• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Reply to thread

> The calf was appropriately disposed of in a local

> landfill and did not enter the human or animal food chain.



well, back at the ranch with larry, curly and mo heading up the USDA et al,

what would you expect, nothing less than shoot, shovel and shut the hell up.

no mad cow in USA, feed ban working, no civil war in Iraq either.



but what has past history shown us, evidently it has shown the USDA et al

nothing ;



Disposal of meat and bone meal (MBM) derived from specified risk material

(SRM) and over thirty month scheme carcasses by landfill

The Committee was asked to consider a quantitative risk assessment of the

disposal of meat and bone meal derived from specified risk material and over

thirty month scheme carcasses by landfill, prepared in response to a request

from the Committee at its June 1999 meeting.


The Committee was asked whether, in the light of the results of the risk

assessment, it held to its earlier published (June 1999) view that landfill

was an acceptable outlet for MBM of any origin, although it retained a

preference for incineration. The Committee reiterated that it had a strong

preference for incineration as the favoured route for the disposal of MBM

and were uneasy about the use of landfill for the disposal of this material.

If there were cases where incineration was not practical the Committee felt

it would be preferable for any material going to landfill to be

pressure-cooked first or possibly stored above ground prior to incineration.


http://www.seac.gov.uk/summaries/summ_0700.htm



Disposal of BSE suspect carcases

It is the Department's policy to dispose of BSE suspects by incineration

wherever feasible. No BSE suspect carcases have been landfilled since 1991.


http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/bse/publichealth/notification.html#disp



OPINION ON


THE USE OF BURIAL FOR DEALING WITH ANIMAL


CARCASSES AND OTHER ANIMAL MATERIALS THAT


MIGHT CONTAIN BSE/TSE


ADOPTED BY THE


SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE


MEETING OF 16-17 JANUARY 2003


The details of the SSC's evaluation are provided in the attached report. The

SSC


concludes as follows:


(1) The term "burial" includes a diversity of disposal conditions. Although

burial is


widely used for disposal of waste the degradation process essential for

BSE/TSE


infectivity reduction is very difficult to control. The extent to which such

an


infectivity reduction can occur as a consequence of burial is poorly

characterised.


It would appear to be a slow process in various circumstances.


(2) A number of concerns have been identified including potential for

groundwater


contamination, dispersal/transmission by birds/animals/insects, accidental


uncovering by man.


(3) In the absence of any new data the SSC confirms its previous opinion

that animal


material which could possibly be contaminated with BSE/TSEs, burial poses a


risk except under highly controlled conditions (e.g., controlled landfill).


SNIP...


4. CONCLUSION


In the absence of new evidence the opinion of the SSC "Opinion on Fallen

Stock"


(SSC 25th June 1999) must be endorsed strongly that land burial of all

animals and


material derived from them for which there is a possibility that they could


incorporate BSE/TSEs poses a significant risk. Only in exceptional

circumstances


where there could be a considerable delay in implementing a safe means of

disposal


should burial of such materials be considered. Guidelines should be made

available


to aid on burial site selection.


4 PAGES;


http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/ssc/out309_en.pdf



During the 2001 outbreak of FMD in the UK, the


Department of Health prepared a rapid qualitative


assessment of the potential risks to human health


associated with various methods of carcass disposal


(UK Department of Health, 2001c). The most


relevant hazards to human health resulting from


burial were identified as bacteria pathogenic to


humans, water-borne protozoa, and BSE. The main


potential route identified was contaminated water


supplies, and the report generally concluded that an


engineered licensed landfill would always be


preferable to unlined burial. In general terms, the


findings of the qualitative assessment relative to


biological agents are summarized in Table 13.


TABLE 13. Potential health hazards and associated pathways of exposure

resulting from landfill or burial of


animal carcasses (adapted from UK Department of Health, 2001c).


PLEASE SEE TABLE AT;


http://www.k-state.edu/projects/fss/research/books/carcassdispfiles/PDF%20Fi

les/CH%201%20-%20Burial.pdf



PART 2


Rendering and fixed-facility incineration were


preferred, but the necessary resources were not


immediately available and UK officials soon learned


that the capacity would only cover a portion of the


disposal needs. Disposal in commercial landfills was


seen as the next best environmental solution, but


legal, commercial, and local community problems


limited landfill use. With these limitations in mind,


pyre burning was the actual initial method used but


was subsequently discontinued following increasing


public, scientific, and political concerns. Mass burial


and on-farm burial were last on the preferred


method list due to the complicating matter of bovine


spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and the risk posed


to groundwater (Hickman & Hughes, 2002).



http://www.k-state.edu/projects/fss/research/books/carcassdispfiles/PDF%20Fi

les/Introduction%20to%20Part%202%20-%20Cross-Cutting%20&%20Policy%20Issues.p

df



Carcase disposal:


A Major Problem of the


2001 FMD Outbreak


Gordon Hickman and Neil Hughes, Disposal Cell,


FMD Joint Co-ordination Centre, Page Street


snip...



http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/svj/fmd/pages27-40.pdf



3. Prof. A. Robertson gave a brief account of BSE. The US approach

was to accord it a _very low profile indeed_. Dr. A Thiermann showed

the picture in the ''Independent'' with cattle being incinerated and thought

this was a fanatical incident to be _avoided_ in the US _at all costs_...


snip...



http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/mb/m11b/tab01.pdf



PAUL BROWN SCRAPIE SOIL TEST



http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/sc/seac07/tab03.pdf




Some unofficial information from a source on the inside looking out -


Confidential!!!!


As early as 1992-3 there had been long studies conducted on small

pastures containing scrapie infected sheep at the sheep research station

associated with the Neuropathogenesis Unit in Edinburgh, Scotland.

Whether these are documented...I don't know. But personal recounts both

heard and recorded in a daily journal indicate that leaving the pastures

free and replacing the topsoil completely at least 2 feet of thickness

each year for SEVEN years....and then when very clean (proven scrapie

free) sheep were placed on these small pastures.... the new sheep also

broke out with scrapie and passed it to offspring. I am not sure that TSE

contaminated ground could ever be free of the agent!!

A very frightening revelation!!!


----------


You can take that with however many grains of salt you wish, and

we can debate these issues all day long, but the bottom line,

this is not rocket-science, all one has to do is some

experiments and case studies. But for the life of me,

I don't know what they are waiting on?


Kind regards,


Terry S. Singeltary Sr.

Bacliff, Texas USA


More here:


http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s018.pdf



INCINERATION TEMPS


Requirements include:


a. after burning to the range of 800 to 1000*C to eliminate smell;


well heck, this is just typical public relations fear factor control.

do you actually think they would spend the extra costs for fuel,

for such extreme heat, just to eliminate smell, when they spread

manure all over your veg's. i think not. what they really meant were

any _TSE agents_.


b. Gas scrubbing to eliminate smoke -- though steam may be omitted;


c. Stacks to be fitted with grit arreaters;


snip...


1.2 Visual Imact


It is considered that the requirement for any carcase incinerator

disign would be to ensure that the operations relating to the reception,

storage and decepitation of diseased carcasses must not be publicly

visible and that any part of a carcase could not be removed or

interfered with by animals or birds.


full text;



http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/04/03006001.pdf



http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/ssc/out311_en.pdf



TSS


What animal is usually the product of a ranch?
Back
Top