Animal disease outbreaks bring on emergency declaration in Minnesota
Feb. 20—The impact of three animal disesases in Minnesota is being felt and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture's Rural Finance Authority Board is responding with interest-free loans.
The RFA has declared an emergency for avian Metapneumovirus, highly pathogenic avian influenza, and the H5N1 flu virus. This makes zero-interest Disaster Recovery Loans available for Minnesota farmers whose operations have sustained livestock losses due to the diseases from Feb. 12, 2025, to Feb. 12, 2026, according to a Minnesota Department of Agriculture news release on Friday, Feb. 14.
"The RFA Board's declaration is an important step in helping Minnesota farmers affected by these three animal health diseases," said Minnesota Agriculture Commissioner Thom Petersen in the release. "I encourage those who have faced livestock losses to explore these zero-interest loans."
Avian Metapneumovirus is a highly infectious respiratory disease affecting poultry. It causes significant immunosuppression in birds which leads to secondary infections and often high mortality. Minnesota has reported 871 aMPV-positive tests since April 2024, which is likely an undercount of actual cases across the state. The disease is a burden to producers who lose birds and have no means of financial support like they do with HPAI and other diseases.
HPAI is a contagious viral disease of domestic and wild birds and is fatal. It's a major threat to the poultry industry, animal health, trade, and the economy worldwide. The first cases of the current HPAI outbreak in Minnesota were confirmed in March 2022. Since then, there have been 185 cases affecting 9.1 million Minnesota domestic birds, mostly turkeys. There have been four HPAI cases reported in 2025.
H5N1, the same virus that causes HPAI in poultry, can also affect dairy cows and other animals; however, it rarely kills cows. The H5N1 outbreak in dairy cattle appeared in a Texas dairy in March 2024. The first Minnesota case appeared in June 2024. No cases have been reported in 2025.
The Disaster Recovery Loan Program offers affordable financing to support Minnesota farmers after declared disasters or hardship events, such as animal disease outbreaks. These funds are available to farmers for expenses not covered by insurance, including replacement of flocks or livestock, building improvements, or to cover the loss of revenue when the replacement, improvements, or revenue loss is due to the confirmed presence of one of the three animal diseases. Eligible farmers will work with their local lender to secure the loans from the RFA.
More information, including full eligibility requirements, can be found on the Disaster Recovery Loan Program webpage at https://www.mda.state.mn.us/disasterloan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Yahoo
Contributor: As the feds abdicate responsibilities, states should band together
Until January, the federal government and the states had a mutually beneficial and straightforward deal: The federal government prioritized challenges requiring national solutions — e.g., national security, natural and public-health disaster relief, managing the American economy. For their part, the states delivered primarily local goods and services — Medicaid and Medicare, much of our transportation infrastructure, public education. Money, specifically taxpayer money, underpinned this deal. In 2023, the federal government collected about $4.7 trillion in taxes, sending back about $4.6 trillion to the states, mainly via social service programs. (The remainder of that year's roughly $6 trillion in federal spending was mostly financed by debt.) Now, this deal between Washington and the states is unraveling to tragic effect. In May, tornados ravaged communities in Kentucky and Missouri, killing 27 people. Because of cuts to the federal government in recent months, the National Weather Service is now stretched too thin to alert rural communities in the heartland about such deadly weather. Ordinarily, after such disasters, the feds could be counted on to provide relief. That too is far from a certainty. When natural disaster strikes — as it did in Arkansas this year in the form of severe storms and tornadoes — federal aid was initially denied and ultimately arrived weeks late. Similar aid was denied to those in West Virginia, Washington state and North Carolina. Meanwhile, normal and emergency disbursements to states and localities are being withheld or threatened explicitly because the administration dislikes a state's LGBTQ+-friendly policies or immigrant healthcare. We are just a little over four months into a four-year presidency, with seemingly more cuts to come. In late May, the federal government canceled a contract to develop a new vaccine to protect against flu strains with pandemic potential (including the H5N1 bird flu), alarming state public health officials across the nation. Some decisions by the feds have been successfully challenged in the courts. Realistically though, there is only so much the judges can and will do to force federal agencies to spend, especially when Congress endorses spending cuts. Meanwhile, states have duties and obligations to their residents. But making up for the massive federal shortfall is no easy feat. No state, acting alone, could come close to replicating the goods and services that the feds are no longer supplying. Each lacks economies of scale; the cost per person is prohibitively high without the bargaining power and efficiency of the federal government. The answer, quite simply, is for the states to pool their resources, thereby spreading the costs over a far wider number of taxpayers. Here are some examples of what clusters of like-minded states could do: set up interstate academic programs that pool students and faculty cut off from federal funds into large regional research consortia; re-create public-health and meteorology forecasting centers servicing member states; and finance pandemic planning and countermeasures, precisely what was lacking — and sorely needed — early in the COVID-19 crisis. Though some may assume these arrangements require congressional authorization, the courts have said otherwise, insisting