RFID Journal Blog
Text size:
T
T
T
Farmer and Rancher Coalition Opposes RFID-Tagging of Animals
7 CommentsLast week, 55 groups from across the United States sent a letter to key Congressional committees asking them to halt funding for the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), and to keep it separate from food-safety reforms. The NAIS would require most farm animals to be tagged and registered with the federal government. Some legislators in Washington want to include the proposed NAIS as a mandatory component of food-safety reforms, which gained urgency following several major incidents of food-borne illness this year in the United States.
Many farmers and ranchers oppose the NAIS because they feel it would impose significant regulatory compliance costs on small livestock producers, and not help combat food-borne illness or animal disease. They also believe it infringes on the privacy rights of farmers who are not raising livestock for integrated meatpackers and processors.
Judith McGeary, executive director of the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance, and one of the letter's signatories, was quoted in a press release as saying: "The giant meatpackers are diverting attention from the real reasons for the recurring food scandals, by pushing a feel-good tracking program that will protect their profits without improving the safety of their meat products." The real problems in the U.S. food supply, the coalition feels, stem not from anything that occurs on a farm or ranch, but rather from contamination in large slaughterhouses.
I agree with the coalition in this respect: It's a mistake to conflate problems in a slaughterhouse with those on a ranch. But I think it may be the coalition that's doing the conflating, and that the group may be acting against farmers' best interests. It seems to me that the coalition is using the bigger problem at the slaughterhouses to avoid complying with the NAIS.
No one claims tracking will eliminate e-coli contamination at the slaughterhouse. RFID tracking was mainly proposed to control an outbreak of mad cow and other diseases affecting live animals. The goal was to quickly identify and isolate any cows that might have such a disease.
I understand that small farmers and ranchers don't have buckets of money to spend on new technology, but I do find it strange that these businesses would not want to protect themselves from a possible outbreak. Consider what happened in Europe, when billions of dollars were lost because no one could identify the diseased cattle.
To me, an RFID tracking system is like insurance. It's going to cut into your profit when you first buy the equipment, but it could save your business—not to mention protect public health. What's more, I think there could be business benefits. I know that in Britain, some high-end stores are selling organically raised beef that's been tracked from birth with RFID. People pay extra for the meat because they know it's safe.
I'm told the major problem the farmers face with RFID is that they think the big slaughterhouses will gain access to more information about available cattle, then use it to squeeze the farmers. The government needs to make sure the NAIS can't be abused in this manner, and could greatly help the process by providing tax breaks to small businesses. I'd also like to see retailers work with meat producers to use RFID to prove beef originated in the United States.
In addition, it's wrong to focus solely on tracking animals. As the coalition rightly points out, more problems originate at slaughterhouses than on farms. It's important, in the event of a problem, to be able to track not only animals, but also which slaughterhouse meat came from, the batch of meat involved and where it was shipped. Singling out farmers alone won't solve much.
Many farmers and ranchers oppose the NAIS because they feel it would impose significant regulatory compliance costs on small livestock producers, and not help combat food-borne illness or animal disease. They also believe it infringes on the privacy rights of farmers who are not raising livestock for integrated meatpackers and processors.
Judith McGeary, executive director of the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance, and one of the letter's signatories, was quoted in a press release as saying: "The giant meatpackers are diverting attention from the real reasons for the recurring food scandals, by pushing a feel-good tracking program that will protect their profits without improving the safety of their meat products." The real problems in the U.S. food supply, the coalition feels, stem not from anything that occurs on a farm or ranch, but rather from contamination in large slaughterhouses.
I agree with the coalition in this respect: It's a mistake to conflate problems in a slaughterhouse with those on a ranch. But I think it may be the coalition that's doing the conflating, and that the group may be acting against farmers' best interests. It seems to me that the coalition is using the bigger problem at the slaughterhouses to avoid complying with the NAIS.
No one claims tracking will eliminate e-coli contamination at the slaughterhouse. RFID tracking was mainly proposed to control an outbreak of mad cow and other diseases affecting live animals. The goal was to quickly identify and isolate any cows that might have such a disease.
I understand that small farmers and ranchers don't have buckets of money to spend on new technology, but I do find it strange that these businesses would not want to protect themselves from a possible outbreak. Consider what happened in Europe, when billions of dollars were lost because no one could identify the diseased cattle.
To me, an RFID tracking system is like insurance. It's going to cut into your profit when you first buy the equipment, but it could save your business—not to mention protect public health. What's more, I think there could be business benefits. I know that in Britain, some high-end stores are selling organically raised beef that's been tracked from birth with RFID. People pay extra for the meat because they know it's safe.
I'm told the major problem the farmers face with RFID is that they think the big slaughterhouses will gain access to more information about available cattle, then use it to squeeze the farmers. The government needs to make sure the NAIS can't be abused in this manner, and could greatly help the process by providing tax breaks to small businesses. I'd also like to see retailers work with meat producers to use RFID to prove beef originated in the United States.
In addition, it's wrong to focus solely on tracking animals. As the coalition rightly points out, more problems originate at slaughterhouses than on farms. It's important, in the event of a problem, to be able to track not only animals, but also which slaughterhouse meat came from, the batch of meat involved and where it was shipped. Singling out farmers alone won't solve much.
