At the 2024 National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) annual convention, the Cattle Health and Well-Being Committee met to discuss traceability policy. The committee advanced an interim policy that was passed by the NCBA Policy Board of Directors, which will remain an interim policy until members vote on the policy later this year.
There was much buzz on social media ahead of the committee meeting, with beef producers sharing mixed feelings about a traceability system.
The advanced interim policy supports an enhanced animal disease traceability system. The policy reads that most major beef-exporting companies have implemented animal ID and traceability systems, and the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) has adopted guidance on ID and traceability.
In addition, the 2021-2025 beef industry Long Range Plan calls for the adoption of an individual animal ID disease traceability system to manage disease outbreaks and enhance trust in U.S. beef.
The policy therefore supports the development and implementation of a national animal disease traceability system.
The committee voted that an animal disease traceability program should have the following components:
• Be compatible with private sector animal ID and verification programs backed by the USDA.
• Be compatible with the general traceability principles of WOAH.
• Recognize existing USDA programs for beef exports.
• Be built using infrastructure that supports other potential uses of ID.
• Utilize low-cost electronic official tagging devices and reader infrastructure, paid for by federal and/or state funds.
• Require data to be kept confidential and strongly protected from disclosure.
• Protect ownership information from disclosure to future owners.
• Protect producers from liability for acts of others, after the cattle have left the producer’s control.
• Operate at the speed of commerce.
• Maintain existing state brand inspection activities without replacement or impediment.
• Work within a framework to accommodate all classes of cattle.
• Allow for separate rule-making process for cattle under 18 months of age.
• Allow cattle movement between adjoining states on pasture-to-pasture permits at the discretion of the involved state animal health officials.
• Maintain data integrity throughout the system, including retagging and retirement of tags at harvest.
• Provide adequate resources to the states and include the transition to any electronic identification.
The policy also supports the adoption and implementation of electronic ID (EID) tags for interstate movement of all cattle included in the 2013 USDA animal disease traceability rule (intact cattle older than 18 months, rodeo and exhibition cattle, and dairy cattle). NCBA will provide outreach and education following the publication of USDA’s final rule requiring EID tags for these classes of cattle.
Finally, the policy supports a private, industry managed, non-government Independent Database Collaborator for critical data coordination. This includes data collection and housing for four data points: ID numbers, times, dates and locations; coordination with USDA’s Animal Health Event Repository and major animal identification program organization; and a defined process for animal health officials to interact with the database in the event of a significant disease outbreak.
Other cattle groups’ reactions
On Jan. 24, the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association (USCA) released a statement in support of a voluntary national animal identification system. The group said the system should have no private control of data, or access to the data, without permission from the cattle’s owner at the time.
USCA continued that all official data should be held in state animal health databases and shared with animal health officials only as needed. The group stressed that no national cattlemen’s association should be able to coordinate or control producer data.
“USCA supports a voluntary national animal identification program and opposes the establishment of a national mandate,” said USCA President Justin Tupper. “Our members believe that each individual producer knows what’s best for their herd as it relates to animal husbandry practices.”
The organization advocates for producers to never be responsible for more than the cost of the tags, and that premises identification numbers should not be required to acquire and apply EID tags. In addition, USCA’s stance is that official ID should only be required for breeding cattle and only as they move into interstate commerce, or as determined by each state’s importation requirements.
As the industry moves to adopt EID, financial assistance will be required from USDA, the group said. Additionally, “As any future transition is made to EIDs, the process will eventually need to move to (ultra-high frequency) in order to improve read range and the ability to read animals and groups at speed of commerce.”
Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF) is against a mandatory EID program. R-CALF claims the EID movement is an attempt to boost the USDA’s status as a team player in the global beef arena, and track industry greenhouse gas emissions.
“It’s not about disease traceability—that’s just a pretext,” Bill Bullard, R-CALF CEO wrote in an op-ed. “It is all about control. It’s all about managing and controlling an industry that’s impossible to control unless you have the cattle industry’s nearly 100 million cows individually identified and categorized in an electronic spreadsheet.” — Anna Miller, WLJ managing editor
