Agroterrorism
Awareness:
Safeguarding
American Agriculture
The Wisconsin Experience
•
•
•
•
•
1996- anonymous call about
contaminated rendered products
Liquid fat contaminated with
chlordane
Supplied to large feed manufacturer
and to ~4,000 farms in four states
Milk and products from farms
contaminated
$4 million to dispose of products
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
•
Define the goals of agroterrorism
Understand the importance of
agriculture to our nation
Realize the impact of agroterrorism
Know which agencies are involved in
mitigation and response
Identify agents of potential use
Address public health concerns
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Agroterrorism
Issues
What is Agroterrorism?
The use, or threatened use, of biological (to
include toxins), chemical, or radiological
agents against some component of
agriculture in such a way as to adversely
impact the agriculture industry or any
component thereof, the economy, or the
consuming public.
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Terrorism
Bioterrorism
Biological agents
targeting humans,
animals, or plants
Agroterrorism
Biological, chemical,
or radiological agents
targeting agriculture
or its components
•Livestock
•Food supply
•Crops
•Industry
•Workers
Other
Conventional,
radiological,
nuclear,
chemical,
cyber
•Typically
direct
human
targeting
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
The Goals of Agroterrorism
•
•
Fear
Economic and trade
disruption
− Unlike
human attack
where high morbidity or
mortality are goals
•
Exports are our lifeblood
− 2000,
$51 billion exported
in agricultural commodities
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Characteristics of Targeting
Agriculture
•
Attack on crops or animals not as
emotional as human targets
− Less
•
•
•
chance of retaliation
Use of agent may go undetected for
days, weeks
Plausible deniability
No one would suspect it would occur
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Clues Suggesting an Attack
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Traceback of animals yields dead-end
No shared factor among animals
History of the farm/facility
Other concurrent outbreaks
Unusual signs
Overwhelming mortality
Unusual season for disease
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Introducing an Agent
•
•
•
•
•
•
Multiple methods of delivery/insertion
Covert vs. overt
Simultaneous introduction in multiple
areas
Accidental by tourists, products
Natural vs. intentional
Real vs. hoax
− Lack
of consumer confidence
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Historical Aspects
of Biological
Warfare Programs
and Agroterrorism
History
•
WWII
− Germany

Experimentation with Foot and Mouth
Disease
− Germany

•
and France
Late blight, wheat rusts, corn beetle,
rapeseed beetle, Colorado beetle (1944)
1940-50’s
− Soviet
Union anti-agriculture weapons
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
The U.S. Program
•
Began in 1941-42
−
•
Exam use of Newcastle, fowl plague, FMD,
hog cholera, rice blast, cereal stem rust,
wheat scab, late blight
Expanded during Korean War (1950-53)
30,000 kilos of Puccinia graminia tritici
spores (wheat stem rust), 1951-69
• 1 ton of Piricularia oryzae spores for
rice, 1966
• Other crop targets: soybeans, sugar
beets, sweet potatoes, cotton
•
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
The U.S. Program
•
1969-70, shut down
− Total
•
•
spent: $726 million
BWC of 1972 finally ratified by U.S.
in 1975
Reasons for discontinuing
− No
guarantee they work
− Costly
− Aging research facilities
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Importance of
Agriculture
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
U.S. Data, 1999
•
•
•
Food and fiber accounts for ~16.4%
of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
24 million Americans are employed
in some aspect of agriculture
Heavily tied to other
industries and sectors
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
U.S. Animal Data, 2001
Animal
Number
Value
Cattle
97.3 million
$70.5 billion
Pigs
Poultry
60 million
440 million
$4.5 billion
$1 billion
Sheep
7 million
$700 million
(non-broiler)
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Leading U.S. Crops, 2001
Crop
Production
Value
Corn grain 9.5 billion Bushels
$18.9 billion
Soybeans
2.9 billion Bushels
$12.6 billion
Wheat
2 billion Bushels
$5.4 billion
Cotton
13.8 million acres harvested $3.1 billion
Tobacco
432,000 acres harvested
$2 billion
Rice
3.3 million acres harvested
$925 million
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
U.S. Exports, 2001
Soybeans
$5 billion
Beef/veal
$2.6 billion
Corn for
grain
$4.5 billion
Poultry
(meat)
$1.6 billion
Wheat
$3.2 billion
Dairy
products
$1.1 billion
Tobacco
$1.2 billion
Pork
$1 billion
Non-animal
exports
$40.5 billion
Eggs
$189 mil
Cattle (live) $271 mil
Animal exports = $12.2 billion
Total agriculture exports = $52.7 billion
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Impact
Impact
•
Potential for mass disruption
− Weaken
workforce
− Destabilize government
•
•
•
•
•
Shocking public images
Loss of freedoms
Loss of consumer confidence
Higher prices?
Food shortages?
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Monetary Impact
•
•
•
Quickly felt by state/federal economy
Loss in trade
Other industries damaged
− Restaurants,
suppliers,
tourism, zoos, hunting, etc.
•
Direct costs
− Diagnostics,
surveillance, depopulation,
cleaning, disinfection, indemnity,
overtime
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Losses to Crops/Plants
•
$33 billion/year in losses due to
plant diseases
− $21
billion due to nonindigenous
pathogens
•
$7 billion/year in forest
products
− $2.1
billion due to
nonindigenous pathogens
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
U.S. Agencies
U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA)
•
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service (APHIS)
−
Veterinary Services (VS)

−
Emergency Programs (EP)

−
Livestock, poultry emergencies
Prepares and trains veterinarians and
personnel to respond to outbreaks
Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ)

Crop, plant emergencies
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
USDA-APHIS-VS
•
National Veterinary Services
Laboratories (NVSL)
Ames, IA and Plum Island, NY
− Four labs
− Provide diagnostic services and training
−
•
•
Foreign animal disease diagnosticians
All suspect FAD’s investigated within
24 hours of notification
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
U.S. Department of
Homeland Security
•
3,000 USDA inspectors
− Airports,
•
borders, seaports
Beagle Brigade
− 1,800
USDA inspectors
− 2 million interceptions annually
− 130 dog teams trained to sniff out meat
and produce at airports
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Bureau of Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE)
•
•
•
1999, over 41,000 U.S. maritime
trading vessels
48% increase in trade entries
2001, Customs processed
− 472
million persons
− 5.7 million containers
•
2002, imported 1.5 million cattle,
5.8 million pigs
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Quarantine Stations
•
Import quarantine of livestock and
poultry
−4
•
Personally owned birds
−6
•
facilities
quarantine facilities
Plants
− 14
quarantine facilities
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
First Responders
•
Local and state veterinarians
−
•
•
•
•
•
Recognize outbreak of foreign animal
disease
USDA-APHIS personnel
University extension personnel
Local, state, federal health agencies
Law enforcement
Emergency management division
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Agencies Involved in
Wisconsin Case
•
•
•
•
City police
County sheriff
State crime lab
Wisconsin Ag,
Trade, Consumer
Protection
−
−
−
Environmental
inspectors
Dairy inspectors
State veterinarian
•
•
•
•
•
Dept. of Natural
Resources in WI,
MN, MI
Dept. of Agriculture
in MN, MI, IL, IA, IN
Dept. of Health in WI
EPA
FDA
−
Office of Criminal
Investigation
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Livestock
Vulnerabilities
•
•
•
•
High density husbandry
Auction markets,
transport of animals
Limited immunity to
foreign animal
diseases
Centralized feed
supply and distribution
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Vulnerabilities
•
•
•
•
•
•
Poor traceability of animals
Expanded international trade and
travel
Infectious agents are widespread
in other countries
Porous borders
Lack of on-farm biosecurity
Lack of foreign animal disease
awareness
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Biosecurity
•
•
•
•
•
•
Efforts to keep out unwanted microbial
agents
Minimizing spread, risk of
disease
Multiple levels at which it
can be applied
Regulate visitors
Restricting movement is essential
Quarantine new animals
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Animal Movement
•
Mixing of animals at auction markets
− More
than 5 million cattle pass through
every year
•
Transported via trucks
− Dissemination
of pathogens to other
animals or fomites
•
1950-60- U.S. military
secret testing
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Potential Agents
Livestock and Plant
Pathogens
USDA High
Consequence
Livestock
Pathogens
and Toxins
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Public Health Implications
•
Several zoonotic diseases
− Many
diseases listed on the previous
slide have human health consequences
•
Mechanical (negligible threat)
− Newcastle
disease
•
disease, swine vesicular
Biological
− Avian
influenza, FMD
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Foot and Mouth Disease
(FMD)
•
•
•
•
•
Virus
Considered to be the most important
livestock disease in the world
Not in U.S. since 1929
Vesicular disease of clovenhoofed
animals
Spread by aerosol & fomites
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
OIE Early Warning System
•
•
•
Disease reported
within 24 hours
to OIE
Informs countries
at risk
Trade shut down
until further
notice
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Foot-and-Mouth Disease
Distribution and Recent Activity
Free
Present
Recent Activity
(Rev. 3-25-01)
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Foot and Mouth Disease
(FMD)
•
Animals at risk in the U.S.
−
−
−
−
−
•
•
100 million cattle
60 million swine
7 million sheep
40 million wildlife
Not horses
Humans rarely infected
Huge economic impact
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
U.K. FMD Outbreak, 2001
•
Total costs over £10 billion
− Ag
industry, compensation,
tourism, sports
•
6 million animals slaughtered
− FMD
•
free in less than 1 year
Public perception
− Animal
welfare
− Smoke pollution
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Wildlife
•
Risk of enzootic wildlife infection
− Permanent
•
trade embargoes possible
Risk to zoos and endangered species
− 1985
Israel FMD infection in gazelles
− 1,500 deaths, spread to neighboring
livestock
•
$100 billion spent in the U.S.
− Hunting,
fishing, camping, skiing, other
outdoor activities
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Newcastle Disease (ND)
•
•
Virus affecting poultry
Four pathotypes
− Asymptomatic,
lentogenic,
mesogenic, velogenic
•
•
vND endemic in Asia, Middle East,
Africa, Central/ South America
Causes drop in egg production,
neurological damage, and death
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Newcastle Disease (ND)
•
•
1950: First U.S. case
1972: Eradication campaign began
− 12
million birds destroyed
− $56 million dollar cost to tax payers
•
•
Outbreaks continue due to illegal
importation of exotic birds and poultry
Humans can acquire eye infections
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Newcastle Disease
•
2002-2003: California outbreak
− 2,662
premises depopulated
− 4 million birds destroyed
− $160 million impact
•
Developing countries
− Effects
quality and quantity of dietary
protein
− Significant effect on human health
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Crops and Plants
Plant Targets
•
Food crops
− Wheat:
#1 grain export in 2002
− Corn: #2 grain export in 2002
− Soybean: U.S. produced ~46% of
world’s crops in 1999-2000
− Citrus, sugarcane
•
Fiber
− Cotton
•
Timber
− Northwest
U.S.
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Economically Damaging Plant
Pathogens in U.S.
Citrus Canker Florida
Tomato Yellow Southern U.S.
Leaf Curl Virus
Plum Pox Virus Pennsylvania
Erad program
Highly virulent
Wheat rust
Nationwide
Sudden Oak
Death
Rice Blast
Northern CA
Varieties
resistant
Highly
destructive
Easily spread
Southern U.S.
Erad program
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Plant Pathogens with
Trade Issues
•
Karnal Bunt
− Wheat
•
Maize Streak virus
− Wheat,
•
grass, maize
Bacterial Wilt
− Potatoes,
tomatoes,
peppers, eggplant
•
Curcurbit Yellow Stunt
Disorder virus
− Cantaloupe,
watermelon
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Fungal Plant Agent
•
Karnal Bunt
Tilletia indica Mitra
− Wheat
− Affects taste not yield
− 1996 discovered in
AZ, CA, TX
−

