PROPOSED TUBERCULOSIS AND BRUCELLOSISREGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Session 1 of the Public Meeting on June 6,

2011, at the Holiday Inn, 1911 1-40 East, Amarillo,

Texas, commencing at 7:30 a.m., before Kary A. Wingo, a

Court Reporter of the State of Texas.

1 SESSION 12

STIPULATIONS2

3

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED4

by and between the attorneys for the5

respective parties that the presence of the6

Referee be waived;7

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED8

that the witness shall read and sign the9

minutes of the transcript, and that the10

filing of the transcript be waived;11

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED12

that all objections, except as to form, are13

reserved until the time of trial;14

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED15

that this Deposition may be utilized for all16

purposes as provided by the Federal Rules of17

Civil Procedure;18

AND FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED19

that all rights provided to all parties by20

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure shall21

not be deemed waived at the appropriate22

sections of the Federal Rules of Civil23

Procedure shall be controlling with respect24

thereto.25

1 SESSION 13

SESSION 12

JUNE 6, 20113

MS. MILLIS: Good morning. First of4

all, let me extend a warm welcome to you. 5

Fortunately, I used to be a semi-professional6

bingo caller, so that may serve me well here7

if this microphone goes out on me.8

I'd like to first introduce myself.9

I'm Deborah Millis, and I'm a USDA employee,10

and former bingo caller. My role here in11

this meeting will be one of grace under12

pressure. So let me first let you know that13

all of the comments and dialogue that occurs14

in our meeting today, which we hope will be15

a rich and worthy dialogue, will be recorded. 16

We have a transcriptionist here with us17

saving those for the public record.18

And, again, let me extend a warm19

welcome to you. And, apparently, if I hold20

this just at this angle, it works out just21

fine.22

This morning we'll be hearing some23

opening remarks from one of our APHIS24

officials, Dr. T.J. Myers. And then we'll25

1 SESSION 14

hear from Dr. Dee Ellis from the state of2

Texas, and from Dr. Lee Ann Thomas. And3

we'll be discussing today the framework for4

the TB/brucellosis regulations that our5

working group has been focused on over the6

past few months.7

I want to let you know some of the8

logistics. Out in the hall to -- out this9

door are the necessary rooms, if you need to10

use those, and then the nearest fire exits11

are out by the front desk here, and I'm12

hoping that we won't have to use those.13

Someone was passing around some order14

forms for lunch today. That's just an15

offering that the hotel has made. And16

you're welcome on your own to sign up for17

those. They need to know by 10:00 on their18

express menu. And, otherwise, in the19

vicinity here, there's many eating20

establishments for when we do break for21

lunch.22

So with no further ado, let me turn23

the floor over to Dr. T.J. Myers.24

DR. MYERS: Thank you, Deb. This25

1 SESSION 15

is a challenge. Is it working at all? I2

think I'll just forgo that and walk among3

you and try and be heard. Can you hear me4

in the back?5

Well, I just want to take the6

opportunity to welcome all of you. My name7

is Dr. T.J. Myers. I'm associate deputy8

administrator with Veterinary Services in9

APHIS USDA.10

We really are focused today on11

hearing from all of you as we're working to12

revise two very longstanding programs that we13

have at USDA, the TB and the brucellosis14

programs. So today really is all about your15

ideas and your input and your thoughts on16

where we're going with these two programs.17

You're going to be hearing first18

from Dr. Dee Ellis, who was a member of our19

working group that's been helping us look at20

a new framework for these programs. He'll21

talk about the need for change in these two22

programs.23

They have been very successful over24

the decades, but as we've seen the prevalence25

1 SESSION 16

of these diseases come down to almost zero,2

there are new challenges and new tacts that3

we need to take to address those current4

challenges. And he's going to be talking5

about that, as well as the outreach that6

we've done so far today.7

We've had listening sessions in the8

past through the published concept papers on9

these two programs, proposing some ideas for10

how we might change them. We've had a11

working group composed of federal, state and12

tribal representatives to help us build that13

framework.14

So this is our opportunity to15

present to you where we are with our current16

thinking on that framework. We have not put17

pen to paper yet in writing our regulation,18

but that is the next step.19

So after these listening sessions20

that we've been holding around the country,21

we will begin writing that new set of22

regulations, and then we'll publish it as a23

proposed rule, which will be another24

opportunity for additional comment before25

1 SESSION 17

anything becomes a final rule.2

So, again, we are doing all that we3

can to get that broad input and that broad4

thinking into what we build so that it's a5

program that's workable for everyone.6

After Dee, then we'll hear from Dr.7

Lee Ann Thomas about the specifics of the8

framework. We posted that on the web, so9

hopefully you've had a chance to take a look10

at that. But she will go into some detail11

on that framework.12

And then following that, we'll have13

some breakout sessions to hear your input and14

to exchange some ideas with you and get that15

dialogue going.16

So, again, the whole theme of today17

is getting your input and your thoughts so18

that we can make this the best program that19

we can make it as we develop those new20

regulations.21

So, again, thank you, thank you, for22

coming in today and spending time from your23

busy schedule. I know it's not easy to drop24

what you're doing to come and talk to the25

1 SESSION 18

Government, but we really do appreciate you2

taking the time to do that.3

And so, with that, I will turn it4

over to Dr. Dee Ellis from the state of5

Texas. Dee.6

DR. ELLIS: Thanks. I'm Dee Ellis.7

I'm with the Texas Animal Health Commission,8

Executive Director and State Veterinarian. 9

Welcome to Texas, if you're not from here. 10

I know a lot of y'all in the room; not all11

of you.12

And they asked -- there's been four13

of these sessions, and they've had at least14

one of the state vets that are on the15

working group go to each session and present16

part of the informational background for you17

to understand the process.18

And since this is Texas, I19

volunteered to do this one. Dr. Halstead,20

the state vet from Michigan, was involved,21

and he did the Michigan part. And then Dr.22

Barton from Idaho was involved, and I guess23

he was in Bozeman. Was he in Bozeman?24

And then we had a meeting in25

1 SESSION 19

Atlanta. Dr. Keller from North Dakota and2

Marshall from Rhode Island were involved as3

well. So they had five state vets.4

I got side-tracked part way through5

this process and asked Dr. Mark Michalke, our6

regional vet from down on the coast with a7

lot of experience with TB and brucellosis --8

he's sat in and helped me out, because I got9

tied up in Austin with some politics. So10

Mark's here as well. And, Mark, please jump11

in if I say anything that's not quite right.12

So what I'm just going to do is13

give you background on the process. And I14

won't resist the opportunity to give you my15

personal opinion a few times in here, because16

-- you know, I think we want to thank USDA17

for the process and the ability to have18

interaction.19

We didn't always agree; I'll just20

say that up front. And that's all right. 21

We still get along. But I think there are22

some things, at least from my perspective,23

that those of y'all in the room need to24

think about if you're -- you know, from your25

1 SESSION 110

perspective, as we go through these comments.2

Go ahead, Lee Ann, and change it. 3

So, obviously, the TB program/brucellosis4

program has been going on for a long, long5

time, and we've made great progress, but6

neither disease is eradicated, and I don't7

think they're going to be any time soon.8

And the reality is the rule-making9

-- the existing rules that were in place10

have become dated somewhat, and in some ways11

the status system for free status has kind12

of run its course. You know, when you had13

brucellosis status and you had Class C and14

Class B and Class A and class free, it made15

a lot of sense.16

But as we got down to the end of17

the program, it became obvious that there18

were some burdens put on certain states for19

both diseases that were influencing the20

activities that they did, rather than just21

fighting the disease. They were getting22

created to maintain or get statuses for23

movement reasons.24

And so we all agree that the status25

1 SESSION 111

concept needed to be overhauled, and that's2

part of what drove this process was to take3

a look at creating rules that were more4

flexible.5

And, obviously, the issue of6

brucellosis in Yellowstone area and the issue7

of TB up in the Michigan area, with wildlife8

involved in both, influenced this process, in9

my opinion, possibly too much, at times. 10

Being from a state that doesn't have a11

wildlife component or issue, obviously, that12

wasn't as important to us as it was for Dr.13

Halstead's folks in Michigan or other folks14

in Yellowstone.15

So sometimes we had to rebalance our16

priorities, but the process works. Go ahead,17

Lee Ann. So that's where we're at. I'll18

stand over here.19

So, like I said, I think wildlife20

really drove this a lot, as far as the21

brucellosis interaction with the elk and22

bison up in Yellowstone area, and for23

whitetail deer, specifically in the Michigan24

area. And Minnesota and some other states25

1 SESSION 112

have had some issues with TB transmission2

between cattle and deer.3

The change in agricultural practices,4

larger dairies, larger operations, calf5

raisers, feeder operations, systems in general6

are going to pose some real problems. And I7

think that's -- in my opinion, that's one of8

the places where the framework that we have9

is not quite fleshed out the way it should10

be, especially talking about the zoning11

things, and that systems -- dairy systems,12

the movement of animals, for example -- are13

very complex.14

And think about that when we listen15

to comments, because the zoning concept ---16

one of the elements is too simplistic. It17

doesn't make sense unless you have a wildlife18

component. And so we really struggled with19

that, and decided at the end of the day just20

to let the rules work their way -- they kind21

of just decided we'll figure it out as we22

go. But, in my opinion, there are some23

loopholes still in these new ag practices.24

Traceability. Obviously, it's coming.25

1 SESSION 113

It's needed for lots of reasons, from disease2

traceability to country of origin labeling,3

to product verification, and at the end of4

the day is consumer confidence and quality5

assurance. And so it obviously needs to be6

a part of this process.7

I would recommend that you keep in8

mind, though, the possibility -- think about,9

as we go through the discussion, the10

possibility of conflict between the ADT rules11

as they appear to be fixing to be proposed12

with the waivers for feeders and slaughter13

cattle and all that, versus some of the14

requirements that this rule could put on15

at-risk cattle and, especially coming from16

Texas, we're very interested in the feeder17

issues.18

Just think about possible conflicts19

that could play out between what the ADT20

rules say are going to be needed and what21

these rules could require on a state or an22

industry to be in compliance.23

Diagnostics. Primarily, that was TB.24

You know, the diagnostics, especially in25

1 SESSION 114

wildlife and even in cattle, have a lot of2

room for improvement. And so that drove3

part of this rule.4

And importation of infected cattle --5

I don't like that term. This isn't my6

slide. If we know they're infected, we7

shouldn't be importing them. But I don't8

think that's really the case in most9

situations. But, obviously, you have to10

balance the trade issue with the risk. And11

we're not in a zero risk environment anymore,12

and we shouldn't be.13

So this is really something that I14

would encourage y'all that are from states or15

industries that utilize Mexican animals,16

really take -- this is -- I don't think this17

is fleshed out as well as it should be in18

this rule, and we really need to pay some19

attention to that.20

And I'm not wearing my -- I'm not a21

USDA guy, so I'm taking liberty here to give22

you some comments as we go. I hope that's23

all right. But that's part of the process24

that worked well as we went through this.25

1 SESSION 115

And state/tribal concerns and actions,2

again, just -- that's the deal that's pushing3

the change. How do we play with each other? 4

How do we trust each other? How do we pay5

for the things that need to be done to6

comply and ultimately eradicate these diseases7

and provide a national system of health8

assurance to our international trading9

partners with each other? And that's the10

intent of these rules. Go ahead, Lee Ann.11

Well, we know that the old way of12

doing business, the statuses for free status13

for TB and brucellosis, had lots of problems14

with poor states, like New Mexico, to do15

things they didn't really want to do to16

maintain free status, zoning and some things17

that complied technically with the rules that18

didn't necessarily make sense, from a19

scientific standpoint.20

And everyone would agree that the21

rules need to be revised. And they are22

suspended right now; both the TB rules and23

the brucellosis rules nationally are suspended24

while this rule-making's going on. And that25

1 SESSION 116

was the right -- that was the right move to2

make.3

Fiscal realities. I think this is4

just the fact that the federal government5

doesn't have money; the state government6

doesn't have money, and how do we still7

maintain an effective infrastructure with8

that? I'm not sure what the difference in9

funding and fiscal realities are, because to10

me they're the same thing; we're broke. So11

just go on from there, Lee Ann.12

So I think when USDA started to put13

together the concept of how to do this, they14

obviously have been influencing -- many of15

y'all in the room are involved with U.S.16

Animal Health Association and their committees17

and the resolutions.18

And for at least the last two years,19

I went back and looked up what some of the20

-- what some of the resolutions were that21

were coming out of U.S. Animal Health. Just22

to tell you, in the TB committee in '09,23

there was a resolution urging USDA to create24

a more flexible rule-making system with25

1 SESSION 117

science-based, risk-based, and also encouraged2

them to look at new tests, validate tests3

and expedite that process.4

On the brucellosis side, in '09,5

their resolutions recommended they do more6

research in wildlife and develop test7

protocols for wildlife, look at b. suis in8

cattle, brucella suis, and basically also9

take a look at their rules in general.10

And then in 2010, the TB committee11

had a resolution asking USDA to consider the12

caudal fold response rate for states to13

ensure they're in compliance with standards14

and running the test right.15

They also, on the brucellosis side,16

asked for some cervid testing improvements17

and brucellosis funding for indemnity, and18

also asked them to take a look at the winter19

feeding of elk in the Yellowstone area,20

because it posed a risk.21

And so they were being pushed on22

both the TB and brucellosis side to revise23

their rules. I want to give them credit for24

being responsive to that. That's one of the25

1 SESSION 118

reasons we're here today is to do that.2

This is, obviously, the way that3

they do business. This is the way we do4

business in Texas as well. We put together5

stakeholder group meetings and have open6

dialog and discussion and evaluate our rules.7

That's the process that's going on.8

And I do think -- I think USDA is9

giving us the opportunity to speak. I10

think, at the end of the day, we'll just11

have to see, from each of us, our own12

opinion on how well they listened. But13

we'll assume it's all going to be good. Go14

ahead, Lee Ann.15

So there were two concept papers. 16

And I know some of y'all here were at the17

meeting in Denver a couple of summers ago on18

TB. And on the brucellosis side, as a19

result of the urging from U.S. Animal Health,20

they put together these two concept papers.21

The brucellosis paper -- they both22

came in '09. The brucellosis paper said,23

hey, we need to work on assuring people that24

the U.S. is free of brucellosis and work on25

1 SESSION 119

national surveillance systems, mitigate the2

wildlife transmission risk, and enhance our3

disease response and control measures, and4

take a risk-based approach. And that was5

the brucellosis paper.6

The TB paper came out right after7

that, and said we have to mitigate the8

implications of wildlife, mitigate the9

introduction of disease from imports, focus10

our resources where the disease is -- I'm11

not sure what that means exactly -- and then12

transition from statuses to zones.13

And so those two papers are the14

driving point for the beginning framework15

that this working group started last fall on16

when we met up in Riverdale for the first17

time. And I'll tell y'all, I'm not that --18

I kind of like statuses. I'm not against19

statuses, if the rules were done right. 20

And, obviously, the old rules are not quite21

right.22

But I think that one of our23

challenges in this process is the apparent24

transition from state statuses to zones. 25

1 SESSION 120

It's a little more complex. And I can just2

tell you that I've looked at some of the3

states that are struggling right now with TB. 4

They're free -- their status is free while5

the rules are suspended. And it's very6

concerning to me, as a state vet, that I7

can't really make a good judgment of what's8

going on there.9

So we need to make sure, whatever10

process we do have at the end of the day,11

that we have a way to exchange information12

and make some scientific and professional and13

industry-based decisions on risk. And,14

hopefully, the industries and the states will15

have some control or some ability to have16

autonomy in that way, and not just to accept17

what we're being told.18

I'm really concerned about that right19

now, especially on the TB side. There's20

some -- we have some major problems in the21

United States with TB. Go ahead, Lee Ann.22

So this working group has met face23

to face three times, I believe, and I've had24

weekly phone calls. And there has been a25

1 SESSION 121

lot of opportunity for engagement,2

opportunities like this as well, at the end3

of the day.4

One of the things that I was5

critical of -- and I guess it'll be all6

right -- is they wanted to start fresh and7

they wanted to base this process on the8

working group papers, the concept papers on9

TB and brucellosis. I felt like we should10

have gone back and looked at the old11

proposed rules that were pulled back, because12

there's a lot of hard work and good work in13

those rules; they need a little tweaking. 14

But the decision was made to start fresh.15

And I do think that we've probably16

missed some things. I think, as hard as we17

tried, there were some concepts and things18

that were put together as part of the19

original rules that were pulled back and20

never passed that still need to be21

considered, and I would recommend y'all go22

back and try and take a look at those old23

rules.24

I can give you an example. The25

1 SESSION 122

Texas feeder industry worked very hard and2

Animal Health Commission was involved in3

proposing some ways to mitigate risks to4

feedyards and proposed some processes there,5

a three-tiered system of risk for different6

kinds of animals. And that was kind of lost7

in the shuffle, and I think we need to8

rejuvenate some of those things.9

And I would encourage y'all, if you10

haven't thought about it and you can find11

it, go find the old rules and look at them12

again and make sure that this framework13

covers all the things that need to be14

covered.15

Because, again, from my perspective,16

the focus of this group kept coming back to17

Yellowstone for brucellosis, and coming back18

to Michigan for deer. And from a state19

that's not those two, it wasn't -- I'm20

really worried that we're missing something.21

So we need everyone in the room and22

everyone in the United States to help us23

make sure that this is a comprehensive24

process at the end of the day.25

1 SESSION 123

And I think it will be.2

So we put together this working3

group. Go ahead, Lee Ann. And so we4

started from scratch -- they did. And you5

can see we're right here in Stage 2. We've6

got the framework for y'all to consider and7

put comments on right now. There will be8

rules and then a final rule and, obviously,9

lots of time for interaction and for10

comments. And so this was the process that11

was developed. Go ahead.12

We were not a federal advisory13

committee. And, you know, the FACA rules14

for input are -- and maybe the word is not15

onerous or burdensome, but -- since I'm not16

federal, I can say that if you have a more17

diverse group than what we had that included18

private citizens and stakeholders, it becomes19

much more of a process to have meetings and20

to document everything that's said.21

So the decision was made to use22

state and federal officials here just to get23

things going. And I think we've probably24

done the right thing for y'all, provided the25

1 SESSION 124

framework for evaluation. And now, for you2

in the room that are industry rather than3

the government, it's time for y'all to do4

your homework. And I think we're just here5

as a reference or a resource for you to help6

you figure out the nuances and the things7

that have been missed.8

And, again, with my folks in Texas,9

I'm going -- have been and are going to10

continue to share thoughts and then,11

ultimately, y'all will each need, from your12

industry or organization perspective, to put13

your own comments into this.14

But this was not -- this was not15

intended to be a federal advisory committee16

type process, mainly to expedite it, I think,17

because we were under -- we all felt like we18

needed new rules as quickly as we can. And19

even under this process, it'll take a couple20

of years.21

So that's the make-up of the folks.22

And we had calls -- 30 or 40 people might23

be on a conference call. And sometimes it's24

hard to do good work that way, but that's25

1 SESSION 125

what we did and that's where we're at today. 2

Go ahead, Lee Ann.3

And I do want to thank the USDA4

folks, Dr. Myers and Dr. Thomas. You know,5

they've done yeoman's work in trying to6

corral a pretty diverse group of folks. And7

the five state vets that were on it were8

from five completely different mindsets, and9

so we, at times, seemed to be coming from10

out in left field, even to each other, in11

what we were talking about. And I want to12

give y'all credit.13

So the framework -- the new14

framework has these objectives. Are they15

realistic? I'm not sure. It is flexible16

and coordinated; I'll say that, for sure. I17

think the United States has a good18

surveillance system and will maintain that19

and we will be able to detect disease20

rapidly. And that's, obviously, one of the21

goals.22

Taking actions to prevent further23

spread or importation, I'm not sure if that24

term -- I think that means importation of25

1 SESSION 126

disease, not importation of the commodity. I2

think we'll be fine there.3

Are we going to eradicate these4

diseases? I'm not sure that's going to5

work. I mean, until we get a little more6

science and work through some of the7

politics, especially in Yellowstone, I just8

don't see it. So I think that's probably a9

goal that's not reachable in this process.10

Document disease status for domestic11

and international trading partners. 12

Obviously, it's important. I'm one of those13

domestic trading partners, and I'm really14

looking forward to this, because we don't15

have that process right now and we need to16

fix it quickly.17

You don't want to overreact as a18

state animal health agency, but I think some19

of us at the state vet level are very close20

to starting to impose restrictions on each21

other's livestock for fear of disease22

transmission, and I don't want to do that. 23

We need to get this finished so we can get24

a good process to exchange information.25

1 SESSION 127

And then, obviously, minimize impact2

on the industry. At the end of the day,3

beyond public health and animal health, is4

economic viability and marketability. That's5

really what we're all about. Go ahead, Lee6

Ann.7

So there's eight elements to the8

framework that are going to be discussed9

during the breakout sessions. I think10

they're appropriate. Many of these elements11

are not going to be that hard for a state12

that already has good rules and laws in13

place.14

I mean, I think, at least from15

Texas' perspective, some of these are just,16

okay, we're already doing that; it's not a17

big issue. In many cases, the CFR and the18

Uniform Methods and Rules were appropriate19

and just needed a little tweaking.20

There are some things up here that21

are significant changes. The zoning -- the22

zoning is one of them that we took a lot of23

time to discuss. And, again, from my24

perspective in Texas, I didn't believe zoning25

1 SESSION 128

should have been one of the eight items. 2

Zoning should have been inside the affected3

herd management. Because if you're not a4

state with a wildlife issue, it's not that5

big of a deal. And TB and brucellosis both6

are not necessarily amenable to zones if7

you're not talking about wildlife interaction.8

Systems, the ag systems, the dairy9

industry, as I said before. TB in the dairy10

industry, how do you zone that? You can't. 11

And so that's what we really need to think12

about, fleshing this out and giving good13

guidance back into the rule-making process to14

make sure we don't inadvertently create15

something that doesn't make sense.16

Obviously, surveillance is key to17

affected herd management. And indemnity is18

big. I think y'all are going to find that19

the proposed rules, you're going to want to20

comment on indemnity, and that goes back to21

the fiscal realities that USDA is facing.22

I know in Texas we're going to23

comment on that, because we have some24

concerns about it as it's written. I'm not25

1 SESSION 129

up here to preach, so just take a look at2

that.3

Importation requirements for states4

like Texas that cross hundreds of thousands,5

if not millions, of Mexican feeders and6

Mexican animals a year, some coming to Texas,7

some going to your states, we need to really8

take a look at that, because it is possible9

there's going to be some burdens put on you10

at the state industry level, unless we make11

sure we work this properly.12

The intent is right -- the intent is13

right to make sure that there's no14

interaction, no infection coming in from15

other countries and the breeding animals are16

not accidentally infected with our feeder17

animal issue, but we just want to make sure18

that we don't have an economic burden put19

upon us that wasn't meant to be there. So20

take a look at that.21

And then the lab part, really, in my22

opinion, we need to put it in there if you23

change the rules. But USDA does a good job24

of that now and there's really not a lot of25

1 SESSION 130

issues, from our prospective. Go ahead.2

So where we're at today is to get3

more input. This is the way to get input4

outside of the state and federal folks who5

were on the framework working group, and6

there's a lot of work to be done. It is7

not complete. I think no one would tell you8

it's complete. It's moving in the right9

direction.10

There is an urgency to this that we11

get some good rules put in place within the12

next couple of years, legally and within the13

system that's set up for government to14

operate. And I do appreciate y'all being15

here. I'm glad to see a big turnout here16

today.17

And I'll be glad to answer any18

questions, from the state vet perspective. 19

And I know Drs. Myers and Thomas will do the20

same throughout the day. But, again, thank21

you for coming. And don't be shy and tell22

us all what you think every step of the way.23

And the rule-making -- we've got24

until June 20th, right? That's the key. So25

1 SESSION 131

everyone should make comments for the2

rule-making part by June 20th.3

DR. THOMAS: And, actually, it's4

been extended until –5

DR. ELLIS: Oh good.6

DR. THOMAS: We have a request to7

extend it, Dee, so it'll be July 5th. There8

will be another notice coming out, and we'll9

be updating our website either today or10

tomorrow with that info.11

DR. ELLIS: Anyway, again, I want to12

thank Dr. Myers and Thomas, the USDA folks,13

Dr. Clifford. They've paid our way up here;14

they've gone out of their way to provide us15

with the resources we need on the Internet,16

the phone calls and all, to try our best to17

struggle through this. And it's been a18

struggle; I'll just guarantee you. It's not19

been easy. I'll stop there, if there's no20

more questions.21

DR. THOMAS: Thank you, Dee. Can22

everybody hear me? I can't claim to be a23

bingo caller, but I'll see what I can do. 24

And just some background is I'm the director25

1 SESSION 132

of Ruminant Health Programs. And in that2

capacity, both TB and brucellosis are one of3

the diseases that I am responsible for.4

So in that capacity, I'm going to be5

presenting the framework to you today. The6

presentation is in the package that you7

received. And, also, because it's a very8

long presentation -- we spent seven months9

developing this presentation -- so about10

halfway through we'll take a break. And the11

break is at a very timely point. It's12

before the indemnity discussion. So I know13

there's a lot of concerns about indemnity.14

And I'm going to repeat something15

that T.J. mentioned and Dee mentioned, is16

that we're really interested in getting your17

comments here today. That's why we're having18

the session transcribed, but I also want to19

urge you to submit written comments. Those20

are really going to be important as we go21

through and write these regs.22

And the "we" is regulatory analysis23

and development staff. We have individuals24

-- this is their job. This framework that25

1 SESSION 133

I'm presenting is just the concept of the2

new regulations. The actual regulatory text3

will be developed after we review the written4

comments, as well as the oral comments. So5

this framework is just the concepts. Next6

slide.7

So because of the similarities to TB8

and brucellosis in regards to disease control9

and eradication, we determined that we will10

look at a single rule as opposed to two11

rules, as it exists now in the CFR.12

And this allows us a lot of13

flexibility. It ensures consistencies between14

our two disease programs, and it also15

relieves the administrative burden of doing16

two separate rule makings.17

So we're hoping that, as a result of18

using -- or going with one rule, we'll be19

able to get these rules out quicker.20

The performance standards -- Dee21

mentioned the UM&R. The performance22

standards should be considered the UM&R. 23

Those will be available for comment when the24

rule is published.25

1 SESSION 134

I know we have received a lot of2

questions about the detail. And I'm not3

going to be giving you the detail in the4

presentation; again, just the concepts. But5

the program standards will also be published6

at the same time as the proposed rule will7

be, and so you will have the opportunity to8

comment at that time.9

The working group had some fairly10

significant discussion early on regarding, for11

instance, should sheep and goats be included12

in this rule.13

And currently the program species are14

going to be those species that we currently15

regulate, those being cattle, bison and16

captive cervids. We aren't extending to17

sheep and goats, primarily for fiscal18

reasons, funding reasons.19

If we were to include sheep and20

goats, we're talking about having to move21

money away from the three species here to22

incorporate a disease program for either b.23

abortus, b. melitensis, b. suis, and those --24

and for those issues.25

1 SESSION 135

And, similarly, the agents will be2

Mycobacterium bovis and Brucella abortus. 3

We're not going to add, under the moniker of4

brucellosis, b. melitensis or b. suis. That5

doesn't suggest that -- if we run into a6

situation where we have, for instance, llamas7

or alpacas on a facility that is determined8

to be TB infected, we will be able to use9

our existing system to remove and/or test10

those animals.11

Similarly, with b. suis, currently in12

Texas, we're using our existing brucellosis13

regulations and policies to remove those14

animals that turn up as suspect animals, and15

we later determine to be b. suis. So we're16

going to continue our existing system in the17

new framework, but we will not be adding18

officially into the regulations other agent19

species. Next slide.20

MR. JOSH WINEGARNER: Lee Ann, I21

just have a real quick question on that22

slide. You didn't have anything on there23

for wildlife, so I thought this rule was24

going to be based on -- was going to focus25

1 SESSION 136

a lot, especially in a couple of the states,2

on wildlife also.3

DR. THOMAS: We have no authority4

over wildlife. Our work with wildlife will5

be a collaborative, coordinated approach. 6

But per se being able to go out and, under7

APHIS authority, either test or, in an8

extreme situation, depopulate, we don't have9

that authority. So, no, we're focusing on10

those three that I mentioned.11

Dee mentioned that our current status12

system is archaic. It tends to be somewhat13

punitive, as I'm sure those of you in New14

Mexico would agree.15

And the system that we're proposing16

is a three-tiered system. It will also have17

general program requirements as well as18

reporting requirements.19

And we want to ensure that these20

regs enforce -- not enforce, but emphasis21

compliance and accountability. And one of22

the, again, factors that Dee mentioned is23

reporting. Transparency is going to be24

critical as we move forward.25

1 SESSION 137

States and veterinary services have2

to have the mechanisms in place and the3

willingness to report situations that are4

ongoing in the United States, for the very5

reason, if we're asking another state to not6

take actions, that state has to be well7

informed about what's going on with either TB8

or brucellosis.9

One thing that I want to stress as10

we go through these elements, we're still11

talking about state/federal cooperative disease12

programs. We, VS, APHIS is not backing13

away. So I just wanted to say up front14

that Veterinary Services still intends to15

have a role here and we're not backing away16

with the creation of these new regulations.17

One of the key components for the18

state or program requirements is for the19

states or tribes to develop, submit and20

implement an animal health plan.21

This is a comprehensive animal health22

plan that includes such things as state23

authority and resources, what surveillance24

they may have ongoing in their state, how25

1 SESSION 138

they might participate in national2

surveillance, case management and response and3

reporting, high-risk subpopulations. We've4

talked about two already today, the GYA and5

the situation in Michigan and Minnesota with6

wildlife.7

It looks like Minnesota may be8

successful in eradicating TB in deer, but I9

think we still need a couple of years of10

data before we can be assured of that fact.11

Are there other potential wildlife12

reservoirs in a state? What risk mitigation13

activities? Some of you may be familiar14

with what the three GYA states have put in15

place in regards to the risks associated with16

wildlife in the GYA area.17

And, finally, a proposed approach for18

zoning. What does the state propose to do19

if they do determine that they have a20

wildlife reservoir, and I'll be speaking more21

about this later, so I won't spend a whole22

lot of time on it. But just suffice to say23

that this animal health plan is a written,24

complex -- a written, complete plan regarding25

1 SESSION 139

these two diseases.2

And when the rule is finalized --3

and assuming that this is part of the4

regulations, VS likely, with the assistance5

of an advisory board, would approve or6

comment, revise, provide recommendations for7

revisions to the plan, and then the state8

would implement it.9

Or VS would have the option, as I10

mentioned, of coming back and making11

comments. Once implemented, though, we would12

look at -- if a state failed to implement13

its plan, it could be classified as14

inconsistent.15

And one of the things that we'll be16

getting your input on is what sort of17

consequences should there be if a state is18

determined to be inconsistent. And there are19

several; there's not one. But we'll be20

looking in the breakout groups to get your21

feedback on that.22

The three tiers would be, as I23

mentioned, inconsistent, which we hope,24

obviously, no one would be in; provisionally25

1 SESSION 140

consistent, which a state would have the2

opportunity to correct certain issues within3

a specified time period. Once that time4

period was over, if they had met the -- or5

if they had resolved the issues, they would6

be moved back to a consistent state or,7

alternatively, they could be moved down to8

inconsistent. Next slide.9

So under general program requirements,10

the state -- and when I say state for the11

rest of this presentation, I'm also including12

the tribes as well.13

When the working group met -- and as14

Dee's presentation indicated, we had tribal15

subject matter experts that were part of the16

working group. And there will be certain17

circumstances where the tribes might -- a18

tribe might be developing their own animal19

health plan, or there might be the situation20

where a tribe would be -- would work within21

the state where that tribe is located and be22

recognized and be a component of a state's23

plan.24

So under general program requirements,25

1 SESSION 141

we want to make sure that the state has the2

infrastructure, the laws/regulations to3

implement, enforce their regulations, that4

they have a reportable disease process, and5

they develop and implement this comprehensive6

animal health plan that I have previously7

discussed.8

One of the questions that came up9

during the discussions was that, well,10

certain -- a certain state only had two11

members -- two individuals that were in the,12

if you will, veterinary animal health13

structure.14

And, so, that doesn't necessarily15

mean, just because you have two people, that16

you're an inconsistent state. But what we17

talked about was, in that situation, the18

state would need to coordinate, collaborate19

with states around it, also to have20

discussions with VS as to what level of21

infrastructure support VS would provide in22

the situation if they were determined to have23

an affected TB or brucellosis herd in their24

state.25

1 SESSION 142

So just because you're a small state2

with a small veterinary infrastructure doesn't3

mean that you're automatically inconsistent. 4

It just means that the state has to5

recognize that and get the appropriate MOUs6

or agreements, other documents, other7

forward-facing planning in place in the event8

that they did have a large TB or brucellosis9

situation in their state.10

Just for reference, if you look at11

the map -- and I don't have this here, but12

if you look at the map for TB and13

brucellosis and states being free, there is a14

-- typically, it's the Northeast, the north15

part of the U.S. We have some states that16

have been free of both TB and brucellosis17

for 20 to 25 years.18

So we want to make sure that,19

through all of this rule-making, that we look20

at the risk and the state looks at the risk.21

So now to move on to reporting22

requirements. I've already mentioned that23

transparency is going to be critical for the24

success of the program. We want to make25

1 SESSION 143

sure that, in a public-facing forum, that2

other states are aware that state plans have3

been implemented.4

We want information about5

epidemiological information. And Dee6

mentioned a resolution about caudal fold7

response rates, particularly critical for TB. 8

So we want to make sure that all this9

information is available.10

I have to say, from -- a concern11

that I have about this is transparency works12

two ways. And at headquarters, one of the13

issues that we've seen is, while we're14

transparent within the U.S. as a whole and15

everybody has an understanding of what's16

occurring and everybody has a comfort level,17

we do have to recognize, if we put18

information available for public access, our19

international trading partners.20

So we have to be very cognizant when21

we move forward with this reporting how we're22

going to ensure that we have a complete,23

total reporting mechanism such that we24

actually don't harm our export markets here25

1 SESSION 144

in the United States.2

I mentioned compliance and3

accountability, and it's going to be built4

into the status system. And it ties back in5

to the question that I asked earlier on this6

slide: What are the consequences of7

noncompliance?8

And while we're trying to get away9

from a punitive approach, i.e., a loss in10

status where there are increased testing11

requirements for moving animals across those12

state lines, what are -- are there other13

consequences? And maybe we still want to14

have that consequence. But I'd say this is15

one of the areas that we really need your16

feedback.17

And, so, in addition to the18

reduction in status, we have loss of funding,19

increased surveillance requirements. There20

are probably others. But what do we want to21

do when a state is knowingly noncompliant? 22

Next slide.23

Zoning we broke up into two24

categories. One is short-term and the other25

1 SESSION 145

is long-term. And you'll see the long-term2

containment is greater than one year. Is3

there anything magical about the one year? 4

No.5

We were just trying to make a6

distinction that there are certain actions7

that are probably short-term zoning that come8

under a category of short-term, you can get9

the disease under control rapidly, as opposed10

to those situations. A good example is11

where we have a wildlife reservoir where12

you're going to be dealing with disease for13

a long period of time.14

In short-term zoning, for those of15

you that are familiar with our current16

program, is the activities that -- the17

activities that occur when you find an18

affected herd in your state, or what do you19

do when you have the presence of disease in20

wildlife without livestock involvement.21

So short-term containment, this is22

the -- nothing new here in regards to the23

handling of an investigation of a herd that24

is determined to have an affected animal. 25

1 SESSION 146

So the herd is quarantined; there's a2

standard epi investigation that would be3

conducted according to protocol.4

The state or tribe would implement5

their animal health plan, what they have in6

place for the finding of an affected herd. 7

And the goal of the containment action is8

eradication. And the action would end with9

the release of the quarantine.10

And there's probably a good example,11

actually, in Texas, of where you have12

actually -- there's a real life situation13

where this has occurred.14

I believe you recently had a15

brucellosis-affected herd, cattle herd in16

Texas. That herd was quarantined. There17

was an epi investigation. That herd was18

depopulated. So you actually did -- have19

done the short-term zoning within the state20

of Texas.21

So the other alternative -- next22

slide -- is a long-term containment plan. 23

And this would be a situation where your24

disease has not been eradicated. I'll just25

1 SESSION 147

use a hypothetical example. I'll pick on my2

home state of Arkansas. Go Razorbacks. I3

know that's not real popular for those of4

you when Arkansas was in the Southeastern5

Conference a long time ago.6

Say you have a situation in Arkansas7

where you had a beef herd -- it doesn't8

matter -- a herd infected with TB or9

brucellosis; however, you were not able to10

contain the spread for whatever reason. So11

in that situation, that would be a situation12

where you would want to have a long-term13

containment plan developed.14

And in this concept, for instance,15

if all of the herds were in the northwestern16

part of the state and you had none in the17

southeastern part of the state, there would18

be consideration, and the state would have19

the opportunity to create a zone with the20

appropriate mitigations to prevent the spread21

of disease outside of that zone.22

You could also talk of a similar23

scenario if wildlife was found to be24

involved. But it's just the creation of a25

1 SESSION 148

zone -- and, actually, the brucellosis2

interim rule that was published on December3

27th of 2010, describes this concept.4

So what it allows a state to do is5

to create a zone with the appropriate6

mitigations, which can include testing7

requirements for animals that are moving8

outside of the zone or interstate, across9

state lines; it can include risk assessments;10

it can include vaccination, if we're talking11

about brucellosis.12

So this long-term zoning plan is13

where you haven't controlled the disease; it14

is still spreading, or you have a wildlife15

reservoir and the state is taking actions,16

again, in a transparent way that all states17

are aware and the information is being made18

available so that there is a comfort level19

with another state receiving those animals.20

Again, the long-term containment plan21

may involve an advisory board. And I'll22

provide a little information at the end of23

the presentation about the advisory board. 24

It may be approved provisionally. It may25

1 SESSION 149

involve -- long-term zoning may involve the2

need to conduct a risk assessment, which VS3

would lead that activity.4

VS would ultimately approve or5

disapprove of the long-term containment plan. 6

And the action would end with the eradication7

of the disease.8

I think, in some situational9

long-term containment plans, such as one that10

Michigan might have, might be in place for a11

long time. I think the situation that we12

have in GYA is that the management plans13

that the GYA states are putting into place,14

I think those are going to be in place for15

a while, because of the significant issues16

associated with brucellosis in the GYA. Next17

slide.18

A couple of examples where we have19

already implemented this type of zoning20

approach. I mentioned the brucellosis21

management plan for the GYA states. And the22

GYA states, because they have a known endemic23

foci of brucellosis in wildlife, they must24

develop and implement a brucellosis management25

1 SESSION 150

plan.2

The plan must define the zone and3

explain the basis for the zone in which the4

disease risk occurs, and there is no -- and5

the TB federal order allowed no automated6

downgrade for an entire state.7

So for those states that -- since we8

published the federal order, which was in9

April of 2010, I believe, a state will not10

be downgraded, as long as it quarantines the11

herd, does an epi investigation, does the12

appropriate surveillance, there is a herd13

plan. So we have alleviated that through an14

order. Next slide.15

Surveillance. Surveillance is an16

ongoing activity and will continue to be17

critical, particularly for our trading18

partners, as well as for other states, again,19

to have a comfort level regarding the20

interstate movement of animals.21

The national component, there will be22

a national component, which would be23

slaughter and other surveillance activities24

that may be ongoing. A state may have25

1 SESSION 151

targeted surveillance that they are conducting2

as part of their animal health plan.3

States may also have other activities4

that would fall into a surveillance stream5

that will be noted and will be accounted6

for. And just a plug for ID. While this7

is not a session on traceability,8

surveillance does require, as animal disease9

control does require, animal ID.10

We're not proposing anything -- we11

will not propose anything in the animal12

health -- in these animal health regulations13

that traceability addresses. We will address14

some issues that are specific to animal --15

these programs, such as vaccination, that an16

animal needs to be identified as a17

brucellosis vaccinate. Next slide.18

Affected herd management and epi19

investigations. Again, this is one area20

where we're not going to be proposing a21

significant amount of new concepts. We're22

going to be following the tried and true23

traditions of animal disease eradication.24

We'll be defining a list of terms.25

1 SESSION 152

We'll identify who determines when a herd is2

affected and how affected herds are managed,3

including development of an animal health4

plan.5

We'll provide for the development and6

investigation and reporting requirements and7

time frames for epi investigations.8

Why are we doing this? Well, again,9

looking at the transparency issue as well as10

other states concerned, if a state's not11

following up promptly on their disease12

investigations, you want to make sure that13

you have some sort of time frame in place so14

that you can maintain the state's15

accountability, and similarly, allow16

consequences if that epi investigation is not17

addressed within the time frame.18

Again, these are questions --19

whenever you see the term consequences, think20

without under what circumstances there should21

be consequences, because some states or22

tribes may have a legitimate reason for not23

conducting an epi investigation as timely as24

they would like to.25

1 SESSION 153

But if there are issues or if there2

are valid -- or if there are no valid3

reasons, what should the consequences be?4

The rule recognizes -- or the5

regulations will recognize that, under certain6

circumstances, there may need to be variances7

from the time frames, and we want to make8

sure that recognizing with a test and remove9

protocol, either for TB or brucellosis, that10

we allow states and/or tribes to receive11

high-risk or restricted movement animals. So12

we're talking about quarantined feedlots, for13

instance. Next slide.14

Okay. Would everybody like a break15

now? I saw one person say yes. Let's take16

a 10-minute break, and then we'll get back17

to indemnity. And, yes, I will come back to18

discuss indemnity.19

(Whereupon a Recess taken from 9:1720

to 9:40 A.M.)21

DR. THOMAS: Before I get into the22

meat of the slide, I wanted to let you know23

that probably the indemnity issue was the one24

element in the framework that took the most25

1 SESSION 154

discussion.2

And there was not consensus with the3

working group, so the concept that will be4

-- that I will present is one that5

represents a VS position. The state vets6

that were on the group actually do have7

concerns about the position that we are8

proposing; however, I really would like you9

to think about some of the -- or the10

challenges that we're facing at the federal11

level regarding this issue.12

And to provide you some background,13

is that, like the states, we have flat or14

declining budgets. For TB, the FY '1115

budget decreased to 15.6 million, about an16

$800,000 decrease. And we have -- this year17

and most years, we have one million dollars18

that's set aside in the federally -- or the19

monies that are appropriated or given by20

Congress. We have one million dollars in21

indemnity money.22

Brucellosis, similarly, saw a half a23

million dollar decrease, and roughly each24

year we have about $500,000 in indemnity. 25

1 SESSION 155

Particularly for tuberculosis, we have relied2

heavily on CCC funding, which is Credit3

Commodity Corporation.4

It's funding that is based on a5

special request for a situation that requires6

additional money; however, because of the7

federal deficit and also related probably to8

the fact that the TB program has heavily9

relied on CCC monies with the potential to10

eradicate the disease, yet we have not been11

able to eradicate it, so our reliance on CCC12

monies is going away. We're not going to13

have that capability to submit a request for14

anywhere from five million to 20 million15

dollars.16

To give you an example of how we17

have relied on TB indemnity, from 2007 until18

2010, each year we've averaged approximately19

five million dollars in indemnity. So that's20

telling you that four million dollars for the21

past four years has been from CCC monies.22

So what is it we're going to do23

when we don't have that pot of money? We're24

still in FY '11, fiscal year '11. We still25

1 SESSION 156

have some CCC funding available, but probably2

in FY '12 that money is going to go away. 3

So we're going to be looking at a million4

dollars to purchase all diagnostic animals as5

well as depopulate herds.6

The other factors to consider for7

both of these diseases is that it takes us8

an average of 60 days to depopulate a herd9

from the time it is appraised until that10

herd is removed. And, again, that is an11

average. Next slide.12

So our proposal for the regulation13

is that it will define the terms that are14

specific for indemnity. It will indicate15

that indemnity -- the payment of indemnity is16

contingent upon the availability of federal17

funds. And that's not new. Actually, our18

current regs state that. So there's nothing19

new there.20

It will describe our approach to21

indemnity; however, the process will be22

detailed extensively in the program standards,23

not in the CFR. The reason being, it will24

be changed more -- it can be changed more25

1 SESSION 157

efficiently if it's in the program standards2

as in the CFR.3

And I'm not suggesting, by saying4

that, that the public will not be aware of5

what those changes will be. We have a6

mechanism of publishing a notice that does7

allow public comment; however, we can go8

ahead, based on a transparent process -- when9

we make that change, we can go ahead and put10

that change into effect.11

If there is -- if there are, excuse12

me, additional comments, we could potentially13

go back and change the program standards. 14

So that mechanism of the publication of a15

notice allows us to do things more quickly.16

So one of the things that we are17

proposing is that we will use a calculator18

as opposed to an appraisal. The calculator19

will be -- will consider a number of factors20

that include the age of the animal, the type21

of the animal, weight, milk production, and22

will include recognition that there are23

differences in the regional values for24

animals.25

1 SESSION 158

There will be a defined transparent2

process for updating the calculator. And,3

roughly, the current calculators in use are4

being updated monthly, the calculators that5

VS has.6

Indemnity would be paid at 1007

percent of the fair market value based on8

the calculator. And because we want the9

ability to remove animals quickly, we're10

proposing that there will not be an appeal11

process.12

Part of the time frame to remove --13

the length of the time frame to remove an14

animal is due to the appeal process, which15

can be a lengthy process.16

In one of the earlier working group17

discussions -- or, excuse me -- one of the18

other listening session discussions, there was19

comment made about the appeal process, and20

it's rather onerous. It goes from the state21

level -- from the owner, to the state, to22

the regions, to Fort Collins, then to DC. 23

So there are numerous steps in an appeal24

process. Next slide.25

1 SESSION 159

APHIS Veterinary Services has produced2

several calculators through a contractual3

relationship with Livestock Marketing4

Information Center, Dr. Darrell Peel. It was5

reviewed by outside review.6

The current beef calculator covers7

bred heifers, bred cows, cow-calf pairs and8

herd bulls. And the price is based on the9

slaughter cow value, with consideration given10

to the cow's age, the cow or the bull's11

weight, the calf age and the quality.12

And this calculator currently13

considers pricing differences in five14

different regions. In the calculator, the15

salvage value is to be subtracted --16

actually, this is an error on this slide.17

When we're -- overall, when we're18

talking about the use of a calculator, any19

payment that a producer receives as a result20

of salvage will be subtracted from the21

indemnity payment. Next slide.22

The reason that I chose the beef23

calculator, it was not as complex as the24

dairy calculator. We have also developed a25

1 SESSION 160

dairy calculator as well.2

The regulation will also describe the3

eligible indemnity expenses. I mentioned the4

use of a calculator for payment for animals5

that are destroyed. We will also pay for6

transportation and the disposal of animals.7

We're not going to be paying for8

cleaning and disinfectant; however, we will9

include, under certain circumstances, the10

purchase of disinfectant where C and D is11

conducted, or cleaning and disinfection is12

conducted. Next slide.13

For interstate movement controls, the14

regulations will allow for interstate, tribal15

or area movement controls for animals that16

pose a risk of disease spread, and it will17

provide the authority to define what types,18

classification of animals and herds might be19

subject to movement controls.20

One example would be the requirement21

for breeder animals that are moving out of a22

high-risk area to be tested.23

The rule will indicate that there24

will be consequences for the lack of25

1 SESSION 161

implementation or maintenance of these2

high-risk mitigation measures, such as3

interstate movement testing requirements or4

noncompliance with the restrictions.5

If a state has active mitigation6

plans in place, then they may preclude or7

diminish the need for movement controls, that8

is, if a state is using terminal or9

quarantined feedlots, has an approved and10

implemented animal -- or it says disease11

management plan or animal health plan.12

As long as there are mitigations in13

place, again, that are being reported, we14

wouldn't necessarily require specific15

