Performance under pressure:

ODA responds to BSE

Perhaps the most infamous cow in America since Mrs. O’Leary’s bovine kicked over the lantern well over a century ago was a Canadian import that took up residence in Eastern Washington’s Yakima Valley. The dairy in which it resided put the small community of Mabton on the map. The animal itself put an international spotlight on the Pacific Northwest as the first U.S. case of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy—better known as mad cow disease—was reported on the eve of the eve of Christmas 2003. The case of the afflicted cow cut a wide swath that reached into Oregon and preoccupied both the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Oregon Department of Agriculture for many weeks.

“It could have happened anywhere in the U.S., but it just so happened to take place in our corner of the country,” says ODA Director Katy Coba. “The resulting flurry of activity tested our people and I’m proud to say they measured up well.”

In the weeks that followed the initial identification of a BSE-positive animal, ODA responded as best it could despite a series of challenges that included information shortages, communication lapses, and the great unknown associated with a first-time experience dealing with a dreaded disease.

Wake-up call

December 23, 2003 promised to be a typical pre-holiday work experience at the Oregon Department of Agriculture as well as state departments of agriculture throughout the U.S. This is the time of year when news slows down, or at least transitions from hard to soft. ODA Communications Director Bruce Pokarney received a phone call at 2:15 p.m. On the other end of the line was a reporter from Reuters.

“He asked for my reaction to the news that an animal diagnosed with mad cow disease had been reported in our neighboring state to the north,” recalls Pokarney. “I thought he was badly mistaken since such news would have prompted a heads up to many of us.”

Pokarney checked with State Veterinarian Brad LeaMaster as well as his public affairs counterparts at the Washington State Department of Agriculture. Nothing had been reported to them. However, a 2:30 p.m. news conference was being called by USDA Secretary Ann Veneman, topic unknown.

“We were gathered around the TV and learned for the first time as the rest of the world learned—the first case of BSE had hit the United States.

ODA officials heard more. The confirmed animal had been previously slaughtered with its carcass further processed into ground beef. Some of that ground beef had been sent to two Oregon meat distributors. By this time, it was apparent that an unknown portion of product had made its way into the retail channels.

Within minutes, the telephones at ODA were ringing incessantly. Reporters from around the country were seeking as much information as they could from as many sources as possible. That included whatever ODA happened to know, which, at that point, was very little.

“On Christmas Eve, I set a personal one-day record for the most phone calls returned and the most phone calls not returned,” says Pokarney, who lost count at somewhere around 65 phone messages.

The volume of calls and interest was so great that ODA’s Dalton Hobbs, a former information officer but now administrator of the Agricultural Development and Marketing Division, was called in to handle media.

Where’s the beef?

ODA’s Food Safety Division has an overall responsibility to make sure unsafe food is not in the marketplace. With word that meat from the BSE-positive animal had come into Oregon, administrator Ron McKay and his staff had to work quickly to get information so that consumers could know if there was a risk. (BSE can spread to humans who consume infectious material, which includes central nervous tissue, but not the meat of the animal or any associated milk products).

“The likelihood of any spinal material being in this ground beef was extremely low or non-existent,” says McKay. “Still, the public was very concerned because the BSE issue was new. We needed to know where the product might have gone in Oregon.”

A class-two USDA recall of the product was underway. However, specific information as to which stores might have received the ground beef was not made available to the public by the federal agency. ODA tried to obtain the information but was refused access, first by USDA and then by the two Oregon distributors themselves.

“There was a lot of media interest and the public wanted to know,” says McKay. “From that standpoint alone, we should have had the information. This is part of our job and we couldn’t effectively do it.”

ODA phones kept ringing for several days after Christmas. Typical questions came from worried family members who wanted assurance that the ground beef they consumed was not tainted with BSE.

“It wasn’t acceptable to them to hear that they had a greater chance of being struck by lightening than they did of contracting the disease,” says McKay.

By week two, the recall issue was pretty much done. The frustration lingered.

How does the BSE incident rank with other events in McKay’s 30-year career in food safety?

