by SUSAN MANN
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency says it has confirmed the presence of scrapie in a six-year-old pregnant ewe that died on Montana Jones’ Northumberland County farm April 20.
Jones was notified of the finding Friday night by email just before four CFIA agents and two security guards arrived at her farm, called Wholearth Farmstudio, with a destruction order for nine Shropshire sheep. They left two security guards and vehicles guarding the premises overnight.
Guy Gravelle, CFIA senior media relations officer, says by email this was a “precautionary measure since sheep had previously been taken from the property in violation of the quarantine order.”
Gravelle was referring the theft of 31 sheep from the farm the night before they were slated to be removed on April 2 and slaughtered so their brains could be analyzed for scrapie. The Northumberland OPP is investigating the theft.
The farm has been under quarantine since 2010. A sheep born on Jones’ farm and sold to an Alberta farm in 2007 tested positive for scrapie about three years later.
The 31 missing sheep pose a serious risk for scrapie and could spread the disease to other sheep and goats, the CFIA’s April 27 press release says. Any premises that received them will be subject to quarantine and further regulatory action.
On Saturday morning, CFIA officials arrived to take the nine sheep away for immediate slaughter. Gravelle confirms the sheep “were euthanized and brain and lymph tissue samples were taken for analysis.”
The decision to remove and destroy the sheep “was the direct result of the positive test result of the sheep that died on the farm,” he says.
Gravelle says the private security firm was there at the request of CFIA to prevent any further breaches of the quarantine. They weren’t there to do surveillance nor were they armed.
The pregnant ewe that died and the nine sheep taken Saturday were part of a genotype group, known as VRQ, considered to be not as genetically susceptible to be diagnosed with scrapie.
There are still 10 sheep remaining on Jones’ farm.
Jones is skeptical about the positive scrapie finding and asked a CFIA vet to give her a tissue sample from the animal that tested positive so she can compare it to a sample that she retained from the dead sheep before it left the farm. She wants to have both samples independently tested so she can compare their DNA to ensure the animal that was tested is the same one that left her farm.
Gravelle says Jones was allowed to take tissue samples from the ewe, which died on April 20, as well as hair samples from the nine sheep the CFIA took on Saturday.
Jones says she knew the CFIA “would come up with a positive.” It’s the easiest way for the CFIA to shut down the media attention and scare whoever took the 31 sheep slated for slaughter April 2 to return them. She says by claiming “they have a positive” that is the CFIA’s defense against the judicial review of the destruction order of the 31 missing sheep filed April 24 by Jones’ lawyer, Karen Selick, litigation director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation.
Jones says the CFIA vet examined the ewe the day before she died and said she was fine. Jones says the ewe didn’t have any symptoms of scrapie. “I think she had pregnancy toxemia because she had an impacted rumen.”
Gravelle confirmed a CFIA vet did clinically assess the ewe the day before it died “without being able to diagnosis it with scrapie.” Not all scrapie-infected animals show any of the classical clinical signs, which make diagnosis of live animals difficult.
As for letting Jones have a sample of the brain to have it tested independently, Gravelle says the area of the brain needed for scrapie diagnosis is extremely small and if the abnormal prion is found in that section of the brain it may not be present in another section “therefore the CFIA did not provide duplicate brain samples,” he says.
Scrapie is a fatal disease that affects sheep and goats. There isn’t any human health risks associated with scrapie but it has serious impacts on sheep and the CFIA aims to eradiate it from Canada, the CFIA press release says. Canada’s approach to confirmed or suspected cases of scrapie is based on internationally accepted science and seeks to minimize disruptions to producers. BF
Comments
MISQUOTE: “I think she had pregnancy toxemia because she had an impacted rumen." is a misquote. I actually said I believe she had an impacted rumen and then her nutritional intake was compromised which resulted in what appeared to be ketosis, or pregnancy toxemia, and the CFIA vet concurred.
Montana Jones
Editor's note: The recording of this interview has been reviewed and Better Farming stands by the accuracy of the story in its entirety.
