AGRI Committee Report
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
For sanitary reasons, it was not appropriate for the Standing Committee to travel to British Columbia during the avian influenza (AI) outbreak that affected the Fraser Valley region in February 2004. The Standing Committee did, however, hold a briefing session in March 2004 in Ottawa, and its agenda called for an eventual fact-finding mission to the region. When the Standing Committee reconvened at the beginning of the 38th Parliament, members unanimously agreed on 14 October 2004 to travel to British Columbia.
The Standing Committee held hearings on 18 and 19 January 2005 in Abbotsford on the devastating AI outbreak (see Appendix 1 for a chronology of events). Over 35 individuals, farming associations and officials from both federal and provincial governments appeared before the Standing Committee.
The fact-finding mission provided a public forum for stakeholders to discuss the lessons learned from the outbreak. Some analysts view that event as the possible precursor of an even more serious outbreak that could eventually have worldwide ramifications. The Standing Committee therefore believes that it is imperative that the lessons learned be well understood and put into action, rather than just being compiled in another bureaucratic document. They must become the basis for implementing an enhanced animal health crisis management system at the federal level, particularly considering that the increasingly integrated nature of animal and human health policies requires a renewed emergency preparedness level. The AI outbreak in British Columbia can be seen as a warning; serious new measures must be taken in anticipation of the “next time.”
The Standing Committee is pleased to present in these initial pages of its report some of the comments made by various stakeholders during the Abbotsford hearings:
The outbreak was a learning experience for Canada – why should the B.C. industry bear the brunt of inexperienced management? Hopefully the lessons learned, and the resulting changes in emergency management will prevent a similar experience from happening again! Our view is that the cost for this learning experience should be shared nationally.
Mr. Garnet Etsell, President
B.C. Turkey Producers Association
Hearings of the Standing Committee on
Agriculture and Agri-Food on Avian Influenza
Abbotsford, B.C.
(Thereafter cited as “Hearings”)
18 January 2005
It is the contention of the backyard farmers that the Avian Influenza outbreak and subsequent mutation from low to high pathogenic strain was a commercial industry problem with subsequent possible contamination of a single neighbouring backyard flock. Put in simple words, we believe that the backyard flocks have never been part of the problem but were made part of an inappropriate solution.
Barbara Fischer
on behalf of the Committee of
the Backyard Farmers Association
Hearings,18 January 2005
Proper management of AI is a public good as human and animal health authorities world-wide recognize the need to come to grips with AI. We believe one way Canada can act is by ensuring there are sufficient funds set aside to compensate for loss of birds and business interruption so nothing stands in the way of a quick, surgical pre-emptive cull.
Tim Lambert, Executive Director
Canadian Egg Marketing Agency
Presentation to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food
Abbotsford, B.C.
18 January 2005
Proper management of AI is a public good as human and animal health authorities world-wide recognize the need to come to grips with AI. We believe one way Canada can act is by ensuring there are sufficient funds set aside to compensate for loss of birds and business interruption so nothing stands in the way of a quick, surgical pre-emptive cull.
Tim Lambert, Executive Director
Canadian Egg Marketing Agency
Hearings, 18 January 2005
It was not managed at the beginning as an emergency situation.
Don Beer, Fire Chief
Hearings, 18 January 2005
Cleaning and disinfecting at CFIA requirements was a massive job at the charge of farmers, and these costs were not compensated.
Derek Janzen, President
BC Egg Producers Association
Hearings, 18 January 2005
Some of our breeding stocks that were depleted are irreplaceable.
Rob Donaldson
Bradner Farms
Hearings,
18 January 2005
As far as the OIE and the European Union,(…) I would look at our outbreak and absolutely congratulate the CFIA for being able to do this in 90 days and not have it breach the valley. But I want you to know that the only reason that CFIA can declare victory is for two key events that happened. April 1st when the industry was invited to the table, there were 20 positive farms. It had breached the high-risk zone, it was out of control. The declaration of a provincial (pause)…getting a provincial emergency team totally changed the tide. We finally had a group of people that were in the business of managing outbreaks, or managing emergencies, and they started to rein this back in. But I want to tell you that the reason this was contained was because of this poultry industry, their dedication and commitment. They presented to CFIA a plan. The reason this was contained was because it was through their efforts of clearing the barns, of getting rid of the negative birds so the flu had nowhere to go, is the reason that this was contained, and I want to go on record as saying it was this industry that turned this around.
Dr. Victoria Bowes
Hearings, 19 January 2005
If there is another outbreak? There should be a total lock-down – no movement of birds or manure. Compensation must be in place to allow drastic action.
Bruce Arabsky, Pollon Group
On behalf of Primary Poultry
Processors Association of BC
Hearings, 19 January 2005
It is ludicrous that the disease was not contained in the Matsqui flat area. Again it is because of procrastination and lack of common sense. We spent a huge amount of time waiting for decisions to come from Ottawa, and most of the time local CFIA staff didn’t know how to interpret those decisions.
Dr Neil Ambrose, DVM
Hearings, 19 January 2005
The following report builds on these and many other practical suggestions, with the aim of preparing Canada to manage future animal health crises more effectively.
Paul SteckleChair
Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food