United States Department of Agriculture • Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • Safeguarding American Agriculture 

Veterinary Services 

Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health March 2011 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Cow-calf Producers’ Familiarity 

with Cattle Diseases and 

Preferred Contacts and Sources 

of Information for Disease 

Outbreaks 

An outbreak of any animal disease—whether a foreign 

animal disease such as foot-and-mouth disease or an 

endemic disease such as bovine tuberculosis—could be 

devastating to producers individually and to the livestock 

industry as a whole. Early detection of disease and rapid 

response are critical to minimize the adverse effects of 

animal disease outbreaks. 

 Because producers typically are in close contact 

with their animals and will likely be the first to notice 

signs of illness, they have a crucial role in spotting 

disease outbreaks and triggering investigations. 

Consequently, it is important that producers be 

knowledgeable about diseases and disease agents. By 

maintaining familiarity with the signs of serious cattle 

diseases and knowing when and whom to call for help, 

producers can speed detection of and response to 

disease occurrences. 

In 2007–08, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 

National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS) 

studied beef cow-calf health and management practices 

in the United States. The Beef 2007–08 study was 

conducted in 24 States,* representing 79.6 percent of 

U.S. operations with beef cows and 87.8 percent of U.S. 

beef cows. The operations were grouped into 4 herdsize categories: 1 to 49, 50 to 99, 100 to 199, and 200 or 

more beef cows. 

The goals of the Beef 2007–08 study included 

examining producers’ familiarity with diseases and 

learning about producers’ preferred contacts for 

reporting suspected disease conditions and obtaining 

information about disease outbreaks. 

 

* States: 

Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, 

Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, 

Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, 

Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and 

Wyoming.

Producer familiarity with diseases 

 Producers were asked to categorize their level of 

familiarity with a number of cattle diseases; response 

categories were “fairly knowledgeable,” “know some 

basics,” “recognize the name but not much else,” and 

“have not heard of it before.” Producers were most 

familiar with brucellosis: 44.8 percent said they were 

fairly knowledgeable about the disease and 33.6 percent 

knew some basics (table 1). Producers on about twothirds of operations knew some basics or were fairly 

knowledgeable about foot-and-mouth disease, bovine 

spongiform encephalopathy, and bovine viral diarrhea 

(65.8, 63.5, and 64.0 percent of operations, 

respectively). 

Table 1. Percentage of Operations by Familiarity with 

the Following Diseases 

Percent Operations 

Level of Familiarity

Disease 

Fairly 

Knowledgeable Knew 

Some 

Basics 

Recognized 

Name, 

Not 

Much 

Else 

Had Not 

Heard 

of 

Before Total 

Foot-and-mouth 

disease 32.5 33.3 33.0 1.2 100.0 

Bovine 

spongiform 

encephalopathy 

(BSE) 26.0 37.5 32.1 4.4 100.0 

Johne’s disease 

(paratuberculosis) 14.8 16.5 23.0 45.7 100.0 

Bluetongue 13.3 15.4 34.0 37.3 100.0 

Anthrax 22.6 28.3 42.9 6.2 100.0 

Bovine viral 

diarrhea (BVD) 31.6 32.4 23.7 12.3 100.0 

Brucellosis 

(Bang’s disease) 44.8 33.6 17.6 4.0 100.0 

Bovine 

tuberculosis 22.8 27.3 31.4 18.5 100.0 

Vesicular 

stomatitis 8.7 12.2 21.2 57.9 100.0 

Anaplasmosis 16.2 13.7 22.9 47.2 100.0 

Rinderpest 3.9 4.8 13.6 77.7 100.0 
United States Department of Agriculture • Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • Safeguarding American Agriculture 

On nearly one-half of operations (49.1 percent), 

producers either had not heard of anthrax or recognized 

the name but did not know much else. On about twothirds of operations (68.7 percent), producers knew little 

or nothing about Johne’s disease. Not surprisingly, 

producers on more than three-fourths of operations 

(77.7 percent) had not heard of the foreign animal 

disease rinderpest, which has occurred only in Africa 

and Asia in recent years and has been the target of a 

global eradication program by the Food and Agriculture 

Organization of the United Nations since 1992.1 

In general, a higher percentage of producers on 

operations with 200 or more beef cows than on 

operations with 1 to 49 beef cows were fairly 

knowledgeable or knew some basics about most of the 

listed diseases (table 2). 

