| |
Advocacy in action
 Department of Homeland
Security plans Plum Island’s replacement
On June 1, 2003, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
assumed control of the Plum Island Animal Disease Center (PIADC)
from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Since that time, DHS
has served as the “landlord” of the island and its facilities
and has been in charge of daily operations and facility
maintenance. The USDA, specifically the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) and the Agricultural Research Service
(ARS), has continued to carry out its mission of protecting animal
agriculture from the threat of foreign animal diseases by directing
research projects aimed at improving diagnostics, therapeutics, and
vaccines as well as training animal health specialists to recognize
diseases of concern.
The PIADC is located on 840 acres on Plum Island, 1.5 miles off
the coast of Long Island, New York. The island has a long history
of protecting the United States, serving as a first line of coastal
defense from the colonial period until its transfer to USDA after
World War II. Ownership of the island was initially transferred to
USDA from the US Army Chemical Corps in the mid-1950’s as a result
of congressional action establishing a new laboratory to address
foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) following outbreaks in Mexico and
Canada. Legislation requires that research on FMD virus be
conducted off the US mainland except by special decree from the
Secretary of Agriculture.
The Foreign Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory (FADDL) is
housed at the PIADC and is responsible for diagnosis of foreign
animal diseases, reagent production and vaccine testing, and
training. Due to space and scheduling limitations, however, the
laboratory is able to conduct only three to four 2-week training
sessions per year. Each session can accommodate approximately 30
students. Most of those training slots are taken up by state or
federal animal health officials or military personnel. Rarely are
spots made available to practitioners. I and four other AASV
members were given the rare opportunity to attend a special
swine-oriented training session in 2000. Since then, AASV has been
very fortunate to have had the opportunity to send a few additional
members through the course. I think all who have had the
opportunity to participate in this intense training session would
agree that the experience is unequaled. There is nothing like
actually being able to observe firsthand the disease process and
explore the clinical signs and lesions (or lack thereof) produced
by these devastating diseases that fewer and fewer veterinarians in
this country have seen.
As everyone who is familiar with the PIADC knows, however, the
facility has a number of detractors. Being on an island, which
perhaps adds at least the appearance of increased security, makes
it very costly to maintain and increases the difficulty of
attracting and retaining employees and researchers. In addition,
the facilities are in need of significant maintenance, upgrading,
and renovation. For these reasons, DHS has begun the process of
evaluating options for the center’s future, including moving the
facility to a new location.
In March 2006, DHS began evaluating 29 applications to house a
facility, the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF), to
replace much, if not all, of the current activities conducted at
the PIADC. At the time of this writing, DHS has narrowed the list
to 18 sites in 12 states. Plum Island is reportedly no longer in
the running. The plan is to develop a short list of three to five
sites by the end of the year and begin environmental impact studies
with the goal of announcing the final site selection by 2008. This
new $451 million, 520,000-square-foot facility will address
biological and agricultural national security risks by co-locating
scientists from several federal agencies in a state-of-the-art
biosafety containment facility. The DHS plans to equip the NBAF
with numerous laboratories that will conduct research in
high-consequence biological threats involving foreign animal,
zoonotic, and human diseases. As a key part of this, DHS plans to
house laboratories that will provide high-security spaces for
agricultural and animal studies and training. In addition, DHS
plans for the NBAF to develop vaccine countermeasures for foreign
animal diseases and provide advanced test-and-evaluation capability
for threat detection, vulnerability, and countermeasure assessment
for animal and zoonotic diseases.
According to information on the DHS website, the NBAF project
will integrate those aspects of public and animal health research
that have been determined to be central to national security. The
related and synergistic homeland defense research, development,
test, and evaluation responsibilities will be met by providing
essential animal model test-and-evaluation capacity to support
licensure of vaccine countermeasures, providing a livestock-capable
laboratory of unique biosafety level (BSL3/Ag and BSL4) for
developing countermeasures for foreign animal diseases, and
providing advanced test-and-evaluation capability for threat
detection, vulnerability, and countermeasure assessment for animal
and zoonotic diseases.
So far, you would have to agree that animal agriculture should
be “happy as a pig in slop.” But, as I think we’re all acutely
aware, pigs in slop aren’t all that they appear. In my mind, and in
the minds of a number of other animal agriculture stakeholders,
there may be some reasons for concern with this process.
Undoubtedly, DHS has brought access to funding that USDA had been
unable to achieve to address the needs of FADDL and the PIADC.
However, DHS has a much broader mission than does USDA (ie, prevent
terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America’s
vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage from potential
attacks and natural disasters) than does USDA. I am concerned that
the emphasis on developing tools to aid animal agriculture may get
lost in a multi-agency facility with partners like DHS, Health and
Human Services (HHS), and the Department of Defense (DOD).
To date, DHS has not sought nor accepted formal comment or input
on the development of the NBAF from animal agriculture stakeholders
directly. All decisions have been made by an inter-agency committee
formed by DHS, which includes officials representing USDA, DHS,
HHS, and DOD. A further area of concern is that DHS does not have a
permanent official representing veterinary medicine. The current
Veterinary Medical Officer is a temporary position under the Office
of the Chief Medical Officer within the Science and Technology
Directorate. Thus, animal health issues, in addition to competing
with all the other science and technology concerns at DHS, are
ultimately filtered through the biases of human medicine. We have
145 years of history working with USDA to improve and protect
livestock and the animal agriculture industry. The DHS, while
certainly well-meaning and well-funded, has little understanding of
agriculture.
For these reasons, I think it is important that those of us
interested in animal agriculture should watch this process
carefully. At the end of the day, we want to come out of the
process with a facility that first and foremost meets the needs of
animal agriculture while ensuring public health and protecting our
way of life. This new facility should build on the impressive
achievements accomplished by the hardworking APHIS and ARS
employees and researchers at FADDL by providing resources that
promote cutting-edge research to develop and validate new
diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines for livestock and enhance
their delivery to market. It is also critical that the training
aspects of FADDL’s mission be expanded and enhanced. Well-trained
animal health officials and practitioners are our first line of
defense. Their training should not be at the expense of ongoing
research efforts. We should all actively embrace and support the
effort to enhance the activities conducted by FADDL, but we as
stakeholders should also be involved in the process from the start
to ensure the interests of animal agriculture remain the focus and
don’t get lost in the bureaucracy.
-- Harry Snelson
|
|
