New risk assessment management protocols for dairy producers

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

by SUSAN MANN

All licensed dairy farmers must now complete a risk assessment management program form for cattle health and have it on file when their farm is being inspected to see if it meets Grade A standards.

The form must be completed annually, according to a report on provincial raw milk quality released at the Dairy Farmers of Ontario spring policy conference in March. The form includes a verification the farmer and veterinarian must sign of animal health and proper use of drugs. The form also indicates a vet-client relationship exists.

The requirement to complete the form was included in Ontario’s milk regulations under the provincial Milk Act. Inspectors will check to see if farmers have their completed form while doing Grade A and Canadian Quality Milk inspections. Farmers will be notified three months before their inspection is to be done. The requirement for farmers to have the form on file every year comes into effect today.

In other milk quality news, DFO reports that 1,438 farmers or 35.5 per cent were registered under the Canadian Quality Milk (CQM) program as of Jan. 31. A total of 99 per cent of farmers are meeting the requirements of the dairy industry’s on-farm food safety program in their validation month or in the following month. To date, only 14 producers or one per cent who have been validated have incurred a CQM penalty.

DFO operations division director George MacNaughton says by email that “milk quality has improved significantly over the last year and producers should be commended for their efforts.”

For other raw milk quality parameters, DFO reports that:

• The number of somatic cell count penalties was lower in August and September 2012 than the previous year but increased in October 2012 and has remained higher than in the previous year since then. The new somatic cell count standard of 400,000 cells per millilitre came into effect on Aug. 1, 2012. Previously it was 500,000 cells per millilitre.
• There was a significant increase in the number of warning and penalty levels for the freezing point estimate test in June and July 2012 compared to the same time in the previous year. DFO, the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food and the lab investigated but “a clear cause was not identified,” the report says. For example, in June 2012, there were 1,352 samples in the warning range compared to 210 in 2011 while in July 2012 there were 1,544 samples in the warning range compared to 430 in July 2011. For penalties, there were 29 in June 2012 compared to 10 in June 2011. In July 2012 there were 37 penalties compared to 23 in July 2011. MacNaughton say freezing point penalties have returned to normal levels since last summer.
• The number of monthly penalties for bacteria testing decreased about 16 per cent from February 2012 to January compared to the same period a year earlier.
• There was a 20 per cent increase in inhibitor penalties from February 2012 to February 2013. That may be due to changes in the inhibitor-testing program that came into effect on March 1, 2012, the report says. The program now tests load and/or producer samples for drugs that are not part of the routine screening at processing plants.
• There was a huge decrease in the number of penalties due to non-Grade A status. The number of penalties declined almost 57 per cent from February 2012 to January 2013 compared to the same period a year earlier with almost the same number of inspections performed. BF