Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Whos in Charge: Communication and Coordination in an Agriculture or Food Emergency June 21, 2007 Dave Filson, Penn State University Abigail Borron, Purdue.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Whos in Charge: Communication and Coordination in an Agriculture or Food Emergency June 21, 2007 Dave Filson, Penn State University Abigail Borron, Purdue."— Presentation transcript:

1 Whos in Charge: Communication and Coordination in an Agriculture or Food Emergency June 21, 2007 Dave Filson, Penn State University Abigail Borron, Purdue University

2 The Importance of Food Safety EDEN Survey Urgent Drinking water security 78% Food security 64% Individuals role 57% Governments role 55% Animal biosecurity 50% Personal security 48% Farm security 45% Financial security 42% Plant/crop biosecurity 37%

3 EDEN: Homeland Security How likely do you think it is that an agricultural, food, or water bioterrorist attack will take place somewhere in the USA? Likely to Very Likely – 86% Unlikely to Very Unlikely – 14%

4 EDEN: Homeland Security How likely do you think it is that an agricultural, food, or water bioterrorist attack will take place in your county? Likely to very likely – 22% Unlikely to very unlikely – 78%

5 Recent U.S. Disasters: Cost Estimates 2005 Hurricane Katrina/Rita$140 B 1980 Drought$104 B 1988 Drought$ 92 B 2001 September 11$ 44 B 1992 Hurricane Andrew$ 45 B 1993 Midwest Flooding$ 31 B 1989 Hurricane Hugo$ 19 B Disaster Cost estimates are difficult to acquire and vary by source. Estimates in 2005 dollars.

6 Foot and Mouth Disease Great Britain costs $32 Billion U.S. Estimates $24 to $140 Billion

7 Emergency Issues An emergency is a situation where the community can resolve the problem with... their own resources.

8 Disaster Issues A disaster is a situation that overwhelms a community's ability to respond and recover with existing resources.

9 Day-to-Day Incidents On a day-to-day basis, incidents happen -- they are investigated, solved, or determined not to be a threat.

10 For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary February 3, 2004 Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-9 Subject: Defense of United States Agriculture and Food January 30, 2004 Purpose (1) This directive establishes a national policy to defend the agriculture and food system against terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies. Background (2) The United States agriculture and food systems are vulnerable to disease, pest, or poisonous agents that occur naturally, are unintentionally introduced, or are intentionally delivered by acts of terrorism. Americas agriculture and food system is an extensive, open, interconnected, diverse, and complex structure providing potential targets for terrorist attacks. We should provide the best protection possible against a successful attack on the United States agriculture and food system, which could have catastrophic health and economic effects.

11

12 Emergency Support Function Mitigation: Plant or Animal Care

13 Prevention Mitigation Preparedness Response Recovery Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan: Interagency Communications

14 Interagency Communications in food or agriculture emergencies and disasters Action starts with detection! Public safety Economic safety

15 High Suspect Plant Information Flow Regional NPDN Diagnostic Laboratory First Detector: County Extension Crop Advisers Land Grant University Plant Diagnostic Laboratory Local State Department of Agriculture USDA: NAPIS APHIS Mitigation / Action Containment and/or Eradication

16

17

18

19 The silo philosophy

20 AGHEALTHEMHS

21 AGHEALTHEMHS

22 Time Communication Or Action

23 AGHEALTHEMHS

24 Communication Or Action Time

25 Various Risks

26 Spinach and Escherichia coli O157:H7 As of 1 PM (ET) October 6, 2006, Friday, 199 persons infected with the outbreak strain of E. coli O157:H7 have been reported to CDC from 26 states. Among the ill persons, 102 (51%) were hospitalized. Three deaths in confirmed cases have been associated with the outbreak. Economic costs: $308 million

27 Peanut Butter As of May 22, 2007, a total of 628 persons infected with an outbreak strain of Salmonella serotype Tennessee had been reported from 47 states since August 1, Local and state public health officials in multiple states, with assistance from CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), are continuing to investigate this outbreak caused by peanut butter, a new food source for salmonellosis in the United States. All remaining jars of Peter Pan or Great Value peanut butter with a product code beginning with 2111 should be discarded.

28

29 Successes The food and agriculture sector has been very successful, dating back to the Meat Inspection Act of 1906.

30 National Animal Health Laboratory Network CSREES Funding Distribution Laboratories CORE NAHLN Laboratories Member NAHLN laboratories Davis Pullman Albuquerque Laramie Ft. Collins Manhattan Ames College Station Lansing Athens Brookings St. Paul Madison Reynoldsburg Kissimmee Ithaca Logan Harrisburg Jackson Raleigh Baton Rouge Tucson Frankfort Hopkinsville Corvallis USDA Program Management APHIS: Dr. Barbara Martin CSREES: Dr. Mark Robinson LincolnTrenton Purdue Georgetown

31 Western Plant Diagnostic Network University of California, Davis Great Plains Diagnostic Network Kansas State University Southern Plant Diagnostic Network University of Florida North Central Plant Diagnostic Network Michigan State University North Eastern Plant Diagnostic Network Cornell University National Agricultural Pest Information System Purdue University National Plant Diagnostic Network Alaska, Hawaii and Pacific Territories PR

32 Challenges Action starts with detection. County-state-federal entities make communication more complex. Silos impede communication between agencies at all levels. Cautions to prevent panic or scares impede free-flow of information.

33 Challenges Emergency managers must understand food and ag. Agriculture must understand emergency management. ICS, NIMS and NRP help County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plans lack substance.

34 Challenges Complexity of the system Individual and agency abilities Understanding NRP-NIMS and CEMP

35

36 Solutions Accept there will never be zero. Collect and share lessons learned Bring back real life incidents; lessons are often lost and/or not acted upon. Analyze accountability and resource allocation. Remove barriers for internal and inter- agency communication.

37 Solutions Improve interagency communications at the lowest level. Provide stop-gap measures. Find and address the weak spots. Use existing networks. Bring all of the players together.

38 Solutions Develop real-world expertise sources that merge research and field applications to develop new solutions.

39 Plans are nothing; planning is everything. Dwight D. Eisenhower

40 Thanks to: Kavita M Berger, PhD Senior Program Associate and the

41 David Filson Penn State Cooperative Extension Emergency Preparedness and Response Coordinator 401 Agricultural Administration Building University Park, PA Phone: Abigail Borron Purdue University EDEN Communication Specialist Department of Ag Communications 615 West State Street Rm 211 West Lafayette, IN Phone:


Download ppt "Whos in Charge: Communication and Coordination in an Agriculture or Food Emergency June 21, 2007 Dave Filson, Penn State University Abigail Borron, Purdue."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google