24. Your submission states that disease was spread primarily by 

movement of animals from breeding areas to fattening areas. What 

other means were discovered that resulted in the spread of the 

disease? What were the results of any epidemio/ogical investigation? 

As it was mentioned in the submission, the first outbreaks that were detected 

were caused by the transportation of livestock from the border breeding 

areas towards the fattening areas located in the center of Argentina. 

Afterwards, the disease was spread within these areas due to the density of 

susceptible animals and also by animals movement among establishments 

of the same area. In both cases the livestock movements were halted 

temporarily (except for immediate slaughter) decreasing outstandingly the 

occurrence of the disease. In the isolated outbreaks that occurred in 

historically paraendemic areas (northwest and Cuyo), in some cases the 

disease arose from the movement of breeders or animals of affected areas 

sent to be slaughtered. 

In some cases it was also proved that in the height of the epidemic, the 

infection was caused by the movement of farm machinery during the harvest 

period, as well as the movement of people (veterinarians, vaccinators, etc.). 

25. What changes in regulations or practices occurred to address the 

epidemiological linkages that were established between focal points in 

the most recent outbreaks? Can you estFinate the effectiveness of 

those changes? 
After the outbreak in neighboring countries in 2000 and because of the first 

cases in our country, the first modifications in the regulations aimed at 

preventing the entry of the agent into the country and at diminishing the risk 

of disease spread from the primarily affected areas (north of the country) to 

the central areas. For that reason, susceptible animals outgoing wwas banned 

and movement was restrained in border areas. 

Additional measures were applied regarding the susceptible animals 

movement throughout the country, including negative serological analysis for 

FMD before the transportation, and as above mentioned, the movements 

were completely prohibited, excepting of those animals for immediate 

slaughtering. 

In spite of these measures, the disease came into the country and spread 

widely in most of the territory. Nevertheless, the strategies of the 2001 

Eradication Plan, allowed the prompt decrease of clinic cases and the 

subsequent disease eradication. 

26. What changes have been made to prevent re®ntroduction of FMD 

into the country? 

The researches conducted as from the last outbreaks (2000 and 2003) 

proved that the northern provinces, in the Bolivian and Paraguay borders, 

are the areas where the infection may be reintroduced. Consequently, from 

the middle of 2003, when outbreaks were reported in these countries and 

after the Salta outbreak, special actions have been implemented in these 

areas tending to diminish the risk of the introduction of the disease and to 

reinforce the surveillance. 
The main actions that were implemented were: 

• The reinforcement of the sanitary structure of the area: the opening of 

additional local offices, personnel hiring, purchase of new vehicles, etc. 

• Official FMD vaccination of all susceptible species, with individual 

identification (eartag). 

• Reinforcement of border check posts: 

• Reinforcement of personnel in borders and check posts of sanitary 

reinsurance. 

• Vehicles disinfection in border posts approved by SENASA in 

Salta, Jujuy and Formosa in the Bolivian and Paraguay borders. 

• Intensification of controls of passengers coming into the country. 

• Destruction of confiscated products. 

• Reinforcement of epidemic surveillance (directed serological 

samples); 

• Additional controls in animal movement. 

his group of actions was formalized in a Plan of Border Receipt, with the 

promulgation of the Resolution SENASA N° 403/2004. inside this plan 

he/she is the Sub-project of North Frontier A that it in fact embraces the area 

referred above (to see Annex III Plan of Border Receipt). 

27. Are there any factors concerning the adjacent regions that are 

relevant to disease spread (e.g. size, distance from adjacent borders to 

affected herds or animals)? 

See Annex III Border Control Plan. 
28. Were biosecurity measures in place that did not work and, if so, 

how were the measures corrected to prevent re-introduction of the 

disease? 

Although the cause of the infection in 2000 was not completely explained, 

the most probable hypothesis is the animals entry through the Argentine 

northern border. This border is formed mostly by physical features (rivers), 

but there is an arid area without a clear delimitation that does not guarantee 

completely the animals entry. Although there are check posts in all the 

border posts, there may be informal animal movement that may hardly be 

detected. 

Consequently, the Border Control Plan was implemented, due to the 

different introductions of the disease into the country through this part of the 

border. This Plan delimitation and actions can be consulted in the 

corresponding Annex. 

