Mr. JENNINGS. How do you account for the fact-what is the reason for some of these counties, and especially, those whole States being white-is it due to the effective work of the States and localities or is there some other reason? Dr. VAN HOUWELING. There is one thing about the map that is a little misleading. The white States do not indicate, or should not be thought to indicate that we have no program at all in those States. We do have a program, but the program is one of successive steps. You begin with calf vaccination and then the milk ring testing and some more testing and an education program until you get to the point where the counties and States want to go under the complete county program such as offered in the counties shown in yellow. A countywide program is required to meet the certified status. There are programs being carried on in every State in the Union at the present time, but they have not all reached the area status, that is, where the whole county has signed up to go into a complete test. Does that answer your question? Mr. ABERNETHY. As I understand it, the objective of this chart is not to leave the impression that there is no program going on in the States where there is no coloring at all, where they are solid white. There is a program but it has not reached the stage that it has in other areas. Dr. VAN HOUWELING. Exactly right. Mr. ABERNETHY. I had the impression that Mr. Jennings did, that these States, Texas and Alabama and Iowa-I believe those are the ones that have neither red, blue, nor yellow in them-had no program at all, but I think a closer examination of the chart will show that it just means that they have not reached the stage of a steppedup program that the other areas have. Dr. VAN HOUWELING. In fact, if we had this up to date as of today, you would have some yellow counties in Iowa and Kansas, and a county in Texas. Mr. JOHNSON. It must be quite a problem in your beef area, where your cattle are semiwild, to try to run a blood test. It is a matter of lassooing? Dr. VAN HOUWELING. You can see it can be done if you look at some of those Mountain States. You can see how far along some of them are. One other program in addition that is being utilized in that area is the taking of blood samples of the animals consigned to slaughter. You can see that is an economical and easy time to get samples. At either the time they go to market or at slaughter. We then trace the tests back to the herds that the animals came from. We, also, use a percentage test of the animals and the herds in those range beef herds and areas in those States. The last map which shows what our goal is for the end of the current fiscal year in regard to certified States and counties. We are estimating we will have 16 States and Territories completely certified by the end of this fiscal year, and something in excess of 1,500 counties. This is something over 50 percent of all of the counties in the United States and the Territories. Mr. JOHNSON. What is the matter with Texas there? Dr. VAN HOUWELING. Texas, as you know, is a large beef cattle range area. They haven't felt that they have had as much infection in those range areas as we have in other parts of the country. And that is probably right. It has just taken a little longer for the program to get underway there. There is a lot of the milk ring testing being done in the dairy areas of Texas. Mr. JENNINGS. What is the significance than as to the North Carolina and Virginia? North Carolina seems to have been free for some time and Virginia not. How do you account for that difference there? Dr. VAN HOUWELING. It depends largely on the demands of the industry in the State, what type of program they want to pursue. The State and Federal officials try to abide by the wishes of the industry. Mr. JENNINGS. Has it been due to the lack of funds? Dr. VAN HOUWELING. In recent years we haven't been restricted by funds, that would impair the work in Virginia. There have been States where the funds have not been adequate to go forward as fast as the program demands would seem to indicate they should. I do not believe that has been the case in Virginia. Mr. JENNINGS. Would you check on that? Apparently, it has been the case because I have received numerous requests or complaints. Dr. VAN HOUWELING. Dr. Anderson says he does not believe it has been this current year, but it may have been in the past. Mr. JENNINGS. Will you check on that for me? Dr. VAN HOUWELING. We will be glad to, sir. Dr. ANDERSON. I may mention, Mr. Jennings, that there have been some requests for funds from the industry in Virginia, that would provide for testing for compliance with milk ordinances which is not in connection with the area testing. They have had adequate funds in Virginia this year to carry on the area work they have outlined to meet the demands of the industry. Mr. JENNINGS. Do you know whether that is true from the State standpoint? I am just asking you this for information purposes. Dr. ANDERSON. When I speak about funds, I am referring to combined State and Federal funds. Dr. VAN HOUWELING. I believe that covers the part of our testimony relating to the achievements and accomplishments under the stepped-up program started since 1954. The booklet referred to is as follows:) PROGRESS REPORT on COOPERATIVE STATE-FEDERAL BRUCELLOSIS ERADICATION PROGRAM PRESENTED AT THE NATIONAL BRUCELLOSIS COMMITTEE ANNUAL MEETING OMAHA, NEBRASKA, FEBRUARY 19, 1958 INTRODUCTION In order that the material available to the National Brucellosis Committee be as recent as possible, some of the data will be presented on a calendar year basis in the same manner as it was handled at the 1957 meeting. Graphic material, together with National and State charts have been prepared to depict the current position and changing trends. Since our report to this Committee last year, the cooperative State-Federal brucellosis eradication campaign has continued to make good progress. The results of over three years' work on the accelerated program are most encouraging and demonstrate the benefits that can be derived from such an all-out effort. The strong support being given the program by the livestock industry and other interested groups underlines a widespread determination to finish once and for all the fight against brucellosis. By maintaining the momentum generated over the past few years, there is every reason to believe that the entire country can be declared Modified-Certified Brucellosis-Free within a relatively short period of time. The 1960 goal, which was considered highly visionary when first proposed, is becoming more realistic all the time. By C. K. MINGLE, D.V.M., CHIEF |