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

We are worried about Mad Cow, but the real issue is VS, and

Help Support Ranchers.net:

CattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
543
Reaction score
0
We are worried about Mad Cow, but the real issue is VS, Anthrox, and soon to be inflicted FMD( via terrorist) ................what is USDA, APHIS VS doing?????



ANIMAL HEALTH
--Vesicular Stomatitis Hits Montana And Other Western States
Test results have confirmed that horses at four additional Yellowstone County, Montana, premises have positive cases of vesicular stomatitis (VS), according to Tom Linfield, Montana state veterinarian. The first case of VS was confirmed on Aug. 10, and as of Wednesday a total of nine horses have been confirmed with VS on five premises around the Laurel and Billings areas.

According to state and federal protocol, when an animal is suspected of having a foreign animal disease (FAD) a FAD veterinarian diagnostician is required to be on-site to collect samples for testing. At that time, the site is placed under quarantine until the test results are available. Samples are sent to the National Veterinary Laboratory Services (NVSL) in Ames, IA, or can be sent to the FAD Diagnostic Laboratory at Plum Island, NY.

Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona also have current cases of VS in horses and/or cattle.

"Because of the confirmed cases of VS, Montana is now considered a VS-affected state, and animal owners and veterinarians should be aware that interstate restrictions will apply," Linfield says. Veterinarians should check the destination state or country to comply with specific requirements.

"There are currently no restrictions for in-state travel for animals, except for animals on the premises under quarantine," adds Linfield. "However, livestock auction markets, fairs and horse events throughout Montana may be requiring the precaution of having a veterinarian check animals before they enter the event and upon departure."

Horse owners can help protect their animals from this disease by avoiding traveling to or congregating in areas known to be affected with VS. Proper sanitation practices should be used, as well as isolating new additions to the herd or animals returning to the herd or premises. Montana will be considered a VS-affected state until 21 days after the lesions in the last affected animal have healed.

VS is a viral disease that primarily affects horses, cattle, and swine, but may affect goats, sheep, llamas and alpacas. In affected livestock, the incubation period for VS ranges from 2-8 days. It is believed the vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) is spread through insect vectors, such as the sand fly and the black fly, movement of infected animals, and contaminated objects such as water troughs and feed bins. Once introduced into a herd, the disease apparently moves from animal to animal by contact or exposure to saliva or fluid from ruptured lesions.

VSV causes blister-like lesions to form in one or several of the following locations: mouth, dental pad, tongue, lips, nostrils, on the coronary bands, or on the teats. VS rarely causes death, but an animal can suffer several weeks while the lesions heal.

Additional information on VS, including a link to USDA may be found at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ceah/ncahs/nsu/surveillance/vsv/vsv.htm ( http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ceah/ncahs/nsu/surveillance/vsv/vsv.htm) where situation reports, maps and movement restrictions and requirements are located.

-- Karen Cooper, Montana Department of Livestock
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
Montana had vs in horses about 20 years ago. As soon as winter hits the cases should disappear.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Heard on the news today that the CFIA is restricting imports of animals from Montana and Wyoming because of the risk of VS.
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
Tam, they are smart if they do this. Montana was a holding state which doesn't make any sense to me. We didn't have it, but animals were held here 21 days coming out of states that had it before they could enter Canada or other states that had restrictions. Seems like a good way to get it.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Canada and N.D have shut down horses coming out of Montana- Billings Live has cancelled the next two months horse sales- GSI canceled this months....Rumor is that this was brought in by a horse that was brought in thru Billings Live- but they are still checking that out...

And rancher you are right- this was here before and disappeared -- If I remember right it was what occurred 30 years ago that closed the Canadian border and trapped our dogging team in Canada- luckily we had another one in the states.......
 

redriver

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
194
Reaction score
0
Location
se mb
Montana should be isolated until there are assurances that the disease outbreak is totally eradicated. 7 years sounds about right. Heel, let's make it permanent.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
rancher said:
Tam, they are smart if they do this. Montana was a holding state which doesn't make any sense to me. We didn't have it, but animals were held here 21 days coming out of states that had it before they could enter Canada or other states that had restrictions. Seems like a good way to get it.

