• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

What will M-ID totally Cost????

Help Support Ranchers.net:

GOOD ANSWERS and COMMENTS BUT!*******
From what I've seen the bolus's are $4.00 to $10.00 each just for them.

That is true,$3.80 for the sheep,goat bolus and $4.80 for cattle and elk. But you have to remember ,when you lose one tag and you have to replace it ,thus you have bought a bolus an thats never lost or can be cut out.

Staff- what is going to be the cost to hire, train, equip and employ the personell across the country that will be needed to record these movements and transfers? *******We DON"T HAVE Enough VETS or BRAND INSPECTORS***************Not much as our system uses tcp-ip real time and runs by itself.Just like the automatic doors at the local stores.Does anyone stand there and open them? NO ,You get infront of the door and it opens itself and when you have finished walking through, they close.


Someone has to input these movements and ownership changes into the computer database.. Its Automatic,,,
All of these data movements and owership changes happen from the reader an database working together as a unit.Do you remember when we had telephone operators 30 years ago.Wasn't automated. We all use cellphones and their are no operators anymore.

.Like Bridges commented about- the cost of buying handheld computerized readers for the brand inspectors...I've seen prices from $900 to $5000 on them....We have run blue tooth readers at the ID show in Chicago that cost $425 bucks and will work with a Bluetooth cellphone or Wireless PDA.

Montana alone has over 200 brand inspectors- 15 in our county alone...Even a cheapy wand at $1000 would put the cost to the state at $200,000....Our system would make their life a lot less troublesome and those wands just don't cost that much anymore.


How many millions $ will developing this infrastucture cost the US cattle producers? Shouldn't be anymore costs unless they want to develope our system over again . **********HOW many years will it take? NOT long when the next disease HITS******


I think this is where Bridges is coming up with the $10-15 a head figure (which personally I think will end up being about twice as much)....We had another group in South America come up with a stupid list of high costs and we shot them them down. ********SOUNDS like Profesors**


.A previous figure put out by Montana State University was $8-10, but now they are finding their are more problems and hidden costs than originally perceived.... ********JUST keep the GRANTS a COMING***
Reason is the profit for the college is the large amount of grants they receive and there's is a finenite list of equipment that will work and the rest of the equipment is crap.The Destron readers were junk even before the universitys got them,alot of states were fooled on what works and what doesn't.Kinda like ,you guess if its good or not!
 
Like Bridges commented about- the cost of buying handheld computerized readers for the brand inspectors...I've seen prices from $900 to $5000 on them....We have run blue tooth readers at the ID show in Chicago that cost $425 bucks and will work with a Bluetooth cellphone or Wireless PDA.

The cheaper and the better they are will speed up M'ID and traceback of animal movements that even a stockyard can't go wrong on buying.
 
Animal ID: Congress Restricts NAIS Funding
Congress has funded NAIS with heavily restricted $33.4 million in the 2006 Department of Agriculture appropriations bill passed last Thursday. The bill prevents acquisition of new information technology systems without the prior approval of its Chief Information Officer and the concurrence of the Executive Information Technology Investment Review Board.
The bill also restricts Dave Coombs, the Ag Department's Chief Information Officer, from spending money on ongoing projects without the prior approval of the Senate and House appropriations committees.

The purpose of NAIS is to track cattle in case of an outbreak of BSE but the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service sees it as a system that will eventually track everything from cattle to catfish.

Can't you just see NCBA tracking Fish ,NOT
 
PORKER said:
Animal ID: Congress Restricts NAIS Funding
Congress has funded NAIS with heavily restricted $33.4 million in the 2006 Department of Agriculture appropriations bill passed last Thursday. The bill prevents acquisition of new information technology systems without the prior approval of its Chief Information Officer and the concurrence of the Executive Information Technology Investment Review Board.
The bill also restricts Dave Coombs, the Ag Department's Chief Information Officer, from spending money on ongoing projects without the prior approval of the Senate and House appropriations committees.

The purpose of NAIS is to track cattle in case of an outbreak of BSE but the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service sees it as a system that will eventually track everything from cattle to catfish.

Can't you just see NCBA tracking Fish ,NOT
Click to expand...

Porker, have you missed the lines in all the NCBA statements in news stories on this subject where it will be a CONSORTIUM of representative of ALL the SPECIES affected running the M-ID program?

Or is it that you refuse to believe that M-ID will be run a Consortium of reps from each species, and NOT by NCBA?

