A National Plan for PRRS Elimination?

Montse Torremorell, Lisa Becton, Harry SnelsonAASV PRRS Task Force

September 19, 2016

Outline

• Background• Intend of the PRRS elimination

framework document• Main points of the document• Process• Discussion

AASV PRRS Task ForceMission:

• Diagnostics – Identify, evaluate and describe the use of PRRS diagnostic techniques that can be used in the treatment, control, prevention and elimination of PRRS.

• Research - Identify, evaluate and summarize PRRS research that can be used to support the rationale behind the use of the PRRS treatment, control, prevention and elimination "tools".

• Research – Identify, from a field perspective, the information gaps and research priorities.

• Interventions – Identify and evaluate intervention "tools" that can be used in the treatment, control, prevention and elimination of PRRS.

• Cooperation – Encourage the development of regional PRRS Task Forces which will be comprised of producers, veterinarians, and industry partners.

• Communication – Provide for communication of PRRS related information to all North American AASV members, state / provincial / regional task forces, and cooperating North American producer groups and industry partners. • Montse Torremorell Chair

• Laura Batista • Lisa Becton • George Charbonneau • Neil DeBuse • Scott Dee • Joseph Fent • Tom Gillespie • Derald Holtkamp • Mike Mohr • Bob Morrison • David Pyburn • Max Rodibaugh • Leigh Rosengren • Kurt Rossow • Alan Snodgrass • Mark Wagner • Paul Yeske

Background

• The AASV, the NPB and the NPPC have all passed resolutions to work towards the development of a national PRRS elimination plan

AASV Position Statement: PRRS EliminationPorcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) is a significant production-limiting disease of swine that is estimated to cost the North American swine industry in excess of 664 million dollars per year. Control of the disease via traditional methods has not been effective in all cases; therefore, it is the position of the AASV that elimination of the PRRS virus from the North American swine industry is the long-term goal. The AASV will take a leadership role by partnering with the swine industry to promote collaborative PRRS virus elimination efforts at the local, regional, and national levels; communicating the need and identifying sources of funding to support such initiatives; and assisting in the transfer of new PRRS-related information and technology across its membership, in order to achieve this goal.Approved by the AASV Board of Directors on October 11, 2011

During the 2011 Pork Forum, a National Pork Board advisement was presented to the delegates and passed that states: That the National Pork Board continue to be engaged in the PRRSV elimination discussions that prioritize research and education towards continued development and application of tools and strategies with the goal of elimination of the PRRSV virus.

Goal: Drive Sustainable Production – The National Pork Board will invest in research and producer education programs that enhance the productivity and sustainability of pork production and deliver benefits to producers, consumers and the community.

By 2020, the National Pork Board will develop, with key stakeholders, the identification and diagnostic tools, surveillance and mitigation strategies for the potential elimination of the top domestic swine diseases.

By 2020, the National Pork Board will deploy tools and programs to decrease the annual economic impact of PRRS by 20 percent, as adjusted for inflation and measured against the 2012 PRRS economic impact baseline study.

By 2020, the National Pork Board will build the capacity to detect and prepare for foreign, non-regulatory swine production diseases, to rapidly respond to non-regulatory and regulatory foreign animal diseases and to facilitate pork producer business continuity.

By 2020, the National Pork Board will expand participation in the worker safety benchmarking database from 27 percent to 50 percent of industry, with a long-term objective of reducing employee animal-handling injury rates by 15 percent.Demonstrating a commitment to improving professionalism (doing the right things for the workforce and the animals workers care for), the National Pork Board will develop and deploy education and training resources that are utilized by 25 percent of the pork production industry and that serve as the basis of employee training and development programs.By 2020, the National Pork Board will provide pork producers with research results, tools and information to improve the productivity of the U.S. swine herd as measured by the following and based on 2015 Industry Productivity Analysis: 10 percent decrease in pre-weaning and nursery mortality, 10 percent improvement in caloric efficiency in grow/finish feed efficiency and Improvement in sow lifetime productivity from 38 pigs per sow lifetime to 42 pigs per sow lifetime.

NPB Strategic Plan

Background

• AASV PRRS Task Force, December 2013

• “…expectation by producers that veterinarians will lead the efforts to develop a plan to eliminate PRRSV from the national swine herd”…

Where to start?

• Objective: – To develop a framework for a National

PRRS elimination program

• Expectation to deliver a document that outlines the steps to guide PRRS elimination efforts at the national level– Identify current gaps, research needs, caveats

• This document is meant to be a first draft to be used as base for discussions as the plan is presented to a broader audience representative of the swine industry as a whole.

• “The National PRRSV elimination framework” is conceived as a road map to assist swine producers, allied industry and regulators in the journey to control and eliminate PRRSV from the national swine herd.

Sub-committee

• Lisa Becton • Dave Pyburn• Bob Morrison • David Reeves • Larry Rueff• Jim Lowe • Derald Holtkamp

• Harry Snelson• Leigh Rosengren• Perry Harms • Howard Hill• Montse Torremorell

• Mark Engle• James McKean

1. Background and assumptions• PRRSV continues to cause significant economic losses• Producers have expressed clear strategic intent to limit the

impact of PRRS (resolutions)• Emergence of novel strains continues (i.e 1-7-4)• PRRSV impacts the welfare of the pigs (i.e secondary

infections and increase antibiotic usage)• There are control strategies that work• Although much is known about PRRSV transmission, there are

still unknowns in particular to between herd transmission• Use of vaccines can assist to manage disease, but role in

National effort still unclear

Background and assumptions

• Program must be producer-led• Framework recognizes the challenges with

preventing herd re-infections• Additional tools and strategies may be required

before this plan can be implemented• Knowledge will evolve and program plans will need

to be adjusted accordingly

2. Program justification• Economics – PRRS costs $$• Emergence of novel strains continues and

threatens competitiveness and sustainability of US swine industry

• Global competitiveness, not just PRRS• Sustainable production, stronger industry• Recognized need to elaborate a plan, and

infrastructure, to successfully eliminate PRRSV from the swine industry

Framing of the program– Producer led, voluntary – National in scope– Desire to minimize the impact of PRRSV and

eventual elimination– Program based on stages – risk based program

• 1st reduction of local/system/regional spread, • 2nd expand and coalesce regions, • 3rd protect negative systems/areas/regions

– Plan requires trust, enhanced communication and uses surveillance, implementable information and proven methods to contain, control and eliminate the virus

3. Plan requirements

• Surveillance• Animal movement• Communication and organization of producer

committees• Herd classification• Risk management

Surveillance• Program to:

– Assess incidence and prevalence– Analysis of data for decision making– Communication– Short term producer value and long term program value– Measure progress

• Swine Health Monitoring Program• Needs:

– Widespread use of program (i.e companies, ARCE)– Local coordinators leadership– Use of Premises IDs– Integration of data automatically (i.e Bioportal, AgConnect, VDLs, production

systems, etc)– Analytical data capabilities– Structured reporting system– Monitoring of boar studs, breeding herds and commercial pigs– Establish guidelines for monitoring and reporting

Animal Movement• Very complex • Constraints that dictate movements: packer

contracts, feed-mill, health status, cost, frequency of movements, site size, vehicle availability, grower contracts, unknown movements situations, ability to respond rapidly to status change, truck wash management, distance

• Animal movement is a major risk for PRRSV introduction into regions

• Recognizes need for controlled movement at some point in the program

• Gaps:– Poor understanding of impact of animal movement

on incidence and presentation of PRRSV breaks in particular in growing pigs

– Can vaccination help manage the risk of PRRS infection via movement?

– Are PRRS breaks associated with animal movement? When do PRRS breaks happen?

– Risk of show pigs to commercial pigs?– How to contain infections identified after animal

movement?

Herd classification

• Critical to define a risk-based PRRSV elimination plan

• AASV herd classification (Holtkamp et al., )• Needs some modifications to include definitions in

line with stages proposed in plan (i.e vaccination)• All herds should have a status and this be updated

regularly• PRRS status of regions or states

Organization of Producers

• Producer leadership and engagement is central• State-level swine health committees:

– State PRRSV Advisory Board (as part of the state swine health committee or the state pork association)

– Function: local champions, collate local information, disseminate information, regional road map, instigate new projects, increase participation

– Lead, coordinate, guide efforts at the State level• National PRRSV Advisory Board

– Coordinate, guide, set minimum standards at the National level • Include also producers in low density areas (i.e through

extension veterinarians, or others groups)

4. Program stages• Envisioned with a bottom up approach with stages at the herd,

regional and state level that account for risks of PRRSV infection

• Allow for logical progression from infection/high risk to no infection/low risk scenarios

• Definition on where the disease is present or absent nationally

• State and national roles and responsibilities recognized. Activities coordinated eventually with State Health officials

• Regulatory program component at some point, but this will be determined by progress of projects and local demands

• Stage 1 – Program initiation– State Pork Association to start state level PRRSV

advisory board– Producer/industry education program – Identify % participating herds and their status (if

known)– Enroll herds in program– Initiate testing– Identify risks at the state level (i.e point of collection,

slaughter plants, routes, etc)

• Stage 2 – Measures from stage 1 plus following:– Monitoring– All herds to have risk management plan in place– Stabilization plans in place– Consider desirability of movement controls into low

prevalence regions– Develop state level biosecurity and intervention plan

• Stage 3:– All sow herds on risk management and

stabilization plans with real time surveillance including grow-finish sites

– Mandatory participation for control/elimination– Category I pigs originating intrastate or intra-

region would be quarantined and enhanced biocontainment procedures would need to be in place

• Stage 4– Surveillance

• Stage 5– Free eligible after 12 months in stage 4

Feasibility

• Level of participation/commitment• Cost of program• Program incentives• Industry buy-in

Needs going forward• Premise ids• Integration of data• Automated data for pig movement• Independent point of information for everybody• Identification of key research/papers/strategies to

guide efforts• Understand biocontainment strategies• Others?

Limitations/Hurdles• Social and economic pressures• Wide use of premise IDs• PRRSV vaccines• Biocontainment of infections in grow-finish sites• Pig movement• Voluntary program

– < % of participation rates– Program incentives

• Funding• Unintended consequences

Distribution

• Solicit comments:– AASV Board – Oct 2015 & March 2016– AASV PRRS Task Force – March 2016– NPB – Swine Health Committee – Under review

Comments

• What are we missing?• Is this framework a step in the right

direction?• Infrastructure needed?• Alternative plans?

Acknowledgements

• AASV PRRS Task Force– Sub-committee

• AASV Board of Directors• NPB Leadership• Lisa Becton• Harry Snelson

Thank you for your attention!