such approval is necessary only when states threaten federal supremacy. (The converse would be true here. The states would be teaming up only because the feds have absented themselves.) Additional arrangements can be even looser understandings. Consider the vacuum created now that the Justice Department has disbanded the team that focused on corruption among officials and fraud by government employees. States can mobilize interstate criminal task forces to track and prosecute corruption by politicians, lobbyists and government contractors (who invariably, when violating federal laws, run afoul of myriad state laws, too). The Trump administration is also tabling consumer protection and environmental investigations and prosecutions. Here too states can pool their resources, extend their jurisdictional reach and protect their citizens, while possibly recouping some expenses. Successful litigation often carries with it awards of legal fees and sometimes damages or monetary bounties: Lawsuits brought by states could force polluters to pay for the damage they do. Of course, not all states will jump into action, at least not at first. But this is a feature, not a bug, of the coming clustering of like-minded states. The Trump administration has created an opportunity for beneficial 'races to the top' in regulatory matters. Here's how that works: As Washington abdicates its long-relied-upon responsibilities, those states that commit to making up for the federal shortfalls will retain residents and businesses. They'll also attract new ones, particularly those frustrated that their home states aren't taking similar compensatory measures. High-tax states are often at a competitive disadvantage, as evidenced by what the Wall Street Journal has repeatedly referred to as a 'Blue state exodus.' But we think that's less likely to happen going forward. Precisely because the feds are no longer promising to fund basic education, infrastructure and social services — and are no longer viewed as a reliable regulator — it's suddenly too risky to chance living or operating a business in a state that doesn't take basic health and safety seriously. Interstate collaboration isn't a cure-all, but it's a start on rebuilding a new national compact without the political strings that have been attached to federal funding in recent months, one that may endure for the foreseeable future. It's a chance to demonstrate resourceful, resilient and good-faith public service at a time when the risk of being worn down into complacency is perilously high. Aziz Z. Huq and Jon D. Michaels are professors of law at the University of Chicago and UCLA, respectively. If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
18 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
As the feds abdicate responsibilities, states should band together
Until January, the federal government and the states had a mutually beneficial and straightforward deal: The federal government prioritized challenges requiring national solutions — e.g., national security, natural and public-health disaster relief, managing the American economy. For their part, the states delivered primarily local goods and services — Medicaid and Medicare, much of our transportation infrastructure, public education. Money, specifically taxpayer money, underpinned this deal. In 2023, the federal government collected about $4.7 trillion in taxes, sending back about $4.6 trillion to the states, mainly via social service programs. (The remainder of that year's roughly $6 trillion in federal spending was mostly financed by debt.) Now, this deal between Washington and the states is unraveling to tragic effect. In May, tornados ravaged communities in Kentucky and Missouri, killing 27 people. Because of cuts to the federal government in recent months, the National Weather Service is now stretched too thin to alert rural communities in the heartland about such deadly weather. Ordinarily, after such disasters, the feds could be counted on to provide relief. That too is far from a certainty. When natural disaster strikes — as it did in Arkansas this year in the form of severe storms and tornadoes — federal aid was initially denied and ultimately arrived weeks late. Similar aid was denied to those in West Virginia, Washington state and North Carolina. Meanwhile, normal and emergency disbursements to states and localities are being withheld or threatened explicitly because the administration dislikes a state's LGBTQ+-friendly policies or immigrant healthcare. We are just a little over four months into a four-year presidency, with seemingly more cuts to come. In late May, the federal government canceled a contract to develop a new vaccine to protect against flu strains with pandemic potential (including the H5N1 bird flu), alarming state public health officials across the nation. Some decisions by the feds have been successfully challenged in the courts. Realistically though, there is only so much the judges can and will do to force federal agencies to spend, especially when Congress endorses spending cuts. Meanwhile, states have duties and obligations to their residents. But making up for the massive federal shortfall is no easy feat. No state, acting alone, could come close to replicating the goods and services that the feds are no longer supplying. Each lacks economies of scale; the cost per person is prohibitively high without the bargaining power and efficiency of the federal government. The answer, quite simply, is for the states to pool their resources, thereby spreading the costs over a far wider number of taxpayers. Here are some examples of what clusters of like-minded states could do: set up interstate academic programs that pool students and faculty cut off from federal funds into large regional research consortia; re-create public-health and meteorology forecasting centers servicing member states; and finance pandemic planning and countermeasures, precisely what was lacking — and sorely needed — early in the COVID-19 crisis. Though some may assume these arrangements require congressional authorization, the courts have said otherwise, insisting such approval is necessary only when states threaten federal supremacy. (The converse would be true here. The states