Return to TFB Main Page
Return to Current Edition
Texas Agriculture Archive

March 19, 2004

USAIP might provide
roadmap for livestock ID

By Mike Barnett
Editor

Attention livestock producers: A national livestock identification plan is coming. It's not a question of if, but when. Although no firm timetable is set, and details have yet to be worked out, the first solid evidence that something's coming down the pike was the recent announcement by USDA that animal identification numbers will be issued starting this fall.

Farm Bureau supports a national livestock identification system. At the recent AFBF convention, delegates suggested such a system should be cost-effective and should provide support for animal disease and eradication, as well as enhance food safety.

In addition, delegates said, "A national system of animal identification with adequate cost share agreement among industry and producers should be established and regulated by an advisory board of producers, processors and USDA officials."

The devil of any plan is in the details, so what might producers expect in a national ID system?

A glimpse at the future might be provided by the United States Animal Identification Plan (USAIP), a work in progress that is being put together by approximately 100 animal and livestock professionals representing more than 70 associations, organizations and government agencies.

Although the discovery of a single case of BSE in the United States in December 2003 has provided a sense of urgency for such a tracking system for livestock, this plan has been in the works for over two years.

The plan, when fully operational, would be capable of tracing an animal or group of animals back to the herd or premises that is the most logical source of disease concern. It would also be able to trace potentially exposed animals that were moved out from that herd or premises.

The plan's long-term goal is to establish an animal identification and information system that has the capability to identify all premises that had direct contact with a foreign animal disease within 48 hours after discovery.

USDA is currently studying the plan, but has indicated it supports use of the data standards developed by the USAIP, as well as the general plan concept.

Components of the USAIP plan, which is still being studied and revised, include the following:

•Standardized premises identification.

•Electronic (RFID) individual identification of animals (this would allow for rapid downloading of information into a database, eliminating the need to write down numbers and then enter them into a computer).

•Group/lot identification, instead of individual ID, of animals that move together without ever commingling with other animals, such as in the swine industry.

•Animals will be identified as they move in commerce (ID would not be required for animals that never leave their premises or origin).

•RFID readers would be placed in markets, slaughter plants, and other areas where animals are concentrated to allow for the electronic collection of animal movements.

•Standards are being developed which would allow for the integration of key pieces of data in different data systems, such as those used by companies that provide production information to producers. This would allow animal health officials access to key data necessary to conduct rapid tracing of animals for disease purposes.

To support the identification process, USAIP data needs would record the dates of birth, official tests/vaccinations, interstate movement, changes of ownership, movement through markets, and slaughter.

Production data, while not required, could be kept by producers that could enable value-added data to flow up the production chain.

How does it work? Suppose a mixed load of calves arrives at a feedyard. One of them is diagnosed with a highly contagious disease.

Through USAIP, the location of where that calf came from would be known. All animals at the premises at the time of or after the exposure—including those sharing pastures and grazing leases—could be identified. Dates animals were on the premises and/or moved would be noted. Locations of all animals that were moved off the premises since exposure could be found, as well as all subsequent areas of concentration of animals they have moved through and identification of all other animals at those locations. Dates of testing for the disease or observation of possible clinical disease would be recorded, as well as vaccination history of all animals (if relevant for the disease in question) would be recorded. And all of this would ideally happen in 48 hours.

In addition, animals entering the United States from other countries would be subject to the same identification and tracking procedures as animals already in the country.

Species specific working groups are currently within the framework of USIP to develop animal identification details for bison, beef cattle, dairy cattle, swine, sheep, goats, alpacas and llamas, horses, deer and elk, poultry and aquaculture.

Governance of USAIP is planned as a joint federal/state responsibility with oversight and input from the industry.

For example, state governments would maintain a state premises database system, submit premises data to a national premises repository, maintain intrastate animal movement database, and report interstate movement to a national identification database.

The USDA would allocate U.S. Animal Health Identification Numbers, administer the national premises repository, including the allocation of premises numbers, and administer the national animal identification database. In addition, APHIS and individual state animal health entities would ensure uniformity of operation across the United States.

Costs would be substantial and USAIP recommends both public and private funding to cover the cost of the program.

Will the program work? Jan Lyons, National Cattlemen's Beef Association president, told members of the House Agriculture hearing held recently in Houston, that she believes in the plan.

"The key to effective implementation is solid standards—which USAIP provides—combined with flexibility for mode of marketing, regional differences and existing programs," she said. "The standards of USAIP are the driving force in ensuring that the system works and is functional."

To ensure that the animal identification system is successful, Lyons suggested pilot programs be implemented in different parts of the country.

"This would allow the plan to be tested using different production and marketing systems and recognize regional dfference," she said.

For more information go to the U.S. Animal Identification website at www.usaip.info.