Welcome to the Age of Ranch Biosecurity

By Lisa Duffey, Montana Beef Network Coordinator with Clint Peck, Senior editor, BEEF Magazine.

Biosecurity, biocontainment, biological risk management. To the beef producer, they all mean essentially the same thing – addressing the possibility of a disease organism or disease complex entering or spreading within a beef cattle operation. Biosecurity means that disease transmission cannot be completely avoided or eliminated – but that some basic management principles can be employed to effectively keep a ranching or feeding operation as secure as possible from a catastrophic biological invasion.

In a report “Animal Health at the Crossroads” issued in July 2005, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) says safeguarding animal health is of paramount importance to the U.S. economy, public health and the food supply. Of key concern are a number of existing and emerging animal diseases that can affect the food supply for a growing world population and have huge implications for international commerce.

Learning Tough Lessons
But, the NAS says the U.S. animal health framework has been slow to validate, and implement new scientific tools and technologies that could significantly enhance animal disease prevention and protect public health. It emphasizes that better diagnostic tests for identifying all animal diseases should be made a priority. Beyond the warning of the NAS, we need only to look back to recent history for lessons in the need for improved biosecurity measures. Our industry paid little attention to biosecurity issues before the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in the United Kingdom. And, no one needs to be reminded of how devastating recent BSE events have been for Canadian and U.S. cattle and beef industries.

While appropriate biosecurity measures may not eliminate risk, they are likely to reduce the threat of disease epidemics and reduce liability throughout the production chain, says Jared D. Taylor, DVM, adjunct instructor in Veterinary Microbiology and Preventive Medicine, Iowa State University Center for Food Security and Public Health. “Producers who have made earnest attempts to control introduction, spread and release of diseases face less opposition from environmental, consumer and regulatory representatives,” Taylor says.

Attention to Zoonotics
Central to many arguments supporting concerted biosecurity efforts on the ranch or farm is that many diseases affecting beef cattle are zoonotic—that is they pose a risk to human health. Brucellosis, BSE, E. Coli O157: H7, Johne’s and tuberculosis are examples of zoonotic diseases. Biosecurity isn’t a new concept to Montana ranchers who have worked for decades to eliminate brucellosis.

Today though, nearly every state animal health authority has issued recommendations and guidelines for increased agricultural biosecurity at the local level. Many of those guidelines follow the models used to battle brucellosis. Cattle producers across the country are beginning to work with their veterinarians in developing programs designed to increase biosecurity at the production level. These efforts include prevention of both zoonotic and non-zoonotic diseases and improved overall vet-medical care.

Agroterrorism and biosecurity
As part of the effort to prevent future attacks on our homeland, Americans must assess the threat of terrorism against every sector of society. The events of 9/11 ushered in a new resolve to secure our borders and property from terror threats. Intentionally introducing a foreign animal or plant disease into the U.S. would not be terribly difficult, according to most terrorism experts. Production agriculture is only now beginning to understand the possibility of such threats.

Clint Peck wrote in the Mid-February 2005 issue of BEEF that agricultural terrorism is not about killing animals or destroying crops, it’s about crippling an economy. Contributing to the vulnerability of U.S. agriculture are the trends of intensive production methods, vertical integration of food production, and an increasing dependence on import and export markets.

In addition to foreign-based agroterrorism threats, threats from domestic elements exist. Extreme environmental and animal rights activists have often been criminal in their opposition to what they term “factory farming” and “imprisonment and exploitation” of animals. Some also fanatically oppose use of genetically modified organisms, trends in global agriculture and meat consumption in general. Whether an act of terrorism against agriculture is probable or possible is an issue for anti-terrorism specialists and law enforcement agencies. But, Peck emphasized that awareness is the first step toward in keeping U.S. agriculture from becoming a direct victim of terrorism.

New paradigms in BQA
National BQA programs (sponsored by the National Cattleman’s Beef Association) have long focused on producing quality beef that satisfies our consumers’ desires for a safe, wholesome and quality eating experience. Those efforts have met with resounding acceptance among producers and have contributed to the increasing nationwide demand for beef. In an effort to expand BQA in Montana and fit the biosecurity issue to the wide range of beef production and marketing circumstances across the state, we’re incorporating new paradigms into the Montana Beef Quality Assurance program. While we’ll continue to maintain a very strong emphasis on beef safety and beef quality assurance measures like reduction of injection site lesions, we know it’s time to move on to broader issues.

Over the next several months we’ll be introducing innovative programs that Montana beef cattle producers will be able to employ in their day-to-day operations. These programs will be designed to help increase ranch and feedlot biosecurity while increasing the market value of Montana cattle and consumer acceptance of Montana beef.

We’re not taking on this effort in a vacuum though. We’re enlisting the assistance and advice of a wide range of Montana ranchers, cattle feeders, veterinarians, animal nutritionists and other business people.

Stay tuned.

Beef: Questions & Answers is a joint project between MSU Extension and the Montana Beef Council. This column informs producers about current consumer education, promotion and research projects funded through the $1 per head checkoff. For more information, contact the Montana Beef Council at (406) 442-5111 or at beefcncl@mt.net

Return to regular view	Text-only	Updated: 08/29/2006