WJVf. Sischo, D.VJVI. Extension Veterinarian, PSU STATE COLLEGE (Centre Co.) Included in the changes in the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) that occurred this last sum mer were several that affect bovine practitioners in Pennsylvania. The most significant of these changes is the new role for veter inarians in the recertification of producers discovered with a viola tive antibiotic residue in their bulk tank milk. In this role, veterinarians will certify that these producers have participated in the 10-point quality assurance program. Although this program will be required for producers with an antibiotic residue violation, the original intent of the program was to be voluntary throughout the dairy industry. There arc many compelling rea sons why the veterinary profession should actively promote this prog ram as a voluntary program. A Milk and Dairy Beef Quality QUESTIONS? USE THIS PROBLEM SOLVER WITH DRAG AUGER FEEDERS PROBLEM System Stalls System runs, stops then reverses Feed on floor at row ends Feed line is not running Auger jumped ou of trough (and is wound all over , the walk ways). Too many smaller sized eggs Too many cracks Wasted feed in the walk ways DON’T PUT UP WITH PROBLEMS! fLJT HERSHEY EQUIPMENT2SS PLANE TREE DRIVE f I rAUPINV LANCASTER, PA 17603 COMPANY ’ INC - (717) 393-5807 Assurance Program (DQA) that is actively recruiting participants can directly address some of the critic isms from consumer advocacy groups against the dairy industry. These criticisms have centered on pharmaceutical residues in foods of animal origin and the belief that antibiotics are used irra tionally in the dairy industry. These criticisms have already prompted the Center for Veterin ary Medicine to tighten up rules for use of extra-label drugs in veterin ary medicine. The possibility is quite teal that dairy practitioners could lose the right to prescribe drugs in an extra label manner. Because of the above criticisms and their potential impact on the dairy industry, the American Vet erinary Medical Association and the National Milk Producers Fed eration designed the 10-point DQA program. It was intended as a cooperative, educational program involving veterinarians, milk receivers, and CAUSES Bad braze Kinked auger Feed level too high Too manyrfeed cycles Foreign object in trough Bad braze at drive Elbows worn through again Failed motor Auger broke Birds not getting enough feed Feeder runs too often causing excess bird movement in the cage during laying periods. Feed trough lip is not high enough BUY BIG DUTCHMAN Vets Important To Milk Quality SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS File or grind excess braze Cut out kink and re-braze Lower feed level Delete a feed cycle Find and remove object Make sure feed cleaner is ' working Determine drive and repair Cut auger, remove elbows and couplers, replace and re assemble Determine which motor(s) out of the four are bad, replace and reset. Gather a welder, torch and grinder. Replace auger in trough, and braze. Be careful not to stretch auger. Add yet another feed cycle. (May require at least 8 per day.) Delete feeding during laying period. (Beware that reduction may result in smaller eggs.) No solution producers, and principally con sisted of a booklet that was received by Veterinary Extension this past summer. Although presented with mater ials. there were no guidelines on how the program would be imple mented in Pennsylvania, and what roles in the implementation the three principals would have. As a consequence, a pilot pro ject was designed to investigate producer, veterinarian and sanita rian attitudes regarding implemen tation of the DQA. The project included a total of 40 producers, 7 sanitarians/milk receiver field representatives, and 5 veterinarians in one Ohio and three Pennsylvania counties. The project was begun in July and ended in October. The lO point plan was initially introduced to the participating veterinarians and field representatives at small county meetings. At these meetings, field rep resentatives and veterinarians were asked to select mutual clients WITH BIG DUTCHMAN CHAIN FEEDERS Chain never needs brazing Chain does not kink Chain runs at high or low levels of feed Chain virtually is unaffected by foreign objects. Feed cleaner is unnecessary and system cannot run backwards Chain feeders have no elbows to wear out. Only one motor per feed line. If chain breaks, it is easily repaired with a hammer and chain breaker tool. Chain does not stretch. Chain feeders provide 2'A times more f«ad space than drag auger feeders allowing it to be run as few as 3 times per day. More feed space allows less feeding cycles, which means you don’t have to feed during laying period. Big Dutchman has high-lip trough, (w) Siq Dutchman. “a step ahead” Lancaster Farming, Saturday, January 11, 1992-Al9 who would cooperate in the study. Field representatives were asked to recruit the producers and introduce the program and booklet to these "volunteers." The veterinarians were asked to subsequently contact the coopera tors and arrange a visit to review the booklet with the producer. At the completion of the visits, all participants in a county were asked to attend meetings where attitudes about the DQA were discussed. Field representatives took diffe rent approaches for introducing the program to producers. In some cases, the booklet was delivered to the producer with little or no expla nation, and in other cases the entire booklet was reviewed with the pro ducer but filled out in large part by the field representative. Visits lasted from 20 minutes to 3 hours, with most visits lasting more than 1 hour. The participating veterinarians made special visits to the farms to review the booklet with the pro ducers. Visits lasted from 30 minutes to several hours, with most visits lasting approximately 30 minutes. Veterinary visits were expedited if the producer had completed the booklet (either by themselves or with the help of the field represen tative) before the visit. There were many important concerns and opinions about the program that emerged from the discussion groups with producers. Some of these were: • DQA was an important and needed program that could help mold consumer opinion, avert negative publicity, and provide educational benefits for all producers. • DQA would not work as a vol untary program, especially if there were no incentives for volunteer ing. These producers felt that the program might best be targeted at new producers or violators, but paradoxically, if they were forced or provided incentives, most of these producers would “volunteer.” • The DQA booklet was diffi cult. Many producers felt that they did not have the education or back ground to understand the many types of drugs and residue detec tion kits that were included in the booklet. • Many of the producers felt that veterinarians needed to have an expanded role in monitoring anti biotic use on farms and take more responsibility for the prevention of residues. Hiese producers felt that veterinary participation in the program was essential and looked forward to the opportunity for increased contact with their veterinarian. • It was generally perceived that the milk receivers would be the best choice for introducing the program on farms. The veterinary profession has two choices in dealing with the DQA program. The first is to be reactive and let veterinary participation in the program be dictated by regulatory action. The second is to be active by promoting the program to clients, providing educational opportuni ties to producers, and contacting receivers and working with them on programs. this is an opportunity for veter inarians to provide an important service to their clients and to them selves by promoting the rational use of antibiotics on dairy farms.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers