The document discusses the USDA's Animal Disease Traceability program and next steps. It provides an update on the program's Traceability Performance Measures and successes/challenges. Key challenges include the limited official ID requirement, exemptions, reliance on visual tags, and exclusion of beef feeders. Regional stakeholder meetings will provide feedback to develop recommendations for advancing traceability. A working group will evaluate gaps and provide options to strengthen the program.

1. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 11
Animal Disease
Traceability (ADT)
Neil Hammerschmidt
Dr. Sunny Geiser-Novotny
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Veterinary Services
Livestock Identification and Information Systems Council
April 5, 2017

2. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 2
• Assessment of ADT Framework
– Update on Traceability Performance Measures (TPM)
– Data related to program disease traces
– Successes & challenges
• Next priorities - where do we go from here?
ADT Report

3. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 3
• Maintain and expand traceability infrastructure as
disease programs are updated
ADT Key Principles
• Administered by States & Tribal
Nations
– Integrate strengths, expertise of
States, Tribes & producers
• Effective solutions that minimize
cost
– Support advanced technologies
• Basic “bookend” system
• Priority on cattle & bison sectors

4. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 4
Have ICVI or other documentation
4
General Requirements
4
Livestock moved interstate, unless exempt, must:
Be officially identified

5. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 5
ADT
Assessment
Report
5

6. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 6
Key to Successful Traceability
6
Timely retrieval of complete and accurate information

7. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 7
• National baselines established in FY 2013 cooperative
agreement period
Traceability Performance Measures
• 1st Comparison
– 2014 Cooperative agreement period
– Report compiled September 2015
– Significant improvement in both
hours & % successfully completed
• 2nd Comparison
– 2015 Cooperative Agreement period
– Review key results in next slides

8. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 8
• Two key factors for each TPM:
– The elapsed time it takes to answer
four specific questions defined by
the TPMs
– The % of successfully completed
TPMs
Traceability Performance
Measures (TPM)

9. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 9
1. In what State was an imported animal officially
identified?
Measures: Time it takes to determine the State/Tribe
where an imported animal was officially identified
Traceability Performance Measures

10. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 10
2. Where in your State was the animal officially
identified?
Measures: Time it takes to determine the physical
location in the State where the animal was
officially identified
Traceability Performance Measures

11. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 11
3. From what State was an animal shipped?
Measures: Time it takes to determine the State an
imported animal was moved from when it moved
interstate into the State
Traceability Performance Measures

12. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 12
4. From what location in your State was an exported
animal shipped?
Measures: Time it takes to determine the physical location
an exported animal was shipped from when it moved
interstate
Traceability Performance Measures

13. Animal Disease Traceability (ADT)APHIS-VS 13
Tuberculosis traces from Slaughter
Total cases by
identification
type
Successful
Trace
Traced
Indirectly
Unable to
trace
Unofficial
Identification
12 9 1 2
No Identification 14 5 5 4
Official
Identification
12 12 0 0
Total
38 26 6 6

14. Animal Disease Traceability (ADT)APHIS-VS 14
Compliance & Enforcement
2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015
Producer 657 590 438 727 16 20
Dealer 56 124 17
Market 310 2 5
Accredited Vet 476 493 1534 1113 12 27
Slaughter Plant 192 148 41 0 0 4
Other Sectors 254 179 143 50 2 1
Trace Regs Outside Part 86 N/A 9 N/A 193 N/A 4
Total Part 86 2878 1776 2299 2016 50 74
1299 143 20
Consultation
Letters of Info.
(or Equiv.)
Cases Initiated
with IES
9 CFR Part 86
Enforcement Actions

15. Animal Disease Traceability (ADT)APHIS-VS 15
How are we doing?
• The ADT program has been very successful
in the context of the framework for covered
livestock:
– Improved administration of official ID devices
– Improved quality of ICVI data
– Increased volume of electronic records
• Significant gaps exist in current
framework

16. Animal Disease Traceability (ADT)APHIS-VS 16
ADT Challenges
• Official identification requirement limited to
interstate movements
– Potential for multiple points of congregation &
local spread of disease prior to moving
interstate.
– Records may not exist
– How do you trace a black
cow with no identification?

