ABSTRACT
When the limit was set at 20% for Salmonella, in the 1996 USDA-FSIS Salmonella Performance Standard, numerous interventions existed in the field and in the plant that could be implemented to assist the industry in meeting this standard. In so doing, the industry was able to lower the numbers, on average to 7.5% by 2000. However, retailers of poultry products were receiving continuous pressure by consumer groups to use chicken that had not received growth-promoting antibiotics. ’e industry responded after 2000 by drastically reducing the use of growth-promoting antibiotics. Also, during that time, the industry was trying to reduce water usage to be more environmentally friendly. Many plants went from using 8 gallons/bird to as low as 4 gallons/bird. ’e washing and dilution effect
of the added water use at 8 gallons/bird provided a cleaner product. Both of these factors likely had an impact on Salmonella prevalence on chickens. ’ere is a misconception that the industry was intentionally discontinuing its intervention strategies and cutting back on chemical usage. ’is is simply not true. I traveled to plants throughout the United States during that time and assisted them with issues
regarding meeting the performance standards. Moreover, there seems to be a misconception that when the USDA-FSIS threatened to strengthen the regulations in 2005, suddenly the Salmonella prevalence decreased. ’is relationship is false. ’ere was a significant change in the way that the industry was allowed to use and monitor chlorine usage. ’is single factor had more impact on Salmonella prevalence than any other I have observed over the years. ’e idea that, because USDA-FSIS puts pressure on the industry to improve, it improves and when the USDA-FSIS does not put pressure on it, Salmonella prevalence increases is not an accurate assessment.
Seasonality, humidity, and disease conditions all have a significant impact on Salmonella prevalence on poultry. ’ese factors cannot be controlled by the industry. Studies have demonstrated that Salmonella prevalence varies by season. Moreover, articles have detailed how higher relative humidity in poultry houses can increase prevalence. I authored an article in Poultry Science (Russell, 2003) that detailed how air sacculitis infections increase Campylobacter counts on broilers and in another popular article detailed analysis of over 5 million chickens; Salmonella prevalence was significantly higher on birds with air sacculitis as well. Unfortunately, the FDA decided to ban the use of the only antibiotic (Enrofloxacin) that is effective for treating air sacculitis (as shown in a study by the Poultry Diagnostic Research Center at the University of Georgia at Athens). With these variables, a plant may be using a particular set of interventions day in and day out with great success, but if the temperature, humidity, or disease outlook changes, the plant may not be able to meet the standard. How can the growers affect the weather? How can they control diseases when their only effective tools have been taken away? ’is seems patently unfair.
