A Santa Gertrudis cow tested positive for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy in Alabama this month. (Donald G. McNeil, New York Times, 14 March 2006) In the three-year span previous to this discovery, two other cows with BSE, commonly called mad cow disease, were reported in Washington and Texas. The result was a three-year ban on U.S. and Canadian exports of beef in 40 countries.

The discovery of the Alabama cow occurred just two months after controversy between Japan and the United States over lifting the Japanese import ban. Because the Alabama cow was destroyed before making it into the food source, there ought not to be justification for reinstating bans on U.S. beef. As in the previous two cases, this cow appears to have been an older cow, born before the U.S. 1997 feed ban. Such feed includes bovine spinal material which, in turn, may carry proteins called prions, trasmitters of BSE in cattle. Thus, animals born before the ban have a significant risk of exposure to the disease.

Based on the animal’s teeth, the local vet reported that the cow was older, “quite possibly upwards of 10 years of age,” Clifford said. But he said it can be hard to tell the age of older cows from their teeth. “It’s an estimate,” he said in an interview with The Associated Press. “We may not be able to determine the exact age. But we’re going to do everything we can to trace this animal back to the herd of origin and determine its age.” (MSNBC, 14 March 2006)

Since the discovery of BSE in a Washington dairy cow three years ago, the Agricultural Department has been testing for mad cows in larger quantities. Even at this level, agricultural authorities have tested less than one-percent of the cattle in the country. They tested 652,697 cows, which is a drop in the bucket compared to the 95 million total head. (MSNBC, 14 March 2006)

Determining the origin of a mad cow outbreak involves some detective work, one which would be made easier with the establishment of a comprehensive tracking system.

Some U.S. cattle producers have invested in a Quality System of Assessment (QSA) which documents birth dates, tracks movement through a 15-digit identification number, and audits participants every six months. This is expensive an expensive undertaking (Beef (Primedia), 1 February 2006) and are, for the most part, set for the purpose of meeting foreign standards of beef, not necessarily domestic standards. This comprises a minority of the total market.

The U.S.D.A. implemented trials for the National Animal Identification System. Each ranch will have a seven-digit address code and each animal removed from its original herd will receive an electronic ear tag, called a Radio Frequency Identification Device, containing information about the animal’s age and class. Dr. Hillman, state veterinarian in Texas and member of the Subcommittee on NAIS explains:

Today, it can take days to track the movement of livestock, to ensure that all exposed or diseased animals have been detected, Dr. Hillman pointed out. He predicted that, by 2008, when the national system is fully implemented and mandatory, tracking livestock movements could be streamlined, greatly enhancing disease eradication efforts. He stressed that the ability to rapidly identify animals and trace livestock or poultry movements is crucial to an effective animal disease response. (Texas Animal Health Commission, December 2004).

The 2008 completion date may not be soon enough for some. Consumers complain that the U.S.D.A. needs to speed up the process for tracking and testing cows.

“The U.S. government has no greater capacity to trace a ’mad cow’ back to its origins or answer crucial questions about its origins than it did on Dec. 23, 2003,” said Carol Tucker Foreman of the Consumer Federation of America. (MSNBC, 14 March 2006)