interstate movement and testing requirements. 16

Next slide.17

We want to make sure, regarding18

interstate movement requirements, that the19

administrator of APHIS has the ability to20

consider variances from movement control --21

or from movement requirement, movement testing22

requirements.23

And this is another scenario where24

we're thinking that an advisory group would25

1 SESSION 162

be helpful to provide their assessment of a2

situation as to whether or not movement3

controls -- movement testing requirements were4

necessary. Next slide.5

For import, we looked at three6

different stages, pre-import, import and7

post-import. And one way to look at this is8

based on where these stages occur. 9

Pre-import I tend to think of as occurring10

in the country of origin of the animal;11

import, at the time of importation at the12

border; and post-import, after those animals13

have entered the U.S. and are being moved to14

final destinations. Next slide.15

For pre-import, we will continue to16

use 9 CFR, Code of Federal Regulations, Part17

92. And these are 11 factors for18

regionalization. This is currently what we19

base our regionalization efforts of any20

country.21

And so we will continue to use this22

existing regulatory framework or, actually --23

excuse me -- the existing regulations to24

evaluate a country as to what requirements25

1 SESSION 163

should be put in place for animals to be2

imported into the U.S. from that country.3

And you'll notice here I'm not4

saying Mexico. We want these regulations to5

be inclusive of the entire United States. 6

And we have -- our reasoning for doing that7

is that, as opposed to just looking at the8

Mexican situation, if we look at the issue9

of import holistically for all of the world,10

is that, again, it's more effective for our11

regulatory process.12

When we look at regionalization, we13

look -- after we assess a country, we look14

at the requirements that need to be put in15

place to ensure that, to the best of our16

ability, we're importing healthy animals.17

After we've conducted an evaluation18

of a country, based on several mechanisms, we19

can increase testing requirements or we can20

potentially halt imports if the risk is21

deemed to be too great.22

The mechanism by which we would get23

this information would be in-country24

reporting, as well as evaluations that we25

1 SESSION 164

might do of the country. If a country had2

testing requirements or increased requirements3

for the export of those animals, once the4

areas of concern have been addressed, we5

would -- we could lower or lessen the6

requirements for entry. And we also want to7

ensure that we maintain the ability to do8

on-site reviews of the country.9

Further for import, we want to10

ensure that the first point of concentration11

after entry must be identified and12

documented. Can we implement a system by13

which, in the regulation, it requires that14

either through the import documentation that,15

again, that first point of concentration is16

identified, and then that records be17

maintained to facilitate the tracing of the18

animals.19

If the animals are moved from the20

first point of concentration across state21

lines, that should actually require a22

certificate of veterinary inspection, as well23

as the state in which those animals are24

destined to be notified. Next slide.25

1 SESSION 165

Post-import, we want to ensure that2

there is continuity of the animal's ID, that3

there is a mechanism to link any and all IDs4

on that animal to any -- we want to make5

sure that the ID on that animal, or any IDs6

on that animal, we have the ability to7

trace. So there is -- we want to make sure8

that the ID is available for tracing.9

And I mentioned that an ICVI, or10

Interstate Certificate of Veterinary11

Inspection, or brand inspection be required12

for interstate movement and that any ID,13

again, will be consistent with the animal14

traceability proposed rule.15

We're considering post-entry16

restriction and testing requirements. Along17

these lines, imported steers and heifers and18

spayed heifers must be maintained separately19

from breeding stock, as well as -- one20

consideration is periodic testing of event21

and rodeo cattle. These animals are fairly22

mobile. They move frequently across state23

lines and is a testing requirement -- will24

that help identify earlier a potentially TB25

1 SESSION 166

-- a TB affected animal? Next slide.2

This element, as Dee indicated, had3

the least discussion. Although it is a4

critical component of any animal disease5

program, it went fairly smoothly. We'll6

define appropriate terms, including the7

consideration that makes sure that these8

regulation -- this regulation addresses a9

pen-side test.10

While we don't have any test11

currently that can be used pen-side -- and12

I'm excluding the card test in this situation13

for brucellosis. Say, for TB, if there is a14

pen-side test developed, we want to make sure15

that our regulations allow us the flexibility16

to rapidly implement what's considered to be17

a pen-side test.18

The regulation will document the19

process of initial approval and20

recertification approval of official diagnostic21

tests and official testing laboratories and22

official testers.23

Changes to the process will be24

accomplished through a public notice in the25

1 SESSION 167

federal register that describes the proposed2

change and solicits comment, public comment.3

We want to make sure we have --4

that the regulations document the mechanism5

to withdraw or suspend approval. And, then,6

finally, we want to make sure that the7

regulation provides a mechanism for quality8

assurance and quality control in our testing9

laboratories, and proficiency testing of10

approved testers.11

So with that, I have -- any12

questions?13

And if you can't read this slide, it14

says: You can pump its tail as long as you15

want; I'm telling you, it will never give16

milk.17

What we're considering -- not what18

we're considering. With my boss here, here's19

our time line, which is a very aggressive20

timeline. We are aiming to get a proposed21

rule out in 2011, with a final rule in 2012.22

Until we get the proposal --23

actually, until we get a final rule in24

place, which is 2012, our regulations remain25

1 SESSION 168

in effect. We also have the TB federal2

order that is in effect, as well as the3

brucellosis interim rule.4

So I would encourage those of you5

who haven't taken a look at that brucellosis6

interim rule, since it describes a lot of7

concepts that we've talked about here, I'd8

encourage you to read that too, because9

that's actually an interim rule that we put10

in place to address the situation in the GYA11

states.12

The other thing that I mentioned13

early on is this advisory board. And in the14

breakout groups, we'll be asking you more15

questions. But the advisory board, as we16

consider it, is a board of individuals who17

provide any -- who provide analysis and18

recommendations back to Veterinary Services.19

I've mentioned some areas where an20

advisory board might be used in evaluation of21

a state's animal health plan, a state's22

status, consequences of noncompliance with any23

part of the rule.24

There are other areas where an25

1 SESSION 169

advisory board might be useful, and we're2

very interested in getting your comments3

about an advisory board.4

One of the challenges that we face5

is the Federal Advisory Committee Act, or6

FACA laws. FACA laws require that, if you7

have a formal advisory committee that8

includes a broad range of public9

stakeholders, including industry, is that that10

advisory board be formally developed and it11

is -- it serves, actually, at the request of12

the Secretary. It's the Secretary's advisory13

board.14

USDA has two advisory boards. So15

some of the challenges that we face -- and I16

just want to say this -- is that, under the17

current FACA laws, to have a national18

advisory board, it would require standing up19

such a group, and there's only two in USDA.20

So what that means is that the21

challenge is we can't bring industry to that22

table, and so we have to be -- we have to23

consider are there alternative ways that we24

can stand up an advisory board, that we can25

1 SESSION 170

develop some mechanism of getting industry2

input into that process.3

And it may be that we need to look4

at locally having state advisory boards. It5

may be an advisory board already exists now. 6

But that is a challenge that we face with7

the advisory board.8

That being said, we're very keenly9

interested and supportive of moving forward10

with this concept, recognizing that we do11

have that challenge. So, with that, I think12

I've addressed the additional comments that I13

wanted to make.14

So I think now -- unless there are15

any questions.16

MR. JOSH WINEGARNER: Lee Ann, I've17

got two real quick. First, on the formula,18

the calculator, on the indemnity, it looks to19

me like that just discusses -- I think it's20

the herd bulls, cows and bred heifers. How21

are you planning to figure cost of seed22

stock and also on feeder cattle?23

Are you going to use the current24

market prices or –25

1 SESSION 171

DR. THOMAS: One of the challenges2

that the calculator faces, which is not3

indicated, is the value of seed stock,4

high-value genetic stock, unique collections5

of animals, such as Wahoo cattle. And6

that's difficult.7

What we may -- one of the8

discussions that has been since we've gone9

out is that you need to take into10

consideration that you have, if you will,11

exceptions to the use of the calculator, for12

it to be -- for it to be successfully13

implemented.14

Others have commented five regions15

isn't enough, that there are unique local16

circumstances. So these are some of the17

feedback that we've gotten already.18

MR. JOSH WINEGARNER: And what about19

on feeder cattle? Say they're almost ready20

to ship and they have the added value from21

feeding them out for the last five or six22

months. How are you going to pay us?23

DR. THOMAS: Well, that gets into an24

issue of what the regs -- actually, our25

1 SESSION 172

authority, the Animal Health Protection Act. 2

And that is the -- when you start talking3

about replacement value, under the Animal4

Health Protection Act, it's not full5

replacement value; it's fair market value.6

So I think you're getting into an7

issue of if it's the replacement value. And8

we didn't discuss it, because our authority9

does not allow us to address replacement cost10

or production cost.11

MR. JOSH WINEGARNER: The other12

question dealt with the segregation of13

imported cattle from -- I think you called14

it imported steer and spayed heifers15

maintained separately from domestic breeding16

cattle.17

DR. THOMAS: Yeah.18

MR. JOSH WINEGARNER: I think I19

understand what that means, but I'm not sure20

if my understanding of what that means is21

the same thing you are saying, so if you can22

elaborate on that for me as to what does23

separately mean.24

DR. THOMAS: Well, that's one of the25

1 SESSION 173

things that has been discussed, is this issue2

of pasturing. Can you have a pasture3

situation that maintains separation? But I4

can tell you what -- the intent is that5

there is no commingling of those animals.6

They can't be in the same pen7

together and they're physically separated from8

one another. The challenge is how do you9

define that physical separation.10

MR. JOSH WINEGARNER: I mean, I11

think that, from my perspective and from12

TCFA's perspective, that we agree that they13

don't need to be in the same pasture14

together, but if they're in adjoining15

pastures and there's intermittent contact,16

then that's okay. At least we've seen some17

scientific studies that say that.18

If it's a feedyard situation, then19

one pen separating the two would be okay. 20

Is that kind of where you're –21

DR. THOMAS: These are the details22

in your comments that -- again, you're going23

to hear this. But I think that your24

specific comments: We would like to see X25

1 SESSION 174

for this reason, will be extremely helpful,2

because pasturing is -- I have -- it's a3

thorny issue with lots of discussion on both4

sides of the fence. Excuse the pun.5

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I can6

appreciate that we need to be fast and7

judicious about taking care of these issues,8

but the idea or notion of no appeal does9

bother me a bit.10

Did the working group give any11

thought to streamlining the appeals process12

versus totally eliminating?13

DR. THOMAS: No, to answer your14

question. But since these public meetings15

have come up, I think that's one of the16

things that will go back and have the17

opportunity to -- what does an appeal really18

mean, and look at the process, because I19

mentioned all those different stops.20

And it's a very -- although the21

process has worked, but is there a way we22

can streamline it. I think we need to look23

at that.24

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That's my25

1 SESSION 175

point. Thank you.2

MR. JOSH WINEGARNER: One other3

thing, as we're moving through today, can you4

give us some feedback as to what comments5

you've heard from the other meetings that6

might help us to either jog something in our7

memory or expand upon some of those?8

DR. THOMAS: I'm going to ask those9

individuals who have been to the other10

meetings, which would be Bill Hench has been11

-- actually, Bill Hench has been a trooper. 12

Bill has been at all of these.13

So, Bill, I'm going to help you14

here. I'm going to focus on the indemnity15

issue. One suggestion that's been made is16

that the calculators be used for diagnostic17

purchases.18

That is, those animals that are19

determined to be suspect or reactor animals20

for the diseases, we want to purchase them21

to do further diagnostic work-up. So we use22

the calculator in those circumstances, and we23

use the current appraisal system for24

depopulations.25

1 SESSION 176

So if you're talking about one or2

two animals, it's okay to use a calculator.3

The other comment was if you -- if4

you develop a calculator, you need to make5

sure you can do it quickly, in other words,6

that it does what you say it's going to do.7

Not necessarily at all the meetings,8

but there was the possibility that industry9

would be willing to add additional monies10

into indemnity. And what I mean by that is11

that the current -- as the current regulation12

exists, any additional payment for13

indemnification of an animal is subtracted14

from what we pay.15

So we've actually had discussion with16

our legal counsel. And as long as the fair17

market value of that animal is not exceeded,18

it's that we can eliminate that requirement.19

So, in other words, what it means, a20

producer could be paid by, potentially, the21

Feds, the states and industry when a herd22

was depopulated.23

Some of the other comments were24

concerns about what I mentioned about the25

1 SESSION 177

FACA, that industry can't be at the table in2

a formal capacity on an advisory board.3

Those are the ones that I -- that I4

recall right now. Bill, do you?5

MR. HENCH: Specifics aren't coming6

to mind readily. I'm sure, as we go through7

discussions, it will jog my memory, and I8

will point those out as they come to me.9

DR. ELLIS: Preemption concerns.10

DR. THOMAS: Thank you.11

DR. ELLIS: I'm just guessing.12

DR. THOMAS: The question was13

preemption concerns. Thank you, Dee. It14

wasn't that I was withholding that one, I15

promise.16

DR. ELLIS: All right.17

DR. THOMAS: Preemption is a18

concern. And when we talk about preemption,19

what we are talking about is we are now20

being asked, when we do a rule-making, is to21

address in our regulations whether or not we22

are going to preempt a state's right to put23

more stringent requirements in for -- and,24

typically, it involves testing requirements25

1 SESSION 178

for animals entering their state.2

So the -- as we look at these rules3

and as we develop the rule, our goal is to4

create a level playing field by which a5

state wouldn't feel the need to institute6

higher testing requirements.7

As Dee brought up, there's a lot of8

concerns, because states want to have this9

ability. So states want to preempt federal10

law.11

There will be -- there have been12

discussions at every -- well, I can't speak13

to Bozeman, but I suspect, Bill, it was14

mentioned. Bill's nodding his head yes, it15

was mentioned at Bozeman. So it was an16

issue that came up, and we don't have any17

consensus on it.18

We are having further internal19

discussions about what our position on20

preemption is going to be. But, again, the21

thought is that, if these program -- if22

there is a general consensus on the23

regulations, if they are transparently24

implemented, should there -- should a state25

1 SESSION 179

feel the need to implement higher movement2

restrictions.3

And, Dee, I think, for the most4

part, aren't they movement requirements?5

DR. ELLIS: Well, I can give you an6

example. Texas right now doesn't recognize7

free status for dairy animals for TB, and we8

require tests and identification which exceeds9

the concept. That's my thought about how10

that would work.11

DR. THOMAS: And, Dee, thank you.12

That's a perfect segue into one of the13

questions regarding interstate movement, that14

hopefully you'll get to in the breakout15

group, is are there commodity groups that16

need to have testing requirements that the17

Fed put in place.18

So should these proposed reg --19

should this proposed reg include an20

interstate movement testing requirement for21

dairy heifers moving across state lines? 22

And, actually, Dee, that goes back to one of23

our proposed rules, because we were going to24

propose that.25

1 SESSION 180

I can tell you the feedback that2

we've gotten has been mixed on that issue.3

DR. ELLIS: I know another example4

is North Dakota requires two tests for TB5

for feeder steers entering their state.6

DR. THOMAS: So I think, again,7

that, if -- given the basis for this need,8

is it something that should be in the reg? 9

Because, I mean, we don't want to preclude10

something that's needed overall for the11

national interest to help eradicate these12

diseases.13

MR. SCOTT DEWALD: I don't know if14

this is the time or the place, but maybe you15

could provide a little bit of an update. 16

I'm a layperson, Scott Dewald from the17

Oklahoma Cattlemen's Association. And it18

goes a bit to indemnity.19

But the diagnostics for TB are just20

horrible, in terms of any kind of sound, 10021

percent test. And I know that some work is22

being done on that. Can we get that ramped23

up?24

Some things -- as you were25

1 SESSION 181

discussing maybe private industry involving2

more funds into indemnity, I think we'd be3

more interested in ramping up the research to4

get the right diagnostic tool so that we're5

not putting down animals that we don't need6

to put down.7

DR. THOMAS: To answer your question8

have we participated, have we been involved9

with, supported activities to look at10

different diagnostic tests or different uses11

of existing diagnostics, yes, we have.12

We have just -- we're actually13

wrapping up a cervid project, and the results14

are looking promising for that. I suspect15

your interest is on the beef cattle.16

And the evaluations that we found,17

actually, have not produced anything that was18

ready to supplant the caudal fold test. We19

recognize that it's not the best, about 8520

percent sensitive. However, can you imagine21

what would happen if we put something too22

quickly out there that wasn't as good?23

So we're working on it. The one --24

the one fact, or the one issue is25

1 SESSION 182

Mycobacterium are very difficult agents to2

have an antemortem diagnosis. In human3

medicine -- I refer to human medicine. 4

Guess what test human medicine is still using5

for TB. The skin test. So they have6

evaluated serologic tests.7

So I think it is really, really8

tough, but we are looking at and we are9

supporting, when we have the opportunity to10

look at different diagnostic tests, yes. I11

don't have specific results, though, off the12

top of my head.13

DR. JOE BAKER: Lee Ann, I wanted14

to ask a little bit about the comment you15

made about, if states aren't found to be16

consistent, that one of the outcomes could be17

reduction of funding or elimination of18

funding.19

And my question goes to the system20

of funding through cooperative agreements that21

has, frankly, been of tremendous benefit,22

particularly to small states like New Mexico.23

We recognize that those funds are24

diminishing with budget constraints in DC. 25

1 SESSION 183

If you're faced with a situation where,2

because of budget limitations in the first3

place, the state is not able to come up with4

a plan that, A, they feel they can5

successfully execute and, B, USDA will6

recognize as consistent, and the outcome of7

that lack of consistency is a reduction in8

the funding, couldn't you just be creating a9

bigger monster for that state?10

In other words, you aren't able to11

do what we think you ought to do, and part12

of the reason is your state's financial13

fiscal ability to address the TB issues it14

has, and we're going to address that15

shortcoming by reducing your funding.16

DR. THOMAS: Right. No, I17

understand. You make a good point. One18

thing that I didn't mention when I talked19

about the animal health plan is we will make20

a template available.21

We're also talking about is there a22

way we can move away from a paper system and23

have this actually be form driven, some sort24

of data-capturing form that can be used, but25

1 SESSION 184

we would provide a template.2

So I think in regards to getting an3

animal health plan together, we are willing4

to provide some sort of template or baseline5

that can be used.6

Another issue that has come up is --7

during the working group discussions -- is8

that, although we talk about a template, it's9

going to be a case by case evaluation,10

because an animal health plan for -- sorry,11

Dee, I'm going to pick on Texas -- Texas is12

not going to be the same as an animal health13

plan for Rhode Island or New York or Vermont14

or New Hampshire.15

And so, although there will be16

general components that will need to be17

addressed, they're not going to be the same.18

DR. JOE BAKER: A spin-off question19

to what I asked, in regards to the USDA's20

2015 plan. And our sense is that it's21

gradually going to shift more responsibilities22

to state agencies, like ours, the New Mexico23

Livestock Board. And isn't that going to24

kind of create a little bit of a double25

1 SESSION 185

whammy, in terms of what states like New2

Mexico are going to be required to do?3

DR. THOMAS: As I indicated earlier,4

we're still considering that these will be5

cooperative programs, even in the face of6

2015. I think John has said, even publicly,7

that we're not walking away from our8

eradication programs.9

I think the challenge that we all10

face, and it's regardless of 2015, are the11

flat and declining budgets and how can we12

support these programs and the activities,13

particularly indemnity, when no one has the14

money, or it's a real challenge to have the15

money.16

DR. ELLIS: Well, I'd just kind of17

echo what Joe's saying. I think we just all18

need to think about this as we formulate our19

comments. The potential, in general, for an20

unfunded mandate, so to speak, if these rules21

are not carefully crafted, will put burdens22

on states, not only in their animal health23

plan, which -- basically, where you get into24

problems is with the risk mitigation for25

1 SESSION 186

problems within that state that may not be2

their fault, so to speak.3

But also, on the importation side,4

you know, something as simple as notifying5

another state when imported animals leave one6

state and go into another. So you've got7

border states where these animals cross. 8

They may be commingled for less than a day,9

re-sorted and then shipped out.10

But that's -- any requirements for11

live security at those places on a commodity12

that was legally and properly imported under13

USDA's authority, and then a burden put on14

the states to then manage the risks for the15

rest of the United States, without16

cooperative funds to do that, is17

unreasonable.18

And I just want us to be careful19

that we don't fall into that trap, because20

what seems like maybe a good idea if you're21

not from New Mexico or Texas, could be a22

thing that we just simply can't do. And23

then what happens? We lose our status as24

per these rules and get downgraded.25

1 SESSION 187

DR. THOMAS: You could lose. Again,2

this is one of the things we want your3

feedback in the role of an advisory board,4

because what we want to do is -- because,5

frankly, we have been criticized that it goes6

into Riverdale and there's been a unilateral7

decision made without input or evaluation by8

an outside body.9

So we want to create this advisory10

board, given the challenges that that has. 11

And I'm using the term advisory board in12

quotations, because of the connotations we13

have with FACA, but everybody -- pseudorabies14

had a control board, so maybe I should call15

it a control board, but an advisory board, a16

group that provides recommendations.17

MS. MILLIS: All right. So what18

I'd like to do is suggest that we take about19

a 20-minute break right now. And we're20

going to change up the rooms. And when we21

return, we would love to hear more of those22

types of comments and feedback and ideas that23

you have and concerns that you have that you24

want as part of the record.25

1 SESSION 188

We're going to be divided into three2

groups. And in this group -- we're going to3

close this wall off here. So if you're at4

these center tables here, you might want to5

move your stuff to where you eventually want6

to end up.7

In this room here -- these rooms are8

divided according to those items, the eight9

regulatory elements that are listed on the10

document in your folder called the Proposed11

Bovine Tuberculosis and Brucellosis Draft12

Regulatory Framework.13

And so the first three are program/14

state requirements, zoning and surveillance,15

and they'll be up here in this first room. 16

You'll have an opportunity to rotate through17

each of these so that we can hear your18

comments on each. We're just doing it in19

small groups, because it's easier to hear20

each other and understand in a smaller group.21

In the second part of the room,22

currently the back part of this room, we'll23

be looking at Numbers 5 and 8 on there, the24

indemnity and approval procedures related to25

1 SESSION 189

official tests and laboratories.2

And, finally, in the back room there3

that's currently closed off from us, we'll be4

looking at the other three areas, Number 4,5

6 and 7, the affected herd management and6

epidemiological investigations, interstate7

movement controls and importation requirements.8

And in each of these rooms, as you9

cycle through, we'll spend about 45 minutes10

in each of the rooms. So we have time to11

get at least a session in before we break12

for lunch here. And I'll have to check on13

the lunch break.14

So let's just break for about 2015

minutes so we can change up the rooms, and16

then we'll ask you to cycle through those17

and kind of sort yourself out so we have18

reasonable numbers in each of the rooms. 19

And then we'll invite you to go to each of20

the groups in turn.21

(Whereupon Recessed at 10:29 A.M.)22

23

24

25

1 SESSION 190

CERTIFICATE2

3

STATE OF TEXAS4

5

I, KARY A. WINGO, CSR, RPR in and6

for the State of Texas, certify that the7

caption to this transcription correctly states8

the facts set forth herein, that the9

proceedings were correctly reported in10

Stenograph by me at the time and place set11

forth in said caption, and have been12

transcribed from Stenograph into typewriting13

under my direction and supervision in the14

foregoing transcript; and that said transcript15

contains a correct record of the proceedings16

had at said time and place. GIVEN UNDER MY17

HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL of office.18

19

20

21

KARY A. WINGO, CSR, RPR22

DATED: JUNE 17, 201123

24

25

1 SESSION 191

.2

Session1 060611Page 15

Aability 9:18 20:1658:10 61:20 63:1764:8 65:7 78:1083:14

able 25:20 33:2035:9 36:7 47:1055:12 83:4,11

abortus 34:24 35:3accept 20:17access 43:19accidentally29:17accomplished66:25accountability 36:2244:4 52:16

accounted 51:6Act69:6 72:2,5action 46:8,9 49:7actions 15:2 25:2337:7 45:7 48:16

active 61:6activities 10:2138:14 45:17,1850:24 51:4 81:1085:13

activity 49:4 50:17actual 33:3add35:4 76:10added 71:21adding 35:18addition 44:18additional 6:25 55:757:13 70:13 76:1076:13

address 6:4 51:1468:11 72:10 77:2283:14,15

addressed 52:18 64:570:13 84:18

addresses 51:14 66:9adjoining 73:15administrative 33:16administrator 5:961:20

ado4:23ADT13:11,20

advisory 23:13 24:1639:6 48:22,2461:25 68:14,16,2169:2,4,6,8,11,1369:15,19,25 70:5,670:8 77:3 87:4,1087:12,16

ag 12:24 28:9age57:21 59:11,12agencies 84:23agency 26:19agent35:19agents 35:2 82:2aggressive 67:20ago18:18 47:6agree9:20 10:2515:21 36:15 73:13

AGREED 2:3,5,7,8,10agreements 42:782:21

agricultural12:4ahead10:3 11:1715:11 18:15 20:2223:4,12 25:3 27:630:2 57:9,10

aiming 67:21alleviated 50:14allow52:16 53:1157:8 60:15 66:1672:10

allowed50:6allows 33:13 48:557:16

alpacas35:8alternative 46:2269:24

alternatively 40:8Amarillo 1:8amenable 28:7amount 51:22analysis 32:23 68:18and/or 35:10 53:11angle3:21animal 8:8 16:17,2218:20 22:3 26:1927:4 29:18 37:21

37:22 38:24 40:1941:7,13 45:25 46:651:3,9,10,12,13,1551:17,24 52:457:21,22 58:1561:11,12 62:1165:5,6,7,14 66:2,568:22 72:2,4 76:1476:18 83:20 84:484:11,13 85:23

animals 12:13 14:1622:7 29:7,16 35:1135:15,15 44:1248:8,20 50:2153:12 56:5 57:2558:10 60:5,7,16,1960:22 62:13 63:263:17 64:4,19,2064:24 65:22 71:673:6 75:19,20 76:378:2 79:8 81:686:6,8

animal's 65:3Ann 4:3 7:8 10:311:18 15:11 16:1218:15 20:22 23:425:3 27:7 35:2170:17 82:14

answer 30:18 74:1481:8

antemortem 82:3anymore 14:12Anyway 31:12APHIS 3:24 5:10 36:837:13 59:2 61:20

apparent 19:24apparently 3:20appeal 58:11,15,2058:24 74:9,18

appeals 74:12appear 13:12appraisal 57:1975:24

appraised 56:10appreciate 8:2 30:1574:7

Session1 060611Page 16

approach 19:5 36:638:18 44:10 49:2156:21

appropriate 2:1227:11,19 42:647:21 48:6 50:1366:7

appropriated54:20approval 66:20,2167:6 88:25

approve 39:6 49:5approved 48:25 61:1067:11

approximately 55:19April 50:10archaic 36:13area 11:7,8,23,2517:20 38:17 51:2060:16,23

areas 44:16 64:568:20,25 89:5

Arkansas 47:3,5,7aside 54:19asked 8:13 9:6 17:1717:19 44:6 77:2184:20

asking 17:12 37:668:15

assess 63:14assessment 49:3 62:2assessments 48:10assistance 39:5associate 5:8associated 38:1649:17

Association 16:1780:18

assume 18:14assuming 39:4assurance 13:6 15:967:9

assured 38:11assuring 18:24Atlanta 9:2attention 14:20attorneys 2:3

at-risk13:16Austin 9:10authority 36:4,8,1037:24 60:18 72:2,986:14

automated 50:6automatically 42:4autonomy 20:17availability56:17available 33:2443:10,19 48:1956:2 65:9 83:21

average56:9,12averaged 55:19aware43:3 48:1857:5

a.m1:9 53:21 89:22B

b10:15 17:8 34:2334:24,24 35:5,5,1235:16 83:6

back 5:5 16:20 21:1121:12,20,23 22:1722:18 28:14,2139:11 40:7 44:553:17,18 57:1468:19 74:17 79:2388:23 89:3

background 8:17 9:1431:25 54:13

backing37:13,16BAKER82:14 84:19balance14:11Barton 8:23base 21:8 62:20based35:25 55:557:9 58:8 59:962:9 63:19

baseline 84:5basically 17:9 85:24basis50:4 80:8beef 47:8 59:7,2381:16

beginning 19:15believe20:24 27:25

46:15 50:10benefit 82:22best 7:19 31:1763:16 81:20

beyond 27:4big 27:18 28:6,1930:16

bigger 83:10Bill 75:11,12,13,1477:5 78:14

Bill's 78:15bingo 3:7,11 31:24bison 11:23 34:16bit 74:10 80:16,1982:15 84:25

board 39:6 48:22,2468:14,16,17,2169:2,4,11,14,19,2570:6,8 77:3 84:2487:4,11,12,15,1687:16

boards 69:15 70:5body 87:9border 62:13 86:8boss 67:19bother 74:10Bovine 88:12bovis 35:3Bozeman 8:24,2478:14,16

brand 65:12break 4:21 32:11,1253:15,17 87:2089:12,14,15

breakout 7:14 27:1039:21 68:15 79:15

bred 59:8,8 70:21breeder 60:22breeding 29:16 65:2072:16

bring 69:22broad 7:4,4 69:9broke 16:11 44:24brought 78:8brucella 17:9 35:3brucellosis 1:2 5:14

Session1 060611Page 17

9:8 10:14 11:7,2215:14,24 17:5,1617:18,23 18:19,2218:23,25 19:621:10 22:18 28:632:3 33:9 35:5,1337:9 41:24 42:9,1442:17 47:10 48:248:12 49:17,21,2449:25 51:18 53:1054:23 66:14 68:4,688:12

brucellosis-affected46:16

budget 54:16 82:2583:3

budgets 54:15 85:12build 6:13 7:5built 44:4bulls 59:9 70:21bull's 59:11burden 29:19 33:1686:14

burdens 10:19 29:1085:22

burdensome 23:16business 15:13 18:418:5

busy 7:24C

C10:14 60:11calculator 57:18,1958:3,9 59:7,13,1559:19,24,25 60:2,570:19 71:3,1275:23 76:3,5

calculators 58:4,559:3 75:17

calf 12:5 59:12call 24:24 87:15called 72:14 88:11caller 3:7,11 31:24calls 20:25 24:2331:17

capability 55:14

capacity 32:3,5 77:3caption90:8,12captive34:17card 66:13care 74:8careful86:19carefully 85:22case 14:9 38:3 84:1084:10

cases27:18categories 44:25category 45:9cattle 12:3 13:14,1614:2,5 17:9 34:1646:16 65:22 70:2371:6,20 72:14,1781:16

Cattlemen's 80:18caudal 17:13 43:781:19

CCC55:3,10,12,2256:2

center 59:5 88:5certain10:19 40:340:17 41:11,1145:7 53:6 60:10

certificate 64:2365:11 90:2

certify90:7cervid 17:17 81:14cervids34:17CFR27:18 33:1256:24 57:3 62:17

challenge 5:2 69:2270:7,12 73:9 85:1085:15

challenges 6:3,519:24 54:11 69:569:16 71:2 87:11

chance 7:10change 5:22 6:1110:3 12:4 15:429:24 57:10,11,1467:3 87:21 89:16

changed56:25,25changes27:22 57:6

66:24check 89:13chose 59:23circumstances 40:1852:21 53:7 60:1071:17 75:23

citizens 23:19Civil 2:10,11,12claim 31:23class 10:14,15,15,15classification 60:19classified 39:14cleaning 60:9,12Clifford 31:14close 26:20 88:4closed 89:4coast 9:7Code 62:17cognizant 43:21collaborate 41:19collaborative 36:6collections 71:5Collins 58:23come 6:2 7:25 45:853:18 74:16 77:983:4 84:7

comfort 43:17 48:1950:20

coming 7:23 12:2513:16 16:22 22:1722:18 25:10 29:729:15 30:22 31:939:11 77:6

commencing 1:9comment 6:25 28:2128:24 33:24 34:939:7 57:8 58:2067:3,3 76:4 82:15

commented 71:15comments 3:14 10:212:16 14:23 23:823:11 24:14 31:232:18,20 33:5,539:12 57:13 69:370:13 73:23,2575:5 76:24 85:20

Session1 060611Page 18

87:23 88:19commingled 86:9commingling 73:6Commission 8:8 22:3committee 16:2317:11 23:14 24:1669:6,8

committees 16:17commodity 26:2 55:479:16 86:12

complete 30:8,938:25 43:23

completely 25:9complex 12:14 20:238:25 59:24

compliance 13:2317:14 36:22 44:3

complied 15:18comply 15:7component 11:1212:19 40:23 50:2250:23 66:5

components 37:1884:17

composed 6:12comprehensive 22:2437:22 41:6

concentration 64:1164:16,21

concept 6:9 11:212:16 16:14 18:1618:21 21:9 33:247:15 48:4 54:470:11 79:10

concepts 21:18 33:634:5 51:22 68:8

concern 43:11 64:577:19

concerned 20:1952:11

concerning 20:7concerns 15:2 28:2532:14 54:8 76:2577:10,14 78:987:24

conduct 49:3

conducted 46:4 60:1260:13 63:18

conducting 51:252:24

conference 24:2447:6

confidence 13:5conflict 13:11conflicts 13:19Congress 54:21connotations87:13consensus 54:3 78:1878:23

consequence 44:15consequences39:1844:7,14 52:17,2052:22 53:4 60:2568:23

consider 17:12 23:756:7 57:20 61:2168:17 69:24

consideration 47:1959:10 65:21 66:871:11

considered 21:2233:23 66:17

considering 65:1667:18,19 85:5

considers 59:14consistencies 33:14consistency 83:8consistent 40:2,765:14 82:17 83:7

constraints 82:25consumer 13:5contact73:16contain47:11containment 45:3,2246:8,23 47:1448:21 49:6,10

contains 90:16contingent 56:17continue 24:11 35:1750:17 62:16,22

continuity 65:3contractual 59:3

control 19:4 20:1633:9 45:10 51:1061:21 67:9 87:1587:16

controlled 48:14controlling 2:13controls 60:14,16,2061:8 62:4 89:8

cooperative 37:1282:21 85:6 86:17

coordinate 41:19coordinated 25:1736:6

Corporation 55:4corral 25:7correct 40:3 90:16correctly 90:8,10cost 70:22 72:10,11counsel 76:17countries 29:16country 6:21 13:362:11,21,25 63:363:14,19 64:2,2,9

couple 18:18 24:2030:13 36:2 38:1049:19

course 10:13Court 1:10covered 22:15covers 22:14 59:7cow 59:10,11cows 59:8 70:21cow's 59:11cow-calf 59:8crafted 85:22create 16:24 28:1547:20 48:6 78:584:25 87:10

created 10:23creating 11:4 83:9creation 37:17 47:25credit 17:24 25:1355:3

critical 21:6 36:2542:24 43:8 50:1866:5

Session1 060611Page 19

criticized 87:6cross 29:5 86:8CSR90:6,23current 6:4,16 36:1245:16 56:19 58:459:7 69:18 70:2475:24 76:12,12

currently 34:14,1535:12 59:13 62:1966:12 88:23 89:4

cycle 89:10,17D

D60:11dairies 12:5dairy 12:12 28:9,1059:25 60:2 79:8,22

Dakota 9:2 80:5Darrell 59:5data 38:11data-capturing 83:25dated 10:11 90:24day12:20 13:5 18:1120:11 21:4 22:2527:3 30:21 86:9

days 56:9DC 58:23 82:25deal 15:3 28:6dealing 45:13dealt 72:13Deb4:25Deborah 3:10decades 5:25December 48:3decided 12:20,22decision 21:15 23:2287:8

decisions 20:14declining 54:1585:12

decrease 54:17,24decreased 54:16Dee4:2 5:19 7:7 8:58:6,7 31:8,2232:16 33:21 36:1236:23 43:6 66:3

77:14 78:8 79:4,1279:23 84:12

deemed 2:12 63:22deer 11:24 12:322:19 38:9

Dee's40:15deficit55:8define 50:3 56:1460:18 66:7 73:10

defined58:2defining 51:25Denver 18:18depopulate 36:9 56:656:9

depopulated 46:1976:23

depopulations 75:25Deposition 2:9deputy 5:8describe 56:21 60:3describes 48:4 67:268:7

desk 4:12destinations62:15destined 64:25destroyed 60:6detail 7:11 34:3,4detailed 56:23details73:22detect 25:20determine 35:1638:20

determined 33:1035:8 39:19 41:2345:25 75:20

determines 52:2develop7:20 17:737:20 41:6 49:2570:2 76:5 78:4

developed 23:12 33:447:14 59:25 66:1569:11

developing 32:1040:19

development 32:2452:4,6

Dewald 80:14,17diagnosis 82:3diagnostic 56:566:21 75:17,2281:5,11 82:11

diagnostics 13:24,2580:20 81:12

dialog 18:7dialogue 3:14,167:16

difference 16:9differences 57:2459:14

different 22:6 25:959:15 62:7 74:2081:11,11 82:11

difficult 71:7 82:2diminish 61:8diminishing 82:25direction 30:1090:14

director 8:9 31:25disapprove 49:6discuss 27:24 53:1972:9

discussed 27:9 41:873:2

discusses 70:20discussing 4:4 81:2discussion 13:1018:7 32:13 34:1154:2 66:4 74:476:16

discussions 41:10,2158:18,19 71:9 77:878:13,20 84:8

disease 10:7,22 13:219:4,10,11 25:2026:2,11,22 33:9,1534:23 37:12 41:545:10,13,20 46:2547:22 48:14 49:850:5 51:9,24 52:1255:11 60:17 61:1166:5

diseases 6:2 10:20

Session1 060611Page 20

15:7 26:5 32:439:2 56:8 75:2180:13

disinfectant60:9,11disinfection60:12disposal 60:7distinction 45:7diverse 23:18 25:7divided 88:2,9document 23:21 26:1166:19 67:5 88:11

documentation 64:15documented 64:13documents 42:7doing 7:3,25 15:1327:17 33:16 52:963:7 88:19

dollar 54:24dollars 54:18,2155:16,20,21 56:5

domestic 26:11,1472:16

door 4:10double 84:25downgrade 50:7downgraded 50:1186:25

Dr 3:25 4:2,3,24,255:8,19 7:7 8:5,78:20,22 9:2,611:13 25:5,5 31:431:6,7,12,13,14,2236:4 53:22 59:571:2,24 72:18,2573:22 74:14 75:977:10,11,12,13,1777:18 79:6,12 80:480:7 81:8 82:1483:17 84:19 85:485:17 87:2

Draft 88:12driven 83:24driving 19:15drop 7:24drove 11:3,21 14:3Drs30:20

due58:15E

earlier44:6 58:1765:25 85:4

early34:11 68:14easier 88:20East 1:8easy 7:24 31:20eating 4:20echo 85:18economic 27:5 29:19effect 57:11 68:2,3effective 16:8 63:11efficiently 57:2efforts62:20eight27:8 28:2 88:9either 31:10 34:2336:8 37:8 53:1064:15 75:7

elaborate 72:23element53:25 66:3elements 12:17 27:827:11 37:11 88:10

eligible 60:4eliminate 76:19eliminating 74:13elimination 82:18elk11:22 17:20Ellis4:2 5:19 8:5,78:7 31:6,12 77:1077:12,17 79:6 80:485:17

emphasis 36:21employee 3:10encourage 14:1522:10 68:5,9

encouraged 17:2endemic49:23enforce36:21,2141:4

engagement 21:2enhance19:3ensure 17:14 36:2043:23 63:16 64:864:11 65:2

ensures 33:14entered 62:14entering 78:2 80:6entire 50:7 63:6entry 64:7,12environment 14:12epi 46:3,18 50:1251:19 52:8,17,24

epidemiological 43:689:7

eradicate 15:7 26:455:11,12 80:12

eradicated 10:746:25

eradicating 38:9eradication 33:1046:9 49:7 51:2485:9

error 59:17especially 12:1113:16,25 20:2026:8 36:2

establishments 4:21evaluate 18:7 62:25evaluated 82:7evaluation 24:263:18 68:21 84:1087:8

evaluations 63:2581:17

event 42:8 65:21eventually 88:6everybody 31:2343:16,17 53:1587:14

exactly 19:12example 12:13 21:2545:11 46:11 47:255:17 60:21 79:780:4

examples 49:19exceeded 76:18exceeds 79:9exceptions 71:12exchange 7:15 20:1226:25

Session1 060611Page 21

excluding 66:13excuse 57:12 58:1862:24 74:5

execute 83:6Executive 8:9existing 10:10 35:1035:13,17 62:23,2481:12

exists 33:12 70:676:13

exits 4:11expand 75:8expedite 17:4 24:17expenses 60:4experience 9:8experts 40:16explain 50:4export 43:25 64:4express 4:19extend 3:5,19 31:8extended 31:5extending 34:17extensively 56:23extreme 36:9extremely 74:2

FFACA 23:14 69:7,7,1877:2 87:14

face 20:23,24 69:569:16 70:7 85:6,11

faced 83:2faces 71:3facilitate 64:18facility 35:8facing 28:22 54:11fact 16:5 38:11 55:981:25

factors 36:23 56:757:20 62:18

facts 90:9failed 39:13fair 58:8 72:6 76:17fairly 34:10 65:2266:6

fall 19:16 51:5

86:20familiar 38:14 45:16far6:7 11:21fast 74:7fault86:3fear 26:22Fed79:18federal2:9,11,126:12 16:5 23:13,1723:23 24:16 30:550:6,9 54:11 55:856:17 62:17 67:268:2 69:6 78:10

federally 54:19Feds 76:22feedback 39:22 44:1771:18 75:5 80:287:4,23

feeder 12:6 13:1722:2 29:17 70:2371:20 80:6

feeders13:13 29:6feeding17:20 71:22feedlots 53:13 61:10feedyard 73:19feedyards 22:5feel 78:6 79:2 83:5felt 21:10 24:18fence74:5field25:11 78:5fighting 10:22figure 12:22 24:770:22

filing 2:6final7:2 23:9 62:1567:22,24

finalized 39:3finally38:18 67:789:3

financial 83:13find 22:11,12 28:1945:18

finding46:7fine 3:22 26:3finished 26:24fire 4:11

first 3:4,9,13 5:1819:17 64:11,16,2170:18 83:3 88:1488:16

fiscal 16:4,10 28:2234:18 55:25 83:14

five 9:4 25:8,955:15,20 59:1471:15,22

fix 26:17fixing 13:12flat 54:14 85:12fleshed 12:10 14:18fleshing 28:13flexibility 33:1466:16

flexible 11:5 16:2525:16

floor 4:24foci 49:24focus 19:10 22:1735:25 75:15

focused 4:6 5:11focusing 36:10fold 17:13 43:781:19

folder 88:11folks 11:14,14 24:924:22 25:5,7 30:531:13

following 7:13 51:2352:12

foregoing 90:15forgo 5:3form 2:7 83:24,25formal 69:8 77:3formally 69:11former 3:11forms 4:15formula 70:18formulate 85:19Fort 58:23forth 90:9,12Fortunately 3:6forum 43:2forward 26:15 36:25

Session1 060611Page 22

43:22 70:10forward-facing 42:8found 47:24 81:1782:16

four 8:13 55:21,22frame 52:14,18 58:1358:14

frames 52:8 53:8framework 1:2 4:45:21 6:14,17 7:97:12 12:9 19:1522:13 23:7 24:225:14,15 27:9 30:632:6,25 33:6 35:1853:25 62:23 88:13

frankly 82:22 87:6free 10:12,15 15:1315:17 18:25 20:5,542:14,17 79:8

frequently 65:23fresh 21:7,15front 4:12 9:2137:14

full 72:5funding 16:10 17:1834:19 44:19 55:3,556:2 82:18,19,2183:9,16

funds 56:18 81:382:24 86:17

further 2:5,7,8,104:23 25:23 64:1075:22 78:19

FY 54:15 55:25 56:3G

general 12:6 17:1036:18 40:10,2578:23 84:17 85:20

genetic 71:5getting 7:18 10:2232:17 39:17 69:370:2 72:7 84:3

give 9:14,15 14:2217:24 21:25 25:1355:17 67:16 74:11

75:5 79:6given54:20 59:1080:8 87:11 90:17

giving 18:10 28:1334:4

glad 30:16,18go 7:11 8:16 10:2,311:17 12:23 13:1014:23 15:11 16:1218:14 20:22 21:2222:12 23:4,12 25:327:6 30:2 32:2136:7 37:11 47:356:3 57:8,10,1474:17 77:7 86:789:20

goal 26:10 46:8 78:4goals25:22goats34:12,18,21goes 3:8 28:21 58:2179:23 80:19 82:2087:6

going5:17,18 6:57:16 9:13 10:5,812:7 13:21 15:2518:8,14 20:9 23:2424:10,10 26:4,527:9,12 28:19,2028:23 29:8,10 32:532:15,21 33:1934:4,15 35:4,17,2535:25 36:24 37:842:24 43:23 44:445:13 49:15 51:2151:23 55:13,13,2356:3,4 60:8 70:2471:23 73:23 75:975:14,15 76:777:23 78:21 79:2483:15 84:10,12,1384:18,22,24 85:387:21 88:2,3

good 3:4 18:14 20:821:13 24:25 25:1826:25 27:13 28:1329:24 30:12 31:6

45:11 46:11 81:2383:18 86:21

gotten 71:18 80:3government 8:2 16:516:6 24:4 30:14

grace 3:12gradually 84:22great 10:6 63:22greater 45:3group 4:6 5:20 6:128:16 18:6 19:1620:23 21:9 22:1723:4,18 25:7 30:634:10 40:14,1754:4,7 58:17 61:2569:20 74:11 79:1684:8 87:17 88:3,21

groups 39:21 68:1579:16 88:3,2089:21

guarantee 31:19guess 8:23 21:6 82:5guessing 77:12guidance 28:14guy 14:22GYA 38:5,15,17 49:1349:14,17,22,2368:11

Hhalf 54:23halfway 32:11hall 4:9Halstead 8:20Halstead's 11:14halt 63:21Hampshire 84:15HAND 90:18handling 45:24happen 81:22happens 86:24hard 21:13,17 22:224:25 27:12

harm 43:25head 78:15 82:13headquarters 43:13

Session1 060611Page 23

health 8:8 15:816:17,22 18:2022:3 26:19 27:4,432:2 37:21,2238:24 40:20 41:741:13 46:6 51:3,1351:13 52:4 61:1268:22 72:2,5 83:2084:4,11,13 85:23

healthy 63:17hear 4:2 5:4 7:7,1431:23 73:24 87:2288:18,20

heard 5:4 75:6hearing 3:23 5:12,18heavily 55:3,9heifers 59:8 65:1865:19 70:21 72:1579:22

help 6:13 22:23 24:665:25 75:7,1480:12

helped 9:9helpful 62:2 74:2helping 5:20Hench 75:11,12 77:6herd 28:4,18 41:2445:19,24 46:2,7,1646:16,17,18 47:8,950:12,13 51:1952:2 56:9,11 59:970:21 76:22 89:6

herds 47:16 52:356:6 60:19

hey18:24He'll 5:21higher 78:7 79:2high-risk 38:4 53:1260:23 61:3

high-value 71:5hold 3:20holding 6:21Holiday 1:8holistically63:10home 47:3homework 24:5

hope 3:15 14:2339:24

hopefully 7:10 20:1579:15

hoping 4:13 33:18horrible 80:21hotel4:16human82:3,4,5hundreds 29:5hypothetical47:2

IICVI 65:10ID 51:7,10 65:3,6,965:13

Idaho8:23idea 74:9 86:21ideas5:16 6:10 7:1587:23

identification79:9identified 51:1764:12,17

identify 52:2 65:25IDs65:4,6imagine81:21impact 27:2implement 37:21 39:939:13 41:4,6 46:549:25 64:13 66:1779:2

implementation61:2implemented 39:1243:4 49:20 61:1171:14 78:25

implications19:9import 62:6,7,1263:10 64:10,15

important 11:1326:13 32:21

importation 14:525:24,25 26:2 29:462:12 86:4 89:8

imported 63:3 65:1872:14,15 86:6,13

importing 14:8 63:17imports19:10 63:21

impose 26:21improvement 14:3improvements 17:17inadvertently 28:15include 34:20 48:748:10,11 57:21,2360:10 79:20

included 23:18 34:12includes 37:23 69:9including 40:12 52:466:7 69:10

inclusive 63:6inconsistent 39:1539:19,24 40:941:17 42:4

incorporate 34:23increase 63:20increased 44:11,2064:3

indemnification76:14

indemnity 17:1828:18,21 32:13,1453:18,19,24 54:2254:25 55:18,2056:15,16,16,2258:7 59:22 60:470:19 75:15 76:1180:19 81:3 85:1488:25

indicate 56:15 60:24indicated 40:15 66:371:4 85:4

individuals 32:2441:12 68:17 75:10

industries 14:1620:15

industry 13:23 22:224:3,13 27:3 28:1028:11 29:11 69:1069:22 70:2 76:9,2277:2 81:2

industry-based 20:14infected 14:5,729:17 35:9 47:9

infection 29:15

Session1 060611Page 24

influenced 11:9influencing 10:2016:15

info 31:11information 20:1226:25 43:5,6,10,1948:18,23 59:563:24

informational 8:17informed 37:8infrastructure 16:841:3,22 42:3

initial 66:20Inn1:8input 5:16 7:4,14,1823:15 30:4,4 39:1770:3 87:8

inside 28:3inspection 64:2365:12,12

instance 34:12 35:747:15 53:14

institute 78:6intended 24:16intends 37:15intent 15:11 29:1329:13 73:5

interaction 9:1911:22 23:10 28:829:15

interest 80:12 81:16interested 13:1732:17 69:3 70:1081:4

interim 48:3 68:4,768:10

intermittent73:16internal 78:19international 15:926:12 43:20

Internet 31:16interstate 48:950:21 60:14,1561:4,16,19 65:1165:13 79:14,2189:7

introduce 3:9introduction19:10investigation 45:2446:3,18 50:12 52:752:17,24

investigations51:2052:8,13 89:7

invite 89:20involve48:22 49:2,2involved 8:21,23 9:311:9 16:16 22:347:25 81:9

involvement 45:21involves 77:25involving 81:2in-country 63:24Island 9:3 84:14issue11:6,7,1214:11 27:18 28:529:18 52:10 53:2454:12 63:9 71:2572:8 73:2 74:475:16 78:17 80:381:25 84:7

issues 12:2 13:1830:2 34:25 40:3,643:14 49:16 51:1553:2 74:8 83:14

items28:2 88:9it'll21:6 24:2031:8

i.e44:10J

job29:24 32:25JOE82:14 84:19Joe's85:18jog75:7 77:8John 85:7JOSH 35:21 70:1771:19 72:12,1973:11 75:3

judgment 20:8judicious 74:8July 31:8jump 9:11

June 1:7 3:3 30:2531:3 90:24

KKary 1:9 90:6,23keenly 70:9keep 13:8Keller 9:2kept 22:17key 28:17 30:2537:18

kind 10:12 12:2119:19 22:7 73:2180:21 84:25 85:1789:18

kinds 22:7know 3:13 4:8,187:24 8:11 9:17,2510:13 13:25 14:715:12 18:17 23:1425:5 28:23 30:2032:13 34:2 47:453:23 80:4,14,2286:5

knowingly 44:22known 49:23

Llab 29:22labeling 13:3laboratories 66:2267:10 89:2

lack 60:25 83:8large 42:9larger 12:5,5law 78:11laws 27:13 69:7,7,18laws/regulations41:3

layperson 80:17lead 49:4leave 86:6Lee 4:3 7:8 10:311:18 15:11 16:1218:15 20:22 23:425:3 27:6 35:21

Session1 060611Page 25

70:17 82:14left 25:11legal 76:17legally 30:13 86:13legitimate 52:23length 58:14lengthy 58:16lessen 64:6let's 53:16 89:15level 26:20 29:1141:21 43:17 48:1950:20 54:12 58:2278:5

liberty 14:22life 46:13limitations 83:3line 67:20lines 44:13 48:1064:22 65:18,2479:22

link 65:4list 51:25listed 88:10listen 12:15listened 18:13listening 6:8,2058:19

little 20:2 21:1426:6 27:20 48:2380:16 82:15 84:25

live 86:12livestock 26:2245:21 59:4 84:24

llamas 35:7local 71:16locally 70:5located 40:22logistics 4:9long 10:5,5 32:945:14 47:6 49:1250:11 61:13 67:1576:17

longstanding5:13long-term 45:2,246:23 47:13 48:1348:21 49:2,6,10

look 5:20 7:10 11:417:3,8,10,19 21:2322:12 29:2,9,2133:11 39:13 42:1142:13,20 62:8 63:963:13,14,14 68:670:4 74:19,23 78:381:10 82:11

looked 16:20 20:321:11 62:6

looking26:15 39:2152:10 56:4 63:881:15 82:9 88:2489:5

looks38:8 42:2170:19

loopholes 12:24lose 86:24 87:2loss 44:10,19lost 22:7lot8:11 9:8 10:1611:21 14:2 21:2,1327:23 29:25 30:732:14 33:13 34:236:2 38:23 68:778:8

lots 13:2 15:1423:10 74:4

love 87:22lower64:6lunch4:15,22 89:1389:14

Mmagical45:4maintain 10:23 15:1716:8 25:19 52:1564:8

maintained 64:1865:19 72:16

maintains 73:4maintenance 61:2major20:21make-up24:22making 39:11makings33:17

manage 86:15managed 52:3management 28:4,1838:3 49:13,22,2551:19 61:12 89:6

mandate 85:21map 42:12,13Mark 9:6,11market 58:8 70:2572:6 76:18

marketability 27:5Marketing 59:4markets 43:25Mark's 9:11Marshall 9:3matter 40:16 47:9mean 26:6 27:1541:16 42:4 72:2473:11 74:19 76:1180:10

means 19:12 25:2542:5 69:21 72:2072:21 76:20

meant 29:20measures 19:4 61:3meat 53:23mechanism 43:24 57:757:15 63:23 65:467:5,8 70:2

mechanisms 37:363:19

medicine 82:4,4,5meeting 1:7 3:12,158:25 18:18

meetings 18:6 23:2074:15 75:6,11 76:8

melitensis 34:2435:5

member 5:19members 41:12memory 75:8 77:8mention 83:19mentioned 32:16,1633:22 36:11,12,2339:11,24 42:2343:7 44:3 49:21

Session1 060611Page 26

60:4 65:10 68:1368:20 74:20 76:2578:15,16

menu 4:19met19:17 20:23 40:540:14

Methods 27:19Mexican 14:16 29:6,763:9

Mexico 15:15 36:1563:5 82:23 84:2385:3 86:22

Michalke 9:6Michigan 8:21,2211:8,14,24 22:1938:6 49:11

microphone 3:8milk 57:22 67:17million 54:16,18,2154:24 55:15,15,2055:21 56:4

millions 29:6Millis 3:4,10 87:18mind 13:9 77:7mindsets 25:9minimize 27:2Minnesota 11:25 38:638:8

minutes 2:6 89:10,16missed 21:17 24:8missing 22:21mitigate 19:2,8,922:4

mitigation 38:1361:3,6 85:25

mitigations 47:2148:7 61:13

mixed 80:3mobile 65:23money 16:6,7 34:2254:22 55:7,24 56:385:15,16

monies 54:20 55:1055:13,22 76:10

moniker 35:4monster 83:10

monthly58:5months 4:7 32:971:23

morning3:4,23MOUs 42:6move 16:2 34:2136:25 42:22 43:2265:23 83:23 88:6

moved40:7,8 62:1464:20

movement 10:24 12:1350:21 53:12 60:1460:16,20 61:4,8,1661:19,21,22,2262:3,4 65:13 79:279:5,14,21 89:8

moving 30:9 44:1248:8 60:22 70:1075:4 79:22

Mycobacterium 35:382:2

Myers3:25 4:24,255:8 25:5 30:2031:13

Nname 5:7national 15:8 19:238:2 50:22,2369:18 80:12

nationally 15:24nearest4:11necessarily 15:1928:7 41:15 61:1576:8

necessary 4:10 62:5need 4:10,18 5:226:4 9:24 14:1915:6,22 18:2420:10 21:14,2122:8,14,22 24:1226:16,24 28:1229:8,23 31:1638:10 41:19 44:1649:3 53:7 61:863:15 70:4 71:10

73:14 74:7,23 76:578:6 79:2,17 80:881:6 84:17 85:19

needed 11:2 13:2,2124:19 27:20 80:11

needs 13:6 51:17neither 10:7never 21:21 67:16new 5:21 6:3,3,227:20 12:24 15:1517:3 24:19 25:1433:3 35:18 36:1437:17 45:23 51:2256:18,20 82:2384:14,15,23 85:286:22

nodding 78:15noncompliance 44:861:5 68:23

noncompliant 44:22north 9:2 42:15 80:5Northeast 42:15northwestern 47:16noted 51:6notice 31:9 57:7,1663:4 66:25

notified 64:25notifying 86:5notion 74:9nuances 24:7number 57:20 89:5numbers 88:24 89:19numerous 58:24

Oobjections 2:7objectives 25:15obvious 10:18obviously 10:4 11:611:12 12:25 13:614:10 16:15 18:319:21 23:9 25:2126:13 27:2 28:1739:25

occur 45:18 62:9occurred 46:14

Session1 060611Page 27

occurring 43:1762:10

occurs 3:14 50:5offering 4:16office 90:18official 66:21,22,2389:2 90:18

officially 35:19officials 3:25 23:23Oh 31:6okay 27:17 53:1573:17,20 76:3

Oklahoma 80:18old15:12 19:2121:11,23 22:12

once 39:12 40:4 64:4onerous 23:16 58:21ones 77:4ongoing 37:5,2550:17,25

on-site 64:9open 18:6opening 3:24operate 30:15operations 12:5,6opinion 9:16 11:1012:8,23 18:1329:23

opportunities 21:3opportunity 5:7 6:156:25 9:15 18:1021:2 34:8 40:347:20 74:18 82:1088:17

opposed 33:11 45:1057:19 63:8

option 39:10oral 33:5order 4:14 50:6,9,1568:3

organization24:13origin 13:3 62:11original 21:20other's 26:22ought 83:12outcome 83:7

outcomes 82:17outreach 6:6outside30:5 47:2248:9 59:6 87:9

overall59:18 80:11overhauled 11:2overreact 26:18owner58:22

Ppackage32:7paid 31:14 58:776:21

pairs59:8paper6:18 18:22,2319:6,7 83:23

papers 6:9 18:16,2119:14 21:9,9

part 8:17,22 9:511:3 13:7 14:4,2421:19 29:22 31:339:4 40:16 42:1647:17,18 51:358:13 62:17 68:2479:5 83:12 87:2588:22,23

participate 38:2participated81:9particularly43:850:18 55:2 82:2385:14

parties2:4,11partners 15:10 26:1226:14 43:20 50:19

passed 21:21passing4:14pasture73:3,14pastures 73:16pasturing 73:3 74:3pay14:19 15:5 60:671:23 76:15

paying 60:8payment56:16 59:2059:22 60:5 76:13

Peel 59:5pen6:18 73:7,20

pen-side 66:10,12,1566:18

people 18:24 24:2341:16

percent 58:8 80:2281:21

perfect 79:13performance 33:21,22period 40:4,5 45:14periodic 65:21person 53:16personal 9:16perspective 9:2310:2 22:16 24:1327:16,25 30:1973:12,13

phone 20:25 31:17physical 73:10physically 73:8pick 47:2 84:12place 10:10 27:1430:12 37:3 38:1642:8 46:7 49:11,1449:15 52:14 61:761:14 63:2,1667:25 68:11 79:1880:15 83:4 90:1190:17

places 12:9 86:12plan 37:21,23 38:2438:25 39:8,1440:20,24 41:7 46:646:23 47:14 48:1348:21 49:6,22 50:250:3,14 51:3 52:561:12,12 68:2283:5,20 84:4,11,1484:21 85:24

planning 42:8 70:22plans 43:3 49:10,1361:7

play 13:20 15:4playing 78:5please 9:11plug 51:7point 19:15 32:12

Session1 060611Page 28

64:11,16,21 75:277:9 83:18

policies 35:14politics 9:10 26:8poor 15:15popular 47:4pose 12:7 60:17posed 17:21position 54:6,878:20

possibility 13:9,1176:9

possible 13:19 29:9possibly 11:10posted 7:9post-entry 65:16post-import 62:8,1365:2

pot55:24potential 38:1255:10 85:20

potentially 57:1363:21 65:25 76:21

practices 12:4,24preach 29:2preclude 61:7 80:10preempt 77:23 78:10preemption 77:10,1477:18,19 78:21

presence 2:4 45:20present 6:16 8:1654:5

presentation32:7,932:10 34:5 40:1240:15 48:24

presenting 32:6 33:2pressure 3:13pretty 25:7prevalence 5:25prevent 25:23 47:21previously 41:7pre-import 62:7,1062:16

price 59:9prices 70:25pricing 59:14

primarily 13:2434:18

priorities 11:17private23:19 81:2probably 21:16 23:2426:9 44:21 45:846:11 53:24 55:856:2

problems 12:7 15:1420:21 85:25 86:2

Procedure 2:10,11,13procedures 88:25proceedings 90:10,16process8:18 9:6,149:18 11:3,9,1713:7 14:24 17:418:8 19:24 20:1121:8 22:25 23:1123:20 24:17,2026:10,16,25 28:1441:5 56:22 57:958:3,12,15,16,2058:25 63:12 66:2066:24 70:3 74:1274:19,22

processes 22:5produced 59:2 81:18producer 59:20 76:21product13:4production 57:2272:11

professional20:13proficiency 67:10program7:6,19 10:510:18 34:6,14,2336:18 37:19 40:1040:25 42:25 45:1755:9 56:23 57:2,1466:6 78:22 88:14

programs 5:13,15,175:21,23 6:10 32:233:15 37:13 51:1685:6,9,13

program/brucellosis10:4

progress 10:6

project 81:14promise 77:16promising 81:15promptly 52:12properly 29:12 86:13proposal 56:13 67:23propose 38:19 51:1279:25

proposed 1:2 6:2413:12 21:12 22:528:20 34:7 38:1865:15 67:2,2179:19,20,24 88:11

proposing 6:10 22:436:16 51:11,2154:9 57:18 58:11

prospective 30:2Protection 72:2,5protocol 46:4 53:10protocols 17:8provide 15:8 31:1539:7 41:22 48:2352:6 54:13 60:1862:2 68:18,1880:16 84:2,5

provided 2:9,1123:25

provides 67:8 87:17provisionally 39:2548:25

pseudorabies 87:14public 1:7 3:18 27:443:19 57:5,8 66:2567:3 69:9 74:15

publication 57:15publicly 85:7public-facing 43:2publish 6:23published 6:9 33:2534:6 48:3 50:9

publishing 57:7pulled 21:12,20pump 67:15pun 74:5punitive 36:14 44:10purchase 56:5 60:11

Session1 060611Page 29

75:21purchases 75:18purposes 2:9pushed 17:22pushing 15:3put6:17 10:19 13:1516:13 18:5,2121:19 23:3,8 24:1329:10,19,23 30:1238:15 43:18 57:1063:2,15 68:1077:23 79:18 81:781:22 85:22 86:14

putting 49:14 81:6Q

quality 13:5 59:1267:8,9

quarantine 46:10quarantined 46:2,1753:13 61:10

quarantines 50:11question 35:22 44:672:13 74:15 77:1381:8 82:20 84:19

questions 30:1931:21 34:3 41:952:19 67:13 68:1670:16 79:14

quick 35:22 70:18quicker 33:20quickly 24:19 26:1757:16 58:10 76:681:23

quite 9:12 12:1019:21

quotations 87:13R

raisers 12:6ramped 80:23ramping 81:4range 69:9rapidly 25:21 45:1066:17

rate 17:13

rates43:8Razorbacks 47:3reachable 26:10reactor75:20read 2:5 67:14 68:9readily77:7ready71:20 81:19real 12:7 35:2246:13 47:4 70:1885:15

realistic 25:16realities 16:4,1028:22

reality10:9really 5:11,15 8:211:21 12:19 14:914:14,17,19 15:1620:8,19 22:2126:14 27:6 28:1229:8,22,25 32:1732:21 44:16 54:974:18 82:8,8

reason 37:6 47:1152:23 56:24 59:2374:2 83:13

reasonable 89:19reasoning 63:7reasons10:24 13:218:2 34:19,19 53:4

rebalance 11:16recall 77:5receive53:11received 32:8 34:2receives 59:20receiving 48:20recertification66:21

Recess 53:20Recessed 89:22recognition 57:23recognize 42:6 43:1853:6 79:7 81:2082:24 83:7

recognized 40:23recognizes 53:5recognizing 53:9

70:11recommend 13:8 21:22recommendations 39:768:19 87:17

recommended 17:6record 3:18 87:2590:16

recorded 3:16records 64:17reducing 83:16reduction 44:1982:18 83:8

refer 82:4Referee 2:4reference 24:6 42:11reg 79:19,20 80:9regarding 34:1138:25 50:20 54:1261:18 79:14

regardless 85:11regards 33:9 38:1645:23 84:3,20

regional 9:7 57:24regionalization62:19,20 63:13

regions 58:23 59:1571:15

register 67:2regs 32:22 36:2156:19 71:25

regulate 34:16regulation 6:1856:13 60:3 64:1466:9,9,19 67:876:12

regulations 4:5 6:237:21 33:3 35:14,1937:17 39:5 41:451:13 53:6 60:1562:17,24 63:566:16 67:5,2577:22 78:24

regulatory 1:2 32:2333:3 62:23 63:1288:10,13

rejuvenate 22:9

Session1 060611Page 30

related 55:8 88:25relationship59:4release 46:10reliance 55:12relied 55:2,10,18relieves 33:16remain 67:25remarks 3:24remove 35:10,14 53:958:10,13,14

removed 56:11repeat 32:15replacement 72:4,6,872:10

report 37:4reportable 41:5reported 61:14 90:10Reporter 1:10reporting 36:19,2438:4 42:22 43:2243:24 52:7 63:25

representatives 6:13represents 54:6request 31:7 55:6,1469:12

require 13:22 51:951:10 61:15 64:2269:7,19 79:9

required 65:12 85:3requirement 60:2161:22 65:24 76:1979:21

requirements13:1529:4 36:18,1937:19 40:10,2542:23 44:12,2048:8 52:7 61:4,1661:19,23 62:4,2563:15,20 64:3,3,765:17 77:24,2578:7 79:5,17 86:1188:15 89:8

requires 55:6 64:1480:5

research 17:7 81:4reserved 2:8

reservoir 38:2145:12 48:16

reservoirs 38:13resist 9:15resolution 16:2417:12 43:7

resolutions 16:18,2117:6

resolved 40:6resource 24:6resources 19:1131:16 37:24

respect2:13respective 2:4response 17:13 19:438:3 43:8

responsibilities84:22

responsible 32:4responsive 17:25rest 40:12 86:16restricted 53:12restriction 65:17restrictions26:2161:5 79:3

result 18:20 33:1859:20

results81:14 82:12return 87:22review 33:4 59:6reviewed 59:6reviews64:9revise 5:13 17:2339:7

revised15:22revisions 39:8re-sorted 86:10Rhode9:3 84:14rich 3:16right9:12,21 14:2415:23 16:2,2 17:1519:7,20,22 20:4,1921:7 23:6,8,2526:16 29:13,1430:9,25 77:5,17,2379:7 81:5 83:17