I'm glad you agree with the CFIA protecting Canada's livestock from VS but why is it so wrong for Canada to protect our herd from other contagous diseases that are in the US and not in Canada. The US had access to our industry in reguards to Anna and Blue in the safe times of the year but that wasn't good enough and it was called a trade barrier, even though a test that was all that was needed. Canada was forced to drop those restrictions. Just wonder How long will it be before Montana producers start yelling about Canada's trade restriction in reguards to VS?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Tam said:
rancher said:
Tam, they are smart if they do this. Montana was a holding state which doesn't make any sense to me. We didn't have it, but animals were held here 21 days coming out of states that had it before they could enter Canada or other states that had restrictions. Seems like a good way to get it.

I'm glad you agree with the CFIA protecting Canada's livestock from VS but why is it so wrong for Canada to protect our herd from other contagous diseases that are in the US and not in Canada. The US had access to our industry in reguards to Anna and Blue in the safe times of the year but that wasn't good enough and it was called a trade barrier, even though a test that was all that was needed. Canada was forced to drop those restrictions. Just wonder How long will it be before Montana producers start yelling about Canada's trade restriction in reguards to VS?

Tam, There's a little more to it than simple testing. Example: I have a bull that I need to ship semen to Canada from. He has a titre of Blue Tongue. Mind you, he does not have the disease, but just has a small amount of antibodies (immunities) for it. I contacted the CFIA and applied for an exemption based on the fact that I have had him tested and would do it again using PCR to prove that he is not a carrier of the disease. I was turned down because the serology test was positive. Serology will test postive from a vaccination only! Now I have to take him to a northern (low risk) state to be isolated for 90 days and them collect the semen between Jan 1 and Mar 31. If it were that easy to just have a test done.
:???:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Mike said:
Tam said:
rancher said:
Tam, they are smart if they do this. Montana was a holding state which doesn't make any sense to me. We didn't have it, but animals were held here 21 days coming out of states that had it before they could enter Canada or other states that had restrictions. Seems like a good way to get it.

I'm glad you agree with the CFIA protecting Canada's livestock from VS but why is it so wrong for Canada to protect our herd from other contagous diseases that are in the US and not in Canada. The US had access to our industry in reguards to Anna and Blue in the safe times of the year but that wasn't good enough and it was called a trade barrier, even though a test that was all that was needed. Canada was forced to drop those restrictions. Just wonder How long will it be before Montana producers start yelling about Canada's trade restriction in reguards to VS?

Tam, There's a little more to it than simple testing. Example: I have a bull that I need to ship semen to Canada from. He has a titre of Blue Tongue. Mind you, he does not have the disease, but just has a small amount of antibodies (immunities) for it. I contacted the CFIA and applied for an exemption based on the fact that I have had him tested and would do it again using PCR to prove that he is not a carrier of the disease. I was turned down because the serology test was positive. Serology will test postive from a vaccination only! Now I have to take him to a northern (low risk) state to be isolated for 90 days and them collect the semen between Jan 1 and Mar 31. If it were that easy to just have a test done.
:???:

But Mike is it OK to protect our Livestock from one contagous disease but not others? If you come from a state that has the disease then I would think you would want to do what ever you had to to assure your customers that you are not sending a disease into their herd.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
But Mike is it OK to protect our Livestock from one contagous disease but not others? If you come from a state that has the disease then I would think you would want to do what ever you had to to assure your customers that you are not sending a disease into their herd.

You must not have read my previous post. The bull does NOT have bluetonge and can in "No Way" transmit it to cattle. I would not endanger any ones herd whatsoever.

My problem with the CFIA is that they don't differentiate between different tests that have different meanings. To them, a test is a test!

I'm not fussing about Canada protecting the herd, at all. I don't blame them. But whoever wrote the regs screwed up.
 

Jason

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,994
Reaction score
0
Location
Alberta Canada
Mike Bluetongue is common in the hotter climate Southern States. The bull could have Bluetongue as a recent contact, but to disregard the test then who is next? Pretty soon all positive tests are accepted and Bluetongue spreads.

I know it is a pain but the relatively small cost to transport the bull to a Northern semen collection center is worth it. The bull will be elegible for export if he passes quarintine in the northern center. The extra semen sales you could generate overseas would more than pay for the cost.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Jason said:
Mike Bluetongue is common in the hotter climate Southern States. The bull could have Bluetongue as a recent contact, but to disregard the test then who is next? Pretty soon all positive tests are accepted and Bluetongue spreads.

I know it is a pain but the relatively small cost to transport the bull to a Northern semen collection center is worth it. The bull will be elegible for export if he passes quarintine in the northern center. The extra semen sales you could generate overseas would more than pay for the cost.

Jason, I'm not asking them to disregard the test. I offered to have two PCR tests within 30 days to prove negative Blue Tongue. The test would prove he does NOT have Blue Tongue.