29. P/ease provide more information on geographic factors that may 

influence the spread of FMD in your country. Discuss in rnore detail the 

social, economic, and political factors that play a role in FMD 

epidemiology and how programs to mitigate risk were designed 

relatfve to these factors. 

There are different socioeconomic types of livestock productions in our 

country. These different types of productions originated different ecosystems 

that have historically influenced the spread of the disease. The bovine 
breeding zones, formed by the provinces of Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, 

Cordoba, La Pampa, Entre Rios (excepting the fattening zones existing in 

these provinces), San Luis, Santiago del Estero, Chaco, Formosa, 

Corrientes, Misiones and Rio Negro, have characterized by the presence of 

an adult population that generated in the past the conditions for the constant 

presence of the virus in the animal population (Primary endemic 

ecosystem). 

Northern Buenos Aires, northeastem La Pampa and southern Cordoba, 

Entre Rios and Santa Fe are zones of bovine fattening. These areas have 

characterized by a high rate of animal contact, with bovines of higher 

susceptibility and a high rate of population rechanging, with entries from 

breeding areas (Secondary endemic ecosystem). 

Northwest and Cuyo regions, formed by the provinces of Jujuy, Salta, La 

Rioja, Tucuman, Catamarca, Mendoza and San Juan, have charecterized by 

a scarce bovine density, with familiar or subsistence economies that have 

not favored the endemic permanence of the virus in last years. Historically 

only sporadic outbreaks occurred because of infected animals and byproducts entry (Paraendemic ecosystem). 

In the south, the Patagonia region is formed by the provinces of Neuquen, 

Rio Negro, Chubut, Santa Cruz and Tierra del Fuego. The provinces of 

Neuquen and Rio Negro, just south of Neuquen river, formed the 

surveillance zone between the FMD free area and the rest of the country 

(Undamaged ecosystem). There have not been FMD outbreaks in the other 

provinces of the Patagonia region and this is a FMD free ecosystem 

recognized by OIE. 
The analysis of the FMD reintroduction in 2000/2001 proves that a border 

with a poor topographical definition in some northem areas influenced the 

FMD appearance. Thus young infected animals moved from the border 

breeding zones towards fattening areas, spreading the disease. The 

experience over the years proved that the control of primary endemic 

ecosystems allows to control and eradicate the disease in the rest of the 

ecosystems. 

At present, the Border Control Plan (see Annex) is being implemented in the 

northern border, as part of a mitigation program of border risk. 

Also see vaccination strategies according the ecosystems in the answer to 

the question What schedules do you follow, including times of revaccinafion? 

30. We are parficularly interested in identifying risk pathways that may 

lead to the introduction of FM® into the United States. P/ease provide 

detafled information concerning export procedures for beef, inc/uding 

storage or quarantine conditions and times, transport procedures, 

s/aughter procedures and projections of the amounts of bone/ess and 

matured beef you intend to export. 

To the ends of being able to export fresh meat with that destination the troops of 

animals that will be slaughtered will come directly from farm. 

The obtained meats of the tasks of the same ones, they will be matured 

immediately in camera after the task, during 36 hours to a temperature in the 

camera not smaller to 4° C, until reaching in the muscle "Yongissimus dorsis' a 

PH 5.9. 
The meats will be completely boneless and free of lymphatic, packed and 

prepared ganglion for their export. 

Although the opening of fresh bovine meat market is still in process, Argentina 

Republic estimates for future exportation similar Ton. as years before. See the 

graphic attached. 

Bovine Fresh Meat Exportations per Year in Tones j 

Na TOTA 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1 2003 2004 

L 

Canada 42.664 122 15.148 22.813 4.581 - - - 

United 49.367 6.717 23.547 14.987 4.116 - - - 

States 

World"s 882.488 86.993 132.271 133.674 38.027 108.357 155.350 227.816 

Exportation 

31. Does Argentina have any FMD-susceptible feral or wild animals? If 

so, what is their disease status in the vaccinated areas and in the 

buffer zones w/th Bolivia and Paraguay? Please address migratory 

patterns between zones and provide any surveillance data you have 

obtafned on susceptible species. 

There are several FMD susceptible wild species in Argentina, native or 

introduced by men: deer, wild boars, capybaras, vvild South American 

camelidae (guanacos, Ilamas, alpacas, etc.), anteiopes, buffalos, etc. 

