• 1.

    Martin S, Meek A, Willeberg P. Epidemiologic concepts. In: Veterinary epidemiology. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1987;321.

  • 2.

    Abt CC. Current and improved biodefense cost-benefit assessment. In: Richardson HW, Gordon P, Moore JE, eds. The economic impacts of terrorist attacks. Northampton, Mass: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2005;119132.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Leitenberg M. Biological weapons and bioterrorism in the first years of the twenty-first century. Politics Life Sciences 2002;21:327.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Kosal ME, Anderson DE. An unaddressed issue of agricultural terrorism: a case study on feed security. J Anim Sci 2004;82:33943400.

  • 5.

    Neher NJ. The need for a coordinated response to food terrorism: the Wisconsin experience. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1999;894:181183.

  • 6.

    Knowles T, Lane J, Bayens G, et al. Defining law enforcement's role in protecting American agriculture from agroterrorism. US Department of Justice, 2005. Available at: www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/212280.pdf. Accessed Sep 10, 2007.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Elbakidze L. The economics of agricultural bio-security: an interpretive literature review. College Station, Tex: Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A&M University. Available at: agecon2.tamu.edu/people/faculty/mccarl-bruce/papers/1123.pdf. Accessed Nov 30, 2007.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    USDA, Agriculture Statistics Board, National Agricultural Statistics Service. Cattle on feed, February 23, 2007. Available at: www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Todays_Reports/reports/cofd0207.pdf. Accessed Sep 10, 2007.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Smith RA, Stokka GL, Radostits OM, et al. Health and production management in beef feedlots. In: Radostits OM, ed. Herd health: food animal production medicine. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co, 2001;581633.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Marshall B, Petrowski D, Levy SB. Inter-and intraspecies spread of Escherichia coli in a farm environment in the absence of antibiotic usage. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1990;87:66096613.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Niskanen R, Lindberg A. Transmission of bovine viral diarrhoea virus by unhygienic vaccination procedures, ambient air, and from contaminated pens. Vet J 2003;165:125130.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Himathongkham S, Bahari S, Riemann H, et al. Survival of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella typhimurium in cow manure and cow manure slurry. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1999;178:251257.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Plym-Forshell L, Ekesbo I. Survival of salmonellas in urine and dry faeces from cattle—an experimental study. Acta Vet Scand 1996;37:127131.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Bach SJ, McAllister TA, Mears GJ, et al. Long-haul transport and lack of preconditioning increases fecal shedding of Escherichia coli and Escherichia coli O157:H7 by calves. J Food Prot 2004;67:672678.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Barham AR, Barham BL, Johnson AK, et al. Effects of the transportation of beef cattle from the feedyard to the packing plant on prevalence levels of Escherichia coli O157 and Salmonella spp. J Food Prot 2002;65:280283.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Dee S, Deen J, Burns D, et al. An assessment of sanitation protocols for commercial transport vehicles contaminated with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Can J Vet Res 2004;68:208214.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Bartley LM, Donnelly CA, Anderson RM. Review of foot-andmouth-disease-virus survival in animal excretions and on fomites. Vet Rec 2002;151:667669.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Brandt AW, Sanderson MW, DeGroot BD, et al. Feedyard manager and veterinarian responses to a Delphi-like feedyard biosecurity survey. Bovine Pract 2007;41:7783.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Kirk JH, Sischo WM, Barnett SC, et al. Salmonella contamination of rubber boots worn on dairies. Bovine Pract 2002;36:1114.

  • 20.

