About seven years ago, Jelinski read an Australian study that said one of the number one risk factors for spreading bovine respiratory disease was cattle sharing water bowls.

“We got to thinking, maybe there is something in the water. We’ve never looked at that,” said Jelinski, who holds the title of Alberta research chair for beef cattle health and production medicine.

Around that time, Stuart Thiessen, owner of Namaka Farms, which has a large feedlot in Alberta, opened another feedlot in Outlook, Sask.

Jelinski said the opening of the new feedlot was an opportunity to do research in a feedlot that had never had a single animal in it. The researchers could examine the bacterial populations of water bowls and see how they changed as animals were added.

Viral and bacterial effects contribute to BRD. Animals become feverish and have trouble breathing. They stop moving around as much and reduce their eating and drinking.

Even before an animal walked into the new feedlot, there was already antimicrobial resistance present.

As animals were added to the feedlot, the number of resistant genes within the water bowl increased. There was already activity in the water bowls.

“You’re looking at a biofilm, a mass of bacteria that’s growing in those watering bowls, which is a great place to grow stuff because they’re heated,” he said.

Food from the animals’ mouths also falls into the bowls.

“If you go to any feedlot and look at the watering bowls, you probably see a kind of slime at the water area interface,” said Jelinski.

“That’s full of all sorts of environmental bacteria, and the more you treat, the more you’re going to see increased resistance,” he said.

The researchers wondered if they could find the bacteria that caused bovine respiratory disease in the water bowls.

Graduate student Daniel Kos began looking for certain types of bacteria related to BRD in the water bowls, but there was certain type of bacterium that could not be isolated from the others.

“The level of BRD pathogens in that watering bowl is going to be pretty low compared to all the environmental stuff that’s growing in there,” said Jelinski.

The team spent over two years trying to develop a media to isolate those BRD bacteria from other background bacteria.

“We could never do it,” said Jelinski. “We believe they’re there.”

The significance of how much BRD is in the water bowls is unknown.

Jelinski said monitoring water bowls for bacteria was much easier and much less time consuming than giving cattle a nose swab.

The team wanted to see if antimicrobial resistance could be monitored through the water bowls.

They were able to show that when more antimicrobials were used, antimicrobial resistance increased. Furthermore, they were able to find antimicrobial resistance for certain medications.

Kos looked at all the genomics data published by the National Centre for Biotechnology Information and analyzed that data as one data set. All researchers who do genomics research and publish must load their genomics data into NCBI GenBank.

Kos was able to find one of the shortcomings of the study by looking at 4,000 files of genomic data. Most of the data was unable to say where the cattle got sick from BRD. Even a person looking at the data and finding antimicrobial resistance wouldn’t be able to know basics such as whether an animal died with BRD or if the animal entered a feedlot with it.

Jelinski said the research showed that the North American profile for BRD pathogens are different than elsewhere.

“We have more antimicrobial resistance. It’s probably related to how we raise our cattle and larger feedlots. You don’t see 20,0000 or 30,0000 head feedlots in Central Europe,” said Jelinski.

Cattle in North America are raised using more antimicrobials, and using more antimicrobials results in more antimicrobial resistance. However, low levels of antimicrobial resistance genes can show up anywhere on the planet.

“But, no doubt, the more you use, the more you’re going to end up selecting for it,” he said.

Jelinski said additional research is being done to try to show a relationship between the antimicrobial resistance in agriculture and antimicrobial resistance that develops in humans. At this point, antimicrobial resistance has not crossed over from animal to human.

In the last couple of decades, health professionals have come up with prudent use guidelines to mitigate the use of antimicrobials, said Jelinski.

“You can do that, but you can only do it to some extent. Like in a hospital, you have to use antimicrobials. In a feedlot, you have to use antimicrobials,” he said.

The researchers found that some genes were basically able to shut down the antimicrobial resistance genes.

Sometimes there is a shift in the DNA that inactivates the gene as well.

“Why is this important? It’s because if I want to figure out what your antimicrobial resistance profile is in your feedlot, and in cattle, and I want to do it phenotypically by swabbing and plating and doing that, the problem with that is that takes time. It can take days, if not longer, to come up with the results, depending on the bacteria and how slow they’re growing,” he said.

Because of the speed and accuracy of results, everyone is moving toward genomics, he said.

“The problem there is you don’t always get a perfect fit, but it’s fast and relatively good,” he said.

About 10 or 12 years ago, it cost $1,000 to sequence a genome, and now it’s $100 and continuing to drop.

The next step is to look at probe capture, which involves taking a swab, grinding up all the DNA in the swab, sequencing it and reassembling it to find out that’s in there.

Probe capture allows researchers to basically pull the genes or types of genetic sequences of interest out of the sample, while the rest is washed away.

If there is a low-level antimicrobial resistance gene in a large sample, a researcher could use it with probe capture, pull out the sample and see it. The probe capture is much more discriminating and sensitive and can target specific genes the researchers want to see.

Currently, probe capture is more expensive and more time consuming, but Jelinski expects that could come down in time.

The post Cattle water bowls hold insight into animal health, antimicrobial resistance appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The limits come after top supplier Abbott Laboratories in February recalled some baby formula including Similac made at its plant in Michigan over complaints of bacterial infections in infants who consumed the products.

CVS said it last month limited in-store and online purchases of the products to three per order, while Walgreens issued a similar cap in March. Kroger has a limit of four products per customer and Target has had restrictions on online sales for weeks.

Abbott said on Tuesday it was “doing everything” it can to address the shortage, including prioritizing production of the products and air shipping them from its U.S. drug regulator-approved facility in Ireland.

The company is also working closely with the Food and Drug Administration to restart operations at its Michigan facility, a spokesperson said. No formula that has been distributed has tested positive for bacteria, according to the company.

Similac, whose listed ingredients include skim milk, whey powder and soy and sunflower oils, was also subject to a recall in the Canadian market effective Feb. 17.

The product was also sold nationally in Canada but the federal health department said, at the time, that while cases of illness have been reported in the U.S., none had yet been reported in Canada.

The recalls are based on the potential risk of contamination with salmonella and Cronobacter sakazakii. The latter is “not commonly linked to human illness (but) in rare cases it can cause serious or fatal infections,” Health Canada said.

Abbott is the leading supplier of milk formula in the U.S., with a market share of about 42 per cent in 2021, followed by British consumer goods firm Reckitt Benckiser with a nearly 38 per cent share, according to Euromonitor data.

About 40 per cent of baby formula products were out of stock across the U.S. last month, said Ben Reich, the chief executive of data firm Datasembly.

Supply chain snags, product recalls and historic inflation have compounded the shortage, he added.

— Reporting for Reuters by Deborah Sophia, Manas Mishra and Leroy Leo in Bangalore; additional reporting by Richa Naidu in London. Includes files from Glacier FarmMedia Network staff.

The post Major U.S. retailers limit infant formula purchases on shortage appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Lab results on Wednesday confirmed anthrax as the cause of death of one animal in a flock of sheep in the R.M. of South Qu’Appelle, about 50 km east of Regina, the provincial ag department said.

The bacterial disease remains the suspected cause of death of four other sheep on the same premises, the province said in a release Thursday.

The pathogen, Bacillus anthracis, can survive in spore form for decades in soil and those spores can build up on pastures due to changes in soil moisture, whether from flooding or drying, the province said.

Animals are at increased risk of exposure to anthrax in drier years when areas normally known to be sloughs or potholes dry up and become accessible, or when ground is excavated or sees excessive runoff.

Infections occur when forage contaminated with spores is eaten by livestock; ruminants such as bison, cattle, sheep and goats are known to be “highly susceptible.” Affected animals are usually found dead without any signs of illness.