With regard to these species surveillance, there is not a program of the 

actions related to the control or surveillance of diseases. Nevertheless 

specific studies have been carried out on vvild species, mainly related to 
FMD and classic swine fiver. Further information can be found in Annex IV 

'Serological samples 2002'. 

In addition, as the OIE have asked member countries to report wild animals 

diseases, information is being gathered through the Environment Secretariat 

and agreements with agencies devoted to wild fauna (Secretariat of Natural 

Resources and Environment, National Parks, etc.). 

The status of adjacent regions with respect to the agent 

32. P/ease describe the boundaries of the buffer zone around the 

vaccfnation area in the District of Tarija in Bolivia that shares a border 

with the provinces of Salta and Jujuy in Argentina (page 23). What 

activities were under-taken in the buffer zone to prevent the 

introduction and spread of FMD? 

See the answer to question What changes have been made to prevent 

reintroduction of FMD into the country? 

The buffer zone called Border Cordon includes an area of 25 km in width in 

its narrowest part, from the Bolivian and Paraguay border inland the country. 

It extends in length, from the department of Santa Catalina, in the province 

of Jujuy, up to the department of Laishi, in the province of Formosa. Its 

length is 1200 km and its area is almost 3 million hectares. 

The whole area of the holdings that are located partly within the cordon, is 

included in the program (see Annex lll Border Contro/ Plan) for sanitary 

purposes. 
In the case of the district of Tarija border, the buffer zone is next to some 

areas of the provinces of Jujuy and Salta: 

PROVINCE OF JUJUY: 

- It includes the 25 km area on the Santa Catalina and Yavi intemational 

border. 

PRONVINCE OF SALTA: 

- The border cordon in this province includes the area next to the 

international border, of the departments of Santa Victoria, Oran, Iruya, 

General Jose de San Martin y Rivadavia. 

33. Is active surveillance (e.g. inspectlon activities and serological 

surveys) occurring in Salta and Jujuy? If no4 explaln why. 

The active surveillance carried out in these zones is similar to the actions 

that are implemented throughout the country: serological samples, clinic 

inspections (in slauthterhouses, auctions, during vaccinations), etc. 

In addition directed serological samples have been carried out in particular 

circumstances, as in the case of outbreaks in neighboring countries 

(outbreak in Pozo Hondo, Paraguay, July, 2003). 

Nevertheless, since the Border Control Plan implementation, additional 

active surveillance actions are conducted in this area, such as differential 

serological samples, vaccinations in all species, individual identification of all 

species, individual identification of all vaccinated animal, clinic inspections 

before animal movement, etc. 
34. How is ani nal movement controlled between the buffer zone and 

neighboring areas in Argentina? 

The official veterinarian or SENASA paratechnician takes part in all the 

animals outgoings from the area included in the Border Control Plan, 

excepting of those animals that would be slaughtered immediately. 

Every susceptible animal that is moved from the Border Control Plan area is 

inspected, excepting those for immediate slaughtering, to check whether 

they have been previously re-vaccinated, verifying notification and entry to 

the destination. 

Every susceptible animal that comes into the Border Control Plan area is 

inspected, verifying if it has the authorization of the SENASA veterinarian of 

the jurisdiction of destination. At the arrival the animals are identified with ear 

tags and re-vaccinated, when they are not sent for immediate slaughtering. 

SENASA may establish additional requirements for animals outgoings 

according to the sanitary situation of the region. 

Fixed posts have been placed along the ingoing and outgoing roads where 

SENASA and security forces control the animals traffic. 

35. Your submission referred to preventative measures (Attachment 1, 

page 23) being strengthened and enforced in relation to Argentina's 

border with Paraguay. What measures were strengthened and 

enforced? What &ind of surveillance and animal health protection 

programs exist in the region? 
See answer to question What changes have been rrrade to prevent 

reintroduction of FMD into the country? and Annex III Border Control 

Plan. 

36. What /evel of ha mony and co/laboration exists between Argentina 

and neighboring countries in terms of FMD contro/? 