    Kirk JH, Boggs C, Jeffery J, et al. Efficacy of disinfectants for sanitizing boots under dairy farm conditions. Bovine Pract 2003;37:5053.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Amass SF, Mason PW, Pacheco JM, et al. Procedures for preventing transmission of foot-and-mouth disease virus (O/TAW/97) by people. Vet Microbiol 2004;103:143149.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Dee S, Deen J, Pijoan C. Evaluation of 4 intervention strategies to prevent the mechanical transmission of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Can J Vet Res 2004;68:1926.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Cameron G, Pate J. Covert biological weapons attacks against agricultural targets: assessing the impact against US agriculture. Terrorism Polit Violence 2001;13:6182.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Carus WS. Bioterrorism and biocrimes: the illicit use of biological agents since 1900. Washington, DC: National Defense University Center for Counterproliferation Research, 2001.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    USDA. Part III: health management and biosecurity in US feedlots, 1999. No. N336.1200. Fort Collins, Colo: USDA, APHIS, Veterinary Services, Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health, 2000.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Shane SM, Halvorson D, Hill D, et al. Biosecurity in the poultry industry. In: American Association of Avian Pathologists. Kennett Square, Pa: University of Pennsylvania, 1995;2628.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Biocontainment, biosecurity, and security practices in beef feedyards

Aric W. Brandt DVM, MS1, Michael W. Sanderson DVM, MS, DACT, DACVPM2, Brad D. DeGroot DVM, PhD3, Dan U. Thomson DVM, PhD4, and Larry C. Hollis DVM, MAg5
View More View Less
  • 1 Departments of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506.
  • | 2 Departments of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506.
  • | 3 Diagnostic Medicine and Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506.
  • | 4 Departments of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506.
  • | 5 Department of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506.

Abstract

Objective—To determine the biocontainment, biosecurity, and security practices at beef feedyards in the Central Plains of the United States.

Design—Survey.

Sample Population—Managers of feedyards in Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas that feed beef cattle for finish before slaughter; feedyards had to have an active concentrated animal feeding operation permit with a 1-time capacity of ≥ 1,000 cattle.

Procedures—A voluntary survey of feedyard personnel was conducted. Identified feedyard personnel were interviewed and responses regarding facility design, security, employees, disease preparedness, feedstuffs, hospital or treatment systems, sanitation, cattle sources, handling of sick cattle, and disposal of carcasses were collected in a database questionnaire.

Results—The survey was conducted for 106 feedyards with a 1-time capacity that ranged from 1,300 to 125,000 cattle. Feedyards in general did not have high implementation of biocontainment, biosecurity, or security practices. Smaller feedyards were, in general, less likely to use good practices than were larger feedyards.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results of the survey provided standard practices for biocontainment, biosecurity, and security in feedyards located in Central Plains states. Information gained from the survey results can be used by consulting veterinarians and feedyard managers as a basis for discussion and to target training efforts.

Abstract

Objective—To determine the biocontainment, biosecurity, and security practices at beef feedyards in the Central Plains of the United States.

Design—Survey.

Sample Population—Managers of feedyards in Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas that feed beef cattle for finish before slaughter; feedyards had to have an active concentrated animal feeding operation permit with a 1-time capacity of ≥ 1,000 cattle.

Procedures—A voluntary survey of feedyard personnel was conducted. Identified feedyard personnel were interviewed and responses regarding facility design, security, employees, disease preparedness, feedstuffs, hospital or treatment systems, sanitation, cattle sources, handling of sick cattle, and disposal of carcasses were collected in a database questionnaire.

Results—The survey was conducted for 106 feedyards with a 1-time capacity that ranged from 1,300 to 125,000 cattle. Feedyards in general did not have high implementation of biocontainment, biosecurity, or security practices. Smaller feedyards were, in general, less likely to use good practices than were larger feedyards.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results of the survey provided standard practices for biocontainment, biosecurity, and security in feedyards located in Central Plains states. Information gained from the survey results can be used by consulting veterinarians and feedyard managers as a basis for discussion and to target training efforts.

Contributor Notes

Dr. Brandt's present address is Saint Francis Veterinary Clinic, 409 County Rd 706, Green Forest, AR 72638.

Dr. DeGroot's present address is Livestock Information Services, PO Box 652, North Platte, NE 69103.

Supported by a grant from the USDA and by the Kansas Animal Health Department.

Presented in part at the Conference for Research Workers in Animal Disease, Chicago, December 2006.

Address correspondence to Dr. Sanderson.