However, Serology tests that come back positive only means he has a titre or antibody. Not Blue Tongue. They simply don't differentiate on what kind of test to use. ANY positive test is a no-no.
 

CattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
543
Reaction score
0
HOw in the hell did this thread get on Bluetongue??? I have heard not one damm thing out of R-Calf, NCBA, and the "totally out of touch" at FB on this issue.......................unbelievable! :roll:
 

CattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
543
Reaction score
0
Rancher,
Why should MOntan get a free pass.........if MOntana has it ahd it has SHUT THE DAMM STATE DOWN!!!!!!!! LET R-CALF figure it out!!! :roll:
 

CattleCo

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
543
Reaction score
0
Vesicular Stomatitis 2005 Situation Report
Background Information

On August 10, 2005, the National Veterinary Services Laboratories in Ames, Iowa , confirmed the finding of vesicular stomatitis New Jersey (VS-NJ) in horses on a premises in Yellowstone County, Montana. This is the first confirmed case of vesicular stomatitis in the State of Montana in 2005. Montana had no cases of vesicular stomatitis in 2004.

On August 10, 2005, the Foreign Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory on Plum Island, New York, confirmed the first case of vesicular stomatitis New Jersey (VS) in cattle in Sublette County, Wyoming, by virus isolation. This is the first confirmed case of vesicular stomatitis in the State of Wyoming in 2005. Wyoming had no cases of vesicular stomatitis in 2004.

On July 14, 2005, the Foreign Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory (FADDL) at Plum Island, New York, confirmed the first case of vesicular stomatitis in cattle in Montrose County, Colorado .

On July 5, 2005 , the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in Ames, Iowa, confirmed the finding of vesicular stomatitis in a horse at one premises in Delta County, Colorado. This is the first confirmed case of vesicular stomatitis in Colorado in 2005.

On June 27, 2005, the State of Texas released the quarantine on the only vesicular stomatitis case positive premises in the State.

On June 22, 2005, the Foreign Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory (FADDL) in Plum Island, New York, serologically confirmed the first case of vesicular stomatitis in cattle in Socorro County, New Mexico, and on June 24, 2005, FADDL confirmed vesicular stomatitis virus - New Jersey by virus isolation. This was the first confirmed case of vesicular stomatitis in a bovine animal in the United States in 2005.

On June 17, 2005, the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in Ames, Iowa, confirmed the finding of vesicular stomatitis in a horse at a premises in Garfield County, Utah, near the town of Boulder. This is the first confirmed case of vesicular stomatitis in the State of Utah in 2005. Utah had no cases of vesicular stomatitis in 2004.

On May 18, 2005, the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in Ames, Iowa , have confirmed the finding of vesicular stomatitis in a horse currently located on a premises in Travis County, Texas. The horse, which was serologically positive for antibodies to VS-New Jersey (VS-NJ) virus, has an epidemiologic link to Yavapai County, Arizona. To date, there is no evidence of transmission of VS within the State of Texas in 2005.

On May 2, 2005, the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in Ames, IA, confirmed the finding of vesicular stomatitis in a horse at a premises in Maricopa County, Arizona. This is the first case of vesicular stomatitis detected in Arizona in 2005.

On April 27, 2005, the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in Ames, IA, confirmed the finding of vesicular stomatitis in horses at one premises in Grant County, New Mexico. The index case was identified by virus isolation. The isolate was vesicular stomatitis virus - New Jersey. This was the first confirmed case of vesicular stomatitis in the United States in 2005.

Prior to the positive cases identified in April 2005, the last case of vesicular stomatitis in the United States was confirmed in the State of Colorado in December 2004
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Mike said:
Tam said:
I'm glad you agree with the CFIA protecting Canada's livestock from VS but why is it so wrong for Canada to protect our herd from other contagous diseases that are in the US and not in Canada. The US had access to our industry in reguards to Anna and Blue in the safe times of the year but that wasn't good enough and it was called a trade barrier, even though a test that was all that was needed. Canada was forced to drop those restrictions. Just wonder How long will it be before Montana producers start yelling about Canada's trade restriction in reguards to VS?