Horses can also be infected, the province said, while swine, birds and carnivore species are more resistant to infection. That said, farm dogs and cats should be kept away from carcasses, the province added.

Producers in regions known to have had anthrax outbreaks are “strongly encouraged” to vaccinate their animals each year, the province said, particularly if a neighbour’s animals are confirmed to have been infected.

Saskatchewan’s most recent previous confirmed case of anthrax infection in livestock was in bison in the nearby R.M. of Chester in 2019.

People are at “minimal” risk of exposure from infected animals but can be infected through direct contact with sick animals or carcasses, the province said. People who believe they have been exposed to an infected animal should contact a doctor or the local health authority.

Carcasses of animals suspected to have been infected shouldn’t be disturbed, but should be protected from scavenger animals such as coyotes or ravens, to avoid spreading spores in the environment.

Anthrax is a reportable disease, meaning veterinarians and labs must report all positive test results to the province’s chief veterinary officer within 24 hours. A producer who suspects anthrax in livestock should contact a local veterinarian immediately.

While anthrax is also still federally reportable, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency stopped actively investigating cases of anthrax in livestock in 2013.

Saskatchewan in 2014 set up a provincial anthrax response strategy, intended to help affected producers in protecting animal and public health. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Anthrax kills southeastern Saskatchewan sheep appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The warnings about the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s first update of inspection procedures at hog slaughterhouses in more than 50 years come after several high-profile recalls in the meat sector.

USDA earlier on Tuesday published a final version of rules that will eliminate limits on how fast companies such as Tyson Foods and WH Group’s Smithfield Foods can slaughter pigs — a change long sought by meatpackers.

The companies can instead determine their own slaughter speeds based on their ability to prevent fecal contamination and minimize bacteria, according to the rules.

Packers can also have employees, rather than USDA workers, remove meat with certain defects from the slaughtering process. Government inspectors will continue to check all live animals before they are killed as well as meat products after slaughter.

The changes could contribute to food contamination, said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of advocacy group Food + Water Watch.

“The implementation of the rule will result in the fox guarding the henhouse,” Hauter said.

Tyson Foods, the biggest U.S. meat producer, slowed chicken processing to protect food safety this year after it recalled millions of pounds of poultry products over concerns they contained extraneous materials like rubber and metal.

Tyson and Smithfield did not immediately respond to requests for comment on USDA’s new rules. The North American Meat Institute, which represents the packers, said companies will continue to produce safe pork.

Slower processing leads to higher costs for companies and limits profits, but advocates say extra caution protects workers.

“Increasing pork plant line speeds is a reckless corporate giveaway that would put thousands of workers in harm’s way as they are forced to meet impossible demands,” said Marc Perrone, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International union, which represents slaughterhouse employees.

USDA ran a pilot program for the new rules that was announced in 1997. Participating slaughterhouses do not operate significantly faster than the current maximum speed of 1,106 pigs per hour, according to the agency.

The pilot program showed the rules are unlikely to cause a higher prevalence of salmonella on pork and may reduce the prevalence of salmonella, USDA said. Under the new rules, the agency will require hog slaughterhouses to establish procedures to prevent meat from being contaminated by certain pathogens and fecal material.

“This regulatory change allows us to ensure food safety while eliminating outdated rules and allowing for companies to innovate,” USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue said.

— Tom Polansek reports on agriculture and ag commodities for Reuters from Chicago.

The post Safety advocates sound alarm over new U.S. hog slaughter rules appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“When we’re talking about respiratory diseases, a lot of the bugs that cause respiratory disease are there all the time,” Beef Cattle Research Council science director Reynold Bergen said at the Alberta Beef Producers semi-annual meeting.

Humans and cattle can both carry viruses for diseases like staph and influenza.

“You’re probably carrying lots of bugs that make you sick. But as long as they stay in the nose, you’re probably just fine,” he said.

But when an animal gets stressed or disrupted, the bad bugs start to proliferate, displace other bugs and move further into the respiratory tract.

Once these bugs establish themselves in the lungs, respiratory disease can flourish.

And unfortunately, some of the basic stresses in the lives of beef cattle can cause bacteria to develop further.

Weaning calves and mixing them with others can cause stress. Cattle can also be stressed when they’re transported long distances when they’re off feed and water, or stuck with a new diet when they’re trying to battle bad weather. It’s a special risk for feeder calves.

“Those are the ones that will typically get mass medicated on arrival at the feedlot,” he said. “Until recently, I have thought of things like antibiotics as kind of a sniper. We’ve given that antibiotic to kill the disease-causing bacteria. Drugs aren’t snipers.”

Bergen said drugs can wipe out both the good and the bad bacteria in a calf’s system, much like a grenade.

“When animals get sick and then we treat them, they’re partly recovering from the diseases, but they’re also partly recovering from the antibiotics as they try to re-establish healthy bacteria.”

The emphasis on the reduced use of antibiotics could be positive for the maintenance of healthy bacteria.

“If we can find an antibiotic alternative, whether it is the management or whether it is an actual pharmaceutical, there could be some improvements in the recovery time, if it’s that effective,” said Bergen.

Liver abscesses

Liver abscesses are another serious problem for cattle health and growth.

“We could drastically reduce our total antibiotic use if we could feed fewer antibiotics to avoid liver abscesses. Those are typically associated with high-grain diets, but beyond that, there doesn’t seem to be an awful lot we know about liver abscesses,” said Bergen.

At this point, scientists don’t know which bacteria cause liver abscesses. There are a few bacteria which constantly show up, but they might not cause the infection.

“If you see a dead animal in your field with a bunch of crows on it, the crows probably didn’t kill it,” Bergen said, to laughter in the room.

Similar bacteria can be found in liver abscesses, but it’s not actually known if they are responsible for the diseases.

“We don’t really know when the feeding period of infection starts,” said Bergen, adding that once scientists learn more, they may be able to get more strategic about which antibiotics can be fed.

Liver abscesses could be caused by animal genetic factors. Bergen said feeding wheat, which is a hotter starch source, is also a concern.

“If we’re trying to reduce antibiotic use at the same time, that might be challenging,” he said.

“The point of this, is that probably in the future, we’ll be doing a fair bit more microbiome-oriented research. If we can understand those bugs better, we’ll understand the disease and hopefully identify more effective alternatives to antibiotics.”

When producers are trying to reduce antibiotic use, this often means that they will have to change their management practices, Bergen said.

The post Microbiome research an important step in beef cattle research appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency on Friday reported five more cattle from the initial cow’s index herd in southeastern Alberta are confirmed to have been infected with Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria — presumed to be to be M. bovis, the bacterium that causes bovine TB.

The five animals were discovered during the removal and destruction of the initial cow’s index herd, in which 52 animals so far showed “a response to initial testing.”

Of those 52, 12 were found in post-mortem exams to have lesions “compatible” with bovine TB; of those 12, five have been confirmed with the bacteria. The source of infection in the affected cattle is still unknown.

“These positive test results indicate transmission between animals has occurred,” the agency said in a statement Friday, adding it’s now running a risk assessment “to determine how these results impact the investigation and whether or not additional herds may be declared infected.”

The bovine TB probe follows a notice in late September from the U.S. Department of Agriculture that a cow from Alberta had tested positive for the disease at a U.S. packing plant.

All cattle from the index herd — which lives on three separate premises in the area — are in the process of being removed from the premises and humanely destroyed, the agency said Friday.

While the index herd is the only one so far to turn up infected cows, federal quarantines remain in place on “approximately” 34 farms in Alberta and two in southwestern Saskatchewan, CFIA reiterated Friday.

No cases of bovine TB have been confirmed in Saskatchewan, the agency said, but the animals on the quarantined farms in that province have been “in contact” with the infected herd, thus are “subject to movement controls.”

