Pending a final decision by the USDA and surrounding states in December, Texas feeder cattle may not be affected by the state losing its cattle Tuberculosis "Free" status.

On June 6, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) published its "interim rule" that officially downgraded Texas' cattle tuberculosis (TB) status from Accredited-Free to Modified Accredited-Advanced. Texas' status was lowered because TB infection was confirmed in two Texas cattle herds in 2001.

Currently, Texas breeding cattle must be officially identified and tested for cattle TB within 60 days prior to being transported across state lines (interstate movement) unless they are moving directly to slaughter. Untested Texas cattle can move freely within the state. The USDA has delayed additional restrictions on moving feeder cattle out of the state.

The delay is to allow Texas time to work out a plan for heifers not intended for breeding purposes.

"Stock covered by the breeding cattle testing and identification requirement include weaned heifers, bred heifers, cows and bulls intended for breeding purposes," explains Dr. Max Coats, assistant executive director for the Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC), the state's livestock health regulatory agency.

The problem with feeder heifers is complicated by the wording of the testing regulations.

The Code of Federal Regulations classifies cattle as sexually intact and sexually neutered. Those cattle that are sexually neutered, like steers and spayed heifers, are obviously not used for breeding, and are not affected by the ruling. However, the estimated 600,000 "intact" feeder heifers that leave the state for grazing and feeding each year are another story.

Requiring identification and testing for all of these heifers would cost the industry and the producer a lot of money, ultimately greatly devaluing the heifers in a calf crop, says Dr. Dan Baca, a veterinarian with the TAHC. "Producers selling a load of feeder heifers would be discounted considerably," he says, to cover the cost and labor of testing.

Baca says the USDA understands what this could do to the industry, and therefore it has allowed Texas time to deal with the feeder heifer issue. "This gives the USDA, the Texas Animal Health Commission and the livestock industry time to find a better way to deal with feeder cattle," he says.

In a recent meeting with USDA officials and chief livestock officials from several nearby states, such as Oklahoma, Colorado, Kansas and New Mexico, the TAHC proposed a plan that would exempt feeder heifers of US origin from testing regulations.

"Based on statistics maintained by the TAHC, we can prove that the risk of these heifers having TB are less than one in a million," Baca says. "Because this risk is so low, we feel it is reasonable not to address attention on these cattle by requiring identification or testing."

Instead, Baca says the commission would focus on feeder cattle from Mexico. "That is our biggest risk," he says. "It is much greater than those of US origin."

Those attending the meeting agreed and said they would present the proposal to their state livestock boards for final approval. The USDA also gave a similar commitment to get their superiors to consider amending the regulations for feeder cattle.

"We will know in December if the USDA accepts our proposal," Baca says. "But we feel it has a good chance of being approved."

Several Texas livestock agencies, including the Texas Cattle Feeders Association and the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, worked together with the TAHC to develop a solution to the feeder heifer issue.

In regards to breeding cattle, the new federal regulation will require ranchers to plan ahead before selling or moving their breeding cattle out of state. "Ranchers may find their breeding cattle to be more marketable if the animals are tested prior to arrival at the livestock market. Untested breeding cattle and bison will be restricted to movement only within the state or directly to a slaughter plant, unless a buyer makes arrangement to have the animals held and tested after the sale. Ranchers will be responsible for paying their USDA accredited, private veterinary practitioners for testing," Coats says.

To conduct a TB skin test, an accredited veterinarian injects a tiny amount of tuberculin into the animal's skin near its tail, in an area called the "caudal fold." After a 72-hour waiting period, the veterinarian examines the site for swelling that might indicate the animal has been exposed to cattle TB. If there is no response, the accredited veterinarian can issue a document as proof of testing, recording on it the test results and the animal's official identification--either a brucellosis ear tag, or for purebred cattle, a firebrand or tattoo registered with the breed.

"About one percent of the 'caudal fold' tests will be positive, and this is expected, as there can be false-positive test results," notes Dr. Coats. "If this occurs, a state or federal veterinarian must run a second test within 10 days. This 'comparative cervical' test, run on the animal's neck, also requires a 72-hour waiting period, and if it is negative, the animal can move freely. A positive test, however, is strong indication the animal may have cattle TB, and it must be slaughtered and carefully examined for internal TB lesions. Tissue samples will be collected and forwarded to the National Veterinary Services Laboratory in Ames, Iowa, for laboratory confirmation."

"There are three exceptions to the TB testing requirements for breeding cattle moving across state lines," says Dr. Coats. "Nursing calves can move without a test, if they accompany their TB-tested dam. Cattle going directly to a slaughter plant from a farm or livestock market don't need a test. Ranchers also can move animals freely from a TB accredited-free herd, a status gained through annual herd testing." (Call the TAHC at 1-800-550-8242 for information about the TB accreditation program.) ©