Buffalo and the WTO

When most people think about the reasons behind the current slaughter of America’s last wild buffalo, they point to the fact that Montana ranchers don’t want buffalo competing with their cows and the fear of brucellosis transmission. While these are certainly important aspects of the conflict, there is another lesser know factor that is equally important and perhaps more difficult to resolve. New international markets have opened up for livestock producers in recent years with the emergence of global trade. A small but growing segment of the market for livestock production now involves lucrative international trade. These, often large-scale, ranching operations are actively working to reduce barriers to trade and increase their profits.

With global trade comes global regulations and restrictions. The OIE, the world organization for animal health, regulates internationally recognized animal disease status. In 1998, the OIE and the World Trade Organization (WTO) formalized an agreement whereby the two agencies would work together toward their common goals of expanding and regulating global trade. The OIE sets the standards for a county to be recognized internationally as brucellosis free. In order to gain brucellosis free status, a country must not have vaccinated any animal for brucellosis in the past three years nor have current cases of brucellosis infection. Two states, Texas and Wyoming, currently do not have brucellosis free status in the U.S. Wyoming recently lost its brucellosis free status because vaccinated, brucellosis infected elk from a state sponsored feedground were commingling with vaccinated cattle and a transmission occurred.

What this all means is that as long as wildlife in the GYA carry brucellosis or even test positive for exposure to the disease, the ranchers will be required or expected to vaccinate their cattle, thus the United States will not gain international brucellosis free status. The consequence to livestock producers involved in global trade is a testing requirement when they transport live animals across international borders. Testing for brucellosis costs money and therefore reduces the bottom line for these operations. USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has come under increasing pressure in recent years to eradicate brucellosis in the GYA. In April 2003, APHIS announced plans to develop an ecosystem wide brucellosis elimination plan with a primary focus on buffalo and elk. The State of Montana recently passed a resolution calling for the development of just such a plan with APHIS designated as the lead agency. Additionally, the Greater Yellowstone Interagency Brucellosis Committee (GYIBC) is working on a revised memorandum of understanding with stronger language toward the goal of eradicating brucellosis from the ecosystem.

An APHIS led brucellosis eradication plan would likely spell disaster for Yellowstone buffalo and elk. APHIS will attempt to gain access to the national parks and implement a massive capture, test and slaughter program. Elk on Wyoming feedgrounds will likely meet a similar fate. In fact, a pilot program for the capture and slaughter of elk in Wyoming will begin next winter. An accelerated eradication program will rely primarily on capture, test and slaughter. Effective vaccines for wildlife do not currently exist neither does an effective ecosystem wide delivery system. The techniques developed for eradicating brucellosis in livestock, i.e., test and slaughter until its gone, will devastate the crown jewel of wildlife populations in the contiguous United States.

It is absolutely imperative that all of us who care about and respect the GYA and the wildlife that call this magnificent place home stand up to APHIS, the OIE and the WTO. Our message must be clear: Global profiteering will not, and must not, take priority over native wildlife and the last wild, genetically pure buffalo in America to continuously occupy their native range.