AATA
The Animal Transportation Association, Inc.
28th. Annual Conference/Congress
Mexico City 2002.
The Mexico City Conference Summary was published in lieu of the Second Quarter AATA Newsletter.
INTRODUCTION:
Held in the Hotel Marquis Reforma, in Mexico City on April 14-17, 2002, eighty delegates drawn from ten countries were in attendance. A wide array of topics was addressed and is reported in this extract from the procedings, which were conducted throughout in English and Spanish by means of simultaneous translations. Social events were held on the evenings of Sunday and Tuesday, April 14th and 16th.
OPENING
SESSION;
Monday, April 15th.
09:00 hours: Following introductory remarks from the outgoing President, Dr. Walter Woolf, the incoming President, Ms. Emma Stamper, and the association’s Mexico City director, Dr. Alberto Malda the delegates were welcomed to Mexico City and Mexico by the representative of the Secretaria de Turismo, Sra. Ana Compean Reyes Spindola, in an address that highlighted the various tourist zones in Mexico. $30 Million dollars have recently been invested in tourism in Mexico and a colorful and informative video was shown that described the natural and cultural treasures of the country from the Frontera Norte around Monterrey, to the Mundo Maya in the Yucatan.
Sra.
Compean can be reached by E-Mail at acompean@sectur.gob.mx
The congress was then officially opened by Dr. Jose Luis Gallardo Nieto, Coordinator General de Ganaderia, whose address was designed to set the tone for the entire conference. Dr. Gallardo, in highlighting the increased volume of trade involving live animal transportation, wanted the delegates to note that Mexico was moving forward with all other leading countries in legislation that would bring dignity and comfort to live animals in transit. He was pleased that the AATA had decided to hold their 28th. Annual Congress in Mexico City and he brought greetings from the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture who could not be present today as he was attending another important meeting in Chile. The Secretary, however, was looking forward to learning of outcomes from this congress.
Dr. Gallardo then officially declared the congress in session.
Dr.
Gallardo can be reached by E-Mail on gallardo@sagarpa.gob.mx
SESSION
NO.1:
“GLOBAL TRADE AND
INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS”.
The first formal session was entitled: “Global Trade and International Programs” and was moderated by Alex Thiermann of Pacific Feeder Services, Chile. Speakers included Lic. Hector Hernandez Rodriguez, Secretaria de Economia; Todd Drennan, the Agricultural Attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City; Raffaella Silvetti representing the European Union; and Greta Nielsen from the Australian Embassy in Mexico City representing the Cairns Group.
Dr. Hernandez described how Mexico was maintaining international openness in the live animals sector, especially within NAFTA. Free trade programs and progressive movements towards free trade agreements were underway with a variety of other countries as well including certain countries in Central and South America. In total, Mexico already had economic/free trade agreements with eleven countries with the objects of fostering trade in live animals, providing new horizons for Mexican products, inwards investment opportunities and the development of quality products for Mexican consumers.
Regulations were in place for the management of live animal imports and exports that reflected WTO standards. In Mexico, there were tax equalization objectives, rules of origin, sanitary and phitosanitary rules, conflict resolution mechanisms, and Agricultural Trade Committees set up to manage trade agreements.
There was a schedule of detaxation for live animals by species, ranging from beef cattle, through swine to poultry, and a timetable up to ten years hence would bring customs tax towards zero although several countries were already zero rated. Dr. Hernandez demonstrated a Calendar of Tax Reductions that detailed inwards and outwards taxes by specific trade agreement with individual countries.
It was very important to eliminate pests and disease and Dr. Hernandez was of the opinion that trade restrictions were not the answer. Any restriction on both the domestic and international movement of live animals had to have a scientific basis. Sanitary measures set up purely to control trade were not acceptable. In Mexico, both the Departments of Agriculture and Health were involved with certification procedures and, of course, all animals needed to be certified as free of disease and parasite.
When controversies occurred, however, Mexico already had an Animal Trade Committee that provided a neutral panel to resolve contentious issues modeled after a WTO committee similarly constituted.
The balance of live animal trade currently favors Mexico with exports of beef cattle mainly to the U.S. Market predominating. Other exports include dogs and swine but there is a challenge to develop movements in poultry and horses as well.
Todd Drennan of the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City followed Dr. Hernandez by declaring that NAFTA trade between the U.S. and Mexico was a mixture of good news and bad news. Fortunately, the good news was predominating and he was here to tell the delegates today that NAFTA was working. There is a healthy two-way trade for all three NAFTA countries (Canada, U.S., Mexico) and most tariffs concerning the exchange of live animals were either gone or being phased out. In 2003, all duties and quotas will be gone and this was especially good for the movement of live hogs. But in 2008, perhaps more importantly, tariffs for foodstuffs will be eliminated.
NAFTA had increased competitiveness and was very important for all three countries. The free trade of live cattle among all three countries would continue to grow. There was a consumer-driven demand for all agricultural products based on more choice, more variety and better “green” conditions of production. Consumers were nutrition-conscious and were looking also for more safety in food production and delivery.
The not-so-good news was that all this was happening on a global basis and that future competition would be global rather than merely regional. Better and faster transportation systems driven by better logistics, better economics, and more flexibility will mean that existing inspection systems and policy decisions will have to be more efficient to keep up. Global harmonization of regulations is desirable. And then there’s the question of food security. The transportation of all food products must be subject to more examination if terrorist inroads through this channel are to be prevented. New technology will have to be introduced to match the speed of today’s and tomorrow’s transportation efficiencies. Fortunately, Memos of Understanding between the U.S. and Mexico were already addressing this important aspect.
Ms. Raffaella Silvetti, in her opening remarks as a representative of the EU, was eager to tell the congress that July 1st. 2000 had been an important event when Mexico and the EU had signed a good commercial and political treaty that incorporated the transportation of live animals. For the EU, this agreement with Mexico was a first with a country not within the EU itself, located in Eastern Europe or a former European colony. There was no similar agreement with the U.S. or Canada and the EU saw this treaty with Mexico as a pioneering and unique event that represented the EU’s Latin American strategy.
What’s more, the treaty is reciprocal and symmetrical and is designed to stimulate and preserve commercial activities on both sides. The EU is the No.2 trading partner of Mexico after the U.S. Recent data, whilst showing a small trade decline in Mexico’s trade with the rest of the world, nevertheless still continue to show growing trade with the EU although its true that the movement of live animals is not a significant factor at this time.
In fact, other than the import of thoroughbred horses, there is little movement between the EU and Mexico right now because of Mexico’s restrictions brought about by recent mad cow and foot-and-mouth outbreaks. This was understandable since sanitary measures were necessary for the life and welfare of people as well as livestock. Bilateral negotiations are under way to examine these current restrictions.
Animal transportation is a very important topic in the EU and people are very sensitive about animal welfare. EU rules are in the process of being formulated and a current 130-page report is the basis for the study of this topic. For example, the report recommends that transportation time should be limited to 8 hours, vehicles should have special characteristics, and there should be adequate provision for feeding and resting of animals and drivers.
The report’s conclusions are thorough if sometimes controversial. With the welfare and health of animals seriously impacted whenever they are transported, due consideration must be given to the preparation, planning, loading and unloading of all livestock in transit. Maximum stress exists during loading and unloading so resting and feeding in transit is best undertaken with the animals still in the vehicle. Drivers need to be well-trained and well-paid and there needs to be proper instructions available to the driver regarding the handling of emergencies. In Ms. Silvetti’s view, young animals should never be transported.
Stricter regulations are likely to flow from this current study. Such considerations as temperature and humidity en route, and a significant pre-trip animal inspection report are likely outcomes.
Ms. Greta Nielsen, who followed Ms. Silvetti, stated that she was not able to comment extensively about transportation standards, as her brief was to explain the Cairns Group and its importance to WTO agricultural deliberations. Ms. Nielsen thanked the AATA for including the Cairns Group as a topic in the program since it was not well known in Mexico.
The Cairns Group is not a trading group but a collection of agriculture-dependent countries brought together by common considerations of market access, subsidies, and domestic support for agricultural issues. From a historical standpoint, countries that relied heavily on an agriculture-based economy had had difficulties in developing trade with the rest of the world. The formation of the Cairns Group lead by Australia in 1986, has sought to improve the status of its members through the formation of collective policies and actions. A combination of members from Australasia, South America, and South Africa has greatly strengthened the effectiveness of the Cairns Group.
Turning to animal welfare, Ms. Nielsen pointed out that as the WTO was essentially a commercial organization, animal welfare more properly came under the review of the OIE, which was the preferred forum for discussing such matters. Considerations of animal quarantine, for example, must not be used to control and distort trade but must be scientifically applied purely for the safety of the animals themselves and, of course, for humans, too.
But there were other trade distortion factors as well that the Cairns Group was working to remove. Trade distorting barriers up to 800% still existed against agricultural products in some countries. Fortunately, a recent agreement entitled the Doha Mandate had addressed these existing anomalies and had enacted resolutions that would increase market access for agricultural products, remove barriers, and do all this by 2005. Ms. Silvetti drew the congress’s attention to a number of Websites that would provide background to the various points raised in her address.
Mr. Alex Thiermann, thanked the panelists for their remarks and invited questions from the floor. As a delegate from Chile, he wanted to remind the audience that another important commercial bloc was the Mercosur group, which was made up of 400 Million people and should not be discounted even as Argentina was going through its present financial and political crisis.
Questions on the EU study were forthcoming from the floor and doubt was expressed about the truly scientific basis for the 130- page report mentioned by Ms. Silvetti who replied that the study was the report of a scientific committee and not yet law. It was good that perceived flaws should be brought up for discussion and review.
Mr. Thiermann wanted to know from Mr. Drennan what had happened to the so-called “Fast Track” trading authority for the President in the USA that was essential to the development of USA/Chile trade relations? “Fast Track” was now “Trade Promotion Authority” noted Mr. Drennan and although recently passed in the House, was likely to have difficulty in the Senate.
Alex
Thiermann can be reached by E-Mail on alext@pfs.cl
Todd Drennan can be reached by
E-Mail on drennant@fas.usda.gov
Rafaella
Silvetti can be reached by E-Mail on raffaella.silvetti@cec.eu.int
Greta
Nielsen can be reached by E-Mail on greta.nielsen@dfat.gov.au
This session concluded at 11:00 hours.
“MEXICO’S AGRICULTURAL
QUARANTINE CONTROL”.
After a coffee break, delegates reassembled for a short session lead by Dr. Marcella Fuentes Orozco, Direccion General de Inspeccion Fitozoosanitaria, who administers the operation of Mexico’s Agricultural Quarantine Control for the Importation of Livestock.
Dr. Fuentes’ message was that the Mexican government had a duty to control the internal and external movement of livestock. This was the only way to protect the country’s livestock heritage; the only way to protect the health of all domestic livestock. But any control had to be explained and had to be based on technical and scientific principals, as there was no such thing as zero risk – there always had to be a judicious balance between international commerce and purely domestic interests. The Mexican Quarantine System was based on the need to implement, inspect, and verify in order to minimize the import of pests and disease and to guarantee public health.
Towards this end, over 100 checkpoints for international trade had been established at seaports, airports and land crossings with over 500 specialists on staff with particular knowledge of livestock, agricultural products, and fish. In addition, there were 43 domestic checkpoints for interstate movements of livestock and many diseases of hogs and poultry had already been eliminated or eradicated.
Mexico evaluated sanitary conditions not only by country but also state if there were significant reasons for doing so. This was particularly significant with live animal trade between Mexico and the U.S. where designated state origins and destinations were additional controlling factors. When a region or country had similar sanitary conditions to Mexico, trade would be permitted, noted Dr. Fuentes.
Similar sanitary conditions extended to the system of documentation, approval of transportation facilities and port-of-entry examination procedures, and quarantine control would vary by origin and species.
In Mexico, live cattle movements with the U.S. predominate. For example: when imports are pre-inspected in the U.S., Mexican quarantine regulations are waived. Horses imported through Mexico City airport whether for breeding or sport, will be subject to quarantine dependent upon their origin. Exports, of course, are governed by the rules that will exist in the receiving countries.
A question from the floor asked Dr. Fuentes specifically about TB controls at the border. Dr. Fuentes replied that this was an excellent example of how state or regional management applied. Certain states in Mexico were TB-free and certain states in the U.S. permitted TB-free animals from these states into the U.S. It was the rules of the receiving state or country that applied.
Dr.
Fuentes can be reached by E-Mail on sopaf.dg@senasica.sagarpa.gob.mx
This session ended at 11:30 hours.
“DISEASE AS A GLOBAL TRADE
BARRIER”.
At 12:10 hours, the topic: “Disease as a Global Trade Barrier” was introduced by the session moderator: Dr. Ned Cardenas, head of APHIS in Mexico City. Speakers for this session included Dr. Bob Bokma, USDA/APHIS/NCIE; Dr. Linda Logan, Texas Animal Health Commission; Amy Mann of the American Horse Council; and Emma Stamper of Crowe Livestock Underwriting, Ltd.
Dr.Bob Bokma in setting up the points for discussion indicated that the principals that would govern international commerce in live animals would be harmonization, equivalence, risk assessment, and regionalization.
Harmonization meant that all rules must be based on international standards but that the standards of the importing country will always prevail. Equivalence would bring import rules in any one country into close conformity with export rules in another and Risk Assessment would be based entirely on scientific disciplines. Regionalization was what the previous speaker, Dr. Fuentes, had been discussing. This meant that regions within countries could be specifically targeted for fewer/more restrictions in accordance with prevailing circumstances.
There were three world organizations that were involved with animal transportation: (a) O.I.E. in Paris looking at animal health; (b) CODEX ALIMENTARIUS, and (c) I.P.P.C. whose brief was plant health.
The O.I.E. mission was to collect and disseminate information on world animal health. Above all, its information system had to be timely and transparent and nowadays the Web was the place for such information to be made readily available. Their “International Animal Health Guide” was an essential expert reference and guide for diagnostics and evaluations of animal health matters.