would be teaming up only because the feds have absented themselves.) Additional arrangements can be even looser understandings. Consider the vacuum created now that the Justice Department has disbanded the team that focused on corruption among officials and fraud by government employees. States can mobilize interstate criminal task forces to track and prosecute corruption by politicians, lobbyists and government contractors (who invariably, when violating federal laws, run afoul of myriad state laws, too). The Trump administration is also tabling consumer protection and environmental investigations and prosecutions. Here too states can pool their resources, extend their jurisdictional reach and protect their citizens, while possibly recouping some expenses. Successful litigation often carries with it awards of legal fees and sometimes damages or monetary bounties: Lawsuits brought by states could force polluters to pay for the damage they do. Of course, not all states will jump into action, at least not at first. But this is a feature, not a bug, of the coming clustering of like-minded states. The Trump administration has created an opportunity for beneficial 'races to the top' in regulatory matters. Here's how that works: As Washington abdicates its long-relied-upon responsibilities, those states that commit to making up for the federal shortfalls will retain residents and businesses. They'll also attract new ones, particularly those frustrated that their home states aren't taking similar compensatory measures. High-tax states are often at a competitive disadvantage, as evidenced by what the Wall Street Journal has repeatedly referred to as a 'Blue state exodus.' But we think that's less likely to happen going forward. Precisely because the feds are no longer promising to fund basic education, infrastructure and social services — and are no longer viewed as a reliable regulator — it's suddenly too risky to chance living or operating a business in a state that doesn't take basic health and safety seriously. Interstate collaboration isn't a cure-all, but it's a start on rebuilding a new national compact without the political strings that have been attached to federal funding in recent months, one that may endure for the foreseeable future. It's a chance to demonstrate resourceful, resilient and good-faith public service at a time when the risk of being worn down into complacency is perilously high. Aziz Z. Huq and Jon D. Michaels are professors of law at the University of Chicago and UCLA, respectively.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
CDC: Bird flu virus that infected Michigan dairy farmer capable of airborne transmission
The strain of bird flu that infected a Michigan dairy farmworker is capable of airborne transmission, amping up concerns about its potential to spark a new pandemic, according to a research letter published in June. In recent years, the H5N1 avian influenza virus has spilled over from birds to a growing number of mammals, including cats, skunks, raccoons, oppossums, rodents and bears. It was first identified in dairy cows in 2024, and then leaped from cows to humans. In May 2024, two Michigan dairy farmworkers contracted the virus. The first reported conjuctivitis, also known as pink eye, as the only symptom. The second Michigan farmworker's symptoms were a little bit different. That person reported upper respiratory tract symptoms, including cough without fever, and eye discomfort with watery discharge. Both recovered. Researchers isolated the virus from a swab used to collect a sample from the eye of one of the infected workers. That virus — clade 2.3.4.4b, genotype B3.13 — was studied to determine how transmissible it is, and the ways it spreads. "Because avian H5N1 viruses cross the species barrier and adapt to dairy cattle, each associated human infection presents further opportunity for mammal adaption," the study authors wrote in "Emerging Diseases," a peer-reviewed journal of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "This potential poses an ongoing threat to public health and requires continual surveillance and risk assessment ... to improve our ability to predict and prepare for the next influenza pandemic." Scientists infected ferrets with that type of virus. Six of the infected ferrets were put in the same living space as six healthy ferrets, and within a week, all of them had bird flu, showing that direct contact spreads the disease. Six other healthy ferrets had no direct contact with the infected animals, but were breathing the same air as ferrets with H5N1 bird flu, and inhaled respiratory droplets. Three of those six previously healthy ferrets became infected, the study found, suggesting an airborne infection rate of 50%. Researchers also collected aerosol samples daily from three infected ferrets, and found evidence of airborne virus particles in samples from all three animals. More: Michigan farmers call for H5N1 bird flu vaccines to protect flocks, dairy cows from virus Ferrets have been used for decades in medical research studies, especially those involving flu viruses, because their lung physiology is similar to humans. They also have similar receptors in the respiratory tract that influenza viruses bind to. All of the infected ferrets survived the 21-day study, researchers said, recovering from moderate disease. On average, ferrets infected with H5N1 bird flu lost nearly 10% of their body weight and had fevers. They were lethargic, and had nasal and ocular discharge along with sneezing. Since 2022, there have been 70 confirmed and probable human cases of bird flu in the U.S. One person in Louisiana, who was exposed to wild birds and a backyard flock, died. To date, there have been no reports of human-to-human transmission, according to the CDC. More: Michigan geese, angry owner change protocol for killing flock exposed to bird flu The CDC says the risk to the average American from bird flu remains low, but it's higher for people who work with animals on farms, at zoos and other animal facilities. Contact Kristen Shamus at kshamus@ Subscribe to the Detroit Free Press. This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Virus that infected Michigan dairy farmer capable of airborne spread