READER'S COMMENTS
NAIS - From the Other Side
Mark: Did you know that a livestock "producer" is defined by the NAIS as being "all individuals engaged in the ownership, management or marketing of livestock included in the NAIS." Did you know that the "livestock" to be included in the NAIS are cattle and bison; poultry; swine; sheep; goats; cervids (e.g., deer and elk); equine (e.g., horses, mules, donkeys, burros); and camelids (e.g., llamas and alpacas)? Did you know that each of these animals must be individually identified with an RFID eartag or microchip except those that "typically move through the production chain as a group of animals?" Do you think this exception might give corporate animal agriculture an unfair economic advantage over the livestock producer who does not typically move a group of animals through the production chain? Did you know livestock "producers" as defined by the NAIS, will eventually have to report to the government or their subordinates within 24 hours every time their "livestock" moves from its birth premises to another, move through a market facility or participates in a show or will face daily fines and penalties? Did you know that on top of paying for the RFID tags and chips, livestock producers will also need to pay an Animal Tracking Database (ATD) to record and archive all of their movement information? Did you know that the NAIS is not a definitive proposal and that the regulations, fines and penalties can change at the whim of the USDA? Did you know that that the NAIS recognizes the Terresterial Animal Health Code (an open-ended international code) which, the last time I checked, published a 24 page document chocked full of requirements for simply transporting an animal on land? Could one logically assume that these requirements may soon be coming to our fair land along with licenses, fines and penalties? Did you know that under the NAIS, a livestock producer will be subject to greater scrutiny, regulation and reporting than a gun owner? Under the NAIS, an eight-year-old child wishing to show a goat at the state fair becomes a livestock producer. Purchasing an RFID tracking system will certainly cut into profit of that eight-year old. I understand that you want to sell these chips but, I grew up in the republic of the United States and I think the price of the NAIS/RFID insurance is a little too high. The certain loss of rights and freedoms is much more frightening than the possibility of a foreign disease outbreak. I would urge anyone who thinks the NAIS is a great idea to please read the official NAIS documents and ask yourself if you would like to be subject to these same open-ended regulations that you are expecting millions of people to subject themselves to who reap little or no profit from animal agriculture. You might want to consider another way to market your RFID devices because there are some real problems with the NAIS.
Posted By: My 2 Cents 9/23/08 at 9:43 AM
Problems with NAIS
Yes, I am aware there are problems with the NAIS. Exempting large beef producers is a big one. Requiring every animal to be tagged is another. But it's strange that I don't hear people talking about fixing the NAIS or devising a system that benefits the ranchers and the public. Makes me want to stop eating meat.
Posted By: Mark Roberti 9/23/08 at 1:42 PM
NAIS
Yes, Mark, it is quite strange that you don't hear of anyone talking about fixing the NAIS or devising a system that benefits the rancher and the public. It seems as the 'common-folk' like myself (who comprise millions) have not been invited to the table regarding the implementation of the NAIS. We feel as if our voices have been intentionally muted by certain industry groups and associations who claim to represent us and absolutely do not represent our interests. One result of this lack of communication has been the filing of this lawsuit rather than the more reasonable avenue of talking about fixing the NAIS to benefit the rancher and the public. You see, the USDA has rules as to how it talks with the public. Their method of talking consists of accepting public comment for a given amount of time on any particular subject. I can assure you that I, and many like me, have given comment to the USDA regarding the NAIS and have never seen any of our recommendations enacted or even discussed. I am not quite sure where our comments end up but it doesn't appear as though anyone is listening. Should you give up eating meat? I would suggest, if I may, that you purchase meat from a local producer. If there is a problem, you should be quite successful in tracing that product back to its source. If the NAIS is enacted as it stands, your local producer might just disappear. Thank you for posting my comments.
Posted By: My 2 Cents 9/23/08 at 4:11 PM
RFID TRACKING LIES?
I am pretty sure I read some where that in Europe that they had RFID tagging in place when mad cow happened and it didnt do a bit of good!
Posted By: farmer John 9/24/08 at 9:37 AM
tagging in Europe
Not true. There might have been some cows tagged but the system was not widely used in Europe. Had the cows been tagged, it could have saved billions in losses.
Posted By: Mark Roberti 9/25/08 at 10:32 AM
NAIS vs Europe
Europe has the same tracking system as NAIS is. It only goes from the ranch to the slaughterhouse door. That's why still every few months is a huge rotten meat scandal reported. Like now 1800 tons of chicken meat, frozen for 7 years, went from Belgium to the Ukraine to be processed for hot sausages and delivered all over Europe. The problem is not only the age of the meat, more criminal is the fact, the chickens where slaughtered because they where contaminated with Dioxin and should have been destroyed. Europe is switching to a full traceback system from field to fork, not only from ranch to slaughterhouse, according to ISO standard 22005 as developed by www.ScoringAg.com. There is no need to register the whole farm like in NAIS and it works perfect for the COOL law too, as it is an individual animal or crop traceback system.
Posted By: Traceback 9/26/08 at 8:17 AM
Tagging in Europe - well, UK anyway.
Status of things in the UK is that RFID tagging is voluntary for farm animals, although all new foal births will need to be tagged from next year (It's still being sorted out how this will work across EU). There is some voluntary RFID tagging in the UK but most animal tagging is simply with a printed tag. The UK Government chose not even to make bar coded tags mandatory when the tagging system was introduced in 1998, although there is a bar code option.
Posted By: John@CoreRFID 9/29/08 at 8:46 AM