Here in the Americas, there was an O.I.E. Region with particular interest in food safety, codes, changes in disease management, and “think tank” sessions. There was a separate and parallel U.S. system of reporting that originated at state level in support of the O.I.E. Such things as surveillance and laboratory examinations, and accurate and timely self-reporting from commercial animal resources all added up to the swift promulgation of O.I.E. notices.
The “codes” referred to above, were Animal Health Codes that existed at each end of an export/import exchange. Compatibilities between regimes meant fewer restrictions but always with the caveat that animals must not bring in new/renewed diseases. There are separate codes for sheep, goats, equine, swine, and avian species. It was interesting that in the case of West Nile Fever in the U.S.A. that healthy horses and poultry did not appear to be affected. Live birds, on the other hand, need to be watched but eggs seem to be OK.
When evaluating regional and country compatibilities, even the existence of endemic disease does not preclude the exchange of live animals provided both areas have similar health control or eradication programs in place as well as verifiable reporting systems. In the past, if it wasn’t looked for, disease didn’t exist. Nowadays, scientific reporting methods are needed to support even the non-existence of disease.
In short: the International Animal Health Guide procedures and a scientific approach to a verifiable reporting system are the best ways of dealing with disease if it is not to be a barrier to global trade.
Dr. Linda Logan from Texas was asked to provide an update on vaccines and research that can address disease that are global trade barriers. She confirmed that there was a comparatively open border with over one million cattle imported into Texas from Mexico on an annual basis. Cattle originating in five Mexican states are permitted free access whilst cattle from other Mexican states still required two examinations.
Agriculture is the U.S’s biggest industry that has grown up from traditional farming into today’s highly intensive business that generated $69 Billion of exports in 2000. Of this number, $11 Billion was livestock.
With the move towards global trade, people can and do bring viruses into the country as well as do the rapid movement of live animals. In all instances, the mode of transportation (planes, ships, trucks) has to be well managed and nowadays we have to be not only aware of the accidental transmission of viruses but also the deliberate and intentional introduction of such agents.This may be as “innocent” as the illegal importation of meat, sausages, eggs, or offals for personal consumption, or as serious as an act of bioterrorism. It would be quite easy for a terrorist to find a disease agent and to deliver it to an unsuspecting public. In disease control agencies, there is a new sense of urgency and purpose post 9-11. Calls for “free trade” will not be answered. We are only thinking of “open trade” that means “risk minimization”.
There is a huge list of existing diseases that cause concern when live animals are moved around. Vaccination programs are a help in minimal outbreak situations but often only the “kill” method of eradication is appropriate.
In the U.S. the Animal Health Program is centered in Ames, Iowa and at Plum Island, off Long Island in NY. In these locations, testing and diagnostics services are carried out and there are also excellent training courses, one of which is conducted in Spanish.
Dr. Logan then went on to examine in detail, Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) and Mad Cow Disease (BSE). These highly contagious viruses are hard to recognize in sheep and, indeed, many countries have endemic FMD although not the U.S. and Mexico. With seven stereotypes and over sixty sub-types, vaccines are not significant as a means of control or eradication. There also needs to be a better way of diagnosing the disease. Right now, even a faulty report of an outbreak can lead to a cascading freefall of the market. It is very important to be sure of a diagnosis to avoid panic and a new diagnostic tool is needed. Plum Island is working on this and a test program with pigs looks promising.
The sad human cases of TSE as a crossover from BSE have been very difficult to handle given the very long incubation period and the obscurity of the transmission from animal to human in the first place. It has, of course, proved fatal in all cases although the number of victims is only around 100. Some interesting research is looking into the possibility that there is a predisposition in some humans to this virus.
The EU is now testing every carcass at slaughter although there is no live animal testing. In Texas, however, any live animal showing signs of BSE is being thoroughly examined and tested. Could BSE happen in the U.S? Its not too likely as stringent rules exist to control animal movements and in any case, all imports from the EU are destroyed. But having said that, scrapie in sheep did arrive into the U.S. in 1947, so large-scale surveyance will always be necessary. Prion testing by means of the “Dot Blot/Western Blot” or “Third Eyelid Exam/Biopsy” will detect abnormal prions and most recently, an importation of Belgian sheep into Vermont identified two animals with likelihood of BSE. A full kill resulted from this examination.
The next speaker was Ms. Amy Mann, of the American Horse Council who wanted to draw the delegate’s attention to NAHEMS, The National Animal Health and Emergency Management System. There was a real need for emergency management when outbreaks of disease occurred. A working group has been formed which will examine outbreaks of disease as they might affect public health, economic activity, and trade flows but this cannot just be a federal responsibility: there have to be local and regional inputs into an organization such as this. The USDA actually has only limited expertise in this area and private veterinarians must also become involved. Truly, the experts are in both the public and private sectors.
When there is an outbreak of disease there is an immediate need to know what it is and how it happened. We need to learn from every incident in order to prevent future similar occurrences. The circle of action runs:
Prevention = Preparedness = Response = Recovery.
Industry guidelines need to encompass such areas of activity as:
Purpose; System Components; Emergency Management Plans; Written Agreements; Authorities and Policies; Surveillance; Communications; Training and Education; Funding; and Crossover Species Coordination.
There had to be a live interaction among federal, state and local expertise and above all, communication with officials, industry leaders, and even the media. Training and education were also important with ongoing test exercises, training courses and key staff programs with careful integration at the different levels to avoid duplication. Ms. Mann was pleased to have this opportunity to direct the delegates’ attention to the NAHEMS as it existed in the U.S. and to advocate similar arrangements in all countries.
Rounding out the session on Disease as a Global Trade Barrier was Ms. Emma Stamper of Crowe Livestock Underwriting Ltd., who wanted the assembly to take a look at risk management through insurance. In Ms Stamper’s view, “risk management” was a kind of jargon. Its really just one of a business’s tools and, of course, we spend our lives as well as our businesses in “managing risk” which is simply the identification, measurement and control of assets.
To understand risks one must anticipate outcomes and the likelihood of consequences, good or bad. It’s always a good idea to be pro-active and to have a backup plan to cover any situation. We can always be “risk averse” which means we can only expect to see a lower return for a lower tolerance to risk. The management of risk, on the other hand is a necessary business tool that through identification and analysis, can lead to “risk control”.
Insurance is the principal method of achieving risk control. When some risks are entirely out of your control, such as the sudden outbreak of disease, transit stress, or the rerouting of a transportation vehicle, then insurance can help alleviate the risk. In a typical insurance policy there are an average of 100 main and 200 extension risk coverages, all of which will provide the insurer with whatever comfort level and risk control he may desire.
But Risk Control can be managed as well and certain measures such as animal tagging, and improved animal husbandry certainly will go a long way to improving the odds against unfortunate occurrences. It was always important to deal with reputable parties. In many ways the AATA and its worldwide membership of dedicated and professional practitioners was always a good place to start when looking for contractors to do your bidding. The AATA’s recent launching of the Grooms Program was a case in point where reputable grooms could be obtained to accompany the transportation of valuable horses thus exercising a proactive element into sensible and prudent risk management.
A series of questions and answers followed.
