Agroterrorism

1
Agroterrorism

• 9-11-01 wake-up call
• We face different security challenges now
• U.S. food production system the safest
• But not designed for terrorism
• Need to develop science-based measures to enhance
  and protect the food supply and human health

2
Terrorism

• Biological, chemical, or radiological agents
  targeting agriculture or its components
• Livestock
• Food supply
• Crops
• Industry
• Workers

• Conventional, radiological, nuclear,
  chemical,cyber
• Typically direct human targeting

Biological agents targeting humans, animals, or
plants
3
Potential Consequences Of Agroterrorism Are High

• Consequences of an attack could be very high.
• In 2002 the food and fiber sector
• 1.2 trillion 11 of GDP 16 of workforce
• Livestock and cropping systems are
  interdependente.g., an attack on either beef or
  corn affects the other.
• Failures in the system would cause widespread
  disruption.

Foot and mouth disease in the UK cost an
estimated 5B to agriculture alone. Tourism
losses were an additional 7.2B - 8.5B.
4
Vulnerabilities are Widespread
Easy access 1M operations 94.8 M cattle poor
biosecurity fence-line access
Vulnerability ease of adversary access
Uncontrolled local transportation poor
security no animal traceability.
Vulnerability infected animals are immediately
dispersed across the U.S.
Commingling and concentration local and regional
sale barns thousands of animals sold daily poor
security high pathogen transmission
Immediate geographic redistribution efficient
and rapid pathogen dispersalincubation times
usually exceed transportation times
Vulnerability animal concentration promotes
transmission of disease
Confined Animal Feeding 2,110 feedlots 23.4M
animals large-scale high-consequence
concentrated in 6 states one animal could
infect entire region or nation
5
(No Transcript)
6
Systems analysis and new technology solutions are
essential.
7
Livestock and Poultry Concentrations

• 95 Million Cattle
• Widespread but feedlots Texas, Kansas, Nebraska,
  Colorado, Iowa
• 60 Million Hogs and Pigs
• Midwest
• 8.5 Million Birds
• Southeast

8
Economic Consequences

• Lost Production
• Export Markets Lost
• Multiplier Effects
• Costs to Government
• Indirect Costs
• Market Price Drops
• Consumer Confidence
• Environmental

9
Potential Impacts

• Sales forecasted for U.S. farm products in 2004
  total 215 billion
• Exports forecasted for 2004 are 62 billion
• Farmers equity in 2003 reached 1.16 trillion

10
US/UK FMD Comparison

• Applying the loss ratios from the U.K. to the
  U.S. livestock industry, Price Waterhouse Coopers
  estimates
• 5.3 million cattle
• 1.4 million hogs
• 800,000 sheep might be destroyed
• 10.4 billion to 33.6 billion

11
The Cow That Stole Christmas

• 12/23/03 discovery of BSE in Washington dairy
  cow.
• Export markets suddenly shut off
• 10 of US beef production
• 2002
• Japan 2.9 376,000 mt 1.4 billion
• Mexico 2.3 336,000 mt 877 million
• Korea 2.2 247,000 mt 816 million
• Canada - .8 92,000 mt 331 million

12
New Mexico Products on Hold

• Chihuahua
• Livestock 785 head - 1,296,250
• Sonora
• Livestock 820 head - 1,405,250
• Durango
• Bulls 1,000 head - 1,600,000
• Mexico, Mexico
• Alfalfa 30,000 mt - 4,200,000
• Dairy Heifers 3,000 - 5,850,000

13
Steps Taken Nationally

• Bioterrorism Preparedness Act
• Expand food and drug administration authority
  over food manufacturing and imports
• Tighten control of biological agents and toxins
• Authorize expanded agricultural security
  activities and security upgrades at USDA
• Address criminal penalties for terrorism against
  enterprises raising animals

14
Steps Taken Nationally (cont.)

• New FDA Rules on Food Processors and Importers
• Registration of food processors
• Prior notice of food imports
• Administrative detention of imports
• Record-keeping