MRJ
 
MRJ, we are contacting all of the CONSORTIUM of representative's of ALL the SPECIES affected by the M-ID program.The head of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service sees it as a system that will eventually track everything from cattle to catfish. We already do that .We have talked to quite a few leaders of the species groups already.By the way Porker might have missed the press releases but we haven't here at ScoringAg.
 
STAFF said:
MRJ, we are contacting all of the CONSORTIUM of representative's of ALL the SPECIES affected by the M-ID program.The head of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service sees it as a system that will eventually track everything from cattle to catfish. We already do that .We have talked to quite a few leaders of the species groups already.By the way Porker might have missed the press releases but we haven't here at ScoringAg.
Click to expand...

Good for you, STAFF! The more people working to SOLVE problems, the more likely the solutions will be good ones, IMO.

I haven't been following the work of that group, so am not sure what they are thinking, but I wonder if the goal will be for a cost recovery only basis with no one allowed to profit from M-ID work, like the Checkoff contracts are. How would you feel about that?

MRJ
 
But I wonder if the goal will be for a cost recovery only basis with no one allowed to profit from M-ID work.We have told the species leaders that we would do M'ID for just the administrate costs of running the systems multi servers with real time RFID tag readers.
 
Old Timer,

I thought you R-CALFers said consumers have a right to know where their beef was "born, raised, and slaughtered"? Didn't you guys realize that it would take a traceback system to prove that?

Your oversimplistic solution of "just marking the imports" has nothing to do with tracing the beef through the plant.

The costs of traceback WITHIN "M"COOL will also include the costs of implementation and enforcement. Laws must be enforced and enforcement adds to the costs which will be passed on to producers. The costs of traceback, WITHING "M"COOL, is far more than the costs of the boluses or tags.

I have no problems with traceback but I have real problems with a flawed law like "M"COOL that prohibits traceback then demands proof of where cattle are born, raised, and slaughtered. The ultimate in R-CALF hypocrisy.


~SH~
 
The costs of traceback, WITHING "M"COOL, is far more than the costs of the boluses or tags.
With our automated reading system of RFID 's anywhere ,anytime ,the cost will be in the penny or less costs running specialized servers in real time.
 
STAFF,

THE COST OF YOUR SYSTEM DOESN'T HAVE A DAMN THING TO DO WITH THE COSTS OF "M"COOL ENFORCEMENT AND THE COSTS OF LOST INCOME DUE TO SEGREGATION OF CATTLE AT THE PACKING PLANT.

Quit trying to create the deception that the costs of your system are the only costs involved with "M"COOL. THAT'S BULL and you know it!

Get the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ out of your eyes and quit misrepresenting the true costs of "M"COOL.



~SH~
 
SH-What the hell good is mandatory ID and traceback if the packers don't segregate/or label and know what animal each piece of beef comes from?....

Packers thru their peons at the USDA expect producers to be able to identify every animals' ownership and pasture change- the least they could do is keep track of it once it hits the slaughterhouse door......Why have ID, if a certain piece of diseased meat and/or carcass, can't be traced back to the animal?
 
~SH~ said:
STAFF,

THE COST OF YOUR SYSTEM DOESN'T HAVE A DAMN THING TO DO WITH THE COSTS OF "M"COOL ENFORCEMENT AND THE COSTS OF LOST INCOME DUE TO SEGREGATION OF CATTLE AT THE PACKING PLANT.

Quit trying to create the deception that the costs of your system are the only costs involved with "M"COOL. THAT'S BULL and you know it!

Get the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ out of your eyes and quit misrepresenting the true costs of "M"COOL.



~SH~
Click to expand...

SH, if everyone followed the law there would be no cost of enforcement. It was Tyson and the other poultry companies that just lost their worker case in the U.S. Supreme Court recently. Get Tyson to pay for those legal costs, why don't you? The problem is that Tyson and companies like it make enforcement cost a lot. A $39 million dollar budget on GIPSA that goes down a rathole for the lack of enforcement in a regulatory agency that listens to Tyson salesmen instead of asking the right questions and gathering the facts.
 
May we repeat SH,We DO NOT have THE COSTS OF LOST INCOME DUE TO SEGREGATION OF CATTLE AT THE PACKING PLANT. We do not need SEGREGATION OF CATTLE in any packing plant anywhere while still operating at your speed of commerence.
 
Conman: "SH, if everyone followed the law there would be no cost of enforcement."
Click to expand...