Tam, There's a little more to it than simple testing. Example: I have a bull that I need to ship semen to Canada from. He has a titre of Blue Tongue. Mind you, he does not have the disease, but just has a small amount of antibodies (immunities) for it. I contacted the CFIA and applied for an exemption based on the fact that I have had him tested and would do it again using PCR to prove that he is not a carrier of the disease. I was turned down because the serology test was positive. Serology will test postive from a vaccination only! Now I have to take him to a northern (low risk) state to be isolated for 90 days and them collect the semen between Jan 1 and Mar 31. If it were that easy to just have a test done.
:???:

But Mike is it OK to protect our Livestock from one contagous disease but not others? If you come from a state that has the disease then I would think you would want to do what ever you had to to assure your customers that you are not sending a disease into their herd.

Tam - they tested thousands of cows in Montana at a huge cost to Montana- some were cattle that ran the fenceline next to Canadian cows.. after all the testing and studies the scientists said that their was "low to no risk" from Montana cattle- "miniscule"- "low"- "minimal"---Kind of like what we keep getting told about Canada's BSE risk :???: But Canada still would not drop all the border rules for Montana cattle :???: - or like Border Rancher would say, they bullied us :lol: until they got BSE and needed to bargain for a way to get the border reopened for Canadian cattle- then miraculously the disease is a non-issue and they will open the border to cattle from most the states....Now you want us to drop all restrictions on Canadian cattle that have a "minimal" or "low" risk of a disease that not only can be fatal to cattle, but also humans- and a disease that could cripple the US cattle and beef industries :? ....

This may be the reason that you find many Montanan's that don't have too much sympathy for the Canadians problem with the closed border....You made your nest----
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Didn't you say
Now I have to take him to a northern (low risk) state to be isolated for 90 days and them collect the semen between Jan 1 and Mar 31.

Did the CFIA give you this option to prove your bull was not contagous?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Mike said:
Tam, There's a little more to it than simple testing. Example: I have a bull that I need to ship semen to Canada from. He has a titre of Blue Tongue. Mind you, he does not have the disease, but just has a small amount of antibodies (immunities) for it. I contacted the CFIA and applied for an exemption based on the fact that I have had him tested and would do it again using PCR to prove that he is not a carrier of the disease. I was turned down because the serology test was positive. Serology will test postive from a vaccination only! Now I have to take him to a northern (low risk) state to be isolated for 90 days and them collect the semen between Jan 1 and Mar 31. If it were that easy to just have a test done.
:???:

But Mike is it OK to protect our Livestock from one contagous disease but not others? If you come from a state that has the disease then I would think you would want to do what ever you had to to assure your customers that you are not sending a disease into their herd.

Tam - they tested thousands of cows in Montana at a huge cost to Montana- some were cattle that ran the fenceline next to Canadian cows.. after all the testing and studies the scientists said that their was "low to no risk" from Montana cattle- "miniscule"- "low"- "minimal"---Kind of like what we keep getting told about Canada's BSE risk :???: But Canada still would not drop all the border rules for Montana cattle :???: - or like Border Rancher would say, they bullied us :lol: until they got BSE and needed to bargain for a way to get the border reopened for Canadian cattle- then miraculously the disease is a non-issue and they will open the border to cattle from most the states....Now you want us to drop all restrictions on Canadian cattle that have a "minimal" or "low" risk of a disease that not only can be fatal to cattle, but also humans- and a disease that could cripple the US cattle and beef industries :? ....

This may be the reason that you find many Montanan's that don't have too much sympathy for the Canadians problem with the closed border....You made your nest----

So do you disagree with Rancher that Canada is smart to restrict livestock coming from Montana and Wyoming because of VS. I heard that Montana restricted the movement of rodeo stock because of Anna and Blue so why can you restrict movement but Canada can't. Other States in the great country of the United States of America restricted the movement of Montana cattle into their state but the independent country of Canada can't. Why don't you go after the other states like you have Canada for their restrictions Oldtimer?
Oldtimer has anyone in the US died from eating Canadian beef? Has one US cow been prove to have been infected by the presents of Canadian cattle in the US? NO. BSE is not a contagous disease and if you have firewalls to protect your herd from the further spread of BSE from your own herd. Your herd will not contract it from a canadian cow either. So please stop useing the BSE issue to justify your demand that we stop restricting Montana cattle because of CONTAGOUS diseases.

miraculously the disease is a non-issue and they will open the border to cattle from most the states....
Little do you know Oldtimer the CCA has been working with NCBA for years, getting these restriction lifted So to say it has only been since BSE that this has become a non issue is just another one of a long line of stories according to Oldtimer.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam it boils down to in both cases science said minimal risk- Canada said no to the science of Anaplas and BT- but now they want the US to say yes to the science of BSE....

Like I said its hard to have sympathy..........
 

Latest posts

Top