Table 2. Percentage of Operations that were Fairly 

Knowledgeable or Knew Some Basics About the 

Following Diseases, by Herd Size 

Percent Operations 

Herd Size (Number of Beef Cows) 

Disease 1-49 50-99 

100- 

199 

200 or 

More 

All 

Operations 

Foot-and-mouth 

disease 64.1 67.1 72.8 74.8 65.8 

Bovine 

spongiform 

encephalopathy 

(BSE) 60.5 66.9 74.3 79.2 63.5 

Johne’s disease 

(paratuberculosis) 27.4 37.4 42.7 50.5 31.3 

Bluetongue 25.9 33.4 36.0 43.9 28.8 

Anthrax 49.1 52.1 58.5 60.7 50.9 

Bovine viral 

diarrhea (BVD) 57.8 75.8 81.0 89.3 64.1 

Brucellosis 

(Bang’s disease) 74.5 84.8 90.3 95.1 78.4 

Bovine 

tuberculosis 46.8 56.0 59.7 63.2 50.1 

Vesicular 

stomatitis 18.8 23.2 29.3 31.1 21.0 

Anaplasmosis 26.4 34.0 44.6 45.1 29.9 

Rinderpest 7.9 9.2 12.9 10.0 8.6 

 

While knowledge about diseases, disease agents, 

and transmission modes enables producers to play a 

crucial role in rapid detection of and response to disease 

or disease outbreaks in cattle herds, that knowledge also 

enables producers to develop biosecurity protocols for 

their operations that will help prevent or limit the spread 

of disease. For information from the NAHMS Beef 2007–

08 study about biosecurity practices, please see 

“Biosecurity on U.S. Beef Cow-calf Operations,” NAHMS 

#557.0509, December 2009.2

Reporting contacts for suspected cases of 

disease 

 As noted previously, producers play a crucial role in 

reporting suspected illness and providing early detection 

of disease outbreaks. To facilitate the reporting process, 

it is helpful to know whom producers are most likely to 

contact about a possible foreign animal disease on the 

operation. Education efforts can target producers’ likely 

contacts to be sure producers are aware of the 

appropriate procedures for reporting a suspected 

outbreak, which will help to speed investigation, 

diagnosis, and response. Almost all operations would 

contact a private veterinarian (95.5 percent) or at least 

one of the listed resources (98.8 percent) if an animal on 

the operation was suspected of having foot-and-mouth 

disease or another foreign animal disease (figure 1). 

0

20

40

60

80

100

Extension

agent/

university

State

Vet’s

office

U.S.

Dept. of

Agriculture

Resource

Figure 1. Percentage of Operations that Would

Contact the Following Resources if there was

an Animal Suspected of Having 

Foot-and-Mouth Disease (or Other Foreign

Animal Disease) on the Operation

Percent

Private

vet

Other Any

35.0 35.2

24.4

95.5

4.3

98.8

Sources of information about disease 

outbreaks 

 During a disease outbreak or other animal health 

emergency, producers need ready access to reliable 

information. By knowing the sources that producers 

would use to obtain information about animal health 

outbreaks, responders to an animal health emergency 

can disseminate critical information appropriately to 

ensure that producers receive accurate information 

quickly. 

 In the NAHMS Beef 2007–08 study, producers were 

asked how likely they would be to consult various 

information sources if an outbreak of foot-and-mouth 
United States Department of Agriculture • Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • Safeguarding American Agriculture 

disease or other foreign animal disease occurred in the 

United States. A majority of operations (85.1 percent) 

were very likely to get information from a private 

veterinarian (table 3). The next two sources that 

producers would be very likely to consult were other beef 

producers (46.2 percent of operations) and extension 

agents (40.8 percent of operations). Although official 

organizations can provide rapid, up-to-date information 

via the Internet, more than 60 percent of producers were 

not likely to consult the Internet, which might reflect lack 

of access to the Internet in remote locations. 

Table 3. Percentage of Operations by Likelihood of 

Using the Following Sources to Obtain Information if 

an Outbreak of Foot-and-Mouth Disease (or Other 

Foreign Animal Disease) Occurred in the United 

States 

Percent Operations 

 Likelihood

Source 

Very 

Likely 

Somewhat 

Likely 

Not 

Likely Total 

Other beef 

producers 46.2 30.8 23.0 100.0 

Private 

veterinarian 85.1 10.3 4.6 100.0 

Extension 

agent 40.8 28.3 30.9 100.0 

Beef 

organization or 

cooperative 20.4 27.2 52.4 100.0 

Magazines 18.7 30.0 51.3 100.0 

Internet 20.9 17.3 61.8 100.0 

State 

Veterinarian’s 

office 28.0 21.1 50.9 100.0 

U.S. 

Department of 

Agriculture 26.7 28.3 45.0 100.0 

Television/ 

newspapers 22.2 28.5 49.3 100.0 

Other 2.7 3.3 94.0 100.0 

With almost half of producers being very likely to 

consult other beef producers in the event of a disease 

outbreak, it is crucial that responding officials 

disseminate accurate information rapidly to the sources 

producers are most likely to consult to minimize spread 

of misinformation and fear. 

Producer beliefs on U.S. outbreak preparedness 

 Overall, 6 of 10 operations (60.7 percent) strongly 

agreed or agreed with the statement “The United States 

is well prepared to handle outbreaks of livestock disease 

currently not found in this country, such as foot-andmouth disease and rinderpest” (table 4). The 

percentages of operations by each level of agreement 

were similar across herd sizes. 

Table 4. Percentage of Operations by Level of 

Agreement with the Statement “The United States is 

Well Prepared to Handle Outbreaks of Livestock 

Disease Currently not Found in this Country, such 

as Foot-and-Mouth Disease and Rinderpest,” by 

Herd Size 

Percent Operations 

Herd Size (Number of Beef Cows) 

Level of 

Agreement 1-49 50-99 

100- 

199 

200 or 

More 

All 

Operations

Strongly 

agree 11.0 10.2 6.7 9.3 10.4 

Agree 49.3 58.5 46.1 47.1 50.3 

Disagree 19.7 19.1 28.1 19.4 20.4 

Strongly 

disagree 12.1 11.3 6.6 16.2 11.7 

No opinion 7.9 0.9 12.5 8.0 7.2 

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Nearly one-third of all operations (32.1 percent) 

disagreed or strongly disagreed that the United States is 

well prepared to handle outbreaks of foreign animal 

disease. Seeking further input from producers about 

their reasons for believing the United States is not well 

prepared to handle such disease outbreaks might 

provide important insights into ways to improve response 

and communications during animal health emergencies. 

Summary 

By being familiar with cattle diseases and their 

modes of transmission, producers will be better able to 

protect their animals from disease and provide an early 

warning in the event of a possible outbreak. Knowledge 

about the people, organizations, or information sources 

producers would contact if they suspect illness in their 

animals or need information about a disease outbreak 

can help ensure that vital information is available when 

and where producers and first responders to an 

emergency will be most likely to access it. 

References 

1. http://www.oie.int/eng/maladies/Technical%20

disease%20cards/RINDERPEST_FINAL.pdf

2. National Animal Health Monitoring System, 

Biosecurity on U.S. Beef Cow-calf Operations, 

#557.0509, December 2009; 

http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/beefcowcalf/beef0708/

Beef0708_is_Biosecurity.pdf 
United States Department of Agriculture • Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • Safeguarding American Agriculture 

____________________________ 

For more information, contact: 

USDA:APHIS:VS:CEAH 

NRRC Building B, M.S. 2E7 

2150 Centre Avenue 

Fort Collins, CO 80526-8117 

970.494.7000 

E-mail: NAHMS@aphis.usda.gov 

http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov

#612.0311 

____________________________________ 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in 

all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national 

origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial 

status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, 

political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income 

is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited 

bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, 

large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 

(202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, 

write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250–9410, or call (800) 795–3272 

(voice) or (202) 720–6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity 

provider and employer. 

Mention of companies or commercial products does not imply 

recommendation or endorsement by the USDA over others not 

mentioned. USDA neither guarantees nor warrants the standard of any 

product mentioned. Product names are mentioned solely to report 

factually on available data and to provide specific information.