Overview
Title
To support Federal, State, and Tribal coordination and management efforts relating to wildlife disease and zoonotic disease surveillance and ongoing and potential wildlife disease and zoonotic disease outbreaks, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The "Wildlife-Agriculture Disease Prevention Act of 2024" is a plan to help different groups work together better to stop diseases that animals can give to people, making sure everyone is safe and healthy.
Summary AI
S. 4963, known as the "Wildlife-Agriculture Disease Prevention Act of 2024," aims to enhance coordination among Federal, State, and Tribal agencies to monitor and manage wildlife and zoonotic diseases—diseases that can be transmitted between animals and humans. The bill establishes a new position called the Agriculture-Wildlife Disease Coordinator within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to facilitate information sharing and collaboration among various agencies. It also emphasizes the development and dissemination of best practices for managing these diseases and authorizes funding to support these initiatives. The goal is to better protect public health, wildlife, and agricultural interests from disease outbreaks.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, titled the "Wildlife-Agriculture Disease Prevention Act of 2024," aims to enhance coordination among federal, state, and tribal agencies in managing wildlife and zoonotic diseases. The bill primarily seeks to address the growing threat of these diseases to public health, wildlife, agriculture, and the U.S. economy. A significant step within the bill is the creation of the position of an "Agriculture-Wildlife Disease Coordinator." This coordinator would act as a liaison among key federal agencies like the Department of Agriculture, the Department of the Interior, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in addition to working with state and tribal entities.
Summary of Significant Issues
One of the primary issues the bill faces is the vagueness in its terms of funding. The phrase "such sums as are necessary" leaves financial commitments open-ended, potentially leading to unchecked spending. Furthermore, the bill lacks a structured plan to ensure the intended cooperation among various agencies, which could result in overlapping efforts, particularly between the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior. The qualifications and responsibilities of the newly proposed coordinator are quite broad, requiring clarity and focus to avoid dilution of efficacy.
Additionally, the bill does not specifically address the integration of public awareness campaigns, which are crucial for disease prevention. Finally, the financial impact described for various disease outbreaks lacks transparency, as there is no detailed breakdown of how these costs were calculated, which hinders full understanding and justification.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, this bill represents an effort to centralize and improve the U.S. response to wildlife and zoonotic diseases, potentially reducing the risk of significant outbreaks that can affect public health and the economy. The public may benefit from better-coordinated efforts, which can lead to quicker response times and more efficient resource allocation during disease outbreaks.
However, without clear budgetary limits and coordination frameworks, public resources might be at risk of being spent ineffectively. Likewise, a lack of public education initiatives might mean that individuals remain unaware of their role in disease prevention, limiting the potential overall effectiveness of the bill's provisions.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Federal, State, and Tribal Agencies: By promoting coordination among these entities, the bill can enhance their ability to prevent and manage disease outbreaks. However, potential role overlap and lack of clarity in responsibilities might lead to inefficiencies.
Public Health Sector: Increased surveillance and coordinated responses could aid public health officials by providing better data and resources, although the lack of detail in funding and cooperation mechanisms could hinder these benefits.
Agricultural and Wildlife Sectors: Effective implementation of this bill could protect livestock and wildlife populations from disease outbreaks, offering economic and ecological stability. However, stakeholders in these sectors may raise concerns about how responsibilities are divided among agencies and the potential bureaucratic expansion without clear results.
General Public: Individuals stand to gain from greater disease control and fewer public health emergencies. Still, without detailed public education strategies embedded in the bill, the public's understanding and support might be limited.
In conclusion, while the "Wildlife-Agriculture Disease Prevention Act of 2024" addresses significant public health concerns, achieving its objectives will require careful planning and implementation, especially concerning funding transparency and interagency cooperation.
Financial Assessment
The bill S. 4963, titled the "Wildlife-Agriculture Disease Prevention Act of 2024," addresses financial aspects primarily through the authorization of appropriations for the initiatives described within the legislation. The financial provisions, however, raise several important considerations.
Authorization of Appropriations
In Section 4(e), the bill authorizes financial appropriations described as “such sums as are necessary” to support the role of the Agriculture-Wildlife Disease Coordinator and other related activities. This language is notably vague, providing no specific monetary cap or detailed budgetary plan. While this method allows for flexibility in addressing various needs as they arise, it poses a risk for potential unchecked or wasteful spending. The lack of specificity can lead to difficulties in ensuring transparent and accountable financial management, aligning with a key issue identified—namely, the potential for inadequate oversight and financial imprudence.
Impact on Implementation and Oversight
The absence of a clear financial plan also intersects with the identified issue concerning the detailed framework for agency collaboration. Without specific financial guidance, there may be challenges in effectively coordinating the roles and responsibilities among federal, state, and tribal agencies. The bill's ambiguity in the financial aspect could complicate allocation efficiency and resource management, potentially leading to redundant efforts or gaps in disease control measures.
Potential Economic Impact
The bill references the economic costs of $3,000,000,000 from the 2022 avian flu outbreak in Section 2(8). However, it does not provide details on how this figure was derived, leaving a gap in understanding the financial ramifications of such outbreaks or the financial savings that could be realized through better disease prevention. Greater transparency in these calculations could strengthen the justification for requested funding and provide clearer insight into the economic stakes involved in managing wildlife and zoonotic diseases.
Omissions and Clarifications
The bill does not specify funding sources or provide a comprehensive budget to cover the proposed initiatives. This omission is notable as it may lead to financial overspending or result in competitive allocation, affecting the practical feasibility and impact of the actions described. Defining the funding sources and creating a detailed budget could help ensure that financial resources are allocated strategically and responsibly.
In summary, while the bill intends to support essential coordination efforts for wildlife and zoonotic disease management, the financial provisions require further clarification and structuring. Addressing these aspects could enhance fiscal responsibility and ensure that the intended outcomes of the legislation are effectively achieved without compromising financial prudence.
Issues
The authorization of appropriations in Section 4(e) uses the phrase 'such sums as are necessary', which is vague and may lead to unchecked or wasteful spending without clear budgetary limits or accountability. This could have significant financial implications and should be clarified to ensure transparency and fiscal responsibility.
The bill lacks a detailed framework or incentive structure to ensure effective collaboration and coordination among federal, state, and tribal agencies, as highlighted in Section 2. This oversight could hinder the intended improvements in surveillance and response to wildlife and zoonotic disease outbreaks.
There is a potential for overlap and redundancy in roles between the Department of Agriculture, Department of the Interior, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as indicated in Section 2. This could lead to inefficient use of resources and may require clearer delineation of responsibilities to avoid duplication of efforts.
The responsibilities and qualifications for the Agriculture-Wildlife Disease Coordinator outlined in Section 4 are broad and may lack specificity. Without clear prioritization and an oversight mechanism, there is a risk of dilution of focus, which could affect the effectiveness of the coordinator's role.
The bill does not specify funding sources or the budget for implementing the actions described, particularly in Section 2. This omission may lead to financial overspending or lack of accountability, affecting the feasibility of the proposed initiatives.
The economic cost related to zoonotic disease outbreaks mentioned in Section 2(8) lacks detail on how it was calculated. Greater transparency on this calculation is necessary to provide a better understanding and justification of the public health and economic impacts.
Section 2 of the bill does not incorporate details on public awareness or educational programs, which are crucial for effective public health initiatives. This could be an ethical oversight, as public knowledge and engagement are essential to successful disease prevention and control efforts.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides the short title of the act, stating that it can be referred to as the “Wildlife-Agriculture Disease Prevention Act of 2024.”
2. Findings Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress highlights the serious threat posed by zoonotic diseases to humans, animals, and the economy. They emphasize the need for coordinated efforts among federal, state, and tribal agencies to manage these diseases, suggesting the establishment of a dedicated coordinator to enhance communication and response strategies.
Money References
- Congress finds that— (1) zoonotic diseases are a significant threat to human populations, livestock, domestic animals, and wildlife, which is evidenced by the fact that— (A) more than 6 out of every 10 known infectious diseases in human populations originated in animals; and (B) 3 out of every 4 new or emerging infectious diseases in human populations originate from animals; (2) zoonotic diseases are capable of transmitting between wildlife, livestock, domestic animals, and human populations; (3) the majority of recent emerging infectious diseases have originated in wildlife; (4) zoonotic disease spillover events are occurring more frequently; (5) many wildlife diseases and zoonotic diseases, such as highly pathogenic avian influenza, are highly transmissible and have spilled over to livestock and domestic animals; (6) chronic wasting disease is transmissible between wild and captive deer and elk; (7) bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis spilled over from cattle to wildlife; (8) outbreaks of wildlife diseases and zoonotic diseases have significant adverse effects on the United States economy, with the 2022 avian flu outbreak resulting in economic costs of $3,000,000,000; (9) outbreaks of wildlife diseases and zoonotic diseases pose a significant public health threat and may lead to a public health emergency; (10) the Department of Agriculture, Department of the Interior, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention play distinct but complementary roles in the prevention, detection, control, and response to wildlife diseases and zoonotic diseases; (11) State fish and wildlife agencies exercise primary statutory authority over the management of fish and wildlife as public trust resources within their borders; (12) the Department of Agriculture is primarily responsible for safeguarding the health of livestock, developing and conducting monitoring and surveillance for livestock diseases, and preventing the spread of diseases that pose a threat to the agricultural industry; (13) the Department of the Interior has a responsibility to develop monitoring and surveillance techniques for highly pathogenic avian influenza and other emerging wildlife diseases, including diseases with zoonotic potential; (14) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is the leading public health agency responsible for— (A) monitoring and responding to human health threats posed by wildlife diseases and zoonotic diseases; and (B) conducting surveillance and research and providing guidance to prevent and control the spread of wildlife diseases and zoonotic diseases to and among humans; (15) increased coordination and collaboration between Federal, State, and Tribal agencies with respect to wildlife disease and zoonotic disease efforts is necessary to adequately monitor and respond to ongoing and potential wildlife disease and zoonotic disease outbreaks; (16) establishing a Agriculture-Wildlife Disease Coordinator as an intermediary between the Department of Agriculture, the Department of the Interior, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would facilitate communication, information sharing, and coordinated efforts to prevent, detect, and respond to wildlife disease and zoonotic disease outbreaks; and (17) the coordinated efforts described in paragraph (16) are essential to protect public health, wildlife populations, and agricultural interests from the impacts of wildlife diseases and zoonotic diseases. ---
3. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, several terms are defined for clarity: "Agriculture-Wildlife Disease Coordinator" is the person appointed according to section 4(a); "Indian Tribe" refers to the definition in the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act; "livestock" is defined as per the Animal Health Protection Act; "wildlife disease" means any infectious disease from wildlife that can spread to other animals; and "zoonotic disease" refers to any disease that can transfer naturally between animals and humans, including wildlife diseases.
4. Agriculture-Wildlife Disease Coordinator Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill establishes a position called the "Agriculture-Wildlife Disease Coordinator" within the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to improve communication and cooperation between various Federal, State, and Tribal agencies regarding wildlife and zoonotic diseases. This coordinator's duties include sharing information, assisting with resource access, coordinating activities, and reporting to Congress on how to better handle disease outbreaks and prevention.