Not everyone does follow the law so there is a cost of enforcement. Your point is moot AS USUAL!


Conman: "A $39 million dollar budget on GIPSA that goes down a rathole for the lack of enforcement in a regulatory agency that listens to Tyson salesmen instead of asking the right questions and gathering the facts."
Click to expand...

You're just critical of GIPSA because they can't find a smoking gun for you packer blamers that doesn't exist. In a single year of GIPSA investigations into alleged price fixing and market manipulation, GIPSA only found one legitimate complaint and all it required was a letter to gain compliance. That's a 98% FRAUD RATE. This industry is chuck full of packer blamers who have nothing to back their allegations, JUST LIKE YOU.


STAFF ($$$$$$$$$): "May we repeat SH,We DO NOT have THE COSTS OF LOST INCOME DUE TO SEGREGATION OF CATTLE AT THE PACKING PLANT. We do not need SEGREGATION OF CATTLE in any packing plant anywhere while still operating at your speed of commerence."
Click to expand...

I'll believe it when I see it. Packer after packer of all shapes and sizes testified in the "M"COOL listening sessions as to the costs of segregation.

Somewhere, sometime, every animal has to have an ID mark to determine where that animal was "BORN AND RAISED", from that point, that information has to follow that animal into the 300 individual packages of beef it becomes shipped to many destinations. You want me to believe the costs of that will be pennys? I DON'T BUY IT!

Sure, you may reduce those costs once the rail system and conveyor system is set up for segregation, but you still have initial implementation costs for the setup of tracking and there will be costs associated with segregation. Imported animals have to be kept seperate as does their beef. You can't tell me the costs BOTH DIRECT AND INDIRECT will be pennies.

You also neglected to mention the costs of "M"COOL enforcement.


~SH~
 
Quote:
Conman: "SH, if everyone followed the law there would be no cost of enforcement."


Not everyone does follow the law so there is a cost of enforcement. Your point is moot AS USUAL!

Yes, and that is what judgments are for. Tyson recently had to pony up based on a unanimous Supreme Court decision. They better hope Agman is right. Some people get a little tired of constantly hearing Tyson's problems and the little campaign bribes.

Quote:
Conman: "A $39 million dollar budget on GIPSA that goes down a rathole for the lack of enforcement in a regulatory agency that listens to Tyson salesmen instead of asking the right questions and gathering the facts."


You're just critical of GIPSA because they can't find a smoking gun for you packer blamers that doesn't exist. In a single year of GIPSA investigations into alleged price fixing and market manipulation, GIPSA only found one legitimate complaint and all it required was a letter to gain compliance. That's a 98% FRAUD RATE. This industry is chuck full of packer blamers who have nothing to back their allegations, JUST LIKE YOU.


I told you before, SH, I am from Texas and I don't need a smoking gun. I can make a case without one. GIPSA's investigations are about as good as its intentions and competency. Both of which are under scrutiny right now. Can't blame all of GIPSA, the people riding that horse are controlling the reigns. That leads us to NCBA (former,eh, MRJ?) and the people over their head--committee chairs in agriculture and the judiciary in both house and senate as well as the sec. of agriculture. If GIPSA does not make the industry pay for the full damages for breaking the law and only requires a letter for compliance, there are some real problems there. In that case they are acting as a mediator instead of a regulator. That is not their mandate from Congress. Maybe the people running that regulatory agency should be getting a paycheck from the packers instead of the government. The transparency would be welcome.
 
Quote:
STAFF ($$$$$$$$$): "May we repeat SH,We DO NOT have THE COSTS OF LOST INCOME DUE TO SEGREGATION OF CATTLE AT THE PACKING PLANT. We do not need SEGREGATION OF CATTLE in any packing plant anywhere while still operating at your speed of commerence."


SH I'll believe it when I see it. Packer after packer of all shapes and sizes testified in the "M"COOL listening sessions as to the costs of segregation.

Somewhere, sometime, every animal has to have an ID mark to determine where that animal was "BORN AND RAISED", from that point, that information has to follow that animal into the 300 individual packages of beef it becomes shipped to many destinations. You want me to believe the costs of that will be pennys? I DON'T BUY IT!

Sure, you may reduce those costs once the rail system and conveyor system is set up for segregation, but you still have initial implementation costs for the setup of tracking and there will be costs associated with segregation. Imported animals have to be kept seperate as does their beef. You can't tell me the costs BOTH DIRECT AND INDIRECT will be pennies.