The increase in the number of infected animals from this case has no effect on food safety, the agency said, as all animals are examined for signs of disease at slaughter. Any animal showing signs of disease, such as lung lesions associated with TB, is condemned and its meat not sold for human consumption.

Conducting a post-mortem on each animal slaughtered has been standard practice in Canada since the 1930s and is not a new measure applied in light of the TB cases, CFIA added.

No “trade impacts” have yet been announced from countries that accept Canadian cattle or beef, CFIA said Friday. Canada is still considered officially free of bovine TB.

Canada, which until now hasn’t seen a bovine TB case in beef cattle since 2011, would lose bovine TB-free status only if another separate Canadian case is confirmed within the next 48 months. The additional TB-positive animals found so far in this specific probe aren’t considered a separate case.

The strain of TB identified in the confirmed case is “closely related” to a strain originating from cattle in central Mexico in 1997, CFIA said. This strain has never previously been seen in TB cases in Canadian livestock, wildlife or people.

CFIA’s emergency operations centre in Calgary has been “fully activated” since Oct. 24. The agency said its emergency response plans are “scalable depending on the nature of the event.” — AGCanada.com Network

The post Bovine TB probe turns up more TB-positive cattle appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Test regularly

Test well water once or twice a year for coliform bacteria and E. coli. Sample bottles are available at local public health offices and come with instructions on sampling. The health office will send the sample to a provincial testing lab, either for no cost or a nominal fee.

“Provincial testing offices only test water meant for human consumption,” said Ken Williamson, who conducts Working Well workshops.

“If people want testing for other purposes you would need to go to a private lab. You can find one by looking under laboratories in the Yellow Pages.”

A chemical analysis should be also done every two to three years, especially if you live in an area that has had instances of flooding, he said.

• More on the Alberta Farmer: You may not want to know what lies below — but you should

Blast bacteria

Shock chlorination, in which a large volume of chlorinated water is siphoned down a well, is another fundamental maintenance chore. It should be done once or twice a year to prevent the formation of biofouling material.

“They’re a nuisance bacteria that forms slime in the water system and the well. They’re not a health hazard,” said Williamson. “However, if you don’t start doing it soon enough the problem just gets worse and worse and people don’t chlorinate until after it’s too late.”

Shock chlorination also guards against contamination by coliform and E. coli bacteria.

“Those two, because they’re easy to test for, are often red flags of other bacteria. Hopefully if you chlorinate once or twice you can get rid of it.”

Care for the well site

Pay attention to the site where the well is located.

“Make sure the ground slopes away from the well so you don’t have water ponding. Keep grass and bushes trimmed and away from the well,” said Williamson.

And don’t build decorative structures — such as wishing wells — on top of the wells.

“They can create a bit of a microclimate where undesirable critters will be attracted to the area around the wellhead and if they can get into the well they probably will. Some of those structures also make it hard to get at the well to service it.”

Attend a workshop

The whole idea behind the Working Well program is to help people understand their wells, said Williamson.

“When people register for the workshop we get their land location. From there we print off their water well drilling report unless the well is so old there are no reports. We then go through the report with them. We provide a template and they draw the different parts of their well onto a diagram. This helps them see how their well is constructed and what’s down below the ground. It’s a really valuable part of the workshop process.”

The workshops are free and last about 3-1/2 hours. Along with provincial officials, there is usually a health inspector and a water well driller at the workshops.

“Meeting those resource people is something people tell us they really appreciate,” said Williamson.

The post Here’s how to keep your well in good shape appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The danger of superbugs

Foodborne illness caused by drug-resistant bacteria, such as the antibiotic-resistant strains of salmonella that have caused beef-related outbreaks in recent years, are also a major cause for concern. Infections caused by drug-resistant bacteria can be more difficult to treat and are a major public health problem.

In fact, the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) estimates that each year more than 23,000 people die as a result of an infection caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Despite the importance and prevalence of that problem, the government does not have requirements related to antibiotic-resistant bacteria in any meat product.

