Area Regional PRRS Control Projects - Amazon Web...
Transcript of Area Regional PRRS Control Projects - Amazon Web...
PRRS Elimination
Discussion and the Area
Regional PRRS Control
Projects
2010 Swine Educators In-Service
R.B. Baker DVM, MSCollege of Veterinary Medicine
Iowa State University9-23-2010
The U.S. Obstacle to greater
Reproductive Efficiency, Profitability,
and Global Competitiveness
PRRS…..
Successful Methods of
Elimination
• Depopulation – Repopulation
• Herd Closure followed by negative gilt introduction
(Rollover)
• Mass vaccination followed by herd Closure then
negative gilts (Modified Rollover)
Successful Methods of
Elimination
• Homologous Serum inoculation followed by herd
closure (modified rollover)
• Introduction of negative gilts only (small herds)
• Parity segregation – Farm switching with Negative
gilts
• Any method that follows the 200 day + rule + negative
gilts
Successful Methods of
Elimination
• For all farm elimination plans – the “Devil is in the Details”
• Biosecurity is a key part of every plan
• Planning timelines for essential steps and adhering to the plan is critical
• Monitoring status and progress through testing
• Rapid response to adverse situations when they arise
PRRS Paradigms
• Test and Removal of ELISA positive sows is the only way to way to eliminate PRRS without depopulating the farm!
PRRS elimination in the “stand
alone” breeding herd is:
• Straight Forward• Relatively inexpensive
– with quick returns–Only two outside
resources• Negative replacements• Negative semen
BreedingHerd
Small System
Large CompanyOr Region
HogState
US
What will it take?
•We are Nearly to the stage where eradication is feasible – We need more science/solutions for area spread
•A technological “fix’ may be in the future but unlikely within the next 10 years = effective vaccine
10 Participating Areas
• Northwest Indiana• Western Michigan• Western Illinois• Pennsylvania• Ontario, Canada• North Central Illinois• Minnesota• Cuming County, Nebraska• Carson, Colorado• Iowa County, Iowa
Goals of Projects
• Reduce the prevalence of the PRRS virus within the selected area
• Compare strains to detail source of PRRS
• Facilitate communication among participants and provide a forum for sharing current program progress
• Assist producers to stabilize and eventually eradicate PRRS through herd management plans
Methods for ARC Projects
• Enroll producers by obtaining production information for each site
• Initial PRRS testing of each site– By serum (PCR and ELISA)
• Complete PADRAP for each site
• Routing testing of sites– by serum and oral fluids
• Sample sites with active PRRS infections to determine presence of virus and characterize
Herd Veterinarian
• Each site will designate their own vet
• Vets responsible for
– Developing herd plan with producers
– Conduct PADRAP analyses
– Routine sampling of sites
Northwest Indiana
• Working group– Indiana Board of Animal Health (IBOAH)– Purdue University Diagnostic Lab– Purdue Vet School
• Currently working on– Identifying
• type of production site (breed-wean, nursery, grow-finish)• PRRS status
– Completing PADRAP
Concerns o I-65, major interstate the runs through areao Funding
Communication is key!o Future activity will depend on sites sharing informationo BI supporting website to share information
Western Michigan
• Working group– MPPA
– Michigan State University
• Intense production in small area– Approx 20% of MI sows in area
– Only 3 sites have finishing pigs move into area
– Unique isolation
• Lake Michigan
• Grand Rapids
• State Forest
• Most area farms participated in pseudo rabies eradication
Western Michigan
• Procedure
– Identify all swine sites in area
– Determine PRRS status
• Rope and PCR (wished they would have done ELISA)
– Conduct PADRAP
• Have Steering Committee (9 Producers)
Western Illinois
• Working group– Western Illinois Pork Producers
– Illinois Pork Producers
– BI
– TriOak
– Cargill
• HAM Counties– Hancock
– Adams
– McDonough
• 197 sites identified– Most PRRS status unknown
– This summer, determine status and conduct PADRAP
Pennsylvania
• Working group– U Penn
• Working on– Mapping sites
• Currently 400 sites ~ 70,000 sows
– Determine PRRS status
• Future– Animal flow– Risk of becoming infected– Design PRRS control strategies specific for Penn.
• Challenges– Funding– Producer recruitment
Ontario, Canada
• Working group– University of Guelph
– OPIC
– OSHAB
• Goals– 1. Implement regional PRRS elimination project
– 2. Assess applicability of US PRRS elimination approaches to Canada
• Funding
• Follow procedure similar to other ARC projects
North Central Illinois
DeKalb County
• Area players– Bethany Swine Health Services– Heuber/Great Plains Management– Hintzche Pork– Lots of independent producers
– 20 sow farms– ~ 8 nursery– 66 nursery-finishing, finisher, or wean-to-finish– ~ 50 show pig sites– Few pigs come into the area– Change in genetic supplier promoted change
North Central Illinois
DeKalb County
• Fall 2009 – Genetic supplier change• Dec 2009 – PRRS meeting in Chicago• Jan 2010 – Map of area• Jan 2010 – Initial PRRS status bleeding• Feb 2010 – Initial producer meeting• Mar 2010 – Boar stud filtered and repop• May 2010 – Advisory Board meeting• Jun 2010 – 10 sites undergoing elimination plans• Summer 2010 – PRRS risk assessment
• Key is EDUCATION of biosecurity
– Producers, trucks, and show pigs
Minnesota
• All sites north of highway 212
• 368 locations identified
– 78 sow farms
– 25 nurseries
– 200 finishers
– 5 boar studs
– 11 show pigs
– 8 buying stations
– 1 truck wash
• 58% of sites tested– 5% positive
• Challenges– Interest from producers and
vets
– Communication
– Don’t know regional flow of pigs
Cuming County, Nebraska
• ~150 sites– Multiple truck washes
– 2 slaughter facilities
– Multiple feedmills
– Majority of pigs imported go to western part of county
– 2 major highways run through
• Progress– Located farms
– Initial meeting
– Created website
• Challenges– 4-H/show pigs
• Communication is key!
Carson, Colorado
• 1 producer– 3 sites – 15, 000 sows
– 2 sites – 8,000 nursery
– 3 sites – 8,800 finisher
– 1 truck wash
– 1 feedmill
• 40-50 sites 4-H projects
• Working group– Extension agent
– Colorado State
– BI
– Producer
• Challenges– Transport of market hogs
– Local vets have little interest in swine
Iowa County, Iowa
• Working Group
– ISU VDPAM
– IPPA
– Local and consulting veterinarians
– Local Producers
• Approximately half the geographic county
• Funding is from IPPA, PIC, BIVI
• 27 sites – 19 producers thus far
The Only means of attaining and sustaining Efficient sow herd productivity is through Good
Management, Disease Freedom, and Biosecurity
The Total Solution is rarely in a vaccine bottle