The AASV Executive Committee, including Kerry Keffaber, Butch Baker, Paul Ruen, and Randy Jones, accompanied Executive Director Tom Burkgren and Director of Communications Harry Snelson on the third annual trip to Washington, DC. The group joined the American Association of Bovine Practitioners (AABP) in a series of meetings hosted by the American Veterinary Medical Association’s Government Relations Division.

We, along with the AABP, met on Monday at the Government Relations Division offices with representatives from USDA’s Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS), Animal Health Institute (AHI) and the Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges (AAVMC). The group then traveled to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) headquarters in Rockville, Maryland. On Tuesday, the AASV Executive Committee traveled to the USDA’s Agriculture Research Service (ARS) headquarters in Beltsville, Maryland, to discuss swine research topics and completed the trip with a meeting with the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC). Following is a summary of those meetings.

APHIS — T. J. Myers and Jonathan Zack

National Animal Identification System (NAIS). To date, approximately 520,000 premises have been registered as part of the NAIS. This represents 37% of the estimated 1.4 million livestock premises in the United States. Notably, the swine industry leads the country with over 80% of the estimated premises registered. Agriculture Secretary Vilsack has conducted a series of listening sessions around the country over the last few months to gauge the sentiments of the American public regarding USDA efforts to further the NAIS, while Congress threatens to withhold additional funding. The AASV stressed support for premises registration and discussed our efforts to educate member veterinarians about their role in the NAIS.

H1N1. Research at ARS and the experience in Canada indicates that H1N1 infection in swine results in mild clinical signs and that virus was recovered only from respiratory tissues. Current research showed very limited serological cross-reactivity with existing vaccines. The USDA Center for Veterinary Biologics is producing a master seed for distribution to manufacturers currently producing licensed swine influenza virus (SIV) vaccines. The master seed should be available in early to mid-July. The USDA continues work on developing the surveillance and response-plan guidelines. Drs Burkgren and Baker met later in the day with Veterinary Service Deputy Administrator Dr John Clifford to discuss the specifics associated with the proposed guidelines.

Mexican classical swine fever (CSF) status. Mexican officials recently announced that the country was free of CSF. The AASV inquired as to the process by which USDA would confirm the CSF-free designation. Myers was unsure if an official request for status recognition had been received from Mexico, but indicated that USDA would conduct an investigation to evaluate issues such as surveillance capabilities, response plans, diagnostic capabilities, and veterinary infrastructure before granting free status.

FSIS – William James

In 2008, FSIS inspected 110,668,451 market swine, 4,076,019 sows and boars, and 815,756 roasters at federally inspected processing facilities. Of those, they condemned 89,849 (0.08%), 22,935 (0.56%), and 2,175 (0.27%), respectively. By comparison, the agency inspected 27,016,548 steers and heifers, 6,802,223 cows and bulls, and 962,505 calves in 2008, condemning 13,235 (0.05%), 100,181 (1.47%), and 12,649 (1.31%), respectively.

Residue sampling is conducted at a rate to accomplish a 90% or 95% detection of a 1% violation incidence. In 2007 (the latest year for which data was available), FSIS conducted 20,853 scheduled residue samplings in cattle and swine combined. They detected 42 residues (0.2%). The agency also conducted 149,590 inspector-requested samplings and detected 1353 residues (0.9%).

AHI

Rich Carnavale discussed the challenges associated with antimicrobial use in livestock, including possible federal legislation which would essentially ban all growth-promotion and prevention uses and some control uses currently available to veterinarians and producers.

AAVMC – Michael Chaddock and Marguerite Pappaioanou

USDA has completed writing the rules governing eligibility for the National Veterinary Medical Services Act, which was authorized by Congress in 2003 as a loan repayment program for veterinary graduates working in underserved areas. Congress has appropriated $4.9 million so far and the House has appropriated an additional $4 million to further fund the program. The rules are currently awaiting approval from the Office of Management and Budget.

The AAVMC presented their proposed North American Veterinary Medical Education Consortium to promote enhanced veterinary medical education issues. The AASV and the AABP join a large number of contributors to this effort. Both organizations, however, were surprised to learn that contributions from Humane Society of the United States had also been accepted and strongly questioned the rationale for this decision.

FDA – Tracey Forfa, Bill Flynn, Neal Bataller, and others. The agency indicated its intent to reissue a ban on the extra-label use of cephalosporins. The revised ban will take a “more targeted approach” rather than the broad-based total ban previously proposed. The new order should go out for public comment in the next few months.

With regard to the discussion of increased veterinary oversight of antimicrobials, FDA indicated that they consider increased veterinary oversight important and would like to see a phase-in of increased controls.

FDA Commissioner Hamburg and Deputy Commissioner Sharfstein have met with representatives from both sides of the antimicrobial issue, including the Animal Agriculture Coalition (including AASV, NPPC, and NPB), Keep Antibiotics Working (KAW), and the Pew Commission to discuss their concerns regarding the use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals. The commissioner recognized that both sides are concerned about antimicrobial use and resistance. She encouraged the agricultural sector to ensure that everyone take the judicious-use guidelines seriously and admonished KAW and Pew to stop “demonizing agriculture” and find a way for both sides to work cooperatively to address the issue.

NPPC – Jen Greiner and Kirk Ferrell. NPPC has been very focused lately on the H1N1 flu crisis. They estimate that the industry has been losing an average of $22 per hog for the past 21 months. From April 24 to June 19, and due mostly to the H1N1 outbreak, the industry has lost $352 million or approximately $8.8 million per production day. The group continues to work closely with AASV, NPB, CDC, and the USDA to minimize the impact of the flu outbreak on US swine production domestically and internationally.

NPPC has also been active on the antimicrobial front, attempting to educate legislators on the potential impact of legislation banning growth-promotant and preventative uses of antimicrobials in food-producing animals. According to NPPC, a 2008 Iowa State study estimated that the loss of antimicrobial growth promotants would increase the cost of production by $6 per pig in the first year.

ARS

Lastly, we met with the leadership of the ARS at their headquarters in Beltsville, Maryland. In my mind, this is such a crucial discussion that I plan to devote “Advocacy in action” to this topic in the next issue. But suffice it to say that the state of federal funding for basic long-term research in animal agriculture is abysmal and must be addressed. Swine research (including animal health, production, food safety, manure utilization, and entomology) receives a paltry 3% of the overall ARS budget. A brand new state-of-the-art research facility at Ames, Iowa, continues to stand empty for the lack of funds to actually physically move into the facility. Unless something changes, when that move finally does occur, the funds required to make the move will have to come from the agency’s research funds, thus further straining an already embarrassingly insufficient budget and limiting the actual research projects the agency can support. Watch for more on this in the next issue of JSHAP.

In conclusion, it is vitally important that our association continues to be active on the issues facing us from a regulatory and legislative perspective. The opportunity to have our leadership interact one-on-one with the folks who are actively engaged in making the decisions directly impacting your ability to practice veterinary medicine and the industry we serve is invaluable. I hope this continues to be an annual event and that the efforts of your leadership will encourage you to become personally involved, either through the association or directly with regulators and legislators at the local, state, and federal levels.

FDA – Tracey Forfa, Bill Flynn, Neal Bataller, and others

The agency indicated its intent to reissue a ban on the extra-label use of cephalosporins. The revised ban will take a “more targeted approach” rather than the broad-based total ban previously proposed. The new order should go out for public comment in the next few months.

With regard to the discussion of increased veterinary oversight of antimicrobials, FDA indicated that they consider increased veterinary oversight important and would like to see a phase-in of increased controls.

FDA Commissioner Hamburg and Deputy Commissioner Sharfstein have met with representatives from both sides of the antimicrobial issue, including the Animal Agriculture Coalition (including AASV, NPPC, and NPB), Keep Antibiotics Working (KAW), and the Pew Commission to discuss their concerns regarding the use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals. The commissioner recognized that both sides are concerned about antimicrobial use and resistance. She encouraged the agricultural sector to ensure that everyone take the judicious-use guidelines seriously and admonished KAW and Pew to stop “demonizing agriculture” and find a way for both sides to work cooperatively to address the issue.

NPPC – Jen Greiner and Kirk Ferrell

NPPC has been very focused lately on the H1N1 flu crisis. They estimate that the industry has been losing an average of $22 per hog for the past 21 months. From April 24 to June 19, and due mostly to the H1N1 outbreak, the industry has lost $352 million or approximately $8.8 million per production day. The group continues to work closely with AASV, NPB, CDC, and the USDA to minimize the impact of the flu outbreak on US swine production domestically and internationally.

NPPC has also been active on the antimicrobial front, attempting to educate legislators on the potential impact of legislation banning growth-promotant and preventative uses of antimicrobials in food-producing animals. According to NPPC, a 2008 Iowa State study estimated that the loss of antimicrobial growth promotants would increase the cost of production by $6 per pig in the first year.

ARS

Lastly, we met with the leadership of the ARS at their headquarters in Beltsville, Maryland. In my mind, this is such a crucial discussion that I plan to devote “Advocacy in action” to this topic in the next issue. But suffice it to say that the state of federal funding for basic long-term research in animal agriculture is abysmal and must be addressed. Swine research (including animal health, production, food safety, manure utilization, and entomology) receives a paltry 3% of the overall ARS budget. A brand new state-of-the-art research facility at Ames, Iowa, continues to stand empty for the lack of funds to actually physically move into the facility. Unless something changes, when that move finally does occur, the funds required to make the move will have to come from the agency’s research funds, thus further straining an already embarrassingly insufficient budget and limiting the actual research projects the agency can support. Watch for more on this in the next issue of JSHAP.

In conclusion, it is vitally important that our association continues to be active on the issues facing us from a regulatory and legislative perspective. The opportunity to have our leadership interact one-on-one with the folks who are actively engaged in making the decisions directly impacting your ability to practice veterinary medicine and the industry we serve is invaluable. I hope this continues to be an annual event and that the efforts of your leadership will encourage you to become personally involved, either through the association or directly with regulators and legislators at the local, state, and federal levels.

-- Harry Snelson, DVM