Two of the most important bacteria responsible for outbreaks attributed to ground beef are toxin-producing E. coli and salmonella.

• More on the Alberta Farmer: Science lacking in alarmist report on beef safety

Shiga toxin-producing E. coli

Although most cases of foodborne illness are simple cases of vomiting and diarrhea that resolve after a day or so, some bacteria found in ground beef, such as Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) can be very dangerous. STEC produces Shiga toxin and can cause severe illness that can last five to seven days and even be so severe that infections require hospital treatment.

Additionally, some people can be left with a life-threatening condition called hemolytic uremic syndrome, which damages the kidneys. STECs are also concerning because they can cause those serious infections at relatively low infectious doses. The STECs can live in the cattle’s gut and are often found on hides, but they cause disease only in humans, not in the cattle.

Recent data published by the CDC show that incidence of illness caused by E. coli 0157:H7 in the U.S. decreased in 2014 to 0.92 cases per 100,000 people, compared with the incidences measured in 2006 to 2008 or 2011 to 2013; the incidence of infections caused by non-0157:H7 STECs and other pathogens did not decrease and remained higher than target rates defined in the government’s Healthy People 2020 goals.

Since 1994, the USDA has considered E. coli 0157:H7 in ground beef to be an adulterant, and in 2012, it added six of the most common non-0157:H7 E. coli STECs (the “Big 6”) to the list of adulterants.

That means that if those bacteria are found during processing in ground beef or in intact beef destined to become ground beef, the product cannot be sold unless it is to be further processed (cooked). Controls for those toxic STEC E. coli are included as part of Hazard Analysis & Critical Control Points (HACCP) at processing plants, and if any are detected, the product is considered adulterated and must be discarded, and the plant must report the result to FSIS.

FSIS does not actually require plants to do regular testing for E. coli 0157:H7 or other pathogens that may cause severe food poisoning, but only for generic E. coli. Generic E. coli is considered by FSIS to be a measure of fecal contamination and a measure of the effectiveness of sanitation in plants, yet there is no performance standard for generic E. coli.

Consumer Reports believes there should be performance standards for filth indicator organisms such as generic E. coli, as well as required tests for STECs. FSIS conducts its own testing for E. coli 0157:H7 and other STECs in beef at processing plants, but there are important limitations, including the frequency and prior notice of inspection to establishments regarding sampling, which could allow plants to temporarily alter procedures.

Interestingly, there are a number of factors related to the way cattle are raised that may affect their levels of generic E. coli and E. coli 0157:H7 within and shed from their intestines. For example, cattle eating grain-based diets appear to shed higher levels of generic E. coli than forage-fed animals. Studies of 0157:H7-specific shedding are suggestive of the same, although there are mixed results. Stress and feedlot confinement also foster poor hygiene practices that can increase contamination.

Salmonella

Although the reported prevalence of salmonella is low, the morbidity and mortality caused by foodborne illness from salmonella is significant, and drug resistance is particularly concerning because outbreak strains found in beef have been resistant to several important clinical antibiotics, including first-line agents prescribed to treat salmonella and other infections. Among the recent, large multi-state outbreaks that have been caused by salmonella-contaminated ground beef, the strain responsible for the 2011 outbreak was notable for its resistance to multiple antibiotics, including amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ampicillin, ceftriaxone, cefoxitin, kanamycin, streptomycin, sulfisoxazole, and tetracycline. Ceftriaxone is an example of a recommended antibiotic prescribed for salmonella infections in humans, and strains resistant to those agents would be more difficult to treat, even in the hospital. FSIS has a performance standard of 7.5 per cent for salmonella in ground beef.

The post What Consumer Reports said about beef safety appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

This follows the death of two bison that died in North Battleford, Sask. and producers are being warned to be on the lookout for anthrax, due to the hot, dry conditions.

The disease is not new to Alberta but rare.