Regional activities are coordinated through different projects and programs 

conducted by several international agencies and agreements, and also 

through bilateral programs and agreements with neighboring countries: 

Hemispheric Plan for FMD Control and Eradication: 

The Hemispheric Plan for FMD Control and Eradication is coordinated by the 

Pan American Foot and Mouth Disease Center (PANAFTOSA) and 

Argentina takes part in one of the PHCEFA sub-programs, Cuenca del Plata 

Agreement for the FMD Eradication. 

Cuenca del Plata Agreement for FMD Eradication: 

In 1987, an agreement among Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay was signed in 

Porto Alegre, Brazil, with the purpose of debating and coordinate a common 

strategy to struggle against FMD. The strategic project was developed in 

February 1988 by technicians of the three countries and it was implemented 

in 1989. In 1992, Paraguay joined the project and afterwards Bolivia. The 

Republic of Chile participates as observer country. 

The Agreement operates through an Executive Committee, formed by the 

sanitary authorities of each member countries, and a Technical Group 
advising the Committee, formed by five veterinarian from each country and 

two permanent consultants, the Coordinator and the Epidemiologist, who 

advice the member countries. This Technical Group, through which all the 

activities of the Agreement are channeled, meets four times a year. 

This multilateral Agreement establishes a system of reciprocal information by 

which data on occurrence and/or suspicions of vesicular diseases are 

weekly submifted with its corresponding geographic location, acting virus 

strains, exposed population, ill animals, etc. In addition, immediate 

notification of any risk sanitary situation, present in the border areas is 

mandatory. 

The country notifies the other members of the Agreement on the prices of 

the young bull on the hoof and this makes it easier to detect risk situations or 

tendencies with regards to possible illegal trade flows of animals, products 

and by-products in the border areas. The Agreement also establishes that, if 

there is a suspicion or disease up to 60 km of the border, or in any other 

geographic point representing a risk for the rest of the countries of the 

Agreement, the affected country has to notify immediatefy their neighbors 

about the situation, so that they can take adequate preventive measures. 

Argentine-Bolivian Technical Assistance: 

Argentina is cooperating with the Bolivian govemment on the struggle 

against FMD by means of transference of technology and technical 

assistance to program the Sanitary Plan. The Bureau of Laboratories of 

SENASA trained Bolivian agents on performance and standarization of FMD 

diagnostic serological tests. Periodical meetings are held among agents of 

both countries in order to exchange sanitary information about cadastres, 
animal poputation, high risk or greatest prevention holdings, vaccinations 

and suspicions, serological samples, etc. 

In turn, Argentina is cooperating with other countries in the region to develop 

a FMD Control and Eradication Plan. 

Bilateral Agreement in the border area with Paraguay. 

Joint tasks were agreed in the border area to establish a FMD vaccination, 

prevention and epidemiological surveillance program with the aim of 

mitigating the risk of occurrence of FMD. Recently, the National Agri-food 

Health and Quality Service (SENASA) signed a letter of intent with the 

Paraguay sanitary service (SENACSA) and with the White Helmet 

Commission to 'agree on a participation and cooperation mechanism' of the 

latter at both sides of the border, wwithin the framework of the Regional 

Program for the Eradication of FMD, boosted by the South Farming Council 

(CAS). The Border Control Plan was established by SENASA Resolution N° 

43 in 2004 and implemented within the framework of these actions. (For 

further information see Annex Border Plan) 

Regional Program for the Eradication of FMD, boosted by the South Farming 

Council (CAS) and South America Standing Veterinary Committee (CVP): 

The Departments of Agricu ture of the enlarged MERCOSUR countries 

(Southern Common Market) (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Bolivia 

and Chile) signed an agreement to form the South Farming Council (CAS) 

as a tool for the regional dialogue, consultations and joint actions, regarding 

the farming, forestry and fishing sectors, animal and vegetal health and food 

innocuousness, as well as international negotiations on products trading. 
The South Farming Council (CAS) was created within the framework of the 

South America Standing Veterinary Committee (CVP). The basic aim of this 

entity is to coordinate actions and increase the regional capacity of 

preventing and control the sanitary effects and risks that afrect animals and 

by-products production and trading in the region. The CVP is formed by the 

highest rank authorities in Animal Health of the Departments of Agriculture of 

the member countries. Among its main tasks, the CVP coordinates the 

actions and strategies of inember countries with third countries or economic 

blocks to facilitate the trading of farming products; coordinates the member 

countries actions before intemational bodies (OIE, Codex Alimentarius, FAO, 

PAHO, etc.); form multiagencies and multidisciplinary teams to respond to 

sanitary emergences and help to the epidemiological surveillance of the 

countries in the region; etc. 