I'm just clarifying that an animal does not necessarily get pregnancy toxemia directly from an impacted rumen.
thanks
Montana Jones
Do hundreds of attendees of Wholearth Harvest dinners between 2009 and 2010 have the right to be told that the farm was quarantined in 2010 due to scrapies? Those who ate sheep at the dinners, do they have the right to know that a scrapies infected sheep was traced back to the farm in 2010 and a scrapies positive sheep died now in 2012? These people paid $125 each and might have ate a scrapie's infected sheep. Do the people who purchased Shropshire sheep meat from Wholearth farm have the right to know about the disease connected to the meat they ate and fed to their children? How many people would knowingly eat a scrapies infected sheep or feed it to their children?
There is no need to promote hysteria! Scrapie is not a risk to humans. The primary objective in this case is to keep our sheep safe from scrapie. A secondary concern, not mentioned in this article, is to preserve genetic diversity in agricultural animals. The sheep slated for destruction come from a rare breed. We should exercise extreme caution in making the decision to euthanize them. Also, there is a new test that allows testing for scrapie while the animal is alive. This would be a good application.
FACT: According to Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Health Canada regulations any sheep under 12 months (ie. lambs) are eligible for slaughter and sale as meat.
FACT: Despite this fact Wholearth Farm chose to allay such fears based on uneducated ignorance (such as yours) and no lamb was or has been served or offered for sale to the public since quarantine was in place
FACT: CFIA has effected Orders of Destruction and quarantines in MANY other similar circumstances. The only difference is no other farmer has ever come forth to public challenge their methods and protocol. They want to remain anonymous, receive compensation, and not have the 'stigma' attached to their farm. A stigma which is again, based on lack of education opinions and public misperception. Clearly, your comments stem from that pool of ignorance.
FACT: Other farms that have experienced this same CFIA process are ALL encouraged to send their lambs to slaughter as per usual, and sell the inspected, safe meat from those lambs under 12 months of age. The Alberta farmer is no exception. Health Canada allows those animals to safely enter the food chain, as they should..there is no cause for concern. Research the scientific facts if you misunderstand this point.
FACT: The word "quarantine" is commonly misperceived...it means simply that the sheep are not to leave premises. All other activities proceed as usual with other animals, humans etc...
FACT: Fear mongers generally do so based on no knowledge of truth or actual facts...do your research.
That pretty much sums it up!
MYTH: No other farmer has ever come forth to public (sic) challenge their methods and protocol.
Anonymous comment deleted by editor.
Why would you not sell or serve lamb during quarantine? Are you concerned that your lamb might be a health risk? If you are so all fired for the facts and disclosure then why doesn't your Wholearth webste say that lamb is not available from your farm? Or are you selling lamb from somewhere else without disclosing that fact? These questions are just questions and nothing more.
Also, if it was so expensive to feed all those sheep, why wouldn't you have sold lambs for slaughter, as is allowed by CFIA? Yes, I sent lambs to slaughter, it is safe to do so, so what is your issue with that? Also, why do you continue to single out "the Alberta farm"? Do you have a personal vendetta against "the Alberta farm"? Do you have problems with "the Alberta farm" owner posting facts. pointing out errors in your version, and asking pertinent questions (based in fact and on the reasons you keep using to say that your flock is free of scrapie?
I hope that by now, you have read enough about scrapie to understand quite a bit about the disease. If you understand quite a bit, you might just come to realize that many of your arguments are either invalid or only confirm what the science already says. Take a serious look at the age of the positive on the Alberta farm and the one on your farm. Interesting how they were born just days apart. Interesting, when one looks at the science, a daughter of a non positive ewe would get less exposure and would have a longer incubation period. It is entirely possible that the dam of WHe 24S was positive for scrapie. She did not live to a ripe old age, by the way what did she die from? Before you answer that, please provide a veterinarian necropsy report, otherwise I am still going to question the cause of death, because from the recent positive found on your farm it would, in my opinion, appear that you are not abe to visually diagnose a scrapie positive animal. I think it is about time that you deal with actual facts, rather than innuendo and facts where something is possibly this or possibly that. A fact, is a fact not a hypothesis.