87:18,20rights 2:11risk 14:11,12 17:2119:3 20:14 22:638:13 42:21,2148:10 49:3 50:560:17 63:21 85:25

risks 22:4 38:1686:15

risk-based 17:2 19:5Riverdale 19:17 87:7rodeo 65:22role 3:11 37:16 87:4room 8:11 9:24 14:316:16 22:22 24:388:8,16,22,23 89:3

rooms 4:10 87:2188:8 89:9,11,16,19

rotate 88:17roughly 54:24 58:4RPR 90:6,23rule 6:24 7:2 13:1514:4,19 23:9 33:1133:17,19,25 34:734:13 35:24 39:348:3 53:5 60:2465:15 67:22,22,2468:4,7,10,24 78:4

rules 2:9,11,1210:10 11:4 12:2113:11,21,22 15:1115:18,22,23,2417:10,24 18:719:20,21 20:621:12,14,20,2422:12 23:9,1424:19 27:13,1928:20 29:24 30:1233:12,20 78:379:24 85:21 86:25

rule-making 10:916:25 28:14 30:2431:3 42:20 77:21

rule-making's 15:25Ruminant 32:2run 10:13 35:6

Session1 060611Page 31

running 17:15S

salvage 59:16,21sat9:9saving 3:18saw53:16 54:23saying 57:4 63:572:22 85:18

says 61:11 67:15scenario 47:24 61:24schedule 7:24science 26:7science-based 17:2scientific 15:2020:13 73:18

Scott 80:14,17scratch 23:5se 36:7SEAL 90:18second 88:22Secretary 69:13Secretary's 69:13sections 2:12security 86:12see18:12 23:6 26:930:16 31:24 45:252:20 73:25

seed 70:22 71:4seen 5:25 43:1473:17

segregation 72:13segue 79:13semi-professional3:6

sense 10:16 12:1815:19 28:16 84:21

sensitive 81:21separate 33:17separated 73:8separately 65:1972:16,24

separating 73:20separation 73:4,10serologic 82:7serve 3:7

serves 69:12services 5:9 37:2,1559:2 68:19

session1:7 3:2 8:1632:19 51:8 58:1989:12

sessions 6:8,20 7:148:14 27:10

set6:22 30:14 54:1990:9,11

seven32:9share24:11sheep34:12,18,20shift84:22ship 71:21shipped86:10shortcoming 83:16short-term 44:2545:8,9,15,22 46:20

shuffle22:8shy30:22side 17:5,16,2318:19 20:20 86:4

sides74:5side-tracked9:5sign 2:5 4:17significant 27:2234:11 49:16 51:22

similar47:23similarities33:8similarly 35:2,1252:16 54:23

simple 86:5simplistic 12:17simply 86:23single 33:11situation 35:7 36:938:6 40:20 41:1841:23 42:10 46:1346:24 47:7,12,1249:12 55:6 62:363:9 66:13 68:1173:4,19 83:2

situational 49:9situations 14:1037:4 45:11

six 71:22skin 82:6slaughter 13:1350:24 59:10

slide 14:7 33:735:20,23 40:9 44:744:23 46:23 49:1850:15 51:18 53:1453:23 56:12 58:2559:17,22 60:1361:17 62:5,1564:25 66:2 67:14

small 42:2,3 82:2388:20

smaller 88:21smoothly 66:6solicits 67:3somewhat 10:11 36:13soon 10:8sorry 84:11sort 39:17 52:1483:24 84:5 89:18

sound 80:21southeastern 47:5,18spayed 65:19 72:15speak 18:10 78:1385:21 86:3

SPEAKER 74:6,25speaking 38:21special 55:6species 34:14,15,2235:20

specific 51:15 56:1561:15 73:25 82:12

specifically 11:24specifics 7:8 77:6specified 40:4spend 38:22 89:10spending 7:23spent 32:9spin-off 84:19spread 25:24 47:1147:21 60:17

spreading 48:15staff 32:24Stage 23:6

Session1 060611Page 32

stages 62:7,9stakeholder 18:6stakeholders23:1969:10

stand 11:19 69:25standard 46:3standards 17:1433:21,23 34:656:23 57:2,14

standing 69:19standpoint 15:20start 21:7,15 72:3started 16:13 19:1623:5

starting 26:21state 1:10 4:2 6:128:5,9,15,21 9:411:11 13:22 16:619:25 20:7 22:1923:23 25:8 26:1926:20 27:12 28:529:11 30:5,19 37:637:7,19,23,2538:13,19 39:8,1339:18 40:2,7,11,1140:22 41:2,11,1741:19,25 42:2,5,1042:21 43:3 44:1344:22 45:19 46:546:20 47:3,17,1847:19 48:5,10,1648:20 50:7,10,2554:6 56:19 58:2158:22 61:6,9 64:2164:24 65:23 70:578:2,6,25 79:2280:6 83:4,10 84:2386:2,6,7 88:1590:4,7

states 10:19 11:2514:15 15:15 17:1320:4,15,22 22:2325:18 29:4,8 36:237:2,5,20 38:1541:20 42:14,1643:3 44:2 48:17

49:14,22,23 50:850:19 51:4 52:1152:22 53:11 54:1463:6 68:12 76:2278:9,10 82:16,2385:2,23 86:8,15,1690:8

state's40:23 52:1152:15 68:22,2277:23 83:13

state/federal 37:12state/tribal15:2status 10:12,12,1410:25 15:13,1720:5 26:11 36:1244:5,11,19 68:2379:8 86:24

statuses 10:23 15:1319:13,19,20,25

steer72:15steers 65:18 80:6Stenograph 90:11,13step 6:19 30:23steps58:24STIPULATED 2:3,5,7,82:10

STIPULATIONS2:2stock65:20 70:2371:4,5

stop 31:20stops74:20stream 51:5streamline 74:23streamlining74:12stress 37:10stringent 77:24structure 41:14struggle 31:18,19struggled 12:19struggling 20:4studies73:18stuff88:6subject40:16 60:20submit 32:20 37:2055:14

subpopulations38:4

subtracted 59:16,2176:14

success 42:25successful 5:24 38:9successfully 71:1383:6

suffice 38:23suggest 35:6 87:19suggesting 57:4suggestion 75:16suis 17:8,9 34:2435:5,12,16

summers 18:18supervision 90:14supplant 81:19support 41:22 85:13supported 81:10supporting 82:10supportive 70:10sure 16:9 19:1220:10 22:13,2425:16,17,24 26:528:15 29:12,14,1836:14 41:2 42:1943:2,9 52:13 53:961:18 65:6,8 66:866:15 67:4,7 72:2076:6 77:7

surveillance 19:225:19 28:17 37:2438:3 44:20 50:1350:16,16,24 51:2,551:9 88:15

suspect 35:15 75:2078:14 81:15

suspend 67:6suspended 15:23,2420:6

system 10:12 15:816:25 22:6 25:1930:14 35:10,1736:13,16,17 44:564:13 75:24 82:2083:23

systems 12:6,12,1219:2 28:9,9

Session1 060611Page 33

Ttable 69:23 77:2tables 88:5tacts 6:3tail 67:15take 5:6 6:4 7:1011:3 14:17 17:1017:19 19:5 21:2324:20 29:2,9,2132:11 37:7 53:1671:10 87:19

taken 53:20 68:6takes 56:8talk 5:22 7:25 47:2377:19 84:9

talked 38:5 41:1868:8 83:19

talking 6:5 12:1125:12 28:8 34:2137:12 48:11 53:1359:19 72:3 76:277:20 83:22

targeted 51:2TB 5:14 9:8 10:411:8 12:2 13:2415:14,23 16:2317:11,23 18:1919:7 20:4,20,2221:10 28:6,10 32:333:8 35:9 37:838:9 41:24 42:9,1342:17 43:8 47:950:6 53:10 54:1555:9,18 65:25 66:266:14 68:2 79:880:5,20 82:6 83:14

TB/brucellosis 4:5TCFA's 73:13technically 15:18tell 16:23 19:1820:3 30:8,22 73:580:2

telling 55:21 67:16template 83:21 84:284:5,9

tend 62:10

tends36:13term 14:6 25:2552:20 87:12

terminal 61:9terms51:25 56:1466:7 80:21 85:2

test 17:7,15 35:1036:8 53:9 66:10,1166:13,15,18 80:2281:19 82:5,6

tested 60:23testers66:23 67:11testing17:17 44:1148:7 61:4,16,2262:4 63:20 64:365:17,21,24 66:2267:9,10 77:25 78:779:17,21

tests17:3,3 66:2279:9 80:5 81:1182:7,11 89:2

Texas1:9,10 4:3 8:68:8,10,19 13:1718:5 22:2 24:927:16,25 28:2329:5,7 35:13 46:1246:17,21 79:784:12,12 86:2290:4,7

text 33:3thank4:25 7:22,229:17 25:4 30:2131:13,22 75:277:11,14 79:12

Thanks 8:7theme7:17thereto2:13thing16:11 23:2537:10 68:13 72:2275:4 83:19 86:23

things 9:23 12:1215:6,16,17 21:5,1721:18 22:9,1423:24 24:7 27:2137:23 39:16 57:1657:17 73:2 74:17

80:25 87:3think 5:3 9:17,22,2510:8 11:20 12:8,1513:9,19 14:9,1716:4,13 18:9,9,1119:23 21:16,1722:8 23:2,24 24:524:17 25:18,2526:3,9,19 27:10,1528:12,19 30:8,2338:10 49:9,12,1552:20 54:10 62:1070:12,15,20 72:772:14,19 73:12,2474:16,23 79:4 80:781:3 82:8 83:1284:3 85:7,10,18,19

thinking 6:17 7:561:25

Thomas 4:3 7:8 25:530:20 31:4,7,13,2236:4 53:22 71:2,2472:18,25 73:2274:14 75:9 77:1177:13,18 79:1280:7 81:8 83:1785:4 87:2

thorny 74:4thought 22:11 35:2474:12 78:22 79:10

thoughts 5:16 7:1824:11

thousands 29:5three 20:24 34:2236:11 38:15 39:2362:6 88:2,14 89:5

three-tiered 22:636:17

tied 9:10tiers 39:23ties 44:5time 2:8 7:23 8:310:6,8 19:18 23:1024:4 27:24 34:7,938:23 40:4,4 45:1447:6 49:12 52:8,14

Session1 060611Page 34

52:18 53:8 56:1058:13,14 62:1267:20 80:15 89:1190:11,17

timeline 67:21timely 32:12 52:24times 9:16 11:1020:24 25:10

today 3:15 4:4,155:11,15 6:7 7:177:23 18:2 25:230:3,17 31:10 32:632:18 38:5 75:4

told 20:18tomorrow 31:11tool 81:5top82:13total 43:24totally 74:13tough 82:9trace 65:8traceability12:2513:3 51:8,14 65:15

tracing 64:18 65:9trade 14:11trading 15:9 26:1226:14 43:20 50:18

traditions 51:24transcribed 32:1990:13

transcript 2:6,690:15,15

transcription 90:8transcriptionist3:17

transition 19:13,25transmission12:219:3 26:23

transparency36:2442:24 43:12 52:10

transparent 43:1548:17 57:9 58:2

transparently 78:24transportation 60:7trap 86:20tremendous 82:22

trial2:8tribal 6:13 40:1560:15

tribe40:19,21,2246:5

tribes 37:20 40:1340:18 52:23 53:11

tried21:18 51:23trooper75:12true 51:23trust15:5try5:4 21:23 31:17trying 25:6 44:945:6

tuberculosis1:255:2 88:12

turn 4:23 8:4 35:1589:21

turnout30:16tweaking 21:14 27:20two5:13,17,22 6:1016:19 18:16,2119:14 22:20 33:1133:15,17 38:5 39:241:11,12,16 43:1344:24 69:15,2070:18 73:20 76:380:5

type 24:17 49:2057:21

types60:18 87:23typewriting 90:13typically 42:1577:25

T.J3:25 4:24 5:832:16

Uultimately 15:724:12 49:5

UM&R 33:22,23understand 8:1872:20 83:18 88:21

understanding 43:1672:21

unfunded 85:21

UNIDENTIFIED 74:6,25Uniform 27:19unilateral 87:7unique 71:5,16United 20:22 22:2325:18 37:5 44:263:6 86:16

unreasonable 86:18update 80:16updated 58:5updating 31:10 58:3urge 32:20urgency 30:11urging 16:24 18:20USDA 3:10 5:10,149:17 14:22 16:1316:24 17:12 18:925:4 28:22 29:2431:13 69:15,2083:6

USDA's 84:20 86:14use 4:11,13 23:2235:9 47:2 57:1858:4 59:19 60:562:17,22 70:2471:12 75:22,2476:3

useful 69:2uses 81:11utilize 14:16utilized 2:9U.S 16:16,22 18:2018:25 42:16 43:1562:14 63:3

Vvaccinate 51:18vaccination 48:1151:16

valid 53:3,3validate 17:3value 58:8 59:10,1671:4,21 72:4,6,6,876:18

values 57:24variances 53:7 61:21

Session1 060611Page 35

verification13:4Vermont 84:14versus 13:14 74:13vet8:21 9:7 20:726:20 30:19

Veterinarian8:9veterinary 5:9 37:237:15 41:13 42:359:2 64:23 65:1168:19

vets 8:15 9:4 25:854:6

viability 27:5vicinity 4:20volunteered 8:20VS 37:13 39:5,1041:21,22 49:3,554:6 58:6

WWahoo 71:6waived 2:4,6,12waivers 13:13walk 5:3walking 85:8wall 88:4want 4:8 5:6 9:1715:16 17:24 25:425:12 26:18,2328:20 29:18 31:1232:19 36:20 37:1041:2 42:19,25 43:543:9 44:14,2147:13 52:13 53:858:9 61:18 63:564:7,10 65:2,5,866:15 67:4,7,1669:17 75:21 78:978:10 80:10 86:1987:3,5,10,25 88:588:6

wanted 21:7,8 37:1453:23 70:14 82:14

warm 3:5,19wasn't 11:13 22:2029:20 77:15 81:23

way9:5 12:10,2115:12 18:3,4 20:1220:17 24:25 30:430:23 31:14,1548:17 62:8 74:2283:23

ways 10:11 22:443:13 69:24

wearing14:21web7:9website31:10weekly 20:25weight 57:22 59:12welcome3:5,20 4:175:7 8:10

went 14:25 16:2066:6

we'll3:23,25 4:46:23 7:7,13 12:2218:11,14 26:3 31:932:11 33:19 39:1639:20 51:25 52:2,653:17 66:6 68:1588:23 89:4,10,1789:20

we're5:12,17 11:1813:17 14:12 16:1118:2 20:18 22:2123:6 24:5 25:227:6,17 28:23 30:332:17,18 33:1834:21 35:4,13,1636:10,16 37:6,1137:16 43:14,2244:9 48:11 51:1151:21,22 53:1354:11 55:13,23,2456:4 58:10 59:1859:18 60:8 61:2563:17 65:16 67:1867:19 69:2 70:975:4 81:5,13,2483:15,22 85:5,887:20 88:2,3,19

we've5:25 6:7,8,116:21 10:6 21:16

23:6,24 30:24 38:443:14 55:19 63:1868:8 71:9,18 73:1776:16 80:3

whammy 85:2whitetail 11:24wildlife 11:8,12,2012:18 14:2 17:7,819:3,9 28:5,835:24 36:3,5,538:7,12,17,2145:12,21 47:2448:15 49:24

willing 76:10 84:4willingness 37:4WINEGARNER 35:2170:17 71:19 72:1272:19 73:11 75:3

Wingo 1:9 90:6,23winter 17:19withdraw 67:6withholding 77:15witness 2:5word 23:15words 76:6,20 83:11work 12:21 18:24,2521:13,13 24:2525:6 26:6,7 29:1230:7 36:5 40:2179:11 80:22

workable 7:6worked 14:25 22:274:22

working 4:6 5:2,125:20 6:12 8:1619:16 20:23 21:923:3 30:6 34:1040:14,17 54:458:17 74:11 81:2484:8

works 3:21 11:1743:12

work-up 75:22world 63:10worried 22:21worthy 3:16

Session1 060611Page 36

wouldn't 61:15 78:6wrapping 81:14write 32:22writing 6:18,22written 28:25 32:2033:4 38:24,25

XX73:25

YYeah 72:18year 29:7 45:3,454:17,25 55:19,25

years 16:19 24:2130:13 38:10 42:1854:18 55:22

Yellowstone 11:7,1511:23 17:20 22:1826:8

yeoman's 25:6York 84:14y'all 8:11 9:2414:15 16:16 18:1719:18 21:22 22:1023:7,25 24:4,1225:13 28:19 30:15

Zzero 6:2 14:12zone 28:11 47:20,2248:2,6,9 50:3,4

zones 19:13,25 28:7zoning 12:11,1615:17 27:22,23,2528:3 38:19 44:2445:8,15 46:2048:13 49:2,2088:15

$$500,000 54:25$800,000 54:17

009 16:23 17:5 18:23

111:7 3:21-40 1:810-minute 53:1710:004:1810:2989:2210058:7 80:2111 54:15 55:25,2562:18

12 56:315.6 54:1617 90:241911 1:8

2223:620 42:18 55:15 89:1520th 30:25 31:320-minute 87:202007 55:182010 17:11 48:450:10 55:19

2011 1:8 3:3 67:2290:24

2012 67:22,252015 84:21 85:7,1125 42:1827th 48:4

330 24:23

4489:540 24:2345 89:10

5588:245th31:8

661:7 3:3 89:660 56:9

7

7 89:67:30 1:9

88 88:2485 81:20

99 62:179:17 53:209:40 53:2192 62:18

PROPOSED TUBERCULOSIS AND BRUCELLOSISREGULATORY FRAMEWORK

BREAKOUT SESSION NUMBER ONE ONPROGRAM (STATE) REQUIREMENTS,ZONING, AND SURVEILLANCE

Session 2 of the Public Meeting on June 6,

2011, at the Holiday Inn, 1911 1-40 East, Amarillo,

Texas, commencing at 10:57 a.m., before Kary A. Wingo, a

Court Reporter of the State of Texas.

1 SESSION 22

SESSION 22

JUNE 6, 20113

Thereupon,4

DR. ROBISON: So Group 1 --5

DR. MYERS: May we just go around6

and introduce ourselves?7

DR. ROBISON: Okay. I'm Clayton8

Robison. I work with the USDA Veterinary9

Services here in Texas. I was one of the10

working group members on this program.11

DR. MICHALKE: I'm Mark Michalke,12

and I'm with the Texas Animal Health13

Commission. And I kind of got into the14

group a little bit later as a replacement15

for Dr. Ellis. He asked me to sit in for16

him.17

So I'm going to try to help Dr.18

Robison facilitate, possibly.19

DR. MYERS: I'm T.J. Myers with20

APHIS Veterinary Services. I spoke earlier21

this morning. I'll be sitting in for a22

while. I may rotate through some of the23

other groups too.24

MS. BRADLEY: I'm Minnie Lou Bradley25

1 SESSION 23

from Memphis, Texas, a purebred Angus2

breeder.3

DR. BAKER: I'm Joe Baker. I'm a4

field veterinarian for the New Mexico5

Livestock Board.6

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: Katrina Huffstutler.7

I'm representing Texas and Southwestern Cattle8

Raisers9

DR. HALL: I'm Rod Hall. I'm with10

the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture. I'm11

a veterinarian in the Animal Industry12

Services there.13

DR. ROBISON: For the Group 114

breakout session, we've got the program15

requirements, state requirements, and also16

zoning and surveillance.17

And these are some of the questions18

we've come up with for this particular19

session. The first one will be the program20

or state requirements. Number one is working21

group discuss the use of an advisory group22

to provide assistance to Veterinary Services23

in regards to certain program activities.24

And under this, we have Parts A25

1 SESSION 24

through E. Question A is: Do you agree2

that these new regulations should include the3

use of an advisory board used to provide a4

variety of recommendations to Veterinary5

Services?6

DR. MYERS: Clayton, before you go7

on, maybe I could just ask a general8

question. Since everyone has been sitting9

through some long presentations, I'd like to10

just sort of get a general sense of what11

folks thought about that first element for12

state requirements, because what this does is13

it shifts those two programs, the TB and14

brucellosis programs, away from programs that15

have -- that are based on state status based16

on disease prevalence.17

Because, in the past, if you had a18

certain prevalence level, you were modified19

accredited, or modified accredited advanced,20

or free. And so that was all based on21

prevalence. And now that the prevalence of22

the disease is so low, we're talking about23

shifting this program to one where the state24

status is based on whether or not you're25

1 SESSION 25

complying with the regulations, having a2

system in place that allows a state to3

respond to disease whenever it's identified.4

So I guess, before getting into the5

details of is an advisory board part of6

that, et cetera, et cetera, I guess I'd just7

throw it open to a general question of: 8

Does that shift in how we manage the program9

make sense to you?10

DR. HALL: To me, it makes sense, I11

think, now that the prevalence is so much12

lower. I like the thought of being able to13

isolate an area if it's a problem, rather14

than knocking a whole state down to Class A,15

or whatever it's going to be.16

I mean, just in our state, we had17

an infected TB herd in the tip of our18

Panhandle four years ago. And we've kind of19

lived under the fear of -- you know, under20

the old system, if we had discovered21

another infected herd within, I believe, four22

years, we could have lost our TB free23

status.24

You know, we would have loved to25

1 SESSION 26

have chopped that part of the state off and2

given it to New Mexico. So I think this is3

a good step forward.4

My only concern is that states that5

do that -- and I think you all have talked6

about it in the plan. You know, we have to7

have the assurance that that state is8

handling that portion of their state to the9

extent that we can trust the animals coming10

from there.11

DR. MYERS: Yeah. And Dee kind of12

spoke to that this morning, that concern13

about, you know, states being interested in14

the ability to take an action if they feel15

like they're not getting that information.16

And that's what Dr. Thomas was17

talking about, transparency being so critical,18

that, you know, if a state does have a case,19

they need to be transparent in the actions20

that they've taken to quarantine, to mitigate21

that disease, to do additional surveillance,22

and share that with everyone so that your23

state is comfortable that another state has24

put those mitigations in place and that25

1 SESSION 27

you're comfortable accepting animals from the2

rest of the state.3

So, now, Clayton, it gets to the4

question about the advisory board, because5

that's part of that transparency, having a6

group that can help us make those evaluations7

of whether or not a state is doing the8

things that it needs to do.9

MS. BRADLEY: May I ask a question?10

DR. MYERS: Sure.11

MS. BRADLEY: When we had12

foot-and-mouth disease in Europe, all right,13

when we had all these big meetings and all,14

they were going to do it by so many miles. 15

You know, if it was an affected herd, it16

would be so many miles.17

Doesn't that make more sense today?18

Because I'm on the border of Oklahoma. If19

Oklahoma has an outbreak or if I have an20

outbreak, you know, right there's the fence21

line. He's okay; these people are22

quarantined. That doesn't make much sense.23

DR. MYERS: No. And that gets to24

the issue of zoning that we talked about25

1 SESSION 28

here. So that is part of this plan. 2

You're right, it does make more sense to do3

that.4

You have to look at the individual5

disease. Foot-and-mouth can be airborne6

spread, so you really have a concern about7

what's going on locally.8

Something like TB, though, where it's9

not necessarily airborne, but it depends more10

on close contact of cattle, you have to look11

at how those animals interact with other12

animals, whether it's through a fence line or13

whether it's through putting them on a truck14

and moving them somewhere. That's what that15

epidemiologic investigation does.16

But you're right, that's part of17

this program, because we do recognize that18

disease doesn't just automatically stop at19

the border of a state. We have to look20

more at how that disease moves and put your21

zone or quarantine or whatever mitigation you22

place based on that understanding, rather23

than just this is where the state line is.24

MS. BRADLEY: Because mostly in25

1 SESSION 29

Texas, I think -- you guys know a lot more2

about it than I do -- mostly it's confined3

to dairy herds, that one you had in South4

Texas.5

DR. ROBISON: Usually, but there6

have been beef herds too.7

MS. BRADLEY: Well, I'm sure, but8

very few. Now, as a purebred breeder, we9

have real problems with every state having10

different regulations.11

We have a sale and then, if it goes12

to certain states, we have to keep them so13

long and do all this testing, even though14

they're free. So I think we need to work15

out something.16

DR. MYERS: So your concern is17

differences in state requirements.18

MS. BRADLEY: Yeah.19

DR. MYERS: I don't want to put20

words in your mouth. You would rather see21

what?22

MS. BRADLEY: Well, we never know,23

because we don't know who in New Mexico is24

going to buy something or South Dakota or25

1 SESSION 210

wherever. And they've got their trailer2

here. We have to send them home and test3

them and then deliver them.4

I would think maybe one rule ought5

to --6

DR. HALL: It would be nice if we7

could ever get there. I don't know that8

that will ever happen.9

MS. BRADLEY: I understand.10

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: I have a question11

about the advisory board. Is there any way12

you can clarify how that would be made up? 13

I know it says, I think, federal, state and14

tribal experts, but beyond that, who would be15

represented on this board, in general terms?16

DR. MYERS: Well, I don't know if17

you guys want to tackle that. You were on18

the committee and talked about it more than19

I was involved. But maybe I'll just give20

you the big picture, and you guys can fill21

in the details.22

The issue that Dr. Thomas was23

talking about, as far as the federal advisory24

committee, really defines or builds a box25

1 SESSION 211

around how the federal government can and2

cannot bring in advice from the public.3

So we are free to have what are4

called government-to-government conversations. 5

So whenever we stood up this working group,6

it's made up of federal, state and tribal7

individuals, because those are all8

government-to-government conversations.9

So we have great latitude in putting10

together that kind of a group. Whenever we11

go beyond that government-to-government12

discussion, that's when the Federal Advisory13

Committee Act goes into effect. What that14

act says is: Federal government, you can't15

cherry-pick who comes and gives you advice.16

So I can't, as a federal agent, say,17

well, we need advice on TB and brucellosis,18

so I'm going to pick up the phone and call19

NCBA. And NCBA is going to tell -- National20

Cattlemen's Beef Association -- and NCBA is21

going to tell me what they think needs to be22

in our new rule, and I'm not going to talk23

to anybody else, and then I'm going to write24

the rule. I can't do that.25

1 SESSION 212

Now, I can try to be as fair as I2

can and say, I want someone to come in and3

talk to me from all the different cattle4

associations and all the different food5

consumer groups, but inevitably, I'm going to6

forget someone.7

So the Federal Advisory Committee Act8

protects the public from the federal9

government making that mistake and only10

picking certain people to talk to.11

So in order to have what's a12

recognized federal advisory group, you have13

to put an announcement in the federal14

register saying: The USDA wants to have15

advice on this particular issue and we need16

the public to nominate people to that group.17

So where we've done that recently is18

we have created one of the two groups that19

Dr. Thomas talked about, the Secretary's20

Advisory Committee on Animal Health. So we21

recently formed that group this past fall.22

We asked for nominations to that23

group. It includes state veterinarians; it24

includes industry representatives; it includes25

1 SESSION 213

consumer groups; it includes organic farmers;2

it includes a variety of3

things. And there's about 20 people on that4

federal advisory committee. That is an5

official Secretary's advisory committee.6

So we can take this rule, or the7

traceability rule, or anything we want for8

that group, and say: Here, give us some9

advice, and it's their responsibility to go10

out and talk to all the people that they11

represent and bring advice back to us.12

It's a very lengthy, very cumbersome13

process, but it assures that we are getting14

that broad input.15

So when this group talked about an16

advisory committee, they were thinking about17

-- and correct me if I'm wrong -- the old18

model of the Pseudorabies Control Board. 19

It's a disease of swine that we eradicated a20

number of years ago. But we used to have a21

Pseudorabies Control Board that included -- I22

don't know how many people were on it. Do23

you guys remember? I wasn't involved in it.24

But it was a small group of state25

1 SESSION 214

veterinarians, some industry folks, and they2

would provide advice on the eradication3

program.4

Well, if I were hard-pressed to tell5

you whether or not that complied with FACA,6

I'd have to say it didn't. And we probably7

-- it was never included in the regulation. 8

It was just this sort of informal thing that9

we did. It was before my time.10

But it was very positive; it was11

very helpful, but probably was not done12

according to Hoyle, so to speak.13

So when the working group that these14

two gentlemen were on was looking at how do15

we bring in some advice to help us make16

those assessments of whether or not a state17

is consistent or not consistent with this new18

rule, if that's part of it, they thought,19

well, an advisory group would be a good20

thing.21

So the way we proposed it in the22

framework right now -- to try and finally23

answer your question as to who would be on24

it -- the way that the working group25

1 SESSION 215

proposed it, would be to have that advisory2

group be made up of federal, state and3

tribal folks, so that it does not violate4

the FACA rule.5

But we recognize that it would be6

nice to have industry input. So how do we7

get that to happen? So that's kind of what8

this list of questions that Clayton was9

getting to. How can we do that without10

running afoul of the FACA? Is there a way11

that industry folks could provide advice and12

input to the folks that are state13

representatives, say, on the committee, or14

the advisory group? So we're open to15

ideas.16

DR. MICHALKE: You pretty much hit17

it on the head, as far as what -- you know,18

my part or participation in the working19

group. I mean, we realize that -- and being20

from a state perspective, we realize that21

industry is an important component and we22

rely on, you know, your advice.23

We work with the industry. So, you24

know, we want to have them in that, you25

1 SESSION 216

know, capacity as fully as possible, you2

know, realizing that we have some obstacles3

there, so -- you know, and we knew that from4

the onset.5

But, you know, I think we would be6

remiss if we didn't bring it up and speak to7

it and look for any comments or suggestions8

from the industry as possible fixes for that9

or what would work within the industry,10

because I think it would be -- I think no11

one has any doubt -- and Dr. Myers said the12

same thing, that, you know, that input would13

be valuable.14

So how do we go about doing that15

to, I guess, maximize the bang for our buck,16

what we can get out of it.17

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: But you are18

interested in working with those groups and19

having some representation within, I guess,20

the legality of your --21

DR. MYERS: Right. Yeah.22

MS. BRADLEY: Would chairmen of the23

health committees, like on Texas Southwestern,24

the chairman of that, would that work?25

1 SESSION 217

DR. MICHALKE: Well, it still goes2

back to what Dr. Myers described about3

private industry in a setting with state,4

federal and tribal.5

DR. MYERS: Because the way the6

board might be used is, let's say, for7

example, it's a board of five people. And8

let's say one of them is the state vet of9

Texas, one of them is the state vet of New10

York, one of them is the state vet of11

California, and then one is a representative12

of the Navajo Nation, and one of them is --13

I don't know -- whoever.14

DR. ROBISON: Michigan.15

DR. MYERS: Yeah, the state vet of16

Michigan. Say that's your board. And what17

the framework talks about is we would want18

that board to help us evaluate, say, the19

state of Indiana, to see if they're doing20

everything they need to do to deal with an21

outbreak that they might be having, or to22

help us evaluate their state plan.23

So if that group doesn't have any24

industry representation, can those folks that25

1 SESSION 218

are on the board, since they're not federal2

employees, can they just pick up the phone3

and call and get some input from, say, an4

industry group that has an animal health5

committee? That's kind of what we're6

thinking.7

How would industry like to feed into8

and apprise that group, since we can't9

necessarily hand-pick who we're going to make10

a phone call to?11

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: Sure. It would be12

more of a case of our representatives13

visiting with Dr. Ellis, or whoever the14

person was, and making sure that our concerns15

are --16

DR. MYERS: Right.17

DR. ROBISON: Let me breeze through18

the sub-units of this question here too. 19

Well, first, should we have an advisory20

board? And the next one, should there be21

two advisory boards, one for brucellosis and22

one for TB?23

Another one is what should be the24

composition of the advisory board? How25

1 SESSION 219

should the members be chosen? Should they2

have a defined length of service on the3

board? And what roles would you like to see4

for the advisory board? So all these little5

sub-units could be discussed.6

DR. HALL: Well, you almost have to7

have some board or some method of -- in the8

cases where -- you gave the -- you said9

Indiana, so we'll continue using Indiana. If10

they're having a problem, we need to make11

sure they are handling it properly, so you12

have to have some entity set up to handle13

that.14

So you'd have to pick one to work15

in all those situations or you have to pick16

a new one for each situation. So it looks17

like it would be better to have something in18

place, I would think, ready to go.19

You don't anticipate a lot of that. 20

I mean, for the most part, states are going21

to do their plans and I don't -- will the22

AVICs look at that plan and say, this is23

okay, and then pass it up to region, kind of24

like they do proper agreements now? Or will25

1 SESSION 220

each state go through a really comprehensive2

evaluation of their plan?3

DR. MYERS: You guys can probably4

speak better to what the committee thought,5

as far as what that review process might6

look like.7

DR. ROBISON: Well, as far as8

reviewing state programs, I guess it would be9

similar to what's in place already with the10

staff, you know, the application or annual11

renewal being sent to staff for review, and12

they say, yes, it's okay, or, yeah, it's13

okay, but you need to do this.14

And if it got contentious, possibly15

it could be sent to the advisory board, but16

that's conjecture on my part too.17

MR. MICHALKE: Well, it's open for18

discussion.19

DR. HALL: It makes sense. I would20

think that would be the way that it would be21

handled.22

DR. BAKER: Would the advisory board23

be something that would automatically be24

engaged for a given state with a given25

1 SESSION 221

problem, or a given region with a given2

problem, or would it be on demand, on3

request?4

You know, we're talking about a5

system where we want to get away from TB6

being found and having an effect on an7

entire state. We want to make it a zone8

response or a regional response. And, yet,9

we're getting right back to talking about10

states.11

And would the advisory board -- two12

questions. Would the advisory board be13

something that would automatically kick into14

play and would they work with the officials15

who have oversight for whatever that zone or16

region encompasses, whether it be one state17

or three or four?18

And then the other question is is19

that a board that would try to help that --20

those states, that state's response be21

considered consistent, so that it would, by22

everyone's agreement in the framework of23

these new rules, that state's approach would24

be appropriate and adequate for the situation25

1 SESSION 222

that exists in that identified area?2

And I'm getting the sense that it3

would probably be an advisory board that4

would be more of an on-demand. And I'm kind5

of wondering if it might not be better to6

have an advisory board that would work with7

that state or states involved in the TB8

issue from the beginning.9

DR. MICHALKE: And I think that's10

the comments we're looking for here, not so11

much to answer your question, but to take12

your thoughts back and record them overall,13

what your thought process is and how that14

board may function, whether it be two boards,15

one for brucellosis, one for TB, and the16

exact capacity that they would --17

DR. MYERS: I'll just turn your18

questions around back on you. How would you19

answer those questions? What would you like20

to see?21

DR. BAKER: I would like to see an22

advisory board, as has been suggested, as23

long as it doesn't violate federal standards24

for such a body. And I do think it ought25

1 SESSION 223

to be something that is triggered by the2

creation of a TB response zone or area,3

whatever you prefer to ultimately call these4

areas where TB's identified.5

And I don't -- I do think it ought6

to be -- the purpose of the board should be7

to assist that state or those states involved8

in the response to formulate a plan to be9

consistent with USDA's expectations and try10

to avoid that provisional consistency or11

inconsistent categorization and the potential12

consequences, whatever they may be.13

So that would be my opinion is that14

it should be created and should be15

automatically triggered with those states in16

formulating their plan.17

DR. MICHALKE: I guess to that18

thought and to try to move on -- we're all19

on one. And moving on, are there any20

thoughts from the group, as far as possibly21

-- Clayton asked the composition of the22

group. Are there any comments on that?23

Because that's one of the, probably,24

issues that is probably going to cause the25

1 SESSION 224

most heartburn, I think, or be the most2

complicated to look at. Does anybody have3

any comments, suggestions?4

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: I think, obviously,5

we're all going to want our interests6

represented. You know, but, I mean, that's7

--8

DR. MICHALKE: Of course, that's why9

you're here.10

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: Exactly. But, I11

mean, beyond that, you know, I don't know12

that there's a specific, just as long as all13

of the stakeholders are adequately14

represented. I think that that's our major15

concern.16

DR. MYERS: And how would you define17

represented?18

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: You know, I guess19

not knowing -- coming in here, not having a20

real good clarification of who was going to21

be on the advisory board, you know,22

obviously, we want someone representing Texas23

beef industry. But, you know, I realize24

that that's not really -- that's obviously --25

1 SESSION 225

that's our wish, just as everyone is going2

to have, you know, different --3

DR. MYERS: Would you feel that4

outreach by state folks on the advisory board5

to industry representatives, would that make6

you feel like you're part of that process7

and have input, or not?8

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: I think so. I9

think if we're able to have communication10

with whatever person or people who are --11

you know, like I said, if the state12

veterinarian of Texas is going to be on that13

board, if we're in communication with him on14

that, I think we feel confident, you know,15

that we're going to be represented, or that,16

at least, our voice is heard.17

And I think that's our main concern,18

is to get our voice heard on what our19

concerns are of our, you know, 15,000-plus20

members.21

DR. HALL: What if the state22

veterinarian of Texas is not on that board? 23

Because not every state veterinarian is going24

to be able to be.25

1 SESSION 226

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: Sure. I'm using2

that as an example. Clearly, that would be3

our preference, but, obviously, I understand4

that's not necessarily -- I guess whoever --5

who is our point person, then, if that is --6

we would want to know who are we supposed to7

communicate with. And maybe it's the state8

veterinarian of New Mexico or Oklahoma or9

someone totally different.10

But, you know, we would, obviously,11

want to know who that person is so that we12

could develop that relationship and voice our13

concerns.14

DR. HALL: Maybe we need to make15

sure that different states that are more16

focused on different types of industry or17

different regions -- I don't know how you do18

that, but just try to make sure that, on a19

small board like you're talking about here,20

that we do -- at least do the best job we21

can to equally represent the entire United22

States.23

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: Sure.24

DR. MICHALKE: And that goes to the25

1 SESSION 227

point that Clayton asked earlier too. You2

know, is one board better, advisory board, or3

two? One for brucellosis; one for TB. 4

What's the thoughts of the group on that?5

I mean, I can see definite pros and6

cons, I mean, to both. They're two7

different diseases.8

DR. HALL: You're focusing on9

different parts of the country on the two10

diseases, really.11

DR. MICHALKE: Exactly.12

MS. BRADLEY: I read the other day13

where over a third of all milker cows/beef14

cows in the United States are in Oklahoma,15

Texas, New Mexico, Colorado and Kansas. So16

when you're talking about over 30 percent17

right in this one area, they sure need18

representation.19

DR. MICHALKE: That's certainly20

something that, you know, we can put down. 21

And that's the type of comments that you22

would look at. Certainly, I don't think23

those things would be overlooked by those24

folks putting those groups together.25

1 SESSION 228

DR. MYERS: So you certainly2

wouldn't want a board that's made up of all3

people from New England and nobody else in4

the country. You'd want that regional5

representation to make sure that --6

MS. BRADLEY: Of course, I guess7

that would take in most of the feedyards8

too.9

DR. MYERS: You know, when I rattled10

off just a hypothetical group, you know, my11

tendency, just because of the agency I work12

for and the diseases that we deal with, we13

tend to think of state representatives as14

state veterinarians.15

But, I mean, Joe, you represent the16

New Mexico Livestock Board, and lots of17

states have livestock boards or other kinds18

of entities.19

Are there other state entities that20

we could legitimately have on a board that21

would bring more of that industry sensibility22

than, say, a state veterinarian would?23

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: In my opinion, if24

we're going to have a government25

1 SESSION 229

representative, I'm probably most confident2

with someone from Texas Animal Health3

Commission, whether that's -- no matter who4

that is.5

But, I mean, I feel like they know6

what's going on more, I mean, within the7

proposed type of group that you've discussed,8

with it being, you know, state government9

type. I mean, we have other organizations,10

of course, you know, Texas Department of11

Agriculture, et cetera. But I think that12

everyone's needs would probably by best13

addressed by having that representative -- at14

least that would be the case in Texas, I15

feel like.16

DR. HALL: I agree. If I'm state17

veterinarian in Oklahoma, if I'm not18

listening to Oklahoma Cattlemen's Association19

and, in Texas, Southwest Cattle Feeders and20

LMA, I'm not going to have the job very21

long.22

DR. BAKER: Would this be -- this23

may be way beyond the capacity of the plan,24

but would it be possible to consider advisory25

1 SESSION 230

boards made up for each outbreak or issue?2

Now, keeping in mind -- I mean, we3

tend to talk about TB and brucellosis so4

much that sometimes you'd think that the5

entire cattle population of the United States6

is infected with one or the other, when, in7

fact, we're dealing with two diseases with8

very low national prevalence. Local9

prevalence? Different story. But national10

prevalence for both TB and brucellosis are11

extremely low.12

And so you look historically -- for13

example, in the five-year period I've worked14

for the New Mexico Livestock Board, you look15

at the number of TB affected herds in the16

United States. Well, it's a significant17

number. But look at the total number of18

beef and dairy herds in the United States19

and what percentage of those herds is20

affected. It's a very small portion of our21

national cattle herd.22

And so it's not like we're going to23

have things every day, every month, every24

year in multiple states and so forth. I'm25

1 SESSION 231

wondering if you couldn't have a system2

where, okay, let's say we have TB identified3

in a dairy in southeastern New Mexico, and4

we're going to set up an established area --5

and maybe it includes a little of West Texas6

where there's some dairies also that it might7

be wise to include in our control zone.8

Why could we not have -- or could9

we have an advisory board set up for that10

response made up of people in the Texas and11

New Mexico industries and the Texas and New12

Mexico regulatory framework and so forth, so13

it was responsive to that outbreak?14

Because, ultimately, we could have a15

situation where, okay, maybe Dee Ellis is the16

state veterinarian on the committee and, all17

of a sudden, we've got a problem in Indiana. 18

Well, the Indiana folks, you know, they might19

like Dee's accent, but maybe not like his20

opinions, or they may think, well, you're21

from Texas; you don't know what Indiana's22

needs are and what our producers want. And23

that might be a valid argument, to a degree.24

DR. MYERS: So rather than having a25

1 SESSION 232

standing board that, you know, we turn to on2

a regular basis for any issue, have multiple3

boards each time an outbreak occurs?4

DR. BAKER: Or you could have5

standing boards, but in a much more localized6

region. For example, you could have each7

state -- I don't know how this would work8

for all the states, particularly I'm not9

familiar with the eastern region states, but10

you could have designated players that would11

be potential board members, so that if you12

had an issue, we already know, okay, if13

Texas is involved in this, these are the14

people that a board would be selected from.15

It might not be every person that's16

board-eligible in Texas. But out of that17

pool of people that we've already said, you18

know, these are the names and the19

organizations that have been tapped. Now20

we're going to pick a couple of them to sit21

on this five-member board.22

And the same thing in New Mexico. 23

So now we have a zone straddling those two24

states. We're selecting from a pre-ordained25

1 SESSION 233

pool of potential board members, and we2

create a board to help assist with that3

problem.4

You might keep the regional thing --5

you know, the regional concerns and the state6

concerns more satisfied and better addressed7

and still have the representation that8

everybody wants to have in this.9

The other thing -- and I'm kind of10

stream of consciousness here -- but is the11

advisory board -- I mean, you look at it12

from one standpoint and it could assist the13

state or pair of states, or whatever, in14

their response, but if you look at it15

through other eyes, it could almost become a16

lobbying board, you know: Don't do that,17

because my constituents say -- you know, and18

pretty soon I could see an advisory board19

not giving much advice, but just trying to20

protect turf.21

DR. MICHALKE: And I guess that22

brings up my question to you -- and y'all23

can comment on it. You bring up two24

interesting things, one, the concept of a25

1 SESSION 234

possibility of having a standing advisory2

board, pick from an array out there.3

I thought you might go with the4

concept of having that board and having --5

it just came into my mind -- and having X6

number maybe fill in for that region affected7

as part of it. You know, we've got8

five, and we're going to turn three more or9

two more, because of this area. I thought10

you were going there.11

The other thing, the comment that12

you bring up that I'd like for you to13

ruminate on -- and, yeah, things are big in14

Texas and I'm a Texan and have always been15

one, so Dr. Myers -- but, you know, we have16

to look at it on the same scale, I think,17

in all fairness, that as we are protecting18

our interests, too, that those other folks19

there have different issues, too, on this20

board.21

So what are the feelings there?22

DR. MYERS: Well, I think what23

you're getting at is, if I'm understanding24

you correctly, some of the concepts that the25

1 SESSION 235

working group talked about is part of the2

role of that board, as the working group3

conceived it, was to have an independent,4

unbiased group that could help us take a5

look at either those annual plans or6

particular on-the-ground situations.7

So if you're dealing with a case of8

TB and the advisory board is, say, seven9

people, all of whom are outside of Texas10

except for one, that one person could recuse11

himself from reviewing the Texas plan and the12

Texas response, but you'd have the other six13

folks helping the USDA do that review.14

So I think what you were getting at,15

as far as a very local group, may be16

something that might be better set up at the17

state level to help deal with that particular18

outbreak or occurrence. But -- and it gets19

away from what you were talking about, as20

far as becoming a lobbying -- or one of you21

said sort of that, that lobbying flavor.22

Because if you're dealing with23

something in, say, the state of New Mexico,24

and the folks on the board are from Rhode25

1 SESSION 236

Island, Washington and Florida and Missouri,2

then you have that unjaundiced eye looking3

at, okay, how is New Mexico doing? Are4

there additional resources that we need to5

encourage USDA to help New Mexico with or,6

you know, providing that sort of outside7

look.8

So, anyway, that was just kind of a9

couple of things that came to mind when you10

were both talking.11

DR. BAKER: I think, historically,12

we -- I look at New Mexico and I'm somewhat13

familiar with neighboring states, because14

they're close. And you look at the way we15

function as a state veterinarian's office in16

New Mexico. I mean, ultimately, in my mind,17

state veterinarian's offices all over the18

country have to make animal health decisions19

that are in the best interest of industry.20

Well, industry is a broad swath. 21

And we might have requirements that the beef22

people have no concerns with, but the dairy23

people are ranting about. Vice versa.24

But in New Mexico, I know one of25

1 SESSION 237

the things that I feel hurts us is, if you2

look at producer buy-in for whatever the3

disease issue, whatever is on the table at4

that moment. And I'll use trichomoniasis as5

an example.6

I've talked to people from other7

states where producer buy-in there on trich8

rules is very high, so the amount of9

resistance, the amount of blowback, the10

amount of arguing and infighting that goes on11

regarding the trich rules is very minimal.12

In New Mexico, we have,13

unfortunately, a substantial portion of our14

producers who want to fight against our trich15

rules.16

And so you look at our compliance17

level in our state versus maybe another state18

who's got better producer buy-in, and it19

might make us look like we're not getting20

the job done. Well, we're fighting a lot of21

forces. We have good telephone service in22

New Mexico, and producers who don't like23

something have caught on that they can find24

their representative's and their legislator's25

1 SESSION 238

phone numbers and governor's phone number,2

and they're on it.3

And so you end up having to deal4

with more than just animal health issues and5

making decisions based on what's best,6

because of the issue itself. It's the7

politics. And that's why I made my comment8

about this turning into just a big lobbying9

board where every interest wants to say,10

well, I want to protect my concern and I11

want to -- and pretty soon you find yourself12

not being advised, but being stymied by all13

of the input.14

And so, I guess, my fundamental15

question is is the advisory board, is it16

advisory? Is it going to help advise states17

on how to construct a response to most18

efficiently and effectively deal with their19

TB or brucellosis issue, or is it going to20

become more of an -- I don't know what --21

an arbitration board, you know, make sure22

everybody gets their voice.23

And what I was beginning to say,24

that I'll end up saying, is that, in my25

1 SESSION 239

mind, the state veterinarian, as Rod said,2

they have to make decisions in the best3

interest of their industry, and they best be4

listening to industry. And we desperately5

try to do that.6

But what's interesting to me is we7

can't reach industry like we think we ought. 8

We're reaching a component of it. We reach9

the ones that want to listen.10

And it's the ones that don't want to11

listen that end up being our biggest12

impediment in making progress and controlling13

disease and so forth.14

And that's an editorial that has15

very little to do with advisory boards or16

anything else. But I think that, you know,17

ultimately, a state's going to have to18

decide, in my mind, how to approach their TB19

issues, based much more so on the science of20

tuberculosis than all of the input from21

producer groups and individual producers and22

so forth.23

And I'm not saying that to belittle24

the value of the input from those groups,25

1 SESSION 240

but I'm saying that ultimately we can't let2

our decision-making process be so guided by3

politics that we lose the ability to make4

sound decisions based on science.5

And I think sometimes we're kind of6

wavering away from good, sound decision-making7

in our disease control efforts.8

DR. MYERS: I think, at least from9

my perspective, the value of having some10

avenue for industry to provide input to those11

members on the board becomes enlightening to12

us on what those industry practices are that13

impact disease control and movement, because14

I don't purport to know how cattle move in15

this country as well as industry folks do.16

So, you know, I think having some17

avenue of getting input in to the members18

that sit on that board to really help us,19

you know, understand how industry practices20

impact responses to these.21

DR. MYERS: We have, like, three22

minutes, and we've only talked about the23

advisory board. We were also supposed to24

cover zoning and surveillance.25

1 SESSION 241

DR. HALL: I'd just like to say one2

more thing about the advisory board. And3

maybe I'm misunderstanding, but, you know,4

I'm not sure -- to me, maybe another word5

could be review board.6

The way I understand it, also, if we7

have an outbreak of TB in Oklahoma, there8

should be -- that board, I'd like for it to9

assist us and tell us, you know, where we're10

going wrong, if we need to do something11

differently to get it under control.12

But I think part of that board13

should also be there to ensure that we are14

doing it properly so that they can assure15

the other 49 states in the United States16

that it is safe to accept cattle from17

Oklahoma, you know, they have this under18

control.19

And for that reason, I think20

thatboard -- there needs to be some21

consistency on that board. So, I guess,22

from that standpoint, Joe, I disagree a23

little bit on picking a group for each24

instance.25

1 SESSION 242

If we can't be consistent, then2

you're opening yourself up to a lot more3

problems.4

DR. BAKER: Rod, your comment leads5

me to a question I had on zoning. And I6

wanted to throw this out.7

T.J. knows, from an earlier8

conversation today, that this is an issue9

that gives me a lot of heartburn. There was10

a cow determined to have TB in Ohio that was11

traced back to a dairy in Kansas that had12

literally been a brokerage for replacements,13

30,000 head in less than 24 months, by the14

veterinarian's own admission.15

That cow was traced on back to a16

New Mexico source dairy that had sent her,17

among several other hundred, to the Kansas18

facility. Okay. What Rod said is -- it19

raises this question. We want people to20

know it's safe to accept our cattle from21

Oklahoma.22

Well, the problem, particularly with23

dairy cattle, is the way they move. That24

Ohio cow may have picked up TB in Ohio. It25

1 SESSION 243

may have picked it up in Kansas. It2

conceivably may have picked it up in New3

Mexico. Where do you draw a zone around4

that outbreak? Where is your zone?5

And the allied question to that is6

-- and I talked to T.J. about this -- one7

of the things -- and this is the wrong group8

to bring it up in, but one of the sessions9

is going to have to do with epidemiology and10

proper investigation.11

Well, when you have a movement of12

animals like that over a two and a half year13

period and you've got people on each end14

looking for TB and one entity in the middle15

not, that creates a problem.16

I think that, in beef cattle's case,17

beef cattle tend to move through more18

predictable pathways, as a rule. There's not19

this spurious spinning off of, well, those20

cows were supposed to go to slaughter, but21

six of them ended up in this guy's herd. 22

That kind of thing goes on more in the dairy23

industry, and the cross-country movement goes24

on a lot more.25

1 SESSION 244

And so trying to draw a zone around2

a dairy TB issue, to me, would be a huge3

challenge, because of that movement. As I4

said to T.J., all you've got to do is go to5

any herd in the western United States and6

start reading silver tags. And those first7

two numbers tell you everything you need to8

know. There's cows from bloody everywhere.9

Another example, we were getting10

shipments of cattle into New Mexico that were11

ostensibly from Texas and Missouri, being12

sent by the Connolly boys, a father/son. 13

One of them runs a deal out of Kentucky and14

the other one out of Texas, but they gather15

cattle, and they were ostensibly Texas and16

Missouri cattle, or Texas and Kentucky17

cattle.18

But when you really got to looking19

at them, they were from a myriad of states,20

and they were all pooled together and coming21

from Texas.22

Well, those cows were no more coming23

from Texas than I'm from Florida, and I'm24

not; I'm from New Mexico. So, I mean,25

1 SESSION 245

that's my problem with creating a zone around2

a dairy outbreak is the movement of the3

cattle.4

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: A similar, kind of5

based off that, concern that we had when we6

looked over this was feral hogs being so7

invasive, how that fits in, you know, with8

the spread of brucellosis from -- amongst9

feral hogs that are, you know, just going10

everywhere and move so far. We were11

concerned with how something like that fits12

into the zone concept.13

DR. MYERS: You guys were in all14

these conversations much more so than I, so15

I'll let you fill in the gaps here. But I16

don't think the concept from the working17

group was that a zone would always be18

applied in every case. Zones would be19

applied when it's appropriate to apply a20

zone.21

So, for example, in Michigan where22

you have disease in wildlife, yes, a zone is23

an appropriate measure to take. Where you24

have, you know, a case in one herd that's25

1 SESSION 246

related epidemiologically to another herd all2

the way across the country, your zone, if3

you want to use that term, would be just a4

quarantine of a facility.5

So you apply zones as appropriate6

based on the epidemiology. Do you want to7

add to that, guys?8

MS. HUFFSTUTLER: So, essentially,9

that's not a hard and fast --10

DR. MYERS: Right.11

DR. ROBISON: And with brucellosis12

in swine, it's a variant, brucella suis. 13

And, say, a cow does contract brucella suis. 14

And all we know, they're considered a15

dead-end host. They'll still have the titer,16

just the same as brucella abortus, and get17

everybody all excited, of course. And, you18

know, they can even shed it in the milk, but19

we consider them to be a dead-end host.20

It's not as much a problem. It's21

just more -- it's tripping the test results,22

and which -- you know, I don't know if I23

should go there. When we were testing in24

the market, if we found those kind at the25

1 SESSION 247

market, we could work them up and do2

cultures.3

If we find them in slaughter, it's a4

different situation too. I'm getting off on5

a tangent there. I better not go there.6

DR. MYERS: We need to break for7

lunch. Were there any other comments on8

these three areas, the state requirements,9

zoning, surveillance? Anything else burning10

that you want to get out verbally?11

DR. BAKER: Is the main thrust of12

surveillance going to be slaughter13

surveillance for both diseases?14

DR. MYERS: Yeah, for the national15

surveillance. But then there's also16

surveillance for an adverse population,17

targeted surveillance.18

DR. BAKER: And that's going to be19

up to the state to come up with?20

DR. MYERS: Well, correct me if I'm21

wrong, guys, but that would be part of the22

state's plan. The state would identify: 23

This is a high-risk population in this state24

for these reasons; we're going to have this25

1 SESSION 248

additional surveillance above and beyond the2

national response.3

DR. HALL: In areas where you have4

a high-risk population in a state, is there5

any possibility of USDA assisting with that6

surveillance testing, or is the state going7

to have to come up with all that?8

DR. MICHALKE: I don't think that's9

all been worked out completely.10

DR. MYERS: No, but the way it11

works now, whenever there is an outbreak,12

we're right there to work on the epidemiology13

and collect samples. So that's not going to14

change, as long as, you know, we still have15

funding.16

So we're having lunch from 11:45 to17

1:00 in the dining room over here. So when18

you come back at 1:00, go to a different19

group rather than this group. Go to one of20

the other two and we'll do another 4521

minutes in each of the other groups.22

And then, at 3:00, we'll come back23

and we'll pull these walls down again, come24

back to the main large room we were in this25

1 SESSION 249

morning. And then that will be just an2

open, general discussion on any and all3

topics and any closing comments that anyone4

wants to make sure we get in the record. 5

Thank you, everyone. Good discussion.6

(Whereupon recessed at 11:52 A.M.)7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 SESSION 250

CERTIFICATE2

3

STATE OF TEXAS4

5

I, KARY A. WINGO, CSR, RPR in and6

for the State of Texas, certify that the7

caption to this transcription correctly states8

the facts set forth herein, that the9

proceedings were correctly reported in10

Stenograph by me at the time and place set11

forth in said caption, and have been12

transcribed from Stenograph into typewriting13

under my direction and supervision in the14

foregoing transcript; and that said transcript15

contains a correct record of the proceedings16

had at said time and place. GIVEN UNDER MY17

HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL of office.18

19

20

21

KARY A. WINGO, CSR, RPR22

DATED: JUNE 20, 201123

24

Session2, 060611Page 15

Aability 6:15 40:4able 5:13 25:10,25abortus 46:17accent 31:20accept 41:17 42:21accepting 7:2accredited 4:20,20act11:14,15 12:8action 6:15actions 6:20activities 3:24add46:8additional 6:22 36:548:2

addressed 29:14 33:7adequate 21:25adequately 24:14admission 42:15advanced 4:20adverse 47:17advice 11:3,16,1812:16 13:10,1214:3,16 15:12,2333:20

advise 38:17advised 38:13advisory 3:22 4:45:6 7:5 10:12,2411:13 12:8,13,2113:5,6,17 14:2015:2,15 18:20,2218:25 19:5 20:1620:23 21:12,1322:4,7,23 24:2225:5 27:3 29:2531:10 33:12,1934:2 35:9 38:16,1739:16 40:24 41:3

afoul 15:11agency 28:12agent 11:17ago5:19 13:21agree 4:2 29:17agreement 21:23agreements 19:25

Agriculture 3:1129:12

airborne 8:6,10allied 43:6allows 5:3Amarillo 1:7amount 37:9,10,11Angus3:2animal 2:13 3:1212:21 18:5 29:336:19 38:5

animals6:10 7:28:12,13 43:13

announcement12:14annual 20:11 35:6answer 14:24 22:1222:20

anticipate 19:20anybody11:24 24:3anyway 36:9APHIS2:21application 20:11applied45:19,20apply45:20 46:6apprise18:9approach 21:24 39:19appropriate 21:2545:20,24 46:6

arbitration 38:22area 5:14 22:2 23:327:18 31:5 34:10

areas23:5 47:9 48:4arguing37:11argument 31:24array34:3asked2:16 12:2323:22 27:2

assessments 14:17assist 23:8 33:3,1341:10

assistance 3:23assisting 48:6Association 11:2129:19

associations12:5assurance 6:8

assure 41:15assures 13:14automatically 8:1920:24 21:14 23:16

avenue 40:11,18AVICs 19:23avoid 23:11a.m 1:7 49:7

Bback 13:12 17:321:10 22:13,1942:12,16 48:19,2348:25

Baker 3:4,4 20:2322:22 29:23 32:536:12 42:5 47:1247:19

bang 16:16based 4:16,16,21,258:23 38:6 39:2040:5 45:6 46:7

basis 32:3becoming 35:21beef 9:7 11:21 24:2430:19 36:22 43:1743:18

beginning 22:9 38:24believe 5:22belittle 39:24best 26:21 29:1336:20 38:6 39:3,4

better 19:18 20:522:6 27:3 33:735:17 37:19 47:6

beyond 10:15 11:1224:12 29:24 48:2

big 7:14 10:21 34:1438:9

biggest 39:12bit 2:15 41:24bloody 44:9blowback 37:10board 3:6 4:4 5:67:5 10:12,16 13:1913:22 17:7,8,17,19

Session2, 060611Page 16

18:2,21,25 19:4,519:8 20:16,2321:12,13,20 22:4,722:15,23 23:724:22 25:5,14,2326:20 27:3,3 28:328:17,21 30:1531:10 32:2,12,1532:22 33:2,3,12,1733:19 34:3,5,2135:3,9,25 38:10,1638:22 40:12,19,2441:3,6,9,13,22

boards 18:22 22:1528:18 30:2 32:4,639:16

board-eligible 32:17body 22:25border 7:19 8:20box10:25boys 44:13Bradley 2:25,25 7:107:12 8:25 9:8,199:23 10:10 16:2327:13 28:7

break 47:7breakout 1:4 3:15breeder 3:3 9:9breeze 18:18bring 11:3 13:1214:16 16:7 28:2233:24 34:13 43:9

brings 33:23broad 13:15 36:21brokerage 42:13brucella 46:13,14,17brucellosis 1:2 4:1511:18 18:22 22:1627:4 30:4,11 38:2045:9 46:12

buck 16:16builds 10:25burning 47:10buy9:25buy-in 37:3,8,19

CCalifornia 17:12call 11:19 18:4,1123:4

called 11:5capacity 16:2 22:1729:24

caption50:8,12case 6:19 18:1329:15 35:8 43:1745:19,25

cases19:9categorization23:12cattle 3:8 8:11 12:429:20 30:6,2240:15 41:17 42:2142:24 43:18 44:1144:16,17,18 45:4

Cattlemen's 11:2129:19

cattle's 43:17caught 37:24cause23:25certain3:24 4:199:13 12:11

certainly 27:20,2328:2

CERTIFICATE 50:2certify50:7cetera 5:7,7 29:12chairman 16:25chairmen 16:23challenge 44:4change 48:15cherry-pick 11:16chopped6:2chosen 19:2clarification 24:21clarify10:13Class5:15Clayton2:8 4:7 7:415:9 23:22 27:2

Clearly26:3close8:11 36:15closing49:4collect48:14

Colorado 27:16come 3:19 12:3 47:2048:8,19,23,24

comes 11:16comfortable 6:24 7:2coming 6:10 24:2044:21,23

commencing 1:7comment 33:24 34:1238:8 42:5

comments 16:8 22:1123:23 24:4 27:2247:8 49:4

Commission 2:14 29:4committee 10:19,2511:14 12:8,21 13:513:6,17 15:14 18:620:5 31:17

committees 16:24communicate 26:8communication 25:1025:14

completely 48:10compliance 37:17complicated 24:3complied 14:6complying 5:2component 15:22 39:9composition 18:2523:22

comprehensive 20:2conceivably 43:3conceived 35:4concept 33:25 34:545:13,17

concepts 34:25concern 6:5,13 8:79:17 24:16 25:1838:11 45:6

concerned 45:12concerns 18:15 25:2026:14 33:6,7 36:23

confident 25:15 29:2confined 9:3conjecture 20:17Connolly 44:13

Session2, 060611Page 17

cons 27:7consciousness 33:11consequences23:13consider 29:25 46:20considered 21:2246:15

consistency 23:1141:22

consistent 14:18,1821:22 23:10 42:2

constituents33:18construct 38:18consumer 12:6 13:2contact 8:11contains 50:16contentious 20:15continue 19:10contract 46:14control 13:19,2231:8 40:8,14 41:1241:19

controlling 39:13conversation42:9conversations 11:5,945:15

correct 13:18 47:2150:16

correctly 34:25 50:850:10

country 27:10 28:536:19 40:16 46:3

couple 32:21 36:10course 24:9 28:729:11 46:18

Court 1:8cover 40:25cow42:11,16,2546:14

cows 27:15 43:2144:9,23

cows/beef 27:14create 33:3created 12:19 23:15creates 43:16creating 45:2creation 23:3

critical 6:18cross-country 43:24CSR50:6,24cultures 47:3cumbersome 13:13

Ddairies31:7dairy9:4 30:19 31:436:23 42:12,17,2443:23 44:3 45:3

Dakota 9:25DATED50:25day27:13 30:24dead-end 46:16,20deal 17:21 28:1335:18 38:4,1944:14

dealing30:8 35:8,23decide 39:19decisions 36:19 38:639:3 40:5

decision-making 40:340:7

Dee6:12 31:16Dee's31:20define 24:17defined19:3defines10:25definite 27:6degree 31:24deliver10:4demand 21:3Department 3:1129:11

depends8:10described 17:3designated 32:11desperately 39:5details5:6 10:22determined 42:11develop26:13differences 9:18different 9:11 12:412:5 25:3 26:10,1626:17,18 27:8,10

30:10 34:20 47:548:19

differently 41:12dining 48:18direction 50:14disagree 41:23discovered 5:21discuss 3:22discussed 19:6 29:8discussion 11:1320:19 49:3,6

disease 4:17,23 5:46:22 7:13 8:6,198:21 13:20 37:439:14 40:8,1445:23

diseases 27:8,1128:13 30:8 47:14

doing 7:8 16:1517:20 36:4 41:15

doubt 16:12Dr 2:5,6,8,12,16,182:20 3:4,10,14 4:75:11 6:12,17 7:117:24 9:6,17,2010:7,17,23 12:2015:17 16:12,2217:2,3,6,15,1618:14,17,18 19:720:4,8,20,23 22:1022:18,22 23:1824:9,17 25:4,2226:15,25 27:9,1227:20 28:2,1029:17,23 31:2532:5 33:22 34:1634:23 36:12 40:940:22 41:2 42:545:14 46:11,1247:7,12,15,19,2148:4,9,11

draw 43:4 44:2E

E 4:2earlier 2:21 27:2

Session2, 060611Page 18

42:8East 1:7eastern 32:10editorial 39:15effect 11:14 21:7effectively 38:19efficiently 38:19efforts 40:8either 35:6element 4:12Ellis 2:16 18:1431:16

employees 18:3encompasses 21:17encourage 36:6ended 43:22engaged 20:25England 28:4enlightening40:12ensure 41:14entire 21:8 26:2230:6

entities 28:19,20entity 19:13 43:15epidemiologic 8:16epidemiologically46:2

epidemiology43:1046:7 48:13

equally 26:22eradicated 13:20eradication 14:3essentially 46:9established 31:5et 5:7,7 29:12Europe 7:13evaluate 17:19,23evaluation 20:3evaluations 7:7everybody 33:9 38:2346:18

everyone's 21:2329:13

exact 22:17Exactly 24:11 27:12example 17:8 26:3

30:14 32:7 37:644:10 45:22

excited46:18exists 22:2expectations23:10experts10:15extent 6:10extremely 30:12eye36:3eyes 33:16

FFACA 14:6 15:5,11facilitate 2:19facility 42:19 46:5fact 30:8facts50:9fair 12:2fairness 34:18fall 12:22familiar 32:10 36:14far10:24 15:18 20:620:8 23:21 35:1635:21 45:11

farmers13:2fast 46:10father/son 44:13fear 5:20federal10:14,2411:2,7,13,15,1712:8,9,13,14 13:515:3 17:5 18:222:24

feed 18:8Feeders29:20feedyards 28:8feel 6:15 25:4,7,1529:6,16 37:2

feelings 34:22fence7:21 8:13feral45:7,10field3:5fight37:15fighting 37:21fill 10:21 34:745:16

finally 14:23find 37:24 38:1247:4

first 3:20 4:1218:20 44:7

fits 45:8,12five 17:8 34:9five-member 32:22five-year 30:14fixes 16:9flavor 35:22Florida 36:2 44:24focused 26:17focusing 27:9folks 4:12 14:2 15:415:12,13 17:2525:5 27:25 31:1934:19 35:14,2540:16

food 12:5foot-and-mouth 7:138:6

forces 37:22foregoing 50:15forget 12:7formed 12:22formulate 23:9formulating 23:17forth 30:25 31:1339:14,23 50:9,12

forward 6:4found 21:7 46:25four 5:19,22 21:18framework 1:2 14:2317:18 21:23 31:13

free 4:21 5:23 9:1511:4

fully 16:2function 22:15 36:16fundamental 38:15funding 48:16

Ggaps 45:16gather 44:15general 4:8,11 5:8

Session2, 060611Page 19

10:16 49:3gentlemen 14:15getting 5:5 6:1613:14 15:10 21:1022:3 34:24 35:1537:20 40:18 44:1047:5

give 10:20 13:9given 6:3 20:25,2521:2,2 50:17

gives 11:16 42:10giving 33:20go 2:6 4:7 11:1213:10 16:15 19:1920:2 34:4 43:2144:5 46:24 47:648:19,20

goes 9:12 11:14 17:226:25 37:11 43:2343:24

going 2:18 5:16 7:158:8 9:25 11:19,2011:22,23,24 12:618:10 19:21 23:2524:6,21 25:2,13,1625:24 28:25 29:729:21 30:23 31:532:21 34:9,1138:17,20 39:1841:11 43:10 45:1047:13,19,25 48:748:14

good 6:4 14:20 24:2137:22 40:7 49:6

government 11:2,1512:10 28:25 29:9

government-to-gov...11:5,9,12

governor's 38:2great 11:10group 2:5,11,15 3:143:22,22 7:7 11:611:11 12:13,17,2212:24 13:9,16,2514:14,20,25 15:315:15,20 17:24

18:5,9 23:21,2327:5 28:11 29:835:2,3,5,16 41:2443:8 45:18 48:2048:20

groups 2:24 12:6,1913:2 16:19 27:2539:22,25 48:22

guess5:5,7 16:16,2020:9 23:18 24:1926:5 28:7 33:2238:15 41:22

guided 40:3guys 9:2 10:18,2113:24 20:4 45:1446:8 47:22

guy's43:22H

half 43:13Hall 3:10,10 5:1110:7 19:7 20:2025:22 26:15 27:929:17 41:2 48:4

HAND 50:18handle 19:13handled20:22handling 6:9 19:12hand-pick 18:10happen 10:9 15:8hard 46:10hard-pressed14:5head 15:18 42:14health 2:13 12:2116:24 18:5 29:336:19 38:5

heard25:17,19heartburn 24:2 42:10help 2:18 7:7 14:1617:19,23 21:2033:3 35:5,18 36:638:17 40:19

helpful14:12helping35:14herd 5:18,22 7:1630:22 43:22 44:6

45:25 46:2herds 9:4,7 30:16,1930:20

high 37:9high-risk 47:24 48:5historically 30:1336:12

hit 15:17hogs 45:7,10Holiday 1:7home 10:3host 46:16,20Hoyle 14:13Huffstutler 3:7,710:11 16:18 18:1224:5,11,19 25:926:2,24 28:24 45:546:9

huge 44:3hundred 42:18hurts 37:2hypothetical 28:11

Iideas 15:16identified 5:4 22:223:5 31:3

identify 47:23impact 40:14,21impediment 39:13important 15:22include 4:3 31:8included 13:22 14:8includes 12:24,25,2513:2,3 31:6

inconsistent 23:12independent 35:4Indiana 17:20 19:1019:10 31:18,19

Indiana's 31:22individual 8:5 39:22individuals 11:8industries 31:12industry 3:12 12:2514:2 15:7,12,22,2416:9,10 17:4,25

Session2, 060611Page 20

18:5,8 24:24 25:626:17 28:22 36:2036:21 39:4,5,840:11,13,16,2043:24

inevitably 12:6infected 5:18,2230:7

infighting 37:11informal 14:9information 6:16Inn1:7input 13:15 15:7,1316:13 18:4 25:838:14 39:21,2540:11,18

instance 41:25interact 8:12interest 36:20 38:1039:4

interested 6:1416:19

interesting 33:2539:7

interests 24:6 34:19introduce 2:7invasive 45:8investigation 8:1643:11

involved 10:20 13:2422:8 23:8 32:14

Island 36:2isolate 5:14issue 7:25 10:2312:16 22:9 30:232:3,13 37:4 38:738:20 42:9 44:3

issues 23:25 34:2038:5 39:20

Jjob26:21 29:2137:21

Joe3:4 28:16 41:23June 1:6 2:3 50:25

KKansas 27:16 42:1242:18 43:2

Kary 1:7 50:6,24Katrina3:7keep 9:13 33:5keeping30:3Kentucky 44:14,17kick 21:14kind 2:14 5:19 6:1211:11 15:8 18:619:24 22:5 33:1036:9 40:6 43:2345:5 46:25

kinds28:18knew 16:4knocking 5:15know 5:20,25 6:7,146:19 7:16,21 9:29:23,24 10:8,14,1713:23 15:18,23,2516:2,3,4,6,1317:14 20:11 21:524:7,12,12,19,2224:24 25:3,12,1525:20 26:7,11,1226:18 27:3,2128:10,11 29:6,9,1131:19,22 32:2,8,1332:19 33:6,17,1834:8,16 36:7,2538:21,22 39:1740:15,17,20 41:441:10,18 42:2144:9 45:8,10,2546:15,19,23,2348:15

knowing24:20knows42:8

Llarge48:25latitude 11:10leads42:5legality 16:21legislator's37:25

legitimately 28:21length 19:3lengthy 13:13let's 17:7,9 31:3level 4:19 35:1837:18

line 7:22 8:13,24list 15:9listen 39:10,12listening 29:19 39:5literally 42:13little 2:15 19:531:6 39:16 41:24

lived 5:20livestock 3:6 28:1728:18 30:15

LMA 29:21lobbying 33:17 35:2135:22 38:9

local 30:9 35:16localized 32:6locally 8:8long 4:10 9:14 22:2424:13 29:22 48:15

look 8:5,11,20 16:819:23 20:7 24:327:23 30:13,15,1833:12,15 34:1735:6 36:8,13,1537:3,17,20

looked 45:7looking 14:15 22:1136:3 43:15 44:19

looks 19:17lose 40:4lost 5:23lot 9:2 19:20 37:2142:3,10 43:25

lots 28:17Lou 2:25loved 5:25low 4:23 30:9,12lower 5:13lunch 47:8 48:17

M

Session2, 060611Page 21

main 25:18 47:1248:25

major 24:15making 12:10 18:1538:6 39:13

manage 5:9Mark 2:12market 46:25 47:2matter 29:4maximize 16:16mean 5:17 15:2019:21 24:7,12 27:627:7 28:16 29:6,729:10 30:3 33:1236:17 44:25

measure 45:24Meeting 1:6meetings 7:14members 2:11 19:225:21 32:12 33:240:12,18

Memphis 3:2method 19:8Mexico 3:5 6:3 9:2426:9 27:16 28:1730:15 31:4,12,1332:23 35:24 36:4,636:13,17,25 37:1337:23 42:17 43:444:11,25

Michalke 2:12,1215:17 17:2 20:1822:10 23:18 24:926:25 27:12,2033:22 48:9

Michigan 17:15,1745:22

middle 43:15miles 7:15,17milk 46:19milker 27:14mind 30:3 34:6 36:1036:17 39:2,19

minimal 37:12Minnie 2:25minutes 40:23 48:22

Missouri 36:2 44:1244:17

mistake12:10misunderstanding41:4

mitigate 6:21mitigation 8:22mitigations 6:25model13:19modified 4:19,20moment 37:5month30:24months 42:14morning2:22 6:1349:2

mouth9:21move 23:19 40:1542:24 43:18 45:11

movement 40:14 43:1243:24 44:4 45:3

moves8:21moving 8:15 23:20multiple 30:25 32:3Myers2:6,20,20 4:76:12 7:11,24 9:179:20 10:17 16:1216:22 17:3,6,1618:17 20:4 22:1824:17 25:4 28:2,1031:25 34:16,2340:9,22 45:1446:11 47:7,15,2148:11

myriad 44:20N

names32:19Nation 17:13national 11:20 30:930:10,22 47:1548:3

Navajo 17:13NCBA 11:20,20,21necessarily 8:1018:10 26:5

need 6:20 9:15 11:18

12:16 17:21 19:1120:14 26:15 27:1836:5 41:11 44:847:7

needs 7:9 11:2229:13 31:23 41:21

neighboring 36:14never 9:23 14:8new 3:5 4:3 6:3 9:2411:23 14:18 17:1019:17 21:24 26:927:16 28:4,1730:15 31:4,12,1232:23 35:24 36:4,636:13,17,25 37:1337:23 42:17 43:344:11,25

nice 10:7 15:7nominate 12:17nominations 12:23number 1:4 3:2113:21 30:16,18,1834:7 38:2

numbers 38:2 44:8O

obstacles 16:3obviously 24:5,23,2526:4,11

occurrence 35:19occurs 32:4office 36:16 50:18offices 36:18official 13:6 50:18officials 21:15Ohio 42:11,25,25okay 2:8 7:22 19:2420:13,14 31:3,1632:13 36:4 42:19

Oklahoma 3:11 7:197:20 26:9 27:1529:18,19 41:8,1842:22

old 5:21 13:18ones 39:10,11onset 16:5

Session2, 060611Page 22

on-demand 22:5on-the-ground 35:7open 5:8 15:15 20:1849:3

opening 42:3opinion 23:14 28:24opinions 31:21order 12:12organic 13:2organizations 29:1032:20

ostensibly 44:12,16ought 10:5 22:2523:6 39:8

outbreak 7:20,2117:22 30:2 31:1432:4 35:19 41:843:5 45:3 48:12

outreach 25:5outside 35:10 36:7overall 22:13overlooked 27:24oversight 21:16

Ppair 33:14Panhandle 5:19part 5:6 6:2 7:6 8:28:17 14:19 15:1919:21 20:17 25:734:8 35:2 41:1347:22

participation 15:19particular 3:1912:16 35:7,18

particularly32:942:23

parts 3:25 27:10pass 19:24pathways 43:19people 7:22 12:11,1713:4,11,23 17:825:11 28:4 31:1132:15,18 35:1036:23,24 37:742:20 43:14

percent27:17percentage 30:20period 30:14 43:14person 18:15 25:1126:6,12 32:1635:11

perspective 15:2140:10

phone11:19 18:3,1138:2,2

pick 11:19 18:319:15,16 32:2134:3

picked 42:25 43:2,3picking12:11 41:24picture10:21place5:3 6:25 8:2319:19 20:10 50:1150:17

plan 6:7 8:2 17:2319:23 20:3 23:9,1729:24 35:12 47:23

plans19:22 35:6play 21:15players32:11point26:6 27:2politics 38:8 40:4pool 32:18 33:2pooled 44:21population 30:647:17,24 48:5

portion6:9 30:2137:14

positive 14:11possibility 34:248:6

possible 16:2,929:25

possibly 2:19 20:1523:21

potential 23:1232:12 33:2

practices 40:13,20predictable 43:19prefer 23:4preference 26:4

presentations 4:10pretty 15:17 33:1938:12

prevalence 4:17,194:22,22 5:12 30:930:10,11

pre-ordained 32:25private 17:4probably 14:7,1220:4 22:4 23:24,2529:2,13

problem 5:14 19:1121:2,3 31:18 33:442:23 43:16 45:246:21

problems 9:10 42:4proceedings 50:10,16process 13:14 20:622:14 25:7 40:3

producer 37:3,8,1939:22

producers 31:2337:15,23 39:22

program 1:4 2:113:15,20,24 4:245:9 8:18 14:4

programs 4:14,15,1520:9

progress 39:13proper 19:25 43:11properly 19:12 41:15proposed 1:2 14:2215:2 29:8

pros 27:6protect 33:21 38:11protecting 34:18protects 12:9provide 3:23 4:414:3 15:12 40:11

providing 36:7provisional 23:11Pseudorabies 13:1913:22

public 1:6 11:3 12:912:17

pull 48:24

Session2, 060611Page 23

purebred 3:2 9:9purport 40:15purpose 23:7put6:25 8:21 9:2012:14 27:21

putting 8:14 11:1027:25

Qquarantine 6:21 8:2246:5

quarantined 7:23question 4:2,9 5:87:5,10 10:11 14:2418:19 21:19 22:1233:23 38:16 42:642:20 43:6

questions 3:18 15:921:13 22:19,20

RRaisers 3:9raises 42:20ranting 36:24rattled 28:10reach 39:8,9reaching 39:9read 27:13reading 44:7ready 19:19real 9:10 24:21realize 15:20,2124:24

realizing 16:3really 8:7 10:2520:2 24:25 27:1140:19 44:19

reason 41:20reasons 47:25recessed 49:7recognize 8:18 15:6recognized 12:13recommendations 4:5record 22:13 49:550:16

recuse 35:11

regarding 37:12regards3:24region 19:24 21:2,1732:7,10 34:7

regional 21:9 28:533:5,6

regions26:18register 12:15regular32:3regulation 14:8regulations 4:3 5:29:11

regulatory 1:2 31:13related46:2relationship26:13rely 15:23remember 13:24remiss 16:7renewal20:12replacement 2:15replacements42:13reported 50:10Reporter 1:8represent 13:1226:22 28:16

representation16:2017:25 27:19 28:633:8

representative17:1229:2,14

representatives12:25 15:14 18:1325:6 28:14

representative's37:25

represented 10:1624:7,15,18 25:16

representing3:824:23

request21:4requirements1:43:16,16,21 4:139:18 36:22 47:9

resistance 37:10resources 36:5respond5:4

response 21:9,9,2123:3,9 31:11 33:1535:13 38:18 48:3

responses 40:21responsibility 13:10responsive 31:14rest 7:3results 46:22review 20:6,12 35:1441:6

reviewing 20:9 35:12Rhode 35:25right 7:13,21 8:3,1714:23 16:22 18:1721:10 27:18 46:1148:13

Robison 2:5,8,9,193:14 9:6 17:1518:18 20:8 46:12

Rod 3:10 39:2 42:542:19

role 35:3roles 19:4room 48:18,25rotate 2:23RPR 50:6,24rule 10:5 11:23,2513:7,8 14:19 15:543:19

rules 21:24 37:9,1237:16

ruminate 34:14running 15:11runs 44:14

Ssafe 41:17 42:21sale 9:12samples 48:14satisfied 33:7saying 12:15 38:2539:24 40:2

says 10:14 11:15scale 34:17science 39:20 40:5SEAL 50:18

Session2, 060611Page 24

Secretary's 12:2013:6

see9:21 17:20 19:422:21,22 27:633:19

selected 32:15selecting 32:25send 10:3sense 4:11 5:10,117:18,23 8:3 20:2022:3

sensibility 28:22sent 20:12,16 42:1744:13

service 19:3 37:22Services 2:10,213:13,23 4:6

session 1:4,6 2:23:15,20

sessions 43:9set19:13 31:5,1035:17 50:9,11

setting 17:4seven 35:9share 6:23shed 46:19shift 5:9shifting 4:24shifts 4:14shipments 44:11significant 30:17silver 44:7similar 20:10 45:5sit2:16 32:21 40:19sitting 2:22 4:9situation 19:1721:25 31:16 47:5

situations 19:1635:7

six35:13 43:22slaughter 43:21 47:447:13

small 13:25 26:2030:21

somewhat 36:13soon 33:19 38:12

sort 4:11 14:9 35:2236:7

sound40:5,7source 42:17South9:4,25southeastern31:4Southwest 29:20Southwestern3:816:24

speak14:13 16:720:5

specific 24:13spinning 43:20spoke2:21 6:13spread 8:7 45:9spurious 43:20staff20:11,12stakeholders24:14standards 22:24standing 32:2,6 34:2standpoint 33:1341:23

start44:7state1:4,8 3:16,214:13,16,24 5:3,155:17 6:2,8,9,19,246:24 7:3,8 8:20,249:10,18 10:14 11:712:24 13:25 14:1715:3,13,21 17:4,917:10,11,16,20,2320:2,9,25 21:8,1722:8 23:8 25:5,1225:22,24 26:828:14,15,20,2329:9,17 31:17 32:833:6,14 35:18,2436:16,18 37:18,1839:2 47:9,20,23,2448:5,7 50:4,7

states 6:5,14 9:1319:21 21:11,2122:8 23:8,16 26:1626:23 27:15 28:1830:6,17,19,25 32:932:10,25 33:14

36:14 37:8 38:1741:16,16 44:6,2050:8

state's 21:21,2439:18 47:23

status 4:16,25 5:24Stenograph 50:11,13step 6:4stood 11:6stop 8:19story 30:10straddling 32:24stream 33:11stymied 38:13substantial 37:14sub-units 18:19 19:6sudden 31:18suggested 22:23suggestions 16:824:4

suis 46:13,14supervision 50:14supposed 26:7 40:2443:21

sure 7:11 9:8 18:1218:15 19:12 26:226:16,19,24 27:1828:6 38:22 41:549:5

surveillance 1:53:17 6:22 40:2547:10,13,14,16,1747:18 48:2,7

swath 36:21swine 13:20 46:13system 5:3,21 21:631:2

Ttable 37:4tackle 10:18tags 44:7take 6:15 13:7 22:1228:8 35:5 45:24

taken 6:21talk 11:23 12:4,11

Session2, 060611Page 25

13:11 30:4talked 6:6 7:2510:19 12:20 13:1635:2 37:7 40:2343:7

talking 4:23 6:1810:24 21:5,1026:20 27:17 35:2036:11

talks 17:18tangent 47:6tapped 32:20targeted 47:18TB 4:14 5:18,23 8:911:18 18:23 21:622:8,16 23:3 27:430:4,11,16 31:335:9 38:20 39:1941:8 42:11,2543:15 44:3

TB's 23:5telephone 37:22tell 11:20,22 14:541:10 44:8

tend 28:14 30:443:18

tendency 28:12term 46:4terms 10:16test 10:3 46:22testing 9:14 46:2448:7

Texan 34:15Texas 1:7,8 2:10,133:2,8 9:2,5 16:2417:10 24:23 25:1325:23 27:16 29:329:11,15,20 31:631:11,12,22 32:1432:17 34:15 35:1035:12,13 44:12,1544:16,17,22,2450:4,7

Thank 49:6thatboard 41:21thing 14:9,21 16:13

32:23 33:5,1034:12 41:3 43:23

things 7:9 13:427:24 30:24 33:2534:14 36:10 37:243:8

think5:12 6:3,6 9:29:15 10:5,14 11:2216:6,11,11 19:1920:21 22:10,2523:6 24:2,5,1525:9,10,15,1827:23 28:14 29:1230:5 31:21 34:1734:23 35:15 36:1239:8,17 40:6,9,1741:13,20 43:1745:17 48:9

thinking 13:17 18:7third27:14Thomas 6:17 10:2312:20

thought4:12 5:1314:19 20:5 22:1423:19 34:4,10

thoughts 22:13 23:2127:5

three21:18 34:940:22 47:9

throw5:8 42:7thrust 47:12time 14:10 32:450:11,17

tip5:18titer46:16today7:18 42:9topics 49:4total30:18totally26:10traceability13:8traced 42:12,16trailer10:2transcribed 50:13transcript 50:15,15transcription 50:8transparency6:18

7:6transparent 6:20tribal 10:15 11:715:4 17:5

trich 37:8,12,15trichomoniasis 37:5triggered 23:2,16tripping 46:22truck 8:14trust 6:10try 2:18 12:2 14:2321:20 23:10,1926:19 39:6

trying 33:20 44:2tuberculosis 1:239:21

turf 33:21turn 22:18 32:2 34:9turning 38:9two 4:14 12:19 14:1518:22 21:12 22:1527:4,7,10 30:832:24 33:24 34:1043:13 44:8 48:21

type 27:22 29:8,10types 26:17typewriting 50:13T.J 2:20 42:8 43:744:5

Uultimately 23:431:15 36:17 39:1840:2

unbiased 35:5understand 10:1026:4 40:20 41:7

understanding 8:2334:24

unfortunately 37:14United 26:22 27:1530:6,17,19 41:1644:6

unjaundiced 36:3USDA 2:9 12:15 35:1436:6 48:6

Session2, 060611Page 26

USDA's 23:10use3:22 4:4 37:546:4

Usually 9:6V

valid 31:24valuable 16:14value 39:25 40:10variant 46:13variety 4:5 13:3verbally 47:11versa 36:24versus 37:18vet17:9,10,11,16veterinarian3:5,1225:13,23,24 26:928:23 29:18 31:1739:2

veterinarians 12:2414:2 28:15

veterinarian's 36:1636:18 42:15

Veterinary 2:9,213:23 4:5

Vice 36:24violate 15:4 22:24visiting 18:14voice 25:17,19 26:1338:23

Wwalls 48:24want 9:20 10:18 12:313:8 15:25 17:1821:6,8 24:6,2326:7,12 28:3,531:23 37:15 38:1138:12 39:10,1142:20 46:4,7 47:11

wanted 42:7wants 12:15 33:938:10 49:5

Washington 36:2wasn't 13:24wavering 40:7

way10:12 14:22,2515:11 17:6 20:2129:24 36:15 41:742:24 46:3 48:11

West 31:6western44:6we'll19:10 48:21,2348:24

we're4:23 15:1518:6,10 21:5,1022:11 23:19 24:625:10,14,16 28:2530:8,23 31:5 32:2132:25 34:9 37:2037:21 39:9 40:641:10 47:25 48:1348:17

we've3:15,19 5:1912:18 31:18 32:1834:8 40:23

wildlife 45:23Wingo1:7 50:6,24wise 31:8wish 25:2wondering 22:6 31:2word 41:5words9:21work 2:9 9:15 15:2416:10,25 19:1521:15 22:7 28:1232:8 47:2 48:13

worked 30:14 48:10working2:11 3:2111:6 14:14,2515:19 16:19 35:2,345:17

works48:12wouldn't 28:3write11:24wrong13:18 41:1143:8 47:22

XX34:6

Y

yeah 6:12 9:19 16:2217:16 20:13 34:1447:15

year 30:25 43:13years 5:19,23 13:21York 17:11y'all 33:23

Zzone 8:22 21:8,1623:3 31:8 32:2443:4,5 44:2 45:245:13,18,21,2346:3

zones 45:19 46:6zoning 1:5 3:17 7:2540:25 42:6 47:10

11 2:5 3:141-40 1:71:00 48:18,1910:57 1:711:45 48:1711:52 49:715,000-plus 25:201911 1:7

22 1:6 2:220 13:4 50:252011 1:7 2:3 50:2524 42:14

33:00 48:2330 27:1730,000 42:14

445 48:2149 41:16

66 1:6 2:3

PROPOSED TUBERCULOSIS AND BRUCELLOSISREGULATORY FRAMEWORK

BREAKOUT SESSION NUMBER TWO ONPROGRAM (STATE) REQUIREMENTS,ZONING, AND SURVEILLANCE

Session 3 of the Public Meeting on June 6,

2011, at the Holiday Inn, 1911 1-40 East, Amarillo,

Texas, commencing at 1:06 p.m., before Kary A. Wingo, a

Court Reporter of the State of Texas.

1 SESSION 32

SESSION 32

JUNE 6, 20113

Thereupon,4

DR. ROBISON: I'm going to be trying5

to kind of lead everybody through these6

discussions. We're going to be talking about7

state/program requirements, zoning and8

surveillance.9

Let's start off first with some10

introductions. I'm Clayton Robison with11

Veterinary Services here in Texas.12

DR. MICHALKE: Mark Michalke with13

TAHC.14

MR. CHAPMAN: I'm Terry Chapman with15

Livestock Marketing Association.16

MR. WILLIAMS: Brad Williams, Animal17

Health Commission.18

MR. WINEGARNER: Josh Winegarner with19

Texas Cattle Feeders Association.20

MR. CARVER: Jesse Carver, Livestock21

Marketing Association.22

MR. DEWALD: Scott Dewald, Oklahoma23

Cattlemen's.24

DR. ELLIS: Dee Ellis, Animal Health25

1 SESSION 33

Commission of Texas.2

DR. ROBISON: We will begin our3

topic through the state requirements, zoning4

and surveillance, and do a quick overview of5

some of the topics for each.6

We didn't get too far in the last7

group, but I'll just give y'all a quick8

overview of some questions, general group9

questions we have. One pertains to that the10

group will discuss the use of an advisory11

group to provide assistance to Veterinary12

Services in regards to certain program13

activities, and there's questions about, if14

we had a board, how would it be -- what15

would it consist of, and a lot of other16

things.17

Another part of the state/program18

requirements is the working group discussed19

that one possible consequence of noncompliance20

is loss of state status, otherwise known as21

inconsistent, or a reduced status, which is22

provisionally consistent, and questions for23

that.24

The working group discussed the25

1 SESSION 34

importance of states or tribes reporting2

certain TB or brucellosis activities in their3

state and tribal lands. That came up quite4

often. It was about how to get the5

information out, instead of hearing things6

through the grapevine kind of deal, to make7

that information available.8

The working group discussed that9

certain situations require a review of a10

state to determine if its status was11

appropriate. And the working group was in12

consensus that a state or tribe's status13

should not be downgraded automatically because14

disease was found in wildlife, and only in15

wildlife.16

On zoning, there was some discussion17

about between the short-term and long-term. 18

On the long-term plan, we discussed that it19

should be required when TB or brucellosis was20

not eradicated within a one-year period, and21

formal zoning could be part of this22

containment plan.23

And, finally, on zoning, the working24

group discussed long-term containment plan25

1 SESSION 35

would be reviewed by advisory board and2

Veterinary Services.3

And then on surveillance, it was a4

fairly short one. It says the working group5

discussed several components to surveillance6

that included national surveillance, slaughter7

surveillance, surveillance of at-risk8

populations and other surveillance. So the9

main part would be focusing on slaughter and10

at-risk populations to maximize use of their11

funds.12

So if y'all have any general13

thoughts about any of this, y'all can speak14

up at any time. I'll just start trying to15

go down the list, however y'all want to16

approach it.17

Some questions for the thought of18

establishing an advisory group, some of the19

questions here would be: Should we have an20

advisory board to provide a variety of21

recommendations to Veterinary Services? 22

Should there be two advisory boards, one for23

brucellosis and one for TB?24

Who should be on the advisory board?25

1 SESSION 36

How should the members be chosen? What2

should be the length of service on the3

board? And what roles would you like to see4

for the advisory board?5

DR. MICHALKE: Open it up to any6

discussion on the advisory board.7

DR. ELLIS: Well, my question is8

what's the intended role of -- what does9

USDA have in mind for an advisory board? 10

Because this is obviously their idea.11

So, I mean, the only one that I'm12

familiar with is the Pseudorabies Advisory13

Board, which really wasn't advisory. They14

were actually making decisions about state15

statuses and about rules and regulations and16

movement of hogs.17

So my question would be is that the18

intent here? Is the USDA abdicating their19

authority to an advisory board, or are they20

just asking for input and they're going to21

retain the right to do things as they see22

fit? And that's a big difference.23

There, obviously, needs to be two24

different groups. Brucellosis and TB, in my25

1 SESSION 37

opinion, are different diseases. Texas2

Cattle Feeders may absolutely need to be on3

the TB advisory board, and they may not have4

any interest at all in brucellosis.5

So I think, from the industry6

standpoint, at least, you're going to have to7

separate it out so different parties can8

participate as they see fit.9

MR. WINEGARNER: From my perspective,10

it does depend on the role of the advisory11

committee. Is it just something for them to12

come and talk and feel like they've been13

able to air concerns, or is it to provide14

input that's going to be taken and used15

productively to make the program better?16

My guys don't need to attend any17

more meetings. That's kind of why they send18

me to meetings. But since -- you know, I19

probably can't serve on the advisory group. 20

Anybody in my capacity probably couldn't be21

able to, for a number of reasons.22

But I would feel -- I'd hate to23

nominate somebody for the advisory group and24

then them get there and feel like it was25

1 SESSION 38

just a waste of their time. So I think if2

we flesh out a little bit more what the3

advisory group will do, their role, I'd say4

–- well, I'll leave it at that for now.5

She's making me nervous on how6

free-flowing I can get with some of the7

things I say.8

DR. ELLIS: That was Josh from the9

Cattle Feeders, by the way.10

DR. ROBISON: It's open to11

discussion. Should there even be a board,12

and what it consists of? What do you want13

them to be able to do? How far do you14

want to carry it?15

MR. WINEGARNER: Well, I mean, we16

obviously want to have an opportunity to17

provide input throughout the process, and18

from that aspect, the board is a great idea19

-- or the committee or advisory group, or20

whatever we call it.21

But, again, if it's just to show up22

at a meeting, air your concerns, and then23

we're going to ignore them later, that's not24

productive either. I'm not saying that25

1 SESSION 39

that's what happens or that's what you're2

going to do, but it's a concern.3

DR. ELLIS: Well, is it just another4

advisory group to the Secretary of Ag, or is5

it actually the board's going to establish6

state statuses and whether they're consistent7

or inconsistent or whatever the term is?8

My understanding, the Pseudorabies9

Board, they made the call and it was10

effective. But I would agree with Josh. If11

this is just a group that's going to give12

input, it's not as good an idea.13

DR. MICHALKE: I think what I've14

heard in the working group and everything,15

just my honest take on it and everything, I16

think it may be going down the primrose path17

a little bit, because right now I don't see18

any movement to actually have industry, per19

se, as part of that group or work group.20

I mean, probably what's on the table21

right now is animal health officials. And22

what they're looking at -- and this is just23

from what I get from the working group -- is24

maybe a subgroup thereto, which we have25

1 SESSION 310

already. I mean, you've got that in Texas.2

MR. WINEGARNER: From a Texas3

perspective, I would feel comfortable, I4

mean, with any of the staff of the Animal5

Health Commission, or if the commissioners6

themselves, most of them, wanted to be on7

the advisory board. And I think it would be8

productive.9

And that's where I don't -- if it's10

going to be what Dee's talking about and11

they're going to make the call on state12

status and things like that, then it makes a13

lot of sense for it to be more of a14

veterinary-focused group, animal health related15

group.16

But I still think you're going to17

need some perspective from the actual18

day-to-day producers on how some of the ideas19

will be translated in the countryside or how20

they'll be enacted.21

DR. ELLIS: Well, business models of22

the different industries, from feeders, to23

cow/calf, to dairies, are different enough24

that you can't expect, really, any one person25

1 SESSION 311

to understand all the nuances.2

And I would want industry3

representation on there if it's real4

board-making decisions that USDA is going to5

follow. Then that's going to make it fall6

under the FACA rules, and it changes the7

process, but I'm okay with that, I mean,8

personally.9

DR. ROBISON: I might mention some10

aspects that came up in the last group. It11

was presented, well, what if, say, you had12

five or six state veterinarians on the13

advisory board. And these state14

veterinarians would have the input from the15

producer groups in their state and they could16

listen to their concerns and then carry that17

forward into the group itself.18

DR. MICHALKE: There's no real19

makeup of this. I mean, there's been20

suggestions, and that's what we were looking21

for in the other group. They talked about,22

you know, pros and cons, but the fact of a23

possibility -- and this was just brought up. 24

I'm just bringing up -- it was brought up. 25

1 SESSION 312

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with it.2

But the fact of having maybe the3

option to set up an advisory board to deal4

with the situation, maybe not have a set5

one. On the flip side of that, you know,6

there needs to be consistency there too. 7

So, you know, although it may sound like a8

good idea to deal with this part or that9

part of the United States, if you don't have10

consistency, then you really don't have a lot11

of anything either, and that was brought up.12

MR. WINEGARNER: And that's -- to13

the idea of putting five or six state vets14

on it, I mean, I don't know that that's --15

if all five or six of those came from the16

Northeast, the Midwest, and the Upper17

Midwest, and then one of the center states,18

then it doesn't really reflect all production19

throughout the country, I guess, is where I20

would go with that.21

So the people that you may have on22

the board wouldn't understand what a feeder23

animal is or crossing of Mexican steers for24

feeder purposes. Unless it was set that25

1 SESSION 313

you're going to have geographical2

representation on there, then I don't think3

it would make a lot of sense.4

MR. CHAPMAN: Or even regional5

advisory, because every region is going to6

have its own setup.7

MR. CARVER: Everybody is going to8

have their own problems.9

DR. MICHALKE: Peculiar to that10

region.11

MR. CHAPMAN: Exactly.12

MR. CARVER: And it would be hard13

for five or six state vets from across the14

country to sit down and try to relate to a15

particular involvement in South Texas, if16

they're not prone to the environment or how17

things operate.18

DR. MICHALKE: Well, I told them it19

didn't count if Texas wasn't on there anyway.20

MR. WINEGARNER: And there may be21

some -- I don't know. Just thinking out22

loud, I wonder if there's a role that the TB23

committee at USAHA could play in this. I24

mean, you've got both animal health25

1 SESSION 314

professionals and industry involved with that2

committee. I don't know how that would work3

out, but it's a thought.4

DR. ROBISON: So you're saying have5

the TB committee be the advisory board kind6

of thing?7

MR. WINEGARNER: I don't know. I'm8

just wondering what -- is there something9

with that relationship that's already10

established that we could use.11

DR. ROBISON: Resident experts12

already in place?13

MR. WINEGARNER: Yeah.14

DR. MICHALKE: You could liaison15

somebody from that into a role.16

MR. DEWALD: Well, I think Josh has17

a really valid point about USAHA or NCBA, or18

any of these other organizations. All have19

policy-making opportunities, can draft20

resolutions, can forward them to USDA, with21

directives, with attention given to particular22

areas.23

So the thing that concerns me about24

an advisory board on these two programs is25

1 SESSION 315

we need to make a rule that's as2

un-cumbersome as possible. We talked earlier3

about how hard it is to do an appeal. And4

I don't know that you want to add another5

layer there that slows down this thing that6

you're trying to speed up. It may be7

counter-intuitive, when we already have these8

other vehicles out there.9

I mean, I really appreciate USDA10

even thinking about this. It tells me that11

they're really open to suggestions and input.12

But I think, from a -- I wouldn't13

formalize something that's going to slow down14

the process would be my comment.15

DR. MICHALKE: Any other issues or16

comments on advisory? If not, consequences17

of staying within state requirements,18

consequences of noncompliance and loss of19

status. Any comments on -- should there be20

any noncompliance issues, you know, that are21

out there that automatically require a state22

to be given an inconsistent status, such as23

lack of reporting, failure to conduct24

surveillance, et cetera?25

1 SESSION 316

And under which situations, if any,2

would inconsistent status be tied to3

increased testing requirements or interstate4

movement? Should there be a limit on the5

amount of time a state's allowed to stay in6

a provisional status?7

MR. WINEGARNER: What page is that8

on. I need to read that.9

DR. MICHALKE: Well, as far as draft10

-- three, four and five.11

MR. CARVER: Reporting requirements,12

compliance, accountability and scope of the13

program.14

DR. ROBISON: If they have the15

standards for each state or tried to -- the16

standards for them to meet, and apparently17

they're not meeting part of those standards,18

how to go at it.19

DR. MICHALKE: I guess at what point20

-- you know, are there any comments at what21

point it would trigger an inconsistent status22

or would trigger restrictions? Any comments23

on that?24

MR. WILLIAMS: I think those25

1 SESSION 317

guidelines -- sorry, Josh. Go ahead, if you2

want.3

MR. WINEGARNER: I understand the4

need for some sort of a consequence, but if5

the goal of the program is to eradicate the6

disease, then if you put a consequence on a7

state that's further -- more restrictive than8

what they have today, and they can't meet9

what they're supposed to meet today, then10

there's no way they're going to be able to11

meet additional requirements.12

So the only consequence, then, falls13

on the producer. They're the ones that are14

going to be punished, not the states for15

being unable to comply with the requirements. 16

So that's where I think it gets a little17

tricky on how you put this together.18

And a lot of it may just be that19

the state doesn't have the money or people,20

manpower, to follow all the requirements that21

we have on them -- that we'll have on them.22

DR. MICHALKE: Brad, do you have23

something?24

MR. WILLIAMS: Yeah. I think, you25

1 SESSION 318

know, taking what Josh said, but I think2

there's going to be a fine line in there3

that you have to have some sort of4

requirement in there just to make sure the5

process is followed, not like we were before,6

two infected herds and you're out. I don't7

think we need to go back down that road.8

But at the same time, if it's not9

-- you know, not really looking at an10

incidence or, I guess, the percent of herds11

infected, that type of stuff, but more of12

are they doing what they're supposed to; are13

they reporting.14

I mean, if a state just doesn't do15

the reporting and fails to notify the other16

states what their problems are, I don't think17

we can just let that go on indefinitely,18

because it puts the producers in the other19

states at risk by bringing those animals in.20

So there's a fine line in there21

between punishing the producer, but still22

making the state do what they need to do.23

DR. MICHALKE: Well, I don't think24

the intention of this is, you know, one25

1 SESSION 319

strike and you're out deal. I think it's2

more of an infrastructure, the state itself3

dealing with, you know, more than probably4

one situation is what I would think, you5

know, a program problem that needs to be6

fixed.7

It's not focused on one area. And8

I think that's where they're going with this9

and what I've gleaned from it.10

MR. WILLIAMS: I could see that, if11

there was an advisory board, being able to12

look at that and judge it on a case by13

case. You know, anything could happen. I14

mean, in Texas, we may have half the state15

burning this year and a hurricane this16

summer. And if we have TB on top of17

everything else, we might not fit the18

requirements for that year. It happens every19

other year.20

So I think we need to look at the21

big picture and there needs to be some22

consequence just to make sure we are23

following the process, but it doesn't need to24

be a hard line.25

1 SESSION 320

DR. MICHALKE: No. And there was2

talk within the working group -- I'll say3

this -- to that point, that by doing it on4

this platform, taking it out of the more5

formal, that there could be a little bit6

more variability and a little bit more7

flexibility within those things.8

You know, of course, there's always9

two sides to everything. You know, it10

depends on if it's you or if it's somebody11

else, you know, and who you're protecting or12

what you're protecting.13

MR. WINEGARNER: What role would the14

APHIS personnel be able to do to assist15

state animal health officials in compliance? 16

Say you were a small state that didn't have17

the resources to have the staff available to18

do everything they needed to.19

Could Federal assist the state with20

being able to comply? That would be, you21

know, additional manpower to help out a22

cash-strapped state.23

DR. ROBISON: Well, yeah, that's24

been bounced around too. We refer to the25

1 SESSION 321

smaller states -- everybody always picks on2

Rhode Island. They have two people in the3

whole deal, but if they kind of form a4

coalition with the neighbors on things and5

also make their needs known to the Veterinary6

Services Agency, you know, this is what we're7

looking at, what can we do kind of thing.8

MR. WINEGARNER: But take it to a9

bigger state, like New Mexico. I mean,10

they're a big state and they have a lot of11

cattle. They don't have a lot of money and12

a lot of manpower resources. That's where13

I'm looking at it.14

I think the Vermonts and Rhode15

Islands can kind of fend for themselves,16

because they don't have a lot of animals17

they need to --18

DR. ROBISON: Well, I'll give you --19

I think I understand what you're saying. 20

Like, say, we have a large dairy herd in New21

Mexico or California that's infected, and22

you've got tens of thousands of animals that23

need to be tested, not only that herd, but24

trace-out herds.25

1 SESSION 322

We can call up a task force and2

have people coming in from other states and3

helping test the cattle. So, you know, that4

has been done already. Is that in line with5

what you're thinking, or something else?6

MR. WINEGARNER: That's part of it. 7

To gain the certification initially, I'm8

guessing, you're going to have to meet9

certain factors, be it just administrative,10

but also some --11

DR. MICHALKE: Just the12

infrastructure, I think, is what he's talking13

about, to set up the program.14

MR. WINEGARNER: Right.15

DR. MICHALKE: And I'm going to16

defer to you, because he asked the Feds.17

DR. ROBISON: Well, as far as being 18

–- 19

MR. WINEGARNER: And I don't have to20

get an answer today. I'm just throwing that21

up as a potential question that maybe needs22

to be addressed as we go through the23

rule-making process.24

DR. MICHALKE: You know, that's25

1 SESSION 323

certainly legit. I mean, from the state2

aspect, you know, us in Texas, well, New3

Mexico is right next to us. And they're4

good neighbors and everything, but we're5

doing all we can to keep the alligators off6

our butts right now while we're draining the7

swamp.8

You know, so I mean, as far as9

those coalitions, it sounds good and maybe10

they'll work up there in the Northeast and11

everything, but I don't know, when you start12

talking big country and a lot more -- how13

that's going to work.14

And I think that's what you were15

kind of -- y'all were getting to a little16

bit, as far as that.17

MR. WINEGARNER: And I would say18

that, if there is a situation that a state19

needs to be given time to comply instead of20

just immediately losing certification or21

classification, maybe they'd have a22

provisional status that allows them time to23

fix the problem and regain that without24

having officially been reclassified.25

1 SESSION 324

DR. ROBISON: And I would presume2

that that should be the case, unless there's3

some outrageous violation where they need to4

be downgraded immediately. That's been5

brought up in our working groups.6

DR. MICHALKE: Yeah, I think that's7

always been the thought within the working8

group. It just goes back to your other9

question of, you know, how do you get that10

basic plan and everything in place there to11

start with, is where I, you know, question12

it, you know, look at what we've heard, some13

questions about that. And that's something14

that's not worked out.15

DR. ROBISON: Any other thoughts on16

that particular topic? Another thing we all17

thought there was a need for is sharing18

information. You hear about an infected19

herd, you know, somebody got a TB infected20

herd up in Ohio or Virginia or something,21

and that's about all you hear. What's going22

on?23

And you may or may not get a trace24

to your state. If you do get a trace,25

1 SESSION 325

well, it would be good to have some2

background information, so just be more open,3

as much as feasible, while still protecting4

person, somebody's personal information.5

You know, here in Texas, they have6

the news releases. I think Bonnie's doing7

that. I think those are real good.8

MR. WINEGARNER: See, I thought9

that's how Mark hurt his finger.10

DR. MICHALKE: I tried to use that11

on my staff. They don't go for it. They12

say you just use these two anyway.13

DR. ROBISON: Do y'all have any14

thoughts on how to -- what you'd like to15

hear, or have we got good enough?16

MR. WINEGARNER: Well, you kind of17

talked about it a little bit over in the18

other, about your concerns.19

MR. DEWALD: Well, I think we do20

need more information to the state21

veterinarians; that's clear. I think we need22

to, though, be careful that we don't just23

have completely open process where every test24

result is sent out, that's open to the media25

1 SESSION 326

and everybody else, because it serves no2

function.3

But if the information serves a4

function and the animal health professionals5

in each state are -- need to be receiving6

that in a timely fashion. I think the7

equine herpes example is a great example. I8

mean, all the data is there. Boom. You9

know exactly what's going on.10

It was helpful for me as a layperson11

and, working at Cattlemen's, I'm getting12

calls from our members: What are you13

hearing about this? And you say: Oh, I've14

got the report right here; here's the15

situation.16

It's a lot easier to manage under17

those scenarios than: Oh, we're in the18

blind; we have no idea what HQ's doing.19

And so that's -- I think you can20

give that information out at particular21

levels and it can be held in confidence, you22

know, with the state veterinarians.23

And like you say, I think it also24

allows them to gear up in the event that25

1 SESSION 327

they do have a trace to their state and be2

more familiar with what the heck's going on3

and have their hierarchy informed: This is4

what's happening; this is what could happen;5

if it does, we're going to do this, this and6

this, and everybody's not running around at7

the last minute.8

DR. ROBISON: Make a good, informed9

decision.10

MR. DEWALD: Exactly.11

MR. CHAPMAN: Is that possible to12

disseminate that information without it being13

total public information?14

MR. DEWALD: Oh, I think so. I15

mean --16

MR. CHAPMAN: And I know where17

you're going, the Mississippi cow.18

MR. DEWALD: Yeah.19

MR. CHAPMAN: I mean, was -- and20

because of the open policy that they had21

developed, that thing hit the news -- and22

there was nothing to it. The end result was23

there was nothing to it, but it was very24

damaging.25

1 SESSION 328

MR. DEWALD: It caused a panic.2

MR. WINEGARNER: And that's where I3

think maybe you set it up in such a way4

that, if you have a presumption of a5

diseased animal, that is shared amongst the6

animal health professionals only.7

If you have a confirmation, then8

that's different. I think that can be9

disseminated to everybody, because, if it's10

just on a presumption, you have the risk of11

causing a market shift on a rumor, rather12

than on a fact.13

DR. ROBISON: Which has happened14

before.15

MR. WINEGARNER: It's happened a16

lot.17

DR. MICHALKE: A couple of times.18

MR. WINEGARNER: And, you know,19

that's scary, from our standpoint, especially.20

DR. MICHALKE: Well, I guess this is21

more geared towards state more so than22

industry, really, that question and that23

quandary there, because there are those24

issues between -- and it doesn't matter if25

1 SESSION 329

it's, you know, a state and federal2

cooperative within a state. I mean, there's3

disparity in some information, to say the4

least. I guess I would say that. Or lack5

of information, at times.6

DR. ROBISON: And some of these7

states, you never really hear anything8

whatsoever out of them.9

MR. WINEGARNER: And I still think10

there will probably be rumors associated with11

this, because somebody's going to tell12

somebody else. But if they have accurate13

information on a presumption and it's14

translated that way, then that's still going15

to be different than, hey, did you hear that16

Arkansas has got this. You know, it's going17

to be a --18

MR. CARVER: Well, just like the19

news releases. I mean, they're pretty short. 20

You know, what you guys put out, I mean, if21

those get passed around, then that's not that22

bad.23

DR. MICHALKE: Because it's24

controlled.25

1 SESSION 330

MR. CARVER: It's controlled; it's2

accurate, but it's not putting more than --3

DR. MICHALKE: And even in the best4

intentions -- a good example of that is with5

EHV. I didn't have any horses down in my6

region. Actually, in Texas, you can kind of7

draw a line from Kerrville straight across8

the state, and everything was above.9

In this case, we were free, but the10

statement came out in one of the deals about11

Brazos Valley Equine Clinic, or whatever. 12

Well, we're in Brazos Valley. Well, it was13

in Weatherford, actually, you know, because14

it was a couple of brothers that had -- and15

a lot of people failed to read any past16

that. So, I mean, that's the thing that you17

watch.18

So Weatherford, you know, we're19

talking 300 miles north. You know, that was20

the name of it, I mean, because they were in21

partnership, brothers, or however they've got22

their business set up. But, I mean, it23

stirred up -- I mean, phones started ringing.24

DR. ROBISON: Let's move on to25

1 SESSION 331

another one. This one -- the last one on2

the program requirements or state requirements3

pertains to disease found in wildlife.4

The working group was in consensus5

that the state status should not be6

downgraded because disease is found in7

wildlife -- only in wildlife. What8

activities would you want to encourage if9

disease is found only in wildlife?10

MR. WINEGARNER: Well, this is where11

I'm confused, because when I asked the12

question this morning, USDA doesn't have13

authority over wildlife, so --14

DR. MICHALKE: I guess what they're15

asking here in this question is your thoughts16

on increased surveillance on what they have17

authority over. I mean, because they do not18

-- I mean, and thoughts on, okay, you know,19

state status is not going to be downgraded20

because it's found only in wildlife right21

now.22

But, you know, if you're in State X23

and you've got -- if you're in Michigan and24

you've got it in deer and you say you only25

1 SESSION 332

have it in deer, there's going to be a lot2

of states out there that's going to want you3

to prove that you only have it in deer.4

So it's to the point of what your5

thoughts would be. I'm assuming that's where6

they're going with this, Josh.7

DR. ROBISON: To follow up on the8

wildlife angle, as far as jurisdiction, you9

know, since we've found what we have in10

Michigan and Yellowstone, basically the state11

animal health officials would be partnering12

with the local wildlife -- it would be like13

Texas Parks and Wildlife.14

So we have done some things, like we15

had that TB herd there in Central Texas16

where we had some disease surveillance around17

where that herd was, and that was in18

partnership with the Texas Parks and19

Wildlife, under their guidance, if you will.20

MR. WINEGARNER: USDA Wildlife21

Services doesn't have component plans at all?22

DR. ROBISON: They do some23

surveillance, but they have to get permission24

as well.25

1 SESSION 333

DR. ELLIS: I think their point is2

that if you have -- I think where they're3

headed is if you have a wildlife reservoir,4

they're going to require those states that5

have a wildlife reservoir to write it in6

their annual plans how they're going to7

prevent the transmission from wildlife to8

domestic livestock.9

MR. WINEGARNER: Well, I don't know10

-- yeah, the reservoirs, we've got a few of11

them. I mean, we're getting more and more12

of them. But what about just the wild,13

roaming actual wildlife, you know, that's not14

on the reservoir? That's also a concern, I15

guess. At least in Texas, wildlife's owned16

by the state. Is it the same in Oklahoma?17

DR. ELLIS: Well, their intention is18

that, if you have a TB or brucellosis herd,19

they're going to expect you to do20

surveillance around that herd, just like we21

did in Texas with this last cattle herd we22

had in South Texas. We went and caught23

animals. We did it with the dairy that Brad24

was talking about in San Angelo. And we're25

1 SESSION 334

doing it from now on on TB infected feeders2

on grass.3

We're going to probably be obligated4

-- we might as well just start. We're5

looking to prove a negative, but I think --6

I don't even know how you would find it in7

the wildlife if it was not in the livestock,8

because you wouldn't necessarily be looking.9

So that's where they don't have the10

authority. USDA is not going to tell the11

Parks Service, or whoever, to go catch deer.12

I think as it relates to a domestic13

disease, you've got to rule out that as a14

possible source. And I think it's okay. I15

think it's probably warranted right now. 16

Some of the cattle problems in the Midwest,17

there's absolutely a connection between deer18

and elk and cattle.19

MR. WINEGARNER: I'm looking at it,20

I guess, from a funding aspect, the focus21

being on the actual production animals rather22

than on wildlife. And is there a way to23

capture revenue from some other means to pay24

for the wildlife component of it?25

1 SESSION 335

DR. ELLIS: I mean, just look at2

Michigan, look at it both ways. USDA's3

authority is to tell the Michigan Animal4

Health Department to take care of the issue,5

which they've done.6

Then it is a state problem. It's a7

state industry/wildlife perspective at the8

state level. And you're right, it could9

become punitive. If you're a small state10

without resources, it could be hard to manage11

that.12

Look at it from this way. If13

you're next door to that state, you want14

them to figure it out, or you don't want15

their animals. So it's probably a reasonable16

discussion to have. I think it's probably17

okay. That's our position.18

MR. WINEGARNER: I mean, I agree19

with the discussion. I'm just trying to20

figure out the role that we play in this and21

how do we -- I mean, like you mentioned a22

second ago, do you use -- and maybe you23

answered the question, Dee, is that you're24

not going to have it in wildlife unless you25

1 SESSION 336

already have it in the domestic population.2

DR. ELLIS: You're probably not3

going to know. Look at Minnesota next to4

Michigan. Michigan says they have a5

reservoir; they admit it; we've got it. 6

Minnesota had deer with TB, but they said,7

no, this is not a reservoir; it's a8

component, but it's a reflection of cattle9

disease spreading in deer, not a permanent10

problem in the deer.11

I think our perspective from a long12

ways off would be, all right, we might take13

it at face value, but we're going to expect14

you to continue to do some surveillance to15

prove that, because that's easy to say and16

hard to prove.17

And I think that probably is18

reasonable for USDA to require states like19

that to continue to do surveillance so we20

feel comfortable, because they did get their21

status upgraded.22

MR. WINEGARNER: How easily23

transmissible is it from species to species,24

and is it more of an issue with regard to25

1 SESSION 337

captives, captive cervids?2

DR. ELLIS: Well, the simple animal3

to find it is coyotes. That's the best4

animal, if you think you have a wildlife5

reservoir, because they eat everything that's6

dead or they eat something else that got it.7

So I think if you were to get it8

established, which is hard -- in some areas,9

you don't have the stocking rate. Up in10

Michigan, up in the north, they get -- they11

have the number of deer, and they're12

congregated in feeding locations. So it's13

probably pretty easy -- obviously, it's14

pretty easy to spread.15

Was it hard to get started? Yes. 16

It probably took many, many years. But a17

state like Texas where we don't have the18

stocking -- you know, have the density of19

deer per acre, it would be a lot harder for20

us to have that. But could we get a little21

localized outbreak? Absolutely.22

And that's why we're going to look23

for it, and we would expect other states to24

do the same. So far, Wildlife Services, you25

1 SESSION 338

know, which is another USDA agency, has been2

amenable to helping us at no cost. They3

were able to go catch wild hogs for us and4

they went out there and -- and also the5

academic institutions sometimes have a6

research interest.7

So on focused -- on an area like8

where you just have one case, it won't -- it9

shouldn't be hard for a state to get10

surveillance around that ranch pretty easily,11

with the resources they have.12

But if you had a whole part of a13

state, you know, infected, where you have to14

have long-term surveillance over a wide area,15

then it could become a funding issue for16

sure.17

But in whose interest is it? It's18

in that state's industry -- their cattle19

industry's interest to get it out of there. 20

So I think the bigger the scope, probably21

the easier it is to get the attention of22

those that need to provide funding, at least23

it has been so far.24

MR. DEWALD: Doesn't the first part25

1 SESSION 339

of that say that the working group's2

recommendation is that, in the event that3

it's found in the native deer population,4

that does not count against the state? Is5

that correct?6

DR. ROBISON: Correct.7

DR. MICHALKE: Correct.8

MR. DEWALD: I totally agree with9

that. I think that's --10

DR. ELLIS: It warrants further11

investigation.12

MR. DEWALD: Sure, sure. That's one13

of those things that has been hanging over14

our head, wondering. I think the State of15

Oklahoma has done some surveillance during16

deer season, and so far everything has looked17

really good.18

But we have a growing cervid19

population, deer farms, and that interface20

between that -- and those deer are moving a21

lot. So that's probably my major --22

DR. ELLIS: You would think captive23

cervids, they're not supposed to be24

commingling with wild deer, so their25

1 SESSION 340

transmission risk to cattle maybe right2

across the fence is legitimate, but that's3

probably less likely to be a wide-spread,4

in-the-forest kind of an issue. That's going5

to be one ranch to another ranch, or one set6

of animals to another in close proximity.7

MR. DEWALD: I guess my concern --8

and this may not be scientifically sound. 9

If it isn't, please tell me and I'll quit10

worrying about it. We require a TB test on11

cervids coming into the state of Oklahoma,12

but we know what the accuracy is on those13

tests and we know that two years later,14

after they come into the state, they could15

be in complete confinement and still have a16

reaction, because the test is just not that17

good.18

So as that industry kind of blossoms19

right now, I'm curious if maybe we're drawing20

some in. Yeah, we're testing for it, and21

the deer guys will say, oh, we test. I22

mean, there's no -- that's not accurate. 23

Just because you test doesn't mean it doesn't24

have TB. It could manifest years later,25

1 SESSION 341

correct?2

DR. ELLIS: (Nods head up and down.)3

MR. DEWALD: And that's where my4

kind of concern is.5

DR. ROBISON: I'll just start6

reading here. On zoning, it says the7

working group discussed that zoning should8

consist of short-term and long-term9

containment activities.10

In short-term containment, the11

following activities must occur: The12

issuance of quarantines, conducting13

epidemiological investigations, testing of14

adjacent contact or potential herds, and15

addressing or evaluating other potential16

risks.17

What other actions, if any, are18

needed that would help ensure that other19

states do not implement interstate movement20

requirements? Basically, what all besides21

that needs to be done to give some assurance22

to other states that things are under23

control, that we don't need extra testing?24

MR. WILLIAMS: I think, going back25

1 SESSION 342

to what we talked about before, it's probably2

just assumed that it would happen, but after3

the other questions, I'm not so sure. You4

can go through all that, but if that's not5

reported to other states, they may not feel6

comfortable with their program.7

So the transparency and the reporting8

of all the activities that they're doing is9

going to be needed for other states not to10

increase their regulations.11

DR. ROBISON: So good communication.12

Like status report? Situation report?13

MR. WILLIAMS: Well, there's some14

things we don't hear about until the end15

after the investigation is totally wrapped16

up. And it leaves you, as a neighboring17

state, wondering what's going on, sometimes18

for two years, while they're getting to the19

bottom of it.20

So I think status reports and, you21

know, just having a communication line that22

you can ask questions and, you know, see if23

your fears are scientifically based, or are24

you just scared because you're ignorant of25

1 SESSION 343

the information.2

DR. ELLIS: Yeah, the communication3

would include open evaluation of the4

activities, because you have states now with5

TB investigations under way. We would assume6

USDA's involved in that and is ensuring that7

they're done professionally and completely,8

but I don't have any way to prove that.9

So if your industry wants that10

assurance, the state vet has to have a way11

to tell them, with some authority or12

certainty, that they know -- or they feel13

comfortable that everything is taking place.14

We have states whose state vets have15

been replaced on short notice. They have16

resource issues. And it may not even be17

their fault, but this process needs to allow18

for open evaluation. In other words, one19

state's epidemiologist should be able to20

evaluate what another state's epidemiologist21

is up to.22

And if they don't feel it's23

appropriate -- and as I said in the24

beginning -- and I'm Dee Ellis from Texas --25

1 SESSION 344

preemption. States should have the right to2

make decisions about entry requirements into3

their state. If they're wrong, they'll pay4

the economic price; their industries will5

suffer. If they're not wrong, they're6

protecting themselves.7

So until you have a process that8

allows us to make our own judgments, then we9

have to depend upon USDA. And with the10

Vision 2015 reductions and their involvement,11

something's got to give. Either give us12

more information or do it yourself and tell13

us what you came up with, but there needs to14

be some way for us to evaluate actions in15

other states.16

MR. WINEGARNER: Dee, I agree with17

your comment on preemption. But I have a18

little bit of a concern, because I don't19

want a state, based off of political20

reasoning, not scientific reasoning, making21

rules to protect -- what they consider taking22

protectionist actions that they think will23

help their local industry, but could harm the24

national industry.25

1 SESSION 345

DR. ELLIS: Has that happened? Do2

you have an example of that?3

MR. WINEGARNER: Country of origin4

labeling is an example.5

DR. ELLIS: That's international.6

MR. WINEGARNER: That's international.7

DR. ELLIS: I'm just not aware that8

at the state level that's really happened. 9

Our systems are too intermingled. I mean,10

you guys, you have members in multiple11

states.12

MR. WINEGARNER: Oh, I understand13

that. But I could see where there's a14

misunderstanding or a concern amongst some15

people about importation of Mexican feeders16

or Canadian feeders that say that, well,17

we're no longer going to take any animals18

from Texas or New Mexico or Arizona.19

So that limits the ability of20

breeding stock and commercial cows to move to21

those other states, and could impact -- you22

know, you've got two different segments.23

DR. ELLIS: I agree with you. Like24

I said, though, in my remarks, the hole in25

1 SESSION 346

this right now is on the systems, the2

industries that have channels of animals that3

move from place to place.4

And, you know, if the rules are5

really based on regionalization and6

risk-based, science-based decisions, then your7

concerns should be addressed in a process8

that allows one state to prove to another9

state that there's not a disease risk.10

Of course, politics, you can't -- I11

can't figure that out. I just know at the12

interstate level, so far, most state vets are13

very reluctant to impose movement restrictions14

without really good reason, because they know15

it could turn around on them in a heartbeat.16

So I just have -- I think it's more17

likely that a state's not taking care of18

their business than it would be that a state19

would impose, you know, a hardship on you to20

move your product, because I see the one21

thing happening now and I don't see the22

other thing. In my career, it hasn't23

happened. That's just my perspective on it.24

MS. MILLIS: If you've not had an25

1 SESSION 347

opportunity to weigh in on the third round2

of feedback, you can join up with that group3

at about five minutes after the hour.4

It's 1:56, by my clock right now.5

Thank you for your robust feedback here. 6

When we're done with that, I think we'll7

join up in the middle room. And that's just8

as a close-out for anybody who may have any9

final comments. I think we have the most10

tables in that middle room.11

DR. ROBISON: That will be roughly12

3:00?13

MS. MILLIS: Yeah, right about then.14

Let's say 3:05 or 3:07.15

MR. WINEGARNER: On the concept of16

zoning, I like the idea of being able,17

especially for a state the size of Texas, to18

not have movement restrictions on the whole19

state if you know that the disease incident20

is in a particular portion of the state.21

But Dee's got a good point, also,22

that besides just geographical concerns, we23

might want to look at industry segments. 24

You know, if it's a dairy issue and you25

1 SESSION 348

haven't had an interaction with that group of2

dairy animals, then why should there be any3

movement restriction on other segments of the4

beef industry?5

DR. ELLIS: Well, California is a6

perfect example of your point. They've had7

four TB infected herds, and they can't --8

there's really not a close correlation9

between any one of the four. So what's that10

tell you? They have a dairy problem.11

So their beef cattle, absolutely, the12

way the rules are set right now, allow13

states to assume their beef are free. In14

Texas, we are allowing California beef cattle15

to enter as they're free. It was the right16

thing to do.17

But what's that mean, back to the18

zoning? It doesn't make sense. It doesn't19

make sense to geographically zone the Chino20

Valley when infections are not related to21

proximity, when you look at the DNA22

fingerprints. So that goes back to -- that23

would lead you to think that's a national24

issue that needs a national approach, or a25

1 SESSION 349

systems approach for the dairy industry,2

rather than a geographical zoning.3

Another concern I have with the4

long-term --5

MR. WINEGARNER: But it could be6

also a geographical and segmented component7

together.8

DR. ELLIS: It absolutely could. 9

I'm just saying, in that particular case, the10

epidemiology is not showing that there's a --11

the only correlations are all dairy cattle12

right now. And this is my secondhand13

knowledge.14

But the long-term zoning says, if15

you're going to have a problem for more than16

a year, then you need to have a zone plan. 17

And my question would be how does that18

interact with the fact that quarantines for19

TB are routinely three or four years long?20

So if you have a three-year21

quarantine on a herd, does that mean you22

have a longer than a one-year infection,23

which would throw you into a zone. And I24

hope that's not the case, because you don't25

1 SESSION 350

want to have to set a zone up just because2

you have a long-term plan in place.3

I want to go on the record here,4

too, that, for the dairy industry, they need5

a milk ordinance. They need the return of a6

national milk ordinance test. Every three7

years or four years they test their cattle8

for TB, because the dairy industry does have9

a problem that they have not figured out10

where they're getting infected. They just11

haven't figured it out. You have to make12

the assumption it's in the industry itself. 13

So I just want to put that into the14

comments.15

MR. DEWALD: One thing I want to16

add -- and let me back up just a little17

bit. I don't know how -- I don't understand18

how USDA could subvert states' rights, back19

to your issue of the State of Texas or the20

State of Oklahoma can do things more21

stringent than what the Feds have set up,22

and that's always been the way.23

I would be almost surprised it's24

legal the Feds could say: You can't preempt25

1 SESSION 351

us on this. I'm trying to think of a case2

where they have been able to be more -- or3

to say you can't be more strict than we are.4

DR. ELLIS: Well, it's a slippery5

slope. And for animal disease traceability,6

I actually agree with them not allowing7

states to -- you know, one state to drive8

the issue for the other 49.9

Chronic Wasting Disease Program in10

deer, they haven't solved that problem. So11

I'm not just a full-blown states' rights. 12

There are times when it's not appropriate. 13

I just feel, for TB and brucellosis, that it14

depends -- so much of the success of these15

programs depends upon the resources the state16

has, experience of their staff, the number of17

staff they have, and then the exchange of18

information with other states to get to the19

source.20

There's so many things that can21

cause a disease eradication program to not be22

effective, that you have to be able to say: 23

Time out. Until y'all get your hands on24

this problem, we're going to do X.25

1 SESSION 352

So, in this case, it is appropriate;2

you're exactly right. It should be allowed. 3

But there are other situations where4

preemption doesn't make as much sense, and5

animal ID program is one of them.6

You can't have the brand states tell7

all the other states: You've got to have a8

fire brand or we're not going to take your9

animal. I mean, that's where it doesn't10

make sense.11

DR. ROBISON: I appreciate y'all12

participating.13

(Whereupon recessed at 2:03 P.M.)14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 SESSION 353

CERTIFICATE2

3

STATE OF TEXAS4

5

I, KARY A. WINGO, CSR, RPR in and6

for the State of Texas, certify that the7

caption to this transcription correctly states8

the facts set forth herein, that the9

proceedings were correctly reported in10

Stenograph by me at the time and place set11

forth in said caption, and have been12

transcribed from Stenograph into typewriting13

under my direction and supervision in the14

foregoing transcript; and that said transcript15

contains a correct record of the proceedings16

had at said time and place. GIVEN UNDER MY17

HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL of office.18

19

20

21

KARY A. WINGO, CSR, RPR22

DATED: JUNE 20, 201123

Session3, 060611Page 15

Aabdicating 6:19ability 45:20able 7:14,22 8:1417:11 19:12 20:1520:21 38:4 43:2047:17 51:3,23

absolutely 7:3 34:1837:22 48:12 49:9

academic 38:6accountability 16:13accuracy 40:13accurate 29:13 30:340:23

acre 37:20actions 41:18 44:1544:23

activities 3:14 4:331:9 41:10,12 42:943:5

actual 10:18 33:1434:22

add15:5 50:17additional 17:1220:22

addressed 22:23 46:8addressing 41:16adjacent 41:15administrative 22:10admit 36:6advisory 3:11 5:2,195:21,23,25 6:5,76:10,13,14,20 7:47:11,20,24 8:4,209:5 10:8 11:1412:4 13:6 14:6,2515:17 19:12

Ag 9:5agency 21:7 38:2ago35:23agree 9:11 35:1939:9 44:17 45:2451:7

agreeing 12:2ahead 17:2air7:14 8:23

alligators 23:6allow43:18 48:13allowed16:6 52:3allowing 48:15 51:7allows 23:23 26:2544:9 46:9

Amarillo 1:11amenable 38:3amount 16:6Angelo 33:25angle32:9animal 2:17,25 9:2210:5,15 12:2413:25 20:16 26:528:6,7 32:12 35:437:3,5 51:6 52:652:10

animals18:20 21:1721:23 33:24 34:2235:16 40:7 45:1846:3 48:3

annual 33:7answer 22:21answered 35:24anybody7:21 47:9anyway 13:20 25:13APHIS20:15apparently 16:17appeal 15:4appreciate 15:1052:12

approach 5:17 48:2549:2

appropriate 4:1243:24 51:13 52:2

area 19:8 38:8,15areas14:23 37:9Arizona45:19Arkansas 29:17asked22:17 31:12asking 6:21 31:16aspect 8:19 23:334:21

aspects11:11assist 20:15,20assistance 3:12

associated 29:11Association 2:16,202:22

assume 43:6 48:14assumed 42:3assuming 32:6assumption 50:13assurance 41:2243:11

attend 7:17attention 14:2238:22

at-risk 5:8,11authority 6:20 31:1431:18 34:11 35:443:12

automatically 4:1415:22

available 4:8 20:18aware 45:8

Bback 18:8 24:9 41:2548:18,23 50:17,19

background 25:3bad 29:23based 42:24 44:2046:6

basic 24:11basically 32:1141:21

beef 48:5,12,14,15beginning 43:25best 30:4 37:4better 7:16big 6:23 19:22 21:1123:13

bigger 21:10 38:21bit 8:3 9:18 20:6,723:17 25:18 44:1950:18

blind 26:19blossoms 40:19board 3:15 5:2,21,256:4,5,7,10,14,207:4 8:12,19 9:10

Session3, 060611Page 16

10:8 11:14 12:4,2314:6,25 19:12

boards 5:23board's 9:6board-making11:5Bonnie's 25:7Boom 26:9bottom 42:20bounced 20:25Brad 2:17 17:2333:24

brand 52:7,9Brazos 30:12,13BREAKOUT 1:5breeding 45:21bringing 11:25 18:20brothers 30:15,22brought 11:24,2512:12 24:6

brucellosis 1:2 4:34:20 5:24 6:25 7:533:19 51:14

burning 19:16business 10:22 30:2346:19

butts 23:7C

California 21:2248:6,15

call 8:21 9:10 10:1222:2

calls 26:13Canadian 45:17capacity 7:21caption 53:8,12captive 37:2 39:23captives 37:2capture 34:24care 35:5 46:18career 46:23careful 25:23carry 8:15 11:17Carver 2:21,21 13:813:13 16:12 29:1930:2

case 19:13,14 24:330:10 38:9 49:1049:25 51:2 52:2

cash-strapped 20:23catch34:12 38:4cattle 2:20 7:3 8:1021:12 22:4 33:2234:17,19 36:938:19 40:2 48:1248:15 49:12 50:8

Cattlemen's 2:2426:12

caught 33:23cause51:22caused 28:2causing28:12center 12:18Central32:16certain3:13 4:3,1022:10

certainly 23:2certainty 43:13CERTIFICATE 53:2certification 22:823:21

certify53:7cervid 39:19cervids37:2 39:2440:12

cetera 15:25changes11:7channels 46:3Chapman2:15,15 13:513:12 27:12,17,20

Chino48:20chosen 6:2Chronic51:10classification23:22Clayton2:11clear25:22Clinic 30:12clock47:5close40:7 48:9close-out 47:9coalition 21:5coalitions 23:10

come 7:13 40:15comfortable 10:436:21 42:7 43:14

coming 22:3 40:12commencing 1:12comment 15:15 44:18comments 15:17,2016:21,23 47:1050:15

commercial 45:21commingling 39:25Commission 2:18 3:210:6

commissioners 10:6committee 7:12 8:2013:24 14:3,6

communication 42:1242:22 43:3

complete 40:16completely 25:2443:8

compliance 16:1320:16

comply 17:16 20:2123:20

component 32:2234:25 36:9 49:7

components 5:6concept 47:16concern 9:3 33:1540:8 41:5 44:1945:15 49:4

concerns 7:14 8:2311:17 14:24 25:1946:8 47:23

conduct 15:24conducting 41:13confidence 26:22confinement 40:16confirmation 28:8confused 31:12congregated 37:13connection 34:18cons 11:23consensus 4:13 31:5consequence 3:20

Session3, 060611Page 17

17:5,7,13 19:23consequences15:1715:19

consider 44:22consist 3:16 41:9consistency 12:7,11consistent 3:23 9:7consists 8:13contact 41:15containment 4:23,2541:10,11

contains 53:16continue 36:15,20control 41:24controlled 29:2530:2

cooperative 29:3correct 39:6,7,841:2 53:16

correctly 53:8,10correlation 48:9correlations49:12cost 38:3count 13:20 39:5counter-intuitive15:8

country 12:20 13:1523:13 45:4

countryside 10:20couple 28:18 30:15course 20:9 46:11Court 1:13cow27:18cows 45:21cow/calf 10:24coyotes 37:4crossing 12:24CSR53:6,23curious 40:20

Ddairies 10:24dairy 21:21 33:2447:25 48:3,11 49:249:12 50:5,9

damaging 27:25

data 26:9DATED53:24day-to-day 10:19dead 37:7deal 4:7 12:4,9 19:221:4

dealing19:4deals30:11decision 27:10decisions 6:15 11:544:3 46:7

Dee2:25 35:24 43:2544:17

deer 31:25 32:2,434:12,18 36:7,1036:11 37:12,2039:4,17,20,21,2540:22 51:11

Dee's10:11 47:22defer22:17density37:19Department 35:5depend 7:11 44:10depends20:11 51:1551:16

determine 4:11developed 27:22Dewald 2:23,23 14:1725:20 27:11,15,1928:2 38:25 39:9,1340:8 41:4 50:16

difference 6:23different 6:25 7:2,810:23,24 28:929:16 45:23

direction 53:14directives 14:22disagreeing 12:2discuss3:11discussed 3:19,254:9,19,25 5:6 41:8

discussion 4:17 6:78:12 35:17,20

discussions 2:7disease4:15 17:731:4,7,10 32:17

34:14 36:10 46:1047:20 51:6,10,22

diseased 28:6diseases 7:2disparity 29:4disseminate 27:13disseminated 28:10DNA 48:22doing 18:13 20:423:6 25:7 26:1934:2 42:9

domestic 33:9 34:1336:2

door 35:14downgraded 4:14 24:531:7,20

DR 2:5,13,25 3:3 6:66:8 8:9,11 9:4,1410:22 11:10,1913:10,19 14:5,1214:15 15:16 16:1016:15,20 17:2318:24 20:2,2421:19 22:12,16,1822:25 24:2,7,1625:11,14 27:928:14,18,21 29:729:24 30:4,2531:15 32:8,23 33:233:18 35:2 36:337:3 39:7,8,11,2341:3,6 42:12 43:345:2,6,8,24 47:1248:6 49:9 51:552:12

draft 14:20 16:10draining 23:7draw 30:8drawing 40:20drive 51:8

Eearlier 15:3easier 26:17 38:22easily 36:23 38:11East 1:11

Session3, 060611Page 18

easy 36:16 37:14,15eat37:6,7economic 44:5effective 9:11 51:23EHV30:6either 8:25 12:1244:12

elk34:19Ellis 2:25,25 6:88:9 9:4 10:22 33:233:18 35:2 36:337:3 39:11,23 41:343:3,25 45:2,6,845:24 48:6 49:951:5

enacted 10:21encourage 31:9ensure 41:19ensuring 43:7enter 48:16entry 44:3environment 13:17epidemiological41:14

epidemiologist 43:2043:21

epidemiology49:11equine 26:8 30:12eradicate 17:6eradicated 4:21eradication 51:22especially 28:2047:18

establish 9:6established 14:1137:9

establishing5:19et 15:25evaluate 43:21 44:15evaluating 41:16evaluation 43:4,19event 26:25 39:3everybody 2:6 13:821:2 26:2 28:10

everybody's 27:7exactly 13:12 26:10

27:11 52:3example26:8,8 30:545:3,5 48:7

exchange 51:18expect 10:25 33:2036:14 37:24

experience 51:17experts14:12extra41:24

FFACA 11:7face 36:14fact 11:23 12:328:13 49:19

factors22:10facts53:9failed 30:16fails18:16failure15:24fairly 5:5fall 11:6falls17:13familiar 6:13 27:3far3:7 8:14 16:1022:18 23:9,17 32:937:25 38:24 39:1746:13

farms39:20fashion26:7fault43:18fears42:24feasible 25:4federal20:20 29:2Feds 22:17 50:22,25feedback 47:3,6feeder 12:23,25feeders2:20 7:38:10 10:23 34:245:16,17

feeding37:13feel 7:13,23,25 10:436:21 42:6 43:1343:23 51:14

fence40:3fend 21:16

figure 35:15,2146:12

figured 50:10,12final 47:10finally 4:24find 34:7 37:4fine 18:3,21finger 25:10fingerprints 48:23fire 52:9first 2:10 38:25fit 6:23 7:9 19:18five 11:13 12:14,1613:14 16:11 47:4

fix 23:24fixed 19:7flesh 8:3flexibility 20:8flip 12:6focus 34:21focused 19:8 38:8focusing 5:10follow 11:6 17:2132:8

followed 18:6following 19:2441:12

force 22:2foregoing 53:15form 21:4formal 4:22 20:6formalize 15:14forth 53:9,12forward 11:18 14:21found 4:15 31:4,7,1031:21 32:10 39:4

four 16:11 48:8,1049:20 50:8

FRAMEWORK 1:2free 30:10 48:14,16free-flowing 8:7full-blown 51:12function 26:3,5funding 34:21 38:1638:23

funds 5:12

Session3, 060611Page 19

further 17:8 39:11G

gain 22:8gear 26:25geared 28:22general 3:9 5:13geographical13:247:23 49:3,7

geographically 48:20getting 23:16 26:1233:12 42:19 50:11

give 3:8 9:12 21:1926:21 41:22 44:1244:12

given 14:22 15:2323:20 53:17

gleaned 19:10go 5:16 12:21 16:1917:2 18:8,18 22:2325:12 34:12 38:442:5 50:4

goal 17:6goes 24:9 48:23going 2:5,7 6:21 7:77:15 8:24 9:3,6,129:17 10:11,12,1711:5,6 13:2,6,815:14 17:11,1518:3 19:9 22:9,1623:14 24:22 26:1027:3,6,18 29:12,1529:17 31:20 32:2,332:7 33:5,7,2034:4,11 35:25 36:436:14 37:23 40:541:25 42:10,1845:18 49:16 51:2552:9

good 9:13 12:9 23:523:10 25:2,8,1627:9 30:5 39:1840:18 42:12 46:1547:22

grapevine 4:7grass 34:3

great8:19 26:8group3:8,9,11,12,193:25 4:9,12,25 5:55:19 7:20,24 8:48:20 9:5,12,15,209:20,24 10:15,1611:11,18,22 20:324:9 31:5 41:847:3 48:2

groups 6:25 11:1624:6

group's39:2growing39:19guess12:20 16:2018:11 28:21 29:531:15 33:16 34:2140:8

guessing 22:9guidance 32:20guidelines 17:2guys 7:17 29:2140:22 45:11

Hhalf 19:15HAND 53:18hands51:24hanging39:14happen 19:14 27:542:3

happened 28:14,1645:2,9 46:24

happening 27:5 46:22happens9:2 19:19hard 13:13 15:419:25 35:11 36:1737:9,16 38:10

harder 37:20hardship 46:20harm 44:24hate 7:23head 39:15 41:3headed 33:4health 2:18,25 9:2210:6,15 13:2520:16 26:5 28:7

32:12 35:5hear 24:19,22 25:1629:8,16 42:15

heard 9:15 24:13hearing 4:6 26:14heartbeat 46:16heck's 27:3held 26:22help 20:22 41:1944:24

helpful 26:11helping 22:4 38:3herd 21:21,24 24:2024:21 32:16,1833:19,21,22 49:22

herds 18:7,11 21:2541:15 48:8

herpes 26:8hey 29:16hierarchy 27:4hit 27:22hogs 6:17 38:4hole 45:25Holiday 1:11honest 9:16hope 49:25horses 30:6hour 47:4HQ's 26:19hurricane 19:16hurt 25:10

IID 52:6idea 6:11 8:19 9:1312:9,14 26:1947:17

ideas 10:19ignorant 42:25ignore 8:24immediately 23:2124:5

impact 45:22implement 41:20importance 4:2importation 45:16

Session3, 060611Page 20

impose 46:14,20incidence 18:11incident 47:20include 43:4included 5:7inconsistent3:229:8 15:23 16:3,22

increase 42:11increased 16:4 31:17indefinitely18:18industries 10:2344:5 46:3

industry 7:6 9:1911:3 14:2 28:2338:19 40:19 43:1044:24,25 47:2448:5 49:2 50:5,950:13

industry's 38:20industry/wildlife35:8

infected 18:7,1221:22 24:19,2034:2 38:14 48:850:11

infection 49:23infections 48:21information 4:6,824:19 25:3,5,2126:4,21 27:13,1429:4,6,14 43:244:13 51:19

informed 27:4,9infrastructure 19:322:13

initially 22:8Inn1:11input 6:21 7:15 8:189:13 11:15 15:12

institutions38:6intended 6:9intent 6:19intention 18:2533:18

intentions 30:5interact 49:19

interaction 48:2interest 7:5 38:7,1838:20

interface 39:20intermingled45:10international 45:6,7interstate 16:441:20 46:13

introductions 2:11investigation 39:1242:16

investigations41:1443:6

involved 14:2 43:7involvement 13:1644:11

in-the-forest 40:5Island 21:3Islands21:16issuance 41:13issue35:5 36:2538:16 40:5 47:2548:25 50:20 51:9

issues 15:16,2128:25 43:17

JJesse2:21join 47:3,8Josh 2:19 8:9 9:1114:17 17:2 18:232:7

judge19:13judgments 44:9June 1:10 2:3 53:24jurisdiction32:9

KKary 1:12 53:6,23keep 23:6Kerrville 30:8kind 2:6 4:7 7:1814:6 21:4,8,1623:16 25:17 30:740:5,19 41:5

know 7:19 11:23 12:6

12:8,15 13:22 14:314:8 15:5,21 16:2118:2,10,25 19:4,619:14 20:9,10,1220:22 21:7 22:4,2523:3,9,12 24:10,1224:13,20 25:626:10,23 27:1728:19 29:2,17,2130:14,19,20 31:1931:23 32:10 33:1033:14 34:7 36:437:19 38:2,1440:13,14 42:22,2343:13 45:23 46:546:12,15,20 47:2047:25 50:18 51:8

knowledge 49:14known 3:21 21:6

Llabeling 45:5lack 15:24 29:5lands 4:4large 21:21layer 15:6layperson 26:11lead 2:6 48:24leave 8:5leaves 42:17legal 50:25legit 23:2legitimate 40:3length 6:3Let's 2:10 30:2547:15

level 35:9 45:946:13

levels 26:22liaison 14:15limit 16:5limits 45:20line 18:3,21 19:2522:5 30:8 42:22

list 5:16listen 11:17

Session3, 060611Page 21

little 8:3 9:1817:17 20:6,7 23:1625:18 37:21 44:1950:17

livestock 2:16,2133:9 34:8

local 32:13 44:24localized 37:22locations 37:13long 36:12 49:20longer 45:18 49:23long-term 4:18,19,2538:15 41:9 49:5,1550:3

look 19:13,21 24:1335:2,3,13 36:437:23 47:24 48:22

looked 39:17looking 9:23 11:2118:10 21:8,14 34:634:9,20

losing 23:21loss 3:21 15:19lot3:16 10:14 12:1113:4 17:19 21:1121:12,13,17 23:1326:17 28:17 30:1632:2 37:20 39:22

loud 13:23M

main 5:10major 39:22makeup 11:20making 6:15 8:618:23 44:21

manage 26:17 35:11manifest 40:25manpower 17:21 20:2221:13

Mark 2:13 25:10market 28:12Marketing 2:16,22matter 28:25maximize 5:11mean 6:12 8:16 9:21

10:2,5 11:8,2012:15 13:25 15:1018:15 19:15 21:1023:2,9 26:9 27:1627:20 29:3,20,2130:17,21,23,2431:18,19 33:1235:2,19,22 40:2340:24 45:10 48:1849:22 52:10

means34:24media25:25meet 16:17 17:9,1017:12 22:9

meeting1:10 8:2316:18

meetings 7:18,19members6:2 26:1345:11

mention11:10mentioned 35:22Mexican12:24 45:16Mexico 21:10,22 23:445:19

Michalke 2:13,13 6:69:14 11:19 13:1013:19 14:15 15:1616:10,20 17:2318:24 20:2 22:1222:16,25 24:725:11 28:18,2129:24 30:4 31:1539:8

Michigan 31:24 32:1135:3,4 36:5,537:11

middle 47:8,11Midwest12:17,1834:17

miles30:20milk 50:6,7MILLIS 46:25 47:14mind 6:10Minnesota 36:4,7minute 27:8minutes47:4

Mississippi 27:18misunderstanding45:15

models 10:22money 17:20 21:12morning 31:13move 30:25 45:2146:4,21

movement 6:17 9:1916:5 41:20 46:1447:19 48:4

moving 39:21multiple 45:11

Nname 30:21national 5:7 44:2548:24,25 50:7

native 39:4NCBA 14:18necessarily 34:9need 7:3,17 10:1815:2 16:9 17:518:8,23 19:21,2421:18,24 24:4,1825:21,22 26:638:23 41:24 49:1750:5,6

needed 20:19 41:1942:10

needs 6:24 12:7 19:619:22 21:6 22:2223:20 41:22 43:1844:14 48:25

negative 34:6neighboring 42:17neighbors 21:5 23:5nervous 8:6never 29:8New 21:10,21 23:345:19

news 25:7 27:2229:20

Nods 41:3nominate 7:24noncompliance 3:20

Session3, 060611Page 22

15:19,21north 30:20 37:11Northeast 12:1723:11

notice 43:16notify 18:16nuances 11:2number 1:5 7:2237:12 51:17

Oobligated 34:4obviously 6:11,248:17 37:14

occur 41:12office 53:18OFFICIAL 53:18officially 23:25officials 9:22 20:1632:12

oh 26:14,18 27:1540:22 45:13

Ohio 24:21okay 11:8 31:1934:15 35:18

Oklahoma 2:23 33:1739:16 40:12 50:21

ones 17:14one-year 4:21 49:23open 6:6 8:11 15:1225:3,24,25 27:2143:4,19

operate 13:18opinion 7:2opportunities 14:20opportunity 8:1747:2

option 12:4ordinance 50:6,7organizations 14:19origin 45:4outbreak 37:22outrageous 24:4overview 3:5,9owned 33:16

Ppage 16:8panic28:2Parks32:14,19 34:12part 3:18 4:22 5:109:20 12:9,10 16:1822:7 38:13,25

participate 7:9participating 52:13particular 13:1614:22 24:17 26:2147:21 49:10

parties7:8partnering 32:12partnership 30:2232:19

passed 29:22path 9:17pay34:24 44:4Peculiar 13:10people 12:22 17:2021:3 22:3 30:1645:16

percent18:11perfect48:7period 4:21permanent 36:10permission 32:24person 10:25 25:5personal 25:5personally 11:9personnel 20:15perspective 7:1010:4,18 35:8 36:1246:24

pertains 3:10 31:4phones 30:24picks21:2picture19:22place14:13 24:1143:14 46:4,4 50:353:11,17

plan 4:19,23,2524:11 49:17 50:3

plans32:22 33:7platform 20:5

play 13:24 35:21please 40:10point 14:18 16:20,2220:4 32:5 33:247:22 48:7

policy 27:21policy-making 14:20political 44:20politics 46:11population 36:2 39:439:20

populations 5:9,11portion 47:21position 35:18possibility 11:24possible 3:20 15:327:12 34:15

potential 22:2241:15,16

preempt 50:25preemption 44:2,1852:5

presented 11:12presume 24:2presumption 28:5,1129:14

pretty 29:20 37:1437:15 38:11

prevent 33:8price 44:5primrose 9:17probably 7:20,219:21 19:4 29:1134:4,16 35:16,1736:3,18 37:14,1738:21 39:22 40:442:2

problem 19:6 23:2435:7 36:11 48:1149:16 50:10 51:1151:25

problems 13:9 18:1734:17

proceedings 53:10,16process 8:18 11:815:15 18:6 19:24

Session3, 060611Page 23

22:24 25:24 43:1844:8 46:8

producer 11:16 17:1418:22

producers 10:1918:19

product 46:21production 12:1934:22

productive 8:25 10:9productively7:16professionally 43:8professionals 14:226:5 28:7

program 1:6 3:137:16 16:14 17:619:6 22:14 31:342:7 51:10,22 52:6

programs 14:25 51:16prone 13:17PROPOSED 1:2pros 11:23protect 44:22protecting 20:12,1325:4 44:7

protectionist 44:23prove 32:4 34:636:16,17 43:9 46:9

provide 3:12 5:217:14 8:18 38:23

provisional 16:723:23

provisionally 3:23proximity 40:7 48:22Pseudorabies6:139:9

public 1:10 27:14punished 17:15punishing 18:22punitive 35:10purposes 12:25put17:7,18 29:2150:14

puts 18:19putting 12:14 30:3p.m1:12 52:14

Qquandary 28:24quarantine 49:22quarantines 41:1349:19

question 6:8,1822:22 24:10,1228:23 31:13,1635:24 49:18

questions 3:9,10,143:23 5:18,20 24:1442:4,23

quick3:5,8quit 40:10quite4:4

Rranch38:11 40:6,6rate 37:10reaction 40:17read 16:9 30:16reading41:7real 11:4,19 25:8really 6:14 10:2512:11,19 14:1815:10,12 18:1028:23 29:8 39:1845:9 46:6,15 48:9

reason 46:15reasonable 35:1636:19

reasoning 44:21,21reasons7:22receiving 26:6recessed 52:14reclassified23:25recommendation39:3recommendations 5:22record 50:4 53:16reduced3:22reductions 44:11refer20:25reflect12:19reflection 36:9regain 23:24regard 36:25

regards 3:13region 13:6,11 30:7regional 13:5regionalization 46:6regulations 6:1642:11

REGULATORY 1:2relate 13:15related 10:15 48:21relates 34:13relationship 14:10releases 25:7 29:20reluctant 46:14remarks 45:25replaced 43:16report 26:15 42:1342:13

reported 42:6 53:10Reporter 1:13reporting 4:2 15:2416:12 18:14,1642:8

reports 42:21representation 11:413:3

require 4:10 15:2233:5 36:19 40:11

required 4:20requirement 18:5requirements 1:6 2:83:4,19 15:18 16:416:12 17:12,16,2119:19 31:3,3 41:2144:3

research 38:7reservoir 33:4,6,1536:6,8 37:6

reservoirs 33:11Resident 14:12resolutions 14:21resource 43:17resources 20:1821:13 35:11 38:1251:16

restriction 48:4restrictions 16:23

Session3, 060611Page 24

46:14 47:19restrictive 17:8result 25:25 27:23retain 6:22return 50:6revenue 34:24review 4:10reviewed 5:2Rhode 21:3,15right 6:22 9:18,2222:15 23:4,7 26:1531:21 34:16 35:936:13 40:2,20 44:246:2 47:5,14 48:1348:16 49:13 52:3

rights 50:19 51:12ringing 30:24risk 18:20 28:1140:2 46:10

risks 41:17risk-based 46:7road 18:8roaming 33:14Robison 2:5,11 3:38:11 11:10 14:5,1216:15 20:24 21:1922:18 24:2,1625:14 27:9 28:1429:7 30:25 32:8,2339:7 41:6 42:1247:12 52:12

robust 47:6role 6:9 7:11 8:413:23 14:16 20:1435:21

roles 6:4room 47:8,11roughly 47:12round 47:2routinely 49:20RPR53:6,23rule 15:2 34:14rules 6:16 11:744:22 46:5 48:13

rule-making 22:24rumor 28:12

rumors 29:11running27:7

SSan33:25saying 8:25 14:521:20 49:10

says 5:5 36:5 41:749:15

scared 42:25scary28:20scenarios 26:18science-based 46:7scientific 44:21scientifically40:942:24

scope16:13 38:21Scott2:23se 9:20SEAL 53:18season 39:17second 35:23secondhand 49:13Secretary 9:5see6:4,22 7:9 9:1819:11 25:9 42:2345:14 46:21,22

segmented 49:7segments 45:23 47:2448:4

send 7:18sense10:14 13:448:19,20 52:5,11

sent 25:25separate 7:8serve7:20serves 26:2,4service6:3 34:12Services 2:12 3:135:3,22 21:7 32:2237:25

Session1:5,10 2:2set12:4,5,25 22:1428:4 30:23 40:648:13 50:2,22 53:953:11

setup 13:7shared 28:6sharing 24:18shift 28:12short 5:5 29:2043:16

short-term 4:18 41:941:11

show 8:22showing 49:11side 12:6sides 20:10simple 37:3sit 13:15situation 12:5 19:523:19 26:16 42:13

situations 4:10 16:252:4

six 11:13 12:14,1613:14

size 47:18slaughter 5:7,10slippery 51:5slope 51:6slow 15:14slows 15:6small 20:17 35:10smaller 21:2solved 51:11somebody 7:24 14:1620:11 24:20 29:13

somebody's 25:529:12

something's 44:12sorry 17:2sort 17:5 18:4sound 12:8 40:9sounds 23:10source 34:15 51:20South 13:16 33:23speak 5:14species 36:24,24speed 15:7spread 37:15spreading 36:10staff 10:5 20:18

Session3, 060611Page 25

25:12 51:17,18standards 16:16,1716:18

standpoint 7:7 28:20start 2:10 5:1523:12 24:12 34:541:6

started 30:24 37:16state 1:6,13 3:4,214:4,11,13 6:15 9:710:12 11:13,14,1612:14 13:14 15:1815:22 16:16 17:817:20 18:15,2319:3,15 20:16,1720:20,23 21:10,1123:2,19 24:2525:21 26:6,23 27:228:22 29:2,3 30:931:3,6,20,23 32:1133:17 35:7,8,9,1035:14 37:18 38:1038:14 39:5,1540:12,15 42:1843:11,15 44:4,2045:9 46:9,10,13,1947:18,20,21 50:2050:21 51:8,16 53:453:7

statement 30:11states 4:2 12:10,1817:15 18:17,2021:2 22:3 29:832:3 33:5 36:1937:24 41:20,2342:6,10 43:5,1544:2,16 45:12,2248:14 50:19 51:851:12,19 52:7,853:8

state's 16:6 38:1943:20,21 46:18

state/program 2:83:18

status 3:21,22 4:114:13 10:13 15:20

15:23 16:3,7,2223:23 31:6,2036:22 42:13,21

statuses 6:16 9:7stay 16:6staying15:18steers 12:24Stenograph 53:11,13stirred30:24stock45:21stocking 37:10,19straight 30:8strict 51:4strike 19:2stringent 50:22stuff18:12subgroup 9:25subvert50:19success51:15suffer 44:6suggestions 11:2115:12

summer 19:17supervision 53:14supposed 17:10 18:1339:24

sure 18:5 19:2338:17 39:13,1342:4

surprised 50:24surveillance1:7 2:93:5 5:4,6,7,8,8,915:25 31:17 32:1732:24 33:21 36:1536:20 38:11,1539:16

swamp23:8systems45:10 46:249:2

Ttable9:21tables 47:11TAHC 2:14take 9:16 21:9 35:536:13 45:18 52:9

taken 7:15talk 7:13 20:3talked 11:22 15:325:18 42:2

talking 2:7 10:1122:13 23:13 30:2033:25

task 22:2TB 4:3,20 5:24 6:257:4 13:23 14:619:17 24:20 32:1633:19 34:2 36:740:11,25 43:6 48:849:20 50:9 51:14

tell 29:12 34:1135:4 40:10 43:1244:13 48:11 52:7

tells 15:11tens 21:23term 9:8Terry 2:15test 22:4 25:2440:11,17,22,2450:7,8

tested 21:24testing 16:4 40:2141:14,24

tests 40:14Texas 1:12,13 2:122:20 3:2 7:2 10:210:3 13:16,2019:15 23:3 25:630:7 32:14,16,1933:16,22,23 37:1843:25 45:19 47:1848:15 50:20 53:4,7

Thank 47:6thereto 9:25they'd 23:22thing 14:7,24 15:621:8 24:17 27:2230:17 46:22,2348:17 50:16

things 3:17 4:6 6:228:8 10:13 13:1820:8 21:5 32:15

Session3, 060611Page 26

39:14 41:23 42:1550:21 51:21

think 7:6 8:2 9:149:17 10:8,17 13:314:17 15:13 16:2517:17,25 18:2,8,1718:24 19:2,5,9,2121:15,20 22:1323:15 24:7 25:7,825:20,22 26:7,2026:24 27:15 28:4,929:10 33:2,3 34:634:13,15,16 35:1736:12,18 37:5,838:21 39:10,15,2341:25 42:21 44:2346:17 47:7,1048:24 51:2

thinking 13:22 15:1122:6

third 47:2thought 5:18 14:424:8,18 25:9

thoughts 5:14 24:1625:15 31:16,1932:6

thousands 21:23three 16:11 49:2050:7

three-year 49:21throw 49:24throwing 22:21tied 16:3time 5:15 8:2 16:618:9 23:20,2351:24 53:11,17

timely 26:7times 28:18 29:651:13

today 17:9,10 22:21told 13:19top19:17topic 3:4 24:17topics 3:6total 27:14totally 39:9 42:16

trace24:24,25 27:2traceability51:6trace-out 21:25transcribed 53:13transcript 53:15,15transcription 53:8translated 10:2029:15

transmissible 36:24transmission33:840:2

transparency42:8tribal 4:4tribes 4:2tribe's4:13tricky 17:18tried16:16 25:11trigger16:22,23try13:15trying 2:5 5:15 15:735:20 51:2

TUBERCULOSIS1:2turn 46:16two1:5 5:23 6:2414:25 18:7 20:1021:3 25:13 40:1442:19 45:23

type 18:12typewriting 53:13

Uunable 17:16understand 11:212:23 17:4 21:2045:13 50:18

understanding 9:9United 12:10un-cumbersome 15:3upgraded 36:22Upper12:17USAHA13:24 14:18USDA 6:10,19 11:514:21 15:10 31:1332:21 34:11 36:1938:2 44:10 50:19

USDA's 35:3 43:7

use 3:11 5:11 14:1125:11,13 35:23

Vvalid 14:18Valley 30:12,1348:21

value 36:14variability 20:7variety 5:21vehicles 15:9Vermonts 21:15vet 43:11veterinarians 11:1311:15 25:22 26:23

Veterinary 2:12 3:125:3,22 21:6

veterinary-focused10:15

vets 12:14 13:1443:15 46:13

violation 24:4Virginia 24:21Vision 44:11

Wwant 5:16 8:13,15,1711:3 15:5 17:331:9 32:3 35:14,1544:20 47:24 50:2,450:14,16

wanted 10:7wants 43:10warranted 34:16warrants 39:11wasn't 6:14 13:20waste 8:2Wasting 51:10watch 30:18way 8:10 17:11 28:429:15 34:23 35:1343:6,9,11 44:1548:13 50:23

ways 35:3 36:13Weatherford 30:14,19weigh 47:2

Session3, 060611Page 27

went 33:23 38:5we'll 17:22 47:7we're 2:7 8:24 21:723:5,7 26:18 27:630:13,19 33:12,2534:4,5 36:14 37:2340:20,21 45:1847:7 51:25 52:9

we've 24:13 32:1033:11 36:6

whatsoever 29:9wide 38:15wide-spread 40:4wild 33:13 38:439:25

wildlife 4:15,1631:4,8,8,10,14,2132:9,13,14,20,2133:4,6,8,14 34:834:23,25 35:2537:5,25

wildlife's 33:16Williams 2:17,1716:25 17:25 19:1141:25 42:14

Winegarner 2:19,197:10 8:16 10:312:13 13:21 14:814:14 16:8 17:420:14 21:9 22:7,1522:20 23:18 25:925:17 28:3,16,1929:10 31:11 32:2133:10 34:20 35:1936:23 44:17 45:4,745:13 47:16 49:6

Wingo 1:12 53:6,23wonder 13:23wondering 14:9 39:1542:18

words 43:19work 9:20 14:3 23:1123:14

worked 24:15working 3:19,25 4:94:12,24 5:5 9:15

9:24 20:3 24:6,826:12 31:5 39:241:8

worrying 40:11wouldn't 12:23 15:1334:9

wrapped42:16write33:6wrong44:4,6

XX31:23 51:25

Yyeah 14:14 17:2520:24 24:7 27:1933:11 40:21 43:347:14

year 19:16,19,2049:17

years37:17 40:14,2542:19 49:20 50:8,8

Yellowstone 32:11y'all3:8 5:13,14,1623:16 25:14 51:2452:12

Zzone 48:20 49:17,2450:2

zoning 1:7 2:8 3:44:17,22,24 41:7,847:17 48:19 49:349:15

11-40 1:111:06 1:121:56 47:51911 1:11

22:03 52:1420 53:242011 1:11 2:3 53:242015 44:11

33 1:10 2:23:00 47:133:05 47:153:07 47:15300 30:20

449 51:9

66 1:10 2:3

PROPOSED TUBERCULOSIS AND BRUCELLOSISREGULATORY FRAMEWORK

BREAKOUT SESSION NUMBER THREE ONPROGRAM (STATE) REQUIREMENTS,ZONING, AND SURVEILLANCE

Session 4 of the Public Meeting on June 6,

2011, at the Holiday Inn, 1911 1-40 East, Amarillo,

Texas, commencing at 2:11 p.m., before Kary A. Wingo, a

Court Reporter of the State of Texas.

1 SESSION 42

SESSION 42

JUNE 6, 20113

Thereupon,4

DR. ROBISON: I appreciate y'all5

coming. Our group will be talking about6

state/program requirements, zoning and7

surveillance. And I've got a couple of8

pages of potential questions here, and we'll9

maybe get some discussion going. I'll start10

off with introductions.11

My name is Clayton Robison. I'm12

with Veterinary Services here in Texas. I've13

been on the working group, TB/brucellosis14

working group.15

DR. MICHALKE: I'm Mark Michalke,16

and I'm with Texas Animal Health Commission. 17

And I've been on the working group, not as18

long as Dr. Robison. I kind of took Dr.19

Ellis' place in a pinch and pinch hit for20

him, but starting to pick up a little bit on21

it, so hopefully we'll be able to conduct a22

reasonable discussion.23

MR. CARSON: Ben Carson, and I'm a24

field BMO with USDA.25

1 SESSION 43

MR. DEAN: I'm Tim Dean. I'm an2

animal identification coordinator for USDA.3

MS. BUZZARD: I'm Andrea Buzzard. I4

work for the New Mexico Attorney General, and5

I represent the New Mexico Livestock Board.6

MR. CULBERTSON: They won't let me7

out of town without her following me. My8

name is Myles Culbertson. I'm the director9

of the New Mexico Livestock Board.10

MR. FROST: I'm Bob Frost, and I'm11

a rancher in New Mexico, and I'm also on the12

New Mexico Livestock Board.13

MR. HALL: Jody Hall. I'm with the14

Texas Animal Health Commission.15

DR. VARNER: Kevin Varner, area16

vet-in-charge for USDA in Texas.17

DR. ROBISON: As mentioned, topics18

will be the state/program requirements, zoning19

and surveillance. And I'll do kind of a20

quick overview of each and then we'll see21

how far we can get into these different22

topics.23

As far as state/program requirements,24

there are five general areas listed here. 25

1 SESSION 44

The first one was the working group discussed2

the use of an advisory group, parentheses, to3

provide assistance to Veterinary Services in4

regards to certain program activities, any5

questions related to that.6

Number two, the working group decided7

that one possible consequence of noncompliance8

was loss of status, or inconsistent status,9

or reduced status, which is otherwise known10

as provisionally consistent, and some11

questions there.12

Number three, the working group13

discussed the importance of states or tribes14

reporting certain TB or brucellosis activities15

in their area.16

Number four, the working group17

discussed that certain situations would18

require a review of a state to determine if19

its status was appropriate.20

Number five, the working group was21

in consensus that a state/tribe status should22

not be downgraded because a disease was found23

in wildlife, and only in wildlife.24

I'll repeat that one. The working25

1 SESSION 45

group was in consensus that a state's status2

should not be downgraded -- well, downgraded3

automatically -- because disease was found in4

wildlife, and only in wildlife. That's the5

last part of the state requirements.6

Under zoning, working group discussed7

that zoning would consist of short-term and8

long-term containment activities. In9

short-term containment, the following10

activities must occur: The issuance of11

quarantines; conducting epidemiological12

investigations; testing of adjacent contact or13

potential herds; and addressing or evaluating14

other potential risks.15

Number two, the working group16

discussed that a long-term containment plan17

would be required when TB or brucellosis was18

not eradicated within a one-year period. 19

Formal zoning would be part of this20

containment plan, and then there are several21

questions here pertaining to that.22

And number three under zoning, the23

last one, the working group discussed that24

the long-term containment plan would be25

1 SESSION 46

reviewed by the advisory board and Veterinary2

Services.3

Then under surveillance, there's a4

short one. The working group discussed5

several components to surveillance, that6

included national slaughter surveillance;7

surveillance of at-risk populations, otherwise8

known as targeted surveillance; and other9

surveillance.10

So surveillance targeted at the most11

cost effective means would be12

slaughter-targeted surveillance, you know, if13

we come up with something else too.14

So we can jump in here anywhere15

anybody has a special interest, or we can16

start number one on the list here. Anybody17

have any thoughts at this point?18

First on the list, back to the19

state/program requirements, was the working20

group discussed the use of an advisory group21

to provide assistance to Vet Services in22

regards to certain program activities.23

And several questions here pertaining24

to that would be: Do you agree that these25

1 SESSION 47

new regulations should include the use of an2

advisory board to provide a variety of3

recommendations to Veterinary Services? 4

Should there be two advisory boards, one for5

brucellosis and one for tuberculosis, or just6

one?7

What should the composition of the8

advisory board be? How should members of9

the advisory board be chosen? Should the10

advisory board members have a defined length11

of service on the board? And what roles12

would you like to see for the advisory13

board?14

And based on what I think I've been15

hearing here today is it will be more of16

regulatory personnel as opposed to industry17

on this board, if we see the need to have18

an advisory board. Also brought up the fact19

that we had an advisory council for20

pseudorabies.21

DR. MICHALKE: Right.22

DR. ROBISON: For the pseudorabies23

program. So that has been done before. So24

it's basically having input and25

1 SESSION 48

recommendations to Veterinary Services. So2

if anybody has any general thoughts or3

questions at this point in time.4

MR. CULBERTSON: Just so I5

understand, these are state level boards,6

right? Or is it across the --7

DR. ROBISON: Well, that's been the8

discussion. You know, we've talked about,9

well, maybe a national board where you have10

five or six state veterinarians. Somebody11

talked about the other extreme where you have12

a problem in one state, one part of one13

state, and you have an advisory board for14

that.15

Another one -- another discussion has16

been, if you have a board -- an advisory17

board for different regions of the country. 18

So there's been a lot of different thoughts19

thrown out in this discussion here today.20

DR. MICHALKE: Our thoughts from21

that, there was some concern. Most folks, I22

think, thought that, given the proper23

authority and proper use of an advisory24

board, it would be good. Just to have up25

1 SESSION 49

there as a wallflower, it probably would be2

a waste of time. That's the comments we got3

today.4

There was some issues there of5

concerns of a national board, where we'd6

represent all regions and how would that7

work, thus what Dr. Robison said about, you8

know, possibility of regionalized boards. 9

But then that leads to inconsistency.10

Those issues were all thrown out11

there. So, I mean, we're just looking for12

points. And that's just some of the broad13

points that were brought up earlier today, as14

far as advisory boards.15

MR. CULBERTSON: It would have to be16

-- I think it would have to be national;17

otherwise, you know, you get 50 different18

advisory perspectives.19

DR. MICHALKE: Well, the issue there20

was, you know, the number, the amount, you21

know. I think there was some fair22

consensus, or a lot of talk on two advisory23

boards, one for brucellosis and one for TB,24

probably to tackle that. And that would25

1 SESSION 410

give you a little bit more variability there.2

But yeah, you tend to lose, as you3

get away from national, any type of impact4

you may have or any consistency.5

MR. CULBERTSON: Would the advisory6

board be looked to more for sort of policy7

perspective, or would they be looked to for8

sort of technical execution of these9

regulations?10

Maybe we need to go back over a11

little bit about what this advisory board12

would be asked to do.13

DR. ROBISON: Yeah. Well, it's all14

open for discussion. Number one is should15

there even be an advisory board. The16

working group thought, yeah, it could be a17

good idea, but as in a lot of things, it18

could be the devil's in the details. So how19

it would be made up and what would they do20

exactly?21

I think we were leaning more towards22

that we'd have the Veterinary Services23

protocol, regulations, and then you've got a24

particular situation that needs to be looked25

1 SESSION 411

at.2

I keep thinking of kind of like,3

maybe, a peer review type situation where,4

say, potentially a state status is on the5

line for whatever reason. You could have,6

like, a peer review of that state and decide7

if they're doing what's necessary, or maybe8

they need to do a little better, or maybe9

they're just not doing their job at all and10

there needs to be consequences.11

There's all kinds of different12

scenarios that could come up for this type13

of situation.14

DR. MICHALKE: I think the idea has15

been more towards, with the addition of what16

Clayton said, more toward technical support,17

probably, and review, in that case, not so18

much policy probably.19

MR. CULBERTSON: That's why the20

consensus has been it should be more like21

regulatory professionals or veterinarians22

rather than industry?23

DR. MICHALKE: Well, no, I don't24

think that has anything -- I mean, certainly25

1 SESSION 412

there's been a lot of industry that's said,2

hey, if that's what it's going to be, then3

that's what we need to have on that board.4

But I think the main driving factor5

in making a functioning board is some of the6

legal ramifications that they have with that7

in trying to make that happen with whatever8

-- what act is? FACA or whatever?9

DR. ROBISON: FACA.10

DR. MICHALKE: Yeah, as far as the11

industry. And, you know, given in one12

session we were in, if that's what they're13

going to function as, as a technical and as14

a review type and not so much policy, you15

know, should that be a state regulatory type16

-- state or tribal, I guess, regulatory type17

officials?18

Again, open all for discussion still.19

I mean, nothing's been set in concrete. I'm20

just recapping some of what we've had in the21

other two.22

DR. ROBISON: You other fellows can23

speak up too.24

MR. HALL: Well, I was going to ask25

1 SESSION 413

Dr. Varner's input on -- I mean, if we're2

talking policy versus technical. I mean, in3

a way, don't the USAHA committees already4

kind of fill those roles, from a policy5

standpoint? Or am I mistaken about that?6

DR. VARNER: I mean, they will. I7

mean, the model that we're talking about here8

is the Pseudorabies Board. I mean, that's9

the most current model for this kind of a10

board.11

And I think that's where we really12

are is deciding what this -- if this board13

is necessary and what this board would do. 14

You can see a couple of things. One is15

what's the toughest decision that we would16

make? USDA is downgrading a state from17

consistent to nonconsistent. Or what's the18

other -- the middle one?19

DR. ROBISON: Provisionally20

consistent.21

DR. VARNER: Yeah. You know, that's22

the kind of thing that you do with a board. 23

The board also -- I mean, I think that's24

really -- you know, then the board could25

1 SESSION 414

also be an advisory group, as far as the2

direction the program is going and that kind3

of thing.4

We really haven't sorted out how5

USAHA would function. I mean, USAHA, the TB6

committee and the brucellosis committee,7

they're fundamental in programming -- in8

charting the course for the program through9

the years, you know, addressing today's10

problems and how we fix it going forward.11

So they're kind of like an adjunct,12

so I see them all functioning kind of -- but13

the day-to-day, there again, those tough14

decisions about downgrading a state, I mean,15

that's tough to do, unless you've got a16

really -- a committee that's got kind of a17

standing where everybody says, hey, they're18

reasonable people and they're going to look19

at it and do a fair job of it.20

DR. MICHALKE: And there was some21

discussion -- I'm glad you brought that up22

about USAHA. There was some discussion in23

one of the groups about the possibility of24

some utilization of maybe those committees or25

1 SESSION 415

-- there was no specific plan given, but2

maybe where you could liaison them into3

something with that, possibly.4

Again, that was just a suggestion. 5

I'm just recapping, again, what another group6

brought up.7

DR. ROBISON: All right. Well, let8

me move on to another aspect of this9

state/program requirements. The working group10

discussed that one possible consequence of11

noncompliance is a loss of status or a12

reduced status. And several questions were13

posed as to are there any noncompliant issues14

-- noncompliance issues that should15

automatically require a state be given16

inconsistent status, such as lack of17

reporting, failure to conduct surveillance and18

so forth?19

Under what situations, if anything,20

should inconsistent status be tied to21

increased testing requirements for interstate22

movement? Should there be a limit to the23

amount of time that a state is allowed to be24

in provisional status? If so, what sort of25

1 SESSION 416

limit? And the last one is what role do2

you see for the advisory board in regards to3

status determinations or downgrades?4

MR. HALL: Dr. Michalke, since you5

were on the working group, can you explain6

to a simple-minded person like me what the7

real difference is between this and what we8

use -- the present status? I mean, is it9

just the same thing under a different name?10

DR. MICHALKE: I think a lot of it11

they're looking for -- they're looking for,12

you know, something to tweak on it a little13

bit and put it in a little different area. 14

But a lot of it's similar to what we use15

today. Wouldn't you agree, Clayton?16

DR. ROBISON: (Nods head up and17

down.)18

DR. MICHALKE: I mean, the questions19

are out there, you know, for comment, I20

guess. And, yeah, it follows today, but21

would you think of anything that would cause22

a state to automatically lose its status? I23

mean, would you look at any -- you know, are24

there any comments on time frame and, you25

1 SESSION 417

know, is there something that we can do to2

improve, which we're probably basically3

discussing business like we're doing today,4

are there any improvements there?5

You know, Dr. Varner brought up the6

fact, in the last question there, you know,7

what do you see the role of an advisory8

board in regards to status determinations and9

downgrades?10

So you're right on target saying11

this is the basic operating procedure today. 12

Are there things that we need to -- and13

that's coming from a real simple mind too,14

Jody, by the way.15

MR. CULBERTSON: It raises a16

question, though. Consistency or compliance,17

nonconsistency, you know, when you start18

placing states into that position, if you19

have a state that's diligently pursuing its20

protection under these proposed -- under this21

proposed scenario, and you have an outbreak22

of TB anyway -- you know, you've got a very23

highly consistent state with TB in it. It's24

not impossible.25

1 SESSION 418

DR. MICHALKE: No, not at all. It2

happens.3

MR. CULBERTSON: And if the status4

designations are designations that have to do5

with the practices in a state, as far as6

surveilling or protecting or whatever, and7

yet the disease is found in a dairy or a8

ranch or a feedlot or whatever, has that9

been anticipated?10

DR. VARNER: I mean, that's the11

reality. I mean, in this world today you've12

got -- we've got TB in the dairy industry. 13

We've got potential -- we've got rodeo steers14

from Mexico and everywhere. We've got15

wildlife. So that's the reality.16

Even in the best run program, you're17

going to have possibilities, especially with18

the quality of the test that we use, the19

diagnostics we've got available. There's20

always a risk you're going to have TB.21

The idea behind this program is all22

of a sudden you have flexibility. California23

has one dairy under the old program that has24

TB. They get a second dairy, and all of a25

1 SESSION 419

sudden they're downgraded. That means every2

beef producer in the state is affected by3

the downgrade. Now you've got to start4

testing cattle to move them out of the5

state.6

And they're saying: Wait a minute.7

This is -- you've got two dairies affected. 8

You've got three -- at that point, we had9

five animals with lesions of TB -- and10

you're going to affect the whole state.11

That's the old program. Everybody12

gets lumped in because I'm in California,13

even though it was purely a limited outbreak14

in the dairy industry.15

Under the new program -- let's say16

California is a consistent state. They find17

TB in the dairy industry. They do their own18

epidemiological; they quarantine the herds19

they need to quarantine. They look at is it20

a wildlife component/not a wildlife component;21

do we have to have a zone or not a zone.22

But through all that process, the23

beef guys aren't affected, because the24

reality is we've shown in this TB program25

1 SESSION 420

that, once we find the herds, there's very2

little risk of spread once we've got a hold3

of that herd. We shut them down.4

So, I mean, that's the beauty of5

this is there's that flexibility built in. 6

I mean, that's the upside. I mean, it's not7

perfect, but it's trying to address that.8

The guys in California, the beef9

guys, said the program's worse than the10

disease. And that's what this is all --11

this is really what started this whole12

process a couple of years ago is to try to13

say -- and, you know, New Mexico, I mean,14

you guys just fought through this too. You15

ought to know.16

MR. CULBERTSON: Well, that is a17

very hopeful scenario, I think, because if18

you've got a state that's working hard to19

reduce the risk of tuberculosis, a single or20

even a couple of cases of tuberculosis21

doesn't signify the failure of that program. 22

It may signify the success.23

DR. VARNER: One other issue here24

that there were a number of different points25

1 SESSION 421

being talked about in the other room, we2

have to just figure out how that all works. 3

If you look at risk, you know, do we need4

to address the risk of Mexican animals? I5

mean, does that have to be addressed?6

What do we do about the dairy7

industry? We know they circulate TB. What8

can be done -- you know, certainly, we all9

are in agreement we shouldn't be raising10

dairy heifers next to Mexican steers in a11

feedlot, but that happens.12

MR. CULBERTSON: You might infect13

those Mexican steers.14

DR. VARNER: You must be a beef15

guy. But, I mean, still we know we've got16

issues. You know, this program, I mean,17

that we're proposing, in my view, is18

flexible, much more flexible than the old19

program. But there's still lots -- the20

devil's in the details. We don't know --21

MR. CULBERTSON: But that's a very22

hopeful thing. And it hadn't -- the light23

hadn't really turned on until we got into24

this discussion about it, because we've said25

1 SESSION 422

for a long time that states ought to be sort2

of earning a premium for finding it, rather3

than being punished for not finding it. 4

Because if you're finding it, it means you're5

dealing with it.6

DR. MICHALKE: It means you have a7

surveillance program out there.8

MR. CULBERTSON: Do we?9

DR. MICHALKE: I mean, it means10

you've got one. If you're finding it,11

you've got a surveillance.12

DR. VARNER: And we're pushing for,13

like, response rates -- one way not to find14

TB --15

MR. CULBERTSON: Is don't look for16

it.17

DR. VARNER: -- is don't push your18

veterinarians to actually do the test right. 19

And that's really -- that's at the heart of20

this too, because I've said that over the21

years.22

The guys that really do their job23

who are pushing to find the disease, they're24

the ones that get -- that have the negative25

1 SESSION 423

fallout.2

Our goal should be to eradicate the3

disease, not to hurt every producer in the4

state.5

MR. CULBERTSON: That's -- you know,6

if the program continues to get developed7

with that in mind, then I think the right8

details and the right decisions on the9

details will be --10

DR. VARNER: Because that is the11

genesis. I mean, this whole thing is out of12

California and the mess -- first, it was, I13

mean, obviously, Michigan, but then we had14

the issues in New Mexico, Arizona.15

And then we broke the bank in16

California. And that's when we ran up17

against the rocks. We ran into that RuAnn18

Dairy that was valued at 35 to 45 million19

dollars. They had one animal. We never20

found more than one animal.21

That animal did have TB. It came22

out of the herd. We brought a diagnostic23

lab, opened it up, and it had TB. And it24

was unrelated to the other herds, you know,25

1 SESSION 424

but what do you do? And in the old2

program, it's let's buy that herd and then3

downgrade everybody else. And all the beef4

guys are going: What are you guys doing to5

us?6

MR. CULBERTSON: Good point.7

DR. ROBISON: I'm going to jump over8

to the zoning topic. New Mexico has had9

some zoning issues in recent years. Number10

one, the working group discussed that zoning11

should consist of short-term and long-term12

activities. In short-term, you've got to13

have issuance of quarantines, conduct14

epidemiological investigations, testing of15

adjacent contact/potential herds, and16

addressing and evaluating other potential17

risks.18

And the question is what other19

actions, if any, are needed to help ensure20

that other states do not implement interstate21

movement requirements. Let's go through some22

other questions here as well.23

What situations, if any, would24

automatically require that a state formally25

1 SESSION 425

establish a zone? What is your2

recommendation regarding the formal formation3

of a zone if TB or brucellosis is found only4

in wildlife?5

If a state has a high-risk6

population, such as dairy heifers or rodeo7

cattle, should these populations be zoned and8

subject to interstate testing requirements, or9

are other mitigations necessary?10

When and under what circumstances11

should a zone be modified, increased or12

decreased in size? And when and under what13

criteria should a zone be removed? For14

instance, should there be a requirement for a15

zone to be free of disease for a certain16

period of time before a zone can be removed?17

Do any of these --18

MR. CULBERTSON: You know, so much19

of this, what comes to my mind is the need20

to -- the need for the ability to understand21

the concept of risk. And risk is not an22

all or none situation. In other words, when23

you say, well, the existence of a class of24

cattle. The existence of that class of25

1 SESSION 426

cattle may mean nothing, in terms of risk,2

or very little, as compared to the management3

of those cattle or the volume or repetitive4

movement in and out of an area of a certain5

type.6

You know, there are conditions --7

some of it's management and some of it's8

man-made; some of it's natural, or whatever. 9

That all accumulates into levels of risk.10

You know, if we use Mexican cattle11

for the example. Mexican cattle sequestered12

in its own feedlot, just for an example,13

there isn't any risk there. Mexican cattle14

mixed with dairy heifers like we're talking15

about, then there's a risk quotient.16

You know, Mexican -- or dairy cattle17

-- you know, recycling old dairy cows, the18

risk goes right through the roof. Or rodeo19

cattle living with a milk cow out at the20

ranch. What I'm saying is that there are21

combinations of factors that create risk.22

And so in a zone, I think a23

well-developed and evolving program of risk24

-- of the understanding and assessment of25

1 SESSION 427

risk, with a broader -- you know, in broader2

terms, should be some part of the3

determination about how long a zone should be4

in place, how big it ought to be.5

You know, it's not only what exists6

in that area. It's what's going on in that7

area; what are the management practices;8

what's the diversity of species or the9

diversity of types of the same species; how10

much movement is there.11

I don't know how many risk factors12

there are, but I think you have to look at13

it in terms of combinations of risks, rather14

than just singular, sort of the old accepted15

norms about what we think we don't like or16

what we think we do like.17

So I think we have to drill a18

little bit deeper and let those things19

determine whether a zone is ready to either20

be released or placed. I don't know. I21

may have confused you more than I've22

clarified it.23

MR. HALL: Well, I was just going24

to ask if, what he's talking about, if that25

1 SESSION 428

came into play in the discussion about, okay,2

having a transparent system in place to3

ensure other states about the risk in a4

zone. Was that discussed as part of --5

under an advisory board or whatever?6

DR. MICHALKE: Transparency in7

reporting and status and situation reports8

were brought up in that, you know, and an9

open evaluation of the activity also was10

brought up in the working group, and also in11

some of the other talks.12

I got into the working group late,13

but a lot of -- and I'm going to -- you14

can get me extra points with the boss. I'm15

going to have to agree with him to some16

extent, and I hate that. And if you repeat17

it this evening, I will deny it.18

But zoning isn't all about19

geographics. You know, Dee makes a good20

point about some of it, and you were leading21

to it in management and so many other22

factors. I mean, there can be things there23

that geography has nothing to do with it;24

it's just what the practice is out there.25

1 SESSION 429

A lot of this zoning, I think,2

stemmed from Michigan and Greater Yellowstone. 3

And there was a lot of heartburn over time4

in the working group, you know, how are we5

going to do this and they're worried about6

this canyon here and public grazing and7

everything. So I think a lot of that stems8

from there.9

But I thought where you were kind of10

going a little different in some of your11

statements, whether you said it -- you know,12

it's not just all about -- and in lots of13

cases it is. But in some cases, you know,14

there's other factors in there.15

MR. CULBERTSON: Well, it makes16

sense that, if you've got some uncontrollable17

aspects, like the buffalo herd in Montana, or18

something like that, that a zone might be19

inevitable.20

But I think the risk factors may be21

-- they need to be considered operation by22

operation, or at least a much smaller --23

DR. VARNER: I mean, in some cases,24

a zone may be the perimeter of the premises,25

1 SESSION 430

the affected premises, and that's the2

quarantine. I mean, that's your3

epidemiologist having the ability to flexibly4

go in and understand what's going on, and we5

need to restrict this premises; we need to6

test here, here and here, that kind of7

thing. But that's maybe your zone is you8

set the premises.9

The worst case scenario is in10

Michigan that we have today, on the TB side. 11

On the brucellosis side, it's Greater12

Yellowstone. Those are a lot tougher because13

of the wildlife component.14

MR. CULBERTSON: Yeah, they're things15

we have to draw a line around.16

DR. VARNER: But, see, in New Mexico17

the zone might well have been maybe just one18

or two premises, or one premises.19

MR. CULBERTSON: And maybe an20

important point to kind of add into all the21

commentary is that it may be that, or it may22

-- because of analyses, it may be as small23

as one premises or as large as a milkshed or24

something.25

1 SESSION 431

DR. MICHALKE: Yeah, I'm not2

advocating that, you know, it's going to be. 3

But in cases it could be that small. And,4

I mean, you're only going to get benefit5

from that. I mean, anything else, you're6

not.7

DR. ROBISON: It had been discussed8

in the working group that you can have a9

geographic area for whatever reason, a10

wildlife problem or just a milkshed or11

whatever. You have this, hopefully, defined12

geographic area. And it could be a segment13

of the industry.14

We talked about the dairy heifers15

going here and there and how they're raised16

and what circumstances, management issues, and17

should further restrictions be placed on a18

defined area of one industry, because they19

are more of a higher risk.20

MR. CULBERTSON: I think there is. 21

You know, the things that make them a higher22

risk are the extended periods of time in23

close quarters, high velocity of movement. 24

Those are very, very big risk factors,25

1 SESSION 432

whether it would be -- even if it was beef2

cattle being handled that way, the risk would3

be way up.4

Beef cattle, traditionally, aren't5

managed that way. But anything -- the risk6

factor isn't the existence of a dairy cow. 7

The risk factor is the way they live. So,8

yeah, you may want to look at conditions.9

Nine times out of 10, you're going10

to snag the dairy industry into that risk11

profile because they live a long time in12

close quarters, which is a very high-risk13

situation.14

DR. ROBISON: The way the industry15

has evolved to meet the needs, the current16

situation, as opposed to 50 or 75 years ago17

you'd have a little dairy herd and it was18

just a small, closed herd. But it's not19

that way anymore.20

MR. CULBERTSON: And if you want to21

look -- you know, drill a little bit deeper,22

if we use these dairies for an example, it23

may not necessarily be all those cattle in a24

group that's such a big deal, but then it25

1 SESSION 433

becomes the movement between those different2

premises of large numbers of cattle.3

That's really where it gets scary,4

when culled animals are not going to5

slaughter, you know, when some of them are6

starting to get recycled, when traders are7

really working the countryside and buying and8

selling these things and new dairies popping9

up and then closing and, you know, this10

dispersal of dairy animals.11

So what happens between all those12

points of concentration, you know, that's13

another one of those risk factors that has14

to be paid a lot of respect to. So, you15

know, we have to look at it that way. We16

can't look at it in just pure basic terms,17

you know, is it a dairy cow; is it a18

Mexican. You know, that's only one part of19

what's going on.20

And if that's creating a risk for21

you in a state, what are you doing to22

address that risk in order to demonstrate to23

the rest of the country that you're24

controlling the health of your state? And25

1 SESSION 434

so that ties itself back over to the2

compliant or the consistent and nonconsistent3

criteria.4

MR. DEWALD: What do you have to do5

to take the zone out? I mean, what is the6

procedure for that?7

DR. ROBISON: Well, that's open for8

discussion too.9

MR. DEWALD: No, I asked the10

question.11

DR. MICHALKE: No, we're supposed to12

be asking the questions. You're supposed to13

be giving the answers. That's our job. 14

That is open.15

DR. ROBISON: What criteria should16

be used to make everybody feel comfortable17

that everything's okay and that's the end of18

it?19

MR. DEWALD: Well, you have to go20

back to look at why you made that zone in21

that area. I mean, if there was a herd22

here, and there wasn't anything up in here,23

why did you make it that big?24

DR. ROBISON: So have those factors25

1 SESSION 435

been addressed appropriately and everybody is2

comfortable that it's taken care of, and then3

-- so as a tailored situation for each zone?4

MR. CULBERTSON: You know, I think5

that there would be -- it probably would be6

tailored for each zone, but there would7

probably -- there are probably two things8

that would provoke a zone, one, the existence9

of the disease itself, obviously, a zone and10

a quarantine or whatever.11

The other would be the existence of12

high enough risk factors that, even though13

you're not finding the disease there, you14

know you need to control the situation. 15

And, you know, I think those risk factors16

are going to have to be evolved.17

You know, I would envision this18

program getting started with a rather19

rudimentary set of risk criteria for that20

sort of thing and let it develop and21

sophisticate as you go. There's one of two22

things, either it's scary as hell, but no23

disease, or the disease exists.24

Poor -- you know, obvious bad live25

1 SESSION 436

security, obvious extreme high velocities of2

uncontrolled trade, you know, there are a lot3

of reasons why a state animal health4

authority might say, you know what, we're5

going to zone that, and there are going to6

be requirements about how cattle come and go.7

DR. ROBISON: Based on risky8

behavior.9

MR. CULBERTSON: Based on risky10

behavior, yeah, risk factors that are -- or11

may or may not be under the control of the12

people in the business there, but yeah.13

And so what would lift it -- then14

the question was, well, what would lift that? 15

Well, the removal of the risk, the removal16

of those practices or those conditions or the17

disease itself or whatever.18

DR. MICHALKE: Well, I think, to19

that, you may add the proof that -- you20

know, you're going to establish a zone. 21

You're going to go, hopefully, ahead, outside22

of this risk or this disease and everything.23

And the surveillance and the proof24

that it is contained and everything, that25

1 SESSION 437

would be your premise for release of that2

zone, containment and proof that it hasn't3

spread, through surveillance.4

MR. CULBERTSON: And, therefore, the5

transparency and the reporting, maybe this is6

where the advisory group has a role.7

DR. MICHALKE: And there's a8

question that comes in there at the end9

right there, you know, under: Working group10

discussed long-term containment plan would be11

reviewed by the advisory board and Veterinary12

Services.13

Any other people need to, you know,14

review the containment plan and what15

circumstances would require a containment plan16

to be supported by a risk assessment?17

MR. CULBERTSON: A lot of this is18

going to take a long time to develop. 19

You're going to have the rules and then20

figure out -- the program is going to have21

to be flexible.22

DR. ROBISON: Maybe if you have a23

tailored situation developing, maybe you24

should state from the get-go: Here's what25

1 SESSION 438

got you here and here's what it takes to get2

you out.3

MR. CULBERTSON: Yeah, set it up,4

set the plan up.5

DR. ROBISON: I was told we've got6

less than 10 minutes to regroup for the7

general session. So do y'all want to shut8

it down now and take a break before that9

starts up? We can keep talking if you want.10

DR. MICHALKE: It's been a good11

discussion.12

DR. ROBISON: We appreciate y'all13

coming in and giving your input.14

(Whereupon recessed at 2:55 P.M.)15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 SESSION 439

CERTIFICATE2

3

STATE OF TEXAS4

5

I, KARY A. WINGO, CSR, RPR in and6

for the State of Texas, certify that the7

caption to this transcription correctly states8

the facts set forth herein, that the9

proceedings were correctly reported in10

Stenograph by me at the time and place set11

forth in said caption, and have been12

transcribed from Stenograph into typewriting13

under my direction and supervision in the14

foregoing transcript; and that said transcript15

contains a correct record of the proceedings16

had at said time and place. GIVEN UNDER MY17

HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL of office.18

19

20

21

KARY A. WINGO, CSR, RPR22

DATED: JUNE 20, 201123

Session4, 060611Page 15

Aability 25:21 30:4able 2:22accepted 27:15accumulates 26:10act12:9actions 24:20activities 4:5,155:9,11 6:23 24:13

activity 28:10add30:21 36:20addition 11:16address 20:8 21:533:23

addressed 21:6 35:2addressing 5:1414:10 24:17

adjacent 5:13 24:16adjunct 14:12advisory 4:3 6:2,217:3,5,9,10,11,137:19,20 8:14,17,249:15,19,23 10:6,1210:16 14:2 16:317:8 28:6 37:7,12

advocating 31:3affect 19:11ago20:13 32:17agree 6:25 16:1628:16

agreement 21:10ahead 36:22allowed 15:24Amarillo 1:12amount 9:21 15:24analyses 30:23Andrea 3:4animal 2:17 3:3,1523:20,21,22 36:4

animals 19:10 21:533:5,11

answers 34:14anticipated 18:10anybody 6:16,17 8:3anymore 32:20anyway 17:23

appreciate 2:5 38:13appropriate 4:20appropriately 35:2area 3:16 4:16 16:1426:5 27:7,8 31:1031:13,19 34:22

areas3:25Arizona23:15asked10:13 34:10asking 34:13aspect 15:9aspects29:18assessment 26:2537:17

assistance 4:4 6:22Attorney 3:5at-risk6:8authority 8:24 36:5automatically 5:415:16 16:23 24:25

available 18:20B

back 6:19 10:11 34:234:21

bad35:25bank 23:16based7:15 36:8,10basic17:12 33:17basically 7:25 17:3beauty 20:5beef 19:3,24 20:921:15 24:4 32:2,5

behavior 36:9,11Ben2:24benefit31:5best 18:17better 11:9big27:5 31:25 32:2534:24

bit2:21 10:2,1216:14 27:19 32:22

BMO2:25board3:6,10,13 6:27:3,9,10,11,12,147:18,19 8:10,14,17

8:18,25 9:6 10:710:12,16 12:4,613:9,11,13,14,2313:24,25 16:3 17:928:6 37:12

boards 7:5 8:6 9:99:15,24

Bob 3:11boss 28:15break 38:9BREAKOUT 1:6broad 9:13broader 27:2,2broke 23:16brought 7:19 9:1414:22 15:7 17:623:23 28:9,11

brucellosis 1:2 4:155:18 7:6 9:24 14:725:4 30:12

buffalo 29:18built 20:6business 17:4 36:13buy 24:3buying 33:8Buzzard 3:4,4

CCalifornia 18:2319:13,17 20:923:13,17

canyon 29:7caption 39:8,12care 35:3Carson 2:24,24case 11:18 30:10cases 20:21 29:14,1429:24 31:4

cattle 19:5 25:8,2526:2,4,11,12,14,1726:20 32:3,5,2433:3 36:7

cause 16:22certain 4:5,15,186:23 25:16 26:5

certainly 11:25 21:9

Session4, 060611Page 16

CERTIFICATE 39:2certify 39:7charting 14:9chosen 7:10circulate 21:8circumstances 25:1131:17 37:16

clarified 27:23class 25:24,25Clayton 2:12 11:1716:16

close 31:24 32:13closed 32:19closing 33:10combinations26:2227:14

come 6:14 11:13 36:7comes 25:20 37:9comfortable 34:1735:3

coming 2:6 17:1438:14

commencing 1:13comment 16:20commentary 30:22comments 9:3 16:25Commission 2:17 3:15committee 14:7,7,17committees 13:414:25

compared 26:3compliance 17:17compliant 34:3component 19:2130:14

components 6:6component/not 19:21composition 7:8concentration 33:13concept 25:22concern 8:22concerns 9:6concrete 12:20conditions 26:7 32:936:17

conduct 2:22 15:18

24:14conducting 5:12confused 27:22consensus 4:22 5:29:23 11:21

consequence 4:815:11

consequences11:11considered 29:22consist5:8 24:12consistency 10:517:17

consistent 4:1113:18,21 17:2419:17 34:3

contact5:13contact/potential24:16

contained 36:25containment 5:9,105:17,21,25 37:3,1137:15,16

contains 39:16continues 23:7control35:15 36:12controlling 33:25coordinator 3:3correct39:16correctly 39:8,10cost 6:12council7:20country8:18 33:24countryside 33:8couple 2:8 13:1520:13,21

course 14:9Court1:14cow26:20 32:7 33:18cows 26:18create 26:22creating 33:21criteria 25:14 34:434:16 35:20

CSR39:6,24Culbertson 3:7,9 8:59:16 10:6 11:20

17:16 18:4 20:1721:13,22 22:9,1623:6 24:7 25:1929:16 30:15,2031:21 32:21 35:536:10 37:5,18 38:4

culled 33:5current 13:10 32:16

Ddairies 19:8 32:2333:9

dairy 18:8,13,24,2519:15,18 21:7,1123:19 25:7 26:1526:17,18 31:1532:7,11,18 33:1133:18

DATED 39:25day-to-day 14:14deal 32:25dealing 22:6Dean 3:2,2decide 11:7decided 4:7deciding 13:13decision 13:16decisions 14:15 23:9decreased 25:13Dee 28:20deeper 27:19 32:22defined 7:11 31:1231:19

demonstrate 33:23deny 28:18designations 18:5,5details 10:19 21:2123:9,10

determination 27:4determinations 16:417:9

determine 4:19 27:20develop 35:21 37:19developed 23:7developing 37:24devil's 10:19 21:21

Session4, 060611Page 17

DEWALD 34:5,10,20diagnostic 23:23diagnostics 18:20difference 16:8different 3:22 8:188:19 9:18 11:1216:10,14 20:2529:11 33:2

diligently 17:20direction 14:3 39:14director 3:9discussed 4:2,14,185:7,17,24 6:5,2115:11 24:11 28:531:8 37:11

discussing 17:4discussion 2:10,238:9,16,20 10:1512:19 14:22,2321:25 28:2 34:938:12

disease 4:23 5:418:8 20:11 22:2423:4 25:16 35:1035:14,24,24 36:1836:23

dispersal 33:11diversity 27:9,10doing 11:8,10 17:424:5 33:22

dollars 23:20downgrade 19:4 24:4downgraded 4:23 5:35:3 19:2

downgrades 16:417:10

downgrading 13:1714:15

Dr 2:5,16,19,19 3:163:18 7:22,23 8:88:21 9:8,20 10:1411:15,24 12:10,1112:23 13:2,7,20,2214:21 15:8 16:5,1116:17,19 17:6 18:218:11 20:24 21:15

22:7,10,13,1823:11 24:8 28:729:24 30:17 31:2,832:15 34:8,12,1634:25 36:8,19 37:837:23 38:6,11,13

draw 30:16drill27:18 32:22driving12:5

Eearlier9:14earning22:3East 1:12effective 6:12either 27:20 35:23Ellis2:20ensure 24:20 28:4envision 35:18epidemiological 5:1219:19 24:15

epidemiologist30:4eradicate 23:3eradicated 5:19especially 18:18establish 25:2 36:21evaluating 5:1424:17

evaluation 28:10evening28:18everybody 14:1819:12 24:4 34:1735:2

everything's34:18evolved32:16 35:17evolving 26:24exactly10:21example26:12,1332:23

execution 10:9existence 25:24,2532:7 35:9,12

exists 27:6 35:24explain16:6extended 31:23extent 28:17

extra 28:15extreme 8:12 36:2

FFACA 12:9,10fact 7:19 17:7factor 12:5 32:7,8factors 26:22 27:1228:23 29:15,2131:25 33:14 34:2535:13,16 36:11

facts 39:9failure 15:18 20:22fair 9:22 14:20fallout 23:2far 3:22,24 9:1512:11 14:2 18:6

feedlot 18:9 21:1226:13

feel 34:17fellows 12:23field 2:25figure 21:3 37:21fill 13:5find 19:17 20:222:14,24

finding 22:3,4,5,1135:14

first 4:2 6:19 23:13five 3:25 4:21 8:1119:10

fix 14:11flexibility 18:2320:6

flexible 21:19,1937:22

flexibly 30:4folks 8:22following 3:8 5:10follows 16:21foregoing 39:15formal 5:20 25:3formally 24:25formation 25:3forth 15:19 39:9,12forward 14:11

Session4, 060611Page 18

fought 20:15found 4:23 5:4 18:823:21 25:4

four 4:17frame 16:25FRAMEWORK 1:3free 25:16Frost 3:11,11function 12:14 14:6functioning 12:614:13

fundamental 14:8further 31:18

Ggeneral 3:5,25 8:338:8

genesis 23:12geographic 31:10,13geographics 28:20geography 28:24getting 35:19get-go 37:25give 10:2given 8:23 12:1215:2,16 39:17

giving 34:14 38:14glad 14:22go 10:11 24:22 30:534:20 35:22 36:736:22

goal 23:3goes 26:19going 2:10 12:3,1412:25 14:3,11,1918:18,21 19:1124:5,8 27:7,2428:14,16 29:6,1130:5 31:3,5,1632:10 33:5,2035:17 36:6,6,21,2237:19,20,21

good 8:25 10:18 24:728:20 38:11

grazing 29:7Greater 29:3 30:12

group2:6,14,15,184:2,3,7,13,17,215:2,7,16,24 6:5,216:21 10:17 14:215:6,10 16:6 24:1128:11,13 29:5 31:932:25 37:7,10

groups 14:24guess12:17 16:21guy21:16guys 19:24 20:9,1020:15 22:23 24:5,5

HHall 3:14,14 12:2516:5 27:24

HAND 39:18handled32:3happen 12:8happens18:3 21:1233:12

hard 20:19hate 28:17head 16:17health 2:17 3:1533:25 36:4

hearing7:16heart22:20heartburn 29:4heifers21:11 25:726:15 31:15

hell 35:23help 24:20herd 20:4 23:23 24:329:18 32:18,1934:22

herds5:14 19:1920:2 23:25 24:16

hey12:3 14:18high 31:24 35:1336:2

higher 31:20,22highly 17:24high-risk 25:6 32:13hit2:20hold 20:3

Holiday 1:12hopeful 20:18 21:23hopefully 2:22 31:1236:22

hurt 23:4I

idea 10:18 11:1518:22

identification 3:3impact 10:4implement 24:21importance 4:14important 30:21impossible 17:25improve 17:3improvements 17:5include 7:2included 6:7inconsistency 9:10inconsistent 4:915:17,21

increased 15:2225:12

industry 7:17 11:2312:2,12 18:1319:15,18 21:831:14,19 32:11,15

inevitable 29:20infect 21:13Inn 1:12input 7:25 13:238:14

instance 25:15interest 6:16interstate 15:2224:21 25:9

introductions 2:11investigations 5:1324:15

issuance 5:11 24:14issue 9:20 20:24issues 9:5,11 15:1415:15 21:17 23:1524:10 31:17

Session4, 060611Page 19

Jjob11:10 14:2022:23 34:14

Jody 3:14 17:15jump 6:15 24:8June 1:11 2:3 39:25

KKary 1:13 39:6,24keep 11:3 38:10Kevin 3:16kind 2:19 3:20 11:313:5,10,23 14:3,1214:13,17 29:1030:7,21

kinds 11:12know 6:13 8:9 9:9,189:21,22 12:12,1613:22,25 14:1016:13,20,24 17:2,617:7,18,23 20:1420:16 21:4,8,9,1621:17,21 23:6,2525:19 26:7,11,1726:18 27:2,6,12,2128:9,20 29:5,12,1431:3,22 32:22 33:633:10,13,16,18,1935:5,15,16,18,2536:3,5,21 37:10,14

known 4:10 6:9L

lab23:24lack 15:17large 30:24 33:3late 28:13leading 28:21leads 9:10leaning 10:22legal 12:7length 7:11lesions 19:10let's 19:16 24:3,22level 8:6levels 26:10

liaison15:3lift 36:14,15light21:23limit15:23 16:2limited19:14line 11:6 30:16list 6:17,19listed 3:25little 2:21 10:2,1211:9 16:13,14 20:326:3 27:19 29:1132:18,22

live 32:8,12 35:25Livestock 3:6,10,13living 26:20long 2:19 22:2 27:432:12 37:19

long-term 5:9,17,2524:12 37:11

look 14:19 16:2419:20 21:4 22:1627:13 32:9,2233:16,17 34:21

looked 10:7,8,25looking9:12 16:1216:12

lose 10:3 16:23loss 4:9 15:12lot8:19 9:23 10:1812:2 16:11,1528:14 29:2,4,830:13 33:15 36:337:18

lots 21:20 29:13lumped 19:13

Mmain 12:5making 12:6managed32:6management 26:3,827:8 28:22 31:17

man-made 26:9Mark 2:16mean 9:12 11:2512:20 13:2,3,7,8,9

13:24 14:6,15 16:916:19,24 18:11,1220:5,7,7,14 21:621:16,17 22:1023:12,14 26:228:23 29:24 30:331:5,6 34:6,22

means 6:12 19:2 22:522:7,10

meet 32:16Meeting 1:11members 7:9,11mentioned 3:18mess 23:13Mexican 21:5,11,1426:11,12,14,1733:19

Mexico 3:5,6,10,123:13 18:15 20:1423:15 24:9 30:17

Michalke 2:16,167:22 8:21 9:2011:15,24 12:1114:21 16:5,11,1918:2 22:7,10 28:731:2 34:12 36:1937:8 38:11

Michigan 23:14 29:330:11

middle 13:19milk 26:20milkshed 30:24 31:11million 23:19mind 17:14 23:825:20

minute 19:7minutes 38:7mistaken 13:6mitigations 25:10mixed 26:15model 13:8,10modified 25:12Montana 29:18move 15:9 19:5movement 15:23 24:2226:5 27:11 31:24

Session4, 060611Page 20

33:2Myles 3:9

Nname 2:12 3:9 16:10national 6:7 8:109:6,17 10:4

natural 26:9necessarily 32:24necessary 11:8 13:1425:10

need 7:18 10:11 11:912:4 17:13 19:2021:4 25:20,2129:22 30:6,6 35:1537:14

needed 24:20needs 10:25 11:1132:16

negative 22:25never 23:20new3:5,6,10,12,137:2 19:16 20:1423:15 24:9 30:1733:9

Nine 32:10Nods 16:17noncompliance 4:815:12,15

noncompliant15:14nonconsistency 17:18nonconsistent 13:1834:3

norms 27:16nothing's 12:20number 1:6 4:7,13,174:21 5:16,23 6:179:21 10:15 20:2524:10

numbers 33:3O

obvious 35:25 36:2obviously 23:1435:10

occur 5:11

office 39:18OFFICIAL 39:18officials 12:18okay 28:2 34:18old18:24 19:1221:19 24:2 26:1827:15

once 20:2,3ones 22:25one-year 5:19open 10:15 12:1928:10 34:8,15

opened 23:24operating 17:12operation 29:22,23opposed7:17 32:17order33:23ought20:16 22:227:5

outbreak 17:22 19:14outside36:22overview 3:21

Ppages2:9paid 33:15parentheses 4:3part 5:6,20 8:1327:3 28:5 33:19

particular 10:25peer 11:4,7people 14:19 36:1337:14

perfect20:8perimeter 29:25period 5:19 25:17periods31:23person 16:7personnel 7:17perspective 10:8perspectives9:19pertaining 5:22 6:24pick 2:21pinch2:20,20place2:20 27:5 28:339:11,17

placed 27:21 31:18placing 17:19plan 5:17,21,25 15:237:11,15,16 38:5

play 28:2point 6:18 8:4 19:924:7 28:21 30:21

points 9:13,14 20:2528:15 33:13

policy 10:7 11:1912:15 13:3,5

Poor 35:25popping 33:9population 25:7populations 6:8 25:8posed 15:14position 17:19possibilities 18:18possibility 9:914:24

possible 4:8 15:11possibly 15:4potential 2:9 5:145:15 18:14 24:17

potentially 11:5practice 28:25practices 18:6 27:836:17

premise 37:2premises 29:25 30:230:6,9,19,19,2433:3

premium 22:3present 16:9probably 9:2,2511:18,19 17:3 35:635:8,8

problem 8:13 31:11problems 14:11procedure 17:12 34:7proceedings 39:10,16process 19:23 20:13producer 19:3 23:4professionals 11:22profile 32:12program 1:7 4:5 6:23

Session4, 060611Page 21

7:24 14:3,9 18:1718:22,24 19:12,1619:25 20:22 21:1721:20 22:8 23:724:3 26:24 35:1937:21

programming 14:8program's 20:10proof 36:20,24 37:3proper 8:23,24proposed 1:2 17:2117:22

proposing 21:18protecting 18:7protection 17:21protocol 10:24provide 4:4 6:22 7:3provisional 15:25provisionally 4:1113:20

provoke 35:9pseudorabies7:21,2313:9

public 1:11 29:7punished 22:4pure 33:17purely 19:14pursuing 17:20push 22:18pushing 22:13,24put16:14p.m1:13 38:15

Qquality 18:19quarantine 19:19,2030:3 35:11

quarantines 5:1224:14

quarters 31:24 32:13question 17:7,1724:19 34:11 36:1537:9

questions 2:9 4:6,125:22 6:24 8:415:13 16:19 24:23

34:13quick3:21quotient 26:16

Rraised 31:16raises 17:16raising21:10ramifications 12:7ran23:17,18ranch18:9 26:21rancher3:12rates22:14ready27:20real 16:8 17:14reality18:12,1619:25

really 13:12,25 14:514:17 20:12 21:2422:20,23 33:4,8

reason 11:6 31:10reasonable 2:2314:19

reasons36:4recapping 12:21 15:6recessed 38:15recommendation25:3recommendations 7:48:2

record 39:16recycled 33:7recycling 26:18reduce 20:20reduced4:10 15:13regarding 25:3regards4:5 6:2316:3 17:9

regionalized9:9regions8:18 9:7regroup38:7regulations 7:210:10,24

regulatory 1:3 7:1711:22 12:16,17

related4:6release37:2

released 27:21removal 36:16,16removed 25:14,17repeat 4:25 28:17repetitive 26:4reported 39:10Reporter 1:14reporting 4:15 15:1828:8 37:6

reports 28:8represent 3:6 9:7require 4:19 15:1624:25 37:16

required 5:18requirement 25:15requirements 1:7 2:73:19,24 5:6 6:2015:10,22 24:2225:9 36:7

respect 33:15response 22:14rest 33:24restrict 30:6restrictions 31:18review 4:19 11:4,711:18 12:15 37:15

reviewed 6:2 37:12right 7:22 8:7 15:817:11 22:19 23:8,926:19 37:10

risk 18:21 20:3,2021:4,5 25:22,2226:2,10,14,16,1926:22,24 27:2,1228:4 29:21 31:2031:23,25 32:3,6,832:11 33:14,21,2335:13,16,20 36:1136:16,23 37:17

risks 5:15 24:1827:14

risky 36:8,10Robison 2:5,12,193:18 7:23 8:8 9:810:14 12:10,2313:20 15:8 16:17

Session4, 060611Page 22

24:8 31:8 32:1534:8,16,25 36:837:23 38:6,13

rocks 23:18rodeo 18:14 25:726:19

role 16:2 17:8 37:7roles 7:12 13:5roof 26:19room 21:2RPR39:6,24RuAnn 23:18rudimentary 35:20rules 37:20run18:17

Ssaying 17:11 19:726:21

says 14:18scary 33:4 35:23scenario 17:22 20:1830:10

scenarios 11:13SEAL 39:18second 18:25security 36:2see3:21 7:13,1813:15 14:13 16:317:8 30:17

segment 31:13selling 33:9sense 29:17sequestered 26:12service 7:12Services 2:13 4:46:3,22 7:4 8:210:23 37:13

session 1:6,11 2:212:13 38:8

set12:20 30:9 35:2038:4,5 39:9,11

short 6:5short-term 5:8,1024:12,13

shown 19:25

shut 20:4 38:8side 30:11,12signify20:22,23similar16:15simple 17:14simple-minded 16:7single 20:20singular 27:15situation 10:25 11:411:14 25:23 28:832:14,17 35:4,1537:24

situations 4:1815:20 24:24

six8:11size 25:13slaughter 6:7 33:6slaughter-targeted6:13

small30:23 31:432:19

smaller29:23snag 32:11Somebody 8:11sophisticate35:22sort 10:7,9 15:2522:2 27:15 35:21

sorted 14:5speak12:24special6:16species27:9,10specific 15:2spread 20:3 37:4standing 14:18standpoint 13:6start2:10 6:1717:18 19:4

started20:12 35:19starting 2:21 33:7starts 38:10state1:7,14 4:195:6 8:6,11,13,1411:5,7 12:16,1713:17 14:15 15:1615:24 16:23 17:2017:24 18:6 19:3,6

19:11,17 20:1923:5 24:25 25:633:22,25 36:437:25 39:4,7

statements 29:12states 4:14 17:1922:2 24:21 28:439:8

state's 5:2state/program 2:73:19,24 6:20 15:10

state/tribe 4:22status 4:9,9,10,204:22 5:2 11:515:12,13,17,21,2516:4,9,23 17:918:4 28:8

steers 18:14 21:1121:14

stemmed 29:3stems 29:8Stenograph 39:11,13subject 25:9success 20:23sudden 18:23 19:2suggestion 15:5supervision 39:14support 11:17supported 37:17supposed 34:12,13surveillance 1:8 2:83:20 6:4,6,7,8,96:10,11,13 15:1822:8,12 36:24 37:4

surveilling 18:7system 28:3

Ttackle 9:25tailored 35:4,737:24

take 34:6 37:19 38:9taken 35:3takes 38:2talk 9:23talked 8:9,12 21:2

Session4, 060611Page 23

31:15talking 2:6 13:3,826:15 27:25 38:10

talks 28:12target 17:11targeted 6:9,11TB 4:15 5:18 9:2414:6 17:23,2418:13,21,25 19:1019:18,25 21:822:15 23:22,2425:4 30:11

TB/brucellosis 2:14technical 10:9 11:1712:14 13:3

tend 10:3terms 26:2 27:3,1433:17

test 18:19 22:1930:7

testing 5:13 15:2219:5 24:15 25:9

Texas 1:13,14 2:132:17 3:15,17 39:439:7

thing 13:23 14:416:10 21:23 23:1230:8 35:21

things 10:18 13:1517:13 27:19 28:2330:15 31:22 33:935:8,23

think 7:15 8:23 9:179:22 10:22 11:1511:25 12:5 13:1213:24 16:11,2220:18 23:8 26:2327:13,16,17,1829:2,8,21 31:2135:5,16 36:19

thinking 11:3thought 8:23 10:1729:10

thoughts 6:18 8:3,198:21

three 1:6 4:13 5:23

19:9thrown 8:20 9:11tied 15:21ties 34:2Tim3:2time 8:4 9:3 15:2416:25 22:2 25:1729:4 31:23 32:1237:19 39:11,17

times32:10today7:16 8:20 9:49:14 16:16,21 17:417:12 18:12 30:11

today's14:10told 38:6topic24:9topics 3:18,23tough14:14,16tougher30:13toughest 13:16town 3:8trade36:3traders33:7traditionally 32:5transcribed 39:13transcript 39:15,15transcription 39:8transparency28:737:6

transparent 28:3tribal 12:17tribes 4:14try20:13trying 12:8 20:8tuberculosis1:2 7:620:20,21

turned 21:24tweak16:13two4:7 5:16 7:59:23 12:22 19:830:19 35:8,22

type 10:4 11:4,1312:15,16,17 26:6

types27:10typewriting 39:13

Uuncontrollable 29:17uncontrolled 36:3understand 8:6 25:2130:5

understanding 26:25unrelated 23:25upside 20:7USAHA 13:4 14:6,6,23USDA 2:25 3:3,1713:17

use 4:3 6:21 7:28:24 16:9,15 18:1926:11 32:23

utilization 14:25V

valued 23:19variability 10:2variety 7:3Varner 3:16,16 13:713:22 17:6 18:1120:24 21:15 22:1322:18 23:11 29:2430:17

Varner's 13:2velocities 36:2velocity 31:24versus 13:3Vet 6:22veterinarians 8:1111:22 22:19

Veterinary 2:13 4:46:2 7:4 8:2 10:2337:12

vet-in-charge 3:17view 21:18volume 26:4

WWait 19:7wallflower 9:2want 32:9,21 38:8,10wasn't 34:23waste 9:3way 13:4 17:15 22:14

Session4, 060611Page 24

32:3,4,6,8,15,2033:16

well-developed 26:24we'll 2:9,22 3:21we're 9:12 13:2,817:3,4 21:18 22:1326:15 34:12 36:5

we've 8:9 12:2118:13,14,14,15,2019:25 20:3 21:1621:25 38:6

wildlife 4:24,24 5:55:5 18:16 19:21,2125:5 30:14 31:11

Wingo 1:13 39:6,24words 25:23work 3:5 9:8working 2:14,15,184:2,7,13,17,21,255:7,16,24 6:5,2010:17 15:10 16:620:19 24:11 28:1128:13 29:5 31:933:8 37:10

works 21:3world 18:12worried 29:6worse 20:10worst 30:10Wouldn't 16:16

Yyeah 10:3,14,1712:11 13:22 16:2130:15 31:2 32:936:11,13 38:4

years 14:10 20:1322:22 24:10 32:17

Yellowstone 29:330:13

y'all 2:5 38:8,13Z

zone 19:22,22 25:2,425:12,14,16,1726:23 27:4,20 28:5

29:19,25 30:8,1834:6,21 35:4,7,935:10 36:6,21 37:3

zoned25:8zoning 1:8 2:7 3:195:7,8,20,23 24:924:10,11 28:1929:2

11-40 1:1210 32:10 38:71911 1:12

22:11 1:132:55 38:1520 39:252011 1:12 2:3 39:25

335 23:19

441:11 2:245 23:19

550 9:18 32:17

661:11 2:3

775 32:17

PROPOSED TUBERCULOSIS AND BRUCELLOSISREGULATORY FRAMEWORK PUBLIC MEETINGAMARILLO, TEXAS_________________________________________________________ BREAKOUT SESSION NUMBER TWO:

AFFECTED HERD MANAGEMENT ANDEPIDEMIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

INTERSTATE MOVEMENT CONTROLS

IMPORTATION REQUIREMENTS

SESSION 6, held Pursuant to Notice and

Agreement on June 6, 2011, at the Holiday Inn, 1911 1-40

East, Amarillo, Texas, 79102, before Sondra Cargle, a

Notary Public of the State of Texas.

1 SESSION 6 2

SESSION 62

JUNE 6, 20113

DR. HENCH: Good afternoon everyone. 4

I'm Dr. Bill Hench with the TB staff, rumen5

health programs. And helping out today is6

Dr. Mark Schoenbaum, who's the Western7

Regional TB Epi -- 8

(Whereupon off the record.)9

DR. HENCH: As I said, helping out10

is Dr. Mark Schoenbaum, the Western Regional11

TB Epidemiologist. Mark and I were technical12

support to the Working Group. We sat in and13

listened in on the calls, but it was the14

Working Group members proper who worked15

through the different elements.16

This breakout session has been17

identified to look at affected herds18

management and epidemiological investigations,19

interstate movements, and imports. When we20

talk about imports, we mean international21

imports, not state-to-state movements.22

And as we began the last group, we23

started with affected herd management and epi24

investigations. And Myles, you wanted to -- 25

1 SESSION 6 3

MR. CULBERTSON: I flunked. I had2

to come back.3

DR. HENCH: -- start on interstate4

movements. So, since you're here, we'll5

start with the movements that you expressed6

an interest in.7

What we're looking for is to get8

your input on interstate movement requirements9

for such things as maybe classes of animals10

that might be at higher risk than other11

classes within the U.S.12

One example that's frequently cited13

is dairy heifers. So, without much more14

ado, why don't you jump in and get us off15

and running.16

MR. CULBERTSON: Well, okay. I was17

hoping to hear -- you know, learn more than18

I could teach on that, because, you know,19

the way it is right now, there are -- there20

are interstate -- there are interstate21

restrictions or rules or whatever or22

agreements or whatever that are made between23

states where a -- one state -- if we took24

New Mexico for the example, there were states25

1 SESSION 6 4

that would not receive New Mexico cattle2

without certain -- you know, without certain3

tests or whatever.4

It wasn't -- it wasn't consistent5

across the country. I don't know that that6

was a big deal to us, but it -- but there7

-- you know, there was an inconsistency.8

I guess it was -- it's more of a9

question than anything else. Does USDA10

anticipate trying to smooth all that out, or11

just is this something that states will12

continue to work out between themselves? 13

DR. HENCH: To make sure I'm14

understanding you, you're saying that, using15

New Mexico as an example, different states16

throughout the country would have different17

requirements for New Mexico cattle entering18

their state.19

MR. CULBERTSON: That's right.20

DR. HENCH: And the question is: 21

Do we anticipate some sort of effort to22

harmonize the requirements amongst the states23

for other states? That's -- 24

MR. CULBERTSON: And just -- and I'm25

1 SESSION 6 5

not necessarily looking for a yes answer on2

that, but -- 3

DR. HENCH: No, I understand.4

And this particular topic has been5

brought up by other states in a slightly6

different format, but generally, it's the7

same thing, you know, level playing field.8

We have some thoughts and ideas9

along those lines, but we'd like to hear10

what you might have to suggest first.11

MR. CULBERTSON: You know, I'm a12

believer in strong communication and13

agreements between states that the USDA can14

support, rather than an imposition by USDA of15

a standard that the states all have to16

figure out how to support.17

And, you know, with that in mind, I18

don't know whether the new program -- whether19

-- you know, how it would look at that sort20

of thing, but I think it's appropriate for21

one state, for its own reasons, to place22

particular restrictions on another.23

Sometimes that's done not wisely;24

sometimes it is. But, you know, I guess one25

1 SESSION 6 6

question that has come up is, is it -- are2

there -- are there legal or constitutional3

issues with the state doing something that's4

more stringent than the federal standard, or5

the reverse of that, the federal government6

being able to do something that's more7

stringent than what the states want,8

recognizing it's all interstate movement. 9

So, there's the federal stake in it,10

obviously.11

DR. HENCH: What might we, in our12

new program, do to help -- do to help you13

all with that type of issue?14

DR. MYERS: Maybe I can make a15

comment on that.16

DR. HENCH: Sure.17

DR. MYERS: A little over a year18

ago, when the Obama administration came in,19

they issued an Executive Order that requires20

all agencies during rule- making to look at21

the issue of preemption and to make a22

conscious statement as to whether or not this23

rule does or does not need to preempt state24

action. So, we will have to consider that25

1 SESSION 6 7

when working on this rule.2

I think, basically, what I'm hearing3

you say is that you feel there are times4

when a state might need to take some5

additional restrictions.6

And I guess the question that I have7

is: What is it that drives a state to want8

to do that? And I think the answer is --9

if I can answer my own question -- is that10

they feel that there is a risk that's not11

being addressed by anyone else.12

And so, what Dr. Thomas talked about13

this morning is the discussion that was held14

in the Working Group of trying to set up a15

system whereby we have transparency in16

reporting, so that whenever state X is17

dealing with an outbreak or a case or an18

incident, that they are sharing information19

on how they are responding to that case so20

that the rest of the 49 states have an21

assurance that, yes, that case that appeared22

in that particular state is being well23

managed, and that anything leaving that24

facility or zone or whatever is established25

1 SESSION 6 8

is being tested, is -- or that risk is being2

mitigated.3

So, I guess my question to you is: 4

If that type of system provided a state5

enough assurance in a transparent way that a6

state is handling a particular situation,7

would your state or another state feel that8

need to put additional restrictions in place? 9

MR. CULBERTSON: It's a good point,10

if we were looking to the program to be a11

reasonable or an accurate measure of the risk12

that exists in that other state.13

And -- and that could be better than14

the perception of one state's -- a level of15

risk in one state. And, you know, New16

Mexico has suffered a perception problem. 17

And the reality is quite different. And the18

perception problem came because of status -- 19

DR. MYERS: Uh-huh.20

MR. CULBERTSON: -- rather than21

compliance. So, if you have a noncompliant22

state, that should be meaningful to other23

states.24

DR. MYERS: Right.25

1 SESSION 6 9

MR. CULBERTSON: But if you have a2

reduced status, then even though we were able3

to isolate to a zone, it didn't really4

matter in another state. It's still New5

Mexico.6

And so, a state that has probably7

done more to search out, to ferret out TB8

than probably any state in the United States,9

except maybe some of the northern -- quite10

far north, is, therefore, probably as low a11

risk as you could have for tuberculosis. 12

And yet, the system created the perception13

about New Mexico so other states had some14

pretty stringent requirements.15

States nearby, maybe less so. I16

mean, Texas, New Mexico, probably had more of17

an understanding of what they were really18

looking at.19

So, maybe the new -- you know, I'm20

just thinking out loud here, but maybe the21

new approach you have here gives the ability22

to have a much more accurate understanding of23

what's going on in those other states.24

I don't -- you know, I don't know25

1 SESSION 6 10

that I have an attitude or opinion about2

whether or how disparate different states3

ought to be on their own behalf, but it is4

something that has come up.5

And the interstate movement, to New6

Mexico, is very important, because we're not7

a feeding state, to a large degree anymore. 8

We have no large packing facilities. So,9

the production in New Mexico has got to10

cross the state line at some time.11

So, anyway, it's just more questions12

than answers, I guess, but that's -- it is13

pretty important in New Mexico, and the14

ability to provide an accurate picture of15

where we really are, or any other state, is16

pretty important, too.17

DR. MYERS: So describe for us what18

that accurate picture would include. What19

kind of information would you want as a20

state, and what kind of information would you21

want to share to other states for cases that22

occurred in your state?23

MR. CULBERTSON: I think quality of24

program, level of surveillance, the kinds of25

1 SESSION 6 11

things that give evidence of a reduction of2

risk rather than an increase in risk, you3

know, what's going on in that state.4

You know, if we were -- if we were5

taking cattle from a state that basically had6

no TB program -- and there's a lot of them7

that really -- compared to what we've done,8

have no TB program, you know, we should9

treat that with a lot more care than a state10

who's had to deal with these things and are11

in an active level of surveillance.12

Yet the ones that have to deal with13

these things are the ones with the big14

scarlet letter on them. You know, I -- lots15

of people before me, you know, have said, if16

you want to find TB, all you have to do is17

look for it. If you want to say you don't18

have it, all you have to do is not look for19

it.20

And so, if there's a way to -- you21

know, and I don't know how you do it in the22

new program. If there's a way to give23

respect and credibility to the levels of24

surveillance and the level of the quality of25

1 SESSION 6 12

the program in a state, it shows that2

they're active and proactive rather than3

disengaged. I think that that's -- that's4

an important marketing component.5

So, transparency gets that. I6

guess, the ability to know -- or to assess7

the quality of the work that's being done in8

a state. That's more important than just9

saying, they're modifying meds or they're10

modifying or -- whatever.11

DR. MYERS: And as a part of the12

program that Dr. Thomas described this13

morning, the -- essentially, the quality of14

the program and the level of surveillance15

would be part of that information that we16

would post for each state, saying, this is17

what a state is doing from the standpoint of18

how they're managing their program, how19

they're doing on surveillance and high risk20

populations.21

I'll just turn to the rest of you. 22

Are there other things you'd like to see23

reported on a regular basis or that you24

would like to make sure are in your reports? 25

1 SESSION 6 13

MR. CULBERTSON: Somebody else needs2

to do the talking here.3

DR. MYERS: I was trying to get it4

off your back there, Myles.5

DR. HENCH: This is a tough one. 6

It can take a lot of thinking.7

You know, if you're thinking about8

bringing in cattle from state X, you know9

there's TB in that state, what do you want10

to know to assure yourself that the animals11

that are coming in are the best they can be? 12

What do you want to know?13

We have the state requirements. We14

have the surveillance that's being done in15

that state. What else would you like to16

know about that state?17

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You know, I18

think, as a producer, the one thing that19

we'd have to say that we would be -- want20

assurances on is that our Texas Animal Health21

Commission could deviate when warranted from22

the federal guidelines that you all are23

discussing.24

Because you don't know, nor do I,25

1 SESSION 6 14

what might or might be an issue in front of2

us here that would require our Texas Animal3

Health Commission to say, we need to be4

outside of this; it needs to be more5

stringent for this reason.6

And I'd say, just as long as we7

know that our Animal Health Commission would8

have that authority to go forward with that9

would be something that would be important to10

a producer.11

DR. HENCH: Any other thoughts? 12

Mark, you've been quiet.13

DR. SCHOENBAUM: You're doing fine,14

Bill.15

MR. KELLER: I think, overall, you16

can have, across the U.S., the same17

regulations, but the states can go beyond18

that.19

So you have a platform that you deal20

with, and they can go and put extra21

requirements -- you know, have the22

flexibility to do so, but that you have a23

clear -- you know, that you don't go, well,24

what's this state want, what's that state25

1 SESSION 6 15

want, what's -- you know, that -- but you2

have some sense of direction here. 3

Otherwise, it's confused. I mean, you have4

to make 100 calls to figure out, you know,5

what you need.6

So, that you implement a base level7

program that each state abides by, but that8

you have the flexibility that, if need be,9

Texas Animal Health Commission can implement10

further steps here that are necessary for11

them to gain confidence, whether that be12

additional testing, premovement testing,13

whether that is additional information14

required, but that overall, that -- you know,15

that there's some base level here that you16

know that every state has. And I think17

that's important.18

MR. CULBERTSON: I'd agree with19

that. I think if we couple that to the20

ability for a state to know what they're21

looking at, where they're not guessing at the22

status or the condition or the risk level in23

their state, so that the Animal Health24

Commission in Texas, or the Livestock Board25

1 SESSION 6 16

in New Mexico or, you know, a state2

veterinarian in Colorado or whatever, if3

they're going on more than just the sort of4

high level statement that a state has had5

tuberculosis or is in a program or whatever.6

And so, the ability to make those7

decisions -- because you're affecting --8

you're affecting commerce when you make those9

decisions. You're affecting the ability to10

move cattle and sell them.11

And so, that can very well be a12

right decision, placing higher standards on13

cattle coming from one area or another, but14

enough information needs to be forthcoming15

for any state veterinarian or any state16

animal health organization to be able to make17

an educated call.18

DR. HENCH: So, trying to combine19

these two, what I'm picking up here is a20

uniform starting point for interstate21

movements, with the abilities, allowances,22

what have you, whatever you want to call it,23

for states to -- help me with the right word24

here, Myles -- increase, be more -- you25

1 SESSION 6 17

know, increase restrictions, increase2

requirements.3

MR. CULBERTSON: Or just -- 4

DR. HENCH: Sort of a level field5

with maybe a little bit of a bump here or a6

bump there.7

MR. CULBERTSON: Yeah. You're8

talking about a baseline -- a standard9

baseline with sort of state-centric10

requirements, or additional requirements, if11

necessary, something like that, where the12

states -- you know, we don't want to take13

the discretion away from a state that feels14

like they need to do something.15

DR. HENCH: Uh-huh.16

MR. CULBERTSON: So, yeah, I think17

if the federal standard is somewhere common18

to all states, then those states can make up19

their mind about the rest of it.20

DR. MYERS: As the framework was21

presented this morning, though, that federal22

standard would include, in the case of an23

outbreak or an incident, increased testing. 24

It would include movement restrictions. It25

1 SESSION 6 18

would include all of those kinds of actions2

that would be appropriate to control that3

disease.4

So -- because what I'm hearing you5

ask us to do is to walk this line where you6

want the federal folks to essentially assure7

that those things are happening, but then8

still reserve the right to take additional9

actions if you feel necessary. I understand10

that.11

So, are you saying that if the12

federal program has those safeguards in there13

that would require additional testing,14

movement restrictions, et cetera, et cetera,15

in response to an outbreak, and that that is16

shared in a transparent way with all the17

other states, then the likelihood of a state18

needing to take those additional actions19

would be minimized? Is that -- are you20

saying that as well?21

MR. CULBERTSON: Yeah. You bring up22

an interesting point that I hadn't given23

enough thought to.24

You know, if we're thinking in terms25

1 SESSION 6 19

of response to an outbreak as opposed to2

just sort of a general preemptive and3

protective measure for the state, which is4

two things, then in a reactive sense, if5

there's an outbreak, then I think there's --6

there are -- then I think the role that the7

USDA plays obviously ramps up to another8

level.9

But in the day-in, day-out trade,10

sometimes there are reasons why states might11

want to place restrictions and what they need12

to know, you know, between --13

DR. MYERS: You asked --14

MR. CULBERTSON: -- one free state15

-- New Mexico's a free state right now. You16

know, New Mexico's a free state. We've not17

had tuberculosis in New Mexico for two years. 18

We have a zone which is working its way to19

completion.20

So, I think New Mexico is sort of21

actually placed in that day-in, day-out trade22

situation where the perception by, I think,23

Colorado, is that they need to watch out24

very closely for the feeder cattle that come25

1 SESSION 6 20

in to Colorado from New Mexico.2

And, you know, I'm not sure. 3

Oklahoma may have changed now, but for a4

while, even cattle coming out of, you know,5

New Mexico generally -- the fact we've got6

this zone in there classifies us in the7

minds of some states to be -- you know, as8

having TB.9

So, I suppose that's fine for them10

to do it, but I -- the observation here is11

that we've got two things we've got to deal12

with.13

One is, if you've got an outbreak,14

if we are reacting to a situation, then15

there are obviously rules that come into16

play. There's movement restriction that17

comes into play.18

Other states are -- but if it's just19

daily trade, I think we find states sometimes20

not trusting that and continuing to want --21

and for good -- you know, for reasonable --22

for good reasons.23

Dairy cattle, when they cross state24

lines, at least between us and other states,25

1 SESSION 6 21

require a TB test. That's a good thing. 2

That's not a federal requirement; that's what3

states are asking. And in doing so, we're4

protecting our own industry.5

So, I think -- I keep coming back6

to the same thing, but I believe -- I7

believe it's better for states to be able to8

have the ability in -- under normal9

circumstances to raise the bar wherever they10

think it needs to be raised to protect their11

own state.12

Maybe -- I don't know what the13

federal baselines should even be there, but14

maybe there are some, but when there's an15

outbreak, well then, the game changes.16

So, that's two different -- that may17

be two different -- and maybe these rules18

don't even need to address the nonreactive19

side of it. I don't know.20

I was just -- I was more curious,21

you know, what the ideas were from the22

USDA's development up to this point about23

interstate movement, what the roles are going24

to be, other than identification. What's the25

1 SESSION 6 22

role that the USDA believes they will play,2

to what degree?3

DR. MYERS: Well, and Lee Ann4

presented that this morning. I don't know5

whether she didn't go into enough detail.6

But do you want to speak to that,7

Bill, as far as some of the -- just sort of8

that federal baseline for interstate movement9

and the particular requirements that the10

group talked about?11

DR. HENCH: The input we were hoping12

to get was similar along the lines of your13

requirements for dairy heifers.14

Do you folks feel that there are15

some classes of animals that may require16

additional testing, like dairy heifers? 17

Another possible example might be the18

rodeo animals. We were looking for input on19

where these interstate movement controls would20

be useful for your concerns. When we end up21

in the -- a long-term containment operation22

with folks called zoning, you know,23

certainly, we will have requirements for24

moving out of that zones.25

1 SESSION 6 23

On a day-to-day basis, where you --2

as you were describing, where maybe we get3

some bumps in the baseline, we're trying to4

find out, you know, what would you like to5

see those bumps cover, and dairy heifers6

being one, which is particularly -- New7

Mexico is sensitive to. And we can8

certainly appreciate that.9

But are there other ideas that folks10

might have?11

MR. CULBERTSON: You know, none of12

those are going to be common to the entire13

country.14

The thought occurs to me that down15

here, you know, dairy cattle is the topic. 16

But you go into other parts of the west and17

it's beef cattle that's the topic.18

And, you know -- so, the rule of --19

you know, the movement of beef females, beef20

heifers out of certain areas in the country21

would give you pause for concern.22

And if you go way further north --23

of course, we don't move wildlife, but the24

wildlife effect on beef herds is -- can be25

1 SESSION 6 24

pretty dramatic.2

So you probably could never just3

come up with a baseline and say, well, if4

they're dairy heifers, you know, there's5

certain requirements, because that's the risk6

orb here. The risk factor in North Dakota7

might be something else, or Wisconsin.8

DR. HENCH: Trying to think of a9

way how we could handle that. You know,10

you're absolutely right.11

Dairy seems to be an issue in the12

southwest. We turn -- in fact, the dairies13

out there are, you know, here and there.14

You get into the upper midwest and15

it's certainly beef herds. And GYA is beef16

herds. So, you're right. Regionally, there17

may be different concerns.18

You know, what's important to New19

Mexico may not be important in Michigan. 20

So, the challenge would be, how could we do21

something at our level to address those22

differences.23

MR. CULBERTSON: That's one reason,24

you know, states have to be able to figure25

1 SESSION 6 25

these things out for themselves.2

So, maybe the question is, how does3

the federal government provide regulatory4

support to a state.5

DR. HENCH: Let's see what our times6

are.7

MR. CULBERTSON: Anyway, that great8

unanswerable has remained unanswered. Maybe9

we want to move to the next topic.10

DR. HENCH: We can certainly do11

that, but getting to grasp the problem is a12

big help. This has helped, I think, flesh13

out what the problem is.14

And thoughts, ideas anyone? Being15

tough, you've only seen this for a couple of16

hours and you have to think on it.17

We've spent hours and hours and18

hours. And even this is kind of a new idea19

that's going to take some consideration.20

As you prepare your written comments21

to us, you know, if you come up with any22

ideas, please include it.23

We've got about ten minutes left,24

two topics. We have imports -- international25

1 SESSION 6 26

imports, or we have affected herd management,2

epi investigations.3

And where would y'all like to jump4

in, affected herds management or imports? 5

You passed this part in the last one.6

Well, let's take a look at imports. 7

We'll try starting with that one this time.8

Briefly, in our framework, we broke9

international imports down into three10

segments, if you will, the pre-import11

segment, which is the country looking to12

export to the U.S.13

We're proposing to address that in14

much a similar fashion that we do now with15

our 11 points of regionalization. This would16

be confirmed in the country looking to export17

to the U.S. by various means.18

We could do site -- on-site reviews,19

paper reviews, combination of what have you,20

and it would be very similar to what we have21

now.22

At the border, or at import, as we23

call it, this would be consisting of our24

port people checking documentation, verifying25

1 SESSION 6 27

that all pre-import requirements have been2

met.3

And we're sort of stretching the4

border a little bit, if you will, to include5

some requirements to identify where these6

animals will be moved to once they clear the7

port.8

Some of our import documentation has9

the address of the importer. And that can10

be on the river walk at Austin, and they11

don't sort cattle there.12

So, we're interested in identifying13

where these cattle are making their first14

movement to, and if they move -- are going15

to be moved interstate from that point, we're16

thinking that we need a mechanism to alert17

the receiving state that these cattle are on18

their way.19

And then the final portion of that20

is post the import, or long-term follow-up,21

feeder animals, feeder-type cattle, we're22

looking for mechanisms to prevent their23

commingling with our domestic breeding herd,24

and we're looking for mechanisms to follow up25

1 SESSION 6 28

the rodeo animals, in particular.2

So, we've sort of identified these3

big chunks and looking to see if we're on4

the right track, if we're going down the5

wrong road, if anybody has any alternate6

ideas or suggestions for accomplishing the7

goals, and those goals being to reduce the8

potential import of disease through our9

verification at pre-imports, the tracking of10

the animals from import to their first point11

of destination, and alerting receiving states12

if they move interstate from there, and then13

maintaining a separation between these14

imported animals and our domestic herd. 15

Thoughts, ideas?16

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: All those17

animals you're talking about have already18

been inspected, and they've already met all19

the requirements that the fed has said you20

had to meet to come in, and then you're21

saying you want to check them again and not22

mix them again?23

DR. HENCH: These animals have met24

import requirements. They're -- 25

1 SESSION 6 29

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Which are2

federal.3

DR. HENCH: They're entered into the4

U.S. under federal requirements. And what we5

want to do is to, as you point out, maintain6

separation from our domestic breeding herd.7

We know from experience that even8

with meeting all the standards, all the9

testing standards, disease does come in.10

The rate of that, the case rate, has11

been dropping significantly over the past12

couple of years, but it's not zero. So,13

we're looking to mitigate the risk even14

further.15

And these are our thoughts at this16

point on how to do it. We're welcome and17

open to any and all ideas that can help us18

achieve that goal.19

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: How does that20

stand with our trading partners, having21

another restriction of no commingling and22

further identification further down the line? 23

DR. HENCH: We have not had any24

feedback from them at this point. They have25

1 SESSION 6 30

been made aware of our frameworks.2

The public comment period, I would3

anticipate some initial feedback from them on4

that. They have asked us to keep them5

advised of our progress, which we have agreed6

to do.7

Direct feedback on it, we have not8

had any, unless you've had more at your9

level.10

DR. MYERS: No, we've met with11

Mexico about a month ago, and then I'm going12

to Mexico, and so is Dr. Thomas, next week13

for our semiannual BNC meeting, national14

committee meeting. So, you know, we'll be15

talking with them about the framework similar16

there.17

But mostly, the changes that Bill18

was talking about are once they've happened. 19

So, I don't know that they're concerned about20

that too much.21

So they're more looking at how the22

changes to this program by getting rid of23

modified credit and modified credit advanced,24

all of those statuses, will affect our review25

1 SESSION 6 31

of their states. So, that's more where2

their concerns are.3

So, your thoughts on the impact of4

having those additional requirements on the5

U.S. side?6

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, I've7

never been in favor of having -- if you've8

passed all the tests and then met all the9

requirements, and then because you came from10

Canada, or because you came from Mexico,11

placing an additional burden on that12

producer, because, quite honestly, he said13

they were okay when they passed him.14

DR. MYERS: Well, I think the issue15

is the quality of the testing, because you16

can carry TB and not show positive on that17

for a number of months.18

So, I think that's the point that19

Bill was trying to make. They can come in20

having met the requirements. That doesn't21

mean that they're not -- 22

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: When they go23

to slaughter at a federally inspected plant,24

aren't they segregated on the floor? Are25

1 SESSION 6 32

they commingled in the -- in the community? 2

DR. MYERS: No. I don't believe3

so. I mean -- 4

DR. HENCH: I'm sorry? Can you5

repeat the question, please.6

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. I just7

asked the question if you segregate them8

while they're out in the pasture and you9

segregate them when you federally inspect10

them at a plant.11

DR. HENCH: When slaughter animals12

hit the plant, they come in in lots, and13

those lots are determined by whoever makes14

them up.15

Do they generate lots based on16

country of origin? Not to my knowledge,17

specifically.18

Generally, we find that as these19

animals move through the production cycle,20

they do stay in lots and that it's often --21

predominantly, if they're imported from22

Mexico, that lot is oftentimes -- and you23

can help me out here, Kevin -- that lot is24

usually Mexican cattle all the way through.25

1 SESSION 6 33

It's one of the things that helps us2

at least identify these cases we find as3

Mexican origin when they don't have ID, when4

they -- 5

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: But they still6

have the tag in their ear?7

DR. HENCH: If they still have the8

tag in their ear, boy, we love it, because9

we can take a photograph of that and we can10

send it to SAGARPA and say, there you go;11

you can go find where this came from.12

If it's a lot of Mexican steers that13

may have originated in Chihuahua and we don't14

have the official ID but we know it crossed15

at this line, that could be 14 or 1516

contributing farms down there to that lot,17

that's a little bit harder sell.18

So we can generally ID that, yeah,19

it was Mexican origin. Where exactly did it20

originate, we're unsure.21

MR. CULBERTSON: Clay brings up a22

good point, though. That test is not23

totally reliable, whether the cattle come out24

of Mexico or cattle coming out of Texas to25

1 SESSION 6 34

New Mexico. It's the same test and the same2

level of reliability, no matter if it's3

interstate or international.4

DR. HENCH: It does present its5

challenges. I know when we get into the6

sensitivities and specificities and start7

looking at prevalences and, you know,8

positive and negative predictive values, it9

can get kind of confusing when you think10

about it.11

So, you're right, the -- a better12

test would be a terrific thing to have.13

MR. CULBERTSON: Well, you know,14

then the -- then reasonableness of that close15

of monitoring of a set of Mexican cattle,16

who have been tested en route to a state17

somewhere, as opposed to a set of dairy18

heifers who have been tested and are headed19

to a state somewhere, the level of risk may20

not be much different.21

And so, it may be -- there may be a22

lot of work here for not enough, you know,23

profit.24

DR. HENCH: I might suggest that the25

1 SESSION 6 35

level of risk could be very much different2

depending upon who's administering the test.3

And that gets back to the concept of4

caudal fold response rates. If somebody who5

has a caudal fold response rate of .016

percent is administering a test, would I have7

as much faith in that as somebody who has a8

one percent response rate, given everything9

else being equal? I'm not sure I would.10

MR. CULBERTSON: No, I wouldn't11

either. We've got war stories in our own12

office about people in other states whose13

veterinarians were bragging that they had14

zero. And, you know, and that's not15

international; that's interstate.16

DR. HENCH: And this is one of the17

things that would be -- I believe it was in18

the -- it was in the program requirements19

elements.20

You know, this is one of the things21

we're going to -- we have an interest in. 22

So, would a hundred Mexican steers that are23

all tested negative be equal to a hundred24

California dairy heifers that are tested25

1 SESSION 6 36

negative, as far as risk goes?2

MR. CULBERTSON: They won't. I'll3

take the Mexicans.4

DR. HENCH: I don't think the risk5

would be equal between the two groups.6

MR. CULBERTSON: No, they wouldn't7

be equal, but it does bring out the point.8

And that is -- and maybe where this9

is taking us is that if we can determine10

what we want to call risk, what do we want11

to call -- you know, if -- if we develop --12

it would -- come up with a more developed13

system for identifying risk, because I think14

there are plenty of cases in the United15

States where there are certain cattle herds16

that pose a much higher risk than certain17

Mexican herds, and we're not dealing with18

that.19

We're just presuming if they're in20

the United States, that there's a mulligan in21

there somewhere for them. And maybe there22

isn't. And so, maybe in the states23

themselves, part of the program for24

compliance or noncompliance or a quality25

1 SESSION 6 37

program has to do with some aspects to their2

own risk assessment that would cause these3

things out.4

You know, if -- if you had -- if5

you had a cow herd and you were6

intermingling Mexican steers with a cow herd7

on a ranch, there are a lot of people who8

believe that that increases the level of risk9

on the cows. It does.10

If you had a cow herd somewhere on11

a ranch and you were trading in dairy12

heifers and they were out there, I think the13

risk is at least as high.14

And so, rather than looking at that15

-- Clay, does it make any sense? Rather16

than looking at another country, or, you17

know, that type of cattle, maybe there are18

levels of risk -- straight level risks that19

may include any number of things there,20

including dairy cattle from states who claim21

that they're TB free. You know, that may --22

that may be risk in itself.23

DR. HENCH: Well, I think they're24

here to tell us that we've run five minutes25

1 SESSION 6 38

over.2

MS. MILLIS: You overestimate my3

powers. I was just checking on how much4

time you needed or if you were at a stopping5

point.6

DR. HENCH: I want to thank y'all7

for coming out here. If there's anything8

that jumps up at you, please let us know.9

The package you received has contact10

information for submitting comments. The11

simplest one to remember is regulations.gov. 12

You don't need the wwwwwww. Do a search for13

tuber and it should bring you right to these14

public meetings.15

And you can ferret out how to submit16

comments there. Plus, you can read comments17

that have already been submitted. 18

Regulations.gov, search for tuber, and please19

send us your thoughts.20

MS. MILLIS: And if you wanted to21

sit in on the third round of inquiries or22

comments, let's join up with that group at23

five minutes after the hour.24

DR. HENCH: Thank y'all. 25

1 SESSION 6 39

CERTIFICATE2

3

I, SONDRA L. CARGLE, CSR, RPR, do4

hereby certify that the foregoing proceedings5

were reported by me, and that the foregoing6

transcript constitutes a full, true and7

correct transcription of my stenographic8

notes.9

10

11

12

SONDRA L. CARGLE,13

DATED: JUNE 23, 201114

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 SESSION 6 40

2

Session6,060611Page 15

Aabides 14:20abilities 16:8ability 9:15 10:711:22 15:8,18,2120:15

able 6:3 8:21 16:320:14 24:3

absolutely 23:14accomplishing 27:6accurate 8:6 9:1610:7,11

achieve 28:17action 6:21actions 17:11,1918:3

active 11:3,18additional 7:1 8:314:25 15:1 16:2117:18,23 18:321:22 30:1,8

address 20:25 23:2525:15 26:10

addressed 7:7administering 33:2033:24

administration 6:15ado3:14advanced 29:21advised 29:3affect 29:22afternoon 2:4agencies 6:17ago6:15 29:9agree 15:6agreed 29:3Agreement 1:20agreements 3:22 5:11alert 26:17alerting 27:11allowances 16:8alternate 27:5Amarillo 1:4,21animal 13:10,16,2114:22 15:11 16:3

animals 3:9 12:25

21:21,24 26:7,2227:1,10,14,17,2331:7,15

Ann21:9answer 4:24 7:4,5answers10:5anticipate 4:9,2029:1

anybody27:5anymore9:25anyway 10:4 24:10appeared 7:17appreciate 22:13approach 9:15appropriate 5:1817:12

area 15:25areas22:25asked18:22 29:231:3

asking 20:10aspects35:17assess 11:22assessment 35:18assurance 7:17,25assurances 13:10assure 12:25 17:16attitude 9:19Austin 26:11authority 13:22aware28:24

Bback 3:2 12:19 20:1233:21

bar20:16base 14:19 15:3based31:11baseline 16:19,2021:14 22:8 23:7

baselines 20:20basically 6:23 10:22basis12:14 22:6beef 22:22,24,2423:4,19,19

began2:23

behalf 9:21believe 20:13,1430:23 34:10 35:24

believer 5:10believes 21:7best 13:1better 8:8 20:1433:5

beyond 14:6big 4:5 11:5 24:1527:3

Bill 2:5 14:3 21:1329:15 30:16

bit 16:16 26:5 32:12BNC 29:11Board 15:12border 25:24 26:5boy 32:3bragging 34:6breakout 1:7 2:17breeding 26:24 28:5Briefly 25:10bring 18:6 34:2437:3

bringing 12:23brings 32:16broke 25:10brought 5:3BRUCELLOSIS 1:2bump 16:16,17bumps 22:8,10burden 30:8

CCalifornia 34:17call 16:4,9 25:2535:2,3

called 22:3calls 2:14 14:17Canada 30:7care 11:1Cargle 1:21 38:4,14carry 30:13case 7:13,15,17 17:828:9

cases 10:14 31:22

Session6,060611Page 16

35:6cattle 3:25 4:1610:22 12:23 15:2215:25 19:8,12 20:622:20,22 26:12,1426:18,22 31:2032:18,19 33:9 35:736:8,11

caudal 33:22,23cause 35:18certain 4:1,1 22:2523:9 35:7,8

certainly 22:4,1323:19 24:13

CERTIFICATE 38:2certify 38:5cetera 17:24,24challenge 23:24challenges 32:24changed 19:11changes 20:22 29:1529:20

check 27:21checking 26:1 36:18Chihuahua 32:8chunks 27:3circumstances 20:16cited 3:12claim 36:11classes 3:9,11 21:21classifies 19:14Clay 32:16 36:6clear 14:12 26:7close 33:8closely 19:8Colorado 15:14 19:719:9

combination 25:21combine 16:5come 3:2 5:23 9:2219:8,23 23:7 24:2427:20 28:8 30:1631:8 32:18 35:4

comes 19:25coming 13:1 15:2519:12 20:12 32:19

36:22comment6:12 28:25comments 24:23 36:2537:6,6,12

commerce 15:20commingled 30:22commingling 26:2428:20

Commission 13:11,1713:21 14:22 15:12

committee 29:12common 17:3 22:17communication 5:10community 30:22compared 10:24completion 19:3compliance 8:1635:16

component 11:20concept33:21concern23:1concerned 29:17concerns 22:1 23:2129:24

condition 15:10confidence 14:24confirmed 25:18confused 14:16confusing 33:3conscious 6:19consider 6:21consideration 24:22consistent 4:3consisting 25:25constitutes 38:7constitutional5:24contact36:24containment 22:2continue 4:11continuing 20:3contributing32:11control17:12controls 1:12 21:25correct38:8country4:4,15 22:1822:25 25:13,18

31:12 36:7couple 15:7 24:1828:11

course 23:3cover 22:10cow 35:21,22 36:1cows 35:25created 9:6credibility 11:15credit 29:21,21cross 10:3 20:6crossed 32:9CSR 38:4CULBERTSON 3:1,164:18,23 5:9 8:4,158:20 10:16 12:1615:6 16:14,18 17:218:6,23 22:16 24:224:10 32:16 33:734:3,19,23

curious 21:2cycle 31:15

Ddaily 20:2dairies 23:16dairy 3:13 20:621:19,22 22:10,2023:8,15 33:1134:17 36:2,11

Dakota 23:10DATED 38:15day-in 18:18 19:5day-out 18:18 19:5day-to-day 22:6deal 4:5 11:2,4 14:819:19

dealing 7:13 35:9decision 15:24decisions 15:19,21degree 9:25 21:8depending 33:20describe 10:10described 12:3describing 22:7destination 27:11

Session6,060611Page 17

detail 21:11determine 35:1determined 31:9develop 35:3developed 35:4development 21:4deviate 13:11differences 24:1different 2:16 4:144:15 5:4 8:12 9:2020:23,24 23:2133:14,19

Direct 29:5direction 14:15discretion 16:24discussing 13:13discussion 7:9disease 17:13 27:828:8

disengaged 11:19disparate 9:20documentation 26:1,9doing 5:25 12:8,1014:2 20:10

domestic 26:24 27:1428:5

Dr 2:4,5,7,10,11 3:34:12,19 5:1 6:8,116:13,14 7:8 8:148:19 10:10 12:2,312:18,20 13:2514:2 16:5,15 17:117:6 18:22 21:9,1723:12 24:8,1327:23 28:2,22 29:829:10 30:11,23,2531:7 32:2,23 33:1834:9,21 36:14,2137:14

dramatic 23:5drives 7:3dropping 28:10

Eear32:1,3East 1:21

educated 16:4effect 23:4effort 4:20either 34:4elements 2:16 34:12en 33:10entered28:2entering 4:16entire 22:17epi2:8,24 25:4epidemiological 1:102:19

Epidemiologist2:12equal34:2,16,22,24essentially 12:417:16

established 7:20et 17:24,24evidence 10:18exactly32:14example3:12,24 4:1421:23

Executive 6:16exists 8:7experience 28:6export 25:14,18expressed 3:5extra14:9

Ffacilities 10:1facility 7:20fact 19:13 23:16factor 23:10faith33:25far9:4 21:13 34:18farms32:11fashion25:16favor30:4fed27:19federal6:1,2,613:12 17:3,7,16,2220:9,20 21:14 24:628:1,3

federally 30:20 31:5feedback 28:23 29:1

29:5feeder 19:8 26:22feeder-type 26:22feeding 9:25feel 6:24 7:6 8:217:19 21:20

feels 16:24females 22:24ferret 9:1 37:5field 5:5 16:15figure 5:14 14:1724:3

final 26:20find 11:8 20:2 22:931:14,22 32:6

fine 14:2 19:17first 5:8 26:1427:10

five 36:15 37:13flesh 24:15flexibility 14:11,21floor 30:21flunked 3:1fold 33:22,23folks 17:16 21:2022:3,14

follow 26:25follow-up 26:21foregoing 38:5,6format 5:4forthcoming 16:1forward 13:22framework 1:3 17:625:10 29:13

frameworks 28:24free 18:23,24,2536:12

frequently 3:12front 13:15full 38:7further 14:23 23:228:13,21,21

Ggain 14:24game 20:22

Session6,060611Page 18

general 18:11generally 5:4 19:1331:14 32:13

generate 31:11getting 24:14 29:20give 10:18 11:1423:1

given 18:7 34:1gives 9:15go 13:22 14:6,9,1221:11 22:21 23:230:19 32:5,6

goal 28:17goals 27:7,7goes 34:18going 9:17 10:2015:15 21:5 22:1724:22 26:15 27:429:9 34:14

good 2:4 8:4 20:4,520:8 32:17

government 6:2 24:6grasp 24:14great 24:10group 2:13,15,237:10 21:16 37:12

groups 34:22guess 4:7 5:22 7:27:23 10:5 11:22

guessing 15:9guidelines 13:12GYA23:19

Hhandle 23:13handling 8:1happened 29:16happening 17:17harder 32:12harmonize 4:21headed 33:12health 2:6 13:10,1713:21 14:22 15:1116:3

hear 3:17 5:7hearing 6:23 17:14

heifers3:13 21:1921:22 22:10,2523:8 33:12 34:1736:3

held 1:19 7:9help 6:9,9 16:1024:15 28:16 31:19

helped 24:15helping2:6,10helps31:21Hench2:4,5,10 3:34:12,19 5:1 6:8,1312:20 13:25 16:516:15 17:1 21:1723:12 24:8,1327:23 28:2,2230:25 31:7 32:2,2333:18 34:9,2136:14,21 37:14

herd 1:9 2:24 25:326:24 27:14 28:535:21,22 36:1

herds2:18 23:4,1923:20 25:6 35:7,9

high 12:10 15:1636:4

higher 3:10 15:2435:8

hit31:8Holiday1:20honestly 30:9hoping 3:17 21:17hour 37:13hours24:19,20,20,21hundred34:15,16

IID 31:23 32:9,13idea 24:21ideas5:6 21:3 22:1424:17,25 27:6,1528:16

identification21:628:21

identified 2:18 27:2identify 26:6 31:22

identifying 26:1335:5

impact 29:25implement 14:19,22import 25:24 26:9,2127:8,10,24

important 9:24 10:610:9 11:20,2413:23 15:5 23:2223:23

IMPORTATION 1:14imported 27:14 31:17importer 26:10imports 2:20,21,2225:2,3,6,8,11

imposition 5:12incident 7:14 17:9include 10:11 17:817:10,11 24:2526:5 36:10

including 36:11inconsistency 4:6increase 10:19 16:1116:12,12

increased 17:9increases 35:24industry 20:11information 7:1410:12,13 12:6 15:116:1 36:25

initial 29:1Inn 1:20input 3:8 21:17,24inquiries 37:11inspect 31:5inspected 27:1830:20

interest 3:6 34:14interested 26:13interesting 18:7intermingling 35:22international 2:2125:2,11 32:22 34:8

interstate 1:12 2:203:3,8,20,20 6:59:23 16:7 21:5,14

Session6,060611Page 19

21:25 26:16 27:1232:22 34:8

investigations 1:102:19,25 25:4

isolate 8:22issue 6:10,18 13:1523:15 30:11

issued 6:16issues 5:25

Jjoin 37:12jump 3:14 25:5jumps 36:23June 1:20 2:3 38:15

Kkeep 20:12 29:2KELLER 14:4Kevin 31:19kind 10:12,13 24:2133:3

kinds 10:17 17:11know 3:17,18 4:1,4,65:5,9,15,16,17,228:10 9:13,18,1810:20,21,25 11:6,711:13,13,22 12:2212:23,25 13:2,6,713:14,21 14:10,1214:14,17 15:2,4,815:13 16:12,2318:9,21,21,2519:10,12,15 20:420:19 21:1,3,1022:3,9,16,20,23,2423:8,13,17,22 24:324:24 28:6 29:1229:17 32:9,24 33:133:7,16 34:7,1335:3,20 36:8,12,23

knowledge 31:12L

L38:4,14large 9:25 10:1learn 3:17

leaving7:19Lee21:9left 25:1legal5:24letter 11:6let's24:8 25:837:12

level5:5 8:9 10:1711:3,16 12:5 14:1915:3,10,16 16:1518:17 23:25 29:732:21 33:13,1935:24 36:9

levels 11:15 36:9likelihood 18:2line 10:3 17:1528:21 32:10

lines5:7 20:7 21:18listened 2:14little 6:14 16:1626:5 32:12

Livestock 15:12long 13:20long-term 22:2 26:21look 2:18 5:17 6:1711:9,10 25:8

looking3:7 4:24 8:59:12 15:9 21:2425:13,18 26:23,2527:3 28:12 29:1933:1 36:5,7

lot10:23 11:1 12:2131:18,19 32:7,1133:16 35:23

lots 11:6 31:8,9,1131:16

loud 9:14love 32:3low9:4

Mmaintain 28:4maintaining 27:13making 6:17 26:14managed7:19management 1:9 2:19

2:24 25:3,6managing 12:9Mark 2:7,11,12 14:1marketing 11:20matter 8:23 32:21mean 2:21 9:10 14:1630:18,24

meaningful 8:17means 25:19measure 8:6 18:12mechanism 26:17mechanisms 26:23,25meds 11:25meet 27:20meeting 1:3 28:729:11,12

meetings 37:4members 2:15met 26:3 27:18,2329:8 30:5,17

Mexican 31:20,2332:7,14 33:9 34:1535:9,22

Mexicans 34:20Mexico 3:24,25 4:144:16 8:11,24 9:79:10,24 10:2,615:13 19:1,4,9,1322:12 23:23 29:929:10 30:7 31:1832:19,20

Mexico's 18:24,25Michigan 23:23midwest 23:18MILLIS 36:17 37:10mind 5:15 17:5minds 19:15minimized 18:4minutes 25:1 36:1537:13

mitigate 28:12mitigated 7:22mix 27:22modified 29:21,21modifying 11:25 12:1monitoring 33:9

Session6,060611Page 20

month 29:9months 30:14morning 7:9 12:417:7 21:10

move 15:22 23:324:12 26:15 27:1231:15

moved 26:7,16movement 1:12 3:86:5 9:23 17:10,2419:24 21:5,14,2522:24 26:15

movements 2:20,223:4,5 16:8

moving 22:5mulligan 35:12MYERS 6:11,14 8:148:19 10:10 12:2,1817:6 18:22 21:929:8 30:11,23

Myles 2:25 12:1916:11

Nnational 29:11nearby 9:9necessarily 4:24necessary 14:2316:22 17:19

need 6:20,25 8:313:17 14:18,2116:25 18:20 19:720:25 26:17 37:2

needed 36:19needing 18:3needs 12:16 13:1816:1 20:17

negative 33:2 34:1634:18

never 23:6 30:4new3:24,25 4:14,165:16 6:9 8:10,239:7,10,13,15,2310:2,6 11:14 15:1318:24,25 19:1,4,919:13 22:11 23:22

24:21 32:20noncompliance 35:16noncompliant8:16nonreactive 20:25normal 20:15north9:4 23:2,10northern 9:3Notary 1:22notes38:9Notice 1:19number 1:7 30:1436:10

OObama6:15observation 19:18obviously 6:7 18:1619:23

occurred 10:15occurs 22:19office 34:5official 32:9oftentimes 31:18okay 3:16 30:10Oklahoma 19:11once 26:7 29:16ones 11:4,5on-site25:20open 28:16operation 22:2opinion9:19opposed18:10 33:11orb23:10Order6:16organization16:3origin 31:12,2332:14

originate 32:15originated 32:8ought9:21outbreak 7:13 17:917:25 18:10,1419:21 20:22

outside13:18overall14:4 15:2overestimate36:17

Ppackage 36:24packing 10:1paper 25:21part 12:2,6 25:735:15

particular 5:2,207:18 8:1 21:1527:1

particularly 22:11partners 28:19parts 22:21passed 25:7 30:5,10pasture 31:4pause 23:1people 11:7 26:134:5 35:23

percent 33:24 34:1perception 8:9,11,139:6 19:6

period 28:25photograph 32:4picking 16:6picture 10:7,11place 5:19 8:3 18:20placed 19:5placing 15:24 30:8plant 30:20 31:6,8platform 14:8play 19:24,25 21:7playing 5:5plays 18:16please 24:25 31:136:23 37:8

plenty 35:6Plus 37:6point 8:4 16:7 18:721:4 26:16 27:1028:4,15,23 30:1532:17 34:24 36:20

points 25:17populations 12:11port 26:1,8portion 26:20pose 35:8positive 30:13 33:2

Session6,060611Page 21

possible 21:23post 12:7 26:21potential 27:8powers 36:18predictive 33:2predominantly 31:17preempt 6:20preemption 6:18preemptive 18:11premovement 14:25prepare 24:23present 32:23presented 17:7 21:10presuming 35:11pretty 9:8 10:6,923:5

prevalences 33:1prevent 26:23pre-import 25:1226:2

pre-imports 27:9proactive 11:18probably 8:25 9:2,49:10 23:6

problem 8:11,1324:14,16

proceedings 38:5producer 13:8,2430:9

production 10:231:15

profit 33:17program 5:16 6:9 8:510:17,23,25 11:1411:17 12:3,5,914:20 15:17 17:2229:20 34:11 35:1535:17

programs 2:6progress 29:3proper 2:15PROPOSED 1:2proposing 25:15protect 20:17protecting 20:11protective 18:12

provide10:7 24:6provided 7:24public 1:3,22 28:2537:4

Pursuant 1:19put8:3 14:9

Qquality10:16 11:1611:23 12:4 30:1235:16

question 4:8,19 5:237:2,5,23 24:5 31:131:3

questions 10:4quiet14:1quite8:12 9:3 30:9

Rraise20:16raised 20:17ramps18:16ranch35:23 36:2rate 28:9,9 33:2334:1

rates33:22reacting 19:22reactive 18:13read 37:6reality8:12really 8:22 9:1110:8,24

reason 13:19 24:2reasonable 8:6 20:4reasonableness33:8reasons5:19 18:1920:5

receive3:25received 36:24receiving 26:1827:11

recognizing 6:5record 2:9reduce 27:7reduced8:21reduction 10:18

Regional 2:8,11regionalization25:17

Regionally 23:20regular 12:14regulations 14:6regulations.gov 37:137:8

regulatory 1:3 24:6reliability 32:21reliable 32:18remained 24:11remember 37:1repeat 31:1reported 12:14 38:6reporting 7:12reports 12:15require 13:16 17:2320:8 21:21

required 15:2requirement 20:9requirements 1:143:8 4:16,21 9:813:3 14:10 16:1316:21,21 21:15,1922:4 23:9 26:2,627:19,24 28:3 30:130:6,17 34:11

requires 6:16reserve 17:18respect 11:15responding 7:15response 17:25 18:1033:22,23 34:1

rest 7:16 12:12 17:5restriction 19:2428:20

restrictions 3:215:20 7:1 8:3 16:1217:10,24 18:20

reverse 6:2review 29:22reviews 25:20,21rid 29:20right 3:19 4:18 8:1915:24 16:10 17:18

Session6,060611Page 22

18:24 23:14,2027:4 33:5 37:3

risk 3:10 7:6,21 8:68:10 9:5 10:19,1912:10 15:10 23:923:10 28:12 33:1333:19 34:18,2135:2,5,8,18,2436:4,9,13

risks 36:9river 26:11road 27:5rodeo 21:24 27:1role 18:15 21:7roles 21:5round 37:11route 33:10RPR38:4rule 6:17,20,2222:23

rules 3:21 19:2320:24

rumen 2:5run36:15running 3:15

Ssafeguards 17:22SAGARPA 32:5sat2:13saying 4:13 11:2512:7 17:21 18:527:21

scarlet 11:6Schoenbaum 2:7,1114:2

search 9:1 37:2,8see12:13 22:10 24:827:3

seen 24:18segment 25:13segments 25:12segregate 31:3,5segregated 30:21sell 15:22 32:12semiannual 29:11

send 32:5 37:9sense14:15 18:1336:6

sensitive 22:12sensitivities 32:25separation 27:1328:5

session1:7,19 2:22:17

set7:10 33:9,11share10:14shared 18:1sharing7:14show 30:13shows11:17side 21:1 30:2significantly 28:10similar21:18 25:1625:22 29:13

simplest 37:1sit37:11site 25:20situation 8:1 19:619:22

slaughter 30:20 31:7slightly 5:3smooth 4:9somebody 12:16 33:2233:25

Sondra 1:21 38:4,14sorry30:25sort 4:20 5:17 15:1516:15,20 18:1119:4 21:13 26:4,1227:2

southwest 23:16speak21:12SPEAKER13:7 27:1627:25 28:18 30:330:19 31:2,25

specifically31:13specificities 32:25spent24:20staff2:5stake6:6stand28:19

standard 5:13 6:116:19 17:3,8

standards 15:24 28:728:8

standpoint 12:8start 3:3,5 32:25started 2:24starting 16:7 25:9state 1:22 3:23 4:175:19,25 6:20,257:3,12,18,24 8:1,28:2,7,10,17,23,259:2,25 10:3,8,1310:15,20,22 11:111:17,24 12:7,8,2312:24 13:3,5,614:13,13,20 15:4,815:11,13,16 16:2,216:24 18:2,12,2318:24,25 20:6,1824:7 26:18 33:1033:13

statement 6:19 15:16states 3:23,24 4:104:14,21,22 5:3,115:13 6:4 7:16 8:189:2,7,9,17,2010:14 14:6 16:1016:23 17:4,4 18:218:19 19:15 20:1,220:7,10,14 24:327:11 29:23 34:535:7,12,14 36:11

state's 8:9state-centric 16:20state-to-state 2:22status 8:13,21 15:10statuses 29:22stay 31:16steers 32:7 34:1535:22

stenographic 38:8steps 14:23stopping 36:19stories 34:4straight 36:9

Session6,060611Page 23

stretching 26:4stringent 6:1,4 9:813:19

strong 5:10submit 37:5submitted 37:7submitting 36:25suffered 8:11suggest 5:8 33:18suggestions 27:6support 2:13 5:12,1424:7

suppose 19:17sure 4:12 6:13 12:1519:10 34:2

surveillance10:1711:3,16 12:5,1013:4

system 7:11,24 9:635:5

Ttag32:1,3take 6:25 12:2116:23 17:18 18:324:22 25:8 32:434:20

talk 2:21talked 7:8 21:16talking 12:17 16:1927:17 29:13,16

TB 2:5,8,12 9:110:23,25 11:812:24 19:16 20:830:13 36:12

teach 3:18technical 2:12tell 36:15ten25:1terms 18:9terrific 33:6test 20:8 32:17,2033:6,20,24

tested 7:21 33:10,1234:16,17

testing 14:25,25

17:9,23 21:22 28:830:12

tests4:2 30:5Texas1:4,21,22 9:1013:10,16 14:2215:12 32:19

thank36:21 37:14thing5:5,18 13:820:8,13 33:6

things 3:9 10:1811:2,5 12:13 17:1718:13 19:19 24:431:21 34:10,1335:19 36:10

think5:18 6:23 7:410:16 11:19 13:814:4 15:4,7 17:218:14,15 19:4,620:2,12,17 23:1224:15,19 30:11,1533:3 34:21 35:536:3,14

thinking 9:14 12:2112:22 18:9 26:17

third37:11Thomas 7:8 12:329:10

thought18:8 22:19thoughts 5:6 13:2524:17 27:15 28:1429:25 37:9

three25:11time 10:3 25:9 36:19times6:24 24:8today2:6topic5:2 22:20,2224:12

topics 25:2totally32:18tough12:20 24:18track27:4tracking 27:9trade18:18 19:520:2

trading28:19 36:2transcript 38:7

transcription 38:8transparency 7:1111:21

transparent 7:2518:1

treat 11:1true 38:7trusting 20:3try 25:9trying 4:9 7:1012:18 16:5 22:823:12 30:16

tuber 37:3,8tuberculosis 1:2 9:515:17 19:1

turn 12:12 23:16two 1:7 16:6 18:1319:1,19 20:23,2425:2 34:22

type 6:10 7:24 36:8U

Uh-huh 8:14 17:1unanswerable 24:11unanswered 24:11understand 5:1 17:19understanding 4:139:11,16

UNIDENTIFIED 13:727:16,25 28:1830:3,19 31:2,25

uniform 16:7United 9:2 35:6,12unsure 32:15upper 23:18USDA 4:8 5:11,1218:16 21:7

USDA's 21:4useful 22:1usually 31:20U.S 3:11 14:5 25:1425:19 28:3 30:2

Vvalues 33:2various 25:19

Session6,060611Page 24

verification27:9verifying 26:1veterinarian15:1416:2

veterinarians 34:6W

walk 17:15 26:11want 6:4 7:3 10:1210:14 11:8,9 12:2413:2,9 14:13,1416:9,23 17:1618:20 20:3 21:1224:12 27:21 28:435:2,2 36:21

wanted 2:25 37:10war34:4warranted 13:11wasn't 4:3,3watch 19:7way3:19 7:25 11:1211:14 18:1 19:223:2,13 26:1931:20

week 29:10welcome 28:15west 22:21Western 2:7,11we'll 3:4 25:9 29:12we're 3:7 9:24 18:920:10 22:8 25:1526:4,13,16,22,2527:3,4 28:12,1532:15 34:14 35:935:11

we've 10:24 18:2519:13,19,19 24:2025:1 27:2 29:834:4 36:15

wildlife 23:3,4Wisconsin 23:11wisely 5:21word 16:10work 4:11 11:2333:16

worked 2:15

working2:13,15 6:227:10 19:2

wouldn't 34:3,23written24:23wrong27:5wwwwwww37:2

XX7:12 12:23

Yyeah 16:18 17:2 18:632:13

year 6:14years19:1 28:11y'all25:5 36:2137:14

Zzero 28:11 34:7zone 7:20 8:22 19:219:14

zones22:5zoning 22:3

001 33:23

11-40 1:2010014:1711 25:1714 32:1015 32:101911 1:20

22011 1:20 2:3 38:1523 38:15

449 7:16

661:19,20 2:2,3

7

79102 1:21

PROPOSED TUBERCULOSIS AND BRUCELLOSISREGULATORY FRAMEWORK PUBLIC MEETINGAMARILLO, TEXAS_________________________________________________________ BREAKOUT SESSION NUMBER THREE:

AFFECTED HERD MANAGEMENT ANDEPIDEMIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

INTERSTATE MOVEMENT CONTROLS

IMPORTATION REQUIREMENTS

SESSION 7, held Pursuant to Notice and

Agreement on June 6, 2011, at the Holiday Inn, 1911 1-40

East, Amarillo, Texas, 79102, before Sondra Cargle, a

Notary Public of the State of Texas.

1 SESSION 7 2

SESSION 72

JUNE 6, 20113

DR. HENCH: Good afternoon, everyone.4

We're down to the home stretch.5

I'm Dr. Bill Hench with the TB6

staff, been on staff for a little over five7

years. Started in Michigan testing cattle in8

the barnyard.9

Dr. Mark Schoenbaum's here. He's10

the Western Regional TB Epidemiologist, and11

we were on the technical advisory group to12

the Working Group.13

We listened in on the calls, but we14

weren't Working Group members who developed15

these elements.16

This particular session is to look17

at the concepts that we've proposed18

surrounding affected herd management and19

epidemiological investigations, interstate20

movement requirements, and imports. And when21

we speak of imports, we're talking22

international imports.23

We've had some good discussions in24

the previous two groups covering all those25

1 SESSION 7 3

three different areas. The last group, we2

particularly focused on interstate movement3

requirements.4

And what did we finish up with? We5

tried to move over to -- we went to imports,6

and it still sort of drifted back to7

interstate movement requirements.8

So, you have all -- any of you have9

any feelings on which topic you'd like to10

start with, affected herds, interstate11

movements, or international imports?12

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Interstate.13

DR. HENCH: Interstate movements. 14

Okay.15

The element interstate movements is16

one of the things we're looking to get input17

on. And the example that they throw out is18

dairy heifers.19

And one of the things we're looking20

for input on is, do you feel that there are21

any particular classes of cattle, or22

commodity groups, as they call them, where23

movement requirements would be applicable? 24

And if so, what might those requirements look25

1 SESSION 7 4

like, what would they consist of?2

We'll throw it out there. There is3

some concern in dairy heifers. I believe4

both Texas and New Mexico have instituted5

change of ownership testing on dairy animals.6

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We have7

requirements in Oklahoma requiring they be8

tested when they're imported into the state,9

not change in ownership in the state, on the10

young animals anyway. We do feel like11

they're a greater risk.12

DR. HENCH: So, in Oklahoma, you13

have import requirements on just young dairy14

animals coming in or any dairy animals?15

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Any dairy16

animals.17

DR. HENCH: Any dairy animals. 18

Okay.19

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: With the20

exception of steers or spayed heifers going21

to a feedlot.22

DR. HENCH: Okay. Steers and spayed23

heifers to a feedlot, even though they are24

of a dairy breed, do not need an interstate25

1 SESSION 7 5

movement test?2

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, not a3

test.4

DR. HENCH: Okay.5

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I guess I6

should -- kind of depends on what feedlot7

they're going to.8

You know, if they're going to a9

feedlot that does a lot of backgrounding10

where they could be in a pen next to a beef11

animal that's going to be going back out,12

then we do require that, but we've got13

several feedlots in the state that feed the14

dairy-type animals. So, we don't require the15

test going into those.16

DR. HENCH: Those would be terminal17

feedlots where everything that comes in goes18

out through the slaughter house?19

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes.20

DR. HENCH: Okay. A hundred percent21

terminal operation?22

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes.23

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, with one24

exception. I think you have -- you allow25

1 SESSION 7 6

for those groups of animals to move out to2

pasture by themselves, as long as they're not3

commingled with anything else, if conditions4

are right, and then go back into the feed5

yard.6

So, they're still under the control7

of the feed yard and not commingled with any8

breeding cattle at that time.9

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I think10

another class of animals that are probably11

subject to the same type of requirements are12

rodeo cattle, Mexican origin animals. Texas13

has that for Mexican roping steers -- roping14

steers.15

DR. HENCH: So, Mexican rodeo16

animals, you would like to see a regular17

test on them for interstate movement18

purposes?19

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We have them20

in Texas now, and I think some other states21

do, too. And there would be some -- I22

guess it would be nice, in some instances,23

to have some uniformity across the states.24

If they're a big enough risk for25

1 SESSION 7 7

certain states to put restrictions on them, I2

think we need to look at it and make3

everybody uniform.4

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Does it really5

matter the origin, or should it be just all6

rodeo stock?7

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Right. And8

that's a good question.9

If you have all domestic rodeo10

stock, you're one contractor that just has11

American calves, are you really at a higher12

risk if they haven't been mixed. But being13

able to tell if they've been mixed or not is14

a good question, a good point.15

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: And I say16

that, I think, because they are grouped17

together and spend a lot of time together18

and you've got different contractors coming19

in and out, you've got more of an20

opportunity to have a disease penetrate that.21

The one exception I would have would22

be those people that might take some steers23

from a feedyard to use at a local roping and24

then go back into the feed yard.25

1 SESSION 7 8

I don't know if they would2

necessarily need that same thing, because3

again, they're under the control of the owner4

or the feed yard manager the entire time.5

They're not mixed with any other6

animals at that event because it's just a7

team roping. There aren't any other bovine8

animals there. I think -- I wouldn't say9

that those animals would need to be tested10

any differently, but -- 11

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: More than12

likely, if they went across the state line,13

they wouldn't be subject to any -- 14

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: But again, if15

you're on the Texas-New Mexico border and16

it's going back and forth, that might be an17

issue.18

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We have those19

same restrictions in Oklahoma also, and it20

would be nice if it were a uniform rule,21

because we get the question all the time,22

well, why do you guys require it and Kansas23

doesn't or North Dakota or whoever. So,24

that would -- that would be one thing that25

1 SESSION 7 9

would really be nice.2

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I would hate3

for the federal rule to come out and be --4

if we're talking about dairy calves -- intact5

dairy heifers coming over, if the federal6

rule wasn't as stringent as the current Texas7

rule, I would hate for us to go backwards.8

So, allowing the states to have the9

authority to do that in and above the10

federal rule, I think, is important also.11

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: A good example12

of that, look how many free states that, by13

federal rule, wouldn't be required to test14

their dairy animals coming into Texas or15

Oklahoma have been found to have at least16

one affected herd in the last five years.17

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Would this be18

the area where the -- like, the commuter19

herd agreements fall into this area of20

movement control?21

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah, I think22

so.23

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Because we24

utilize those to a degree. We want to make25

1 SESSION 7 10

sure that we don't adversely affect our2

ability to do those.3

DR. HENCH: At this time, commuter4

herd agreements are anticipated to remain. 5

And those are -- the exact reason for that6

is for folks who have grazing on both sides7

of the state line.8

And that involves, of course, you9

know, the agreements between both states,10

their state veterinarians, their ADICs. 11

Everybody's happy with the arrangement, and12

we just go back and forth as part of normal13

business.14

It's anticipated that that will15

continue. I don't foresee any major changes16

to the concept.17

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you.18

DR. HENCH: Uh-huh. Any other19

thoughts on movement requirements? Joe, you20

haven't said nothing.21

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Okay, I'll22

bite.23

We've faced -- we, in New Mexico,24

have a split state status currently. And25

1 SESSION 7 11

we've implemented import requirements and2

movement requirements, change of ownership3

requirements and so forth, that, frankly,4

we've promoted as being temporary while we5

were under split state status.6

And we've been trying to assure our7

producers that once we were able to achieve8

an accredited free state status statewide,9

that a lot of these testing requirements10

would go away.11

In light of the comment about, we12

hate to take a step back -- and I understand13

the comment. You know, if we keep those14

same kind of testing requirements in place as15

more of a national standard, I think we16

could see some heartburn amongst New Mexico17

producers that feel they've been shouldering18

a good bit of expense and responsibility in19

following the testing rules that we20

implemented. And I don't know how that21

would play out if it became more of the22

norm.23

DR. HENCH: Well, correct me here if24

I'm wrong, but your testing requirements in25

1 SESSION 7 12

that are for movements within New Mexico,2

correct?3

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, change4

of ownership within, import requirements, and5

so forth.6

So, let's say we're telling somebody7

that because of the MAA zone, there has to8

be a test on change of ownership, or has to9

be a test of cattle coming out of the zone,10

and now because of the way these rules11

evolved, that testing is still going to be12

required, even though our zone is gone.13

It -- I could see it playing out14

that way where -- this is where you kind of15

get into the sticky wicket of the preemption16

issue that Lee Ann and Dee Ellis kicked17

around there for a few seconds in the group18

meeting, this idea that states have,19

heretofore, had the right and the ability to20

have more restrictive or additional21

requirements versus the federal movement22

requirements.23

And I just -- I don't have a24

solution. I don't really have a question. 25

1 SESSION 7 13

I have just this pondering, okay, what's2

going to happen if the requirements carry on3

even if our state status changes.4

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, to stay5

on preemption real quick -- and this is6

going to be a little bit contradictory to7

what I just said, but it's going to be8

consistent with what I said in the other9

room, and that is -- 10

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I was for it11

-- before, I was against it.12

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: How'd you like13

that one?14

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It depends on15

what is is.16

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I have a17

slight concern with the use of preemption to18

facilitate political agendas rather than19

animal health agendas, and especially in20

certain states to where the -- they're trying21

to be protectionist of their local industry22

and use an issue like importation of Canadian23

feeder cattle or Mexican feeder cattle to24

keep breeding stock or commercial cattle from25

1 SESSION 7 14

one state from entering their state.2

So, I don't know how to stop that,3

or even if it -- it is a problem or will4

become a problem, but it's certainly a5

concern that I have based on some actions on6

the international front that seem that7

they've used that same philosophy.8

DR. HENCH: It is a challenge. 9

What the -- what the absolute correct answer10

is, I don't know. We're hoping -- the11

reason for these meetings is to get feedback12

and ideas. Ideas generate ideas.13

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I think the14

answer is to make sure that everything's15

based on sound science, but implementation of16

that is the -- is the tricky thing, because17

everybody has their own agenda that they're18

trying to achieve and can manipulate the19

evidence to further their cause.20

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Someone explain21

to me, Dr. Ellis, in the -- kind of in his22

opening remarks, mentioned the fact that23

there could be -- or he felt like there24

could be problems between this rule and the25

1 SESSION 7 15

interstate movement requirements and the2

animal disease traceability rule. And I'm3

not sure exactly what his point was there. 4

Does anyone -- Brad, have y'all talked about5

it?6

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I was at a7

different meeting this morning, but let me8

look through here and see if I can't see9

something -- 10

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I want to say11

he might have been referring to the12

brucellosis program, rather than the TB13

program, and that if the brucellosis program14

transitions like some think that it will,15

then you lose the -- already, the16

identification component of that program and17

the TB rule for some of the -- some of18

those animals that we're all hoping will help19

facilitate implementation of the disease20

traceability program. I think I said that21

right.22

DR. HENCH: I'm sorry. I truly do23

not remember those particular comments. I24

think I might have been off getting a dose25

1 SESSION 7 16

of Tylenol for my back.2

Any other thoughts on interstate3

movement requirements? Shall we move on to4

a different topic?5

Where would you like to go, affected6

herds or international imports?7

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'd like to8

talk a little bit, Bill, about the epi9

investigations.10

And this is pursuant to a11

conversation Mark and I had at lunch. And12

it was very enlightening, and I appreciate13

learning. And I'll give you a capsule of14

what we talked about.15

I was talking about the trace of the16

Ohio affected cow, in tracing her back17

through a Kansas dairy to New Mexico dairies. 18

And I told him I had heartburn because it19

appeared that Kansas was basically going to20

sit and take a step back and wait to see21

what the status of the New Mexico herds was22

going to be.23

And in looking at that whole trace24

scenario, understanding that a lot of cows25

1 SESSION 7 17

moved through the west Kansas dairy in a2

fairly short period of time and went to a3

lot of places and so forth, I've been4

concerned all along that Kansas wasn't doing5

more to start tracking where cows had come6

in from and gone to and so forth and through7

that facility.8

And Mark pointed out to me that,9

well, the way the rules are written, we --10

we, USDA, can't really call those cows high11

risk or coming from an affected -- or going12

to -- you know, because it's just not the13

way our rules are written, so it would be14

premature of us to tell Kansas, you've got15

to figure out where all those cows came from16

and went to.17

And so, they kind of go back to the18

herd of origin, which in this case, appeared19

to be the New Mexico herd. And that kind20

of explained to me why we had to kind of21

act first and so forth.22

But in looking at it strictly from23

an epi standpoint, not from a rules24

standpoint or anything else, looking at what25

1 SESSION 7 18

I perceive as a -- as factors of elevated2

risk for TB in that Kansas dairy, and3

realizing that because the system -- whatever4

the reasons, the system has allowed them to5

wait and see what happened in New Mexico,6

and because of the way things played out7

more slowly than I think everybody would have8

liked in New Mexico, we're now, what, some9

nine months farther behind the curve in10

tackling any of the trace work that may have11

to be done on the cattle that went through12

these dairy in Kansas.13

And I think -- you know, when I14

hear the comment about completing15

epidemiologic investigations in the time16

frames required and so forth, what's going to17

be required? And maybe we need to look at: 18

How do we approach epi.19

I mean, to me, you kind of maybe20

would be smarter to look in multiple places,21

and then -- instead of saying, well, New22

Mexico -- we feel New Mexico's the highest23

risk of the source of that TB, so we'll look24

there first and nowhere else, even though we25

1 SESSION 7 19

went through another dairy and then to the2

Ohio dairy and so forth.3

I would think that it would be in4

everyone's interest if everybody was looking5

everywhere to try to get their hands around6

the spread of this disease and where it came7

from and where it might have gone from8

there.9

DR. HENCH: We're at a point where10

we can address those inconsistencies in epi11

tracing, and your input on it would certainly12

be helpful.13

There have been comments in the past14

that epidemiological investigations need to be15

completed in 90 days, 120 days, 180 days,16

and put a finite time limit on it.17

The problem there arises is the epi18

investigations associated with a 40 cow-calf19

herd where the guy gets a bull every third20

year and sells everything are going to be21

very much different than the epi22

investigations associated with a 15,000 head23

genetics herd. One could probably be24

completed in 60 days. The other one might25

1 SESSION 7 20

take well over a year.2

So, an alternate idea's been thrown3

out, periodic sit reps -- situation reports,4

if you will, periodic updates on what's going5

on. And this ties in with our transparency6

concept of, you know, making this stuff7

available.8

As Lee Ann pointed out, it's great9

for letting the states know what's going on. 10

We've got to be careful with our11

international trading partners.12

But the availability of a regular13

update on the epi progress of an affected14

herd -- you know, we've found -- identified15

six more traceout herds, and two were over16

in this state so we alerted that state. 17

That's -- that is another way we could go18

with it.19

Thoughts? Ideas? You know, what20

else can we do is what we're looking for.21

You know, you've identified a22

potential problem, yeah. We've got it here,23

and it's the bookends thing. What happened24

in between?25

1 SESSION 7 21

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I think that2

it might be useful to notify -- and this is3

where I think we have to be careful about4

what the information is we're providing.5

If we know that there's a6

confirmation of the disease, then I think7

that information can be disseminated more8

widely.9

If we have a suspected case, or10

there is a cohort that's in another state, I11

think if you -- I think if you notify the12

animal health officials in that state and let13

them know, then at least they're on alert,14

but the information is not a rumor that15

could affect market.16

So, I think there's a sensitivity17

there on, is it a suspected case or is it a18

confirmed case. And the audience for19

delivering those two is different.20

I'd like to go one step further,21

though, and I think we need better22

information on slaughter surveillance also.23

It's a little different than this24

topic, but I don't think that we have an25

1 SESSION 7 22

accurate understanding of the number of2

animals that actually are -- that come back3

with TB lesions at slaughter except for, I4

think, that information is provided at USAHA.5

So maybe there's an opportunity to6

-- in the name of transparency, to come up7

with a system to provide that information to8

-- to at least the state vets, but maybe to9

industry as a whole or segments of the10

industry or something so that we can kind of11

identify those areas where we think there12

really may be a problem, and when we get the13

information once a year in that report, we14

have a better understanding of where it15

actually came from.16

DR. HENCH: There have been a couple17

of resolutions, recommendations come out of18

USAHA in the national assembly. We have19

been addressing that.20

And Dee, haven't we made those21

reports available on the national assembly22

calls here recently, slaughter cases, what23

have you?24

DR. ELLIS: Kind of. At some25

1 SESSION 7 23

level, yes, they've been discussed. I'm not2

sure that -- and I've missed some of the3

calls, but I'm not sure they're always4

discussed to the detail or the information's5

provided that some would like, --6

DR. HENCH: Were you --7

DR. ELLIS: -- but the USDA's making8

a better effort -- concerted effort to9

provide that information.10

DR. HENCH: We're feeling our way11

along here.12

DR. ELLIS: Right. Baby steps.13

DR. HENCH: Yeah. We are working14

down that line, so hopefully, we can fine15

tune this to what everybody needs.16

Anything else on the epi17

investigations?18

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, the19

other was, I think what we talked about20

earlier this morning is that we need a21

better test.22

DR. HENCH: We need what?23

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We need a24

better test. We need -- 25

1 SESSION 7 24

DR. SCHOENBAUM: It would be nice.2

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We've got to3

get some recert dollars put into that to4

come up with a way to do it. And that's5

my -- that's more in the industry is to put6

political pressure on people that can7

appropriate the funds to USDA or to the --8

to the people that develop the test, I9

guess.10

DR. HENCH: Well, the tests are11

typically developed by private industry.12

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Right.13

DR. HENCH: There's somewhere between14

four and six right now that are in the15

pipeline.16

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Do y'all do17

-- I don't know the right word right now,18

whatever time it is, but pilot projects with19

some of the -- with some of the new20

technology, the new tests? Do y'all21

sometimes do both caudal fold and that just22

as a way for them to beta test it?23

DR. HENCH: That's -- at that stage24

of development, that type of comparison is25

1 SESSION 7 25

premature.2

When we have a more mature test,3

we'll take it out and do comparisons with4

current test technology.5

That is currently underway for6

captive cervids. One particular test is7

being compared to the skin testing in captive8

cervids. We had a strong effort into that9

this past testing season, this past winter.10

If I recall correctly -- I'm sort of11

on the periphery of that -- we achieved all12

the sample numbers we were looking for in13

elk, white-tailed deer.14

We're anticipating getting the numbers15

of samples we were searching for in reindeer16

here in summer. It's a big commercial17

animal in Alaska, and there's several herds18

that are going to be doing significant19

harvests, and we're going to obtain samples20

at that time to evaluate serological tests.21

We are working on it. It's just a22

matter of getting a test that's somewhat23

fieldable, if you will, rather than a24

breadboard to compare.25

1 SESSION 7 26

So, until the tests are mature2

enough to be run that way, it's difficult to3

really take it out in the field and put it4

side by side.5

But we do compare it side by side6

as part of our evaluations. And the goal is7

to develop new tests to put in the field8

that are better, that are faster, and as9

they said on the Six Million Dollar Man,10

stronger.11

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: This is --12

that's, in my mind, critically important. 13

And I think if we're able to accomplish14

that, then affected herd management becomes15

much a easier situation.16

This sentence says: Establish17

criteria for defining -- or for determining18

an individual animal as negative. In all19

reality, that's a toughie.20

DR. HENCH: That's a hard one to do21

is say a hundred percent.22

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes.23

DR. HENCH: It's a hard one to do. 24

And when you're testing an affected herd, you25

1 SESSION 7 27

really want to know if that animal is going2

to test negative, that it really is negative. 3

That's a hundred percent sensitivity, and4

we're not quite there yet.5

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: As Mark6

Gamacho (phon.) so eloquently points out, you7

can't divorce specificity and sensitivity. 8

And inherently, you're always going to have9

false positives and false negatives.10

And even if you were to approach a11

hundred percent specificity, if your12

sensitivity is not real high, then you're13

going to have a lot of false information14

given to you, because it's going to pick up15

things other than what really is TB and on16

and on and on.17

This is not unique to TB testing;18

this is inherent to any test. It's like the19

liver enzymes should be between this number20

and that number. Well, that's an average,21

but there's people with liver disease with22

normal values and people with healthy livers23

with elevated values, and it's an unfortunate24

part of testing.25

1 SESSION 7 28

That gold standard of a hundred2

percent really is only by culturing the bug.3

DR. HENCH: And then when you get a4

bug that specializes in hiding from the5

humoral immune system, that's what brings us6

together.7

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Can any8

changes be made to affected herd management9

without a better test?10

DR. HENCH: What changes might you11

have in mind?12

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, we have13

a herd in Oklahoma right now that has a cow14

that came from the infected herd in Indiana. 15

She's positive on a single cervical, but she16

also is positive for fecal PCR for Johne's.17

I don't think anybody thinks this18

cow has TB. None of the other cohorts from19

the same year from that herd have tested20

positive, and there's been 20 some odd of21

those.22

And it takes a long time to go23

through the whole scenario, but in a lot of24

ways, this -- the herd that that cow is now25

1 SESSION 7 29

separated from, she's isolated away from the2

herd, that herd is no different than another3

herd that had that animal in the herd, but4

because she was not in the herd, that herd5

was allowed to be tested and turned loose. 6

And it just -- it's causing us some problems7

right now.8

You know, I can make an argument --9

and not that I'm -- I mean, I'm not a state10

veterinarian, but if I was, I still wouldn't11

say, well, no, we're going to turn that herd12

loose without USDA's blessing.13

But it just seems like there should14

be some way of managing that herd without15

having to, you know, kill that cow if we16

allowed the previous herd to go free with a17

herd test.18

DR. HENCH: Might that actually be19

more of an epi investigation as opposed to20

an affected herd management?21

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, I don't22

know what you'd call it.23

DR. HENCH: No, I -- you know,24

affected herd management, in my mind, means25

1 SESSION 7 30

we've confirmed disease in that herd.2

At this point, in your herd, it's a3

herd whose disease status is, say, in4

question. And that would be under the epi5

investigations.6

And there certainly is room in the7

new program to address that under an8

epidemiological investigations; you know, how9

could we do that; you know, what -- as you10

point out, the one herd that she passed11

through was tested once, tested negative, and12

released from quarantine. Maybe under the13

new program, we could find or develop some14

specifics.15

And again, we're getting down into16

the details, which is not exactly what we17

were aiming for here, but it's certainly good18

background.19

As we develop the standards for epi20

investigations, maybe we could come up with21

something, you know, pull this animal out,22

hold her separate, test the rest of the herd23

once or twice or something. You know, we24

can certainly address that.25

1 SESSION 7 31

There are provisions to do that in2

the current program, to hold that animal out3

and test her and test the other herd -- part4

of the herd. There are provisions in the5

UM&R to do that under the current program.6

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, those7

haven't been presented to us as an option,8

really. And we were given four scenarios9

that, you know, we could operate on, and the10

producer basically picked the scenario that11

-- to test that individual cow.12

And had she tested negative, then we13

would have been on down the road. But since14

she responded to the single cervical, that15

meant she was classified as a reactor.16

And so -- and I understand the need17

for consistency, you know. If -- I know18

that we have to be careful in the way we19

handle those things in that, you know, if20

you do one thing on this herd, then, you21

know, you have to be prepared to do it on22

the next herd.23

So I understand consistency, but it24

would sure be nice if -- ideally, we'd have25

1 SESSION 7 32

a test that we could test the animal and2

say, she's either got it or she doesn't, but3

that's not going to happen anytime soon.4

But it would be nice if there was a5

little bit of leeway to be scientific and be6

proper but still maybe not negatively impact7

a producer.8

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You brought up9

-- and I wonder if, at some point, you --10

it becomes statistically significant that 2011

cohorts are negative.12

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That what? 13

Say that again.14

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Twenty cohorts15

to this cow are negative. Is that16

statistically significant to lead us to17

believe -- like Rod says, none of us believe18

she has TB.19

So, I don't know if there's some way20

to -- if you've tested 20, how many are we21

going to put down before we say it doesn't22

happen -- she doesn't have it.23

DR. ELLIS: Well, what's your risk? 24

That gets back to what's your risk for being25

1 SESSION 7 33

wrong?2

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That's a good3

question.4

DR. ELLIS: And what are the5

repercussions if you are wrong? I mean,6

that's where you -- that's your Catch-22 in7

TB.8

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: And I9

understand that as well.10

DR. ELLIS: I mean, I'm not saying11

-- I'm just saying that's the danger.12

Did y'all talk about -- not to13

change the subject, but I know we're almost14

out of time. Did y'all talk about15

definitions while I was out? I came in16

late, and I'm sorry.17

DR. HENCH: Have not touched on18

definitions at all today.19

DR. ELLIS: Especially with Josh20

sitting here. You guys from the cattle21

feeding industry, you really need to take a22

look.23

There's some proposed definitions for24

an affected feedlot, which -- and in the25

1 SESSION 7 34

Working Group, I tried to say that's not2

even -- that shouldn't even be in there,3

because if the feedlot biosecurity plan was4

adopted that was submitted with prior5

rule-making, the three-tiered system, where6

you have a -- high risk animals, you've got7

no risk animals, in other words, domestic8

animals being backgrounded and then you might9

have a mixed status, that shouldn't matter,10

because if you find an infected animal at a11

slaughter plant that has been fed prior to12

that, biosecurity procedures should not13

implicate other animals that are still on14

feed in there.15

And the existing protocol to clean16

and disinfect pens and to not share sick17

pens or working facilities between high risk18

and lower risk animals, if they're following,19

I don't even believe that should be a20

definition that's included.21

But you guys need to really watch22

that in the feeder industry, because what23

they -- for folks that don't understand the24

system and other states that don't accept25

1 SESSION 7 35

Mexican feeder animals, for example, this2

could be, with the best of intentions,3

misconstrued and cause economic harm to your4

commodity groups.5

So, it's pretty important that that6

be -- my recommendation is that we make sure7

industry guys are involved in the decisions8

about how to define terms that affect only9

their business.10

It's just like we were -- a dairy11

issue, you need to let the dairy people play12

a major role in that.13

And that's the role -- when you put14

together working groups with just a few15

people representing the whole United States,16

it's easy to not have an expert, so to17

speak, at the table. So these kinds of18

processes are important to get the word out.19

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Dee, before20

you came in, I asked a question before you21

got here. Would you explain your comment22

this morning? I didn't quite understand it23

exactly, about that this program could24

contradict the animal disease traceability25

1 SESSION 7 36

program somehow and the interstate movement,2

I think.3

DR. ELLIS: Yeah. The animal4

disease traceability concept, as I understand5

it, the rules are not released yet, but will6

allow for a waiver for identification of7

feeder animals for some length of time after8

this program began.9

This rule, as I understand it --10

now, obviously, the rule's not out either,11

but the framework that is there is that12

states and industries will have to ensure13

identification on at risk populations. And14

so, there's your conflict.15

If this rule says they've got to be16

ID'd for their entire lives, and the other17

rule says, well, we're going to waive that,18

this -- they're not -- there's a conflict19

there. And I think probably the intent in20

this rule would overpower the intent of the21

other.22

If this rule says a state has to23

make sure that -- in the industry that24

Mexican feeders always have a tag and they're25

1 SESSION 7 37

never mixed with breeding animals, and you2

always keep up with them, they've always got3

a health certificate, and it's always written4

down on that health certificate, that's going5

to trump the waiver that was intended to be6

put in place for those other animals in that7

other program.8

That's where two trains on separate9

tracks running about the same speed, you may10

not have the same content in the rule-making.11

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Why did --12

does the animal disease traceability -- and I13

can't remember either, but I thought it's --14

I thought it didn't allow that waiver to be15

allowed on Mexican cattle. I thought it16

required them to be ID'd.17

DR. ELLIS: I think it would. 18

Right now, it's not out yet, but my19

understanding is that feeder cattle -- I20

mean, it's just feeder cattle.21

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's not a22

waiver, though. The proposed rule won't23

address feeder cattle. It will only address24

adult cattle, and they'll come back later25

1 SESSION 7 38

with the feeder cattle component. So there's2

not actually a waiver on it. It's the same3

intent, but -- 4

DR. ELLIS: It's silent, which is5

actually worse, in a way. If it's silent,6

then it doesn't address it. And then this7

rule comes out saying they're going to have8

ID, they're going to have to have ID.9

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: But I'm about10

--11

DR. ELLIS: I would interpret it12

that way.13

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah. But I14

don't see a concern, though, maintaining ID15

on a population, or however we determine the16

risk, if it's an elevated risk.17

I mean, that's why we have ID on18

dairy cattle, imported dairy cattle. We've19

got it on Mexican cattle coming across.20

I mean, we have a better ID now on21

Mexican and Canadian cattle than we do on22

domestic cattle. And I -- I think that's23

the way we operate currently, so I don't -- 24

DR. ELLIS: Well, it comes down to25

1 SESSION 7 39

the recording of the ID for interstate2

movement.3

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: And that's --4

yeah, that's -- 5

DR. ELLIS: The traceability6

requirement's going to be that you figure out7

where that tag came from, you know.8

And my understanding is that the9

ATD, the animal disease traceability rule,10

would allow feeders to move interstate11

without the recording of tags; whereas, this12

rule, basically, the intent would be you need13

to keep up with them at all times.14

And that's why I said that's an --15

that could be an unfunded mandate back to16

the state.17

In our case, it's not even our18

cattle. It may just be passing through19

Texas, but if their first point of20

concentration is in Texas and then they're21

going to Kansas, the burden -- by the way22

I'm reading this, the burden would be on us23

to call the state and tell them they're24

coming, make sure the health certificate has25

1 SESSION 7 40

all the IDs on them, and it could be --2

it's just a potential for some problems3

there. That's what I was pointing out.4

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I can see5

that.6

DR. HENCH: I've been given the7

eight- minute warning. And they will --8

that we will meet in the middle room.9

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Does that mean10

we have eight more minutes to discuss in11

here before we leave?12

DR. HENCH: If you would like to go13

for the eight -- for the now seven minutes14

until we meet in the middle room for15

adjournment.16

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Or you're17

saying there's eight minutes before we meet18

in there?19

DR. ELLIS: So we have a20

seven-minute break if we quit right now. 21

That's what it means.22

DR. HENCH: It's up to y'all.23

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, what24

else -- what have we not gotten to that was25

1 SESSION 7 41

supposed to be discussed on this?2

DR. HENCH: Imports.3

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Was this the4

labs also in this room or was the lab -- 5

DR. HENCH: I'm sorry?6

DR. ELLIS: No, that was -- 7

DR. HENCH: That was in with the8

indemnity.9

DR. ELLIS: With indemnity, yeah.10

Well, the imports, in general, I11

think if you haven't talked about it at all,12

the concern there is that -- placing a13

burden on a state for an animal that, the14

day before, was allowed to cross legally15

under USDA authority, and as soon as they16

stopped foot, USDA says, okay, we let them17

in, but now it's your problem, make sure18

nothing bad happens.19

That seems to be a little bit of a20

mixed message as to the risk. And21

certainly, we don't want to stop the trade22

or stop the practice, but there has to be23

some realistic compromise to whose24

responsibility they are after they come in.25

1 SESSION 7 42

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: As much as2

I'd like to have better knowledge about what3

is coming into the state, I agree it's not4

your place to keep track of them.5

DR. ELLIS: But here's an example of6

what happens. Cattle crossed from Santa7

Teresa, New Mexico on their way to North8

Dakota. They come over to Texas, and the9

guy realizes North Dakota requires two tests10

to get in, so they hold them up.11

And then they test them and there's12

a problem, and they're Texas cattle because13

we just happened to be where the guy14

stopped. That's the problem.15

That's where you get back into16

systems of movement. And I do agree that17

the first point of concentration, the clarity18

on where they're going originally, should be19

on the crossing papers.20

We're looking for some cattle right21

now that -- last week that we're looking for22

those cattle that came in, and they didn't23

go where they said they were going to go. 24

And I don't know if there's any repercussion25

1 SESSION 7 43

right now for that to happen.2

But the imported cattle, you need a3

whole meeting just on that process and let a4

number of the feeders be there to explain5

their business and their needs and then --6

and realistically assess risks. They're not7

necessarily always as high risk as you think8

they would be. Depends on where they came9

from and how they were managed, and throw10

the roping steers in there.11

By the way I read this rule right12

now, a roping steer and a bucking bull are13

not going to be allowed to ride on the same14

trailer to the rodeo because a bucking bull's15

a breeding animal and the roping steer16

absolutely is the highest risk.17

There's no doubt in my mind. That's18

the class of cattle we need to be on top19

of. Texas already requires a test every 1220

months and they have to have it with them,21

but there's a lot -- the importation section22

of this rule needs a lot of development.23

And it's not anybody's fault; it's a24

complex situation. And not many of us on25

1 SESSION 7 44

the Working Group knew much about it, so it2

was really hard to make traction on even3

writing down what needed to be done.4

So I would encourage -- you guys5

need to comment on that and say, we want to6

talk about this more, you guys being the7

feeder industry.8

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: And I'm not9

sure that there's a good understanding of10

what a feeder animal actually is, one, and11

what happens to it when it first enters.12

I think there's some that believe13

that as soon as the animal crosses into14

Texas or into the states, it goes straight15

to a feedyard.16

And, you know, that's not what17

happens. It stays with its group of cattle,18

but it goes to pasture until it gets to a19

certain weight and then goes to the feedyard. 20

So, I mean -- 21

DR. ELLIS: An animal on feed at22

the end of its life is not necessarily a23

feeder animal, by definition, when it comes24

in from Mexico or somewhere else, even25

1 SESSION 7 45

another state. Not the same thing.2

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: But it really3

doesn't even stay with its group, Josh. And4

we get health certificates, and we require5

that a copy of that 17-30, that import6

document, come in.7

And I'll get a health certificate8

that has 400 head of stocker calves listed,9

and there will be six or eight of those10

17-30s that have a cumulative total of maybe11

1500 steers on them.12

And, you know, yeah, I'm sure all13

those animals are on there, but how are we14

going to ever really find -- you know, it's15

just really tough. And so, I'm not sure16

they stay together very well.17

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The ones that18

are purchased by the feedyards are, let me19

put it that way, because they're grazed by20

themselves and then go to the feedlot.21

If you're an individual importing22

them as stocker cattle that you're hoping to23

feed later, then yeah, you run into that24

situation.25

1 SESSION 7 46

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I got you.2

DR. HENCH: Well, we've got about a3

minute and a half. I guess I've thanked4

every group at the end. I'll point out to5

them regulations.gov. You don't need those6

47 Ws, just regulations.gov. Do a search7

for tuber. It will take you to the8

announcement on this Working Group, and you9

will be able to submit comments that way.10

You will always also be able to read11

comments that have already been submitted. 12

And the same information is contained in your13

packet as far as tracking it down and14

submitting comments. Please send us15

comments.16

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The comments17

that were provided today and at the other18

working groups in these breakout sessions and19

at the other meetings that the -- that20

they're transcribing, are those going to be21

posted?22

DR. HENCH: I don't know exactly how23

they will be made available. I haven't had24

that question before. Thank y'all.25

1 SESSION 7 47

CERTIFICATE2

3

I, SONDRA L. CARGLE, CSR, RPR, do4

hereby certify that the foregoing proceedings5

were reported by me, and that the foregoing6

transcript constitutes a full, true and7

correct transcription of my stenographic8

notes.9

10

11

12

SONDRA L. CARGLE,13

DATED: JUNE 23, 201114

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 SESSION 7 48

2

Session7,060611Page 15

Aability 10:3 12:20able 7:14 11:8 26:1446:10,11

absolute 14:10absolutely 43:17accept 34:25accomplish 26:14accredited 11:9accurate 22:2achieve 11:8 14:19achieved 25:12act17:22actions 14:6additional 12:21address 19:11 30:830:25 37:24,2438:7

addressing 22:20ADICs 10:11adjournment 40:16adopted 34:5adult 37:25adversely 10:2advisory 2:12affect 10:2 21:1635:9

afternoon 2:4agenda 14:18agendas 13:19,20agree 42:4,17Agreement 1:20agreements 9:20 10:510:10

aiming 30:18Alaska 25:18alert 21:14alerted 20:17allow 5:25 36:737:15 39:11

allowed 18:5 29:6,1737:16 41:15 43:14

allowing 9:9alternate 20:3Amarillo 1:4,21American 7:12

animal 5:12 13:2015:3 21:13 25:1826:19 27:2 29:430:22 31:3 32:234:11 35:25 36:437:13 39:10 41:1443:16 44:11,14,2244:24

animals4:6,11,15,154:17,18 5:15 6:26:11,13,17 8:7,98:10 9:15 15:1922:3 34:7,8,9,1434:19 35:2 36:837:2,7 45:14

Ann12:17 20:9announcement46:9answer 14:10,15anticipated 10:5,15anticipating25:15anybody28:18anybody's 43:24anytime32:4anyway 4:11appeared 16:20 17:19applicable 3:24appreciate 16:13approach 18:19 27:11appropriate 24:8area 9:19,20areas3:2 22:12argument 29:9arises 19:18arrangement 10:12asked35:21assembly 22:19,22assess 43:7associated 19:19,23assure 11:7ATD39:10audience 21:19authority 9:10 41:16availability20:13available 20:8 22:2246:24

average27:21

BBaby 23:13back 3:7 5:12 6:57:25 8:17 10:1311:13 16:2,17,2117:18 22:3 32:2537:25 39:16 42:16

background 30:19backgrounded 34:9backgrounding 5:10backwards 9:8bad 41:19barnyard 2:9based 14:6,16basically 16:2031:11 39:13

beef 5:11began 36:9believe 4:4 32:18,1834:20 44:13

best 35:3beta 24:23better 21:22 22:1523:9,22,25 26:928:10 38:21 42:3

big 6:25 25:17Bill 2:6 16:9biosecurity 34:4,13bit 11:19 13:7 16:932:6 41:20

bite 10:23blessing 29:13bookends 20:24border 8:16bovine 8:8Brad 15:5breadboard 25:25break 40:21breakout 1:7 46:19breed 4:25breeding 6:9 13:2537:2 43:16

brings 28:6brought 32:9brucellosis 1:215:13,14

Session7,060611Page 16

bucking 43:13,15bug28:3,5bull 19:20 43:13bull's 43:15burden 39:22,2341:14

business 10:14 35:1043:6

Ccall 3:23 17:1129:23 39:24

calls 2:14 22:2323:4

calves 7:12 9:5 45:9Canadian 13:23 38:22capsule 16:14captive 25:7,8careful 20:11 21:431:19

Cargle 1:21 47:4,14carry 13:3case 17:19 21:10,1821:19 39:18

cases 22:23Catch-22 33:7cattle 2:8 3:22 6:96:13 12:10 13:2413:24,25 18:1233:21 37:16,20,2137:24,25 38:2,1938:19,20,22,2339:19 42:7,13,2142:23 43:3,1944:18 45:23

caudal 24:22cause 14:20 35:4causing 29:7certain 7:2 13:2144:20

certainly 14:5 19:1230:7,18,25 41:22

certificate 37:4,539:25 45:8 47:2

certificates45:5certify 47:5

cervical 28:16 31:15cervids25:7,9challenge 14:9change 4:6,10 11:312:4,9 33:14

changes10:16 13:428:9,11

clarity42:18class6:11 43:19classes3:22classified 31:16clean34:16cohort 21:11cohorts28:19 32:1232:15

come 9:4 17:6 22:3,722:18 24:5 30:2137:25 41:25 42:945:7

comes5:18 38:8,2544:24

coming 4:15 7:19 9:69:15 12:10 17:1238:20 39:25 42:4

comment11:12,1418:15 35:22 44:6

comments 15:24 19:1446:10,12,15,16,17

commercial 13:2525:17

commingled 6:4,8commodity 3:23 35:5commuter 9:19 10:4compare25:25 26:6compared 25:8comparison 24:25comparisons 25:4completed 19:16,25completing 18:15complex43:25component 15:17 38:2compromise 41:24concentration 39:2142:18

concept10:17 20:736:5

concepts 2:18concern 4:4 13:1814:6 38:15 41:13

concerned 17:5concerted 23:9conditions 6:4confirmation 21:7confirmed 21:19 30:2conflict 36:15,19consist 4:2consistency 31:18,24consistent 13:9constitutes 47:7contained 46:13content 37:11continue 10:16contractor 7:11contractors 7:19contradict 35:25contradictory 13:7control 6:7 8:4 9:21CONTROLS 1:12conversation 16:12copy 45:6correct 11:24 12:314:10 47:8

correctly 25:11couple 22:17course 10:9covering 2:25cow 16:17 28:14,1928:25 29:16 31:1232:16

cows 16:25 17:6,1117:16

cow-calf 19:19criteria 26:18critically 26:13cross 41:15crossed 42:7crosses 44:14crossing 42:20CSR 47:4culturing 28:3cumulative 45:11current 9:7 25:5

Session7,060611Page 17

31:3,6currently 10:25 25:638:24

curve 18:10D

dairies 16:18dairy 3:19 4:4,6,144:15,16,18,25 9:59:6,15 16:18 17:218:3,13 19:2,335:11,12 38:19,19

dairy-type 5:15Dakota 8:24 42:9,10danger 33:12DATED 47:15day41:15days 19:16,16,16,25decisions 35:8Dee12:17 22:2135:20

deer 25:14define 35:9defining 26:18definition 34:2144:24

definitions 33:16,1933:24

degree 9:25delivering 21:20depends 5:7 13:1543:9

detail 23:5details 30:17determine 38:16determining 26:18develop 24:9 26:830:14,20

developed 2:15 24:12development 24:2543:23

different 3:2 7:1915:8 16:5 19:2221:20,24 29:3

differently 8:11difficult 26:3

discuss40:11discussed 23:2,541:2

discussions 2:24disease7:21 15:3,2019:7 21:7 27:2230:2,4 35:25 36:537:13 39:10

disinfect 34:17disseminated21:8divorce27:8document 45:7doing17:5 25:19Dollar 26:10dollars24:4domestic 7:10 34:838:23

dose 15:25doubt43:18Dr 2:4,6,10 3:144:13,18,23 5:5,175:21 6:16 10:4,1911:24 14:9,2215:23 19:10 22:1722:25 23:7,8,11,1323:14,23 24:2,1124:14,24 26:21,2428:4,11 29:19,2432:24 33:5,11,1833:20 36:4 37:1838:5,12,25 39:640:7,13,20,23 41:341:6,7,8,10 42:644:22 46:3,23

drifted3:7E

earlier23:21easier 26:16East 1:21easy 35:17economic 35:4effort 23:9,9 25:9eight40:8,11,14,1845:10

either 32:3 36:11

37:14element 3:16elements 2:16elevated 18:2 27:2438:17

elk 25:14Ellis 12:17 14:2222:25 23:8,1332:24 33:5,11,2036:4 37:18 38:5,1238:25 39:6 40:2041:7,10 42:6 44:22

eloquently 27:7encourage 44:5enlightening 16:13ensure 36:13entering 14:2enters 44:12entire 8:5 36:17enzymes 27:20epi 16:9 17:24 18:1919:11,18,22 20:1423:17 29:20 30:530:20

epidemiologic 18:16epidemiological 1:102:20 19:15 30:9

Epidemiologist 2:11especially 13:2033:20

Establish 26:17evaluate 25:21evaluations 26:7event 8:7everybody 7:4 14:1818:8 19:5 23:16

Everybody's 10:12everyone's 19:5everything's 14:15evidence 14:20evolved 12:12exact 10:6exactly 15:4 30:1735:24 46:23

example 3:18 9:1235:2 42:6

Session7,060611Page 18

exception 4:21 5:257:22

existing 34:16expense 11:19expert 35:17explain 14:21 35:2243:5

explained 17:21F

faced 10:24facilitate 13:1915:20

facilities 34:18facility 17:8fact 14:23factors 18:2fairly 17:3fall 9:20false 27:10,10,14far46:14farther 18:10faster 26:9fault 43:24fecal 28:17fed34:12federal 9:4,6,11,1412:22

feed 5:14 6:5,8 7:258:5 34:15 44:2245:24

feedback 14:12feeder 13:24,2434:23 35:2 36:837:20,21,24 38:244:8,11,24

feeders 36:25 39:1143:5

feeding 33:22feedlot 4:22,24 5:75:10 33:25 34:445:21

feedlots 5:14,18feedyard 7:24 44:1644:20

feedyards 45:19

feel 3:21 4:11 11:1818:23

feeling23:11feelings 3:10felt 14:24field26:4,8fieldable 25:24figure 17:16 39:7find 30:14 34:1145:15

fine 23:15finish 3:5finite 19:17first17:22 18:2539:20 42:18 44:12

five 2:7 9:17focused3:3fold 24:22folks10:7 34:24following 11:2034:19

foot 41:17foregoing 47:5,6foresee10:16forth8:17 10:1311:4 12:6 17:4,717:22 18:17 19:3

found9:16 20:15four 24:15 31:9frames 18:17framework 1:3 36:12frankly11:4free 9:13 11:9 29:17front14:7full 47:7funds24:8further14:20 21:21

GGamacho27:7general41:11generate 14:13genetics 19:24getting15:25 25:1525:23 30:16

give 16:14

given 27:15 31:940:7

go 6:5 7:25 9:810:13 11:11 16:617:18 20:18 21:2128:23 29:17 40:1342:24,24 45:21

goal 26:7goes 5:18 44:15,1944:20

going 4:21 5:8,9,125:12,16 8:17 12:1213:3,7,8 16:20,2317:12 18:17 19:2120:5,10 25:19,2027:2,9,14,15 29:1232:4,22 36:18 37:538:8,9 39:7,2242:19,24 43:1445:15 46:21

gold 28:2good 2:4,24 7:9,157:15 9:12 11:1930:18 33:3 44:10

gotten 40:25grazed 45:20grazing 10:7great 20:9greater 4:12group 2:12,13,15 3:212:18 34:2 44:2,1845:4 46:5,9

grouped 7:17groups 2:25 3:23 6:235:5,15 46:19

guess 5:6 6:23 24:1046:4

guy 19:20 42:10,14guys 8:23 33:2134:22 35:8 44:5,7

Hhalf 46:4handle 31:20hands 19:6happen 13:3 32:4,23

Session7,060611Page 19

43:2happened 18:6 20:2442:14

happens 41:19 42:744:12,18

happy 10:12hard 26:21,24 44:3harm 35:4harvests 25:20hate 9:3,8 11:13head 19:23 45:9health 13:20 21:1337:4,5 39:25 45:545:8

healthy 27:23hear 18:15heartburn 11:1716:19

heifers 3:19 4:4,214:24 9:6

held 1:19help 15:19helpful 19:13Hench 2:4,6 3:144:13,18,23 5:5,175:21 6:16 10:4,1911:24 14:9 15:2319:10 22:17 23:723:11,14,23 24:1124:14,24 26:21,2428:4,11 29:19,2433:18 40:7,13,2341:3,6,8 46:3,23

herd 1:9 2:19 9:179:20 10:5 17:19,2019:20,24 20:1526:15,25 28:9,1428:15,20,25 29:3,329:4,4,5,5,12,1529:17,18,21,2530:2,3,4,11,2331:4,5,21,23

herds 3:11 16:7,2220:16 25:18

heretofore 12:20hiding 28:5

high 17:11 27:1334:7,18 43:8

higher 7:12highest18:23 43:17hold 30:23 31:342:11

Holiday1:20home 2:5hopefully 23:15hoping 14:11 15:1945:23

house5:19How'd13:13humoral28:6hundred5:21 26:2227:4,12 28:2

IID 38:9,9,15,18,2139:2

idea 12:19ideally31:25ideas14:13,13,1320:20

idea's 20:3identification15:1736:7,14

identified 20:15,22identify 22:12IDs40:2ID'd 36:17 37:17immune 28:6impact 32:7implementation14:1615:20

implemented 11:2,21implicate 34:14import 4:14 11:212:5 45:6

important 9:11 26:1335:6,19

importation 1:1413:23 43:22

imported 4:9 38:1943:3

importing 45:22

imports 2:21,22,233:6,12 16:7 41:341:11

included 34:21inconsistencies19:11

indemnity 41:9,10Indiana 28:15individual 26:1931:12 45:22

industries 36:13industry 13:22 22:1022:11 24:6,1233:22 34:23 35:836:24 44:8

infected 28:15 34:11information 21:5,821:15,23 22:5,8,1423:10 27:14 46:13

information's 23:5inherent 27:19inherently 27:9Inn 1:20input 3:17,21 19:12instances 6:23instituted 4:5intact 9:5intended 37:6intent 36:20,21 38:439:13

intentions 35:3interest 19:5international 2:233:12 14:7 16:720:12

interpret 38:12interstate 1:12 2:203:3,8,11,13,14,164:25 6:18 15:216:3 36:2 39:2,11

investigation 29:20investigations 1:102:20 16:10 18:1619:15,19,23 23:1830:6,9,21

involved 35:8

Session7,060611Page 20

involves 10:9isolated 29:2issue 8:18 12:1713:23 35:12

JJoe10:20Johne's 28:17Josh 33:20 45:4June 1:20 2:3 47:15

KKansas 8:23 16:18,2017:2,5,15 18:3,1339:22

keep 11:14 13:2537:3 39:14 42:5

kicked 12:17kill 29:16kind 5:7 11:15 12:1514:22 17:18,20,2118:20 22:11,25

kinds 35:18knew 44:2know 5:9 8:2 10:1011:14,21 14:3,1117:13 18:14 20:720:10,15,20,2221:6,14 24:18 27:229:9,16,23,24 30:930:10,22,24 31:1031:18,18,20,2232:20 33:14 39:842:25 44:17 45:1345:15 46:23

knowledge 42:3L

L47:4,14lab41:5labs 41:5late 33:17lead 32:17learning 16:14leave 40:12Lee12:17 20:9leeway 32:6

legally41:15length 36:8lesions22:4letting20:10let's12:7level23:2life 44:23light11:12liked18:9limit19:17line 8:13 10:8 23:15listed 45:9listened 2:14little 2:7 13:7 16:921:24 32:6 41:20

liver27:20,22livers 27:23lives36:17local7:24 13:22long 6:3 28:23look 2:17 3:25 7:39:13 15:9 18:18,2118:24 33:23

looking3:17,2016:24 17:23,2519:5 20:21 25:1342:21,22

loose29:6,13lose 15:16lot5:10 7:18 11:1016:25 17:4 27:1428:24 43:22,23

lower34:19lunch16:12

MMAA12:8maintaining 38:15major10:16 35:13making 20:7 23:8Man26:10managed43:10management 1:9 2:1926:15 28:9 29:2129:25

manager8:5

managing 29:15mandate 39:16manipulate 14:19Mark 2:10 16:12 17:927:6

market 21:16matter 7:6 25:2334:10

mature 25:3 26:2mean 18:20 29:1033:6,11 37:2138:18,21 40:1044:21

means 29:25 40:22meant 31:16meet 40:9,15,18meeting 1:3 12:1915:8 43:4

meetings 14:12 46:20members 2:15mentioned 14:23message 41:21Mexican 6:13,14,1613:24 35:2 36:2537:16 38:20,22

Mexico 4:5 8:1610:24 11:17 12:216:18,22 17:2018:6,9,23 42:844:25

Mexico's 18:23Michigan 2:8middle 40:9,15Million 26:10mind 26:13 28:1229:25 43:18

minute 40:8 46:4minutes 40:11,14,18misconstrued 35:4missed 23:3mixed 7:13,14 8:634:10 37:2 41:21

months 18:10 43:21morning 15:8 23:2135:23

move 3:6 6:2 16:4

Session7,060611Page 21

39:11moved 17:2movement 1:12 2:213:3,8,24 5:2 6:189:21 10:20 11:312:22 15:2 16:436:2 39:3 42:17

movements 3:12,14,1612:2

multiple 18:21N

name 22:7national 11:16 22:1922:22

necessarily 8:3 43:844:23

need 4:25 7:3 8:3,1018:18 19:15 21:2223:21,23,24,2531:17 33:22 34:2235:12 39:13 43:343:19 44:6 46:6

needed 44:4needs 23:16 43:6,23negative 26:19 27:327:3 30:12 31:1332:12,16

negatively 32:7negatives 27:10never 37:2new4:5 10:24 11:1712:2 16:18,2217:20 18:6,9,22,2324:20,21 26:8 30:830:14 42:8

nice 6:23 8:21 9:224:2 31:25 32:5

nine 18:10norm 11:23normal 10:13 27:23North 8:24 42:8,10Notary 1:22notes 47:9Notice 1:19notify 21:3,12

number 1:7 22:227:20,21 43:5

numbers25:13,15O

obtain 25:20obviously 36:11odd28:21officials 21:13Ohio 16:17 19:3okay 3:15 4:19,235:5,21 10:22 13:241:17

Oklahoma 4:8,13 8:209:16 28:14

once 11:8 22:1430:12,24

ones 45:18opening14:23operate31:10 38:24operation 5:22opportunity 7:2122:6

opposed29:20option 31:8origin 6:13 7:617:19

originally 42:19overpower 36:21owner8:4ownership 4:6,1011:3 12:5,9

Ppacket 46:14papers 42:20part 10:13 26:727:25 31:4

particular 2:17 3:2215:24 25:7

particularly3:3partners 20:12passed 30:11passing39:19pasture6:3 44:19PCR28:17

pen 5:11penetrate 7:21pens 34:17,18people 7:23 24:7,927:22,23 35:12,16

perceive 18:2percent 5:21 26:2227:4,12 28:3

period 17:3periodic 20:4,5periphery 25:12philosophy 14:8phon 27:7pick 27:15picked 31:11pilot 24:19pipeline 24:16place 11:15 37:742:5

places 17:4 18:21placing 41:13plan 34:4plant 34:12play 11:22 35:12played 18:7playing 12:14Please 46:15point 7:15 15:419:10 30:3,1132:10 39:20 42:1846:5

pointed 17:9 20:9pointing 40:4points 27:7political 13:19 24:7pondering 13:2population 38:16populations 36:14positive 28:16,17,21positives 27:10posted 46:22potential 20:23 40:3practice 41:23preemption 12:1613:6,18

premature 17:15 25:2

Session7,060611Page 22

prepared 31:22presented 31:8pressure 24:7pretty 35:6previous 2:25 29:17prior 34:5,12private 24:12probably 6:11 19:2436:20

problem 14:4,5 19:1820:23 22:13 41:1842:13,15

problems 14:25 29:740:3

procedures 34:13proceedings 47:5process 43:4processes 35:19producer 31:11 32:8producers 11:8,18program 15:13,14,1415:17,21 30:8,1431:3,6 35:24 36:236:9 37:8

progress 20:14projects 24:19promoted 11:5proper 32:7proposed 1:2 2:1833:24 37:23

protectionist 13:22protocol 34:16provide 22:8 23:10provided 22:5 23:646:18

providing 21:5provisions 31:2,5Public 1:3,22pull 30:22purchased 45:19purposes 6:19pursuant 1:19 16:11put7:2 19:17 24:4,626:4,8 32:22 35:1437:7 45:20

Qquarantine 30:13question 7:9,15 8:2212:25 30:5 33:435:21 46:25

quick13:6quit 40:21quite27:5 35:23

Rreactor31:16read 43:12 46:11reading39:23real 13:6 27:13realistic 41:24realistically 43:7reality26:20realizes 42:10realizing 18:4really 7:5,12 9:212:25 17:11 22:1326:4 27:2,3,1628:3 31:9 33:2234:22 44:3 45:3,1545:16

reason 10:6 14:12reasons18:5recall 25:11recert 24:4recommendation35:7recommendations22:18

recording 39:2,12referring 15:12Regional 2:11regular6:17 20:13regulations.gov 46:646:7

REGULATORY 1:3reindeer 25:16released 30:13 36:6remain 10:5remarks14:23remember 15:24 37:14repercussion42:25repercussions 33:6

report 22:14reported 47:6reports 20:4 22:22representing 35:16reps 20:4require 5:13,15 8:2345:5

required 9:14 12:1318:17,18 37:17

requirements 1:142:21 3:4,8,24,254:8,14 6:12 10:2011:2,3,4,10,15,2512:5,22,23 13:315:2 16:4

requirement's 39:7requires 42:10 43:20requiring 4:8resolutions 22:18responded 31:15responsibility 11:1941:25

rest 30:23restrictions 7:28:20

restrictive 12:21ride 43:14right 6:5 7:8 12:2015:22 23:13 24:1324:15,18,18 28:1429:8 37:19 40:2142:21 43:2,12

risk 4:12 6:25 7:1317:12 18:3,2432:24,25 34:7,8,1834:19 36:14 38:1738:17 41:21 43:843:17

risks 43:7road 31:14Rod 32:18rodeo 6:13,16 7:7,1043:15

role 35:13,14room 13:10 30:7 40:940:15 41:5

Session7,060611Page 23

roping 6:14,14 7:248:8 43:11,13,16

RPR47:4rule 8:21 9:4,7,8,119:14 14:25 15:3,1836:10,16,18,21,2337:23 38:8 39:1039:13 43:12,23

rules 11:20 12:1117:10,14,24 36:6

rule's 36:11rule-making 34:637:11

rumor 21:15run26:3 45:24running 37:10

Ssample 25:13samples 25:16,20Santa 42:7saying 18:22 33:1133:12 38:8 40:18

says 26:17 32:1836:16,18,23 41:17

scenario 16:25 28:2431:11

scenarios 31:9SCHOENBAUM 24:2Schoenbaum's2:10science 14:16scientific 32:6search 46:7searching 25:16season 25:10seconds 12:18section 43:22see6:17 11:17 12:1415:9,9 16:21 18:638:15 40:5

segments 22:10sells 19:21send 46:15sensitivity 21:1727:4,8,13

sentence 26:17

separate 30:23 37:9separated 29:2serological 25:21session1:7,19 2:22:17

sessions 46:19seven40:14seven-minute40:21share34:17short17:3shouldering 11:18sick 34:17side 26:5,5,6,6sides10:7significant 25:1932:11,17

silent 38:5,6single 28:16 31:15sit16:21 20:4sitting33:21situation 20:4 26:1643:25 45:25

six20:16 24:1526:10 45:10

skin 25:8slaughter 5:19 21:2322:4,23 34:12

slight 13:18slowly 18:8smarter18:21solution 12:25somebody 12:7somewhat 25:23Sondra 1:21 47:4,14soon 32:4 41:1644:14

sorry15:23 33:1741:6

sort 3:7 25:11sound14:16source 18:24spayed 4:21,23speak2:22 35:18SPEAKER3:13 4:7,164:20 5:3,6,20,235:24 6:10,20 7:5,8

7:16 8:12,15,199:3,12,18,22,2410:18,22 12:4 13:513:11,13,15,1714:14,21 15:7,1116:8 21:2 23:19,2424:3,13,17 26:1226:23 27:6 28:8,1329:22 31:7 32:9,1332:15 33:3,9 35:2037:12,22 38:10,1439:4 40:5,10,17,2441:4 42:2 44:945:3,18 46:2,17

specializes 28:5specificity 27:8,12specifics 30:15speed 37:10spend 7:18split 10:25 11:6spread 19:7staff 2:7,7stage 24:24standard 11:16 28:2standards 30:20standpoint 17:24,25start 3:11 17:6Started 2:8state 1:22 4:9,105:14 8:13 10:8,1110:25 11:6,9 13:414:2,2 20:17,1721:11,13 22:929:10 36:23 39:1739:24 41:14 42:445:2

states 6:21,24 7:29:9,13 10:10 12:1913:21 20:10 34:2535:16 36:13 44:15

statewide 11:9statistically 32:1132:17

status 10:25 11:6,913:4 16:22 30:434:10

Session7,060611Page 24

stay 13:5 45:4,17stays 44:18steer 43:13,16steers 4:21,23 6:146:15 7:23 43:1145:12

stenographic47:8step 11:13 16:2121:21

steps 23:13sticky 12:16stock 7:7,11 13:25stocker 45:9,23stop 14:3 41:22,23stopped 41:17 42:15straight 44:15stretch 2:5strictly 17:23stringent 9:7strong 25:9stronger 26:11stuff 20:7subject 6:12 8:1433:14

submit 46:10submitted 34:5 46:12submitting 46:15summer 25:17supposed 41:2sure 10:2 14:15 15:423:3,4 31:25 35:736:24 39:25 41:1844:10 45:13,16

surrounding 2:19surveillance21:23suspected 21:10,18system 18:4,5 22:828:6 34:6,25

systems 42:17T

table 35:18tackling 18:11tag36:25 39:8tags 39:12take 7:23 11:13

16:21 20:2 25:426:4 33:22 46:8

takes28:23talk 16:9 33:13,1544:7

talked 15:5 16:1523:20 41:12

talking2:22 9:516:16

TB 2:6,11 15:13,1818:3,24 22:4 27:1627:18 28:19 32:1933:8

team 8:8technical 2:12technology 24:2125:5

tell 7:14 17:1539:24

telling12:7temporary 11:5Teresa 42:8terminal 5:17,22terms35:9test 5:2,4,16 6:189:14 12:9,10 23:2223:25 24:9,23 25:325:5,7,23 27:3,1928:10 29:18 30:2331:4,4,12 32:2,242:12 43:20

tested 4:9 8:1028:20 29:6 30:1230:12 31:13 32:21

testing2:8 4:611:10,15,20,2512:12 25:8,1026:25 27:18,25

tests24:11,21 25:2126:2,8 42:10

Texas1:4,21,22 4:56:13,21 9:7,1539:20,21 42:9,1343:20 44:15

Texas-New 8:16Thank10:18 46:25

thanked 46:4thing 8:3,25 14:1720:24 31:21 45:2

things 3:17,20 18:727:16 31:20

think 5:25 6:10,217:3,17 8:9 9:11,2211:16 14:14 15:1515:21,25 18:8,1419:4 21:2,4,7,1221:12,17,22,2522:5,12 23:2026:14 28:18 36:336:20 37:18 38:2341:12 43:8 44:13

thinks 28:18third 19:20thought 37:14,15,16thoughts 10:20 16:320:20

three 1:7 3:2three-tiered 34:6throw 3:18 4:3 43:10thrown 20:3ties 20:6time 6:9 7:18 8:5,2210:4 17:3 18:1619:17 24:19 25:2128:23 33:15 36:8

times 39:14today 33:19 46:18told 16:19top 43:19topic 3:10 16:521:25

total 45:11touched 33:18tough 45:16toughie 26:20trace 16:16,24 18:11traceability 15:3,2135:25 36:5 37:1339:6,10

traceout 20:16tracing 16:17 19:12track 42:5

Session7,060611Page 25

tracking 17:6 46:14tracks 37:10traction 44:3trade 41:22trading 20:12trailer 43:15trains 37:9transcribing46:21transcript 47:7transcription 47:8transitions 15:15transparency20:622:7

tricky 14:17tried 3:6 34:2true 47:7truly 15:23trump 37:6try19:6trying 11:7 13:2114:19

tuber 46:8TUBERCULOSIS1:2tune 23:16turn 29:12turned 29:6Twenty 32:15twice 30:24two2:25 20:16 21:2037:9 42:10

Tylenol 16:2type 6:12 24:25typically 24:12

UUh-huh 10:19UM&R 31:6understand 11:1331:17,24 33:1034:24 35:23 36:536:10

understanding 16:2522:2,15 37:20 39:944:10

underway 25:6unfortunate 27:24

unfunded 39:16UNIDENTIFIED3:134:7,16,20 5:3,6,205:23,24 6:10,207:5,8,16 8:12,158:19 9:3,12,18,229:24 10:18,22 12:413:5,11,13,15,1714:14,21 15:7,1116:8 21:2 23:19,2424:3,13,17 26:1226:23 27:6 28:8,1329:22 31:7 32:9,1332:15 33:3,9 35:2037:12,22 38:10,1439:4 40:5,10,17,2441:4 42:2 44:945:3,18 46:2,17

uniform7:4 8:21uniformity 6:24unique 27:18United 35:16update 20:14updates20:5USAHA22:5,19USDA 17:11 24:841:16,17

USDA's 23:8 29:13use7:24 13:18,23useful 21:3utilize9:25

Vvalues 27:23,24versus 12:22veterinarian29:11veterinarians 10:11vets 22:9

Wwait 16:21 18:6waive36:18waiver 36:7 37:6,1537:23 38:3

want 9:25 15:11 27:241:22 44:6

warning 40:8wasn't 9:7 17:5watch 34:22way 12:11,15 17:1017:14 18:7 20:1823:11 24:5,23 26:329:15 31:19 32:2038:6,13,24 39:2242:8 43:12 45:2046:10

ways 28:25week 42:22weight 44:20went 3:6 8:13 17:317:17 18:12 19:2

weren't 2:15west 17:2Western 2:11we'll 4:3 18:24 25:4we're 2:5,22 3:17,209:5 12:7 14:1115:19 18:9 19:1020:21 21:5 23:1125:15,20 26:1427:5 29:12 30:1633:14 36:18 42:2142:22

we've 2:18,24 5:1310:24 11:2,5,720:11,15,23 24:330:2 38:19 46:3

white-tailed 25:14wicket 12:16widely 21:9winter 25:10wonder 32:10word 24:18 35:19words 34:8work 18:11working 2:13,1523:14 25:22 34:234:18 35:15 44:246:9,19

worse 38:6wouldn't 8:9,14 9:1429:11

Session7,060611Page 26

writing 44:4written 17:10,1437:4

wrong 11:25 33:2,6Ws 46:7

Yyard 6:6,8 7:25 8:5yeah 9:22 20:2323:14 36:4 38:1439:5 41:10 45:1345:24

year 19:21 20:222:14 28:20

years 2:8 9:17young 4:11,14y'all 15:5 24:17,2133:13,15 40:2346:25

Zzone 12:8,10,13

11-40 1:2012 43:2012019:1615,000 19:231500 45:1217-30 45:617-30s 45:1118019:161911 1:20

220 28:21 32:11,212011 1:20 2:3 47:1523 47:15

440 19:1940045:947 46:7

661:20 2:360 19:25

771:19 2:2791021:21

990 19:16