17. Animal Disease Traceability (ADT)APHIS-VS 17
ADT Challenges
• Official identification requirement limited to interstate
movements
– Exemptions are confusing!
– Impossible to monitor & enforce compliance
Direct to slaughter
Moved intrastate
Moved interstate
Official ID or backtag
ICVI

18. Animal Disease Traceability (ADT)APHIS-VS 18
ADT Challenges
• Reliance on low-cost technology
(visual only tags)
– Inability to read official identification
at the speed of commerce
– Transcription of official identification
on movement documentation
o May mean the animal is handled
multiple times
o Issues with legibility & transcription
errors

19. Animal Disease Traceability (ADT)APHIS-VS 19
ADT Challenges
• Exclusion of beef feeder cattle in the
official identification requirement
– Feeder cattle are not isolated from disease
(face exposure through management,
marketing & long-distance movement)
– Trade implications
oLack of full traceability
domestically

20. Animal Disease Traceability (ADT)APHIS-VS 20
ADT Challenges
• Requirements for collection of all identification
devices & correlation to the carcass through
final disposition
• Inconsistently applied due to:
– Inability to collect all identification at the speed
of commerce
– Procedural issues at plants
– Turnover of plant personnel & lack of education

21. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 21
Outreach – “Next Steps”
• Discussion on ADT Framework including:
- What’s working well
- Gaps in traceability
- Revisions to current framework
- Long-tem objectives

22. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 22
1. Conference calls with State & Federal Animal
Health Officials
2. Grassroots feedback at local levels obtained by
State & Federal Animal Health Officials
3. Regional stakeholder meetings
4. State/Federal Working Group
5. National ADT Forum
22
APHIS-VS
Outreach – “Next Steps”

23. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 23
The public meetings will be held from 8 a.m. to
3 p.m. at the following locations:
• April 11: Oklahoma City, OK
• April 13: Riverdale, MD
• April 20: Nashville, TN
• May 2: Bloomington, MN
• May 4: Denver, CO
• May 11: Rancho Cordova, CA
• May 24: Billings, MT
ADT Regional Public Meetings
23

24. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 24
• Review ADT Framework
• Report on ADT Assessment
• Stakeholder Panel
• Open Microphone Session
• Breakout Group Discussions
- Official Identification
- Movement documents
- Beef feeder cattle
- Short & Long-term traceability goals
ADT Regional Public Meetings
24

25. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 25
2017 ADT Working Group
25
• Objective: To evaluate gaps in the initial
traceability framework & provide options for
advancing traceability in the future.
• Utilize the feedback from ADT 2017 outreach
activities to develop a report with
recommendations on the next phase for ADT.

26. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 26
ADT 2017 Working GroupName Affiliation
Geiser-Novotny, Sunny Cattle Health Staff/ ADT Veterinarian, APHIS VS SPRS
Hammerschmidt, Neil Manager, Animal Disease Traceability, APHIS VS SPRS
Halstead, Steve District Director, APHIS VS SPRS
Hickam, Linda State Veterinarian. Missouri Department of Agriculture
Hughes, Dennis Nebraska State Veterinarian and Animal Health Administrator
Nebraska Department of Agriculture
Kitchen, Diane Veterinarian Manager, Bovine Programs, Florida Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services
Linfield, Tom Assistant District Director, APHIS VS SPRS (Montana)
Massengill, Rose Animal Disease Traceability Coordinator, APHIS VS SPRS
McGraw, Paul State Veterinarian, Wisconsin Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer
Protection
Odom, Rick Animal Health Information Systems Manager, VA Dept. of Ag,
Schwabenlander, Stacey Senior Veterinarian, Minnesota Board of Animal Health
Scott, Aaron National Preparedness and Incident Coordination Center (NPIC), APHIS VS
SPRS
Smith Justin, DVM Deputy Animal Health Commissioner, Kansas Dept. of Agriculture
Steck, Allie Animal Disease Traceability Coordinator Pennsylvania
Turner, Alex Traceability Veterinarian, Colorado Department of Agriculture
Westly, Rolf VMO, APHIS VS SPRS
Winslow, Thatch Assistant State Veterinarian Wyoming Livestock Board
Zaluski, Marty State Veterinarian , Montana Department of Livestock

27. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 27
National ADT Forum
27
• Consider feedback obtained throughout 2017
• Discuss possible approaches & solutions to
next phase of ADT
– Review ADT WG report
• September 2017

28. APHIS-VS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) 28
28
Thank You!
Neil Hammerschmidt
Dr. Sunny Geiser-Novotny
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Veterinary Services