|
MINUTES BORDER
GOVERNORS CONFERENCE
AGRICULTURE WORK TABLE
NOVEMBER 18, 2003 MINUTES
Commissioner Combs welcomed everyone to
Austin and began the meeting.
The
animal and plant technical committees gave updates on activities
relative to their committees.
Plant
(provided by Aurelio Posadas of California):
Funding continues to be an issue
for plant pest eradication specifically for the Pink Bollworm and the
Mexican Fruit Fly. The work
table agreed to write two letters to USDA/SAGARPA requesting additional
sterile moth/fly releases. Ricardo
Rel of New Mexico will write draft of the Pink Bollworm letter and David
Kostroun will write draft of the Mexican Fruit Fly letter.
Once letters are written each state will send copies to their
congressional delegations and their agriculture industries to support
the AWT’s requests. The
draft letters will be placed on the AWT website under the “Members
Only” section. The
following will need to be used to access this section:
username:
bgcuser
password: frontera
domain: merlin
It
was also discussed that all 10 Border states needed to participate in
the Agriculture Work Table to make it successful.
It was suggested by Victor Velez of California that the
Governor’s representatives should be contacted in each state to have
them encourage the agriculture secretaries/commissioners of their states
the importance of participating. Ricardo
Rel of New Mexico will get a list of all the governor’s
representatives. David
Ibarra of Baja California will call the Mexican states and Susan Combs
of Texas will contact the U.S. states.
Action:
Draft Pink Bollworm letter
(NM)
Draft Mexican Fruit Fly letter (TX)
Obtain Governor Representative list (NM)
Animal
(provided by Bob Hillman of Texas):
Two main issues that need to be
addressed include the training of human resources and planning and the
need for a response fund. Again,
biggest obstacle in fighting against introductions of animal pests and
diseases is the funding issue and the length of time it takes to get
funding.
Diseases
of interest to both Mexico and the United States are:
•Exotics diseases,
such as FMD
•Bovine Brucellosis
•Bovine Tuberculosis
•Cattle Fever Ticks
•Avian Influenza
•Exotic Newcastle
Disease (END)
•Transmissible
Spongiform Encephalopathies
There
are many groups that currently exist dealing with specific animal issues
and the AWT should not duplicate efforts but should work with these
groups (which the border vets do).
These include:
•Bovine Brucellosis and Tuberculosis are addressed by the Bi-National
Committee
•Vaccination issues for exotic diseases are addressed by the North
American Vaccine Bank
•Fever ticks are
being addressed by the Fever Tick Task Force
•Poultry issues are
being addressed by the BGAT
•TSE issues are not
clearly being addressed as a border problem
•Response issues have
been initiated as a result of END in California but should be expanded
to
include all
exotic diseases
The AWT should take the
opportunity to address the TSE issues which are currently not being
addressed by any group and move forward on these.
David Ibarra from Baja California and Victor
Velez from California reported that the Animal Health Committee met on
October in San Diego with federal officials from USDA and SAGARPA.
This meeting served to launch a plan to mitigate and prevent END
in the border region. Additionally, it was reported that a video on
biosecurity for farm workers is currently being shot in California with
assistance from Baja California. A
follow-up discussion to review the plan will be scheduled in conjunction
with a meeting of the Binational TB Committee in Phoenix, Arizona on
January 29-30, 2004.
It
was further discussed that the AWT should work to develop a
“response” work/training plan for all animal pest/diseases.
California is putting together such a plan for END and it was
agreed that such efforts should be used as a prototype to develop other
disease work plans. California
will share this information with all states as they would like for the
states to distribute the END information.
Action:
The Border state
veterinarians/animal health contacts will meet to discuss the best way
to do this.
Emergency
Response Contingency Fund:
Both in the animal and plant
discussion it was agreed that some kind of contingency fund is needed so
states can respond quickly to pest and disease outbreaks. The biggest obstacle/delay lies within the ongoing struggle
between USDA and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) over funding.
This can take a long time resulting in adverse impacts on disease
responses. The longer it
takes to receive the necessary funding the more it could cost to
eradicate pest/disease. California
experienced this problem with its END outbreak.
California had to spend state money long before federal money
became available.
Action:
Each state should talk with
their governors and take the issue to the federal level. Susan Combs offered to speak to Cliff Johnson at OMB about
this problem as well. However,
at this time NFACT will write a letter to OMB (who would like to do
this?).
Bioterrorism
Summit (provided by Jeff Witte of New Mexico):
New Mexico offered to host a
bioterrorism meeting sometime in March in Las Cruces to include all 10
Border states, appropriate state and federal officials and Canadian
officials. Jeff relayed
that New Mexico Tech recently purchased a town to use as training ground
for bioterrorism response efforts.
A tour of this town will be conducted at the meeting.
Some topics discussed to include are communication, roles of
agencies and an overview of Texas-Coahuila FMD exercise. Each state will
provide other issues they would like to see discussed at this meeting to
Jeff. David Ibarra of Baja
California will provide a list of participants from Mexico to be invited
to Jeff.
It
was further discussed that the new Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
is now the main agency that will be in charge if such a crises occurs
not USDA. DHS does not
understand agriculture and its integral role in the United States.
The AWT needs to take a lead in educating DHS about agriculture
and its importance.
Action:
Pick a date in March (NM)
note: do not plan during NASDA’s Trinational Accord meeting which
is March 10-13, 2004, or the state veterinarians’ meeting (?)
Rough draft of topics (NM)
Rough draft of participants (NM)
Lead
States on Committees:
Animal Technical Committee:
Texas and Coahuila
Plant Technical Committee: California
and Baja California (possibly Sonora)
Bioterroism Technical Committee: New
Mexico – Baja California (possibly another Mexican counterpart)
Action:
Contact Mexican states to see
who will be the lead in Mexico (Baja California)
Website:
Need a functioning website.
TDA will purchase a name that can be easy to remember by all
states. Suggestions
included: bgag.com,
awt.com, borderag.com, etc. TDA
will look into what names are available and proceed from there.
Future
Meetings:
It was concluded that the next
AWT meeting will occur the day before the bioterrorism meeting in Las
Cruces. At this meeting it
will be necessary to have accomplishments and draft 2004 recommendations
and action plans. NM will
assist in finding a location for the meeting.
|