A questioner from the floor wanted to know from Dr. Logan if ruminant animal feed was still being fed to pigs in the USA? In the UK, it was too difficult to differentiate between feed for pigs and other animals so bonemeal foodstuffs had been banned altogether. Dr. Logan confirmed that ruminant animal feed was still available for pigs in the USA.
Dr. Logan was then asked if an immediate stoppage of all livestock transportation following a suspected outbreak of foot-and-mouth was possible in the USA? In the UK, total stoppage was only instituted after 72 hours. Dr. Logan described a recent experiment in Texas where an immediate prohibition on the transportation of animals lead to significant economic outcomes and disruption of prices at the marketplace. Total and immediate transportation stoppage was therefore very difficult from an economic standpoint.
A comment from the floor referred
to the situation in Brazil where sheep imports were closed to USA and Canadian
genetics due to an outbreak of Scrapie in an imported animal.The border closure
also extended to goats until the disease situationcould be evaluated .Brazil is
now in the process of reopening the border to goats but it is expected that
they will, at some timein the future , require animals to be microchip ID’d to
facilitate tracking of animals and disease control momitoring.
Dr. Ned Cardenas can be reached
by E-Mail on ned.l.Cardenas@aphis.usda.gov
Dr. Bob Bokma can be reached by
E-Mail on bob.h.bokma@aphis.usda.gov
Dr. Linda Logan can be reached
by E-Mail on llogan@tahc.state.tx.us
Amy Mann can be reached by
E-Mail on amywm@earthlink.com
Emma Stamper can be reached by E-Mail on emma@crowelivestock.co.uk
The session ended at 2:15 PM for lunch.
SESSION
NO. 3:
“GLOBAL PORT PRACTICES; TODAYS ISSUES AND SOLUTIONS.”
Congress resumed at 3:45 PM.
Robert
van Voorthuysen, Representative of KLM Cargo in Atlanta GA introduced the
distinguished panel of speakers. Ms. Carolyn Young, Sea Air International
Forwarders; Gordon Doonan, Canadian Food Inspection Agency; Tim Harris, Harris
Associates Ltd; Kevin Maher, GlobalVetLink; Joe Santarelli Sr. Mersant
International; and Stephan Poirier, Calgary Airport Authority; would all bring
their expertise and observations to this discussion, noted Mr. Voorthuysen.
Ms. Carolyn Young was welcomed as the AATA’s new chair of the Global Port
Practices Group. Her interests, she noted, were the development of a uniform
health certification process, the acceptance of the electronic transmission of
documentation to expedite animal movements, and a standardization of
containment and disinfecting arrangements.
Loading
densities aboard aircraft and planned
locating that will avoid shifting livestock at waypoints were also
important. Nowadays, security issues dictated that business should only be done
with known parties. She was also looking forward to the introduction of a
uniform and universal format for animal identification and the keeping of
records and statistics.
Above
all, noted Ms. Young, Emergency Contingency Plans (ECP) must be in place before
transportation commenced so that all parties along the entire length of the
journey would know what actions to take in cases of an emergency.
Gordon Doonan presented greetings from the Canadian O.I.E. (Office
International des Epizooties) and thanked the organizers for inviting him back to
examine what had transpired since the topic had been discussed last year at the
AATA’s conference in Toronto. O.I.E., noted Mr. Doonan, is now supported by 158
countries with a mandate to develop standards, options, and proposals for the
safe and humane transportation of animals.
O.I.E.
had a mandate to promote standard regulations and reporting procedures. Animal
health in itself could be broken down into two elements – disease prevention,
and animal well-being. Before an animal could be transported by air, land, or
water, it should be disease free and in good condition, either through a
vaccines regimen or because of appropriate rearing conditions on the farm.
Standards
were set at O.I.E. by all countries working within the system with one vote per
country regardless of size or volume of traffic. Recommendations and standards
were strictly science-based and were produced at O.I.E’s annual meeting in
Paris every May. The O.I.E’s standards were accepted by the WTO on the basis
that O.I.E. gets its own guidance from experts and from special commissions set
up to examine individual situations. It was Mr. Doonan’s view that the AATA
should be recognized as an “expert” or “adviser” to some of the commissions in
order to have its voice heard. He had a proposal for the AATA: -
a)
AATA
recognizes transportation as a factor in the transmission of disease;
b)
AATA
wants to be recognized as an expert in its area.
Mr. Tim Harris, the author of the AATA’s “Global Files” which
appears
weekly on the Internet, chose as his subject, SITPRO
– the Simplification of Trade Procedures, to standardize documentation,
worldwide. As the chairman of Sitpro’s UK group, Mr. Harris looks forward to
the day when speedy and accurate paper-free trading will be the norm. EDI had
turned out to be only of benefit to big business whereas Sitpro will benefit
everyone.
Sitpro’s
new form “TOPFORM 2” in the UK coupled with the “Electra Tool Kit” will cost
only 50% of EDI and reduce paper costs by 95%. More importantly, it will
substantially ease the flow of information.
“WebElectra”
offers a complete and international documentation system. It is formatted to
international UN standards and could not be easier to use. By logging in to the
“WebElectra” site, it was only necessary to fill up the boxes, drawing down
from prompts and historic data. Business rules and procedures were “built in”,
noted Mr. Harris, and there was also a checklist of all the documents that
would be required to complete a transaction. What’s more, the format could be
completed in any language because of standardized formatting. One only needed a
Web Browser to read transmitted data but a paper copy would be available at the
press of a button.
Sitpro
is a great breakthrough for small businesses, declared Mr. Harris. It had been
developed by the British government but the formatting was to world standard.
Fees to join Sitpro were very reasonable and there were special deals for
training programs.
The
contact in London was Michele Barker. WebElectra exists now. It should be more
widely used!
Kevin Maher, who followed Mr. Harris, wanted to draw the congress’s
attention to “Global Vet Link” a Web-based Health Certification and Regulatory
System. This was a specialist Web site for veterinarians and was driven also by
the need to eventually eliminate paper-based documentation. The link was
especially aligned to state requirements and can be animal specific. It was
particularly valuable for the interstate movement of animals as the appropriate
documentation could be exchanged instantaneously with permitting and
checkpoints alerted to the movement.
The
State of Florida was the first to use this state-of-the-art document transfer
system but the program was now moving into a true “Globalvetlink” stage with
worldwide links.
Additional
enhancements to the system included links to diagnostic laboratories, recording
of unique identities for individual animals, a secure format, the existence of
an audit trail, and real time links on a 24/7 basis. All these benefits would
result in a reduction to the time taken to transact business, the elimination
of mistakes, the revelation of any false attributions, and no mail or postage
costs.
Mr.
Maher showed examples of the Florida program and pointed out that a digital
photograph of each animal could be part of the document exchange system. The
Web application architecture was completely secure and there was a particularly
stringent security hierarchy.
Just
as the previous speakers had declared, a paperless regimen of documentation
control for the movement of animals was available now. All that was missing was
the will, determination and acceptance to carry the concept through to its full
implementation.
