Oldtimer said:
1) Rod there in lies part of the problem- you have to have somebody inputting the data...Half these old cowboys have never ever been on a computer, let alone input info into one...
2) Under USDA's original proposal every pasture movement (out of county?) and ownership change would have to be individually read by each animal ID, input into the computer by an official (brand inspector, vet, USDA bureaucrat, official reading station, ??? ) ....
1) I got into a debate with Tam once about this. You have those old cowpokes write down the tag number and the animal its being placed into, then send that scrap of paper into a competent data entry clerk. I worked the numbers for Tam (who of course didn't believe me) and it would have taken 2 competent data entry clerks all of a month to enter in each and every single animal in Canada. Since the US's herd is 8x that size, we're looking at 16 clerks for a month. That is not mind boggling stuff.
And add in every movement and change of ownership entry, which in many cases is several times in a single year...Plus the people to record and verify those movements and ownership changes (inspectors) along with those to police and prosecute it if its going to become mandatory...You have a new bureaucracy that will need to be created...
2) With the RFID tags and boluses, all that needs to doing is an animal be scanned, then the new owner ID input. Plug the little scan tool into port, and away goes the information. Even my 87 yr old grandmother once plugged my Pocket PC back into its socket for me after I told her how over the phone in 10 seconds.
And what will the cost for this equipment (readers, scanners, computers, data bases, etc.) be ? How many will be needed to equip a new bureacracy of inspectors nationwide?
On the Australian matter, that was a simple database design error. Obviously, Australia didn't hire competent people to build their system, nor did they use up to date tools to build it. You can't use that example as an arguement against a national ID system.
And you think USDA has more competent people :???: :wink: :lol:
Anyone who stands against a national ID system I believe is putting their own welfare ahead of that of the industry. When the CCIA was rolling out their tagging program, the only people truly arguing against were those who were 1) confused by what the program was to do, or 2) too damned lazy to put a tag in an animals ear. Education solved 1). And those 2)'s eventually faded into the background as an unpleasant reminder that there are truly some lazy fools running cattle.
Rod- I'm not against an ID system- I'm not convinced that the system proposed is workable or cost effective- Is it worth what it will cost? ...I'm still waiting for USDA to come up with their cost estimate and compare it with what Australia has put in so far ( I believe it averages out to over $37 per head )....I'm also not convinced its necessary...Maybe some areas of the US need a kick in the butt to get them to do something (anything)- but many areas have done great IDing, tracking animals, and controlling disease for years already without the USDA sticking their nose in...
And Kathy, I'm a little confused by your statement as well. There are no health records attached to any ID system used by the CCIA.
Under USDA's original proposal- every health inspection would have to be input into the data base...Even every time the vet looked at an animal (shots, C-section, bangs vaccination, etc)....
Rod