You also neglected to mention the costs of "M"COOL enforcement.

How about this: ScoringAg Closes Traceback and Traceup Gap With a Unique Packing Plant Application



ScoringAg's packing plant system ensures that the live animal's unique ID and other data are carried through the packing plant during processing without animal or product segeration in the plant.

(PRWEB) August 26, 2005 -- ScoringAg's extensive Web-based livestock database provides the vital Site-Specific Recordkeeping™ necessary to verify the animal's history from birth to the packing plant's receiving dock and holding pen. The real-time database keeps track of all relevant information about the animal's birth, ownership, care and feeding, medical treatment, transport, and all details necessary to provide complete point-to-point source verification.

Until now, when the live animal enters the packing plant, specific unique identity is often lost completely at slaughter. ScoringAg's packing plant system has changed this with a unique means of capturing the live animal's ID and other data, and passing it through the slaughtering and fabrication processes along with the various products that are produced – from carcass (including hide, organs, and other items at slaughter) to sides, quarters, primal parts, and finally to the commodity cuts.

ScoringAg can also be customized to include any specialized data collection and labeling needed for export, custom cutting to order, and pricing labels for wholesale and retail distribution. The flexibility of the system's on-site programming allows each packer to include any special labeling on the fabrication line as required for storing, shipping, and distributing intermediate and final products.

Unlike many elaborate packing plant production management systems (which often fail to keep track of individual animals as they are processed), ScoringAg's packing plant system is simple and does not require reorganizing or rewiring the plant, or changing the flow pattern of fabrication. Instead, ScoringAg provides strategically placed scan-and-print barcode-based information processing stations to transfer unique animal ID and other data with the animal products as they are processed.

ScoringAg's packing plant system is currently being installed and is receiving much favorable comment as to its effectiveness, ease of use, and ability to integrate easily with the packing plant's processes. In the near future,Nov and Dec., the plant system is scheduled for installation in several medium and large-scale packing plants in Central and South America. Because of the modular nature of its information processing stations, the system is scalable -- it is able to meet the needs of the smallest custom packer or locker, and at the same time adapt to the demands of the largest high-speed processing line.

ScoringAg.com and its traceback and traceup system for agriculture products, featuring Site-Specific Recordkeeping and traceback and PIDC location code, is one of the many divisions of ScoringSystem, Inc., which is located in Sarasota, Florida USA and specializes in providing solutions with mobile data, via wireless PDAs, laptops, and Semacode-programmed Nokia, Siemens, and Sony Ericsson cell phones. Whether using RFID or barcodes for traceup and traceback of livestock, from birth through the packing plants and on to the consumer; or tracking transport containers or perishable meats and other food consumer goods, www.ScoringAg.com makes managing data easier – and does it in an extremely cost effective manner from "Field-to-Fork."
 
Conman: "I told you before, SH, I am from Texas and I don't need a smoking gun."
Click to expand...

What the hell does Texas have to do with the price of tea in China?

To earn a guilty conviction, you have to have proof. YOU HAVE NO PROOF! NONE, NATA, ZIP, ZERO!


Conman: "GIPSA's investigations are about as good as its intentions and competency."
Click to expand...

More cheap talk with no supporting facts! ZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz!


Conman: "Both of which are under scrutiny right now. Can't blame all of GIPSA, the people riding that horse are controlling the reigns. That leads us to NCBA (former,eh, MRJ?) and the people over their head--committee chairs in agriculture and the judiciary in both house and senate as well as the sec. of agriculture. If GIPSA does not make the industry pay for the full damages for breaking the law and only requires a letter for compliance, there are some real problems there. In that case they are acting as a mediator instead of a regulator. That is not their mandate from Congress. Maybe the people running that regulatory agency should be getting a paycheck from the packers instead of the government. The transparency would be welcome."
Click to expand...

More cheap talk with no supporting facts! ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz!



~SH~
 
Porker, the latest news;Using RFID cattle truck readers, such as the Idology wireless LightningROD Reader technology and AVID's PowerTracker V, field data was collected by reading RIFD ear tag numbers on the fly. Then, by transferring the data via TCP_IP to the ScoringAg Public Search via Bluetooth phone or PDA wireless, the animal's public source RFID data was available immediately, in real time, as it is retrieved on-line from ScoringAg's Web-based databank which updated the exact premises where the real time RFID reading took place down to the second the animal was read.
 

Latest posts

Top