The
next speaker was Joe Santarelli Sr., who had chosen “Tranquilizers Aboard
Aircraft” as his topic. Mr. Santarelli made no apology for his role as a “mover
and shaker” within the AATA. He had been in business for 34 years, which was
six years longer than the AATA had been in existence. But one could not hope to
make change alone. It was necessary that there was group support for all
worthwhile projects and the AATA was certainly an excellent forum for such
efforts. “We can’t fight governments and airlines alone!” declared Mr.
Santarelli.
A
case in point was the topic of tranquilizers on aircraft. Who had the right to
administer and who had the right to control? The AATA had been meeting with
industry leaders – government, insurers, shippers, and intermediaries – could
these questions be answered?
The
AATA had created a registry: The Equine Attendant Program, that was in the
process of developing a code of practice that would incorporate background
checks, training programs, and would describe the contents of an Animal
Emergency Kit that could be carried aboard aircraft under the control of the
Captain. Such a kit would also provide a documentary trail of controlled
veterinary products and this would surely be of interest to governments and
airlines that still had to be brought on board to this program.
Clearly, since 9/11, the open presence of scalpels
and hypodermics was no longer permissible. On the other hand, there was no need
to sacrifice the movement of live animals by air on the altar of “security”.
In
Mr. Santarelli’s opinion, there was now a healthy interest in the AATA’s groom
program after 9/11 on the part of airlines, airports and governments and that
was a good thing. And it needn’t stop at horses, he noted, but could easily be
extended in time to exotics and livestock – all very do-able. Managed and
secure animal transport must be part of the answer and not part of the problem!
Stephan Poirier, of Calgary Airport – “The Animal Friendly Airport” as he
noted – was pleased to associate itself as part of the answer. As a rule,
airports do not invest in animal facilities because there’s no money in it.
Airports are just not animal friendly because their structure is designed to be
people friendly and that doesn’t fit with the requirements for animals.
Calgary
Airport, however, is different. There, they looked at what made airports animal
unfriendly and decided to change things around. First of all, they eliminated
the curfew so that planes could arrive and depart at all times. Then they
extended the length of the runway to accommodate all types of aircraft. And by
keeping costs competitive, Calgary went after the live animal business with a
carefully contrived plan of commitment to this traffic.
A
separate animal terminal has been built that will keep animal and people
traffic apart and at the same time offer safety for animals and airport
employees alike. By offering the safe and efficient transfer of animals between
terminal and aircraft,speed and efficiency have been enhanced by the employment
of skilled and trained personnel.
Users of the Calgary unit, noted Mr. Poirier, have
rated the facility as quality-oriented, cost-effective, and high in service
values.
All
of the animal handling plan originated in an overall study of cargo potential
for the region that identified animals as a significant sector. It was felt,
however, that special facilities would have to be built and a special
infrastructure designed from the ground up that would cater for this.
Accordingly, “brainstorming” sessions were introduced to look at what
facilities would be needed, what sales efforts would be needed to support such
facilities, and what issues could be realistically controlled.
The
result has been the new (January 2001) best practices animal terminal as part
of the new cargo terminal built at Calgary Airport. At 12,000 sq. ft. the
animal structure was the largest in Canada dedicated for this purpose with its
corralling transport platform and three-level pens. A weigh scale had also been
included as part of the structure to avoid extra handling of animals as they
came in and out. To date, in additional to cattle and sheep, ostriches,
buffaloes and alpacas have been handled. Buffaloes are a particular difficult
species to handle!
Moderator,
Robert van Voorthuysen, next took over the podium to talk
about current security procedures at airports. Since 9-11, airport security had
certainly been tightened even for live animals, but after February 17th.
2002 and the introduction of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
in the USA, even more stringent security measures have been implemented.
For
example, a tendered shipment from an unknown shipper with no recorded business
identity is now dealt with only after close background investigation. Only
known shippers can receive 24-hour attention to their business and the
tendering of false documentation will be subject to civil and criminal
penalties. Particularly worrisome are shipments received from connecting
carriers and other third party service providers who are now required to
provide a “Security Statement” on their documentation. If there is no security
statement, there is no shipment. In fact, airlines are increasingly only now
willing to do business with known third parties, as they have neither the time
nor the interest in the necessary research and background checks that dealing
with unknown parties now demands.
Mr.
Van Voorthuysen then invited questions and comments from the floor.
The
first speaker wanted to know from Mr. Poirier how Calgary Airport was planning
to recover the cost of its new animal section?
In reply, Mr. Poirier stated that as the airport was a non-profit
business in the private sector, it was not necessary to look for a return on
investment as such. The animal section had cost over $One Million Canadian, but
revenue was seen as contributing to economic growth and the investment in the
animal section had already demonstrated substantial growth. Anyway, if it
ceased to do so, it could always be converted into something else.
Another
speaker noted that Mr. Van Voorthuysen’s description of only doing business
with “known” third party service providers was an opportunity for the AATA and
its members to be recognized as “known” third parties. Mr. Van Voorthuysen was
in complete agreement with the statement.
Harking
back to an earlier speaker, Mr. Kevin Maher, this speaker from the floor stated
that he had had problems in Florida with documentation procedures and the
system described by Mr. Maher didn’t appear to be working at all Florida
airports. The questioner wanted to know if any airports or shippers had
complained about the effectiveness of the GlobalVetLink? Mr. Maher replied in
the negative.
Other
floor speakers wanted to know more about Calgary. What sort of links were there
between the animal shed and the aircraft? What about day-old chicks in winter
conditions? Mr. Poirier was pleased to
inform the audience that the distance between the animal shed and the aircraft
was only 500 yards to the provision of portable pens and chutes was easy to
accomplish. Calgary’s special features were designed for large animals rather
than chicks, which still tended to be transported by passenger aircraft. While
the weather could be a problem in winter, the distance between plane and shed
was so short. The absence of an airport curfew meant that animals would be
handled without delay but should one occur, exercise pens could be quickly
assembled.
A
speaker wanted to know from Emma Stamper and Robert van Voorthuysen what
airlines were doing about their limits of liability for insurance purposes? Mr.
Van Voorthuysen stated that KLM were maintaining their $20 per kilo liability
limit but that he assumed that most shippers also took out their own additional
insurance. But supposing an insurance matter was triggered by so-called
“technical delays”? It made no difference; IATA limited an airline’s insurance
cover to $20 per kilo. Remember, you can always purchase more cover, noted Mr.
Van Voorthuysen.
What
about a shipper’s common law right to sue for negligence? That could always be
done but the recent Toronto Protocol had largely supported the underlying
Warsaw Convention and it might even be more difficult to sue under these
circumstances than it had previously been.
How
about the AATA providing a legal advocacy service? We are all involved. It
could be our mission to raise the standards of shipments with membership in
AATA becoming a hallmark for quality animal handling. Could not demonstrated
quality of animal handling be a legal position to take in face of airline
liability limit?
Mr.
Van Voorthuysen noted that charter airlines often provided no insurance cover
whatsoever. KLM, on the other hand, was well known for providing “Goodwill
Settlements” above and beyond their legal liability. It always paid to do
business with known entities.
Ms.
Stamper reminded the gathering that the AATA had a very active Airline
Committee” which was the appropriate forum to engage in further important
discussions of this type.