“I’ve been here 24 years and this is the third year that I’ve seen anthrax,” said Dr. Wendy Quist, veterinarian with Frontier Vet Services in Fort Vermilion.

“Anthrax looks like many other things that cause sudden death, so if producers have sudden death in their herd, they probably should be contacting their veterinarian to get a diagnosis.

“Too many times, I have calls from people weeks later, wondering why an animal died. They probably should be calling a veterinarian as soon as possible.”

Anthrax is a bacteria that is in soil in many areas. Under certain conditions, such as drought or high temperatures, there is a greater risk for the bacteria to become infective.

Overgrazing, fresh raking, and areas that have been dug can expose cattle to fresh soil, which may contain anthrax, said Quist.

“Combine that with some drought and the risk is much greater,” she said.

When cattle ingest anthrax, they will die almost immediately and appear bloated, with blood coming out of their mouths and anuses. If anthrax is suspected, do not open the carcass, as this can spread bacteria and further contaminate the pasture. Anthrax is also transmissible to humans.

“Be aware that the discharges from the carcass could be infectious to humans,” said Quist. “People should be practising proper biosecurity and should be wearing gloves and being careful about handling tissue.”

Other animals should be removed from the pasture, and a tarp should be placed over the dead animal to prevent scavenging of the carcass. The edges of the tarp should be staked to the ground. Producers should not remove the dead animal, and should not call for deadstock pickup. After the vet takes samples, the carcass should be allowed to rot for a few days, so some of the bacteria are killed before it is buried or burned.

“Burned is preferable, but a lot of times, these things happen when we’re on a fire ban or have high fire hazards and it’s not practical,” said Quist.

Individual producers in areas of high risk or have known cases of anthrax can get a vaccine for their animals.

The post Anthrax strikes two cattle operations near Fort Vermilion appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Anthrax is a contagious and infectious soil-borne disease caused by spore-forming bacteria that can infect mammals, primarily herbivores, resulting in the rapid onset of severe disease within a few hours.

Anthrax is a federally reportable and provincially notifiable disease in Alberta. The Office of the Chief Provincial Veterinarian (OCPV) with Alberta Agriculture and Forestry will assist with diagnosing the disease and will work with your private veterinarian to help manage the case.

If you suspect an animal might have anthrax or have a sudden, unexplained death of an animal:

• Call your veterinarian immediately. Getting a prompt and accurate diagnosis will assist in preventing the spread of the disease within your herd and to other herds.
• Remove surviving animals from the pasture.
• Do not move dead animals, and do not call for deadstock pick-up.
• Try to prevent scavenging of carcasses by covering them with a secured tarp or heavy-duty plastic. Stake the edges to secure the plastic or tarp.

If there is suspicion of anthrax, your veterinarian will collect the appropriate samples and send them for testing. After samples are collected, obtain and follow the veterinarian’s instructions regarding deadstock disposal. Proper disposal is very important to limit the spread and recurrence of anthrax. Natural disposal and deadstock pickup both increase the risk of future anthrax outbreaks by spreading the spores over a wider area.

Although animal cases pose minimal risk to humans, caution should be exercised when handling animals or carcasses suspected of having anthrax. Humans can become infected by direct or indirect contact with infected animals or carcasses, or exposure to infected or contaminated animal products. This can lead to serious disease, complications and potentially even death. Contact your local Public Health Office if you have handled infectious animals or animal products for assistance in determining the risk of anthrax and the need for interventions like antibiotics, if necessary. If you think that you are actually infected or sick with anthrax, seek medical attention as soon as possible.

In animals, anthrax can be prevented by vaccinating susceptible animals. Talk to your veterinarian about vaccination, as he/she can assist you in making a decision whether it is appropriate based on the risk of disease in your area.

More information on anthrax can be found at the links below:

http://www.albertabeef.org/uploads/anthraxforwebsitepdf-361.pdf

http://www.beefresearch.ca/research-topic.cfm/anthrax-62.

The post Anthrax detected in northern Alberta appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.