−
Clean up cost $45 million
Remain viable in soil 5 years
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Factors Influencing Effectiveness
of Crop Pathogens
•
•
•
•
•
•
Meteorological conditions
Susceptibility of crop
Planting times, season, irrigation
Geographic terrain
Ability of agent to survive and thrive
Dependence of agent upon insect
vector, mechanical, or wind
transmission
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Conclusion
What Have We Learned?
•
•
•
Threats need to be taken seriously
Framework for response and
coordination
Adequate resources and expertise
Determine extent of attack
− Prevent disease spread and associated
losses
− Prevent any public health implications
− Finding the perpetrator
−
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Improving Biosecurity
•
Tailored to each farm
− Cost-benefit
considerations
− Must consider
state/federal concerns
− Universal precautions
•
•
Role of USDA-APHIS
Involvement of
industry groups
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Summary
•
•
•
•
•
•
Agroterrorism is a real threat
Economic consequences could be
severe
Awareness education imperative
Working plans in place
Minimal direct human illness
Continued vigilance essential
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Additional
Resources
•
•
•
Davis RG. Agroterrorism: Need for
awareness. In: Scanes C, ed.
Perspectives in world food and
agriculture: 2003. Ames, IA: ISU
Press. In press., 2003
USDA-APHIS website
www.aphis.usda.gov
OIE website
www.oie.int
Center for Food Security and Public Health
Iowa State University - 2003
Acknowledgments
Development of this presentation
was funded by a grant from the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention to the Center for Food
Security and Public Health at
Iowa State University.
Acknowledgments
Author:
Radford G. Davis, DVM, MPH
Co-author:
Danelle Bickett-Weddle, DVM