Robert van Voorthuysen can be reached
by E-Mail at Robert-van.voorthuyzen@klmcargo.com
` Carolyn
Young can be reached on E-Mail on Carolyn@seaair.ca
Gordon
Doonan can be reached by E-Mail on g.doonan@inspection.gc.ca
Tim
Harris can be reached by E-Mail on timhharris@compuserve.com
Kevin
Maher can be reached by E-Mail on kmaher@globalvetlink.com
Joe
Santarelli, Sr. can be reached by E-Mail on Joesr@mersant.com
Stephan
Poirier can be reached by E-Mail on stephanp@yyc.com
The session and the day’s procedings were concluded
at 5:40 PM.
Tuesday, April 16th. 2002.
SESSION
NO. 4
“MEXICAN PROCEDURES FOR IMPORTING AND
EXPORTING ANIMALS.”
Day Two of the AATA Congress in Mexico City was convened at 09:15 AM by Dr. Alberto Malda Worldwide Animal Transportation, Mexico City who introduced the session’s panel: Dr. Inez Vazquez del Mercado, Worldwide Animal Transportation, Mexico City; Dr. Melissa Vasquez Sansoaes, Worldwide Animal Transportation; Dr. Juan Ramon Gonzalez Saens Pardo, Director Sanidad Animal, Confederacion Nacional Ganadera; and Dr. Maria Teresa Moreno Manzanilla, Exoticos y Salvajes, S.A.
Dr. Ines Vazquez described how she had designed and implemented Worldwide Animal Transportation’s website and E-Mail system in 1992 to reflect and constantly update the general requirements for animal importing into and exporting from Mexico. In today’s presentation, she would examine the procedures now in place that apply to Mexico with regard to sanitation, logistics, and regulations.
Imports into Mexico (particularly air imports to Mexico City) require the services of customs as well as the tax collecting procedures of the government’s Commerce Department. Animals are cleared on arrival against a receipt from the airline certifying import status. There is a special Horse Tariff Tax.
Also required is the payment of a Sanitation Fee to the Agricultural Department where the animal is checked off against the “prohibition/extinction/protection” list. At this time, the Foot-and-Mouth Certification (and any other sanitary certifications that may be called for), the Certificate of Origin and the Certificate of Animal Use are required. All documentation requires that each animal be adequately identified. A veterinarian’s examination against all sorts of diseases is required at the airport and there may be a quarantine hold of 30 days.
Disinfection will also be called for at the airport which is likely to cover limbs but sometimes the whole body of the animal. No swine or sheep are permitted to be imported into Mexico at this time.
Exports are similar to imports with more documentation and the participation of the several government departments. A Laboratory Test Certificate is required by the Department of Agriculture supported by a paid receipt of recent date. Samples will be sent to a federal laboratory for analysis.
Exports of live animals require a close watch on dates as there is a very tight “window” of opportunity available after all the formalities have been completed. One of the special documents is a “visa” guaranteeing entry into the destination country. As a rule, Mexican government offices close promptly at 5:00 PM and it is always best to submit documents before 1:00 PM to be on the safe side.
Animal holding facilities at Mexico City Airport are virtually non-existent and an overnight wait should be avoided if at all possible to reduce stress to the animal. On the Customs side, the “red/green” clearance exists. If the red light shows then a full and formal documentary procedure will be required. Fortunately, Worldwide Animal Transportation has very good relations with government and airport officials in Mexico City. With the full and proper documentation for an animal in place and in advance, it is possible for an animal to go straight from truck to plane for export (or vice versa for import).
Dr. Gonzalez followed Dr. Vazquez. His topic was to talk about exporting cattle from Mexico to the USA and Canada. Historically, there had been a big drop in the number of live cattle exported northwards from Mexico during 1996 and because of the revalued peso at that time coinciding with the introduction of new sanitary laws.
Nowadays, this traffic was again flowing strongly because of an interim rule that permitted cattle exports from accredited states, particularly Sonora State which had received advanced health control status. Other states had tighter rules dependent upon local health conditions so it was very necessary that a Certificate of Origin accompany all movements. There were also variations in the rules dependent upon whether the cattle were bound for breeding or slaughter.
A special status had been established for cattle shows and fairs. Mexico was engaged in bringing all state health rules up to international status but in the meantime, state-to-state cattle movements were limited to peer condition states. States with a higher health status don’t want their status compromised by animals from a state with lower health characteristics. All animals must have a brand identity. As a broad description, Mexican states closer to the northern border were more favorably placed on the health scale which was graded 1 to 6 with status 1 being OK for export to the USA and status 5 or 6 signifying intra-state movement only.
In conclusion, Dr. Gonzalez wanted to assure visitors that the export of Mexican cattle to the USA and Canada was very important; Serious TB and brucellosis eradication programs were being actively pursued and Mexico aspired to fully conform to international standards.
When looking at the movement of wildlife and exotic animals in Mexico, Dr. Maria Teresa Moreno was an acknowledged expert in this field. Her presence at the AATA Congress was to review this important field where there was much money involved and the existence also of a black market.
In the case of wildlife and exotic species, the land borders were more favorable for smuggling than were airports where there was strict adherence to the list of permitted birds, mammals and reptiles with the appropriate documentation and notice coupled to some special testing and perhaps some quarantine.
Pre-shipment clearance was the best procedure with a Certificate of Origin from a country that was approved by the Mexican government. Documentation in any language has to be accompanied by a proper Spanish translation. It always made good sense to seek daytime arrivals as overnight delays brought only stress to traveling animals. Fridays should always be avoided as any delay might result in a weekend holdover with disastrous results.
Following Dr. Moreno’s remarks, Dr. Malda opened up the discussion by asking for questions and comments from the floor.
An enquiry concerning the Mexican states where TB was endemic was answered by Dr. Gonzalez who also indicated that current testing prior to permission to ship took from 30 to 45 days, dependent upon the eventual destination. An express testing program of 14-15 days in advance of shipment did, however, exist for certain traffic.
A speaker wanted to know from Dr.Moreno or Dr. Vazquez what happened to horses that arrived in Mexico City after 5:00 PM on a Friday? A weekend holdover was likely unless an Extraordinary Clearance Service could be organized. Worldwide Animal Transportation Services were good at that sort of thing and should be engaged to request such special services if required. For example: gorillas, elephants, rare species, and pandas automatically receive special treatment by the authorities.
How long was a typical quarantine at Mexico City Airport? Surely horses were not subject to this? Quarantine could last up to 30 days dependent upon the Country or Origin and the tests required.
What sort of services was available for detained dogs? Water only. No food. Animals were retained in their transit crates, as there were no pens available at the airport. Dogs would not be allowed out of their transit kennels for exercise.
In these days of electronic communication, can animals be cleared by fax/E-Mail documentation? This was possible but only before 3:00 PM and only in advance of the animal’s arrival, which would have to be by no later than 5:00 PM.
For communications to this panel: -
Dr. Malda can be reached by
E-Mail on info@albertomalda.com
Dr. Vazquez can be reached by
E-Mail on inesmalda@redinternet.com.mx
Dr. Vasquez can be reached by
E-Mail on melimalda@redinternet.com.mx
Dr. Moreno can be reached by
E-Mail on exoticos@prodigy.net.mx
The morning session concluded at 10:20 AM.
“DEVELOPMENTS IN THE ANIMAL TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRY.”
This session was called to order at 10:45 AM by the
panel moderator, Mr. Tim Harris, of
Harris Associates, UK. The speakers would be introduced by Mr. Harris in turn
and would consist of Mr. Eddie Harper of the Road Haulage Association of the
UK; Dr. Malcolm Mitchell of the Roslin Institute, Scotland, and Dr. Bill
Lindsay of Feld Entertainment, Florida USA.
Mr. Eddie Harper, who spoke first, was pleased to be reporting on recent
developments in the trucking industry between Ireland and Spain. A variable two
or three deck vehicle designed by the Roslin Institute had been utilized for
cattle. In addition to providing excellent transport conditions for its cargo,
the truck also recorded temperature, humidity, ventilation air flow, and carbon
dioxide production. The movement between Ireland and Spain had consisted of 14
hours travel; a rest period of 24 hours on the boat crossing; and a further 14
hours in transit to destination.
At
the moment, there were government rules for travel and rest times for animals
and drivers that did not coincide so this was a problem that was now being
addressed.
Dr. Malcolm Mitchell took up the topic of government regulation with the
remark that any and all legislation had to be science-based. There were
significant advances in research into animal transportation at Roslin and
through Mr. Harper’s Road Haulage Association as well as collaborations at
universities and at the Silsoe Research Institute. The transport of poultry,
pigs, sheep, cattle, and ostriches had been undertaken with remote monitoring
of each species and its transportation environment.
Data logging by means of radiotelemetry – a process not yet commercially available – continuously recorded the heart rate and body temperature (internal and surface) of each animal. To this could be added data from such systems as GPS (Global Positioning) and weather reporting for a full record of an animal transportation event.
It was interesting to note that telemetry results had already shown that fan ventilation had been found to cause less stress in animals under transportation when compared with natural ventilation. This was particularly true when horses were transported and dehydration of the animal had been reduced because of controlled ambience thus avoiding “shipping fever”.
Dr. Bill Lindsay had a very special responsibility in the animal transportation industry as the person in charge of the rail movement of animals for the famous Barnum and Bailey Circus that wintered in Florida but traveled all over the USA during the rest of the year. There were two touring shows on the road at any one time. The moves were by custom-built rail carriages, usually once a week, with a water stop every eight hours.
Animals traveled with their well-trained handlers and were constantly supervised. Handlers were familiar with each animal in their care and watched for any signs of stress.
Strategies were in place to avoid extremes in temperature with nighttime movements; seasonal planning to avoid extreme heat and cold; and constant monitoring of animals’ temperatures. Much care was exercised to ensure the cleanliness of the animals and their surroundings in transit.
Tim Harris thanked each speaker for this morning’s contribution and reminded the audience that each would be back on the platform again as the congress continued.
To communicate with this panel: -
Tim
Harris can be reached by E-Mail on timhharris@compuserve.com
Eddie
Harper can be reached by E-Mail on eddiecharper@aol.com
Dr. Malcolm Mitchell can be
reached by E-Mail on
This session concluded at 12:15 PM.
SESSION
NO.6:
Commencing at 12:30 PM, an examination of Emergency Management Protocols was chaired by Mr. Joe Santarelli Sr. of Mersant International with Tom Schooler of Animal-Port-Houston USA; Lisa Schoppa, Continental Airlines Cargo,USA; Bjorn Clausen, Corral Line, Denmark; Eddie Harper, E.H. Consultancy UK; and Tim O’Byrne, Calico Beef Consulting, Canada on the panel.
Mr. Tom Schooler’s opening address was read by Mr. Santarelli owing to Mr. Schooler’s indisposition. Mr. Schooler’s analysis of Emergency Management Protocols started with the variables: species, origin, way points, transportation mode, destination – then looked at the permits, licenses, approvals and agreements that were already in place or needed to be established when examining potential emergency situations. The health status of an animal would always be a good indicator of its ability to survive an emergency.
Guidelines and regulations are at the heart of any protocol, noted Mr. Schooler. And good publicity when a protocol was seen to be effective should not be ruled out. There was always a general interest in a story, especially about certain animal species, that had a happy outcome.
Action plans should be clearly and exhaustively formulated with all parties given a copy of the protocol. It was important that the species be clearly identified and that adequate insurance cover is in place. External markings on crates etc. must be clear and international in scope.
Taking up Mr. Schooler’s theme from the point of view of an airline, Ms. Lisa Schoppa was pleased to introduce Continental Airline’s “Petsafe” program to the congress. It had already been running for two years and had been well received by customers. Unlike many other airlines, the “Petsafe” program included written emergency procedures as part of the operation. Continental preferred Precaution to Embargo, noted Ms. Schoppa but even so, there were a number of embargo situations that the airline had introduced for the overall protection of traveling animals such as use of unsuitable aircraft, avoidance of summer heat, a prohibition on certain breed types, and humidity questions in some cargo holds. Sometimes also, a heavy passenger or mail demand might preclude the carriage of animals on certain flights at certain times.
Continental had a Veterinary Consultant on staff and she was pleased to note that Doctor Walter Woolf and Ms. Millie Woolf of AirAnimal, Tampa FL guided Continental in their “Petsafe” program.
One problem was delays at hub airports especially in hot summer weather. The “Petsafe” program now recognized this area of concern and had set up a procedure that if a departing flight with animals aboard were to be delayed more than 45 minutes, it would be directed to return to offload the animals. This had lead to a system of prioritization by which flights carrying animals were afforded facilitated departure. Long flights (especially transpacific) were also problems and aircraft pilots were especially instructed to be aware of and to take adequate care of any live animals aboard their flights.
But emergencies do happen! Escapes; Illness or Injury; Accidents; Incidents requiring to be reported to the FAA under new regulations – all these needed to be covered by Emergency Management Protocols. Continental moved over 40,000 animals in 2001 and fewer than ten were reported “ill in flight”. Dedicated Station personnel were on hand to watch out for animal’s welfare and in the unfortunate occasion of a death, Continental would arrange and pay for an autopsy or necropsy.
Following on from the establishment of general protocols and emergency procedures for airlines, Mr. Bjorn Clausen wanted to talk about similar arrangements for the ocean transportation of live animals. As a naval architect and an AATA member since 1977, Mr. Clausen was well placed to discuss ocean transportation. In a typical year, Corral Lines transported around 165,000 animals, mostly sheep and cattle.
At Corral Line, avoiding emergencies was the Number One task. There were established international rules for animal carriage by sea written into ISO Regulations and Corral’s own ISM System was his company’s “bible”.
On board his vessels there was usually a stockman or veterinarian on staff. Because ocean voyages were longer than air journeys, there were certain advantages. More space; better ventilation; fodder delivery; time to properly and carefully process documentation; and cheaper transportation costs were only some of the advantages of ocean transportation that came to mind.
But emergencies at sea did occur and Emergency Protocols were in place to handle these. On occasions of mechanical breakdown of engines, ventilation, or water-making capability, regulations in place already required a second power source or system as backups. The rules in place in Australia and New Zealand were particularly stringent on this. Then there was bad weather but nowadays this could be avoided by means of weather routing – steering a course away from or around reported bad weather areas.
Firefighting arrangements were also most stringently applied.
When planning a voyage, attention was always paid to the prevailing condition of the livestock and whether there was any pregnancy. Fodder quantity and quality were carefully calculated to cover the duration of the voyage with an adequate margin of reserve and complete and correct documentation drawn up as much in advance as possible. The ISM Regulations require an Emergency Response Teams to be briefed and trained not only aboard the ship but also in the head office ashore.
In the event of an emergency, Corral’s Emergency Protocols encompass: - customer alerts; notifying flag state, and authorities at the loading and discharging ends of the voyage; advising closest country of an emergency situation; calling the insurance carriers and the vessel’s P&I Club; and alerting the Press. ISM regularly required a full drill aboard all vessels and at head office and an annual audit at all levels.
Any outbreak of disease aboard a vessel was, of course, a serious matter. Corral preferred to avoid crises of these rather than having to deal with them but nevertheless, protocols were in place to handle such situations, also.
Airlines, ocean carriers. It was now the opportunity for the congress to learn from a truck operator and who better than Mr. Eddie Harper from whom we had heard earlier on the topic of Developments in the Animal Transportation Industry. Mr. Harper had been a participant in the writing and establishment of emergency road traffic protocols in the UK. These were designed around three scenarios: a Road Traffic Accident (RTA); Road Delays; and Bad Weather.
With regard to RTAs, there was a network of local participants available throughout the UK but a registered veterinarian was automatically called in for each incident. The police forces were also brought in to regulate traffic and roadblocks instituted as required especially if animals were escaped from the conveyance and roaming the highways.
The protocol, however, was also interested in the reactions of the driver. If he were incapacitated in any way then there had to be a way for the system to know what the truck was doing and what animals were on board. Accordingly, a “Call Sticker” has been placed on the side of each truck with a listing of contacts in the event of an emergency. Unfortunately, General Emergency Services are not yet well equipped to handle animal emergencies. The driver is usually the best person to direct an emergency, but in his absence or incapacity, the “Call Sticker” is invaluable. Nowadays, the electrical and hydraulic systems aboard a sophisticated animal transporter require expert knowledge for their use. The contacts from the “Call Sticker” are there to help.
The general public might also be unhelpful and should be kept away from an accident scene involving live animals. There must be no unauthorized release of trapped animals without adequate emergency handling procedures in place. Animals will be stressed or aggressive.
Remember, an RTA – Road Traffic Accident – can happen at any time to anyone!
Mr. Tim O’Byrne, always recognizable with his big cowboy hat, was the final speaker in this session and his job was to address Emergency Management Protocols from the point-of-view of road traffic in the State of Alberta, Canada.
Mr. O’Byrne’s business was training and he had a series of video productions that he used to train truckers for emergencies. Pictures of rain and fog, and dead cattle lying in the roadway after a collision were mute testimony that accident prevention was much better and easier to manage than accident cure.
There was a problem with lack of understanding of how accidental situations should be avoided, and after 9-11, terrorism and biosecurity issues had been added to such normal situations as delays, emergencies, and disease.
Livestock had to be protected from fear, panic, and injury and the owners of the animals and the drivers of the vehicles were equally tasked to provide safety management protocols for every transport occurrence that was species specific even down to such details as whose authority would be required to euthanize distressed beasts.
Calico Beef Consulting had prepared a Code of Practice for the transportation of animals by truck. Mr. O’Byrne is in the process of seeking the widest acceptance of its principals from government and commercial interests.
The participants of this session may be reached as follows: -
Tom Schooler can be reached by
E-Mail on tom@pettransport.com
Lisa Schoppa can be reached by
E-Mail on lschop@coair.com
Bjorn Clausen can be reached by
E-Mail on info@corralline.com
Tim O'Byrne can be reached by
E-Mail on calico@handlingcattle.com
The session concluded at 1:55 PM.
SESSION
NO.7:
“WORKING GROUPS TO DEVELOP
EMERGENCY
PROTOCOLS FOR EACH SPECIES”.
Congress
resumed at 3:00 PM with voluntary assembly into discrete working groups to
consider species-specific Emergency Protocols for future reporting to the full
congress.
Group leadership was provided by : -
Pets/Small Animals Ms. Lorna Barkey, Lyon Petmobile Services,
Toronto CA
E-Mail: petcoach@interlog.com
Wildlife & Exotics Mr. Tom Schooler, Animal-Port-Houston,
Houston TX
E-Mail: tom@pettransport.com
Livestock Mr. Luis Rocha, American Genetics International,
Dallas,TX
E-Mail: agicdlar@aol.com
Mr. Tim Harris, Harris & Associates Ltd,
Redhill UK
E-Mail: TimHHarris@compuserve.com
Horses Mr. Joseph Santarelli, Sr., Mersant International,
New York NY
E-Mail: joesr@mersant.com
The breakout meetings were concluded and the congress adjourned for the day at 5:30 PM.
Wednesday, April 17th. 2002.
SESSION
NO.8:
“TRAINING PLUS COMPETENCY
EQUALS IMPROVED
ANIMAL WELFARE”
The 28th. Annual Congress of the Animal Transportation Association (AATA) resumed at 9:00 AM with Immediate Past President, Dr. Walter Woolf, officiating. Dr. Woolf introduced the distinguished panel that would be examining training and competency issues and introduced Mr. Eddie Harper of E.H. Consultancy, UK; Mr. Tim O’Byrne, Calico Beef Consulting, Canada; Mr. Tim Harris, of Harris Associates, UK; and Ms. Lisa Schoppa of Continental Airlines,USA.
Mr.
Eddie Harper, who spoke first, wanted to direct the audience’s attention to
the video “The Road Ahead” which was playing in the lobby in English and
Spanish. This was a most valuable learning tool that had been produced by the
Humane Slaughter association. It came also with a book and had been translated
into eleven languages.
As Mr. Harper had previously explained in another session, Road Traffic Accidents were serious matters requiring serious management if the outcomes were not to become even more disastrous. Training was the key ingredient to a driver’s ability to handle such a grave situation and it was true to say that most safety agencies were largely ill equipped to handle such catastrophes. Training engendered competency; and competency engendered improved animal welfare.
Mr. Tim O’Byrne was in full agreement with Mr. Harper and the circumstances in Canada, the USA and Mexico were no different from those in the UK. Not all livestock carriers were even registered as such, noted Mr. O’Byrne. This made effective management of the sector and training of drivers even more difficult than it needed to be.
Calico Consulting had prepared a publication: “Developing a Proficiency Tool Kit for the Livestock Trucker in North America” which would go a long way to fostering training and competency.
Livestock transportation by road in the USA and Canada amounted to around 600,000 hogs, 700,000 cattle and 25,000 horses on an annual basis. This was a huge environmental challenge right there. Problems concerning the initial assembly of animals to make up a load, rest stops, feeding, watering, and transfers, were well recognized but then there were resettlement and termination considerations as well and animals had to be allowed to recover from the stress of transportation.