15
Steps Taken Nationally (cont.)

• Homeland Security Act
• Agricultural border inspections from APHIS to DHS
• Possession of Plum Island Animal Disease Center
  from USDA to DHS
• Executive Branch Actions
• HSPD-7
• Critical infrastructure identification,
  prioritization, and protection
• HSPD-9
• Establishes a national policy to protect against
  terrorist attacks on agriculture and food systems

16
Steps Taken in New Mexico

• NMSU A Strategic Location

17
Location

• Santa Teresa
• Largest privately owned land port
• 3 ports 180 miles of NM border
• 5 ports 250 miles
• from El Paso, Texas, to Douglas, Arizona
• Military infrastructure
• White Sands, Holloman, Fort Bliss
• I-10, I-25 corridor
• NMSU

18
NMSU - GOVERNMENT PARTNERS
19
NMSU - INDUSTRY PARTNERS
20
NM Tech / NMSU Consortium

• Prior to 9-11- investigating naturally occurring
  breaches
• January 2003 NMSU contacted Phelps Dodge to
  explore acquiring Playas
• February 2003 NM Tech seeking to purchase Playas
• March 2003 NM Tech and NMSU agree to establish a
  consortium
• Draft letter to Senator Domenici for Tom Ridge
  and Homeland Security
• Other coordination meetings and Playas visits

21
Playas, New Mexico
22
Residential Facilities
Single Family Houses 259 Apartments 25 Total
Square Feet 355,600
23
Community Amenities

• Bank
• Mercantile
• Medical Clinic
• Churches
• Air Strip

24
Projected Homeland Security Training Programs at
Playas
Advanced First Responder Training Pipeline
Security Suicide Bomber Prevention Local
Government Official Training Food Supply
Security Protective Force Transportation
Security Battlefield Sensor Utilization
25
Antelope Wells

• NMSU
• Hidalgo County
• NM Border Authority
• Mexico
• Ascension, Buenaventura,
• Galeana, Casas Grandes, Janos,
• Nuevo Casas Grandes,
• Chihuahua

26
NMSUs Vision

• Ensure the biological security of our nations
  agricultural and natural resource assets by
  planning and conducting research and developing
  complementary programming that will protect these
  assets from biological security breaches or
  threats

27
NMDAs Role

• Agriculture biosecurity system for New Mexico in
  place prior to December 2003
• NMDA homeland security emergency response system
  completed in November 2003
• Label reviews and feed inspections conducted to
  ensure compliance by producers and feed
  manufacturers since 1997

28
NMDAs Role (cont.)

• Started discussion to include agriculture as part
  of the Homeland Security Initiative with General
  Annette Sobel - NMOHS
• Created the Agricultural Biosecurity office in
  coordination with other NMSU entities.
• Jeff Witte was named director in November 2003
• Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment for the
  State of New Mexico

29
Border Governors/Gobernadores Fronterizos
30
Mexico

• NMDA and New Mexico Livestock Board members met
  with the Union Ganadera Regional de Chihuahua to
  evaluate computerized systems for tracking live
  cattle.
• Working with producers to implement system in 2004

31
AgriGard 2003

• A coalition of industry and federal, state, and
  local law enforcement
• Communicate and coordinate in the event of a
  terrorist attack
• Associations with FBI and DIA
• Security at the farm level
• First responder training
• First detector training
• Cyber security

32
What Needs To Be Done

• Food Security will involve everyone
• Plant producers, animal producers,
  manufacturers/processors, restaurants/food
  service, retail, warehousing, and agricultural
  inputs.
• Initial Detectors will include
• Farmers, producers, veterinarians, plant
  pathologists and entomologists, CES agents.

33
What Needs To Be Done (cont.)

• Agroterrorism research
• DHS
• USDA
• ARS, FSIS, APHIS, CSREES, ERS
• State Departments of Agriculture
• Congress
• FY 04
• FY 05

34
Conclusion

• Security plan in place
• Food supply is safe
• Working toward minimizing negative economic impact

Sound science continues to be our guide. --
USDA Secretary Ann Veneman
35

• Consumer confidence in the safety and security
  of the food supply is paramount to national
  defense.

Dr. I. Miley Gonzalez New Mexico Secretary of
Agriculture