|
|
|
Animal ID rolls ahead with premises registration
Whether livestock producers are ready or not, the wheels are starting to turn on national animal identification as states begin registering animal premises and some producers begin placing electronic ear tags in cattle.
In many ways, animal ID is nothing new.
For the past several decades, animal health officials have kept records and premises numbers in tracking diseases like brucellosis, bovine tuberculosis and scrapie in sheep, said Sam Holland, South Dakota state veterinarian.
“We have to associate a number with a name to keep a database, whether it’s handwritten in a book or on a computer. We’ve been doing that for years,” he said.
The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) was announced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in the spring of 2004. The goal of the program is to establish universal, one-time numbers for animal premises, individual animals and groups in order to trace animals in the case of a disease outbreak within 48 hours.
The major activity going on now in all states is premises identification, the first of three major phases of NAIS. The second phase is individual animal identification and the third is tracking of animal movements.
While premises identification is now voluntary, USDA plans for mandatory registration by 2008. The goal is to have a fully functional national system by 2009.
Minnesota so far has registered about 10,000 premises - the second highest number of registrations among states in the country, said Dave Wiklund, Minnesota NAIS project manager.
“According to national statistics, we have approximately 35,000 to 40,000 premises in Minnesota,” he said.
Wiklund said education is a key component, as University of Minnesota Extension educators are delivering the NAIS message at every venue possible.
In South Dakota, education also plays a key role, with assistance from Extension educators, veterinarians and Farm Service Agency offices, Holland said.
So far, more than 1,900 South Dakota premises have been identified, with another 2,000 applications pending, Holland said. The state has an estimated 17,000 cattle premises, 1,500 hog premises and up to 200 poultry premises, as well as premises such as slaughter plants, markets, exhibitions and county fairgrounds. A premises is anywhere that an animal might reside or any piece of property with an animal facility on it.
Premises registration is taking place by direct contact in visits or at meetings, by mail, by phone and through Web sites in each state.
Information that is recorded is basic - address, contact name, telephone number, what kind of operation it is and what species are on the premises.
Nebraska has more than 4,000 premises identified, about 12 percent of the estimated 30,000 premises in the state, said Royce Schaneman, animal ID coordinator for the state of Nebraska.
“The frustrating part is there seems to be a lot of misinformation and miscommunication about the program. The more we’re out having sign-up meetings and doing presentations, we’re hoping that we’re dispelling some of the myths,” Schaneman said.
Steve White, state animal ID coordinator in Iowa, said Iowa has 90,000 premises to register.
“We’re starting to reach out and contact large groups of people,” White said.
Premise registration is voluntary - but is strongly encouraged at this time. On one hand, it’s important for animal health reasons, White said.
“And when it becomes mandatory, if producers don’t have premises registered, they could be locked out of markets,” White said.
In preparation for the second phase of individual animal identification, working groups for different species are making recommendations to the NAIS subcommittee of the USDA, White said.
Animals will be identified either individually or with group/lot numbers.
The cattle industry has already adopted electronic radio frequency ID (RFID) tags, placed in the animal’s left ear. Tag numbers can be read visually or by electronic readers “at the speed of commerce” as cattle move through a chute, into a truck or through a gate.
“Cattle is out in front, but there are other species working groups making recommendations,” Wiklund said.
The equine working group recently adopted RFID, although the group has yet to adopt a means of capturing that information. Holland said the group is considering an implantable chip instead of visible tags.
The sheep industry is using hard tags as it has for the last several years as part of the scrapie control program.
Swine and poultry industries, similar in that their animals tend to move in groups and don’t intermingle, will likely be using group/lot identification numbers through tags or tattoos.
The identification method an industry group chooses does not have to be electronic.
“The USDA is technologically neutral,” Wiklund said, but the technology must fit within USDA requirements. With USDA approval, each industry group determines its own use of technology in order to ensure the most practical options are implemented.
Although it is still voluntary and the second phase of NAIS hasn’t started yet, there are cattle operations going ahead with electronic ID of individual animals.
Some cattle owners are using EID because age and source verification will mean greater access to certain markets or buyers, Holland said.
Reaction to NAIS has run the gamut, from acceptance to curiosity to negativity, Holland said.
“You’ve got some who have real concerns about cost and confidentiality and new management data. They don’t want to do anything different from what they’ve been doing for the last ‘X’ number of years,” Holland said. “Even most of those realize that a more uniform and meaningful ID system is coming and they want to have some comment on what it is and how it’s going to be implemented.”
Holland urges producers to stay as informed and involved as they can and contact state officials or Extension educators to get their questions answered.
Confidentiality is a hurdle that needs to be resolved before many producers will feel comfortable with NAIS.
“I think USDA and the industry need to get that resolved,” Holland said, adding that national legislation has been drafted to provide for confidentiality.
Tracking of animal movements in the third phase of the program is the greatest confidentiality concern.
“There’s always that possibility that someone with a particular agenda would get access to that data and be aware of the movements,” whether it’s an animal activist or a competitor, Holland said.
Until the national database is up and running, information is kept at the state level, Wiklund said. The Minnesota Legislature passed confidentiality language to protect information collected by the Board of Animal Health.
“For the people on the fence one way or the other because of confidentiality, this has helped them make up their mind to register their premises,” Wiklund said.
Comments »
esbee wrote on Nov 11, 2007 8:57 AM:
susan barackman wrote on Nov 11, 2007 8:55 AM:
jan wrote on Oct 1, 2006 8:49 PM:
Bruce Marshall wrote on Mar 23, 2006 8:45 PM:
fugitive247 wrote on Mar 4, 2006 9:58 PM:
Jauson King wrote on Feb 26, 2006 8:51 PM:
Walter Jeffries wrote on Feb 12, 2006 10:23 PM:
William Jud wrote on Feb 2, 2006 11:20 AM:
Sharon Johnson wrote on Feb 1, 2006 5:59 PM:
Say NO to NAIS wrote on Jan 25, 2006 2:24 PM:
Patricia Hampton wrote on Jan 15, 2006 12:02 PM:
Kevin Winterstein wrote on Jan 14, 2006 11:06 PM:
Sue Karber wrote on Jan 14, 2006 6:18 PM:
Cherie Graves wrote on Jan 3, 2006 11:16 AM:
Comment on this story
Comments will be approved within 48 hours
Japan opens market to United States beef
Animal ID rolls ahead with premises registration
Protect dairy cows during severe cold
Budget deficit, world trade will impact 2007 farm bill
Marketing plans can lead to higher profits
Monsanto breaks ground on corn breeding facility in S.D.
Jauson King wrote on Nov 26, 2007 12:47 AM: