Letter to the Honorable Tom Vilsack, US Secretary of Agriculture

Letter

GOVERNORS URGE USDA TO WAIT ON BRUCELLOSIS ELIMINATION ZONE

The Governors of Idaho and Wyoming expressed their concern to the U.S. Department of Agriculture on what they say is an "ill-conceived and hastily contrived" approach to eliminate brucellosis.

Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter of Idaho and Gov. Dave Freudenthal of Wyoming wrote to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack regarding the proposed National Brucellosis Elimination Zone (NBEZ), which they say would further impede the progress of disease eradication.

Brucellosis is a bacterial disease that causes pregnant cows and elk and wild bison to abort their fetuses. An aggressive eradication program has eliminated the disease in much of the United States. The only known reservoir of brucellosis infection left in the nation is in wild bison and elk in the Greater Yellowstone Area.

Governors Otter and Freudenthal say that the USDA' s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) proposal does not address the root problem of brucellosis transmission in the Greater Yellowstone Area - wildlife.

"NBEZ seems to simply ‘fence' the wildlife and livestock together, with no real wildlife management being required within the National Parks and on the National Elk Refuge," they wrote. "While we have no interest in federal management of wildlife populations in our states, we are all too aware of the ‘hands-off' management policies of the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service."

"More concerning still is our perspective that the efforts of USDA-APHIS to address our states' collective and individual concerns, at least thus far, have seemed superficial and non-engaging," the Governors said. "To be blunt, the NBEZ process has been a top-down, formulaic federal effort."

Inherent in the NBEZ proposal, they continued, is the idea that by setting aside this zone, USDA-APHIS can therefore declare the rest of the nation "free" of the disease and "walk away from the issue forever, with little likelihood or need for the agency to ever have to truly and fully address the problem going forward."

As a result, the Governors say, "brucellosis, in a national and even regional sense, will simply fade from the public conscience with the states of Wyoming, Idaho and Montana being left to their own devices to deal with yet another unfunded federal mandate and the livestock producers in the Greater Yellowstone Area being forever handicapped at the marketplace not because of any actual persistence of brucellosis in their cattle herds, but because of some federally contrived ‘zone.' Certainly, the markets already have provided some ‘zoning' of sorts, but NBEZ seems to perpetually cement the area as somehow being tainted, with USDA-APHIS having no real, ongoing responsibilities in terms of funding or management."

The Governors asked Secretary Vilsack to withhold action on the NBEZ proposal until they have had an opportunity to convey their preferred course forward.

"Our states know all too well the hardships of brucellosis," they said. "While we very much appreciate the nearly century-long efforts of USDA-APHIS to eradicate the disease, the NBEZ proposal seems ill-conceived and hastily contrived when measured against the agency's historic diligence in seeking the elimination of brucellosis."

The text of the Governors' letter follows:

May 5, 2009

The Honorable Tom Vilsack
Secretary , U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington , DC20250

Dear Secretary Vilsack,

We write to you concerning the National Brucellosis Elimination Zone (NBEZ) proposal that is being crafted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS).

Despite meetings between USDA-APHIS and our state agencies and livestock producers, the NBEZ proposal remains clouded by a general lack of important information, which in turn has sparked fears and doubts about the ability of USDA-APHIS to implement such a strategy and motives in suggesting the policy in the first place. This correspondence should be considered a part of the formal record for the NBEZ rulemaking.

Our states know all too well the hardships of brucellosis. While we very much appreciate the nearly century-long efforts of USDA-APHIS to eradicate the disease, the NBEZ proposal seems ill-conceived and hastily contrived when measured against the agency's historic diligence in seeking the elimination of brucellosis.

More concerning still is our perspective that the efforts of USDA-APHIS to address our states' collective and individual concerns, at least thus far, have seemed superficial and non-engaging. To be blunt, the NBEZ process has been a top-down, formulaic federal effort. It would seem that any shift in brucellosis policy - no less one aiming to affect a sea-change in the regulation of the disease - would be deemed an undertaking worthy of a comprehensive, finely tailored, responsive and engaged approach.

To enumerate several specific concerns, we offer the following:

1. NBEZ does not address the root issue with brucellosis: wildlife. NBEZ seems to simply "fence" the wildlife and livestock together, with no real wildlife management being required within the National Parks and on the National Elk Refuge. While we have no interest in federal management of wildlife populations in our states, we are all too aware of the "hands-off" management policies of the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

2. NBEZ is set up to allow USDA-APHIS to create a "Brucellosis will always exist in this area" boundary, declare the rest of the nation "Free," a stated objective from day one of the brucellosis program and walk away from the issue forever, with little likelihood or need for the agency to ever have to truly and fully address the problem going forward. This is especially true in the age of pasteurization, where thankfully the risk of transmission to humans is minimal. Brucellosis, in a national and even regional sense, will simply fade from the public conscience with the states of Wyoming, Idaho and Montana being left to their own devices to deal with yet another unfunded federal mandate and the livestock producers in the Greater Yellowstone Area (GYA) being forever handicapped at the marketplace not because of any actual persistence of brucellosis in their cattle herds, but because of some federally contrived "zone." Certainly, the markets already have provided some "zoning" of sorts, but NBEZ seems to perpetually cement the area as somehow being tainted, with USDA-APHIS having no real, ongoing responsibilities in terms of funding or management. Even with promises from Dr. Clifford and others to include brucellosis funding in the agency's annual budget - as opposed to our having to fight for earmarked funding - these assurances are not long tenured when viewed against our states' futures with brucellosis.

3. States do not have the manpower to implement and enforce the transfer restrictions that would likely be imposed with NBEZ. Given the limited proclivity of USDA-APHIS to attract federal funding for its programs today, there is little hope for federal assistance to help three minimally populated states fund broad new regulatory efforts within and outside of the "elimination zone."

4. NBEZ would functionally lead to a split-state status, thus undermining any possibility to attract not only federal funding, but also state dollars for vaccine and diagnostic research, which we believe are key to the ultimate eradication of brucellosis.

In the coming weeks, you will be receiving a document that details Idaho and Wyoming's perspectives on how we might mutually achieve better management of brucellosis in the GYA. The approach is rooted in the notion that states must retain control over wildlife and livestock management, but recognizes USDA-APHIS' need to absolutely limit the chance that the disease will be spread to currently brucellosis-free areas. We would request that any action on the NBEZ proposal, including any Federal Register publication, be withheld until we have had an opportunity to convey our preferred course forward.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide our initial perspectives on your agency's NBEZ proposal. Certainly, as we learn more about the details of the proposal, we will have additional comments. We look forward to working with you, individually and collectively, to address our concerns.

Sincerely,

C.L. "Butch" Otter Dave Freudenthal
Governor of Idaho Governor of Wyoming

Source