} as a result.
Hill said the industry needs USDA's Agricultural Research Service to bring its resources to bear on PED by studying the virus. Hill said a vaccine is just one of the tools needed to get the disease under control.
When the disease was found a year ago, USDA was concerned that if PED were treated as a foreign animal disease, then that would affect the movement of hogs, possibly prompting states to shut down their borders to hogs from other states where PED had been reported. Moreover, early action by USDA could have affected trade as well. Thus, USDA stayed behind the scenes.
“Given the information that we all had in May 2013, the response at that time was probably about as good as you can get by USDA, by the industry and the states,” Paul Sundberg, chief veterinarian for the National Pork Board, said in an interview. “I don't know if any of us in May could have predicted the scope of this.”
Positive samples were averaging about 50 cases a week at diagnostic labs until winter hit. By February, lab tests were finding as many as 300 positive samples a week. The volume of positive tests being reported has declined to about 250 samples a week.
A spokeswoman for USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service told DTN the agency has no new details about the reporting and monitoring announcement made by the department on April 18. In an email, she stated, “USDA has been working with our partners on PEDv since the disease was first found last year. We've met with them several times and know what they are looking for to address PEDv. We discussed the monitoring and control program with them before announcing it publicly. We are currently taking their input into consideration as we draft the Federal Order and program requirements.”
Rep. Mike McIntyre, D-N.C., asked industry representatives at the hearing Wednesday about USDA's monitoring regulation. Shane Miller, a senior vice president for Tyson Foods, said USDA needs to ensure its program is “practical at the farm level” and does not disrupt commerce.
Hill said USDA “needs to take a thoughtful and measured approach” to any surveillance program. Hill said USDA officials want to implement the rule quickly “in just two or three weeks here,” but it would take time to get pork producers to buy into such a program. Hill added that NPPC is skeptical of a program that would monitor hog movements.
“We don't think it would be beneficial in any way to limit producers' ability to move livestock,” Hill said.
USDA LATE TO INTERVENE?
Tom Burkgren, executive director for the American Association of Swine Veterinarians, said in an interview that data security, identifying infected farmers and possible movement restrictions were among the biggest issues when PED was found. There were fears about possible quarantines and restrictions. The industry moves about 1 million pigs a day, so any restrictions on movement could cripple the pork industry.
“We don't know the details yet. I think there remains a question of just how workable that would be. Certainly, we have been talking to USDA about the hurdles that would have to be overcome in order to implement that type of a program.” Burkgren said.
Mandatory reporting of PED would have been more appropriate from the outset than after the infection has been found in 30 states and 6-7 million pigs lost, Burkgren said. “Having said that, you have to be careful what you ask for because the industry was very sensitive to not disrupting business continuity for producers.”
The pork industry relies on just-in-time delivery, both as market hogs leave to the slaughter operation and new feeder pigs are delivered shortly after.
One of the bigger problems early in tracking the disease was with premise identification. Too often, premise addresses led to the home or office of the owner of the pigs instead of the address of the physical location where animals were kept. Added to that, the diagnostic data USDA releases on the disease shows disease activity in each state, but it is not helpful for knowing where clusters of the disease may be showing up.
Hindsight is always 20/20, but Burkgren said the swine veterinarians have questioned why USDA wasn't more proactive in stemming the spread of PED earlier. “We do get that input that USDA could have done more early on. You don't want to make that a big issue because we still have a lot of work to do on PED. It seems like I am criticizing USDA, but that is the general feeling from our members that USDA could have done more,” Burkgren said.
USDA's response plan for PED could be used as the basis for a possible future response plan for other production diseases. Next week, the industry is holding a meeting specifically to create a roadmap to better define what to do in the next major disease outbreak that isn't directly under USDA's umbrella for disease control.
“Now, one of the things that we know is we need to have a better agreed-upon plan to respond next time,” Sundberg said. “That's what we are going to work on next week.”
© Copyright 2014 DTN/The Progressive Farmer. All rights reserved.
Posted with DTN Permission by Haylie Shipp