You are correct about the quarantine, except that there are other conditions besides just no movement of sheep off the farm. You can get a license to remove them, if they are going for slaughter (provided they fit that category). Equipment and products involved with the sheep are also, normally quarantined. The other notable thing is that all visiters to your farm must be informed about the quarantine and that people entering any area that the sheep have access to, must have their shoes disinfected prior to leaving. Just interested to know, since you say you want full disclosure, have all the visiters during the quarantine been notified of it?
A major error in your "facts" is that there are other farmers who have publicly challenged the order of destruction. Did you ever hear about the water buffalo in BC? Did you ever hear about numerous other isntances? Did I ever not allow the public to have access to the facts involving the case on my farm? Intersting side note, how come you went to the media almsot immediately when none of your sheep were yet ordered to be destroyed? In my opinion, the fact that you took yhings public, without my consent (when things are supposed to be confidential unless the actual owner wishes to go public) tells a lot about just how much you care about your fellow breeder. It also makes me wonder what you were trying to accomplish. In my opnion, it would appear that you weren't so sure that your "healthy" sheep were as free of scrapie as you claim, otherwise, why would you already be trying to save them, well before they were ever ordered destroyed, well before there was any indication that they would be ordered destroyed? Please do not tell me it was to help me, because as is evidenced by your accusations and defamation of character, of me and my farm, there is absolutely no interest in helping me, in my opinion, it is all about Montana Jones and who cares who it may hurt. Fact, I offered to help you and give you science based information to perhaps enable you to keep your flock alive, but since it wasn't your way, you refused. Fact, you do not accept a lot of facts and try to twist information to suit your cause, example being the fact that the sheep that tested positive from my farm was WHE 24S, a ewe purchaased from your farm at about 14 months of age. You try to say it didn't come from your farm yet in articles you posted yourself, you say it did come from your farm and use information (which you have been notified, numerous times is incorrect) on her offspring to try to prove that she didn't have scrapie. Why if she didn't come from her farm would you try to disprove that she has scrapie? Why wouldn't you just say that she didn't come from your farm.
Also, I am awaiting a public apology for your statement in regard to the traditional characteristics of my flock. if you have never seen my flock, and you haven't, how can you be an expert and tell what breed characteristics they have or do not have? Or is this once again a case of Ms. Jones, knowing everything and no one else could possibly be able to know anything?
Do not forget, it was you and your lawyer who warned me about deafamation of character, so you do know what it is (well at least should, although you seem to not understand that the truth is not defamation). So, either remove the defaming statement and issue an apolgy or understand that this issue may be revisited. The facts are the facts, and the sooner they are presented to the public, then the sooner the public can make informed decisions.
Patric Lyster
The fact is that lambs are safe to consume, so why would you not sell lambs or lamb meat while you are in quarantine? Just curious as to what your reasoning is when you say it is in fact safe?
Other farmers have challenged the protocol and got changes, but they did it based on scientific facts, not on theory or emotion.
Quarantine also means that sheep products, feed and manure cannot leave the farm. it also means that all visitors are to be notified of the quarantine and any entering areas that the sheep have access to or accessed, must have their footware disinfected before leaving.
"Better Farming"? Credibility plummets when anybody can speculate and spout nonsense on a public forum, especially disappointing to see in a publication espousing to be high quality journalism.
What if down the road they find people can get the Scapies?
As sad as it is to have your flock removed by CFIA, It is the right thing to do. The Sheep farmers of Ontario and Canada have asked for this program. It is for the betterment of the industry as a whole. This woman is under minding the whole sheep industry with doubts about whether lamb is safe to eat, whether her gentics is somehow mixed into other people's flocks. Whether the missing flock is infecting other flocks. CFIA does compensate you for the animals they remove, and in this case, it will be more then this women will ever be able to sell an other animal for. She is making a mockery out all the other sheep farmers who have given up so much to make Canada's sheep industry better. Some how I really doubt that CFIA is in a conspiracy to prove these sheep have scrapie.
Those who govern set the rules. Many years ago a very intelligent man was put to death for proving the earth we live on is round. The clergy that ordered the killing had convinced some narrow minded people that the earth must be flat and you will fall to Hell,---if you venture to far from the donation plate.
Stan Thayer.
Funny thing about history.
The victor always writes the history the way he wants it to be remembered.
Heros and villains in every story to polarize the future generations.
Quoted from mad-cow.org
"Supernatant fluid from a scrapie-infected hamster brain homogenate was mixed with soil, packed into perforated petri dishes that were then embedded within soil-containing pots, and buried in a garden, in the Washington DC area, for 3 years. Between 2 and 3 log units of the input infectivity of nearly 5 log units survived this exposure, with little leaching of virus into deeper soil layers. These results have implications for environmental contamination by scrapie and by similar agents, including those of bovine spongiform encephalopathy and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease."
lots more interesting facts and reasearch on this page, do your reading. enjoy!
Other farmers have challenged CFIA and got changes to the protocol. If you check, you will see that the old protocol was to destroy the whole flock, period. The a Saskatchewan farmer challenged the protocol, with scientific fact not a bunch of possibly this or that, and got it changed to doing genotyping for resistance. CFIA did a pilot project, after studying the science, and found it worked, thus the protocol was changed to use genotyping to preserve a portion of the genetics. Then in 2010, I challenged the protocol, with scienctific based information, and got a pilot project going. THat pilot project was originally offered for 1 year, because it works and was successful, it is now being offered for 2 years. It allows the owner to keep the susceptibe ewes for 2 years, mating to RR rams and thus allowing the keeping of the resulting offspring (thereby saving genetics that are either rare or very hard to recreate). That pilot project is based on the science that shows that ewes (even if infected with scrapie) do not shed infective prions when they are pregnant with, give birth and rear lambs with an R in their genotype. The use of science basd facts is what gets changes to the CFIA protocol. It can be changed, but you need to provide facts and provide a proposal that is sound and addresses the risk to other flocks.
In my opinion, Ms. Jones went public because she didn't want to work with CFIA and use the pilot project because it wasn't exactly what she wanted. Yes with the pilot project, the ewes ordered destroyed are destroyed after the 2 lamb crops, but that is necessary to test, because if they are infected, it is necessary to ensure that they do not spread it. I offered Ms. Jones, help with scienctific research information and facts which coud have kept rams alive, regardless of susceptibility (she could have used them for mating with the QR daughters produced from the pilot project, thus saving more of her genetics). She refused and didn't consider that keeping the ewes alive for 2 years, without putting other flocks at risk (which has most likely happened with the theft of 31 sheeep, from her flock which has now been the source of 2 confirmed cases of scrapie) was going to preserve genetics. While on the pilot project, she could have made a proposal, based on science which may have been able to save some or all of the ewes. But, in my opinion, rather than looking at the big picture and the risk to other sheep flocks, she is only concerned with her own flock (evidenced by her taking almost 2 years to provide trace in and trace out information, and then pretty much only as a tactic to try to get the CFIA to not order destruction, and failing that, to at delay the destruction [from her lawyers letters to the CFIA, posted on the internet]).
I have no issue with someone wanting to save their flock and genetics, but I do have an issue with someone providing misleading information, only a portion of the story, and even outright false information (sometimes presented as facts).
Recently, Ms. Jones has started complining abot the media, when they talk to others and get the other side of the story. Why is this? Why does she indicate, in my opinion from her moi comment, that the media should be getting all their information from her? Is she scared that the facts do not support her stance? Is she not willing to accept fact and would rather deal in theories (possiby could be this or that, is not a fact, it is a theory)?
I am only askiing questions which arise from the facts and how many of them differ, in my opinion (and that of some other knowledgeable people), from what Ms. Jones presents.
Post new comment