MSU University News
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Branding alone won't work in national animal ID program
Montana ranchers have branded their livestock for more than a century, and it works well in Montana. However, it won't work by itself as a national animal identification system, says a Montana State University beef expert who's involved with animal ID on the state and federal levels.
Most states don't have brand laws or a department of livestock like Montana does, said John Paterson, MSU Extension beef specialist and director of the Montana Beef Network. Besides that, similar brands may be used in more than one state, making it harder to trace the origins of specific animals especially since the U.S. Department of Agriculture's mandate for tracing cattle in case of a disease outbreak.
Mad cow disease was discovered in Washington state in 2003, prompting U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman to call for the establishment of a national livestock ID program. The goal was a verifiable animal tracking system that could trace animals to their original ranch in 48 hours.
Ever since, Montanans have been discussing issues and asking questions about the logistics of implementing a program of this magnitude, Paterson said. During statewide meetings in August, the first question ranchers asked was where branding fits into an ID program, he added. The Montana Beef Network, Pfizer Animal Health and the Montana Stockgrowers Association held the meetings to update beef producers about animal identification and other issues in the cattle industry. The Montana Beef Network is a partnership between MSU and the Montana Stockgrowers Association.
Many ranchers wondered why they needed to switch from branding to a new identification system that involves ear tags, electronic readers and computers, Paterson said. They said elderly ranchers especially would find it difficult to master the new technology.
"We already have a way to identify animals that we have been using for 150 years," Paterson said, reporting their comments. "It works well for us. We have one of the best brand departments in the United States, so why do I have to use different technology?"
But Montana is one of only 13 states that have branding laws and departments, said Andy Kellom, field representative for the Montana Beef Network. And all of those states are in the West.
"So what happens when calves from Montana are shipped to Iowa where there are no brand laws, no brand inspector and no infrastructure to support that?" Kellom asked. "And what if the same feedlot is buying cattle from Colorado with the same brand, and they co-mingle them in the feeding pens?"
Paterson said branding works well when Montana-born cattle stay in Montana, but not as well when they cross state lines and are finished in Midwestern feedlots.
"You certainly can do it, but it becomes much more difficult, especially when the USDA has suggested a 48-hour traceback," Paterson said.
Besides branding, Montana ranchers are concerned about record confidentiality. They want to know which ear tags and scanners to buy, Paterson said. He told the ranchers that, as part of a USDA pilot project, MSU has been investigating the use of prescanned ear tags and storing data in a private data base which should provide the confidentiality producers are demanding. This approach means that cow-calf producers would not have to invest in expensive computer hardware.
Montana ranchers also wonder if the national ID program will provide them with carcass characteristics and calves' feedlot performance if they want that information, Paterson said.
"The short answer is ‛No' because the national animal ID program is only for disease trace back which starts at the ranch and ends when the animals are delivered to the packing plant," Paterson said. "Auction markets, feedlots and packing plants will also have to participate. It is a live-animal program and is not to be confused with the Country of Origin legislation which is basically a meat program which informs consumers where their meat is coming from.
"These are benefits they already receive through the Montana Beef Network which has had an animal identification program since 1999 and also provides carcass data back to the rancher," Paterson said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Branding alone won't work in national animal ID program
Montana ranchers have branded their livestock for more than a century, and it works well in Montana. However, it won't work by itself as a national animal identification system, says a Montana State University beef expert who's involved with animal ID on the state and federal levels.
Most states don't have brand laws or a department of livestock like Montana does, said John Paterson, MSU Extension beef specialist and director of the Montana Beef Network. Besides that, similar brands may be used in more than one state, making it harder to trace the origins of specific animals especially since the U.S. Department of Agriculture's mandate for tracing cattle in case of a disease outbreak.
Mad cow disease was discovered in Washington state in 2003, prompting U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman to call for the establishment of a national livestock ID program. The goal was a verifiable animal tracking system that could trace animals to their original ranch in 48 hours.
Ever since, Montanans have been discussing issues and asking questions about the logistics of implementing a program of this magnitude, Paterson said. During statewide meetings in August, the first question ranchers asked was where branding fits into an ID program, he added. The Montana Beef Network, Pfizer Animal Health and the Montana Stockgrowers Association held the meetings to update beef producers about animal identification and other issues in the cattle industry. The Montana Beef Network is a partnership between MSU and the Montana Stockgrowers Association.
Many ranchers wondered why they needed to switch from branding to a new identification system that involves ear tags, electronic readers and computers, Paterson said. They said elderly ranchers especially would find it difficult to master the new technology.
"We already have a way to identify animals that we have been using for 150 years," Paterson said, reporting their comments. "It works well for us. We have one of the best brand departments in the United States, so why do I have to use different technology?"
But Montana is one of only 13 states that have branding laws and departments, said Andy Kellom, field representative for the Montana Beef Network. And all of those states are in the West.
"So what happens when calves from Montana are shipped to Iowa where there are no brand laws, no brand inspector and no infrastructure to support that?" Kellom asked. "And what if the same feedlot is buying cattle from Colorado with the same brand, and they co-mingle them in the feeding pens?"
Paterson said branding works well when Montana-born cattle stay in Montana, but not as well when they cross state lines and are finished in Midwestern feedlots.
"You certainly can do it, but it becomes much more difficult, especially when the USDA has suggested a 48-hour traceback," Paterson said.
Besides branding, Montana ranchers are concerned about record confidentiality. They want to know which ear tags and scanners to buy, Paterson said. He told the ranchers that, as part of a USDA pilot project, MSU has been investigating the use of prescanned ear tags and storing data in a private data base which should provide the confidentiality producers are demanding. This approach means that cow-calf producers would not have to invest in expensive computer hardware.
Montana ranchers also wonder if the national ID program will provide them with carcass characteristics and calves' feedlot performance if they want that information, Paterson said.
"The short answer is ‛No' because the national animal ID program is only for disease trace back which starts at the ranch and ends when the animals are delivered to the packing plant," Paterson said. "Auction markets, feedlots and packing plants will also have to participate. It is a live-animal program and is not to be confused with the Country of Origin legislation which is basically a meat program which informs consumers where their meat is coming from.
"These are benefits they already receive through the Montana Beef Network which has had an animal identification program since 1999 and also provides carcass data back to the rancher," Paterson said.