“As far as a public health threat, it was fairly low. As far as public perception, it is probably right at the top of those things I’ve ever dealt with.”

Following the cow tracks into Oregon

Meanwhile, ODA’s Animal Health and Identification Division also found itself right in the middle of the issue as USDA continued its epidemiological investigation to determine other potentially affected cows. It had been determined that the original animal was born in Alberta, Canada and most likely had consumed feed that contained mammalian protein—a common way for BSE to spread from animal to animal. (A ruminant feed ban has been in place since 1997.) The search was on to find cohorts of the positive animal, identify them, destroy them, and test them for the presence of BSE.

“With the case originating in neighboring Washington, there was a decent probability of us getting involved, especially in light of the fact that it was found in a dairy animal,” says Dr. Andrew Clark, field veterinarian who coordinated ODA’s animal inventory efforts in Eastern Oregon. “It took just a few days for us to officially learn that we were involved because of potentially associated animals being purchased by Oregon dairies.”

The trail led to four Oregon dairies, three of which were east of the Cascades. The mammoth task of going through records and checking 23,000 individual dairy cows for identification was underway. ODA provided more than a dozen personnel, including brand inspectors and veterinarians, to take part in an inventory of animals. A federal task force of 21 people also arrived to do the job. Most of them came from Mississippi, Florida, and Georgia.

“The conditions included snow, sleet, fog, rain, and lots of mud,” says Clark. “It was not pleasant working conditions. Many of these people had never seen insulated coveralls, for example. It was quite an adventure for them.”

It was hard, brutal work, too. Documents, including various veterinary certificates that might have singled out suspect animals, either did not exist or were not always reliable. That meant looking at each animal for information contained in ear tags. In five days, the crew checked all 23,000 cows—an average of more than 4,000 a day. State Brand Inspector Jack Noble acted as a foreman in the process, organizing the work teams. After each cow was inventoried, its forehead was marked with fluorescent pink paint.

“We took the job seriously,” says Clark. “After the fifth day, people were very tired but pleased with themselves. There was lots of satisfaction to go along with the chill and the fatigue.”

During the course of the inventory, one cow definitely associated with the original BSE-animal was identified in Oregon. USDA characterized 19 others as “animals of interest,” meaning they could not be ruled out as associated animals. They were just a handful of dairy cattle among the many others identified throughout the Pacific Northwest as being somehow connected to the original cow. All were destroyed with samples taken for testing. All results came back negative for BSE.

“We’ve had a chance to respond to a BSE incident,” says Clark. “We’ve learned a bunch and can be more efficient next time should it happen again.”

Critical review

Throughout the several weeks in which BSE was a newspaper headline, ODA’s collaboration encircled several industry groups, other government agencies, and, of course, the Governor’s Office. A major priority for Governor Kulongoski was protecting the state’s dairy industry. After all, there has never been any evidence that milk and dairy products are at risk of BSE. The governor made several personal calls to industry folks as well as federal officials, including Secretary Veneman. His interest and support for ODA’s efforts were well received.

“Having a governor recognize what potentially is at stake when something like this happens is a tremendous asset for our livestock industries,” says Director Coba.

The governor sent a letter to USDA urging that improvements be made in the area of notification and communication. While there were many positives associated with the way USDA handled the BSE outbreak, the letter pointed to areas of concern—especially with the ground beef recall. Hopefully, both state and federal officials have learned from the experience and will be even better tooled to deal with the next BSE crisis, should one occur.

In the meantime, Governor Kulongoski invited the ODA team that dealt with the BSE incident to his ceremonial office in April to present a plaque and a thank you for what he called an extraordinary response during a challenging time.

With mad cow disease, it may be a case of “perception is reality.” The actual risk to the public often did not match the fear and concern. It was part of the Oregon Department of Agriculture’s job to keep public hysteria from causing damage to the state’s dairy farmers and beef ranchers. By most accounts, the challenge was met successfully—an experience not easily forgotten by the industry or the government agencies involved.

ODA Home Page | ODA Publications | Ag Quarterly | Contact Us