37. What are your procedures for recognizing countries as free of FMD 

or other diseases? 

The Repubfic of Argentina accepts the status established by the World 

Organization for Animal Health on FMD and for other diseases for which this 

organization establishes recognition processes of the sanitary status. 

The extent of an active control program in the region 

38. What is the role of the private sector in FMD control programs? 

Who funds the control activities at the local level and how does the 
government oversee any private sector roles? P/ease describe how 

private and governrnental units interact for FMD control. 

The law 24.305 and its Regulatory Decree (643/96) validate the local 

foundations and entities of sanitary struggle. The national plan establishes 

the tasks of these entities and the FMD Eradication Plan shall be founded on 

them at local level. These entities of struggle against FMD are created and 

formed by local producers and people related to the livestock sector. 

In addition, the private sector takes part in the National Committee of 

Struggle against FMD (CONALFA), through representatives of veterinary 

professionals, meat processing plant industry, livestock agents, etc. This 

committee takes part in the planning, monitoring and assessment of the 

FMD Eradication Plan. 

One of the main roles in private sector, carried out through their foundations, 

in the FMD control is to cany out the systematic vaccination campaigns. This 

strategy that had already been used in the nineties allowed the eradication of 

the disease in Argentina for the first time. The local entities of sanitary 

struggle have an Administrative Committee, a Technical Committee and an 

Operating Committee. The Administrative Committee is formed by producers 

and deals with the management of the funds required by this committee 

operations. The vaccines and the applications are afforded by each 

producer. 

Each administrative area located within the systematic vaccination area of 

the country, has its Local Vaccination Plan, which is developed by the 

respective Local Sanitary entity and should be approved by COPROSA 
(Provincial Commission of Animal Heafth). Later, once Plan is approved, it is 

sent to CONALFA and SENASA to obtain the definitive approval. 

The 361 Vaccination Plans of the country, supervised by SENASA, with 

their 5900 agents are responsible for the implementation of the vaccination. 

The SENASA Resolution N° 623102, establishes the duties and 

responsibilities of each member of the operating group, and how his duty 

should be carried out. 

A strict control over the performance of each group member is performed 

both by the Technical Committee members and the SENASA Local 

Veterinary. 

SENASA Resolution N° 33/02 states the audits that the SENASA Local 

Veterinary of the jurisdiction should carry out on the Local Plan, parlicularly 

on the operating group performance during the campaign. 

39. What type of training is provided to participating institutfons and 

which personnel are given the training? 

See question 4. 

40. What role do private practitioners play in disease surveillance, 

detection, and reporrting? 

The Local Sanitary Entities of Vaccination performed an important role in the 

disease surveillance, as the operating group (vaccinators and programmers) 

visits and inspects al{ the bovines in the establishments at least twice 

annually. The task carried out by this group and that of the producers and 
people who are in charge of the animals turn them into one of the main 

sensors of the surveillance system. 

41. On page 28, you mentioned that contact animals may be subject to 

sanitary s/aughter for domestic consumption only, provided that 

appropriate biosafety and risk mitigation procedures are fo/lowed. 

In some cases the contact animals that would be used for domestic 

consumption were slaughtered when the disease was still endemic. 

42. During an outbreak, why are on/y diseased animals slaughtered and 

not all contact animals? Please provide more details. 

The previous submission information on this issue fitted vvith the regulations 

(SENASA Resolution N° 35/02) established in a different sanitary situation, 

when the disease was still endemic, after one of the most important FMD 

outbreaks that have been in the country. When the outbreaks occurrence 

decreased and there were only sporadic cases, sanitary slaughter was 

implemented. 

At present, sanitary slaughter is indicated for all disease animals and direct 

contacts, with the destruction of the carcasses in the same holding, when the 

FMD outbreak is confirmed. 

43. How are carcasses disposed of on fanrs where stamping out 

procedures are implemented? 
In the cases when sanitary slaughter was implemented, the carcasses were 

buried in a sanitary pit or destroyed by heat. 

44. P/ease provide updated information on the number of disease 

investigations and quarantines conducted by Argentina during the past 

3 years. 

Quarantine measures were implemented in all the FMD suspected 

establishments, either because the outbreak was confirmed or the disease 

was ruted out afterwards. 

The following table shows the number of establishments inspected due to 

outbreaks occurrence o to suspicion of vesicular disease in the past 3 years. 

YEAR OUTBREAKS SUSPICIONS TOTAL 

2001 2438 64 2502 

2002 1 3 4 

2003 1 0 1 

2004 0 0 0 

45. What epidemiologica/ investigations were done to trace the source 

of infection? What procedures were followed in conducting the 

investigations and what follow-up procedures have been instituted? 

What were the results of the investigations, if any? 
AII cases of outbreak or vesicular disease are investigated firstly to reach a 

definitive diagnosis, and to determine also the cause and spread of the 

disease (retrospective and future tracing, respectively) in the confirmed 

cases of FMD. 

The technicians of the emergence team of the affected area develop 

research and tracing tasks, jointly with the local veterinary. Information is 

gathered through observations, visits, interviews and samples taking. The 

local SENASA office (Sanitary Management System) has a database. 

Researches on holdings or people related to them are conducted from the 

data collected about the affected establishment and adjacent holdings 

(animals, people and vehicles movement, vaccinations). 

In the 2001 and 2002 outbreaks, the research was carried out in most of the 

cases at local or regional levels as a result of the high number of cases. This 

research was oriented to the study of the outbreak in each district. 

Resolution 35/2002 approves the Program for epidemiological researches 

and preventive activities when the occurrence of FMD is suspected and has 

an annex with a epidemiological research form. The Program states the 

measures that should be taken to respond to the outbreak and the 

researches that shall be conducted. 

Vaccination status of the region 

46. Please provide an update concerning vaccination activities for the 

second campaign in 2002 and for 2003. 

See Annex V Vaccination Table. 
47. What schedules do you follow, including times of re-vaccination? 

The area where the Systematic FMD Vaccination Program is implemented 

includes all the provinces located in the north of Rio Negro and Neuquen 

rivers. A regionalization strategy is applied according to the ecological 

features, production forms and structures, trading modes and circuits and 

movement flows of each region. Applying these premises the following 

regions were established: 

Central Region: Buenos Aires, Chaco, Cordoba, Formosa, La Pampa, 

Santiago del Estero, San Luis and Santa Fe. 

Mesopotamia Region: Entre Rios, Corrientes and Misiones. 

NOA Region: Salta, Jujuy, Catamarca and Tucuman. 

Cuyo Region: La Rioja, San Juan and Mendoza. 

Northern Patagonia A Region: Rio Negro, Neuquen and Patagones district 

(Province of Buenos Aires). 

(In the province of Rio Negro animals are only vaccinated in Gral. Roca, 

Pichi Mahuida, Choele Choel, Conesa, Avellaneda and Adolfo Alsina (in a 

partial way). 

In the province of Neuquen animals are onfy vaccinated in the 

Confluencia district. 

The strategies that are implemented according to the regions are as follows: 

Central Region: 
• Central, Mesopotamia and Northern Patagonia A Regions (excepting the 

districts of R. Lista, Matacos and Bermejo in the province of Formosa): 

two vaccination campaigns are conducted annually on all bovines. 

• NOA (excepting the districts of Gral. San Martin and Rivadavia Banda 

Norte in the province of Formosa) and Cuyo Regions: two vaccination 

campaigns are carried out. In the first campaign all bovines are 

vaccinated. In the second campaign the bovines that are in high 

prevention holdings are vaccinated, along with the bovines which will be 

moved. 

In these regions, the second vaccination campaign involves only holdings of 

highest prevention because of the following features: 

• They are located in adjacent areas to facilities were animals are gathered 

(slaughterhouses, auctions, etc.). 

• Holdings with a high number of bovines. 

• Holdings with an intense dynamics of cattle movement, permanent 

ingoings and outgoings. 

• Holdings for bovine fattening. 

Geographic, climatic and epidemiological reasons impose this strategy. 

a.- Geographic and climatic aspects. 

• The first period is longer due to the features of the area: rugged regions, 

foothills of the Andes range and high pealcs. 

{: