Federal authorities assessing BSE aftershocks and steps that still have to be taken

While consumer confidence in the Canadian beef industry has remained high in Canada throughout the BSE crisis, the future depends on proving to the rest of the world that our feed practices, traceability measures and surveillance standards are working to prevent the spread of BSE, says Dr. Nina Szpakowski, Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) veterinarian and animal products program network director for Ontario.

The story so Far
The CFIA's May 2003 BSE investigation considered many potential sources of origin of the abnormal protein that causes the brain-wasting disease, Szpakowski says. They include: imported animals, domestic cases, exposure to contaminated feed, maternal transmission, spontaneous mutation, relation to other transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE's), and agri-terrorism.

The CFIA's evidence and analysis shows that in both the May and December cases, the animals were born before the feed ban. The CFIA believes that the two animals were exposed to contaminated feed as calves, when cows are most susceptible to BSE, Szpakowski says.

The source of contaminated feed is believed to be United Kingdom animals imported into Canada. They entered the feed chain before the CFIA's removal of all U.K.-origin animals in 1994.

Between 1982 and 1989, 191 cattle were imported to Canada from the U.K. when it wasn't known that BSE was circulating there. Of those 191, more than half were located and destroyed in 1994 and tested negative for BSE, and 68 weren't tested because they died before the removal of U.K. imports, Szpakowski says. Of the 68 non-tested animals, 59 passed inspections and went into the food chain. Nine died on their farms. Of these nine, four were buried and five were rendered. Of the 68 non-tested animals, 10 traced back BSE-positive U.K. farms, she adds.

The CFIA believes that a few of the 68 cows legally entered the feed chain, contaminated a small portion of the feed, then were recycled within meat and bone meal materials in 1997, infecting our Canadian animals.

Szpakowski says she expects the CFIA will return to the May case with new information from the December case--still under investigation--to track the untested 68 animals in detail and to examine the relationship between the U.K. herds of origin, the birth herds in Canada, renderers, feed mills and feeding practices.

Traceability
The CFIA's trace activities depend on the integrity of animal identification, Szpakowski says. With good mechanisms to trace identity, herd of origin and animal movements in the face of BSE, other foreign animal diseases, or threats to the food industry, the CFIA can follow international guidelines and limit animal depopulation numbers.

"The better your herd and individual animal identification, the less likely you will loose your herd," Szpakowski says. "We need more than just your memory, we need to have substantiating and corroborating evidence as to the herd of origin."

With good identification, traceability and history records, animals subject to removal are calves born one year before and one year after the BSE-infected cow's birth and its two most recent progeny.

If the CFIA is taking a lot of animals from farms, you know that there's an identification or traceability problem, Szpakowski says. If there's information missing, the CFIA will take more animals to ensure that the animals it's looking for are included in the depopulation. In the May case, 2,700 animals were destroyed and the CFIA quarantined many herds because the birth herd of origin couldn't be identified with absolute certainty, she adds.

Surveillance
Canada has had disease surveillance, which involves testing animals for BSE, since 1992. Starting immediately, the number of animals tested annually will be progressively increased from the current level of around 5,000.

Ottawa has announced $92.1 million in funding over five years to invest in enhanced identification measures, tracking and tracing, and increased BSE surveillance.

“These measures will build on what is already one of the strongest food safety systems in the world,” says federal Agriculture Minister Bob Speller. “They demonstrate the commitment of this government to address the issue of BSE and support our Canadian industry.”

BSE testing levels will increase over the next five years, with at least 8,000 animals tested in the next 12 months, and will eventually reach levels of 30,000 animals per year or more, says Dr. Francine Lord, CFIA veterinarian and national manager of import and export for animal health. Testing will focus on animals most at risk of BSE. These include downer, dying, diseased and dead animals. Testing will likely include some healthy older animals as well, she adds.

A more comprehensive cattle identification program is also planned for implementation over the next two years. Lord says the goal is to tag all cows on farms, not just animals leaving the farm. In addition starting January 1, 2005, the Canadian Cattle Identification Agency will be adopting electronic Radio Frequency Identification tags and will be looking at expanding its database to include more information, she adds.

Feed Ban
The CFIA implemented the feed ban in Canada in 1997 to prevent BSE from entering the food chain. Under the feed ban, rendered protein products derived from almost all mammals are banned for use in ruminant feed.

Canadian producers may only feed their cows approved animal protein products. Banned ingredients in ruminant feeds, or prohibited materials, include protein with meat and bone meal from mammals other than pigs and horses. Milk, blood, gelatin, rendered animal fats or their products haven’t been banned.

All products containing prohibited material must be labeled with the statement: Do not feed to cattle, sheep, deer or other ruminants.

If you feed both ruminants and non-ruminants on the same farm, you must keep accurate records and invoices for two years, the CFIA says.

Farmers, feed manufacturers and renderers are required to take steps to avoid cross contamination by providing clear labeling, separate storage and dedicated equipment, or thoroughly cleaning non-dedicated equipment.

As part of the feed ban, the CFIA implemented a permit system for Canadian renderers. To operate plants, renderers must get an annual permit form the CFIA. These plants must be in full compliance with regulatory requirements to get a permit. Compliance is verified by annual CFIA inspections.

All Canadian feed mills are also inspected for compliance with feed ban regulations. Additional inspections are part of the National Feed Inspection Program. A high level of compliance has been recorded among feed manufacturers, the CFIA says.

Other countries’ experiences have taught Canada that feed restrictions are critical to prevent BSE transmission in our feed supply and eliminate BSE from the animal population, Szpakowski says.

Soon, there’ll be a discussion paper outlining three options for enhancing Canada’s feed ban, she adds. The options include:

• Leaving the present feed ban in place but enhancing it to have dedicated lines for feed production for ruminants separated from production for non-ruminants. More enforcement would be added;
• Removing specified risk materials from all feed to all animals to help reduce accidents in feed delivery on farms. This option was recommended by the international peer review of Canada’s May BSE investigation;
• Removing all animal protein from animal feeds. However, this would have significant impact on to the industry and cause environmental problems. Those materials have to go somewhere, Szpakowski noted.

The discussion paper will be available for comment from industry and government representatives.

The future
Along with enhanced surveillance, traceability and feed practices, Canada’s future success in battling BSE will also depend on developing rapid test technology, Szpakowski said. If test and hold procedures are in place and rapid tests aren’t available, abbatoirs would be keeping carcasses for a long time and having to reduce slaughter capacity.

Awareness and education are also key, she says. Providing producers with information and encouraging them to report animals, perhaps through incentives, would help move away from short-term solutions. “If we ship cattle that become BSE positive overseas, we’ll lose all international credibility.”

(reprinted from The Milk Producer, February 2004)